Hyper-v
Is America’s Backbone Spineless? | Discussing Conservatism with
Is America’s Backbone Spineless? | Discussing Conservatism with Rebecca V
#Americas #Backbone #Spineless #Discussing #Conservatism
“Benjamin A Boyce”
Rebecca V is a mother of five, editor at @WrongSpeakPublishing , and something of a spicy tweet poster. We discuss the need for America’s backbone: hard working middle class family men and women, to grow a spine and speak…
source
To see the full content, share this page by clicking one of the buttons below |
Hello, intellectual here, I can always be found watching Benjamin Boyce's channel.
You can't have a spineless backbone. A backbone is a spine. Asking if a backbone is spineless is like asking if your car is an automobile.
Oh my gosh… I had to laugh about the poor dog. If you like training via play, check out "sexier than a squirrel" podcast, I found it interesting… though i dont have a dog, so…
Thank you for this conversation!
Dogs are gifts! They teach us patience with unconditional love. And so awesome for a young family 💝
Great interview. I agree with her perspective, as I have lots in common – except I’m Canadian and have even more work to do in waking up my normie friends and neighbours
I noticed in 2012 well before 2014
'was it 2050 that half of women will be single and childless'
2030
'it doesnt have to be religion'
it basicly does. you need to identify an enemy, an evil, and then cultivate an ideal self to hold in contrast.
the problem with attacking libertarians, is that they are more competent. wanting liberty over all is a potential reasonable responce to a tyranical other.
this isnt me protecting libertarians, they are idealistic lolcows. but they are more worthy of respect than conservatives. conservatives pontificate without those pontifications having any value or meaning. you want an american identity, who cares? the only people who care are overly attached. they will be unwilling to sacrifice their sacred cows when the time comes, and it has.
if you want to make a separate society and culture, that is possible, but what is it centralized around?
you could centralize cristianity, but that is part of the cancer. christianity, marxism, and feminism are the same paradigm of grievance mongering.also it wont give the powers necessary. can you marshal an army for christ? then how will you maintin a monopoly of force without a force capable of it? winning a war is sophistry, you need an emposing police pressence.
you could make a nondenominational spiritual right, that would bring in the christians, astrologists, pagans, and scientists into a big tent. but the right to research would have to be granted to scientists.
you could side with an caps, but you would only have influence to the degree you can control demand and supply and profits.
but the point is that to expand the tent you need to profane your ideal government. you both need brass tacks of police, and you need to keep enough people to care by compromising.
'libertarianism says you dont have to have anything shared'
libertarianism is about values, it prioritises liberty above all. most libertarians are minarchists, which is what you are trying to advocate from one side of your mouth.
all identities are anti-x. if you try shifting to be in favor of something that is when you lose your allies.
The first person that I’ve heard mention how the left wants to CHAnGE HUMAN NATURE, they think they are gods; human nature CANNOT be changed. I love this woman. I’m not on twitter, but I may have to reconsider joining, so I can see her work. She is fantastic! Benjamin , you’ve done it again, the guests you have on, are SO interesting; you are so good at what you do. Thank you so much for all your hard work!
I'm pretty sure race is too real to just overlook. It's so real it comes blasting thru in every interaction one has with another – it's the first thing you notice about someone, other than how attractive they are. And those "elite huite old men"? Yea, they're not huite.
Great talk, Benjamin. Rebecca mentioned service – it makes me thing of the programming we receive in school regarding slavery. I think they teach us that it was a worse thing than it actually was. It's arguably the best thing to happen to those bloodlines – they're American now. I came out of school not wanting to serve ANYthing. Women today see marriage and motherhood as a form of slavery. We went wrong there… that guilt thing pops up everywhere.
Here's a problem I think is pervasive in the discourse right now. When your average person says "Liberal," and we have this widespread anachronism of the "Progressive" Liberal, (it was a New Deal thing, and got resurrected as a neologism,) what we're rly talking abt is "Marxist". That's what we mean, and I think it's what ppl should be saying. This becomes important, because the whole language game is a big part of how Marxists operate (as we know).
We should delineate the "Classical Marxist" left (a specific category) with whom the rest of us tend to emphatically disagree, from the "Classical Liberal" center/center-right, as well as the Conservative right.
Also, we should further differentiate the particularly bad "Neomarxist" left, as well as "Neoliberal" centrists, and the "Neoconservative" right. The latter categories, as ppl already associate with the terms, involve a combination of ignorance, bad actors, and cronyism.
I've been a pretty big fan of Ian McGilchrist, who just had a great episode with Peterson.
Something close to this, I think has been pretty well established. But I'll specifically suggest:
Classical Marxist (left) = "left brain" … Classical Liberal (center/center-right) + Conservative (right) = "right brain"
In addition (half of these are well established, half less so) proposed, primary traits, mapped along spectrum:
left, "neurotic" … center, "disagreeable" … center-right, "agreeable" … right, "conscientious"
Edit: here's the simple dichotomy imo; Marxists vs. Moderates
2nd Edit: many ppl might know a phenomenon in the psychological literature, called "splitting," I'd say that's fundamentally what the left is always doing. I'm not saying we don't all frame the dialectic sometimes, nor that we shouldn't do so. However, if "neuroticism" is one's primary trait, then one might typically have difficulty with productively engaging in discourse, without sufficiently managing to avoid the pitfalls of black & white thinking.
🍞
Let me answer by saying, check out my soon to exist Substack, Jules-Is-a-Pseudo-Intellectual.
Hah, it was pretty much the fusion of goths and cholos, that created my fav, "alternative" pop-cultural aesthetic and ethos, that originated a few decades ago.
Not sure if Gen X will ever be able to entirely take the reigns, unfortunately, because this seems to be a problem with smaller generations.
Wow I was an only child, not sure if four siblings would have made me more, or less sane lol.
Great Girl Ms. Rebecca. !!😉👍and surprising freshness!!
Great point to say that those who saw the wokes grow up were 🤤 lazy: Leave them to these weirdos, how "cute" they are and they're not going anywhere… 😶
Beautiful tree 🌳🌰🌳and ancient mosses…whoever ☁️☁️☁️was a cat! 🐈⬛😼
She has the correct instincts, but the "we need to go back" rhetoric is not an answer, it's a wish. America failed. You don't go back, you go through
Transacting in the left's language is never going to work. "The Democrats are the real racists" is an embarrassment. You are tacitly accepting their position.
About a third of the way in, and I think missing the religious dimension is showing a bit. Conservatives didn't "let liberals take over" the public schools. Public schools were always a religiously-driven effort to instill progressive Christian values (of the Protestant ruling class) onto kids. As Protestantism cannibalized itself and finally removed God, the public schools never changed their mission, just the message. You can't "go back" to public schools educating children because that was always downstream of creating austere Protestant children.
We need to refrain from calling the totalitarian left, liberal.
To be reflexively liberal is not exercising liberalism. Liberalism (and conservativism for that matter) requires a deliberate thought process.
Anything less is simply behaving tribal.
Conservatives must be reminded their liberal values. While Liberals be must reminded conserving institutions, customs and courtesies, does not make you a bigot.
Behaving liberal is just as hard, if not harder than behaving Christian.🐿
👍
Interesting. Thanks. 🐿
Speak for yourself. Diversity is not a strength, neither is tolerance.
Yes. America's backbone overall is spineless and we are heading for a dystopian hellscape by being overtaken by the woke leftist lunatics who run and control all of the most important institutions in this country, the West and the world.
Thought I have seen Ms. Rebecca on The Reason that is Boyce, sometime prior, but I was incorrect. One other time I thought I was wrong, but turns out, I was only mistaken.