Normie Sadism
Svevlad
At this point, everyone here has heard about this phenomenon, which I believe is increasingly defining culture, politics, everything in general (though it is said, and is very correct, that normies don't really exist anymore, that is beside this specific subject). The phenomenon itself deserves it's own thread more specialized than the "Acceptable Targets" one, I think.

What I notice as an outlander in a place where this phenomenon is much weaker, is that in western, particularly American contexts, this goes far beyond sadism into genuine hatred and vitriol. Perhaps with the disappearance of the normie, the sadism is only increased further. Often I get the impression I'm talking to human bombs, or some such, simply itching for an excuse and opportunity to maul someone like a shitbull.

What is the root of this? I believe a degenerated social enforcement impulse provides the root, but it is a neutral one - the impulse is useful in a healthy society. What we're dealing with is much more severe, and explosive. This makes it useful to truly get to the factors that caused this misguiding.
Leverkühn
(06-10-2022, 03:27 PM)Svevlad Wrote: What is the root of this? I believe a degenerated social enforcement impulse provides the root, but it is a neutral one - the impulse is useful in a healthy society. What we're dealing with is much more severe, and explosive. This makes it useful to truly get to the factors that caused this misguiding.

From Nietzsche's Genealogy of Morals
Quote:The slave revolt in morality begins when ressentiment itself becomes creative and gives birth to values: the ressentiment of beings denied true reaction, that of the deed, who recover their losses only through an imaginary revenge. Whereas all noble morality grows out of a triumphant yes-saying to oneself, from the outset slave morality says "no" to an "outside," to a "different," to a "not-self:" and this "no" is its creative deed.
I think many "normies" in the Western world walk around with this massive amount of hatred and rage in their hearts, and they can't let it out violently, so it just stews within them internally. And of course, these are often decently educated people well-versed in the mores of our culture, which views racism, sexism, or any kind of bigotry as the worse things imaginable. So when these people do end up exploding, it's not going to be against the niggers they see constantly making a mess of public spaces or the Shaniqua at the DMV. When they blow up, it's going to be against one of those "easy targets" discussed in the other thread. Largely I think 'normie sadism' has arisen and reached such extreme levels because we can't physically act out our anger and offense in a violent manner: whether that be a duel or just a small fist-fight, something like that is impossible for someone entrenched in well-mannered, white-collar culture. I think because they can never let this energy out externally, it just becomes something very rotten, beyond what would be the case if people just duked it out in physical fights. They desperately wish to let this energy out, but they feel inadequate in their ability to do, so when they do get a chance to act out revenge it takes on this incredibly sadistic quality you won't find anywhere else.
Svevlad
(06-13-2022, 12:10 PM)chungus Wrote:
(06-10-2022, 03:27 PM)Svevlad Wrote: At this point, everyone here has heard about this phenomenon, which I believe is increasingly defining culture, politics, everything in general (though it is said, and is very correct, that normies don't really exist anymore, that is beside this specific subject). The phenomenon itself deserves it's own thread more specialized than the "Acceptable Targets" one, I think.

What I notice as an outlander in a place where this phenomenon is much weaker, is that in western, particularly American contexts, this goes far beyond sadism into genuine hatred and vitriol. Perhaps with the disappearance of the normie, the sadism is only increased further. Often I get the impression I'm talking to human bombs, or some such, simply itching for an excuse and opportunity to maul someone like a shitbull.

What is the root of this? I believe a degenerated social enforcement impulse provides the root, but it is a neutral one - the impulse is useful in a healthy society. What we're dealing with is much more severe, and explosive. This makes it useful to truly get to the factors that caused this misguiding.

Normies don't exist anymore? How so?

There even was an old thread about it, but look at how things are: "normie" is someone who is fully normal, yes? "According to the norms" and so. Yet, does the biomass we call normies fulfill any sort of objective norm? It's all junkies, SSRI chomping media addicts without even the basest of ambitions, total husks. In any sane society, these would be institutionalized, if allowed to live, even.
Corvid
(06-13-2022, 02:10 PM)Svevlad Wrote:
(06-13-2022, 12:10 PM)chungus Wrote:
(06-10-2022, 03:27 PM)Svevlad Wrote: At this point, everyone here has heard about this phenomenon, which I believe is increasingly defining culture, politics, everything in general (though it is said, and is very correct, that normies don't really exist anymore, that is beside this specific subject). The phenomenon itself deserves it's own thread more specialized than the "Acceptable Targets" one, I think.

What I notice as an outlander in a place where this phenomenon is much weaker, is that in western, particularly American contexts, this goes far beyond sadism into genuine hatred and vitriol. Perhaps with the disappearance of the normie, the sadism is only increased further. Often I get the impression I'm talking to human bombs, or some such, simply itching for an excuse and opportunity to maul someone like a shitbull.

What is the root of this? I believe a degenerated social enforcement impulse provides the root, but it is a neutral one - the impulse is useful in a healthy society. What we're dealing with is much more severe, and explosive. This makes it useful to truly get to the factors that caused this misguiding.

Normies don't exist anymore? How so?

There even was an old thread about it, but look at how things are: "normie" is someone who is fully normal, yes? "According to the norms" and so. Yet, does the biomass we call normies fulfill any sort of objective norm? It's all junkies, SSRI chomping media addicts without even the basest of ambitions, total husks. In any sane society, these would be institutionalized, if allowed to live, even.

These normies are in a uniquely diseased state for our time, more or less coping with the frivolities of the post-industrial West, the decay of culture, and seemingly bleak future ahead of them. The state of normies is a reflection of society itself in a decadent, purposeless state. It has never been this bad.
parsifal
i'm unsure whether it makes more sense to revive this thread or "acceptable targets" but either way it needs to be mentioned how uniquely cruel normalcattle become as soon as a straight man intimates any attraction towards girls aged 17 or younger. of all the things one can say, even if you outright proclaimed "i hate niggers" you would not be attacked so viciously. i have seen it too often that a man who makes the mistake of being honest about his feelings finds himself the subject of unanimous outrage. they take this as license to say the nastiest most sadistic things imaginable and no matter how many concessions he makes it has no effect. any attempts to defend the position are met with absurd fallacies and hyperbole, it's as if there is a chip implanted in their brains programmed to send them into a bloodthirsty frenzy when the taboo is violated.

i was witness to this earlier today when a man who simply said "i think minors are attractive" in an online game instantly became the target of absurd vitriol. i am not exaggerating when i say i was the only one not telling him things like "i hope you never find happiness in your life" or "you deserve to be fed to a wood chipper" in response to such sacrilege as "i just want to hold hands with a teenager." another example this brought to mind is this tweet, which despite the apologetic tone and sympathetic situation of the man in the greentext the overwhelming majority of the comments are, well, see for yourself. notably in both of these instances, the backlash is disproportionately excessive. objectively, admitting to having feelings for a girl who is not even below the age of consent in most of the united states is anodyne but the normie sadism it elicits is nonetheless unmatched.
anthony
(02-23-2023, 01:11 AM)parsifal Wrote: i'm unsure whether it makes more sense to revive this thread or "acceptable targets" but either way it needs to be mentioned how uniquely cruel normalcattle become as soon as a straight man intimates any attraction towards girls aged 17 or younger. of all the things one can say, even if you outright proclaimed "i hate niggers" you would not be attacked so viciously. i have seen it too often that a man who makes the mistake of being honest about his feelings finds himself the subject of unanimous outrage. they take this as license to say the nastiest most sadistic things imaginable and no matter how many concessions he makes it has no effect. any attempts to defend the position are met with absurd fallacies and hyperbole, it's as if there is a chip implanted in their brains programmed to send them into a bloodthirsty frenzy when the taboo is violated.

i was witness to this earlier today when a man who simply said "i think minors are attractive" in an online game instantly became the target of absurd vitriol. i am not exaggerating when i say i was the only one not telling him things like "i hope you never find happiness in your life" or "you deserve to be fed to a wood chipper" in response to such sacrilege as "i just want to hold hands with a teenager." another example this brought to mind is this tweet, which despite the apologetic tone and sympathetic situation of the man in the greentext the overwhelming majority of the comments are, well, see for yourself. notably in both of these instances, the backlash is disproportionately excessive. objectively, admitting to having feelings for a girl who is not even below the age of consent in most of the united states is anodyne but the normie sadism it elicits is nonetheless unmatched.

It's all ultimately pure normalfag sadism in that it's directed towards socialised people who obviously pose no real harm and are not genuine criminal or antisocial personalities. If you mention Rotherham to these same people they'll get mad at you. The issue itself is kind of a red herring. In practice this stuff is OUT OF CONTROL in many non white cultures and an UNTOUCHABLE issue. Easy extreme example is aboriginal/indigenous Australian communities. It's taken for granted that the children and youth in those families should be allowed to roam the streets in giant feral mobs because it's safer than their own homes. It's taken for granted all of the girls are going to be actually raped before turning 18. And I know the Australian abbos aren't the only ones who live like this.

That's half of the obvious falseness of the issue. The other half is how these people are blind and deaf to all other suffering of children. I've never seen a sign from any of these people that they are actually thinking about the well being of children in any true sense. They only want to hold up and rally around socially accredited signs that you're against abuse. It's like the photonegative of boomers who want to kill all of the underground sex traffickers after letting their own children go insane in public school.
Guest
(02-23-2023, 01:11 AM)parsifal Wrote: i'm unsure whether it makes more sense to revive this thread or "acceptable targets" but either way it needs to be mentioned how uniquely cruel normalcattle become as soon as a straight man intimates any attraction towards girls aged 17 or younger. of all the things one can say, even if you outright proclaimed "i hate niggers" you would not be attacked so viciously. i have seen it too often that a man who makes the mistake of being honest about his feelings finds himself the subject of unanimous outrage. they take this as license to say the nastiest most sadistic things imaginable and no matter how many concessions he makes it has no effect. any attempts to defend the position are met with absurd fallacies and hyperbole, it's as if there is a chip implanted in their brains programmed to send them into a bloodthirsty frenzy when the taboo is violated.

i was witness to this earlier today when a man who simply said "i think minors are attractive" in an online game instantly became the target of absurd vitriol. i am not exaggerating when i say i was the only one not telling him things like "i hope you never find happiness in your life" or "you deserve to be fed to a wood chipper" in response to such sacrilege as "i just want to hold hands with a teenager." another example this brought to mind is this tweet, which despite the apologetic tone and sympathetic situation of the man in the greentext the overwhelming majority of the comments are, well, see for yourself. notably in both of these instances, the backlash is disproportionately excessive. objectively, admitting to having feelings for a girl who is not even below the age of consent in most of the united states is anodyne but the normie sadism it elicits is nonetheless unmatched.


The categorical thought-killer that it is is quite interesting. You are right, you can literally make a more palatable argument for lolocaust denial than anything related to the AoC. Most of them don't even try to argue, just post some stupid groid reaction image.



This reminds me, I had a friend on rwtwt who devolved into one of those progressives in all but name, you know, the "I love everyone, I don't hate blacks, I just think we're better off apart" type... the "once you get older, you'll understand!" type. He was previously one of two leaders of a mildly significant sub-community; a schism between him and the other leader precipitated this transformation into a holier-than-thou quasi-libtard who, in lieu of actual life experience or achievements, carried himself as just oh-so-mature, above the angsty teens. One of his most strongly held "convictions", reinforced by his liberal inclusion of whatever less-than-mediocre, boring, cookie-cutter-personality egirls wanted to join his group and their subsequent longhousing of him (if only I had known that word back then...), was a knee-jerk adverse reaction to simply joking about pedophilia or anything resembling it. (Predictably, he tried to turn me against the leader of the other splinter faction of the group.) He insisted that to allow anyone to joke about it would result in the group eventually becoming populated by unironic pedophiles. It can happen to anyone! I believe this phenomenon is just one of the most prominent and strongest symptoms of the "longhousing" of our culture; it has all the telltale marks of women's rhetoric: emotional arguments, appeals ad populum, personal attacks in lieu of logical arguing. The list goes on, and you alluded to this in your post.

Maybe off-topic, but I am endlessly amused at the cognitive dissonance women must possess to convince themselves and then one another that women are pristine, vulnerable flowers in a world full of monsters who want to take advantage of them. One of the purest reflections of this is that they will all attack you for what you mentioned, and try to sic attack dogs on you if available, from OF prostitute to radfem. (The "trad girls" on Twitter do this as well, though I block them on sight, as they're really just "feminists wearing trad dresses".) This connects to what I said earlier about their rhetorical tactics; it's why you can't allow them a say in anything important, they drag down discourse as such. Anyway, once you even raise a finger in defence of the opposite side, you're condemned regardless, if only for not having the tact to hold your tongue, as this isn't something you argue if you care about your perception by others.

Well, normies will just go wherever the current takes them. The fact that their brains short-circuit or they come up with tenuous bullshit in defence of their "but that's wrongthink!" instinct is evidence of this. What Protected category do you think will be proscribed to criticise next? My money's on blacks.
Svevlad
Just tell them that the AOC in most of Europe is 14, 16 in most US states except libtardistans on the coasts. Figuratively drill it into their eyes with needles, screwdrivers (but physically doing it is desirable also). You can only defeat it by a "corruption" of their Holy Belief (the Age of Consent) that is "heretical" (not 18) overwhelming them. Hopefully some kill themselves from libtard apoplectics.
parsifal
i always bring this up but as i said they become impervious to facts as soon as the alarm goes off in their brains. most of the time they will completely ignore what you just said and if they address it at all it'll be some meaningless non-argument like "that doesn't make it right... because it just doesn't okay"
Reply 



[-]
Reply
Message
Type your reply to this message here.




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)