problem
I was planning to post something today, but something came up in my life (one of my brothers said some nonsense to me in an email) that will take a couple of days—or more—to write a thoughtful letter in response.
I won’t go into details. Those who have read Susan Forward’s Toxic Parents know the chapter where Forward discusses how those siblings who weren’t abused react to the abused adult child who dares to speak out about the crimes committed by their parents.
As soon as I finish writing the long letter I plan to send my brother, I’ll get back to my usual activities here.
13 replies on “Family”
I feel like it’s precisely because of my autism that I would have no such ego to cause this disgusting dishonesty. I don’t have any protective mechanisms to shield myself from asking incisive, self-surgical questions – this is why you hate me for asking “what if children must be abused for the race to survive?” or “the deaths of Germans were no tragedy, the dissolution of the NSDAP was”.
Marco had no idea he was abused as a toddler, but he was. I think you should start considering that something similar happened to you when your memories of the events are too distant and hazy.
Dear Adunai,
I’m curious, what it is that makes you consider your question here (I’ll go with the only direct one I can see) is incisive? Generally I associate that word with sharp, clear expression and/or some penetrating insight. I do not rate the question as incisive simply because you’d like very much for it to be. Personally I hate it not because it is incisive but because it is illogical, and manifestly inane. I see it as phrased pragmatically, true, but the premise itself is flawed. I take it you cling doggedly to it for brute psychological reasons as much as academic ones (or more so).
It feels like there is an unstated need for this severe cognitive bias; this enforced blinker. That might entail that you have no ego, and need a weary crutch of some sort to boost that self-confidence, but perhaps it might as well suggest your ego is in fact quite robust, if you like the sound of your own pet theory that much, over and above all sensible suggestion to the contrary.
Given all we have written here about child abuse and the fallout of it, I still very much struggle to see how methodically turning our young ones into gibbering basket cases is a bonus for our survival as a race (after all, so few recover, as the odds are stacked heavily against them, and so few even out of that group could be considered useful from an NS revolutionary standpoint – for example, I don’t think John Modrow is, recovered as he may be and good at criticising psychiatry). Even were were not talking about severe abuse and psychotics here, we would at least be instigating a generational slide into institutionalised neurosis and depression. It’s very much the last thing we need at the minute, considering also that such cases are far more unlikely to breed (which is, by the by, another argument again genetic heritability). Beyond just the abstract consequences at macro-scale, there is the notion of loyalty to the other members of our race, and basic compassion for them, and it does not seem sensible (or tasteful somehow) to deliberate place them in situations of prolonged torment, which you know (or should know, were you not dead inside) that they not appreciate in the slightest, and which will cause unfathomable emotional pain.
It’s very hard to fight a revolution if nigh on 100% of your next generation are confined to psychiatric units, off the rails in various drug/drink/maladaptive coping mechanism fugues, or have killed themselves. It’s very hard to function as a race at all, given that possibility, irrespective of the need for violent revolution.
If you would fervently like children to be abused, do just say so, as consistently it feels to me on review of your positions long-term like you’re extrapolating from your own personal wishes in your arguments (which would suit an autist with no theory of mind), much as you’d like to universalise them to give a veneer of legitimacy. But don’t tell me it’s ‘to save the race’.
I would say rather than ‘we must abuse children’, that ‘we must be aware’ that such abuse occurs, and is effectively unstoppable under our current historical conditions, much as it has been in the past, and that, rather than seek to produce more invalid cases, from which one day a few unlikely hardcore survivors may one day clamber, we should instead merely seek out and protect those who have been abused, in the hope that they can be shifted to our worldview more easily. An apparent evil, more than a technically necessary one. Find those in our society who have been wounded, and get to them in time that they may be rendered useful to us. The abuse is already off the charts among our people. You have enough to work with already, I’d wager, if we can find them.
Just as a question of my own, and just out of curiosity, what, hypothetically, do you think you would have to know or be presented with if you were to consider changing your mind? I’m interested in the rough speculations on what would have to be apparent to undo your worldview? I’m making the generous assumption there that you’re arguing in good faith, and are, at least, open to the possibility of a changed opinion, even if it does not seem currently necessary.
I don’t think Adunai can clearly explain his point of view; he’s too vague.
Perhaps Adunai doesn’t distinguish between mistreatment that doesn’t break minds (for example, how children were raised in Sparta) and mistreatment that produces psychoses.
One thing nurses who work in large psychiatric hospitals say is that a few nurses can easily control hundreds of patients. That doesn’t happen in prisons because inmates rationally coordinate riots.
In a huge psychiatric hospital housing thousands of schizophrenics, on the other hand, each patient is atomised, in a parallel universe with the others, completely incapable of organising a riot. That’s why it’s so easy for a few nurses to control a legion of patients.
I don’t think Adunai knows this because he hasn’t studied what I’ve published here about psychiatry. I assure you that he hasn’t even read my Day of Wrath or How to Murder Your Child’s Soul: a book that, thanks to you, is now in Kevin MacDonald’s library.
I don’t want to drown esteemed CT’s blog in my rubbish, so I have responded on my blog. Conversely, if going there is offensive in its own way, I will be brutally laconic.
1. Savage Asians mistreat children, Europeans are gentle – yet it’s the Europeans who are going extinct. Ergo, child abuse is not a factor (or a factor for this collective suicide).
2. Slavery was abolished not by schizophrenics but by well-adjusted English lords in the 1830s, ergo schizophrenia cannot be a factor.
3. Christianity is built on bemoaning the plight of the individual, and on condemning any respect to the authority and clan as evil. Ergo, the “rights of the child” must be seen as equally pernicious to “the rights of man”. The child must be seen as property of the clan, and clan as property of the NSDAP, in an anti-Christian land.
There are different kinds of abuse. Spartan children were abused by the state to turn them into warriors. Ben and I are talking about something quite different: parental abuse that leaves children handicapped.
A Spartan is a fearsome fighter.
A pair of lightly armed nurses can control one hundred schizophrenics because the patients are so insane—their selves are so shattered—that they cannot coordinate any mutiny.
Just to address point 1. Yes, savage Asians do mistreat children. But rates of neuroleptic usage/coercion to neuroleptic usage in non-Western countries are very low. Hence why the individuals generally turn out better. It’s not really the initial abuse that gets you… it’s being caught by the System and ruined for decades afterwards. We’ve mentioned this point before. I hoped you had remembered.
On point 3. ideally there would be no need for ‘rights’ for the child because good Aryan parents would not brutalise them anyway. I don’t want to get into the debate of deciding that one must be Christian to be kind, as that really has no ending with you. Just because a child has no rights does not mean one may automatically expect the best by inflicting harm on them. I would expect them looked-after as Hitler himself managed, thinking of everything from the Hitler Youth to the Adolf Hitler Schools. I have no problem with the Agoge. What more are you proposing|
2. sorry, I missed you, please tell me what schizophrenia cannot be a factor in. It has not made an active contribution, no, but I think, were you to look, that you would see the passive failure nonetheless… we are losing adolescent children every year to this avoidable phenomenon.
Please address my final question, if you would. Just succinctly.
As a final off-topic question, please update me as to how you hunt for psychiatric genetics evidence is going. Sorry for the long-winded phrases – my question mark key is currently jammed.
Yes… To understand Adunai’s mind, just see what he himself writes :
Bold emphasis is mine. I won’t bother refuting what he says about me because he hasn’t read my autobiography. One can only wonder what Lovecraftian horrors he suffered as a child (my educated guess is that he repressed the whole thing).
Dear Adunai,
I read your reply on your own page. You’re entirely correct in that there are not that many schizophrenics (my figures show 1% of the population, much as one must always account for both under-reportage and misdiagnosis). However, given that the ‘standard’ non-schizophrenic common consequences of child abuse long-term (accord to 6 separate medical sources I cross-referenced) are an increased risk of:
Migraines; Diabetes; Arthritis; Vision problems; Cancer; Stroke; Bowel disease; Heart attack; Migraines; Lung problems; Back problems; High blood pressure; Heavy drinking; Many sexual partners; Having sex for gifts or money; Using drugs; Self-harming; Anxiety; Depression; Trouble learning; Trouble paying attention; Memory problems; Problems with self-control; Low self-esteem; Post-traumatic stress disorder; Brain damage; Anorexia or bulimia; Behavioural disorders; Learning disabilities; Poor grades; A higher chance of dropping out of school; Difficulty holding jobs; Challenges with executive function (planning, problem-solving, etc.); Autoimmune disorders; Chronic pain and fatigue; Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD); Suicidal thoughts or attempts…
As well as that fact that child abuse is robustly associated with certain regions of the brain failing to form, function, or grow properly, i.e.
Amygdala (Processing emotions); Hippocampus (Learning & memory); Orbitofrontal cortex (Decision-making & emotional regulation); Cerebellum (Motor behaviour & executive functions); Corpus callosum (Left and right brain communication & other processes).
As well as the fact that child abuse sufferers commonly struggle with sleep problems such as an altered sleep cycle, nightmares, sleep disturbances, hypervigilance, and insomnia.
And given that psychologically they commonly:
Have trouble knowing who you are or what they want; Look for external validation rather than internal; Use the reactions of others to gauge how they feel or should feel; Have trouble establishing boundaries; Become selfless caretakers of others but not themselves; Have an increased risk of revictimization; Have difficulty asking others for help; Become approval seekers and people-pleasers; Have trouble building a social support network or have trouble accepting support.
And given that toxic stress interferes with developing healthy neural, immune, and hormonal systems and can alter DNA expression so much that over time, multiple ACEs—especially without adequate adult support—can affect the nervous, endocrine, and immune systems and have lasting effects on attention, behaviour, decision-making, and response to stress throughout a lifetime.
Plus the fact that… there are decades of research linking ACEs to an increased risk of developing chronic diseases and behavioural challenges, including obesity, autoimmune disease, diabetes, heart disease, poor mental health, alcoholism, and even reduced life expectancy by as much as 20 years…
And finally, given that it is estimated approximately one-third of abused and neglected children will eventually victimize their own children (Prevent Child Abuse New York, 2003)…
Do you still think this is a good idea? it sounds like it’s more trouble than it’s worth!
I’ve answered your ‘cruel Asians’ point in my previous message. I’d only add that they tend to have extended family who can take in the sufferers. We’re atomised in the West and hand it all across to the iatrogenic psychiatric ‘doctors’ to mangle further.
I’d say regardless of the number of schizophrenics that, as members of our *own* race, they needed helping out. It should even be easier on that regard.
Adunai has also said:
My emphasis. Yes: he must be banned permanently.
Adunai’s comments quoted here leave one speechless
Adunai says he hates like a thousand suns (IMHO he must have been horribly abused as a toddler, and he has no memories about it). Hate is a good sign only if he uses that hatred to become a warrior and try to do something like in Pierce’s novel. But incels don’t think about a racial revolution because, unlike us priests of sacred words, they don’t have our guiding principles (4 and the 14 words). Burning your children alive is the exact opposite of those four words, Eliminad todo sufrimiento innecesario.
Anyway, you can get an idea of why Adunai shouldn’t be commenting on this site.
It’s the line ‘if science proved that…’ that gets me the most. Irrespective of the fact that scientism ‘proves’ many foolish things, it feels to me to be the clutching at straws equivalent of stating ‘if science proved that swallowing ricin every morning was conducive to a long and healthy life I’d be queuing up to distribute the vials’… I mean, what’s the chances it ever would conclude so foolish a thing (let alone definitively)?! I’m not sure if it makes him feel better, but I’m sterile, so sex is a superfluous activity to me anyway, and one I have come over time to view as biologically pointless in my own life. Me aside though, it disturbs me that he would envy those of our race who could produce the next generation of Aryan children so much that – for the very thing that does continue the race occurring! – he becomes actively genocidal towards his own people. It indicates that he has no interest in continued Aryan life, and simply wants sexual relations in and of themselves, for degenerate, hedonistic purposes. No, I don’t get the idea he wants health, luck, and future prosperity for Aryans at all. So why come out with these crazy schemes as if they were legitimate expression instead of just calling a spade a spade?