ARI Supporter Attacks Me and Linz

Neil Parille's picture
Submitted by Neil Parille on Sat, 2017-08-05 22:08

He accepts Yaron's attack on Linz . . . . what's new . , .

Quack Quack Quack

VSD's picture

where's my free-range-coop where I can lay an egg a day and bathe in muddy waters so as not to think or worse articulate those thoughts : D however you can't have biology rule and then artificially suppress it - so I demand my little eggs to lovingly care and breed over : P
I (think I) know where you're coming from Linz but with such (abundant) posts (taken out of context of knowing Solo before it became purely about passion) it makes you sound like the worst misogynist since girls first picketed a war-time president ; )
ahhh well - I'll just go back to my little pond in my neck of the woods and leave you alpha warriors to conquer the world : P
note to self: stop deluding yourself that reason will return to passion ... no more solo for the next 6 months (at least)! bye ...

Bwook: Unclear and Wwong, as Usual

Grant Jones's picture

"Man's metaphysical nature becomes less and less relevant." Well, he did support a woman (and sociopath) for president. Men and women have sufficient free will to act contrary to their nature. But, free will doesn't allow one to evade the consequences of such decisions, which is misery and unhappiness.

"Nature, to be commanded must be obeyed," Francis Bacon. "Nature is less and less relevant because of iPhones," Yawon Bwook.


Lindsay Perigo's picture

I've heard the exact opposite being said as well. That the more the society is free the more the biologically driven urges tend to become apparent, because more free to express themselves.

Problem arises when artificially aggressive wimmin insist on having jobs as well as indulging their biological urges.

In the Linzist universe, easily taken care of: since all women nowadays are fry-quackers, who perpetrate a crime against humanity every time they open their mouths, they must be placed under house arrest, where they can freely indulge their biological urges without sabotaging civilisation.

On second thoughts, they might pass on their fry-quacking to their brood. Best to pre-empt that. Short-term expedient: subsidised contraceptive implants to ensure no breeding by fry-quackers. And of course, no vote for fry-quackers.

Serious point: Yawon Bwook in this instance not guilty as charged. Didn't say gender is a social constwuct. Did, however, say wace is. Obleftivism!

I agree with Linz

Bruno's picture

I think Yaron here is making a valid point, though debateable.

I've heard the exact opposite being said as well. That the more the society is free the more the biologically driven urges tend to become apparent, because more free to express themselves.

Anyhow, Yaron has never jumped on the gender is a social construct bandwagon, though he's on board with race being a social construct.

Yawon and social constwucts

Lindsay Perigo's picture

In all fairness to Yawon, I don't think he's arguing that gender is a social constwuct in the exchange Gwant links to. Hewe it is:

Al Meyer · 1:14:55 The main thing is that usually women prefer to spend time around family and friends rather than be at work for all that time. No doubt about the ability, but the desire usually isn't there.

Yaron Brook · But what is the source of their lack of desire? Is it engrained by biology, or other factors?

Al Meyer · Just my opinion, but probably biology. Since women are generally the care givers in nature. As someone else pointed out women are generally more empathetic and caring whereas men are more driven to protect and provide.

Yaron Brook · Al Meyer not obvious to me that this is not overridden by reason in a modern world. Once many options and choices are available, I think biology becomes less and less relevant.

Yawon is weally saying, as best I can tell, that the twaditional biological urges of women to build a nest etc awe incweasingly being ovew-widden by conscious choices. Which is twue. Note, Yawon is allowing for mind-body dichotomy hewe. As he should, since thewe is some, as any honest acknowledgement of the animal part of "wational animal" must allow. Yawon of course would nevew admit this if someone wewe to call him and point it out. Doctwinaire dogmatism would immediately weassert itself.


Neil Parille's picture

Got the weport fwom you.

Yeaw Neiwl

Grant Jones's picture

I saw that report. The ARIians will deny and ignore it while citing cooked statistics from their libertarian friends at CATO.

In other news. Yawon Bwook comes out in favor of the theory that "gender" is socially constructed:

"...not obvious to me that this is not overridden by reason in a modern world. Once many options and choices are available, I think biology becomes less and less relevant" Yawon Bwook

"I think biology becomes less and less relevant." WTF? I'm mean WTF!?

Immigrants And Crime

Neil Parille's picture

So here is data that refutes Lyin' Yaron Brook on his claim that immigrants commit crime at a "much, much lower rate" than the native born -


Neil Parille's picture

Gwant. My experience is that you can ask Amy, Biddle, Brook, etc. until you are blue in the face about how they would screen third worlders and you will never get an answer.

The immigration debate in immigration circles started in depth 2 years ago when Amy critiqued Ed Mazlish's piece on her blog. We still don't know what Amy and Yaron supposedly believe about screening, Islamic immigration, etc. Maybe it's not our fault.


Lindsay Perigo's picture

The problem here is not ARI's "thickness"—it's their conscious capitulation to evil and promotion thereof. Obleftivism. The whole Peikoff/Binswanker/Warts/Bwook Axis of Evil must be taken down. Whatever else may be said about them, they're not stupid; they know what they're doing, and I've no doubt they're being paid to do it.

Note, not one luminary from the aforementioned OrgOist Axis of Evil has tried to defend Obleftivism's intrinsicist view of rights.

What exactly did Amy block you from? Some Faecesbook thing? Badge of honour! Smiling

The Nose Ring and "Harassment"

Grant Jones's picture

I'm glad Amy was able to update us on her aesthetic preferences for nose rings. That's a load off.

I'm the one she's referring to around the 37 minute mark. To be honest, I only listened to a few minutes of it. That's all I can handle of her droning on about subjects she knows little or nothing about.

For the record: about a week ago she posted a news story about Moslem savages being Moslem savages in Pakistan. I responded that she supported importing these savages if they didn't have a criminal record or rabies. She denied it. I posted a quote and link to an article in Cap Mag where she said just that. Then she denied her words meant what they mean. I didn't respond. I posted a response to her Fox News clip yesterday thanking her for admitting that she supports open immigration and no cultural screening for Mohammedans. Her response was to block me. Her idea of "harassment" is pointing out the contradictions of her ludicrous viewpoint.

We can leave aside Amy's dishonesty. What's important is that there isn't a dime's worth of difference between her Craig Biddle type "screening" and Harry Binswanger's more insane no-borders views. The result is the same. Something like 90% of the population of Pakistan would be eligible for immigration under Amy's standard. How is the US government suppose to determine if this or that Mohammedan was involved in mob violence back in the Punjab? Of course, the stealth Jihad is even more dangerous that the violent variety. Amy and Biddle have apparently the same "solution" to the stealth jihad: ignore it and it will go away.

She has indeed gone full Merkel. Or full Obama, or full Bush on this issue. Never mind the political, cultural and economic imbecility of her position. For forty years Amy's ilk have argued about the alleged economic benefits of mass third world immigration. Where are these benefits? The benefits don't exist for most of the American people. The American people have seen their quality of life deteriorate. Of course, mass immigration is not the only cause of their reduced quality of life, but it's a big one. They know it. Amy, and her ARI ilk, are too thick to understand the optics involved. Keep telling the American people that "capitalism requires turning the entire country into California and your working class neighborhood into a third world toilet" and all they've done is discredit capitalism. That they're too stupid to realize this basic truth demonstrates their gross incompetence as "philosophers."

P.S. Amy's premise is complete nonsense. There is no such thing as a "right" to cross an international frontier. No such "right" exist in the natural or legal sense. Furthermore, these open immigration types have never attempted to make that argument beyond parroting Ayn Rand. That's because as rationalists, they have no interest in the facts of reality to give rise to rights both moral and political. Context is not their friend on this and most other issues.

Amy Supports Open Immigration Of Muslims

Neil Parille's picture

Here at 37 mins on:

Yes she would somehow (no explanation given) support the exclusion of the really bad ones, but that's it.

And if I understand her correctly the burden would be on the USA to show that a particular Muslim immigrant is a risk. Guess she has never heard of Taquiya.

Thanks Amy, at least you have clarified it - you have now gone full Merkel. And thanks for attacking me (if I'm the one you mentioned - although I have not attacked you on FB).

And read Locke sweetie - he didn't support rights for Catholics and atheists, so I can only imagine what he would have thought about your belief that Islamic immigration is a right.


Neil Parille's picture

Amy now goes full open immigration - (first 15 minutes)

Amy seemed somewhat skeptical about open immigration in the past, but now is towing the ARI line.

Linz, you are right about Amy and Apple.

Thank goodness ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... Bruno listens to Bwook for his MOGA! series. Saves *me* the torture!

Was that Amy I just saw on The Next Revolution? I just caught the last few seconds where she or someone who looked just like her was part of a panel. Will have to watch the repeat.

Update: yes, it was Amy, pushing the Bwook/Binswanker Obleftivist line on open borders, no right to protect ourselves from alien cultures, etc. If I'm not mistaken she also at one point defended Apple for refusing to break open the Iphone of the San Bernardino Islamofilth terrorist. I can't be sure—she was very waffly in that segment, upward-inflecting a lot and sounding like a ditzy schoolgirl (looking like one as well with that dumb nose-ring). If that indeed is what she was saying then she just inducted herself into TF as far as I'm concerned. That's The Filth.

Yawon says Muslims in Sweden are mere "pests" and the weal thweat to Western Civilisation is Twump. Weally?

Yaron's Latest On Immigration

Neil Parille's picture

Still calls for open immigration - no mention of excepting Muslims.

Starting around 48 minutes.

I can't listen to this Brook

Andrew Atkin's picture

I can't listen to this Brook guy for no other reason that he can't pronounce his R's. I just can't shake the feeling that I'm listening to a three year old. It actually antagonises me. I also can't stand the way Tommy Robinson talks - mutated trash.

You're probably right, Lindsay. Speech is extremely important. It's just too 'primal' to ignore.

And here's another thought: Why have we been biologically programmed to react so strongly to speech (good and bad)? Maybe it really is less superficial than we like to think? Nature's way for telling us there really is a bit of a problem with the individual?

To be clear ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

I've said this repeatedly, but here it is again: *I* was the one who pulled out of the debate with Yawon, after a last-minute demand from Amy that I undertake not to utter any "broad criticism of Yaron." I don't doubt that that demand came from Yawon himself, and that my pulling out was exactly what he hoped for, as evidenced by the fact that Amy gleefully announced it on Faecesbook within seconds and made no effort to speak to me about it privately. I haven't heard a thing from her since. That lot are awash in bad faith.

Here's my challenge: I'll debate Yawon any time with a neutral moderator (not a paid intellectual whore like Amy) we mutually agree to, and with no pre-conditions. I'd love to call him the evil treasonist that he is to his face; he can call me whatever he likes. No holds barred, not even a commitment to be civil, though I'd agreed to that for Amy's programme. Civility in the face of evil is no virtue—and Islamenabler Obleftivist Yawon is Evil Incarnate.

So let this challenge go forth! Yawon, bwing it on!!!!

Seriously ...

Grant Jones's picture

Is this person Yaron Brook's sockpuppet? He provides some video of Brook from two years ago as if he isn't all over the place on immigration. As if, Brook isn't too gutless and dishonest to present his views in objective writing. Then he rationalizes Brook wussing out of the debate with Perigo. He then states that a twelve minute long discussion with a non-Objectivist constitutes a "debate." Then, he denies that Brook, and many other Obleftivist leaders, slander those of us who disagree with their no-border dogma as racist and xenophobic.

It's quite clear who the dishonest one is. Keep after them Nweil.

P.S. I visited this guy's Twatter page. Neil is his only apparent reader. Neil is certainly the only one who bothers to comment on its brainless, unoriginal Objectivish boilerplate. So, Yawon Bwook's Sockpuppet should be nicer to Neil, given that Neil may be his entire audience/only customer.

P.P.S. Neil, good job responding to him on the limited Twatter format. You quickly refuted his points.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.