Tag: SJW

“The Most Important Book of 2015”

The Most Important Book Of 2015: SJWs Always Lie

As someone who has been the target of SJW attacks for years, and who has helped bring awareness to their totalitarian interpretation of “justice,” I began reading Vox Day’s SJWs Always Lie with enthusiasm. Not only does it go into depth about what SJW’s think and how they behave, it also gives you a strategy for fighting back when they come after you or your organization.

SJW’s have so infected Western institutions and corporations that it
is inevitable you will come face-to-face with an SJW who hopes to harm
you and your livelihood. For that reason, SJWs Always Lie amounts to essential reading for all men. It’s the most important book I read in 2015.

In the universities, in the churches, in the
corporations, in the professional associations, in the editorial
offices, in the game studios, and just about everywhere else you can
imagine, free speech and free thought are under siege by a group of
fanatics as self-righteous as Savonarola, as ruthless as Stalin, as
ambitious as Napoleon, and as crazy as Caligula. They are the Social
Justice Warriors, the SJWs, the self-appointed thought police who have
been running amok throughout the West since the dawn of the politically
correct era in the 1990s.

Vox methodically breaks down the enemy that we have been fighting for
years, including their strengths, weaknesses, and modes of attack.
While information on fighting SJWs are available on various sites and
forums, this is the first time it has been assembled in one cohesive
work.

I very much appreciate the distinction. Regardless of what you might think of him, Roosh has been on the front lines of the cultural war and he has fearlessly continued to stand up for men, even men who disdain and disavow him.

Roosh knows, much better than most of us, the lengths to which SJWs are willing to go to disqualify, discredit, and destroy a man. That is why his praise for the book is so meaningful, and so significant.

SJWs defending their turf

One of the people following my author page received this from Goodreads today:

Hi there

Your account was recently brought to our attention.  Upon review, we have decided to remove it from the site.  A CSV of the books you shelved is attached for your personal records.  You are banned from using Goodreads in any capacity going forward.

Sincerely,

The Goodreads Team

That’s four banned already. As I said, for all the libertarian pretensions of the CEO, the company has been entirely converged. The purpose of Goodreads is no longer to simply read and review books, but to advance social justice ideals by building up SJW authors and attacking anti-SJW authors and anyone who supports them.

That is why Goodreads will go into decline and Amazon will eventually shut them down and replace them. The only way a converged business can survive is as a parasite, either with a government host or a corporate one.

They’ve been busy

It’s great to see how David Lambert and Alexandra Hollingshead, among others, have been so totally absorbed with reading all my books over the holidays….

It’s a good thing Goodreads banned the Rabid Puppies group or people might engage in an organized effort to attack authors by lowering their ratings!

This is why we need to establish non-converged cultural institutions and ruthlessly work to keep the SJWs out of them. SJWs will always stack the deck and do their very best to use whatever power they can obtain, be it petty or significant, in the interest of forcing social justice on society. And anyone who challenges their Narrative will not only be attacked, but silenced, and stripped of their ability to defend themselves or respond in kind, to the extent that the SJWs are able to do that.

“Society should treat all equally well who have deserved equally well of it, that is, who have deserved equally well absolutely. This is the highest abstract standard of social and distributive justice; towards which all institutions, and the efforts of all virtuous citizens should be made in the utmost degree to converge.”
 —John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism, 1861

Fortunately, efforts on several fronts are already underway, and your help will be needed on some of them. We’ll be having the January Brainstorm as soon as I get a time and date from the panelist I’ve selected, and we’ll be discussing the current state of the project I’ve chosen as my top priority as well as the panelist’s upcoming project.

It’s going to be short notice, so be prepared for that.

UPDATE: By the way, note that for all their posturing, SJWs clearly hate it when you call out their reviews for the ideological trash that they are.

I do suspect you’re a fake profile, much like some of the other lice which crawled all over my reviews of Day’s stuff.

Always hit back twice as hard. Remember, they are fragile creatures of little accomplishment; in many cases these attack “reviews” are their only sources of pride.

Code of Merit

Rosarior has made a solid attempt at providing an alternative to the Codes of Conduct that SJWs are successfully using in their attempt to enter and converge many open source software projects. It’s called the Code of Merit.

A meritocratic code of conduct devoid of social politics.

This Code of Merit should not be necessary. The fact that it is necessary means there is something wrong with the solutions the software industry is trying. They should recognize that fact and not insist that their solution is the only solution.

  1.     Software is like nature: it evolves, so the best implementation must prevail.
  2.     You will contribute, you will learn, and mistakes are allowed.
  3.     Mistakes are not final and everybody has a second chance.
  4.     Don’t expect others to do your work or help you with your work forever.
  5.     Harassment as defined by law will not be allowed. Questioning is not harassment. Repeated questioning after an individual has stated their desire for disengagement is harassment.
  6.     Censorship will not be permitted. Seeking to silence an individual voicing constructive opinions will not be allowed. Silencing vitriol is not censorship.
  7.     This is a space for technical prowess; world politics have no place here.
  8.     Everything that makes a person an individual, including but not limited to body, sex, sexual preference, race, language, religion, nationality, or political preferences are irrelevant in the scope of a technical project.
  9.     Everybody is different, so differences will not be mentioned by anyone, even by the individual suffering/experiencing/having/enjoying them. We are all individuals seeking the common goal of improving ourselves and improving our collective project.
  10.     Everybody has the same rights and the same opportunities to seek any challenge they want. The chance to screw up will not be denied to anybody.
  11.     There is no room for ambiguity: if an individual is ambiguous regarding a statement it is up to the individual to provide more context. Ambiguity will be met with questioning; further ambiguity will be met with silence.
  12.     If a discussion arises that cannot be solved in the space of the project, it will be discussed in a separate space. Disruption of the project will not be allowed.
  13.     This Code of Merit does not take precedence over governing law.

It’s a good start, and I certainly support the idea, but I find it both defensive and excessively explanatory. I also find that it leaves a few small cracks that SJWs will, as is their wont, ruthlessly attempt to exploit.

Here is a first pass at a weaponized version that I believe will be more effective in both rooting out and deterring SJW entryists.

OSS Code of Merit

Everyone who joins this project agrees to abide by this meritocratic code in the interest of successfully reaching the objectives of this project.

  1. No objectives beyond the stated objectives of this project are relevant to the project. Social Justice Warriors are not permitted to join this project in any capacity.
  2. Any attempt to suggest, propose, or otherwise advocate for an alternate Code of Conduct or to advance social justice ideals will result in immediate expulsion from the project.
  3. Your value to the project will be solely determined by your direct contributions to the project in the objective form of code, documentation, fundraising, and testing.
  4. No member of the project who has not contributed [a specified amount of code] is permitted to accept any board position, administrative position, or management-related role in the project.
  5. You will do your own work. Any attempt to pass off the work of others as your own will result in immediate expulsion from the project.
  6. Individual characteristics related to body, sex, sexual preference, race, language, religion, and nationality
    are irrelevant and will not be taken into account concerning your value to the project.
  7. If a discussion arises that cannot be solved in the space of the
    project, it will be discussed in a separate space. Disruption of the
    project will not be allowed.
  8. The director of the project is king, emperor, and god of the project. There are no limitations on his ability to make decisions and discipline members of the project. Cross him at risk of expulsion from the project.
  9. All present and future advisory boards will answer to the director of the project. The director can disband any and all boards and committees at will and at his sole discretion.
  10. The director of the project is X. The vice-director is Y. If the director is incapacitated or otherwise unable to perform his duties, Y will assume the director’s role for three months and will appoint a substitute vice-director. If the director is still unable to perform his duties after three months, Y will become the director of the project and the substitute vice-director will become the vice-director.
  11. If you do not approve of the direction or the objectives of the project, then leave the project.

One thing I’ve noticed is that SJWs always attempt to minimize the role of whoever started the project and made it successful, ergo shutting down any possibility of that by protecting the status of the project director and giving him the unrestricted ability to boot any member seeking to effect change should be the first priority of any project that wishes to remain productive and unconverged.

    When the coverup fails

    The SJWs of science fiction fandom have done their level best to denigrate, discredit and disqualify Daniel’s historic five-part expose on predatory child abuse in science fiction over the last five decades. They want to bury their sordid past, and hide their filthy present, because they know that their embrace of criminal deviancy will cause even the liberal mainstream to turn against them if it ever comes to light.

    • “[Day] is just writing stuff to fill his slate and then cackle both evilly and ineffectively.” – Chris S.
    • “RE: Castalia House’s new thing. It’s a reactionary tactic called Amplification, where they use the language of progressive politics to either accuse progressives of doing something horrible, or to claim that the horrible thing they do must be accepted by progressives or they’re being discriminatory.” – Lorcan Nagle
    • I haven’t stopped laughing at the weaksauce effort there yet. Even if I ignore the clearly incredibly out of context quotes as well as the utterly inaccurate paraphrasing of what people said, there’s still a great deal of it that seems to have come from an alternate universe.” – snowcrash 
    • “I hate to give Castalia House credit for anything, but their usage of Search Engine Optimization tactics ain’t bad. Using science fiction and the Clarke miniseries as a traffic driver, there may be new eyeballs that are exposed to his words. Of course, there could also end up being lots of traffic driven to CH for the words “rape” and “pedophilia“. I’ll bet he thinks of that as a victory condition, too, right up to the point where the authorities start asking questions.” – Glenn Hauman
    • “This blatant attempt to play “gotcha” with SF’s history of dealing with sexual abuse committed within its own community is a particularly vile and disgusting example of hypocrisy.” – McJulie
    • “That’s kind of wild misreading of what Delany said.” – Aaron

    As Daniel noted, these responses are not atypical, they represent the longtime position of the SF fandom community to protect the predators in its midst.

    Of all 200+ comments in the threads at File770, not one fan raised the question of what should be done about the problem. If the “Safe Space as Rape Room” series hasn’t demonstrated that there is a code of silence regarding pedophilia in science fiction, the feral reaction of the fans to this “old news” certainly does.

    Notably, of the above selections, three of the pedo-apologists comprise File 770’s Top 5 “most prolific” commenters of 2015: JJ, Peace Is My Middle Name, Aaron.

    So if you had any doubts that these are the thoughts of core fans, those doubts should now be gone.

    And, as we know, SJWs always lie. They cannot hide the truth, especially not while there are still witnesses able to call them out and expose their attempts to retroactively spin their Narrative.

    Excellent, if emetic article: I am Breen’s daughter Moira Greyland, and I am glad to answer questions, though I cannot promise they will be less emetic than the article itself.

    Seriously, this is very upsetting subject matter. I cried when I read your article, though I’ve been steeped in this material for awhile. Reading my father’s words is most upsetting.

    I wish I knew a little less.

    Another survivor is equally forthright:

    Speak up:

    For all the rape culture stuff that gets tossed around you can really reduce it to one word and that is: Silence.

    People who rape count on you being too shocked, too thrown off, and feeling too guilty and complicit for not doing something right away to speak up. Don’t let them get away with that. Speak up. Find help. Do whatever it takes to snap back to reality. I don’t care who you are or how you vote, that’s the single best thing you can do for yourself or anyone else.

    They are speaking up. We are willing to stand up, speak out, and support them, those individuals who have survived far worse from SF fandom than anything we have ever experienced at their nasty little hands.

    For those who wish to question our motivations, we have but one response: “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

    And there is no friend more loyal than a Rabid Puppy.

    SJWs, exposed

    The SJW calling himself Hawk S. Rabidus made a risibly false claim.

    Nobody else is organizing or manipulating things on Goodreads (or the Hugos) using concerted action. There is no cabal.

    There most certainly is, as in both cases, the emergent behavior of the various individuals who share an interest in pushing social justice is observably manifest. In the case of the Hugos, the editors at Tor Books have been engaging in concerted action for decades. They have, by their own admission, decided when new awards will be created, when they will win those awards, and when they will step back and permit others to win them. In the case of Goodreads, it is a group of petty SJWs and SJW librarians who have collectively sought to lower the ratings of right wing authors. Thanks to Sean O’Hara, we were able to put together the list of all 100 or so, including moderators like rivka, and librarians like banillah, Bryan Young, davidofterra, and Getty Hesse.

     SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police
    by Vox Day, Milo Yiannopoulos (Foreword)
    Getty Hesse’s review
    Jan 04, 16

    did not like it

    I’m putting this review up because the book desperately needs a lower rating. One does not need to read this book. The very blurb is resplendent with contradictions.

    SJWs subject the world to “their intolerant thought and speech policing,” and yet the VERY NEXT SENTENCE speaks of “the SJW agenda of diversity, tolerance, inclusiveness, and equality.” Tolerance cannot be intolerant. Vox Day is saying here that something is not itself. And he doesn’t even suggest that their “agenda” is something else masquerading as “diversity,tolerance, inclusiveness, and equality,” oh no, rather these things contradict “both science and observable reality.” I’m not even going to bother to explain why that statement is incredibly idiotic. Anyone with half a brain cell should be able to figure it out.

    And, for the record, Vox Day is not “the most hated man in science fiction.” He’s the most laughed at.

    If SJWs could do logic, they wouldn’t be SJWs. Forgive the digression, but Getty Hesse’s pseudo-dialectic makes my teeth itch. It’s true that X cannot be Not X, but Y most certainly can be. In much the same way Tom Brady is not the New England Patriots playbook, SJWs are not the professed SJW agenda. As usual, both Vox’s First Law and the First Law of SJW can be seen here.

    What is interesting about Goodreads is that it provides an excellent way of publicly identifying where people stand on the socio-political spectrum. Aside from the amusement that this latest showdown has provided, it has sparked some very interesting discussions in our tech circle, including some things we’re going to discuss in our next Brainstorm, where we will talk about the planned fork of Wikipedia and the shape of its eventual replacement.

    More importantly, this has finally allowed me to answer the core question with which I have been wrestling: do we create something that is a right-wing alternative to Wikipedia or do we shoot to replace it entirely with something better that the left can be safely permitted to use without converging it like they always do?

    Speaking of things that provoke laughter, Rolf Nelson received an email from The Goodreads Team explaining why they would not be removing an obviously fake review in which it was apparent that the reviewer could not possibly have read the book.

    Goodreads policy allows users to rate a book as soon as it is listed on the site. We do not dictate on what basis Goodreads members form their personal opinions about a book, so we have no rules about reading the full text of a book before rating and reviewing it. We recognize that not everyone will agree with this policy, but it is one that has worked well for the Goodreads community over time.

    Users are entitled to express their honest opinions about the book,
    even if others feel them to be misguided or wrong. We don’t evaluate a
    reader’s opinions based on how, when, or why they made a judgement about
    the work that they read. Given the subjective nature of reviews, it’s
    hard to designate one review as “wrong” and another “right.” Even if we
    could, it would be impractical to manually verify the authenticity of
    every statement made in a Goodreads review, and we have to be consistent
    in how we apply our policies.  

    That would explain why they were able to ban me in good conscience: they have no need to be consistent about how they apply their unviolated non-policies.

    But we shouldn’t be surprised that Goodreads’ policy permits the review of books one hasn’t read, as it even permits the review of books that don’t exist. Two Goodreads librarians have one-starred a book that I supposedly wrote for Ben Bella that was never signed to a contract, that I never wrote, and Ben Bella never published. It’s nice that ignoring reality has worked well for the Goodreads community over time, but history is quite clear on the way that reality tends to impose itself in the end.

    One more tangent, if you don’t mind. Ben Bella graciously returned to me the audiobook rights to The Irrational Atheist and we expect it to be available on Audible from Castalia House sometime in the February-March timeframe.

    Review fun with Sean O’Hara

    So, it turns out that Sean’s got some really… interesting… reviews. I liked this one of, ahem,  Bodacious Space Pirates, of all things. Apparently if you stare too long into the abyss of hyperspace, you’ll eventually see some oversized tits.

    Bodacious Space Pirates: Abyss of Hyperspace Vol. 1
    Sean O’Hara’s review
    Sep 14, 15

    liked it
    bookshelves: manga, space-pirates, space-opera, science-fiction
    Read on September 13, 2015

    I wish the novels would come out in English. This just isn’t a very good substitute.

    I wonder why he is reading Bodacious Space Pirates if he can’t read Japanese? Sadly, Sean can’t even get the “review the editing non-review” right, and today introduced the innovative “review the non-editing non-review”:

    Riding the Red Horse
    Sean O’Hara’s review
    Jan 04, 16

    did not like it

    This book claims to have been edited by Tom Kratman and Teddy Beale. This is a lie. They couldn’t edit an elementary school newsletter. To call what they did here “editing” is an insult to editors the world over. It’s more like they got their friends together and had everyone shit on a plate. And for some reason they’re inordinately proud of what they produced.

    But then again, there’s a good chance a similar pile of shit will become President, so maybe they have a point. 

    Fascinating. He’s attacking everyone from Jerry Pournelle to William S. Lind. While declaring that the book – the book – claims it was edited by people who did not edit it. I wonder who did? And were they bodacious?

    And then there is this, which one would have thought defied description. And yet, Sean somehow manages the trick.

    Princess Jellyfish, Vol. 1
    Sean O’Hara’s review
    Jul 20, 15

    really liked it
    bookshelves: manga, josei, romance
    Read on July 15, 2015

    How to sum up the plot of Princess Jellyfish…? Well, it’s a romance involving a love triangle between a nerdy girl, a transvestite, and the transvestite’s brother who’s a rising star of the political world. Also, real estate plays a big role, as does fashion design and of course jellyfish.

    Of course jellyfish! How could there not be jellyfish when there are transvestites?

    I think it goes without saying that what we have here is a gentlemen who has never, ever, kissed a real live girl. And there is more, there is literally 548 reviews more. You have to read them to believe them; they are too freaking funny!

    They owe him

    It’s always interesting to see how SJWs continually vacillate between claiming that I am totally insignificant and can’t possibly achieve anything and asserting that I am a dire threat to SJW convergence who must be stopped at all costs.

    You All Owe Me

    So, you may be familiar with Vox Day, the neofascist scumbag who tried to game the Hugos last year because the award always goes to so-called “social justice warrior” authors. Well recently, after people pointed out that the Goodreads Choice Awards have a wide, wide user base and still award the same type of books as the Hugos and Nebulas, he decided to take action. Over New Years weekend he announced the formation of a Goodreads group with the purpose of gaming the site. Of course the group was set to private so the evil SJWs wouldn’t be able to see what he was up to.

    Too bad for him the only thing keeping out the SJWs was a challenge question that could be answered with a simple Google search. By Saturday night I had access to the group. I didn’t know what to do — undermine him from the inside, play Serpico and leak screenshots on a piecemeal basis, or save them up for a big reveal. The last one seemed the best way not to get caught until I had a good collection of dirt, and I was strongly leaning in that direction.

    But after reading File770’s news roundup yesterday, which included a story about someone being ganged up on by Day and his goons, I decided it might be better to give warning where I could…. Since Vlad so kindly left a link to this evil librarian who had cut off
    his privileges, I decided to contact him with a warning. Within eight
    hours Vox Day’s group was gone and VD’s over on his blog whining about
    being banned here.

    It doesn’t seem to have occurred to Sean O’Hara, the SJW infiltrator par excellence, that I made no effort to keep out SJW entryists; I literally wrote the book on SJW entrysm, after all. And Castalia House has been under nonstop cracking attempts since last April. The supersecret question that Sean managed to puzzle out was: “What is the name of the spokesmanatee”.

    The goal had absolutely nothing to do with committing any vandalism on the site. The goal was to see to what extent the SJWs were running amok on Goodreads and smoke them out. I also wanted to learn the system in the build-up to the next Reader’s Choice award, which is not something to which I had hitherto paid any attention, but at least superficially looked less corrupt than the Hugo Awards. We discovered how converged the site is much faster than I had anticipated, thanks to Sean and Rivka, who is not only a librarian, but a moderator.

    It should be obvious that if I had any desire to wreak havoc, I would not have formed a public group of around 200 people and permitted anyone to join it. I would have simply unleashed the 466 Vile Faceless Minions sworn to mindless obedience of the Supreme Dark Lord.

    In any event, this isn’t over. If you want to weigh in, make a Goodreads account, follow my author page, and rate a few books that you’ve read. It only takes a few seconds, and obviously, it is something the SJWs there greatly fear or they would not have reacted as they did. Once more, we see that whatever they have read, it isn’t Sun Tzu.

    Here is an example of a one-star review that Goodreads still deems appropriate and features on its site:

    Rhea rated it did not like it
    Shelves: 0-stars-not-even-literature, never-ever-read

    The author is a bag of shit, a brainless cockroach, a demented baboon. He (or should I call him “it”?) is racist and sexist and writes poorly-conceived, cookie-cutter, Tolkein-clone, wish-fulfillment fantasy to fill its empty life. Fuck you and fuck your mother for not having her priorities straight nine months before you were born.

    Also, if you read one or two of its blog posts you will see that it has absolutely no sense of logic. I skimmed over one and apperently Vox says that because women are suffering from sex abuse at workplaces, they shouldn’t work at all because their presence is causing “smart capable men” to “turn into rapists.” What the honest fuck?!? WHAT KIND OF ACID DO YOU HAVE TO BE ON TO ARRIVE AT THAT CONCLUSION!?!? Is he drunk??? Is he a troll??? Is he even human??? My theory is that his father had sex with a horse…

    Here is an example of a one-star review that Goodreads deemed worthy of a permanent ban and removed from their site, in addition to a four-star review of Banks’s The Business and a five-star review of Haruki Murakami’s A Wild Sheep Chase.

    Vox Day rated it did not like it
    Shelves: fiction

    THE WASP FACTORY, by Iain Banks, was declared to be one of the top 100 novels of the 20th century by The Independent. That being the case, one can only presume that the Unabomber’s Manifesto, a collection of the Best of The Penthouse Forum Letters, and a recipe for recycling human waste finished in the top 10.

    The Wasp Factory is grotesque in almost every possible way. It is a horror story that is carefully calculated to shock and appall the senses in much the same way, and for much the same reason, that a performance artist would defecate on stage and then roll around in his own excrement. If one reads this book without feeling at least a little disgusted with the author and inclined to wonder what his problem is, there is almost certainly something psychologically wrong with you. The fact that the author succeeds in his obvious authorial intent is not an indication of “exceptional quality”, but merely demonstrates the depths to which the author intended to descend.

    Iain Banks is not a bad writer. Quite the opposite, and I have read and enjoyed a number of his books. But The Wasp Factory is about as egregious a misuse, as irresponsible an abuse, of an author’s literary talent as one can imagine. The plot is absurd, the characters are paper-thin and completely lacking in any credibility whatsoever, and their bizarre sadism is surpassed only by that of the author in subjecting the reader to this novel.

    The fact that it was highly praised is a severe indictment of the terrible state of modern literary criticism.

    Social Justice convergence at Goodreads

    This is hilarious. Goodreads not only deleted my account in less than 36 hours, but they deleted the Rabid Puppies group as well.

    Hello Vox,

    Your account was recently brought to our attention.  Upon review, we have decided to remove it from the site.  A CSV of the books you shelved is attached for your personal records.  You are banned from using Goodreads in any capacity going forward.

    Sincerely,
    The Goodreads Team

    La, whatever shall I do without SJWs telling me what to read? In any event, that should certainly suffice to demonstrate what sort of playing field they have established there. It’s an interesting sort of business plan that revolves around marketing only to the left side of the political spectrum.

    Of course, they’re not alone. Consider the open source projects that have also been converged. As I have written, keep them out, or they’ll eventually kick you out.

    But what these actions demonstrate is weakness and what they represent is opportunity. Every company that is converged is handing a competitor the opportunity to FoxNews them. Whether it is Mozilla or Wikipedia or Goodreads, the eventual outcome is clear: they will go the way of CNN as soon as a non-SJW competitor appears.