To Say That ‘Grass Is Green In Spring’ One Must Draw Swords

To Say That ‘Grass Is Green In Spring’ One Must Draw Swords
January 17, 2018 Admin

Greetings men-

VivatEuropa sent me this excellent video below.

Its with an Italian psychiatrist discussing what is going on in Italy and across the West.


Stones Are Grey

The video meshes well with an evolution in my thinking I’ve seen over the last few months. Not a huge mind you but a very slight pivot, which is that the only way to really frame progressivism from a metapolitical perspective is just to acknowledge it for what it is- mental illness.

Progressivism as we see in the West today is nothing but collective insanity or mental illness, and even engaging in language which implies that discussion of it is a political debate is counter-productive, because it can’t even be called that.

Now, it might seem contradictory to say this but I do think that the ‘Jordan Peterson approach’ of finding common ground and not making one’s opponent feel stupid can be quite successful and is good, but at the same time I think that things like mass-Muslim immigration, the current ‘transgender movement’, and everything else, can only properly be regarded as insanity, and we should relate to those who possess it with the same sympathy yet firmness of resolve that we do the schizophrenic or otherwise mentally ill.

I think the two approaches can be complimentary if done right.

Again, here is the interview with the Italian psychiatrist:




And here is an excellent video by Charisma On Command about Dr. Peterson – also a psychiatrist (or psychologist?) if I remember right:




Editor’s Note: These ‘Charisma On Command’ folks are VERY talented. Great channel.






Comments (4)

  1. SteveRogers42 1 month ago

    Jordan Peterson’s approach would make sense if both sides to the argument were acting in good faith and proceeding from a common set of values and vocabulary. This is why JFK and Barry Goldwater, or Richard Nixon and Scoop Jackson, could work together in respectful collegiality, since both sides were good Americans who were trying to do the right thing for the country as they saw it.

    This is not longer the case. The American consensus has been shattered. The pussyhat progressives, the BLM Bolsheviks, and the Anitfa anarchists are not honorable opponents, nor are they harmless little fluffballs who can be mollified with the proper therapy. They are actively seeking not just to demolish our political system, but our entire culture and civilization as well. This is 4GW.

    So with all due respect, I have to say that your approach of “sympathy and firmness of resolve” in the face of their destructive insanity does not go far enough. I think that these vermin need to be mercilessly mocked at every opportunity, attacking their appearance and mannerisms, their beliefs, their personal histories, and anything else we can get ahold of. We need to trigger their insane little brains with the goal of causing a meltdown in each and every one of them. No sympathy. No mercy. Let the chips fall where they may.

    “In war, there is no substitute for victory”
    –Gen. Douglas MacArthur

    • Author
      Admin 1 month ago

      You make a good point my esteemed friend.

      I think it depends on what we are talking about.

      I certainly would never counsel ‘compromise’ with the groups you mentioned. They are our enemies and wish to destroy us and kill our civilization.

      If we treat them as we would the extremely mentally ill, there is of course no compromise though.

      What I think Peterson demonstrates well is how to conduct oneself in those situations in which you actually ARE going to talk with them.

      In those circumstances I think his approach is more powerful than O’Reilly’s for instance, in the above clips.

      This is not because of anything to do with the SJW in question, as if they are mentally ill we don’t care what they think, but because it provides a more persuasive visual to those who might watch it and be red-pilled as a result.

      Tucker Carlson is a great example of this too.

      He will mock SJW’ism like crazy, but when he has one on his program and he actually engages with them rather than just yelling at them or something, and in so doing gives them the rope to hang themselves. Hence that infamous furrowed brow of his lol.

      Its the same way that you are going to look better to third parties when you are talking to a schizophrenic if you actually engage sincerely and with empathy, rather than just yelling at them despite their obvious mental illness.

      So yes, tactically and culturally I agree, ruthless mocking and critiquing.

      Individually though I like Peterson and Carlson’s approach, IF and WHEN it makes sense to engage one on one.

  2. Unknown 1 month ago

    Non-discrimination means that liars should no longer be called liars, criminals should no longer be called criminals, illegal immigrants should not be called illegal. All should be seen as of equal value, irrespective of their deeds – the only things that count are color, origin, religion, and sex. And all must be equal (except white european christian men, as these must be assumed to be over-privileged).
    Leftists have fallen in love with humanity, or rather an image of humanity that has been “photoshopped” to be more likeable for leftists – and they want all of us to adhere to that fake image. Of course it does not work in practice, but the fake image can still be enforced in communication. That needs a lot of repression, which is being called “political correctness”. Practically it is a shelter for liars, criminals, and illegal immigrants.

    • Author
      Admin 1 month ago

      I found that last interview Peterson just did with the British gal to be quite instructive… it was really amazing how heavily she was attacking him for the most commonsensical, normal stuff. I really think these nutjobs WOULD have us in concentration camps if they thought they could.

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *