Jump to content

Matt D

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    348

  • Joined

  • Days Won

    16

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Matt D

  1. Matt D
    I’d like to start a conversation about women’s suffrage. I think a case can be made that giving women the vote was a huge mistake. Women are the rulers of the sexual domain, so when they’re given equal share over the political realm we get feminism and Hillary Clinton. Here’s a video I illustrated explaining how the integration of women into the political sphere has led to the decline of Western societies. Somebody is going to take women’s freedom away from them—it’s either going to be white Western men or North African / Islamic migrants. Which will they prefer? I want to stress--this isn’t a moral issue. If we presume a State exists and if we want to maximize freedoms for everyone, then women's suffrage—like illegal immigration--is essentially a government program because women (especially single women) tend to vote for leftist policies, the net result of which is greater power for the State. For more on the marriage gap see: http://www.crisismagazine.com/2012/the-marriage-gap-in-the-womens-vote Voting was supposed to be reserved for property-owning white men--typically the highest IQ in America. Since those days we've bought into the myth that everyone is equal and therefore deserves an equal say in their government. The only problem with that argument is it's just not true. You might say “it’s going to be impossible to repeal the 19th Amendment”. I'll respond to that with two points. Firstly, we did it with prohibition. Secondly, a lot of people thought that a politically incorrect businessman like Donald Trump wouldn’t have a chance at the Presidential office. And yet, he's poised to win the nomination. Also, maybe this doesn't require a political solution. We--men and women who are waking up to the lies of feminism--can start shaming women who try to influence politics. I look forward to hearing your comments.
  2. Matt D
    Do you like Donald Trump but on principle reject the idea of voting? Perhaps there's a third way...
  3. Matt D
    The reporter's response at the three minute mark is priceless: "Huh."
  4. Matt D
    Facts and Myths About IQ - Part 1 | Stefan Molyneux and Linda Gottfredson
  5. Matt D
    The Top Three Lies of Feminism | Milo Yiannopoulos
  6. Matt D
    Narration by Milo Yiannopoulos. Original audio - http://tomwoods.com/576/ This video is completely viewer supported. Please consider becoming a patron of our work: https://www.patreon.com/illustratedphilosophy
  7. Matt D
    Wow, this is incredible. Great job! Seriously, please follow up when you've published the final essay because I would love to share this as widely as possible. Here are some comments I wrote down whilst reading. Feel free to incorporate or discard as you see fit. -- "As the preference for rationality spread from the great thinkers of the enlightenment to the common man, the illusory ideal of “the consent of the governed” became popular." A lot of these great thinkers were in fact Christians or theists. There's nothing to correct, however I think many people forget that rational enlightenment came out of centuries of philosophical disputes within the church. "...and a well thought out contract will also include specific language that determines in what way the contract may be broken." All contracts must have this, not just those which are well thought out. You can't sell yourself into indefinite servitude and you can't give up your right to choose to break a contract. Good rape analogy! "So what is the common thread that binds together the people in societies that are generally peaceful?" 'Generally peaceful' sounds too vague imo. "While it is true that we now enjoy a measure of freedom and wealth that would absolutely baffle the hereditary aristocracies of old, we have not yet secured our liberty." I wonder if it's possible to secure liberty. You can choose liberty and even die for it, but the moment you think you're secure is the moment you're willing to forgo liberty for the sake of maintaining security. "...governments that use violence to punish subjects who do not conform to the edicts of the tribal council or of the local warlord, have always benefitted from parents’ use of physical violence to control and instruct children." Perhaps the word 'instruct' is to kind and only begs the question. At the very least, you might say 'discipline' or put quotations marks around "instruct". "It is almost universally understood that our interactions with children should be held to a higher standard of conduct than our interactions with other adults." If I were on the other side of the argument, I would feel annoyed that you are stating something is near universally understood before you have explained it to me, and I clearly don't understand it otherwise I wouldn't need to read your article. Also, it's not only the fact that children have fewer experiences, but the fact that children didn't choose to be born to a given family that we must hold a higher moral standard to our interactions with children. (Watch my illustrated video on Peaceful Parenting linked below. Stef does a good job with this concept.) "And again, we recognize that consent given in this area must be the consent of an adult, as a twelve year old does not have the necessary information or experience to make an informed decision that could have major impact on his life." If I were a devil's advocate I'd ask: Then is it justifiable to use force to stop a twelve-year old from having sex with an adult if both parties consent? "A child is someone that will hopefully assume the responsibilities and exercise the natural rights of adulthood at some point in the future. " Right. For instance, I am technically the slave master to plants and animals if I own pets or care for a flower. Although they are beings with limited consciousness and experience, I'm not really immoral for holding them as my captive because they will not later grow into human adults.
  8. Matt D
    Good catch.
  9. Matt D
    This is worth watching for Dr. Rushton (a former FDR guest) single-handedly taking on a panel of PC sociologists on topic of race and intelligence. There's also some interesting counterarguments put forward by Dr. Graves regarding R/K selection theory.
  10. Matt D
    Ayn Rand on Objectivism [seven minute video]
  11. Matt D
    Great read! So if you want to test a feminist to see if she really cares about gender equality, ask her what she thinks about radical Islam and monogamous marriage. If she says "I think people should be free to practice whatever religion they want and have sex with whomever they want" then you know she's an empty-headed leftist who is, knowingly or unknowingly, out to destroy civilization.
  12. Matt D
  13. Matt D
    It's my pleasure to serve you the next installment of Illustrated Philosophy. This time the topic is peaceful parenting. Please take the time to share this video. You know how important the message is.
  14. Matt D
    Old wisdom backed by new research: http://www.ted.com/talks/robert_waldinger_what_makes_a_good_life_lessons_from_the_longest_study_on_happiness
  15. Matt D
    I never understood how people could get so good at sports, or music, or dancing. It's part natural talent and partly because I've been drawing since I was twelve.
  16. Matt D
    New video: Support my work: https://www.patreon.com/illustratedphilosophy
  17. Matt D
    From 'The Origins of War in Child Abuse - Chapter 7 - Child Abuse, Homicide, and Raids in Tribes' by Lloyd DeMause. 00:14:09 - "Physical contact with the wife is avoided and separate sleeping areas are maintained by husbands. A gynarchy, composed of the mother, grandmother, and other mothers, brings up the children, so the boys have little contact with males in their early years and are utterly ambiguous about their gender. Archeologists have even determined that 'There were no neanderthal families to begin with since women and children lived in separate areas from the men in caves.' This arrangement was practiced, historically, from tribal cultures into early states, even in antiquity." http://www.fdrpodcasts.com/#/1456/the-origins-of-war-in-child-abuse-chapter-7-child-abuse-homicide-and-raids-in-tribes
  18. Matt D
    Thanks!
  19. Matt D
    My next project will be to create a sketch animation video series for either 'On Truth' or 'Practical Anarchy'. I will probably start off with just one chapter and see what kind of response I get before deciding to do the full thing. If you want to support my work you can do so on Patreon. https://www.patreon.com/illustratedphilosophy
  20. Matt D
    Mike, et. al. I made a couple purchases using FDR's amazon affiliate links. How do I know whether you all get compensated? Is there a way you could post the names of everyone who helped out or is that information kept private? I'd be curious to know what kind of kickback you get through them. I appreciate your reply! Matt
  21. Matt D
    You're right, the excerpt is just what got me thinking about the question. I don't have any conclusive evidence one way or the other. Yeah, I'm inclined to think it's all just politically motivated. The Islamic leaders can interpret religious text any way they please in order to spread hatred against whichever country with whom fighting would help best maintain their power. At the end of the day, it doesn't really matter if they hate us for our freedom or for our wars, because we know they hate freedom and love war.
  22. Matt D
    I've made enough mistakes that I can contribute to the wall of hard-won, red-flag knowledge: 1. Uses the phrase "I feel like...(you're not listening)" instead of "My perception is that..." This indicates shallow self-awareness of her genuine feelings because she can't separate thoughts from emotions. 2. Says she's interested in "exploring the possibility of" polyamory because "modern. feminism. oppression." UGH. Don't go there. (R selected) 3. Says she has a problem with your friends or if you have a problem with her friends. 4. Says she doesn't care how much money a man makes, it's his looks that drive her to date a guy. (R selected) 5. Tells you about her abusive family but says she doesn't see the harm in small doses of them. She treats her parents as a financial lifeline. 6. (repeat) Rushing into any kind of sexual act early on. Be especially wary if she tries to convince you your inhibitions are holding you back. (R selected to the max)
  23. Matt D
    This is such a common argument among libertarians and the MSM. It goes something like, "Of course Islamists hate America, we're always invading and bombing their country!" Sounds valid, but how much water does this theory hold? I was reading an essay by Bruce Bawer called "Crisis in Europe", published by Hudson Review 2006 (link to article on JSTOR below), which puts forward an interesting answer to this question. In it he draws on the scholar Bernard Lewis, author of The Crisis of Islam: "It's not American imperialism or exploitation that provokes Islamists but rather the seductive appeal of American culture, their own attraction to [it] which appalls them.... while outright Russian imperialism--including the Soviet Union's harsh suppression of Islam within its borders--has been a far more detrimental factor in the lives of Muslims than anything America has ever done. Russia has been criticized by Muslim leaders far less than America has." Bawer's essay focuses on the topic of Muslim non-integration into European culture. For this reason alone, it's well worth a read. Here's more from Bawer:
  24. Matt D
    I'm going to make the case that it's not about whether you vote or not, it's about how you talk about your decision to vote or not. I'm going to assume we're all anarchists here who want to see the eventual demise of the State. I hear a lot of people saying, "Focus on peaceful parenting and self-knowledge instead of voting." What I think they mean to say is: "Focus on peaceful parenting and self-knowledge instead of advocating for political action as a solution to violence." The act of voting itself is not necessarily the equivalent to advocating for political action as a solution if when talking to other people you explain that your vote was cast in self-defense of an injust system because you though that the odds of a better future were slightly better than flipping a coin. If they can't understand that, if they say "No, you are supporting the system implicitly", and they refuse to look at what you're actually saying, then they aren't worth your time. (Note: There may even be people who respond as such lurking here, so be warned.) For instance, a conversation could go something like this: Stranger: "Who'd you vote for?" Me: "I voted for Donald Trump. Although I'm an anarchist who believes that government is immoral because it's funded by theft, I definitely don't want to see my children grow up in a country governed by extreme totalitarianism. In the long term I think we need more people to speak out about the immorality of all forms of coercion are, including the deleterious effects of spanking and the abuse of children, but in the short term we also need to protect the conditions, such as free speech and the separation of church and state, left over from the European Enlightenment in order for our grandchildren to be able to have the conversation we're having right now without cowering in fear." Stranger: "Interesting. Do you think Trump can reverse the trend towards socialism? Won't he be a war-mongering hawk abroad just like all the others?" Me: "I think a Trump presidency would improve the odds of reversing that trend by a small amount... We know for sure that peaceful parenting is not going to experience a renaissance in the middle east any time soon. The West is the best shot the world has. Let's just say that in exchange for an hour of my time at the voting booth I can improve the chances of that happening from 5% to 10%. I think that's worth it, don't you?" ... And suddenly, I've just had an honest conversation about morality, peaceful parenting, immigration, values and statism all at once. They may not agree with me but that would be the case even if I told them "I don't vote because it goes against my principles", without explaining anything beyond that.
  25. Matt D
    I created this sketch animation to promote Freedomain Radio. The narration by Stef is from the end of the call-in show titled "FDR 3148: Being Clubbed By An Inert Brain". I apologize in advance for the grainy video quality. If this video is well-received I hope to do more projects of this sort in higher definition. If you can help out by sharing the video online, I would very much appreciate that.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.

  I accept