Quote of the day—Larry Correia

I really don’t get the mindset where being willing to hurt a perpetrator is equivalent to blaming a victim.

If you truly believe in empowering women, then you shouldn’t stand in the way of the ones who choose to defend themselves.

Larry Correia
June 10, 2014
The Naive Idiocy of Teaching Rapists Not To Rape
[I think the mindset he describes is extremely harmful and out of touch with reality. But I do sort of understand it.

It is a cultural thing. They view taking responsibility for your own self-defense as “joining the cult of individualism”. They view rapists as someone in “the collective” who hasn’t been sufficiently indoctrinated. If only the collective had more power…

Individualist are opposed to giving more power to the collective hence we, by our very nature, are opposed to what they view as a force for good. Giving individual women the power to defend themselves distinguishes them from the masses of women that do not have the inclination, skills, or tools to defend themselves. It is cultural suicide for the collective to encourage individuals to stand out.

But understanding it doesn’t mean we have to accept it. Only in a homogenous collective is one opinion or viewpoint just as valid as another. This is their goal. Their utopia will be achieved when the response to dissent is a prison term, a psych ward, or a bullet to the head* and the power of the collective is nearly infinite in comparison to the power of the individual.

We need to do all we can to legally and morally destroy the cult of the collective. It’s not just anti-women it’s basis of all the great genocides of the 20th Century and perhaps of all time.—Joe]


* I’m nearly finished with The Gulag Archipelago, 1918-1956: An Experiment in Literary Investigation (Volume One). Lenin and Stalin’s vision and the implementation of that vision are disturbingly vivid right now.

21 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Larry Correia

  1. “Cult of individualism”
    Hmm. Could there be a more self-contradictory term? I thought of “ice-cold heat” but then many ices can still have significant, useable heat in them. “Darkness of light”, maybe.

    Collectivists view rapists as being in the collective, do they? Interesting that they would acknowledge a rapist as one of their own, and correctly so. A capitalist would have sex on a peaceable, voluntary basis, whereas a collectivist intends to get his wants and needs fulfilled through coercion. What after all is the moral difference between a rapist and anyone who advocates “redistributive change”? They all share the one belief that says, “If someone else has it and you want it, you deserve it, so take it. Anyone who resists is only being selfish and needs to be punished for it.”

    That’s Obama and all Progressive/authoritarians right there, and as I’ve said, when we look into what drives the communist mind, we’re looking right into the criminal mind.

    • Interesting observations, and I can find no logical fault in them.

      As an aside, I think we can also agree that the “feminists” saying that men should “just not rape” while simultaneously advocating a culture of disarmament – disempowerment in the name of empowerment, if you will – that makes it easier and safer for men to rape is a set-up for failure.

      However, I’m increasingly finding that this is a feature, not a bug. Any world view espousing equal rights and equal responsibilities between men and women is a direct threat to the hardcore “feminist” agenda, in which women are granted all the privileges while men are stuck with all the responsibilities, and any transfer of responsibility to women – self-defense, in this case – constitutes an unfair burden on women.

      They refuse to allow a man to be their “knight in shining armor,” calling such actions “misogynistic,” “chauvinistic,” “demeaning,” and “antiquated,” but at the same time they refuse to take responsibility for their own safety and shriek in disgust at women who do. Disempowerment in the name of empowerment, indeed.

      • It’s all about the demoralization, and therefore weakening, of our society.

        So the question is; how deeply can we be weakened, how long will it take, and when will we wake up and see what’s happening? All of that goes into the question; when are we “ripe enough” for the picking? It’s like deciding on when to buy in the stock market; when have we as a society bottomed out in this cycle?

        I can’t begin to answer that. Some people say it’s between now and this November. It may be another hundred years for all I know, but indicators seem to say “soon”.

  2. This same idiocy is present in the ubiquitous “Sexual Harassment” class so beloved of large corporate America.

    And why isn’t self defense included as the founding concept of “our bodies, ourselves?” If you can’t ensure basic bodily integrity and safety, anything that comes out of that movement is merely an enshrinement of a pecking order, with the all-powerful, all-knowing yet somehow benevolent government at the top, and the poor, weak and helpless of whatever group is on the outs with said all powerful, all knowing yet benevolent government, on the bottom.

  3. “Only in a homogenous collective is one opinion or viewpoint just as valid as another.”

    Really? Why should one OPINION be more valid than all the rest? Keep in mind an opinion (dictionary definition) is “a view or judgment formed about something, not necessarily based on fact or knowledge.”

    Shouldn’t all OPINIONS be just as valid as another?

        • As if you have any concept of thought. You’re a herd animal who cannot stand seeing people outside the herd; you demand they be forced into it.

    • I know people who are of the opinion that a perpetual motion machine could be built, so “No”. I know people who are of the opinion that “redistributive change” (wholesale robbery) is a wonderful idea, so “No”. Then there are those who have the opinion that all “teabaggers” are horrible and dangerous and must be put down because of their opinions, and so we come to the opinion of those who SAY that all opinions are equally valid; What they mean is that all opinions which run counter to the Founding Principles of America are fine and wonderful, whereas opinions favoring the American Founding Principles are to be quashed.

      A similar term, “Open Minded”, refers to anyone who agrees with Progressives/communists/authoritarians or will otherwise stay out of their way, whereas “Closed Minded” refers to anyone who favors liberty and morality or otherwise opposes Progressives/comminists/authroitarians.

      But you knew that already or you wouldn’t be trying that tired, cheap, transparent, idiotic, old trick. I would have thought that, by now, you’d now better than to use that garbage here.

      Besides; “judgment formed…not…based on fact or knowledge” is what? Let’s just say that you’ve offered a lot of opinion here over the years.

    • I suppose it depends on how you view the phrase “just as valid”. If you mean “it is still an opinion regardless of it’s merits” then you are correct. What I intended, but didn’t make clear, was “not all opinions are of equal merit”.

      I give greater merit to the claim that arson was involved in a fire to the investigator expressing his expert opinion than I do to heavily in debt owner of the property trying to collect insurance money who claims it was not arson.

      I give greater merit to the claim an infection is due to bacteria by a medical doctor who is looking at the lab reports than I do to the person claiming the sores were from the spit of the devil.

      Are you saying you do give equal merit to all opinions?

      • I think you got it! The word should have been “merit” instead of “valid.”

        “I think Catholics are better than Jews” or “I think Jews are better than Catholics.” Those are both opinions and I believe they should be treated equally. It’s like that old saying “Opinions: Everybody has one.”

        • P.S. You are giving greater merit to professional opinions, not just opinions. A professional opinion would meet a higher standard to substantiate that opinion. It would also be a form of collective opinion (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion) since, the examples you gave, would be based on scientific research.

    • “Shouldn’t all OPINIONS be just as valid as another?”

      This is a joke, right?

      Stop. Reread what you wrote, then consider what it might say about your patterns of thought.

      Remember, it used to be a matter of opinion that blacks were unequal to and should be subservient to whites, too.

  4. “Those who do not possess swords can still die upon them” Eowyn of Rohan. The belief that self defense is wrong is insane.

  5. They view taking responsibility for your own self-defense as “joining the cult of individualism”. They view rapists as someone in “the collective” who hasn’t been sufficiently indoctrinated. If only the collective had more power…

    I have a different – and simpler – understanding. I think that when we say women should learn to defend themselves, they believe we are also saying that those who don’t (or somehow fail to) defend themselves somehow deserve what happens.* Or, put another way, they view advocating that all women should learn to defend themselves somehow shifts the blame for rape to those who don’t learn to defend themselves.

    It’s wrong, but I think they honestly believe this.

    * I’m pretty sure there’s a name for this type of logical fallacy (falsely associating two unrelated beliefs), but I can’t remember it or find it.

    • Category error, I think – they lump “failed to prepare” with “deserve what happens to them (deserves zero sympathy),” rather than with “unfortunate but possibly preventable (deserving of some sympathy and corrective education).”

  6. A friend of mine said “I think the reason why the phrase “I’m not like most girls” annoys me so much is because women have been conditioned to feel like they have to disassociate themselves from the female gender to be recognized as an interesting human being and if that isn’t fucked up then I don’t know what is.”

Comments are closed.