On Choosing Violence

Smashing Pseudoreality Series

Without belaboring the point unnecessarily, we must return once again briefly to Marcuse, and his project of implementing mental barriers to wrongthink. You see, for all the evil of the man, he was, in fact, quite genius in a pragmatic sense. He saw the systems of human relations and understood the phenomenon of memetics long before the term was coined by Dawkins. What’s more is that he saw the interplay of emotion and reason in swaying opinion that sees reason lose nearly every battle for minds. He saw that by enacting a cult of taboo around the ideas necessary to combat his grand scheme he might actually be able to prevent his opponents from ever thinking the thoughts necessary to defeat him. This cult of taboo was “The New Left” of which Marcuse is called the father. This is the movement of Liberation. This is their moment.

To understand this phenomenon, we first should look to modern examples – the sort that still look ridiculous. For this look no further than the professional medical establishment’s insistence that we now refer to expectant mothers as “pregnant people,” and those who breast feed infants as “chest feed[ers].” Absurd? Obviously, but this line of effort has been ongoing for a long time. In five years on our current trajectory calling that person holding their infant a “mother” might land you in prison, but by then you probably won’t dare say something so breeder-phobic. However, to look back historically is even more interesting. What games have they played with language, and in what ways have they subverted your own thought process?

The nationwide rioting of 2020 did billions of dollars in damages and appears to have claimed lives in the triple digits. Some were beaten to death in the streets by mobs targeting white and Asian people. Others died in fires, burnt alive as modern Wicker-men sacrifices to the god of anti-racism. Amongst this mass hysteria was another such line-of-effort along the Marcusian, dialectical-alchemy strategy of encapsulating wrongthink within a thorny hedgerow that you dare not peek over.

In the state of Wisconsin as various criminals, sociopaths, and Communists of all flavors rioted the police largely stood down on orders of The Cathedral. The city of Kenosha was savaged by these malcontents. Whether they simply wanted to watch the world burn, or truly believed that the total destruction of “the system” would lead to the rise of the equitable Utopia doesn’t matter for our purposes (though the correct answer is “yes”). What matters is who stood up when all of the forces ordained for good stood down. It was, as it nearly always is, a young man. First, he volunteered to clean the city after a night of riots. Then, as night fell, this young man equipped himself in precisely the manner that has been celebrated by civilizations for millennia.

The Shaolin-Hands of Kyushu martial artists represents both the open hand of friendship, and the closed-fist of conflict. In this likeness our young man equipped himself with a medical kit for which he was trained, and a rifle for which we was likewise. Early in the evening he was seen on video rendering aid to those of all persuasions with injury. As the criminal element grew in both size and intensity our young man is then pictured standing before a mob that was attempting to push a fully flame-engulfed dumpster into the pumps of a gas station. Utilizing a mere a hand-held extinguisher and his own body as a blockade our young man prevented the terrorist attack on the city he loved that might have claimed very many lives in a petrol station explosion.

Average malcontents never take kindly to the persona of goodness reflected back at them; the contrast brings too much cognitive dissonance to bare. The truly sick – those bent toward destruction – however, lash out at goodness with a vengeance from the pit. This is what our young man then endured as he was fired upon by the mob, chased, and beaten bluntly about the head before an attempt was made to execute him as he lay on the ground. However, and in the truest nature of all those come before with a hand in securing to us the blessings of liberty, our young man too had a clenched fist.

On that night seventeen-year-old Kyle Rittenhouse killed two men and injured another with his weapon. Of those he killed and wounded there was a history of child rape, and brutal domestic violence, to say nothing more of their attempt to bomb a petrol station in a city of one-hundred thousand before shooting at the young man.

The media blitz that followed told you nothing of the story above. It told you that Kyle was a right-wing domestic terrorist. It told you he went to a protest looking for people to kill. He “hunted” his victims. It said those he shot were pillars of the community and dedicated domestic partners. It told you he had murder in his heart. This, however, brings us to the intersection of an even older mass line-of-effort.

We have, those of us under a certain age at least, grown up in a culture that tells us “violence is never the answer.” It’s a phrase we learn before we have reason, and it’s repeated oft enough to make sure we never apply reason to it. But does that make sense? If violence is never the answer, then how do we justify going to war? How do we justify self-defense? How do we justify laying hands on a rapist in the act to put a stop to it? Should we simply ask nicely that he stop ravaging the young woman? We’ve been conditioned to believe that absent permission from The Cathedral violence is always bad. But violence is not bad; It is not evil, nor is it wrong. It is also not good. Violence is totally amoral until circumstance is attached.

You see that now there are two lines-of-effort coming together here. The first we are conditioned to already: violence is always bad. The second, and more specific line of effort applied along the Rittenhouse narrative is: do not dare use violence against our revolution. Ultimately both these lines serve the same purpose. Marcuse wanted to make sure the counter-revolutionary faction never formed to oppose him, and so violence must be taken off the table for the opposition (see “Repressive Tolerance”). Violence must be stopped at the level of the first thought of it. Kyle didn’t understand this. Kyle was a glitch in The Matrix. The agents of the media were dispatched to reinforce the barriers, and make sure nobody ever raises a finger to them again.

At the end of the day, it matters little what was in Kyle’s heart that night. Though there’s no evidence for the allegations of malicious intent what really matters, and the only thing that really matters, is whether or not he was justified in his actions. To this I say, unequivocally, yes, he was. I make no apologies for him having been there with a weapon as a minor. He stepped up when the authorities stepped down, and without that rifle there is little doubt that he would have been murdered. What’s more his death would have been brushed under the carpet as yet another sacrifice to the city of devils on the road to the greater good. Who knows how many casualties might have resulted if that gas station he saved single-handedly had gone up in smoke.

There is nothing good, noble, nor useful about harmless men. To pre-emptively choose nonviolence is fatalistic cowardice. Do not cooperate with the mass line-of-effort. Violence can be used for good, and you know this. If you can’t quite “get there” mentally it would be a good time to ask yourself how long before you hesitate to call a woman “mother.” Now go find a mirror.