What grinds my gears

For many years I have been watching horrified how far the modern feminist social justice ideology is going, and what kind of negative effects it has on the world as large (such as censorship, limiting basic human freedoms, intimidation, harassment, persecution, sometimes even from officials), but I have been able to largely do this as a distant observer from here Finland. Surely my country is a modern progressive (the right kind of progressive, not the regressive social justice kind) society that just laughs off that madness that's happening at distant lands far away? Nope. The ideology is so incredibly virulent that it's already metastasizing Finnish education at all levels. First the ministry of education announced that they will be teaching social justice to grade schoolers, almost directly copied from the same program in Australia. The whole shebang. Whites are privileged, there are like a million different genders, terminology like "cis"... The entire thing....

Fidel Castro was a brutal totalitarian dictator of Cuba who oppressed the citizens of Cuba for almost 60 years. For all that time, consistently, Cuba ranked as one of the countries with most human rights violations. Firing squads, imprisonment of political dissenters and journalists, you name it. Castro's regime impoverished the country, while Castro himself was a multi-millionaire. He ruled the country with an iron fist. When news of Castro's death surfaced, Cubans who had escaped political persecution to the United States, and pretty much lived in exile there, marched the streets in celebration. They expressed their sincere relief that one of the darkest moments in their country's history was finally, at some level, over, and that perhaps now their country will begin the long and arduous march to human rights and liberty. Surely world leaders would have sympathized with these political exiles? Certainly a word of hope, a wish for a new brighter era for Cuba was widely...

The "big lie" term was coined by Adolf Hitler in is book Mein Kampf , and refers to the propaganda technique of (an authority figure) telling such a huge lie that the audience just accepts it because they cannot fathom such an authority figure telling such a blatant lie, and thus assume that it must be true. A more popular form of this, put forward by Joseph Goebbels, is that if a lie is repeated enough, it becomes true (in the sense that people at large will simply start accepting it as true without question; it becomes true in their minds, even against evidence of the contrary.) This is actually understandable from a psychological perspective. We are pretty much hard-wired to believe in things that everybody else believes. If everybody around us believes something, without question and without criticism, without alternative views, we tend to take it for granted as well. This especially if we have been raised in such an environment all our lives. It requires an unusual k...

There was an article written by a social justice warrior (which link I have lost and can't be bothered to google) talking about why the libertarian principle of equality of opportunity is a really bad thing. Even unconstitutional. It proceeded to describe "equality of opportunity" pretty much as "equality of outcome", which is one of the major criticism that egalitarians have about the modern social justice ideology. One example it gave of enforcing "equality of opportunity" was that if a person is born in a rich family, then his money would need to be taken away and distributed equally among the poorer people, to give everybody the same opportunities and not have somebody have an unfair advantage. This is so wrong at so many levels. For one, that's quite directly what equality of outcome is, not equality of opportunity. But at the most fundamental level it's a complete misunderstanding of what the principle of "equality of opportunit...

Some time ago a YouTube user nicknamed Apollo Legend made a video about " the death of speedrunning ". In this video he's not saying that speedrunning is becoming less and less popular, but that the organization has, in his view, become stagnant, and that there is little progress in terms of organizing speedruns (eg. speedrun races), poor leadership, and so on. On a rather different tangent, and quite unrelated to that particular topic, I wrote a comment to that video that in my view speedrunning of some particular games seems to be completely dead. And I mentioned Half-Life 2 speedrunning as the quintessential example. What do I mean by this? Well, here's an essay on that subject: Firstly, we have to define what we mean by "speedrunning". In essence, it's playing a game from beginning to end as fast as possible. To reach the ending of the game in as a minimal time as possible. Of course it's not that simple. Some ground rules need to be set,...

If there's one country that has embraced modern feminism, to the most absolutely ridiculous extents, it's Sweden. Other countries like Canada and Australia are working really hard to get there, but Sweden is by far in the lead on this front. That is, the lead on absolutely ridiculous mentally retarded feminist ideas. Take, for example, the brilliant idea that the way that snow has been ploughed in Stockholm is sexist, and needs to be "gender equal" . Why is it sexist? Because ploughing has been prioritized to first plough the busiest and most important roadways. I especially love this part of the article: Inspired by authorities in the municipality of Karlskoga, Helldén explained that snowploughs in Stockholm typically target areas frequented by men, such as the roads Such as the roads... Anyway. They now implemented a more "gender equal" priority to snowploughing, which of course in feminist parlance means that places frequented by women (such as d...

Creationists have all kinds of misconceptions (and distortions, and straw-men, and even outright lies) about the theory of evolution. But this post is not about them. It's about common misconceptions that non-creationists, even those who fully accept the theory, often have about evolution. The "evolutionary ladder" This is a very old myth about biology that goes back hundreds of years, well before Darwin. In fact, Darwin's books about evolution argued against this (instead proposing an evolutionary tree , where all species are on an equal level at the ends of the branches.) The idea is that there are rather discrete "steps" to evolution, and different species are at different levels on this "evolutionary ladder". At the top are, of course, humans. Below them are apes and monkeys, and so on and so forth, neatly classified in terms of complexity and evolutionary progress. This leads to the thought of "taking the next step" in evol...

The modern feminist social justice ideology is, at its core, deeply misandrist. In other words, it just hates men. Almost every complaint and claim they make is about something related to men and how they are somehow a problem. At the same time, they will never, ever, acknowledge any fault that's prevalent in women and rare in men. "Toxic masculinity" is but one of the several such topics they have come up with. It's mostly misaimed, based on exaggerations, fabrications, and barking up the wrong tree. Well, I could just as well use the same tactics to come up with the concept of "toxic femininity" to attack women as a whole. Like this. (Note: I obviously don't think like this. I'm making this up as a demonstration of how you can come up with such rhetoric, using facts mixed up with exaggerations, fabrications and fallacious conclusions.) Toxic femininity is the phenomenon that women, at large, are raised in our society to be overly emotional,...

Donald Trump's election as the next president of the United States, and the reaction by the regressive left to it, has really shown how completely devious and abhorrent the regressive leftist ideology is. A reporter of the CNN network said in a televised interview that at some point at the beginning of the presidential campaign, CNN showed full unedited speeches by Trump. And that this was a "mistake". It's quite public knowledge, and has been for quite a long time, that biased journalists will often engage in censorship and even dishonest editing in order to drive a certain agenda (eg. a political one.) Of course journalists seldom want to admit to using such underhanded dishonest tactics. Except, apparently, when the subject is an undesirable person. Then it seems to be completely ok to censor and edit. Then it seems that the honest showing of full unedited footage is a "mistake". And they don't seem to have any qualms about openly stating so. Mo...

After Trump's victory in the American presidential elections, blogs and YouTube were filled with crying social justice warriors. Some of these videos are just hilarious. Others are really scary (such as the one by the infamous Anita Sarkeesian, where she talks exactly like a dangerous cult leader. It's astonishingly dark and scary.) One of the most infamous YouTube feminists, Laci Green, also made such a video. She says in that video: "We let this happen." No. You didn't "let this happen." You made this happen. It didn't happen regardless of your efforts. It happened precisely because of your efforts. (And by "you" I'm referring to the entire regressive leftist cult.) The Democratic Party (ie. the "liberals", ie. the "left") in the United States has been largely appropriated by the modern feminist social justice ideology. Not all supporters of said party are social justice warriors, but quite a significant po...

Whether Trump's victory of the presidential election of the United States will end up in a global catastrophe will remain to be seen. Personally I highly, highly doubt it; all that fear-mongering is just complete bullshit. Anyway, that's not the point of this post. Trump's victory was important and significant for other reasons. The leftist media, both in the United States and in the rest of the world, was highly biased and partisan in this election. It reached rather outrageous levels within the United States itself. It was basically a constant barrage against Trump, while largely downplaying and even ignoring any fault that Clinton may have had. The leftist media really, really pushed Clinton to become the president. The smearing campaign against Trump was so global in scale that it might even be unprecedented in the history of American (and even world-wide) press. Yet, they lost. And that's why this result was so incredibly important. This loss signals to the...

Can you tell what is the difference between these terms? One of them is not like the others: "Non-white people" "Colored people" "People of color" To the average person they might sound like pretty much synonymous, just three different ways of saying the same thing. But they are not! Two of them are racist, while the remaining one is the "politically correct" term. More specifically, the third one is ok, while the other ones are offensive. At least at this moment. Why? Who knows. The phase of the Moon, maybe? Let's see how long before the third one becomes inappropriate as well. I'm really wondering if social justice warriors will then go back to their old YouTube videos where they use the term and remove them. As with all political correctness, it's pretty much arbitrary and ever-shifting. Again and again I encounter that yet another word is, somehow, "racist", or at the very least "inappropriate". Lik...