I talk about Blankslatism a lot because there is massive resistance to the idea that politically right-wing (like Republicans) and far-right groups (like the Manosphere) can’t be blankslatists because blankslatism is a politically leftist. It has been quite difficult for me to convince anyone that the Manosphere is deeply leftist, for how could they miss something so critical?
The explanation is that the average person tends to think in simplistic, linear terms. People who think linearly about political and ideological matters cannot fully comprehend that they’ve overlooked an “aisle crossing” ideology. Such a claim seems to be completely incoherent. Few people can stomach the reality of a widespread deception without denying it. “It’s a conspiracy theory!”
I resolve this problem by posting things showing how blankslatism is ubiquitous in the right-wing segment of the political landscape. In doing so, I show that there is no meaningful philosophical difference between left-wing leftism and right-wing leftism. For example, in Monday’s “Blankslatism Strikes Again!” I cited the blankslatist views of right-wing conservatives Matt Walsh (~4 million followers) and Rob Henderson (~200k followers). I showed that this view is effectively no different than the liberal leftist views in last week’s “Blankslatism Strikes Again!”
Today I am going to highlight a recent statement by Derrick Evans, the former Republican member of the West Virginity House of Delegates, a Candidate for the U.S. Congress, and a front-and-center God-first conservative Christian.
All parents need to ban together and REFUSE to have their kids do homework.
If you can’t teach them during the 8 hours they are at school then you need to figure out what you can do better.
This is about as blankslatist a claim as they come. Here is my response.
This is an incorrect take. Correlation does not imply causation. The effectiveness of homework—like all forms of education—is distributed according to the intelligence of the student.
A blankslatist would never consider the role of intelligence when evaluating the effectiveness of education. They would never judge a school on the basis of the students themselves. Politically speaking, the blame always lands with the administration, curriculum, or some other external environmental cause.
But the reality is that homework, like algebra, is not effective in many schools because most of the kids doing the work are not intelligent enough to benefit from it. But, relatively speaking, smarter kids can and do derive some benefit from homework. If done right, homework is a tool used to benefit the smart kids.
“The smarter they are, the more consistently they try and the more efficiently they succeed.”
— Charles Murray, author of The Bell Curve
The idea that innate intelligence of the student explains the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of homework is completely forbidden. It is easier and more socially acceptable for a Republican politician to talk about Jesus than it is to talk about intelligence differences. It’s politically safer for Evans to aggressively oppose LGBT and Islam than it is to say that students have inherent genetic differences. Talking about intelligence would almost certainly end his political career, and this is a guy who had to be pardoned by Trump for his role in the January 6 events and subsequent imprisonment.
One of the bloggers I read is educationrealist. I also follow him on Twitter. One of the things he noted was that universally reviled Common Core math curriculum is actually preferred by gifted students. They find the work to be more challenging and fulfilling than the traditional work. This is, I suppose, not all that surprising considering that Bill Gates is behind it. Now, can you see where this is going?
Back when Common Core was all the rage, I was still somewhat Blue Pilled regarding blankslatism. Just like Derrick Evan’s calls regarding homework, I saw the same kind of calls by angry conservatives to “band together and REFUSE” to have their kids do Common Core. But I was wrong. Common Core increases the disparity between the lower and upper tiers of students. It makes the smarter kids perform better and the less smart kids perform worse.
If society wasn’t run by blankslatists, school policy would be to officially segregate schools and curriculum according to the intelligence of the students. Instead, parents with high-intelligence selectively do this by moving to “better school districts.” Because they can implement de-facto segregation, they are never forced to think about the biological realities that blankslatism denies.
I saw a post that said “a talkative child is a sign of high intelligence.” I must be raising all of NASA 😛
Evans is is probably your typical somewhat above-average-IQ white man married to a somewhat above-average-IQ white woman with somewhat above-average-IQ white children:
Like almost everyone who is slightly grounded with reality, Evans knows that intelligence is real and that he is personally benefiting from what some would call “superior breeding.” He has, at least in part, a genetic advantage. But he could never, ever say that, except as joke.
Unfortunately, the habitual denial of reality makes one a pretty lousy politician (I repeat myself).
Derek,
The explanation is that the average person tends to think in simplistic, linear terms. People who think linearly about political and ideological matters cannot fully comprehend that they’ve overlooked an “aisle crossing” ideology. Such a claim seems to be completely incoherent. Few people can stomach the reality of a widespread deception without denying it. “It’s a conspiracy theory!”
I resolve this problem by posting things showing how blankslatism is ubiquitous in the right-wing segment of the political landscape. In doing so, I show that there is no meaningful philosophical difference between left-wing leftism and right-wing leftism. For example, in Monday’s “Blankslatism Strikes Again!” I cited the blankslatist views of right-wing conservatives Matt Walsh (~4 million followers) and Rob Henderson (~200k followers). I showed that this view is effectively no different than the liberal leftist views in last week’s “Blankslatism Strikes Again!”
I talk about Blankslatism a lot because there is massive resistance to the idea that politically right-wing (like Republicans) and far-right groups (like the Manosphere) can’t be blankslatists because blankslatism is a politically leftist. It has been quite difficult for me to convince anyone that the Manosphere is deeply leftist, for how could they miss something so critical?
BUT Especially the following part
The main guy who explained that was associated with the ‘sphere?https://zippycatholic.wordpress.com/2015/09/23/how-no-enemies-to-the-right-perpetuates-the-mind-trap/
”How “no enemies to the right” perpetuates the mind trap
Liberals (which include almost all modern people) are ironically so narrow-minded that they see other kinds of liberals as the farthest pole of conceivable political opposition. Those few who manage to permit their thoughts to stray outside of the Overton window tend to do so in quite predictable ways.
We can think of modern politics as a mental prison composed of a soft chewy center, a comfortable center made of left-right faux opposition within the Overton window – differing mainly from place to place on how many and which particular unprincipled exceptions to liberalism are allowed. Surrounding this soft chewy comfortable center is a hard and impenetrable shell of Nazi just outside of the Overton window. When someone on the right looks left, he sees the gulags. When someone on the left looks right, he sees Auschwitz. That keeps almost everyone anchored in the comfortable middle. Some do hang out on the outside crust; and the more disgusted and alienated people become the thicker the hard shell becomes, as the comfortable center shrinks.
Few actually escape from this prison. And if we have no enemies to the “right”, we will never escape to the real world outside of the shell.”
Guys like Scott found Zippy’s left/right-liberals stuff interesting(as he said at simp frame on an old post), BUT i knew it explained much of why the ”right” always ”loses” in the end. Because it’s built on the same ”principles” in the end.BUT shhhh guys like {REDACTED} can’t handle that red pill!
You also know Psudeonoymous Commenter made Zippy out to sound like how he describes yourself here?
2022/12/12 at 22:28
I’ve made this point before.
Zippy was not part of the manosphere as it was constituted during his lifetime nor as it would be constituted today. He wasn’t even part of what I’ve called the Christomanosphere. He wasn’t a Deep Strength or a Donal Graeme. Zippy hated and disdained all things Red Pill. He did write on masculinity and some of what he wrote lined up with basic tenets of masculinity and relationship management, but he completely rejected most Red Pill concepts like Game, men gaining advantages over women in relationships, male superiority in relationships, women’s diabolical and intentional conduct, etc.
He completely rejected any notion that the Church should be involved in helping men with any of this. To him, the Church existed to preach the gospel and administer the sacraments, and that was it. In his mind, there were no Godly or ethical solutions to men’s relationship problems. Men who found themselves on the losing end of this were just that — losers — and would have to live with that loss. There was no hope for them, nothing to do for them, no way to give them anything. They were just S O L, and that was the end of it for Zippy. ”
” In his mind, there were no Godly or ethical solutions to men’s relationship problems. Men who found themselves on the losing end of this were just that — losers — and would have to live with that loss. There was no hope for them, nothing to do for them, no way to give them anything. ”
And that doesn’t sound like what Psudeonoymous Commenter says now about most ”unattractive” MEN? Does that make him a Zippy or DEREK now, too?
Yeah, it is uncanny.
On the other hand, I’ve always said I’m not a part of the Manosphere proper. Some take this as some sort of hostile commentary, but to me it is simply an observational fact.
Derrick Evans
I saw a post that said “a talkative child is a sign of high intelligence.” I must be raising all of NASA 😛
HA! That’s why and how WE lost so many MEN inventing things since the church got cucked in 1100AD!
WE encourage girls/wimminz to talk(so” fathers” can get their daily simp framing /goddess worship in)! & tell boys to shut up! Ask me how i know that!
Have you read Dutton and Charlton “The Genius Famine?” This can be explained almost entirely by dysgenic effects starting around the industrial revolution in Europe. I wrote about that here.