Excellent. The illustrations in the Twitter thread and their exposition in this article are spot-on.
Humiliation is associated with strong feelings of powerlessness
CIA’s post-9/11 torture regime was intended to induce “learned helplessness” and included not just physical torture but sexual and religious humiliation. The two psychologists who designed it, consulted by Douglas Feith, described it as such.
One might notice the similarities to the ritualized sexual humiliation of white girls and women in pornography which uses not just the old fashioned techniques of a pimp, but also, by broadcasting it to the world, is meant to humiliate the ethnicity as a whole. It’s not different than a conquering army forcing fathers and husbands to watch as their daughters and wives are raped.
I recall a Charles Bronson movie where the villain, just about to torture the hero, says “a woman must be made to remove her own clothes, but a man must have his clothes stripped from him.”
Eating bugs? Forcing a conquered people to eat food (or non-food) he finds disgusting or taboo isn’t uncommon in history. Recall Spielberg’s film “The Help” where the “racist” Southern ladies are tricked into eating pies infected with feces. Or just watch any Hollywood movie about Southerners.
The constant snark of the media directed at whites, Christians, and conservatives and describing their objections as “anxiety,” implying cowardice, are another form of humiliation.
If one wants to see the modern version of the Soviet’s Komsomol parades simply watch the Youtube videos of the Satanic Temple mocking pro-life protestors.
The Ottoman’s köçek is eerily similar to the promotion of male homosexuality and transsexualism, not to mention Drag Queen Story Hour.
Liberalism is a force that reduces all people to smaller and smaller economic units, so wherever there is any resistance in the arts, in culture, in religion, in community, and especially in democracy, these must be overridden by the will of liberal rulers.
Isn’t this more precisely called “totalitarianism?” German National Socialism and Mussolini’s fascism, both anti-liberal, nevertheless had similarly totalitarian aspects, although clearly not intended to humiliate the völk
For instance, while the NSDAP’s Kirchenkampf had none of the ethnic hostility of the Soviet’s Renovationism, they are at least of a kind. Didn’t even Hitler tell Himmler to knock off his more bizarre “German neo-pagan” stuff because it was scandalizing the Christians? Consider the practice of replacing even everyday greetings among even civilians with “Heil, Hitler” and a Roman salute. Mussolini’s fascism had similar tendencies with his “corporatism” demanding that all social institutions be united with, even subservient, to the state.
One supposes you could describe a “totalitarian liberalism” that would demand the break-up of all civil society institutions, even the family. Perhaps liberalism has an inherent individualism that tends towards that.
I just find the neo-right’s use of term like “liberalism” and “progressive” to be confusing and seemingly ahistorical. The term “left” seems more generic but also more of a label that a descriptive. Perhaps even that is too generic; one of the hosts of the old “Myth of the 20th Century” podcast once summarized the right as “order” and the left as “freedom.” Those terms are too broad to explain what is going on here. Any society is going to have to balance order and freedom.
After all, a society cannot be “occupied” by an ideology. A society can be “occupied” by a specific group of people who hold to an ideology, sincerely or cynically.
We simply don’t see it for what it is because liberalism’s conception of the political is economic at heart, and so if it is to remain that way then the people under its thumb need to be seen, but especially to feel, that they are buying what’s being sold to them of their own free will and intent.
This may indeed be a necessary fig-leaf under liberal capitalism. This may also explain, in America, the White liberal elite’s participation in these atrocities.
But certainly, there is a strong element of simple ethnic hostility that has nothing to do with economics and this would seem to better explain the participation of the faction of the ruling elite that doesn’t consider themselves “white,” “Christian,” or really even “American.”
I don’t get the vibe of a drive to “humiliate” Americans from the liberal elites like Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, or Jeff Bezos.
I absolutely do get that vibe from the elites of that other ethnic group, and the faction of the native elite that Spandrell would call “Bio-Leninists,” maybe the best example LGBT.