Debate Guide: State hypocrisy - Revision history

The Admins at 15:09, 20 April 2024

2024-04-20T15:09:01Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:09, 20 April 2024
Line 5:		Line 5:
	This (ab)use of power is perhaps understandable, when viewed in an historical context. Behind the façade of "protecting children", nation states, especially those in the developed world are struggling with the demise of historical institutions such as the nuclear family and organized religion - all of which allowed for a degree of stability and predictability via the indoctrination of an uneducated laborer populace. Today's state remains focused on perpetuating the nuclear family as its base unit: middle class, heterosexual society and its moral values/doxas - e.g. propagation of the ''"social lie"'' of a non-exploitative order. This degree of predictability helps ensure a stable economy and national morale, providing a basis for expansive foreign policy and geopolitical power.		This (ab)use of power is perhaps understandable, when viewed in an historical context. Behind the façade of "protecting children", nation states, especially those in the developed world are struggling with the demise of historical institutions such as the nuclear family and organized religion - all of which allowed for a degree of stability and predictability via the indoctrination of an uneducated laborer populace. Today's state remains focused on perpetuating the nuclear family as its base unit: middle class, heterosexual society and its moral values/doxas - e.g. propagation of the ''"social lie"'' of a non-exploitative order. This degree of predictability helps ensure a stable economy and national morale, providing a basis for expansive foreign policy and geopolitical power.

	One particular threat to the state's control over its populace is the expansion of personal and sexual relations outside of its ''approved unit(s)'', since these cannot be moderated by conventional means and give rise to delinquent, anti-authoritarian discourses that subvert norms such as [[minor]]ity. After all, delinquent and [[Degeneracy\|degenerate]] relations are not prescribed any normative structure, as the state disapproves of them. "Sex" for the purpose of heteronormative/homonormative social recreation and procreation, ~~is a~~ fully ~~"vetted" exercise~~ of [[Wikipedia:Bipower\|biopower]], and [[pederasty]] is not. To governments, giving power to pederasts and other sexual deviants would be like putting a sharpened knife in the hand of an aggrieved chimpanzee and the key to its cage in the other.		One particular threat to the state's control over its populace is the expansion of personal and sexual relations outside of its ''approved unit(s)'', since these cannot be moderated by conventional means and give rise to delinquent, anti-authoritarian discourses that subvert norms such as [[minor]]ity. After all, delinquent and [[Degeneracy\|degenerate]] relations are not prescribed any normative structure, as the state disapproves of them. "Sex" for the purpose of heteronormative/homonormative social recreation and procreation, fully conforms to the demands of of [[Wikipedia:Bipower\|biopower]], and [[pederasty]], an unapproved form, does not. To governments, giving power to pederasts and other sexual deviants would be like putting a sharpened knife in the hand of an aggrieved chimpanzee and the key to its cage in the other.

	==How hypocritical states give their game away==		==How hypocritical states give their game away==

The Admins at 15:05, 20 April 2024

2024-04-20T15:05:37Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:05, 20 April 2024
Line 3:		Line 3:
	History tells us it is in the interests of authoritarian, and even western democratic states to [[Wikipedia:Antisexualism\|problematise and police sexuality]] in some way. Treating bodies and desires as an [[Sexceptionalism\|area of special "sexual" interest]] has been identified by many modern scholars as an attempt at [[The History of Sexuality\|using discourse to exercise soft power]].		History tells us it is in the interests of authoritarian, and even western democratic states to [[Wikipedia:Antisexualism\|problematise and police sexuality]] in some way. Treating bodies and desires as an [[Sexceptionalism\|area of special "sexual" interest]] has been identified by many modern scholars as an attempt at [[The History of Sexuality\|using discourse to exercise soft power]].

	This (ab)use of power is perhaps understandable, when viewed in an historical context. Behind the façade of "protecting children", nation states, especially those in the developed world are struggling with the demise of historical institutions such as the nuclear family and organized religion - all of which allowed for a degree of stability and predictability via the indoctrination of an uneducated laborer populace. Today's state remains focused on perpetuating the nuclear family as its base unit: middle class, heterosexual society and its moral values/doxas - e.g. propagation of the ''"social lie"'' of a non-exploitative order. ~~The order promoted by these values~~ helps ensure a stable economy and national morale, providing a basis for expansive foreign policy and geopolitical power.		This (ab)use of power is perhaps understandable, when viewed in an historical context. Behind the façade of "protecting children", nation states, especially those in the developed world are struggling with the demise of historical institutions such as the nuclear family and organized religion - all of which allowed for a degree of stability and predictability via the indoctrination of an uneducated laborer populace. Today's state remains focused on perpetuating the nuclear family as its base unit: middle class, heterosexual society and its moral values/doxas - e.g. propagation of the ''"social lie"'' of a non-exploitative order. This degree of predictability helps ensure a stable economy and national morale, providing a basis for expansive foreign policy and geopolitical power.

	One particular threat to the state's control over its populace is the expansion of personal and sexual relations outside of its ''approved unit(s)'', since these cannot be moderated by conventional means and give rise to delinquent, anti-authoritarian discourses that subvert norms such as [[minor]]ity. After all, delinquent and [[Degeneracy\|degenerate]] relations are not prescribed any normative structure, as the state disapproves of them. "Sex" for the purpose of heteronormative/homonormative social recreation and procreation, is a fully "vetted" exercise of [[Wikipedia:Bipower\|biopower]], and [[pederasty]] is not. To governments, giving power to pederasts and other sexual deviants would be like putting a sharpened knife in the hand of an aggrieved chimpanzee and the key to its cage in the other.		One particular threat to the state's control over its populace is the expansion of personal and sexual relations outside of its ''approved unit(s)'', since these cannot be moderated by conventional means and give rise to delinquent, anti-authoritarian discourses that subvert norms such as [[minor]]ity. After all, delinquent and [[Degeneracy\|degenerate]] relations are not prescribed any normative structure, as the state disapproves of them. "Sex" for the purpose of heteronormative/homonormative social recreation and procreation, is a fully "vetted" exercise of [[Wikipedia:Bipower\|biopower]], and [[pederasty]] is not. To governments, giving power to pederasts and other sexual deviants would be like putting a sharpened knife in the hand of an aggrieved chimpanzee and the key to its cage in the other.

The Admins at 15:04, 20 April 2024

2024-04-20T15:04:28Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:04, 20 April 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:Biop.png\|thumb\|Some [[Michel Foucault\|Foucault]] ideas, including [https://youtube.com/watch?v=5ymkzKsh1HQ Biopower]		[[File:Biop.png\|thumb\|Some [[Michel Foucault\|Foucault]] ideas, including [https://youtube.com/watch?v=5ymkzKsh1HQ Biopower]
	]]		]]
	History tells us it is in the interests of authoritarian, and even western democratic states to [[Wikipedia:Antisexualism\|problematise and police sexuality]] in some way. Treating bodies and desires as an [[Sexceptionalism\|area of special "sexual" interest]] has been identified by many modern scholars as an attempt at [[The History of Sexuality\|using discourse to ~~propagate~~ power]].		History tells us it is in the interests of authoritarian, and even western democratic states to [[Wikipedia:Antisexualism\|problematise and police sexuality]] in some way. Treating bodies and desires as an [[Sexceptionalism\|area of special "sexual" interest]] has been identified by many modern scholars as an attempt at [[The History of Sexuality\|using discourse to exercise soft power]].

	This (ab)use of power is perhaps understandable, when viewed in an historical context. Behind the façade of "protecting children", nation states, especially those in the developed world are struggling with the demise of historical institutions such as the nuclear family and organized religion - all of which allowed for a degree of stability and predictability via the indoctrination of an uneducated laborer populace. Today's state remains focused on perpetuating the nuclear family as its base unit: middle class, heterosexual society and its moral values/doxas - e.g. propagation of the ''"social lie"'' of a non-exploitative order. The order promoted by these values helps ensure a stable economy and national morale, providing a basis for expansive foreign policy and geopolitical power.		This (ab)use of power is perhaps understandable, when viewed in an historical context. Behind the façade of "protecting children", nation states, especially those in the developed world are struggling with the demise of historical institutions such as the nuclear family and organized religion - all of which allowed for a degree of stability and predictability via the indoctrination of an uneducated laborer populace. Today's state remains focused on perpetuating the nuclear family as its base unit: middle class, heterosexual society and its moral values/doxas - e.g. propagation of the ''"social lie"'' of a non-exploitative order. The order promoted by these values helps ensure a stable economy and national morale, providing a basis for expansive foreign policy and geopolitical power.

The Admins at 21:12, 11 April 2024

2024-04-11T21:12:08Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:12, 11 April 2024
Line 21:		Line 21:
	*If governments were genuinely concerned about "protecting children", they would also be concerned about the results of [[Debate Guide: Cyclical paternalism\|cyclical paternalism]] and the associated phenomena. Only, these are adverse consequences of their own sex-policing '''moral scheme''', so naturally they ''avoid addressing it''.		*If governments were genuinely concerned about "protecting children", they would also be concerned about the results of [[Debate Guide: Cyclical paternalism\|cyclical paternalism]] and the associated phenomena. Only, these are adverse consequences of their own sex-policing '''moral scheme''', so naturally they ''avoid addressing it''.

	*The ''pedophile'' is pretty much a shape-shifting lizard to the establishment at this point, in that he can be everything bad, all at once. One perfect example of the '''moral opportunism''' surrounding the "pedophile" is how in the sciences, pedophiles ~~are~~ presented as [[Research: Offender characteristics\|'childlike', 'regressive' and 'weak' men]], who ~~can~~ only cope with ~~'childish'~~ relationships, ~~yet within the criminal justice system~~, the trauma ~~from~~ these "childish" relationships is said to result directly from a deliberate, intelligent manipulation and abuse of a power gap.		*The ''pedophile'' is pretty much a shape-shifting lizard to the establishment at this point, in that he can be everything bad, all at once. One perfect example of the '''moral opportunism''' surrounding the "pedophile" is how in the sciences and in law, pedophiles were once presented as [[Research: Offender characteristics\|'childlike', 'regressive' and 'weak' men]], who could only cope with relationships on the level of a child. Nowadays, however, ideas have shifted, and the trauma caused by these once "childish" relationships is said to result directly from deliberate, intelligent manipulation and [[Debate Guide: Power disparity\|abuse of a power gap]].

	*We seem to have a [[Nepiophilia\|nepi]] problem in Western Society, so let's talk about it. Television networks allow adverts in which mothers intimately coddle, even kiss the buttocks of their babies. What if the father were to carry out such an abusive outrage? If he can't, then why? Surely this isn't because we are in the midst of a cynical '''moral scheme'''?		*We seem to have a [[Nepiophilia\|nepi]] problem in Western Society, so let's talk about it. Television networks allow adverts in which mothers intimately coddle, even kiss the buttocks of their babies. What if the father were to carry out such an abusive outrage? If he can't, then why? Surely this isn't because we are in the midst of a cynical '''moral scheme'''?

The Admins: /* How hypocritical states give their game away */

2024-04-11T21:07:49Z

How hypocritical states give their game away

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:07, 11 April 2024
Line 15:		Line 15:
	*Why do the same governments who "protect" and "safeguard" minors by denying them a variety of civil liberties, permit the abuse of foreign children in waged slavery for their own economies' benefit? The reason is because the suffering of some invisible brown children in another economy matters not to the foundations of their own hive-maintenance, sex-policing '''moral scheme'''.		*Why do the same governments who "protect" and "safeguard" minors by denying them a variety of civil liberties, permit the abuse of foreign children in waged slavery for their own economies' benefit? The reason is because the suffering of some invisible brown children in another economy matters not to the foundations of their own hive-maintenance, sex-policing '''moral scheme'''.

	*In many western developed countries, a child is potentially responsible for his decision to commit crime from the age of ten or even earlier. Firstly, if they are capable of choosing to commit burglary or murder at 10, why not a sexual relationship? Secondly, if they are not adults in this regard, why punish these "children" as such and institutionalize them as soon as they engage in "delinquency", when the result is often a lifetime cycle of criminality? The answer is because these countries care not about the fundamental interests of "children", ~~when they have a~~ predatory behaviorist '''moral scheme''' ~~to protect~~.		*In many western developed countries, a child is potentially responsible for his decision to commit crime from the age of ten or even earlier. Firstly, if they are capable of choosing to commit burglary or murder at 10, why not a sexual relationship? Secondly, if they are not adults in this regard, why punish these "children" as such and institutionalize them as soon as they engage in "delinquency", when the result is often a lifetime cycle of criminality? The answer is because these countries care not about the fundamental interests of individual "children", but instead the ''social institution of childhood'' underpinning their predatory, behaviorist '''moral scheme'''.

	*Politicians and officials repeatedly talk up "evidence based" policies, but then go on to make ludicrous appeals to the "protective instincts" of parents. They can't have it both ways; either the measures are a reactionary '''moral scheme''' or have some grounding in an evidence based approach to child welfare.		*Politicians and officials repeatedly talk up "evidence based" policies, but then go on to make ludicrous appeals to the "protective instincts" of parents. They can't have it both ways; either the measures are a reactionary '''moral scheme''' or have some grounding in an evidence based approach to child welfare.

The Admins: /* How hypocritical states give their game away */

2024-04-11T21:04:20Z

How hypocritical states give their game away

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:04, 11 April 2024
Line 9:		Line 9:
	==How hypocritical states give their game away==		==How hypocritical states give their game away==

	We have noticed a number of "tells" re. this policy outlook being a '''moral scheme''' completely unrelated to '''[[safeguarding]]'''. These can be used as short, punchy arguments at the '''beginning or end''' of replies, to demonstrate your natural skepticism:		We have noticed a number of "tells" re. this policy outlook being a '''moral scheme''' completely unrelated to its purported ends of '''[[safeguarding]]''' children. These can be used as short, punchy arguments at the '''beginning or end''' of replies, to demonstrate your natural skepticism:

	*Common wisdom would tell us that a ''sexual offense'' has a ''victim and a perpetrator''. But this isn't strictly true in CSA clown-world. [[Ageism]] details examples where both minors were treated as perpetrators and victims at the same time. If this were not a '''moral scheme''' to appease prejudice, wouldn't our reaction to such events be fundamentally different?		*Common wisdom would tell us that a ''sexual offense'' has a ''victim and a perpetrator''. But this isn't strictly true in CSA clown-world. [[Ageism]] details examples where both minors were treated as perpetrators and victims at the same time. If this were not a '''moral scheme''' to appease prejudice, wouldn't our reaction to such events be fundamentally different?

The Admins at 21:03, 11 April 2024

2024-04-11T21:03:20Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:03, 11 April 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:Biop.png\|thumb\|Some [[Michel Foucault\|Foucault]] ideas, including [https://~~www.~~youtube.com/watch?v=5ymkzKsh1HQ Biopower.]]		[[File:Biop.png\|thumb\|Some [[Michel Foucault\|Foucault]] ideas, including [https://youtube.com/watch?v=5ymkzKsh1HQ Biopower]
			]]
	History tells us it is in the interests of authoritarian, and even western democratic states to [[Wikipedia:Antisexualism\|problematise and police sexuality]] in some way. Treating bodies and desires as an [[Sexceptionalism\|area of special "sexual" interest]] has been identified by many modern scholars as an attempt at [[The History of Sexuality\|using discourse to propagate power]].		History tells us it is in the interests of authoritarian, and even western democratic states to [[Wikipedia:Antisexualism\|problematise and police sexuality]] in some way. Treating bodies and desires as an [[Sexceptionalism\|area of special "sexual" interest]] has been identified by many modern scholars as an attempt at [[The History of Sexuality\|using discourse to propagate power]].

The Admins at 21:01, 11 April 2024

2024-04-11T21:01:15Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:01, 11 April 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[File:Biop.png\|thumb\|Some [[Michel Foucault\|Foucault]] ideas, including [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ymkzKsh1HQ Biopower.]]]		[[File:Biop.png\|thumb\|Some [[Michel Foucault\|Foucault]] ideas, including [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ymkzKsh1HQ Biopower.]]
	History tells us it is in the interests of authoritarian, and even western democratic states to [[Wikipedia:Antisexualism\|problematise and police sexuality]] in some way. Treating bodies and desires as an [[Sexceptionalism\|area of special "sexual" interest]] has been identified by many modern scholars as an attempt at [[The History of Sexuality\|using discourse to propagate power]].		History tells us it is in the interests of authoritarian, and even western democratic states to [[Wikipedia:Antisexualism\|problematise and police sexuality]] in some way. Treating bodies and desires as an [[Sexceptionalism\|area of special "sexual" interest]] has been identified by many modern scholars as an attempt at [[The History of Sexuality\|using discourse to propagate power]].

The Admins at 21:00, 11 April 2024

2024-04-11T21:00:56Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:00, 11 April 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
			[[File:Biop.png\|thumb\|Some [[Michel Foucault\|Foucault]] ideas, including [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ymkzKsh1HQ Biopower.]]]
	History tells us it is in the interests of authoritarian, and even western democratic states to [[Wikipedia:Antisexualism\|problematise and police sexuality]] in some way. Treating bodies and desires as an [[Sexceptionalism\|area of special "sexual" interest]] has been identified by many modern scholars as an attempt at [[The History of Sexuality\|using discourse to propagate power]].		History tells us it is in the interests of authoritarian, and even western democratic states to [[Wikipedia:Antisexualism\|problematise and police sexuality]] in some way. Treating bodies and desires as an [[Sexceptionalism\|area of special "sexual" interest]] has been identified by many modern scholars as an attempt at [[The History of Sexuality\|using discourse to propagate power]].

The Admins at 20:47, 11 April 2024

2024-04-11T20:47:13Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:47, 11 April 2024
Line 1:		Line 1:
	We have noticed a number of "tells" re. this policy outlook being a '''moral scheme''' completely unrelated to '''[[safeguarding]]'''. ~~Use these~~ as short, punchy arguments at the '''beginning or end''' of replies to demonstrate your skepticism:		History tells us it is in the interests of authoritarian, and even western democratic states to [[Wikipedia:Antisexualism\|problematise and police sexuality]] in some way. Treating bodies and desires as an [[Sexceptionalism\|area of special "sexual" interest]] has been identified by many modern scholars as an attempt at [[The History of Sexuality\|using discourse to propagate power]].

			This (ab)use of power is perhaps understandable, when viewed in an historical context. Behind the façade of "protecting children", nation states, especially those in the developed world are struggling with the demise of historical institutions such as the nuclear family and organized religion - all of which allowed for a degree of stability and predictability via the indoctrination of an uneducated laborer populace. Today's state remains focused on perpetuating the nuclear family as its base unit: middle class, heterosexual society and its moral values/doxas - e.g. propagation of the ''"social lie"'' of a non-exploitative order. The order promoted by these values helps ensure a stable economy and national morale, providing a basis for expansive foreign policy and geopolitical power.

			One particular threat to the state's control over its populace is the expansion of personal and sexual relations outside of its ''approved unit(s)'', since these cannot be moderated by conventional means and give rise to delinquent, anti-authoritarian discourses that subvert norms such as [[minor]]ity. After all, delinquent and [[Degeneracy\|degenerate]] relations are not prescribed any normative structure, as the state disapproves of them. "Sex" for the purpose of heteronormative/homonormative social recreation and procreation, is a fully "vetted" exercise of [[Wikipedia:Bipower\|biopower]], and [[pederasty]] is not. To governments, giving power to pederasts and other sexual deviants would be like putting a sharpened knife in the hand of an aggrieved chimpanzee and the key to its cage in the other.

			==How hypocritical states give their game away==

			We have noticed a number of "tells" re. this policy outlook being a '''moral scheme''' completely unrelated to '''[[safeguarding]]'''. These can be used as short, punchy arguments at the '''beginning or end''' of replies, to demonstrate your natural skepticism:

	*Common wisdom would tell us that a ''sexual offense'' has a ''victim and a perpetrator''. But this isn't strictly true in CSA clown-world. [[Ageism]] details examples where both minors were treated as perpetrators and victims at the same time. If this were not a '''moral scheme''' to appease prejudice, wouldn't our reaction to such events be fundamentally different?		*Common wisdom would tell us that a ''sexual offense'' has a ''victim and a perpetrator''. But this isn't strictly true in CSA clown-world. [[Ageism]] details examples where both minors were treated as perpetrators and victims at the same time. If this were not a '''moral scheme''' to appease prejudice, wouldn't our reaction to such events be fundamentally different?

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:12, 11 April 2024
Line 21:		Line 21:
	*If governments were genuinely concerned about "protecting children", they would also be concerned about the results of [[Debate Guide: Cyclical paternalism\|cyclical paternalism]] and the associated phenomena. Only, these are adverse consequences of their own sex-policing '''moral scheme''', so naturally they ''avoid addressing it''.		*If governments were genuinely concerned about "protecting children", they would also be concerned about the results of [[Debate Guide: Cyclical paternalism\|cyclical paternalism]] and the associated phenomena. Only, these are adverse consequences of their own sex-policing '''moral scheme''', so naturally they ''avoid addressing it''.

	*The ''pedophile'' is pretty much a shape-shifting lizard to the establishment at this point, in that he can be everything bad, all at once. One perfect example of the '''moral opportunism''' surrounding the "pedophile" is how in the sciences, pedophiles ~~are~~ presented as [[Research: Offender characteristics\|'childlike', 'regressive' and 'weak' men]], who ~~can~~ only cope with ~~'childish'~~ relationships, ~~yet within the criminal justice system~~, the trauma ~~from~~ these "childish" relationships is said to result directly from a deliberate, intelligent manipulation and abuse of a power gap.		*The ''pedophile'' is pretty much a shape-shifting lizard to the establishment at this point, in that he can be everything bad, all at once. One perfect example of the '''moral opportunism''' surrounding the "pedophile" is how in the sciences and in law, pedophiles were once presented as [[Research: Offender characteristics\|'childlike', 'regressive' and 'weak' men]], who could only cope with relationships on the level of a child. Nowadays, however, ideas have shifted, and the trauma caused by these once "childish" relationships is said to result directly from deliberate, intelligent manipulation and [[Debate Guide: Power disparity\|abuse of a power gap]].

	*We seem to have a [[Nepiophilia\|nepi]] problem in Western Society, so let's talk about it. Television networks allow adverts in which mothers intimately coddle, even kiss the buttocks of their babies. What if the father were to carry out such an abusive outrage? If he can't, then why? Surely this isn't because we are in the midst of a cynical '''moral scheme'''?		*We seem to have a [[Nepiophilia\|nepi]] problem in Western Society, so let's talk about it. Television networks allow adverts in which mothers intimately coddle, even kiss the buttocks of their babies. What if the father were to carry out such an abusive outrage? If he can't, then why? Surely this isn't because we are in the midst of a cynical '''moral scheme'''?