I am returned

(Blows up stupid argument with mind)

[joe-kewl]

Having spent months in partial isolation, learning much political theory and reading much, having spent the last 3 years largely quiet on Tumblr barring when the mood strikes me.

Joe Kewl is back. And I'm coming to take no prisoners. I'm unleashing the full power I've been culminating.

With that in mind, here's my manifesto.

Fuck Communists. Fuck Nazis. Fuck Globalists. Fuck Progressives. Fuck Intersectionalists. Fuck neoconservatives. Fuck RINOs.

Fuck radfems. Fuck BLM Race grifters. Fuck SJW moralists. Fuck nihilists who are okay with all of this because nothing matters to them. Fuck Islam. Fuck historical revisionists. Fuck anti-Western sentiment.

And once again, with all my heart,

Fuck. Communism.

[arizonaconservativegal]

Tumblr: Maybe if you weren't a nazi bigot who wants us dead, we wouldn't have to say you should be shot. Me: Okay but I'm not and never was. Tumblr: Yes you are. Die fascist.

[arizonaconservativegal]

I really don't know what you people want from me if you're not going to accept a damn word I say anyway

[yokelfelonking]

They don't want anything from you. They want acceptable targets to hurt so they can feel self-righteous and powerful.

Remember, they don't attack people because they're fascists, they call people fascists so they have an excuse to attack them.

Also notice how they use "you are adjacent to Bad People so therefore you approve of them and are complicit in their evil" all the time but completely ignore how many fucking groomers and child molesters and sex pests are in their camp.

By their own definitions every single progressive approves of, promotes, and takes part in child rape and sexual abuse and are due the punishment for such evil. If they deny it we can just say "stop being child rapist adjacent if you want to not be called a child rapist" and shut down every argument with "I don't have to listen to people who rape kids".

[joe-kewl]

Cosigned.

[kob131]

... Can someone explain the joke to me? Because I don't even know what the joke is.

'Charlie hates Jesus'? But why?

'Lol, Hazbin Hotel BAD!' Ok. ... And?

Like, what's the punchline?

[joe-kewl]

There's an underlying possible reference that her nature as a demon and the daughter of Lucifer makes her hate him.

But the bigger punchline is that he's stealing her thunder.

And as someone pointed out on Twitter..

https://x.com/toffee_32/status/1953463705343021144?t=sGHFFKY_1P7MfaC00i3Wzw&s=33

https://x.com/toffee_32/status/1953467017467433390?t=sGHFFKY_1P7MfaC00i3Wzw&s=19

"I love that he probably actually went through the effort of watching the show to draw this because he got the premise and characters right. A simple effortless hater wouldn't have gotten it on point. I know what you are (a furry)"

"The concept of Stonetoss studying and internalizing the character design idiosyncrasy of Vivziepop as he watched Hazbin Hotel that culminated in drawing Jesus in a way that naturally fits the other characters of the show"

[feminismisstillahatemovement]

[feminismisstillahatemovement]

[sprongulous-the-frungular]

>declares half the species as evil by default

>wonders why that same half of the species wants nothing to do with them

Truly, one of God's greatest mysteries.

[joe-kewl]

You shat this bed, you fucking lie in it.

[cupcakesandmisandry]

[madame-helen]

Anne's politics allowed this to happen and this men (but also other women) threating her are other lefties.

[feminismisstillahatemovement]

It was feminism that invented and pushed into law the lie that "gender is a social construct", directly leading to the present nightmare we're all trapped in, and it is predominantly women who still support it today.

[girlactionfigure]

antisemitismtoday

“There is something grotesque about people living thousands of miles away, in safety and comfort, loftily second-guessing and trying to micromanage what the Israelis are doing in a matter of life and death.” Thomas Sowell

[joe-kewl]

Thomas Sowell is a top 5 of all time. Every damn thing he says is so brilliant and articulate. Just 70 years of banger after banger

[changeling-droneco]

We need to start actively calling the leftists that uhhh *checks notes* plot to murder hundreds of jews with one of the most dangerous and painful poisons known to man, neonazis. Can we do that? Can we start calling them leftist neonazis? I feel physically sick. No more, no more quarter for the movement, if it talks like a nazi, walks like a nazi, and tries to torture jews like a nazi, its a nazi.

[crabbybun]

A report of the incident in question

[joe-kewl]

Ohhhh, look! Look who wants to use the label for what it should actually mean, but now can't since it's been so watered down that it means nothing! It's almost like we warned you that bludgeoning us with the neonazi label would fuck you when neonazis came into vogue! Well, this is a real quagmire, isn't it? Now, somehow all the traditionalist rights and libertarian centrists will get lumped in with antisemitic lefts! Really puts you in a pickle, doesn't it?

We fucking warned you.

[joe-kewl]

You're one of the most based users here

Thanks. I'm not here very often. Twitter is much better.

[ned8-back-again]

op blocked me but

i am not forming the conclusions you want me too. i am not reading this and thinking "dang the US should expand its welfare"

i am thinking that your grandfather was a lazy parasite and should have been catapulted into the aegean sea

[joe-kewl]

Journalists are subhumans. They will brazenly lie and when caught in a lie will try to continue to lie to your face. They can't even capitulate with grace.

Thieves and liars, cross my heart, I hope you fucking

DIE.

[argumate]

“the alt-right is recruiting depressed people” has two awkward implications: either it cures their depression, in which case yikes, or it doesn’t, in which case oops

[anosognosic]

I have opinions but it’d mostly just be my fight club post again

[anosognosic]

But okay let’s go again: to be a man in lefty “intersectional” internet spaces is to be confronted with a constant background of hate. Some men are cynical enough to espouse it to reap the social rewards without turning it on themselves. Others can’t. They internalize the discourse and grow to hate themselves (made worse because they imagine that the intersectional-lefty men who don’t hate themselves actually live up to the contradictory demands that the discourse lays on them instead of realizing that they are hypocrites).

This dynamic is depression-inducing.

Now, it’s possible to find a better corner of the internet, or leave social media altogether. It’s also possible to mature out of it, find some measured middle ground where you’re still basically a progressive, take the hate in stride etc. But depressed people are not necessarily the best at making good decisions for themselves.

Any path out of it necessarily involves not submitting to other people’s resentment, but it’s not easy to do that with the drumbeat of “you are terrible” in lefty spaces. Meanwhile, the alt-right offers a readymade path out of that sad-sack life–even if into another sort of shitty life, but at least one where you don’t make yourself into a doormat. It probably does improve their depression.

(This is the primary psychological truth of “cuck”: that self-hating lefty men are complicit in their own submission, that there is a measure of masochism in it, and that it is kind of pathetic–and many, maybe most, of the people who use the term are secretly (or not so secretly) talking about themselves in the past.)

[morlock-holmes]

I don’t know if it’s hypocrisy, exactly, but one of the things I accidentally discovered recently is that in lefty woke internet spaces nobody actually expects men to internalize the messages they’re being given. And if you have been working hard to internalize them, something almost physically snaps inside when you discover that fact. So, a friend of mine posted a message on Facebook last year around summer, which said something like “With summer coming on this is a good time to remind everyone: it is never okay to sexualize someone because of what they are wearing.” Within a couple of weeks of that, in a different conversation, in a different context, “I think when you go up to a person in a bar, you just see a cute person and go up and talk to them because it would be fun” When I repeated those two thoughts to people who aren’t really part of these social justice-y, woke internet spaces, they went, “Wow, no wonder you feel so conflicted about your sexuality, when you’re getting such conflicting advice from your peers.” When I repeated those thoughts to people who were familiar with woke culture, every single one of them said, “Uh, yeah, that first one wasn’t meant to be taken literally.” Sometimes, for people who were skeptical or disillusioned with wokeness, it was said in a kind of sad, “I hate to break it to you” kind of way, like, “Yeah, I get that ‘never sexualize women’ sounds like it’s meant to be advice about your thoughts and behavior, but it’s actually not.” With people who are still into that culture, it was said with a kind of undertone of disbelief. Like, how neurotic must I be to think that “it is never okay to sexualize someone” actually means what it says? Like, they are openly perplexed that I spend most of my time talking to attractive women terrified that I am sexualizing or fetishising them.  Like, they literally can’t understand how constantly hearing “It is never okay to sexualize a person” would somehow lead to the worry that you might accidentally sexualize someone. It doesn’t scan to them. “It’s never okay to sexualize someone” just isn’t a moral admonition, it’s just not supposed to be something you ever say to yourself in your day to day interactions. And when I discovered that, I could almost hear a little popping noise in my brain, and I became really, really intensely angry at this whole woke project.

[isaacsapphire]

I wonder, how much of lesbian sheep syndrome is caused by this? Because, every social space where it’s ok to be a wlw is also swimming with “it’s immoral to look at a woman lustfully” “it’s immoral to sexualize women.” Which is a bit of a problem, when it’s also the only space that says, “it’s ok for women to desire other women.”

[reformed-roark]

I have to wonder though: if their rhetoric isn’t meant to be instructions on how to behave, what the heck is it meant to be?

[lovecrafts-iranon]

This is my first time hearing that it’s not supposed to be literal

[the-real-seebs]

I assume it’s purely performative, or intended to create status claims about kinds of people? It would make a lot of sense.

I knew someone who would say stuff like “[person] deserves to be broke and homeless and starving”, and if you said “wait, that’s horrible, no one should starve”, she got confused because who the fuck said anything about it being okay for anyone to starve? She didn’t even perceive the possibility of understanding those claims that way.

[drethelin]

It’s the same kind of fundamental conflict as between “don’t tell lies.” And “if your grandma asks if you liked what she got you for your birthday you say yes regardless”

People want to make strong moral statements in simple language. They don’t mean them to be binding in the same way simple code is binding, but they also don’t not mean them.

[joe-kewl]

All of you are swimming in circles around the right answer but just not jumping on it.

It’s really simple. The left has NOTHING to offer men. There is no masculinity allowed. If you express a desire to be a family man, you’re patriarchal and that’s toxic. If you want to be strong, to be capable of fighting and defending yourself (or others), that’s patronizing and toxic. If you want to build yourself up and make yourself famous for your contributions, you’re in the way of women’s success and that’s toxic.

Young men can’t get jobs, can’t get houses, and they can’t get women who are anything above a 5 who think they’re an 11 because of hoeflation gassing up extremely basic bitches covered in tattoos and a good deal overweight. They feel like they have been strategically denied of even the most basic life goals of success, at a systematic level, and the proof for this massively outweighs the proof against. They feel like they grew up into a world that openly hates them and wants them to fail. That despises them for the crime of being born a man, and yet demands that they make themselves onto slaves to support this sytem that hates them. The left is this, and it is incapable of welcoming men. We saw this during and after the election, as the DNC scrambled to field anyone even partially masculine to appeal to men. What did they come up with? Tim Walz, a yuppie loony who couldn’t even pretend very well how to handle a hunting shotgun, David Hogg, a sneering and effeminate stolen valor “school shooting survivor” ((He wasn’t there that day and his parents are feds. All that needs to be said)), and Hasanabi, an insane commie fuck who is not capable of expressing even a single positive thing about young men or their country of origin.

You don’t fucking have a man.

You wanna know why the right keeps winning men? Cause you fucking shoved them into their awaiting arms. The side that believes men are contributors, protectors, that they can be wise, dependable, and beloved fathers, the side that encourages men to be productive, responsible, and strong. The side that likes sports and pubs and the military and cool cars and shooting the shit and challenging video games. The side that says all the woke nonsense about hating your own gender is wrong, and it doesn’t have to be this way.

It isn’t surprising at all. In fact it’s abundantly simple. You want to know why Andrew Tate gained popularity? Because you tried to tear down Jordan Peterson (back in his prime). It goes as far back as Warriormale, the epitome of wholesome masculinity, who was derided as Toxic Masculinity.

Men want to be men, just as women want to be women. No amount of progressive propaganda and indoctrination is capable of surgically altering thousands of years and dozens of generations of masculine and feminine coding, and now you have a revolt of young men flocking to the hardest of hard right so they can be men and not feel ashamed of being masculine, and women saying fuck the feminist girlboss sisterhood, I want to be my husband’s pretty princess and the domestic goddess and get pregnant with 4 children.

Men are naturally inclined to want to be masculine. And you went out of your way to tear down most of the figures that defined manliness as being “strong, noble, and responsible. Like a chivalrous knight.” Did you think they would stop wanting to be men? They just sulked until Andrew Tate and others came about. The guys who defined manliness as “aggressive conquerers who take what they want, and dominate and control money, bitches, and power. Like Genghis Khan.”

Men will NEVER look up to weak, spineless, mewling sycophants like Walz, Hogg, or Hasan, because they know it won’t get them laid, it won’t get them respect, and it won’t get them money. You attacked masculinity at its best, and it’s not gonna disappear, so I hope you like it coming back in a far less noble demeanor. You could have had gallant gentlemen who treat all women as queens. And you ran them off. So now you get the thugs who treat all women as stupid bitches who deserve to be exploited.

This is your fucking problem, you made it, and it’s not going to go away. You shat this bed and you’re gonna fucking lay in it.

[joe-kewl]

If you needed more proof I'm right, the DNC just ousted David Hogg as a potential leader because it violated their gender diversity rules, extremely shortly after he said "maybe we shouldn't be alienating men so much."

Lol. Lmao. Roflmfao, even.

[beardedmrbean]

Yes, that's because it literally is therapy.

[r4cs0]

GOD FORBID

[argumate]

“the alt-right is recruiting depressed people” has two awkward implications: either it cures their depression, in which case yikes, or it doesn’t, in which case oops

[anosognosic]

I have opinions but it’d mostly just be my fight club post again

[anosognosic]

But okay let’s go again: to be a man in lefty “intersectional” internet spaces is to be confronted with a constant background of hate. Some men are cynical enough to espouse it to reap the social rewards without turning it on themselves. Others can’t. They internalize the discourse and grow to hate themselves (made worse because they imagine that the intersectional-lefty men who don’t hate themselves actually live up to the contradictory demands that the discourse lays on them instead of realizing that they are hypocrites).

This dynamic is depression-inducing.

Now, it’s possible to find a better corner of the internet, or leave social media altogether. It’s also possible to mature out of it, find some measured middle ground where you’re still basically a progressive, take the hate in stride etc. But depressed people are not necessarily the best at making good decisions for themselves.

Any path out of it necessarily involves not submitting to other people’s resentment, but it’s not easy to do that with the drumbeat of “you are terrible” in lefty spaces. Meanwhile, the alt-right offers a readymade path out of that sad-sack life–even if into another sort of shitty life, but at least one where you don’t make yourself into a doormat. It probably does improve their depression.

(This is the primary psychological truth of “cuck”: that self-hating lefty men are complicit in their own submission, that there is a measure of masochism in it, and that it is kind of pathetic–and many, maybe most, of the people who use the term are secretly (or not so secretly) talking about themselves in the past.)

[morlock-holmes]

I don’t know if it’s hypocrisy, exactly, but one of the things I accidentally discovered recently is that in lefty woke internet spaces nobody actually expects men to internalize the messages they’re being given. And if you have been working hard to internalize them, something almost physically snaps inside when you discover that fact. So, a friend of mine posted a message on Facebook last year around summer, which said something like “With summer coming on this is a good time to remind everyone: it is never okay to sexualize someone because of what they are wearing.” Within a couple of weeks of that, in a different conversation, in a different context, “I think when you go up to a person in a bar, you just see a cute person and go up and talk to them because it would be fun” When I repeated those two thoughts to people who aren’t really part of these social justice-y, woke internet spaces, they went, “Wow, no wonder you feel so conflicted about your sexuality, when you’re getting such conflicting advice from your peers.” When I repeated those thoughts to people who were familiar with woke culture, every single one of them said, “Uh, yeah, that first one wasn’t meant to be taken literally.” Sometimes, for people who were skeptical or disillusioned with wokeness, it was said in a kind of sad, “I hate to break it to you” kind of way, like, “Yeah, I get that ‘never sexualize women’ sounds like it’s meant to be advice about your thoughts and behavior, but it’s actually not.” With people who are still into that culture, it was said with a kind of undertone of disbelief. Like, how neurotic must I be to think that “it is never okay to sexualize someone” actually means what it says? Like, they are openly perplexed that I spend most of my time talking to attractive women terrified that I am sexualizing or fetishising them.  Like, they literally can’t understand how constantly hearing “It is never okay to sexualize a person” would somehow lead to the worry that you might accidentally sexualize someone. It doesn’t scan to them. “It’s never okay to sexualize someone” just isn’t a moral admonition, it’s just not supposed to be something you ever say to yourself in your day to day interactions. And when I discovered that, I could almost hear a little popping noise in my brain, and I became really, really intensely angry at this whole woke project.

[isaacsapphire]

I wonder, how much of lesbian sheep syndrome is caused by this? Because, every social space where it’s ok to be a wlw is also swimming with “it’s immoral to look at a woman lustfully” “it’s immoral to sexualize women.” Which is a bit of a problem, when it’s also the only space that says, “it’s ok for women to desire other women.”

[reformed-roark]

I have to wonder though: if their rhetoric isn’t meant to be instructions on how to behave, what the heck is it meant to be?

[lovecrafts-iranon]

This is my first time hearing that it’s not supposed to be literal

[the-real-seebs]

I assume it’s purely performative, or intended to create status claims about kinds of people? It would make a lot of sense.

I knew someone who would say stuff like “[person] deserves to be broke and homeless and starving”, and if you said “wait, that’s horrible, no one should starve”, she got confused because who the fuck said anything about it being okay for anyone to starve? She didn’t even perceive the possibility of understanding those claims that way.

[drethelin]

It’s the same kind of fundamental conflict as between “don’t tell lies.” And “if your grandma asks if you liked what she got you for your birthday you say yes regardless”

People want to make strong moral statements in simple language. They don’t mean them to be binding in the same way simple code is binding, but they also don’t not mean them.

[joe-kewl]

All of you are swimming in circles around the right answer but just not jumping on it.

It's really simple. The left has NOTHING to offer men. There is no masculinity allowed. If you express a desire to be a family man, you're patriarchal and that's toxic. If you want to be strong, to be capable of fighting and defending yourself (or others), that's patronizing and toxic. If you want to build yourself up and make yourself famous for your contributions, you're in the way of women's success and that's toxic.

Young men can't get jobs, can't get houses, and they can't get women who are anything above a 5 who think they're an 11 because of hoeflation gassing up extremely basic bitches covered in tattoos and a good deal overweight. They feel like they have been strategically denied of even the most basic life goals of success, at a systematic level, and the proof for this massively outweighs the proof against. They feel like they grew up into a world that openly hates them and wants them to fail. That despises them for the crime of being born a man, and yet demands that they make themselves onto slaves to support this sytem that hates them. The left is this, and it is incapable of welcoming men. We saw this during and after the election, as the DNC scrambled to field anyone even partially masculine to appeal to men. What did they come up with? Tim Walz, a yuppie loony who couldn't even pretend very well how to handle a hunting shotgun, David Hogg, a sneering and effeminate stolen valor "school shooting survivor" ((He wasn't there that day and his parents are feds. All that needs to be said)), and Hasanabi, an insane commie fuck who is not capable of expressing even a single positive thing about young men or their country of origin.

You don't fucking have a man.

You wanna know why the right keeps winning men? Cause you fucking shoved them into their awaiting arms. The side that believes men are contributors, protectors, that they can be wise, dependable, and beloved fathers, the side that encourages men to be productive, responsible, and strong. The side that likes sports and pubs and the military and cool cars and shooting the shit and challenging video games. The side that says all the woke nonsense about hating your own gender is wrong, and it doesn't have to be this way.

It isn't surprising at all. In fact it's abundantly simple. You want to know why Andrew Tate gained popularity? Because you tried to tear down Jordan Peterson (back in his prime). It goes as far back as Warriormale, the epitome of wholesome masculinity, who was derided as Toxic Masculinity.

Men want to be men, just as women want to be women. No amount of progressive propaganda and indoctrination is capable of surgically altering thousands of years and dozens of generations of masculine and feminine coding, and now you have a revolt of young men flocking to the hardest of hard right so they can be men and not feel ashamed of being masculine, and women saying fuck the feminist girlboss sisterhood, I want to be my husband's pretty princess and the domestic goddess and get pregnant with 4 children.

Men are naturally inclined to want to be masculine. And you went out of your way to tear down most of the figures that defined manliness as being "strong, noble, and responsible. Like a chivalrous knight." Did you think they would stop wanting to be men? They just sulked until Andrew Tate and others came about. The guys who defined manliness as "aggressive conquerers who take what they want, and dominate and control money, bitches, and power. Like Genghis Khan."

Men will NEVER look up to weak, spineless, mewling sycophants like Walz, Hogg, or Hasan, because they know it won't get them laid, it won't get them respect, and it won't get them money. You attacked masculinity at its best, and it's not gonna disappear, so I hope you like it coming back in a far less noble demeanor. You could have had gallant gentlemen who treat all women as queens. And you ran them off. So now you get the thugs who treat all women as stupid bitches who deserve to be exploited.

This is your fucking problem, you made it, and it's not going to go away. You shat this bed and you're gonna fucking lay in it.

[designchic75]

Check his hard drive!

[yourtoradorasextendedwarranty]

Sorry but if you get caught you know the risks. Don't care. Part of the thrill for people is the possibility to get caught. And believe me when I tell you that they know good well they might get in deep shit if they do.

Also consider that kids could come across what you are doing. Or worse for you, a person that's willing to stab your partner in the back then rape you. Everything in life comes with risks. Life is not "Safe". You do the crime, you do the time.

[otakuvampyre]

There are a lot of issues with the sex offender registry (like the fact women get to avoid being on it far more often than men, or the fact you can get on it by simply peeing in a public space, even if you didn't do so in front of people), and while I think the sex offender registry should be exclusively for shit like rape, sexual assault, and CSA, I don't think this is the right way to bring attention to it's flaws. 🤣

[yourtoradorasextendedwarranty]

Honestly the language he's using just makes it sound like gay people are degenerates that want to have sex in public.

[joe-kewl]

Sometimes the boot fits, even if it upsets you. Promiscuity is a raging problem in the gay community. And there are those who want to address it and fix it, and those who call everyone in group A a bigoted homophobe. I would advise group B to listen to group A before group C (the actual bigoted homophobes who view all gays as abominations that need destroyed) is the majority. This is the on ramp, you'll want to take it before you can't turn around.

Also, @ the sex offender registry, I'd personally have there be echelons. There's a difference between a drunk pissing in a park and a 15 year old and 17 year old getting caught up, versus a guy grooming, kidnapping, and raping a minor.

[feminismisstillahatemovement]

[joe-kewl]

Feminism did this. #MeToo was a weaponization of social media built to destroy the bonds between men and women. And it worked. Men will absolutely not approach women because they don't want to be ruined. Women are pretty much hardwired not to make the first move. So everyone is lonely and bitter.

And now we have a near full on gender war. The divide is worse than ever.

By the way, gender wars are extremely rare in history, but the only times they ever happened, one side won decisively and no surprise its the side that is mentally and physically designed for war, combat, and standing their ground mentally and physically.

So, when you see a man go "repeal the 19th!" And wonder how the fuck it got this way, try your hardest to scroll back in time to when a woman made up a rape accusation and dragged a mattress around a campus, destroying a man's life so thoroughly he killed himself.

You may now fast forward to wondering why young men nowadays are openly declaring women should have their rights taken away.

Cause. Effect.

[taxideermied]

I hate 2 say it but being a part of a “weird” subculture does not meaningfully inoculate you against a conservative moralizing impulse. You gotta unlearn that. Saying “cringe is dead” is not enough, you have to actually be okay with things that discomfort, perplex and/or disgust you.

[thisishowyoumakemovies]

Additionally, if you have an impulse to exclude or punish people for making you uncomfortable, examine why that is.

[joe-kewl]

Actually, sometimes you're right to be disgusted. Sometimes you are right to demand enforcing of rules. You are almost always correct to gatekeep.

I know this will piss you off. Too bad. It's right. Look how many fandoms are utter dogs hit because they became inclusive to literally everyone. Look how many timeless mediums became grey blobs because they rinsed off all its identity for mass market appeal. Look at how many niche interests have been completely overtaken.

Exclusion is good thing. And often for good reasons. Disgust is a moral reaction to a perceived "wrong." This can be uncleanness, immorality and depravity, and so on. The real examination worth doing is whether or not your disgust is appropriate. If it is misplaced or if it is very rightly placed.