Chris Chupik mentions this piece in the comment section at Sarah Hoyt’s blog.
Oddly he says this:
Christopher M. Chupik March 26, 2017 at 12:09 pm
If you believe the commenters, I’m an American Christian Conservative Trump-supporter.
News to me.
Except…well nobody (i.e. zero people) call him either an American, Christian or a Trump supporter. I expect non-sequiturs and claims of persecution but I’m actually a bit baffled by this. Naturally, he doesn’t quote anybody but wow, talk about people running in mid-air with no ground below them.
Hoyt also adds, counterfactually:
accordingtohoyt | March 26, 2017 at 2:03 pm | Reply
Oh, we all are. In fact I was going to do a post on this. They don’t understand quite a number of us are not Christian, not straight, not cis anything. They divide by conformist group, so the only reason we don’t belong to them must be our unacceptably characteristics and being members of the establishment they imagine (which hasn’t existed for at least 100 years.) The scientific name for them is “Asshats.”
Huh? Is it the quip about modern conservatives thinking demons are real and nazis are imaginary that annoyed them? Because Hoyt just appended her comment to a piece that complains about witches and which disputes the existence of Nazis. The comment relates not to what I think conservatives ARE but as to how conservatives PORTRAY themselves, as amply documented by fellow pups in recent weeks.
Are conservatives all kinds of people? I assume so, because I’ve never met a group of people that wasn’t diverse at least on some dimensions. Do modern right wing conservatives/libertarians let straight Christian men call the shots and control the debate? Hmmm, yup. Indeed we all saw how that dynamic played out in the Puppy-debacles.
We’ve been busy watching Rabid shenanigans with books covers, but meanwhile over in Sad Puppy domains, Chris Chupik has decided that modern Nazis are largely imaginary. Chupik, for those who don’t know, is notable mainly as a regular commenter on Puppy blogs but sometimes he guest-posts at According to Hoyt. https://accordingtohoyt.com/2017/03/25/coyote-gravity-by-christopher-m-chupik/
[This get’s long so more below the fold…also ‘Spencer‘ is usually an external link but each time to a different article rather than peppering this piece with quotes]
A follow up from the earlier post on John C Wright’s belief that the left (in general) is essentially a religion of witchcraft. I failed to include a link so here http://www.scifiwright.com/2017/03/the-last-crusade-in-the-kingdom-of-witches/
And again, recently, many throngs of lunatics in a ghastly display of vulgarity, completely with nudity, swearing, and other degradations, wearing images of women’s genitalia on their heads. The gathering was called a protest, but no protester could articulate for what cause they gathered. It was yet again called a political movement, albeit, again, no law nor policy nor any specific political act was demanded to be done or undone. What was it for?
They are rituals, ceremonial, magical. They are sacraments, symbols intended to create the result they symbolize.
In the comments to my post, Doris V Sutherland pointed to some statements made by Wright’s fellow Dragon Award winner, Brian Neimmeier. I’ll link to one of his posts that goes into some detail: http://www.brianniemeier.com/2015/12/the-demonic-obsession-of-cultural.html
Extraordinary demonic activity may occur in various ways. Some refer to these phenomena as “stages”, but they’re more properly called “areas”, since they don’t necessarily follow an orderly progression.
The areas of extraordinary demonic activity are:
External physical attacks: pain and/or harm inflicted by a demon.
Oppression: various external torments that often masquerade as extreme bad luck.
Obsession: uncontrollable, irrational thoughts induced by demonic activity.
Infestation: refers to demonic attachment to a place, an object, or even an animal.
Possession: one or more demons takes control of a person’s body (not the soul).
Subjugation: voluntary submission to demonic influence.
Brian then goes on to ask whether SJW’s show signs of demonic possession and concludes that most don’t show the signs but do show the signs of ‘demonic obsession’. He later concludes:
Since the current social crisis more likely involves external demonic obsession than internal possession, mass exorcisms aren’t required to address the problem. Just as physicians can mediate divine healing through their skill, ordinary people can mediate deliverance from evil through prayer and fasting on behalf of our afflicted brethren.
Phew! I for one, strongly encourage those concerned about SJWs to wholeheartedly put their efforts into prayer and (reasonable) fasting. Also, check under your bed for talking cats. Oh and maybe check your calendar to see if it is the sixteenth century still.
Oh, and one last sppoooookkkky thought – remember how the right keep projecting their own faults onto others? And now they think people are controlled by demonic forces? Sleep tight.
The thing with the Evan McMullin killed Milo’s Career theory from our Puppy pals that really is bugging me is that it is just really, really, poor story telling. It’s too elaborate as a factual piece (unless, as I noted, moderate conservatives are pathetic at skullduggery) but worse, it’s just really bad as fiction.
No, if we are going to do fiction let us do it properly.
Who benefits specifically, with the timing and the events leading up to Milo’s fall from grace? I’ll credit the Puppies with at least getting you need a specific villain in a fictional story – the story can’t just be ‘people who don’t like nazi punks in general’.
Plotwise, for fiction rather than fact:
- You need a bad guy.
- It can’t be who you immediately expect.
- They have to directly benefit from both Milo’s rise & fall.
- When it is revealed, it all has to make sense in retrospect.
Ergo, Steve Bannon did it. I mean not really because we live in a real world where Ockham’s razor cuts such a story to shreds.
Bannon- Breitbart – Milo. Milo was great for Breitbart – stirring up shit, pulling in some angry young men and generally running interference for the alt-Right. But that was then. Bannon is next to the centre of power. Breitbart, which was once on the out fringes of conservatism is now accepted. CPAC will be Bannon’s chance to seal the deal – an alliance between wider conservatism and his own reactionary-nihilism.
Breitbart has a big presence at CPAC this year (in truth as well as in our fiction) and Bannon will appear with Reince Priebus. Donald Trump will give a keynote speech and…well some idiot invites Milo Yiannopolus. Can Bannon ensure Milo behaves? Probably not – after all he’s never needed Milo to behave, he has only ever needed Milo to stir shit. Worse, even Milo does behave at CPAC, everybody knows he has said some crazy shit which would alienate the still sceptical social conservative wing.
Solution (in fictional land): explode the scandal bomb early before it can do any collateral damage to CPAC, Trump, Breitbart or Bannon (that’s in reverse priority order).
Note only three things have actually happened to Milo:
- He got disinvited to a conference held by people he doesn’t like.
- He lost a book deal with a publisher he doesn’t like
- He ‘resigned’ from Breitbart.
Only one of those things looks like a betrayal…
Yeah, but in reality…nope. Events don’t need secret plots or sinister villains.
During the election, I mentioned that some kind soul had put me on a Trump mailing list (cheers).
Some months after the election and the begging letters are coming at an increased frequency:
Now firstly, as I’m not normally a recipient of US party political fund raising, I don’t know if this kind of frequency of requests for donations is typical. Second, I doubt there is any one kind of explanation for the Trump regime’s behaviour. However, I’d like to suggest that “make as much money as possible out of the 15% reactionary core of the US population as quickly as possible” makes a lot of explanatory sense. That doesn’t mean the other strong hypothesis “destroy the rule of law in screaming howl of hatred torn between the forces of chaos and fascism” is false, just that “…and let’s make a pile of cash out of the rubes while we do it” is a relevant coda.
I was told by some conservatives who were at least somewhat unhappy with the idea of Trump, that Hillary’s unsecure email issue absolutely made her unfit for office.
Oddly the email crowd seems to have gone rather quiet in the wake of revelations that senior Whitehouse staff are themselves using a private RNC server for emails. On top of that Trump is using an unsecured Android phone and the POTUS Twitter is apparently linked to an unsecured Gmail account. Finally to top it all, press secretary Sean Spicer appears to be accidently tweeting passwords:
Anyway here are the loud howls of protest about this situation from those same conservatives:
Oh look, a blank space.
Fascism loves nothing more than to exploit death to spread both fear and misinformation. The recent shooting at Fort Lauderdale has proven to be just such an occasion. The Daily Beast reports: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2017/01/06/inside-the-alt-right-s-florida-airport-shooter-esteban-santiago-hoax.html?via=desktop&source=twitter
Far rightwing figureheads immediately invented an elaborate and racist conspiracy theory that CNN had lightened a photo of alleged Fort Lauderdale airport shooter Esteban Santiago shortly after the Friday attack.
In reality, CNN had yet to air a picture of Santiago, let alone lightened a picture of him. The conspiracy also used a picture of an entirely different man named Esteban Santiago—not the alleged shooter.
Sure enough, over at Science Fictions own gloomy core of Alt-Right confusion, Vox Day is pushing the same line: http://web.archive.org/web/20170107052215/http://voxday.blogspot.com.au/2017/01/5-dead-in-ft-lauderdale-shooting.html [web archive link – live link here http://voxday.blogspot.com.au/2017/01/5-dead-in-ft-lauderdale-shooting.html%5D
Fake news, lies, propaganda? Not sure what the best word for it is. Malicious bullshit is probably the best description – I doubt Vox knew or cared whether the image was true.