She May Get There

Programmed women can break free of their programming

As I’ve mentioned on many occasions, one thing that men fail to grasp is that because women are dynamic creatures, today’s propaganda-spouting feminist is tomorrow’s traditional wife, complete with healthy, unvaccinated children. As long as she hasn’t been too damaged by her youthful forays into the insidious world of college and career, or sunk herself too deeply into degeneracy, she can be successfully rescued from herself and from her Clown World programming.

This isn’t to say that she will be, or that success is guaranteed, only that it isn’t the complete impossibility that the men rendered involuntarily celibate by Clown World would have you believe.

This is an anecdote from a woman’s initial exposure to the world outside the empire of lies. The verdict is far from settled as to which way she will ultimately fall, but the deciding factor is what sort of man she chooses. The fact that she refuses to stop wondering about the lies she’s been fed, the fact that she wonders if she might herself be one of those bad people, the fact that she doesn’t want to entirely stop questioning the ever-changing Narrative, indicates that she still has a chance of escaping her programming and the path leading her toward being a societal and genetic dead end.

This was the thing that everyone on the left had warned me about, that Nazis were among us, that they were well-dressed and persuasive, and that simply questioning the liberal orthodoxy was the gateway drug to becoming a Nazi yourself. I wondered if I should stop listening to Red Scare. I wondered if I was a bad person. I wondered if I should abandon politics altogether.

But I wasn't convinced. I thought it might be more dangerous to shut out these views I disagreed with and trust people who said, "This person is bad, and their views are dangerous." And I'm still convinced of this now. In fact, I think seeing these ideologies uncensored, both by their opponents and by the people promoting them, can be useful. People may flirt with more “dangerous” ideologies, out of no desire more than just to be edgy or feel different. And while some may end up like Matt, others may just be turned off the whole thing and become, quote on quote, normies.

So, what made us go down these different paths? I want to say I'm more of a critical thinker than him, but I doubt that. I actually think intelligence has little to do with whether or not someone falls for these ideologies. Instead, it boils down to how we see this world. This guy liked believing he was part of a superior group and that isolationism and homogeneity were the keys to a peaceful and prosperous society.

More than anything else, he just liked feeling different. When leftism became the dominant cultural ideology, with companies releasing merch for Pride month and Joe Biden embracing identity politics as a campaign strategy, Matt no longer felt subversive. His ideas were no longer illicit, they were the norm. So he switched sides and got to feel special again. For me, though, those things weren't enough. I'm fortunate to have lived in other countries, visited even more, and interacted with people from various cultures, nationalities, and religions. Adopting his worldview would mean giving up on the joy of mingling with people different from me.

I think there's also the fact that when you realize so much of what you previously believed was wrong, it's easy to conclude that everything you were told must be a lie. I do understand how he came to this conclusion. In the contemporary left, you are not allowed to point out even the most basic of inconsistencies, like defunding the police will encourage violent and antisocial behavior, rather than curbing it. There is an unfortunate tendency on the left to take common-sense views and exaggerate them until they alienate most normal, not-chronically-online people.

I see how he must have felt when he realized that he had been lied to and finally let himself listen to his instinct instead of staying safely in the party line. But he fell into a trap that all of us are vulnerable to: the thrill of belonging, of abandoning one camp for another.

Her female lack of empathy prevents her from understanding that his motivation has nothing to do with “feeling superior” or “feeling different”. It should be obvious that it is highly improbable that his rejection of the false maintream Narrative has anything to do with his “feelings” at all; that is a recognizably female perspective she is projecting upon him. She has yet to understand that one always belongs to one camp or the other. Either one dwells in the realm of truth and Truth or one is a prisoner of Clown World. This is one of the meanings of the multi-layered statement that asserts “the truth shall set you free”. But the fact that many men and women do not recognize truth today does not mean that they are incapable of it, or that they never will.

And so the act of reprogramming begins…

Which is why it is always a mistake - always - for a man to dismiss a woman in whom he is interested solely on the basis of her having been ideologically programmed to be a Narrative-spouting Non-Player Character. The one thing that is capable of breaking a woman’s programming is her love for a sufficiently strong man combined with her natural instinct for marriage and children.

Remember, Nature always wins in the end. And the truth is not opposed to nature, to the contrary, our camp subscribes to the concept of Natural Law, whereas the other believes in tabula rasa, social constructs, and dynamic definitions.

Obviously it is much preferable to find a woman who is already fully dedicated to the truth and is sufficiently courageous to reject the programming on her own, or at least with the help of a proper upbringing. But never forget that what has been programmed can, at least in theory, be reprogrammed.