A couple of thoughts on the bait and switch which is “gender”

The notion that men who pretend to be women should be able to compete in women’s sports is back in the news again.

Listening to Dennis Prager this morning on replay brought a few thoughts to mind.

The first thing is how the whole misguided concept came to pass.

We used to use the word sex, (as an adjective rather than a verb), to describe what sex a person was. Male, or female. The answer to that tells us a lot about the person’s biology. Then the notion of Gender was introduced. Gender is what sex a person thinks they are, as opposed to what they are. Pseudo-reality over reality. This concept was advanced by several notorious Marxist doctors since the 60s including Drs Money and Ehrhardt  as well as others who I am too lazy to look up right now. But Money and Ehrhardt I had to study in university in the 70s. There are actually more famous ones than Money.

Gradually, the word sex disappeared from popular use, as well as use on forms, and was replaced by Gender. And now leftists could safely say that there are as many genders as people can imagine, as its circular reasoning so of course there is because gender means what sex you imagine you are, and that any attempt to impose gender on someone, is fascism, which is it in the Marxist logic using that rhetorical trick/line of reasoning.

The next phase came when they claimed that gender, the imaginary thing, is real and we all must submit to that, and bear with me, this is where it gets wiggy, biological sex, is not.

And therefore, any attempt to stop a man from competing in women’s sports is racist. Using the expanded definition of racist to mean failing to support any taxonomy at all that the left creates at any given moment.

But wait! Since we have disposed of biology altogether in favour of a more Marxist one, much like the Soviet communists did when they banned Darwin and forced Lysenkoism on everyone, why stop there?

Why not allow adults to compete in Children’s sports? Certainly we have to get rid of all weight classifications in contact sports like boxing and wrestling. Why can’t heavyweight boxers fight fly weights? How about special Olympics against normal Olympians? The Philadelphia Eagles Vs. high school flag football?

The distinctions are all biological and are all therefore “racist” by the same definition? Why are these demands not made yet, and more importantly, why is this obvious and important comparison not made as an argument against this insane dialectic negation tactic being used to obliterate something which allow women’s sports to exist at all?

All the distinctions and categories made above are created in order to make competition fair, and therefore fun and exiting. These distinctions are a part of Western taxonomies. The science of categorization which allows things to work, to be properly judged without having to examine each thing from scratch on every encounter. They are imperfect and from time to time, need to be modified even using science as a modifying examiner. It allows people in many biological categories to be able to compete against people with the same rough class of attributes so that training, effort and talent can create the win as opposed to seeing Randy Macho Man Savage crush a 12 year old in grade school wrestling.

Males and females as categories are not 100% accurate for 100% of the people. But it works. And the current cancelling of actual scientists who deny the Marxist pseudo-reality of “gender” is actually an attack on our entire taxonomy. Because the left, with an insight on Western thought and Western civilization that only people with a burning, even demonic hatred of it can have, intend to destroy us with ideas and words, and taxonomy is one of Western civilization’s most powerful ones.

For the rest of us, taxonomy is just the background noise of our culture. People may get together in bars and debate or banter or joke about the attributes that make up a taxonomy, like women, or men, or dogs or cats. But the left intends to destroy the very concept altogether. And by doing so, all sense of fairness within all of our cultures.

Three short clips explaining what communism is, and how it works. More relevant than ever now

In 2019, Ava Lon took on the herculean task of watching a long video by a Polish intellectual, I think an artist turned bell-ringer as he saw communism in ascendance in the West.

The video was an explanation of exactly who and what the tacticians of Marxism are and did. He left how we can see that around us, up to us.

This requires concentration. But each of the three clips are short, and very important.

Thanks again to Ava Lon for this massive and important effort. One which grows in importance by the day.

Hate Speech. A tactic of the Frankfurt School:

On homosexuality, artists, and the long march:

On how to stigmatize an entire culture:

Using logical fallacies as weapons against all Western thought

There is a lot of material exposing the horror behind the stories, as well as the horror of the stories today.

Of course, one probably shouldn’t see the second without understanding the first, or else one becomes part of the stream of misdirected action which is likely the intention of these events, shaped by unnamed sources, which have shaped our world this year.

Most of the policies and events of the past many years, but most effectively 2020, seem to be a deliberate reversal of the use of logical fallacies.

For example, if one reads a book or website on what constitutes breaches of logic you might notice one called, “Argumentum ad hominem”.

This is where you attack the speaker rather than the idea in order to discredit the idea by ridiculing or otherwise devaluing the speaker.

In logic of course, this does not hold. Meaning if you seek a truth, that truth exists independently of the speaker, or even his credentials. Which is a related fallacy called, argumentum ab auctoritate.

In other words, if you meet a drunk on the street who gives you medical advice, the advice itself is independent of the fact that it came from a drunk on the street. In fact, he could be a top ranking surgeon on a bender, which again, doesn’t mean the advice is correct either. you have to analyze an argument on its own merits.

The modern left imputes layers upon layers onto that fallacy such that the gene pool of the speaker affects the weight the speaker brings to the argument.

And like true communists, if you object to an idiotic argument that may be brought by a black person for example, then your questioning of the argument will be made equivalent to your being a “racist” against the speaker and his entire race.

It feels very much like the Frankfurt school tacticians read a proper book on logical fallacies and created an entire set of anti-cognitive tools based on their opposites. Tools that let them destroy reason itself in order to apply a Hegelian/Marxist system on the world And it seems to have worked so far.

In fact it’s possible that Hegel, the source of all this crazy, did exactly that as he was a philosopher and was likely familiar with Greek thought and the pursuit of truth.The rest of them from Marx to the second generation school of Frankfurt school tacticians just refined these tactics. An example below on Habermas, the second generation Frankfurt School tactician who created the means to force a Marxist consensus on the majority, then make all opposition to that consensus, “hate speech”. Which goes a long way to explain Global warming, and the labels applied to anyone who uses real science to show why all the models concerning it are nonsense.

One of the main attack vectors of Hegelian/Marxist methods is “Critical theory”. Pretty much the weaponization of ad-hominem but in every possible way it can be used. The adjective, “Racist” being the tactical nuke of ad-hominem slanders.

For evidence of that look no farther than the death of George Floyd. There is not on scintilla of evidence that the police who is alleged to have caused his death had racist motivations. Not one person has come out and said he had issues with black people or other non-white groups. But the accusation that he did was enough to set off what looks more and more like a pre-planned communist insurgency based on the accusation alone.

For a great primer on Critical theory, check out this video by Bill Whittle when he was with Pyjamas Media. He does an excellent job of explaining the Frankfurt School and the basics of communism and critical theory in under 12 minutes.

Moral inversion, the idea that the person pointing out a horror is the bad one and the people perpetrating the horror are victims of the violence of your pointing it out is another kind of rhetorical nuke. Islamophobia is maybe the best example of that.

Notice the escalation also of moving from ‘words are violence’, meaning that saying something that goes against communist objectives, like stopping Islam from deconstructing Western freedoms, to “silence is violence’ meaning that now, you must openly agree with communist objectives or be part of the tactics required to achieve them, or your failure to do so justifies our violence in retribution against you.

And make no mistake, that is what silence = violence means.

There are many more logical fallacies that have been inverted, weaponized and launched on us to destroy logic and reason as our modus. We certainly see it in Black Lives Matters actions as it is meant to replace rule of law, due process and the presumption of innocence with identity-politics based accusations.

Which also explains why up until about now, BLM actions happened after an officer killed a black suspect in self defence or at least understandably and not when it really was a racist cop. The idea is to create fresh layers of outrage with each stage so that the system itself comes unglued. What good is an autopsy if everyone thinks that the results of it are rigged for political purposes? (Yet more damage the Epstein affair has done perhaps) Or a trial if all the evidence for the defence appears to be damage control to let a “racist white cop” off the hook for a “racist murder” of an “innocent black man”.

All these actions are meant to foment contempt and distrust and hatred for the system itself. Which is why, (as what was meant to ba a paragraph or two about links to be posted) has turned into this. Its critical that we understand what’s going on or we become the useful idiots of this well strategized attack on Western thought and civilization.

Here is a link to Stephen Coughlin’s paper, Re-remembering the Misremembered Left. A detailed analysis of the people and ideas that led us to where we are now. He and Richard Higgens have written more and newer papers which deal more directly with these events and can be found here.

Re-Remembering is especially interesting to me, because it was written before the pandemic and the riots. But help frame these events in a way that allows clarity.

Thank you to anyone who made it this far. Really this was meant to be an intro for some of today’s horrors. But it went a little long. Looking forward to any thoughts or rebuttals in the comments.

The Neo-Marxist 2-step get to authoritarian communism

Not that long ago, the left pushed the narrative that speech was violence.

The idea was, if you said anything Neo-Marxists did not agree with, it was the same as if you had applied physical violence to oppose their agenda, and therefore any sort of violent defensive action was justified.

Much like the Islamic idea of “Defending the Faith”. Where not allowing Muslims to impose their religious laws on you is grounds for jihad against you as you have attacked their religion/religious rights to impose Islam on you.

In Marxist terms, if you said anything they could reframe as “Racist, Sexist, Homophobic, Transphobic, and lets be clear, that includes saying things that are true, such as “biological sex is real“, they would use violence on you, even mob violence and whatever other means they could think of to destroy you, your career, family and relationships.

And now, like true communists do, they have deployed phase two:

(Also like the Islamic concept of “Hijra”, which means two things. A Muslim moving to a non-Muslim area in order to make it Islamic, or increasing the degree of Islamic adherence of an area by upping demands. Ottawa residents for example might remember a year around a decade ago where you simply never saw a Muslim head cloth and nearly never or never a face cloth and then all of a sudden, they were everywhere like Dandelions)

Phase two of the Marxist hijra is “Silence is Violence”

This means that it’s now, not enough to keep your non-Marxist opinions to yourself. You MUST speak out and support the never ending cycle of leftist negation of all things Western and if you don’t, you justify violence against you. They will hurt you, and it will be your own damn fault.

And we move closer and closer to the 1984, 3 minutes of mandatory state imposed hate. But 3 minutes will never be enough. And the demands on you to submit will never be enough until you submit that your life, your children, and all your efforts are the sole and total property of the state and any injustice you perceive is done to you by the state, including your death, you should consider to be an honour to have the chance to sacrifice to the state.

The Left will not stop until we are Aphids. And as we are not Aphids, they will not stop until we, and all we have built or accomplished, are destroyed, or we stop them.

Eeyore for VladTepesBlog.

Frankfurt School, Repressive tolerance, and selective enforcement. The law now only applied against European thinkers

Here is another example of a fellow who will not be arrested for a hate crime, banned from Twitter or Youtube and probably has quite a few followers on Facebook.

I would say that is court-worthy evidence of counselling murder of people for being part of an identifiable group.

Let’s compare that to the banning of Tommy Robinson from every social media site with exactly zero evidence that he broke any speech codes or laws concerning what may not be said.

Maybe its time for another look at how Marcuse set up the idea that through the use of repressive tolerance, a minority can control a majority:

How Marxism weaponized homosexuality, artists, and a fresh look at Gramsci and the Long March

This is the 4th clip of the Polish intellectual Ava Lon has done for us, as part of a series from this video. The man who made it, is well known in Poland for explaining the nature of leftism and Marxism. The First three clips can be found on our D Tube channel, as well as here.

Direct link

Third clip from the same video

Second clip from the same video

First clip from the same video

(Will add other clips as they are found. The original entire clip in Polish can be seen here below)


Prager U misses the key piece on leftist-Tolerance

Prager videos are excellent. And there is nothing wrong with what Dave Ruben says. But there is something missing that makes all the difference in one’s understanding.

Dave Ruben’s video is an accurate observation of the left’s version of tolerance, and is cathartic for the rest of us in a thin way, as it confirms our own observations. But unless you understand why we all see what we see it is of limited use.

I draw your attention to page 71 of Rich Higgins and Stephen Coughlin’s paper on the Strategy and Tactics of the Left. An examination of the various Marxist tacticians and strategists, and the legacy of destruction they created.

While Marcuse was a prolific writer, treatment here will be limited to establish- ing the dialectical nature of Marcuse’s “Repressive Tolerance” in furtherance of explaining its dialectical design.


“Repressive Tolerance” weaponized critical theory for use against America and the West. For Marcuse, the repressive tolerance of America was, and still is, in need of negation by a liberating toler- ance—Die Amerikanische Kultur muss aufgehoben werden.


As with Horkheimer and Lukács, Marcuse’s Marxism was purposefully Hegelian. While still in Germany, Marcuse studied under Martin Heidegger.179 In 1932 he wrote a Ph.D. level thesis, Hegel‘s Ontologie und die Grundlegung einer Theorie der Geschichtlichkeit (Hegel’s Ontology and the Theory of Historicity).180In 1941, while on staff at the Institute for Social Research at Columbia University, he famously wrote Reason and Revolution.181 The full name of the monograph is Reason and Revolution: Hegel and the Rise of Modern Social Theory.182 In 1965, he wrote “Repressive Tolerance”.183


“Repressive Tolerance” lays out the operational design of Marxist critical theory applied to America. Marcuse did this through the arbitrary division of tolerance into two forms; liberating and repressive, for the purpose of subjecting toler- ance to a dialectical process of negation. Under Marcuse’s regime, (universal) tolerance becomes intolerance to non-conforming (particular) views.

Leftists have, as they consistently do in their war against reason, redefined important terms accepted by us all as having specific meanings, in order to weaponize them to the purpose of the destruction of Western culture, laws and civilization. Tolerance, to leftists, and especially those steeped in leftist thought like ANTIFA, means Marcuse’s Repressive Tolerance, which as stated above, is a critical theory tactical weapon to crush all who stand in the way of ascendent Marxist thought as the dominant and only form of thought.


Thank you PC for sending in this video explanation of repressive tolerance.

(This video above fails to understand the Hegelian type of thinking which is the core of Marxism. His explanation is good in terms of the practical understanding of its result, but to really understand repressive tolerance you have to understand the Hegelian-Marxist strategy of dialectic negation of our culture(s) )

A paragraph from Stephen & Rich’s Re-Remembering The Misremembered Left

Political Warfare recognizes the role narratives play in overwhelming a rule of law society. This includes the formation of mass line movements and counter-state activities that utilize narratives at the cultural level, with the objective of powering down into the political space, where fidelity to the narrative will result in non-enforcement of law that, over time, will become institutionalized.


It is through the process of imposing narratives that the opposition first becomes influenced and then controlled; becoming a controlled opposition. Abuse of language leads to an abuse of power. Political warfare strategies are intensely dialectical, seeking the isolation of American values that are then negated through a relentless process of dialectical negation—Aufheben der Kultur.

Above is a paragraph from Stephen Coughlin’s document, The Left’s Strategies and Tactics. It is a document I post at link to at every chance.

Reading near the end, this paragraph caught my attention as something that needs to go up right away, as it explains so many accelerating events we see around us now daily. The ANTIFA Storm Troops battling old ladies in walkers trying to go and see Maxime Bernier speak in Hamilton for example.

This may be the woman who was mobbed by ANTIFA thugs of the elderly in Hamilton this weekend

Explaining Frankfurt School’s Marcuse’s idea on the minority dominating the majority via ‘tolerance’

Thank you Ava Lon. This, like the previous one you did, must have been hell to do, as the thinking of Marxists is so twisted.

Direct link:


Killing Canada back online!

If anyone has not seen this yet and wants to get an indication of who is working to remove freedoms and democracy from Canada, how and why, you can get at least an intro here.

Some of the people mentioned in this video have since formed an organization together which is essentially a SPLC type thing, calling itself an “Anti-Hate” group and consists of at least two of the people discussed in this video and a couple of others who are not.

More on that later.

Terrorism fuels leftist apologists in Toronto

I have tried to watch this clip maybe 5 times and failed every time because the strident dishonesty and failure of logic of the hysterical and hate filled women who interrupted an interview by David Menzies of the Rebel, made it so that I simply couldn’t get past the one minute mark. This time, I stepped away from the laptop and listened from where I couldn’t hit pause.

I can see why it has over 100,000 views. This women is a tight package of nearly all of the tactics of the contemporary left. The fuse premise stokes anger, breeds sanctimony which fuels strident self righteousness, and then justifies actual kinetic behaviour. Im pretty sure if she thought she could be effective it at, she would turn violent.

Its a tough watch because its such a good example of a failure of humanity in some ways. But watch it we will. Much like rubber necking at a civilizational car accident.


News from Airstrip One. Trans-prisoners

Sorry all, that I was late with the Reader’s Links post for today. Its up now. Look below.