Essay Guy

A month or few ago I made a thread asking for your input on an essay topic I should write for my class. I finished it.

pastebin.com/Xe45tXns

Other urls found in this thread:

britannica.com/technology/U-boat
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

tl;dr please

if you want a summary, read his main heads, dumbass

I kinda made it more about what they've done and what they're doing.

It really doesn't touch Hollywood.

Im sorry to be the one to tell you, but your grade is hopelessly tied to how much the professor agrees with your opinion. I read "oxytocin" and "weimar republic" and stopped. redpills get red pens every time.

inb4 OP gets kicked out of his elite controlled school

My teacher will more or less agree. She's been looking for an excuse to why Bernie lost ever since. So more than likely she will start to blame them.. hopefully!

pretty good paper imo op

paragraph 14 line 4 >do not make no sense

> See a question with "you" right at the start of the paper
> automatically closed

>First paragraph
>"They have exploited the holocaust"

Enjoy your failing grade OP

The class is pretty relaxed, I would doubt if she would even notice that.

I took two step into that essay and I gun ran over by the "naming the jew" train. You know, if you wanted to write an essay where you "named the jew" (something about which I'm not particularly enthused), you'd be much better off writing something about all the positive contributions the jewish people is making to America.

"Did you know that the Jews plays a tremendous part in shaping the rich landscape of American media? Through agenda driven programming designed to present progressive point of view to the American public, the chosen people of Hollywood have successfully been able to help American (1) normalize homosexuality, (2) break the taboo of interracial marriage, (3) help us overcome Christianity, (4) and promote redistributive social justice!

What's more, the Jewish community is also very active in the banking sector, one of the most rapidly expending sector of the economy between 2000 and 2010. Indeed, X% of investment banking executives officers are Jewish, an overrepresentation of Y% relative to their weight in the population, a testament to the resilience and consciousness embodied in Jewish culture."

Subversion 101 kiddo. Nothing personal. *Teleport to Hogwart*

Exactly. You have to make people realize that Jews are over represented in certain areas like finance, media, etc. without blaming them outright for their negative contributions. It takes a long time to ease someone into accepting the realities of the Jew.

It's really important that you don't assume normies have even 1/10th of the autistic knowledge of a Sup Forums poster. If you mention (((them))) at all, most people will immediately think of the holocaust and nothing else tbqh familia

Well, I'm not a communist, so I'm not talented in subversion

System thinks my post is spam :/ How to not trigger the filter or whatever?

Instead of opening the door for an average reader to perhaps question WHY this tiny ethnic minority has such an overwhelming monopoly on mainstream media and always happens to turn up in the same types of progressive indoctrination, you make yourself sound like a tinfoil conspiracy theorist that is painful to read even for redpilled people. I don't know if you had to sound unbelievable to not get expelled or something, but it was not convincing or pleasant to read.

>you'd be much better off writing something about all the positive contributions the jewish people is making to America.
That's pretty deceitful... are you Jewish yourself?

you're rambling

you're all over the place. i know it's connected in your head but try to weave it together better for the average cuck. what this guy said honestly within 400 words you've gone from french revolution to oxytocin to weimar republic

also where the fuck are your sources

It's not about crediting them, it's about revealing their levels of influence. It's all in how the essay is written.

I left them out in the pastebin

Yes, I read your post.

Subversion is a lot about "pre propaganda". It's not about directly arguing your point, it's about putting in places these elements and concepts you will want people to see later on. Ambiguity is a huge factor.

So, for instance, if I wanted to raise "white consciousness" on a college campus, I could indeed put some provocative flyers around explicitly advocated for it, which would have the effect of triggering every body around. But if I wanted to do it in a subversive way, I would actually place pro Black, pro Asian, pro Latinos, pro Muslims flyers around, everything but whites, or only mentioning whites and the west in connection to something negative at best.

Why? First, because the system isn't designed to reprimand non whites for being ethno centric, so that the flyers wouldn't cause much of a stir. That's because the system is pro diversity from a white context, so that diversity is interpreted as "non white". Second, because the actual goal of these flyers would be to increase the saliency of the concept of race, to make people think in terms of race, all day, all the time. While this does not explicitly target white people per se, they still see the flyers and they still think "Hm, everybody is thinking in terms of race", which pre condition them to do it as well, on top of forcing them, sub consciously, to make a choice. "Which team am I on", they will semi consciously ask themselves. More importantly "Which team are THEY on?", they would also wonder.

I hate to be the one to say it op, but this is a bad essay. Frequent awkward phrasing, inconsistent subject matter, and half of it barely relates to your opening paragraph. Cut out the oxytocin part and the holocaust denial part for sure, because frankly the logic that the explosive gas would permeate the bricks is ridiculous bullshit. Get rid of the in depth description of the hookers too because it's off topic and gratuitious. Totally unsourced, badly structured, D work at best

I was never a writer

>To understand the exploitation of the holocaust and how it affects America and the holocaust in general
u wat?

>They have exploited the holocaust
>extermination of the white race
>elimination of morals and tradition
Holy shit, where is the subtlety? Are all Americans this blunt? If i didn't read the OP I would've assumed that this was some typical anti-Semitism piece. I know you intend it to be, but you need to go at it slowly to not make it easily dismissible from the get-go. Write something in the style of "yet in the current political climate the identity of those in control is not examined more closely.".Write how nepotism is occurring frequently in the occupations related to those areas.

listen you cant just name the jews like that, your paper will likely be uploaded to a database, because they want to scan for plagarism and it will have your name attached to it for the rest of your fucking life

This is good stuff leaf, but I think you're underestimating people's ability to rationalise cuckery and White extinction. People on campuses have heavily internalised the attack on Whites, and so, while realising that people think in terms of race, they will only feel guilt and an appreciation for increasing diversity. The next step would of course be to introduce them to real diversity. Perhaps flyers advocating trips to Africa, or bringing impoverished inner city nigs to their campus for some contrived reason.

The advantage of the more triggering propaganda is that campuses are obliged to respond. I forget where it was, but one university has spent millions on diversity related uselessness. They're haemorrhaging money for no reason other than 'muh feelings'. As with all things, it's a balance.

...

This leaf gets it.

This is what's considered essay material in America?

No wonder the US is filled with dimwits. Jesus.

Oh fuck.

did you actually hand this in to a professor?

You call this an essay?

Yeah and no it's more of my thoughts strung on paper into a semi legible piece

well i wouldn't name the jew and hand it in as a paper unless you know what you're doing

Your name is being added to the ACLU meme database as we speak

I'm not rejecting any techniques and I've thought about the issue you're mentioning. There are some people who do actually try to attempt a "flight from white" consisting in merger with the identity of the oppressed, talking about white people the way non white do, being snarky against them the way non whites are, etc. That's not something that's completely solved for me, as I don't really know what it is that causes it, although I suspect it's a sort of "noble savage" complex, an idea of "the other" as a distressed being incapable of malice and will to power. At the risk of sounding cliche, I believe it's a form of deeply internalized benevolent racism, which ascribes to non whites a quasi total absence of ill intent, which does not even recognize their capacity for it.

Maybe the subversion move would be to, for instance, promote stories about the military conquest of the "rich and fantastic Ottoman empire" or something of the sort.

why don't you guys fix his fucking essay for him kek would be proud

>yfw realize anti-semitic paper with real name uploaded to Jewgle database
What grade/level are you, user?

its been nice knowing you lmao

WELL?

I understand why you did this. I read the whole thing and it was logical and coherent. I just hope you're ready for the unfortunate ass blasting that awaits you :/

Dear diary, OP was not a bunch of sticks today.

I think it's a blending of the ingroup and outgroup. Like Molymeme said, these Whites see themselves as an outgroup unto themselves. I think that's why so many liberal Whites go for socialism, to have a family. They have no roots, no bonds, no connection to anyone other than their cats. This could be contributory to the idea of 'there's just one race'. The noble savagery does play into it I think, leading to the interesting paradox of 'democrats are the real racists' - while this is true, nobody cares.

I'm not sure any ideological force will change these people. Ideologies can always be rationalised and compartmentalised. Classic liberal doublethink - browns can have empires and conquest, but when Whitey does it we ought to be punished. I think the way forward here is to have a practical edge to any propaganda. Making these people feel the sting of the blades they have forged will be more effective, and more satisfying.

Lmfao, you're a fucking idiot. This paper is a piece of shit, I hope you fail.

good thing I wasn't the only one.

Thank you for your input

I don't know what kind of assignment it was, but essays are generally supposed to be argumentative texts based on facts and consistent reasoning to establish a proper thesis, not just impressions of an edgy teenage à la "da joos did it". It's extremely historically incorrect. You portray the French monarchy prior to the revolution as a qualitative government; people starved because the monarchs were inept narcissists. You also contradict yourself when you, in the first paragraph, blame Jews for trying to "abolish science" only to immediately condemn rationalism and analytic thinking. What's up with that?

The Age of Enlightenment has nothing to do with cultural Marxism. The Age of Enlightenment is the mother of our scientific civilization. It's the mother of western constitutional government and the escape from tyranny. As Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, etc. are the fathers of America, Th Age of Enlightenment is undoubtedly its mother.

How old are you anyway?

Read history and learn how to write.

I disagree, for a HS or Freshman college paper, it was no worse than average. Not A+ material but not utter shite as you say, o great based literaryanon

I really do believe in ideological transformation I just don't believe that all of it has to be achieved through ideological or symbolic means. That's like when people assert that you can't change someone's opinion through discussion. That's simply not true. It's just a fact that most people do not understand how to properly conduct a discussion in such a way that a person will slowly get to see what it is that you see, if only because most people do not themselves fully understand what it is that they see and what they are, therefore, arguing about.

For instance, many people will feel differently about multiculturalism if you explain to them that they probably believe in some form or another of the notion of the "universal man", a kind of abstract entity that is supposed to represent the default state of a person around which culture exist or, more precisely, in reference to which the existence of "culture" is ascertained, in that any deviation from this default state is interpreted as being at once "cultural" but also superficial, since it doesn't obviate the underlying, constant human nature of the person displaying a certain instance of a culture. Now, as you do this, you're not arguing about multiculturalism per se, but you are rather making explicit the implicit notions that are at the heart of vulgar multiculturalism, its version as given to the mass. These notions are prior or, literally, beside the point in question, which is multiculturalism, but are never the less part of a network of belief, idea, symbols, which reinforces it, and which are also emotionally charged (i.e. propelled by non rational forces which must also be explained).

This is all somewhat complex because, when you talk to somebody who is, say, twenty, you're speaking to somebody with more than ten years of ideological baggage and institutionalized socialization designed to promote inclusion, agreeableness, conflict avoidance, xenophilia, etc.

Not a single citation of any source. Even if the content wasn't complete horseshit, the essay is nothing without previous studies to back it up. Impressions of a teenager is not good enough for any serious academic consideration (leftist bias set aside).

>You also contradict yourself when you, in the first paragraph, blame Jews for trying to "abolish science" only to immediately condemn rationalism and analytic thinking. What's up with that?

Science is a mix of the analytic thinking and creativeness, to over analyze everything is fucking retarded and you end up with "muh atheism".

Technological progress was before and made the enlightenment and French Revolution possible, not vice versa. increasing population and increasing urbanization were prompted by industrialization and technological growth

Good god what grade are you in? You write at a 10th grade level

Getting warmer

For those who just wanna now how it ends.

>to over analyse
This is just a meme-ish cop out. Atheism is just lack of belief, it is not necessarily a product of "over analyzing". Many of the founding fathers (Thomas Paine for example) were deists at best, and not thesist. Creativeness is not a product of traditionalism or even theism, quite the contrary. Creativeness surely necessitates going beyond the boundries of your own, and other's conventions.

The Age of Enlightenment preceeds (but didn't end before) the French and the industrial revolution. It starts with Galileo and Newton, not the other way around. Heck, the industrial revolution is enabled by Newton' laws of motion.

Should have thrown in the Voltaire quote m8. Otherwise bretty gud

This goy knows to much

Take him out

SWEDEN YES

I agree with your assessment - the vast majority of public discourse is conducted within the range of rhetoric rather than dialectic. I think you can change someone through argument, but only if you argue within the method of how they were originally converted. You'll never get someone to convert to nationalism with facts if they were argues into multiculturalism with feelings, because they will have internalised that process. As an aside, I am studying linguistics, and part of the course covers rhetoric. It's an immense field of study, and I would recommend looking into it to anyone reading.

Recognising systems of belief are an important part of defeating the insidiousness of Cultural Marxism. Dismantling those systems is key to winning back the institutions across the world. However, I'm not ready to discount the importance of practicality in this endeavor. Ideologies only go so far as the people believing them, so I think they key to stopping the ideology may be stopping the people themselves. If they recognise - through intuition or blunt force trauma - that they are doomed, they'll change. To be honest, any who don't change under those circumstances I wouldn't want on our side anyway.

In this thread, OP becomes ostracized by every professor in the liberal arts department, and possibly by the president of the college.

The paper screams anti semitic. You didn't camouflage the threat (((they))) pose well enough and allow the reader to come to conclusions on their own. When writing a paper like this, you need to basically jab at the reader softly with facts, and never name (((them))) outright.

The way to do it is by using subversion, and approaching the red pill of an educator over the course of a semester through dedicating papers to topics such as cultural Marxism, then on the history of the media, then on the current financial market, providing small demographics based on race and religion in each of these, not in a bad way, but as a fact providing informative literary piece.

So you got expelled?

guarantee your teacher won't read past three sentences of this ""essay""

>are you Jewish yourself?
Gaze into the abyss etc etc. How new r u?

i hope your university isnt very liberal because fuck I think I wouldve gotten an F and sent to the chancellors office.

>This is just a meme-ish cop out. Atheism is just lack of belief, it is not necessarily a product of "over analyzing"

What I mean by "muh atheism" is more or less those like "the atheist experience" and such. Who DO over analyze everything.

>Creativeness is not a product of traditionalism or even theism

Never said it was, I just said to be a rationalist all the time takes away the ability to be creative and to think out of the box.

>The Age of Enlightenment precedes (but didn't end before) the French and the industrial revolution. It starts with Galileo and Newton, not the other way around. Heck, the industrial revolution is enabled by Newton' laws of motion.

Isaac Newton was anti-enlightenment. He supported the monarchy. So were Euler and Gauss.

Your essay isn't in the plagiarism database. You didn't turn this shit in. Of course if you did I would get you thrown out of college so nice troll.

Just say you wanted a challenge so you tried to argue in favor of a "crazy conspiracy theory"

What database?

op said its not the exact paper

I'm a deist, but I don't think The Atheist Experience is over analysing. They are analysing, and of course one's theistic bias and cognitive dissonance will brush it off as over-analysing.

Nobody is rationalistic all the time, it's not a potent problem.

Isaac Newton may have supported the monarchy all that jazz, but his work paved the way (is that the correct expression? Sorry I'm Swedish) for the enlightenment and its emphasis on scientific and rational inquiry.

what the hell's the point of the class then?

Probably an intro course.

This is awful and all over the place it has no sources or information

It looks like a literal compilation of Sup Forums posts

Not beginning your second paragraph as such,

"The Jews! They are the ones who use the Lügenpresse as the engine to drive their train of deceit and guilt! It is they who wish to bring down a nation and our people - but for what gain? The gain to gain ultimate and absolute power! They care for nothing but power - not their family, nor race, but the very thing that allows them to exert control over our lives to gain even more power. The jewish race sees power as the greatest of all things one can achieve, and the only thing one should love - as it is written, and thus commanded in their devil scripture."

what the fuk. you're a horrible writer. where's your thesis? I don't knwo waht the fuk you're talking about. it just goes on about points that are not connect to each other with a unifying theme. you cannot imply in an essay. if youre gonna blame the jew you have to come out and say it somewhere within youre first two paragraphs. don't get mad when you fail and blame it on liberal education. half of this paper is conjecture

Yes and i'm certain you actually turned this in.

I mean, it's not like anybody would ever lie on Sup Forums..

You stupid fuck. Immediately express your regret. Figuratively get down on your knees and claim that this was your attempt to argue something that you don't believe. It's one thing if the school thinks you're an edgy tool who can't write a decent paper, it's another entirely if you get put on a list or they think you're antisemitic. Start bailing water right now.

Within two years Germany won the war. Their U-boats came as a shock to the world. The Russians had a revolution, the French had a mutiny, the British had little supplies. Not a single bullet had landed anywhere near Germany.

>This is what Americans actually believe; their minds are set fixated on wrong and right, black and white, that they can't even see the middle ground.

The truth is WWI was a stalemate. We weren't progressing, but neither were the Germans. That was until Britain bought out the tanks and the tactics after the initial disaster of the Somme. And from that point, war changed forever.
Britain won WWI by the sheer losses between 1914-1916. And Germany was losing loads of me too - don't forget. But the Germans never learnt from their mistakes, they never had any spirit or courage to change and recreate war in their image.

britannica.com/technology/U-boat

I think it's also worth mentioning that German U-boats weren't a spectacular sight since they were effective - the truth is they weren't due to the Germans deep down in their barbaric minds understanding it was morally wrong and understanding the indiscriminate sinking of ships would only make them more hated by neutral powers (and it did finally make America decide to join the Allies).
Your praise to Germany during those historical paragraphs was undeserved and plainly wrong.