Quote: (04-29-2017 11:56 AM)Brother Abdul Majeed Wrote:
All these degenerate groups are tied to one another. I'm not actually surprised to find out that there's a link between Antifa and NAMBLA. Some of those noodle-armed wispy bearded Antifags look as though they have groomed by pederasts.
Has anyone done a comprehensive write-up anywhere on the connections between pedophile activists and other political groups throughout history?
In looking at this, I think it's important to draw a distinction between pedophiles and pedophile activists. Pedophiles are covertly present everywhere, including in organizations like the Catholic Church and the Republican Party that don't officially condone pedophilia. Pedophile activists are another story; they are only able to openly operate where their presence is tolerated. They were, for example, allied or affiliated with
the gay and lesbian movements,
the Labour Party,
the German Greens, etc. till those groups decided to part ways with them.
Sometimes a distinction is drawn between two kinds of men who have sex with boys: faggots (i.e. effeminate homosexuals) and pederasts (i.e. butch homosexuals). Pederasts have sometimes allied with the right (an example being the Nazi SA led by Ernst Röhm). I guess one might argue, fascists only tolerated pederasts because they were temporarily useful to them, the same way that the Japanese were useful to Hitler, despite not being Aryan. On the other hand, it's also been argued that Hitler wasn't much opposed to pederasty, but was more concerned with rooting out faggotry (which explains the concentration camp inmates with pink triangles).
So then, are faggots more inclined to ally with the left? If so, I would expect organizations like the Spartacist League to lean more toward the faggot side of the spectrum. As others have pointed out here, Antifa-type groups tend to consist of limp-wristed leftists.
I'm not sure how to explain men like Milo, who put on a faggoty persona, and seem to condone man-boy sex, but nonetheless are antifeminist. It's been pointed out by Roosh and others that Milo is not actually all that conservative. Yet he was a Trump supporter. So I'm not quite sure what to think of that. Styxenhammer666 claims that Milo is just an entertainer who would be a leftist if he thought that would make him more popular, but I don't believe that.
It's not unheard-of, though, for someone to hold a bunch of logically inconsistent philosophies, or to make an offhand comment without realizing immediately that it contradicts other elements of his belief system. That's another possible explanation for Milo's statements.
Given the strength of anti-pedophile sentiment among the general public, pretty much every group would like to gain a political advantage by describing its opponents as pro-pedophilia. Modern feminists are extremely anti-pedophilia, because for them, there's not much downside, given that most of those prosecuted for offenses like child porn possession are men. It fits in with their doctrine that men are predators at the apex of a sexual dominance hierarchy.
Feminists were among those who wanted to raise the ages of consent and marriageability to at least 18 (if not 21), so that high-SMV older men would end up getting with older women who had already completed a higher level of education (and thus would be more inclined to enter the career world), and who had already had opportunities to "explore their sexuality" prior to marriage. A lot of sex offender psychologists are women, because it gives them a chance to crack down on the men who are under their purview, while at the same time making use of their psychology degrees. It was also partly feminists who drove the NAMBLA crowd out of the gay rights movement.
I also hypothesize that feminists oppose men having sex with boys because that stance is the logical conclusion one would reach after adopting their other premises that (1) men having sex with girls is predatory, and (2) the sexes should be treated equally. Feminists, like other socialists, view relationships in which there's an imbalance of socioeconomic power between the parties to be exploitative. How, then, is pedophile activism compatible with leftism? Presumably, pedophile activists deny that there's a power imbalance between children and adults, or say that the child is actually the one with more power. (We might compare this to how in the socio-sexual hierarchy,
women are more powerful than betas.)
At the same time, hardcore religious conservatives ally with feminists sometimes because they're opposed to a lot of the same stuff (e.g. pornography) that feminists don't like. There are some weird alliances going on, because religious conservatives view feminists as degenerate for supporting sluttiness, yet they would also view RVFers (who oppose feminism) as degenerate for recognizing the reality that some women are already predestined to be sluts, and taking advantage of that fact. Yet at the same time, a lot of RVFers wants to ally with religious conservatives in order to bring about patriarchy.
The bottom line is that pedophile activists, like feminists, are entryists. They will infiltrate any movement and organization where they can get a foothold, and seek to influence its doctrine in a pro-pedophilia direction. Feminists have been very successful at this, for example, by influencing the church to become cucked. There are also pedophiles on every part of the political spectrum who justify pedophilia using different arguments. For example, a patriarchal pedophile might say, "My children are my property," while a leftist pedophile might say, "Children have the right of sexual self-determination because they are equal to adults."
By the way, I just have a random question -- is it alpha or beta to become one of those cops who sits at a computer all day pretending to be an 11-year-old girl, in order to entrap pedophiles into driving across the country and showing up with wine coolers and condoms?