Friday, October 25, 2013

A Catastrophic Metaphor

Sometimes people learn more from metaphors than they do from reality, because with a metaphor like this, they can think rationally instead of emotionally. Some people can read through this whole thing without realizing they're supposed to be mad, and thereby learn something for a change. This is from Violence Against Whites:

Should humans be allowed their own houses?
Once upon a time David the Nationalist was writing an essay in his bedroom when a cat jumped up on his desk and started walking all over the keyboard. He was startled and annoyed, and took the cat outside.
The next night he was again working on his essay, and this time two cats jumped on his desk and started sniffing around for food. David thought this was very odd, and went to speak to his flatmate, John the Liberal.
“Last night this random cat jumped up on my desk while I was writing an essay. I took it outside, and tonight there’s two cats! What’s going on?”
“Oh yeah, there was a cat outside, I’ve started letting it in. Tonight there were two cats outside, so I let them both in”.
“You’re just going to let random cats into the house? Where are they going to sleep, where are they going to shit, what are they going to eat?”
“Don’t worry about all that, the main thing is that they wanted to come inside, and if they want to come inside, we should let them, because of inequality”.
“But who’s going to pay for them? Are they neutered, what if they start having loads of kittens everywhere? I’m not really into cats, they smell, they leave fur everywhere, these ones are making a racket”.
“Just feed them and they’ll stop meowing”.
“I shouldn’t have to feed them to make them stop meowing, this is my house!”.
“This is a big house, there’s plenty of room for us and the cats. Two cats aren’t going to cause any problems in the future”.
“Alright then, just keep them out of my bedroom”.
So John the Liberal started feeding the cats, and letting them shit wherever they wanted. Soon there were three cats, four cats, five cats, and then one of the cats had a litter of eight kittens.  David the Nationalist started protesting again:
“This house is starting to become over-run with cats! There’s shit everywhere, it smells, there’s fur all over the furniture, they’re always making a racket whenever they’re hungry, we can’t take anymore cats, we’ve got too many as it is!”
“I think it’s good having lots of cats in our house because it creates diversity”
“Diversity? Diversity of what, smells? I don’t want “diversity”, I liked the house the way it was before. Now the house stinks of shit, the cats aren’t neutered so they keep having kittens. And not only are the cats we’ve already got having kittens in the house, you’re still letting more in off the street!”
“But they wanted to come in, they were hungry”
“Just because they want to come in doesn’t mean we have to let them! This is our house, for us, not a damned petting zoo for all the cats in the world!”
“But we have to let them in because of diversity”
“You and your stupid diversity! Did I ask for diversity? What’s so good about diversity, if it means there’s thirty-odd cats running around my house knocking my things over, meowing all the time, shitting everywhere. Some of them even scratch and bite me!”
“But not all the cats scratch and bite you, only some of them do. It would be wrong to blame all the cats just because some of them scratch and bite you”.
“I wouldn’t have gotten scratched if you hadn’t let loads of cats in in the first place! And scratching me isn’t the only problem, even if they’re not scratching me, they’re making a mess, I keep tripping over them in the hallway. And we’re getting less food because you keep spending more and more money on cat food, you know we have a shared food budget!”.
“I think you’re being very speciesist, this house shouldn’t just belong to us, it should be for the cats too. You should just embrace diversity. And if you do, diversity will be our strength”.
“I want the cats gone! Two was bad enough, but now there’s . . . how many are there now, anyway?”
“We can’t put the cats outside, because some of them were born inside. I don’t know how many cats there are now. Counting how many cats there are is speciesist. Why does it matter how many cats there are? There’s humans here too, why should we have a special right to be here more than the cats?”
“Because it’s our house, we were here first! We’re the ones who put the furniture here, we’re the ones who buy the food. They’re only here because of us”
“I think you’re looking at this too much in terms of “us and them”. You’re the one causing the problem here, not the cats”.
“No, you’re the one causing the problem here, because you’re the one letting all the cats in in the first place!”
“Well if you don’t like it, maybe you should move to another house”
“I shouldn’t have to move to another house, this is my house and I don’t want loads of cats in here! If I move to another house, someone like you will probably start letting lots of cats into that house too. At some point you have to draw a line and fight it”
“Stop living in the past. It’s 2013 now, you sound like you’re from 2012 or something”.
“Alright, look, can we at least agree that we’re not going to let any more in, we have too many already and shouldn’t add any more”.
“I tell you what, we’ll have a vote on it”.
Okay, that sounds fair and democratic”.
So they voted on whether to keep letting cats in, and David lost because the cats could vote too.


  1. Eager Young LiberalOctober 25, 2013 at 3:01 PM

    People are more important than cats, your metaphor assumes they have no inherit worth, which people do

    1. Speciesist.

    2. In other words, because every life is precious, the white race must die.

  2. That was excellent, should be required reading for all high school students.

  3. By all means! Get the point across to them before they encounter the mad monks in seminary!

    1. Eager Young LiberalOctober 25, 2013 at 4:05 PM

      Oh yea, those mad seminarians who believe in the value of people. Its bad enough that they have to read fabricated history which defies the founders and McCathy.

  4. I've kept cats (well my wife and kids did. The cats kept me). Cats are better people than most people. I've lived among immigrants, legal and otherwise, some deserve a chance, some deserve to get the boot, and none of the bills before Congress properly discriminate between the two groups,

    1. Eager Young LiberalOctober 25, 2013 at 10:51 PM

      Another answer I can actually consider!

      While not directed to what you said, but fitting within the general theme. Libertarians have to adjust their views if they actually want their policies to make sense. The biggest thing to combat immigration is to pass policies that spread the wealth to more countries. Now I am not talking about just aid, but policies that do not create the need for them to look outside their own countries for wealth. I know Libertarians are all about a completely free market economy. But if companies were forced to pay fair wages, the people and countries would rise out of poverty and people would not need to immigrate. Essentially if every country had at least a basic level of wealth, there would be no need to immigrate, or at least not on the level that we see it now.

  5. It has been said that in soviet poster art "a tractor is always a tractor". This is one of the problems of the far left, collectivist mind: for some reason they have lost the ability to understand the more subtle aspects of language. There is no room for metaphor or simile. Parables are lost on them. Many will read this story and only be confused as to why any normal person would not like cats.

  6. Reminds me of this post by Matt Parrott: