So yesterday I quoted some random Spearheader who described women (well, white women in particular) as “complete parasitical whores roaming the landscape spreading VD like Johnny Appleseed and fucking men over.”
One reader wondered if Mr. Appleseed really went about spreading VD. So I did a little research, and it turns out that it is exceedingly unlikely that Mr. Appleseed – who actually was a real person — spread anything other than the magic of apples. And his Swedenborgian beliefs.
Why? Because Mr. Appleseed – real name John Chapman – was what these days we might call a Man Going His Own Way. Seems he didn’t have much truck with the ladies, according to one contemporary account quoted in his Wikipedia entry:
On one occasion Miss PRICE’s mother asked Johnny if he would not be a happier man, if he were settled in a home of his own, and had a family to love him. He opened his eyes very wide–they were remarkably keen, penetrating grey eyes, almost black–and replied that all women were not what they professed to be; that some of them were deceivers; and a man might not marry the amiable woman that he thought he was getting, after all.
So what led poor Mr. Appleseed to these dire thoughts about women? Apparently the underage girl he hoped to some day get with was more into dudes who weren’t him:
Now we had always heard that Johnny had loved once upon a time, and that his lady love had proven false to him. Then he said one time he saw a poor, friendless little girl, who had no one to care for her, and sent her to school, and meant to bring her up to suit himself, and when she was old enough he intended to marry her. He clothed her and watched over her; but when she was fifteen years old, he called to see her once unexpectedly, and found her sitting beside a young man, with her hand in his, listening to his silly twaddle.
That ungrateful little strumpet!
I peeped over at Johnny while he was telling this, and, young as I was, I saw his eyes grow dark as violets, and the pupils enlarge, and his voice rise up in denunciation, while his nostrils dilated and his thin lips worked with emotion. How angry he grew! He thought the girl was basely ungrateful. After that time she was no protegé of his.
But Appleseed, despite giving up on women in the real world, held out hope for the afterlife – explaining to others that he expected to have two spirit wives all his own after he died. Which I guess is the 19th century equivalent of the MGTOWers today who fantasize about the sexy robot ladies who will eventually, it is hoped, make actual human females – with their troubling “thoughts” and “needs” and “desires” of their own – obsolete.
Mr. Appleseed’s quest to remain alone was probably also helped by the fact that – if the illustration I found on Wikipedia is any indication – he looked a bit like Dale Gribble from King of the Hill. Only much, much sloppier, with long hair. Oh, and instead of wearing a baseball cap, he wore “a tin utensil which answered both as a cap and a mush pot.”
So, yeah, a creepy weirdo who hates women — definitely an MGTOWer all the way.
Oh, except that he actually did something with his life — you know, helping spread apple trees to a big portion of the midwest — instead of spending all his time going on about how all women are whores.
If I was going to be really cynical I’d guess that it’s because both Americans and Europeans often care less about the deaths of people who are not white, thus both the famines under Mao and the trauma caused by the Cultural Revolution are more easily brushed aside by some people than anything similar that happened in Europe would be.
If I was going to be really cynical I’d guess that it’s because both Americans and Europeans often care less about the deaths of people who are not white, thus both the famines under Mao and the trauma caused by the Cultural Revolution are more easily brushed aside by some people than anything similar that happened in Europe would be.
That too. But then lots of people killed off in the Soviet purges were pearly white, and the West, as a whole, never distressed itself unnecessarily about their deaths— that much is true. Which isn’t to say that “The less people look like us, the less we concern ourselves about their fate” isn’t a valid rule. But it usually works in conjunction with another rule: “The farther away the trouble is, the less we care about it.”
I think the general rule is “if it doesn’t affect me directly, I don’t care”, as illustrated admirably by most of our regular trolls.
And maybe is worth mentioning that Stalin was a Georgian.
Africa provides some particularly shaming recent examples: Rwanda, Darfur, Congo, Zimbabwe, etc.
That was why I brought Georgia up in the first place.
If I was going to be really cynical I’d guess that it’s because both Americans and Europeans often care less about the deaths of people who are not white, thus both the famines under Mao and the trauma caused by the Cultural Revolution are more easily brushed aside by some people than anything similar that happened in Europe would be.
as long as were talking about stalin-
When one person dies, it’s a tragedy, but when a million people die, it’s a statistic, and when a million people of color die, its a footnote.
Well, at least Stalin wasn’t from Alabama.
(rimshot)
It’s quite hard to imagine him with a banjo on his knee.
Actually, scratch that – a mental image of Stalin with a banjo on his knee has just popped into my head in almost three-dimensional clarity.
Mags: Please email [email protected] – I don’t want to talk about this in public, an’ it please you.
I think the general rule is “if it doesn’t affect me directly, I don’t care”, as illustrated admirably by most of our regular trolls.
With respect, I’d like to propose a variant: “If I can’t directly perceive the ways in which it affects me, I don’t care” — though that comes to much the same thing in the long run.
About Joe Stalin with a banjo on his knee — I’ve heard scuttlebutt to the effect that the name of the folk-rock band “Country Joe and The Fish” was conceived as a jokey tribute to Stalin (though “The Fish” part was a reference to Mao). Don’t know how true this is, but if there’s anything to it, substitute a guitar for a banjo and you might be in business.
Some internet commenter called Jock McTrousers is the representative voice of the British left?
My (admittedly more limited) understanding is that British leftist politics had a much, much larger Trotskyist contingent historically, so a bit more totalitarian leaning than the democratic socialist domianted US, but still, not Stalin fans.
Hell, I am a Brit who used to ID as a communist when I was younger, and I still have a little bust of Lenin in my apartment. But Stalin? Nope, no thanks.
Cassandra, are you saying you didn’t agree with prominent communist leader Jock McTrousers?! I am positively astonished by this news!
(Stalin was the Russian Tyrant-in-Chief, was he not, as opposed to the Georgian Tyrant-in-Chief? See what I mean?)
NO, Stalin was the tyrant-in-chief of the Soviet Union, which was politically speaking a different entity than Russia, which was a part of the Soviet Union.
The Soviet Union got started in Russia, was dominated by Russia, and Russia is officially its successor state. If you want answers about gulags, or Holodomor, or Stalin, you go to Russia first. It is technically correct to say ‘Russia was a part of the Soviet Union, and they’re not the same thing’ but I think that downplays the power Russia had in comparison to the other USSR members, and how much more invested they are in the legacy of the Soviet Union.
For starters, Russification was a thing, and it never became Georgification no matter how crazy and powerful Stalin became. Hell, I have a friend born in Ukraine in the 70s, and his passport bears a technically incorrect transliteration of his name because the the Soviets took their letter G from them to make them more ‘Russian.’
I am as smitten with Russian culture as the next person but when talking about history they really don’t get a pass by saying ‘what, the Soviet Union, who were those guys? Not us.’
BTW, the is the best manboobz thread derail ever. Thanks, NWO!
Html fail Sorry.
Did you miss this part?
“NO, Stalin was the tyrant-in-chief of the Soviet Union, which was politically speaking a different entity than Russia, which was a part of the Soviet Union.”
No one is saying that Russia didn’t dominate the Soviet Union, just that technically Stalin ruled the entire Union, not just Russia.
Also, it sounds very odd to call Stalin “the Russian” anything, since he was not in fact Russian. Georgians really do not appreciate being described as Russian, on the whole.
It was the politically speaking that got me – politically speaking, today, if the Soviet Union did it, and we want to talk about it today, Russia has the primary responsibility for answering for it. While there are plenty of topics for which drawing strict lines between the two entities is appropriate, answering for the Holodomor is not one of them.
And no one said that it was.
I think I just want a better way to say ‘Russia was part of the Soviet Union.’ It is a correct statement but you can just feel the whitewash in it. It really doesn’t give an accurate sense of what the situation really was.
Then please find a way to say it that doesn’t in any way imply that Stalin might have been Russian. Given the history between those two nations, it really grates to describe him as anything other than Georgian.
I also don’t think you’re likely to find anyone with enough interest in this topic to bother discussing it who isn’t very well aware of the extent to which Russia dominated the Soviet Union.
Ah, there’s the problem. OK, fair enough. You do have to specify leader of the Soviet Union over Russians to be clear and sensitive to that issue.
And we’re discussing Soviet History on a blog dedicated to mocking internet misogynists. I assume nothing about the participants (and especially the lurkers) of this conversation 🙂
To be fair, knowing absolutely nothing about any given subject has never stopped Slavey from talking about it before.