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.
Derp spelling. Continues to run.
Although to be run or not to be run is a wonderful mangling of English that rolls off the tongue.
Yeah, seriously…what influence does Radical Hub have exactly (Not to derail the thread even further…though I’m sure Johnny Appleseed is being mentioned on that blog somehow)?
Using THAT as a representative of Feminism is like using The Daily Mail as a representative of Britain.
NWO,
Thanks for the post from the idiot fringe. just whatI needed to start my day.
Also, that report from the Mail is just histrionics and so is your response to it. The report says nothing about making fathers illegal or any other such tripe. I’m not convinced that it would work the way it’s intended to but it’s certainly not trying to write fathers out of the equation. Besides, why do you think you have the right to tell the English off about their legal system? They’re quite capable of managing it without any ‘help’ or criticism from you.
We remind everyone that he posts here. He has no idea why this would make us less than kindly disposed toward him. ^_^;
You want to know something awesome? There are threads where the rest of the Stormfronters tell him to cool it with the weird crap. Google “David K Meller” and “Stormfront,” it’s out there.
AG: He posts there
I reply to some of the more outrageous drivel about … Ron Paul
yeah… several posters have advanced criticism of Ron Paul that youve totally ignore. For one, youve never explained how you can base a theory of constitutionality on overturning mculloch v. maryland.
we all know you dont have anything to add except more chest-thumping and slogan-shouting, because its all you ever do. the question is why do you keep lying, when any sane person could go back and read the thread to see that it never happened.
So this is NWO and Meller? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=14njUwJUg1I
Ahhhhahaa that is them!
Okay, I have googled. Wow.
So, when you talk about the smart people sites, you mean things like stormfront and probably amren? (Which if you do like, well, you like amren, if you don’t you can be like NOT AMREN HOW COULD YOU ASSUME I LIKE AMREN! I AM A STORMFRONT FAN!)
Okay. So other than being racist (NO, NO, NOT RACIST, CAN’T YOU READ I JUST LOVE MY OWN CULTURE READ MY POST BEFORE YOU CALL ME A RACIST YOU NOT-POST-READER) and wanting women to have the temperament of a well-bred pomeranian pup… AND tending to spectacularly miss the point and rant on about how everyone around is a nut who can’t read, you now say you worry about making libertarianism look bad to the leftists?
Well, it’s gonna be a little difficult to turn around here, but go for it! I can’t advise you not to go for it. Please. Go for it.
No, Statler and Waldorf are witty and have an endless repertoire of original remarks.
Well, why not turn all women into poms? We obviously couldn’t be well-bred German Shepard pups ’cause they get hip problems as they get older and we ladies will be needing to pump out (white) babies ’til we keel over dead. And we couldn’t be Border Collies ’cause they are clever and bossy, and we couldn’t be shar pei’s because fat and wrinkly, and we couldn’t be newfies ’cause any dog walking around carrying a keg of booze on its lonesome is obviously a total slut, and–
It’s like he almost gets it here…
I thought we were pit bulls with lipstick.
I just realized that Sarah Palin is fading from my memory. That gives me hope.
Zhinxi–Gold isn’t STATE money, it is market money! State “money” begins with government (or central banks empowered by government) issuing paper “guarantees” for gold holdings confiscated from private holders in the marketplace, passing laws requiring acceptance of these gold backed (???) banknotes as valid payment of debt or fulfillment of contract, while the actual money remains in central bank’s vaults–or the State treasury–and citizens are either forbidden outright to own gold, or face onerous taxation, reportage, and licensing required to own and trade in natural and real money.
Access to resources played–and plays today–a part in many, if not most wars, and gold could be included as one of the resources whose access inspired military action. However, this is true of access to any and all valuable resources, whether or not they have use as money! Wars for resources come about when governments deny opportunities for peaceful trade, either to protect the fortunes of domestic producers or traders in said resources, or to force access where peaceful trade and exchange is no longer possible.
“When goods cannot cross national borders, armies will”. Richard Cobden
Not all wars are of course, caused by access to resources, still less gold (indeed, gold, because of its very universality, probably allowed everyone FREER access to the available supply than other contested resources, and even there, may well have been a force for peace and commerce, rather than war. Certainly, in the past 6,000 years, there has been far more conflict over say, salt, iron, slaves (no, the global slave trade–even the African slave trade– did NOT begin around 1480 AD, and White people were, if anything, Charlie-come-latelys, to that execrable and barbarous commerce), spices, certain kinds of rare woods, furs, copper, silver, water oases (especially in desert regions) etc. ALL of the wars fought for each of these resources, and many others,, were fought with the same viciousness, barbarity, and exploitation that the quest for gold ever inspired. You are not mistaken, Zhinxi, in calling attention to the part that gold may have played here, but you tell only a very small part of a very large, and tragic story, most of which probably would have happened even if gold never existed!
Another point that should be raised is, if I understand your objections to gold correctly, that almost every resource that exists (and I left out a lot in my all-too-preliminary list above) has the same bloody warlike history as gold!
Taking only one example: It is certainly possible that the first and second world wars (fought at least in part to control oil fields, shipping lanes and access points) killed and maimed as many people in the years from 1914-1945 as all of the wars that have been fought over gold and its mining, shipping, and storage, over the past 6000 years, and that wouldn’t even include everything else, from salt to iron, from silver to spices!
Are we to quit using everything else the way you seem to want everyone to quit using gold? The same arguments that you cite against the use of gold seem to apply to everything else over a comparable length of time. Where will everyone be then?
We can’t be pit bulls with lipstick, because the lipstick might smear as we eat all those baby boys the feminists constantly throw us! (Agh, Palin. Speaking of eating your young…)
I have never met a well-bred Pomeranian. All the ones I’ve ever met have been beautiful, but hellaciously nervy and yappy, even by small dog standards. If NWO wants women to be like well-bred dogs, he’d be better off trying to head us in the direction of labrador retrievers. Now those babies are placid.
Rayncitigyrl, I must protest!
Don’t compare the joys of a true Pomeranian to those yappy, vicious impostors caused by failure to properly set limits in puppyhood and keep a close eye on the temperament and disposition of the Maternal Stock!!1!
Breeding only for looks – though of course, TRUE Poms are things of unbelievable beauty, pleasing to masters and, yey, a proper mistresses eye! – And the vicious desires of undescriminating customers in an inflated puppy mill economy driven by the small dog needs of FEMINIST harpies, has caused there to be confusion and difficulty in aquiring the true pom! Yes… It is true that those who appreciate and LOVE the pom, in all it’s playful, sweet, flirtacious glory – placid and obedient, yet still full of a SPECIAL NATURAL pomeranian energy all their own and glorious – must sometimes turn to the Labrador, which while a fine enough companion, is most manifestly NOT FLUFFY!!!!
A true pomeranian’s bark is the delightful music that makes life sweet! A false pomeranian – again! The fault of FEMINISTS, and need I mention that most puppy mills could not aquire enough starter cash without fractional reserve banking becoming the national standard??! Feminists drove the need for the “Small dog” – creating this inferior imitation of the TRUE POM! That longs to compliment the loving home of man and true woman!
Sweet, playful, obedient and yet not silent! Frisky! FLUFFY!!!!
THE POM!
But there is some hope. Japanese experiments in creating the ultimate in virtual PomeranianReplacements are on the way. Soon, true families, composed of TRUE MEN and their robot wives can indeed replace the vicious, nervous creatures that FEMINISM created! And then, what will become of your LABRADORS?!*
POMS AND FREEDOM!*
Z. H. INXY
*We shall use them only for duck hunting!
^9.5, very good, will be advancing to semifinals.
Half point deduction for failure to use the phrase “dogs(?).”
*hysterical laughter*
I hereby renounce every bad thing I have ever said about Pomeranians, and will apply to the waiting list for the PomeranianReplacement robot.
I have indeed known some wonderful, non-barky Poms. And Zhinxy wins the internet.
Meller – Well, you’re getting closer to my point, so I’ll just say this at the moment – I’m not necessarily against anyone using gold as a medium for trade. I don’t have that much of a dog in the gold standard vs. fiat fight. What I want is a preponderance of independent currencies, which is even more damaging to the state. Private gold mintage and e-gold very much included. My point is much more that to talk up gold as the natural metal of peace, as if it is somehow granted this status in a pure and natural way, while the other resources you mention are not given the natural money glow. Their bloody histories are much more easily acknowledged by libertarians/conservatives/other goldbugs. It’s not about “quit using x” it’s about “quit acting like x fell like manna from free trade heaven” – It’s obscene to shove the horrors of gold mining under the rug and demand our state embrace it as a CHECK on it’s power.
And again, it’s possible that a gold standard will do something to that effect, and if so, good. But I don’t want a State, I don’t want it held in check by the limits of credit and currency, I want it gone. 😛 And I want not to virtually deify gold, but to seek out alternative economies, and credit systems. And if you want something that’s pissed off the Gov even more than private gold ownership, look at what happens to alternative money systems….
But anyway. Yes, gold has much in it’s favor. But we can’t just clamor for it above all things to be MONEY, THE TRUE MONEY.
A money, sure.
And we absolutely can’t relegate it to some status as “the peaceful, honest currency”
P.s. POMS AND FREEDOM!!!!!!!
zhinxy– Isn’t it enormous fun to write like that? Now we know why he does it.
Also, gold is not universal. The early Tokugawa shogunate had a rice standard, not a gold standard. Gold represented a certain amount of rice.
The issuance of bank notes in the early US to make up for lack of coinage cause massive, massive economic and social issues. The super peachy wild bust and boom cycles, and the whole “contributing to the civil war” thing…yeah, that worked so very, very well.
On the side issue of grandparents rights, I am against them. Largely because…well, I have met my parents. Thinking my father might ever get custody or visitation rights to my child (or any child) is a horrifying thought. I would not want my mother to raise my child either, though I would allow her to visit, I would not want to be forced, and I would set the rules.