On Freemasons

From the Urban Dictionary:

Fisking:

The word is derived from articles written by Robert Fisk that were easily refuted, and refers to a point-by-point debunking of lies and/or idiocies.

And it is now time to do that to the inveterate liar (and coward) JMSmith of the communal blog of idiots at the “orthosphere”.

First, a point of intellectual rigour: sometimes, when dealing with people that are essentially functional retards, it is difficult to immediately know if the cause of their errors is mainly due to their obvious mental deficiencies, rather than intentional wish to deceive, but there is an easy method for being certain: check how many outright lies they state in their version of events.

And while in this case, it is absolutely clear that JMSmith is very stupid too, we can be certain he is mainly a flat out liar and deceiver.

I will be fisking his whole post, (archived, because liars tend to… well… change stories) as is reserved for intentional liars.

His lies with grey background, my facts in normal type.

First his title:

Bruce Charlton is not a “Gatekeeper” Nor a “Shill” Nor a “Glowie” Nor a “Fed”

He is referring to this post of mine, and, well sunshine, the only word I attributed to Bruce was gatekeeper, and that, it is clear from my post, only in terms of the effect he is having on people who subscribe to his nonsense. I made this obvious when I specifically wrote:

“I am not yet convinced he is an intentional gatekeeper, like say, Milo Yankmypolus, but he is undoubtedly adding to the level of blackpilling despair. I am more liable to put this down to his being the intellectual coward he is, as well as being a gnostic heretic, which, intentional deceiver or not, can only lead to Hellish effects, results, conclusions and beliefs.”

And that point was repeated. I certainly never accused Bruce of being a “Fed”, a “Glowie” or a “Shill”, these are fantasies (lies) attributed to me by the liar JMSmith. He lies a lot. Let us continue to fisk his lies.

I had not read Giuseppe Filotto until Kristor linked to his denunciation of Bruce Charlton. I have since read nothing but that denunciation and Filotto’s appended comment that the Orthosphere is a nest of “cretins.”

I never used the word cretins, with respect to these fake “orthos”,

UPDATE: A commenter pointed out I did in fact do this, and called them cretins, though in a comment, not on the actual post. Fair enough. Mea Culpa. The rest remains correct though.

so he is lying when he pretends to quote me. What I have done is pointed out that their are dishonest, that is, that they lie. Here. I will grant however that they are also stupid, but I reserve the word “cretin” for foes actually worthy of at least an insult. These morons hardly rise to that level, they are common, garden-variety, lying, retards.

Filitto accuses Charlton of being a “gatekeeper,” possibly by intention and certainly in effect.

This is the only sentence he got mostly right, except for spelling my name wrong, but stupid is as stupid does.

He means what is more properly called a “shill,” since the accusation is that Charlton is aiding the side that he ostensibly opposes.

Ummm… no. You disgusting liar. If I meant to call Bruce a shill, I would have said so. I never used the word shill, nor in any way hinted he was anything of the sort. I specifically stated Bruce is most likely a quasi-incel infatuated with his own sub-standard (and cowardly) intellect. I certainly never remotely assumed Bruce was a shill. And for who would he be a shill anyway? But JMSmith, being a retard, probably doesn’t even know what the word “shill” means. And it’s gonna be really hard to try to retroactively make that accusation against me stick; once he googles up the meaning.

In culture theory, a “gatekeeper” is a person who can admit or exclude aspirants to some coveted inner ring of the chosen few. Like St. Peter at the gates of Heaven, a “gatekeeper” can say “welcome to the elect” or “be damned and to Hell with you.”

Again. No, you miserable retard and borderline illiterate. Gatekeeper in common parlance is someone that prevents large numbers of people from discovering or acting upon the truth, by feeding them partial truths and deceptions mixed in such proportions as to steer them towards some other effort that will sap their energies instead of have them expended on the real issue.

Charlton is as far as possible from being a “gatekeeper” because he is not himself part of a clique, club, cabal or inner ring.

And I never hinted or said he ever was. So stick your strawman were the sun don’t shine.

No one has ever improved his prospects, or advanced his career, by oiling up to Charlton. And I don’t believe Charlton is accepting applicants to his idiosyncratic church of one.

And where did I say he did? I didn’t. Shove this second strawman too.

The truth is that Filotto is “gatekeeping” when he denounces Charlton for acting as a “shill.” I should perhaps say “insidious fear monger,” since a “shill” fosters false hope. In its pure sense, a “shill” is a covert salesman who pretends to be a disinterested bystander in order to boost consumer confidence and thereby sell some dubious product. An “insidious fear monger” is a secret agent of the thing that is feared. He demoralizes, discourages, and fosters despair. In the guise of a friend, he spreads despondency and alarm.

Once again, this is literally 100% the opposite of the truth, as can be gleaned by the original post on Bruce, my very point was that Bruce is the one causing despair. And I have made numerous posts stating precisely the opposite, that despair is the very thing to avoid as it is a lie. Here is one blatant example, and here another. In fact pretty much my entire existence is geared against despair, indeed the very article criticising Charlton does so because he’s spreading despair, as this moron later proves too. So as an accusation, the entirety of the above is not just an obvious lie, but also projection and mental retardation of the highest order. And again, I never, ever, said Charlton was, or was acting as, or represented a “shill” so in every way and form, the accusation is simply an outright lie.

I seldom close Bruce Charlton’s Notions with the feeling that that God will very shortly be returned to his Heaven, and that all will very shortly be set right in the world. This of course proves that he is not a “shill.”

So, you admit he makes you despair, but… this means he’s not a “shill” (which only YOU have ever accused him of being, never me) because… wait for it…

A “shill” would have tricked me into purchasing one of the opiate nostrums that are peddled by the charlatans, mountebanks, and carnival barkers of the Right.

…because he didn’t SELL you something and hence “steal” your money. Let me guess, this fucking moron is an American. They are the most materialistic of cultures, and the dumber they are, the more so.

And I don’t think he is an “insidious fear monger” since our danger is really much greater than many good people suppose.

Again, you utter liar, I have never used the words “insidious fear monger”, especially not against Bruce. So why the fuck are you pretending to quote me? Are you so desperately stupid you don’t understand that people can verify what I wrote for themselves? Clearly, the answer to that question is yes. Yes you really are.

Filotto is grossly unfair when he says Charlton is an “intellectual coward.” A fair critic could say that Charlton is overly bold, or even rash; that he rushes in where angels fear to tread, bites off more than he can chew, gets in over his head. I do not say these things myself, but I would not laugh out loud at someone who did. I do laugh out loud at anyone who says that Charlton is an “intellectual coward.”

Given that JMSmith has now amply demonstrated he’s a complete idiot that barely knows the meaning of common words, I will put the above paragraph down to his being too stupid to understand what “intellectual coward” means. And no, I am not unfair, at all, I am merely making observations, since Bruce has flat-out avoided addressing the absolute nonsense that is Mormonism.

In fact JMSmith makes it clear he has no idea, when he lists attributes that say nothing of intellectual cowardice or bravery, but rather highlight the fact that Bruce is just dumb, and believes dumb things that are literally so stupid a normal child would laugh at them, such as believing Mormonism in any guise can be true. Do you even know the story of Mormonism? Look it up. It makes the Xemu of Dianetics (scientology) sound logical and likely! Seriously, go see the musical Book of Mormon, it’s hilarious and not too far off historically speaking from the actual facts.

The man sacrificed his reputation as a scientist when he came out as “religious,” and then sacrificed his reputation as “religious” when he did not settle comfortably into some collective creed.

Which only evidences that my take of him that he is enamoured with his own “iconic” intellect (which in reality is mostly specious nonsense written as if it were deep thoughts) while really not having much there at all, is very close to the bullseye.

Charlton may be a nut, but he most certainly is not a “intellectual coward.”

Again, JM, invest in a good dictionary. You clearly need one.

Towards the end of his post Filotto tells us that Charlton is actually a physical coward because all his wild speculation just excuses  shirking “battles in meatspace.”  Filotto particularly accuses Charlton of the quietist conviction that God’s people should not fight spiritual battles with the weapons of this world because those who handle the weapons of this world will become worldly.  He says,

“Bruce is obviously of the opinion that the Spartans should have just gone quietly into the night, and so too the knights of Malta and everyone who ever picked up a weapon and fought the tyrants and won.  Pathetic, disgusting, black-pilling coward.”

I am not sure that a man as ornery and pugnacious as Charlton should be accused of quietist convictions, but his fear of fighting with the weapons of this world is hardly naïve.

Ah, the lies, they multiply eh? Let’s see what I actually accused Bruce of, eh? The full quote of my writing:

One [of Bruce’s posts] on the doom and gloom idea that even if we try to fight back against the forces of evil we are only contributing to the overall evil and destruction of all, and his completely nihilistic nonsense ends with the panacea that we must only rely on the “spirit” since all battles in meatspace are only adding to the evil. It is possibly his most cowardly post yet and the one I despise most of the ones I have read. Bruce is obviously of the opinion that the Spartans should have just gone quietly into the night, and so too the knights of Malta and everyone who ever picked up a weapon and fought the tyrants and won. Pathetic, disgusting, black-pilling coward. It is enough to make me believe he is a gatekeeper and intentionally so, but I know enough to realise that the probability is more on the side of him being your typical, nihilistic British geek. All theory and no balls.

It is obviously clear I am referring to the intent of his message, and that intent is nihilistic, cowardly, black-pilling lies. And I again specifically point out his “gatekeeping” is the result of his own misery and despair, and not an actual intentional wish to be a gatekeeper.

J.R.R. Tolkien wrote a very long book that illustrates the reality and hazards of earthly power, and Charlton has brooded more than most on the lessons contained in Tolkien’s book. Spartan “freedom” is, I would add, a very ambiguous sort of freedom.

It is obvious I never even considered Charlton’s bravery or lack thereof from a physical perspective, frankly the thought never even entered my mind because I simply do not rate him, as I do not rate most people, as even significant in any physical confrontation.

But that aside, there is nothing, absolutely nothing, ambiguous about Spartan freedom. The difference was either continue being Spartans, free to live as Spartans chose to do, or be slaves and servants of Xerxes and his Persians.

How this fucking intellectual pustule on the ass of a gnat can not understand that very simple point is precisely because he is an intellectual pustule on the ass of a gnat, while pretending to have an idea worth sharing with the world. He doesn’t. He’s just a virtue-signalling-machine, pretending to know what JRR Tolkien meant with respect to fighting evil in the flesh.

It is obvious that whatever JRR intended, JMSmith is literally to stupid to ever possibly even guess at it, much less get it right.

And yes, this is the usual , Kurgan sledgehammer to a crippled flea, but how else will these morons learn, other than by purifying fire?

And lastly, let’s look at my actual final take on Bruce, shall we?

Do I think Bruce Charlton is evil incarnate? No. I assume he’s your typically pedestrian Brit, unsatisfied with life and going about it in his quiet desperation, while sharing it with others in an effort to make himself feel more relevant as a whole, but instead, just spreading despair, nihilism, and heresy. I don’t care about Bruce. I am far more concerned with the people he might influence into taking his gnostic nonsense on board in any way.

So, yeah, it’s the usual moron, wanting to insinuate himself into concepts, ideas and online discussions far above his station, probably in the misguided hope of getting more clicks to his site in order to seem more relevant than he is to… someone. Anyone. And instead, just proving to anyone reading this that he is an idiot.

UPDATE 2: JMSmith responds with what, in Roman Law, goes for general agreement, since he remains silent on the factual accusations of deception I level at him:

Filotto Strikes Back

Ok, I admit it, I kinda like the title, as it’s a distant recall to Star Wars, The Empire Strikes Back. And as we all know, Darth Vader, and the Empire are the good guys. Just like the Kurgan they nicknamed me after is too. Obviously. I mean who wants that whiny, depressed Frenchman as an immortal?

Readers who like to consider both sides of an argument may peruse Giuseppe Filotto’s blistering rejoinder to my apology for Bruce Charlton.  Filotto argues that I am stupid, a liar, and at times even a stupid liar who lies stupidly.   I also once misspelled Filotto’s name, for which I apologize. 

I didn’t lose sleep over it, but the apology is accepted though it wasn’t required at all as far as I am concerned.

Filotto is a vigorous vituperator, although his stock of insults is limited to deprecation of the intelligence and veracity of those who disagree with Filotto. 

Nope. This is another lie. A factual observation is not an insult, even if done in a rhetorically insulting manner. The Rhetoric is just to make sure the sting drives the point home. If you don’t want to be called an idiot, don’t behave like one. And if you don’t want to be called a liar, don’t lie. Simple.

In my experience, disagreement has less obvious origins. 

But we are not discussing disagreement. In fact, honestly, you never even entered the arena with regard to discussing the points. You lied about me and what I did and said and I pointed out you lied. That’s pretty much it. You also made some comments about Bruce which, if anything, supported my take on Bruce, not yours, whatever that might be, other than he’s a great guy apparently, as far as you’re concerned, despite the fact he spreads misery and despair with very little in the way of solutions.

I will say that I agree with Filotto that despair is self-fulfilling prophesy, and that we should all do what we can to keep our peckers up.

Well, I never suffered from erectile dysfunction, so I can’t agree with your implication that taking viagra is the answer to life’s problems, but then, as I said, I never suffered from that particular affliction, so who am I to judge!

And as a final point, since you agree with me on despair, I fail to see how you can defend Bruce on his general zeitgeist.