Wew. This is special.

One of the things I tend to try to do whenever I delve into any shit like this is assess “What is this person trying to achieve?”… It’s not good.

a pathological focus that channels its energy into topics like racial or gender-diversity tribalisms, and the insistence that one’s needs be taken care of by others.

Alright so the three things this person opposes are:

• Racial diversity

• Gender diversity

• Caring about other people’s feelings (which they have rebranded into “needing to be taken care of”)

The force of such tribalism tends to take as prisoner all remaining citizens who don’t identify themselves with the child archetype, creating a two-class society of childlike adults who set out to pull on the heartstrings of more matured, responsible adults within the same society.

Here they are rebranding marxist class analysis into patriarchal “adults” and “children”. The bougies (and their supporters) are the adults and everyone else are the children.

Using biological language, what we are witnessing is a hacking of the parental brain of society, garnering its collective sympathies with the bait of dramatized neoteny. When our biological operating system is hacked in this way, and the hack is taught as cultural operating practice within government institutions, universities and in popular culture, there is little chance to circumvent its omnipotent demands.

Word salad but ultimately this serves to make the matter ontological. They argue that being child-type or adult-type is inherent, genetic.

The only way to circumvent the aggressive vulnerability of the child archetype is for a portion of society to say NO when faced with its demands — demands which tend to appear as an insistence for redress of female victimhood, race victimhood, “marginalized” sexuality, wage inequality and so on — the masks of the child archetype.

Ahh so here enters the 4th thing this person actually cares about - wage inequality. The class element to where this is all coming from.

Biologists, neurologists, evolutionary psychologists, and ethologists have long recognized parent and child instincts in the form of parents’ urge to caretake and protect juveniles, and conversely of juveniles having an impulse to announce their vulnerability as a signal of their need to be cared for.

This biological fact was independently discovered and understood by archetypal psychologists (parent & child archetypes), object relations psychologists (parent & child objects), and by other schools of psychology dealing with the ‘inner child’ and its need for caretaking. Object relations psychology goes so far as claiming the sexual libido is subservient to the evolutionary imperative of parent~child bonding, making this dyad the strongest motivator in human affairs.

Blah blah blah more justification that this is all ontological and genetic. They’re recreating the basis for eugenics arguments.

While the above video provides only half of the full speech given by Hillman on the child archetype, it does impart a good overview of the topic. Hillman touches on Jung’s description of the child archetype as including traits of vulnerability, a sense of futurity (that life will begin in the future), innocence, and also a feeling of hermaphroditism. This sexual orientation (hermaphroditism) of the child archetype is also confirmed in Freud’s idea that toddlers are polymorphous perverse and not yet forming what Freud understood as an appropriate genital identity as boy or girl.

Carefully weaving together bullshit ancient debunked psychology with eugenics to wield transphobia as a form of “say no to the woke” as a basis for nazi fascism where trans people replace the role of the jews in the old ideology.

Goal of this person? To create an argument hedged in convincing sounding (to the layperson) pseudo-science that “the woke” must be opposed, or else society will be destroyed (as evoked by their choice of imagery for the post). By making the matter biological they seek to have readers come to their own conclusion that the “child brained” people of society must be destroyed for the good of society. The goal of the writer is to have the reader come to their own conclusion that genociding the “child-brained” people is for the good of everyone else.

Conclusion: It is rebranded eugenics of ubermenschen(adult brains) and untermenschen(child brains) within the current culture war context. For the purposes of waging class war.