Archive for the ‘culture’ Category

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Normality bias

Sunday, December 13th, 2020

In the year fifty eight years before Christ in Rome it became obvious that elections were rigged. Courts and due process had ended in the sense that some political violence went unpunished, and attempting to defend oneself against political violence was the gravest of crimes, in the sense that political disagreement was a crime, as Roger Stone and Sheriff Joe recently discovered, while political violence was not, as those who cheerfully had themselves videoed while attempting to murder Kyle in Kenosha demonstrated.

And yet, not until shortly after the assassination of Caesar, fourteen years later did people adjust to the new reality. And Caesar himself did not adjust to the new reality. Before he crossed the Rubicon, he made an offer and attempted a strategy which would only have made sense if legality and free and fair elections were still in effect, though had not been in the slightest effect for seven years.

Similarly the French and Russian Revolutions, though reality set in faster in those cases. When Napoleon took power, ten years after the revolution, he had to lecture those that his soldiers dismissed that they were appealing to a reality that no longer existed and they themselves had destroyed ten years ago.

I fear that Trump, suffering from incurable optimism, will attempt such a strategy, as Caesar did. It is likely to prove as fatal for him as for Caesar.

That Caesar allowed himself to be in a position where he could be assassinated shows he was still suffering from normality bias, and the immediately following the assassination, the assassins demonstrated massive normality bias, believing that with Caesar dead, the old normality would spontaneously return. When normality failed to return, Romans only then finally realized it was dead and not easily resurrected.

And when Napoleon finally declared himself Emperor, we see a fair bit of outrage from those who imagined that the old normality was still in effect, even though it had abruptly ended in the French Revolution fifteen years earlier.

If Trump thinks he can run again in 2024, he is terribly mistaken. He will be in prison by then, and very likely dead by then.

Posted in culture, politics | 454 Comments »

The fall of the Republic

Thursday, November 26th, 2020

Today in America it is the year in Rome fifty eight years before Christ. We are here. The mob is on the streets, which the courts decline to put down, courts and legal processes of the Republic politicized and defunct, carrying out political vengeance and refusing to enforce law, elections blatantly fraudulent and discredited.

Caesar crossing the Rubicon was the culmination of more Rubicons than you can shake a stick at. Before Caesar crossed the Rubicon, Clodius and Pompey crossed the Pomerium.

And before they crossed the Pomerium, Rome had the grossly dysfunctional courts, the undue process, and the rigged elections, that we have right now.

Soros and Hunter Biden are Clodius. Trump is Pompey, Cato, and Cicero. The Insurrection Act is the Senatus Consultum Ultimum.

When Pompey crossed the Pomerium fifty two years before Christ, he rolled up the useless, cowardly, weak, and undisciplined mob, and enforced order without mucking around with the useless and discredited courts.

But, since Pompey was an idiot, he then stepped down from the job of dictator, expecting normalcy to return. It did not. And everyone else acted like idiots also. Seeing order return, they thought that democracy, legality, and due process had returned, though obviously it had not.

Order seemingly restored by Pompey’s dictatorship and the Senatus Consultum Ultimum, Rome went on a conquest binge, dropping the pretext of self defense, and pissing off all its neighbors. One of its neighbors, the Parthians, revealed that they had been advancing the art and technology of war, while Rome had been quietly regressing. But the Parthians were content to grossly humiliate Rome, and merely returned their borders to where they were legally supposed to be, though there was absolutely nothing to stop them from rolling up the the entire eastern empire, and perhaps Rome itself. They still had and observed the legality that Rome had abandoned.

Eight years later, forty nine years before Christ, massive abuse of the courts and lack of legality forced Caesar to, with extraordinary reluctance, cross the Rubicon, after several years where legality was not in effect, but people still deluded acted as if it was. And finally, belatedly, remarkably belatedly, people after the assassination of Caesar recognized that legality, due process, courts, laws, fair trials, and free elections are finally gone and are not coming back any time soon.

Political violence continues to grow, eventually resulting in total war, immensely destructive civil war carried out by extraordinary and unprecedented measures.

After eighteen years of ever escalating chaos and ever more massive and extraordinary bloodshed, after a civil war that turned total, Caesar’s adopted son, Augustus, made himself dictator, but having learned from Pompey’s error, did not step down from the job expecting normalcy to return.

Legality, due process, free elections, and peaceful transfer of power, once lost, are hard to restore.

But despite the imperium, the swamp went on being swampy, the state religion went on being hostile, legality did not return. And things stayed like that for two and half centuries, till Constantine built a new capital, and made a new religion the state religion.

My hope is that our Pompey will be our Constantine, that we do a fast forward over Rome’s centuries of war and ruin.

Posted in culture, politics, war | 1,152 Comments »

The three magic words

Friday, August 7th, 2020

Civilization is collapsing, the revolutionary political crisis is approaching, but, worse than that Heartiste has stopped posting on game, and Roosh has turned tradcuck. So even though I have sworn this is not going to be a game blog, and my life has demonstrated times without number that no end of men are better qualified to post on game than I am, I guess I will have to step into the gap, at least a little bit.

The three magic words are not “I love you”

The three magic words are “You are mine”.

Every now and then I grab my woman while she is doing something and start groping her, and she protests indignantly and sometimes struggles a bit, but she loves it. And sometimes when I do so, I say “Mine”, or “You are mine”.

Men want to own women, and women want to be owned by manly men, but no one gets what they want. Instead we spin plates, while she waits for the next booty call from someone more manly than ourselves.

When a chick says “I love you”, it is always a shit test. She wants to see if she can control you by making you tell her you love her on demand. If she can, you have failed the shit test, she will not remember you exist, and will look all the way through you. You should tell her you love her unpredictably and considerably less often than she tells you she loves you.

If you regularly fail at shit tests, she will scarcely remember your name. It will be like one of those names she had to remember in order to pass a history test, and this is an important and frequent shit test.

This is commandment One and Five in Heartiste’s Sixteen Commandments of Poon. Though I would give it several months between when she says “I love you” and you eventually getting around to saying it, and I say “I love you” back about one third of the time that she says “I love you”.

I have followed the Sixteen Commandments of Poon both instinctively, and through long and painful experience, long before Heartiste started blogging, and they are the greatest short summary of that small part of game that can be put into readily intelligible words.

Game, however is more readily intelligible if we understand it through the lens of Evolutionary Game Theory, which should be understood as a materialistic account of the spiritual truths of the first part of the Book of Genesis, Evolutionary Game theory being, for higher animals, primarily evolutionary psychology, evolutionary psychology being in large part the application of game theory in the context of natural selection, the moral consequences of material and effective causation, the Logos.

Evolutionary Game theory is an account in terms of material and effective causation, in terms of chance and necessity, the Book of Genesis tells us something about how the consequences of Evolutionary Game Theory are the Will of Gnon.

The ancestral environment of the higher races of man was the interior of the Eurasian land mass, and this is where successive waves of more advanced humans came from, the most recent such wave being the Aryans, who emerged from somewhere near the Caspian sea, equipped with bronze weapons, small horses (the horse had not yet been bred the capacity to carry a man on its back) and chariots, with their homes and possessions in carts. This is an environment where extreme seasonal differences made it necessary to accumulate capital and maintain technology. You cannot survive there without stuff and considerable thought and preparation for the next season. Thus not only were they under higher selection for forethought, industriousness, scientific thought, and smarts (hence the bronze weapons) they were under higher selection for successful family formation. Mars is a harsher environment, and will be a stronger filter.

A single women cannot effectively own stuff, particularly in the ancestral environment where being able to defend stuff is a very large part of being able to own it, and are maladapted to possessing property except on behalf of an alpha male. Hence the common pattern in a divorce where the wife expects the last guy who gave her a booty call, who is way handsomer and more charismatic than her husband, to marry her, but no more booty calls are forthcoming, then her husband gets a new woman way younger than she is, wherupon she pisses away her share of the family assets and wrecks the lives of her children. Mars will not succeed with a system that allows assets to get into weak hands.

For the higher races to reproduce, have to prevent women from continuing to cruise for a higher alpha all their fertile years. If not allowed to cruise, property of the first male they have sex with, and compelled to honor and obey.

For about the cost of two dates, you can have a hooker, and it is not an adequate substitute. Hookers are only a marginal improvement over masturbation. What progressives offer men, a rotating series of hookups, is just not what most men want, as revealed by men’s actions.

Yes, a harem is better than just one wife, but a changing rotation of whores is not a harem. The point of having more than one woman is having more than one woman. If I sleep with several women that is really great. If one of them sleeps with another man that is really bad and I will certainly dump her, probably beat her, and might well kill her. I will be very angry and sad for a very long time.

Roosh eventually discovered the downside of spinning plates and serial hookups.

Look at the typical male polyamorist. He is psychologically scarred and mentally crippled for life. Having a bunch of whores rather than owning a woman, or better, owning two women, just really sucks brutally. Those guys are traumatized for life.

It unmans men, as if every day a bully beat them up, and they could do nothing about the daily humiliation but suck it up. Just look at what it does to men. It would be kinder to cut their balls off, which is pretty much what progressives are planning to do to us.

The typical male polyamorist looks as if a fat blue haired feminist has been beating him up every day – indeed, he would probably love it if a fat blue haired feminist beat him up every day.

Whores are a marginal improvement on beating off to anime, and hookups a marginal improvement on whores. When men are reduced to such desperate straights, it totally crashes their testosterone and they buy an anime cuddle pillow and weep bitter tears upon it.

We are maladapted to watching the decline from the pool.

Roosh took the wrong redpill from realizing that banging sloots becomes unfufilling after a while. He wants a 50s family life as men generally do, but needs to realize its impossible without a restoration of some degree of de jure patriarchal authority.A convincing claim to be backed by the supreme alpha, and a plausible willingness to carry out his will on adultery, adultery as defined in the Old Testament, serves as a substitute for de jure backing of patriarchal authority.

The Old Testament prescribes the death penalty for a man who sleeps with someone else’s wife or betrothed, and the death penalty for the woman if she consented. And who gets to carry out that penalty?

Well, that is not defined. In the time of judges, Israel was somewhat anarchic, so presumably the husband and his family and friends. In the book of Proverbs, King Solomon assumes that system, though he implies some regulatory restraints, so that continued to be the system under King Solomon.

That is the best system, because the state or the official priesthood monopolizing the killing of adulterers emasculates the husband, and thus makes adultery more likely.

We should be wise as serpents, and I fear that Roosh has lost focus on the wisdom of serpents.

Roosh now advocates not using game to find a wife because women that need game and PUA tactics to catch will most likely not make for loyal Christian wives.

Once, however you meet a woman, it is game on. If he suggests otherwise he is absolutely wrong.

It is always game on. There is no rest for men. We are always on stage. We can only be ourselves when there are no women around.

I have a serious disagreement with him about wise behavior in a fallen world. In a fallen world, we should be as wise, and preferably wiser, than the minions of Satan, as well as cooperating more successfully.

Most of the minions of Satan are fools and liars, and should not be listened to, but Heartiste speaks the truth. Roosh feels, correctly, that the wisdom of Heartiste and himself is apt to be used for evil and destruction, that it facilitates choices that are unwise for oneself, and damaging to others, but that is a choice that each of us must make for ourselves. Good people must be armed with the same or better knowledge than bad people. When Jesus told his followers to get swords, he meant sharp swords, and not to draw them lightly, but have them at the ready to be drawn.

You have to bang them, or they are not going to stick around. If a man and woman spend more than a week together without banging, they are going break up, unless the woman is literally kept locked in by her father between suitor visits. Plus you want very much to bang them. Same night lays are difficult (though if in an international tourist spot where you can plausibly claim that you have to go to the airport tomorrow afternoon, less difficult) but second week lays are also difficult.

There is no substantial distinction between the fast seduction arsenal, and the seduction at all arsenal. A sword cuts the same whether wielded for good or evil.

The prohibition against adultery is against sleeping with other men’s wives and betrothed, and the prohibition against fornication is against disrupting other people’s families and other men’s patriarchal authority. Since marriage as traditionally understood has long been illegal, and the family court and child protective services are rapidly moving towards making family illegal, there is not much likelihood of committing adultery or fornication these days.

Listen to Heartiste, but, as Roosh discovered, there are better lives than watching the decline. Heartiste speaks the truth, and an important truth, and everything he says is true and important, and unlike most of Satan’s servants should be listened to with attention, but when he truthfully tells you that that watching the decline from poolside is the easiest way, and the better way is hard and dangerous, and likely to end in terrible failure, he is telling a truth that serves his master.

The redpill must always outrank everything… Otherwise you are preaching something other than truth, and Roosh is now preaching something subtly different from the truth. The Old Testament celebrates physical desire. There is just no mention of this chaste eros stuff. Sexual love and sexual desire are inseparable. That is what makes them sexual.

Roosh suggests that you search for a good woman. Wrong! Women are blown where the winds take them. All women are like that. A good woman is good because she is subject to the authority of a good man. All woman are naturally bad unless under the authority of a good man. There are no unicorns. No Women Are Like That. (You should however search for a woman with a low count, and a count of zero is infinitely preferable, for otherwise she is likely to forever carry a torch for the bad boy who got away, regarding you as a regrettable and inferior temporary substitute.) All women are good when nestled securely under the thumb of right patriarchal authority. The late eighteenth century, early nineteenth century Australian authorities had seemingly complete success in turning whores into wives, by making their husbands strong.

You cannot make a housewife out of a ho in our current environment, because she will see you as weak compared to numerous pimps she has been with. However late eighteenth, early nineteenth century Australia had swift and total success in making ho’s into wives. When the elite shotgun married them off, they reacted as if abducted from the weaker tribe into the stronger tribe, and completely internalized the values of the stronger tribe – which required and expected respectable female behavior. Female virtue is more easily obtained if you are more manly than anyone she has been with previously and a bit scary than by searching for it. Of course, in today’s environment, you don’t have backing from your tribe, you have hostility from your tribe. This makes things far more difficult than in late eighteenth century Australia, but not impossibly so. You have backing from God.

Evolutionary psychology predicts that women want the semen of men who are successful with women, while also wanting to hang with men who will protect them and look after them, because such a man is likely to look after his children. The female fantasy, expressed in a number of films, is a loving husband whom they do not have sex with, and a parade of alpha male cads whom they do. This is the equivalent of the male harem fantasy, except that the harem is serial rather than parallel. Most women do not however attempt this, expecting the obvious reaction, just as males are frequently a little nervous about asking a girl for a threesome with her sister.

A propensity to beat her and treat her as easily replaceable is indication that she is easily replaceable, hence indication of success with other women. Actual infidelity is also evidence of success with other women. Thus evolutionary psychology predicts that women will like an alpha asshole with a touch of beta provider – will like someone who looks after her and protects her, but also beats her, treats her as easily replaceable, and sleeps with other women.

It is the nature of women to think of their man before they think of themselves. If she thinks of you after she thinks of herself, then she still carries a torch for the bad boy who got away.

Sex is not a reciprocal activity. Men conquer, woman surrender, but men perform and woman choose.

The mating dance has not been accurately depicted in media since the sixties. (Though it is still accurately depicted in Communist Chinese media, but the Chinese are too alien, too different.)

If you don’t perform the mating dance correctly, will get nowhere fast. The dance is complimentary but asymmetric.

Women want to be commanded, want to serve, want to surrender, want to be valuable to a strong man, want to make him a sandwich, want to bear him children and warm his bed. But they want a strong man, preferably in a strong tribe, and their perception of strength is primitive compared to that of males. And they will never stop testing you for strength.

This is why, when you are trying to get a chicks attention, it never helps to do something nice for her, even to rescue her from danger. Rescuing the damsel in distress is a trope for male viewers. In books and movies targeted at women, the male love interest never rescues the damsel, he endangers her. Negs work, asking her to do something for you works, commanding her works. Stuff that a man would find ridiculous or insulting, and would either make him angry or make him laugh at your pretensions, works.

Negs work astonishingly well, even if so lacking in wit that they are actually insults and would make a man bristle up.

I have actually rescued a chick from danger in real life, with entirely predictable results. Protecting people registers with men as strength, but not with women as strength. Endangering people, innocent people, including the woman herself, registers as strength. I know this from my personal life experience. If you doubt me, check out the love interests in books written by women for women. All women are like that.

Women like men who frighten them. If you don’t kill a man, but beat him, he’ll resent you and wait until his chance to strike back. If you don’t kill a woman, but beat her, she’ll get “Stockholm syndrome” and be pretty loyal

A man needs to own a woman, he needs a house, and land and children. A man that does not own a woman breaks, and a rotating collection of sluts is not ownership.

If she is free to suspend cooperation at any time, men are disinclined to invest in her and her children. You pump and dump, so that if you are lucky, you dump her before she dumps you. You spin the plates to avoid being spun. There is always someone more alpha than you are. You pump and dump because it hurts less that way. Evolution shaped you that way, evolution makes it hurt, so that you would not waste time looking after a chick that becomes pregnant with Jeremy Meeks’s demon spawn. Evolution has planted the knowledge in you that investing in a woman you do not own is a bad investment.

You don’t plant trees on land you don’t own, and if you don’t have some land and plant some trees for your grandkids, it hurts.

Roissy truthfully tells us how to operate in defect/defect equilibrium with women. But the point is to achieve cooperate/cooperate equilibrium.

My wife, after making me my morning coffee, “jokingly” threatened to charge me with rape, domestic violence, and all that. Just friendly joking ha ha. She observed that this would make her rich, which made it not very funny at all. I “jokingly” quoted the Old Testament, and “jokingly” pointed at the ocean. (Implying that if she called the cops on us she might go for a very long swim.) Haha. Just having fun. We laughed. I laughed for real, because when I pointed at the ocean, I passed her shit test, and she loved me for passing her shit test. Alpha male backed by the supreme alpha male. She points at alpha cop, I point at alpha God. She points at my assets, I point at the ocean.

That is how you reach cooperate/cooperate equilibrium.

Let us imagine two mafia guys. Cops put each one in separate cells, and tell them.

“If neither of you rat the other out, we will punish you for carrying a gun without a carry permit and stuff. If you rat your pal out, and your pal fails to rat you out, you get off free, your pal takes all the blame, and gets the electric chair. If both of you rat each other out, we will let you off with forty years in prison. If you don’t rat your pal out, and your pal rats you out, you get the electric chair.”

The prisoner would be much better off if he was sure that the mafia would kill the rat.

In a prisoner’s dilemma, you want and need external enforcement. It is in a woman’s individual biological self interest to be in a situation where if she runs off with the wedding singer, she gets dragged back on a leash and beaten, and the wedding singer gets beaten to death, just as it is in the prisoner’s individual self interest to be a member of an organization that will kill him should he rat on the other prisoner.

Women are unable to reproduce, because they have an abundance of choice, and no way of irrevocably escaping choice. So they love a man who can deny them choice. Trouble with Roissy’s framing is that he correctly says that women love bad men, and correctly concludes you should be bad, but fails to notice that a good man can be strong enough to take away a woman’s unwanted freedom.

Female behavior that appears wicked, foolish, and self destructive to a man is entirely intelligible when we realize that the proud independent rapidly aging overweight barista with one hundred thousand dollars in college and credit card debt is unlikely to have children, and is likely to die alone and be eaten by her numerous cats, but if abducted by Islamic State and sold on the auction block naked and in chains would probably have seven children and twenty five grandchildren, and would die surrounded by loving family.

If a man is defeated, conquered and subdued, perhaps because his tribe and country is conquered and subdued, he is unlikely to reproduce. If a woman is defeated, conquered and subdued, she has escaped from defect/defect equilibrium, escaped from prisoner’s dilemma, and also been transferred from weak men and a weak tribe to strong men and a strong tribe, and is therefore likely to be highly successful in reproducing. As a result, women have no country, no tribe, and no ingroup. When they are daughters, they have their father’s tribe, when wives, their husband’s tribe. A woman without a father or a husband is a stateless person, and if a state piously declares her to be a citizen, the state is deluding itself, or deluding its actual citizens in order to commit treason against them.

Thus female behavior that is seemingly wicked, self destructive, and crazy, makes sense when looked at through the lens of Evolutionary Game Theory.

Betas think they will be happiest if they have what alpha males have, happiest with a rotating series of sterile girlfriends, but if this was truly male nature it would be inconsistent with Darwin’s sexual selection. It is inconsistent with the fact that when men have all the power and women are powerless, fertility is high and whores nonexistent, and inconsistent with what I see in front of my nose.

Beta males think they want what alpha males have, but the men that women see as alphas rapidly discover that what women are giving them is not what they want, it represents the victory of the selfish female defect/defect strategy over the selfish male defect/defect strategy. Every pimp is a cuck.

I was at a party and I was talking about women to a blue pilled normie, who is, predictably, raising two boys who are not his own, their actual father, predictably, being in jail, and the normie, predictably, being childless.

I attempted to start a conversation about our past misadventures with women. He fearfully remarked “Women don’t like that” – meaning women don’t like men talking about their past women and he did not want to upset his girlfriend.

To which I replied: “Women love what they hate.” His girlfriend supposedly likes nice guys like himself, but somehow during a protracted fit of absent mindedness wound up bearing two sons to a violent stoner with no job who spends all his mysteriously acquired money on drugs.

When she was with the violent stoner, she had a job and he did not, while now she is with the nice guy, he has a job and she does not. I never saw her hug him, or look at him admiringly, at the party, even though he was by far the most handsome man at the party, and except for myself the most intelligent. Handsome, wealthy, intelligent, kind, and he predictably gets another man’s leavings. Women like dangerous men, or men who plausibly seem dangerous, and she likes most of all a man who can plausibly appear to seem dangerous to herself. Escaping from defect/defect into cooperate/defect is no escape. Your mission is to escape into cooperate/cooperate and to live in accordance with the will of Gnon.

But there is no escape from shit tests. Mohammed had a large harem, absolute power, and it clear he had a hard time. This is a chronic problem with large harems, and empires frequently die of it, as the Turkish empire did and the Chinese empires often did. Genghis Khan had no women problems, and neither did his sons, but his grandsons were lesser men than he. Women will find a way to shit test you.

Tags:,
Posted in culture | 411 Comments »

Status and violence

Wednesday, June 3rd, 2020

Observe that everywhere throughout the American hegemony, it is cool and hip to protest the murder of George Floyd. Enormous crowds are protesting in Germany, in Australia, in Amsterdam. Suddenly no one remembers Wu Flu.

Look for the dog that did not bark: They are not protesting in Russia and China. People behind the shield of Russian and Chinese nukes are laughing as virtue signallers in the US get their windows smashed in. When the mob can smash your windows in while police stand around like potted palms, then it is cool and high status to join the mob that could smash windows in. Even if you are not smashing windows in, you could, therefore cool, powerful, and high status.
[evp_embed_video url=”/videos/virtue_signal.mp4″]
I can see that violence works. If they can sic a mob on certain speakers, and the mob can break things and hurt people with impunity, then the speakers who instigate the mob are high status, and the people being beaten and chased are low status. I see this work over and over again. The left started using the mob for deniable violence in the early 1600s. It worked then, it works now.

If I were to speak at Berkeley, I would be beaten, and those doing the beating would suffer no consequences. Therefore I am low status. If someone attempts to practice the scientific method at Berkeley, he will be beaten and will lose tenure, therefore the scientific method is low status and peer review is high status. If Trump had gone to church without first having the press beaten and kicked out of the park like stray dogs creating a nuisance, would have been stoned, with stones provided by the peaceful non violent press that is merely doing its job, while the press who are merely doing their job heroically put the heroic peaceful non violent stone throwing protesters on television. That is where status comes from. From the rocks thrown at Attorney General Barr, and the bombs that landed on Syria and Libya. They manipulate people with status, but the status comes from rocks and fires, and when rocks and fires are met with shields and batons, they escalate to fire and steel.

If Trump cannot visit Lafayette Park because peaceful non violent protesters would throw rocks at him, as they threw rocks at Attorney General Barr, Trump is low status. If non violent peaceful protesters organized and instigated by the peaceful non violent press who is merely doing its job can vandalize Trump’s Church with impunity, Trump’s congregation and his God is low status.

If the peaceful non violent protesters and the peaceful non violent press who is merely doing its job gets chased out of the park with blows and kicks like stray dogs who are creating a nuisance, then Trump his high status. Watch.

When Barr dispersed the mob that threw stones at him, Barr was high status, and thus Trump was high status. When pastor and Bishop of Saint John’s praised the mob that defaced their church, and started a fire in it, they were low status, like the helpless and terrified virtue signalers in the video above, and thus Father, Son, and Holy Spirit low status. When they praised the mob that defaced their church and started a fire in it, they joined the mob that spat on Christ.

Being civilized people, we prefer not to notice what the house of status is built on. The Cathedral manipulates with status carrots and status sticks, but when that does not work, high altitude area bombing, as recently in Libya and Syria. Syria was color revolutioned, and when color revolution failed, bombed, because Assad followed the letter of Cathedral law, protecting minorities and affirmative actioning women to exactly equal numbers and status in Academia, but failed to have a majority cat lady Academia. Assad protected minorities – but protected Christians and Churches, as if Christians and Churches qualified as a minority. He was not supposed to stop affirmative action at mere equality, and was not supposed to protect all minorities. The press merely doing its job was shocked and outraged when Putin stopped Pussy Riot, aka Soros, from vandalizing and obscenely desecrating Russian Orthodox cathedrals, and were shocked and outraged by brutal repression when Assad brutally repressed Church burnings, lynching of Christians, and rape of Christians.

Why was the scientific method high status from 1663 to 1944?

Ostensibly, because King Charles the Second, doing his job as the fount of all honors, mortal and divine, declared it to be high status, making the invisible college into the Royal Society, following his policy of making prosocial productive activities high status, and antisocial destructive activities low status. The Puritans did not like the scientific method, preferring truth by consensus, just as today we get truth by peer review in place of truth based on empirical evidence obtained by the scientific method, and sent the mob around to the Royal Society to break them up, as their ideological descendants deal today with anyone who attempts to practice the scientific method at Berkeley. King Charles the Second’s men, wearing steel, and with steel in their hands, took care of that mob, and then the scientific method was high status.

The invisible college had to be invisible, because the mob would have beaten them up for practicing the scientific method. Therefore low status. When the Royal Society were protected by the steel of King Charles the Second, and the Puritans not protected, then they and their method were high status. When Charles the First’s Bishops were beaten up by the mob, then Charles the First’s official Church was low status, his Bishops were low status and he was low status, so he lost power. When Charles the Second’s Bishops and scientists were protected from the mob, and Puritan preachers unprotected from the mob, then the scientific method, his scientists, his Bishops, and he himself was high status, and held onto power.

If Trump’s Attorney General can have people who throw rocks at him chased out of the park like stray dogs for creating a nuisance, then Trump is high status, and will hold onto power, as Charles the Second did.

You cannot throw rocks at Trump’s Attorney General, and you could not throw rocks and Charles the Second’s Bishops nor his scientists. That is where status comes from. Power comes from status, the power to control status comes from rocks, and the power to control rocks comes from steel. Russian Orthodox is high status in Russia because Pussy Riot, aka Soros, cannot vandalize Cathedrals. Christianity is low status in America because they can. Christianity is low status because the pastor and Bishop of the Church that Trump attends have to suck it up when the mob vandalizes their Church, and praise the mob. Praising God is low status, because it is dangerous. Since we are all civilized men, just as the peaceful press is merely doing its job reporting peaceful protests, we support and praise the mob smashing our windows because status, rather than because violence, being civilized men, as we are all civilized men, and civilized men respond to status, rather than violence, but the status comes from violence. We are not actually all that civilized. We are still risen killer apes, and not very far risen.

Everyone knows in their heart that the blue state governors are complicit in burning down their own cities, that the police who still have the time and energy to arrest abortion protesters are complicit in burning down their own police stations. And this makes them high status, and Trump low status. “See, we can destroy our own cities, and Trump cannot stop us. He is weak, weak, weak, getting weaker, weaker, weaker”. That path ends in color revolution, with the color revolutionaries seizing power, then with Trump being killed, then his family killed, and eventually, my children killed. Trump would be arrested by those blue state cops who were strangely unable to arrest those burning down their own police station, with the enthusiastic support of the pastor and Bishop of Saint John’s church who were unable to criticize those setting fire to their own church.

Attorney General Barr clearing out Lafayette Park under the authority of President Trump after the peacefully protesting mob peacefully threw rocks at him, and having the press that is merely doing their job beaten like stray dogs merely chasing chickens, is the first step on a path that, if walked to the end, brings us to a better place.

Posted in culture | 257 Comments »

Legacy Media report that failure to make sufficient human sacrifices is punished by the wrath of the Gods

Tuesday, May 19th, 2020

The plan for Wu Flu bears a striking resemblance to the plan for a Green New Deal.

If sufficient human sacrifices are not made, dire natural disaster will ensue. Now that they have the Wu Flu disaster, seem to have lost interest in the Anthropogenic Catastrophic Climate Change of Doom disaster.

Some time ago Iran, noticing that Wu Flu is over, ended their lockdown. The media of course reports Doom. The wrath of the Gods has punished Iran for their impiety.

Has it?

Looks like the lockdown slowed the rise very slightly, and ending the lockdown slowed the decline very slightly.

Wu Flu deaths in Iran grew by a factor of ten every eleven days till March 21st, remained at steady constant death rate to April 10th, and since April 12th the death rate has been in slow exponential decline. Imposing lockdown had little effect in Iran, and ending lockdown had little effect in Iran.

The decline is painfully slow, but it is exponential. Death rate in Iran falls by a factor of two every twenty eight days, which means that most of the deaths are behind them now.

Don’t believe anything you read in the legacy media. They are evil, angry, hostile people who hate you, and tell you lies that will harm you. Everything you read in the papers is a lie by evil people who intend to harm you in any way that they can, who want you dead, want your children dead, do not want white people to have sex, and especially do not want white people to have marriage and children. The reason the news does not cover hate crimes against white people is that they give each other high fives whenever the hatred that they spread against white people results in white people being murdered or driven out of their homes. They celebrate every time one of our warriors is killed in pointless endless wars that they instigate against people far away, in lands of which they know nothing, and when the warriors come home prosecute our warriors for war crimes because the warriors had to defend themselves against enemies out of uniform hiding behind women and children.

They hate us, they hate you, and they hate themselves. Hatred and evil consumes them and drives them mad.

What appears in the legacy media are the ravings of evil angry dangerous madmen, and they only matter if the madman is dangerously powerful.

If any commenter uncritically presupposes that anything that appears in the mainstream media bears any connection to reality, other commenters are likely to get rightly angry at him. The legacy media only tells the truth when half the truth is useful in getting people to look away from the lie. When they tell the truth, it is packaged in frame that says “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain”.

Posted in culture, politics | 383 Comments »

The Logos has risen

Sunday, April 12th, 2020

On Easter Sunday we recollect the victory of Christ.

Most times, people at Easter reflect on resurrection as as the promise of the next world, but this is the Dark Enlightenment. Let us reflect on the victory of Logos. A man can be killed, even an idea can be killed, but the truth will not stay dead.

Our officially unofficial State Religion of progressivism is hostile to truth and at war with telos, logos, and reality itself. Gnon is the personification of order, telos, and logos, while Satan is the personification of disorder, perversion, and lies. No one can be relied on to speak truthfully and candidly if under his true name connected to job that can be destroyed and face that can be beaten in. Statistics always lie. Anonymous anecdote is the most reliable source, and it is not all that reliable.

So, what do we do?

We know the truth, live the truth, and so far as is safe to do so, speak the truth. When others lie, and it is dangerous to contradict them, we withhold the appearance of assent, the form and appearance of consent.

The problem with giving assent is not just that we required to hate ourselves our ancestors and the accomplishments of our civilization, to make ritual public denunciations of those things, it is that giving assent to evil hurts one’s mind. It strips away the strength to hold yourself together. Hence the high rate of madness among leftists.

It is highly effective to conceptualize the establishment of cooperate/cooperate relationships as obedience to Gnon. Works with my wife, works with my contractors. This leads naturally to conceptualizing the disobedient wife, the contractor who fails to properly attach the tiles, the contractee who pays late or not at all, as agents or worshippers of the other guy. In some cases, EU, Epstein, and Hillary Clinton, literal worshipers.

Thus, in the context of establishing cooperate/cooperate relationships, demonizing the enemy as Satanists or agents of Satan, works, because demonizing them as Satanists establishes that you and the person you hope to cooperate with are adherents of a common tribe with a supreme alpha male in charge of that tribe.

Conceptualizing the ingroup as adherents of Gnon facilitates cooperation, because people are apt to demonstrate superior holiness by praising Gnon and proclaiming adherence to his laws. Hence I always invoke Old Testament law when commending the killing of unfaithful wives and their lovers or promising a contractor prompt payment and, when reminding my wife to honor and obey, invoke the New Testament and her marriage troth. So it is metaphorically accurate to conceptualize in this fashion even when it is not literally accurate.

We are biologically adapted to cooperate on the basis of shared faith, and old type Christianity is the most functional religion for cooperation.

If you are blue pilled, you are not likely to get laid or marry a fertile age woman. If you are red pilled without being darkly enlightened, the red pill will make you ill. You need a red pilled ideology with the empirical red pill.

If you take the red pill, while adhering to blue pilled moral values and political beliefs, you are apt to wind up black pilled, behaving self destructively (“Men going their own way”, “Men’s rights activists”), or committing suicide.

To internalize the red pill and yet remain mentally healthy, you have to believe that Gnon commanded that female sexuality should be under male authority, that female consent to sex is morally irrelevant. The red pill implies that female consent it is a mere fitness test, not something women genuinely want, hence their seemingly strange behavior with regard to rape and sexual harassment laws. To notice that, and yet remain sane and psychologically healthy, you have to believe that Gnon ordained female sexuality to be under the control of husbands and fathers, that rampant sexual immorality is not men looking a women with lust in their hearts, but women making their own sexual choices.

When men complain about rape, they complain about Rotherham and Cologne. When women complain about rape, they complain about handsome white high status wealthy famous college athletes raping poor innocent coeds, revealing that the real cause of their complaint is not the horrible horrible rape, but the horrible horrible lack of rape.

Hence a system where the complainant is the woman, and the criterion is the woman’s consent, fails, in part because female consent is opaque, and most opaque to the woman herself, in part because they fail to complain about the events we expect and want them to complain about, while actually complaining about failed fitness tests. All rape and sexual harassment complaints are fake, as near to all of them as makes no difference, not because rape and sexual harassment does not happen, it happens a lot, but because rape and sexual harassment is not what provokes complaints of rape and sexual harassment. For laws against rape and sexual harassment to have the intended effect the complainant has to be the husband or father, and the criterion has to be his consent, not her consent. Rape and sexual harassment laws fail to stop the behavior we actually want stopped, while endangering good men.

If you accept blue pilled ethical values, while observing red pill reality, then you are assenting to evil, to evil that hurts you, and this assent will tend to black pill you, and drive you crazy.

The red pill is facts about the world, but is implies ought, and ought implies is. If you accept red pill facts, blue pill moral beliefs will make you reluctant to accept red pill facts, and if you manage to accept the empirical truth of the red pill, while trying to hang on to blue pill morality, it will make your mind sick.

The concept of the logos is the reason and reasonableness of the material world, the will of Gnon working through material cause effect, that morality follows from cause and effect. If one sees the way the world works, and endorses evil as good, it is going to twist your mind up. If you see cause and effect as operating as the red pill describes it, then cause and effect is contrary to blue pill morality, from which you can conclude that world is all screwed up, and possibly kill yourself, or conclude that the world is working in accordance with the will of Gnon, who created Eve has a help meet for Adam, and that blue pill morality is Satanic.

If you do not believe that female emancipation was a very bad idea, was immoral, either you have not actually swallowed the red pill, or else, if you actually have swallowed the red pill, if you find seemingly strange female behavior intelligible and entirely predictable and are aware of fitness tests, hypergamy, and the opacity of female consent, the red pill is going to make you ill.

As a general rule, in most societies at most times, conformity to the official belief system strongly correlates with sanity and good conduct. Obviously in our society, the reverse is the case. Lefties tend to be evil and crazy. I don’t think it is because crazy people are more likely to accept a crazy belief system, because craziness inclines them towards many possible crazy belief systems. Rather, the need to continually deny what is in front of one’s eyes is driving people mad.

One can deduce is from ought, in the sense that one’s rational self interest is to ally with and befriend good people, and to avoid or drive away bad people, but the problem with this rational deduction is that though it provides a distinction between good and evil, it does not provide a compelling reason for oneself being good. If one announces commitment to good on purely rational considerations, one might be announcing this commitment for the purpose of getting someone to cooperate, whom you intend to defect on. One is more likely to succeed in establishing a cooperate cooperate relationship if one frames good conduct as adhesion to a shared tribe led by alpha male, the supreme alpha male, and that ethical behavior is that behavior that follows from the way the world in fact works (by their fruits you will know them) is because the way that the world works is a reflection of the will of that alpha male.

Posted in culture | 748 Comments »

Time for a second Dissolution of the Monasteries.

Sunday, September 22nd, 2019

In French Revolution, they smashed the enforceable apprenticeship system, and in the nineteenth century, the British smashed their enforceable apprenticeship system. After the enforceable apprenticeship system was ended, the quality of workmanship declined with each generation for several generations, as revealed by old furniture.

This was a move to priestly power. The priestly class were seeking to force all children to spend endless hours at Church school. And ever since then education has been getting longer and longer, and sucking up people’s entire youths, when they should be working and having children.

It is time for the Dissolution of the Monasteries.

The priestly myth of education is that there is some magic juju with education, that there is a special magic secret way, and if your kids do not get it, they will be irreparably harmed.

From time to time, drinking their own Kool-Aide, they have experimented with various magic formulae for teaching children, but each experiment produces the null result

On the face of it, this would seem to show that education simply does not work. But this is an obviously absurd conclusion, since it is obvious that when you do stuff, you generally get better at it, and it is obvious that when a child does stuff under the supervision of an adult who is good at that stuff, he gets a lot better at it.

Rather, the conclusion should be that there is no magic special sauce for education, and that priestly education is only good for teaching people to be priestly. If your dad makes furniture, and makes you help, you will get better at making furniture.

The control test for formal education is unschooling and Sudbury school, Sudbury being a school that just does not school children. There are 50 years of anecdotal evidence that the original Sudbury Valley School works very well, at least for middle class kids who are already probably of above average intelligence, and the numerous imitators produce similar results. Also works with parents volunteering in place of staff, which approximates the deliberately less formal and less organized unschooling programs.

Reading surveys of the unschooled, looks like the results are similar to schooling, supporting the null hypothesis, and that the results are better than schooling to the extent that it leads to the child spending a lot of time with adults, and worse to the extent that it leads to the child being socially isolated – that a child learns more spending time one on one with a random adult, than in a class of thirty kids and one teacher, and learns more in proportion as he spends time with several different adults. Bad outcomes occur if the only adult contact is the mother, and the mother does not know much or do much, but even bad outcomes are not conspicuously bad. An unschooled boy who has had bad unschooling is not obviously and radically worse off than the boy who has had good regular schooling. The worst unschooling does not make a dramatic or consistent difference, short of locking the kid in a dungeon and feeding him through the keyhole.

Unschooling is often combined with, or a result of, a theory that children don’t need discipline. If you have an undisciplined four year old in your house he will make a mess, break stuff, and hurt people. Starting at a quite early age children need to be stopped from doing lots of stuff they want to do, and made to do some stuff they do not want to do. Otherwise they will occupy the entire house and leave no room for anything or anyone else, and occupy everyone’s entire attention, and leave no time for anything else. But the priestly class does not have any magical special high value formula for stuff that children should be made to do. Most of their magic rituals are a great big waste of child’s time, when he could be actually learning something, such as learning how to do useful work by actually doing useful work. When kids transfer from unschooling to schooling, as often happens with college, they seldom have any problems catching up on all the stuff that the college kids were supposed to learn, but frequently failed to do so.

There is nothing obviously very wrong with unschooling. Most unschooled kids do OK. If a child spends a lot of time with adults who know stuff, he will learn stuff – but he will learn a whole lot better to the extent that those adults have loco parentis authority over him and he is compelled to treat them with respect. The most educational activity of them all is child labor under adult supervision. It is not that teaching does not work, but that a special cast of priestly highly trained specialist teachers using special magic juju methods does not work. Children spontaneously soak up knowledge from adults like sponges, and they soak it up better if compelled to treat those adults with respect. The rest is details that the priestly class, the educationists, have no special knowledge of or ability at. If the knowledge is around, the kids will pick it up.

In practice most stuff is learned from Joe Random, where Joe is not an educationist, but you glommed on to him because he was good at something you needed to do.

The professor is high status, and he tells people that everyone can be high status, thereby propagating his religion to other people’s children – and producing an oversupply of priests. Throw more money and power at the professor, and supposedly everyone will be affluent and high status like the professor. Probably writing essays on hermeneutic lesbianism in seventeenth century French poetry, and getting master of arts in intersectional basket weaving.

We obviously want to cut off open entry into the priesthood, and cut the priesthood back to reasonable numbers.

Assume an apprenticeship system. We used to have something very like apprenticeship for the officer class. That is a path to high status. We have something very like apprenticeship in the judiciary, with judicial clerks tending to become judges. And then Trump’s show “The Apprentice” marketed apprenticeship as a path to high status in the merchant classes. That was a path to high status. Most people are not going to get high status positions, but a plumber probably makes more money than you do. We are going to get excess demand for apprenticeships to high status positions, and the solution is to filter the applicants for intelligence, diligence, pro social qualities, and good breeding.

We want all kids to learn reading, writing, and counting. Not all of them, left to their own devices, will, but it seems that most will, much as all white kids and most black kids pick up human speech without any elaborate state intervention. It does not follow that we need to incarcerate all kids through most of their childhood and young adulthood. Maybe we should detect and incarcerate problem children, and the children of problem parents, into low status institutions for low status people.

Education obviously works, in the sense that if you practice something, you get better, and if you practice under the supervision of someone who is good at it, you get a lot better. The null hypothesis is not that education fails, but that if you try to bureaucratically mass produce it and make sure no one slips through the cracks, the results are not much different from what happens if kids educate themselves under the supervision of parents and adult associates of parents, that mass produced education fails to produce the expected and hoped for results.

Education is not only “book learning” of various sorts, but socialization. Morals and ethics. Religion. Asabiyyah. Thus, for example, most American children still pledge allegiance to the flag every day. This sort of ritual binds the nation. We can do that for an hour on Sundays, and when people are being hatched, matched, and dispatched. Also various special occasions, such as thanksgiving and Christmas. We don’t have to suck up everyone’s childhood.

Reading old books, stuff written before 1935, it is obvious that the elite and upper class did not think the stuff taught at elite upper class schools mattered. The important thing learned at Eton was sportsmanship and forming social bonds with other upper class kids and social cohesion within the upper class. Some time during the twentieth century, we forgot the joke. People wanted to believe that if you gave everyone the right education, everyone could be upper class. It was said that “the battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton”. In the book “When Worlds Collide”, written in 1932, the author takes it for granted in his character descriptions of upper class characters that that is the elite attitude to education, that elite believed that the sports and ensuing elite social cohesion was what mattered, that the educational material at Eton and Oxford was mostly pointless, not very useful or high status, and that the elite is correct to believe so. The null hypothesis of education is what all gentlemen believed back then. The trouble was that the priesthood running Harvard did not like people to know that truth. And now people don’t.

Classic Chinese, is I am told, a shared body of allusions and in jokes to poetry, history, story, and legend. Looks like the mass production of a shared elite culture, to hold China together against the centrifugal forces of empire. That is a legitimate and useful function of mass education, though cramming is going to give you a shitty elite culture of test optimizing grinds who are not actually all that good at anything.

But teaching engineering does not give you engineers. I know this well, for I was in on the dawn of software engineering, when no one was trained in software engineering and academics had not yet reinvented it as an academic discipline, and I subsequently had to interview no end of people who were trained in engineering by academics. Doing engineering gives you engineers. It is all self taught or learned by apprenticeship. If East Asian grinds think otherwise, they are all wrong.

Posted in culture | 234 Comments »

#ClintonBodyCount

Monday, August 12th, 2019

People who know too much about the Clintons have been suiciding with remarkable regularity, and no one paid much attention, but the suicide of Epstein was just one too many convenient suicides.

Attorney General William P. Barr issued the following statement:

“I was appalled to learn that Jeffrey Epstein was found dead early this morning from an apparent suicide while in federal custody. Mr. Epstein’s death raises serious questions that must be answered. In addition to the FBI’s investigation, I have consulted with the Inspector General who is opening an investigation into the circumstances of Mr. Epstein’s death.”

That there are going to be dual, and dueling, investigations into Epstein’s convenient suicide suggests that Barr, like myself, suspects that the FBI may have given Epstein a bit of help suiciding, in which case he probably also suspects that a whole lot of other people who knew too much about the Clintons may also have had a bit of FBI assistance in their similarly convenient suicides.

Now, everyone is a “conspiracy theorist”.  We are now in the latter days of the Soviet Union, when no one believed the narrative that everyone was required to believe.  Twitter has shadowbanned #ClintonBodyCount.  All other conspiracy theories about the Epstein alleged suicide are allowed, but not the obvious one: that the FBI arranged for his suicide to protect the Clintons and a host of other members of the elite. The suggestion that Mossad murdered Epstein is disinformation from FBI shills, and the suggestion that Epstein is still alive is just nuts. People who know too much about the Clintons don’t get sent to a remote tropical island. If that was not Epstein’s body on the slab, it would be because the real body showed indications of strenuous and violent disinclination to commit suicide.

That the story got out of control reflects loss of cohesion on the left – the crazy left went after Epstein because they deluded themselves he had something on Trump – every major media outlet was loudly announcing a nonexistent Trump Epstein connection, while ignoring the Clinton Epstein connection, and the connections between Epstein and all the usual rich and powerful older and more moderate progressives.  Epstein died twelve hours after this narrative predictably collapsed.

Epstein knew too much about too many important and powerful people. In particular he knew too much about the Clintons.

His continuing usefulness depended on him being pals with Trump, and thus potentially having the goods on Trump. The mainstream media was salivating over the Trump connection. So they put the heat on him to give them the goods on Trump. And then it comes out that though he says he is pals with Trump, though he told his girls he was pals with Trump, they never saw Trump palling with him.

Hence not useful. And, a few hours after this comes out, a few hours after it becomes known he is not useful, there is a convenient camera malfunction and he hangs himself in a room with nothing to hang himself from.

Yet another tragic suicide by someone who knows stuff about the Clintons. But this time, something is different.

Hating whitey is the KKKrazy glue that holds together the coalition of the fringes.  The very white and disproportionately Jewish progressive elite cultivated the crazies, and predictably, like Frankenstein, found themselves unable to control their monster.  The crazy left joined with the sane right to let the Epstein cat out of the bag.  It was crazy for them to do this, and sane for us to do this.

Used to be the left had all the smart people, because they had the elite universities, and they selected the smartest people for the most intense indoctrination, starting as early as possible, and then promoted smart leftists to high positions in the power structure. Recruiting the smartest people, however, led to embarrassing results. If you select the smartest and most civilized 0.1% of whites, and the smartest and most civilized 0.1% of blacks, the smartest black you recruit will be rather obviously dimmer and less civilized than the dimmest and least civilized white you select. For one hundred and fifty years, they have been tinkering with university entrance criteria to make them more inclusive, looking for criteria that will enable more members of under-represented groups to qualify, which tinkering has in recent years become alarmingly drastic as leftism has become alarmingly holy, with the result that elite universities are no longer recruiting the best, the left is no longer recruiting the best. They are recruiting the craziest. All the smart people in the progressive establishment have one foot in the grave. The left has long been the anti white party. It is about to have an anti white face.

Going after Flynn was crazy, and is predictably blowing up in their faces, and going after Epstein was crazy and has predictably blown up in their faces. Chances are that more crazy stuff is on its way.

The Flynn affair and the Epstein affair are good places to start draining the swamp, to purge the FBI of leftists. If Trump gets control of the justice department and the FBI, Trump will have a self coup. Once he has the FBI, if he gets the FBI, social media will then fall.

I have been predicting a Trump autocoup for a very long time, and my predictions have been wrong. I have also been predicting the great wall of Trump for a very long time and my predictions have been wrong. But now construction on the great wall of Trump has started. We now see you tube videos of the great wall of Trump, and it is starting to look great.

Trump is still not in a position where he dares hire Trump loyalists. Hence no one wants to be a Trump loyalist. But the prospect of him, or his dynastic successor, being able hire Trump loyalists, gets closer.

Posted in culture | 120 Comments »

Gay needs to be suppressed

Tuesday, August 6th, 2019

Gay simply did not exist until the late nineteenth century, and when we are in power, they will no longer exist, and people will not quite remember that they ever existed, much as they do not quite remember that pre-2008 Obama was opposed to gay marriage and was born in Kenya, or that before Christmas 1978, the Democrats and every single tenured academic in the entire US government hegemony supported the Khmer Rouge, or at least politely remained silent while his academic institution supported the Khmer Rouge, taught students a pro Khmer Rouge version of recent events, and required them to affirm that version in essays.

Chesterton’s Fence: All functional societies either look down on homosexuality, or altogether strictly prohibit it, executing the offenders, and those that stop suppressing it, soon go into decline. Likewise, all successful religions that last for a long time prohibit it. Those societies that manage to reproduce most fruitfully invariably restrict gay activity.

The reactionary state will in theory throw men who lie with a males as with a woman off skyscrapers, or publicly hang them, or something like that –  something terrifying, deadly, and, most importantly, publicly humiliating.  Without the public humiliation, nothing we do will have the desired effect. No society has ever managed to kill off gays as efficiently as they kill off themselves and each other, thus merely killing gays is of limited effectiveness. It is essential to kill them in a way that lowers their status.

In practice, however, we should only do that to people who obstinately and persistently shove the gay in our faces despite lesser punishments and lesser humiliations, because those are the ones that cause problems.  If gays stop shoving gay in other people’s faces, if gays let us pretend that they do not exist, things are fine enough, even if a whole lot of bad things may be happening behind closed doors.  We don’t need to poke our nose behind everyone’s door.  They would love us to pay them that much attention, and we would fail their fitness test if we did pay them that much attention. We do need to poke our nose behind the doors of people who are ostentatiously shoving the gay in our faces, and use what we find as an excuse to throw them off a tall building so that they will damn well stop shoving the gay in our faces.

We need to terrorize gays, not into not existing, which would require far too much terror, and give them far too much attention, which attention they would enjoy far too much, but we need to terrorize them into allowing us to pretend that they do not exist, as successful societies routinely pretended.  Our ancestors knew that sodomy happened, but denied that those involved were attracted to males.  Rather, they assumed that those guilty were attracted to concave surfaces, or concave surfaces that were part of children.  They did not quite forget the joke (after all it is right there in the Old and New Testaments, so it is hard to forget) but did not quite remember it either.

This post stolen wholesale from this excellent comment, which reminds us of Chesterton’s fence.  All societies that survived suppressed homosexuality.  Failing to suppress it presages decline and collapse.

So why do societies that tolerate gay then collapse?

Signalling Hazard: If you allow gays, David cannot love Jonathan. If David cannot love Jonathan, hard for the mighty men of David to stick together. If the mighty men cannot stick together, the state cannot cohere. If the state cannot cohere, you get anarcho tyranny, a thousand Kings three miles away instead of one King three thousand miles away.It’s just no longer possible for men to hang out with each other, especially in intimacy, without the lingering suspicion that something of the “poop-dick” variety must be going on. Gay destroyed men’s friendships. It used to be possible for men to walk together down the street and even invite each other for sleepover without anyone having the faintest suspicion that anal sex is involved. To have successful cooperation, we have to be able to meaningfully bond with each other, but meaningful bonding is absolutely impossible when signalling “I love you bro” translates to “I want to fuck your ass.” Without gays in society, we would be able to express legit affection and signal brotherly loyalty to each other, and without the nagging need to perpetually explain that we are “no homo.”

If gays are free to speak, I am not free to speak. “Just bake the cake, why don’t you.” If you tolerate homosexuality, you must tolerate free speech by gays about sex and sexuality, whereupon you cannot, in practice, tolerate free speech by straights about sex and sexuality

“Multnomah County Library offers a series of programs called Drag Queen Storytime. These events seek to explore ideas of difference, diversity and inclusion through stories, music and costume. The library serves a diverse population with a broad range of interests, preferences and needs. We strive to reflect our communities’ needs in selecting programs, books and other materials.”
Evidently biblical marriage and the heterosexuality of old movies is not “diverse”. If men dressed as women having sex with small boys in public on the Multnomah County Library floor are officially incuded, Perseus rescuing and abducting princess Andromeda must necessarily be officially excluded.

Normalizing perversion inevitably leads to and requires abnormalizing normal male sexuality. Thus normal male and female sexuality (men conquer, women surrender, but men perform and women choose) can no longer be depicted. You cannot depict the Han Solo of the original Star Wars movies or the original Indiana Jones any more. A society that allows homosexuality to be depicted is unable to to allow heterosexuality to be depicted, except by having the heterosexuals act gay, as for example in the recent star wars and avengers movies. If society makes space for gays act gay, it cannot allow space for straights to act straight. If gays are included, straights are necessarily excluded. There is no room for both them and us. For us to have room to be ourselves, we have to deny them room to be themselves. Even in porn, you will not see female submission to the conquering male realistically portrayed. You have not seen male conquest and female surrender since “McLintock”, and “Gone with the Wind”. What you will see portrayed is males and females following the gay bondage domination and submission script. Bondage domination and submission is a hateful gay parody of the inherent inequality of the courtship dance, as drag queens are a hateful gay parody of femininity. You are not allowed to depict Han Solo hitting on Princess Leia If you were to attempt to create something like the first Star Wars movie today a whole lot of men and women with no children will complain that depicting men and women following very different mating strategies, (men conquering and women surrendering, men performing and women choosing) is oppressive. If those complaining get declared normal, I get declared abnormal. There is no room in the world for both them and me, for they will not permit room in the world for Han Solo, Indiana Jones, Rhett Butler, and McLintock. A world with no room for heroes has no room for me. If it is legal for gay to exist, then it is illegal for me to exist. It is legal for a person who identifies as a man to have sex with a person who identifies as a woman, but it is illegal for me to act as men act with women, as men and women in old movies acted. It has proven impossible to include gays without excluding straights.

Denormalization of biological families: Whenever homosexuals are allowed, they inevitably argue, “We are normal, just like everyone else. We should be allowed to have kids.” And when they do get children, what happens? For one, the children grow up in confusion about what normalcy is and what it isn’t, leading to dysfunction later in life as they try to make sense of the world. Secondly, state and society face endlessly weird, even absurd, “Clown World” dilemmas in dealing with homosexual “families,” e.g. when homosexuals fight over custody over children donated by sperm or egg or adopted. Thirdly, the traditional family unit itself is wholly unraveled as the door is now opened for whatever bizarre sort of household one can imagine: “Why can’t transsexuals be parents too? My single mother has already transitioned to a single father and Xe still loves me!” and so on and so forth. And fourthly, allowing sex freaks to raise children is prone to result in sexual abuse, whether it’s diddling by gay “parents,” or anti-testosterone hormonal torture by lesbian “parents,” or growing up in a whorehouse attended by fetishists of every shade, hue, and color.

Consent Culture: Women don’t really like consent. They prefer “It just happened”. If consent is defined as normality, then biblical marriage is defined as abnormality, as a crime. Consent culture makes Paul’s first Epistle to the Corinthians 7:3-7 crime instead of law. If consent defines what sex is right and what sex is wrong, this effectively abolishes marriage, making it hard to reproduce. Women don’t like to be beaten and don’t consent to be beaten, but they like men who might beat them regardless of consent, like men who will take them sexually regardless of consent, and sometimes, some women, some of the time, will make you prove it. It is not that women want to be mistreated, but they want to be alone and in the power of a man who might well mistreat them, or alone with him, his minions and his numerous concubines. Under these circumstances, “No” is merely a fitness test. Gays invert this by consenting to being beaten. BDSM is a hateful gay parody of the inequality characteristic of normal sexuality and of divinely ordained biblical marriage. As Drag Queens get off on an ugly hateful gay parody of femininity, BDSM gays get off on an ugly hateful gay parody of biblical marriage. In order to attain sexual liberty, the LGBT crowd have signed off on “consenting adults” morality. Hence their enthusiastic embrace of whatever the latest installment of Feminist dogma is, without which they would be condemned as “rapists” by the Feminist system. Perverts benefit from Consent Culture, because it allows them to do as they please (“consenting adults”) while preventing evil privileged heterosexual men from forming stable families with young women. Thus, all homosexuals regardless of political affiliation adhere to the Consent Culture Feminist dogma. Consent means that a drag queen can have sex in public with a six year old boy on the floor of Multnomah County Library, but Perseus cannot abduct Princess Andromeda. If drag queens get to molest small boys on the floor of Multnomah public library, then I do not get to abduct Princess Andromeda. If it is legal for drag queens to molest small boys in public on the floor of Multnomah public library, then it is illegal for me to marry in accordance with Saint Paul’s letter to the Ephesians 5:22-33, First Peter 3:1-7, and First Corinthians 7:3-5. If we don’t throw gays off tall buildings, or hang them in public, or something similarly terrifying and status lowering, then they make biblical marriage illegal, making it difficult for us to have children. We have to suppress them, for if we fail to suppress them, they suppress us. If they get away with secretly having sex with small boys behind closed doors, that does not cause problems for us, assuming it is fatherless boys, which it always is, but if they can get away with having sex with small boys in public on the floor of Multnomah public library, then we cannot get away with divinely ordained marriage. We have to stop them, so that they cannot stop us.

Diseases: Gay sex is unhealthy, and moreover, the typically promiscuous habits of most gays—triple digit partners are par for the course among the vast majority of them—vastly exacerbates the spread of venereal diseases. STDs, particularly the serious ones such as AIDS, are essentially a homosexual phenomenon, though it’s also shared by other degenerates and reprobates that choose to come into regular contact with them. Gays, whose sexuality is undiscriminating and impulsive, and who are prone to heavy drug use (they do condom-less “chemsex” orgies with complete strangers), are the petri dishes of humanity, carrying assorted manifestations of God’s wrath. Like rats, wherever they go, disease follows; thus homosexuals, especially when unrestricted, are a public hazard. Furthermore, through their normalization of queer practices (cunnilingus, anilingus, etc.) among normal people, and through bisexuality, the gays have managed to infect some members of regular society with their abominable filth, which infection is useful for the gays, as it allows them to scare-monger society about the diseases that they themselves spread! Then they ask us taxpayers to invest resources into solving their sicknesses. Gays, knowing full well that they’re disease-ridden, steadfastly sought to receive the “right” to donate blood.

The ever increasing rage and repression directed against men attracted to fertile age women, and men to whom young girls are attracted is a displacement activity for the rage which ensues when people are forbidden to notice, and forbidden to prevent, gay sexual activity with eight year old boys. Because the state of Florida dares not stop drag queens from having sex with small boys in public, the State of Florida gives a mandatory five year sentence if you induce a woman who looks twenty two, but who is actually seventeen years and nine months, to send you a naughty selfie on Facebook Messenger, even if you have never met her in person and had no way of knowing her age. Going after straight men interacting with fertile age woman is displacement activity that they engage in because they cannot do what they inwardly wish to do, punish gay men having sex with eight year old boys, just as they punish men in the vicinity of misbehaving women because they cannot do what they inwardly wish to do, punish misbehaving women.

We seek to restore young arranged marriage. The homosexuals and their leftist supporters will viciously fight tooth and nail against arranged marriage, because “What if someone is gay?” In a society in which everyone is assumed straight, gays being either all dead or hiding deep in the closet (or not born in the first place), there is no such problem; but when gays are tolerated and accepted, and their presence is constantly celebrated, then any attempt to restore arranged marriage will be met with fierce opposition and cries of “Not everyone is heterosexual! Therefore, you oppressive bigots need to allow people to voluntarily choose their sex-mates, and only upon reaching fully mature adulthood!” – thus, modern Liberal Marriage. Gays are heavily invested in sexual liberalism, in allowing all adults to consent to sex with all other adults, and to withdraw consent to sex at their most frivolous whim, hence rampant divorce and defect-defect equilibrium. Liberal Marriage is absolutely incompatible with the reactionary program to make real young patriarchal marriage legal and easily attainable again.

Shamelessness: The behavior of gays is lacking in shame, a trait for which they’ve been infamous from time immemorial; they proudly wear their deviance on their sleeve. Whereas a normal person doesn’t parade around his sexual proclivities, the gays constantly shove theirs in everyone’s face. When gays are present, the atmosphere itself becomes gay, because they keep broadcasting their gayness in broad daylight. They emit an incessant sexual noise, forcing the rest of us who are naturally averse to faggotry to seek refuge from it, psychologically or physically. Can you imagine straight men parading around giant sex toys and so on?

Perversity: It’s extremely common for homosexuals to possess plethoras of aberrant fetishes, which, like their “main” deviance, they also seek to normalize. The BDSM world (gimp suits, sexual torture, etc.) is inextricably linked to gays, who pioneered it, and who were embraced by it. They relish dangerous, risky sexual behavior that leads to harm and death. Gays host scat parties in which the participants shit diarrhea and vomit on each other; they are fond of various sexual gratification toys that most normal people want nothing to do with; they are often sexually attracted to prepubescents, even toddlers (nepiophilia); there is the whole queer “furry” thing; and in all aspects, their sexual behavior is abnormal and depraved, bearing no resemblance to that of most heterosexuals.

Subversion: A fundamental political problem with homosexuals is that they always seek to upend sexual mores and morality to make them as favorable as they can be to their own death style. One can say that this is understandable and sympathize with it, but why exactly is it in society’s interest to abandon its own healthy ways to cater to the deviant desires of sexual minorities? Homosexuals never cease trying to converge everyone and everything to their death style, hence why they insinuate themselves into sundry political movements and undermine the dominant, pro-social morality therein in order to suit their special agenda. They attempt to turn all political and cultural niches incompatible with homosexuality to “gay friendly” – and, if that doesn’t work, they frantically endeavor to destroy said niches.

Homosexuals generally don’t conform to natural sex roles, because faggots are effete and dykes are masculine; consequently, they have long been the most vociferous and ardent advocates for turning all social institutions – and, indeed, society itself – into “sexually neutral” domains. They champion the entry of women into the workforce and oppose patriarchy and patriarchal marriage for that reason; they support coed education and coed workplaces; they want women to have authority over men; Homosexuals and Feminists share the same goals, and needless to say, there’s great overlap between these two categories. Most feminists are ugly childless lesbians, and the rest become cat ladies when they are no longer hot enough to bang musicians and criminals. Effete men want to be allowed to do whatever women traditionally do, and masculine women likewise want to be allowed to do everything men traditionally do, thus gays and lesbians are deeply embedded in Feminism, particularly the “classical” Feminism of giving women “equal rights.” Homosexuals as an integral ingredient of the Feminist poison. Long before gays parodied marriage by marrying each other, preparatory to winging each other while searching for nine year old boys to transexualize, lesbians made heterosexual marriage gay, in the name of the rights, freedom, and safety of married women, which rights were demanded by women who were single and unlikely to ever get married.

Infertility Normalization: Homosexuals usually have little to no children. The omnipresent celebration of the LGBT alphabet soup has resulted in a normalization of singlehood and childlessness; it’s no longer possible to say in polite society that reproduction is good and lack of reproduction is bad, because, among other things, of “homophobic overtones.” Whenever we critique low TFR, we critique a condition that is part and parcel of the gay death style, one that incessant propaganda, particularly aimed at young women and nerds, propaganda often produced by actual fags, has successfully transmitted to the entire society. By being loud, proud, and childless, and by attaining high status in society, the gays have turned childlessness into a “legitimate life choice,” indeed, as many leftists will tell you, a preferable choice than breeding. Homosexuality marches shoulder-to-shoulder with anti-natalism.

Gays are annoying. Gays predate on straight men constantly; they are offensively extroverted (gays) and aggressive (lesbians); their manner of speech is disgusting; their body movements are always exaggerated, ostentatious, and sexually non-conforming; they always manufacture more drama than they are worth. Their character’s virtues-vices ratio is horrible, as they possess more vices than one can count, and little to no virtues. Everything about them signals “Bad News.” They are also extremely petty and politically domineering, hence their going specifically after nice Christian bakeries and forcing them at the government’s gunpoint to “Bake the cake.”

Lack of Pair-Bonding: It is normal for humans to pair bond. This is another aspect of basic human decency which is conspicuously absent in faggots: They switch life (death) partners without the tiniest bit of attachment to anyone who came before. It’s just a “mood,” you see? Every day, nay – every hour, can bring someone new to take the place of the previous “sex mate.” Gays are never “couples” after the heterosexual model: They are always inexclusive friends-with-benefits looking for a novel sexual sensation. Deep affection and amorous loyalty are altogether foreign to their mentality. This has ramifications for normal society, as gays – especially during the Baby Boomer generation – have contributed their part to normalizing divorce, swinging, and promiscuity.

Disinhibition: Again, they just can’t help themselves: They constantly sexually harass normal people, and have absolutely no control over their own aberrant inclinations. Their behavior is wholly impulsive and high time-preference; they are unable to refuse drugs, unable to refuse condom-less sex with AIDS-positive strangers, and usually unable to plan anything ahead – they “live for the moment,” and as one would expect, die young. They are entirely controlled by Satan.

Cultural Marxism: The Frankfurt School Cultural Marxists and the like-minded Freudians have pioneered and disseminated advocacy for homosexuality and various bizarre sexual behaviors. These guys hate us and intend our destruction, therefore anything and everything they advocate is intended to destroy us.

Bad Aesthetics: Homosexuality is viscerally repulsive. Knowing that the dude right next to you engages in anal sex with men is vomit-inducing. Beauty is truth, and evolution has instilled in us natural aversion to the unhealthy; we can tell ugliness and vileness when we witness them, and instinctively know to back away and stay away. Those whose instincts don’t tell them to avoid homosexuals have something wrong with their brain-wiring and/or brain-structure. By tolerating gays around, society makes itself disgusting. While this alone may not be, and may not register as, a sufficient argument to ban the gays, it does point us to a valid field of inquiry: Why does homosexuality intensely trigger our healthy disgust reflex? Of course, beyond it being a dead-end reproductive strategy, it’s also a recipe for quick premature death from disease; it’s also eerie, like seeing mutants, androids, or cadavers, alerting us that something is terribly wrong. Gay is in uncanny valley, and our aversion to uncanny valley is generally healthy.

Leftism: Homosexuals are naturally prone to leftist politics, as leftism is, by no means exclusively but in substantial part, a project to normalize the abnormal for this or that reason; being abnormal themselves, homosexuals are automatically inclined to support general left-wing causes, be it race-denialism, socialism, Feminism, and really any form of artificial egalitarianism or war by the unsuccessful against the successful. Notice how homos constantly blame everyone else for their afflictions, instead of examining their own behavior; so no surprise they’re in a coalition with like-minded anti-civilizational forces against civilization. Gays are pro-black, pro-brown, and pro-Muslim. Muslims hate gays, but gays like Muslims because Muslims hate us. Gays inherently and naturally tend to treason, so need to be excluded from power, and, more importantly, excluded from status, for if gays are high status, treason is high status, and if treason is high status, it appears that treason prospers, and if it appears that treason prospers, then treason will prosper. Gay status is the overthrow of King, Crown, Throne, Altar, and the massacre of our soldiers.

Objectively Aberrant: Homosexuality is a natural dead-end. If a man is attracted to other men, and is not attracted to women, he is not very likely to pass his genes forwards. It’s an evolutionary death sentence.

Slippery Slope: “acceptance” of gay has led to Gay Marriage, normalization of “sex change” disfigurement, Drag Queen Story Hour, and so on. Once sodomy is tolerated, a Pandora’s Box from Tartarus full of Hell-spawn is opened, and other perversities follow suit. For example, cuckoldry, which cuckolds now call “polyamory.” Presumably, one reason that some people support faggotry is because they themselves are perverted in some or other way, and by clamoring for homosexuality to be normalize, they seek to thereby open the door for their own perversity, as with World War Tranny.

Confusion: Just generally, having gays around creates endless confusion about what is sexually normal and what isn’t. People are being bombarded with all kids of nonsense about “orientation” and “gender identity” and so on, and some are lost in the confusion and can’t sort out what is going on. We seek to usher in clarity: People need to know what is expected of them and where they are hierarchically stationed. Homosexuals disrupt clarity, bringing turmoil and vagueness into both day-to-day life and into the political scene. Being neither fish nor fowl, being sexually inverted, they’ve intentionally proceeded to insert “queerness” into manifold aspects of life, from clothing to school curricula to 56 different sexual identifications on Facebook to whatever else.

Preference Politics: The homosexuals have made it impossible to discuss sexuality in a logical way, because sexual politics have been marred by “preference politics”: The idea that your political objectives correspond to, and merely boil down to advocacy for, your personal sexual proclivities. Thus, when I say “Attraction to 13-year-old chicks with boobs is part of normal healthy male sexuality,” most readers automatically assume that I have a “fetish for jailbait,” and will call me “hebephile” or “ephebophile” for it; I will then have to spend ages explaining that my own preferences (or lack thereof) have nothing to do with it. Since gays are all about preference politics, politics in service of a specific sexual preference, people assume that all discussions of sexuality must likewise necessarily revolve around preference politics. Yes, it is frustrating to be unable to say “It’s normal for men to be aroused by 13-year-olds” without people assuming that I, personally, have a specific fetish for 13-year-olds, and am saying what I’m saying solely due to my own personal fetish. That “This person is engaging in preference politics” is now most people’s null hypothesis is the result of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and so on similar perverts forcing themselves on normal society. Even though gays are a tiny minority, they soak up all the cultural space, leaving no room for straights.

Hypersexuality: Gays are hypersexual, and invest tremendous efforts acquiring more and more sexual experiences, to the exclusion of other pursuits. Their excessive lust leads them, and whoever is politically influenced by them, to prioritize gay sex above e.g. scientific-technological advancement and cultural creation. The faggot’s quest to attain ever greater sexual pleasure takes precedence over whatever else he wants to do, so often they end up doing nothing else but cruising for sex. Individually, that’s self-destructive; on the political level, it results in gay parasitism, e.g., gays using our tax money to subsidize gayness, instead of other things. By and large, homosexuals are not “also gay,” but rather, are “gay above all else.”

Biological Leninism: Another reason that the homos support left-wing causes is because of Biological Leninism: Since their status under normal circumstances is low indeed, gays attach themselves to and promote whatever political faction that promises to artificially raise their status. They are natural members of the left-wing coalition, and are status-invested in maintaining the Cathedral, for without the Cathedral’s elevation of the gays, they would rapidly lose their social prestige. They may not rank as highly as transsexuals and abortionists on the Progressive Totem Pole, but under any healthy system they’d be absolute pariahs, or dead, so they side with the Cathedral. Moreover, they need a Cathedral to normalize homosexuality through “point deer, make horse,” i.e., by collectively and unanimously pretending that homosexuals are totally normal. Without the Cathedral, people will once again notice that the deer is not in fact a horse – that gays are not anything remotely normal.

Pedo-Hysteria: Hysteria about “pedophiles” is in large part a consequence of Gay Liberation, as many homosexuals have a distinct preference for prepubescent boys. The current witch hunts against “pedophiles,” which result in multitudes of normal heterosexual men getting sent to the slammer for bogus sex-crimes, is facilitated by both the presence of homosexuality in the social atmosphere (leading to the invention of the “pedophilia” anti-concept) and by actual homosexual predation on boys who are often prepubescent. Pedo-hysteria doesn’t allow us to notice that Humbert Humbert doesn’t creep into the bedrooms of 9-year-olds, but that it’s the other way around. Furthermore, LGBT politics are fundamentally hostile to male sexuality and to heterosexuality in general, because inherent to LGBT politics is a re-definition of normalcy to exclude old-fashioned normality.

Priests vs. Warriors: Homosexuals give power to the leftist priesthood, the lawyers, the judges, the professoriat, official science and the official mass media, and in turn are supported by the leftist priesthood, because acceptance of homosexuality rests on rule-by-priests. A society ruled by warriors does not tolerate faggotry and male effeminacy, so faggots are naturally inimical to warrior rule and to warriors; they feel much more comfortable when society is ruled by priests, and are adept at playing holiness signalling games. Any Priesthood not explicitly anti-homosexual sooner or later becomes homosexual. Hence the problem with the Roman Catholic priesthood.

Conspiracy: Gays always conspire, form secret cliques and secret clubs, as for example the band of perverts now running the Vatican, which gives them leverage over those not in the know; that’s one way in which gays acquire power. Their conspiratorial behavior makes them dangerous, because in order to govern effectively, the government – which is fundamentally a conspiracy – needs to eliminate other conspiracies that vie for power. Government being a conspiracy, it should be the only conspiracy in place; thus, by having secret societies, the gays undermine the government, and it’s in the interests of the ruler to uncover the gay cliques and to eliminate them.

Cosmopolitanism: Homosexuals are atomized individuals not invested in the prosperity of their tribe; generally leaving no descendants behind them, being genetic dead-ends, they freely associate with members of other tribes, and form alliances based on homosexuality, rather than on ethnicity, or geography, or religion. They are outsiders and outcasts within their own societies and among their own ethnicities, so they tend to ally themselves with other outsiders and outcasts, and with any global power promising to advance their agenda, perceiving their in-group to include fellow gays and perverts, and to exclude most everyone else.

Suicidal Ideation: Gays are not only apt to self-destruct, a quintessential feature of their psyches; they also flaunt their self-destructive proclivities before everyone else, seeking – and, through propaganda in the media and in the entertainment industry, succeeding – to normalize suicidality. They are sick, morbid people, and they spread their morbidity around; misery doth love company. By making suicidal ideation “cool,” they have wreaked damage to whoever absorbed that idea and became depressed, dysfunctional as a result. By inflicting their suicidal ideation and self-destructive modes of thinking and behavior on the rest of society, they have further reduced the fertility of all those malleable to be influenced by fashion, which is now determined by gays. The TFR, and overall happiness and satisfaction in life, suffer under the homosexuals’ cultural domination; gays aggravate civilization’s downward spiral.

Tags:
Posted in culture | 120 Comments »

Marriage

Sunday, July 28th, 2019

The core of the reactionary program is to make marriage legal again. Without marriage, the higher races cannot reproduce successfully, and reproduction is dysgenic.

Leftist marriage, modern marriage, is gay. Marriage has been gay since 1928.

Obviously reactionaries must reintroduce marriage that is suitable for heterogamous organisms, and we will have to introduce it as a matter of faith and morals before we can introduce it as a matter of law.

The left offers your wife cash and prizes for destroying the family assets, destroying you and destroying your children. The lawyer and the marriage counselor will tell her she is oppressed, and she can get a court order that gives her cash and prizes, raises her status, and will result in her marrying a six foot six billionaire athlete with a dong the size of a salami.

Modern marriage is gay. Everyone who gets married gets gay married. If your wedding vows are symmetric and interchangeable, the same of the man as for the woman, your marriage is gay and you are being gay married.

If your wedding has a master of ceremonies or a priest who acts like he, rather than the groom, is the big important man at the wedding, that he is the alpha male, your wedding is gay, and you are being gay married. (And the master of ceremonies is usually gay, and if he is not gay, he thinks that two males pretending to marry each other with the intention of cruising for nine year old boys to transexualize is smart and fashionable.)

The wedding organizer appoints a gay master of ceremonies whose main job is to define the groom as Homer Simpson, to emasculate him in the eyes of the bride. The minister conducts a gay wedding ceremony that treats the bride and groom as equal and interchangeable, even though experience has demonstrated that wives will not tolerate househusbands, and will invariably leave a domesticated man for a wild man who beats her, rapes her, and rapes and beats her husband’s children.

The worst thing progs did ever was remove “Honor and obey”, “submit and reverence” from the marriage ceremony.

The book of common prayer purged the wife’s vow to honor and obey and purged Paul’s letter to the Ephesians 5:22-33 in 1928. That, not female suffrage, was the worst thing ever, effectively abolishing marriage.

One household necessarily has one captain. If the wife does not promise to honor and obey, to submit and reverence, you are not actually getting married, because you are not actually forming one household, so no point in the ceremony, and, surprise surprise, people stopped holding the ceremony, just as they stopped turning up to Church when the pastor started telling them their husbands were Homer Simpson and if you showed up at Church you were likely homophobic.

We have to restore the marriage ceremony to what it was before first wave feminism.

The marriage ceremony needs to include “honor and obey”, and it needs to once again include Paul’s letter to the Ephesians 5:22-33

  1. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
  2. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
  3. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
  4. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
  5. That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
  6. That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
  7. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.
  8. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:
  9. For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
  10. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
  11. This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
  12. Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.

And once again include the first epistle of Peter 3:1-7

  1. Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;
  2. While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.
  3. Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
  4. But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.
  5. For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:
  6. Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.
  7. Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered

And we also need to have 1 Corinthians 7:3-5, though the book of common prayer does the same thing in a different way:

  1. Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.
  2. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.
  3. Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.

Because without the obligation each to sexually gratify the other, no marriage.

The need to bring marriage back implies a familist movement will look awfully like a religion.

Another important aspect of family is eating together at the same time. Everyone, kids, wife, and guests, holds off from eating until the patriarch says “Amen” then they all eat together. Grace is a ritual that ensures that everyone eats together and that presents the alpha male as backed by the ultimate alpha male, God. Women inherently like their alpha male to be backed by a bigger alpha male, and they are astonishingly comfortable with being assigned to another man by a higher alpha.

So any effective familist movement necessarily has religious rituals that are going to qualify it as a religion. But, like the Masons and progressivism, will probably have to pretend that it is not a religion.

On the other hand, to inculcate the appropriate attitude in women, to make the rituals work, have to tell them “God says do it this way”, which kind of gives the game away.

OK, if God is three and God is one, familism can be a religion and not a religion. If AA can be not a religion, familism can be not a religion.

The Anglican Church died, as the Congregational Church died as a Christian movement long before them, and the Roman Catholic Church is dying in the west. The Pope defends priests having gay sex in a great big pile by saying “consenting adults” and “Global Warming”. Well, if Global Warming is the great moral crisis of our times, why should anyone show up at Church. And they don’t. And if the Church abolishes marriage, why should anyone get married. And they don’t.

The Christian and biblical position is that Christians are kin by adoption and by marriage, that Christians are adoptively the children of God, and the Church is the bride of Christ. So when the pastor abolishes marriage and attacks the authority of the father and the husband, he saws of the branch on which he sits, and it looks to me that every Church dies after it abolishes marriage, though its death takes a bit over a century. The longer ago they abolished marriage and the family, the longer ago they died. Congregationalism was the first to abolish marriage and the family, and the first to go.

We want a synthetic tribe, because we are detribalized. God backing dad comes in mighty handy for making the family a family, particularly for making people eat meals at mealtime. And God comes in mighty handy for promoting ingroup cooperate/cooperate equilibrium by making people kin. These two functions of God seem to be connected in practice.

It is recorded that Christianity spread in the early Roman empire in large part through conversion of women. It is also recorded that marriage had collapsed in the early Roman empire. I suspect these two facts are connected, that Christian marriage may have been a familist movement in the early Roman empire. Similarly we notice that today white female Christian converts to Islam are overwhelming fertile age single women. Roman women converting from dead paganism to live Christianity in the Roman Empire may well have been similar to white Christian women converting to Islam today. They are joining a synthetic tribe where the ultimate alpha male will assign them a husband and ensure that they have a family. While the ultimate alpha male of today’s Christianity is going to give them a “season of singleness”.

If we look at the marriages depicted in the bible, they are all marriages in which the top alpha male assigns the woman. Which is what women want, even if they don’t know they want it.

In Genesis, God, the ultimate alpha male, marries Eve to Adam.

Abraham, a powerful alpha male who successfully made war with kings, marries Rebecca to Isaac. Rebecca is not consulted until afterwards, and Isaac is not consulted at all.

In the book of Ruth, Boaz is a powerful male who is the top alpha in the environment where Ruth is working. Ruth sneaks into Boaz’s bed while he is drunk and sleeping, asks Boaz to marry her, and appears to believe he has authority to perform marriage on the spot. He declines to do so, saying he has to resolve some legalities first but they spend the night together anyway. In the morning he goes off and successfully resolves those legalities, and later assembles witnesses and marries Ruth. Ruth’s mother in law (Ruth is a widow and the adoptive daughter of her mother in law) gives the bride away. Boaz, a powerful alpha male, is the one who presides over this ritual, not a judge or a priest. The elders witness, but they don’t emcee. If Ruth is present at this ritual she does not speak, but before the ritual she had plenty to say to her mother in law and to Boaz in private.

Chicks like the man who is throwing a party, because he is top alpha at the party. As “Setting the Record Straight” tells us, game boils down to three simple things.

  • Pass her shit tests
  • Don’t show weakness
  • Dominate other men

It is obviously optimal for marital harmony if the wife always sees her husband in social contexts where he is top alpha. When you throw a party, other alpha males act at the party as if you are the top alpha, even if in other social contexts you are not. So having someone else preside over the marriage is not a good idea. Marriages should resemble the marriage of Boaz and Ruth – unless the bride actually is being assigned to someone else by a powerful human alpha, as tended to happen during the early days of Australian settlement. If we look at first millennium Christian doctrine on marriage, it appears that marriage is a sacrament performed by the husband with the priest being wedding organizer, rather than presiding over the wedding. Existing Catholic doctrine is that marriage is a sacrament performed by the husband (which was very recently re-interpreted as the husband and the wife), but the priest presides over the ceremony, with the husband not being the alpha male in that context. Anglican doctrine back in the days when it was actually functioning as a religion is that marriage is and is not a sacrament. The articles say it is not a sacrament, but the preamble given by the priest in the book of common prayer treats it as a sacrament, and in the ritual the husband performs that sacrament.

He takes the brides hand, and

With this ring I thee wed

And then the priest tells the congregation what just happened, describing it terms that make it sound mighty like a sacrament performed by the husband. So, marriage is a sacrament or something very similar performed by the husband. And we know from evolutionary theory, PUA theory, and PUA empirical observation that this is in fact what women want – which suggests that the husband, rather than the priest should preside over the marriage, with the priest acting as wedding organizer and second in command at the party.

To get women to collectively behave better, women have to be informed as to what behavior is good.

Depict wives and children interacting with husbands and fathers the way they were depicted on television and movies after 1933 and before 1963. That will inform them. We cannot do that till we are in power. But while out of power, can restore the marriage ceremony to what it was before 1928: Wife promises to honor and obey, husband promises to love and cherish.

And let us go back a bit further, nine hundred years further. Husband administers the sacrament of marriage. Technically he still does: Takes wife hand. “With this ring I thee wed.” Places ring on finger. But that has been heavily played down for many centuries. It was a big power struggle in the Church of England after Henry the Eighth. They keep trying to make the marriage contractual (“I do”), when it should be sacramental (“with this ring I thee wed”). Women really hate contractual marriage. Contractual marriage is failing a shit test right at the starter’s gun.

We also need to restore the tradition that is implied in the story of the wise and foolish virgins, where the husband mock abducts the wife to a big party which he emcees, and everyone at the party treats him as top alpha male. Abduction, or else someone with family authority over the bride gives this woman to this man, leading her to the man. “Who giveth this woman to this man?” Women do not really like consensual and contractual marriage, hence the need for the bride to be given away or abducted.

Tags:,
Posted in culture | 246 Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »