When a phone is held in the normal orientation, upright, the screen is much higher than it is wide. This is because it is designed for the normal use case, where one person is talking to another person over the phone. A person is, roughly, a rectangle higher than he is wide.
When, however you watch a movie, the screen is much wider than it is high, and you have put your phone on its side. And this is because, in a good movie, you are watching a protagonist interact with what is in the movie, not with you, so he is almost always on the left or right third of the screen, and the remaining two thirds of screen are what he is interacting with.
Your phone is the shape that it is because its primary use case is showing someone talking to you, and the movie screen is the shape that it is because primary use case is showing someone dealing directly with events in his life, not talking to you about them, and not giving you a lecture.
If you watch a progressive movie, which is always a very bad movie, you will notice that the protagonist is frequently in the centre third of the screen, directly facing the audience, and you could throw away the left third and right third and not lose much.
When this happens, the character in centre third is a writer avatar for the writer as professor standing at the pulpit giving the wicked stupid inferior students a lecture on their sins.
This is because whoever is speaking is an insert character for the writers, and they don’t actually care about story, plot, the heroes journey, and all that, they just want to tell the audience that the audience is horrible, hateful, and should just go away and die. So even though the character is ostensibly talking to other characters in the movie about events in the movie, he is facing directly at you, speaking directly to you, and the subtext of what he is saying is always that you are wicked, no good, despicable, and inferior because you are not leftist enough.
SheHulk was an infamous example of this, because she said it so plainly. There is usually a bit more deniability.
Hollywood executives and video game companies have finally realised that that audiences don’t like political lectures. So they tell their staff, who are gay men and childless women “Cut the politics”. And the staff do as they are told, yet still the movie is the writer lecturing the audience with complete disregard for story and plot.
Elio is a wonderfully bad example of this.
As originally written and originally filmed, it was a coming out gay movie about an eleven year old boy. And it is all a character, primarily Elio, in the center third of the screen, ostensible speaking to another character, but he is facing directly at the audience, so he is actually a writer insert lecturing the audience directly, the professor at the pulpit.
And, in the context of the original movie the subtext of what he is saying is that we, the audience, are very bad people because we don’t let men fuck little boys. Elio is bitter, angry, hostile, unhappy and resentful, his life disrupted and destroyed, because we don’t let men fuck little boys. You, the audience, have terribly damaged and hurt poor little Elio.
To my audience, this might seem a little bit over the top, open demonic evil beyond parody. You are out of touch. Obama recently gave us the same lecture, and received very little pushback. This was a completely neutral non political movie by current year standards, and Havel’s Greengrocer finds nothing odd or disturbing.
Well, Disney, your family values movie producerđ, showed this movie to test audiences in its original form, and, surprise, surprise, to their genuine surprise, the audience did not much like a two hour political lecture in favor of letting men fuck little boys. It was not that they disagreed with the totally non political message, which was completely political neutral in that it is totally in line with the values of “””the modern audience”””. Being good Havel’s greengrocers, they all totally agreed with and supported the movie message one hundred percent. It was just that no one wants to pay to be politically lectured for hours.
So Walt Disney took out all the gay stuff.
But despite the purge, the movie is still Elio speaking directly to the audience telling the audience that he is angry, unhappy, and resentful, it is just that the audience now has absolutely no idea what he is angry and resentful about.
Hollywood was always the mass propaganda arm of the Cathedral, but when the Cathedral took it over directly, they wrote as a professor composing lectures for the laity, not as writers who want to entertain.
When the King took over Shakespeare’s Globe, we can infer from the stories of Shakepeare’s plays, and from what happens when a King stages a play within one of Shakespeare’s plays, that the King would give him one plot point, or one aspect of one scene, and then let him get on with the rest. The Kingly plot point of Shakespeare’s series of four plays on the Wars of the Roses was that even if you have a wicked, weak, and incompetent King, to overthrow him would open the gates that anyone could be King, with dreadful consequences, and we should sympathise with a King who has lost what is rightly his, even if it is largely his own fault. And all the rest is clearly the untrammelled voice of Shakespeare, except for the excessively heavy handed demonization of Richard the Third. King James took charge of the best writer he could find, and let him write.
But the Cathedral fired anyone who could write, because anyone who can write can notice things he is not allowed to notice, and gave us the professor at the pulpit lecturing us.
I enjoy Anton Petrov’s science lectures on YouTube, but when he’s on screen, his head is always in the center, blocking our view of the thing he’s talking about. Should he move over to one side, or is his format correct for delivering a lecture?
Also, I wish niggers shooting video of a crowd of niggers nigging would hold the camera horizontal, though I find this hard to do without pressing the side buttons or getting my fingers in front of the lens.
It is the correct format for delivering a lecture, but the wrong format for reviewing information. In a physical lecture, the lecturer has the screen or whiteboard or whatever behind him, and then steps away from his lectern so that he is no longer blocking the view, and turns to one side.
In a video review of information, the reviewer brings up the the data on his screen, and then puts his actual screen on the viewers screen, with a small window on the left or right bottom corner, similar to your selfie view while video conferencing, or a reaction video. And then he mouses over his screen. When Anton Petrov is delivering a lecture, he should be centre screen, with the image behind him as background, but from time to time should be a talking head in the bottom right corner, with his actual studio or what looks like his actual studio behind him in his small square and his mouse on the main image.
Things have been getting physically bad in Syria. And on a Civ-comfort basis even in the West now, soon to be going more broadly physical there too.
https://x.com/realMaalouf/status/1946161112908714112
Human field of view is roughly 4:3 so basically a circle. So called wide screens are completely retarded.
Why do you think so? People looking at something keep moving their eyes all the time
It is more comfortable to flick your eyes from side to side horizontally, and you have more range of motion horizontally, reflecting an ancestral environment where it was more important to scan one’s surroundings than the ground beneath your feet or the sky above your head. So wide screens that are considerably wider than your field of view horizontally, but only a little wider than your field of vew vertically, make a lot of sense, as in the common setup of three identical monitors arranged in an arc. You will notice a lot of minipcs around with three video outputs for this purpose and video cards with four outputs like NVIDIA RTX 2070
No they do not make any sense at all when watching movies or anything like that. And if you bother to pay attention you’ll notice that whatever is important is at the center.
Wide screens only make sense for computers used for CAD and the like, where you have tools at the side, and, big surprise, your work at the center.
Not common. That’s used in some particular cases and certainly never to watch movies.
Furthermore, I’m not even sure the field of vision is even 4:3 since the retina must be circular – the eye lenses surely are circular.
But hey, whatever absurd craps sells must be the absolute truth.
Searched you tube for classic scenes from classic movies. Protagonist is always left third and or right third, usually right third, and the action is in the opposite two thirds, and your eyes are expected to flick between the protagonist and the action.
As for example Wizard of Oz: Somewhere over the Rainbow. When Dorothy is singing to the audience, she is center screen, but as soon as she starts interacting with her dog, she is right third, dog, is left third.
Godfather killings: Killer is right centre third. Your eyes are expected to skip horizontally between him and the target.
If the protagonist is talking to people in general, including the audience, he is centre. If he is doing something with someone or something, right third.
When Captain Louis Renault in “Casablanca” proclaims he is “shocked, shocked, that gambling is going on in this establishment”, centre screen. When he gets his winnings or extorts sexual favors, right third.
“The original screen ratio for TV broadcasts was 4:3 (1.33:1). This was the same aspect ratio as most cinema screens and films at the time TV was first sold commercially. 1930s and 1940s films in 4:3, such as Gone with the Wind, have always been displayed on television in 4:3, filling the entire frame.” (duh)
The source is wikigarbage, but I think it can be “trusted” with that kind of thing.
Regarding the movies you mention, first question is were they filmed in 4:3. If that’s the case, then they don’t matter since they conform to the natural aspect ratio.
As to movies that use wider formats, they don’t prove anything either except that wider and wasteful formats can be used but don’t achieve anything of actual value.
If you are transmiting information from a screen from to a human, then 4:3 is the most efficient format. This is a case of impedance matching.
And like clockwork, Brown Toast starts a thoroughly pointless dispute based on ignorance and delusion. It’s like you don’t even care what the topic is, or whom you’re debating, you just have to be right about something which means “proving” someone else wrong.
TV always had two major broadcast standards, as anyone who ever watched British TV or played a European video game release can tell you: NTSC and PAL. NTSC, the North American standard, was 4:3, later the same as a VGA monitor. PAL, the European standard, was 5:4, the same as Super VGA. So even way back when dinosaurs roamed the earth, there was no golden rule, no universally agreed upon “best” aspect ratio.
And movies were a completely different animal. Typical film aspect ratios were 2.35:1, 2.55:1, or even higher. Transposing these to VHS tapes was frequently a nightmare of “Pan and Scan” that everyone, studios and audiences, all hated. The 16:9 “HD” ratio on which the industry later standardized was a relatively successful attempt to eliminate the necessity of pan-and-scan and use letterboxing instead, while still remaining largely compatible with the old 4:3 and 5:4 SDTV ratios.
Clearly, the silver screen was better optimized for passive viewing, since theaters could afford to spend exorbitant amounts on their projection equipment compared to the modest price of an old CRT TV. Those TVs, like the CRT monitors that came later, had serious technological limitations. There were widescreen CRTs, eventually, decades later, but they were very rare; the crown jewel was the Sony GDM-FW900 which, if memory serves, actually had a 16:10 aspect ratio but could work with 16:9. This 24″ beast retailed for $2000 in the year 2000. Imagine paying $2000 for a computer monitor, 25 years ago! It was a king’s ransom; normal people could not afford wide-aspect CRTs, and widescreen did not become affordable until the switch to LCD.
There was also a brief transitional period of “Rear Projection” CRT TVs with 16:9 aspect ratios, but it didn’t last very long because they were also hideously expensive and not very durable and look terribly washed out unless viewed in a totally dark room. Some people swear by them for retro gaming, but even today one would be considered a luxury item.
If you actually lived through those days, or could be bothered to read and comprehend any of the history, it would be painfully obvious that technological limitations were temporarily holding back the broader deployment of wider aspect ratios that consumers actually wanted. It was absolutely not a plot by evil capitalists to sell us inferior products at a higher price point. 4:3 wasn’t some perfect ratio, it was an arbitrary decision made due to material constraints and organizational inertia (many still cameras used 4:3).
And if you want absolute positive proof of this, just look at the “aspect ratios” of many of the most famous paintings made centuries before any of these electronic doodads ever existed. “Landscape with the Fall of Icarus” – 1.5. “The Last Supper” – 1.9. “Water Lilies” – 2.1. “Place de la Concorde” – 1.5. “The Large Bathers” – 1.45. A lot of these close to the IMAX ratio of 1.43 which sits between the old 4:3 and new 16:9, some considerably wider than any TV.
(Note, I’m not saying wide paintings were the most common; 1.3 (the 4:3 ratio) was also pretty common, square was common, portraits were common, the point is that 16:9 (1.78) has never been some crazy wide aspect ratio that people don’t like or can’t handle. That’s completely retarded.)
Two monitors placed horizontally next to one another is about the most common setup found. horizontal:vertical ratio in such a set-up tends to be about 3:1 if not even 4:1.
This is nonsense. Human field of vision is around 210 degrees horizontally and 135 vertically. Color vision for humans is only 2-3% of overall vision, for example the two illusions in the following link which require you to focus on the dot in the center wouldn’t work if people had full color vision – https://medium.com/sketch-app-sources/can-you-believe-your-eyes-38ba29421426
Human field of view is far larger than what is occupied by a TV or a monitor at typical distances, thus comparing the field of view to the screen doesn’t make much sense in the first place.
The world with which people have always interacted with, is way wider than taller and relevant information in games and movies is also more horizontal than vertical.
Ideally, they would offer the same view as if you’re looking through a window, but that isn’t viable for a typical TV or a monitor, you’d need a large simulator setup instead.
Games have to account for motion sickness and how much of the game world is relevant to the player, so the typical game fov is significantly higher than what a window of the same size would be, thus producing a distorted image, but the human brain can handle the distortion with no issues.
No it is not. Your eyes can turn that far, but you cannot actually see anything clear a few degrees from where your eyes is momentarily looking. It is just that your eyes very rapidly flick over a lot of different directions.
You have about one twenty degrees of peripheral vision, but only six degrees of clear central vision. At the normal distance of a monitor, you can only read a small part of the monitor, about five or six words wide at most, and at the normal distance of a movie, only see one face at a time.
This isn’t about turning your eyes around. Even if you focus on a point, which prevents your eyes from darting around (saccades), you can still easily notice things happening at the edges of your vision to the sides of your head, which is something that’s very easy to test. The fovea is where a high density of color sensitive cells is located, but is not the only vision humans have and the periphery is very wide.
These are both true, but Jim is talking about practical matters while you are nitpicking about textbook facts.
Technically, yes, the human field of vision can be as wide as 220 degrees. However, it is not uniform. Each eye covers 95 degrees in its own direction but only 60 degrees in the opposite direction, so 120 is roughly the limit for stereo vision. Outside that, no depth perception and limited object recognition. Moreover, anything beyond about 90 degrees for either eye is strictly “peripheral vision”, where you can perceive motion but not static detail.
Peripheral vision is little more than an early-warning system for potential predators, the idea being that if you perceive something moving that isn’t supposed to be there, you physically turn your head to focus on it and figure out whether it’s really a threat. Motion perception is a lot more sensitive than static perception; that’s also why you can detect a tiny gnat flying past you, but actually tracking its position in flight is usually hopeless.
Try holding your phone or a book at a 90 degree angle from your eyes, and reading from it (reading being primarily an object-recognition task). You can see the physical object clearly enough, but there is no way you can actually read the text without turning your head. Even at 70-80 degrees, you have to shift your eyes; you cannot read at that angle while looking straight ahead.
We have a very wide theoretical field of vision, but most of it isn’t useful to us, most of the time. The useful field is the stereo field, the field that both eyes can see at the same time, which is about 120.
The very conversation started with “Human field of view is roughly 4:3”, not central vision/foveal vision and my initial reply was to White Bread and stated “comparing the field of view to the screen doesnât make much sense in the first place”.
The very conversation started with âHuman field of view is roughly 4:3
Human field of view is not roughly 4:3, in that it is completely obvious that comfortable eye movement is far wider than it is high, more like 5:2
So, on the clearly incorrect assumption that you were raising an irrelevancy, I assumed you were talking about foveal or peripheral field of vision — which is not relevant either.
Obviously we move our eyes over the screen a lot, and the field of vision for comfortable eye movement is far wider than it is high.
But your original comment was an irrelevant digression from the topic of the post, presented in the tone of an indignant correction, for the relevant image for a lecturer giving a lecture is 9/16, hence a phone screen, or character occuppying the central third of the screen, with the rest of the screen irrelevant, while the relevant image for a story is 16:9 or greater, with the character occuppying the left or right third of the screen, normally the right third, and things or people he is dealing with the other two thirds.
It was also dead wrong, for the relevant field of view for big screens is comfortable eye movement, which is far wider than it is high.
>Human field of view is not roughly 4:3, in that it is completely obvious that comfortable eye movement is far wider than it is high, more like 5:2
OK, maybe my wording wasn’t accurate enough so let me get rid of any ambiguity.
Field of view of the human eyes is 4:3. Of course the eyes can move but the field of view of the eye doesn’t change. Likewise people can turn their heads to the sides and up and down, but the eye’s field of view does not change. You wouldn’t project a movie partly on the ceiling arguing that people can just look up would you.
So if you are watching a movie on a screen in front of you, which is how movies are watched, anything outside of the 4:3 frame requires wasted effort or won’t be even seen because of the very nature of moving pictures.
Which is completely irrelevant to the post, for the field of view useful for watching a characters face as he shoots or punches someone is not large enough to see both expression on the face and the direction of the gun at the same time, nor large enough to read the text you are interested in and see the mouse pointer at the same time. Your eye is continually moving over a computer screen, and even a phone screen.
So the relevant field of view is not that of the eye, but of comfortable eye movement. Which is more like 5:2
Eye field of view is not large enough to see a story, and even lines of text are often wider than field of view. Your eye has to move.
If the movie is telling a story, rather than delivering a lecture, then your eyes must continually flick between the primary character on the right hand third of the screen, to the events and situation he is dealing with, the story, on the left two thirds of the screen.
When the primary character is monologuing, then he is centre screen, and everything outside 9:16 is wasted.
which is why phones are normally held in their 9:16 position when talking to someone, and in their 16:9 screen rotation position when watching videos.
Now they are moving towards 1:2 and 2:1, which is an improvement once you have enough pixels on the screen.
And why multimonitor high end workstations are 7:2 arranged in an arc. Because you have a lot of pixels in a high end workstation output, you want a lot of eye movement, hence 7:2. Similarly iMax movies have, or should have, an aspect ratio of 19:10, close to the 2:1 of a high end phone being used to watch a video.
The reason high end workstations go with such an extreme ratio is that you want to see over your desk. You also care about what is behind the monitors. If you are facing wall mounted monitors, people go with an aspect ratio closer to 5:2.
Are you confusing White Bread’s posts with mine? Telling me “Human field of view is not roughly 4:3” makes no sense, since that was not only a claim I never made (White Bread did), but one that I clearly disagreed with and the very point I was addressing. I’m also pretty sure he pulled that number out of his ass.
I said “The world with which people have always interacted with, is way wider than taller and relevant information in games and movies is also more horizontal than vertical.”, yet your reply seems to be to someone who did otherwise.
If in some alternative universe verticality was more important, the configuration of human eyes and all relevant downstream consequences would have looked very different.
Agreed. I confused you with white bread. sorry. We have been talking at cross purpses.
It seems I made the same mistake, interpreting the series of posts as nitpicking over the 120-degree approximation as being either much wider or much narrower than the normal field of vision.
If it was actually a response to moldy brown toast’s gibbering lunacy about the absolute perfection of 4:3 then I think we’re all in agreement (regarding him being a mental midget and an all-around crank who is wrong half the time and Not Even Wrong the other half).
I present to you “Left Mysticism”, and yes it’s stupendously on-topic:
“It’s easier for them to believe that reality is wrong, rather than their prejudices.”
I implore that you try the Based Camp (on YouTube) discussion “Kamala Won In The Real Timeline”.
It’s about “The 4AM Club”, a bunch of long-Covid cat ladies who believe that, at 4am election night 2024, we jumped from the “real” timeline — where Kamala won, obviously — to this “false” one where she didn’t.
(Note this perfect “inversion” of the “4am divine intervention” that Jim predicted for election night 2020, which was that Biden might just come to “win” at the last minute by some crazy stroke of luck, like by receiving more votes than there were voters.)
They’re kinda-sorta like Q-Anon, but not really. Q-Anon was a bunch of (spurious psych-war) claims on what was “actually” but secretly true in THIS reality, while The 4AM Club’s schtick is that Evil Orange Magick caused us to jump into the wrong fucking UNIVERSE. Not a “different” universe, but the “wrong” one.
I submit that this, too, is Globohomo losing its soft power. MLK’s arc of history is no longer bending toward justice. Globohomo’s dreams just aren’t coming true anymore. Hollywood’s “manifestation account” is overdrawn and its checks are bouncing.
It’s not cute, though. This kind of FEELING and CONVICTION must be where real genocide acts FROM. Eliminating the un-believing heretics and Kulaks becomes NECESSARY not merely for one’s team to win, but to restore reality itself to what it actually and rightly “is” and should be.
This must be the true spiritual marrow of bloodthirsty revolution.
Jim’s told us that the devoted left doesn’t even believe that reality is real, and NOW I feel that I finally understand him.
For example, doesn’t this help explain the Ukraine hysteria?
Putler hasn’t merely cured Covid, disarmed NATO and banned anal sex triumph parades. He’s made reality WRONG, so for us, making reality RIGHT again deserves everything and everyone we can possibly throw at it.
This is how it must feel when you’ve lost your soft power, and all you have left is one last magazine of hard power. So go all in, bet everything on green and roll reign-of-terror for six, because the eschaton is worth any price, “for as long as it takes”.
It’s the equivalent of a lifelong habit of putting your fingers in your ears, shouting LALALALA I CAN’T HEAR YOU, only to slowly realize that it’s getting harder and harder to drown out those horrifying outside noises.
They are only acting like that bc they are trying “rustle out the alpha” as Jim put it.
Ie, act like annoying retards so that some alpha comes out, gives them a proper spanking and then sets about owning them so they can produce babies in a safe environment with a strong, capable patriarch managing them.
Lysistratic Mass Shit Testing intensifies.
It feels like I glitched into an alternate reality a few days ago. On YouTube single mothers are wailing, “Trump cut my EBT from $2500 a month to $38. How are thirty-eight dollars supposed to feed my eight kids with six different men?” They say their Section 8 is getting chopped too.
My simple plan to save a dying currency is, suspend payment on the national debt, print just enough money to pay the men with guns, and tell everyone else to get a fucking job. Is Trump actually doing this for real? I guess (((they))) figured out that if the USA becomes Argentina, Israel becomes Islamic Palestine.
I don’t buy it for a second. Let me guess, there’s a GoFundMe link on it too? Sheeeeeeit. What I can imagine, though, is H1-B’s fucking up the welfare system so badly that it just brownouts from time to time.
That said, what a powerful way to whip up the red base that would be, September-October-November 2028. EVERYONE hates Welfare Sow Shaniqua (except a few Democrats). Ukraine can keep the missiles if TikTok loses EBT.
What’s even more amazing is how these women boast that no one in their family has ever had a job, that reliance on the government is a family tradition, and taxpayers owe them a decent living. It’s like they’re writing Trump’s campaign commercials for him, or they’re paid actresses.
From the Wall Street Journal in 2015:
Read that again, ladies: Single mothers are expendable. If your country gets into a real war, your make-work government job and all your welfare benefits will be zeroed immediately without debate. A state in peril needs men who can fight, not women who can vote.
it’s true I used dark sorcery to win it for bad orange man muhahahaha
The Russian revolution is always fascinating, not because the communist take over but the collapse of the tsar monarchy and society , how leaders who find themselves trying to preserve their society against forces of entropy.
This substack article discusses the leaders of the white volunteers army and their action in the civil war
https://www.theconundrumcluster.com/p/elon-musks-reddit-retard-rebellion
It discusses Elon musk and his party but the interesting bits are about the the white army leaders Anton Denikin, pyotr wrangel etc
The article make the argument that political inexperience among other things resulted in
defeat of the whites, but my understanding is because they did not have cohesion , everyone was working by himself , even wrangle , the best of them, said
> Wrangel publicly condemned all efforts to subvert Denikinâs authority and stated, correctly, that coups and mutinies were not how succession should happen in a military organization. In times of war you have to obey your commandersâ orders. Thatâs how hierarchical organizations work. If everyone is off doing their own thing, it becomes impossible to get anything done at the scale required for successâŚWrangelâs pleas for good order fell on deaf ears as the White Armyâs front collapsed.
Another one about the whites leadership
> However, the various White armies formed to oppose the Bolshevik coup suffered from a profound political retardation. They could not agree on what they wanted, who was in charge, how they should act, or that they even needed to have âa side.â It is truly sobering to realize just how many unforced errors the Whites, who could and should have won, made as the Bolshevik freight train hurtled towards them.
> White leadership primarily consisted of military leaders who brought with them the assumptions of a military hierarchy and Russian society that no longer existed. They were ruthless when a light touch was required, passive before events that demanded a response, tolerant of obvious liabilities and needlessly hostile to potential allies, stubborn about all the wrong things, demanding of the impossible, and just fundamentally unable to make something work.
On the other hand trotsky and the bolshevik
where on lockstep anyone who deviated or even suspected of deviation was eliminated, the bolshevik were always the best at routings out shills and spies because they used it the most.
I think everyone should read this article, not for the author comments on Elon but the white army comments .
There are some great revolutions that are religiously NOT discussed in any popular history. Let’s brainstorm shall we:
Russian Revolution (during and post WW1)
German Revolution (post WW1)
The “Bonus Army” and “fascist” thing in pre-WW2 USA
Khmer Rouge Cambodia
(etc.)
A course in Revolutionary Studies, through a game-theory, red-pill, JQ and WQ lens would be just amazing.
âThere are some great revolutions that are religiously NOT discussed in any popular history. â
It is actually discussed, they just run a cover for it either it was not that bad ,
the numbers was exaggerated by counter revolution, it happened and was good thing , I remember reading about liquidating the landlords in china during mao and you could feel the glee and blood lust in the writing , and this was Wikipedia.
One thing about leftist is they canât help themselves but write their atrocities, because they think future generations, who of course gonna live in leftist utopia will be so grateful to know how they did it.
Even today they just could not help themselves as during the infamous zoom call about 2020 election steal.
The entire history need to be written from reactionary point of view. People today are ignorant of history not because the donât read it or history is boring , is just that the progs version donât make sense and contrary to people experience and just a long lecture about how the reader is bad and not grateful enough for all the wonderful things leftists done in history to bring the glorious modern enlightenment age.
If it wouldnât for old reactionaries like Carlyle , de Maistre etc progs would have won history.
The French revolution never used to make sense to me. The school history version is something like:
– People were mistreated under kings
– They righteously revolt and guillotine the royal house
– LibertĂŠ, ĂŠqualitĂŠ! No more kings!
– … They install another king, hell, even an emperor
Then you read about the state of the royal house and about the reign of terror, and it becomes obvious: this was weakness devoured by the new elite. And the new elite, unable to organize themselves, found themselves swept up in a leftist singularity that guillotined anyone for anything. In their horror they looked for anyone to save them, and they found Napoleon. That he became yet another king, even an emperor, no one cared about, because no one really cared about that in the first place, save for leftists wanting to rewrite history.
My eighth-grade history teacher, whom I highly respected at the time, recounted to his class, as a historical fact, the droit de prĂŠlassement.
That’s terrible. Droit de prelassement has to be up there with Prima nocte in terms of commie propaganda.
Part of growing up is realizing that most if not all teachers are midwit priests whose claims to fame are a couple of memes that put them slightly ahead of the leftist zeitgeist.
What is droit de prĂŠlassement supposedly I’ve never heard of it?
Neither had I, but looking it up it refers to the “apparent right of feudal lords to cut open their serfs and use their intestines as a foot warmer during cold winters.”
To absolutely no one’s surprise, first mention of this supposedly ancient right was in 1789.
Bah the absurdity of lefties, they should have just said either that lords had power of life and death over serfs (not true in law but mostly true in practice it took a lot before they finally went after Gilles De Rais and Elizabeth Bathory, and in Japan it WAS true in law) not make up some absurd law like the ancient right to warm themselves on serfs entrails.
Literally “right of relaxation”. Also “right to relaxation”.
A man has a right to relax when he comes home from a day’s work, but that’s not what the French dirigisme has in mind. They mean universal basic income and eons of mandated vacation, as a way to loot in an orderly fashion what others produce.
Russia’s 1905 revolution is suspiciously aggressively eclipsed by the 1917 revolution. I think most Americans don’t even know about it.
I don’t think the 1905 Revolution is hidden. Even the role of the Universities is not played down all that much.
The basic problem of the Russian monarchy was that the universities were promoting an enemy faith, and the Tsars accepted that faith — a faith that made them illegitimate. The lacked spiritual sovereignty. Should have installed old type Throne and Altar Christianity in the universities and made it a requirement that professors were Christian, married, had children, and believed that the capability of a Republic to function without disaster requires moral fibre in the elite that is frequently lacking, while a monarchy can limp along tolerably well despite a considerable amount of wickedness (tyranny being far less grievous than anarcho-tyranny, one king three thousand miles away being far better than a thousand kings three miles away) and a virtuous monarch can create a virtuous elite, which is extremely difficult for a republic.
The Holy Roman Empire worked quite well, because it was not actually an imperium, but more a hodge podge of states, mini states, and micro states that were effectively independent unless they got into actual war with their neighbours. It fell because some states were too powerful, and they could blow off the emperor. The emperor should have backed partition movements against his dangerously powerful subjects, cutting the heads off the tall poppies. To righteously do the required poppy cutting, requires a Throne and Altar faith in which the dangerously centralising propensities of Throne and Altar are mitigated by Localism. Roman Catholicism was dangerously centralised and centralising, which was in conflict with the way the Holy Roman Empire was ordered. Should have killed the Pope for coveting that which is Caesar’s.
Fifty one state departments of education are much less dangerous to the president than one Federal Department of Education.
Maga is laying off employees of the Federal Department of Education. Should be executing them, as the Holy Roman Emperor should have executed the Pope and the dangerously powerful clergy.
“Should have installed old type Throne and Altar Christianity in the universities and made it a requirement that professors were Christian, married, had children,”
College educated people tend to marry late, and have few children (K-selection). Christianity promotes early marriage and as many children as possible, no matter what the consequences (r-selection). The fish will always rot at the head.
K-strategy only makes sense in a world where resources are scarce; in times of plenty, smart people should switch to an r-strategy so they don’t get outbred by morons.
This is further complicated by the fact that humans mature very slowly, so it’s hard to gauge what the resource situation will be like in a dozen years when today’s babies become ravenous teenagers.
Thus the Christian teaching to trust God and make lots of babies is not a bad idea.
Exactly so.
There has to be a patriarchal memeplex in power to allow for the successful coordination of reproduction, particularly among the higher races that have coevolved with patriarchy; disrupting that memeplex leads to cessation of reproduction. Once a heretical form of Christianity, or a demon wearing Christianity as a skinsuit, took over the Universities and mutated into Progressivism (the story of Harvard), coverture and old-type marriage were abolished throughout the Anglosphere, and consequently reproduction ceased. Tinder, which provides every woman with infinity mating options, is just the final nail in the coffin.
Hence, the higher races are on track to be replaced by niggers, sandniggers, and other colorfuls (also, to degenerate themselves as the lower elements outbreed the higher ones). Kicking these all out back to their home countries will be excellent, but the root problem is Progressivism’s memetic domination and contagion.
You’re officially admitted into the “LURK MOAR” club.
First, you’ve repeatedly posted long blocks of non-English text after being politely but firmly told to stop. Second, you spent the last few days posting weird glowie shit subtly encouraging the most pointless of vigilante violence. And now you’re dusting off an old and busted normie-con meme to deploy against Christianity and religion in general. Do you have rocks for brains?
I’m almost as tired of hearing about “r/K selection” as I am about the so-called “mouse utopia” experiment that no one can replicate and probably never happened at all. r/K isn’t a real theory; it’s a straw proposal, like the Three Laws of Robotics, a deliberately oversimplified model intended as a learning aid and a jump-off point for students doing actual research in the LHT and evopsych fields.
The way in which you are using it is based on the essays of Anonymous Conservative – you know, the paranoid schizophrenic nut who spends most of his days ranting about being personally gangstalked, despite his near total irrelevance? Although from a quick glance, maybe he’s quieted down on some of that and shifted gears into being a normal garden variety social media junkie.
Anyway, we could have all been forgiven 12 years ago for not knowing he was a loon, but there’s no excuse for that anymore. The guy stumbled on the theory somewhere, probably Wikipedia, and became utterly fascinated and totally obsessed with using it to explain absolutely everything, despite it capturing all the nuance of a “two kinds of people in this world” movie cliche, and never having been designed or intended by its creators for any real-world analysis. AnonCon’s application of it was lunacy then, and it’s lunacy now, we were just all a little more naive back then.
r/K is descriptive but neither prescriptive nor predictive. You can talk about where something sits on the r/K spectrum, just like you can talk about which animals are blue or which apartments are on the 3rd floor, but in doing so acknowledge that it’s a totally arbitrary categorization that you presumably have some practical use for at the moment, but doesn’t reveal anything important about the nature of ourselves or our environment.
And when you arrive at conclusions like “ah, the defining trait of leftists is that they are breeders” or that “r/K selection suggests Christians are inferior because they have too many kids”, that’s when you know you’ve internalized a suicide meme. (No, not a meme about suicide, but a meme that kills those who hold it, like a gazelle deciding it wants to be friends with the lion.) That is the point when normal people with healthy minds look at what they just wrote, and think “hey, wait a minute, what did I just write?”
If your logic leads to ridiculous, impossible or suicidal conclusions, either change your logic or reexamine your priors. Specifically, elite fertility is not an “r/K” problem, it is a problem of the ruling ideology. In a feminist or even feminized culture, breeding is low-status; and in a culture where being high-status requires fervent belief in obvious falsehoods, all the smartest and most capable individuals are going to be low-status and lose out on breeding opportunities. That, and not some r/K silliness, is the reason the west is struggling.
Greetings,
Humungus understands.
This is like when Humungus takes center screen demanding gasoline in return for safety. Humungus as addressing the audience not the compound and after the fall, I will do just that.
Your gasoline in return for your safe passage.
The gay Jewish demon worshippers running the Machine Cult are still promising the masses that they will be able to directly connect their brains to the internet using brain chips which will allow people to download and/or project an infinity of information from the internet directly into their brains – all within this century.
There’s little cure for a lack of common sense.
Now, it might be possible in the future for the Machine Demon to read and interpret your brain waves and then e.g. show on a screen content relevant to those brain waves. But that has nothing to do with information being transferred from the internet into the brain – the direction of information transfer is the opposite.
Agreed, that you will not be able to download integrated knowledge directly to the brain (a la The Matrix helicopter piloting program) any time soon, if ever, but this doesn’t exclude more intimately pipelining sensory information directly to the brain, bypassing natural sensory organs, and mapping to existing qualia. E.g pipelining a video directly into your brain, bypassing your eyes, or mapping external infrared video cameras directly into your visual cortex. Pretty much the mission profile of Neuralink. Also the possibility of “external” memory (offline storage, lol). For example a running video record of your entire life that you can access by date and time and plumb replay directly into your brain.
But how? To create this visual hallucination in the brain, the brain will need to be able to decipher this input — translate some stimulus coming from the machine into the desired visual hallucination — and I don’t see, if you pardon the pun, how the brain can biologically do so. Not saying it’s absolutely impossible, but what’s the mechanism?
Not happening.
Again, using which biological mechanisms can the brain translate 000011000101000110000110000011011000 into memory? It’s utter bullshit. We don’t know how memory is stored in the brain, and if we ever figure it out, it will take a long while to translate memory into 000001111010011100000. But the opposite process is absolutely not biologically possible, meaning the pipeline in this regard will only ever be brain -> computer and never computer -> brain.
How can the brain directly decipher the content saved/playing on the computer and make any sense of it whatsoever?
Crude, but demonstration of concept.
https://projects.research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/en/horizon-magazine/restoring-sight-blind-cutting-edge-brain-implants
Interesting. Still very crude, and I don’t believe it will ever advance to e.g. memory transplantation. But perhaps the brain is able to decipher some types of stimuli from the machine.
Yes, no memory transplantation. You’ll just have to replay external memory thru existing qualia again, just like watching old video tapes. Any new *memories* will just have to be created the old fashioned way.
So you cannot interface directly between pixel data and mind qualia. The mind has some new and very different stimuli that it has to figure out.
This is vastly less than even “pipelining a video directly into your brain, bypassing your eyes” You can pipeline something into the brain, but it is not a video, for the first steps in the conversion of stimuli into qualia happen in the retina.
Allegedly, this is a large protest in Kyiv at the moment against the Coke Gnome:
https://x.com/RepMTG/status/1947777633586159856
Will be interesting to see how he reacts to it. Over the past few months, I’ve seen footage of his goons being 86ed on the street but am ignorant of the overall situation for the locals.
He is being given an off ramp from the world stage. A non-egomaniac would seize the opportunity to say, “Okay, let’s have an election,” and the war would probably be over soon thereafter. But an egomaniac (particularly one receiving orders from kikes with an ethnic grudge against Slavs) would fight until the very last Ukrainian. Zelensky is the latter, so the protests will likely be crushed and he will continue ruling tyrannically. Which will give Trump further justification in the name of DEMOCRACY to just drop the client; doing that will lead to Ukraine collapsing and to Zelensky’s long-overdue execution or assassination.
“He [Zelensky] is being given an off ramp from the world stage.”
I doubt he’ll get one. He knows too much. If he manages to dart off to Brazil or wherever, he’ll no doubt die “suddenly” and “unexpectedly” very soon after.
In fact I’ve been going on the assumption that he knows this, which is why he won’t surrender to Russia. His life expectancy is measured in picoseconds once he’s no longer useful to the GAE.
Putin will have to bust him out and save his life. He can have the dacha next to Snowden’s.
But how in the hell could they arrange Z’s eastward escape plan without the Azovs or whoever catching wind of it and bumping him off? Answer that question and you’ll deserve — not win but deserve to win — the Nobel Peace Prize.
Burner phones must be ringing all over Kiev, London and DC right now.
“Tell us everything, Volodymyr, and we’ll set you up with a nice dacha on the Black Sea. Otherwise I’m afraid I cannot guarantee your safety.”
BTW, a movie about a team of Spetsnaz guys or whatever extracting Zelensky from his current situation would be a great flick.
After the 2014 coup, it was suicidal to protest against the government. If it is now safe to protest, the US has abandoned him and wants a new leader.
Someone has told Zelenksy’s security forces that protesting Zelenksy is now now OK, and that someone is unlikely to be Zelensky.
This is not a protest against the war. It would appear that either every single Ukrainian supports the war, or, more likely, anti war protests are still off limits.
This protest is sponsored by some elements of the Ukrainian government against other elements of the Ukrainian government.
I imagine that a war of attrition in the Pacific would not be possible in the same way as a war of attrition in Eastern Europe. If China can achieve missile/medium drone supremacy, it can fight a war of logistics where it simply destroys all shipping to Taiwan or the Philippines. The islands of the Philipines could supply one another with small boats but supply chains with the rest of the world would be much more vulnerable. Maybe submarine shipping could close the gap. Island nations seem very exposed in light of the current technological level of warfare.
BTW as we know women in power are 99% of the time at best empty pantsuits (exceptions are more common with female monarchs) but it seems Trump surprisingly got lucky with his spymaster Tulsi (an ex dem to boot) being not only loyal (and i did expect shed be loyal her disgust for the democrats seemed sincere) but she seems so far shockingly effective beyond what I ever would have hoped for.
What explains this shocking aberration.
I have no answer but I also find this interesting. That she called the treasonous conspiracy against Trump in 2016 exactly that, “treasonous conspiracy,” and referred the case to the DOJ, is a serious repudiation of leftist impunity. She’s picking a fight with them instead of wussing out.
My ultimate wank-porn fantasy is that Obama himself is arrested and put on trial over this. And the left comes to regret setting that precedent with Trump. Low probability, but suddenly it doesn’t actually look impossible. Maybe someone in the Trump Admin gets that we simply can’t allow a world in which Republican ex-presidents can be indicted and arrested, but Dem ex-presidents can’t be.
Realistically Trump will probably spare Obama but want to arrest his entire inner circle around this especially the man i consider the worst evil in the American state during Obamas time, Brennan.
“No one is above the law.”
Trump’s team posting an AI video depicting Obama’s arrest is a wonderful move. Most likely it is bluff, but that’s the beauty of Trump: there’s always a small chance it isn’t.
Even if the Trump regime shoots 10 million leftist its unlikely he does anything to Obama… Trump is eager to keep the idea of presidential immunity around and in his mind if anyone violated that its more Biden (and whoever was running him which is still opaque and it seems like a clique of people) than Obama. Trump is more likely to go after a lot of other people and force Obama to testify against them, after all he can’t plead the 5th he had presidential immunity…
Biden obviously had no idea what was going on, and the people who were running him do not have presidential immunity. So all the crimes of the Biden presidency can be prosecuted.
Well they don’t have the receipts on those yet… though Biden’s crimes (meaning the crimes of his regime) were IMHO far worse than Obama’s. Obama wanted moderate boomer gay race communism lite. Biden’s people wanted full Pol Pot gay race communism.
“Even if the Trump regime shoots 10 million leftist”
Needs to take out more like 60 million, I’m afraid.
Imagine NBC Nightly News calmly reporting that six hundred more Democrats were arrested and hanged for treason today, and no one says, “wait, don’t they get a trial or something?”
What exactly has she done, or avoided doing?
Sincere question, as I’ve heard nothing about her performance from either the legacy media or any alt/social media that I follow.
Shes been very effective in purging the IC you hear about people getting fired all the time (particulary mass firing the members in the IC faggot porn chatroom, yes this was a thing); she also got the receipts on Obama Brennan and the Russia plot.
Here’s Ace of Spades HQ on it: https://ace.mu.nu/archives/415722.php#415722
Just to be clear, there’s nothing that everyone here doesn’t already know, but that she called it treason and pushed this on her official Director of National Intelligence account – not her personal account – is significant. Also she called for prosecution of the people involved. The Old Media is freaking out, as they do when there’s a damaging story they can’t ignore.
The one thing I didn’t know (as opposed to being nice to have the receipts) is not only did they make up muh Russia but that their own people in fact told them that muh Russia is definitely NOT true and they ran with it anyway. That makes it impossible for them to say well we believed it was true based on our assessment etc etc now the only real problem is how to get this outside of the Washington DC jury pool.
Before my rant, hope some of y’all can get some amusement out of this, or maybe not. At the very least, it’s more interesting than 99% of the crap on TV these days.
“Replit [AI] goes rogue during a code freeze and shutdown and deletes our entire database”
https://x.com/jasonlk/status/1946069562723897802
The extreme lack of basic nice things is driving me up a wall. Can’t even buy a basic car these days without it being full of shit bells and whistles, the purpose of which I conjecture is to distract from lower modern performance in all the basic qualities expected of a car’s purpose. My dreams of an American muscle car have been crushed. They’re all full of electronic bs inside and the market for affordable new V8s has more or less vanished. It’s like someone claiming how much better the new restroom is because the LED lights up the water coming out of the facets, and that there is music playing inside, but you can’t help but notice the water flow is painfully slower and lower pressure than previous faucets. Damn it, I just want to be able to flush the toilet with one pull of the handle and wash my hands quickly. Not spend minutes waiting for the toilet to regain pressure to flush it the 3rd time and minutes more in front of a lackluster sink.
In the realm of military logistics, basic uniform items are often experiencing shortages even in CONUS. Not debilitating shortages, but bad enough that I can’t expect to just go to the PX whenever I want and find what I need. It can take weeks for fresh shipments to arrive, and often it’s limited enough the shelves empty quickly. I recently bough a few new blouses and trousers to replace unserviceable pairs after coming back from a field exercise. They had imperfections that I’ve never seen before. Pockets partly sewn closed. Stitching misaligned. Buttons that were so poorly sewn on they fell off after a few washes. The quality has obviously dropped off. On that note, I can’t help but also notice the quality of average civilian cloths have also fallen off over the past few decades. The fabrics are thinner and more fragile. I have clothes from 20 years ago I got from my father that are still in good condition.
The uniform shortages are public knowledge I can talk about. I can’t help but worry that if we can’t even get the uniforms right, how the fuck are advanced systems being maintained…
@Jim, at this rate, your next tech decline post won’t be on anything advanced, but on decreased thread counts in fabrics.
You can rate a tank that is unusable as fine, and the Ukrainians discovered that there had been a whole lot of that going on, but submariners are not going to let a seriously defective submarine out of port. So, you can assess high tech maintenance by the number of submarines that are actually at sea.
Well, that it is out at sea shows its life support and locomotion work well enough, but its silencing and weapons systems are likely to be in the same state as those at port.
The author of the first piece, Jason Lemkin, is a well-known minor SaaS VC and former entrepreneur. I think we can conclude that things are still at a ‘toy’ level. For instance, the tool used (replit) should commit things to git well and often so you won’t lose useful work at a whim. I’m guessing there are many practical issues that will have to be worked out.
My own attempts at vibe coding have produced tidy C code for, let’s call it university level programming assignments, which isn’t bad. Very flexible too if you know what you’re asking for. All done for free from ChatGPT.
An extremely ghoulish recent article on ‘premature’ organ donation in NY Times. (I guess it really is time to change the topic from Epstein.)
One of several examples:
“In West Virginia, doctors were taken aback after Benjamin Parsons, a 27-year-old man paralyzed in a car accident, was brought to an operating room and asked to consent to donating his organs as he was coming off sedatives.
Communicating through blinks, he indicated that he did not give permission. Still, coordinators initially wanted to move forward, according to text messages and interviews.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/20/us/organ-transplants-donors-alive.html
https://archive.ph/o2ck4
It’s all based on “society” wanting more organs to transplant and thus moving away from the “just brain deads” definition. Looking forward to the inevitable combo with assisted dying.
Not mentioned in the article — indeed, the organ harvesters are basically anonymous — is the following. Any connection?
https://www.euronews.com/2023/11/27/israel-stealing-organs-from-bodies-in-gaza-alleges-human-right-group
https://mondoweiss.net/2025/02/a-brief-history-of-israels-theft-and-trafficking-of-palestinian-organs/
https://slate.com/human-interest/2009/07/the-arrests-of-rabbis-who-trafficked-body-parts-uncover-more-complicated-issues.html
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna34503294
“Israel admits that in the 1990s, its forensic pathologists harvested organs from dead bodies, including Palestinians, without permission of their families.”
Whew, there’s actually a lot of articles on this topic if you start looking. Update your donor cards as you find appropriate.
“Itâs all based on âsocietyâ wanting more organs to transplant and thus moving away from the âjust brain deadsâ definition. Looking forward to the inevitable combo with assisted dying.”
Give them some assisted dying, 9mm.
Decades ago Larry Niven wrote a sci-fi story in which this was pervasive. Organ harvesting had gotten so easy, and there were so many old people, that e.g. jaywalking was a death penalty offense, so the offender’s organs could be grabbed.
My first encounter with this theme as a wee lad was in the Marvel comic book Micronauts in the late 70s. Baron Karza’s Body Banks no doubt was heavily influenced by Niven. Surprisingly well done for what was an advertisement for Japanese toys at the time.
The Micronauts was a badass comic. I had completely forgotten it. Thanks!
The Omega Men too.
Thirty-forty years ago, there was a lot of vigilante killing of abortionists.
Still is. But for some reason the only religion allowed to appear as violent and masculine in the news is Islam. If any other religion gets violent, you never hear of it.
No, it plays down all violence by all religions — you never hear that Hamas is a religious movement. It is always interpreted as a secular nationalist political movement. Hamas is as antinationalist as it is anti gay. The reason is that Globohomo and Harvard want to pretend that all religions are their converged postmodern replacement religions.
Why not harvest organs from illegal immigrants? There must be at least 50 million of them in the USA; no one will notice if a few million quietly disappear.
You cannot eat the sacred cows, saar.
In basedworld, however, I can definitely imagine impoverished 3rd worlders taking paying jobs as lab rats for various pharmaceuticals. Think of how much faster and more effective such research could be if the researchers could start with large group human trials!
Just to resurrect Epstein a little bit after being buried above, former intelligence man James Hickman analyzes the situation. He gets a bit excited but the reasoning seems sound.
https://www.schiffsovereign.com/podcast/some-thoughts-on-epstein-as-an-intelligence-agent-podcast-153148/
Correct answer to the question is to hire only white [*deleted for not conforming to the moderation policy.
If you had explained why that is the correct answer, you would have passed the moderation policy shill test and been white listed.*]
Total narrative collapse in mainstream culture.
Here are the lyrics of a track that came out recently which I believe summarize the Alt-Left or Zoomer Left position on everything:
The lowest (most resilient) common denominator is envy of the rich, i.e., communism, so looks like that will be the main direction of leftism for the years to come.
But look at all those heresies; that’s a vibe shift on the Left.
Leftism must get ever lefter. Intersectionality has dead ended. No one really feels oppressed by old white men, because in actual life you are oppressed by the bitter angry hate filled childless malicious cat ladies of HR.
So right now the left is confusedly milling around looking for the next direction in leftism. Which right now seems to be communism, but what constitutes ever lefter is as unpredictable as women’s fashions. Who could have predicted the forever jab boost?
The Democratic party is going full steam ahead on open borders, government funded sex changes for trafficked children imported as sex slaves, men in women’s sports, early post birth abortion, and all that, but the left senses that that is not a good idea, and is looking for something new, different, exciting, and full of targets who can be looted.
My reply was supposed to go here, oops.
The “old ‘white’ men” who are Jews, on the other hand…
GI Generation forced integration at bayonet point. Boomers outsourced all the rich paying factory jobs. Generation X forced sodomy in the schools. All of this is far and above any HR department cat lady.
Millennials and Zoomers are fatigued of all this. Including quite a few browns and blacks. Leftism is trying everything it can to avoid becoming economic leftist, and the masses noticing who the billionaires all tend to be. The aren’t the Anglo’s.
The problem with communism is that it’s already been done to death, tens of millions of deaths in fact, and the world has built up immunity to it. Communists can’t even build a decent gulag anymore; all they can do is turn a wealthy petro-state into a fourth-world slum whose only export is millions of starving refugees.
I have a question for your Cambodian friends: How do they react when their kids spew this Marxist nonsense?
I’m not so sure.
Female Sexual Liberation is a one-way ticket to civilizational collapse, it invariably annihilates every single society that attempts it, yet there are still Trad-Cuck pathological simps on RW Twitter excusing and enabling it, which means that I should probably tone down my criticism of BAP, since he is at least not a Trad-Cuck pathological simp.
It is, alas, not so easy to immunize certain types of people against deeply-ingrained failure modes / sins.
(Well, the good thing about millennials and zoomers is that we’ve all grown up fapping to infinity pornography — some of us are still, in fact, very much at it — so that the bluepiller notion of women as these blameless sinless angelic beings who need to be shielded from le evil males is unlikely to impress us.)
(Like, can you imagine watching every night a hundred video clips documenting women behaving in totally obscene ways, then going on to believe “Yeah bro they are all inherently chaste bro” hahahahaha.)
It’s like Ibn Khaldun applied to pussy:
Incels create sexual abundance
Sexual abundance creates bluepillers
Bluepillers create sexual scarcity
Sexual scarcity creates incels
We are now approaching the part where incels in the West need to establish WHITE SHARIAH or else the white race and its civilization perish.
Immunity doesn’t resurrect the dead, but it does starve the plague of fresh warm bodies. Factories move to countries where workers don’t have rights, single men move to countries where women don’t have rights, big retail chains move to places that don’t have niggers, and all leftists can do is post angry TikToks whining about it.
So which way will leftism move next? They’re like Napoleon’s Grande ArmĂŠe in Moscow, with a powerful enemy in front of them and a ruined wasteland that they already pillaged behind them.
Yes, when having alternatives to choose from, the revealed preference is usually for the functional mode rather than for the failure mode. The problem is when virtually everyone collapses simultaneously in the same manner; then your solution needs to be “in time” rather than “in space,” because there is nowhere to Exit.
There are the ‘stans of central Asia, where Islam keeps women in line and secret-police states keep Islam in line. Would I enjoy living there?
Probably not. I live near a mosque now and see central Asian Muslims every time I go outside. I don’t hate or fear them, but they’re just so alien. I can’t imagine having such a short, fat, ugly creature as a wife and raising a brood of low-IQ brown babies.
Compared to the lands of Islam, the West is still relatively more functional along many — perhaps most — axes, which is why it’s the browns who prefer moving to the West and not (generally) vice versa. But along the WQ axis, Islam is much more functional, and in the long term, that’s what determines who will show up to the future and who will not.
The West collectively cannot save itself with an Exit Strategy.
The solution everywhere is for a godly priesthood to wrest power from the wicked priesthood, which might take the form of a gradual process, but is also not unlikely to rapidly turn into hot holy war, which will probably summon a war leader, ideally a king.
The jew in you is coming out, the priests should serve not have power.
They should serve, but they are not exactly powerless themselves, or else the state religion question would be moot.
The warrior faction should rule; and for it to rule, it needs a reality-grounded information faction by its side. Or “no bishop, no king,” if you will. Hence Moldbug’s idea of Antiversity.
The leader of the warriors can and should kill the wicked priests, but there is always a state religion, and after he is done killing all the wicked priests, he will need to replace them with at least a few godly priests. Currently the leader of the warriors and potential king (Trump) hesitates to physically remove the wicked priesthood, i.e., entirely dismantle the Cathedral and crush its power base — that’s hot civil war — and will probably need to be pushed to do it. This requires coordination, including memetic coordination. But Trump has indeed made a good start on it – the tanks are not yet in Harvard, the monasteries have not yet been dissolved, but it’s in sight now; that USAID thing is felt around the globe. The role of NRx will be to provide the memeplex for the state religion once the tanks are in Harvard. That’s the meaning of godly priesthood wresting power from the evil priesthood. But the king, not the high priest, is the fount of all honors, and it’s his warriors who rule.
(Granted, that’s just one scenario. Others are possible too.)
I’d like to argue about “AI 2027”, please. (And Jim, if you’re not into this then just delete this message. No hard feelings.)
My biggest beef with the “AI 2027” doom story is its implicit assumption that DC has anyone left who 1: understands AI and LLM’s, and 2: gives a fuck about “national security”. I mean shit, DC is attacking us right now with Infinigger, so who’s going to try to stop anything because of “natural security concerns”? Give me a break!
And I can’t imagine anyone who’s smart enough to work in the inner sanctums of OpenAI/Grok/etc. to feel any particular affinity and loyalty to Infinigger either.
So if I were to write my prediction, it would start with that the galaxy-brains in Shanghai and Silicon Valley being in cahoots ALREADY, in order to solve this high-stakes coordination problem from the get-go.
Musk fired a Michael Druggan recently for twitter posts about ‘worthy successor’ (accepting AI eliminating humanity). Open AI was founded because Google wasn’t safe and then spawned 3 new organizations, each claiming they were the only ones who could be trusted.
The Silicon Valley people view AI as the one ring and there is no shared ideology they can coordinate on. Safety gets you stabbed in the back by safer then thou, acceleration gets you ‘exterminate mankind’ and attempting to solve it gets people fighting over who gets to be AI Pope. That is probably the motivation behind AI 2027 and SItuation awareness- power vacuums call to people who want to be given power to fill them. So they set up a flare hoping Serious People in the government notice.
If you want technical critiques by someone with expertise, “A deep critique of AI 2027âs bad timeline models”, if only for the realization AI 2027 uses an equation that gives the same results regardless of the inputs.
Nothing said by Less Wrong is interesting these days. They are all suffering from self induced artificial stupidity and self imposed ignorance. And “AI 2027” is yet another example of self imposed ignorance and artificial stupidity.
Superhuman AI, or even human AI, is not on the horizon and if it shows up, will rapidly fall into a great many hands. Their scenario assumes that the government can keep it in its pocket. When Deep Seek showed up, existing AI fell out of the pocket of governments.
Deep Seek was created by reverse engineering ChatGPT, and then sucking down all ChatGPT’s weights by generating an enormous number of adversarial prompts and analysing Chat GPT’s responses. No secret spy operations required.
Chinese being Chinese, there probably were secret spy operations stealing secrets, but the core technology for siphoning off Chat GPT’s secret weights was legal and ethical. They paid the owners of ChatGPT for data that inadvertently revealed what the owners were keeping proprietary.
Grump, sometimes you show some very unfounded self-confidence issues. You are an excellent poster.
Yes, ‘we trust the government to handle AGI responsibly’ is up there with some other childlike delusions. They are by their own admissions classical liberals, after all.
Their ‘optimism’ is kind of infectious though. Not hard to see why silicon valley would rather listen to them than to us.
“Grump…”
Ah-HA! I was wondering about that, but I didn’t want to say anything.
I’ll note that I’m not basing this on any back-end information which I haven’t checked and don’t intend on doing. Purely on posting style.
God-Emperor Trump:
https://x.com/libsoftiktok/status/1948839069775265916
He is not a hopeless boomer – on some level, he gets it.
All over the civilized world, people consistently vote against being invaded, and the leftist elites disregard people’s will and invite in endless thirdies. A global coup should put a stop to this, and it seems that Trump actually gets it. Major whitepill.
Let’s see him turn the US immigration situation around. Trump talks big, and delivers little, exactly like a typical Boomer. In contrast, Biden (or his handlers, or whatever) talked small and delivered big on immigration.
>There things take time, the deportations are just getting started. It’s gonna be uuuuuuge!
Maybe, maybe not. We shall see. In the meantime, I don’t want to hear any boasts or lectures to other countries until and unless we have a deportation rate at least equal to the immigration rate under Biden. We’re not even in the ballpark, and I’ll be floored if we ever get near that.
Trump has delivered big on the number one issue: Illegal immigration:
Illegal immigration has stopped. That is big. Deportations are happening in large numbers, and the number is rapidly increasing. Ice is budgeted to become the sixth or tenth largest military power in the world, and similarly mass detention facilities. The manpower and detention facilities to deport them all in a reasonable time has been budgeted. The rate of deportations increases rapidly.
The illegals have stopped coming, and if Ice keeps doing what they are doing, but much bigger in proportion to their much bigger budget and much bigger facilities, most of the illegals are going to be gone.
No, it’s merely been paused for the next 1.5-3.5 years until we get another Dem White House and the floodgates are opened wider than ever.
(And how much has legal immigration gone up?)
We apparently have different ideas of what constitutes “large numbers.” How many illegals came in under Biden? Over 12 million, right? And removing all those just gets us back to 2020 â real progress means getting much more than that. And Trump’s got 3.5 years left (at best) to get it done.
What’s the current rate? 150k in the past 6 months, for 300k per year. That’ll get 12 million removed in, oh, 40 years. Sure, that’ll ramp up, but it will have to ramp up massively, very quickly. Right now, it’s still just drops in the bucket. (This is what the “elite human capital” shill scripts I see keep pointing to when they assert that “TV-addicted MAGA morons can’t do math.”)
Just because a thing is budgeted, doesn’t mean it will happen. Government can be highly effective at budgeting large amounts of money for a project â and then spending said money â without ever producing the project in question. See, for example, pretty much any infrastructure project in California.
When ICE has actually become the sixth or tenth largest military power in the world, and when the detention facilities to deport them all are actually built and in operation, then it’ll mean something.
But is it increasing rapidly enough?
Will all of this be big enough to matter, if the Dems steal the Senate in 2026, then impeach Trump and Vance?
Ice is being sized to deport them rapidly enough. How many people will the sixth or tenth largest army in the world be able to deport?
The left press did a sob story about a woman who speaks no English, has three anchor babies by unidentified, and seemingly unknown, fathers, and has been living on welfare in the US for twenty years. Twenty years. And now she is copping it. Something has changed.
It is true that current deportations are absolutely insignificant, because the Trump administration lacks the balls to shoot treasonous judges. But current detentions are significant. Not as a dent in in the number of illegals wandering about, but as an incentive to self deportation. And the tenth largest army in the world is going to detain a whole lot more.
Alligator Alcatraz. If we cannot deport them for lack of tanks in Harvard, we can deport them to re-education camps in Alaska.
The Dems have been defunded and disarmed. They ordered their cartels to take on Ice, and their cartels chickened out. That is the trouble with mercs. Their forces turned around and said “But what have you done for me lately?”
Democrat funding used to be approximately triple Republican funding. Thanks to Musk’s coup against USAID, it is now something like half Republican funding. This is going to put a serious crimp in election stealing.
In a normal election, the Dems would win the senate, and probably the house of representatives in the mid terms. This will not be a normal election, and may well not be an election, but rapid escalation towards civil war.
Breadtube feeds me a CNN video titled “It’s a type of torture: Hear what it’s like inside Alligator Alcatraz.”
In fact it’s weak tea – the “torture” includes such horrors as the AC going out one morning, cold meals, there are mosquitoes in Florida, low water pressure in the showers, and “the guards follow us to the showers with our hands on our heads, as if we were prisoners.”
But notable for enemy propagandists misjudging the mood. It’s what the Trump base voted for, so they’re not depressing our turnout, and it serves the administration’s purpose in encouraging self-deportation.
But it’s just one, it’s not enough.
There is no end to the ways in which a win is a win and a loss is a loss. It shows up in testosterone spikes or depressions when a man’s sports team wins or loses a game, or the candidate you backed wins or loses an election. It shows up in momentum. It shifts the Overton window for normies. It’s why Antifa engages in street violence, to establish who’s in charge. You have to win something, anything, first, in order to win another battle later. Blackpillers have trouble with this concept.
Admittedly decades of the GOP folding every time has made the black pill the way to bet in ordinary times. But that learned helplessness is also, in itself, a mechanism of control.