Women want what they do not want, and love what they hate.
Men understand what they want in love, sex, and romance, and act to attain it in a way that seems to them realistically likely to attain it. There is a straightforward connection between desire, intent, and action.
Women are not like that, and consent culture has imposed upon them an insoluble task to which they were not exposed to in the ancestral environment of evolutionary adaptation. They face a problem that lacks a rational solution, and their response to it is, unsurprisingly, deeply irrational.
Miss Average wants to be loved and cared for my mister one in thirty, by the six foot six billionaire athlete vampire King, and proceeds to act in ways that make it unlikely that anyone will ever love her except her cats, that no one will ever care for her, and that she will die alone and be eaten by her cats.
Some of them panic at age thirty or forty, and proceed to condescend to reluctantly marry mister average, who is fifty years old and involuntarily celibate up till now, but by that time, her eggs and her womb have probably dried up.
And when parents and uncles tell their rapidly ageing daughters and nieces that they should get their act together, it is totally and completely ineffective. They get really really angry on being advised.
Women complain men are not willing to commit, not even willing to approach. Meaning mister one in thirty is not willing to commit to miss average, and mister average is not going to approach miss average, because he will probably be charged with sexual harassment, rape and assault. Women just do not like low status males around, any more than they want rats and cockroaches around.
Obviously women are happiest staying at home cooking, cleaning, serving and obeying their husband. But, in the event that the six foot six billionaire vampire King should fall madly in love with him, have absolutely no intention of cooking, cleaning, serving, and obeying him. They will, off the bat, make entirely unreasonable demands.
Of course these demands are merely a shit test, what they actually hope for is to be smacked and handed a mop. But they are unaware of hoping for this.
Of course we all know that in matters of love and sex, what females intend, and what they believe that they want, have little connection to actual female conduct. “It just happened”. It is all a shit test. But this shit test is preventing successful family formation and reproduction.
There are a number of obstacles to reproduction.
1. Defect/Defect equilibrium. It is in both party’s interest to defect on their partner before they get defected on. It is a woman’s reproductive interest to be in a situation where she cannot defect, thus human females reproduce most successfully as property, men least successfully as property. Notice the tendency of female romances to be set in magical worlds where the main female character is excused from the inconvenience of consent. We all, male and female, long for the ancestral environment of successful reproduction.
2. Women have an absurdly inflated idea of the their value as a wife or a long term partner, because it is easy for them to get semen from a high value man.
3. Women have absurdly inflated idea of their value as a relationship partner, because they delude themselves that they are in a relationship, when they are merely somewhere near the bottom of a long booty call list.
4. Even if a woman has an accurate idea of her value as a relationship partner, it is still female nature to avoid being with low value men, meaning men of value similar to herself, and try to be with high value men. If a women does this, despite having an accurate idea of her value as a relationship partner, then she is a filthy trash slut, as women tend to be unless forcefully restrained by a man with a stick, and since she does not want to think of herself as a filthy trash slut, she cultivates an inflated view of her own value to protect herself from the knowledge that she is a filthy trash slut.
5. Women don’t think they have to bring anything to a relationship except themselves, because they don’t have to bring anything to a booty call except themselves. If they hope to be loved, cared for, and looked after, they need to start by cleaning the man’s house, picking up his clothes, doing the laundry, and cooking a nice meal. Of course a chick is, in practice, never going to do that on her own initiative, because she subconsciously hopes to be made to do that. But because we men tend to be oblivious, we tend not to command until the amount of trash on the floor makes it difficult to move around, we have no clothes left that do not stink, and strange fungi are growing on the unwashed dishes. If a man is looking for a relationship, he needs to command service. If a woman is looking for a relationship, not much she can do except inject herself into situations where service is likely to be commanded, or else somehow overcome the natural female propensity to shit test by cooking, cleaning, and tidying up on her own initiative. There have been a few occasions, not often, where women have just shown up on my doorstep and just got on with sex, cooking, cleaning, and tidying up. Worked on me because I am just lazy and most men are just lazy. But it is much more in accordance with female nature and the mating dance for the man to drag her to his lair and put her to work, and women much prefer this to having to arrive under their own power. In the ancestral environment of successful reproduction, being dragged to the man’s lair and compelled to serve looks a lot more like permanent security suitable for raising children than just showing up under her own power. If the man dragged her there, he probably will not let her go.
“And when parents and uncles tell their rapidly ageing daughters and nieces that they should get their act together, it is totally and completely ineffective.”
Indeed, but is there anything that could be said to daughters and nieces that would be effective?
Arrange meetings where she gets to dance with men you’ve preapproved as suitable future husbands.
Greetings,
This essay carries the essence of what it means to be reactionary. It starts at home. Control of self, wife, family… it is God’s will. Consider it a test.
Once you’ve mastered your household, then you will be confident to go on to greater things.
Yeah, there’s no galactic expansion before things down here on this blue ball are in Order.
So it is.
Apostolic wisdom, right there.
Women ♥️ attention.
“If he doesn’t hit you he doesn’t 💘 you”
Banning domestic violence creates loveless households, divorce, and the collapse of society.
Stand up against government mandated emotional abuse.
ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂਜੀਕਾਖਾਲਸਾਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂਜੀਕੀਫਤਿਹ
https://blog.reaction.la/economics/fertility-and-corporal-punishment/
https://x.com/RWApodcast/status/1984296786027069476
Youtube going back to the usual clamping. Another victory for nothing ever happens bros?
I’m being farcical of course, but its looking like everyone is thinking the temporary government is going to be very temporary and someone is going to do the needful to them soon, so they are trying to get in the good graces of the proggies again. I’m honestly hoping I am wrong about this though.
There has been a startling escalation in censorship on the Ukraine. Supposedly Russia is suffering a bazillion casualties, the Ukraine is winning, winning, winning, and Putin is falling, falling, falling.
This escalation of censorship happened immediately after a large proportion of the Ukrainian Nazis got trapped in the Pokrovsk agglomeration, which represents a major reduction in the Global American Empire’s capability to terrorise and murder Ukrainians.
As RWA said immediately before being banned from Youtube “We are reaching previously unseen levels of copium”
This is the number one point I’ve come across. Yes, well, OK, maybe the Ukraine is very slowly losing, but they’re killing 5 Russians for every dead Ukranian!
The copium of ‘Ukraine is losing on literally every front but we’re still slaughtering Russians’ is palpable. Good.
Given that Russians are still volunteering in considerable numbers, while the Ukraine is running horribly short of conscripts, casualty ratios have to be at least ten to one in Russia’s favor, probably thirty to one. Another indicator is that brigades are three to five hundred men when formed, and yet we see areas with many brigades but only a thousand or so troops, indicating that most Ukrainian brigades have very few men left.
That “brigades” are formed with just three to five hundred men is an indicator all by itself. The usual word for a newly formed unit of that size is “battalion”.
My error, I mixed up battalions and brigades.
The other day Angelina Jolie was touring the Ukraine against this and that and in support of the other, and they stopped her car and mobilized her local driver from under her nose, leaving her stranded for a bit.
My internet imaginary friends are all chirping about a “Ukrainian” Blackhawk helicopter mission into Potrovsk, led by Budanov and the Ukro-spooks, that didn’t go so well. The small size of it (<10 aircraft), too few to make a tactical difference to the city, surely revealing it to be an "emergency NATO/Nazi rescue" extraction mission.
Parallels with the horrendously wasteful NATO/Nazi rescue missions to the Mariupol Azov steel works in 2021.
The two-teir structure of the Ukrainian military (and thus society in general as well, I imagine) is made ever more blatantly and insultingly obvious, at least to my perception.
A whole lot of Azov are trapped in Pokrovsk. Likely the point of the blackhawk mission was to extract one of them.
Assuming, of course, the point of the blackhawk mission was not a bullet point on a Washington presentation.
The troll got his way. Now, having finally switched from Racist Jesus to Anti-Racist Jesus, I’m still trying to figure out how America will actually solve its vastly disproportionate black violent crime problem. Seriously, what is the Realistic plan to properly manage the less-than-perfectly-civilized black population? Look, the root cause of the mismatch is primarily genetic. You can fit some races neatly into modern civilization; others much less so. Let’s we convert the elite to Jimianity. Now what?
I do really like some blacks, and for the most part get along with them just fine. It’s not like I wake up in the
afternoon“morning” all enraged about those damn niggers. But obviously their presence, at least under the current conditions, does tend to bring about civilizational disorder. The term “bio-weapons” accurately describes a vastly disproportionate percentage of blacks. This needs to be solved if we are to advance to higher stages, doesn’t it?Or should crime be dealt with simply as crime, without a special, explicit race-specific policy?
Explicit race specific policies always turn out to be necessary, and progressives always wind up reluctantly sneaking those policies in through the back door.
Thus, for example, feather indians need, and generally get, different rules on alcohol to white people. Blacks need simpler and harsher rules, and swifter enforcement. Also many drugs that whites can generally handle OK are just devastating to blacks, so black communities demanded special rules on drugs popular among blacks.
Yes, that makes sense – different rules for different people, under the principle of “salus populi suprema lex.”
The negro thinks he can build civilization, but due to Dunning–Kruger effect, low skilled negros will limit their own population growth through a variety of methods; drugs, poverty, crime…
Whatever remains can be recruited into the army.
Certainly God can use anybody, even Balaam’s ass (Numbers 22:28).
A lot of atheists, whose first spoken word as babes must have been “akshually”, like to point to Balaam’s Ass as evidence of the primitiveness of the Holy Bible. Certainly, an insistence on pigheaded literalness might leave one less than impressed, but I recall the spirit of the story was even a dumb donkey had more sense than the greatest amongst the heathen idolaters. Quite a bit of teh funneyz in the Good Book if you know how to read it.
Yes; I’ve read some books on humor in the Bible (which humor there’s aplenty), and that episode is often regarded as one of the lulziest. And it’s full of valuable lessons, too. The ass did humble itself in the Lord’s presence; with superior discernment, it had repented before Balaam did. Thus the famous words of Micah (Micah 6:8),
…had, in a sense, been fulfilled in the donkey before they were fulfilled in Balaam himself. But “better late than never,” as they say.
Moreover, the ass’ submission to the Lord was complete, whereas Balaam’s sin got the better of him. Thus, as you say, it’s more worthy to be a donkey than a mighty sorcerer of the dark side.
Hence Zechariah 9:9:
The Lord can use anybody.
I’m currently a little over halfway through Malleus Maleficarum, and it’s driving home more so than Daemonologie what the practices of heathen idolatry were. The closest contemporary comparison I can make is Stone Age Herbalist’s reports on modern day sub-Saharan African superstition, now more in-your-face to Westerners thanks to immivasion.
Let’s say Christian fundies get into power and ban all abortions, and birth control while we’re at it. Okay, then in a few generations you’ll have many more blacks, and particularly from dysfunctional backgrounds. Is this not a problem for civilizational advancement that the New Ruling Class will need to solve?
Not necessarily.
Successful reproduction requires cooperation between the sexes. Cooperate/cooperate equilibrium requires enforcement.
Hard to have enforcement on sex and all that, except religiously based, a state religion. If a non state religion can get away with enforcing reproductive cooperation that the state religion is disinclined to enforce, soon enough it will become the state religion — old type Mohammedans are betting on this.
OK, assume we have a state and state religion that supplies enforcement preferentially for high status people, preferentially for those who subscribe to the official faith, and preferentially for those who work hard, pay taxes, and play by the rules. Obviously inferior races will fail to reproduce as successfully as higher races.
Obviously you have to take away women’s inalienable right to fornication, adultery and single motherhood. Abortion problem then largely solved. The abortion problem is basically that booty calls are apt to come in quite infrequently, once every few weeks, so women are reluctant to go on the pill, and when they answer a booty call, are in no position to demand that a condom be used.
Once abortion is rare, no one will demand that it be safe and legal.
Abortion already is rare, [*deleted for posting from an alternative reality, the world as leftists imagine it*]
The great majority of women commit at least one abortion, and in a very large proportion of cases, there is a biological father who would strongly object if he knew. Abortions are kept secret not because of social sanction against illegitimate pregnancy, but to avoid paternal demand that the pregnancy be legitimised. The primary cause of abortion is women keeping their options open in case they should get another booty call from General Bucknaked.
I thought it was 1/3rd of women.
Official statistics on controversial questions should never be believed. In a world where facefags cannot speak the truth, we have to rely on personal experience and anecdote.
I remember watching “Fast Times at Ridgemont High” for the first time a few years ago and the Jennifer Jason Leigh character gets pregnant and goes and gets an abortion at the corner abortuary like it’s a perfectly natural thing to do. I was quite put off by this. Can you imagine this same scene in a 1940s, Humphrey Bogart/Carey Grant era movie? The movie would be banned and many principles arrested for indecency and/or promoting crime.
I’ve only known two women who admitted to it (not something I typically ask either though).
The sad thing is as bad as that is anyone in clownworld who watches it clearly sees a much BETTER world then what we have now. Fast Times does not invoke the emotion of how horrible she was for having an abortion (that was a side note) it invokes the emotion of THIS IS WHAT THEY TOOK FROM YOU. Also I really really love the Jackson Browne song…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xk2NHZukTY
No need to ask point-blank; any woman who is committedly pro-choice has had an abortion. Whether single and on the bottom of a booty call list, or married with kids and going to church; all of them.
Optimistically it might be less than “great majority,” but Jim is right that the official stats have to be the floor not the actual number.
(Applying this rule means a couple of my friends and family with children have a dark past. That’s not good, but another Jimism is that wives are made not born, and from the outside that seems to have happened.)
Most women use birth control pills. Abortion is for the morlocks. And Western Christian women have always dated around (but with no sex until the pill was invented) with minimal parental involvement, but there was no such thing as a General Bucknaked.
Just look at your own Christian family and national history. Don’t trust the government.
Most women who are in a relationship where they expect to have regular sex with a particular man, but do not want a baby, use birth control pills.
However most women are not, in fact in a relationship that involves the expectation of regular sex. Sex “just happens”, and since they are theoretically not expecting it to happen, and it probably just happened with a man who did not meet any of her sixty eight bare minimum necessary requirements for a potential husband, partner, date, or even hookup, they were not on the pill, and did not even have a packet of condoms in their handbag.
He, if he learned of the baby, would probably want to keep her around, so she does not tell him, because she feels entitled to a six foot six billionaire athlete vampire king, and a baby would lock her down into permanently having regular sex with a man who failed to meet any of her sixty eight bare minimum requirements, just because she strangely and unexpectedly had sex with him once.
Most women are not prepared for unexpected sex, yet, strangely, unexpected sex somehow keeps happening with unexpected men.
So who are these “unexpected men” impregnating these women? Is this just average guys “getting lucky” aka being in the right time and place while they are ovulating?
Game is all about being that guy. Yes, partly luck, but a lot of it is skill, experience, and optimism.
What happens is that sex happens, to the surprise of the chick, but after a bit she figures she can do better and needs to keep her options open.
Most abortions are the result of unexpected sex followed by “I can do better, I need to keep my options open”
What happens is that she goes on a date, not expecting sex, sex “just happens”, and then pregnancy just happens, and she does not want to be stuck with this guy.
The vast majority of women who walked the path single –>career girl –>crazy cat lady –>hag –>evil witch had lots of abortions due to unexpected sex on the way to becoming evil witches, due to lots and lots of unexpected sex that “just happened”
Anonymous Fake is correct that the vast majority of women do not use abortion as a contraceptive method for expected sex. Rather, abortion is the contraceptive method for unexpected sex.
Their energy and rabidness at pursuing and defending abortion rights tells us quite a lot. (I think.)
They do technically know where babies come from — sperm+egg+time=baby — but they also reveal that they DO NOT sense that they’re in positive and conscious control over whether sex actually happens. It just happens. Sometimes. Or at least it can. You never know.
Sorta like an alcoholic, maybe. He knows that drinking alcohol gets him drunk and fucks up his life, but he also senses — and correctly — that he’s NOT in positive and conscious control over whether he actually drinks or not. It just happens. Sometimes. Or at least it can. You never know.
(Let me know if I’m not thinking correctly about this.)
Exactly so. Women were just not designed for a world where consent to sex was a thing, and just don’t like it and cannot handle it.
In all traditional societies, sex is either forbidden or mandatory.
Ties into the theme of women inevitably describing themselves as ‘complex’ and ‘mysterious’. Well, maybe, a little bit, but what’s really happening is that a big part of why a woman does what she does is simply shut off from her consciousness. Evolutionary biology made it so she’s wired to not understand her actions.
Worse than just being unconscious and walled off, their emotional and logical brains are actually more interconnected than men. Men have the ability to compartmentalize their emotions. Even when a woman is trying to think things through, her horny pussy brain is coloring her perceptions.
“That guy is icky, ignore him. What even is rocket science?”
“I’ll tell Mr. Thundercock that I want to be strong and independent so that he will respect me. I should talk to him about… some work things in a dark, secluded room after everyone else has left.”
“That guy at work said I smell nice, what a fucking weirdo. Mr. Thundercock is so much nicer, and clever, too! Like when he jokes about tying me up in his basement, so funny.”
“I should dress up as a fictional breeding slave for rich, powerful, White men to protest these rich, powerful, White men doing bad things. I hope rich, powerful, White men are there to see the protest!”
Whoops, the horny pussy brain comment was in response to Alf. Jim, could you move it to the correct spot?
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/115470116607441456
I see some on Right Twitter being against any intervention here.
What is the Jimian Christian position?
This is something spearheaded by Cruz:
https://www.cruz.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/religious_persecution_in_nigeria.pdf
Looks to me like the non-interventionists on Right Twitter have a point. Assistance to the Christians should be provided, but the US should probably avoid going to war in Nigeria.
The United States shouldn’t intervene, but Christian charity should be directed to Nigerian Christians to aid them and if necessary arm them.
While military support for co-religionists is a Christian option, Nigeria has a population of about 220 million people (35-45% Christian) so 3,100 Christians murdered, while a problem does not call for the blunt force of American intervention.
I haven’t thought enough about the Nigerian situation to have a position on it, but one benefit of military “intervention” there would be that it would use some US military capacity. This would let Trump say to the Thermidorians, “Hey, sorry, we already have military commitments elsewhere, can’t spare the soldiers, planes, etc. for Ukraine.”
Overall I’m not big on bombing, occupying, etc. every corner of the globe – God knows we have enough problems of our own – but that would be a silver lining of such a venture.
Speaking of which, I wonder how Venezuela’s doing.
I believe at this point any American boots on the ground outside the Western Hemisphere are a bad idea. As long as you have the Prog Regime in power, “invade the world” is highly likely to be followed by “invite the world,” and then with Nigerians you will get a particularly unpleasant strain of infinniger. I do think that perhaps some humanitarian assistance should be provided to the Christians, but I’m with the Moderate Paleocons on non-interventionism here, as per Thomas Aquinas’ Just War theory.
It’s got that “strongly worded letter” vibe, so probably amounts to nothing substantial.
Importing a horde of Nigerian migrants would be a total disaster; Christian or not, Nigerians are among the worst (if not the worst) blacks, quickly assimilating to the obsolete farm equipment’s racial resentment but being ten times as industrious with the grift, even more so than the dot-Indians. The only reason they aren’t a bigger problem is that they number relatively few.
Military intervention would also be a disaster, for all the reasons we’ve become accustomed to. We’ve more or less retained the ability to blow stuff up when facing a vastly inferior opponent, but long ago forgot the art of effective rebuilding or vassalage. There’s no more reason to expend blood and treasure there than there is in the middle east.
Resettlement to other parts of Africa is possible in theory, but always seems to be a shitshow in practice, I think in large part because the various “regions” of Africa that we in the west tend to think of as analogous to European nation-states just aren’t that at all; most don’t have clearly-defined borders or even functional governments, and the ones that do, usually aren’t agreement-capable. So intra-African resettlement tends to be confusing and unproductive.
Whenever I read on-the-ground reports about (de)colonized Africa, it seems clear that the old European Colonizers were far more effective than Team America World Police. More effective at creating zones of stability and productivity in general, and more effective at converting Christians and keeping them alive in particular. That system just worked, probably because the colonizers had very literal skin in the game; they were there for the long haul.
We will see what happens with Trump’s idea of commercial development in Gaza. Conceptually it seems to share many of the same elements, but with a much more secular flavor and far less emphasis on the Church, which may turn out to be a non-issue in the modern world or may (more likely) prove to be its principal failing.
In any case, a return to some form of that is probably the only viable solution. America sympathizes with our Christian neighbors and yadda yadda, but we are not going to commit our military and are definitely not going to commit our own soil. Rather, the USG grants official license and development rights to any network of missionaries and PMCs who care enough about the issue (or see enough potential profit in it) to establish some outposts there, build them up, defend them ruthlessly, and become a haven for all those oppressed Nigerian brothers in Christ. The nominal goal of the “Nigeria Corporation” will be to generate profit, but it will inevitably have a heavy contingent of missionary types who are more interested in spreading and preserving the faith.
This will probably not happen; Cruz wants sanctions and other BS, as if any country in Africa would or could be weakened by such things. Economic sanctions work when there is a well-established regime whose productivity depends heavily on trade, or alternatively, when there are belligerent/rival neighbors who could use the sanctions as a pretext to move in for the kill. Is any of that true about Nigeria? Honestly, I don’t know much about the country’s inner workings, but somehow, I doubt it. So Cruz is just playing politics, wants to do some cheap and ineffective virtue-signaling to appeal to his Christian voter base, and Trump is throwing him a bone with some Royal Proclamations, as the king often does to mollify his feistier lords. Beyond that, hot air.
Obviously the only way to protect Nigerian Christians is to subject them to rule by white Christians.
Which requires a fertile elite, which requires that America be ruled by old type Christians.
Fuck the Nigerian Christians. Any US involvement is just going to bring millions of them here, place them above me in the status hierarchy, teach them that everything I have is stolen goods and theirs by right, and justify further interventions and reparations to make up for the damage Uncle CSAM will do over there. I’ve seen this show enough times to know I don’t want to watch it again.
https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/115476385101120405
We’ll see where this is going.
Pete Hegseth:
https://x.com/PeteHegseth/status/1984751436102791607
I’m not entirely sure that, from the JUST WAR perspective, doing this is a good idea.
(See, goyim? An Israeli patriot need not be a war-mongering neocon shill.)
None of that is the fault of the Nigerian Christians.
In case you did not notice, the people who would use their plight as an excuse to make them welfare clients are not in power in the USA right now.
The people who would rather make the Nigerian Christians safe in their own land, by the simple method of killing the Mohammedans who are wanting to kill those Nigerian Christians.. are in power at the moment.
Nigerian Christians wouldn’t piss on me if I were on fire. They could murder me and sleep like babies that night, because I am outside their in-group. Their in-group, by the way, is not Christians; it’s not Blacks; it’s not even Nigerians; it’s their clan/extended family, and that is part of why Nigeria is Nigeria. Anyone outside that in-group is enemies or prey. Do not accept them into your in-group, because you will never, ever get into theirs.
Fuck Nigerian Christians. I don’t owe them a goddamned thing.
When the lips are gone the teeth will feel cold.
If we let people genocide the Nigerian Christians, we are up next. They may not see unity with us, but those killing them see unity with us.
Nigerian Christians have nothing to do with me. I’d be perfectly happy with a policy of salutary neglect toward every African on Earth, Christian, Muslim, animist, or atheist. But that is not in the cards. Our evil and arrogant rulers insist on using the irrelevant problems of far-away peoples to coerce me into joining their telescopic philanthropy. You might say those evil arrogant rulers are my enemy, not the Nigerian Christians. OK, sure. But conceding that you care about the woes of their little overseas wubbies plays into their hands. I would prefer that Nigerians Muslims murder every last Nigerian Christian male and kidnap, rape, and convert every last Nigerian Christian female than that we bring one single Nigerian Christian refugee within 1000 miles of the USA.
Even here, I see people falling for this garbage for the 100th time because they pasted a cross on it. Disgusting. You’re out of your mind if you think Nigerian Christians are standing between American Whites and genocide in any way whatsoever. They are a tool of that genocide, a pawn of that genocide’s architects, and active and enthusiastic participants in that genocide the moment our wicked rulers use our pity to bring them over here.
In Old Times, the Pope would handle this, he would get word, and make it so that Kings, the Maintainers of Armies, would find reason and incentive to intervene in faraway lands.
Thus there would no longer be any call/interest in importing foreign people away from their homelands, they would stay and make them great again.
https://x.com/EYakoby/status/1984107619380838909
When your Popes are Woke, flying gay colours, blessing blocks of ice, and building Islamic prayer rooms in the Vatican… Christians die, you get “refugeed”, and your enemy lives another day to grow even stronger.
It’s time to evict and replace your Popes.
That’s true, and moreover, it’s time to be ruled by warriors rather than by priests. If, as Yarvin likes to say, Sovereignty be conserved, then the ultimate sovereign (on Earth) ought to be the King, not the Pope.
(By the way, this might be slightly off topic here, but I legit don’t get KD’s troll re the Parousia. Does he claim to be the Second Coming? Or is it me? Both of us? Lol. I’m honestly not sure where this is going. At least as far as I’m concerned, I’m literally just a shitposter. Not a temporal and/or religious authority of any kind.)
(If I get my theology right, the first time around the Lord showed up as a High Priest figure a la Melchizedek, while the second time He will show up as a King crowned in all glory. If the Parousia is a temporal authority, e.g., the future King of America, Commander of the Christian Armies, then clearly it’s not some random Israeli shitposter on an anonymous blog with no worldly ambitions. I don’t mind contributing whatever I can to the arrival of that Divine King, but obviously that’s not me; my contribution — such as it is — is intellectual and spiritual, but I’m not qualified to be a Literal Monarch or some such. Alt-Master KD, however, can probably serve as both King and High-Priest, so it makes sense that he is in fact the Parousia, assuming that’s any of us, lol. Anyway, sorry for the digression from War in Nigeria.)
(Sorry for samefagging, but I think the most any commenter here can aspire to be is a Paul-like figure spreading the Word on Earth to prepare it for the Second Coming. I highly doubt that any one of us can realistically claim to be an Avatar of God. I’m not entirely opposed to the idea, but God is supposed to be infallible, inerrant, sinless, etc., and I just don’t feel like any of the regulars here fit this description; no offense to anyone. It’s an entertaining troll, though.)
No one here is within a parsec of being an avatar of God. What are you doing?
If this is an attempt to do some sort of reverse psychology* or whatever, it is not going to work.
*Like Dirk Gently in that Douglas Adams novel, in which Dirk constantly went around denying that he had psychic powers, in an attempt to get everyone to believe that he had psychic powers.
Nah, I only use reverse psychology to shill for Israel. I’m responding to a certain post from some time back; I also try to figure out what the purpose of running this Alt-Theater is, considering most of it is directed at me, for some reason. I mean, you don’t need to “troll me into” holding any position; we can just talk like normal people.
I’m reasonably certain that this theater is inside your head, and entirely certain that said personal targeting is inside your head.
We are living in unusual times and thus have had some unusual shills, some of whom really aggravate me personally, but I would never claim to have been the subject of their activities, as circumstances and plain old common sense don’t support that. It’s online gangstalking, taking a bunch of anons (or even just one troll) who are merely going about their business and interpreting it as a big conspiracy against you.
This is Jim’s blog. The dumb shills are here to shout scripts into their megaphone and don’t care whose blog it is, only that there’s a comment form. The smart shills are here to perform the Trotsky dance, pretend (usually badly) that they’re one of us and try to gradually direct our energy toward topics and actions that help them and hurt us. And the trolls, if there are any, take pleasure in provoking anyone at all, doesn’t matter whom as long as they get their lulz.
There is just no archetype, no internally consistent behavior model for what you describe; it can only be fantasy.
I won’t argue against this.
Also, I probably do need to take a break from poasting. I rejoined in full-force following October 7 to achieve certain political goals (this is a highly visited blog), and looks like my work is pretty much done. Until next time. Peace! 😉
While I don’t believe in being AUTISTIC re Thomas Aquinas’ Just War Principles, it is vital to have the war waged by a proper authority – a Sovereign who can make war/peace and be obeyed in the long-term. The problem in the US is that the Cathedral has not yet been dismantled, and if you start importing Nigerians, the leftist deep state and perhaps future Democrat politicians — whose sovereignty, if you pardon the pun, trumps Trump’s — will make them into tools for dispossessing Real Americans.
Dismantle the Cathedral of Demons, have a Sovereign who actually is sovereign and can make long-lasting war/peace (he need not be literally a King; Putin is a “President,” for instance), and then this won’t be a problem.
Nah, it’s not so simple; I don’t know much about Nigeria, but “just go in and kill the terrorists” never works on its own – you always need a longer-term plan than just doing that in order to be successful.
Again, I don’t autistically subscribe to Just War theory — or any theory, for that matter — but its principles are sound, and “hope of success” (spes successus) sure is one of them.
Another problem I’ve noticed (and personally had to deal with) is that if against all odds, you actually do get a happy relationship then her friends will do everything in their power to break you up.
This particularly happens when she’s outwardly appreciative, respectful, agreeable and submissive to you. Especially if her friends are single women, recently divorced women or gay men.
It’s actually a very severe problem. People see a woman who’s nice to her bf or husband and act like a vampire seeing the cross.
They’ll try to convince her to needlessly start fights with you, defy you, disrespect you, exacerbate any existing disagreement, convince her she’s being abused, etc. If she refuses to comply, they’ll start making fun of her and socially isolating her.
I remember a couple years ago some woman wrote a Twitter post along the lines of “Every morning my husband makes me coffee and we sit in the backyard for 20 minutes sipping and talking. It’s my favorite part of the day, I’m so lucky to have him ☺️”
People just went completely apoplectic at her for weeks. They couldn’t stand the thought of a woman being happy and grateful to her husband. It’s on par with holocaust denial.
It’s nearly impossible to have a happy marriage in such an environment. You just can’t make things work if interlopers are constantly trying to sow discord and go frothing-at-the-mouth insane over the most mild prosocial sentiment.
All happy marriages are quietly and furtively eighteenth century. There is one family structure that works, and nothing else can work. And that family structure is sacrilege against progressivism. What you are seeing is people thrown into outrage by sacrilege against their faith.
This outrage reveals their faith to be demonic.
People know in their hearts that a happy marriage inherently involves gross violation of the most sacred doctrines of progress.
So you tell her: your friends envy you, and like crabs in a bucket want to pull you down to their level.
If you indeed have a happy relationship, and especially you knock her up, she will just lose interest in those friendships. Works the other way around too: I’ve seen some single women react to babies not unlike a vampire reacts to garlic.
Apparently women want to get fucked by hard men, such as the 2 throat-slitting Muslims in the UK that just did 10 people on a train, lol.
Short good video of Mamdani exposing himself multiple times
https://x.com/RealDonKeith/status/1984574557932462470
Lying is one of the wholesale strategies of the Democrat/Left Politicians, Socialist Economists, and Muslims.
At least some portion of the Internet, though small, seems to be waking up.
But everyone is still very far from doing what needs to be done.
Dark Forces are very strong… people will need to start deploying a lot more Light, Strength, and Numbers in public to beat them.
Military General spews litres of Wokism’s Crocodile Tears
https://x.com/RealDonKeith/status/1984559007328321900
There used to be a commenter here who wrote a great post about Just War in the context of Russia-Ukraine. I’d like to reproduce it here:
Extrapolating from this to Nigeria, military action should be strongly reconsidered.
Some women are more self-aware than others.
https://old.reddit.com/r/womenarethings/
Remember that owning, commanding and punishing a woman is completely above board if it is framed as a kink. I’m content with my sheltered religious wife, but some of you psychos could try and ‘adopt’ one of these poor neglected girls. Offer to ravish, degrade AND provide them food and housing for them and they’ll be lining up. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of them had quite low bodycounts as they are saving themselves for General Butt Naked.
That is the problem; by doing so, you accept the progressive frame that it isn’t normal, is done only per her “consent” and can be terminated by her at any time. That is not marriage, it is gay marriage.
In a more general sense, you’re describing this as an improvement on the status quo, but it is not. As we’ve said a number of times in the past, body count isn’t just a number, it’s quality over quantity: an alpha widow of just one alpha male, while unlikely to be encountered in the wild, will shit test with far greater frequency and intensity than a regular whore who has dumped ten betas but never really been with an alpha–that is, not any guy she considers much more alpha than you. Body count should really be “alpha count”.
We don’t discuss or perform the monkey dance because we like the monkey dance, we do it because it is necessary from time to time. To the extent that the reddit content is authentic, and not just porn bait, women who are out there in public demanding ever more elaborate performances are not good wife material.
Very reasonable caveats.
It should be possible to move things into a normal marriage over time. Having submission as a fun ‘secret’ within the relationship, acting as legal plausible deniability, is better than nothing. Making her loyal by passing shit tests is also important. Until we get a sane and sympathetic society and legal system, do you have any better ideas?
Lots of zoomer girls are virgins despite being porn addicts. Trying to rehabilitate one is again better than nothing, but of course if you can marry a well raised daughter of a patriarchal fellow then that is far better, but hard to find.
I didn’t realize “nothing” was the frame of reference. Plate-spinning is also better than nothing, it’s just not very good. But is shacking up with a bondage girl better than spinning plates? I’m not so sure. Very high likelihood of total loss on investment and ruinous personal consequences. At least plate-spinning is low investment and gives you the slim but compounding odds of a lottery win.
Every time I read this, the primary source inevitably turns out to be the girls themselves, posting on TikTok or Instagram about who they are still virgins at 23 or whatever.
I don’t believe it. Women lie. Women have always lied. That they are lying in favor of virginity, as opposed to boasting about their sexual history as the previous generation did, is an encouraging indicator of the cultural winds. But the men who believe them are still fools.
I can believe that zoomer women have had fewer partners on average than millennial women did at the same age, because zoomer men are more pussified than ever, and opportunities for real in-the-flesh social contact are fewer than ever. But virgins? Nah.
If someone out there reading this has a zoomer daughter, and can honestly say with any confidence that his daughter of fertile age really IS a virgin, then what the hell are you waiting for? Find her a good man, or even a nice boy, and get her married while there’s still an opportunity. If she really is a virgin at age 23, or even age 18, then setting her up should be the easiest thing you have ever done. And if it is not so easy, then maybe daddy’s little princess isn’t really such a princess.
All those times did not count because it just happened.
How spot alpha widow?
If you have more status than anyone that has banged her, it doesn’t matter.
It’s gigachad or bust at this point.
If you are short on status/experience, bang a fat chick with a cute face and get her into fitness.
Never done that. I frame it as marriage as commanded by the New Testament. BDSM is a gay parody of the divinely commanded relationship between a man and a woman, in the same way drag queens are a gay parody of femininity and leatherboys are a gay parody of masculinity.
To the best of my recollection, that was always my attitude even before I was a Christian. It just seemed funny. That framing it as a kink made it actually kinky.
To frame it as a kink, implies the culture of consent, safe words and all that, but what matters is to reject the culture of consent.
Consent and commitment are at odds with each other, the collapse of reproduction is the result of the rise of consent, and the resulting collapse of commitment..
Brother Jim: how do you feel about the “trad wife” movement? Are some of them genuine Proverbs 31 women, or do they turn into low-value women the moment they get off Instagram?
Grifters all, Pearl is the only honest egirl and she rightly calls out these feminists phonies for what they are.
If you see her on the internet, she’s a whore.
which might be an overexaggeration, but not by much. Chaste women just don’t have an online presence. ‘Trad wife influencer’ is a contradiction in terms.
As for any purported ‘based’ ideology, well, you already know the answer to this. Women just don’t process abstractions in the same sense men do. ‘Trad’ for a woman is just the flavor of the day, the dress she gets to wear to flaunt. Not a completely empty gesture, in the sense that how she chooses to flaunt will say something about her. But to project more onto her baking a cake on instagram than ‘give me attention’ is misunderstanding the nature of women.
Same with all these ‘based’ right-wing influencer women (and left-wing women for that matter). Do any of these women believe what they say? At the moment they say it, no doubt. But being women, they always reserve the right to change their mind anytime later, depending on how they happen to feel, depending on the men they encounter. With the way shit-testing is wired, it is in fact pretty much guaranteed that she will change her mind at some point, because shit-testing to a woman is much more important than some ideological abstractions.
Good wives are made, not born.
Women believe what power tells them. Power needs to be her husband.
With virtually all of them, as soon as they become influential their content just becomes finger wagging at and nagging men for what they consider male misbehaviour, which is completely laughable for a “trad” “right wing” woman. There’s only maybe a couple who refrain from doing that.
They’re generally poison to the online right. Worse, some of them are “ex”-whores and still want to lecture men. There is a subset of “Christians” who pretend to be on our side and worship them. The idea of an “””ex”””-whore who converted to Christianity five minutes ago and now peddles moral lessons on others is like crack for those types. Really insidious people, and they’ll accuse anyone who calls them out for what they are as not being “real” Christians as they don’t believe in forgiveness or whatever.
Quite insidious as these men also push young men away from Christianity. There’s a few of these types on X.
It is the nature of women to top from the bottom. Women love looking after their man, but will always use that looking after to control him.
Herodotus chapter 1
—the Phenicians arrived then at this land of Argos, and began to dispose of their ship’s cargo: and on the fifth or sixth day after they had arrived, when their goods had been almost all sold, there came down to the sea a great company of women, and among them the daughter of the king; and her name, as the Hellenes also agree, was Io the daughter of Inachos. These standing near to the stern of the ship were buying of the wares such as pleased them most, when of a sudden the Phenicians, passing the word from one to another, made a rush upon them; and the greater part of the women escaped by flight, but Io and certain others were carried off. So they put them on board their ship, and forthwith departed, sailing away to Egypt.
…
Now they say that in their judgment, though it is an act of wrong to carry away women by force, it is a folly to set one’s heart on taking vengeance for their rape, and the wise course is to pay no regard when they have been carried away; for it is evident that they would never be carried away if they were not themselves willing to go.
I ask for a re-wording of this that doesn’t use the word “want”, over and over, for what are actually different verbs/actions/phenomena. The goal is to call things by their proper names, and use words that make sense, and that best align with and describe “the logos”, without mystical one-hand-clapping hocus-pocus.
To say they “don’t want what they want” is scramble-language, that I hope and suspect just isn’t necessary.
Because that’s what I want to believe, that there really is a logic here, a perspective, a mental model, that doesn’t involve self-contradiction. Even if walking the path is much more challenging than knowing the path, just describing the path in a straightforward and objective way is still very helpful.
First try:
Women really do want what they say they want, when they say they want it. (I’ll believe that.) That AND, once they GET IT, they respond negatively, in a way that they themselves don’t understand or expect.
Agency is wanting things, and acting somewhat competently with intent to get them. In matters of sex, romance, and reproduction, women do not have agency. They react to stimuli. “it just happened.”
Hence the use of scramble language.
If they really want what they say they want, what they clearly believe that they want, why does giving it to them have counterproductive and surprising results?
What we are seeing is a huge increase in childless women.
Spinster –> career woman –> Crazy cat lady –> Hag –> Witch
None of them are consciously and intentionally choosing Crazy cat lady –> Hag –> Witch
Eighty percent of women say “I did not plan to end up childless, it is just that there were no good men”. But, of course, there is a huge supply of good men invisible to women, a huge supply of desperate incels.
Women are not acting to get what they want;
As Alf observed:
Bix: Jim is being brief in the passage you quote. Expressing the full truth about female sexual psychology and behavior, precisely and with due attention to all the nuances, qualifications, provisos, exceptions, and footnotes, would take a lot more words than a casual reader new to the blog might be willing to read.
The formulation “Women want what they do not want” is brief and clear, and brings the contradictions to the surface. Those contradictions don’t originate in Jim’s formulation; they are right there in female psychology. “Women want toasted ice,” as someone once said.
Men who want to understand this subject more precisely than the casual formulation can and should note the distinction between conscious desires and unconscious desires. But even that way of putting it isn’t right (aside from the trite Freudianism). It’s better to say that conscious desires may be completely different from actual, physical behavior patterns. The behavior patterns are instantiated in neural architecture, hormonal effects on behavior, etc., so they are in the body, but not in the brain, or not, anyway, in the conscious part of the brain.
It’s obvious, for example, that women’s shit-testing is sometimes completely unconscious and unplanned.
Here’s another one, this one about men: Men, especially young men, are tense and irritable if they’re not getting sex. This makes them more likely to get into fights, which could help them gain status if they win, and get them access to sex. And if they lose the fight, well, they have less to lose, since they’re not currently breeding anyway. Men who are getting sex are much more mellow, because they have something to lose if they lose a fight. This is obviously not consciously planned; it’s just a feature of male hormones, neural wiring, etc., that evolved for obvious reasons.
So the distinction between conscious desires and non-conscious behavior patterns is important. Relatedly, your last paragraph:
“Women really do want what they say they want, when they say they want it. (I’ll believe that.) That AND, once they GET IT, they respond negatively, in a way that they themselves don’t understand or expect.”
Sure, that is part of it too. Women’s “wants” are situational in a way that’s not true of men. Give men a truth drug and ask them what they want, and they’ll all say “Hot young pussy” 100% of the time. Do that with women and who knows what you’ll get, but it would not be consistent across time. The Art of Game rests on a few pillars and perhaps the most important one is never pay one damn iota of attention to anything that comes out of a woman’s mouth on topics related to sex. The part of a woman’s brain that flaps her jaw has no access to the part of her brain that implements her reproductive behavior.
Another fact is that even on the surface their desires are contradictory. Probably, at least some feminists consciously tell themselves that they desire a “nice guy,” and then hop onto one of the female porn, I mean webtoon, sites that Jim has so hilariously commented on over the last few months. What do these women “actually want”? That’s an essay question, and a long one. Look how long this comment is, and I’m just skimming lightly over the surface.
What women express as “what they want” is a part of an elaborate, unconscious system for ensuring that they don’t end up abandoned and pregnant on the ancestral savanna. They “want” a good career and to be strong and independent, so that they can be sure that the man that owns them will take them and hold them and not let them go. The largest problem is that civilization is so successful at controlling women and apportioning them that they have not had any selection pressure to update that programming since the ancestral savanna.
Women “want” a career the way that elite military branches/units “want” to fail the weak or undedicated. They actually want someone, but they have to filter them out to make sure that they aren’t getting the wrong someone. “I want to be a bad bitch girlboss,” is the female equivalent of “We aren’t promising a rose garden.”
I understand the concepts being communicated but the way you communicated them in this post made no sense to me.
Wulfgar Thundercock expressed basic evolutionary psychology as clearly and simply as it can be expressed.
Wulfgar Thundercock expressed basic evolutionary psychology as clearly and simply as it can be expressed.
On those terms, American woman would be “evolving to extinction”.
High races require investment by both parents to reproduce successfully, since they rely on cultural inheritance to function. Current environment makes this extremely difficult, and for many women impossible. Their behavior would be functional in an environment that did not attempt to force women to be “free”, force them the exercise agency in sexual matters.
Well put, all of you. This is what I’m talking about.
The Soros family attended Mamdani’s election victory party tonight, pictures all over the Internet.
Thanks to the Left’s foolish partnership with Islam, the Massive PAC Funding by Linda Sarsour, CAIR/ISNAA, overseas, Tax exempt non-profit March For Women Organization, etc… and the Democrat-type Politicians that no one bothered to throw out decades ago… we get to see how soon the first video will turn into the second video.
https://x.com/LoomerUnleashed/status/1984777911178580170
https://x.com/RadioGenoa/status/1983931175723790426
https://x.com/OmarFatehMN/status/1984636784869802089
Omar Fateh @OmarFatehMN, the Somali Muslim candidate for Mayor of Minneapolis just posted these pics with a caption that says “the future is bright”. Not a single White Person or Non-Muslim is in the pictures. Just Muslim women in full Burkas. They are literally telling you to your face your future in the US is going to be a political Islamic takeover by Muslim invaders.
It is very sad that so many White women are voting for these Islamic devils and their Leftist comrades.
That should tell the Western White Man they need to up their game far beyond what these comrades are doing.
It’s always difficult to compete against the free-shit-givers.
But it can be done, one way or another.
Throwing them out is a good start.
And sooner or later, the next Crusade will happen, in some form or another…
https://x.com/JohnnyDonie/status/1985986923090067647
Because as on this blog: “We cannot live with these people”
> the next Crusade will happen, in some form or another…
> https://x.com/JohnnyDonie/status/1985986923090067647
During his victory speech, Zorhan Mamdani, who supports “globalize the intifada,” pledged to fight antisemitism. However, after making that pledge, Mamdani went on to rant about Islamophobia and called for Muslims to seize power throughout America.
Zohran Mamdani quotes communist Eugene Debs in his victory speech, “I can see the dawn of a better day for humanity.”
The Political Inflection Point and Shift from the Red-Green Partnership has just occured with NYC outcome…
”
If the GOP doesn’t start taking the threat of Islam seriously, we will lose in 2026 and 2028. Bookmark this. Islam is the biggest threat to our country and the GOP is silent about this threat. Are they willing to sacrifice our country to appease the Muslims? Wake up.
”
”
Why did the GOP run 2 Never Trumpers for Governor in New Jersey and Virginia?
”
”
NYC, Virginia, and Minnesota all elected Jihadi Muslims tonight.
”
”
I told you the GOP would get hammered today. The GOP lost every major election and now multiple Islamic jihadists are in power. I warned the GOP this would happen if they didn’t start speaking out about the Islamification of America. This is what happens when a party attaches itself to Qatar. There were no major efforts to address the danger posed these candidates because the GOP is too in bed with Islamic foreigners. The GOP has their priorities wrong.
”
number one political issue on the ballot in 2026 and 2028.
Loomer Unleashed
@LoomerUnleashed
7h
”
Democrat Ghazala Hashmi is the new lieutenant governor of Virginia. Hashmi, who was not born in America, attends events wearing a headscarf and speaking Arabic, all while standing behind a giant banner reading, “He has named you Muslims.”
”
”
America is about to become an ever more violent country as Communism and Sharia have become normalized.
“
Thoughts on Pol Pot 2: Electric Boogaloo firing off in NYC/VA? Has the fraud machine founds its coherency sea legs?
It seemed stupid and, after a while, inevitable. The default state is of course that the Democrats win in NYC, so no surprises there. Mamdani was the only one who really stood out … Well, now the voters will get what they wanted, good and hard (HL Mencken).
Still a bit stunned by how sweeping Dem victories were in VA. Given how weak, lame, and totally not cool the opposing ticket was, it wasn’t surprising Team Evil dug in there, but to be so brazen about it hints at hubris, desperation, or an even more toxic combo. The position of state AG must be crucial to their plans to let Jay Jones with his damaging rhetoric win despite all the prior talk of split tickets from the media. Can’t wait for the next cuck to tell me how my team is so much more principled when we have to excommunicate our own for far less.
Normality bias. We did not vote our way into this mess and are not going to vote our way out of it.
Normality bias killed Caesar. Let us pray it does not kill Trump and Vance.
I humbly take the admonishment. The Librarian of Celaeno, in his latest essay, quotes Glenn Beck making a similar statement as mine on Jay Jones, and that’s no association to aspire to.
The Republicans never fail to fail. They are a party of merchants and shopkeepers, and such people never rule for long. They always sale out or get conquered.
The only one of those races the Republicans really had what some might consider an outside chance absent Trump doing some election “fortification” was the New Jersey governor’s race. There was some hope the most right wing sometimes voting bloc in the blue sphere the Italians were going to turnout for a good ol reactionary goombah but it seems like they didn’t have the numbers to beat out all the shitlibs.
The Cominator:
I watched Ciattarelli speak impromptu to some folks outdoors and I liked how he talked. I figured this guy could have a real chance among the sensible NJ business types who liked Christie, and he would be a far better Christie. Alas, it was not to be. The whiny entitled grifters have gotten the upper hand on the dutiful producers.
Leftism accelerates in NYC et al
“Notice how none of Woke right stooges are speaking out about Mamdani and the other Islamo-Commie candidates on the ballot today. It’s almost like these people aren’t really conservative or Trump voters. What are they doing though? Praising Hitler and attacking Trump.”
A few more bad races and suspect to see more chatter about secession of Midwest Central SouthEast states.
https://x.com/EvanAKilgore/status/1985491076338061570
This video has nearly 200k likes on Instagram and over 1 million views. “This is what America would look like if Hitler won the war.” There are thousands of videos like this praising Hitler on Instagram.
Decades after a Jewish poetess changed the Statue of Liberty into the Statue of Mass Immigration, Hitler would probably declare it the Statue of Aryan Womanhood or some such, but leave it standing.
There is no such thing as a “woke right.”. That is the enemy’s term.
I told you the GOP would get hammered today. The GOP lost every major election and now multiple Islamic jihadists are in power. I warned the GOP this would happen if they didn’t start speaking out about the Islamification of America. This is what happens when a party attaches itself to Qatar. There were no major efforts to address the danger posed these candidates because the GOP is too in bed with Islamic foreigners. The GOP has their priorities wrong.
And some people accuse Trump of being too much a friend of Israel.
Given that Qatar is where Hamas gets its support from, it would seem to me that being friends with Israel and being friends with Qatar are simply incompatible.
That is normality bias….
What did you expect? the Rubicon is behind us. we are not voting our way out of this.
“Given that Qatar is where Hamas gets its support from, it would seem to me that being friends with Israel and being friends with Qatar are simply incompatible.”
Consider the Profumo affair: Christine Keeler had simultaneous affairs with John Profumo and Yevgeni Ivanov, lol. Assign the roles for the current case appropriately.
Has anyone else gotten the feeling that we’re getting passed by the normies? Just today I heard Nick Fuentes mentioned on a very normie sports podcast. It was as an example of someone who would scare the hoes, if you will, but still, not with the usual ritual casting out. (In fact it was also the first time I had heard him mentioned in normieworld at all.)
1. Nick is astroturfed, he probably still is working with his supposed nemesis who caused him to be as he is Ben Shapiro. Con inc and the groypers both really really suck.
2. Reaction was always about getting our ideas via osmosis more into the elites than the masses.
About 2., do you think Yarvin’s fame is indicative of some success in that field?
Yes but unfortunately there are still more leftist elites and they are far more fanatical.
Yarvin’s plan was to get some of the left elite on board with throne. Thermidor is something like his plan coming to fruition. Congratulations Yarvin. I was never very interested in this plan, because leftism getting ever lefter ever faster usually begets Thermidor. The problem then is, what follows Thermidor?
But Yarvin is just too Jewish to accept Altar, and you have to bring a gun to a gunfight and a faith to a holy war. We are not getting out of this except by Throne and Altar.
The true king must issue the command to kill as many leftists as necessary to exclude the left from power.
How will you know the true king? You will know him by his sword, the sword of justice. And you will know Justice by the faith.
Altar-pilled. We need Altar, good and hard. Wager of Pascal…
“Yarvin is just too Jewish to accept Altar, and you have to bring a gun to a gunfight and a faith to a holy war. We are not getting out of this except by Throne and Altar.”
From Yarvin’s tribute to Larry Auster (2013):
“It strikes me as quite implausible that when our dark age ends and the kings return, if ever, it will be under any banner but the Cross. Or as Maistre put it:
“‘Frenchmen, it was to the noise of hellish songs, the blasphemy of atheism, the cries of death, and the prolonged moans of slaughtered innocence, it was by the light of flames, on the debris of throne and altar, watered by the blood of the best of kings and an innumerable host of other victims, it was by the contempt of morality and the established faith, it was in the midst of every crime that your seducers and your tyrants founded what they call your liberty.
“‘But when man works to restore order he associates himself with the author of order; he is favored by nature, that is to say, by ensemble of secondary forces that are the agents of the Divinity. His action partakes of the divine; it becomes both gentle and imperious, forcing nothing yet not resisted by anything. His arrangements restore health. As he acts, he calms disquiet and the painful agitation that is the effect and symptom of disorder. In the same way, the hands of a skillful surgeon bring the cessation of pain that proves the dislocated joint has been put right.'”
Shame he never developed that thought further. 2025 Yarvin is advocating Machiavellism, unclear if even Deistic.
pretty sure yarvin know about throne and ultra and understand the necessity of it.
But he is facefag.
If you get to put wine in him like in that podcast , his tongue start to flow.
But as he say , he is amateur historian , the altar is for prophet and priest.
Totally not clear to me that he understands it.
The wine podcast is a great example of where Yarvin’s mind is at, because in that podcast a third person is present who repeatedly asks Yarvin Christian related questions. Every time Garvin answers a variation of: “yes great question but uhmm actually power. You should care about power. Did you know communists care about power? If you want to win, you’d better start caring about power.”
“If you want to win, you’d better start caring about power.”
Well, yeah.
Yes I too was once in my early twenties and into Robert Greene.
Obviously there’s some value in what Yarvin says. But notice the context: multiple questions about a specific faith are asked, and every time, instead of answering the question within that faith, Yarvin deflects into what he clearly cares about much much more: Machiavellianism.
If Machiavellianism worked, history would’ve been littered with Machiavellianist societies. But instead, history is littered with Christian societies. Funny that.
The problem with Machiavelli is that everyone cares about power, and everyone would always like more of it, not less. Essentially, Yarvin is preaching to the choir: everyone is already a Machiavellist. Hence, does not matter if a Christian, a pagan or even a communist would ask him a question about their faith: his answer would be the same regardless. Whereby he reveals his lack of understanding of throne and altar.
What per se do you think doesn’t work re Machiavellianism…
No man rules alone. Always a synthetic tribe rules, so you always have a state religion. And you always select for elite virtue on the basis of the state religion. Which means evil people are always going to game the religion’s criteria for virtue.
Does not scale.
Victor plays for power, Igor plays for power. Victor gets to be king, Igor right-hand man. Why should Igor be content with that? Perhaps he judges that his position is best being right-hand man. But if pure Machiavelliianism, Igor will seen no reason not to scheme behind Victor’s back. Victor, not even being able to trust his right-hand man, will have a very hard time getting things done.
Machiavellianism seeks to defect whenever it is in one’s interest to defect. Christianity says: walk the extra mile. Christianity wins.
I wouldn’t exactly say this, Machiavellianism says not that every individual should always defect (though he says heads of state should defect more often than ordinary men) its more that power is a dirty business and to expect defect defect. Which I think is true.
Life is a dirty business. Everyone defects. Hence the power of the man who does not defect at the first sign of trouble.
The point is not that there isn’t value in Machiavellianism. The point is also not that there aren’t some Christians who should learn a thing or two about defecting (recall Jim’s ‘you have only two cheeks’).
The point is that one cannot serve two masters, and Yarvin makes it clear that Christian God is not the master he serves.
Two cheeks and the extra mile are game theory for attaining cooperate cooperate equilibrium under imperfect information, the game theoretic formulation being one tit for two tats.
But game theory implies that killing and genocide should be on the table, and Christian Just war theory does not exclude genocide, just rigorously restricts its application.
Not sure if I am expressing this correctly, one last attempt…
There are clear similarities between Yarvin’s Machiavellianism and Jim’s Christianity. Both emphasize winning. Both emphasize realpolitics, seeing reality as it is and taking GNON into account.
But there are great differences as well. Yarvin emphasizes ruling: one must become worthy, attain power, rule. Classic NRx. Yarvin is non-theistic: rule of the CEO dictator who has no worth other than the military and effective business leadership.
Jim’s Christianity however puts one in a completely different mindset. Being Christian per definition means to serve. Even the king serves (God) as he rules (his people). This shared sense of serving the same God is what enables cooperation/cooperation. A Christian serves God and hence is much more occupied with fulfilling his role than making all the ‘right’ power moves, and quite interestingly, through fulfilling said role, often ends up making even better power moves.
I think you’re being unnecessarily critical, Alf. While Yarvin is a namefag (actually a facefag at this point) and thus obviously isn’t going to tell the whole truth, he is quite correct to point out that throne comes before altar.
Parts of the right have developed an unfortunate, effeminate tendency to think they should have some say in what kind of king they get. We need someone to rule, we need a king, but he must be a Good Christian King, wise, generous, God-fearing, patient, erudite, etc. It reads like a woman’s list of 50 requirements for her man, precisely none of which, or at best one or two of which, will actually be satisfied by the man she ends up with.
We don’t get to choose our king, that’s the whole point of having a king. The king is whoever has that power and knows how to keep it, regardless of whether it’s presented as a divine-right monarchy or some bizarre postmodern corporate figurehead. What happens in practice is not that a king is carefully selected from some panel of Christian men of virtue; that’s the democratic fantasy. What happens in practice is that someone seizes power, potentially someone very nasty and not even remotely Christian, and then, having realized that no man rules alone, installs a Christian state religion because it has the best track record at creating order and prosperity.
Yarvin speaks to the elite who would seize power. His critique of Thermidor, which is entirely accurate, is not that they aren’t Christian enough (they may or may not be), but that they still aren’t grasping or wielding power effectively. You cannot solve coup-complete problems without the coup, and the coup could be said to be in progress (sort of) but is far from complete, and the answers to completing the coup come from Machiavelli, not Christ.
After the coup is complete then the answers come from Christ, but not before. We here are all preparing for the “after”, anxiously awaiting the return of the king, or simply dictator, who finds himself in the position of needing a new order. Emphasizing the priority of throne is not the same as rejecting the altar; we have to be ruled by warriors, not priests.
In any case, I don’t think Machiavelli in practice means perpetual defect-defect equilibrium, because in the real world, not everyone is a plotter and schemer, and a good king, or should I say prince, is quick to get rid of any schemers close to him, starting with the court eunuchs. Just consider the ordinary, bland white-collar corporate life as an analogue: does everyone want to be manager? Does everyone want to be CEO? Those things come with more money, yes, and more status, maybe, but also a lot more risk and responsibility, and some people don’t want that. They are perfectly content where they are.
The king’s advisors aren’t always, necessarily going to be scheming against him. While it clearly does happen, and has happened many times throughout history, it is almost always a tiny minority faction of the elite, even when the king in question is wildly unpopular. Most people just go along to get along. We actually want a king who is a little bit cynical, so that he is not blind to mortal threats, but surrounded by friends and advisors and inquisitors who are all men of the faith and help keep him on the straight and narrow, so to speak.
Kings who forget the throne, and yield power to the altar, tend not to remain king for very long. Altar is still extremely important, but Yarvin is right: throne first.
Not so. The coup will succeed if the NCOs obey. Not going to obey Machiavelli
Yarvin’s fault is that he comes up with an ideology intended to impress his fellow blue tribe urban monoculture faggot Jewish leftists (Thermidor). Not going to fly. For a coup, need an ideology that the NCOs are going to buy. Which is what Pete Hegseth is selling.
Yarvin is wrong. The enemy faith is still live. Holy war is coming. You have to bring a gun to a gunfight and a faith to a holy war.
And in fact Machiavelli says not to tolerate the schemers and gives a sort of guide to identify them ie he especially says not to trust the flatterers…
There is first of all the obvious retort that this is pretty much the inverse of what the bible says.
Second, the proposition that once the coup is complete Yarvin will, like a jack-in-the-box, suddenly don a cross and say: ‘btw we’re Christians now’ is laughable.
He is an intellectual. We are all intellectuals. Just a fancy modern-day word for shamans, priests, preachers, what-have-you. He is selling his altar, his social technology, right now, in every podcast. And it is not Christianity.
Anyone who is even participating in this conversation is thereby admitting that he cares about power.
I perceived Yarvin’s comments to be addressed to people like “principled conservatives” who don’t understand what time it is.
Sure, and he’s addressing ‘principled leftists’ too for that matter.
But the ‘waking up’ stage was bleeding edge 15-20 years ago. Today, not so much. We’ve moved on, notably solving the women question and the coordination/faith question.
Saying “we” have moved on is repeating the same misunderstanding I was trying to address the other day. Yarvin isn’t talking to us, he is talking to Thermidor, or to the MAGA coalition, or to whatever elements overlap.
Have they moved on? Are they solving the woman question, or even within five thousand miles of solving the woman question? Do they know what time it is? Sure doesn’t look that way from here.
Perhaps Stephen Miller and Pete Hegseth know what time it is. Elon Musk seemed, for a while, to know what time it is, but proved us wrong eventually. Donald Trump and J.D. Vance either still don’t know, or are struggling against a lifetime of habit and conditioning to accept what time it is. And as for everyone else in their orbit… not a chance.
I don’t see any evidence of these folks having a hard time with Christianity. Even if their version of it (aside from Hegseth) is still basically Churchianity, they publicly support it and would likely be willing to promote “real” Christians if they were in a position to do so. Their biggest blind spot, their Achilles heel, is still power; they just aren’t grasping it, or even blindly flailing at it. They still have democrat-brain, or whig-brain; they still think, or act as if they think, that power just magically transfers toward whomever has the most popular support–or that if said transfer is failing to happen, it’s because of a few bad actors. They still think that public executions and private swimming lessons are just an edgy joke.
Obviously you need to bring a faith to a holy war. But you also need to bring guns.
Thermidor is now on board with Trump. Actually seizing power from the permanent government is a coordination problem — needs a large team, look what happened when Musk exited the coalition. After the murder of Charlie Kirk he rejoined the coalition on the basis that “If we do not hang together, we will all hang separately”/
But to actually seize power, Thermidor always needs reaction on board, needs a counter faith that rejects the enemy faith as evil, not merely foolishly overzealous in the pursuit of superior virtue.
Stalin needed Beria, Cromwell needed Monck.
And this, Yarvin fails to address. Yarvin says “seize power” But you cannot seize power from a live faith except with a better faith. Been tried before. Cromwell seized power, but it kept slipping through his fingers until he got Monck on board.
Seizing power from a live faith is holy war, and you have to bring a gun to a gunfight and a faith to a holy war.
Yarvin often makes such references, but not because he understands by ‘Cross’ what we here do. For him Gnon = order in a purely materialist and economic utilitarian sense. For Yarvin religion has at best historically served as a good way to most efficiently build the best Throne. But even then he does so confusingly; his ‘CEO’ is conspicuously atheist/without ideology.
He does not understand the actual role of Altar: neither as holy ideology for the tribe, or as virtue for the elite. Hence why his political philosophy almost never refers to either.
It’s his fundamental flaw. It’s why I could never understand, with his focus purely on absolute executory Power, where and how he drew the line between authoritarian right-wing power and authoritarian left-wing power. He points to the fruits of one over the other as evidence which is the better, but never explains the qualitative difference.
That difference is a reference to what is transcendant/holy. Jim just captured it perfectly and succinctly.
what is your deal with Nick fuentes?
[*deleted for failure to comply with the moderation policy*]
Nick Fuentes is a commie. Goes around saying “I am more right wing than thou because I hate Jews and women more than you do” while promoting socialism, socialism in the name of working class whites that would benefit the woman with ten thuglets by ten different thugs at the expense of working class whites. Hates Trump because Trump has a flying palace and a hot wife, while Nick Fuentes does not.
On religion he is ultramontainist. But only a national Church can save us. An ultramontainist Church is inherently going to promote transgenderism and all the stuff that Nick Fuentes theoretically opposes more than you do. Still, I would rate him as better on religion than Yarvin.
This really is the biggest threat within the right, isn’t it. Unsurprisingly our enemies have latched onto the dumbest thing we have going, the joo obsession, and used that as a point of entry and dividing wedge. It has become hard to talk to chuds about anything relating to joos, which for them now means pretty much everything.
The crown is picked up out of the gutter by solving the woman problem. It will not be done by anybody like Fuentes, who is gay and neo-MGTOW, but not by Trump either who is too much of a boomer and has daughters in key positions.
This “in-fighting” (insofar as those fighting are real people on the side of good and not just shills) over the jew thing is irrelevant and distracting from things that matter. It’s no coincidence that we see it picking up now after the Palestine ceasefire.
Nick Fuentes accurately and self deprecatingly calls himself a spiteful mutant. Hence my complaint that he is a commie and that he hates Trump because Trump has a hot wife and a flying place and Nick does not.
But he has a point — when straight white males grew up being taught by women that they are inferior, hateful, no good, should simply disappear, obviously we do need an identitarian movement. And Nick Fuentes is the leader of that much needed indentitarian movement. Which is unfortunate. It would be better if it was led by sexually and financially successful blond blue eyed pure blooded Aryan male.
Now I am a blond blue eyed straight white Aryan male who is as near to pure blooded Aryan as one is likely to find in this day and age. But identitarianism is just not my thing. But we really do need a blond blue eyed straight male Aryan leading an identititarian movement on the right that is not commie and does not hate Trump for his success.
So is Nick the real deal, or just a controlled asset? I have an innate distrust for his personality but if he’s who he claims to be then I guess he’s not an enemy. I am just afraid he is there to split his followers off Trump and cause chaos in the right.
I think Nick Fuentes is a genuine identitarian. Since straight white males have been educated in a gynarchic environment which teaches them they are inherently sinful, hateful, despicable, and inferior, there is naturally mass demand for a genuine identitarian leader. And naturally some people would seek to become the leader of a genuine straight white male identitarian movement.
Since he is a facefag and namefag, would inevitably catch heat, and be under pressure to become a controlled asset, and then be under pressure to steer the identitarian movement in directions favorable to the deep state.
Pretty obviously, Nick Fuentes is a controlled asset, but plausibly, also a quite genuine identitarian.
Not quite a genuine identitarian. His followers are oppressed by gynarchy, and enraged by it, but he does not oppose the nineteenth amendment. Which makes him a mighty useless identitarian. “I hate women more than you do, and I am a genuine Roman Catholic, but it goes without saying that women should have the right to vote and to deny their husbands sex at whim.”
I think he started off as a genuine right winger and genuine identitarian, but he bent under pressure.
Obviously the latter…
It was once said here that spies tend to get lost in double- or triple-crosses. Nick seems to be playing that game.
I don’t believe you can be an identarian or a nationalist and an ultramontanist at least not in a world that has motorized transport and jet engines. Sounds like some jesuitical bullshit to me.
Two observations I would like to drop here for thoughts:
1. The intent of Elon with Optimus is to use millions of third worlders using VR headsets and finger-sensors, thereby providing mass training data, training data which will solves the classic Jim’s blog observation that a robot cannot fold laundry.
2. The trend of social media being replaced by group chats. I feel like every family has a Whatsapp group chat by now. And I’m personally getting more entertainment from well-honed telegram group chats than traditional platforms.
Current state of the art is that no robots have a world model containing objects with object permanence and entities with consciousness.
This makes it impossible to use “monkey see, monkey do” training on them. They can imitate your actions, but not the meaning and purpose of those actions, so will not notice nor care when the same actions fail to have the same effects because of slight differences in the objects on which the action is performed.
This is analogous to the Tesla problem that millions of human drivers stopped briefly when a child shaped object appeared in front of the vehicle, and then started going forward again after a brief pause, so Tesla learned to do the same, but failed to learn that they waited for the child shaped object to get out of the way.
That the neurotransmitters that signal social interactions have much commonality between lobsters and men indicates that the urbilatarian did have a world model containing objects with object permanence and entities with consciousness.
Nobody has a functional solution to the Leftist problem.
[*deleted for failure to comply with the moderation policy*]
Sure we have a solution to the leftist problem. Throne and Altar governance.
The left are acutely aware of this solution, hence the “No Kings” protest.
When and where have Throne and Altar actually beaten and cured Leftism? Do we have to go back to England in the 1600s for that?
Obvious example, the restoration. Throne and Altar put an end to leftism for over two centuries.
Every left singularity ends in Throne, and Throne lasts according to the vigor and virtue of Altar.
Every left singularity ends in throne, but without altar, it is like plowing the sea.
Does Throne and Altar being Freehold as well?
Assuming you mean bring, it leads to it.
The reason freehold is important is without men being masters of their own homes and own their wives and children, there are gradually no future generations. So throne and altar will get have the person in power with the tools and the incentive to correct things. They can still fuck up, but getting to throne and altar in the first place selects for people who aren’t blue pilled.
So we do have to go back to England in the 1600s for that, just like NEET said, then.
No, it didn’t, it only lasted 28 years, because the Restoration was ended by the “Glorious Revolution.” The “Throne” ceased to be the Throne the moment Parliament proved able to evict its occupant and select a new one, no matter how much some people “piously pretended” that that wasn’t what happened. It did happen, that’s all that mattered, and the Throne has been effectively vacant ever since they imported Georg Ludwig from Hanover to ensure that Britain never again had an actual king (while Walpole grabbed much of the resulting “power leak” to become the first Prime Minister).
That is Victorian period leftists rewriting history to give themselves older roots.
Which is not entirely false. It was the whigs taking power, and the whigs were the left. But is not entirely true either.
One of the key issues was a standing army. The revolution rejected the existence of a permanent standing army. Surely this is a right wing position?
It was not that they wanted parliament to exercise power. It was that they wanted the King to not exercise power.
Which created a vacuum that should have been filled by a strong Church. Being filled by a weak Church, came to be filled by the left.
If the revolutionaries had wanted the King not to have a standing army but had wanted parliament to have a standing army, then would be fair to call it a leftist coup.
The rise of the left was “occasional observance”. Which was supposedly greater tolerance of religious deviation, but in practice was intolerance of old type Christianity and enforcement of postChristianity. And postChristianity did not get the upper hand until 1820 or so.
The precedent that parliament could formalize de facto the removal of a king who had lost goes back to when they deposed Richard II in favor of Henry IV. Also happened multiple times between Henry VI and Edward IV. Henry Tudor avoided it by making a terror inducing power move of proclaiming that he had become king one day before Bosworth and making all lords who fought for Richard apply for pardon. What happened to James II was not a new thing.
It was new in the sense that James was not kicked out by the prince of orange , no the left called the prince and offered him the throne, if it was the prince of orange landing same as Henry , then that a different matter.
in general I agree with moldbug thesis that the rot started with Elizabeth allowing powerful men exercise power on her behalf, resulted in puritans smelling power being ceded and since then it was leftism march with the usual unprincipled exceptions.
True, but the best system was modernity, corporate capitalism plus coverture, corporate capitalism is modern book keeping based on protestant Christianity, coverture being a direct expression of Biblical law on marriage.
And this lasted unchanged from 1660 to 1820, effortless shrugging of leftist attacks, spiritual, ideological, and physically violent.
So the stuff you are complaining about seems frivolous to me. It would have been leftism with a republic of wicked men, and it became leftism when the elite became wicked, but it was not leftism at the time. And that marriage and modern capitalism survived to 1820 shows it was not leftism, or not leftism as we know it. Modernity survived from the the fifteenth century to the eighteenth, and in England from 1660 to 1820.
It was very similar to what happened to Richard II, with Richard II Henry Bolingbrooke landed and he was so unpopular his army just abandoned him. William of Orange landed and James II was so unpopular his army just abandoned him. The invitation differed really only in that it made it clear William would be treated more as a rebel english lord rather than a FOREIGN invader.
It’s hard to say the rot started with Elizabeth when England started her reign off as a bankrupt backwater (that had just lost Calais) and ended as the world’s leading maritime power. Charles I made a huge mistake in embracing the Jesuit Laud, that basically guaranteed civil war. And Scotland prior to Laud was politically royalist but religiously the lowlands at the time were run basically by the Puritan equivalent of the Taliban. Trying to introduce Catholic style services was of course about as well recieved as trying to impose 3rd wave feminism on Afghanistan. Elizabeth and James had both the crypto papist and extreme Puritans well under control Charles should have continued their policy.
Off topic, but to the fellow who was interested in stack machines some weeks ago: there is of course the long-running project of Yarvin himself, Urbit (e.g., https://urbit.org/blog/contributor-spotlight-dozreg-toplud ) which as I now recall features a stack machine at the bottom. Your capacity for jargon will be tested, but it’s really not worse than a cell biology course or the typical IT nonsense for that matter. Contribute or use for inspiration.
My excuse for not mentioning them is that they are not top marketers and stay in underwater mode for months. I forgot about them.
There is also Smalltalk-80, which I believe had a stack-based VM and used a sympathetic ‘world as a binary image’ approach. The classic Smalltalk-80. The language and its implementation is freely available nowadays, I believe.
I’ll skip past the Java JVM, which I suppose is the most popular stack machine. The main learnings was that you have to compile away the stack machine to go fast, but I also liked the bytecode verifier that checks that the bytecode is well-formed. This has led to a small track of securing VMs. Another learning is that in spite of vast effort, it’s difficult to make real Java applications fast and scalable. No doubt there are many causes, but I think a key one is because of the big ball of mud, er vast tangle of objects, structure.
I think there are valid modern cases for small and efficient even if less powerful forms of coding. Consider the shift towards telegram style group chats. There’s no reason to have each individual messenger application define say, a checkers board, rather you can have an open language that produces a little (or big) box in any app that supports its interpretation, so it compiles into an interactive VM, then you just have to sync state between users. People today are sharing memes with JPEGS and MP4s. We could have interactive memes. Pull the dagger out of the pop-up pirate and so on, which just reference and pull from JPEGS and MP4s. The ecosystem here would be whole-piece chunks of code, a page or so, not metaprogramming with multiple files and multiple teams, but fun and small things. On a phone we can browse tens of thousands of old jpegs with a swipe of the thumb and if chunks of low level code were built and shared, we could have a similar approach to small and interactive tiny apps. I think this concept even includes documentaries. The advantage of replacing a great deal of documentary content with text codes are numerous (would anyone dispute?), and people say it can be done with SVG and javascript, but I don’t see ‘youtube of svg/javascript’ or ‘tiktok of svg/javascript’ and I can think of downsides.
There is someone messing about with this but hasn’t written up any documentation and is still getting there. His idea is super-tight abstract codes, sharable as one chunk (‘alphanumeric’) that will fit into a text message or at the end of a url, that translate to a whitespace and symbol-containing language via simple character-replacement. The indented code compiles into stack based virtual machine instructions. A rough example of a documentary:
https://eventscript.org/0/#hba0bv%22/mona.jpg%22bv%22/athens.jpg%22ba1bv%22/lorem.txt%22bx3n1r6bx1ndx3i2abx7nr1bx8nr1bx9nr2be2bax11n0bax3nx68bax4nx69basx12nn0bvx1ndx3i2bvx2ndx4i2bax12nx12cg0badbv1bwx5n0bv3bwx5ntx12d1ui1bv3bwx0n1ctx12d4ui6bwx1ndx3hx0i2bwx2ndx4hx0i2bv3bv1bwx1nx1dg0be1bax2nr3bax4nr3bax3n1r4bax1ndx3i2bax11n2bax16n0r03bax20nr5bax19n0bax18n0bax17n0bax12nx12cg0badbv2bwx14n0bwx15n100bv2bwx14n100bwx15n200bv2bwx14n200bwx15n300bv2bwx14n300bwx15n500bv2bwx14n500bwx15n600bv2bwx14n600bwx15n700bv2bwx14n700bwx15n800bv2bwx14n800bwx15n900bv2bwx14n900bwx15n1000bsx12nn0bx12nx12cg0bsx12p14bae3bvx3nx68bvx4nx69bvx11n1bvx0n1r2bvx1n0bvx2ndr8
The alphanumeric code stored in the url becomes the nested form inside the box on the right. Each line is an instruction, each instruction ran every frame, but with conditionals/jumps. You can type LABELS to see a crude partial translation of the tight instructions to human readable ones, for example x12=x12+g0 translates to time=time+dt. To see the stack-based VM instructions underneath you can type OPS
There is an interactivity example, click a screen to flap a bird
https://eventscript.org/0/#sx12nn0bae1x1n2r2bag11n0bag12n1bae1x2nf6t1udr5bx12nx12cg0bx3n2bx1ndx3i2bx11n0be1bax11n1bax7n1bax4n2bax3nr2bax1nx1dg0hg12basx1od2r2bvx1n2r2bvx2nf6t1udr5bvg12ng12h1r15be2bax11n2bax7n0bax3nr2bax4nr2basg142wbvsg11o0bwg11n0bvg11nd2abax2nx2cg0hg11i2bag11ng11cg0h3bse2x1ce2x3pe1x1base2x1oe1x1ce1x3bvse2x2ce2x4pe1x2bwg11n0bwe2x2n0bwe1x1n2r2bwg12n1bwe1x2nf6t1udr5bse2x2p1le2x2od1bag11n0bae2x2n0bae1x1n2r2bag12n1bae1x2nf6t1udr5bhba0bv%22/background.jpg%22bv%22/pipe.jpeg%22bv%22/bird.png%22
Urbit (and I swim against current trying to understand it) seems to get more fundamental than any of this, as ADD and MUL and pretty much everything are themselves definable, in fact they literally do have to be defined. There could well be some kind of deep insight there in the long run but it is beyond my own reach. I find my thoughts devoted towards how a tight string of alphanumerical characters could represent say, pong (and hopefully things even more useful than pong) in a way that is enjoyable to understand, organise, share, and unpack conceptually. Surprisingly silly when you think about how easy it is to share a 50mb piece of media from a phone in a text message but we cannot send the 100 bytes or so representing the concept of pong (at least, the steps to run it would vary a lot, and the whole process to get it running being unattractive).
There is something earlier called chip-8 in the 1970s which aimed to be a kind of universal VM, where the user directly writes the bytecode, smalltalk of course compiles objects and methods into bytecode. I have complaints about past attempts. One big example (i’ll focus on it to avoid typing too much) is the focus on pixels/rasters in the output, an obvious technical necessity of past eras, but now we have easy scaling and retina displays, I find myself believing that anything outputted from a universal VM should be compositional in nature, and therefore can find itself displaying ‘in a box’ but be totally indifferent, ideally even unaware, of the number of pixels in that box, is trapped towards using only universal concepts like relative distance from the centre. It has the advantage of forcing everything to be fully scalable, which often more than makes up for what was lost from the occasional good (and often very bad) implementation of ‘responsive’ design.
This implies that output is html with inline svg. Eg, an “app”.
For code to do the same non trivial and interesting thing on two different machines implies an enormous amount of shared context, which shared context has been growing and growing over the years, resulting in less and less portability
Which has in turn resulted in appimage and docker files, where one wraps a reasonably compact program in gigabytes of context.
For this to be useful, each small part of that context needs to be represented by a hash, and larger parts by a hash of those hashes, so that if one has a lot of programs wrapped in their context on your machine, we do not get identical chunks of context duplicated over and over and over.
A2:
Certainly the hardware itself is designed and tuned for stack operations, but at the application level I like lambda expressions. I don’t mean a hyper-pure and hyper-typed language like Haskell. I mean a language that implements lambdas lightly on top of ordinary C routine calls, fully embracing side effects without shame (e.g. https://github.com/chkoreff/Fexl).
When you have lambda expressions implemented by substitution, you then have closures. When you have closures, you can write domain-specific APIs that handle program logic in a normal imperative style, with embedded mutable data that you cannot see outside the API. The context in which a piece of code runs can be isolated as rigorously as desired.
There are immutable data structures such as strings, numbers, lists and tuples. The mutable data structures, specifically associative records, character buffers, and variables, merely point to immutable data. That prevents the wackier kinds of data corruption.
All the high level data structures are reference counted, so I’m never worried about memory allocation and don’t have to contend with the complexity of a mark-and-sweep garbage collector.
Directly circular data structures are technically possible using records and variables, but the general advice there is (1) Don’t do it, and (2), If you do it, break the cycles yourself before you let go of the root object. I myself never do it. Even wild abstractions like infinite lists can be represented with the fixpoint operator.
Because the language is close to C, it’s always possible to optimize low-hanging fruit by writing a C routine and binding a symbol to it. In a sense you can view the application as being “written in C, but with a very powerful configuration language.” That for me has been the sweet spot, a well-worn groove with a palpable sense of “clear air” when writing all sorts of code.
FYI Jim, your site backup links are 404’ing on me
Thanks for the heads up.
Fixed now.
A cron job runs every night regenerating the backups and purging the blog database of potentially incriminating data. Something funny was happening with the special case protection of wp-config.php, which was breaking stuff.
I revised the cron job to be robust in the face of weirdness.
deleted for lack of passing the moderation test
If even a poor Negro or Musselman can manage to keep their wife at home
deleted for lack of passing the moderation test
Old type Islam, just like Old type Christianity, can keep wives at home, because both view their wives as their rightful property.
Blacks don’t do wives. They very rarely transition from the mating dance to marriage.
Another case of successful player burnout? Once you become a successful apex player you lose interest in playing.
https://x.com/Cobratate/status/1989981131933090086
I just finished Margaret Atwood’s 1985 novel The Handmaid’s Tale, and I must say, it’s truly visionary. Atwood saw that a fertility collapse was already in progress and that states would have to take drastic measures to reverse it.
In the 1990s the Republic of Gilead is a totalitarian Christian socialist terror state with many enemies — Baptists, Catholics, Quakers, and Jews who refuse to convert or emigrate to Israel.
Gilead’s young war heroes get fourteen-year-old virgin brides, while older men of good standing, if their wives have failed to bear children, get surrogates. Cat-ladies and other useless people get sent to “the colonies” which are actually mobile forced-labor battalions.
In the low-tech impregnation ritual depicted in Chapter 16, we see that protecting the wife’s feelings is more important than getting the surrogate pregnant.
The narrator is a 33-year-old feminist who was caught trying to flee the country, sent to a re-education center, and later assigned as a surrogate to a high-ranking official in Cambridge, Massachusetts.
It seems that around 1990 a group of Harvard professors sat down together and said, “Guys, this gaynigger feminism shit isn’t working. Let’s kill the homos, send the niggers to camps in North Dakota, and impose Biblical patriarchy on white women.”
“But elections…” “Canceled.” “But protests…” “Machine-gun them down and thank God that our enemies were so foolish as to assemble in the open like that.”
I don’t want to spoil it for anyone but the book does not end with strong empowered women, niggers, and gays overthrowing the regime and bringing its evildoers to justice. Maybe that happens in the Hulu version; I haven’t watched it.
Because women usually not consciously but sometimes consciously want to forcibly impregnated by high status men. So of course a woman types about it as if it’s horrible while she has her other hand between her legs.