Money has functions four

A medium, a measure, a standard, a store.

1. Medium of exchange

The US centered financial system has become less and less functional for exchange, with international bank transfers becoming ever more dangerous and difficult. Cutting Russia out of SWIFT was a huge additional blow to this functionality. Countries now need to keep some foreign reserves in the Yuan or the Ruble, in order to enable transactions, and are starting to do so. Israel, among others, has added a tiny amount of Yuan to its foreign reserves, and correspondingly decreased its dollar and EU holdings by a tiny amount.

I was expecting far bigger moves, far faster, but it begins. Slower than I expected. Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent, but they correct eventually.

In the commodity markets, someone who is making preparations and spending money with the intent of delivering a commodity, such as ingots of copper, sells a on the commodity exchange a promise to deliver, in return for a promise to pay a certain price, thus he knows when he is spending money to dig and smelt the copper, how much he is going to be paid. Similarly, someone who is preparing to build something, for which he will need a great deal of copper, buys a promise of delivery at a certain price, and these promises are traded on the commodity exchanges. When the time comes for both parties to fulfill the contract, the supplier delivers the commodity to somewhere ten thousand miles away from the commodity exchange, and gets paid the agreed sum by a speculator on the commodity exchange, and the buyer pays a different agreed sum to a different speculator on the commodity exchange. This makes the entries on both parties books meaningful, connects the paper book keeping to reality, and ensures your books accurately depict activities that will deliver a stream of fiat money.

Reality now is that commodity exchanges are defaulting on contracts right, left, and sideways.

“Sorry, sanctions” says the commodity speculator as he pockets your money.

“Also Anthropogenic Climate Change, Covid, Environmental, Social, and Governance” he says as he pockets some more. We are seeing a collapse of trust and trustworthiness among the elite operating the financial system.

In order to move goods over distance, you need financial system you can trust. And lately the elites operating the financial system have been acting in a conspicuously untrustworthy fashion.

“You contracted for delivery of urea, and it was not delivered, and in consequence your corn crop failed? Sorry. Can’t be helped. Environmental, Social, and Governance.”

To move goods over distance, particularly commodity goods with fluctuating prices, we are going to need a blockchain, an immutable append only data structure. But to connect a blockchain to physical things, like land or urea deliveries, would require a stationary bandit who enforces property rights witnessed by a blockchain, so that he can tax those property rights and so that his military logistics works. Need the social technology, as well as the software.

2. A measure of value

You look at dollar prices to see if something is too expensive or a good buy, but with rapid inflation your past experience and your intuition is worthless.

The US dollar has become disastrously less useful as a measure of value, and the physical shortages you are seeing are a reflection of this.

As I posted previously: A business is built on its books, and when you have rapid inflation, the books are meaningless. It is like trying to build a house using rubber tape measures and silly putty set squares. Normality bias is built into the way a business operates, so they get hit first and hardest when the seigniorage tax approaches and exceeds the Laffer limit.

3. A standard of value

You contract in dollars for future payments, as when buying real estate with a fixed interest mortgage.

Mortgage rates are rising rapidly, but are well below inflation, and so far, are rising substantially slower than inflation. So real estate at ridiculously high prices with a high interest mortgage is likely a very good buy.

The financial risk of buying real estate at a high price with a high fixed interest rate, is that the government will successfully check inflation. Last time the government successfully checked inflation was the Reagan era, which required a long period of real interest rates that reflected real inflation. If the government has the will to raise interest rates to match real inflation, and if it has the financial capacity to do that without defaulting on the national debt, then real estate might well be a bad buy. What are the chances that the government has the will and financial capacity to do what had to be done last time?

The big risk with real estate, as a great many wealthy people in blue state America are discovering right now, is not that government might suddenly discover the will and capability to halt inflation. It is that government might well lack the will and capability to defend your property rights. All those lily white people in lily white neighborhoods full of three million dollar mansions put out their socially required Black Lives Matter signs, and voted to defund the police to prove that they were good persons, and, surprise surprise …

4. A store of value

If you store value in US dollars, you are paying a very high seigniorage tax.

703 Responses to “Money has functions four”

  1. [*deleted by error, sorry*]

  2. […] There recently was some discussion about how powerful Elon Musk is, what constitutes power, and the Riddle of […]

  3. Severian says:

    LOL, the FAA has delayed the Starship environmental review again.
    Fourth time now.

    • DavyCrockett says:

      Well yeah even if they were considering allowing it to go through there was no way in hell they would after it was announced twitter would accept his deal to buy it and go private, especially when he posted the john Lennon meme and the Overton window meme.

  4. Jimmy says:

    >> 2) If you were Musk right now, what would you do?

    > Prepare a bolthole on the fringes of the Russian or Chinese hegemonies. Outer Mongolia seems like a good place to build and launch rockets. Also, invest heavily in cryptocurrency. I would buy Polygon, not Twitter. Buying Twitter is normalcy bias.

    Polygon is utterly meaningless. 99% of the public has never heard of it. Leftists wouldn’t be shitting their pants in public if Musk bought Polygon.

    Crypto? Musk owns the most important companies in several market sectors. He’ll never have any need for crypto. Anything he wants will never be more than a call or text message away, with whatever form of payment he wishes to make, if the other party even wants payment.

    Regardless, if you think the richest and arguably most powerful private citizen on the planet might need to flee to the fringes of Russia or China, what hope is there for the rest of us?

    This place has gone ridiculously black-pilled in recent months despite a HUGE improvement in fortunes for our side.

    I don’t get it. I really don’t.

    • jim says:

      > > > 2) If you were Musk right now, what would you do?

      > > Prepare a bolthole on the fringes of the Russian or Chinese hegemonies. Outer Mongolia seems like a good place to build and launch rockets. Also, invest heavily in cryptocurrency. I would buy Polygon, not Twitter. Buying Twitter is normalcy bias.

      > Polygon is utterly meaningless 9% of the public has never heard of it. Leftists wouldn’t be shitting their pants in public if Musk bought Polygon.

      Indeed they would not shit in their pants, they would pay no attention. They would be very badly mistaken in paying no attention.

      Which is why Musk could get away with it, while it seems increasingly unlikely he will get away with buying Twitter.

      Indeed, it is starting to look as if he will not be able to get away with launching rockets for much longer. What made him think he will get away with enabling freedom of speech on Twitter?

      It is only possible to operate openly and freely if you stand outside the intellectual horizons of our enemies, and ambush them from behind a jungle of complexity.

      NASA died because rocket technology is incompatible with leftism, indeed all modern weapon capability is incompatible with leftism. They are beginning to realize this. They are ceasing to inadvertently chase our technological capabilities away, and starting to deliberately chase our technological capabilities away, recognizing technological capability as a threat to their status system. Tech wizards and tech prophets are a threat to the status of those who have memorized fifty nine buzzwords for sexual identity, just as Christian priests and prophets used to be before they capitulated to globohomo.

      • Pooch says:

        Indeed, it is starting to look as if he will not be able to get away with launching rockets for much longer. What made him think he will get away with enabling freedom of speech on Twitter?

        Conservative elite are attempting to conserve the dead, dying Republic, not fully convinced it is no longer breathing. They are supportive of Musk buying Twitter because they think free speech matters and is important. When the Biden government steps in to block it in an egregiously illegal manner or allows the deal to go through but egregiously intervenes against free speech, they will get some more proof that the Republic is no longer worth conserving.

      • Jimmy says:

        > Which is why Musk could get away with it, while it seems increasingly unlikely he will get away with buying Twitter.

        According to whom?

        Even Biden and the White House are shitting their pants publicly over Musk’s purchase of Twitter. If Musk was so easy to shut down, why the pathetic public pants-shitting?

        Musk isn’t an incompetent buffoon like Trump. The Shaniquas and trannies who populate our “elite” (hahaha) aren’t going to do shit to Musk. They know it, and Musk knows it.

        • Andy says:

          Just back footed AOC, but maybe only a few weeks/months of fun before the Ministry of Truth intervenes?

          • Andy says:

            Oops, see Pooch already noted down thread

          • Jimmy says:

            Yeah, I’m sure Elon Musk is shaking in his boots over these low-IQ wackos:


            • jim says:

              These whackos can indefinitely imprison him without trial under torture.

              If he is not shaking in his boots, it is normality bias. He should be preparing a bolthole. Maybe he already is.

              • Jimmy says:

                Totally nuts.

                At last check, there were about 20 Jan 6 people still behind bars, none of whom have two nickels to rub together and most of whom were dumb enough to give prosecutors the rope with which they’re being hung.

                The idea that Elon Musk — who is a lot smarter, a lot richer, and a lot better liked than Trump — is going to get tossed into jail, indefinitely, without charges, is totally insane, not “normality bias.”

                • jim says:

                  In 2017, you would have said that what happened to General Flynn and the Jan 6 protesters was totally insane.

                  Nor is it true that they do not have two nickels to rub together. Plenty of them have decent money, and plenty of people with a great deal of money want to get them out. Like Russia, they are demonetized, not without money.

                • Jimmy says:

                  > In 2017, you would have said that what happened to General Flynn and the Jan 6 protesters was totally insane.

                  Flynn and the Jan 6 protesters both dug their own graves.

                  [*Official Cathedral disinfo deleted. We have been over that ground too many times already and anyone still pushing it is willfully ignorant or deliberately lying. In neither case is discussion likely to be profitable.*]

                • jim says:

                  The facts on General Flynn and the Jan 6th protesters have been discussed elsewhere, at great, and indeed grossly excessive length, and I am not going have that stuff on this blog. I got bored with it real fast, when it became absolutely obvious in the General Flynn case that nearly everyone on the official side was willfully lying and not going to stop no matter what facts and evidence were presented. If we attempt to debate it, the debate will go on forever because you are not going to stop either.

                  My eyes glaze over.

        • jim says:


          Trump did not have much power even while president.

          But he still even today has enormously more power than Musk.

          Musk is merely rich. Trump cannot kill people or have them imprisoned, unlike Cathedral operatives, but he can unseat rinos.

          • Jimmy says:

            Trump had little power as president of the United States but he has more power right now than Elon Musk?

            You can’t be serious.

            Trump is so pathetic, he’s not even allowed to tweet. When he gets that ability back, it will be because of Musk.

            Trump is still out there pushing the clot shot and claiming lockdowns saved lives. He’s a total clown who has learned nothing.

            Trump does, indeed, still has a bunch of low-IQ supporters, but if you truly believe that voting is over, as you’ve said countless times, then Trump’s supporters are meaningless.

            • jim says:

              > Trump had little power as president of the United States but he has more power right now than Elon Musk?

              > You can’t be serious.

              Even I have more power than Elon Musk, for he is tweeting my memes, which he probably received not from me directly, but from an ever growing body of people on a variety of platforms, the meme warriors, and meme magicians. I am not tweeting his memes.

              In the long run, ideas always rule, for an army needs a faith. The trouble is that the official faith right now is evil and stupid. When Constantine rose to power, the official faith was merely stupid.

              • Jimmy says:

                > Even I have more power than Elon Musk, …

                This is a bizarre mix of Trumpian delusion of grandeur and gibberish.

                You do not, in fact, have more power than Elon Musk, and neither does that pathetic pussy, Donald Trump.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Do you know the answer to the Riddle of Steel?

                • jim says:

                  The riddle is that the ability to control what people think is more powerful than the ability to punch holes in them with sharp objects.

                  And the answer to the riddle? Why, it is that within that can dismiss efforts of mind control.

                  I know the answer, but do not have the words to say it. Jimmy’s mind is controlled, so obviously he does not know the answer, or even the riddle.

                  I could say it is the holy spirit, but I suspect that two people talking about the holy spirit are not talking about the same thing.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  I was asking Jimmy, mostly rhetorically. You have the right of it. When Thulsa Doom shows Conan the answer, he commands a woman to kill herself for him, and she does. “What is steel compared to the hand that wields it?” I would say that it is the final understanding that distinguishes the PC from the NPC. Once you know your own will, can you ever really be controlled by another? Sure, you can enslave a man or bargain with him, but there is always something there that is his that you cannot replace with that which is your own.

      • pyrrhus says:

        The Twitter deal looks like it’s going to happen…afterwards, who knows? But it’s God’s own truth that Musk’s approach, not hiring Shaniqua and trying to hire the best, would lead to the kind of success that cannot be tolerated by our woke elites…

    • alf says:

      Yes if only we could go back to the optimism of before recent months, when this blog’s proprietor hadn’t gone to extreme lengths to hide his id and location. Oh wait….

    • Karl says:

      Musk is not powerful. He is rich and therefore can buy many things, but he cannot have anyone arrested, he cannot break legs or kill people.

      Think about it. What if Musk were your enemy. What would you fear?

      What if some ranking drug cartel member were your enemy? What would you fear?

      Musk isn’t even as powerful as a local crime lord.

      • Jimmy says:

        Drug dealers kill people to make money and most of them spend their lives in hiding or on the run.

        Elon Musk has more money than every drug dealer alive and enjoys it publicly.

        Your example needs work.

        • Pooch says:

          Drug dealers and criminals kill people for any reason or no reason and if they are hiding or on the run it because they fear a greater power, a rival gang or the biggest gang of them all, the state.

          Power grows out of the barrel of a gun.

        • Skippy says:

          Elon Musk does not publicly enjoy money e.g. his girlfriend complaining that he wouldn’t replace a mattress.

          This is one of his strengths.

          It isn’t very clear that Musk even has much/any actual cash. His net worth is mostly theoretical sale value of securities. His main source of ‘power’ is that his enemies are heavily invested in these securities, especially TSLA.

          • The Ducking Man says:

            After some point a “thing” can be too interconnected with a person.

            I wouldn’t call musk’s case of not replacing matress as being stingy. I can imagine him being too used to his mattress that he can’t bother replacing it.

            As mattress enthusiast myself, I know that meager $5,000 to $10,000 is already so far up in quality scale that it hardly worth it upgrading.

      • Starman says:


        ”Think about it. What if Musk were your enemy. What would you fear?”

        The Russians and Chinese fear Musk’s absolute superiority in outer space.

        • Karl says:

          If they do, they fear him him like a weapon in another man’s hand. His superiority in outer space may make someone else powerful. Musk does not wield that power himself.

          No man is powerful if he cannot imprison people, have people beaten up, maimed or killed.

  5. The Ducking Man says:

    Off topic, but I have question for guys here who gone through mid-life crisis.

    How’s life after your mid-life crisis?, what things you did in that phase?, how did your wife react during that phase?

    I’m not here arguing the existence of such term in reality. I’m asking because I recently I had “itch” to return being pre-marriage wild (motorcycling, ADV, and I also feel like starting side business). I Suspect it might be what people call mid-life crisis.

    Money wise is no issue, my only concern is wife might not respond too kindly since she never knew my wild side.

    • Adam says:

      The more you do what you want to do, instead of what she wants you to do, the more alpha you need to be. The more she does what you want her to do, instead of what she wants to do, the more alpha you need to be.

      Depends on how bad you want to live your life. If you want to keep your wife, and keep her happy, attention is a woman’s favorite drug. If you want to focus on yourself, going to have to pass a lot of shit tests.

      A practical note, giving your wife a good fucking once a day can smooth things out considerably. Don’t be afraid to be rough about it. Try to send the message that she’s on the inside of your life and not on the outside.

      • Oog en Hand says:

        “The more you do what you want to do, instead of what she wants you to do, the more alpha you need to be.”

        Correction: The more you do what you want to do, instead of what she wants you to do, the more alpha you are.

      • Neurotoxin says:

        “The more you do what you want to do, instead of what she wants you to do, the more alpha you need to be.”

        No. No, no. No no nonnononononono. You have this bass-ackwards. Your frame is oh so very wrong.

        The more you do what you want to do, instead of what she wants you to do, the more alpha you will seem to her. Yes, you’ll be shit tested. And the magic secret is… just deal with the shit tests. Be a mensch.

        • jim says:

          Right on.

          You have an important mission. Much more important than her. If she is your mission, she is going to leave. The more you do what she wants you to do, the more impossible things she will demand. Her real objective, of which she is not consciously aware, is to make it impossible for you to do what she “wants you to do”, to make you man up.

          • The Ducking Man says:

            Thanks guys for the affirmation.

            I guess my concern is substantiated, but I just need to man up more.

  6. nnms says:

    1. What evidence is there that the red pill is stronger than the black pill? Why do you think that status, confidence, and the ability to be violent is more important than face/height? Especially when the state has organized socialism and whore children get food. Isn’t it profitable for a woman to look first of all at appearance in such conditions in order to get healthy and beautiful children?
    2. You talk a lot about religion, but don’t you think that in conditions where there are no organized religious communities, and in schools they teach that religion is something unfashionable from the wild Middle Ages, religion works only through true unshakable confidence in own convictions? If a person does not truly believe, will this work for him?

    • jim says:

      > 1. What evidence is there that the red pill is stronger than the black pill?

      Black pillers die alone. Red pillers score.

      > Why do you think that status, confidence, and the ability to be violent is more important than face/height?

      Direct personal experience. Plus, it is obvious.

      And if you do not have any real life experience of women, hit the porn racks and romance racks. Stuff intended for a male audience is all visual, all about looks. A man can accurately assess a woman’s fertility in thirty seconds at thirty paces. Stuff intended for a female audience is all text, all about alpha, as women assess alpha, which is often startlingly different from the way males measure alpha. Takes a while to assess alpha.

      > religion works only through true unshakable confidence in own convictions? If a person does not truly believe, will this work for him?

      Works for me, whose faith is as a mustard seed, and whose sins are manifold.

      Come to think of it, they made Saint Nicholas a saint, despite the fact that he engaged in some of the more conspicuous misconduct as I engaged in. And they made Justinian a saint, despite the fact that some of his wars turned near genocidal. Clearly he did not intend that they would be genocidal, but in war you do what it takes to win, and this is apt to have adverse effects on the civilian population.

      So even I am not entirely out of the running to be sainted, though anyone who knows me would think it entirely unlikely.

      • Guy says:

        At the store the other day saw a short obese man with his stomach over his belt and his man tits visible through the open armholes of his tank top. His girl was hot, fit, well put together in terms of dress and makeup, bubbly and happy. The man had a look on his face that communicated he was not agreeable in the least and short of temper. One of the more extreme examples, but it’s emblematic of the way things are.

        The mother of my child also was way “out of my league” but I beat the shit out of anyone else who got in my way and, lo and behold, she’s with me 20 years later.

        Pretty boys can get girls, especially young ones, but they’ll go and fuck a real man first chance they get. The media will tell them pretty boys are cute, and they’ll superficially “believe” that for a little while, until push comes to shove.

        • Adam says:

          Best compliment my wife ever gave me, we were watch The Sopranos and I asked her if I was a gangster, she said “no your a thug, gangsters are pussies”.

      • someDude says:


        Saints are over-rated!

      • nnms says:

        I looked at female porn, I see that men dominate and take an active role, but I don’t see men with the appearance of Denis DeVito, I see men with the appearance Henry Cavill. Maybe appearance is not as important as dominance, but still important enough.

        Well, if faith works without crystal certainty, why does it work in your case?

        • Adam says:

          Size matters, and looks too. Heartiste posted a study once that confirmed the greater the difference in height the greater the attraction, rated by appearance only. So looking the part matters.

          That being said, if you can’t act the part, your toast. Look at any number of high profile athletes and celebrities that have women run around on them or worse.

          Have to be able to hold frame and pass shit tests. Dominant men do that. Dominant men, defective men, take pleasure in hurting someone, as it feels good to dominate someone. Making someone low status make you high status. And if you can do that your better off than just having looks.

          • jim says:

            You can get by without looks, but you have to somehow get your foot in the door for long enough to pass a shit test, which is considerably harder without looks. And without looks, a shit test may not be forthcoming, hence the neg, which is pre-emptively interpreting something as a shit test.

            Hence leading with a neg.

            But, having passed a shit test, you are now in a better position than the handsome young man who gets paid to put his handsome face on other people’s products, but who is apt to fail a shit test.

            Looks matter in the first ten minutes, but after that, relatively unimportant.

            Also, simply being seen from a distance as alpha male of the group is going to way outweigh looks.

            I was waiting in a restaurant from my group to arrive. In the restaurant were two chicks much younger than I. Whenever you see a female group out, they are out to be picked up. Sex is always on a woman’s mind, but, being solo, I was of course utterly invisible to them, so pre-emptively ignored them. I was waiting quite a while, which would confirm my low status in their eyes.

            I was facing away from the door, so that I could avoid being seen as looking at those two chicks, which would have further confirmed my beta status that I was advertising by being solo waiting in a restaurant. My bodyguard who is alpha as hell, arrived, leading my group, which meant he was approaching from behind. Big, tall, handsome, and just acts alpha with every breath he takes, like a lion on the prowl. Now his normal behavior with approaching someone from behind is to just walk up and slap them on the back, but he always acts respectful to me. (He even acted respectfully when helping save my life, when slightly less respect would have been useful.) So he walked up behind me and hover handed me. Which to supersensitive female alpha radar was like a bomb going off. Thereafter, those two chicks were trying to catch my eye.

            Clarifying the overly grandiose status implications of this story. I could never afford a bodyguard for any length of time, and certainly cannot afford it now, so only employed him during the relatively short period when one of my identities needed a bodyguard. I do not routinely have, nor need, nor could afford, bodyguards. That overly conspicuous, dangerous, and expensive identity is now retired, and my current and all recently deployed identities are lower in the male status hierarchy than that one.

    • Adam says:

      Women look for dominance. Who is going to succeed in defect/defect, and impose defect/cooperate on others. Height and face is good all else equal, but looks are not going to pass shit tests. Imposing your will on a woman will pass shit tests.

      • jim says:

        Good looks certainly work in getting ones foot in the door, but then comes the shit test. I spent a while hanging out with a guy who got paid money for allowing his face to be used on other people’s products, and observed what happened.

        Good looks provide a huge benefit in the first thirty seconds, but after ten minutes, largely irrelevant.

        • Adam says:

          Exactly. Handsome gets her forebrain to say yes, dangerous gets her pussy to say yes. Best to be both, but if you can only be one, be dangerous.

    • Aidan says:

      Because my face and height have been the same since I was a teenager, and my prospects with women varied throughout my life. One week, I am working as a waiter during the summer, acting polite and serving people. Tons of hot girls come through the restaurant- almost impossible to get laid at work. Almost impossible to bang my coworkers. The next week, I go back to college, where I am the baddest dude in my social circle, and immediately start swimming in pussy. Clearly my genetics changed overnight

      • someDude says:

        Clearly! That’s got to be the only explanation.

        But on second thought, you might be mocking us. So it’s possible that your genetics did NOT change overnight. Probable, even. Now what could it be?!!? Hmmm! I know your comment has a clue somewhere, but Dang it! I can’t seem to find it. Let me think about it day and night and perhaps I’ll figure it out sometime by the end of next week.

        Perhaps nnms can do better!

      • The Ducking Man says:

        I’ve read about being “bad boys” over and over, but I still cannot picture what does it really mean being bad boy.

        I mean it’s pretty easy being bad boy when your job is F1 driver, fighter jet pilot, or drug dealer.

        But what about good portion of population who does 9 – 5? what activity that’s practically possible for those people that still count as bad boy’s activity?

        • jim says:

          Hey, you could be a mafia legbreaker, and it would be largely irrelevant to whether a woman sees you as a bad boy.

          It is the capacity to break the rules and get away with it. Very much interrelated with shit tests.

          Being a fighter pilot or a war hero is irrelevant. Being a drug dealer, alarmingly relevant. Cheating at poker for serious money alarmingly relevant. Try to taste the difference.

          I pass by mistreating women in highly illegal ways, and everyone just smiles and laughs, and I pass by being plausibly willing to kill people, including her, should they seriously wrong me.

          Women are attracted to serious defection from cooperate/cooperate. I don’t do that. But they are also attracted to the capacity to one sidedly impose cooperate/cooperate on unequal terms.

          • The Ducking Man says:

            > > you could be a mafia legbreaker

            > Hugely impractical, no mafia around where I live.

            My point was not to suggest you me a mafia legbreaker. I was telling you that being a mafia legbreaker would not help.

            > I’ve been facilitating underground dealings for my company, my wife doesn’t seem to really care.

            Nor would I expect her to care. That is not the kind of badness that women find cool. That is what I meant when I told you that being a mafia legbreaker would not help.

            Not only are female perceptions of alpha two million years out of date, their perceptions of badness are two million years out of date.

          • skippy says:

            “It is the capacity to break the rules and get away with it. Very much interrelated with shit tests.”

            A good job for being good with women is “mysteriously monied unemployed person.” A fighter pilot has a lot to lose.

        • Adam says:

          One part that guys fail to pick up on a lot, is how much female attention you get, and your sexual options. Hot chicks are attracted to guys who fuck hot chicks.

          It is somewhat downstream of what Jim said, and you have to keep it going for it to keep working, but it is hugely attractive. If your alpha, take your wife/girlfriend to Victoria Secret and walk around with her looking for stuff that would look good on her. The other women in the store are going to be looking at you, and your girlfriend is going to notice the other women looking at you. That’s like a line of coke for a woman.

          You don’t have to necessarily do anything criminal to defect. Women don’t have feelings about laws. Displaying sexual and social competency alone will indicate you are defecting from normal.

          • Neurotoxin says:

            “Hot chicks are attracted to guys who fuck hot chicks.”

            This is well known in Game. “Preselection,” “social proof.”

            • Adam says:

              Right. I think guys overestimate how much “bad” plays a role in female attraction to bad boys. Getting away with things most guys wouldn’t (or wouldn’t try to) is attractive, but it’s not necessary to live a life of crime to get pussy.

              Not to mention, committing a crime is not going to help you pass shit tests. Being willing and able to replace your girlfriend because you get a lot of other female attention is going to help you pass shit tests.

              • Pooch says:

                but it’s not necessary to live a life of crime to get pussy.

                Yeah I think Jim over emphasizes this. I have never once, even for a second, threatened violence or crime to any woman and I’ve fuck a lot of bitches. Way too many to count.

              • jim says:

                “Bad” is the potential capability for violence against other men, and against her.

                • Pooch says:

                  and against her.

                  Nowhere in Heartsie does he mention capability for violence against women. I have never verbalized I have the potential to hurt a woman. Not once and I’ve fucked several lifetimes of bitches. But I’m strong and have a muscular physique so perhaps it’s implied in a woman’s mind.

                • jim says:


                  The plot premise of Yona of the Dawn: The protagonist is a princess. The primary love interest is a usurper to the throne who treacherously murders her father the King in front of her, and intends to exterminate the entire royal family, Yona in particular. Yona is rescued, but is passive, reluctant and unhelpful to her rescuer, and keeps getting herself unrescued for the entire series.

                  The entire pile of pirate/vampire/demon/mafia/werewolf/murderer romance.

                  I pick up a random romance, and it opens with the man who is quite obviously about to become the primary love interest murdering his mother by hanging her. The hanging is described in sweaty, passionate detail. The sex is pro forma, not interesting. The writer does not seem very interested, merely there to demonstrate that the primary love interest can get his way with women.

                  In the series “Yona of the dawn” the primary love interest needs to kill Yona, because if she married someone, that someone would have a legitimate claim to the throne. In particular, the secondary love interest is a nice boy revolutionary against the usurper, so the story could be resolved by her marrying one or the other, but it is absolutely obvious which one is getting the pussies of Yona, the audience, and the writers wet. The only role of the resistance seems to be give the usurper rational motive for killing her.

                  The entire pile of reverse harem romance, where there is the bad boy, the nice boy, and the mysterious boy.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I think physically taller and built you are the less you have to make implications of the potential for violence… also you don’t have to if you’re a musician and she likes your music…

                  But generally Jim is right that women like plausibly violent men… the problem i have as a sperg is I will not navigate such nuances well.

                • Pooch says:

                  the problem i have as a sperg is I will not navigate such nuances well.

                  Hit the gym. Lift weights and you’ll be fine. I’m not plausibly violent and have never implied that I am. Still fucked and continue to fuck.

                  Don’t get me wrong slapping my girlfriend when she’s argumentative to the point of absurdity would make my life easier. Still have not done it and have never threatened it. Maybe my relationship will ultimately fail because of this who knows.

                • Red says:

                  Nowhere in Heartsie does he mention capability for violence against women. I have never verbalized I have the potential to hurt a woman. Not once and I’ve fucked several lifetimes of bitches. But I’m strong and have a muscular physique so perhaps it’s implied in a woman’s mind.

                  It was discussed in Heatsie’s comment section by some of the bigger names there. One man described how is girlfriend once asked him what he would do if he caught her in bed with another man while on a road trip to vegas. He replied that he’d shoot the guy and her. She got real quiet for the rest of the drive and then fucked him like a wild animal when they hit the hotel room.

                • jim says:

                  I seem to recall Heartiste frequently posting about hot chicks writing hot letters to men in prison for vile violent crimes.

                • Red says:

                  Hit the gym. Lift weights and you’ll be fine. I’m not plausibly violent and have never implied that I am. Still fucked and continue to fuck.

                  Pooch is right. Also getting bigger makes you more sure of yourself if you have to fight and very few men will fuck with someone who’s jacked. Easy to do thug game when no one wants to fuck with you.

  7. Mike Thalassitis says:

    They have announced a Ministry of Truth (“Disinformation Governance Board”) as part of the Department of Homeland Security.

    1) What do you make of this? Is this strength – going mask off because they know they can do whatever they want? Or is it weakness – they don’t think they can control the narrative using their usual methods?

    2) If you were Musk right now, what would you do?

    • jim says:

      > 1) What do you make of this?

      Observe my total lack of surprise.

      > they don’t think they can control the narrative using their usual methods?

      Usual methods? Every year or two they escalate to methods ever more radically unusual. The Ministry of Truth is one more step. Not very many steps remain before we reach the Khmer Rouge killing fields.

      > 2) If you were Musk right now, what would you do?

      Prepare a bolthole on the fringes of the Russian or Chinese hegemonies. Outer Mongolia seems like a good place to build and launch rockets. Also, invest heavily in cryptocurrency. I would buy Polygon, not Twitter. Buying Twitter is normalcy bias.

      Ministry of Truth is obviously a reaction to the specter of free speech on Twitter. If Musk permits free speech on Twitter, he is likely to be arrested and either given the Jan 6th protestor – General Flynn treatment – indefinite imprisonment without trial, or the Epstein treatment. I was expecting a pile of people to be Epsteined by now. It has not happened yet, but indefinite imprisonment without trial under extraordinarily harsh conditions is happening on a massively escalated scale, and quite obviously there is intent that something will happen if we get free speech on Twitter.

      Should have been building a bolthole and developing technologies to enable the Sovereign corporation. Polygon is owned by our enemies, but is developing tech that would be wonderfully useful and effective for that purpose.

      At the moment that our enemies own Twitter causes us far more harm than that our enemies own Polygon, but Twitter cannot be fixed by the methods of free market capitalism, Polygon can.

      • Kunning Drueger says:

        Everything seems to be normalcy bias these days. Might be trying to bang Perrfect while Good is being swept off her feet and carried away by people who aren’t so blackpilled.

        Musk is building an Info Epoch War&Peace machine. He is following all the steps you assert that Putin should follow. He has a satellite network, a surface to orbit regularization machine, a company that builds underground tunnel networks, an obscene amount of bitcoinz, and he just took control of the second most popular public communications platform. He’s quite literally building a 21st century SovCorp, and he’s doing it without going to jail, getting cancelled, or losing status. Maybe it’s just coincidental that he’s putting himself on top of the latest military, social, and financial instruments of power.

        A few lifetimes ago, I was on a contract job filming instructional videos for an ad company disguised as a tech company. They were in the process of taking over the background bureaucratic operations of the Census Bureau, and the videos were about how USG handing over the reins to a company was sweetness and light and oh so legal. This was ~2008. If Musk is making a move and not just naively, accidentally building a competitor for USG, he will at some point soon make moves towards entertainment, education, and/or bureaucracy.

        • Cloudswrest says:

          I’ve speculated that Musk is basically an agent/”drone” for various, more red/rightwing factions in the GAE, perhaps more commercial and/or M.I.C., in the same way that Soros and Gates are drones for the more Left/Woke factions.

          • suones says:

            > M.I.C.

            The M.I.C., aka the Kshatriya-Vaishya Alliance, is the friend and protector of proles everywhere, and they should be grateful for it. The “golden” years of American proles in the 50s were largely due to the efforts of MIC, and proles were largely grateful, happy, and content. It was still the era when a worker would instinctively doff his hat to Mr Ford.

            Eisenhower taught proles to envy and fear MIC because he was a secret Communist speaking on behalf of evil priests. The very coinage “MIC” seems an anti-concept designed to attack harmony in the Aryan caste system. Maybe Jewish.

            Too bad MIC thought it could dispense with priests entirely and neglected to have its own cadre.

            • Anonymous Fake says:

              [*deleted for using the phrase “merit based” in a context where it obviously means madness, evil, and demon worship based.*]

              • jim says:

                Stop presupposing your interlocutor agrees with your world view, that everyone agrees with your world view, when we have gotten tired of rejecting it over and over and over.

                You can argue for your world view, but fake consensus is not argument, and I don’t want fake arguments on my blog.

                You supposedly argue for X, but your actual payload is the supposed shared consensus on Y.

                Activities that require academic accreditation are the least merit based, not the most.

                Who is the greatest rocket scientist in the world? Musk. What is his accreditation?

                Or perhaps Wernher von Braun. OK, he wound up with a doctorate, but he started building rockets before he got a doctorate. His doctorate thesis was “Construction, Theoretical, and Experimental Solution to the Problem of the Liquid Propellant Rocket”. Which of course he had been doing well before he showed up at university. The government classified his thesis as a military secret, which suggests that the government was interested in his rockets before he went to university.

                His career was apprenticeship to rocket makers first, then rockets, then university.

                • Anonymous Fake says:

                  Fake consensus arguments are one of the Cathedral’s most powerful rhetorical tools and throwing them back at them is effective [*”hail fellow peasant. I am a fellow peasant on your side against your enemy, who is the is the kulak with two cows, fellow peasant” deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  1. You are not throwing fake consensus arguments back at the Cathedral. You are throwing the Cathedral’s fake consensus arguments at us.

                  2. Fake consensus is not effective against the Cathedral, and it is only effective for the Cathedral because they have all the loudspeakers and silence all disagreement. To the extent that people are able to voice disagreement, fails to be effective.

            • The Cominator says:

              The MIC red empire is better than the other side but its very wrong to make them out to be saints…

      • someDude says:

        Aha! Polygon. Let me add this to my list of cryptos. Thanks, Jim!

    • Mister Grumpus says:

      Who here thinks that Elon doesn’t already “know” everything there is to know here? Or rather, has a certain amount of political ignorance and disinterest been a crucial ingredient to his willingness to work so hard to be as successful as he is?

      I got this wrong last time. I was sure that Trump knew he had to cross the Rubicon. But he didn’t. He’s also still out of jail, so I got that wrong too.

      One thing I want to point out though. The only way to get people off of Twitter and onto something else, preferably something more crypto-durable, is to get Twitter destroyed first.

      Cathedral can easily wreck Twitter, at any of 33 protocol stack levels. Everyone knows that. But then there’s no more Twitter.

      (I’m amazed they didn’t flip it into a not-for-sale NGO Clinton Foundation side-show when they had the chance.)

      So unlike with Parlor or the Daily Stormer or whatever, they can’t simply do what they did before, which is nuke the website. Now they have to suddenly switch to prosecuting Elon personally.

      But again. Who doesn’t believe that Elon doesn’t already know this?

      • suones says:

        But again. Who doesn’t believe that Elon doesn’t already know this?


        Over the years I’ve developed a heuristic: always assume the enemy is as or more competent than he looks, and also that allies are weaker than what I expect.

        Charles II underestimated proto-Harvard, Prithviraj underestimated Ghori, White Russian traitors underestimated Red degenerates, National Socialists underestimated Stalin’s hordes, Japanese warriors underestimated Kansasian farmhands.

        Uncle Putin underestimated Zelensky. Rus gay army underestimated A3OB.

        I learn from Halaku Khan — when the Caliph of Baghdad refused his offer, he not only sacked the city, but also ensalved the population, and trampled the Caliph under horses. If Putin did not have the ability/willingness to trample Zelensky and depopulate Kiev, he should have stayed far away. Which, “co-incidentally,” is what Rus is doing NOW, after losing who knows how many good men in boondoggles like Hostomel.

        So yes, I made a mistake with Trump, and assumed he was not as stupid as he looked. Not with Elon. He is every bit as naive as he looks, and I will continue believing this until he does something to prove otherwise.

      • Neurotoxin says:

        If the bad guys have any kind of restraint they’ll just have the SEC and other regulators tie up the purchase of Twitter forever. After reviewing it for two years, they’ll deny it. Then he’ll have to take them to court. Then the courts will side with the SEC, game over. It’s hard to imagine them allowing Musk’s acquisition to proceed.

        Also, Musk has some partners in the takeover bid; he’s not literally ponying up $44 billion of his own money. His partners, a few large financial institutions, are bound to be subjected to “heightened regulatory scrutiny” in the very near future. It can’t be stated on the record, but it will be made plain to them that this wave of audits, reviews, lawsuits, etc. will go away if they jump ship on the Twitter bid.

        • The Cominator says:

          This is the most realistic scenario…

          • Jimmy says:

            > This is the most realistic scenario…

            No, it isn’t. There are zero grounds for delaying the sale, let alone blocking it. It’s not like Facebook or Google is trying to buy Twitter.

            > It can’t be stated on the record, but it will be made plain to them that this wave of audits, reviews, lawsuits, etc. will go away if they jump ship on the Twitter bid.

            You think these people didn’t know leftists would be opposed to the deal?

            • Neurotoxin says:

              “There are zero grounds for delaying the sale, let alone blocking it.”

              You’re assuming law still matters.

              “You think these people didn’t know leftists would be opposed to the deal?”

              Investment banks aren’t exactly shy about taking on risk.

            • The Cominator says:

              “No, it isn’t. There are zero grounds for delaying the sale”

              The grounds are they want to and they can. When things become political the law doesn’t matter… like the election steal.

              Stopping a multi-billion dollar takeover on some legal pretext looks normal enough so they’ll make something up.

  8. i says:

    Thoughts on this essay on the history of Socialism from Ancient history?

    “Shafarevich has singled out the invariants of socialism, its fundamental and unchanging elements, which depend neither on time nor place, and which, alas, are looming ominously over today’s tottering world. If one considers human history in its entirety, socialism can boast of a greater longevity and durability, of wider diffusion and of control over larger masses of people, than can contemporary Western civilization. It is therefore difficult to shake off gloomy presentiments when contemplating that maw into which–before the century is out–we may all plunge: that “Asiatic formation” which Marx hastened to circumvent in his classification, and before which contemporary Marxist thought stands baffled, having discerned its own hideous countenance
    in the mirror of the millennia. It could probably be said that the majority of states in the history of mankind have been “socialist.” But it is also true that these were in no sense periods or places of human happiness or creativity.

    Shafarevich points out with great precision both the cause and the genesis of the first socialist doctrines, which he characterizes as reactions: Plato as a reaction to Greek culture, and the Gnostics as a reaction to Christianity. They sought to counteract the endeavor of the human spirit to stand erect, and strove to return to the earthbound existence of the primitive states of antiquity.

    The author also convincingly demonstrates the diametrical opposition between the concepts of man held by religion and by socialism. Socialism seeks to reduce human personality to its most primitive levels and to extinguish the highest, most complex, and “God-like” aspects of human individuality.

    And even equality itself, that powerful appeal and great promise of socialists throughout the ages, turns out to signify not equality of rights, of opportunities, and of external conditions, but equality qua identity, equality seen as the movement of variety toward uniformity. ”

    What is strange is why Plato was such a Socialist.

    • Varna says:

      Shafarevich is the author of one of the best books on Jews on the market today, which he worked on for decades.

      He starts with Mesopotamia, goes through Cleopatra’s Egypt with its institutions completely taken over, then the slow takeover of Rome, and then onward to more modern history.

      Jumps through hoops to try make things as “neutral” as possible.

      • russophobe says:

        In English?

        • Varna says:

          Nope. 95% of the social science and political books published in Russian would never be published in English even before the current new cold war. Far too reactionary. Even the socialists sound like David Duke.

          (same goes for the thrillers and sci-fi, for that matter. 95% Mickey Spillane social mores reacting to a 21st century world, in the case of the protagonists)

          So only arduous copy-pasting in online translate services. Or use of current crisis to finally brush up on Russian. Who knows. Maybe sane Russia whisperers will again be needed a few years from now.

    • S says:

      The essence of socialism is priestly rule- observe all the pre-enlightenment examples were theocracies- and in Greece philosophers were attempting to seize the priest niche.

      So Plato is telling everyone how the ideal state is one ruled by people like Plato.

    • yewotm8 says:

      “It was written by a mathematician of world renown: in the Communist world, practitioners of the exact sciences must stand in for their annihilated brethren.”

      Describes the comment section here as well.

  9. Pooch says:

    Good article by Moldbug in which he lays out pretty clearly how to coup:

    Therefore, upon inauguration, the first step of the new President will be to declare a state of emergency.

    In every state, the President will call out the National Guard; put the Guard under the command of the military; and put all police agencies under the Guard. The President may simplify this command structure as needed—and must remove all officers who do not click through a DocuSign committing them to the new constitutional regime.

    According to the Constitution, the President is the commander-in-chief of the military.

    The major problem with this is I can’t possibly see how the President pulling this off could be anything but a warrior. History shows us Caesarism is a warrior’s game. Hitler, Mussolni, and even Hugo Chavez, all being examples of dictators that rose through legal democracy and party politics, were military men.

    • Red says:

      Moldbug continues to print hopeful garbage so people will continue to donate him. The US Constitution matters about as much as the Soviet One did. In a bureaucratic system, one must use bureaucratic means to take power, like Stalin did. Remove people who are not your guys, and put your guys into power. Then execute a coup.

      Take a look at what DeSantis has done in Florida, he’s using the bureaucracy and other levers of power the left takes for granted as his personal tool. Blue man is removed and replaced with a DeSantis loyalist. Step by step he’s turned Florida into a hard Red state.

      • Pooch says:

        The US Constitution matters about as much as the Soviet One did. In a bureaucratic system, one must use bureaucratic means to take power, like Stalin did.

        I could see that although Stalin had a ton of experience from the Russian Civil War. I would still count him as a warrior or a quasi-warrior. I don’t know if we have the equivalent in our bureaucracy. The FBI are just a bunch of faggots, not warriors.

        The warriors are in the military so I still think any American coup would have to originate from the Pentagon somehow.

        Blue man is removed and replaced with a DeSantis loyalist.

        What blue man?

        • Red says:

          What blue man?

          Every blueman he can get his hands on. See Com’s posts about DeSantis firing and replacing the law enforcement officials in charge the Dem counties so that they can no longer rig the elections there.

          Stalin was a warrior/bureaucratic. He replaced men loyal to his foes with his men and he did via the bureaucratic rules.

          • Pooch says:

            Stalin was a warrior/bureaucratic. He replaced men loyal to his foes with his men and he did via the bureaucratic rules.

            The problem with the Stalin comparison, is that Lenin had already done the heavy lifting of regime change before Stalin came to power, establishing One-Party rule and himself as the unofficial official monarch of the empire.

            When Lenin was in his old age and in declining health, Stalin, sensing the succession battle on the horizon, started putting people in place for him to win that succession battle.

            This doesn’t exactly track for our current situation. We would necessarily need a Lenin before we got a Stalin. Likely would mean the GOP being completed ejected, criminalized, and banned. In the ensuing chaos one Democrat would become the leader of the party and the empire.

            I don’t find this particularly likely though. The Two Party/Uniparty system just still seems quite stable to me in its power.

            • Kunning Drueger says:

              I don’t think 1:1 historical similes work, but maybe Trump was Lenin Desantis is Stalin?

              • Pooch says:

                Hard to see that, given Trump had barely any power, and Lenin had absolute power.

      • ExileStyle says:

        DeSantis could honestly be The Guy. Military experience, sheer alpha indifference to convention and polite decorum (an alpha energy which has single-handedly turned FL from ambiguous purple to deep red in just a few years btw), knows that politics ultimately boils down to simple friend-enemy distinction (not “principles” or conservative nostalgia or whatever the RNC thinks they stand for), and so identifies enemies and then acts against enemies with little effort and rapid effect.

        He is running Florida like Hungary or Russia: Leader has Plan, Leader’s Men write Law for Plan, Legislature passes Leader’s Law. So far virtually no stumbles or serious resistance, let alone failures.

        It all seems so effortless to him. I suspect he is just testing boundaries at this point, seeing just how far he can go without serious effort. He also seems to have that dash of inhumanity, disdain, indifference, or whatever you want to call it that all serious rulers require to overstep known existing bounds to power and take the definitive step.

        An interesting and promising man in any case, regardless of outcome.

        • Pooch says:

          Military experience


          DeSantis has been a brilliant conservative. But a conservative is not what we need. We need someone who is going liquidate the current regime and replace it with absolute Caesarism.

          • The Cominator says:

            DeSantis could do it perhaps but he’d do it more via administrative snowballing of power ala Stalin…

            • Pooch says:

              I would love to be proven wrong, but history tells us Caesarism is a warrior’s game, not a lawyer’s.

              • ExileStyle says:

                If, as Jim suggests, the weapons of war have changed from guns and bombs and tanks to information and ideas and language, a lawyer-warrior might be just the solution called for.

                Stalin is the best parallel I think. While experienced in violent crime like bank robbery, he was not a member of the warrior class. He mastered a new political system, and navigated his way through its new rules, and then imposed his own rules.

                Neither was Cromwell a military man, until he made himself into one after already becoming powerful.

                Military experience, regardless whether combat or not, also matters in shoring up support among other military veterans, and serves an important PR function. Militaries are societies of initiates, and DeSantis is an initiate, regardless of his skill with weapons or military strategy. That counts a lot for millions of well-armed men in the US.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Interesting that is true, Cromwell had no military background (other than militia drills) until he was 43…

                  And I don’t think he ever lost a battle (there was one siege battle in Ireland he won ugly with heavy causalties with him accepting enemy terms after a couple failed storming attempts NOT Droghedra)…

                • Aidan says:

                  We say warrior and not “military man” because it is a spiritual quality. Cromwell was a warrior from the day he was born. So was Stalin.

                • Pooch says:

                  We say warrior and not “military man” because it is a spiritual quality. Cromwell was a warrior from the day he was born. So was Stalin.

                  I do believe this. Heroism, courage, valiance in face of death. These come from within and cannot be learned.

                • Pooch says:

                  Interesting that is true, Cromwell had no military background (other than militia drills) until he was 43…,

                  The movie Cromwell (1970) I think does a good job at depicting this. I thought it was really well done even if it wasn’t exactly historically accurate fro brevity’s sake. It’s particularly anti-Catholic so I would especially recommend it to you Com.

          • Red says:

            We need someone who is going liquidate the current regime and replace it with absolute Caesarism.

            Not going to happen. Rome had had 50 years of Generals imposing their will on the state before Caesar. The cathedral system is designed to avoid a Caesar or a Bonaparte by keeping military men low status, isolated, and only promoting political generals. We might get one if things get bad enough, but there’s more ways than one to skin a cat.

            A DeSantis or Intel spook is more likely than a Caesar.

            • The Cominator says:

              One of the last BAP cast had a very interesting marine officer on it, US mil moves all career people around to weaken any sense of unit cohesion so i imagine to make coups unlikely.

              • Red says:

                Yep, the Cathedral isn’t very worried about having a weak military because they want a weak military to protect themselves.

            • Pooch says:

              and only promoting political generals

              Napolean was a leftist in favor of the revolution and low status until the French campaign in Egypt and Syria. Even though France lost, Napolean’s status was raised considerably with his heroism. When he got home, he couped within the coup of Emmanuel Joseph Sieyès.

              I could see something similar where after some sort of engagement with Russia or China, a leftist American General, even someone like Milley, showcases impressive military skill and then coups.

              We should probably get the idea that we will some amazing on the issues right-wing Caesar out of our heads. History shows that holiness spirals are stopped by leftists not rightists.

              • Red says:

                Napolean was a leftist in favor of the revolution and low status until the French campaign in Egypt and Syria. Even though France lost, Napolean’s status was raised considerably with his heroism. When he got home, he couped within the coup of Emmanuel Joseph Sieyès.

                Observe what the Cathedral did to Patton and Petraeus. No popular general is going to be allowed to stay in command of an army and if the danger is high enough they’ll kill him. Patton had spooks following him constantly during the war(those pages from his diary leaked to the press wasn’t an accident) and when he started talking about writing abook about what really happened during the war, they offed him.

                • Pooch says:

                  I don’t doubt that, and any prospective military Caesar or Napoleon who shows competence in battle would need to know that, killing them before they kill him. Patton was unprepared.

                • i says:


                  A competent General needs to have a healthy dose of paranoia that somehow doesn’t go overboard.

                  And is adept at maneuvering in court as much as in battle. Or he has competent loyal subordinates that take care of the political side of things.

        • The Cominator says:

          I like DeSantis but do not reall consider being a JAG a warrior…

          • Pax Imperialis says:

            Being a JAG could have given him some positive exposure to warrior culture. Connections are important. This is being optimistic though.

            JAGs can easily end up seeing the military culture as the enemy because their career is based on overzealous taking civilian legal backgrounds and using it to attack military culture.

            I don’t know DeSantis well enough to know which direction he went.

  10. Pooch says:

    Off-topic question:

    What was the material cause and effect for why the Muslims sacked Constantinople and still hold it today? By all recorded accounts, the Sack of Constantinople in 1204 was much more destructive, violent, and harsh on the entire Christian population than both Alaric’s sack of Rome and the Vandals’ sack of Rome during the 5th century.

    Why did GNON do this?

    • S says:

      The same reason the Byzantine lost in 670 and 1066- their elite couldn’t cooperate and preferred defection even at the cost of destroying the empire. So same issue as their immediate predecessors.

      The Turks hold it because they fought and won in 1919. After that point the West totally self cannibalized and they were safe.

      • jim says:

        In the context of blockchains, when discussing the problem of getting consensus we regularly use the term “Byzantine fault”. And a little story is told to explain what a Byzantine fault is: One general sends a messenger to another general with one story about what he and other generals are doing, and a different general a different story, in order to get those generals, or one of them, killed, so that he can be emperor of what is left of Byzantium.

    • Aidan says:

      The fact that the Byzantine population did not recover after the Justinian Plague tells us that it was not just that the elite was constantly defecting on each other; they were not fertile enough either. The Cominator thinks highly of the Byzantines for successfully waging defensive war on all fronts for a thousand years, but I ask why they needed to wage defensive war at all.

      If you have an enemy that will not relent in attacking you, you need to march to his homeland, put his cities to the sword and fire, and force him to submit. But if any Byzantine emperor marched out to truly pacify his enemies, there was likely to be a different emperor on the throne when he got back, and there would be a civil war, and Constantinople would come out of it weak, and weakness would encourage aggression. In fact, that’s exactly what happened.

      Constantinople was never taken back because white is wolf to whites. An expedition in sufficient force to defeat the Ottomans, which would take a lot of force, would leave the state at the mercy of its enemies back home. If Charles V had succeeded in bringing all of Western Europe into the Roman Empire, or at least close alliance with it, then Constantinople might have been taken back.

      • The Cominator says:

        Depends on the time period… there were Emperors who successfully marched out (Basil the Bulgar Slayer) the problem was advancing on one front even if you weren’t betrayed tended to invite weakness on another. The hordes of the steppes were endless and they always had implacable enemies on the Middle Eastern front (as well as restless provincials because it was the Middle East…).

        • Pax Imperialis says:

          Logistics and geography played a big role too. Unlike Rome which was perfectly anchored in the middle of the med and sheltered on all sides by sea and mountains, The Eastern Empire was wide open plains in the Anatolian region, wide open plains in the Bulgarian region, and extremely mountainous in the Balkans and Greek areas. The Eastern Empire had the simultaneous problem of having difficult to plug boarders with a core that was difficult to project power from. Contrasted with Rome which had easy to plug boarders and, due to naval power and central location, easy power projection.

          Summarized as difficult for Byzantium to defend and attack.
          Easy for Rome to defend and attack.

          Which is why it’s remarkable that Byzantium outlasted Rome from purely a geographic point of view.

          • The Cominator says:

            The Eastern Empire outlasted the West because Marcian (who should have the title the Great) reversed almost all the bad policies of Theodosius that were killing the West, including restoring capitalism.

            • Pooch says:

              The West was already terminal, being sacked twice already by barbarians, by the time Marcian rose to power in the East.

              Rome was the center of gay parades and decadence, got Christianity too late to save it. Although got Christianity in time to soften the blow from Gnon. The barbarians, who were Arian Christians themselves, took mercy on the Christian churches and the Christians who took refuge in those churches.

              • The Cominator says:

                Was absolutely still salvageable, Romes military situation prior to Claudius II and Aurelian was almost as bad.

                • Pooch says:

                  Rome no longer had a supply of competent emperors. All the warriors were dead. Needed them from the East.

                • The Cominator says:

                  In civil wars Western armies pretty consistently beat the East…

                • Pooch says:

                  Not after Stilicho, the last competent military leader of the West. Rome’s prospects died with him, although by playing the various Germanic tribes against each other for a while they were able to stave off the inevitable for another 70 years or so.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Aetius… Valentinian III should have duplicated Marcian’s policies and not killed Aetius.

                  Rome managed to somehow recover enough to fight the Huns (and even get the barbarians to go in with them) after the insane post Stilcho order to murder the families of the Federati.

                • Pooch says:

                  Aetius only a had a small army, but was able to masterfully persuade Avitus to assemble a huge coalition of barbarians to join him against Attila at the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains.

              • The Cominator says:

                When Marcian came to power Constantinople may have been intact but much of the rest of the Eastern Empire had been burned by the Goths, the Persians or occupied by the Huns (Pannonia).

            • Oog en Hand says:

              Theodosius the red-pilled Christian?!

          • Aidan says:

            The Ottomans had no problem at all ruling and projecting power from Constantinople. Clearly they did not think it a poor logistical seat for an empire, and neither did Constantine. If you have wide open plains, you expand your empire until you hit a defensible border, and defend that. Clearly Basil the Bulgar slayer did not kill enough Bulgars. Should have built a pyramid of skulls fifty feet high on the southern mouth of the Danube as a warning for other steppe hordes. But to clean out the barbarians requires that you fill the land you conquer with fertile settlers afterwards. Obvious lack of fertile settlers on the frontier, or the hordes would not have so easily kept coming back in.

            • The Cominator says:

              The Turks were steppe conquerors… and it took them centuries to get off the horse.

              • Aidan says:

                The horse was the preeminent weapon of warfare until the invention of the maxim gun. And the Byzantines were no stranger to horses, relying on their cataphractarii

                • The Cominator says:

                  But they did not live on them…

                • i says:

                  @The Cominator

                  They had food on hooves that subsisted on grass. Milk and Meat that came along with them.

                  Which made logistics easier compared to the settled populations.

                  That’s how it is more possible for nomads to conquer than to be conquered.

                  The settled people would have to come up with increasing the range of farmland and supply depots and canals in order to catch up.

                  Unless they already have an agro-pastoralist economy that allows them to transition to food on hooves with its milk and meat which feeds on grasses and riding horses themselves.

                  Which while making logistics easier also somewhat limits the numbers of troops according to the carrying capacity of the grasses and herds available.

                  China had a hard time chasing the nomads partly because they didn’t raise herds of sheep and goats that could be transitioned to the steppe landscape.

            • Pax Imperialis says:

              The Ottomans also did not draw its core demographic from the highly mountainous and difficult to administer Greek peninsula. Ruling from Constantinople for Byzantium is a completely different orientation than ruling from Constantinople for the Ottomans due to differences in where the core demographic lives.

              That said, the Ottomans also became the sick man of Europe fairly quickly. In about 200 years after the fall of Constantinople Ottoman expansion into the west has halted at Vienna. In another 200 years their empire was falling apart.

              • Red says:

                600 years for an empire is pretty good and I note that unlike the Romans, the Turks still occupy Constantinople to this day.

                • i says:

                  Turks still had sustainable fertility in spite of the Bubonic plague returning again and again.

              • S says:

                The Ottomans aren’t comparable as unlike the Byzantines they only had a single dynasty rule the country. The result was even though they were Muslims they were able to keep a higher level of social cohesion among the elite.

                Also worth noting they abolished their military and rebuilt it from scratch (The Auspicious Incident in 1826); I’m not sure how many other societies could pull that off and not implode.

    • C4ssidy says:

      The iconoclast periods reminded me of jimian elite holiness spirals, similarities both to Protestantism and immigration worship (for iconoclasm is very similar to Islam) . Feels a lot like they had their own version of enlightenment

  11. Cloudswrest says:

    Is this video intended to enrage? It’s like the news satire in “The Running Man” or “The Hunger Games.”

    • Pooch says:

      Late Soviet Republic vibes. When this stupid “Governance Board” starts making Musk censor the right, it only helps to disqualify the regime’s legitimacy.

  12. Pax Imperialis says:

    “What do you mean the US is supplying intel to Ukraine? You’re crazy and have no idea how difficult it would be to supply real time targeting intel! Nothing to see here. Totally because of Ukrainian brilliance and Russian incompetence.” Said the fed shortly after the moskva sinking.

    “US has been providing near real time targeting from the beginning because America is the best in the world and totally not in a proxy war with Russia” Bragged the fed a couple of weeks after the moskva sinking.

    It’s like at this point they are not even putting effort into gaslighting anymore

  13. Severian says:

    The usually biased ISW too now concedes that Russian forces have switched to a more effective operational method. Making slow but steady progress in Donbas.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      Institutions always fail before they succeed; in broad terms, one might say that victory in war goes to the side that can afford to make the most mistakes.

      People can learn, but institutions are not people, and they don’t learn, except to the extent that they are substantially, if not formally, replaced by different institutions, and or are made more like ‘people’ forthwith.

      The more an institution exists ‘as an institution’, the less it can learn; the more it exists merely as a formal expression of the proprietary will of the men involved, the more it can learn.

  14. Encelad says:

    Another hint that Russians might consider changing strategy to conform to Epoch Information war

    • jim says:

      That the Russian forces are “on alert” to do it and not actually doing it yet could imply that this is a threat, and not actually let off the leash yet, or could imply that they are seeking precise targeting information, and their network penetration is very bad.

  15. Pax Imperialis says:

    Fake and gay things are a type of power. Chinese recognized it with the “point to a deer and call it a horse.”

    We can not just dismiss something as fake and gay because we cannot just dismiss power.

    Fake and gay things have to be strangled in the crib before they grow into demons.

    At one point the Quakers/Shakers where just shaking away in their little communes. Today their ideological/biological descendants are “literally shaking” from the halls of Harvard. A substantial increase in their power.

    I must wonder what the world would be like if the British monarchy had managed to strangle the fake and gay religious predecessors that would become the “literally shaking” people of today.

    But the British monarchy didn’t, and now we are here today with a fake and gay prince with his plastic mulatto wife lecturing us Americans about racism with the Queen happily dumping that problem on us.

    • jim says:

      > Fake and gay things are a type of power. Chinese recognized it with the “point to a deer and call it a horse.”

      They are a demonstration of submission to evil power. The evil man imposes a test. When you see other people submit to that test, you know are in trouble.

      But they are also a vulnerability of power. The troops that marched with Constantine did not necessarily believe that the divinity of Christ was real, but they knew the divinity of the emperor was fake.

      • Starman says:

        “The troops that marched with Constantine did not necessarily believe that the divinity of Christ was real, but they knew the divinity of the emperor was fake.”

        Once every Roman soldier realized that the Roman Emperor’s divinity was fake and gay, the Third Century crisis kicked into high gear with the average emperor’s reign being only 18 months.

        • jim says:

          Sudden improvement in imperial longevity when the state religion became Christianity.

          An army needs a faith. The official faith of Constantine’s army came out against Constantine, but Constantine received, or claimed to receive, a divine revelation to the contrary. And his army marched on Rome under the banners of that faith, the major opposition faith to the official faith of his and the enemy’s army.

          In front of Rome, Constantine met an army with twice as much men and equipment as his own. He launched a frontal attack across the line. Zero tactics, zero clever strategy, no maneuver, straight on man on man. Same troops, equipment and training on both sides. Enemy army collapses. He takes very few casualties. Enemy army largely wiped out.

          For as long as Constantine lived, the official faith theoretically remained pagan, but in actual practice it was glaringly obvious that Christianity was now the official faith.

          With the end of the old walking dead zombie state religion, Constantine moves the center of power to what became Constantinople.

          • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

            When God, Himself, say, “Go and conquer in my name,” and you obey, then it will be easy to conquer. The material and effective causation being that your army has a strong faith and theirs does not, because you have God on your side and they do not.

            One reason why I am uncertain that we need any defection from the current elite. They are not, in fact, elite. They have no faith, and therefore little cohesion. Like Constantine, we would require comparatively few men to crush them.

            • The Cominator says:

              The Aztecs may have fallen to a small force of determined men (if ever anything good can be said about Catholicism its the epic deeds of Cortez) but we 1st need a small force of such determined men.

              • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                Agreed. We are not going to roll over them in a week, but the point is the same. We do not need them. We need to build a communications infrastructure that we can use to speak amongst ourselves, and then we wait. Our time is coming.

    • Pooch says:

      Harvard/American Revolution is a bad example of this. At the time of the American Revolution, like the English Civil War before it, the Puritan descended middle class was monumentally more virtuous than the royal court. Very similar to the end of the Roman Kings and beginning of the Roman Republic. Transitioning to a republic is inevitable at that point.

      The better example is the Bosheviks, which should have been strangled in its crib, in fact Churchill used this exact phrasing but got no support from the US.

      • jim says:

        During a holiness spiral, reports of virtue or lack thereof need to be taken with a large pinch of salt.

        • Pooch says:

          The Puritans of the mid 17th century were incredibly virtuous with an average of 7-8 children per woman in wedlock (Cromwell himself being a shining example of this virtue with 9 children to one wife).

          Charles II had zero legitimate children and something like 13 illegitimate children from 9 mistresses, many of whom were married. This is a massive drop in virtue of the Royal Court from the Puritan middle class. It was this lack of virtue that ultimately bit hard during the Queen Caroline debacle.

          The Congressional Congress, and founders of the Constitution, who gave authority to the American Revolution in the 18th century were not quite as virtuous as their Puritan ancestors of the 17th century, as the holiness spiral was just beginning, but still plenty virtuous, more virtuous than the Royal Court.

          This lack of virtue of the English monarchs has resemblance to the last king of Rome, Lucius Tarquinius Superbus, who was overthrown by the virtuous Patrician-class for his egregious lack of virtue.

          The problem with the Puritans was not their lack of virtue, but their lack of any guard rails to maintain their incredibly high virtue, having no Confession of Faith and no official hierarchy of their State Church, enabling the holiness spiral by Harvard.

          • DavyCrockett says:

            Well that means James II was more virtuous than Cromwell, with 10 Legitimate children.

            It’s too bad that the Calvinists, Puritans, and dissenters were too unvirtuous to allow him and his successors to rule and instead overthrew any real power the British Monarchy had permanently with the “Glorious” Revolution, which ensured the total supremacy of Parliament/Democracy over a limp dick fake monarchy starting with William of Orange, who was so unvirtuous he had ZERO children, no children at all.

            James II was also remarkably virtuous in that he personally commanded troops in the field, on the sea in the Navy, on land with the Cavalry, personally subjecting himself to risk on both theaters of war many times.

            • The Cominator says:

              He converted to Roman Catholicism and Catholicism is demon worship.

              • DavyCrockett says:

                Not in the 1600s.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The Jesuits existed then and caused the 30 years war…

                • DavyCrockett says:

                  Jim has made dozens of comments and posts about Counter-Reformation Catholicism of the 1500s and 1600s being a good religion and a good state religion along with 1500s/1600s High Church Anglicanism.

                • jim says:

                  Sack of Rome led to a wonderful improvement in Roman Catholicism. The old grotesquely evil heresies are still theoretically doctrine, but they are buried in the basement under the pile of junk beside the water heater.

                  But apostolic succession exclusively through Peter is still a fatal flaw. It is also an obvious lie, because that line of apostolic succession has been extinguished and replaced in a highly irregular fashion more times than you can shake a stick at.

                  The practice established by the apostles was that anyone with apostolic succession can give someone else apostolic succession, as in the old feudal system where any knight can make another man a knight, though of course, to the extent practical he should do so with the consensus, or at least the likely consensus, of the others. And when Christianity became the state religion under Constantine, feudalism followed.

                  The doctrine of Papal apostolic succession through Peter, through one man, was established so that the Pope could effectively lead armies in the field, could tax and conscript. It is not the job of the high priest to lead armies in the field, still less to tax and conscript.

                  After the sack of Rome, the Pope retired from leading armies in the field, and from taxing and conscripting, leading to the doctrine of apostolic succession exclusively through Peter becoming a useless and dangerous encumbrance. It also means that the Roman Catholic Church is stuck with a pile of evil and dangerous heresies sitting in the basement underneath the pile of junk beside the water heater.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Catholicism became less obnoxious to Catholic monarchs after the Emperor sacked Rome… if said Catholic monarch could plausibly invade Italy. But some like Henry VIIi could not.

            • The Cominator says:

              Really Charles II should have agreed to naming the Duke of Monmouth as his heir…

            • Pooch says:

              Well that means James II was more virtuous than Cromwell, with 10 Legitimate children.

              And 4 illegitimate children by his various mistresses.

              If any King is to be commended for his virtue it’s George III who had 15 children with a single wife and no mistresses, rather remarkable for the scandal-ridden court that was the norm at the time. Ironically, he was the King who presided over the American Revolution.

          • DavyCrockett says:

            Also even if your fairy tale view of the Puritans was true, which is extremely dubious and doubtful, the fact that their system only lasted for about a hundred years give or take a bit speaks to how unvirtuous they were in practice outside of an idealized view of a few individuals and events. If your religion almost immediately devolves into Unitarianism, deism, and atheism after just a few generations of being free then that means not so virtuous as you thought you were, and actually exceedingly unvirtuous and viceful.

            • Pooch says:

              Also even if your fairy tale view of the Puritans was true, which is extremely dubious and doubtful, the fact that their system only lasted for about a hundred years

              That system lasts to this day.

              There is complete continuity of ideology, organization, personel, and physical headquarters going all the way back to the founding of Harvard. Same people, same headquarters, same belief system, continually changing, but only changing by a small amount at any one time, even though over the centuries these continual small changes became enormous changes.

              • The Cominator says:

                Nah the Puritans lost power to unitarian entryists and the unitarians devolved to Fabian progressive commies.

                • Pooch says:

                  The Unitarians were the Puritans. Same family tree, same people, same ideology, continually changing…

                • The Cominator says:

                  Presbyterians considered Unitarians heretics and they were either driven to Rhode Island or killed.

                • Pooch says:

                  Presbyterians considered Unitarians heretics and they were either driven to Rhode Island or killed.


                  Unitarianism was the state religion of New England that crushed the Christian South (many of the Southern elite were Presbyterian) in the War of Northern Aggression.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Unitarianism was considered heretical in Mass Bay and even the more tolerant Plymouth colony…

                • Pooch says:

                  Unitarianism was considered heretical in Mass Bay and even the more tolerant Plymouth colony…

                  In what century? By the time of the Civil War, it was the dominant religion of Massachusetts.

                • The Cominator says:

                  At the time of the original Puritan settlement though by the 18th century the religious laws were not enforced with such zeal…


                  Rhode Island was the proto Unitarian colony originally and it was so pozzed it tried to stay neutral in “King Phillips War”… Mass got subverted by unitarians later on… and perhaps Jesuits in Unitarian guise.

                • Pooch says:

                  Not seeing anything that Roger Williams was a Unitarian. He was a bit too extreme for the Massachusetts Bay Colony Puritans and got exiled by them.

                  The Puritans changed into the Unitarians by the will of Harvard, and not through any means but for Harvard.

                • The Cominator says:

                  But what subverted Harvard, not originally a Unitarian place and originally hostile to them…

                • jim says:

                  Harvard was rotten to the core from the day of its founding, for it was formed by ministers of the Church of England purged by Charles the Second for coveting what is Caesar’s.

                  Albeit even those purged were clearly Christian, unlike their modern successors, for Cromwell had a short way with the post Christian elements of Puritanism, which were subsequently resurrected by Marx, Marxism being post Judaic Judaism, as woke is post Christian Christianity.

                  The Donatist heresy is the core of all holiness spirals. The Caesar of each state Church should, when he deems it necessary, decisively influence the selection of Bishops, and if necessary, purge, and possibly execute, the high priest – albeit such unpleasantness should be extraordinarily rare, and ordinarily Caesar should accept the advice of the consensus of the leaders of the flock, with each Bishop influencing the consensus in approximate proportion to the size of his flock, in approximate proportion as he can get followers to volunteer to do useful work, in approximate proportion as his flock show up for communion, and in approximate proportion as his flock show up to be hatched, matched, and dispatched.

                  Feudalism resulting from the rise of Constantine, and it tends to be dated from Constantine, though it developed over time without a clear starting date or definition, being an inherently irregular form of authority with lots of local variation, and an inherent ability to more or less tranquilly accommodate a lot of local variation, was the practices of the apostles of the New Testament being applied to secular authority.

                  Secular accounts of Constantine, of feudalism, of the Holy Roman Empire, of the unification of England by King Alfred, of the travails of the Kings of England from Charles the first to George the fourth, and so on and so forth completely and radically miss the point and ignore what actually happened. Faith is the basis of large scale cohesion, and large scale cohesion the basis of armies and power. All history books that leave out the role of faith in these events are whig history.

                  Each good Christian state Church should remain in communion with, and the leaders of each flock should make decisions collegially with, all other good Christian state Churches, forming one Christian Church with many national Churches. Caesar should attempt to observe the peace of Westphalia, even with states whose religion is not good Christian, but often, if the state religion of another state is not Christian or not genuinely Christian, that is not going to be feasible, because the enemy state will be attempting to subvert your state religion with the intent of overthrowing your Caesar.

                  The chaplains of our current army are no longer its chaplains, but its lawyers, with which it is infested, and their faith is as fake and gay, and as cynically disbelieved, as the divinity of Caesar was. The Republic is over, and with it, legality is over. A new faith is needed, preferably a very old new faith, and after it rises, a new legality will also be needed.

                • Pooch says:

                  Jim probably has a better answer. It became the point of entry by Enlightenment-influenced theologians and ministers attacking the original orthodox Calvinism of the Puritans.

                • Pooch says:

                  Harvard was a power leak, it had immense power and no way to guard this power, liberal ministers saw the apples rolling around on the floor and proceeded to dive at them starting the holiness spiral.

                • The Cominator says:

                  So we agree that Harvard itself in a time of declining faith (it was not subverted at the time of sinners in the hands of an angry god)…

                  But was the subversion organized and if so by who?

                • Pooch says:

                  Not organized.

                  This guy was one of the first subverters as far as I have found. I would read up on him if you want to dive into it further.


                • jim says:

                  > Not organized.

                  Not organized from outside. Organized from inside. Harvard subverted Harvard from the beginning, and continues to do so to this day.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I’m not sure the 1st stage of subversion at Harvard as far as i can see was Armianism… the same way that was the 1st stage of subversion of the Calvinist church of England (under Elizabeth I and James) was subverted by Armianism…

                  I don’t think its coincidental and i think the same group was behind it but i unfortunately can prove nothing.

                • Pooch says:

                  Harvard was rotten to the core from the day of its founding, for it was formed by ministers of the Church of England purged by Charles the Second for coveting what is Caesar’s.

                  Harvard was founded in 1636 during the reign of Charles the First so I don’t think this fits but it seems things started getting really fouled up with the State Church of Massachusetts theologically in the 18th century so could be influences from those purged ministers.

                • Pooch says:

                  I’m not sure the 1st stage of subversion at Harvard as far as i can see was Armianism…

                  Yes the first stage was Armianism, one predestination was removed, the flood gates were open for Enlightenment thought into the Church.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Harvard may have been rotten originally… but lets say even the old rot of Harvard had a very different character than it did later or now…

                • jim says:

                  Indeed it did, very much so.

                  And by today’s standards, 2008 Obama was a flaming nazi.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I’m not convinced the Armian and Unitarian subversions weren’t from the outside…

                • Pooch says:

                  Not organized from outside. Organized from inside. Harvard subverted Harvard from the beginning, and continues to do so to this day.

                  Jim is right. There were just no mechanisms in place to stop its subversion, being the unofficial official Vatican of the State Church of Massachusetts. Secretive hierarchies are always evil.

                  Here is a great book discussing it in detail:

                  Do a search for “john Leverett”, the first Harvard President who really enabled the holiness spiral.


                • skippy says:

                  Old Harvard would have looked insane to Europeans, including Englishmen, at the time. It’s post-WWII normality bias to believe the USA and its precurors were ever sane.

                • pyrrhus says:

                  That was already starting to happen in the 1950s. I was there as a kid and found it weird…..but Harvard in the 1960s was surprisingly conservative and backed the Vietnam War…

                • The Cominator says:

                  The problem with the Vietnam war was that it was the 1st foreverwar… no plan to achieve victory.

                • jim says:

                  The problem with Putin’s Ukraine war is that his plan to achieve victory was World War II blitzkrieg, which did not work and is not going to work.

                  The polygon plans a forever war, and if in five years, or ten years, or twenty years, Russia stops fighting, they start advancing, eventually all the way to Moscow. They will take it slow, so that no one step runs a high risk of going nuclear, but will arrive in Moscow in due course, after numerous not-peace peaces.

                  So, needs a new plan that can achieve victory.

                  Victory is not achievable with existing equipment. Needs not only new tactics and strategy, but new equipment, which will take a while.

                  Is now switching to Information Epoch warfare, but has so far failed to do anything very effective. That the Russian state computer networks are dreadfully insecure indicates a lack of awareness and skill in the methods of modern warfare. He needs to fire the government IT department, and hire a new one.

                  Needs not only Information Epoch weapons like those of Turkey, but better hacking and better resistance to enemy hacking.

              • Kunning Drueger says:

                Vietnam was not the first foreverWar. Korea was the first foreverWar, and it is still the basic template for the GAE.

                • Pax Imperialis says:

                  Korean war had clear victory objectives. The fall of North Korea into a US lead Korean State. As soon as the Chinese intervened and it no longer looked feasible at relatively low cost USG pulled the plug and went for a ceasefire that became a peace treaty in everything but name. The war lasted only 3 years, 1 month.

                  Contrast that with Vietnam where the US never even had the intention of invading North Vietnam and played a purely defensive war in the South. Sort of impossible to win if you never go on the offensive. Vietnam war was the first forever war because the US never had any clear victory objectives like defeating the enemy. The war lasted 19 years, 5 months.

                  Now it could be argued that USG is in a forever cold war with North Korea, but North Korea is largely a proxy for the forever cold war with China that has been going on and off since 1940s.

          • Frank Matters says:

            No small amount of bemusement to watch virtue be weighted in children after my castigation.

            • jim says:

              It is a remarkably good and reliable indicator of virtue. If man does not want to look after sons, will he look after kin, friends, and allies?

              If he does not have cooperate/cooperate equilibrium with his women, will he have cooperate/cooperate equilibrium with you?

              With women, the difference is astonishingly obvious. Compare divorced women and childless women, with women who raise their children with their fathers.

          • Aidan says:

            Puritan asceticism, along with their fashion, was a holiness spiral that eventually resulted in having no children. A little decadence in the elite is not a bad thing. The virtue spiral was not yet at the point of not having sex with your wife, but it got there eventually.

            There is a direct line from wearing all black and white to appear more priestly to cutting your dick off and wearing a dress. Anybody who saw the diggers and Fifth Monarchists knew where Puritanism was going to end up.

            • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

              Iconoclasm is a perennially recurrent, and quintessentially spergmatic heresy.

              ‘How do u kno if ure worshiping thing, or the representation of thing?’

              In normal people’s minds, it’s a distinction without a difference.

              • Aidan says:

                I would ask the iconoclast that without an icon to keep him grounded in his worship, how can he be sure he has not turned his worship away, toward something else?

                Looks a lot to me like we need icons. Christians who went to churches where there was no statue of Christ naked and bleeding on the cross, no Baroque mural of the Father presiding over the kingdom of Heaven, eventually stopped worshipping Him.

              • Cloudswrest says:

                They’re still working on the Sagrada Familia in Barcelona.

                Relying solely on private donations, the Sagrada Família’s construction progressed slowly and was interrupted by the Spanish Civil War. In July 1936, revolutionaries set fire to the crypt and broke their way into the workshop, partially destroying Gaudí’s original plans, drawings and plaster models, which led to 16 years of work to piece together the fragments of the master model.[12] Construction resumed to intermittent progress in the 1950s. Advancements in technologies such as computer aided design and computerised numerical control (CNC) have since enabled faster progress and construction passed the midpoint in 2010. However, some of the project’s greatest challenges remain, including the construction of ten more spires, each symbolising an important Biblical figure in the New Testament.[11] It was anticipated that the building would be completed by 2026, the centenary of Gaudí’s death,[13] but this has now been delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic.[14]

                • jim says:

                  Please refrain from publishing links chock full of tracking information. (I know it was only duckduckgo information, but it still gave an account of how you found the image, so I edited it out on the general principle that really long links make me nervous.)

                  Find a static link to an image, and insert it in your comment as <img src=”…” />

            • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

              >Though in many natural objects, whiteness refiningly enhances beauty, as if imparting some special virtue of its own, as in marbles, japonicas, and pearls; and though various nations have in some way recognised a certain royal preeminence in this hue; even the barbaric, grand old kings of Pegu placing the title “Lord of the White Elephants” above all their other magniloquent ascriptions of dominion; and the modern kings of Siam unfurling the same snow-white quadruped in the royal standard; and the Hanoverian flag bearing the one figure of a snow-white charger; and the great Austrian Empire, Caesarian, heir to overlording Rome, having for the imperial color the same imperial hue; and though this pre-eminence in it applies to the human race itself, giving the white man ideal mastership over every dusky tribe; and though, besides, all this, whiteness has been even made significant of gladness, for among the Romans a white stone marked a joyful day; and though in other mortal sympathies and symbolizings, this same hue is made the emblem of many touching, noble things- the innocence of brides, the benignity of age; though among the Red Men of America the giving of the white belt of wampum was the deepest pledge of honor; though in many climes, whiteness typifies the majesty of Justice in the ermine of the Judge, and contributes to the daily state of kings and queens drawn by milk-white steeds; though even in the higher mysteries of the most august religions it has been made the symbol of the divine spotlessness and power; by the Persian fire worshippers, the white forked flame being held the holiest on the altar; and in the Greek mythologies, Great Jove himself being made incarnate in a snow-white bull; and though to the noble Iroquois, the midwinter sacrifice of the sacred White Dog was by far the holiest festival of their theology, that spotless, faithful creature being held the purest envoy they could send to the Great Spirit with the annual tidings of their own fidelity; and though directly from the Latin word for white, all Christian priests derive the name of one part of their sacred vesture, the alb or tunic, worn beneath the cassock; and though among the holy pomps of the Romish faith, white is specially employed in the celebration of the Passion of our Lord; though in the Vision of St. John, white robes are given to the redeemed, and the four-and-twenty elders stand clothed in white before the great-white throne, and the Holy One that sitteth there white like wool; yet for all these accumulated associations, with whatever is sweet, and honorable, and sublime, there yet lurks an elusive something in the innermost idea of this hue, which strikes more of panic to the soul than that redness which affrights in blood.

              Melville deeply channels the New-Englander weltanshauung here; where some atavistic part within them, however alloyed it may become by accumulated understanding of history, teaching, or experience, is never the less in the end repellent to that beauty which is in coherence with civilization.

        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          In the late 19th century, it was a common commie talking point to say that ‘lower classes’ were better exemplars of virtues aristocrats talked about than the aristocrats themselves; but once they usurped the incumbent aristocrats who talked the talk and took their place, there stopped being anyone who walked the talk.

          Funny, that.

    • Anonymous Fake says:

      “Point deer make horse” happens in the absence of universal meritocracy. [*Proceeds to redefine meritocracy as rule over every human activity by a priesthood centrally run from Harvard*]

      • jim says:

        Merit, is by definition, decentralized and subjective, and can only be assessed by performance in the field, which assessment can only be made by those in the field with the party being assessed.

        Meritocracy is also, in practice, scarcely distinguishable from nepotism and semi hereditary aristocracy, since the apple does not fall far from the tree, and one can best assess kin and friends.

        • Anonymous Fake says:


          • jim says:

            I have made this argument many times before, and will briefly allude to it once again. You don’t respond, and I keep deleting you because I am tired of arguing against someone who ignores my arguments and sails right ahead.

            1. Enforceable apprenticeship, which made it possible and profitable for the skilled people in one generation to transmit their skills to the next was destroyed, and replaced by ever lengthier education, so that our our enemies could steal our children. This lead to an immediate and obvious collapse in skilled artisanship, clearly visible in old buildings and old furniture.

            2. University is and always was a religious organization, a system for training priests in the official state religion. Always has been, always will be. When everyone gets trained at university, everyone gets trained in priesting, with the result that priestly activities intrude into the real economy. We just do not need everyone officially trained in the official state religion. We only need a very tiny fraction trained in that religion.

            3. Academic degrees are a very bad and ineffective system for assessing “merit”, which is necessarily subjective and can only be assessed in the field by other people working in the same field, and can only be assessed by people close to the person being assessed. The problem is not that the assessment system is politically biased, but that it exists at all.

            • Anonymous Fake says:

              [deleted for argument by false dichotomy*]

              • jim says:

                value belongs to those who create value. Overproduction of priests results in a priesthood that subtracts value.

                Your entire range of positions that are supposedly the only thinkable and possible positions presuppose that priests aka academics should distribute value, and that everyone agrees that priests should distribute value, that it is an entirely uncontroversial position accepted by everyone, including me, as if I had not stated a position very far outside the range of positions that you posit as thinkable, and the basis for discussion, that the only issues on the table are how vigorously the proper priestly determined distribution of value should be enforced, and how the priestly assessment of merit should be improved.

      • Ash says:

        You say this, yet you are American.. have you looked at the music or other garbage coming out of your culture.. I can ignore the past century and get my children to listen to classical music from Germany.. including let’s say Offenbach (french composer of German descent.. give it a listen. Still popular today)

        But even 2 years ago, in a restaurant that starts playing american music like “WAP” in front of my children.. I had never heard of such garbage before and yelled for the waitress or manager to come over, and yelled at them to instantly turn the shit off or we leave instantly (Italian restaurant playing american music for that afternoon till that point). My wife asked me to calm down, and I told her to shut up and listen to the words.. as the waitress left and manager came my wife said “omg.. wtf is this?” The manager apologized and they stopped playing “American/Jewish” music.. wtf

        How on earth can you criticise a deer or horse when you have whores singing about their “wet ass pussy” for day time listening ?

        • The Cominator says:

          Point deer make horse is something you should lookup. Also nobody here likes Cardi B but how is this relevant…

          The Cathedral doesn’t want good music anymore. Also don’t blame the Jews for the decline of music… jews actually tend to have a good musical aesthetic and taste (visually they don’t but musically yes). American music was at its best in 50s and early 60s which was the height of jews controlling the music industry.

    • skippy says:

      The British Tories and Church of England seems to have been alarmed by the Puritans who had manned and officered many fine regiments in the English Civil War. They eaged institutional warfare against Massachussetts and defeated it. They seemed to have thought the Quakers were just silly. Now not only the Archbishop of Canterbury but the British Crown Prince and the Pope are Quakers.

  16. ExileStyle says:

    He did it, guys. Twitter is now the property of Elon Musk. $44 million.

    • ExileStyle says:

      That’s $44 *billion* obviously…

      Should we all sign back up? What happens now.

      • Pooch says:

        The next interesting thing will be if he gets Trump back on.

        • Kunning Druegger says:

          A cursory review of headlines showed a few outlets spinning the Musk takeover as a death knell for Trump’s social media project. I don’t know if that’s the case, but I do wonder if we’re about to see an explosion attempts to launch “personal” social media platforms.

          And I wonder if or how Urbit, or an Urbit-like system, may be affected by this. I am but a midwit, so I may be completely off base in this, but my interpretation of Urbit was that it basically did everything locally, and you just sort of “visited” places online, as opposed to having accounts, coins, and files stored externally on servers and just having the interface portray it as if you are going elsewhere. Is this just completely incorrect?

          • Pooch says:

            I have no knowledge of anything related to Urbit besides that it was Yarvin’s project. Yarvin refuses to ever bring it up now and I haven’t felt the need to inquirer further.

            • Kunning Druegger says:

              Check it out some time. Very complicated but interesting project. Yarvin left because he sucks as a CEO, and he didn’t want any splash damage from his public persona affecting the company, IIRC.

          • daniel says:

            It’s not unlikely that soon Yarvin himself will get a Twitter account.

        • Karl says:

          No, the next interesting thing will be whether he can exercise power inside twitter. Can he fire people working against him? Can he hire whoever he wants?

          If he can’t fire his enemies, they will sabotage whatever he does.

          • jim says:

            Taking it private will protect him from SOX, but he has not taken in private yet, and even he does will get grief from HR and legal.

            • Karl says:

              Indeed. I expect that he’ll find it difficult firing the people in HR and legal that give him grief. IF he manages to fire them, I expect him to get grief from numerous branches of the adminstration.

    • notglowing says:
      The massacre of they/them jannies is overdue

    • As was obvious even when Trump was president, Twitter and all assorted social media are not private property. They will remain arms of the State and the State can take away leaseholder rights at any time. Increasingly even leaseholder rights mean nothing as rule of law becomes irrelevant.

      Musk’s billions have not procured ownership, merely leaseholder rights which the State can take away at any time.

      • jim says:

        > Musk’s billions have not procured ownership, merely leaseholder rights which the State can take away at any time.

        This an inherent problem with the corporation, which is a grant of identity by the state.

  17. The Cominator says:

    So they are going to let Musk acquire twatter… anyone have any theories on this?

    • Frank Matters says:

      Musk heads what seems to be the only innovative branch in US military engineering. Through Tesla, has a lot of experienced engineers making AI tools work, and is not totally comprised of moral naval gazing like we see in the other beeg tek zaibatsus. I am deeply suspicious of Muskeegee, and I suspect what is in store is highly targeted social engineering through modern AI techniques. Lots of rather important people seem to use twattir to coordinate, and it seems to be a major source of memetic refining on both sides of this war. This is an important system getting passed from one hand of the state to the other.

      • Kunning Druegger says:

        We keep looking for Caesar/Stalin coming from the military. We also saw a merchant (Trump) try and fail to take power. Maybe it is just Musk. He is a merchant, of sorts. A priest, of sorts. And he seems to have some capacity for strategy. I happen to agree with Yarvin’s assertion (probably not his originally) that space is the dominant position from which to exercise force (the hierarchy as he describes it is Space > Air > Sea > Land). Musk has claimed a stake in each of this through his companies/projects (Tesla/Boring-Land, SpaceX-Sea/Air/Space). If he continues down the Mars Colonization track, building an orbital platform is subjectively trivial. If his tentacles extend through all other GAE space endeavors, he is defacto Emperor of Earth. With his tech empire as a base for being The Stationary Bandit of Earth, Twitter then becomes the system by which his edicts are transmitted, possibly through the Neuralink system for even faster transmission and tighter C&C.

        This could all be projection and/or fantasy, but he really seems to be assembling an Info Epoch Empire.

        • The Cominator says:

          That depends on the supreme commander not being on earth… if he can live on a luxury artificial gravity orbital platform then sure.

        • Anonymous Fake says:

          Space is fake and gay. Force currently comes from owning the schools and the streets of the most important cities. ‘Sperging out about conventional, official methods of warfare is how the red tribe gets itself killed for nothing in meaningless wars, Vietnam or WWI or Afghanistan etc. The GI Generation had all the force ever and it got Boomered hard because it didn’t understand soft power.

          The only technology we should think about is flying cars so elites (middle management deep state types who are really upper middle class at the end of the day) can live in the red subdivisions and commute to the blue skyscrapers without ever seeing a street mob or getting trapped in traffic.

          Physical proximity will always matter. Stiff handshakes, firm eye contact, and sex appeal. This is hard-wired evolutionary behavior and trying to slip past it with cryptoshit is a loser move. The reason post-apocalyptic literature is so popular with the right is that it instinctively knows this. Going back to densely populated villages where you can look your ruler in the eyes every day and tell him you don’t like his policies is more effective than writing emails to some staffer living in some important place far away from you.

          • jim says:

            > Space is fake and gay.

            The higher races appeared as a result of settling harsh lands requiring technology (clothing and shelter) and forethought (preparation for the long harsh winter, food preservation technologies)

            Space will give us a higher race of man. The Cathedral will find Musk’s settlement alarmingly white, and probably alarmingly sexist, and send Shaniqua. Shaniqua will suffer a spacesuit malfunction, or the life support will fail because Shaniqua cannot use a space toilet.

            > Force currently comes from owning the schools and the streets of the most important cities.

            Force comes from force. Antifa is fake and gay

            New England conquered America in the war of Northern Aggression, and replaced the separate state religions of the separate state, with one universal state religion, whose head quarters were Harvard, as they had been since Charles the second purged the priesthood of the Church of England, and some of those priests fled to New England.

            Then it conquered the world in World Wars I and II

            The only way conservatives can regain control of schooling is individually by home schooling, and collectively by deadly violance.

            Antifa and BLM can only win because they are allowed to shoot us, and we are not allowed to shoot them.

            > Sperging out about conventional, official methods of warfare is how the red tribe gets itself killed for nothing in meaningless wars.

            Power comes from war. The ultimate argument of Kings.

            What got us killed for nothing in meaningless wars is the same thing as got the aristocracy killed in World War I. That our own government hates us and wants us dead.

            If our guys were in command, victory would be highly profitable, and the winners would get land and women, as in the days of the Roman Republic, in the Anglo Saxon conquest of the Britons, and the Norman conquest of the English.

            > Physical proximity will always matter. Stiff handshakes, firm eye contact, and sex appeal.

            Physical proximity fails to scale. It matters a great deal less than it used to. The real economy is re-organizing, has largely re-organized, to rely on the network, rather than the big cities. Effective militaries are dispersed and largely without a physical center.

            Take a look at Trump’s networking. In so far as it is big city based, it is based on Miami, which is the forty fourth largest city in the USA. And Trump spends a great deal of his time a long way from Miami. You telling Trump what he should be doing?

            Social interaction takes place over the network. I can see our enemies synchronizing over emails and video conferences. The climate conspiracy was organized over email. The election steal was organized in a vast video conference. You think you can do conspiracies and seizures of political power better than they can?

            We have to do more and more transactions and networking over distance, and I, and our best people, are working on technologies to make it happen, and to make it safer.

            We now have technologies, the blockchain, so that we can trust book keeping over distance. This can make dispersed corporations work. It can give us the sovereign corporation, a change as almost as radical as Charles the Second introducing the joint stock publicly traded corporation. This will be a vast new power center, or a vast collection of vast new power centers, as the joint stock publicly traded corporation became, but with an independence from the state, and from big cities, that current corporations lack.

            These are vast and radical changes, that will turn power upside down. They will be accompanied, are being accompanied, with the rise of Information Epoch warfare, where targeting, rather than mass, is central and critical. It begins. Cancellation, deplatforming, and demonetization are network based, and Zelensky has upped the network stakes in the Ukraine from cancellation to physical liquidation. But two can play at that game, though at present Zelensky seems to be playing it a whole lot better than Putin. Putin does not yet seem to realize that he can challenge Zelensky’s control of the network within Ukraine by better means than tanks and artillery.

            • Anonymous Fake says:

              [*deleted for endless repetition*]

              • jim says:

                You make valid arguments that deserve response. But when I rebut your arguments, you just ignore the rebuttal and go right on posting a slight variation of the same argument.

                The rebuttal to your argument is that the elites you refer to are not getting pussy.

                • Contaminated NEET says:

                  >the elites you refer to are not getting pussy.

                  So then where do they come from? How do they reproduce themselves? Gays reproduce by molesting children, and it works well enough for them.

                • Aidan says:

                  That the elite is getting dumber is evidence that they are not breeding, but vampiring the children of the less elite into their circle. That is fine for a few generations, but soon the elite will be too dumb to do anything at all. That means of reproduction means an elite made up of niggers, white and otherwise.

                • Neofugue says:

                  > That the elite is getting dumber is evidence that they are not breeding, but vampiring the children of the less elite into their circle.

                  As a clarification, elite males vampire less-elite females into their circles. I would love to share personal observations on this topic were it not for the risk of doxxing.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  It is the risk of poor breeding that makes me a little leery of grabbing the first woman I can rope down and knocking her up. I am trying to find a better class of woman, genetically speaking(AWALT), and I am having shit luck. I am in a low class area, is it best to settle or try to hunt in a more elite area?

                • Pooch says:

                  If you want better genetic stock in a wife I would hunt in a more elite area. I’ve never done anything but that. This means urban and suburban. I would find where the trendy place where the post-college crowd moves to and hangs out at.

                • jim says:

                  Easiest place to pick up chicks is an international tourist hot spot. You should find good quality there.

                • Pooch says:

                  Easiest place to pick up chicks is an international tourist hot spot. You should find good quality there.

                  That too. Found my fiancé exactly like this. Especially if you visit and stay at places that are more expensive and overwhelmingly white. If there are lots of blacks and spics around, you’re in the wrong place.

                  Go with a crew in which you can be the alpha of that crew, and you are set.

                • Aidan says:

                  I am trying to find a better class of woman, genetically speaking

                  Don’t think too hard about it. The genes for male achievement are clearly on the Y chromosome; your sons may inherit some physical characteristics from the mother’s family but the things which make men great come through fathers and fathers; I happen to notice that mulattos with white fathers perform leagues above mulattos with black fathers.

                  That the patrilineal name also happens to perfectly trace the distribution of the Y-chromosome tells us that the Y-chromosome is what matters the most. As long as you are dating above the heroin class and breeding within the IQ communications gap there should be no problem.

                • Cloudswrest says:

                  I happen to notice that mulattos with white fathers perform leagues above mulattos with black fathers.

                  If often thought there should be separate names for these, like “Ligers” and “Tigons”. Actually these names fit perfectly for hapas, as in Asian Tiger, and European “Richard the Lion Heart.” But alas, I don’t know of any good names for black/white pairings.

                • Cloudswrest says:

                  Of course, one could use standard nomenclature and refer to them as “Wegros” and “Nites”, LOL

                • Cloudswrest says:

                  Or perhaps “Wacks” and “Nites”.

                • Pooch says:

                  Don’t think too hard about it. The genes for male achievement are clearly on the Y chromosome; your sons may inherit some physical characteristics from the mother’s family but the things which make men great come through fathers and fathers; I happen to notice that mulattos with white fathers perform leagues above mulattos with black fathers.

                  This is directly contradictory to Smart and SeXy by Roderick Kaine. I have not read the book but he seems to make the case, back by lots of data, studies, and such for the following:

                  males tend to be more intelligent, but those genes must be passed through women, so having smart women to breed with is essential or these genes are exterminated; female equality creates a wave of incompetence in society, driving men away and causing intelligent women to fail to reproduce; deleterious traits pile up at the same time important traits decrease, and this creates a chain reaction where the smarter and better people refuse to breed.


                • Pooch says:

                  I happen to notice that mulattos with white fathers perform leagues above mulattos with black fathers.

                  I have no first hand experience with mulattos but I happen to notice a high functioning mulatto like Obama had a white mother and your typical stupid NBA mulattos have black former black ball player fathers who hit it big and scored a white woman.

                • Cloudswrest says:

                  Or perhaps “Wacks” and “Nites”.

                  More refinement, “Whacks” and “Nites”. Or how about “Whacks” and “Bites”?

                • Cloudswrest says:

                  I have no first hand experience with mulattos but I happen to notice a high functioning mulatto like Obama had a white mother and your typical stupid NBA mulattos have black former black ball player fathers who hit it big and scored a white woman.

                  Your post above is confusing. Both cases are the same (Bites). I only have experience with these too. Whegros/Whacks are almost as rare as hen’s teeth.

                • Pooch says:

                  Yes this is what I meant. We have the case of Obama but also stupid NBA mulattos. So I’m not exactly sure what that means.

                • Cloudswrest says:

                  More refinement, “Whacks” and “Nites”. Or how about “Whacks” and “Bites”?

                  It keeps getting better. How about “Whacks” and “Blites”?

                • Aidan says:

                  The genes that make men functional and able to do great things, to innovate, create, reason analytically, and so forth, the genes that explain why there are many great male artists, inventers, and leaders, and almost no female ones, have to be on the Y chromosome. Where else would they be? There might be some raw cognitive ability that comes from the mother, but my anecdotal experience is that it matters very little, and my experience is that the average working class woman is not much dumber than the ones who go to college and strive for the elite anyway

                • jim says:

                  > have to be on the Y chromosome. Where else would they be?


                  Y chromosome does very little other than determine sex.

                  What happens is that women have two X chromosomes, men have one. So, if there is an X chromosome for greatness in the family and an X chromosome for crappiness, the son has a good chance that it will be the son’s only X chromosome, while a daughter will have two X chromosomes, one for greatness, one for crappiness, so the X chromosome for greatness will be fully expressed in some of the males of the family, while the daughters will be midway between the crappy sons and the great sons.

                  Since the variance in reproductive success for males is much larger than the variance in reproductive success for females, genes that are something of a crap shoot, might produce big success or big failure, depending on the environment and what other genes are present, tend to wind up on the X chromosome.

    • Pooch says:

      I don’t know if any one is all that upset about it besides low-level journalists who hold no power.

      • Pax Imperialis says:

        Mr. Brezhnev and cohort are upset if only because their dementia addled minds can’t comprehend what twitter is and thus lashes out in anger at what they see as youthful man asserting his dominance.

        Musk got hit by new government investigations as soon as he started buying twitter. I expect government scrutiny of Musk to increase

    • Javier says:

      A lot of people make the mistake of thinking tech companies control the government, but it is the opposite. If Musk tries anything the left disapproves of (banning CNN for blatant lying or whatever), all those judges and officials who had no problem with censorship before will suddenly find that Musk is guilty of depriving people of their sacred twitter rights. I suspect there will be ever more “you just claimed the opposite 2 months ago”-style accounts showing flip flopping journalists and politicians and it will have the exact same impact it has now (zero).

      • The Cominator says:

        Musk probably isn’t acting alone here… otherwise I don’t think he’d be allowed to acquire it.

        • Pooch says:

          How could have he been prevented from acquiring it?

          • Javier says:

            Congress or any number of legal interventions. “Compelling national interest,” sudden dedication to anti trust laws, etc.

            • Pooch says:

              All that is very slow moving and could still very well happen. The deal likely won’t close for a couple of months.

          • The Cominator says:

            Glowniggery from behind the scenes which was definitely attempted… but some other forces blocked them…

        • pyrrhus says:

          Musk is only putting up about a quarter of the money, so some very heavy hitters are definitely involved…

      • Kunning Druegger says:

        I think it is inaccurate to say that the growing number of accounts, channels, and sources highlighting the rampant flipflopping has 0 impact. If one expects some kind of cinematic, overnight change, like some gay-ass V for Vendetta type of thing, then yeah, it isn’t going to happen. But societies move like tectonic plates. There are a lot of variables, and those variables can mean very different causal relationships. If the background noise had no effect, we’d still be living under the Coronatarian regime. But every sleepy joe meme, every clip of Psaki being a woman, all the little things pile up.

        I’m not trying to be or advocating for relentless optimism. But I do think that we are very quick to make absolute statements regarding efficacy, we don’t include enough padding in our predictions, and we aren’t constructing accurate timelines. Why this is the case, I can’t say. But it does explain how Jim keeps being right and wrong at the same time. I don’t know if it is calibration or interpretation or what.

        Whatever the case, the Groomer Meme didn’t come from nowhere, and it wasn’t built overnight. When I think back to what /b/ and /pol/ were like, phraseology and terminology -wise, just a few years ago, I am absolutely floored by how much shitlord subculture has become apart of normie lexicon and frame. YoutYube meme accounts aren’t going to change anything overnight, but they are doing something.

        • Neurotoxin says:

          Yes, facts and logic just bounce off leftists, but they don’t just bounce off everyone. Argumentation is one of the necessary parts of the strategy of our side.

          It’s not correct to say, “The left advances even though we refute their bullshit, so we might as well not refute their bullshit.”
          That’s like saying, “We still have some murders, even though there are laws against murder, so we might as well not have laws against murder.”

          • jim says:

            But you have to diagnose their bullshit accurately. Don’t bother dealing with the magician’s patter.

            I just don’t see anyone that seems plausibly Christian talking bullshit about Christianity. They despise Christians, hate Christians, and hate Christ, and when they say “Jesus Jesus, I love Jesus, I love Jesus more than you do, you are going to hell”, the answer is holding frame, not discussing subtle flaws in their overly complicated theology, their evidence and their arguments.

            You rebut with evidence and arguments the lies that actually delude people. For example that men can be women and women can be men with surgery and hormones, that the vax protects.

            You don’t bother rebutting evidence and arguments that are not sincerely held, and are just to distract you “Hail fellow peasant, you are oppressed by the evil peasant who has more cows than you do, and Wall Street granted him those cows because he is a minion of Wall Street”.

            And many sincerely held lies, for example Marxist theory of value, are best rebutted by appeal to their fruits, rather than dissecting theory and evidence. I reply to the Marxist theory of value with Mao’s great leap forward.

            • The Cominator says:

              The flaws ain’t subtle.

            • Neurotoxin says:

              “Don’t bother dealing with the magician’s patter.”

              Of course. Which is why e.g. Cominator’s copypasta elsewhere in this thread is so aptly hilarious.

              > Kyiv

              >You will never be a real woman.


    • Mister Grumpus says:

      “…and authenticate all humans.”

      I read this as a KYC “just trust us” self-doxxing policy.

      • Contaminated NEET says:

        Yeah, me too. “Come into my parlor.” No thanks Elon, I’d rather not.

    • Pete says:

      The Cathedral will wait and see what he does. If he actually allows free speech, then every time someone posts a dissident sort of comment, shitlibs will screenshot the comment and forward it to advertisers. Result: Advertisers begin to pull out.

      If right wing speech is still allowed, next credit card companies will blacklist Twitter. Google and Apple will remove it from app stores and so forth. Eventually Musk will have to ban all non-Cathedral views again, or Twitter simply collapses into a second Gab.

  18. Frontier says:

    RE: Inflation

    Just a note that Shrinkflation is being used to try and hide inflation again. (This is when the amount of product you get is slightly decreased, hoping that you don’t notice that you’re getting less for your money, as a decrease in weight or volume is less likely to be noticed than an increase in price).

    Looking at the soup cans from the last shopping trip, they were labeled as less weight than what we got a couple weeks ago. They’d also gone up from 2.50 a can to 3.19, for an inflation rate around 29% in just 2 weeks.

    3 lbs. bags of Salmon from Costco were up from 29.99 to 32.99, 10% increase. Pre-cooked frozen hamburger patties and flavored chicken sausages that we get to save time were simply not available.

    This matches Jim’s observation that prices get jacked up whenever the seller reorders, and that staples will often just not be on the shelves.

    • Javier says:

      I’m noticing advertisements now claiming that inflation is actually price gouging (who is paying for these ads?) This is the next step to eventual price control laws, which will make it impossible to sell products above cost, leading to store shelves rapidly emptying. At that point they will blame the shortages on ‘evil hoarders,’ and things will get pretty scary.

      Buy up all the survival food you can now, but do not tell anyone about it.

    • jim says:

      Since the product changed, the CPI will not register that as a price increase. The CPI statisticians are eager to be willfully fooled.

      It was an improvement. You get more hedons per can, they say.

  19. Anonymous Fake says:

    So the majority of French who are actually French voted le Pen, and thus probably 70% of ethnic French males, and this didn’t matter one bit. And this is before considering any election rigging.

    What now? The national vote and globalist state vote don’t line up. Would either side die for Ukraine?

    • Javier says:

      I am continually shocked by the number of supposed NRx people (who witnessed 2020 first hand) still talking like elections are an actual thing.

      • The Cominator says:

        I think the House Elections will be an actual thing but the Senate and Presidency all things being equal will not, if Musk is allowed to acquire twatter that means that Musk is part of an elite faction which has decided the leftist faction must be destroyed…

        We’ll see how that plays out.

      • Anonymous Fake says:

        They are when the left wins. But the demographic details they reveal are always relevant because the left only thinks about winning, but not what they have won. What this vote showed is that Boomers and foreigners overwhelmingly went Macron, while the young French overwhelmingly went for le Pen.

        • jim says:

          This vote shows nothing. The election was stolen.

          He who votes, counts for nothing. He who counts, counts for everything.

          • Frank Matters says:

            What makes you think that frogland has the infrastructure necessary for fraudulent elections? I haven’t seen much lamenting of a stolen election, but lots of lamenting that the French boomers won it for more and more afrikans faster and faster

            Seems like normality bias out of the boomsters to me. These are the same people who let the French in Algiers get genocided.

            • Frank Matters says:

              Attempting img again, jim you may want to pull this to static if you find it meaningful enough.

              • Frank Matters says:

                I cannot the html or the way its hosted is some magic or something else but,

                Here is a link to the post containing image

                • Pooch says:

                  If it was stolen or not does not matter. The President of France answers to the US embassy.

                • Frank Matters says:

                  I think this is a good exercise, because I truly don’t know, all I’ve seen is some vague leaked cables about policy setting

                  In what way does the state department enforce this sovereignty? If someone that the internet right championed, like Zemmour, came into power and staffed the bureaucracy with people who wanted France lighter than a daisy (just play along), and they started sending them all to Sweden, what would happen? It’s hard for me to imagine them nuking France. I could see them perhaps starting a long propaganda campaign to make them out to be literally NASDAP reborn, and then doing so. But even that seems a stretch, Russia has lots of history being a scary empire to suppress for tapping into. Sanctions? The EU is a complex beast and this would start to unravel a lot of work. While there is already an economic catastrophe ongoing, remember Germany is buying *even more* Russian gas than before, I am not sure how that would work.

                • jim says:

                  > It’s hard for me to imagine them nuking France.

                  It is mighty easy to imagine them nuking France. Reflect on what they did to Rhodesia and South Africa, and what they were doing to Donbass.

                  Recollect them flattening Libya, and attempting the genocide of the Alawites. They genocided the Tutsi related tribes in the Congo and attempted to genocide the Tutsi in Rwanda. You may say, “OK, but the Tutsi were black”, but most Alawites look as white or whiter than most Jews.

                  Soft power works because backed by hard power, and resort to hard power, and to the most brutal and horrifying form of hard power, genocide, happens with the utmost regularity. It has been happening for two centuries, and seems to becoming more common, more extreme, and more brutal.

                • Pooch says:

                  The civl service who actually run France report to the US embassy, not the President of France. They are mere figureheads, with little power.

                  If the President of France actually attempted to overrule the US embassy and take back sovereignty, they would find the FBI would have strangely rummaged through their office in the morning. The FBI regularly harasses US politicians in the US who don’t play ball, and they have free reign to do the exact same in Europe if necessary.

                • jim says:

                  Not terribly interested in official statistics of a blatantly rigged election.

                • Frank Matters says:

                  All of those besides perhaps South Africa and Rhodesia, I did not live during their heyday, are far away and total unknowns to the median person. Easy enough to play games and not disturb the peasantry too much. They also were not nuked, but had long festering insurgencies funded and supported, culminating in air power dominance getting provided to the peaceful protestors.

                  I can definitely see a quickly funded insurgency erupting in sovereign France. But, France has her own nukes. The empire is distracted trying to bully the bear and deter the dragon. With a real will-to-power populist, could maybe have enough time to achieve true independence. Rwanda is headed by Kagame, still. That the country is long infiltrated and crawling with alphabet soup suits is, to my mind, a much bigger hurdle.

                • jim says:

                  > South Africa and Rhodesia, I did not live during their heyday, are far away and total unknowns to the median person

                  Europeans know each other and blend into each other, yet Europe has with great regularity had terrible and devastating wars, and is rapidly becoming due for another.

                  South Africa was not a total unknown. I know lots of refugees from South Africa.

                  If the president of France defied the Polygon and purged his bureaucracy of demon worshipers and Polygon loyalists, he would be declared another Putler. attempted color revolution and low level war would ensue, which low level war would likely eventually remove him he failed to escalate in response, and if he escalated in response, then all the media declare he started it.

                  > but had long festering insurgencies funded and supported, culminating in air power dominance getting provided to the peaceful protestors.

                  Gaddafi was not killed by a long festering insurgency. The polygon can fester up an long festering insurgency anywhere, and if the sovereign does anything about it, he gets declared Putler and more direct intervention ensues.

                • jim says:

                  > culminating in air power dominance getting provided to the peaceful protestors.

                  In the Congo and Rwanda genocides, culminating in ground troops intervening to protect those carrying out the genocide. The same was about to happen in Syria as they prepared a genocide for the Alawites, but Russia intervened, and they did not want a direct conflict between Russian ground troops and their troops.

            • Javier says:

              France has had large scale mass unrest going on four years now–and the hated leader is re-elected in a landslide!? Are you kidding me? What part of that seems the least bit believable?

              • The Cominator says:

                Its not as certainly fake as the American election, muslims voted 95% for Macron… no mail ins in France. Most Euro countries are heavily populated with urban marxists…

          • Anonymous Fake says:

            [*Cathedral bullshit on the French election thinly disguised as reactionary analysis of the French election deleted*]

            • jim says:

              I would be happy to debate the french election with someone who came out as enemy. Not going to debate it with someone who says “I am on your side, but …”

  20. […] Jim and the four functions of money. […]

  21. Pax Imperialis says:

    Kyiv or Kiev? At this point does it matter? Fake and real are often two sides of the same coin. The specter of Ukrainian ethnic identity is now very real even in it’s fake origin. The genie is out of the bottle. Stuffing it back in is no longer possible. For the Russians this is a disaster, but not one that can’t be dealt with. For the Russians a quick victory appears off the table. A long war may mean enough anti Russian fervor is generated in the West to cut off Russian exports. Not to mention sheer loss of men and material such a long conflict would entail.

    So what are Russia’s options? As jim has pointed out they are fighting WW2 in the information age. A highly costly method. War might be a great teacher as jim also points out, but learning is also a process that takes time. And even lessons learned take time to implement. Russia must fight here and now with what they have and what they’ve trained for.

    Building an information era war fighting capability would require designing, building, and equipping an army already in the field. Not an impossible task, but one that would likely take more than a year. Thus we’re back to a long war. Such a war means they continue to pour in men and material into the meat grinder at high cost. It also might mean they lose. Are we really to believe that Ukraine sunk the most advanced Russian ship with domestically developed missiles? Looking at NATO intelligence gather operations happening just outside Ukraine suggests targeting information is being provided 24/7 not to mention an ever growing arsenal of weapon shipments. Ukraine is very much increasingly fighting an information era war made possible by western assistance. The Ukrainians don’t have to learn through blood since the capability is being spoon feed to them. Combined with mass mobilization they may outnumber the Russians with the continuous weapon shipments arriving.

    Thus Russia has a terrible choice. Attempt to learn at the risk of bleeding out far faster than learning. Or, they decapitate Ukraine without information era weapons. The Russians were never good at targeting. Good thing tactical nukes have a far larger margin of error.

    Kyiv and Kiev are now the same. They’ve become a symbol of Ukraine. Such symbols must die for Ukraine as a concept to die. The terrible choice to fire a tactical nuke at the capital would likely mean the end of Russian exports to the west, but a long war likely offers the same. Russia is fighting WW2, but that doesn’t mean they have to fight the eastern front as well. Fighting the pacific ultimately ends in unconditional surrender.

    So I wonder and posit the question to all those here. Does Putin have the balls?

    • Basil says:

      I may surprise you, but Ukrainians also know how to think. The fact that Neptune was created in such a dysfunctional state as Ukraine is a manifestation of the human spirit and only adds respect to the developers. Secondly, it is difficult to call a cruiser commissioned in 1982 the “most advanced” ship. You are right about the fact that Ukraine would not have been able to survive without the help of the Western military industry. This is also true of the Soviet Union during World War II. It does not follow from this that the Slavs are some kind of apes who cannot create anything themselves.I’m not hinting, but it was the unwillingness to end the war that caused the collapse of the Empire and the Bolsheviks coming to power. When you make a mistake, you should try to cut your losses in order to be more prepared for the next battle

      .The obvious problem that you diligently do not notice is that the “Russian Federation” is Russia to the same extent as “Ukraine” and surpasses Ukraine in terms of Russophobia. In Ukraine, even now, a Russian-speaking person who associates himself with Russian culture can live anywhere, in some regions of the Russian Federation it will be very uncomfortable for him to live, and in some it is almost impossible. Galicia is still many times safer than Chechnya or Tyva. The same applies to the allied countries of Russia, which regularly write off their debts free of charge at the expense of Russian taxpayers, in which Putin somehow does not notice real ethnic cleansing. The Ukrainian battalion Tornado was punished by the Ukrainian court for crimes against Russian-speakers, crimes of ethnic minorities and migrants against ethnic Russians in the Russian Federation and Central Asia are almost never considered, and law enforcement agencies have repeatedly concealed such facts, while prohibiting any hint of self-organization among Russians, which would could solve these problems in parallel, as well as punishing those Russians who dared to defend themselves. Before you return Ukraine and Belarus, you will have to return Ukraine. Before you take back Ireland, you need to take back England. Before you take back Colombia, you should take back Spain. There is nothing constructive about the return of Ireland to modern Britain, or the return of Colombia to modern Spain. Good Christian Russian poem (recognized as extremism in the Russian Federation)):

      Небесной вскормлены волчицей,
      Мы были выводком волчат.
      Насколько надо измениться,
      Что эти гены в нас молчат!

      – С Христом, распятым на кресте,
      Не сразу стали мы не те…

      Минула тыща лет крестовых,
      И выветрился «волчий чад»:
      Мир видит лишь «овец Христовых»
      (Их режут, а они молчат).

      —Доколе это нам терпеть?
      Уже уменьшились на треть!

      Изводит время травоядных, —
      Клыки отращивай, овца,
      Но в стаде сохраняй порядок
      Природный (не теряй лица).

      —Давай, овца, по-волчьи выть,
      Но только там, где «волчья сыть»!

      Свои овчарни защищая
      (Увы, закон войны таков),
      Организуйтесь, овцы, в стаи,
      Идите, овцы, на волков.

      – Не всепрощенье и любовь,
      А зуб за зуб и кровь за кровь!
      Долой овечую покорность,
      Долой Овечьего Христа!

      Молчание овец – позор наш!
      Рычи и мясо ешь, овца!

      – Ты вспомни, что у нас, овец,
      Был Суперволком праотец!.
      Спаси себя, спаситель мира,
      Мой изувеченный народ:

      Смирения взорвалась мина
      В тебе, и ты разрушен вот.
      – Загни, овца, концы креста,
      спасись у Русского Христа!

      (Наш тот Христос, чья грозна речь:
      «Не мир принес я вам, но меч!»).

      • jim says:

        > it was the unwillingness to end the war that caused the collapse of the Empire and the Bolsheviks coming to power.

        Nuts. Stupid official lies.

        It was treason within that caused the collapse of the Empire and the Bolsheviks coming to power. Alexander released the demons, and Nicolas failed to reclaim the necessary memetic sovereignty to reign them in.

        He had Stalin and Lenin in his hands, and ample legal grounds to kill them. Since they were more holy than he was, gave them only a slap on the wrist, for fear the British elite might deny him the status he sought.

        1916 was just 1906 only more so, the continuation of an ever escalating shit storm that had brewing ever since Alexander. Did World War I cause 1905?

        That Tsar could not kill Lenin, Stalin, and Trotsky, but that Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin could, and did, kill lots of people caused 1905 and 1916.

        • Basil says:

          [*Communist/Polygon Academic story of the Russian Revolution deleted*]

          • jim says:

            Yes, I have heard it all before. Many times. We all have heard it before. And this is the second time you posted it. I see no reason for this to appear twice in succession in this blog.

            The first time you posted it I issued a rebuttal, giving you, in brief capsule form, the reactionary and Dark Enlightenment account of the Russian Revolution, and briefly posting some evidence for it.

            And now you just sail right ahead as if no one could possibly disagree with or doubt orthodox official issue.

            Since you ignored the first rebuttal, and made no response to it, if I allowed this post through, would have to make a second rebuttal, which you would also ignore.

            Reactionary account of the Russian role in World War I in a slightly oversimplified nutshell: The primary military objective of government of Russia in World War I was to get the aristocracy that officered the Russian army killed, so that the Russian government could murder the Tsar. The Germans were merely a handy meat grinder.

            It was more complicated than that, and in this post I present no evidence for our account. No point in presenting evidence and explanation for someone who will ignore that evidence and explanation, as you just ignored it previously.

            The Polygon hopes to rerun the Russian Revolution, and hopes the forever war will lead to a rerun, but this is the wrong point in history for that strategy to work, because the progressive holiness spiral is not running in Russia.

            The Russian military Cathedral tells me that this US government strategy is as dead in the water as Ukrainian effort to have a nationalist insurgency behind Russian lines. The enormous vulnerability of our rulers is that they are required to believe their own lies, and their strategy to conquer Russia is based on their own lies.

            • Basil says:

              What about [*deleted for the usual reasons*]

              • jim says:

                All your questions presuppose and take for granted as unquestioned and universally accepted truth a narrative I have repeatedly rejected as explicitly and clearly as I can.

                You are challenging me to fit my words into official truth.

                No thanks.

                Any explanation of 1916 and what followed has to explain 1906 and what followed. Which the official explanation conspicuously fails to do.

        • Pax Imperialis says:

          Is it possible there is some small truth in there? Had the Tsar ended the war earlier and promptly marched the armies back east to wage war on the Bolsheviks, things might have ended better for the Tsar. It requires an army to exterminate treason on that scale, and the internal threat of Bolsheviks was a higher threat than German demands.

          Unfortunately for Russia, even if the war ended earlier, the Tsar would have likely been content with ignoring the Bolsheviks. Thus he would still have ended up in the basement with his family and shot.

          • Basil says:

            [*official history deleted yet again*]

            • jim says:

              Not what I said. Almost the opposite of what I said.

              You are not responding to what I said. You are responding to what I said that can be reframed and re-interpreted to fit the official narrative.

              You are talking to people who not buy the official narrative. If you want to argue for the official narrative, you need to acknowledge that we have a different narrative by arguing against our narrative, rather than just sailing right ahead as if we were strangely and mysteriously ignorant of official truth about the current war, and the events of 1906 and 1916.

              That cow manure gets bellowed at us from every rooftop. There is no need to repeat it yet again, unless you are arguing against our position, rather than blithely sailing on as if we were mysteriously ignorant of official history.

              If you argue against our narrative, I will allow it through. If you just sail right along as though we were mysteriously ignorant of what gets bellowed at us all the time, no point in wasting space on my blog. We have all heard it all before far too many times.

              • The Cominator says:

                I wasn’t sure about Basil but I become sure when he spelled Kiev Kyiv…

          • Kunning Drueger says:

            The danger of counterfactuals as a predicate for general or specific assertions about reality is the very idea that tweaking one, a small, or just a few variables will take effect without disrupting all the other variables. I find it’s intellectually safer to construct a counterfactual predicated on a single, clear choice that was made by one man… but good luck finding such a creature. The retrospective lens of history reduces bodies of disparate thought to single ideas and disparate groups of men into single entities. It makes it easier to teach and discuss things, but it obfuscates what actually happened.

            • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

              Put in other words, if the men were the sort of men who would take different actions in such-and-such situation, they would well have taken different actions in every other situation theretofore, too.

          • jim says:

            > It requires an army to exterminate treason on that scale

            “That scale” is a group of high officials, professors, and judges, small enough to meet around a coffee table and feel each other’s warmth. The Sovereign only needs one good loyal bodyguard to kill them all, the wisdom to know who needs killing, and a faith that he is right to act.

            Which faith he must share with and use to inspire those who used to answer to those he just killed, for no man rules alone.

      • Pax Imperialis says:

        The Moskva was the most advanced Russian ship in the Black Sea region. Ships don’t just stay frozen in time. They are constantly upgraded with new radar, weapon systems, counter measures, etc. The same is true of most weapons platforms. One only needs to look at the F16 of 1974 vs the F16 of 2022. The same frame, but today’s F16 would decimate yesterday’s F16.

        Anti ship missiles need targeting and guidance. The Ukrainians have no targeting capability that extends into the Black Sea. NATO does. NATO also has been flying constant recon drones in the region 24/7. It’s pretty clear NATO has been feeding intelligence to the Ukrainians, so claims that sinking the Moskva was purely of Ukrainian brilliance reeks of BS.

        • jim says:

          > but today’s F16 would decimate yesterday’s F16.

          Today’s F16 has never been tested in war. The warthog has and the people who need the warthog in battle are scouring ancient arms dumps for seventy year old parts, because they think today’s parts suck.

          • Kunning Druegger says:

            I’ve heard some interesting opposition to the Warthog as king poop of CAS. Not sure if it’s just one sperg with an axe to grind (he is a gay, after all). Nonetheless, it was an interesting take. And we all know John McCain (rest in piss, traitor) was wrong about everything.


            • jim says:

              Short summary of what was not said in that video.

              The gulf war largely consisted of the A10 wiping out Iraqi tanks, artillery, and armored personnel carriers.

              It also consisted of a massive demonstration of US technological superiority over Soviet weapons.

              But that was a long time ago, and the question that remains to be resolved is, who has the tech lead now?

              And the surprising answer is … – obviously Turkey.

        • antifabulist says:

          >The Ukrainians have no targeting capability that extends into the Black Sea. NATO does.

          You incredible dumbasses.

          Literally out of sheer pity, and so as to not be seen kicking retarded kids, is today’s tutorial on maritime search.

          We bring this up because of the globally stupid commentary regarding recockulous assertions that the US was fingering Russia’s Moskva cruiser for the Ukrainians, who then shot gaping holes in it with a couple of their Neptune AS missiles, which would be their second or third time being used ever operationally, AFAIK.

          For those with military, engineering, or DoD expertise, who already realize how unlikely and improbable that scenario sounds, my sincere condolences. I feel your pain.

          So, by the numbers:

          I. The Pigeon

          Russian Federation Cruiser Moskva. Originally the lead ship and namesake of the Soviet Slava class of cruisers. Launched in 1979, 611 ft long, about 10,000 tons, with a top speed of 32 knots. Recommissioned as the Moskva (121) under the re-organized Russian Federation in 2000, after sitting idle at dockside for 10 years, and the flagship of their Black Sea Fleet. Originally designed as something to go after Americanski aircraft carriers, it’s armed with air, surface, and subsurface search and attack capabilities, which included 6 Russian CIWS anti-missile gatling gun-style defensive systems, and manned by about 475 officers and crew.

          II. The (likely) Hunter

          The Ukrainian-developed R-360 Neptune missile is a rocket-assisted subsonic anti-ship cruise missile, derived from the Soviet-era Kh-35 (which was nicknamed the “Harpoonski”, being a pretty close copy of the USN Harpoon, in size, weight, configuration, etc.).

          The Uke design added a rocket booster to get increased range, in this case, out to about 190 miles, but the basic missile still hums along at about 30′ above the waves. At a programmed point, the active radar-seeker head turns on, locking onto the target at about 20 miles range (at the horizon), whereupon it drops to about 12′ over the water, and bores straight in until it hits the target with a 300# penetrating high-explosive fragmentation warhead. (The American Harpoon pops up, and does a terminal dive down into the ship it hits, by contrast.) It’s only designed to kill ships up to 5,000 tons, (about half of Moskva’s size), which would explain why two of them would have been fired, to ensure sufficient damage for sinking the target.

          The Ukes first deployed it only in March of 2021, and it’s designed to be fired from heavy truck launchers from up to 15 miles inshore, and out to 175 miles out to sea.

          III. The Unlikely Bird Dog (?)

          The P-8 Poseidon, USN’s land-based ASW/maritime patrol plane, since 2020.

          Based on Boeing 1994 upgrade of their 1969 design 737 jetliner, flies to a service ceiling of 41,000′, with a working range of about 1300 miles.

          It took off from Italy, proceeded to the Romanian Black Sea coast, and could be presumed to be doing long slow racetracks of that 100 miles length, safely within NATO airspace, observing the Show to the east and northeast.

          It can spot a sub periscope with its surface search radar at 29 miles, and see targets the size of a full container cargo ship (radar cross section of 10,000² meters), or the supercarrier USS Nimitz, at 220 miles. The Moskva, with an RCS about 1/3rd that size, would have to be commensurately much closer in to be identifiable, probably something more like 65 miles, under best conditions (i.e. search a/c at max altitude, and Moskva broadside). Degrade either or both those conditions, and the detection and tracking range to the target gets shorter still.

          If radar abilities were a simple line graph (and they’re not) the graph for the P-8’s abilities would look like a simple 45 degree diagonal line.

          But they’re not, and that line is a curve with the bend upwards. not a flat plot, meaning it’s even worse than the 45 degree line, even with the new high-speed low-drag whizbang radars now deployed by Poseidons.

          The actual plot of that curve, i.e. how deep the fall-off is and what ranges, I leave to practical physicists: Raytheon is looking for you.

          If you can and do name the actual plot for the Poseidon’s AN/APY-10 radar, the FBI, DIA, and CIA would like to have a chat with you.

          The other problem is those ranges are based on max altitude; the lower the flight, the worse the capabilities of the radar to see anything. And the P-8 operates anywhere from 1000′ to 41,000′, and everywhere in between. Lacking a MAD boom, it doesn’t need to get down in the surf spray like the P-3 Orion did, but at some point, like certain weapons or sonobouy deployments, lower than 41K’ is going to be their go-to choice.

          Which degrades the radar’s visibility. Which also pushes the detection zone on the earlier graph down as well.

          Flying a racetrack surveillance pattern from well back inside Romanian airspace, so as not to be misidentifed by either side as a hostile aircraft adjoining an active war zone, the Poseidon’s radar acquisition and tracking range would be further degraded, and spotting Moskva would have been iffy in the best case, and simply beyond its capabilities for much of that track.

          Open sources pinpointed her (him to Russian ship conventions) on satellite imagery after the explosion, at 45°10’43.49″ N, 30°55’30.54″ E.

          That location is miles away from where the WSJ reported the ship was when it exploded.

          And the WSJ report also fits the suggested operating area available to anyone on the internet after April 7th, at the same prior source. (Which would rather obviously include the entire Ukrainian military and intelligence establishments.)

          This information is provided so that people who read one sales brochure and stay at a Holiday Inn Express once, and then think that a P-8 can detect troops in the open and sub periscopes at 250 mile ranges, can helpfully pop their heads out of their asses, and unfuck themselves. Surface search radar doesn’t work like that.

          This is the difference between IRL, and your XBox and PlayStation games.

          To date, Russia maintains that the Moskva had an unexplained fire and explosion in a ship’s magazine space, and sank while being towed back to port in a storm, which all worldwide weather reports have failed to identify as ever existing. (Two Neptune AS missiles up your ass will bring about a similar result, btw.)

          And the Neptunes could have been aimed out to sea “to whom it may concern”, or using drones to relay targeting information, or even just nothing more timely than that Naval News open-source report, and simply locked onto the biggest target out there, sailing around fat, dumb, and happy, and totally oblivious that they were meat on the table.

          Apparently, the chaff decoy launchers and 6 CIWS mounts on Moskva performed just about as well in actual combat as any other component of the Russian forces have done since this war began. Sux to be Vlad. Or worse yet, one of his military minions. “Russian Warship, go f**k yourself!” turned out to be rather prophetic, in the event.

          Thus obviating any need for the US Navy to see things beyond its ability, explaining why they had no explanation for a sea-skimming missile attack, or what happened to make Moskva explode, and therefore absolving the entire US chain-of-command from the command-and-control and liaison nightmares inherent in trying to get real-time maritime surveillance intel captured, verified, downlinked, translated, and funneled to the guy in the truck pushing the red button on those missiles, which task is one helluva lot harder than it sounds. Ask anyone who’s ever done anything in the actual .Mil that’s even 1/10th that complicated, or anyone who’s ever worked with the government at pretty much any operational level.

          • Pax Imperialis says:

            >And the Neptunes could have been aimed out to sea “to whom it may concern”, or using drones to relay targeting information, or even just nothing more timely than that Naval News open-source report, and simply locked onto the biggest target out there, sailing around fat, dumb, and happy, and totally oblivious that they were meat on the table.

            Oh yes, please do tell how Ukraine managed to hit the same target twice in a target rich environment by blind firing a weapon system with around 20 nmi of seeker range at a ship about 65 nmi off the coast. The Moskva was in proximity to other vessels that could have easily been locked on to by a blind fired missile. Those drones the Ukrainians are using are even more blind than the Poseidon in the worst case conditions and they were also relatively far away by all accounts and being used as a radar distraction. Add in the fact that the Ukrainians haven’t been blindly firing missiles in the past. It seems clear they aren’t starting to blind fire now and that knew what they were shooting at.

            NATO, more specifically America, does have a history of flying drones all over the black sea and in close proximity to Russian and Ukrainian boarders from the start of the conflict. These flights also have a history of being done with tracking turned off for hours. If you know the exact flight paths and how close they are getting to the boarders I’m sure various alphabet agencies would be very happy to talk with you too. I’ve been focused on the suspected role of US drones in this incident.

            No one here was even talking about the Poseidon until you mentioned it. But now that you bring it up, I feel the need to share some basics on how intelligence works. As you’ve pointed out there are technical limitations to radar, but the plane is useful even in what it doesn’t see (which is still quite a bit). The black sea is fairly small. If you can establish a general location and direction a ship is sailing from, and know where it is not, you can get a fairly good set of predictions of where it might currently be or will be in the near future. Do this over a period of time and you might even find out the ship is sailing in a predictable and habitual manner. Something the US paid for in the Yugo wars when it decided to fly it’s stealth planes in the exact same flight path multiple times. Eventually you get shot at and even hit.

            So how does this tie into intelligence sharing? The US is not directly feeding real time targeting information to some Ukrainian soldier with his finger on the trigger. JTAC and similar is fucking hard. As you perfectly pointed out it’s next to impossible do so with forces that are not even training together as a coalition, not to mention that much of those forces are barely more trained than paramilitary militias.

            What the US can do is let some guy in the Ukrainian government/military know that we have 90% confidence that the Moska will be sailing on a particular path. That guy decides it might be a good idea to pass down orders so some guy in a truck with his finger on a trigger does take the shot. That’s how you get

            >why they had no explanation for a sea-skimming missile attack, or what happened to make Moskva explode, and therefore absolving the entire US chain-of-command from the command-and-control and liaison nightmares inherent in trying to get real-time maritime surveillance intel captured, verified, downlinked, translated, and funneled to the guy in the truck pushing the red button

            US Intel seems to have been spoon fed to the Ukraine Government from even before the this whole conflict began with estimates of Russian troop numbers, capabilities, movements, etc. All those things can be utilized as targeting information even if that wasn’t the intention of sharing. Is it really so surprising that the Ukrainians had brains to do something with that intel? The only thing surprising was that US intel did not think the Ukrainians would take the shot and how well it worked. Perhaps they thought they were just letting the Ukrainians know the suspected locations of the Russian black sea fleet’s main anti air capability such that Ukrainian air mission could take it into account.

          • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

            The tunnel-vision on P-8’s is kinda weird considering satellites and drones exist.

            • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

              I think it is a tell.

              “Did you shoot him?”
              “Shoot him? I don’t even have a Colt 1911 with compensator and mahogany grips! How the fuck would I have shot him?”
              “Sir, I didn’t mention what kind of gun… You’re under arrest.”

              • Kunning Druegger says:

                Unrelated, but I think the P-8 is a sexy airframe. I also love the KC-135 and the KC-10. I know they’re just juice busses, but something about their big ass engines and the matte gray paint… the P-3 was breddy gudd too.

          • Kunning Druegger says:

            I appreciate the effortpoast, if only to reinforce how much the denizens of fedland really do hang on to every word typed in opposition. Everyone knows the US is actively engaged in getting Russian’s killed. As has already been stated, satellites exist, and so does SAD/SOG.

    • jim says:

      Kyiv or Kiev? At this point does it matter? Fake and real are often two sides of the same coin. The specter of Ukrainian ethnic identity is now very real even in it’s fake origin. The genie is out of the bottle.

      An ethnic identity based on lies by a power hostile to ethnic identity. Unlikely to fly. Ukraine is a multiethnic state.

      It is not a genie loosed from a bottle, but a demon in fancy dress claiming to be a powerful genie. They had a go at insurgency, and it utterly failed to fly, which tells me that this demon lacks any power.

      > Building an information era war fighting capability would require designing, building, and equipping an army already in the field. Not an impossible task, but one that would likely take more than a year.

      The war can only be ended by Russian victory or Russian defeat. The Cathedral does not want to defeat Russia too quickly, because it is trying to conquer Russia without World War III. It likes to patiently grind its enemies down. Absent Russian victory, the war will likely still be going for many, many years. The only way this war can end quickly is Ukrainian collapse and decisive Russian victory, which remains possible, according to Russian propaganda, but seems less likely every day. If no Russian victory in the next several years, the war will only grow as one limit after another is stepped over.

      And, by the way, it is the Information Epoch, not the Information Era. The Information Epoch, unlike the materials ages and the energy ages, had a definite starting point, hence an epoch, not an era.

      > Such a war means they continue to pour in men and material into the meat grinder at high cost.

      Not unless the Russians are stupid. They do not have to win a quick victory. Currently the strategy is that if World War II tactics have failed, they fall back to World War I, because, as you say, that is all they have got. World War I.

      What makes World War I unlikely to be a viable strategy is that it is difficult to attrit grunts armed with Information Epoch weapons. But, if it is difficult for the Russians, it is also difficult for the Ukrainians. This war will run until one side or the other finds tactics and weapons that actually work in the modern era. The Russians are in no need to hurry to win the war by obsolete weapons and tactics. They are not under any time pressure, and the Polygon does not want to put them under time pressure, because nukes.

      The Ukrainians set up a meat grinder, and the Russians decline to pour grunts into it. Instead they shell it. Their artillery is vulnerable to Ukrainian drones. It is costing them, but the Ukrainian meat grinder is high value target, so not a complete waste.

      Sometimes the Ukrainians decline to set up a meat grinder, and hope they can destroy Russian artillery without too much cost, whereupon World War II tactics start working, briefly and in a rather small area, for the Russians.

      The Ukrainians are being attrited. They can probably handle this rate of attrition for a very long time. But the Russians can handle it for a much longer time.

      • Basil says:

        Is it possible for the Russian Federation to switch to a sluggish positional war under the current conditions? I’m not sure. If so, the best thing to do is to mothball the conflict and start modernizing the army.

        • jim says:

          They already have switched to a sluggish positional war. Current strategy is attrition, but I don’t think that either side has suffered all that much attrition so far. What is attrition but sluggish positional warfare?

          • Severian says:

            Attrition might be staring to take a serious toll on Ukrainians. More reports are coming of plainclothes volkssturm corpses in the Donbas.

            Look at this surrendered Ukrainian on the Izyum front.

            On the other hand they seem to think they are capable of attacking Kherson. It’s hard to get a good picture of the overall situation.

      • Pax Imperialis says:

        I’m not convinced we are in an Information Epoch, CRISPR is changing everything. Soon we could very well end up with an era of bio-engineered super humans and covert biological warfare that decimates crops and herds. While evidence already points to biological warfare targeting agriculture, it will be nothing compared to precisely designed tools being developed now. Naming things Epochs is best left to historians since the past is stable. Of course time may very well prove you right. I’m not certain over the future or even the time we live in. To me it’s still uncertain. Arguments over era/epoch aside:

        “An ethnic identity based on lies by a power hostile to ethnic identity”
        can run on pure inertial for far longer than anyone wants. Whatever it is, genie or demon, the Russians are going to have to strangle it to death.

        “Not unless the Russians are stupid.”
        The past 30 years of Russian military operations is not encouraging. It’s a wretched history.

        “The Ukrainians are being attrited. They can probably handle this rate of attrition for a very long time. But the Russians can handle it for a much longer time.”
        But the Russians don’t have to tolerate a long war of attrition. A small nuke and demand for unconditional surrender could side step this whole ordeal. Russia might be stuck fighting WW2, that doesn’t mean it has to be fighting WW2’s eastern front. They can give Ukraine the Japanese experience.

        The Russians still need to reach Moldova. Every month they don’t, EU/NATO/US is able to stir shit up. Moldova just had a small scale color revolution. Russia needs to get there before western influence is solidified.

        • Basil says:


          • jim says:

            Official bullshit too silly to waste space fisking.

            You just sail right along invoking one official story after another. This is starting to resemble my conversations with the truthers. I would rebut one absurd truther story, he would ignore the rebuttal, and come up with twenty more.

            Postwar Japan did not convert to Americanism because of the clear superiority of the American way of life. They converted because nuked and enemy occupied. The Ukrainian way of life is considerably less attractive than the Russian way of life. United State Government warfare and the gay parade are not wonderful benefits that Ukrainians will fight and die for. The Tsar did not fall because he failed in war. He failed in war for the same reasons and in the same way as he failed in 1906. The problem was, he needed to shoot the high ranking progressives within his government who were pursuing his internal overthrow and external defeat. His failure to execute Lenin and Trotsky was merely a symptom of lack of memetic sovereignty. It was not that he failed to shoot Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin. This was merely a symptom of the disease. It was that he failed to shoot the people who were making it terribly coarse, oppressive, and low status to shoot people like Lenin and Stalin.

            If the mess left by Alexander had been cleaned up with a suitable number of executions and flogging, Russia would still be ruled by Tsars today. Tsardom was defeated from inside, not from outside. Outside is an enemy meme, and I will not let you just roll along confidently assuming it.

            I will allow you to argue for it. I am just not going to let you repost endless United States Harvard bullshit assuming it. We have all heard it before, and it is a waste of space to hear it yet again.

            • Frank Matters says:

              《When Varvara Petrovna announced her idea of founding a magazine, people flocked to her in even larger numbers, but charges of being a capitalist and an exploiter of labour were showered upon her to her face. The rudeness of these accusations was only equalled by their unexpectedness. The aged General Ivan Ivanovitch Drozdov, an old friend and comrade of the late General Stavrogin’s, known to us all here as an extremely stubborn and irritable, though very estimable, man (in his own way, of course), who ate a great deal, and was dreadfully afraid of atheism, quarrelled at one of Varvara Petrovna’s parties with a distinguished young man. The latter at the first word exclaimed, “You must be a general if you talk like that,” meaning that he could find no word of abuse worse than “general.”

              Ivan Ivanovitch flew into a terrible passion: “Yes, sir, I am a general, and a lieutenant-general, and I have served my Tsar, and you, sir, are a puppy and an infidel!”

              An outrageous scene followed. Next day the incident was exposed in print, and they began getting up a collective protest against Varvara Petrovna’s disgraceful conduct in not having immediately turned the general out.》

              Dostoyevsky, *The Demons*. Published in the early 1870s. Apparently the problem had been metasticizing for quite a while before cancerous eruption.


              • jim says:

                This prefigured the Russian government fighting World War I not to defeat Germany, but to get men like General Ivan Ivanovitch Drozdov disempowered, and preferably killed, so that the government could get the Tsar killed.

                This has everything to do with the the fall of the Tsar, and World War I was merely a detail of implementation. If not one path, would have been another. 1905 was a preview of what was coming. Would have tried again whether or not World War I gave them the opportunity to murder as many aristocrats as possible.

                And I will let Basil post, if he responds to this claim and this argument and argues against it, instead of just confidently retelling us whig history that we have heard bellowed from every rooftop over and over again.

                He is unresponsive, but is not pushing any of the well known shill scripts. Rather, I suspect that the problem is that he just cannot wrap his mind around the idea that not everyone believes what they are officially told. He is not pushing a shill script, since shill scripts fake being subversive to the Cathedral memes. Rather, he is pushing straight up Cathedral memes, and is unable to debate them, because he just cannot register that people are rejecting them.

                • Aidan says:

                  The clockwork regularity with which absolutists farm out government to a cabal of bureaucrats and professors, lose memetic sovereignty a generation later, and lose their heads a generation after that, never ceases to impress me.

                • The Cominator says:

                  He spelled Kiev, Kyiv… you can’t really come back from that.

              • Neurotoxin says:

                “Next day the incident was exposed in print, and they began getting up a collective protest against Varvara Petrovna’s disgraceful conduct in not having immediately turned the general out.”

                Wow, Antifa and the Twitter mob existed in Russia in the 1870s. Sure it’s fiction, but Dostoyevsky must have gotten the idea from somewhere. The leftist personality is always the same, across times and places.

        • Kunning Drueger says:

          Wait, CRISPER? The thing that was 3 years from changing everything back in 2015?

          • Pax Imperialis says:

            CRISPER is a tool. It opened the door to fast and precise genetic engineering. It takes time for tools to be fully utilized.

            The first plane was 1903
            The first plane for military purposes was 1909
            The first bomber was 1913, a decade after the first flight

            CRISPER is much like the first plane

            CRISPR-Cas9 was developed in 2015
            First genetically engineered babies in 2018

            • restitutor_orbis says:

              A geneticist I know attempted to modify silkworms to produce spidersilk fiber for use in ballistic armor. He more or less succeeded technically but lost the patent battle with another company. (Look up “Entogenetics”, interesting story).

              Anyway, he got all of the equipment necessary with friends & family money, mostly second hand. I asked him what would have stopped him from doing the same with a deadly virus to make it worse, and he said “nothing other than me not being a psychopath”. His opinion was that within a decade or two we’d be seeing rogue biologists able to create dangerous viruses from home that could wreak havoc the same way amateur hackers can create computer viruses.

              There’s so much potentially bad stuff brewing I cannot even process it all.

              • jim says:

                Yes, it is rapidly becoming a whole lot easier create extremely deadly diseases.

                But improving humans, though theoretically possible in principle using reasonably foreseeable technology, is still a considerable way off. We know in principle how to do it. You just normalize uncommon mutations to remove genetic load, though figuring out what is and is not an uncommon mutation is considerably harder than it sounds, due the fact that the genome makes widespread use of unary encoding, so the same information may be encoded in a diversity of ways. We need to be able to identify that what is encoded is rare, not that how it is encoded is rare, otherwise our search for genetic load will be overwhelmed by irrelevancies.

                Interestingly, it seems to be effectively illegal, and draconically suppressed, to create diseases for mosquitoes, cockroaches and similar pests.

                Yet they have no problem creating deadly diseases for humans, supposedly for research purposes to discover what diseases might arise in future, though this research seems to strangely focus on creating variants of natural diseases that are highly unlikely to arise by natural means.

                Perhaps what is happening is that they fear that people researching methods for killing mosquitoes, might reveal information they prefer was held close.

              • Kunning Druegger says:

                If this is possible, why hasn’t it happened? There are supposedly many people, factions, and ideologies out there with serious axe grinding dispositions.

        • jim says:

          > Whatever it is, genie or demon, the Russians are going to have to strangle it to death.

          The American/Ukrainian government attempted to get partisan warfare going behind Russian lines. Failed hilariously. No strangling was needed. Ukrainian nationalism is transparently fake and gay.

          • Pax Imperialis says:

            America has been trying to instigate rebellions and partisan warfare inside Russia since at least the Soviet Union came about. I’m tempted to say even further back in history as well, but my Imperial Russian history is somewhat fuzzy.

            All attempts failed hilariously preciously because Russia was willing to strangle it to death.

            Same in Cuba with bay of pigs. Fidel was more than happy to slaughter unsupported partisans on the beach.

            Fake and gay things that are not strangled immediately grow up to become things like Harvard and Yale. A far more pernicious and annoying problem.

            As Yarvin has pointed out, as well as the historians of the past, the American revolution was fake (Most people were loyalists or did not care), but it succeeded because much of English society (and some English generals) was sympathetic and not willing to strangle it to death.

            If you give fake things free roam they grow up to something not just fake. At best it’s Harvard that berates you for not castrating your child, at worst it’s a Lenin that gives rise to a Stalin ending in a Brezhnev moment.

            • jim says:

              > All attempts failed hilariously preciously because Russia was willing to strangle it to death.


              The American empire is that part of the world where the USG can instigage trouble, and if the government tries to put the trouble down, kill the leadership. And if a major ethnic group, tribe, or faith tries to put it down, genocide that ethnicity.

    • Skippy says:

      A lot people said a Soviet nation had been born in WWII, but the Soviet nation died quickly as soon as the pressure came off.

      Ukraine is a result of pressure. The more the Ukraine state – which is headed by Russian-speaking Jews – wins in the field the more people will calculate that it’s not in their interest to oppose it, but ethnicities are not born in eight years.

      Recently some people who still know what they are doing have had to prevent the Pope going to Kiev to congratulate the population on their part in the Holy Roman Empire’s crusade against the Slavonic East, forgetting that Ukraine is still mostly Orthodox.

    • The Cominator says:

      Anyone who spells it Kyiv is assumed to be a tranny.

      • Pax Imperialis says:

        Does it even matter how it’s spelled at this point? I would argue it does not because the place has to be razed to the ground and on its ashes Putingrad built.

        No more fights over Kyiv/Kiev because it would be gone. No more fights over Ukraine/Russia because both would be gone. It would only be greater Russia.

  22. Anonymous Fake says:

    Cracks in the Cathedral. You’ll know we’re near the end when this becomes a battle royale ring of lawsuits.

    • jim says:


      That is not a crack in the Cathedral. That is evil hateful hostile people in power quarreling over the loot.

      Which quarrel has been running for well over a century, and is unlikely to be resolved until they start killing each other rather than suing each other.

  23. Richard W. Comerford says:

    As I have pointed out before, the “global elite” are eventually going to make themselves enough of a nuisance that it becomes conceivable that they will be slaughtered. Historically, when the cost of food surpasses 30% of the typical household budget, the ruling class is overturned — often in an eruptively violent way.

    Obviously I am not going to go as far as to call for violence, but I cannot help but smile when I think of the likes of Bill Gates and Barack Obama running terrified from an angry mob.

    • jim says:

      Ruling class failure creates opportunity for ruling class overthrow – but you always need instigation and leadership from a dissident faction within the ruling class. The mob cannot do anything useful by itself, but merely loot the liquor store and smash up the pawnshop.

      Bronze Age civilization was white Aryan civilization. When it got decadent, whites got rolled back in the colonial periphery, and Egypt got brown Pharaohs, among them the Pharaoh that “knew not Joseph”.

      I conjecture that he purged people of Aryan descent from the priestly elite, with the result that children of Israel got literate leadership, unlike the rest of the sea peoples, which is why we have their story seen from their point of view, but the stories of the rest of the sea peoples are largely lost except for faint echoes in legend.

      In those faint echoes, we see sea peoples burning cities with leadership from the old urban civilized elite, but their own culture, tribal identity, and faith. Agamemnon was a King of a Bronze Age civilized city, but he was leading a coalition of illiterate barbarian sea peoples, and in due course his own city eventually burned. Moses was raised an Egyptian priest and magician. Aaron probably had the same background, therefore they could read and write. Agamemnon probably could not. Probably had his priestly scribes do that for him.

      If Egyptian magic worked, which I am inclined to doubt, but do not altogether disbelieve, then during the decline of Bronze Age civilization, it had come to have unpleasant, unpredictable, and unintended consequences, indicative of technological decline or demonic infestation, the equivalent of our Covid Vax disaster. The vax is now causing an aids like condition in our massively vaccinated people. The vaccine weakens the immune system, with the result that the multiply vaxed are apt to get chronic low level covid infection, which further weakens the immune system, eventually resulting in death. We lack information about what happened with Egyptian magic, or even whether actually it existed or not, but we have excellent information about the vax disaster, which is both technological incompetence, and attempted demonic magic by demon worshipers. As to whether there are actual demons being worshiped by the vaxxers, and actual demonic magic, I both disbelieve and suspect, but I know there is actual worship of demons, serpent Christ and the Red Dragon among them, whether the demons be real or not, and actual magical thinking, whether magic works or not.

      We have plenty of evidence that the priesthood in Egypt had rather advanced physical technology, though they did not have iron or steel, nor anything that relies on high temperature furnaces. You cannot cut ten ton blocks of stone with micrometer precision using copper chisels – indeed you cannot cut them at all using copper chisels, and when you are cutting paving stones, why bother with micrometer precision unless you are using a machine that churns out blocks with that precision whether you need it or not? Maybe Egyptian magic is dimly remembered advanced bronze age technology, which fell to the same forces that our technology is falling to. Demons, or worship of demons.

      • Kunning Druegger says:

        While the lack of elite leadership means no long term planning or stable transition from one stationary bandit to another, I don’t think it is accurate to say that the mob can do nothing useful. Given how many elites populate urban areas, and given how blind the elite are, or act, when it comes to threats, a considerable number could be annihilated by mobs just due to proximity. Further, even in a mob, there’s a distribution of capacity and capability. Leaders and leadership will emerge, however short sighted and incompetent. Cathedral memes about the culpability of whites and the wealthy in the “oppression” of the so-called little guy means there is already a list of targets in the mobs head.

        I’m not really disagreeing with your conclusions, but time and again you state that unless the elites, or some elites, are involved, the mob will accomplish nothing. I think it would be more accurate to say they will accomplish nothing of lasting value. But they may very will accomplish extirpation of high IQ and wealthy people in the urban zones, which would be very helpful to someone, presumably.

        • Pete says:

          “there is already a list of targets in the mobs head.”

          Yes, placed there by the elites. So the mob will crush the enemies of the elites, as they did in 2020: Non-rich whites and small business owners.

          • Kunning Drueger says:

            True enough, but I’ve yet to met a nogg that can distinguish between a middle class white and an upper class white. A big red flag of collapse will be elite flight from the urban areas. I don’t mean Joe Rogan moving to a different state, I mean piles of dead university students and (((artists))) as small, boutique security companies spirit their teachers and journalists away to safety.

            • jim says:

              > A big red flag of collapse will be elite flight from the urban areas

              It is already waving hard, but you want it to wave hard enough to wipe out the college towns the way it wiped out Detroit.

              • Kunning Druegger says:

                The flag is up, the breeze is blowing, but it isn’t that accelerated yet. Things are not at the big break point, which is why pseudo-normality keeps coming back, Trump isn’t in jail/a shallow grave, and racial violence is easily explained away as unfortunate crime wholly the fault of evil capitalism. There have been individual events, like Rittenhouse, the great LA train heist, and many more, that would/should have been the “inciting event,” but so far the pressure abates and no conflagration.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  It’s the two-step of the old 20th century liberal order; summon up daemons to destroy neighborivals, then try to stuff the back into the bottle again.

    • Karl says:

      Do you have any historical examples that the ruling class was overturned when the cost of food surpasses 30% of the typical household budget?

      I doubt that figure as there were entire societies where only the rich spent only 30% of the household budget on food and everybody else spent more. Historically, I assume most people spent most of their income on food.

      Anyway, people judge the failure of their government by comparison to other contemporary governments or the relative change of their living conditions.

  24. Kunning Druegger says:

    I read the Vanity Fair piece. It is more about JD Vance, Theil, and the power players of the “new right.” Yarvin just pushed out a piece (probably in response to a swell in subs ((lolkek))) staking his claim to “the deep right.” The game is afoot as to whether other journalists will sense a trend and start registering their disapproval or ambivalence.

    The piece is only worth reading if you have a liberal arts degree and a strong stomach. It isn’t bad, or good. It doesn’t say anything damning or notable. It is merely the product of a hesitant member of the intelligentsia coming into contact with incongruent signals from unexpected sources. The author desperately tries to minimize large concepts by continuously focusing on the females that have attached themselves to this “movement,” always circling back to their quotes and positions as a sort of vaginal anchor point. The unintended side effect is things like mass incarceration, racialized policing, and other proggy touchpoints come off as incredibly stale when compared to a resurgence of traditional values, quiet coups forming, and “20 somethings” (this term gets used a lot) being less than impressed with what The Cathedral is offering. The journo probably got told, multiple times, exactly how his/her/its position in our society is to rubber stamp proper thought, and is now struggling with how fucking obvious this is, and has been since 2016.

    Awhile back, I met up with Yarvin. He is exactly what he says he is. He is not what people write about him. He is clearly making a move to become an accepted pundit, but he’s too autistic and real to be the face of anything. The article reflects this very well; he’s an intellectual precursor to whatever is happening now.

    Which leads us to what we should be talking about: what happens next. Auron Macintyre and the rest of alt-podcast are going to go through the same process every cool new thing does, and they will predictably let it go to their heads, make mistakes, then collapse into infighting. It is irrelevant.

    What is relevant is that there is a crowd of young men converting to Christianity, getting married, and orienting their lives toward traditionalism. In 3-5 years, their marriages will start failing, and they will be destroyed by their women. We need to figure out how to get the Marriage Pill ready for mass production and consumption. Let the podcastfags yammer, that’s their job. We should be thinking about who is listening to them.

    There is no single social construction as powerful as patriarchy. I think this is because patriarchy, unlike all other social constructions, does not need perfect examples to work. It makes up very well for failures in judgement or reason. It dispenses with female opinion *outside of mate motivation*. It gives men a platform and process with which to accomplish anything that could conceivably be accomplished. Patriarchy is the winning ticket, and that is exactly why the Cathedral is arrayed against it in total opposition. They fear it because it works.

    • Pooch says:

      Yarvin has correctly identified that the strategy of the early Christians is the winning strategy. The blue pilled progressive upper classes aren’t actually our enemy, they are just people we haven’t converted to our side yet, except he’s trying to covert those from the Cult of Reason with merely better reason. Cannot work.

      If attempting to convert those to your side, need a faith. “New Right” is not a faith and attempts to convert the pagans to the “New Right” will fail. Need the real deal, red pilled Christianity. As Jim has said, Christians in the front and the reactionaries coming in right behind them.

      I suspect it’s Yarvin’s Jewishness preventing him from taking Christ pill, which becomes obvious when one takes neo-reaction to its inevitable conclusion.

      • markmark says:

        i have been thinking the exact same thing re:Yarvin’s heritage. I have also met him, briefly. He claims he’s “not really jewish” on a technicality because his mother was a gentile, which is a very jewish thing to say. He is biologically and culturally jewish, and he rejects Christ. Everything about his life trajectory and family history is classic Ellis Island, jewish will to power. Perhaps it will be possible to convert him, or perhaps he aims to remain a jew. There are many similar “based” and “normiecon” facefag jews out there riding the dissident bandwagon that I also wonder about. From Darren Beattie to John Goldman to Dave Rubin.

  25. The Cominator says:

    While I don’t trust anyone in the Catholic hierarchy as I believe the Papacy is by nature corrupt evil and the Mystery Babylon of revealation and I suspect Vigano by saying all the right things is playing a deeper game…

    He has apparently named my favorite order (I wish I had the raw video but I was astonished to see this link on Free Recucklic)…

    • Pooch says:

      Like most organized Christian Churches (except some of the completely converged Protestant denominations), the Roman Catholic Church still has a Christian remnant, Vigano being the face of that Christian remnant. If I were Vigano I would just join SSPX though.

      • The Cominator says:

        I’m skeptical that a real Christian would ever make Cardinal of mystery Babylon or indeed that anyone gets to cardinal without outright being a demon worshipping homo or something… but he is certainly drops redpills and the fact that he named the Jesuits is very interesting…

  26. i says:

    Traditional Disney has been quite subversive in regards to family dynamics:

    Rebellion against the Father.

  27. Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

    The penetration of the ‘groomer’ meme into popular discourse has provoked some rousing conniptions of pointing and sputtering by the incumbent preaching class.

    • Pax Imperialis says:

      Definitely more powerful than cuck. Cuck just points out weakness/perverseness. Groomer points out perverseness plus evilness.

      It has been beautiful to watch their reactions

  28. Don Harrington says:

    The topic of Rod Dreher and his alignment came up on this blog a little while ago. He recently announced his wife is divorcing him.

    Also wrote a long and very emotive piece about how the experience makes him even more sure God is with him.

    I suppose that’s one way to be expelled.

    • Pooch says:


      • jim says:

        Rod Dreher is a member of conservatism incorporated, who is struggling with whether to be a member of conservatism incorporated and a McChristian, or to be a reactionary and a Christian.

    • Frank Matters says:

      Apparently as a Catholic and then Eastern Orthodox, and married for some 25 years, he only had 3 children. If not a fertility issue, he failed his mandate to “be fruitful and multiply.” He is also a mealymouthed RINO, which does not help. Certainly acted like a eunuch in his married life, which led to this result.

      I don’t feel pity for him, yet another bad example that hopefully others might learn from.

      • The Ducking Man says:

        3 kids with high odds of survival is already good. My grand parent from father side had 17 children, only 5 reached adulthood, out of those 5 only 1 finished basic K-12 education (my father).

        Honestly tho I don’t understand how people here equating be fruitful and multiply with having 10+ children. Noah only had 3 children, Abraham to Isaac to Jacob was only 2 siblings per generation, David only had 2 sons fighting for his throne, and lest we forget John the Baptist who didn’t have children till he died.

        • Frank Matters says:

          We are facing the spiritual crisis of a child sacrifice culture. In the beginning, you sacrificed your potential children to have more ‘fun’ in your younger years. Then you needed to sacrifice your children for your ‘career’ and ‘education’, in particular women needed to do this. Eventually the spiral continued and now we have states competing to be the first to set up a brazen bull in the public park for you to throw your toddler into.

          Do you get it, yet? Two different worlds entirely. Those among the white race in good spiritual health are responsible for replacing the rest that is actively degenerating as they fail to even pass on.

      • Pooch says:

        How many children do you have?

        • Frank Matters says:

          Pointed question. Have I hit upon a nerve? Do you want to give me a schoolmarm lecture?

          Instead of playing Socratic Questioner how about you make your case as I have. In our fallen world, it is the responsibility of all healthy people, physically and spiritually, to have as many children as they are able. Not as they want to, as many as it is convenient, as they are able.

          • jim says:


            How many children do you have?

            Seems like a mighty relevant question.

            • Frank Matters says:

              None, I am a yung sperg. I was not born into religion, and I have to create a family from scratch as my parents, both grandparents and the majority of my aunts and uncles are divorced. Am I disqualified now? Do *you* wish to give me a schoolmarm lecture on how difficult it is to have children?

              I plan to do as I say, have as many as I am able, as soon as I am able. I see it as my spiritual duty, and I will fulfill it.

              • Pooch says:

                Have some children first before you criticize others for not having more. You are the bum on the street, criticizing the businessman walking by for not making enough money.

                • Frank Matters says:

                  As expected, a lecture.

                  The businessman wants more money, and does what he can to grow his business. The family man finds children a burden, a drag. Better to not have them.

                  Why don’t you, towering exemplary that you are, offer advice on why I am wrong? Throw the homeless bum some business advice? Tell this bum what he does not know about cash flow.

                • jim says:

                  I am always telling bums about cash flow, accounting, and book keeping.

                  Some of them hear me and understand.

                  I don’t offer advice on family. But the great obstacle to family is that a woman is not going to want children unless she is firmly under the thumb of someone sufficiently alpha and manly. And that I do offer advice on.

                  In the ancestral environment, for an unowned woman to get pregnant was apt to be a death sentence for her and her children, and being unowned a very temporary condition, so evolution has not given women adequate programming to deal with it.

                  Marriage is ownership, and it has been abolished. Have to restore it by individual action until we are in a position to restore it by collective action. Gnon commands us to do what it takes.

                  There is a role for divine rage. We are required to turn the other cheek and walk the extra mile, but only one extra mile and we have only two cheeks. Those being exhausted, then it is on, and Christian and Old Testament history is full of what happens next. Christians are permitted Old Testament solutions to evil, but required to have the command of Caesar before we can apply them collectively.

                • Guy says:

                  You make excuses for your lack of children after admitting to having none. I started late because I was a retard, that’s why I have less than I’m proud of. You quickly got defensive, realizing you had been foolish, and should just admit you said something dumb

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  If there is no grounds to be critical of lack of children, on what grounds is he being critiqued?

              • schoolmarmish lecturer says:

                “Boast not thyself of to morrow; for thou knowest not what a day may bring forth.” – Proverbs 27:1

              • Adam says:

                If you plan to have kids, what are you waiting for?

              • jim says:

                It is difficult to have children.

                I know this well.

                And if you want to have children without catastrophe ensuing for you and them, have to have marriage 1.0. Without the support of society and the state, difficult.

                Marriage 1.0 is of course illegal. Have to be an outlaw, and have an outlaw frame and mentality.

                And, of course, there is the small detail of finding a woman. Very difficult.

                Woman are always going in all female groups to pick up joints. Often rather expensive pick up joints far away. The nearest bar is unlikely to work. To break into such a group, you need a group of males, with the alpha male of the group leading the entry operation. Make friendly casual acquaintance with the bartender and bouncer first. Plow through a sea of whores, and snatch up a woman who has a slightly smaller notch count.

                • Game says:

                  I also suggest finding Roosh’s ‘Game’, and learning how to cold approach.

                • linker says:

                  How can I find these pick up joints? Look for which expensive bars and restaurants in the city have hot girls on Thursday and Saturday nights?

                • The Cominator says:

                  Pickup joints are rarer than they were 10 years ago and especiallysince the scamdemic…

                  And if you do find them the music nowadays tends to be really unbearable. It used to be you could hangout in the smoking area to avoid that but most of them just vape inside now.

                • Skippy says:

                  It makes more sense to build an environment that attracts women and gives you status in normal life than to pick them up through nightlife.

                • Pooch says:

                  Look for which expensive bars and restaurants in the city have hot girls on Thursday and Saturday nights?

                  The opposite. Find the places that have dollar beer night or some such on Thursday nights. I pulled a lot of tail from a place like that back when I was gaming.

                • Pooch says:

                  It makes more sense to build an environment that attracts women and gives you status in normal life than to pick them up through nightlife.

                  You can do both. The value and status you assume in your normal life you can carry right on over to your night life, especially if you have a crew with you and you are the alpha of that crew.

                  For bars, this means finding the dollar beer night type places with the post-college crowd and running good standard Heartsie game.

                  For clubs, you’ll need VIP/bottle source. Clubs particularly create an artificial high status among all the men with bottle service. Almost impossible to play without it, but with it you are practically guaranteed to pull ass.

                • Aidan says:

                  What are you good at and like to do? Whatever it is, there is a way to show it off in front of chicks, to get status out of it and make friends with other men. Even if you are a total nerd with no life, no skills, and only hobbies of consumption, I happen to notice that the comic and game store at the local mall has plenty of cute young nerd girls.

                • linker says:

                  @Pooch I don’t want post-college girls. Even 21 is not ideal.

                  @Aidan Good advice.

                • Pooch says:

                  @Pooch I don’t want post-college girls. Even 21 is not ideal.

                  So you want younger? Well given 21 is the legal drinking age, you are not going to find any pick up joints for under 21 year old girls.

                  Your only option is a church and even then that’s going to be tough.

                • Kunning Druegger says:

                  Pooch, you lack imagination. There are lots of places people hang out besides church and bars. Location matters, but mindset, attire, and conduct are also relevant. Aidan said it well:

                  “Whatever it is, there is a way to show it off in front of chicks, to get status out of it and make friends with other men.”

                  I have never been in a social situation wherein I couldn’t find a girl looking for a master, or a guy looking for friends (past a certain headcount of course). This is why I believe it is of primary importance to work on the way you carry yourself and conduct yourself in all things.

                • Pooch says:

                  Pooch, you lack imagination. There are lots of places people hang out besides church and bars.

                  I know that. I responding specifically to linker’s inquiry on how to find the pick up joints Jim had originally mentioned.

                  I told him where and how to find these pick up joints, and he puzzlingly responds that 21 year old girls are too old for him.

                • Kunning Druegger says:

                  …interesting. If he starts to creep down into verboten territory and asking for detailed advice, red flag?

                • Pooch says:

                  Could be.

                • linker says:

                  I said not ideal. Do not put words in my mouth and speculate that I am a fed playing the ultra long game and that one day I will suggest breaking the law. That is ridiculous.

                  A lot of college freshmen and a small amount of high schoolers regularly drink with fake IDs. There are also fraternity parties, house parties, etc.

                • Adam says:

                  Here is some advice I would give to my younger self if I could.

                  1- Get a manly job in construction or something similar, something physical. Become competent, more competent than most. Take a job as a field or shop manager. Get used to taking charge. Learn how to give orders people respond to. Learn how to say no to manly men and not back down, and navigate conflict without losing your cool.

                  2- Get a big dog that is smart with a strong personality. Something fun. Learn how to take care of it. Teach it to obey your commands.

                  3- Learn to let go and have fun.

                  If any of that is too much for you, probably going to struggle with a wife and children. #1 took the longest for me, but even if you did just 2 and 3 you would be way ahead of most guys.

                • Adam says:

                  Also to add to the above, your work crew will help in finding cute girls. Either their girlfriends will have single girlfriends, or you can go to the bar or whatever together and pick up girls. Approaching girls when your with your buddies having fun is pickup on easy mode.

                • Pooch says:

                  A lot of college freshmen and a small amount of high schoolers regularly drink with fake IDs. There are also fraternity parties, house parties, etc.

                  No idea how old you are, but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are young yourself, If you want a girl who is under 21.

                  In that case, your best bet is to join a higher status frat and throw frat parties. You have instant status and tribe. I’ve seen many nerdy guys land a good looking wife like this from college.

                  Obviously, this doesn’t work if you are not college age. If you are older than college age than 21 year old girls should certainly be ideal.

                  But if you are so young that a 21 year old girl is not ideal, you probably should be focusing on increasing your value, status, money, etc like the others have mentioned instead of picking up chicks.

                • jim says:

                  > you probably should be focusing on increasing your value, status, money, etc like the others have mentioned instead of picking up chicks.


                  Game is its own value and status. The young man who is swimming in pussy typically has no job,no prospects, lives by a bit of casual work, some jobs in the gig economy, a bit of theft, fraud, and burglary, and mostly by sponging off his numerous girlfriends.

                  I do have money and status, and used to have quite a lot of it. Translating money and status in the male hierarchy into pussy is not easy.

                • Pooch says:

                  The young man who is swimming in pussy typically has no job,no prospects, lives by a bit of casual work, some jobs in the gig economy, a bit of theft, fraud, and burglary, and mostly by sponging off his numerous girlfriends.

                  As a Christian I can’t support this. When Christianity is in power once more, young men like this will be forced to find productive work and marry or be enslaved.

                  I have no problem if a young man is looking for a young wife to start a family. He probably should be getting his money in order whilst also looking for a wife.

                  The young man who is just looking to pick up chicks and enjoy the decline pool side, I do have a problem with.

                • jim says:

                  That is the problem: that marriage is difficult and dangerous, and there is no shortage of pussy outside of marriage.

                  You should not criticize men who are responding to incentives. You should criticize those incentives. We have to preserve the supply of marriageable daughters by empowering fathers to lock up their daughters and punish them for misconduct, and make marriage safe for men. The problem is not that we allow rakes, but that we grant whores high status.

                • jim says:

                  Picking up chicks and enjoying the decline from poolside is less fun that it sounds, particularly as one gets older. In the game of players and bitches, defect/defect equilibrium, the bitches win “She was not yours, it was just your turn”. It grates.

                  Because the bitches win, state, church, society, and family, need to primarily restrain the bitches not the players, by acting to ensure an adequate supply of marriageable women.

                • jim says:

                  > As a Christian I can’t support this.

                  You are worried about the young man banging numerous chicks?

                  I worry about the theft, the lack of prospects, and the sponging off his numerous girlfriends. But mostly I worry about the loss of marriageable women, which is their fault, not his fault.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Once again we do not incentivize whores so much as something much worse than whores…

                • Pooch says:

                  We have to preserve the supply of marriageable daughters by empowering fathers to lock up their daughters and punish them for misconduct, and make marriage safe for men. The problem is not that we allow rakes, but that we grant whores high status.

                  The problem of the early Christians all over again. They made it work in the churches, we will have to make it work in the churches.

                • Adam says:

                  The men made it work in the churches with the back of their hand. They were male dominated social orders. Jim’s account of guys swimming in pussy is true. Those men may seem reprehensible, but they are socially dominant, and more importantly dominate women with little regard for the women. If you have it in you, they will not only enthusiastically fuck you, they will pay your rent, bail you out of jail, buy you drugs, etc. That is how women reward men who can dominate them.

                  Can’t just sprinkle some alpha on the Bible. Need to dominate women to get them to do what you want them to do, and not do what you don’t want them to do. By whatever means necessary. If men tomorrow slapped every woman across the face for speaking back to him, the birth rate would climb and the divorce rate would fall.

                • Pooch says:

                  You are worried about the young man banging numerous chicks?

                  I worry about the theft, the lack of prospects, and the sponging off his numerous girlfriends. But mostly I worry about the loss of marriageable women, which is their fault, not his fault.

                  I’m not worried about anything except my family, friends, and community, but If I’m going to give game advice I’ll give it to the man seeking a wife, not the man simply seeking hedonistically pleasure like a dumb nigger.

                  The latter is not worth my time, even though a bunch of years of my life were wasted doing just that. Would rather not see others make the same mistake although I suppose it could be argued my game wasn’t ready for marriage until I had done all that, perhaps.

                  What are marriageable women? Aren’t all fertile unowned women marriageable? What makes an unowned woman marriageable and not marriageable?

                • jim says:

                  You cannot obtain a wife in today’s society without ploughing your way through a sea of whores. I use the word “whore” in its old sense, not its current usage. In the old usage, all modern women are whores.

                  You always start out in defect defect equilibrium, and have to get from that to cooperate/cooperate equilibrium.

                  > What makes an unowned woman marriageable and not marriageable?

                  Like reused sticky tape, the stickiness diminishes with each use.

                  The more they play the game of players and bitches, the harder it is to break them from that game.

                • Aidan says:

                  What makes an unowned woman marriageable and not marriageable?

                  Are you the most alpha man she has been with or are you not? That is what makes the difference.

                • jim says:

                  Exactly so.

                  But what do females view as alpha? It is different to, and in substantial degree alien to, what men perceive as alpha. Female alpha radar is amazingly sensitive, but two million years out of date.

                  Females with weak fathers or no fathers tend to imprint on very bad men as their exemplar of alpha. You will not match, and you should not match.

                  Your best bet is a chick with a strong father, who hung around for long enough to imprint on her the Dad type as an exemplar of manliness before being ejected. Chicks with fathers who are no longer around tend to be easier for older men, but truly fatherless chicks are apt to be trouble unless virgins, and they lose their virginity at an inconveniently young age.

                • Skippy says:

                  “You can do both. The value and status you assume in your normal life you can carry right on over to your night life, especially if you have a crew with you and you are the alpha of that crew.

                  “For bars, this means finding the dollar beer night type places with the post-college crowd and running good standard Heartsie game.

                  “For clubs, you’ll need VIP/bottle source. Clubs particularly create an artificial high status among all the men with bottle service. Almost impossible to play without it, but with it you are practically guaranteed to pull ass.”

                  Nightlife is an artificial low male status environment, one where four men chase one woman, and men have no means to show their higher status. Swipe apps are the same.

                  That doesn’t mean it is impossible to succeed, but the odds are against you. Industry is designed to extract money from low status/middle income men by e.g. letting them pay for waiters to pretend to worship them.

                  In day life, with social proof, women will accept remarkably weak stuff as proof of reproduction-worthy higher status, while even the best and most expensive nightlife acting wears off the next morning.

                • jim says:

                  > Nightlife is an artificial low male status environment, one where four men chase one woman, and men have no means to show their higher status.

                  A solo male has no means to show his higher status.

                  But you are very right that it is an artificially low male status environment. Women will travel enormous distances and incur considerable costs to find an environment where men appear to have higher status. The night life near you is an artificially low male status environment.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “Females with weak fathers or no fathers tend to imprint on very bad men as their exemplar of alpha. You will not match, and you should not match.”

                  Um Jim you have said the opposite to this in the past and its generally my experience.

                  Fatherless girls (or girls whos father died when they were young) tend to be much more receptive to guys who have less dark triad traits. Girls with controlling overprotective fathers tend to be attracted only to very violent and evil men (Aidan’s theory is they subconsciously want a man who will overthrow and kill their father).

                • jim says:

                  Girls with a strong father whose father died when they were young are a very good target, particularly for older men.

                  By fatherless, I meant literally no father. The mother did not know, and did not much care, whose sperm it was, or divorced the father when the girl was an infant.

                • Pooch says:

                  My experience with girls that are fatherless, missing fathers, or have divorced fathers is that they are sluts with massively high body counts. I’d imagine strippers and prostitutes would be from this group.

                • jim says:

                  The Cominator is a keen on strippers and prostitutes, but women want to be owned, and men want to own women, and it is very hard to own a stripper or a prostitute, because she has been banged by Jeremy Meeks, and very likely banged by General Buck Naked.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The funny thing is my all time fav stripper is the opposite and the exception, she said she got along very well with her father and was his favorite. She also didn’t have to be a stripper she in fact had a good Amazon corporate job… but being a nymphomaniac and finding corporate life fake and gay… she preferred stripping. No idea whether she got visited by General Butt Naked.

                  But yes I don’t think them having fathers is the rule…

                • skippy says:

                  Jim – is it really distance and cost, not guest list?

                • jim says:

                  Empirically, that is what I observe. Distance and cost. But then, I was never on a guest list.

        • Anonymous Fake says:

          If you send your children to compulsory K-12 schooling, you effectively have zero children. They are the Cathedral’s children. We want to have real children and to compensate those fairly who were forced into the Cathedral’s culture against their will with the careers and social prestige we were promised. And then we can rebuild.

        • BabyQ says:

          Currently my wife and I are early 20s with a 1 year old. Want to have a lot of children. Can any commenters here give me advice on having a lot of children, how long to wait between kids for wifes health (doctors recommend multiple years, but also recommend the clot shot), etc. Anything at all to do with having a lot of kids. Thanks

          • C4ssidy says:

            Sanderson is on the 9th and believes that breastfeeding provides a reasonable natural gap to give some time to recover. He probably has whole sermons on the subject

          • Aidan says:

            Multiple years is bullshit. Her pussy needs two months tops. The more kids she births, the easier it gets to push em out.

            • someDude says:

              Wouldn’t breastfeeding while pregnant put too much strain on Body resources? And how long are you thinking the breastfeeding period ought to be?

            • Yul Bornhold says:

              Will contest this on the basis of the Archive of Viriculture. I know this text is correct because it’s on Chadnet.

              “Viriculture Presciption #25: Space your children so there are three years between conceptions.”

              “As interesting and consequential as the effect of birth month is on development, the effect of birth interval on development may be even greater. There is a well documented association between a short birth interval and low birthweight or infant mortality.”

              [many examples offered]

              “Along these same lines, other studies have confirmed that not only indicators of health, but mortality itself is affected by birth intervals:”

              [another example]

              “The general notion that gestation depletes a mother’s store of child-building material is a major concept for viriculture. The traditional safeguards descibed above allow for adequate repletion of this material before gestation of the next child begins. In our modern context, the traditional inabilty to conceive too quickly after a live birth no longer exists. We must therefore go out of our way to make sure that mothers do not gestate a second child before repeating the necessary vital material for superior viriculture.

              “One way this can be done is by creating an environment that mimics that of traditional mothers. If a modern mother engages in attachment parenting, on-demand nursing, “extended” nursing and, sleeping with her baby, then her evolved safeguards will function properly, and lactational ammenhorria will prevent pregnancies in too rapid sucession.”

          • Red says:

            The one possible reason I’ve heard for waiting is nutritional recovery. Pregnancy and breast feeding take a lot of nutrients out of a woman. Which is probably why her first child is usually the biggest/strongest if she has 2 in quick secession. Recovery might be sped up with good nutrition, but western nutrition is basically voodoo and there’s no decent guide on getting her ready to go again beyond waiting for a while.

            If you’re waiting to go go on the kids, keep on her a good high quality diet.

            • jim says:

              Moderate protein, plenty of animal fats, preferably grass fed animal fats or fish fats (milk, cheese, butter, and sea fish).

              Adequate divalent salts (calcium, magnesium, zinc, manganese, and copper) Pregnancy and breastfeeding takes a lot out of a woman’s bones.

              Pregnancy and breastfeeding needs plenty of the same stuff going in through the mouth as comes out in the milk. Which is animal fat, animal protein, and divalent salts.

              Western diet is apt to be low in divalent salts and radically unbalanced in divalent salts. Night cramps are often an indication of unbalanced or inadequate divalent salts. People keep saying “calcium” because that is the main one, but unbalanced divalent salts are as bad as deficiency, and has similar effects. If you have a lot of one divalent salt, then you get similar effects to a deficiency of the others.

              If you have symptoms of a divalent salt deficiency, and the doctor says you need more of one particular divalent salt, you probably need more of all of them.

              • Red says:

                Adequate divalent salts (calcium, magnesium, zinc, manganese, and copper) Pregnancy and breastfeeding takes a lot out of a woman’s bones.

                The problem is what’s Adequate and how to get those in the right quantities? My guess is regular meals of liver(couple of times of week) is probably the way to go but I don’t have a way to confirm it.

                • jim says:

                  Western diet has ample, and probably excessive, protein, and reasonable amounts of animal fats, but has a problem with vastly excessive and unnatural amounts of omega six polyunsaturated fats, which cause all sorts of adverse health consequences, and may well be a major cause of our obesity epidemic.

                  It is weirdly and randomly screwed up with respect to divalent salts – which are apt to be a big issue during pregnancy and breastfeeding.

                  Divalent salts are inorganic, you don’t need to get them from organic sources. I mix up a powder:
                  Calcium Carbonate 107 grams
                  Epsom salts 218 grams
                  1.0102 grams zinc citrate
                  0.870 gm maganese gluconate
                  0.246 copper sulphate

                  And take a heaped teaspoon of that powder in water.

                  Or you could just take some tablets that give a balanced set, but they are rather big tablets, and most tablets are grossly unbalanced. RDA of calcium and magnesium is physically a bit much to be taken as tablets.

                  But obviously better to get it from food.

                  In which case, drink lots of milk.

                • Red says:

                  Thanks Jim, I’ll put that information to good use.

          • Kunning Druegger says:

            Lot’s of good stuff here. I think year gaps are an excellent interval. The spread works well, and by #03, #01 is starting to “help,” at least in terms of monkey see, sibling do. Another good method is wait 6 weeks, then weapons free and let God decide.

            Breastfeeding is amazing for kids, good across the board, and it gives the women a supermom capacity. And not just with your kids, it makes them guides and queen quim in their sewing circle. It also drives feminists mad for some fucking reason.

            Good luck, God bless, bro.

          • Andy says:

            I don’t personally have a bunch of kids, but in talking with friends and relatives with five or more children, the preferred gap between kids seems to be 2-3 years. One family had four years between the first and second child. Too long, mom and dad said. 14 months between the 2nd & 3rd. Too quick. They fell into two year gaps for subsequent kids, which felt about right for them. The older kids help with the younger ones, according to my great aunt. She and my great uncle were fortunate to have very conscientious older kids. Doesn’t always happen.

          • X says:

            Dr. Weston A. Price, an American dentist who surveyed primitive and untouched peoples in the 1930s, all of whom had near-perfect health and striking similarities in nutrition and lifestyle found that an interval of a few years was critical:

            “One of the most interesting traditional practices reported by Dr. Weston Price was the deliberate spacing of children in primitive societies. Throughout Africa and the South Seas, it was considered shameful to have a child more than once every three years.

            “Modern science validates this practice. We now know that the ideal interval for preventing physical birth defects is three years; this is also the optimal spacing for the emotional health of children. And allowing at least three years between pregnancies permits the mother to recover her nutritional stores between children and to provide sufficient attention to each child–and to her marriage!”


            And here:

            “To support the notion that having fewer children could decrease child and infant mortality, Ostry and Frank point out that bearing and nursing children taxes a mother’s micronutrient stores, especially her stores of vitamin A and iron. These nutrients, in turn, are well known to protect infants and children from infectious diseases. […]

            “[These statistics are] consistent with the argument that Ostry and Frank maintain, that the more children a woman has, the more her nutritional stores are taxed, compromising each child’s ability to survive infectious diseases.

            “If this argument is correct, it is a great testament to the ‘primitive wisdom’ documented by Weston Price, which included family planning, as he explained in Nutrition and Physical Degeneration (p. 398):

            ‘Another important feature of the control of excellence of child life among the primitive races has been the systematic spacing of children by control of pregnancies. The interval between children ranged from two and a half to four years.'”


            (resubmitted as intended as a direct reply to BabyQ’s comment—please delete the other one)

            • A2 says:

              This looks to me more like social population control by primitives in a Malthusian environment.

      • Kunning Druegger says:

        Frank, I don’t understand the venom. As well, it seems hypocritical to talk about what others should do while not doing so yourself.

        I realized at the end of my 20s how foolish I had been in regards to children, and only by the grace of God and no small amount of luck and effort on my part, I started a family. I’d like to have more kids, in fact I am working on it, but there are a ton of externalities, not least of which is how truly fallen our society is. it is impossible to find a good woman, but I now realize that is because a good woman is actually the result of a never ending process requiring many people, many elements, and, again, a fair amount of luck and effort, all over time. A good father is essential, but so is a good mother. Then you need good family, good land, good memes, good faith. At any point, something could happen to make things less good. This, to my mind, is what keeps a lot of our guys waiting too long. So I have come to the perspective that it is a tactical mistake to wait for a good woman. Instead, find a woman with good qualities, and knock her the fuck up. Then get gudd over time. This is not optimal, but it is what it is, at least currently. Parenthetically, a long time back in a different comment thread, Jim or someone talked about how, if a man and woman marry young, having few or no other lovers, they kindle a fire that doesn’t seem to age, though their bodies dwindle. I’ve seen it myself, some older than dirt farmers and their frail little wives, their walls blanketed with pictures and their children and grandchildren and great grandchildren forming a huge crowd. Something to be said for young love, I guess.

        If there are healthy communities generating good woman and worthy men, bully for them, and I’ll gladly serve in what ways I can to bolster, protect, and expand. But in my travels, there are many, many more men, women, families, and communities with some good qualities and lots of baggage. Again, suboptimal. But the Restoration Project was never going to be easy. Best to get started and work things out as we go.

        One fascinating element of fatherhood that I’ve found is how children give you this amazing ability to rise to the occasion. I was so scared I wouldn’t be ready in an theoretical sense, but when it happened, it was invigorating, challenging, and about the most terrifyingly awesome body of feels, like a wonderful sense of dread. You start to realize just how important the little things are. And the love that grows is matched by a burning wrath for anyone and everything that threatens both the child and their world.

        I encourage you to get started ASAP. Don’t wait for the right time or the perfect girl. The Cathedral has many powerful weapons, but one of their most effective techniques is instilling the sense that “settling” is bad, variety is paramount, and hedonics are the highest motivator. Settling is the most important step in laying a foundation, and if it takes too long, things get warped and cracked.

        I want to tell you to stop being a twat, but coming from me, that’s pretty hypocritical. So maybe just consider the idea that you catch more flies with honey, and fewer beatings when you have brothers. I’m sure you’ll hit back with some witty, zoomer tier response, and that’s fine. You aren’t the enemy, and I’m no saint. Stay strong, get gudd, have kids, buy land, bro. As many and as much as you can.

        • Adam says:

          I second this. I started young and it served me well. My wife wasn’t by any means a good girl, but she was better than the rest. And she fell in line until after our third child. I did many things most would find reprehensible to keep things together until my kids were grown. I’m glad I started young because I wouldn’t have had the energy or the fire later. I’m divorced now (happily) and although it’s easy to say I failed, given what I was and we as men are up against I’m glad I married the girl I did, and glad I had my kids. It’s never going to be an ideal world for a man. It is up to man to make something out of what is in front of him.

          • The Ducking Man says:

            >I’m glad I started young because I wouldn’t have had the energy or the fire later.

            People (especially this Frank Matters fella) need to understand to raising children is not easy task. They are money and importantly time and attention drain especially on their younger days.

            I start having kid at 26, now that he is 1 year old things are getting easier. But the first year are the real deal. The lack of sleep, rest, and generally lack of time to do the basic thing really put a toll on my mind. Can’t imagine going through this again at late 30s.

            • Red says:

              It’s weird that any male takes part in the child care during the early years. That’s what women and your extended family is for. Men are not well suited for it.

              • jim says:

                My job was always playing with them and ensuring obedience. Sometimes, often I would put them to sleep.

              • pyrrhus says:

                I found our boys to be great fun once they got to about 6 months..we played little games, watched inappropriate movies (they would fall asleep on my chest) and later recited Doctor Seuss and Robert W. Service poems, amongst others…

              • Kunning Druegger says:

                I absolutely love being involved, but I have to withdraw for down the road reasons. I agree there’s a line between woman’s work and men’s work, but I also look down on men that can’t handle their kids, as if they are little strangers that hang out with their wife. Obviously, there are exceptions to this, but I have found that if a guy I meet isn’t actively involved in raising his children, he isn’t worth my time or effort in support or friendship. I am drawing a distinction here between distant (sometimes good, oftentimes unavoidable) and incompetent.

              • The Ducking Man says:

                My role in the household is akin 6th man in basketball team like James Harden in his OKC days.

                I know I’m not good enough to be starter or in closing minutes but I’ll be damned if I don’t put in 35 minutes per game stat.

                I admit that I drew short end of the stick after I realized that my wife’s extended family are full of physically disabled.

        • Frank Matters says:

          The vitriol is in response to one of the people responsible for the current state of my civilization, of the life I have lived. Watching the destruction of not just my own family, but all the families around me. Watching as everything I value outside of myself is destroyed, and getting mocked as it happens. People such as Dreher actively mislead and add to the confusion of the world, actively prevent a resolution forming to oppose the leviathan. When someone attempts to make things personal as a way of defending such a creature, I react as such. That I have yet to achieve my goals does not preclude me from seeing what is true and what is worthy, and speaking on what is true and what is worthy.

          I will lead by example, I will accomplish what I say, or I will die in the process, and be thankful for it.

          • Neofugue says:

            While the factual content of your posts is correct, the tone in which you communicate is wrong.

            “Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again” (Matthew 7:1-2). Judgement given will be measured to you in return, beginning with the above discourse in the comments section and ending with the final judgement.

            As a disclaimer, I am not one to hold back judgement and condemnation especially on this blog, so it would be hypocritical for me to tell you to stop. However, a man consumed by judgement, resentment and condemnation cannot accomplish anything of value. You may end up having fewer children than Rod Dreher for various reasons outside of your control, so it is best not to set yourself up to be humbled.

            With respect to judgement, it is important to remember that God’s judgement is perfect as he sees all of which you know not. The demon-worshipers attempt to undermine Hell with “soul sleep,” universalism or some form of “post-death-repentance” because it forces us to become Gods, to take judgement into our own hands and thus destroy ourselves.

            Rod Dreher is not only a “cuckservative,” he is the paragon of the “cuckservative.” However, only God knows his heart, so only God can judge him.

            • Red says:

              >Rod Dreher is not only a “cuckservative,” he is the paragon of the “cuckservative.” However, only God knows his heart, so only God can judge him.

              I man is what he does. A man who does evil deeds but he really has a good heart is a lie leftists use to defend the wicked. If Rod Dreher repents and condemns his evil ways, as Saul of Tarsus once did then and only then can he be judged a righteous man.

          • Ash says:

            Good luck my kind sir, may you have plenty of children, for they will care of their ancestors and history.. make the right decisions and guide your children to follow Christ’s path.. you will be rewarded

        • The Ducking Man says:

          >I encourage you to get started ASAP. Don’t wait for the right time or the perfect girl.

          Amen brother. finding women with less baggage (and possibly virgin) is a lot more realistic strategy than waiting for “the one”.

        • alf says:

          In agreement with pretty much everything the regulars are saying…

          Other thoughts: I would like many children, but at two yung ones we are currently maxed out. It’s a lot of work. Depends on the kids as well: I have never been an easy kid, and my oldest is even worse. Little wolf child. If you are atomised — good luck! If you have a village, works wonders, but has problems still: the unanimous boomer advice is that you must be strict, set a thousand rules and if they don’t work you fail as a parent. Also, many have the mindset that spending too much time with children is not fun and you should delegate to the state.

          • jim says:

            Maxed out?

            For me it was a breeze. Try tighter discipline, and make sure your wife prioritizes taking care of the kids above all the crap that woman are supposed to pursue.

            Children naturally will demand all the attention that you can give them. Curtail those demands. I never told my kids “children should be seen and not heard”, but they acted rather as if I did. They would hang out quietly hoping for attention, and sometimes I would notice that they had been waiting quietly for a long time, and feel bad about it.

            I don’t remember getting cross with them for demanding attention, but they remember me as stern.

            • alf says:

              My wife has come around beautifully as a mother and prioritizes it above all else. We are even in agreement on homeschooling, which being alien to our culture faces criticism from pretty much everyone. She makes me proud.

              We tried the strict thing. It’s what literally everyone says after all. Didn’t work. Works for my youngest – I tell her no, she listens. Magic! For our oldest it is not that discipline does not work, but mostly he wants understanding. I am confident it will pay off when he is slightly older, and then I hope God will grant us more children.

              On the subject, Jim, if you don’t mind me asking: why did you stop at two?

              • jim says:

                It is a personal tragedy, that I do not wish to discuss. A tragedy in which I was culpable, but most certainly did not intend that outcome. But now, remarried, trying for more. So, have not stopped.

                • alf says:

                  I’m sorry to hear.

                • Kunning Druegger says:

                  God grant you peace and acceptance where necessary. Wisdom is never cheaply bought.

                  Dear Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.

                • Mike Thalassitis says:

                  Best of luck with that, Jim.

                  If you don’t mind me asking, are you doing some kind of protocol with hCG?

                  I am currently on a cruise dose of Test. I have a few kids and will want more further down the line. What do you think about taking hCG while on Test vs just taking hCG as you come off?

                • Ash says:


                • Mayflower Sperg says:

                  Nor do I wish to discuss the tragic events that shattered my family and ended my genetic line in America. My only hope now is to emigrate to a country not controlled by Harvard, change my name, and start another family there. I will not be missed; the government can easily import a hundred Africans to replace me. Perhaps in a century or two my descendants will return to settle the forested ruins of North America.

                • Kunning Druegger says:

                  Maybe you need to discuss it, M. Sperg? You did bring it up. I wish we had a safer than unsafe way to talk to each other. I hate that we can’t support each other in this community, past comments and keks.

                  Your comment keeps knocking around in my head. God grant you peace and acceptance where necessary. I want to say more, but there’s not much to say, and words are worth their weight in gold.

                  Good luck. I hope GNON gives you more kids.

                • Mayflower Sperg says:

                  Marriage has taught me two things: First, it is logically impossible to have children in any Western country. They are the government’s children, not yours, and if you raise them in any way the government disapproves of, you will be deemed guilty of abuse or neglect.

                  Second, autism genes are more strongly expressed in males than females, so marrying a woman more autistic than yourself is a recipe for disaster. Not having anything else to do with her life, my wife agreed to marry me against her better judgement.

                  We’re still good friends, but it would be a bad idea to have more kids even if she were still fertile. Maybe she’ll join me in exile and be an aunt to my future children, about whom the collaborators in my family will know absolutely nothing.

                • Gorgeous George says:

                  This sounds like cope m8, there’s nothing wrong with cope but no need to go on the internet with it.

              • Neurotoxin says:

                Alf: “Depends on the kids…”

                “We tried the strict thing… Didn’t work. Works for my youngest – I tell her no, she listens. Magic! For our oldest it is not that discipline does not work, but mostly he wants understanding.”

                Signal-boosting this, for those who don’t have children: Child rearing is the art of the possible. It’s pure pragmatism, and any simple theory you think you have for child rearing is going to be confounded by the reality of the thing. At least occasionally. I’m not necessarily saying don’t have a parenting philosophy; I’m saying don’t think “parenting theory” is like the laws of physics.

                Understand this: Parents react to their kids as much as vice-versa. There was a woman who wrote a book about this in the 1990s and she made a huge splash in the field of child psychology. (Might have been Judith Rich Harris.)

                An example she used – this actually happened – was that a mother had two kids and they encountered a strange dog. One of the kids was excessively scared and the mother had to calm her down. The other was too eager to dart off toward the doggie and play, and the mother had to hold him back. Since we’re sane people here, and not a bunch of blank slate retards, we understand that these differences in personality are significantly genetic. The mother had to adjust her parenting to each child’s nature. To a significant extent, it’s the exact opposite of the liberal blank slate notion that the parenting shapes the children’s nature: Your kid’s personality dictates your parenting, not the other way around.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  A traveling evangelist once said; “I don’t practice what I preach, ’cause I aint preaching to myself!”.

                • Kunning Druegger says:

                  Parenting seems to be like combat: you need to have a plan, but if all you have is a plan, you’re fucked. The metaphor extends further in terms of resources, experience, geography, external actors, allies, official faith, the list goes on.

            • People who say “children should be seen and not heard” should be seen and not heard. The conversation of children in a family is a beautiful thing.

              • jim says:

                I have important things to do. If permitted, children will take over your life. Don’t permit it.

                If you have one child, he inherently needs a whole lot of attention and there is no solution for that, but two kids can keep each other company. If allowed, will want dad’s attention 100% of the time.

                Sometimes my kids would do bad and dangerous things. Took after their dad in that regard. But their dad has more experience in doing bad things and not getting into trouble, and dangerous things and not getting hurt.

                When I detected this (and they rapidly became good at avoiding detection), I would intervene and redirect their energies into something less dangerous and destructive, which generally resulted in us doing relatively harmless slightly bad and slightly dangerous things together, but dangerous enough to horrify the womenfolk.

                • Cloudswrest says:

                  Sometimes my kids would do bad and dangerous things.

                  When I look back on my younger years I marvel that I’m still alive and in pretty much one piece. I must have one of Heaven’s most powerful guardian angels!

                • BabyQ says:

                  Thanks to all the commenters for your baby interval advice. Can you give me any advice on when the baby is newborn/young? I remember the constant crying would interrupt my sleep and make me grumpy, whats the best way through that?

                • Adam says:

                  Make your wife take the child into the other room and go back to sleep. Works best if she breastfeeds and does not work.

                • Cloudswrest says:

                  Works best if she breastfeeds and does not work.

                  I remember humorist Dave Barry commenting on breast feeding. He said it had many advantages! One of the top ones was that men can’t do it!

                • Andy says:

                  Honestly? Co-sleeping and breast-feeding. Young baby goes in between mom & dad or in a co-sleeper next to mom. Baby gets hungry, starts to stir, mom rolls over and puts a boob in baby’s face, and everyone quickly settles back down. Minimal fussing. You’d be surprised at how many people fall into this routine, although they’d never admit it publicly. It comes out in quiet conversations between new parents with a nod and a wink. (Note, I don’t recommend co-sleeping for heavy drinkers or drug users. Those are the kids who get squashed, although hysterical mother news will rarely explicitly note it.)

                  Once baby can make it through the night, baby goes in with the siblings. I recommend siblings share rooms when they’re young (under six), even if there is space for everyone to have their own room. Humans have spent millennia sleeping in one room dwellings or caves in family groups and most young kids settle best sleeping near another human (preferably mom but not always possible).

                  Another recommendation for the young kids’ room: have a twin bed or mattress in there that can handle an adult. Young kids have frequent night disturbances like illness, teething or nightmares. I can’t tell you how many parents – mostly moms – end up regularly on the floor in the kids’ room all night comforting a child. They love to complain and virtue signal about it which probably explains the lack of agency. Have a comfortable place for mom to lay in the kids’ room during those times. She’ll be a lot more pleasant the next day, although she won’t get to virtue signal as hard.

                  Sex while co-sleeping you ask? Makes you wonder how all those pioneer families had 10 kids living in a one room log cabin. I suspect the kids were sent out to do chores while mom and dad had a quickie. Nowadays, after baby feeds at 5 or 6 am, place baby in the baby swing watching the colorful mobile or, if old enough, in a high chair with some new toys or baby snacks and you can have 15-20 minutes alone with the wife. I heard a story about a friend of a friend who would throw a handful of cheerios into his toddler’s crib when baby woke up super early, and he & the wife got 45 min of peace while baby hunted for all the cheerios. Do not personally recommend.

                • Kunning Druegger says:

                  Second pretty much everything Andy said, great stuff there. The cheerios thing is hilarious. If you’re too fat or too addicted to co-sleep, you’re probably a bad parent. I absolutely treasure the memories of all the family and animals squashed up on the bed.

          • Andy says:

            One thing I didn’t fully realize until I had children is that genes really can and do shuffle in interesting ways. One child is a strange combination of characteristics of two cantankerous great grandfathers and a crazy great uncle…thus, a barbarian. I expected my children could inherit certain traits but I did not see that particular combination coming, let alone playing out as it has. There really are easier, more compliant children and then there are more highly strung children. Structure and routine are important for all kids while growing up, although some need more and some thrive with less. Like any construction project, you use different tools at different times for different reasons, and sometimes you have to improvise with your toolkit. It’s an ongoing challenge to say the least.

      • Anonymous says:

        How many children do you have? Please be sincere.

  29. Basil says:

    It is a pity that there are no pagan sources of patriarchy left in Europe, and only the Koran and the Bible remained from socially acceptable books about submission to a husband .. I really like all these wreaths, patterns, folk dresses, old peasant music and all that. It has its own strikingly attractive aesthetic.

    We must return these things when modernity breaks.

    • jim says:


      Paganism failed.

      Paganism only lived when people worshiped their ancestors, and traced their lineage back to the gods.

      You confuse cause and effect. Paganism did not make patriarchy work. Patriarchy made paganism work.

      Without patriarchy, ancestor worship does not work. Without ancestor worship, paganism succumbs to demons and cynicism. Demon infested pagans get conquered.

      When they lost their connection to their fathers, they lost their connection to their gods.

      If you want to reinstall paganism, first install extremely severe patriarchy, then wait several centuries.

      Take a look at today’s pagans. Limp wristed faggots.

      Indian paganism only works to the extent that it is not pagan. Serious demon infestation. It has had a serious demon infestation ever since the time that Arjuna and his kinfolk killed each other.

      • i says:

        When the Indo-Europeans were taking over India. They didn’t have the benefit of what the Conquistadors had. Which is the backing of Christ.

        The Gospel as it works functions as a Sword which wages war against demon infestation through destruction of belief systems which were demon infested and replacing Christ in its place.

        The Temple of Artemis fell into disuse once the Gospel took hold of Ephesus in Paul’s day for example.

        The Conquistadors also had major helping from the diseases that they brought with them inadvertently which did the lions share of work for them.

      • Basil says:

        I fully agree with your words about the state of modern paganism, I just express my regret that this is how it happened

        It is possible to return the aesthetics of pre-Christian times within the restored Christianity.

        • jim says:

          I rather like the aesthetic of Christian times.

          I think you must be looking at the aesthetics of demon worshipers posing as Christians.

      • Sher Singh says:

        Rule of fathers, rule of Warriors.
        Rule of Khalsa.

        Don’t insult Dharma


        • Oog en Hand says:


          All women are whores.
          The mother of jim is a woman.
          Let us use logic.

      • someDude says:

        Jim, I will have to disagree with your example calling out Lord Krishna as a Demon. The part where you talked about the Ras-Lila which you described as a seduction of married women. The fact is, Krishna hadn’t even hit Puberty at the time of the Ras-Lila and therefore, it could not have been a seduction.

        Yes, the Husbands of the Gopis did forbid their wives from going on to the Rasa Lila with Krishna, but that was not due to their fear of seduction. Just that they felt it was a waste of time and the chores in the house were being neglected.

        Not a seduction, and not undermining patriarchy.

        • Oog en Hand says:

          If we were to judge the Bible according to human morality, OT God is Pol Pot, NT God is John Lennon.

          • jim says:


            You have been listening to post Christians.

            God does not change, and for two millennia Christians did not think he had changed.

            The pioneers certainly did not think he had changed.

            • Oog en Hand says:

              Post-Christians like Marcion?

              • jim says:

                Post Christians exactly like Marcion, who was rightly excommunicated.

                The current heresies have been around over and over again.

                All this new stuff is also ancient.

            • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

              What is the name of that heresy? That God is eternal is the orthodox position, but is there a name for the progressive revelation from God? That he is constantly waiting to give us improved instructions once we reach a certain level understanding?

              • jim says:

                I don’t think there is a name for it. The Marcionite heresy, in the modern context, results in a divine revelation that the God of the Old Testament was racist, sexist, and homophomic, and that the new improved real God wants us to transition our children into monsters of intermediate sex incapable of reproduction.

                I would just call it demon worship. The image of this new improved real God as depicted by his current worshipers is serpent Christ – depicted as a literal old fashioned demon very much in the style of the images used by the faiths condemned in the Old Testament, and demanding similar human sacrifices.

                Figuring out new names for a very old entryist attack on Christianity leads to presentism. The original Christians just said “demons”. They were correct. Entryists come up with complicated explanations. Those explanations are just the patter of the stage magician to distract your attention away from what he is actually up to. Their stories should not be given attention and are unworthy of thought.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Agreed with the disregard of their arguments, but I was trying to see if there was a name to look up arguments against it. I have a friend who has been arguing it to me, and I am trying to reach him instead of just telling him he is a fucking heretic and shutting him down.

                • jim says:

                  The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition:

                  1. The doctrines and practices of the Pharisees.

                  2. Hypocritical observance of the letter of religious or moral law without regard for the spirit; sanctimoniousness.

                  3. Pharisaic doctrine and practice; zeal for the ‘traditions of the elders,” and the exact observance of the ritual laws; hence, rigid observance of external rites and forms of religion without genuine piety; hypocrisy in religion.

                  Seems like a fair summary of the New Testament and early Christian critique of Phariseeism.

                  As the alt right would say, the Jews were Jewing God.

                  Someone who argues that Jesus brought a new and improved morality and further improvements are on their way will very soon get on with telling you his latest improvement. The premise is defensible. It is just a mild stretch or creative interpretation of the standard Christian “New Covenant” doctrine, but, premise being granted, demon worship follows hot on the footsteps of the premise. By their fruits you will know them.

                  You cannot argue with their reasoning, because their reasoning is entirely defensible and reasonably arguable, and because it is motivated reasoning, your arguments will encounter a brick wall. It will make no difference what you say. Rather, it is a question of fruits. And much the same poisonous fruit always follows.

                  It is hard to draw a sharp line between this demonic doctrine, and the standard orthodox new covenant doctrine. And because of motivated reasoning, your interlocutor will Motte and Bailey between perfectly orthodox doctrine and demonic doctrine. Nothing terribly wrong with the reasoning, the problem is what motivates the reasoning.

                • Pooch says:

                  I’ve never heard that one before. Do you mean them attempting to Immanentize the eschaton in order to bring God’s Kingdom on Earth?

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  No, not so much that, as Christ was God coming to the Earth to reveal a new law to Mankind, because the Jewish priesthood had kept the true teachings of God from the people. Basically communism, but for religion instead of capital. The Pharisees had hidden the truth of God from everyone, so Christ came to tell everyone to be pacifists, treat everyone the way you want to be treated, and all the shit the left says about how Christianity, truly understood, is progressivism.

                • Kunning Drueger says:

                  Sounds like Calvary Chapel cuckery duckery. Post Christians are the worst. In the end, those lukewarm types will probably present more problems than atheists and foreigners.

          • someDude says:

            Oog, whats with these cryptic comments? It’s not really clear what you are trying to say. Now that I think of it, on a previous post of yours, it was not clear whether you were disagreeing with me, agreeing with me or insulting me

            • Oog en Hand says:

              I am supporting you against jim. The previous post was an insult.


              • While I appreciate your intention to defend the old Gods, I also understand that Western reaction particularly Christian reaction and we Hindus will never see eye to eye on certain topics, particularly those touching on certain Hindu deities, and also our views on certain aspects of Christianity. I have stopped getting into those arguments.

                But fact remains that Hindu Dharma remains the only live representative of old Aryan religion in this age and ancestor worship is still part of our religious practices.

                • Oog en Hand says:

                  Does Hindu Dharma recognize the possibility of eternal damnation, that is, is Hindu Dharma resistant to the Wager of Pascal?

                • The Cominator says:

                  No Hindu or Buddhist variant believes in ETERNAL damnation, though some variants believe you can end up in a hell realm for a VERY long time (like literally trillions of years).


                • jim says:

                  I am as ignorant of Hindu theology as Oog En Hand is of Christian theology, and if I tried to get into the details with somedude I would only look stupid.

                  Hinduism is not entirely overrun by demons, but all the Aryan religions succumbed to demon infestation, including Hinduism.

                  I do not wish to resume arguing that certain Hindu gods are obviously demonic, because that just pisses off good people. But they are. Which is why Hindus keep being conquered by non Hindus.

                  Indra/Thor/Zeus/Jupiter was not a demon, but one of the original ancestors of the Aryan people. At least some people in Iceland remembered him as ancestor who in his mortal life was located somewhere near the original Aryan homeland, which, since Iceland and Norway are a mighty long way from from the original Aryan homeland, sounds like something they remembered, rather than something they made up. Krishna is a demon. The advice he gave to Arjuna was extremely bad, led to disaster, and continues to lead to disaster today. He was also disastrous for patriarchy and male authority over women. But the primarily demonic part of his faith is what he told Arjuna, not his contribution to female misconduct.

                • Kunning Drueger says:

                  I looked up “Krishna and Arjuna” and found this:

                  I’m thinking that is probably just misleading? If it is remotely close, what is the bad advice there? I think I see it, just wondering what the BJC/dharmaposter perspective is. Krishna seems like a wishy washy advisor encouraging fratricide, but I may be off, or that summary is poor.

                  I’m almost afraid to ask these things, because I feel like a tourist visiting another man’s temple.

                • jim says:

                  Krishna is encouraging fratricide.

                  Arjuna … tells Krishna that he doesn’t want to fight against his own family, and that his family fighting within itself will lead to chaos in the kingdom. He also says that there are great heroes and respected scholars on the other side,

                  Chaos in the Kingdom ensued, the family was destroyed, and its political power destroyed. Everyone involved in the war, predictably, lost.

                  The British conquered India in substantial part because the royal families kept murdering their kinfolk, and frequently invited the British in to assist them in doing so.

                  Demons always want you to kill your children and your kin.

                • The Cominator says:

                  While im sure the Indians may have been unusually willing to backstab each other isn’t that pretty normal with succession disputes.

                • jim says:

                  Pretty normal, but if you take the broad look at history, Christians generally won because less backstabbing.

                • someDude says:


                  The Hindu perspective is that you can’t let the Evil guy walk away with the world and everything good in it, even if he is Kin. Krishna is not encouraging Fratricide, he is just not going to allow Arjuna to walk away from Battle. Arjuna is reluctant to fight the evil doer for no reason other than that the evil doer is Kin. That is unacceptable to Krishna.

                  Would Putin allow the Ukrainians to walk into NATO because Russians are Kin with the Ukrainians? Same religion, same language (maybe a difference dialect), same genetics, etc

                • jim says:

                  > The Hindu perspective is that you can’t let the Evil guy walk away with the world and everything good in it, even if he is Kin.

                  That is not the perspective that Krishna is giving Arjuna.

                  Rather Krishna is telling Arjuna that the consequences of war, and the reasons for war, do not matter. That it is OK to shit in your own nest, because you should be detached from the things of this world

                • someDude says:

                  Jim, Yes, there is a part where Krishna says

                  “Although physical bodies can be destroyed, a person’s essence will be reborn again and again, unchanged, through the process of reincarnation”

                  Was just Lord Krishna trying to console him about the potential loss of loved one’s on the enemy’s camp. But that’s only part of what Lord Krishna says. He says much, much more including asking Arjuna to have some Shame about being thought of as a Coward who took refuge in kinship in fear of his own death in battle.

                  He tries to appeal to Arjuna’s sense of manliness, to his sense of duty as a warrior, to fear of shame, and finally delivers the philosophy where he says a day will come anyway where you lose your Kin. You will have to grieve anyway. So why shy from Duty over potential grief?

                  Nowhere do Hindus understand Lord Krishna’s discourse to mean that Killing Kin is okay because reality is not real.

                  The problem with Hindu Kings inviting Brits into their personal disputes with other Hindu Kings was the same as Muslim Kings inviting Brits into their personal disputes with other Muslim Kings. It’s just a lust for power. Not following from Lord Krishna’s advice to Arjuna on the Battlefield.

                  Had the Indians owned an EIC like enterprise trading with Britain on British soil, I daresay some English party would have invited the Indians to interfere on their behalf in the English civil war.

                  That is why Machiavelli cautions the sovereign from permitting any foreign power or ideology a base on their soil as it permits malcontents within the kingdom to take help from that foreign power in any internal dispute.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Or perhaps to put it in other words, Krishna says a lot of things about a lot of things, and it is easy to take one particular thing pertaining to one particular concern, and run with it everywhere.

                • Kunning Druegger says:


                  Ok, but Krishna *seems* to be advocating a position eerily similar to post-modernism in terms of moral/intellectual equivocation. “Everything is equal to everything, in the end we all die so death doesn’t matter, all stories end so how they end is irrelevant, etc.” This is a poisonous perspective. This is how you get Kings to piss away their empires and princess to avoid conquest. Ironically to the example under review, we see the whisperings of Krishna in modern America telling people to ignore race, ignore violence, accept things, because in the end we are all equal and racism bad.

                  I fully acknowledge I may be missing the point, the link I pasted is an inadequate source to pull from, or I am grossly misinterpreting Krishna. Regardless, it was a strategic mistake to let the British in for Indians, just as Americans were foolish to let the academe into politics and policy.

                • jim says:

                  Supposing it was right and necessary for Arjuna to fight, the justification that Krishna gives is equally applicable to the generals on the other side. It is an all purpose justification for not worrying about consequences, for not worrying about kin, friends, allies, and nation, rather than a rule for prioritizing some consequences above others.

                  Too many family members wanted too much power, and were disinclined to share. But no man rules alone, you always have to share some power. At the same time, power by its nature, can only be shared very unequally. But any practical division would have resulted in all family members getting some of the pie – just very different amounts of pie.

                  Instead, most of the pie was destroyed.

                • someDude says:

                  @pseudo @Kunning

                  The point I’m trying to make is that an argument that says it is okay to kill your kin because nothing really matters and nothing is real is invalid because if nothing really matters and nothing is real, then why can’t Arjuna just walk away from Battle? If all is illusion, why does Duty as a warrior matter? Krishna after all appeals to Arjuna’s sense of being a warrior and his sense of manliness.

                  A philosophy like that can’t differentiate between action and inaction will default towards inaction. If won’t differentiate between courage and cowardice, will default towards cowardice. Arjuna, being intelligent and educated could not have missed that argument and would have questioned Krishna on it.

                  No Hindu understands Krishna’s advice as meaning that it’s okay to kill Kin since nothing is real and all is illusion. Instead they understand it to mean that you can’t let the evil doer walk away with it all just because he is Kin.

                  To be sure, there are Hindus who default towards inaction using the very argument Jim stated, so the accusation is not entirely unfounded. This is probably what accounts for the infamous reputation that Hindus have for fatalism. But this is not how I understood Krishna’s advice growing up. Not how anyone I knew growing up understood it.

                  Every race, every nation, every religion, has its share of idiots, cowards and evil elite. And our evil elites saddled us with that interpretation just as your evil elites saddled you with the interpretation that you turn cheek after cheek while being struck repeatedly.

                • someDude says:

                  Sorry, somehow I missed Jim’s last comment.

                  Jim, the other guy, the evil cousin, did not want to share at all. He refused to give them even 5 Villages that they asked for as a compromise. The other guy wanted war or surrender.

                  The Mahabharata is considered a tragedy in India. To this day, some communities make it a point to take a bath after every recitation of the Mahabharata. The understanding is that Krishna led Arjuna through the best choice possible in a sea of worse choices.

                  What you are calling an all purpose justification, that the soul re-incarnates, is just Krishna consoling Arjuna. Krishna does not say that what is being perceived is unreal (reality is not real). What is he says is that what Arjuna perceives at that moment is not all that there is. That there is more to reality than what Arjuna perceives and is aware of. The problem is that the same word is used for both conditions (Maya, meaning both delusion and illusion).

                • Mayflower Sperg says:

                  At the same time, power by its nature, can only be shared very unequally. But any practical division would have resulted in all family members getting some of the pie – just very different amounts of pie.

                  Instead, most of the pie was destroyed.

                  Like the game show Divided, where the prize money is split 60-30-10 and the three members of the winning team, who were total strangers when the game started, have 100 seconds to agree who gets which share as the prize dwindles toward zero.

              • Jim you basically ignored the entire history as narrated in the Mahabharata which spans multiple generations and centuries of the Kuru dynasty.

                Without going too deep:

                1. Krishna is actually a kin of Arjuna/the Pandavas.
                2. Pandavas and Kauravas are strictly speaking not related by blood since Pandu did not have children due to a curse.
                3. Despite Duryodhana’s hatred of the pandavas Krishna did his best to prevent war as an envoy. All negotiations by the pandavas were rejected by Duryodhana.
                4. By the time of Krishna’s advise to Arjuna all bridges had been burned long back. At that time Arjuna had to do his duty as a kshatriya and not turn back.

                • jim says:

                  Other people involved in the story disagreed.

                  Bridges with kin are never finally burned.

                  Deeds done, and outcomes resulting, showed that they were right. Those outcomes were still happening when the British invaded India.

                • Again, a lot that happened in Mahabharata led to bad outcomes. My point is that it cannot be blamed on Lord Krishna’s specific advise to Arjuna.

                  Bhishma’s vow of celibacy started the decline of the dynasty.

                  If you read the entire history, neither the pandavas nor kauravas were the rightful heirs. It should have been Bhishma (Devavrata).

                • jim says:

                  I see the same broad pattern in anglo saxons conquering India, as King Alfred uniting England.

                  And, similarly, when the Constantine changed the state religion of the Roman Empire, the life expectancy of emperors changed from weeks to decades, and hereditary succession replaced continual bloodshed.

                  No matter what goes down, your kin are still your kin. The details of the story of Arjuna fade away when you put them in the context of broad historical pattern.

                  And the broad historical pattern is that this is bad conduct. Any one incident has no end of details that make one man’s conduct arguably defensible. But the broad pattern of which this incident is typical is obvious evil.

                • > Bridges with kin are never finally burned.

                  Yes, but the pandavas and kauravas were not actually related by blood. And strictly speaking neither the pandavas nor kauravas were the actual heirs of Shantanu.

                  This aspect is ignored by most Hindus even, but I think it explains the immense hatred of Duryodhana towards the pandavas which is the main cause of the war.

                • someDude says:

                  Jim, Arjuna did not want to fight even after having accepted that his cousins on the other side were wrong. He just wanted to give it all up, for not reason that that the other side were Kin, which Krishna said was not right. You can’t just let the evildoer take it all, even if he is Kin. Reactionary whites cannot allow Progressive whites to take the entire continent, just because they are Kin. They have to fight and maybe exterminate. Even if fratricide, it’s not unjustified.

                  Suppose Christ was in place of Krishna. What advice would Christ have given Arjuna?

                • jim says:

                  You are telling me that in the circumstances of this specific event, it was necessary and right for Arjuna to go to war against friends and kin.

                  Perhaps it was, quite likely it was. But Krishna is not telling Arjuna that in this specific situation war against friends and kin is necessary.

                  He is giving Arjuna a general all purpose group of reasons why war on friends and kin is OK, which applies equally in all situations.

                  > Suppose Christ was in place of Krishna. What advice would Christ have given Arjuna?

                  I expect he would have given him a nutshell version of Christian just war doctrine, or a parable to that effect. He would have also told him to walk the extra mile for peace.

                  One of the points of just war doctrine is that a key war objective must be order and peace, and that the war must have realistic prospects of establishing order and peace. Sometimes the only effectual way to establish order and peace is bopping people with a big hammer. Arjuna’s assessment was chaos, which assessment proved accurate. Krishna argued, among other things, that Arjuna, being a warrior, had a duty to fight. But Arjuna was a ruler, not just a warrior. He had a duty to establish order. Krishna is arguing that order does not matter, which is strange advice to give a ruler.

                  Krishna argues that Arjuna should be detached from this world. A ruler should not be detached from whom and what he rules.

                • someDude says:

                  But Krishna did walk the extra mile for peace and even risked Capture, imprisonment and possible torture. The extra mile was walked and the two cheeks were already struck.

                  I can concede your point that a King must not be detached from the plight of those he rules. However, I don’t think Krishna’s advice is to for Arjuna to be detached from the plight of his people.

                  The advice is for Arjuna to be detached from his emotions (Feelz) like his attachment to allies of an evildoing cousin. The word “Loka” does means world in one context, but in other context it also means feelings/sensations/perceptions. And I think when Lord Krishna asks Arjuna to be detached from the things of this world, it is this that he means. This is how I have always understood it. This is how my Family members have understood it.

                  Christians are not the only ones with an Evil priest problem and malicious misinterpretations to weaken the faithful. As a practicing Buddhist, I can attest that Buddhism has this problem as well though Indian Buddhist seem most susceptible to this particular mind virus of seeing the Buddha as some sort of precursor to Gandhi as Christ was a pre-cursor to Obama.

                  The Buddha was against aggression, not self defense (hell, he even delivered sermons on effective fortificatyions), and not even retaliation (he praises a girl who kills a would be rapist for her presence of mind).

                • jim says:

                  The question was: Should I kill friends and kin when the result is apt be chaos and the destruction of kingdom and family?

                  And Krishna’s answer is that the world is unreal, so it does not matter.

                  You argument is that dire times require dire measures. Perhaps they did, quite likely they did. But that was not Krishna’s answer.

                • My take is that Krishna’s advise to Arjuna was very specific to the situation at hand.

                  There are a lot of later additions and interpretations by hindu scholars of later ages that mixes up the specific advise with general philosophy.

                • someDude says:

                  If it is okay to kill kin because the world is unreal, then it is okay for Arjuna not to fight because the world is unreal. If world is unreal, nothing matters, neither action nor inaction. So inaction becomes the default. Arjuna, being intelligent and well read, could not have missed that logical fallacy. It is Arjuna’s feelings that are transient and he should place duty above mere transient feeling.

                  This entire thing about the world being unreal, in a malicious misinterpretation by Evil priests. Yes, post-Hindus do think this way, but that does not follow from Krishna’s teachings to Arjuna in the battlefield.

                  I am no scholar, but I can say that neither me nor anyone else in my family understood it this way. There are post-Hindus who understand it this way, but that’s not too different from Post-Christians wanting to strike Christians several times and wanting Christians to keep turning their cheeks over and over again.

                • jim says:

                  > It is Arjuna’s feelings that are transient and he should place duty above mere transient feeling.

                  Feelings for friends and kin are not supposed to be transient.

                  That the likely outcome of the conflict was chaos makes it debatable what Arjuna’s duty was.

                  It was his duty as a warrior and and ruler to ensure that his family ruled. But which faction or group in the family?

                  And the battle failed to resolve that question, with the result that nobody ruled.

                • someDude says:

                  I’ll leave someone else to address the question of the transience of feelings towards Kin since I suspect my answer would be incomplete or not well explained or subject to misunderstanding. Maybe DR, or Singh can take it or if Suones was around.

                  Regarding which faction to choose, Arjuna chose well, his own brother Yudhistira was closer to him by Blood than the evil doing cousin, to say nothing of comparative virtue.

                  The Battle did resolve the question, Yudhistira did rule and there was no chaos during Yudhistira’s rule, indeed there was order.

                  But the point that this was fratricide (regrettable but unavoidable) was long understood by all. It has been long understood that the war all but extinguished the noble bloodlines of India with the result that Cowards and idiots survived the war while the brave and noble perished, an effect that continues to this day. But it was always seen as the lesser of two evils. For Duryodhana to rule unopposed would have been an unmitigated disaster.

                • suones says:


                  And the battle failed to resolve that question, with the result that nobody ruled.


                  The battle absolutely resolved that question (and all other outstanding questions). Shri Maharaj Yudhishthira ascended to the throne of Hastinapur as rightful King, with his brothers by his side, and inaugurated a golden age in Hindu Aryan culture that lasted for almost a thousand years (until Alexander’s invasion). His heir, Shri Maharaj Parikshit, was Shri Arjuna’s biological grandson, so Shri Arjuna benefited greatly as well.

                  Shri Maharaj Parikshit was the first Maharaj in Kali Yuga, and his power was such that he battered Kali the arch-demon himself into submission, while protecting Prithvi Mata (Mother Earth) and Dharma. Shri Maharaj Parikshit is in fact the model for a true Monarch — even though no mortal can ever completely destroy Kali (this is not Kali-Yuga for nothing), yet a potent-enough Samrat can absolutely banish him from his Samrajya, to the great safety of his subjects.

                  His sons were equally virile, all of them conquered vast lands in all directions, and each one became a Charkravarti Samrat in his own right.

                  The great sagacity of this line of Kaurava Emperors created an unbroken 700-year peace. It was they that presided over the transition from Bronze Age (most of Mahabharata is Bronze Age) to Iron Age. Bharat was perhaps the first nation to enter the Iron Age, and our iron and steelmaking prowess is the stuff of legend (Wootz steel, etc). The Western Aryan “Bronze Age Collapse” never actually happened in the East, in Bharat. In large part because the same guys continued in power before and after Iron was developed. Tellingly, Hastinapur is the capital of Bharat and not just a regional capital, in large part due to the outcome of the Mahabharata and the personal sacrifices of those involved.

                  I only mention all this because brother someDude invoked me. Otherwise it is useless to debate from the disparate positions we have. You seem intent on stopping the waterfall midway and rolling back to Charles II, while I feel the rollback needs to go all the way to Jerusalem for it to be possible at all — damming the stream that feeds the waterfall.

                • jim says:

                  You doubtless know your Hindu theology and Hindu history better than I do, and it is true that the Bronze Age collapse did not happen in India.

                  But Krishna is not making any of the arguments by which any of you defend the conclusion that Arjana should go to war. He is making the argument that consequences to kin, friends, allies, and nation do not matter.

                  And that fratricidal kinslaying civil war killed off most of the family.

    • Kunning Drueger says:

      Any return to Paganism would have to be entirely organic. By this, I mean war bands and tribes finding, elevating, and venerating wise men in the process of fighting, expanding, and propagating in a Hobbesian or near-Hobbesian state. Paganism is nuanced like a child’s imaginary game, with core elements fabricated whole based on experiential and existential ecstasy or dread. You can’t preach or spread paganism without semen or sword. Like the longbow, you must spend your whole life practicing it for the value to be realized. Those, like myself, who crave its adoption in current year are fooled into desiring it by art & entertainment (Cornwell and Stirling for me), having it artificially juxtapositioned in fantastical circumstances. If it’s ever coming back, it will do so organically amongst illiterate tribes with instilled patriarchy.

      Christianity, on the other hand, can be taught, transferred, and adopted by almost anyone. If, like me, you find the polytheistic elements of paganism appealing, there’s the pantheon of the Saints, a literal bug-feature intended precisely for us midwit or illiterate tribe members. There’s probably something out there that articulates this better than me, but Christianity is easily adapted into Whitoid, Negroid, or Slantoid cultures. It’s self propagating after introduction, and it can operate in a connected nodes or isolated node network. The biggest problem seems to be just adaptable it is, as it can be shanghaied by malevolent forces.

      Paganism is childish, so we must leave it to the children of the coming dark age. If the Restoration Project fails, the survivors of the collapse will inevitably instantiate paganism due to natural phenomena and random chance. But I don’t think moderns or post-moderns are capable of that.

      • suones says:

        No one’s stopping you or anyone from starting your own worship. If you gain spiritual strength, so far so good, if not, try something new. Worship of an Old God, your Old God, who is your Kin and loving Father, whose blood is your blood, doesn’t have to be complicated. The proof is in the pudding — if it tastes good or rotten.

        …war bands and tribes finding, elevating, and venerating wise men in the process of fighting, expanding, and propagating in a Hobbesian or near-Hobbesian state.

        The Russian border conflict is ripe for the waking of an Old God from slumber. Moloch and Yahweh are fighting together and whatever spiritual forces “Orthodoxy” had were proven either ineffectual or spent. Putin has awoken something, of that I’m sure[1]. Not sure how “it” ties into his whole Jewish Messiah Worship frame while fighting a literal ZOG Golem state.


        • someDude says:

          Brother, Listen, I did not take your dream literally! I thought you were saying that for effect

          I thought it was something like the conversations William Lind has with Kaiser Wilhelm,

          r David Goldman/Spengler has with Cardinal Richelieu

          Do you really want to be broadcasting something like this? I still say you are using the dream as a rhetorical device

          • suones says:

            I still say you are using the dream as a rhetorical device.

            This is the Jewish/psychoanalyst trap I warn against in my article. There is no difference between “rhetorical device” and a “diyvastra” from Mata Saraswati/Athena, or at least a distinction without a difference.

            HP Lovecraft, of all people, realised this despite being raised in the Semitic false consciousness. Who’s to say if Trevor Towers is a more “real” place than Celephais, in the Valley of Ooth-Nargai? Who has drilled into the pyramids of Antarctica to discover if they’re in fact horn mountains as claimed? Who has explored the Roof of the World and tried to find Leng[1]? Too bad Lovecraft didn’t have a guru to properly channel his spiritual power, and instead of birthing a glorious Avatar, he birthed Chthulhu instead.

            [1] To their credit, National Socialists actually did try to find Leng, and planned to explore Kadath, unlike fake American “SCIENCE!” Although American “SCIENCE!” was still “science” at the time. Can the Sno-Cruiser be built now, with better tyres this time? Why are flights to Kadath still using DC-3s/Baslers?

        • jim says:

          Christianity is good at resurrection, and I see Russian Orthodoxy, behind the shield of Putin’s nukes and Putin’s war, awakening from death as we watch.

          It lives.

      • someDude says:

        Kunning, just as a reference, The Japanese are even more Polytheistic than modern Indians and literally have 8 million Gods or there-abouts

        The Japanese are the true standard bearers for polytheism while India’s desperate poverty and degradation might actually be hurting the cause of polytheism. When considering Polytheism in a modern context, do consider modern Japan in your calculations.

        • Oog en Hand says:

          The Japanese did know how to deal with Christians.

          Japanese is related to Hungarian and Turkish. Sanskrit is far closer to Dutch and English.

        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          To be more specific, shintoism is more in the pantheistic ‘everything has a spirit’ vein, rather than any one particular arbitrarily large number of spirits.

          • jim says:

            Christians are apt to believe that everything has a guardian angel, or in some cases is haunted by demonic spirit. And Shintoists believe that one kami, Ameratsu, is the highest of the kami, and apt to believe that all kami are aspects of one kami. The similarity between healthy but completely different religions is greater than similarity between healthy and demon infested variants of what is nominally the same religion.

            The series “Rome” accurately depicts Romans of the late Republic and early empire morally decadent and worshiping demonic, rather than divine entities. No one in the series ever invokes Jupiter. They invoke beings that are unambiguously demonic and frequently explicitly female. Their religious rituals look demonic.

            Episode eight of season two of Rome opens with Imperator Caesar Augustus giving a lecture on sexual virtue, and the vital importance of Roman matrons in producing new Romans and civilizing Rome, which lecture was entirely accurate, both in what actor representing Caesar Augustus said, and what the real Imperator Caesar Augustus really said, except that he somehow neglected to mention that back when Roman matrons were virtuous, inspired a virtuous Roman Republic, and produced large numbers of new Romans, their husbands had arbitrary power of life and death over them. And then in the rest of episode eight, everyone, including Imperator Caesar Augustus, proceeds to arbitrarily demolish marriage and the authority of husbands, Imperator Caesar Augustus by adulterously marrying someone else’s wife.

  30. Basil says:

    An ironic video by a blogger from Kyiv about how to behave with a girl. But the advice is very good (everything is clear without words). Zoomers give me hope, nature always finds its way.

    • The Cominator says:

      > Kyiv

      You will never be a real woman. You have no womb, you have no ovaries, you have no eggs. You are a homosexual man twisted by drugs and surgery into a crude mockery of nature’s perfection.
      All the “validation” you get is two-faced and half-hearted. Behind your back people mock you. Your parents are disgusted and ashamed of you, your “friends” laugh at your ghoulish appearance behind closed doors.
      Men are utterly repulsed by you. Thousands of years of evolution have allowed men to sniff out frauds with incredible efficiency. Even trannies who “pass” look uncanny and unnatural to a man. Your bone structure is a dead giveaway. And even if you manage to get a drunk guy home with you, he’ll turn tail and bolt the second he gets a whiff of your diseased, infected axe wound.
      You will never be happy. You wrench out a fake smile every single morning and tell yourself it’s going to be ok, but deep inside you feel the depression creeping up like a weed, ready to crush you under the unbearable weight.
      Eventually it’ll be too much to bear – you’ll buy a rope, tie a noose, put it around your neck, and plunge into the cold abyss. Your parents will find you, heartbroken but relieved that they no longer have to live with the unbearable shame and disappointment. They’ll bury you with a headstone marked with your birth name, and every passerby for the rest of eternity will know a man is buried there. Your body will decay and go back to the dust, and all that will remain of your legacy is a skeleton that is unmistakably male

      • ExileStyle says:

        Splendidly savage.

        • The Cominator says:

          I can’t take credit for a copypasta but this should be applied to any who spell it Kyiv, if you are following fake and gay Cathedral spellings in this place you should be treated as fake and gay.

  31. Leon says:

    More book recommendations. There was a book on intelligence and beauty and how the sexes evolved towards those end goals. It got talked about a bit on the old manosphere.

    • Kunning Druegger says:

      Smart and SexXy by Roderick Kaine (aka Atavisonary). I have it, but it is a bit over my head.

  32. chris says:

    I remember reading a blog years ago called Charlton’s Miscellany, by Bruce Charlton. I remember he wrote a post where he was discussing why he became religious.

    I remember it because I like to consider myself a rational man. I took courses in math at university and noticed a comparison to the argument structure of his post and some of the proof methods they were teaching us.

    I remember the argument was essentially, if God isn’t real, then those who believe should not be doing what is Good. (With Good defined as the outcomes produced by those religious denominations.) Now those who believe ARE producing what is Good, therefore we cannot conclude God isn’t real.

    I saw similarities to the method of proof by contradiction. If you have A, it can be true or false. If you assume it is false, and follow the argument from that and observe a contradiction, then you cannot conclude it is false, and since the only alternative is that it is true, then it must be true.

    That’s why I remembered it.

    Now it has been many years since I read that (I am 35 now). Probably close to 10 years. And while I was raised Catholic, I have been Agnostic and non-religious for many years (since around 17). Roughly from when I developed my adult brain. I have not believed in God since I was a child, and even then that belief was superficial, like believing in Santa Claus.

    However, in the past 10-15 years, as I have gotten older, I have seen with my own eyes how wickedness always seems to prevail, how trust always seems to be betrayed, and how the hope you place in others gets dashed. (A recent betrayal by someone who I trusted against my better judgement got me thinking about this.)

    The algorithm of life itself, evolution, is written such the strong survive and the weak perish. That the first to cheat wins. Defect defect is the equilibrium we are trapped in. Not just with women, but with all conduct we engage in.

    You place your trust in someone, and if it is in their interest to defect and they can get away with it, expect the defection. How do you change that? How do you trust when you can’t enforce?

    And it’s not even human or animal behaviour. The very structure of life struggles against the harshness of the cosmos to exist as life. Go outside and UV rays from the sun seek to ionise the molecules in the cells of your flesh. Were it not for our atmosphere, we would be torn to shreds by far harsher radiation.

    But I digress.

    If the manner behind the material world is written such that evil wins, the only way you can break that chain is through transcendental intervention, from outside the existence of material reality.

    And while I have seen no evidence of the transcendent, the evidence of the fallen state of the world is ever abundant. So while I am not starting to believe in God, I am starting to believe in the Devil, and how this world is his.

    Let’s hypothesise. If the Devil is real, would that be necessity imply God is also? Is this a proof? And what then?

    For while I have seen the fallen nature of life itself, understood it as an algorithm, and seen it play out with my own eyes in the conduct of those around me. There is no scenario I see where it does not win, barring divine intervention.

    Is this what makes people religious? I ask because I have never felt any sensation of the divine and I always thought that that is what makes people believe. Maybe this is the closest someone like me can get.

    • Pooch says:

      Stop trying to prove or disprove the unfalsible. Christians, those that have believed in Christ, have defeated evil before. Can defeat evil again.

    • Cheato says:

      Seek and you will find, knock and you will enter. Pray and ask God for guidance. Ask Him.

    • alf says:

      Were it not for our atmosphere, we would be torn to shreds by far harsher radiation.

      Yet, there is an atmosphere, and we are not torn to shreds. Wonderful isn’t it.

      Let’s hypothesise. If the Devil is real, would that be necessity imply God is also?

      Those who cooperate always outcompete those who don’t. The metaphorical devil, or literal evil people, can only cooperate while piggybacking on something bigger than them, in our case, the old Christian empires.

      Cooperate/cooperate is the equilibrium of good people. God, and per extension Gnon, challenges us to return to it.

    • MT says:

      Heh, if you remember reading Charlton’s site “years ago”, then you may be pleasantly surprised to find that he hasn’t stopped, nor has his quality declined, over the years:

      “Is this what makes people religious?”

      Not for most people, but for some it is. I dunno where you stand on the VD Question (that is, Vox Day, not venereal disease, I don’t imagine there are too many people on the pro-venereal disease train, but then again Vox Day seems to polarize people just as much), but he writes about the question of evil frequently. In my view his finest post is here:

      “Is this a proof?”

      “Proof” is a strong word, philosophically-freighted, but yes, many of us think so. The older that I get, the more I am convinced by the observation that human beings act exactly as they would if the biblical account of humanity was true.

      • Adam says:

        I’ve read his blog a bit in the past. Couple of interesting things he brought up which I have not heard anywhere else, is the idea that fear is an addiction and also that man is better off not speaking words. At least a man who seeks to do good would be better off remaining silent, or something like that. Quite a bit of truth there.

    • Everyone alive is the beneficiary of an unending stream of free blessings raining down upon them constantly, blessings they did nothing to earn. At a bare minimum these include:

      — the laws of physics hold up
      — the planet is largely habitable

      Whoever or whatever is behind the physical Universe is not an exploiter. This is the fundamental problem with our enemies: they will never be allowed to transcend this physical reality because their way of being is contrary to the nature of the creator(s).

      This is a truth you can directly observe personally and bank on.

    • jim says:

      Theodicy attempts to answer a question that has never troubled me.

      “Why cannot I have candy?” asks the child.

      • Oog en Hand says:

        Omnipotence can create candy that doesn’t make your teeth rot.

        • Adam says:

          Cause and effect is what binds God’s creation together, and creates the hierarchy of authority. Cannot do away with gravity and still expect your feet to stay on the ground. God cannot be the highest authority and also make you the highest authority.

        • jim says:

          Omnipotence exercised in this fashion would make a very boring world. If I were omnipotent, would make a world like the game worlds that I made, which were nastier than this one.

          • Anonymous says:

            That just sounds masochistic.

            • jim says:

              Doom is the most popular PC game ever, with one hundred spin offs and imitators.

              Seen any games based on My Little Pony?

              Imagine living in the My Little Pony universe. Would suck.

              Consider the example of meaningless pointless evil popular among those who argue that the existence of evil falsifies the existence of God. A fawn gets caught in a random forest fire, gets horribly burned, spends a long time dying. That sucks.

              Imagine a universe were you could not get caught in a random forest fire, because God would always hoist you out. That would suck worse.

              Imagine a universe where evil people could not do evil things, because God would always intervene, and make sure the outcome harmed the evildoer, and left his victims unharmed. Now that would really suck.

              If I wrote a game universe like that, no one would buy it.

              • Cloudswrest says:

                I once quipped in a comment on a Steve Sailer article that if crime was eliminated how would we know who the criminals were? He replied he could live with that.

              • Anonymous says:

                That would suck worse.

                I could live with it. Doom’s popular, but so’s Minecraft.

                I don’t think that either you could argue me to your position or I could argue you to mine. Really I’m just trying to understand the perspective that says “If I were omnipotent, would make a world like the game worlds that I made, which were nastier than this one.”. They already want to cut your sons’ dicks off, you’d give them wings and horns and flame breath too? Maybe because that makes it more satisfying to blow them out of the sky with a shotgun—I could understand that.

                • jim says:

                  > you’d give them wings and horns and flame breath too? Maybe because that makes it more satisfying to blow them out of the sky with a shotgun

                  That is a big part of it.

                  But to really make it good, it would be great if I had the power and ability to give the monsters free will and moral choice – and then load the game so that they fairly regularly, but not entirely reliably or predictably, tended to make extremely evil choices. KOS game mechanics get boring after a bit. If I had the power and the ability, would make the game mechanic considerably more subtle than KOS. Not that there would not be lots of KOS, but it would not always be the optimal strategy for the good guys. Frequently would be though.

                • Anonymous says:

                  That would be hells of fun as a game. I love Terraria, but where Terraria is weak is that the enemy attacks are all variations on ramming into you and firing projectiles at you. If they attacked more intelligently, if they were territorial and built things in the world, if you and them could have uneasy temporary truces with and enforce contracts against each other, that would add fascinating depth to it.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Well when I die I want to be transferred to a Universe more like “A Nice Place to Visit” in the Twilight Zone (with of course the addition of authentic cultural life of some kind).

                  Maybe other people couldn’t take it and would find it so boring it would be like hell… but I’m not one of them.


                • suones says:

                  KOS game mechanics


                  Or as some say, KOSM

                  Thank you, thank you, I’ll show myself out.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  > Doom’s popular, but so’s Minecraft.

                  And every popular streamer that everyone tunes in to watch is playing on survival mode.

                • Anonymous says:

                  Bad things are entertaining when they happen to other people.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Sure but, that’s what everyone who is not five is all playing, too. Noone cares about anything that’s done in creative mode; in their minds, it doesn’t really ‘count’.

                • i says:

                  “but so’s Minecraft.”

                  Most people gravitated towards the survival mode of minecraft. It is just more exciting to have danger and risk of failure somehow.

                  And also every other feature of said survival mode like how natural resources are made into tools and technology and overcome adversity.

              • suones says:

                Imagine a universe where evil people could not do evil things, because God would always intervene, and make sure the outcome harmed the evildoer, and left his victims unharmed. Now that would really suck.

                This is lame.

                Ackshually, the Jewish “God” is not infact omnipotent, but only so in their minds. Because of course one always exaggerates and embellishes the powers of one’s own Kin Old God. Also, He does intervene time and time again whenever his Chosen get themselves into trouble (which is quite often), to the great harm of others. The Bible is literally chock-full of his interventions. It is the greatest foolishness to attempt to combat the Chosen without taking into account this 800lb spiritual gorilla “intervening” on their behalf.

                Why doesn’t he help a fawn? Because the fawn is not his Chosen. Who helps fawns? Buddha. Also, Mahavira. The latter even helps flies and other insects tho, which causes his followers to succumb to disease and die out, which isn’t so good.

                Perhaps the greatest trick “God” has played is convincing Aryans to cast off their own spiritual armour, and lay down their swords and icons, and put out their Holy Fires, because all that is “superstition,” and the only TRVE “God” is the Chosenites’ Patron. Who will grant goyim great wealth if they serve the C****n and smite them if they stray. Basically, turns every Aryan into John Hagee.

                I always wondered why “Atheism” for all its vitriol against “Christianity” never mentioned these facts, but always seemed to attack the Aryan middle class family man who went to Church because his Father taught him to.

                Want a real god? One that WILL intervene on your behalf and kill your enemies so you don’t have to? If you’re a Jew you’re all set. Just follow your covenant (“reform” or “atheist” Jews can go fuck themselves). If you’re NOT a Jew, well… 😁

                • Anonymous says:

                  Deer are nice enough I suppose but it’s rather telling that even though you’re clearly biased against God that you mention how he helps human men while the only example you have of Buddha supposedly helping beings is that of Buddha helping young or baby deer.

                  Even in your negative and biased perceptions of Him at least He’s helping humans and not young deer.

                  And Christ, God, has helped many White European Gentiles for thousands of years, indeed many a time against Jews and Pagans.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Given that the Jews are the hapless slaves of the descendants of the Christians, I would dispute your interpretation of who is the chosen of God. It is practically the meme. “Look at me. I am the chosen now.” Except instead of a scrawny African against a European captain, it is a Chad European Crusader staring down a scrawny Semetic shepherd. The good Jews turned to Christ, embraced Europeans as brothers, and we will take them to the stars with us to fulfill our Lord’s covenant with Abraham.

                  My God does not need to kill my enemies for me, because God helps those who help themselves. If God killed all my enemies for me, it would ruin my fun. I play three types of video games. Farming sims, games where I slaughter hordes of enemies to protect my people, and empire-building strategy games. I want enemies to fight.

                • i says:

                  “Ackshually, the Jewish “God” is not infact omnipotent, but only so in their minds. Because of course one always exaggerates and embellishes the powers of one’s own Kin Old God. Also, He does intervene time and time again whenever his Chosen get themselves into trouble (which is quite often), to the great harm of others. The Bible is literally chock-full of his interventions. It is the greatest foolishness to attempt to combat the Chosen without taking into account this 800lb spiritual gorilla “intervening” on their behalf.”

                  It seems that this 800lb gorilla actually does carry his threats through. The Assyrian Empire and Babylon Empire were destroyed.

                  The City of Tyre has been demolished according to this beings decree.

                  Cyrus which was anointed by this being also came into power and become the liberator of his “Chosen”. To show that he is a “Living God” who actually responds to his followers prayers.

                  “Why doesn’t he help a fawn? Because the fawn is not his Chosen. Who helps fawns? Buddha. Al