National Capitalism and Sanctions on Russia

The Global American Empire thought sanctions would ruin Russia. Still think that, though they now think it will take a little longer. Formerly talking weeks, now talking years.

The Russian economy has, according to statistics, been knocked down ten or twenty percent. Seeing a Youtuber chatting to Russians on the ground, sounds roughly accurate. The question is, is it, like the ruble, bouncing back, or going over a cliff? The ruble bounce back came as a shock to the Global American Empire, and they are still in denial, though the denial is getting mighty thin. I rather think that the effect of sanctions on the Russian economy is going to be similar, is already becoming similar.

The effect of the sanctions has been to impose National Capitalism on Russia from outside.

A modest dose of national capitalism worked great for the Trump economy. It spectacularly industrialized South Korea.

National Capitalism defined

National Capitalism is self sufficiency in the organization of people for production, and self sufficiency in the skills and equipment needed for production, that relies on internal free markets and supports local businessmen.

If your people are being organized for production under a businessman subject to a foreign sovereign, that foreign sovereign is going to make him pursue the interests of that sovereign rather than your sovereign, such as exporting his state religion to you, and the interests of that sovereign’s people, not your people.

If the skills and equipment needed for producing one thing are in your country, rather than in a foreign country, production of that thing has large beneficial externalities, making it easier for others of your people to produce other things, creating opportunity and incentive for the talented among your people. These externalities are not part of the profit and loss of the business, so businesses are apt to make decisions to offshore stuff where the offshoring has harmful externalities onshore. And if the business is run by a foreigner subject to a foreign corporate headquarters, he is going to keep critical skills and equipment close to his foreign headquarters. Hence close to a foreign sovereign, and far from your people, who are thus unable to take advantage of those skills and equipment to compete with that business, or start other businesses producing related products.

So how is this working out for Russia

A builder in the middle of a one horse town found that nails and screws were unobtainable or absurdly expensive, because they had formerly been imported from the west. He also found that metals, which had formerly been exported to the west, were now considerably cheaper.

According to Global America Economists, that builder is now going to stop building. And for a little while he did stop building. What he did instead of building was go to China and buy a self contained computer controlled machine that turns metal into nails and screws, and now he is back to building, and also in the business of selling nails and screws.

If millions of Russians are doing something similar, then the short term effect is that the sanctions will have rapidly diminishing impact, and the long term effect will be to create Russian skills and jobs repairing, maintaining, upgrading, and eventually building those machines.

Similarly when the McDonalds franchise pulled out of Russia. The former franchisees organized a new franchise, and their burger joints ripped down their McDonald’s signs and put up the new signs. They also renamed, and slightly altered, their menu. Which means that Russians are a whole lot less likely to be forced to watch black people, mixed race couples, transexuals, and faggots, eating burgers on television.

858 Responses to “National Capitalism and Sanctions on Russia”

  1. restitutor_orbis says:

    Yesterday evening I stumbled on something that was new to me. It was in an area I had always dismissed as just wishful thinking. But now I’m curious if you guys already know about it, and if so, what you make of it.

    1) The Pashtun claim to be one of the Lost Tribes of Israel, there is historical evidence for this claim, and it is accepted as plausible by both European and Jewish anthropologists.

    OK, that’s neat. Except…

    2) The Pashtun are genetically similar to Iranians, that is, Indo-Europeans, and speak an Indo-European derived language.

    The combination of these claims has left people puzzled. For instance, “Are the Pashtuns Aryans, or are they a lost tribe of Israel?” Either or.

    The obvious but unthinkable conclusion is that they are a lost tribe of Israel, AND they are Aryan, BECAUSE the original tribes of Israel were Aryan. I know the Indo-European ancestry of the ancient Israelites has been asserted before (by Christian Identity, etc.) but I had always dismissed it. None of their sites had ever pointed out that the Pashtun as evidence for this.

    I was so thrown off that I decided to look up exactly when the Assyrians scattered the tribes, and saw that it was allegedly 722 BC. But… that tracks with the first archeological evidence of the Celts: “The oldest archaeological evidence of the Celts comes from Hallstatt, Austria, near Salzburg. Excavated graves of chieftains there, dating from about 700 BCE, exhibit an Iron Age culture (one of the first in Europe).” (Encyclopedia Britannica)

    That led me down the rabbit hole of investigating Celtic and Israeli ties, with links to the Tribe of Dan, Danes, Danube, Don, Macedonians, and more.

    So… have I just made myself bonkers from a poison red pill, or is there something to the idea that the real Israelites were Indo-Europeans?

  2. Sher Singh says:

    Let me show what place you hold in the world:

    The most ancient account of Christianity is that Mary is a whore.
    Had we taken your lands – you’d be Dhimmis. Now your descendants are blacks transsexuals. :shrug:

    Out of politeness & concern for our own dignity – we don’t laugh too hard.
    Don’t ever mistake the Sun’s merciful rays as anything but fire.

    Khalsa is SuryaVansh.


    • Aidan says:

      As a first instinct, I wanted to post that we would put all of your “singh” to the sword, grind the punjab into dust with a volley of thermonuclear artillery thicker than the rains, and press your “kaur” into service as cattle in human dairy farms after looting what paltry little you have to steal, but I am a Christian, and God commands me to attempt to make peace before employing such measures, and I suspect your leaders will crap their ceremonial panties and make peace if even a whiff of that eventuality reaches their noses.

      And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword: But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself; and thou shalt eat the spoil of thine enemies

      • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

        It is not terribly helpful to threaten massive retaliation over one retard. What would be the point? It enhances his importance, that his pathetic rants could justify such a response. It unfairly lumps Hindu reaction in with him, too. Yes, we can scour the earth, and take everything he has. Given that, is everything he has even worth the effort and the implied insult to our Hindu colleagues? For one transwarrior that can do nothing but shout and boast of hollow achievements and empty threats? What better way to show our superiority than to ignore his threats, because even if he had the capacity to try to follow through on them, then we can turn a baleful eye to him and scour him from existence?

        • Kunning Druegger says:

          I share Aidan’s sentiment, though not in some global sense (however justified it may be – there is never 1 roach or 1 rat; if you see one, assume at least 10 others nearby), rather look at what his campaign over the space of a week has done. The Dharmabros have pointed out, honestly and accurately, that they get attacked by shills when they post with any kind of elevated frequency. This observation was accepted and internalized by the Occidental faction here, and conduct was changed. The resentment here, for me, is that the transwarrior continues to post and it is Occidentals combatting him. This isn’t our mess to clean up, it is for the Dharmabros to deal with. Xir belongs to them, so they should take the necessary steps. It is beginning to feel like they either tacitly agree with him, or are indifferent. Yes, they have responded in rebuttal, but they must continue to do so, on every single post. Annoying, but there you are. We do the same for them whenever someone improperly invokes the streetshit meme. We police our own. Are they not to be held to the same standard?

          Whatever the case, Sher Suck provides nothing of value. His curry flavored shit is no different from normie twitter. He should be hellbanned for noise generation alone. He has derailed this post for days now.

          • Aryaman says:

            I think he is a clown and a menace but I’m not the proprietor here. Whatever I say would be perfunctory, just further littering the comments. His goal is to stir things up and make things illegible, not persuade. And the more that is said about him, more that his words are agonized over, the more he gets of what he wanted.

            • Kunning Druegger says:

              Fair point, but “masking” is an effective tactic used by many sides. It is impossible to make a comment about jews on the public internet without someone showing up to remind everyone of the 6 gorrillian, or the only democracy in the middle east, or any other baseless meme. Jim has said this is a tactic to create a false perception of the weight of a given set of opinions. I agree, but it is also a signal to both allies and adversaries: “we see what’s going on.” And it works. That’s what I was trying to relate, and I didn’t succeed.

              Aidan’s refinement is dead on as well. There should be consequences for saying such things, and it is good and proper to be the consequences we wish to see.

              • Dharmicreality says:

                It is difficult for me to follow each and every conversation here. I post here less frequently that I did.

                Besides it is really up to Jim to censor disruptive commenters as he sees fit.

        • Aidan says:

          I don’t care a whit about the empty threats and insecure posturing, but my ancestors would have butchered him for calling God a fag, and without that attitude, we will never get anywhere. In real life, if an insignificant subhuman can call God a fag and get away with it, it raises his status. We should act like a nascent elite here. If a diplomat of the Punjab called Christ a bugger, citing our internal enemies to do it no less, it would be right and proper to threaten him with nuclear hellfire and the rape and enslavement of his women.

          • Neofugue says:

            Singh is just a nastier and dumber version of Suones, an even more filthy street-shitter. However, at least Suones would write quality posts on occasion.

            I sincerely hope Jim is just busy and cannot moderate the comments section at this moment, but this is not acceptable. He needs to be put in the gutter with Miserius.

            Threatening him with nuclear hellfire, however, is not the right approach. Capturing him and converting his extended family to Christianity, forcing him to watch them eat big juicy steaks in the process, is the best response. God gave us the cow to be eaten, and him watching his kids eating a delicious burger after saying the Lord’s prayer will torment him far more than killing him in an instant and painless nuclear hellfire.

          • clovis says:

            I agree with the papist about this. Heresy can be punished with banishment, but blasphemy deserves death.

          • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

            And if he were a diplomat we would burn him at the stake, then send his head back to the Punjab with a reminder that the West will burn them all like him if they want a fight. But he is not a diplomat, he is just a troll. He came to sow discord, so let us not make his job easier.

  3. Sher Singh says:

    What Jim fails to understand – is some of us may not have an inferiority complex. We may understand that our religion’s are fine – GAE is the problem.

    The solution to GAE – directly, is white genocide.

    Beyond memes, we don’t need to subject ourselves to critique by a Christian ‘priest’. Cow slaughter is banned by the Gurus, we don’t care about ancient interpretations. Furthermore, we also know we hold MORE power than you in your own homelands.

    Like you said – it doesn’t matter that Hindus destroyed themselves in civil wars before Christians conquered. Likewise, it doesn’t matter that Whites had 2 world wars and 3 centuries of Jewish infestation. Victory is Victory,

    Dharmo Rakshati Rakshitah. Jai Sri Krishna Jai Sri Ram HAR HAR MAHADEV


    • Fidelis says:

      You are like a small yipping dog. No one here takes you as anything but a fool, your boasts are the obnoxious bark of a neutered chihuahua. Go run and hide inside your mother’s purse before someone steps on you.

      • Sher Singh says:

        You’re literally white in a world where even the Niggers laugh.
        We seat white converts beside untouchables & away from those of the 4 Castes.

        That is the primordial reality of the Khalsa – ChakraVartain. Jim is a fake priest,
        Gather round him – every second you spend here, non-whites invade your land.


        • Kunning Druegger says:

          I respect Modi for one reason only: the aged manlet refuses to wear a tie. You post quite a lot, which probably means you are sitting at a computer for extended periods. That computer, the desk it sits on, the people you serve, the products you interact with, the energy underpinning the whole web, all of this flows from and back to the West.

          This is not good or healthy. We have been terrible masters to you browns, and I genuinely regret every ounce of silly, stupid “reason” our elites shit all over you guys. You were happy, trapped in your flood plains, trading shiny rocks, poking each other with ancient metal you could no longer forge. You were satisfied, believing your world was The World. You actually found brown women attractive (this is our greatest crime: we showed you white women, and you will never recover from this, because you see now what ugliness passes for beauty in the jungle, and your females will be forever encumbered by whitening creams, tangle straighteners, and every other manner of “pale-ification”).

          You guys were fine the way you were, and we decided to bring the “light” of western civilization to you. This was wrong, cruel, and unfair, to you guys (because you were happy in the dirt), and to us (because we aren’t allowed to manage the herd of browns as a good overlord should). A note on that last point, and stay with me, this will require you attempting to take up the White Gaze:

          One of the most powerful tactics Cathedralites use to ensnare young whites in school with the guilt & shame perspective is pointing out how old the Other Societies are, how vast their history is, how many people of which they are composed. They do this to make Occidental (which means white, as everyone in their heart knows) youth feel unworthy of overlordship, unworthy of their inheritance. It worked very well on any generation raised to respect old things and rare things. I definitely fell for it, and many, many of my cohort still labor under this delusion. It took me a long time to realize the lie underneath it all: either whites are magic, actually a master race and able to do and create things no other races can, or the rest of the races are just lazy and naturally limited. You so-called great civilizations had millennia to figure out wheels, boats, chemistry, astronomy, maths, and the gift of constrained fire, all of the constituent parts of high-powered societies with the stars as their birthright. And to your collective credit, you did stumble into many of these things. But like children raised in the shadow of a volcano, you considered the secret powers spewed from the earth as play things, baubles for your pleasure, and nothing more. You, the Rivers people, the Middle Kingdom, the Stone dwellers of the Andes, the whole lot of you had every opportunity to give up your clay gods, forge empires, and sail outward. But you didn’t. We all like to point and laugh at the African’s failure to discover boats, wheels, and reading (but the drums are so quaint!), but every brown, black, and yellow of substance in this world wears a necktie and coat in the Western style, like children dressing in their parents clothes.

          I don’t begrudge you your angst. You’ve been poisoned by mental frameworks your meat hardware can’t run properly, like a massive digital signal being displayed on a cathode ray tube monitor. I know it is my ancestor’s fault. They saw the shapes of your hands and hearts and esteemed you equal, then imbued you with the blessings and curses of highly organized, monotheistic society, and expected you to grow properly. Only the worst tropical plants can survive in temperate climates, the hardiest and vilest weeds. The jungle fruits and flowers are constrained to where they belong, and sometimes the greenhouse. You are Kudzu, Sher Singh. I will never blame Kudzu for doing what it does naturally. But you also can’t pretend that you are a crop or flower, just because you’ve overwhelmed the natives in an unnatural range to which you were transported by shortsighted men who esteemed you as so much more than what you actually were.

    • Redbible says:

      Your are neither Sikh nor Hindu. You are a shill who is here to attempt to get the Christians here to start fighting with Hindus (and Sikhs). You attempt to push the payload that Hindus and Sikhs with seek to genocide all Christians, and that nothing can stop that.

      You are far more likely to be a muslim, who is afraid that Old type Christians and Old type Hindus might form an alliance on this blog space. If that happens, they will likely both agree that since muslims are not agreement capable, that killing all muslims is in order.

      Maybe you a nigger that know that in a world of natural order, you’ll be at the bottom of the peaking order. Maybe you are a shill that works for and supports the GAE, which is why you make sure to screech about “how much” you “hate” the GAE.

      That said, you seem to only be touching and talking about parts of Sikhism and Hinduism that our gracious lords from the GAE (peace be upon them) would not disapprove of. if you want to prove you are a Sikh/Hindu, share with us things in Sikhism/Hinduism, that you believe in, that the GAE would disapprove of someone saying or thinking. In short, commit a thought-crime that involves Sikhism or Hinduism.

      Of course I already know that you won’t commit any thought crimes against you masters, you lying piece of shill.

      • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

        I think he really is a Sikh, based on how he responded to some of my accusations. He knows that the Cathedral has his people by the balls, and that he does not have the balls to challenge them directly. He brings up an inferiority complex because it struck home. Just like how he went off when I called him a fake warrior. He knows, at some level, that he is a bad, unworthy Sikh, because he has a cowards craven heart. Instead of fighting his real enemy, who will crush him if given a chance, he comes here to show how big and tough he is. All his self-loathing at his failure to uphold his own values gets thrown at us.

        He is the Sikh version of the guys who blame the Jews for everything, because taking responsibility for the failures of European civilization is too painful. He is pushing white genocide because then he can blame all his problems on us instead of dealing with the very real problems his people have.

        • Sher Singh says:

          No, I came here because DharmicReality mentioned the last post.

          Letting your daughter shotgun marry instead of honor killing sends the wrong collective message.

          I’m bullish on Dharmic and White survival, although in a Pagan form.


          • Sher Singh says:

            You’re not part of my faith, attacks on Sikhi go nowhere.
            Monotheism is about belief over practice, Sikhi is opposite.

            The Guru has ordered destruction of the Turk (Abrahamic).
            You’re still an enemy, and I treat you like one.

            With Bow let us win kine, with Bow the battle, with Bow be victors in our hot encounters.
            The Bow brings grief and sorrow to the foeman: armed with the Bow may we subdue all regions


        • Aryaman says:

          I rather doubt it. Having pride in your patrimony precludes a wrathful inferiority complex and declaring holy war on strangers is just silly. Normal people do not do that.

          • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

            He does not have pride in his patrimony, because his patrimony is resistance and war and he is doing neither. His patrimony stands in judgement of him, and he can feel their disappointment and disapproval. Declaring a holy war he will never have to fight is his coward’s way of trying to be worthy, but it is not working. He could put this energy in opposing GAE influence over India, but that would be too dangerous. So here he sits and rages, full of sound and fury.

      • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

        I do not see him spreading any discord between us. I am not going to fight with you over some empty bravado from someone who is clearly less intelligent than you and outside your norms. For all his insults and blasphemy, I do not assign blame to Hinduism. That is all on him.

        Also, whether we come to an eventual accord or not, I fully intend on putting an end to the Mohammed Problem. That is something that needs to happen regardless. Those who will convert will be spared, and those who do not will be exterminated. The Peace of Westphalia cannot coexist with Islam.

      • Sher Singh says:

        End cow slaughter if you want friendship – Maharaja Ranjit Singh to Afghan Kings
        This was said at the start of all exchanges, and the response was Aryans eat beef.

        If you can’t accept us in our current form, as we are, and have been for millenia.
        Then what’s the point of further discourse? We have our orders from the Guru.

        Destroy the Turk, Protect the Cow.

        You ask us to apostate for alliance with a faction you admit is close to defeat.
        You’re not members of our faith, not our Priests, not Warriors, not Khalsa.

        If we tell you something is Ok or not OK in our religion, that’s the end of it.
        You’re agreement incapable – nor are we in need of it, the Guru has given us all.

        Let the ‘Hindus’ speak for themselves, I’ll kindly take my leave.
        Blessings to all

        Nanak Naam Chardi Kala Tere Bhaney Sarbat Da Bhalla


      • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

        All of our criticism of Hinduism here, ultimately, is descriptive, perhaps even prescriptive in certain respects, but not instructive. You do not need to make any of the adaptations that Jim and the rest of us point out, but there is as much risk in not changing enough as in changing too much. If you do not solve the problems that led to India being a conquered, fractured backwater, then those problems will come back with a vengeance when Europeans pull back to start solving our own problems.

        It is going to take time to sort out America and Europe and start purging our xenos. If you have not solved your problems by the time we are ready to start expanding again, then you will be faced with another Aryan invasion. This time, however, there will not be any ancestral gods with which to merge, and the state church is going to have a pretty harsh view of opposing religions.

        This is not a threat, it is just a fact of nature. The same forces that pushed Aryas’ sons to expand will push mine, too. A united rival civilization is liable to survive, but a divided one will fall the same way the Indus Valley civilization did. You have to fix it, either with our solutions or with others you find or invent. If you do not, then the cold, uncaring nature of the world will doom you.

  4. Starman says:

    Russia should do an above ground nuclear test on livestream.
    Then tell the United States government to do a similar test on livestream.

    Let’s see if Shaniqua has been doing her “maintenance.”

    • Red says:

      If so, then Putin’s decided to skip the escalation game and go right to the penultimate step. I hope that’s enough to stop this madness.

    • Mister Grumpus says:

      Yes. We’ll settle this with a nuclear dance-off.

    • Kunning Druegger says:

      In terms of the RF v. the GAE, I agree that Putin could gain a ton of status and momentum by demonstrating the incompetence and incapacity rife in the forces of the Empire of Lies. As it pertains to the not-war in Ukraine, I think moving to nuclear now would be a massive signal of weakness.

      Let’s dispense with the MSM bullshit and normie perspective. The UKR is in an existential fight for its life, and it would have collapsed without massive foreign support. Zelensky is in so deep that, if the RF pulled out tomorrow and handed the 4 breakaways to Kiev, the country is still on the fast track to non-existence. Russia has only really lost in terms of its status as the big scary bogeyman of the East. Their casualties are miniscule, their weapons systems are excellent (both sides are relying on them), their military is fully intact (the lion’s share of the fighting is being done by Wagner, Volunteers, and the Militias), and they have been forcibly spared from being trapped in the web of GAE NGOs, charities, and woke corporations. The RF is nowhere near the place wherein its only option is to escalate to nuclear devices. For Manwe’s sake, they aren’t even technically “at war” with Ukraine, as neither side has declared war.

      If Putin uses a nuclear device in or near Ukraine, the GAE has the Cassus Belli they have been earnestly seeking since February 2022 to initiate an unholy crusade against the last bastion of free whites (and friends lol, suck it Basil you relentless faggot). Russia’s original position was that the local issue of Ukraine was the pathway *towards* an existential crisis for the motherland. NATO taking over the Balts did not end the Russian Federation. Ukraine was declared a red line, and when their entreaties for dialogue were rebuffed, they escalated to the SMO. Now they are escalating to a counter terror operation. If the GAE war faction is desperately seeking escalation to nuclear, that should be the absolute last thing the RF leadership does. OpEds and tweets are no good reason to let the GAE call the tune. While the US can be brought to its knees by a handful of trannies, suicides, and 5000 war dead over 20 years, I don’t think the same can be said for Russia. They lost far more in Chechnya. Yes, their tactics need refinement, but are we really suggesting that the cause in Ukraine is so lost that the only viable solution is to nuke the Hohol trannies? Is that really the only way the motherfucking Russian Federation can deal with a coalition of the wanton fighting with HIMRS and Hiluxes?

      • S says:

        Putin probably thinks the same thing Jim does- NATO forces are participating in UKR operations. Respond to military relevant escalation with military relevant escalation- send more and they get the bomb.

      • Starman says:

        @Kunning Druegger

        “As it pertains to the not-war in Ukraine, I think moving to nuclear now would be a massive signal of weakness [LOL]… If Putin uses a nuclear device in or near Ukraine…

        A Russian nuclear test doesn’t need to be “in Ukraine” or “near Ukraine,” dummy. It’s a test. The US nuclear test can happen on a test site in Nevada.

        Now if the US is unable to test its nuke on livestream, its power is over.

        • Kunning Druegger says:

          I will make my position more clear.

          The nuclear test concept is a good one; it would force the GAE to display its incompetence.

          A nuclear device detonation that is geographically connected to Ukraine, or strategically linked *closely* to the SMO/CTO is a bad one. It says we are out of options, our military is on the ropes, and we feel threatened. That’s why I wrote it the way I did.

          > Now if the US is unable to test its nuke on livestream, its power is over.

          You said the same thing about the fall of Kabul. I am willing to say you may be right in the broad expanse of history, as in, future historians will use the event as a marker for the downfall of US military hegemony. In the immediate term, you were wrong. I base this on the fact that Europe continues to track blindly with the State Department, and the Kremlin and Beijing continue to translate all official documents, speeches, and releases into English. The world continues to act as if the US military is dominant, even if it is no longer the case.

          The nuclear test concept would work, but I don’t think it will happen right away. There are other ways to achieve the same outcome. Best Korea just launched a “test” over Hokkaido, and SKorea and the US responded by sending 4 “test” missiles into the ocean. One of the SKorea shots failed and crashed. This is an interesting development. The Best Korea shot was the furthest they’ve ever flown, and it has shocked the GAE military establishment deeply, which is why they responded in kind. If the GAE were fully confident in themselves, they would have had the sheboon press secretary mention it in passing the next day with some dismissive remark. Instead, they responded in kind. When 1 of the 4 failed, then it started to go towards the memory hole.

          The Korea missile incident proves your hypothesis, Starman. Further, it demonstrates that you are not just tossing out a random idea, you are thinking on a wavelength that is similar to the most ardent adversaries of the GAE.

          Additionally, Iran’s drones are making a big impact (lol) in the Ukraine. They are performing well, and many second and third rate powers are taking note. Jim asserts that Turkey is on the forefront of that sector, but that never sat well with me, as I have come to believe the Turkroach is long on talk and short on walk in most cases. Ngorno-Karbkh is a point in their favor, but beating up on Armenia is not some monumental task.

          There are a significant number of categories wherein the GAE can be showed to be incapable and far below expectation. Missiles, maritime maneuver, drone tech, force readiness, and disposition and morale of units spring to mind easily, but I bet there’s more.

          You are a warrior. I am a priest. We will never see eye to eye, but I think demonstrating courtesy and supporting each other is a good act to follow, even if it is only an act. Aidan made an interesting observation:

          > We should act like a nascent elite here.

          I agree with him. It may feel hyperbolic or LARPy, but it very well could be something that can be ported elsewhere. There was a trend on Dissident Twitter where the group leaders, the guys with larger followings, refer to their followers as “Kings.” Initially, I thought it was a funny poke at the kangz bullshit jizzed out by Negro Twatter. But I noticed that over time, it seemed to elevate the discussion and set a very positive tone, a stance that they, and by extension we, are better than our opposition.

        • Kunning Druegger says:

          Forgot to include:

          “South Korea, U.S. conduct missile drill in response to North Korea missile test”

  5. Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

    I just had a unpleasant realization that I think ties in with Jim’s theory that the GAE will try to create a leftist nationalist group because tranny jannies do not fight. It will be Patriot Front. Patriot Front is the GAE Azov Battalion. They are out doing disaster relief in Florida right now and are not being doxxed, which means that someone is protecting them.

    • Red says:

      They’ve been running the Nazi play book a lot the last couple few years. They’ve been grooming PF for a false flag terror complain for a while now but they could switch things up and use them at their enforcers. Watching congress honor Azov fags the other day was disturbing and made me wonder if that’s the direction they’ve decided to go.

    • Adam says:

      Yup. Overnight the current memes will disappear and old patriotic memes will reappear. Not only will the red tribe continue to think they are the good guys, they will think things are finally changing and getting better. They will finally be winning.

      • Mike in Boston says:

        The red tribe […] will think things are finally getting better

        This is my prediction as well. Some RINO will play the role of Stalin and give a “dizzy with success” speech. The GAE can roll back wokeness a little just as the Soviets rolled back collectivization, to give them some time to consolidate.

        • Neurotoxin says:

          “The GAE can roll back wokeness a little”

          Maybe, but I think it unlikely: the holiness spiral has taken on a life of its own. Leftists always call up demons they can’t control; it’s one of their patterns.

  6. Aryaman says:

    There has been a lot of Hindu posting but this I think is both relevant, and worthwhile to all here.

    I heartily recommend you all watch S. S. Rajamouli’s Baahuballli (1 & 2), and then RRR. Jim will appreciate the mating dance (somewhat literally) in Baahuballi 1, and the action in all three films is fantastic. Action that you actually want to pay attention to for its own kinetic logic, action that is consistently novel and creative. Baahuballi is the better movie of the two but RRR has the better action and is more entertaining. Its anti-imperialism is entirely beside the point, is so exaggerated and portrayed as such in the service of masculinity that I don’t think anyone will actually be offended. (The British are portrayed as somewhat more savage than Red Indians in American classics).

    You should try to watch it in the original Telugu, for the music is better, but it is easier to get ahold of in other languages of which Hindi is probably best. I watched it in the theater and have not seen Americans have so much fun watching a movie in a long time. I hope this recommendation is well-received. Ideally there is more to say about it in the context of this blog, but if nothing else hopefully fun. These are modern, blockbuster movies you can watch with your sons (and daughters) that valorize the good, beautiful, strong, and true.

    • jim says:

      You guys told me that the vedic religion from the time that you led the world in mathematics, science, and industry is irrecoverably lost.

      Priests are always writing stuff down. I find this hard to believe.

      Because our resident transwarrior wants to ban cow slaughter world wide, I did a little digging, and found that, as I suspected, the early Aryan faith in India did not prohibit cow slaughter. It is like the Bible on fornication and adultery: a prohibition against a violation of property rights, that got holiness spiraled into a prohibition on having and using property. Asok is fine with cows being slaughtered by their rightful owners. (Their rightful owners probably being Aryans who were allowing their cattle to pasture on Dravidian crops and who did not want those pesky Dravidians interfering with the cow.)

      If I can dig that up, while not being Indian and scarcely trying, you can doubtless dig up lots of unthinkable stuff. I suspect that the state religion of the time and the area where Indians led the world is not lost, just disturbingly unthinkable.

      We urgently need to impose the Pauline requirement that priests be recruited from married fertile men with well behaved children, because celibacy gives us a Church full of faggots, and to the extent that they are not faggots, they lack the skills to support husbands and fatherhood. Fixing the ban on cow slaughter is far less urgent for you than fixing the problem of celibate priests is for us, but there is something else crapping up your religion that makes it bad for science, technology, industry, and good governance.

      One of the things that made the limited liability joint stock publicly traded for profit corporation possible was that the Anglican Church pushed a doctrine that earning an honest living was a meritorious, holy, and divinely ordained activity, rather than being “worldliness”.

      This was a reaction to the corruption that was exposed to justify the dissolution of the monasteries. Henry the eighth made a pretty good case that they were not performing their spiritual function, and the Anglican Church internalized that. This doctrine had a great deal to do with industrialization and world conquest – that it was right and meritorious to turn an honest profit. The doctrine that material and effective causation was the Logos manifest similarly made science a worthy activity.

      Corporations had long existed, but they were not for profit, they were like today’s ngos, nominally private instruments of the crown. And for profit enterprises had long existed as an accounting fiction imagined into reality, but valorizing the for-profit corporation required a faith that made it right.

      You need to dig. I suspect it is there, just unthinkable and disturbing. As I said, priests always write stuff down.

      No one today likes to notice the dirt that Henry the Eighth dug up on the monastics, and if it is in front of them, they fail to comprehend it. The data is there, but people avert their eyes. I suspect you are averting your eyes.

      This is not an attack on your faith. We have big problems also. You have bigger problems, and you need to address them. If I address them, you will naturally be disinclined to listen to a Christian telling you what is wrong with non Christians. You notice Brahmins holiness spiraling ritual cleanliness without regard to actual cleanliness. There are bigger things you need to notice.

      • Hot Tap says:

        Back when the West was hitting its peak of capacity as knowledge increased and thinkability decreased – around 1880 – it investigated the early Sanskrit texts in some detail and tried to reconstruct the Indian religion.

        The works of Paul Deussen are excellent and available on

        The British also reconstructed the Code of Manu and actually used it as law in India.

        • jim says:

          Code of Manu, written down one millenium after the Aryans conquered, based on verse that is centuries older, how much older no one really knows. Maybe the original Aryan invaders instituting the social order of conquest immediately after conquest, maybe seven centuries later.

          Full of good stuff about women and the female role.

          And, like the Book of Solomon, notices that women are not sexless angels, and that their volcanic urges cause problems that have to be controlled.

          If the British can legislate the code of Manu, those parts that the British considered the proper magistry of the legislator, could today’s Hindus?

          The interesting thing is that the British did not base legislation for Hindus on then current Hinduism, indicating that they perceived it, as I perceive it, as a degeneration from the original Aryan faith.

      • someDude says:

        Priests are always writing stuff down. This is true. However, there is a difference in the case of Hinduism and Christianity.

        Let’s take the stuff the Christian priests wrote down when things were working in Christendom

        1. It is relatively recent, say the time of Charles in the 1600s.

        2. The language in which they were written down is not archaic and the meanings of words have not undergone a whole lot of change, the script used then almost the same as the one used now. So less scope for misunderstanding.

        3. They were written down post the invention of the printing press. So lots of copies.

        4. Those original books and their faithful copies still exist.

        Not too many of these conditions are true in the case of the Hindu scriptures. They were written down a long time ago, before the printing press, written on palm leaves (not a whole lot of copies), in an archaic language no longer spoken, words whose meanings have undergone change multiple times, in a script no longer used and a whole lot of them lost for ever due to the mass burning of the books in the great libraries of the great universities of Takshashila (Taxila) and Nalanda.

        So I’m not entirely unsympathetic to Aryaman’s view that the written record of what used to work in Hindu-ism at the time when they led in Math, Science and Technology may well be irretrievably lost. I hope it is not all lost, but hope is not a strategy.

        As regards what you may read from old Books written by Europeans, these certainly have some merit, but there is always the question of the frame of interpretation that the translator is using. Is he trying to fit Hindu scripture into a Christian frame, a progressive frame, a Victorian frame? How is he approaching the subject of his study? How many Europeans have translated the same scripture? Where do the translations differ? Too many questions.

        It is not as easy as a few hours or a few days searching on This is something that will need state support. Or a very wealthy, smart, Aristocratic man with time on his hands who feels an urge to do something for his co-religionists on the intellectual sphere. We can hope

      • Aryaman says:

        There are bigger things you need to notice.

        What are the bigger things I need to notice? I notice a lot. I am not naturally disinclined to listening to something by virtue of the fact it is a Christian saying it. When I tell Christians what their religion says about something they are not offended or on guard because my line is not “Hail fellow Christian: here is why Jesus wants you to let refugees take over your land, and endorse reparations for people who want to kill you.” My line is that “quiet charity to men of goodwill in need is virtuous, ostentatious suggestion that others ought to perform virtuous acts publicly is not, nowhere did Jesus take from Peter to give Paul, takes for granted that in toil there is profit, and indicates he is rewarded who puts his masters’ endowment to good use and he is scolded who drowned in envy wastes his masters’ endowment.”

        Of course, Jesus says a whole bunch of other stuff and a lot of it dangerously close to contradicting what I just said. Whether or not it is hard for a rich man to enter heaven than a camel to pass through the eye of a needle I don’t know, but anyone making a big deal about this is likely up to no good. The resolution, probably, is that when the rich man asked Jesus what he should do, Jesus replied he should not murder, lie, or steal — and do a whole bunch of other reasonable things. Only when the man professes that he has already done it all, professes in front of a crowd that he is seeking greater perfection still, does Jesus command him to give up his possessions. The man’s sorrow at the command implying that he is not holy but merely wanted to perform holy acts; the predicate to Jesus’ response, “if thou wilt be perfect” almost sarcastically implying its own contradiction since you cannot be perfect. Probably it is also a hint that a man ought to relinquish his property and estate to the command of his heirs and not before he is too old.

        You need to dig. I suspect it is there, just unthinkable and disturbing. As I said, priests always write stuff down.

        Regarding the unthinkable and disturbing, and without necessarily endorsing the movement more generally, consider some of what Prabhupada (of ISKCON) said over the years, but not too long ago.

        [Regarding Indira Gandhi] She is not a leader. She is a prostitute. When women are liberated, this means prostitutes. Free women are called prostitutes.

        Although rape is not legally allowed, it is a fact that a woman likes a man who is very expert at rape.

        Man has no maximum. Even an eighty-years-old man can marry a sixteen-years-old girl.

        (He is wrong about this, for a great many reasons the exact picture he has in mind is a little disturbing: because it would altogether be better for everyone if women did not become widows at 18).

        [The King] must be very powerful, very strong, strongly built. You have seen the picture, Rāmacandra? Sturdy body. You see.

        It is therefore the duty of the father to get his daughter married before she attains puberty. Otherwise she will be very much mortified by not having a husband. Anyone who [satisfies her] at that age becomes a great object […] she will love that man for the rest of her life, regardless who he is.

        Woman reporter: What advice do you have to women who do not want to be subordinate to men?

        Prabhupada: It is not my advice, but it is the advice of the Vedic knowledge that woman should be chaste and faithful to man.

        Woman reporter: What should we do in the United States? We’re trying to make women equal with men.

        Prabhupada: I am not trying. You are already not equal with the man because in so many respects, your functions are different and man’s functions are different. Why do you say artificially they are equal? As I told you that the husband and wife–the wife has to become pregnant, not the husband. How you can change this, both the husband and wife will be pregnant? Is it possible? Is it possible?

        Woman reporter: No, it is not.

        Prabhupada: Then by nature one has to function differently from the other.

        Woman reporter: Why does this mean that women have to be subordinate? Just because they bear children and men can’t?

        Prabhupada: Well, by nature… No, as soon as you get children, you require support from the husband. Otherwise you are in difficulty.

        Woman reporter: Many women have children and have no support from husbands. They have no husband.

        Prabhupada: Then they have to take support from others. You cannot deny that. The government is giving you support. But the government is embarrassed. If the husband supports the wife and children, the government is relieved of so much welfare contribution. So that is a problem.

        The Vedic idea is that woman should be married to a man and the man should take charge of the woman and the children independently so that they do not become a burden to the government or to the public. […]

        Prabhupada: I do not say of any particular woman, but according to Vedic civilization, we have never seen in the history that woman has become a leader.

        Woman reporter: Women have been leaders.

        Prabhupada: They were not selected. The leader–formerly it was monarchy–the monarchs were selected by the advisory board of the first-class men. So they never selected any woman to become the leader of the society.

        Woman reporter: What about women who are elected by the people?

        Prabhupada: Well, people election… Just like you elected Nixon and then you wanted him to come down. So this kind of election has no value. Sometimes you elect and sometimes you pull down. So what is the value of this election?

        Woman reporter: So a leader should not be elected.

        Prabhupada: Elected, but not by this general public. They have no intelligence. They sometimes elect a wrong man, and again they try to drag him down. So what is the use of such election? Because that election is not sober, not mature. If the election was mature and sober, then there was no need of dragging him down again.

        Woman reporter: We have talked to scientists who say that the size of the brain has nothing to do with intelligence. Do you believe that?

        Prabhupada: I think that the scientists do not think like that. They keep the brain of a particular scientist to study. They keep the heart of a particular noble man. Why they try to study the heart and the brain if there is no difference?

        Nitai: Sometimes they keep the brain of a great scientist to study because they think that he is so intelligent, there must be something we can learn from studying the brain. So if they are thinking like that, then there also must be a difference between a woman’s brain and a man’s brain.

        Woman reporter: What they say is that there is difference, but it has nothing to do with the size.

        Nitai: Then why do they keep great scientists’ brain to study?

        Woman reporter: They keep many people’s brains to study.

        Nitai: Especially great scientists, that they want to see what has made this man so intelligent.

        Woman reporter: That’s not necessarily true.

        Prabhupada: Then why they study the brain? What is the purpose of studying brain unless there is difference?

        I won’t add more to avoid a too lengthy post, but he has plenty to say about race in America too.

  7. i says:


    This is what DARPA is now doing:

    The US intelligence community has launched a program to develop artificial intelligence that can determine authorship of anonymous writing while also disguising an author’s identity by subtly altering their words.

    The Human Interpretable Attribution of Text Using Underlying Structure (HIATUS) program from the Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA) aims to build software that can perform “linguistic fingerprinting,” the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) said.

    “Humans and machines produce vast amounts of text content every day. Text contains linguistic features that can reveal author identity,” IARPA said [PDF].

    With the right model, IARPA believes it can identify consistencies in a writer’s style across different samples, modify those linguistic patterns to anonymize writing and do it all in a manner that is explainable to novice users, ODNI said. HIATUS AIs would also have to be language agnostic.

    What should be done?

    • Neurotoxin says:

      First of all, most new tech is marketed with a lot of hype that overstates what it can do.

      Try not to write with a particular style. (Pseudo has the most recognizable style here. You might want to change that when writing under a different name, Pseudo.) You have favorite metaphors, turns of phrase, foreign phrases? Don’t use them. And do make an effort to use turns of phrase you normally wouldn’t. You’re normally anal-retentive about the difference between a comma and a semi-colon? Deliberately misuse them when you need to mask your identity. You normally hate “different than”? Make sure to say “different than” when masking. Etc.

      I suspect that this is only going to be useful to them – if at all – in certain narrow situations like, they already suspect that person A and person B are the same person and are looking for another tool to help them judge that. And the person(s) has a fairly unique writing style. They can’t sweep the entire Internet for everybody’s texts and compare every person to every other person. The mathematics of combinatorics would prevent this from happening before the heat death of the universe.

      • Kunning Druegger says:

        > deliberately misuse the semicolon

        In the immortal words of William Muderface-Murderface-Murderface: I’d rather cut off my own dick.

        • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

          Here is what you have to do; just fuck with your grammar and then robot will get big sad.

          • Neurotoxin says:

            Me talk much better good English then any robot can underztand.

            And that,s a; fact.

  8. Anonymous Fake says:

    [*fake consensus*]

    • jim says:

      You need to present your version of reality within the frame that audience is unlikely to agree, and you are arguing for your story against our story.

      If I allowed it through I would have to present exactly the same rebuttal as I presented before. Waste of space.

      When you say something that presupposes something I have previously disputed, present as if a dispute was in progress and you are arguing your side in the dispute.

      • Anonymous Fake says:

        [*deleted for false consensus*]

        • jim says:

          The false consensus I referred to is the proposition that widespread academic accreditation is a bottom up phenomenon, rather than a top down phenomenon.

          I will allow you to argue it is a bottom up phenomenon, but I will not permit you to debate as if no one thinks otherwise.

          • Anonymous Fake says:

            Look the article I posted even mentioned that the “draft dodging” phenomenon was deliberate and [censored for being unresponsive]

            • jim says:

              I have repeatedly proposed very different causes for the rise of accreditation, and very different consequences of that rise. And if I allowed your stuff through, would have to repeat my stuff all over again, because you write as if no one thought the causes were very different.

  9. Red says:

    Social commentary including commentary by actual claimed victims of grooming and SA in the comment section here:

    And this guy commenting on 4chan degeneracy:

    And his commentators.

    @i needs to take the shill test. He appears to be a blue pilled shill who’s not even trying to argue the issue, just posting bullshit.

    • i says:

      I am posting evidence of the impact of such memeplexes.

      Just because it is contrary to the actual truth on the ground about our knowledge of human nature. Doesn’t mean those people aren’t out there. Who genuinely are misled as per Jim’s analysis of their displacement behavior.

      Unless those people are all fake somehow outside this blog and a few other websites of this dissident sphere.

      • jim says:

        I do not encounter these people in real life.

        No one is offended or disturbed by an older male with a fertile female. Opposition to “pedophiles” is completely fake. Opposition to pederasts is spontaneous and heartfelt.

        • i says:


          In that case. With videos with 10,000s to 100,000. With plenty of comments. And the anonymous comments appear to be written by real human beings talking about their real experiences.

          And if anonymous certainly they should be more likely to speak their mind.

          Those same channels also cover legitimate topics on the other hand. That seem well thought out with good evidence.

          Other blogs I frequent similar to this blog also talks about such things from time to time.

          How do I truly know if they are real or fake?

          • jim says:

            > In that case. With videos with 10,000s to 100,000. With plenty of comments. And the anonymous comments appear to be written by real human beings talking about their real experiences.

            Should I believe ten thousand videos manufactured by authority, or my own eyes?

            Been there, done that. No resemblance. Look at what people do, not what they say. It is completely fake. If it was real, we would have had a word for pedophilia all the way back to biblical times, but I can remember a time when most people could not comprehend the word.

            It is a totally astroturfed effort manufactured from above to get the heat off faggots and onto normal men.

        • Fidelis says:

          >No one is offended or disturbed by an older male with a fertile female

          I have encountered this. Some are mildly offended but overlook it quickly if the man is “of good will” or just agreeable to them. Doesnt manifest in a social confrontation. Others are greatly offended but I have only seen otherwised deranged leftie types greatly offended.

          • jim says:

            Synthetic outrage. Some people, mainly childless old women, are always on the lookout for socially approved reasons to harm people. I had one such incident, and immediately smelled the unreality.

            I looked her in the eye and replied “she is old enough to bear children, and I am young enough to father them”. She looked around for the outraged lynch mob to support her, not seeing it, shrivelled up.

            • Fidelis says:

              As I said, the most greatly offended are otherwise deranged. There is a mild sense of distaste among some young men. Mocking of an old man and his very young girlfriend at the casino, for a specific reference, but the incongruous relationship was only brought up as a side dish to the offense at the man’s obnoxious behavior otherwise.

      • Red says:

        Just because it is contrary to the actual truth on the ground about our knowledge of human nature. Doesn’t mean those people aren’t out there.

        Something that only exists in Polygon propaganda isn’t real. Posting propaganda videos doesn’t help your case. You’re being a useful idiot for people who hate you.

        I think your problem is that you believe what woman say. Bad mistake. Historically courts have greatly devalued woman’s testimony because they are much more likely to re-arrange facts to suit their current view of an event. A woman can willingly go to bed with you, have multiple organism and a full night of pleasure and if you start acting beta the next day she can easily re-arrange last night’s sex as you raping her and she’ll fully believe it.

        Believe what women do, not what they say.

        Secondly, women love real rape. In my early 20s had a girl friend who was raped when she 13 and she talked about having been raped multiple times, but she talked about it like it was a status symbol. When I asked he about the details of the first rape, she described how she dressed up as adult including padding her bra, went to an illegal rave at a disused industrial center, and then wandered off into the darkness away from people. She was then raped by a random guy. At the time I thought it was odd she wasn’t all that upset about the experience. She never reported him to the cops. I assumed her other “rapes” where similar events where she put herself in a situation where she was likely to be raped. When someone walks into trouble multiple times it’s because they’re looking for that sort of trouble.

  10. Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

    Evil Vizer/Undead Odalisque got purged off or Twitter. Guess the flat chested twat/employee had enough.

  11. Opioidus says:

    is there a collection of your selected writings? a pdf or something? if there isn’t, there needs to be. at least make a collection post or something.

    • jim says:

      I am primarily concerned with organizing my writings on software, which have yet to be published. And real life is has been keeping me mighty busy for the past couple of months and will likely keep me busy for three months longer.

    • Kunning Druegger says:

      I’ll try to initiate this as a response to Opioidus’ comment, as he was the one requesting it, but if there’s not enough response, will launch a new thread.

      Let’s put together a Selected Jim reading list. Every regular, both rarepoasters and usual suspects, please respond here with 1 to 3 favorite posts, blessed posts, or stellar comments. Restrict it to Jim’s stuff for now, as we will do another list for blessed and stellar comments.

      Dig deep, my negros. I know there have been some amazing posts in the last year, but let’s try to reach way back. Once there is a good selection, I will make a Curated List, and then we can expand if needed.

      Please attempt to keep this meta; dredging up Classic Jim will almost definitely reinitiate old discussions and disagreements, which is fine and even desirable, but the goal is to construct a reading list that can be shared with a single link. Also, this is for us to do, as Jim has stated he is busy.

      Here are 3 random selections:

      • Mr.P says:

        Here’s the first ever comment of Jim’s I saved offline. It’s from 2018. Been saving the brightest lightening bolts ever since.

        Everyone who sometimes eats pizza can afford it, as near to all of them as makes no difference. I eat out with working class people often enough, and I know what goes down. I also, less frequently, eat out with wealthy people in places I cannot afford, and food costs are insignificant for the people spending money in both places.

        Not everyone who goes to the pub or gambles can afford it, but these things are not the major cause of economic stress.

        The major cause of economic stress is not working class vices, but housing costs escalated by ethnic cleansing of whites from areas that they build, and degree inflation. You are blaming the workers for the suffering the progressive state inflicts upon them.

        All part of my ongoing post-grad continuing education.

      • Adam says:

        The make women property again one needs to be on the list.

      • Barry says:

        Wouldn’t consider myself a regular poster, but have commented plenty of times here throughout the last 7 or so years, under various names.

        An obvious one to include in a Jim reading list is “the Optics of Noticing“. Definitely shouldn’t be a first introduction to Jim, but it really weeds out who is actually redpilled on the WQ and who is purplepilled.

        I’ll have a better look later and give a couple more recommendations. Probably some articles on the leftist singularity.

      • Contaminated NEET says:

        I don’t remember what year it was from, but the autobiographical piece about entryism, being a young Leftist, and seeing Maoist acquaintances come back from tours of China dead-eyed and spiritually broken but still repeating the party line was a banger.

      • Anonymous says:

        this hilarious one where Jim mocked SWPL food and its homeopathic quantities of black truffle sticks in my mind.

      • Your Uncle Bob says:

        Here’s one I found useful. Some selection bias though, from clicking back and forward from KD’s three links.

      • Mike in Boston says:

        This is a terrific idea. Consider including The Resurrection of God for the much-needed upbeat reminder:

        The faith of Gnon requires confidence that God intends use to be happy, provided that we follow his laws, intends us to conquer the world and the stars, requires the white pill. If someone accepts the red pill but concludes the black pill from the red pill, concludes from the red pill that a wife and children that belong to him, in a home that belongs to him, will not make him happy, not of our faith. The black pill is gnosticism. The white pill requires us to accept the world of the fall, the world of Darwinian natural selection, and still be cheerful and optimistic about it. Every morning the dawn wakes me up, I squeeze my wife’s backside, and she makes me coffee while I watch the sun rise over the islands and the sea. Most evenings I check my fruit trees, then I sit down on my log in my garden, and watch the sun set over the mountains. Every few weeks, I get drunk with my friends. Is this a world that belongs to Satan? Is this a world ruled by Satan? Every dinner and most lunches I thank the Lord for my food, for the pleasant company with whom I eat it, and for the beautiful creation in which I eat it.

      • c4ssidy says:

        Scanning through all those comments would take decades. Would one day need to set up some kind of foundation with people working full time. Eventually you’d have an organised collection of knowledge which you could use as a basis for a city-state, which according to theory would expand outward until encompassing the universe

        • Adam says:

          Not really. I read the blog for a couple of years before I started posting about a year ago. Easily read through it start to finish. Most of the older posts do not have 1k+ comments. Probably the last couple of years have more comments than all previous years. It’s worth the read though, there have been a lot of quality posters over the years, and it’s interesting to see the development of the arguments and memes we use.

      • Neurotoxin says:

        Key “Jimian” concepts. I can’t cite a link for most of these. In no particular order:

        1. Democracy is not a long-run tenable system. People have been making this point for centuries if not millennia, but the “Jimian” description of the problem is more modern than someone commenting on ancient Rome or whatever.

        2. The analytical perspective of evolutionary psychology-cum-game theory.

        3. The application of this perspective to all the sex stuff. Female psych, etc.

        4. The phrase “social technology.”

        Certain laws and customs regarding marriage, for example. Property rights are another example. This is one of those phrases that just clicks when you first encounter it and makes you wonder why someone didn’t coin it a long time ago.

        5. In the last couple of years there was a post on the social effects of widespread acceptance of homosexuality. A poster (I forget who) originally wrote it and Jim turned it into a post, IIRC.

        6. Holiness spirals/signaling spirals/purity spirals. I don’t think Jim originated the term, but this blog is probably one of the key nodes for spreading the concept.

        7. The insistence on modeling the left for what it is – a bunch of evil people, briefly – and only paying attention to the left’s “ideas” as is necessary for practical purposes. The comments thread from the last year in which we all tried to define the damned thing has some great stuff. A note I made to myself: “At
        HerbR provides a good list of definitions of leftism…”

      • IQ Enthusiast says:

        1. Various articles on technological decline, including planes, skyscrapers, big macs per hour.

        2. There hasn’t been a proper post but we need a proper post on the Jim/Starman position on female youth. Jim has posted many a golden comment on Gab regarding this subject.

        3. Very obscure but there was a comment thread regarding The Truth About Arable Land And Soil Science which was very fascinating to my autism. A proper post regarding that would be useful.

  12. Ok, reading the trend of the conversations here, it appears that the conversation between us Dharmics and western reaction is over.

    I have nothing more to say.

    • alf says:

      First to conquer the stars wins.

    • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

      Hardly. I think we can still have interesting critiques, and conversations. In both directions, given honest intentions. However, if, like Ser Singh/Jatt Arya, someone decides to offer intentional offense, we will respond. I think that having an international perspective on reaction is more valuable than only critiques of our own culture. It allows us to evaluate the core principles of civilization from outside the cultures we grew up in.

      • Sher Singh says:

        There’s no intentional offense [*censored for gross and blasphemous intentional offense of just about everyone*]

      • Dharmicreality says:

        Problem is every time we have had the beginning of a fruitful conversation, there has been some kind of disruption. Not going to name-call, but once it was some guy (later proved to be a shill) bringing up the topic of street shitting. I fell for it the first time, but got smart when it happened again. Another time, it is some guy needlessly inviting insults to Hindu Gods. Another time ,it is somebody needlessly introducing some other disruptive topic like veganism (which is a distinct Cathedral faith clearly different from traditional Hindu vegetarianism, which the Cathedral loves to attack using the consumption of beef as a weapon).

        Last time I spent a lot of effort to bring some atmosphere of camaraderie back into the discourse, and I thought we had a tacit understanding not to denounce each others’ Gods. Unfortunately Jim continues to call out specific Hindu Gods as demons, when earlier he had said that it should be a matter for Hindus to sort out.

        It seems to me that the Cathedral has a dedicated section of shills devoted to ensuring that any Hindu Right wing does not get into a productive conversation or understanding with Western Dissident Right.

        It’s very tiresome to see the shills getting their results.

        • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

          It means that our conversations are going to be messy, offensive, and had in the middle of a fight. That is a shame, but this is a war. The enemy gets a say in a war. We are at war for the survival of our two peoples, so I will do my best to reach out a hand. I still think there can be camaraderie and discourse between us. Given how badly they want to stop us, there is worth in continuing the discussion.

          Look at the conversations where Ser Singh-and pardon the metaphor, but it is too good to pass up–starts shitting all over the place. There are the comments responding to him which are rude, crude, and intended to provoke an emotional response. Then SomeDude or Aryaman comment in it, and the hostility gets turned off to talk with them. It only gets turned back on when Ser Singh starts in again.

          We Western reactionaries can draw a distinction between collegial discussions and verbal assaults. And finally, to be frank, my opinion of Hinduism should matter as little to you as your opinion of Christianity does to me. Ultimately, we are looking to fix our own civilizations, and it is very likely that any specific solutions would not work for one another. We are very different peoples after all, even if we share the same problems. But that very difference is what makes the conversation so useful. Do not let the Cathedral take it away.

          • someDude says:

            My attitude on this blog is that I’m here to learn. Jim’s blog is like a university (multi-versity?) on sociology, psychology, political economy, Game theory and what have you. I am a huge admirer of how Jim

            1. Handles shills.

            2. Interprets Christianity in light of Game theory, biology, evolution and natural selection.

            3. Digs up old Christian sources from a time that things used to work.

            My hope is that Dharmics learn from Jim because the essentials are the same. Of course I don’t agree with Jim’s interpretation of Lord Krishna and Lord Shiva, but to then withdraw from dialogue from what is probably the highest IQ discussion space on the internet for just for those two reasons would be throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

            Dharmics have to be thick-skinned and certain ground rules are to be followed. No Dharmic must insult Christianity or Christians on this blog. They are free to do so on their own blogs and forums, but not here. As the Brits like to say, it’s just not cricket.

            Hindus have made the mistake of once being inward looking (navel gazing as some call it) and the result was a millenium of subjugation. They can’t afford it this time as the result might well be annihilation. They have to be outward looking, learn as much as they can from every credible source out there, friendly unfriendly or neutral.

            Yet, if Hindu Gods are insulted here, we will just politely disagree and move on to other learnings which are plenty. This place is a treasure trove of worldly wisdom. I would not stop engaging unless Jim explicitly asks me to.

            • alf says:

              I enjoy your comments and lament that your attitude is not wider spread among other dharma commenters.

              When Jim points to Krishna as a bad influence, I assume he is correct until proven wrong, and also that he is trying to be helpful, not insulting. Jim has an imitable talent for that kind of stuff. But, peace of westphalia demands that if you take it as an insult, we move on to other stuff.

              • someDude says:

                if you enjoy reading my comments, that’s high praise indeed. I am among the few (as you joked about the number) that bought your book. It was quality. Now excuse me while I go lift some weights to take advantage of this testosterone boost.

                Never let a testosterone boost go to waste.

              • Aryaman says:

                On this, Jim is neither entirely right nor wrong, but closer to wrong than right. But really, it does not matter. The north star is Ayodhya. It is wholly of this world. Rama is the ideal man, Sita the ideal wife, and his rule is one of virtuous prosperity and not indifferent self-abnegation.

                That some pretty bad demons were absorbed somewhere or the other is pretty obvious. The good thing is that these demons are more or less literally presented demons, which should be easier to deal with in time than whatever has got people gagging their children with masks.

                As for what mutual worth there is of collegiality, I point back to my above recommendation that everyone watch Baahuballi and RRR. It is no surprise the director says he takes his inspiration from Mel Gibson.

        • jim says:

          Long ago, you guys had some impressive mathematics, and some decent technology and industry.

          And then, under East India company rule, you had decent mathematics again.

          I have been nagging you guys to dig up information on the faith that ruled when you had some good stuff long ago.

          Have you tried? Is that information lost?

          I have been industriously digging what made our development of of science, technology, industry, industrialization, and empire happen, and confidently conclude that the ruling faith was central in making it all possible. Have you been digging?

          We know that the Aryans were initially contemptuous of the deities of conquered. What I suspect you will find is an East India Company situation, where the proto Hindu Aryan rulers went right on being contemptuous of the deities of the conquered.

          • Sher Singh says:


          • Aidan says:

            Part of the problem with polytheistic systems is their nature as a theological compromise between different groups. Ditching a large portion of the pantheon would piss a lot of people off, almost certainly causing instability. Would require a lot of sovereign violence to keep the peace, and for this reason likely out of the memescape of possibility for Hindus.

            • jim says:

              > Part of the problem with polytheistic systems is their nature as a theological compromise between different groups.

              Aryan polytheism was a compromise between the deified ancestor of one gens, and the deified ancestor of another gens, when they formed a coalition to knock down a city’s walls.

              And then the gods of the conquered Dravidians were allowed in, and brought some baggage with them. The Hindus, if they are unable to chuck out those gods, need to chuck out that baggage.

          • Aryaman says:

            That information is lost, though maybe I ought to be looking harder. Though it seems pretty likely quite a bit of the advanced mathematics was the result of deep inquiry into the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin, or the like.

            But I think enough of the religion remains, some of it with a lot of fidelity, that we can speculate as to what will work by projecting what worked in England onto what we have that remains.

        • jim says:

          > Unfortunately Jim continues to call out specific Hindu Gods as demons, when earlier he had said that it should be a matter for Hindus to sort out.

          It is obvious that something bad happened to your religion a long time ago. And something bad is happening right now, and your analysis of what is going wrong now sounds good to me.

          But you need to look for what went wrong a long time ago.

          It is unhelpful for an outsider to call out certain gods as demons, but you have an old problem somewhere. It would be a lot more helpful were an insider to look for it.

  13. Barry says:

    What do you make of this?

    They’re claiming they can intercept encrypted messages on Signal. Surely they are bluffing?

    • jim says:

      Whatsapp was sold to our enemies. There will be an update, if there was not one already. Same thing happened to skype.

      Signal has a potential vulnerability to man in the middle, if you twist the arm of the man who controls the identity server. It is a fundamental problem with any system that has a centralized identity server, no matter how secure the client.

      A truly secure messaging system has to be built on top a client wallet with a UI for private keys similar to that of crypto currency wallets – hence my position that it should be a crypto currency wallet, enabling you to embed money in messages.

  14. that guy says:

    Izyum might have been a fluke. After Lyman, it’s a trend.

    • Red says:

      I have no idea what Putin’s doing, but at this point he may need to start some treason trials for his generals. The areas under attack are not being reinforced in a timely manner. He may have some traitors in the ranks.

      • jim says:

        Not reinforcing areas under attack is often a rational strategy if playing for corpses, rather than turf. Russian advances and Russian retreats have both been quite costly for Ukraine.

        But perhaps I am being too clever by half. The truth will take a while to become apparent.

        • Anonymous Fake says:

          [*Global American Empire account of Ukraine war effort deleted*]

          • jim says:

            Could be true, not ridiculous propaganda, but we have heard it all before.

            If true or false, we will not know for quite some time. I think it false, but Lyman is evidence supporting the story.

    • jim says:

      Izyum caught the Russians with their pants down, and they fell back to reduce the likelihood of troops getting cut off.

      Lyman not so easily explained. Lyman is a strong answer to Putin’s speech.

      My prediction, however, remains unchanged, though the fall of Lyman is arguably evidence against it. The Ukraine, no matter where the front is, will find holding that front costs more in blood than they can afford for very long.

      • Red says:

        Putin continues to signal weakness. At this rate he’s likely to end up removed by men willing to grasp the nettle.

        • jim says:

          I think not, but we shall see.

        • Neurotoxin says:

          “Putin continues to signal weakness.”

          I’ve been wondering what his deal is. Russia can’t let the provocations of the level that it has borne, go unanswered. Maybe he has had a failure of nerve (this strikes me as the least likely possibility).

          There are other possibilities. Maybe he’s delaying escalation to buy himself time as he prepares certain capabilities. It could be verifying that his nukes work. It could be that he wants to get the reservists he just called up at a basic level of soldierly competence.

          Maybe he’s in a Trump-like situation in which the titular head of the government really doesn’t have that much power. Maybe he has already ordered a nuclear strike and the order has been defied.

          Maybe he’s doing a bunch of sub-rosa diplomacy with other countries. E.g. maybe he’s pointing out to Germany, France, etc. that their “alliance” with the US has been rather one-sided, outrageously so now that their “ally” has destroyed a pipeline that was going to keep them from freezing this winter.

          Maybe China is making certain military preparations and Russia must wait until Russia and China can move in concert.

          The worst possibilities are that he’s had a failure of nerve (unlikely) or that he’s in a Trump scenario.

          • jim says:

            China is slowly running down the debt the US government owes it. It is unlikely to move until the debt drops to a reasonably small value. At the current rate (which is slowly increasing) that is going to take ten years or so. If China has any plans to act soon, I would expect a more rapid reduction in the debt.

            When you are owed as much as China is owed, parking the money is a big problem. If I was in their shoes, I would say “war is coming no matter what we do, international obligations are going to go up in smoke”, and buy gold, high value metals, bitcoin, land, and rights in natural resources that are close enough to China that they can make that right stick.

    • Aidan says:

      See some russkie channels blaming a single bad general as responsible. Might be cope, might not be

      • Karl says:

        Not just blaming him. I have read that the commander of the Western Military District, Alexander Zhuravlev, was removed for failures.

      • jim says:

        I don’t think a single bad general was responsible. I think the Russians made a strategic decision to keep their troops thin, to reduce casualties from Himars.

        • Red says:

          They’re losing a lot of morale for saving a few men’s lives. Bleeding the other side dry doesn’t really work unless you can counter attack from time to time so you troops feel like your winning. There’s also a big hit to confidence in their leadership every time they give up a town because the Ukis are mass murdering Russians civilians and blaming it on Russia. They feel helpless to do anything about it because the Russian government refuses to fight fire with fire.

          • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

            Yeah, when it was just separatists, that was one thing. Now they are giving up Russian territory and Russian people to the worst monsters man has to offer. Nevermind public opinion, you have to smash some Ukes into greasy smears or the troops are going to give up. If they take casualties, it happens, but it will harden their resolve. It is worse to stand around safe and helpless than to risk death under your own power.

          • jim says:

            The cities recently lost, were recently gained.

            The major population center that the Ukrainians are after in this offensive is Severodonetsk-Lysychansk, which the Russians took four months ago. If, as seems likely, the Ukrainian offensive runs out of puff before it gets anywhere near Severodonetsk-Lysychansk the Russians are still winning over the last four months.

            The Ukrainians are willing to expend troops to hold ground and to gain ground. The Russians are unwilling to expend troops to hold ground. So they are going to lose ground from time to time.

            Severodonetsk-Lysychansk fell not so much to a Russian offensive, but rather that the Ukrainian troops were exhausted and refused to fight. When the exhausted Ukrainian troops fell back to the city, they declined to defend the city, which would have been an enormously strong point if defended by fresh troops. It fell with a handful of broken windows and fallen signs, without any significant war damage.

            For Russians to win, the Ukraine has to become one big Severodonetsk-Lysychansk.

            Ukraine assembled a concentrated force, and threw it against one point on the front, catching the Russians with their pants down. The Russians are not reinforcing that point on the front. Well, if the Russians are not moving in reinforcements, what stops the Ukrainians from continuing their advance? The Russians are betting that the Ukrainians are taking enough casualties that their advance runs out of puff, and it looks like it might well be running out of puff, though it has displayed a lot more puff than I or the Russians expected.

            The Ukrainians have launched three similar offensives in Kherson. If all four offensives run out of puff without getting very far, that represents a substantial diminution in the Ukrainian capability and will to hold ground.

            If the offensive grinds to a halt without Russian reinforcements being brought in to stop it, it represents a significant gain of ground, but also the expenditure of a significant amount of Ukraine’s capability for offense and defense.

            • DavyCrockett says:

              “The cities recently lost, were recently gained.”

              That’s true for some of them, it’s not true for a lot of them as well. The hohol Ukrainians took a couple of weeks ago, Izyum was taken by Russia at the very beginning of April, more than 6 months ago. Lysychansk like you said was taken by Russia more recently than Izyum, Lysychansk taken only 3 months ago.

              Izyum being taken by UKR is also concerning because Big Serge wrote a whole piece on how if the Russians hold onto Izyum then the Ukranians are in a huge amount of trouble, but if the Russians lose Izyum to UKR than Russia’s in a gigantic amount of trouble

            • DavyCrockett says:

              Lyman, taken October 1st by UKR, was taken earlier by Russia than Lysychansk as well. Lyman taken by Russia on May 27th, Lysychansk taken on July 2nd and Sievierodonetsk taken on June 25th.

  15. Red says:

    Since no one believes that Russia blew up their own pipe lines and the GAE is obviously did it the new shill line I’m seeing is was poor maintenance that caused both of them to blow up within hours of each other. Looks like a roll back from immediate WW3.

    • Cadfael says:

      Still believe the USG was responsible, but here is a plausible explanation of maintenance screwups causing the leak.

      • jim says:

        It is a plausible explanation of one pipeline blowing up. It is an entirely ridiculous explanation of two pipelines blowing up in rapid succession.

      • Red says:

        Speak of the pipeline and the new shills pop up. I’m seeing this exact shill line everywhere now.

        • Kunning Druegger says:

          This is wild speculation, but we get a dedicated shill assault every time we call out GAE/NATO military malarkey specifically. When that Black Sea Fleet ship got hit, a dude showed up with a wall of text about how GAE assets could not possibly have been involved (they were, and it was demonstrated by many and bragged about by the War Faction). There are other examples that follow this pattern: Jim or a Regular details how some military intel based action shows a clear GAE connection, and a rando shows up to point and laugh at how unbelievably improbable the assertion is. I think one of the few actual tentacles of Sauron’s Eye that is actively monitoring us is either a contractor for or actual agents of DIA. I believe this to be the case because of Jim’s assertion that providing virgin pussy for loyal warriors actually scares the shit out of them, and they will nuke this site and roll us up if there is ever any substantial uptake of that specific meme.

          I further believe that they are harvesting ideas from Jim for their own use, which is why they, somehow (and I cannot explain this, it’s just an instinct), keep this place active (as in, keep it safe from SJW and NPC wave assaults). They want the utility on offer here, but they either will not or cannot actually use it (at least not yet), so they keep it in the shadows and harvest ideas as well as collect intel.

          I am very aware of how… silly this sounds.

          • Adam says:

            I noticed the wall of text guy too. Like glow harder nigger.

            Truth has sort of an odd property to it that it is not seen until it can be seen, and once it is seen it must be accepted. Or something like that. Sort of a natural defense to the weak and the wicked.

  16. Anon says:

    Does anyone has a link to the book English Society 1688-1832 pdf download. (Not the English Society 1660-1832 version which you can find)?

  17. Basil says:

    [Enemy lies deleted*]

  18. Anonymous Fake says:

    Putin openly calls the West’s leadership Satanic and quotes Jesus. I seriously wonder what reaction one would get from showing this to Republicans like Ted Cruz or Josh Hawley. Or even Trump. How do you react when you realize you aren’t the good guys anymore?

    If this is like any other holy war, Russia will get holier and the West will get more Satanic. A year from now, Putin might just be leading public prayers to St. Michael for his aid and President Harris might be blessing “perinatal abortion” (legal now in California and it passed by a 30-9 vote) sacrifices to Shiva for victory.

    With providence, we might see Putin crowned a new czar and Americans vote legitimately to end democracy someday.

    • Fidelis says:

      Do my eyes decieve me or does this broken clock tell us the time.

      • someDude says:

        And above average shill in both intelligence and adaptability. That’s why Jim allows some of his stuff to get through.

        I’m not too crazy about his statement on “Sacrifices to Shiva”. Kamala Harris hates Hindus more than she hates Legacy Americans much as Soros hates Israeli/Orthodox Jews more than he hates Christians. Every Hindu nationalist has nothing but contempt for that Gorgon. It might have been hatred had she been more competent.

        The American that Hindu nationalist like is Tulsi Gabbard.

    • Sher Singh says:

      If you’re going to insult Lord Shiva then you can become a post-natal abortion.

      • jim says:

        When the Aryans conquered the Dravidians, the Dravidians worshiped a penis god and a pussy goddess. Lord Shiva is in large part the assimilation of the penis God into the Aryan faith.

        • someDude says:

          That’s not very fair, is it? It’s one-part the worship of Fertility and masculinity (Shiva is multi-dimensional). All Pagans worshipped fertility to some extent, Greeks worshipping Aphrodite to some extent. The Japanese Shinto too have a version, Okoninushi.

          I admit the symbology regarding the worship of Lord Shiva is largely lost, but characterization as merely a penis God is unfair. Now this characterization may merely be a reaction to Sher Singh insulting Christianity and the saints, in which case I hold my peace.

          • jim says:

            We know the Aryans had a low opinion of the Harappan phallus worship, and that a whole lot Shiva symbolism derives from Harappan symbolism.


            the hymns speak of the conquered peoples only in terms of contempt. In contrast to the light-skinned “nobles,” they were dark, snub-nosed barbarians (in the sense of speaking an unintelligible language); contemptible phallus worshippers who were nevertheless wealthy, with cattle, fields and fortified cities.

            One of the most celebrated finds from Mohenjo-daro is a seal bearing the image of a horned, three-faced male deity, seated in a yogic position and surrounded by animals — elephant, tiger, bull, rhinoceros and goat. This is evidently a prototype of the great god Shiva, lord of the beasts and prince of Yogins. Also connected with the worship of Shiva is the phallic symbol, or lingam, many representations of which have been found on Indus Culture sites.

            • Sher Singh says:

              [*deleted because I do not consider you a reliable source on old Aryan faiths.*]

              • jim says:

                They were ancestor worshipers, and each particular little group had its own particular ancestor. Hence enumerating no end of ancient Gods and trying to relate them to modern gods is an exercise that seldom leads anywhere.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  Na, all ancestral Gods are considered forms of Lord Shiva and Ma Kali.

                  Google Rudra Dev you’ll see the resemblance and the names are interchangeable.


                  Like how the Greeks equated Herakles with Krishna Ji.


                • jim says:

                  The Icelandic Norse considered Thor an ancestor who lived as a human somewhere in Asia, and the Greeks and the Romans had a large supply of more recent deified ancestors whom we have ample reason to believe were real people and whom they believed, and probably had better reason to believe than we did, were real people who lived as humans long ago – in the Roman case, not always that long ago.

                  Shiva is where you stuff all the male demon gods of the conquered people. Stuffing ancestor gods into Shiva is a recent convergence of moving Aryan polytheistic ancestor worship into monotheism. Stuffing Harappan gods into Shiva is an older convergence.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  Pan-en-theist is what Late Greeks/Modern Hindus are. All the Gods have Long Hair & Weapons – All Gods are True.




                • jim says:

                  Your links analyze deities who are very obviously deified ancestors, as if they were modern Hindu deities, and as if the sources examined perceived them as modern Hindu deities.

                  There is some truth in that for the late Greeks, when their gods were dying, but it is silly when analyzing the Vedas, and it is a false frame for the Greeks. As their gods became more like Hindu deities, they also became more like philosophical abstractions, or aspects of the Logos. And then their gods died.

            • someDude says:

              Jim, not all of us buy the Aryan invasion hypothesis. There are quite a lot of holes in it as addressed by this series of articles.


              It has also been pointed out that the Vedas themselves do not talk of the geography of any country other than India. Neither do the Vedas anywhere point out the foreign origin of the dominant castes. If the Aryans indeed invaded from abroad, I think they would have at least described the Geography of the areas they came from somewhere in it or at least alluded to their own foreign origins somewhere in the scripture

              They do no such thing. This makes me an agnostic on the issue.

              • jim says:

                I stopped reading your link midway through the first paragraph, because it just flat out lies

                “due to the lack of any archaeological evidence for any invasion in the Indus Valley Civilization (IVC) at the 1500 BC”

                Unburied dead bodies in the streets, and the sudden disappearance of the cities and urban technology of the Indus Valley civilization sure looks like evidence of invasion. Looks like what the mostly Aryan Sea people did to Bronze Age Civilization two centuries later. Sudden disappearance of language of the people of those cities. Sudden disappearance of literacy. The cities vanish, and the language vanishes. Somebody invaded. Someone with a completely different and entirely unrelated language – a language closely related to that of most of the very similar invaders that rolled over Bronze Age civilization two centuries later, and founded Mediterranean Bronze Age civilization two millenia earlier.

                Large scale cities require large scale water supply and public hygiene. That disappeared, so you did not have large scale cities for quite a while after those cities suddenly vanished.

                The horse and the chariot appears, and the cities disappear. Suddenly. With signs of ruthless violence. They did not slowly shrink and wither. The irrigation system is abandoned.

                Plus, of course, language, religion, and now genes. The genetic evidence is overwhelming. If your link says something different, well the first paragraph lied barefaced, so I would assume it lies barefaced about the genes also without bothering to read it.

                The Aryan’s do not speak of their ancestral homeland, because it was a multigenerational migration. They were born not very far from the places that they conquered, and their fathers were born not very far from the places that they fathered their sons.

                The fundamental social technology of the Aryans was absolute patriarchal authority, and absolute sovereignty of each patriarch, which gave them high fertility, plus they were wandering pastoralists which gave them high mobility, so unending population pressure pushed each little group outwards. It is not like a King in the Pontiac steppe summoned an army to go forth and conquer India. When an army in a walled city was objecting them pasturing their herds on its land, they had to put together a coalition and do something about those walls and the people behind them.

                • someDude says:

                  Yeah, all of these are reasonable points.

                  But I also can’t accept that all points must be thrown overboard because of one error. I understand that you are invoking the poster girl principle here. However, in this case, I posit that poster girl principle does not apply since the Indian deep state is not trying to convince us of OIT, in fact, much the reverse. They are desperately trying to convince us of AIT, so as to make the eventual conversion of India to the Abrahamic faiths more palatable to the Hindus.

                  For a theory to be accepted as correct, it must crush all counter occurences. What of the R1a1 local maxima in the Punjab? That point is also worth countering.

                • jim says:

                  > What of the R1a1 local maxima in the Punjab

                  What of it. Look at R1a, rather than cherry picking a particular subgroup.

                  The linguistic evidence agrees with the Y chromosome evidence. The broad spread of certain words indicates influence, and the broad spread of certain Y chromosomes indicates that that influence consisted of someone invading and conquering someone. And the genetic evidence of conquest is all one way – into India.


                  in the Swat Valley of northern Pakistan, samples of DNA from modern people, and remains dating from 1,200 BCE have steppe ancestry, while previous ones do not, indicating that the Aryans had arrived by then and mixed with the farmers. Meanwhile, farther east, DNA from Rakhigarhi in Haryana from around the same time does not display the Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a, now common in northern India.

                  While Europeans have had R1a way earlier.

                  If it did not come from the pontiac steppe, then you are facing the even less palatable conclusion that it came from Europe. R1a1 is an eastern subgroup of R1a, subsequently spread far and wide by Brahmins, but it is pretty obvious where those Brahmins got it from.

                  Your Y chromosomes come from far away. Your X chromosomes are ancient Indian. X chromosomes follow the female line, Y chromosomes the male line. You are descended from the men who conquered, and women who were conquered. I, on the other hand, am descended from Aryans both in the male and female line.

                  Dravidian culture and religion substantially survived Aryan conquest, but the eradication of the cities and the loss of literacy is similar to what other Aryans did around the Mediterranean at roughly the same time. Bronze Age civilization was whacked by a coalition of groups, but the groups generally had the language, the faith, and in large part the genes of those that whacked the Indus Valley Culture. And none of them liked cities. Someone who did not like cities conquered a large part of the world at about that time, and the genetic evidence shows they did not originate in India.

                  Your cities got flattened at roughly the same time as every city of Bronze Age civilization around the Mediterranean got flattened, a century or two earlier than most of the Mediterranean cities, though it did not happen all at once in either the Mediterranean nor in India, and your got your new Y chromosome genes at about the time that the cities around the Mediterranean were burning.

                • FrankNorman says:

                  Conquerors who take native wives would beget daughters as well as sons, so if these people did not pass on any Aryan X chromosomes, it means that their own mothers were non-Aryan.
                  Either that or none of their female offspring made any genetic contribution to the population.

                • jim says:

                  Every male gets his X chromosome from his mother and his Y chromosome from his father. So men born of the concubines of conquerors would all have the X chromosome of the conquered race, and the Y chromosome of the conquering race, and would pass on his Y chromosome in the male line.

                  And when that son became a conqueror …

                  The X chromosomes are retained in the lineage by marriage, but rapidly lost in the lineage by concubinage. The Aryans had only one wife, but unlimited concubines.

                • someDude says:

                  Thanks Jim. This is food for thought.

                • i says:


                  The X chromosomes are retained in the lineage by marriage, but rapidly lost in the lineage by concubinage.

                  Only with having daughters with his concubines does the X from his mother is even passed on but combined and then intermixed with the native population.

              • Red says:

                Anytime you hear a modern archaeologist saying “actually, there wasn’t invasion” they’re lying. They’ve been told to ignore invasions much they told to ignore human sacrifice.

                >Jim, not all of us buy the Aryan invasion hypothesis.

                No one likes to be told they’re the product of invasion and rape, but all of us are the product of invasion and rape. That’s just how the human race evolves. People telling you otherwise are deceiving themselves and others.

                • someDude says:

                  But Indian archaeologists in India have been and are insisting on an invasion. The whole point is to make a conversion to the Abrahamic faiths more palatable to Hindus. The idea is the Islam and Christianity are just software updates over the old Hinduism coming from the west. If Hinduism itself is accepted as an alien faith, then the will to fight the Abrahamic faiths weakens.

                • jim says:

                  That Hinduism derives from the religion brought by Aryan invaders does not make Hinduism an alien faith. You are your father’s sons, and should adhere to your father’s religion. And not your mother’s.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Syncretic Hinduism makes sense, because it was my ancestors versus your ancestors but now they will both be our children’s ancestors. The solution being to adapt them in. Christianity is a completely different form of religion. You cannot combine your ancestors and the Creator of the universe, because that is two different forms of deity. Two groups of ancestors mingling because their descendants are mingling makes far more sense.

              • Your Uncle Bob says:

                >It has also been pointed out that the Vedas themselves do not talk of the geography of any country other than India.

                Arctic Home in the Vedas (1903) argues for an ancient familiarity with the seasons, day cycle and constellations of the near-Arctic if not the Arctic. I found it very plausible as a lay reader, but keep in mind I don’t speak the language to judge for myself.

                I gather also the author is well out of the modern western mainstream, so perhaps the Indian even more so. He goes so far as to posit a homeland actually in the Arctic, even farther north than the now-accepted region for the Yamnaya. That strong form hypothesis is ruled out by modern information, but some contact with or earlier sojourn in the Arctic is still quite possible, maybe necessary to explain the elements he points out.

                He does talk about geography somewhat, especially river names, arguing that old names, originally of real rivers in the homeland, were first applied to mythical rivers as they traveled, then reapplied to new rivers when they settled in India. And in parallel, that soma was an old name applied to a new plant/extract required as they shifted locales. These parts I don’t remember as clearly, but they’re in there.

                • jim says:

                  Aryan words are cold climate words – their vocabulary for warm climate phenomena is always local. Aryans did not originate in the near arctic, but when they maintained one cohesive culture through aristocrats marrying the daughters of distant aristocrats, some of those aristocrats were likely near arctic. They settled the near arctic early in their expansion, because less opposition there.

                  Aryans had monogamous marriage, plus as many concubines as they liked, but only the sons of the wife inherited noble rank, and the eldest son of the wife inherited his father’s rank. This, with long distance aristocratic intermarriage, had some effect of maintaining cultural identity, social cohesion over long distances, and the capability to organize large coalitions from broad areas for collective action, such as war.

    • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

      Damn, that article is nuts. Maybe I have not been reading the major news sites as much, but that rhetoric is seriously unhinged.

    • Basil says:

      And also the right-wing gigachad Putin spoke about the neo-colonial west and the possibility that the children of Africa will be malnourished, because the utilization of the Slavs must continue.

      • jim says:

        Yes, Putin tips his hat to left wing drivel rather too much in that speech – while repurposing left wing language to profoundly reactionary meanings.

        In many ways, it is the inverse of those shills saying “Hail fellow reactionary, reaction, rightly understood, means equal rights for faggots, socialism, and eating bugs”. He is telling them that leftism, rightly understood, means nationalism and overthrowing Harvard.

        • Mister Grumpus says:

          Now I finally understand what you mean by Russia not yet having achieved Memetic Sovereignty. But even within the other guys’ game rules, those are some very clever trick plays.

    • Ash says:

      He also openly praises the USSR which in and of itself was a satanic construct, and revels in the mass slaughter of hundreds of thousands of white Christians. I cannot fathom how people have deluded themselves into your line of thinking

      • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

        The founding fathers were a bunch of leftist lunatics, especially Jefferson, and people still remember them fondly. There are a lot of myths about history that people hold near and dear. Putin has talked about not wanting a return the the socialism, but to the place in the world that Russia had as the Soviet Union. It is the national pride they miss, not the starvation and shortages.

        • clovis says:

          They are also proud of their World War 2 vets, many of whom were Orthodox fighting not for the communists but for the defense of their land, which is no different from most in the American right who are proud of their grandparents who fought in D-Day. You can say we were on the wrong side of the war, but no person who is actually on the right can fail to show honor to their ancestors who risked or gave their lives in service to their fatherland, even if the leaders of their fatherland abused their underlings love of their country.

        • Fidelis says:

          What have you read from Jefferson that leads you to call him a leftist lunatic? Would appreciate firsthand sources, especially his own writings.

          • Adam says:

            If equality is the primary leftist focal point of the blue tribe, freedom is the primary leftist focal point of the red tribe.

            Freedom does not exist, nor will it ever exist. Your life, and the life of every living thing comes with a price. To deny this is to deny reality, and material and effective causation. Thomas Jefferson and many of his peers did deny this, denied the price that must be paid, as well as demand someone else pay it.

            • FrankNorman says:

              I think you are muddling two meanings of “freedom” there.

              If someone runs a shop, you are free to buy from that shop or not, but if you choose to buy, you have to pay.

              But you can choose whether to buy or not.

              • Adam says:

                I don’t think the red tribe, or any of the founding fathers define the word freedom as autonomy to purchase goods or even set prices as you see fit. If they do it is sort of included in the main definition but not really the true emotional, psychological and spiritual core.

                The core seems to be much more aligned with freedom from the burden (moral agency) and freedom from consequences. It is a consumer meme, and is fit for slaves and subjects. It is for men who are slaves to their emotions, and fooled by their imagination.

                If you truly accept that you are responsible for everything that you do and everything that you do not do, than no matter where you are and no matter what you are doing you are as free as anyone can ever be. Failing to see that is failing to see that you are just a very small part of Gods creation. As if you placed yourself at the center of Gods creation, with everything else positioned relative to you.

                Forgive me if this does not make sense, I am not as competent as I would like to be as far as my writing goes.

                • Adam says:

                  To put it another way, those clamoring for freedom the most are those who are the most subject to their own conditioning. But freeing yourself from your conditioning is an inside job, and until you are free on the inside you will never be free anywhere, regardless of the conditions.

          • Hesiod says:


            Rewriting the Bible to suit one’s autism, I mean, enlightenment is fairly demented.

            • Fidelis says:

              you’re the only one to post the actual writings of the man. That is fairly leftist behavior, to rewrite the bible according to one’s own views, but as you imply it is moreso extremely spergy behavior. Does not justify calling him a leftist lunatic, but is condemnable behavior for sure.

              I don’t see much of the typical leftist destroy and subvert white (Anglo-Saxon particularly) civilization rhetoric out of Jefferson. Just heretical views as a result of a weak church, and republican views as a result of naive idealism. I can hardly blame him for the latter, hindsight is 2020. I guess you can call his particular support of liberalism as a leftist redistribution program, but I have not read anything from him that sounds subversive as opposed to naive.

              • Adam says:

                Does he strike you as someone that would help us make women property again? Maybe he would, but his memes suggest otherwise.

                What about immigration, and dealing with the other races? From Wikipedia-

                “Jefferson took seven cases for freedom-seeking slaves[43] and waived his fee for one who claimed that he should be freed before his minimum statutory age.“

                He is no friend of mine. He is a product and producer of the enlightenment.

                Just read his Wikipedia. He’s a progressive social worker.

              • Red says:

                >Does not justify calling him a leftist lunatic,

                “All men are created equal.”

                That’s leftist lunacy.

              • Kunning Druegger says:

                I feel like Jefferson’s position on the French Revolution is the only evidence required for a “conviction,” but it should also be noted that even the worst of the lot (Thomas Paine and Samuel Adams) where hella-based in comparison to many, maybe most, men these days. I would trade 10,000 GWoT “””war vets””” for 100 Bolsheviks (assuming I get to reprogram them, obviously) no questions asked. The Cathedral has ruined at least three generations of men of the West. So yes, in my opinion the American Revolution was a leftist revolution, the men who perpetrated it are still very worthy, very manly men of might and main. This creates strange instances where their words are worthless but their deeds are worthy of emulation, as the action was effective even if the intent was a net-detriment.

                • Adam says:

                  It’s obvious a lot of those guys were incredibly manly. It can be hard to reconcile but certainly they had many admirable qualities.

      • Red says:

        He also openly praises the USSR which in and of itself was a satanic construct, and revels in the mass slaughter of hundreds of thousands of white Christians.

        A nation that ruled 1/3 of the planet for 50 years. People respect strength no mater how evil it was.

        • i says:

          For a time:

          Isaiah 25:3-5

          3Therefore, a strong people will honor You.

          The cities of ruthless nations will revere You.

          4For You have been a refuge for the poor,

          a stronghold for the needy in distress,

          a refuge from the storm,

          a shade from the heat.

          For the breath of the ruthless

          is like rain against a wall,

          5like heat in a dry land.

          You subdue the uproar of foreigners.

          As the shade of a cloud cools the heat,

          so the song of the ruthless is silenced.

          King Jesus will indeed be revered for his power, Justice and fairness.

          Being powerful enough to be generous to the Righteous needy and weak is quite a flex.

  19. JustAnotherGuy says:

    Zelensko is applying for NATO membership, things are accelerating faster than I thought.

    • JustAnotherGuy says:

      Seems like they got denied membership? I can’t really tell what GAE is up to with Ukraine anymore.

      • Kunning Drueger says:

        What you are seeing is substantial proof for the school of thought to which I ascribe: no central conspiracy; many goals, many plans. The Conspiracy of Conspiracies seeks to portray a singular image of a centrally organized entity, but when there is resistance, the rats start scrabbling for crumbs and searching for exit options.

        • jim says:

          Not what I am seeing. The deviation from the central line was swiftly silenced. Someone briefly erred about what one single central authority decided was permissible. He was informed of his error, and swiftly corrected it.

          The central line is always changing, and people are always struggling over what it should be. In this sense, many conspiracies. But one central authority always imposes its will, one conspiracy of many comes out on top on one issue of many. Everyone subscribes to the new line, and forgets that they ever embraced any other. In this sense, one singular authority. We have divided power, which continually struggles, and centralized power, in that pretty quickly one new line is imposed on all.

          • Kunning Drueger says:

            No single center. It’s musical chairs in terms of who gets to choose the line, and there are multiple songs playing. So there are central theses, there are central tenets, there are central shared visions, but it is incorrect to say there is one central authority. There is one flock, many birds, and a handful of characteristics that dictate who is flock and who is solo. This is why our Central Thesis School can never name the Leader, or the Cabal, or the everlasting They, with any consistency or accuracy. It’s the equivalent of saying which grackle is leading the flock; you can say which one happens to be in front, or which one seems ahead, or which ones are failing to keep up, but it is arbitrary. There is no king grackle.

            • FieryBalrog says:

              I think the way Covid was and is being handled supports this thesis.

              There is way too much dirt coming out about Fauci and the vaccines in particular. Some faction doesn’t like that little shit and is making sure “respectable” outlets occasionally get to publish bombshells, bookended by the Jan 2021 article in NY Mag by Nick Baker and the recent Lancet publication that officially blessed the Jeffrey Sachs line that reads “possibility of US lab research-> Covid”.

              • The Cominator says:

                Fauci is perhaps expendable if they need to expend him, no one will touch his Jesuit background and curiously that the CDC director at the time also had a Jesuit background.

                • FrankNorman says:

                  What’s in this for the Jesuits?

                • jim says:

                  Nothing. They worship Serpent Christ, who wants to devour the world.

                  What is in it for trannies?

                  The Covid scam is demonic evil, self hating and self destroying, not rational self interested evil, which seeks to gain an advantage or a benefit by wicked means.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The Jesuits are Satan worshipping glowniggers so what’s in it is its demonic evil carried out by psyops and subversion.

  20. Zack says:

    EU internal security service delivers report about the incel threat:öls_first_scan_of_phenomen_and_relevance_challenges_for_p-cve_202110_en.pdf

    “Attackers who have committed mass atrocities either explicitly or implicitly as
    a result of incel “traits” are canonised into the suite of incel “heroes”. This paper intends to demystify key
    tenets of the incel ideology and its relationship to violence, outline key challenges for practitioners in
    prevention and countering of violent extremism (P/CVE) in reaching this community, and offer
    recommendations for intervention providers and practitioners to increase and improve work related to this

    “The incel community is part of the wider “manosphere” (
    ), a collection of anti-feminist, largely online
    communities engaged in varying levels of misogyny and, on occasion, targeted violence (
    ). The manosphere
    can be largely understood to have four distinct spheres: Pickup Artists (PUAs), Men Going Their Own Way
    (MGTOW), Men’s Rights Activists (MRAs), and Incels (
    Men’s rights activism is the oldest section of the manosphere and predates the internet. MRAs are interested
    in legal and political change and are focused on the perceived unequal treatment of men in issues such as
    divorce and child support allocations (
    ). Supporters of MGTOW advocate that men withdraw from normal
    interactions with women, including avoiding cohabitation, and maintain a strict hierarchy between
    genders (
    ). Alternatively, PUAs and incels are both focused on accessing sexual relationships with women.
    However, while PUAs believe that through a set of behaviours called “game” they can manipulate women
    into having sex with them, incels believe they are genetically and societally disadvantaged in such a way that
    they are denied access to sexual relationships with women.”


  21. i says:

    In regards to dealing with demon infestation. I recommend this Book by the Exorcist Malachi Martin “Hostage to the Devil”
    There is even an Exorcism Manual at the end of the Book.

    Tell me what you guys think of this Book. Is it going to be of good use?

  22. someDude says:

    The Muslim conquests of India took a rather long time. The first assaults started against Afghanistan (which then as now was rich having been on the strategic silk route) when it used to be Buddhist. That took about 350 years and Afghanistan had to be converted to Islam twice. The Buddhist Afghans of that time did not eat Beef. Would they have still been Buddhist had they eaten Beef? I don’t think so.

    I’m not opposing Beef eating for Occidentals. Rather, I’m arguing that it has a marginal effect on the Hindu warrior spirit. Besides, since the Muslims consume Beef, it provides the Hindus with a very convenient schelling/rallying point against them. I would not give up the prohibition on eating beef just yet.

    • Sher Singh says:

      Eliminate cow slaughter in the whole universe.
      Ugardanthi, Chakka 5


      • jim says:

        Well now I know what you are doing here.

        You are attacking the peace of Westphalia.

        Putin’s program, and ours is to restore the peace of Westphalia. (Since Harvard, having imposed one state religion on all the states of America, is now attempting to impose one state religion on the world, and this is pissing off a broad coalition.)

        If Old Type Christianity wins in the west, and old type Hinduism wins in India, and the peace of Westphalia then fails, you will wish you had been ruled by Harvard.

        Also, if your faith is incompatible with peace and alliance with any foreign sponsor, then when war comes, and war is coming, you will have no foreign sponsor. The first two steps to making the holy army of the Sikhs real rather than merely an empty symbolic ritual is to have Sikhi compatible with foreign sponsorship and a means for performing transactions and managing collective assets that the Indian state does not control.

        The latter I am working on, or was working and intend shortly to resume working on, though real life events have got me busy on other matters for the last couple of months, and are likely to keep me busy for three more months.

        • someDude says:

          If Sher Singh thinks that it is the duty of Dharmic warriors to end cow slaughter everywhere in the world, then it is indeed a state of perpetual war and one in which annihilation is a real possibility. The general understanding is that cow slaughter is prohibited within the historic borders of Old India, which includes modern day Afghanistan.

          There are no historical precedents to Hindu Emperors invading Persian Zoroastrians or the Scythians of Central Asia because they ate Beef. Ranjith Singh did not annex Khyber Pakhtunwala from the Afghans because they ate Beef. He did so because he recognized the eternal nature of war with Islam. He of course found banning cow slaughter in Khyber Pakhtunwala a very convenient schelling point to humiliate Afghans and grab their land and property whenever they were found in violation.

          If ever Old Type Hinduism wins in India and Sher Singh goes about haranguing people to invade countries to stop cow slaughter there, he would find no takers. And if he refused to be ignored, a Sikh Monarch might order some with a sufficiently scary reputation to have a chat with him over Tea.

          • Sher Singh says:

            [*bombastic promises of world conquest and inflammatory insults against both Christianity and non Sikh Hindus censored*]

          • Sher Singh says:

            [*bombastic promises of world conquest and inflammatory insults against both Christianity and non sikh Hindus deleted*]

  23. Aryaman says:

    Making this a new comment for legibility. I do not think Hindu proscription on eating beef is a holiness spiral. I am in a position to say this because I am, as much as one can be, an old type Hindu who does not eat beef (or meat, but I have eaten both beef and meat several dozen times in my life), nor do I begrudge anyone in the west who does, and find the organized movement against the eating of meat rather demonic and repulsive.

    But that other Aryans elsewhere do not have a proscription on eating cow does not mean that the Hindu proscription must have been so imported from various demonic or “Dravidian” influences. And the Indians who were exporting steel to the Mohammedans the Christians were very impressed by were Indians who, by and large, did not eat cow among the higher classes, and had not done so for quite a while.

    Reason without faith is demonic, especially where the faith is not falsifiable. Beef is obviously very healthy for you, and very good for you. But it is probably rather possible to be vigorous and fit without it, and I am vigorous and fit without it.

    • Red says:

      But that other Aryans elsewhere do not have a proscription on eating cow does not mean that the Hindu proscription must have been so imported from various demonic or “Dravidian” influences. And the Indians who were exporting steel to the Mohammedans the Christians were very impressed by were Indians who, by and large, did not eat cow among the higher classes, and had not done so for quite a while.

      You had the best steel and yet your warriors were garbage. That rather speaks to their lack beef eating.

      • Aryaman says:

        No it doesn’t, and you don’t know your history. Christian conquest of India happened well after the ability to produce the world’s best steel was either lost, or became rare and marginal at best.
        Nevermind that producing good steel is correlated with having good warriors; for both require a social technology that emphasizes science, industry, and cooperation. Which technology was lost in India well before Columbus sailed.

      • Sher Singh says:

        Indian soldiers have never been called garbage by any serious militaryman.
        There’s more VCs in a couple Indian Regiments than the entire commonwealth.

        You took 2 centuries to win & 90 to run. Mass immigration has gone on longer..
        Let’s fight after another century of mass immigration :shrug:


        • someDude says:

          Listen Sher Ji, this exaggeration does our cause no good. To be sure the British Indian Sikh, Gurkha and Rajput regiments punched above average in VC awards, but

          1. That’s hardly something to boast about, having won it in service to a foreign power that hated Dharmics and favored Muslims at every turn.

          2. Its absolutely incorrect that a couple Indian regiments won more VCs than the entire commonwealth. And you know it.

          • Sher Singh says:

            [*bombastic promises of world conquest and inflammatory insults against both Christianity and non sikh Hindus deleted*]

      • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

        During the period to which he is referring, I believe that the Indian warriors were rather fearsome, which is why the Mohammedans were trading, not raiding.

        • Red says:

          He didn’t give a time range and around the time the Arab world was raving about Indian steel is also around the time that the initial Muslim conquests of India were underway.

        • someDude says:

          The Mohammedans started raiding India within 50 years of Islam having become a thing. They were raiding the North Indians (who they had a border with) and trading with the South Indians. The South Indians at that time had a rather fearsome Navy and the Muslims, not so much. Had they had a decent Navy, pretty sure they have raided the southern coasts.

          However, after having taken about 600 years working their way through North India, they did raid the South Indians, by land, by which time, both sides had a rather shitty Navy.

          While the Islamic conquest started North and moved south, the European conquest started South along the coasts and then moved North, the Europeans being fearsome at sea and the Hindus being too exhausted and having lost too much quality human capital (Islamic slaughters took place in cities which is where high IQ people congregate) to resist.

    • Red says:

      > But it is probably rather possible to be vigorous and fit without it, and I am vigorous and fit without it.

      Not that I’ve observed. Every white vegetarian I meet looks unhealthy, smells bad, and has bad hair. Warriors should eat meat if they want to be strong and powerful. Workers don’t necessarily need meat to be productive but who wouldn’t want to be strong if given the choice?

      • Aryaman says:

        Oh come on. The white vegetarians you see that are fat and smelly are weird Gaia worshippers, and are fat and smelly for that reason, and not because they eat lots of egg, cheese, rice, lentils, and vegetables cooked with ghee and butter.

        > who wouldn’t want to be strong if given the choice?

        I am plenty strong. And stronger than the vast majority of people that eat beef, though maybe not as strong as I would be if I ate beef, but strong enough that it does not matter.

        • Red says:

          I am plenty strong.

          What sort of weight do you pull in the gym?

          Oh come on. The white vegetarians you see that are fat and smelly are weird Gaia worshippers, and are fat and smelly for that reason, and not because they eat lots of egg, cheese, rice, lentils, and vegetables cooked with ghee and butter.

          Fair enough. Lets talk about Indians. I work with several Indians who don’t eat meat. The women have bad skin and the men are short and puny. The quality and quantity of protean you get from vegetables isn’t enough to really build good height and strength. The dairy and eggs help, but it’s not enough to hit your full potential.

          On the other hand I worked with a Muslim Indian woman who loved meat. She had fantastic skin and was very attractive.

          • Aryaman says:

            > What sort of weight do you pull in the gym?

            More than 405 for a couple reps.

            Ok. To the extent Indian women in the west have worse skin (and I don’t necessarily think they do, but don’t insist on arguing the point) I have no reason to think it has to do with beef or diet. I know quite a few Indians close to a foot taller than their parents, which I chalk up mostly to dairy and eggs not beef (for which claim I have evidence).

            > On the other hand I worked with a Muslim Indian woman who loved meat. She had fantastic skin and was very attractive.

            May well be but I don’t think you’re going to find that the women in Islamabad are more attractive than the women in Bombay. In fact I suspect you would find the opposite.

            • Red says:

              Pretty good weight. I think you’ve proved your point, though beef is still a better. Doesn’t make a lot of sense to handicap your people by avoiding it. The coming age is going to need a lot of strong warriors.

              I know quite a few Indians close to a foot taller than their parents, which I chalk up mostly to dairy and eggs not beef (for which claim I have evidence).

              Cheap animal based protean results in large jumps in height for everyone.

              • someDude says:

                Be that as it may, The prohibition on beef eating and the veneration of the cow provides a very convenient schelling point to all Dharmic Indian faiths (Sikhs, Hindus, Jains, Buddhists) and castes when rallying against Beef eating muslims.

                I would keep this prohibition for the time being. The schelling point gives us gains far greater than the extra physical strength beef eating would give us. Its a matter of priorities. Besides, I doubt westerners eat milk producing cows. I think Y’all eat the Bulls.

                • Kunning Drueger says:

                  You should look into protein farming, a lot more nuance than many people think. All steak isn’t created equally.

                  I find the Schelling Point argument incredibly persuasive, given that my people seem to have an inborn resistance to having or recognizing them.

                • jim says:

                  It is a good schelling point against Muslims. Terrible schelling point against the Church of Harvard.

                  For the Church of Harvard, Woman Question.

                • Sher Singh says:


                • Aryaman says:

                  Actually it is a decent Schelling point against Harvard, too. Eating meat, and beef specifically, is the paradigmatic protest against traditional Hinduism and the patriarchy implied thereby. Harvard promotes the eating of beef in India in very much the same way it forces temples to admit women.

                  Leftists in India are very perturbed when they learn I do not eat beef or meat and feel themselves in unfriendly company, because it implies heresy, and suggests I might actually believe the things I chanted at my wedding.

                  Perhaps it is different in America, where there is an actually existing and wholly Western holiness spiral relating to meat into which the Indians who happened not to eat meat are absorbed. They are, by the Cathedral, taught to think themselves better than their hosts: and too much of the time more than happy to do so.

                  But that is not how it is in India. A man who does not eat meat (but does eat dairy), and is nonetheless fit and healthy, is reliably sane and a Hindu who does eat beef is invariably a feminist that wants to abolish marriage, expropriate private wealth, and use that money to insist all girls go to college. Invariably.

                • jim says:

                  > Eating meat, and beef specifically, is the paradigmatic protest against traditional Hinduism

                  Not for much longer it will be. Harvard’s war on meat is escalating

                • Aryaman says:

                  Well, Harvard can walk and chew gum at the same time. Just as a man cannot save himself from a feminist mob by claiming to be a woman (unless he actually emits the necessary demented aura) simply because they have authorized transgender.

              • Aryaman says:

                Cheap animal based protean results in large jumps in height for everyone.

                There is something about drinking milk when you are growing, specifically, that really spurs growth. Don’t think it’s the protein. Though animal protein is of course very good.

                Note that I’m not disputing and nowhere have disputed that beef is very nutritious. And it seems like a very wholesome, healthy part of western society. (Though I do find some kinds of factory farming rather cruel and unusual).
                I am saying it is not a holiness spiral (there are other, actually palpable and harmful holiness spirals in Hinduism at hand). And I am saying that “strong men eat cows, period” is not generically true.

                • i says:


                  Don’t forget the importance of seafood. Especially with the Zinc. In addition to dairy and eggs.

                  Although Seaweed, Algae and Mushrooms are also good.

      • Aryaman says:

        In any case, warriors do and always did it meat. They did not eat cow, and they did not eat cow in the glory days.

        • someDude says:

          Eating a cow makes as much economic sense as eating a hen. Witness the Cuban laws in cow slaughter. You get 2-5 years imprisonment for slaughtering a cow without authorization. It used to be worse before. To be sure, I’m not arguing solely the economic angle, just that it is an important angle. The biggest angle is the schelling point.

          Besides, I think even the westerners eat the Bull and not the cow unless they have money to burn.

          • Sher Singh says:


          • Aidan says:

            We eat the bull. One bull can knock up an infinite number of cows; most bulls are fair game to be eaten. Sometimes we have to go deep into out history when we wonder how long we have been pwned. Jim wants us to ditch Saint Jerome, and the crap in Hinduism is much older. However, I recognize that an Aryan focused revival would upset the relative peace of the caste system.

            • someDude says:

              Thanks, that what I guessed. Why would anyone want to eat a cow and lose the lifetime supply of milk? Traditionally Hindus did not eat the Bull either as they needed the Bull for tilling the field. This was before tractors and mechanised agriculture which are so recent. So in a sense, they felt that both the Bull and Cow have been their benefactors for so long. Eating the Bull for Hindus is like eating the Dog for westerners. We just can’t get ourselves to do it.

              Then there is the Schelling point against Islam to consider. As long as we hope to expel Islam from our lands, the prohibition against beef will remain. If we give it up, it would be because we have either driven the Mohammedans from our lands or we have surrendered to them and to the inevitability of us turning into them. Zombie apocalypse

              • jim says:

                Fair enough, but cows produce more cows, and at some point you have to regulate their numbers to the supply of grass. Cows in India tend to be starving. Their population is regulated by lack of food. This is not a rational or productive way to manage cattle.

                You want well fed bulls to pull ploughs, and well fed cows to produce milk – which requires that they produce calves. And if you have well fed cows producing well fed calves, the time arrives for a feast.

                And the reason Sher Singh is banging on this Schelling point is that it is a point that prevents peace between groups equally oppressed by the Global American Empire, whose faiths are being equally converged to Harvard.

                It is also a Schelling point that makes it improbable that you will get foreign sponsorship when war comes, and war is coming.

                As a schelling point for organizing armed conflict, it means interfering with the agricultural practices of locals who are practicing more efficient forms of agriculture, which is going to get up the noses of potential foreign sponsors.

              • jim says:

                > Then there is the Schelling point against Islam to consider

                Islam is not your immediate problem. In Pakistan, Harvard convergence is being subtly and not so subtly resisted, in Afghanistan, flamboyantly and violently resisted, but in India, both Islam and Hinduism are rapidly converging to Harvardism.

                • someDude says:

                  To be fair, In India, Muslims are being rapidly converged to Harvard with the active encouragement and cooperation from the Modi government which no Hindu has any “beef” with (pardon the pun). Hindus recognize this as vital to putting the brakes on the Islamic fertility rate.

                  To publicly oppose the convergence of Hinduism to Harvard while at the same time cheer the convergence of Islam to Harvard within the same country (India) is a political feat which no democracy is capable of. If there are some counter examples you can point to, I would be delighted to take a look.

                  The obvious step is to end democracy in India, and it is recognized by right wing Hindus, but Modi himself appears to be a worshipper of Democracy. So, it seems we are stuck in a bad equilibirum.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  That is a bad idea, to try to wield an evil blade to good ends. It is liable to end up cutting you worse than your enemy. Better to effect a lowering of Muslim fertility by killing the men and fucking their women. You know, like the Aryans used to do.

                • jim says:

                  To lower Muslim fertility by Cathedral means involves allying with your more powerful and more dangerous enemy, against your less powerful and less dangerous enemy.

                  The outcome of such alliances is invariably the disappearance of the ally.

                • someDude says:

                  @Jim @Wulfgar

                  You’re right. But it seems to us that the Cathedral converging Hinduism is no longer an option. Whether or not we assist Harvard in converging Muslims, we’re getting converged anyway. So this is just taking the Muslims down with us.

                  Also we are hoping that in time we will get a prophet who will kill call out demons in Hinduism and issue a call for killing them. When that does happen, we do not want the Muslims to have too much of a head start on us.

                  Also you can’t convince the average Hindu that Muslims are less dangerous than the Cathedral. We’ve been fighting them now for 1350 years. In our mind space, they are now assuming the proportions of the mythical eternal enemy. The Cathedral is just an amorphous Johnny come lately in the minds of most Hindus.

                • jim says:

                  A huge problem with your Caesars is that they were lawless, oppressive, and apt to kill kin and loyalists.

                  This indicates a problem with Hinduism.

                  Typically in its early days the East India company won its monopoly privileges as follows:

                  An east India company merchant would set up shop somewhere. Business would be good for a while, then the overlord would kill him and confiscate his stuff and his women, that being a routine hazard of living under that overlord. East India company rightly pissed about this, assembles an army, kills the overlord, his family, loots the city, and departs, leaving anarchy in their wake. A new overlord comes to power, a new East India Company merchant sets up shop, and this time around gets treated with kid gloves, while all other merchants continue to be at risk of arbitrary oppression.

                  When the East India company governed it created prosperity by being, compared to the sovereigns it replaced, relatively peaceful and law abiding. Christianity won because of relatively virtuous Kings. What was it about Christianity that gave it better behaved rulers, and Hinduism worse behaved rulers?

                  Long ago, some kinds of Hinduism did pretty well, leading the world in mathematics, science, and technology. What was it about that Hinduism that was different from the Hinduism that the East India company wound up ruling as an accidental byproduct of looking for food seasonings?

                  My suspicion is that they did not consider Krishna and company to be deities, but I don’t know. Does anyone know? We have copious records of the faith that gave us science, technology, industrialization, and empire. What is the state of your records?

                • Kunning Drueger says:

                  Polytheistic societies will always be submitted by monotheistic societies. Polytheism is a natural disunion that tolerated far too much variance.

                  “How do I get from A to Z?”
                  “Many ways, some better than others. I prefer this way, and others have different ways, and each of us likes our way best, so be wary of which way you choose.”

                  “How do I get from A to Z?”
                  “There’s is only one correct way. Shun the others, and ignore those who don’t, and we shall walk together.”

                  Done. Polytheism only survives where converged pseudo-monotheists keep it alive, just like matriarchal systems. The path that fosters the most cooperation for the least cost will inevitably dominate all preferences.

                  Look how Sher Singh trashes his kin while making a fool of himself in front of the outsiders. What can our based Dharmabros do? Beg him to stop. Apologize for him. Temper his stupidity as much as possible.

                  What would happen if I started spouting off abought Christianity, saying whatever the Occidental equivalent of Sher Stoopid’s diatribe? I would be tolerated until I deviated, then I would be censured and silenced. There’s no need to tolerate some off based fool, and if I have a point, the veracity will put itself from repeated collisions with reality.

                  Some dumb faggot doesn’t like steak and cigarettes, and he’s able to weaponize this idiocy to maximize bandwidth jamming. That’s a hell of an exploit. I’m not saying monotheism is perfect, but I am saying monotheism will beat polytheism every time enough of the time. Dharmabros, show me where I’m wrong.

                • Sher Singh says:


                • Jatt Arya says:


                • jim says:

                  Changing the topic while purporting to reply.

                • someDude says:

                  @ Kunning, in General, you are right that Monotheism has the edge over polytheism. Historical record backs you up. There are counter examples though, Early-Tokugawa period being one, where Polytheistic Japan acted to eliminate Christianity from Japan via an inquisition, events that are alluded to in the Hollywood movie, Silence. But one swallow does not a summer make as they say.

                  Among the Dharmic faiths, Buddhism practically acts like a monotheism as does Sikhism. So they have been more effective in recent times against Christian proselytization than Hinduism has. Buddhist South Korea is an important counter example, but it may not count, being directly under Harvard domination. Christian proselytization in India should be compared with the same in Sri Lanka, Burma, Thailand and Vietnam. We draw the conclusion that Buddhists are indeed doing better than Hindus here.

                  There is some indications that some in the Hindu clergy got this. Hence

                  1. The emphasis on the One Brahman who is the source or all.

                  2. The Virtual disappearance of temples devoted to the worship of Brahma and the other deities like Indra/Varuna/Agni. Temples to Shiva and Vishnu overwhelmingly dominate the landscape.

                  3. Their emphasis that Vishnu and Shiva are really the same and worship of one is worship of the other. That Rama and Krishna are incarnations of Vishnu.

                  I see these (and others) as attempts to consolidate Hinduism into some sort of monotheism so as to consolidate Hindus. Hard to say how this will pan out eventually.

                • The Cominator says:

                  the Japanese Christians were controlled by the demonic Jesuits so it was totally justified.

                • someDude says:


                  Perhaps you can’t pass of Rajput/Maratha factions inviting EIC into their mutual quarrels as a strike against Hinduism. No less a person than Machiavelli cautions that the sovereign must never allow a foreign institution to set up base in one’s own country for fear that factions within that country might start inviting the foreigner into their mutual quarrels. Wasn’t Europe Christian when Machiavelli wrote his treatise? Isn’t that what’s happening out west with immigration? Progressives inviting foreigners to shit on Kin.

                  Had the Indians set up shop in Britain in the 1600s, pretty sure they would have been invited by the slightly weaker faction to help settle the English civil wars of that century regardless of Christianity in Britain.

                  If you say that the flaw in Hinduism manifests in the fact that the Hindus did not even ask the British for a quid-pro-quo by setting up shop/trading stations in Britain, you may have a point worth considering. But looks like Modi gets that. In return for Indian market access to British Goods, he asked for access to the British labor market for Indian labor.

                • i says:


                  In General, you are right that Monotheism has the edge over polytheism. Historical record backs you up. There are counter examples though, Early-Tokugawa period being one, where Polytheistic Japan acted to eliminate Christianity from Japan via an inquisition, events that are alluded to in the Hollywood movie, Silence.

                  Indeed. There is also the fact that Jesus Christ is a real living being active after his ascension. As the Right Hand of God the Father he is still involved in building his Kingdom on this Earth.

                  The much more vulnerable Early Church in the Roman Empire had plenty of Miracles and overt Supernatural support. Before reaching critical mass.

                  And God doesn’t choose to preserve skinsuit wearers. They are allowed to be eliminated. Like diseased parts cut off to preserve the health of the body.

                  Nonetheless. Japan was forced to reckon with Christian Europe. And the hidden Christians reemerged once religious freedom came about from this reckoning with Europe by immediately joining the Catholic Church and other orthodox Churches in existence.

                  Especially when Matthew Perry came with his Gunboats.

                  Only a few hardliners remain but since they weren’t in the orthodox faith died out.

            • Sher Singh says:

              Bull sacrifice allowed in Vedas, stopped by Sri Krishna Ji.
              Hindu fall dates to Nanda Raj who made Brahmins cut hair.

              Hindus kept unshorn hair till Jahangir Time even & a Katar too.
              Sikhs & Gurkhas eat Buffalo so this is semantics. Fk Cow slaughter,


              • Sher Singh says:


                • jim says:

                  Just not going to allow you to post anything that looks vaguely related to attacking the peace of Westphalia on my blog.

                  Now that you have revealed what you are about, which is destructive and self destructive, not going to allow it to waste space on my blog.

                  Alliance between Old Type Hindus and Old Type Christians would be very handy in overthrowing the Global American Empire. You are here to attack that by stirring up trouble between Christians and Hindus, who are both being crushed by the super holy faith of Harvard imposed by Global American Empire.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  [*declaration of holy war on everyone including some great powers censored*]

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  He has got a bad case of, “me big dum,” but is he really stirring up that much trouble? He is being such an ass in comparison to SomeDude or Aryaman that he does his argument no favors.

                • jim says:

                  I want alliance between Old Type Hindus and Old Type Christians, against the common threat to us all.

                  But it is mighty easy for evildoers to create trouble between men of goodwill, but very different faiths. So, censorship.

                  Everyone of all faiths needs to adopt the Christian principle of “Peace on Earth between all men of Goodwill”, because otherwise, nukes.

              • jim says:

                Krishna is demonic Davidian entryism into Hinduism. Everything inserted by Krishna is demonic and weakened you.

                His speech to Arjuna is not an explanation that “this is war, because of the evil deeds done by your enemies, and in war you must do bad things”, but the universal all purpose rationale for doing bad things.

                Henry the fifth’s speech telling his men it is time to do bad things is Christian. Krishna’s speech to Arjuna is demonic.

                Henry the fifth’s speech presupposes the state of war, and says that in war different rules apply. Krishna’s speech is about the decision to go to war, and tells Arjuna that the decision to go to war does not matter, for nothing matters.

                And as a result, when the British were in India, one Rajput would go to war with his brother, and one brother or the other would invite the British in, and when the dust settled, the British had the palace and both brothers were sitting bare assed in the dust.

                Hence the Christian admonition “Peach on Earth to all men of good will”. Had Krishna at least mentioned bad will on the part of Arjuna’s opponents, that would not have been demonic. But instead he tells Arjuna that killing your brother does not matter.

                By stirring up trouble between old type Christians and Old Type Hindus, Ser Singh is self destructively displaying bad will.

                • Sher Singh says:


                • jim says:

                  It is a wee bit early to declare holy war on Christianity, and even if you were in power, would be unwise, and if we were in power, suicidally unwise.

                  Christians of any kind are not going to submit to a Khalsa full of foolishness, and Old Type Christians are definitely not going to submit to a Khalsa containing demonic stupid $#!%.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  “We bombed a few of their ships, and they dropped the sun on us! Twice!” –Japan, 1946

              • Aidan says:

                Krishna huh? Color me surprised. You are furious about beef because getting mad about more substantial violations of your religion would get you killed.

              • Neofugue says:

                You will never be a real Aryan

                • Kunning Drueger says:

                  Top kek, no survivors

                • The Cominator says:


                • Jatt Arya says:


                • jim says:

                  I am almost pure Aryan. You are a mongrel. I know this because the original Aryans left their genes all the place, making it obvious what the original Aryan genotype was.

                • Jatt Arya says:

                  > I am almost pure Aryan. You are a mongrel. I know this because the original Aryans left their genes all the place, making it obvious what the original Aryan genotype was.

                  1. You’re a Christian, automatically a Dalit.
                  2. Lol, it’s not White people.

                  It’s well established that rape of White Women made Aryans in Europe White. It seems the women there still have a fetish for it,


                • jim says:

                  I am have not only the Aryan Y chromosome, which descends unmixed in the male line, which you probably have, but the Aryan X chromosome, which descends unmixed in the female line, which very few Indians have, and you are extremely unlikely to have. I am descended from Aryans in both the male and female line, and all populations that have a substantial amount of the Aryan X chromosome look very like me.

                  The genetic evidence shows us what population groups are pure blooded. They look very much what the Nazis thought they looked like.

                  You are descended from Aryans via conquest and rape of conquered population, in your case the short and dark skinned population that they conquered when they reached India. I am descended from Aryan marriage and I look very like people all over the world who descended from Aryans by marriage of Aryans to Aryans. Aryan nobility tended to marry other Aryan nobility, and nobility was inherited by marriage, while the numerous offspring of numerous concubines became culturally Aryan, but commoners.

                  Almost no one in India is descended from Aryans in the female line. The culturally Aryan tribes had picked up a whole lot of X chromosomes from conquered populations before they even reached India, as had many of culturally Aryan peoples that overran Bronze Age civilizations. You were conquered by impure Aryans, who rapidly became a whole lot less pure, and picked up some demon worship from their subjects.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  White women like rape because White men like rape and we are very, very good at it. Meanwhile, you sad, thirsty dumbasses are posting, “plz show bobs and vagne.” Which sounds more like the wandering conqueror and which sounds like the conquered natives? Just something to ponder.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Also, since we Christians are Dalits, how does it feel to know that your civilization got accidentally conquered by a bunch of Dalits as a side effect of trying to cook better food?

                • Sher Singh says:

                  The average height for Yamnayan men was 175.5cm (5 ft 9 in), approximately the same as the modern average for American and French men, and slightly taller than the average Mesolithic EHG men, who stood at 173.2 cm.

                  Yamnayan DNA tested by Haak (2015), Wilde (2014), Mathieson (2015) showed that Yamna people (or at least the few elite samples concerned) had predominantly brown eyes, dark hair, and had a skin colour that was moderately light, lighter than Mesolithic Europeans, but somewhat darker than that of the modern North Europeans





                  Yet, you’re not nobility you’re a christian.


                • jim says:

                  This data is consistent with “consequently have looked more like modern Scottish and Irish people”. Who, incidentally, have a high proportion of Aryan X chromosomes, indicating descent in the male and female line from the original Aryans.

                  According to “North Europeans (Scots, Scandinavians, Baltics) possessed the highest percentage of Yamna-like ancestry.”

                • Sher Singh says:

                  [*empty bombast of world conquest deleted*]

                • Sher Singh says:

                  > This data is consistent with “consequently have looked more like modern Scottish and Irish people”. Who, incidentally, have a high proportion of Aryan X chromosomes, indicating descent in the male and female line from the original Aryans.

                  Makes sense, they wouldn’t have been as pale I think.
                  We’re patrilineal though, and nobility is by the Sword.

                  I don’t really have a problem with my ‘black’ blood. In fact, I’m kind of proud of it.


                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Ser Singh TL;DR is, “Look at me. I’m the Aryan now.”

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  You could photoshop a turban on the Somali pirate guy from the meme and it would be a near-perfect representation of him. Up to and including the part where he gets splattered across the wall when he comes across White warriors that actually know what they are doing.

                  Just so we are clear, guy, you have no conquered shit but each other in a looong fucking time. Your greatest claim to fame is that you got conquered by some of my ancestors and picked up a few of their habits. You got beat by the Aryans, the Muslims, the Christians, and I am sure if the Bhuddists had tried their hand, then they would have gotten you, too. Before you start talking mad shit about conquering the world, maybe you could try and win a war at home, first. Physician, heal thyself.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  [*faggotry deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  You don’t sound very religious to me.

                • i says:


                  It seems the Aryans in India never thought or were able to keep in contact with the Aryan homeland in order to import Aryan brides from there.

                  But their primary mistake wasn’t a powerful enough religion that could resist syncretism with demonism, fatalism and occultism.

                  The ban on “Magick” is very important. There are good reasons why Sorcerers were put to death. Because of the contact with demons like Pharoah’s sorcerers.

                  Christianity does that over time to other demonic faiths. As the Greeks burnt their Magic scrolls after conversion.

                  And of course the work of exorcism by Men like Malachi Martin:
                  Exorcist Malachi Martin “Hostage to the Devil”

                  There is even an Exorcism Manual at the end of the Book.

                  And itself must fight heresies as a result of demonic infiltration.

                • jim says:

                  > It seems the Aryans in India never thought or were able to keep in contact with the Aryan homeland in order to import Aryan brides from there.

                  We have an ancient artwork from Western China depicting a marriage with Nordics from the west, Indians from the south, and local Aryans in attendance. So there was some very long distance marriage between aristocratic families, but because it is a mighty long journey, one may plausibly conjecture that only the top aristocrats did this, and not often enough to counter the gene flow from underneath, nor the divergence of faith, language, and culture.

                • jim says:

                  The magic scrolls contained formulas that could supposedly compel the deity. This is indicative of demonic deities.

                  Tales of traffic with demons depict the demon delivering what was promised – but the price turns out to be considerably higher than expected.

                  Jewish legalism treats God as a demon. They perceived Roman domination as the divinely threatened punishment for failure to obey the commandments, and responded by getting too clever by half at thoroughly following the letter of the commands while evading the spirit. God was not amused.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  @Ser Singh

                  Gotcha, bitch! I have you now. Took me a bit, but I got it in the end. You are no warrior, and a real warrior would be disgusted that you were put in the same class as him. I am disgusted that you consider yourself a warrior–as if we have something in common. We are not alike, despite your pretense of bearing arms.

                  The priests of your people that have participated here have largely comported themselves with priestly dignity. You, on the other hand, are a dog barking from safely inside your fence. All bark, no bite. If you had but a fraction of the bark in your bite, India would not have spent centuries under the thumb of foreign rulers and conquerors. You are a failure of a warrior, and you do not even have the integrity to be ashamed of it. I hope your ancestors find it in themselves to forgive you.

                • Sher Singh says:


                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  It is not just faggotry, Ser Singh is a tranny. Specifically, he identifies as a transwarrior. He is not a warrior, and has none of the essential characteristics of one, but he identifies as a warrior. He wants us all to treat him like a warrior while he imitates his depraved mental idea of what it means to be a warrior. If we do not share in his delusion, he lashes out.

                  You will never be a real warrior. You are a weak man twisted 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 weak, pathetic 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 transwarriors who “pass” look uncanny and unnatural to a man. Your lack of confidence is a dead giveaway. Even if you do manage to hang out with some drunk warriors, they will turn tail and bolt the moment they sense your pathetic, weak spirit.
                  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 without your fake rank, and every passerby for the rest of eternity will know than no warrior 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 weak.
                  This is your fate. This is what you chose. There is no turning back.

                • Sher Singh says:


                • ten says:

                  i mean, like, whoah. yikes.

                  this is some top shelf bullying. fucking vintage. you love to see it.

                  this has been fun and somewhat informative, but lets not let this absolute disgrace of a village fool put on his show forever and ever and ever. waste of reader bandwidth etc.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  No need. I am done, my mission accomplished. He can play the village idiot as much as he likes, but we all know he is no warrior, and we also know that he knows it, too. He can cope and seeth and Jim will just delete his posts and he will just have to seethe and cope about that, too.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  ‘Transwarrior’ – I’m not an individual, just following the
                  Sorry that whites are so worthless they lose ancestral cults.

                  It’s really not our problem given your behavior.
                  You’re another Gen X’r seething that you got replaced. ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂਜੀਕਾਖਾਲਸਾਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂਜੀਕੀਫਤਿਹ

            • jim says:

              Saint Jerome is not too bad at all, the trouble was that a holiness spiral built on his writings.

              If interpreted as arguing that widows and neglected wives should grin and bear it, he is OK. If we could ditch the holiness spiral, we could keep Saint Jerome – with appropriate caution and framing.

              • Aidan says:

                Looking at the roster of saints and their diversity of opinion, clear that a man can be in theological error but still attain God’s grace. We do not have to condemn Jerome to hell to acknowledge he was in error on celibacy and put his teachings next to the sump in the basement.

                • i says:

                  Cannot quite trust Augustine or Jerome on the topic of sexuality.

                  Their views are quite deranged and unbiblical.

    • FieryBalrog says:

      I just want to add to this conversation that Westerns have a huge blind spot when it comes to their own treatment of animals and how it is of a peace with how Western elites now treat their populations and indeed the rest of the world.

      Factory farming is demonic, and pure evil. It is a Western and more so an American creation and hardly anyone in the West outside of a fringe cares. It’s certainly something that people who correctly identify the Satanic nature of the modern West should care about and not cover their eyes to.

      “See no evil” mindset we see with our new friends the transgender psychosis is simply an extension of a broader, older insanity.

      When everything is just a mechanical problem to by engineered and optimized, just ad Carlyle railed against, and when all humility and wisdom is jettisoned, and when men play at God, you eventually get finance capitalism, factory farming, WWI trench warfare and the CIA torture program. You end up with optimized, omnipresent wickedness.

      Humility about this means recognizing the spiritual degradation that comes from our relation to our animals, too. And that while humans are born hunters, and no one should deny that, it’s the way you hunt that really matters. One respects the early whalers and the fair contest between man and earth. One is repulsed by what happened afterwards.

      • jim says:

        Living as far from power as I can get without treading water, I have quite a few acquaintances who are farmers. They treat their animals fine. This rhetoric is used to attack family farms and bring them under centralized control, to impose big centralized factory farming in preparation for making us eat bugs. Enemy rhetoric.

        I have often remarked that if cockroaches only afflicted rural kitchens, they would be declared a rare and endangered species. This rhetoric is urbanites making up stories about the kulaks preparatory to exterminating them.

        Quite a few of my runins with authority have been about “rare and endangered species”, which are usually declared rare and endangered because their huge and swelling numbers are causing major problems and caused me major problems. But my acquaintances seem to get runins justified by factory farming rhetoric, which is used to suppress them precisely because their farms are nothing remotely like factory farming.

        Your rhetoric is urbanites complaining about kulaks.

        • FieryBalrog says:

          Apologies if I wasn’t clear in my target. Certainly not the family farm, even the large and productive family farm which, no matter what technology they end up using, are given to tradition at heart and are simply buffeted, like the rest of us, by forces beyond them- the Monsantos, the Dow Chemicals, the agricultural and environmental bureaucracy; and other such arms of Leviathan. Kulaks are never the source of evil practices even if they get targeted by pro-Gaia for things that *other priests* are wholly responsible for. Kulaks are just the dog that gets kicked by the Gaia priests because that’s a sport our entire priesthood finds sadistic joy in.

          None of the rhetoric of the Gaia priests is sincere. I think we all agree with that. Some, or many of them, may genuinely *feel* righteous when indulging in the rhetoric. They will scream about scapegoats while they close their eyes, ears and mouth to Satan’s work around them. Long bereft of real religion and real spiritual guidance, even the sincere among them attach to false ideals and simulated emotion. I am not trying to echo the Gaia priests.

          I meant to highlight the nature of American agribusiness and academia as a highly visible symbol of what America is. The industrial behemoths, and their daddies, the American University system, and the techniques and procedures they pushed out and spread the world over. The Cathedral scientists who bred the modern broiler chicken, designed the quarters they are raised in, and the beak trimming that goes with it; the systems by which cows came to be fed corn (unnatural and purely to optimize cow marbling and weight for given feed cost) and antibiotics (to “deal” with the side effects of that) in tandem.

          Detailed examination of American optimization, scientific research, and “government by charts” reveals layer upon layer of insanity. What other regime but one with this long history could have created Covid-19 out of a program that – everyone involved pretended – was a vital effort to tame and *solve* pandemics?

          Again, these servants of our American Leviathan invented *beak trimming* (Ohio state university), just about the same time FDR’s progressive Science Priests were unleashed on the American state and its people. In every way, they treated animals like objects to be vivisected, manipulated, abused and exploited at will. Long past feeding the population was achieved, the techniques continued and expanded, now for such noble girls as stoking the fires of human gluttony, lust, and other excessive appetites. Should it surprise us to learn the extent to which the American Church of Science has, these past many decades, psychologically abused and experimented on their own flock; rendered them obese, drugged, and sexually unhealthy; stripped them of family and children; poisoned the women against men, and the men against women; and now looks to have them physically mutilated and degraded?

          All around us are signs of optimization gone mad, divorced from human love and virtue. This was only possible by each year moving further from the worship of God, until we were burying any sign of Him and filling ourselves with contempt for Him. Telling themselves they were building the cornucopia, that ocean of “cargo” that is their vision of heaven on earth.

          • Red says:

            These shills have become boring.

            • FieryBalrog says:

              I’m no shill, I’ll pass any shill test you like save a loyalty oath to Christ as I am not a Christian but a Hindu, even if I was never immersed in my own faith as I was raised.

              If you want me to describe the feral nature of America’s niggers, the need for a pubescent woman to be under the locked ownership of her father, husband, or male kin guardian in their absence, I’ll be happy to elaborate.

              What America has done to its animal flock is hardly less despicable than what it has done to its human flock. Yes, it’s hard to keep looking at all the demons entered our world and harder still to acknowledge that one’s own ancestors helped open that gate to hell. But in truth it may be good for Westerners to examine their pride as the world-conquerors, because that conquest is father and mother to what the conquerors have long ago become.

              • Red says:

                All you know about American farming comes from the lying American media and leftist shitheads. Trusting them indicates that you’re either an idiot or a shill. Which is it?

                The first step in learning reality is to stop trusting those who make a living and a religion out of deceiving you. The next step is to only believe things that you’ve personally experienced or those you trust trust as honest have personally experienced.

                • FieryBalrog says:


                • jim says:

                  Most animals are not raised by giant multinational corporations. They are raised by farmers, and I know how they treat their animals.

              • Neofugue says:

                As someone with a decent amount of wealth, I have the option to buy American Wagyu at my local butcher for $120/lb ($267/kg), filet mignon for $55/lb, prime ribeye for $35/lb, grass-fed New York strip for $30/lb, or ground beef for $12/lb. In addition, I can purchase meat at the Whole Foods at slightly less expensive prices, though the chain has declined slightly since Bezos acquisitioned it. Cafo meat is never sold at any place I purchase food.

                The average person in the United States does not have the luxury of eating like me; however, as someone who does not hate the proles, I do not wish to deny them meat out of a misplaced sense of moral superiority.

          • The Cominator says:

            I’m sympathetic to the anti factory farming of animals idea myself but I agree with gym it’shuge agribusiness which tend to do this.

          • Neofugue says:

            In this instance, the urbanite devil masks his hatred of normal people in the guise of “caring for animals” and “caring for public health.”

            Industrial meat production in the developed world is as clean and humane as it has ever been, especially compared to Halal ritual slaughter, which is absent from your critique. “Factory farming” is the agricultural equivalent of “sweatshop,” where a modern plant that kills livestock with carbon dioxide is “factory farming” while Halal ritual slaughter is not, the implicit lie being that capitalism and entrepreneurs make people worse off, and that the way for individuals peoples and nations to enjoy prosperity and development is to implement socialism and eat ze bugs.

            Also it should be noted that no one is impressed by your midwit wall of text, though the effort to appear as one of us is duly noted.

            • Red says:

              The primary problem we have modern agriculture is we still haven’t cracked how to supply all nutrition necessary to the things we grow on an industrial scale.

            • FieryBalrog says:

              I’m not one of you. Your tribe opened the gate to hell that is modernity.

              Cling to your pride if you will as you plunge the world into hell. (wasn’t that the 20th century?)

              Your humane megacorps invented beak trimming for the humane benefit of the chickens, I’m sure. Wicked, wicked race.

              • FieryBalrog says:


                • jim says:

                  I am an urbanite who fled the cities. I have eaten animals that I have known and then killed. You urbanites have no idea.

              • someDude says:


                I find it fascinating that you pretty much ignored NeoFugue’s comment on the Halal slaughter of Animals.

                If you’re Hindu, you should have no problems applying your standards to Halal Slaughter. Let’s see what you have to say about that.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  I know what he will say.

                  “Durka-durka, mohammed jihad durka lurpa!”

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:


                • FieryBalrog says:

                  I posted a comment denouncing Halal slaughter of animals. I think it got blocked or didn’t get approved.

                  Bleeding an animal slowly to death is despicable.
                  Mohammad is neither a prophet nor a role model.

                  Does not excuse the mass scale psychological abuse of animals and humans conducted by America.

                • jim says:

                  Nothing wrong with Halal slaughter. If you do a good cut on animal’s throat, it passes out pretty quickly, about twenty seconds.

                  The real objection to Halal slaughter is that it is not done according to the rituals set by the Harvard priesthood, but by some other priesthood.

                • someDude says:

                  If a shill, not the kind that can’t criticize Islam or Muhammad. Though to come to a reactionary blog and denounce the treatment of animals by Food corporations does sound strange. If a shill, I guess time will tell what can’t be mentioned.

                  Yet, By and large, I can’t help noticing that those most vocal about kindness to animals tend to behave rather badly towards those of their own species, their rhetoric of kindness to animals being not much more than a mask for their hatred of their fellows.

                • Kunning Drueger says:

                  They’re “kind to animals” because they experience cats and dogs and goldfish, and the rest of their contact with animals is through a page or screen. They think every animal is a pet or a victim.

                  Another disconnect from reality displayed by this Tolkienym is the idea that high intensity production farms are somehow different from family farms. This is a hilarious talking point that urban and suburban midwits use often, and it shows they have no contact with agriculture. “Factory farms” can be owned and operated by a single family that hires on labor seasonally. It’s not like Purdue doesn’t get chickens from family owned farms. There’s no bright line between a farm owned by a corporation and a farm whose biggest customers are corporations. I am in no way advocating for all of the agro practices in place, but it’s just ignorant to believe that a 10,000 acre family owned farm with automation and a single client is somehow better than a 10 acre farm operated by ag students that smoke pot and believe dumb things. There’s a ton of nuance and unavoidable realities due to market forces, state of the art, and externalities.

                • Neurotoxin says:

                  “They think every animal is a pet or a victim.”

                  Just like their attitude toward non-whites.

                • Neofugue says:

                  > Nothing wrong with Halal slaughter. If you do a good cut on animal’s throat, it passes out pretty quickly, about twenty seconds.

                  Orthodox Christians are not allowed to eat Halal food unless there are no other options or they are receiving food from Mohammedans. Kosher is fine since it only involves a blessing but Halal is not given the ritual involved.

                  Animals are animals, thus you can kill them however you wish, though in my opinion modern “factory farming” is sufficient. The fake Aryans attack meat production stemming from their doctrine of reincarnation, because if you believe that humans are reincarnated into animals, and that “good” humans become cattle, then killing cattle is tantamount to killing people like yourself.

                • jim says:

                  Paul says it is OK to eat food sacrificed to idols provided it is done in a non worshipful manner, and one is not perceived as doing it a worshipful manner. Presumably the same applies to Halal.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  @Neurotoxin “Just like their attitude toward non-whites.”

                  >implying there is a difference.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  [*focus on issues likely to divide opponents of the Global American Empire deleted*]

                • FrankNorman says:

                  Let me suggest another take on it:
                  A Hindu is opposed to meat-eating on the basis of his religion. But he knows that argument won’t fly with Westerners, so he has to find some other argument.
                  People who are pushing vegetarianism are not always Globohomos who want to make people eat bugs. Sometimes they are just virtue-signalling their supposed moral superiority as plant-eaters.
                  So they will argue that farming animals in order to kill and eat them is cruel (the argument seen here) or that meat-eating is unhealthy (it isn’t) or that it has too big an ecological footprint and should stop for the sake of The Environment, or that it’s simply not faaair for rich white people to eat burgers while poor brown people have to live on rice or maize, or that.. etc etc.
                  The thing to understand is that the opposition to meat comes first, the arguments offered for the position come second – they are not the real reason!

  24. Kunning Drueger says:

    Neofugue says “Creationism should not come into conflict with Darwinian evolution, because if you believe that the world is ~7000 years old you should be able to abrogate when causality begins. Miracles themselves are an abrogation of the laws of nature, so it is not as if Christianity can use science to prove itself. It is thus possible for Christianity to have its cake and eat it too, so long as science and theology are kept in separate domains.”

    Can he, or anyone, elaborate on this? I don’t understand, and I have never met an explicit Christian who has stated this position or anything similar, particularly keeping Science and Theology separate.

    • Albert says:

      “Miracles themselves are an abrogation of the laws of nature …”.

      Not necessarily. Most miracles in the Old Testament can be viewed as highly improbable coincidences. A meteor just happened to explode over Sodom as Lot was leaving. A landslide blocked the Jordan River just as the Israelites were ready to cross. An earthquake destroyed the walls of Jericho just as the Israelites were marching around it. ‘On the Reliability of the Old Testament’ by Kenneth Kitchen offers naturalistic explanations for the plagues of Egypt.

      The New Testament miracles are a little harder to explain. ‘The Physics of Christianity’ by Frank J. Tipler tries. Control of quantum effects and neutron flows could explain healing, walking on water, and more.

      The idea is that miracles don’t violate the laws of nature, they just use effects well beyond our capabilities.

    • jim says:

      I do not keep theology and science separate. Evolutionary psychology endorses the spiritual meaning of the Book of Genesis, and Genesis spiritually endorses Evolutionary Psychology. Material and effective causation is God creating the world through Christ and continuing its existence.

      The moral and social implications of material and effective causation is the will of Gnon manifest in the material world.

      The separation of “is” and “ought” is a gnostic heresy. Anglicanism from 1663 to 1820 vigorously and effectively rejected this heresy.

  25. Kunning Drueger says:

    I’m starting to think the Nord02 thing was very likely the US, maybe GAE. This flies in the face of my, and others, previously stated position that the DoD/Pentagon/Brass whwre in opposition to the Wat Faction at State Department. Did they relent, did they cross over, are they being ignored?

    This is a really big deal. If the war faction is now commanding the Navy or SOF, then we need to seriously consider that the GAE might be about to do some very dumb and dangerous things.

    On that note, multiple countries, as well as the US, have warned their citizens to leave Russia, per Russian Telegram…

    • The Cominator says:

      “This is a really big deal. If the war faction is now commanding the Navy or SOF, then we need to seriously consider that the GAE might be about to do some very dumb and dangerous things.”

      Specops command goes right to the White House not so much thru the Pentagon…

      The Navy traditonally is more under bluegov than redgov as well.

    • Neurotoxin says:

      Also, the anti-war faction can’t be everywhere all the time. If orders go from the White House directly to some Spec Ops unit or whatever to blow up a pipeline, it’s not as if General Idontwanttostartanuclearwar in the Pentagon need even be told about it. The anti-war folks in the military might have heard about this the same way we did, by having it pop up in their news feed after the fact.

    • Red says:

      What we’re seeing is the people warning about the dangers of escalation being silenced by Putin’s repeated failures to strike back. The insane continue to push insane escalations safe in the opinion that Putin’s too much of a pussy to really fight back. The people slowing down this process or blocking seem like fools as their predictions of retaliation don’t happen, so they’ve started to shut up or stand down.

      The GAE shows every sign that they’re getting ready to formally accuse Russia of the pipeline bombing and they may even invoke NATO article 23 and declare war on Russia.

      • S says:

        The Russians enacted partial mobilization and openly state they will use nuclear weapons to defend Russia. I’m not sure what more escalation you want.

        Also, the idea of claiming an attack on a Russian owned pipeline is an attack on NATO is hilarious to me. I’m not claiming they wouldn’t do it, but it is the absurdity that makes clownworld clownworld.

        • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

          NATO attacks Russian pipeline to NATO country, accuses Russia of attacking NATO, goes to war with Russia for attacking NATO in an attack that everyone knows was committed by NATO against NATO, but will not admit it. Future history students are going to read about this debacle and just wonder what the fuck was happening.

          • Kunning Drueger says:

            This post made me wonder how much nuance can be conveyed through cave painting and oral tradition, which then reminded me of how cinema translated the existential terror of the late Cold War. Some really well done films in that era.

        • Neurotoxin says:

          “The Russians enacted partial mobilization and openly state they will use nuclear weapons to defend Russia. I’m not sure what more escalation you want.”

          Apparently not enough people in the US government believe the Russians mean it. Or they think that it will be a nuclear war which will only kill European-descended populations whom they want to genocide anyway.

          • num lock says:


            • jim says:

              Your factual claims and evidence seem highly improbable. Hard to believe. How do you know these things to be true? Sources please. How do these sources know these things to be true?

          • Karl says:

            Sure Russians mean it, but they mean tactical nukes in Ukraine. Nato understands that and doesn’t mind escalation on that battlefield.

            • Neurotoxin says:

              Putin knows whom he has to destroy, or intimidate into backing down, in order to defend Russia. And the GAE knows he knows it. They are betting that he’ll pussy out or that a war in which nuclear weapons are used won’t get out of control.

              (The sane position is that if nukes are used, things have already gotten considerably out of control.)

              Most of the people who are provoking Russia live in or near Washington DC, a.k.a. Target Number One in a “things get atomic” scenario. Imagine being so insane that you bet your life that a war won’t get out of control. “A war getting out of control? What a strange idea! That’s never happened before.”

  26. Severian says:

    Someone blew up the Nord Stream pipeline big time.

    There is no doubt this was intentional.

    • Cloudswrest says:

      According to VoxDay it was an *U*nidentified *S*tate *A*ctor.

    • Kunning Druegger says:

      Here’s the list of state level actors with the capacity:

      Top 10 Countries with the Largest Military Submarine Fleets (Global Firepower 2021):
      China – 79
      United States – 68
      Russia – 64
      North Korea – 36
      Iran – 29
      South Korea – 22
      Japan – 20
      India – 17
      Turkey – 12
      Colombia, Greece, United Kingdom (tie) – 11

      Taken from:

      Not included on that list are the countries listed here:

      The question is, who benefits most from NordStream being unable to return to operation for the foreseeable future?

      • Aidan says:

        Anybody who wants continued NATO support for UKR; any NATO member could have taken it on themselves to close the door of potential capitulation to Russia. Not necessarily a submarine either, a drone-dropped torpedo or kamikaze unmanned underwater vehicle could have done the job. The Baltic Sea is quite shallow.

        • Kunning Druegger says:

          I was explaining this to Lady Druegger, and everything I “know” comes from this book [1]: doing anything on the seabed is very challenging, even in “shallow” seas. The capacity to do construction undersea is roughly similar to doing construction in space, or on the top of a mountain, in that you must get to the location, you must have people who can work at the location, and you must have tools that work at the location. Here’s a great mini-doc [2] on the raising of the Kursk. Well worth the half hour as it is just a fascinating little operation, but it also demonstrates a consistent element of all undersea work: there is no consistency. Each operation, whether it is connecting pipelines, placing foundations for pylons, or bending data cables so that the signal “spills out” and can be “harvested” for surveillance, must be incepted, planned, provisioned, and completed.

          Russki Telegram has already pointed out that a US/NATO sea squadron was “in theater” so there would be ample cover for a submersible SOF, but it is kind of sloppy operational planning to do it that way. It is possible that charges were planted a while back, and they were activated remotely, but why would they do it with a GAE squadron in theater, that would just add unnecessary circumstantial evidence. I think details of this might leak out later, but it could also be the case that whoever did it fully expects their tracks to be covered by some bigger event, you know, like, World War Next or something.

          Hard to know, but “qui bono” is almost always the correct approach. I don’t see how Russia benefits from forcing Germany and many other European countries firmly into the Adversary column. Maybe China wants Russia to commit, and is removing any potential offramps? Maybe Qatar shelled out to get some wildcat undersea contractor to do it, just to continue the general destabilization and collapse of the Occidental Empires? When I first heard about it, I thought it was too challenging for the GAE, both because of a decline in capacity as well as the (more likely IMO) fact that the skills and assets required are under the “WW03 no thank you” faction at DoD. But the clips of both Biden and Nuland emphasizing that “If Russia invades Ruthenia, Nord02 will not happen” definitely lend credence to GAE war faction meddling.


          • Yul Bornhold says:

            Russia 100% did not bomb their own pipeline. If they wanted to stop the oil, they could just flip a lever.

            NPC: “Ah, but this way Russia could turn off the oil while avoiding European resentment for tumbling them into darkness.”

            For this to be true, the Russian elite who (hypothetically) ordered the bombing of their own pipeline would have to be dumb enough not to realize the GAE would blame Russia regardless. The Russian elite is not that dumb.

          • Dr. Faust says:

            No one but Ukraine and GAE have anything to gain from this so they did it. Russia did not blow up their own pipeline as a false flag. False flags are used to start wars or escalate them. My money would be put on Ukraine soldiers, riding US ships, backed by CIA directors.

            Is winter more or less of a deterrent than in past wars? It seems like any day this could escalate into open war. I’m surprised it hasn’t already. I think Russian nukes are the only thing stopping it.

            • The Cominator says:

              The US did it, though for “legal” purposes they probably had a Ukranian or Polack on hand to press the detonator.

      • simplyconnected says:

        Rumor on chans is US-UK special operations did it so when Germans freeze in the winter, their government won’t reach a deal with Russia for more gas, which would bring Germany and Russia closer.

        • The Cominator says:

          Almost 100% a Navy Seal mission…

          Wish one of them would go public.

        • Red says:

          It’s also an inducement for Germany to invade Russia if they want the gas turned back on.

      • Starman says:

        @Kunning Druegger

        “Top 10 Countries with the Largest Military Submarine Fleets (Global Firepower 2021):
        China – 79
        United States – 68
        Russia – 64”

        Keep in mind that all US submarines have nuclear propulsion. That is not the case for the Chinese and Russian submarines.

      • Red says:

        It’s really bizarre that you’d consider anyone besides the GAE as the source of the attack. They have the most to gain from it, blowing up pipelines is quite easy with divers and they’re barley hiding that they did it.

        The reason this sort of stuff is so unprecedented because it’s very easy to destroy underwater transport objects but once you start doing so a game of tit for tat quickly degrades everyone’s infrastructure.

        Russia could responded by cutting the transatlantic fiber cables in multiple places really screwing up the west, but I think they’re going to continue grinding down NATO in the Ukraine instead of responding.

        • The Cominator says:

          I imagine that to take the heat off Biden (as this is going to make some people outside of their usual whipping boys of American tax slaves in the US and Russians VERY angry) some Ukranian group that theoretically is a non state actor will take responsibility…

          • Red says:

            Their official line coming from the shills is that Russia did it. That’s more point deer say horse stuff and they’ll stick with it.

    • ten says:

      American navy currently at the local swedish submarine harbour, straight line from the attack site. We do have the best stealth submarines around. Probably not necessary to employ them, unless russia has detection capabilities for lesser vessels. Idk.

  27. JustAnotherGuy says:

    personal blackpill thought of the day for me:

    So Jim once mentioned here that everything has been getting considerably worse except for computers, but I want to touch on that considering the news we heard of the new AMD chip line up:

    Some of you might already know this, but the new AMD chip’s are very powerful, very heat intensive, and take up a lot of power consumption. It seems a lot of the new computer tech is taking up immense power, which is moving people to get bigger PSU’s to fully utilize their machine’s capabilities. But I feel this is the end of the progress for computers because the infastructure to support the power demands is no longer there and is getting actively destroyed.

    Cathedral’s goal is of course a world population of 500 million, and they have been hard at work destroying critical energy infastructure to facilitate this. This means the need power to run the new computer tech will only really be available to the high class personnal like the military, while the civilian sector gets absolutely rekt on this front. This is probably why military tech is the last thing to degrade, as they have top priority for infastructure needs, they are the last to see the decay that continuously piles up around them.

    I can afford the ddr5 ram, new mobos, and new chips, but I’m going to be sticking with my current stuff since it runs everything just fine still.

    • jim says:

      Coolers have been getting more and more enormous, and have ceased to be practical. The cooler for the machine I am now building is absurd, and I am not going to any bigger with air coolers. On the other hand, a separate water radiator is practical if we keep on going along this path – have a long pipe that dumps the heat outdoors in warm weather, and a short pipe that dumps the heat indoors in cool weather. Talking very big, inconvenient, and entirely immobile cooling systems.

      On the other hand, the arm64 architecture simply produces a lot more computations per watt than the x64 architecture (known to windows people as x64 and to linux people as amd64)

      This appears to be the last useful generation of amd64. More power, more heat, lots of heat in a very small area. However, arm64 holds potential for future advance.

      We could go to vastly lower power usage with asynch clockless designs, where circuits that are not doing anything use near zero power, but this would require a radical cpu redesign from the ground up.

      • A2 says:

        Well, everyone has known since 2006 that the jig is up. (End of Dennard scaling.)

        The process shrinks nowadays are not even related to feature size anymore. But it allows everyone to claim Moore’s Law is still around, in some form. In spirit, perhaps?

        There is of course a lot of struggling with various ways to optimize what we have but what we really need is a replacement for CMOS. There seem to be none on the horizon.

        • Severian says:

          Nvidia’s Jensen is openly saying Moore’s law is dead, justifying the big price increases of the new cards.

          • jim says:

            Yes, Moore’s law is dead.

            EUV was not an advance, but a surrender.

            The time has come for contact lithography. That should have been the next generation after they reached the highest frequency that matter can manipulate.

          • A2 says:

            Lol, they still bravely soldier on for their customers, though at a slightly higher cost. But Nvidia’s providers (TSMC et al) still act as if Moore’s law is there.

        • jim says:

          We know that carbon nanotubes can do electronics on a vastly smaller scale than silicon CMOS – but to utilize this requires extremely precise and specific control of carbon nanotube structures, which we do not have.

          This requires nanotechnology. We do have one working nanotechnology – DNA readers where the key component of the sensor is an individual very large molecule, that interacts with a single DNA molecule, resulting in readout from a single DNA molecule as it passes through the sensor.

          It is a long way from that to fabbing carbon nanotubes. Not close, but it is vaguely in the same ballpark.

          If we were doing contact lithography, that would be a good path to the very small scale control of matter that makes nanotechnology possible. Shrink contact lithography, you are doing much the same thing as when constructing a DNA reader, except doing a whole lot of it in parallel.

          • A2 says:

            Carbon nanotubes might be the most promising technology at this point in time but it still seems far off until production. However, MIT has apparently built a 16-bit 14,000 CNFET processor.


            We would need something much more precise than a DNA reader to build these sort of structures. It may be possible, but not investigated as far as I know. I’m not familiar enough with contact lithography to say anything useful about it.

            Graphene, to take another example, seemed like a potential miracle material but … no band gap.

            • jim says:

              Their carbon nanotube processor is big and power hungry, because they lack precise control over the nanotubes. So each gate contains thousands of nanotubes, instead of two.

              Graphene has no gap, though its egg carton equivalent does have a gap. Carbon nanotubes can have a gap, which can be engineered, adjusted to whatever is needed. They can be fully metallic, or fully bandgapped, or zero bandgap like graphene.

              A semiconductor is intermediate between a metal and an insulator, and a zero bandgap material is intermediate between a semiconductor and a metal. A zero bandgap or very low bandgap material can in theory support logic gates based on ballistic electron movement, which can approach the theoretical limit for gate power costs – current gates consume millions of times more power than the theoretical limit.

              The ideal processor would use metallic carbon nanotubes to distribute power and signals, and zero bandgap carbon nanotubes for the gate output line, with the ballistic electrons in the gate output line being controlled by the magnetic field of the current in the metallic gate line.

              Power rather than size is what is hurting us. There is room for astronomical improvement in speed and power consumption.

              A processor based on ballistic electron gates would consume quite a bit of power, but it would have an very high gate switching speed – enormously faster than current processors, but only moderately lower power and moderately smaller.

  28. Encelad says:

    Cuba has legalized anal marriage
    I thought Cuba was outside the GAE influence and they were instead old type leftists, what’s going on?

    • Kunning Druegger says:

      Remember, all communism springs forth from Harvard. It may take a circuitous path, it may phase change repeatedly, but the source of Global Communism has always been the Cathedral intelligentsia. GAE soft power is almost wholly the provenance of the State Department and their tentacular menace of NGOs. I have no evidence to give you, but I am fairly certain the NGOs made significant in roads during the Obama administration. If you want to know who is behind any initiative, effort, or operation, you have to dig into the organizers and benefactors of the effort. I can almost guarantee that there is a network of US based NGOs and nonprofits who are behind cavorting sodomites in Cuba.

      Completely and totally unrelated, check out these shining examples of conscience based patronage facilitators:

      You can’t find a more upstanding and wonderful group of money launderers and influence peddlers. The holiness of these folks is off the charts, and I bet you’ve never heard of them.

    • Kunning Druegger says:

      Upon consideration, Paris could also be a source of International Marxism, but I am not well versed in French History, so they principle actors may have shifted outward from there. “France sneezes, and Europe catches a cold” is an old saying.

      • jim says:

        Not following your history.

        Perhaps you are thinking of more recent events.

        The descendants of the organization and the religious and political apparatus of the false Popes of Avignon holiness spiraled into the Enlightenment and the Church of Reason. French Revolution. The Thermidorean reaction attempts to restrain the holiness spiral, has a rough ride, calls in Napoleon for a helping hand, Napoleon shows them the door, and terminates the holiness spiral at pretty far left.

        Napoleon loses, arguably because of leftism destroying his logistics, Anglos eradicate the memetic descendants of the Church of reason, but they have their own holiness spiral running entryism against them.

        Marx, seeing the entryists take power within England, moves to England, digs up the roots of the current mob in power, which were the ideological descendants of the leftists that Cromwell suppressed, and creates a Judaised version of it, or equivalently does to Judaism what those guys did to Christianity.

        • Kunning Druegger says:

          Is Protestantism a byproduct of communism?

          • clovis says:

            We use the word “protestant” inaccurately in the English speaking world. It originally meant Lutherans who protested at the Diet of Speyer in 1529 the repeal of the religious tolerance Charles V had extended to them during the previous decade or so. Only later did it come to include Calvinists and radical Independents like Cromwell.

          • jim says:

            No, communism is a toxic byproduct of protestantism.

            That said, I am a protestant. Orthodoxy had accumulated a small pile of heresies, and Roman Catholicism a much bigger pile of heresies. Of course the explosion of protestant Churches led to an explosion of heresies, the demon worshipping church of Harvard being one of them, but the criticism of then existent Christianity was correct.

            Mary and Joseph had the sexual relations proper for husband and wife, and if they did not, no one should admit it, because to doubt that Christ had biological brothers is an attack on every man’s marriage, every man’s capacity to reproduce, and will of God expressed in Genesis 2:24.

            Similarly, the failure to give effect to Paul’s commands on the recruitment of Bishops and Deacons.

            • Kunning Druegger says:

              Sidestepping the theological points (which sound very compelling to me, obviously a man sleeps with his wife, exactly as God intended), how can communism be a byproduct of protestantism when the will to entropy through greed and envy is as old as time? I am not trying to be a legalist, I am trying to order my thinking. Marx didn’t invent Communism just as Smith didn’t invent Capitalism. But Protestantism was invented, maybe developed is a better word, within written history (Clovis says 16th Century, I myself couldn’t produce a date). Wouldn’t protestantism be a byproduct of entryism into the orthodox Christian faith(s)?

              • jim says:

                > Wouldn’t protestantism be a byproduct of entryism into the orthodox Christian faith(s)?

                Not entryism when you come out in open opposition. Within the Roman Catholic Church, people got pissed with ever increasing blatant self serving heresy, and proceeded to say so in plain and straightforward words. Promptly got expelled, and would have been killed, except that a whole lot of Kings were getting pissed with the Pope’s grabs for earthly power.

                Protestantism was a originally a restorationist movement, to ditch various heresies, in particular and especially the heresies that led to the great schism, but they were none to keen on various lesser heresies, most of them long predating the great schism, that Orthodox Christianity still subscribes to.

                Of course a whole lot of them proceeded to holiness spiral into assorted grave heresies, which eventually became nineteenth century postchristianity, and twenty first century demon worship, but the basic point was glaringly obvious – that the Church needed to reform ad return to its roots.

              • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                The basic problem of protestantism is that, in the attempt to repudiate the say so of a heretical bishop in Rome – which, at the time, concerned specific points one might quite reasonably object too – they ended up introducing forms of argument for repudiating the say so of anyone anywhere on anything; germinal seeds of nominalism that, in time, came to bloom into the gnostic whig theocracy we know and hate that rules to day.

                • jim says:

                  Quite so.

                  But the say so of that heretical Bishop needed to be repudiated.

                  We need to restore one universal Christian Church on the model that existed in the first millenium of Christianity. And actually existent Orthodoxy is not converged to demon worship, unlike the Vatican, and its governance model is national Churches united by the consensus of the national Bishops. Need some more national Orthodox Churches. We are not Russian, nor Greek, nor Armenian.

                • Mike in Boston says:

                  The basic problem of protestantism is that, in the attempt to repudiate the say so of a heretical bishop in Rome […] they ended up introducing forms of argument for repudiating the say so of anyone anywhere on anything

                  Quite right. As Jim writes below, the solution would have been to return to the consensus of the universal Church of the first millennium, which consensus had already been shattered during the Great Schism.

                  As I have apparently been pointing out for eight years, Khomiakov made a similar point, calling the Pope “the first Protestant” for breaking that consensus.

            • Mike in Boston says:

              I am sorry to see Jim misunderstand about Joseph and Mary. Mary was thirteen when she was betrothed to Joseph, a widower of over eighty years who already had at least seven children, simply for her own protection. As an Orthodox writer explains:

              for her protection she was betrothed to Him (otherwise she would be considered a prostitute or a mistress, being found in the household of an unrelated man.) Thus we call Joseph “the betrothed” to set him apart as the chosen protector of the Virgin Mary and her divine Child.”

              The priest told Joseph, “Take the virgin of the Lord and keep her for Him.” So we can see that their relationship was not that of a normal husband and wife.

              The fact that Mary was ever-virgin does not attack marriage. The atypical marriage of Joseph and Mary shows the uniqueness of Mary in human history.

              But Christ’s presence at the wedding in Cana shows marriage to be an honorable estate. And in every single service of the Orthodox church, Mary’s parents Joachim and Anna are remembered during the closing prayer.

              So it’s not necessary to contradict the teaching of the Church to try and make a point in favor of marriage, when the Church gives us many other examples to show its esteem for marriage.

              • i says:

                @Mike in Boston

                The source for that I think is dubious. And doesn’t hold up compared to the 4 selected Gospels.

                The Protoevangelium was the earliest example of virginity in perpetu mentioned that we know of.

                But it is fan fiction. Like the other forgeries of the life of Jesus.

                • jim says:

                  At least it is a fan fiction that reconciles the commandments on women and marriage with perpetual virginity.

                  But the trouble is that Joseph is normally depicted as a young man, twenties or early thirties, with a fourteen year old wife. And if that is the mental image that people have in their heads, perpetual virginity is an attack on every marriage, every family, every man’s capacity to reproduce, and on the basic commandments of the bible on these topics.

                • i says:


                  Since Mary our Lord’s Mother is held up as the model of femininity.

                  This sets up the Madonna-Whore division that has ruled the West ever since.

                  The perfect woman therefore cannot ever be sexual especially with her Husband. But all sexuality then is monopolized by the whore.

                  I think its like setting up a feminine counterpart to the masculine God by having her virginity mirror the ever-virginity of the Lord Jesus.

                  But I think the difference is that the Lord Jesus Christ never married.

                  But is pledged to be married to the Church.

                  It would make more sense for Mary to be ever-virgin outside marriage and single like Christ in that case. Then it wouldn’t be a problem.

                • jim says:

                  The ever virginity of Mary is an attack by faggots upon straights. It was inevitable that when the Church abandoned Paul’s command to recruit priests from married men with well behaved children, that the church would be overrun by faggots, because the Church and schools give access to other people’s children.

          • Neofugue says:

            Communism is a byproduct of holiness-spiraled Lutheranism, a descendant of the evil which began the German Peasants’ War of 1524 to 1525, the uprising which Luther condemned and was later crushed. Marx and Engels built Communism off of Müntzer; “to each according to his need” is plagiarized from Müntzer’s omnia sunt communia.

            • clovis says:

              The proto-anabaptist Muentzer had little to do with Lutheranism. The thing was that Luther’s willingness to confess the faith and risk death opened the door for others to ride his coattails

              • i says:

                Seriously those Communist cults keep arising through the ages. From its roots since the beginning of the First States.

                Those demons keep wanting to bring back communism.

              • Aidan says:

                The willingness of German nobility to hide Luther behind sharp pikes and stone walls opened the door for others to ride his coattails, in the same way that the House of Saud protected Wahhab and gave him the legitimacy to spread his sect.

              • Neofugue says:

                Luther wanted to reform the Catholic Church but in so doing he opened a can of worms which metastasized into demon worship and post-Christianity. If faith is based on scripture alone, no one has authority to define truth—Protestants do not and cannot follow absolute sola fide as they require creeds and consensus to maintain unity. Luther believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary, do modern Protestants?

                Without the church and the consensus of the saints there are infinite ways to bend scripture to fit demonic purposes. That being said, the converged churches are in competition to see which branch pimps out the most women and sodomizes more of its sons, so there is a balance between consensus and individual discernment.

                • Kunning Druegger says:

                  Can the argument be made that there is a significant utility in forming a “new” church, a new faith, that cherry picks what is valuable and discards what is worthless? I am not arguing that this should be done, rather theorizing whether it should be something that needs doing. It would need to be a project for the ages, like a cathedral, built up over time and across generations. We need a faith to carry to the stars with us, so it will need to be resilient, simple, sturdy, and dangerous. Having grown up in a Protestant family, I am rather confident that Protestantism is almost certainly NOT that faith. I am much enamored with ROCOR, but I worry about the opposition to Darwinism, given how much of our reality, the tenets of the Reactionary/Dissident Right interpretive framework, is predicated on observable evolutionary elements.

                  I am not trying to be excessive here, and maybe this topic is better left untouched, but I can’t help but consider how powerful a tool it would be, to have a “new” faith that is steeped in tradition yet constructed to be deployed in the current era. This could just be a facet of week faith and/or modernity poisoning. The Evolution Issue, in my mind, is the single biggest handicap to the Christianities. It is the exploit by which Equalism, Communism, and Feminism do so much damage.

                • Yul Bornhold says:


                  Trying to engineer a religion is tricky business. The main strength of faith is the claim to divine revelation–the higher than human authority. If you’re just making up what you think best, you’ll undermine divine authority.

                  Joseph Smith incel: “Emma, why you not happy with me fucking other woman?”

                  Joseph Smith chad: “God COMMANDS his handmaid Emma Smith to accept her husband’s righteous polygamy.”

                  (Yes, there’s some sympathy to polygamy in reactionary circles but there shouldn’t be towards Smith. This guy would send his followers off on mission trips to Europe so he could get at their wives.)

                  Then you’ve the practical problem that the vast majority of religious start-ups fail. The products of deliberate state-oriented religious innovations fail even when they succeed. The Phoenicians worshiped Baal for millennia. The Church of England imploded in centuries. Scandinavian Lutheranism not so hot either.

                  Long before Darwin, people were plenty racist. Early Portuguese explorers didn’t need evolution to notice that Africans were different.

                  Also worth pointing out that most reactionary insights function from the perspective of game theory even without evolution.

                  I suspect we’ll experience the literal end of the world within a century. If I *knew* that, obviously, wouldn’t bother with much of a space program but suspicion isn’t certainty. In any case, the immediate problem is America going Rwanda. If possible, the use of political force (in the broad sense) should be used to create a sane state with sound social policy (patriarchy, flow of authority, deterrence of crime), along with infrastructure and military.

                  I suppose expansion into space is almost an alternate eschatology. Final frontier as ultimate purpose, which puts it into competition with traditional eschatology.

                • Neofugue says:

                  > Can the argument be made that there is a significant utility in forming a “new” church, a new faith, that cherry picks what is valuable and discards what is worthless?

                  Who are you to cherry pick what is valuable and discard what is worthless? Why follow you and not Muhammad, Joseph Smith, or Charles Taze Russell? You could try something similar to what William Luther Pierce did…good luck.

                  > I am much enamored with ROCOR, but I worry about the opposition to Darwinism, given how much of our reality, the tenets of the Reactionary/Dissident Right interpretive framework, is predicated on observable evolutionary elements.

                  Modern post-Christians are feminist, equalist and corrupt because of fear, pride and subversion, not Creationism. Exegeting Genesis to feminism is akin to exegeting Galatians to negro-worship.

                  Creationism should not come into conflict with Darwinian evolution, because if you believe that the world is ~7000 years old you should be able to abrogate when causality begins. Miracles themselves are an abrogation of the laws of nature, so it is not as if Christianity can use science to prove itself. It is thus possible for Christianity to have its cake and eat it too, so long as science and theology are kept in separate domains.

                  If a post-Christian is arguing feminism on the basis of Genesis, ask him whether or not the Fall applied to women. If he gives you nonsense, ask him if women do bad things. If your interlocutor states that all bad things women do are the fault of men, inform him that he is a Gnostic and leave him if he refuses to engage.

                • Kunning Druegger says:

                  Excellent points, Yul and -fugue. Much to consider.

                  Post-Christianity pilfered everything they wanted and left out everything inconvenient. In so doing, they were able to port followers and impetus, maintaining a façade of piousness and tradition, while planting the seeds of daemonology to be reaped by future generations. A more clinical and holistic study and explication of this process is necessary to understand what happened and how it happened. But we know why it happened: the prince of lies forever ensnares the hearts of men. Thus will it ever be.

                  The inclination I feel is not to “make” a new religion. It is more of a desire for reformation, a reordering of principles and precepts. I assume that all here agree *we need to rollback the social software to a build that works*, and I acknowledge that those 12 words describe and contain a veritable universe of concepts and actions. This is, in essence, The Restoration. In order for that restoration to be successful and persistent, there are things from the “healthy build” that have to be altered, fixed, and possibly abandoned. If that fails to happen, then all of the original exploits and weaknesses will remain.

                  In the long run, Luther’s movement of reform ushered in far more ill than good (right? how not, given the state of Things? maybe not, I cannot say), so an inclination towards reformation should be viewed with critical and expansive skepticism. If we fall into a new dark age, the silver lining is that restoration becomes much simpler as an operation. But if we don’t Fall, we will need to move forward with lessons being learned as much as is possible.

                  Jimian Christianity is a start to that process. Maybe it’s best to just let things happen as circumstances demand. But it is a deep concern that infighting, purity spiraling, and legalist/factional recalcitrance will be exploited by adversaries. It might be better to have a concerted effort, something taken up by a council of men from the Acceptable faiths with a set of ground rules, minimums and maximums as a boundary for going forward, to address some of the exploits that were used to defeat the GNON compliant faiths.

                • jim says:

                  > In the long run, Luther’s movement of reform ushered in far more ill than good (right? how not, given the state of Things? maybe not, I cannot say)

                  Luther immediately found a holiness spiral running underneath him, which he successfully urged the princes to put down with fire and sword. It stayed put down.

                  Long after Luther, the Brownists started a new holiness spiral in Anglican Christianity, which now rules the world.

                  But long before Luther, a holiness spiral started running in the organizational descendants of the organization of the false Popes of Avignon, which undermined French feudalism, and eventually gave rise to the Enlightenment and the Church of Reason. One can reasonably say the Brownists were in a sense Luther descended, though descended from Luther imitators rather than directly Luther descended, but the Church of Reason was not. That Church is a descendent of Papism.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Protestants don’t give a shit about unity, people who can define truth leads to things like Fauci and anyone who accepts someone else’s ability to define truth wholeheartedly is subhuman…

                • i says:


                  Plenty of heretical communist cults like the Cathars and Albigensians arose prior to the Reformation.

                  The Reformation simply gave them more room.

                  Collectivism that is anti-individualist, Anti-family, Anti-sex differences. Etc. Is a false demonic unity through and through.

                • Lambada Equis says:


                  Interestingly, this is the topic of Gene Wolfe’s Book of the Long Sun (a generation ship is launched toward the stars with an “engineered” Catholicism to organize the human affairs of the cargo. The punchline is that it is hinted that God is willing to work even with this).

    • Anonymous Fake says:

      [*deleted for unexplained and absurd presuppositions*]

      • jim says:

        You write as if it is perfectly obvious, and obvious to everyone here, that the US has a strong motive to invade Cuba, rather than protect its government from overthrow, and that it had no strong motive to invade Syria.

        The motive for invading Cuba is incomprehensible to everyone here. You are going to have to explain your reasoning, and explain your presupposition, rather than confidently assuming that we all agree with some point of Cathedral doctrine that not only no one believes any more, but no one even remembers any more.

        The motive for invading Syria is obvious. The motive for Cuba is incomprehensible – I suppose there is some long forgotten point of Harvard doctrine you are pushing, but cannot guess what it is.

        • The Cominator says:

          I’d invade neither but I think the US if I had to pick I’d rather we invade Cuba than Syria…

        • Kunning Druegger says:

          The American Nationalist in me sees Cuba, and the entirety of the Caribbean and Middle America, as rightful American clay. But America is a skinsuit empire, so of course she would only be concerned with useless clay in faraway places for the sole purpose of displaying evangelizing holiness.

  29. Kunning Drueger says:

    Jim, can you comment on why female conservatives get to speak and act like this? As well, can you confidently state whether or not lady-leaders such as this are actually what they say they are?

    I will be honest, I find her rhetoric incredibly inspiring, her delivery was excellent, and she seems to speak from the heart (there’s a language barrier but she still seems real). As a rule, I don’t trust female politicians, and I generally think the need to be post-menapausal to have any kind of chance at competency and rationality. I just have a hard time believing a badbitch can be married to a real man. When you get those incredibly rare women who can lead a patriarchy, they are always barren, and they always have a male wife. Otherwise, the powerful female rules from behind and beneath. Both are exceedingly rare.

      • Kunning Druegger says:

        I am so tired of this sentiment. Support for Israel is unavoidable if you want to be politically active in conservative circles. i don’t like this, I don’t agree with it, but I am tired of worthy people having their support undercut by “anti-Zion” shills, particularly when being anti-Israel is quite often a cover for fed shills. It is Divide & Conquer tactics. Every time any conservative starts making headway, there’s a massive campaign to undercut their support over supposed purity. The net result is a Cathedral agent beating them, and I don’t see how that is a good thing.

        • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

          In a conflict between civilized men and savages, side with the civilized man. The anti-Israel position is as ridiculous as the pro-Israel position given the obeisance of Israel to globohomo. Acting as if anyone talking favorably about Israel is being commanded by Zionists is retarded because Zionists are helpless and pathetic. As you say, most of the anti-Israel believers are either retarded and being led around by leftists, or leftists themselves.

          I am certainly not going to go out of my way to help Israel, especially as they have no more right to the Holy Land, which should be held by Christians. However, I am just as certainly not going to criticize them for bombing Muslims. No friends to the left, and no attacking anyone from the left, even Israel. That is what most of these criticisms come to in the end.

          • i says:

            Anti-gentile behavior however should be called out. And dealt with.

            • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

              Absolutely. Christians and Christianity should come before Israel every time. For an example, Palestinian Christians should be protected while the Muslims are pushed into the sea. That goes doubly for Christian countries. I am of the opinion that after we take Jerusalem we let the Jews purge the Muslims in the area and they can settle down there. Then we expel the Jews from Cristendom and send them to their new lands in the Middle East. Israel is where we will put all the Jews so we do not have to kill them all. Let them visit their holy sites in the city, but not live there. Jerusalem belongs to Christianity.

              The reflexive anti-Israel stance is either a relic of incorrect Judocentric theories of leftism(Elders of Zion) or is government entryism(hello fellow right-wingers). Either way it is not conducive to a useful conversation. If it is sincere, it is still incorrect, because if the Jews were really running things, then Hamas would be running scared and hiding in the desert. If it is shill talk, then it should be silenced.

              • Ash says:

                This is fundamental misunderstanding of how the Israeli establishment operates. They genuinely do not want to throw the Muslims into the sea. For instance, if Syria offered peace tomorrow in exchange for full transfer of the Golan, they’d evict every single Jew in the area immediately and return that land in order to secure that treaty. They mistakenly and unironically are desperate for peace, and war-weary after fighting virtually nonstop for the better part of a century

    • Yul Bornhold says:

      Political lesbianism? When no man playing the male role, a woman will sometimes step up and run a domestic-abuse flavored larp of masculinity.

      Or to think of it another way, single motherhood, women having children on their own, feral, is *bad* but widowhood, a mother having children on her own isn’t *bad* in the same moral sense. It’s an accident. A tragedy. I think (or hope, because optimism) that a widow can do a decent job raising children on her own but, even so, the hardship will grind on her far worse than if she had a husband.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      The polygon isn’t afraid of women, naturally, so it’s often willing to let them get away with more of their feminine uppityness before slapping them back down into the plantation (which they always bow down too in the event).

      • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

        Women in charge is emasculating even if the woman is a “conservative.” It is in opposition to the natural order and against the will of God to have a woman lead. Therefore, it is a degenerating–and thus leftist–occurance to which the left does not have much objection. They are perfectly willing to let a woman emasculate her own men, because they can route the apparatuses of state around her.

        • The Cominator says:

          Female leaders should be viewed with suspicion and not ideal but at the same time I’m willing to be pragmatic… female queens always occasionally ruled even when every other woman in the society was property and some did okay…

          They tend to do far worse as Democratic leaders…but so does everyone. I’d certainly prefer if the Italian lady was president as opposed to say Biden.

          • Neofugue says:

            Female monarchs often become whores because of a lack of male ownership, in particular the Romanov whores, with avid equestrian Catherine creating the first female university in Europe.

            Among the few noble Queens, what is your take on “Queen of the Night” Maria Theresa? IMO the Roman Catholics should have made her a saint along with her daughter and Louis XVI, but Catholicism being Catholicism they were too gay to do it.

            • The Cominator says:

              Not a fan of Maria Theresa at all. Am a fan of Elizabeth I.

              Catherine the Great was pretty successful as far as her civil score but given that she reduced 95% of Russians to a state indistinguishable from de jure slavery (and it was far worse than it was before) she was a nasty ruler.

            • i says:


              What is against the Natural Order. Is that the Husbands of Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth the II is that they aren’t actually Kings. Rather they are consorts

              By virtue of the Headship of the Husband. It should be that the Husband should be King and overall Head.

              If a man marries a princess. He is automatically to be the King and overall head of the Kingdom.

              • francophone says:

                That’s what the Hundred Years’ War was about. “France is too great a kingdom to pass through the hands of a woman,” and the peers of the realm awarded the crown to a cousin rather than the daughter. The English disagreed, and you may judge for yourself how much of that was justified by greed at the prospect of grabbing the richest kingdom in Europe. Regardless, the precedent of it being acceptable for the monarchy to be traced or defined by female descent equally with male descent was set then, and the English monarchy has been defined by that ever since.

                The French monarchy is in many ways a better and more successful model than the English, and required a much more brutal and overt communist attack to bring it down.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Louis XIV killed the French monarchy by

                  1) Bureaucratizing it and also bureaucratizing economic life

                  2) Emasculating their aristocratic officer class but still keeping them as theoretically pre-eminent (theoretically the Sword nobility was still higher than the Robe nobility)

                  Getting rid of the Hugenots didn’t help him out either. It didn’t die right away it was more like a slow spreading cancer.

                  The “July Monarchy” of Louis Phillipe actually would have done great (since Louis Phillipe on matters of economics was practically a Randian) if it just wasn’t brought down by the Jesuit 1848 plot.

                  The English monarchy arguably survived more troubles than the French monarchy.

                • Kunning Druegger says:

                  True, but England is also the second worst pernicious source of cathedral meddling after Harvard. The Eternal Aenglo has been in on every single terrible happening of the 20th Century, and their track record in the 21st is not looking to be any better, as their insidious effect is only dampened by their loss of empire and influence.

                  I was going to point and laugh at the Honhonhon poster, but he makes a great point: France was converged, in the end, through blood and fire; England was converged with ink and ballots.

                  While this is an interesting and valuable discussion, it is further reinforcing the fact that All [white countries] have sinned [against their peoples, cultures, traditions] and fallen short of the Glory of God [==the blessings of GNON].

                • francophone says:

                  No, that’s false.

                  France was an impossible tangle of conflicting regulations and local privileges and contradictory requirements and overlapping taxes, none of which had been addressed by the preceding centuries of royal expansion. Louis XIV regularised much of that. To the extent a bureaucracy was installed it was required to administer the more orderly (and less oppressive in total) system that replaced the previous jumble of local administrations, hundreds of local courts that duplicated government expenditures and tax burdens and attempts at pomp and splendor by local big shots.

                  The military aristocracy was very much in the ascendant under him as well. One need merely consider the life of Prince Eugene, who at nineteen considered being refused the command of a regiment such a surprising and unexpected insult to his honor that he departed at once for Austria, swearing never to return to France except with weapons in hand. Turenne and de Saxe exemplified and made the best use of French martial qualities – de Saxe’s advice was that soldiers should not fire their weapons when attacking, but rely on bayonets instead, because French soldiers closing at a charge always had the fury to carry the day. De Saxe won enough battles to prove his point, and it wasn’t until the better firearms of a century later that the balance shifted.

                  I have no idea to what you are referring about the Huguenots. That rebellion ended and had no further consequences afterward. “Une foi, une loi, un roi” was the motto at the time for good reason.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I’m less and less thinking Harvard more and more I think that all roads lead to Rome or at least most of them. When I refer to the American Cathedral my tendency in the future will be to say Georgetown…

                  English fuckery in American politics almost always involves their glowniggers (I remember their involvement with McCain and Hillary in trying to frame Trump) but if English glowniggers were so subverted it probably involved the original glowniggers of the world… our friends in the society of Jesus. Also England wasn’t always so so bad it became that bad with Tony Blair. And Tony Blair like Fauci is something like a Jesuit.

                  Tony Blair after totally ruining England converted to Catholicism (because Roman Catholics can’t be prime minister old Glorious Revolution law) and apparently was always secretly did some Catholic observances…

                • The Cominator says:

                  Did Louis XIV’s killing localism in favor of a centralized state make France richer or poorer? The Hugenots were France’s most productive group. Don’t take my word for it, Louis XIV’s most able minister Vauban (Colbert was a cancer) said so publically.

      • Kunning Druegger says:

        Strategically, is it possible for a woman to re-instate a Christian patriarchy? My elementary understanding is that the answer is No. A female could potentially introduce the circumstances that might lead to a Restoration, but nothing more than that. As you say, they always eventually bow down.

        • Neuropoison says:

          Everyone should keep in mind that

          (1) politics is the art of the possible. Given that Jesus taking over the world hasn’t happened yet, we must choose among the options that are actually available,
          (2) our enemies are screeching in rage about her political ascension. That’s a good sign.

        • Neurotoxin says:

          Went to moderation. Did I use the wrong name?

        • Adam says:

          >Can a woman re-instate a male dominated social order designed to explicitly suppress female hypergamy?


          • Kunning Druegger says:

            I’ll belabor the point for the sake of discussion:

            Why not? Males can instate an order explicitly designed to enhance female hypergamy, why can’t it work the other way around? Could it theoretically be analogous to the Stirling Cycle Engine, as in, couldn’t it be run “backwards” to achieve the opposite reaction?

            I acknowledge that it is unlikely to the point of silliness, but I have personally seen a woman shame men into being more manly. It wasn’t some bull-dike pretending to be one of the guys, it was a stay at home mom thumping a bible, and it worked. But that was an isolated incident and the female probably had selfish reasons for doing so. Nonetheless, I have to wonder if it is possible for a female to become worthy, accept power, then hand it off to the proper male dominated institution. Typing it out feels a bit silly, but we are in a state of affairs wherein only females are even allowed to think thoughtcrimes, and only rarely. Marjorie Taylor Green seems to be more on message and pure than the overwhelming majority of her male peers. Ditto for the wopette firebrand.

            Upon consideration, it could very well be an impossibility, and one that the upper echelon of the Cathedral (the Octogenarians) were well aware of, and so they established the precedent of letting “conservative” women have their say because there’s no risk of them transferring their power to a man. But that seems awfully risky. All it would take is the right woman to sweep to power then place a crown on the head of her most favored warrior before jumping into bed, or off a cliff.

            • Adam says:

              Because they cannot resist the temptation to reach for power.

              Because female authority is a shit test that men must pass. Females cannot pass a shit test for you, nor resist the temptation to shit test you.

              A woman cannot dominate a man while the man simultaneously dominates the woman.

              Can a woman halt a holiness spiral? I don’t see why not. But that is a long way from a Christian patriarchy.

            • yewotm8 says:

              I can theoretically see a man whose powers of game, dominance, and muh dick are so potent that he convinces his President wife to gradually roll back laws regarding women. But eventually a public shit test would be issued against him and passing it would require backing by the rest of the male elite, meaning that such a transfer of power would be inevitable anyway.

        • francophone says:

          Jeanne d’Arc did. The Dauphin had signed a treaty renouncing the throne. She put him back on it, and the dynasty lasted centuries more, to great success.

          • Adam says:

            I won’t speak on the particulars of something I do not know, but sounds like she had a title, not power. Sounds like she submitted to an alpha male, or group of alpha males.

          • The Cominator says:

            Her case is so exceptional in history (female queens and rebel leaders happen sometimes, women actually commanding the army and seemingly being good at it no other examples but her) I question the tales authenticity.

            Also she claimed she had divine guidance and that is why she could do what she did… but her 2nd in command was the serial child torturer and murderer (who claimed he was sacrificing them to demons) Gilles De Rais. And yet the English DID seem to think she was the actual commander and not just a mascot…

            Its all a very strange case which is not at all consistent with the rest of history.

  30. Cloudswrest says:

    Off topic, but does anybody here remember J. Orlin Grabbe? I used to read his blog until he apparently suddenly died in 2008. It was on his website that I first read about Bitcoin.

    • Cloudswrest says:

      Some early mass media presaging mentioned in Wikipedia.

      Lesley Stahl of 60 Minutes, produced an investigative segment about misinformation on the Internet that aired on March 2, 1997. Grabbe was interviewed on the show and presented as a representation of misinformation found online. Her comments about the dangers of anyone being able to create content on the Internet, rather than relying on mass media, led to further commentary online.

    • Albert says:

      I remember when he first appeared, pre-web. I checked his website everyday once he started it. The photos were a nice addition to the libertarian, crytography, and digital money content.

      • Neurotoxin says:

        I seem to recall reading his site during and after the Clinton-era crypto wars. Plus, pics of hot chicks.

        IIRC, he once referred to the media as “the cloaca of the ruling class,” LOL.

  31. restitutor_orbis says:

    Patriarch Krill of the Russian Orthodox Church has declared that soldiers who die in the line of duty have all their sins washed away.

    • jim says:

      Yes, Patriarch Kirill is reading it better than Putin.

      • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:


      • Kunning Druegger says:

        Respectfully, Jim, I disagree. The Patriarch has a lot more room to speak and act, as he is the unquestioned Leader of his “organization.” Here’s a quote from Putin on 24 February 2022:

        “Citizens of Russia,

        The culture and values, experience and traditions of our ancestors invariably provided a powerful underpinning for the wellbeing and the very existence of entire states and nations, their success and viability. Of course, this directly depends on the ability to quickly adapt to constant change, maintain social cohesion, and readiness to consolidate and summon all the available forces in order to move forward.

        We always need to be strong, but this strength can take on different forms. The “empire of lies,” which I mentioned in the beginning of my speech, proceeds in its policy primarily from rough, direct force. This is when our saying on being “all brawn and no brains” applies.

        We all know that having justice and truth on our side is what makes us truly strong. If this is the case, it would be hard to disagree with the fact that it is our strength and our readiness to fight that are the bedrock of independence and sovereignty and provide the necessary foundation for building a reliable future for your home, your family, and your Motherland.”

        I draw attention to that last line: Strength and readiness to fight are the bedrock of independence and sovereignty and provide the necessary foundation for building a reliable future for your home, your family, and your Motherland.

        That is on fucking message. A few days or weeks ago, in response to a question about “the future” and Putin’s plans, Sergey Lavrov, easily the greatest statesman of our era, stated that Putin had laid out everything in his speeches on the 21st and 24th of February. Here are links to English transcripts provided by the Kremlin:

        Here’s a link to all of the publicly available addresses:
        I have begun working my way through them, and it seems to me that Putin is very much aware that this is leading to a global showdown.

      • clovis says:

        I thought only the pope arrogated to himself the right to declare plenary indulgences. This is disappointing.

        • jim says:

          It is a holy war,

          Not exactly heresy. He will be retroactively interpreted not as issuing a plenary indulgence, but as issuing a well founded opinion on this particular war.

          • clovis says:

            My son tells me that Stalin forced the patriarch of Moscow to make a similar statement during the Great Patriotic war. At any rate, one does not wash his sins away through fighting a war. Sins are washed away through Christ’s blood and merit, and His merit is offered in Baptism and the Gospel and received by faith. Not through self-sacrifice. Luther wrote much better about holy war in “On War Against the Turk.”

            I appreciated Kirill’s gay parade sermon. That was phenomenal. This statement is a reminder that Orthodoxy and Rome only manage to be Christian at funerals when they plead God’s mercy alone.

            • clovis says:

              IOW the idea that we wash our sins away by self-sacrifice is a denial of the atonement.

    • Sher Singh says:


      • jim says:

        Not going to argue theology with you, because you always make such discussions unprofitable and disruptive.

      • Kunning Druegger says:

        Second time asking this to a different, combative poster: Sher Singh, what is your goal here? What do you hope to accomplish through engaging in dialogue?

        I am starting to think that this is a good but soft shill defense. I have used this in IRL discussions; I attempt to force a person to state what their goals are, specifically, and if they are bad faith trolls, merely adopting an antipodal position for the sole purpose of fostering dissention, they are forced to come up with something more substantial on the fly. They often get lost in their own muddled mind and come up with something very stupid, or they reach for the stars and say something ridiculous, or they squeak by but invalidate their own stated purpose later. So it is more of a “dye pack” shill defense. Regardless, looking back on our many shill corpses, I feel somewhat strongly that if they had been forced to “state their business,” we would have had more flags/indicators to go off of. One thing to consider is the honest answer changing over time. The reason I came here is not the reason I stayed here, but I did come to it honestly in both cases.

        • Sher Singh says:


        • Sher Singh says:


          • jim says:

            deleted for triumphally boasting of empty symbols of power, authority, and capability for violence that been systematically stripped of any
            real substance.

            You were beaten, and your boasts are an accommodation to defeat and subservience, not resistance to it.

            To resist, you need to look at your actual chains, instead of imagining them away. You have been stripped of the capability for collective violence and your faith has been converged, and when you boast of the empty symbols of authority and power, you are submitting to that convergence.

            • Sher Singh says:

              ਖੰਡਾਪ੍ਰਿਥਮੈਸਾਜਕੈਜਿਨਸਭਸੈਸਾਰੁਉਪਾਇਆ ॥
              kha(n)ddaa pirathamai saaj kai jin sabh saisaar upaiaa ||
              At first the Lord created the Khanda and then the whole world.

              We can work as Foederati against you, we’re not Puritans.
              Khalsa grows either way – anglosphere is being broken lol.
              Liberals are more against cow slaughter than christcucks.



              • jim says:

                You triumphantly boast of the empty symbols that the Cathedral permits you, while ignoring what it has taken away from you, and utterly abandoning the thought of taking that back.

                Real men eat beef. Sikhs worrying about cow slaughter is like Jews worrying about milk products contaminating meat products.

                • Sher Singh says:


                • jim says:

                  The center of the Sikh religion is not the holy cow, but the holy army engaged in holy war. You have lost your center, and are engaging in displacement activity.

                • someDude says:

                  Jim, Sikhs have never eaten beef from the day their religion started until today. When it comes to protecting cows and not eating Beef, the average Sikh is definitely more particular about it than the average Hindu and in all likelihood, more particular about it than the average Brahmin.

                  They were not eating Beef while, led by Emperor Ranjit Singh, they conquered and held on to Khyber Pakhtunwala (Afghan territory). You can’t accuse Sikhs of that period of not being real men.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  > The center of the Sikh religion is not the holy cow, but the holy army engaged in holy war. You have lost your center, and are engaging in displacement activity.

                  Losing sight of why you fight is how whites become christian

                • jim says:

                  Given that old type Christians conquered the world, including you, created science, technology, and industrialization, I think their sight was demonstrably clearer than yours.

                  If you are fighting to prevent people from eating cows, there is something terribly wrong with your vision.

                  Your endless pot shots at Christianity are stupid, unproductive, disruptive, dishonest, and mysterious. No one here takes pot shots at old type Sikhi – we merely point out that new type Sikhi is as converged as new type post Christianity.

                  Why are you taking potshots at Christianity, without distinguishing between the old type and the new type? What is your business here?

                • Sher Singh says:


                  You’re encouraging cow slaughter & insulting the Khalsa.

                  [*bombastic arrogance deleted*]

                • jim says:


                  A wise, martial, and right religious instruction under the circumstances, which Sikhs are not following.

                  Under similar circumstances, Russian Patriarch Kirill issued a similar ruling, which Russian Orthodox Christians are following.

                  > You’re encouraging cow slaughter & insulting the Khalsa.

                  Damn right I am. The original Aryans ate beef and slaughtered cows. Made them big and strong. Cows were indeed holy, but slaughtering cows and eating them was even holier.

                  The Hindu belief in sacred cows represents a demonic attack or internal holiness spiral on the ancient Aryan faith.

                  And in fact old type Sikhi does allow and encourage beef eating, you just have to slaughter the cows in a suitably sacred manner, which is not hard at all. That Sikhs are not slaughtering lots of cows and eating lots of beef, that your rules on cows have been holiness spiraled to discourage cow slaughter and beef eating, rather than encourage cow slaughter and beef eating, represents the intrusion of a hostile holiness spiral.

                  You need to purge the cow holiness spiraling out of your Khalsa, as we need to purge priestly celibacy and the desexualization of virtuous women.

                  When the Europeans dropped in on the Japanese, the Japanese immediately wanted to get bigger and stronger, so they researched what made Europeans big and strong, and decided it was partly genetics, but also partly beef. So they valorized raising cows and eating beef, encouraged the raising of cows with state action, and encouraged eating beef culturally and socially. High status people ate beef, and eating beef was made high status.

                  The Japanese government encouraging the raising of cows by state action was the equivalent of the sacredness of cows in the original Aryan faith, and socially encouraging eating beef and making it high status was the equivalent of the Aryans holy cow slaughter and holy eating of beef. The ancient Aryans were following the same social policy for the same reasons as the modern Japanese.

                  Modern Hindu cow sacredness is a demonic holiness spiral on the original Aryan cow sacredness, which was originally intended, like the modern Japanese policy, to produce bigger and stronger warriors.

                  Everyone ridicules the modern sacred cow doctrine. It is transparently silly, it makes you weak, physically and mentally.

                  The original Ayrans ate mostly beef – they were meat eaters, and cows were their biggest meat source. The holiness spiral on cows, like the Christian holiness spiral desexualizing virtuous women, is in line with Harvard policy..

                • Sher Singh says:

                  The longest composition in Dasam Bani is Triya Charitar.
                  Tales about the character of women.

                  Discussion on the WQ begins & ends with male authority.
                  Women need to be tied like cattle.

                  Sati Mata Ki Jai


                • jim says:

                  This is a vital and central point of Sikhi, and the holy army is supposed to enforce it.

                  Unfortunately your holy army has been out of action since we old type Christians defeated you, and Sikhs are not enforcing. Not individually, and not collectively.

                  Recommended corrective reading on individual enforcement of ownership: Mate Guarding Game Everyone should apply this, and Sikhs should apply it while working towards a holy army that can collectively enforce it – which you are not working towards, instead adapting your holy army to purely symbolic and ritual role, entirely detached from securing individual authority over your land, your gardens, your homes, your wives, and your children.

                  Female Sexual Preferences covers the same material while providing a larger context and covering related matters.

                • Aidan says:

                  The ban on eating beef is a demonic entryist attack on the ancient Aryan religion. The ancient Aryans were pastoralists who drew their strength and wealth from ranching, they were the cowboys of the ancient world. Could only have been dreamed up by Dravidian demon worshippers to sap the strength of their conquerors.

                  Every Sikh I have met is rail thin and unhealthy looking; cows are wonderful machines that turn nasty weeds into delicious milk and beef, which makes a man big and strong.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  A neo-primitivist future where the genetically modified and cybernetically enhanced crew of a reaving ship raids the O’Neil cylinders that hold the livestock and women of a rival fleet. Raiding goes back and forth, tit-for-tat, and and begins to escalate into more open warfare. Eventually the local military lord demands that they trade hostages and exchange daughters to end the feud. The marriage celebrations entail a massive feast and party, drinking, and the men carrying away their new women to their new homes.

                  In that future we will bring the greatest of beasts with us to the stars. Alongside the dog and the horse, the cow was responsible for getting us where we are today. We will bring their strength with us beyond the sky.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  [*deleted*] It’s war then [*deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  It is not war, because you are defeated, because you are making your holy army’s role ever more symbolic and ever less real, and because you have failed to expunge modern and ancient demon worship and holiness spirals from Sikhi, rendering you ever less militarily capable.

                  I am primarily concerned with modern holiness spirals and demon worship in Christianity, but the ancient ones on celibate priests and the ever virginity of Mary are pretty bad.

                  For your war threat to be real, rather than impudent boasting about nonexistent martial spirit, you would need fix Sikhi in ways analogous to old type Christianity and the old type Aryan faith – which would of course diminish or eliminate your theological reasons for war.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The Sikhs probably would have done very well for themselves IF they weren’t up against the British army in its prime.

                  Probably there wasn’t any non-white force at the time that could have beaten the Khalsa… I like Sikhs overall everyone I meet who deals with them closely tells me they are generally good honest people (exact opposite of typical Indians) but this guy shouldn’t come here to cause trouble.

                  Treating tobacco as a major sin (the most benign of drugs because it doesn’t negatively warp the mind) to be met with mob violence is obviously holiness spiraling.

                • jim says:

                  Nicotine is the original nootropic

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  I would caution you against war with people like me. My ancestors beat yours as a side effect of shopping for spices. That was not a holy war, that was just negotiation. A holy war of Christendom versus Hinduism would be the end of your world.

                  Plus, I like fighting people and fucking people up. You are threatening me with a good time. It would be a nice, straightforward fight. “They worship strange gods that are not the One, True God. Show them the error of their ways.” No heart and minds bullshit, just some old-fashioned conquest.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  Tobacco & Beef have been banned since First Guru.
                  Brits fought a Sikh Army depleted by 10 years of civil war.

                  Nothing more to say, stop deleting theological responses.[*deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  > Tobacco & Beef have been banned since First Guru.
                  > Brits fought a Sikh Army depleted by 10 years of civil war.

                  Exactly so. That is how Christians have been defeating everyone for the past two millennia. Failure of cohesion by non Christians.

                  Civil war is a form of incohesion. Incohesion reveals there is something very wrong with your state religion: By their fruits you will know them.

                  King Alfred did not kill any pagan leaders that I recall. The pagan leaders killed each other and King Alfred converted the survivors at swordpoint – thus considerably improving their life expectancy.

                  > Nothing more to say, stop deleting theological responses.

                  Kindly refrain from confidently telling us that our theology is wrong because a bunch of gurus whose religion is infested with Dravidian demon worship and ancient holiness spirals disagree. This argument is unlikely to persuade.

                  Also stop telling us that Christians and Christianity is unmanly. It was manly enough to conquer the world, including you, and keep women in their proper place. It is today’s postchristianity that is unmanly.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  [*attack on Christianity deleted*]

            • ten says:

              Well no, the ban on eating cows is the aryans telling their shitskin subjects to stay the fuck away from their cattle, the shitskins internalizing their masters wishes like good little fucking bitches, and over time, you get sher singh, the dumbest shitstain to ever wear a retarded hat and a toy sword, prancing about and feeling mighty that he is kept as a pet and sees his retarded hat mirrored in other pets of the cathedral (when not conflating his shitskin cousins beating up some cow farmer with himself conquering the british empire).

              Shere kahn, king of the jungle, you’re pretty damn dumb.

              • Sher Singh says:

                Untouchability begins with cattle consumption.
                Other civilizations like the Persians & Egyptians protected cows.


                • jim says:

                  Successful civilizations protected cows because they are tasty and nutritious.

                  You have holiness spiraled cow protection, in the same way Christians holiness spiraled chastity from protecting and supporting marriage, to subverting and attacking marriage.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Untouchability in the sense that no one can even come close to touching our records and accomplishments? Hindus did not land on the moon, or build the nuclear fusion bomb. Hindus did not conquer the entire world. Christians did that. Christianity is the social technology equivalent of the first protohuman to throw a rock as weapon technology. “The evolutionary arms race is over; this is my planet now.” So say all you want, confined to a single subcontinent. It is all cope.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  [*attack on Christianity deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  Your attacks on Christianity are unworthy of discussion.

                  Your faith is no more the original Aryan faith than today’s Judaism are the original faith of nomadic pastoralist patriarchs, and an Indian is no position to ridicule us for allowing race mixing. The Aryans were tall and white when they conquered India, now their descendants are brown and short.

                • Sher Singh says:


                • jim says:

                  Your prehistory is too silly to be worth rebutting. We know what second wave Aryans looked like. Aryans left their genes all over the place, and populations with those genes fairly pure can be found all over the place.

              • jim says:

                Your account is more plausible, because nomadic pastoralists conquering grain farmers. The cattle continued to wander, and the nomadic pastoralists told the grain farmers to let them be.

                But the primary reason that the pastoralists were keeping cattle was to eat them.

                Tasty and nutritious.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  Which Aryan invasion are you speaking of?
                  Pathans & Baloch came in the 6-800s, Scythians before.

                  Christianity builds institutional cohesion by attacking kinship
                  The rule of law surpassing blood feuds, this is well known.


                • jim says:

                  The first wave of Aryan invasions happened at the beginning of Bronze Age, three thousand before Christ, but did not reach India. There was a subsequent wave of Aryan and culturally Aryan peoples whose racial background is somewhat complex at the end of the Bronze Age, thirteen hundred BC. And Aryan and sort of Aryan peoples have been at it the whole time and for a long time after.

                  The Indian Hindu religion is descended from the Aryans of the second wave who invaded India around 1700 to 1400. Unfortunately they got a large infestation of the demon worship of the conquered Davidian peoples.

                  The evidence for this is linguistic, genetic, and in the religious rituals of Aryans of this period. Indra=Thor=Zeus=Jupiter. They had a lot more in common with paganism of Greece and Rome that lasted in Iceland to 1000AD, than they had with modern day Hinduism, of which Sikhi is an offshoot. They were ancestor worshipers.

                • Sher Singh says:


                • Aryaman says:

                  But note, the zenith of Indian civilization as far as science, mathematics, and industry go happened well (as in, millennia) after the latest plausible point of admixture. And the best science, mathematics, and industry came from parts of India now called Dravidian (though the differences are not all so simple), though it came from the less admixed among those, who were nonetheless still more admixed than people in the North.

                  Also, ancestor worship very much remains in all the most relevant sacraments, the performance of which look more or less identical to the way they were done a very long time ago, and would not appear alien to other Aryan-derived groups.

                  There is holiness spiraling in Hinduism. The place to see that is an obsession with cleanliness whereby Brahmins will not drink from a glass of water used by non-Brahmins, will not eat in the kitchens of others, and will throw water around places to symbolically clean themselves while becoming less clean in the process.

                  And there is demon worship in Hinduism too. (Though Krishna is not the source of that). But the real problem is that it is a muscular religion that has forgotten its muscularity, and does not have anything remotely resembling a pope or college of priests professing the religion to the people. Chanting ancient words while important is not enough, and now everyone makes up their own stories about what the precepts of the religion mean in the common tongue.

                • jim says:

                  > the best science, mathematics, and industry came from parts of India now called Dravidian (though the differences are not all so simple), though it came from the less admixed among those, who were nonetheless still more admixed than people in the North.

                  The faith of those in England that accomplished science, technology, industrialization, and world empire is amply recorded, and reading it I can see what worked and why it worked. There were lots of colorful, illustrative, and dramatic incidents showing the interaction between faith, science, industry, and conquest.

                  You do not seem to know what the faith of those that achieved the best science, mathematics, and industry in India was. It does not seem to be well recorded, and if it is recorded, you have not been looking. Yes, it was Hinduism, but there are a lot of very different kinds of Hinduism. It is considerably more diverse than Christianity.

                  And far from all versions of Christianity were comfortable coexisting with science, technology, and industry.

                • someDude says:


                  It’s indeed beginning to look like not having a pope is the same having too many popes.

                  Can we make something of the Shankaracharya tradition? Or the Tatacharya tradition? There has got to be a solution we can use.

                • jim says:

                  Orthodoxy does not have a Pope.

                  What it does have is national leaders who are answerable to Caesar.

                  That works.

                • Aryaman says:

                  You are right that I have only a foggy sense of what was going on around the time there was science, mathematics, and industry in India. But we do know that this time was millennia after admixture ended, and after extremely strict endogamy that survived through the 20th century began. So, genetically, those guys are pretty similar.

                  But I can gather some of what worked there by looking at what worked for England in the time of the industrial revolution, by projecting the successful part of Christianity on to the successful part of Hinduism, to the extent there is not a contradiction. Of which there is plenty, but not on issues such as marriage.

                  There are a lot more demons in Hinduism as it is practiced today, and obviously there are dramatic material deficiencies that follow as a result. So the mustard seed might be obscured by a lot more muck, but it is alive and well — and in some ways more so than in the west. You do not believe it, but the important sacraments which govern Hindu life are not usually filled with demons, and observed as they were observed a very, very long time ago. And the meaning contained therein is fully compatible with patriarchy, indeed ordains it.

                • someDude says:


                  Then what comes first? The caeser or the Prophet/Archbishop. Past precedent/Historical record/Folklore from India is that the Archibishop came first and he mentored the Caeser. I can readily point to three cases. Other Hindu commentators may correct me.

                  1. Chanakya-Chandragupta (Maurya dynasty/Empire)

                  2. Vidyaranya-Harihara&Bukka Raya (Vijayanagara Empire)

                  3. Baba Ramdas-Shivaji (Maratha Empire)

                  We’re hoping for another one, but one that calls out demons in Hinduism and instructs Caeser to do his thing.

                  Also, whether Hindus should convert to Sikhism en masse may also be something worth looking into. Sikhism has considerably fewer demons and we don’t think of them as different from us and Sikhs themselves claim to be the only real Hindus left in India. We could be Hindu-Sikhs.

                • jim says:

                  Sikhism is faith whose center is the army. If no real army, no real faith. Old type Sikhi is sovereign or in a state of war and rebellion. They lost. Having lost, they lost their core. Hindus converting to Sikhs does not convert Sikhs to Sikhs.

                  Christianity and most forms of Hinduism leave that stuff to Caesar. Which is a weakness in wartime, a strength in peace, and a very great strength when under hostile occupation. It is easier for a Christian to remain Christian under defeat and occupation by an enemy faith, than a Sikh to remain Sikh. Replaced their center with a martial symbols. To become actual Sikhs, have to work towards recovering their center.

                  Christians have lost their hierarchy for the most part. Old type Roman Catholics are in a bind analogous to the bind the Sikh’s are in. Sikhs are in a better position than Roman Catholics, but, under hostile occupation, still a major flaw.

                  The major flaw in mainstream Hinduism is the substitution of ritual cleanliness for actual cleanliness, which is analogous to the Sikh problem of a ritual army for an actual army. Christianity has always been protected to some extent from this class of problem, being born in a revolt against this class of problem.

                  But what is biting everyone is the woman question. The only people taking effective action on this while under hostile occupation are old type Muslims. If we don’t fix it, the future is old type Islam.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  [*bombast deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  As Brahmins and Jews substitute ritual cleanliness for actual cleanliness, you substitute ritual sovereignty for actual sovereignty. Harvard smiles and gives you a pat on the head.

  32. Mister Grumpus says:

    Notice how Russia might be pulling off a more fair election in Donbass than Michigan, Wisconsin or Pennsylvania can.

    Then notice how much organization, firepower, and ready capability for violence — right up to nuclear — have been required to make it possible IRL, just for an opinion poll.

    One fair vote, one fair count, one time? Do I remember that from somewhere?

    Eye opening and disturbing.

    Now that the “sham election” meme is out there… God 2024 is going to hurt.

  33. Severian says:

    Looks like something might really be happening in China.
    From a very pro China account just now:

    • Severian says:

      Actually disregard this.
      I completely fell for a sarcastic post. Better off deleting this thing.

  34. The Cominator says:

    Re China coup, the flight cancelations add credibility to the coup rumor I was wondering why they’d cancel flights then I thought they’d do it if they intended to arrest all Xis political allies.

    Good hopefully the Maoist scum is gone.

    • Kunning Drueger says:

      I call you brother, so don’t hear what I’m not saying. We need China to be whole. We need them to throw off the plans and efforts of those that would neuter my sons and put you in a shallow grave. If They coup Xi, you, Desantis, us, and everyone good and honest is fucked. I know Covid is the only thing that matters to you, and I don’t begrudge you your victory, but you’ve been here too long to be that shortsighted without someone saying something. Don’t be the stable dinner dwarf, my friend.

      If the State Department can unseat Xi, the nukes are going to fly. Russia is playing for table stakes. I hope I’m wrong.

      • The Cominator says:

        if xi is coupled its not globohomo but Dengist in the army and party. Xi is more an ally than enemy of globohomo.

      • Sher Singh says:

        @Sher Singh
        As I’ve said before, I remain impressed by both the Sikhs and the Gurkha. But it must be pointed out the teaming mass of barefooted paupers and the only 20th century weapon we saw was the horse. My point stands.

        So, Singhs carrying guns & sabres in India is a result of Globohomo.
        The Brits giving up on banning Kirpans in the 1910s is as well.

        56D wignat chess where everything is the cathedral rather than their empty existence.


        • jim says:

          I am allowing the comment through, but it is unresponsive, and I probably should not.

          The point in the comment that you are ignoring and failing to respond to, is that you get to carry a big knife, because you are perceived as brown, and are indulgently granted brown privilege as one of our masters pets (because you look like the other pets, even if you are not in fact a pet) and no one takes your big knife seriously, while they do take our guns seriously – and if we carry some other weapons, they take them seriously also, because when whites riot, continents burn.

          Perhaps they should take you seriously, and before 1840 they did take you seriously. But, perhaps because ignorant of history, they do not take you seriously now. You are not being respected, you are being indulged and patronized.

          • Sher Singh says:

            I carry a 3ft Sword. Nihang Singhs carry guns openly no license.
            White social technology is to respect the state & love thy neighbor.

            That’s how Europeans lost their tribes, clans & now “race”.
            W/o politicized kin-ship units, whites fail to see how every other group resists state authority inherently – they don’t internalize orders the way Hajnal whites do.

            More a case of shooting the messenger – whites don’t riot, they march.
            The state makes them march, and the state is woke.

            That’s my only point, and I don’t care to belabour it further.


            • Kunning Drueger says:

              Fascinating. Years of respect cultivated by living and working amongst Sikhs all being undone by one goal post shifting, bitchmade mudskin. You knew exactly what I meant, and you made Jim explain it to you, only to stick up your nose and pretend you are above it all. The fact that you ported your response from a past comment to this one, and lack the skill, tenacity, or sense to connect the two different topics is proof positive that this ride is too big for one track dirt people. Go wave your sword at the clouds while you play bouncer for your Hindu betters. Your only here to wave the pendant of a people who never asked you to. Anti-white invective is the only tune you have, and you aren’t particularly good at singing it.

            • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

              You can carry a sword or a gun because it does not matter if you carry a sword or a gun; you are not a serious threat. You would very quickly find that your license, while unofficial, is still very real should you step out of line. Any resistance to the Cathedral would see that unofficial license revoked, and police coming to enforce upon you the same laws they enforce upon whites. You are more a slave than the disarmed whites because you cannot even see the chains and bars keeping you in.

              • Sher Singh says:

                > Any resistance to the Cathedral would see that unofficial license revoked, and police coming to enforce upon you the same laws they enforce upon whites.

                What like the 10 of thousands of Sikhs killed in the 80s & 90s?
                [*unresponsive, boring, and endlessly repeatitious abuse deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  No, like the millions of Tutsi genocided in the Congo by Cathedral funded proxies provided with close ground support by Cathedral aircraft manned by Cathedral pilots, and artillery support by Cathedral artillery manned by Cathedral troops.

                  What made this genocide possible was the blood diamonds attack. The Cathedral deplatformed and demonetized the Tutsi large scale self defense organizations, so the self defense organizations switched from US dollars to uncut diamonds to purchase weapons and organize logistics, so the Cathedral demonetized uncut diamonds.

                  And they have demonetized you, so that any time they get irritated by their brown pets getting uppity, they can, and will, exterminate you man woman and child as they exterminated the Tutsi in the Congo.

                  They laugh at your toy swords, which are toys because they have taken away the means that would allow you to use weapons in a large scale organized collective way.

                  Which is why Plonky2 going open source is a huge deal, because it makes possible a crypto currency that is strongly resistant to the blood diamonds attack.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Do not forget Waco. They will burn you, your women, and your children alive, bury the evidence with bulldozers, and pose for victory photos above your graves. Your entire religion within the West poses less of a threat to the Cathedral that the Branch Davidians.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  We had Bluestar & the Partition. Lakhs of Muslims in body bags wasn’t a GAE plan – you can tell from their telegrams.

                  Some states such as Italy or Denmark still oppose the Kirpan. A Singh was arrested in North Carolina for it yesterday. It’s definitely a struggle for basic religious dignity. However, no place above 0.5% Sikh bars it at all.

                  The references to toy swords are uncalled for and blasphemous. Sikhs are better armed than all groups but White Americans – who Imo are that way due to a historic accident, only 1/3 of Americans own guns.



                  “Your entire religion within the West poses less of a threat to the Cathedral that the Branch Davidians.”

                  Within the decade, there’ll be more Sikhs proportionally within Canada & Australia than the Indian Republic. Like I said, I’m bullish on Sikhi because the Khalsa has defeated hordes of white & black attackers in alliance before such as DasRajna (Battle of Kings)


                  A new post-Industrial (Victorian) white phenotype is emerging which is immune to GAE propaganda, and state efforts – I’m bullish on its growth & expansion.


                  “Western Europe, State Formation, and Genetic Pacification” by Peter Frost & Henry C. Harpending.

                  We’re anti cow slaughter, anti inter-caste marriage, pro Dharmic etc. Neither pro nor anti GAE it varies by issue – however, the Khalsa bows only to the Guru.

                  “The Khalsa is never a satellite to another power.

                  They are either fully sovereign or in a state of war and rebellion. ”


                • jim says:

                  > “The Khalsa is never a satellite to another power.
                  > They are either fully sovereign or in a state of war and rebellion. ”

                  But you are not in a state of war and rebellion, while the plain meaning of your faith is that you should be. Your faith is being converged. Your militarism is merely carefully symbolic, and your fertility rate is plunging.

                  And if you were in a state of war and rebellion, you would be crushed like an ant, because entryism and the fact that the state has complete control of your money makes collective violence difficult.

                  > Within the decade, there’ll be more Sikhs proportionally within Canada & Australia than the Indian Republic

                  The branch Davidians posed more of a threat than any number of Sikhs, because they were collectively organizing to give effect to old type Christian marriage. You can start boasting when being a brave and loyal member of the Khalsa guarantees one an obedient virgin wife.

                  You are preaching old type Sikhi to new type Sikhs, just as I am preaching old type Christianity to new type post Christians, so I am going to censor all your anti Christian Sikh triumphalism, and all your anti white Sikh triumphalism.

                  White Christians beat you, and you are still beaten and still under the thumb of the degenerate successors to White Christians.

                  Well, we are under that thumb also, so let us not take potshots at each other. You started taking pot shots first.

                • Jatt Arya says:


                  Also, I thought I was using Sher Singh here but it Was Jatt Arya.

                  You can see I’ve just been away for a few years, but am a longtime commentator.

                  Don’t appreciate the censorship. 3 years on, I still haven’t separated the White Mass from GAE (worship/minions). However, a non-GAE White faction has emerged, and it’s appreciated.


                • Jatt Arya says:

                  Your faith is being converged. Your militarism is merely carefully symbolic, and your fertility rate is plunging.

                  And if you were in a state of war and rebellion, you would be crushed like an ant, because entryism and the fact that the state has complete control of your money makes collective violence difficult.

                  We have no reason for collective violence [*triumphalism deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  I don’t see anything to be triumphant about. You are under the thumb of Harvard, as much as any mainstream Christian Church, and in the stuff I deleted you implicitly admitted what you explicitly denied. A whole lot of Sikhs were willing to act as their religion demanded, but in the end, unable to act, for the reasons I described. Harvard has taken away your capability for collective violence, even though collective violence is the very center of Sikhi.

                  And you are not going to get it back until being a brave and loyal member of the Sikh military reliably gets one an obedient virgin wife.

                • Jatt Arya says:

                  > I don’t see anything to be triumphant about. You are under the thumb of Harvard, as much as any mainstream Christian Church, and in the stuff I deleted you implicitly admitted what you explicitly denied. A whole lot of Sikhs were willing to act as their religion demanded, but in the end, unable to act, for the reasons I described.

                  The state withdrew the farm bills.. So we won.
                  [*empty boast deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  You are and were in chains, and were protesting a change in those chains. The state has a monopoly of buying and selling those farm products. This is sovereignty? Avoiding unfavorable change in your chains is winning?

                • Sher Singh says:

                  You can start boasting when being a brave and loyal member of the Khalsa guarantees one an obedient virgin wife.

                  Why boast about it? Women belong [*deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  Sikhs have the symbols but not the substance – your reproduction rate is collapsing.

                  Much as you have the symbols of an army, but not in fact the substance, as has been repeatedly demonstrated in recent times.

                  Which is why the Cathedral feels comfortable indulging your empty pretenses.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  Idk why you’d delete [*deleted again*]

                • jim says:

                  Because the soldiers of the taliban have authority over their land, their gardens, their homes, their children, and their women, and Sikhs do not.

                  As I said before, empty boasts. The Cathedral smiles and gives you a pat on the head for being boastful and brown.

                  The Cathedral left you the empty symbols of your army, your land, your homes, and your women. It left you your weapons, but took away the capability to use them collectively. As it did our weapons.

                  You substitute the symbols of army and authority for an actual army and actual authority, and when the Cathedral pats you on the head you boast you have intimidated it.

                  This is akin to the Jews substituting the letter of the law for obedience to God’s commands, a violation vehemently denounced by Jesus, and forty years after his death demonstrated in blood literal and spiritual, resulting in their prophesied expulsion. You need a prophet who will tell the Sikhs that they need an actual army that will enable them to take actual authority. He will probably get the treatment Jesus got, but perhaps be more violent about it.

                  You need to start with money that the government cannot control, then proceed to logistics and advanced weaponry, and then organized collective violence to establish an order that gives you real individual and collective authority over your land, your gardens, your homes, your women, and your children.

                  Your boasts are irritating to us, disruptive of this blogs community, and harmful yourself and your fellow Sikhs, for they are acceptance of Cathedral fake reality.

                • Anon says:

                  You are like a bull in china shop.

                • alf says:

                  Your boasts are irritating to us, disruptive of this blogs community, and harmful yourself and your fellow Sikhs, for they are acceptance of Cathedral fake reality.

                  Nail on the head. Pride is the original sin.

                • Starman says:

                  @Sher Singh

                  “ho Imo are that way due to a historic accident, only 1/3 of Americans own guns.

                  That statistic is just as fake and gay as the fake FIRE GDP of blue cities.

                • Guy says:

                  I’m constantly amazed by how many people have guns. I’m surrounded by progressives who hate 2A but make a principled exception for themselves. After all, what if some savage breaks into THEIR home?

                • Sher Singh says:


                • Kunning Druegger says:

                  Hi, I am Sher Singh! You may remember me from such hits as [deleted for gross stupidity] and [unresponsive, endlessly boring]. Today, I am being paid by [not a real group] to tell you all about [Cathedral propaganda masticated then spit out by some ethnicity somewhere] and why you, the whites, are responsible for [dumb shit we did to ourselves].

                • Jatt Arya says:

                  I don’t need money to yeet on whites. They do it to themselves.

                  Jim said you shouldn’t burn niggers for marrying white.
                  Christcucks are ok with a biblical Brazil.

                  Not like this punk will approve any responses.
                  O well, demographics stay ticking. 🤷‍♀️⚔️


                • jim says:

                  How are Sikh demographics going, now that you have lost authority over your land, your gardens, your homes, your wives, and your children, and, contrary to your religion, failed to go to war, Taliban style, over it?

                • i says:


                  I’m surrounded by progressives who hate 2A but make a principled exception for themselves. After all, what if some savage breaks into THEIR home?

                  They don’t actually believe what they profess. What they believe is demonstrated by their actions.

                  And of course they are against 2A for you. Not for them.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  > How are Sikh demographics going, now that you have lost authority over your land, your gardens, your homes, your wives, and your children, and, contrary to your religion, failed to go to war, Taliban style, over it?

                  Nihang Singh demographics are fine.
                  There isn’t a generation without rebellion in Panjab.

                  The Taliban have mountains & a foreign sponsor or 3.
                  You’re showing your misunderstanding of war.


                • jim says:

                  > > How are Sikh demographics going, now that you have lost authority over your land, your gardens, your homes, your wives, and your children, and, contrary to your religion, failed to go to war, Taliban style, over it?

                  > Nihang Singh demographics are fine.

                  Sikh population of the Punjab declined from eighty percent in the 1970s to fifty seven percent in 2011. You are probably a minority today. Don’t lecture us on white displacement. You have lost your homeland.

                  You are beaten, old type Christians beat you, and you have failed to rebel against the proxies of the demon worshipping memetic descendants of Christians. The Sikh leadership are also converging your religion to the Harvard ruled Hinduism of those proxies, and you personally and individually are converging it on this blog – posting cow worship while dismissing the things that make it possible to use collective violence as a Jewish plot.

                • Sher Singh says:


                  55% in 1961 & 57 today. You have no clue who or what Nihangs are.
                  Sikhs were always a minority in greater Punjab.


                  Women belong behind the veil, if the state wants to take em into its harem – you fight it.


                • jim says:

                  Image search on Nihang shows a gross under representation of young men, and holiness spiraling on ridiculous turbans, rather than impressive weapons. What happened to the shoes with metal points for lethal kicks?

                  Those turbans are the same stuff Christ called out, when he said “they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments,”

                  > Women belong behind the veil, if the state wants to take em into its harem – you fight it.

                  But you are not fighting it. And if you did, the state would be on to you like it was on to the Branch Davidians.

                • Sher Singh says:


                • jim says:

                  You are focusing on irrelevant, trivial, and minor aspects of the Sikh faith that will not get you in trouble with Harvard. I am suppressing this stuff as I suppress the material from the fake Christians.

                  You in tones of triumph and the language of victory announce your weakness and surrender.

                • Sher Singh says:


                  The younger gen supports em, and war will fix the rest.
                  Endia’s given up on quick cultural change due to 80s.

                  You’re right in pointing out how bad things are,
                  I’m comparing it to how much worse things could be.

                  The Kirpan could be outright banned or made dull.
                  Italy tried pushing plastic ones, Rajputs can’t carry arms.

                  The Large Turbans are a few men who do it to encourage youngsters. I don’t do it, but will not condemn nor see it insulted.

                  “A Singh protects cows and Brahmans.”


                  You’re not one to tell us which parts of Maryada we follow or not.


                • jim says:

                  > The Large Turbans are a few men who do it to encourage youngsters. I don’t do it, but will not condemn nor see it insulted.

                  You urgently need a prophet who will insult it as Jesus Christ insulted broad phylacteries.

                  The clothing code for Nihang requires impressive weapons and armor, impressive turbans are a detail, a detail ridiculous if disproportionate to the weapons and armor. As I type this there is hanging on the wall opposite me a medievalish weapon more impressive than any of the medievalish weapons that came up on the first page of image search for Nihang. If the old men carried that it would encourage the youngsters.

                  > You’re right in pointing out how bad things are,
                  > I’m comparing it to how much worse things could be.

                  No you are not. You are boasting as if you were following, as if Sikh’s were following, the martial commandments of your faith while running away from them as hard as you can.

                  > war will fix the rest

                  there will be no war, for you, you personally and the Sikh leadership, are running away from the things you can and must do in peace and in defeat to prepare for war and victory.

                  Talking as if you were actually martial and actually in a state of war is a substitute for what what your faith requires, and I am not going to allow you to wave this substitute around on this blog, and even less should your religious leaders allow it at home.

                  You are defeated and occupied. Your faith requires you to never allow this. Having allowed it, your faith should require to act in the reality of today, while preparing for a different reality tomorrow. Empty boasting is not what your faith requires. Real preparation is what your faith requires.

                  What you have been doing on this blog is the equivalent of what the Jews did under Roman occupation – their faith said that foreign conquest was a punishment from God for disobeying his commandments. They had been Jewing God, and they escalated their “obedience” to the Lord’s commandments by Jewing God twice as hard.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  [*empty boasting deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  Sikhs are converging, not following, Sikhi, and you are converging Sikhi in the direction away from conflict with the Cathedral and towards Harvard’s hindu proxies in India.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  You urgently need a prophet who will insult it as Jesus Christ insulted broad phylacteries.
                  The bigger problem is Vegetarian Fake Sikhs who push gender equality, inter-caste marriage & Symbolic Kirpans.

                  An empty symbol being the antithesis of the Sikh religion, and Kshatriya Dharma in general.

                  That falsehood is destroyed with every tobacco or beef lynching done by Nihang Singhs. The Dal (warband) is also pushing back against heresies & Christian missionaries – coming off a victory against the state in 2021 where the Guru’s Flag flew atop Delhi’s Red Fort.

                  A Sikh is one who eats meat, a Brahmin is one who does not.

                  The Veggie Sikh bs is a product of British times & institutions.
                  It’s a spent force though – elites either support Nihang Singhs or liberalism. Morale is very high following the farmer’s agitation.

                  No you are not. You are boasting as if you were following, as if Sikh’s were following, the martial commandments of your faith while running away from them as hard as you can.


                  We’re allowed to fight on the run. You can’t make men fight who don’t want to – a peacetime army’s job is to maintain customs, and traditions.


                  With the Pathans in Kabul war will surely come.
                  Sikhi spreads during war.


                  I’m just someone who carries a Sword. My life’s changed since I started doing so, make of that what you will.


                • jim says:

                  Fair enough, but I am not going to allow you to $#!& up the comments with triumphalism, when you are merely enlarging your phylacteries.

                  Sikhi does indeed spread during war, being a religion adapted for a continual state of war, but you are not going to get anywhere without a foreign sponsor, and you are not going to get a foreign sponsor while running away from the center and core of your faith, which is the capacity for collective violence.

                  Instead of preparing your religion for a return to state of war while adapting it to defeat and hostile occupation, you are adapting it to permanent defeat and and permanent hostile occupation. And being obnoxiously triumphant about this adaption.

                  Well, no alternative to adaption to defeat and hostile occupation, but boastfully celebrating such adaption as if in martial state of war is not going to be allowed on my blog. The problem is to distinguish between concessions to reality that keep you alive for better days, concessions to power that make better days improbable, and adaptions to defeat that make future victory possible. And your boastful triumphalism is the reverse of this.

                  Holiness spiraling on safe things like absurd turbans is an adaption to defeat that makes better days improbable. Similarly cows. Should be holiness spiraling on control of women, not protection of cows.

                  Aryans eat meat. Refraining from cow slaughter is an ancient holiness spiral on respect for property rights in roaming cows – a holiness spiral that denies, rather than upholding, that property right. Much as priestly celibacy is an ancient holiness spiral on respect for men’s property rights in women, a holiness spiral that results a Church infested by faggots who deny, rather than uphold, those property rights in women

                • jim says:

                  > > You urgently need a prophet who will insult it as Jesus Christ insulted broad phylacteries.

                  > The bigger problem is Vegetarian Fake Sikhs who push gender equality, inter-caste marriage & Symbolic Kirpans.

                  All Kirpans are symbolic for the core of the Sikh religion is organization for collective violence, which you are running away from. A ridiculously large turban is just as empty a symbol of superior holiness as vegetarianism. The vegan sikh is displaying superior holiness in a way that violates obvious precepts of the Sikh faith, and the man with silly hat is displaying superior holiness in a way that subtly violates the precepts of the Sikh faith.

                  > > You are boasting as if you were following, as if Sikh’s were following, the martial commandments of your faith while running away from them as hard as you can.

                  > We’re allowed to fight on the run.

                  You are not fighting on the run. To the extent that there is Sikh violence, it strikes at what the Cathedral does not care about or would prefer to be suppressed, and fails to prepare for large scale coordinated violence. Sikh violence is itself converged.

                • jim says:

                  > That falsehood is destroyed with every tobacco or beef lynching done by Nihang Singhs.

                  Going after tobacco and beef merchants is a displacement activity, akin to the outrage of shills on Gab about “pedophiles” – meaning straight men having sex with fertile age females, while those shills piously ignore the faggot schoolteachers who are sexually attracted to all people without boobs regardless of chronological age who are surgically removing their daughters boobs.

                  You guys need, and your faith requires, control of your land, your gardens, your homes, your wives, and your children, and the capacity to organize large scale collective violence, a job that Christianity assigns to Caesar, but a job that is part of Sikhi. The Cathedral which hates meat and hates tobacco smiles benignly upon you when you go after its targets.

                  Going after targets that the Cathedral does not like either is less silly than wearing ridiculously large turbans without the weapons on display that make a big turban considerably less ridiculous, but it still a displacement activity from the demands of your faith. It is still convergence.

                • Kunning Druegger says:

                  > You’re not one to tell us which parts of Maryada we follow or not.

                  If this is the case, who are you to tell us anything? Again, I ask you, why are you here? If you want to poke fun at suffering white people, why not go on Black Twitter and make fun of a dead queen or regale your fellow browns with witty anecdotes of once being Kangz? This place has a purpose, and a synthetic tribe with things to contribute. I am struggling to figure out why you are here, what you want, and what you have to offer. You may not realize this if you don’t have any experience with western media, but we get a metric fuckton of depressing news, divide & conquer propaganda, and just the worst memetic garbage basically 24/7. So there’s really no for another mentally colonized crybaby shitting up the comments section.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  You are telling me that you are fighting against beef and tobacco? Impressive! That will sure show the Cathedral! Are you going to go beat up people to protect homos, next? Or maybe you could send your daughters to school instead of getting married. With enemies like you, what will the Cathedral ever do?

                • Sher Singh says:

                  @jim Agree on everything but cow slaughter. We still eat buffalo, and cattle raiding is encouraged.

                  @kunning Came back to comment due to a blog post elsewhere, normally just read. Pulled in now,

                  @jim Could you do the courtesy of offering suggestions?

                  The situation as it stands is Sikhs have 2 1/2 armies.

                  1. The SGPC (Gurudawara comittee) Task Force is arming as the state pulls away from bodyguard activities

                  2. Nihang Singhs

                  3. Avg initiated Sikh

                  1 & 2 mostly have bolt actions & double barrels.
                  3 has melee weapons in a country which lacks even those.

                  1 & 2 can co-ordinate on a semi-mass scale. 3 has village panchayats or councils which can mobilize manpower.


                  However, none have any artillery or air (drone) power.

                  Indian laws related to lower castes & women are weaponized.
                  Either can get an extended family arrested on an accusation of insult & are non-bailable.

                  A few thousand Sikh youth have been arrested under anti-terror laws often for made up things. The above & these laws are all non-bailable. Trials can take decades,

                  Personally, think we’re staring at the abyss as every issue but the woman question is a distraction.


                • jim says:

                  Can they use violence at scale? Or can they merely celebrate the empty rituals of violence at scale?

                  Fairly frequently push comes to shove. And what I see is that the Indian state can push and not get shoved.

                • Sher Singh says:

                  As far as killing over beef & tobacco – violence & challenging the state’s doctrinal monopoly on it is good.

                  All things are solved by violence, and it is the solution to all problems. Weapons are the physical aspect of the Goddess.

                  Escalating violence as the state pulls back is how you end up with Raj. It’s always a back-forth.

                  You cannot separate women from violence as the Goddess demands blood.


                • jim says:

                  > As far as killing over beef & tobacco – violence & challenging the state’s doctrinal monopoly on it is good.

                  Is antifa and BLM a challenge to the state’s monopoly of violence?

                  The traditional monopoly has always been state monopoly of large scale force, and state restraint of private violence to those targets the state finds appropriate.

                • Sher Singh says:


                • jim says:

                  Last time that I am aware that Sikhs used violence at scale was partition, when the British just gave up and left you to your own devices, and that was not really violence at scale. Just lots of small groups independently wiping out lots of small groups.

                  Any good examples since then? Any good examples before then, but after white Christian warriors defeated you?

                • i says:


                  “Going after tobacco and beef merchants is a displacement activity, akin to the outrage of shills on Gab about “pedophiles” – meaning straight men having sex with fertile age females”

                  It also has real world impact like the stings on what they consider predators and groomers I sometime see videos popping up in regards to those incidents.

                  Chris Hansen and his show which existed even at the earlier stage of the Internet.

                  FBI arrests and so on.

                  Social commentary including commentary by actual claimed victims of grooming and SA in the comment section here:

                  And this guy commenting on 4chan degeneracy:

                  And his commentators.

                  But it is interesting that they all involve out of wedlock sex or assault if their cases are true. And men not interested in marriage and family.

    • Mister Grumpus says:

      Take it easy. Flight cancellations suggest that something is up, but gives us no clue as to what it is and which direction it’s going. One could just as easily peg it as Xi’s side winning, and trapping their enemies inside the country.

      That said, wherever you’re getting rumors and information about the China situation, please share, because I have no idea where to even start.

      • The Cominator says:

        No solid info other than lots of flights being cancelled suddenly (and not due to muh zero covid) so no idea whats going on… but its something. Xi is not appearing… he could be trying to trick his enemies into coming out before the party congress though.

  35. Kunning Druegger says:

    Wagner Group is interesting in terms of memetic sovereignty:

    There’s something going on in the cracks and around the edges of this war. An identity is taking shape and it may supplant the dominant Occidental Dissenter meme that has existed for quite a while. The biggest and best critics of the West have always been in the west, but that may be changing. We talk a big game, on this blog and elsewhere, but these Slavic warriors seem to reserve talking for jokes and instead co-locate their money and their mouths. Just a thought, and it could just be some well crafted propaganda.

    • Kunning Druegger says:

      Sorry for the samefagging y’all, just working my way through updates now that I have time.

      Notice… well, notice everything. The harsh and antiseptic décor of the building, the ill fitting clothes of the released POW. The trim bodies of the 2 women. The unabashed physicality as these owned women are restored to their possessor, and I am not referring to some twisted, western masturbatory fantasy; his wife and his sister had lost him, and he has been restored to them. They were on the fast track to lonely babushka, and now they get to be women again.

      I get the sense that every “Russian” soldier has a place, a purpose, a life on hold while he is away fighting, while every Ruthenian partisan is totally absorbed by his act of resistance. When this war ends, the Hohols will go back to non-existence on the periphery of the GAE, and every Russian will go back to their life. Subjective and biased in the extreme, I know. But no one dies nobly or valuably for sodomites, and anyone can get to Valhalla if they choose to face the foe.

      Maybe it is just my perennial emotional vampirism, but those sobs felt real, completely blind to the camera. When Western women cry, my first thought is that they are trying to manipulate someone; it always feels like an act, and an easy one. When these Occidentals weep, it is so begrudged, like the tears have been extracted from them at great cost.

    • Neurotoxin says:

      interesting in terms of memetic sovereignty

      This reminds me: I was reading the Evil Vizier/Undead Odalisque blog on female beauty
      and toward the end there’s a picture of a Jackson Pollack painting with a caption that begins:

      “Never forget that the rich fell for modern art. Wealthy status-seekers lack memetic sovereignty…”

      The ideas and language are spreading.

      • Aidan says:

        Pretty sure John Sanilac at least reads jim, I think I’ve seen him comment here before. We had some discussions on Twitter- I can’t get behind some of his taste, like favoring plastic surgery to cartoonish proportions for women.

        • someDude says:

          I’m not sure I care for his use of memetic terminology without offering proper credit as to the origin of the term. I understand if he does not want others to know that he comes to this blog, yet, I can’t get behind it. I can;t get myself to endorse that sort of thing. Something feels off.

          My original dislike of Harari was also this, that he passed of ideas originating elsewhere (some from MoldBug) as his own. I don’t much care for that sort of thing.

          Hell, I found Jim’s blog because couple Hindu nationalist bloggers readily credited Jim and even linked to his blog, especially his posts on Leftism. Hell, DharmicReality and Suones also both readily credit Jim even if in opposition to his ideas. They don’t pass of Jim’s ideas and the ideas originating in the comment section of this Blog as their own.

          • Neurotoxin says:

            Giving credit where credit is due is good. But using a word or phrase as if it’s already well-known is an effective way to spread it. It’s how the left gets insane neologisms like “homophobia” etc. into common use. They just act like it’s so well known that if the reader doesn’t know what it means, the reader is a weirdo. So the reader looks it up, or guesses its meaning from context and starts using it himself.

            (I remember “homophobia” appearing, like a switch had been thrown, during the Matthew Shepard affair. One day that word didn’t exist. 24 hours later it was in every newspaper.)

            Since the left is evil and their language is designed to obscure reality, this tactic is evil when they do it. Since we are good and are trying to spread language that illuminates reality, this tactic is good when our side uses it.

            • jim says:

              > Since the left is evil and their language is designed to obscure reality, this tactic is evil when they do it. Since we are good and are trying to spread language that illuminates reality, this tactic is good when our side uses it.

              Rather, this tactic is good when applied to achieve the rectification of names, to ensure that people can speak about unspeakable concepts, and bad when used to promote anticoncepts, to make it impossible to speak about reality, independent of who is using it. It is just that we ordinarily use it for rectification of names, and they usually use it for anticoncepts, nuspeak, doubletalk, and doublethink.

              It is not good when we use it because it is we are the ones using it. It is good or evil according to the purpose to which it is wielded, and we are wielding it to good purpose, while they are wielding it to evil purpose.

      • Neurotoxin says:

        On Twitter, Odalisque just reported that Twitter shadowbanned his feminine beauty thread.

        Listen, you old and fat Titter hag: Man are not going to be attracted to you just because you censor them when they talk about what they find attractive.

  36. Kunning Druegger says:

    Here’s an interesting post from ASB (Canadian Russophiles):

    “Another thing that needs to be said, the war will be very different once the new Russian Armed Forces troops touch down in Ukraine.

    Up until now, majority.. and we mean a huge majority of the fighting was carried out by Wagner, Rusich and the people’s militias. Russian Armed Forces were carrying out a supportive role. They were in the background. They were providing air support, logistics and possibly artillery strikes, etc — like we said, they were in the background. Probably 70-150+ KM behind the front lines. (With some exceptions)

    However, this time, as Kadyrov said — “the war will start now. Up until now it was child’s play” (or something along those lines, don’t recall the exact words he used) — and this is true.

    Those who watch closely, nobody knows where Russian troops are in Ukraine. There’s no information about this. However the Russian MOD regularly includes divisions, battalions and units of the LPR/DPR in their reports and their areas of operations. There’s basically no information on Russian brigades and their place of deployment, because realistically — they are not deployed on the front lines. They play supportive and specialized roles.

    This is all about to change now, it is going to be Russian army proper doing the fighting.

    This will show in terms of operational security (unfortunately for us, this means the fog of war will be real because the leaks will be non existent), logistics and equipment, and highly likely — modern technology used on the battlefield in form of EW, drones & aviation.”

    Additionally, ASB states that what is being reported about China is bollocks. To be fair, ASB maintains a tight political line: anti-GAE and pro-[anti-GAE]. They are very consistent about this. I have received temporary bans and stern warnings for things they thought were not properly worded, and I’ve also received grudging admissions. They axed their comment section every time the doom posting got too heavy, and they have maintained a significant degree of separation from the obvious RF-shill accounts. I trust them implicitly to “be themselves,” though I don’t necessarily trust them, if that makes any sense. their tack seems to be “GAE MSM is always lies” and that’s an excellent lodestone in these times.

    • Red says:

      The GAE is currently trying to take down Iran with their usual color revolution crap. Wouldn’t be surprising if they tried the same in China. The Chinese public is very unhappy with Xi for his attempts to bring back Marxism. That’s fertile ground for Cathedral fuckery.

      That being said, I don’t know what going on in China if anything.

      • Yul Bornhold says:

        Game is up on color revolutions. States know how they work and how to stop them. Recently, the cathedral tried a color revolution in somewhere-stan (Kazakhstan?). The supreme leader there begged for Russian. When the opposition saw the armed might of Russia incoming, they realized the moral arc of history wasn’t going to work for them and they disintegrated.

        At this point, any leader who doesn’t have a plan for color revolution is a fool. Pretty dumb of the cathedral to color code their little operations. People might not have noticed the pattern if they hadn’t.

        • Red says:

          Color revolution street roits where cover for GAE agents overthrowing the government. The GAE doesn’t need in order them to overthrow a government.

          • Anonymous Fake says:

            [*deleted for presupposing that antifa is a manifestation of spontaneous outrage at oppression, and presupposing that your interlocutors take it for granted*]

            • Anonymous Fake says:

              I did *NOT* say Antifa was spontaneous or oppressed! They are the children of middle management deep state workers, whose interests are opposed to the nominal rulers of the nation [*deleted*]

              • jim says:

                Antifa is astroturf, funded and organized by Soros, who is a laundry for government money. They are the instrument of the state.

                I said this many times, and you keep writing as if no one said it.

        • Wolf says:

          Recent color revolutions also failed in Myanmar and Thailand, correct?

          • jim says:

            Yes, color revolution strategy worked great for a while, but people got wise to it.

            It was a crude escalation of methods that Global American Empire has been using in a more subtle and clever manner for a very long time. Which crude escalation has damaged the effectiveness of those methods.

            The sovereign smells a color revolution, he looks for foreign tentacles, and cuts off those tentacles.

            Our media tell us that Russia is a totalitarian terror state, but there is more freedom of speech in China than here, and lot more freedom of speech in Russia. Far too much. Putin needs to get chopping on those tentacles.

            Spiritual security requires memetic sovereignty. Putin is not memetically sovereign, that is his enormous weakness. Building the great Cathedral gets him half way there.

            • Publius Discretius says:

              Does patriarch Kirill announcing holy war counts as memetic sovereignty?

              • Jehu says:

                If Russian Orthodoxy was the spiritual hegemon in Russia, it would more or less grant memetic sovereignty for the duration of said holy war. But it’s not the spiritual hegemon, it’s probably only got 20-30% spiritual market share. So it helps, like having enough air power to contest enemy air supremacy helps, thereby getting it to just air superiority against you. But it’s not sovereignty or even close to it, although it’s moving in the right direction.

          • Mister Grumpus says:

            That Shanghai Cooperation Organization is surely running whole seminars on color revolutions now. Maybe even a proper school/institute just on the subject. What they are, how they work, and what to do, backed up with clear and concise case studies.

            “Come with us if you want to live.”

  37. Cloudswrest says:

    Anybody know what’s going on in China right now? Seeing rumors/reports of a lot of top level political instability.

    • Red says:

      It’s not clear what’s going on. My guess is the GAE ordered a coup of some sort.

      • The Cominator says:

        Xi Is a bad guy, the Woodrow Wilson of the 21st century and if it’s true I’m glad he’s gone. I don’t think it’s true but I hope so.

        He helped out the dems/jesuits with the covid hoax and has been inching back communism to his own country.

  38. Pseudo-Chrysostom says:*)

    ‘Member when, only a handful of years ago, ‘democracy is fake lol’ was Official Cool amongst tastemakers?

    We ‘member.

    (“vote not guaranteed to count”)

  39. i says:

    Jolly Heretic does pretty based videos on the group selected nature of Christianity:

    Genius Group Strategy that Christianity entails enabled the conquest of the world.

    Although he does comment on modern day maladies too like this so called “MAP” phenomenon:

    Is MAP some shill movement or something? Its like normalizing pederasty and at the same time lumping in normal sexuality and perversion. It is popping up more often on twitter and other I think shill discourses like on 4chan.

    • jim says:

      Yep, MAPs are shills.

      The word “pedophile” was created to normalize faggotry and pederasty.

      Since all straight males are attracted to all fertile females regardless of chronological age, all straight males are “pedophiles”. Replacing “pederast” with “pedophile” was intended to deny the obvious difference between faggots and straights. Faggots are repelled by firm bouncy breasts the way normal people are repelled by shit, and are attracted to male children and female children without breasts, straights are attracted to females with breasts.

      Observed behavior: I have dated, over a considerable age gap, chicks that looked fertile (boobs) and looked jailbait. No one blinked an eye, no one paid attention. The supposed rage against “pedophiles” is a displacement of the rage we are not allowed to express against faggots.

      No one reacts in real life to men dating fertile females regardless of chronological age, even though they theoretically know they are supposed to be horrified, outraged, and shocked.

      Yay boobs!


      • jim says:

        The real difference in sexual attraction between normal males and faggots is that faggots are allergic to breasts, and are attracted to adult males, boys, and girls that have not yet started to develop breasts. All normal males are pedophiles, in that they are attracted to all fertile females regardless of chronological age, and all faggots are pederasts, in that they are attracted to men and to children without breasts, regardless of chronological age.