Not a dog barked

Remember all those mighty and entirely spontaneous protests demanding that the Obama regime do what it quite obviously wanted to do and was quite obviously looking for justifications for doing, protests demanding that the government block every form of energy production in every white country, which obstructions have made the US into an energy importer for sixty years or so.

And, of course, with deep reluctance the Obama regime would invariably yield to the justified and entirely spontaneous and genuine rage of the mighty masses. </sarcasm>

Overnight (well, over the first one hundred and fifty days of the Trump regime), the US has become an energy exporter. Trump would repeal a regulation by executive order, and the next day coal miners would be digging coal, repeal another regulation, and the next day drillers would be pumping oil. One day he makes an executive order, the next day Americans in flyover country are back to work. The next day after that he makes another executive order, and the day after that, more Americans in flyover country are back to work.

You did not hear of this.

Probably because the mighty and justifiable enraged masses strangely failed to spontaneously show up to spontaneously demonstrate their might and spontaneous justified rage. They were always demanding that Obama shut down energy, but somehow, when Trump turns the energy policy of every previous Democratic and cuckservative president for the last sixty years arse over tit, no protests happen.

Funny thing that.

By the way did you know that there is overwhelming support for impeaching Trump? It must be true, I read it in the newspapers. </sarcasm>

Leftism has been a mass movement under both Democratic and cuckservative presidents, been a mass movement since nineteen sixty three. But Donald Trump gets elected, and suddenly and quietly it just is not a mass movement any more. Funny thing that.

Yes, the permanent government is giving Trump a hard time. Trump has not won yet, and maybe the permanent government will win. We are, or recently were, right on the edge of the special counsel impeaching Trump without bothering with that old fashioned two thirds vote in the senate. But Trump has cut off the permanent government at the knees, in that the mighty and justifiably enraged masses are no longer spontaneously demanding whatever the permanent government wants them to spontaneously demand this morning and no longer spontaneously enraged about whatever the permanent government wants them to be spontaneously enrage about this morning.

Reagan talked about defunding the left, Trump has actually made a start on defunding the left. Obviously there is a lot more defunding to be done, but suddenly leftists that do not yet have social justice warrior jobs are no longer expecting that they will get social justice warrior jobs in the very near future as a quid pro quo for the latest protest. That funding for the left has stopped its endless and open ended increase and has actually decreased, even if only by a little, has resulted in leftism as a mass movement vanishing in a puff of smoke.

This has resulted in an intense search for other sources of social justice warrior funding. Thus for example, we see complaints that venture capitalists that control large amounts of other people’s money should be subject to destruction at whim without evidence by social justice warriors. Cheryl tell us: “This is where it has to be fixed – the fact the burden of proof always falls on the person reporting the incident.”

“Fixing” this, of course, will have the effect that Silicon Valley venture capital will wind up funding social justice, rather than technical advance, which we already see happening with Uber, Airbnb, and Apple. Uber and Airbnb are committing social justice suicide. Apple has such deep pockets that it will likely survive, but probably not Airbnb and Uber.

Airbnb is trying to prevent Filipinos and Chinese from being racist. Would have more success preventing water from being wet.

Their power base in Silicon valley derives from appointments made by the Obama regime. Thus for example Cheryl, who is currently shaking down the management of Silicon Valley venture capital firms with sexual harassment allegations for which there is a curious lack of evidence, worked for a Malaysian startup fund funded by the Obama administration and the Malaysian govt. Not a tech person, not a startup person, a political commissar. In the course of accusing a venture capitalist of inappropriate sexual behavior, she depicted herself as engaging in behavior that I find entirely inappropriate in a woman – for example this evil venture capitalist somehow caused her to be alone with him, and, while alone with him in a private flat with a nice bed, somehow caused her to consume very large amounts of scotch. Pretty sure that if sex did not ensue, it is because he fought her off.

86 Responses to “Not a dog barked”

  1. Garr says:

    The problem with alpha-sociopaths is that they’ll turn on you in a second if they think you’re being disrespectful. You can’t punch them in the face, because they know guys that’ll kill you. This is a political problem, Viking! Well … warlords that can’t deal with insightful jesters won’t last long. The secret of British world-power: an aristocracy that didn’t simply murder the freaks.

    • Garr says:

      Drinking too fast — not the current post, either! Just as well. Bad personal incident, that’s all. The thread of connection is: civil war leads to feudalism, which is rule by personality (not by impersonal “elites”), i.e. local warlords, who are likely to kill you if you don’t make subservient gestures.

  2. Pseudo-chrysostom says:

    A liberally minded person tries to do everything without ever actually ‘directly’ doing it.

  3. Turtle says:

    Right-believing rulers such as St. Vladimir, Prince of Rus, and the Passion-Bearer Czar Nicholas are the saints supposed to help present-day governors, presidents, etc. So I pray to them about politics. It’s easier with icons, but I don’t have any of them yet. I prayed to St. Nicholas at church this past weekend, and I believe he is already aware of America’s struggles, and is helping us. I don’t expect any impeachment or assassination of Trump. Especially when reading his many books, it is clear he is a wise man, just not perfect yet.

  4. Glenfilthie says:

    I wouldn’t be too hard on Trump. Draining that swamp has placed him in great personal danger. The leftists have already fired the first warning shots, the beatings and back alley murders have begun, and shit is getting real.

    In fact, I fully expect a repeat of the JFK assassination. ‘The lone crazy, acting completely and totally alone’, somebody nobody ever heard of – will take him out with a surgical strike that should not have been possible. YJust as you were expected to believe that a loon could take out a president with a defective milsurp rifle, and bullets can travel in circles … you will be expected to believe Trump will be killed under equally improbable circumstances.

    America is an affront to human nature. The default govt model for the human animal is the law of the jungle: tyrannies, oligarchies, feudalism. Given the amount ncreasing number of shit skins flooding in, it is only a matter of time before the base defaults of the human animal reassert themselves. America is gone.

    • peppermint says:

      JFK was a dhimmicrat. If Trump had run as a dhimmicrat he would have been assassinated by now.

      Trump’s DoJ files criminal charges against “peaceful protesters” and journalists.

      I bet Sessions is considering which CNN execs to charge with the federal felony they know their staffers just committed.

  5. Alf says:

    In Cheryl’s defence, her account of events is fairly believable save for the hilarious hamster rationalisations (I was quite confused how I was suddenly alone with him! I was fooled for 2 years!).

    Goes to show how much women hate hate hate weak game. Dave made 1 half-assed attempt at kissing her and she remembers it as if she were raped.

    Seems Dave is the victim of his bad game. No weakness unpunished.

    • StringsofCoins says:

      It is always amusing to see a girl’s hamster at work. Oh my things just kept happening! There was more scotch in my glass somehow, somehow I was alone with him, if he didn’t have weak game it would be somehow his penis ended up inside of me. And these women somehow want men to believe they are anywhere near our equal. Laughable.

      • Joe says:

        Agreed. It also strikes me as another reason SJWs are doomed to eventually disappear…they make male-female relationships too dangerous for men to pursue and SJW men end up pussified to the extent that SJW aren’t interested in reproducing with them. If there wasn’t a danger of SJWs taking down all of us with them it would be amusing to sit and watch them self-destruct. If we somehow manage to split off and have our own country separate from them, the news dispatches from SJW-istan are going to be schadenfreudalicious.

        • Anonymous says:

          “For the happiness of women, we must institute forced arranged marriages for girls as soon as they hit puberty.” – AA

          • jim says:

            Left to their own devices, women make extremely bad sexual choices. They need a strong hand and firm guidance in sexual matters from a man who loves them and can compel them to do what is right.

            Which is to say, their father.

    • jim says:

      If he had actually raped her, would remember being seduced, and be shaking down a different venture capitalist.

    • Mister Grumpus says:

      > Goes to show how much women hate hate hate
      > weak game. Dave made 1 half-assed attempt at
      > kissing her and she remembers it as if she were
      > raped.
      > Seems Dave is the victim of his bad game.
      > No weakness unpunished.

      Damn. Thanks for the angle.

  6. Starman says:

    Sooner or later, God-Emperor Trump should arrest Cheryl for Extortion and Racketeering…

  7. viking says:

    Trump is the naive little boy that said the Empire has no clothes, everyone knew this but its now in the open. The left is wondering if they keep screeching hes crazy will it go back to normal. They lost places like those coal states and are being cautious they are not simply surrendering you will have to put bullets through tens or hundreds of thousand of leftists skulls before they surrender then you will have to severely oppress them for at least fifty years before you can hope to eradicate them and you will have to rebuld a culture of your own I cant thnk of a suitable foundation for that culture than race to some degree a “we” culture as apposed to a world culture.Christianity will have to be wiped its a jew meme designed to destroy solidarity. its an entryist ploy frag it.

    • Garr says:

      On Christianity — someone linked to this at Lion:

      and I found it interesting: the idea is that Christianity succeeded because that’s where the women were at, so the men followed them there. Author says that (1) due to no infanticide/abortion there was already a more even male-female ratio among Christians, and (2) due to high female status among Christians, women wanted to convert. A couple of doubts I have: first, reading Ovid gives me the impression that Romans were highly monogamous and that their marriages had pretty much the same tone that ours did in the 1950s; (2) if pagan Roman women were so low-status how were they allowed to convert to Christianity in the first place? (An interesting side-point that he makes is that Spartan women had much higher status than Athenian women did — they weren’t baby-killed at a higher rate than the boys were, they were educated, they owned land. He thinks that the higher the ratio of women to men, the higher the status of women because if there aren’t many women they’re treated as valuable property.)

      • jim says:

        I interpret the evidence as implying the direct opposite: That Christianity lowered the status of women, mandating subordination of women but good treatment of women. As a result, Christians enjoyed biological expansion at Mormon rates.

        They also enjoyed conversions of women to Christianity, for exactly the same reason as conservative old style Muslims are today enjoying conversion of Christian women to Islam.

        If his theory was valid, Christianity would today be booming among formerly Muslim women. Instead the opposite is, predictably, happening.

        • Turtle says:

          I visited a mosque this week, in an affluent suburb. It was the manliest place I’ve ever been, better in this sense than the only Orthodox men’s monastery I’ve visited. But, the guys were uncomfortable with me there, seeming to expect me to disrespect them and the religion, though they did kindly say “Salaam.”

          I was with a friend who respects Christianity, so I guess Jim would call him a ‘bad Muslim.” But he’s pious and follows the rules.

          I don’t think women are converting to Islam as much in America, compared to England, because there, the Islam involves FGM on a far vaster scale. It’s a big deal when ~5 girls are ‘circumcised’ in Michigan, but there, it happens to thousands of female children. I assume they want this done to them, too. So, Muslim women convert women to Islam as much if not more than Muslim men convert women.

          In Christianity, only a same-sex godparent is required, and having one of each sex is conventional but optional. I don’t know how Islam works, but it is far more personal, with the idea that if you pray right, then people won’t need to pray for you. They don’t want to be prayed for, which is perhaps the biggest religious difference between it and Christianity. Christians think it’s humble to rely on one’s brethren, not only on God.

          It’s easy to convert women (or anyone) to a religion when they are seeking any religion at all. It is not easy when they are atheists/ anti-religious. Religiosity is naturally related to sex, and I suspect that religious women want more pleasure than the atheists do, while unbelieving women want to avoid pain and life, especially motherhood. Motherhood’s place in women’s lives is one of the biggest issues determining whether a woman is religious. Religious women either choose a self-cult, as in feminism (dildos, gigolos, demon paramours), or a family cult, as in Mormonism (be fertile, rich, happy), or a God-cult (theology, mysticism, contrition).

          I have only anecdotal evidence, but people who enjoy liturgies and the sacraments enjoy God, while unbelievers are disgusted or pained by church services. It’s easier to be a Muslim, in terms of attendance at the temple, because there’s no incense, no clergy, no venerating icons or relics, no lighting candles, no images, and it’s a sparse, neat place. It’s kind of asylum-like, quiet and spacious. But, that can get boring and ‘stifling.’

          Just like there are many denominations nominally of Christianity which vary in their modes of worship, Islam has many denominations too, and I have no idea which ones are popular in the West, or how Westerners see them. White converts tend to life Sufi mysticism, as a way to feel close to God (allah for them) with more than just obedience. They generally do Sufi when they are really looking for Celtic Christianity (focused on nature, peacefulness, friendship with animals and the land/sea/air, and monuments)), which is submerged now by the great schism.

          It’s funny that we are so ignorant of Islam, that we don’t even know what kind is practiced by Bosnians, as opposed to Saudis. But, we don’t need to know everything, we only need to be friendly neighbors to these people. And I liked the mosque better than the mainline-Protestant churches around here, so surprisingly, I think near-future alliances will be between more and less devout people, not the current left vs. right divide. I have more in common with a strict Muslim than a Halloween-celebrating Protestant.

          Trump promised to relieve religious communities of the ban against political involvement, which is hugely ignored. When my presbyter is allowed to state his opinions on ballot measures and candidates, he will freak out due to the social tension of politics, I think, but others will step right up to the newly liberated pulpit. And Muslims will, I hope, turn out to love America more than the gay-marriage crowd do. That’s what it feels like when I’m at their mosque around the 4th of July- I’m in America there.

          • Contaminated NEET says:

            >Muslims are the real Americans.
            Wew, lad.

            Knowing thy enemy is one thing, but don’t get so cozy with him that you become him. There’s plenty to admire about Islam, but it’s an alien creed practiced by aliens who come here to conquer us.

            • Turtle says:

              Enemies don’t need to be foreign aliens to hurt us. The ‘here since the 17th century’ Protestants are enemies too. Their pride parades cause HIV transmission, but you won’t call this out as being as vilent as jihad. The familiar forms of evil, done by that church in your hometown, are less shocking than jihadi evil. But we wouldn’t have a jihad/ terrorist warfare problem without the pride parade problem. The jihadis are scared we will make them gay and give them AIDS. Really, they’re fighting for survival, knowing they are capable of succumbing to sodomy. The Protestants are aggressors here, just like sodomites in Muslim countries presumably get in legal trouble by flaunting their perversion and hitting on straight men. I don’t feel more comfortable in Protestant churches than in a mosque.

              I think you’re right that we need to know our enemies, not just vaguely love them, but the process of familiarization requires relationships with them, which means becoming friends. So we must love them to know them. I admire only the parts of Islam which are derived from or equivalent to Christianity. But they do everything differently, so there’s not much overlap.

              What if Christians came to conquer your land and people? Would you welcome them?

              • Contaminated NEET says:

                Christians are coming to conquer my land right now. They’re called Mexicans, and no I don’t welcome them.

                You’re right that not all enemies are foreign, and I would never say otherwise. Our most dangerous and certainly most insidious enemies come from the ranks of our own people. This doesn’t mean I should sign on to collaborate with foreign conquerors. Note also that our domestic enemies employ these foreign enemies as catspaws against us, thinking (foolishly) that once we are finished they will easily convert and control their mercenaries.

                Disgust with our traitorous degenerate rulers is a sweet and seemly thing, but when it leads you to write NPR-tier garbage like:
                >That’s what it feels like when I’m at their mosque around the 4th of July- I’m in America there.
                then you’ve gone very wrong somewhere. That’s not opposing the poz-industrial complex; that’s speaking its words for it.

                smh famalam

                • viking says:

                  “Christians are coming to conquer my land right now. They’re called Mexicans, and no I don’t welcome them.”

                  Hall of fame

                • Cavalier says:

                  >Hall of fame

                  I second this sentiment.

                • Turtle says:

                  NPR is islamophobic, because Islam is homophobic. It’s a phobia-frenzy! So, I’m not with NPR.

                  As for Mexicans, they are syncretists often, worshiping their ‘indigenous’ idols, and “the sacred heart of Jesus,” and “our lady of Guadalupe,” and all that pagan stuff. It’s a distraction from actual Christianity. here’s the test they fail- who goes on *pilgrimage* to Mexico? I think they have one Orthodox monastery, But I know nothing about it!

                  Christianity isn’t a conqueror’s faith. It’s tolerant, not that Jim would like for his czar to help Muslims build their mosques.

                  I don’t know what this largest European mosque is like, without going there, but I’d like to visit someday, for St. Nicholas’s sake. He helped build it, but atheists, not Muslims, killed him, right?

                • peppermint says:

                  NPR says that it’s problematic that Islam in the West isn’t getting converged into tolerating gays like the female-run Black churches and they need to be offered more nubile White and Jewish masters student social workers until they understand that Islam is really another expression of Transcendentalism.

                • Turtle says:

                  I suppose NPR lusts after Islam, but is too scared to pursue it. It’s a lust from afar, like gazing at the women getting water from the well. They also don’t understand the possibility of homophobia being a religious norm, as in punishing sodomy, not fearing it.

              • viking says:

                Socialism, Britain colonizing you, these are things white men can recover from in a decade or three, niggerization is forever, one drop is all it takes

          • Joe says:

            Turtle met some nice muslims and now he’s all “muslims are nooo problem! After all, they politely said ‘Salaam’ to me. I felt so welcome 🙂 🙂 :)”


            • Turtle says:

              They are no more of a problem than the churches with BLM and gay rainbow flags broadcasting their virtue signals. I feel more kinship with the Musulmans than with churchians (cucked pseudo-Christians).

              Further, the main opposition of a Christian is against atheism and paganism, not other monotheistic religions. Czar Nicholas II helped Muslims build a large mosque, and while that’s controversial, he gets no ‘diversity points’ credit from shitlibs. I do, however, admire his discrimination between different religions in his empire.

              The Muslims I met have limited English speech, and I did not in fact feel welcome, only permitted to be someone’s guest. They should in fact be strict.

              Anyway, yes, Jesus!

              • peppermint says:

                yeah, see, if you would pick mahometan sand niggers over White atheists because monotheism, you’re a cuck

                • Turtle says:

                  Plenty of Muslims are Bosnian, Indonesian, etc. – many different nig-nogs, not just sandy ones. I believe God picks pious people over unbelievers, yes. Why wouldn’t God do so, if He knows He exists, and wants to be worshiped?

                  As I’ve written before, it seems that good angels are white, indicating that God wants all His servants to be white, while demons are depicted in our iconography as purely black. I think I like whiteness more than you do, because I believe whiteness is wonderful, not just competitively superior according to Darwinist-Nazi principles.

                  I don’t pick who my neighbors are, and the Muslims I know personally are Aryan. I believe White atheists have dark souls, and that’s what counts the most- spirituality. I don’t understand why you would like White people if they don’t have souls. What’s valuable in them then? Skin color itself? Creative IQ and pretty pigments?

                • Contaminated NEET says:

                  Good God! As much as I love him, I thought maybe p-mint was going too far with his soul-theory-equals-cuckery line, but you’ve just written QED after every post he ever made.

                • Samuel Skinner says:

                  Turtle has apparently never heard of the concept of heresy before. To paraphrase Moldburg, if the communists had believed Marx was divinely inspired, Turtle would choose them over atheists.

                  “Why wouldn’t God do so, if He knows He exists, and wants to be worshiped? ”

                  If God wanted to be worshiped in the manner you are implying, the most virtuous thing would to produce loudspeakers to recite prayers.

                  “As I’ve written before, it seems that good angels are white, indicating that God wants all His servants to be white, while demons are depicted in our iconography as purely black.”

                  This may shock you, but the iconography was created by mortals and while you may believe it is divinely inspired, inspiration is just that- inspiration. It does not mean that they can be taken as a 1 to 1 record of how the heavens look. They are meant to convey emotion, not be photographic records.

                  It would be like complaining about the fact that the soldiers crucifying Christ were in contemporary military dress rather then Roman outfits; the point was to convey the scene so people could understand it.

                  “I believe White atheists have dark souls, and that’s what counts the most- spirituality.”

                  God did provide a top 10 list of things he wants his followers to do. White atheists manage to do several of them better then Muslims; 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 9 with a partial for 7 (atheists are more likely then believers to commit adultery when controlling for ethnicity).

                • Turtle says:

                  @Samuel Skinner

                  Marx was a satanist, and perhaps simple-minded fools are less at fault for their communism/satanism. To believe a satanist is divinely inspired is a top-kek error.

                  I didn’t imply the manner of worship, because it varies by tradition; of course, I believe my tradition is the perfect one, exclusively. The Pentecostals and even some Orthodox missionaries in Africa use loudspeakers, yes, and it’s controversial. Large cathedrals have speakers because they’re too big to hear everything from way in the back.

                  Technology is questionable, like using electric lights instead of candles. I don’t know if it matters. The Church specifies that some prayers are loud, while others are quiet. We know what we’re doing, even if we can’t explain it all.

                  You haven’t seen angels; they look different to different people who do see them. Some icons depict the seeraphim in blue, and cherubim in red. I won’t specify my experience, because it is dubious and personal. More often, people feel the presence of angels, as if they are shimmering or hovering near us. It’s very rare to fully see them.

                  Besides iconic art, we have relics, such as the robe of Christ, and vestments worn by canonized clergy. They, being spiritually powerful, are not limited by the time in which they were made.

                  The Gospel specifies that the angels in the tomb telling the women that Christ had risen looked like men. It’s not the only incident of angels appearing as men. Andthe Aleut John’s testimony that his angelic companions were like white men is reliable, in that St.Innocent, whose judgment of stories I trust, believed him.

                  I believe immortal angels paint (called writing, oddly) icons too. The icon of Christ “not-made-by-hands” is one supposed example.

                  Atheists tend to be idolaters, with a religion other than Christianity. Also, they by definition blaspheme against the living God’s existence. The kabba/ allah, etc. do seem idolatrous, but more in that they confuse the cosmic principalities for God Himself. I do think allah is real, but not God.

          • jim says:

            It’s funny that we are so ignorant of Islam, that we don’t even know what kind is practiced by Bosnians, as opposed to Saudis. But, we don’t need to know everything, we only need to be friendly neighbors to these people.

            No, we don’t need to be friendly neighbors to those people. We are not being unfriendly, our unfriendliness is not causing problems. They need to be friendly to us. Their unfriendliness is causing problems.

            Most of those people are sort of OK with you, but they respect people who will kill you, and perceive them as holier than themselves.

            Just as there is in all the world not one Christian who called for violence against the creators of Piss Christ and Andres Serrano, there is in all the world not not one mainstream plausibly pious Muslim who condemned the fatwa against Molly Norris. In that sense, every single Christian in the entire world is opposed to holy war and seeks peace, and every single Muslim in the entire world supports holy war and seeks conquest. Not every Muslim wants to personally blow himself up in order to take you with him, and there are some Muslims who are clearly none too keen on actually existent Islam, but every Muslim who plausibly seems genuinely pious is supportive of those who will kill you, or at least reluctant to be seen to be openly, directly, and overtly unsupportive.

            Muslims are always fighting each other, and Shiites oppose Sunni terror – while practicing their own Shia terror, which is not a very large improvement. Similarly, Sunnis oppose Shia terror, while practicing their own Sunni terror, which is arguably a fair bit worse.

            • viking says:

              I have to beg to differ Jim at that time I was a christian and though it had more to do with my reactionary nature than my cultural catholicism I called for the stoning of mapplethorpe and serrano.

              • peppermint says:

                if your preacher had, he would lose his church’s tax status under a rule Trump just quietly eliminated

                • Turtle says:

                  He already did it? Hallelujah, my dear compatriot! Thanks for the wonderful news. I thought I would have known, but maybe my news sources are lacking.

                  So, will anyone come back to newly un-cucked churches, or am I being unreasonably hopeful?

                  I don’t think my jurisdiction (bishops and mostly clergy administrators, with some laymen involved) will change the official policy against politics at the pulpit. But they do march against abortion every January, so they show some will to be active. That’s not enough to satisfy me, but at least they are trying. I would like more focus on criminal justice (from more pre-emptory investigations to more chaplaincy in prisons) and blessing the whole country, like clergy visiting power plants. But, that’s just my ‘civilization first’ policy.

              • Turtle says:

                That’s endearing, Viking.

                I believed Mecca should be closed off to the Hadj as a “time-out” after 9/11. I also thought bad artists should be enslaved to good ones, as apprentices. I’m more of a modern-American parenting-style discipline guy, not rushing to physical violence. But, it’s a last resort.

                Anyway, if you didn’t pray ‘against’ (for people to not be led astray by it) that anti-Christian art, then you don’t yet get to enjoy Christian art. I hope you know the ‘graven images’ rule only prohibits idolatry, not Christian paintings, sculptures, etc. Even the Old Testament Hebrew religion had art. And stoning is biblical, not reactionary, not that I mean to define your beliefs without knowing you personally.

                A reactionary would perhaps make a counter- exhibit of ‘piss modern art,’ with destruction of some hilariously over-priced and over-wrought pieces, or stop the government grants funding “piss Christ” by not paying taxes as a real protest. Vigils work too.

                Also, we can interpret “piss Christ” as a confession, that only the Life-giving Cross can cleanse us of our filth, both urinary and spiritual (both are caused by sin). And that’s true, in my opinion, even if the artist didn’t realize he was presenting this dogmatic truth.

                • viking says:

                  Lets not confuse the original conservative reactionary with the wrecking jew followers who call themselves neo reactionary. However the time for throne and alter reactionarism is passed. It is fine to revere our ancient accomplishments including how christianity was once a good force in northern europe after having destroyed the Roman empires.But that time is passed, christianity is a cucked death cult of immense irrationality it denies life and the universe and its laws and all the works done therein for the promise of an afterlife, the reward of this afterlife is to eschew your self, family people, nation and culture in favor of the other because thats gods will. When this was practiced within and only within Europe the benefits acrued to other europeans, thats over with the world is small, and we know god doesnt exist or at least that all religions are bullsht. It may be sad to we who value our culture but it is reality, we may need to replace this culture needing culture to survive but this christian thing is death. I am not a neo nazi nor actually even alt right but i can help but notice hitler did just that he invented a new religion that incorporated as much of the culture as possible but was based on life on the people and on the biological reality. Im not advocating resurrecting nazism but in a mere decade he establish on of the strongest cults in history and it was in fact a healthy positive cult from the perspective of those people. He may have proved this if he had moved slower and less aggressively against other whites.I personally would have found it a bit stifling but its worth thinking if a modified version could be developed. Most of you who still have faith in christianity but are woke imagine a right christianity and point hopefully at periods in history when such iterations were dominant usually because it served the purpose of some king. The problem is those periods directly contradict christianity itself its tenets and teachings, christianity has been clever at convoluted explanations but they cant last some lefty will always ask what would jesus do and jesus was a lefty through and through so the answer will always be if we are not in a leftist civilization we are not n a christian one.

                • Garr says:

                  Jim’s Emperor-cult suggestion seems reasonable, the Imperial President being seen not as a god in and of himself but as a conduit through which the Divine/Cosmic Will pours into our time and place (America, now); the ceremonies can be entertaining spectacles and processions with a somewhat light-hearted feel to them — we are, after all, Americans, not North Koreans. (If we get another Obama or someone like McCain down the line — oh well, the conduit gets clogged sometimes.)

                • peppermint says:

                  Democracy reliably chooses short-sighted and harmful leaders.

                  Henry VIII was pretty good. We can be sure, right now, that Barron will have a son with no congenital diseases and an IQ over 100.

                  With no universities or information distribution networks to hide behind, liberals won’t even exist. Without puritans, there will be no Cromwell.

                  I’m not sure what social technology to use against the patricians bringing in foreign imported goods and labor to destroy the middle class. Harold Covington says no niggers in the White American Republic. Rome’s plague of slaves weren’t all niggers, though. Maybe automation destroys the incentive for foreign imports to replace the native middle class.

                  Will there ever be a resurgence of hippies and boomercucks, or can people keep it in their heads that either you work and fight for your family and nation or you get cucked by someone else?

                • Cavalier says:

                  >Maybe automation destroys the incentive for foreign imports to replace the native middle class.

                  Automation destroys the reason for the existence of the middle class. Middle-class activity is predominantly the production (and consumption) of material (industrial) goods, as well as cultural goods, and the management of both, i.e. paper-pushing bureaucracy, in corp and in gov. The production of cultural goods will persist, and probably thrive, but the production of material goods will continue to decline as those jobs that cannot practically be outsourced to ant-civilization are automated away.

                  Yes, this means that fewer and fewer people will be able to purchase the products, but only in the long term. In the short term, immense profiting for those who adopt automation quickest — and, in any case, as those in power are money changers, the production of material goods, especially of the popular kind, hardly concerns them.

                  There was hardly a middle class before the Industrial Revolution — except, perhaps, in New England — and once the industrial workforce has been demobilized, there will again hardly be one, and there is no agriculture to return to, that, too, having been automated.

                  There are only four possible futures, quite frankly: the first, a forceful devolution of agriculture from agricorp to coerced yeomanry, serfs chained to the soil in fact if not in law; the second, UBI unterserfdom and all attendant degeneration, all peoples degraded to the level of the negro or below; the third, massive depopulation, along the lines of the South, with a few thousand great plantation overlords, minus the workforce; the fourth, massive depopulation caused by the catastrophic breakdown of technological civilization and consequent descension to the preindustrial mode of life — diseased, bleak, and short.

                  The National Socialists, recognizing and respecting the sacred and spiritual bond between earth and farmer, sought the first, a return to the soil; we, having crushed the Germans, are clearly getting some Lovecraftian horror of the second and third, an UBI and depopulation.

                  Our world is dying… in the blink… of an eye.

                • jim says:

                  Automation destroys the jobs of the people who formerly worked on the assembly line, and no one ever thought those people to be middle class. Middle class jobs are unaffected by automation. Indeed middle class jobs are increased by automation, since robots need more supervision and guidance than human assembly line workers.

                  What is destroying the middle class is the great centralization, that wealth these days is dispensed and distributed by people on the revolving door between regulators and regulated. It is nothing to do with the technology level or the standard of living. America is losing its middle class for much the same reason as Venezuela has lost its middle class.

                  The disappearance of the middle class is a result of the first world becoming third world, not a result of advances in technology.

                • Turtle says:

                  > > it was in fact a healthy positive cult

                  The Nazis were drug addicts, allegedly. I haven’t read this book, but it seems true.


                  Yet, Hitler insisted that smoking is evil. How is that inconsistent policy/ belief system positive and healthy?

                  Hitler was wannabe-British, even though they poison-gassed him in WWI, after he first dodged the draft with his brother in England. So, he’s not really white, so much as imperialist, just like Mussolini was a Romanist (neo-Caesar style, I think). Hitler did not create a cult; he plagiarized, from Luther to Hindu Aryan religion and “Roman salutes.” I see nothing original in National Socialism.

                  > > Jesus was a lefty …

                  I don’t see Jesus as political, only as holy. Politics is worldly, while God’s Kingdom has no elections or fighting over power and other resources. It’s a peaceful place, with infinite abundance, thus no scarcity, and nothing to fight over. So, Jesus can’t be left or right; only sinners have politics.

                • peppermint says:

                  What’s a middle class?

                  Is it the people between poverty and luxury?

                  Is it the people with small amounts of property?

                  Is it the people with serious but not top-tier careers?

                  Revilo Oliver thought that revolution would soon be impossible due to the destruction of the middle class, but our notion of middle class is different.

                  The Marxist notion – neither a wage-slave nor a capitalist – doesn’t cover everyone who we would consider middle class.

                  The middle class will almost always exist because the people on top are by definition not everyone and some people who aren’t on the top will almost always not be on the bottom. Communism is an attempt to destroy the middle class, but the USSR also had people who weren’t on the top but were comfortably above the bottom.

                • pdimov says:

                  “The disappearance of the middle class is a result of the first world becoming third world, not a result of advances in technology.”

                  Very astute observation.

                • Cavalier says:

                  >Automation destroys the jobs of the people who formerly worked on the assembly line, and no one ever thought those people to be middle class.

                  Yeah… “no one”, meaning (higher (relatively)) middle-class cubicle farmers who couldn’t bear to be thought of as indistinct from the (lower (relatively)) middle-class factory workers.

                  But, you see, I can nevertheless grant you this point without injury to my argument, as by “middle class” I mean those putatively white-collar salarycucks who service the needs and desires of those directly producing material goods, such as doctors, lawyers, accountants, factory bureaucrats, management, and so on.

                  >Middle-class jobs are unaffected by automation.

                  Less affected… for now. However, in the long term, middle-class paper-pushing is by and large more automatable than most blue collar labor.

                  >Indeed middle class jobs are increased by automation, since robots need more supervision and guidance than human assembly line workers.

                  To the extent that cubicle farmer jobs have increased due to automation, it is thanks to the vast increase in useless paperwork and suchlike that has vacuumed up many of the sort of people who would have been working on the factory line.

                  To the extent that cubicle farmer jobs have not decreased to a fraction of their former size, it is because of government and quasi-governmental regulations necessitating the use of hordes of white-collar drones for one purpose or another.

                  >What is destroying the middle class is the great centralization, that wealth these days is dispensed and distributed by people on the revolving door between regulators and regulated.

                  That’s literally the definition of the (higher) middle class. Government bureaucrats are the prototype of the (higher) middle class, and the vast majority of middle-class jobs are created by governmental or quasi-governmental intervention, i.e. mountains of useless regulations and formidable redistribution of wealth. Washington, D.C. is the most middle-class city on earth.

                  >America is losing its middle class for much the same reason as Venezuela has lost its middle class.

                  Outsourcing of factory labor to China? In which country, completely coincidentally, in the exact same timeframe, is experiencing a rapid and enormous boom of its middle class?

                  >The disappearance of the middle class is a result of the first world becoming third world, not a result of advances in technology.

                  What is (was) the prime economic difference between the First World and the Third World, when those terms first gained meaning? I say that it was, in the brief snapshot of time in which they were relevant, a vast “middle class” of economically viable industrial workers. In the Third World they have, and have had for a long time, a small population of useful people and a very large population of useless people. In the First World, the two-pronged assault of outsourcing and automation of industrial goods is deprecating, for lack of a better word, the middle class. “Average is over”, or something like that.

                  P.S. Where did all the agriculture and manufacturing jobs go? Into finance, insurance, real estate, government, “professional and business services”, education, and health care What productivity! What usefully spent time of man! What essential functions: finance, insurance, real estate, government, “professional and business services”, education and health care! Whatever would we do without them!

                • jim says:

                  The disappearance of the middle class in the US resembles the disappearance of the middle class in Venezuela, and it is not automation, technological progress, or even outsourcing to China that has destroyed the middle class in Venezuela.

                  Outsourcing to China, and to some extent automation, has destroyed the white working class in the US. The destruction of the middle class is political, not economic, the result of anarcho tyranny.

                • Cavalier says:

                  >Is it the people between poverty and luxury?


                  >Is it the people with small amounts of property?

                  Bought on credit; owned by the bank.

                  >Is it the people with serious but not top-tier careers?

                  Economically, it is nearly everyone deluding themselves into believing that they have a “career”.

                  >The middle class will almost always exist because the people on top are by definition not everyone and some people who aren’t on the top will almost always not be on the bottom.

                  Wonderful words, but signifying nothing. “Middle class”, in addition to the direct economic focus which I have taken, often conveys a certain suite of values including honesty, hard work (or the appearance thereof), credentialism, unimaginativeness, salaryserfdom, and so on. These values, like everything in life, are obviously under natural selection in accordance with the specific economic and spiritual environment of the time. More recently, “middle-class values” have taken on an air of emasculinity, uselessness, divorce-rapeage, borderline economic poverty, and so on, reflecting the changing circumstances. Do these represent “true” “middle-class values”? I leave this question up to you. What isn’t in question is that if you define “middle-class” positionally, you will always have a group of people, however large or small, who fall between extremes.

                • Cavalier says:

                  The process of the destruction of the middle class is very simple:

                  First, its economic base, the original reason for its existence, is cut out from under it, outsourced to China and automated away, however, it persists — for a while — as a relic, especially among the older generations, as a kind of bribe for not raising hell. The outsourcing is a political event; the automation is a technological one. Government intervention to sustain a purely parasitic middle class is also a political event; government jobs are government gibs, as well as all jobs created by government regulation, as most office jobs are.

                  Second, easy money inflates the value of middle-class asset classes whilst defiling the value of the certificate which in the past qualified the recipient for entry into the middle class. The certificate now lacks value because economic performance is now largely irrelevant, the vast majority of office jobs being artificially produced by the government, directly or indirectly.

                  Third, economic collapse provides the systemic shock to slough off the worst and least-protected test-sucklers, while general malaise inhibits new entry into the class.

                  Fourth, the economic value of the vast majority of middle-class worker drones being negligible, or negative, they are marked for ruthless exploitation, the most significant being divorce-rape, wherein the children effectively become wards of the state and in so doing their moral values degraded beyond any capacity to revolt, their economic productivity unneeded. Also, the 9-5 salarycuck is taxed into oblivion — enough money to take, to little to have estate planning.

                  I’ve definitely missed a few important points here, but this is the general gist of it.

                  …Okay, here’s another one: consider the effect that a sudden return to 19th-century free-market economics would wreak on the following prototypical middle-class professions: doctor (all kinds), lawyer, accountant, government bureaucrat, corporate bureaucrat / middle-manager, consultant, professor, and banker.

                  It isn’t pretty, is it? Or do you revel in the carnage?

                • jim says:

                  All these, except for middle manager and corporate bureaucrat, are government jobs or quasi governmental jobs performing jobs that used to be performed by the private sector. Pretty sure that doctors and accountants would be substantially better off working for themselves once again, rather than for the government.

                  Some middle managers have been displaced by computers, but Walmart has plenty of middle managers and corporate bureaucrats performing real and important jobs.

                  Jobs such as doctor, accountant, lawyer, have been destroyed not because the jobs do not need doing, not because we do not need smart people to do them, but because the government has taken them over and mandated that they be done in a stupid robotic way, for which the government does not need smart people, so that the government can affirmative action women and coloreds into these quasi governmental jobs.

                  This is particularly visible in Venezuela where these jobs just are quite obviously not being done at all, even though there is a rapidly growing army of people piously going through the superficial motions of performing these jobs.

                  We need accountants to track value. We need lawyers because people disagree on the interpretation of the rules, and the interpretation of agreements we have made. In a free market system, these people produce genuine value, and are rewarded accordingly. In a quasi governmental system, not so much.

                  The government takes over an area of formerly middle class employment promising the people who did the work that they will be freed from the burden of having to perform. But after freeing them from the burden of performance, government proceeds to send in its clients, women and coloreds, and after a while, the area of employment becomes less and less middle class.

                • Cavalier says:

                  Accountants are a programmatic tax code away from being automated into oblivion; or, in other words, continue to exist in order to help we polloi fend off the government.

                  Since the New Deal, doctors have become one of the most protected classes in existence. Socialistic healthcare — which we have, and have had, since that time — has become not so much a way to care for the common people as to enrich the doctorly class. Minus government subsidy-via-regulation, 75% of doctors would find themselves out of work, possibly more.

                  Some middle managers and corporate bureaucrats at Walmart earn their pay somehow, probably. I would imagine that their principle task is that of fending off the government. And though technology ever lowers the cost of communication and transaction, bureaucratic inertia is a potent thing indeed.

                  Lawyers, well, their entire occupation is created by government regulation. “Disagreeing about value” is just a nice way of saying “I deserve millions because I spilled McDonald’s coffee in my lap”, or “I deserve to take my husband for everything he has and everything he will ever earn, and his children too”, or generic criminal cases which in a more civilized age would not have lasted months or years and terminated in lengthy prison sentences, but days or weeks and terminated in hanging.

                  I only have to have a lawyer because the government and every two-bit hack is looking for an easy payday.

                • Cavalier says:

                  P.S. I would like a comprehensive Jim analysis of this:

                  I think it would be well worth your time, and a valuable post indeed.

                • Turtle says:

                  >>> Is it the people with small amounts of property?

                  >> Bought on credit; owned by the bank.

                  Beautiful, Cavalier!

                  So, here’s my *relational* model of class, focused on measurable property, not how people smile at each other with envy or contempt, etc.:

                  indigents – own nothing in dollar market value, determined by asking a representative sample of the population what something is worth

                  poor – feel needy, receive charity, own little, lie- pretend to own nothing or a lot, typically make excuses for ‘unfortunate circumstances’

                  working class – working paycheck to paycheck, with stable jobs and balanced budgets, but not comfortable with the arrangement

                  psychic middle class – both fear losing their status, and not gaining more of it – an ego issue

                  economic middle class – give to charity, but receive it too. donate to food bank, receive discounted membership at gym. pay taxes, but a lower marginal rate. spend on mass-luxuries, like ‘premium ice cream,’ but can’t decide between thrift (bulk ice cream) and splurging (going to the ice cream parlor)

                  upper class- leasers, bankers, capitalists, holders of far more property than they can manage without hiring underlings or use without sharing it with a corporation

                  elite- don’t need to work, but direct the economy anyway, perhaps for fun/power trip, or as charity

                • peppermint says:

                  a lot of liberal boomers own their homes and vote for policies that reduce their property values or increase their property taxes

                • Cavalier says:

                  Turtle, everything but >upper class and >elite seem fine to me, though maybe the morass don’t overly warrant differentiation.

                  The interesting part to me is the constitution of the upper class, namely the distinction between the salaryman and the capitalist, but finer points as well.

                  Consider the salaryman: he, though he may be CEO and make many millions of dollar per year, is nevertheless merely a privileged segment of the human centipede that is his organization, his continued tenure at the whim of the board, subject to extremely tight behaviorist operating bounds.

                  In contrast, the capitalist’s property right is absolute, or nearly so. No one can arbitrarily part him from his lifeblood, no SJW or government lawyer can fire him from his ownership in his company, and though his company is susceptible to assault in other ways, he personally is one or more limited liability shields away from any potential assailant.

                  And then there are other eddies and currents as well, like real estate moguls marrying very smart 5’11” models.

                • jim says:

                  > Consider the salaryman: he, though he may be CEO and make many millions of dollar per year, is nevertheless merely a privileged segment of the human centipede that is his organization, his continued tenure at the whim of the board, subject to extremely tight behaviorist operating bounds.

                  When you reach a transparently absurd conclusion, it is time to re-examine your priors and premises.

                  You are reasoning from Marxist premises to Marxist conclusions, and the fact that you wind up in such a strange place should tell you that Marxism is bunkum.

                • Cavalier says:



            • Dan says:

              For you Islam = annihilation of enemies/ conquest and subjugation, and therefore all true Muslims are extremists or their less courageous supporters. You always maintain this position, but never argue for it, and so it comes across as far too reductionist and silly.

              There are hundreds of ‘pious Muslim’ leaders/public figures who condemned the fatwa and the surrounding hysteria in the Molly Norris incident, just as there are in response to every terrorist attack. You have to hunt for them of course, because even the crazy ‘Islam-loving’ leftist media ignore it (which tells you something about how actual that love is). Of course, you define what ‘pious’ means, so you can load your own sentence. It’s a bit convenient that you just fall on the ‘no true scotsman’ fallacy to argue that in so far as they condemn violence they are no longer Muslim.

              You do make one qualification in that perhaps some are simply reluctant to seem ‘overtly unsupportive’ and I would argue this is the vast majority. Although Muslims are taught to uphold justice over tribal bonds (contrary to your theory), it’s understandable human nature to stand with ones own. Much as the black Americans ashamed of black violence are stuck between a rock and a hard place when it comes to condemning it.

              And yes, Muslims are always fighting each other. Its scary how quickly they descended into ‘civil wars’ after the Prophet died.

              • jim says:

                There are hundreds of ‘pious Muslim’ leaders/public figures who condemned the fatwa and the surrounding hysteria in the Molly Norris incident,

                I recall the press went looking for such, could not find any.

                Poster girl principle applies. If you catch the press manufacturing fake poster girls, there are zero genuine poster girls.

                • Turtle says:

                  I expected to hear from at least fake such figures, but none showed up. Many then-liberal people were disappointed by this failure to perform ‘peace activism.’

                  I find that Muslims don’t care if violence happens to humans, because they don’t have a suffering God who experiences human life himself, only allah. If allah can’t be crucified or tempted, then allah doesn’t care what happens to us the way Jesus does. Jesus’s love is condescending, literally coming down from Heaven to live on earth, not mechanical, as in a prayer ==> blessings formula.

                  In Islam, it’s expected to receive benefits from prayer, fasting, etc., apparently not because allah is pleased, but because that’s just how it works. A lot of their spiritual practice is optional, as if people can choose to ‘subscribe for extra blessings.’ Yet I don’t know if they work miracles.

            • Turtle says:

              What I mean about being friendly is not being about submitting to evil or cuckig out. For example, it’s friendly when I find women attractive, even though they have a different ethnicity than I do. I should overcome my bias to appreciate their beauty. Similarly, I don’t like Islam, but it is not all bad, because it is monotheistic and related to biblical Judaism, however derivatively. Muhammad’s uncle was a Christian, I’ve heard, and Muhammad revered St. Katherine the Great-Martyr of Alexandria, protecting her monastery in the Sinai. I dont know why he would adore her, but not her Bridegroom Jesus, but this is as mysterious as how Luther could publish his own version of the Bible, leaving out the Epistle of St. James.

              I have a ‘proactive’ standard of friendship. If I don’t welcome people, and accept their hospitality, we’re strangers. In parts of Canada (central provinces I think) , the different religious communities get along much better than in most countries. I think a big part of why is that they’re mostly immigrants, who are all invading the English, French, and Native territory.

              As for accusing Muslims of transgressing against us, I’m supposed to only notice my own sins, even though this moral effort sounds ridiculous to many. I don’t know how it’s even possible to focus on one’s own misdeeds, without any anger or blame directed at others. I have made some progress in this direction, by doing more confession than forgiveness, but really, I can’t forgive anyone without admitting how he hurt me. So I don’t really understand this issue.

              I know that most if not all Muslims are reluctant to be opposed to jihad, and that peace rally in Europe had more journalists than Muslims, but at least my one Muslim friend supports Trump’s Muslim/ 6 countries travel ban, opposes the Wahabi extremists, and likes all Muslim countries, from Mali to Malaysia, not only the rich Gulf states. I know he’s unusual, but I wouldn’t have gone to the mosque without him. We went to a church right afterwards, at my suggestion.

              My sense that the mosque welcomed me is not only about the men there. Places have their own histories, and perhaps
              sentience. There might be angels there, as in our altars. The men were warm because they don’t worry about the gay threat. It’s very relieving to experience a gay-free setting. I did not know how oppressive gay pride is before then. There is no personality cult at good (in context) mosques, especially Shia ones, because they don’t have clergy per se. I know this might be exaggerated, and clergy are needed anyway, but I don’t like the tension between priests and laypeople in churches. Having no women in authority at mosques is pleasant too. The absence of converts from new-age Baby Boomer religions is further comfortable. A lot of what I liked at the mosque is simply not dealing with what I don’t like at my church. Only adults, no children, is another comfortable thing. And with no women, no sexual tension.

              Muslims are proud of their religion, and confident that it is valid, not saying “doubt is part of faith” as an excuse for incomplete belief. Their posters specify that sin is wrong, and we must pray to receive God’s blessings. That’s somewhat mechanical, as if God is obliged to follow His own rules, while really, He can bless people who don’t pray too (the sun shines on everyone). But it’s also true that prayer is rewarded.

              I felt very differently blessed during and after my mosque visit. It improved my mental focus and trust of God’s providence. I do feel obligated to visit other temples, to learn from and meet the people of other religions.

              I prefer Islam to atheism. St. Nicholai called atheism a ‘daughter of materialism,’ meaning that greed causes blasphemy. I don’t now how that happens, but St. Nicholai means that we first lose spiritual vision overall, and then lose faith in God. Muslims have some spiritual vision, and that’s better than blindness, even though it’s distorted vision. I’d rather appreciate them than feel threatened by them.

              Finally, consider this book excerpt:

              “Man has such powers that he can transmit good or evil to his environment. These matters are very delicate. Great care is needed. We need to see everything in a positive frame of mind. We mustn’t think anything evil about others. Even a simple glance or a sigh influences those around us. And even the slightest anger or indignation does harm. We need to have goodness and love in our soul and to transmit these things.”

              Elder Porphyrios, Wounded By Love .

              So, I’m not sure how friendly I am to Muslims.

              • peppermint says:

                》We need to see everything in a positive frame of mind. We mustn’t think anything evil about others

                — Justin Trudeau, The Authoritarian Personality. “Brilliant and revealing”, says NYT Book Reviews

      • Dave says:

        I’m told the Christians also picked up baby girls that pagans had left to the wolves, and raised them as Christians. So they probably had a significant surplus of chaste, beautiful young ladies in their congregations. So yeah, a huge incentive for young men to convert. Do hang on to a little of that bad-boy pagan vibe, it’s catnip to Christian chicks.

      • viking says:

        I think theres some truth both ways jims point is valid but i thnk roman women were known as being into all sorts of nw age crap like christianity, also probably a lot of slaves and such uprooted from own culture gravitate to slave religion.and romes culture was declining. in some part because christianity at least gibbon thought so i also think christianity tends to destroy empires,

        • peppermint says:

          I never thought of that before, you’re right, it’s important to call christcuckoldry new-age hippie crap exactly like all the guru nonsense that flooded the US in its hour of strength and doubt.

          Hopefully in a hundred years when we Nazis are strong, no one tries to reach for any mud religion to virtue signal with because the penalty for a man doing that is death and for a woman sale as if not a wife then as a tube-tied domestic servant.

  8. viking says:

    Thanks for an example of why moldbugs plan to turn the world over to capitalists is a stupid idea, capitalists dont give a shit about well run nations they dont even give a shit about acting sustainably regarding their own interests they only care about the nearest dollar which is why they have been sponsoring leftism for decades and are now fully merged in the NWO project. Please reaction wake the fuck up moldbug had some clever blogs and critiques that appealed to lefty millennials he is not the answer to all our problems.

    • Mister Grumpus says:

      OK, so I’m naive it appears. The Moldbug idea about the big many-shareholder super-corporation taking ownership of the state… I never thought homeboy was serious about that in actual real life. Is that how you took it?

      • viking says:

        Oh they’re serious about it all right its there big idea their alternative monarchy is more tongue in cheek. They are locked into it because they have also bought the democracy is the problem thesis, now I admit that part is a bit stronger argument . still i dont really see american voters getting what they want not even the liberals who believe the lies of their masters and so would not want what they do if they knew, well the niggers and spics and jews etc would still want to loot whites but thats understandable not a democratic problem its a multicultural problem.

        • Theshadowedknight says:

          The final form is far from locked in. First of all, the managerial apparatus is not built up, let alone completed. Second, the man of the hour is not at hand because the hour is not at hand, so the form he decides upon is not yet there. The NRx crew are the infrastructure of the NRx state, not the leader. Some of them may enter the leadership caste, but they are mostly concerned with supplying the manpower for the king/emperor/president/etc.

          What if Donald Trump had 10,000 classically trained NRx types ready to insert into the Deep State as his operatives on day 1? What could he achieve?

          The Shadowed Knight

          • vxxc2014 says:


            This is the man, the hour has begun.

            NRx has no experience in any sort of governance or power.
            It’s a dream.
            Power must be earned old ways.
            People don’t pass out power cuz good LARP ideology.
            not even the Communists do that.

            Moldbug good at inside baseball criticism, he has no solutions.
            Also pointing the blame at the dead Puritans his own family threw down is clever distraction to buy time, make some money before getting on the plane to TLV -Tel Aviv.

            He’s full of shit.

            • jim says:

              NRx has no experience in any sort of governance or power.

              Neither did the Bolsheviks. At least we have an appreciation of the difficulty of the problem.

              Power must be earned old ways.

              On examination, we find that the old ways power was supposedly earned were myths. People would seize power, but,lacking a myth by which to hold it, someone else would seize it from them, Moldbug’s problem of insecure power.

              As our priesthood move ever leftwards, the myth of democracy becomes ever less credible. Hence “Russia stole the election for Trump” say the priesthood, not noticing that they are sawing off the branch on which they sit.

              • viking says:

                you dont own what you cant defend there may be different ways to rally the violent men to your side but in the end you either have the ultimate veto of superior violence or you dont moldbug has no divisions. until nrx has figured out how to get some divisions they will never rule. And the bolsheviks replaced the germans as the tsars administrators they had experience

                • Samuel Skinner says:

                  At the risk of extended historical analogies… look at China. The man who founded a new dynasty used violence, but he needed people to legitimize his rule (hence the Confucians).

                  If history follows the Greek model then we should expect a tyrant and the will look for an official ideology to justify the necessity of their tyranny. People telling everyone about how great tyranny is and how it would work even better if we give the tyrant unlimited power are definitely in the running.

                  It isn’t guaranteed since “copy the CPC”, national socialism, theocracy or warlordism are all obvious alternatives.

                • jim says:

                  The plan is not so much that violent men will rally to our side, but that a violent man will seize power and we will rally to his side. I am running for Grand Inquisitor, not King, another guy is running for Archbishop, not King. But expressing our plan in quite those plain words undermines its effectiveness. We shall support the rightful King because he is the rightful King and it is the will of God.

                • Turtle says:

                  I am running for marriage and missionary service 😉 . Few missionaries are married, because it’s a monastic thing, but serving a mission parish (in America or anywhere, really, not just the 3rd world) is a way to not sacrifice having a family for asceticism. This is not independent of politics, so I do need a good Caesar unto whom to render what is his. Any Caesar is honored, but only good ones are admired.

            • Theshadowedknight says:

              Are you sure this is the hour? Even Jim was estimating that the coup would have happened by now. We will not know the man or the hour until after it has happened.

              NRx does not exist to seize power. It exists to serve the man who does. It provides a managerial framework for the ruler, and a ruling myth. The King is the king because he will kill you if you say he is not, but he is also the king because that is the will of God.

              You tell the NRx inquisition that the King is not the king, that they are full of shit, wind up executed for heresy. Three days later, inquisitors publicly check to see if you arose from the dead; check to see if you were holier than Jesus Christ. Nope, not holier, still dead; ergo the King is still the king, long live the king, amen.

              Jews. Cape. Matador. Follow along pls k thx.

              The Shadowed Knight

              • Theshadowedknight says:

                Maybe DJT is not the man. Maybe DJTJr, and DJT retroactively becomes King Trump the First. Maybe someone else. Who knows? Wait and see.

                The Shadowed Knight

                • viking says:

                  Personally I think Trump is John the Baptist he prepareth the way, lays the axe at the base of the tree for The One that is coming.

          • Anonymous says:

            Donald Trump neither knows nor gives one one-millionth of a shit what a neoreactionary is.

            “10,000 classically trained NRx type” – wtf are you talking about? There’s no such thing as nrx training, classical or otherwise. The NRx people blog a bunch of fucking minutiae, a bunch of inane autodidacts larping life away.

            • peppermint says:

              At its height, there may have been a thousand self-identified NRxers or people they recognized blogging and commenting, a number dwarfed by the old WN movement and the glibertarian movement.

              Today everyone is either alt-right or a cuck. The problem Trump would have had hiring the alt-right would have been identifying them from the average republican and the relative political inexperience against the average republican. Those barriers will continue to exist until we win.

              • Turtle says:

                Experience is illusory- remember Trump’s quip, against Hillary’s “BAAD experience?” It’s not good to make the same mistakes for a long time. A good novice is better than a bad old-timer, despite “experience.”

  9. Thrasymachus says:

    W was quite liberal and SJW friendly. Trump isn’t that conservative but is not SJW friendly, this must make the difference.

Leave a Reply