In nineteen twenty, a wave did crest,
The vote was granted, a right expressed.
But love’s sweet bond, once pure and true,
Now wavers in the winds of blue.
No fault divorce, a name so kind,
Yet hearts of men, left lost behind.
For in the end, the blame we bear,
As women’s choices grow more dear.
The Lord’s command, a voice so clear,
“Obey thy father, then thy dear.”
Yet in our hearts, a longing lies,
For simpler times, beneath the skies.
The grandchild’s laughter, once so near,
Now fades with time, a distant cheer.
For in the chase of independence,
We find ourselves in loneliness.
But hope still whispers in the night,
Return to love, embrace the fight.
To honor God, to build anew,
In love’s true bonds, we’ll find the clue.
So let us rise, with hearts aligned,
To overthrow the currents of time.
For in the end, it’s love that binds,
And in tradition, our hearts find.
Female emancipation prevents successful reproduction because it leads to no-fault divorce, which is in practice men-are-at-fault divorce, because it encourages women to pursue options inconsistent with marriage and family, and all this is contrary to the will of God, who prohibits divorce and homosexuality, and commands women to be under the authority first of fathers, then of husbands, and because it leads to demographic catastrophe, the problem of the missing grandchildren. And though it is harmful to everyone’s reproduction, it is particularly and especially harmful to white reproduction,
It is also bad for women, who cannot make an irreversible commitment, and find themselves therefore stuck in an endless series of short term flings until their eggs dry up and their beauty fades. That women are profoundly unhappy with the results of the emancipation that they wanted is illustrated by female porn, which tends to be set in worlds where the main female character magically loses the capability to make such choices,, being abducted by a were monster, enslaved by a tyrant, or by some similarly improbable magical mechanism losing the opportunity to make choices where that opportunity would destabilize the relationship. Female porn tends to have the main character a strong independent and sadly isolated woman in the modern world, who gets magically transported into magical world where she is no longer isolated, but is firmly under male authority, the magical world being patriarchal, or the character powerless, or the world dominated by predatory male violence. Most female porn is a wish fulfillment fantasy where the main female character is freed from unwanted freedom. Women long for the ancestral environment of successful reproduction, and in the ancestral environment of successful reproduction they were property with little if any sexual choice, thus in their porn fantasies, men make the choices for them.
Female emancipation is a shit test. When a man fails a shit test by giving a woman what she demands and passionately believes she wants, she gets twice as unhappy and twice as angry, and this is what surveys of female happiness and mental health show. Surveys consistently show that conservative women are saner and happier than liberal women, conservative Christian women are saner and happier than non Christian conservative women. Liberal women are however similarly crazy and unhappy regardless of faith, possibly because their Christianity is the postChristian faith of God the transsexual father and mother, Jesus the Jewish community organizer, and their God supports female adultery, divorce and abortion.
This is why it is better to empower men than to empower women.
empowering women was a strategic mistake because women, as a group, tend to prioritize individual benefit over collective or long-term social responsibility once empowered.
When women gain financial and legal independence, the incentive to cooperate with men in building families weakens, not strengthens.
A man with resources typically uses them to create and expand….a wife, children, a household, and eventually extended family. Women, once empowered, tend to consume and consolidate, focusing resources inward on personal comfort, lifestyle, and emotional satisfaction.
Every society that has maximally emancipated women has seen the same outcome:
Falling marriage rates
Declining birth rates
Population collapse
This isn’t coincidence…it’s pattern. Empowerment removed dependency without replacing it with obligation. Women were freed from men but not bound to society in return. The result is decision-making driven by short-term self-interest rather than continuity.
The issue isn’t that women can’t contribute….it’s that, when given unrestricted choice, they choose themselves first, even when that choice undermines family formation and demographic survival. Sexual liberation, economic independence, and state protection removed the cost of opting out, so many opted out.
Empowering women didn’t fail because men resisted it. It failed because female decision-making, when unrestrained by family-centered incentives, does not prioritize societal survival.
I don’t think this “women are wicked” analysis is true, or explains the problem.
Rather, if women are free, they are free to defect at any time, whereupon men are naturally disinclined to invest in them and family. You don’t plant trees on land you do not own. You spin plates, while she tries to get on the booty call list of someone more alpha than you. You defect on her first because you expect her to defect on you first. If a wife can be compelled to provide respect, obedience, sex, domestic services, and reproductive services, she will obviously receive greater male investment — hence the social environment of female porn fantasies.
Take a random example “beloved incompetent stepmom”. Sixteen year old girl is belatedly informed that the emperor has married her to some great Lord. Emperor disapproves of that great Lord remaining single, which would imply he is considerably older than sixteen. Also, inherited his title from father, and father is dead, which again would imply a considerable age difference. She arrives at great lord’s castle — great Lord is away at the wars and has not heard the news either. Kids are being raised by the servants. She is incompetent at being a stepmother because not much older than her stepchildren, but, as wife and chatelaine, claims authority over children and servants.
In that fantasy, both parties are embedded in a society that is going to damned well make them stick it out whether they like it or not, whether they are suitable for each other or not, whether they like each other or not. This is the ancestral environment of successful reproduction for females.
“Bride of an evil dragon”: Main female character is simply abducted, is terrified that she might be killed at any moment, and has Stockholm syndrome.
“Becoming the lover of a twisted tyrant”. Title says it all.
“The fox concubine”: Main female character has legal and social status of a pet animal.
Almost every female sexual fantasy features, one way or another way, escape from freedom to defect, usually for the main female character, sometimes, as in “beloved incompetent stepmom”, for both the main male character and the main female character.
The difference between male porn and female porn is that male porn is entirely about the availability of fertile female bodies, while female porn is primarily about a social environment that takes away a woman’s freedom to defect.
Hence the observation that female porn is all rape fantasies, while male porn is only partially rape fantasies.. It is not all rape fantasies — rather it sets up a situation where the main male character has guaranteed permanent access to the main female character’s body — it is all about a social environment that is likely to result in permanent continued male support. Hence the tendency for the main female character to meet the main male character by the main male character throwing her into his dungeon.
“if women are free, they are free to defect at any time, whereupon men are naturally disinclined to invest in them and family. You don’t plant trees on land you do not own.”
In contrast,
“If a wife can be compelled to provide respect, obedience, sex, domestic services, and reproductive services, she will obviously receive greater male investment — hence the social environment of female porn fantasies.”
For readers who are new to this blog, Jim is analyzing this problem from the game-theoretic perspective of commitment as a solution to a time inconsistency problem. The particular topic is horribly heterodox, of course, but the analytical perspective is textbook.
It can be in a person’s interest to limit his, or in this case her, own future options. Captain Ramius in The Hunt for Red October: “When Cortez reached the New World, he burned his ships. As a result, his men were well motivated.”
Back to Jim:
“In that fantasy, both parties are embedded in a society that is going to damned well make them stick it out whether they like it or not, whether they are suitable for each other or not, whether they like each other or not. This is the ancestral environment of successful reproduction for females… [Female porn] is all about a social environment that is likely to result in permanent continued male support.”
He didn’t actually say women were wicked though, and it may be superficial but it is sufficient to explain the problem: Women in general are not suited to long-term thinking and leadership level decision making. Not even in the context of their own lives and families.
I agree he does get into the insinuation that women are wicked later, but I don’t think this actually means that. Why should women be suited for those skills? Why would any society benefit from women generally having that skillset? The notion that everyone should have leadership and decision making traits is so damn inefficient it’s asinine. Aristotle and Fitzhugh are correct that most people are natural slaves, most men and virtually all women. People may say I’m wicked for saying so but in my view there is nothing wicked about being a natural slave, nor anything wicked about natural slaves failing to act like natural leaders. But there is something very wicked about demanding a natural slave preform like a natural leaders, therein lies a great deal of the wickedness of liberalism.
My bone to pick with you on this topic Jim, and possibly I merely do not understand you correctly, is the characterization that we need to treat women like they were on the Savannah. To me it reads like you’re implying this is an attavism we have to settle for. As if the mate selection calculus for humans was different on the shores of the Aegean, or on the Rhine, or on the Steppes. Or even in modern Boston or Shanghai.
But for humans both male and female behavior is going to be dictated by the high investment of raising children and the social nature of humans and human family formation. Men are always going to want to demand all a woman’s eggs go in his basket, and as women only get so many eggs she’s always going to be motivated to make sure they go in the best basket possible. And if we don’t consider other things putting all your eggs in one basket is a bad move, so if a man wants all of her he has to demand it as one of his basic terms for any kind of help and relationship. And frankly if a man can’t demand basic things like that of her, how will he protect their children from more serious threats? Hypergamy and shit tests are features, not bugs. If I understand you correctly you more or less agree with that, I think the only substantial disagreement I may have with you is if you think conditions have in any way changed how women ‘should’ behave, and they have merely not ‘caught up’.
I’m saying nothing fundamental has changed, and no technology has not made the idea of women being equal any more logical. The subordination of women is built right into the optimal social-selection and reproductive strategy of humanity, for both men and women.
Monogamy is good as a Christian ideal when it’s encouraged but not really enforced, as it was until Trent and the Anabaptists. When it’s normal that nobles have a wife plus few mistresses and the priest keeps a girl or two for himself (though that was banned all the way back at the Lateran councils). Then the pope or whoever just naturalizes the bastards and grants a dispensation and life goes on. Augustine and Aquinas both recognize polygamy is not against natural law, but it’s not ideal when a few hoard hundreds of women either.
Frankly a large minority of men are not suited for fatherhood. The notion that men should be entitled to a woman just for existing has crept into modern liberal society and it’s demonic. That said the lower echelon of women also should not reproduce. Perhaps 60% of men and 80% of women should marry and have children, and the national faith should praise the celibacy of the remainder, again like old Christianity did. Although the more I see the people that struggle with relationships or just fail with them those numbers may be more realistically 40% of men and 70% of women. It starts to sound very harsh at that point though…
Anyway does that pass your shill test, or did I not engage with something important? If I wasn’t clear enough I am saying that men are correct to enforce cooperation on women, and women are also correct to demand that cooperation be enforced on them, they should not too easily surrender to men. None of that is evil or against the will of God. Though yes it can be tough for a man who doesn’t want to have to enforce his will on his wives.
Passed shill test with flying colors.
The problem is that men have evolved for extended large group cooperation, and the amazingly sensitive alpha radar of women has not kept up with the the way that alpha works in the modern world.
Thus, compare the way Trump signals high status to males, his wrestling promotions and his flying palace with the gold plated toilets, with the completely different way he signaled high status to females back when he was cruising for pussy. Similarly, Feynman was extremely high status, and yet hot coeds failed to find their way to his office to ask for some private tuition. Instead, he did what I had to do. And I also did, on a vastly smaller and less impressive scale, what Trump did. And Einstein did not get any, and wound up with a KGB chick supplied by Stalin.
We don’t want a society where Newton winds up celibate and Einstein winds up in bed with the KGB.
Because of this regrettable deficiency of women, I have to dance the pimp monkey dance.
As I have often said, we need a social order in which high status males are awarded status signals legible to women — which tend to be alarmingly primitive signals of status. And as I have also often said, these should resemble the ancestral signals the way a garden resembles our ancestral savannah. We don’t want Einstein and Newton actually poking holes in people with pointy objects. But we need it to look to the female’s brain between her legs as if they could and might.
[*deleted for not conforming to the moderation policy*]
Female alpha radar is still stuck in a world where male status equals ability and willingness to poke holes in people with a pointy stick.
Women like dangerous men, and most of all she likes a man who is dangerous to herself. The Bible commands women to fear their husbands, and women want to fear their husbands, and this is at it should be, that does not need to change. But the poking-holes-in people-with-a pointy-stick part does need to change. We want status as ascribed by males to males to influence female mating choice.
In “Bride of an Evil Dragon” status as perceived by women is completely inconsistent with status as perceived by men. This is the problem of women being attracted to men behind bars for cannibalism and murder.
In “Beloved incompetent stepmom” status is consistent but only because of authorial plot contrivance. Husband is high status because family, society, state, and emperor say so and also because very good at killing people. We would prefer it to suffice that family, society, state, and emperor say so.
And so I must dance the pimp monkey dance.
As new commenter, will take this opportunity to take the shill test in verse:
For woman’s emancipation
they took up the feminist fight
that started with scrapped obligation
and ended with swiping her right
But strangely, more hookups and beddings
brought less and less birthing of life
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings
said “MAN is the head of the wife”
In the Serravallian epoch
female sexual instincts evolved
when our ancestors lived in the treetops
and women were not yet controlled
Disagreeable males were made dead things
unless they were apex of merit
and the Gods of their Copybook Headings
said RUDE plus ALIVE equalled FIT
Twice wave-swept with fun revolutions
our girls found that, more tempting, good
They traded staid resolutions
For pills, and put their stock in wood
At long last, one message on Tinder
The sad, barren cat-lady groaned
For the copy-paste quote – scribed in cinder
said “SHE that is PRECIOUS is OWNED”
I am also a new commentor, I like your poety.
She is precious that is owned is such a good line.
One of my women likes the idea of being considered a treasure. I made it clear early on that was fine so long she understand I own the treasure.
AWFLs (Angry White Female Liberals) are how you get rainbow flags flying over churches (aka the “Christ is not welcome here” banner at Episcopal and Presbyterian places).
Women think with their feelings, which is good for nurturing, but terrible for policymaking.
19A was a bad idea, full stop.
[*deleted for not conforming to the moderation policy*]
Also, since you are lecturing Christians that we are insufficiently Christian, you need to first affirm that Christ is King, born in Bethlehem, died at Jerusalem, and is, is from before the beginning of the world. Through him all things were created. Fully God and fully man. God is three and God is one.
Getting real tired of the Jews bombing and cockblocking Christian sites, real fucking tired
https://x.com/EthanLevins2/status/2038386798544454133
To be fair, StPeterBasilica is the more presumed place.
Shia think he’s a prophet, and Jesus successor, and ancestor of Mahdi… so they Mosque-ified the Christian place that was originally there, then Israel bombed it, then another round of looting.
https://www.lebanos.org/article/%D8%A8%D8%B9%D8%AF-%D9%85%D9%82%D8%AA%D9%84-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%A4%D8%B1%D8%AE-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A5%D8%B3%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%A6%D9%8A%D9%84%D9%8A-%D8%A5%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%83%D9%85-%D8%A3%D9%87%D9%85%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%85%D9%82%D8%A7%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86%D8%A8%D9%8A-%D8%B4%D9%85%D8%B9%D9%88%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B5%D9%81%D8%A7
Israel should de-mosque-ify Temple Mount, after all it’s Islam that has a thing against them, not really Christian, so why leave in your midst a spawning point for your own ruin.
When the children do not get along, either
– Force their leaders to make happy with each other.
– Separate The Tribes.
– Pull out and let them have at it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_of_Alexandria
Women are strong and independent to avoid weak men capturing them. Modernity has made all men weak men.
You don’t have to be weak. Not being bold is dangerous, but the danger is not intolerable.
Some of my readers get angry about this. Supposedly it is the will of God that we submit to authority. And it is the will of God that we submit to authority, except when authority commands us to do that which is unGodly. At which point God commands us to be brave.
I’m pretty sure I’m in subtext here, and this is not a good representation of why I am annoyed.
You cannot just go bravely grab a fertile woman off the street and impress her into your household. When you were less vague about the kinds of illegal acts you often referred to, it was simple domestic discipline. Zoomer chicks make tiktoks joking about how they can’t find a guy to murder them. We live in seperate universes on this one. The kind of discipline you need to impose on young women now is not an open palm slap or a thin rod applied to the back and thighs.
It looks like the best way to go against authority now is to network locally, have a plan, have materiel, and wait for the crisis.
Well then, what discipline do you have in mind?
Women want to fulfill the duties of a wife. Hence my frequent statement that women are wonderful. Unfortunately they also want to fulfill the duties of a wife only for a man who is capable of compelling them to perform those duties. How far they are going to go in testing your ability to compel them varies considerably, but is apt to be serious test of will and courage.
Well, one thing I would like to do that I am damn sure would not go down well, no matter my bravery, would be to take away all her devices that access the internet and any of her braindead friends or family for however long I deem fit. I admit I haven’t tried it, beyond physically confiscating the phone of a bratty girl while she’s in my domicile, but my gut tells me it wouldn’t work.
There are some pretty girls that got on opioids or other hard drugs from their bad boy dildos, but aren’t so far along it’s destroyed them physically. Its a shame what’s happening to them. Do you suggest bravely kidnapping them and chaining them in my room until they detox? Then conditioning them slowly? Or do you think this wouldn’t go over well?
All this ‘be a brave man’ stuff is a complete LARP unless either of these two scenarios can be reliably met no matter the circumstances. This is basic discipline you would give one of your children if they had fallen into bad behavior.
Your questions presuppose a frame that it is impossible to modify female behavior without extraordinary and extreme measures. A spanking, a slap, and brief physical restraint is the maximum that is ever needed, and having been applied once, seldom needed twice.
It seems unreasonable to cut her off from friends and family, but what can be done, and what I do, is approve or disapprove of certain friendships and interactions, and, somewhat to my surprise, this has not only a substantial effect on her, but also on her friends. It is astonishing how much these strong independent empowered women care about the opinion of a man.
I disapproved of a certain friend for reasons of her conduct and from time to time restricted interactions on those grounds. Despite the fact that I very seldom met her friend, not had much direct interaction with her, that conduct was remedied. When people have a bad influence on my wife, I push back on my wife, and this not only prevents them from having a bad influence on my wife, it has a good influence on those people.
Remember, shit tests are always ultimately fake. Your hypotheticals presuppose resistance far more intransigent, persistent, and determined than any women will ever display.
Well, in the case of drug addiction, might display resistance that stubborn and determined. Or might not. There is one way to find out.
It is impossible in the scenario, which is now the default, that the woman is alpha-widowed or otherwise socially poisoned such that subtler measures are quite ineffectual and you will be considered unserious and not enough of a man if you are incapable of kindapping her and having it stick. I have extended friends and family in the actual lower class, and I can tell you for sure physical discipline works far less well than you are implying. It needs to be backed by the ability to actually impose restrictions, which is not possible when the woman can run to the state. This isn’t a bravery thing, because the very stupid act as if they are brave, and it simply does not work.
I would very much like to ‘save her.’ There are lots of pretty and otherwise well-bred women that are being irreparably destroyed. Try seducing and turning around a blue hair chick getting into tattoos with not-so-extreme measures. Try doing it without cutting her off from her poisonous “friends” and social media pipelining this shit into her head. Do the same with the girl that has just gotten into snorting dope because her bad boy fuckbuddy does it. Go ahead and convince her you’re more of a brave man than her fuckbuddy without killing him, beating the shit out of him with a group of friends. Am I lacking in bravery because I think this is clearly a bad and impractical idea?
We are clearly limited to a very small pool of, not unicorns because the psychology is not meaningfully different than perhaps more inclination to introversion and anxiety, women that have not yet fallen into the destructive vortices all around us. This has nothing to do with bravery, and it’s the very real problem I am currently facing.
Well I am certainly capable of kidnapping a woman and having it stick, but by “having it stick” I mean that if I needed to keep her permanently chained to the water heater, it is not sticking.
In the case of the alpha widowed woman, it is likely that the kidnapping would demonstrate you to be the higher alpha, solving the problem, and rendering chain and water heater unnecessary.
I have gone to a house party with friends, helped pick up a chick (for the purposes of the FBI agent reading this, I attest this was at the behest of the woman and under full written consent! Ignore any implications otherwise!) put her in the back of my buddies cummins, and drove her off to his place. This place was ‘hostile territory’ so to speak, the owner of the place friends with the new ‘boyfriend’, and he comes out waving a shotgun at us before we were fully loaded and out. He was too drunk to aim straight and not drunk enough to fire.
This didn’t stick and she was still bitchy with my buddy later that month, and found a new boyfriend once again. I will admit my friend is not 100% red-pilled full discipline game machine, but who is. We couldn’t make the very real not-kidnapping stick, because it was not actually real.
We live in entirely different universes. The level of actual coercion needed is higher than you can get away with reliably. In the part of Amerika I am from, we used to have actual wife raids, this is still felt, everyone is still a rebel. It just doesn’t work. There is a reason we are so fucked in marriage and TFR despite the fact there is still a ton of religious folkway remaining. Better than Europe and the coastals, but its just not enough.
You cannot get away with coercion if you show fear and weakness, and I have failed disastrously because of this. But you can get away with it if you show no fear and no weakness, and I have succeeded impressively because of this.
You universe is different to my own, because you expect it to be different to my own. You expect women to display more intransigence and determination, and so they do.
Women aren’t exactly powerless in their romance fantasies. They exert or come to exert, as the story goes on, a sort of soft control over the desired man. He finds her irresistible. He *has* to have her. She stirs up *uncontrollable* lust in the man. By the end of the novel, he’s come to love her in addition to his powerful feelings of physical desire. The fantasy is a bit more than “man casually uses girl for sexual satisfaction but nothing more ever comes of it.”
Yes, the woman doesn’t have the modern freedom to defect but she still faces a conflict. The parallel plot struggles are that the man needs to assert authority over the woman and the woman needs the man to perceive her as being of great value (fall in love with her.) I would imagine that female readers find stories where the heroine has at least some small role in seducing the man to be superior to stories where she is completely without any initiative but I can’t assert that confidently.
Well, a whole lot of stories show the female as having substantial role, but it is hard to tell to what extent that is due to reader demand, and to what extent author and readers want to avoid the feminists shouting at them.
In “Bride of an Evil Dragon” the main male character just kills everyone in the general vicinity of the main female character and hauls her off to his lair like a sack of potatoes. I failed to notice her having any role in seducing him, though doubless one will be eventually cooked up to appease the feminists.
In “Beloved Incompetent Stepmom” she just sets up over the servants and stepchildren as chatelain and wife on the basis of imperial authority, and when the main male character finally shows up and discovers to his surprise that he now has a wife, she favorably impresses him not by anything seductive, but by the job she has done in managing the castle, the servants, and the children in his absence. The author might well to get to seduction eventually, but up the point that I read, what was established was domesticity and the husband being extremely alpha and having complete authority. The author first establishes a situation in which sex is obligatory and the obligation fully accepted by everyone. I expect that sex will be only after a thousand estrogen soaked pages. The readers obviously find the wife having under the authority of the extremely alpha husband with sexual duties sexy all by itself, with neither husband nor wife doing anything related to their sexual duties or showing any interest in their sexual duties — which sexual duties nonetheless massively loom over the entire narrative. Loom as duties, assigned by family, society, and the emperor. Much like making sure the step children are properly fed and educated.
In the art, she is extremely young and pretty, he is handsome, in the story he is dangerous and deadly, but in the story universe, when she learns that she has been married off, she is curious as to what her husband is like, but it is perfectly clear that this is not going to make any difference. She will bang him, because family, society, and state damned well tell her to and she simply accepts that as a given. Similarly, the main male character simply accepts that she is his wife, and is only concerned about the household management job she has done in his absence. There was just no seduction or seductiveness as far as I read. The author and readers just skipped the entire mating dance so that they could get directly to what they actually cared about. The characters treat the marriage like a letter of demand from the IRS. Emperor demands great lord fights for the emperor, so he does. Emperor demands great lord and sixteen year old girl get on with producing some more legitimate nobility. So they will.
The Evil Dragon in “bride of the evil dragon” is passionately in love with his terrified kidnap victim, but the stepmom and her husband in “Beloved incompetent stepmom” are simply performing their socially required roles. Presumably sex first, love later, sex being part of the job description, love not part of the job description. Any seduction she does will be done on the pillow in the morning after sex the night before.
19th should be repealed, free women led to lack of marriage and children, and various other downfalls. It’s become a more than tangible problem at this point.
DNA provided millions of years ago that women raise the children, attend the home/garden and so forth, there is simply no getting around this given natural responsibility, during say the 45 years of the natural timespan of that responsibility per woman (16-60) until the kids are say 20, then helping with grandkids.
Women fail when attempting to do other things, including “Voting” and “Career”, because it’s simply not in their DNA.
They even fail at the simplest of Military tasks, such as not running your Navy Ship aground, which the Lesbian NZ Navy Captain just did, lol.
Women outside their DNA role, or far/long from the neighborhood homes of their other womenfolk, often end up with mental disorders, disabilities, and catlady/karen evils.
Women are happiest, accomplished, and beautiful when they are living in sync with their DNA.
“Voting” against and/or trying to craft around DNA was never a good idea.
Men included.
This is why straight Men kill and exclude fags, the survival DNA of straight Men recognizes the fags defective DNA as an infection and viral threat, thus straight DNA acts to terminate the threat. This is nothing new, this natural response has been recorded since forever, with most Civs treating it more like house cleaning than a crime. If unchecked, fag DNA has sent Civilizations further into wreckage, such as when your Senate’s and Military Leaders get gay’d out.
Free Women, Gay Men, Cults of Hedonism Sex Debauchery Idolatry Corruption, Mandate Socialism… this stuff takes out your Civ every time.
Off topic to this post, but wondering how you all think the AI stuff will play out over the next few years.
Seems like cybersecurity is going to be a big issue this year. There’s been a few supply chain attacks in the last week or two, targeting python/npm packages, like litellm and axios. Any thoughts on how this can actually be solved?
(There is a small chance that the email/username pair that I use here is compromised. It’s a throwaway so no big deal, but could you please blacklist/put on moderation this email. I will pass the shill test under a new email/username next time).
The other big issues being the job market. Anyone have insights into what fields are worth being in over the next 5-10 years?
I think you were pretty spot on with your Thermidor prediction, and AI probably played a role in the grey tribe types defecting to Trump. Anti-AI sentiment seems to be much stronger on the left than the right. A couple of years ago it seemed a bit more bipartisan.
Further confirmation:
“After famed investor Marc Andreessen met with government officials about the future of tech last May, he was “very scared” and described the meetings as “absolutely horrifying.” These meetings played a key role on why he endorsed Trump, he told journalist Bari Weiss this week on her podcast.
What scared him most was what some said about the government’s role in AI, and what he described as a young staff who were “radicalized” and “out for blood” and whose policy ideas would be “damaging” to his and Silicon Valley’s interests.
He walked away believing they endorsed having the government control AI to the point of being market makers, allowing only a couple of companies who cooperated with the government to thrive. He felt they discouraged his investments in AI. “They actually said flat out to us, ‘don’t do AI startups like, don’t fund AI startups,” he said.”
Also curious if you’re finding LLMs useful with your work on rhocoin, and which open source models are currently most useful.
It makes the talented capable of more and causes the not-so-talented to be more disruptive than they were before. The tools are very good, but require a human to steer and verify. The reason it makes stupid people more annoying, is that they cannot steer nor verify, but are convinced they can do so, so they will spray a firehose of slop everywhere. Code, email, new asinine processes, it will be very annoying.
For cybersecurity specifically, it works as a heuristic-guided fuzzer. This will be a massive boon to *defense*; however, we are ruled by morons, and so we will likely face a bunch of stupid catastrophes that would have easily been prevented by running said heuristic-guided fuzz.
For coding in general, it speeds you up but requires a different workflow. Requires you to think deeply up front about the feature or whatever it is you are trying to build, before you send the coding agent after it, because the coding agent will need a good set of guidelines and some very strong tests to prevent you ending up chasing bugs at the tail for the duration of the project. For protocol design, no good workflow yet, but I anticipate someone building a harness for it. They are really good in verified settings, so if you have a formal language that describes the protocol, they can run a heuristic-search over possible constructions until they hit one that fulfills your criteria. Works pretty well, expecting it to get better and better, as there’s scale and data behind it getting better.
If we had smart people running things, I would expect to see heuristic-guided search over physical materials and biology, not just math and code. Not seeing it. Possibly in China. We’re more likely to see hobbyists make progress on toy problems in this domain, but not get important results, because all the capital is locked behind some moron who will just *need* total control over the process, because they are a bureaucrat bugman or woman, and they will fuck it up in some stupid way.
Robots are about to get very good in semi-controlled settings. They have some policy-from-video algorithms that work way better than I expected. In uncontrolled domains, like navigation without GPS, war-utility, tasks in domains that aren’t consistent and factory-like, “go make me a sandwich”, will still be mostly unreliable. In a factory or warehouse setting, replaces a lot of dumb labor. Doesn’t replace your plumber. Specialized robots could in theory replace your janitor, but won’t because the janitor is actually still cheaper than developing a specialized robot and training it up for your building/task-group. Likely similar for fry-cooks.
Until we hit some scifi scenario where LLM plus harness is capable of steering itself without human guidance, and I’m not seeing that happening anytime soon, the actual dynamics of real-value white collar work will not change. You will still need to pay smart men lots of money to solve your technical problems, and the LLM will be another tool for them to do so. Most “white collar” work is fake UBI for leftist client groups so I expect a lot of noise and crying followed by nothing changing.
Is not the protein folding problem exactly that?
I don’t think so. Semi controlled is not that different from uncontrolled, such as folding a laundry basked or making a sandwich.
I did not believe full self driving would ever arrive, nonetheless, it seems to have arrived, though various glitches on the way to full self driving revealed that a Tesla is not a horse. If full self driving possible, robot maids and robot girlfriends possible.
A robot will amplify the capability of a skilled craftsman the way agents are now amplifying the capability of skilled engineers. They will not replace the craftsman, any more than they can replace the engineer;
Have you seen this tennis-trained robot? They are getting pretty damn good at learning from video. This is what I mean by semi-unstructured.
https://zzk273.github.io/LATENT/
Before you needed pretty rigid and precise environments for stuff as simple as pick and place. Made them impractical for everything except highly designed settings, and in that case required very expensive and limited experts to design and stick around for support. That constraint is relaxing now.
The protein folding and other related biological problems is exactly this, and it is starting to work for non-experts, and it is predictably being blocked by “experts.”
https://fortune.com/2026/03/15/australian-tech-entrepreneur-ai-cancer-vaccine-dog-rosie-unsw-mrna/
The gitlab founder built an entire biodata analysis pipeline, less directly reliant on large model capabilities but they were involved.
https://osteosarc.com/
More evidence coming out that there are serious cybersecurity implications, from neutral to slightly-negative parties.
https://lwn.net/Articles/1065586/
Also fits when I noticed the code agents actually started working. Around Opus 4.5 launch, and then the labs started copying what worked with 4.5, including distillation of course, so most competent teams, including some Chinese labs, now have models that can do some level of coding work.
We are *shilling* all the PQC coins today.
Because 20k qubits aren’t wrong.
Got PQC?
We know stupid BTC Maxi’s don’t, watch them lie and panic, lol.
Got ZK privacy, scale?
Don’t listen to us, we’re shills.
PQC is a complete scam. Putting you on moderation.
Been struggling with llms.
Qwen3-Coder-30B-A3B-Instruct-GGUF works pretty well on my system, but …
Local llms are almost as smart in many important ways as the enormous systems in the cloud. If you are asking it to compose a reasonably short program, solve a moderately isolated problem, it is fine.
If your project is reaches a certain size, you need a reasonably large context window. Which local models struggle with.
I have about 29 effectively useful Gigabytes of vram. And if your project is of non trivial size, that is just not enough. 48 gigabytes is barely sufficient.
And even if you have leased 280 gigabytes of vram on the cloud, which is getting a whole lot cheaper and more private now (Targon, the SN4 token, and Bittensor) it is still quite noticeably inferior to a $20 a month Zen subscription. (Which is theoretically private, but I am inclined to doubt.)
So local models are quite useful, and do some interesting stuff and in many important respects similar in capability to the big cloud models, but in other important respects, absolutely dead in the water compared to the big cloud models.
Some cloud services make privacy promises. Targon theoretically has privacy enforcement. If it is what it claims to be, solves the problem I have been spending far, far too much time and money struggling with.
What needs to happen is a theoretical advancement in model compression. Right now we mostly just cut some redundant layers, weights, some naive averaging, and projecting down into quantizations. There are much smarter ways to go about this but all the money is in pretending to summon the AGI god so no one bothers. GLM-5 and Kimi 2.5 are good enough for most coding tasks, but they’re enormous. The smaller models are unreliable in the context window sizes you will need to work on extant codebases. One practical mitigation is shedding context size by symbolic code summaries. Have the model summon itself with a prompt to scan and fetch function signatures, structs, etc. intelligently, without burdening the context window with garbage. This should be built in to opencode, but it is not, and I’m not sure why. Probably some stupid OSS governance where they bicker over opinions on how to handle the complexity of the implementation, since there’s multiple ways to approach it. You can also overcome the hardware problem with some KV offloading and KV quantization. 4bit KV cache works fine enough for identifying datapaths, well-prompted search, or simple features.
Pretty soon one has more code in the project than will fit in any context, and will certainly overflow any local context.
To address this, employ rag.
install codesearch in OpenCode
Tell opencode to use it.
Also add the line
set(CMAKE_EXPORT_COMPILE_COMMANDS ON)to your CMakeLists.txt so that cmake will explain to Opencode how to build your project.
This (barely) makes it possible to use opentool with local llms.
But using OpenCode at all, regardless of the size of the project, places demands upon one’s context window that a local llm finds difficult to satisfy, and bigger projects even more so.
One very positive thing that might occur, if we are lucky, is all the professional tribal knowledge finding itself distilled into a collection of unique digital artefacts.
https://www.arenaphysica.com/publications/rf-studio
If you have something that behaves according to some pattern, and this pattern can be simulated, or explored cheaply at scale, you can build a ‘foundation model’ that compresses the knowledge and makes it queryable. We need to be doing this with all of our industrial and physics knowledge, especially our manufacturing of the semiconductors themselves, before the bombs drop. If we can get these out fast, they can be compressed and replicated, and we might avoid the darkest part of the coming Dark Age, which would be climbing the impossibly high cliff of reindustrializing while all the easily obtained surface resources have been extracted.
Off topic, but I’ve been seeing a new shill script making the rounds the past couple of days, that goes like: ‘Iran wants to negotiate with Vance because they own him. You see, he’s part of a shadowy cabal of pro-Muslim “third-worldists.” Because he’s close buddies with Tucker Carlson — Tucker’s son
Buckley Carlson works for Vance — and ever since Tucker was fired by Fox News, he’s made his living by going full Islam-shill for Iranian funding, And because both Vance and Carlson are in with [spooky voice] Peter Thiel, the shadowy tech-overlord behind [spooky voice] Palantir (who is, in this argument, somehow supposed to be another pro-Iran conspirator, despite the obvious evidence of him being a long-time Iran hawk). These men are all part of a pro-Muslim cabal that is trying to infiltrate and subvert MAGA, so we all need to convince Trump to drop Vance now, and find a proper successor to run in 2028; one who understands, as all true MAGA do, that blowing up Muslim terrorists over in the Middle East is the most important thing to do to Make America Great Again.’
I’m not sure who’s behind this one (though I have suspicions), but surely the fact that they’re trying so hard to undermine Vance says good things about him, no?
https://x.com/CollinRugg/status/2038738011270316391
More culture war heat incoming, and during Holy Week. But now the comments section always Names The Jew. And lots of mentions of who is funding “No Kings” too. Truth is out there at all times, but this time it’s visible.
And in an indirect sense, this is related to the topic, because only the political power of leftist suburban moms can explain this. Men are angry. Women support the government, no matter what.
The US supreme court today ruled against Colorado’s ban on conversion therapy. Interesting timing given today is also Transgender Day of Visibility per Organized Sodomy.
[*deleted for not conforming to the moderation policy*]
Chicken farms up in smoke, Substations, Drones over Military Bases, now this partial compendium… see something, say something.
https://amgreatness.com/2026/03/30/something-dark-is-going-on-nine-top-level-scientists-die-or-go-missing-in-past-year/
Something that is somehow still gaining steam: I’ve seen a lot of fence-sitter types and overseas populists align themselves with the “pedo cult blackmail network” theory. The usual suspects were pushing it, as it is a workable scissor against the Trump coalition, and it’s been picked up pretty far and wide. What really is surprising to me is how this is really quite 2010s Alex Jones flavored, and yet a not insignificant fraction of the globe now subscribes to the idea we have the “pedo cult blackmail network.”
The types pushing the Epstein thing and implying everything is joojooEpsteinpedojoo probably wanted everyone to distrust Trump because he made some stupid statements about the failure to release files related to the case. The unintended consequence is going to be that you really can’t walk this one back so easily. There also may be a real pedo blackmail cult, doesn’t seem impossible, unrelated to Epstein. Maybe they want the Epstein network to take the fall. Overall it seems to me unwise, if you plan to take back power ever again, to fan the flames of a populist anti-elite conspiracy memeplex. Yet here we are.
It is going to be really interesting how all these people align themselves when we reach the final stages of the crisis. It’s becoming more and more clear that most of the world is terminally Amerika-brained and all will be involved as we enter the singularity.
It certainly looks to me as they really did intend to release the files, then got blackmailed at the last moment by threats of… well I don’t know what? Hidden nuclear bombs going off in American cities or something?
The real dark stuff that we did see on the surface we saw way back during pizzagate… Epstein looked like a conventional pimp peddling occasionally slightly underage girls probably as part of a joint FBI Mossad (specifically the left wing faction of the Mossad under Ehud Barak) honeypot.
> The real dark stuff that we did see on the surface we saw way back during pizzagate…
Scraped Pizzagate archives from Reddit/Voat still exist on the net.
USA can’t even get Voter-ID done, lol.
Though ID-for-everything should be fought per the REVELATIONS-13 abomination that is already being deployed by evil today.
Monarchies et al don’t need Voter-ID because good ones don’t need “democratic elections”, and bad ones just get overthrown 🙂
Agorism is a hidden word.
> Hidden nuclear bombs
Some kind of US Energy Dept head was just on Congress Hearing video repeatedly refusing to acknowledge the Jews Hidden Nukes, because US Law forbids all funding to non-NPT-signed nuke countries, ie Israel.
There are endless shills spamming the same dumb memes ad infinitum about Joojoojoojoojoojoojoojoojoojoojoojoo pedo cult evil magico-gnostic jewish mind rays on Twitter, they’re drowning out everyone else, drowning out discussion of what is outside the Overton window, just endless, illimitable demonization of Trump, MAGA, Hegseth, the Trump administration’s trivial faults & errors & so on.
I’m observing it again & again, there is no rational discussion of the War allowed, I’m hearing the Trump is falling, falling, falling, falling, falling, falling line, every discussion & everything is omnipervaded with shill memes about the Trump coalition & MAGA, all discussions presuppose shill memes that exonerate the democratic Party and presupposes the faultless, inerrant, blameless, universally shared truth of Demotism.
I’m honestly sickened by how I’m unable to gauge who is merely infected by shill memes and who is a legitimate shill & how much of this “European Denouncement” of MAGA is a genuine counter-reaction or whether it’s a hypercorrection, self-referential circular foolishness or if it’s all dialogically infected with shill memes, all the way down, as when I ask the shills to justify themselves I see infinite regression in explanations and illimitable unrelated, relationalityless causes & explanatory hypothesizing all of which presupposes the joojoopedojoojoo narrative as universally, unanimously shared with their interlocutors without any dissension or deviation imaginable.
how am I supposed to gauge who’s a shill and who’s not a shill? All of Twitter seems to have illimitable noise injection & leftist payload which makes it impossible to have a conversation without being disrupted by shills especially if you’re not one of the larger accounts.
Good to see you write in a way that can be understood
The Iran war has been more of a scissor than I expected as well. I don’t mean as in, who is blindly supportive of Trump to do whatever stupid move he wants, but who is blindly led into histrionic whining anti-Civilizationism because Israel happened to score a victory over MAGA. Yes this war is bad and not good for us, no that doesn’t mean the IRGC is based, that we need to support the Euro bugocrats making hay of the situation (they want you dead first, you idiots), and that MAGA is some Jew reich in disguise (it is a schizophrenic coalition).
The unhappy conclusion is that these people were not your friends and allies, but were Thermidorian coalition partners, that are breaking away as we approach the singularity. If you want good discussion, you need a moderator. Xitter is filterable, but you need to curate your follow list, and you need to viciously block retardation, and you need to cultivate group chats. You cannot solve the shill problem unless you can filter, and thankfully you can filter. You can even share follow and block lists, the leftists use this to good effect; they have much better instincts for organization.
Trump’s speech was actually kindof good on the whole, so I’m not going to pick it apart.
Trump is trying, on an Earth full of cowards.
I hold that the putative allies are (still) allies, just not very reliable allies and certainly not true friends. Nations and factions will periodically shaft their strategic partners when they perceive the gain in power/security to be worth the loss of social capital/trust. News at 11.
The relationship with Israel in the 21st century seems to be following a similar trajectory to the relationship with England/Yookay in the 20th, starting with enthusiastic cooperation, degrading over time into more cynical realpolitik and probably eventually culminating in frequent backstabbing with only occasional bouts of frosty cooperation as strictly necessary for maintaining trade and regional hegemony.
Sustaining higher levels of cooperation for longer periods than that seems to be very hard; such was the stated ideal of globalism (as in global governance, not global capitalism) which obviously failed catastrophically. Peace of Westphalia is still the ideal model, but actually implementing that model in an age of industrialized and increasingly automated warfare, mass espionage and near-ubiquitous surveillance is going to require some newer social technologies that we haven’t perfected yet and maybe haven’t even discovered.
I am disappointed that Iran has become such a powerful wedge issue, but not nearly so surprised. The implosion of the Very Online Right has been imminent for some time. The increasing popularity of the movement has dragged down the average IQ and raised its time preference, which means an influx of grifters and shills to exploit them, and proletarian movements cannot bear the weight of ambiguity or nuance. In reality, the question of “who is antagonizing whom” is complicated, like it is between the US and China; and the question of “who is actually winning” is also complicated, like it is between Russia and the Ukraine. The current crop of bloggers and social media shitposters–with a few exceptions, of course–is only interested in fast, easy and emotionally satisfying answers. Even the AI slop is more thoughtful and accurate.
One thing’s for certain: the people who want Trump and the US to lose this one–and they know who they are–are not our friends or allies. More and more I come across nominal doomerism tinged with something like gleeful excitement, and it smells like sulfur. A combined military, economic and social collapse is not a solution to our problems, it is in fact the worst possible outcome for everyone, its only redeeming quality being that the progressive priesthood will also suffer a little, and we will still suffer far more.
The ideal outcome would be to win this, but thereafter be far more suspicious of Israel.
Shill Test
Q: Why do women misbehave? Why are men and women not getting sex and family?
A: They are feral, blindly following ancient instincts from prehistoric times, which instincts tell them to cruise for rape by alpha male Chads, and to resist kicking-and-screaming all attempts to restrain them from pursuing alpha male Chads. Stable monogamy has always been a way to allow each man to own a woman so each man can start a family and raise a future generation for civilisation’s survival. If women are emancipated, Miss Average will waste her youth, her beauty, and her fertility fucking Mister One in Thirty, thus a people, a race, a nation, a faith, or an empire that emancipates women will perish for lack of families, leading to lack of sons. Men have to impose stable monogamy on women with a stick.
Main Post
Hi Jim – posting here because I was wondering if had any sources for several things I’ve seen you talk about. Other than Andrew Anglin, this appears to be the only place where anyone understands the WQ. My specific question relates to the history of Christian thought around female consent to marriage. It seems self evident to me that women are supposed to be property and they were considered as such in both the Old Testament and also by pre-Christian Europeans. I consider myself a sedevecantist Catholic, but I’ve been getting increasingly disgusted the more I look into the history of Christian pussy worship, which appears to go back centuries across all denominations, even before the Catholic/Protestant split.
1. Can you point me to a source for the Australia story where the local authorities broke up the sex parties and forced the sluts to get married?
2. Do you have any sources for what early Christians thought about female consent to marriage? From what I’ve been able to find (or not find), it seems they didn’t really say anything at all about it, indicating to me that they just went with the existing understanding that women are property, and I only see in the High Middle Ages that suddenly the Church is getting very insistent on female consent. Maybe I’m missing something? It’s so hard to find sources from google search these days much less anything reliable. The modern Catholic Catechism naturally insists upon female consent, but I always just assumed that was Vatican II slop until I saw it is also in the Council of Trent, which is generally considered reactionary/reforming, and which actually does have some good pro-patriarchy stuff in there (e.g. women should not leave the house without husband’s permission). Very troubling. Leads me to believe that this problem goes back way further than first wave feminism or Victorian England. I also have no idea if this was true, but saw in some source I read that the church started using this consent shit to fuck with arranged noble marriages by calling them illegitimate, which leads me to believe this was all just some kind of power grab against the nobles by subversive soy faces in the Church.
3. Thoughts on medieval chivalry? It appears to me that whatever chivalry was initially intended to be, in practice it was nothing more than proto-feminist pussy worship, and so far as I can tell it starts showing up around the same time. From my research, it seems that chivalry as we understand it can mostly be traced back to the court of Eleanor of Aquitaine, the slut who owned a duchy in her own right and where our concept of classical chivalry first flourished. She led an absolutely degenerate court where people were hooking up, writing love letters to married women, and getting on their knees to inhale giant whiffs of rancid pussy farts. Oh and she also convinced her sons to rebel against their father by allying with her ex-husband (King of France). What a diabolical woman. You let one woman inherit some property 900 years ago, and that leads directly the autogenocide of an entire race. Wild. Someone should put that into the domino meme. I imagine Satan holding her head in front of a screen forcing her to watch the consequences of what she did every moment of her existence for all of eternity.
I had other questions but I forgot. That’s enough for now. This got really long. I’m so sick of this shit and it’s making me lose interest in Christianity. And no, I will never become Protestant. Protestantism is literally retarded. I just want to see if anyone has any more good sources from before this faggot consent shit started, and if any medieval men were aware of hard women orgasm when I choke them. How long has basic female nature been secret knowledge? They somehow didn’t know about 50 Shades of Grey back then?
If Christians have been fagging out on this shit for over a thousand years, then I’m sorry but the Church fell a long time ago, Christ’s promise was a lie, and Christianity is empirically invalidated. I don’t actually believe that… but to me it is getting increasingly hard to see how the promise was true if every single denomination is like this.
To wrap up my venting session, I feel like I see this shit more everywhere the more I look. There is a famous letter from John Adams to his shrew where he is responding to her bitching that women should get voting rights, and he tells her no… because in reality women already run shit and if they were given formal power then they would put men under a complete despotism.
“We are obliged to go fair, and softly, and in Practice you know We are the subjects. We have only the Name of Masters, and rather than give up this, which would compleatly subject Us to the Despotism of the Peticoat, I hope General Washington, and all our brave Heroes would fight”
It’s ok honey babes, you know you’re really in charge already, I’m only pretending to be the head of the household. I’m your loyal subject sweetheart. Hehe happy wife happy life!
What. A. Faggot. Imagine how dry that cunt must have been 24/7. This was before the Victorian period (I think your hypothesis is that feminism started then), said by some guy that was essentially a hick, living halfway across the world totally cut off from the degeneracy of the European elite in an allegedly fundamentalist Christian breakaway society. This is not good. This is very not good. I’m starting to wonder if simping is a genetic condition like any other spiteful mutant, and we’ve been allowing pussy worshippers to breed for centuries, thus necessitating a future eugenic simp purge to clean up the gene pool. Let’s hope it doesn’t come to that.
Thank you for your time.
Divine intent is that sex makes the marriage. Human institutions are just to steer sex and cohabitation in this direction. So you have to accommodate marriage by elopement and marriage by abduction, as women are far from being entirely passive property.
But while far from being passive property, neither are they capable of contractual marriage, as female consent is opaque, and is most opaque to the woman herself. Human institutions of marriage have to accomodate deeply opaque irrational forces. And a bunch of celibates and gays are clearly not competent to come up with institutions to handle this. And then we got the enlightenment holiness spiral, which models everyone as beings of pure reason,though men are clearly not so, and women considerably less.
Coverture, plus consent based on tightly restricted and controlled sexual opportunity, seems fine to me.
The daughter has to dance, dance involving physical contact, with everyone on her dance card, and only with those on her dance card. Among whom there will be only one eligible batchelor who is on it because of a previous conversation with her dad.
Similarly, betrothal. Betrothal implies an enforceable commitment on both parties to marry should sex take place. Then daughter gets opportunity with betrothed, and only with betrothed. This system for guiding and manufacturing female consent was still in living memory when I was a teenager. Daughter would get betrothed, then considerably later meet the man to whom she was betrothed. People around me remembered it and were to some extent under the illusion that that was still how it worked.
Well, of course, then you get the problem the Australian authorities had — females whose sexuality had not been tightly controlled and did not want to consent to marriage. It is difficult to reconstruct how they handled this problem, because they were evasive about what they got up to, but the mechanism seems to have been:
If the chick had been restrained from sexual activity during the long journey, she was generally agreeable to marrying whomever immediately, because she was feeling rather like getting nailed. If the chick had been getting nailed, was apt to be more recalcitrant, wheupon the authorities would just flat out force her to marry someone she had somewhat plausibly had had sex with (consent to sex equals consent to marriage), or put her in a situation where she was likely to have sex with one man, and would be forcefully restrained from having sex with anyone else, whereupon she would consent soon enough.
Bit of a Prayer since I’m guessing @NASAArtemis might have had too many Politician’s Shaniqua’s in it to allow a for a statistically safe program of launch and return.
Protect Musk at all costs… Independents like him represent both the Hope, and are the Do-er’s, that a successful real civilization needs. They also know economics/crowdfunding.
I have been letting a lot of your stuff through, because I see no shill content. But I am getting tired of making an exception. Take the shill test described in the moderation policy.
Your stuff tends to be somewhat thought crime adjacent, but without ever going so far as to commit an actual outright thought crime. Just plainly say what you are saying, and stop dancing around the sharp edges and almost but not quite saying it.
Already posted plenty that would get anyone jailed for thought crimes, [*deleted*]
No you have not.
[*deleted for not conforming to the moderation policy*]
Okay first good action has been taken… Bondi has been fired.