Capitalism

October 24th, 2022

Time to discuss the nature of capitalism, because fake Nazis on Gab are spouting Marxist history, economics, and theory:

The Marxist sees bread on the supermarket shelf, and thinks this a manifestation of a central plan. He thinks we already live in a socialist economy, with big capitalists giving marching orders to little capitalists.

And that is why they refuse to acknowledge that Musk is the great rocket scientist of our day, as Wernher von Braun was the great rocket scientist of his day.

The man who favors equality hates better men and hates great men more, and wants to tear down and destroy what they create, for he is envious of the excellence of anyone superior to himself.

They will not acknowledge that entrepreneurs create value and capital. If suddenly the world has a whole lot more lift to orbit capability, supposedly it must be because Harvard assigned the rocket technology to Musk, and the Rothschilds allocated the necessary resources and commanded it to exist. Supposedly that technology was granted to Musk by Harvard. “Where is Musk’s degree in rocketry?” they sneer. If Musk owns Starlink and two thirds of civilizations lift to orbit capability, he must have stolen it somehow from someone.

All the technology of industrialization was created by entrepreneurs like Musk.

The Marxist who calls himself a Marxist names the center from which the central plan comes as “wall street”. The Marxist who lyingly calls himself a fascist says “Rothschilds” (Before 1930, the Rothschilds had a great deal of wealth and power, which they used for evil purposes, but in 1930, they lost most of it, and anyone still saying “Rothschilds” in this day and age is usually a Soros shill. Everyone whose last name is Rothschild dropped off the bottom of the Forbes 400 long, long ago, usually with creditors hunting him and his assets.)

These guys who call themselves fascists and Nazis while spouting Marxist theory and Marxist economics are enemy entryists. If any of the original Nazis were fans of Marxist economics and Marxist theory, Hitler took care of that lot in the night of the long knives.

The Marxist thinks that all the wealth and value of the modern world was stolen, that value is not created, merely distributed. When the fake Nazis praise Hitler’s socialism, they imply that they will distribute all this value back to proletariat, but they are Soros shills (we know they are working for Soros because strangely unable to notice what Soros is up to), and Soros thinks that all this wealth and value was stolen, not from the the disturbingly white proletariat, but from the brave and stunning warrior women of subsaharan Africa, and plans to ship it all back to Africa to be buried in the fertile African soil, from which it will supposedly sprout anew.

(Why you might ask would Soros and Zelenksy fund and protect third positionist national socialists? Well in the Ukraine, they are fighting for a globalist Jew installed in power by Soros and Victoria Nuland, and are the only force that Zelensky can rely on to shoot conscripts who attempt to run away from the front.)

It logically follows from Marxism that all wealth is stolen, so it logically follows from Marxism that if you are better off than fly blown maggot infested half starved subsaharan Africans who are eating each other, you must be oppressing them, and need to be punished. That punishing you makes the Marxist holy, and punishing you more makes him even holier.

The huge increase in lift capability to orbit that Musk created is a demonstration and reminder that science, technology, industry, and wealth is created by entrepreneurs. Thus Marxists want us stuck on earth forever. They think we are all kulaks.

Industrialization and Tech

We have had three hundred and eighty years of corporate tech innovation, starting with the canal and water power companies that appeared under Charles the second, and tech innovation is always performed by a tech CEO, and the innovation always spreads via engineers whom that CEO trained. Corporate tech innovation always depends on a techie in power. Always has, always will. He is soon replaced by bean counters, lawyers, and suchlike, as Jim Clarke frequently and loudly complained – and then tech innovation by that company ends. As Jim Clarke frequently and loudly complained

You can buy existing tech by hiring an engineer who has trained under someone who was implementing that tech, but new tech always needs power, authority, and status for it to be created in the first place. This corporate formula is centuries old.

When Wernher von Braun was a prisoner of Nasa, with war crimes charges pending for bombing London and employing slave labor, he told them how to build rockets, but they could not build them. To build them, had to put him in charge and compel everyone to treat him with respect. To build them, had to give him power and status.

It is just not practical to develop significant new tech unless you are the CEO: Bessemer and steel, Shockley and transistors.

Bessemer tried to teach other steelmakers his method of making steel, but they were unable to learn, while engineers under his command were able to learn. Shockley wrote the book on how to build transistors, but every transistor everywhere is built by an engineer who trained under an engineer … who trained under Shockley. The book just did not work, just as Bessemer’s licenses and patents did not work. Knowledge needs power to be implemented.

Smart guys, knowledgeable guys, are not enough. You need a really smart and knowledgeable man in charge, and the people implementing his vision have to treat him respect, or else stuff just fails to work.

Academia bears the same relationship to technology and industry as niggers bear to civilization. Someone builds a civilization and niggers say “We build dat. We waz Kangs” and proceed to smash it up. Someone builds a technology, and academics say “we taught you how to do that”, then they meet behind closed doors and establish an official scientific consensus on the basis of secret evidence that they will not show anyone, a consensus that makes the technology stupid, impractical, expensive, and dangerous. Academia inherently and naturally applies the theological method, which is great for establishing consensus on matters of faith and morals, but disastrous for matters of material and effective causation, for which we need the scientific method. The inherent nature of academia makes it very difficult to apply the scientific method if the university is signing your paycheck. This has always been the way that it was, and it will always be the way that it will be. It is just the wrong form of social organization for addressing matters of material and effective causation. Academia just cannot do it, any more than you can hammer nails with a screwdriver. Wrong tool for the job. It is stupid to attempt to train techies in academia, though today HR forces us to only hire those with “good” degrees. Trying to do science and tech through universities is like trying to innovate technology in a company with a bean counter or a lawyer as CEO.

Until Musk, all American rockets, including the moon rocket, were the same basic design as Wernher von Braun built at the rocket club.

After Wernher von Braun built those rockets at the rocket club, he then went to university and got a degree in rocketry, the very first degree in rocketry, as if there was some professor who knew more about rockets than he did. And then he got kidnapped by the Nazis to build rockets to hit London, then kidnapped by the Americans.

After Wernher von Braun retired, American rockets went steadily downhill, implementing that same basic design, but less and less well.

Then Musk decided we need better rockets if the human race and technological civilization is going to survive. So he hired an existing rocket scientist who had trained under someone who had trained under Wernher von Braun, who had some sketchy recollections on how to build rockets. Then Musk built a few Wernher von Braun type rockets, then proceeded to rapidly improve the art of rocketry.

Definition of Capitalism

A Marxist will never define capitalism. So, we get to define it.

The word “capital” is derived from “head” as in “head of cattle”. If you want to count a herd of cattle, easiest to count their heads, so “head” is a synonym for how many cattle you have.

Capital is a generalization of how much cattle you own. Cattle produce milk and calves, and it is a generalization from counting up cattle to counting up assets that you use to produce value, milk and calves among that value.

Cattle being the original form of wealth, wealth that produces milk and produces more cattle, if wisely and competently husbanded. So “capital” is wealth that is like that, wealth that can produce more wealth, if wisely managed. So capitalism is doing that. The primary original form of capital, back in the days when Aryans conquered the world, was cattle. And cattle are still to this day a significant and important form of capital.

Capital is well managed cattle, also mines, oil fields, trucks, factories, ships, and so forth. That is capital, using it well is capitalism, and a capitalist is someone who uses it well and uses it to create more capital.

The capitalist creates capital and applies it wisely and productively:

Proverbs Chapter 31
13 She seeketh wool, and flax, and worketh willingly with her hands.
14 She is like the merchants’ ships; she bringeth her food from afar.
15 She riseth also while it is yet night, and giveth meat to her household, and a portion to her maidens.
16 She considereth a field, and buyeth it: with the fruit of her hands she planteth a vineyard.
17 She girdeth her loins with strength, and strengtheneth her arms.
18 She perceiveth that her merchandise is good: her candle goeth not out by night.
19 She layeth her hands to the spindle, and her hands hold the distaff.

The capital that she creates in part is her savings from spinning, in part that she “considereth” the field – meaning she invests her savings wisely, so the field is more capital than her original savings, for it embodies not just the work of spinning, but the work, ability, skill of judgment, and in part that she directly creates capital, by planting vines.

She is was little capitalist, a kulak. A commie talks about Rothschilds, Wall Street and such and such but if you scratch a commie you will find it is really the kulaks he hates, because we feel the status competition with people close to us, not far from us. He really hates the man who owns a pizza shop, and the small family farm. He explains that by killing the cows of the peasant with two cows, you are actually striking a blow at the Rothschilds and doing a big favor to the peasant with two cows.

But the merchant who wisely applies capital is apt, in time, to wind up with a lot of it, so will hire other people to work it. The good wife Solomon spoke of is likely to eventually find her family owns a bigger vineyard than they can harvest.

Mathew 20:
2 And when he had agreed with the laborers for a penny a day, he sent them into his vineyard.
3 And he went out about the third hour, and saw others standing idle in the marketplace,
4 And said unto them; Go ye also into the vineyard, and whatsoever is right I will give you. And they went their way.

And eventually his assets become so great that he needs other men to manage them and invest them wisely for him:

Mathew 25:
15 And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey.
16 Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents.
17 And likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two.
18 But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord’s money.
19 After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them.

So the lord was a bigger capitalist. Where do big capitalists come from? They come from little capitalists, kulaks.

So a capitalist is someone who owns a lot of value that he uses competently and effectively to produce more value. Not quite the same meaning as entrepreneur. He might be a speculator or an investor, but an entrepreneur is the archetype.

Capitalism is what such people do, and to ask whether a society is capitalist is to be distracted by Marxist flim flam. Those people are capitalists, and what they are doing is capitalism.

Those who rule do not produce wealth and value directly, so in this sense no “society” has ever been or ever will be capitalist, but those who rule have to produce a social order that permits such people, or they will be conquered by rulers who do have an adequate supply of such people and thus have the logistics, provided by capitalists, that enable them fund and equip armies and to move those armies over distance.

A society is capitalist to the extent that those who rule attempt to foster capitalists and succeed, but to ask if a society is capitalist is to ask the wrong question. Soviet Russia depended on capitalists as much as every other society. It thus had to tolerate the mafias, and invite in foreign businessmen, so capitalism was illegal, but widely practiced and quietly tolerated. If you want to argue Soviet Russia was capitalist, look at the mafias, international investment, and the private plots. If you want to argue it was socialist, look at laws, enforcement and official documents, but both arguments are irrelevant and unimportant, distracting you with what is irrelevant to capitalism and capitalists. All societies are capitalist, or else they are starving and about to collapse and/or be overrun by foreign enemies. No societies are capitalist, because capitalists never rule, never can rule, never will rule. Thus it is always stupid to ask if a society is capitalist. A government can be, and often is, anti capitalist. But after Lenin hung the capitalists with the rope he purchased from the capitalists, Lenin and Stalin found that they still needed rope.

Marxist (and fake Nazi) history

Marxists and fake Nazis sneak in an implicit definition of capitalism by Marxist history. Which implicit definition is too obviously stupid for them ever to say it outright. Instead they tell a story about our past that implicitly presupposes that everyone already accepts that Marxism is true by definition and completely uncontroversial, much like the troofers arguing from the assumption that everyone knows and agrees that building seven fell straight down like a demolition, that there was no airliner sized and shaped hole in the Pentagon and that molten steel was pouring out of the Trade towers.

Marxists will never ever tell you their definition of capitalism, because if said plainly, their argument would sink like a stone. Instead they ramble around saying stuff that assumes that everyone already agrees with their definition.

Thus the point and purpose of Marxist history is nothing to do with history. It is to sneak in a definition of capitalism that no one would buy if proposed explicitly and overtly. They do not give a dam about history. They actually want you to accept as the universally accepted and uncontroversial definition of capitalism, a definition that nobody in fact believes – not even Marxists, for if they genuinely believed it, they would be willing to actually state their definition.

Marxist history is that capitalism is new – that previously there was feudalism, then the capitalists took power from the lords. Which implicitly defines capitalism as a system of government, which is transparently silly and which no one believes for a moment.

So, a little discussion of what feudalism was.

Feudalism and knighthood is exemplified by life and career of William the Marshal, who is the type specimen of knighthood and feudalism.

Feudalism was a very direct form of warrior rule, in a time when highly trained warriors when with extremely expensive equipment mattered, and hordes of peasant conscripts mattered not at all, when one or two highly trained expensively equipped warriors could slaughter a mob of peasants like sheep.

Any knight could make another man a knight, which is to say, any man with the right to keep and bear arms could give another man the right to keep and bear arms, though they only cared about expensive arms involving a great deal of training. Possession of land was power and nobility, and since it was power and nobility, could not ordinarily be bought or sold. In unstable times, generally acquired at sword point. In stable times, inherited through primogeniture.

Typically this was by the granting of fiefs. The possessor of a fiefdom would grant a portion of his fiefdom to a knight, in return for fealty, in a contract binding on the parties, and also binding on their descendants by primogeniture in the male line. Kings and great lords tended to be generous in unsettled times in granting fiefdoms to land that they did not in fact possess, to men that they suspected were capable of taking possession of it at swordpoint, but in more settled times, it led to a quieter life if one only granted fiefdoms to land that one did in fact possess, about which they were apt to be more tightfisted.

Not much point in making a man a knight, unless you could give him armor and a warhorse capable of carrying a man in armor. And there were two ways of acquiring armor and warhorses. One was by taking them off another knight at swordpoint, which William the Marshal did quite a bit of in his younger days, and the other was by buying them from people who produced such things, which he did quite bit of in his older days.

(In principle you could also take them at swordpoint from people who produced such things, but such people tended to be hard to find if they were at risk of losing their stuff at swordpoint)

Land was nobility, but it was not warhorses and armor. William the Marshal acquired quite a lot of land at sword point, but land does not in itself produce warhorses and armor. For that, you need wealth and a market economy that can generate elaborately transformed goods. And if there is nothing on your land but a rather small number of half starved peasants, which was the condition of much of the land William the Marshal acquired, not going to produce much in the way of wealth. So, William the Marshal, aging warrior, went into the real estate business. To persuade productive people to settle on his land, and thus to subject themselves to his power and his taxes, he had to grant them security – that no one else would shake them down, and that he would only shake them down within certain predictable limits. Which deal makes capitalists and capitalism possible. In going into the real estate business, in developing his land, he became a capitalist, and created the conditions that made it possible for people who were not knights and not noble to become wealthy capitalists.

The power of the lords was ownership of land, which depended on ownership of war horses and armor. They did not own the means to produce warhorses and armor. Which meant that those who could produce advanced goods, armor being among those advanced goods, tended to wind up owning some substantial amount of land after there had been peace for a while, and nobility flowed from that peacefully acquired land.

To the extent that lords were able to convert swordpoint ownership of land into money ownership of warhorses and armor, feudalism was capitalist. To the extent that lords were unable to convert swordpoint ownership of land into money ownership of warhorses and armor, not capitalist and not very feudal either, since the life expectancy of lords was apt to be short. If goods are always transferred at swordpoint, no one is going to produce warhorses and armor. The methods that William the Marshal applied in his youth to acquire warhorses and armor led to a rather chancy life for the nobility.

Land was never the primary means of production, because no one cared all that much about land, but about obtaining warhorses and armor, which land does not spontaneously bring forth. They had to acquire warhorses and armor, advanced goods, through the capitalist economy.

Land was the measure of nobility, and land ownership predominantly acquired at swordpoint. We are always ruled by priests or warriors, and usually something of both. Capitalists did not rule then and they do not rule now. Those who owned land ruled, but they had to provide the necessary conditions for capitalism, or die.
And to the extent that they failed to maintain the necessary conditions for capitalism, they frequently did die.

Land was power. But it was not wealth. And wealth provided the means for power and land. So when feudalism was less chaotic and violent that it frequently was, we saw both wealth and nobility. Wealthy men who were short on nobility would marry their sons and daughters to nobles who were short on wealth.

Capitalists have never ruled, never will rule, never can rule. Any time capitalists have ruled, they have been warrior capitalists, like the pirates of Hong Kong, or the pirates of the Venetian Republic, or the bandits of the East India company. Clive of India was an armed and dangerous corporate accountant arranging corporate mergers, acquisitions, and takeovers between businesses with armed and dangerous boards and armed and dangerous CEOs. His primary skillset was bookkeeping and accounting, though another important skill was keeping gunpowder dry.

If you look at who rules and who fights when discussing capitalism, you are not looking at capitalism. Which is the Marxist sleight of hand when they deny that feudalism was capitalist. They “define” capitalism by telling you “look at this shiny thing over there”. Don’t look at the shiny thing. Look at capitalism.

Wealth got you warhorses and armor. Land was not the measure of wealth, but of nobility and authority. But to keep land, nobility, and authority, needed warhorses and armor. So had to obtain wealth. In stable times there were a lot of people who were wealthy, but lacked land and nobility, and lot of people with land, nobility, power, and authority, who were mighty hard up for wealth, though mighty good with a sword and a horse. Nobility short of wealth tended to marry wealth, and wealth short of nobility tended to marry nobility.

Feudalism is a form of warrior rule, the most naked, direct, and simple form of warrior rule. Rule is irrelevant to whether a society is capitalist or not. What matters is security of property rights, and thus the opportunity to use capital to create more capital. Property rights were not very secure during feudalism, but to the extent that they were insecure it was a problem that the lords had no choice but to attempt to fix, that William the Marshal, the defining exemplar of feudalism and knighthood, did fix. To the extent that property rights were insecure, not only did capitalists not dare become to wealthy, but nobles were short of warhorses and armor, and thus the sons of nobles were unlikely to inherit land and nobility.

Feudalism was warrior rule by warriors with expensive elite equipment. Expensive elite equipment is elaborately transformed goods, and you do not get elaborately transformed goods without capitalism. A suit of armor, a warhorse, and a swordarm like lighting got William the Marshal land, but warhorses and armor failed to spring spontaneously from that land. In order to obtain armor and warhorses without the rather dangerous activity of chopping up other knights, had to foster capitalism on that land.

Posted in economics, politics | 482 Comments »

Another one bites the dust.

October 19th, 2022

I don’t usually cover the events of the day, because one loses track of the big picture. The events of the day only reveal their meaning when viewed months, years, decades, or centuries later.

With democracy and freedom of speech dead, there is no way to resolve conflicts within the elite except lethal violence. Covering this incident because it is a significant escalation in inter elite violence.

ABC news producer and senior counterterrorism adviser and investigator for the House Homeland Security Committee raided by FBI, and not seen again.

Things are escalating far slower than I expected. But they are, as expected, escalating.

They have been escalating for a long time. I expected that following the stolen election of 2020, they would escalate a whole lot faster. They have not been escalating a whole lot faster, but it looks like they are escalating somewhat faster.

In these internal conflicts, and in the external conflict with Russia, we are seeing limited conflict for limited stakes. People are acting as if not everything was on the table, as if it was not winner takes all. This is normality bias. Escalation to internal civil war, and/or external world war III is inevitable until someone emerges capable of imposing order. Every time a rule is broken, a limit overstepped, there is more up for grabs on the table, until eventually the stakes for everyone are win or die.

For a very long time I have been predicting democide, genocide, civil war, and/or external war for 2025-2026. That things have been going slower than expected does not yet incline me to shift that prediction. Normality bias is that the 2022 elections will be normal, or that the regime will get away with pretending that they are normal.

I doubt it.

The regime took power on the basis that they would temporarily use extraordinary measures to return things to the way they were, and extraordinary measures would cease to be necessary. Obama normality would return. People in the elite believed they were returning to normality, and this belief is stabilizing things, like Wily Coyote walking off the edge of a cliff, but not falling until he looks down and sees the abyss beneath him. With members of the elite vanishing, the abyss is getting hard to ignore.

Posted in party politics | 224 Comments »

National Capitalism and Sanctions on Russia

September 20th, 2022

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

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

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

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

National Capitalism defined

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

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

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

So how is this working out for Russia

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

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

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

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

Posted in economics | 1,739 Comments »

Female sexual preferences

September 11th, 2022

Neurotoxin recently posted on the dysgenic nature of female sexual preference, and its evolutionary origins:

Neurotoxin:

Female sexuality is anti-social and dysgenic. It must be restrained for the good, and indeed, the survival, of the human race.

We begin with the truism that evolution selects for reproductive success and not any other trait. There is no restraint on evolution selecting for horribly anti-social sexual tendencies if such are reproductively optimal.

Observed fact: Women are fiercely attracted to men who play defect in the iterated prisoner’s dilemma game that is society. (Defecting in the classic prisoner’s dilemma is always better than cooperate no matter what the other player does.)

Suppose it’s the environment of evolutionary adaptation (EEA) in a time of food scarcity. A man who sneaks into another family’s hut while they’re asleep and kills them all and takes their food will have better chance of survival, and so will his kids, than one who doesn’t.

No, it’s not really that simple, because the rest of the village, if they find out about this, might kill him and his family. But (1) they might not find out, and (2) a displayed willingness to do such things means that he’ll do them if it’s necessary; he doesn’t always have to do them. Also, (3) if he is observed to get away with it, then he has either guile or power to, well, get away with it.

Evolution doesn’t give a shit about nice. What we call “evolution” is simply cause and effect in the biological world. Also, there is a genetic component to personality. Suppose we start with some women who are not attracted to evil traits, or are even repelled by them, and some women who are attracted to them. There will be situations in which the repelled women’s children starve to death because she tied her fate to the wrong kind of man. Such a woman’s genes are not passed on to the next generation. The genes of the woman who mated with the amoral murderer are passed on.

So the next generation has a higher proportion of amoral males and females who are attracted to amoral males.

We stand at the end of a long evolutionary process. Current women are the result of the last million years (or however long) of the evolutionary process playing out. Modern women are the effects of evolutionary cause-and-effect processes.

(Modern men are too, along with palm trees, fruit flies, bullfrogs, etc. But that’s neither here nor there for the moment.)

Humans can no more avoid evolutionary cause and effect than they can avoid physical cause and effect, like F = ma, etc.

The surprising thing is that there have been environments that evolutionarily selected for pro-social traits on a scale beyond one’s biological clan. This is a precious thing. It’s not at all obvious that if these traits are eliminated, they will ever come back.

(By the way, why isn’t this selection effect just as strong for men as women? Two points: A woman can’t feed herself (at least, she can’t hunt) or defend herself when she’s 8 months pregnant. (They have enough trouble getting in and out of a car.) So her survival depends significantly on her mate. This effect isn’t present for men.

Also, since men are the sex that fights, including fighting other tribes, there is more selection pressure for cooperation operating on men. This is actually a well-known fact in evolutionary circles, apparently: At the level of competition between groups, cooperation is evolutionarily rewarded. But at the level of intra-group competition it’s not that simple. It’s not be that defect/betray is always rewarded, but it is sometimes.)

So: Women are fiercely sexually attracted to men who can dominate other men and are psychologically inclined to do so. They’re particularly drawn to men who kill and get away with it, because that is the ultimate example of power. The person the man killed was trying to resist being killed, yet the killer was able to kill him anyway. And a man who is powerful enough to kill someone who is doing everything he can to avoid being killed, has a large amount of power indeed. If you can kill and get away with it, you either have personal qualities that enable you to do that or are part of a social group with lots of power, that uses its power to support you.

In either case, it’s a good idea for a woman to hitch her reproductive wagon to your star, because you will try, and probably succeed, to protect and support the children you have with her.

So: Woman do not get wet for nice guys, never have, never will.

Empirically: Criminals, especially violent ones, reproduce at a higher rate than Jeff in Accounts Receivable.

Since there is a genetic component to personality, female sexual choice is not only dyscivilizational but dysgenic. It causes the next generation to be shifted in the direction of violent, amoral thugs. Such people are also observed to be low-intelligence. Cops apparently have a saying: “Criminals are dumb.” Female sexual choice breeds low IQ, high time preference/low patience, and anti-social (as in , murderously so) people.

Female sexual choice involves them typically mating with exactly the men that they should not be mating with, for the good of the human race.

Myself on solutions to this problem:

Love is war. All is fair in love and war.

Sex and reproduction is a game of prisoner’s dilemma.

We have defect/defect equilibrium between men and women. To successfully reproduce, need cooperate/cooperate equilibrium.

In order to successfully reproduce, State, State Church, society, kin, and family, have to impose peace, cooperate/cooperate equilibrium, between men and women. Time to end the state of war.

Defect/defect equilibrium between men and women is the game of players and bitches, cooperate/cooperate equilibrium is marriage 1.0, marriage as commanded in the New Testament. Peace between men and women is Biblical or Koranic marriage (Mohammed was right about women) War is what we have now, hence grandchildren are what we do not have now.

So the question is, what is preventing family formation, family formation being the proper telos of human sexuality. Why can so few men accomplish this telos?

Men want to bang every fertile age woman. Woman want to be banged by Mister one in thirty.

Women are allowed to successfully fulfill their goal, men are not allowed to fulfill their goal.

Men want to own a woman. Even successful players find it terribly disturbing and soul destroying that the woman that they bang has banged no end of men before them, and will soon bang someone else. This leads to player burnout. Even marginally successful players soon get burnout. The knowledge slowly soaks in that in the game of players and bitches, the bitches are winning, and even successful players are losing. One soon starts feeling homicidal, and is apt to kill the adulterous woman and or her latest lover. Players counsel other players “avoid oneitis” “She was never yours, it was just your turn”. Bullshit. This is the counsel of despair.

If one cultivates a detached attitude “It was just my turn, she did me a favor”, one avoids homicide, but this is not very satisfactory at all. If one abandons one’s telos, one is psychologically broken, hence player burnout. She was not doing you a favor. You were doing her a favor. If you adopt this attitude, you avoid homicide, but develop other disturbingly weird and unpleasant behaviors and attitudes. It is terribly stressful. Homicide is less stressful. There is a reason why the bible counsels to avoid sluts, but today, nothing but sluts, so what is a man to do?

Successful pursuit of telos requires ownership. One despairs or becomes homicidal because even if one get one dick wet from time to time, one is failing at accomplishing one’s telos. Player burnout is a manifestation of despair. One avoids homicide, but in a world with no female companionship other than sluts, loses one’s soul.

Women want to be owned by a man, but they resist ownership with great vigor, because they want to be owned by a sufficiently strong man. This resistance is a shit test, which is difficult to pass because the state puts its thumb on the scales, giving women social superweapons, allowing women to capriciously threaten men with arbitrary imprisonment or loss of job, property, and children.

To pass this shit test, it is necessary to have an outlaw attitude. One dare not be intimidated by these terrible and wicked threats and the state’s vast apparatus of coercion, for women smell this as weakness, and are apt to wander away from weak men.

Police are lazy, incompetent, and inefficient. One can get away with murder. And in practice, these threats are only ever carried out against those intimidated by them. Almost all who are convicted of rape are innocent, because women seldom if ever bring complaints against actual rapists. All rape charges are always bullshit like the Rolling Stone “A rape on campus incident”, a woman crying out for attention from mister one in thirty. All men convicted of wife beating are charged because of failure to beat their wives. No woman has ever complained about my workplace sexual harassment, and all the men I saw who suffered complaints against them of workplace sexual harassment were far too blue pilled and terrified of women for the charge to be credible.

That females successfully pursue the goal of getting banged by mister one in thirty, over and over and over again, prevents the formation of families and children, and results in few men successfully marrying, and reproductive failure. White fertility is no down to about one, halving population in each generation. Men are not getting laid, and not getting married, and women, instead of getting regularly banged by their husband, are hanging out by their phones hoping for their next eleven pm booty call from Jeremy Meeks, which never comes. They end up childless and alone.

When childless women hit the wall, when Jeremy Meeks no longer calls, they turn crazy and evil – observe public school teachers and old fat political commissars of Human Resources.

In order to reproduce successfully, we need cooperate cooperate equilibrium between men and women, but what we have is the game of players and bitches, defect defect equilibrium, as men pursue the fuck everyone goal, one in thirty of us successfully, and women pursue the fuck mister one in thirty goal, successfully enough, but aborting their children.

In order to successfully reproduce, we need a system where females, starting at a very early age, six or so, are restrained from private contact with males who are not close kin, except those that their fathers deem suitable for marriage. Biblical or Koranic marriage has to be imposed on women by state, state church, society, kin, and family. This requires either extremely early betrothal followed by extremely early marriage (the solution applied east of the Hajnal line) or extremely drastic coercion against women (the solution applied west of the Hajnal line), or some mixture of both.

In order to successfully reproduce, we need a system where if a female is behind closed doors for a minute with a male who is not close kin, it is assumed that sex took place, dad and society breaks out the shotgun, the happy couple get married or else, and the wife is compelled to honor, obey, and to never have sex with any other man. Female adultery, meaning females having sex with a second man while the first man is alive, needs to be a crime rather than a human right.

If the state puts its thumb on the other side of the scales, empowering husbands to pass shit tests and disempowering women from giving them, instead of giving women social superweapons, instead of allowing women to capriciously threaten men with arbitrary imprisonment or loss of job, property, and children, then it is easy to turn whores into wives, as the authorities in late eighteenth century early nineteenth century Australia demonstrated.

Disturbed by sex parties on the beach, the Australian authorities did not punish the men or the women involved. Instead they forced every woman to get married immediately, and punished them for speaking back to their husbands, putting a very firm thumb on the scales to enable men to pass shit tests, and forbid women from giving shit tests to their husbands.

The women reacted as if abducted by the stronger tribe, and completely internalized the values of the stronger tribe, in this case the values of middle class wifely respectability. Absolutely one hundred percent success in turning whores into wives ensued. Female misconduct dropped to zero.

Reproduction fails, obviously, when you get defect/defect equilibrium between women and men

Defect/defect equilibrium is the game of players and bitches. Reproduction is prisoner’s dilemma with few iterations, so you always get defect/defect without external enforcement.

Social enforcement only happens if society recognizes secure property rights in what is valuable, and the most valuable capital of all is eggs and wombs. Husbands have to have a secure, socially and legally enforced, property right in their women.

For this to work psychologically, women need to be virgins at marriage, which only happens if fathers have a secure, and legally enforced, property right in their daughters. Which right must end completely and irrevocably at marriage. Rape is dating a woman without the consent of her father. Female consent is opaque, and most opaque to the woman herself.

Women frequently resist prolonged and enforced virginity very forcefully. Late marriage leads to a whole lot of conflict, which requires extraordinary enforcement, utterly unthinkable and unimaginable by modern standards. I find the level of enforcement that was required disturbing and distasteful, and therefore favor early betrothal, eight to ten or so, and early marriage, twelve to sixteen or so, even though successful societies have tended to have very late marriage – eighteen to twenty four or so.

The middle eastern tradition on this is Sharia. Its western equivalent is coverture.

Even when we had stern patriarchy and very stern coverture in place there were no end of stories about the servant girl getting in trouble for helping her lover rob her master, or robbing her master to fund her lover, and the bride running off with the wedding singer.

The effective fix is that such are fallen women, very low status, and against such women extreme measures of control are natural, socially acceptable, and normal. No one cares what happens to a fallen woman. A woman’s status must depend on a man’s property right in her. Her status is that property right. Wrongful acts against women are punished as wrongful acts against the man who has a property right in her sexual, reproductive, and domestic services.

Coverture

A wife and a husband are one person, and that person is the husband. Thus a wife cannot herself own property, make contracts, etc.

Male chastity consists of respect for other men’s property rights in women. Not applicable to unowned fallen women.

Female chastity consists of respect for her man’s property right in her sexual and reproductive services.  Sleeping with someone other than her husband is unchaste, and failure to sleep with her husband is unchaste.

Old Testament solution

Female immorality: Death.

Fornication or abduction of a married or betrothed woman: Death

Abduction of an unmarried unbetrothed virgin: Shotgun indissoluble marriage, or death if you bug out on the marriage part. (If she is with you without supervision, it is polite to the virgin and her father to assume that you abducted her, and inquiring whether she made it strangely easy to abduct her is impolite.)

Fornication or abduction of unmarried, unbetrothed, non virgin.

….

….

sounds of crickets chirping.

If you abduct an unmarried, unbetrothed virgin, and pop her, and the the father absolutely prohibits the marriage, the penalty is …

Wait for it …

Wait for it …

You pay a substantial fine, but the father is socially shamed, and priesthood assigns him a humiliating monicker.

Tags:
Posted in culture, Faith, science | 815 Comments »

Origins of the white race:

August 18th, 2022

The white race is the youngest and newest of the races, originating about ten thousand years ago.

Blacks are in fact a very diverse set of races, some of them considerably superior to other black races – same skin color, different physical and psychological features.

About sixty or seventy thousand years ago, a very small black tribe or large family with the outward urge characteristic of modern whites left subsaharan Africa, and headed out into Europe, expanded, eventually exterminating previous races in the region. Sea levels were lower then, and they had impressive seagoing ability, they island hopped all the way to Australia, where they failed to exterminate a different race with which they could not interbreed, but replaced them over most of Australia. Small and diminishing populations of older races remained here and there throughout the world.

They were, however, still black. Probably a better quality of black, but still black. Pretty much everyone still around was black or brown.

About twelve thousand years, the climate started getting nicer, and northern Africa, now a desert, became wet. Agriculture started in Northern Africa, consisting of patriarchal groups united by descent in the male line owning property. There was also a people focused on fishing, sea travel, and shellfish gathering, but they disappeared and the survivors were assimilated into the grain farmers when the oceans rose ten thousand years ago. To establish security of property over larger groups, more capable of defending that land, priesthoods developed. These people were brown, dark eyed, and dark haired. More or less the same people as modern middle easterners. In Europe, brown skinned largely blue eyed people, with a various hair colors hunted and gathered.

The middle eastern agriculturists rolled into Europe, displacing, replacing, and exterminating the hunter gatherers.

Inland of Europe, Eastern Europe, the pontic steppes, the hunter gatherers were advancing their technology of clothing, housing, and food storage to deal with very harsh winters. Which means that being nomadic they needed to transport more stuff, which was a problem. They were becoming herders, rather than hunters, and they made their domesticated horses, still too small to carry men, pull wagons, which enabled them to create and keep more stuff.

And in Eastern Europe, the farmers ran into nomadic herders that were too technologically advanced to exterminate and replace. So, to make peace, they traded hostages and women, an event recorded in the Norse legends of the Æsir and the Vanir. These guys were ancestor worshipers, and at least some of the Norse Gods were remembered as originally human ancestors all the way to the beginning of recorded history. The conflict is also remembered as Cain murdering Abel.

The mingled race evolved into whites, among them the Aryan race. The Aryan race, organized patriarchally and aristocratically, equipped with copper weapons and horse drawn chariots, expanded westwards into Europe, killing the men and marrying the women, replacing and mingling with middle eastern grain farmers, and South East into India, where they failed to do such a thorough job of upgrading the locals. The locals in Europe and India had priestly organization, rather than aristocratic. The Aryans in Europe rubbed out that priestly organization, and mostly replaced their demon Gods with the Aryan ancestor Gods. In the middle east, Aryans ruled, but failed to have large biological impact. Nomadic patriarchalists, probably originally Aryan, also worshipped the one God. Hard to know if this was part of the original Aryan faith, or they picked it up somewhere along the way. “The ancient city” plausibly speculates that it was original, and presents suggestive evidence supporting that thesis. Organizing under Kings and priests, the descendants of the Aryans created Bronze Age civilization. In the middle east, failed however to have a very large biological impact, though they ruled the place. In India, the demon gods of the locals survived more successfully, and entered the Aryan religion more extensively.

In Europe and the Middle East, and to a lesser extent India, Bronze Age civilization went decadent, failing to reproduce, with high levels of infanticide, demon worship, and human sacrifice. Without Kings, property rights in land and cattle was only practical under patriarchal organization, but with Kings, emancipation becomes all too possible, and in the latter days of Bronze Age civilization we see Kingship running in the female line, which suggests that the male line had become uncertain. In the collapse of Bronze Age civilization was overrun by peoples who preserved the original precivilized Aryan ways, though some of those peoples may have mingled extensively with lesser races in their travels, perhaps largely as a result of abducting women.

Because of the collapse of trade, they had to use iron, and did not have furnaces hot enough to melt it. So they made bloom iron from very high grade iron ore, which no longer exists anywhere except in very tiny amounts. Bloom iron you have to heat and hammer, and heat and hammer some more, like kneading bread dough, for a very long time before it becomes a useful material. And if you use the kind of iron ore that still exists today, no amount of heating and hammering is going to produce a useful material, because there are too many non metallic impurities in the bloom. To get useful iron from the kind of iron ore that still exists today, have to heat it hot enough for the iron to melt, and thus separate from the non metallic impurities.

Indra is the same ancestor as Zeus, Thor,and Jupiter, whom at least some of the Saga period icelanders recalled as an originally human ancestor living somewhere near the Pontic steppes.

So it is fair to say that the white race started with Thor.

Posted in science | 1,860 Comments »

zeek rollups can enable full blockchain scalability and full blockchain privacy

August 17th, 2022

The fundamental strength of the blockchain architecture is that it is a immutable public ledger. The fundamental flaw of the blockchain architecture is that it is an immutable public ledger.

This is a problem for privacy and fungibility, but what is really biting is scalability, the sheer size of the thing. Every full peer has to download every transaction that anyone ever did, evaluate that transaction for validity, and store it forever. And we are running hard into the physical limits of that. Every full peer on the blockchain has to know every transaction and every output of every transaction that ever there was.

As someone said when Satoshi first proposed what became bitcoin: “it does not seem to scale to the required size.”

And here we are now, fourteen years later, at rather close to that scaling limit. And for fourteen years, very smart people have been looking for a way to scale without limits.

And, at about the same time as we are hitting scalability limits, “public” is becoming a problem for fungibility. The fungibility crisis and the scalability crisis are hitting at about the same time. The fungibility crisis is hitting eth and is threatening bitcoin.

That the ledger is public enables the blood diamonds attack on crypto currency. Some transaction outputs could be deemed dirty, and rendered unspendable by centralized power, and to eventually, to avoid being blocked, you have to make everything KYC, and then even though you are fully compliant, you are apt to get arbitrarily and capriciously blocked because the government, people in quasi government institutions, or random criminals on the revolving door between regulators and regulated decide they do not like you for some whimsical reason. I have from time to time lost small amounts of totally legitimate fiat money in this fashion, as an international transactions become ever more difficult and dangerous, and recently lost an enormous amount of totally legitimate fiat money in this fashion.

Eth is highly centralized, and the full extent that it is centralized and in bed with the state is now being revealed, as tornado eth gets demonetized.

Some people in eth are resisting this attack. Some are not.

Bitcoiners have long accused eth of being a shitcoin, which accusation is obviously false. With the blood diamonds attack under way on eth, likely to become true. It is not a shitcoin, but I have long regarded it as likely to become one. Which expectation may well come true shortly.

A highly centralized crypto currency is closer to being an unregulated bank than a crypto currency. Shitcoins are fraudulent unregulated banks posing as crypto currencies. Eth may well be about to turn into a regulated bank. When bitcoiners accuse eth of being a shitcoin, the truth in their accusation is dangerous centralization, and dangerous closeness to the authorities.

The advantage of crypto currency is that as elite virtue collapses, the regulated banking system becomes ever more lawless, arbitrary, corrupt, and unpredictable. An immutable ledger ensures honest conduct. But if a central authority has too much power over the crypto currency, they get to retroactively decide what the ledger means. Centralization is a central point of failure, and in world of ever more morally debased and degenerate elites, will fail. Maybe Eth is failing now. If not, will likely fail by and by.

Eth is full of enemies, but it is also the leading edge of blockchain scaling technology.

Zk-starks and zk-snarks

Zk-snark stands for “Zero-Knowledge Succinct Non-interactive Argument of Knowledge.”

A zk-stark is the same thing, except “Transparent”, meaning it does not have the “toxic waste problem”, a potential secret backdoor. Whenever you create zk-snark parameters, you create a backdoor, and how do third parties know that this backdoor has been forever erased?

zk-stark stands for Zero-Knowledge Scalable Transparent ARguments of Knowledge, where “scalable” means the same thing as “succinct”

Ok, what is this knowledge that a zk-stark is an argument of?

Bob can prove to Carol that he knows a set of boolean values that simultaneously satisfy certain boolean constraints.

This is zero knowledge because he proves this to Carol without revealing what those values are, and it is “succinct” or “scalable”, because he can prove knowledge of a truly enormous set of values that satisfy a truly enormous set of constraints, with a proof that remains roughly the same reasonably small size regardless of how enormous the set of values and constraints are, and Carol can check the proof in a reasonably short time, even if it takes Bob an enormous time to evaluate all those constraints over all those booleans.

Which means that Carol could potentially check the validity of the blockchain without having to wade through terabytes of other people’s data in which she has absolutely no interest.

Which means that peers on the blockchain would not have to download the entire blockchain, keep it all around, and evaluate from the beginning. They could just keep around the bits they cared about.

Unfortunately producing a zk-stark of such an enormous pile of data, with such an enormous pile of constraints, could never be done, because the blockchain grows faster than you can generate the zk-snark.

So, zk-rollups, zeek rollups.

zk-stark rollups, zeek rollups

Zk-stark rollups are a privacy technology and a scaling technology.

Fundamentally a ZK-stark proves to the verifier that the prover who generated the zk-stark knows a solution to an np complete problem. Unfortunately the proof is quite large, and the relationship between that problem, and anything that anyone cares about, extremely elaborate and indirect. The proof is large and costly to generate, even if not that costly to verify, not that costly to transmit, not that costly to store.

So you need a language that will generate such a relationship. And then you can prove, for example, that a hash is the hash of a valid transaction output, without revealing the value of that output, or the transaction inputs.

But if you have to have such a proof for every output, that is a mighty big pile of proofs, costly to evaluate, costly to store the vast pile of data. If you have a lot of zk-snarks, you have too many.

So, rollups.

Instead of proving that you know an enormous pile of data satisfying an enormous pile of constraints, you prove you know two zk-starks.

Each of which proves that someone else knows two more zk-starks. And the generation of all these zk-starks can be distributed over all the peers of the entire blockchain. At the bottom of this enormous pile of zk-starks is an enormous pile of transactions, with no one person or one computer knowing all of them, or even very many of them.

Instead of Bob proving to Carol that he knows every transaction that ever there was, and that they are all valid, Bob proves that for every transaction that ever there was, someone knew that that transaction was valid. Neither Carol nor Bob know who knew, or what was in that transaction.

You produce a proof that you verified a pile of proofs. You organize the information about which you want to prove stuff into a merkle tree, and the root of the merkle tree is associated with a proof that you verified the proofs of the direct children of that root vertex. And proof of each of the children of that root vertex proves that someone verified their children. And so forth all the way down to the bottom of the tree, the origin of the blockchain, proofs about proofs about proofs about proofs.

And then, to prove that a hash is a hash of a valid transaction output, you just produce the hash path linking that transaction to the root of the merkle tree. So with every new block, everyone has to just verify one proof once. All the child proofs get thrown away eventually.

Which means that peers do not have to keep every transaction and every output around forever. They just keep some recent roots of the blockchain around, plus the transactions and transaction outputs that they care about. So the blockchain can scale without limit.

ZK-stark rollups are a scaling technology plus a privacy technology. If you are not securing peoples privacy, you are keeping an enormous pile of data around that nobody cares about, (except a hostile government) which means your scaling does not scale.

And, as we are seeing with Tornado, some people Eth do not want that vast pile of data thrown away.

To optimize scaling to the max, you optimize privacy to the max. You want all data hidden as soon as possible as completely as possible, so that everyone on the blockchain is not drowning in other people’s data. The less anyone reveals, and the fewer the people they reveal it to, the better it scales, and the faster and cheaper the blockchain can do transactions, because you are pushing the generation of zk-starks down to the parties who are themselves directly doing the transaction. Optimizing for privacy is almost the same thing as optimizing for scalability.

State of the art

We are not there yet.

In principle we know how to create a zk-stark that can prove successful execution of an arbitrary turing machine. In practice we do not.

In principle we know how to create a zk-stark that can prove verification of several other zk-starks. In practice we do not.

We have a vast multitude of zk-snark systems that can prove particular things, for example that the inputs to a transaction are equal to the outputs without revealing the transaction.

We need a turing complete zk-stark engine, one that can produce a proof that any algorithm was performed with the expected result, and do not yet have one. There are people that claim to have built them, but their source is closed.

correction added seventeenth of September

https://blog.polygon.technology/plonky2-is-now-open-source/

“Earlier this year, Polygon announced Plonky2, a zero-knowledge proving system that represents a major breakthrough for ZK tech. Plonky2 offers two main benefits: incredibly fast proofs and extremely efficient recursive proofs. It’s a huge leap forward for the ZK space, and we’ve been blown away by the response from the developer community: people want to build on Plonky2.

Today we’re proud to announce that Plonky2 and Starky are open source. They are now dual-licensed under the MIT license and Apache2.”

This is wonderful and unexpected news, but I am overwhelmed by real life events, and cannot take advantage of it until 2023

As of today, all blockchains that do not use zk-rollups are obsolete, all blockchains that rely on everyone verifying everything are obsolete. We now have the solution to the enormous and ever growing blockchain, and the enormous amount of private information it makes dangerously public.

Someone said when Satoshi first proposed what became bitcoin: “it does not seem to scale to the required size.” And ever since then people have been struggling to solve that problem. Now we have a solution.

A closed source zk-stark system is not a zk-stark system, because when Carol applies her verifier to Bob’s argument of knowledge, how can she know what it is verifying?

Further, closed source cryptography seldom actually works. When hostile outsiders take a look at it, usually falls over. They may think they have what they claim to have, but do not necessarily actually have it. They may think that their verifier is verifying the zk-stark produced by their prover, when it is actually verifying something far weaker.

We need a compiler, that, given code for an arbitrary algorithm in a language for the virtual machine, produces a prover that executes the code in virtual machine and also produces a zk-stark proving that the code was executed with the expected result, and the compiler also produces a verifier that verifies the zk-stark. And that compiler has to be open source, without magic secret unexplained codes in it.

A closed source blockchain is not a blockchain, but an unregulated bank, because those who have the closed source could do anything, and a closed source zk-stark system is not a zk-stark system, because not an argument of knowledge, but a mere claim of authority.

We know know in principle how to produce a fully scalable blockchain – but actually doing so is another thing altogether.

How a fully scalable blockchain running on zeek rollups would work

A blockchain is of course a chain of blocks, and at scale, each block would be far too immense for any one peer to store or process, let alone the entire chain.

Each block would be a Merkle patricia tree, or a Merkle tree of a number of Merkle patricia trees, because we want the block to be broad and flat, rather than deep and narrow, so that it can be produced in a massively parallel way, created in parallel by an immense number of peers. Each block would contain a proof that it was validly derived from the previous block, and that the previous block’s similar proof was verified. A chain is narrow and deep, but that does not matter, because the proofs are “scalable”. No one has to verify all the proofs from the beginning, they just have to verify the latest proofs.

Each peer would keep around the actual data and actual proofs that it cared about, and the chain of hashes linking the data it cared about to Merkle root of the latest block.

All the immense amount of data in the immense blockchain that anyone cares about would exist somewhere, but it would not have to exist everywhere, and everyone would have a proof that the tiny part of the blockchain that they keep around is consistent with all the other tiny parts of the blockchain that everyone else is keeping around.

Posted in crypto | 103 Comments »

Crimestop

August 12th, 2022

Steve Kirsch was a big time Democratic Party donor, who has given tens of millions of dollars to left wing causes.

As you no doubt know there has been a huge rise in the young person death rate, and there is a curious lack of curiosity about this enormous number of deaths. “Death of unknown causes” has risen from being a very minor and extraordinarily rare cause of young person death, to being the major cause of death, which should tell you that they know damn well exactly what the cause is.

Steve Kirsch, suffering some deaths of “unknown” causes in his circle, started looking into it, and very quickly came to know the cause of death. So he wrote some letters to the usual beneficiaries of his generosity.

Which went unread – or at least no one admitted to reading them.

Now if someone who is in the habit of making gifts of tens of millions of dollars was to write me a lengthy and heartfelt letter, I would read it with great attention, even if it was about flying saucers and space aliens. No way would I not read a big donor letter, and in the highly improbable event I did not read the letter, no way am I going to tell the big donor I did not read it.

It seems very puzzling that shills are stopped by shill tests. Why do they not just lie? In the great self cancellation of enemy entryists in Russian organizations they burned their bridges behind them as they fled to the west, stealing any organization funds and small portable assets they could grab from the enemy organizations they had successfully entered, and lying with casual abandon. Why not just lie? After all, everything a shill says is a lie.

The inability to tell Steven Kirsch that they had read his letters reveals the answer. It is not that the enemy cannot lie. They lie all the time, they lie continually. It is that the enemy cannot truth.

Posted in Faith | 469 Comments »

Decline in GDP per capita

August 11th, 2022

Your grandfathers could enjoy a house, a garden, children, and stay at home wife looking after the kids. Their grandchildren are dual income no kids, but live in a little box with Ikea furniture Not only did we land on the moon in the 1970s, we had nicer cars, nicer toilets, and better clothes washing machines, though today we have nicer phones and computers.

But Americans can no longer make the cpus and ram for those computers, which come from Taiwan and South Korea, and our war planes cannot fly as far, as high and as fast as the warplanes of the seventies.

The US and Europe have thrown many billions at the collapse of chip technology problem, and repeatedly had the leading chipmakers in the US empire come here and to Europe to give us their technology, and they attempt to do so, and are strangely unable to do so. Their smarties cannot cross the IQ gap between themselves and the normies running our chip foundries.

“China’s top chipmaker SMIC has successfully advanced its chip manufacturing by two generations and is now exporting 7nm chips, despite US sanctions attempting to block its rise, a reverse engineering analysis from techinsights on its products has found.” This puts China four years behind the current state of the art. Close enough to support modern information epoch warfare weaponry, while the US is utterly dependent upon Taiwan and South Korea.

Compare the old malls with the new shopping centers. These are places built for poor people. I recently revisited San Francisco, having been away for a decade or so. That the streets are full of human shit and crime is governmental failure caused by browns in government, but that the buildings need some maintenance and a coat of paint indicates everyone is getting poorer.

I recently visited a high end jewelry shop. It was a shop built to serve people poorer than the people of my youth. Prosperous people demand nicer surroundings. The ambience was a lot more Walmart than the places people shopped long ago. Compare our shopping centers with the old malls. Obviously built to serve poor people.

“The mall was big and beautiful and comfortable and even a little overwhelming. All of the wide passages, lined by stores, were multi-level – two in most places, but three at the food court and the movie theater. Everything there was new and gleaming and clean and safe, and automatic sliding doors and escalators were all around the place. There were walkways suspended in midair over wide indoor plazas and courtyards.”

“The decline of the mall coincided not only with the rise of the internet, but also with the rise in earnest of Walmart and other big-box warehouse stores. There are no skate parks or indoor waterfalls at Walmart. The increasingly impoverished remnants of what was once our middle class shuffle in to buy cheap junk”

Biden tells us everyone is getting more prosperous. That lie comes from the same people who are denying space travel and arguing for flat earth, and is as plausible as that the earth is flat. I can see that ordinary people are poorer, for middle class is a wife, a house, a garden, and children.

“Don’t you know that it’s 2015? That means gay marriage! Women in combat! Even the first rumblings of the normalization of pedophilia! Say what you will about the Classical Marxists of the past – Lenin, Stalin, Mao – but they built massive hydroelectric dams, intercontinental missiles, skyscrapers, and atom bombs. Yet in The Current Year, they and their grand projects have been replaced by the Cultural Marxism of Gramsci, Marcuse, and Alinsky. To the leftists of The Current Year, global warming means we can’t build big impressive things anymore, so now we simply declare the cutting edge to be increasingly degenerate sexual and cultural practices. There is nothing of The Future in The Current Year – any caveman could have smoked dope, had weird sex, or dressed up like a girl.”

A holiness spiral peaks suddenly, and then it is over. Sometimes no one survives, but usually it is abruptly terminated by a Hitler or a Stalin before it gets to that point.

A dark age sets in slowly, at about one percent a year for centuries, From time to time there are dramatic crises, and even turnarounds, but these make little difference to the long term trend. We have a holiness spiral and a dark age setting in.

Posted in economics | 74 Comments »

Covid public service announcement

July 30th, 2022

Biden has just come down with Covid again, or never shook it in the first place.

The quadruple jabbed have damaged immune systems, so keep getting it, and take longer and longer to recover from each case. In any person with a normal immune system, live virus is cleared from the blood and body fluids in a few days, though it hangs around barricaded in the nuclei of the cells causing trouble for a while longer.

The golden purebloods, people who caught covid and have never been jabbed, are largely immune once they recover, and unless they were also coming down with half a dozen deadly comorbidities (usually obesity related) purebloods recover about as fast as from any cold or flu.

Covid was genetically engineered to attack the lungs, the immune system, the ovaries, and the testes, so each case damages the immune system of the jabbed further, and the longer it slowly lingers, the more it damages the immune system. We may soon see a massive outbreak of AIDs like symptoms if the boosted keep boosting. Or maybe even if they stop, but keep getting lingering Covid over and over and over again.

Ivermectin, widely available as horse paste, is highly effective if taken early. This drug has long been used on a wide scale in a humans and animals to treat an extraordinarily wide range of ailments caused by entirely unrelated living organisms and is very safe and cheap, which is why official “science” does not like it. It knocks out for a month or two some basic cellular processes that are non critical for most mammals, and as insignificant as the appendix in humans, but absolutely essential for a huge range of entirely unrelated life forms.

The mechanism of action of Ivermectin against Covid is unclear – indeed its mechanism against many sorts of organisms is unclear, but it may act by disabling a cellular function, non essential in humans, that the Covid virus abuses to get into the nucleus of the cell, where your immune system cannot counterattack without massive collateral damage.

A single dose of horse paste containing 20mg Ivermectin taken in the first day or so of the infection will cure you very shortly, and if taken prophylactically because you have close contact with Covid cases, gives you protection for a month or so. If taken after a few days, not so effective. In that case you might want to keep on taking it, though it has little effect after the first week or few days. Nicotine is also effective, and, unlike Ivermectin, effective later in the infection. Get a patch if you failed to take Ivermectin promptly. And all the usual stuff, vitamin D and balanced divalent salts, in particular zinc.

Despite the powerful prophylactic effect of Ivermectin, I would not recommend taking it every month or so just to be safe, because though widely used for a very long time, with no significant side effects, it has not been widely used in this manner.

Also, we have a state religion of Worship of the Awesome Might of the Covid Demon, thus worrying too much about Covid is demon worship, even if you are using protective measures that his holy priesthood has denounced as sacrilegious (because they actually are effective). On the one hand, Ivermectin represents defiance of the state religion. On the other hand, taking too much trouble to protect yourself against Covid represents respect for the Might of the State’s supposedly mighty and awesome demon.

The correct Christian attitude towards demons is that demons do not exist, and that demons do exist, but are ridiculous, contemptible, and impotent against the power of Christ. It’s just the flu, bro.

Posted in science | 850 Comments »

A prediction corrected

July 8th, 2022

Shortly after the 2020 election, I predicted that Trump would be arrested within a few months, followed in due course by an ever increasing number of Republicans, and would in due course be Epsteined, executed, or disappeared.

It rapidly became apparent that this prediction was on Musk time. The conspirators that stole the election, like the conspirators who murdered Caesar, expected and intended to return to normality by abnormal means. And normality means the continued existence of a significant Republican party, and allowing them a little bit of the gravy.

Which becomes difficult when your violent unpopularity is grotesquely obvious. You cannot have normality while moving lefter and lefter, faster and faster. Leftism is smashing the economy, causing staglation, leftism is heading hard fast into world war three, leftism has legalized robbery and murder, and leftism is turning school grades four to eleven into gay child whorehouses. (Child protection services could not keep up with demand) The war on food is just beginning in the US, but it has gone over the top in Denmark.

I did not believe then, and do not now believe, that this intent can be accomplished. Too many actions motivated by gross hostility to normal Americans have been taken, and more are coming down the pipeline, faster and faster. I have taken some bets on the outcome of the 2022 elections. I bet that Republicans will be thoroughly denied power at every federal level, but am no longer betting that they will be denied even the job of dogcatcher in dogpatch.

Soros has also concluded that a return to normality is impractical.

Soros calls for implementation of my prediction: Eliminate the Republican party by any means necessary

The public votes peace and prosperity. We have war and stagflation. It is completely obvious that anything resembling an honest election would be a Republican landslide, and that what Soros has in mind is nothing that resembles an honest election.

Things are grim now, and are going to get a whole lot grimmer soon. The Republic is past its use by date, and all that remains is for a sufficient number of normies to wake up to the new reality. Which is happening, but resolving the crisis does not appear possible now. It looks like we are on the path where stability is restored by a Stalin or the Thermidorians and Napoleon, rather than a Cromwell, let alone a Sulla or a Suharto.

In this crisis, we should not now prepare for victory, but rather for preserving technological capability and the capacity to organize in an increasingly hostile environment. We should act to maintain the capability to act when more favorable circumstances arise.

In the Trump years, I hoped and expected for favorable circumstances to arise, but when the time came, Trump, in the memorable phrase of namefag Yarvin, fished in the Rubicon.

When it became obvious that an election steal was being prepared, Trump called in the lawyers when he should have called out the militia.

Today, an honest election requires the measures employed by Caesar and the NSDAP, which are such as to produce one honest election once. Regular honest elections require a somewhat virtuous elite, which is gone and not coming back until a generation or two of good leadership by good Kings.

In the early Republican primaries, the Republican party was able and willing to hold free and honest primary elections, which of course quite predictably led to ultra maga landslides, what I would call the Christian national capitalist faction of the Republican party.

Then there was a sudden change, in which blatantly rigged primaries produced cuckservative landslides.

I will not rehearse the evidence that these were rigged, because that buys into the enemy frame, that if they call it an election, it is an election unless you can prove it is not.

This is a reversal of the burden of proof. It is for the winner to prove he was honestly elected, not for the loser to prove he was not. Elections must be conducted in such a way that there is proof that the outcome was legitimate. If they are not conducted in this way, it is because the winner knows he will not be able to prove that. And in these elections were deliberately conducted in a way that makes it impossible for the winner to prove he was honestly elected.

Well, that might suffice to satisfy our enemies that they can tolerate a mild mannered cuckservative outerparty. And that is their clear intention and hope. A hope that seems to be being dashed.

The abortion ruling was to throw some red meat to the Republican base, so that they would not abandon the cuckservative party, without which the appearance of normality could not be continued. But it does not seem to be continuing anyway, rendering the cuckservative party useless to our masters. A substantial fraction of the left seem to view any political activity that would give the Republican party the superficial semblance of meaning and purpose as an intolerable affront.

In any left on left conflict, the faction promising to immanentize the eschaton wins, and faction promising business as usual loses. Keeping a fake Republican party on life support is getting in the way of immanentizing the eschaton. Biden and company are trying to do both, and are falling between two stools. Which is what I expected to happen, but I expected it to happen a whole lot faster.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in party politics | 1,524 Comments »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »