I normally do not cover the news of the day, which cannot be understood without a frame of reference rooted in centuries past and looking forward to centuries to come. Other people cover it, it gets far too much coverage.
But this is as big, and perhaps bigger, than Trump coming down the escalator.
Trump’s Maga strategy in the US, One Nation’s strategy in Australia, and Farage’s Reform Britain strategy in Britain, was to deviate from the Uniparty far enough to clearly differentiate from the uniparty, but no more than that, and stay as buddy and connected to establishment, with as many establishment retreads in the party and administrative political apparatus as possible. Which, as we saw and continue to see in the Trump administrations, is a big problem, for personnel is policy, and his policy is in practice, depressingly uniparty. Look how long it took him to fire Pam Bondi and how long he defended her against Maga.
But in the British council elections, we had our first direct competition between the Trump strategy, and the no kidding full break with Uniparty strategy. And Restore Britain wiped the floor with Reform Britain. Reform has been wiped out in Greater Yarmouth, Restore’s test run, by the party well to its right. The same will happen in national British election.
Everyone has been trying to position themselves midpoint between Trump and Uniparty, while Trump himself has been trying to deviate as little as possible from Uniparty while still retaining Maga brand identity, so the right in politics is being nibbled to death by people compromising, and people then compromising on those compromises, and then compromising some more, while the Uniparty cheerfully continues to boldly to sail ever lefter, ever faster.
Uniparty is dying in Britain and Australia, because no one can tell the difference between one fake contender and another any more as the entire political establishment sails ever further left. The whole Uniparty project is falling apart.
The Uniparty policy, starting in the 1850s, was to introduce democracy, but knacker it through control of the mass media to create a fake conflict between one branch of the Uniparty and another branch, what is called Kayfabe in professional wrestling, and focus the public’s attention on that fake conflict. A faceless group of bureaucrats held power in the shadows, and hired a bunch of performers to distract public attention from anything that actually mattered. No matter which party won, the outcome was scarcely different. Democracy never worked, and it is not going to work. It is the method of obfuscating this that has failed. We had a Republic before it became democratic, but once the form of democracy was introduced, actual democracy would have delivered unacceptable results.
But now elections are turning into Uniparty versus everyone else, the blue haired crazies on their left, and the actual opposition to their right.
That Trump was allowed to be elected indicates a mutiny by the tech oligarchs. The issue that is really burning them up is that capitalism is being replaced by system that redistributes wealth away from actual businesses and ordinary people to quasi state businesses, such as the banks, the finance industry, the insurance industry, the medical industrial complex, and the rest, that lives on the revolving door between regulators and regulated. The British and European economies, and to a lesser extent the Australian economy, are collapsing because the uniparty came to view that it did not want any actual businessmen around, and the American economy has had grossly falling living standards for many years for the same reason. Which has pissed off a whole lot of very talented and wealthy individuals who are able to do something about it.
If you take the kayfabe political conflict seriously, which I never have, it is very odd that no one except Lowe has tried the Trump strategy without cozying up to the ever less popular uniparty. Lots of people in the US and the world are trying to be Trump, but a bit less Trumpian, even though he revealed a vacuum that he has not been attempting to fill. Lowes’s strategy is to play the country gentleman, which is less threatening that Trump’s bombastic showman persona, while pursuing political policies and personnel selection policies that distance himself from the Uniparty far more radically. What is really upsetting the Uniparty is his personnel selection, for personnel is policy. The Uniparrty prefers to rule from the shadows, by having the right people in place.
In response to this threat, the Uniparty has come out with a new definition democracy. Democracy now means limits on the power of the merely elected politicians in favor of the permanent bureaucracy. If those politicians are allowed to interfere with the actual running of the country, it is not a democracy, and we must defend democracy. Which they might get away with if the permanent bureaucracy was merely a parasite trying to keep its host alive, but is unlikely to work all that well when the parasite seeks to destroy the host.
There’s a second element to Lowe that’s worthy of note.
One of the consistent features of the fake uniparties is that they are national. This seems trivial, but it’s an important feature because it allows them to define the center around which conflicts revolve as the uniparty’s home base. For instance: Reform UK is still a Westminster party, hence committed to playing on Deep State terrain. In the USA, the GOP is a Washington DC Party. Defining the fulcrum gets you 50%+ of the way toward the Uniparty.
Lowe is starting as something else. Restore Britain is beginning as a REGIONAL party. Thus ensuring that the center of its efforts is defined away from the Uniparty’s home base. That is at least as significant as the personnel choices, if maintained.
In Canada, the Reform Party did much the same thing around Western Canada, while competing on a national stage. So, too, does the Bloc Quebecois. The Reform Party eventually killed the incumbent Progressive Conservative Party, then became the senior partner in the current Conservative Party of Canada. It got them elected a couple of times, but the CPC promptly fell again to Laurentian Uniparty capture. I don’t think that was a coincidence.
The weak should fear the strong as the dark should fear the light. Breaking with the uniparty and talking truth to power is the logical next step and the only longterm solution.
“In response to this threat, the Uniparty has come out with a new definition democracy. Democracy now means limits on the power of the merely elected politicians in favor of the permanent bureaucracy.”
What’s new about that? Isn’t that how it has always been?
Maybe rule by the permanent government will become even more obvious, but everybody interested in the topic has known that for a long time. “Yes Minister” was filmed in the eighties and is about rule by Sir Humphrey rather than the minister. Moldbug wrote about the power of the cathedral and the permanent bureaucracy.
Yes, but the bureaucrats pretended it was not so. Now they are saying that rule by bureaucrats is a vital principle of democracy, established by the founding fathers. For merely elected politicians to rule is undemocratic.
In yes Minister Sir Humphrey was fond of saying I’m merely a humble servant and that ministers are our lords and masters… almost as if he really believed it in the second while he was saying it.
Been rewatching Yes Minister this week with the wife. Excellent stuff. Also 1970s Columbo.
In the latter, in every frame, in every sentence, you can see the work of people who a) love what they are doing, and b) understand life. Understand what human character is, how it works, what nuance is. Like reading a Raymond Chandler or Georges Simenon detective story. You can reverse engineer from material like that what a human being is, what society is. Not from today’s stuff.
Looking back, it’s as if after the year 2000, most of modern films, serials, and books were created by AI, before AI. Like there were two generations of increasingly artificial and soulless pop culture products, in a way heralding the coming of AI.
The nuance of the human condition is today taken to mean “moar 65IQ melodrama”, and “realism” is taken to mean “cruelty and blowjobs”. Even without “the message” it still all sucks. Absolutely like a bunch of visigoths taking over the organizational structures and arts of a previous civilization and instantly making it all lose 90% of its value and worth.
Master and Commander (2003) was maybe the last 100% solid non-arty film.
Only some. Judges always claimed the right to rule that any act of the elected government is unconstitutional and therefore void.
The uniparty is full of stupid people, but they will come up with better marketing of the limitations of the power of the elected goverment, namely that the elected government is bound by law and the constitution. Should Lowe ever become prime minister, he might well find that any laws his majority passes and any of his orders are ruled illegal and therefore void.
I am absolutely certain Lowe will find that. But this prospect has already been anticipated and discussed. Parliament is supreme. Those that rule his government void will find themselves unemployed, and rulings that they are still employed will not manifest as paychecks. Not to mention that the Sergeant at Arms is likely to obey whoever has a parliamentary majority regardless of who rules what.
Recall that when this issue arose over Trump firing a bunch of DoJ hostiles, security just gave them the heave ho. (A precedent he failed to follow up on and enthusiastically apply, perhaps deterred by screams of “fascist dictatorship”.)
When the courts ruled that hostile newsmen were allowed to wander around the Pentagon, look at whatever they chose, and interview whomever they chose, the Trump administration ignored this, though it did not just flatly ignore it, it made a show of pro forma compliance without the newsmen actually getting anything that they wanted.
As I said, the swamp is made of mud, not steel. In a direct in your face confrontation, when push comes to shove, it is always going to yield like mud.
The swamp is certainly talking steel, but if the regime is not impressed by such talk, it will find that there is nothing there. You can just do things.
Back when Game of Thrones was good, the spymaster, Varys, told a riddle to Tyrion Lannister involving three powerful figures and one common man. In the story, a king, a priest, and a rich man each bid a sellsword to slay the other two, offering lawful rule, divine command, and gold respectively.
Varys asked who lives and who dies, but provided no single answer. Instead, he explained that “power resides where men believe it resides,” describing it as a “trick” and a “shadow on the wall” that even a small man can cast to kill.
Well then, where do men think power resides? They think it resides in parliament. Put the question to the test, and two of those three men will die.
Well, yes. If Lowe has the will to rule and a stomach for bloodshed, he’ll rule and find that hardly any bloodshed is necessary.
He’ll have to break or cancel lots of international treaties. It is not just British judges who’ll rule against him. The European Court of Human Rights or some other international court will also rule against him, and Lowe cannot prevent those judges from being paid.
The uniparty fields candidates who do not want to rule and are content to be well-paid figureheads drawing a nice salary. Let’s hope Lowe is different.
“The whole Uniparty project is falling apart.”
Have you forgotten the Tea Party?
The Uniparty was just the cover, it wasn’t the true power. If non-uniparty candidates win, they will be co-opted, subverted, or replaced by whatever means are necessary. In extremis, elected bodies will be ignored by various “democratic” means.
The Uniparty is dead. Long live the Uniparty.
The uniparty successfully co-opted the Tea Party. They have not been entirely successful in co-opting Trump, hence massive Trump derangement syndrome.
The uniparty successfully co-opted Reform Britain. And Britons saw what was coming down the road, and created Restore Britain, which on its first performance in Greater Yarmouth looks like it will wipe the floor with the co-opted Reform Britain.
The same thing is likely to happen in the coming American presidential primaries. We have been around this merry-go-round before, and are wise to it. The same thing is happening with the converged Christian Churches.
You deleted the comment below mine with this explanation:
“…gross deviation from empirically observed reality. Politicians have been irrelevant showmen and carnival barkers for the permanent government ever since the eighteen fifties or eighteen sixties.”
Apply that to what I said. The Uniparty will always win, because voting for politicians is irrelevant to what politicians vote for.
We are not voting our way out of this.
Scarcely matters, voting will end soon as the stakes on the table get ever higher, as the political apparatus of both parties realize that they have to win once and forever. With the Democrats launching political prosecutions before friendly judges with friendly juries, if the Republicans ever lose they are going to go to jail, followed not long after by being Epsteined, and Democrats are beginning to realize that if they don’t win the mid terms, they are unlikely to be ever allowed to ever win again.
I have been predicting war and or democide internal or external for 2026 for well over a decade. The way events are unfolding, if my date is premature, it is not going to be very premature.
If someone does not start civil war II shortly before or shortly after the mid terms, they are suffering a fatal case of normality bias. A common ailment. That error killed Caesar, and then killed his assassins.
We are going to war against “our Democracy” — Europe’s euphemism rule for by Eurocrats, as distinct from deplorable populism where the deplorables are permitted to vote in deplorable parties, Followed by a cleanup at home. Or Civil War II, a cleanup or attempted cleanup at home, which if successful will be followed by war against “our democracy”.
It has been said that a Smith And Wesson beats four aces. Wrong! It does not. But it definitely beats six aces, and we already have had five aces played.
The way to avoid a civil war is to win quickly and decisively. Disarm all opponents and eliminate their leadership. Instead of a civil war, there’d be coup or an autogolpe.
No hope for that?
Well of course I am hoping, and praying, for that.
Could well happen. Prepare for less fun outcomes.
[*Deleted for the same reason as I deleted most of your previous comments — gross deviation from empirically observed reality. Politicians have been irrelevant showmen and carnival barkers for the permanent government ever since the eighteen fifties or eighteen sixties. Even Reagan and Thatcher could only get away with what they did because the permanent government realized that redistribution had gone way off the deep end of the Laffer curve, and they wanted to pivot to mass immigration and the destruction of the family unit, which went into full speed ahead under Reagan and Thatcher.*]
[*Deleted for demon worship passing as Christianity*]
Samuel and Elisha were able to serve the Lord, serve order, and serve the King.
The idea of Christianity being aligned with the forces of chaos is absurd. The other guy is the one aligned with the forces of chaos.
Not to mention that the moderation policy forbids anyone telling us about what Christianity should be and what Christians should do unless they first give the affirmation, which you have never been able to do.
Christianity began as a subversive commie cult, and when Gutenberg gave the Bible to the average man, it went back to being a subversive commie cult. I was raised Protestant, but it didn’t take, so I freely admit I’m a semi-outsider, but it’s obvious to me that organized Christianity regularly sides with Chaos over Law. Not always, but most of the time.
I notice that neither have you given us the affirmation. Seems obvious to me that Old Type Christianity never sides with chaos. You are just black pilling about Christianity the way you black pill about reaction. When it was a severely suppressed Roman Cult, there certainly were large elements that sided with chaos, but after Constantine took power, they wound up being correctly declared heretical.
In the protestant revolution, a large faction of the protestants did side with chaos, but Luther promptly declared them wicked and heretical, which stuck.
The Puritans holiness spiraled towards chaos, but Cromwell came down hard on that faction of the Puritans. Organised establishment Protestantism does not like chaos. Out of power Protestantism seeking earthly power is frequently attracted to chaos, but these factions never achieved power and wound up being squashed for heresy like bugs, or becoming blatantly and obviously postChristian. They were either purged from Christianity, or upped and voluntarily left under their own power in a grandiose huff of pious indignation, as for example the quakers.
Christian sects that remain Christian tend to over emphasize and fetishize obscure and incomprehensible points of doctrine that distinguish them from other sects (Hello, can anyone explain to me what it means to say that an eternal being “proceedeth from” and in the unlikely event that they can explain this, how can they know where the Holy Ghost “proceedeth from”?) But christian sects that side with chaos tend to set to manufacturing large and real differences between themselves and other variants of Christianity. By their fruits you will know them.
The Platonic soul was rejected by the early church because it’s self-existent, and to be self-existent is to be God, and people are not God, therefore the soul is not self-existent. So the Aristotelian soul became default. In that model the personality is an emergent property of your essence. You are not your thoughts, you are not your personality, and your mind is far more than just your consious thoughts and persona. Thoughts and personality naturally proceed from the totality of everything you are, your essence.
If you’ve ever seen LutehrnSatire, Connel and Connel and ‘Patrick’, you could note that every allegory and pretty much every description of the trinity eventually turns into something heretical, because words are small and God is big and all that, but we can still try, and what I’m gonna say next is very much subject to me being aware that my description has many shortcomings and outright errors. But we all have to make do with what we have.
A person is a rational substance with an independent nature, a logic or way of thinking or way of being. The person of the Father is the most ‘on the metal’ person of the Godhead. God is infinite and impassible and inscrutable and so far beyond even the highest beings in creation that he’s untouchable and unfathomable, and I could go on. The Father is the ‘Absolute’ person of God. But the will of God, which flows from the essence of God, is to fill creation with every possible good thing, and some good things require micromanagement, from that will, and from that ‘absoluteness’ of the Father, proceeds a logic which cares about the details of creation, and enters into it and interacts with it, in order to fulfill that will of the Father to create everything. So the Son proceeds from the Father. The Son exists as a natural consequence and extension of what the Father is, what the essence of God is. He is a person in that He repents a completely different kind of reasoning, a different kind of logic, than the Father, but the results, the goals, the will, the essence, is the same.
And that much is more or less agreed upon by east and west. Now the Holy Spirit exists as a kind of perfusion and unity between the person of the Father and the Son. Naturally the Spirit proceeds from the essence of God, and primarily the Father, but the Son also participates in sending the Spirit (Bible says so and all that) so the Latins say the Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. In a way this kind of means ‘From the Father through the Son, or ‘with the Son’, but that’s not exactly right either… There’s a primacy to the Father because the Father is the most ‘on the metal’ person of the Godhead, and there’s a certain dignity and status of the Father that has to be preserved. But far better linguists than I tell me that in Greek, the problem is even worse than in English, because there is no word precisely equivalent to filliloque. The closest one would make the claim imply something like ‘The Holy Spirit equally proceeds from the Father and the Son’.
This is a terrible computing analogy I thought of you are all free to mock me for. If the Father is the BiOS, and the Son is the Direct OS, and the Holy Spirit is the OS Shell, they’re all the computer. And they can all run independently. But you need the BiOS to run DOS, and you need the BiOS and DOS to run start your more advanced OS Shell (well you used too, sometimes, this is one of many flaws with this analogy). And the Latins are saying the OS runs through BiOS and Dos while the Greeks are replying ‘nothing starts at all without the BiOS, why are we even talking about Dos here?’
Anyway the whole thing is way, WAY down the list of why the east and west split.
The East got excommunicated because of Simony. They buy and sell bishoprics for the rights to tax people and make a profit off their investments. They still do that today. I don’t think I have to get into the details as to why that’s a very bad thing.
The bull of excommunication had a lot of items on it. And the only ones the east talks about is filliloque, because they’re not technically wrong about filliloque from a Greek perspective. But it was a tangential problem, and always was a tangental problem.
It’s like if you confront a woman and say ‘You’re a whore and you steal money and waste it and you can’t stop eating too much and your lazy and you stole all your recopies from Betty Crocker’. And the woman comes back and says ‘No I can prove my recipes are genuine and authentic and were around far longer than Betty Crocker even existed’ and then she turns around and says ‘so now you need to apologize to me because you’re the bad guy and I didn’t do anything wrong’.
That’s how the east is towards the west.
Mark me if you talk to an ‘East Orthodox’ that refuses to talk about the simony problem, or any of the other problems the East has, you have a purity spiraler that is going to waste all their time on holier than thou bullshit but doesn’t have any real faith. And even if they come at you holier than thou talking like protestants are the worst things ever, you talk about the simony problem and they admit it’s a problem, they become humble enough to have a good, constructive relationship with, and they’re worth listening too.
___
The Adamites and Bohemians and other pervert sects did get purged, or rather self-purged. But a lot of the Radical Reformation was not Chaos. The Munsterites wanted old-type Christianity in an era when the Catholics were converging on Renaissance humanism and Luther stopped short of distancing themselves from it. I believe Luther was on the most correct side of this issue, but the internal reports say the Munsterites lived peaceful orderly lives. And history says their decedents, the Amish and Mennonites and Hudderites, not only survived but thrived. That points to them being orderly, not chaos. They survived being at war with everyone, and being outcasts, and they never turned into something like the Jews or Gypsies. I deal with all three groups on the regular. The Mennonites only started to secularize in the hippie era, and even then it’s the minority of them. The other two groups keep a very strong traditional society.
The Quakers are oddballs, but they also built very stable and prosperous and orderly societies. I think it’s tough for outsiders to see the order in Quaker society because it’s nominally invisible. But it certainly exists. Nixon was Quaker stock, and he’s the best president the US had in a long time by many metrics. By the metric of how much our enemies hate him he’s up there with Trump, they’ve already mostly forgotten about Bush but they’ll still go out of their way to attack Nixon. John A MacDonald was Quaker stock, and enemy-controlled Canada is working very hard to unperson him from Canadian history. Certainly he’s not important on the level Washington is to the Americans, but he is the first Prime Minister.
What’s the metric for Chaos and Order around here? To me it’s Gods Moral Law, the wages of sin is death, the wages of civilization level sin is civilization level extinction. The longer it survives and the more it’s people prosper the more order it has. The more it wastes and destroyed prosperity the more chaos it is. Buddism is chaotic compared to Brahamism, Brahamist society was up there with the best in the world beside Sumeria. But Buddhism is orderly compared to tribal polytheism, as it puts some restraints on tribal polytheism, so you can have long term stable Buddhist societies. Although the east prospered more with Taoism, and Zen Buddhism is beter than Hindu Buddhism.
With Liberalism. It just keeps dying over and over again. They’re not re-naming themselves and their movements constantly just to confuse us. The liberal movements are actually failing, over and over again, but someone adjacent to that failure thinks that if we just tweaked it so and so it would work, so it’s tried again under another name, and it fails again. Todays Marxist doesn’t actually care about or even relate to Marx much. Todays Liberal really has no context to even understand French Revolutionary liberals.
But todays Lutherans really do understand and agree with the Small Catechism. And there are modern non-denominational churches I’ve seen that think and act in a way very, very similar to how the Quakers that founded Ontario and Pennsylvania think and act. But Quakerism is more chaotic than Lutheranism, and Quakerism is quickly fading into broader evangelicalism and the larger Pentecostal movements. It’s still much less chaotic than any kind of liberalism, or even any kind of Buddhism. Quakerism was less chaotic when they planted their flag as being outsiders more firmly, their weakness is, and always was, being too accepting of others. They got immigrated out of existance for the most part.
This site is anti Roman Catholic and mostly pro Orthodox. Its not that Quakers are innately all bad people but if any religious tradition begat gay race communism (other than deliberate subversive actions by jesuits) it was the fucking quakers not the calvinists really.
I see. I would put forth that Franciscanism (Which probably represents the majority view of Roman Catholicism today) gave us todays gay race communism. Well Socinaimism/Unitarian Universalism is even worse, and they dug into academia earlier than most people care to admit. And finally Spinoza and other kind of Jewish/Kabbalistic subversion, which really did a number on German philosophy. That would probably be my top 3 if we’re trying to point to the big bad ideas.
But the logic of poverty worship comes from Assisi. Even Dominic simply respected poverty and simplicity, he didn’t worship is. Nominalism comes from the Fransiscans too. Rejection of scholastic and intellectual traditions comes from Assisi.
I know Pius X did a lot to try to point the finger at protestants for modernity, but the Catholic nations are all far more liberal progressive than the prot ones, and other than Franco the prots are far more likely to kick the progs out than Catholics. I agree with that general sentiment on Catholicism.
East Orthodox is pretty good overall, but I do want to point out they have some problems that are important enough to talk about but are not talked about, and there is a lot of holier than thou aimed at prots in western east orthodoxy.
Yeah Quakers are worse than Calvinists, but that’s a very high bar. Quakers are nothing like as prog as their stated ideas make them appear, just like Roman Catholics are by and large nothing like as traditional as their values and ideas make them to appear.
The big crime of the Puritanism was begetting Quakerism. But it has the same propensities, and eventually fell into the same wickedness.
@Jim
What is baffling is how Puritanism is actually harboring the parasites that were more apparent in the rise of the Quakers. The Abolition of sex and nation of everything physical that God made. Of in fact opposing the incarnation of Christ by implication.
Like do they actually have Gnostic infiltrators all along among them? In spite of how in terms of Sexuality the Puritans were actually pretty healthy during their time.
As soon as you start discussing the nature of holy spirit, or any person of the trinity as distinct from any of the others, you are discussing the unknowable and incomprehensible, so you are 1. Inevitably going to commit heresy. 2. Inevitably going to commit nonsense.
OK, we can talk about Christ, because he is fully man, and fully God, and showed up to prove it. The rest of them, we are in trouble.
And we got into far too much trouble discussing the nature of Christ. So let us just keep it short about Christ. And the rest of them, keep it shorter.
No, the differences in the Trinity are unknowable, we know about them by revelation. The Son came and told us about the Father. The Son came and told us about the Holy Spirit and how He sent the Holy Spirit (filliloque). Even without revelation we know the Father by Natural Law, and intuition (Faith) can lead to quite a few good inductive bits of understanding about the Son. The Magi knew of the Son. The Book of Manu knew about the Son and called him Brahma. The Sumerians talking about the Gods making a place for the malformed and unfortunate were hinting at knowing something about the Son. It’s possible that you can’t know about the Spirit by reason or Faith alone, without special revelation, beyond that feeling of ‘there’s even more to it than I realize’. But special revelation tells us about the Spirit, so we can know some things about the nature of the Spirit.
And the whole persons as distinct from one another but of the same essence isn’t even difficult, it’s just the whole thing Calvinists warned us about happened, nominalism means people can’t understand classical philosophy. It’s all made worse that the whole concept of ‘person’ got universalised so that ‘person’ means ‘human’. It’s closer to ‘consciousness’ but even that isn’t exactly right. The Infinite producing three distinct consciousnesses is not really that astounding a claim in the grand scheme of everything Christians are claiming.
No, the reason every allegory and metaphor falls into heresy and error is the much more mundane problem of the limits of human language. Every allegory, for anything, taken to far falls into error. Every metaphor falls short of being literal, even when it succeeds at being super-literal. Think about describing electricity. We say it flows along lines, imagery of waterways and canals is evoked. It’s not particularly close to what is actually happening as we understand it. It’s good enough, even for electricians, but it isn’t true. Metaphors always break down, even with completely normal things.
_____
We got into the correct amount of trouble discussing the nature of Christ. Almost everyone who wound up purged needed a good purging. All of the early groups on the wrong side of the Christological controversies were assholes. St. Basil himself noted the Arians were heretics because they were assholes, not because of their Christological views. The only group that caught flak and didn’t entirely deserve it was Nestorius, and he was still wrong. Seems like a decent enough chap though, and his wrongness is very mild compared to others. But it seems God agrees he was close enough, because Oriental Orthodoxy exists to this day, and they’re good folks that get along well with other Christians, far better than Greek Orthodox and their cohorts. Nestorius probably got it worse since he was at the tail end of the controversies and enforcing strict Christology was the cool thing to do at the time.
As for the Quakers. Oliver brought old Geroge in, and said, ‘your group is getting pretty big and you’re a bunch of weirdos, you gonna be an asshole about stuff’, and George said ‘no’ and then Oliver and George were freinds. And then Charlie came in and brought George in and said ‘Bunch of little groups are being assholes and stiring up shit. Your group is pretty big, you all gonna be a bunch of assholes’ And George said ‘no, but I’ll tell everyone you’re an asshole if you don’t let my folks out of prison’, and that was good enough for George and he let the folks out. George had aspirations to peaceably take of the Anglican church, sure, but every good man should have aspirations. It didn’t pan out and he moved on and made a nice little society in the new world.
Contrast that with the Arians, who waged war on everyone else every time they could muster the numbers and influence for it. Sacking pagans and Trinitarians alike. Declaring themselves the only true and faithful there ever was. If God didn’t furnish us with a theological reason to kick out the Arians we would have had to do it anyway.
Sweeter than Acadia Quaker Ontario was. I’ve read all about. Sweeter even than Puritan land as far as just living there goes, and Puritan land was in fact very sweet. Cider festivals in fall and skating festivals in winter, always had something sweet on the table every meal as a mater of custom, read their bibles but not too fanatical (despite how George himself seemed), went to church every month, stood there an hour in silence, went home. Good simple folk. They DIDN’T have the same holier than thou spirals the Puritan faction had. And contrary to the views I see here, I think that was their weakness. They accepted other so much they eventually became a minority in their own lands. Sure their ideas and ancestors still exist in Pentecostalism and Evangelicalism, but they really did mostly lose to Puritans and Catholics who continued to stand on their own side when they moved into Quakerland.
Puritanism was about keeping Rome out of English culture. I think they were right to do that. Puritans are the gatekeepers, the Quakers are just one of many groups that wanted to stay out of the whole conflict. Quakers and Methodists represent the kind of conflict-avoidant people that create more conflict, the person that complains ‘There are too many factions I don’t know what to do so I’ll just go do my own thing’ and then they wind up creating yet another faction. Puritans were firmly flying their own flag and standing for their own people, I dunno how you blame Quakers on Puritans.
Unless you think Puritans were wrong to demand Rome be kicked out of Anglicanism. I think they were right on the money, and if anything they didn’t gate-keep the Catholics out enough. I’m happy to see a Romanist Itlaly and even a Romanist Spain, but I don’t want to see a Romanist Anglo-sphere. The Angosphere is for Anglos.
Real holiness is cheap. A simple-honest life is easier than people make it out to be. Super-holiness, or false-holiness, is always costly, I don’t think you can make it cheap. But Quakers had a decent measure of real holiness, they did weird things themselves but generally avoided forcing their weirdness on others. They did complain about May-Poles and skip Christmas but unlike the Puritans they didn’t actually ban those things.
And to be clear, I’m more on the Puritan side of things than the Quaker side of things. I’m just trying to sus out the thrust of the complaint against the Quakers, and see how Order and Chaos are being measured around here.
Luther was right to treat revelations received in committee by a large committee of a large bureaucracy full of faggots and perverts with suspicion and cynicism.
Lets stick with scripture and personal revelation, and not get too clever about interpreting scripture.
Mortals need guidance from a living church in applying the spirit of the law to the circumstances of a particular people in a particular time, and guidance on interpreting scripture, but guidance on the nature of the trinity does not seem all that useful if it goes too far beyond the relevant scriptures.
It stopped short of the worst abuses, but it was full of high costs for everyone else, and low cost for oneself. Everything in modern leftism was first prefigured by some factions of Quakerism.
The weakness of Quakers is low cost superior holiness, a precursor of woke.
Where do you get the notion Quakerism was interested in low cost super holiness? The practical life was living simply, going to church once a month or so and standing silently, and leaving.
Quakers were one of the ‘we don’t want to fight about this so everyone else can do their own thing while we do our own thing’ factions.
I wish modern woke was doing that.
As to the other thing, yeah theology by committee is a bad thing, luminaries are better, because luminaries either stand the test of time or quickly establish themselves to be insane and their sect dies. A handful of luminaries gave us our Christology, and committees stamped their approval on it more or less after the fact. Committees coming together to state that the thing that works works is probably the least bad thing committees can do, it’s sometimes even borderline good.
>I notice that neither have you given us the affirmation.
That’s true, and I’m not going to. I don’t claim to be a believing Christian, and my understanding is that the affirmation is for commenters claiming to be Christian.
Christianity was the ‘order’ faction in ‘how do we deal with Rome’. The Jews were the ‘drive them out and purity spiral’ faction, that leads to chaos because they were not powerful enough to drive them out, so they died and Jerusalem was razed. The Samaritans were the ‘adopt Roman habits, including Rome-in-Decline vices’ faction that leads to chaos because Rome-in-Decline vices lead Rome itself into Chaos. For a non-Christian reference to this see Juveniles satires.
The Christian position was to respect Roman power but reject their vices. That’s the order faction move. And many of the trap questions thrown at Jesus Himself revolve around this particular problem.
Christianity ‘subverted’ Rome by being the faction still worked and had children and families while the emperor was marrying trannyboys and declaring them better than real women and every non-Christian noble woman was sleeping around with her darkie gladiator slave while driving Silphium to extinction.
Taking care of the weak is civilization and order, not commie chaos. The Law of Hammurabbi is ‘To protect the weak against the strong and ensure the rule of law in the land’, among the oldest Sumerian tablets is a story of one god making various kinds of malformed men, and the other finding special places in society for them so they can live and thrive.
But ‘He who does not work, does not eat’ was an Iron Law in early Christianity, so much so that traveling ministers would be considered heretics and thrown out if they asked for money, per the Didache. And that’s how Christianity was until Francis of Assisi, that fellow is an agent of pure chaos. It’s poetic that ‘San Francisco’ is the new Sodom. A divine joke.
And Protestantism renewed ‘He who does not work, does not eat’ and that is the way of Order. The fact that a retard who’s work isn’t worth much is still fed isn’t communism, it’s civilization.
Communism is what Fransis wanted, idealizing beggars and vargrants and accusing workers of immorality for working productively.
Every virtue has two vices. Too much care for the poor, and indulging the hapless and criminal is chaos. Too little care for the poor, and a brutalistic society is chaos.
A blackpiller like you can’t accept that all it takes to ‘win’ is just to be the faction of least chaos in a chaotic time. But over and over again ‘let all the stupid and evil people kill themselves off while you live a simple, good life’ has proven to win the long game of civilization.
Walter Burkert, in Creation of the Sacred: Tracks of Biology in Early Religions, attributes early Christianity’s success to its repudiation of three widespread methods of population control: exposure, homosexuality, and prostitution. I would expand exposure to include abortion and child sacrifice, but given certain ancient mystery cults’ suspected activities, all three probably were intertwined and complicit.
Burkert, alas, seemed to harbor no special consideration for the Faith, but he gave Christians their due for following our Heavenly Father’s (or GNON’s if one prefers) law to long-term success.
Just so Hesiod. Just so.
Gods moral law will have its way.
I would say Christianity, properly understood, understands Heavily Fathers will better than anything else. But we’re not the only ones who understand it at all. And we certainly don’t understand all of it.
One of the most heartening things is that some high amount, over 80%, of those that voted for Restore in Yarmouth were voters who normally do not bother to vote. Finally feeling that someone represented them, they came out.
Election turnout is always low. If that sort of homeless voter mobilisation can take place at a national level in 2029, Lowe might just be able to pull it off.
Nothing wrong with Quakers Jim.
Quakers are ruled by committees, which theoretically include everyone, but of course cannot.
The committees are far too large, and include only the theoretically most holy, which of course leads to highly convenient forms of holiness.
Committees too large to meet around a coffee table are necessarily and unavoidably dominated by the most stupid and the most evil, because they inevitably tend to consensus, unless you have someone at the top who keeps them in line. Consensus is always dominated by the most evil and the most stupid, the evil because they are unmoved by facts, evidence, logic, or debate, since they do not reveal the real motives behind their positions, the stupid are unmoved by evidence, logic, or debate, because they cannot keep up.
If you absolutely have to have a committee for representation reasons, and you have to absolutely have one for communion of the Bishops in a multi national, multi ethnic church composed of official state churches, because a sovereign is rightly suspicious of excessively centralized religions (the Jesuits have murdered a lot of princes, and arranged the assassination or overthrow of quite a few Kings), then it should exercise the absolutely minimal amount of governance.
I think there may be a problem here in that you’re viewing Quaker churches as the center of Quaker life, rather than as a side-club. Pennsylvania/Ontario Quaker communities operated on family lines, patriarchies. Basically extended clans.
The Quaker church was run by committee because it was not important. Rember that for most of their history these people didn’t even have sermons. They had announcements, perhaps a short bible reading, and silence. The Committee had to coordinate when people got together and who presided over the silence.
Real bible study and teaching faith was in the home, under the father.
Like I and a few others said, these people didn’t gate-keep, so their decedents and diaspora pretty much all went on to become other groups, mainly modern Evangelicals and the Pentecostal/Apostolic movement.
But I’ll say this: anyone saying the Harvard problem is Puritans or Quakers who also mysteriously fails to mention the Unitarian Universalist takeover (Socinians) in the early 1800s should be HIGHLY suspect. I don’t have to conspiratorially claim that the Unitarian Universalists turned into the modern woke by some alchemal chain, they always were.
Now if someone wants to argue that liberal leaning Puritans in Harvard in conjunction with excessively tolerant Quakers allowed Universalists in in the first place? Sure. Looks like that’s not too far off. But once the Universalists got in they demanded more ground until they took over, and that is as we say that. If anything the Quaker comittee church got co-opted by Unitarians rather than Quakers originating leftism. It appears to me that most the Quaker decedents moved on to an anti-university mentality that cumulated in things like the 1920s fundamentalist movement.
Where are the Puritans today?
They became Unitarian Universalist. via transcendentalism and half a dozen other names. And unfortunately were in charge of the Harvard and the State Religion of New England, and eventually the United States, as they did so.
Mentioning all those names is just engaging with the magician’s flim flam patter. Puritans are Brownists, and the only reason I am calling them Puritans rather than Brownists is that that was what they were calling themselves during the English civil war.
If we engage with the enemy’s ever changing names, we lose track of them. True
Brownismcommunism has never been tried. The left forever re-invents itself, and yet nothing changes — no matter whether it is GlobalWarmingClimate Change, Covid lockdown, Covid Jab, justice for the proletariat, nigger integration, gay liberation, transition rights, anti fascism, think of the children, whatever, it is always the same old same old.The name changes nothing. The Brownists deserved to rule over you because they were holier than you were, and those forcing the jab on you, and ventilators down your throat if murdering you could improve their numbers, deserved to rule over you because they were holier than you were.
Puritan, quaker, unitarian universalist, vaxxer, it is all the same. The name changes are just flim flam so that they can get behind you with a dagger.
They hate you, they mean to destroy you, they hate everyone. So they keep changing the their name.
They change the name on the letterhead and on the door of the building, but they are same people working out of the same building.
When the Democratic Party stopped being the Global
WarmingClimate Change party, and became the Vaxxer party, did a whole lot of old Democrats suddenly leave the party and a whole lot of new Democrats enter it? Did anything change at all?They wanted control of you and your assets to save the Earth from Global
WarmingClimate Change. And then they wanted control of you and your assets to save the world from the awesome might of the Awesome and Mighty Covid Demon. They are still Brownists and always have been.What is that nonsense?
Unitarian Universalism came from Renaissance humanism via Socinianism, and came to America via Anglicans taking the Trinity out of the Common Book of Prayer. Every step of that is exactly what the coalition that called itself puritan was explicitly against, up to and including the indirect Italian influence.
A tiny fraction of puritans did join up, certainly, but that was unquestionably apostasy to the puritans side, and the Unitarians also quite explicitly saw such a conversion as rejecting everything Puritanism stands for. In any sense of the discourse of the day it was pertinent to be Unitarian meant to not be Puritan, and vice versa.
Where are Puritans today? They’re the religious right. They’re the people progressives hate and continue to hate on centuries later, they’re the ‘obstacles to progress’. The people who wear the badge of ‘Puritan’ most proudly today, and who have direct blood ties to them, are the evangelical fundamentalists and reformed reconstructionists.
As for the Brownists, well they weren’t wrong, Anglicans screwing the the book of prayer meant they were siding with humanism over orthodoxy. Down the line they joined the Mennonites and baptists in the Americas, both very successful groups with very prosperous ways of life. And those two groups represent two of the three different churches I’ve heard proper ‘We need Old Testament Kings that smash idols and drive out heathens’ sermons. Brownism, and puritanism as a whole, was tried, it was glorious, it lead to many prosperous generations and the great successes of North America.
I know this, they’re my people, I have records of generations centuries long. The only remotely left wing people in my whole extended family are the distant wing from which an aunt married some Italian.
Happened twice, sadly.
Puritans great fault is that they tend to leave institutions in a huff when the institutions get corrupted. I’ve seen them do it in my lifetime, and there is plenty of serious debate about what to do about universities and credentialism, usually my kin would just do what we’re good at and succeed, credentialism has been weaponized against us and we debate if we should go to universities because they’re now mandatory for some things or if we should continue to avoid them.
But leaving in a huff is exactly what happened at Harvard. To claim that Harvard was still puritan after the puritans left for greener pastures is absurd.
I fully understand why liberals and Catholics hate puritans. I do not at all understand why you do. Everything that’s pushed the left back, 50s culture, Fundamentalists of the 20s, ‘anti-intelectual’ movements that shun Unis and public school systems, all of them are laden with Puritan DNA.
Puritans and other similar “Calvinist Theocrat” type people will react to an institution being corrupted by abandoning it and building a new one. We can discuss if that’s the right or wrong approach.
But the people who do the corrupting, the so-called “progressives”, hardly ever build anything new of their own. They can only infiltrate and corrupt.
There is one exception I can think of: the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. JW theology is basically Socinian. Arianianism repackaged for the 19th century. But they are in other ways too fringe for the Jesuits cough-cough “progressives” to think worth infiltrating and subverting.
Harvard was explicitly Puritan. Then explicitly Evangelical, explicitly Transcendentalists, explicitly … They change their beliefs as often as Apple issues new Iphones.
When did Puritans and other similar Calvinist Theocrat type people react to Harvard being corrupted by abandoning it and building a new institution?
That would be like Bernie Sanders leaving the Democrats because they rigged the primaries against him and were in bed with the oligarchs. Of course he would never leave the Democrats merely because they are a bunch of corrupts gangsters who have systematically destroyed everything he supposedly believes and has supposedly been working for.
And every step towards actually existent communism is exactly what the coalition that called itself communist was explicitly against.
You are taking their loudly announced beliefs far too seriously. You are making the “true communism has never been tried” argument. The Brownists were pissing all over Christ and the Apostles back in the days of Shakespeare. Remember what Christ said about declarations of virtue and piety announced with the blaring of trumpets and the clashing of cymbals. Observe the Pope holding photo ops and media events at which he demonstrates his great humility.
The sequence of events was that after Cromwell died, General Monck staged a coup — his praetorians get to guard parliament, and parliament’s praetorians are violently dispersed.
Parliament votes for elections in which Royalists will be prohibited from running, but somehow royalists win. Funny thing that. Restoration ensues. Part of the Restoration is that all the clergy of the Church of England have to re-apply for their old jobs, and are quizzed on conformity to Church of England doctrine. Those that will not affirm orthodoxy lose their jobs — purged for Puritanism. Some of them take ship to America, where they found Harvard. Harvard was the religious seminary of the state religion of New England. And is now the seminary of the state religion of the United States.
The beliefs of Brownists were never beliefs, merely a flag to rally around and a club with which to strike the heads of their enemies.
Look at Harvard today. One day they believe in participatory democracy, the next in the mandatory vax jab. They have been that way since Harvard was founded by the priests purged by King Charles the Second from the Church of England.
The Puritans who got purged and sailed to America, were purged for inability to conform to the thirty nine articles.
What, specifically, do Puritans claim is wrong with the thirty nine articles?
All the Puritan objections were one objection, that the thirty nine articles reject the Donatist heresy every which way, and the Puritans, from the days before they called themselves Puritans, affirm the Donatist heresy every which way.
I just do not see that. What I see is Harvard is laced with Puritan DNA. Who shuns the public school systems? Amish and similar shun the public school systems. No Puritan background there. No evangelical background either.
The evangelicals were socinians, or rapidly became socinians, which is the half way house to Unitarianism, and the evangelicals and socinians were a university based movement. Which meant they were, in America, a harvard based movement, which meant they were, in America, a Puritan movement.
Have you ever been to a Quaker service? I attended one once, and I barely survived. The holier-than-thou Left-wing nagging was beyond anything I had previously imagined. They are infectious human waste: Patient Zero for the American branch of Leftism, which is the brand of Leftism that is gleefully destroying Western Civilization. They are worse than the Muslims, worse than the Jews. The only positive thing about Quakers is that there are very few of them.
Based Camp recently did a rather informative episode on how the Quakers birthed much of what is today’s American leftism. The episode was kind mind blowing, not going to lie. And I think it renders Yarvin’s thesis (that the Calvinist Puritans of New England were the source of American leftism) a bit obsolete.
[Yeah, I’m a longtime lurker, first time commenter, and I know the rules, so here’s my shill test:
When miss average is given 100% free sexual choice and open access to the digital equivalent of a sears catalog of all the men in her town, miss average will exclusively bang Mr. 1-in-30, and probably with no demand for commitment attached. When she approaches the wall, probably in her mid-to-late 20s (or early 30s if she’s hasn’t yet packed on the pounds), she will fall off of Mr. 1-in-30s booty call list and onto Mr. 1-in-10s list. Give it another 10 years and it’s “where have all the good men gone???” And thus a cat lady is made. Meanwhile Mr. Average has probably gotten very little pussy, if any at all, and has very little incentive to hone his craft at much anything beyond video games.]
“I think it renders Yarvin’s thesis (that the Calvinist Puritans of New England were the source of American leftism) a bit obsolete.”
That not entirely accurate, Yarvin was talking mostly about Harvard, which is a puritans institution.
There are other strains of leftism, but in the hale of power, puritans leftists run supreme.
Quakers are very holier-than-thou but are very hostile against hierarchy. Thus made them impotent and ineffectual.
Puritans were holier than thou with a lot of pragmatism through in, a lot of unprincipled exceptions which is why they control the world.
Most interesting thing for me about quakers is that Nixon was a Quaker and from a Quaker family, which explain his fate.
Right.
Harvard is where the power is at, but ideologically, Quakerism has had far more influence on Harvard than its parent ideology than Puritanism.
However, organizationally and institutionally, the line of personnel and organization runs through Puritan priests kicked out of the Church of England in the restoration, to Harvard, to Civil War I, to where we are now, in a line of institutional and organizational descent. You can’t do stuff without a hierarchical organization. Quaker committeeism renders them evil, but ineffectual.
I’ve long supported the theory that modern leftism came overtly from the Quakers with in the shadows support by the Jesuits. Not every Quaker is evil William Penn and Nixon were not evil and many on an individual level wonderful people in a sort of Ned Flanders way but their altruistic bring heaven to earth Christianity is cancer when you try to scale it.
The problem with the puritan theory is that yes after the civil war people who were ideological descendents of Puritans had conquered the US. And they almost immediately lost power to a coalition of more conservative free soilers (supported crucially by most union army veterans including Grant and Sherman)and newly strong corporate interests. The whole gilded age narrative was the puritan types bitching about this.
Quakerism being infested with Leftist post-Christians is, IMHO, due to the lack of gatekeeping on the part of the original proto-Charismatic sort of Quakers. They’d have done better to have at least some basic list of Christian doctrines a person had to affirm in order to be welcome.
The Calvinism of the Puritans got secularized into a mindset of “we are the morally superior elite with the right to rule over everyone else” without the original premise of Divine election.
The Quakers are an example of an anti-Calvinist response, but whose stance decayed from “No, Jesus did not die just for a special elite, He died for everyone! Everyone can potentially become a child of God” into “everyone is automatically a child of God whether they believe in Him or not!” or suchlike.
Quakerism doesn’t gatekeep well. Their ‘sense of the meeting’ consensus structure is just way too vulnerable to the sort of passive aggression that the left uses. It is also fond of invisible lines of authority. The more traditional Quakers also did a lot of throwing out the baby with the bathwater on the sacraments of communion and baptism. Yeah, they’re not D&D spells granting salvation irrespective of your behavior and relationship with Christ, but Christ DID tell us to do them. So it suffers the whole, let’s go meta from the text and use that to reject what the text specifically says problem. And structurally it has no effective immune system. That said, I’m a Quaker, albeit not a very good one, as is my church.
I do note that one of the most effective ways to counter passive-aggression. Especially when they fake compliment you is to take what they say literally.
Either they will keep trying with their barbs being completely ineffective. Or they are forced to escalate into overt hostility which is itself more overt aggression. Flushing them out.
Quakers as individual people tend to be very good, quakers trying to scale their ideology otoh causes a lot of evil.
Quakers trying to treat outgroups better then they had been treated traditionally on an individual level (women, orphans and bastards, minorities etc) was not per se evil, quakers trying to create laws that overthrew the old hierarchy so those groups would be treated better created perverse incentives. With women particularly disastorous. I sort of agree with quaker abolitionism (and I can’t blame you guys for the deranged serial killer John Brown who was a big part of why the South just chimped out at Lincoln’s election when Lincoln would have much preferred to abolish slavery very gradually with financial compensation and no war) but it was pushed way too zealously.
Methodist abolitionism said ‘It’s immoral to import outsiders to do work that our fellow Englishmen should be given’, and I agree with that.
What was Quaker abolitionism like?
It does not matter. Quaker abolitionism made them holier than you were then, and the Jab makes them holier than you are now.
Brownism gets a shiny new and improved belief system about as often as Apple issues a new Iphone.
Do you think that when the party of Global
WarmingClimate Change became the party of the Jab, all the old Democrats went away and were replaced by new Democrats?Women do not have actual beliefs, and the left does not have actual beliefs. A woman has feelings, and a leftist has a flag to rally around and a club to beat his enemies with.
A woman is not debating you. She is shit testing you. And discussions with leftists are just leftists psyching themselves up preparatory to destroying you.
Leftist beliefs matter as schelling points for coordination, and in this sense leftists take them seriously and they matter a lot. But they don’t actually function as empirical beliefs about the external world. It is like the effective altruism of the effective altruists — it does not matter how much harm and suffering it causes in the external world, it still justifies them getting your money.
When will the Leftism ever end… keeps growing more diabolical funded and higher people echoing, roving from head to head, and always some new head comes spewing and trying to fuck everyone.
This is NO King of mine, this wearer of false pelts.
Nor does marriage between these two devils make either of them or their shit good.
King Charles announces his disgusting orders to roll out Digital-ID against the God-given Freedom of his own Citizens
@disclosetv/status/2054514249616024045
Alex Soros announces his takeover of Soros money
@disclosetv/status/2054561775102591137
Geert still going strong
@geertwilderspvv/status/2054564046813163524
Polish singer Alicja Szemplińska walked out of an interview when asked if she had a message for Israeli fans.
@hureyaksa/status/2054607856029110434
If you kept Coverture, married off your young daughters wombs to your eligible men, you too would have massive numbers of babies with which to defeat the Islamic and Leftist invasions of your lands.
@hureyaksa/status/2051285967156416537
Sikh puts on the full armor of god, lol.
These are not the Sovereign Kings of Olde, do not be deceived by the show.
“King” Charles just had to mention “Climate Change”… who puts this nonsense in a “King’s” mouth… how about the real Brits stuff all this CO2 Plant Food back in his mouth.
@disclosetv/status/2054517269200294370
Fake Pomp Circus
@disclosetv/status/2054511890663956836
@disclosetv/status/2054508958631489755
Hey not-King Charles, what about the “Safety” of the Native White English Civ “Community” your Govt has been wrecking and letting get invaded and conquered for decades and century… how about Restoring that Civ that Original White Community, not this fake All-Communities bullshit.
@disclosetv/status/2054513406728720460
Will the False and Politician and non-Invoking Popes soon be thrown out…?
Vatican warns Society of St. Pius X, that ordination of bishops, without consent from Pope Leo XIV, would create a “schism”, and that the planned ordination ceremony would be “a grave offence against God,” and entail excommunication from the Church — Reuters
Then maybe we can have some real Kings throw all this PedoFaggotry out of Europe, along with with vonDerLeyen+LaGarde and the entire EU Parliament/Commission itself.
@disclosetv/status/2054544520063135926
Macron admits he let 17M useless niggers into France, calls them French, and supports them over the French people
@disclosetv/status/2054286191256612930
Macron announces that MansA, an African arts hub, will be established in a building close to the Eiffel Tower that, “used to have a Franco-German presence, it will now be an African and European presence.” In front of a display screen full of pastel pedo colors.
Hantavirus… don’t fall for the new COVID/COVAX scam.
Stop it with the link spam and random roundup of evil. We already know this stuff, and you are in violation of clause of the moderation policy against long and boring.
Mark Hamil Star Wars? NO. Mark Hamil is a disgusting screeching Leftist, just like Robert DeNiro and Morgan Freeman. They’ve destroyed the brands that preceded and even emanated from them. Like Canadian comedy was funny, but Michael’s SNL was increasingly 0wn3d by Leftism and became repulsively irrelavent.
@basedTorba
The Australian government has officially declared war on free speech, and they have threatened me with 12 months in prison for exposing their blueprints. I have been served with a production notice from their new Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion. They are using expert activists to weaponize the definition of antisemitism by broadening it to include any criticism of Israel or globalist power structures. They want to label our speech a national security threat. Their own documents express deep frustration that platforms like Gab have shifted toward true free expression, and they are now moving to force us back into their controlled and state monitored box. They demanded I hide this information and threatened 12 months of jail time if I speak. Good luck enforcing that. I do not answer to Australian bureaucrats, and Gab does not answer to state sponsored censors. This is exactly why we built Gab. We are creating a parallel society that is independent of their captured institutions, their corrupt courts, and their laughable threats of imprisonment. You cannot cage the truth, and you cannot stop a people who have decided they will no longer be silenced. We are staying the course. We need your support now more than ever. Go PRO: pro.gab.com Donate: donate.gab.com
https://x.com/DataRepublican/status/2053950228596957690
The Shadow Cabinet of Soros🚨 This is the story of National Security Action, a secretive Soros NGO. Ten days after Trump’s inauguration, a former Pentagon official publicly floated a military coup in Foreign Policy magazine. Within a year, she was advising a new Soros-funded organization that quietly assembled 70 former Obama national security officials under one roof. 46 of them went on to staff the Biden administration — including the Secretary of State, CIA Director, DNI, NSA, and UN Ambassador. 88.6% were Obama alumni. The primary funder: the Open Society Action Fund. The same woman simultaneously sat on the funder’s board and the organization’s advisory council. She also co-founded the Transition Integrity Project and spent 14 years at New America developing doctrine on military refusal of orders.
@gentilenewsnet
You have not complied with the moderation policy, and are still on moderation, but this is important and useful information — Data Republican has found the network that is the head of the snake.
The obvious thing to do is to arrest and detain that network for treason against the Republic. But I fear that the Trump administration may be reluctant to defend itself. But they have to at least reduce the level of election rigging in the mid terms, and it would then be easier to do a proper clean up.
This looks rather like failure to pass any of the moderation policy requirements, and violation of the long and boring clause, but what Data Republican dug up actually matters quite a bit, and Torba, unlike most of this stuff, matters.
So letting this through. But I will be suppressing outrage porn and link spam. This contains, however two items of actually significant outrage porn and link spam.
Letting this through should not be interpreted as freedom to dump unlimited amounts of boring outrage porn and link spam.
CIA which is not supposed to have domestic law enforcement powers raids the cabinet level officer who oversees them while Trump is out of the country wtf is going on?
Cominator:
That’s how you know who the real government is. They’re the people who just do things by force and nobody stops them. There were weapons on both sides, but everyone knew which side was willing to use them.
The narrative is opaque but the official party line right now is it was “not a raid”. It definitely sounds nefarious im as anti foid in government as anyone here but Tulsi is still one of i think Trumps more trustworthy appointments (I liked how one of her first actions was purging the members of a faggot chatroom from the glowies) whereas I absolutely do not trust Ratcliffe so it sounds very nefarious still.
The struggle over possession of the dirt on each other has been a physical struggle for a long time — as for example the Epstein murder. It is still physical.
Pretty sure Trump wants Tulsi, and thus himself, to have the dirt. And the rest of the government does not like that at all. Hence the raid.
The dirt that matters tends to be complicated and tedious to understand. Look how much work it took Data Republican to structure information at was officially available into something that made sense and told a story. You have to connect the dots, and there are just far too many dots and far too many connections. Trump has not the time nor the patience to make sense of the dirt, so it needs distribution, but if you distribute it, the power attached to it slips away.
We talk here a lot about black helicopters and midnight raids against the left, but it is the left doing midnight raids on us.
Black helicopters and midnight raids need data before they can do anything, and the data is hidden in a maze. And we are seeing rather less will than we need to get the data, which would imply even less will to get the people that the data will reveal.
Still, the prospect of being hanged in the morning concentrates the mind wonderfully. The Democrats can never be allowed to win another election ever, because if they do, they are going to take care not only of Trump, but of the useful and effective members of the Trump administration.
Now I sound like QAnon. “Trust the plan”. Trouble is, I see a lack of will to get and analyze the necessary data, which implies even less will to do what is going to take.
Start by rounding up the Soros network. We have enough dirt on them to hang them. And if we round up the Soros network, that is going to substantially diminish the fraud in the midterms. The Democrats can never be allowed to win another election ever, and rounding up the Soros network before the midterms would knock one leg out from under the fraud system, which as we saw in 2020 is a lot more centralized than it pretends to be, so it therefore can be radically impaired by a beheading strike.
The dirt only matters while voting matters or courts matter. It is normality bias to worry about this dirt.
There is much better justifications to crush opponents than this dirt, e.g. an unautorized raid on a cabinet level officer.
Not true. Dirt still matters and will always matter.
Does not matter in the way Boomers fantasize that it matters, the way 90s-era Hollywood liked to glamorize it, where you merely threaten to release the dirt and the target is forced to comply, or you actually release the dirt and through some magic of democracy and the press, justice automatically happens, somehow. That is obviously not real.
But dirt still matters within the elite because individuals in modern elite institutions and especially governmental branches are operating well in excess of the Dunbar number. It is impossible to keep track of so many constantly shifting loyalties, to know down to any given moment who are your friends and who are your enemies. You might have your band of brothers whom you trust completely, and a small group of sworn enemies forming the permanent outgroup, but for the hundreds to thousands of individuals and organizations in between, dirt is your #1 decision making tool.
As in: “sure, these guys look good on paper, but how do I know I can trust them?” Well, you go looking for dirt, and if there is enough dirt and it looks authentic then you drop them from your list. Or on the opposite end, “sure, these guys are a constant thorn in our side, but is it worth the financial expense and the cost of making new enemies to actually go after them, are they truly deep-down evil or just sort of crooked?” Again, you need the dirt, because you just do not have the time or resources to hunt down every crook in town when literally everyone in town is a crook.
Just because a certain cohort has unrealistic beliefs about the value of information, does not mean information isn’t extremely valuable. If information and access to secrets was not valuable, empires and nation-states would not spend vast amounts of resources trying to gather the dirt on their opposition, both domestic and international. You can’t wage war or even maintain peace without information.
[*Deleted for all the usual reasons that I silently deleted about ten of your previously comments in their entirety*]
They can be AI’ed into saying “nigger”
[*deleted*]
Saying “nigger” does not matter unless the left wants to get you for entirely unrelated reasons that they refuse to admit, and lately the right has been coordinating to protect people that the left is going after, when the only grounds that they admit to are such frivolities.
What does matter is wicked people coordinating to do wicked things, and you cannot AI the coordination into existence.
True, if there is enough dirt and it looks authentic people are dropped, but it is very difficult for a bureaucracy to present authentic looking dirt many years after the event. If you want to form your own judgment on dirt you have to read through a huge file. Very few people can do that, even if they get to read the file, and noone can do it for everyone who needs to be dropped or cleared.
The usual solution to that problem is to trust the judgement of your friends. If someone I trust says X is bad, I drop X. If someone I trust says X is good, X becomes a candidate to join my in-group. If your in-group lacks a faith, it is not possible to trust a moral judgment of a member. Then your in-group needs a huge bureaucratic effort and a file to decide who to work with.
For all practical purposes dirt now simply means that a committee says “look we have a shit-load of evidence that X is a bad man. We have examined that evidence and concluded X is bad. Trust our judgment”. If X is really bad and socially close, you don’t need the committee. Someone from your in-group will know something about X and tell you to drop X.
In short, dirt doesn’t matter because people can’t hide their evils so well that people close to them won’t notice. No need to know the details to drop someone.
Yes, that is the usual, lowest-effort and often best or “Old Testament” solution. The second-best solution, the Machiavellian solution, which becomes best in a zero trust environment, is to have multiple actors with proven competency (but rarely with proven loyalty and often with clear disloyalty) dig up the dirt on each other and their enemies, and to then do business with whomever ends up being the least covered in shit.
This is the very strategy that worked on–not for, but on–Donald Trump, and caused Thermidor to ally with the Trump faction. Trump’s enemies have been trying, non-stop for the last ten years, to dig up whatever dirt they can find on the man, and in all that time, have come up with bupkis. The man is far from perfect, but he is a known quantity, and his current allies know that and keep coming back to that despite other internal tensions.
“Discovery” is the service Elon Musk was providing with DOGE, and it was extremely effective in targeting and dismantling the left’s largest slush fund. It is the same service that people like Data Republican are providing today, which may be instrumental in dismantling the left’s largest personnel network. The service is to sift through enormous mounds of seemingly-unimportant, barely-verifiable, boring-ass information and filter them into a single coherent picture that is convincing enough to be used as leverage or even casus belli. Not a lot of people can do this, and most who try go insane and devolve into ridiculous conspiracy theories, like Anonymous Conservative; the ones who are actually capable are more valuable than gold.
Yes they can. You paint a picture of a real premodern or Dunbar-sized world where everyone knows everyone, or perhaps a fictitious postmodern world where surveillance and reporting is impartial or self-interested. We live in a real postmodern world where surveillance and reporting is ideological and weaponized. It is difficult to conceal one’s evils when acting alone, but far less difficult when powerful institutions (the press, the courts, etc.) are able and willing to cover it up and aggressively target and wage war on anyone attempting to uncover it.
Of course, conspiracies involving hundreds or thousands of individuals cannot keep themselves a literal secret, but the modern play is not to rely on total secrecy, really, but to rely on complexity, propaganda, milieu control and sheer audacity, such that normies presented with the facts will simply refuse to believe them, or be unable to understand them. But that only works on normies, which is to say on dumb people, and most people in politics are indeed dumb, but Trump and Thermidor are not.
from X
“The power struggle in the Philippines has now escalated to the point of using armed force.
Marcos Jr. has been trying to impeach Sara Duterte. He secured a victory in the House of Representatives, but things haven’t been going smoothly in the Senate. The pro-Duterte camp launched a surprise vote, removing Senate President Tito Sotto — a Marcos ally — with 13 votes, and replaced him with former Duterte-era foreign secretary Alan Peter Cayetano. This has significantly reduced the chances of the impeachment motion passing in the Senate.
Unwilling to accept defeat, the Marcos camp then attempted to send in military and police forces to storm the Senate and arrest a pro-Duterte senator, Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa. Dela Rosa served as police chief and was the point person for the drug war under Duterte. He also played a key role in the Senate vote that removed Sotto.
The two sides reportedly exchanged gunfire in the Senate, and the Marcos camp ultimately failed to take Dela Rosa away. The intensity of the confrontation between the two factions in the Philippines now surpasses even that of South Korea’s political scene. The Marcos and Duterte camps are no longer just political rivals — they have become mortal enemies, where one side’s victory means the other’s annihilation. With the 2028 presidential election on the horizon, it seems clear that an even more intense showdown lies ahead”
basically a civil war, amazingly no one notice or saying this.
normality bias is a hellva drug.
basically it is GAE vs Duterte’s daughter, GAE literally invaded the senate with guns blazing to remove them.
It seems to be the GAE in exile, without backing from the US armed forces. The Philippines is full of US bases, and this time around so far they are sitting it out.
In the USA, The left faction of the Democrats, which is now the dominant Democrat faction, effectively they are Democrats, intend to annihilate the Maga faction of the Republicans, now the dominant and ruling faction of America, if they win the house and the senate in the midterms. Might well attempt to do it anyway, even if they lose, but they would much prefer to do it with the legislature giving them the appearance of legality legitimacy, and the appearance that the Republic still lives.
If not, they may well go for it anyway, with the judiciary giving them the appearance of legality and legitimacy, but no one believes that the judiciary is following the law any more. The judges are burning their legitimacy and credibility the way the legacy media did.
Pagentry at China red-carpets is a bit over-the-top sus?, also, lots of young Chinese honeytrap seen on offer to the delegation.
Here’s Viktor Orban handoff speech to the new kid
@PM_ViktorOrban/status/2054514826999673222
CIA history
RepLuna: The CIA has 24h to return the docs to Gabbard’s office or else I will motion to issue subpoena. These docs have been requested by Congress.
CIA seized 40 boxes of JFK and MK-ULTRA files that were being processed by ODNI for declassification.
CIA whistleblower to testify that the intelligence community covered up the origins of COVID-19, per Rand Paul.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_violations_by_the_CIA
Canada court trashes Alberta secession petition.
Polls
AOC: 26% ComSoc, Unmarried Sloot
Buttigieg: 22% Faggot, Pedo, GunGrabber
Newsom: 21% Fraud, ComSoc
Harris: 13% Airhead, Drunk, Whore
lol
Karlon = Aylo with new handle?
Obviously.
He’s the weed that just won’t stop growing, no matter how many times you spray it and pull it and salt the earth. Tell him without a trace of ambiguity to “GO AWAY NO ONE LIKES YOU” and put him on permanent moderation and he’ll be back the very next day with a new alt. We’re well into the double digits now, maybe even the 20s or 30s.
Doesn’t WordPress have a shadowban feature, or a bot detection plugin that can be tweaked for situations like this?
This is a case for whitelist based moderation rather than a blacklist based one. In Jim’s blog the stage should not be open to all but those who are of a certain level of understanding of neoreaction, and particularly Jim’s brand of reaction and willingness to acknowledge this world view along with the associated crime thoughts. Unfortunately a lot of normie-conservative level chatter is being tolerated here, made worse by the “news of the day” daily outrage porn. It’s getting tiresome.
Shill testing is important but I guess it’s as important to ensure that those who cannot acknowledge the topics regularly discussed here or show lack of understanding deliberately or otherwise are not allowed to wander off into vacuities and link spam.
Probably
Dem governor in Colorado commuted Tina Peters sentence… no way he would do this unless he thought they’ve lost…
Tina Peters was given nine years for investigating the 2020 election fraud, on the grounds that she used deception, impersonation, etcetera, to obtain evidence of wrongdoing. It was a gross injustice, because the use of deception to dig up info on wrongdoers is entirely standard.
This means that wall against noticing the massive and blatant 2020 fraud is starting to fall apart.
If the wall is falling this close to the midterms, it means that Democrats are starting to believe they will not be allowed to steal them.
[*deleted for not conforming to the moderation policy*]
You cannot link to a pass of the moderation policy. Your comment itself has to pass it. And, anyway, the content of the link itself does not pass. It has thought crime levels or racism, but an actual thought crime is not only racist, sexist, or whateverist, but also contains actual reasons that racism, sexism, homophobia, or whateverism, is true and morally right.
You are going to have to say that niggers are not the same species, which you did not, though in the context of your link that is obviously what you meant, and what the significant differences are, which neither you nor your link did.
Gabbard quit ODNI today.
Why leave out the context you mongoloid. Her husband has bone cancer.
Men should generally not allow women to hold or aspire to political office, certainly not unkept women.
“Independent” women in political office are disaster for both Men and the Civ.
If one quits to go be helper for her man, that’s side context.
The much larger question is what has happened ever since Men allowed women to crapflood their own parliaments executives judicials, corps, and academia.
Studies show about 90% of 600,000 abstracts in the social sciences written over the last 60 years have a left-wing orientation, and that this trend has been getting worse over time.
Here’s article about the devastating results of Leftism and unowned Women…
dailysceptic.org:2026/05/19/no-wonder-men-are-opting-out/
1950’s women were mostly married to their bosses/workmen and brought to work as useful secretarial eye-candy.
Today many workplaces have some green-haired lesbian wenches in HR, emasculating men, and filling the place with diversity.
Bolt’s CEO Ryan Breslow just fired his entire HR dept.
“They were creating problems that didn’t exist, those problems disappeared when I let them go. — Breslow, Fortune Summit”
Other context… CIA supposedly just raided ODNI which got weirdly buried by media, Massie got Jewed, then ODNI head who’s been outing CIA stuff quits because “cancer”.
While Fox News gets caught putting one “Adm. Harward” on TV who is wearing a silicone mask.
spacex.com:starshield
CyberPolygon, MKUltra
Putting cancer in someone’s water is probably not outside the range of spookthuggery.
Angela Merkel (woman, karen, leftist, who should never been allowed to vote, let alone allowed to leave the house without escort of male father husband brother pastor) has treasoned against the entire White race and must be jailed tried and executed for this sadistic criminal conspiracy.
cnn.com:2025/09/05/europe/germany-refugees-migration-changed-sentiment-intl-cmd
Europe is the “jungle.” The “garden” is gone.
European hubris sealed its fate.
USA “garden” is already under massive successful attack, and losing fast.
Act now.
When Merkel declared on August 31, 2015, “We can do this,” she initiated an all-of-society “welcome culture” that quickly produced a full-blown migrant crisis for the whole continent. Over ten years later, the influx of millions of Muslims into Europe has transformed school demographics and local politics, unleashed an explosion in sex crimes and anti-European violence, strained Europe’s hospital services and social safety nets, and exacerbated government debt.
Merkel’s fateful decision to “welcome” Middle Easterners to Europe transformed cities and towns across Europe into the Middle East.
I believe the word you’re looking for is “war crime”, defined as “a deed so heinous that you shall be hanged for it even if your actions were legal at the time.”
I am MAD about a WOMAN that was DUMB! I am mad MAD about the BLACK AND BROWN BODIES. White people rise up! Go vote harder! Actually you deserve it for not voting hard enough! Muslims EXIST. They build MOSQUES.
I saw an article, a white person was KILLED by a MUSLIM that once visited a MOSQUE. Wake Up Sheeple!
(for real, though, why is this a constant fixture here? Jim just ban this on pattern recognition or give Alf the leave to ban this on pattern recognition, please.)
To anyone intimately aware of the behaviour of high caste men, especially Anglo-Saxons, it is the “country gentleman” who is the more dangerous and likely to do you in than the “bombastic showman.” Contrast the flamboyant Napoleon Bonaparte with General Suvorov, or even Admiral Nelson. Conservative men are prone to understatement.
That’s some impressive talk, but it hasn’t been backed up by action in decades, if not centuries. The only people your high caste Anglo-Saxons are interested in fighting against are those low class and gauche enough to consider actually doing some to save them. They have too much to lose, and they’re too invested in their self-image as calm, sophisticated, stable pillars of the community.
[*deleted for not conforming to the moderation policy*]