Shortly after the election was stolen, I predicted that Republicans would never win anything ever again, and that Trump would go to prison, soon to be followed by most of the Republican party.
But, it seems that I was running on Musk time.  If you want to know what our enemies are up to, listen to what they accuse us of. Social Justice Warriors always project.
Hat tip PJ Media:
The Atlantic’s Barton Gellman wrote breathlessly, “the ballots cast by American voters will not decide the presidency in 2024. Thousands of votes will be thrown away, or millions, to produce the required effect. The winner will be declared the loser. The loser will be certified president-elect. The prospect of this democratic collapse is not remote. People with the motive to make it happen are manufacturing the means. Given the opportunity, they will act. They are acting already.â€
“The democratic emergency is already here. We face a serious risk that American democracy as we know it will come to an end in 2024, but urgent action is not happening.â€
So, if the usual inversion applies, 2022 will not be too blatantly democracy 2020 style, but 2024 will be.
Recap. The Democrats in 2020 had the usual fraud in place to deal with the expected Trump landslide, but got a Trump Tsunami instead, so had to stop the counting, and dump in lots of hastily printed ballots at four in the morning. These additional fraudulent ballots were centrally printed in the middle of the night, so unlike the fraudulent ballots issued earlier did not have the downballot candidates filled in.
The expressions of alarm reflect concern that the usual deniable fraud is not going to suffice, and they are going to have to go about it in a more obvious fashion, and stop worrying too much about pretending that democracy is still operating. But they figure the mask will fall off in 2024. Which does not mean it will stay on in 2022 – it fell off in the early hours of 2020 November the fourth, but they hastily put it on again and announced that no one had noticed.
Considering how bad things are going, 2024 may be fun to watch if i am still alive. Fireworks may happen.
Any wild guesses who will be running against who?
Hillary vs DeSantos. GOP’s rigging the primaries now anytime it looks like a national populist seems likely to win. Hillary’s been on TV a lot lately crying about being robbed in 2016 and the decks have been cleared with the removal of the Granny Murderer of NY.
No way man. It’s Trump if he wants it. DeSantis will surely stay out of his way and hillary isn’t popular anymore with the new generation at Harvard/NY Times. It’ll be Kamala, Butt plug or Com might finally hit his monkeyshelle Obama prediction.
Hillary was never popular, and neither is Joe Biden or the Cunt but she’s very smart compared to the new generation of Dems. Big Mike Obama is possible.
I wouldn’t vote for Trump again. The gutless wonder learned nothing from 2020. He’s still letting his kike brother in law advise him and shows no signs of being willing to wield real power to reward his friend and punish his enemies.
Kike Son-In-Law*
She maybe smarted but she is really old and the new generation is salivating to put her and the rest of the old dems on sticks, roast them and eat.
Probably not literally eat them.
I thought Kushner was out with Trump. And he just told Netanyahu to fuck off. Trump seems to be distancing himself from the Israel lobby. Not that I think it matters all that much, but DeSantis is clearly taking Israel money (as are most/all Republicans). He flew over there and kissed the wall wearing a yamaka if I recall.
Israel is irrelevant. Trump’s still getting advice from Kushner last I heard. Though checking up on current news, I could be wrong.
Kushner was essentially acting as an agent of Sheldon Adelson and the Israeli nationalist lobby in the Trump administration (as most “right-wing” American Jews do), so Israel is relevant in that respect.
Yeah I’m not seeing much about Trump-Kushner in the news. Looks to me Kushner/Ivanka are trying to re-enter polite society by distancing themselves from Trump.
Israel is not relevant in any respect here, because foreign policy in general is not relevant. Trump’s failures were all domestic.
Let’s just agree for the sake of argument that Kushner was bad at operations and worse at advising. None of that mattered in the end. What mattered is that he needed an autocoup to stay in office and failed to produce one, instead riling up a bunch of powerless proles and playing straight into the enemy’s hands.
Exactly what was the “Israel lobby’s” role in that? Or in his naive appointment of a bunch of Federalist Society traitors to the bench, or in his failure to recruit any competent personnel for political offices?
So he threw the Israelis a bone with the whole Jerusalem embassy thing, and fired a few cruise missiles into Syria. BFD. Bubba Bill would have done the same.
It’s relevant in the sense that if Trump were to autocoup, going to need loyal people around him without split localities to outside interest, which Kushner clearly was not.
So if Trump is making a run at 2024 surrounding himself with the same old same old Kushners and the like, I think Red’s criticism is valid in that autocoup is just as unlikely in the 2nd term as it was in the 1st term.
split loyalties*
This is a shill meme and always has been.
Trump wasn’t surrounded by backstabbing little shitbirds because of Israel. He was surrounded by them because of the US Government and because of himself.
Stop putting words in my mouth, faggot. Trump was surrounded by people not loyal to him, Kushner being one of them.
Trump is a loser who didn’t understand the game he was playing, and our enemies ran circles around him. A second Trump term would be more of the same: a huge gift to the Left. An autocoup? Please. He’s a boomer who eats a big bowl of normalcy bias for breakfast every morning.
This is kind of a stupid wignat or fednat meme. If Kushner has an outside master its not anyone in Israel.
No. Fednats say Trump is a Zionist shill controlled by Jewish mind control rays yada yada making no distinction between Israeli nationalist jews and American secular Jews who hate Israel.
Kushner is the former (Israeli nationalist Jew not secular prog Jew) and had connections to Adelson and Netanyahu. Kushner was not controlling Trump or anything close but was just in his inner circle. That is not a Fednat shill thing to state that.
Look, the phrase “split loyalties” or more often “dual loyalties”, like “dual citizenship” is literally always used to mean Israel. You said the words, not I.
When have you ever heard the shill machines talking about people with Canadian, European, Chinese or Indian citizenship or “loyalty”? We have huge problems with the last two especially, but the people who natter on endlessly about Kushner and Israel never mention them. That’s how we know they’re shills.
Nationalist jews can be kind of annoying and tend to never shut up about their beloved Israel, but nationalist jews are not the real enemy.
I was not just referring to Kushner and Israel (Red brought him up), who in my opinion was just a minor piece of the Trump administration. The better example is Pence his own VP turned out to be not loyal when Trump needed him most. His loyalty lies with the ruling elite, not Trump.
Jim said it best. Nationalist Jews are the enemy of our enemies, who wish to destroy Israel, but they are not exactly our friends.
Alright, point taken, I’ll just drop the Israel thing.
In any event, loyalty is a two-way street. Maybe some of the war-enthusiasts wish to correct me here, but I think this idea of absolute one-way loyalty to the boss is actually peculiar to the modern merchant or managerial class, which Trump really played to the extreme as the “alpha merchant”. In more traditional hierarchies, the chief or the King may send warriors to their deaths, but he doesn’t denigrate them or throw them under the bus, he treats them as valuable (which they are) and protects them to the best of his ability. The loyalty is not equal on both sides, same as the loyalty from a husband is not the same as loyalty from a wife, but both have responsibilities.
Trump acted like everyone “underneath” him was replaceable, and the personnel he ended up with reflected that attitude. We were all giddy over the thought of him doing that with the deep-state shills, but not his own appointees. Moreover, I see no signs that he’s learned any important lessons since then – he still talks and acts like it’s all about himself – and so even if he did win in 2024 (though I doubt that he will, because Globohomo believes their own lies about him), it would end up being another own-goal for the boomercons.
My ideal 2024 would have the Republicans running a literal dog, horse, or maybe one of those circus bears, thereby calling attention to the fact that (a) a literal dumb animal would be preferable to whatever primped-up geriatric pants-shitter that Globohomo is able to dig up these days, and (b) it doesn’t matter who they run because they’re not going to be allowed to win anyway. Of course, the Republican party still wants its sweet sinecures and grift money, so that will never happen – they’ll keep up on pretending that it’s real and not scripted, even as the sinecures and donations dry up.
Yeah, I have to agree with HerbR on this. Unless I see some serious Rubicon crossing by Trump, I am not getting out to wage war on his behalf. He would have to do something that there is no coming back from. Something like ordering a blatantly unlawful execution, where there can be no forgiveness by the elite. I do not want to end up in the position of the I.VI protesters where he threw them under the bus because he did not realize what was happening and what needed to be done.
Pooch is also right about the loyalty part. He needs men who are loyal to him, or at least what he stands for, and do not have any backers in power besides him. He needs to stand by those people, and protect them, but they cannot have divided loyalties. Whether that be to Israel, the monoparty elite, China, India, Islam, or even Canada. If he is to have any hope, they need to be Trump’s men, through and through. Without loyalty, he is not going to get those men, and without them he has nothing.
I’m talking about the Cathedral, not the actual voters. Hillary barely gets mentioned in the NY Times anymore. She’s old news. They still very much love the stunning and brave of Kamala though, and likely big Mike even more.
I don’t think the Dems want Hillary, and in Presidential elections, last hurrahs have been a no-no since 1960…
Hard to predict if Trump will give 2024 a go. On one hand, his ego almost demands it. On the other, he seems to be enjoying himself making a rukus on the sidelines as an “expert observer.” Added bonus being on the sidelines is he can criticize, claim he would do better, but never have to deliver.
As for the fraud side of the ticket, who knows. If Biden is still around, he may not be able to string two coherent words together (not that it stopped it last time). Also too many behind him want him out of the way and would be an easy task to accomplish. For Kameltoe to pull it off, the fraud levels will have to be off the charts. Seems they are grooming Buttplug for the spot.
If he didn’t intend to run, would have abandoned all of the political fundraising, which is the opposite of what he’s done. I don’t know who is still sending donations in reply to the cringe emails, but obviously some people must be – and I can’t imagine what he’d want to do with the funding other than take another run at the presidency. He can’t keep it for himself, wouldn’t settle for a “lesser” political office, and I doubt he has any interest in being a “conservative Soros” and funneling the money to other people.
In the UK Farage seems to have carved out a niche as an observer who at specific moments can influence policy by threatening to create a new movement.
Boggles my mind how he’s able to attract talent into a movement with the formerly implicit and now all but explicit promise that they are not meant to win, just nudge others in the right direction. I dare say history will remember Farage, but not something you would count on others to be able to emulate.
Mr. Trump will only run if he feels he can win. That means he has to make a determination as to how much the demo-KKK-rats are capable of cheating in swing states.
Well, obviously they are capable of doing whatever it takes. To stop them, as I keep saying, will require methods similar to those used by NSDAP or Caesar.
To my surprise, the regime has followed a peace policy, perhaps because they don’t want to give a Caesar opportunity. And they will not allow a NSDAP – the NSDAP was semi tolerated because it was a left faction, like antifa.
When we get to this point, the usual path out of it is that the left gets so busy devouring us and each other, that you get a Napoleon or a Cromwell – a leftist who imposes order on the left at swordpoint, ending the left singularity, and thus the left’s momentum. But it takes a generation or so for them to lose momentum.
The right revolutionary path out of it is illustrated by Mussolini. The equivalents of antifa and BLM running wild, private citizens act to do something about it, a leader comes to the head of those private citizens, and marches on Rome. Not happening now. Could happen if the power struggle between the gerontocrats and the younger generation of Woke radicals turns hot. They burned cities to get rid of Trump, might burn cities to get rid of the gerontocrats.
At this point, anyone non left seeking power has to wait for the left to self destruct. Right now the leadership is trying the Brezhnevian stagnation path, but it is too early for them to try that. They need a Stalin or a Cromwell to quell their left first. If they keep on this path, the Soros/Kamala faction is going to get truculent, as it got truculent in Italy and Chile.
Law is over, and the power struggle is going to be within the left. Whoever is least affected by normality bias will tend to win, so the power struggle within the left will become increasingly violent – albeit most that violence is going to be manifest outwards against normies, to provide a cover for violence inwards against each other, as happened during the “mostly peaceful” protests . But, because normality bias, that power struggle may be delayed to 2024.
In Italy, that outwards violence provoked a forceful response from the citizens, in Spain from the army. Our cities are being slow boiled. If fast boiled, could provoke a reaction, as it provoked in Kenosha.
NSDAP was not a left faction. 20th century fascism was reaction, but laced with cancerous tumors of democracy—“right-wing populism”. An improvement on Communism, but not much of one, as Moldbug would say.
It was tolerated because of remnants of the ancien régime still in the judiciary and the security state of 1930s Germany.
The NDSAP was a left faction that sometimes presented itself as a right factuon.
Quite the contrary. Nazism was never in any way part of the left, Hitler just ripped off some of their memes to win elections.
We’ve been over this before…
Hitler was a socialist ergo a leftist.
Moldbug went over this a decade ago.
Leftism is like a club: you can’t just say you’re a leftist, and be one. You have to actually be accepted into the club. You have to be part of the Left, and if you’re not you are part of the Right—i.e., the set of all those competing, unjustly of course, with the Left.
Hitler was using a leftist meme (socialism) to compete with the Left because democracy.
And he was wrong, Tik did a five hour video with hundreds of citations on it. Hitler could steer right at times and he often campaigned right but he was a non marxist leftist and most of the more activist nazis were leftists.
Moldbug is not wrong.
The left is one vast alliance—proverbially, a leftist sees no enemies to the left, and no friends to the right.
The NSDAP does not fit this pattern, thus rightist (ripping off leftist memes).
https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2009/09/gentle-introduction-to-unqualified/
Hitler’s ultimate vision could best be described as Marxism for northwest europeans race onlyand established by conquest not by some bs about an international workers revolution (that was the part hitler considered a jewish scam).
But he agreed with marx on a lot of things and thus was ultimately a leftist.
Narrow focus on a single aspect of the left is a major factor in weakening social groups against entryism. The opposite, which hardens against entryism, is Jimian shill-testing, even if it does go overboard once in a while.
“The left is feminine, this is masculine, therefore it must be on the right”
“The left is anti-white, this is pro-white, therefore it must be on the right”
“The left is pro-democracy, this is anti-democracy, therefore it must be on the right”
All of these statements and all similar formulations are false.
The left has no essence. The left is social entropy, entryism, holiness spiraling, game-theoretical defection strategy. Globohomo does have certain rather specific traits, but Globohomo is not leftism, it is merely the current public beta of leftism manifested in governmental and pseudo-governmental entities.
Moldbug argued that Fascism is rightism larping as leftism. But the nature of leftism is such that larping as leftist is leftist, because the progression of social entropy does not require authentic belief, only compliance. Almost everyone on the left is larping, to some significant degree.
We’ve spent the past year, if not longer, discussing how leftists do in fact have enemies to the left, and how it is usually a leftist with enemies to the left who manages to halt the holiness spiral. One can’t characterize the entire phenomenon by “no enemies to the left” – that is simply a tactic or general guideline, not an essential characteristic.
If leftism in entropy (disorder), then rightism is extropy (order) and fascism was very much order. It was halting the holiness spiral into Communism. This is not to say fascism was still shit. A barrel of wine with a cup of sewage is still sewage.
The moment Cromwell and Stalin halted the leftism spiral and defected on those to their left to bring order, they became former leftists.
Hitler wasn’t a fascist, that’s an Antifa talking point. Hitler was a natsoc. Yarvin was wrong, TIK and Razorfist were right.
Mussolinis facism is yes not the same as National Socialism, one can argue Italian fascism was fundamentally right wing but its hard to argue National socialism was given its fundamentally very left wing end goal of a socialist utopia (but for Northwest Europeans only).
No it wasn’t.
“Less disorder” is not the same as “order”. If you drop your anchor somewhere between where the status quo is right now and where the left is trying to take it tomorrow, then all manner of left-wing craziness will appear “right-wing” to you.
National Socialism wasn’t strictly the same as Fascism, but neither of them were well-ordered systems based on sound economic principles and well-tested social technologies, just ad-hoc attempts to claw back a tiny bit of order to countries that were in total disorder. That’s an admirable goal in the abstract, but also the reason why they failed so disastrously – they not only tried to resuscitate a corpse, they tried to do it with an improvised potato battery.
National Socialism is a form of fascism.
Debatable – rather they were related and similar left wing heresies, with different deep roots but a lot of cross fertilization.
No national socialism is profoundly left wing in its ultimate outlook…
Italian Fascism is not, Italian fascism is about organizing the state in such a way to maximize its civ score but its not entirely sure how to go about it. But going about that goal correctly would mean very right wing policy choices.
Mussolini’s fascism and Nazism differ in only minor ways. Arising out of democracy, both pit the forces of popular consensus, parochial tradition, vested or corrupt interests, and military order against the Left.
Leftism promises utopia, that political action can reverse the fall…
and national socialism basically did that. Furthermore Hitler agreed on much with Marx…
Mussolini only promised to possibly revive the Roman Empire.
You must not be very familiar with Hitler. The “Third Reich” means “Third Empire” as in continuation of the previous German Empires before it.
Both Mussilini and Hitler ended up as monarchs via popular politics of the time in opposition to the left (Communism/Anglo liberalism). The individual policies in their respective party platforms are not all that relevant.
Fascism is monarchy which is existentially dependent on a popular support base.
And i would suggest you watch Tiks video on this subject since you keep obstinately insisting that national SOCIALISM is right wing.
Who is Tik? Some facefag youtuber? Why should I care what a facefag youtuber is saying? Does he think Democrats are the real racists too?
Like I said, Moldbug settled this over a decade ago. Like the Confederacy before it, Nazism was a reactionary movement in opposition to the organized and institutionalized Left of the time. If you’re debating material Moldbug wrote in Unqualified Reservations, which is the foundation text of NRx, I’m not sure what else to tell you.
If Moldbug said that, and I do not recall him saying that, he was wrong.
Nazism was certainly not reactionary. It was another left faction, and was so perceived until Nazi Germany attacked the Soviet Union.
Moldbug certainly wasn’t perfect, when he talks about brahmins and democracy he is great when he talks about solutions and non brahmin political movements or god forbid covid he was to say the least not so great.
Tik the facefag youtuber did a very very well cited debunking of dea of the idea that nazism was right wing and proved it was clearly a heretical variant of marxism.
I linked to it above. He argued Hitler was a rightist ripping off leftist memes to win support.
Perceived by who? Certainly not the Soviets and certainly not the US or Britain. So who is left to perceive them as a “left faction”.
The last major public condemnation of National Socialism by a major German politician was Von Papen’s Marburg speech, which speech the left, then as now, dismissed as “in favor of the old militarist industrialist clique”.
Nazism was perceived by the actual right in Germany as radical revolutionary left, also so perceived by big business and most of the officer class.
The Marburg speech only makes sense if the Nazis were the major left party, and Papen the leader of the major right party, and the world’s interpretation and response to the Marburg speech only makes sense if they were seen that way by everyone.
Pooch is right that Moldbug basically did say that but as you say jim he was wrong.
Moldbug indeed holds that NS was reaction, he never modified tgat view.
My 2c, he’s right, Marx does not determine who is left or right, there was a left wing before Marx and there will be one long after he’s forgoten. Nazis were the reaction of the middle class to the predations of the left, even Mises ( who had a grudge agains them on account of them trying to kidnap hiw jewish self) says so plainly.
Omnipotent Government is, AFAIC the ultimate on this.
Mises position is that Nazism was leftist, which position the Mises institute continues.
Hitler decided what NS was, he was capable of tactical pandering to monarchists and the middle classes but he was committed to eventually creating a socialist volksenmeinschaft (im on my phone and not looking up the spelling) so yeah he was a non marxist leftist.
You can argue that Goering and the SS faction were not, but the party faction was very left wing and so was Hitler.
While not entirely orthogonal, economics correlate only weekly to the right v left divide. Its high and low v middle all the way, Hitler got paid to protect the middle class and thats what he did to the best of his abilities. The middle class doesn’t care what you do with big business, even if you nationalise it or heavily regulate it they are cool. They only work there in any case, but the real test if if you hit the middle class businesses, which he never did beyond what he needed to do to win a war.
That is Marxist class analysis.
Left versus right is looters versus people with existing status, power, and assets to protect. And it is absolutely obvious that people with status, power, and assets to protect saw the nazis as a threat, and people looking for apples rolling around when applecarts get knocked over saw them as an opportunity.
Hitler was far worse for small business.
Disagree with Jim and Com, but its ok, my model of the left is different from the apple cart model hence the disagreement.
Your model of the left is invalid. If Hitler was the outraged middle class, and the communists the oppressed proletariat, who was voting for Papen and company? More people were voting for him than those horrid military industrial complex (presumably due to evil mind rays emitted by the military industrial complex🙃)
It is obvious in America today that Marxist analysis is silly. Proles vote for Trump, welfare mums, trust funders, and billionaire Ivy Leaguers vote for Biden. And it was equally obvious that Marxist class analysis was silly in the German elections of the 1930s.
I would pay to listen to Jim and Moldbug debate this topic over podcast. Moldbug would win but it would still be epic.
Jim would win…
Yarvin is terrible verbally, sounds like a stoned nerd, every third tier politician would win a 2+2=5 debate with him. Jim sound like he’d be far more articulated, but the point is verbal debates are a shonky tool beyond the obvious entertainment value.
Applecarts are a big part of leftism but not the complete picture, its promising utopia once enough applecarts have been knocked over.
Ancient world leftism generally did not promise the utopia part.
Leftism: from de Sade and Marx to Hitler and Marcuse by Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn
Come on Jim, you know well its not Marxist but de Jouvenellian.
Model is: people coordinate in coalitions big enough to get what they want but no bigger, obviously leading to two coalitions of the midlle and high with low who duke it out (if upper half vs lower half the former would alwyas win). Contra Marx, these coalitions are not stable but move depending on who is low in the society.
Case in point, the left kicking our labour from its ranks whne they found the underclass of vibrancy, single women and assorted migrants yo rely on, hence labour moving to the right now. Hence libertarianism having a bad day as no more room on the right, need to keep the coalition happy and labour is what it is. Too many other examples to mention, but the mechanims is “we need to be enough to get whay we want, but no more”. This is how you get your Thiels on our side, no need for them at the top anymore.
Maybe its “invalid” but sure as hell it ain’t Marxist.
Socialism was fundamental to Hitler’s National Socialism in a way it never really was to Mussolini hence it was leftist.
Papen was an aristocrat and obviously not too enthusiastic about giving Germany away to Hitler and his working class coalition.
Papen and his faction got the votes of near half the population. That was the mainstream of the moderate right, and Hitler the mainstream of the ever more radical left. Papen was not some kind of radical reactionary rightist, he was the equivalent of today’s cuckservatives.
Antifa/BLM factions may well duke it out in the streets during hyperinflation. If the less extreme faction of the antifa were to physically dominate the more extreme faction (because more orderly and less effeminate) we would be re-running what happened in Germany.
I agree that NS was more interventionist economically speaking than fascism, but this was due to what they wanted to do (again, ripping Mises here).
Italy just wanted to escape the Mediterranean prison of Gibraltar, Malta and Suez and thus become a truly independent naval power (notice similarities to Russian strategy), but otherwise was happy to remain in the system of economic exchange, give or take few colonies (you have to fight the British anyway, get something from them).
Germany wanted nothing less than to be fully self-sufficient economically, an impossible task given its borders. Only expansion to the east would allow it to become so, and isolate itself rom the vagaries of global markets to the degree that the US and Russia could. Given the autarchic mandate and the need to fight another war during which you woudl be starved, strict control over exports and imports was essential. Below the level of control required over big business to effect this plan, I am not aware of any major planning innitiative that touched small business. Hitler could have gotten away with far more in the ’30.
So yep, big differences there but what they wanted to do was very, very different. Again, as per Mises, Hitler was the only guy who had an actual feasible plan of getting where all German nationalists wanted to get to anyway.
My understanding anyway.
Papen the papal agent was most responsible for him coming to power though, Hitler mainly came to power because the Catholic trade unions wouldn’t support the real reactionary right.
Catholic minorities are worse than jews…
Conventional mainstream normal politics continued for quite a while after Hitler was elected, and normality bias led to it continuing for a while even after the enabling act.
Hitler came to power because the left had a majority, and Hitler the largest share of the left vote. Hitler won fair and square. The right was able to rule for a while because the Nazis and Commies were fighting in the streets. The combined right just did not have enough votes to govern. There was just no way to put together a democratically legitimate government except a coalition that included a party of the left as a major partner.
Was not perceived that way by those remnants of the ancien régime—notably in the security forces and judiciary system. When the SA had street fights with the Communists, the SA men tended to get off and the Communists get long jail sentences.
It was entirely obvious to everyone that the fascists were on right. Populist right-wingers to be sure, but right-wingers nonetheless.
This not true. None of the street fighters got long sentences until Hitler was elected, and the first people to get long sentences were his guys. Much as the security forces of our regime are indulgent when left factions today come to blows, and communists continued to murder each other in the west until very recently with everyone quietly not noticing.
The security forces, then as now, did not have the balls to deal with the lawless and violent left, and the first thing they did when they got their testicles back was lock up a bunch of nazi street fighters.
What they wanted to do was unworkable leftist utopian bullshit, the perfect socialist volksgemeinschaft or peoples community.
I think there is quite a bit of mythologization of that conflict still lingering. It was a war for geopolitical advantage, like they all are, but since it serves as the basis of the current world order it must have been some global crusade against this or for that. Nah, all parties did what they thought they had to to get what they thought reasonable to get.
One more point though, some people (maybe no one here, but many I know personally) find it hard to agree that NS was both rightwing AND that NS was a very incompetent government by German standards who got a lucky break in France. No comparison whatsoever to the WWI behemoth, and no one doubts the right-wing nature of the latter (even though actual socialism was implemented in WW1). But competency is not being right-wing, so the link is fallacious. They were incompetent right-wingers.
The National Socialists were a very competent, successful, and effective government by German standards, up to the attack on the Soviet Union, partly because Hitler was big fan of order. Unfortunately, his idea of order was socialist, and the inherent disorder and chaos of socialism bit, and bit hard when they launched their attack on Russia. Socialism is inherently leftist, and inherently disorderly, because it is an opportunity to knock over the applecarts and grab the apples of the private owners of capital.
Ok, would you consider the national socialists broadly as competent, markedly more or markedly less than the guys who led Germany into and across WWI?
In my mind there is no comparison: they nearly won the first one, and lasted 6 years by a miracle of France the second time around.
>Ok, would you consider the national socialists broadly as competent, markedly more or markedly less than the guys who led Germany into and across WWI?
>In my mind there is no comparison: they nearly won the first one, and lasted 6 years by a miracle of France the second time around.
France crumbled because their Roman Catholic officer core was wiped out in WW1 and replaced by socialist dandies who surrendered at the first shot in WW2. The British fought decently in France but their military was far too small and lead by pretty poor officers, but better than the socialist dreck running the French military. Germany had managed to save almost all their best officers from being slaughtered in the trenches in WW1 by using better tactics.
But even then the Nazis managed to fuck things up with Dunkirk. The Nazis also managed to fuck up tank production. The 80% of their tanks in the battle of France were the PanzerI or II light tank and the mark I was originally intended to be a training tank and they had only a small quanties of Mark IIs. The super tanks like the Panzer III and Panzer IV could not be produced in the quantity required by the Nazi Socialist economy.
During WW1 the Germany military took over the civilian government and implemented war socialism with predicable results: starvation and lack of production and logistics. Using war socialism in a long war is a great way to lose.
Hitler was a leftist who went after the German aristocracy. He firmly believed in Socialism with a very significant exception: it was not universally applicable to everyone, everywhere (workers of the world unite) but was applicable to the ubermensch (Germans of the world unite). He incorporated nationalism fundamentally to his leftist movement, which is why it’s called “national socialism” to delineate it from the universalist Marxist position espoused by the Russian socialists. I guess the smoke that obscures the fire here is that, after some purges, the aristocratic warriors of Prussia eventually got on board with the Nazi program, but it seems very clear that they just went along to get along.
Here’s TIK making a 4 hour case with a massive amount of sources: https://youtu.be/eCkyWBPaTC8
Here’s Razorfist making the same argument in 16 minutes in a far more concise way with fewer sources: https://youtu.be/9-SLqdhkvJo
Here’s an excellent and obscure book by Wolfgang Schivelbusch concisely comparing Hitler’s Germany, Mussolini’s Italy, and Roosevelt’s America (with references to Stalin’s Russia): https://www.amazon.com/Three-New-Deals-Reflections-Roosevelts/dp/0312427433
The vehemence of modern leftists reeeeeing anytime someone points out that “Socialism” is a part of National Socialism is, I think, the biggest red flag in this debate. If it wasn’t true, they wouldn’t care.
Hitler was a socialist and Nazism was socialism with Austrian characteristics.
@ KD re Hitler v aristocrats.
To the degree that Com’s sightseeing services shall ever be required, they shall be booked for the aristoi. Taking some on a tour pour encourager les autres in no way makes one a leftie in my eyes, it all depends on context. Its the middle that counts.
The difference between Leftism and Rightism is simply this.
Logos or Anti-Logos?
Christ or Anti-Christ?
Not seeing that. What I see is Communists getting their skulls caved in by the security forces and bodies thrown in the canal during the Spartacist uprising.
I also see Hitler attempting violent overthrow of the government and getting sentenced imprisonment for 5 years. There, he received friendly treatment from the guards, and was allowed mail from supporters and regular visits by party comrades. Including time on remand, Hitler served just over one year in prison.
It is just absurd now to claim the Nazis weren’t on the right as it was then. It is and was entirely obvious to everyone.
The response to the Beer Hall Putsch was just as lethal as the response to the Spartacist uprising.
Whereupon the left stopped attempting uprising, and focused on getting an environment safer for left action. With the result that communists got even more of a free pass than the Nazis did.
It certainly was not obvious to anyone at the time that the Nazis were on the right. Papen was the leading politician of the moderate right, and Hitler the leading politician of the less extreme left, which is how everyone reported and thought about the conflict between the partners in that fragile and tense coalition.
The idea that Hitler was on the right only started to circulate after Hitler canned Papen, rendering the mainstream right irrelevant.
The transition between these two contrary frames involves casting Papen as some kind of tiny minority extremist (military industrial complex, or aristocratic reactionary right). Which is just ridiculous. Papen was mainstream cuckservative right.
For as long as democratic politics continued, and it continued for quite a while even after Hitler was elected, and even after the enabling act, for as long as Papen, his faction, and the mainstream parties remained relevant, Hitler was the slightly less radical left, and Papen the moderate wobbly right, or the major leader of the mainstream cuckservative moderate right, and that is how everyone reported it and thought about it.
Check how Papen’s Marburg speech was reported and thought about.
When they entered coalition, the idea was that Hitler would provide leftist democratic window dressing for the right to continue to rule, that the left majority of voters would supposedly be represented, but not really. And that is what everyone thought was happening and would happen. But, of course, Papen was a cuck, and Hitler was not.
The problem was that the left had the majority of the votes, so to preserve the appearance of democracy, cuckservatives had to provide the appearance that they were represented. Papen thought he was inviting Hitler to provide the fake appearance of representation of the left, everyone thought that Hitler was there to provide the fake appearance of representation of the left majority, but of course, Hitler instead provided real representation of the left majority.
For as long as mainstream democratic politics continued, everyone saw Hitler as representing the slightly less extreme left, Papen and the rest as representing the wobbly cuckservative mainstream right. They thought Hitler was going to be the fake democratic representative of the left majority of voters. Instead they got the real representative.
The street fighting happened because the security forces were pulled off the left. Once elected, Hitler and Papen agreed that it was time to take the security force off the leash, and put the street fighters on the leash. The security forces were let off the leash, and the first thing they do is charge five Nazi street fighters with murder and the judiciary proceeds to come down on the nazi street fighters like a ton of bricks.
It did not at any time look like the security forces were giving the Nazi street fighters more freedom of action than they were giving the communists, and did not look like it even after Hitler was allowed into the government.
Repeating: So long as democratic politics was perceived as mattering, Hitler was perceived as the slightly less extreme voice of the left majority of voters, Papen the moderate wobbly cuckservative right. Check out the reporting of Hitler being allowed into government, and the reporting of Papen’s Marsburg speech.
Only obvious if you have already ruled out left-on-left violence as a possibility and therefore the only plausible explanation for violence between the National Socialists and International Socialists is that the National Socialists were actually right-wing.
Which is false. Left-on-left violence is commonplace, even today.
Hitler was extreme right and Papen attacked him from the left in that speech. Papen wasn’t even cuck right. He was centre-right and a liberal. All the politicians were liberals. What’s so complicated about that? It is exactly how the history books depict because the left wants everyone to know how Hitler rose to power. They lie about a lot but not about everything.
Hitler was extreme right. We are extreme right. Are we Nazis? How do we reconcile this? It is reconciled with the Law of Sewage.
And yet to this day, people keep reconciling the frame in which that speech was seen then, and today’s frame in which Hitler was a right winger, by casting Papen as some form of tiny minority extremist, aristocratic or military industrial complex:
For example, the official voice of the left, Wikipedia, reconciles the two contradictory frames by telling us:
Ah so sounds to me he is not protesting that the Nazis are left-wing (they weren’t), he’s correctly protesting that 1933 was a revolution, not a reaction—just as wine mixed with sewage is sewage.
Perhaps our definitions of left and right are different. My definition of the Right is a negative set, unorganized by definition. They are just not left. Rightists cannot be expected to share any consistent pattern of attributes, or to cooperate effectively on any positive project.
Papen is correctly saying, “Well I don’t like this version of the Right, smells and tastes like sewage’, and he’s right.
Papen saying that Nazism is “Marxist revolution” is protesting that the Nazis are left wing.
And when the alliance between the cuckservative right and the less extreme left was formed, the alliance between Papen and Hitler, everyone’s analysis was “don’t worry about those radical leftists. They will gladly accept a role as paper ornaments over business as usual if rewarded with a few goodies and some crumbs of power and status”. When Papen says “Marxist revolution” he is saying that it is not a crumb, but the whole cake.
And very shortly thereafter, Hitler grabbed the whole cake and Papen did not have any.
This quote stands out in which Papen pleads:
In other words, “have we defeated the left only to look like sewage?”
This quote makes no sense if the Nazis are left wing..
Papen was accusing the nazis of being similar to Marxists, which they were. Makes total sense if they were left wing and he was attacking them from the right, which they were and he was, and everyone then perceived him as doing and them as being.
The cuckservative right (Papen) allied with the less extreme left (Hitler) to put down violence in the streets and to obtain Democratic legitimacy. Having done so, Papen was shocked to find that Hitler had no intention of being a paper decoration to cover business as usual – that he intended something very similar to Marxist revolution.
Which revolution Papen called left wing, because it was, and everyone everywhere saw it as being.
This is a terrible definition of the right… and yet it still excludes Hitler.
How is he excluded? As Moldbug states it was easy to determine who was and wasn’t part of the Left at the time:
George Orwell said otherwise.
Nazis and commies were all part of one left. A faction fight arose, as it so often does, and broke those connections as it so often does. Was Trotsky’s social graph connected to Stalin’s? Well, not after 1940, but it was all one group in 1932. And, similarly, you don’t have to trace nazism and fascism very far back to find them all in the same group. Mussolini being the number one example, but most of pre Mussolini thinkers and activists of fascism and Nazism also. Nazism primarily drew on the Volkish movement, which were among those leftists Orwell ridiculed as drinking orange juice and wearing sandals.
Yes, there’s at leasr five definitions of the spectrum floating in this discussion. Is the right: all non-socialists, all those who have more to defend than to gain, all those not accepted as of the left by the left, middle class or aristocracy?
Rethorical question.
The right is those who cooperate and coordinate to push memes that protect their applecarts, and enable coordinated defense of apple carts, the left is those who cooperate and coordinate to push memes to knock over applecarts and grab those apples.
I never found Moldbug to be a particularly great authority on Nazism or WWII. I don’t know if it’s the Jewish issue or just a coincidental blind spot, but it is fairly interesting how Moldbug was almost always (correctly) obsessed with using primary sources and not the fake history written by progressives decades or centuries later… but when it came to the Nazis, he just dismissed the whole thing, saying “yeah, it happened pretty much the way everyone says it happened, no need to keep digging here, let’s move on”.
And if you do keep digging, you find that the Cathedral lied and continues to lie about the Nazis as much as it lied about the Tories and the Old South.
Can’t trust Moldbug’s sources on this one, therefore can’t trust Moldbug, because analysis primary sources were what made his analysis insightful in the first place.
What he calls rightism larping as leftism is better understood as slow boil-the-ocean leftism larping as fast immanentize-the-eschaton leftism. He offers some insight in pointing out that the Nazis were pretending to be something they were not, but fails to correctly identify what they actually were, simply accepting the popular narrative without looking too hard for contrary evidence.
And if you read the Table Talks (a primary source) its very hard to come to the conclusion Hitler was a rightist of any kind.
Honestly Com, Hitler reminds me a lot of you with your obsession with killing leftists mixed in with other unimpressive ideas.
Well to be fair Hitler did tactically side with the right to suppress the SA and Roehm (who in true leftist fashion was plotting to overthrow Hitler for insufficient leftism), and in his 1st two years even with the more free market Schadt on economic policy.
But he didn’t like it… and he went in a more leftist and radical direction as time went on.
It was Hitler’s willingness to make tactical accomodations with the right against the Marxist left and more radical Nazi (technically non Marxist but still non Marxist left) that is what confuses people.
But people get confused because they don’t look at the overall direction Hitler went and the direction Hitler said he wanted to go. Bormann Hitler’s evil spirit (hated by the more rightist Nazis like Goering and Himmler) in the later years was a thorough leftist radical nazi in the mold of Roehm. Goebbels was one as well.
You torture his words to fit your narrative. Papen does not say “Marxist revolution” he says “anti-Marxist revolution”.
But anyways, I will agree to disagree. Moldbug’s treatment over a decade ago is more than convincing, to me at least.
Papen is telling us that anti Marxist revolution is developing a suspicious resemblance to Marxist Revolution:
You, not I, torture his words by snatching two words out of context: The context of those words being
You look at his words of praise for his coalition partners, and say he is telling us they are right wing, but this speech was an attack on his coalition partners, and was perceived as an attack on his coalition partners. He accuses the Nazis of carrying out a Marxist program. Nazis are commies and commies are Nazis.
Cuckservative politician makes a deal with the radical left. Gets burned. Happens all the time.
arplan summarizes the speech as follows:
Arplan reads that speech the way I read it. “Nationalist, Catholic, and Conservative forces”. That is the right versus the left.
And they (Arplan, not Papen) illustrate Papen’s speech with a picture of Nazis promoting an anti bourgeois propaganda slogan, to show what Papen is complaining about. Those Nazis are the left going after other people’s apples.
If I am torturing Papen’s words, so are most web pages that quote them.
Back to Papen again:
Here he is calling the Nazis commies, or as near to commies as makes not much difference.
And here he is again calling them commies at considerable length
And plenty more of that stuff throughout his speech.
Nazis are commies and commies are nazis, near enough as makes no difference, and so Papen is telling us, despite larding it with buckets of honey for Hitler and his coalition partners. Amid the pile of sweet talk for Nazis and Hitler, declarations of his enthusiasm for Nazism, and loyalty to the Fuhrer, he is telling us that Nazism is terrifyingly and dangerously left wing.
And that is what the world heard him say, and that is what the world believed.
If you go through the Tik video and think that Hitler was anything but a schismatic variant of Marxist you are approaching borderline npcstatus.
Pooch, the phrase “anti-Marxist revolution” would seem to indicate some confusion on the part of poor Papen. There is no such thing as a revolution from the right. As every Moldbuggian knows, revolution is the opposite of reaction.
“I have so pointedly outlined the problems of the German Revolution and my attitude towards it because the talk of a second wave that will complete the revolution shows no sign of abating. Whoever toys so irresponsibly with such ideas should not conceal the fact that a second wave can easily be followed by a third, that those who threaten with the guillotine are most likely to end up underneath its blade. It is also unclear to where this second wave might lead. Have we gone through an anti-Marxist revolution in order to carry out a Marxist program?…
No Volk can afford a constant revolt from below if it wants to stand the test of history. Someday the movement must come to an end, someday a solid social structure must emerge, held together by an impartial judiciary and by an undisputed state authority. It cannot be formed with eternal dynamism. Germany must not become a train speeding off into the blue, with nobody knowing when it will stop. History flows by itself, it is not necessary to drive it on incessantly…”
This is the immediately recognizable tone of a conservative shouting stop to history. This is basically Edmund Burke but without the literary genius.
Of course he was confused. He was cuckservative.
But the question in dispute is whether the Hitler and company were seen as radical left of radical right. And here we have Papen, then the leader of the mainstream moderate cuckservative right, attacking them as radical left, and the entire world seeing it as dispute between moderate right and radical left.
Of fascism, it is sometimes said ‘leftist but with good aesthetics’.
But of course, one precludes the other.
I’m sorry if i step in randomly, i couldn’t be bothered to read the thread lest i get brain cancer.
As per TIK, who should stick to politics instead of luling about how race is unscientific, Hitler was obviously a socialist (and a democrat) which is obviously leftist.
As per Moldbug, whose exact words on the topic i don’t remember, but paraphrase as “sorry, hitler was one of our guys”, Hitler was completely opposed to leftism 1 (liberalism, americanism) as well as leftism 2 (communism, judeobolsjevism).
We are aligned with Hitler in this opposition, but not in Hitlers proscription of leftism 3 (nationalism, aryanism), because just like liberalism destroys liberty and communism destroys the community, leftism 3 would destroy the nations and the aryans, and we are good friends of liberty, community, nations and aryans, to the extent they are good friends of ours.
Leftism has a club you don’t get to proclaim yourself a part of without committing the required treasons, and Hitler was not part of that club, but leftism is also social entropy and defection against natural order, which NS certainly was.
Can’t we all just sit on the fence and get along?
The main disjunction i am seeing here is not so much quibbling over definitions, but the equivocation of brownshirts with antifa.
In formal terms there are obvious similarities; footsoldiers with tactic approval from their leadership to enforce implied goals. But this elides the substantial differences, which is what is important in the end.
People who hung up a swastika up in their shop window would have their shops defended by brownshirts; where as the communists, then and now, would instead be burning down their shops.
The state of becoming lost in mental labyrinths of formality, such that they lose sight of substance, is a classic failure mode of contemporary outer-party types. They frequently point out how frequently contemporary inner-party types violate ‘principles of liberal democracy’ – such as ‘freedom of speech’, ‘freedom of assembly’, ‘freedom of association’, and so on – not quite grasping that the ‘principles of liberal democracy’ were merely tactics of yesteryear’s leftists, that in latter years outlived their usefulness, once they had occupied the commanding heights.
Yes, important distinction.
Yes, and one that made the Brown shirts very popular with the average shopkeeper…The communists demanding protection money would then get badly beaten up, all in return for relatively modest contributions to the Nazi Party…Always hire the better quality thugs….
Communists (then and now as Pseudo stated) do not protect capital, only destroy it.
And the Nazis destroyed capital very effectively, with particularly socialist flare, in that the more applecarts they captured, the fewer apples they had.
-NSDAP electors came from the right, and, less importantly, from the socialist party. Not at all from DKP (Goebbels said the opposite, but Goebbels came from the left-wing part of the party).
-NSDAP deputies seats on the right side
-NSDAP make an alliance with the most other right-wing party (DNVP)
-newspapers of 1933, from left-wings newspapers to right-wing ones, considered NSDAP as a far-right party.
Only liars, ignorants, an people which agree with the absurd left-wing scheme of libertarians can without shame clame that Hitler was a leftist.
The main and eternal opposition between left and right is not about economics, but about the value of equality/inequality.
Those are facts. NSDAP was a right-wing party.
Moreover, you’ll never convert any left-wing voter (any=zero, literally) to change side by saying “hey dude, Adolf was a leftist”.
Bullshit.
Link me to a right wing newspaper that considered Hitler right wing.
There were some genuinely right wing things about Hitler in that they endorsed racial inequality and they were aligned with the DNVP (because the commies were viewed as worse) that much is true. But Hitler’s view on economics was still VERY close to that of Marxists… and Hitler was more in his heart aligned with Goebbels than Himmler and Goering (this is why Goebbels was spared the purge after Hitler spoke to him).
And I would argue that right vs left is fundamentally (this is a recent insight) about whether you endorse natural law or positive law, inequality is merely one aspect of natural law and the NSDAP only endorsed one aspect of inequality.
Liberal democracy was always a total scam from day one, and today that scam is falling apart. Normality bias is to think the scam will continue to succeed. It is failing now, and will very shortly fail a great deal worse.
Right now the leadership is trying the Brezhnevian stagnation path, but it is too early for them to try that.
After Brezhnev came Andropov, who as head of an intelligence agency knew how bad the material situation in the country was, but who was a true believer in the moribund official leftist ideology and wanted to keep it alive by making small concessions to reality.
Now I see that fucker Pompeo has, to his credit, managed to lose 35 pounds. I suppose he really thinks he’ll be able to succeed where Andropov failed.
Pompeo losing weight def means he wants to run, but he’d have to get rid of both Trump and Desantis to even have a chance in the primary so whats his plan.
> ” Could happen if the power struggle between the gerontocrats and the younger generation of Woke radicals turns hot. They burned cities to get rid of Trump, might burn cities to get rid of the gerontocrats. ”
Purely hypothetically, what is likely to trigger such wokie-vs-gerontocrat friction in the US in the near future? And even more theoretically, what events should one look out for to indicate it is happening or about to happen?
I don’t know what to look out for despite being likely to end up inside the blast area of the intraleft political fights. (No, I don’t really want to explain that one, just know that you can end up in bad areas in more ways than the geographic.)
Money and power.
The build it back better bill is an enormous pile of handouts to keep all potential trouble makers happy, and regardless of whether it gets passed or not, the tsunami of handouts is in fact getting under way.
The gerontocrats would be happy to stall it forever, but they dare not say so, and if they could say so, likely to be ignored, and the money spent anyway, bill or no bill.
But free goodies for everyone will eventually run into a shortage of physical goodies, no matter how fast you run the printing press, whereupon the temperature is going to rise.
Buying off the radicals is, to my surprise working, but the capacity to buy them off is rapidly approaching its physical limits.
The free goodies have lasted for a while, for a surprisingly long time. But the strain is starting to show. There is a lot of ruin in a nation, but I can see people finally adjusting their inflationary expectations.
I tell someone I am going to charge them way more because inflation, and they seem happy enough.
Barring something unexpected, looking very much like Trump will run in 2024 against a random massively unpopular Democrat, likely as a massive favorite even in the fake polls that massively over-sample Democrat voters, which for the Democrats to win is going to require even more obvious 4am ballot dumping fraud than in 2020.
For Trump to win, he is going to need to autocoup quickly after the election, likely with the help of the Republicans throwing out the fake electors in the fraudulent states as a bare minimum amongst many other things, and he is going to need to have that plan in place well before the election.
It’s a lot of ifs, highly improbable, and probably more likely he winds up in jail before then but even so it still is a non-zero chance he can pull it off. So the story of Trump isn’t quite over yet…
Trump lost all moral authority on J6 when he fled the field. Solders are not going to follow him into battle or an auto coup.
So you don’t think that de Santis will run? Trump’s shilling for the vaxx has seriously hurt him IMO…
I think it’s likely DeSantis will stay out of Trump’s way and only run if Trump turns it down.
I agree Trump’s vaxx shilling is stupid but I don’t know it’s hurt him that much, Trump 2024 signs are still abundant in red areas.
> it fell off in the early hours of 2020 November the fourth, but they hastily put it on again and announced that no one had noticed.
The GOP working with the Dems to put it back on always surprised me, but it seems now they were reassured looting as usual would resume and they’d get their share of the loot.
The big question is can the Democrats stop the public slide endless crime. If they can’t, they’ll be forced to rig in 2022 just avoid losing by 25% of the popular vote. NYC under Adams will be a key metric here.
The article quoted from is: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2022/01/january-6-insurrection-trump-coup-2024-election/620843/
In it the author, apparently some sort of high-ranking Ivey League academic critter, lays out in detail how Trump is endorsing GOP candidates in strategic state-level positions of battleground states that can stop the fraudulent vote from being certified (State Legislators, Governors, Secretary of States) combined with new laws being passed in those states where the State Legislatures can more easily take back their plenary power of vote certification. The ending of the article is a good summation:
So they are correctly identifying that if Trump people certify the vote in enough battleground states, all the 4am ballot dumping in the world is not going to matter because the fake counts won’t get certified. They are going to have to escalate to something else beyond just ballot dumps. Likely something extreme. Perhaps outright violence. Sounds like Trump may really get another shot at an autocoup assuming he does get his people in place in 2022.
Last time around, Trump fished in the Rubicon. Unless he shows the will and capability to cross the Rubicon, the left will apply outright violence, and outright violence will succeed. They applied outright violence last time around. Trump not only has to get his people in place, he has to get in place the capability to defend them.
Also, every Republican state will be a battleground state. If they fear ballot dumping is going to be resisted, they are going to apply it everywhere with sufficient vigor that if it goes unchallenged it will, no matter how implausibly, win that state. For 2024 they are preparing to remove the Republican party in every state at every level, if there is significant Republican resistance to them stealing the election.
I expected a major internal power struggle in the left this year about who is actually in power, leading to violence against normies to cover their violence against each other. Did not happen. But it will happen sooner or later, probably sooner. If it happens before 2024, will complicate their efforts to steal the election.
Trump doesn’t have any people. He staffed his Whitehouse with people who intentionally kept out Trump supporters. The dude has no idea how to cultivate loyalty and trust.
By people, we are referring to candidates in key races that can stop the fraud, not actual admin people in this context.
One such example:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kari_Lake
Short of having armed men in the counting booths you’re not going to stop the fraud. How many men can Kari Lake bring to the fight?
Trump couldn’t cultivate the loyalty of the people directly around him and was regularly advised to select people who hates him who went on to punish Trump’s friends while rewarding Trump’s enemies. what’s the fuck is the point of putting him into official power again?
The best thing for the country is the Dems arrest him and make a martyr out of him. The Dems seem to have concluded that Trump is magically making everyone hate them.
Don’t need to be in the counting rooms. Governors, Sec of States, and state legislatures can refuse to certify fake vote totals.
Trump was never in official power. To be in official power, Trump is going to have to cross the Rubicon this time if he gets the chance, not fish in it.
Yet they’ve consistently failed to do so. Getting one person here or there into power isn’t going to change that. Even DeSantos had to accept fraudulent votes and later cleaned the problem up by removing those people from power. Governors have the power to do things like that, but so far only DeSantos is doing so.
Official power as in, Officially in charge, but not actually in charge, AKA the Presidency. Actually in power would be Trump Tank meme with thousands of Troops following him.
It’s not one or two people here or there. Apparently there’s enough Trump “election integrity†people running in key races in enough battleground states for this senior level Ivey League think tank fucker to sound the alarm in a massive freak out Atlantic piece. They wouldn’t be doing that if they weren’t concerned about it.
To me it sounds more like they decided to take Trump out and they’re starting to come up work on excuses on why they’re going to start arresting political foes including Trump while trying to keep the fiction of Democracy alive.
They very well could arrest Trump before 2024 in order to “save democracyâ€. The I.VI committee seems to be working towards it.
In 2020 every legislature certified the phony ballots. In the key states with (R) majority, only half were willing to protest. Every state house needed wholesale replacement after 2020, but he’s only been able to go after the few worst traitors like Cheney.
There are rumblings about a GOP House naming him Speaker, but most of them backstabbed him on j6 too.
Yes he was. Being the President is having official (de jure) power. Whether that implies having actual (de facto) power is a different question.
The ship has already sailed on Trump crossing the Rubicon. That requires official power. Unless Globohomo no longer considers Trump a threat, which I won’t speculate further on, the only way he can win in 2024 is by using NSDAP-style tactics to force a fair election. He cannot use NSDAP-style tactics without an NSDAP-style following, and he is not going to get that following after fishing in the Rubicon, and certainly not by kissing up to lawyers and politicians instead of rallying warriors and priests. That dog won’t hunt.
Trust is difficult to earn and easy to break. You get one chance to cross, and Trump missed that chance. Whether it was due to the overall cluelessness and egocentricity of “alpha merchant” (my opinion) or simply having too many forces arrayed against him, doesn’t really matter anymore. Who in the world would follow him a second time, especially when all outward signs are that he hasn’t changed his strategy or overall mindset at all?
FWIW, rural Mid-Atlantica is positively aflame with Trump 2024 fever. Flags, truck trains, local rallies, and boisterous supporters gathering with cheap beer and shitty music. I know this doesn’t translate into heavy demographic swing, but it occurs to me that Trump 2024 could become an army of disaffected, heavily armed Amerikaners if the Steal is employed again. I get the same emails you refer to sometimes, and I agree it is high level cringe. But street people inhabit the corners where the alms flow free. This is an assumption, but I think the emails keep going out because money keeps coming in. As near as I can tell, those funds are building a massive electioneering network. This excites the Boomer.
Now, from our lofty and secluded position on the heights of political realism, we know that elections are fake and democracy is gay. But there are a lot of men with our inclinations but no real sense of scope that see Cthulhu but don’t understand it. So they are building boats and forging harpoons. They will inevitably fail, whether that failure is playing in a rigged game expecting the other team, the refs, the announcers, and the spectators to be fair OR they get the “high office” and nothing changes in deep sea swimming patterns. But I think it might be a very good thing to have a bunch of networks of similarly inclined people scattered all over the country. I’m pretty sure Wulfgar and I could turn youth groups into Minecraft comfort squads relatively quickly if the organization, trust, and raw talent is in place, only lacking leadership and goals. So I hope I keep getting Trump cringe, I hope rural and white Americans get their hopes way, way up. We need people to straight up abandon the democracy meme. Jim is fond of saying the grassroots don’t matter, and in our clerical oligarchy he’s right. But I am reasonably certain that if you build an army, generals will appear.
Give me just 10 minutes of interview, like with Tucker or Hannity or anyone, where Trump apologizes to his people.
Somehow, and in whatever normie code is necessary, apologizes for failing to take power, for letting those 1-6 people get fucked over, for not pardoning Assange et al, and for not shutting down the Covid thing right from the start.
Explains what he didn’t understand before, but understands now.
Because how can he not understand it now?
And to really go for broke, apologize for not telling everyone straight away that Q was fake and gay.
That would be amazing. That could change a lot. Real Hero’s Journey type stuff.
Maybe that means he can’t lead anymore, and has to symbolically subordinate himself to someone else who’s better equipped to save him. DeSantis, Tulsi, I don’t know, somebody. Fine whatever. Whatever works.
Anyone who thinks this is a stupid idea, please explain. I’m all ears.
And I’d volunteer to help you out. But I don’t see it bringing in the youth or building networks, only milking the boomercons and tapping already-existing mediocre networks. (Did Trump ever even get himself a Gab account?)
I’m not saying these aren’t good people. They’re my neighbors and I’d help them all out however I could in a pinch. They’re just politically useless, I’d no sooner try to organize a serious movement around them than I would ask them to design a new cryptocurrency. They’re good for votes, and that used to matter, but stopped mattering in January ’21.
It’s like the warfare you guys have been talking about, where a single elite unit can take out a hundred poorly-trained and poorly-armed peasants. A handful of sharp statesmen armed with megaphones can move the overton window far more effectively than a thousand angry “vote harder” tradcucks armed with failed ideologies and unfunny memes.
Yes, I’ve been watching for any sign of this. Have not seen it.
I know his ego won’t allow a full mea culpa, or maybe political realities won’t allow it, but I don’t even see it being spoken in the subtlest of code. Not even in the “mistakes were made” weasel language of the career politician. It’s just not there.
I think he honestly believes, in his own mind, that he did everything right, got screwed because of factors completely outside of his control, and that all he needs to do is get the votes in 2024 and everything will be swell. Or something much more cynical than that, but I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt. If he has a new outlook or a new strategy, he is keeping it very well-hidden.
Did Trump ever even get himself a Gab account?
Yes, but he’s never interacted with it, just spammed press quotes.
This, he foolishly thought the establishment would be willing to deal with him and rewarded his enemies and abandoned his friends.
In politics reward your friends and be totally merciless towards your enemies.
Trouble is, merchant class. Trump is a deal maker, and he trying to make a deal with people with whom no deal is possible.
A Republic operates by the elite making deals with each other, accepting compromises, and honoring those compromises. This is no longer possible, because our ruling elite is no longer agreement capable, and in the end, someone is going to rule who crushes his enemies, watches them driven before him, and rejoices in the lamentations of their women.
That is not politics, which is indeed the art of the deal. That is war. Normality is over, politics is over, and, because of normality bias, people do not yet realize that war is upon us.
The Roman Republic drifted in this state for seventeen years, and because normality bias, even Julius Caesar did not realize the Republic was over, and died of normality bias. His adoptive son did not make that error.
Politics when there is a powerful demon worshipping religion within a polity is war by other means.
From that sounds like we either get a left-wing coup or a right-wing coup. Regime change either way.
How could violence against normies cover intra left violence?
Eppstein died in his cell without any violence against normies as cover. People who had dealings with the Clintons died without any violence against normies.
Violence against normies will be -I assume- riots, burning, looting, and increasingly murder. That might work as cover, but only locally at the place where the riots are happening. I do not understand how this could be useful cover. What am I missing?
If you harm a lot of normies, and a few leftists for allegedly insufficient leftim, your violence against lefties will not cause you to be perceived as anti left.
Ah, cover to hide motive, not cover to hide the intended target with collateral damage
More specifically; the more you do and want to do violence to those evil sinner normie wreckers proves that you love leftism more than those other sketchy lukewarm leftists; so it’s perfectly fine for you to torture them to death for their insufficient leftism as well.
“How could violence against normies cover intra left violence?”
Signal: Noise.
Why would you think that? Left factions fighting each other would indicate a Cromwell or a Stalin was halting the holiness spiral against those more holy than themselves, and there has been no indication of that.
Leftists have no enemies to their left, it is the defining characteristic of a leftist. I see that alliance holding truer than ever for our present modern left.
Honor among thieves lasts for as long as the thieving is profitable. Jim, who always has one eye on the future, sees the profitability is about to expire. But our leftist friends are rather slow to catch up, and insofar they catch up, are trying very hard to ignore the writing on the wall.
I guess I am just not seeing what he sees. I still see the left, all across the united spectrum of it, raking in profits hand over fist at the expense of the peasants.
I, like Jim, am seeing more and more signs, but of course I am on the look-out for them.
However, when I for instance tune in to the Joe Rogan podcast it is like I’m on a different planet. Dude’s going on about the awesomeness of the cultural zeitgeist, awesome technology this, incomprehensibly angry Amerikaners that… Literally and metaphorically high.
I think a good argument can be made that as long as you can order anything you want on Amazon and have it arrive at your door within a week, leftists will stay on their high.
Rich cultural commentator that is surrounded by fellow rich people and can get whatever he needs is surprised that people without tens of millions of dollars are upset. He can get Ivermectin to beat covid, so what is the matter. The little people will get turned away, but he does not see that. People are having to resort to court orders or black market to get what he got, but he does not see that. CNN lied about him and he was fine afterwards, so it is not that big a deal, right? He cannot understand the perspectives of the people they successfully destroy. He is the worst of what Gen X, an already shitty generation, has to offer.
Generalizations about huge groups like generations are approximate but Gen X is broadly speaking the best generation around.
I am on the look out for it too. The only thing I can point to is the harassment of the moderate Democrat senators to vote for the radical left agenda.
I was expecting full on threat of Antifa violence against them resulting in quick capitulation. Instead they got screamed at by some browns walking around town. And they haven’t budged. Not the high energy violent pressure tactics I was expecting. Washington Post is now attacking Manchin over his business dealings so I suppose we’ll see if that results in his acquiesce.
What you see is consistent with Alf’s observation that thieving is profitable, and and does not falsify my prediction that thieving on this scale cannot continue because they are going to run out of readily stealable loot, and the left is going get stroppy about the division of the loot when the well runs dry.
‘No enemies to the left’ is a tactic that holds true as long as there are still some significant ‘enemies to the right’ (ie, people making value) around that they’d like to shake down.
Though even that can be a close thing, the whole precis of something that ‘does leftism’ is to defect on those closer at hand. Noone has killed more communists in history than communists.
(A state of affairs ripe for correction, of course.)
Right. Barring a Stalin or Cromwell, we should expect the violence to go only one way – towards those who are deemed insufficiently left and never vice-versa. Jim implied he was expecting both the former and the latter, but I could be misinterpreting what he meant.
The violence will go only one way. Violence against normies will provide a cover for violence against the insufficiently left.
Off topic: it’s official. The double jabbed have crap protection against the barely detectable Omicron.
https://newatlas.com/health-wellbeing/omicron-two-dose-vaccine-pfizer-astrazeneca-oxford-study/
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/two-dose-vaccines-induce-lower-antibodies-against-omicron-study-finds-2021-12-13/
What we will likely be seeing is the first serious wave of “a variant” being a mild flu for the purebloods, and rapid-onset-AIDS for some of the mega-jabbed. In the form, one would assume, of a combination of the classical AIDS stuff like sudden aggressive pneumonia, combined with new fancy stuff like heart and kidney failure and strokes. Plus eruption of chronic conditions and cancers which appeared prior to that to be under control.
Also we should likely expect a sudden rise in “sudden adult death syndrome” (SADS) with explanations being to do with global warming, mental health, drugs, and white supremacy.
I really hope you are wrong.
I really hope that:
a) the above will only affect up to a quarter of the jabbed and no more, and
b) that this will provide the window of opportunity to smash globohomo for at least a couple of generations duration
It is clear that the jab is having undesirable and unexpected effects on people’s immune systems – though mass deployment of a new technology for an application that it was never designed or intended for can be expected to have unexpected effects. We also have reason to expect that that immunizations repeated at short intervals are likely to have bigger effects in time, due to immune system exhaustion and overtraining.
The immune system response to the jab is abnormal, because it is looking for a virus that just is not there. Abnormal stresses tend to be damaging, and repeated abnormal stress is likely to cause critical damage. We are sailing unknown waters.
I glanced at the links above and fail to understand what you mean with “the above will only affect up to a quarter of the jabbed and no more”. But whatever “the above” precisely means, on what do you base you hope that it will only affect up to a quarter of the jabbed and no more?
“The above” was my morose predictions, not the links.
My hope is based on personal experience + splitting the difference between mainstream denial and paranoiac info + clinging to the belief that God is merciful even when we don’t deserve it.
Rightly or wrongly my gut feeling is that there’s a chance that a quarter of the jabbed get the worst effects, and the rest get effects that can be managed like any chronic b.s. as long as the system is not actively trying to kill you.
I otoh wish the clot shot was universally lethal within two years… it wont be but given that if it was it would produce a world that was leftist and npc free it would be very good if it was.
You forget that Africa isn’t really going for the shots. Wipe out 3/4 of Europe and they will do a land grab.
Not with a united remnant of redpilled whites. 100 whites can control 100000 africans without white shitlibs getting in the way. That is why im so uncompromising on the white shitlib question.
The real coup on victory march through the Covid-BLM summer of 2020 was so blatant that anyone with eyes to see has seen quite enough.
Question for historians: What examples do we have from the past, when the Left Singularity revealed in stereo the full and terrible glory of its invincibility, but then withdrew back to its castle for a while, denying that it even happened, only to come out later and finish the job?
Likewise: Tell us about when the Left Singularity got too retarded, too fast, tripped over itself and somehow lost anyway. This one’s tricky because the Khmer Rouge couldn’t read or count toward the end, but they still successfully tortured and starved Cambodia to death. Maybe Franco’s Spain? Those syndicalists were nuts, digging up nuns and stuff.
PS re. DeSantis: Florida is being fortified as an emergency backup boomerziocon redoubt, and Presidentito DeSantis is the commandant in charge of it. Trump moved his legal residency there, remember. General Marshall never left DC, and for everyone’s sake including his own, DeSantis is staying put.
PPS re. crypto (Dear @Jack): Without a safe means of communication and metacommunication we’re just so fucked. They’re censoring accounts, apps, domains, everything for this one. Even static TCPIP addresses to traceable server boxes might be too much to ask (call Cisco, done). I thought Jim was paranoid on this point twelve months ago but I was surely wrong.
Jim what do you think of the Helium network ??
I have to admit, Trump’s fall in 2020 was dispiriting to me despite my not having any skin in American politics. Now 2024 represents a significant moment in history. India is also going to elections in 2024, and the Left in India is itching to oust Modi with all the help they can get from the Cathedral.
My big hope is that, in 2024, the Cathedral is too busy and preoccupied with stealing the US Presidential Election to pay too much heed to Modi. There is too significant a Cathedral presence/agency in India, to ignore the possibilities of Modi being “Trumped”.
The positive is that, unlike in the US, there is almost no cohesion between the home-grown Leftists on the ground and the Cathedral elites in India, so the chances of a mass steal seems much less. Also India has an Election Commission, a Central authority, which oversees all elections and individual States have no say in counting or announcing results. Still anything is possible.
Trump kept the Cathedral and its Orcs busy with US politics and their best brains were deployed in the States. What they had operating in India were second stringers at best. Otherwise, we might have seen a much more serious attempt at stealing the election in 2019 itself.
With Trump gone, the eye of Sauron now falls on India and a better quality of Orc can be spared for coordinating the rigging of 2024 in India. 2024 will not be as easy as 2019. Every Dharmic Oriented Indian was rooting for Trump even though he had no skin in the game in American politics precisely for this reason even if he cannot articulate it. Trump kept Sauron and his Orcs busy at home in the States.
I am still hoping that the lack of cohesion between our homegrown Left and the Cathedral elite will prevent wholesale fraud. Obviously at booth level attempts at fraud will happen. That, along with the fact that India uses EVMs controlled by the Election Commission.
You seem to place a lot of faith on the Election commission. Is it some sort of hard to corrupt organization?
No, they are just tired old bureaucrats with the usual levels of corruption and red tape. What I’m betting on is that the cathedral elite in India are not physically capable of corrupting the electoral process. On the other hand, the homegrown Left will continue indulging in their decentralized disruptive tactics unless they get a new leader (Shehzada is too incapable of leading a new Left coalition and there are too many regional leaders with ambition to form a cohesive opposition to Modi).
I’m convinced that unless the Modi government really f**ks it up, we’ll not see a big steal. However all this is my projection based on current situation. We still have a long way to go for 2024.
Off topic. Someone previously was poasting about bribing someone to fake their vaccination. Here’s a news article from New Zealand. These people when the shill route. https://trends.gab.com/item/61b88a84f5713b9e75523511
Re. Molnupiravir. What’s going on re. the media (MSM)?
https://trends.gab.com/feed/5daf66772fea4d3ba000883b/item/61b8d4eb9abc46d00e9571ba
Been thinking a bit about the war discussions.
On recommendations of commenters here, been watching Dovahhatty’s series on Rome (fun stuff). Again and again, I see this constant low-level skirmishing going on all the time. An army invades here, another there… The Germans franks raid here, the goths raid there… etc etc, which pattern I think holds well into the medieval ages, well into the twentieth century.
For those skirmishes to go on all the time, it must have been advantageous for men to participate in them, despite the threat of death. Now, currently, I cannot imagine participating in a state army, because it’s not really a band of warriors, although it might one day be once again.
But I suppose when civilizations crash, participating in a band of warriors becomes inevitable. I guess I’m wondering what that’ll look like in the 21st century. I mean, you got your rifles, tanks, missiles, jets, drones, whatnot… Possibly nukes.
Eh I don’t even know where I’m going with this comment. I guess I’m just trying to imagine future warfare, knowing what we know about the impending fall of the west. My guess is that the parties able to hold on to warfare technology will have a massive advantage, but what if several parties do so equally? And when SHTF, do you even need stuff like jets or just some good boots defending mountain grounds?
The recent hierarchy of war is that a soldier gives you control of the ground, a small group of soldiers can take out a soldier, but groups of soldiers are vulnerable to tanks, mobile artillery, and artiller, and groups of soldiers, tanks, and artillery, are vulnerable to warthog type aircraft, which are vulnerable to fighter type aircraft.
For a while, the best answer to tanks was a bigger group of tanks, and it was back to cavalry war, which only went away for a brief period, with older officers who had been around when cavalry worked now commanding groups of tanks rather than groups of horsemen.
Recent developments are that large drones – a lot bigger than your hobby drone, but not big enough to carry a man, stealthed against radar, offer a huge advantage because they can take out tanks, groups of soildiers, artillery, etc. Anti air can stop them, stealthing is not entirely effective, but they are small and cheap, while anti air that can stop them is big and expensive. Tanks and artillery, like aircraft carriers, are rapidly becoming technologically obsolete.
So far no one is effectively using the huge advantage of drones: Seeing.
What we should have but do not yet have is that every soldier’s helmet should give him the option of seeing through a gunsight camera on his gun, which he can point without poking his head around the corner or over the parapet, and also the option of a God’s eye view of the battlefield in visible, far infrared, and any changes (moving or moved objects) showing up in side looking radar. (For side looking radar is visually unintelligible if you are just looking at the view of one instant.)
All this stuff is expensive, difficult to use, and requires high levels of coordination and cooperation, so you want a relatively small number of elite people operating it who have been trained in its use from an early age, rather than a horde of hastily conscripted ill equipped briefly trained peasants, so military technology now favors aristocratic rule and aristocratic armies.
Anti air that can stop drones cannot really stop drones that pop up, operate near the battlefield, and pop down. Existing military drones require a short airstrip, a small aircraft carrier, or need to be air launched from a plane, but observation drones should be launched by individual soldiers. A very small bomb delivered precisely on target can take out a tank, so we should be able to build vtol drones suitable for launch by an individual soldier or a jeep that can take out tanks or mobile artillery. Military drones need to become a great deal smaller, and the technology to make them a great deal smaller is feasible.
That the potential level of technology favors aristocratic armies is precisely why we do not have that nice stuff. There have been plenty of cool weapons worked on by various militaries which were shelved because the average grunt could not effectively operate them, such as airburst grenade launchers with built-in range finders, which could tell the grenade precisely which range to detonate at. Should have drastically changed infantry warfare, and the technology worked great, but they could not find soldiers who could effectively employ them.
We need aristocratic rule and warrior elites before we can develop weapons that maximize their effectiveness in combat.
Wasn’t the official reason the low effectiveness of a 20mm payload? Would make sense for lack of IQ to be the real reason, as the former objection would not prevent the adoption of air burst into IFV cannons, which IFV are meant to fight alongside infantry anyway.
On the other hand, mortars are far harder to properly use than air burst, and still are irganic to the infantry.
I think the causation is more the other way around. There are plenty of smart grunts out there, and I have met quite a few. There are plenty enough people to have at least one or two of those launchers per squad, which is still devastating to tactical norms. I expect that it was the elite nature of the theoretical wielder that made it untenable, not the weapon itself. The regime thrives off of repressing the natural elite. An aristocratic military elite is completely unacceptable to them.
That would work really well with soldiers wearing helmets that gave them a drones eye view of the battlefield.
Now that you have led me to think about it, seems to me that the tactics and weapons of Charles the Hammer were not all that favorable to the aristocratic form of organization – that the aristocratic military and and political form came first, and the weapons, equipment, tactics, and training that enabled one warrior to slaughter a horde of poorly trained poorly equipped reluctant peasants came later.
The Franks did not really have effective heavy cavalry till much later.
From what i unsterstand the Franks waged war mainly by having big scary men charge with war axes. Im no expert on this though.
Indeed- in Charles the Hammer’s time, the default tactic of warfare was the shield wall, which was perfected in Roman times as a tactic not for a warrior elite but a rigorously trained and drilled civilian army, such as the later Prussian. During late Roman times and the Dark Ages, the quality of warfare declined a bit, as the tactics stayed the same but the level of discipline and training declined.
First came a warrior elite, the ennobling of a class of unfree soldiers who were not exactly slaves and not exactly free men, (‘knight’ originally meant ‘boy’, in the sense that you would call a nigger ‘boy’) which became a lord’s corps of officers when a levy was raised (In England they were called huskarls, churls bound to a ‘house’), and then came the technology to allow a warrior elite trained since birth to be maximally effective. First, chainmail armor, helmets, and the Dane axe, because having men with long two-handed axes striking over the clash of shields helped one shield wall overcome another, and later the Norman cavalry, because it proved far more effective in breaking the shield wall.
Calvary had become very important in the eastern Roman empire as they continued to fight many threats on many fronts with fewer and fewer men. Heavy Calvary become better equipped even more effective.
The really big change was the complete collapse of the trading economy resulting in less available food. Even if you could raise a Roman size 80k army you sure the fuck couldn’t feed it in the field.
Groups like the Franks adopted heavy Calvary as they become civilized and started taking tips from the Eastern Roman empire who’s tech was still light years of ahead of everyone else in the area.
They had fewer and fewer men because they could no longer train infantry to actually fight- the switch to cavalry was about making the few fighting men they had left more mobile, so they could actually get to where there was a problem. And in the times where cavalry was prominent, the ability of a Roman army to defeat barbarian forces they would have easily manhandled two centuries earlier became questionable. Looks to me like a little bandaid over a big wound.
Cavalry had a niche and legitimate function on the late roman battlefield, but it was not the dominant force it was later under the technologically more advanced Normans. The heavy cavalry in the form we know of was invented in feudal Iran, by an aristocratic warrior elite, was adopted imperfectly by Eastern Rome, then Western Rome, and perfected by another aristocratic warrior elite.
The chief invention that allowed for the Norman mounted knight was not a form of armor, but a form of saddle which allowed the rider to withstand the force of charging into a body of men at high speed without falling off.
RE Eastern Rome, the economy was not in anything like a state of collapse in Charles the Hammer’s time. The Eastern Roman Empire’s economy was great because Marcian ended socialism… Justinian however raised taxes which hurt their economy some though (Procopius talked about that before Justinian there was complete economic freedom with the only restriction being that it was illegal to sell weapons to hostile barbarians).
Eastern Roman cavalry were small elite heavy cataphracts and lighter horse archers.
>A lot of big wigs wondering if chaff was still effective and viable in a ship’s defense role. So after months of arguing between engineers, studies and other blah-blah-blah they decided to run an exercise to actually prove it.
>It’s kind of a big deal, because it’s one of the last Red Storm Rising-style, War-at-Sea, us vs. the Reds on blue water scenarios, with plenty of jamming, countermeasures and missiles. I get sent to a Sprucan as an extra hand, to help them with getting their Seasparrow up to green-go status. The system on that can was seriously fucked though and we only got it up a few hours before the shoot. So I leave CIC and head to the helo deck to watch (something of a no-no, but they weren’t stopping me).
>I forget the exact scenario name, but it was “multiple inbound, multiple vampires” against this Sprucan I’m on and a DDG and a CG, with a radar reflecting buoy a few miles away acting as the CVN. They make their inbound run and, as per the exercise, we pop chaff, a lot of chaff and starting letting birds fly, 4 Natos and 2 RAMs.
>The CG and DDG are behind and to either side, but we’re turning while doing this to keep the Mk.95 unmasked. So right as they’re bringing their SPYs up to full power, they run right through the pretty chaff cloud we made.
>It’s the same as putting an aluminum wrapper in a microwave. There were FUCKING MASSIVE 100ft long arcs flying arcross the chaff patterns, complete with sounds to match. If you’ve ever seen “The Final Countdown” the freak storm surge is what it looked like, except about 1000X more AWESOME. Both of ships had scorch marks over their arrays when it was over.
As techne such as radar arrays continue to increase in power, they start also entering into realms of creating destructive fires in of themselves. The indiscriminate gaze of a beam of SHF, like the eye of Balor, which is normally a problem with weapon systems, becomes rather copacetic with regards to the matter of zapping one or more small drones like bugs. Like those colourful anecdotes of the 500+kw Smerch array mounted on the mig-25, which, when activated on the ground, would cause any of the unfortunate rabbits living around the airfield in front of the plane to keel over dead.
Combined Detection and Interdiction, or ‘see-die’ (an acronym i just came up with), are an elegant elaboration of developing capabilities (eg, http://www.space4peace.org/articles/radar_becomes_weapon.htm), where your DEWs and your sensors are basically the same systems in different modes. Whether it’s broadband, IR lasers, mass spectrometering particle beams (for clouds of inflatable dummies hiding the real warheads from an exoatmospheric delivery system), or more besides.
Another technique of interest is simple tube fired beam-riding projectiles. Using a 10,000 dollar missile on a 1,000 dollar drone with a shaped charge strapped to it is not a very economical trade; but using a 100 dollar round on a 1,000 dollar drone certainly is a fair trade when you’re getting protection from destruction out of the deal.
Of similar kind to this, also mentioned off-hand in other posts before, is intensification of small arms systems. Eg, helmet or weapon mounted IRSTs, displaying target trajectory leads directly on the soldier’s scope and or eyepiece, where they can just point and shoot with their 2 gauge long arms, and the proximity fused grenades take care of the rest.
And of course, all of the techniques can furthermore be also used in autonomous systems as well, which i would anticipate seeing in the coming spectacles of robot rumbles.
“so you want a relatively small number of elite people operating it who have been trained in its use from an early age”
Which runs into the problem that technology is advancing and changing the rules too fast for that.
“Which runs into the problem that technology is advancing and changing the rules too fast for that.”
Didn’t seem to bother military elites like Patton. WW2 saw very rapid improvements in tech.
Technology is stagnating, it is just our armies are stagnating worse. Start a kid at nine, send him into battle at nineteen. Technology is not changing that fast.
Coincidentally just ran into this promotional drone army video by DARPA.
I’m seeing some women. Some seasoning with non-communicative buzzwords. And as a comment points out: why are they advertising this?
But still, looks cool.
>And as a comment points out: why are they advertising this?
Because DARPA hasn’t developed anything into a practical weapon system for 20 year now. They need videos like to justify their funding.
ISIS used the same sort of drones to successfully send tiny bombs down the hatches of Syrian tanks 4 years ago. Turkey took their ques from this and built a practical and cheap military drone industry. Whatever DARPA is working is almost certainty going to end up being a boondoggle.
aha the entire point is to make it look cool.
Sick. No practice like live practice I guess.
I expect the future of war to be highly mobile and well trained teams of dragoons. Mounted infantry in a technical, able to move quickly, dismount and fight, and quickly disengage when needed. Instead of a 13 man infantry squad, you have a 15-man squad, with 5 per truck. You can mount and/ or carry heavy weapons to deal with armor, charge the drones, mount anti-drone defenses, etc. Something like a Hilux technical team as the smallest unit of organization.
It will be a return to the days of cattle raids as practice for war, and I think we should look to cultures where that sort of fighting was common for the structures that made them adept at fighting.
This got glossed over, but I think you are correct, at least generally. I base this on what happened in the Syrian civil war and a lot of other conflicts. There will be variations and it is dependant on what the state of airpower is. There may also be a lot of walking around due to geography and the need to hide from ISR.
It’s hard to predict what war will look like. All the fancy ISR and drone tech is completely reliant on global data nets, at least the way it is configured currently. The recent kerfuffle in Azerbaijan shows what is possible between low level actors with outside benefactors and very high barriers to escalating the spread of the conflict. But if the high level actors actually go to war, I predict the fancy war will last maybe a few days before 0days, satellite kills, and massive, full spectrum jamming turn a lot of cool things into bricks. But who knows.
At the local level, I think you’re going to see a massive expansion of private security as police forces either collapse or become the lackeys of whoever is the nominal warlord of a city or area. Merchants will require convoys, area and point defense, and personal protection. So too will communities that have useful, valuable, or desirable things. Community levies in some places, full time constabulary in others. I think this will kick off when the jewelry store hullabaloo currently going on in Minnesota starts to spread. MSM will attempt to keep a lid on it, but at some point it will become the new normal to see a guy like me with a goon squad at the grocery store, the hardware store, basically any place with assets that can be carried away on foot or in truck. The real fun starts when semis start getting rousted. It won’t take much highway banditry for logistics companies to start hiring security convoys, and that’s one of the few things our esteemed military can sorta kinda do, so lots of manpower and competence. Subdivisions will pool cash to build walls and hire gate guards, and the affluent will hire personal protection. It will become a status symbol. There’s a deep pool of recruits on both sides of this, too. Lots of potential bandits and spearmen. I don’t know if this necessarily escalates into pitched battles, but if trucking company A has more business than good sense, and trucking company B just happens to have a score of “Asset Protection Specialists” sitting around draining revenue…
This may sound a bit unrealistic, but a lot of the things I’ve described are business as usual in Central America. In Honduras, the government controls the cities and the gangs control the roads. Both run checkpoints, and both skim off the businesses that operate in the country. San Pedro Sula is (was?) basically controlled by the maras and Tegucigalpa was controlled by the government. The murder rates were insanely high and every cash business had at least one armed guard. The worker housing was tightly guarded, the factories were walled and patrolled, and there was a sort of detente between the big maras and the government, with most violence being happenstancial and fringe. But this was the case in ~2012, and the prior decades were rife with straight up battles between maras, paramilitaries, and border skirmishes with El Salvador. The area I was in (the campo) had intermittent grid power and security through obscurity in the mountains. Some of the pequenos told me that some time in the 1990s, paramilitaries would go village to village, round up any males with tattoos, and execute them. This was to tamp down on the maras recruiting. This kind of thing won’t happen immediately, but there’s no reason to assume that all of our (US) importation of 3rd world bodies won’t result in 3rd world problems. You Europeans will probably have a different experience, given that you surrendered your arms decades ago, but have also been importing 3rd worlders.
I think this potential reality is quite the opportunity for anyone that can coordinate and plan to offer “goods and services” for businesses and governments. The current private security business culture is hilariously pozzed, incompetent, and bloated. They don’t actually provide security. If real security risks become even a little more commonplace, there’s going to be opportunity for early movers with access to competent manpower and capability to provide actual security. This is something I’d love to get into, I’ve been discussing the broad strokes with Others and I think a lot of the pieces are here in this very blog community, including IT, personnel, management, and initial funding. If things just keep stumbling along, no real reason. But if the situation does degrade as dramatically as I’ve outlined, JimCo Security Solutions could be a very worthwhile investment…
This article outlines a lot of what you discuss above. I agree there is definitely going to be opportunities opening up in blue crime ridden areas for early movers.
https://www.opb.org/article/2021/12/01/rise-of-private-security-firm-downtown-portland/
The Turkish drones were successfully frustrated by jamming the network, whereupon the Turks gave them good AI and jam resistant point to point local connections.
Point to point links are difficult to jam, and laser point to point links damned near impossible. The future military will use point to point to prevent leakage of information and jamming. Actually the present military, those militaries that are keeping up with the times.
The turkish drones are in line of sight of their controller when up high, and the controller can and does give them general orders that they autonomously carry out in specific detail when below line of sight. The controller looks at their data, and annotates it, and they act on what they see, plus the annotations. The controller says “kill this”, and when they see what they think is “this”, they kill it.
We’ll see how adaptable Major Shanekwa is to battlefield realities. It still remains that if enough satellites get hammered, the global network is fucked. Floating new birds and repairing submarine cables are pretty simple to do, unless this had to be done under the pressure of constant interference. But that’s on the global conflict scale. I’m incredibly bearish on hitech weapons resilience. They’re designed by men with soft hands and deployed by men with empty heads, but we’ll see.
Jim, please consider my idea of launching a security company. I and others can do a lot of the on the ground work with you just being generalissimo CEO. It isn’t as cool as Blockchain stuff, but it could generate revenue and provide a legitimate means for conferences, property acquisition, and lots of stuff besides. I genuinely believe we have the brain- and manpower here, particularly if some of our vets maintain good contacts. Aiden and I have discussed some other aspects of what the company would look like, who the target clients are, and how we set initial conditions for a structure that can be reconfigured from small security company to mannerbund networks. Very general stuff, but it has to start somewhere.
I’ll throw my hat in the ring to be a legbreaker. It might not pay as well as engineering, but I am getting a sense that as a white man engineering is going to be hard to break into. I would not mind carrying a rifle for a living. I also have other skills from my service that might be of use, but that is something I can only talk about in generalities, and never in public.
I agree with you, Kunning.
I’ve personally been investigating the possibility of a private police company, a special type of security company. The state of North Carolina looks like a good prospect because it allows for private companies to field uniformed and plainclothes officers with full power to arrest and enforce on whatever property they are hired to defend. While the officers are on the private property they defend, they ARE the police. The officers can carry firearms and use cruisers with sirens. Most of the hospitals and universities already use private police in NC.
The private police company can separately also be a security company with both armed and unarmed security guards, private investigators, armored car drivers, etc. The rules require that the police officers have separate uniforms and chain of command from the security guards, and that the security guards not operate the police cruisers.
There are legal hurdles to jump through but they are not impossible. The founder(s) do not have to be police but must be “of good character” without even a class B misdemeanor. A provisional license follows, with six months ot secure the first client(s) and hire the first employee — who *must* be a police chief on staff who has been to a state police academy and been a sworn police officer for the state previously. The state attorney general’s office told me that the primary issue these companies have in start-up is that not enough police officers meet the “men of good character” standard.
There are currently only 60 private police companies in the state, with the smallest at 1 police officer and the largest at 100. With Asheville, NC currently defunding its police, and Raleigh police protesting the vaccine mandate, the market seems real.
I think this would be a good business to be in, both in the near term as things go awry, and in SHTF situations.
The term is a little different everywhere, but “private police” and “special police,” as well as “peace officer” are all the same basic thing. NC is actually pretty challenging to do this kind of thing in. There’s no single standard and each state has different requirements. Typically, if you folly VA’s DCJS rules, you’re pretty well set for lots of other places. Some states have no rules whatsoever passed state gun laws, while others make it extremely hard to operate any type of security. The mega-corp Allied Universal is the biggest entity in private security at the moment. They just absorbed G4S. They are basically a bunch of rich investors that took over Allied Barton and Universal West. It’s a complete cash grab, as they’re just consolidating by buyouts and undercutting.
A lot of groundwork needs to be laid in terms of legal, market saturation, structure, and services, but it’s actually quite amusing just how the midwits run the show. A canny enough brain trust could be very effective in this market. My angle is going after communities and churches, with the goal of leveraging their existing capital/revenue as well as manpower. Definitely more to it, but I was looking at a structure for associating and training “good guys,” not a money printing machine. Most security companies are basically the latter, and it works very well for the owners so long as they don’t ever actually have to provide real security.
You look to be an order of magnitude further ahead of me in knowledge of this, but the limited research I have done in NC tracks with everything you’ve said above.
The angle of approaching communities and churches is very clever. My business partner and I here had thought of targeting rich gated housing complexes in areas like Asheville that have voted themselves into high crime.
I confess to not having a good solution to the issue of litigation against the security agency in the event of any brew-up (discussed below). Be like Caesar’s wife, I imagine, is the answer…
The church bit also allows us to pick from Christian curchgoing men and hit them with the demon worshipper test as a preemptive shill test. It explains why we would ask it of our employees, if it is a Christian church security operation. We definitely do not want feds in our security apparatus, unless they are double agents on our side.
On a scale of 1 to mailing bitcoins to a PO box, how interesting is this proposition? I’m genuinely interested in pursuing it, and I have some of what’s required to get started with planning, but to even get to the idea of proposals and seeking capital, gallons of ink need to be spilled. I need help doing things, and more importantly I need a team that can help figure out what needs doing. I’m also not at all interested in running the show, as operations and training are what I actually do. I need business minded and capable people to help me understand the entrepreneurial side of things. No worries if no interest, but I thought I’d ask. There’s a lot more detail work that’s been discussed, but a more secure forum for exchange is required, obviously, and I can’t imagine Jim wants us cluttering up the comments with TPS reports.
>private security company
Get real, gentlemen. The system is not going to tolerate a racist authoritarian for-profit militia. The instant it gets out that it’s run and owned by weird alt-right internet super-fascists, you’re going down hard. One of your guards is eventually going to have to lay hands on vibrant young kang. This will be found to be the crime of the century. You’re all going behind bars, and all your money is going into said kang’s and his lawyers’ pockets.
I agree with you here in general, even Erik Prince’s Blackwater was kind of curtailed and he has real elite tie ins.
It is important to remember that Prince relied heavily on GOP hawk patronage. After they hung him out to dry, he sought out and envassaled himself to the gulf monarchists. As I stated elsewhere, the defense industry is lousy with stunning and brave leadership.
The names change quite often, but there are a lot of highly effective PMCs operating around the globe. They were instrumental in Sri Lanka as well as a few other “minor” conflicts in subsaharan africa and Pacifica. As indicated elsewhere, successes are not documented. They are ignored. Failures are amplified.
https://www.amazon.com/War-Dog-Fighting-Peoples-Mercenary-ebook/dp/B002IVU9E6
An old book, but a /k/lassic. I’m pretty sure certain events discussed in this book were instrumental to BAPism’s foundations.
Good point. Given the state of the world, it’s hard to argue with that being a likely outcome. :-\
Pussy. Nothing ventured, nothing gained, and the state grows weaker and less capable by the day.
Didn’t work for this young kang in Minneapolis…
https://vimeo.com/639305048
Wulfgar already pointed out the roast beef you keep in your panties, but your comment is worth responding to if only to encourage you to actually look into what “private security” actually is. Literally, Google “private security company” and check out different cities, regions, etc. There are some definite operator as fuck outfits, but they are very small and very exclusive. PSOs are 10:1 with police forces, and their pay is at or below Amazon warehouse rates. If the violent crime stats go up in a general way, a ton of these paper companies will just dissolve, but there will still be a need for personnel.
Yes, if a company is started with a bunch alt-right faggot shit laced into it, it would only end badly. But that’s what you said,that isn’t what I’m pitching. I’m talking about a legitimate, law abiding company that provides full suite security services to clients. It isn’t easy, but it isn’t impossible. New companies pop up almost constantly precisely because there’s a lot of money and only a few people that can actually deliver.
Most private security is a bunch of room-temperature IQs standing around in a uniform as a deterrent. Problem comes when real predators start running around, as they know that damn near all of the security guards are helpless. I worked security for a while, and the kind of people that work security do it because standing around is about all they are good for. Retention of anyone who is marginally competent is very difficult, and there is massive turnover. They are not going to do a fucking thing against the kind of organized banditry going on in the blue cities.
Exactly. Insurance companies demand security, and companies spend the bare minimum to fulfill that obligation. But that’s where I think the right methods and philosophy could steal a ton of market share. Providing actual security to people that actually need it. Providing good security at affordable but realistic rates. The beauty of it is you can set up a literal monarchy of armed security and competent intelligence officers using “watered down” biblical precepts, and there is no cloak and dagger, no hidden agenda. I think it is a very achievable project well within the scope of the people here. To my mind, the biggest hurdles are startup capital and personnel. You have to have good pay, no bullshit. Good pay, good gear, good training. These kinds of companies already exist, they just tend to be relatively small and single client.
And if yours isn’t the glowies are going to wonder why…
The glowies are too busy checking each other for cockbreath and/or shitdick or being triggered by microaggressions to do anything. The days of competent regime security forces are over.
Shaniqua isn’t all pervasive within the feds yet, 5-10 years from now probably but remember the onlyfeds meme… the evil geriatrics have thus far maintained an unprincipled exception for their security forces…
All of the recent fed ops have been obvious and badly done. The reason that OnlyFeds is a meme is because of how retarded they are. They are not getting comparisons to the SS or the KGB, they are mocked as unskilled, malevolent, and transparently incompetent.
Not to belabor the point, but go watch the recent CIA recruitment videos and then come here and tell me that they are competent and fearsome.
It’s not Shaniqua the Fed you have to worry about. It’s Shaniqua the cosmetologist/aspiring hip hop artist with her sail-foam, recording one of your guards having a less-than-polite interaction with one of her compatriots.
If, as you intend, you’re one of the very few organizations standing up to widespread organized banditry, people will notice. And the people who matter (“activists,” journalists, bureaucrats) are not going to like it. Why is this widespread banditry going on? Because the people who matter want it to, and they’ve put out the message that anyone taking the measures necessary to stop it is committing a serious crime and will be punished severely.
Will the powerful and connected carve out unprincipled exceptions for themselves? Maybe, maybe not. Hermes, Apple, Louis Vuitton, and co. thought they had unprincipled exceptions, but apparently they don’t. Even if there is a niche available as the defender of the powerful and connected, expect your powerful and connected clients to toss you to the wolves the second the incriminating vid hits Worldstar. The unprincipled exception, if it still exists, belongs to them, not to you.
Pussy.
Well Wulfgar, go ahead and stick your big swinging dick into this sausage grinder and see what you pull out.
If I shove my swinging dick into the sausage grinder, I will pull out my big swinging dick and you will still hear the clanking of my balls of steel.
I can’t fault your fighting spirit, Wulfgar, but this plan only squanders it. Recently you wrote:
Is applying physical force to the system’s most adored pets disengagement? It’s the opposite. It’s going up to the system, slapping it’s face, groping its girlfriend, and asking it, “What are you going to do about it?” You get points for chutzpah, no doubt, but decadent though the system is, it’s still more than capable of flattening you.
While in no way demeaning Wulfgar’s action oriented disposition, you’ve erected a strawman. I’ve elaborated in other comments how this is so. Steel sharpens steel. Your assertion regarding Worldstar issues has been addressed. Please critique further along a different axis of attack.
Again: legitimate company providing legal security services to Red region businesses and communities, not ragtag rentacops playing find-the-felony with drug addicts in urban jungles.
No matter how professional your guards are, no matter how right-wing the exurbs you plan to operate in are, the plan is to protect business’s property from rampaging Blacks and Leftists. At some point, this has to involve physical conflict with the rampaging Blacks and Leftists. At that point you become a criminal and Cthulhu swallows you whole.
Security in exurbs and rural areas are dealing with a cornucopia of rapscallions, and plenty, if not the majority, are white. More to the point, your critique is reliant on some woke ass bitch standing around with a cellphone. Consider too the diversity of response of communities to private and/or civic security. Portland businesses try to protect their property, and the Wokes write hit pieces and hold rallies in condemnation. Cor d’lane Idaho gets inundated with locals strapped up to the eyes based on a rumor of Antifags showing up, and it is celebrated. If George Floyd’s death had been responded to with shrugs and indifference by the denizens of the city and state where it happened, I don’t believe it would have escalated like it did. I also believe there was malevolent instigation by intelligence services to spiral that situation, so that’s a point in your favor. But it remains integral that the psyop network and an easily manipulated population be in place. Do you really think Amerikaners are going to cry foul when a good looking, well spoken, highly trained security specialists stops some drug addict criminal from hurting people, breaking stuff, and steals things? Honestly?
I have no idea what you’re talking about my friend, this hypothetical company would be owned and operated by registered Green Party voters such as myself and normie Democrats with a history of attending peaceful protests for social justice such as Kunning, and it would do nothing more than provide lawful and professional security for people who need to keep their communities and businesses safe.
This is good idea, obviously. Make sure that your surface proteins read “friend,” not “foe.” It still won’t be enough to save you when the video goes viral, though.
Pussy.
Yet hundreds of these companies exist, make profits, and avoid being destroyed by lawfare.
There are a lot of moving parts to any venture. Nothing worth having or doing is going to be easy, and doubly so for good men in evil times. I think this idea has merit, and I wanted to see what my brothers thought. I think you are being pessimistic, but not unnecessarily so.
I wonder how much geography and demographics play into routine enforcement interactions being spun up into cultural flashpoints. Attempting to do this in blue cities is very tricky. Pooch’s link shows that it is being done, but it also shows how the endeavor can engender powerful scrutiny. His other link, the video, shows that Portland isn’t the only place. But I’m pitching something fundamentally different. Without good research, this is just guessing, but I am interested in looking for clients in the edges of suburbs, exurbs, and rural areas, not third world hellscapes in densely populated urban areas. I would not accept clients who have neglected security and are in a rush to rectify a bad situation, but instead are looking forward to hard times and spreading lawlessness. I’m not interested in excessively monied elites fulfilling insurance requirements and rubber stamps. I am interested in faith based organizations, communities with fair to excellent social cohesion, and a desire to build “walls” before the Mongol scouts appear on the horizon, and industries or companies that aren’t playing the “diversity == strength” game. This means less easy money, higher startup and maintenance costs, and higher barrier to entry across the whole venture: clients, vendors, personnel, and methods. Based on my (arguably limited) experience of the industry, there are niches like this, but I admit it’s forward thinking in a sector that tends to be backward looking. So it is risky and complicated. But it doesn’t have to be massive, it needs to be scalable and portable. The idea is to develop a method that can be imitated. To develop an organization that puts honesty and capability before revenue. That’s a tough sell. But I think it is a worthwhile endeavor, and I think everyone here has something to contribute. If it’s a bad idea, then it deserves to be abandoned. The negative possiblity that you pointed out is real, but it isn’t a showstopper. Name any negative enforcement incident, as many as you’d like, and I bet, if we drill down to the facts, the vast majority will involve poorly paid, undertrained, insufficiently dedicated personnel making myriad mistakes while they attempt to accomplish an impossible task with no management support in a location that doesn’t need or want them. This is one of those things like snowboard or motorcross helmets; there aren’t good data because the times it works are not recorded, because the helmet worked and the adrenaline junkie walked away unscathed. Successful private security outfits almost never receive any publicity or attention outside of the industry.
Yes if you truly have a normie security company full of typical nigger tier IQ mall cops you can do that.
But the minute you try to make the company a little different… I foresee trouble.
Erik Prince who has true elite connections and a true elite warrior class background thought this way along time ago, hes not king yet anyway.
Contaminated NEET
In South Africa, private military companies outnumber the police and the military.
The police have lost respect from all sides. Niggers know that cops flee the moment the realize they’re dealing with anyone black and the average person views the cops as worthless in maintaining order and dealing with criminals based on their behavior over the last 2 years. South Africa is a adapt comparison.
Me as CEO of a legal security corp might well be suicide, both for me and that company. Connections between my CEO identity and some other identity might well come to light, because security corporations are subject to particularly intense scrutiny and compliance requirements.
What I am working on is sovereign corporations on the blockchain. Which is taking longer than I expected from being ready, even as a pre-alpha prototype proof of principle. The design work is far from finalized, and the written code does not have all its foundations laid yet, though some of them are laid.
This is preparation for a future in which security corporations, among other corporations, are sovereign. At which point incompetent, corrupt, disunited, and ineffective state security is likely to find itself bypassed by sovereign corporations and rendered irrelevant.
Your proposed business cannot be a publicly traded corporation, because it is damn near impossible these days for anyone to create a publicly traded corporation for any purpose whatsoever. It has to be privately owned by a small number of wealthy people who know each other, more or less trust each other, know bookkeeping and accounting well enough that they cannot be schmozzled by accountants or each other, and don’t have any dangerous identities or activities in the closet. Those people will choose one of their own to be CEO.
As I write in Triple Entry Accounting:
Your plan would be a whole lot more workable if sovereign corporations existed.
This is great stuff but I still have beef with a few things. Will argue some other day though, maybe if you get an accounting post up someday.
Ok, message received. Good points, too. I don’t envision a publicly traded entity, but I’m also not a business person. I’m thinking a small, private enterprise with simple rules (ala Conway’s Game of Life) for establishing a robust and moral company culture that provides real security for real people, placed, and things. From what I’ve seen, there are a lot of similar types of companies that do this for megachurch leadership and facilities, not to mention high level government facilities, but that’s a different situation.
If I was approaching you as a potential investor, what would you want to see from me in terms of things to review to make your decision? Like, the actual pitch documents and data. I’m sure this is very naive, but I’m not an entrepreneur so I would greatly appreciate any guidance.
Today, boots on the ground are often bait.
The heavy damage is done with smart bombs and “cognitive warfare” or use the indigenous against themselves.
In milspeak: “cut the head off the snake” or destroy leadership. No leader, no focus.
With regard to the future of war, the US Army War College’s Strategic Wargaming group had a summit 18 months ago that I attended. It was public. The summit was to invite various civilian and military experts to discuss how advanced artificial intelligence would change warfare. (No one said “the Chinese” but certainly no one was worried that the Afghanistan Army would be fielding SKYNET…)
The consensus among the AI experts there was very similar to what Jim has suggested elsewhere — that 20th century tank-and-plane warfare is over, that 21st century warfare will be fought by drones and that whichever side has better drones with better command-and-control over their drones will win. The analogy that was used repeatedly was naval warfare in 1939. At the time, the battleship was thought to be king, but in reality it was already obsolete because fleets of carrier aircraft would dominate war. In the same way, the current fighting force of most armies was seen as obsolete, but the obsolescence wasn’t yet being recognized by the militaries, who continued to invest poorly. Some of the AI experts thought human operators themselves would be obsolete within the decade except insofar as they were kept as a “man in the loop” for safety reasons.
I know (but am not part of) some of the wargame team at RAND, and they are considerably less techno-optimistic about future war. Their view is closer to that of Kunning, below, when he says that the fancy future will only last a few days and then it’ll be more like World War I/II fighting. RAND (which is very operations focused) figures that no one has or can afford very many smart weapons, and no one has the industrial capacity to quickly crank out many of them before the tech levels get brutally hammered by cyber attacks and so on. RAND’s focus has been on hypothetical wars between Russia and America in the Baltic region and China and America in the South China Sea; America loses in almost all of their battles. I don’t know the details of how we lose.
The Army officers I have spoken to seem to be largely in a state of despair, as they all felt the upper echelons were frittering away our last years of technological edge on gender nonsense and so on.
No one from the three groups takes the idea of any sort of civil war or insurgency in America seriously, or at least would not admit taking it seriously to me (a civilian without clearance). Almost by default, though, such folks tend to be inside the bubble, so I don’t in any way take that to mean it couldn’t happen.
Rand is inside a bubble where Shaniqua is the tech lead. They used to be smart people. They are not smart people any more, though I am impressed that they correctly assess China winning in the South China sea.
Blanket assumptions are dangerous. I’ve worked for stunning and brave companies that had actually capable and effective contractors do the real work behind the scenes. Worthy of remembering because it would be the height of stupid to assume your enemy is incompetent, be correct, and still lose because you shortchanged their capacity to become effective. Every defense contractor has gone over to the Cathedral diversity mandate. It requires looking at their subs to see who’s actually going to generate capable and useful stuff.
My only exposure to RAND has been RAND’s wargame group. It seemed like it still has some really smart guys in it… but they’re all all white men fast approaching retirement age, the sort who were playing ASL as teenagers. I was tied for youngest wargamer at the last session I attended, and I’m 46.
So perhaps I should have said that particular group of grognards correctly assessed China winning. I don’t know that the message was understood outside their department…
Exactly so.
And were they say, or even think, that countries without Shaniqua as tech lead and trannies running the officer corps might have better luck with high tech warfare, they would be out instantly.
I once knew someone rather high up at RAND, who had a reputation for being very smart. I tried to pick his brain, and he was either not all that smart or was very scared to commit thoughtcrime. If scared to commit thoughtcrime with another man over drinks and food, not able to commit thoughtcrime in a report other people will read. If he personally saw the Taliban winning, I doubt he would have dared to say it. They are allowed to see China winning because a substantial faction is hungry for war with China, and “we need to step up or we will lose” is an old play for more gibs and hawkish posturing. To admit the Taliban’s obvious victory is to admit that the Afghanis had no will to fight and die for the ‘homo.
Well, they did not take the Taliban seriously, until they got their asses handed to them and had to bravely, bravely run away. The part of the military that will side with the regime is the least likely to stand and fight. POGs and REMFs abound, along with the least effective sections of the military. That is also in a scenario where the supply lines are in constant danger and there is no front line, with a much more well-armed and capable resistance. I am as afraid of the US military as the Taliban was.
Democracy or Constitutional Republic?
In either case, the country ended on 2020 with gross election fraud. There were signs in the run-up on 2018. More signs all along the way. Cause and effect. 2020 was blatant.
Not sure what label to put on this gov. Tyranny for starters.
Materialist Clerical Oligarchy.
https://www.opindia.com/2021/12/harry-potter-jk-rowling-scotland-police-trans-women-raping-actual-women-activists-orwell/
Hilarious. The old batty feminist is getting holiness spiralled by tranny/globohomo.
Hahahahaha, get some masala chai, some kurkure and enjoy the show. Let’s not interfere in the proceedings. If only our seculars would get into similar trouble with Abrahamism 3.0
CV19 Shot—-
When I’m out in public, I’ll red pill on the shots. I get the most success with blacks. My reasoning is they are the most likely to spread the information and rebel. I’ll mention Marvin Hagler, DMX, or Tuskegee.
Yesterday, ran into an uppity black that claimed no one has died of the CV19 shot. So I mentioned CDC VAERS. This black was a hard case though. Couldn’t break through the ice.
VAERS: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html
12,313 deaths were reported 21 Jul 2021. The very next day it was in the 6K range. Why the change? Today the count is 10,128.
These deaths are being reported, but some are being deleted. CDC allows some reporting, but will not validate the claim. The shot is “safe” but it kills.
Seems counterproductive. If you are effective in turning your Black Friends(tm) into disciples and prophets against the vaxxx, who do you think is going to hear and heed their counsel? Morons.
In an ideal world, every black would have lined up for these poison jabs and lied or threatened violence to get extra doses. Instead, we face a future where the lowest IQ blacks skip the shots (no job to lose), and a majority of Whites become dead or infertile, due to this one simple trick using their high trust nature against them.
And seriously, “”Tuskegee””?? Just stop. Some nigger confessed to killing a 14yr old White boy “because Tuskegee”. https://vdare.com/posts/black-man-accused-of-stabbing-ryan-rogers-to-death-says-he-did-it-because-of-the-tuskegee-libel
Their resistance is a layer of protection for whites. They’re here, I will make use of them.
“In an ideal world, every black would have lined up for these poison jabs and lied or threatened violence to get extra doses. Instead, we face a future where the lowest IQ blacks skip the shots (no job to lose), and a majority of Whites become dead or infertile, due to this one simple trick using their high trust nature against them.”
Fuck the NPCs. Its too bad the jab won’t be universally and quickly lethal.
The Japanese are by nature even higher trust but they learned in WWII the hard way not to be complete morons about it.
Japs are high trust with each other, definitely not trusting round eye jabjuice.
They used to be high trust with each other, not any more, famous for it. Which gave them a huge advantage, because much business is made a lot easier if you can trust your counterparty. Which advantage has now largely evaporated.
I mean seriously these kind of expressions of sympathy for white leftists sickens me, I will never understand it. I can feel some sympathy for people who didn’t want to lose good jobs and didn’t have time enough to arrange a fake… but people who did it merely because they trusted the lying fucking cathedral health authorities are enemies and ought to be shoved into fucking gas chambers. These people are enemies.
And yes white leftists are the real enemies, not fucking blacks. Without white leftists nigs are just minor pests. The problem is the vaxx will in the vast majority of cases just cause them infertility (though that is perhaps good if there is a genetic basis to leftism) and expensive health problems, if it quickly killed everyone it would be great.
> people who did it merely because they trusted the lying fucking cathedral health authorities are enemies
The clotshots are a casual thing to the people who take them, aren’t they, though. There is an assymetry in which the purebloods are willing to kill or be martyred, but to the muds this is just one more stupid thing in a long parade of stupid things, like trannies or female suffrage.
Lefties may be useful. If I can get them to be vocal about their vaxx injuries then try to smash the system. They’re a battering ram just waiting for use.
Besides, some lefty chicks are pretty hot. All they need is an alpha to bring them around. Wouldn’t want to waist what can be used.
“Besides, some lefty chicks are pretty hot.”
Unless they have a very high regime position they wouldn’t be killed, sterilized sex slaves. Sold at auction…
This is probably the most ridiculous part. Sterilizing women? Really?
When even the commies think you are being ridiculous, you know you have gone too far, Com. No one is going to go along with this, especially the men tasked with completing it. Anyone who would go along with it is too damaged to be worth keeping–yourself included. If you think you are going to breed out defection from the human gene pool, you are a fool. Doubly a fool if you think you will do it in one generation.
If hes a shill him opposing me is a good sign.
No, it means that his ability to bullshit himself and others was overcome by the stupidity of the idea. What are women good for? Making babies. What is your solution to the problem of badly behaved women? Stop them from making babies. It is a stunning stupid solution to a problem that has a much simpler and easier solution that will provide better results.
sterilized sex slaves
The whole point of rape and pillage is owning wombs, not turning them into plastic fuckbots that need to be fed and watered.
Com’s comments are all over board, occasionally landing near the bulls eye. I try to ignore the really retard-tier ones though.
This is–by far–his worst take on the port-restoration situation. It is almost as if someone distilled the Platonic essence of “bad idea” into a drug, shot Cominator up with it, and then asked him how to solve the problem of feral women.
Eugenic quality selection has to be enforced on both sexes, lefty chicks can be used as rape slaves but absolutely should be denied reproduction…
>Eugenic quality selection has to be enforced on both sexes
That excludes you bro.
Smart girls are more likely to be “leftist” (if you insist on taking the political opinions of women seriously), intelligence is more influenced by the mother than the father, ergo sterilizing leftist chicks would be dysgenic, probably massively dysgenic.
Whatever…
Society is not going to benefit from letting female preference and a progressive gay social religion all but wipe out spergy types imho though.
Women massively cluster around average intelligence, women in the two SDs above normal iq tend to be batshit bpd types.
Like smart males, get more education, and are more vulnerable to understanding the nonsense that they are taught.
Unlike smart males, schools award massive status to the alarmingly few smart females that they find. Because massive status award, they have inflated demands for male status in their sexual partners, which demands are seldom satisfied. This is what drives them crazy, as, for example, female lawyers.
>intelligence is more influenced by the mother
Yes
>Smart girls are more likely to be “leftistâ€
No
That sword cuts both ways of course; just as taking a girl from a good family as your wife be salutary for your kin, so would taking a girl from a not so good family be even worse for them.
Pseudo-Chrysostom I consider you to be a genius…
What is your opinion on this matter in detail…
Yes, but BPD is really FWD (Feral Woman Disorder). If owned, BPD suddenly and inexplicably disappears. But when the state is enforcing female sexual choice, very hard for a woman that’s above 130 IQ to get owned because their shit tests get too complicated for average men to pass.
In a patriarchy, their fathers would arrange a marriage with a man in some upper-class high-IQ profession, and that man would have no trouble passing her shit tests. No more BPD.
The shit tests may have well been impossible to pass but her boyfriend (later husband) was a pretty alpha guy but she still got crazier as time went on before going way down the drain on hard drugs (now dead). Strangely when they got divorced instead of raping him on it she basically contested nothing and admitted it was all her fault.
Its sad, probably the one chick I knew who was genuinely funny. She was truly wired differently than a normal chick in some ways even if Alpha seeking AWALT software was there.
Genuinely funny women require a level of female IQ that is rare. The 2 genuinely funny women I’ve dated were Jewish or part-Jewish. I’ve heard that the rare really smart women tend to be Jewish but I’m not sure how true that is.
My woman has a great sense of humor. She contests it is even better than mine, and although mistaken, it is close.
I’ve seen that first hand. A close friend’s sister who’s about 15 IQ points below me went on to get her PHD in material science. She got a freeride all the way to the top. Her standards got so high that only something above a PHD could command her attention, but she’s unfortunately a plain jane. She’s a bitter woman who’s starting to collect cats in her early 30s now. No prospects of ever marrying.
@com
There is a lot of minutae out there that i am sanguinely agnostic about.
For example, if i am throwing a party at the broadstreet hotel, of course it is relevant for me to concern myself with the seating arrangements in the reception hall. Yet, it would be rather nonsensical for me to take my seating arrangements for my party guests at the reception hall in the broadstreet hotel, and then proclaim this to be applied in all buildings across the grand soviet, wherenever people may happen to be sitting down.
But then, why not? Have i not exercised prudential judgement in accordance with the perennial order of creation here? Why should my solution in this matter not be applied universally?
Because there are details that are different? So then we have arrived at a further perennial principle of creation: that any given telos will to a given extent unfold itself in particular ways in a particular context; that particular ways in a particular context are necessary in order to be participating in that same telos, instead of an other one.
That furthermore, in such cases where one is less familiar – or indeed wholly unacquainted – with the particulars of a particular context, then there is less possibility of a good decision even if they tried; that, at the limit, *the very attempt to render such a judgement would only inevitably produce something calumnious*, no matter how one turned it in their minds, whichever considerations they could come up with they might decide upon.
Like a steering linkage that can only shift the wheel in 30 degree segments, an accelerator and brakes that can only go zero or full throttle, it would be simply impossible to use this to drive a car through a winding road at speed.
Men who want to take more indirect or more direct means of discouraging the reproductive fitness of character traits more given towards leftism are both men i can work with (and indeed it must be granted that there is such a thing; that the make-up of character informs behavior; that the matters of such make-up are broadly heritable; and that this is not limited to just males of the species). Or more broadly, ideosocial milieus i am comfortable adapting in and towards The Good; because of course, all preconceived notii are inevitably interpolated with regards to the ineluctable demands of praxii (‘true so-and-so, properly understood…’).
This failure to understand women is why you have trouble dealing with them. You can cure a woman of leftism by fucking sense into her. You do not need to eugenically filter women by leftism, because you have the DNA they need to become good rightist girls. You just have to pump it into them.
If I decide that a woman’s opinion is important and relevant, I will tell her what her opinion of that now is. Then, having done so, I will resume not caring what she thinks. If she is very smart, I will rely on her good sense a little more than I otherwise would, and allow her to consult on an issue, given that I know she has good priors. Otherwise, why are you trying to get into a woman’s mind? The only useful way to get into a girl’s head is through her mouth, into her throat.
I’m not trying to be offensive here Wulfgar but when you last spoke about it you claimed to have none of that kind of experience at all…
Hmm Alf, may I remind you of the moment that we agreed that I’m the funniest in general, but you’re the best at making creative, theatrical jokes?
babe pls 😂
So alf are you faking being your girlfriend or is someone else faking being your girlfriend.
I assure you com she is one hundred percent real.
I’m not saying you have no girlfriend I’m saying you have no girlfriend who decided to post here under the name bigtitties1994…
your disbelief is only making the situation funnier 😂
tits or gtfo
How tender and loving is alf really, miss BT? Us enquiring minds in this den of thieves desire to know.
Well, except for the occasional farts on my face and the fact that he never wants to tickle my arms he sure is a loving boyfriend and father.
Arqi there are no women on the internet, tits or GTFO.
â¤ï¸
No, I have no experience in fucking it out of them, but I have used my sheer force of personality to push women right. Friends and coworkers that are supposedly leftist start agreeing with me on right-wing positions because I have the strongest personality around. I am not telling you I made them vote Trump or anything that extreme, but I can get away with blatant, public heresies against progressivism because I am more impressive than the leftoids.
Given that experience, other successes with modifying behavior and opinions, and the testimony of Aidan and Alf, I can say that I am right and you are not. Women follow the leader. Hell, even most men do, too. You, when you realized your spergness, embraced it and leaned all in on mastering the power of autism. I went the other way, and studied how to communicate and influence people. Once you start pushing on people’s minds and you see how easily they bend to your will, you cannot ever take them that seriously ever again. It is not something you cannot learn, I would think. You would probably have as much success as I did with opinions as strong as yours are. Once you experience the power to shape people in your image the way I have, your perspective will change. There is no teacher like experience.
“No, I have no experience in fucking it out of them”
Well Wulfgar I mean this would make you a lot less experienced then even me the uber sperg whoremonger (god knows why if you’re plausibly dangerous and violent they should be tripping over themselves to spread their legs for you).
And yes I’ve fucked non-whores as well but its a fucking horrible hassle nowadays…
You really can’t change a woman’s views with occasional casual banging even as the gigachad you have to go through the trouble of owning her long term… its not like she’ll instantly want to see you shot commies the second your dick goes in her.
BTW recent events in Chile IMHO prove that if you are not part of the Final Solution (to leftism) you are part of the problem.
You have more experience with women, yes. We have precisely the same amount of experience fucking women we actually own. That is my fault for being an excessively holy shithead when I was surrounded by college girls. There were a few offers, and I was just being a fucking idiot instead of taking them up on it. You have not started a family like Alf, or on the way there like Aidan. I will take shit from them, but you do not get to get uppity with me.
There is no final solution to leftism. The idea that there is is so absurd as to be unbelievable. That you would even suggest such a thing means that there is some massive gap in your understanding of the situation.
I’m not getting uppity with you, I’m just pointing out that you don’t know what you’re talking about here exactly either.
Well I do know a little bit about what Wulfgar is talking about, and he is on the ball.
And btw you may say its a failed shit test or pussy whipping or whatever but I’ve seen it go the other way and guys end up adopting the politics of the girl they are fucking rather than the other way around, they don’t always dump the guy right away or ever either.
Its also happened historically… We’re not a fan of the American Revolutionaries but Benedict Arnold (who was considered pretty alpha) married some Loyalist Pussy before becoming a Loyalist himself.
Female opinions are always a shit test. Are you as alpha as the guys who speak for Uncle Sam the Big Pimp, because Uncle Sam the Big Pimp has cops, tanks, and helicopter gunships, and you don’t.
To which a pretty good answer is that they may be backed by Uncle Sam the Big Pimp, but you are backed by God.
At the time of Benedict Arnold’s betrayal, the British had clear and overwhelming military supremacy, but were unable to turn that military supremacy into political power, due to treason within by the whigs – much the same problem as US troops had in Vietnam. The primitive female alpha detection algorithm could see the military supremacy, but could not see the treason within turning it into weakness. And it would have been hard for Benedict Arnold to tell his wife that he had God backing him, because the revolution was already postchristian, while the guys exercising and daily demonstrating military supremacy had a clear and genuine belief that they were fighting for a monarch whose rule was the will of God.
I have gotten women to change their opinions based on my peer pressure alone. Once you do that, whether or not you are fucking them, you will appreciate how women form their opinions. It is more like a software install than anything in their firmware. Whoever has the most dominant frame nearby is where women get their attitudes.
As Jim says, if a woman is uncertain whether on not you are more dominant than the alternative, she will test you. If you pass the test, she retains your software. If you fail, she installs the competing software and start looking for ways to get captured by them. A woman’s opinions are like her name. If you make her take yours, she carries her man’s name. If you take hers, then she still carries a man’s name, but it is her father’s instead. Same with opinions. A woman always has a man’s opinions, so be the one that gave them to her.
Most crazy chicks are just crazy on account of being unowned.
There are real crazy chicks, and usually it is a result of a breakdown in the shit testing instinct. Not worth trying to fix, but not hard to screen for.
Wulfgar, you should go crush some pussy unless sincere religious convictions prevent you from doing so. It is good experience for when you have a girl to yourself. Just don’t fuck too much, because going down to one girl after a long career of womanizing can be rather painful, take it from me.
That is the plan, but I am living in a desert where I am right now. Working on changing that, but I have not seen a decent unowned woman in days, and have not been in a position to make a move in longer. I might just try my luck with gym game, since that is a drive from where I live and there are actual decent girls there. I am still irritated I was such a dumbass during college, but nearly all of the girls I met there were either taken or were not taken for good reason. It was pretty slim pickings in a STEM degree track.
Gym game is great. Remember single women work out for 1 reason: To look good in order to attract the attention of alpha males.
Simply, introduce yourself or find some other reason to briefly acquaint yourself and judge her reaction. It will be immediately obvious if she is interested. If she is, chat a little, then end the conversation by saying you have to get back to your workout but you will text her some time and get her number. Then it’s just standard game after that.
I’ve pulled 2 chicks from the gym and it was great. Wish I did more gym game when I was single but I was too much of a beta bitch. If I was single, it’d probably be main mode of pulling (since I’m a gym rat).
“nearly all of the girls I met there were either taken or were not taken for good reason. It was pretty slim pickings in a STEM degree track.”
Maybe I’ve acquired some fucked up taste, but plain nerdy girls, especially of the STEM type, really get me going.
You might be underestimating just how slim the pickings were. I don’t know where Wulfgar went, or when, but we are possibly talking about ratios of 20:1. Adjust for the odds of them being white (or white enough) and not fat, and the fact that 50 other guys are competing for the same mediocre pussy, and it’s got to be almost as demoralizing as being a Twitter simp.
But what I don’t get about Wulfgar’s excuse is why he didn’t just look in the other faculties. STEM major or not, they still force you to take liberal arts classes. You pick the most obviously inane but not overtly feminist one, like English Lit. Or you go all in on the Women’s Studies chicks, but that requires bigger, brassier balls that the average college boy does not possess. I certainly didn’t.
I know exactly what you mean about the plain nerdy girls – at least I think I do – but they’re more easily found in conventions, gamer groups, office parties, book clubs, etc. University is always whore school for women, even STEM. High school nerd cliques like the A/V club or chess club (back when those still existed) might have fared better, still a poor ratio but fewer total dicks on cockblock duty.
I was being a shithead, but it was not just me. The quality of girls I met were terrible, and by the time it came to start expanding out into the humanities classes to fulfill my degree requirements, covid panic had moved classes online. And by not taken for a reason, I do not mean plain looking, I mean overweight, really crazy, or a combination of the two. I showed up in classes after most people had paired off in earlier semesters, and the single girls were single for a reason. Talking about their Tinder conquests like they were an achievement, false rape accusations, and just a generally bitchy attitude about them. After a couple incidents I just gave up on it and decided to wait until I was done with school.
With regards to gym game, all the girls I picked up at the gym made it obvious in some way beforehand, though I no longer go after the ones that don’t. I never banged any girls who weren’t staring me down, showing off in front of me, or asking me to spot them on squats. The gym gives women a good chance to see how dominant and masculine you are relative to the competition without you needing to directly amog them, and gives the women many good excuses for putting themselves in your vicinity.
Would not recommend cold approaching. Just walk around and do your sets with good body language while ignoring them until they make it quite clear they no longer wish to be ignored. I’ve had great success by calling them out in a cheeky way like “excuse me, that’s very distracting, could you move to the side a bit?”, but just asking them about the exercise they’re doing as if you’re genuinely curious works well too.
“That is the plan, but I am living in a desert where I am right now. Working on changing that, but I have not seen a decent unowned woman in days”
I think you should get it out of your system, if no other option fuck a stripper.
Good call on gym game. Any other suggestions or lessons, other than the basics?
I am not fucking hookers or strippers, Com.
Com, you need to start fucking regular women again. Failure mode sex isn’t good solution long term.
Looks and age count for a lot less than you might think. Alpha is what primarily matters. But it is easier to fake alpha when you have sufficient funds to spend quite a lot of time and money faking it. The Cominator has quite a lot of time and money.
Albeit if you are morbidly obese, nothing is going to work. Age and looks count for far less than males are apt to think, but there is a limit.
The common recommendation is to be someone in the band, and I see that working great for other people, but someone has to hire the band, and he can make sure that he demonstrates he is more alpha than any of his mere hirelings.
And then of course, there are motorcycles, combined with a real or faked capability for violence, but I gave up on motorcycles a long time ago after damn near killing myself on one. Adequate motorcycle skills are a significant investment, though not as large an investment as adequate musical skills.
Jim that is basically who gets laid in clownworld now
1) Plausibly violent bikers (I would get killed)
2) Musicians (maybe I could do that but never had much aptitude)
and other than that drug dealers and celebrities. I suppose music is the way to go… even if you have to spend 16 hours a day for 100 days learning an instrument…
You mean mass euthanasia?
I still think 2022 is going to be massively rigged, don’t know why they sacrificed Virginia but the old senile fuck is running his trap again.
https://goodwordnews.com/joe-biden-predicts-2022-victory-at-democrats-christmas-party-while-ignoring-waukesha-survivors/
Rigged as far as the Senate goes anyway, I’m more skeptical they can rig most of the house races…
The thing to watch is the Trump endorsements. Trump has endorsed some incredibly based people in select battleground states that can potentially act to not certify the fraud in the Presidential election of 2024. It’ll be interesting to see if any of them can win or if they themselves get frauded out. If they do, 2024 is in play for Trump. As long as the Republicans get 1 of the House or the Senate, they can potentially object to a fraudulent count of electoral votes that way as well.
The list is here:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trumps-2022-endorsements-are-earlier-bolder-and-more-dangerous-than-when-he-was-president/
Trump absolutely sucks at picking people, it was always his biggest weakness.
Disagree. I think he has real skill at collecting talent when he has unfettered access to good candidate pools, as well as a free hand to hire and fire. When he was constrained by party and process, then he failed. Just my opinion, but his campaign team was excellent and his regime team was 75% terrible.
Maybe it’s the talent pool. Or maybe “personnel” can’t be defined as a blanket skill. One’s ability to vet and hire good personnel depends on the specific area of expertise.
Trump is obviously very good at hiring for sales and marketing positions, and probably also some traditional executive positions, especially those around managing money. The usual merchant stuff.
He’s shown himself to be no good at all at recruiting warriors or priests, because merchants generally have no need for them (not within their organizations, anyway). and don’t understand how they think or operate Just look at the lawyers he kept running through – every single one of them either actively working against him or just plain nuts. His choice in warriors wasn’t much better – Flynn would have been a good choice if Trump had actually protected him, but Mattis, McMaster… it was 3 years into his presidency that he finally came up with the bright idea of taking his message directly to the troops, but never tried to convert the passive support from that into anything active.
Scott Adams really believed that Trump would find it relatively easy to adapt his corporate experience to the domain of government – which we know is the domain of warriors and priests. And Scott Adams has shown himself to be wrong on just about everything. Although I didn’t really understand it back then, it’s no surprise to me today that merchant skills don’t easily convert to statesmanship skills. And therefore no surprise that he managed to pull together a great campaign (merchant) team but an atrocious legal/administrative/security (priest/warrior) team.
Yes, the pool was shallow, but that’s because he went diving in the kiddie pool. There were plenty of people out there who could have provided the muscle he needed, but he wanted to “make deals”. And as for the press, he probably could have just bought the Washington Post from Bezos (maybe with a little “encouragement” for Bezos to sell it), fired all the staff and hired a bunch of us to write pro-Trump propaganda. Yeah, it wouldn’t have been nearly as fun as watching him publicly shit on CNN and the official press in general, but it would have been a lot more efficient.
He just doesn’t know how to be anything other than a merchant. I thought he’d learn, out of necessity – many of us thought that – but it never happened.
The Trump endorsements are all over the place ranging from incredibly based Stop the Steal type candidates to dumb GOP shills like Rubio and Tim Scott. Not exactly sure if that is by design or what.
Trump only picks people he thinks are going to win.
Well it could be a good sign he’s actually picking some that are not Con Inc. shills that can win.
Dear God, please deliver us from the normie memes.
“based and redpilled”
“stop the steal”
“battleground states”
I think Jim must understand because he referred to it as the “end of the pretense of democracy” and not the “end of democracy” – as in, democracy already ended a long time ago and the regime is just getting ready to stop pretending.
But the faggy demotist memes that always get spammed whenever he makes a post about elections only serve to make us all look like children. When prog elites read about Mr. 1-in-30, General Butt Naked, female rape fantasies and adrenarche, they become confused and terrified. When they read these boomerbait democracy-is-still-totally-real-I-just-know-it memes, they have themselves a deep and hearty chuckle and take another swig of Cognac.
Please, stop bringing in memes from Twitter and Breitbart, or wherever this stuff is coming from. It’s like carrying a McDonald’s bag into the French Laundry.
I can’t help but notice all of your comments have a very faggity and long-winded feminine argumentative style to them.
Would you like HerbR to be antagonistic?
Jimian shibboleths have memetic sovereignty while normie shibboleths do not. The former cause terror amongst our enemies because they do not operate within Progressive constraints, while the latter demonstrate ideological submission.
The normie meme is the horse thinking to himself if he trots just a few more steps he will get to eat the meal dangling in front of him, just as the normie believes that if he wins just one more election, appoints one more judge, or appoints one more congressman, he will be left alone. According to the normie, mass-abortion is caused by Roe and the Supreme Court, while according to NRx, mass-abortion is caused by feral women being emancipated. Normie memes are blue/purple pill memes, and Jimian memes are red/white pill memes. The former exist only as a means of distracting and confusing the Proles. Using normie memes make their users appear of lower extraction, and while Progressives are not afraid of uppity Proles, they are afraid of subversive elites.
I don’t find HerbR’s comments to add all that much value. He’s long winded and mostly wrong and the few things he’s right about were written by Moldbug over a decade ago.
I don’t disagree about memetic sovereignty. I have been an avid reader of Jimian memes for years. What normie meme am I using? My use of the word “based”?
“based and redpilled†(regarding politicians who are debased)
“stop the stealâ€
“battleground statesâ€
These memes all assume that voting and elections matter.
It is not who votes that counts, it is [the elite] who counts the votes. 2020 demonstrated that there is no effective elite in the United States who will back serious opposition towards the regime at the federal level, thus there is no reason to expect a nonexistent elite to appear in 2024. The game is over at the federal level, and will most likely be over at the state level if significant executive decisions are not made by local political machines willing to break rules.
I don’t see “stop the steal” being used as a meme in Pooch’s original comment. I see him calling certain candidates “Stop the Steal type candidates”, which is a description, the way one might call other candidates “Build Back Better type candidates”. Those candidates may or may not be “incredibly based” (probably not) but that is an error of judgement, not bad meme usage.
Sans a military coup, they are the only things that matter for orchestrating regime change. There is just no other way to do it in the present system.
It’s not who votes, it’s who counts the votes and it appears Trump is attempting to put Trump people in place in 2022 to count the votes in 2024. I’m not overly optimistic, but there’s at least a non-zero chance of success, even if it’s infinitesimally small. The freakout by the journalist in the article linked above in Jim’s post would indicate they are concerned about it.
I’m not trying to be blackpilled or whitepilled, just clearpilled about the situation, nothing more.
Yes likely error in judgement.
I’m “mostly wrong”, hm? Care to provide a few examples?
I haven’t accused you of being a shill, Pooch. If I didn’t think you understood the Jimian memes then I wouldn’t bother prodding you to drop the Twitter memes.
But you’re like this old friend I had in college who would ask for advice, listen patiently, repeat it back in his own words demonstrating obvious understanding in the moment, and then be right back to the old habits within a couple of days. You show that you get things (i.e. it’s who counts the votes) but almost immediately go back to posting with the theme that democracy is real, voting still matters, we can still totally win this thing if the elections go our way.
Yes, I’m guilty of being long-winded a lot of the time.I don’t bore people with monologues at BBQs, but this is basically a dialectic space. If you want short punchy sound bites stripped of all meaningful context then that’s what the social networks are for.
What’s wrong with “based”?
That the people to whom he applies the word are not based, but debased.
It is an excellent word, used appropriately. Which it frequently is not.
@HerbR
I think it was Pooch who posted stuff about “this explosive lawsuit will stop the steal” in late 2020. Not Tom really got pissed at that comment, and for good reason.
Not going to happen. The Democrats will do whatever it takes to prevent that.
The best likely outcome is that the iron fist becomes even more visible.
The best outcome is civil war.
An orderly examination of fraud through procedures long obsolete and largely forgotten is not on the cards.
To hope for an orderly and peaceful examination of electoral fraud through the processes that are now scarcely remembered is rather like expecting Prince Philip to head into the British house of parliament, arrest people for treason and apostasy, and lop their heads off in the public square.
Of course an orderly examination of fraud through legal procedure long obsolete and largely forgotten is not going to be sufficient to beat the fraud. What it is, is merely a first step that if walked to the end, must necessarily end with autocoup or civil war.
They’ll bum-rush the capitol buildings, bash heads, shoot some people, leave blood on the walls, take selfie pictures with it, and give each other medals for heroically stopping another 1-6.
So long as politicians go along with the plan and agree to have their wires pulled, Republican or Democrat makes no difference. The illusion of two sides when they’re all marching to the same tune.
Right now the tune is “sustainable population” under the guise of pandemics, vaccines, war, and climate change. They want to thin the herd to 500mil.
Yeah the VA governor who won is as about squishy system-approved as you can get. It shouldn’t be surprising they didn’t pull out all stops to steal from him. Now some of the Trump endorsements look like they are actually going to put up meaningful resistance. Will be interesting to see what happens to them.
I agree, I think the talk about Trump rigging 2024 in order to justify arresting him. The Democrats believe in magic and they think Trump is using black magic to convince people to hate them and Joe Biden. They simply don’t understand why they’re so hated with the endless good media propaganda they receive. Joe Biden is very upset how much the public shits on him whenever he travels about the country. So they’re working themselves up to burn the witch and his closest followers.
Specifically they believe in mind control rays…. the way commies believe that ordinary people who don’t believe tax increases they say will be for the rich only are under the influence of capitalist mind control rays and wignats believing unowned women behaving badly are under jewish mind control rays.
We should be in favor of anything that forces the mask off further. Be that Trump getting arrested or 2024 being shockingly more irregular than 2020. Anything that takes us farther from the fake and gay uniparty politics of old decreases legitimacy for the regime.
Glowniggers dredging up the hit they pulled on jacky boy and implying the soviets did it. They must really be running out of ideas at this point to whip up the russiamania they want.
Link, the idea the Soviets would have hit him is beyond retarded.
LBJ got his glowie friends to do it for him…
Eg https://archive.md/RcF2l
They been floating a few spots on it on tv news here and there the past few days.
Seems that T. Rex Sex is still arguing with jim about economics stuff. I noticed that in jim’s page on usury does not cite any sources, so thought I might post some for completeness.
“What was their definition of a loan or mutuum? This was a contract which the scholastics, in accordance with their usual procedure, had taken from Roman law. It applied only to fungible goods of which the use could not be separated from the substance or, in different words,which could not be used without being consumed. Fungible goods were such goods as could be weighed (grain), measured (wine), or numbered (money).(7) The lender did not expect the borrower to return the very thing that was lent but an equal quantity of the same species. To expect more was usury, whether it applied to money or to any other fungible good.
[…]
The scholastics, of course, did not object to someone investing money profitably by entering into partnership, provided he shared in the losses as well as in the profits. Even if one partner supplied all the capital and the other only his personal services, as in the Genoese commenda or the Venetian and Ragusan colleganza, such a transaction was perfectly legitimate. A partnership was not a loan but a different contract.(13) There was the danger, however, that an interest-bearing loan might be concealed under the color of another form of contract. The scholastics were not oblivious of this possibility and called such a disguised loan a contract in fraudem usurarum.(14) Accordingly, they distinguished between overt usury, which was charged openly on a loan, and palliate usury, which was cloaked in the garb of another contract.(15) Thus, usury could be hidden in an emptio venditio (purchase-sale) by simply charging a higher price on credit sales than on cash transactions.”
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/business-history-review/article/abs/scholastics-usury-and-foreign-exchange/55D452FDED2638250564431328F7236A (use sci-hub)
Looks like jim is right. Moderns take one of the many kinds of economic contracts that Christian law permitted, the mutuum, arbitrarily translate it to the unrelated word “loan”, and then claim on the basis of the restrictions on the mutuum that all productive investment was banned by the Church. So they will quote passionate denunciations of usury by these benighted friars without mentioning that they were denouncing, and only denouncing, the equivalent of credit card debt.
The author cites among others the scholastic economist Saint Bernardino of Siena. To make double triple sure let’s consult a primary source, the third volume of Bernardino’s complete works, containing his “Sermones” in Latin: https://gutenberg.beic.it/webclient/DeliveryManager?pid=9561299&custom_att_2=simple_viewer&search_terms=DTL6&pds_handle=. I’m too lazy to type it out and translate it but whoever can read Latin can turn to Sermo XXXVI et passim and see that his account matches closely with that cited above.
Jim is certainly correct that this is the traditional Christian understanding. At least among traditional Catholics online I’ve known this view to be the consensus for a long time, justified in the same way.
To put one thing some people don’t seem to get into perspective…
White and gentile leftists are the real enemy.
To think that any other group is the real enemy is to imagine that Germany’s Eastern European “allies” were the real driving force behind the Axis Powers. Now Rumania may have been a critical ally but Rumania was nothing without Germany and blacks and even jews and dotheads are nothing without white shitlibs.
Also you should hate white shitlibs more, traitors within your ranks deserve more genuine hatred than people in a true outgroup.
Isn’t you plan to kill everybody? It is not either practical or advisable. Many just believe what they believe because it was what they are tough or they are just trying to live their lives. They will believe whatever is needed and that includes what you want if you have the power.
There is also the problem that you may need to run a state and you cant just go killing certain classes of people at least in to great of a number because you need them to help you run your state.
No just everyone who still thinks Rittenhouse was guilty, that Corona is real and threatening, or that Biden is doing a good job. Roughly 1/4 to 1/3 of the populace.
And really only the men, the women will get non hereditary slavery…
Now maybe in practical terms you just can’t kill that many fine fine… but you can damn sure kill all of those people currently in priestly jobs. In Academia, in journalism or other media, in bureaucracy, law etc. These people aren’t technical personnel they have NEGATIVE value and nothing will collapse without them.
In the 1950s things could have been restored with relatively little bloodshed if it seems like I want to kill everybody its that things have decayed or entropy has progressed to the point where you need to get rid of a lot of people to set things right.
Probably not by the right but you will have your wish.
You literally propose to murder some 75 million innocent people and think that this would be just a dandy way to introduce your new virtuous Christian regime to the world.
Happily people like The Cominator have thus far only existed in leftist regimes.
Agreed and this is why the right loses… we need to be as demonically merciless and psychopathic as the left. Jim likes talking about selectively using social technology from the Old Testament, I’m proposing Old Testament warfare on them I mean when we get the chance. I would argue that Beria was in a way a man like me, he was never a left winger and was almost executed as an anti communist after the Bolsheviks took power.
The priesthood is not 75 million people, 30 million probably with probably 10% or so right wing dissidents so lets say 27 million.
I do not know what you would consider the right “winning” to look like. Having a “demonically merciless and psychopathic” government which has demonstrated the willingness and ability to commit democide does not count for me.
Well what are you going to do with the old leftist priesthood after you just fire them all…
You are going to have millions of extremely bitter implacable enemies with generally above average verbal IQs condemned to a low status existence…
What about a general amnesty followed by extremely harsh blasphemy laws? Not talking about NGO employees or legal clerks for the left judges, just the normie idiot that gets his news from Facebook. I talk to these people, the censorship works, unless you seek out novel ideas and like to read a lot of text online you’re not going to be informed. That cuts out a lot of useful people who just didn’t bother to learn a lot of history.
If someone wants to talk communist in public, or put on a march for rights after the coup, easy enough to round them up I’d think.
What kind of blasphemy laws.. of course i would have the death penalty for “communist propaganda” and “feminist propaganda” but one thing i really hate the Cathedral for is killing the days of irrerevent and bawdy comedy that existed in the 80s and 90s and making this an utterly humorous era.
I want nothing a non leftist could ever worry about no matter how irrevent or cynical, and im willing to make mountains of leftist skulls to do so.
The harsher we are to leftists the less stupid general controls we need on everyone else.
Cominator, you talk as if leftism is an inherited condition like blond hair.
Errr humorless era…
Yes i believe there is an inherited component to leftism… look at the Swedes.
I think that the crafting of the laws would need to be done carefully, but at the same time the more important thing is to be careful about who is trying cases and putting the law into effect. We’ve seen any good law can be subverted and twisted. Murderous, envious people publicly agitating because they’re miserable just need to be put to death, same with open sodomites.
You cannot use the tools of the Enemy to defeat the Enemy. The temptation is part of its tools, but it does not end well. You end up possessed by the same demons you were fighting, and you have gone very far to get nowhere at all.
Of course fighting monsters too long you become monstorous and gazing into the abyss the abyss gazes back at you, but historically the two examples of right wing regimes which did large scale massacres of leftists the approached seemed to work.
Other approaches consistently failed. I know Jim loves Charles II but Charles II already had the advantage that most of the Puritans who wanted to build God’s kingdom on earth had lost faith that it was possible or at least that it was possible in England. Cromwell (who represented if anything the anti Catholic independent Puritans, btw they went to Plymouth and Cape Cod not Boston) already shut down the Presbyterian control freak and Digger commie factions and that they were already in power for a while and none of the utopians or control freaks were happy (the independents were pretty happy I guess but they mostly objected to percieved crypto Catholicism from the Stuarts).
Our rot is much much more deeply rooted and has not done much effective purging of itself (the only faction that they’ve really purged is leftists who just can’t accept that a dude who mutilates himself is now a woman and should be able to strut around women’s bathrooms)… if we get a Caesar on top of a live demon worshipping priesthood he is going to have to ruthlessly get rid of them.
And no Machiavelli was right just firing them will make for a huge pool of determined implacable and fanatical enemies capable of some degree of spontaneous coordination as soon as pressure is eased up.
Cominator: Yes.
Lol.
I deny they are innocent and confining the purge to the priesthood… itd be more 30.
I really shouldn’t, but what the hey…
So, is this only those who truly think Rittenhouse was guilty, or everyone who says they think that? Only those who honestly think Corona is real and threatening, or anyone who wears a face diaper and smiles and praises Modern Evidence-Based Medicine as they get their boosters? Only those who actually think Biden is great, or anyone who says they voted for him, content in the knowledge that the ballot is secret?
Do you claim to know and judge them by their inner thoughts, or does this only require a cursory look at their actions, with “think” being used to mean “looks like they think”?
If 60 minutes came out tomorrow with a 1-hour exposé favorable to Rittenhouse, and the next day, some portion of those people who previously said they thought he was guilty are suddenly 100% positive that (a) he was totally innocent and (b) they never believed he was guilty in the first place, do those people all still get the rope for ever having believed he was guilty?
Can people say one thing and mean another, or is that in and of itself a criminal act in your justice model?
Should the weak, stupid and gullible be criminalized, or merely pitied and marginalized?
With Rittenhouse I just said people who still stubbornly STILL think hes guilty and will say so, thats a very very good sign of incurable fanatical shitlibbery given that even the Cathedral media was not on the whole all that eager to crucify him in the end.
We can tell the morons who still believe in the Corona demon today this isn’t hard, they won’t shutup about it. We’re still in a pandemic, get vaxxed etc. These people are the worst subhumans of the left bar none since worshipping the corona demon imposes enormous costs on them personally its not just them adding their weight to who is in power.
Secret Trump voters in blue jobs and blue areas don’t pretend to support Democrats, they pretend to be apolitical. I know some of these people given that I was a very open Trump supporter in a very blue area for a long time.
“Do you claim to know and judge them by their inner thoughts, or does this only require a cursory look at their actions”
Judged on actions and words with coercion being a mitigating factor. I don’t care about your thoughts, actions above all and to a lesser extent your words reveal where you stand.
You say coercion should be a mitigating factor, but don’t seem to accept coercion as a mitigating factor. People are having their livelihoods threatened – they’re officially not allowed to work or in some cases even leave their homes unless they make an offering to the Covid demon. You and I may conclude that the personal costs of Covid demon-worshiping are extremely high, but as far as they know, the personal costs are negligible and the costs of disobedience are extremely high. How’s that anything but coercion?
And as for the other categories, you seem to be saying that ignorance is not a mitigating factor, even if we are awash in lies and accurate information is extremely hard even for the very determined among us to find. Is ignorance a crime, or isn’t it? You didn’t give a straight answer last time.
No, this is you being unable to read people. The “crypto-reactionaries” among us, the smart ones, always aim to be appear as the second- or third-most most far left. Not the farthest left, because that attracts unwanted attention and invites competition and scrutiny, but far enough such that if you accidentally make some off-color comment, people will assume they misheard or misunderstood, or that they just aren’t up on the latest fashion. Vox Day wrote the book on SJWs, he’s one of the most ornery fucks in existence, and even he gave this advice to anyone having to make a living in the deep blue.
It is becoming increasingly untenable for normal people to actually do this, because bioleninism, but not completely impossible yet.
To quote Aidan from a thread way further down:
This is the Machiavellian way, the Mafia way, it is how intelligent and politically savvy operators conceal their intentions until they are ready to take on their enemies. They are totally normal, law-abiding, God-fearing (or Covid-fearing) citizens, with a very respectable history of charitable and political donations and friends in high places. You wouldn’t dare accuse them of being a devious Alt-Right Nazi Reactionary without positive proof.
Idiots fly the snek flag and cuckservatives pretend to be apolitical. Those are the people you were able to spot because they suck at staying hidden, which means the enemy recognizes them too, and the ones who are still around only survive because progressives still consider them too pathetic and powerless to be a threat – but all it takes is one hungry SJW looking for their first scalp, and they’re finished. The serious operators gave you a wide berth, politely acknowledging your existence but otherwise treating you as radioactive.
You don’t believe they exist – and they don’t care because, in the event of a collapse, they’ll be the ones taking power and giving orders to people like you.
Lets say that ignorance combined with activism in support of your ignorance is a crime.
I’m in particular extremely unsympathetic (alright i fucking really hate them) to people who believe corona lies because truth is very easy to find if you go looking for it and anyone who got locked down should had both free time and curiousity. Im not talking about getting a vax certificate to keep your job i mean vocal support of corona chan on social media, people who want their relatives to show vax passports etc.
Re people faking leftism…
No decent person will have a job that requires them to go full demon worship so yes decent people in blue areas just keep their mouth shut. I was able to spot the apolitical closet Trump supporters because they told me who they were.
Pretending leftism is more dangerous than pretending to be apolitical, rightists sometimes destroy their enemies but leftists destroy their friends. Coming from Massachusetts you didn’t get ostracized over politics until say late 2015 and you didn’t get ostracized for keeping your mouth shut…
I cant speak for the covid era i got out of that place as it had gone completely mad.
Let’s be specific. Augustus has just taken power and made you in charge of the proscription. How do you determine who is on the list?
“People who believe corona lies†is not particularly easy to test for it. How? Give us in detail how you would go about determining who is to be proscribed and who isn’t post-regime change (because this is the only time it could ever be done).
Of course 1st priority would be high level people in the old regime, then alphabet agencies, academia especially Ivy League academia (in non technical jobs), medical and legal priesthood, and NGOs. I think everyone here agrees this group needs to go and go immediately. Some may be spared for a time as we want certain information out of them though.
Also I would take certain “foundationer” families and apply the Vorenus solution (Bushes Rockefellers people on the Bilderberg steering comittee etc) to find out who is really at the center of the spiderweb. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPviZSKVKJc
Then you would look at people who donated money to Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden, they have to go.
Anyone whos job was a diversity or female inclusion anything would have to go automatically too.
Then you would investigate the lower priesthood (people in teaching, law, miscellaneous bureaucracy) who don’t fall into the above categories. Proof they voted or donated to Trump or supported him on social media or something (donating to Flynn or Kyle Rittenhouse would also be good) would get them labeled a right wing dissident priest and thus exonnerated and given how empty the priesthood is likely to be quickly promoted.
But otherwise would be scrutinized for anti Trump (from a left wing perspective) anti Kyle and pro Corona demon worship posts. Mostly I expect to find out this group of people are shitlibs and have to go but about 10% of the priesthood should survive.
That’s not bad although I would spare women. Women just blindly and fanatically follow who’s in power.
Attractive women would be sold at auction not killed… except if they are in the top category. I’ve said this before.
Stupid idea. Fertile aged women get married off. No fertile aged women should still not be killed but well find something for them to do.
Non*
Sorry Psaki has to go…
Women of ivy league professor rank, leftist judge, congress, senate or presidents staff… have to go. The rest can be treated as you say (but they can never be wives, their status will be worse)
There will be so few 1st category women that it won’t matter in the scheme of things.
The other problem you’ll run into is fleeing leftists. White leftist are particularly good at fleeing. Have been doing it for centuries. They already joke about fleeing to Canada and Australia. A restoration in America likely is going to require a brutal purge of the english speaking countries of Australia/Canada/UK.
Need to prevent high level flight but if low level leftists flee its no problem.
It really isn’t. Try for just one minute to put yourself in the normie’s shoes. Where do you go looking for “truth”? Google? Top 500 results are all mainstream media. Fox News? Pretty much the same narrative, just 5% less alarmist. Social media? Everyone remotely interesting has been purged.
Truth is very easy to find when the state religion promotes it, very difficult to find when the state religion proscribes it.
You’re strawmanning. That’s not what was said, and I don’t feel like repeating myself – please read it again.
You spotted them because they were not hiding. Not competently, anyway. They “just want to be left alone” and most of them are desperate for a sympathetic ear.
If you’re bad at it, maybe. Progressivism is mostly performative – the entire philosophy is constructed to enable people to gain status at next to no risk. Excepting the creeping bioleninism, it is not hard for an ambitious person to appear to be observing all of the correct rituals and shibboleths without really actually doing any of it. The enforcers are extremely lazy, corrupt and cynical. It is not quite as simple as literally “buying indulgences”, but not that far off, either.
Secrecy, subterfuge and manipulation are all pretty central to the transfer of power throughout history. For someone who reads as much of it as you do, I’m surprised you haven’t picked up on this.
It’s bitterly amusing to me – you’ve constructed an alternate reality based on social media posts where you’re able to see into men’s hearts, but actually have no clue what’s really going on. People with serious ambitions don’t confess their secrets to someone who talks about exterminating 1/3 of the US population without a trace of irony – they assume that person is either a fed or just unhinged, and steer clear.
I full well understand im a sperg and im no good at intrigue deception etc.
I don’t plan on using a blog position as a springboard to personnel power… that idea is absurd. Memetic power otoh. Sure.
Someone needs to say that the right has an unfortunate tendency to spare too many of the enemy… and that we need to avoid that mistake.
I could not imagine larping as a prog, it would be larping as an out and out loud fag. What kind of man could do that…
Pretending to be a prog for social points is the spiritual equivalent of being gay for pay…
That’s how you see it, but that’s not how it is. It’s mostly just some token donations, registering as a Democrat (or Green Party), paying lip service to DIE YT at the occasional strategic moment, ratting out an insufficiently left shitlib once in a while (and when you hate all these people anyway, ratting them out won’t trigger a modicum of guilt), and keeping your social media feeds clean.
In case it wasn’t obvious, I’m not talking about hardcore priestly professions like journalism or law – camouflaging oneself in those would be exponentially more difficult because the actual work that you do is supposed to be inherently pro-regime. I don’t imagine that there are a lot of “XYZ studies” professors that will be worth saving. But a researcher, a bureaucrat, an engineer, a doctor, an architect, a mid-level manager, even a primary school teacher or principal – really not all that difficult.
Getting more difficult every day, and may be impossible within a few years if the holiness spiral isn’t halted – but as of today, still not that difficult.
There are some cases that really are pretty unambiguously definitely-gets-the-rope leftist, like teachers pushing trannyism on their students and even trying to take custody away from parents who refuse, but those are outliers.
>I could not imagine larping as a prog, it would be larping as an out and out loud fag. What kind of man could do that…
It’s hard for a sperg to do, but easy for most people. Most people give the state religion lip service at most. It’s their children that are turned into zealots for the faith.
Heroic attempt, HerbR. You ITT and St. John questioning Tytirus helped me internalize some things I’m struggling with. But look at some of these details: TC thinks he knows people because they tell him stuff; he is unable to even imagine acting/speaking one way and being/believing another; the topic of Tier 01 evil fertile woman comes up, and his go to is Jen Psaki; he thinks 1/3 of registered democrats need to delet but he has explicitly said Jimmy Dore gets a free pass. He thinks hu-man fe-males are only good for breeding and fleshlight. There’s no great mystery here, he’s just an out of touch loner type with no social skills and an admittedly fascinating elaborate genocidal fantasy. If he was a whole man, a man with family or property or prospects or followers, I’d not argue as much, nor would I demean him. Because it would be a serious person saying some very heavy things that don’t make sense to me. That’s what Jim was when I first encountered him: insane ideas that made no sense within the framework of my perceptions. Over time, the seriousness with which he addressed topics, the defense in detail, the scores of examples, all of it forced me to confront myself. I don’t like 90% of what Jim asserts, and that is because I am a product of a bent and evil system that programmed me to shun truth and welcome damage. So I can’t trust my instincts when it comes to Jim. Similarly, TC deserves credit for forcing the fact that the Right is too merciful; mercy for the guilty is cruelty towards the innocent. But that’s where it stops. The rest is just murder fantasy, a perfectly understandable response to the disgusting nation we inhabit, but having little other no value past the initial exhortation. I think it’s a bad look, it is childish and unbecoming, so I register my dissent and mock him, as I get mocked every time I turbonigger.
“he is unable to even imagine acting/speaking one way and being/believing another;”
People speaking one way and being another is common… I’m aware people do this. People acting one way and being another otoh is rare.
>They already joke about fleeing to Canada and Australia. A restoration in America likely is going to require a brutal purge of the english speaking countries of Australia/Canada/UK.
As if there aren’t already groups of people in these countries who want to do this. All you’d need to do is give them permission and run the standard color revolution script the USA has been running for decades already.
Our enemy is the evil unvirtuous elite who are increasingly becoming more Jewish and more non-white.
The minute the elite truly becomes totally nonwhite they will lose immediately (if it was all jews it would be one thing but it won’t be all jews).
They still have the geriatrics, Stacy Abrams can’t rule.
It is self-evidently becoming both less white and less Jewish, and more brown and yellow.
Yes you’re right…
https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/the-vanishing-ivy-league-jew
I really should not be dignifying this stuff with a response, but. Whether or not leftists are “guilty” is completely immaterial as to whether it is right or prudent to do… whatever it is you want to do to them. It is always possible to arrange circumstances in our minds so that our or someone else’s guilt can seem as great or as small as we like. The concept of “guilt” is little more than an absolutely gratuitous fantasy, unless it refers, as it does or at least should in criminal proceedings, to “the likelihood that some person will commit such-and-such an action again in such circumstances that are likely to occur”. This is what you should be asking yourself with regard to leftists. Everything else suggested by our thoughts about guilt is born ultimately from intellectual confusion and emotional malice.
Yes history shows that leftists who are spared tend to surrender and then when the pressures off they unsurrender. Look at Spain and Chile now.
Neither Franco or Pinochet could have done what you want and it is not granted that if they have done it spain or chile wouldn’t have a strong left by now. It is a very seductive memeplex and both leaders made that their respective countries wouldn’t turn into wastelands.
What Suharto did worked, and South Korea did something similar (I learned this very recently) and it worked. So I would say I have history on my side. Yes South Korea has a weak version of Cathedral feminism but communism and even lesser forms of economic socialism are utterly dead. Massacreing leftists en masse works.
Franco had the context of a hot civil war, he absolutely could have killed them all. People opposed to you in rear areas are a threat to your supply lines potential spies saboteurs and guerillas and just overall a security risk.
Pinochet had less scope for action but he could have gone well above 3000 top fanatical leftists.
I disagree that your plane is a good idea or workable and i am going to disagree also that Franco could have done it after the war.
Besides that i don’t disagree that much with you. What Pinochet did worked and what Franco did absolutely worked. It may not look like it to you but Portugal and Spain are too similar countries but Spain works much better than Portugal.
From what I’ve read about Spain it has consistently left wing socialist governments for the past 20 years, consistent unemployment above 30%, and a neverending 3rd world invasions.
I mean I guess compared to say Pol Pot’s Cambodia it works but that is not a level of working I’m satisfied with…
20 years isn’t 50 years and sooner or later intellectuals would be found to promote leftism. This is a problem you don’t resolve simply by killing people.
It may not be a level of working you are satisfied but people need to work with what they have.
Btw the lever of unemployment isn’t real, Spain has a huge parallel economy.
No one will promote leftism unless it works. The truly effective measure is not killing all leftists, or even censoring all leftists, it is a social order in which collective action to knock over apple carts does not work.
Okay given that Spain is a med country I can believe the unemployment level isn’t real, whats the real unemployment level then…
Pretty much impossible to tell. Maybe half, that would mean 7 or 8%. Pretty bad still but the relative large parallel economy lets that extra wealth be created.
Not that any of this would help the younger generations. They are all pretty much fucked.
Re. knocking over apple carts, and what to do with the Marching Morons.
With progressing automation, what I call, the rising tide of competence (to be useful), what happens to the people who are underwater? The ratio of “morons” to producers increases everyday. As they say, idle hands are the devils workshop. Perhaps someday automation will reach a point where most people will live in an allodium (i.e. “a pod”) in the desert where all food and water is recycled, providing for all physical needs, and no external input is needed other than energy.
An environment highly unfavorable for reproduction, plus we will not enforce their marriages, nor provide a free childcare and childminding service, nor cash and prizes for spawning bastards. Their reproduction rate should drop to about 0.6
There was science fiction series and some science fiction books set in the world you envisage.
In one book the underclass people evolved into a different species, and eventually the machinery to keep them alive came to be neglected. Though in that book they were also failing to reproduce, reproduction rate approaching 0.2, so the catastrophic failure of the highly advanced machinery that was keeping them alive seems redundant, except to provide a dramatic ending.
In the series, the productive people evolved into a higher race, the pod people continued to reproduce and remained largely unchanged from present day people, and tensions between the races got nasty. Happy ending, as technological advance by the productive people got the burden of the unproductive people off their back. The unproductive were effectively converted into conscious plants, that the productive could ignore. For the most part the conversion was voluntary, since the plant lifestyle was quite comfortable, but it was not all that voluntary, because in the series, as in the book, the productive had started to neglect the overburdened systems that were keeping the pod people alive, and there was a catastrophic grid failure that only moderately inconvenienced the productive, who had necessary competence, skills and equipment to continue their normal lives without using the the massive interconnected interdependent systems overburdened by pod people, but everything that primarily existed to service the pod people stopped working. So essentially the same ending as the book, except that instead of they all die horribly, they all get an injection of nanobots (or get infected with nanobots) that make them less of a problem. The productive people reduced or abandoned their use of equipment that requires a massive interconnected interdependent system, and the massive interconnected system just stopped working for the pod people. Everyone switched to a technological base that is locally autonomous and less interconnected and interdependent.
As Jim says, the problem is solved by leaving it be. We skim the cream off the top of the unproductive or marginally productive underclass, and let the rest struggle and die as the result of their own choices. If they commit crimes, we kill them. If they do something especially useful, then we reward them. Anyone tough and dedicated enough to claw their way into the working or middle classes will gain all the duties and privileges therof, and the rest can scrabble for survival.
Paul in Romans:
Which is not to say a Christian can not have good reason for genocide. But it must be better reason than ‘voted for Bidan.’
Ecclesiastes 3.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ecclesiastes%203&version=YLT
To everything — a season, and a time to every delight under the heavens:
2 A time to bring forth, And a time to die. A time to plant, And a time to eradicate the planted.
3 A time to slay, And a time to heal, A time to break down, And a time to build up.
4 A time to weep, And a time to laugh. A time to mourn, And a time to skip.
5 A time to cast away stones, And a time to heap up stones. A time to embrace, And a time to be far from embracing.
6 A time to seek, And a time to destroy. A time to keep, And a time to cast away.
7 A time to rend, And a time to sew. A time to be silent, And a time to speak.
8 A time to love, And a time to hate. A time of war, And a time of peace.
As usual, your historical knowledge impresses me. But c’mon com. Not convincing me with non-biblical Jewish books of wisdom. We are Christians. A recurrent theme of Jim’s blog is doing things the Christian way. Whatever merit of your plan, I have read enough of the new testament to conclude, having given your plan a fair hearing, and hell, even finding some sympathy for it, that it is just not a Christian plan. If you want to garner support for your plan, and you seem to be intent on doing so, perhaps you ought to start your own blog.
Alf haven’t you admitted to being an athiest anyway.
So are you citing Christianity or progressive churchianity here?
https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/400x/63551500.jpg
Long long time ago.
Since when was ecclesiastes non-biblical?
My mistake, translation into my language is wildly different, did not recognize.
Point still stands of course. Ecclestiases preaches wisdom, moderation, enjoyment of life. It does not say: ‘thus the blood of milllions must flow.’
“Point still stands of course. Ecclestiases preaches wisdom, moderation, enjoyment of life. It does not say: ‘thus the blood of milllions must flow.’”
It says there is a time for it…
It worked for a while. It is no longer working.
Entropy never sleeps.
Not seeing it, Muslim and lower type of Asian Indonesia was never going to be a great nation but communism is extinct and Cathedralism is weak.
The Suharto Code, total extermination of anything commie, has yet to be refuted….
Chile failed because no counter ideology.
Pinochet’s game was depoliticization. The state religion is evil, he thinks, so let us not have one. Only to find it was still there.
Pinochet was drafted by junior officers to take the top job. Draftees rarely do more than absolutely necessary. Maybe one of those junior officers would have done better than Pinochet
What about giving Jews the firing squad and white gentile vermin a good necklacing?!
Cries the yearling pig, “the sheep, the sheep are the problem! to hoof and tusk my brothers, dark deeds need doing!”
The raving porker paces past, back and forth, churning the dust with his worry and woe and murderous wishes.
Meanwhile the flock follows, the dog dodges, and the shepherds spy a succulent morsel, dancing daily closer to the butcher’s blade.
Anecdotal, but there’s a supposed COVID outbreak where I work. Basically sounds like people getting the flu, nobody’s in the hospital of course, but 100% of the people are vaccinated. Probably about a dozen people. HR told me I was a close contact, but I’m off for a bit of time so not being asked to test to return. Best part was them asking me to mask when I go back for a few days to be safe, then realizing I’m not declared either way as to vaccination status so I’m supposed to always be masked, then quickly dropping it entirely rather than risk bringing it up.
There is a high likelihood that you got it and did notice.
I expected vaccination to result in evolution towards increased lethality, but so far this does not seem to be happening. It still evolving into its own vaccine.
The spike protein was what the vaccine used to direct the immune system onto covid. The spike protein was also what was doing the most damage. If omicron covid mutates to use different proteins, then the disease also becomes less likely to kill its host. Which is an advantage for a respiratory viruses. Seems like a two-for-one deal for the coronavirus.
Probably, I mean that 100% of the people who acknowledge they feel sick are vaccinated. I’d say rather than the vaccine making it worse it’s likely that these are just weak pussies who get sick all the time. Maybe a little of both? My father got the vaccine and is fine, but he never acknowledged ever getting sick really before either.
It hasn’t been studied in enough depth to actually confirm, but I would hypothesize some kind of hump curve, maybe even a bell curve of vaccine leakiness relative to harmful mutations.
Not leaky at all, and you actually eradicate the pathogen. Too leaky, and it just doesn’t have any effect on the normal evolution. Marek’s may only occur at the peak, where the vaccine is effective enough to legitimately warrant mass deployment but just slightly leaky enough to prevent herd immunity.
It is a coronavirus immunity is always temporary.
Get enough strains through your immune system and new strains tend to be pretty mild when you do catch them.
Isn’t really? The temporary protection of recovery from covid infections has been argued by people who what to give the clot shot everyone.
Of course, that doesn’t mean it’s not true, but any claim that supports an evil plan is suspect.
They may actual give permanent and definitive protection agaisnt covid and all other virus and bacteria. And many other causes of death.
How potent they are in this only time will tell.
That seems like non-sequitur? It’s not a question of whether immunity is temporary or permanent, but whether it’s sterilizing or non-sterilizing.
A vaccine providing temporary sterilizing immunity might still be worthwhile, but non-sterilizing immunity never is, even if permanent.
In theory yeah sure but what is the point if it is a virus of this type? Sterilizing or not.
Every year or two you get a new variant that ignores the immunity that many people have and it has extremely difficulty in killing anyone that has not at least one foot in the grave.
Evolves to be less lethal than a virus that required cooking the books to hit less than 0.5% mortality rate
Everything looks fake and ghey to this uppity prole
Speaking of cooking the books.
A nice old lady explaining how according to her the coup started its slow creep for real circa 1997-98. Surprisingly interesting video once it gets rolling.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ad07-gwcDUo
I suggest downloading it before it goes down.
The second or third old lady that impresses me, since the start of the great reset.
Many observable, verifiable data points — but an awfully neat and tidy overarching explanatory narrative???, e.g., the $trillions in missing money is buying mind-control and a multi-planetary civilization???
>Many observable, verifiable data points — but an awfully neat and tidy overarching explanatory narrative
Appears at least at first glance to explain at least 10-15% of observable reality.
And can mesh more or less well with the rest of what I’ve been thinking in terms of globohomo, biopolitics, systemic entropy etc.
I take my 10% slices of potentially useful explanations where I can find them.
She is nuts.
Any theory will explain ten percent of reality.
Saw lots of anti-mandate users of Russian chans discussing it; the translated Youtube vid into Russian has almost half a million views, serious discussions in the comments.
To the external Slavland viewpoint some or much of she has to say makes at least some sort of sense.
Then again Slavic paranoia and fatalism are legendary.
@Varna
It’s just a long hour and a half video of a woman talking, where’s the transcript?
Listening to people talk is so incredibly tedious and low-bandwidth. Try turning on closed captions and reading them (or use youtube-dl to download the captions file).
Jim, Just read an Anglin article about UK making flirting illegal. Sounds like he’s on the same page WQ. Even uses “shit test.” He could be lurking your blog.
He’s definitely gotten a lot closer to the mark in the last year or so. He used to be a self-proclaimed “champion of incels” while also acknowledging that his infamy got him laid like tile. But every so often in the last year he drops an article that could have been lifted from the Roissy archives.
By whatever route, our memes are heavily influencing the entire alternative right. We are winning, and shills, who vastly outnumber us, are losing.
Mareks disease is probably vaccine leakiness + packing chickens in like sardines…
Humans aren’t packed in that densely even in say Bengal.
Cities probably have enough density for it to happen if the vaccines actually give any kind of protection.
You’re probably getting hit with Omnicom. The shit is super mild and it’s wiping Delta out. The UK is up to 60% Omnicom infections and will hit 95-98% within a few weeks. COVID is over in South Africa in like 6 weeks because of it. Most of the US should be vaccinated via Omnicom infection by mid to late Feb and unlike the Jab, Omnicom actually provides immunity.
“Finding a traditional wife in the ocean of tradsluts who discovered “Odin” five mintues after recovering from severe bleeding caused by anal sex with Jamal is not an option either. Varg Vikernes/Burzum could do so only because he was the most important fugure alive when it cane to black metal+traditions and so he could choose from a vast plethora of girls mailing him while still in jail snd most of all in the pre-social media era. Plus his wife is autistic and since autism is a “masculine” way of perceiving things (as opposed to the BPS like discussed in that thread) she may never felt really tempted to embrace the slut life. ”
Source: http://www.ncu.su
Some people cannot get feces under their foreskins…
Don’t know why it’s relevant to quote here (also, your link is broken and appears suspicious) but yeah, Varg is pretty blind to the fact that it was his career as arsonist and killer more than anything else that let him nab a cute aspie wife and pump a small army of blonde kids into her. I let it slide though because he’s living a good life, did a lot for BM and especially dark synth, and seems like a chill guy. At least we have KPN as a shining beacon of based in BM
The Cominator will get laid. Burning down monasteries of the Cathedral is more or less a mitzvah of the Burzum Mujahedeen.
All of you here love obedient, modest, quiet, defenseless “slaves”, as Jews like to say through feminist propaganda. And me too. And just like you, I am annoyed by the bitches who strive to turn the house into an eternal battlefield. But one thing worries me: are we passing on to our children (including our sons) a tendency to be weak, obedient, quiet slaves if we marry such women from generation to generation? Plus, in some way we weaken the pressure on men and unworthy ones also gain access to reproduction. Of course, I do not forget about sexual demorphism, but still.
I’m coming to the conclusion that you (some of you) are going too far, friends. We need patriarchy, but we only need it in the social and cultural sphere. We need to eradicate the manifestation of hostile anti-family, anti-racial and anti-natalistic memes and keep social life in order by maintaining the status of married and having children. In the legal sphere, it is worth reducing the level of socialism, and solving the problem of pedo-hysteria. The patriarchy of Jews and some other religious communities in the Western world works better than the patriarchy of many countries with Sharia. We need to extend their practices to the whole society.
Women will never be weak and obedient, for they have always been selected to weed out the weak men, and will continue to weed out the weak.
Recollect that all existing women are the end product of hundreds of millennia of being absolute property, like a dog or a cow, for all societies, peoples, empires, faiths, nations and cultures that failed to keep women in line quietly vanished from history. Now that there is no longer mutual support among strong men to enforce obedience among women, wome perceive themselves as being surrounded by weak men in a weak tribe, and lash out accordingly, but even strong men in a strong tribe do not get to rest easy.
Many an emperor with ten thousand conservatively raised concubines, and the unquestioned and unquestionable right to execute any of them or all of them for any reason or no reason at all, has had women troubles, and many an empire has died of such women troubles.
Nature gives women far more power than men, for all a man can do is merely kill you, but woman can make you immortal. Because nature gives women far too much power, the law must give them very little.
And no matter what the law says, they will still have too much power. There is no rest for men.
To quote Aidan, Final Notes on the WQ:
“I have seen “tradwifeâ€, totally submissive to her husband, does nothing but cook food and pump out babies, thrown around as a strawman by bitter and vengeful women. And yes, it is a strawman. It does not exist. Women are always testing your power, your fitness. And, a woman who is well-owned by a strong man is not meek and submissive. Rather, she blossoms like a flower, becoming outgoing, radiant, bubbly, internally serene and outwardly energetic. For older women with kids, generous, loving, and matronly. It is easy to believe that all women are wonderful and precious when every woman you meet is under the hand of a strong man. In ye olden times, it was men like Shakespeare, seeing the best and worst of women, who dealt with plenty of wenches and feral harlots, who dropped the real red pills. Domination is not about whips and chains and crying sex slaves. That’s all LARPing. It is rather a state of deep contentment, of natural harmony, punctuated by the occasional contest of will.”
Apart from Jim and Aidan I haven’t found any dissident blog ever writing so clearly about patriarchy. To me all others are confused because they view it from the modern frame.
Aidan’s archives especially on patriarchy should be mandatory reading for anybody who even wants to comment on the WQ here. Not to sound like a fanboy but Aidan’s prose is clearer and even more explicit than Jim on this topic especially his posts on romantic love and need for arranged marriage.
Not to toot my own horn, but a number of factors need to converge. Practical experience with women, a knowledge of history, the virility to understand the ancients deep in one’s own blood, the will to know the truth, and the prosaic talent to express it. And then the pugnacity to fight back against purple pilled memes.
I suspect a lot of men understand the way they need to act with their woman in their bones, but it is imperfectly expressed; even their own thoughts get muddled by a modern frame and enemy memes.
Yes, exactly so.
https://www.opindia.com/2021/12/california-parents-blast-teachers-for-coaching-of-students-into-trans-identity/
Reading stuff like this makes me feel that the Cominator solution to leftists at least those in priestly jobs is not that radical.
Mahamleccha: Greater Demonspawn
The problem with Cominator solution is not the killing of enemy priests.
Well what is it then, I’m willing to restrict the purge to the priesthood (and high level military leftists) on the grounds there are far too many Democrats but I insist that high level priests have to go.
I would also insist on the low level priest but there is not point in going further. The church lady or their male counterparts, the low level bureaucrats or the law is just too much they will believe whatever you want them to believe. Doesn’t mean of course there is no need for small purgers.
Congratulations, you have reached my position.
Have to count most teachers/professors as priesthood too. These evil witches pushing transgay and hate-whitey are not being forced by an administrator or curriculum.
This is what i think… but most people here get awful squeamish about that.
Its pure squeamishness and sentimentality that makes people oppose my solution which is the only one backed by historical logic. History shows you can’t keep these people around… and that reactionaries in power that didn’t implement my solution proved to be a speedbump on the road to globohomo or communism.
I think most of these people don’t want to think about sacrificing shitlib relatives and such.
I think they are afraid of going to Hell. Being religious folk, they tend to believe in an afterlife, in hell and heaven etc etc. But you hit the nail on the head in that they are squeamish of sacrificing shitlib Kin.
Yet their own shitlib kin would have no trouble sacrificing them if it came to that.
You willing to sacrifice ShitLib Kin, Com? A sibling? A parent? A child?
I’d do it myself if I had to.
You can start calling fathers, brothers, and working men squeamish about mass murder when you move out of mommies basement and build a family, Commienator you NEET faggot.
Don’t live in mommies basement.
My point stands. You’re a man with no skin in the game.
You should not one way in group people…
I feel the line should be drawn at demon worship. Voluntary and enthusiastic demon worship should be the criteria for the helicopter. Others who merely go along should be given a chance as per Jim’s criteria to take the affirmation of the new state religion and be excluded from the ruling priesthood. And watched constantly for defection.
This really has always been my view…
I just having seen a lot of people enthusiastically embrace demon worship since I would say roughly around 2012 believe the rot is far worse than almost anyone else thinks.
When you say go along is the nub… there are people who do the bare minimum and otherwise mostly keep their mouths shut. Then there are people who have done things to signal enthusiasm…
My inclination would be that the latter group should not be viewed charitably.
@Cominator:
“Then there are people who have done things to signal enthusiasm…”
Yes. That’s the line. That’s the step of conscious choice.
Lots of Havel’s Greengrocers out there. Most everyone really. Because stuff happens and people gotta live somehow.
But it’s the running up to the head of line to shout “And it’s a good thing!”, louder and more convincingly than anyone else, that’s your dead giveaway. That’s the guy who will do everything he possibly can to un-surrender and bring the singularity back, because it’s his only way to get back up the social ladder.
Honestly, it’s just like how the Khmer Rouge “had to” ice anyone with glasses, anyone with a degree, anyone who needed The Revolution to fail in order to be somebody again and save his own skin.
You won’t go to hell for killing a commie, nor for killing 10 million commies. Morality just doesn’t apply to leftists.
There was a Thai Monk Kittiwuttho Bhikkhu who famously got it right (Buddhism is not demon worship and Christian Morality and Buddhist Morality are almost identical) when he said killing communist is not a sin, quite the opposite.
Sounds to me (outsider) that Cominator is saying that leftists and rightists have speciated in the US, and cannot be relied on to live peacefully among one another any more than different races can. It seems like this is obvious to the point thta C is confident in people’s abilities to spot a foreigner at sight. Further, seems to me he is saying that if you allow these foreigners to live amongs you they shall but bide their time and strike back.
At which point, a conciliatory solution presents itself. The only way to ensure peace between two peoples is to separate them, hence just make a list based on very slim “evidence” or just say-so of reputable others and apply it to mass expulsions to the new Jerusalem. Any of the original 13 colonies are not crucial to the US, and the same goes for pacific states. Designate a lossers country, chuck em all there.
Wont they juts use it as a springboard to attack, as the original New Engalnders did? Yes, but thats you first cheek all turned up and flaming red, and you are all out cheeks now.
Have not speciated. When the state religion changes, the vast majority of people will believe something different today from what they believed yesterday, and not notice their beliefs have changed.
“Its pure squeamishness and sentimentality that makes people oppose my solution which is the only one backed by historical logic.”
Agreed. What is the alternate vision here really?
People delude themselves that all the deluded leftists will be magically cured when their media crack is taken away and the media says the opposite…
Now in some cases that is true, but in many cases it won’t be and it certainly won’t be for anyone who loses their priestly job and almost everyone in current priestly jobs is going to lose their job.
Machiavelli 101 if you take someone’s state job away in a purge you really have to kill them too, unless you want a bitter fanatical implacable enemy.
Just decriminalize violence against leftists and ensure they can’t get a job better than walmart greeter. If they act up, the solution is open-source beatings and humiliation, which the average normal man has a stomach for, while he has no stomach for a titanic abattoir meant to turn 30 million people into dog food.
The leftists will remain bitter enemies in their hearts? Good, let them seethe. Not like they can do anything about it.
The leftists are merely being resettled to their own communities Aidan but of course violence against them will be legal too.
While the average man may not have the stomach to turn 30 million leftists into dog food, I’m sure that there are many elite reactionaries of the new state religion that would be willing to do the job. While private violence may serve to keep individual leftists at bay, what is the harm in letting enthusiastic reactionary warriors of the state execute leftists on a larger scale. I applaud TC’s bloodlust and would gladly aid him in his righteous crusade against leftists. Even if it’s a bit excessive, executing leftists can be like sport or a causal hobby of the new elite.
You obviously don’t need to make it public till after the fact…
They are merely being resettled…
I finally get it, you want to be Beria.
The Cominator’s enthusiasm makes him too dangerous to be Beria, but he would be invaluable as one of Beria’s henchmen. He is smart, which a Beria needs, and cheerfully willing to do terrible things, which a Beria needs. But not only lacks the judgement to apply violence selectively, lacks the judgement to apply it correctly.
But to actually get long term victory, we need, not a whole lot of free helicopter tours to the pacific, but a state religion saner than our current one, and we will not only need the priests to be smart, which the Cominator seems to be, but exemplary in their personal individual lives, their marriages, family, friends and work, which he is conspicuously lacking, and to have good insight into how and why normies act as they act, which he conspicuously and spectacularly lacks.
If things get as bad as they could and we have a far left takeover I want SOMEONE to be Beria but I suspect a sperg would have had a hard time as Beria.
Fine, let me be more specific. There is no will to genocide even in the reactionary elite; even if you can find enough men to do it, many will inwardly defect and start working against us. That is just the feeling I get based on my intuitive judgement of people. Genocide is a massive schelling point for a counter-elite to coordinate against you. And TC says it will be secret, but if you have to hide something, it is because you are ashamed of it.
Shooting millions of people is hard.
Confining millions of people in conditions where they cannot get adequate food, fresh water and shelter from the elements is easy.
Shouldn’t call it genocide, since the targets are not designated by race or ethnicity, but by leftism. If more than 2% of them turn out to have big noses and names ending with stein, that’s just an unfortunate cohencidence.
I do not think that it’s fair to say that there is no will to genocide within the reactionary elite. I know I’m not elite, but I too have the desire to genocide the enemies of Christ. TC seems elite to me and his will to genocide is surely indicative of a potential will among the elite to target leftists on a large scale. If leftists can genocide millions of innocent people then surely reactionaries can genocide a few million guilty leftists without defecting.
The elite is a social club and trust me i ain’t it…
Jim’s blog is like a social club and you’re a prominent member here. I always assumed the reactionary elite would be directly memetical descendents of Jim
“parents-blast-teachers-for-coaching-of-students-into-trans-identity”
The current solution of “blasting” them with words doesn’t seem to be solving anything.
This has nothing to do with the Cominator solution. Someone grooming kids into being trans is ripe to be purged. The Cominator debate revolves around him wanting to kill everyone who mumbles along “trans rights are human rights” at meetings.
Even better, this is easily solved via private violence. Within living memory in this country, when my grandfather did not like the way my uncle’s teacher was teaching him, he walked into the classroom and broke the teacher’s nose. If we simply declined to prosecute violence against leftists the same way that the elite today declines to prosecute violence by leftists, the problem would sort itself out very quickly.
This is anarcho-tyranny, not good. If we want to punish trans groomers then we should have the state do it, with legitimate criminal trials.
Not anarcho tyranny, the leftists will lose their citizenship and be tatooed with a hammer and sickle on their hand… it will be understood to say the least they do not have the protections of citizens in good standing.
>If we want to punish trans groomers then we should have the state do it
Nah, they should be beaten to death by the fathers and left in a gutter outside the school. The state should decline to press charges over someone who needed killing.
Recommend you read Aidan’s “No Police” article.
Anarcho tyranny is where some people can get away with harming citizens and people who should be protected by the state frivolously. You should always be able to harm people non frivolously.
The overly strict restraints on private violence are a big part the reason why women are unable to perceive the male hierarchy. Their stupendously sensitive alpha radar is still attuned to the days when we looked rather like apes equipped with sharp objects.
For women to go along with mating with the men they should be mating with, we need a lot more private violence to be legal, and we need a presumption that if a tax paying respectable property owning citizen kills someone who turns out to have been living on welfare and crime with a long history of getting in trouble, the killing presumed justified absent evidence to the contrary. One more bit of trouble that he caused just turned out very badly.
Yes, but it still seems to me to lie in the domain of the state to punish things like that in the OP. Because these school employees grooming kids to be trans are doing so, not exactly at the behest, but with the abetting of the state religion and state power. So it seems to me that it is the new state religion and the new state power which should be involved in their punishment.
The restoration should make a clean break: the new laws and standards only apply people’s actions post-restoration, and punishing peoples’ pre-restoration actions should be done by the state, carefully and with great show of equity. Otherwise I can imagine Cominators going around deciding that someone who tweeted “Black Lives Matter” in 2020 is an enemy who deserves the helicopter.
Unlike the Cominator, I reject the proposition that people should be punished for misdeeds done under the old state religion. That is to expect a level of judgment and inner moral self guidance that most people just do not possess and cannot be expected to possess. But if they commit any misdeeds when the state religion changes, then it is on.
Will be a terrible awful mistake…
No, jim is right. And in either case private violence is the wrong solution.
@Tityrus
You’re a cuck.
Red, how so?
A man who rejects private violence will find his woman fucking another man and will sit quietly in the corner crying until they finish. IE, a cuck.
Without private violence there’s no order, no private property, and no ownership of your wife and children. Slay the man who would dare take what is yours.
Right on.
We can kill burglars, so we can kill adulterers.
Shopkeepers should also be allowed to kill shoplifters who get stroppy when detected.
If you cannot defend your house, you don’t have a house.
I do not reject private violence, but I do not think that, after the restoration, we should allow private violence against those who committed misdeeds under the old state religion. It seems that we are split on the middle as to whether or not some misdeeds should be punished after the restoration, and I say that even if we decide that some of them should, we can still safely rule out Aidan’s solution.
You’re not going to vote your way to a Restoration; and Ignatius, Patron Saint of Acceleration, is not going to give you one while you sit poolside.
The whole point of the official religion is to define the rules of the game so the players can work it out themselves.
The sovereign pronounces a list of things to be proscribed, and doughty bunds across the land know what to do any time they encounter such – and in cases where you meet resistance, that is where you call in the huskarls.
Pseudo-Chrysostom, I know what you are saying. Jim says that no leftist misdeeds done under the old regime should be punished, and I agree with him. But I am saying that even if it were decided that XYZ leftist nonsense done before the restoration is just beyond the pale, it should belong to a state tribunal to judge and punish it, not private citizens.
There is a state tribunal: the good upstanding men of the community, naturally a part of the official gang, organized by the sheriff, duly appointed by the sovereign to do such organizing.
You’re letting the blinkers of your bovinization programming block you from seeing what a real state looks like.
(Real, meaning, naturally, in it’s original sense, of valuable.)
I would have no problem with that, of course. But Aidan seems to me to want to put those who were leftists or did bad things under the old regime in the “needed killing” category, that is what I disagree with.
The ‘private vs public’ distinction is a modern invention that cuts across the grain rather than along it; its general purpose is to confuse discussion, not assist it; and its more particular purposes are to meme more Right inclined folk into staying away from power (by equivocating dysfunction with ‘government’, and function with ‘not-government’,), and also to meme people seeking power and or service into engaging in communism (by equivocating principles of organization that lead to dysfunction with ‘government’).
>But Aidan seems to me to want to put those who were leftists or did bad things under the old regime in the “needed killing†category, that is what I disagree with.
Of course, you might find yourself in hot water then.
No need to be sarcastic. But I take it as your way of acknowledging my point.
Im sure you can agree that ‘not killing those who did bad things’ sounds rather strange to the ears when said explicitly like this.
I am not talking about putting people on a list to be killed under the new state religion for their crimes under the old. I am saying that a former leftist will simply be presumed guilty if he gets up to trouble, and if he gets up to trouble and a local man decides to do something about it, the courts will be completely uninterested in finding the good man at fault.
We want good men to be unafraid to use violence against leftists, and this will keep the former true believers in the old state religion in line.
Yes, Aidan, this is what I understood you as saying. I object to it, I think the only reasonable thing to do is wipe the slate clean.
Hail fellow reactionaries, leftists should face no punishment nor should they be prevented from organizing or suffer from an inferior legal status.
As the man says, “distrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful!
They are people of bad race and lineage; out of their countenances peer the hangman and the bloodhound.
Distrust all those who talk much of their justice! Verily, in their souls not only honey is lacking.”
Mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent.
Is it a good sign to discuss what should be done if in the condition of absolute power? I see echoes of natsoc forums.
It does not matter at all until close to such a state. Kill everyone who needs killing, kill noone else. The limit is unclear, and will remain so until far after the killing stops, when many who should not have been killed will already have been.
Well. Private violence is obviously the right solution. The matrix of justice is a conjugate of vengeance and hammurabi, which in a highly balanced state is christlike, ie minimizing externalities.
Jim, do you think active demon worship should be pardoned under a reactionary state ? Especially the Worship of Moloch.
I agree with you that mere misdeeds under old state religion should be pardoned if they affirm the new faith.
I am not talking about the NPCs here.
The core issue in this debate is what constitutes an NPC and what proportion of the population are they. Commienator grossly overestimates the latter and is decidedly ambiguous on the former. For the record, I think one way helicopter Groupons are in order for 3% of the US population (~10 million), and I think I’m being incredibly liberal in application.
10 might be enough.
27 is roughly my estimate.
Jehu took power after the state and priests of Baal had engaged in active lethal violence against priests of the abrahamic religion
He slaughtered them, but he left the worshipers of the Golden Cow alone – other than they found themselves out of state power.
This seems about right to me.
@TC
It looks like we are the edges of the spectrum, me at ~3% and you at ~10%. I worry that proscribing more than 3 will let evil people escape through technicality. On your position, I worry that you will have many slots to fill. I posit that my boundary of constraint will force the Inquisitorium to choose wisely so they count for more, while yours is begging for a Kmer style escalation.
I would be surprised if it was 3 percent. I think it is more likely less than 1% that is important and needs to be removed in a controlled and organized manner. The rest will either be killed off as they cause trouble or will fail to reproduce and will be gone in a generation. Official state policy will result in their elimination without the necessity of a large state apparatus for mass murder. You can have the results you need from official state policy, while relying on unofficial private actors to handle it.
I lean more towards The Cominator’s solution in the process of the overthrow. However, once we are done and assume control of the state, we need to quickly revert to an Inquisition as Jim suggests, killing only a couple dozen people per year. We want a small and controlled Inquisition under the hand of the King and the Patriarch of America. The current elite needs to go; killing many, while the best of them are retained and allowed to prosper under supervision. We must not make the mistake of Charles II and allow the Puritans to escape and regroup.
The offenders under current discussion are not violating a future state religion, but Natural Law at its most basic definition. No statute of limitations for them.
New religion will not be achieved without prior proliferation of Cominators.
Exactly!
What is a state!? A miserable pile of private violence!
Anarcho-tyranny is the capriciously unequal non-prosecution of unprovoked violence, and prosecution of non-violence, based only on the identity or party loyalty of the perpetrator.
We are advocating fair and impartial non-prosecution of corrective violence, regardless of perpetrator, committed in response to the recipient’s persistent failure to respect the property rights of other men or generally behave in a civil fashion.
The two could scarcely be less alike.
State police and state courts do not exist to punish every single stupid insignificant act of thuggery or buggery. That system can never scale and always devolves into actual anarcho-tyranny, police state, or both. State police exist to enforce public order, when a situation has escalated well beyond the capability of small-scale private violence to resolve. It has always been so, no matter what a few dusty old legal books have to say about it.
Of course, it is legitimate to kill burglars and adulterers, I know this. But it is anarcho-tyrannical to “decline to prosecute violence” against someone in the new regime because they did leftist stuff in the old regime, which is what I took Aidan to be advocating for.
Why is it legitimate to kill burglars or adulterer’s?
Old Testament and human nature.
A law that goes so radically contrary to human nature is not going to be obeyed.
I don’t think Pseudo-Chrysostom was actually asking why, he was trying to see if I would answer correctly, like a shill test.
It’s a socratic question. Im interested in why you think it is legitimate, and we will see how it plays out in connection with the original point.
You haven’t answered, by the by.
I haven’t?
Sure sounded like the answer to me. What is wrong with it?
jim, he was addressing me.
Yes, that’s a rhetorical question for Tityrus. The payload being that the same natural law that allows good people to kill bad people in the middle of crimes also provides for good people roughing up and harassing bad people who are not actively in the middle of doing bad things.
It depends, of course, on how deadly the regime becomes. At present, not that deadly. Oviously some serious crimes and lethal crimes against their own laws have been committed. They have murdered quite a few people, and if we get the chance those who were directly involved will hang for it. But ninety nine percent of the old regime were not directly involved, and will do a U turn and not notice that they have.
You merely state this as fact, without any reference to the definitions above or any alternative definition of your own. Starting to sound like a shill.
However, to give you the benefit of the doubt, maybe what you are getting hung up on is the difference between people doing leftism today (under the old regime) and those still found to be making trouble under a hypothetical new regime. With the exception of one or two individuals here, none of us really care about those in the former category as long as they don’t land themselves in the latter category.
I would still not call it anarcho-tyranny if the state declined to prosecute individuals going after former leftists, because it is not arbitrary or capricious, is simply based on their (former) misdeeds. However, because it is liable to lead to holiness spiraling and the mass destruction of productive capital, we are not going to permit that to happen. Garden-variety leftists who are unwilling or unable to reform will be denied legal protection, and high-level officials whose leftism under the former regime was simply too frequent and severe to forgive will likely be tried and executed as war criminals, or just helicoptered.
You can go with our guys, who will extend legal protection to those who make a sincere conversion and remain loyal to the new regime, or you can wait for a Stalin or Suharto who will just kill everyone and let God sort it out. Your choice.
>Even better, this is easily solved via private violence. Within living memory in this country, when my grandfather did not like the way my uncle’s teacher was teaching him, he walked into the classroom and broke the teacher’s nose.
All the children being targeted are bastards. The sort of private violence inflicted by fathers is probably still going on and getting absolutely no media coverage, but the groomers still know who is safe to abuse and who is not.
They all remember when this happened and they fear it might happen again:
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x68qw1f
The Loudon County Virginia girl raped in the bathroom by a fake tranny wasn’t a bastard. Her father was arrested for blasting words at the school board.
Fake tranny? WTF is that?
When a girl is sent to whore school she soon becomes a whore. That’s a bit different from an adult abusing her when a father might possibly do something about it. Her father didn’t kill the kid because he already knew his daughter was a whore(it wasn’t the first time they fucked).
Unlike some here despite my uncompromising attitude to shitlibs I have some sympathy for the unfortunate spawn of unowned women who after all did nothing wrong themselves.
I think its far more horrible to allow them to be abused at will by any paramour of their mothers, or the globohomo system then to dispatch vile demonic leftist scum to the their punishments in the hereafter. Once our order is established there will be so few of them anyway and those who did nothing wrong are a more proper object of christian compassion then those who choose to worship demons.
>I have some sympathy for the unfortunate spawn of unowned women who after all did nothing wrong themselves.
That’s because you’re a whore monger who’s purple pilled on women. Women don’t have moral agency.
Bastards are always trouble and the women who spawn them bring nothing but evil into the world.
From Webster’s: fake tranny (n): Dude pretending to be a chick, but conveniently doesn’t chop off his dick, because he might still want to fuck a real chick with it.
You’ve accepted the the woke premise that being a tranny is intrinsic and somehow holy. Men who dress as women are degenerate scum, dick chopping or not.
It might not be a very important difference at the end of the day, but there is a difference between the men who go tranny (chop or no chop) to achieve holiness under the current state religion and the men who do it as a sort of invisibility cloak to wear in women’s locker rooms. And of course both are different from the men who get sexually excited by the fantasy of being a woman and demand the rest of society validate their delusions.
All degenerate filth, but different kinds of degenerate filth.
I have accepted no such thing. There are degenerates who chop their dicks off (transsexuals), and degenerates who want to trick people info thinking they’ve chopped their dicks off (transvestites).
God commands death for them all.
A man who chops is his dick off is more likely to murder a girl instead of raping her as has happened several times now at American colleges. A man who dresses as a women to gain access to women is more likely to rape but generally it’s false pretenses for seduction rather than rape, as seen with Caesar’s wife. And a man who wears women’s clothing is a faggot who disrupts then normal male relations through his public displays of effeminacy.
Implying that a man bent on seductions through dressing as a woman is somehow worse than the other 2, isn’t compelling.
All trannies are fake, but there are different sorts of fakery. The perp in this case was just a ‘guy in a skirt’ and made no real pretense of being effeminate or being a woman, he just wanted sexual access to the women’s restrooms. I think a lot of tranny athletes are like this also, they just want an easier record book to play against.
Imagine something like the old “real men, real roleplayers, loonies, and munchkins’ trope. This guy’s a munchkin…
>I think a lot of tranny athletes are like this also, they just want an easier record book to play against.
The status aspect is huge. Trannies are very holy right now. Our hind brains tell us than status = reproductive success and people are doing the most insane things like removing the ability to reproduce in order to gain that status.
People arguing that wearing a skirt to get sexual access is worse than being a dick chopper are falling into the progressive holiness hagiarchy buy accepting the idea of “real trannies” vs fake. The more real the tranny = the more holy the tranny according to the progressive.
The average cuckservitive has already embraced this idea, while they send their daughter’s to whore school and whine when their daughters become whores. Progressives want this sort of behavior because it encourages more boys to wear dresses.
We don’t have to erase distinctions between categories just because they’re all degenerate or evil. Marxism and Progressivism are different ideologies with different lineages, and they both need to go, but you are better off knowing which species you’re dealing with in any given situation.
And every so often the opportunity comes up for salami-slicing (no pun intended), like with the TERFs. Knowing one’s enemy is just good strategy.
People arguing that wearing a skirt to get sexual access is worse than being a dick chopper are falling into the progressive holiness hagiarchy buy accepting the idea of “real trannies†vs fake.
Both are using deception to gain sexual access, and both deserve death. The dick chopper is trying to fool drunk straight men into giving dick. The dick tucker is trying to fool his way into the girls locker room to steal pussy.
The latter is obviously worse, and deserves lynching. The former will resolve itself unto death, either when the drunk straight dude realizes he’s been false-fagged, and beats the tranny to death, or when enough failed false-fag attempts lead the tranny to suicide.
Very good point
The temporary pause on the holiness spiral has been removed…
https://www.axios.com/biden-covid-vaccine-mandate-appeals-48ef4223-f705-48bf-9e33-7ca2c7d4431a.html
I’m trying to find more on this, was this a random judge on it…
Because I thought before this Biden lost everything on the full panel.
Check the link again they updated it with the details.
This is absurd. A 3-man panel from 6th Circuit Appeals cannot overrule a 3-man panel from 5th Circuit Appeals. The 6th didn’t even need to do this, since the compromised Supremes will undoubtedly rule for the jab.
Some may find it interesting to know – if they don’t already know – that several of the largest and most progressive companies never stopped citing the Biden mandate in their internal communications even after it had initially been overturned in the lower court.
Almost as if they knew that this would be the outcome – and just in time to start enforcing it.
But surely that cannot be the case, after all these are Trump’s Federalist Society judges, how could the elites possibly have predicted they’d side with boostermania?
I wasn’t even aware there was “pause”. When someone starts blabbing about the courts this, or the law that, I just want to beat them over the head with the 2020 election court cases where judges blatantly ignored the law at every turn and then they went full Soviet show trials with the J6 suckers.
I’m surprised by this because until this point this had been consistently kicked in the ass by the courts.
Off topic:
https://voxday.net/2021/12/17/no-racism-in-rpgs/
D&D finally comes clean that Orcs were always niggers. I mean we all knew it, but it’s just one of those things no one says out loud.
To borrow a line from Terry Pratchett, I haven’t hurled dice in anger in decades but I still have my original and beloved 1st ed AD&D books, tattered from much usage. Ironically, this development makes D&D far more demonic than it ever was back in its golden days.
Off topic: What’s the reason that a lot of militaries have traditionally kept their enlisted men unmarried? Higher testosterone?
I don’t know, and indeed nobody knows, the reasons are unspoken, and get lost in time. My guess is that the ancestral environment, a single man was apt to acquire wives, land, a home, a garden with women to work it, in war, while a man with a wife who was away at war was apt to lose them, so single men are innately more warlike than married men.
Armies today would be vastly more effective if successful war once again led to soldiers acquiring wives, land, a home, and a garden with women to work it. Trouble is that successful generals do not want to leave their troops behind. In an environment like late Republican Rome and imperial Rome, where a general has one war after another, he cannot do that. On the other hand, it is clear that early, and considerably saner and more virtuous Republic, did do that, because the issue with the conflict between latins and Romans was such acquisition.
Less bastards.
Pretty sure you get more bastards when unmarried.
How so? When married men die in war the sons become bastards.
Not that I’ve heard. Orphans tend to much better than bastards. There’s always a sense of rejection from having a parent up and leaving that I don’t observe with kids who father died. They’re not as well off as kids with both parents, but not nearly the garbage that bastards typically are.
Confirmed in a study by Henry Harpending and … and, er, a woman. In particular, girls whose father abandoned them made their sexual debut considerably earlier than normal. However, for orphans, this was not observed.
It was sometimes the case in Europe that soldiers would bring their wives and kids along with them, to cook the food, pitch the tents, and so on. Especially once standing armies led to career soldiers. But it is more that those who went to war tended to be unmarried and landless in the first place; second sons, the urban laborer, and so on.
I also wondered if the question itself was reversing cause and effect.
Islam has been giving us a pretty good demonstration of the kinds of men who readily and willingly go to war. If you want to recruit a lot of warriors in a very short time, then round up the angry and childless with no prospects and promise them a better life… maybe.
Men with roots and families can go to war and obviously should have the stones to do it, especially if their way of life is being threatened, but are always going to be more reluctant to wage expansionist or holy war, unless they’re either able to bring their families along or take home more women as concubines. DNA-wise, the odds favor staying at home and having another 10 kids.
Heard a vet claim Truman would say: “If an enlisted needed a wife, we would issue one.”
Less distraction, less benefits. Used to need CO’s permission.
Now, they don’t try to control it. If married they even let you live in a decent house instead of a barracks. Spouse and kids get free medical.
https://www.ibtimes.com/senior-chinese-religious-advisor-calls-promotion-atheism-society-2363850
>”…since President Xi took office more than three years ago [2013], the leadership has increasingly sought to promote a more traditional socialist line, while criticizing Western cultural and liberal values and other “unhealthy†influences. And Zhu’s remarks […the party should “unambiguously promote Marxist atheism to society,†and preserve “its leading position in the thinking of the masses of the people,”…] come soon after a national religious work conference – the first for 15 years – at which Xi emphasized that Communist Party members must not believe in religion, and said China must reduce foreign influence on religion to prevent “infiltration.—
But of course, the pretense of ‘irreligion’ is itself the always and already open port for the whig religion to hack in and install itself.
China sounds like it’s being converged hard by globohomo.
I think they’re trying to “self-converge” with Old Type Maoism as a defense against Globohomo. I don’t think it will work, but it is interesting to see them struggle. Kind of disappointing, too. They seemed on track for Monarchy with bugman characteristics. This is probably just fanboyism on my part, but I genuinely believe that the middle or high power that institutes neo-monarchy will be the next great power.
Dems are shifting course on Crime:
https://twitter.com/ShellenbergerMD/status/1471958010163449856
Not surprising. The Cathedral is very good at easing off the accelerator for stabilization purposes.
Girlfriend’s college friend’s husband just up and died apparently (in his 30s). Family will not provide cause of death for “privacy”. Guessing it was the vaxx/booster. If it actually was a covid death I would think they would loudly proclaim from the rooftops for status.
Either vax/booster or a sudden windowmaker heart attack that people think might have been tied to the vaccine, so they won’t speak about it. The heart attack rate has doubled in most places with high vaccine complience.
Encourage your friends and family to get their vaccines/booster shot asperated if they’re dumb enough to get them. Hitting a blood vessel during vaccination is likely to result in very significate heart problems or death. Asperation probably helps and multiple countries have adopted it now trying to reduce the damage from the vaccines.
Or better yet, tell them not to get the shot. We’re about 2-3 months out from Omnicom vaccinating everyone with no more side effects than a cold.
Speaking of heart attacks, my girlfriend’s father just had a heart attack at age 60 last week. He survived and is ok but very scary. He’s a great guy, conservative, salt of the earth, but like most boomercons pretty overweight from spiritual pollution. And also like most normie boomer cons he’s weak and let his wife bully him into the cloth shot, but that was months ago.
Do you think the shot could have caused his heart attack?
clot shot*
Whe are seeing a highly abnormal number of cardiac events in young healthy people. Emergency is overwhelmed by cardiac events. They are seldom lethal, and the patients usually make good recovery, but there are a remarkably large number of them. Some of them, not very many, lethal, heart related deaths have risen, but not a lot. But there is a major epidemic of less lethal cardiac events from which everyone is, for some strange reason, averting their eyes.
The true, safe, and effective vaccination has arrived. It is the omicron variant, just as cowpox was the immensely successful smallpox vaccine.
I’m afraid you are being too optimistic re omicron. It was a perfect bait and switch operation: make the new variant known, polls indicate massive disbelief at the fortuitous timing. What to do? Easy, allow the circulation of rumours that this strain is both far more infectious and milder. People get their hopes up and the cynicism of a few days prior evaporates. Now turn back on the strain being milder, but the idea of a far more infectious strain is established. Done deal.
Obviously does not matter how mild or severe it is, delta is nothing to write home about anyway and look what they got people to do.
Wait for the new and improved vaccine to come out in 2022 lol.
You overestimate their competence, internal coordination, and sanity.
Quite probable, but the smoking gun from my vantage point was the one- or two-days delay between the original “NEW variant named by WHO” in the evening news and “this may be far milder, maybe, possibly” I started to encounter in the places I follow. I found that pause highly suspicious.
Perhaps not Jim, they pulled this bait and switch on corona chan before.
Cathedral went from its a nothingburger to omg we’re all gonna die, must lockdown forever and all ballots must be mail in.
Not a bait and switch, a U turn.
A bait and switch is clever. A U turn is incompetence
I just tested positive with what is very likely omicron and can confirm it is identical to if not a little less severe than every cold I have ever had. I am not vaccinated.
They cannot bait and switch because this new variant really is incredibly, astonishingly contagious which I can verify based on the number of people in my own life turning up with it in the past month. Notably they have all had a somewhat worse time with it than I even though they are vaccinated and I am not.
This really is the true, safe, and effective vaccination and it is considerably safer than Delta and considerably both safer and more effective than the vaccine.
I don’t think it’s really true that “Delta was nothing to write home about”. I know healthy people who had a hell of a time with it and lasting pulmonary impairment, nothing like any flu. Delta with treatments that are unavailable or suppressed is however nothing to write home about.
A regular cold, sounds like just the thing. Everyone should get it.
And because vaccination tends to lock your immune system into attacking the wrong thing, the vaccinated are likely to have a worse time of it than the purebloods.
Remember that “vaccination” is a lie, for the word derives from cowpox. If it is not a harmless form of a disease that grants immunity to its dangerous relative, it is new technology that never quite worked right and is now working a great deal worse.
There appeared to be promising attempts at developing an intranasal vaccine that failed to attract government promotion and funding
It is not just the idea or rumor of a “far more infectious strain”. It really is a far more infectious strain, by order or orders of magnitude. The numbers reported in places where it is spreading are underreported by orders of magnitude because many people are testing positive with rapid antigen tests at home. Some forty percent of the people I know tested positive recently and the people I know aren’t so different than the people in my reporting area overall.
Vaccination by omicron is great. Problem is that your recovery status will lapse after 6 months. Reinfection will be difficult, perhaps impossible. So after 6 months the problem of compliance with vaxx mandates is back.
“Conservatives can’t even conserve their own cardiovascular systems.”
>And also like most normie boomer cons he’s weak and let his wife bully him into the cloth shot, but that was months ago.
A friend of mine who’s in great health had a heart attack at 39 around 6 months after his 2ed shot. A piece of plaque broke off from the arterial wall and clogged up his heart slowly over time. Besides that his heart is in great shape(no sign of heat disease besides this blockage) and they’re expecting a very good recovery. I’ve heard of other odd out of place blockages with people who normally wouldn’t be in the high risk group.
It may be that the spike proteins having entered the blood stream either cause inflammation of the arterial wall or that the immune system attacks the arterial wall trying to find the source of the spike proteins. This may result in small pieces of plaque breaking off and flowing to the heart and forming a partials blockage. Overtime time this blockage collects more material the way a stick in a steam forms a dam, fully blocks the heart and then results in a sudden heart attack, often known as a widow maker.
That’s a theory on the subject, but I’ve seen no actual work on testing this idea, but doctors are scared shitless to investigate or publish problems with the vaccines. The other major factor is how much of the spike proteins hit the blood stream, hence why the clot shot should be asperated. But even with asperation 12-14 people taking the shot will get detectible amounts of spike proteins in the blood. So also the weakest vaccine possible should also be taken. J&J>Pfz>Mod in terms of quantity of lower quantity of spike proteins.
Since are deaths are not nearly as high as they would be if every clot shot application was very damaging, I suspect randomness in hitting a blood vassal or leaking into the blood stream in large enough amounts is a major factor in the danger of the vaccine.
That is a very possible hypothesis. Also, I’m not particularly convinced that J&J is any less deadly than the other 2. People have dropped dead from that one too and the Cathedral seems to at least admit that and discourage it, while it will not for other two (because more holy?).
If the needle hits a blood vessel and the whole vaccine goes into your blood stream then you’re very likely to develop micro blood clots almost immediately. Though number dead from J&J blood clots is far less than the people who’ve died from blood clots from the other 2 vaxxes, that don’t ever seem to get bad press about their clotting deaths.
There’s no recorded cases of J&J causing myocarditis probably from fewer spike proteins produced by the shot. I’m sure it causes myocarditis as COVID itself causes myocarditis from the spike proteins with a bad infection, but the inflammation is probably less and people recover faster from it. Unless myocarditis is acute it takes a long time to diagnose it, so the J&J cases are just being missed as most people seem to recover from the more mild verities at least in the short term.
J&J isn’t bribing the FDA and CDC to the same level as the other 2 vax makers, which is why they’ve been shit on from the start. J&J also has issues with poor production controls(they assemble their vaxxes using niggers) probably resulting in tainted batches, but that’s probably an issue for all 3 makers given the state of the US. J&J might be worse in this regard, hard to tell.
You’ll note that no further vaccines have been approved despite multiple vaccines having been ready for quite a while now. The FDA and CDC shitsticks are making bank of those 2 so that’s all they need approved.
People who try to excise while having damaged blood cells cause further heart damage probably through micro clots. Which is why a lot of athletes are suffering horrific problems that don’t fade over time. People who get the vax should avoid strenuous exercise for at least 90 days while the blood recycles. Same goes for a bad case of COVID.
Joe Rogan interviews Dr. Peter McCullough. He starts with the history of how he treated patients, and goes all the way through the dynamics of spike proteins and everything else. Very dense with citations, personal research, and collaboration with other doctors. It’s a long interview, but I could not stop watching and will definitely watch it again with others.
https://rumble.com/vqt3p6-jre-1747-dr.-peter-mccullough.html
Good good article on the J6 Reichstag fire. Sold reporting on the people leading the group non of whom have been arrested or are even being looked for by the FBI.
https://www.revolver.news/2021/12/damning-new-details-massive-web-unindicted-operators-january-6/
The videos of Scaffold Commander are particularly harrowing now that we know he was a fed.
I always wondered why the scaffolding was there and why the cops didn’t secure it.
Also, my guess is now the “suicided†cops were cops that found about this completely fed-lead plot.
Brother, genuinely interested in an honest answer, and not asking to poke fun, outgroup, or insult: did the massive exchange over “Nazis: Left or Right” alter your perspective at all?
We’ve had our differences, and I know my place, so I don’t apologize for being an ass, it is my nature. By I do honestly esteem you a kommrad and I think you’re wrong, so I said it. But that doesn’t make me right or you stupid. So that’s why I’m asking, because I want to know how effective brigading a brother is. It might not be the best tactic…
My conclusion: The Nazis were a combination of left and right elements, but it’s not particularly relevant because even if they were the “National Capitalists” instead of the “National Socialists”, as neo-reactionaries we should be rejecting that just the same.
The problem with the Nazis weren’t that they were socialists, the problem with the Nazis is that they didn’t re-establish absolute divine-right monarchy.
wasn’t*
Ok. I think the discussion was worth it. I probably disagree on the math, but the total is the same, and well put, too.
Interesting take. My take is the problem with the Nazis is that they were socialists and continued to get even more socialist. It was their socialism that drove most of their more destructive policies. Hitler needed to stop moving left in after the night of the long knives and if he’d done so, everyone in Europe would be speaking German and praising Hitler for saving them from Marxism.
You can see the same sort of insanity going on with the wokees. They’re essentially National Socialists but with POC as their favored group(Note the national socialists were Germanic supremist, not white supremists). POCs need to be charge of everything. Since POCs underperform it must be the evil Jews, err Whites causing it. Every time an economic outcome fails for POC, they put the screws harder to Whites. It’s racial socialism much like the Nazis practiced. They plan a similar end game for whites as well.
If Hitler went capitalist instead of socialist, even if they had won the war they would been where China is now. Shitty state religion of “the partyâ€. Only absolute monarchy can solve the state religion problem. Not capitalism.
Not true, China was ruined and poor, and went overnight to the country with the highest GDP in the world (US GDP figures are fake and getting faker)
Germany would have started off with an advanced industrial economy, and had forty more years than China to advance from there.
Which, if Hitler had been total cynic about Nazism, is what he would have done. Unfortunately he was a sincere believer.
Not to belabor the point, but to everyone who says National Socialism was a left-wing movement, congratulations you’ve come to the same conclusion as the New York Times best selling author and liberal cuckservative Jonah Goldberg.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_Fascism
We’re struggling with a lack of primary sources here. Moldbug does a lot of hand waving on the subject and Goldberg is a neo-con grifter and can’t be trusted. What is quite obvious is a lot of Hitler’s program was very leftwing, and Hitler’s 3ed way socialism, or regulatory socialism is the model that a lot nations like the US Venezuela now practice. Hitler also got more socialist as the war went poorly for Germany.
TIK’s videos on the subject are interesting, have lots of primary source material, and he gets attacked regularly from cathedral trolls over his work. I’m more inclined to believe him over a proven liar like Yarvin and Goldberg.
There’s little doubt that Hitler was practicing war socialism with his confiscation of capital everywhere he gained power. One of the few areas of the Reich that actually produced good in large qualities was Czechoslovakia which was one of the few occupied areas that was practicing capitalism under SS occupation. Everywhere else saw a massive collapse in the production of all goods as the Nazis stolen everything they could, much like the Soviets.
You’re not understanding my comment. TIK is arguing the exact same logic as Jonah Goldberg. They both argue NS was some sort of left-wing movement. And Moldbug is not a proven liar. Yarvin is. There are mountains and mountains of primary sources that Moldbug cites. I’m not going to regurgitate his whole blog here. Anyone interested should check out https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/
No one is arguing he wasn’t. It’s in the name! The debate is if that precludes fascism (and nazism) from being a reactionary movement.
>The debate is if that precludes fascism (and nazism) from being a reactionary movement.
Was there a large movement of Monarchist who supported Hitler? Did the Nazis try to restore the Kaiser? I rest my case.
>They both argue NS was some sort of left-wing movement.
Seizing capital from one group to give it to another is socialism. The Nazis absolutely cut back on the degeneracy going on in Germany, but their economic program was all leftwing, just less leftwing than the Commies. Their social program was stopping at leftwing position X on social issues but not going more leftwing. Letting women vote, work, and not restoring the patriarchal family isn’t rightwing.
Yes. Particularly in the judiciary and the security forces.
All true. It’s likely we are in a pointless semantics battle. If you want to put the Nazis on the extreme right or the “less extreme left”, as Jims says, it makes no difference.
Nazism was a violent reaction against liberalism, ironically borne out of liberal democracy (which is why it was shit). It is the reason the Allies came down so hard on them and the mere mention of Nazis today makes progressives and liberals gasp in fear.
In the 20th century, it was not the reaction we (or Papen) wanted, but it was the reaction we got.
Hitler had genuinely reactionary supporters Pooch is right about that part at least but ALL of them ended up eventually regreting it.
Yes, particularly when it became glaringly obvious that Hitler was mad man.
Hitler was a madman? That’s a cathedral trope. Most of Hitler’s behaviors were quite rational, though often acting from a incomplete understanding of the world and he wasn’t exactly the brightest guy.
The reactionaries got sucked just like everyone who allies with leftists get suckered. Hitler never tried to restore the Kaiser and instead preferred to rule as a priest.
Hitler was relatively sane for a socialist up until at least 1938, Hitler frm 1942 was batshit.
Not slaughtering the British army at Dunkirk because he wanted to create some sort of united Anglo-Germanic racial empire was not particularly rational.
Hitler was very intelligent but with an insane worldview followed later by actual insanity but Von Braun said that even in Hitler’s later mad days he came away convinced after a discussion of rockets that Hitler was a genius.
He also had an photographic memory for every technical detail of armament… Hitler’s mental flaw wasn’t stupidity.
The context for what happened there is missing because Hitler was never interviewed on the subject. But the move seemed to be mostly about taking the time to secure the Panzer’s flanks with infantry, something that the German army high command and Hitler were both scared shitless about since nothing like a armed column attack had ever been attempted before. They felt at any moment the allies could smash through those very thin lines and chop the panzers up.
The initial halt order was from General von Rundstedt and Hitler later endorsed it over the objection of many in the German army. Hitler wasn’t a brilliant military commander and often made mistakes when he took tactical command, much like Lincoln or FDR.
But the majority of the German army thought the German air force would sink any UK shipped that tried to get the troops out of Dunkirk. But the UK got it’s shit together and established air superiority over the beach for most of the duration, greatly limiting the air forces ability to sink the transports removing the troops from the beach.
Hitler like most German statesmen and leaders never could understand anyone besides Germans. The moves they made always showed a profound ignorance of the true behavior of other peoples and the elites from those nations.
Later when he was being drugged up pretty regularly he was defiantly not rational, but actions like going the Ukraine for it’s food and oil during the invasion of Russia was quite rational.
Not in this area, he doesn’t. Which I pointed out before and you are still ignoring. Moldbug’s portrayal of Nazism is conspicuous for its lack of primary sources.
I don’t really care what Jonah Goldberg has to say on this subject or any other subject. This “anti-citation” is an inherently silly and puerile argument, right up there with “Pepe the frog is an Alt-Right hate symbol because the Daily Stormer posted it once”.
Cite evidence.
You want me to cite evidence of Moldbug not citing evidence? How fucking ridiculous can you be?
Prove your points with evidence or fuck off.
Pooch, cite Moldbug text and his sources. Then we’ll debate the issue.
I’ve read the collective works of Moldbug multiple times. I was impressed with his Nazi stuff at the time, but my own continued reading of history doesn’t support it, especially on the economics side(Nazis economics was not rightwing). It might be time to review, but there so much extra crap in his stuff that picking parts to debate is quite difficult. Moldbug was never focused.
Since you’re the one making the arguments it’s up to you to pull the sections of text and the sources.
I’ve already linked once below when this was originally debated.
Here’s another:
https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2008/04/open-letter-pt-2-more-historical/
Moldbug is not a source. And he is too full of wind to find his sources, and when you do eventually after much effort find them, you will find his sources on nazism, unlike his other sources, are secondary sources that date from after the time that official truth did a 180 on nazism, from being radical left, to being radical right.
Moldbug mentions Hitler in practically every post on UR. It’s a main theme of his blog. I’m not going to just post the entitreity of UR here but those are 2 that come to mind.
Arguing that the Nazis were radical left or radical right is semantic battle point that I’m wiling to move beyond.
The main point, that I hope we can all agree, is that Nazism was a reaction against progressive liberalism, albiet a poor one.
is a semantic battle at this point that I’m wiling to move beyond.* bad proof reading
Herb complains that Moldbug does not cite evidence, and you demand that he provides evidence of Moldbug not citing evidence.
You, Pooch, are being unreasonable and silly. No one can provide evidence of a negative.
It is your job to provide evidence of a positive. If Moldubug cited any plausible sources, you need to find them and present them, not Herb’s job to fail to find and present evidence of failure.
Having red that post Moldburg cited a Liberal Italian PM saying that Fascism used Reactionaries to come into power. It doesn’t speak to Reactionary character to Fascism. Nor is citing a Liberal PM who probably called everything he opposed Reactionary particularly persuasive, since that’s been the standard leftwing slur since the French Revolution.
Citing talking heads isn’t evidence of reactionary behavior, rather it’s evidence of talking heads opinions from a different age.
Nor is Fascism the same as National Socialism. You’re going to need a better post than that.
I’ve already wasted too much time on this likely meaningless semantic battle (labeling of “left” or “right”).
But again, is no one refuting that Nazism was a violent reaction against liberalism? If not, we are done here. Even Com seems to agree with that one.
Woke is a violent reaction against liberalism. And the number of liberals it has beaten up or killed is starting to catch up on the rather small body count of liberals killed by the nazis.
The more radical left devours the less radical left. What is new?
It was a reaction by nationalist working class vet commies against internationalist jewish priestly commies, but they were all different branches of commies.
Woke was derived from liberals in Harvard. They are just more extreme liberals.
Nazism was not derived from Harvard.
Big difference. Now you are getting ridiculous and arguing against your own blog posts. World War 2 was when Harvard conquered the world. You coined that phrase.
And the liberals derive from the super protestants, who derive from the holiness spiraled post puritans of the civil war, who derive from the Puritans that Charles the Second purged, who tended to be a lot more radical and power hungry than the Mayflower Puritans were.
While the Nazis derive from the radical Lutherans that Luther helped crush. The quarrel in Germany was Anglo derived left versus the left with Germanic roots. But it was just yet another interleft quarrel, though its roots go back earlier than most.
And so it was seen until America entered alliance with Stalin.
Nazis are commies and commies are nazis, near enough as makes no difference, and that is how everyone saw them until the alliance with Stalin.
As with all interleft quarrels, the smaller the difference, the more likely they are to kill each other.
And in course of conquering the world, defeated all variants of leftism not derived from their own roots.
Albeit communism was always something of a thorn in their side, being derived partly from Judaism, and partly from the holier than Jesus puritans that Cromwell crushed, rather than the Puritans that Charles the Second expelled.
Woke was derived from liberals in Harvard. They are just more extreme liberals.
Nazism was not derived from Harvard.
You sure about that…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Hanfstaengl
https://www.historynet.com/hitlers-harvard-man-ernst-hanfstaengl.htm
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna6487029
Could you expand on this? That is, about Nazism deriving from radical Lutherans.
Read Leftism: From de Sade and Marx to Hitler and Marcuse by Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn.
Notice whose name is in the title. If you find Kuehnelt-Leddihn wrong about National Socialism, refute him here, on Jim’s Blog.
No doubt will make for a good conversation.
Moldbug already refuted him and cites him extensively in UR. Again, everything I’m saying was already said by Moldbug decades ago.
over a decade ago* (not decades)
Tik is the leading authority on this and nobody has refuted him yet.
Watch the damn Tik video and try to make a detailed rebuttal of that or stop this nonsense.
Just stop with Tik. I’m not watching facefags on Youtube that have nothing to do with NRx. Read some basic Moldbug first before commenting on this.
Well plenty of people on here were very impressed with Tiks work on this here and Tik absolutely doesn’t care if leftist like him much (he does want to avoid getting banned by youtube) but thats it so if you want to argue a POV that is massively against the boards opinion you’re going to have to familiarize yourself with the massively well researched and detailed arguments of TIK and refute them.
Saying Moldbug said this doesn’t inpress… Moldbugs a smart guy but look at his views on covid he can be very very wrong about things.
You’re being ridiculous. I am a diehard Yarvin supporter and I’ve read his position. It is shit. What’s really going on here? You keep moving the goalposts over a pointless topic…
Yes slightly strange discussion.
If the debate is to continue on topic, Pooch should point us specifically to Moldbug citing primary WW2 sources.
I’m not sure how there can be a debate. Any close look at Nazi Germany economics shows socialism oozing from every pore. Yarvin got a lot of shit wrong in some areas. The Nazis were not as degenerate as Weimar Republic, but they went right on debasing the currency, instituting price/wag controls and industrially under performing during WW2 because of it.
Too many words have been wasted on it and I don’t really intend to waste much more but as my final comment on the matter:
Moldbug cites primary sources but none regarding the Marbug Speech which Jim particularly uses to address his position. I will cite one here: New York Times in depth expose of the Nazi Party 2 weeks after the Marberg Speech July 1st 1934 (you may have to pay to see it).
https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1934/07/01/95049451.pdf?pdf_redirect=true&ip=0
It appears we are all sort of right and sort of wrong. At this time, in 1934, there were left-wing and right-wing factions vying for control of the future direction of the Nazi Party.
The NYT lays out in detail the various members of each faction. Hitler appears to not be very interested in the economics side of things. Von Papen is not the leader of cuckservative party, as Jim says. He is the leader of the monarchist faction within the Nazi Party according to this article.
To quote the article:
So it was intraparty conflict. Pretty interesting article. And keep in mind this was before Night of the Long Knives in which Hitler seems to have killed off elements of leftists and rightists within the party.
Not there were not.
Rather were extreme left and less extreme left factions vying for control of the future direction of the Nazi party, and I don’t see the New York article as disagreeing with that account. By “right” they mean, in context, the right wing of the nazi party, not Junkers, Aristocrats, and Papen.
The New York Times article summarizes those to whom Hitler appealed as follows
The New York Times article summarizes Hitlerism as follows:
“revolt”, “socialism”: Does not sound right wing to me, and did not sound right wing to Papen.
Papen was appealing right to his own party base, moderate cuckservatives, to Christians and Christianity, and far right to the Junkers and the aristocratic generals. Those were not nazis. Some nazis were more acceptable to the cuckservative right and to the far right than other nazis, but that does not make them right wing. It makes them the right wing of a far left party.
Title of Article is:
“LEFT VS RIGHT IN GERMANY
Hitler’s Party Is Divided Between Those Who Want Social Reform And Those Who Would Preserve the Present Economic System”
And, of course, surprise surprise, they did not preserve the current economic system, which is what Papen was complaining about when he implied that Nazis were commies.
Papen also complained of class dictatorship, which is very much a Marxist concept.
Of course I’d love nothing more than to pay for a NYT article.
I do not believe that Papen was ever a member of the NSDAP.
Re Roehm and the radicals.
Yes Hitler suppressed them, but then after he suppressed them he got not less socialist but more socialist.
Yes he was from 1938-1945 but in 1934 he was “independent” but unofficially officially a member.
Recommended way to upload a pdf?
Here’s a free download for the article: https://ufile.io/ui4209kn
Is nationalism not right-wing? Is Hitler’s brand of Aryan White nationalism not extreme-right wing?
Leftism has no essence, merely tactics. In the age of empires, late nineteenth century early twentieth, when empires were the shaky applecart full of nice apples, nationalism was very obviously left wing.
Nationalism was very obviously left wing back when British officers were aristocrats, wore splendid uniforms and big hats. Very obviously right wing in the age of Globohomo, because these days it is “international” organizations doing the grabbing and kicking over the applecarts.
Nationalist opposition to the Austro Hungarian empire was leftist, quite obviously leftist, because that was the shakiest applecart around.
Nationalism was invented by the French Revolution, which was pure essence of leftism. But at the time of Hitler, when globohomo was getting started, left wing or right wing according to the circumstances. Versailes and Wilson was the beginning of globohomo. Woodrow Wilson internationalism, leftist, World communism, leftist.
It was a split in the left between nationalist leftists and internationalist leftists. Internationalist leftists won, so now nationalism is right wing. In a little while, in may be leftist again. Leftism has no essence, it is just entropy.
thank you.
Instinctively this seems very logical to me. The twentieth century was the century of different strains of leftism fighting it out, an argument I even remember Moldbug making, but judging from other comments here I might be misremembering.
No it isn’t, this has been extensively discussed before.
Nationalism was the old leftism, the holiness spiral on monarchism. In time, as leftists became globalists, the cuckservatives became the nationalists.
Socialism is a state planned life, which is exactly what Hitler had in made, only he wanted it planned for his countrymen — hence national socialism.
The old NYT article, if anything, absolutely confirms all this. It talks about a fight between the right and left wing sides of the party. On the right wing it names Hindenburg and von Papen, who want a return to monarchy, on the left wing it names Goebbels and Rosenberg, who want socialist reforms.
It is rather obvious which side won.
Leftist invention, though it’s useful if you live in a nation that doesn’t have Monarch. Works well combined with a civic religion. The left largely rejects nationalism now, but they pop it back in whenever they think it will be useful.
You really need to watch those TIK Hitler videos.
National Socialism took Marxist class theory and turned it into National Socialist Racial theory. He substituted Germans for the Workers. He wanted Germans in charge of all businesses because that would resolve the conflicts in society, so he seized all businesses owned or run by non Germans and gave them to Germans. In practice this meant he seized all non German businesses and Businesses who wouldn’t support Hitler and gave it to himself and Nazi cronies, typical socialist behavior.
Then he instituted wage and price controls while the Nazis debased the currency slowly, and caused a food shortage that began before WW2 with socialist farming policies that resulted in farmers selling mostly on the black market.
Racially, whites are wolves to whites, so not much point to invoking white or German unity. Hitler was always pissed the British for not buying into his German unity BS.
Nationalism can be right or left wing depending…
Nationalism of the ancient kind is greater tribalism based on shared language religion history and perhaps dynastic affiliation… this is right wing.
Romantic 19th century extreme nationalism is leftist and stupid.
Nationalism can only be a merely coincidental window dressing that could just as easily be a pretext for doing leftism as not, if the groups characteristics of various clades are merely coincidental window dressing, who could just as easily work in one nation as an other, that one nation can work as easily with one melange as any other.
But, since this is obviously not true, equally obvious that less given towards doing leftism – obvious that different things are more or less given to rationalizing more or less leftist action in this or that context.
In his memoirs, von Mellenthin wryly observed that the soviets quickly started bringing czarist military traditions back into vogue after getting their shit kicked in in the opening movements; such as impressive looking high status officer’s uniforms, shining epaulets and all. Even the orthodox church was catered too.
Is this to imply that czarist military traditions were the devil’s work? No, it implies that there was an extent to which the soviets were willing to make nods to divine law for the sake of their survival.
(A delineation of attitudinal comportments presents itself; those optimizing for hedons, and working to arrange for their guarantee when necessary; those optimizing for potency, and indulging in hedons when convenient (or that to which what is potent and hedonic is identical even); and those optimizing for death, insensitive (or antipathic even) to both.)
The most damaging ideologies in history are not pure fatuity, but fatuity agglomerated with certain kernels of truth; such that they are more easily accepted, more easily rationalized; such that actually do gain power, and thus thereby, actually can do such damages they promised to.
Nazis were nationalists but also
– Purple pilled on women
– believed in state control of economy and not free markets
– nationalized and centralized the police forces and security apparatus much like communists everywhere
– wage and price controls
– did not believe in natural hierarchy of society I.e. were egalitarian though obviously it didn’t extend to Jews and inferior races.
– hated the aristocracy I.e the monarchy. Hitler had lot of contempt for the Kaiser and his supporters as well as the Prussian officer class.
– Nazis had killing fields which is a dead giveaway of socialism (read Jim’s old website on why socialism needs killing fields)
Seems a lot left wing except the international brotherhood/humanism part of communism.
Ergo nationalists and socialists.
You haven’t even cited Moldbug here, you just keep saying “Moldbug Moldbug Moldbug” and linked to the UR home page. Reminds me of the “I don’t have time to educate you” posturing SJWs I used to deal with. What exactly are you citing and what is it based on?
If you don’t want to watch a YouTube video then fine, but if you’re possessed of the smallest level of self-awareness, you’ll stop shouting out irrelevant and repetitious “but Moldbug said so!”s like a five-year-old having a conniption fit. Especially don’t tell other people to “just stop” when you’re the one who necroed the topic.
Scroll down fucktard. Btw we all know you are the same Not Tom who bought into the covid hysteria after it was already hilariously obvious a Cathedral op.
Don’t know what you’re talking about, slick. I never took the coof seriously. Moved to the middle of nowhere just to get away from the hype, and was out there mocking face diapers while Glorious Leader Supreme Commander Trump was still huffing and puffing about Operation Warp Speed. Whenabouts did you realize that it was all a scam?
And quit changing the subject. That’s another SJW mainstay. If you’re going to pick fights, then fight like a man.
Moldbug, normally a big fan of old primary sources, suddenly turns to total reliance on modern secondary sources.
Nazis are commies, and commies are nazis, near enough has makes no difference. They were the less extreme faction of the radical left, and everyone saw them as the less extreme faction of the radical left. Then we went into alliance with the commies, and it suddenly became the official truth that nazis were radical right, and suddenly everyone forgot that yesterday they had been radical left.
Papen in his Marburg speech is speaking to and for the moderate cuckservative right, and also speaking to the radical right. He is calling the nazis commies, and that is what everyone at the time thought. That was the mainstream normie position, until it suddenly was not.
Do refute that Nazism was not a reaction to liberalism? If not, then probably not much to debate on the issue for all intents and purposes.
Do you*
Nazism was communism for angry veterans who blamed the internationalist and jew commies for Germany’s defeat, but still basically communism.
Bullshit.
To refute an evidence based argument, you need evidence.
Where is the evidence?
Nazis were commies and commies were nazis, near enough as makes no difference, and that is how everyone saw it until official truth did a 180 when we entered alliance with Stalin. Orwell tells us that the only people who thought there was a big difference were nazis and commies, and that was true until official truth suddenly made the commie view official.
We were allied with Communist Russia well before Stalin. We created created communist Russia. America is a communist country. Communism comes from Harvard.
The SJW playbook:
1. Start with outlandish or divisive claim
2. Double down when challenged, saying “it’s obvious” and “everyone knows”
3. When presented with contradictory evidence, roll eyes and say it’s from a discredited source or complain that it’s tedious
4. Continue repeating original claim while progressively raising the bar for opposing evidence, e.g. demanding proof of a negative
5. If cornered into presenting favorable evidence, make vague references to people and books who supposedly agree (but avoid direct quotes)
6. Blame the other party for either starting the argument or dragging it on too long, while making sure to have the last word in every dialog branch.
Trouble with SJW tactics is that they’re only effective with a brigade, which is only effective with no moderation or sympathetic moderation. One person doing it all by their lonesome is just sad.
I got seriously pissed when Pooch demanded that you prove a negative, and then declared victory because you had not.
That is not the kind of debate that I hope for in my blog.
Jim, maybe a master list of Right and Left associations, philosophies, movements, etc? It could be an ongoing thing, too, and a containment post for “””discussions””” like this. Hearkening back to something I brought up a while ago, is it possible to have a “lobby” or some place for regulars to meta- discuss? Sorry if that’s a dumb question, not web developer.
>Nazis were commies and commies were nazis
Not seeing a difference between commies and nazis is like not seeing a difference between races. Nice if you can afford it, but at the time, one of those groups was significantly more likely to kill you depending on who you were.
If you were a Jew in Germany, it mattered, (nazis more likely to kill you) and if you had a small business in Nazi Germany, it mattered (commies more likely to kill you). But, under present circumstances, does not matter.
The holy faith of woke has so far proved vastly less lethal than commies, though they have tasted blood, and I fear for the future, while commies were more deadly than Harvard even in the west where they were out of power and operating underground while Harvard was in power. Though lately Harvard has been horrifying lethal in Africa, but still small potatoes compared to commies.
And the majority of cathedralites/NPCs/antifas think nazis are far rightwing. If you are trying to use some sort of inverse association logic (dumb people think something therefore it must be false) then that would backfire here horribly.
I find this debate tiresome. It is news to me that Moldbug calls NS a right-wing movement now. He called it a mutation of democracy on UR.
If you take the historical perspective of an eagle, sure looks like NS is a resurgence of 19th century “romantic nationalism”. Which was leftist in its time, attempting to dismantle the institutions of the old aristocracy, and leftist in essence, boiling down to a notion that a nation is to be ruled by the “spirit” of that nation, as expressed through the collective democratic will of the people. Arguing over whether the Nazis were real socialists or not is missing the point; they are leftists because of the “nationalist” part.
By the 20th century, the fact that nationalism acknowledged the reality of blood, or race, and the fact that it believed that the spirit of the nation could be embodied in a single great leader to whom the masses hand over absolute power, made it intolerably right-wing in comparison to the leftism of the 20th century. If you are debating within the 20th century frame, nationalism is indeed right-wing, but with a proper historical frame it is not. Hitler revived an older and saner form of leftism to combat a newer and more insane form of leftism.
The reactionary position is that a nation is not ruled by its racial spirit, but its elite, and it is the blood of the men who do great things that defines the nature of the nation. I know a rare few “National Socialists” who believe in aristocracy, and that the path to a new aristocracy lies through revolution, closing the door behind them as they take power, and that the will of the people is merely a last resort, using leftist tactics to install an ancient order. I disagree with them, but I can also call their position right-wing. Chances are, though, that any given NS you run into is not one of them.
Moldbug’s latest, https://graymirror.substack.com/p/monarchism-and-fascism-today, is what he thinks of fascism now. He calls it populist. “Right wing” doesn’t appear.
Calling nazis “socialist” makes little sense except to an American. In the post-WWII American domestic political classification, “socialist” is a catch-all term that describes one side (the wrong/left one) fairly accurately. Trying to place Goering there is of little practical utility. (To paraphrase a well-known philosopher, if your political classification system puts tax increases and Goering in the same category, of what use is your system?)
Interestingly, this system is becoming obsolete even in America. When you go from “we must destroy the economy by taxing capital gains” to “we must destroy the economy because climate change” to “we must destroy the economy because covid” to “we must put the unvaccinated in camps”, the tried and true “socialist” label has more and more difficulty keeping up with the challenge. This is a slide into insanity, not a slide into socialism.
The “crypto-governance” system he describes is basically the one jim is building right now.
But going on a Default Friend’s podcast? Default Friend doxxes right-wingers on Twitter and gives the info the journalists. It is so irritating that he hobnobs with people like that while giving jim and the rest of us the cold shoulder. I know he has to because he’s a namefag and a facefag, but still.
Take it FWIW, but Yarvin actively dissociates from all of NRx sources, as in actively ignores them. I think it is terrifying in the extreme to create something over which you have no real control. He birthed a babe, walked away, and now his child is a powerful man grown. I’m probably cutting him too much slack, but when I choose to incorporate a loyalty, it’s full on ride or die.
Socialism is organized insanity. Many such cases.
A colloquial analysis of use-cases involving the word fascism over the past 70 years produces a simple and obvious definition; the word fascism is used when describing things preclusive to communism. Policies that preclude communism are fascist. People that preclude communism are fascist. Under such a retrochronic lens, historical behavior of the National Socialist German Worker’s Party as it existed could be described as contingently fascist, though, arguably, not inherently fascist.
It is quite possible that, given time, if it kept to itself (and was left to itself), the Reich would eventually go the same way the Middle Kingdom did, which is a pivoting towards national capitalism, or ‘socialism with Deutsche characteristics’ as one would say. Probably even more likely than the CCP case, actually, since in latter years the chinese have been showing some rather unfortunate reversion to type.
The geo-strategic serendipity of China’s case was that it was a big target in an out of the way location, with respect to powers in Europe or America. Hence, even as it bled itself dry, none there were around both interested and capable of knocking them over (much like Russia as well). And hence, over a long time scale, there was a chance for men with a keener ear for the music of the spheres, such as Deng Xiaoping, to take the reigns of power.
What can followers of this blog do to help rectify the Earth’s shortage of CO2? I’ve always preferred the texture of disposable cutlery so might use them in the house full time . I always buy new reusable bags in supermarkets and use them only once, but thinking of buying several each time and throwing them in the trash on my way out
Rumor out of NYC, that bums are renting their arms for vaxx surrogacy. Cute, but each clever “life hack” against the tyranny, rather than the deserved reaction, is just allowing them to inch closer to chipping everyone.
https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/093/453/322/original/cccd0dd1d3488802.png
You can’t really ask a bum for ID.
Australia-style quarantine camps now coming to America…
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2021/12/18/new-york-state-assembly-advancing-legislation-to-create-involuntary-covid-quarantine-camps/
https://www.freightwaves.com/news/exclusive-central-freight-lines-to-shut-down-after-96-years
Inflation sinks trucking company. They couldn’t hire enough drivers at a price that allowed them to operate with a profit.
@pooch,
Replying to your post on Aryan centric nationalism of the Nazis.
Ethnocentric Nationalists are not extreme right wing. That’s a leftist meme. Depending on the other policies it may be left wing.
Lots of modern nationalists including ethno Nationalists are merely less left than the international humanists/progressives. Hence right wing by their definition .
I’d humbly advise Jim to make a post re the nazis being left, if he’s still interested in the argument (looks like he may not be anymore though)
I was and still remain of the opinion that they were rightists, and far, far too much is being made here of their supposed socialism, where various posters consider deficitary spending, foreign exchnage controls, rationing and control of big business socialist. You know, like Nixon lol. I’ll read up a bit more on the economics of those years and come back prepared on the argument.
Nazi autarkhic socialism in preparation for total war may be excusable…
Nazi socialism as a fundamental end goal (which Hitler talked about) and retarded inefficient socialism in agriculture is not excusable and puts them on the left.
You can’t be right wing and favor a planned economy in the long term, it grossly violates the freehold principle.
It’s more than economic socialism. Nazis were egalitarian in social outlook with exception provided for Jews and inferior races. Also purple pilled on women. They hated aristocracy and monarchy and any natural order of society.
Also a lot of Nazism looked like communist state: secret police, increased centralized security forces, killing fields.
You’re falling for the Harvard and cathedral definition of left and right wing.
It depends on the kind of socialism.
“Vote for me and you can take other people’s stuff” is the very essence of leftism and the core and essence of Hitler’s program. See Shakespeare’s parody of the eternal leftist, Jack Cade. It has been centuries, and they have not changed in the slightest.
Unfortunately the elite had been busy robbing people with funny money, an activity that undermined popular support for property rights. The kind of people who would ordinarily shoot socialists were now feeling sympathetic socialism, having been hard done by the elite. The same thing may well happen in America if hyperinflation hits, as is looking likely.
If, on the other hand, Ghengis Kahn tells his army to loot and burn a city and kill anyone that does not look useful as a slave, it is right wing socialism, and will lose the long term benefits of conquest. But it may well be sound to forgo the chance of a reliable tax base and good logistics to ensure one does not have enemies at one’s back.
I think its when socialism is a utopian end in itself that it becomes unforgivably leftist.
I would certainly promise that the priesthoods houses property and daughters would be distributed to people on our side after they were “resettled”.
The losers in a war generally lose their shit to the victorious side and our warriors must be rewarded. Though we shouldn’t take what was gained through useful labor. Looting the Jews in Nazi Germany only harmed the Germans.
Women in general should be a socialized good were every man of property is given one and only one woman as his official wife. Letting the alpha, the rich and the powerful hog all women shouldn’t be allowed.
The people on my purge list who ever did anything useful you can count on one hand.
Purge lists have a tendency to expand beyond the guilty to those who are merely rich enough to loot while pretending they belong on the list. It’s good to set hard limits.
I’ll check re agricultural policy, seems a promising lead.
Obviously planned economy is left, but I see no signs of a planned economy AFAIK, indeed strong effort to resist setting up one. Mises tries mightily to make nazis look like soviets and fails in my eyes. He’d be a primary source, I reckon.
“Obviously planned economy is left, but I see no signs of a planned economy”
They literally had “The Office of the Four Year Plan” which was supposed to be better than the Soviet Five Year Plan.
I am ignorant of this office, will check out.
It scarcely matters.
The Nazis are leftists because selling socialism, not because attempting to implement it.
Central planning is invariably chaotic, so invariably devolves into something very like Ghengis Khan’s right socialism.
The issue is, they are promising people who want to loot that looting is on the table. It is not what they actually did, for what socialists wind up doing is never what they thought they were going to do.
If Hitler said, “Only looting foreigners. German capitalists we need, and they are going to be fine and keep on with business as usual”, then nazism would have been primarily nationalist, and only incidentally socialist. But that is not what he said, and not what he wound up doing. But what a movement actually wound up doing is irrelevant to whether a movement was left or right, since leftists never do what they thought they were going to do. Their theory (which was always merely an ad hoc rationalization for knocking over the applecart and grabbing some apples) gets abandoned for pure entropy, and entropy is formless and predictable only in that it can be predicted to be unpredictable.
Jim, what do you mean when you say that the Nazis derive from “the radical Lutherans that Luther helped crush”? Are you talking about the Anabaptists?
Perceptive as always, you mention the distinction that matters. I strongly suspect the former situation, judging by analogy to what I see nowadays and the hollowing out of libertarianism.
As I said, Hitler had the support to go much further left than he did in the ’30 and declined to, so seems like right-wing reaction with a severe entyism problem. But I’ll read up some more re econ.
“Could have gone lefter but didn’t” is your qualification for what is Right… I may be a midwit, but that’s fucking retarded.
It is would be retarded, thankfully also not what I said.
My standard of right is the middle vs the alliance of high and low, nothing to do with policy, economic or otherwise. The point you reference was made to drive forward my idea of nazis as rightwinger with a severe entryism problem, not to prove them being right-wing.
“My standard of right is the middle vs the alliance of high and low”
That is stupid. The right stands for eternal truth and natural law…
The left promises to immanentize the eschaton generally by knocking over apple but ends up bringing about hell on earth.
Lol, went from retarded to just stupid.
Watch me make my way in the world boys
It is stupid, though. I don’t know what instigated this recent zerg-rush of “here’s what I think left/right really means” comments, but I wish it would stop.
We know the Jouvenelian model. And we know the cladistic model, the social-network model, the antinomian model, the revolutionary/regicidal model, the economic model, the R/K model, the status-maximizing model, the warrior-priest model, the game-theoretical model, and the thermodynamic model, and that’s just off the top of my head. It’s been done. We don’t need remedial classes by people who appear to be freshies themselves.
The usually good and insightful discussion that happens here is all of a sudden being drowned out by recycled alt-lite debates which weren’t that interesting in the first place. Let’s reverse the trend.
Surely even you would agree that when challenged to explain whether I think this or that is right I would explain myself. Or should I rather decline to answer a straighforward question lest I offend those who disagree?
The definition of leftist is important and I haven’t really seen it defined to my satisfaction ever…
In fact if you can list all those models (I’m familiar with SOME but not others) it would be good.
I have one model that explains them all.
Leftism, as a broad group with many conflicting factions that nonetheless coordinates and cooperates effectively, is the group that is continuously cooperating and coordinating to take other people’s power, money and status, without regard for how those people earned their money and status, and pursuing power without regard for the mandate of heaven, without regard for whether that power is being used judiciously to provide a safe and functional environment for everyone where everyone has the ability to pursue their own interests in positive sum ways.
Rightism does not want anyone to lose money and power and status to someone else, unless there is a good reason for it, a reason that is broadly accepted, and broadly accepted for good reasons – the logos. The rightist does not like instability, and does not like unstable power. The leftist is always coming up with “good” reasons.
I’m surprised, because I thought all of those models had been covered to some degree on this blog. But if commenters who’ve been around much longer than I have aren’t familiar with them, then I guess I’m mistaken.
To avoid an insanely long rambling post, I’m just going to write one sentence on each:
– De Jouvenel AKA HLvM: Elites weaponizing underclass (collectively “left”) against middle class (“right”).
– Cladistic: Leftist ideologies all share common memes and derive from common ancestor(s).
– Social-network: Leftism inferred from personal/institutional ties, parties attended, etc.
– Antinomian: Christian definition, elevating “divine grace” over established law, usually to describe Puritan/Quaker movements.
– Revolutionary: Actual etymology of “Left/Right”, the revolutionaries vs. royalists – more generally, hatred of non “consensual” authority.
– Economic: Leftism as destruction/”redistribution” of capital, rightism as capital creation.
– R/K: Leftism/rightism as manifestations of different reproductive strategies (r and K, like rabbit vs. wolf).
– Status-maximizing: Leftists as “sociopathic status maximizers”, best to just google it.
– Warrior/priest: Jim Lite, leftism as priestly rule, rightism as warrior rule.
– Game-theoretical: Leftism as defect/defect, rightism as cooperate/cooperate.
– Thermodynamic: Leftism as social entropy, that which creates disorder and regresses us to a more primitive state without constant energy input.
But this list isn’t supposed to be a “pick any one you want” buffet, the reason the list exists is that all of the models have some predictive power (some more so than others) and none of them are complete. Because leftism has no essence. You could no sooner come up with a definition of leftism that is neat and tidy and accurate than you could make Communism work in practice.
Good answer.
My answer was intended as a generalization of the common element of each of these excellent answers, the commonality in all of them, not intended to contradict any of them.
The R/K model lacks predictive power in the short term, and fitting it to current events is driving its author insane, but it has considerable power in describing the long term cycle of races and civilizations.
Leftism is basically cancer in the national organism.
Hey HerbR, you neglected to tell us which of those are stupid, come on don’t leave us hanging.
All of those definitions are excellent, none of them are stupid, except that R/K definition lacks short term and current events predictive power, and attempting to over apply it will drive you mad.
I have no problem with the definition Jim just posted either, of course. Certainly much better than the freshie definitions polluting the comments over the last few days. The only caveat I’ll mention is that the definition itself relies a lot of subjective or hard-to-define terms (“power”, “status”, “coordinate”, “functional”, etc.), which, while I would expect most reasonable people such as us to broadly agree on their meaning, can still become exploitable weak points for entryists over a long enough timeline. Wrongification of names is their signature move.
Some of the models, like cladistic and entropic, also rely on subjectivity and judgment. But others, like game-theoretical and r/K, do not, they are based in literal math or incontrovertible easily-observable phenomena. That is why one should not come to rely too heavily on a single model – if you suspect you’re in the presence of an entryist, can fall back on any of the other models to test the hypothesis. Fault-tolerant systems always have built-in redundancies.
P.S. WordPress’s aggressive indentation and full-text justification made my last post look like a lot more of a garbage heap than it really should have been. Sorry for that, don’t think there would have been any way to clean it up.
I’m not sure if you were aiming at humor or petulance there, but I’ll answer the question [again] anyway:
What’s stupid is becoming highly invested in one specific, narrow theory of what the political left or right means, and arguing for supremacy of that theory.
I do think HLvM has fairly low predictive power on the scale, mainly because it is more of a tactic than a trait, and modern progressivism is mostly a middle-class phenomenon. But it is still worth keeping in the toolkit as a means of checking whether some idea that made it past all the other filters is actually crypto-leftism. It’s not the idea that’s stupid, it’s the elevation of that idea above all others.
“Left” and “right” themselves are just shorthand anyway, like Cathedral or Globohomo. It’s not worth the ink to argue about whether X is left or right, only whether it is good ideas or bad ideas. Communism and Nazism were both big piles of bad ideas, Nazism having slightly fewer bad ideas.
Okay, one more effortpost and then I’m (hopefully) done.
I think that trying to fit any universal theory to both the history and present is liable to eventually drive its holder insane.
If you hold rigidly to the economic definition of leftism, you’re going to do be doing a lot of mental gymnastics if you want to maintain that Locke and the Libertarian Party are on the left – it’s really obvious when you drop the economic definition and use almost any of the others, but if you reject all the others, well then they’re “obviously” on the right.
Similarly if you’re engrossed with de Jouvenel, you’ll spend all year trying to explain away the creature known as SWPL. Exclusive to r/K, and the fertility rates alone will make no sense to you. Antinomianism explains progressivism really well but Marxism horribly. Even the game-theoretical model is imperfect as leftists are clearly capable of engaging in short-term cooperate-cooperate as long as they are cooperating with other leftists to take status or power away from those who naturally earned it.
The right-wing mind, maybe the human mind in general, is strongly inclined toward hierarchies and especially those with one entity at the top. But nature is a lot messier than that. There are species for which biologists still argue over which genus they belong to. Is Pluto a planet, or just an asteroid? Taxonomies always seem easy until you try to implement them, then they get real hard. Our taxonomies and hierarchies are imperfect because we are imperfect.
Instead of arguing over the One True Model ™, we could apply our intellect toward refining the models, understanding when and how they apply to different scenarios, like physicists do with Newtonian mechanics vs. general relativity vs. quantum mechanics. None of the models are wrong, they just have different uses, and attempts to create a useful uber-model continue to fail spectacularly.
No one model fits, and yet not hard to recognize leftists from all over history.
I know them when I see them.
>and modern progressivism is mostly a middle-class phenomenon
People make a good argument that it’s rather a phenomenon of too many middle class people in elite occupations (due to everyone going to college etc.)
Excellent Herb, thank you. I’m a broken record on this, but the last year of my life has forced me to accept that, within the confines of my chosen tribe, I’m a midwit. Within my social circles I am above average. Within my profession, I’m borderline polymath. The relative nature of my capacity to contribute in these varied environments has done a number on my self-esteem. Cry moar faggot, indeed. Emoblogpost is a caveat for stating that I am out of my depth here. I can keep up with most of the fellas, but reading is not comprehending. Herb, your QRD on those systems of analysis are immensely valuable to me. I’m pretty sure I could do what you did, but it would require gallons of spilled ink, turning signal to noise. While ensconced in this monastery of bits, it is important to maintain high barriers to entry, elevated discourse, and harsh repercussions for fed/tard/low effort posting. But at some point, we’re going to have to sally forth, and it would be wise to have double jacks, mallets, screw drivers, tweezers, and photolithographic… doodads, at our disposal. There is a value to stating the presumed obvious, because there’s no guarantee of high worthiness in the future recipients of the great and good work being done here. For any that might have missed it, St. John just posted a miniature essay that is quite simply brilliant (for me, could be very obvious for others). It will pingpong in my cavernous skull for a while, and over time more truths will reveal themselves. Such are the talents he possess. GNON’S wonders never cease. But your concise list has a power all its own (again, to me; others may find it pointlessly brief). I’m not going to ponder it, reread it, discuss it with my wife, etc. I’m going to save it, memorize the basics, and inject it into my rhetorical rhapsody immediately. Value exists in application, and the capacity to apply varies wildly.
So thank you, my nigger, even if it pained you to pen it.
https://www.reddit.com/r/socialism/comments/66qjzr/well_well_fight_you_for_it/
Basically what Jim said, straight from the horse’s mouth.
@HerbR,
Both humor and petulance, and am not done.
For my benefit, when a debate around the proper classification of a movement rages on, it is apparently stupid to take a side based on a simple model which can be falsified, is it so? Would the smart thing to do be to generally hold nazis of the right or left bases on no prior model, but switching implicit models in accordance with the ebb and flow of the conversation?
Not challenging the established fact of my stupidity, or the futility of the debate of course, but one always seeks improvement.
Not seeing any of the models on which Nazis were right wing.
– De Jouvenel AKA HLvM: Elites weaponizing underclass (collectively “leftâ€) against middle class (“rightâ€).
Check. Peasants and impoverished former middle class promised the stuff of the middle class and the rich
– Cladistic: Leftist ideologies all share common memes and derive from common ancestor(s).
Immediate descent from volkish german movements and cross fertilization with fascist movements.
– Social-network: Leftism inferred from personal/institutional ties, parties attended, etc.
When Hitler was in charge of the National Socialist party, no such personal institutional ties, but loads of ex commies in the Nazi party, and before Hitler, lots of interleft links.
Moldbug argues that this shows the Nazis right wing, but I argue that all it shows is that the usual interleft internal quarrels turned as nasty as the often do.
– Antinomian: Christian definition, elevating “divine grace†over established law, usually to describe Puritan/Quaker movements.
Racial consciousness suspended all laws. Much as woke now suspends all laws.
– Revolutionary: Actual etymology of “Left/Rightâ€, the revolutionaries vs. royalists – more generally, hatred of non “consensual†authority.
Revolutionary, they said it all the time.
– Economic: Leftism as destruction/â€redistribution†of capital, rightism as capital creation.
Socialist
– R/K: Leftism/rightism as manifestations of different reproductive strategies (r and K, like rabbit vs. wolf).
Nazis were not much for marriage.
– Status-maximizing: Leftists as “sociopathic status maximizersâ€, best to just google it.
Inapplicable till Nazism became the state religion. Before, not true, after, totally applicable. Within the Nazi party we saw plenty of holiness spiraling, which of course rapidly worsened when goodies were on the table, among ordinary Germans, obvious status maximization.
– Warrior/priest: Jim Lite, leftism as priestly rule, rightism as warrior rule.
Hitler and the Nazis hated the aristocrats, and put the generals firmly under the thumb of the politically correct.
– Game-theoretical: Leftism as defect/defect, rightism as cooperate/cooperate.
Of Hitler and Stalin it is said that the most untrusting of men (Stalin) trusted the most untrustworthy of men (Hitler) The ideology of Nazism was that everyone should cooperate under state and leader, but Hitler went into alliance with Papen, which, as so regularly happens with radical left/moderate right alliances, wound up burning the moderate right.
– Thermodynamic: Leftism as social entropy, that which creates disorder and regresses us to a more primitive state without constant energy input.
Nazi socialism rapidly developed the usual disorder of socialism, which really bit them hard during the occupation of Greece and the invasion of Russia.
HLvM is my go-to model, so I’ll only adress that part of you post. All of the below is based on my imperfect understanding of the era, so happy to be contradicted on any factual point.
Nazis came to power specificaly on the back of a movement that used street gangs to protect paying small businesses from roaming commies, the very definition of a middle-class movement. Some here have floated the same idea.
They did promise other people’s stuff, but always foreigners, so not relevant to the internal political discourse. Whilst they did expropriate many german citizens – notably jews – these were always sold as interal foreigners.
Finally, their whole propaganda was premised on the Jew being a quasi-1 percenter who used his position of power to steal and leech off the nation, etc, so typical HLvM propaganda. Anglin uses the same nowadays.
On the “low” front, they banned trade unions and froze wages. La Wik claims real wages never rose during the entire regime, when adjusted on a per hour basis, pretty serious if true for a movement that got started at the hieght of the depression.
Many confounding factors on the econ front, but no planning ever on an econ-wide basis, though much planning relevant to foreign exchange controls. 1943 and Speer are debatable, but rather clear Hitler resisted the move until he thought no other way of winning was possible.
Very same as italian fascism really, or Hungarian or Romanian movements, all nations that suffered a red wave inthe ’20 and learned the hard way.
I don’t see a debate raging on, I see 2-3 individuals making a
boneheadedcontroversial assertion, being chastised at first politely and then with increasing exasperation by the majority, but irrationally refusing to concede the point, then coming back hours/days later to “and another thing”-ify it, like a caricature of the 3rd letter of the Greek alphabet that Dr. Professor Sigma Game UHIQ, Esq. shills relentlessly, more commonly known as having enough sand in your vagina to build a Cray Supercomputer.Certainly, the topic continues to be discussed, it’s plain as day that we don’t all share the exact same inner monologue about this overhyped single-dimensional ideological E-meter, but I’m almost positive there was nothing “raging” about it until the hissy fits and flitty flounces started a few days ago.
Jim has made his position on the subject rather clear, in my very humble and totally not smug at all opinion, and while he is entitled to refine that position and frequently does, it is his blog and we should roll with the punches. This is our roleplaying/practice sim for the position of trusted advisors and lieutenants and bishops, quietly offering the occasional “sir, [audible comma], don’t you think maybe you should…” in the commander’s ear when he starts talking nonsense after the fourteenth glass of single-malt, but always remembering our place and why we’re here in the first place, because none of us could spin up a community this size and maintain it for 12-aught years. Well, maybe Aidan if he hadn’t self-terminated out of justifiable paranoia.
In summation, your latest question presupposes that this debate, if it can so be called, was simmering beneath the surface for months – roiling, even, and desperately needed to be had, lest we all break out into fist-E-cuffs over our total mutual incomprehension and ensuing asabiyyah collapse. In reality, I think, it was at most a very minor point of inconsequential disagreement – that even if some fellows thought that Der Fuhrer was more Right-Wing than Charles II and Charles the Hammer combined on account of some obscure technicality, we all agreed that his butt-buddies weren’t the sort of club we’d want to emulate because of its total and catastrophic failure. And since Moldbug himself (apparently the “root cause” of this tiff) said that the NSDAP was an object lesson in how not to have a Reaction, there was really never much of a debate to be had, except as academic wonkery in the nascent but burgeoning field of leftometry.
To put this in real succinct terms for the differently-attention-spanned: Nazism being “left” or “right” is a bikeshed problem. What actually matters is that it’s a big pile of garbage ideas that produced garbage outcomes, because GIGO. It matters as much as where Mainline Protestant Megachurch Franchisee #314159 lies on the Secular-Pious Axis – i.e. not very much at all.
I see, so what really incenses you is the debate itself, and thus all those who disagree of such a minor point are fools. Obviously not for our host, who has but to let us know and I trust all (well, at least I) would drop it.
Please notice though (ex. This very thread) how the issue is brought up again by others, not by me. I’m happy to disagree on this if it suits our host as per the very head of this thread.
Agree on one thing though, it matters not at all.
Herb, it’s going to happen again. Multiple times. You’re right, it wasn’t simmering, but Nazism, meme or otherwise, has an action potential that absolutely terrifies the calcified elite. There’s this appeal to the symbolism, the history, the taboo… Something about it gets people going. It should not be a surprise at all that young men who are stomped on find it and cling to it. Chuck Klosterman (I spit on him, thrice) said something like, “Every straight male has a Led Zeppelin phase. Some get over it by the second playthrough of Stairway, others spend their whole lives in it.” Nazism is the Led Zeppelin of NRx. I don’t know why, but this “spat” has definitely created a bit mine to return to when it flairs up again.
Nuts.
Look at what Soros shills like Rex are shilling. They want us all to become Nazis as they imagine Nazis to be and to believe, as they want nazis to be and believe. They are doing their damndest to deniably spread nazism as imagined and invented by the elites (which version is very similar to actual Nazism, except expurgated of all elements that are actually revolutionary against existing actual elites)
They would love us to become nazis, they would love a living and vigorous nazi movement made in their image, because it is a fellow brand of leftism that they could and would assimilate, that they have been lovingly designing for assimilation since 1940.
Here is their ground plan, implied in shill post after shill post. Their pet nazi movement gets let off the leash to attack the Rothschilds. Unfortunately the Rothschilds have fled to their private island, so the nazi movement knocks over the Jewish pawnshop, and moves on to the bagel shop and the liquor store. And then it is business as usual for the elite, who are rapidly replacing their Jews with their dot Indians already.
Their pet nazism is subtly different from nazism. It is third positionism, which was from day one an entryist movement against Nazism and fascism, originally fostered by Stalin, and they have been lovingly fostering it all these years as the antidote to reaction, actual Nazism, and fascism. And the big flaws of actual fascism and nazism was that it was too damn close to third positionism. Papen therefore believed it assimilable. It was not, but Soros obviously has total confidence that third positionism is assimilable, and it obviously is, having been designed for that purpose from the beginning.
Rex is trying to sound like a Nazi, but he does not sound like a Nazi. He sounds one hell of a lot more like a commie than the actual Nazis did. That is third positionism, and that is what the elites want.
The Nazi line was that capital was productive, and businessmen were productive, but they needed to produce under the command of the state. Rex, and the rest of the Soros shills, are telling us that capital is unproductive, businessmen are unproductive. Wealth is just there for the taking. The woke think wealth and value spontaneously sprouted from the fertile soil of subsaharan Africa and colonialists stole it. The third positionists that it spontaneously came forth from America’s magic dirt, which sprouted supermarket shelves and continues to fill them. That is the modern priestly elite line, not the Nazi line. Rex is cover for Biden crushing fracking. Hitler would probably have crushed fracking through socialist fuck up, but he never would have thought it virtuous and wise to intentionally crush fracking. The hand of the state, Harvard, and the priestly elite in a thousand nazi shills sticks out like dogs balls, and did so from the beginning, sixty years ago.
It has been standard operating procedure for a thousand years. Corrupt, decadent, and treasonous elite hires Jews to do their dirty work. The masses get truculent. “Oh” say the elite “It is those terrible Jews” Jews get expelled, then back to business as usual. Usually works out as planned. Sometimes the things go bad, which is what happened with Hitler. Third positionism is Nazism retooled by our masters to make sure that this time around it works out as planned, with a Recucklican as Papen, and some poor sucker as Hitler, and this time around the poor sucker will do what Hitler was supposed to do and expected to do, be a garden ornament giving democratic cover to business as usual.
Third positionism is their cure for what they feared Trump would do and what I hoped he would do. They plan to do Papen and Hitler all over again. It failed last time, but it has worked fine hundreds of times before, and they have complete and well founded confidence that this time it will work out as planned.
@Jim,
If the continuation of this is annoying (ex. As HerbR is claiming), please feel free to edit my response above to yours. You have my full support to do this, I sincerely mean this. Sometimes i may not know when to shut up 🙂
I would love it to continue if all parties observed the usual high standard of debate. One side has been failing to observe that standard.
Incensed? Not at all. That’s either an incorrect reading or maybe negative transference.
My usual emotional range runs the gamut from polite eyebrow-raising, to sarcastic eye-rolling, to facepalming frustration and eventually to derisive laughter and the whackin’-it gesture, and this is no exception. Maybe I felt a twinge of anger at the whole proving-a-negative thing because of all the memories it brought back, but that was the only record skip.
Condescending, maybe, and assholerific, guilty as charged, but fury is a much different emotion. I reserve that for the people who want to invade my home, my kin, my wallet and now my literal blood.
I felt more than a twinge of anger.
“Yes, but…”
It is the action potential itself that terrifies them, not Nazism. I am positive that on a primal level, they understand that they are meat, and unguarded meat at that. Nazism is just the only language they have to express that angst, because it is all tangled up in the Third Founding Myth.
In the bugman’s bug-brain, everything threatening ties back to Nazism somehow, no matter how absurd the connection. Kenosha, I.VI, [148]8chan and QballAnon all have something to do with Nazis, don’t ask us what, maybe the ADL can explain it.
You know how Jim talks about female regret and how the only language Globohomo gives them to express “bad sex” is rape, so rape is what they’ll call it? Or how the Covidian shivers about “breakthrough” cases because they don’t have words like “non-sterilizing immunity” in their vocabulary? It’s kind of the same thing. Soft power fears hard power, demon worshipers fear the authentically holy, omega males fear the gigachad, but the only approved language they have for it is “fascist” or “nazi”. They actually used to use the word “reactionary” – like, decades ago – but I think that word itself triggered crimestop and therefore had to go.
Hitler is the bogeyman, and Pepe and the OK sign are the bogeyman’s shadows on the wall at 4 am, but “bogeyman” is also just a word, he has no form or substance. The mistake of Sieg Larp is thinking that the Untermenschen fear the form of Nazism, which is just silly, because it’s been portrayed millions of times in popular culture, and not always satirically. What they actually fear, what absolutely scares the living snot out of them, is the ghost of a hint of a possibility that they might be wrong about the End of History, that any non-left movement could successfully organize and maybe even overtake them. They fear being dominated – the men do, anyway.
Anything that is scary enough to them will get linked to Nazis, somehow. But the converse is not true – having something linked to Nazis does not automatically scare them. It may trigger their memetic immune system, regardless, and that tends to end badly for the ones doing the triggering – but it does not hurt or scare Globohomo unless it presents a real threat.
The elite certainly fears right-wing populism. It is not that they are necessarily specifically afraid of LARPers with black sun tattoos marching down the street in jackboots, but their worldview requires them to believe that their immantization of the eschaton is at constant risk of being thwarted by a mob of unenlightened kulaks, either voting for a dictator or rolling up in their flannel shirts and pickup trucks to execute politicians for sacrificing babies to satan on Epstein Island.
It is the action potential of right wing populism in general that scares them. And not without effect. The only reason I can see that the US is not as far gone as Europe is that the American elite is scared of Amerikaners with guns, and tries to boil the frog much slower as a result.
What is right-wing populism and how is it different from left-wing populism?
Not asking for lofty ideals and flowery illustrations here. Just the simple and basic and semi-rhetorical question of how right-wing anything can be right-wing without legitimate authority, or how anything with legitimate authority could be classified as populism.
The idea of “populism” emanates from a democratic frame. One would have to be a leftist to imagine such a thing as a right-wing populist, because to a rightist it ought to evaluate to the null set. Which, I guess, means leftists really can fear “right-wing populism”, even if it is make-believe, but that goes back to my original point about fearing the formless bogeyman.
Revolutionaries fear other revolutionaries because they know what revolutionaries are capable of. But there are no right-wing revolutionaries.
Trump is a populist, obviously. And in his populism he was always praising the people who built America, both the welder and the boss.
He was attributing dignity to the worker in his role, without taking it away from the boss in his role. Populist, but not low versus high.
Right populism becomes a viable strategy when the masses realize the priesthood hates them, despises them, and wants to take away their stuff, their dignity, and their status.
It is “right” under my favorite definition, because the masses are defending their applecart.
“What is right-wing populism and how is it different from left-wing populism?
Not asking for lofty ideals and flowery illustrations here. Just the simple and basic and semi-rhetorical question of how right-wing anything can be right-wing without legitimate authority, or how anything with legitimate authority could be classified as populism.
The idea of “populism†emanates from a democratic frame. One would have to be a leftist to imagine such a thing as a right-wing populist”
This is nonsense.
Julius Caesar was a right wing populist and Trump was a right wing populist (now hes become a cowardly shill lately).
The left wing commie populist says rich people have things and the government should take them and then you’ll have them.
The right wing populist says the corrupt elite have screwed you over (and hes not lying) and you need to empower me the one man on your side to stop their stupid policies that ruin you.
A right-wing populist is a man who whips up a mob to defend natural law rather than tear it down. No need to defend natural law when it is not under attack, so naturally it can only exist in leftist times and a decaying society.
Populism itself cannot stop leftism, but populism can be an excuse or put one into a position where he can commit the necessary violence to stop leftism.
“My standard of right is the middle vs the alliance of high and low, nothing to do with policy, economic or otherwise”
The kings of old invented the class of knights as lesser nobility to exert some control on the greater nobility. Likewise with chartering towns, granting self-determination to repubic-esque councils of burghers in order to circumvent the hierarchy of vassalge and obtain an immediate tax and soldier base. And the greater nobility would play even lower people against the middle. The Jouvenalian dynamic is not cut and dry, it is messy and omnipresent throughout history. Everybody engages in HLvM. It is simply a fact of power dynamics. Patrons always find clients to use to advance their interests. Nothing related to right/left about it.
Agree that HLvM is a simple fact of stable coalition-building and cannot be gotten rid if short of Fnargl and his Ring.
I disagree that is has nothing to do with left v right: it IS left v right, hence I never expect that conflict to go away. Coalitions just reshuffle after a loss, and the center moves. Hopefully some elites are moving to our coalition as we speak, to boost the middle in hope of future victory. (I reckong bith Jim and Moldy are trying to attract them). Lack of coherence among the left as per Jim makes sense but the high and low coalition having become too big explains the same set if facts on the ground.
Trump and Brexit make no sense if not under the lense of part of the elite defecting.
It is just a tactic, a tactic that tends to be more useful among leftists and more common among them. But the tactics the left uses are just whatever is likely to knock over the applecart, though the the middle is apt to have most of the apples that they want. Depends on the circumstances.
I’ve talked to national socialists online, and they aren’t outright against property rights, but they are part of an increasing faction on the right that supports certain measures of economic socialism, and see themselves as the true alternative to a false dichotomy of communism and capitalism, which prevents any meaningful change for the better of their people.
They are mostly Americans who have seen republicans bend over backwards for big businesses who follow leftist lines, rob their people, and ban them from social media, with the other side being democrats pushing leftism and succeeding in it virtually unopposed.
They also see libertarians not only being ineffective, but in many cases pushing downright poisonous ideology and accepting many liberal principles as part of libertarianism. A libertarian accepts degenerate behaviour, attacks on Christianity, and social media companies silencing right wing discourse.
They identify jews with both big business, and leftism, and therefore unrestrained private business with leftism, and see communism and libertarianism as both ways to atomize individuals, making them self-centered, and seeing themselves as god.
National socialism is the alternative to the atomized individual, giving money to care for his people only, and not accepting it means not accepting necessary sacrifices to the tribe, and believing in atomizing/selfish/jewish/libertarian/capitalist philosophy, meaning one isn’t willing to submit to something more than himself, meaning one cannot believe in God, only himself. See objectivism.
So individualism is identified with evil and antisocial predatory behaviour which is identified with degeneracy, usury, and exploitation rather than contributing to your nation.
It can be difficult to argue neoreactionary ideas with National Socialists, because they will see it as a version of libertarianism which is individualism which is atomization which is in their view the enemy tactic, and worse, a form of entryism.
If you said you believe every man should be the king of his own house and family, you would be playing into that idea.
This is made more difficult by the fact that boomers often argue that national socialism is socialism, without really understanding the nuances of the subject, and making bad arguments around it. The well is very much poisoned for supporting any form of “capitalism” when it’s seen as a form of jewish subversion and misdirection, and a way to prevent people from cooperating.
I would also like to see Jim make a long form post about it.
It’s possible to argue that:
– Hitler didn’t really adopt traditional systems, and was rather a progressive in some ways, but this is not very convincing because the context is too different from then. Even Stalin seems like a traditionalist compared to the average acceptable political opinion today. Also the elites at the time betrayed the germans, which makes many actions look justified.
– National socialism was purple pilled on women. Also not an easy argument to make in practice, since national socialism did push for fertility and nuclear family that national socialists care about and see as important. They tend to not be fully redpilled on women to begin with, and pushing true red pilled ideas can be difficult while avoiding accusations of either being contemptuous towards women (which they correctly see as homosexual behaviour) or being seen as a pick up artist, who sees relationships from a too cynical perspective, not conducive to respecting the sanctity of marriage. I also cannot argue this line easily myself, since I am not married.
I find it almost impossible to tell the difference between an unironic internet “natsoc” and a fed shill, and this summary isn’t making it any better.
It’s not even a coherent position, just a big bag of shill memes duct-taped together. Probably why PC wants us to call them fednats.
Dedicating a long-form post to a giant nest of fed shills doesn’t seem all that productive, and in my opinion sets a bad precedent that people can post any inanity in the comments and expect Jim to put serious effort into a response. There is tons of good information out there on the topic already, people are just flat-out refusing to look at it.
> just a big bag of shill memes duct-taped together.
To be fair, I am illustrating a whole range of opinions rather than one person’s particular worldview. It’s certainly not coherent in the sense that there is a system to it, in its current form, in the way that Jim’s ideas or neoreactionary ideas are organized.
There’s also no consensus, and their big issue is a lack of measures to prevent shills and entryists from operating.
There’s a spectrum of people who are part of this, and what they have in common that distinguishes them from other groups is their opposition to communism/leftism while also being distinctly against “laissez-faire capitalism”, with jews as a monocausal explanation for societal problems, and the exact economic position as well as how much they favour social programs varies a lot. But Hitler and National Socialism or Fascism are seen as the model, and they tend to call themselves National Socialists or Fascists. They do distinguish between these two, but the in-depth understanding of what they entail varies.
There is still overlap between reaction and this group of people, in terms of ideas, but most of the overlapping concepts are only partially overlapping.
The economic acceptance of varying amounts of socialist ideas, and the ambiguous position on women are what distinguishes them. I will also note that these spaces seem to have a presence of women greater than most right wing spaces, especially girlfriends or wives of the men who are part of the community.
I interact with these types a lot on the fediverse, the decentralized, or rather federated, alternative to twitter. Which is very active. Fediverse is split along political lines.
The “mainstream” instances run by mastodon, which are left-liberals and in particular pro-tranny. These are technically the biggest individual instances, but they are disconnected from most of the rest, because they cannot stand anything opposed to them.
Then there’s spinster, the radical feminist, trans exclusionary instance. Obviously cast out by leftists, they are basically pre-2015 feminists, but their opinions on trans stuff overlaps with the right wing instances. Being outcasts, the radical feminist and the right wing instances federate with each other, leading to hilarious interactions.
There is one woman on spinster who rants about all men being rapist in blatant fantasies on her timeline all day, which leads to men from other instances making fun of her.
The only other political faction is libertarians, meaning objectivists, anarcho-capitalists, and other groups of that sort which are almost extinct today.
There is no significant reactionary presence. I try to expose people there to ideas from this sphere, without explicitly mentioning that they are neo-reactionary, and frame them in a way that would convince them, considering where they are coming from and what they believe.
If they push Jews as a monocausal explanation of societies problems, there is one Jew that they are strangely reluctant to mention, and also strangely reluctant to mention the problems that he is causing. If, when pressed, they do mention those problems, they minimize and euphemize them.
They are Soros shills, nearly all of them.
You are talking not to National Socialists, but to the third positionists, who were exposed as shill/entryist movement in the 1940s. A very old shill organization. They have been around for a while. They originally worked for the Soviets, as a shill movement against fascists and nazis, and when the Soviet Union imploded, got new employment with the Cathedral.
When Hitler slaughtered those nazis even holier than his very holy self, Stalin looked for Hitler’s Trotsky, could not find one, manufactured him. Trotskyism is, or recently was, a real communist faction opposing Stalin/Mao communism. Third positionism was never a real fascist/nazi faction opposing Hitler/Mussolini/Franco fascism.
All big conspiracies leak, and this one leaked horribly a very long time ago.
Although Trotkyism is not a shill movement, it is an entryist movement, which has very similar functionality – Trotskyist show up all over the place saying they are something that is completely the opposite of Trotskyism – but Trotskyism has pretty much expired for lack of a deep pockets sponsor, while the third positionists continue to robotically spam much the same stuff they have been robotically spamming for seven decades.
“Rothschilds rule the world” are a Soros shill meme, and third positionism seems to be a different group, albeit they are pushing a very similar shtick. They are all ultimately run by Harvard, so all ultimately the same group, but Soros is run by Harvard via the State Department, and his shills have different script writers distinct from the shills run by Harvard via the FBI, while I have no idea who is running the Third Positionist shills, perhaps Harvard via the CIA. Could be the same organization as the “Rothschilds rule the world”, with two different script writers. But until Stalin died, they were run by Stalin.
Wasn’t Gregor Strasser Hitler’s Trotsky?
Yes Gregor Strasser was Hitler’s Trotsky, but Hitler killed him and everyone like him, so Stalin had to manufacture replacements. The Third Positionists started off as Stalin’s stooges, totally fake from the beginning and still totally fake to this day, while Trotsky got away, and the Trotskyists were totally real from the beginning, and probably still are to this day, albeit Trotskyists are always generating innumerable totally fake movements and the CIA has lots of entryists in the Trotkyists. Maybe Trotskyism is now a fake movement puppeted by the CIA, I have no idea, but it was plenty real when I was a young man and as far as I know, still is.
Trotskyism is alive and well. They go by the name International Marxist Tendency. They actively recruit on college campuses, are a pipeline for Antifa recruiting, and are lousy with FBI CIs. They often meet up at Whole Foods or Starbucks.
https://www.marxist.com/
In a world of sexual anarchy, you always start from defect/defect, so you always have to start as a pick up artist. I was a pick up artist before the phrase was invented, and the art and theory posted on the internet.
Unless your patriarch acquired a wife for you from a patriarch with whom he is in cooperate/cooperate, because kin or members of the same male hierarchy, you are going to start with your women in defect/defect, also known as pickup artistry.
The only way to have a world in which men are not required to be pick up artists, is to have a world in which you generally acquire a wife through your patriarch acquiring a a wife for you from another patriarch with whom he is in cooperate/cooperate, where you acquire a wife from Dad’s kin or Dad’s status hierarchy, so you are starting out with her and her family in cooperate/cooperate.
So if Christianity demands that men not be pick up artists, it must also demand a world in which women’s husbands are generally selected by their families. Because otherwise you are going to either plow through a pile of whores looking for a wife, or else wind up single, childless, and alone.
It is contrary to the will of Gnon that those obedient to his commands shall wind up single, childless, and alone.
Nazi economy had two phases, under Schacht (until he quit in 1937) and under Goering. Neither of these distinguished gentlemen was a socialist.
[…] Jim notes the expected date on which the pretence of democracy ends. […]
Cops have Christmas party at a bar. Lieutenant sitting in chair minding his own business, when all of a sudden twats ring out. Rookie copchick gives lieutenant lap dance, lieutenant kicked out of his job while the holocaust is being investigated.
Not only can the CEO no longer fuck his secretary, he now gets fired if she bends over to pick up a pen and begs him to look.
https://nypost.com/2021/12/19/nypd-rookie-gives-boss-lap-dance-at-wild-holiday-party/
Quotes from the article say how the boss “f-ked up”, and the chick “doesn’t know any better because she just came on the job.” Pun probably unintended. Photos reveal the guilty spectator’s face, but blurred out the innocent instigator.
Its stupid but regime tranny jannies are not our concern.
Absolutely! Every event that reduces their cohesion within is worthy of Cheer. Let those bastards f*** each other over.
That is your flaw. The psychology of regime tranny jannies is our concern. Know your enemy, know yourself.
I just added the blog “Founding Questions” to the sidebar, because it is a deep investigation of our enemy’s psychology.
Though female psychology is of more immediate practical importance, and will remain of great practical importance even after victory, while enemy psychology will vanish like dew beneath the sunlight.
Them undermining the morale of their enforcers like this is a good thing.
This is easily understood. Women are perfect angels who can do no wrong, unless evil white male mind control rays make them misbehave. There was clearly a misbehaving woman, so you must find the source of the evil male mind control rays. The lieutenant was giving them off, because he had status in the police chain of command and was receiving the misbehavior. This is a evil white male cop, so if he emits evil mind control rays to make a woman give him a lapdance, probably also emitting them to make blacks drop out of school, smoke crack, and commit crimes. Better can his ass.
From our perspective it is just as easy. They put a fertile age female around a male with female preselection and a dominant role in the local social hierarchy, and put her in a subservient position relative to him. Then they had a party where they could let their hair down. Anyone could see where this was going. A tale as old as time.
Jim wrote:
“Founding Questions” wrote:
At the very least he’s pretty funny.
“Founding Questionsâ€.
This is terrific stuff.
Indeed. I wonder how Jim finds such gems as “Founding Questions”
His post on learned helplessness is, I think, spot on.
Sadly, the fact that they will learn nothing seems true too.
It was linked from another blog on Jim’s blog roll.
I read some of the stuff. Very good and uniquely rambling writing style. Also Uses entertaining code language to avoid the Eye of Sauron.
They will learn nothing seems to justify my pov on the shitlib question…
He claims progs’ brains are broken so they don’t learn, just blindly follow doctrine. Once the doctrine changes they may simply switch over, since they don’t have a problem contradicting what they thought last week (chocolate ration was 30 grams last week but they don’t remember now that this week the great leader raised it to 20).
It’s true too, i’ve observed much the same myself in the past.
At a base level, there is a certain kind of mindset that finds an atavistic attraction to the idea of ‘secret action’, broadly construed; and that is people who find the idea of personally, or openly, or directly dealing with other people to be a daunting proposition. Hence one finds a disproportionate selection of such types in the ‘intelligence community’.
And thus, to avoid dealing with people, which they perceive as messy and complicated, they concatenate even more messy and complicated machinations to give effect through more discursive means to their desire for control – which they feel no less keenly; indeed, so much more so even.
Indeed. Would be interesting to hear some fantasies of violence from commenters here to pinpoint what kind of man they are.
What kind of fantasies of violence do you mean? What kind of violence we see ourselves committing when we imagine a fight? That sort of thing, or something else?
Large-scale violence, violence against our enemy on a societal level. We can pray for Caesar, but I’m sure we all imagine scenarios in which the forces of good and evil have to fight it out. I’m recalling TC’s desire to ‘relocate’ leftists, and it seems relevant to the ‘nerd’ theory of secret operation and institutional action.
There is someone here I strongly suspect is a former corona Karen under a new name…
Most here are nerd-spook types. If we did a Jim Blog camping trip, our style ;), I feel confident in saying at least half would fall out before we got halfway. I’ve found that the more grandiose the violent fantasy, the less likely there’s any real capacity for Hard Work. It’s the same with Leftists: the ones that fantasize about camps are the ones who are utter failures at physical anything.
I am a nerd, but I have done quite a lot of personal violence, which the Cominator quite obviously has not, and have a few times wandered long distances in wild country, sometimes without food for long periods (the no food part was not intentional).
When I was cruising for chicks, I had broad shoulders and powerful muscles, and for part of that time, reasonably small pants. But lately, settling down happily to domesticity, I have allowed myself to lose considerable muscle mass. Still wearing reasonably small pants, but though my pants size has not increased, my shirt size has decreased considerably.
Some day – God willing – Jim will be able to shed anonymity from a position of strength. On that happy day, he shall be so kind as to share photographic evidence of this rock phase he speaks of, for our merriment and undoubted amusement.
This morning, before I woke up, I had a dream. In the dream I was my teenage self, not yet fully grown, and a really big man proceeded to beat me up and humiliate me. I could not do much about it. I retreated, or got away, and then I heard my Dad calling for help. I rushed over to find the really big man attacking him, and because the attacker failed to focus on me, I was able to attack him from the side. I got the attacker in a strangle hold and cut off the blood flow to his brain. After a bit he stopped struggling and collapsed, taking me to the ground with him. I continued the strangle hold, then I woke up.
Mine are either tossing a chemical bomb into some regime building and me and the boys gunning down anyone who escapes, or ambushing a tactical team that comes to my house and executing the survivors on a livestream. Those are the two main themes.
I only have the very visceral fantasies of pummeling them with fists, or a bat or some other blunt object.
It doesn’t scale up, obviously, but it’s hands-on. I mean, literally. And there’s always a chance you get to hear them beg for mercy and promise to change their ways (which you should never believe).
No idea what kind of man that makes me. Probably would say a common thug, but fantasies are fantasies because they ain’t real. Still, I feel that nothing beats a direct confrontation, assuming the enemy gives you that chance.
My dreams are running community checkpoints, checking in on core families and farms, staring down refugees, and pushing boundaries outward with leapfrog kibbutzes and fortified hamlets.
My nightmares are guerilla ambushes, long distance destabilization attacks, alamo standoffs, and figuring out minimum KCal allocations.
There’s a fantastic element to both, and I believe it demonstrates exactly the type of man I am: a subordinate leader (xo) focused on logistics & supply and regional security, which translates quite well to cell leader. The former is optimistic, the latter is pessimistic. I never really fantasize positively about fighting because I’m always terrified of running out of food, water, ammo, and defensive depth.
Beating up some niggers.
This morning I dreamt that I had plastered a wall but it was all wrong.
Can’t even remember my last violent fantasy… Years ago I had a dream in which I killed a hord of zombies with an automatic rifle.
I sometimes dream of maning the neighbourhood watch in a situation of no rule of law, overwatch positions, budies, all of that. Entirely irrelevant to my actual situation on so many levels, but some fun to think about. When fancy realy strikes, a roaming guerilla band establishing a bare-bones govt as we go.
Mine is me and my Platoon getting into an urban gunfight with the Regime apparatchiks and taking down 50 of them for every one we lose
My violent fantasies are varied in that some of them are personal, up-close physical violence and some of them are impersonal, distant.
But they’re mostly directed at the liars of the Empire of Lies we live in.
E.g., some of the impersonal fantasies involve the headquarters of certain media outlets and a looooot of explosives.
We could totally win this war in a couple of years if we could just shut down the fucking lying.
I wouldn’t fantasize about boom devices… boom devices have collateral damage and are impersonal.
I’d like to personally minecraft delete them with my minecraft acme projectile shooting device… I imagine it would feel like God himself was pulling the trigg#r and that I was just an instrument of pure righteousness…
“I wouldn’t fantasize about boom devices… boom devices have collateral damage…”
What?
What?!
Did the Cominator, of all people, just fret about collateral damage?!
Comie, you ol’ softie! 🙂
I also have the fantasies involving hand-held kinetic energy weapons.
As to the indiscriminate approach: Well, they’re just fantasies. But.
We are at war with people who plainly intend to genocide us.
This is no age for saints.
Sooo @neurotoxin you’re back commenting? I mean, by all means, welcome back. But you realize we are still saying horrible things about women.
I’ve always wanted to spare innocent people while showing absolutely no mercy to guilty people…
And in my view leftists are all guilty no matter how low their rank.
“Sooo @neurotoxin you’re back commenting?”
I have self-control issues, it seems.
“I mean, by all means, welcome back. But you realize we are still saying horrible things about women.”
I’m pretty sure you’re being sarcastic, but: I love this place. Five years ago, if someone had told me there’s a place on the Net where I wouldn’t be the most red-pilled commenter, I’d have been like, “Oh shush, not possible.” Yet here we are.
Well fair enough good to have you back.
Who are the regulars of ~5 years who haven’t ragequit, renounced, or sabbaticaled? This place is a lot like what /b/ once was: if you ever truly get here, you can’t really leave.
@ Alf: Thanks homes.
@ Kunning: “if you ever truly get here, you can’t really leave.”
Yeah, this place is like freakin’ Hotel California in that regard.
Browsing through the comment section this time five years ago, it’s a completely different vibe. Contaminated NEET and PC stick out as long-time regulars. I also see Karl, Grumpus, Oliver Cromwell, Cloudswrest, and apparently also arqiduka. Also more I’m surely missing. For instance I see ‘red’ commenting over ten years ago, not sure if the same red as commenting now, but that makes him senior commenter over me by at least a few years.
It’s fun to think of how this place changed over time. I’d say very roughly there’s been three periods. Ok, four.
period 0 — Starting out. Good content, very few comments.
period I — ye old NRx sphere cross fertility. Quality comments, many commenters with their own blog links.
period 2 — NRx is over its top and its commenters disappear. But, Jim gets his own regulars. Quality varies.
period 3 — Jim’s reputation grows, and especially in the Trump and post-Trump era, comment section explodes. Quality control has gone up.
Who knows what the future has in store.
Ha, yes.
Lol, 5 years ago? Maybe some isolated off-hand comment, but I struggle to remember that far back.
I am curious about how many left and came back with a different username. How many of us would be recognized if we went back to our old nomme de guerres?
I used to dream about needing to fight but lacking strength, or needing to run but lacking fatigue. At that time i certainly lacked neither, and fought regularly at a martial arts club as well as occasionally on da streetz. After having a dream where i needed to fight my dad, and i ripped him to gory shreds, i never had those dreams again, and when i have had some dream where violence is going on, they all end in animalistic rain of blood and limbs.
I’ve met a fair number of NSA types in my day, and that characterization of them is pretty accurate. I’ve NOT met CIA types in general, so I can’t comment usefully on them.
Blue-pilled men treat female misbehavior as a fact of life that must be endured, like death, taxes, and the weather. “What can you do?”
What I see as blue-pilled men are the guys who send their daughters to lap dance school, along with tranny and lesbian school.
Hands-in-the-air guy still has hope that a leader will emerge and stop the spiral.
You’re confusing blue-pilled with woke. Most men are blue-pilled, only a tiny fraction buy into Stunning and Brave.
Unless what you actually mean by “lap dance school” and “tranny and lesbian school” is just college, period, and in that case you’re correct. But sending them to get a degree in chemistry or engineering is just as blue-pilled as sending them to queer studies.
Some years ago, the head of a national fraternity once wrote an article for their house magazine, wherein he gave advice to the young men in school on how to positively handle one of the most dangerous threats to their academic career – house parties – and in particular how to handle the most dangerous component of house parties – female coeds. Such as, making sure they don’t arrive to a fraternity house early, making sure they don’t stay late, sending then home if they look drunk, intoxicated, or indeed for any trouble at all, and so on.
With each dab of colour that came together to paint outlines of life, the implication that arose was that just being in the vicinity of women was inherently dangerous for a male student’s continued stay at university, and indeed for his life prospects in general, and great care needed to be taken to modulate the possibility of such encounters.
Or in other words, plain simple common sense from an otherwise ordinary man who, though not possessed of world-historical consciousness, merely observed happenings around him with a clear eye. Naturally, this became something of a minor cause celibre that rippled across the internet, with tastemakers from all the usual rags lining up to point and sputter.
Because, you see, you are supposed to follow the rules, but you are not supposed to acknowledge them. Descriptions of the circular firing squad weakens it’s power. The official reality is that a female student cannot take two steps outside her dorm without being accosted by gangs of tall, phenotypically aryan varsity starters on degree tracks in [elite membership badge] – which we must say many are quite upset by not getting – which you must be seen to acknowledge, even as you try to square it with the reality where that official reality is a social weapon of mass destruction to sends terrified men running to the hills left and right, which you must not be seen to acknowledge, even though the logical conclusions the purveyor’s own prescriptions for the former lead naturally to the latter, in any case.
The only thing that replaces a supremacism is another supremacism.
q.v. The Billy Graham Rule/Mike Pence Rule.
I suspect traditional restrictions on inter-sexual associating were more to protect men from baseless accusations of sexual bad behavior, as they were to protect women from actual bad behavior.
Thales mentions the Mike Pence Rule, and you also see this with men in the business world and academia increasingly saying they’re reluctant to mentor female employees/students.
By the way, it looks like it’s time for Chile to fire up their helicopters again.
Gabriel Boric Font
-Involved in high school politics
-President of a student organization
-Leader of student protests
-Law student
-The name of the party is Izquierda Autónoma
Considering the general international situation i am betting on Chile starving really fast.
RE speaking of diversity…
Think I saw three of Biden’s fly in illegals when I was out in Florida last night. These did not seem like Florida spics with one sort of speaking English and having the barrio menance looks about them…
Our spics tend to seem whitish and civilized, hopefully I don’t start seeing more.
The plan is to fly in six hundred million of them over the next eighteen years. I am not making this up. They are not saying, or even thinking, the specific number six hundred million but their plans are enormous, and if their plans come to fruition and are implemented successfully and continued for two decades, it is around six hundred million. They are getting in a lot, and think it not nearly enough.
This reminds me of a Soviet quote, when asked why they have a bio weapons program, since they already had nukes. (paraphrased) A billion Chinese want to take our land. Is impossible to make enough bullets.
Welp and here I thought the holiness spiral was losing steam. 2022 is setting up to be fun…
https://twitter.com/echo_chamberz/status/1472828155194789893?s=20
There are contradictory reports about what the senile retard plans to announce.
The sane option, we must learn to live with coronavirus – I find this unlikely, Biden only does sane things when foreign governments bribe him to (ie the Russian pipeline) and he doesn’t think he has to worry about how unpopular this will be
The insane option, tripling down on stupid – Lockdowns travel restrictions mayber camps etc.
https://twitter.com/AuronMacintyre/status/1472703942819778567?s=20
Like I said there are contradictory reports (which is unusual) one of which says he is going the sane option, I’m NOT optimistic the sane option will prevail.
Do you have a link? Nothing I’ve seen is sane.
https://pluralist.com/the-white-house-prepares-to-surrender-on-covid-opinion/
Here’s one link… not saying I believe it but its out there.
Yeah not buying it. CTH is reporting “major fear push” but not giving specifics. His reporting is usually accurate for this sort of stuff.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2021/12/20/white-house-planning-major-omicron-fear-push-for-tuesday-december-21st/
White House message:
That White House advance message sounds ominous. It sounds like they are about to turn the screws tighter.
Omicron is the true vaccine. It is not as mild as smallpox/cowpox/vaccina, but it is getting there. Which is why our leadership is terrified of it.
“Threatening” purebloods with Deathwinter and overflowed hospitals sounds more like giving up, and letting nature take its course. The only thing about that pant-shitter you can trust, is that he doesn’t call the shots.
Well surprisingly nothing new that is particularly stupid.
@ jim
> Which is why our leadership is terrified of it
Why would they not just keep hoaxing it in defiance of observable reality, same as ever — short of eradicating the common cold & flu, what difference can it make?
To stop would mean defeat there is only the way forward.
@Pooch
Tim Woods is a fictional character from the 24 TV series.
So EU seems poised to approve Novavax, which a “subunit vaccine” and thus allegedly more traditional. Does anyone know anything about it, or its technology? Any thoughts generally?
https://www.nzz.ch/international/coronavirus-weltweit-die-neusten-entwicklungen-ld.1534367
I believe it is a reliable and safe technology used in children vaccines. If the EU isnt feeling to bloodthirsty it is a way to keep boosters and passports forever without slowly fucking up the entire population.
Russia came out swinging at the very start with three vaccines: a vector clotshot (Sputnik), a trad vax Chinese style (KoviVac), and a subunit “mild clotshot” (EpiVac).
EpiVac was aggressively marketed to seniors as having mild side-effects. Today the scene has changes: everyone gets Sputnik for free, fat cats with connections pay out of pocket for the trad KoviVac, and EpiVac the subunit “benign clotshot” has been quietly shelves and isn’t talked about anymore. Especially after one whole family (mom+dad+grandma) dropped dead at the same time after getting it.
https://ngs.ru/text/health/2021/08/03/70058306/
The official response was not what you think safe and effective factckecked and debunked, but nevertheless this was the last straw after which EpiVac sort of faded away and is not talked about anymore. Now instead of three vaccines there’s just two: the free for all Sputnik clotshot, and the out of pocket trad KoviVac.
EpiVac is still, however, used in Turkmenistan, where it is mandatory.
Iran made its own subunit clotshot, called COVAX-19/, and a second one, Razi Cov Pars
India has COVOVAX, which is a clone of Novavax, just like Covishield is a clone of Astra Zeneca. India is the world’s producer of cheap farma, so now they’re learned to twist the arms of overseas clients China-style and get to clone everything.
Taiwan’s vaccine is also the subunit Medigen
Cuba’s shots are also subunit, Soberana and CIGB, the latter being also used in the allied nations of Nicaragua, Venezuela, and Vietnam.
China uses 4 types of trad vaxes for civilians, the vector clot shot (CanSino) for the army, and a subunit shot Anhui, used manly by Uzbekistan and Indonesia.
So not, the subunit is not ‘more traditional’, it is still in the ‘artificial spike protein pieces’ clot shot family, midway between the true clotshot and the trad vax. It just uses bits and pieces of the alleged spike protein, which in theory is enough to teach the body to react, without introducing an actual spike protein.
It is supposed to have more benign side-effects at least initially, but the Russians are now pretending this was never a thing. Whereas Taiwan, Iran, Cuba, are proudly using their own versions on themselves, and India and China are exporting their own (or in India’s case, cloned) versions.
Maybe it works if you don’t fuck up during manufacturing and then during transportation and storage, and this can’t be done across the endless tundra of Russia, but can be done across smaller distances like Taiwan or Cuba. Although if China is exporting it to Indonesia and Uzbekistan, maybe it’s just a question of being tech that needs to be handled by non-drunken non-Ivans, whereas the cruder Spunik clotshot can be whipped up by any random Tajik immigrant.
Bottom line. If no choice:
1) Take a trad shot
2) If no trad shot–take the subunit shot
3) If not subunit shot–take a single-shot clotshot like Janssen or Sputnik Lite
4) If not single-shot–a double dose clotshot
5) If not double dose clotshot–an RNA serum
Once you go into clotshot and RNA serum territory–prepare a 90-year old man routine. Be a lazy vegetable a few days prior, and then a lazy vegetable for at least a month afterward, as the people dropping with heart attacks and stokes after the shot appear to be clustering in sports and gyms and pilot-like professions. No physical stress whatsoever. Let the spikes circulate slowly and they will with some luck do less damage than at full speed.
Also aspiring and sheit.
And don’t get on the booster ride. If you get the shot once, to get the system off your back for a while–use this breathing space to plan how to not get sucked into the booster ride. On the booster ride all bets are off.
India also has homegrown Covaxin a traditional vaccine. I’ve been resisting vaccination so far – mostly pressure is from family. If inevitable I’ll take the trad shot.
There has got to be a way to get our names on the database without taking the shot. In a country where everything is fake and everything is on sale, it is strange to “have” to take the shot.
I haven’t taken the shot yet nor do I have a cert, but I am actively looking and it seems strangely difficult. I think we need a friend of a relative in or a friend of a friend in the database entry department.
Strange indeed, considering that the risk of detection is very low. What punishments are threatened by the government?
Not very clear on what the punishments are for being in possession of one. But here is something for selling them, https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/mumbai-news/3-arrested-in-navi-mumbai-for-issuing-fake-covid-vaccine-certificates-101639754698305.html
Now I can get fake covid certificates from Telegram or other sources. Thats not a problem. What I want is to get my name on the national database as having taken the shot without actually taking that shot. And I’m finding that strangely difficult.
Germany is planning on trying to castrate Telegram real soon.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/politician-says-germany-should-ban-telegram-unless-it-tackles-extremist-content-2021-12-14/
I am right on the verge of deciding that Germany and Austria and the rest of them really do need more diversity. Maybe they should be fucking swamped with Somalians and Turks.
If at the smallest excuse, no matter if they are in a “leftist phase” or a “rightwing phase”, a “nationalist phase” or a “globalist phase”, they react to life’s challenges by instantly reverting to “your paperz pleeze” then I simply don’t know.
Perhaps the perfect combined system really was Germanics and Nordics living within modified Anglo institutions, as was the case with North America before it got kiked.
Solution to prevent castration:
Nerovetsrethca sdnalreden. Or start using Somali yourself. Added advantage: you can read THEIR messages…
In India it can’t cost that much to have the nurse throw the shot in the trash can it?
It can, if the punishment is severe enough.
Where I live, any waiter in restaurant who doesn’t know you checks your vaccination documents because you might be a police officer who will fine him for not checking
That’s exactly what I would have thought. I have never heard of anyone who has done that. This, in a place where I know people who can get you fake Educational certificates, fake land records, fake property deeds, fake compliance certificates, mobile sims without giving them your UID … you name it. Yet, I strangely do not know anyone who can get me a Covid cert without vaxxing.
I, and another colleague at work have been trying all our contacts and coming up blank. Even he is perplexed at this state of affairs. Even asking this question (do you know anyone who can get us on the national database without the shot) of friendly strangers one has just met in a train or bus evokes accusing glances from people who happen to be overhearing or sitting close by.
No one will bat an eyelid if I ask where to get fake Edu certificates or how to contact an agency where they can do a student’s final year project, mind you! Strangest blood thing I have witnessed. Maybe people in this country really believe this Covid nonsense.
There is a lot of people especially in the cities/elite class who believe in it. Outside of cities you can hardly find any masks.
I have staunchly refused vaccination so far. There is growing pressure from family to get it.
If push comes to the shove do you object to Covaxin? I believe Jim has also agreed that traditional vaxxes should be safe or at least much safer than the clot shots.
As a practising Engineer, I firmly believe in “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”. I haven’t fallen ill for a single day since March 2020. Clearly I have natural immunity. Why would I do something that is not required? I don’t change working designs just for the heck of it. Why would I do something unnecessary on a working design (my bodily immunity) far more complex than any engineering device I ever worked on?
I’ve got the fake certs. Now lets get on the national database. The only advantage of being in India is that the Government is too incompetent to make push come to shove and everyone knows it including the stray dogs and the neighborhood cat. I’m sure I can get on the database, just need to devote more time to figure it out.
Just get a fake cert and tell your family you’ve got the vaxx and show them that fake cert to prove it.
Don’t fight unnecessary battles.
Don’t try to wake up a person pretending to be asleep
Dont reason with people who don’t have that faculty. Just lie to them. That satisfies them
If you have got fake certs, why don’t you walk up to whatever offical place that puts names in the database and present your fake certs for registration?
If the cert looks good, how could the clerk entering your name into the database find out is fake?
At least Indian doctors are not follow the cathedral line on omicron and admitting that it’s mild and cold like.
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/delhi/omicron-symptoms-mild-mostly-cold-like-doctors/articleshow/88399416.cms
@Karl
Good question. They way it works in India, is you first get the Jab, then your name gets entered into the national database and you are given a Login/ID. Then you use those credentials to log in and download the Cert.
So you can’t go up to the clerk and ask for an entry into the national database based on your cert. If he does not find your name on the national database, he will assume that your cert is fake because of course he will and you will have to bribe him just for not calling in the Cops.
I think the more expensive hospitals in India that are offering the mRNA based vaccines might be an option for getting on the national database for a hefty Fee without the jab, wink wink nudge nudge. I’ll take that option should push come to shove.
Now I know there was a time when people were getting the mark of the beast without getting on the database. Now suppose I could get a fake cert dated to that date and walked into the office and asked for an entry into the database?
Thanks Karl, You Genius!
@someDude
The idea of a national database into which entries are made whenever anyone is vaccinated by the person doing the vaccination is considered in Germany as well. It really makes fakes somewhat harder.
However, there will always be exceptions to the rule of entering at the time of vaccination. You mentioned the fact that some vaccinations were made before the database was created. So there must be a way to enter old certifications.
Moreover, people might receive a vaccination in a foreign land. Instead of forging a certification of their home country, people might forge a certification of a foreign country. When they present such certification for entry into a national database, they simply say they were travelling and received a vaccination abroad.
What can a data entry clerk do? Ask her supervisor whether the foreign cert is real? Call the police because she suspects it is fake? What can the police do? Investigate whether some physician in Pakistan or Bangladesh really gave you a vaccination? If the police has no easy way to prove that the certification is wrong, they’ll give up.
@Karl
Thanks for this idea #2. That said, You will find the Bureaucracy always tends towards inaction. So if you bring in a cert from a foreign land during your travels abroad and if the clerk does not know the rules, he will simply refuse to enter your name into the database or will enter it for a bribe. But at least the fraud is not obvious. And you won’t get arrested.
My problem is if they ask to see the stamps of the foreign country where I supposedly got my Vaxx on my passport. I really haven’t travelled abroad since this Kayfabe (Gayfake) started and have no plans to till this madness dies down, which well might be never. The sheer incompetence and corruption of the Indian state gives any man with a three digit IQ plenty of breathing space.
I must clarify. Getting the fake covid cert that looks real enough is easy. Getting your name on the national database as having taken the shot without actually having the taken shot seems to be perplexingly difficult. It’s the name on the database we are looking for
I’ve told my family and friends and everyone who will hear that I’ve taken the shot. Strange that they are so insistent on the shot given that within the family, a relative was recently hospitalized in seruious condition with the virus in spite of having taken the shot. God, what Theatre!
Friends and family can be a very strong source of immediate social pressure, so diffusing this in one way or another can help a lot, at least in the short term. Cuts the pressure by half at least, leaving only the media and the state.
Hi Jim, sorry for posting another off-topic, but I need advice from someone who experience on this forum.
What is the recommended dose of testosterone for (1) inhibit procreation and (2) therapeutic (non-sport) use?.
I plan to have my wife free of birth control because even without it she already have difficulty managing weight and hormone level. Somewhere along in this forum I read that THT in male is damn good birth control so I’m thinking “why not?”.
I am now 27 y.o., generally healthy with good BMI, but below average athleticism. I don’t plan to increase athleticism. This purely therapeutic and birth control.
If you can share specific brand and it’s doses that also would be very helpful.
Wouldn’t you be better off telling your wife to lose weight or knocking her up? Bitches seem to have no issues losing weight when they’ve decided to hunt for a new man or want to be attractive to men who won’t fuck fat chicks.
As far as test goes, there’s a small chance of losing your ability to have children altogether from it. I’m the told the odds are low, but it’s a possibility.
Her gaining weight was coupled with erratic period and mood swing is what suggests me she has hormone issue.
Thanks for the heads up, I should be more cautious on this.
Hard to answer, because the official truth is that there is no male contraceptive, and so they are in denial and full of lies, but it does not take all that much additional testosterone to knock your sperm count to zero.
However it takes several months for it to fall to zero (hence cylcing. If you cycle right, your sperm count is only moderately depressed.) But quite moderate steady usage, zero.
And if you go for too long at moderately steady usage, permanently zero, so don’t do that.
But as I said, every doctor is cowering in fear of this usage.
Why would they be afraid of male contraceptives?
Oh, they are working hard on male contraceptives, looking for some variant of testosterone that has the contraceptive effect, but not the masculinizing effect.
Don’t be a fag, knock her up.
Already did. I just prefer long window between 1st kid and 2nd kid (3 to 4 years) because she had C-section with the 1st kid.
Pulling out is 100% effective. Or you can do as Catholics do, and use “natural family planning”, which means charting her cycle and not banging her during the few days a month during which she risks getting pregnant.
Relevant to the rythm method
http://daviddfriedman.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-rhythm-method-and-population-growth.html?m=1
On asperating the clotshot: Data from Norway and Demark is in. Clotshot in Norway without asperation has around 1 case of myocarditis per 33k. In Demark with asperation 1 in 14k. Asperation cuts down the risk bad heart inflammation by 2.5x. The root of the problem is still the spike proteins from COVID damaging your system. In most people they eventually hit the blood stream and fuck you up but the quantities are certainty lower if they miss a blood vessel and most people probably recover from it. Though it seems likely that athletics will aggravate the damage unless the time is taken to let body heal from the damage.
Grr, reverse those numbers. Demark 1 in 33k. Norway(no asperation) 1 in 14k.
If the numbers were so vanishingly low, we would not be seeing footballers keeling over on live TV.
Another pronouncement of sanity from the former Empire of the Rising Sun
https://dailysceptic.org/2021/12/21/do-not-discriminate-against-the-unvaccinated-japanese-government-tells-citizens/?fbclid=IwAR3JizptkHp_uGrXNq3Dm3P3jGiiiS0rRBuEIDDT1WoSPKpPlN_ra8ws3eY
Not pinpointing you, but i never understand why people on alt sites post links with faceberg trackers. Happens everywhere. Especially odd is seeing twitter trackers on links at gab. You’d think those guys would autostrip them out.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2011460/Journalist-stages-rape-cure-PTSD-caused-Haitian-womans-real-sex-attack.html
LOL here is a REAL redpill on women article. Roastie journalist sees rape, can’t suppress her urge to be violently raped… her fellow woman therapist agrees that being violently raped is really hot and she should make it happen.
But it was caused by “trauma” from witnessing it.
Wait headline is wrong she didn’t even witness the “rape” she just met someone (the dark part is the woman she met actually got mutilated)…
The headline story was better but its still good…
I don’t believe that leftism has no essence. Leftism in its many forms through history is multifarious because the essence of leftism is hatred of reality, the desire to overturn natural law and impose manmade law onto the fabric of the world. There is only one natural law, and an infinite number of ways in which one can reject, pervert, or invert it. All leftisms are thus different, but we still know it when we see it.
The leftist may, as Jim says, simply want to knock over the applecart and steal some apples, but in his elaborate justifications for doing so he is strangely zealous, and his ideology in all places and times can be distilled to a singular motive; that he hates reality.
The Jim theory of leftism, applecarts and envy, equates the leftist with the barbarian who sacked Rome. Yet I can’t help but feel that the leftist is defying the natural order and the barbarian is fulfilling it.
These definitions require a shared frame. The devout leftist believes in a different natural law, the zeitgeist or the arc of history. And though the Zeitgeist is clearly not Gnon, is probably a demon if he exists at all, there’s something ineffably similar about them. Both always manage to reassert themselves even after appearing to be totally vanquished.
The Greek philosophers tried very hard to define things like “reality” and “natural law”, and didn’t entirely nail it down after centuries of work and millions of words. I don’t think you’d be able to do it in a few sentences. To use your definition of leftism, need a shared definition of something much more complex and harder to agree on than leftism.
It’s not just knocking over applecarts that constitutes the Jim theory, it’s the coordination to knock over ever more and ever larger applecarts, which requires communication, which is how the elaborate justifications emerge.
Reality is in your blood, bones, flesh and the air you breathe, the world around you You cannot describe reality or natural law generally because it is within and outside you and defies precise definition. Yet we are born intuitively aligned to it.
Yet we all know reality when we see it and human instinct is connected to it.
It is the leftists who need elaborate and infinite justifications to defy reality. Leftists who take themselves seriously become evil and insane over time while the cynical leftists are merely thieves and opportunists looking to increase their power and status. We find it hard to define leftism because they have an infinite number of ways to reject reality.
The central infirmity of the gnostic is his presumption that his standards for judging what constitutes evil are prior to Nature’s God.
Id est, the central infirmity of the gnostic is that his intuitive perceptions of what constitutes evil are incorrect.
Id est, gnosticism is the sentimental heart, or animus, of leftist behavior in praxis.
So what?
The question isn’t whether or not the definition is intelligible to you, or your buddies. It’s whether or not the definition is robust enough to resist entryism at Dunbar-plus levels.
“I know it when I see it” definitions are navel-gazing, paradoxically ignoring the reality that such definitions don’t survive contact with the real world for very long.
“I know it when I see it†definitions work when everybody wants to see them. Is it not possible to create a priesthood where every member wants to see it, and those who don’t are removed?
You’re looking for a Green-Beard Meme, which might very well require an actual Green-Beard Gene to propagate: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green-beard_effect
The implication of such a meme/gene would be to almost immediately outcompete all others, so I guess my answer to “is it possible” would be “I hope so”. But it is very rare to find these traits in nature, with increasing rarity as the organism itself grows more complex. It is doubtful that such a meme exists today, because if it did, would have already outcompeted all the others.
Every state religion attempts to be a Green Beard Meme. Whereupon its enemies adopt protective coloration. Every time a biological tribe conquers the state, it attempts to be Green Beard Gene. Whereupon the tribe finds power in the hands of those not particularly loyal to the tribe (the Khaldun cycle).
But the protective coloration does not really work that well.
Every successful Christian state priesthood has found effective shill tests, and it destruction was always failure to apply them, immune system dysfunction.
Reflect on our latest entryist, (there may be more around who have yet to reveal themselves). The basic flaw is that they want to use their meme as green beard meme for themselves, and as protective coloration for entryism, and the one must conflict with the other.
With past Christian priesthoods, usually it was usually some Christological issue – the enemy failed to embrace the paradox. But our “I am a deist” entryist could not pull it off either.
Moral of this history, both the history of this blog and all of Christian history, is that you cannot really have a meme that reliably identifies our guys – but you can spot the memes that reliably reveal a cohesive and coordinated enemy attack. You cannot reliably detect our coordination, but you can reliably detect their coordination.
I agree, and I’m glad to finally be back down to earth in this thread.
And I further stipulate that “inversion of reality” or “against the natural order” aren’t reliably effective ways to detect their coordination, which is why no Christian state (or any other successful state religion) has ever tried to rely on a definition so vague.
The bible has a lot of words, and most of them are there for a reason. And one pattern you see in the bible is that it tries to take a lot of difficult, nebulous, high-minded ideas and reduce them to simpler parables and rituals and affirmations that ordinary(ish) people can understand. When I see people doing the opposite – taking relatively straightforward memes and tests and observations and inflate them into exceedingly vague, abstruse, subjective-sounding generalizations – well, that’s when my defenses go up.
I have a collection of shill tests, which work astonishingly well, and looking back into history, this is a very old tactic. Why could not T. Rex Sex even disagree with our position in a way that stated what the position was that he opposed and disagreed with?? He could say “Y is true”, but could not say “Y is true, therefore X is false.”
This slipperiness is the eternal and unchanging reveal. They will never say what they are saying.
The bible represents generalities by concretes. When Christ talked about the spirit of the law, he told us to look past the concretes to the generalities, but refrained from purporting to reify the generalities.
Leftist, and evil, therefore, can only be revealed by specifics and concretes, and any useful tool for recognizing leftists must be adapted to the particular times, albeit we can look at past tests for inspiration and example, my demon worshiper test being a collage hastily pasted together from stuff that has very been very useful and effective for well over a millennium.
The specifics of a particular time and place need to be understood in the context of the generalities over the past few thousand years, but one cannot expect a useful definition that can be mechanically applied by steam engine in any particular time and place. For my demon worshiper test, I looked to the spirit of many centuries, and grabbed those particulars that are relevant here and now.
Our enemies equally grab particulars, but they do so with malicious intent, to turn the spirit upside down.
This is obvious in the general discussion of left and right, both here and in the broader society, but it is particularly obvious with more-christian-than-thou demon worshipers, for that discussion has been running hot for two millennia, and priestly types are more apt to write stuff down, while the discussion of who is left, who is right, what is left, what is right, has only been running hot since the French Revolution, so it is a lot easier to do meta analysis, analysis of analysis, on the discussion of who is Christian and who is not.
>And I further stipulate that “inversion of reality†or “against the natural order†aren’t reliably effective ways to detect their coordination, which is why no Christian state (or any other successful state religion) has ever tried to rely on a definition so vague.
I mean, christian monarchs very explicitly invoked the idea of natural order as justification. Does throne, altar, and freehold ring any bells? Divine right and all that? See Robert Filmer for a reference example.
They are absolutely effective; but of course, not all detectors of natural order, in the first place, are created equal.
It does indeed, and Jim would not have written an entire feature-length blog post about it if the entire concept could be reduced to a few pithy phrases that everyone intuitively agreed upon.
Throne, altar and freehold are the names we give to the ideas, not the whole ideas. So it is with “natural order” – it’s a nice phrase, but it is the definition that matters, and declining to have a non-tautological definition fails as a Schelling point.
Interesting paradox, isn’t it? We cannot become too attached to the letter of the law, because heretics and apostates will always find ways to subvert the letter of the law. Yet without something concrete, the spirit of the law is impossible to divine.
It’s almost as if the men who wrote the bible kinda sorta knew what they were doing by relying on this earthy storytelling rather than either a tightly-scoped code of laws OR gassy metaphysical abstractions. Then again, the devil can quote scripture for his purpose… no method is so perfect that it can’t be screwed up by weak or ineffective leadership.
No it is not the definition that matters. Socrates long ago pointed out the futility of definitions. Obviously we can know a violation of the natural order when we see it. Sticks out like dog’s balls.
In practice, a species is defined by a type specimen preserved in a jar. Drag Queen Story Hour is your type specimen right there. They define the whole left, including Burke, even though he would have called on throne and altar to burn them in a fire.
The antifa mug shot makes another good type specimen.
You’re vacillating between saying you want pithy phrases and bemoaning the evils of pithy phrases as convenient.
One of the things from my point of view is that i am not really interested in or trying to ‘universalize’ leftism as a concept, a tendency which i feel underlays many of these issues (that something either must be a universally applicable concept, or else it is bunkum – the characteristic fatality of the ‘enightenment project’).
‘Leftism’ is evil, but not all that is evil – or ‘adharmic frame’ as our dot friends might say – is leftism. The matter of leftism particularly concerns such internecine affairs which may weaken a body politic with regards to a telos of it growing to become a predominant super-organism over creation – the theophanic implications of such we will simply note in passing here. Creative destruction is not leftism, as my good friend Nicky Land would vociferously argue. There is no need to impute some form of manichean necessity into the idea, once you stop needing to inflate it beyond it’s scope. Cutting off a rotting bough, separating the wheat from the chaff, physically removing social democrats from your hoppean libertopia, et cetera et cetera, are all good and natural and inevitable operations of entity working to export entropy for creating local order.
As this conversation progresses, it has started looking more like this is coming from a projection of your own difficulties in wrapping your head around the idea, in seeing the same things we are seeing.
>And I further stipulate that “inversion of reality†or “against the natural order†aren’t reliably effective ways to detect their coordination, which is why no Christian state (or any other successful state religion) has ever tried to rely on a definition so vague.
My point (and I believe Pseudo-Chrysostom’s before me) was that you can in fact reliably detect enemy agents in this manner. You don’t need strict definitions of wrong and right if the people doing the deciding are all in tune with Gnon. They can “feel” when something is wrong. When reading shillposts, you can tell that something is off, even if you don’t know what it is. Hence, you know it when you see it.
I remember around 12 years ago I felt that something was wrong with all of the ideas I was encountering. I had a thirst for something else, without realizing it. Even though I was still a teenager eating up most of the “stereotype threat” bullshit I was fed, I was still scouring the same “science” articles that fed me it for the truth. Then one of them by happenstance linked to Roissy’s blog. I knew right away that he was right and all the other bullshit I was reading was wrong. Took me a long time afterwards to find Jim’s, but I had the same feeling when I found it. You really do know the truth when you see it, even if you need to go back and look your own experiences to prove to the conscious part of your brain that the model fits observed reality better.
Of course, this requires a brain that is 0% NPC; as Pseudo mentioned, not all detectors are created equal. But good detectors are not only able to detect ideas well, they are able to detect the ability of other detectors quite well also. And then sort accordingly, an unfakeable green beard.
HerbR:
Recent case in point, the arguments with T Rex Sex, about capital, usury, and Soros.
And of course, the type specimen of leftism, Drag Queen Story Hour.
Works.
Obviously you cannot use it in your shill test, because the other guy is going to tell you and everyone he is in touch with reality and you are ignoring it, which is entire shtick of the troofers, but it nonetheless sticks out like dog’s balls.
The Drag Queen Story Hour performers will tell us that we are ignoring the reality that some men want to be women, but the their exaggerated femininity is ludicrous unfeminine, as the exaggerated masculinity of a leather boy is ludicrously unmasculine, and their interactions with the small human sacrifices that parents send to Moloch is sexual rather than paternal or maternal – they don’t act like men or women who tell their children stories.
Is there any way by way of intellectual argument/proof to get everyone to agree about what they see in front of their eyes and feel in their bones?
For that matter is there any way to define Reality other than by using symbolic names at some level?
The solution to those ultimately imperceptive of divine law is not ‘meme harder’ – such is the fatal conceit of the cuckservative – the solution is to Physically Remove And Separate such beings from society.
I wrote something along those lines in my latest blog post
I feel too much energy is wasted on debating a moot question of whether Nazis are leftists or right wing.
I would describe myself similarly, though substituting Logos or Gnon for Dharma. Can you link to the full blog article?
Here https://dharmicreality.wordpress.com/2021/12/20/the-dharmic-right-position/
I think what a Westerner would say along the same lines as they are a right winger who believes in natural hierarchies and natural law.
Thank you!
That is a compelling argument. Obviously I am indeed missing something.
The difference is between attacking the applecart with a sword and axe, and using poisoned words to disarm the owner, then knocking over the applecart while pretending not to, then declaring the applecart fell over by itself while you scoop up the apples in order to be helpful.
So the solution is to combine the priest and applecart definitions. Sounds right to me—I can’t think of any counterexamples to it.
Perhaps something about leftists not being strong and impressive people, so steal through lies and subterfuge, instead of physical aggression?
Note I wrote that before you wrote the second part of your comment so I pat myself on the head.
Why does GNON care at all about this? I understand why we might prefer the strong straightforward barbarian to the slippery false friend, but the universe doesn’t give a damn. If a strategy works, it works, and those who employ it will succeed and out compete those who don’t. Hasn’t Leftism proven itself to be a very effective strategy? Hasn’t it, in fact, shown itself to be far more effective and better adapted to our current social environment than Christianity, Rightist, Jimism, NRx, or any other alternative we might prefer?
Somehow, though, we say the cold and indifferent laws of the universe despise Leftism even as Leftism succeeds beyond all other memes and all other strategies. I suppose I should distinguish between the success of Leftism itself as a meme and the success it brings its human hosts, but even if we just look at the hosts, Leftism pays them off nicely as long as they’re clever and cynical enough to know when to follow it wholeheartedly and when to grant themselves unprincipled exceptions.
So is the strategy of cancer cells – until the organism dies.
The direction of life, humans, and civilization has been to higher levels of cooperation at broader and broader scales. Screw it up, you disappear from history.
Multicellular animal life started out as a single celled life form that looks a bit like a sperm, and a bit like a white blood cell. They are still around. They swim around till they run into another small life form, then they eat it. Or it eats them. They did not like that part, so they ganged up, a team of them like a wolf pack, so that if they ran into something big, they could take it. Such small teams are still around, but some of them evolved into rather larger and more highly organized assemblages of cells. And here we are.
Leftism, like cancer, is a failure of extended cooperation.
I expect that those teams of single celled organisms had and have a problem with some members of the team defecting at an inconvenient moment, and hostile aliens swimming up and saying “hail fellow team member” An inquisition is to a civilization what an immune system is to an individual. Our civilization is suffering from advanced acquired immune deficiency.
This definition, incidentally, is closest to my heart.
Leftism is cheating. Now all’s fair in love and war so you’ll see plenty of cheating in both, but really, cheating is about screwing over your supposed in-group, thus the goths sacking rome was more a thing of Rome’s internal leftism finally killing it.
When you have a soccer match, even though both parties are opposed, the match is ritualized — there’s stuff you and cannot do. Everybody cheats now and then, but the fun is in seeing them punished. What happens with rampant leftism is the cheaters no longer gets punished; even the referee starts cheating. Good for the referee in the short term, kills the sport in the long term.
As with the soccer match, so with society. Thus, leftism as cancer, a breakdown of extended cooperation.
I keep on my computer one of those pictures of antifa mugshot collages to remind myself who these people are.
We all recognize them. Leftist are “sneaky fuckers” who can’t cut it in the natural dominance hierarchy and try to cheat and steal their way up. Like those fat women writing articles about beauty at every size (for women) but how they’re not attracted to fat men. They can’t compete with attractive women so they try subverting by lying and shaming instead.
As Jim says, a healthy immune system would’ve ensured these people are kept in their proper place.
Leftists are NOT sneaky fuckers because sneaky fuckers work alone and leftists work ALWAYS in groups.
Also there are some impressive leftists, although among the really impressive I doubt prevalence is so high.
There used to be some impressive leftists long ago, for example Bertrand Russel.
Not seeing any impressive leftists around today. Maybe Soros, who has one foot in the grave. There are some young impressive leftists in the tech priesthood, but they have found themselves cast out of the left priesthood as insufficiently woke. Any tech priest in good standing in the left priesthood is startlingly stupid – at best he would be useful as a quality assurance engineer.
That’s a fair point.
I must admit, when I see this, I see a sneaky fucker.
Well if you want me to admit that there are apparent leftist who act like leftists most of the time but do not actually believe in leftism even a little the “this is what a feminist looks like” sneaky fucker is a REAL example of that.
You’ve got a real greengrocer there…
But sneaky fucker is an individual defection strategy, generally by a guy who tends to stay rather aloof from the male hierarchy as much as possible. The classic example of the sneaky fucker is a guy looks for wives of deployed soldiers and such…
Not sure I understood very well what you meant.
The guy in the cartoon tries to get close to women by being an “ally”: him being an “ally” is a reproductive strategy for unattractive herbs, I think it’s exactly a sneaky fucker.
I may be stretching the meaning of sneaky fucker. I understand a sneaky fucker is the lion that fucks the lioness while the alpha lion is distracted.
I suppose it would be useful to have a word for the commie that incites revolution because he expects to have higher status and access to women after he wins the revolution.
The point is simply that both the sneaky fucker and the commie are trying to bypass the dominance hierarchy, or the natural order or whatever you may call it. The commie is trying to subvert and kill his way to high status. He wouldn’t be trying to subvert and kill his way to high status if he had honestly earned high status to begin with. I see a very similar behavior to the sneaky fucker, though your point about leftism being a group strategy stands.
The sneaky fucker does not want to fight for status at all… he wants to avoid all that dangerous stuff and just bang chicks above his pay grade (women’s excessive status relative to men tends to make this not work in America now).
The sneaky fucker would not be a leftist because generally they would have an entirely cynical mentality. I can understand the sneaky fucker in a way I could never understand the leftist (I can predict leftist behavior to some degree but the way they really think is utterly alien to me) because the sneak fucker’s worldview may be cowardly and underhanded but its at least fundamentally logical.
I suppose for the leftist bioleninist dregs that make up antifa they imagine there will be some magical heavenly kingdom on earth where they will be other than biolenist dregs but it won’t ever happen… they also want to belong to something.
Leading leftists just want power and will burn down everything to be king of the ashes.
I cannot understand non dreg but non powerseeking leftists at all… I think they are just dangerous lunatics.
Definitely. I think I understood you from before.
This is why I said I may be stretching the meaning of sneaky fucker.
In biology everything is ultimately about reproduction. Status acquisition is about access to women, just as everything men do they do to gain access to women (better women, more women..).
The commie using lies and subterfuge to acquire status is not literally fucking women sneakily. But he’s going around the status/dominance hierarchy to try to acquire status in order to get access to women. The fact his ultimate goal is fucking women, not status, should be obvious.
Animals sneakily fuck the alpha’s females while he’s distracted.
Commies sneakily acquire status through lies and subterfuge in order to fuck women that, in a more honorable competition, rightly belong to a stronger and more impressive man.
Possibly the term sneaky fucker isn’t the right one, because it means something precise in evolutionary psychology. But there’s a strong parallel (ultimate goals are the same, means are similar).
@SimplyConnected
Cross-dressing male cuttlefish.
@ simply connected
Do male feminists have game? Seems to me they are more in the orbiter friend zone than anything.
Leftists are more like cancer cells, but these cancer cells also come with a religion that cancer is good and that opposing cancer is evil..
Do we need the “also”? No matter who you are, no matter what you do, you are going to come up with some kind of rationalization for it in which you are the good guy. Have you ever met anyone who straight up tells you “yup, I’m a total dirtbag, but I’m not proud of it, please hate me”?
Even if the rationalization is just “following orders”, which it rarely is – eventually even the order-follower comes to either identify with the order-giver, or overthrow them, or flee.
I believe real cancer cells also have a way of turning off the immune system against them.
For now we could just accept the paradox:
Leftism is part of nature and consistent with Gnon’s will.
and
Leftism is against nature and directly opposed to Gnon’s will.
On one hand, leftism is, as Contaminated NEET has said in this thread and elsewhere https://blog.reaction.la/war/where-we-are-now/ a memetically evolved super-meme:
On the other hand…
The current incarnation of leftists in western society call male-to-female transvestites “women†and talk as if there could ever be such a thing as homosexual “marriage.†Clearly this is spitting right in Gnon’s face.
In economics, leftist ideas amount to “take stuff produced by other people,†which is, to put it gently, not scalable or sustainable. It’s not scalable or sustainable for the same reason cancer isn’t. Is cancer consistent with Gnon’s will? Fuck no. Clearly not.
Environmentalism’s extreme adherents are already saying the human species should render itself extinct (seriously). And its tendency, even in its “non-extreme†variants, is in that direction. Advocating extinction of your own species is the second-most disgusting thing one could do, second only to trying to actually do it. Obviously this is violently opposed to Gnon.
None of this can last. Indeed, it isn’t lasting; the society that is host to this sickness is rapidly and obviously dying.
Perhaps this is a paradox we need to accept, but didn’t you leave out one of the possibilities?
Leftism is part of nature and opposed to Gnon’s will.
It doesn’t logically follow that because X spawned Y, Y must be carrying out the will of X. After all, nothing is more dangerous to Leftism N than Leftism N+1.
Many natural processes are terribly destructive. They have important functions in isolation, but tend to spiral out of control. And no, I’m not making a Petersonesque “balance” argument – to presume that we can even know, much less control, the exactly correct balance of some destructive process, would be to claim that we know better than God. We still avoid the destruction as best we can, because that is all we mortals can do.
>Leftism is part of nature and opposed to Gnon’s will.
I seem to recall that religions or thought-systems which imply that Satan/evil are natural and existed alongside the benevolent creator don’t do so well, as they imply an equivalence between good and evil. In Abrahamic religions, God creates Adam and then Satan tricks him into becoming a fallen man. The lesson is to always return to God, our natural state, and ignore Satan, who came later, and doesn’t have an equal hand (or any at all) in our creation or shaping.
>For now we could just accept the paradox:
I don’t think this is a paradox. The left are not following Gnon’s will, but Satan’s. They are gaining some temporal status over their ingroup in exchange for fucking their own shit up. Gnon’s will in this case is “you shouldn’t fuck your own shit up” and “if you see somebody else fucking his own shit up, you should go fuck him up and take his shit before he can fuck it up too bad”.
Whoops, I took a Christmas break from the Net for a few days, I didn’t mean to check out of this discussion.
HerbR wrote:
“didn’t you leave out one of the possibilities? Leftism is part of nature and opposed to Gnon’s will.â€
Now that you mention it… Leftism is cheating in ways that are good for the cheater in the short run but bad in the long-run, like a cancer that kills its host. Leftism is self-destructive; that’s why it’s against Gnon.
It’s also inherent in the nature of things for game-theoretic reasons.
Briefly: leftism is cheating, and there cannot be an equilibrium with no cheaters, because…
If there were no cheaters then we’d have no reason to have anti-cheating measures.
But there if there are no anti-cheating measures then cheating is a successful strategy. So it will appear and spread.
Therefore: There is no equilibrium with zero cheating.
Like any sane person I fucking hate this and maybe someday people who come after us will find a way to destroy this situation. But I think we’re stuck with it for now.
Of course, this doesn’t mean that there’s no hope of reducing the amount of cheating from something huge (now) to something small (the foreseeable future, I hope). I like to think that, precisely because leftism is self-destructive, we’re close to peak leftism.
Blockchains are designed with considerable care against various subtle forms of cheating, and this design is profoundly difficult, complex, and notoriously subtle and difficult to correctly implement.
The way of the future will be to move bookkeeping, accounting, and various other measures against cheating to the blockchain. We will also go from double entry account, which ensures that the books of the corporation are internally consistent, to triple entry accounting on a blockchain, which ensures that the books of the corporation are not only internally consistent, but that its account of its obligations and transactions with clients and partners is consistent with their account.
The fundamental force moving us to a blockchain based world is an untrusted and untrustworthy elite.
Leftism, the categorization of systems of which those create to destroy order for personal gain, is the product of human will turned away from God. It is not God’s will that nations have Leftism, rather that men turn their hearts towards the Devil in their pride and destroy their neighbor.
Leftism is a plague, GNON’s punishment reserved for weak men.
@Contaminated NEET
Globohomo got its ass kicked by the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Meanwhile, the McChurch continues to get its ass kicked by Globohomo.
Agree. Leftism is a life strategy for people who aren’t strong and impressive.
As Jim points out the left does not really have a new crop of genuinely impressive people (the ones they had getting long in the tooth).
As for strength: there was a reddit screencap going around where some antifa types were discussing getting stronger to get ready to fight. One of them replied that it was a bad idea to go to the gym to become stronger because it is well known that as soon as people work out and become strong, they also become right-wing.
I regret generalizing too much, and “sneaky fucker” may not be a good characterization in general. There is definitely an element of defection involved, trying to subvert the dominance hierarchy. It is a difficult task to precisely characterize leftism.
Left and Right have no meaning outside of a political context and within a given political context they define the two poles in conflict: The Left being evil and wrong and the Right being good and true.
I see Left and Right outside the political context.
Rightism creates order. Leftism destroys order. A farmer who tills a field, grows grain, and stores it in bins is a rightist. A mouse that eats that grain and shits in the bins is a leftist. The cat that catches that mouse and eats it is a rightist.
A rodent that eats only wild seeds is a rightist, for it does no harm to any higher life form. Rather, it benefits higher life forms by collecting food into a compact, nutritious package for them to consume.
This is the entropy definition of leftist, that we represent order and that they represent chaos and yes that is true in a sense but its also not sufficient, creatures of the animal kingdom are not political they just follow their instincts to eat and survive. They do not act according to a political motivation or ideology.
Animals do not have much large scale cooperation, so that there is not much to defect on.
Leftism is parasitic on social order.
Though chimps make war, so they must have some.
I saw an interesting video of wild cattle. The lions broke up the herd, and when the cattle were running wildely in confusion grabbed a calf. And while they were busy, the cattle reformed into formation, shoulder to shoulder, and marched on the lions. With the cattle acting very martially, as one, holding formation, they dealt with the lions easily.
Well leftism cannot be defection on the social order in a demon worshipping leftist theocracy like ours because it IS the social order… that is the terrible situation we are in.
Rightists create order. A “leftist social order” is usurpers exploiting, consuming, and destroying order that past generations of rightists created.
Detroit was the last city the rightists built and the first that the leftists destroyed. Now all cities have turned necrotic and the cancer is spreading into the suburbs.
A ‘leftist organization’ is always a contingency; it can not exist, or does not exist, without something vital to define itself against; it holds no greater object in of itself.
I don’t favor the order/chaos distinction for rightism and leftism because though the left produces chaos, its methods are not chaotic. The left substitutes its own law for the natural law, and its law may be constantly and radically changing (purity spiral), but it needs law in order to interface with the world and effect its changes.
‘
The Left always operates through false gods and evil laws, never really believing in “no gods, no laws”.
Aidan good summation, your blog is missed.
“I saw an interesting video …”
Battle at Kruger
https://youtu.be/LU8DDYz68kM
Aidan, leftists use laws the way Muslims use passenger jets and skyscapers. They exploit order to destroy it.
The Homestead Act was nine pages. The Affordable Care Act was two thousand pages. Laws written by leftists are chaos, not order.
>The Left always operates through false gods and evil laws, never really believing in “no gods, no lawsâ€.
I’ve never seen the left follow the law as written. It’s always an excuse to commit some act of evil and when the law doesn’t agree with those acts, they ignore it.
Western leftism is clearly particularly designed to exploit christian mercy, which is why they should not recieve it.
No mercy to the enemies of mercy. No tolerance for the intolerant. Those who are kind to the cruel will become cruel to the kind.
The point is that leftists steal by breaking the natural order, they are the equivalent of the sneaky fucker of evolutionary psychology. They take what is not rightly theirs from being strong and impressive. Just from that I would expect them to be the most petty and least likely to share once they acquire it.
The sneaky fucker is not breaking the natural order. The strategy has evolved independently countless times in countless different species, from lizards to fish to dung beetles. Clearly it works, and thus it is blessed by GNON.
We don’t want it to work, and non-sneaky-fuckers are acting in accord with GNON’s will when they try to expose and expel the sneaky fuckers, but similarly, the sneaky fuckers are acting in accord with GNON when they try to fool the rest of us and get some sneaky sex without going through the dominance challenge ritual or provisioning the females.
We can call it whatever you want. I would call it the dominance hierarchy, which should have a more precise evopsych definition.
Sneaky fuckers break the dominance hierarchy. When I said they break the natural order I mean to say the break the dominance hierarchy. Obviously they are part of nature and can be a winning strategy some times (not without risks).
I think the way to reconcile applecarts and envy with barbarians fulfilling the natural order is that the barbarians are attacking their outgroup, not their ingroup. A strategy along the lines of what you say, “using poisoned words to disarm the owner…” and so on, can only work when it comes from a traitorous ingroup member. Leftists being dangerous to other leftists, leftism being a circular firing squad, that is against the natural order.
In my experience leftists are more concerned with tipping over applecarts. Picking up the fallen apples is just an added bonus.
“There is no way anyone needs a billion dollars.”
They cant truly expect any of Elon Musk’s money will end up in their bank account, but want it taken from him all the same.
The dynamic of the leftist agitator trotskyite going hail fellow rocket haters, why I too have a sister named Nell, and she too had done be bit by a rat, and there’s Whitey on the Moon, is gaining zero traction, perhaps because it has nothing to hook into, there is no real or imagined grievance that normies would imagine having against the Star Prophet.
I don’t think you’re missing anything, Jim. I think the sidebar is – unintentionally, I’m sure – driving an unnecessary wedge into the issue.
Listen, friends: leftism is part of nature, like cockroaches and ants are part of nature. You don’t want them in your buildings or anywhere near you, and you have to fight them, constantly, and take proactive steps to keep them away. But they were put on this earth by the same God or evolutionary process that created you and your big brain. If we didn’t have them, we’d be up to our elbows in shit – literally.
Ants and cockroaches and flies eat the garbage people throw out, or sometimes the garbage that nature itself throws out, like dead leaves and such. It’ll decompose anyway, eventually, probably, but not nearly as fast as those pesky little insects can take care of it. These bugs are only really a problem when they’re under your roof, and only a crisis when they’ve somehow managed to evolutionarily adapt to thriving under roofs in general, like those Satan-spawned German cockroaches that can’t even survive in the outdoors.
Leftists are normally the scavengers that swoop in when rulers are no longer worthy and institutions are already becoming decadent and corrupt. One of those paleoliberal guys, a few years back, I forget which one, took a really excellent look at all of the corporations that had begun humiliating themselves with woke advertising, and found an interesting pattern: all of these corporations were already financially sick, if not outright hemorrhaging cash then at least having clearly passed their peak. This is consistent with Founding Questions’ (great link, btw) observation that companies turn to open leftism when they try to exceed their mission, for example due to market saturation.
Leftism comes from Gnon just as Satan comes from Yahweh, and while the gods may marginalize or even hate their own creations and certainly not want them to gain too much power, they were created for a reason. Some institutions need to die, not necessarily because of anything we’d intuitively recognize as “leftism” but because they’ve become decrepit, weak, ossified, calcified, unable to perform. The natural rightist says “we don’t have the authority to interfere” or “the market will take care of it”, the natural leftist says “no way, fuck that, these assholes need to burn”. And 95%, maybe 99% of the time the leftist is horribly, catastrophically wrong, but the 1% of the time that they’re right is how humanity manages to keep breaking through developmental plateaus.
You know this in your bones as an athlete or bodybuilder or scientist or writer or engineer. Consistency is the key, almost all of the time, just put in the effort and keep it up… but when you hit that plateau, you know you have to try something different, because doing the same thing isn’t working. Even if the new thing is totally back-asswards, even if it’s obviously stupidly hilariously wrong and causes you to lose months of progress (or centuries of progress, at civilization scale), you might learn something that lets you finally break through. Your injury causes you to pay closer attention to your form and technique, you manage to salvage the one good idea from hundreds of pages of gibberish, you realize one of the basic assumptions you made in your algorithm was wrong… whatever it is, your attempt to do something different may have been an abject failure but it gave you the experience you needed to do the right thing.
I’m not saying that God wants you to be leftist – God forbid. But there is nothing really unnatural or unreal about destruction. Yahweh personally destroys a whole bunch of shit he’s disappointed with in the Old Testament, and is even sometimes willing to destroy the good and wholesome merely to test an individual’s resolve. No matter how horrible and destructive leftism is when it gets out of control (and it gets out of control mighty fast, no argument here), it has a function.
So what’s the difference between the barbarians at the gate, and the leftists inside the gate? Nothing, except which side of the gate they’re on, and maybe some evolutionary changes from being inside for too long. If the civilization is still strong, it will fend off the barbarians and nuke their camps, and it will disempower or purge the leftists. If the civilization has become militarily weak, then the barbarians will raze it, and if spiritually weak, then the leftists will raze it. It’s the exact same thing, viewed from different angles.
“The sidebar”? To what do you refer
This branch of the conversation. Is there a good shorthand for “top-level comment reply to a wordpress post, especially one that is not a direct reply to the original blog post”? I don’t think “thread” sounds exactly right.
It’s just a word I used. Unlike the majority of my reply, it didn’t have any deeper meaning behind it.
Christianity precludes this idea. It understands all good to proceed from God and all evil to proceed to man’s sin.
Christianity does not preclude this idea.
It depicts Satan as one of God’s angels, on an alarmingly long leash, who is giving effect to God’s will by acting seemingly contrary to God’s will.
So, all evil proceeds from man’s sin in the sense that we made the choices, but God put temptation, or allowed temptation to be placed, in our way. Who stuck the tree in the middle of the Garden of Eden, and the serpent in that Garden, and then wandered off from the garden for a bit?
Consider it the cookie test.
To grow, we need an opponent. A sparring partner that doesn’t actually try to beat us is good for training and learning, but without overcoming an actual determined opponent we will be lesser.
And so the enemy of Man finds his evolutionary niche, and it is filled by God’s highest angel, because it is the most important task.
Or at least this makes sense to me, while it also worries me, because it is at most a single step removed from satanism.
I see Satan as really trying to rebel against God- that his rebellion plays into God’s plan is something he well understands, but he can’t help but continue on the path that he chose.
The rebellion of Satan is the same rebellion against natural law as leftism. “Why is He God and not me? I could be a better God than He is, could make a better reality.”
But all Satan can actually do is tempt men and lead them to destroy their souls, the only way he can actually stick it to God.
Ok, you are right.
I notice that the Catholic catechism answers the question of why God did not prevent man from sinning this way: “the victory that Christ won over sin has given us greater blessings than those which sin had taken from us”. That is interesting.
On top of what Jim already said, this is an illogical argument even if we accept the premise. If evil proceeds from man’s sin, and man’s sin proceeds from man’s free will, and God created man and gave him free will, then God owns the whole shebang. The buck stops here.
The question of “why does God allow evil to exist?” is an ancient one and has spawned many holy wars. Maybe the answer is unknowable to us, too profound for our puny mortal minds to understand, but none of that invalidates the question. Good and evil come from the same source because all creation comes from the same source. This does not make them equal – that is the path of heresy – but evil is not alien.
Unless you believe in more than one god, or none at all, at which point you’re very far away from anything resembling Christianity.
The best refutation to the is God evil thing I’ve seen is that if god was evil you’d be suffering like the characters in the I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream game (where the computer was considerably more sadistic than the short story).
Of course God is not evil, that’s the black-pilled and heretical answer to why evil exists. Evil is attributable to the creator, but to further conclude that the creator must be evil barely even qualifies as composition fallacy.
If I build a wood shed, and the shed catches on fire, does that mean I am flammable? There’s no transitivity here – the properties of the things I create are not properties of myself, and the properties of God’s creations are not properties of God.
Well, okay, man was created “in his image” – but that still implies we are imperfectly so, either we lack some properties that God has or we possess some that God doesn’t have. Or both.
Its hard to not blame the creator for not creating a suffering free world when you with your limited human perceptions don’t really understand the purpose of suffering…
So until I saw the simple brilliance of the refutation of the problem of evil being the sadism of God himself being that… no if God were truly evil your suffering would be astronomically worse… it was a problem for me.
Seems to me that many Christian theologians have tried to deprive evil of ontological equality with good, by regarding good as a positive thing but evil as simply the absence of good, etc etc. But you are right, the opposite view, as well as being appealing, straightforward, and logical, is completely compatible with Christianity.
Gotta be careful with Theologians.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUSTKisEgTo
“Theology is a device for enabling Agnostics to stay within the church”…
Theology should only be the study of what the Church says as pontificating on each and every little detail leads to heresy. It is fitting that HerbR and Tityrus are doing “unbeliever†theology, but this practice is as ancient as Origen, his work prefiguring Biblical criticism and Modernism.
I’m curious, neofugue. Do you think that evil was created by God and in what sense?
Satan, who was the highest of the angels, is created by God, And Satan fell. Then God stuck the tree of knowledge and Satan in the garden of Eden, then went for a little walk, then Eve fell, then Adam fell.
A universe without free will, or without choices that matter, would be extremely boring. When a programmer makes a game universe, he is going to fill it with monsters, and if he could give them free will, he would.
The problem I see with this explanation is that it reduces God’s creation to the creation of contingent truths, while implying that the necessary truths exist apart from him and are not under his control.
For any of these deductions to work God would have to have had the choice set before him, “should I give humans free will and allow them to sin, or should I not give them free will and not allow them to sin”. For this to make sense we have to say that God did not create this “or”, that there are necessary limits on what he can create that are outside his control.
We might allow this, but it runs into the difficulty of why we should care about God instead of focusing all our attention towards the necessary truths which limit everything, even God.
Seems more reasonable to say, “yes, God actively wanted to create evil and didn’t just do it because he was forced to”, or, “evil actually has no being and cannot belong to the class of things that were created (because it is choice/vacuity/etc), therefore God didn’t create it”.
If God is like a video game programmer creating a game universe, if God is little bit like me, or rather if I am a little bit like God, I would do stuff similarly. Of course the video game you create is ultimately under your control in some sense, but in another quite important sense, if you have done it right, it is not.
When you are writing a video game, you should exercise your control to make sure that you do not have control.
God created neither death nor suffering nor evil. Evil has no hypostasis or existence as such, rather it is the absence of good, with death being the absence of life. Evil is the alienation of the created being who has estranged himself from God. The Orthodox Tradition accepts that the entrance of death into the human race was realized as a consequence of man’s subjugation to the devil, after having disrupted his communion with God. God created us free and gave us the right to choose on our own the way of good and of virtue, or the way of sin and evil. If He had created human nature without free will, by this imposed condition He would have rendered the created intelligent being purely passive in nature; the creature would simply submit, not having the possibility of doing otherwise, since it would not be free. However, God wished that, after a fashion, we too should be His co-workers in His creation and be responsible for our own eternal destiny. God knows in His infinite wisdom how to transform the causes of evil into that which is profitable for man’s salvation. Thus God uses the consequences of evil so as to make roses bloom forth from the thorns, although He never desired the thorns, nor did He create them in order to use them as instruments. He permitted these things to exist out of respect for our freedom.
Free will and death and basic doctrine quoted from OrthodoxInfo.
Relevant to the above comment by Cominator, I am not doing my own theology rather quoting doctrine enshrined by the Church.
Sound and correct theology. Though I look at it from the perspective of a video game programmer, not that I have been a video game programmer for a very long time.
War is, at further remove, the process of ontological priority. It both asks and answers the question of what has what priority.
When an entity engages in warfare with another, it is asking the question: which of us has priority? And asking the question also occasions it’s answer. The entity that exists has higher priority than the entity that no longer exists.
War is the process of ontic priority. Those modes of being that exist and continue to exist and have more frequently or less contingently existed, then, have demonstrated higher priority than such modes of being that do not exist, have passed out of existence, have less frequently or more contingently existed, or could not exist.
For an entity to be described as virtuous at warfighting, for it to become more virtuous at warfighting, then, is for it to be something that participates in such higher priority modes of being; to anticipate them, even; to be something that can anticipate them.
If there is any one sentiment that finds the greatest extent of representation in defining modernity, it fear of power.
Demotism, because fear of power (‘noone can have power over me, because they might do something bad to me’).
Gun grabbing, arms control, because fear of power (‘other people having strong tools would increase their ability to do bad things to me’).
Superhero stories where people with fantastical abilities are depicted as isolated loners, because fear of power (‘if people have power, they could do bad things to me’).
A cuckservative is also something that fears power, in it’s own way; it fears playing the game of power, doing the sort of things that would lead to power. The cuckservative can sense, on a more or less conscious level, that if he starts playing to win, the same way those who hate him and want him to die are playing to win, that it will mean war, in very short order.
Which is to say, it would mean a transformation of circumstances, out of the state of affairs they feel comfortably understand of, into a brave new world, where they have no mental script to follow; and this terrifies them.
They prefer to be ‘principled losers’, to be disenfranchised, and then carp at the foibles of their disenfranchisers, because that at least feels familiar to them. They prefer one way war (also known as ‘mopping up actions’), to two way war, because the former at least allows them a short time to continue pretending civil cooperation exists.
The script given by enemies of civilization to society is of course purposefully designed to allow them to win, and to channel any instinctual defenders of civilization into the ranks of loserdom; but it’s the only script the cuckservative knows, so he follows it to the only conclusion he can.
>”One of those paleoliberal guys, a few years back, I forget which one, took a really excellent look at all of the corporations that had begun humiliating themselves with woke advertising, and found an interesting pattern: all of these corporations were already financially sick, if not outright hemorrhaging cash then at least having clearly passed their peak.”
Rather, this is all but always and exactly what pseudosanctimonia is for, which is usually what is being referred to specifically when people speak of ‘virtue signaling’ in pejorative senses, which is a broad label that can include very good things as well.
Where one might find pharisees, gnostics, leftists, or other synonyms of congenital solipsism, in any particular vocation, they will be competing, not in terms of the vocation as such, but with *you, personally*.
They might be on a football team, but they are not ‘about’ football; they might be in a company, but ‘the company’ is not what they are about; they might be in America, but ‘being American’ is not what they are about.
Whatever particular positions they might happen to fill, subjects they might be embedded in, topics they might appear occupied by, is a mere function of historical contingency; any and all serve only as equally inerchangeable vehicles for expressing the vituperative animus of their chronic backbiting syndrome.
They can never ‘talk shop’; whatever object a given band of men is ostensibly ‘for’, they will all but inevitably derail by inflating the scope of discussion with simplistically adulterated ideograms that they are capable of wrapping their heads around, which they might fain to call ‘universal principles’, in order to furnish such pretexts for such poison of spirit.
The more parochial a matter, the more deterministic it is, the easier it may be for such kinds to find their empty charlatanism exposed as devoid of any real virtue. Whereas, matters much more transcendent are often also comensurably more difficult to verify; and hence, a perverse irony; that such kinds are so often most attracted to such fields that they are also least qualified to traffick in; indeed, the very *last* sorts one would ever want.
When it comes to motivations, well, there are lots of ways to make a living. Why chose the business of unholiness? The only way a man could tolerate such a spiritually poisonous existence, is if his soul was already poisonous. Payment is a ‘bonus’ for creatures like little George, and that is what makes him more ‘reliable’ for his function. If he wasn’t fronting multinationals, he’d be in an NGO pseudopod somewhere spreading poz; and if he wasn’t in an NGO pseudopod, he’d be on twitter signaling about poz. They love the ability to use poz as pretext to loot people, but lack of loot does not commutatively lead to a change in heart, because poz is their heart.
The cultivation of subversive intellectuals, particularly regardless of whether they personally considered themselves ‘communist’ or not, was one of the soviet union’s chief strategic weapons used to advance its interests in other countries around the globe, and against the US in particular. In the event that the soviet union fell, what happened to all those men in all their positions all over society? Did they collectively go poof? Have a change of heart? Renounce the devil and all his works and et cetera?
In fact, not only did they not disappear, but they doubled down even. No longer did people ask what the party line in Moscow was: now, they considered themselves even holier than Jesus – i mean the politburo.
When a lesser shitlib, for instance, agitates for the advancement of mud people or the like, it is an idolization nominally denotated as and conflated with mud people, that exists in their mind, that they are agitating for, not mud people (or whatever else it is) in reality.
But of course, it is that same unfortunate reality that receives the fallout of their psychosis all the same.
What is the xenophilia of a such a man? Consider world-formation capacity as an ‘aperture’, through which greater or smaller ‘sections’ of Being can go through, or be held by, the subject. A subject of such comportment, then, can hardly *see* that which is farther; if he is more cognizant of anything in greater truth of entirety, it is that which is more obvious in his sight. Ie, that which is *nearer*.
When the solipsist perceives lack of virtue, it is most of all *in his neighbors* that he sees it; whereas on the other hand, he does not see lack of virtue in the far away, because in fact *he does not see it at all*.
When he experiences annoyances of life, perceived slights, injuries and insults, it is, generally, his neighbors that he experiences ‘doing’ these things he sees to him, these people who rudely intrude into his narrativization or puts it to lie, while at the same time *lacking a broader vision in which to place such experience into context*. In his mind, he truly and earnestly believes *his neighbors are all the ills in the world*.
When he feels fellow-feeling with ‘the alien’, it has been because ‘the alien’ to him is in truth an empty cypher; it is precisely *because* he does not truly ‘see’ it, that he can fill the space under it’s nominal heading with a totem of his own making, all his hopes, aspirations, and idealizations… a projection of himself, in fact, what he *desires* to be himself.
When dealing with personages suffering from chronic backstabbing syndrome, one of the first mistakes one can make is thinking of such as cynically pragmatic consequentialists.
Reason is a tail wagged by the dog of sentiment, and in cases where one might sense more rational praxeology in actions of such sorts, it exists only in a delineated sense, to serve the animating impulse, which comes first, as reasons are found to rationalize it.
Imagine for a moment that there is a basketcase/shit together continuum, with an ascending scale of how much shit someone can have together. If you could indefinitely expand franchise to ever greater swaths of the basketcase continuum, surely then you could outnumber the people in one place who have more of their shit together, and coterminously recruit the loyalty of the former with the promise of eating for lunch the latter. Of course, you would then no longer have any shit together, and you’d find yourself presiding over a crumbling enfamished wasteland, a vacuum open for some other group with more sense to come in and conquer the easy pickings left over; but hey, death of a society is a small price to pay for a temporary spot on top of it’s status hierarchy, right? Such is the nature of congenital solipsism.
The existence of men with virtue, groups with virtue, societies with virtue, is an existential threat to the leftist’s self-esteem, defined by his insecurities. He both at once cuts down what comes before, and also ensures naught can grow up behind him, all for the same reason. So does ‘leftist organization’ also exist in only a contingent, delineated sense; it cannot exist except for something vital to define itself against; and by the same token, cannot exist against itself either. It is the nature of the game being played, the ultimate ironic wage of the playact; to be left is to die with no successors, no heirs, no legacy.
And broadly of course, it is about ensuring everyone else is in the same boat. Misshapen pieces, modes of thought ill fitted for existence in this plane; tormented by simply being in this world, they are driven towards death – but don’t have the decency to die alone. Such is the nature of thanatos.
That is one crucial difference between the barbarian besieging the walls of pozopolis, and the pozer inside of pozopolis; the barbarian is an exponent of a rising society his sons will inherit, the pozer has neither. One form demonstrates it’s ontological priority over another.
The question of whether one prefers one existential state of affairs over another is ultimately a question of what divinity speaks through your blood. It would be appropriate for my enemies to not share my faith, that beings which do observe it may prevail over them all the easier.
Not even the subversive themselves can fully anticipate what dysfunctions they will lionize in the future. Rather, the world moves, dysfunctionalities become apparent, and ‘leftism’ inevitably converges towards them. Such is its nature.
You should really start a blog. I think your comments here deserve to be articulated as complete essays in their own right.
Personally, I thought most of it was rambling and missing the point. I wrote a long post, so he wrote a longer one.
PC is making the same error that a lot of people on the right make: relying on a model of the left that is tinted, almost to opaqueness, by the modern practice of leftism. Thus the obsession with leftists as weak, effeminate, cowardly, demotic, pozzed, against nature, NGOs and lawyers, and so on. This is all true – for the modern context.
What of Locke, Hume, Voltaire, Kant? Leftist and subversive, yes, but hardly solipsistic. And what of Stalin, Mao, or Genghis Khan – are you going to call them weak or effeminate? Give me a break.
Leftism in a historical context doesn’t look much like leftism in a modern context, and when you become fixated on the modern context, that’s the beginning of the end – the slide into irrelevant cuckservatism, or worse, nazi larping (because everything is nazis vs commies in the mind of a modern).
If one’s definition of friend and foe requires constant hair-splitting and razor wire to avoid outgrouping friends and ingrouping foes, then it’s time to revisit your priors.
Leftism in a historical context looks a lot like it does in a modern context. Locke, Hume, and so on were indeed opponents of the natural law, seeking to improve on nature by appealing to nature, as the Pythagorean cult was recognizably leftist. The earlier the leftist, the more he argues that he is fulfilling the natural law by overturning it. Should not be fooled.
Let’s take a look at Khan as a leftist. Refer to Hulagu’s letter to the Mamluk sultan. It implies that the Mongol religion saw living in cities an affront to natural law. The Mongol hordes had the character of a Crusade, a holy war. The Mongol tested his conception of the natural order against the civilized world’s conception of it. That Khan burned their cities and raped their women proved that the cities individually had grown too weak to defend themselves; they had in that historical moment strayed too far from the natural order to protect what was theirs. That we still have cities, and that Mongolia is a backwater, shows that civilization better adheres to the natural order in the long run that barbaric pastoralism. I have a spiritual affinity for barbaric pastoralism, but Vae Victis.
Sure looks like a test between two different conceptions of the natural order, the way men have constantly tested their adherence to natural law through warfare since the beginning of days.
Need to be careful when defining what “works.” Agriculture and civilization beat savage hunter-gathering but the life of a savage is, by many metrics, better than that of a graincuck. Still, numbers and superior organization will tell.
Sometimes barbarian pastoralists beat civilization. Sometimes civilization beats the barbarians. The life of a barbarian obviously better than the life of a graincuck.
But our civilization is so technologically advanced (i.e. rich) we’re no longer graincucks. The American redneck is naturally taller, stronger and healthier than his borderer ancestor from 500 years back.
Of course, the borderer was happier because his wife belonged to him, his liege lord didn’t subject him to abuse by holy minorities and, while his diet was technically inferior, he couldn’t pollute himself with anti-nutrition in the way that is so common to us.
Better than any of these possibilities: just be the aristocrat ruler lording it over everyone else. Even in the age of graincucks, Hammurabi was no stunted grass eater. Automation could theoretically make everyone an aristocrat, not in terms of status, but at least economically. But sooner or later you’ll run up against space concerns.
Historically, the cities did not rise until barbarians conquered graincucks and became their shepherds. Civilization beat barbarism because civilization had a barbarian elite that could organize and lead the graincucks in war; and the aristocracies of early civilization maintained their barbarian habits, hunting and riding and training for war.
“The thicker the hay, the more easily reaped” said Alaric to the leaderless and uncoordinated graincucks of Rome. Numbers do not win; graincucks do not win except for being organized by warriors. In fact, graincucks do not exist except for being under the protection of warriors. But the warriors eventually disappear, and some barbarians realize that the cities are full of graincucks, with no real warriors on top, and move in to rectify this imbalance.
We still have warriors, of a sort. Unfortunately, they’re slave warriors. Subordinates. This is to say; the effective parts of the police and military. This complicates taking over the cities. The communist states had the same problem. A slave military following the pozzed elites.
In present America, we face a perplexing problem. Where’s the wealth? Very few farmers, as a percentage, and that’s complicated by subsidies. The holy minorities don’t produce much wealth. The arms and agencies of the cathedral produce even less. A vast amount of manufacturing has been offshored, so we’re not making much either.
This is all in regards to hypothetical barbarians seizing a city. What precisely are they trying to control?
Rome had “warriors of a sort” when Alaric sacked it.
The productive capital of our civilization is in energy, engineering, and distribution. We do not make as much as we used to, but we make plenty. The barbarians will take control of and provide physical security for factories, highways, power plants, the mining operations that provide fuel for the power plants, and the communities of human capital that produce high technology.
None of these require cities. Let the skyscrapers crumble under a month-long barrage of constant artillery fire. Let the yuppies and hipsters be put to the sword and their crying women be shackled and marched off en masse. Or let the cities stand as safari zones in which we can train our sons in live-fire urban warfare exercises against the naked and starving savages that will continue to inhabit the ruins like it’s a Robert E Howard novel.
The economic need for cities was never very great. The transport net can and routinely does deliver anything from anywhere. Los Angeles is now a great bottleneck obstructing a great port.
Cities came into being as meeting places where a priesthood hung out to reach consensus, and still today primarily exist in order for the elite to hang around the elite. When a non urban elite conquers an non urban elite, they suffer radical shrinkage.
That is an enticing vision at a base level, but let’s be real, you need cities, and big ones too Aidan. Regardless of how many times we are sold the Zoom life, you need millions to congregate in CBDs for a modern economy to work. Raze the current ones if need be, but new agglomerations will spring up. Dis is da wae.
“By their fruits” is indeed a truly excellent and clarifying test of what is for or against the natural order. Unfortunately it can only be directly employed with hindsight. The historical analysis is what gives rise to all of the individual, more practical models that provide some (not always reliable) foresight.
X failed because it was against nature. We know X was against nature because it failed. That’s a tautology. What specific qualities make X against nature? How can we predict if Y is likely to fail based on its similarities or differences to X? Predictive power is what makes a model – description without prediction may as well be pointing and grunting.
You can’t say this is unimportant. Every major religion has been fundamentally focused on the question of what nature (or God) favors and what it abhors. And since there are many different religions, many of which have been very successful in at least some sense, including Islam and Confucianism, obviously there is not universal agreement on this question. We need more than “let’s collect all the people who agree and remove the ones who don’t” – that’s a goal, not a plan.
Jim has often stated that there needs to be at least an affirmation. Probably several affirmations, all of which need to be periodically tweaked.
Well their memes were obvious enough then. Were they recognizable as leftism then?
Well the left as an organized large scale faction becomes obvious when you have party politics. But as an intellectual movement? Burke was recognizably the left, and was the first prominent leftist to become frightened of those who out lefted him. Rousseau was obviously the left. The thing existed before there was a word for it, and people were seeing that thing as a thing before they had a word to talk about it.
Similarly, game and red pill on women goes back a very long way, and only became a concept when that body of lore and knowledge was suppressed to an absurd extent and became largely lost.
The left goes back a very long way, and recognizing it is not that hard.
And what you see when you look back a very long way, millenia, in priestly writings, is that the regnant priesthood is losing its grip, numerous counter priesthoods want to take its stuff for good or bad reasons, and the left is what you get when the counter priests are not much worried about whether the reasons are good or bad, they will grab any bludgeon handy.
Which undermines the fundamental cohesiveness of the counter priesthood, being united by opportunism rather than any deeply held and stable beliefs, resulting in a propensity to holiness spiral when they succeed.
I am of course talking about Yul’s scenario in which barbarians invade; he sees a lack of productive capital that barbarians have the capacity to exercise stationary banditry on and keep civilization going, and I say there is plenty, but not in cities.
I don’t necessarily want to destroy the cities; I fantasize about it, because I hate urban life and especially the two-legged vermin that infest it, but it’s not really a part of the program, and probably not a good idea.
Herb: “What specific qualities make X against nature? How can we predict if Y is likely to fail based on its similarities or differences to X?”
We know history, which repeats itself. Codifying natural law and reaching consensus on it is an entirely separate issue, but it turns out that most of the work has been done for us. The Old Testament is a hit of uncut, pure natural law. We can have a discussion of what constitutes natural law, but Jim’s entire blog is a discussion of what constitutes natural law. How does war work, how do human castes work, why to we need to kill fags, what is the proper structure of governance, how must women be treated, etc.
You say “natural law is what works” is a tautology, but everything that is true is a tautology. “The sun rises every morning” is a tautology. If you accept Logos, reality is real, and thus everything that is true and real proves itself true and real. Telos is how we both define, delineate, and qualify reality. I could write a treatise on how teleology solves the problems philosophers have been wrestling with for ages, but the fact that they do is gay, and it would be gay for me to write it.
Properly understood, teleology is not only the study of purpose, because purpose inherently implies action. Things are defined by what they do, not the properties they possess. Because actions can be either effective or ineffective, teleology implies natural law. A balloon shaped like a hammer is a poor hammer because it cannot bang in a nail or break anything. Is implies ought. “Hammer” is just a word. The reality and existence of hammers is in the action of banging in a nail and the end of two objects firmly affixed with a nail. “Hammer” is the word we apply to objects especially useful and effective for this purpose. It is impossible for a man to live without teleology, or he would be banging in nails with balloon hammers. We must make value judgements from what works and what reality is. We already do, all the time, instinctually and inherently.
My program is Natural Law, Logos, and Telos. The Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit.
The mines and the farms are of course not in cities, the factories keep moving to the outskirts of cities, and the outskirts of smaller cities. The distribution network bypasses the cities to the maximum extent that it is allowed to, which frequently is not all that much, and new distribution networks keep popping up because the older distribution networks are being strangled by their urban nodes.
That’s an interesting take on cities. You reckon the move you see is fundamental or due to the influx of vibrancy and other clients to big cities? The largest city in earth, and growing agianst a backdrop of demographic devline, is Tokyo, so I’d hazard the former.
* the latter, lol
You should do it.
@ Yul Bornhold
This is a Marxian interpretation of the agricultural revolution. The aphid dreams of the golden age when it was an ant.
The graincuck is the product of the hunter-warrior realising that they could enslave their conquered enemies and less-productive offspring, instead of killing them. The graincuck’s ancestors indeed were hunter-gatherers, but whenever you introduce a domesticated animal back into the wild, they will inevitably not make it; the very reason they are a domesticated animal is that their ancestors, or the particular selection of genes they inherited from their ancestors, couldn’t have made it in the ancestral environment.
I think Kant was soliphistic, what exactly was leftist about Hume (I’m no expert on the guy) and why are you leaving out the worst leftist of all, truly the devil in human form worse than even Marx, Rosseau.
Genghis Khan was a pastoral conqueror not a leftist.
Hume wrote a lot of stuff, but the one thing he is remembered for is his saying that you can’t get an “ought” from an “is”.
Which saying Jim flatly rejects, and which saying is most assuredly leftist if you take Aidan’s perspective that leftism is opposition to the natural order. Hume says outright that what happens in nature should not be our guide.
If you just look at Hume’s bio on La Wik, it’s obvious he was a raging leftist. And yet he was best buds with Adam Smith. That should at least be a mild head-scratcher. He did not get along well with the Whigs. I guess you could say he was like an ancient Jordan Peterson or Carl Benjamin, very much a product of his time but in many ways trying to push back against the tide.
Genghis Khan was the ultimate alpha nigger. Barbarians didn’t produce civilization, they destroyed it.
It is unfortunate that he is remembered for a misinterpretation of one offhand remark in the Treatise. But Hume’s real single most important contribution was his inductive skepticism.
Just looked over my post above again and I realized it might come off as a little rude. Sorry about that. Was in a hurry.
Seems like the most opaque think here is your reading the post (or non-reading, as it may happen). Nominalism is an intellectual expression of congenital solipsism. So yes, Locke and Kant (and others of like ilk) absolutely were solipsistic in character.
Stalin was a lesser Napoleon. Mao, very unambiguously a leftist. What benefit did China reap from him? I once again question your strange perceptive resistance to seeing spades as spades. I really wonder what ‘leftism in a historical context’ means to you, because, for example, the seeds one may see in 16th century ‘enlightenment humanists’ are very clearly related to the blooming ‘flowers’ you smell today. If you have difficulties with this, i can recommend a refresher course in neoreaction 101 here: https://radishmag.wordpress.com/2013/11/08/democracy-and-the-intellectuals/
So it is like, because a given figure is not completely impoverished in every single way, you can’t label them with a political snarl word? Not All Leftists Are Like That? This is really bluetribe, categorically imperative style thinking. (You know, very much like those thinkers so mentioned.)
To wit: the contingencies of leftist behavior, generally, are relative to the broader milieu it subsides in – in virtues and vices alike. A figure’s point on a line at an isolated moment in time is not the most essential part, it is their *cardinality* that is what holds the great matter; what directions they effect to move things, what destinations they imply, what teleologies they serve to advance.
You are responding to me as if I said that any of these figures were not on the left. What I clearly said was that your definition of leftism must be wrong if it fails to place these figures on the left – and since these men clearly had a lot of strength, and balls, and ruled with an iron fist. They were exactly like ancient barbarians, and so a definition giving effect to barbarism as the anti-left clearly has some problems.
Well clearly then you have spectacularly failed to understand ‘my definition of leftism’.
Neither myself nor Aidan in the first place necessarily equated ‘barbarism’ with ‘anti-leftism’; he brought up an example of an invading army surrounding Rome, and sophistical traitors inside of Rome. Both entities are aligned against ‘Rome’, broadly construed, yet he perceives significant difference between them. The fact that you do not perceive any significant difference between then is perhaps a significant data point here.
The entire post, not just the linked comment, is a more comprehensive position of which I was trying to elucidate here.
Leftism is not natural in and of itself, rather it is a perverted form of a natural instinct. Without hunger one would starve, but perverting it into gluttony is evil. Leftism focuses on material gain through attacking social order and social technology, which separates the Leftist from the bandit or plunderer.
The barbarian is good to himself and destructive to the city, he is a predator.
The weak tribe dies so that the strong tribe can conquer the stars.
I accidentally hit enter and sent an incomplete post.
The barbarian is a predator. Surface level leftism is predation and the waylaying of applecarts – mobile banditry.
If that predator finds predation terribly exhausting and opts to instead attach himself to the lifeblood of the prey as a parasite, then he is dependent on keeping the prey alive, or at least to be able to move along to the next prey. Depth 1 leftism is parasitism and taxation of applecarts – stationary banditry or carpetbagging.
If that parasite loses sight of its dependency on its host and wants all the blood, it is a cancer or terminal infection that also kills the parasite. It destroys without gaining life itself, it is a karmic black hole. So depth 2 leftism is anticosmic satanism. A (caco)demon in the parlance of the dark enlightenment.
If the parasite instead GNONcompliantly and wisely cultivates its host and maximizes his applefarming, it is the good stationary bandit, the good state, rightism, and it is a symbiote, not a parasite. An eu-demon.
This is a distinction I want to replace. You claim rightism grows from leftism and enters back into it. There are many good and beautiful things which can only result from the “parasitism” of stationary banditry. The stationary bandit is not a parasite, unless a shepherd is a parasite.
That the predator benefits from becoming a shepherd is simply part of the natural law. A predator -always- benefits from becoming a shepherd. If the predator is a dumb nigger who lacks the competence to be a shepherd, he is just an animal, and his predation is a zoological phenomenon rather than a historical one.
That sheep should be under a shepherd is natural law. A horse was made to be ridden by a man; the fact that man managed to domesticate horses makes it retroactively true that the horse’s telos was always to be the steed of man. Leftism is not the parasite that decides to drink all of the blood; it is the sheep who thinks he can do a better job than the shepherd, or hates the idea of being beneath a shepherd.
Indeed, predator->parasite->symbiote. The stationary bandit can be both detriment and boon to the host. Not railing against all stationary bandits.
I think rightism grows from (aryan) conquerors trying out this city and peasant caste thingy that those rich ass middle eastern priest castes got going, implying cultivation of productivity among free men rather than mass slavery/command economy, so in that sense..
Peasant caste leftists are those sheep. Traitor priest caste leftists are not.
Is there really a distinction of kind, instead of a gradient over several traits or modalities?
The husband-cattle, or rather husband-homestead dynamic is the natural outgrowth of private property, which is the natural outgrowth of forclosing the commons.
Problem: tragedy of the commons
Solution: forclosing commons
Unintended consequences: private property => growth of homesteads => institutionalisation of natural law to resolve disputes between patriarchs of individual homesteads
So we say that the institution of slavery, or a patriarch husband, or a shepherd, having absolute or near-absolute domain over his chattel is a good thing, because we value the surplus that is only possible by eliminating the tragedy of the commons, and we don’t like leftism, because it leads to levelling, it leads to everybody being equal in hunger.
But there is no sharp distinction between a parasite and a farmer, and a phenotypical sheep has as much a chance of fulfilling the farmer role as a phenotypical wolf.
If we use the definition “envy plus defection”, treason being a great crime, we have to deal with the issue of men who usurp kings, many of whom rule well and cannot be called leftists.
Was Caesar a leftist? Reasonable people can agree that he saved Rome; I would say the the natural order required that Rome become an empire or collapse, and Caesar, then Augustus, fulfilled natural law, despite taking advantage of the leftist party, the populares, to do it.
My interpretation of Late Republic Rome is the Populares were populist-right (with my definition of right being those on the side of the good and true) and the Optimates were elitist-left (with my definition of left being those on the side of evil and wrong).
I hate to be the fag who links an entire fucking book for you to read
https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Ancient_City/vUwzAQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0
But there is an entire fucking book you (and everyone here for that matter) should read
Leftism was dead in Rome by the time of Caesar because Sula killed it. What was left was faction reaching towards Monarchy and Empire(Populares) and a faction trying to re-animate the corpse of the Republic that they’d grown fat off looting(Optimates, today they’re the Cuckservitives/Brezhnevites).
We have a triple system today with Left pushing a new state religion, the Cuckservitives/Brezhnevites who hold most of the power, and a small very large but politically powerless Populares movement searching for a king. Trump was a man who stepped into that role for the Populares, but he was too weak to rule.
Reposted because the formatting was bad on the first go around:
Leftism was dead in Rome by the time of Caesar because Sula killed it. What was left was faction reaching towards Monarchy and Empire(Populares) and a the Optimates were trying to re-animate the corpse of the Republic that they’d grown fat from looting and destroying. Optimates filled the role that today is filled by the Cuckservitives/Brezhnevites.
We have a triple system today with Left pushing a new state religion, the Cuckservitives/Brezhnevites who hold most of the power, and a very large but politically powerless Populares movement searching for a king. Trump stepped into that role of the leader of the Populares, but he was too weak to rule and did not have the will to be a king.
I’m actually more hesitant to apply the left-right axis to the Roman Republic. It doesn’t track well. The theory that Sulla stopped a leftism spiral is not convincing. There was no holiness spiral on the state religion because Rome had an official closed priesthood, unlike ours. Marius/Sulla were simply just the leaders of their respective political factions who violently suppressed their political enemies for a time (with Sulla ultimately giving back control to the Optimate Senate with the institutions purged of any Plebian/Populares power). Our triple system just doesn’t fit there.
The class conflict of Rome does track extremely well though. It was HL v M all the way (with the slaves acting as the Low). You’re right there was no priestly political faction in Rome like the Democrats. The Optimates acted like our Republicans more or less, content on the mass importation of slaves for cheap labor, but not for any religious or idealogical reason.
I do believe Trump will get another shot to become in 2024. It’s shaping up that way, but this time if he’s too weak he’ll be Gracchus’d.
become king*
“I’m actually more hesitant to apply the left-right axis to the Roman Republic. It doesn’t track well.”
The ancient world didn’t really have many utopian leftists it had more simple robber leftists (but often in response to simple robber crimes by the elite) advocating hardcore redistributive politics but generally they did not promise a magical utopia for all.
Rome had a “radical” populares faction which corresponded with this kind of simple robber leftist but Sulla wiped them out entirely. Right wing populists are not leftists.
In the civil war with Sulla the Populares were allied with the Samnites, and the Samnites intended to kill every Roman male and destroy the walls of Rome.
Sulla had a two front battle – entering Rome, and fighting the Samnites. Sounds like the modern left to me.
>I do believe Trump will get another shot to become in 2024. It’s shaping up that way, but this time if he’s too weak he’ll be Gracchus’d.
They’re currently setting him up to be a foil against DeSantos. Biden and co praising him for his vaxcuckery is a bad sign. The threat of the DOJ locking Trump up on one side and feeding him the flattery he so desired from the media on the other is a great way to control him.
DeSantis*
Trump’s vax cucking is very worrisome (although he did say no mandates which gets glossed over), but Trump is still the only existential threat to the regime being the charismatic leader of a mass populist movement. As the leader, only Trump can use the mass movement to win the democracy game, then demand and take absolute power.
DeSantis is a life long GOP politician and just a product of the existing regime with no charisma. The elite are not scared of him one bit, which is why Con Inc. and Populist Inc. continually shill for him.
>As the leader, only Trump can use the mass movement to win the democracy game, then demand and take absolute power.
LOL, wut? Did you miss what Trump did last time? He cucked around and found out.
>DeSantis is a life long GOP politician and just a product of the existing regime with no charisma. The elite are not scared of him one bit, which is why Con Inc. and Populist Inc. continually shill for him.
DeSantis is an elite. Military service, extremely effective leadership in Florida including shutting down the Dems vote rigging. They were afraid of Trump because they thought he might be Ceasar, instead he was just a cream puff and they’re starting to use him as such. DeSantis could be a Ceasar, he’s got the right background for it. Trump proved he isn’t capable of it.
>but Trump is still the only existential threat to the regime being the charismatic leader of a mass populist movement.
Populist moment that he did nothing with. He didn’t put his supporters in power, he didn’t use his supporters in street battles against antifa, instead he tried to make deals with people who hate him and us. And then there’s Trump’s insane criminal justice reform that let thousands of hardened criminals back on the streets.
DeSantis is not really a warrior (I mean he was a Coast Guard JAG but calling that a warrior is really really stretching it) and I’m not sure he can counter the election rigging but hes smart and hes capable and less likely to cuck.
If there is anyone more likely to stop the fraud and take power I would rather back DeSantis rather than Trump… who IMHO is compromised. I think he was told to talk like a conservative inc normiecon and shill the vaxx and they won’t indict him or his family or something.
Look up Sulla, Samnites, and Populares. Allying with the Samnites while the Samnites were at the walls of Rome and intended to overthrow the walls of Rome and kill every Roman male looks like modern left wing insanity.
Democrats are prepared to do whatever it takes. And in the early hours of 2020 November the fourth, they proceeded to openly do whatever it took.
The census results have been retroactively adjusted to prevent blue states, which are losing population, from losing representation to red states. The votes in 2020 were retroactively adjusted. The Republican primaries are being prospectively adjusted, and as we go into the 2022 elections, will be retroactively adjusted. Followed by the 2022 mid term elections, which are being prospectively adjusted, and will be retroactively adjusted.
Should Trump survive to 2024, there is no way Trump can win unless he is prepared to deniably organize violence on the ground during the voting process.
The only possible way to have a fair and free election is to apply the methods used by Caesar and the NSDAP, and these are such as to produce one fair and free election once.
And Trump has demonstrated he is not the man for that.
Not necessary if Trump Republicans fail to certify fraudulent vote counts in contested states, but failing to certify fraudulent vote counts is merely the first step upon a series of steps that necessarily ends with Trump demanding and taking absolute power with armed men at his back.
The path Trump started walking in the battle of Lafayette Park when he had Antifa, blacks, and journalists beaten like stray dogs to save St. John’s Church may necessarily end in victory or him being Gracchus’d in 2024. Riding off into the sunset may not be an option this time.
Trump is worthless. When everything was at stake… when we were in a gutter knife fight for the survival of our society… when it really mattered that he fight, and fight to win…
He whined that the left wasn’t playing fair, and folded like history’s biggest pussy.
He conclusively proved that when the chips are down, he won’t fight.
And he damaged us immeasurably because his victory in 2016 taught the left they had weaknesses, without using those weaknesses to destroy them. They patched those weaknesses on election night 2020. That might be a catastrophe we cannot come back from, because now no other non-uniparty candidate will get elected to the presidency ever again.
I don’t want to hear any more about Trump.
Unless you’re selling me tickets to the Pay-Per-View when the left executes him. It will be amusing to watch him bleat, as he’s being dragged to the gallows, “You totally can’t do this, because it’s illegal!â€
I think that the easiest way to characterise this is
> Barbarian sees a game prize he wants, assumes it was taken by force, since it’s the only game he knows, goes ahead to play the assumed combat game and win, and take it. No resentment involved.
>Leftist sees something he wants, also assumes it was taken by force, since it’s the only game he knows, knows the he *cannot win that game*, attempts to subvert the rules.
Bonus round : Leftist doesn’t care as much if he wins, just resentful that someone else won.
I think the Jim theory of leftism isn’t entirely incorrect as both are outcomes of covetousness based on the assumption that anything anyone else has was taken by force, rather than generated through co-operation.
Spot on.
“covetousness based on the assumption that anything anyone else has was taken by force”
Leftists don’t care whether what you have was taken by force or not. They just want what you have. (And barring that they want to destroy what you have.)
When they say that what you have was taken illegitimately – it’s stuff the evil white man stole from the noble non-whites, or distilled blood the capitalists sucked from the bodies of the workers, etc. – it’s just pre-emptive propaganda designed to justify their planned grabbing of your stuff. Don’t pay too much attention to that; it’s just a robber saying “I have the right to take your stuff because…” blah blah.
Leftism has no essence. It is our categorization of systems whose adherents develop and utilize in destroying social order for personal gain.
As societal organization is the outward application of morality, Leftism is primarily a spiritual phenomenon rather than a doctrinal axis. The political spectrum models attempt to simplify the divide along economic and socio-cultural issues but fail to account for interchanging ideologies, eras and cultures. Chaos in one era may be considered order in a different one. The National Socialists of the 1930s were Leftists because their system supported many of the Weimar Republic’s destruction of ancien régime institutions among them monarchy, caste and coverture. However, because of our twenty-first century perspective National Socialism appears as relative order, thus contemporary National Socialists are spiritually not-Leftists even if ideologically of the Left.
The natural order is outlined in the shibboleth “God, King and Country,†the implementation of social structure based it on a shared religion or religio. Rather than seeking to change the world at a fundamental level, these societies accommodate fallible man and raise him to the best of his ability, which is why traditional societies are highly stratified. Leftists seek to destroy this organization for personal gain, and Leftism is the justification. The foundation is the same but the justification varies, which is why as Jim says, the Leftist simply wishes to knock over the cart and steal its contents. The Barbarian who plunders another country is not a Leftist, but the demagogue who sacks the aristocracy is a Leftist. In one era, Leftism is nineteenth century Nationalism in undermining of the monarchies of Europe; in another era, Leftism is twenty-first century Internationalism seeking the destruction of the nations of Europe. The ideological content varies, but the spirituality remains constant.
TL;DR: Rightism is, Leftism is not:
Why would the barbarian fulfilling the natural order?
Rome abandoned GNON. Entropy is a part of the cycle. This is part of my opposition to the TC solution. On paper, I 100%agree; carve out the rot. But leftism is a cancer. You can’t just carve out cancer. Sometimes, cancers win because they completely outclass the healthy cells in terms of survival. So it’s not just a question of fittest in the moment. Look at cultural Marxism, it is clearly the superior short term strategy given the system it is consuming.
GNON and Zeitgeist. 2 gods that are free to take up whichever method they deem appropriate.
Set aside the word ‘envy’ for a moment, and I think this is the distinction:
The barbarian wants what Rome has, and he’s willing to use force to get it, depriving Rome as a side-effect. If prosperity grew on trees, the barbarian would be happy to pick some instead of invading Rome.
The leftist is mad that Rome dares to have prosperity, and feels insulted by it. The leftist wants to deprive Rome first, and any stolen apples are a side-effect of upsetting the applecart.
Good post Aidan, leftists are other than simple robbers…
The simple robber understands what he is about… the leftist does not.
Some more thoughts on the difference between the barbarian and the Leftist (As expressed on my blog, reproduced here)
“The difference between the barbarian who wants to sack Rome and the Leftist is that the barbarian instinctively recognizes natural law and respects real strength, probably even ready to retreat on facing a stronger foe, while mercilessly attacking weakness as he perceives it; whereas the Leftist is boiling and seething with rage over the very existence of Reality as expressed through natural law and wants to weaken and destroy the strong, not by his own strength but by subverting natural law because he himself cannot be strong.
Another point: the Leftist does have a certain spiritual energy (of a negative kind) which cannot entirely be defeated or destroyed using intellect alone. Any opposition to adharma has to derive strength from Dharma, and cannot rely on non-Dharmic means or intellect alone.”
Kind of old news from 2020, but it seems always relevant.
Another apple cart is knocked down, this time for people who sometimes have little or nothing:
https://www.post-journal.com/life/viewpoints/2020/03/govt-outlaws-freelance-work/
> Actually, more understand now, because they got a very personal lesson. Once the bill passed, Vox media cut hundreds of freelance writing jobs.
> When Gonzalez was asked if she felt bad about that, she sneered, those weren’t “real jobs.â€
Being a freelancer myself, this makes my blood boil. At least I don’t live in the US.
If they did this here, I’d just stop reporting any income.
> “You’re thinking you’re helping us, but you’re not,†says musician Ari Herstand in my new video. He says the anti gig-work law could “crash the California music economy.â€
I bet they are quite happy about this. That’s a lot of people they’ve destroyed livelihoods for, a lot of damage they can boast about.
> Why? Before the law passed, if he played a gig where he’d hire a drummer, bassist and guitar player, “I just cut (each) a check for $200. Now, I have to take that drummer, put him on payroll, W2 him, get workers’ comp insurance, unemployment insurance. I have to pay payroll taxes. I also have to now hire a payroll company.â€
I’d like to find Pseudo-Chrysostom’s (was it him?) post(s) about the leftist perspective on creating an artilect, their desire to systematize everything to the detriment of actual human action and responsibility. There was something about soviet submarines as well.
>freelance jobs are feudalism
LMAO
What are the apples that can be grabbed by this? I see only virtue signaling destroying the livelihood of freelancers.
Anyone employing freelancers has to now go through the hiring process with them, bring them on with benefits, pay more taxes to the government, expand HR, get some diversity consultants to examine the impact of the new hires, and probably a freelancer-to-employee consultant. Unless you want to try to get an exemption from the law for your industry, which involves lots of parties being thrown for politicians and lots of campaign donations.
Never underestimate the sheer spite involved. A parasite and social blight is offended that people are figuring out a way to make something, so she destroys it. She did it because she could, because to see productive people produce is a reminder of her utter worthlessness.
HR grabs control of your freelancers and you lose control when you have to hire a payroll company. Those are the apples. The entrepreneur who was paying those freelancers loses power, status, and money to the morbidly obese mustachioed lesbian of HR.
This is so true.
One of the most painful moments in my life came after I had sold my company. Celebration turned to horror so fast. Within a month, the sort of banter that our team had enjoyed in the office for 10 years was leading people to get calls from, literally, the morbidly obese lesbian who ran HR. All it took was one snake with a grudge and a bat-phone to HQ. And even though I was the founder and ostensibly still in charge of the company (now a division of the larger entity) I was powerless to protect my people.
The best talent left rapidly and I couldn’t replace them because new hiring had to go through the obese lesbian. Many of my best workers had been autistic geniuses who had dropped out of college to work on stuff they liked, and now I couldn’t hire people who didn’t have the right degrees.
HR policy backed by corporate law is nowadays designed to make sure that a successful entrepreneur is brought to heel and forced to kowtow to the appropriate diverse gods.
Hey man, have you given any thought to my sort of, kind of proposal? Not completely off topic, either. Is it possible to run a modern company without an HR division? I feel like HR was invented as a place to reduce drudgery for leadership as well as a “safe place” to park side chicks and fuck pigs. If this is the case, one solution is leadership biting the bullet and carrying some of the hire/fire burden. Is it a law that a company has to have an HR department as well as delegate hiring responsibilities to them?
Even without HR department you still need few dedicated employee to process payroll (which are often under HR department). You’ll just end up renaming HR while not solving the core problem which is HR having any power at all.
The current corporate structure on big picture are result of decades of natural selection of business world. IMO the big map corporate structure is already correct, only problem is modern corporate implement the correct design into disaster.
Think like 737. All 737 and most passenger plane for lay person looks very similar. It was only until 737 Max that disaster starts to happen. 737 basic design is fine, 737 Max specific design is disaster.
Modern corporate disaster starts to happen when they give support department (HR, Finance, IT, Audit, etc) equal power to department who actually do the job (Production).
Payroll can be – and in many companies is – subsumed to Finance instead of HR. Its a mechanical function with no power at all in and of itself.
Alos disagree with you interpretation of the issue: I don’t thinks its support vs production, its rather anybody at all not being fully subsumed undet the CEO or Board, be they HRBPs, CROs, GenCos, Heads of Audit etc. Let the COO at Mitsubishi talk back to the CEO and you woll get exactly the same issues down the track.
The contractor in question was complaining about the whole bucket of manure, not one item in the bucket. The entire bucket of manure is attached to payroll and all that. The details are irrelevant, and are deliberately complexified and uglified to hide and evade reality.
Further, the problem is not subsumption under the CEO, for he is probably an entrepeneur, nor subsumption under the board, who want a profit. The problem is that that CEO and board are rendered powerless and terrified by Human Resources, Accounting, and Legal, who want superior holiness and despise the mere ignorant hateful plebeians, like the CEO, who create value and are trying to see value created.
The man who posted that article complaining was a CEO.
>its rather anybody at all not being fully subsumed under the CEO or Board … let COO talk back to the CEO
Organization having infighting has been happening since dawn of time. No amount of organizational engineering will prevent infighting.
As you said, HR function (keeping payroll, gathering resume) are mechanical function. The correct design is we should not give will power to something that is mechanical.
When I say that I only fresh grad intern, I don’t need HR adding “minimum 2 years experience required” on the job post. HR like other supporting departments are just a tools for departments who actually run the company (whether it’s marketing or production).
Having a say in who to fire are willpower of CEO that HR as mechanical tool should not have.
HR as department is not the problem, giving willpower to HR is the problem.
Well, Plpayroll – not HR – is the mechanical function. HR more broadly is tasked with serving as collector and first instance adjudicator of complaints and , as a direct result, will come to propose policies to limit these. These are usefull functions that have to be performed but it becomes immediately obvious how this can be perverted by those intent on bridling a firm. A resonable solution is to make the CEO supreme over any policy, but realistically the CEO will not have time to worry if Jane’s dress really is too short.
If Janes dress is too short, her supervisor should handle it. If the CEO does not like the way her supervisor is handling it, should have a private quiet chat with her supervisor. Why should some other department be involved?
The way you describe things happening is not normal, not business as usual. It is disruptive, destructive, disgusting, and foul. Being used to the way things used to be done, I am endlessly shocked, horrified, outraged, and disgusted. It is like a man wearing a dress. It is pathological, evil, shocking, abnormal, and disgusting. It is the degeneration, collapse, and disintegration of the corporate form.
Sounds like a sub-Dumbar setup to me Jim, not sure this informal system scales to anything approaching a global behemoth. Could be failure of imagination on my part ofc.
Getting above Dunbar scale requires the exact opposite approach to the way you think is normal. You have to create separation between different subcenters centers in ways that avoid overlapping and mutually interfering authority.
Chain of command. Your boss has a boss, but as far as the employee is concerned, his boss is the boss, and his boss’s boss, and all departments that do not answer to his boss, are irrelevant. Militaries were the first organizations to attempt to go above Dunbar scale, and they figured this out a very long time ago – which knowledge was abandoned starting in 1860.
The way, the only way, to go above Dunbar scale is to make sure that as far as Jane is concerned, it is Dunbar scale. There is no alternative.
We are seeing the collapse and destruction of the corporate form.
Scaling anything in an insane theocracy other than an omerta mob with ethnic solidarity is going to be painful.
BTW I didn’t like the security company idea but I do like the idea of waiting ten years (for the security state to become totally Shaniquaized) and forming a sort of mafia like organization… Sicily was the original anarcho tyrannical clownworld.
So, the Team Lead’s time is better used being a TL 80% of the time, an HRBP 10% of the time and an accountant 10% of the time, which I think would be the straightforward interpretation of the principle? Is there no scope for specialisation and ensuring that this team operates under the same standards re overtime as the other team and is not dependent on which side if the bed the TL woke up on?
I understand that overlapping authorities, even if specialised, are dangerous but I see no alternative to getting above Dunbar, other than having the team accountant report to the TL. Let’s not even get started on audit.
Probably works decently for militaries, not so much for orgs I think.
HRBP should not exist, and there was a time very recently when it did not exist. It is as if you are telling me that if I don’t send my kids to drag queen story hour I would have to put on a drag queen performance myself, and sodomize my kids myself. “Human Resources as a Business Partner” is evil, ruinously destructive, and disgusting.
The bookkeeper should have zero authority, so zero percent of the team lead’s time should be spent bookkeeping. The bookkeeper records what is done, he does not decide what is to be done. The accountant is the guy who figures out what the books mean, and decides what columns should go in the books. The accountant is charge of the bookkeepers, so zero percent of the team lead’s time should be bookkeeping, because the accountant should have zero operational authority over anyone except bookkeepers. His job is to figure out what the books mean, and make sure the bookkeepers keep them in a meaningful way. His job should be to track the movement and creation of value by people doing stuff, not to tell them what to do, but figure out what happened as a result of what they did. Sometimes you need his help in deciding what value will be created by a proposed course of action, but he does not get to tell people what course of action to take, and should not be the final authority on anything at all, other than how to keep the books, but may be an advisor whom the man who makes decisions may need to consult from time to time. Preferably seldom.
That’s the responsibility of the boss’s boss, going all the way up to the CEO. It’s not like this is hard. Send out a spreadsheet and tell the department heads to fill all the total overtime hours. If any look suspicious, ask them for a breakdown by employee.
First of all, that’s life. Second, only shit managers drag down the whole team just because their kid is sick that day or whatever. And finally, almost no teams operate this way, with or without HR – especially when you’re using words like “TL”, you’re obviously talking about high-skill work, and those managers don’t micromanage. They meet once a week with the team for an hour, or do a 5-minute update each morning, or something.
If a manager’s direct reports can’t go 5 minutes without a catastrophe unless they’re under constant supervision, then that team or department has already failed. That’s not a problem you can solve with MORE process and dotted-line reporting chains.
You’re parroting some serious bugman stuff here. Please to be eliminating words like “HRBP” from your regular vocabulary.
Request denied, HRBP is the job title and I see no reason to pretend it isn’t. Silly request, please stop making such.
On the rest, I see what you are saying: “I choose to trade unity of command for specialisation”, which is a fair choice but I think one thta cannot possibly scale more tha 3 reporting levels. This system is basicaly saying “yeah, you are big boys, figure it out” which works wonders for a small team and looses steam fast.
But I freely acknowledge the point being made by Jim and you, that adopting paralel, overlapping hierachies will introduce the rot. It will, the question is, it this fair price to pay to gain scale?
It does not gain scale, it loses scale.
To scale, each bottom level unit is a Dunbar group, and the top people in several units form another higher level Dunbar group, and the top people from several higher level Dunbar groups form yet another even higher level Dunbar group, a system summarized as “chain of command” You don’t want your generals getting between the sergeants and the troops still less do you want a committee of generals getting between the sergeants and their troops.
It is a job and job title that did not exist a short time ago, just as Drag Queen Story Hour is a performance that did not exist a short time ago.
A business needs that job done about as much as it needs antifa arsonists burning the place down.
Jim, that sounds better than it works. Take the shop accountant: who does he report to? The shop manager? Obvious issues with that setup, you have written much on these. No, he has to report to an accounting TL, and so on to the CFO. A paralel structure is workable , one that goes all the way to the top and only ends in the CEO. Audit is even worse, ends with the Board! Is HR a justified such structure? I think so, you need policy and consistency thta cuts across the org.
In the army, it is no issue to hav ethe mortar guy report the same lime as the machine gunner or further up the line, the artillery guy.
But I have not seen a time when HR was not there, as you claim you have. Maybe I’m wrong.
I have seen a time when HR did not exist, and until quite recently it did not exert the ruinous and destructive power it does now.
HR is a tentacle of the state in your business.
Huh? So what? Shall I pretend it does not exist now? What a curious concept.
Drag Queen story hour exists. It should not. You are asking who would do the job. The answer is that anyone attempting to do that job should be be instantly terminated.
You are being unresponsive. No one denies it exists now, any more than anyone denies that murderers, arsonists, robbers, and pederasts exist.
You would terminate those who would want to work as HRBPs? Because you dislike the job title?
HPRBs need to be terminated because business exists to create value, and they destroy value and get in the way of creating value. But you cannot terminate them because the regulatory state that they represent would then destroy your business.
The corporate form is being destroyed by being dissolved into the chaos and disorder of the anarcho tyrannical regulatory state. This renders large scale cooperation impossible, which is why we cannot build nice things any more.
Agree that HR is the leash on which firms are held close. But this is because the CHRO reports outside the firm, not to the CEO (de facto.) Should there be no HR in tomorrow’s world, they would find legal or finance to do the same. A firm cannot fight the state.
That being said, HR itself appears to me to be a valuable function and must run paralel in order to perfom. BUT the CEO should.always override the CHRO. I think that the shop manager should not overide the Hr advisor though: only the CHRO should do that.
I will drop the issue now.
You need someone to track payroll, holidays, and stuff, but this should be a bookkeeping function, not an administrative one, providing information to employer and employee on the employers upcoming obligations. In particular, no role in hiring and firing, other than to figure out what a dismissed employee is owed.
HR should merely be an aspect of bookkeeping that is of special interest for employees.
I was being unresponsive to your claim there, not what you said, and I apologise.
But you quoted my response to HerbR who was asking me to stop using the term, which led me to mistakenly link your and his request.
I appreciate the perspective, but I disagree on both counts. The 737 is an excellent airframe with plenty of crashes, just like the Queen. Yes, Max is a great example of Pajeet being given far too much power with no oversight. But HR was an exploit discovered, not crafted. I still maintain that it was laziness in leadership. Arqui response is better than I could put forward regarding the other elements.
Unrelated, impregnate your lady. Come what may, it is better for a man to have children.
>I still maintain that it was laziness in leadership.
True story, when my company had to fire 250 domestic workers during financial crisis. The COO was too lazy devising the plan, the job was delegated to local HR manager, not to production manager.
They ended up firing productive workers and curses from near retiree for being fired instead of retired in good term.
The BoD was wiped clean 1 year after, and the company went to bigger problem.
Laziness is no issue when done correctly and delegated to correct person (I myself is lazy supervisor). Issue starts give HR willpower to decide instead of strictly processing the firing memo and severance pay.
It is highly unlikely he was too lazy.
It is highly probable that he was too terrorized, terrified, and broken.
HR will tell you if that if you fail to jump through a very small burning hoop the company will be sued into the ground, meaning that HR is going to instigate a legal and regulatory action to make sure the company is sued into the ground.
The problem is that legal, accounting, and HR are tentacles of the state, and have a powerbase external to the corporation.
And the law in question is to force you to hire a bunch of expensive people who are backed by state power to interfere in your business.
I agree that those fuckers in legal, accounting, and HR should stay quiet when I told them something to do, only say something when I told them to.
I have but I can’t quite fathom how to cross the chasm on it. Even though I agree it’s a good idea, I don’t really have the hitting power of someone like Jim to move this forward.
Ok. An associate of mine already has started building something similar to what we discussed, but it is still in its infancy. Hopefully having a meeting with him and his guys soon. I’ll report back if/when things start going forward.
The big hurdle now is figuring out a safe way to take conversations from here to a more formal place while maintaining the integrity of this place. I’m not quite sure what the best method for that is.
What Jim said, but also the article shows how they are directly benefitting from it:
https://i.imgur.com/VFyR70M.png
A perennially recurrent theme, in fact.
(Eg,
https://blog.reaction.la/war/where-we-go-from-here/#comment-2702914
https://blog.reaction.la/science/the-clot-shot/#comment-2759647
https://blog.reaction.la/war/the-shots-heard-around-the-world/#comment-2669443
https://blog.reaction.la/uncategorized/fixed-privacy-leak-in-avatars/#comment-2711514
https://blog.reaction.la/uncategorized/fixed-privacy-leak-in-avatars/#comment-2711531
https://blog.reaction.la/uncategorized/back-again/#comment-2708749
https://blog.reaction.la/culture/time-for-a-second-dissolution-of-the-monasteries/#comment-2239130
https://blog.reaction.la/politics/michael-knowles-at-ukmc/#comment-2059943
https://blog.reaction.la/politics/michael-knowles-at-ukmc/#comment-2051353
https://blog.reaction.la/war/the-reactionary-program/#comment-2023844
https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2014/04/the_maintenance_of_certificati.html
http://nathanmarz.com/blog/mimi-silbert-the-greatest-hacker-in-the-world.html
https://i.4pcdn.org/x/1615518897406.png )
Thank you very much. I had trouble finding these posts again, only had a few screenshots saved here and there.
I don’t think i found them all either honestly, but those are some that i remembered or stumbled upon while searching.
An article on implementing a new (normie) currency. Might be of interest for those with big crypto plans too.
https://www.johnkay.com/2021/12/08/currency-options-for-an-independent-scotland/
(John Kay is a normie, but a worthwhile normie.)
I’m vaguely aware of right wing nutrition but does anyone know a good place for finding an overview of the theory? Something more in depth than twitter soundbites denouncing seed oils.
Saturated fat vs. non-saturated fat.
Processed foods. What kinds of processing are bad and why.
Agricultural chemicals and their consequences.
That sort of thing.
I know what you mean, but I’m not sure there are any aggregate infodumps for it. Bits and pieces you can infer from Goodrich’s blog (he’s the #1 anti-seed-oil guy) [1], then there’s JustMeat.co from the bitcoin carnivores [2]. I haven’t seen any strictly right-wing sentiment against processed foods, it seems very mainstream to me (Kevin Hall is extremely mainstream). Fat saturation is mostly a pony of the low-carb crowd, in opposition to Harvard, but I struggle to come up with a central figure here. Nearest to agricultural chemicals would be Time Mold Slime Mold’s series on obesity [3], but I’m not sure they’re right-wing.
[1] http://yelling-stop.blogspot.com/
[2] https://justmeat.co/
[3] https://slimemoldtimemold.com/
https://blog.reaction.la/science/obesity-nutrition-and-spiritual-pollution/
Much good discussion here.
https://www.americanpartisan.org/2021/12/the-american-partisan-nutritional-empowerment-program-guide-part-3-of-6-healthy-fats/
If you read The Big Fat Surprise: Why Butter, Meat and Cheese Belong in a Healthy Diet [by (((Nina Teicholz)))] (a thorough study of how the scientific consensus of fat developed and changed) you will discover that peer reviewed material is like a barrel of wine to which a bucket of sewage has been added. Her account of the Mediterranean diet is a particularly entertaining depiction of the manufacture of consensus and the subsequent development of peer reviewed evidence for that consensus.
What I’ve Learned and Dr. Eric Berg DC is my go to YT for anything related to health and diet.
True story, I fixed my balding hair by listening to Dr. Berg which he said is often caused by gut issue. I drank probiotic regularly nowadays and the balding sign is pretty much gone.
>Right wing nutrition
lol wut?
So left wing nutrition…
“I believe in open borders AND eating 350 grams of high fructose corn syrup (that a giant mega corporation I hate prepares for me) every day”
> Saturated fat vs. non-saturated fat.
> Processed foods. What kinds of processing are bad and why.
> Agricultural chemicals and their consequences.
It’s all very, very simple. You have similar hardware to your pre-civilised ancestors.
Yes, civilisation has forced our evolution to a degree, and there are less of us that suffer horribly from grain consumption.
Jack Kruse hides good knowledge behind seemingly insane ramblings. He’s like the David Icke of nutrition. But worth examining his stuff.
Left wing nutrition = Eat the bug, goy. Eat the soy, goy. Reduce cow emissions, goy.
Interesting. Details are slim, but this does NOT appear to be an RNA vaccine, but an advanced form of typical protein vaccine.
https://citizenfreepress.com/breaking/u-s-army-creates-single-vaccine-against-all-covid-and-sars-variants/
After some Googling.
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/scitranslmed.abi5735
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8651551/
It is a synthetic very large molecule that looks something like a virus – which is less likely to drive your immune system insane.
But nothing looks and acts as much like a virus as a real virus does
Omicron is the true vaccine for Covid, as cowpox was the true vaccine for smallpox:
“We have treated 24 Omicron-positive patients so far, but only two were symptomatic. One had low grade fever, sore throat, ..“
My elderly overweight parents who have heart problems caught Omni last week. Both were sick for 3-5 days, low grade fever, coughing, score throat. This week they’re still coughing a bit, but otherwise they’re fine. This shit is on par with the average flu.
[…] A comment I left on Jim’s Blog […]
Piggybacking off the HR discussion from downthread, I run a small <10-person startup that has so far managed to avoid any entanglement with HR, mainly by outsourcing payroll to external companies and outsourcing other human resource issues (recruiting, health insurance, onboarding, etc.) to freelancers that we can fire if we have to.
I imagine having HR in our company as a tentacle of the state would cripple our ability to hire (for example, forcing us to hire for "diversity" which luckily we've been able to avoid so far), and manage in ways that create value. I'm curious at what size exactly we will see pressure to hire dedicated HR people, as well as how to avoid this (i.e who to pay Danegeld to) for as long as possible.
If you have outsourced recruiting, the organization you have outsourced recruiting to is certainly affecting your hiring.
An outsourced HR is slightly better than an inhouse HR, but they heavily influence your hiring as you can’t hire anybody they have already rejected (and never showed you the application).
Try to take back recruiting from those freelancers and you’ll find out how powerful the governments tentacles are.
Used to be fifty employees, but I am doubtless out of date
I do kind of wonder whether the way that sucks the least to do ‘HR’ is to just give every boss who commands a Dunbar number-ish amount of people a minion or two. Call them secretaries. They report directly to that boss who is accountable for their actions, and they handle payroll, insurance, onboarding and personal stuff, as well as assisting in recruiting (in practice, a large fraction of your recruiting is going to be done by your employees—they know people).
Nothing says that HR needs to handle payroll. Just have a payroll department.
The boss needs to have sole handling of firing, and the bookkeeper should handle the ensuing paperwork – which has become an intolerable flood due to government intrusion into firing, which is an external powerbase of HR within the corporation. External powerbases undermine the cohesion of the corporation and destroy its ability to act as one.
Recruiting should be done by the boss, and by his existing workers with the boss’s approval and final consent. The people doing the work know other people with similar skills, and are in the best position to judge those skills. HR is notoriously useless and destructive in recruiting programmers. It is a massive obstacle sitting in your way.
The minion in question should be the bookkeeper. HR duties should be rolled into accounting, and those duties that cannot rolled into accounting are an intrusion into the authority of the boss, that undermines the corporate form by underming the capability of the corporation to act as one.
I’d like to hear how near or off the mark I am on this one — war veteran describes what its like to kill a man
My response, besides rolling my eyes, was thinking: nice humblebrag bro.
“I see it every night.” i.e. PTSD. He’s not bragging.
American combat soldiers tend to come from semi religious places in flyover country and I have on a couple of occasions met ones who said they were bothered by it… mainly it turned out because they were afraid they were going to hell.
In both cases they seemed considerably relieved when I said the proper translation of the biblical commandment was “Thou Shalt Not MURDER” not “Thou Shalt Not Kill” and that they could look this up.
PTSD is a healthy reaction of the subconscious to one’s act that, as the lawyers say, shocks consciousness. The reason we have so much PTSD whereas before WW1 it was practically not a thing, is operant conditioning and bombing weddings in Peshawar, while the state religion tells us that taking a life is the gravest sin (what the guy in the video intimates), and killing civilians is a most heinous “war crime” lol.
All research into PTSD is bought and paid for by the DoD, and is basically a massive PR effort to obfuscate this.
Your relocation divisions will sleep soundly 🙂
I believe WW1 was for most people in it pretty damn traumatic and terrifying…
In WW1 it was called shell shock and i believe stress from hearing constant shelling of fixed trenches was pretty real.
Shellshock is cattle realising they are cattle at the slaughterhouse, whereas previously they believed themselves to be fully actuated humans with a mission on Earth, or something. PTSD is a strict superset of this, and mostly comes from situations that are both objectively and subjectively individual.
The “hearing more explosives go boom than in all previous wars combined” is a DARPA-sponsored copout. The soundtrack is not a problem, people could literally sleep through it, until some of them
couldn’t.
Well lets look at probably the only good thing to come out of WWI, Tolkien.
Some aspects of his personality do strike me as a guy who never quite recovered from the war mentally. Making a whole fantasy world complete with languages… having to throw in the dead marshes and such.
Tolkien never went around saying the war fucked him up a little, but in some ways he was clearly mentally um touched by it. So its not ALL fake and gay.
I like Ernst Jünger’s writing. Neither his writing nor his bio suggest that the war(s) fucked him up.
According to Camille Paglia, abortion is killing, not murder.
According to jim, killing demonspawn isn’t murder.
And euthanasia…
In Hebrew and Arabic, killing is KTL, murder is QTL.
Why is the KJV so lousy at translating?
As you show, much murder gets redefined as either killing, or not even killing. If you think in words, you will be misled by wordsmiths. KJV is *obviously* not forbidding all killing. There will be a lot of killing of animals and plants, and indeed people. The Bible works as a useful reminder once you understand what GNON wants from you, which understanding cannot be gleaned from reading Bible alone.
GNON = Holy Ghost
No Sola Scriptura, but Papal Infallibility, amirite?
Wrong.
Church tradition, consensus of the community of the saints, lived experience, and scientific method. Judge by the fruit, respect your father, nullis in verba.
Interestingly there was a discussion on that subject among reactionaries a while ago in which the consensus was that PTSD is mostly fake.
PTS is real. It comes in different forms. It can be survivor’s guilt, good men struggling with having to do bad things, bad men discovering morality, and many others. The one that is “fake,” as far as that goes, is soldiers internalizing the proggy narrative that being hard and cold is evil. So, yes, many of the midwit military folk susceptible to the influence of memetic Progressivism suffer from fake PTS. Real PTS is almost always survivor’s guilt. And it isn’t isolated to soldiers. Walk across enough minefields intact, and dream state v. waking life will spin up some pretty awful subconscious inclination.
The cathedral has made it crimethink to celebrate warriors and the mighty deeds that warriors do. It’s been this way all the way back to WW2.
Mighty deeds like bombing weddings in peshawar in order to better teach girls how to put a condom on a banana.
If the guy were a warrior doing warrior things, no PTSD. But he is a peasant soldier doing shitty things in a country he has no business being in, and oh boy is that blood hard to was off.
More PTSD with WW1 because the war was completely for evil and everyone involved eventually knew it.
WW2 soldiers on the allied side felt good, they won and even if FDR and the allies were bad the Nazis and the Japs also did very bad things.
Vietnam even if we were the good guys we lost, the army was betrayed, and American society spat on them.
How come no one ever suffered from PTSD until demonization of warriors escalated spectacularly?
My monkey brain is rather proud of having survived troubles.
I think we’re both treading on thin experiential ice here, Jim. Survivor guilt does not come from surviving. It comes from surviving the unexplainable. The bird goes down and your buddies are in puddles and you don’t have a scratch. An IED sends your MRAP to Mars and you walk away while you’re bro is mailed home in a jar.
I’m going to speak for a few lads who cannot or will not speak for themselves right now: some shit just doesn’t compute, and the more you try to calculate, the worse it gets. No amount of therapy or happy talk will bring clarity and acceptance. Some people marshall their shit, others check out. I’m carrying a few flames for Bros that couldn’t handle it. No amount of explaining will fix the others.
…but this is a very small group. The vast majority of dudes that talk about PTSD are cry baby faggots who have internalized a guilt narrative. I have neither time nor sympathy for them. But I have encountered a few of the legitimately broken, and that’s why I say PTS. It isn’t a disorder, it’s a consequence.
It occurs to me that these examples you’re offering, like the MRAP to Mars, are not moments of personal power, as killing generally should be, but of impotence.
A friend of mine was diagnosed with PTSD. And for what its worth he clearly is troubled by a particular incident. But like your examples, he pretty much wasn’t an agent in the event. He wasn’t even there at the time, close enough to hear but not close enough to see or do anything. But he has the sort of retrospective awareness that had he just talked to someone five minutes longer, hell even 30 seconds, they’d probably still be alive. Of course he had no way of knowing at the time.
This guy is proud of his violent achievements, and he has them. He has the stories and scars to prove it. What bothers him is when there is nothing he could do.
Of course he is troubled by the incident.
The shrink talking to him and attempting to make it into PTSD is, however, engaged in a hostile act against him.
Nuts right back at you, Jim!
You are overgeneralising your own tenuous interpretation of an n = 1 incident, an incident that you view from a very subjective viewpoint, a perception coloured by the then-recent trauma. And you are ignoring the mountain of evidence of all these people that obviously have something very wrong with them, people who vote with guns and bullets that their life is never going to be worth living, people eating the gun rather than endure the hell any longer.
People who never had seen the insides of a shrink’s office, who spend months on a waiting list just to get to talk to some slut who could barely scrape through the college, and who is just phoning it in. And you’re telling these people that their experience is iatrogenic, and that if they didn’t talk to that slut that is just phoning it in, they would not have had the experience for the past five years, and they would not have to want to eat the gun and end it all, they would not lose their job and their family, and they would not have to spend months on the waiting list.
If your explanation of a mountain of evidence involves time travel, perhaps it’s not the slut that is phoning it in causing it, perhaps it is not iatrogenic.
Are they?
Are people actually in distress over PTSD, or just pleased to have a socially approved justification for real or hypochondriac dysfunction, or a socially approved response to behavior they fear is socially disapproved?
The two examples of PTSD quoted in this thread is a chick who was looking to get brutally raped because PTSD, and a man who was boasting about killing another man having PTSD over it.
If having certain symptoms gets you off the hook in a society thick with pressure and disapproval, and your shrink puts pressure on you to have those symptoms, lots of people are likely to have those symptoms.
I am not seeing a mountain of evidence that people have distressing reactions to trauma. I am seeing a mountain of evidence that people have socially approved distressing reactions to trauma, which distressing reaction just happens to excuse all the things that they have done which are rightly or wrongly subject to ever intensifying social disapproval.
Let’s use accurate terms.
The official theory of PTSD, and the reality portrayed in for example Lady Macbeth’s plight, is that traumatic events are inherently stressful; if the stress is not processed adequately, this will result in a disorder.
You are writing that you have zero stress response to a traumatic event. This is impossible, this is nonsense. I don’t believe that is what you mean. Does your heartrate remain static as you torture kittens to death? Do you compose your grocery shopping list as you beat the shit out of some unfortunate sob in the boxing ring?
I believe what you mean is that people do not have disorderly reaction to the elevated stress from violent events. In your narrative, trauma is perhaps not the right word, because you seem not to view violence as traumatic, and I would agree.
Is that what you mean?
In this thread, apart from the two examples of the chick and the soldier boy, you are ignoring the small detail of the WW1 trench infantry, the bomber crews and the fighter escorts Pseudo-Chrysostom mentioned, the vets The Cominator mentioned, and the commonly found affliction that Lady Macbeth represents.
There is a lot of attention whoring, and people have “PTSD” from watching their boyfriend ejaculate on the pillow without their express written consent, but I don’t see those people’s functioning being affected. I have, on the other hand, PTSD wreak havoc in people’s lives, and it is hard to pin that down to seeking social approval for whatever they may have done, which was in the end quite insignificant compared to what they kept doing because of the disorder.
I have massive stress response to traumatic events. This is healthy sane, and normal. At the time the shrink was harassing me to have PTSD symptoms, I had, however, absolutely none of the symptoms he demanded that I have. He demanded that my stress take pathological and hurtful form, which form it did not resemble in the slightest. My stress response was so different from the stress response that he demanded as to be unrecognizable in his terms and his language, and I only now, at this moment, in response to your post, recognize that what he was fishing for was my actual response to the situation, redefined in pathological terminology. I did not recognize it then, and I only now recognize it.
At the time, and until this moment, this simply never occurred to me, that he was not conjuring up PTSD from thin air, but attempting to redefine my actual reaction to stress as an illness, as pathology. It simply did not occur to me until this moment that my actual response to stress was related to what he was fishing for, because my subjective experience of stress simply was not recognizable in his terminology.
The depression shrink came closer to the mark. And I told her I was rationally, appropriately, and proportionally depressed by objectively depressing events, and would get over it by and by. “Life’s a bitch and then you die. You have to laugh, or else you would cry” It simply did not occur to me to make a similar reply to the PTSD shrink, because his pathologization of stress made it unrecognizable to me. It simply never occurred to me until this moment that he was talking about my actual response to stress, translated into the language of pathology and sickness.
Until this moment, it seemed to me he was pressuring me to invent symptoms from thin air, but now that you equate stress with PTSD, it seems likely he was pressuring me to reinterpret and redefine my actual response to stress as illness. But I simply did not recognize what he was talking about as intended to be in any way related to my actual experience of stress. It seemed utterly and incomprehensibly alien to my lived experience, while what the depression shrink was talking about was recognizable.
Obviously I was badly shaken up by having had a rather rough time, but if PTSD is the medicalized and pathologized description of that, the description was not recognizable to me then, and it still seems mighty strange and alien to me when you equate the normal stress response with PTSD. It is absolutely nothing like PTSD.
If being shaken up by a rough time is “PTSD”, PTSD is a weird, unnatural, unrealistic, strange, and artificial description of it, which denigrates and belittles those who have been having a rough time, a strange, deceptive, and misleading newspeak originally cooked up by priests to belittle and condemn warriors.
If PTSD is the medical terminology for being shaken up by having a rough time, and this simply never occurred to me until you equated the two, it is just unrecognizable, alien, and irrelevant to way in which people actually get shaken up by having a hard time.
It never occurred to me until now that he was pressuring me to adopt the social role of victim because I had been having a hard time. I just thought he was babbling on about something weird.
If people have a socially approved disorder, they will wreak havoc, because they have socially approved superpower over other people. They are disabled, and everyone has to accommodate the disabled. Being disabled is high status, valorized, and state subsidized, so we get the enthusiastic mass manufacture of disability.
Disability is honored, subsidized, and empowered. Productivity is demonized, condemned, taxed, and intimidated. So, surprise surprise, we get more disability and less productivity.
If victims are honored, and warriors dishonored, warriors are apt to choose to be victims instead. If victims are honored, and the productive dishonored, the productive will choose to be victims instead.
You cannot have PTS*D* that close to the event. To an extent, it is a matter of definition, but the gist is, the symptoms (being shaken, having nightmares and even hallucinations, being dissociated, easily startled, aggressive or numb, depressed, not quite there) is perfectly normal in the aftermath of an event (the rule of thumb is approximately one month), and the prognosis is that it will just work itself out. After about a month, the prognosis is that something went wrong, and it will not just work itself out, and because the same symptoms going on for too long become ever harder to handle, it is by definition a disorder (i.e. an affliction that is uncommon and gets in the way of living one’s life in a functioning way).
So that close to an event, it is not disorderly, because it doesn’t get in the way of your living your life (any more than any other acute illness would), and because it is not uncommon or unexpected.
This close to an event, it is termed post-traumatic stress (not disorder), and the problem is, if you suppress that stress, you suppress the processing of the stress, and anyway, if you give a midwit shrink something, he will try to pigeonhole it. If I, an autistic, go to a shrink, he will probably be overjoyed I have this officially holy jewish disease, but when I was a kid, it was not a thing, so people would just think I was obtuse, and probably thought my mother didn’t love me, and tried to get rid of me as quickly as possible.
I cannot make heads or tails of at which point you’re talking of PTS and when of PTSD. I suspect you are using PTS, PTSD interchangeably, and also stress and sterss processing interchangeably, and also stress and trauma.
In your telling, the bad guy tries to talk your limbic system into having not had processed the stimulus. That cannot possibly work. Either he was talking to you shortly after the event, at which point he would be fishing for (acute, normal, expected) post-traumatic stress, or he would be talking to you after the deadline for orderly processing the event has passed (roughly one month), at which point you either had the (chronic, abnormal, disorderly, still expected but only in a fraction of instances) post-traumatic stress disorder, or didn’t, and no amount of talking could possible make your lizard brain travel back in time and change its mind.
Sure, you can reject the official model of how the biology and psychology of it works, and you can reject the official vocabulary, and the etiology of the thing, or that the thing even exists, or that it is one thing and not multiple disparate things, and I sure do that in parts, but if we are to have a meaningful discussion, we must keep to some definition of terms.
Your retelling is drastically divergent from the official doctrine on PTSD, not just in the sense that they would underhandedly do one thing and piously profess they are doing another thing, but that their supposed actions do not match with the official doctrine of what their actions should be. They act very roguish and maverick in your story.
That is probably the framing they adopt, and the reason they do it is officially they are non-judgmental, and unofficially DoD who pays for all the research insists that the soldiers that get it are the good guys. In fact if you have PTSD it is always your damn fault, by definition, according to my theory of it.
There certainly is something in the system that tries to derail the processing of the trauma, for example the Duluth model, but that is just kinda whatever. If one is not a victim, one is not easily talked into it. You turned out fine, after all.
That is certainly true, but PTSD sufferers are treated like dirt. Any service that you need to access, be it medical, social security, financial, whatever — requires capacity for action that you at that point simply do not have; look at what VA does to vets, months on waiting lists to just talk to someone. You are holy if you get “raped” and parade your holiness in the newspaper, but the guys who eat a gun are not holy, they’re out of sight out of mind. Little boys who get sodomised are not holy. The plurality of PTSD cases are car accidents, but you wouldn’t know that, because it is not holy, it is performatively holy, but people with PTSD scarcely have the energy or desire to perform.
You are trying to process my words into language that has a lie at its core. Don’t do that. Your language is in large part the cause of PTSD. Your account of how people respond to stress is a lie. Stop being deceived. It is not like that.
Some people who have been very severely stressed are very vulnerable to suggestion for a quite short time after the events. Not all of them, probably not most of them, but a great many of them. This has been known for a very long time, long before there was such a thing as PTSD. If someone believes his immediate stress response was like that, this is what he has been told, not what he in fact experienced.
If doctors hastily get at someone who is still very badly shaken up, there is a good chance he will be persuaded to believe any bullshit he is told, and will internalize it. This is brainwashing.
It that is true, and I have no reason to think it is not, it would mean that some of our biggest social problems will disappear like magic as soon as people adopt a new weltanschauung. While it is not possible to talk someone’s limbic system into not having PTSD, it seems that you had a much healthier, ancient subconscious frame, and what causes the rise of PTSD is the modern frame, the modern worldview. Nice thing is that we don’t have to understand how the new software subverts our biology, we only have to reinstall the old software.
Sure, but only immediately after the event, not months or years after the event.
I observe first-hand, and hear second-hand, people being in a state of shock immediately after car crash; I observe nightmares after traumatic events indicating processing during sleep; I see people being easily startled or developing phobias, and gradually incorporating the phobias into their lifestyle. Most people who experience PTSD never talk to anyone, and when they talk to a professional, it is years after they could possibly incept PTSD into them. The official story is skewered with lies, but they are built on kernels of truth, truth that was uncontroversial hundreds of years ago when Shakespeare wrote about Lady Macbeth.
Ok how do people respond to stress?
Talking to friends and acquaintances, and making it into a story is one of the ways to deal. Elation and renewed energy is another. What else?
Does not last very long, which is probably why shrinks like to get into action right away as soon as real doctor goes away and emergency lets them in.
What you are calling PTSD is a system of delusions pushed hard by shrinks, and adopted partly by people taught lies by shrinks, and largely by people seeking victim status and the social super power of victimhood – with people in the latter category being far more common and prominent these days.
Sleep that knits up the ravell’d sleave of care,
The death of each day’s life, sore labor’s bath,
Balm of hurt minds, great natures second course,
Chief nourisher in life’s feast.
I wake, and the dream fades, ah, it was just a bad dream. And then I hug my wife, and in the morning she makes me coffee. I seldom remember my dreams. That is what dreams are for.
Today, PTSD is a popular and high status story, because victimhood is high status and gives license for anti social behavior. When laughing in the face of danger, or going to sleep in a terribly dangerous situation because there is no way to escape the danger, and it just goes on and on, is high status, and licenses for anti social behavior are not so liberally handed out, you will hear different stories.
>While the ability to dissociate is likely universal, or nearly so, some people are clearly more susceptible to dissociative states than are others. There is little question that someone’s innate ability to dissociate can be greatly enhanced — although not necessarily by ethical means. The most severe of the dissociative ‘disorders,’ MPD/DID, is in almost all cases created by psychological trauma so severe that the traumatic episode(s) cannot be integrated into the experiences of the core personality. By far the most common cause of MPD is early childhood trauma — usually, but not always, resulting from horrific abuse by a parent or other adult guardian. Dr. Frank Putnam noted in 1989 that he was “struck by the quality of extreme sadism that is reported by most MPD victims. Many multiples have told me of being sexually abused by groups of people, of being forced into prostitution by family members, or of being offered as sexual enticement to their mother’s boyfriends. After one has worked with a number of MPD patients, it becomes obvious that severe, sustained, and repetitive child abuse is a major element in the creation of MPD.†Dr. Deirdre Barrett, writing in 2001 for Psychology Today, offered a similar observation: “‘dissociaters’…have the following traits in common: Many such subjects reported a history of child abuse. Although some remembered this directly, some had been told by others that they had been battered…Other dissociaters who had not been abused had suffered childhood traumas such as prolonged, painful medical conditions and before the age of 10 experienced the deaths of their parents.â€[…]
>[…]And how would that control be attained? Estabrooks shied away from the details, only alluding to the severe psychic torture that is required to split a person’s core personality and then exert control over the alter personalities that are created. The trauma is often referred to euphemistically as “a form of hypnotism.†In one passage, for example, Estabrooks noted that multiple personalities “are caused by a form of hypnotism in the first place! We will see that emotional shock produces exactly the same results as hypnotism.†Later, he came a little closer to the truth: “multiple personality [can] be both caused and cured by hypnotism. Remember that war is a grim business. Suppose we deliberately set up that condition of multiple personality to further the ends of military intelligence.†Still later, he came even closer: “everyone [can] be thrown into the deepest state of hypnotism by the use of what [I] termed the Russian method — no holds barred, deliberate disintegration of the personality by psychic torture…The subject might easily be left a mental wreck but war is a grim business.”[…]
>[…]Verdier went on to explain that in order to achieve truly lasting states of brainwashing (or mind control), it is necessary to subject the victim to “profound and deep emotional states.†The recommended emotional states are fear, shock, and anxiety — all of which have “an intense disinhibitive effect on the human brain.†Even more effective is pain — because, “according to the eminent neurologist, Dr. Wilder Penfield, sensations of pain from the muscular sensory system enter the sub-cortical brain regions directly.†With a passage seemingly lifted from Estabrooks’ writings, Verdier left no doubt that pain and fear are the most useful items in the MK-ULTRA toolbox: “Russian political scientists do support the belief that given enough punishment, all the people in any time or place are susceptible to hypnotic control.†Verdier echoed other of Estabrooks’ beliefs as well, including the idea that “brainwashing†could and should be widely utilized for “benevolent†purposes, and the notion that children are ideal candidates for mind control programming: “Brainwashing can be slow, insidious and sure when applied to children early in life.. .It is likely that there is a short period of time following corporal punishment when the child is in a state of decortication — hypnosis, so to speak. This is the ideal time to plant the positive instructions for better behavior in the future.†What the good doctor considered “corporal punishment†and “positive instructions†was left to the reader’s imagination.
St. John’s quotes remind me of a book called The Rape of the Mind by Joost Merloo. Written in the 1950s by a Dutch Underground member who was tortured by the Nazis, then escaped. He later testified before Congress regarding the “treason” of captured American pilots in Korea. Free EPUB online. The book basically explains how actual mind control works. Fascinating stuff.
Jim, I detect what seems like bravado and braggadocio regarding PTSD. You’re the leader, so it is your job to tell us what we should mock, ignore, or exalt. At the same time, and this is anecdotal, I’m pretty sure there a lots of potentially useful men trapped in the “weltangshung” or whatever of modern victimology. Getting through to them without talking down to them is probably a useful tactic. As Gavrilo Princep taught us, even pussified skinnyfats can topple empires.
Prince Charmin Ultra Gay is basically outing himself as a flaming academe shill with his pronouncements about this or that mental affliction. Modern psychology in every one of its forms is alchemical at best, snake oil at worst. The former is a necessary misstep on the path towards actual scientific progress, the latter is grifterism. Faggots with degrees drawing make believe lines between imaginary afflictions is peak woke. Communism is always the haunt of mind-men. This is not to say there is nothing there. Mental affliction is exactly like the climate: of course it exists, and no your rain dances and human sacrifices have nothing to do with it. Notice how niggers don’t get PTSD. Octaroons do, but only if they identify as conservative. Notice how white man PTSD results in suicide and trannyism in no particular order. Notice how female PTSD results in pushups, pushup bras, and revenge. Notice how Nobel savages don’t get PTSD, they get even.
If you are in an elevator with everyone you love most, and it falls, and everyone gets pulped while you are unscathed, you’re going to have a bad time. You will have unhealthy responses to the stress you experience after the temporal effects of a given trauma have ceased. You don’t even have to script crazy horror movie happenings. Look at the little boys that get diddled by powerful sodomites. It’s the same thing. They aren’t being diddled anymore, they aren’t even kids! Snap out of it, wuss! It doesn’t work like that. Not will any amount of talking about it. Action must be taken. And some of those actions (suicide, perpetuation of sodomy, transference to innocents) are ameliorative and destructive. Other actions can be ameliorative and be beneficial. There’s little hope for the truly broken. But there are probably a ton of people who are vicariously victimized who need a very forward conversation, a very rigorous beating, and a new purpose with a good amount of oversight at first. This will cure them of the chronic ghey that ails them.
There’s too much noise and too little signal on this topic. Too much entertainment memery and no basic facts. Outside of personal experience, every single source on this subject is completely converged.
> (((Joost Merloo)))
Early Life:
Take a large pinch of kosher salt with whatever he has to sell. It won’t come as a shock to the readers here, but torture porn biopics are something of a shtick.
Kunning your inability to shut up about things you know little about is nauseating.
@jim
It really isn’t. Flaunting certain holy characteristics but only in very narrowly approved of ways is. So for example, it is holy to cut your son’s dick off, but it is very unholy to talk about the level of suicides (50%) this effects, and try to do something that actually helps. It is holly to go to gay pride, but it is unholy to go to conversion therapy. It is holy to be a nigger, as long as you stay on the plantation, but god forbid you don’t.
What I am saying tracks well with observed reality.
You are stretching your narrative to fit reality reported to you by people and books, and you are stretching the narrative, and it doesn’t fit, so you ignore most of the points made in this thread that disprove your narrative:
Most people with PTSD never see any medical professional whatsoever. It is difficult to see a professional even if you want to, and there are delays that prevent you from seeing anyone very shortly after an incident, because long waiting lists. And the system could do that, you could have mandatory counselling after car accidents, but you don’t see that, the state is quite unwilling to even send a badgenigger, and drivers are disincentivised to report due to the massive (and unjust) financial penalty from increased insurance premiums. Car accidents being the plurality of PTSD cases, this would be a fertile ground on which to descend if you wanted to manufacture PTSD like your theory proposes is happening. But they disincentivise shrink intervention instead of incentivising. Under my theory, what they are currently doing would increase PTSD, and under my theory, this is why they are doing it.
Unlike Krueger, a blathering idiot who doesn’t ever know what he is talking about, nor never talks about anything he knows, I have experience with people with PTSD (not professionally, from personal life) — and Jimian advice, Jimian worldview, Jimian prioritising of strength, masculinity, laughing in the face of adventure would have helped them mightily.
It is not fruitful to try understand subversion on subversion’s terms. C S Lewis tried it with Screwtape Letters, and while it is entertaining light reading, the fruit is rotten, may Lewis rot in hell, reading his feminist screeds never helped anyone. Doesn’t really matter. We ought not to dwell on how (((psychology))) subverted our biology to introduce PTSD, all we have to do is resettle the jews, install the old software, and the problem will fast sort itself out.
No I am not. You are stretching my narrative to fit tall tales reported to you by people and books.
I am telling you, telling you repeatedly, that the books are hateful hostile lies from beginning to end, enemy lies intended to harm the patient, and that what is reported to you by people is distorted by self interest, desire to flatter the powerful, and psychiatrically induced delusion.
I am flat out unambiguously and plainly rejecting what is reported to you by people and books.
Enemy lies, enemy lies.
Look, I see in the workplace seemingly sane and normal people just not seeing female misconduct that gets right in their faces, and you think I should believe politically correct self reports by people who are, or claim to be, mentally disturbed?
Bullshit. Not what I see in front of my nose. What I see in front of my nose is that shrinks get inflicted on unwilling people by state and quasi state institutions at the slightest excuse.
If someone has some event that might supposedly cause PTSD, or there is some incident of unusual behavior, cops or hospital or whatever is going have a shrink jump on him despite his total lack of enthusiasm for seeing a shrink.
Who are you hearing this crap from? It is from the shrinks, who are forever lobbying to get the authorities to inflict them on people even more than they get inflicted on people already.
People who wander the streets all day screaming at demons and causing trouble never get to see a psychiatrist, because there is no money there, but someone middle class, someone with assets, is going to have a shrink sicced on him against his will at any excuse. They bust someone, expecting him to go with the public defender, but instead he hires a lawyer. Bingo, then they want a psychiatric evaluation. Where there are people with assets who are in some kind of trouble, a shrink will appear whether they like it or not.
Lady Macbeth’s nightmares are obviously intended to depict moral guilt. She is not “processing stress”, she’s processing sin. Those scenes are informed by the Christian view of psychology, has nothing to do with PTSD.
Psychiatry, especially in the 20th and 21st century, has a long history of violating primum non nocere.
Is that so? Let us count the psychiatric ways…
– Depression is holy, for we have no end of women complaining how hard their life is, feeling very sorry for themselves and expecting others to acknowledge their self-pity.
– PTSD is holy, for war is the most toxic of masculinity and obviously every man must be troubled by his toxic masculinity.
– ADD is holy, for a diagnosis gives much needed bonuses in school.
– Autism is holy, as for a man to acknowledge that he is a loser is the first step to disavowing his toxic masculinity.
– Antisocial personality disorders are holy, for they are rewarded with plenty female attention, shrinks primary among them.
– Transgenderism is obviously holy, and as with all of these labels, the point of its holiness is not happiness, it is status through victimhood. Psychiatry never heals any of its patients, because its patients revel in their victimhood and are systematically encouraged to do so.
The list goes on and on. Psychiatry can be boiled down to ‘you are a victim, we are all victims, here are some holy pills for your victimhood.’ It’s toxic, and the only way to deal with it is to shut them out like you’d shut out a vampire.
Charmin Ultra Gay is displaying every red flag of an academia zombie. Pretty soon he’ll be complaining about how unfair it is that holy psychology is not as fiscally rewarding as automotive maintenance. He is a rainbow lipstick faggot, just like Anonymous Fake, just like Carlylian Restorationist, and every other over educated, under experienced Trotskyite before him. Point and laugh as he desperately deploys scripted antisemitic memes to cover up his hand tip over PTSD.
@jim
Most people never see the insides of a medical office, never speak to anyone.
We are obviously talking about two disjoint sets of people. I am not talking about people who have resources that can be leached off of, but people who have abilities that need to be degraded or destroyed. As the resident marxist, I of course primarily empathise with the much larger foundation of the pyramid, the soldiers that eat the gun or the folks that got a job without commute because they had a car accident and the PTSD from driving a car was affecting their work performance.
I thought that I knew a lot about PTSD, but this thread really brought some new perspectives.
@alf
(((Psychiatry))) is much better regarded as an enemy psyop, which from the very beginning it has been. But we must understand that the enemy works by taking something real, and inverting it, some say that this is because Satan, unlike God, cannot create. [not a christian, leave me alone]
Depression is holy, as long as you do not try to point out that a depression coming from external causes that one cannot do anything about is vanishingly rare — and that is precisely the kind of depression that is not holy.
Autism, again, not holy. If it were, aspie-friendly places would not be destroyed by bringing in screaming little “autistic children” to trigger (correct use) sensory overload in us. Codes of Conduct would not be demanding us to speak socially approved lies. If autism were holy, (((Katie Bouman))) would be praised for making tea and coffee for her autistic (((colleagues))) who actually wrote the code.
… and so on and so forth.
To think that victimhood is holy is to cargo-cult jewishness. No. It is holy to be very powerful and be performatively a victim. The former is essential, albeit harder, do not expect people to fawn over you just because you play the victim: you need to beat them up first.
@trigger nigger
> yap yap yap longhouse drivel
Well you tried to be internet friends because you thought I was shitting on someone you didn’t at the time like, and now you just act like a spurned sheila. Case in point why women and their d&c, unfunny, solipsistic drivel ought not to be welcome in male spaces.
Sudo go make a sandwich, bitch.
The proverbial ‘inside of the medical office’ is the official reality everywhere in latter days. Civilization is pathologized, and citizens are all now patients in the asylum.
Jim he is right that autism isn’t all that holy…
You may get some small privileges in fake and gay government schools but thats like small privileges in a prison when you aren’t really suited for prison… but id rather have not been a sperg. Cathedral doesn’t like spergs we notice things…
Its not like being a tranny or obnoxious fag where you can sue anyone who says anything remotely critical.
Disability is honored, subsidized, and empowered; but there is one disability that no one honors, and that is the socially disabled.
He is bragging, and PTSD is a social disease, induced by doctors and society. If you are expected to man up, and you expect yourself to man up, you are 100% immune to PTSD.
Some time ago a hospital sicked a shrink on me (I was in the hospital for the physical consequences, not the mental, and did not appreciate having shrinks inflicted on me) and I recollect how indignant and upset he was that I did not have PTSD in the slightest. You are supposed to have PTSD. It shows you are a good person.
If you did something which is according to your deeply held beliefs unspeakably wrong, you would expect that deed to haunt you, Lady Macbeth style. Almost no-one ever does things like that, and when they do, they get the demons, and it is low-key expected they do. PTSD is a product of our religion being insane and demanding people to do things, or allow things to happen, which according to the same religion are on that level of beyond bad. The experience has to be visceral.
When you’re getting PTSD, you basically fucked up so bad that you and possibly your whole civilisation are going to hell, and it is time to reassess. Which we are, so more and more people getting it is not surprising. It is like depression, but deeper and more comprehensive. An evolved healthy reaction to a super unhealthy stimulus.
I like the definition that other commentators have been offering in this blog, that it is a real reaction to a sick spiritual system.
Likely the nightmares and all that are completely real, but real in the way demonic possession is real. If you choose not to hang out with demons, not going to get demonically possessed.
That’s half of it. The other half is that if you done fucked up like Lady Macbeth did, you gonna have bad time. Her spiritual system was perfectly healthy.
But the mechanism is the same whether it’s PTSD or Lady Macbeth.
Lady Macbeth’s visions are PTSD. Why would you think they’re not?
IRL I haven’t really ever observed women with guilty consciences except for BPD girls.
For normie women the rationalization hamster absolves them of all responsibility. So called BPDs seem to lack the rationalization hamster.
No, I agree with you. You are saying that Joe Rogan guy and Lady Macbeth are having the same kind of reaction to very different religious systems.
He might legitimately feel that way, or maybe he is just saying the appropriate thing. If he does feel that way, I suspect he would feel differently if he had been taken out for drinks and been celebrated after he smashed the other guy to death with a rock. I doubt I would have any doubts or regrets if I killed a Mohammedan with a rock, because he had it fucking coming to him for being a demon worshipper.
Yes there is a slight subtlety to it. Maybe he means what he says, maybe he does feel guilt through societal pressure or whatever. Like he understands that it is expected of him to feel guilty about taking another man’s and acts accordingly?
But my monkey brain tells me I’d be pretty proud if I killed a man with a rock, and you can sell me a bridge if his monkey brain is any different.
It really has to do with your religious sentiments…
A lot of American soldiers think back and then default to their original shallow understanding of christianity and think in the back of their mind that they’ve committed horrible sins and will be horribly punished by God.
I’ve met a couple…
You’re thimking about it too cerebrally, Alf. This works at the limbic level. The guy has a deeply held unarticulated belief that what he did was very wrong. His feelings do not care about your facts, as it were.
Plus, he’s lying. If a man intending to kill you sneaks up on you from behind, you’re gonna be too busy dying to do anything about it. It is typical of PTSD sufferers to retell the story in a way that helps them cope. If he could jovially relay “I got spooked by a kid, operant conditioning kicked in, fucker had it coming lol”, he would be in a much better place, spiritually.
He is probably an NPC. A soldier at heart, not a warrior. The two of us can celebrate our base masculine desires and our successes on our own, because we can make it on our own and we operate around society, not within it. He needs that society, and so his monkey brain is telling him that he did bad society thing, make sad face, have bad dream. Our monkey brains would be saying, fuck yeah, me big ass-kicker, now go fuck and party, good to be ass-kicker; good to win. To him, society is what keeps him alive. To us, society is where we go to find our tools.
Issues relevant to the matter seem to be:
1) PTSD is claimed to be pervasive nowadays, and was claimed not to exist (i.e. no recognizable symptoms described) before WW1
2) Societal pressure – as either encoded or hijacked by the media of the day – can very deeply influence people.
These two issues can be reconciled into either one (or even into a combination) of two very different explanations: either PTSD has been willed into being by a priestly class intent on clipping the warrior class, or PTSD was always a thing but it was considered cowardly to admit to being anything but elated at having pillaged a village, with all that this entails.
Do Mexican cartel members feel horrible at night due to what they have to do on a daily basis? Do nignogs? I don’t know, but I sure know the easiest way to get wacked in that milieu is to admit to this, so we’ll never hear as much from them.
Still, given that I would see zero evolutionary advantage to a PTSD module in our brains, I tend toward thinking PTSD is largely willed into being nowadays, but am not too confident.
PTSD is an evolved, adaptive response to an extreme stimulus. It is a more complex and more comprehensive depression. Same as depression, many people are currently being paid to muddy the waters about why it occurs and why it may be a good thing. Depression allows (forces) one to reassess priorities; it will allow (force) you to quit being an international playboy and find God (see: Roosh). PTSD allows (forces) you to entirely rewire your personality, something that is otherwise not really possible past puberty. Yes, it’s painful.
To the extent that PTSD was not occuring before WW1, it is because it is socially constructed by the DoD to be totally different from e.g. the visions that Lady Macbeth has, and which everyone low-key expects people like her to get if they do what she’d done. We have an insane religion that from one corner of the mouth tells us to do things, and from the other corner tells us that those things are unspeakably awful, which is why we have more of it now, but being haunted by demons after committing a very bad deed is a human universal.
I understand PTSD to be different from just having a conscience in that people supposedly suffer from it even having fought like real gentlemen etc etc. In this sense, I don’t think “feeling bad about having been a gentlemam warrior” ever was a theme before WWI.
> supposedly … fought like real gentlemen
Yeah, like who?
Hm, KD above speaks of guys who got it simply by surviving an IED, no fighting at all. The orginal shell-shock implies trauma from being under fire, nothing to do with any doing on your own part.
A common element of all these different dynamics is the perception of control.
For example, during the second war of internationalist aggression, escort pilots in the continental bombing campaign had, objectively, a much greater risk of being shot down than the bomber crewmen; yet rates of combat fatigue were more than double in latter, as compared with the former.
The reason is simple and obvious; irrespective of the dangers in reality he faced, the fighter jockey, mounted atop his steed, felt that *he had control over his destiny*. Whereas individual crewman on the bomber, each having narrower remits, concordantly felt oft like that had precious little influence over their chances, could merely pray their number did not come up.
Shell shock is of like kind with this; a screeching wode swinging his axe in your face is something you can viscerally grapple with; but what do you do about falling death streaking over from beyond the horizon, while you are stuck sitting there in a trench? It felt, so oft, like all one could do is simply pray their number did not come up. It is that feeling of powerlessness, a feeling of *lack of control*, that sows the seed; which the milieu he participates in may exacerbate, or denature.
IEDs and survivor’s guilt, just as so. The perception of caprice, arbitrary chance, that either you were powerless to change anything, or that you somehow *should* have had the power, but failed to.
Yes. And as you have hinted, it would be a curious question to ask what kinds of religious ideas are better at keeping people from feeling too bad about these types of situations. Maybe Islamic-style fatalism?
Having agency to address the problem makes a huge difference psychologically, even if the agency is not likely to make a whole lot of difference.
It is not fatalism that prevents old type Muslims from getting PTSD. It is a faith that says that killing and being killed is OK.
Good point re feeling in control. I know people eho are terrified of earthquakes for that very reason.
jim, but what about situations where there is no control or agency, like the IEDs and other things that KD talks about above? He says: “some shit just doesn’t compute, and the more you try to calculate, the worse it gets”. Seems to me that there might be belief systems that make some of these things compute.
Kyle Rittenhouse appears to have ptsd. He had control over his situation. Was he just demonized into accepting trauma? Or is his breakdown during recounting the incidents during his trial not indicative of ptsd?
Kyle Rittenhouse was traumatized not by his life being in danger, nor by killing people who needed killing, but by lack of social support for killing people who needed killing.
The cops who told him to go home when he attempted to get arrested, after he had told cops he killed people, in front of a crowd of hostile people telling the cops he had killed people, acted appropriately and correctly. But he had internalized that this is not how they would and should act.
>Kyle Rittenhouse appears to have ptsd. He had control over his situation. Was he just demonized into accepting trauma? Or is his breakdown during recounting the incidents during his trial not indicative of ptsd?
Kyle was filmed wearing a shirt saying AR15s > Skateboards. He clearly doesn’t have any issues with killing those who needed killing. I think Jim’s got the right of it with Kyle.
@tity
‘IEDs are just something that happens’ illustrates the dangers of the passive voice. Solipsistic modes of thought inhabiting a world where things just happen to happen with no agency.
There is agency with roadside bombs and the like. What they are is an epiphenomena of an ostensible fighting force that is precluded from ruling the people around them. The ideological preconceptions of demotist theocracy by design precludes that which is more orderly rulership, and naturally soldiers under a demotist regime are obliged to operate under the same preconceptions, and also without any unprincipled exceptions the theocrats themselves may use to stay in power. Leading to states of affairs where the poor bastards are much like those abused rodents in the old learned helplessness experiments; they simply shut down.
When the Western Roman Empire had to deal with piracy in the mediterranean, what they did what show up in force at any of the ports the pirates would dock at, kill everyone, and bring in settlers to repopulate the area.
In the event, the roman lake was pirate free for more than four centuries.
Distress (external stress one has no control of) vs eustress (stress one can overcome by levelling up and getting gud). It is sinful and evolutionarily deletrious to allow oneself to be under distress, to be in situations where other can do unto us and we cannot do unto them. There is no paradox.
Today’s PTSD is not much like actual shell shock, of course. It’s just a word that feminists use to signal their superior sensitivity and sacred victimhood.
E.g., “Whlle I was staggering around drunk in a back alley (my drinks had obviously been spiked behind my back), some man put his arm around my shoulders — without my consent! — and steered me to a taxi, which took me back to my shared squat. He had already paid for the ride, showing he was part of the patriarchy! Ever since then, I have had trouble sleeping and have been diagnosed at the women’s medical centre with post-traumatic stress disorder. Subscribe to my patreon.”
This topic has indeed been touched on before.
The most prosaic level is that of course the mindset of a labouring caste man is not adapted to life and death in war the way a man possessed of more warrior character would be. The warrior’s perspective is almost completely alien to the peasant’s (what do you mean you would not lose your nerve in a stressful situation? what do you mean this is not a stressful situation to you?). It is alien to many priestly types also – though better examples of the species may ideate it, by sufficient imaginative capacity.
A second level is that ‘PTSD’ is the social custom. You are *supposed* to have ‘PTSD’. You can turn on broadcast tv and watch a few episodes of M.A.S.H. to see what some priestly heebs living in the city think how war and warriors are supposed to work. People watch media and internalize the narrative, the life plan. They see how each part plays it’s role in the act, and they follow the script. They are not consciously thinking in terms like ‘i am going to go into an adrenaline pumping situation and thereafter psychologically self-sabotage’, but their limbic system is learning the score. When they find themselves in a situation, they intuitively follow their rolemodels for that situation.
A third level is that it is an epiphenomena of civilizational scale nihilism in general. Presently regnant underlords offer no good reasons for their soldiers to be doing anything they are doing – because they don’t have any good reasons. Aimless ennui, purposelessness, and listlessness are the rule, not the exception.
You’d expect a man who enrolls in the army to know what he signed up for.
I think the comments to the short show this as well. No one is saying ‘lol cringe’. Instead everyone is posting inspirational quotes on the timeless horror of war.
The US Army is, nominally, an all volunteer force. So yes, even if they are recruiting from all society, there is still some pre-selection effect at play.
At the same rate though, many of the foregoing are also joining up mainly for economic reasons, getting their internments in modern seminaries paid for by the GI bill and all that. They’re not ‘really’ expecting mortal combat; or to the extent they do expect it, it’s in a ‘ill deal with it if it happens’ way, not a ‘Conan! what is best in life!?’ way.
> know what he signed up for
It is not the killing and dying, but the murdering, and insane rules of engagement. How do you suppose it works. Was the guy, aged 17 or 22, supposed to disregard his teachers, all the patriotism instilled in him from cradle, the fact there are millions of vets,, some of them in his family, speaking of discharging their duty fondly, and say nah, there’s this guy on the Internet in the future in 2021, Prince Charming, and based on his poasts, I think the whole soldier thing is cringe and don’t do it!?
One doesn’t necessarily want to insult vets. Those guys are on our side, and being a soldier is a big part of their identity. If you look at for example Fuentes, there is some beginning of how that rhetoric can be wrought, but it is not easy. What would be the point to spit on the core identity of the guy who is basically a victim here? But make no mistake. There is an enormous PR machine behind misleading the public about what PTSD is, and much of the comment section is paid shills or people who regurgitate paid shills. Organic response looks like Winter Soldier or PTSD awareness campaigns by vets for vets & spouses.
It is mostly that the organs of their official religion, not the nominally Christian but the Harvard religion, constantly tell them that they have done evil deeds, and like most good men, feel terrible and guilty about the fact that they did evil.
Merely remembering life-threatening situations is adaptive. We are meant to remember danger because it helps us develop a plan for the future. We are meant to dream about danger because our dreams are a training dojo for real life. How we feel about these dreams and memories is another story.
When I was a child, I watched a man die in front of me, and my response was “good, he deserved it”, because he did deserve it, and it never bothered me much. My brother also watched him die, and was quite traumatized for a while, because he considered himself somewhat responsible, which he was not.
You get PTSD in society when you call war evil and warriors evil. Remembering war and violence is natural, but if you are remembering it with a guilty conscience, going to fuck you up.
We just tell our warriors that heroes frequently get killed, but on the way out they are doing their best to take as many enemy as possible with them, and our soldiers that when our enemies grasp women and children to act as human sandbags, the blood from those sandbags is on the heads of our enemies. No more PTSD.
There is also a whole lot of fake PTSD. I myself have come under pressure from a shrink who was sicced on me to display PTSD symptoms. You are supposed to get PTSD or else you are a bad person.
Are you conflating post-traumatic stress with post-traumatic stress *disorder*?
You are supposed to experience trauma as stressful, and you have to process that stress. There is a limited window within which the stress can be processed, about a month, and if it is not processed well, it becomes disorderly. Pressuring the client to stop denying he is experiencing post-traumatic stress (that is not yet disorderly) is exactly the think I would expect a shrink to do.
Nuts.
I was there. I know exactly what happened.
I suffered absolutely no post traumatic stress, and the shrink that was sicced on me was indignant that I did not. He was pressuring me to have post traumatic stress, and post traumatic stress disorder, and anecdotally, they pressure everyone.
Their job is not to help the patient process traumatic stress, but to push people to wallow in it. Their job is to turn trauma into post traumatic stress disorder. They want people to have it. It is iatrogenic disease. I was right there, and your story about what the shrink was doing is just the lie that shrinks say to cover their crimes.
Their job is to turn trauma into post traumatic stress disorder.
Indeed it is, and you can see that in the protocol for “rape” “victims”. But you are throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
I would really like to figure out how to do blockquotes
It’s just the HTML tag.
There is no baby.
Rough times are rough. Also water is wet. You are compelled to revisit rough times in your mind to make sure you don’t blunder into the same thing again. Revisiting rough times in your mind is no big deal. This is absolutely no big deal.
What is a big deal is being compelled to bemoan how terrible it all was. Rough times you survive are great. Observe that just about every story has the hero hitting some mighty rough times. A good story has no end of the hero encountering “traumatic stress”.
What is now called post traumatic stress used to be gentlemen telling each other of their exciting adventures and close shaves, when adventuring was honorable, brave, and something done by the better sort of people did. Since the priesthood despise that sort of people, you are now required to bemoan adventures.
Jim, you are a righteous machiavellian genius hero, and are getting indignant at a peasant headshrink trying on you the shit he was told to try on peasants, shit that is plausibly suitable for helping with peasant problems. There is no need to project your own machiavellian tendencies on the midwit doctor, or surmise the poor dears share your steely psyche.
I was not there, so I’ll admit in your particular case maybe that’s what happened.
What he was trying to do to me is harmful and hostile to the peasants. It would have been as bad for a peasant as for me, but more likely to be successful.
>Rough times are rough. Also water is wet. You are compelled to revisit rough times in your mind to make sure you don’t blunder into the same thing again. Revisiting rough times in your mind is no big deal. This is absolutely no big deal.
Nah, you’re being a callous idiot who is showing no ability to understand nuance. Sure, the majority of men, in your “average” war are going to be at the very least neutral about it, or even will desperately miss it once they come home. This piece, unfortunately behind a paywall, by a Vietnam vet in the 80s, is an excellent example of this. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FFU4DrFUcAAiUdw?format=png&name=small
On the other hand, you had a whole generation of soldiers in WW1 who developed the best documented cases of PTSD up till that time who had no nexus of leftist social workers around them to prop up delusions in their head. If anything the doctors during WW1 were encouraged to ignore any mental symptoms the soldiers showed and get them back into combat as soon as possible, and there certainly was zero attempt to continue a sort of “PTSD make-work complex” after the war. So you’re talking out of your ass.
You have a valid point. But today, it is obvious that PTSD is overwhelmingly iatrogenic, and World War I was not a normal war.
World War I was an attack by the priesthoods of the respective countries upon the warriors of those countries, and they got PTSD because not able and not willing to take priesthood out and shoot them.
Violence and death is not psychologically disturbing for men. What is psychologically disturbing is helplessness caused by internal beliefs. Helplessness caused by external causes, or by one’s own errors that one has no difficulty recognizing as errors is rough, but I have been there often enough. It is not that rough and it is not psychologically disturbing. What is disturbing is internal causes that one cannot acknowledge.
The problem was not that they were being killed, but that they were being killed by treason within.
Just as men have breaking points in regards to failures/disasters in their career, their finances, their family and relationships, so do they have a breaking point in regards to combat. A man cannot go on and on and on through combat indefinitely without it eventually affecting him.
The reason PTSD is widespread today indeed has nothing to do with the above (in my opinion) real reason. The most common reason for it today is what Sebastian Junger has talked about, and it matches exactly what you’ve said. Namely, that warriors, when they come home to an effeminate and atomized home front, immediately feel totally disconnected and adrift, having lost the brotherhood of their military life. This of course, has nothing to do with the horrors of war and has everything to do with leftists destroying the social fabric.
Not going to argue this, jim has it covered. But I will link to an interesting essay by Borges about WW1 and Guillaume Apollinaire that Pseudo-Chrysostom posted: https://blog.reaction.la/faith/satanic-symbolism-at-the-vatican/#comment-2798053
Great point. I imagine that every warrior instinctively feels he should be rewarded for his valor in battle. But you come home and hey whats that, nobody gives an actual shit, and moreso, none of the victories and built brotherhoods in battle translate to any status at home.
Have to give it to leftists, they play well into this I think. Similar to workers’ unions, more benefits for veterans has often been their thing.
Put in other words, it is not war that has changed, but the peace that has changed.
I thought I knew a lot about PTSD, being autistic and this being one of my special interests. But boy, is the rabbit hole deeper than I ever imagine.
Jim’s point about iatrogeny is, though in my opinion flawed, nevertheless at least partially correct, as in the *Duluth model*, I think in the sense that they take something real, it being PTSD or depression or diabetes, and weaponise it against the population, against family, against the person, and the whole system that is supposed to cure or alleviate the problem in fact exacerbates it 10x in order to exploit the fallout, politically and financially.
@ The Cominator
The point that the good old white boys are scared of hell because of taking lives, that is perhaps the blackest of pills that I had to swallow, it is so simple and yet so obviously true. I always thought that the grunts knew to differentiate killing in war, but it is obvious, now that you mentioned it, that this is not the case, that it cannot be the case.
From my family to all of you, every last one of you big brained, smart mouthed, keyboard jockey motherfuckers:
Merry Christmas. Try to take a few moments and ponder what is good, what is worth fighting for, killing for, dying for, building towards. Dark times ahead, lads. I want to say a particular thanks to Jim, St. John, Aidan, HerbR, and Wulfgar. You guys are a strange and wonderful bunch. TC, Pooch, Starman, the dearly departed, and lurkers around; Merry Christmas, faggots. Wish you all could stop by, swill some vodka, and be happy. Here’s hoping for a tomorrow together, whenever that may be.
Merry Christmas gentlemen!
Merry Christmas!
Marry Christmas Fed!
May you have a wonderful Christmas with your friends and family.
Listen here, you little shit… Merry Christmas bruv
Merry Christmas to you and all men of good will.
Merry Christmas!
Merry christmas 🌲
Merry Christmas!
Merry Christmas.
Merry Christmas!
Merry Christmas!
He has risen indeed.
https://youtu.be/f9mw78px_DI
Biden gets owned on phone call. Google “did Biden say let’s go Brandon” and enjoy the weak attempts at spin. I know this is a very minor thing, but it is tiny cracks that topple empires.
Not minor at all! Getting pranked is low status, and high status is getting away with stuff. It’s just like that one guy shouting “Pepe!†during that Hillary speech.
There’s a lot of pranking going on out there too. Straight outta Glasnost.
In the Holy Nativity of our Lord by Richard Crashaw
Christmas by George Herbert
Christ’s Nativity by Henry Vaughan
On the Morning of Christ’s Nativity by John Milton
[…] At https://blog.reaction.la/party-politics/end-of-pretence-of-democracy-rescheduled-to-2024/ HerbR provides a good list of definitions of leftism: […]
Pseudo-Chrysostom said:
Oh come on. Et tu pc? Maybe I read your comment wrong and you are not jumping on the autism bandwagon, but I’ve spent a good deal of time typing the following comment so I’ma submit anyway.
Here’s a good way to test whether something exists or not: can you reliably recognize and exclude entryists? If you can’t separate the real from the fake, the concept does not cut reality at the joints.
In the case of autism, you can’t. If a person claims autism, he is autistic, end of story. And these days, many men claim autism, women claim autism, everybody fucking claims autism.
So let’s take a look at my circle of nine friends.
One used to talk exclusively about trains. Awkwardly derailed (heh) conversations to insert trains. Later did the same with politics. He has learned to constrain himself somewhat. Clearly, autistic.
Another is incapable of carrying a normal conversation. You can tell he’s in his head. Sometimes when you shake hands with him he’ll change his hand in a fist just before you grab it. Obviously, autistic.
And then there’s me. I derive my entire worldview from strangers on the internet and make no excuses for it. Also, I like sorting and labeling stuff. Undoubtedly, autistic.
This gives us a 33% autism rate in my circle alone. What does that tell us about autism? It tells us, to my mind, that it is astrology. You can find it whenever, wherever you want to.
Here’s an alternate hypothesis. What if, hear me out, pretty much all men are autistic, because a preoccupation with objects over people is what allows us to make ourselves valuable.
What if the reason you feel awkward with the cashier is because you don’t like being there, and she doesn’t like being there, and it shows?
What if the reason you feel awkward with the colleagues at work is because it is a fake and gay work environment and you merely recognize it’s fakeness and gayness?
I’m pretty sure there used to be a time where you were judged on just being a good person, not on how well you could pretend you are still in high school acting like a social butterfly.
But not today. Today when a two-year old boy does not give the stranger at least five seconds of eye-contact when she yells his name, he is autistic and if you make a wrong move child services will be on the alert.
It’s a ridiculous inversion in which communication managers are good people and programmers are bad people.
You have a long term girlfriend in clownworld supposedly and aren’t a celebrity, superwealthy and you don’t seem plausibly scary like Jim sounds like hes plausibly very scary IRL (not that I know of, I’m pretty sure you aren’t scary).
Good sign you aren’t autistic.
This seems like a thread im not party too, so your statement at the beginning is probably right.
I simply make the observation that those bad at being popular… tend to be unpopular.
Humanoids are interactive species – that is to say, social – and so dys-ability in interacting with other humanoids is extremely crippling. Depending on the scope, even worse than loss of a limb, in terms of life prospects relative to the median.
Theoretically, this should be no less deserving of subsidization with status in accordance with the officially unofficial religion of subsidizing all that is dysfunctional with status; but this doesn’t really apply to unsociables all that much, because one, unsociables are unpopular, and two, because of one, they aren’t really relevant as useful totems for a power seeker, either.
To given an illustration, one of the serendipitous happenstances of fate is, that though sub-saharan bantus are generally incompetent, impulsive, and possessed of vanishingly short time horizons, many subjects thereof have can have a natural degree of gregariousness that those who don’t know any better can find entertaining, which endears them to them; this, in fact, is and has been one of the most significant factors underlaying their usefulness as totems for certain factions of power-seekers over the years, and the influence of this factor in pivotal periods of transition can’t be underestimated.
Autism is like porn or art; it stands out as itself, but it exists on a spectrum. It can be very desirable in certain circumstances, to certain parties, but can also be cumbersome and inconsequential.
My first contact with ’tism was in a homeschooling group. Just the most awful combination of undesirable traits in a kid: nails cut to the quick, neck and head gear to protect him from himself, terrible bone structure and asymmetry, no intelligible speech. So, being young, I assumed that that’s what autism meant. It was quite shocking when I found out, years later, that many people in my life considered me autistic. An ex was convinced that my tendency to predict sentiment and response based on intuition and close attention to facial musculature indicated that I was on the spectrum. There are other things that lend credence to the diagnosis. But I can’t into math, I only remember birthdays if they coincide with historically relevant dates, and (I believe) my IQ is 120. So who knows.
Like in our discussion on psychopathy, the political nature of the use of the label has rendered the term worthless as an objective descriptor. Every dude that posts here is autistic, and autists tend to clump. I don’t really trust men that aren’t sperglords or gigachads, they seem mercurial and sodomish.
Jim’s Blog: the dwelling place of turbo-autist psychopathtriarchs.
There are at least three, and possibly more, different characteristic strains that are each and all denotated under the label of ‘autism’, which is one of the problems with use of the term in popular discourse.
There the ‘downy’ kind of autism, that you observed in your schooling; we are not talking about savants here, or even idiot savants, just strait up idiots.
Another is the sense of ‘autism’ that simply equivocates the term with normal male-brain thinking, the dim self-awareness of such by some bodies giving rise to the tendentious terminology of ‘extreme male-brain theory’.
And yet another sense is ‘internet autism’, the term autist being a word folk have adopted for the denotation of a recognizable kind of annoying, disruptive, and or low quality spergmatic behavior that is a perennial menace to discussion fora.