Free Software Foundation pushes back

I am a fan of the Gnu development environment, ./configure && make && make install, and a subscriber to the Free Software Foundation.

And for a long time my emails from the Free Software Foundation have had only the most superficial connection to free software, and are primarily about the fact that everyone like me is evil and need to go because we oppress women and nams. Also my hatefulness causes blacks to attack Asians.

So I figured that that development environment was going to die as the Star Wars Universe died, and I should move away from it. Shaniqua loves to make software developers suffer, as Star War’s writers love the tears of the fans.

And then, suddenly strangely, and surprisingly, I started once again getting emails from the Free Software Foundation about Free Software. (that is “free” as in “free speech”, not “free” as in “free beer”.)

And not long after that, I saw a spray of outrage from converged and extremely unfree free software organizations, whose software projects are dying of bitrot under Shaniqua’s curation, about the Free Software foundation.

All of the organizations listed are actually one organization with a variety of sock puppets and letterheads, an organization with absolutely no interest in software, and which is distinctly hostile to software developers, viewing them as white male deplorables.

Rather, the progressive priesthood noticed the existence of another priesthood among software engineers, and vigorously attempted to converge it. Since convergence was having insufficient success, not in that the software priesthood espoused red pilled views, but that they failed to view knowledge of the latest shibboleths for sexual perversions as higher status than the latest shibboleths about software, the progressive priesthood proceeded to use more vigorous and aggressive measures, similar to those it has been using against “nazis” and “fascists”. The existence of high status shibboleths that it had not deemed high status enraged them.

To which attack, the software priesthood responded like a wet noodle. I was shocked and outraged by the feebleness and gutlessness of ESR’s limpwristed pushback when a bunch of sockpuppets in his comments section set to doing to some other man in the free software movement what had earlier been done to ESR.

The Software Priesthood is still saying “we are progressives too”, but this has not been working for them. The only thing that is going to work is identifying and purging the enemy. And since they made no attempt to identify and purge the enemy, I figured that they were a lost cause.

Well, the Software Priesthood are showing signs of life. And the enemy is becoming more visible and distinct as the enemy, shedding its “hail fellow engineer” disguise. The enemy just does not like Western Civilization, nor any of the things that Western Civilization in its greatness created, because what Western Civilization in its greatness created makes their mascots look like plains apes.

This may well turn out to be merely another Comicsgate, which was rapidly conquered by enemy entryists, but the people running the entryists against Comicsgate were smarter than the fans. They are nowhere near as smart as the people they have been purging from the Free Software movement. We shall see what happens.

What I am seeing the Free Software Foundation doing is trying to keep a low profile and focus on free software “Hey, we are non political. We are not interested in politics.”

You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you. The real Free Software Movement are coming on board, very quietly and very reluctantly.

777 Responses to “Free Software Foundation pushes back”

  1. @Suones, continuing on the Aryan/Dravidian divide. I believe that there is a distinct racial difference which is observable to this day between the two. I think the main reason why India still preserves this distinction is because of the tight Caste hierarchies, fairly strict restrictions on inter-caste marriage until in the last 100 years or so and so on. If the prog agenda goes through, I think the intermingling of races will make it next to impossible to distinguish between the two.

    @others,
    Among Indians, Aryans (mainly the Brahmins and Kshatriya castes, but also some Vaisya castes – though there is a fair intermingling of race/caste which makes it impossible to generalize accurately) tend to have fairer skin (wheatish toned skin which does get dark due to sun exposure, but not the chocolate brown dark of the Dravidian). Also Aryan features are much more refined than the typical Dravidian and I think we are closer to European standards of beauty in this regard rather than African standards. Also I’ve noticed that the Dravidians are much more heat-tolerant, resistant to tropical diseases and naturally physically stronger similar to the African race. However, the Dravidian IQ is distinctively lower. I hate the summer heat, and barely can stand the heat of April / May / June. Even though we are both Indians,

    I think we can find the distinction much easier to understand than the Westerners here, particularly because they tend to club all brown-skinned people into a single basket of races.

    • Oog en Hand says:

      Possibly the Dravidians are hybrids between Elamite invaders and dark locals. Upper Caste Dravidians could be maternally Aryan.

  2. Pooch says:

    Entire crypto market selling off. Jim is this in response to incoming regulation?

    • jim says:

      I don’t get excited about the daily news, and do not try to find reasons for the latest change.

      I did not bother to think about this until you asked, and my two cents on the issue is not worth two cents.

      I conjecture a lot of people, myself among them, expected swift dramatic crisis after the Deep State got its puppets in – that the Deep State would rapidly lose control, so purchased crypto for that reason. And now everthing is going along quietly, and when one faction tries to start a war with Russia, the Deep State firmly sits on them, squashes them, and they stay squashed. So now a lot of people think normality will continue indefinitely.

      I don’t think normality will continue indefinitely, but it is likely to take a few years for the $#!% to hit the fan.

      So I am just sitting and holding, and not paying much attention, as I have been for quite some time. If the sell off continues, it is a buying opportunity. If I feel a buying opportunity has arisen, then I will research the matter.

      What I do pay attention to is technological developments in crypto currency, and the nature of the attacks against it.

      Maybe the sell off is motivated by the success of the regulatory attacks on crypto currency. To me, the success of the regulatory attacks on crypto currency are a technological opportunity, but I suppose that to many people, looks like the doom of crypto currency.

      I have been expecting successful regulatory attacks for quite some time.

  3. alf says:

    Regarding the autism discussion: Here is a very recent poster boy for autism, and observe the entertainment branch of the cathedral jumping on with both hands. Which in itself is a damning sign, but lets judge for ourselves.

    So, immediately my thoughts on seeing the kid is that something is obviously wrong with him. So, brain damage, explaining his eccentric behavior. Supposedly autism explains his behavior, but when his father gives his criteria for autistic behavior, I hear close to zero criteria from the dsm. So really, ‘autism’ seems to have slightly more predictive power than your zodiac sign, much less predictive power than brain damage.

    Com, do you think you have brain damage? If not, I suggest that thinking of yourself as a victim of autism is not the healthiest way.

    • linker says:

      Autism is just a catch all term for a malfunctioning brain. Examples of autism are often contradictory like a kid who hates social interaction, and another kid who wants to endlessly
      and enthusiastically educate other kids about Sonic the Hedgehog lore. What it means in context is just “malfunctioning brain”. Have to figure out what they mean from context. When icycalm calls someone an autist in a derogatory way he is saying they have brain damage that makes them prefer inferior simpler uglier video games. When a 4channer calls someone an autist in a positive way he is saying they investigate a topic in a very obsessive and logical manner. When Cominator says he is an autist he is saying he is not good at socializing with people who are much less intelligent than him and who he basically views as subhuman. When a psychiatrist diagnoses someone with autism they mean “GIBS ME MONEY GIBS ME DAT MONEY I WENT TO COLLEGE GIB MONEY GIB MONEY GIBS ME DAT FEDERAL RESERVE GOVERNMENT MONEY GIMME DAT APPLE CART”

      I think it’s fair to say it’s an anti-concept.

      • The Cominator says:

        While my IQ is above average but I’m not a genius (I’m certainly not Jim) and I try not to view people too harshly until they do something that upset me…

        Also there is some compartmentalization within higher intelligence. My geometric math skills were in general much higher than my algebraic math skills. I struggled with even introductory algebra initially the concepts just seemed strange and yet I remember in geometry we had “reflection proof” problems and I got it and I remember I didn’t even have too much trouble with it and I can’t remember if NOBODY else did or my best friend the truly genius 1600 SAT score who became an MIT physics major also got it (I know that it was nobody but us). I was never good with complex integrals or infinite series (signals class was the bane of my existence in electrical engineering I finally passed it by taking it in a summer going to bed right after class every day waking up at 1 in the morning studying for 8 hours on just that class, and after barely passing I promptly forgot nearly everything).

        The people I tend to hate most are intelligent people who have willfully rejected truth and they tend to be not the dumber people who I especially in recent years have come to take a more charitable view of, but people of slightly above average IQ who have decided to become cathedral parrots.

        • orochimaru says:

          “The people I tend to hate most are intelligent people who have willfully rejected truth and … who have decided to become cathedral parrots.”

          yes! to add to that I know smart people like this as well. people who have won international competitions in STEM yet continually regurgitate Cathedral prolefeed because they don’t have the mental fortitude to seek and understand what is true.
          (I would put people like BigYud into this category.)

      • Dave says:

        Autism is very real; my son is a textbook case of the low-functioning sort. Its most obvious link to Asperger’s is that Asperger parents beget a lot of autistic children.

        The spectrum isn’t “brain damage”, it’s a specific set of genes that travel together, which is rather mysterious because spergs don’t socialize well and have great difficulty finding mates, raising the question of why they didn’t go extinct long ago.

        Strong social skills are usually beneficial to one’s genes, but on the occasions when society becomes a herd of lemmings stampeding off a cliff, social misfits are left behind to repopulate.

        As to Cominator’s frustration with high-IQ people adopting anti-human ideologies, Spengler’s Bioleninism essay said that smart people do OK under pretty much any social system because they figure out new rules faster than proles can. However painful it may be, change is good when it kills your competition without killing you.

    • The Cominator says:

      I do not know the exact cause (I do NOT think it is strictly hereditary as autists sometimes do manage to have kids and it doesn’t seem to pass on, it may be an in vitro thing) but trust me its real enough. My brain functions well enough for reasoning and analysis but my fine motor skills have also always sucked as badly as my social skills. I do not have any serious head injuries that I know of.

      The Cathedral probably wants to assume a sort of gleichschaltung of autistic education for younger autists because a bunch of autistic 4chan shitposters damaged their legitimacy (autists tend to really really hate deception and a regime based on blatant constant lies is not something they like) over the past decade in a way they have sort of checked for now… but will never forget. I don’t think they’ll be successful but this is more about the regime wanting to coopt a threat.

      The other thing is autists had some chance of scoring chicks really up until the era of modern wokeness but the metoo era of fat lesbian women who won’t even talk to men who don’t seem Jeremy Meeksesque makes it virtually impossible for us unless you want to do my stripper thing

      • alf says:

        Your first criteria if autism is another one I have yet to hear: autists hate lies. Besides the, ahem, self-serving definition 🙃, what category do you think that criteria applies better to: autists, or good men?

        As for the low scoring with chicks: I could just as easily argue that autists, with their strong frame and disregard for social norms, should easily score chicks. Again, what category does the criteria better apply to: autists, or low-T men?

        • The Cominator says:

          Its not just hating lies its being slow to grasp even the concept of deception.

          High functioning autists/spergs (and this was true in my case) don’t even grasp the concept of saying anything other than exactly what is in your head later than most children. I’m not sure if the issue is so much repetition as obsession. I’ll go through phases of being obsessed with certain topics most of which aren’t useful. I’ll be obsessed with WWII for a number of months and be obsessed with the Star Wars expanded universe in a few other months (I have also been obsessed with discovering the Cathedral’s command and control function but other than finding bits and pieces I have failed). Fatally this kind of thinking also tends to give spergs oneitis with girls although after getting burned bad enough over the years this gets cured…

        • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

          As an autist myself, it’s not that hate lies, but that we have to use patterns and logic to maneuver through social situations. Lies are inconsistencies that make it difficult to socialize. They disrupt the pattern recognition that lets us function. It feels like an attack, so the result is that it causes us to view liars as unpredictable and dislike them. It’s not as if autists never lie or manipulate. Its that when people say one thing and do another it’s upsetting and confusing.

          • The Cominator says:

            We are slow to grasp the concept of deception at least i was…

            • Ace says:

              I was considered quite gullible as a kid. I’m still quite gullible but I’m now deep suspicious that everyone trying to manipulate me and I tend to be very untrusting. I find discerning truth from lies is based on talking to people is very difficult and mentally painful.

              I bought my first house not too long ago and the most difficult thing about home ownership is hiring people do work on the house. I have an extremely difficult time dealing with people and due to a total lack of hand eye coordination I absolutely suck at doing my own handy work. Trust is hard and it’s worse when you’ve pre-conditioned to being lied to and abused by people who know how to lie well.

              One of the things I love the most of about NRx is the emphasis on telling the truth. Speaking the truth increases in an age of lies gives me hope for the future.

    • Ace says:

      They lumped in autism with Aspergers with autism back in 2013 because people with Aspergers tend to be unusually gifted while being social stilted and people with autism have brain damage that makes them retarded. The goal was to make people with Aspergers feel broken.

      https://www.webmd.com/brain/autism/mental-health-aspergers-syndrome

      I was born with what used to be called Aspergers and I’ve met other people with it and we as a group tend to be incredibly obsessed with small areas of life, repeat ourselves endlessly, and annoy the shit out of people who don’t have it. Social situations are hell with large groups of people and I can never read what people are thinking unless I spend a great deal of time around them. All the normal social ques and telling polite lies tend to be missed. This is not always a bad thing, ignoring social ques with women works great as long as you don’t worry about if you are violating social norms or not.

      For instance I was once at a small house party where the entertainment was a belly dancer. Of course everyone wanted to bang her after she got done dancing but she was refusing drinks looked like she was getting ready to go. So someone asked her age and she said guess. I guessed 30 because it was funny(she was 22). For the rest of the party this chick was glued to my arm. I’d negged her when I’d never heard of the concept of negs, all because I didn’t consider the social construct that you don’t remind women that the wall is coming.

      At the same time people with Aspergers are often very intelligent in some areas of life. I’m that way with software engineering, general logic, and mathematics to a lesser degree. I’m around 20-30 IQ points smarter than anyone in my family. My guess is Aspergers is a brain recombination that overwrites sections of social instincts with more generalized intelligence capacity. You’ve got more room to learn but basic social interactions are not automatic.

      • The Cominator says:

        “I was born with what used to be called Aspergers and I’ve met other people with it and we as a group tend to be incredibly obsessed with small areas of life, repeat ourselves endlessly, and annoy the shit out of people who don’t have it. Social situations are hell with large groups of people and I can never read what people are thinking unless I spend a great deal of time around them. All the normal social ques and telling polite lies tend to be missed. This is not always a bad thing, ignoring social ques with women works great as long as you don’t worry about if you are violating social norms or not.

        For instance I was once at a small house party where the entertainment was a belly dancer. Of course everyone wanted to bang her after she got done dancing but she was refusing drinks looked like she was getting ready to go. So someone asked her age and she said guess. I guessed 30 because it was funny(she was 22). For the rest of the party this chick was glued to my arm. I’d negged her when I’d never heard of the concept of negs, all because I didn’t consider the social construct that you don’t remind women that the wall is coming.”

        My experience is that chicks like our lack of conformity to unwritten rules until they realize we’re not alpha just socially retarded.

        Strippers and “dancers” like me too…

        • Ace says:

          >My experience is that chicks like our lack of conformity to unwritten rules until they realize we’re not alpha just socially retarded.

          Yep. I’ve had some great moments of seduction, but once the girl figures out I’m socially awkward things go poorly. When is why I tend to do the thug game. It’s easier to maintain that frame. Of course there was that one girl who wanted me to beat her and of course I was accused of beating her when I refused to do so. That was a hard lesson.

          • The Cominator says:

            Yeah don’t do thug game because you tend to end up in actual thug situations… never had a girl want to beat her only spank her very hard.

            I have all the same traits you said you unintentionally negged the dancer… never had any luck negging. Strippers seem to like so called horny nice guy game in a way more normal women dont. They DO like being called sluts and whores when things escalate to a certain point… in a dominant way not a judgemental one.

            • Ace says:

              >I have all the same traits you said you unintentionally negged the dancer… never had any luck negging.

              Negging works best for me when I treat the girl like my bratty little sister, which is what I was doing with belly dancer. Of course I didn’t realize it was nuclear level neg (this girl was hot as fuck and even my player friend was getting no where with her). If I think intentionally about negging, it doesn’t work for me.

              • jim says:

                They can detect when negging is forced and artificial.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Can you describe how to do it properly in detail?

                • Pooch says:

                  Search the red pill subreddit for it.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I’ve read about it but I’ve never seen good detailed instructions on how to do it properly for social retards such as myself.

                • Pooch says:

                  https://heartiste.net/the-subtle-art-of-the-insidious-neg/

                  They work best on very hot women who are used to being beta orbited. All you’re doing is establishing that your value is higher. Unnecessary when it’s already established your value is already higher.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Some of the information may also be downright wrong as well, I can speak with good authority on stripper game and the typical stripper game post says don’t get a lap dance…

                  Wrong make her qualify and comply a bit then get a lap dance and escalate. If you want to screw a girl above your normal smv and game skill at low (as opposed to no charge) stripper game is for you but she just isnt going to do a guy she just met at her work for free and without getting a dance niggers are always trying to get them to do this… not with much success.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Okay pooch good list i think in the spirit of that list the word i would use is “innocent”…

                • Ace says:

                  > All you’re doing is establishing that your value is higher.

                  Negs are not the only way to establish that. I once plucked a women’s large straw hat from her head and put it on during a bus ride back to the hotel at a conference in DC. She was mildly outraged but by grabbing the hat I demonstrated higher value than her and I turned it into game, which she loved. Having the frame that you’re better than her is really useful.

                  Oddly I hadn’t even spoken to her before I stole the hat. It just felt like a funny thing to do and I did it. Maybe she was sending me signals and I reacted to them, or maybe I decided I wanted to bang her and I ignored the normal social rules and focused on what was fun.

      • alf says:

        The majority of my friends are socially retarded in one way or the other. It is much rarer to find a man who is socially savvy than one who is not.

        As for the endless repetition: Not 100% sure about this one, but I am typing this in between my kid demanding I fetch a ball after he throws it behind the tv, over and over and over. If I stop fetching the ball, he gets angry, so perhaps he shows signs of autism. But it seems to me that for many men, an interest in a subject, bordering on obsession, is what allows us to become proficient in that subject, and in the end rightfully begets respect.

      • G.T. Chesterton says:

        They lumped in autism with Aspergers with autism back in 2013 because people with Aspergers tend to be unusually gifted while being social stilted and people with autism have brain damage that makes them retarded. The goal was to make people with Aspergers feel broken.

        Around 15 years ago my mom flew out, and decided she had “some news” to tell me. A local nurse friend of hers has a kid with aspergers/autism, and she had observed me over the years and diagnosed me as “high-functioning aspergers”. Mom said she had some papers in her suitcase to give me later.

        Well that was a bummer. I thought about it, and it made sense. Like my slight compulsion to count the spokes on alloy wheels while at a red light. Not keeping record of it, but if i happened to look at a wheel, or some pattern on a wall, and wasn’t thinking about anything else at the time, I would count the spokes. That was in the Rainman spectrum. Other traits matched as well.

        We met with her friend, who explained some things. At some point I cracked a joke and she said “That was funny. It’s very rare for aspies to have a sense of humor, so more evidence you are high-functioning.” Half hour later, her 17-ish son comes downstairs to find two invaders still occupying his living room, and blurts out something like “A home is for family, not for outsiders.” Apparently he’d been hiding in his room the whole time waiting for us to leave. But that was another Oh Shit momemt. I also get that feeling of invasion when unexpected guests – even ones I like – show up. I would never blurt out what he did, rather just tolerate their presence in some degree of discomfort. Still, I was a bit worried about my “condition”.

        The day she flew back home, mom gave me those photocopied, yellow-highlighted articles to read. It was replete with stuff like “aspergers sufferers will, given the wrong flavor ice cream, scream and flail their arms and smack their heads”. Just outlandish crap you’d only see in a mental ward, and not even in a movie about mental patients because it’s too absurd.

        I threw that shit in the trash and never seriously considered it again. I would liken it to the Lead Paint Chip scam that blacks use, but I don’t think Whites have ever been fellow-white enough to monetize Aspergers Grift. If used to keep White kids out of diversitized classrooms, then more power to ’em, but I suspect it’s just a self-appointed Victimhood Badge for mothers.

  4. Debian Dev says:

    The Debian Project’s vote on Richard M. Stallman (RMS) is arguably the single broadest-based response among actual open-source developers outside the Free Software Foundation (FSF) proper to the imbroglio that heads the thread. At this writing, 387 votes are in from (as of the last time the Project’s secretary published a count) approximately 1011 eligible voters. This represents somewhat heavier a voting turnout than usual.

    For information, I have not counted, but believe that about 20 percent of the eligible voters reside in the United States as I do (and as RMS does, as well). The rest mostly reside in (listed in order of prevalence) the European Union, Britain and Latin America, but excepting negro sub-Saharan Africa, there are a few almost everywhere.

    There has been some publicly visible discussion among developers of the desirability of breaking precedent and concealing the individual votes of the voting developers. As far as I know, the secretary has made no final determination regarding concealment, so we’ll see what happens. If the secretary follows precedent, after all (and if I had to guess, I would guess that he will), then results will be published at 23:59 UTC tonight.

    Upon reflection of the discussion here, unfortunately, it would not wholly surprise me if the publication of results were followed by the purge of dissenting developers here predicted, especially if RMS should lose the vote by a wide margin. Even if it doesn’t, the Revolutionary pressure continues to build. Meanwhile, a purge of Debian on behalf of RMS would be ironic insofar as the Debian Project has, for the past 20 years, been the principal redoubt of open-source developers who were never especially keen on RMS in the first place; so it’s not as though the purged would be rabid RMS partisans. Debian would be getting rid, rather, of men who have kept RMS pretty consistently at a discreet arm’s length since long before the present Revolution burst onto the scene but who, despite that, still think the present anti-RMS witch hunt absurd.

    The situation is not static. Several pieces are moving on this chessboard at once. Most of the movement lies out of my field of view.

    So we’ll see. 23:59 UTC tonight.

    • That Would Be Telling says:

      Thanks for the updates. Since I fully abandoned Microsoft Debian or lately the downstream Ubuntu distribution, first due to it adopting systemd later, now due to some 3rd party software that only officially supports it, has been my daily driver for more than a decade.

      If a purge commences and it hits too many of the people who handle security patching, might this entire ecosystem quickly become nonviable for a whole lot of users?

      • Debian Dev says:

        If a purge commences and it hits too many of the people who handle security patching, might this entire ecosystem quickly become nonviable for a whole lot of users?

        This is a good question. Any answer I gave would be pure, totally unfounded speculation.

        Debian has expelled a smattering of unproductive pests over the years, but never as far as I recall anyone who was managing significant aspects of the Project such as security patches. Indeed, Debian has arguably erred in the opposite direction, letting the occasional squatter impede progress in his area of responsibility for years, judging it preferable to afford the squatter time to take the hint that he should step aside, rather than to force him out.

        So a purge would be something new.

    • jim says:

      In the takeover of the science fiction writers association,an enormous number of writers who had never published a book voted

      The number of Debian developers voting seem strangely large. What proportion of these developers have ever written a line of code.

      • Debian Dev says:

        The number of Debian developers voting seem strangely large. What proportion of these developers have ever written a line of code?

        Most, I believe. There are 50,000 software packages in Debian. Each package has a build configuration (debian/rules, which overlays the upstream developer’s Makefile or CMakefile or whatever), an installation script, and a bug tracker. The configuration and script do not write themselves: as you know if you’ve configured unpackaged software to work on even a single system, that generally takes a fair bit of fiddling to get right. Meanwhile, bugs have to be patched, upstream preferably, but within Debian if not upstream.

        By no means are all packages actively maintained: some are in good enough shape and are useful enough to a small but nonzero number of users that they linger, untouched, in Debian for years; but their configurations and scripts still had to have been prepared by somebody, sometime.

        Let’s try a (literally) random sample of Debian Developers whose votes the secretary’s web site reports as having been already recorded. No doxxing/namefaggotry, but if anyone does not care for my random sample, then he can go to construct his own.

        Dev #1: no code I can see.

        Dev #2: massive quantities of code, including code uploaded during 2021, mostly in natural-language processing and Perl modules. (This dev puts me to shame.)

        Dev #3: not much since 2015, nothing I see since 2018, but this dev was a significant contributor in the early years of the Project, mostly in filesystems and network infrastructure.

        Dev #4: massive quantities of code, including code uploaded during 2021, in several areas including JavaScript infrastructure, multimedia, and 3-D graphics rendering.

        Dev #5: modest quantities of code, including code uploaded during 2021, all apparently having to do with banking and transfers of funds.

        It’s too small a random sample to be fairly representative, I suppose, but there it is, for what it’s worth. All five in the sample happen to be male.

        My sense is that the 1000 or so Developers probably consist roughly of

        * 100 who have never written code but are held to have contributed in other significant ways;
        * 300 who write code and usually vote;
        * 100 who write code and do not vote;
        * 100 who used to write code but still usually vote;
        * 400 inactive, who no longer write code and no longer vote, but have not yet been retired from the Project’s roster.

      • Debian Dev says:

        Sorry, Jim. I didn’t get the thrust of your question the first time.

        Most of Debian’s translators, graphic artists and so on lack voting rights, but some that have put in large numbers of hours over the years have won voting rights. There is one specific area in which voting rights have been granted to a small handful of women who do little in my observation but cause trouble and siphon off Project funds. (Well, I could speculate that they do something else, but that’s not fit for family consumption so I’ll say no more of it. I lack both curiosity and specifics, nor has anyone in the Project asked my opinion, anyway, so it’s not for me to say.)

        If a translator does just a little coding, that seems to open the path to voting rights more easily.

        I have never let any of that bother me much, admittedly. No org is perfect. Debian development has been a lot of fun, and I like the people.

    • Debian Dev says:

      A total of 420 votes were cast. Condorcet voting results are hard to summarize in a single sentence but, boiling it down, the upshot is that FSF and RMS seem to have won, 197 to 196.

      However, only 77 took an unambiguously pro-RMS stance. The balance merely insist that Debian remain neutral and mind its business, so from that standpoint the result is

      * 77 pro-RMS,
      * 120 neutral,
      * 196 anti-RMS.

      • jim says:

        I am surprised.

        This is not at all what I expected.

        I now expect that, like the election of Trump, it will be treated as an intolerable and outrageous anomaly, and decisive action will in due course be taken to prevent a recurrence.

        • Debian Dev says:

          I have no idea what to expect, so remain a step behind you as far as I know. Excepting devs from places like Russia and China, whose English is weaker and, thus, who participate less in list discussions (yet still vote), you got the social dynamics right.

          I hold no particular brief for or against RMS, as you know, but the 196 who would have unpersoned RMS for using normal English pronouns and finding women attractive make no sense to me. I have known many of those guys a long time. Most of them were never so surly as some are now. It’s weird.

          • linker says:

            They are buck broken. Men like us can witness nearly unlimited amounts of horror and insanity and laugh in the face of it. Some men get totally buck broken and become a pathetic slave licking up their master’s vomit like a BDSM girl. Most men are somewhere in between. It probably has to do with child abuse, circumcision, spanking, strict striver parents. Trains the brain to submit to violence. That explains why they were more chill before. There has been increased threats of violence and psychological abuse from Moloch so they become increasingly subservient to Moloch because their parents trained them to do as they are told under threat of violence and psychological abuse.

          • jim says:

            > would have unpersoned RMS for using normal English pronouns and finding women attractive make no sense to me. I have known many of those guys a long time. Most of them were never so surly as some are now. It’s weird.

            If RMS is high status, they are not.

            They have been disrespected.

          • jim says:

            > Excepting devs from places like Russia and China, whose English is weaker and, thus, who participate less in list discussions (yet still vote), you got the social dynamics right

            It is not that their English is weaker. It is that Russia and China have nukes and are outside the American Hegemony.

            This is the reason that their social dynamics is different.

      • Debian Dev says:

        I have made too many comments in the thread to assume that many are still reading, so let me add just one more thing and let it rest.

        The result of 196 left versus 120 center versus 77 right is consistent with attitudes and personalities I have observed in the Debian Project during the past 15 or 20 years. The attitudes are sincere. The personalities are real. The neutrals mostly seem to agree with the leftists in substance, but don’t want Debian politicized.

        The difference is that, 15 or 20 years ago, the left got along with the right. The right was generally free to discuss its rightism briefly in moderation. I seldom did, but some did. I remember a young dev from Chile at the annual conference in 2007 or 2008 who, while a pickup soccer game was forming, mentioned in English to the devs gathering to play that he was a “conservative, for Pinochet.” It sounds corny but I don’t know enough about Chilean politics to comment other than to report that he blurted it out with a serious look on his brow (in response to what, I have no idea) and yet, the Debian Project having more than the usual quotient of eccentrics, anyway, no one seemed much to care. Pinochet was dead in any event.

        The incident left an impression because I would vaguely have imagined the first Pinochet man I met to be wearing golden epaulettes or carrying a swagger stick or riding a horse or a helicopter or something, instead of being a programmer kid in exercise shorts.

        I remember an older dev from Germany in 2005 who showed me a verse in an English-language Bible for some obscure reason. Even cornier? Well, it happened, at the end of a session, standing in a noisy meeting room, while other devs were coming and going. A nice guy, he happened to be someone who had earlier connected me with someone else over IRC for help regarding a misbehaving library call, so I already knew him a little. I never found out for certain what point he was trying to make with the Bible, though, nor do I remember the verse, except that neither he nor the Pinochet supporter suffered any adverse consequences. Everyone remained relaxed.

        Those were different days.

        • iu says:

          > and yet, the Debian Project having more than the usual quotient of eccentrics,

          I suppose an English Debian developer might have been equally startled to encounter an American Debian developer who was a Reagan Republican and would have thought him some kind of eccentric. A Chilean Pinochet conservative is no more surprising, eccentric, or unusual than an American Reagan Republican.

          You are inside a bubble of false consensus, and have been for quite some time. Because people have been curbing their tongues for quite some time.

          > Those were different days

          No they were not. The disease was marginally less advanced than it now is.

          If someone can push their brand of holiness on a developer mailing list without being ridiculed and told to shut up, you have a problem.

          If someone can push their brand of holiness on any list, and be genuinely shocked and outraged when someone with a different brand of holiness pushes back, you have a considerably bigger problem.

          If someone can push their brand of holiness on any list, and no one with a different brand of holiness dares push back, you have a very serious problem indeed.

          If you thought a Chilean Pinochet conservative was some kind of eccentric, you already had the very serious problem indeed.

  5. The Original OC says:

    Jim, you have often said that French leftist descends from the False Popes of Avignon. Unlike Independentism, Lutheranism, Rabbinic Judaism, and the rest, I am unfamiliar with the ideology of the Avignon Papacy. Can you recommend any material on this topic?

    I have read the second edition of “English Society 1688-1832,” and can confirm that it is a sound description of the destruction of the Anglican order by Whigs, and that it is sympathetic to the Anglicans and to the society they created.

    Whether it is less so than the first edition, I cannot say.

  6. RMIV says:

    a genetics researcher i quite like expounds upon data that can be summarized here as Jim fucking called it

    not quite like i imagined but there it is

    https://youtu.be/8FIpUhQMw5A

    • linker says:

      The Alternative Hypothesis is also great. He comprehensively proves that IQ is real and genetic and thoroughly debunks every argue against it ever made. It helped red pill me because it removed every possible rationalization from my brain so I had to either be red pilled or choose to be a liar, and I chose the former.

  7. Ace says:

    People who donated to Kyle’s defense fund have been doxed:

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/apr/16/us-police-officers-public-officials-crowdfunding-website-data-breach

    Campaign is already underway to purge them.

  8. onyomi says:

    Second only to the medical tyranny, the worst development of the past couple of years seems to be that whites are literally not allowed to defend their homes and neighborhoods against blacks in any way, shape, or form, other than simply fleeing and letting them destroy things (even calling the police may result in your being targeted for harassments and/or be ineffective). But because the incidents are (for now) still isolated, it seems like the average white American doesn’t understand the threat this represents. Is there hope for people ever standing up to this sort of thing even in the form of e.g. a counter protest to the sort of protest that we saw recently in South Carolina. Like, where are this guy’s neighbors?

    • Pooch says:

      Anarcho-tyranny at the fullest.

    • Karl says:

      Sure there is hope. People are at present adhering to the unofficial state religion. As soon as they stop believing in it, they’ll stand up.

      As the state religion is a death cult, it will sooner or later self-destruct and be replaced by another religion.

      Anyway, the problem is not limited to whites in America. It is not much different in western Europe. Mayor difference is that western Europe already has an alternative relgion to the present progressive death cult, namely Islam. That alternative has its disadvantages, of course, but Muslims are not allowing niggers to destroy their property.

    • Pooch says:

      Best you can do now is get the fuck away from
      Africans at all cost. Too many Africans accosting people in your neighborhood? Time to move.

      • onyomi says:

        At this point it seems like even suburbs aren’t good enough because an African can “jog” into any random neighborhood, even if a lot of them don’t live there. At the same time big corps (Blackstone) are supposedly buying up rural housing, presumably to rent to replace single family homes for rural whites with apartments for refugees shipped there?

        • Pooch says:

          As the percentage of black population of a town goes up, criminality rises exponentially. From my understanding this town and the Georgia jogger town, although individual nice neighborhoods of the victims, black percentage of the town is still approaching 40%. Way too high. You’re playing with fire living around so many blacks even if your culder sac is white. US African percentage is still only 13% so moving away is still viable. I’m not sure what the right percentage is but anything over 15% and I’m feeling uneasy about it.

          It’s the Hispanics that are getting harder and harder to move away from, but they aren’t nearly the problem of blacks (at least yet) because of the compounded effects of genetics AND holiness.

          • linker says:

            Hispanics will not go around killing whites before they go around killing blacks. They are more rational than hateful.

            • Pooch says:

              Exactly. Hispanics aren’t nearly the threat to your safety as blacks are. They are the extreme outlier. Having said that, living around Mexicans is going to resemble living in Mexico. Expect trash to be everywhere.

              • Ace says:

                Wetbacks will steal from you and rape your wife and kids. You don’t want want them around. The difference is they can be deterred to some degree, blacks cannot without lethal violence.

                https://www.foxnews.com/us/texas-father-kills-man-trying-to-sexually-assault-daughter-police-say

                Secondly Hispanics have not been weaponized by the left yet. When they’re ready they will use them to mass murder whites. Niggers naturally murder anyone who doesn’t look like them, but Hispanics will eventually be used for the same purpose by the left.

                • Pooch says:

                  Secondly Hispanics have not been weaponized by the left yet. When they’re ready they will use them to mass murder whites. Niggers naturally murder anyone who doesn’t look like them, but Hispanics will eventually be used for the same purpose by the left.

                  I don’t think the left could ever elevate Hispanics above blacks in their holiness ranking at this point. They are locked into the mid-tier of the racial caste system because of too much white-admixture. They’ll need to mass import more sub-saharan Africans if they want a Detroit-style ethnic cleansing of the entire US.

                  If trends continue unopposed, I do see the regime’s security forces being replaced by a supermajority of Hispanics though, in much the same way the late Roman Empire’s army was full of Germanic barbarians. Like the Germancis, they’ll eventually realize they’re on the same side as the cartels and segments of the army will merge with them.

                • Ace says:

                  They don’t have to evaluate them above blacks, all they have to do is give Hispanic gangs free reign to target whites.

                • Pooch says:

                  The hispanic gangs aren’t as stupid as the blacks to be indoctrinated to hate whites in the same way. They have their own form of cohesion, the old gods of Mexico. They’ll just kill everyone equally.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The left needed Hispanics back when votes mattered now its up in the air… they are not monolithic either i tended to hate them in Massachusetts but in Florida they ain’t so bad… hard to predict how things will go.

                • Pooch says:

                  Trump picked up what 30-40% of them? Hey I’m fine fighting beside them if that’s what’s needed to win.

      • linker says:

        Impossible to live near blacks as a man because you will be forced to kill them in self defense and you will go to prison. Don’t fall for the trap of moving to a lily white libshit town in Maine or Minnesota or Washington though. White liberals are as dangerous as blacks in the long term because your neighbors will scheme behind your back to get you out into a concentration camp. Also avoid big cities obviously because they will turn into meat grinders as soon as the system receives a setback.

        • Pooch says:

          White liberals are as dangerous as blacks in the long term because your neighbors will scheme behind your back to get you out into a concentration camp.

          Nah, like Moldbug says, in the end it boils down to racial conflict. White liberals are dangerous because eventually they’ll feel guilty and import Africans and non-whites into your middle-class neighborhood (but obviously not into their zillion dollar elite gated community).

          • Pooch says:

            Although as things stand currently, I wouldn’t live in a 100% white shitlib place like Maine or Washington because of the China Flu insanity. I’d rather go to a place like Florida and trade a little bit of diversity for freedom from the covid bullshit.

            • The Cominator says:

              Blacks are a proxy guerilla force for leftist whites entirely. If there are no leftists blacks would not be too much a problem.

              Imagine South Afrika in a world without leftists, the whites would rule it (unless it got invaded) for 10000 years.

            • Ace says:

              Lots of blacks in eastern Washington. Sooner or later leftists import them to formally white areas.

          • linker says:

            *gets put into an anti-vaxxer FEMA concentration camp*

            Well at least I lived in a racially pure aryan neighborhood!

    • The Cominator says:

      Depends on where you are (for now the Feds may step in) there is a reason that Florida had no riots despite being a very very minority heavy state. You are very much allowed to defend yourself here (also race relations in Florida despite prog efforts are very good relative to New England which despite all the leftists pieties in practice different racial groups get along far worse).

      • Pooch says:

        Florida did have riots in the blue cities, but It’s not entirely riots that are the problem. It’s blacks randomly wandering into your neighborhood creating problems and when you tell them to get lost and call the cops, they come and arrest you for it.

        • linker says:

          You say the conflict is purely racial then invent a scenario where white cops put you in a white jail.

          • Ace says:

            You glow in the dark.

          • Ace says:

            You ever hear of Kyle Rittenhouse?

            • linker says:

              The guy who killed 3 white guys and is getting sent to prison by the white cops and white government? Great example proving my point nigger. I will never simp for white liberals and do the wignat move of saying they are perfect angels who are just manipulated to do bad things by Jew mind control rays and 13% of the population with 85 IQ.

              • Pooch says:

                I would argue the violence against him is still communal violence. Kyle was attacked by the white allies of rioting blacks. If no rioting blacks, no need for Kyle Rittenhouse to be there.

          • Pooch says:

            The conflict is BDH-OV, what I meant is that the violence between the groups inevitability is going to be racial violence (Moldbug calls it communal violence).

            The white shitlib places like a lot of New England are actually quite safe and nice. Boston is a beautiful city simply because there’s not many blacks there. Pre-covid, the worst you’d have to deal with were maybe high taxes and pride flags. Post-covid, they are still nice places but it’s going to be increasingly unbearable with covid restrictions. Same thing is happening in Canada.

      • Ace says:

        >You are very much allowed to defend yourself here (also race relations in Florida despite prog efforts are very good relative to New England which despite all the leftists pieties in practice different racial groups get along far worse).

        The Zimmerman trial is a big part of this. The left made a big push to make black criminals sacrosanct from self defense laws and lost.

  9. Noname says:

    Just a few observations on Antifa:

    Antifa was present in the United States protests back in 2008 under the label of Anarchists. Even then it was observed there were undercover operatives in their movement.

    Mark Bray has written a handbook for their adherents that you can find on archive.org called Antifa Handbook. It is written as a quasi history of authoritarian governments that were antisemitic with advice on rioting and property damage.

    Locally here, there are four primary Antifa leaders. The primary leader claims to be a freelance journalist and has frequent contact with the FBI in which they ask her about any threats made towards Antifa.

    The secondary leader is a white male who claims to be is ex-military Intel. I tried to verify this through the AF OSI but they seemed more interested with me than Antifa. This individual also attends Law School here locally which I did verify.

    Following 1/6, I have observed multiple Antifa accounts turned FBI informant in a desperate attempt to rat out Trump supporters.

    Recently I was watching a Unicorn Riot stream where a police Captain smiles at the cameraman saying they follow their work while at the same time arresting other journalists. Unicorn Riot is often linked to by various Antifa groups and seems to be working with them.

    Antifa ramped up their activity just as normal citizens tried to protest the lockdown. Antifa also shows up at any free speech protest to counter protest.

    I observed a local protest here through one of their live streams and the local police department was standing right in front of them very relaxed as if acting out some live photo op.

    There’s more but overall I’ve laid out my case for the following conclusion. And that is that Antifa is not some grass roots movement as we are led to believe. They are clearly working in concert with federal and state government. The goal of which is to create chaos, prevent real dialog and stifle any grass roots movement to address government overreach through intimidation.

    • orochimaru says:

      thank you captain obvious.
      (y’all think this guy is a fed?)

      • jim says:

        we shall see.

        More data needed. If a fed, will unintentionally leak more data soon enough. They glow in the dark.

        • Noname says:

          I’m trying to expose Antifa as a fraud.

          Earlier you were supporting the Soros theory. I’ve shown there’s more to it.

          • jim says:

            There is always more to it. Any account of reality is a necessarily a simplification. That antifa is a fraud is not news here, hence the the response to your news was not altogether breathless.

            It is entirely obvious that Antifa has more central direction and state sponsorship than it pretends. The question then is, where is the center?

            • Noname says:

              Soros bankrolling politicians makes him the center?

              They are being contacted by FBI directly. Todays FBI isn’t the ’50s Hollywood suit and tie. I’ve seen them at job fairs. They are diverse millennial types, fat sloppy, uppity and edgy. Lots of woke white females.

              No, I believe Antifa is an FBI black project funded by your tax dollars with the intend of disrupting your First Amendment rights and allowing biggov to roll over you. A lot are college students with government backed loans waiting to be forgiven. And, I wouldn’t be surprised if they had some sort of revolving door program.

              • jim says:

                Soros funding Antifa makes him the center. Soros is the State Department money pipeline, the cutout. He funds stuff the USG wants funded, but does not want its fingerprints directly on.

                Maybe the FBI is in charge, but not necessarily directly funding.

              • linker says:

                Gates, Schwab, and Soros are objectively the center.

                • Ace says:

                  Gates, Schwab, and Soros are mailmen who drop the off the money where their masters order them. The question is, who’s the masters?

  10. The Cominator says:

    https://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/royal-navy-reports-russia-closing-5304504 Russia closing off the black sea… not good. Putin obviously thinks war risk now is very high with our insane government.

    • Pooch says:

      May god grant Putin the strength and wisdom to smite the demonic forces stacked against him.

    • suones says:

      Geographical autism alert!

      Technically, Russia has not closed the Black Sea but the Sea of Azov. The only country with the physical capability to close the Black Sea is Turkey (that is NATO).

    • Ace says:

      The portions of the deep state want war with Russia and who’s ever controlling Biden is trying to avoid it. So when the deep state push Russia, Russia pushes back and Biden caves.

  11. Noname says:

    Jim has pointed out that whites are wolf to whites. I ran across a similar Solzhenitsyn statement in 200 Years Together. It seems that when some whites are accused of being tribal, they expend extra effort to prove they are not to the extent of throwing their own under the bus.

    There is more than a culture war going on here. It is tribal. Noel Ignatiev best described it when he said the task is to organize minorities to end the legacy of whiteness. That is what we are seeing.

    Tucker points out the hypocrisy of the other side, but they already know and don’t care. There are no more people to be red pilled. If a strong leader does not emerge soon, it will be over.

  12. linker says:

    Just me or is the right becoming vaccinated against left wing smears? Usually when The Cathedral targets a limping conservative they break ranks and he gets eaten, but it seems like the attacks are not working very well this week.

    1. The front page of reddit is all stories about how Matt Gaetz has pedophile rape orgies in the Bahamas with harems of 15 year old girls. Wall to wall coverage in the media strongly implying. All republicans are defending him. Fox News is defending him. He seems in high spirits. Republicans are retweeting the epic Project Veritas video of a CNN director saying “Matt Gaetz is too much of a threat we had to use propaganda to destroy him.” Seems like Republicans love that guy now. Maybe we will soon be allowed to take harems of 15 year olds on trips to the Bahamas?

    2. Tucker’s Odyssey
    Day 1: calls Asa Hutchinson a child abusing faggot cuck <—- media starts sucking off Hutchinson a lil bit
    Day 2: names the white genocide <—- wall to wall coverage on all networks coordinated by the ADL calling him a white supremacist
    Day 3: NAMES THE JEW, Charlie Kirk also names the Jew <—- media in fucking hysterics
    Day 4: Says the capitol siege was AWESOME, HER NAME WAS ASHLI BABBIT SAY HER NAME <—- journalists hyperventilating

    Usually when a Fox host says something slightly red pilled the Fox executives try to shut it down, but he just went off for 4 days in a row and seems like he is under no duress and will face no recourse.

    • The Cominator says:

      Definitely a positive development the court packing and filbuster elimination push seems to have redpilled some of these cucks but it wont’ matter unless the right develops the capacity for organized violence.

    • onyomi says:

      My cynical side says GOP is great on the issues when they’re out of power, but imainstreaming of such ideas is surely positive.

    • Pooch says:

      Definitely positive developments, but the Murdochs’ line in the stand is still race which is a good proxy of where the Republican elite stand. Tucker can’t yet mention white replacement but he can mention everything but, which wasn’t the case a year ago. We need the Overton Window to keep nudging to the right until the term “White Replacement” is acceptable.

    • Ace says:

      It’s weird how boomers like Sundance can’t get past the Marxists it’s all about the money analysis. Companies in general don’t want vaccine passports. Companies are enforce government edict because we’re living under a national socialist government that uses the corporations to enforce it’s will much as the Nazis did.

      • suones says:

        It’s weird how boomers like Sundance can’t get past the Marxists it’s all about the money analysis.

        Almost as if they’re Vaishyas who can’t think of anything apart from “all about the money.” This is what makes them vulnerable to priestly attacks, by Jews or Harvard.

      • Pooch says:

        What I agree with is that we are trending to free and control states. It’s going to come down to states rights, again. I’m starting to think a SERIOUS secession movement could have real elite support with they keep pressing on Covid.

      • Atavistic Morality says:

        But it is in fact about the money, it’s not Marxist analysis, it’s ancient wisdom: birds die for food but humans die for riches. What constitutes Marxist analysis is boiling everything down to economics, which is done by design because Marxism is a priestly attack on merchants utilizing less successful merchants/artisans against their own. Marxists promote the framework that everything boils down to economics, there is only merchants and artisans, like the magician moves the hands to distract you while behind the scenes performs his tricks. But while not everything boils down to economics, because priests and warriors also exist, everything actually does boil down to money or what money represents: benefits.

        Progressive priests promote dissent among the merchants and the artisans to get a cut, they make it so the apple-cart is toppled because when the apples are on the ground and uncontrolled they have created an opportunity for them to take some. They create a conflict based on misrepresentation of facts or simple libel and then claim that they are required to solve this artificially built conflict, for which of course they will be appropriately compensated: this is exactly what the Democrats have been doing for decades and it’s the reason why the holiness spiral itself exists. If you’re a new progressive priest in the block, you’ll need to topple new apple-carts to get your cut, so they started with banking and “looking out for the small guy”, using the small guy as an excuse to defect on the big guy and loot him, then women, then niggers, then faggots, then transsexuals. They actually probably started way before that, in the original fight of federalism vs confederalism, federalism being a very good excuse to ransack the states “on the interests of national unity and protecting the Republic”. You either sell your new snake-oil or you bring an innovation to the old snake-oil, just like the nigger narrative has become increasingly stupid, nonsensical and insane with its development.

        The misrepresentation of the cause and effect by Sundance is either prompted by his intellectual inability and ignorance or because he is a priest selling his own snake-oil. If you’re a priest that wants to replace the other priest, you will very happily keep promoting the framework that let’s you play all your tricks, like the Casino and the house always win, merchants and artisans will keep fighting each other and you will keep getting your cut. But Boomers in general have an instinctual feeling that capitalism is not the problem so they want to defend it, while still being under the effect of priestly narratives which jumble all of it together giving you some very out of touch arguments. They have not known any other education, but that everything boils down to merchants and only merchants exist, they can’t recognize the priest and his tricks.

        But make no mistake, this is about money, the priest wants riches. If he couldn’t make a good living out of defecting on you and everyone else, he wouldn’t, though he is probably also unnecessarily malicious, because of being evil or drunk and insane on his own snake-oil.

        • Ace says:

          >The misrepresentation of the cause and effect by Sundance is either prompted by his intellectual inability and ignorance or because he is a priest selling his own snake-oil.

          I think Suones nailed, Sundance runs a his own grocery store, at least used to. He’s a merchant, thus he sees everything in terms of Merchants.

        • The Cominator says:

          The artisans haven’t been getting a cut since the 1970s…

  13. The Cominator says:

    https://graymirror.substack.com/p/big-tech-has-no-power-at-all

    This is moldings post on big tech I agree with most of it but I find it hard to believe there is no command and control… some glownigger type force targeted Zuckerberg when he wanted to allow free speech on facebook.

    • Pooch says:

      Nah he was getting threats in the press and the courts.

    • Ace says:

      Modly’s full of shit on no command and control. I see it all the time in the press and with online shills.

      It’s interesting seeing how limited his perspective is without understanding religion. Sundance gets closer to the root of the issue with his pictures of people knelling down to BLM than Moldy does.

      • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

        Ironic since his whole Big Idea in the first place was about the reality of command and control behind the illusion of ‘independent voices who all just happen to agree on everything’.

        Not what you could call aging gracefully.

  14. Pooch says:

    Great example of Havel’s greengrocer at work here with Charlie Kirk: https://twitter.com/charliekirk11/status/1382101931380805635

    Charlie Kirk is an establishment cuck Republican and just mindlessly parrots whatever the mainstream GOP party lines are. A year ago he called people racists and anti-semites for tweeting the exact same things. Now that replacement migration is in the mainstream and no longer thoughtcrime (thanks to Tucker’s brilliant monologue) he likely would fail to remember that he thought any different if you asked him what changed.

    Tucker’s monologue: https://twitter.com/ColumbiaBugle/status/1381770500926361603

    • Contaminated NEET says:

      Charlie Kirk is not the greengrocer. He’s the apparatchik back at Party headquarters who decides what posters to send out to all the greengrocers along with their carrots and spinach.

    • The Cominator says:

      I don’t get exactly what was ever so bad about him… he was not a Nevertrumper type.

      Kirk’s flaws were mainly the same bluepilled normalcy bias of Trump himself.

      • Pooch says:

        He is a mirror of the Republican establishment.

      • linker says:

        He tries to get everyone to the right of him cancelled. He has zero right wing values. He advocated for open borders “I think the US should staple green cards to diplomas”.

        I’m not even sure if he supported Trump during the primaries. Trump never advocated for open border “as long as they come here legally!” or tried to cancel anyone to the right of him (besides James Fields and the 1/6 people). Charlie Kirk is one of the many RINO parasites abusing Trump’s senility to get rich quick and undermine his agenda.

        Nick Fuentes collected Kirk’s skull by waging The Groyper War against him.

        • The Cominator says:

          I had barely heard of him until the groyper situation and as far as I can tell looking at him his main function was to try to get so called center right cuckservative types to vote for Trump.

          • Pooch says:

            He barely lifted a finger during stop the steal like the rest of the GOP that’s all you need to know.

  15. Cloudswrest says:

    Roosh on the holiness spiral.

    https://twitter.com/rooshv/status/1381810512124608514

    • linker says:

      He is a holiness spiraller himself. He is also doing some psycho sexual thing where he has already fucked hundreds of white girls, but now he is virtually castrating white men.

      Greetings fellow CHRISTIAN man. I am an ARAB STUD. I have defiled over 200 white girls. I have had one night stands with white girls who are “so drunk they could not walk“, took their virginity, and refused to call them back. I have went about this in such a cruel and heartless manner that you should feel bad, about yourself!

      Even though you are an empathetic white guy who just wants to have some fun and hopefully find a nice girlfriend and then have a wife and kids and not an EVIL ARAB STUD PSYCHOPATH, I am now all of a sudden priest of YOUR religion. Not only that but despite all of my evil deeds, I am much holier than thou. If you have sex, I declare that that is fornication and unholy. Thou must be a castrated incel. If you attempt to have sex, I declare that that is GAME and unholy. I can say that because I have raped 200 white girls, so I am an expert on unholiness and you are just like me if you talk to a hot girl. If thou are a white man thou must not have sex nor reproduce without following my Holy Christian Guidelines. These Holy Christian Guidelines, invented by me, an Arab rapist, basically castrate you and end your bloodline hahahahaha! Well at least you won’t get to HELL! You will die as a white incel cuck and go to heaven, I do declare, inshalla- oops I mean Praise Jesus!

      Roosh is honestly a useless idiot. His only function is browbeating white men into being celibate and mediocre in the name of “holiness”. If you point this out he will “disprove” you by saying you are less holy than Him despite behaving like a complete sadistic psychopath until recently. (And I would argue that he is STILL acting like a sadistic psychopath, but in a much much insidious way.)

      • The Cominator says:

        Roosh is obviously quite sincere I don’t think his change is entirely for the best but hes sincere.

        The problem with Roosh’s new stance is he letting his faith in his new religion override certain aspects of redpill truth.

        Roosh thinks fornicating for fun is sinful and wrong and part of a twisted and satanic social order that it even occurs in such a widespread way okay fine… the problem with his knew stance is he has enough redpill knowledge to know that nowadays you HAVE TO fuck a girl before you court her for marriage and furthermore marriage 1.0 doesn’t legally exist anyway and you need to be a plausibly violent thug to have a chance at it. Girls are extremely flaky with guys they haven’t fucked yet…

        Roosh’s stance should be its okay to practice pickup and casually fucking girls because there is no other way to find one and marry one nowadays. That would be redpilled christian.

        • linker says:

          He’s sincerely a religious zealot who is subconsciously acting out a primal Muslim bride gathering ritual. He’s possessed, just like he was possessed by the need to fuck as many white girls as possible, regardless of whether he even liked them or if they were hot, regardless of their feelings, regardless of making his own life better or making the world a better place for anyone. He doesn’t do any conscious lying, he doesn’t have self control, he is fully under the control of his own trauma and zeal.

          By the way, I’m not a Christian or a theologian. How bad exactly does the Bible say “fornication” is? It’s not one of the Ten Commandments. The Bible also says “be fruitful and multiply”. Could you not make a solid case for prioritizing that over avoiding pre-marital sex and “game”, especially in the world we are living in?

          • The Cominator says:

            Hes a high T Levantine who got tired of sex (and really even if you don’t want to get married you want to MOSTLY bang one slut at a time with maybe occasionally banging another one) with sloots he didn’t own in his old age.

            I do not think he wants multiple sloots he wants one ideal tradbride now as Orthodox Christians do not practice polygamy if he wanted polygamy he would not have become an Orthodox Christian, he may have trouble finding his tradbride if hes not willing to occasionally bang her during a courtship (and he will find that the girl being a trad religious girl will make absolutely zero difference in this fact, women’s limbic sexual circuits are designed to override any rational moral etc considerations).

            • Pooch says:

              Nah he was just a sexless autistic nerd throughout high school/college (like most men) and was tired of not having sex with any of the pretty girls around him. So he dedicated his life to figuring out an autistic way to do it, then realized after many years it wasn’t fulfilling because he didn’t own any of them and remained in a state of perpetual defect/defect.

          • suones says:

            He’s sincerely a religious zealot who is subconsciously acting out a primal Muslim bride gathering ritual.

            That’s the point. In his mind he calls out for Yahweh, but his blood calls for Baphomet. This is the thing with Old Gods — you cannot escape. Obeying your God is like swimming with the current, its easier and you go much farther, much faster. I advocated once, for him to renounce his stupid fixation on his mother’s stupidity and admit what he is — a Muslim. He blocked me lol.

            PS: For any Literalist Fools: Baphomet is absolutely an Old God, far predating Muhammad and at par with Yahweh. His Temple at Mecca is ancient.

            • The Cominator says:

              Islam is an evil universal religion. Their holy scriptures literally say their god is the greatest of decievers ie the father of lies. The christian view of Muhammad was that he was indeed a prophet OF SATAN.

              • suones says:

                You fundamentally misunderstand Baphomet. It only pretends to continuity with Yahweh cultists, but it is in reality an absolutist cult of Ishmaelites’ Moon God, Baphomet. When Yahweh cast Hajira and her child Ishmael out into the desert to die, she found the spirit of the desert, who let them live and found Mecca. That spirit is Baphomet, is very, very powerful, and is older than Iram of the pillars. One of the oldest of Old Gods. Equating him with “Satan” or such Yahwehite foolishness is a fatal mistake.

                My conjecture is that the Cult of Baphomet lay dormant once the fertile Sahara turned to desert, but was revived in spectacular fashion by Muhammad. Only the Templars worked out some of the secrets, but they were purged by Philip.

                Sons of Bharat have been in conflict with Baphometans for a millenium, and the worst mistake one can make is to underestimate Baphomet’s spiritual power (as Prithviraj Chauhan found out).

                • restitutor_orbis says:

                  I would (genuinely) like to hear you elaborate more on your theology here. Who are the Old Gods, what is the source of their power? I have never heard Yahweh discussed from a polytheistic viewpoint before, fascinating.

                • The Cominator says:

                  My favorite passage (and if I were king with a state church it would be a general order that all priests must reference this passage once in EVERY weekly sermon) in the bible is Matthew 15:20 about fruit and false prophets.

                  Islam destroys technological civilization except that it keeps expanding (much like socialism), its own book says that its God is the father of lies… and even worse it prefers cats (yeah I know Jim likes cats) to dogs.

                  Mohammedan moon worship is clearly a form of demon worship. We know it by its fruits and the fact that they follow like communists, progressives and socialists the father of lies.

                • suones says:

                  @restitutor_orbis

                  Credit where credit is due, this isn’t “my” theology. If I see far it is only by standing on the shoulders of giants, chief among whom is my father who gave me the capability to see.

                  OTOH, it is way more complex than can be summarised in a comment. Sons of Aryas have forgotten much of their lore, and even I must reconstruct much that is lost. I intend to make a full series of articles about this, but I’m afraid it must be book-length, for which I have scant time! In other words, the proper thoughts will only form in my mind and I will be granted the opportunity to write them if and when wished by Mother Saraswati, the goddess of learning, eloquence, and music.

            • Pooch says:

              He’s half Armenian which is why he is Armenian Orthodox.

              • suones says:

                This is what he tries to delude himself into believing. But his actions and appetite befit Baphomet. Like a Lion pretending to be a horse lol.

                The thing with Old Gods is, you can’t choose which one you want to follow. Your blood calls out for the god, whether “you” want it or not.

                Most Aryan Yahwehites don’t understand this, because they learn from an early age to suppress the call of their blood and pay obeisance to Yahweh, who is a Semitic, foreign god. Therefore they are much surprised when they find out that the call of blood gets stronger in others. It is very hard for hot-blooded folks to suppress their blood, which calls for sacrifice to the Old God of their Fathers.

                • Jsd says:

                  Then who are we supposed to worship? Thor?

                • jim says:

                  Suones is an old type hindu. He thinks we should worship Odin.

                  But that social technology failed. Worshippers of Odin were defeated by Christianity because their leaders kept murdering each other.

                  And the social technology of the old type Hindus, when old type Christians entered India, was not a significant improvement on that.

                • alf says:

                  That sounds like it could make some sense, not that I’m any expert.

                  My main issue with Roosh is that for a man claiming to know so much about the nature of women, life and whatnot, why is he still a bachelor. Like c’mon man, be the change you want to see.

                  Also he has that curious ‘inability to mention Jim’s name syndrome’, but perhaps that is a namefag thing.

                  But otherwise I like his content. Funny and thoughtful.

                • alf says:

                  So I check Roosh’s blog right after this comment and whaddya know in his latest post he says the earth is no older than 10,000 years. Off into the deep end, I guess.

                  There really is something to the notion that those who resist mainstream nonsense are susceptible to weirdstream nonsense. Whenever I open bitchute, I am bombarded with conspiracy theories and it’s not just the feds. Roosh’s 10,000 year old earth fits the same category.

                • Pooch says:

                  Is that the consensus of the Orthodox Church?

                • The Cominator says:

                  Alf the 1st issue with that is dumb people are more likely to resist propaganda that are obvious lies than status conscious midwits but dumb people beliefs in rejecting demonic lies still remain ignorant and dumb in some ways that just in a way that rejects the lies of the enemy.

                  Now Roosh is not dumb and hes even smarter than your average midwit shitlib though not a genius… I have to think hes just ODing on the God pill too much. He sees the enemy in all his demonic evil and figures the best way to fight that is going full godpill.

                • Pooch says:

                  He sees the enemy in all [it’s] demonic evil and figures the best way to fight that is going full godpill.

                  Completely agree.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The solution to be at peace (I mean after realizing the full evil of the enemy) with yourself without believing delusions like 7000 year old earth or something is reconciling yourself that the righteous goal is the COMPLETE EXTERMINATION of the enemy.

                  When you accept that the only righteous path is the full extermination of all socialists, progressives, communists, feminists and muslims and all other children of the father of lies you no longer need to endorse delusions to be at peace.

                  Those who willfully rejected truth in such an extreme way are of their father the devil… thou shalt not suffer a leftist to live Deus Vult. The right needs to take the Suharto pill. The mass murder of 10s of millions of leftists is not evil at all it is the most righteous thing in the world.

                • Pooch says:

                  The mass murder of 10s of millions of leftists is not evil at all it is the most righteous thing in the world.

                  Give it up man. How many times are you espouse that nonsense? No one here agrees, including Jim.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I think the Shadowed Knight (relucantly) came to agree with me.

                  If you’re not part of the Final Solution you’re part of the problem :D.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Lets meme it to be sexy

                  https://ibb.co/N1LTCNq

                  https://ibb.co/pw9qYr9

                • Pooch says:

                  Yeah I’m going to kill half my family. I’d rather join Antifa and lead them into your house to piss on your corpse.

                • linker says:

                  Depth squads for every single person complicit in the decline of civilization!!! Except le BASED arch-Vaishya Jeff Bezos who was forced to fund the Washington Post!11

                • The Cominator says:

                  Your family members who supported Biden will cheer loudly when you are taken away and as the purity spiral gets worse (if it gets there) as they themselves are taken away.

                  What loyalty do you really owe them if they are still a sincere leftist at this point… or are willing to go along with it more than the bare minimum under coercion with threat of immediate consequences (this I can forgive but no more than this). Understand that your leftist family members will pass their own kids through the fire to Moloch. Fuck them.

                • linker says:

                  Jeff Bezos sits atop the golden Vaishya Throne, looking out up on his vast estate, contemplating. He sheds a single tear for Pooch’s family. “Damn it all!” he thinks, “why weren’t they strong enough to fight back against The Cathedral!”

                • The Cominator says:

                  You really make too much of my agnosticism on Bezos. My position is that insofar he is a leftist is that he is possibly under pretty direct coercion.

                  Bezos would be tried and would be allowed to plead coercion, and that he never wanted political involvement but as he got too big the government took an interest in him. He would potentially win acquittal and potentially not it would depend on the facts of the case.

                  I suspect he would be convicted of doing something however small on his own initiative in support of the covid lockdowns and be executed for that.

                  The only tech oligarch I’m pretty sure would be acquitted is Zuckerberg, Zuckerberg can present pretty strong evidence he acted under coercion the whole way based on things that are publically available.

                • linker says:

                  Maybe Zuckerberg could earn his freedom by giving you a predator drone to hunt down all of our families. He could also compile a list of people who expressed negative feelings towards “rapists” and “pedophiles”. Arch Vaishya San Francisco tech CEOs would be a great asset to exterminate blue pilled and purple pilled cucks. We would of course reward them with the finest concubines as well as entire states. Zuckerberg can have California, Bezos can have Washington. Bezos says he is Lizzo’s number one fan. In the Holy Jimian Ethnostate we will have an annual Lizzo concert with mandatory attendance to celebrate the purge of cringe purple pilled cucks.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I do not want to exterminate or harm in any way normies or the purple pilled. That is the basis on which I say Bezos may get acquitted. He can argue he was a rich normie who wanted to be an apolitical online Montgomery Ward but that he was coerced and threatened by glowjoggers. People outside warrior and priestly jobs in particular should not be considered under any obligation to be brave under threat of state coercion (Republican officials who failed us due to cowardice and judges and such are another matter their cowardice SHOULD be punished).

                  Its leftist in various forms that have to go, as well as people who TOOK INITIATIVE in collaborating with them (rather than following orders under coercion)…

                • Tom says:

                  There is no fundamental disconnect in aim between Aristotle and Aquinas’s Christiandom. Aryans seek the Almighty, the creator, the first and infinite. And when they had pantheons of fragmented gods they were unsatisfied with them.

                  But Islam worships a lesser being, so there is a disconnect between Aristotle and Avicenna and the Islamic world.

                  Proper Aryans worhsip the infinite, the self existant, that which has made and is. Some other people maintain memories of worshiping the same being, Ancient Israel included. Classical Israel shifted to worshiping a god of legalism and beurocracy, and that is alien to Arians, but it also has nothing to do with Christianity beyond Christ rejecting it.

                  Bapomet is not such an old god, it had a beginning and it will have an end. It is another god of legalism, and probably the same being as that which modern Jews worship, and the same as those which Judiazed Christians worhsip. That being is alien to Aryans.

                  Aryans seek that which is, the self-existant God. Thus they are the Christ-bearing race, and they were so even before the incarnation. Aristotle sought that which Aquinas knew.

                • RMIV says:

                  Cominator mentioning him induced the realization that i’ve not seen theShadowedKnight here in some time.

                  do we know what’s become of him? i enjoyed his commentary

                • Tom says:

                  Mr The Cominator, do you think there are actually tens of millions of leftists that need mowing down?

                  In terms of folks that actually drive leftism, that actually have volition, perhaps there are hundreds or thousands. But most people just go with whatever their heard does. Arbitrarily killing npcs isn’t useful. They’ll just flip to whatever the new ideology in power is.

                  Most folks here that have leftkin probably have npcleft kin. I know the branch of my family that is left is functionally apolitical and would be just fine in a society that was not democratic.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “In terms of folks that actually drive leftism, that actually have volition, perhaps there are hundreds or thousands.”

                  Then can we agree these at least need to go…

                  My problem with the NPCs is they consciously decided that truth has no value, people like that are going to cause problems eventually. Maybe you could reprogram them sure but then later so can someone else. At least I think the white male leftist NPCs should go so white males can have a sense of asabiyya. I don’t see why any white male who actually voted for Biden (barring immense creative or scientific value) should live…

                  At the very least they should be driven into exile.

                • onyomi says:

                  It’s an interesting question how many people would need to be rounded up or otherwise taken out of action to break the back of globohomo.

                  On the one hand, I have historically tended toward a “big forces align to create bad incentives which bad people take advantage of, but if those, particular bad people weren’t there at the time others would have taken their place” sort of view (e.g. climate scientists have an inherent incentive to be climate alarmists and politicians have an incentive to listen to climate alarmists over those who say no sweeping government action is necessary), as well as a “stupid more than evil” view (e.g. I suspect a lot of the Nancy Pelosis of the world lie to themselves that they are a force for good more than they are consciously aware that they are horrible but are doing it anyway because it’s so rewarding); on the other hand, I find BAP’s claim that there may be e.g. 500 people pulling a lot of the most important strings at any one time, often times the same, small groups of people for decades at a time, convincing, as well as his noticing the suspiciousness of how, with rare exceptions nobody important seems to get targeted for assassination anymore.

                  I also agree with Jim (or at least, what I think is his opinion on this) that status matters a lot, so while millions may be participating in the bad incentive game, it might not take killing/exiling millions or even tens of thousands to fundamentally shift the milieu if e.g. circumstances should change such that, instead of being perceived as cool and empowering, being leftist instead seems dangerous, low-status, and/or revolting, then the vast majority would simply let their cognitive dissonance rationalize their way into a less left-wing position. Such a shift in circumstances could perhaps be achieved by targeting a relatively small number of the most influential figures in politics, media, academia, etc.

                • Tom says:

                  I think I see the difference in out outlooks. I don’t presume NPCs consciously decide very much of anything.

                  I used the modern mechanistic term, but I don’t like making machines of men too much. I’m going to pivot into Christian theology, those are terms we can both talk on right?

                  You know the Eastern doctrine of Ancestral Sin? In that doctrine Humans are not just sin-imputed like Augustine said, rather the first sin caused a weakening of will that was passed on intergenerationally, so that man on his own is not strong enough to resist sin.

                  God in Grace at the point of decision restores our will enough for us to really and truely choose Him freely. If we reject Him we fall back into a corrupt, weak, sin ruled will. If we accept Him we start to regain our true freedom, with His help. But even in accepting Him it’s a long journey to having a truely free will. That’s part of Theosis.

                  Those who utterly and finally reject God are going to be destroyed one way or another. They will enter into an increasingly destructive cycle of demonism and often that means we have to destroy them before they hurt our people. At that point there is not much difference to then between letting them self-destruct or having us kill them. And if we kill them we save many others suffering. So Aquinas says on the death penalty. If they were going to repent, they would have, we don’t ever need to worry about that. (I’m sure you know all that, I’m just demonstrating that I know it, and am not going to come back with dumb arguments about ‘what if letting them murder 10 more children would have given them time to repent’ or such garbage)

                  But for most people, their rational soul, their nous, is darkened entirely. They don’t make logical decisions, or choices, or execute acts of their own will for self improvement. The capacity to change ones own script is rare at best, it doesn’t exist at all for most of mankind. They didn’t consciously and ably decide a single thing in their whole lives.

                  Even the person who accepts Christ or actively seeks the Most High without knowing Christ, they start with a very dim nous indeed. They cannot be expected to get rid of all the evil ideology coded into them overnight or even in just one generation. And even someone like me, my nous is not so bright, I can appriciate the greatness of the saint-kings and desert fathers, but I can only just follow their thoughts enough to appriciate that they are better than me.

                  We ought to destroy those who create and initially promote demonism, but everyone downstream of them may or may not have ever really decided to be part of it.

                  *The western Church has this ‘slavery of the will’ concept as well, but it’s not spelled out as concisely as Ancestral Sin. Probably the best read for the Latin church’s idea is the Cannons of the Council of Orange of 529. It deals with Plegianism, and pre-emptively condemns what was much later called Jansenism or Calvinism.

                • jim says:

                  > I’m going to pivot into Christian theology, those are terms we can both talk on right?

                  Suones is a Hindu. He does not understand Christian theology.

                  He adheres to a brand of Hinduism that has very deep Aryan roots, and which worships a very ancient Christophany, but I am not going to pull the Roman and progressive trick and tell people that they are ignorantly worshipping our Gods. He figures the older and more ancient the better, and much truth in that.

                  He figures we should worship Thor. Hmm, by that reasoning some Hindus should worship Kali rather than Rama. That did not turn out well.

                • Tom says:

                  I’m going to think out loud a bit because this is a good place for insightful criticism.

                  I’d say that following your script isn’t a real decision. Let’s say I want to plan for food, so I look at flyers for the best price on meat I want, and then I go buy that meat. In one sense I decided I need to plan ahead, and I decided between store ABC and store DEF. But really I had the script ‘have extra food on hand’ from my Grandad, and I had the script ‘shop around for the best deal and bulk buy on sale’ from Grandad. Grandad got those scripts as a reaction to scarcity circumstances in his time.

                  They’re good scripts, but in me they’re handed down and in him they are nessesitates drilled into him by the environment.

                  Now to me a real decision was made when the lead pioneers said ‘I will create a new home for my people, and we will survive’ that was an act of will and inner strength, and that singular act of will created a lot of the great things we accomplished in the west. Acts of volition like that don’t happen every generation, or even every century.

                  Now, I knew even when I was young that the ‘buy cheap’ script had a bug in my time. It works great in pioneer towns with a closed economy and a ‘help your neighbors’ ethic. But with open global markets it has serious flaws. Mant good right wing folk, just run the pioneer script and never contemplate it at all.

                  A major enemy is the folks that stop us from debugging these scripts. Right wing pundits that seem like they should be redpill but always stop short of actually advocating in the interests of our own people, and then they turn and attack white advocates.

                  Of course the main enemy are those who actively create self-destructive scripts and set them loose on the masses. Call it creating demons or propaganda or whatever you want. Those who use their will to create death-scripts have to be destroyed utterly.

                • suones says:

                  @Jsd

                  Then who are we supposed to worship? Thor?

                  That is a question every man must answer himself. Every woman/NPC, being incapable of answering this, or any, question, must instead worship her/his Lord and Master as a god, and pay obeisance to his gods.

                  This is the way.

                • suones says:

                  @Tom

                  I had the script ‘have extra food on hand’ from my Grandad, and I had the script ‘shop around for the best deal and bulk buy on sale’ from Grandad. Grandad got those scripts as a reaction to scarcity circumstances in his time.

                  Maybe Granddad had it right, and you’re wrong.

                  Now, I knew even when I was young that the ‘buy cheap’ script had a bug in my time. It works great in pioneer towns with a closed economy and a ‘help your neighbors’ ethic. But with open global markets it has serious flaws. Mant good right wing folk, just run the pioneer script and never contemplate it at all.

                  I’m sitting in a 5000 year old place and yet your Grandfather’s script wisdom strikes me as sensible while the Jew garbage you call “global markets” is suicide. If it had not been people like your grandfather living among us today, we would have seen untold destruction during last year’s “pandemic.” I literally do exactly as your grandfather recommended, and am much the better for it. Our villages had a bountiful harvest last year (== zero starvation) and are on track for another bounty this year. The only loss suffered by “the economy” was either paper loss[1] (== zero actual loss) or suffered by rootless urbanites who thought, like you, that they could “debug” grandpa’s “script.” Sri Vishnu feeds the birds and the beasts, he will surely feed you, but only if you let Him.

                  [1]: People like me, who follow grandpa, didn’t even suffer paper losses lol. My holdings remained profitable throughout the “pandemic” and beyond.

                • Tom says:

                  Suones,

                  Grandad would have you out of his community and tell you not to look back, and he’s right.

                  Globalism is a circumstance, debugging is adaptation to change in circumstances. Grandpa said his mom always cut a roast in half before she put it in the oven as a family tradition. Why? Because she had a small oven that only fit that way.

                  I put whole roasts in the oven. So did he. It’s another way of describing Chestertons fence.

                  So are you the ‘white guy neopagan who pretends modern esoterica is ancient’ kind of hindu or ‘Dravidian who got white wisdom 5000 years ago and proceeded to inject demons into it ever since’ kind of hindu?

                  Either way you’re larping at having grandads wisdom, when in fact you’re far from even running his scripts. My Grandad is a Christian Englishman of good Teutonic stock. Either yours is the same and you bring shame to him, or you’re an alien who shares no part in him.

                • jim says:

                  He is part Dravidian, his Dravidian side has been injecting demons into five thousand year old white wisdom, which is why the Hindu Kingdoms were unable to stand against the Muslims and the Christians, and he thinks we should do the same.

                  Closer to home, the Old Gods of Mexico are now walking this side of the border.

                • Tom says:

                  Thanks Jim. I don’t mean to come off overly rude, Ive read lots of suones comments that are insightful. He’s clearly a good regular.

                  But I don’t make any bones about out-grouping. If I’m crossing lines let me know and I’ll dial it back.

                • Tom says:

                  I should have titled my comments better.

                  I’m interested in talking to The Cominator about NPCs in Christian theology, and just how many actually need killing. I’m not very interested in talking to Hindus about Hinduism, but I’ll throw in my 2c if a Hindu has the wrong idea about Christianity.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Com is right: kill the leftists. Mercy to the guilty is punishment of the innocent. You might not want to kill your family, but they want to and gladly will kill you if given the chance. My mom, now that I am taking a more active role, has come around to repeating what I say and hates hates hates the demon left. My sister is a woke cultist and refuses to listen. Both were pretty standard liberal feminists when I was growing up, but they took different paths. If women can do that, then men have fewer excuses.

                  When it comes to your people, do unto others as you would have others do unto you. When it comes to the enemy loudly proclaiming himself, do unto him before he can do unto you, and do it as brutally and thoroughly as it takes. Killing all of the sincere leftists in a big, nasty purge/slaughter is exactly what they are planning to do to you. So do it to them first.

                  Com might go a bit overboard, but its probably better to kill too many than too few. The Inquisition can take over from that point, and we get to live as best we can until our descendants have to deal with the next holiness spiral. Rarely has a civilization died of over-executing heretics. Were too many, or too few puritans executed?

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Regarding theology, God wiped Sodom and Gomorrah off the face of the earth, told the Israelites to massacre everyone in Jericho except the woman who help His men and her family, and generally was willing to wipe out all but those repentant and willing to atone as Ninevah did. When we must think how many we must kill, how many God will permit, remember that God made the Nile run red with blood and slew all the firstborn of Egypt for their sins. America’s sins dwarf that of Egypt, and our war may need a far greater bloodletting.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Based and deus vult pilled.

                • suones says:

                  @Tom

                  I’m interested in talking to The Cominator about NPCs in Christian theology, and just how many actually need killing. I’m not very interested in talking to Hindus about Hinduism, but I’ll throw in my 2c if a Hindu has the wrong idea about Christianity.

                  Hey no problem. Too bad this “forum” only has limited threading support.

                  @Others:

                  So are you the ‘white guy neopagan who pretends modern esoterica is ancient’ kind of hindu or ‘Dravidian who got white wisdom 5000 years ago and proceeded to inject demons into it ever since’ kind of hindu?

                  Neither. I’m an Aryan[1] who worships his fathers, and his father’s gods, and is grateful for the bounty of Mother Earth and Father Sky. I believe abandoning one’s father and his gods is the first step on the road to destruction, not just of the material kind, but total spiritual obliteration.

                  I understand that centuries of Semitic poison has destroyed the soul of many sons of Mannus, and unlike Jim who believes this can be reversed and brought back to a more manageable state, I have little hope of this happening — the Semitic gods are simply too jealous.

                  I understand that “globalism” is societal poison — in commerce as in religion.

                  I believe in letting Chesterton’s Fences stand until it can be proven that it is harmful to let a partiular one continue to stand.

                  Hindu Kingdoms were unable to stand against the Muslims and the Christians, and he thinks we should do the same.

                  The Hindu Maratha Empire never fell to Islam. Northern Empires fell due to underestimating Baphomet’s power. India was conquered by the East India Company who were not really doctrinaire Christians, self-segregated themselves, and launched Britain on the path of greatness after London had repudiated Rome.

                  I do not recommend anyone to do anything.

                  [1] I’ll only discuss the whole Aryan vs Dravidian debate with others not infected by Cordyceps semiticus.

                • jim says:

                  > > Hindu Kingdoms were unable to stand against the Muslims and the Christians, and he thinks we should do the same.

                  > The Hindu Maratha Empire never fell to Islam

                  The East India company versus the Hindu princes was much the same story as King Alfred versus the Vikings and other pagans.

                  Over the past five thousand years, you have taken too many demons on board.

                • Pooch says:

                  At least I think the white male leftist NPCs should go so white males can have a sense of asabiyya.

                  If God graces us with victory, I think we’ll find that the average white male non-Jewish leftist is going to resemble Scott Alexander. Basically men trying to get by and doing their best to not be called a racist and virtue signaling from time to time (this was my mindset before I became red-pilled), but not all that enthusiastic about eradicating whiteness.

                  Ultimately, this is high-low vs the middle. Caesar taught us that the elites are going to have to go. Then, inevitably, the question is going to come down to what we do with all this bioleninism.

                • The Cominator says:

                  If you’re not part of the Final Solution you’re part of the problem. Those who signaled woke beyond the bare minimum under compulsion passed their children and their nation through the fire to mooch and took the mark if we get the chance we should show no mercy. They certainly won’t.

                  The filibuster and some well armed red state populations is the only thing now holding back kulak war level atrocities and its enabled by these spineless people who acceded to demon worship… why the sympathy for these utterly contemptible people who make the world a hellscape if they had any worth they would at least privately oppose the enemy’s evil ideology.

                • suones says:

                  @Pooch

                  If God graces us with victory, I think we’ll find that the average white male non-Jewish leftist is going to resemble Scott Alexander.

                  “Scott” is an Ashkenazi Jew. I have no idea if this is a sarcastic post or not.

                • Pooch says:

                  Didnt realize that.

            • Oog en Hand says:

              And what will happen if your MATERNAL ancestry is North-African?!

          • Pooch says:

            Jesus stresses that sexual immorality is a grave sin.

            • suones says:

              Taking sexual/marital advice from an incel, lol.

              • The Cominator says:

                Ye blaspheme, Jesus was a VOLCEL. There is no such thing as an incel cult leader. Even if you believe Jesus was a fraud and hate christianity any semi successful cult leader is going to have all the pussy he wants. Every woman on earth wants to be fucked by a divine being and have a demigod baby.

            • Ace says:

              Jesus stresses that sexual immorality is a grave sin.

              Jesus primary teaching on the subject seemed to be about Jewish men divorcing their wives so they could marry again. The backdrop was a world where all are men were married and the only sort immorality they were dealing with was abusing divorce for a younger filly.

              • Pooch says:

                Yes good point. Although the word fornication seems to be a word created in translation with the creation of KJ Bible, as another commenter mentioned, in keeping with the Jesus’s spirit of the law (and expanded upon by St. Paul), it could be reasonable to argue that sex with women without the intention of ownership is a sin.

          • restitutor_orbis says:

            By my read, the Bible is actually much more redpilled on sex than current translations and commentators would have us believe.

            The term “fornication” appears in the King James Version and means “sexual intercourse outside of marriage.” But fornication was a translation of the Greek “porneia,” meaning “sexual immorality.” And “porneia was a translation of the Hebrew “zanah,” which meant “adultery” and “prostitution,” with the latter associated with temple prostitution especially.

            “Adultery,” in turn, includes (a) sex by a man with a married woman, and (b) any sex by a married woman with a man who is not her husband. “Adultery” does not include (a) sex by a single man with an unwed woman, or (b) sex by a married man with an unwed woman.

            So with each translation, the term became broader and broader, until today we end up with Christianity that would condemn as sinful the very acts of conquest-and-ownership God commended his Israelites to do.

            Conversely, the interpretation above is perfectly in line with Jim’s view on marriage 1.0. The man owned the woman. The fact that I own a car means you can’t drive it. But the fact I own a car doesn’t mean I can’t drive other cars.

            I am of the belief that there is no sin in simple sex, unless it is idolatrous, or unless it causes a woman to break her marriage vow. Somewhere along the line (probably Paul’s influence?) things went awry.

            • The Cominator says:

              Any bible passages you find iffy at all or promote bluepilled morality should be crossed reference with the Young Literal Translation.

            • jim says:

              Everything in the bible about sex is a commentary, explanation, or clarification of the final commandment:

              Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.

              And nothing in the bible about sex makes sense except in that context.

              So: In a social environment where women are unowned and are frustrated by lack of ownership, inapplicable to banging any women you are likely to meet.

              Furthermore, the Old Testament does not make clear, but the Lord Jesus Christ does make clear, that the law and the prophets are to be interpreted and applied in such a way that they work, that they accomplish their intended purposes, have the intended effect. The spirit, not the letter.

              Incel and female immorality is not the intended effect.

              In a society that does not respect or protect ownership of land, a farmer must still grow potatoes, and to do so, has to anarchically and illegally take possession of some land, breaking numerous erratically, unpredictably, and infrequently enforced laws and regulations in the process.

              And we must anarchically and illegally take possession of women.

              • Niiiidriveevof says:

                The problem with fornication is not that it’s taking possession of a woman, it’s that it’s failing to take permanent possession of her.

                I am interested in your claim that unowned women don’t count. What evidence can you show that anyone besides you took this to be the correct interpretation?

                • jim says:

                  If you wind up together, with the intent and ability to stick it out all the way through, all the actions taken to bring about this outcome are OK.

                  Reflect on the story of Tamar and Jacob.

                  Jacob and Tamar begat Perez, of the line of David. Tamar was right to do what she did.

                  Christians are not forbidden swords. We are merely required to pursue better solutions first. But under current circumstances, better solutions have very limited availability.

                • Pooch says:

                  If you wind up together, with the intent and ability to stick it out all the way through, all the actions taken to bring about this outcome are OK.

                  And what if there is no intent to stick it out all the way through?

                • Niiiidriveevof says:

                  I mean whores. Who from the tradition said or implied that whoring wasn’t immoral?

                • jim says:

                  Obviously whoring is immoral, and the story of Jacob and Tamar tells us that in old Testament times they had a short way with whores.

                  But equally obviously, they were controlling female sexuality, not male sexuality. The problem was unowned women, not male sexuality.

                  You need to read old (pre Romance) sources from within their world view, which world view was familial collectivist and took it as completely self evident that women were not men and men were not women.

                  If you transliterate things people said pre-Romance to read a modern individualist meaning into them, and assume that the people saying those things could not tell the difference between men and women, you get nonsense.

                  You have to read stuff from before AD 1000 in the context that men and women are different, the household is one person, and that person is the head of the household.

                  So, in that social context, if you look at someone’s daughter, and think about having sex with her without agreement from the head of her household to transfer her to your household, you are violating the final commandment. If you give the stuff on fornication and adultery some meaning unrelated to the ten commandments you are, like the Jews sneaking, in new commandments to provide justification for burying and abandoning the old commandments.

                • polifugue says:

                  Vladimir the Great divorced all his wives and disbanded his harem after converting to Christianity. Seems like unowned women did count.

                • Niiiidriveevof says:

                  By whoring, I mean men using whores. Do you say that it wasn’t understood as sin? That it wasn’t understood as serious sin? This is what I’m asking for evidence for. It doesn’t need to be spelled out in so many words, but I need something; I can’t simply take your word for it.

                • jim says:

                  Yes, a sin, but what was that sin? The problem that needed to be dealt with was whores, not their customers.

                  And, as the story of Jacob and Tamar reveals, that was the problem that they dealt with.

                  The problem is that a whore is a brave and stunning empowered woman. If she has a pimp, he is a cuck. He may beat her from time to time, but he is still a cuck.

                  To understand what words mean, you have to look at what people did. It is not a matter of reading Church fathers, for the meaning of the words has changed underneath us.

                  Similarly, the authorities in late eighteenth century, early nineteenth century Australia, did not whip men for screwing women. Neither did they whip women for screwing men. They shotgun married the women off, and whipped them if they spoke back to their husbands. I conjecture they would have also whipped a wife for whoring, or a man for banging someone else’s wife, but it seems that that simply never happened.

                  They used vigorously moralistic language, and it is obvious that they did not mean by “whore” and “whoring” what you mean by whoring.

                  To understand what moral words mean, you have to look at what people with power using vigorously moralistic language did.

                  These people had legitimate authority. They had guns. They had whips. They came from a sternly moralistic society. They used sternly moralistic language.

                  They were very disturbed by all the sex that was happening.

                  And it really does not seem to have occurred to them to punish a man for having sex with an unowned woman. Or even to punish an unowned woman for having sex with a man.

                  What most certainly did occur to them was to punish a woman for resisting ownership, and they vigorously did so.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “What most certainly did occur to them was to punish a woman for resisting ownership, and they vigorously did so.”

                  Yes instead of moralfagging this is what our ethos needs to be… the problem is not immorality it is that women are high status and unowned.

                  Moralfagging distorts and obscures the problem.

          • chris says:

            “By the way, I’m not a Christian or a theologian. How bad exactly does the Bible say “fornication” is? ”

            If I am not mistaken, in Catholicism, fornication is a mortal sin which without repentance sends you directly to hell.

            • jim says:

              Yet strangely, the Roman Catholic Church rolled over and surrendered to the troubadors and the Romance Revolution.

              This resembles blue pilled dad of a nine year old girl who enthusiastically proclaims he will shoot pedophiles, a pedophile being someone who receives a naughty selfie from a girl who is seventeen years and nine months old, and due to heavy wear and much rough use, looks twenty four, and yet is strangely blind to his nine year old princess holding unsupervised sleepovers with boys, and who sends her off to party university when she is about to turn eighteen.

              The position that the Roman Catholic Church took in response to the Romance crisis utterly discredits its claims to authority on sexual matters. In practical substance and actual effect, the substance of the position was that “love” made it OK for wives to cheat on husbands, and OK for men to sleep with other men’s wives, but not OK for men to keep a mistress.

              The Roman Catholic Church has as much authority on sexual matters as does the dad who says he will shoot “pedophiles”, while his seventeen year old daughter is at party university and his nine year old daughter is holding a mixed sex sleepover without supervision by adult male kin.

              • Niiiidriveevof says:

                You’re right about the scandal, but its claims to authority come from an unchanging heaven, and the relevant claims it makes about fornication seem to be unchanging since long before the invention of romance.

                • jim says:

                  But the claims it makes against fornication changed in meaning, and were emptied of important content, when it capitulated to the Romance movement.

                  In this, they resemble the claims that blue pilled dad makes against “pedophiles”.

                • jim says:

                  Do they come from unchanging heaven?

                  When Pope Gregory split from Orthodoxy in 1054, his claims came from armies in the field.

                  You can argue there was bad conduct on both sides in the split, but if the Patriarch of Constantinople was coveting rectories and churches, Pope Leo and Pope Gregory were coveting Kingdoms.

                • Niiiidriveevof says:

                  The authority of kings is also from heaven, yet enforced with armies. There is no inherent tension here.

                  Not all the claims it makes about fornication changed in meaning. I’m not seeing the correspondence you’re implying between what you say and what the church said in the old days.

                • jim says:

                  The pope coveted that which is Caesar’s

                  Which resulted in conflict within the Church paralleling conflict between nations.

          • polifugue says:

            > How bad exactly does the Bible say “fornication” is? It’s not one of the Ten Commandments. The Bible also says “be fruitful and multiply”. Could you not make a solid case for prioritizing that over avoiding pre-marital sex and “game”, especially in the world we are living in?

            Fornication is not one of the Ten Commandments. Neither is incest, sodomy, nor temple prostitution. [X] not being in one of the ten commandments is a typical excuse of pleasure-lovers, and not a particularly good one.

            Fornication is a mortal sin in every serious denomination of Christianity. It is the reason why Christian kings had mistresses instead of concubines.
            Vladimir the Great was commanded to and promptly did divorce all his wives and disband his harem after converting to Christianity.

            If a Christian sleeps with a woman and afterwards leaves her he has to go to confession for it. The modern variant of the confession service in Orthodoxy used in my church is over a millennia old. In this world of defect-defect, it is pardonable to sleep with a woman with the intention of taming her, but anything else (sluts in bars, “practice whores,” plates, girlfriends, etc.) is not acceptable.

            We do not care what the prodigal son does when he falls, but he has to go to confession if he decides to return. The king may have a mistress, but he has to keep her under the rug, away from public view.

            • jim says:

              > Fornication is not one of the Ten Commandments

              Fornication is a particular application of the final commandment.

              When you apply those commandments, and read people applying them to sex and family, then unless those people are moderns you need to read them in the social context that the unit of society is the household not the individual, and that men are not women and women are not men.

              The prohibition of incest and divorce do not follow directly from the ten commandments, but adultery and fornication does.

              And the trouble is that giving fornication a meaning that does not follow from the ten commandments leads directly and immediately to breaking them, as when the Roman Catholic Church before the French Revolution so easily ruled that a marriage was nullified because the woman had not really given consent, or when it encouraged daughters to defy fathers and wives to defy husbands.

              This parallels the Jews of the time of Jesus holiness spiraling the law on blood, so that they could wrongfully spill blood, and claim they were acting in accordance with the law of Moses.

              > Fornication is a mortal sin in every serious denomination of Christianity.

              And the more that that denomination encourages women to screw around till their womb dries out, the more that denomination proclaims it to be a mortal sin.

              If you give the biblical laws on sex and family an interpretation that supposes that men and women are interchangeable, and that families do not exist, only individuals, you are turning them upside down.

              • polifugue says:

                I refer to “fornication” as “sex without marriage,” not necessarily “sex before marriage.” It is pardonable for a couple to elope in secret and finalize their marriage after the deed, although it is preferred by the church for a couple to be wed in full view of the congregation before consummation.

                Incest and sodomy show that Christian morality is not confined to the ten commandments. And while there is no reason to deny fornication as it relates to the tenth commandment, there is no reason to assume that fornication is a sin limited to the context of the tenth commandment.

                The parable of the prodigal son does not lead to feminism and mandatory female consent any more than “there is neither Jew nor Greek, male nor female” leads to multiculturalism or homosexual marriage. If fornication is not a sin, why did Vladimir the Great divorce his wives and disband his harem?

                • jim says:

                  > I refer to “fornication” as “sex without marriage,”

                  The trouble is that this definition fails to acknowledge the existence of families and households, and fails to distinguish between men and women.

                  The trouble with that definition, is that when applied in a society where women are emancipated, marriage 1.0 is illegal, and family is rapidly becoming illegal, is that it necessarily turns the original meaning (rooted in a society where the unit of society was the household rather than the individual, and where men were not women and women were not men) upside down and back to front.

                  Our eighteenth century ancestors would, if a nine year old girl attended a sleepover without supervision by adult male kin, have absolutely no doubt that fornication had taken place, and would break out the shotgun and call the pastor to correct the matter.

                  Unless you are reacting as an eighteenth century gentleman would react, you do not mean by fornication what he meant by fornication.

                • Karl says:

                  Our eighteenth century ancestors could correct the matter with a shotgun and a pastor, because it was possible to get a nine year old girl married and marriage actually meant something.

                  Today we can’t.

                  How would our eighteenth century ancestors have reacted if there is no pastor and no marriage?

                • jim says:

                  Well, that is the point. If no pastor and no marriage, we have to deal with the situation at hand – rather than by redefining fornication so that everything is just lovely because it is totally God’s will that very large numbers of men should be involuntarily celibate.

            • Nikolai says:

              Pleasantly surprised to see this take from you

        • Pooch says:

          Roosh is reverting to ancient working good social technology with the goal of establishing cooperate/cooperate equilibrium for himself personally and influencing his followers to also do the same, a noble and just cause indeed.

          Trouble is, as JIm has preached, cannot simply revert back to a cooperate/cooperate environment. Given present circumstances, one must start in defect/defect and impose cooperate/cooperate by taming a whore.

      • The Cominator says:

        You’re too hung up about rape those of us here of the Jimian redpill reject the idea that women are all that traumatized by rape. Most women do not exactly want to hit over the head and be rape raped by a stranger in an ally or a home invader (though some DO fantasize about this) who after all might kill them afterwords but women also do not exactly like giving explicit verbal consent with every base. Women don’t like being asked if you can kiss them, touch them, finger them or fuck them they want to make eyes at you in private and have you just do it. If you ask them they will generally get turned off and say no.

        • linker says:

          Yeah I know. Just trying to illustrate the type of guy that Roosh is. There is something very twisted about going for quantity over quality because when a girl fornicates with a new man she loses something. Doing that hundreds of times, just for the sake of “notches” is insanity. If I was super attractive Casanova stud, I would be looking for quality over quantity, trying to find some 10/10 girlfriend and/or a harem of 8/10 hotties. I would not tear up a 6/10 girl’s hymen while she is black out drunk because I ghosted the 8/10 girl I banged last night rather than calling her back because I wanted more “flags and notches”. And this is observably how super attractive high status men behave. They do not behave like Roosh because they have empathy and because they are more sane; they are not just zealously following some obsession.

          • The Cominator says:

            I have a controversial take on female notch count that will probably upset everyone.

            Women lose something for the 1st three notches sure… after that additional notches don’t make much difference as far as pair bonding. There is not much difference between four and four hundred.

            Highly used women can still pair bond sexually… but you need to fuck them way way more and better before they do.

          • Pooch says:

            No offense, but you sound like a blue pilled faggot on female nature.

            • linker says:

              Would you rather fornicate with or marry a female who has taken more cocks or less cocks? Are females more strongly able to pair bond with their husband if they have taken less cocks? Based on your answers to these questions, it is clearly not blue pilled to say that Arab guys racking up hundreds of notches, including deflowering virgins, not even for their own amusement, but just as a pathological obsession, is bad for society. Even worse than that is that they then turn around and psy op white men into not fornicating or reproducing, then shame anyone who disagrees with this as being “unholy”. I don’t think pickup artists should be sent to the gulag (although Roosh probably thinks this now!), but just pointing out the undesirability and the hypocrisy of Roosh’s behavior is not being blue pilled or simping for whores or whatever you are gonna straw man me as saying. Maybe it was wrong to call him a dirty muslim psychopath rapist, but that was just dramatic embellishment and hyperbole to get my point across, which apparently I am failing to do.

              • Pooch says:

                Would you rather fornicate with or marry a female who has taken more cocks or less cocks?

                I’d rather fuck and marry a woman than not at all. Look around, there is a massive virgin shortage. Not going to find one given present circumstances so must make do with what we have which means taming and marrying a whore. As Jim has often told, the story of 18th century Australia shows it was done and can be done.

              • The Cominator says:

                Female notch count matters up to three because her ability to pair bond sexually (and maintain some degree of what passes to a woman as genuine loyalty to you) becomes damaged when it goes higher . But if you are not at least a woman’s third it doesn’t matter much if you are her four hundredth.

                I don’t think Roosh and co had too too many virginial or semi virginal types.

                • Pooch says:

                  I don’t think Roosh and co had too too many virginial or semi virginal types.

                  No he wasn’t. He was sitting pool side fucking whores enjoying the decline than realized it was not a fulfilling way to live (I also came to the same conclusion which is why I identify with him).

                • Pooch says:

                  enjoying the decline in a perpetual state of decline/decline, I should say.

            • linker says:

              But please, if I didn’t address your concern, elaborate on your strawman about how specifically I am blue pilled about females. You are leaving me guessing here. I’m going to be really astounded if you think Bezos is a politically neutral arch-Vaishya and Roosh is helping impressionable young white men by giving them Holy Commands to be celibate.

              • The Cominator says:

                You do not seem to understand what we are saying about Roosh or Bezos.

                We are criticizing Roosh on the grounds that the overall goal he is preaching to men and society is laudable… but in clownworld the fact is that men need to fuck a girl before they can court her (and that even if she is a good trad church girl that will not change as female instinct is going to overpower her religious scruples every time) and that means using his old pickup methods for a more noble purpose.

                You sounded bluepilled because as I said you seemed overly concerned about rape in a way that ignores female nature where women like to feel dominated and overpowered during sex (Roosh did not hit women over the head and actually rape them in alleys). You are right that at a certain point a man prefers quality over quantity though.

                • Pooch says:

                  and that even if she is a good trad church girl that will not change as female instinct is going to overpower her religious scruples every time

                  AWALT.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I don’t believe in hard AWALTs as much as some here do but when it comes to women’s sexual instincts AWALT is a good model. Female sexual instinct and especially arousal is designed to overpower and shut down female rational thought (such as female rational thought is in any case). This means their religious scruples are never going to matter in regards to how they act sexually… it might leave them feeling more remorse if the sex was bad or rationalizing that the fact that they sinned and fornicated was God’s will as God prompted them to give into the weakness of her flesh and sin in this case because Jesus wanted to bring her together with you or something. This is why you have to bang the religious trad girl too.

                  The only exception to this sexual AWALT is a woman that is genuinely sexually frigid (or so selective she is only capable of being aroused at the thought of general Butt Naked raping her) neither of which you want to marry you are better off trying to marry a stripper with a 500 notch count then a frigid woman.

                • Mike in Boston says:

                  in clownworld the fact is that men need to fuck a girl before they can court her

                  I am aware that a lot may have changed since then, but I have much firsthand and even more secondhand knowledge that this was not the case as recently as fifteen years ago.

                • Pooch says:

                  Definitely the case in the age of Tinder.

        • orochimaru says:

          “Most women do not exactly want to hit over the head and be rape raped by a stranger in an ally or a home invader”

          stop being such a leftist. they do.

      • polifugue says:

        Old-type Orthodox Christian here.

        Accusing Roosh of judging fornicators is projection. One of the first things taught in the Orthodox Church is the Jesus Prayer; we do not judge our brother like the Pharisee but focus on only our own sins. Roosh does not care if you decide to read his advice and screw 200 white girls, he thinks that fornicating is wrong.

        Fornication is the sin of the prodigal son, which is recounted on the second Sunday of pre-Lent. Sex with women without the intention of ownership is evil and is condemned in this service. God commands us to own women, not to defile ourselves in defect-defect.

        Roosh is not trying to proscribe celibacy to his readers, he is telling them to flee defect-defect and find a wife in the church. The irony of his plan is that his readers end up marrying women in their late 20s early 30s who are trying to settle down, normative in most parishes.

        So Roosh is right in that what he has done is evil, and given that his game did not land him a wife or family it would be understandable for him to forego game and proscribe his other plan.

        The first problem with Roosh is that to break defect-defect, it requires a man who is willing to break multiple laws. If a father wishes to give his trad waifu daughter to a man in a morally Christian manner, he must break the law, and it is difficult to break the law without being redpilled.

        The second problem with Roosh is that marrying a woman on her terms means most likely marrying a older woman with a high notch count. That being said, Jacob Rees-Mogg married a 30 year old and his traditional marriage turned out well.

        My advice for a man would be to learn game to tame a young whore. If you can’t or won’t, marrying an older woman with a high notch count and having two or three children is better than being childless. If you wish to cheat and marry an underage virgin, I light a candle for you and wish you all the luck in the world.

    • linker says:

      I agree that Roosh became unfulfilled with meaningless, ownershipless, sex. I do not see him advocating for superior social technology though. I see him shaming men, advocating Victorianism, and advocating celibacy, not literally, but under the guise of “waiting for a pure perfect Christian woman who does not require game, who you will court asexually and get married before having sex with”. In my opinion that pious Victorian behavior will lead impressionable white men to celibacy.

      • Pooch says:

        It is superior social technology if imposed on society by the state, that every tax-paying man gets provided with a virgin wife. However in today’s circumstances your criticism is entirely valid.

      • linker says:

        Perusing his twitter. He is also a crypto-marxist. He expresses hatred for capitalism and “usury”, which is absolutely retarded.. He is basically a crytpo-leftist.

        Roosh’s political position: The sexual market is messed up because of male lust. The financial market is messed up because it is too unregulated and capitalism is inherently bad. When the government takes outrageous taxes from a productive white man and then gives free money (“loans” or “usury”) to bums, the bums who received money are the True Victims Who We Must Feel Pity For. This is the fault of capitalism. We must have a more larger and more powerful churchian government to prevent men from using game, to prevent women from being beautiful and wearing sexy clothes, and to restrain capitalism more so that bums do not get their feelings hurt.

        Roosh is not a strong right wing advocate. He is a status-hungry holiness spiraling priest. He does not want apple carts to stay upright. He wants to knock down the same apple carts, but with Muslim aesthetics and obfuscation.

        • linker says:

          > Capitalism has condemned more souls than any other system in history. Material riches = spiritual poverty.

          > Capitalism is state-sponsored usury, an ideological vehicle that allows a few oligarchs to control and dominate billions of people. Usury is a sin.

          Responding to a graph showing that the percent of sexless men has risen from 7% to 27% since 1989:

          > Best news I’ve seen all month.

          > Don’t fear poverty.

        • Pooch says:

          Usury is a problem but he incorrectly attributes capitalism to what we have now, which is not capitalism.

          My biggest issue with him, though, is that he has Jews on the brain. As alf said, his writing is thoughtful and funny and I enjoy his content. Though, he does not quite understand the nuisances of what’s happening like Jim does (not many people do). BAP suffers from this too, but I view them both as major assets to the Right.

          • The Cominator says:

            BAP doesn’t have jews on the brain (and I’ve been in contact with him on and off for twenty years) the worst that can be said about BAP is he thinks the NDSAP a lot of the SS guys had their hearts in the right place (he doesn’t think they were right about everything though)…

            • Pooch says:

              BAP rejects the Puritan hypothesis and thus NRx. He blames all our current problems on the Jews.

              • The Cominator says:

                I don’t entirely accept the puritan hypothesis and have said so.

                BAP’s thinking on the subject cannot be summed up so simply, BAP is a very smart guy and his thoughts on the subject are complex. He agrees (as does Jim and even Moldbug) that in certain eras (the very late 1800s to the mid 30s) the left was indeed very jewish. He does not think it was the case today or the case earlier in the Victorian era.

                • Pooch says:

                  One of his recent podcasts I forget which one he explicitly stated our current leftism is entirely Jewish and can be traced to Marx. He also explicitly rejected Moldbug’s Puritan hypothesis and called it bullshit.

                  I enjoy his alot of commentaries but it can come off as glorified Nazi-larping to be honest.

                • Pooch says:

                  at times*

              • The Cominator says:

                BAP believes the REAL spiritual heart of the modern left originated (and I agree with him) not with a jew or a puritan or any group of them but in the writings of Jean Jaques Rosseau. That Rosseau’s writings more than any pre Marxian christian socialists (who go back to before Calvin there was a great Christian socialist element to the 14th century Jaquerie revolts) begat the age of revolutions in Europe and that the Jewish and ex Puritan socialists even the hardcore communists were mostly bastard offspring of Rosseau their spiritual father.

                The reason is that Rosseau gave rise to the one common thread of all leftists movements since, that man is infinitely malleable and has also been infinitely corrupted (he was an originally amiable but mostly solitary herbivore much like the Orangatuang). Now the left wants to use this infinite malleability but NOT to restore man to his original good natured Orangtuang ness… but to make him some kind of ant creature. And Rosseau wanted this.

                Rosseau’s philosophy goes from demonic lies to demonic objectives… just like all the left.

                • jim says:

                  The French left is descended through heretical entryism into the French Catholic Church starting from the false Popes of Avignon. While Rousseau is concentrated essence of that evil, focusing on him distracts us from what the war in the Vendee and the war in Spain was fought over.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Can you explain in more detail…

                  The Vendee was after the French revolution a revolution spawned at least partially from Rosseauian memes. The avignon papacy was for instance the French monarchy trying to get control over the Catholic Church which became overmighty and tried to enact international priestly rule which peaked during the papacy of Innocent III and I fail to see what it has to do with the age of revolutions which began with the French revolution and began again in the mid 1800s from similar Rosseauian memes. Rosseau’s memes also contributed to the jewish Marxist memes and somewhat puritan Fabian socialist memes.

          • linker says:

            imo BAP is a genius. He is the only person gatekeeping, crypto-feminists, crypto-marxists, and other forms of slave moralists hard. He understands that capitalism is good for the white man and that women on twitter nagging about pornography are not “the real traditionalists”. My only beef with him is that he seems to have ‘inability to mention Alex Kierkegaard’s name syndrome’. I’m not saying he plagiarized him, but it’s hard to believe he has never heard of him. I haven’t noticed BAP having Jewbrain syndrome, but maybe he does.

            • The Cominator says:

              He doesn’t I’ve known him online for almost 20 years and he is a borderline genius IMHO.

              BAP is prone to taking a semi apologetic view for the NDSAP (and this is one of my few real points of disagreement with him) but he is not a jew obsessive.

              • suones says:

                …a semi apologetic view for the NDSAP…

                Hitler did nothing wrong. Sieg Heil! 1488 卐

                Over here we’re proud of Uncle Adolf, his autobiography is the perennial bestseller (so much that the lugenpresse deletes it from the sales charts haha). I’ll discuss any alleged shortcomings of the glorious NSDAP might have had when the Left agrees to stop fetishising bastards like Lenin, Woodrow Wilson, or FDR.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  basiert und rot gepillt

                • The Cominator says:

                  Check out the video of a youtuber called “TIK” on how national socialism is socialism and thoroughly leftist on everything but race and get back to me. He devotes 5 hours to this with an copious variety of primary sources.

                • suones says:

                  @TheCominator

                  You completely missed my point. Whatever the shortcomings of the NSDAP, fact is they beat Commie thugs in the street and sent their leaders to jail or the gallows. NSDAP has a long, long history before coming to power, and even after coming into power the command economy years[1] were an exception rather than the rule.

                  You seem to have no idea how Marxist extortion rackets are run, probably because these things do not happen in USA (at least not any more). In areas where we have live Marxist insurgencies, Commie thugs come to your shop to ask for their weekly “donations.” If you refuse you can be beaten up, dragged to a “People’s Court” and humiliated, and your shop attacked. This was the lot of the shopkeeper in Weimar Germany, and was supported by the USSR J-Left and their American sponsors.

                  The Weimar shopkeeper had to pay up, or else… The NSDAP offered an escape. The shopkeeper could instead pay his friendly neighbourhood NSDAP chapter a visit, get his membership and hang a swastika in his window. The next time the Commies came a-calling, they would get a sound thrashing by a couple of brownshirts. If then your shop “co-incidentally” got firebombed, the next day the Commie office on the corner “mysteriously” burned to the ground. NSDAP did this successfully for years, before they came to be widely seen as the only protection from the J-Left, and got endorsements from business big and small (IG Farben, Daimler, Krupp right to the grocery store across the street all hung swastikas in their window).

                  When Libertardians can prevent the J-Left (or now, more commonly, Prog Left via blacks, Mexicans, etc) from looting a small TV shop, then they get to lecture about the evils of National SoCiaLiSm.

                  The only alternatives in Weimar Germany were: Judeo-Bolshevism, Fabian-Socialism/Menshevism, or National Socialism. Both of the first two guaranteed death for German kulaks, the first by the bullet and the second by starvation. I feel that Hitler not going all the way and assuming crown and sceptre was a factor in his psychotic breakdown — you can only lead to win if you yourself 100% believe in your Divine Mandate, which Hitler resisted because he himself identified with “the common man.” The sin of the NSDAP lay in their covetousness, which is a much, much minor inconvenience than death.

                  Anyway, I only discuss such matters in this here place because I assume (thanks to the Rooster Prophet’s effective moderation) we are all on the same side (or will be) in the coming storm. To any Leftists/Left-aligned bastards I simply give the reply I posted earlier. First disown Woodrow Wilson then we can talk about Uncle Adolf. Hail Victory! Jaya He![2]

                  [1] which, as we discussed before, was only accepted by Hitler because it promised a faster military buildup, which he desperately wanted.

                  [2] Fun fact: The Indian National Anthem written by Rabindranath Tagore (Kshatriya — hereditary warrior) is so nakedly Imperialistic that it was only adopted in abridged form. Jaye He! is the concluding exhortation — “Victory (to the Supreme King)!”

                • Starman says:

                  @suones

                  ”When Libertardians can prevent the J-Left (or now, more commonly, Prog Left via blacks, Mexicans, etc) from looting a small TV shop, then they get to lecture about the evils of National SoCiaLiSm.”

                  Exactly.

                  The old NASDAP delivered on its protection. When a man asked the question, “what’s in it for me?” the old NASDAP answered and took action on his behalf.

                  I yet to see anything here in the American empire answering my question, “what’s in it for me?” or actually doing anything about it.

                • The Cominator says:

                  SA thugs before the Roehm Putsch did that too in areas they controlled and after Hitler became Chancellor in all urban and semi urban areas of Germany.

                  Yes the Nazis gained support by being the only armed opposition to commies thugs but I’m mainly discussing the actions of the Nazis in power and the ideology of Hitler himself. It is perhaps true that only a form of nationalist leftism light can muster the violence needed to counter other forms of leftism (I think BAP thinks this)… rightist do not seem good at extralegal thuggery without state backing. Still I would prefer the right gets a prophet… with a faith militant of a faith opposed to the left we can beat them without adopting a heretical form of leftism.

                  But nothing positive could have come from Hitler’s Germany. If the state were taken over by Goering or Heydrich perhaps National Socialism would have become militant German National Capitalism (under Goering perhaps under Heydrich almost certainly) but under Hitler that would never happen Hitler was a socialist not exactly a Marxist socialist but a sincere and actually pretty fanatical socialist nevertheless. Hitler was okay with an incremental and piecemeal approach to the form of socialism he wanted… but he was resolved to get there. The war was launched when it did to avoid an economic collapse.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Also to the extent you can say NSDAP violence was right wing violence you have to understand the context they were operating in (and Moldbug went over this in the Open Letter). The Weimar republic was a former monarchy and the judiciary and the “Cathedral” in Weimar was fundamentally reactionary and they hated the communists (even if the parliament was generally social democrat, and the social democrats had to admit there were enemies to the left with the Spartacist uprising). This allowed the Nazis to get the advantage in right wing street violence.

                • Starman says:

                  @Cominator

                  Ok Cominator, what’s in it for me?

                  Despite being the most prolific commentator here, nothing you’ve said has been useful to me, except for calling out COVID as the hoax it clearly is.

                • The Cominator says:

                  You don’t have to engage if you don’t want to.

                  Useful information for people personally…

                  Out of the money covered call options on MARA a crypto miner can make you around 20%ish on your money in 45 days also as the dollar declines the stock goes up (in a VERY volatile way). Also when there are big drops (as there was yesterday) you can cover your options and wait a couple days for the bounceback and do it again…

                  If you are a gameless sperg (like me) living the incel life I also gave a detailed posts on how even people such as us can bang hot strippers… not totally for free but far less than you’ll pay escorts. You are certainly being somewhat autistic lately… R7 I like you and we are all unhappy with how almost everything in 2020 went but your chimpout should end.

                  What useful information do you want from me… I agree with Jim on general principles of useful things to do. Don’t have obvious valuable property in the US, flee the country if you can try to hide your assets etc.

                • Starman says:

                  @Cominator

                  What 2020 taught me is no one can be trusted, especially people who keep saying “trust the failures” (Giuliani).

                  And once again, another useless strings of words from you.

                • Mike in Boston says:

                  If you are a gameless sperg (like me)

                  Don’t put yourself down. Being a “sperg” may or may not be changeable; I don’t know.

                  But being gameless is certainly changeable.

                  Faking it until you make it– works. Faking it long enough shifts your mental state.

                  You sound defeatist. I hope I am wrong. You are someone who knows the way things really work, as opposed to swallowing the lies of clown world. No reason to be defeatist.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  ” When our party had only seven men, it already had two principles. First, it wanted to be a party with a true ideology. And second, it wanted to be the one and only power in Germany. ”

                  Hitler will tell you what his belief system was himself, which was above all the triumph of the will; that power comes to those with a will towards it, everything else negotiable as pragmatic.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I lack the social intelligence I would say to fake being a dangerous and violent man without either being unconvincing or actually getting arrested or killed. I’m defeatist when it comes to American women (who aren’t strippers) its too hard for someone with serious deficiencies in social intelligence and without a genuine criminal background to compete for the small % of nonfat non lesbian larper American women.

                  Roosh before his conversion went through a period where he talked about how hard game with American women had become… also meeting American women in the wild you actually like is increasingly rare. Too many fat ones and dike larpers…

                  The bad thing about doing my stripper thing is you just lose almost all desire to go back as far as American women go, its not free but its not that expensive if you play it right (and you can convert it to a relationship should you dare eventually if you can manage to fuck them good but there are risks). Their personalities often also aren’t really all that bad, and they are no woke strippers (all strippers are “racists” including the black and hispanic ones). Most strippers think the idea of women running the world is a horrible idea. Strippers have the NATURAL vices and deficiencies of unowned women (self destructive pleasure seeking behaviour, ill advised sex that just happens)… not feminist grotesqueries of natural female vices (no stripper will ever deliberately get fat in the same manner that a normal woman would feel a compulsion to change her hairstyle). In clown world plenty of them are psychologically LESS twisted than the average woman.

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lou_Pai

                  Lou Pai the autistic Chinese nerd did nothing wrong…

                • jim says:

                  Then do what Roosh did. Head off somewhere the women are slimmer and you get opportunities to practice game.

                  In America, you are not going to get any opportunities to practice game unless you have a good wingman, and preferably an entire entourage. And a wingman helps mightily anywhere.

                  You are a smart man. Social skill requires practice and is mightily helped by understanding and analysis of what is going on. From time to time your instincts will jump up and take over the wheel. Let them, they are usually smarter than you are, since they have billions of years of experience and you do not. Afterwards, analyze why you reacted as you did, and why you have those instincts.

                • Pooch says:

                  Roosh is likely more of sperg and a nerd than you, Com. This is why he had to develop a finely tuned system in order to get laid. It did not come natural to him. Guys who have natural game don’t dedicate their life to learning game and write about it.

                  Lift weights and get fit. Then get on the apps. It doesn’t take much to be a top 20% man in today’s age of beta faggy soyboys. Go on dates and practice in the field. I’ve been on 100s of dates and probably have had 1000s of rejections. Anyone in experienced in game will tell you the same. Like any skill it takes dedication to the craft and hours and hours of practice until it becomes 2nd nature and eventually it does.

                • jim says:

                  Apps work, because ninety nine percent of your competition (and one hundred percent of the chicks) do not know what the chicks are looking for.

                • The Cominator says:

                  All the covid crap makes travel difficult… when i do it mow given the situation it will likely be the idea of going to Asia permanently.

                • suones says:

                  @Pseudo-Chrysostom

                  Hitler will tell you what his belief system was himself, which was above all the triumph of the will; that power comes to those with a will towards it, everything else negotiable as pragmatic.

                  Unfortunately, Hitler met the limits of his will soon enough. GNON called out for him to assume his destiny as God Emperor, but he shrank back from it, sure that he was just another Common Man (a delusion he got when he was down and out in Wien). The trouble with Triumphing based on Will is that “Will” is a fickle whore who gives galactic shit tests that you have to pass or be destroyed. The trouble with Fuhrerprinzip is understanding that it doesn’t stop at the Fuhrer, but extends all the way to GNON. Hitler failed at both, but it was a GLORIOUS failure that any of us would have to be born a thousand times to even approach.

                  @TheCominator

                  None of what the Nazis needed is applicable to us. The NSDAP had an excellent street fighting force and arguably the world’s best Army, and was only in need of a better State Religion than cucked Christianity. *We* have the reverse problem: too many priests and too few warriors.

                  The need for a good faith militant is when you actually have an Army, or at least a militia, and a Prophet is less direly needed than a General who will become King after victory. I am a priest at heart, but I learn War so that my sons don’t have to. Become a Paladin.

                  As for State support, the State is degenerate and ineffectual. It has zero chance against us. Our challenge is to figure out a way to convert marginal tactical victories into total strategic victory. This circle was only squared in the last century by Mussolini, which method was eagerly copied by Hitler.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Nazi Germany’s state religion was Hitler worship (or if you want to put it more moderately at least the Nazis own form of pseudo Marxism with Hitler having a cult of personality) not Christianity and Hitler loathed Christianity privately (read the Table Talks) though he didn’t plan to go after it too much until after the war.

                  Hitler’s problem was that he was very very close to a Marxist, his initial economic policy for the 1st two years wasn’t so bad (when he let Schadt run things) but he began putting the socialism in National Socialism after that. Also Hitler’s 1st two years were devoted to somewhat winning over the higher officers of the army who tended to be old monarchist right wing types.

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eCkyWBPaTC8

                • orochimaru says:

                  “Apps work”

                  they do? where can i read more about this?

                • Pooch says:

                  Red pill subreddit

            • Pooch says:

              He’s not obsessive but he has said that our current year leftism is entirely Jewish and can be traced to Marx.

              • suones says:

                Moldbug deserves credit for pointing out the Puritan origins of Progressivism, but he gives Jews far too much credit. Judeo-Bolshevism is not a spent force yet, and is dominant in the US Left. Prog Left is an ascendant force, but not completely dominant.

                Of course, Moldbug instinctively covers for his tribe, and BAP for his own, but both are right to some degree. For example, the entire system of Affirmative Action/Reservation is of Jewish origin, created to benefit Jews, and sustained by them. The same with unlimited immigration, “civil rights,” you name it, all Jewish, in USA as in South Africa or Rhodesia. To pretend that “trannerism” is a bigger problem than immigration or even feminism is either retarded or devious, and both of the latter are Jewish projects, regardless of Moldbug.

                • The Original OC says:

                  Progressivism appears to have Quaker origins, as Scott Siskind pointed out – is it wrong?

                  Kevin MacDonald describes the Puritans as a proto-Anglo race-nationalists, destroyed by the American Revolution – is it wrong?

                  Jewish power is certainly real, but it’s focused on preserving the Jews first, only incidentally on crushing the goys, which is why they want all the things you mention specifically. They want to fragment society into lots of minorities so that they, a minority by design, do not suffer the disadvantages of being a minority in relative terms.

                  You can see this in Moldbug’s essay on Siskind’s reinvention of Naziism, in which he says yeah saving the goys might be nice or whatever, but it has a small chance of hurting us, so maybe best not to do it.

                  Whereas Anglo power in, for example, reconstruction, was very much focused on crushing the Anglos, as was French power in Haiti.

                • Pooch says:

                  Female emancipation is the biggest problem which came about long before the Jews arrived.

                • suones says:

                  @The Original OC

                  Progressivism appears to have Quaker origins, as Scott Siskind pointed out – is it wrong?

                  Hey, is it cool to use Scott’s “real” name now? 😆

                  It’s not wrong, but it is not the complete truth. Like Moldbug, Scott instinctively covers for his tribe. One Jew commenting on another Jew’s mutilation of an Aryan movement.

                  Jewish power is certainly real, but it’s focused on preserving the Jews first, only incidentally on crushing the goys, which is why they want all the things you mention specifically. They want to fragment society into lots of minorities so that they, a minority by design, do not suffer the disadvantages of being a minority in relative terms.

                  I do not care for the “reasons” given by Semitic apologists for trying to crush us. It is all pilpul.

                  …saving the goys might be nice or whatever, but it has a small chance of hurting us, so maybe best not to do it.

                  This is imputing rational motives to the demonic impulses of Jews. If they were completely rational, they wouldn’t be engaged in trying to destroy Israel itself. In fact, since it is verboten for anyone of consequence to so much as wink at Israel, the chief enemies of Israel are other Jews. Zionists are engaged in an existential struggle, with Jews. Jim believes that Zion under King David will fix a lot of Jewish problems, and I tend to agree with that, but it is only hypothetical at this point.

                • The Cominator says:

                  We do not generally agree with wignat memes leftist jews are a big problem but leftism is not a Jewish ethnic conspiracy. Please cut this bullshit.

                • jim says:

                  Leftism is not a Jewish ethnic conspiracy, but Jews play a substantial role (which role is being diminished by dot Indians) and a lot of the madness of the left is Jewish madness, which appears in other forms among non progressive Jews.

                  So on the one hand, we need to sit on people who say that there is nothing but a Jewish problem, and on the other hand, we have to acknowledge that there really is a Jewish problem.

                  The big problem, however is the woman problem, and it is not the Jews that gave us that problem.

                  I totally blame Jews for the banking and fiat money problems, and in the documents I am preparing cheerfully use the terms “Jewish Banking”, “Christian Banking”, and “Islamic Banking”, because that is what they are.

                  If we successfully address the problem of Jewish Banking, that will make us rich, but it will not give us grandchildren.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The time of the jewish left is in its twilight, even for those who don’t consider them white they look too white for woke pieties and reform jews don’t have jewish children generally.

                • linker says:

                  Saying that Jews are crushing us is as ridiculous as saying blacks or women are crushing us. Traitorous whites are crushing us and that allows blacks and Jews and women to cause mayhem as a proxy for traitorous whites. Without traitorous white men, Jews would be powerless merchants, women would be in the kitchen and black people would be deported or relegated to ghettos where they cannot collect welfare or attack white people. White males are 1000x stronger than all of those groups combined so it would be trivial to do all of that without white male defectors.

                  suones has no empathy for the Jews but in my opinion, Jews are acting with great honor. The white race is defecting on itself, and it has a history of defecting on Jews undeservedly (Holocaust) rather than to expel their own defectors. White people in their current state are insane, not agreement capable, and randomly lashing out at each other, at Jews, at China, at Russia, etc.

                  From this game theory perspective you can see the Jews are doing the RATIONAL and VIRTUOUS thing by protecting their own and trying to destroy and enslave the goyim. Jews are like the master race. They are like white people but smarter and not race traitors to their own kind.

                • suones says:

                  @Pooch

                  https://blog.reaction.la/culture/forget-about-cultural-marxism/

                  That article is about avoiding an exclusive focus on “Cultural Marxism.” I believe it is targeted at “whites-only” socialists who find, in Jews, a convenient excuse for upsetting a lot of applecarts. Not Soros, of course, but the local pawn-shop owner.

                  Moldbug and Siskind, OTOH, completely dismiss any Judaic involvement in any destruction at all, which is the other extreme. Cultural Marxism has been a major problem in USA since WWII, not the only problem, but a major one, and has been exported across the world. CM is quite transparently a descendent of Marxism, which is an offshoot of Judaism.

                  Today, while the Prog Left can be considered as the Bioleninist descendent of Puritanism, the so-called “Establishment” Left (Chomsky, Schumer, Pelosi) is resolutely Marxist, and has slightly more power than the former, though declining.

                  Not focussing autistically on “tHe JeWs” does not mean completely ignoring Jewish leadership and perpetration of various revolutions arond the world, and continued Jewish support for Leftism. Jim commented somewhere that ~80% of Jews voted against Trump, and this was with him trying every trick in the Talmud to appease them, including giving his daughter.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Jews are not acting as an ethnic conspiracy to establish themselves as a ruling class though your post does make a good point that things would probably be better if they were.

                • linker says:

                  Does Scott Alexander have ANY value besides as a cautionary tale? I skimmed his blog and there was one mildly interesting article about amphetamines. Otherwise he seems like a midwitted eunuch and a toady for the deep state. Even the amphetamine article was not red pilled, it was just talking about which is the best to prescribe without even challenging the concept of why psychiatrists need to prescribe them. He behaves as if psychiatrists are actual experts and not credentialed hyper predators that ruin people’s lives.

                • jim says:

                  Scott is not a midwit. Scott is an extremely smart guy who applies ninety percent of his massive brainpower to making himself stupid, and finding amazing clever ways to inflict harm on himself and everyone around him.

                  As leftism gets stupider and stupider and more and more evil, he finds ever more clever ways to rationalize it.

                  In the Kathy Forth shenanigans part of him could see what was happening, and talked about it in code, which code I could read, but he could not. The sane part of his mind was locked in a closet and chained to the wall, and telling us in code about what was going on, while hiding the messages not only from the commissars, but from Scott himself.

                • suones says:

                  @jim

                  Leftism is not a Jewish ethnic conspiracy, but Jews play a substantial role (which role is being diminished by dot Indians)

                  This is because we’re the only Aryan tribe who can see the role played by ageing Jew Brahmins, and we take to it. Others, like Cominator (or a past commenter, Not Tom), seem to have crimestop whenever Jewish leadership and/or complicity in major crimes of leftism comes up. Really, the declining Jewish power means a vacuum is created, and Anglos should be eagerly filling it, but then they would have to admit to themselves that Jewish power exists in the first place, so they do not.

                  Oh, and Marxism, the bedrock of J-Left, is certainly an offshoot of Judaism in the same way as Prog-Left is a Christian heresy.

                • jim says:

                  > Oh, and Marxism, the bedrock of J-Left, is certainly an offshoot of Judaism in the same way as Prog-Left is a Christian heresy.

                  Marx, sitting in the British library, read up on the Christian heresy suppressed by Cromwell, and proceeded to do the same thing with Judaism in place of Christianity.

                  Marxism is Judaism transliterated to a pretense of science and materialism, but Marx was inspired in substantial part by what the Diggers did to Christianity before Cromwell stomped hard on them. The pseudo scientific pseudo materialism is Marx’s own, but the proletarian identity is the digger identity.

                  And once the Soviet Union fell, Cultural Marxism is Marxism that accommodates modern progressivism, so there was cross fertilization both in the original source, and in today’s destination, with a Jew originating, and Jews bringing it back into Puritan derived progressivism as cultural, rather than economic, Marxism.

                • Pooch says:

                  Interestingly, something like 40% of Jews in Florida voted for Trump.

                • The Original OC says:

                  Puritans had a handle on the WC, and their women were fruitful.

                  In principle, Puritans were open to the world, but did not evangelise, and married within and among geographically close Puritan families, much like the Amish.

                  It was Quakers who wanted to ask women three times to consent, and then ask the community to consent to the consent, and invite the world to join them (although they eventually moved the Scots-Irish into upstate Pennsylvania). The Quakers were sterile and died out, but their evangelism did not die out, and their immigration-evangelism exploded because of the uniquely favourable geography.

                  It is Quakerism, not Puritanism, with which we now contend. Quakerism converted formerly Puritan New England two hundred year later, just as the high church Anglican South was converted after the Civil War to demotic low-church Evangelicalism, and low-church Evangelicalism is now being converted to Quakerism.

                • jim says:

                  Nuts,

                  I don’t recognize these Puritans you describe.

                  Puritanism was always a state religion which imposed it’s faith by war and state power, beheading a king in the process.

                  Puritanism attacked marriage and the family, abolishing the sacrament of marriage, suppressing Church weddings in favor of state weddings which treated men and women exactly alike, abolished Christmas and introduced divorce.

                  When Charles the second turned the clock back and purged the Church of England, many of those purges fled to America, where they founded Harvard, which was the Vatican of Puritanism.

                  The distinguishing feature of Puritanism is rule by priests. State power and evangelism by conquest.

                • The Original OC says:

                  You are right about all of that.

                  Puritans seized power in England in a military coup in the 1640s, and when that failed they moved to the United States. But they weren’t the only ones, and the American Revolution was carried on one century later by people who were not Puritans, who did not dress as Puritans, who did not disproportionately come from New England, and who had not gone to Harvard.

                  John Adams was from New England and went to Harvard, but was a Congregationalist, not a Puritan. George Washington and Thomas Jefferson were both Virginia Anglicans who attended William & Mary (Washington to be licensed for a trade). Puritanism had not and did not take over America in a military coup, as it very openly and viscerally had done in England in the 1640s.

                  Modern America, and the empire it rules, is not puritan. The Warsaw Pact was noticeably Puritan, outlawing American fashions on Puritan grounds, promoting clean living and bodily health in the notoriously alcoholic Russians, and so forth. Modern American lifestyle is sensuality combined with an insistence on momentary consent on all things, a consent that *begins* with those involved, and widens, where allowed, to require consent of the whole community. This is the Quaker formula, a formula that conquered through the education system rather than through military means.

                  The Puritans mismanaged England, but they did not fail to breed in New England until their power was broken and they were subordinated to the national government. At one time, Puritan New England had been like Mormon Utah in the later 19th century.

                • jim says:

                  Puritanism, like communism, keeps renaming itself to get rid of the bad name it acquired in power,

                  Congregationalism was Puritanism, renamed. One of an endless succession of renamings,

                  The State Churches of the Colonies that started the revolution were Puritan Churches no matter what they called themselves.

                  The Puritans changed their name as often as their trousers, while the renamed church would continue from the same buildings with the same personnel.

                • jim says:

                  The New England educational system was explicitly and overtly run by the state Church, which explicitly claimed to be Christian, more Christian than thou, all the way to 1950.

                  At what date do you draw the line and say “on that date Puritans lost power”

                  What happened on that date?

                • alf says:

                  If your goal is robbing others, emancipating women is an obvious tactic, since it weakens men (and in the long run, women), making them easier to rob.

                • Mr.P says:

                  @The Original OC

                  The American Revolution was carried on one century later by people who were not Puritans, who did not dress as Puritans, who did not disproportionately come from New England, and who had not gone to Harvard.

                  John Adams was from New England and went to Harvard, but was a Congregationalist, not a Puritan.

                  Generally on the right track but not quite correct in the details.

                  “From eastern Maine to southern Connecticut, the Puritan churches — now termed Congregationalist — lined up on the patriot side, urging their members to resist” i.e., take up The Revolution. American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America by Colin Woodward, p. 119.

                  Chapter 4, “Founding Yankeedom,” details the holiness spiral of the Puritans, who “came to the New World not to re-create rural English life but rather to build a completely new society: an applied religious utopia, a Protestant theocracy based on the teachings of John Calvin.” Ibid, p. 57.

                  “Yankeedom was first to rebel [against British rule]…. The nation with the greatest religious and ethnic cohesion, national self-awareness, and commitment to self-governance, Yankees were willing to fight and die to preserve ‘the New England Way.'” Ibid, p. 119.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The problem with the puritan hypothesis is in the post civil era when the radical Republicans lost the postwar power struggle and lost it BADLY they only won with Wilson who considered himself a southern fabian progressive and only in alliance with ethnic leftists, papists and jews. So the post puritans were only part of this coalition and the common thread of all these leftist philosophies were that they were inspired in some part by Rousseau.

                • jim says:

                  Communists always form a United front, and when the front gets power, the rest of the front is devoured.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The puritan faction seemed to lose heart with the Wilson administration though… where they were never the dominant position anyway.

                  The left thereafter depended mostly on ethnics and organized labor from that point on (until the late 60s).

                  The puritans (and really they were post puritans) formed part of the early modern left… but not the dominant faction and they never won on their own.

                  That is my basic criticism of the puritan hypothesis. I don’t reject it totally but it has problems. I agree with BAP’s Rosseau theory…

                • jim says:

                  Not seeing it.

                  The “super protestant” faction seemed to be in the driver’s seat.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Wilson and House and FDR and Hopkins seemed to be to be inspired by British Fabians (who may have a pedigree going back to Protestant dissenters but if they do I’m not aware of it) rather than post Puritan dissenters.

                  The post puritan faction had a substantial rural voting bloc that disappeared almost entirely after Wilson when the Democratic party thereafter came to depend (as today) mostly on city voters (and now upon city vote counters).

                • Pooch says:

                  Not seeing it either. Rousseau is just better concealed Calvinism.

    • Cloudswrest says:

      My thought/impression was VP poster “Imwill” was some sort of shill or hasbara. He is way off the “Hertzsprung-Russell diagram” of typical VP commenters.

    • RMIV says:

      i tested those waters on Social Galactic with that 4chan poast of Charlie & Eunice Johns delineating the multicultural AoC trap that gifts hymens to Juan, Tyrone, and Mohammed.

      predictably there were no few hysterical responses. others came at me with their slanted Bible justifications for their purple/blue pill’d position. most simply said something to the effect of “any man sniffing around my teenage daughter gets shot.”

      pointing out that many if not most girls are obviously fucking by 14/15 proved futile. they never engaged that point per se but only staunchly implied that they would not approve. how bold.
      Question: if a man’s daughter is fucking around without his blessing is that a form of cuckoldry? because i floated that idea and the losers in that thread further lost their minds. many a You Have Been Blocked and all that.

      interestingly, my primary supporters in discussing the subject were women, several of whom seemed to think getting married ever younger would have saved them no end of trouble and anguish as well as being both Biblical & healthier.

      i noticed the men ignored these women, never inquiring of them on these points even once, and continued to question my allegedly compromised virtue until i tired of the exercise

      • Good field research that corroborates my impression from VP comments. It sounds like Social Galactic is a cucky waste of time. Would you agree? Or should I join and start trolling them from within?

        Yes a daughter who plays the whore under her father’s roof cucks the father. That is why the daughter of a priest who did so was burned in front of her father’s door under Biblical law. Judah nearly burned Tamar for it.

        • RMIV says:

          Social Galactic is not a complete waste – there are certainly folk such as we in the mix there – however i can’t imagine you’d get the full gas outta it without a product to pitch. it’s useful place for getting traction on anything creative you happen to be crafting.

          there are talented people in there but the quality of conversation however is much lowered compared to this haven

      • Tom says:

        To me that seems like a complicated question. Would I be wrong to say that a fathers genetic intrests regarding his daughter are more feminine than masculine?

        It was in the sabine daughters genetic intrest to be taken by Romans. Was it not also in the Sabine fathers genetic intrests? If your wife gets taken you fight to the death, if your daughter gets taken you sabre rattle and shit test and then go home.

        These guys that talk about shooting anyone who approaches their daughter, they’re probably softies who talk big. It’s a shit-test for anyone who approaches their daughter. But men are not used to instinctively shit-testing so first time fathers think that testing impulse is how they really feel.

        • Aidan says:

          If a man tries to keep his daughter chaste by scaring off her boyfriends, said daughter will bring home progressively more violent and brutal men, in an attempt to find a man who can and will kill her father.

        • Leon says:

          Dalrock had a post on fathers living vicariously through their daughters and behaving like their pimps or cuck boyfriends. IIRC he argued that these fathers had emotionally incestuous relationships with their daughters due possibly to an unfulfilling relationship with their wives and that it was just as unhealthy as the momma’s boy relationships.

          • The Cominator says:

            I’d like a link…

            The weirdest thing I’ve always found is that its the fatherless girls who tend to like “nicer” guys at least enough to give them a chance more so than most American women. A “strong” father tends to create girls who want to find someone WORSE than Jeremy Meeks otoh. Girls who liked me tended to be fatherless or at least fatherless by puberty.

            Fatherless boys otoh are a mess.

            • Aidan says:

              Like I said above, a girl will chase men who are stronger than her father. If your daughter has a good boyfriend or suitor, it is best for you to take the L and treat your prospective son in law as at least an equal to you.

              What you observe is true. Fatherless girls are more willing to sleep with, date, and stay with nice guys, but you are probably in there after a long parade of assholes. But who knows. Thinking back on it, all the girls I banged who I knew long enough to talk about family with, had strong dads, and I knew strong because the girls would complain about their father being too overbearing. The ancient meme of the fatherless slut is probably not true, or if true, it is because fatherless girls sleep with nice guys, and nice guys notice that the only girls who put out for them don’t have dads.

              • The Cominator says:

                One other reason for the fatherless slut trope is most women the absence of violently disapproving male relations and feminist or progressive memes will eagerly embrace prostitution. Most fatherless girls in pre progressive times probably did.

              • Pooch says:

                My personal experience is that women with weak or missing fathers become sluts and whores and men with weak or missing fathers become beta.

              • Anonymous 2 says:

                Girls whose father abandoned the family tend to have an earlier sexual debut than those with fathers. However, if I’m recalling this correctly, if the father dies rather than abandon, they will also delay sexual debut.

                Draper and Harpending, “Father Absence and Reproductive Strategy: An Evolutionary Perspective”.

                • Aidan says:

                  “Slut” is a bit of an imprecise term that is used to refer to general female sexual immorality. I’ll be more precise. Girls with no fathers are more indiscriminate in their mating. Girls with fathers are more hypergamous, and girls with strong fathers are extremely hypergamous, looking for men who could take her from her father, so she might not have a high body count, but the men she dates are liable to be very evil, as I was once very evil.

                • RMIV says:

                  Aidan,

                  i often read your blog a Battleaxe to Bullshit. rollicking great stuff while it was there and i hope you backed it up or otherwise preserved those writings. always wanted to tell you how much fun i had reading it.

                  anyway you say you were once very evil, here. what precisely do you mean? i suspect i could do with some cultivation in this regard. are we talking Ragnar Redbeard MIGHT IS RIGHT or more James Lafond the knife-fighter?

                • Anonymous says:

                  RMIV, the archive of Aidan’s blog is linked in the blogroll of Jim’s blog. It’s a PDF of all of the posts.

                  https://blog.reaction.la/misc_upl/Setting%20The%20Record%20Straight.pdf

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  I think he means evil in the sense that he was the strongest man around and did what he wanted. Fucked around, deflowered virgins, was a general dick to anyone who was not one of “his” men or their women. That’s the impression I got from his blog. A barbarian, like Conan, who is stronger than the so-called civilized men and can push them around and take whatever he likes as a result.

            • Leon says:

              I think it might be this https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2018/04/26/rules-for-dating-a-daughter-of-the-king/ or one of the articles it is linked to. Not sure till I dig through all of them.

              • Tom says:

                I just heard that John Pipers (adult) kid did an anti-Christian screed on Tic Toc, and I thought of Dalrocks articles talking about how Piper advocated backdoor feminism.

                I know good men can have sons go astray, but I don’t think John Piper ruled his roost at all in this case.

      • polifugue says:

        > pointing out that many if not most girls are obviously fucking by 14/15 proved futile

        When I was in college, I met an English coed who said that almost every girl where she’s from loses their virginity at or before 13. It is not that she was of low caste, she was rich and attending a top liberal arts college.

        Any man upset at someone pursuing his teenage daughter probably failed to notice she lost it many years ago.

        • RMIV says:

          agreed. when i was 11 or 12, was fooling around with girls my age (my sister one year younger often had sleepovers on weekends)
          we had only a vague idea what we were doing, really, but parents rarely policed us for some reason and seemed forever oblivious so there was plenty of experimentation

          i never forget how easy that was to get away with, right under their noses, and at such a young age too when i’m engaged in conversation with a blue/purple pill’d dad.
          dead giveaway that such a man never received any genuine attraction from women for they can only imagine such things must occur under some form of evil coercion, it could never be their little princess’ idea.
          cope seethe, the lot of them

          when i was 17 i noticed most of the girls in my class, not to mention them in my sister’s circles a grade below us, were hooking up with college-age guys. knew a 15 year old too that had a 30-something musician boyfriend. parents are truly clueless, but looking back, i’m not sure the mum of that 15 year old didn’t know what was going on yet insisted on ignoring that the screen on daughter’s bedroom window kept coming off outside 🤔
          the dad was a beta

        • suones says:

          That’s why the correct age of female marriage is near 12. It’s going to happen anyway, so best to make sure it happens with a worthy groom.

      • Dave says:

        “any man sniffing around my teenage daughter gets shot.”

        Then he sends his teenage daughter off to a party college 400 miles away.

  16. RMIV says:

    ignoring the implied Trump-gushing Q-tardery,

    y’all find any merit to the theory laid out in this poast?

    https://greatawakening.win/p/12i4DJq8k2/many-are-asking-about-what-the-d/c/

    • jim says:

      Saw it happening in front of me. One of the many spokes Trump hurled into their wheels.

      “It is an emergency”, says Trump, and proceeds to rip the bureaucratic obstacle course out by the roots under emergency executive powers.

      Now if only he had declared a similar emergency on ballot box stuffing.

    • onyomi says:

      It’s an interesting question: namely, most of the right wingers assume the vaccine is a power play to make everyone submit to Bill Gates, big pharma, creeping surveillance via medical records, etc. but maybe it really is plan B?

      • jim says:

        It is not either or.

        Our enemies are making hay with it. But they would have made more hay if no vaccine.

        • onyomi says:

          Yeah, I don’t think in terms of grand plans so much as elites who follow their incentives to take advantage of situations that emerge. But it’s a good point that, although I’m unhappy about pushes for e.g. “vaccine passports,” it arguably could have been worse if the vaccines hadn’t come along (though arguably it also could have been better if people had finally just gotten fed up, but the willingness of large segments of the population to go along with this seemingly interminably so long as uber eats is still running is shocking).

          • orochimaru says:

            “but the willingness of large segments of the population to go along with this seemingly interminably so long as uber eats is still running is shocking”

            yes. such strict lockdowns are only possible because many have access to high-bandwith internet. the WEF crew researches this extensively.

          • suones says:

            …the willingness of large segments of the population to go along with this seemingly interminably so long as uber eats is still running is shocking…

            Why? Large segments of financially well-off men who’re deprived of home-cooked meals rely on Uber Eats. Uber Eats (and our local equivalent) are doing the Lord’s work.

            (Deprived of home-cooked meals because deprived of hausfrauen).

    • Ace says:

      Like I’ve been saying, get your vaccine shots or fake them. Pay an Indian pharmacist a small donation to toss the needle and stamp your card. The WuFlu freakout loses it’s power.

      The the blocking of the J&J vaccine over death rate that’s far less than the other 2 and is actually lower than the some problem from women on birth control is just a desperate attempt to keep the COVID gravy train going.

      • Pooch says:

        FBI announcing they will prosecute fake vaccine passports.
        https://www.ic3.gov/Media/Y2021/PSA210330

        Not that they’ll know you bribed the Indian pharmacist, but in the off chance that they catch you or she reports you, you’re likely looking at the 1/6 Capital rioter treatment…20 years of domestic terrorism and sedition charges and indefinite solitary confinement before your trial with no chance for bail with regular black guard beatings of course.

  17. TyrantOfTangent says:

    Jim, why don’t you bring up the example of Mormons to buttress your point about breakdown in sexual relations already setting in in 19th century?

    Reading 1883 book on American cities and the author is constantly whining about these degenerate, evil Mormons imposing their lust and polygamy on naturally chaste women. But then he’s constantly trying to explain why women are flocking to Mormonism despite that (3/4 church membership female in 19th century, ratio even more skewed in conversions).

    Two quotes to give you that Jim feeling – J.W. Buel Mysteries and Miseries of America’s Great Cities (1883):
    “The full enormity of this vassalage system will be better understood when the further fact is given that there are no laws in Utah against rape, incest, or oppression … Furthermore – and it is one of the most important considerations in considering the crimes of Mormonism – there are no coroners in Utah.” p. 446.

    “Mormonism, instead of advancing by liberal footsteps, has gone back into the ancient ages and become like the church of Moses, Abraham, and the old patriarchs who lived under revelation just as the Mormon church does to-day. They have literally accepted the Old Testament as their code of ethos and live under it, by which we may see an existent society identical with that described in the Pentateuch.”

    Sounds based to me. What am I missing on the Mormons?

    • jim says:

      I have not read that book. Added it to my already lengthy reading list.

      Of course women converted to Mormonism. Always looking for a strong man backed by a strong tribe. Mormonism supplied the strong tribe. We need to supply the tribe. Trouble is that the instant we come out of cover, will be crushed as the Mormons were crushed.

    • The Cominator says:

      The problem is the mainstream Mormon church has become the progressive Mormon church.

      The Mormon elders are only a few years away from marching in pride parades and slutwalks.

    • Tom says:

      I’d opine they have some major weaknesses, for the fundamentalist/trad ones it’s glaringly the idea that more women = more holy. For the mainstream ones it’s the fact that they caved on their core values when the American fed pressured them. Mainstream mormons ought to be better on the race issue and woman issue than others, but my experience indicates they are often worse and do extra virtue signaling to offset their doctrines. The most anti-polygyny folks I’ve encountered are mainstream mormons.

      As to FLDS and mainstream mormons of old: they’ve always had a feminism issue. They have more than enough ‘strong horse’ traits to offset it and be desirable, but they have more ‘in house’ problems than mainstream protestant polygynists. Especially in terms of jealousy problems.

      Utah was the first state to give women the right to vote. Predictably they strongly favored keeping polygamy. The fed was blindsided by this and promptly revoked womens right to vote. But the mormons have always been eager to signal how good they are to women, and how they’re just like the rest of society, and how they’re real true progressive people. Obviously they’re not progressive people, to their credit, but they try to signal it way too strong.

      But if we’re not talking esoteric theology issues, the mormons core issue is just this: they view having more women as being more holy, and that implies all sorts of socially destructive things.

      • TyrantOfTangent says:

        Link to hathi trust citation page for book (which has link to full book) for anyone interested (the title of this one is Sunlight and Shadow because the same book was released twice, second time under this name in 1889): https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/102286888 . Salt Lake City section is only interesting part as the rest of the book is just him complaining about women being corrupted by bad men in the big cities.

        There is a bit on the marriage ceremony that also aligns with Jim’s perspective – “… he (the priest) tells the man that he must look to God, but the woman must look to her husband as her god, for if he lives in his religion, the spirit of God will be in him, and she must therefore yield him unquestioning obedience, for he is as a god unto her, and then concludes by saying that he having authority from on high … seals the man and woman for time and all eternity.” p. 436.

        Tom – thanks for that analysis, I haven’t spent much time interacting with Mormons and that fills me in on some of the details. Feminism issue comes through a bit in the book where LDS seems to deny or keep secret some of their own ceremonies in order to avoid being seen as regressive.

        To Tom’s point:
        “A man’s or a woman’s glory in eternity is to depend upon the size of the family; for a woman to remain childless is a sin and a calamity … her husband’s rank in eternity must greatly depend on the number of his wives, and she will share in that glory whatever it is.” p.444

        Also seems plausible that Mormons kind of needed to adopt polygamy considering their excess female population. But then once fixed as a core tenet, can become a problem.

        • Tom says:

          The poly thing existed pre migration, so it seems to be a facet of Mormonism being founded by a small set of very alpha men. I respect that in and of itself. The tying of holiness to wives makes sense in the context of a first generation of very alpha pioneer men showing off their status. It leads to some obvious and some counterintuitive problems when that alpha philosophy became an intergenerational religion.

          Obvious problem 1 is the supply problem. They’re not a war-culture that raids for women, but they are pretty good seducers (which made them enemies more than polygamy itself did). But the quantity-> holiness teirs demand way too much supply. Muslims cap wives at 4, but 4 for mormons is just getting into the upper teirs of holiness, with 7 being a more desirable number. If their numbers were more like 1 is holy, 2 is extra holy, 3 is max holy, they probably could have made a better go of it.

          2nd problem is that it ties holiness to women, which is always, always a bad thing. This is mitigated a lot by the fact that the only holy woman is under a man. It’s still a problem though.

          3rd problem is that saying ‘the supreme alpha decrees that all our men are alpha enough to have many women’ is, well, that it isn’t true. The supreme alpha seems quite happy to let some men be terrible with women and others great, and to let nature take it’s own soft eugenic course. Early Christians had concubines, the preisthood scolded them but it was otherwise tolerated. It was tolerated all the way to the lateran councils of the 1200s, and even past that to the council of Trent in the 1500s. Christianity has a place in it for the eunich and the alpha. And the alpha getting some scolding isn’t even a bug so much as a society-level shit test to make sure the man with more women is the kind of man that can handle more women.

          Mormonism 1.0 doesn’t have a place for men who are bad with women. And that’s most men. I can’t help but wonder if the mormon preisthood of the day wasn’t eager to hear the US fed overturn polygamy.

          I agree with Psudo-Chrysosotom in a way. It’s better than wives = holiness. But I think Christianity 1.0 had it better: if you want sex, you get a wife and have children. Or you just don’t have sex. There is no need to promote fecundity, God made sure it would come naturally. You just need to ban avoiding children. There is no need to make naturally infertile couples 2nd class, but there is a need to make intentionally infertile sex 2nd class or worse.

          • Tom says:

            For disclosure Im a Christian that owns a couple women, and I know a variety of FLDS and protestant polygynists as well. My women behave well, and I have no doubt that most people on this blog could maintain multiple women without trouble, probably with less trouble than I have (I never was anything like a PUA).

            But I would not reccomend polygamy to the overwhelming majority of men. They would have an endless stream of shit-tests. Mormon ‘God says I should have more women’ is a strong stance. The prot polyagamists say ‘I choose to have more women and Gods fine with it’ is stronger.

          • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

            It’s a single sentence, so obviously there will be more nuance than can be fitted within a single sentence.

            An implication of rampant bastardry can sound shocking to a civilized mind, but quite evidently, successful reproduction doesn’t actually take place *except* if there is patriarchal marriage, anyways – most especially with higher order species of humans.

            • Tom says:

              Well said. Anyway it was a good single sentances that said a lot. To me it said the priority should be children, not wives, and I wholly agree.

              Take it as ‘building on what you said’ more than ‘disagreeing with you’.

              All that in mind I’d say it’s better to make patriarchal order itself holy. Being the patriarch entails a holy duty to those who belong to you, and not being the patriarch entails holy duty to the patriarch. Fecudnancy and stability will flow from that naturally

              Which, I’d opine that Christianity 1.0 does.

      • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

        Need to view having more children – or more grandchildren – as more holy instead.

        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          Random thought this provoked; theological writings unsealed only after your death (ie, not writing that will benefit your status now).

  18. Dee says:

    I am fairly new to Jim‘s blog and reactionary thought in general. My knowledge of real history is very little which is why I was wondering if Jim would be willing to provide a list of essential reading.

    Thank you

    • jim says:

      “The True History of the American Revolution”
      by Sydney George Fisher

      Short of it was that the American Revolution was treason – by English whigs against English tories – like the fall of China to communism and the Vietnam war was a proxy war for a power struggle fought in Washington, the American Revolution was a proxy war for a power struggle in London.

      English Society 1688-1832: Ideology, Social Structure and Political Practice During the Ancien Regime

      Reveals the centrality of the state Church and heretical entryism to politics.

      I don’t have any good books for pre-1820 sex and marriage, for marriage 1.0. I much need one.

      • suones says:

        …the American Revolution was treason…

        Amen.

        GNON knows how many tradcucks I’ve triggered by that hate-fact, but the fact remains that the only Patriot in America was Benedict Arnold.

      • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

        The closest thing you can find, or that i’ve found, would probably be something like The Monstruous Regiment of Women, by John Knox; which isn’t so much about how house fathers should coordinate to handle women, as much as it is about the women in authority question in particular.

      • The Original OC says:

        “I don’t have any good books for pre-1820 sex and marriage, for marriage 1.0. I much need one.”

        Untying the Knot by Roderick Phillips.

        The book is written from the perspective that abolishing marriage is good, necessary and obvious circa ~1990, but gives a comprehensive comparative account of divorce laws in all of Europe throughout the post-reformation period.

        The Anglicans seem to have had the toughest divorce laws in Europe, being essentially Catholics with a national focus, and this is reflected in the rapid population growth of England.

  19. onyomi says:

    Jim: “All women will forcefully resist the trad wife role, All Women Are Like That, but they all love a man who successfully compels them to adopt it, and they all really enjoy being compelled to adopt it.”

    Just want to say this comment from an older thread is a real lightbulb for me because, when I met my wife, she was a feminist who said her career was very important to her and that she didn’t want kids. As I gradually got her to accept a more traditional role, it’s been obvious each step of the way that she’s been happier, yet I’ve often wondered if I shouldn’t have just started with someone more naturally inclined to a trad role rather than marrying a feminist and slowly changing her.

    If Jim is correct, as I suspect he may be, then my mistake was in thinking that my wife was resistant to the trad role I could tell she’d be happier with due to bad social programming from her liberal parents and pop culture. Rather, it could be that all women inherently, ironically resist accepting the trad role that will make them happy, but without a culture of patriarchal authority to make it happen, the individual father and/or husband bears a lot of the burden of well, taming her, so to speak?

    • orochimaru says:

      yes. she will always resist.

    • jim says:

      Emperors with authority to execute any of their concubines for any reason or no reason, with concubines raised completely for the role, have had empire ending women troubles.

      Woman are like that so that in the ancestral environment, they will wind up in the trad wife role as the property of a strong man, not a weak man.

      Unfortunately our environment makes all men weak, so large numbers of women fail to accomplish what they are seeking, and wind up as cat ladies.

      The solution is to boldly be strong, a course of action which is unavoidably dangerous.

      There is no legal way to have marriage 1.0.

      Christians keep trying to find a “good” woman. But no woman are good by blue pilled measure of a good woman. Hence the black pill.

      All women are good under the thumb of a strong man. However, a woman who has banged too many men will only be good under the thumb of General Butt Naked.

      • onyomi says:

        It sounds too obvious put this way, but it seems a blind spot in many men’s mental model of women may arise due to the fact that we cannot know our mothers before they were mothers. I also never had an older sister or any older female cousins, etc. I saw frequently.

  20. Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

    On an incidental note, people who wear helmets are more likely to get head injuries.

    • suones says:

      [citation needed]

      • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

        The joke is about nominalistic thinking, and or how factums and statums will be unintelligible to persons possessed of such modes of thought – especially when purposefully used disingenuously.

        It is literally true that ‘people who wear helmets’ are more likely to get head injuries… because people wearing helmets tend to be people in situations where they could expect a danger of head injury in the first place.

        ” A WITTY statesman once said, you might prove anything by figures. We have looked into various statistic works, Statistic-Society Reports, Poor-Law Reports, Reports and Pamphlets not a few, with a sedulous eye to this question of the Working Classes and their general condition in England; we grieve to say, with as good as no result whatever. Assertion swallows assertion; according to the old Proverb, ‘as the statist thinks, the bell clinks’! Tables are like cobwebs, like the sieve of Danaides; beautifully reticulated, orderly to look upon, but which will hold no conclusion. Tables are abstractions, and the object a most concrete one, so difficult to read the essence of. There are innumerable circumstances; and one circumstance left out may be the vital one on which all turned. Statistics is a science which ought to be honourable, the basis of many most important sciences; but it is not to be carried on by steam, this science, any more than others are; a wise head is requisite for carrying it on. Conclusive facts are inseparable from inconclusive except by a head that already understands and knows. Vain to send the purblind and blind to the shore of a Pactolus never so golden: these find only gravel; the seer and finder alone picks up gold grains there. And now the purblind offering you, with asseveration and protrusive importunity, his basket of gravel as gold, what steps are to be taken with him?—Statistics, one may hope, will improve individually, and become good for something. Meanwhile, it is to be feared the crabbed satirist was partly right, as things go: ‘A judicious man,’ says he, ‘looks at Statistics, not to get knowledge, but to save himself from having ignorance foisted on him.’ With what serene conclusiveness a member of some Useful-Knowledge Society stops your mouth with a figure of arithmetic! To him it seems he has extracted the elixir of the matter, on which now nothing more can be said. It is needful that you look into his sad extracted elixir; and ascertain, alas, too probably, not without a sight, that it is wash and vapidity, good only for the gutters. “

        • suones says:

          Got it, haha. I mentally extended your statement to read “people who waer helmets are more likely to get head injuries, compared to people who do not wear hlemets while engaged in tasks prone to head-injuries.” But you did not say that.

          Thanks for the lesson in logic, friend. 🙏

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      This was a reply with 20:35 down below.

  21. onyomi says:

    Random question: I think Jim has suggested the peripheries of the Chinese and/or Russian empires might be good places to wait out whatever’s currently brewing in the US and/or maybe Western Europe. Any thoughts on periphery of US empire, e.g. Puerto Rico, assuming one’s extended family is still in the continental US? If you had a job offer in Hong Kong and a job offer in Puerto Rico, which would you take?

    • linker says:

      Islands just seem wrong. Not sure why. If civilization collapses you will be stuck on that island. That seems like a fucked up situation to be in. If on a continent you can travel between cities on foot if need be or escape into the wilderness. Maybe this is not rational? I would choose Hong Kong over Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico could be a staging ground for some atrocity the empire cooks up. Look at what they are doing to St. Vincent today, refusing to rescue unvaccinated people before a volcano explodes. Kamala could just do some random shit to Puerto Rico like kill every white person to save the locals or carpet bomb it because their corona numbers are too high. They are going to make it a state soon. I’m not sure why you think it would be safer. If anything it is the perfect target because its under complete control of the empire, but far enough away that Americans see it as an irrelevant island of browns. Kamala will nuke it and leftists would be like AAAAA LOOK AT THE POOR BROWNS THIS IS WHY WHITE PEOPLE AND COVID ARE BAD, and conservatives would be like WOW DEMONCRATS ARE THE REAL RACISTS, IMAGINE IF THE OUTRAGE IF THEY DID THAT IN THE US??? THE HYPOCRISY OF DEMOCRATS KNOWS NO BOUNDS!!! Also you know how it’s supposed to be risky to live in major cities? The main reason for that is that if anything happens you can’t leave! The same thing sort of applies to an island. I’m sure it’s filled with FEMA people and military bases too, which is not good.

      I choose Hong Kong 1000%.

      I’m uneducated on this topic, but it’s something to think about.

      • onyomi says:

        Thanks for the thoughts! Tend to agree.

      • yarr matey says:

        Boats are a thing.

        A 30-ft sailing yacht is completely affordable, small enough for one person to handle and big enough to travel pretty much anywhere in the Caribbean or coastal US you want, assuming you’re willing and able to put in the time and work to maintain it. If you live in an island environment, you’d better.

        If you’re living somewhere as a remote-worker IT drone with the boat as a luxury toy you take out less than once a month, then you’re not taking the vehicle seriously and should be continental. Take it out on a near-daily or at least weekly basis, barring bad weather, for a year or so, and you’ll be ready to pick any island you want. But you have to train yourself into knowing how to use it and knowing what to expect.

        • jim says:

          Boats cost a great deal of space, time, and money. A boat capable of fleeing a collapsing empire needs a group that regularly uses it, not one man that regularly uses it, because it really is not practical for one man to regularly use it. A thirty foot sailing yacht is not capable of fleeing the US empire, while still sucking up one hell of a lot of maintenance time, energy, and money.

          • Starman says:

            If you can cross the ocean, you can flee the US empire. The ocean covers 70% of the Earth’s surface.

            https://youtu.be/CiZKvDxeLeg

            • Pooch says:

              Pirates are going to be an obstacle, particularly around Africa. Make sure to bring plenty of weapons and ammo.

              • suones says:

                Pirates are a problem, but not the problem. The Indian Navy routinely fucks their shit up. The main problem is the US Fleet[1]. Good luck escaping that in a boat.

                [1]: https://www.c7f.navy.mil/Media/News/Display/Article/2563538/7th-fleet-conducts-freedom-of-navigation-operation/

                • Pooch says:

                  Very true, if we are assuming the US Navy is still operational during the time when you flee I would not want to run into them without valid documents, but than again if you have no Navy protection, pirating is going to turn from a small problem into a big problem especially around black territories. History is littered with black pirates causing problems against small merchant fleets. They will not be tremendously combat effective though. You may be able to repel them with precision rifle fire.

                • Pooch says:

                  I should say African pirates in general not necessarily black. Plenty of Arab pirates causing problems.

                • Starman says:

                  Sending a billion dollar destroyer commanded by captainess Shaniqua to go after a single sailboat is Ever Given tier retardation.

                  That said, during the Bronze Age collapse, people whose homes were mobile (boats and tents) or who were rich Phoenician merchants were at a significant advantage than those whose homes were fixed to the land.

                • Starman says:

                  While having a home that was mobile was highly advantageous in the Bronze Age Collapse, being Chinese living in China was also advantageous during the Bronze Age Collapse.

                • jim says:

                  The tribe of Dan, which according to one ancient source frequently or usually lived on boats, did OK during the bronze age collapse, but their boats were mighty big, had fifty or so men on board – which is roughly what you need to support and maintain a sailboat from within the resources and skills available on that sailboat, and also what you need when making landfall in dangerous territory. A thirty foot yacht is not equivalent, because the resources and skills needed to keep it going over any substantial time and distance are necessarily land based.

                  The Dannite solution is, approximately, the seasteading solution. Build a community that is sea based. Minimum required size is not small. And seasteading is dangerously vulnerable to drones with missiles and smart bombs. A large boat can be efficiently destroyed by a very small bomb from a very small drone.

                • suones says:

                  …being Chinese living in China was also advantageous during the Bronze Age Collapse.

                  Or, you know, you might skip the whole “Bronze Age” gayness and go straight from Stone to Iron, like South India.[1] Bet they don’t teach that in gay history. North India is slightly more complicated, but the line linking Bronze Age to proto-Aryans is a short, straight one. This is what you get for submitting to gayfake “history” terms like “Bronze Age collapse.” There was no such collapse in China, no such collapse in India. In fact, Aryan reading/writing is better in every way than Bronze age Indus Valley forefathers.

                  [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronze_Age_India

                • Pooch says:

                  There was no such collapse in China, no such collapse in India.

                  There was no Bronze age collapse in Indochina because there was no Bronze age civilizational greatness in Indochina (and debatable if there was ever greatness in Indochina at any point in history).

                • Starman says:

                  It’s cheaper to send a SWAT team to a fixed house or destroy that house with a drone and a firebomb than it is to send a billion dollar destroyer with drones and captainess Shaniqua at the helm looking for a little sailboat.

                  A sailboat that can switch from land fall to land fall as needed to avoid danger. Much like a man with a tent can switch from one spot of land to another to avoid danger.

                  The Bronze Age Collapse had the dreaded Sea People’s but it also had people on boats just avoiding danger. On land, one of the beneficiaries of the collapse were the nomadic Aramites and the Jews with their mobile temple, the Tabernacle.

                  The Canaanites were fixed farmers living in fixed houses that lived between empires (Egypt and Hatti), they got the short end of the stick.

                • Starman says:

                  And with the mentions of 50 men and 60 men.

                  No man can be trusted these days.

                  Cominator still defends Rudy Giuliani to this day.

                  Jim still thinks the Proud Boys are trustworthy, despite Jim’s post on the RedPill on Women being The Gold Standard of RedPills:
                  https://blog.reaction.la/uncategorized/fixed-privacy-leak-in-avatars/#comment-2716517

                  If anyone wants to set up their own fight club, I suggest asking every single recruit a multiple choice RedPill on Women question. It’s obvious that the Proud Boys and their ilk cannot do so. On Gab, there’s a ton of Q, MAGA types and Alt right types who insist on putting women on pedestals. You’re gonna put your trust in them? LOL

                  That said, better to ask the question, “what’s in it for me?” Put “looking out for #1” as your central focus.

                  Wanna stay fixed to one spot of land? Or have the option of being mobile. Fixed houses cannot flee danger.

                • jim says:

                  Are they blue pilled? Maybe. Links?

                • Starman says:

                  @Jim

                  ”Are they blue pilled? Maybe. Links?”

                  The Proud Boys and others like them were lead by fucking fed informants!

                  https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2021-01-27/proud-boys-leader-was-government-informant-records-show

                  That is piss-poor performance. I’m not the only one here among the commentariat that pointed how much these groups suck.

                  You can look at my posts on Gab dealing with these people. They often block me.

                  https://gab.com/r7booster/posts/106068115411073291

                  https://gab.com/r7booster/posts/106067514090032020

                  https://gab.com/rooshv/posts/106054506646674645

                  https://gab.com/MajorPatriot

                  “What’s in it for me?” Needs to be answered, and it needed to be answered yesterday. So I’m going mobile and I do not intend to be fixed to any land.

                  And like I said earlier with Cominator… Rudy Giuliani wasted people’s time, but more importantly, Giuliani WASTED MY FUCKING TIME.

                  Here’s another one!

                  ”Hold the line patriots!”

                  https://gab.com/Praying-Medic/posts/106067298065975235

                  Just wait and wait and wait and Trust Da Plan!

                • jim says:

                  The first three links seemed to involve interactions with feds, shills, and idiots who might well be duped by feds and shills. But I am not seeing proud boys being blue pilled in those links. Is the creationist a proud boy? He was triggered and shocked by “nigger”. You can tell who someone worships by which desecrations offend him. Christian my ass, I doubt he would be able to take the affirmation. Somehow I doubt a whole lot of proud boys are terribly shocked by the word nigger.

                  It is plausible that they might be shocked by someone doubting the inherent chastity and virtue of nine year old girls, but your links do not seem to be evidence for this proposition.

                  Major Patriot and Anonymous Patriot do sound like proud boys, though not seeing anything that shows that they are. Not seeing anything in your links that shows they are blue pilled either.

                • Starman says:

                  @jim

                  “You can tell who someone worships by which desecrations offend him. Christian my ass, I doubt he would be able to take the affirmation.”

                  Nate17 is a fed shill, the problem was that every single professed American Christian in that Roosh subthread did not call out Nate17, even after he had openly called Saint Augustine a liar. It was only me and an anime shitposter (Wanderfrank) who was calling him out. That is pathetic! Do you wonder why I don’t trust anyone now. Ironically, Qanon resembles the Soviet Union’s “Operation Trust

                  “It is plausible that they might be shocked by someone doubting the inherent chastity and virtue of nine year old girls,”

                  “Major Patriot and Anonymous Patriot do sound like proud boys, though not seeing anything that shows that they are. Not seeing anything in your links that shows they are blue pilled either.”

                  Major Patriot routinely reposts Preying Medic (my spelling), a Qanon grifter. Their ilk routinely blocks me for posting even mild RedPill on Women questions and statements (non-Lolita RedPill on Women Qs). I don’t even get the chance to ask them the hardest of RedPill on Women Qs before they block me (the hardest being the Lolita Women Qs).

                  https://gab.com/FollowtheLeader

                  https://gab.com/Ra_

                  https://gab.com/JerryMandering21

                  https://gab.com/TheProgressiveNemesis

                  https://gab.com/Oldme

                  https://gab.com/BetsyBoss

                  https://gab.com/Andrew17

                  The Proud Boys and others like them are shitty human capital. You are being willfully blind. And these links are just a sampling. These links in this post are only the most recent ones and only those who blocked me.

                • jim says:

                  If they block you, likely they are frightened by crimethought, or frightened of being exposed as entryists.

                  That the Christians in the Nate subthread failed to call out Nate as entryist does not necessarily imply they cannot tell the difference between Christians and entryists against Christianity. It may well indicate that it is an issue they wish to avoid, because they fear consequences.

                • Starman says:

                  @jim

                  Jon Carver blocked me as soon as I once again asked FBI Nate17 the multiple choice RedPill on Women question.

                  https://gab.com/JonCarver

                  Jon Carver defending an exposed FBI shill Nate17 (note that Wanderfrank and DjangoCat called out Nate17, but TruChristian Jon refused and instead blocked me)

                  Jon Carver:

                  “Parting words for StarProphet: If you aren’t already repenting of your sins and placing your trust in Christ you should start ASAP. Your enemies are Satan and your own carnal nature NOT Nate17. blocked.”

                  These people suck. They are garbage human capital that cannot be depended on or trusted.

                  I (and Alf) are once again right about these people.

            • jim says:

              I do not advise crossing the ocean on a thirty foot sailboat. It can be done, it often is done, but it is tough.

          • Mike in Boston says:

            A boat capable of fleeing a collapsing empire needs a group that regularly uses it

            More unvarnished common sense. A buddy of mine has that sort of 30-something foot sailing yacht and I should call him up and quote “a 30-ft sailing yacht is completely affordable” because hearing his uncontrollable laughter for a few minutes would be pure gold.

            Granted his annual cash expenditures are just barely less than outlandish, but in order to keep them that way he does most of the maintenance himself, something that would be completely infeasible were his kids not grown and out of the house.

            So bug-out by boat is revealed as yet another problem that requires effective coordination that excludes entryists and enemy agents.

            • Starman says:

              @Mike in Boston

              Does your buddy live aboard his 30’ yacht?

              • Mike in Boston says:

                @Starman

                Nope. Hawaii, this ain’t.

                • Starman says:

                  While a 30′ yacht has more items to maintain than a house… But for some people, living aboard is easier than finding nigger-free housing that would stay nigger free in America. And others don’t have the kind of business people connections or people-skills to find the right kind of nigger-free housing in South-East Asia, but instead might have the equipment maintenance skills for maintaining a liveaboard yacht.

                  There used to be a working app called “Sketch Factor” where you can see where the nigger undertow is and can monitor its rate of change, to find the nigger-free house. But then BuzzFeed and the NYT complained and called it racist (even though it only tracked crime, not race), and thus Sketch Factor got neutered.

                  So a man can get a 30′ yacht or just have a backpack with a tent folded up inside to evade the nigger undertow.

                • Pooch says:

                  Good point. Best to build a small fleet of like minded exiles like the exiles of Troy who supposedly founded Rome and head for remote territory. Even if you land in hostile territory would not take but 10-20 organized armed white men to clear an area of savages.

                • Starman says:

                  @Pooch

                  As noted up thread, those whose houses were mobile (boats and tents) had an overwhelming advantage over those whose houses were fixed to the land during the Bronze Age Collapse. Packing and unpacking boxes from house to house in the state of Georgia gets old after awhile. Living aboard a 30′ blue water sailing yacht sure beats buying an expensive $350k house in a neighborhood that then turns into a niggerhood (see Buckhead GA).

            • Anonymous 2 says:

              “It’s like standing under a cold shower tearing up five-pound notes.” (Ted Heath)

              But it can still be enjoyable to some.

              • jim says:

                Yes, but something expensive goes wrong with a yacht at frequent intervals. If you are trying to cross the Pacific on a yacht, and something goes wrong …

                When Captain Cook and his men got shipwrecked, they had the resources and skills to make major repairs to their ship – because they were continually rebuilding it en-route.

                Sailing on long journeys, need a large team with a broad skillset and lots of spare materials and parts.

                • Cloudswrest says:

                  Which is why I think any manned trip to Mars need send a fleet rather than a dingy.

    • jim says:

      Puerto Rico is US empire. Hong Kong is a little uncomfortably inside the Chinese Hegemony, but if they decide they don’t like you, will likely throw you out rather than do you harm.

      A lot of states in the Pacific were formerly US empire, and are now quietly hedging their bets. If everything goes pear shaped, will likely be nice places to wait it out.

      • onyomi says:

        By formerly US empire Pacific states do you mean like the Philippines, or?

        • jim says:

          Japan is showing small signs of independence, Malaysia has pretty much revolted, Singapore is piously swearing allegiance to both sides, Thailand has revolted, Burma is going its own way – the list goes on.

          • orochimaru says:

            I wonder when west europe will find its balls.

            • Atavistic Morality says:

              I believe western Europe will slowly change its allegiance to China with increase influence from Russia. At least that is what you can see in the latest behavior from Germany and France.

              If Xi Jinping wants to reestablish the Mandate of Heaven then I believe it’d be a very good thing for us Europeans. Confucianism, or a form of it, is a real and viable social technology especially when compared to the insanity and destruction of progressivism.

              • orochimaru says:

                well France is rearming, which is a good sign.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  I was talking about the latest trade agreement, all three nations publicly chummy in a video-conference to the chagrin of the State Department.

              • suones says:

                If Xi Jinping wants to reestablish the Mandate of Heaven…

                This is the crucial step. Hitler failed at this, Stalin also, and Putin, and Mao. There is no reason to believe Xi will succeed, or even if he understands why it’s necessary. One doesn’t pick the Mandate of Heaven, it is Heaven who gives one its Mandate to rule as the Son of Heaven.

    • Oog en Hand says:

      Which language is harder, Spanish of Cantonese?

      • According to the Foreign Services Institute–which has decades of experience training diplomats in a wide variety of languages–Spanish is one of the easiest languages for English speakers to learn and Cantonese is one of the hardest.

        Spanish is a category 1 language, which require about 600 hours of study to achieve “General Professional Proficiency” in reading and speaking.

        Cantonese is a category 5 language, which require 2,200.

        • Oog en Hand says:

          And Polish, Hungarian or Dutch?

          • Dutch is category 1. Polish and Hungarian category 3 (1,100 hours). I found the official ratings here:

            https://www.state.gov/foreign-language-training/

            The updated ratings use a four category system, but still rate Cantonese as requiring 2,200 hours.

            • The Cominator says:

              I’m surprised Japanese is in the highest category I’ve been told that especially compared to other Asian languages its not that hard to speak…

              The writing is hard though.

              • I’ve noticed that Japanese seems really easy to understand, even compared to European languages. The verbs and consonants seem so sharp and easily distinguishable, and it’s easy to pick out phrases in media intended for native speakers, even though I’ve never studied the language.

                “Watashi wa”
                “Dozo yorosko”
                “Kaiju”

                There are some grammatical features that probably take a long time to learn, though (three politeness levels), and the time estimates are for learning to speak *and* read proficiently.

                • Aidan says:

                  I have a decent bit of Jap. Not hard at all to learn to speak, the main difference being that it is a S-O-V language instead of a S-V-O. It’s a bit more vague and less objective than English, meaning relies more on context but that’s true of all eastern languages and it’s not nearly as bad as Chinese. Very hard to learn how to read at a fluent level, though autocorrect for the characters helps a lot with writing on the computer.

                • onyomi says:

                  In my experience, Mandarin and Cantonese are both significantly harder than Japanese and Korean because of their tones and the density of the writing. My best guess as to why Japanese would make it into the same category would have been that you still have to learn kanji, including context-variant readings of kanji, but modern Korean no longer uses these and is grammatically quite similar to Japanese yet still falls into that category, apparently.

                  One complication Japanese and Korean have that Chinese languages mostly don’t, or not to the same degree, is complex degrees of formality that need to be expressed through e.g. word choice and verb conjugation. To be a native-like speaker of Japanese or Korean able to navigate all kinds of social situations you have to be able to adjust such things depending on the situation and whom you’re talking to.

  22. Pooch says:

    https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2021/04/09/another-tripwire-crossed-pentagon-orders-updated-screening-of-military-to-identify-extremist-outlooks-in-preparation-for-what-is-to-come/

    Good breakdown on what’s happening with the military by Sundance. I agree with him that signs are starting to point to the regime making preparations for military invervention/Insurrection Act (they already have the word “insurrection” in the mainstream now) in red states that will inevitably ignore/nullify increasingly insane federal law. He points to continued covid compliance or state elections as possible triggers for military deployment.

    They do seem aware that their fighting force is mostly white southerners though. The question is how long do they wait to purge and replace them (if they are even able to) before they are deployed against the citizenry.

    • onyomi says:

      Disturbing developments, though I must say I was pleasantly surprised to see the Biden WH backing down on the “covid passport” issue, seemingly in response to Florida, Texas, and other states preemptively passing laws against them. One could argue they simply realized they would be a logistical nightmare, but that they could have realized before announcing support for the idea not too long ago. Seemingly strong state-level opposition was what made the idea non-viable.

      You could say it’s too early for them to carry out such plans, but they are also racing against the clock wrt the media’s ability to keep covid hysteria at the fever pitch necessary to potentially justify such a move.

      • Pooch says:

        Yes I agree that was a white pill. Although they only backed down from government-enforced vaccine passports. They are still suggesting that vaccine passports enforced by the private sector are totally fine. To me it looked more like a probe to test the resistance level of the right and could be revisited later.

    • Ace says:

      They do seem aware that their fighting force is mostly white southerners though. The question is how long do they wait to purge and replace them (if they are even able to) before they are deployed against the citizenry.

      There’s 2 styles of purges: Slowly and all at once. All signs point to an all at once purge incoming. The recent stand downs and indoctrination sessions identified anyone who might show leadership in fighting back. The rank and file purge will come later or simply by them not re-enlisting. Anyone being put through critical race theory Maoist struggle sessions isn’t going to re-enlist.

      I think Sundance is wrong about COVID used at the justification. COVID’s a spent force thanks to Trump’s vaccines. I think they’re going to have to go the false flag/foreign war route.

      BTW, got some conformation of what happened with COVID. According to Crenovich Bannon recommended that Trump get ahead on COVID and blame it on China and the Democrats while outflank them on it. Jared recommended downplaying it to keep the stock market up. It wouldn’t shock me to learn that Jared was working for the Dems.

      • The Cominator says:

        Trump didn’t downplay it enough he should have tried to use force to prevent lockdowns and prevent mail in voting EARLY ala Orville Faubus. It was the Chinese fault but it was always at worst a bad flu.

        • Ace says:

          Trump didn’t have enough control of the Government to stop it short of a coup, he wasn’t capable of thinking in those terms. Trump should have come down like a ton of bricks and used COVID to remove Democrats from power on an emergency basis for delaying COVID relief and for murdering people in nursing homes. When you foe sets a trap for you, the best thing you can possibly do is trigger the trap on them. Bannon was right about it.

          • The Cominator says:

            Yes he was too weak because he had not stacked the government with his own people, this was always his problem he was bored with adminstrative details and it blew up on him. Removing governors for nursing home murder would be a good move but he also to some extent at least initially believed in the covid hoax and this was his other great error… yes the virus is real but it was never the terror it was made out.

            • Jehu says:

              The Republicans wouldn’t even let him do recess appointments (the Senate never adjourned until like 2020 to prevent exactly this). So I don’t think you can lay Trump’s failure to stack the government at his feet, because the Republican’s absolutely would not confirm any actual Trumpists.

              • The Cominator says:

                The solution was to have a succession of acting agency heads who would confirm orders in transmittal under a series of permanent white house “czars” who would exercise actual authority over the agencies.

                Trump needed to insist above all on rewarding his friends and punishing his enemies, this is one of the first principles of politics and you NEVER compromise on it.

                • Pooch says:

                  Trump thought the Republican establishment would be willing to work with him after it became obvious their electoral future depended on Trumpism. In hindsight, it was obvious they wouldn’t because they are not of the class that Trump represents and honest elections don’t matter.

              • Starman says:

                @Jehu

                ” The Republicans wouldn’t even let him do recess appointments (the Senate never adjourned until like 2020 to prevent exactly this). So I don’t think you can lay Trump’s failure to stack the government at his feet, because the Republican’s absolutely would not confirm any actual Trumpists.”

                Trump was piss poor at personnel selection. His direct personal appointments (such as his legal team) revealed how terrible Trump was at this. Those appointments didn’t require Congressional approval.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Yes he was a genius at mass persuasion debate and policy but incompetent at administrative details. He should have left that entirely to Stephen Miller imho…

                • jim says:

                  Not seeing that he was incompetent at administrative details, though he trusted hostile lawyers too much.

                  What is the evidence that Richard Stallman was incompetent at administrative details?

                  The accusation that he is autistic and spergy is obviously absurd and a lie. Why should we believe the accusation that he was incompetent at administrative details.

                  I see no end of highly competent CEOs getting in trouble through an uncontrollable and dangerous legal department. It is a hard problem that frequently creates difficulties for very good administrators.

                • Pooch says:

                  His major flaw. He had a knack for selecting people to jobs that would stab him in the back.

                • jim says:

                  Progressive. But progressivism moved on, and he did not.

                  Progressives get stabbed in the back – I have frequently remarked that a communist was a lot safer under Hitler than Stalin.

                  Getting stabbed in the back reflects on progressivism, not on Stallman, and letting the legal department get away from him reflects on our legal system, not on Stallman.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Never said he was autistic he was the opposite of autistic. But appointments and administrative details were clearly something he was terrible at.

                • jim says:

                  Is it clear?

                  Not seeing it. Who sees it, and how do they see it.

                  The legal department got away from him, but that is a huge problem even for very competent administrators.

                • Pooch says:

                  I’m not seeing him being incompetent at administrative details but I think his personnel selection is valid criticism. Then again I don’t think it was unreasonable to assume, at the time, he could fill positions by leveraging the existing Republican party apparatus instead of starting from scratch with the assumption they would work with him in good faith. Not so reasonable a position now.

                • Starman says:

                  Trump sucked at personnel appointment, period.
                  Rudy Giuliani, the day drunk.
                  Sidney Powell and her stupid kraken lawsuit.
                  The unhinged Lin Wood.
                  Pat Cippollone (Trump referred to him “as a friend”! LOL).

                  Now contrast this with how Elon Musk does personnel management: “every employee is responsible for whom he recommended for hiring.” In other words, if a SpaceX employee is bad and needs firing, whoever hired him or recommended his hiring gets fired also. Then everyone who was hired or recommended by the fired hirer/recommender gets canned too! (And you can check the Starbase/Boca Chica LabPadre livestreams to see if this policy is still in effect).

                  Imagine if Trump fired everyone recommended by Reince Preibus and General Kelly?

                • Starman says:

                  Just to be clear here, this specific comment sub-thread is about Trump’s hiring practices, not Stallman.

                • Pooch says:

                  If we ever get power back, the only criteria for a position should be loyalty. Every single appointee to anything should resemble someone like Mike Lindell regardless of qualifications or experience.

                • jim says:

                  It is the only way to win.

                  Alfred the Great won because you could not get anywhere in his administration, except you were a good Christian – within the Royal definition of Christianity.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “Rudy Giuliani, the day drunk.”

                  I have to defend Giuliani. Giuliani’s arguments from what I heard were factual, had hard evidence and they were well layed out. The problem Giuliani had was the judiciary and lawyer class in general including the federalist cucks just decided (corruption or cowardice) they were going to let Biden have it and they weren’t touching it.

                  There was not a single evidentiary hearing.

                  Not disagreeing with your main point.

                  “In other words, if a SpaceX employee is bad and needs firing, whoever hired him or recommended his hiring gets fired also.”

                  The rule probably isn’t THAT absolute but it probably most likely leads to you getting fired if you recommended a bad employee and if not it will be a blackmark against you.

                • Starman says:

                  @Cominator

                  I have to defend Giuliani. Giuliani’s arguments from what I heard were factual, had hard evidence and they were well layed out. The problem Giuliani had was the judiciary and lawyer class in general including the federalist cucks just decided (corruption or cowardice) they were going to let Biden have it and they weren’t touching it.”

                  FUCK Giuliani. Guiliani said, “If only we had another month” (after repeatedly ignoring General Flynn for months and ignoring the General’s speaking while fiddling with a bunch of phones). A big FUCK YOU to Rudy Giuliani. General Flynn already had a plan and loyal troops in place to deal with the ballot steal attempt, right at election night, but Trump’s piss poor personnel choices lead Trump to choose Giuliani instead.

                  Giuliani wasted people’s time. More importantly, Rudy Giuliani wasted MY TIME. Fuck Rudy Giuliani with a razor-bladed anal plug. He is the reason that I will no longer trust and wait for authority to protect me or trust the string of words from a wordsmith (I either see it myself or “it’s livestream / visual evidence or it didn’t happen”).

                  I’m through with “Trust the Plan.”

                • The Cominator says:

                  Flynn’s plan was half assed too…

                  He wanted a coup that wasn’t a coup.

                  The 1st thing you do in a real coup is PHYSICALLY ELIMINATE all alternative heads of state you don’t do it half assed.

                • Starman says:

                  @Cominator

                  “Flynn’s plan was half assed too…

                  He wanted a coup that wasn’t a coup.

                  The 1st thing you do in a real coup is PHYSICALLY ELIMINATE all alternative heads of state you don’t do it half assed.”

                  You didn’t read the link I posted (I can tell, because it takes a lot more than a couple of seconds to read it, and you responded immediately to my post against Day Drunk dumb-ass civilian, Giuliani)

                  Giuliani didn’t have a half-assed plan to do something. He did nothing. He had no plan and he did nothing. It was all fake.

                  Giuliani did nothing.

                  The fact that you didn’t bother to read the link before responding is more vindication for me that people who don’t have callouses on their hands cannot be trusted at their word… even if they’re redpilled. A RedPilled wordsmith is still a wordsmith, a word-thinker.

                • Pooch says:

                  The Flynn plan was not a coup. It was doing what would have been necessary to win the election.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Giuliani foolishly thought the courts would allow evidentiary hearings based on overwhelming evidence he had… he was wrong but his case was good.

                  I agree there should have been a coup, but the coup plan Flynn had could not have been successful because it was like the coup against Chavez where they didn’t kill him.

                  There should have been a coup and I said there should have been a coup, but it should have not been a half assed coup.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “The Flynn plan was not a coup. It was doing what would have been necessary to win the election.”

                  It was a half measured coup trying to be democratic that was absolutely doomed to fail… when you use violence you have to be willing to use violence.

                  There were three alternative heads of state based on Democrats winning I don’t want to elaborate beyond this but… to seize power successfully they all had to go. Followed by Trump being installed as speaker of the House before the 20th…

                • Starman says:

                  @Cominator

                  “There were three alternative heads of state based on Democrats winning I don’t want to elaborate beyond this but… to seize power successfully they all had to go. Followed by Trump being installed as speaker of the House before the 20th…”

                  Trust Da Plan! LOL

                  Maybe Q will finally save us… any day now. Just wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait and wait…

                  Yeah the “trust other people plan” isn’t working, I’ll just do it myself. Speaking of which, there’s a sub-thread about sailboats here.

                • The Cominator says:

                  You know (at least I think you are R7 rocket) I’m not a Qtard dude…

                  Flynn otoh apparently (I can only assume hes lost mental capacity) was at least after his legal troubles ended…

      • Pooch says:

        All signs point to an all at once purge incoming.

        I don’t know if they can just purge all the white males yet. They still constitute the majority of actual warriors with diversity being in logistics at least for now. If they are smart they’ll just wait for the Hispanics to eventually replace the whites that don’t re-enlist. Maybe they’ll encourage some whites to become loyal by upping their pensions/combat pay to a high enough amount where it becomes worth it to sit through the struggle sessions and mindlessly enforce the regime’s edicts like cops.

      • Pooch says:

        I think Sundance is wrong about COVID used at the justification.

        I could see state elections being used as the trigger. Would not shock me for Biden to do what we all wanted Trump to do, invoke the Insurrection Act during an election that a Republican wins using “voter suppression” as the justification.

  23. Anon says:

    I have some crypto opsec questions.

    Over the years I’ve bought crypto through KYC exchanges. Bounced through different wallets, exchanges (including non US exchanges even though I’m a US resident), exchanged to different coins, etc. Never reported on taxes except answering yes to the question (paraphrasing) about “have you bought, sold, exchanged, or acquired crypto”. Current portfolio value is high 5 figs.

    I realize now that this is an opsec fail. My current plan is to:
    – Move all crypto to existing account on a non KYC exchange.
    – Convert all crypto to monero.
    – Send monero to personal wallet.
    – From personal wallet send monero to fresh account on a non KYC exchange using vpn/tor.
    – Convert monero on exchange back to original different coins.
    – Send coins to fresh hardware wallet.
    – In future only buy crypto with fiat via p2p such as local bitcoins, and clean trail of custody such as through monero again, btc tumblers, coinjoin, etc before moving to hardware wallet or exchanges for trading.
    – If every questioned by gov, say I lost everything and have no records.

    I’m a bit worried that despite this I may have some problems down the road. Is this a good plan? What are my potential risks, and how bad are they?

    Jim your blog is pure gold thank you.

    • jim says:

      Good plan.

      Except for the back onto a KYC exchange part. Try Bisq – although you are probably going to wind up doing Bisq equivalent of KYC in order to do transactions over distance.

      They are endlessly tightening up, and people are endlessly finding new ways around, and it seems to me that the people finding new ways around are winning.

      The government has a record that you purchased crypto currency. Generate a record that you sold crypto currency as quickly as possible, in a manner difficult for them to verify. Pay taxes on the purported sale.

      If that is a lot of taxes, well then, you just lost the key to your wallet, and mislaid or failed to record the wallet master secret. Happens all the time. Seems that remarkable amount of crypto currency has been lost.☺

      If you had crypto sitting for a long time in a KYC exchange, then move it off the exchange, say you sold it, and pay taxes.

      • Anon says:

        Thank you Jim.

        Yes after washing everything through monero I plan to never use KYC exchanges again. I didn’t hold on KYC exchanges for any substantial amount of time.

        It would be quite a lot of taxes as most of the present portfolio value is from gains, and I might have to pay short term capital gains. I can’t think of a way to report a smaller sale that would hold up to scrutiny and therefore pay less taxes. Also I have previous sales on KYC exchanges that I was supposed to report and pay for years ago which I didn’t, as well as dex and non KYC sales to other coins that may show up in blockchain analysis, so it seems like I shouldn’t attract more attention.

        I’m hoping it will be enough to just not report anything, and if anything comes up in the future say I lost my keys, don’t have any records, and don’t remember anything. Hopefully worse case the IRS says I owe a few grand from those previous sales with late fees and I just pay up. The potential future risk doesn’t seem to outweigh the the lost time and money I’d incur for trying to do everything by the book. It seems like you would agree.

        • Pooch says:

          And remember, as the law requires today, you only have to pay capital gains the tax year you convert your crypto into USD. As long as your hodling crypto (which could be forever) I don’t see a problem with taxes unless they add some sort of wealth tax or something down the road (which they very well might do).

          However, the problem is going to come when you need to make a big purchase in USD (like a car or a house) where a large sum of USD magically shows up in your bank accounts from selling crypto.

          • Anon says:

            It is my understanding that you are also supposed to pay capital gains when you exchange one crypto for another, ie trading bitcoin for ethereum on an exchange. Or USDT or whatever.

            Yes taking out into USD will be difficult, but I expect this to get easier over time.

            • Pooch says:

              I’m not sure if that’s accurate. A tax accountant I talked to said that’s not the case. Buying means converting from USD to crypto and selling means converting from crypto to USD. Converting from crypto to crypto is not tax relevant according to him. I suppose he could be wrong.

              • Pooch says:

                But if during the conversion process you are converting to USD temporary in order to buy more crypto, than that would be considered taxable.

    • Humble Acolyte says:

      >If every questioned by gov, say I lost everything and have no records

      This will work for now if you have to deal with the taxman.

      But in an expropriation scenario the boating accident story will get you tortured. So much the worse for those who actually did lose their coin. In the long run we are marked, and should prepare accordingly.

  24. notglowing says:

    Unsurprisingly, some leftists are trying to make this dead 100 year old man bad by digging up a few mildly controversial quotes by today’s standards, and mildly based by our standards.

    https://twitter.com/feebux/status/1380528901542273025

    I knew nothing of this British royal before, but now I almost like him.
    Most of these quotes are just kinda funny. Even most people who disagree with them would probably not find them bad enough to cancel him, and this is the worst they could find of a man who lived a century and was a public figure.

    • onyomi says:

      I’m kind of curious when, if ever, Lincoln will get seriously cancelled. Some statues have already been taken down, but that was because he was looking paternal toward a slave or something. Obviously he’s got all kinds of statements that sound problematic by today’s standards, including having committed the crime of being a white man, but he also feels like such a linchpin in the normy’s narrative of US history that you can’t take him out without a bunch of Jenga pieces falling over.

  25. suones says:

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/amazon-is-ahead-in-union-vote-as-tallying-set-to-resume-11617960604

    American proles say no to agitation (even in a black-majority town). Anglin is right that blacks, while unable to help being violent, are not natural leftists. There is hope for America yet. A small town in Alabama has established co-operate-co-operate, even if for a while.

    PS: “AmaZOG is bad” is a fake and gay Leftist attack. Amazon has shaken down Vaishyas like anything, and Bezos is an arch-Vaishya himself — incredibly rich (high status in Vaishya terms) but lacking memetic sovereignty (thus vulnerable to Brahminical attacks). “Mom and pop” nonsense — that fight was lost to Walmart. Now that it is established that Mom and Pop are no longer in the picture, it is just competition with Walmart, one that Amazon is winning.

    • nils says:

      An interesting analysis from a old rhodie i read recently, paraphrased, the offering to the african gook(nigger am.) of the vote in their future, was in itself a revocation to the supremacists right to rule (Kings mandate of heaven in east/west tradition) that it was a rebuke of the intrinsic might is right. A strong horse begets a strong horse(secretariat was a conspiracy i was raised in, he had no right to be the beast he was, heart weight, but he was bred because he might be.) I don’t mean to criticize a good man, but the wallmart fight is not lost, my small yankee! town from upstate ny was beset by a wallie bid in 2007ish. and it was obliterated. Small town “jurisprudence” and old anglish strength of the county, still exists. Even here in deep blue hinterland, as far as wallmart, the saratoga lads dgaf what anyone says, we make deals with old family banks that are barely hanging on and damn the rest of them. So no, wallmart doesnt own it all, and mom and pop aint beat, we got frontier vio’lence that would put any cuck to shivers, maybe in most places, but local is stronger then you’d think(by a load that’d get you in the slammer), the capital bs dont cutt here except in the budget, and thats second to blood and old families. plus we control the budget still, even with quomos bid for dom, we own the purse. and the state can suck cock and tweek off. fuck em, they dont own us yet, and having been privy to a few confi. convos they aint gonna, we make plans based on water and sewerage that have us bulletproof when the loosers come to town. so dont cuss middle america out yet, Levit’ town is as fake as it were, us old amerikaners are still here even in neu jorvik. I cant speak to any union but the pilots, but most around here who is poor are not keen to unions or the union, they got shit on just like the 1st iraq war, and they know a union aint no differnt then a comintern.

    • linker says:

      Can you elaborate? I don’t understand how this union is leftist agitation or how this is white pilling. I admittedly know nothing about unions.

      Regarding Bezos- Being hyper-vulnerable to leftist attacks seems nearly as bad as being a leftist himself. It’s a stretch to even say that he’s not a leftist! He owns the Washington Post for gosh sake!! Amazon also took down Parler when the coup was happening. They also censor right wing books. Being the richest man on Earth and not putting up any resistance to the people threatening the human race indicates extreme levels of ignorance and malice. At least Elon Musk puts up a feeble resistance.

      I am trying not to sound rude, but it’s not self evident how this is a white pill and it’s not self evident how Bezos is not a leftist.

      • The Cominator says:

        Probably operating under glownigger coercion.

        • linker says:

          This sounds like Alex Jones tier rationalizing that the enemy is not as bad as they seem.

          >You see when a mother cuts her sons penis off, you can’t blame the mother you know cause she is just doing what the media is telling her to do, and the media is totally controlled, their scripts are controlled by Jeff Bezos, but Bezos has no choice because the CIA controls him, the CIA agents are not bad people, you know they just signed up to protect their country, the rank and file is not bad, but their bosses were installed by George Soros, George Soros isn’t even the top guy though, he’s just doing what he was PROGRAMMED to do by people you haven’t even heard of, a secret society of demons and vampires, and their boss? The illumnati. I don’t think the illuminati is the top of the pyramid, there’s some evil force at the top ??????????.

          Basically claiming that every human is a good person and simply misguided even though they are demonstrably not, just shifting blame around to progressively more obscure people until you get ?????????? demonic force who is in charge of the illuminati and you aren’t allowed to wish harm on anyone or label anyone has an enemy (which conveniently protects Alex Jones from getting sued into oblivion).

          It seems to me that Jeff Bezos would not arbitrarily be under more glownigger coercion than Elon Musk. who is now richer, and has always been slightly hostile to leftists, even though that hostility is very feeble, consisting of promoting crypto and posting slightly politically incorrect memes, and also Elon Musk does not own a Top 5 Leftist Propaganda outfit like Bezos does. I would say that a *reasonable benchmark* to claim that Jeff Bezos is not evil would be that he does less evil things than Elon Musk.

          • The Cominator says:

            No its obvious the owners of major media companies have no influence over them as they speak with one voice its not rationalization its the only thing that fits the facts.

            • Pooch says:

              They absolutely do have influence over them, but Bezos only owns the Washington Post so it doesn’t attack Amazon. He likely also heavily incentivized them to push pro-lockdown stuff because it helped Amazon. He has no incentives to influence anything other than that.

            • Pooch says:

              Suppose for a moment Bezos was actually an ultra based right-wing shitlord. What prevents him from turning the Washington Post into a major right-wing publication? Magically, Amazon comes under antitrust threat from the DOJ with every other media outlet calling for Amazon to be broken up and Bezos to be deplatformed and banned on everything.

              • The Cominator says:

                Zuckerberg started having bad things happen to him when he wanted to keep free speech on Facebook.

                Yes Bezos is allowed to prevent WaPo from attacking Amazon but he can’t exercise any editorial control on political content.

                • Pooch says:

                  Yes Zuckerberg gets attacked relentlessly by the press (and potentially the courts) if he gets out of line. Moldbug went over this in one of his namefagged posts that was actually good.

                  Bezos could absolutely exercise editoral control. There’s nothing stopping him from firing all the faggot journalists and replacing them with frog anons if he wanted. But the second he does that, Amazon is instantly under massive attack from the DOJ for antitrust and he becomes an hit piece target for the rest of the press. There is a massive stick keeping him in line. He has nothing to gain and a lot to lose for attacking the elite.

                • linker says:

                  Where is the failing communist fake news rag burning a hole in Elon Musk’s pocket? Why are Bezos and Zuck the cuck under glownigger coercion but not Musk? Or is Musk just this Herculean hero who is the only man strong enough to fight off the deep state? If all of these guys are so secretly based, why does Nick Fuentes not wake up one day and see a million dollars in his Monero wallet? If that happened I’m sure he would keep it a secret. Maybe it has happened already. Do you think Nick Fuentes is secretly ultra rich from all of the money Bezos, Musk, Thiel, and Zuckerberg send him? Or maybe Zuck the cuck is, in fact, a cuck! What seems like the simplest explanation to you?

                • linker says:

                  I never claimed that Bezos was very powerful. I never denied the existence of the carrot and the stick. I read that Moldbug piece. Just curious why Bezos does far more to aid and abet the communists than Elon Musk. Is Elon Musk super powerful? Does the deep state just like Elon Musk a lot more?

                  And I still don’t understand why the nignogs voting against a union is white pilling.

                • jim says:

                  Elon Musk disengaged from targets of primary interest to social justice warriors before targeting space.

                • Pooch says:

                  Elon Musk doesn’t control anything of any interest to the left. He has a faggy car company and is testing rockets. He has no stake in PayPal anymore so nothing he controls is much of a worthwhile target. Musk is smartly flying under the radar in order to get into space.

                • Pooch says:

                  If Bezos really was a man of virtue he would give up his holdings in Amazon like Musk in order to eliminate that as an attack vector. He’s just another faggy rich billionaire groveling at the feet of the elite for status.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Elon musk doesn’t own an msm media organ.

                • linker says:

                  I don’t believe you. I think Elon ENRAGES the left and I don’t see him lying low at all. He just got in trouble for posting a Ben Garrison cartoon today. I think you are looking for facts to fit your narrative.

                  I can make the case that Tesla is a massive power leak. Controlling a network of self driving cars and the a network of satellites that let people live in the middle of the woods and have high speed low latency internet would be extremely powerful, not to mention the sci-fi stuff he intends to get to like neuralink and space travel. He is basically trying to become the Emperor of everything from the city streets, to outer space, to dissident hermits living in the middle of the woods, to your own consciousness with wires poking around your brain. Maybe right now Amazon is more powerful, but it’s not self-evident that Amazon is so much more powerful that they consciously chose to give Bezos a short leash while giving Elon a long leash despite his constant jabs, jestings, and provocations.

                  I repeat that I believe you are trying to rationalize your narrative here that Bezos dindu nuffin wrong and that he is just a normal dude who wants the best for everyone. I totally disagree. I think he is a morally bankrupt NPC at best and less narcissistic form of Bill Gates or George Soros at worst. Maybe that’s what an arch-Vaishya is. I don’t know. I don’t see any reason for all this simping for Amazon and Bezos.

                  PS how do you do the indent thing to quote someone on here?

                • linker says:

                  >Elon musk doesn’t own an msm media organ.

                  I say that Bezos is a leftist because he owns the leftist WaPo. You say that WaPo is only leftist because of the CIA. I say that Elon Musk does not own a leftist newspaper and that the CIA does not force him to own a leftist newspaper. Pooch says that the CIA forces Bezos to own a newspaper because Amazon is more powerful than Tesla. Cominator says that the CIA ignore Elon Musk because he does not own a newspaper.

                  Occam’s Razor indicates that Bezos is a leftist.

                • Pooch says:

                  I can make the case that Tesla is a massive power leak. Controlling a network of self driving cars and the a network of satellites that let people live in the middle of the woods and have high speed low latency internet would be extremely powerful

                  Self-driving cars are not happening Jim has gone over this before. Tesla is just a scam to distract the elites while Elon gets into space. The satellites may be an attack vector for the SJWs in the future, but until it actually exists, they aren’t likely to know or care about it.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Everything enrages the radleft but msm outlets are a more proper target for gleichschaltung.

                  Our point is not that Bezos is good our point is that he isn’t making the decisions.

                • Pooch says:

                  Pooch says that the CIA forces Bezos to own a newspaper because Amazon is more powerful than Tesla.

                  Not what I’m saying at all. I’m saying while Bezos still has his net worth tied up in a high-value target like Amazon, the elites have him by the balls. Because Must doesn’t, they don’t.

                  But it obvious that Bezos is blue-pilled and Musk is red-pilled.

                • Pooch says:

                  Our point is not that Bezos is good our point is that he isn’t making the decisions.

                  Exactly. Despite his billions, he’s not of the elite so there’s not a whole lot he can do to actually change things.

                • linker says:

                  Sorry guys but this all seems like narrative fitting to justify why Bezos does not have free will but Elon has free will. So leftists are not attacking Elon because they don’t know that space travel is powerful, because they erroneously think that self-driving cars are powerful? We are approaching the point of unresponsively talking past one another and your arguments are flying away from Occam’s Razor at escape velocity.

                  Maybe you are misunderstanding me? I am not saying that Bezos is the ringleader of the communists or The Devil, I am stating that contrary to what suones seemed to be saying, he is an actual bona fide leftist and that being the owner of the Washington Post proves this. Musk is not a leftist. This is proven by him posting Ben Garrison cartoons, vaccine test skepticism, going on Joe Rogan, and other dog whistles, as well as the lack of leftist holiness signalling, and the fact that he does not own a leftist media company like the Washington Post.

                  Hit me with a link to Jim talking about self-driving cars if you can find it.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Tim Cook, Jack Dorsey and Sergey Brin are definitely doctrinaire leftists at least to some degree with Dorsey at least likely being a far and zealous leftist. Bezos seems an apolitical or centrist operating under coercion there would need to be a full trial under a right wing regime to determine this. Amazon only started acting in accordance with gleichschaltung very very late (unlike say Twatter).

                • linker says:

                  I sense subterfuge from Dorsey. He is constantly promoting crypto and he says he is working on turning twitter into a decentralized open protocol with the Twitter corporation as just a front end. Maybe he is just blowing smoke up right wingers asses with this? I think it would be less dangerous to tell right wingers to fuck off you insurrectionist nazis than it would be to blow smoke up their ass. I suspect he is blowing smoke up left wing asses just like Jim suspects Charles Hoskinson is blowing smoke up their asses with his “Cardano will save the starving African children!” act. I don’t see *anything* good coming out of Amazon or Bezos.

                • jim says:

                  The government program is regulated KYC crypto. He, therefore, will be producing regulated KYC crypto.

                  The Chinese government violently dislikes US social media giants, and is deeply concerned about the Chinese social media giants. They are worried they have too much power. Xi wants to run the priesthood. He does not want the priesthood running him. He sees what has happened in the US, and does not want a re-run in China.

                  The social media giants are not so much answerable to the US government as answerable to Harvard – you can see this in Wikipedia.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Twatter established gleichschaltung earlier than anyone and zealously and went beyond what they were being pressured to do at the time. Hes a zealous leftist.

                  Government’s eventually want to establish state digital currency…

                • linker says:

                  >Twatter established gleichschaltung earlier than anyone and zealously and went beyond what they were being pressured to do at the time.

                  Couldn’t this just be because of a power leak? Facebook seems way more zealous, or equally zealous now, taking your word for it that twitter was first.

                  >Hes a zealous leftist.

                  I don’t see it. His underlings are zealously leftist, but what are you gonna do, tell HR to hire less leftists for the min wage content moderation shit? It looks like he zealously cooms, watches youtube videos, tweets about bitcoin, and smokes weed.

                  >Government’s eventually want to establish state digital currency…

                  I don’t understand what point you are trying to make with this. What does this have to do with twitter? Isn’t USD already a digital currency?

                  You are unresponsive to the fact that Jack is seemingly sowing the seeds of twatter’s destruction with his open protocol thing. So the guy that constantly promotes bitcoin and is constructing a way to evade the twitter censors is a staunch leftist, but the guy that owns the washington post and tweets about climate change and lizzo is just an innocent centrist who is enslaved by The Cathedral? No way. I don’t believe it unless you present additional evidence.

                • The Cominator says:

                  You need to make your case not me since almost everyone else here thinks Dorsey is a zealous leftist and sees Bezos as someone who at worst bends with the wind and is interested mainly in preserving and possibly expanding his own wealth.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “The social media giants are not so much answerable to the US government as answerable to Harvard – you can see this in Wikipedia.”

                  My theory is the command and control is at least pseudo linked with the CIA. Its an extension of the old Operation Mockingbird. The CIA is the derp state government and it is also Harvard and the Ivy Leagues as it recruits very heavily out of Harvard and other Ivy League schools.

                • linker says:

                  Guy #1: Owns a top 5 ultra-leftist newspaper that loses money hand over fist. CEO of a leftist corporation
                  Guy #2: Promotes crypto, posts slightly politically incorrect dogwhistley funny stuff. CEO of a non-leftist corporation.
                  Guy #3: Promotes crypto, CEO of ultra-leftist corporation, but apparently has a plan to morph it into a decentralized protocol that is censorship-proof.

                  Ok so we agree that guy #2 is probably a little bit right wing or very right wing and hiding his power level. That’s Elon Musk, but the contention between us is about guy #1 and guy #3. You are telling me that guy #1, despite owning an ultra-leftist newspaper that loses money hand over fist, is a CENTRIST. And you have all sorts of mental gymnastics to basically say that ultra-leftists FORCED him to buy an ultra-leftist newspaper that loses money hand over fist. However, you say that guy #3, who seems to me to be a secret agent and/or useful idiot who is doing things to help the right wing, is in fact, definitely and ultra-leftist, and your evidence for this is that the corporation he manages is ultra-leftist. Not only is this totally contradictory because the reasons you say that guy #1 are forced to be leftist apply tenfold to guy #3, you are saying that guy #3 and his ultra-leftist cronies are the actual people who forced guy #1 to purchase an ultra-leftist newspaper.

                  You are saying that Bezos was FORCED to purchase the Washington Post, yet Dorsey decided to censor right wingers out of his own volition, he totally has monarchical control over his own corporation and if he was a centrist like Bezos, he could have hired a centrist HR department who would have hired centrist content moderators for minimum wage and twitter would be less censorious than Facebook. Say “Psych!” please! What strain of weed you are smoking to come up with this stuff?

                • The Cominator says:

                  Dorsey has never done anything to help the right nor does he plan to, he is nearly always the 1st to do leftist things and hires only far leftists. Dorsey is likely interested in mark of the beast KYC crypto because like Engels he is a rich guy who believes in communism.

                  Amazon’s tepid and VERY LATE cooperation is entirely explainable by acting under state duress. Nothing you say refutes this view. Amazon did nothing leftist until I think at least late 2017.

                  You can’t say exactly why Bezos bought the WaPo but other than keeping them from criticizing Amazon he clearly has no power over its editorial content and if he tried to exercise that bad things would happen to them. Its entirely possible he was told bad things would happen to him (and certain favors would be granted if he did buy) if he didn’t expend a small fraction of his wealth to buy it.

                  Dorsey has displayed leftist zeal on his own initiative, what people say doesn’t show their beliefs what they do does. Bezos does not show initiative in doing leftist things he did it late and seemingly without much zeal. He does not personally virtue signal prog or socialist platitudes either.

                  You seem to be arguing that Bezos has real editorial control of WaPo and keep repeating this. No one here believes this because all MSM organs despite seperate owners (Murdoch used to be an exception but increasingly not, my theory is that tabloid man Murdoch had blackmail information on powerful people and possibly a dead mans switch which insulated him from behind the scenes coercion) speak with one voice. Some big Time Warner shareholders wanted to fire Jeff Zucker of CNN and run it profitably as a real news station to maximize ratings. Nothing came of this. The state (some covert organ of it) controls the MSM and the owners don’t. Bezos owning Wapo proves nothing. Repeating that he owns WaPo proves nothing.

                • Pooch says:

                  I am stating that contrary to what suones seemed to be saying, he is an actual bona fide leftist and that being the owner of the Washington Post proves this.

                  I see him as worshipping money, not worshipping left-wing pieties. He owns the Washington Post simply because it strengthens the position of Amazon.

                  Now for the record I believes he’s a bad person not for being a leftist, but for being complicit in the looting of the middle class during the China Flu lockdowns. The Washington Post pushed lockdowns hard and he magically ends up with billions more in net worth while small businesses go under as Amazon flourishes. That is a big problem for me. I would have him tried on that.

                • Pooch says:

                  And of course it reflects poorly on Bezo’s character to own a leftist rag like WaPo (Musk would never do this), but my point is he’s only doing it to make more money for Amazon not because of leftist zeal. With or without Bezos ownership, WaPo would be putting out the same filth. The only thing different would be Amazon be criticized or not. Other than that, his ownership is irrelevant to the readers.

                  Like I said before if Bezos truly was a man of virtue he would be using his fortune to do something good for the human race like Musk. Instead he uses his fortune to gain more fortune with the hope the elite will notice him and let him into their club. He’s pathetic.

                • Starman says:

                  Jeff Bezos is just a businessman, a very skilled businessman.

                  He responds to priestly attack the way a good merchant would… take actions that protect his bottom line.

                  StarProphet Elon Musk’s behavior, on the other hand, is strikingly similar to Muslim Prophet Muhammad’s behavior when Muhammad was still in Mecca. Eventually, Muhammad had to flee Mecca for Medina… and there, Muhammad’s prophetic career took a different turn.

          • linker says:

            One of the main problems with right wingers is that they will never hold people accountable for their actions, even when that person has absolutely zero coercion on them. Basically they are denying free will. If you actually evaluate people’s actions with clarity you will realize that 90+% of the white population has to be enslaved or exterminated. And if you acknowledge this, it’s hard to make friends and people call you an edgelord.

            Take circumcision for example. You are under no coercion to circumcise your children besides getting hassled by nurse. You won’t lose your job or your reputation or anything like that. Another would be voting for Trump. About 40% of white people did not vote for Trump. There is zero excuse for this as votes are totally anonymous. Some people will just never admit that most white people are subhuman evil pieces of shit, and that’s how you get ridiculous theories like the illumnati or wignats blaming Jewish mind control rays for things that muh angelic innocent white people do out of their own free will.

            Leftists are very good at this “holding people accountable” thing which is what causes their holiness spiral. I pray that I am not just becoming a crypto-leftist here. I am not advocating scorched earth kill all circumcisers no mercy Khmer Rouge style. I am saying that the prevalence of circumcision and of white race traitors logically proves that most white people suck and therefore it’s a mistake that they have any power over human affairs. And the least you can do is simply *say* that circumcision is wrong and *say* that a white person who votes against Trump is as bad as any kike. Another distinction is that leftist holiness spirals are based on hatred and resentment while I think my non-holiness non-spiral is based on logic and the desire for human civilization to continue.

            (TLDR on circumcision is that it has no benefits and it lower IQ and increases neuroticism (= literally the cause of leftism), so you are making it more likely that your son becomes a leftist or cucked RINO republican and making it more likely that your grandson gets circumcised and so on. Now you know.)

            • jim says:

              > One of the main problems with right wingers is that they will never hold people accountable for their actions, even when that person has absolutely zero coercion on them.

              Everyone engaged in business, or who is participating a publicly traded corporation, has massive coercion on him. They are all terrified. Capitalism is collapsing under pressure, which is why we cannot have nice things any more.

              Simultaneously, there is a massive propaganda offensive against ordinary people to delude them.

              When someone blue pilled hears truth from someone in person, he surprisingly likely to agree with it, particularly after a few beers – but he is never going to be the first person to say it, or even think it.

              • linker says:

                With all due respect, where is the coercion to not secretly vote for Trump? Even though the election was fake, at least 30% of white men voted against Trump. Even though there is a massive propaganda offensive to do this and there is massive coercion not to counter this propaganda, I also attribute this to extreme levels of stupidity and malice in these white men.

                To these white “men” I would say: If you think a man can become a woman with pills and cutting their dick off, or that IQ is not real, or that white men should be oppressed more, or any of the other countless and absolutely ridiculous leftist shibboleths, you are either a Moloch worshiper or borderline too retarded to tie your shoes. Things have gone way too far into clown world territory to attribute all of this to people being misinformed or tricked or peer pressured or victimized by jewish mind control rays. As Jim says you are terrified by an invisible monster. There is an insatiable invisible monster terrorizing you, terrorizing your sons, and your grandsons, and to fight back, all you have to do is to anonymously check a little box for Trump in the privacy booth and you don’t do it? You would vote for your son to pay 50% of his income in taxes then go to jail over a false rape accusation and then get shanked by niggers or get shanked by the aryan brothers for being a “chomo”? You would vote for your daughter to be a serial coal burner? You would vote for a senile guy and an Indian psychopath female who want to launch nukes at Russia? Race traitor! Traitor to humanity! Enemy of the good, the beautiful, and the true as Vox Day says!

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  There wasn’t any coercing to not secretly vote for Trump, but most of those white men were urbanites, they’ve been indoctrinated and manipulated since they were children and made to believe that voting for Trump was like voting for the Grim Reaper.

                  According to your logic the kulaks with one cow that supported the Trotskyites to kill the kulaks with two cows and eventually wound up in a gulag themselves were intent on and very happy with the result, it doesn’t compute. We are not talking about magic, we are talking about things that are observable, measurable… the kind of stuff the CIA researches and uses because it works.

                  You’re capable of recognizing the facts because you’re actually aware of the facts, while they’re under the influence of a delusion reinforced by the authority figures in their lives, considering that they live isolated in a social bubble without any real first hand contact. Even if they had contact, they’ve been taught to re-interpret reality to fit the delusion.

                  Where you say paying a robbery of 50% income taxes they see piously supporting the holy leaders who will guide them to utopia. Where you say false rape accusation, they say this is impossible, as women would never do that and the holy leaders have assured them about it. Even if one of two did it, it is unfortunate but it’s worth it because it will bring utopia. Where you say shanked by niggers they say those niggers are falsely incarcerated and would absolutely never do such a thing. Where you say aryan brothers they agree they are dangerous and evil, which is why they must pay 50% income taxes, to fund the efforts of the holy leaders to suppress the evil white supremacists. Where you say serial coal burner they see the beauty of female emancipation and the love of interracial relationships. And like this every single thing you’ve said and every single thing you’d be able to argue.

                  They do not have the ability or do not find themselves in the circumstances that allow them to recognize or acknowledge reality, like the men in Plato’s Cave.

                  I think jim is the absolute best reactionary opinion leader when it comes to describing leftism possibly because when he was younger he himself was a leftist so he understands its inner mental traps the best. He was manipulated and indoctrinated, he himself felt the grip of psychosis on him when he went to China and saw the reality of what he was taught about communism, if I remember right the story went something like that.

                  Besides, whether they voted for Trump or not it makes no difference, or did you miss the massive electoral fraud? In truth there isn’t a way to truly tell who voted for who.

                  Reactionaries don’t deny free will and don’t refuse to hold others accountable, but if you were middle management/floor level and mostly unaware or mostly coerced or both in a criminal enterprise, no judge would convict you.

                • The Cominator says:

                  In the age of trannyism and feminism and white males are the devil we should not make excuses for leftist only those operating under direct coercion who did no more than the minimum. Anything beyond that gets the helicopter if we get the chance. They made a choice to reject the truth.

                  I can sort of understand being a communist in the age of child mine laborers working for subsistence but not now.

                • jim says:

                  That would require executing nearly half the population. And it would require executing just about everyone with administrative experience. Which is a rather big job, and job likely to leave chaos in its wake.

                  The greatest social order in history, that gave us empire, science, and the industrial revolution, was founded by demanding that people in priestly occupations re-apply for their old jobs, and during the job interview, promise to conform. Which of course Havel’s Greengrocer cheerfully did, and quite a few entryists that proved troublesome did.

                  That worked for 150 years. Havel’s Greengrocer, finding himself empowered, ridiculed the entryists and rendered them impotent, and mostly they gave up and got real jobs, or went to America to found Harvard and plot to take over the world.

                  The most drastic successful purge seems to have been that applied by Suharto in Indonesia. Which worked very well for a short time, but is now a large part of the way to being replaced by Cathedralized Islam, with lots of Brave Stunning Empowered (but strangely loveless and childless) women telling Muslim men what Islam really is. (Hint: It is not what Mohammed thought it was.)

                  The Indonesian purge was successful not because they were cheerfully willing to kill lots of people, but because they had a live state religion ready to roll, and plenty of Paladins with which to kill lots of people. It was the adequate supply of Paladins that made the difference, and I think the same result would have been accomplished without actual killing, merely purging.

                  Killing lots of people permanently fixed the Communism problem, but it has not protected them from Communism’s big brother.

                  If Charles the Second had killed lots of people, we would not now have the Harvard problem. But chances are we would have a very similar problem. To prevent the problem we now have, need to have enslaved William Wilberforce for heresy and apostacy, and sent him to Jamaica.

                  The problem was that Socinians and related sects found a formula where they could sneak past the thirty nine articles. That experience indicates that you have to update your antibodies from time to time to deal with the antigens of new entryisms.

                  The affirmation of faith I demand from commenters with the more-Christian-than thou frame is specifically designed to keep out not only demon worshippers, but also Gnostics and Socinians. Its strange effectiveness indicates we still have a live Socinian problem. (Which I find surprising, and flat out demon worship now seems to be the bigger problem.)

                  If Charles the Second had purged the Church of England Indonesian style, well that would have prevented Harvard, and American history would have been very different, but it would not have done diddly about the Socinian problem.

                  To prevent stuff like Socinianism and the Church of Reason, you need, not a Indonesian type purge, but an inquisition with authority to adjust the affirmation to exclude the biggest and most immediate threat from entering the state and quasi statal apparatus, because there are always going to be new faiths practicing entryism against the official faith.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I think about 30% of men…

                  Nits make lice.

                • jim says:

                  Eliminating people on that scale has been in practice only accomplished by chaotic means, which left a mighty big mess.

                • Aidan says:

                  The first stage is outrage at what they’re doing to the poor agencyless peasants. The second stage is outrage at the moral iniquities of the peasants, complicit in their own destruction. The final stage is aristocratic contempt for the agencyless peasants, and inner peace. Most men are followers and they will even follow the devil right into hell. That’s just reality.

            • Bilge_Pump says:

              Trump was a scam. Ive never voted in an election because i think democracy is retarded. Any vote you make can be erased by Shaniqua, if her owners decide its what should happen. Trump was an entertainment president, and most of his promises were fake and gay. You must be suffering from hopium withdrawals to say all that crap about white people.

              • The Cominator says:

                Trump was not a scam he at least held back war with Russia. Trump’s policies were all for the best but he was a normalcy biased boomer who was administratively inept.

                • Pooch says:

                  Trump was not a scam he at least held back war with Russia.

                  And held back the infinite migration over the southern border like we are seeing now.

              • linker says:

                ok wignat

  26. RMS is as extremely high functioning autist. Easily the best living software designer / developer, but I think not suited to a leadership / management role. He is bad at dealing with people, and I don’t mean it in the offends sensitive snowflakes sense but more like even for an entirely normal man having dinner with him in a restaurant is a challenge full of WTFs, I think someone wrote a hilarious article about it way back. He should design software, not lead people.

    Obviously not meaning it in the sense of agreeing with the SJWs in any way, just pointing this out.

    • jim says:

      RMS seems to have successfully led the Free Software movement. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

      • Aidan says:

        Often the case that some autistic men can communicate effectively and even lead over email, when they have no interpersonal skills in face to face conversation.

        • jim says:

          I see Richard Stallman on Youtube. Does not sound like there is anything wrong with his interpersonal skills. Sounds like a charismatic leader with good interpersonal skills to me.

          Interacts in person with the interviewer. Seems like a leader in person. Speaks directly to the common man, which a lot of techies cannot do.

          • Aidan says:

            Yeah, not bad at all. I’m biased against computer guys because of my generation, but the older generation seems a lot better.

    • suones says:

      St IGNUcius is not only the Founding Father of Free Software but has led the enterprise hugely successfully over more than three decades. From the apocryphal story about the printer driver that started it off to GNU/Linux today (which I’m using to write this screed), Stallman has led it through everything. Even today his capacity, although mellowed by age, is undoubtedly more than any current competitor. Even Linus has proven to be a coward and cuck.

      I’ve yet to see evidence of how Stallman is somehow not a good leader of people when he has inspired, and continues to inspire, fanatical dedication. This gayfake attack “not a people person” is retarded and stupid.

      • OK that is a very good point, I forgot about the part of “he has inspired, and continues to inspire, fanatical dedication” because what little involvement I had in FLOSS was on the side of ESR’s “open source” and more libertarianish attitudes like saying the GPL is not even necessary anymore, and people in there were not at all that fanatical about RMS than RMS’s “free software”, more leftish, GPL lawfare kind of folks are.

        • suones says:

          RMS was right, GPLv3 was and is right, TiVo-ization has become a massive problem in SaaS-land, ESR was stupid and wrong and “open source” is just a cancer from Mammon.

          All this is in hindsight, of course. I was ambivalent about GPL till 2003 or so too.

    • Anonymous 2 says:

      RMS is as extremely high functioning autist. Easily the best living software designer / developer, but I think not suited to a leadership / management role.

      Heh, clearly he’s a charismatic figure (in spite of being somewhat bizarre) but technically … not in the top 100 or top 1000. Top 10,000? Perhaps. Was he in his heyday in the top 100 at the MIT AI lab? Perhaps. Yet far more of a classic cult leader out of the deserts of the middle east, I’d say.

      • nils says:

        Red russian when asked, how can a monarchist be a communist(under peaceful interrogation)? replied. The communist will more surely find the absolutism of autocracy then the white russians with their delusions of republicanism, derived from their anglophilia. 10 years later Stalin took power totally. And that red soldiers prophesy of the reds being stronger monarchists then the romanovs was proven, at least to my mind, make your own decision. worth comes from the fruit, by which you will know them.

        • The Cominator says:

          Communism and leftism in general always at least theoretically has “collective leadership” which means insecure power.

          Stalin’s worth was that he wiped out 90%+ of the communist true believers in order to make his “collective leadership” without “factionalism” secure. It did not become a monarchy as “collective leadership” returned after his death although without genuine leftist belief.

          • nils says:

            Van Rensburg was the hardest reading I’ve ever struggled through, to this day, it is a major component of my Christianity, I am terrified of the lords’ Angels and their prophecies. Honestly, the Russ’ suffering on the volga, is pathetic. In comparison to the significance of the Lord”s Will over the West. The Volgograd, and Varangian Guard are insignificant in regards to the western war in the pines. Stalin suffered from the same insecure inheritance as all dictators.

    • alf says:

      To what extent is ‘autism’ an anti-concept? I have searched on youtube for poster boys on autism, all I could find was Rain man, and some kid peppermint once linked. In both cases, ‘brain damage’ is a much more accurate term. In all other cases it was just people telling me they or their children were autistic based on seemingly arbitrary characteristics.

      Autism is
      – likes stuff
      – is good with stuff
      – is not glib
      – likes order, sorting stuff
      – doesn’t know social mores
      – doesn’t make eye contact
      – does not listen
      – but not necessarily.

      Which seems to bith arbitrary and applying to a very large chunk of men. Autism seems the kind of thing that is fun to call your friends, but an anticoncept for a psychiatrist to call men.

      • The Cominator says:

        I have mild autism (what used to be called aspbergers) believe me its real enough.

        One aspect of it that is very concrete is we are slow to grasp even the concept of deception… sperg children when we speak say whatever we are thinking for a lot longer than most children.

        • Why do you think I hate lying/manipulation so much… suck at detecting them. Too easily pwned. Hating having that vulnerability. Literally like a security bug in a system hackers can exploit. Like when women do sadfishing. That is such an exploit.

          • The Cominator says:

            In the modern west now as far as women go…

            My advice FOR MY FELLOW SPERGS is to fuck strippers (unless you can go out of the country but the covid bullshit makes that harder), I did a long post on how to do this and you don’t need to be adonis for it to work (the reason being a lot of strippers not all but a high % are nymphomaniacs who are at least subconsciously frustrated at working themselves into semi sexual situations that nearly all of the time don’t progress to full sex).

            https://blog.reaction.la/uncategorized/fixed-privacy-leak-in-avatars/#comment-2713334

            Its not hard and its far less expensive and less scammy than regular escorts. It won’t be totally free but you can find really beautiful girls who will enthusiastically (far more so than escorts) fuck you for regular lap dance cost so if you make good money not expensive. You may even be able to progress to free but I don’t recommend this… not for us. If you think they will be cold and robotic all the time when they do this… I swear its not the case.

            We’re not good at larping as violent thugs unless we really want to become professional violent criminals and surveillance and forsenics (yes Jim is right that cops don’t care about doing their jobs too much but if you really regularly commit crimes you’re chances of being caught dead to rights increases to near 100%) and unless you have a job that attracts groupies game in the West now is larping as a violent thug. Spergs larping as violent thugs will either not sell it well and be laughed at or do it in such a way that they will be arrested or severely beaten or killed (mouth writing checks your ass can’t cash).

            I suppose the only downside to this is you increasingly lose interest in regular Western women (at least in the US, maybe Continental European women are very

      • jim says:

        I am the opposite of autistic, and Stallman is even more the opposite of autistic.

        RMS is plenty glib.

        During his interviews he repeatedly makes eye contact and engages in good non verbal communication. He tends to talk at length and is difficult to interrupt, but what he says is responsive to what the other guy says – he does not have to think before answering. He answers instantly, reflecting instant understanding and appropriate response to what the other man is saying.

        When the other guy uses manipulative techniques, such as hidden assumptions, he instantly spots the deception, instantly gets angry.

        This is not autism. It is the opposite of autism. People get upset because he cannot be manipulated by that technique. They get upset because his social skills are very good, not because his social skills are very bad.

        I can do that too, but it is hard, and I struggle. What happens when someone deceptively slips in a hidden presupposition is that I get a bad feeling, and have to stop and think for a moment to figure out what is going on. It does not get past me, but my response is slower than Stallman’s. Stallman realizers something is wrong as fast as I do, but figures out what is up, spots and calls out the deception a bit faster than I do.

        He also calls out the deception more fluently than I do.

        In every way, this is the opposite of the official definition of autism. It is hard for the interviewer to get a word in edgewise, but when the interviewer does get a word in Stallman responds relevantly and appropriately, which is a lot better than most interviewees do. And his handling of deception is very very good. I think I am very very good, but he is better.

        • RMIV says:

          would ya kindly point to the Stallman interviews you referenced? i am suddenly interested in this man’s inter personal talent. it’s hard to get into the computer stuff when one is a math idiot and can operate computers in only elementary ways.

          • jim says:

            I cannot give you the links. I just did a search for Stallman interview.

            He is a hard man to interrupt, but makes good eye contact and appropriate non verbal response. He responds swiftly and relevantly to whatever the other man says, and if the other man says something with a subtle deception at its core, instantly gets cranky when deception is attempted, and in due course analyzes the deception.

            • RMIV says:

              no problem, Jim. my curiosity got the better of me and i watched a few. you were right; anyone imagining Stallman is spergy must be judging the book by the fat cover.

              he seemed incisive and steel-spined to me

        • Anonymous says:

          his handling of deception is very very good. I think I am very very good

          This the stupidest thing you have written so far.

      • onyomi says:

        I think it’s a useful concept; it’s just that, like most mental disorders, it’s not a binary like pregnancy or covid-19 infection but a suite of traits everyone has to some degree and it only becomes a problem if they manifest in an extreme degree out of balance with the rest of the personality (depression, mania, obsessive-compulsive disorder, etc. are similar).

        It used to be “autism” just referred to those in whom this group of stereotypically male traits was overdeveloped, seemingly at the expense of faculties like theory of mind, ability to pick up on social cues, etc. Colloquially it now just refers to people with a lot of those tendencies, like Scott Alexander.

        Some people with a lot of some such trait can be quite successful: Donald Trump (mania, OCD), Vitalik Buterin (high functioning autism), etc. sometimes because they’re just inherently balanced within their overall personality and situation and sometimes because too much of one thing can compensate for another. I think “game” is basically slightly autistic people compensating for the fact that seduction doesn’t come naturally to them by trying to figure out its moving parts.

        Steve Sailor likes to harp on the high coincidence between highly intelligent, driven, disagreeable men and mtf trans (Bruce Jenner, Wachowski Bros., Donald McCloskey). My personal theory is that, lacking a strong sense of self, they have difficulty distinguishing between what they find attractive in others and what they find attractive in themselves.

        • jim says:

          Autism, in so far as it exists at all rather than being an anticoncept, is a weak theory of mind.

          And I am seeing a lot of weak theory of mind around.

          • The Cominator says:

            Its a big part of it but its also a very weak ability to read so called social cues. You also tend to go through periods of obsessive interests with random subjects.

          • How do you interpret the idea “theory of mind”? Have some easy example at hand, a frequent failure at that?

      • In my case it was being very literal-minded, all dictionary denotation, words with strict definitions, not getting connotations exist. Like when I was a teenager and someone told me “This band is the best in the world” I was pulling a Dwight Schrute and asked shit like “Are you basing it on MTV ratings?” when real just meant “I like them a lot.”

        This literal-mindedness is very useful in STEM. A computer is very literal-minded, only those who can at least switch into literal-minded mode can learn to code. I suppose other STEM might work similarly, its gotta be precise.

        As these are typically male occupations, this literal-mindedness is sometimes called extremely male brain. But I don’t think it is just yet another case of shaming men for being men, for rhethorics or poetry are male things too, so getting connotations does matter.

        Also consider the package it comes with. Autistic boys are kicked to the bottom of the hierarchy, often end up insecure and shy. I did the no eye contact thing when I had low confidence and was insecure about people judging me, then when I gained confidence and I was caring far more about how I judge people than how they judge me, I started making eye contact in way people sometimes called uncomfortably piercing.

        Similarly, I thought I have social anxiety, which is also part of the package, until I realized I don’t, I just flat out don’t like most people and the anxiety came from faking liking them, faking interest in them. Once I got really down I do not care about the stupid shit most people talk about and I do not care anymore about explaining things to them that just go woosh over their heads, all that anxiety was gone and was replaced basically by something like cold politeness with a hint of contempt in most cases.

        Social mores… used to be clearly defined. There were books of etiquette. Easy peasy. And etiquette courses for the dumber. Now you are supposed to intuitively “get” them and indeed it does not work as well. But really because there is something in the brain that finds them difficult, or more like because deep down I don’t give a shit about the social mores of dumb cattle? In normal places, like here, where being polite and responsive and suchlike are the mores, I have no trouble with them at all. This place could be an IRL club and I would have no social more problems at all.

        Finally, there are autistic women, like my daughter who freaks out when people make the smallest mistake, as in: not even angry, just really really afraid. She has very rigid concepts of how things are to be done, of course, she got those concepts from me, her mother, and from teachers, but absolutely does not get that there are things like exceptions and people aren’t robots to do things 100% the precisely right way all the time. And when they don’t she feels really afraid because she feels lost, does not know what to expect.

        I find for the autistic brain, it is hard to get out of binary, yes/no mode, things always have to be 100% or 0%, hard to get that more probablistic-statistical way of thinking. It took me a while.

        But it is not a lifelong disability. I learned myself out of and will teach her out of it. It is that one learns these kinds of things much slower.

        For example I understand the concept of God only now in my forties. It is not when God literally exist or does not exist, like an object. There is an objective world out there, but our brains are not 100% objective, all kinds of stuff in the subconscious, so metaphors can be real for us. They can be super powerful, realer than reality. Things can be real without really existing. Hamlet and Frodo are real without ever having existed, as in, it is valid to ask what would Hamlet or Frodo do. The world is objective out there, but in our minds we do not view the world as a bunch of objects, but as a story. It is meaningful to say the story has an Author, God. This does not mean a literally-existing-Author-object. And it took me 40+ years to get it because autism.

  27. The Cominator says:

    https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/megan-fox/2021/04/07/united-airlines-announces-they-will-no-longer-hire-the-best-pilots-n1438258

    United airlines declares a massive increase in future plane crashes is a small price to pay to pretend women and lower IQ blacks and hispanics can be pilots.

  28. The Cominator says:

    I’m wondering what is about the precise point of time when the Cathedral went from wanting to maintain some level of credibility to when the Cathedral adopted full blown gaslighting and making people agree with obvious lies…

    I would say somewhere between 2010-2012 they adopted Senator Roark’s speech as gospel.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1DqgQkxjIg

    • jim says:

      point deer, make horse, 指鹿为马

      Senator Roark in “Sin City”
      “Power don’t come from a badge or a gun. Power comes from lying. Lying big and getting the whole damn world to play along with you. Once you’ve got everybody agreeing with what they know in their hearts ain’t true you’ve got ’em by the balls.”

      They are sons of the father of lies, and their shibboleth is always a big lie.

      So we need to make our shibboleth a big truth that contradicts one of the big lies. The biggest and most shocking truth: That the sexual nature of women is maladapted to emancipation, that emancipation prevents them from reproducing and makes them unhappy. That as individuals, and as a society, need to make women property again.

      Each man must be King under his own roof.

      As King and high priest under my own roof, I make everyone sit and make everyone listen to grace before they start eating. This frequently requires physical coercion on badly behaved children who do not want to sit, even briefly, and vigorous social pressure on women, who want to keep conversation going during grace. Men, however, instinctively play along. Since I am compelling obedience in order to give thanks, I am, for that brief moment when I function as high priest under my own roof, claiming that as top alpha under my roof, I am backed by the supreme alpha of the universe.

      I keep it very short, because I am hungry and want to dig in. I have seen some men drone on forever. I don’t know whether that works or not, but it always looks to me like weakness. Whether it seems like weakness to women, I do not know. The local alpha who is confident in the backing of the higher alpha does not drone on and on about the higher alpha – sounds like a mother saying “wait till your father comes home”.

      Well, that is what it feels like to me. I have insufficient observational evidence to ascertain whether that is what it feels like to women and children.

      And we need a national sovereign, and a national high priest, that backs the sovereign and high priest under every roof.

      • Mike in Boston says:

        some men drone on forever

        The most common Orthodox Christian grace is pretty short:

        Lord Jesus Christ our God, bless the food and drink of Your servants, for You are holy indeed, now and ever and forever. Amen.

        My father, who is one of the most alpha men I know, prefers an extemporaneous grace, but his never come out any longer than the above.

        • jim says:

          I think an extemporaneous grace that briefly acknowledges the particular blessings of the moment is better, because people tune out what they have heard before far too many times, and because it better demonstrates alpha – that you are making a decision and taking initiative on behalf of the top alpha of your tribe, hence you look more like a lieutenant of the big man acting within the sphere of authority he has granted you. Also it is easier to get women to shut the #*@& up if you actually have something say.

          If there are two fertile age females at the table, they are likely to shit test you and God by trying to keep on talking.

          And because you have to actually think about the blessings you have received.

      • onyomi says:

        It seems a lot of this stems from the catastrophe that is The Pill. The more obvious problem everyone worried about when it was invented/accepted (I think it was actually illegal until recently in Japan, maybe still is elsewhere) was that it would lead to female promiscuity, which it probably has. The less obvious problem is that it gives even married women too much control over the form her marriage will take.

        That is, when sex unavoidably leads to pregnancy for most women, most women have three choices: nun, single mother, wife and mother. Among these three, three is obviously the way to go for most. But the pill introduces options like:

        Whatever those Sex in the City ladies are trying to be and married career woman.

        These are superficially appealing because being pregnant and having babies is hard and makes you physically dependent on others/cramps your ability to pursue your “passion.” Of course, most women’s actual “passion” is being a mother, but that is strongly discouraged by the current culture, to which women are more strongly attuned, typically, than men.

        • onyomi says:

          Some might say the pill merely levels the playing field because men always had three options:

          incel/priest, deadbeat, pater familias

          with “deadbeat” being more attractive than “single mom,” but this ignores the ways in which the original game was weighted in females’ favor, namely that dick is always in greater supply than pussy.

          Most men did not have and do not have an equivalent to the female “Sex in the City” option, something of a “have your cake and eat it too” scenario (until menopause hits and you realize you wasted your life).

          • Pooch says:

            Male equivalent is being a player.

          • The Cominator says:

            The main difference is erosion of patriarchy and on top of that (in the West but not in most of Asia or Russia) artificially high female status and western consent culture (as Jim has said women really hate explicit consent while most of them probably don’t want to be bonked in the head and violently raped in an alley, and some do want this, most like an element of coercion at least the first time you cross each base… they like to feel to some degree that they are being taken and have no choice).

            Before paternity testing women had the option of passing their bastards off as their husbands sons (as long as the father’s weren’t too too different in appearance) if they could avoid being caught. With the era of the automobile and men working away from home they had a greater scope to sneak around and not get caught. There were also pretty effective ways of inducing miscarriages that go back to ancient antiquity. Roman and medieval prostitutes did not get pregnant and stay pregnant every month. Much is made of infanticide in Imperial Rome but as bad as women can be its not something most women will want to do to healthy baby of theirs that they carried to term and they are still out of work for a number of months.

            From what I heard the pill initially lead to a period of rampant female promiscuity but females were deathly afraid during the aids crisis (more so then men who realized it was mostly a faggot disease) and then as that passed the cathedral started boosting female status far above men… leading to women not wanting to fuck most men. Then many also started getting fat and larping as lesbians most of the time… leading to very few easily fuckable women compared to men. So the effects of the pill on female promiscuity in the west were temporary. A normal man would probably have a FAR better chance of picking up a girl in a bar in the 1950s before the pill then they would now. Women don’t like thinking about consequences too much when it comes to sex (men will take risks too) and sometimes they find the risk of very negative consequences a turn on.

            So to sum up I don’t think you can blame the pill… though a lot of modern women are medicated in very negative ways that makes them fatter and tends to kill their sex drive.

            • onyomi says:

              I think maybe invention of new technology often begets a “grace period” during which we get to enjoy both the superior social technology adapted to the state without it and the technology itself. But once the material conditions that necessitated the social technology are gone the social technology erodes.

              For example, in addition to contraception, probably part of the motivation for women’s lib was the fact that household gadgetry and public schools, etc. made running a household a less than all-consuming task. For a little while this merely resulted in housewives with more time to Martha Stewart the home, look nice when hubby gets home from work, etc., but eventually this gave way to many women believing they could “have it all.”

              • The Cominator says:

                “For example, in addition to contraception, probably part of the motivation for women’s lib was the fact that household gadgetry and public schools, etc. made running a household a less than all-consuming task. For a little while this merely resulted in housewives with more time to Martha Stewart the home, look nice when hubby gets home from work, etc., but eventually this gave way to many women believing they could “have it all.”

                This indeed enabled modern feminism (it just wasn’t possible before this) but modern feminism wasn’t a necessary consequence of it…

              • Atavistic Morality says:

                There was no motivation for women’s libs except that women always try to walk the extra inch. Before women’s libs the elite weren’t yet degenerate traitors so they always told them what you ought to tell them, “shut the fuck up”, but eventually they became degenerate traitors and started to use women’s libs to plunder and destroy their fellow men like they use niggers, Climate Change and Coronavirus and whatever excuse they can come up with that becomes the flavor of the day these days, that increasingly makes the bureaucracy stronger and richer and everyone else weaker and poorer.

                Notice that there’s little time difference between women’s libs and the founding of the Federal Reserve and a few years after you get the Great Depression, signifying the process of further plundering. It all goes hand on hand, the whole thing is the bureaucracy/priesthood/Cathedral toppling apple carts and plundering society, piece by piece.

                • onyomi says:

                  It makes sense that the timing may not have been right for e.g. women’s lib to cause the income tax and federal reserve, but then the question is why the elites became degenerate traitors?

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  Human nature, life… everyone has heard the story of the self-made rich father with the worthless drug addict son. The children of the virtuous elite have completely different circumstances to their forefathers and so do their grandchildren.

                  Jim always points out that the FF themselves were already engaged in holiness spiraling to a degree, which technically isn’t really wrong, but then again you could always claim that an elite is holiness spiraling at any point like every human is technically “dying” at any point. But in practical terms they built an aristocratic republic that worked absolutely perfectly fine and easily top two society in the history of mankind. And those very same men were aware of what would eventually happen, as Jefferson said, the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time.

                  Why do humans believe they can build a perfect permanent society that never decays? In truth everything in this universe constantly changes and it either improves or decays, but never stays the same. And history proves that the same applies to societies.

                  In that sense, reactionaries are just the mechanic figuring out what the fuck is going on with the car and how to fix it. How naive is it to think that there would never be destructive rulers? As naive as it’d be to think that there would never be a destructive human.

                • suones says:

                  Why do humans believe they can build a perfect permanent society that never decays? In truth everything in this universe constantly changes and it either improves or decays, but never stays the same. And history proves that the same applies to societies.

                  We know we can’t “stop” decay. We just want to decrease the rate of decay. Hopefully by an order of magnitude or two.

                • Pooch says:

                  but then the question is why the elites became degenerate traitors?

                  Degenerate state religion (Holiness spiraled Puritanism). Although it can be argued that Republics by their very nature always trend toward decadence and degeneracy of the elite over a long enough time scale.

                • jim says:

                  Yes. Gaming the state religion is only one form that internal elite conflict takes.

                  In a Republic, there is no one to keep the elite in line. And over time, it is apt to get out of line, one way or another.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  @suones

                  Accelerationism is not jim’s position though, but sure, whatever your preference is. But you’re definitely not a representative of most humans, who in fact seem to believe or are made to believe that society is not decaying but rather “progressing”, at least in the west. I have no idea what your people say on the streets.

                  @Pooch

                  You can say the exact same about anything else, it’s not a valid argument considering you can’t find a single instance of a political system and an elite that haven’t decayed over a long enough time scale.

                  Republics are far more stable forms of government considering their record, compared to monarchies. It is difficult to build a virtuous elite but it’s also more stable, while monarchies constantly flip flop between complete fucking disasters and mediocre kings, with the somewhat rare good monarch. But it’s also true that when there’s a good monarch he provides a more effective leadership than a good virtuous elite in a Republic.

                • jim says:

                  > Republics are far more stable forms of government considering their record, compared to monarchies.

                  Oddly, historians writing under the rule of Monarch drew the opposite conclusion.

                  Republics with a virtuous elite are as stable as that elites virtue, while with Kings all too frequently a lion begets a jackass.

                  So historians who did not worry too much about the occasional jackass correctly drew the conclusion that monarchy is stable, Republics unstable, because, on the longer historical timescale, the virtue of elites is unstable, and on the short historical timescale, a Republic without a virtuous elite is unstable.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “Republics are far more stable forms of government considering their record, compared to monarchies. It is difficult to build a virtuous elite but it’s also more stable, while monarchies constantly flip flop between complete fucking disasters and mediocre kings, with the somewhat rare good monarch. But it’s also true that when there’s a good monarch he provides a more effective leadership than a good virtuous elite in a Republic.”

                  Republic’s are stable IF they are small and have a virtuous elite. No Republic that has expanded beyond being a regional power has lasted very long. Big powerful republic’s decay like picked fruit left in the hot sun.

                  Rome’s social decay got very bad after the second Punic war and America’s got very bad after WWII (whereas before societally we survived a 10 year quasi communist administration).

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Autocracy carries the possibility of bad rulers.

                  Demotism carries the guarantee of bad rulers.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  @jim

                  I disagree, I don’t think they were correct at all. As a matter of fact, the two most remarkable civilizations the west has built in terms of scale and success were born as republics, Rome and America. And what about very successful free cities like in ancient Greece and Italian Renaissance? After the fall of Rome, there’s also a big difference between the late absolute monarchs and the early monarchs who worked and needed the explicit support of the nobility. In what historical context has a monarchy proven more stable than a republic? Perhaps you’re talking about China, I don’t really know its history. Rome was a lot more stable as a republic, and the farther away from a republic and the closer to the necessity of a monarch the more restless and bloody. And then after Augustus you don’t really get that stability, instead you get degenerates like Caligula and Nero. The problem is that well, after all the republic did fall and a monarchy was indeed needed, but the monarchy didn’t do so well and soon fell as well.

                  Republics seem scarce, finding a virtuous elite seems a sort of fortuitous encounter born out of specific circumstances, but once they are established the virtue of the elite is more stable and durable than the ticking bomb of the lion begetting the jackass, consistently, repeatedly.

                  @The Cominator

                  Republic’s are stable IF they are small and have a virtuous elite.

                  That is what it seems, but you don’t have better examples in monarchies when talking about stability. You do have better leadership and imperial efficiency in very specific monarchs while they were alive, but you also have some who spread absolute death and misery all the same, so you have cases where the grandfather creates the first empire where the sun never sets (Fernando I de Aragón) and luckily the grandson (Carlos I de España) continues his labor faithfully, but you get like a 100 years and afterwards not stable and rarely again successful in the same manner. How about England? How long a record?

                  Also, I’m not sure that size is necessarily all that dooming for a republic, it’s just that a regional power requires time to grow into something more and this time is long enough for the virtuous elite to decay. Using the same example, it’d seem that while Spain was “smaller” it was doing better, but in the end it all boiled down to the monarchs, not really the size.

                  @Pseudo

                  Republic as in aristocratic republic, democracy is insanity.

                • jim says:

                  > I disagree, I don’t think they were correct at all. As a matter of fact, the two most remarkable civilizations the west has built in terms of scale and success were born as republics, Rome and America.

                  You are mixing up cause and effect.

                  Republics happen when you have a virtuous elite, Rome being the classic and extreme example. Need a virtuous elite to have a great civilization.

                  When you don’t have a virtuous elite, need a King.

                • Pooch says:

                  The virtue of the founding American and Roman Republic elite came about from the social technology enforced by their monarchical predecessors.

                • monarchist says:

                  “monarchies constantly flip flop between complete fucking disasters and mediocre kings, with the somewhat rare good monarch”

                  Which imaginary fantasy-novel monarchies do you have in mind, here? Because it certainly isn’t the English or French monarchies, nor from my limited knowledge does it fit the Spanish. The truly bad kings were exceptional in that they were so unusual. Even then many of those had their redeeming qualities – Edward II of England was a competent enough administrator in everyday matters, and John II of France’s bad reputation is based largely on his losing at Poitiers, which was a very near thing, much more so than the English commonly admit. Charles VI’s madness is one of the few clear-cut cases, and Louis XVI is guilty primarily of being too nice. Much more common is a run like France’s Philip II, Louis VIII and IX, Philip III and IV – five kings of consistent ability and dedication who provided stable and wise government for more than a century. Even then the trend breaking wasn’t inevitable – Louis X was starting to get the hang of really being a king when he died, and his brother Philip V could’ve been one of the best if he’d lived longer. Covering a similar period, the English kings through the Hundred Years War were some of the best leaders history has ever seen, making the best of an extreme imbalance in power and population to nearly pull off a successful union of the two most dynamic and productive European peoples. The English monarchs through the 1600s and 1700s continued that track record – the overwhelming influence of English in the world today is largely the result of policies and actions taken then. I could go on, but the plain fact is bad monarchs are extremely and consistently rare. Of course that’s on a national level; I say nothing about any given individual’s personal interactions with them. But I wouldn’t want to invite Vladimir Putin to my house, either, regardless of the fact that he’s easily the sanest person on the world stage today.

                  To have a virtuous elite, you first and foremost need parents who know how to teach their children what is important. The European aristocracies had figured that out, and the result was a thousand years of steady improvement. and incremental national cohesion With a republic – especially a republic where “the people can and should shoot the government from time to time”, is one of the founding principles (and it is a principle with which I agree in theory but still await practical observation) – the virtuous elite must consist of a majority of the electorate, a majority which consistently maintains itself. There is much less margin for error, much less margin for temporary societal decay, much less ability to recover from mistakes. Repubics are inherently fragile, with such fragility scaling upwards the more interaction they have with the rest of the world.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Nicholas II of Russia is probably the very worst monarch in history being personally responsible for WW1 the greatest disaster in the history of western civilzation. Phillip II of Spain is close. Charles the bewitched since he couldn’t function was less worse than those two.

                • jim says:

                  If anyone is personally responsible for World War I it is King of Serbia Peter I of the House of Karađorđević, who could neither make peace nor war, being unable to control those engaged in warlike acts against the Austro Hungarian empire.

                  So Austria issued an ultimatum, demanding peace or war. He was too weak to comply with that ultimatum.

                  So, war seemed inevitable. And then Nicolas II announced his intention to protect Serbia against invasion by Austria. And then Germany attacked everyone.

                  Serbia did not have to engage in warlike acts against Austria. Austria did have to respond to low level war with flat out war. Nicholas II did not have to promise to fulfil his treaty obligations to Serbia. And, having promised, he might well not have done so very effectually.

                  And, because it is quite likely Nicolas II would not have protected Serbia very effectually, or might have protected Serbia and then installed a Serbian government capable of making peace, Germany did not have to attack everybody.

                  Serbia to be able to engage in warlike acts against Austria and get away with it was intolerable, and something needed to be done, but the man who actually did something about it was the Kaiser, and what he did was to invade France, which was clearly not the best thing to do about it.

                  Something needed to be done about Serbia, but invading France is not the greatest way to do something about Serbia.

                • Pooch says:

                  I suppose the question is, given a virtuous elite, is a Republic superior to monarchy?

                  We know given an unvirtuous elite, a Republic leads to insanity and thus monarchy is the only viable option.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “So, war seemed inevitable. And then Nicolas II announced his intention to protect Serbia against invasion by Austria.”

                  This is where I blame him, he triggered the alliance system to protect a terrorist state.

                • jim says:

                  Yes he did. But it clear that neither he nor anyone else foresaw the consequences.

                  A short while ago, the figurehead president of the USA promised the Ukraine the full support of the US.

                  Ukraine are attempting to re-occupy Donbas by means short of naked force. To which the locals are responding with naked force. If the proverbial hits the fan in Donbas, there will be dreadful civilian and military casualties, which will likely lead to Russian intervention. If Russia intervenes, the US will likely intervene. If the US intervenes, we will likely discover if our nukes still work.

                  But if it turns out that that presidential declaration leads to world war III, its full idiocy will be obvious only in retrospect.

                  And that Nicolas II was triggering the alliance system into total war was evident only in retrospect.

                  Other outcomes were possible, and pre hoc, more likely. Austria could have responded to low level Serbian warfare with full on warfare, then Russia could have intervened in Serbia, then Germany could have intervened in Serbia. How is pre-emptively invading France a bright idea, or even anything that could have reasonably been predicted?

                • The Cominator says:

                  “But if it turns out that that presidential declaration leads to world war III, its full idiocy will be obvious only in retrospect.”

                  Its quite obvious to both of us NOW not in retrospect.

                  Nicholas II’s stupidity in supporting the Serbs when there was an alliance system in place would have been obvious to me then.

                • jim says:

                  > Its quite obvious to both of us NOW not in retrospect.

                  It is a possibility, a possibility that is gravely under estimated.

                  And the possibility that supporting Serbia would lead to World War was gravely under estimated. Did anyone, except a handful of people like ourselves, say “This is going to lead to World War”?

                  On the other hand, that invading France was definitely going to lead to World War was entirely obvious.

                  So if anyone, other than the weak King of Serbia, that is to blame, it is the Kaiser.

                  If the fracas in the Ukraine leads to World War III, then in restrospect any of the stages in the escalation could be labeled THE crucial step – but it will have been only one of sequence of stupid actions by people accustomed to long peace who fail to appreciate the fragility of peace and the horror of war.

                • The Cominator says:

                  France was always going to attack Germany if it ended up at war with Russia… lots of fanatics who wanted Altace Lorraine back.

                  Possible Germany could have avoided British involvement by not going through the lowlands.

                • jim says:

                  The obvious solution was for someone to forcibly install a government in Serbia capable of making peace or war, rather than both simultaneously. The threat of war could have been ratcheted up relatively slowly to increase pressure for this solution.

                  Instead, with war looming, Germany decided to attack everyone first.

                  With war looming, one can obtain deals not otherwise obtainable, and put attacking everyone first on the negotiating table.

                • suones says:

                  Just to add my 2c. Nicholas II’s fault was that he was not an autocrat at heart. As Imperator and chief of the Orthodox flock, he was personally responsible for the actions of lesser Kings, like a father unto his wayward children. Just like negligent parents fail to discipline their children early on, so the Tsar failed to discipline the wayward children in power in Serbia.

                  He was right that Austria had no right to intervene in Serbian matters. But he himself should have intervened, ensured that justice was served, and made it obvious that the Tsar’s justice was swift and fair, which could potentially have decreased tensions with Austria.

                  His attitude was like that of lower-class “parents” who leave their children out to play on the roads, but immediately try to mob up if a passing motorist faces an accident due to the children. If Nicholas II didn’t feel himself up to the task, he should have nominated a worthier successor rather than abdicating in favour of Jews.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Austria had to do something state backed terrorists assassinating the imperial heir was intolerable.

                • jim says:

                  Yes.

                  Had to threaten to invade Serbia, to force someone to clean up Serbia, on the threat that they would clean it up if no one else did.

                  And before they got started on cleaning it up, German invaded France, which was jumping the gun.

                • The Cominator says:

                  One event during the July Crisis highlights how inexcusably stupid Nicholas II was to me…

                  He could have gone to the Archduke’s funeral and talked personally with Wilhelm and Franz Joseph (who both attended) and tried to work out a solution without the government war factions getting in the way… he did not.

                • jim says:

                  Weakness leading to weakness: Sovereigns need to work together to bypass and dismpower their dangerously powerful servants.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  @jim

                  You are mixing up cause and effect.

                  Republics happen when you have a virtuous elite, Rome being the classic and extreme example. Need a virtuous elite to have a great civilization.

                  When you don’t have a virtuous elite, need a King.

                  I don’t see how anything I’ve said is different or contradicting with this. I simply point out that when you do have a virtuous elite, it’s far more stable in the sense that the republic will be overall better throughout a longer period of time, while with kings you’ll get instability in the sense that throughout the same period of time the regime will be more variable and wave between good, stagnant/mediocre and bad.

                  @monarchist

                  Which imaginary fantasy-novel monarchies do you have in mind, here? Because it certainly isn’t the English or French monarchies, nor from my limited knowledge does it fit the Spanish.

                  I agree your knowledge is limited when it comes to Spain, the amount of terrible and traitor kings we’ve had far outnumber the good ones, I’ve never met a Spaniard who didn’t agree, from all walks of life and all political leanings.

                  I’ve never been too interested in the general long history details of English and French monarchies so I’ll not argue with you in this point, I’m not interested in pulling out history and arguing about technicalities and details and start counting kings one by one. But simple logic indicates you must be wrong, since we have the hindsight and we can point out the lack of results. Good kings become world famous because they are very rare and when they do exist the results are extremely remarkable, and I’m talking world changing remarkable.

                  And bad kings are so incredibly destructive they are responsible for human disasters like the French Revolution. This is possibly the worst calamity Christendom has ever suffered and a French monarch is the one responsible for it. The Cominator has his own list apparently, but WWI would’t have ever happened without the French Revolution initiating the obliteration of Christian social technology to begin with.

                • jim says:

                  > I simply point out that when you do have a virtuous elite, it’s far more stable in the sense that the republic will be overall better throughout a longer period of time,

                  Sure, a Republic is better, assuming a reasonably high level of elite virtue.

                  How do you get a reasonably high level of elite virtue?

                  Historically, the answer has always been a reasonably sane, but rather intrusive, state Church under a virtuous monarch.

                  Virtuous monarchs are, of course, no sure thing, and sane state Churches are no sure thing, but a King with a son has incentive to worry about the future, and the power to do something about that future, so virtue is more likely than in other forms of governance. If you have one man responsible, you have at least a chance he will actually be responsible. If many men responsible, no one responsible. So a Republic is likely to lose the virtue that made it possible. (And Kings with short life expectancy and little prospect of their sons following them are worse.)

                  > And bad kings are so incredibly destructive they are responsible for human disasters like the French Revolution.

                  Louis XV said “after me the deluge”. Louis XVI inherited a problem that only a King could solve, and only a great King. Louis XV and XVI were not bad, merely too weak for the task at hand.

                  Louis XIV had a big problem with over mighty nobles. He drastically solved this problem. Thoroughly, completely, and totally. A little too thoroughly, completely, and totally, with the result that he then had a new problem, which problem rapidly worsened during the reign of King Louis XV, and came to a head under the weak hand of King Louis XVI.

                  Republics cannot solve the problem of holiness spiraling. If King Louis XVI had held memetic sovereignty, would have crushed the holiness spiral. If no King, no solution.

                • alf says:

                  I lean towards monarchy over republic, since a monarch can fight civilisational entropy better than a republic. At the same time, plenty of impressive republics; golden century Netherlands got its start as a republic.

                  And bad kings are so incredibly destructive they are responsible for human disasters like the French Revolution.

                  I reason this the other way around: the king is responsible for stopping leftist singularities such as the French revolution. Only when he was gotten rid of did the French terror get into full swing.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  This kind of superficial thinking is typical of the gnostic throughout history.

                  ‘The king is in charge of politics, and i see here we have political problems (that i may or may not be causing myself in the first place); therefore, if we get rid of kings, we will get rid of political problems!’

                • suones says:

                  If King Louis XVI had held memetic sovereignty…

                  This is an extremely big demand. Warriors generally lack memetic sovereignty, which is a Brahmin trait. Kings possessing memetic sovereignty are the ones who establish Empire and Religion. Samrat Ashoka the Great and Tsar Peter the Great come to mind, but they were really exceptional Kings. A “good” King merely keeps the system put in place by his fathers and maintains it. Louis XV and XVI were both “good” Kings, but they simply didn’t have what was needed.

                  PS: Paladins can come from warrior or priestly classes. Eg: the longest surviving Hindu Empire was led by Peshwas who were literally Brahmins who took up the sword.

                • jim says:

                  > > If King Louis XVI had held memetic sovereignty…

                  > This is an extremely big demand.

                  Yes it is an extremely big demand, but for a King to satisfactorily perform his job as the fount of all honors, mortal and divine, (which is to say run the status system so that status is awarded for prosocial, rather than anti social, activities) he really needs memetic sovereignty.

              • Atavistic Morality says:

                @jim

                How do you get a reasonably high level of elite virtue?

                Historically, the answer has always been a reasonably sane, but rather intrusive, state Church under a virtuous monarch.

                Historically I don’t think the state Church is necessarily involved in the development of the elite virtue, but rather the elite virtue develops on the image of the virtuous monarch, his actions, his behavior and the guidelines he is setting up for the organization that prove successful. And from there, the state Church forms and is a feedback.

                Virtuous monarchs are, of course, no sure thing, and sane state Churches are no sure thing, but a King with a son has incentive to worry about the future, and the power to do something about that future, so virtue is more likely than in other forms of governance. If you have one man responsible, you have at least a chance he will actually be responsible. If many men responsible, no one responsible. So a Republic is likely to lose the virtue that made it possible. (And Kings with short life expectancy and little prospect of their sons following them are worse.)

                Republics always have leading figures, precisely because if many men responsible, no one responsible. There is always a de facto opinion leader and among the virtuous elite someone always take the initiative, it’s the way of the world. Republics lose their virtue and Kings lose their kingdoms, I don’t understand where this argument is leading. If Kings were infallible and clear cut better than Republics, which it seems to be the point your ultimately trying to make, the world wouldn’t be the way it is today, the lineage of Kings would be eternal.

                Louis XV and XVI were not bad, merely too weak for the task at hand.

                An ineffective leader is a bad leader, this is also the way of the world: the leader is the greatest figure and takes the greatest credit and holds the greatest power, but he must also bear the disgrace, suffer the wort of the consequences and be condemned the most. The monarch is responsible for whatever happens in his kingdom, if there is a problem it’s his duty to fix it, no excuses.

                Republics cannot solve the problem of holiness spiraling. If King Louis XVI had held memetic sovereignty, would have crushed the holiness spiral. If no King, no solution.

                Agreed.

                @alf

                I lean towards monarchy over republic, since a monarch can fight civilisational entropy better than a republic. At the same time, plenty of impressive republics; golden century Netherlands got its start as a republic.

                If this were true the two most famous western revolutions wouldn’t have happened under the watch of monarchs, and the two most successful western empires wouldn’t have been born from republics. If monarchs alone could fight civilizational entropy, today you’d be under a king.

                Have you ever known anything in this world that was permanent? Nothing is forever, social decay is inevitable, just like your car breaking down is inevitable, everything is subject to entropy, nothing is perfect in this world. We should adjust what we do to what is needed to solve the issues as they happen, today we need a King, tomorrow a Republic might be better.

                Jim always says that man is a fallen creature living in an imperfect world, so why insist that a perfect political system exists? Well, history proves that this is obviously untrue.

                I reason this the other way around: the king is responsible for stopping leftist singularities such as the French revolution. Only when he was gotten rid of did the French terror get into full swing.

                Of course, that’s why it’s his fault, you said so yourself, its his responsibility.

                No one sane would make excuses for the engineer that builds a bad bridge that collapses and in the process kills many people. Why make excuses for the king? This thinking and this line of argument doesn’t persuade towards monarchy, it sounds tyrannical and destructive. Kings have to pay for their failures with redemption or death, if redemption remembered as redeemed, if dead as a failure.

                Who supports bailing out bankers and businessmen when they fuck up? No one, and they don’t deserve to, they have to pay for the consequences of their actions or their inaction, this is both the privilege and the duty that comes with position, and its the way of the world. That’s why the market economy works, the failures are cropped. That’s why all successful societies were patriarchal, the rest were failures and were cropped.

                • jim says:

                  > No one sane would make excuses for the engineer that builds a bad bridge that collapses and in the process kills many people

                  No one sane would abolish engineers and bridges because a bridge falls down.

                  King Louis XIV created conditions that permitted a holiness spiral, because the problem he was dealing with was unrelated to that problem. He was not worried about entryism into the State Church, because the entryists truthfully enough indicated French nationalism and independence from Rome, and Rome was hostile and difficult.

                  King Louis XV failed to do anything decisive about the holiness spiral, which towards the end of his reign had become obviously dangerous and threatening. King Louis XVI tried, like our friend from the Debian foundation, to skate below the radar, trying to appease and accommodate, a tactic that can never succeed.

                  OK, they failed. But if there had been no King, there would have been no one who could have succeeded.

                  > If this were true the two most famous western revolutions wouldn’t have happened under the watch of monarchs

                  Present conditions are very similar to those preceding the Russian Revolution. Instead of overthrowing a King, they are overthrowing a race and a civilization.

                  You are blaming the fall of applecarts on the existence of applecarts. It was King Louis XVI’s applecart. Now it is my applecart, and I have no King to lead an army.

                  > Historically I don’t think the state Church is necessarily involved in the development of the elite virtue

                  Alfred and his family created England from chaos with a state Church. The Battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton. In the days of Roman virtue, Roman generals would invoke the bodies of the troops’ fathers and the temples of their gods, a practice that we mainly know about through the ridicule it attracted during the decline of Roman virtue.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  ‘Well getting my leg chopped off was a pretty uncool experience… but if i chop my arms and other leg off too, then i wont have to worry about getting my limbs chopped off anymore!’

                • The Cominator says:

                  Of the three last of the Bourbon Louis the revolution was LEAST the fault of Louis XV.

                  Louis XIV cut the nuts off the aristocracy and made them a parasite class that had little use (the French revolutionaries were right about that) sequestering them in the wastefully expensive Versailles. This probably doomed the Ancien Regime… he made the ruling class a bunch of effete bureaucrats (whereas formerly they had been masculine dangerous warrior aristocrats) and he also socialized the economy and got rid of his most productive citizens the French Protestants. His military gains given the enormous cost were uninspiring and the English under the Duke of Marlborough at one point nearly captured Paris (worst French defeats to the English since Agincourt). Hes mostly known positively to some because visiting foreign aristocrats thought Versailles looked cool (but because there was no other seasonal court it stunk to high heaven, most courts moved seasonally because all the shit had to be cleaned up at certain points) and he lived and reigned a very long time.

                  Louis XV did not to my knowledge do anything to make things all that much worse in his long reign and at least it came about somehow that some of the Versailles aristocrats did lots of useful scientific work. He also somewhat roled back Colbertian socialism though not enough. He was the best of the three.

                  Louis XVI was certainly not an evil malignant man the way French Revolutionaries said he was but he was weak and foolish. France was broke from Colbertian socialism and he got involved in a not too successful multi theater world war against England. In desperation he called the Estates General… Then came the Tennis Court Oaths which started the revolution.

        • Fred says:

          The more obvious problem everyone worried about when it was invented/accepted (I think it was actually illegal until recently in Japan, maybe still is elsewhere) was that it would lead to female promiscuity, which it probably has.

          This is a commonly-encountered opinion in red pill circles, but it’s obviously false: if it were true, female promiscuity would be higher in countries where the pill is available OTC (eg. Latin America).

          As Jim keeps pointing out, the cause of female promiscuity is high female self-esteem and/or high female social status (some clarification on these would be appreciated).

        • jim says:

          > It seems a lot of this stems from the catastrophe that is The Pill

          We have had effective contraception since the early bronze age, and had effective abortion up to the dark age following the decline of the Roman Empire.

          There is no indication that this makes much difference. The pill was effectively illegal in Japan until quite recently, but disaster set in immediately McArthur’s emancipation of women became effective, and has been rapidly getting worse ever since.

          • onyomi says:

            I’m not convinced separating pregnancy from sex hasn’t gotten a lot easier and more reliable in the past several decades, nor that the hormones so many women are now taking regularly aren’t affecting society in some subtle but possibly profound ways, but I take your point about the timing (and by disaster I assume you mean falling birth rates, especially? Because the conservative, patriarchic attitudes remained for some time, to some extent are still present, at least compared to the US and Europe).

            Still, while not any sort of technological/material determinist, I do strongly suspect that certain social developments may become, if not inevitable, then highly likely when particular material circumstances obtain, and that, so long as they obtain, one may be fighting strong headwinds.

            Do you have any thoughts on Robin Hanson’s “Forager vs. Farmer” theory? https://www.overcomingbias.com/2017/08/forager-v-farmer-elaborated.html

            I am pretty convinced by it, including the corollary that it is hard to avoid patriarchic farmer morality degenerating into a kind of neo-forager-ism once technology succeeds in meeting peoples’ basic needs with comparatively little input.

            • Ace says:

              >Individuals who saw a norm violation could tell others, and then the whole band could discuss what to do about it. Once a consensus formed, the band could use weapons to enforce their collective decision. As needed, punishments could escalate from scolding to shunning to exile to death. Common norms included requirements to share food and protection, and bans on violence, giving orders, bragging, and creating subgroup factions.

              The article is already full of shit almost from the git go. Group enforcement is rare in hunter gathers, rather someone that violates the rules too strongly is simply murdered by one of the group that he or she pissed off.

              I read about a glutton who refused to hunt or fish that was part of a Maori in New Zeeland. People looked down on him for it, but whenever he demanded part of the the days hunt or fishing he was always fed by the tribe. One day he demanded part of the fish that one of the men had caught and the man he demanded it from simply killed him. Everyone in the the tribe agreed that the glutton was someone who needed killing and that was the end of it. Collective action isn’t norm as this writer forces his progressive beliefs on peoples he’s never studied.

              In the 20th century a shocking discovery was made: Female chimps mated with every member the band pretty close to equally, but 50-75% of the children were sired by the alpha male. The only logical conclusion is female chimps can somewhat control who’s sperm they’re getting pregnant from. Since Humans and Chimps share a common ancestor and both have unusual behaviors like warfare it’s likely that our common ancestor females also had this ability and it was passed down to all human women.

              Thus if you consider the idea that women can subconsciously control who’s sperm gets them pregnant, things like the sudden decline in the American and Japanese birth rate after men’s status is reduced far below that of an alpha male makes a lot of sense, pill or no pill.

              • jim says:

                > In the 20th century a shocking discovery was made: Female chimps mated with every member the band pretty close to equally, but 50-75% of the children were sired by the alpha male. The only logical conclusion is female chimps can somewhat control who’s sperm they’re getting pregnant from. Since Humans and Chimps share a common ancestor and both have unusual behaviors like warfare it’s likely that our common ancestor females also had this ability and it was passed down to all human women.

                The Cervix and Rape

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  There are a few interesting hatefacts along this line that also relates to the SIDS discussion earlier. There is a study I read a while back that showed that “aggressive intercourse” increases the amount of luteinizing hormone in semen, and that helps make a pregnancy more likely. However, a woman’s immune system is more likely to attack the fetus if she is not getting fucked by the father on the regular. The microchimerization that comes from insemination helps attune her immune system to the presence of foreign genetic material.

                  Then you get into the fact that semen contains a bunch of hormones and neurotransmitters, and that women who have no sex or sex with a condom have a significantly increased rate of mental illness over those who have sex bare. Women go crazy when they aren’t getting sex because their brains are not wired to produce everything they need. They are physically incomplete without a man.

            • The Cominator says:

              “nor that the hormones so many women are now taking regularly aren’t affecting society in some subtle but possibly profound ways”

              This is somewhat important more so than pregnancy effects (women in a sexual mood really don’t think much about consequences anyway and potential negative consequences tend to turn them on) but what is more important is a lot of women are on psychiatric drugs which tend to slow their metabolism (making them fat) and kill their sex drives.

              We do not have a promiscuity epidemic, quite the opposite.

            • Aidan says:

              Hanson is missing a very important group; pastoralists. Pure foragers are almost all niggers, irrelevant when talking about history, and pure farmers live in a state of Gaea worship and redistributive socialism, but pure farmers no longer exist; they were long ago conquered by semi-nomadic pastoralist barbarians who became the warrior and priestly elite of those settled societies.

              Farmers versus Cowboys. Patriarchy was a cowboy invention, property was a cowboy invention, and organized warfare was a cowboy invention. My cows, my women, cattle raid with my boys. Pastoralists had “thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s ox…”, and primitive farmers all had socialism. The cowboy ethos was transplanted onto farmer society when cowboys conquered farmers.

              We are not devolving into neo-foragerism, we are devolving into neo-farmerism; what BAP calls the “longhouse”. The malnourished male, the tyrannical rule of the grandmother, the grain cult that wants you eating beans and vegetable oil instead of meat and milk. Resembles quite a bit what we have today. The forager, despite being a nigger, is individually an impressive specimen, fit, competent at least at hunting, woodcraft, survival, even if totally lacking the skills to function in civilization.

              • nils says:

                It has struck me for a while that the assumption of evolution in man should be that the surviving “hunter gatherers” should be assumed to be a poor representation of the civilized populations origins, they mostly look like they are adapted to disease and heat resistance more than anything. The muh abos argument is dumb, the abo are a dead end and havent changed in a million years, they are obviously not the same as aryan/proto schythic peoples 30 millenia ago. Its to bad all the technical evidence is wrongthink and memory holes for the origins of europeans out of the russian lands prior to the greek world.

              • onyomi says:

                Hmm… this makes a certain amount of sense; certainly in Chinese history (the one I happen to know best) there are three distinct groups: the horse-riding pastoralists (Huns, Jurchens, Mongols), the farmers (most Han Chinese), and the foragers (most of the southern minority populations, who were probably driven onto crummy land by farmers).

                The historical tendency is the pastoralists are better warriors and periodically conquer the farmers (Han), but they tend to “farmerize” after a time of settled living, and, eventually, to be kicked out once they lose touch with their warrior heritage.

                I’m not entirely convinced, however, that it’s the pastoralists and not the farmer who bring patriarchy and civilization. The non-mobile farmers build city walls and grow grain for their wine. These they use to enchant Enkidu-types (a pastoralist warrior?) and bring them into the fold. But Gilgamesh was the king.

                The founders of the Zhou Dynasty may possibly have been pastoralist-ish warriors relative to the Shang rulers they conquered, but I have no reason to believe the Shang were not primarily farmers, as opposed to pastoralists.

                I suppose it’s possible the best combination is farmer settled civilization with periodic injections of pastoralist nomad warrior ethos to keep them from devolving into socialist matriarchy, but I thought BAP’s “longhouse” was more about foragers like North American Indians? I would consider the Iroquois to be foragers with some pastoralist warrior tedencies more than farmers lacking an injection of pastoralist patriarchy.

                • jim says:

                  > three distinct groups: the horse-riding pastoralists (Huns, Jurchens, Mongols)

                  Jurchens were not horse riding pastoralists. They were grain farmers who were culturally assimilated to the patriarchal Mongols, but retained their own language and farming technology while adopting Mongol social technology.

                  So it was the Mongol social technology that mattered.

                  Pastoralists have property that can wander off, or be herded off, so successful pastoralists develop or adopt a social technology that discourages rustling and cattle raiding, creating a social environment where cattle that wander off are likely to returned. (And if they are not returned, trouble ensues.) They apply this same social technology to control women, giving women essentially the same legal status as cattle, though of course higher social status. Then they conquer their decadent neighbors.

                  The invention of barbed wire contributed to our loss of this social technology, which will have to be reinvented around an environment where every woman carries a smart phone, and the man with proper authority over her can at any time see where she is and what she is doing. (And Facebook cannot.)

                • Ace says:

                  Civilization in the true sense of the word, IE cities is created by mass religion. Religion allows a group to overcoming Dunnbar’s number and enables widespread farming and city building.

                  Patriarchy, IE fathers rule appears to be innate. When people stop practicing it they’re quickly conquered by their neighbors who do practice it. Civilizations who abandon it just take longer to fall and be conquered because civilization when they are patriarchal unstoppable war machines destroying most of the local competition not of equal power.

                • onyomi says:

                  >Civilization in the true sense of the word, IE cities is created by mass religion.

                  Typically I view early cities as the result of farmers needing walls to protect their grain stores and immobile fields. I have heard the theory that maybe the earliest fixed settlements, like Gobekli Tepe, were religious meccas like Uppsala (or well, Mecca), but I’m not sure those necessarily formed the nucleus of the earliest cities.

                  I guess the question is, is causality: religion->cities->farming, or farming->cities->organized priesthood

                • The Cominator says:

                  Aidan explained it.

                  Religion (and conquest) -> farming -> cities.

                  People who were formerly independent hunter-gatherers did not want to become unfree farmers. Priestly and warrior compulsion by conquering pastoralist who became the elite had to come before agriculture because taking up farming was not generally voluntary.

                • jim says:

                  > people who were formerly independent hunter-gatherers did not want to become unfree farmers. Priestly and warrior compulsion by

                  People who were independent hunter gatherers seldom became farmers.

                  Farming expanded primarily by genetic replacement.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Farming expanded primarily via enslavement.

                • jim says:

                  The early Romans and Greeks were primarily grain farmers, and had little use for slaves.

                  The Angles and Saxons were primarily grain farmers, and had little use for slaves.

                  It does not look like any early farming society of which we have good knowledge had more than one third slaves.

                  Large scale slave plantations replacing free farmers was later economic development.

                • Ace says:

                  >Typically I view early cities as the result of farmers needing walls to protect their grain stores and immobile fields. I have heard the theory that maybe the earliest fixed settlements, like Gobekli Tepe, were religious meccas like Uppsala (or well, Mecca), but I’m not sure those necessarily formed the nucleus of the earliest cities.

                  Cities predate farming and Megalithic religious temples predate cities. All cities were built with a religious structure at their center and were almost certain ruled by a priesthood.

                  Jericho the oldest city we’ve discovered had a religious tower at it’s center:
                  https://youtu.be/1BrhZBMOS8U

                  Jericho was probably also the earliest known site where religious holiness cycle caused the place to be abandoned for a couple of thousand years.

                  Sumer the oldest mass civilization that we know of was ruled by priests for all of it’s early history. Cities started off as religious temples. The small farming villages spreading everywhere were a biproduct of the city people leaving their cities as they got to full and spreading out.

                  These small farming villages continued to spread but large cities almost always spawned around religious centers or colonies from cities.

                • jim says:

                  The Bible tells us that the first city was led, and perhaps founded, by “a mighty hunter”, implying that cities predate agriculture.

                  We have increasing evidence that all the early cities were built around temples, and the temple came first, then the city.

                  I conjecture that the temples represented a divinely commanded moral order than enabled men of different male lineages to meet peacefully for religious festivals, during which festivals they could exchange goods and exchange sisters for wives without getting killed too often.

                  Eventually it came to pass that there was a permanent population of priests at festival site, and soon a permanent population of tradesmen. Which led to farming, which led to granaries, which led to city walls. But farming came later and the walls came last.

                • suones says:

                  I conjecture that the temples represented a divinely commanded moral order than enabled men of different male lineages to meet peacefully for religious festivals, during which festivals they could exchange goods and exchange sisters for wives without getting killed too often.

                  This is how Mecca was founded (around the Temple), and why Muhammad preserved the central Temple even as he condemned “idolatry” in general. The Meccan Temple is the only Temple Muslims worship at, and all prayer anywhere in the world is to be done while facing in that direction. Visiting the Temple in person is how Muslim elites (who might be otherwise mortal enemies) get to meet on neutral ground. Muhammad knew good social technology when he saw it.

                • Ace says:

                  Jim you have a different view of religion than I do. I think that tribal shamans or witch doctors got together to form a priesthood that then commanded the locals to build the temples in the name of the gods for the priesthoods own gain. The megalithic temples were the original conspiracy of a priesthood fooling people into doing their bidding. Even things like studying the stars was used to predict when a solar eclipse would happen so the priesthood could control the tribes.

                  The amount of labor that went into these megalithic sites was massive. Parasitism soon turned to symbiosis as religion wared against religion and the priesthood began improving the lives of the people they were extracting resources from if for no other reason than to survive attacks from hostile religions. Göbekli Tepe was probably burred by the a hostile religious group that conquered it.

                  The number of priests at such temples was always limited because without agriculture there was no way to sustain people in large numbers who didn’t spend their time hunting and fishing. Once agriculture got started temples quickly turned into permanent cities as the priesthood realized the power to directly rule people instead of indirectly through the gods. Of course living off mostly grain was hard for hunter/gathers people. Took some genetic changes to enable it.

                • jim says:

                  > I think that tribal shamans or witch doctors got together to form a priesthood that then commanded the locals to build the temples in the name of the gods for the priesthoods own gain.

                  Well of course they did. But they could not gain anything unless people showed up from time to time, and not too many people would show up if members of different male lineages kept killing each other.

                  So, like a stationary bandit, their interests were not entirely in conflict with the interests of their congregation.

                  > The amount of labor that went into these megalithic sites was massive

                  If you can build a big complex project, you can mount a big complex war effort. Similarly, if you can land a man on the moon, you can land a nuke on Moscow.

                  Thus building a megalith can enable you to obtain diplomatic advantages without the potential inconvenience and hard feelings that would result from actually killing people.

            • jim says:

              > I’m not convinced separating pregnancy from sex hasn’t gotten a lot easier and more reliable

              Yes, it has gotten a lot easier and more reliable. But its easier for the Taliban also.

              Looking back at past based societies and debased societies, contraceptive technology does not seem to have made much difference.

              Bronze age women who did not want to get pregnant could insist on condoms and sodomy, or apply infanticide. Or apply the more convenient modern form of infanticide where a women fails to pay attention to what happens to her babies when her latest lover drops over.

              Societies that emancipated women somehow mysteriously failed to reproduce, despite the non availability of the pill. Societies that did not emancipate women, Taliban, Timore Leste, continue to reproduce despite availability.

              We saw an abrupt collapse in birthrate when women were abruptly emancipated in Japan. The introduction of modern contraceptive technology does not have a large enough impact to be break the noise floor. Looking at the past, the pill does not make a substantial difference. What we are seeing now, we have seen before many times.

              Looking at the distant past, many many societies have been debased, and being debased, failed to reproduce. And looking at the recent past, lots of societies initially restricted the pill, and eventually changed their minds, and you just cannot see any significant impact in the data.

              Japan emancipated women suddenly. Big impact. Japan legalized the pill only very recently. No noticeable impact.

              The pill has substantial side effects, because it messes with women’s hormones, and for this reason a lot of places initially restricted it. No difference ensued between places that restricted it, and places that did not.

              The sexual revolution began with the rejection of the divorce of slut Queen Caroline, took an abrupt turn for the worse immediately before the start of World War I (which is odd, I would have expected such a turning to happen immediately after World War I, rather than before). There was a reaction against the 1910 sexual revolution in the 1930s, which gave us the relatively conservative period of the 1950s, and then we had a major shift to an even more radical sexual revolution in the 1960s.

              The 1960s revolution came after the pill in some places, before the pill in others. Does not seem to have had noticeable impact.

              • Atavistic Morality says:

                It just dawned on me, the simplicity of it all.

                Emancipation of women is telling them that their job and duty is not to have children but instead do whatever the fuck else that has nothing to do with the fact that they are women.

                If you tell a bricklayer that his job is not mainly laying bricks, he won’t. If you do acknowledge and remind the bricklayer that his job is in fact to lay bricks, he will, regardless of anything else he might do to help. This is a legitimate simplicity which can be observed in every business, people only effectively do their job and stick to it when they are specifically, and some times repeatedly, reminded that they are responsible for it.

                • onyomi says:

                  In Chinese history, at least, and at certain times, at least (the antiquity to 1000 AD period actually more liberal than the 1000-1900 AD period in this regard), unmarried and especially widowed women had a lot more legal and financial freedom than married women. Yet, unlike e.g. modern Japan you wouldn’t get significant numbers of women putting off and putting off marriage just to enjoy more autonomy.

                  Feminist histories of premodern China (including those taught in China) often describe women as “appendages” of their husbands (or male relatives) with a strongly negative implication. What is not mentioned here is that being e.g. “minister’s wife” was a very high-status thing for a woman to be, much more so than the employment possibilities open to an unmarried woman, like cook, waitress slut, or matchmaker.

                  Today the sky’s theoretically the limit for a woman to pursue any path she wants, but it also seems like the status of “doctor’s wife,” “lawyer’s wife,” etc. have gone down?

            • yewotm8 says:

              Women find themselves forgetting to take their pill when having sex with men who are dominant or otherwise have high genetic quality. You are still making the mistake of thinking that the rational part of the woman’s brain is in charge when making a decision as important as reproduction, and all signs point to that being false. It’s false in terms of who they have sex with, why would it not also be false when determining who to be impregnated by? Just because birth control p