Not the Babylon Bee

Somewhat after the last minute, they have proceeded with the real case against Kyle.

A bunch of peaceful protestors peacefully protested by smashing cars and setting buildings on fire.

The militia showed up toting guns, Kyle among them, to stop this.

The peaceful protesters felt this was extremely provocative.

Kyle saw a fire, and unwisely went towards it alone carrying his gun and a fire extinguisher. Ziminski was smashing up cars, and either Ziminski or Rosenbaum or both had lit the fire – we know Rosenbaum had lit other fires.

The prosecution claims, on quite improbable grounds, that Kyle pointed his gun at Ziminski. According to Kyle’s testimony, he did not notice Ziminski until Ziminski started shooting at him, but under the circumstances Ziminski would feel threatened by an armed militia man showing up while he was peacefully smashing cars and so forth. He would feel as if someone was pointing a gun at him and suggesting that he stop peacefully smashing other people’s cars and peacefully setting other people’s property on fire.


It really does not make any difference whether Kyle pointed the gun at him or not. If you are peacefully protesting, armed militiamen are threatening.

We have no reason to believe that Kyle pointed a gun at Ziminski. We have strong reason to believe that this incident started with Ziminski firing warning shots at Kyle, or shooting wildly at him and repeatedly missing. But the prosecution theory is that this incident started with Kyle provoking Ziminsky, which he indeed did, and thus that Kyle had no right to self defense, because the incident was started by Kyle and the rest of the militia provoking peaceful protesters.

There the protesters were peaceful destroying aggressive hostile capital, and the militia provoked them.

Therefore attacking a militia man was totally legitimate.

And, because provocation, they had every right to attack the militia man, and the militia man no right to self defense.

Yes, this is the prosecution theory – and this is the theory of all those arguing that Kyle is guilty. This is not the Babylon Bee.

The bottom line argument is that the militiamen, Kyle among them, started it by inhibiting peaceful protesters from peacefully protesting.

Kyle was there to help protect businesses: Provocation.

We need to think ourselves into our enemy’s shoes. If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.

The enemy does not know that wealth and value is created. He thinks it just springs forth from the fertile soil, and evil capitalists lock it up. The enemy is a chimpanzee wandering in the urban jungle. So when he destroys stuff, he is doing a good deed and should be commended. When he prevents the creation of wealth, as with Biden’s moves against oil production that have sent the price of fuel skyrocketing, he is redistributing it back to the the rightful possessors.

The enemy saw the destruction of Kenosha as constructive, rather than destructive. They are doing it so that our grandchildren will have a future. (They don’t have grandchildren – they are doing it for us.)

Envy is wanting the successful man to not have what he has. The envious are supposedly motivated by wanting the other guy’s stuff, but they want to smash it, rather than take it.

If you actually want the same kind of things the other guy has, rather than wanting to take what he has away from him, you are going to admire and respect, which is going to facilitate you learning from him and imitating him. If you want to destroy what he has, you are going to hate. Admiration and respect facilitates learning and imitation. Hatred and contempt facilitates destruction.

Critical race theory seems to be tightly focused on the tale that all the science, technology, and industry of western civilization was stolen from the brave and stunning warrior women of subsaharan Africa.

Envy is hating and despising who has nice things for what he has. The normal behavior is to admire and respect someone for what he has, which facilitates imitation, and thus facilitates getting what he has. Admiration of people who have what you want is adaptive. As I am found of pointing out, a hot wife and a flying palace helped Trump get votes. Envy is uncommon, pathological, maladaptive, and self destructive, characteristic of broken people with a death wish. Our enemies are broken people who want to die and want the world to die with them, hence the popularity of Satanism among them.

The faith of the Cathedral is largely a collection of rationales for envy. So the woke tend to be people who suffer passionately and extraordinarily from envy. So, peaceful protest. Carrying a gun to protect businesses is provocative.


624 Responses to “Not the Babylon Bee”

  1. TBeholder says:

    Envy not held in check by greed. =)
    As Chesterton pointed out (in Orthodoxy), a “virtue” can do even more damage than a “vice” if allowed to run around without leash and go wild. For mostly the same reasons, plus a trend for not being countered equally hard.
    So here’s synergy of a feral virtue and a feral vice: virtue signalers do their best to enable and encourage the vice.
    Right here: the looters met their Kyle, the bleeding heart inquisition met… jack all. You know they are more dangerous and that some of them belong on lamp posts, and the rest in the rooms with padded walls. The next guy on the street knows this. But it was going on for longer than any of them lived, and it looks like lamp posts will be uprooted and looted sooner than this problem is fixed.

  2. A Concerned Citizen says:

    AntifaBLM are terrorists. When they are rioting, looting, and destroying, we should be actively shooting them.

  3. simplyconnected says:

    Kyle was there to help protect businesses: Provocation.

    We need to think ourselves into our enemy’s shoes. If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.

    Ridiculing progs is fun, but I’ve come to realize that the above is a very important point.
    For a good illustration see this recent dailymail article describing how proud boys were terrorizing a neighborhood by simply marching, while BLM can burn the whole place down and it’s just property they’re all insured why do you care you bigot.

    Not sure what it implies in terms of strategy, but as painful as it is, it does make sense to try to understand how exactly they think in order to use it to our advantage (God knows they don’t understand us, but we shouldn’t make the same mistake).

  4. Niiiidriveevof says:

    excellent, the full schmittian explanation, where this and the previous post are only partial.

    • Niiiidriveevof says:

      the question that was missing an answer: why did the elite waver in an awkward middle ground on rittenhouse, neither ignoring the case nor actually demanding conviction?
      & what exactly does this communicate about the rioters vs. whites battlefield to future combatants?

      • Pooch says:

        why did the elite waver in an awkward middle ground on rittenhouse, neither ignoring the case nor actually demanding conviction?

        After realizing that they had drank their own koolaid and the facts were not on their side likely leading to an obvious non-conviction, the elite did not want riots in a non-election year so played down the case while also giving some lip service to the radleft. It was really the radical left (which now consists mostly of Jewish Bolsheviks and Black Nationalists) who wanted Kyle’s head so fervently.

        • Pooch says:

          The elite don’t particularly care about Amerikaners gunning down their pets in the street because they know they can shut that down at any point by telling the security forces not to stand down. It’s the rioting coalition of Antifa/blacks that hate it because it’s a big hinderance to future rioting.

        • Niiiidriveevof says:

          that’s part of it, but i meant that the linked article answered those questions better and more fully.

    • Unfortunately it appears that Modi government is cucking out to cathedral sponsored leftist agitational politics. The tame repeal of the farm laws has made the BJP look foolish and low status.

  5. G.T. Chesterton says:

    “I support the BLM movement. I support peacefully demonstrating.”

    C’mon, kid. This won’t make the hyenas eat you last. Hyenas don’t speak English.

    • Pooch says:

      Don’t dogpile or attack the kid. He’s only 18 and has already been through hell many lifetimes over. Besides he has to say this shit. There’s no way he can come out and not say this.

      • G.T. Chesterton says:

        Not dogpiling. Those two statements juxtaposed imply that BLM is organically peaceful. It is not, and he knows it’s not because he had to bring an AR to peacefully clean grafitti at a BLM event.

        He needs a speechwriter, and a manager/advisor to screen out trap questions like “Are you a racist?” If you can’t trust ///ourguy/// Tucker for a straight interview, then best not to give any more interviews. Anything you say can and will be used against you.

        He isn’t out of the woods yet. The feds might charge him, and he’s got civil litigation to think about. He needs to lay low and quiet.

        • The Cominator says:

          Sandmann who is more savvy about this shit will advise him. Lets not be too hard on him.

          • Pooch says:

            Now Sandmann I don’t exactly trust. Apparently he’s mixed in with the McConnell campaign now.

        • Pooch says:

          Those two statements juxtaposed imply that BLM is organically peaceful. It is not, and he knows it’s not because he had to bring an AR to peacefully clean grafitti at a BLM event.

          Of course but he’s only 18. He will learn that he’ll get no sympathy points no matter how nice he is to these people.

        • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

          I think the feds know that the only thing keeping the lid on the right gunning down their stormtroopers is the hope that you will not go to prison. The insane far left might believe their own hype, but the older, saner left is watching their hit squads–I mean tactical teams–get blown apart by run of the mill criminals. If they were to break into my house, God forbid, they would probably lose the whole team. If I managed to get my backup called in, they might lose more than that.

          All that they have left is the illusion of invincibility and the hope of freedom. If they take away the latter, then the former is going to follow quick and the whole system collapses right after. Kabul was a wake-up call, but they have done nothing to fix it. No rollback of feminism like they did prior to WWII. Their “fighting” “men” are not men, and cannot fight. Between the Capitol False Flag and the Fall of Kabul, they realized that they are hated, vulnerable, and they have no one to fight for them. They have lost. They know it, I know it, and it is just a matter of time before everyone else realizes it, too.

        • Pooch says:

          He isn’t out of the woods yet. The feds might charge him, and he’s got civil litigation to think about. He needs to lay low and quiet.

          I agree. The DOJ can unleash their black national socialist Civil Rights head prosecutor on him at any time. On the other hand, going on Tucker, as was going on the stand, humanizes him on a whole new level to millions of Amerikaners. He is a folk hero for the right. Going after him with the feds may risk a backlash, particularly in their own security forces, that they aren’t ready for.

      • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

        The atomized citizen of the current year is a cast-away adrift in a sea of psychic bombardment. The state church and all it’s organs placed him under immense trauma, and stockholming, cracks, and concessions are so often the result. Many such cases.

        But he does not have to say this, and definitely should not say this.

        Those who do not apologize are forgiven, and those who do apologize are destroyed. For the animals sense either strength, or weakness.

    • c4ssidy says:

      Rittenhouse has potentially tens or hundreds of millions in libel lawsuits at stake, give him a break, he should say whatever he is advised to

  6. Mister Grumpus says:

    Here’s what I can’t think all the way through yet, probably because I’m too afraid.

    Most voters would now do anything they (safely and legally) can for a Republican President, Congress, whatever they can get.

    What other choice do they have?

    The trains aren’t even running on time anymore!

    But now they straight up know 100% that even if their guy “won”, he probably wouldn’t “win” anyway, and even if he did the riots from then on would be horrific, and if they had to defend themselves from rioters then they’d be in serious trouble with the law, like Kyle was.

    Where does this go?

    Michael Moore said that a Trump election would be the biggest “fuck you” in modern American history, but now I’m not so sure.

    • Mister Grumpus says:

      A lone Kulak can’t change DC or Harvard or Manhattan, but he can quit his job and try to move.

      I’m seeing ever more urgent relocation to redder areas going on out there, and also DC’s increasingly aggressive pursuit and punishment of escapees with migrants from Afghanistan, the southern border, etc. Cutting off or restricting fuel, electricity, medicine, who knows what next.

      My point is that it’s obviously punitive. Not just incompetent. Like closing that gasoline pipeline from Canada, and then Secretary of Energy Bitch Whoever laughing about it on TV. There’s malice and revenge in it, and more will perceive it as much. Three more years of this at the very least.

      An obvious Bible question:

      Pharaoh had had enough of the plagues, and finally let the Israelites leave town, but then changed his mind and chased after them.

      “I hate these people! Get them out of here!”
      “Wait! Stop them! They’re getting away!”

      It never made sense to me, but now I’m getting an inkling of something.

      What do you make of that?

      • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

        It is the impulse, the vituperation that comes first, and reasons are found to rationalize it.

        Woman-like qualities are endemic amongst many of those observed as happening to be doing leftism, such as their solipsism; verbally expressed desires often having little to no relationship with their animating impulses, such that they can shift and twist back on each other as easy as the wind, and which the subject themselves may oft not have conscious recognition of.

      • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

        Defeatism is weakness. The faith is dying along with its ability to organize and project force. Kyle’s exoneration and the increasing defection of the up-and-coming elite is snowballing. These people have already lost. Like Huber stumbling off with a bullet in his chest, their movement is just the last gasps of life in a dying body. Kabul was the ultimate white pill, because it shows that any sort of organization at all is going to run over them like an avalanche.

  7. Jehu says:

    God has seriously interfered in the whole Rittenhouse saga.

    Why would the DA put a witness (they guy Rittenhouse shot in the arm) if he knew that said witness would utterly destroy his case?

    The only explanation is that he was sure that the witness would lie, at least if we presume that the DA was vaguely competent.
    The witness had every incentive to lie through his teeth. But he didn’t, he said the truth, which is that Rittenhouse held his fire until HE pointed his pistol at him. It wouldn’t have been a difficult lie to sustain. Why didn’t he?

    My gut suspicion is that God prevented him from lying. It’s the least crazy explanation. Maybe that was God’s reasoning for sparing him in the first place.

    And the DA pointing Rittenhouse’s AR-15 at the jury with his finger on the trigger? What the hell was he thinking. Did God make him mad to His Glory?

    The whole scenario around Rittenhouse is also ridiculous. 17 year old with absolutely no firearms combat experience puts up a performance that Alvin York would envy? The FBI just HAPPENS to be zeroed in on the whole thing with high resolution imaging? Rittenhouse’s buddy just happens to be drawn away while he responds to the fire? Likely all of Rittenhouse’s attackers were FBI assets and this was a hit. But God didn’t like that apparently.

    • 18.45 says:

      Grosskreutze doesn’t have the physiognomy of an antifa, and by not lying on the stand, could have put himself on a path to redemption. I think his not lying was a choice, on some level. Might save him.

      • Jehu says:

        Like King Ahab, he’s being given lots of chances by God. Maybe his story will end better.

      • G.T. Chesterton says:

        Grosskreutz was no boy scout on the stand. Kyle’s lawyers had to beat a confession out of him. As posted on chans:

        >I never chased Kyle Rittenhouse
        >okay, I mean I chased after people about to harm Kyle Rittenhouse
        >okay, I did chase Kyle Rittenhouse
        >but I ddn’t have a gun
        >but I didn’t mention the gun
        >okay, I had a gun but it fell out
        >okay, I had a gun but it fell out into my hand
        >okay, I had a gun but it fell out into my hand but I didn’t do anything with it
        >okay, I had a gun but I pulled it out on purpose and chased Kyle Rittenhouse and pointed it at him
        >okay, I had a gun that I pulled out and chased Kyle Rittenhouse with and pointed at him and it was illegal for me to have


    • Dss says:

      I mean, shooting him once, in the arm to disarm him, and leaving him alive so that he could come onto the stand and completely exonerate him is more perfect than I could ever design.

      • jim says:

        Looks mighty like a divine miracle, telling us we should show mercy and forbearance, but that mercy and forbearance does not require us to be pussies.

        Kyles mercy and forbearance was rewarded by Grosskreutz speaking the truth, when it was obvious that the prosecutor expected him to lie, had rehearsed him in the necessary lies, and that those lies were going to be rewarded.

  8. notglowing says:
    There’s a giant frog statue in “Rittenhouse Square”

  9. Kunning Drueger says:

    In the context of the fall of Kabul, skyrocketing inflation, and growing derision of the current regime, what does the Cathedral have to derail the rising tide? If it were spring or summer, there’d be a canonized negro by Monday. But the weather isn’t conducive to the shambolic revolutionaries, and even if we do see organized “spontaneous peaceful protests, my money says they are short lived and minimal. Then there’s the possibility of a false flag, which is a dangerous option. If it isn’t at least a Newtown, they run the risk of it having the reverse effect of being inspirational. The recent accusations of the FBI counterterrorism goons going after pissed off parents adds a further layer of complexity.

    Maybe they are just completely flummoxed, but I think they’re going to do something to arrest the tendency. Whatever it is, it will be a good measure of their capacity to effect outcomes. A year ago, they were celebrating the theft of a national election. Now they can’t even rig the trial of one resolute boi.

    • Pooch says:

      Historically in the 4th Republic when the inner party goes too hard on the leftism too fast, the scene is set for a wave election of the outer party who use their new found popular support to pass a tax break and throttle down the holiness for a bit, stabilizing the system to the more typical gradual shift left.

      • Kunning Drueger says:

        The would be leaders of the inner party, the thought mavens, got a taste of naked power with Coronahoax and election fixing. I don’t think they’re going to go quietly. They’re too old. My wager with Jim stands, but I’ve got a feeling that a quiet winter will feed directly into a terrifying spring.

        • Pooch says:

          Going to be interesting for sure. The fortification against Trump required not only the Democrat machines dumping ballots but Republicans defecting against him in the red state governments to not look to closely at it. Maybe they do that against overtly Trump candidates but we shall see.

          If in the event it’s business as usual and the predicted red wave occurs, Trump will most certainly run again in 2024 and god only knows what that means. Trump election years tend to contain a decade’s worth of events.

  10. Pooch says:

    Btw for anyone that thinks highly of Robert Barnes (I know he has been brought up here). He was weirdly black pilling from the start and was convinced Rittenhouse was going to jail. Maybe he was butt hurt he got booted off the defense team or something but I’m putting him in the grifter Populist Inc category. Occasionally he says something worthwhile but he probably shouldn’t be taken serious for much.

    • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

      He had done the trial prep and polling and found that 70 percent of the Kenosha jury pool presumed Kyle guilty. As a result, he set up a jury selection team to make sure Kyle got a fair jury, but the CIA spook who was handling Kyle’s security turned it down. He was worried because it was going to take a miracle to get Kyle off, and with a lawyer that is not great. It just happened that God came through with a miracle, and Kyle got a good jury. That was not blackpilling, it was reality.

      I do not know the odds of getting a jury with only 1 out of 12 from that 70%, but its pretty fucking low. I cannot remember the formula to calculate it, which is pissing me off, but I would not place a bet on it for any money. The fact that Kyle got aquitted is a miracle from God. Barnes not expecting a miracle is not a strike against him.

      • Pooch says:

        Ah ok makes sense. Thanks for clearing that up.

        • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

          I have my disagreements with Barnes, but on Kyle he was one of the earliest and most vocal defenders. He let everyone know when Lin Wood and John Pierce were doing sketchy shit with the bail fund; he gave interviews anywhere they would have him talking up Kyle and shitting on the prosecutors for being crooked, lying, corrupt bastards; he helped promote Kyle’s fundraising, and he was using his social capital to get a dream team of lawyers and experts together to crush the prosecutors and free Kyle. I

          do not think that Kyle’s lawyers were trying to screw him, but they made a lot of mistakes. Lots of other lawyers were watching and commenting and were screaming at them to object to the violations that the prosecutors were committing, especially with such a sympathetic judge. From what Barnes and a few others have said, the security person for the Rittenhouse family is a glownigger, and might have been trying to sabotage the case from the inside. He is someone to watch out for, because he might try to roll this into right-wing fame and notoriety.

          • Red says:

            >do not think that Kyle’s lawyers were trying to screw him, but they made a lot of mistakes.

            You’re not cynical enough. The Prosecution invented a CGI picture which was the only thing they could possibly get a conviction off of and the defense barley fought against it being admitted into evidence. The downscaled version of the video is the worst bit, people have taken a look at the video now and handbrake was used to resize it. The defense didn’t even turn their video over to a computer expert before they argued about it before the judge. The worst was offering a mistrial without prejudice at the last minute. All the prosecution had to do was accept it and they’d get a whole new trial that were they could fix things in advance. Thankfully the prosecution was convinced they’d won and didn’t take it.

            They wanted to lose, but in such a way that they could claim they just fucked up. The thing that won this case was Kyle incredible testimony. No one thought Kyle was anything other than a good kid who killed bad people who attacked him after he got done testifying.

            • jim says:

              That Kyle’s lawyers were not flagrantly doing whatever it took to lose, no matter how blatant, was pretty good and far better than I had hoped for.

            • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

              No, I am plenty cynical. I just think that if they had been trying to lose, they would have let a lot more shit through. Richards is not a great lawyer, and loses most of his cases. The other guy did some incredible work tearing into Bye-cep and ruining a lot of the perjury the prosecutors had suborned. That would not have happened if they were trying to throw it. They were just not that great.

              When I look at the primary malefactor, and I have to choose between a couple of not very competent small town lawyers and a fucking glownigger CIA spook, I know who I think is running the show. Richards did a better job in this case than in nearly any other case he has done, according to lawyers who were following the case. The spooky boy was the one who–and this is according to Barnes, so take it for what you think it is worth–nixed the jury selection and polling team. He is doing suspect things with Kyle’s defense fund, which Barnes thought was supposed to be the property of Kyle, so that he would get whatever was left once the trial ended. When one guy goes above and beyond his normal competence and the other guy is a glownigger doing shady shit with money and pulling strings best left unpulled, I am inclined to bypass the lawyer and start doing horrible things to the glownigger.

      • Encelad says:

        >I do not know the odds of getting a jury with only 1 out of 12 from that 70%, but its pretty fucking low.

        14.88 odds in a million! 😀

        Lol, I am not even kidding


        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          Kek wills it.

        • mathdoodler says:

          Where’d that *12 come from? The question is what is the odds of getting one and only one opponent out of a pool of 12, given a 70% probability of getting an opponent on each draw. .3^11 is the probability of getting 11 supporters with the 12th undetermined. Multiply that by .7 for the 12th being a guaranteed opponent. There’s no need for any additional multiplication, because you’ve already drawn all 12 jurors by that point.

          Did I miss something? (other than numerology to make the result look cool)

          • Anonymous says:

            You ran the numbers for the case of the first eleven guys not being opponents and the last guy being one. But there’s also the case of the second to last guy being the opponent and the rest not being opponents. That’s a distinct case, it has its own probability, and you need to add it to the probability of the first case because the question asked if ANY one guy is an opponent, not just the last. Same with the other ten cases. That’s where the *12 comes from.

            This is from the binomial formula. (Also the answer to Wulfgar upthread.)

      • Javier says:

        It’s entirely possible that, once exposed to the truth and facts for the first time, the jurors simply changed their minds. Same thing happened in the Zimmerman trial.

        Most people blindly believe whatever they are told, making no effort to find the truth, and very few truly understand what shocking liars the MSM is.

        • Pooch says:

          Yes this is correct. Many liberals had no idea that he shot only white people.

        • G.T. Chesterton says:

          It’s entirely possible that, once exposed to the truth and facts for the first time, the jurors simply changed their minds.

          +1. Most likely explanation. It’s disgusting that 70% were so ignorant about what happened in a deadly riot that happened in their own community — after they had ample time to find answers.

        • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

          Possible, but Barnes said that he was running mock juries, and that many of them would not change their minds no matter what was said. Total NPC crimestop in effect. I think he said that the most common result was a hung jury, but that conviction was more likely than exoneration. This was a miracle from God, as He protected one of His loyal servants.

          • Jehu says:

            You may have stumbled upon the logic that had Kyle himself take the stand. Normally that would be a bad move, and an unacceptable risk.

    • Red says:

      As far as I can tell all of Kyles lawyers were either incompetent or mildly trying to lose. Only when outside sources would point out their fuckups (video resolution decrease, CGI video edit, etc) would they push back at the shit the prosecutors were doing.

      • jim says:

        Kyle had a huge problem getting non evil lawyers who were not trying to lock him up for life. Not seriously trying to lose was a huge improvement and made a huge difference.

        The judge was very good, disallowing the grossest improprieties. I did not expect that, and it is obvious that the prosecution did not expect that.

        The judge wanted to be seen to be fair. That is remarkable and unusual, suggestive of divine intervention.

        • Red says:

          Saint Kyle won the Judge over. He’s just a good kid and good people can see that and can’t help but like and want to help him.

          I don’t know what Kyle’s future is going to be, but I expect great things. He’s an amazing shot but seems to be a reluctant warrior. Personally I would have put 2 extra rounds through that disarmed commie fuck given the excuse of the gun still in his hand.

          Not quite smart enough to be a good priest, but good enough to be a saint.

        • Karl says:

          The judge was old. He has been a judge for decades. I guess he still believes the same things as he did when he was appointed in the 80s.

          An old lefty with a secure career has not much reason to out left everyone else – that is what aspiring youngsters do who to get ahead.

          Young judges as group are to the left of older judges.

          Don’t know how many judges of that age are still around, but I guess others of that age might be similar

      • Whitespace says:

        I was astonished to see both sides analyse mob violence as a set of discrete encounters. It is fortunate that this situation involved so little ambiguity, because the the defense counsel ceded a lot of ground to an impossible standard of self-defense.

        Where were the use-of-force experts? Just imagine hearing your lawyers argue over pixels rather than force disparity!

  11. Aidan says:

    Looks like riots are brewing. Will be interesting to see how it plays out. Perhaps they are nixed at the 11th hour, perhaps the cops are ordered to actually crack down this time. Or maybe the lefts street enforcers are getting out of hand.

    • Pooch says:

      Meh…Non-election year Antifa looks pretty fucking pathetic if you ask me.

      • ExileStyle says:

        Lol join us in an “actual revolution.” Looks like the honest communists didn’t get the memo…

    • jim says:

      Antifa can only put on a riot with state backing. The state no longer wants riots.

      • Pooch says:

        Outside of places like maybe Portland and San Francisco, Antifa can’t put on riots unless niggers start it first. They are low energy. Angry blacks are very high energy.

      • Aidan says:

        I know. They know, and they’re going out anyway. I doubt they get a big enough crowd for looting and burning, and I doubt the cops get orders to stand down like last time, but I think it is interesting because Antifa is testing just how long their leash is, and interesting to see the state’s reaction to what seems to be unsanctioned Antifa activity.

        • Red says:

          After the steal Antifa was marching around Portland with long guns for about 4 hours before the cops were ordered to beat them into a pulp.

          I don’t think they feel the need for Antifa and BLM anymore. The FBI is openly operating as their KGB. This is shaping up like the Clinton years but with a FBI that’s much weaker and filled women warriors who lead swat raids.

  12. Fred says:

    Good news on Rittenhouse.

    BTW (apropos of nothing), imagine having an ideology so weak even Ben Shapiro can defeat it.

  13. Cloudswrest says:

    This Rittenhouse related tweet comment and thread is somewhat funny, and echos some Jimmian themes. You can bet she’s horny for him!

    • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

      Yeah, that is the reddest red pill I have seen in a while. Man, what a wake up call. Their boy got smokechecked and his girl wants to fuck the right-winger who smoked him. Soyboys beware.

      • Pooch says:

        She’s actually not half bad either in a weird hipster way. Would definitely take her as spoils.

      • G.T. Chesterton says:

        lolmao. Straight outta National Geographic.

        • Anonymous BTC boy says:


          • G.T. Chesterton says:

            The bf looks like a colorized holocaust photo. He’s way past soy, and gone ovaries-deep into veganism.

            • Cloudswrest says:

              That’s a post mortem photo of the bf. Seriously! LOL. The uncropped version has been floating around the internet. Hilarious that they would use it in this composite image.

          • ExileStyle says:

            This is hilarious. Like something that if we read it as a comment to a Jim thread we might consider little more than satire, or speculation about some far away exotic culture, but nope, just some white gender studies hipster in Wisconsin. I hope she follows through on her instincts, for Kyle’s (and natural law’s) sake.

            • Red says:

              > I hope she follows through on her instincts, for Kyle’s (and natural law’s) sake.

              Kyle’s likely to wake up one day with her having scaled a 20 foot drainage pipe, broken in his bedroom window with a rock, and mounting him before he’s even aware of what’s happening.

              • ExileStyle says:


                It’s possible if not probable that the only reason Huber was there in the first place is because this blood-thirsty woman signaled that she needed a warrior and wanted him to either become a warrior himself or show her the way through his defeat/death to an actual warrior to submit to.

                I almost amended my comment above to note that she could be dangerous for Kyle, and he should watch out, but then I realized that Kyle quite clearly has his shit together. I think his warrior status might be such that he can even bypass all further shit-tests from this particular woman. Not that he would fail them anyways.

          • Oog en Hand says:

            She is twenty-five. He is no longer hard candy, but BARELY LEGAL…

          • f6187 says:

            “Gittings was seen handing Rittenhouse a small note as the defendant was leaving the court room and upon question [sic] she confirmed it did contain her phone number.”

            That sounds just a wee bit too perfect. Did someone make this up just to get retweets? #IWantToBelieve

          • Bouncer says:

            Cloudswrest, is there any link to the article that that screenshot was taken from? My internet-fu is too weak to track the origin down, unless it is a photoshop by someone (I hope not)?

            To Jim; hello, long time reader, first time commenter, love your work so far, it’s clarified several ideas/concepts I had rattling around for years but had trouble putting into words.

      • Cloudswrest says:

        It’s more than just Kyle smoking him. With his acquittal Kyle also has the blessings of Gnon and society. It’s Deus Vult. Can’t beat that!

    • Fëanor says:

      This is replacing the Grata Honoria greentext as my goto “redpill a normie in 20 seconds” image.

  14. The Bidenator says:

    Kyle found not guilty.

    • The Cominator says:

      Welcome news that the leftist cunts must have caved!

    • Jehu says:

      God is Great!

      He has made His enemies ridiculous.

      • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

        God is great, and Kyle is one of his children! God bless Kyle Rittenhouse!

        • Jehu says:

          God already has blessed him. I bet God will bless him with a good, attractive, and obedient wife too and many children too.

    • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

      KYLE DID NOTHING WRONG! That is now a legal finding, so fuck all the leftoids!

    • Kunning Drueger says:

      Fusillades of celebratory gunfire going off all over my county.

    • notglowing says:

      I didn’t think this news would make me so happy, but it made my day.

      Not to detract from it, but the fact that such a clear slam dunk case made it to court, and came so close, means self-defence is dead in the US.
      At some point I thought his situation was hopeless until things started turning around.

      • Red says:

        I haven’t teared up in years, but I’ve done it twice in 2 weeks, once watching Kyle testify and again watching him walk free. Thank God!

        Ballad of the Kenosha Kid:

      • Red says:

        I haven’t teared up in years, but I’ve done it twice in 2 weeks, once watching Kyle testify and again watching him walk free.

        Thank God!

        Ballad of the Kenosha Kid:

      • Pooch says:

        Not only was it a clear case of self defense but the amount of restraint (and aim) that Kyle had to only shoot at those physically attacking him was borderline divine intervention. I don’t think we’ll ever see anything like that on video, in multiple angles, again. The fact that it even went to jury means self defense is dead in blue cities.

        God bless Kyle. God is good. Kyle for emperor.

        • The Cominator says:

          Thats why we call him Saint Kyle!

          I prefer the one to the Tune of Big Iron myself but we should definitely spread around all the Kyle media we can so here’s another one.

          • Kunning Drueger says:

            I know it’s 80% memes, but how else are legends born?

            • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

              The story of life is filled up with also-rans who never made it into history to begin with, for one reason or another, when their moments of truth came, they did not measure up.

              When the Kenosha Kid was ambushed from behind, knocked to the ground and on the brink of disaster, he guided his shots strait and true, under pressure of life or death.

              And so he is still around to tell his tale.

          • Pooch says:

            I don’t know if the Saint meme is a good one. A Saint implies he was martyr’d like St. Floyd.

            • Kunning Drueger says:

              There’s really no other ending to the story, not with enemies like ours.

            • Neofugue says:

              Most saints had noteworthy lives worthy of their title. Martyr saints are often venerated in groups such as the Hundred-Thousand of Tiflis or the New Martyrs of Russia, so by default there are more martyred than non-martyred saints, but martyrdom alone does not make one saint more venerable than another.

              Of course, the point of “Saint Kyle” is hyperbole in the same fashion as “God-Emperor Trump,” so the exaggeration is the point.

            • Red says:

              Saint’s a good meme for Kyle. He’s a good kid who wants to help people and a reluctant warrior. He not yet a Commie Slayer that will be soon be needed.

        • pyrrhus says:

          No…Self defense is very alive everywhere, even in Chicago, as long as the defender is black or hispanic…There are numerous examples of hispanics wasting black hood-rats and the Cops going…nothing to see here!

  15. Varna says:

    Austria is making the shot mandatory(!) for all from February 2022.
    Finally habbening.

    At least refuseniks have two months until then to stock up and do their dentistry and sheit. Or move to fucking Belarus.

    And still no option for a trad vax if you’re in the, ahem, free world. Curiouser and curiouser.

    • ExileStyle says:

      That was a quick reversal and instant double-down. Here we go, boys. Remember that Austria’s always been at the vanguard of all of this: among the first to lockdown, first to close borders, etc. Coming soon to a post-sovereign state near you!

      How do they plan to enforce this? Door-to-door shot teams? Restricting grocery stores?

      • Fireball says:

        It should relative easy to restrict people without passport from shops.

        If you really want to enforce this, it is also quite easy. Grab the database of vaccinated people and compare it to the citizenship, healthcare system and the tax databases. Since you have their addresses just send a letter with the fine with interest after a certain date so it increases automatically and it is done.

        Or if you want just send the police to their home.

        • pyrrhus says:

          But their friends can still buy them whatever the unvaxxed need while they play games and watch movies online….Austria will have to go full Nazi to enforce this diktat…

          • Fireball says:

            Good point but still depends on vaccinated people supporting their friends for long enough time.

            And with the progression we have seen in the last two year you expect that will not go full nazi?

            • simplyconnected says:

              Had thought about this contingency, came up with:
              * many supermarkets you can order online, they will deliver if you are sufficiently close
              * if you have friends that managed to get “vaccinated” and have all the sacraments, they could help
              * in sufficiently rural areas there is always someone glad to get paid to do your shopping.

              • G.T. Chesterton says:

                It should be obvious by now that this isn’t just “two more weeks to flatten the curve”. They want full compliance and subjugation. First they will ban you from the stores, then the stores will stop delivering to you, then the other stores will be banned from delivering to you, then they will jail anyone smuggling food to you. Assuming you haven’t been de-banked yet, and still have money.

                Analogies of the yellow juden star will fail, because banning Anne Frank because of her big nose was just mean and arbitrary and racist; but banning disease-spreading anti-vaxxers is saving grandmas and babies from heart attacks.

                • simplyconnected says:

                  They want full compliance and subjugation.

                  Yes, politicians seem more afraid of their masters than of the population. Until that changes they will continue increasing the pressure.

          • G.T. Chesterton says:

            .Austria will have to go full Nazi

            It’s good that type of thing is not in their blood.

        • The Cominator says:

          How would you enforce it if the shops don’t enforce it, if they use cell phone tracking what if you go shopping without a cell phone?

          • Fireball says:

            I forgot that not everyone is a docile cuck.

            Either way applying fines to stores that are not enforcing it through random inspections and snitches. It could work or scare enough. Also random police check points would also work specially if you start to slowly demanding a digital passport.

            Still all of this depends how docile austrians will be.

        • notglowing says:

          Does such a centralized database really exist?
          I’ve been reading about how the EU DCC works on the website of the RKI and it clearly says your pass is the only copy of that information, and that deleting it from your device deletes that information. This is intentionally due to having to comply with the EU’s own GDPR rules.

          The relevant information to sign a certificate is sent temporarily to the Robert Koch Institute (for Germany) and the certificate is signed, then they delete the data.
          If Germany had a centralized database of who is vaccinated, it would work differently.
          Hence anyone with a correctly formatted yellow book signed by a doctor with the numbers of the vaccine batches and dates matching, can get an EU DCC from any pharmacy.

          Could Austria be different? I’m not so sure.

          Of course individual countries may maintain such a database, but I have seen zero hints at it. I think only the place where you vaccinate has that info.

          • Fireball says:

            If Austria doesn’t have such a database then makes it easier for them to fight this.

            My experience with the GDPR it is just a club to hit plebeians with.

          • ExileStyle says:

            And even if it does exist, and they disregard the admittedly solid EU privacy laws, it is presumably a pretty huge technical challenge implementing it. The technical flaws in these “GreenPass” systems are already ridiculous, let’s see their mediocre, lazy, state-employed programmers/app developers put this in place.

            I’d also note that there is a pretty hardcore, determined Right in Austria. Some folks still have Hitler photos/shrines in their homes. Like not ideological “Neo-Nazi” types just rural types whose parents and grandparents spoke so fondly of that era of peace and harmony among their co-nationalists. It’s proven hard to remove some notable public swastikas from the era. If you’re keeping up your Hitlers and your Swastikas well into the 2020s, do you think you’re very impressed by all of this? But then again if they’re literal Nazis who knows…

            Also, there are no laws except village, church, and traditional social-shaming laws deep in the mountain valleys, like in many other places. And, surprise surprise, this is where the resisters are. Might be 10-20% of the population but 80-90% of national surface area.

            But if 2021 has taught me anything, it’s how basically malleable people are. So maybe they’ll just grumble and bend over.

    • Gauntlet says:

      It’s not mandated until they arrest and jab all the unvaxxed. If we are in biblical prophecy, then the mark will be optional, even if it seems like it is not. They are all offers from the devil.

      I will proceed with God at my back and decline all offers to be jabbed.

      • The Cominator says:

        The vax does not fill all the characteristics of the mark at least not yet, the mark is “optional” but eventually your other option (after being totally unable to engage in any commerce in a much more effective way) is execution.

    • simplyconnected says:

      I was yesterday celebrating that police and military had refused to enforce the measures. Not sure now. Also not sure how much hope the pureblood population has without organized police/military support.

      • G.T. Chesterton says:

        More support is needed, than “refusing to enforce”, which is doing nothing. Sooner than later, die polizei will be replaced by others willing to enforce.

        The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing. -Edmund Burke

    • Karl says:

      The government of Austria talks about making the shot mandatory for all or maybe almost all, but there is not even draft of the law available. Enforcement is intended to be by fine for misdemeanor (note: Austria is one of the very few countries where imprisonment for misdemeanor is possible).

      Unless the madness is stopped by force, the clot shot will be made mandatory everywhere in the Western world (and large parts of the rest). Maybe Austria will start with enforcing mandatory clot shots, maybe not. February 2022 is so far away that I wonder why the government didn’t pick an earlier date.

      I don’t get your point about a trad vax. Would you want to take one every 6 months? I mean it can be treated any better than recovery from an infection. But if you have to take it every 6 months, then what would it be, but a smaller sacrifice to the mighty covid demon. I do not think that would end well.

      • Pooch says:

        They know enforcement is a problem right now if a significant portion of the populace is unvaxed so they announce restrictions in the future to scare people to take it so that when 2022 rolls around the unvaxed are a much more manageable number to persecute.

        • Karl says:

          Don’t think that enforcement by fine is a problem. Locking everyone up is a problem, but deducting a fine from millions of checking accounts is easy.

          Collecting fines is not much different from collecting taxes. Governments are good at it. Perhaps this will change when people use only crypto currencies, but at present Austria has the infrastructure to fine every unvaccinated taxpayer.

      • Pooch says:

        Interestingly, the courts blocked Biden’s private company mandate for now, at least temporarily and the civil service does not seem to be interested in ignoring the court order to Biden’s dissappointment. I wonder if there is some court in Austria that can do the same.

  16. The Bidenator says:

    On the topic of the vax causing heart problems in children, and whether there is evidence of this yet. Is there clear evidence of heart problems already? I’m not sure, Karl linked a source that seems to point to yes. But more importantly, there is evidence that they are expecting futher evidence to show up. Experts are saying that increase in heart problems in adolescents are due to increased weed consumption. Or from pandemic stress. Or because heart attacks increase in winter. Or due to decreased activity and bad diets (in world class athletes?). Don’t forget strokes are now common in children:

    All of the usual excuses applied to adults are being applied to kids. And there’s this beauty, published the week following the stolen election: Climate change is going to cause increases in heart attacks. Other articles are saying heart problems in babies might be on the rise because of climate change.

    There are better examples that I’ve seen, these are just what I remember off the top of my head and could quickly dig up. So I think its almost a certainty that we’ll be seeing 5 year olds drop dead in the weeks after they get their Fauci Ouchie. Ouch!

    And for those that didn’t see, Pfizer lied about the results of their clinical trial. from Alex Berenson’s substack:

    The one-paragraph summary: Pfizer told the world 15 recipients of Comirnaty had died in its pivotal trial. The real number was 21 – compared to only 17 people who didn’t get the shot.

    My question, as a follow up to all this is just how far are they willing to push this lie? A holiness spiral is just that, a spiral. People don’t just immediately leap to the most holy position possible, just to a position holier than everyone else. Why don’t they leap to the bottom, in one bound? Reality is pushing back against them.

    If the vaccine side effects keep getting worse, they will surely have to back off on pushing the vaccine and then act as if they always claimed the clot shot was risky, like they flip flopped on covid. But if the death toll stays where it is at, they could keep this up forever.

  17. Fireball says:

    Jim. Since this not about Kyle and it is about things in a irrelevant place, fell free to delete this.

    So here in the rectangular of retards not only those that took the janssen vaccine will need a booster 90 days after taking the 1st dose, this booster needs to be the phizer or morderna one.

    But what is most interesting and a warning for the rest of Europe is that regional government of the archipelago of Madeira has put the unvacinated in a severe lookdown and everyone including the vaccinated need to do the covid test every 7 days.

    And the cherry on top of all of this is the idiot that is the president of Madeira has admit on tv and it was not live that the vaccines grant no immunity.

    I expect by the end of next week that must intellectuals always knew that this shit never confer immunity and that is why we need to jab everyone forever.

    • jim says:

      It is starting to look as if vaccine causes massive spread of China flu, that the vaccinated are dangerous to each other, and even more dangerous to the purebloods. Observe what happened in Gibraltar.

      Possibly because the vaccine fails to provide resistance in the nose and throat, so the vaccinated continue to catch and spread the disease, and may so even more effectively than unvaccinated person getting the disease, because an unvaccinated person is more likely to retire to bed. Also, the vaccine screws up your immune system, possibly because the immune system goes crazy looking for a virus that is not there, so the vaccinated may well be more likely to catch and spread diseases, nose and throat China flu included.

      • Fireball says:

        Gibraltar is a interesting case a fully vaccinated population and cases still keep happening and are increasing. Not much different from where i am.

        The weather is specially nice for this time of the year so it may help to keep the number of cases down but with an almost fully vaccinated and elderly population and with the booster already starting to being administered i may have a good view of how dangerous the vaccines are.

  18. Pooch says:

    Jim, I may accept your bet that the Republicans won’t pick up seats in the midterms (I think they will). The Cathedral is preparing the narrative that they are fine losing in 2022 and then reving up the 4am fraud machine to steal it from Trump again in 2024. The elites seem smart enough to know that they can’t just blatantly eliminate the fake ping pong game between parties without massively damaging the regime’s legitimacy.

    • The Cominator says:

      They can’t rig most of the House Elections so easily, because no votes or counting done in places like South Philidelphia…

      They can rig the Senate though.

      • Pooch says:

        I predict they don’t rig enough to prevent the Republicans from gaining control of the Senate, which would require blantantly rigging red states where Biden is deeply unpopular and polling is not even close for the Democrat candidates. Doing so would be essentially complete ejection of the outer party.

      • Pooch says:

        The election of 2020 was fortified to “save democracy” by defeating Trump. Now that democracy is safe again we can return to our regularly scheduled program of meaningless back and forth between the inner and outer parties.

        • jim says:

          We shall see.

          My prediction remains that we will not see a resumption of the meaningless back and forth, but I confess that evidence is mounting against this prediction.

          • The Cominator says:

            They probably just thought Virginia wasn’t worth stealing…

            I can’t imagine they will take that attitude with the far more powerful Senate.

      • jim says:

        > They can’t rig most of the House Elections so easily

        Normalcy bias.

        • The Cominator says:

          How would they do it, they rigged 2020 in places like South Philidelphia how do they rig the house (i mean except house races in places like that) when they count house races locally mostly in places not like that.

          • jim says:

            Lock out the Republican scrutineers, or those scrutineers that are not in their pocket, and print one hundred million ballots. What is going to stop them?

            • jim says:

              > But im saying all that shit happened in a few key urban areas…


              They have installed a key urban area in every federal electorate, and it will have an astonishing number of voters.

              Obama bombed key federal electorates with Somalis, and the bombing has resumed under Biden.

    • jim says:

      OK, after the mid terms, if the Republicans get more seats in the mid terms, I pay you 0.001BTC, even if it is obvious the results are fake, in that no Trumpists allowed and no landslide allowed. If they don’t, despite the obvious and massive unpopularity of the Democrats, you pay me 0.001BTC. We will specify the bitcoin address over Bitmessage – my Bitmessage address is on the sidebar.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      The gerontocrats are getting pretty antsy in trying to rebanish the demons they started mass summoning in 2008.

      A carefully groomed simulacra of ‘managed democracy’ was an essential piece of the 20th century liberal order. Their position of power in general, and the system of graft they presided over in particular, depending on the simultaneous phenomena of the marks believing in the theater, and it also being largely irrelevant to consequential influence.

      This is obviously quite a difficult magic trick to pull off. Incumbent underlords wanted the privilege of being able to say their magic words (Racist Sexist KKK!), to extract tribute at leisure from marks, and destroy targets who might threaten to dream of societies that aspire to greater things than a circular spiral of digging holes and filling them back up again.

      At same time, in a narrow sense, they don’t want anyone else muscling in on this privilege – and in a broader sense, in more sophisticated examples of the species, they don’t want their use of their magic words to actually result in going all the way through. The point is getting status over people, and getting paid-off by people, without *completely* knocking over the applecart.

      It is a weltanschauung that has lived and died within a single lifetime. The atomism the old underlords promoted to cement their power, served also to crumble it. Younger generations increasingly either did not get the joke, and sought to give effect to the magic words in full credulity; or to the extent they did get the joke, felt no attachment to it – where shocked and repulsed by the sights that greeted them the more they explored outside the cave of shadows they emerged from.

      The mindset of such a regime could be briefly described as ‘hegelian’; one part of them might earnestly believe – or earnestly desire to believe – that the leftisms they may be doing are in fact good and holy things to do; another part of them, at another time, might think ‘there is no such thing as morality anyways’, so of course there is no reason not to do whatever is easiest for their particular contingent grifts; yet another part of them, at yet another time, might think ‘it does not matter if i am doing good or bad – if i am doing good, then good – and if i a doing bad, that is also good, since it merely provokes a synthesis for an even greater good in the future’.

      Men can often vacillate between different rationalizations for the same actions in different times and spaces. A certain degree of schizophrenia of this kind is, you might say, a necessary precondition for this sort of being.

      • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

        “While the verdict in Kenosha will leave many Americans feeling angry and concerned, myself included, we must acknowledge that the jury has spoken,”
        – t. bidet

        How do you control that which you cannot say you disagree with? An interesting question, whose answers we will all find rather interested in us, in coming years.

  19. Hesiod says:

    The judge has banned MSNPC from the trial after one of its minions was detained for following the jury bus. Decimating the entire journalist group there would have been better.

    • Kunning Drueger says:

      Flexin’ on the judiciary is allowed for *some* folks, I’ve been told. I wonder if this will escalate.

  20. Tityrus says:

    COVID-19: 14 children receive wrong vaccine dose at Antioch Sutter Health clinic

    > The error was discovered Saturday morning after doses began to ran out faster than anticipated among the first group of kids to receive their shots, indicating that the vaccines were less diluted than they were supposed to be. A spokesperson for Sutter said that the affected kids — all of whom received the shots on Saturday — received roughly double the dose of the vaccine meant for 5 to 11-year-olds, or about 20 micrograms instead of 10 micrograms.


    • Varna says:

      What you don’t understand is that myocarditis for kids from the vax is only scary sounding but otherwise completely fine.
      Mr. Kiefer debunks, fact-checks, and soothes unfounded fears. What would we do without Kiefers of all types.

      • jim says:

        This definitely sounds funny. A bunch of kids are showing heart attack symptoms, but they are totally fine. No problem. Relax. No biggie.

        But do we have evidence that he is lying?

        This should be showing up in the death rate for children.

        • Varna says:

          They only started on the kids. I would expect every booster to have a cumulative effect. Like with getting hit on the head. Once or twice–OK. You’ll be fine in a few days or weeks. Once every half year — expect brain damage to become engrained.

          With adults — I think a lot of the unregistered side-effects will be hiding in a rise in industrial accidents, car crashes, train crashes, and especially airplane emergencies, as the air pressure very likely is not a gentle mistress for many crew members and stewardesses who have recently gotten the clot shot. Submarines too, likely.

          Commandoes blacking out during parachuting. Cardiovascular emergencies during forced marches, running, stuff like that.

          Overall death rates are still likely within the realm of “statistic fluctuation”, but a spike in accidents all across the board, connected to things being done under physical pressure or having to withstand acceleration or sharp atmospheric changes, and also of course basic fast reaction — that is where I think is the most logical place to look for tangible data.

          And the kids… The kids grow into men with Russian levels of health — where heart attacks at 40 are the norm, and where men live a decade less than women.

          Ah, another thing — reaction to alcohol and drugs. We should expect also a spike in heart attacks connected to levels of drinking and weed smoking and ecstatic club dancing which in the past would have been much lower.

          • Fireball says:

            So besides what is been seen in athletes when or by which booster we should start seeing this in the general population?

            • f6187 says:

              I wonder if the “deaths by coincidence” we see in young athletes and celebrities are actually higher than usual, or are they simply the byproduct of us paying attention to them and making long lists of their names, which we didn’t do in prior years.

              It is alarming to see long lists of 20 to 40 year old people in tip-top shape collapsing, suffering grievous illness, or spontaneously dying for “no apparent reason,” but how much of that was going on in 1968, 1994, or 2009 for example?

              • Fireball says:

                If were “we” collecting the data and if i haven’t see data of this going down to 1980.

              • G.T. Chesterton says:

                It was rare. Almost no one dropped dead out of the blue, without suffering a hard hit to the head or a hard hit off the crack pipe. Nothing like today, with dozens dropping in less than a year.

                • f6187 says:

                  Courtesy of Roosh:


                  And that’s just Association footballers. In general, there are many athletes and young people dying from heart incidents this year, including an 11 year old girl who suddenly collapsed from cardiac arrest at school, and a brother-sister pair of athletes who died within two months of each other, both from cardiac arrest.

                • f6187 says:

                  f6187 wrote: “And that’s just Association footballers.”

                  Should add: and that’s just Association footballers who died *while playing*.

                • jim says:

                  “While playing” is the relevant number, because we can compare Association footballers who died while playing, to association footballers who died while playing in previous years.

                  Young people dropping dead while they happen to be on television is way, way up. Yet strangely death statistics for young people dropping dead are not up – except sometimes they are. One source from one country will show one thing, while other sources from the same country will show a different thing, revealing that the official statistics are a lie. If they lie about consumer price index, why not the excess death rate?

                  Death rate among under sixties seems to have roughly doubled, plus there is an epidemic of mental and physical disability.

          • f6187 says:

            Researchers conducting these human trials should be following up with D-Dimer tests to detect the byproducts of possible blood clots. Compare and contrast between vaxed, boostered, unvaxed, those testing positive and sick, those testing positive and not sick, those who have recovered, etc. We might as well get some data out of this fiasco.

          • Varna says:


          • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

            It’s one thing to ‘know’ in an abstract sense that so-and-so thing might be a bad thing for such-and-such reasons, but when you are faced with it’s visceral consequents in reality, it is simply goggling all the same.

            Jesus Christ.

            • Dave says:

              I felt a deep sadness on recently getting an e-mail from the school that vaccines will soon be available to 5-11 year-olds, and where to get them. Many of my kid’s classmates will suffer heart damage, a few will die, and there’s nothing I can do to stop it.

              The only silver lining I can see is that women are naturally more deferential to authority than men, so the children of single mothers will be hit harder by this.

              • G.T. Chesterton says:

                Yours will be hit too, if you don’t pull them out of there. They don’t ask your permission before putting sodomy and kill-whitey into your kids’ heads; they damn sure won’t ask your permission “to protect their health” with a jab.

                • Varna says:

                  Yup. Even without an official mandate all it takes is one “mix-up”, and they’ve been doing a lot of mixing upping lately.

                  But always into one direction, these mix-ups. Must be the universe itself showing approval of their agenda, kek.

                  Yet, as I’ve said before, in the more “progressive” municipalities, cities, and states, parents have to be super careful and low-key in choosing home-schooling for their kids. Otherwise the moment the local authorities want to collect some virtue points, a SWAT team will kick in the door at 3 in the morning, shoot the dog, confiscate the kids for their own good, and pass them on to some deserving fags.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Just make sure to make open-ended threats to the school. “There will be consequences for any ‘mistakes’ that happen to my children.” “If any of my children get ‘accidentally’ vaxxed, I will go after both the school and you.”

                  Nothing blatant enough to be an unlawful physical threat, but make sure that undercurrent is there. Get your children out as soon as possible, but make sure you protect them in the meantime. Make sure that the school and the nurse know that you will make them pay if they fuck with your kids.

                • Red says:

                  Otherwise the moment the local authorities want to collect some virtue points, a SWAT team will kick in the door at 3 in the morning, shoot the dog, confiscate the kids for their own good, and pass them on to some deserving fags.

                  SWAT’s is less unlikely to raid your home if you have a one or more registered AR15s. A couple of FBI agents took a dirt nap from a guy they raided for kiddy porn in Florida recently, his AR went through their armor with ease after he spotted them coming on his doorbell cam. I would guess than cops are going to be less inclined to go on such raids in the future.

                  Just make sure to make open-ended threats to the school. “There will be consequences for any ‘mistakes’ that happen to my children.” “If any of my children get ‘accidentally’ vaxxed, I will go after both the school and you.”

                  This is unlikely to work and will probably only get you charged with making terroristic threats. Fathers need to actually do acts of revenge before future threats will be taken seriously and those acts of revenge need to be known to the public.

          • Varna says:

            In Israel all-cause mortality is apparently soaring, connected to a wave of heart-related problems.
            Significant mortality rise in the 20-29 population segment.

            Others are claiming to have found a 500% rise in heart attacks among FIFA players in 2021.

            If only one could channel the progressive impulse for “separation of church and state” into “separation of corporation and state” and “separation of media from state”, and channel the “verified source” impulse into clearly marking the owners of all media on their front pages (WaPo, a publication owned by Bezos in fat letters)… This could go a long way.

            • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

              The people saying ‘separation of church and state’ don’t want separation of church and state; they want to separate *your* church from the state, so theirs can move in in it’s stead; their church and their definition of ‘church’ both being designed to move past each other.

              • Varna says:

                Sometimes making the system publicly pretend to follow its own rules and values, with you setting the boundaries of the pretense and subtly enforcing them, is the best play of the moment.

                After all, that’s to a large extent how globohomo carried out its infiltration in the first place.

    • Kunning Drueger says:

      114 kiddos given the full jab in VA. Are there many instances of this? If this is a pattern, then I think it’s safe to assume some medtechnocrat cabal is quietly encouraging it. But why?

      • Red says:

        I don’t have any first hand knowledge about shooting the kids full of spike proteins, but I’ve noticed a couple of trends recently in medicine: Room temperature spear chuckers are everywhere now in these sorts of low level jobs medical now and there’s now a moral imperative to harm or kill whites via medical care. Lazy sub 80 iq nig nogs is the more likely reason.

  21. Red says:

    I hope there’s a somewhat Alpha man on the jury who can push the hold out cunts into voting not guilty. That’s what happened in the Zimmerman trial. I no longer have any confidence that the judge will do anything other than what will appease the left.

    • The Cominator says:

      Eventually after enough one or two more mistrials he should walk.

      • Red says:

        What makes you think the they won’t rig the follow up trials? They drank their own coolaid this time. Now that they’ve cast of their delusions they’ll kick the rigging machine into high gear.

        • The Cominator says:

          The radleft wants Kyle crucified but the deepstate tards are not so into the idea. Without that level of absolute support hard to completely rig the trials.

          • Pooch says:

            Yeah if the deep state really wanted to rig it would have filled the jury up with blacks.

          • Pooch says:

            But that’s not to say they won’t do that the 2nd time. We have rule by media and Harvard, not the deep state or even the radleft. If Harvard/NYT wants Kyle’s head they will get it but it’s impossible to predict where they spiral to.

            • The Cominator says:

              My survey of legal cuntocracy contacts I know who are cucked leftists or otherwise (not extremely radically so) are that they all think he should walk. You even had some anti Trump billionaire come out publically about it too. The establishment left is not so unaminously eager to crucify Rittenhouse.

              • Pooch says:

                Browsing the front pages of NYT and Washington Post seems to confirm what you are saying. They are minimizing the story.

              • Doom says:

                I reckon the establishment left still believes in doing work and getting paid and general property rights.

                One thing to believe in a massive welfare state, quite another to believe that it should be legal for the have nots to come to your house and take what is “theirs”.

            • jim says:

              The deep state wanted riots when Trump was president. They don’t want riots now, so are not altogether unhappy when rioters get shot. That is one part of the holiness spiral that they are – not exactly resisting, but not trying very hard to enable.

              Taking vigorous action to nail Kyle will empower their enemies on the even more evil and even more insane left – who will take over sooner or later, but they would rather it was not sooner.

              Harvard, on the other hand wants riots, and Harvard always gets its way eventually, but Harvard is playing a long game, and does not always want to get its way immediately.

              • Pooch says:

                Harvard, on the other hand wants riots, and Harvard always gets its way eventually, but Harvard is playing a long game, and does not always want to get its way immediately.

                The official mouth piece for Harvard, the New York Times, seems to not want riots. They are minimizing the story.

          • Red says:

            Have you been listening to the media? They want his head on a platter. They were just surprised when reality conflicted with their narrative which left them shocked and confused. But they’ve now recovered and the machine is ramping up. They won’t make the same mistake again with Kyle.

            • Pooch says:

              Depends what media. I use NYT/WaPo as a weather vane to see what the Cathedral elites are thinking and they don’t see totally hysterical about him on their front pages. CNN wants his head but is more for the commoner libtards, they are just hysterical about everything.

            • The Cominator says:

              The media having put up a 24/7 wall of leftist lies for years cannot suddenly break frame without risking too many people waking up from NPCdom not most of them but maybe some of them…

              So the media probably has orders to support the radleft narrative on the Rittenhouse case, but the establishment type leftists the lawyerrocracy and such… they aren’t all so zealous for this not from what I see.

        • eretus says:

          Unlike the January 6 buisness, Kyle didn’t directly fight the deepstate, but rather antifa. The Deepstate seems to think that antifa is useful once in a while but they do not want them to get out of control, nor do they really want to meet their demands.

          Antifa in general have been very well treated by the legal system, in that they’ve been allowed generally to opperate with impunity, but this is an interesting case where they’re seeing whether normal people can be allowed to defend themselves, and not just whether antifa can burn loot and murder when convenient. To antifa rioters who see themselves in Rosenbaum, Huber, and Grosskreut, this is a very important question.

          If Kyle goes to jail, the state looks bad to normies, and gives antifa even more confidence in its power and legal protection, which the state might not want. If Kyle goes free, that keeps antifa in its place, but also may scare people away when they want riots later, and may give them riots now. The Governor of Wisconsin doesn’t want riots, thats why he already called in the Natl. Guard.

          The whole case is a hot potato. No one wants to be the one to make the decision. The jury knows antifa will try and target them. The judge knows too. The state probably just wishes it were over and done with and maybe they had an easy scapegoat to blame either way.

          As an arm of the state, the media doesn’t particularly care what happens to Kyle. But it doesn’t want to alienate too many of its suporters, many of whom will be sympathetic to Rittenhouse if they read a single decent summary of what happened. Now that the drama of testimony is done they probably have to just sit back and wait for a ready scapegoat to emerge, whether its the judge or the jury or someone else.

    • Pooch says:

      What happens if the cunts won’t budge and it’s a hung jury? Retrial? Yeah the dumb ass boomer judge is just now realizing the New York Times is saying nasty things about him so he’ll be no help.

      • Aidan says:

        The judge said that he would not consider the defense’s motions for a dismissal based on prosecutorial misconduct unless Kyle was actually convicted of something. It is likely that the judge will declare a mistrial with prejudice in the case of a hung jury, which would give the deep state what they want- not empowering antifa by removing the right to self defense. But the judge is personally probably rather scared of that. It would put a big target on his head. He is clearly sympathetic to Kyle, but wants him to be acquitted cleanly. Personally, I do not trust a boomer to do the right thing.

    • pyrrhus says:

      Ann Coulter suggests that the Judge excluded evidence of these felons’ criminal records from the jury…Can that really be true? It’s pretty much standard cross for defense attorneys…

    • G.T. Chesterton says:

      I hope there’s a somewhat Alpha man on the jury who can push the hold out cunts

      Holdout is suspected alphacunt.

      “#54: Knows some of the witnesses named, but could set that aside”

      FFS “knows some of the witnesses”, as in, (1) attend the same church, or (2) helped assemble molotovs and ACAB signs at antifa sub-commander’s house?

  22. notglowing says:

    Seems like Austria’s idea of lockdown for the unvaccinated has faced backlash from the military and police, who are opposing it.

  23. Pooch says:

    So apparently the 3 holdouts in the jury are 3 AWFLs. Imagine letting random women on the street determine when it is or isn’t appropriate for a man to fire a rifle at another man. This is the current state of decline we are at right now. Astonishing when you step back to think about it.

    • ExileStyle says:

      The longer the verdict takes the more unlikely the just verdict will come.

      If he is convicted, it is over. America, the West, all of it. Plain and simple. I have understood this in theory for years but not yet comprehended it viscerally and actually. This is that moment. If he is convicted, I am shaking the dust of America from my feet forever.

      • The Cominator says:

        As I said hes 100% not getting a guilty verdict, but hung jury likely.

        • ExileStyle says:

          I pray you’re right.

          But as Pooch said: the fact that’s what we’re hoping for is an astonishing sign of how far gone we already are.

        • Red says:

          A hung jury without a dismissal with prejudice is a conviction at this point. The left will rig the trial fully next time. Even Kyle lawyers are trying to fuck him up by asking for a dismissal without prejudice. As Jim said, they drank their own coolaid but next time they will rig everything to the moon.

          • ExileStyle says:

            Nothing will change or decelerate until violence is met with proportionate violence, I have come to realize. I drank the Trump-as-Caesar koolaid myself for too long, always having this idea that “the people” would somehow rear up, counterbalancing the left’s tactical precision with sheer mass and the support of natural law. So much for that, at least in the short term.

            Remember the Clinton/ATF/FBI orgies of 92-95, Ruby Ridge, Waco and all that? They slowed the fuck down after Oklahoma City, remember, whether they realized it or not. The US was mysteriously light on “right wing terrorism” for quite some time after that, until Obama’s crew came barking around with their paranoid CRT fantasies.

            And in case my minder is watching: OKC was of course, of course not morally or politically justifiable, but the Cathedral did seem to sense how precarious its own position really was when one or two men acting alone could wreak that kind of havoc. (Just as they realized that one 17 year old with common sense and a healthy self-preservation instinct was more than a match for a whole antifa mob including three trained, armed cadres.)

            • Pooch says:

              Terrorism doesn’t work unless there is what Carl Schmitt referred to as an “interested third party” ie Mandela’s terrorism worked because he was appealing to American/Soviet power. Brevik’s terrorism did nothing to stop communism in his country because he had no third party power to appeal to.

              However, right-wing terrorism did work in Weimar Germany, or prewar Japan, because it aligned with fascist conspiracies in the security forces.

              Classic Moldbug piece on this:

              • The Original OC says:

                Terrorism by a lone competent man who doesn’t expect to get away with it can always work, but there’s a limited supply of such men.

                Interested third party is needed for a constant supply of mediocre terrorists, like an army in a mass mobilization war.

                • Pooch says:

                  No. When I say work I mean achieve the desired political result. Breivik was immensely competent at killing but his actions had literally zero affect on Norway politics and policy because there was no power willing to support his efforts. Mandela’s terrorism on the other hand was only successful because of American/Soviet power directly funding the ANC and who most certainly would have invaded SA (this was being discussed as early as the 60s) to end apartheid if it came down to it.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Brevik at least delayed Norway immigration policy becoming like Sweden’s because it caused genuine fear in the leftist elite there. So saying what Brevik did is worthless is not true.

                • Pooch says:

                  Brevik at least delayed Norway immigration policy becoming like Sweden’s because it caused genuine fear in the leftist elite there. So saying what Brevik did is worthless is not true.

                  It did nothing of the sort. Norway is full of immigrants just like every other Western country.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I didn’t say it was good, im saying he delayed immigration policy getting changed to be quite so bad as Sweden.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  St. Brevik absolutely had a positive effect on Norge, just not the sort of effect that is immediately obvious.

                • Pooch says:

                  He did not. The trend line of immigration into Norway is completely undisturbed pre and post Brevik shootings. If Norway is slightly less cucked, it has nothing to do with Brevik even in the slightest and more to do with Sweden just being the most cucked nation in the West, even by Scandinavian standards.

                • Jehu says:

                  Norway is a tiny country, like 1/50 the population of the US. 50 Breivik’s could easily destroy the US (using a definition of destroy as cause to cease to exist as an organized polity with greater than 50% casualties). Hell, I bet that 12 could do it. But they couldn’t take it back or make it great again.

                  To put Breivik’s acts in proportion, imagine that his equivalent killed like 3500-4000 college student types of the elite in the US. Norway is a tiny country.

                • The Original OC says:

                  Breivik’s attack didn’t work if:

                  1. nobody who was killed by Breivik was more competent than the current/future leaders of the left party (whenever these guys would have reached their peak power ages)


                  2. the difference in competence between the guy Breivik killed and the guy in power instead would not be significant for any policy outcome.

                  I don’t know. We will never know. But it stands to reason that he significantly reduced the competence of the Norway left party at some point in time.

                  If you reply that it’s not worth life in prison, sure, that’s the pragmatic limitation of individual attacks.

                • Pooch says:

                  A better term to use would be were the attacks effective?

                  Sure maybe Brevik traded his life to kill a bunch of competent leftists. I’ll grant you that. Did it have a noticeable affect to the left’s power in Norway in any significant way? What was Brevik even trying to accomplish? Was there even any goal? What did he expect would happen?

                  Now let’s look at Mandela’s equally brutal terrorism. It lead to the white government’s complete capitulation to the black nationalist ANC. As a personal bonus, he was granted his freedom. Now that seems effective to me.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Mandela wasn’t effective, the tranzi imperium acting as a stalking horse for afrocommunists was effective.

            • Red says:

              OKC is something the left would love to have happen right now. They’d use it to start filling up boxcars full of Trump voters.

              The only sort of action people should be doing right now is moving to Red areas and starting to build up a community to protect each for when things get worse. Let the blue areas burn themselves to the ground in a leftist orgy.

              • Pooch says:

                100% seconded. And that doesn’t necessarily mean a red state if it’s unreasonable to get there. Plenty of red areas to retreat to in blue states. Mask compliance is a good indicator. When the collapse starts hitting hard for real, state lines will seldom matter.

              • ExileStyle says:

                That’s a great take by Moldbug. I miss his early stuff.

                I literally was not advocating for anything resembling that, only noting that things seemed to slow down briefly after that, with Red Staters allowed to go about their business more freely for a few years. But maybe I’m romanticizing the 90s.

                What I would say is that *if* there were an “interested third party” somewhere, ATF and Antifa would not stand a chance.

                The pessimist in me would ask how the Kulaks fared by “keeping away from the cities”…

                • Pooch says:

                  What I would say is that *if* there were an “interested third party” somewhere, ATF and Antifa would not stand a chance.

                  If there were a right-wing conspiracy in the security forces (particularly the leadership) and the courts, then NSDAP-terrorism is a go. We have the polar opposite now. The factors that made 20th century right-wing tactics successful in Italy and Germany are just not present anymore.

                  The pessimist in me would ask how the Kulaks fared by “keeping away from the cities”…

                  Did not help on the Russian revolution timeline. On the civilizational collapse timeline, helps a lot. In prior collapses (fall of the Roman Empire/Bronze Age Collapse), the cities were quite bad with large portions of the population being wiped out by violence and hunger.

          • pyrrhus says:

            They’re now asking for dismissal with prejudice, based on the Prosecution’s hanky-pank with the drone video…

        • Cloudswrest says:

          It’s quite common for there to be a hung jury when the defendant is guilty, but has partisans on his side in the jury. It’s quite an eye opener for there to be a hung jury when the defendant is obviously innocent. You have to be really evil to want to convict an innocent man.

          While I think any conviction is impossible, a hung jury/mistrial will deny Kyle a finding of innocence and make any defamation lawsuits against big media virtually impossible.

          • The Cominator says:

            Nick Sandmann has expressed support for him and he is as rich as Croesus now, Kyle will be set for life in the likely chance he ultimately avoids prison.

          • Jehu says:

            You know, I kind of wonder whether the jury is considering doing a filibuster of its own. Unfortunately I don’t see any big snowstorms in the 10 day weather forecast for Kenosha. I’d be tempted to delay the verdict until there’s REALLY bad rioting weather if I had any likely on tap.

      • Pooch says:

        The verdict although of important cultural symbolism of the times is almost insignificant practically speaking. The right to self defense was over the moment this even went to trial. Even if Kyle get’s off, the risk to do what Kyle did is too great. Between lawyer fees and being put through the whole process to only have it come down to a coin flip is too great for the common man to bear.

        • Pooch says:

          And by coin flip I mean the random whims of women, who’s logic is often based on reality no better than 50% of the time.

        • Red says:

          >Between lawyer fees and being put through the whole process to only have it come down to a coin flip is too great for the common man to bear.

          It’s been that way since the Zimmerman trial. If you carry a gun, buy self defense insurance.

          The big change was Kyle was preventing him from having a competent legal defense at all. His defense lawyers are bad but that’s all he could find given the level of canceling the left put out for anyone trying to defend him.

          • Pooch says:

            There was no video of Zimmerman. The police at least could make a semi-coherent case for it at least going to trial.

            The attacks on Kyle were all on video. There is no case and the mere fact that it went to trial means self defense is over in any reasonable sense regardless of verdict.

            • Red says:

              I watched the entire Zimmerman case. The prosecution had nothing. Even that lying sow they put up didn’t have any sort of hearsay evidence of Zimmerman’s attacking Trayvon.

              Hell they showed their evidence to a grand jury who did not return charges against Zimmerman.

              Self defense is over if you’re a wicked blue city. If you live in one, leave now before GNON smites the city with ruin, as he doing so with Kenosha, LA, San Fran, Seattle, NYC, etc.

              • Red says:

                *Self defense is over if you live in a wicked blue city.

              • Pooch says:

                Self defense is over if you’re a wicked blue city. If you live in one, leave now before GNON smites the city with ruin, as he doing so with Kenosha, LA, San Fran, Seattle, NYC, etc.

                Well said. Amen.

              • The Cominator says:

                Zimmerman had a record of being a hothead bar fighting spic (I know the type and I don’t like them) I thought originally he started the fight and shot the nig when he was losing.

                Precious (the fat Shaniqua) sunk their case by saying that Martin went back out looking for Zimmerman. Before Precious said that I thought it more likely Zimmerman started the fight.

                • Red says:


                  You thought that way because the media told you to think that way. Zimmerman was clearly doing the mall security guard thing of following Trayvon around while he cased houses to break into. There was no physical evidence of anything besides an unprovoked attack on Zimmerman.

                • Pooch says:

                  Yeah he was neighborhood watch for a community that had frequent nigger breakins. Not at all unreasonable to be doing that, but without video the only thing people were going off of was what the media were telling them.

          • Pooch says:

            Kyle also had tremendous help with funding. You can’t expect to get that type of help if you’re ever in his shoes.

            Without the funding he would have had to hire an incompetent public defender at best and an enemy lawyer at worst.

            • Red says:

              You can buy CCW insurance.

              The problem with Kyle’s case is Kyle being shut off from competent legal defense because the left cancels anyone who defends him. With the money he raise he should have the OJ dream team, instead he has a couple of lawyers who appear to be terrified of the mob and are not working in his best interest.

              • Pooch says:

                I have one but I honestly haven’t read the fine print. Is there a max limit on those insurances? A hostile state/federal government will try it’s hardest to bankrupt you before you get to trial to force you into taking a plea agreement to their liking.

              • Pooch says:

                The one guy who defended his store during the riots killed himself rather than get put through it. He may have had a winning case. Forget his name.

                • Red says:

                  He needed self defense insurance, but even then it wouldn’t have been enough in a blue area. If he had insurance he would have had a trial but his life still would have been ruined.

                  The only model that works is having a amounts to a security cartel or extended family willing to do violence to protect you. That makes you a hard target and prosecutors tend to leave you alone. However, grouping up with other Amerikaners in a red area seems like better option than trying to fight the system on it’s own turf.

                • Pooch says:

                  In a red Amerikaner rural/semi-rural area, if you are in good standing within the community, a red area cop or sheriff is unlikely to even bring charges. Hell they are probably your neighbor. This is where you want to be.

                • wv redneck says:

                  >In a red Amerikaner rural/semi-rural area, if you are in good standing within the community, a red area cop or sheriff is unlikely to even bring charges. Hell they are probably your neighbor. This is where you want to be.

                  Nice fantasy you’ve got going there. Try visiting us in the real world sometime, you might learn a few things.

                • jim says:

                  I can confirm what Pooch claimed. Cops in semi rural areas are great if you live there, if you have lived there a long time, and you have social connections with other people in the community.

                  If, however you are just passing through, they want you gone.

                • T. Rex Sex says:

                  There’s probably some play in the system if you’re on a first-name basis with the sheriff, mayor, DA, et al. You’ll want to have a suspicious amount of free time during normal business hours, a conveniently undefined amount of assets held in accounts far away, and casual evidence of an “aristocratic” hobby or two. Consider taking one or more of your locals along as you partake of your newfound hobby. The most powerful give you incidental power of life and death over them for a period of time.

                • Kunning Drueger says:

                  wv redneck is right, to a point. It isn’t so simple. Lots of different factors. In states like VA, the cops are good, but the leadership can be very sensitive to media attention. That being said, when compared to blue cities and suburbs, it is absolutely undeniable that you’re in a better place. It also depends heavily on who’s shooting, who’s shot, why it happened, and who saw it. Whatever the case, to put yourself in the best position, it would behoove any migrants to rural and exurb areas to get to know neighbors, get to know LEOs, send holiday cards, contribute to local charities, and be visible to the local elite. Also, the sheriff is an elected leader, and there’s always something they want or need.

                • Zachary says:

                  I believe that his name was Jacob Gardner.

      • HerbR says:

        If he is convicted, it is over. America, the West, all of it.

        Puh-leeze. This kind of grandstanding was old in 2016. It was old even in 1916.

        If you’re going to flee, then flee. Gabbing about how “this time I’m serious” is just being a childish drama queen.

    • pyrrhus says:

      Yes…It wasn’t that long ago when women were not permitted to serve on juries…

  24. Cloudswrest says:

    Seems a lot of people are beginning to speculate that Kyle was picked out and TARGETED as an easy mark for mob execution, like Aaron Danielson in Portland, but he put up an unexpectedly good defense.

    Here’s Voxday linking to an Anonymous Conservated blog article:

    Here’s Quintus Curtius on Twitter:

    • The Cominator says:

      He obviously was there is no speculation about it I would have thought this obvious from the beginning, Kyle is a kindly looking lad with a boyish face the kind that psychopathic bullies like Rosenbaum (normally he picked on young boys) naturally go after.

      • Yul Bornhold says:

        On the other hand, he carried an oh-so-scary assault rifle. Rosenbaum not the sharpest crayon in the box.

      • Cloudswrest says:

        Indeed. But we’re referring to a collective, conspiratorial targeting rather than an individual initiative targeting.

      • The Cominator says:

        Rosenbaum thought the kindly looking Rittenhouse was too much of a typical cuckservative pussy to actually shoot him even if he intended to take his gun and murder him.

        I guarantee you nobody was going to target some redneck Biker for Trump type with an AR15 because the antifags know those guys will shoot them. Rosenbaum and the rest of the crowd that followed underestimated Kyle.

        • jim says:

          I have had this problem a couple of times – deadly weapon in my hand, other guy cheerfully confident that there was no possibility of me actually using it.

          Bad people have vast confidence that the justice system will protect them from unpleasant consequences of bad actions. But just as the system is just lying it will protect good people from bad people, it is just bluffing that it will protect bad people from good people.

          I have had a bit of experience of dealing with the justice system, and so far have escaped without a stain on my sterling character. They are incompetent, lazy, unmotivated, and even less motivated than usual when they are supposed to be going after good people. Also, a good lawyer has good connections, and can just pull them off your back.

          Good lawyers, the nigh miraculous ability to talk to cops, and an adequate grip on how things work, have so far kept me (if not safe) unharmed.

        • Aidan says:

          As a biker for trump type, I agree. Kyle was attacked because he did not look dangerous- looking dangerous is most of self defense, and it is hard to put into words. Even when I was clean cut and looked like a frat boy, I could safely walk through the ghetto at any hour. I tend to be treated at all times like I am armed with a deadly weapon, and it probably has more to do with the way you move and the kind of eye contact you make.

      • Kunning Drueger says:

        TC, I normally attack you and throw shit at some of the things you say, but that’s not what brothers are supposed to do.

        You have a way of stating how obvious things appear to you, and it is good that you are attenuated to signal over noise. But I want to encourage you to remember that SOME FOLKS (me) are not as quick on the uptake and may have a fair amount of ignorance and/or emotional distortion clouding our perception. In retrospect, it does seem pretty obvious St. Kyle was targeted. You stated why pretty succinctly. But it definitely didn’t occur to me. Just food for thought.

        • The Cominator says:

          My asset and my curse is my total cynicism and total lack of so called “emotional intelligence” with keen (but not genius) traditional intelligence.

          I guess this makes many things very obvious to me that others can’t see, whereas I can’t see many things that normies can (that is more the lack of so called emotional intelligence social skills etc, I don’t think my cynicism hurts me much at all).

    • HerbR says:

      He was targeted, but not in the demented sense that AC is trying to convey.

      Now suppose the riot was a complex intel operation, being run from an underground command center many miles away, by intel professionals watching events live on their TV screens, like feeds from numerous “streamers” like Gaige who were running around with their phones, streaming the riot

      No. Just no. Vox Day went off the deep end at the end of 2020 and AC has been way off the deep end and into the kiddie pool for many more years. Spend too much time around nut jobs and you’ll become one of them.

      • Pooch says:

        Yeah can’t read Vox Day anymore. Too crazy.

      • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

        The “intelligence” agencies that were completely shocked that Kabul fell are not going to be able to set up some vast organized conspiracy. They could not organize a gangbang in a whorehouse, let alone a complicated hit. AC is a paranoiac, who sees the evil hand of the CIA in everything. In fact, the CIA’s hands are in their pants, jerking off. They are suffering from the same stupidity and cancer that is affecting the rest of the government.

        • The Cominator says:

          The intel agencies are incompetent but they don’t need to be competent to control media and big tech just the ability to plausibly threaten people and say that my gang is bigger than any gang you could assemble.

          So the hand of those that glow is in everything, and yet they are still incompetent at anything other than bullying media and tech moguls (which is unfortunately all they need to do).

        • Guy says:

          AC does a great job aggregating news stories, but his idea of a boots on the ground surveillance program in every town in America doing physical surveillance of literally anyone is odd. He seems to be able to acknowledge how odd it is, and for the most part is coherent, so it’s interested me for a while trying to figure out what his deal is. He frequently shows”evidence” which is random cars at intersections, but believes it to be self evident that this shows someone watching him.

          Him and Vox Day seem to be disinformation agents. AC maybe has a weird brain condition though which causes him to see everyone as watching him, but without other symptoms of schizophrenia.

          • jim says:

            > AC does a great job aggregating news stories, but his idea of a boots on the ground surveillance program in every town in America doing physical surveillance of literally anyone is odd

            The enemy surveilles us. We want to surveille the enemy.

            > Him and Vox Day seem to be disinformation agents.

            Vox Day is unreliable, but no one is telling him what disinformation to distribute. He is not a a disinformation agent. Some of his stuff, for example his corporate cancer series, is great.

            And the entertainment he produces fights back against the cultural domination of our enemies.

            But Vox Day is a story teller, and is more concerned that his stories be entertaining than true. He is a cultural warrior, not a news source.

            • Guy says:

              That seems like the most probable expansion for Vox. There were times I questioned his sincerity with the more over the top Q stuff, but I enjoy his content.

              For AC, are you suggesting he’s correct? I know the enemy is watching us, but he’s very specific and says that homes on each street are reserved for cabal who start lifelong surveillance in kindergarten on promising non cabal families and use advanced tech to spy on dissidents like him through their walls. It’s not that it’s not all based on some truth, just that he seems to make literal claims that don’t match up with reality. I know that happens on a limited scale, but every neighborhood?

            • HerbR says:

              I concur. I’d never accuse Vox Day of being a deliberate shill or disinfo agent. He is apparently maneuvering into the role of a highbrow Alex Jones – which is fine as it were, but more than a little skeezy the way it’s been done as essentially a bait and switch, trading off of former credibility as a mostly-serious intellectual.

              In any case, he’s certainly more palatable when understood as providing entertainment mixed with a bit of info here and there, as opposed to providing serious info and analysis with an entertaining spin.

              He’s becoming a lot more stubborn and brittle with age, though, and wasn’t exactly good at admitting mistakes in the first place. His commentary in the aftermath of the 2020 election (not the first few days, but weeks and months after) and recently escalating crusade against Darwinism are both examples of a level of cringe that, a few years ago, he would have been sensible enough to avoid.

              Like so many purple-pilled entertainers and commentators, I’d rather not waste time and words complaining about them, and just ignore them and let them do their thing, but people keep bringing them up as if it’s important to pay attention.

          • Prince Charming says:


            VD feels embarassed for shilling corona long, long, long after everyone else had realised it was a hoax. Being so spectacularly and so publicly wrong on the biggest political thing of your lifetime would be a problem for any Ultra-High-IQ political commentator’s self-worth, but VD is also a bit of a gamma, and instead of admitting to being wrong, has doubled down. Hence, he is currently suffering from cogdis big enough to blot out the Sun. So he engages is thinking about wildly improbable things. Which is not as bad as long as one keeps track of the low probabilities, which many of his readers do not. He will just keep calling people idiots for taking corona seriously without addressing his taking it seriously, until the embarrassmemt will be too far back in the rear view mirror to matter.

            Stasi needed a massive workforce, because tapping, bugging, and tracking people, not to mention data storage, processing, and retrieval, used to be very labour intensive. (Also, Stasi get shat on, but the main argument agaist them was that the supposed counterrevolutionary threat was nonexistent or overblown, which in hindsight is not true.) Nowadays, half a dozen fusion centre techs can surveil a whole city, with field work being almost entirely optional. I am not sure what it is that a decade after Snowden makes people engage in being old-fashioned paranoics worrying about a possibility of physical, individual, and particular surveillance (when just PRISM is electronic, blanket, and holistic, as well as long obsoleted by much better tools), but it must be some kind of mental ilness.

            • HerbR says:

              I may be mostly bearish on VOXD, but I have no idea what you’re talking about when you say he shilled for corona, and especially “after everyone else had realized it was a hoax”. When, where, how?

              I can vaguely remember him being in the “somewhat concerned” zone back when almost all of us were somewhat concerned – i.e. before the real IFR was known, before the Zelenko Protocol, certainly long before all of today’s drama over boosters and vax passes.

              Could be that I just missed it as I’ve certainly been following him a lot less lately, but I wonder if you are confusing him with someone else, like Yarvin.

              • Prince Charming says:

                He started coronaposting when the numbers looked like SARS, when there were like 200 diagnosed cases worldwide total, and kept posting as if it were not just a flu, then just a few months ago he did a 180, people started congratulating him for only taking two years to wise up, then he came down like a ton of bricks on them, saying that new facts had emerged (they had, 18 months prior), disabled comments, and keeps making idiotic takes because cogdis.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  The media machine doing a 180 from their early unorganized stance of ‘just the flu bro orange man racist’ probably felt like vindication to him – ‘see, i was right all along’ – and so he became attached to it, in defiance of it becoming increasingly clear that the 180 was a weaponized narrative coming down from on high.

                • G.T. Chesterton says:

                  I don’t recollect him taking that long. I remember his initial position being “Hey, I work from home already, so lockdowns no big deal for me, so no big deal for anyone else either.” (Also his current, stupid take re: Austria.)

                  I thought he had accepted the HCQ solution pretty early, but continued to think lockdowns were great, because it finally gave TGE cover to arrest all the pedos and satanists, which he was totally doing, globally. His commenters were most hysterical though, reeing that keeping their boomer parents safe from coof outweighed anyone else living and working as normal.

                • Kudzu Bob says:

                  I have read Vox pretty much every day for six or eight years, and while I have significant differences with him on a few matters here and there, your claim that he shllled for coronavirus is laughably false.

                • Prince Charming says:

                  @ Kudzu Bob

                  Why are you lying.

                  > UPDATE: It’s cute that some of you have been saying that Covid is the flu for some time now. The difference is that it was nothing but your groundless opinion at the time, and there was no reason for anyone to pay attention to that. This is logic combined with statistics being publicly reported by the same authorities who are advocating the injected mutatives, and is thus considerably more credible, to such an extent, in fact, that anyone who does not pay attention to this should not be taken seriously.
                  > Posted on April 16, 2021 by VD

                  (emphasis mine)

                  “What you do not understand” is that the gamma secret king has been right to be wrong (for over a year), because if you say he wasn’t, he’s gonna call you mean names.

                  This does not detract from the many contributions that VD has made both in terms of original ideas and in popularising important memes. His hangups, and the perceived need to lie, are entirely in his own head. But it is obvious the contribution of the “gamma” meme comes largely from VD’s own shameful introspection.

                • Prince Charming says:

                  @ G.T. Chesterton

                  Oubliettes are not that bad
                  If you only shop ahead

                • G.T. Chesterton says:

                  re: gamma secret king, etc

                  He’s a bit of a fag sometimes, but you’re accusing him of “coronaposting” for 18 months until suddenly flipping, which at least three of us disagree with. The example you quoted is evidence of his “not smarter than me” act, big deal.

                  He didn’t disable comments, j00gle did that by kicking him off their platform. He now has his fans commenting under Socialgalactic, which i assume is a paid service.

                • G.T. Chesterton says:

                  Pretty sure he never advocated for vaxxes either, which would be the simplest mark of a coronashill. Not even when his precious Gawd Emperor was hawking them.

                • Prince Charming says:

                  I mean, his posts are public, so you can read them. I’m right, you are wrong, etc.

                  The poast I quoted was his meltdown just after he pivoted. If you were not there at the time, that is a bit of an inside baseball, because it happened in the comnents.

                  The backup site is just a wordpress. It does not have comments, old or new, for the same reason Jim’s backup does. Comments keep us honest.

                • Kudzu Bob says:

                  You don’t cite anything VD wrote more recent than a month after the start of the global lockdown, back when most prople had no idea how severe–or mild–coronavirus was going to be. That’s the tell you’re making shit up.

          • HerbR says:

            AC maybe has a weird brain condition though which causes him to see everyone as watching him, but without other symptoms of schizophrenia.

            People have a funny view of paranoid schizophrenia, as if these people are all drooling, turd-flinging tards who can’t have a normal conversation. In fact, AC is exactly what you should expect to see from this mental condition, there’s no surprise or inconsistency that he is coherent.

            A paranoid schizo’s mental model is as rational as anyone else’s, but starts with unfalsifiable paranoid first principles, and adds an even worse instinct for probabilities than the baseline human brain has, which is already mediocre at best. So they are constantly looking for evidence of mind control and gang stalking, and will eagerly accept evidence that anyone else would assume is an obvious coincidence, but within that framework, all of the same rules of logic and causality still apply.

            Yes, Jim, the enemy watches us – but that’s a motte and bailey twist. Agreeing on the general principle does not mean accepting any of the ludicrous particulars. The enemy watches us by passively collecting mountains of data, running machine learning algorithms and occasionally drilling down when the Eye of Soros is focused on a particular individual, and that’s actually a far more effective method than the oafish sort of active surveillance portrayed in Hollywood action flicks. Why invest valuable personnel and equipment into high-touch spying when you can just mine the target’s social media accounts and find one old and out-of-context quote that will ruin their life? Or pay a few dried-up whores to say he groped them two decades ago.

        • Kunning Drueger says:

          Wulfgar, it could be that overseas intel is being shorted on womynpower and attention because they’re starting to really focus down on the domestic side of the culture war. It kind of makes sense for both the radicals as well as the Neo-Liberal old guard to do that. They love to hate white me, and there’s a ton of OSINT to be had thanks to social media. I don’t necessarily think it’s bunkers and real time ISR, but it may be cells and handlers with general targeting and execution orders. The Portland assassination was so obvious, and as TC said, St. Kyle definitely gives off a very naive vibe.

      • yewotm8 says:

        I thought it was well-acknowledged that Antifa are very organized and centrally commanded. The grunts are dropouts/drug addicts, the platoon leaders are professors or other university employees, and there are glowniggers sitting in vans a few blocks away from each protest, constantly in communication with the various squad leaders. I remember reading many articles like these last year, I think some even linked from this blog’s comment section:

        Possible that these are all disinfo, but what would they gain from this? Possible intimidation of real patriots?

        • The Cominator says:

          “I thought it was well-acknowledged that Antifa are very organized and centrally commanded.”

          They are but radical leftists are NOT tame animals.

  25. notglowing says:

    It seems like the Italian government is moving to force infinite doses after all, but it hasn’t quite happened yet.
    A number of people have taken the third dose already, though it is voluntary.

    The talks are about reducing the validity of the pass from 12 to 9 or even 6 months. They even consider removing the ability to get tested to get it for 48 hours, though it seems that they’re gravitating towards making the test only valid for 24 hours, which would also make it completely impractical.

    They admit that the antibodies wane after a few months, and this is the reason why the boosters are coming. At least, this being the reasoning, they will not simply invalidate all 2-dose passes like Israel did, rather they will expire after that time from the dosage.
    My efforts might prove futile in the end, but at least I will still have a few months of time, four at a minimum.

    In terms of enforcement, as I said before, Germany seems very lazy about it, they will only look at the pass and never scan it, even if they just see a QR code. In Italy they always scan it, but they never ask for your ID in places where they would normally not ask for it, meaning someone could have the Adolf Hitler pass and possibly get into a restaurant if the employee doesn’t know their name.

    The Swiss are the most thorough by far. They always ask for it when it is needed, they scan it, and also demand to see your photo ID.
    However, Switzerland was considerably more resistant to it, it seems. There was some government propaganda about getting vaccinated, and you do need the pass to eat inside anywhere, however outside of the big cities, it’s full of anti-covid-legislation signs on houses and sometimes even paid ads on streets.
    There’s some kind of movement called “Vaccinated Against Covid Passes” or something, too.

    These anti-pass signs are all the same two or three designs, printed and not handwritten, in fact I saw none that deviated from this, meaning that it’s all organized to some extent rather than independent.

    • Varna says:


      In Russia they’re locking down people over 60 if not punctured or not gotten over covid in the previous months. If pureblood and healthy boomer– lockdown for you. Including cancellation of public transportation cards.

      In Slovenia purebloods are no longer allowed to fill up their cars at gas stations.

    • Pooch says:

      I am told in Germany you can also just bribe the person checking passes to let you in a place without the pass.

      • Karl says:

        Bribery is an art. Of course, it is possible in Germany and everywhere else, but considering how easy it is to forge vaxx-passes in Germany bribery is certainly not cost efficient in Germany.

    • Gauntlet says:

      In Norway we had “freedom” for about one month. The new government took over and almost immediately announced regional shut downs and vaxx passes if the municipality wants to use it.

      My plan is to live like normal and ignore the enforcers. If stopped, I will call on the power of Gnon as the reason for not complying. It has worked before. Citing religious exemption and discrimination laws.

      The third shot is being rolled out for the old now, no news about the double vaxxed loosing privileges yet.

      • Varna says:

        Gonna be a very interesting winter all over the northern hemisphere. And in the more cargocultist parts of the global south.

        • Arqiduka says:

          Keenly waiting to see how the first post-jab winter goes up north, so that stupid-as-bricks Aussies may see 6 months into their own future. Not holding my breath though.

    • Red says:

      Lots of resistance to boosters on reddit. They haven’t started censoring it yet.

      Given the level of oppression we’re seeing these days, it’s likely to result in most people going around the requirements rather than trying to defy it. This however is causing a status issues. Men who have to pretend to comply with a corrupt system lose status compared to those who defy it. This causes women to more fully adopt the state religion.

      We may need a stronger campaign of the evilness of the jab to deal with the status problems. Or a more open way to flout it.

      • Pooch says:

        Given the level of oppression we’re seeing these days, it’s likely to result in most people going around the requirements rather than trying to defy it.

        This is what we want. When formerly Trump-deranged obedient libtards start losing faith in the system is the exact moment when it’s legitimacy can be challenged. In the late Soviet Union, even the formerly staunch communists knew it was bullshit and it was just a matter of time until the thing fell. But the USSR had the luxury of “collapsing into” the viable alternative of liberal democracy. We don’t have that luxury.

        • Pooch says:

          when the formerly staunch communists*

        • Red says:

          It doesn’t track well. Globohomo is a living and rapidity growing faith. The Soviet Union fell because the elites adopted the Cathedral faith instead of the dead Communist faith. I see no signs that our elites are anything other than becoming ever more devoted to Globohomo. The NPC’s waking up is interesting and will cause issues for the elite, but it doesn’t change the equation.

          • T. Rex Sex says:

            The Soviet Union’s fall was, first and foremost, a liquidation event. There will be a similar event in America if (when) “our” “elites” ditch the dollar. The faith component exists but its immediacy pales in comparison to the panic-stricken reality of empty food shelves and insolvent commercial loans.

          • Starman says:


            “Globohomo is a living and rapidity growing faith.”

            Afghanistan revealed Globohomo to be a dying religion. No living religion relies exclusively on mercenaries. The Taliban didn’t need mercenaries.

    • ExileStyle says:

      The situation in Europe is dire. Switzerland is voting soon on the latest restrictions, but I expect them to pass by a comfortable margin. Scandinavia has also rapidly retreated from their relaxations (vaxpass in Denmark, Norway again).

      Enforcement is divided largely on urban-rural lines, and to a lesser extent on class lines. When i was in Switzerland last year in the thick of it, I just took a train out to a small town in the mountains and had a few cigarettes at a local bar (illegal) and ditched the mask (illegal) and forgot about the whole thing for a while.

      Switzerland is probably the best hope for Europe right now, to be honest. The right-populist anti-lockdown Swiss People’s Party is still the largest party in parliament (though without a majority), and controls many cantonal parliaments. But that hinges on how many people swallow the propaganda. The last direct vote on covid stuff passed 60-40. I expect this vote to have a narrower margin, but Switzerland has an aging population and old people without Gnon (there and everywhere) are terrified of death and will probably put it over the top.

      They also have mail-in voting, which has become suspect, esp. now that the world learned from the US 2020 case…

      • Red says:

        >They also have mail-in voting, which has become suspect, esp. now that the world learned from the US 2020 case…

        LOL, if they have mail in voting then you don’t have elections.

        I’ve lived in 2 states that adopted mail in voting in mass. Neither state has had a free and fair election since they adopted it. If the Swiss People’s Party wants to win, they’re going to have to occupy the vote counting booths.

  26. Kunning Drueger says:

    Wulfgar, just wanted to respond but the thread had a lot of other good discussion going on and I feel this is important. Academics inflated the numbers on “natives” in CONUS because it is multi-bird with single stone.

    The military mythos of America is that we punch way above our weight and do it with low casualties. At the same time, the concept of “fair fight” or “fair play” is also integral to the myth. We don’t use no pesky chemicals or cheater weapons, just the good ol’ colt 45 and muh trusty Winchester. I think you’re a USM bro, so you probably know this is retarded, but it is what the soft handed academic thinks Amerikaners think, and there’s probably some truth to it. 100 million dead Injuns with perfect headshots stacked up between the Appalachians and the Pacific would be staggering, particularly if it was just a few thousand good ol’boys and a some potatoeniggers doing reloads. But when you then propagate the notion that it was a germ vector on top of the blatant lie of smallpox blankets, the whole thing starts to seem unfair. Those poor, poor Noble Savages, vegan and nigh on immortal, singing songs and living life in peace, laid low by cruel deception and chemical weapons, w-w-why that’s genocide, GENOCIDE!!!!

    It’s a complex of deceptions. Cultures with no understanding, whatsoever, of virology and bacteriology do not use intentional chem/bio warfare. As TC pointed out, KP’s War was very symmetrical and not at all certain in outcome. The New Englanders had a terrible time and it set the tone going forward. Brutality was required and through grim determination and the favor of GNON, our ancestors won for us a continent of immeasurable worth. They earned it, simple as. So the academic chopper fodder have cobbled this almost completely fictional counter narrative of insanely devious bacterial warfare, senseless slaughter, and asymmetrical & unfair treatment, with a large side of racism for flavor. And all of it just by chance, no effort or intentionality, except of course for the deceitful thievery part. They are convinced that it damages the ego and self image of the Amerikaner, and having sat through more than a few Cathedral college history courses, I’d say it’s pretty effective to those that don’t know or know of actual history. This is why I hope to one day be a part of an honest historical project, something that contains everything we actually know about humans, our cousins, and our inferiors. Not some grandiose accounting, like based Dovahatty’s account of Rome. Myth building is awesome and necessary. But I think we should have a Whole Story put together, a big fucking tome we drop on a Xeno’s lap and say “This is the story of how your worst nightmare came to be. Read it and despair, scum.”

    Howard Zim is maybe the most evil man who ever lived, and the whole of the history Academe does his evil work.

    • Red says:

      Read The Discovery And Conquest Of Mexico if you want the real story. The population of Mexico probably went up after the Spanish put an end to human sacrifice.

      Only civilized foes in the New World were an actual threat to whites, thus the conquest of Mexico and the Incans is the only story that matters. As for the rest, the only remarkable part is how many of the hunter/gather survived. The typical outcome of hunter/gather meets civilized people is the complete annihilation of the hunter/gathers. Whites went easy on them.

    • Neofugue says:

      Despite my reservations about Protestants and Protestantism, it is these types of things which lend credence to Cominator’s position, not because doing so is in our strategic interest, rather that these people cross the line in ways that demand justice.

      • Neofugue says:

        That being said, I am not openly endorsing Cominator’s position, rather expressing sympathy for it.

    • Red says:

      Jesus as your boyfriend fails again.

      The state religion gotten a lot stronger over the last 5 years. It’s become very attractive to women. This women converted to Christianity to Globohomo.

    • Yul Bornhold says:

      Let’s take a moment to notice the fagginess in this supposed patriarchal movement:

      “The thing that really disturbs me is the whole emphasis on the daddy-daughter thing. The purity pledges, father daughter banquets—your heart is supposed to be daddy’s until he gives you away to your husband.”

      These “patriarchs” do nothing to help their daughters marry. In fact, they actively get in the way. Jim has talked about the subtle European practice of filling out dance cards for daughters so they fall in love with pre-approved suitors. Quiverfull instead has daughters dancing with their fathers. They don’t directly arrange marriages either.

      They’ve a very blue pill theory of girls finding husbands and naturally falling in love. This is very much the mindset of daddy chasing off suitors with his shotgun and only the best guy for daddy’s little girl. As Aidan once said, this is a great way to ensure your daughter finds a man willing to kill you and use your skull for a drinking vessel. Of course, it’s all *talk* so what actually happens is the daughter leaving the house and making a slut of herself same as any other girl.

      How does this happen?

      Same as modern Persia. The Quiverfull founders came from a deeply blue pill (chivalrous) background. They read the biblical prescription for patriarchy and subconsciously reinterpreted it into a blue pill framework. If you read the Vice article or if you’ve any familiarity with Christian homeschool in general, you’ll notice the deeply rooted beta nature of these “patriarchs.” They take the Christian idea of submission and turn it into using your wife as an emotional tampon.

      From the article:

      “My husband had become such a tyrant. I started standing up to him here and there. He flipped out.”

      Petty and hysterical response. Utterly unlike Jim’s silent and strong menace. Needy, insecure and demanding “patriarchal headship” is in some ways worse than normal beta. A woman will ditch an ordinary beta because such behavior is deeply repulsive to her. When she’s stuck with her husband because fear of God, she’ll grow deeply resentful.

      I’ll appeal to Aidan again. If you want patriarchy, have to internalize the red pill. Have to treat women like children. You love your woman but she leans on you, not you on her.

      • jim says:

        The underlying theory is the Victorian blue pill theory that women are naturally chaste and uninterested in sex, which theory failed catastrophically for the victorians.

        The correct model is that women will crawl nine miles over broken glass to be brutally raped by a demon lover, but they are not interested in sex with you, and they are not interested in sex with man their dad wants them to marry.

        To control female sexual choice you have to expose them to a parentally preselected males under circumstances that favor that male – he gets to touch her and control her, as in ballroom dancing, and is treated respectfully by males with alpha cred, and deny them exposure to all other males except you can control the circumstances to avoid triggering uncontrollable and volcanic female sexual desire.

  27. Fëanor says:

    I’m obviously not saying that Kyle did anything wrong, but it seems to me that Jacob Blake, the negro who was shot to kick off the riot in Kenosha, did not much wrong either. As far as I can tell he was shot for resisting the state-sponsored kidnapping of his own child, and if he had been white, this blog would be upset about the incident and the left would be saying he deserved it. Of course I’m aware of the friend-enemy distinction at play, but the normiecon messaging on this point seems counterproductive.

    • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

      He was not resisting the state sponsored kidnapping, he was trying to drive off in a stolen vehicle and went for a knife. He sounded like scum, and I do not know if he had any actual criminal history, but he used the typical black attitude of, “I have the right to do whatever I want because I am a Very Holy Negro.” The police, not wanting to be stabbed, shot him.

      • Fëanor says:

        Probably it was rational for the cops to shoot him at the point that they did, but they were there in the first place to enforce the state-sponsored kidnapping, and to serve a warrant on him for a bunch of crimes that shouldn’t exist, i.e. his woman had weaponized the bluepilled legal system against him in a shit test.

        • Fëanor says:

          Probably he was scum. But I am an absolutist about this. Do not deprive a man of his rights over his woman and children unless you would also kill him, and in that case you should probably just kill him, rather than create a slippery slope.

          (I am aware that we are already at the bottom of the slippery slope. This does not change my opinion.)

          • HerbR says:

            In any conflict between the anti-male and the anti-white, the correct reactionary position is to not give a shit and let them go after each other. Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.

            • Pooch says:

              Exactly. I really don’t care how Democrat-run city cops treat the blacks. In fact, the worse they tear each other apart the better probably.

              • Red says:

                I feel this way about people living in blue cities. They deserve what’s coming. They need to flee like Lot from Sodom.

                • Fireball says:

                  It would be better for everyone that people wouldn’t be allow to flee the blue cities.

                • Pooch says:

                  At some point they are no longer going to have a place to flee to.

                • Red says:

                  >It would be better for everyone that people wouldn’t be allow to flee the blue cities.

                  I mean that the righteous should flee blue cities. It’s no longer possible to be among the Globohomites without being corrupted or destroyed.

          • G.T. Chesterton says:

            Do not deprive a man of his rights over his woman and children

            A nigger is not a Man. Clean shoot.

            Though if I were on the review board, would probably have reprimanded the officers for not Rodney Kinging him much sooner to prevent the need for deadly force.

            And right there is our Catch 22. Any corrective action taken by any White man against any subhuman is grounds for chimpout. Had George Fentanyl not died, the media still could have used the “eight minutes of neck hate” to whip up the masses.

            • Red says:

              >A nigger is not a Man. Clean shoot.

              A man is a man. But in this case, this was a nigger with a stolen car so he’s someone that needed killing.

              I’ve defended OJ Simpson for years because his cunt wife stole his children from him. She got what she deserved and so did that kike she was fucking. Men, no mater their race need to be secure in their property and family rights.

  28. Pooch says:

    Slightly interesting that Peter Thiel is moving to DC and seems to be getting more involved with politics. Thiel is the closest thing we have to actual elite support for the non-cucked right and has ties to Moldbug. He’s apparently backing 2 senators in AZ and OH in the midterms. Will be interesting if Thiel can prevent a steal by Dems there.

    • Andy says:

      Interesting – he’s one to keep an eye on – thanks for sharing or I would have missed it. Apparently he feels comfortable enough setting up a $13 mil base (as in “home”) in DC.

    • Prince Charming says:

      He’s a fag. Unless and until he pulls a Milo and repents, wouldn’t hold my breath.

      • Kunning Drueger says:

        Can you elaborate on or qualify the charge of cockmongling?

        • The Cominator says:

          Thiel openly has the perversion… But hes one of the few good ones overall much like Milo…

          • Kunning Drueger says:

            Genuinely did not know that. That’s a rather large blackpill for me, tbqu. I wish someone could explain the existence of, for lack of a better term, redpilled gays.

            • Pooch says:

              Can’t explain it either.

            • HerbR says:

              The simple answer is that they aren’t “redpilled”. Because they’re largely incapable of pedestalizing women, they’re more likely to be familiar with women’s hypergamous and backstabbing tendencies, but without the deeper appreciation for a woman’s positive qualities, that’s simply blackpilled.

              I don’t hear any of these homos talking about owning women, or raising families, or really anything to do with accumulating social technology and capital over many generations. They are cold and calculating men, Thiel included – not particularly interested in fixing society, just high-functioning, wealthy, and smart enough to realize that the revolution will eventually come for them and their wealth.

              They are, in a sense, “natural conservatives” in the cuck definition – i.e. they have a vested interested in preserving the very left status quo but preventing it from going much farther left.

              • alf says:

                Who are you and what do we deserve these quality comments for.

                • HerbR says:

                  Nobody special, just another technocrat who turned redneck after finding out that the future they had planned for us involved sitting through rolling blackouts with our balls cut off, popping antidepressants and eating bugs.

              • Mister Grumpus says:

                Watch our Stalin be a homo, then. How else can a white man get near power anyway? Obama had to talk white to pass back then, so Peter has to suck dick today. Child rapists are dragging us from cop cars out there, very nearly, so no way I’m spiraling on this.

                Maybe Elon will get bi-curious. He’s not stupid. Salon will debate and question his bi-sincerity.

                • HerbR says:

                  You’re pretty far off the mark on this one. A lot of the lesbian or “genderfluid” insanity that comes from the female side is fake or imagined or misinterpreted, but men don’t pretend to be fags. They don’t suck dick because they “have” to. That’s just not a thing. Men who aren’t homo are far too viscerally repulsed to pretend.

                  We can debate whether homosexuality is genetic, pathogenic, chemical, or some combination of the above, but the perversion has been around far too long and survived far too many purges to be a mere social contagion, like all the trannyism going around right now.

              • Pooch says:

                they have a vested interested in preserving the very left status quo but preventing it from going much farther left.

                This is a salient point. We don’t need someone (or someones) to reinstall based 17th century Anglicanism. We need them to shut down the holiness spiral permanently, violently if necessary. Everything after that is secondary. Leftism that can no longer move left dies.

                • HerbR says:

                  And you think Peter Thiel is the man for the job?

                  You’re correct that the position does not require a reactionary faith – at least, not initially. What it does require is the capacity for extreme violence.

                  Fags are not warriors. They’re more interested in fucking the troops than leading them to victory.

                • Kunning Drueger says:

                  He may not be the faggot we want, but he might be the faggot we got. Something I’ve learned about the capacity for violence in whites: there’s no way to tell until it happens, and some of the most unlikely bodies can be capable of unreal brutality. Elsewhere it was said that it took 1000 years to socialize the germanics. Further back, it was asserted that it took 300 years to Cuck the Norse. This might be my white identitarianism shining through, but I think nearly every straight white male can learn to be brutal. Some have a real knack (Wulfgar possibly) and others try to not feed that monkey (myself and I’d guess Jim and others). It isn’t always a question of physical capacity either. I’ve worked with dudes who are terrifyingly big but can’t stomach bone through skin. I’m one of those people that, given too much time to think, I get locked up in internal debate. Given only time for pre-reaction, I act unencumbered.

                  So I bet Theil would probably keep an adamantium G43x in a shoulder holster that’s never been fired, but would have no trouble deploying right wing comfort squads to San Francisco. We’ll probably just have to work with what we have.

                • Pooch says:

                  And you think Peter Thiel is the man for the job?

                  No. The man for the job, if we are lucky, is going to be a great military tactician the likes of Caesar or Napoleon who is likely going to need elite organization and funding to equip and raise his army.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  I knew a guy who was in Army Special Gorces when it was still a bunch of legitimate ass kickers, and he said that under fire, white men always fight back. The only times he ever knew a guy in the teams to lose his shit under fire were black, and still just a couple. Now there is a selection effect, in that the hardest and most brutal men try out for Special Forces, but it is still a useful anecdote.

                  I am not even sure I am that much of an outlier, once you take into account progressive piety and social pressure. What is worse, slaughtering 30,000 Afghanis to send a message that America will not be fucked with, or killing hundreds of thousands of them over two decades and turning allies over to the enemy during the retreat?

            • Prince Charming says:

              Conquest #1.

              Fags legitimately hate fags, hate themselves being fags.

              The propaganda coup of the current regime is to convince fags that sodomy is an immutable personal trait and not something one does (and may well start doing less, or stop entirely). Milo got cancelled hard once he started talking about this.

      • Pooch says:

        Agreed, but gay as he is, he’s probably the closest thing we have to an actual reactionary in politics. He’s probably to the right of Trump.

    • Nicodemus Rex says:

      Thiel is great and a true elite — he’s carved a niche as basically the only investor in the Valley that will stand by you if the mob comes howling for your scalp. Combine that with a well-known reputation for retaliation if someone hurts the career of one of his protegés, and it’s easy to see why he has loyal men behind him (as Trump did not.)

      But the time for businessmen is long past, and obviously a gay man will not be the next American Caesar. Someone like Thiel is in politics for the short run: not looking to dissolve the Cathedral completely, but just looking to keep the government functional enough that he can continue to make money off lucrative contracts and stave off disaster.

      • Pooch says:

        But the time for businessmen is long past, and obviously a gay man will not be the next American Caesar. Someone like Thiel is in politics for the short run: not looking to dissolve the Cathedral completely, but just looking to keep the government functional enough that he can continue to make money off lucrative contracts and stave off disaster.

        You may be right, but the optimist in me says Thiel is smart and knows the Cathedral is coming for him eventually. He has made Moldbug-pilled comments that democracy is not sustainable (he even knows Moldbug personally). Thiel is no warrior, but Caesar and Augustus needed some elite support and our Caesar is going to need elite support. Someone is going to need to pay to feed and arm Caesar’s army.

  29. Kunning Drueger says:

    Maybe our society has a higher capacity for languishing as well as a higher tolerance for terribleness than we think. For the last couple years, I keep thinking, “there’s no way (x) group will put up with (y) event, statistic, effect, etc, for much longer.” But Burrough’s Days of Rage illustrates that Americans with only a handful of TV channels and tie stick reefer managed to ignore a burgeoning guerilla war and complete gutting of every major city. At no point in the 1970s did any kind of right wing militia march into a downtown area and reestablish law and order. As well, no mob of leftists invested any rural towns and established a Marxist Caliphate. From the 60s to the 90s you definitely get highly atypical instances of both based and anti-based craziness, but it was largely a punctuated equilibrium.

    A few posts back, someone asked if we were not already in a period of malaise. Of the multiple good responses, the one that stuck out the most to me was the assertion that stagnation is the absence of a leftward spiral. Simple and profound in its ramifications, because if that is correct, we have a very solid methodology for gauging where to stick the You Are HERE pin, at least in terms of spirals.

    I have two questions:
    What is the opposite of the Brezhnevian Malaise/Stagnation for the right wing?

    Is it possible that everything Jim has asserted is happening is in fact happening, but on a much more protracted timetable?

    The first question is just a technical one because I was wondering if we just call that The Good Times or The Good’Ole Days. The second one is, in my opinion, absolutely critical. If 2026 is truly a good estimate of the Beginning of the Gray Terror, then I don’t care about carrying debt as much as I do care about supplies, redundancy, and proximity. If it is potentially much further out, the calculus changes dramatically, as many GWoT vets will be dead or worthless (based on their tendency to commit suicide or eat narcotics like candy), all the remaining based boomers will be basically buried, and the elite will be even more incompetent and easily lead around by the nose with drugs, technology, and the ambiguous promises of digital immortality.

    If it is going to be a while, we don’t need mannerbunds as much as we need monasteries. I think it’s an important question. The Right, for good or ill, is fighting back, and I bet they will continue to make small gains. This is bad, as it lulls people back into a sense of complacency while energizing the radicals.

    • Mike in Boston says:

      Is it possible that everything Jim has asserted is happening is in fact happening, but on a much more protracted timetable?

      This is in fact my current best guess. I see too many analogies to the 1914-1917 period to think for a moment we are going to get Brezhnevian stagnation. Much more likely is that we are in the middle of a 1917 that will last years or even a decade. The purge of the armed forces is underway, the previous ideology of generic Protestantism is hopelessly low status among an elite dedicated to the successor ideology even though they know it will destroy many of them. See for example how Diaghilev welcomed communism even though he knew it would mean the end of his career and probably life.

      Diaghilev had the sense to move abroad, which is the only sensible thing to do when facing 75 years of communism. I’m still waiting for the equivalent of a White Russian movement to organize itself here so I can join its Volunteer Army; and maybe some Red State governor will actually have the stones to make something happen; but my children all have passports from a country that, even though far from immune, shows at least some small signs of resisting wokeness. Because in hindsight, emigration provided the best outcome for anticommunist Russians in 1917.

    • Fireball says:

      Look at the scientific fiction of the past, of what they tough it would be the year 2021. The only thing that they didn’t predict was the rise of computers and what they tough we would achieve we didnt.

      Fertility is under replacement for quite some time. There is no money, no no status no pussy for the majority of young men. Even for women there is nothing at this rate, must will die childless.

      So yeah i say we have been in a stagnation for a while even if it is not a brejnevian stagnation. What comes next is the true decline.

      • Pooch says:

        The decline we our experiencing is depicted almost verbatim in many ways by the Roman poet Juvenal in Satires written in the early 2nd century. The empire didn’t fall until the 5th century.

        • fred says:

          If we are following the timeline of the Roman empire, we are in the 2nd century late republic where the Republic gets more and more dysfunctional and corrupt until various strongmen seize control. So maybe Trump is Gracchus. Doesn’t fit well but it doesnt have to.

          • Pooch says:

            Yes we’ve discussed that before in prior posts. Best case is we get Caesar of the late Republic (which still may be some time away), worst case is we get the slow decline of the late empire into third worldism.

            • Kunning Drueger says:

              Worst case is the last thing we see is our children spitting on our faces while their tranny guardians caress their peroxide dyed hair.

            • ExileStyle says:

              I’, sympathetic with the theory, encountered among the by-now rare bird of Lost Cause southerners, that the Republic ended in about 1865, with the disenfranchisement of the landed gentry in favor of the urban proletariat and the vast expansion of the federal government. (Not to mention an assassination in a theater by a guy whose father’s name was literally Brutus.) We had no Augustus, only an impersonal federal bureaucracy which emerged from this. The parallels with the 2nd Century, so right about the time of Juvenal, are striking. I see no evidence of a pre-Julian senatorial/republican ethos, just a huge rich empire in decline more interested in obscene comedy shows and florid explorations of sexual degeneracy than maintaining something which makes little sense to anyone anymore anyways.

              • Pooch says:

                I’, sympathetic with the theory, encountered among the by-now rare bird of Lost Cause southerners, that the Republic ended in about 1865

                Yarvin/Moldbug delineates the American republics as a series not unlike how the French refer to theirs as follows:

                1st Republic – Articles of Confederation which failed after only a decade

                2nd Republic – Hamilton’s system which lasted until the Civil War

                3rd Republic – Created by the Lincoln regime which you outline in your comment and lasts until FDR’s new deal.

                4th Republic – Founded by FDR and is ongoing.

                • ExileStyle says:

                  Interesting. I do vaguely remember that account. This particular Lost Cause theory, though, would have the all but definitive end of the American Republic happening in the 1860s, which would translate the 4th republic into 1850s antebellum Buchanan/Pierce compromise America, with Imperial America extending onward from there, putting us pretty deep into decadent post-Marcus Aurelius territory, towards the end of Pax Romana/Pax Americana.

                  Correlating one-to-one like this is kind of a parlor game, but it’s interesting to note how every single war since the Civil War has been a war of imperial expansion, whether territorially or financially. And honestly I find, despite a sentimental and ancestral commitment to America, little worth saving about the American model from about 1840 onwards. (This corresponds, incidentally, to the first mass wave of non-British immigration, and Jackson’s enfranchisement of non-landowning males.)

                • The Cominator says:

                  I would say that Wilson effectively killed the Lincoln Republic before FDR, Harding and Coolidge brought back an illusion of it but it was gone.

                  Wilson was 1000x more evil than either Lincoln (who was responding to a chimpout by chimp importers after all) or FDR.

                • Red says:

                  The 3ed Republic founded under Dishonest Abe was the end of the Union of sates. The Southern elites were welcome back into power once they adopted New England’s state religion. I’d mark FDR as the end of the Republic as governance shifted almost entirely to the DC bureaucracy with the 4th Republic, or rather it might be called the First Empire.

                • Red says:

                  >I would say that Wilson effectively killed the Lincoln Republic before FDR, Harding and Coolidge brought back an illusion of it but it was gone.

                  To be honest, FDR was more like Caesar after Wilson broke the system. We’re still waiting for our Augustus, who may never appear.

                • ExileStyle says:


                  Yes, people pay far too little attention to the diabolical presidency of Wilson. The Federal Reserve, institutionalized progressivism, not to mention the rabbit-hole-worthy betrayals surrounding out entry into war in 1917 (cough Balfour Declaration cough). We live in Wilson’s world more than FDR’s in many ways.

                • Pooch says:

                  putting us pretty deep into decadent post-Marcus Aurelius territory, towards the end of Pax Romana/Pax Americana.

                  I agree. I have serious doubts that a Caesar/Augustus could even materialize at this point given the decadent environment.

                • Kunning Drueger says:

                  Don’t forget, first female president as well. Wilson was truly the devil’s own.

                • The Cominator says:

                  To be fair to her Wilson’s wife was a much better president than he was given that I don’t think any of the numerous examples of really awful shit that came under Wilson came when she was the unofficial acting president (she probably did not trust “Colonel” House), but that isn’t saying much.

        • Varna says:

          I think we need to multiply speed of change by tech and divide by generational change. What took a 100 years in the pre-industrial world, takes 10 years in the industrial world, and 10 minutes in the computer world, but is slowed back down by human inertia.

          If we accept “generational change” as something that happens every 15-20 years, then this is the basic time unit of sociopolitical change right now.
          What took 300 years back in the day takes 30 years now — two 15yr generational cycles. (in this sense the eternal boomer was among other things a shield agaist unchecked change which many people do not appreciate)

          When people have no free will and instead just channel the dominant narrative that most overlaps with their personality structure, they become passive social cells. “Passive” in the self-awareness sense. They merely channel and amplify impulses, they do not generate their own impulses.

          When a system is healthy it solves problems and helps its constituent biological parts thrive; when a system goes toxic it starts creating problems and feeding off them, and preys on its biological parts. Hence it must always expand like cancer in order to survive. It cannot have sane internal equilibrium, a toxic system is always parasitical and predatory and must always try to take over everything it touches.

          In Roman times the mechanical quasi-sentient (in the virus behavior sense) algorithm of the toxic parasitic system depended on the speed of a man on foot, a man using horse power, and a man on a ship. This was the “speed of neural exchange” inside the toxic system.

          Later steam. Later diesel. Airplanes. Telegraph. Telephone. Now with the Internet, the systemic algorithms are still slowed down by human speed on their most “crude layers”, but in their “higher layers” of functioning, they’re operating at the speed of light.

          Still not quite self-aware in our human sense (knock on wood), but already way, way beyond anything in recorded history.

          Were it not for human inertia, paradigm change and total makeovers would be happening every 3 minutes. Due to the human factor, it’s still more of every 30 years.

          However, the algorithm increasingly works around the human factor, and sees it increasingly as something to get rid of. Its human agents, who believe they are following their own cunning plans, do not appear to quite realize what lovecraftian entity they are serving and to what ends, and how disposable they themselves and their kids are.

          Over the last decades the human bio-unit was increasingly reduced to a system-node the point of which is simple information input-output. Money comes in, money comes out. Digits come in, digits come out. Product comes in, product comes out. And so on. All other inherited structures and meanings got dismantled, and only an in-out node remained.

          A very inefficient node. A slow and awkward node with a prosperity to not function as well as it should. A node that has outgrown its usefulness.

          • Varna says:


          • Pooch says:

            Interesting analysis. So on your scale roughly 35 years until the US turns into South Africa I’d say.

            • Varna says:

              Thanks. Who becomes a South Africa and when was the obvious important question before the great reset kicked in. Things have rather quickly moved toward “who survives, on what terms, and at what cost”.

              Including subtopics such as “will longevity be capped at 50 for the proles”, “will all surviving kids be sickly”, “will we have freedom of movement”, “will we have freedom of commerce”, “will the planet’s population be culled to predetermined numbers”, “will there be mandatory programming of cognition” and so on.

              At this point managing to derail and roll back this crap all the way to the golden age of 2019 when questions such as “will we all become South Africa within out lifetime” still have meaning, is the short-term and medium-term positive outcome I’m personally hoping for.

              Should this be achieved, then yes averting third worldism is an issue again. For now averting lightning-fast descent into ultra-brutal inhuman genocidal cannibalistic demonic machine dystopia within the coming 1-2 years seems more pressing.

              I’d literally rather live in 2019 Nigeria or Indonesia than in what the new masters are trying to enforce. If we manage to stop this, roll it back, and place in safeguards to ensure this doesn’t happen again at least for 3-4 human generations, we can then continue onward, fixing the surviving remnants of sanity, and building new layers on top, imo.

              • Contaminated NEET says:

                Sure, our rulers plan on some kind of horrifying “soft”-totalitarian machine-mediated panopticon for us and an unending hedonistic transhuman pig-philosophy orgy for themselves, but can they really do it with the human capital they prefer to employ? I doubt Shaniqua, Jose, and Ahmed can enforce this Black Mirror world on unwilling men with 15 or more IQ points on them.

                • Varna says:

                  Very true. At least very likely. However, there are forms and ways of *failing* in what they are trying to do, which are also super not good outcomes.

                  “They tried to achieve X but instead only destroyed everything hihihi” is the timeline which I think we are being called upon to avert.

                  1. Sabotage their obvious agendas
                  2. Stop their failures from destroying us all, but without this strengthening the agents of evil*
                  3. Punishment of the agents of evil and overly enthusiastic collaborators
                  4. Introduction of multiple layers of civilizational safeguards based on the lessons of our times

                  * (something the corporate cuckservatives are guilty of. When the crazies try something insane and instead of their plan working out — everything starts collapsing, the cuckservatives stop or slow down the collapse, in ways which strengthen those who started the process via their insane agendas in the first place. instead the sane need to be able to recognize what is happening and tactically guide the failure in ways which will help destroy those who started the process, and not destroy the rest of the world. A guided avalanche sort of thing)

  30. Tityrus says:

    Slightly off-topic: I feel like there used to be more poo-in-loos in the comment section here a month or three ago. Did India IP ban this website or what?

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      TL;DR: dramafagging.

    • Kunning Drueger says:

      Apologizing again for my part in that, because I would really like the hear their collective opinions regarding mass deletion of Minecraft Accounts. St. John, I have to say I was pretty miffed by some of your assertions about dealing with the opposition and their offspring. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but isn’t there a danger in mechanizing deletion? Doesn’t it become to easy to just through problems into the oven? This may be equivocation, but is the Right immune to spirals, or is there some kind of inherent mechanism that dictates when to stop? Jim asserts that Stalin stopped after he ceased the spiral, and I took him at his word. But of late I’ve begun to feel that it was WWII that stopped the purges, and if Germany had kept it in their plains, he would have continued purging until he died. I might be off base on that one, I don’t have a lot of good source material…

      • jim says:

        > But of late I’ve begun to feel that it was WWII that stopped the purges, and if Germany had kept it in their plains, he would have continued purging until he died

        The great purge started in 1934, and ended in 1938. Repression after 1938 continued to be fairly dire, but it did not get more dire or less dire during the war.

        > is the Right immune to spirals, or is there some kind of inherent mechanism that dictates when to stop?

        The right is not immune to spirals (Fascist Japan being arguably a right wing spiral) but the right is order while the left is disorder, and spirals are inherently disorderly and leaderless.

        • Kunning Drueger says:

          The source I’m going through now says the purges of the 1930s break into 3 segments or themes: de-kulakization & collectivization, the foreign threat conspiracy, and the extirpation the of leadership and enforcers. The third one seems like elimination of spiralers, the first one is the result of incompetence. The book I’m reading asserts that the second one, the foreign threat conspiracy, started as a resource grab by regional NKVD heads and snowballed into a massive purge.

          I wonder if Stalin would have stopped if there’d been no war, and at the moment, I think the answer is no.

          • jim says:

            Dekulakization and collectivization occurred under Stalin’s leadership, but he was riding the tiger, trying to apply the brakes, and failing miserably. Events were out of control, and he found himself dangerously, confusingly, and frighteningly outflanked on the left.

            What had happened is that he had zigged right and zagged left. After the crisis of socialism hit hard, Lenin had backed away from socialism “temporarily” with the New Economic Plan, which Stalin rode rightwards to power, but of course the party became restive when it did not look so temporary, so finding himself outflanked, zagged left to socialism, decreeing collectivization, whereupon he was outlefted by even holier elements in the party going even further left, resulting in dekulakization and collectivization rapidly mutating into genocide.

            As he consolidated power, he was able to stop de kulackization and collectivization, or at least make it somewhat less genocidal. Dekulackization and collectivization was largely a Jewish Bolshevik initiative, Jewish Bolsheviks outflanking Stalin on the left, and had they not been stopped, every ethnic Russian, Ukrainian, and Georgian, including Stalin, would have been killed. It largely ended in about 1932. About sixty million Russians, Ukrainians and Georgians, all of them ethnic Russians, Ukrainians, and Georgians, were murdered. There was an obvious ethnic and racial element. Despite the pretense that they were operating under the Marxist theory of economic classes rather than ethnicity and religion, ethnicity rapidly became more and more salient. To this day, all Trot groups and groups of ideological descent from Trotskyism such as the neoconservatives are as Jewish as a Bar Mitzvah.

            The power struggle within the party continued, but now with Stalin having the clear upper hand, from 1932 to 1934.

            The great purge began in 1934, and steadily escalated, eventually killing about 750 000 people. Stalin tried to avoid the purge being ethnic the way dekulakization and collectivization was, but nonetheless the ethnic effect of the great purge was that Communist Party became Judenrein. A distinctly Jewish party became a distinctly non Jewish party.

            If your sources neglect the ethnic character of these events, they are lying to you. A jewish account of these events is going to blame everything on Stalin and going to say he was totally bad and went on being bad (because the party did not re-judaize when the purge ended, but remained Judenrein, while the Trotksyists had become and remain to this day as Jewish as a Bar Mitvah.)

            If your sources are telling you that it was all Stalin all the time, what they are actually telling you is that the party became Judenrein and stayed that way.

            • The Cominator says:

              ” About sixty million Russians, Ukrainians and Georgians, all of them ethnic Russians, Ukrainians, and Georgians, were murdered.”

              I’m not one to whitewash the crimes of the Bolsheviks or any other leftist group but that number sounds absurdly too high, almost as bad as when shitlibs claim that Anglo settlers taking over the country murdered 100 million Indians (as if there ever were that many). Also wasn’t the highest % Dekulkakization/Holodomor regional death % in Kazakhstan.

              Did you mean 6 million, I would guesstimate the Holodmor death total throughout the Soviet Union to be anywhere between 6 to 15 million people.

              • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                There were about a hundred million Indians when the white settlers showed up, but it was mostly disease that killed them. It is as ridiculous to blame that on the settlers as it is to blame the Chinese for the Black Plague just because it traveled down the Silk Road. The ones we killed were killed fair and square, in wars of conquest or defense, but it was not a hundred million of them.

                • Pooch says:

                  it was mostly disease that killed them

                  This may be progressive Whig history. The white man came, saw, and conquered. The red savages violently and brutally resisted, but the white warrior spirit killed those fuckers dead in combat. The textbooks want to delete this great and glorious European military conquest out of history, making it seem like it was never a fair fight.

                • Pooch says:

                  And might I add they were often killed to the last man in combat unlike other races. Either they were too stupid or too brave they would not surrender until every last Indian warrior was a corpse.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Nah, you have to respect the sheer fucking savagery of the American Indians. They were a tough fucking fight and they drove off the Vikings. Whites beat them, but it was a hard-fought war and we might have ended up the way of the Vikings had disease not weakened them. Disease does not make a conquest less glorious, as it was the primary killer in nearly all wars before the 20th century.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Whites landed on the moon. We built weapons that create miniature suns. No fight against us by non-Whites has ever been fair. That does not make it less glorious.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Within the Continental US even before the diseases (which were introduced by the Spanish not by us Anglos) I maintain that there were not NEARLY 100 million Indians. The United States during WWII only had a population of a little over 150 million and we had large scale mechanized agriculture and great cities at the time.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  They had a massive portion of the US turned into a massive buffalo farm. They did not need mass agriculture. Also, who cares who made them sick? They were unable to recover from it and that is on them, not on us. Life is not fair, and it does not matter whether we got them sick or the Spanish did. They got sick, and because they were dirty savages, they spread it and got wiped out by it. Disease is as much a part of war as guns and swords.

                • Kunning Drueger says:

                  The “100 million” claim is pretty dubious. Aidan and I were discussing the Congo under Leopold and he pointed out how the math they used to total up the figures was really questionable. They always assume very high numbers and tabulate the unknown as dead. In the case of Congo the European crymongers added something like 8-10 million out of thin air to make it seem more atrocious, and the 100 million feather folk feels the same. And, as you said, they’ll do anything to minimize a white/euro achievement.

                • The Cominator says:

                  How many people can the land support as buffalo herdsmen, and herding nomad cultures (even if the land can support large dense numbers) will fight genocidally if packed too closed. Pastoral hunters and herders don’t do population density well.

                  The Injun population could not have been more than 40 million at the most BEFORE the diseases (this is within the Continental US). When the Anglos got here it had to be much lower.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  I do not understand how sticking 60 million more savages makes the achievement less impressive. The number could be wrong, but then why add so many more? A couple million whites managed to kill 100 million savages and that is somehow downplaying the achievement? That does not make sense. Unless you are saying that killing that fictitious 60 million makes us look worse somehow? You seem to be taking two contradictory stances; that they are adding to the number that we supposedly killed in order to diminish the accomplishment and make it seem less impressive?

                • The Cominator says:

                  My main interest in this was not letting absurd numbers stand…

                  I have not commented on the achievement so far but if you want it my opinion of the achievement is as follows. There were two occasions where the Indians were a serious problem.

                  In New England (vs our friends the Puritans) “King Phillip’s War” (which in proportion to the population was an extremely bloody war).

                  in Texas and the Southwest the Commanches who would wage war via skirmishes and raids and until the revolver was invented were largely unbeatable because they were sort of like smaller scale Mongols, they would not attack forts and large towns but outside of that nothing was safe. This is why the original old blood Texans tended to be a little crazy because only crazy people wanted to move and settle in Commanche country. The Commanches were also why the Mexicans invited white Anglos into Texas in the 1st place as the Mexicans at the time sure as fuck didn’t want to move there. The commanches tended to torture captives to death, they would sometimes spare younger teenagers to train them to be commanches though (older and younger then that were almost inevitably killed). Oh also they didn’t kill niggers they just sold them as slaves.

                  Otherwise they were kind of more of a slight obstacle to white settlement more than a serious threat.

                • The Cominator says:


                  Apparently it IS about 60 million total but that was over the entire existence of the Soviet regime.

                • jim says:

                  Pretty sure that most of that was 1916 to 1932 – .when Stalin was insecure and being outlefted, and before Stalin.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Probably the 1st round of mass killings was post seizure of power, civil war and post civil war under Lenin and Trotsky (ending largely with the NEP)… from 1918 to 1921 of which Stalin was barely involved.

                  I suspect that far more people died in this period than even forced collectivization because there was no Stalin or Bukharin trying to apply the brakes at least not until things got very bad. Also the New Economic Policy probably would never have happened except that Trotsky got his ass kicked trying to invade Poland.

              • HerbR says:

                Holodomor was just one particular instance of specifically starvation-related deaths. Jim is talking about the entire death toll in Communist Russia.

                Very similar to the death toll under Mao’s China, which is generally accepted to be around 65 million.

                Yes, these numbers are staggering, but if you’re going to dispute them, need an explanation for where all of the population went.

                • The Cominator says:

                  When I say Holodomor/Dekulkaziation I’m talking about the mass murders dispossessions and starvations in the early 30s throughout the Soviet Union. I do not think the total of that round of mass murders could have been above 15 million.

                  Stalin did some other post great Terror mass murders once he had real control but they were overwhelmingly aimed at ethnic groups he didn’t trust and even then they tended to be less deadly (though the purged generally ended up living grim lives in Siberian Gulags or in Ethnic Resettlement Zones).

                  If you want to include the mass murders and starvations of Lenin and Trotsky prior to the NEP (which were probably worse but probably are the least well documented because the US left still likes Lenin and Trotsky and can’t blame those on Stalin so easily) you could probably add maybe up to another 25 million to that figure possibly.

                • HerbR says:

                  I really don’t care what you think “could” be true. Account for the missing population, or stick to what you know.

                • The Cominator says:

                  You have to know what the exact population was and how much it decreased, reliable information on this is more guesswork than science. Its like parsing out Covid statistics accurately, you might be able to tell what they are lying about but you can’t exactly reach the real truth either.

                  Even if you can read the Soviet archives yourself do you think their statistics were all that reliable (particulary in Lenin’s time). Obviously the Soviets at the time were reporting that under the glorious leadership of comrade Lenin the Revolutionary Soviet Socialist Republic’s population was increasing all the time. I mean for a census taker to report anything else that would be the kind of thing a wrecker counter revolutionary enemy of the people would do.

                • HerbR says:

                  Your argument so far condenses down to “this aggregate total doesn’t agree with my back-of-the-envelope estimate of a few specific components of it based on numbers I just pulled out of my ass.” That’s hardly sufficient to shift the burden of proof.

                  If you want to start questioning the body count of global communism, you should have something tangible to back up your claims. No one took the holocaust revisionists seriously either until they actually collected some real evidence – and even then, the best they were able to show is that officially-accepted totals were off by a factor of perhaps 20-50%, not a 10X discrepancy.

                  Believe what you want to believe, but hot takes on thin ice don’t make lasting impressions.

                • The Cominator says:

                  60 million in Soviet mass murders is above Rummel’s death estimates for the Soviet Union (in terms of murders and famines) so I’m not the one trying to shift the total.

                  65ish million is around the estimate for Mao’s mass murders and avoidable famines.

                • jim says:

                  I probably misremembered Rummel.

                  When I read Rummel, his numbers seemed reasonable. What were his numbers from the Russian revolution to 1932?

                  What were his numbers from 1934 to 1938?

            • Kunning Drueger says:

              The book is Blood Lands, and it’s interesting because it was critically acclaimed yet roundly hated by leftists, which is strange. It doesn’t neglect the ethnic elements, and even acknowledges the part the Chosen played, but it definitely portrays Stalin as the man at the controls.

              One big coup-complete project is going to be the sifting of documents and sources to construct an accurate history of humanity. This should probably be something the priests are tasked with, but kept highly classified and ethnically/nationally separated. The Royals should be the only ones with access to the collated Source at will. Every century, a new edition will be released of The Document. Any corrections, additions, or removals must sit for decades and be reviewed many times to see if they hold up.

        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          Signaling feed-back loops are theoretically possible in almost any situation lest something makes it otherwise; it is what sort of things that make it otherwise that are the pertinent sticking points.

          If you have a state of affairs where majority opinion holds import, for one reason or another, this forms conditions that select for memes to mutate into more adulterated forms, for more broadspectrum appeal across the lowest common denominators.

          If you have states of affairs where there is great distance between the professor of an opinion, and the consequences of that opinion, for one reason or another, then this forms conditions that are much less selective against maladaptive memetic mutation.

          Empirically speaking, one is hard pressed to find instances across history of mass mania exploding into mass action under right inclined – which has not insignificant overlap with conservative inclined. Restraint, circumspection… timidity even. The so common fatuity one finds in proponents of civilization in times of crisis is not going too far… but not going far enough.

          • Kunning Drueger says:

            So instead of a Holiness Spiral, the Right has a Mercy Spiral… We suddenly start thinking we have a million cheeks to turn and every reason to keep turning them.

            • Red says:

              Sure seems like it.

            • The Cominator says:

              Yes why i use my limited voice to try to plant the seed of not doing that next time…

            • ExileStyle says:

              The Christian Right, that is…

              With regard to the detailed exchange above, my heuristic is that Holiness Spiral and Leftism are mutually defining and basically synonymous. Entering the Spiral means entering Leftism, and entering the Left means entering the Spiral. I think we should think of a new term if we need one to describe (allegedly) similar processes on the Right. Otherwise we’re muddying the waters and pretty soon debating about our own Babylonian Talmud rather than thinking about history, past and future…

              • Tityrus says:

                This is true. There is no leftism without a holiness spiral, and no holiness spiral without leftism. Holding fast to this idea is the key to winning. The reason why conservatives and reactionaries have historically had little success combating leftism is that they have attacked the branches of leftism instead of the root, which is holiness spiraling.

      • The Cominator says:

        The right is 90% resistant to spirals because rightist accept by its nature that there are hierarchies hence someone tends to be firmly in charge when there are purges its not a situation with insecure power.

        The only rightist insane purity spiral I’m aware of was Imperial Japan in the 30s and 40s. This was caused by the head of the hierarchy generally in Japan the Emperor not ruling (with a couple of exceptions like when the IJA and IJN were actually shooting at each other and of course him ordering the surrender of Japan) unless the insecure power ruling council collectively begged him to intervene.

        • Red says:

          The only rightist insane purity spiral I’m aware of was Imperial Japan in the 30s and 40s. This was caused by the head of the hierarchy generally in Japan the Emperor not ruling (with a couple of exceptions like when the IJA and IJN were actually shooting at each other and of course him ordering the surrender of Japan) unless the insecure power ruling council collectively begged him to intervene.

          I have a hard time calling 30s and 40s Japan rightwing. The official hagiarchy and rank power structure was not followed. Jr. officers were setting policy because their superiors were afraid of them, no one was really in charge, their warriors swung from suicidal bravery to being chickenshit right when they could have struck the deciding blow during naval battles, etc. It all stank of anarchy rather than order.

      • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

        Industrial scale execution requires industrial scale methods. I like the ideas that Pseudo-Chrysostom shared precisely because they require no permanent establishment of infrastructure for mass killings. Building it practically guarantees it will be used, so if we do not have to build it, that is preferable.

  31. Firebal says:

    They saw the destruction of Kenosha not as constructive but as rightful and moral. Why would someone as low status as that kid even have the right to think of stooping them. Of course they were outrage by it.

  32. Yul Bornhold says:

    Kyle getting off is weird if radical leftism is accelerating.


    Kyle’s innocence verdict is a result of the system functioning as intended i.e. the judge and the jury listened to the evidence and quite reasonably decided the kid did nothing wrong. To the radical leftist, who a priori *knows* Kyle’s guilt, this proves that quietly weighing the evidence is fascist, racist and all the other usual sorts of haram.

    They’ll have to fix the court system, meaning they’ll hollow it out and wear its skin. The Soviets used to have trials. We know how those went. Such a decolonized system would work like this:

    1) Kyle shoots the guys trying to beat him to death.
    2) He receives a swift and speedy trial with a judge and jury composed of community experts (BLM agitators and the worst kind of college students.)
    3) In a day or so, the judge and jury sentence him to sodomy for life in state prison.
    4) They are so excited by this act of justice, they begin searching for bystanders to prosecute.

    tl;dr Kyle getting off will inspire the left to gay the court system.

  33. Jimisakike says:

    [*deleted for failure to take the shill test*]

    • jim says:

      You told us how easy it was to pass the shill test.

      So, pass it, and your stuff will be allowed through. It is an open book test. The passing answers are in the comments.

      • Jimisakike says:

        [*deleted for failure to pass the shill test*]

      • Jimderjuden says:

        What makes a girl tick: Narcissism, makeup, mirrors, clothes, jewelry. [*FAIL*]
        On Soros: He’s the bigshot jew that bankrolled the campaigns of commie attorney generals to destroy western culture.[*FAIL, but you are getting warmer, suggesting an FBI shill, when I figured you for a Soros shill*]

        • jim says:

          If you are not a shill, but merely genuinely this innocent and naive about women, you urgently need to read the game posts in this blog, and, better, in Setting the Record Straight, or else you are going to die alone and childless. Alf is also pretty good. Roosh used to be great, the great theoretician of the red pill, but he took a dose of blue pill with his Christianity.

          If you are genuinely this naive about Soros, search the comments for Soros discussion.

          • Jimisahipsterjew says:

            No way am I reading Alf. He’s an atheist.

            • jim says:

              Fine, no problem. Read the articles he cites, and Roosh.

              The articles cited here are all good Christian stuff.

            • alf says:

              Quite the opposite. Not that I think you’d pass the demon worshipper tests anyway.

              • jim says:

                It is interesting that so many shills cannot pass the demon worshiper test.

                I doubt that the people hiring them require or enforce demon worship, though some elements of the apparatus hiring and supervising them are likely demon worshipers, but the job requires bad people, and there just is a lot of demon worship going around.

                • alf says:

                  I was impressed with how Koanic/Glosoli literally disappeared in a puff of smoke when you called him out for demon worshipping.

                  Seems to me that they like using atheist as a slur. I presume because the man who is not backed by God is susceptible to the devil.

          • Fellowjew says:

            Let’s take it one step at a time.

            Soros first. What more is there to say?
            -Bankrolls radical lawyers for AG
            -Funds antifa
            -Subversive jew
            -Helps Shwab with great reset
            -Lives in a big house

            Anything else I need to know?

            • jim says:

              Where does Soros’ money come from, what does he do overseas, and what is the class and background of the people operating antifa.

              What has he been up to in Russia, Russian aligned countries, China, and former Soviet states that are insufficiently keen on Globohomo?

              How did things go in Haiti?

              • Fellowjew says:


                • jim says:

                  Looks like a Soros shill script “I hate Soros and Jews too”.

                  Pretty sure Soros not only hates Jews, he hates himself. But there are certain things about Soros that Soros shills cannot mention, no matter how hard they go on “I hate women, Jews, and Soros also”, and you are not mentioning them. I am coming back to view that you sound like a Soros shill.

                  But let us forget about Soros for a while, and see if you can commit thought crimes on women. That will establish whether you are a shill or not, whereas drumming on about Soros is merely an indicator of which shill organization.

                • Fellowjew says:


                • jim says:

                  The woman question test reveals the shills every time.

                  Not only can he not commit thought crime on women, he is unable to notice all the thought crimes in the links that I and others sent him on how to pass the shill test, unable even to disagree with those terrible thought crimes.

                • Fellowjew says:


                • jim says:

                  Not the answer to the woman question

                • The Cominator says:

                  Its funny how every prog reacts to thoughtcrimes on women as if he witnessed some indescribable eldritch lovecraftian horror that while he gets a sense he saw something horribly wrong his mind cannot describe it

                • Fellowkike says:


                • jim says:

                  If you cannot speak the truth on women, everything you say is going to be misinformation and if there is anything true in your words, it will be, as it was on the Soros issue, half truths intended to deceive by pointing away from what matters “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain” says the man behind the curtain.

                • TopKek says:

                  A moment I throughly enjoyed was a few years back when Putin called fall of the USSR “biggest geopolitical catastrophe of the century”. I hope our Caesar, once secure on throne and alter, calls the 19th Amendment of our former republic, “biggest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century”

              • Jimisjoo says:


                • jim says:

                  Take the shill test.

                  We know that there are certain topics that shills are not permitted to talk about, or even to respond to other people talking about them in order to disagree.

                  Your inability even to disagree in a way that reveals to the reader what you are disagreeing with reveals that you are typing on a computer issued by your IT department, that you are supervised, that there is an algorithm scoring response and engagement, that you are part of state sponsored organization trying to converge the alt-right to harmless irrelevance.

                  Your script is everywhere. We have seen it all before, in a hundred variations decorating it with superficial appearance, but not the actual substance, of interacting with your audience. One microphone attached to a thousand megaphones.

            • Frontier says:

              “-Lives in a big house”

              Lol. Jim knows how to get the enemy to reveal what motivates them.

              Who care’s that a rich person lives in a big house? Only a pathetic commie shill possessed by the demon of envy. Enemy detected.

            • Aidan says:

              Always amusing how supposed jew-haters are amazingly ignorant of the evil deeds of the jew who embodies every crime and misdeed that he thinks jews are guilty of

          • f6187 says:

            “Back then I could not put into words what I can so easily now: we were pumping and dumping an entire city of daughters.

            As for us: as happy as we were supposed to be, we weren’t.”

            That’s some good writing right there. Thanks for the link, which I’ve bookmarked in my Reading folder.

            • f6187 says:

              Forgot to mention the punchline: “We now have one kid and one more on the way. So game worked out pretty well for me.” Hah, nice.

  34. T. Rex Sex says:

    > There the protesters were peaceful destroying aggressive hostile capital, and the militia provoked them.

    In Kenosha, Wisconsin? There is no capital in Kenosha, Wisconsin.

    • The Cominator says:

      He is using the word capital in the sense a marxist would use it.

      • T. Rex Sex says:

        I know what capital is and I know where it is. It is in New York. It is in Charlotte, North Carolina. It is oozing along Sand Hill Road.

        Kenosha, Wisconsin? Lol.

        • The Cominator says:

          When the leftist says capital what he REALLY means is anything he thinks he can steal.

        • jim says:

          You do not have the foggiest idea what capital is.

          There is no capital in New York.

          There are leeches in New York that suck the blood of entrepreneurs in middle America.

          OK, the buildings in New York are capital, but they only of value because provide housing for the leeches, and people who live on crime, welfare, and government jobs, but when I say government jobs I repeat myself.

          They also provide housing and workspaces for the productive people who provide services for the leeches and people who live on crime and welfare, but if we got rid of the leeches and those who live on crime and welfare, those building would not be worth much. The buildings in New York unproductive, because there to service unproductive people. Capital is capital because it is productive, the archetypical form of capital, from which the name is derived, being cattle. New York is parasitic and unproductive.

          Farmland is capital, oil wells are capital, mines are capital, factories are capital. The stuff the rioters were destroying in Kenosha was capital. New York?

          If New York got nuked, no one would miss it. When Biden shut down the frackers, everyone hurts. Who would hurt if New York disappeared from the face of the Earth?

          Everyone is right now painfully discovering what the frackers were doing for them. What does New York do for me? What Biden destroyed, what the rioters destroyed, was capital. People hurt. The fracker wells were productive. New York is unproductive, therefore not capital.

          Every day I use what the frackers do for me, what the farmers do for me, what the factories do for me. What does New York do for me?

          New York is unproductive, unlike the archetypical form of capital, cattle, from which the word is derived. Capital is capital because it is economically like cattle.

          If the greenies eliminate cattle and make us eat bugs, as they plan to do, I would hurt. If the Russians eliminate New York, I would not hurt.

          A factory is like cattle, thus is capital. If the greenies eliminate factories, as they plan to do, I would hurt. When Biden shut down the frackers, it hurt me. New York is not like cattle.

        • Starman says:

          @T. Rex Sex

          “I know what capital is and I know where it is. It is in New York. It is in Charlotte, North Carolina. It is oozing along Sand Hill Road.

          Kenosha, Wisconsin? Lol.”

          Limpwristed urbanite bugman scribe detected.

          Actual capital is what Jim has accurately described. Not the fake ass FIRE “economy” of NYC (May God allow the Russians to nuke it).

          Capital is factories, farms, energy sources and businesses that sell the products of factories and farms (such as the business in Kenosha, WI that Kyle Rittenhouse was protecting).

    • jim says:

      “Capital” means “head”, means durable productive useful value, as in “head of cattle” Back in the early Aryan and early iron age period, the primary form of capital was cattle, and people would count cows a herd by counting their heads. Counting the heads of cows and sheep was how people like Abraham and Israel measured their productive wealth.

      The protesters were destroying productive forms of value, primarily cars and business buildings.

      It is a very old word.

      The word “Capitalist” is a Marxist coinage. The word “Capital” is very old indeed.

      What the Marxists call “Capitalists”, they then called “entrepreneurs”, “husbandmen,” or “merchant adventurers”.

      The word “Capitalist” is stupid and evil, a manifestation of envy, hatred, and malicious destructiveness, since the “capital” is not capital except in the hands of man who husbands it to make capital into more capital – which is not a all easy to do, hence the distinguishing characteristic of the people the word points at is entrepreneurship.

      • Kunning Drueger says:

        Jim, is the term “socialized capital” acceptable under the Rectification of Names? It is defined as the product of Neo-Liberal capture of mature and/or calcified forms of business through regulation and/or subsidy. There may be a better or more accurate term, but I’ve struggled in bar top debates separating things like social media giants and healthcare conglomerates from “purely” entrepreneurial entities like small businesses and the like. Socialized Capital is one of the Cathedral’s biggest weapons against any usurpation.

        • jim says:

          The Cathedral intrusion has gone all the way down to quite small businesses, overflowed them, and is now penetrating open source, and essentially everything.

          There are some big nominally private businesses that are quasi statal, as for example banking, education, real estate development, healthcare, and insurance, and there is a massive and ever growing state intrusion into every business – see Coyote blog for the travails of a very small business run by someone who is quite libertarian and reactionary.

          If he gets overrun and weaponized for the promotion of holiness, the only real capitalism remaining is in semi illegal activities.

      • T. Rex Sex says:

        Is usury a legitimate form of entrepreneurship?

        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          What do you mean by usury?

          • HerbR says:

            What HE undoubtedly means by “usury” is “any interest-bearing loan”. To the commie, anyone who would even think about trying to profit off of those with less stuff is an evil usurer. They should just give out free money, because they’re rich.

            • T. Rex Sex says:

              Where do you think money comes from, exactly?

              • HerbR says:

                Merely asking that question reveals your evil frame.

                “Money” is simply whatever common asset is used to keep track of wealth. It is totally irrelevant where money comes from, and it depends on what is used as money. The relevant question is where wealth comes from. Wealth comes from productive economic activity.

                Do you know what productive economic activity is?

                • T. Rex Sex says:

                  “Asking where the actually existing money comes from is evil.”
                  t. retard

                  Here, let me be even more clear. As a public service from me to the less fortunate.

                  Where do you think fiat currency comes from, exactly?

                  I’ll give you a hint: ex nihilo. It doesn’t exist until you borrow it.

                  Who are you borrowing it from?

                • HerbR says:

                  Where do you think fiat currency comes from, exactly?

                  Who cares? Stupid, irrelevant question, with intent to reframe the discussion as communist economics. We are talking about capital, not fiat currency.

                  Obviously you would like fiat currency to be the same as capital, because then government can create wealth by printing money and give it to you. That is not reality. Capital does not spring from the earth ex nihilo, it must be produced.

                  Who are you borrowing it from?

                  No one. I don’t borrow fiat, I’m far more concerned with trying to exchange the fiat that I already have for instruments whose value is not liable to suddenly and catastrophically evaporate in the future.

                • Contaminated NEET says:

                  T. Rex has a point. By my reading, the Jimian conception of usury is not kind to fractional reserve banking. It doesn’t matter if it’s fiat or solid gold, lending money you don’t have in the hope that too many of your depositors won’t come to you at the same time is a proven recipe for crisis, bank runs, bailouts, “too big to fail,” and all that crap.

                  Moldbug was right to call fractional reserve banking, which he called “maturity transformation,” essentially dishonest and harmful.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Usury can be recognized by the fact that it is indiscriminate; a usurer will seek to peddle a usurous financial instrument not just to the productive, honorable, and wise, but also to the shiftless, flakey, and foolish; in certain respects it will prefer the shiftless flakey and foolish even, so that if or when they default, they can then take them to the cleaners through debt peonage; and if this happens with a sufficient number of debtors, take all of society to the cleaners, through ‘bailouts’. That is if it is validated by the sovereign as normal in the first place.

          • T. Rex Sex says:

            As I understand it, there are a variety of forms of usury. The most well-known concerns the conversion of money from a “dead” medium of exchange to a living force. Probably any net-parasitic activity would qualify under the ancient definition.

            Does this answer your question?

            • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

              Not really.

              Do you consider lending at interest usury?

              • T. Rex Sex says:

                >The Catholic Church in medieval Europe, as well as the Reformed Churches, regarded the charging of interest at any rate as sinful (as well as charging a fee for the use of money, such as at a bureau de change).

                Do you not?

                • jim says:

                  Wikipedia lies, as usual.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  St. Thomas Aquinas covered this centuries ago.

                  Lending that facilitates valuable enterprise – especially whereby it would otherwise have not been possible – is meet and right so to do.

                  Lending that is not tied to any particular enterprise, and where the lendee is on the hook to repay, but the lender not on the hook to ensure the party they are lending too is productive, honorable, and wise – elsewise they would lose their money – that is usury.

            • jim says:

              No, that is not the ancient definition, nor the Christian definition.

              • T. Rex Sex says:

                Here’s the Wikipedia version:

                >In many historical societies including ancient Christian, Jewish, and Islamic societies, usury meant the charging of interest of any kind was considered wrong, or was made illegal.

                >Though the Roman Empire eventually allowed loans with carefully restricted interest rates, the Catholic Church in medieval Europe, as well as the Reformed Churches, regarded the charging of interest at any rate as sinful (as well as charging a fee for the use of money, such as at a bureau de change).

                That’s pretty clear-cut.

                What’s the problem?

                • jim says:

                  As usual, Wikipedia lies in the service of our enemies.

                  You will notice that Wikipedia cites no traditional Christian sources for this claim. It cites twenty first century commies, though the claim goes all the way back to nineteenth century commies.

                  if you borrow money in Dubai to finance a property, the mortgage is likely Islamic. If you tell Dubai Islamic Bank that Islam forbids interest “of any kind”, they will not be amused.

                  In Christianity, you can charge interest against a loan on property, but the debt, and the interest, follows the property, not the person.

                  Islamic banking is more restrictive than Christian banking, but it most certainly does not “forbid interest of any kind” Islamic banks are in business right now and Dubai Islamic Bank charges like a wounded bull.

                  Islamic banking tends to a legalistic interpretation of Islamic law, while Christian banking focused on the spirit of the law – and the spirit of the law is that God ordained what we now call capitalism.

                  The essential part of both Islamic and Christian banking, is that if all goes well, the loan is repaid with interest, and if things go bad, both borrower and lender have to bite it.

                  The first Islamic banker was one of Mohammed’s numerous wives. Christian banking is not around any more, but was exemplified by the Knights Templar, who among other things issued what we would now call mortgages on property.

                  The knights Templar were destroyed because they loaned a large amount of money at interest to a King, who instead of repaying them, accused them of all manner of improbable crimes and murdered them. But usury was not among the many accusations he made against them.

                  The benefit of both Islamic and Christian banking is that it gives the banker an incentive to lend to strength rather than weakness, to wisdom rather than foolishness, and to the creation of capital rather than immediate consumption.

                  You know the joke that a banker lends you an umbrella when the sun shines, and snatches it back when it rains. Under both Islamic and Christian banking, the banker gets wet.

                • T. Rex Sex says:

                  The most hated sort, and with the greatest reason, is usury, which makes a gain out of money itself, and not from the natural object of it. For money was intended to be used in exchange, but not to increase at interest. And this term interest, which means the birth of money from money, is applied to the breeding of money because the offspring resembles the parent. Wherefore of an modes of getting wealth this is the most unnatural.

                • jim says:

                  The same sources as are telling you that any interest is usury, are telling you not only that Christianity thinks that, but that Islam thinks that.

                  And, rather obviously, Islam does not think that.

                  You can get away with lying about what happened long, long, long, ago, but your sources are also lying about what is happening right now.

                  A Islamic mortgage is not usury, and no one thinks that it is, even though Dubai Islamic Bank interest charges are rather steep, while credit card payments are usury, for perfectly clear, obvious, and excellent reasons. And, back when we had Christian mortgages, they were not usury either and absolutely no one thought that they were.

                • T. Rex Sex says:

                  The source is Aristotle.

                • jim says:

                  Your frame, however, is not Aristotle’s, and you did not find the quote in Aristotle. You found the quote in someone applying a Marxist frame to Islamic and Christian laws on lending.

                • T. Rex Sex says:

                  Uh huh. So when Aristotle says something that you don’t like, you (thinking him me) call him a Marxist, and you accuse me of not really having read Aristotle.


                  In addition to having (not) read Aristotle, I’ve also (not) read Dante. Shall I dig up a quote for you? It’s (not) been a while but I seem to (not) recall something about how it isn’t usury if you charge a reasonable rate of interest.

                • jim says:

                  Probably because whether the interest rate is reasonable or not has absolutely nothing to do with whether a loan is usurious under Christian and Islamic law.

                  The question at issue in both Christian and Islamic law is who is on the hook when things go pear shaped.

                  Christian law against usury has been dead for centuries, so it is easy for commies to lie about it, but Islamic law against usury is still live, and the interest rates charged on home loans by Dubai Islamic Bank are high. Try telling their loan officers that charging interest is unIslamic.

                • Contaminated NEET says:

                  >reasonable rate of interest

                  Jim is not saying that the rate of interest that makes a loan usurious, but rather the collateral (or lack thereof).

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Interest rates are a red herring; the fundamental dynamic is the question of how each party is or is not on the hooks.

                  A usurious instrument can be marketed to anyone and everyone, because there is only upside for the patron, while the customer holds all the downside.

                • T. Rex Sex says:

                  Point acknowledged. I update my last sentence to read:

                  “It’s (not) been a while but I seem to (not) recall something about how it isn’t usury if you have collateral.”

                • jim says:

                  Probably because whether a loan is usurious or not has nothing to do with whether the borrowers has collateral.

                  Rather, the question is who is on the hook when things go pear shaped and the collateral fails to suffice, for example if a housing slump adversely affects collateral for a home loan issued by Dubai Islamic Bank.

                  It is not that adequate collateral makes a loan not usurious. It is that if a loan is not usurious, the lender has a lot more reason to think about the collateral.

                  That is what makes their loans not usurious.

                  Albeit usurious bankers are a happy to make usurious loans to people with no collateral, and if the Christian law on usury gets re-imposed, they will no longer be so happy.

                  It is easy for commies to lie about the Christian law against usury, because it has been dead for centuries, but Islamic law against usury is still live, and the loan officers of Dubai Islamic Bank pay no attention when commies tell them what their beliefs are.

                  The archetypical and ancient form of capital was capital, from which the word is derived. Capital means “head”, as in count of cattle.

                  The archetypical and ancient non usurious loan was that lender loaned the borrower some cattle, and after a certain time got back the same number of cattle, plus a few more, if things went well. And if things did not go well, he did not.

                  The archetypical usurious loan was that the lender loaned the borrower some money to throw a big party, the borrower did not understand compound interest, and the lender got the borrower.

                • T. Rex Sex says:

                  Maybe we’re talking past each other.

                  When I read Aristotle, I notice that he doesn’t say anything about who is on the hook when things go pear shaped. Instead he says something about how when you lend out 30 pieces of silver today with the expectation of getting back 33 3 days hence, that is unnatural and an offense against God.

                  Dante speaks similarly:

                  “Once more go back a little to the point,”
                  I said, “where you state usury offends
                  The divine goodness, and untie the knot.”

                  “Philosophy, to one who understands,
                  Points out — and on more than one occasion —
                  How nature gathers her entire course

                  “From divine intellect and divine art.
                  And if you pore over your Physics closely,
                  You’ll find, not many pages from the start,

                  “That, when possible, your art follows nature
                  As a pupil does his master; in effect,
                  Your art is like the grandchild of our God.

                  “From art and nature, if you will recall
                  The opening of Genesis, man is meant
                  To earn his way and further humankind.

                  “But still the usurer takes another way:
                  He scorns nature and her follower, art,
                  Because he puts his hope in something else.”

                  What is this “something else”? A kind of alchemy, perhaps? Black magic? The Devil?

                  Neither man splits hairs about whether bankers should suffer when their loans to tits-up. Rather, they call into question the very morality of term transformation. Under the rule of either an Aristotle or a Dante, the only banks would be narrow banks.

                  To be fair, however, under the rule of a Jesus Christ, bankers shall be the lords of the earth. (Matthew 24:15)

                • jim says:

                  You don’t know what term transformation is.

                  Putting you on moderation for persistently talking commie nonsense, and to defend the rectification of names. You keep randomly using terms without regard to their meaning, using them merely for their emotional affect. This adversely impacts everyone’s ability to communicate.

                  There are no Christian bankers around any more to defend themselves, but there are plenty of Islamic bankers around.

                  And their defense, which is entirely sound, is that when they lend out 30 pieces of silver, the deal does not guarantee that they will get 33.3 pieces of silver back. They share in the profits, and they share in the losses. The banker, and not just the borrower, are on the hook when things go bad.

                  This is what makes it not usury. And this is what made what the Knights Templar did not usury.

                • T. Rex Sex says:

                  Correction: Matthew 25:14.

                • T. Rex Sex says:


                • jim says:

                  Our words have our meanings, and you persistently using them with different meanings undermines our ability to communicate.

                  If you are going to argue, you need to use a shared vocabulary with your interlocutors. This discussion is unprofitable because you are trying to shift the meaning of the words that we are using underneath us, so no agreement is possible. We are talking past each other..

                • Pseudo-CHrysostom says:

                  The sticking point here is, you will have to explain *why* you think charging a price for a service rendered (interest) is usury, as other parties have already explain why *they* do not think such is what usury means, and further what they do think usury means when they say usury.

                • T. Rex Sex says:

                  [Commie bullshit deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  Your argument presupposes that the Marxist labor theory of value is true, that we agree that it is true, that Christians agree that it is true, and Christianity agrees that it is true.

                  And the reason we have been talking at cross purposes is because you will not acknowledge that not every person on planet earth agrees that a blatantly absurd theory that not even communists take seriously any more is true.

                  If you want to argue the Marxist theory of value, you are going to have to argue it. I am not going to allow you to post comments that presuppose that it is unarguably and indisputably true, and everyone knows it is true, because this leads to a waste of space as people talk at cross purposes.

                  No one ever argues the Marxist theory of value, because it is so obviously ridiculous. Instead, they always presuppose a false consensus – and presupposing a false consensus results in pointless waste of space as people talk past each other.

                  Similarly the troofers will never argue that building seven was undamaged and fell straight down on its foundations like a demolition, or that there was no commercial airliner sized and shaped entrance hole in the pentagon, and so on and so forth. They will instead assume that those things are uncontroversially agreed and universally accepted.

                • T. Rex Sex says:


                • jim says:

                  I would love to debate the labor theory of value if I could find a debating partner who was willing to acknowledge that his interlocutor disagrees with the labor theory of value.

                • T. Rex Sex says:


                • jim says:

                  You refuse to debate the labor theory of value, because you know as soon as you actually debate it, rather than arguing from the false consensus that everyone agrees it to be true, someone is going to point out it is obviously absurd and that you guys murdered something like one hundred million people on the basis of this theory, and are trying to do it all over and murder another hundred million or so.

                  But, for the record, so that when this comes up again I can link to this comment when shutting down another commie shill, I will explain the communist, libertarian, Christian, Islamic, and Dark Enlightenment positions on savings, investment, capital, usury, and entrepreneurship.

                  The Marxist position is the labor theory of value – that value is labor, and only labor is value. Saving and investment is an evil plot against the proletariat, and therefore the there is no need to apply capital to its highest and best use. For a private person to apply such judgment is just robbery and extortion, and needs to be punished. Supposedly the man who supplies the worker with tools, equipment, and materials and tells the worker what to do with them is just oppressing the worker, no different than if he was telling the worker to lick his boots. The peasant with two cows is oppressing the peasant with no cows, so we need kill his cows. The peasant who is holding back seed corn to plant in the spring is causing the famine (hence the term “kulack”, meaning fist, representing his wicked act in holding on to his seed corn), so we should set his children on fire to force him to tell us where he buried the seed corn.

                  Mao murdered everyone who knew how to make steel (because they were oppressing the masses), and the steel making facilities were destroyed, sometimes intentionally, but usually through neglect and abandonment because they fell into the hands of people who had no idea what they were. But he was not worried. Just command the peasant to labor at making steel, and labor will magically become steel.

                  Needless to say, it did not.

                  The libertarian position on savings, investment, capital, and entrepreneurship is the same as the Dark Enlightenment, Christian and Islamic position, that these are good and virtuous things, that they deserve reward in this world and will be rewarded in the next, but the libertarian position on usury differs.

                  The libertarian holds that if thrifty Bob saves, and spendthrift Carol wants to party now, and Bob and Carol freely agree that Bob will loan her some money today, and she pay him back with rather more money tomorrow, that is totally fine, because each of them is getting what they want and freely agreed to the deal. The flaw in this argument is that Carol is going to regret it when tomorrow comes.

                  The Christian position is that the saver and investor has a divinely commanded duty to put his capital to the highest and best use, which is generally that use most profitable in the long run, and that enabling Carol’s wicked and foolish behavior is not the highest and best use, because money does not beget money, because even if it is the most profitable use for Bob, it is an unprofitable use for Carol. Bob is taking advantage of Carol’s sinfulness and weakness, and enabling it.

                  Bob is entitled to his original money back, and nothing more. He is also entitled to take his original money out of Carol’s hide by disturbingly drastic means, but this must be punishment for Carol’s sinfulness and improvidence, possibly quite drastic punishment, not reward for Bob. If Carol is late paying, everyone should lose and no one should win, because if Carol is late paying, the loan should never have been made in the first place.

                  But suppose Ann wants to borrow to buy a cow, so that she can get calves from the cow and milk the cow. That is productive, while a usurious loan is unproductive. So Bob is entitled to a return for enabling the investment, and he is also entitled to be repaid. Bob is entitled to a return for enabling wise investment, for applying his capital the highest and best use.

                  But suppose the cow dies. Well that was an unwise investment, so everyone, Bob included, should lose. Sucks to be Bob. So Bob should have an ownership interest in the cow, rather than an ownership interest in Ann’s debt. If things go bad, he is not entitled to profit, or even get his original money back. Wise investment should be rewarded, unwise investment should lose you money. You are not entitled to a reward for saving and investment. You are entitled to reward for saving and wise investment. The lender has an obligation to ensure the borrower uses the money productively, and if he gets a share in the gains, should also share in the losses.

                  An arrangement where Ann pays part of the money for the cow, Bob pays the rest, and if Ann makes her payments to Bob, she eventually owns the cow, and if she does not, Bob gets the cow, is not usurious, because though money does not beget money, cows beget more cows. So Bob can have a profitable property right in the cow until Ann pays the cow off or the cow dies, but he cannot have a profitable property right in Ann or Carol.

                  The Islamic position on usury is similar to the Christian position, but more complicated and legalistic. But unless you want to listen to a boring Islamic banker go into incomprehensible boring detail, it is the same position.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Also i don’t think censure is warranted out of hand here; the idea that interest is not interest but usury is common in the discourse, and it’s not impossible for one to have simply never encountered anyone who would argue otherwise (that either they also agree that interest is not interest but usury; or, disagree that usury is a bad thing).

                  Maybe someone literally does believe that asking a price for rendering a service is usury, which would then occasion a discussion of what is meant by ‘usury’ in the first place, and what matter it is; it is valuable to know how to have conversations like that with people who might be earnest but blue-pilled; and it the response to the question of defining your terms that informs whether you can have a discussion with someone from a different background, or if you are speaking with a scripted bot.

                • jim says:

                  There are eighteen comments by T. Rex Sex on the question of capital that I allowed through, and a roughly comparable number of replies by me. In all of my replies I point out that capital is productive under a wise and competent entrepeneur, and in none of his comments does he acknowledge that I am making such a claim. In none of them does he acknowledge in any way that capital or entrepreneurship creates value, or that anyone anywhere has ever claimed that they create value.

                  Total waste of space. He was not arguing in good faith, but to change the meaning of our words underneath us.

                  In the comments that I silently deleted, which was in the end quite a lot, I do not recall how many, he had what he implied were direct quotes from me, in which he rewrote my words so that I was not claiming that capital and entrepreneurship creates value.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >The Christian position is that the saver and investor has a divinely commanded duty to put his capital to the highest and best use

                  A man who makes value doing B may not necessarily know much about doing A or C; but he may have the wisdom to recognize other men who do; and by investing them them, he then becomes able to put his capital to work in ways he would not otherwise have been able to on his own; and thus thereby, the facilitation of further growth in the power of their society.

                • T. Rex Sex says:


                • jim says:

                  I am not going to respond to this because it is just a stubborn and immovable redefinition and re-interpretation of our words so that no matter what we say, we are actually saying that communists are right.

                  The problem is that you are re-defining “usury” so that the peasant with two cows and the peasant that fails to hand over the seed corn is committing usury and he and his cows need to be killed.

                  You keep telling me that what I am “actually saying” is such and such. It is not what I am saying. It is the opposite of what I am saying. It would only be what I was saying if I agreed that communists are right, and the entire rest of the world and every human civilization throughout history was wrong.

                • T. Rex Sex says:

                  You wouldn’t recognize good faith if it slapped you across the face. I wouldn’t trust you to run the town dime store. So long.

                • jim says:

                  I gave a long and detailed definition of usury is and is not.

                  You don’t like that definition. What is yours?

                  You don’t actually tell us, rather you assume everyone already knows and already agrees, and always has.

                  I say your definition of usury means that you need to kill the cows of the peasant with two cows, then kill the peasant, that you need to pour gasoline over the children of the peasant that is holding back the seed corn and set them on fire.

                  Do you say it does not mean that? Well actually you don’t say.

                • Neofugue says:

                  > I would love to debate the labor theory of value if I could find a debating partner who was willing to acknowledge that his interlocutor disagrees with the labor theory of value

                  Ideological systems require foundational circularity by which their adherents derive conclusions from priors. In societies with high asabiyyah these starting points begin from ideas beyond mortal comprehension, often referred to as God, of whom the holy intellectuals of the Enlightenment promised to do away with. Two centuries later, we now know substituting God with “reason” did not end the necessity of first principles, merely that foundational thought shifted from the unknowable to ever more insane claims denying empirical reality. The demon-worshiper cannot acknowledge his interlocutor disagreeing with his position because it would be tantamount to denying his system; an ideology which denies itself having a leap of faith in its fundamental doctrines cannot comprehend another in disagreement as doing so would be self-refuting.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  @Jim 06:07

                  Which is quite reasonable, it is simply a matter that the reader does not see any of the silently deleted material, so it can look like an abrupt and sudden shift in the conversation, which can look concerning.

                • T. Rex Sex says:

                  Jim, I have something called dignity. You may have heard of it. It precludes me from engaging with tyrants and fools. You aren’t a fool but you’re acting as a tyrant.

                  I thank Pseudo-Chrysostem and Contaminated NEET and others for their support.

                  Whether you like it or not, Jim, regardless of whether you admit that it’s usury or immoral, it is simply a fact that when money increases at interest the entrepreneur becomes the handmaiden of the banker.

                  I expect you to stay in denial. You won’t disappoint. I don’t care.

                • jim says:

                  > it is simply a fact that when money increases at interest the entrepreneur becomes the handmaiden of the banker.

                  It is not a fact when Christian banking or Islamic banking is practiced, because the banker then has a shared interest in the success of the enterprise – whose success depends in substantial part on the wisdom, competence, and diligence of the borrower – which puts power in the hands of the borrower, and takes power away from the lender.

                  This conversation is going on and on repetitiously because you will not acknowledge that for millennia, usury has had a different meaning to the meaning that you want to impose on it – which is behavior characteristics of Marxists and progressives – changing the meaning of words in such a way that they only make sense within the Marxist mental framework, and making thoughts outside that framework inexpressible in words, and thus unthinkable in so far as thought depends on words. You oppose the rectification of names by corrupting names.

                  Bob lends money to Ann to buy a cow. Ann puts a down payment on the cow, and pays Bob every month until the debt is paid off with interest, while she gets the milk and the calves. If she misses a payment, Bob gets the cow. And if the cow has no calves, and thus no milk, and dies, Bob gets a dead cow instead of repayment of the debt with interest. Which means that Ann, not Bob, is in the driver’s seat.

                  You keep casting the Christian and Islamic position on usury as the commie position on “usury”. What the commies call “usury” is not usury. It is an excuse for killing the cows of the kulak with two cows, and then killing the kulak, because when you and commies talk of “usury”, you deny the productivity of capital and wise entrepreneurship, which denial leads to destroying capital, and destroying people who use capital wisely and productively.

                  The Christian position is that you cannot benefit from debt upon the person, but you can benefit from debt on productive property used productively. The Islamic position is shared interest in success, and shared cost of failure, which amounts to the same thing, and the same thing as the game theoretic Dark Enlightenment position on usury – that the rules on debt must be such that the banker does not have an interest in trapping the unwise and short sighted borrower in debt that turns out to be a bad idea, as for example almost all college loans, and all credit card debt that somehow turns into long term debt.

                • T. Rex Sex says:

                  Yes, you keep restating your positions. I know that. It’s obvious.

                  What isn’t obvious is why you keep restating “the” alleged biblical position on usury without actually bothering to quote the Bible. In fact I think you’ve only quoted a Dubai bank established in 1975. But it’s funnier than that, because the bank alleges itself to be the first truly Islamic bank in the 1200-year history of Islam. I know very little about Islam, but if Musselmen had bankers before 1975 I suspect they (the bankers) would be quite surprised to learn of this.

                  Whereas I quoted the Bible once (semi-ironically) and Aristotle and Dante in earnest. Quite a difference.

                  Here’s yet another source, the second-least pozzed Christian church speaking English:

                  >Usury sometimes has more than one meaning. In biblical English it often means simply charging interest on a loan. At other times it implies an unduly high rate of interest. Under the law of Moses, Israel was forbidden to charge usury, as in Ex. 22:25; Lev. 25:35–38; Deut. 23:19–21; Neh. 5:1–13; Ezek. 18:8; 22:12. The restriction, however, seems to be when lending to a fellow church member. There is no clear restriction against charges for loans to others. Jesus gives some credence to interest charges in Matt. 25:14–30; Luke 19:12–27. Latter-day revelation does not contain restrictions against interest charges.

                  Jesus “lends” some credence to interest, but I don’t see any mention of collateral. Just like Aristotle and Dante? Hmm…

                  Anyway I don’t really care about this. I literally believe that money increasing at interest is metaphysically evil and a violation of natural law on par or worse than murder. But I know you don’t care about that so I’ll engage you on your terms.

                  Whether you call them capitalists or entrepreneurs or something else, you consistently glorify producers of useful things. WHAT DO INTEREST-CHARGING MONEYLENDERS PRODUCE?

                • jim says:

                  > What isn’t obvious is why you keep restating “the” alleged biblical position on usury without actually bothering to quote the Bible.

                  I have never stated the biblical position on usury.

                  The bible does not take a clear position on usury. What it does say when it goes into specifics is that leases have to have a terminal date, which is not all that helpful, though it addresses some edge cases, but not others.

                  The Christians, finding themselves in power, had to get deep into the details and specifics that the bible is unclear about, had to come up with a clear and coherent position on usury that gave effect to the spirit of the law, the spirit of the law being that usury is bad, but productive use of capital and what we would now call wise entrepreneurship is good.

                  And there is obviously some tension between the biblical position on usury (against) and the biblical position on savings, investment, and the wise application of capital, what we would now call capitalism (for).

                  The Christian position on usury is not the biblical position. It is the customary and traditional Christian interpretation and application of the spirit and intent of the biblical position. And what they came up with has the effect, from the game theoretic perspective of the Dark Enlightenment, that interest bearing loans whose terms incentivize duplicitous manipulative conduct by the lender and foolish self destructive conduct by the borrower are usury, while interest bearing loans whose terms give both parties an incentive for the wise and productive use of capital are good. Which is much the same as what Islam came up with, though the Islamic rationale is more legalistic, and emphasizes the lenders must bear risk in the event that the loan turns out bad for the borrower, while the Christian rationale emphasizes that the interest payments must arise from benefits that continue to be enjoyed by the borrower. Christians focus on the case the loan turns out good for the borrower, while Mohammedans focus on the case the loan turns out bad for the borrower.

                  Thus resolving the biblical tension between the biblical position capitalism good, and the biblical position usury bad.

                  Which tension the commies resolved as capital bad, investment bad, profit bad, wise application of capitals is a con game to rob the poor, kill the cows of the peasant with two cows, then kill the peasant, and the Christians resolved with a more balanced and complex position.

                  Undoubted and obviously the commie interpretation of those biblical fragments (kill the cows, then kill the peasant) makes more sense and is more logically consistent if you take just the words of the bible on usury in isolation and then apply the prohibition against usury to the maximum possible extent, but then you are throwing the rest of the bible into a ditch and running off with one fragment snatched from its broader context.

                  > The bank alleges itself to be the first truly Islamic bank in the 1200-year history of Islam.

                  Does it? Give me a link. There seem to be a great big pile of Islamic bankers around right now, who claim to have precedent running right back to one of the wives of Mohammed.

                  And regardless of what Islam has been up to, the Knights Templar were Christian bankers a very long time ago.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >I literally believe that money increasing at interest is metaphysically evil and a violation of natural law on par or worse than murder.

                  The devil in the details here, is that ‘money’ can be a slippery category, and has a tendency to proliferate, even if the nominal supply of a money ‘on paper’ is remaining the same.

                  If we can speak of an inherent metaphysical issue with a given financial apparatus, it is situations where there are more liabilities on paper than there is liquidity on paper to extinguish them. Such states of affairs often – though not necessarily – arise from unbacked lending (which is often euphemistically referred to as ‘fractional reserve’ lending; such reserves often being very spare fractions indeed), which are operations of alchemy: the creation of something where before there was nothing. Or, under the frame where moneys are understood as representations of potency, it is a situation where a party is creating a signal of potency – with the desserts attendant thereto – absent a reality of potency.

                  The Christian position on financial instrumentation in general, and lending in particular, generally resolves this tension by having much of the liability simply vanish in case of catastrophe (eg, lender beware). The judaic approach to finance tends to be more preoccupied with making liabilities stick no matter what, come hell or high water; which not too uncommonly now and then sets off chains of dominoes that lead to hell or high water, for aforementioned reasons.

                • T. Rex Sex says:

                  Thanks for your intelligent reply, Jim. However,

                  Whether you call them capitalists or entrepreneurs or something else, you consistently glorify producers of useful things.


                • jim says:

                  Unresponsive and repetitious, and this is the last time I will allow something like this through. We have been over this again and again and again. Waste of space.

                  The core of the Christian position on legitimately lending money on interest is that you can only charge interest if you are producing some real value.

                  Once again, for the umpteenth time, and for the last time that I will tell it to you, I tell the story of Ann and Bob

                  Bob lends Ann money to buy a cow. Until the cow is paid off with interest, he owns the cow, but as long as Ann is making payments, she has a right to use the cow. If Ann does not make payments. he gets the cow back, but then Ann has no obligation to pay him anything further. While Ann is making payments, she gets the calves and the milk. If the cow is productive, he eventually gets his money back with interest. A Muslim would say this is not usury, because if the cow has no calves and therefore does not produce milk, Bob gets a barren, sick, or dead cow back, he shares the risk with Ann. A Christian says he is entitled to his payments with interest while the cow is productive, because the cow, which Bob ultimately owns until paid off, but Ann has a right to use while she is paying it off, is producing calves and milk.

                  What benefit is Bob producing you ask? He paid part of the cost of the cow, it is his cow until paid off, and and his cow is producing.

                  This gives the lender a reason to ensure that the money he loans is used productively, since as a Christian would focus on, he shares in the benefits of it being used productively, and as a Mohammedan would focus on, the costs of it being used unproductively. The lender must ensure that his capital is put to productive use, and must lend to borrowers who put it to productive use. There is the value that the money lender is producing, when constrained to make loans under Mohammedan or Christian law.

                  The money lender produces value because his capital is producing value, and because his wisdom is attempting to ensure it is loaned to people who will produce value with his capital.

                  Under the Jewish rules, if he lends it to an idiot, he gets to own the idiot. Under Christian and Muslim law, if he lends to an idiot, he gets to own the fruits of idiocy.

                • T. Rex Sex says:


                • jim says:

                  “Hail fellow reactionary”, says Trotsky

                • T. Rex Sex says:

                  It’s only repetitious because you repeatedly avoid the question.


                • jim says:

                  For the umpteenth time you asked what value Bob, the money lender, is producing to deserve those interest payments.

                  And, for the umpteenth time, I answered. In the example of Bob making a loan to Ann on Christian terms, he is producing calves and milk. He is also applying, or at least intends to apply, and is trying to apply, his capital to its highest and best use, to a use that will give Ann reason to continue making payments, payments that she has no obligation to make if she chooses to stop using Bob’s cow – thus Bob is deploying both his capital, and his best judgment on the productive use of that capital, that best use being in the example, a cow, to be owned by Bob until Ann pays it off, and managed by Ann.

                  If you don’t like the answer, try a different question, or explain what is wrong with that answer. Instead of asking yet again a question that presupposes that the best thing to do is kill the cows of the kulack with two cows, then kill the kulak and that all Christians agree with this and always have agreed.

                  You are not asking questions, nor making arguments – your payload is not the question, but the presupposed fake consensus on which the supposed question or supposed argument rests.

                  Everything you say presupposes that capital is unproductive, that judgement on the best application of capital is unproductive, and that we and Christians and everyone else agrees that it is unproductive. Which leads to the conclusion that it was fine to burn Kenosha, and that the best way to help the peasant with no cows is to kill the cows of the peasant with two cows, then kill that peasant.

                  And I am just not going to allow anything further through that presupposes a fake consensus on terror, destruction and mass murder, nor anything more that presupposes that it was a good and virtuous thing, to which all right thinking Christians agree, to burn Kenosha.

          • T. Rex Sex says:

            >And if you lend money to buy a house in the middle of a housing boom, you collect interest on the mortgage, but then there is a housing slump, the mortgagor returns the house in good order and condition, but in the middle of housing slump, the mortgagee is sol under the old Christian laws.

            What is sol?

            • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

              ‘shit out of luck’, probably

            • jim says:

              “sol” means “$#!% out of luck”.

              The lender shares the ups with the borrower, and under the old Christian rules, is required to share the downs, in order that interest bearing loans are loaned to create productive assets, create capital, rather than made to trap foolish borrowers.

  35. Prince Charming says:

    I think the problem with judging people’s supposed motives is that we are starting in media res, and that this is a war. Everybody has a lot of very good grievances, and many very good instincts. Is the instinct of the antifa foot soldier to fight the patriarchy better or worse than the instinct of the southern boy who enlists to drone weddings in Peshawar? I think they’re both shit, but the virtue of soldiers is valiance, not wisdom.

    I have never mingled with people who made it their business to amass power for themselves, such as your pinko friends of yesteryear. But you haven’t changed, Jim. You are still a genius, and you still want to amass power and wield it. And you don’t understand the little people, who are not capable of power, and want to do the best they can with the limited human capital they possess. You don’t understand the people who want to be good, and see the destruction of the Black society, and correctly conclude that it is the White man’s fault, and want to contribute by challenging racism where they see it. Nor do you understand the people who you bullied in school, and made them into card-carrying members of the coalition of the fringes. They have a very limited view, and their thoughts are not your thoughts, but neither are they their converse.

    • jim says:

      Only one of the people who attacked Kylie was black. Maybe he was a hero who had legitimate grievance against white society, and was manipulated and aimed at the wrong target.

      But the rest of them were priestly Jews, born and raised with a silver spoon in their mouths, raised to be members of the high priestly elite, who horribly failed out of that elite and dropped to the bottom.

      It is safe to diagnose them as motivated by envy.

      You are right that I want power and always have. But what I want is not mere power itself, but to make a mark that lasts forever. Destruction makes a mark, but that mark is always swiftly erased by the sands of time. Only construction can make a lasting mark.

    • HerbR says:

      the instinct of the southern boy who enlists to drone weddings in Peshawar

      You talk like a fag, and your shit’s all retarded.

      I’m fairly confident that “Prince Charming” is Communist Revolutionary under a new alt.

      • jim says:

        Fits. Communist Revolutionary was obviously someone who failed out of the priestly class.

        • The Cominator says:

          Maybe I’m wrong but its not him, Communist Revolutionary WAS a former bureaucrat and he could not stop repeating himself on the need for the state to destroy the dastardly restaurant owner class (yes for those who weren’t here THAT was his obsession, for all I know he knew Anthony Fauci and the other lockdown kingpins since his platform eerily resembled lockdowns) he couldn’t shutup about it and he would invent bizarre “facts” like that poor white people blew all their excess money on eating out (drinking out they do sometimes but never eating out, not even the fatties).

          Prince Charming may be many things… but he is not that.

      • HerbR says:

        Looking more closely at the post history, I’m not so sure anymore. CR resolutely avoided any discussion of the red pill, while PC does not.

        But I’m getting a lot of the same old-school Marxist vibe. Hates progressivism, but only because it outcompeted “classical” Marxism.

        • Tityrus says:

          Prince Charming is just trying to balance out the tone that sometimes comes up here of excessively selfsure Pharasaical moral condemnation. Not balancing that out is how you get people like The Cominator.

          • HerbR says:

            No, I’m not seeing that. He gives off red flags in almost every post like I give off gas on fajita night.

            Any of us, any time, can go virtually any other place in the world for “balance”, including turning on the TV for 20 seconds or opening a single page of a newspaper. There is not and never has been any need for such “balance” here, and having one or two people like the Cominator isn’t a negative outcome.

            • jim says:

              He has real understanding of our ideas and our frame, and is allowed to express them, therefore does not have HR looking over his shoulder. He is writing this in private on his own computer, while Communist Revolutionary was obviously writing stuff under supervision, and Communist Revolutionary’s output was obviously graded by an algorithm that was intended to measure engagement.

              And he has a point, in that the black man who attacked Kyle might, for all we know, have been motivated by misplaced heroic impulses – but it is obvious what motivated the rest of them.

              I smell the smell of someone who failed out of the priesthood, which might explain his sympathy for such characters.

              • Prince Charming says:

                That you can shoot a into a crowd of mostly peaceful protestors, and hit these three ghastly characters seemingly at random gives everyone a pause. I don’t imagine anyone has sympathy for them. But this post talks about the peaceful protestors in general, and my comment was talking about peaceful protestors in general.

                If the objective is to know the enemy, are these three represenative of the whole mob, is the whole mob pederast Jews? No, it is not, plenty of impressionable young men who think they are doing the right thing. Normies. And plenty of peole just doing it for the lulz. Almost none of them fit the machiavellian psych profile of elite White string pullers.

                I am flattered you think I was ever anywhere near priesthood, Jim.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >plenty of impressionable young men who think they are doing the right thing. Normies.

                  Group violence is fun. Going out with the boys on a raid to fuck shit up on the other side of the hill speaks deeply to human social needs.

                  Their reason for rioting is rioting itself. An antifa provocateur shows up to milling crowds of nogs, throws a brick through a window in the vicinity, and it’s off to the races.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “who think they are doing the right thing.

                  Do they?

                  “And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.”

                  After 2020 and years of outrages I’d say we’re all out of cheeks.

                  I have way more real sympathy for the poor blacks who take the opportunity to loot but aren’t really there to destroy.

                • Contaminated NEET says:

                  >and my comment was talking about peaceful protestors in general.

                  Bullshit, PC. Pure and obvious bullshit. You were talking about the “valiance” of the “antifa footsoldier” in a “war” and his legitimate grievances. You were actually making a reasonable point: these people do display some genuine virtues even if they’re on the wrong side. Don’t puss out and claim you were only talking about “peaceful protestors” and you deplore all political violence. It’s an obvious lie, and it’s not necessary here.

                • Prince Charming says:

                  @The Cominator

                  Yes, they do.

                  They are told, and they see, that mostly peaceful protests are high status, that the sovereign, the priesthood, the state religion, everybody who is anybody agrees that what they do is holy, healthy, necessary. What, you disagree with the Lightbringer?

                  So they believe it. And how could they not, what exactly do you want them to believe, and how are they supposed to discover it? It is our fault that we have allowed their professors at the pulpit, our fault they went to the schools for 15 years, our fault that the most persuasive version of our story that they ever heard was

                • Prince Charming says:

                  … some conservative controlled opposition guy (I really don’t know who these people listen to these days).

                  @ NEET

                  I was talking in general because Jim is talking in general. I do think that we ought to respect the enmy’s fallen, and I think pretending antifa are pantsies and not veteran fighters is delusional, but at the same time if these three guys are representative of the left or even just the mob, then both Jim and I are widely off the mark.

                • Prince Charming says:


                  “Peaceful protestor” is a propaganda term used by cathedral media for color revolutionaries and rioters. It should not been read to imply that their purpose is protest, or that they are peaceful. They burn cities, murder people, and overthrow governments.

                • Contaminated NEET says:

                  >“Peaceful protestor” is a propaganda term used by cathedral media for color revolutionaries and rioters. It should not been read to imply that their purpose is protest, or that they are peaceful.

                  Fair enough, PC. I misread your meaning.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >pretending antifa are pantsies and not veteran fighters is delusional

                  They are violent, yes; but fold in the face of violence.

                  Without their minders in the police there to protect them, easily routed.

                • jim says:

                  > is the whole mob pederast Jews?

                  Most of them are something of that sort..

                  Broken, wicked people. What do you expect from an ideology that valorizes the worst in people?

                • Pooch says:

                  The mob was your typical urban Democrat voter ie bioleninist trash. The people Kyle shot were a good representative sample. Blacks, browns, and underclass jews.

                • jim says:

                  Kyle did not shoot any blacks or browns.

                  And the people he shot were not so much underclass as horribly failed overclass.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Kyle didn’t shoot any black people. I thought only the worst of NPC progs believed he did…

                • Pooch says:

                  He shot at a nig and missed. There were plenty of nigs in the mob smashing cars.

                • Mike in Boston says:

                  An antifa provocateur shows up to milling crowds of nogs, throws a brick through a window in the vicinity, and it’s off to the races.

                  Exactly this was happening in 1917. The establishment has memorialized Lenin’s political theory wank, but conveniently forgotten that he used to harangue the crowd in front of, in one documented example, a watch shop, declaring, how the owner of the shop was a capitalist oppressor, and should be expropriated. The mob would then loot the shop.

                  Even the “nogs” part of the analogy holds up if one accepts “Afanasy Fet”‘s assertion that Russians are Negroes:

                  Negroes don’t like to work, demanding payouts from the government, Russians don’t like to work, missing the days when they could get payouts from the government.

                  Negroes like to riot, so do Russians.

                  Most Negro adult males have been to prison at least once, most Russian adult males have been to prison too.

                  Negroes like to wear leather jackets and huge golden chains, Russians do too.

                  When a Negro gets some money, he buys the biggest ugliest SUV he can find, so does a Russian.

                  The most popular Negro style of music is gangsta rap, “tough” criminals singing about their crimes and women, the most popular Russian style of music is blatnoy shanson, “tough” criminals singing about their crimes and women.

                • Neofugue says:

                  > Even the “nogs” part of the analogy holds up if one accepts “Afanasy Fet”‘s assertion that Russians are Negroes

                  There are significant class and ethnic divisions among the Rus. My Russian friends are embarrassed by their lower-caste brethren, often getting upset at the mere mention of them.

                  The Rus consisted of Scandinavian elites ruling over a Slavic population; Vladimir the Great, himself a Viking, facilitated the formation of the Varangian Guard. As a result of the Tatar Yoke, the Rus were split along three ethnic-political divisions, the Russians in the North led by the elites who survived the Mongols, the Belorussians in the West under the suzerainty of the Poles, and the Ukrainians in the South under Tatar and then Ottoman rule.

                  Serfs should have been economically emancipated from their farms for the purpose of industrialization but not artificially-lifted of their social status. Class distinctions are just as present as racial ones.

                • Pooch says:

                  Kyle did not shoot any blacks or browns.

                  He shot 2 rounds at a nigger and missed as the nigger’s boot hit his face.

                • pyrrhus says:

                  “seemingly randomly”? Nothing of the kind..The shots were aimed and very accurately aimed…Not that I would miss most of those in the crowd if they had been hit accidentally…

                • HerbR says:

                  If the objective is to know the enemy

                  Know, not sympathize with. Are you conflating the two accidentally, or on purpose?

                  are these three represenative of the whole mob, is the whole mob pederast Jews? No, it is not, plenty of impressionable young men who think they are doing the right thing.

                  Antifa is mostly middle-class white and jew, probably more jew than white, and their legal defense and financial support is almost certainly predominantly jew. Obviously the entire “mob” is more heterogeneous than that, but that’s just playing subversive word games. The agitators (antifa), animated by evil intentions, egg on the rioters and looters (mostly niggers) who don’t need much egging on and are animated mostly by animal instinct, as the other PC says.

                  It is not necessary to try to perceive evil through evil’s own eyes, or to understand evil through evil’s own cognitive processes. That is definitely not what Sun Tzu meant. It is quite effective and much more efficient to understand them through the metaphors of Satan and the Seven Deadly Sins, especially envy – it is a highly reliable predictor of their overall behavior, strategy and tactics.

                • Aidan says:

                  “No, it is not, plenty of impressionable young men who think they are doing the right thing.”

                  Nah. The people who are out to fill social needs go out during the daytime, take their selfies for instagram, and leave before the sun goes down. The people who are out there at night all need to be shot- every last one of them.

                  Like others have said, antifa is composed of the dropout flunkies of the actual elite. A meth-addicted boyfucking antifa man will have a brother or sister who went to Georgetown, Harvard, and so on, and works for the state like their parents.

                  Your sympathy for these people is either disturbing or misguided. I know them. I went to school with them. They fail to receive jobs in the elite like the rest of their families, so they live a holy boho lifestyle of polyamory with fat ugly chicks, drug use, and petty crime, subsidized by Soros NGOs that their family puts them in touch with. I am friends with them on my normie social media, which keeps my finger in the wind of the holiness spiral. They all need to be slaughtered like animals. They are the Robespierres, the Barebones, the dumb degenerate successors to the moderate leftists.

          • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

            The Cominator did nothing wrong. The Cominator does nothing wrong. Quit being a fag. Yeah, he might be a little trigger happy, but if Jim manages to pull a Charles II, we end up with the same problem in just a couple hundred years. Charles II did a lot of things right, but letting the Puritans escape was not one of them. He should have had them all killed and had Harvard and Yale sacked, burned, and razed. Oops.

            The Inquisition is for after the purges. Once they are over, we can be pleasant, firm, and restrained. Until then, we let Saint Breivik guide us and we cut down the tree of leftism, dug up its roots, burn them, and then salt the earth it grew in. Then we can fall back to occasional weeding. They all need to go, and it is not as if we are going to be killing the cream of the crop. We are talking about the male counterparts of AOC, here, not Feynman. It is not as if their deatha are going to be any great loss.

            • Tityrus says:

              > We are talking about the male counterparts of AOC, here, not Feynman. It is not as if their deatha are going to be any great loss.

              If their deaths are no great loss then their lives are no great danger. jim assures us that most of the elite is now composed of the stupid evil, and the smart evil for the most part have one foot in the grave. So the stupid evil can just become slaves. Problem solved.

              The “male counterparts of AOC” are simply not a dangerous people. All you have to do is keep them away from power and they can live perfectly fine productive lives.

              • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                This is somewhat analogous to saying ‘there was no big problem with importing bantu serfs to america, because they could never seriously challenge the saxons’.

                But there is a big problem with it, because they are ever-present schelling points for subversion to so much more easily coalesce around; as we have seen.

                • The Cominator says:

                  YES! THIS! Finally someone else and probably a more intelligent poster than me who gets it the way i do with a better summation than i could perhaps have made…

                  And as i repeat history shows that this is what happens.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Yes, this is pretty much my reasoning for killing them. If they live, others can cohere around them. God forbid we keep slaves long enough that Progressivism survives among them like Voodoo did. If they are dead and gone, and all their ideas are locked away under Inquisitorial Seal, no one and nothing to cohere around.

                • Aidan says:

                  There are always poor and miserable people who are schelling points for subversion should a rival elite try to play HLvM.

                  Bantu serfs was a far lesser problem than importing Puritans to America. The problem with Bantu serfs is that their labor depended on the profitability of cotton; everybody knew that they would eventually have nothing to do. And indeed, when slavery was abolished, a full quarter of them starved to death, though history chooses to sweep that under the rug.

                  Under Jim Crow, a lot of them found something productive to do, and those who could not just up and died. If it were not the blacks, Harvard would have holiness-spiraled over something else.

                  Even just turning Antifa loose, most of them would be unable to find something productive to do, and just die.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >it is theoretically possible for a man with one arm amputated to win in a fight; therefore, there is no problem in giving yourself and living with disabilities

                  But maybe i’d rather have two arms?

                  I do not find such sorts of argument especially attractive, im sure you understand.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >it is theoretically possible for a man with one arm amputated to win in a fight; therefore, there is no problem in giving yourself and living with disabilities

                  Perhaps i’d rather have two arms though.

                  I do not find such lines of argument especially persuasive, im sure you understand.

                • Anonymous BTC boy says:

                  Repeating the most important parts of Aidan’s response.

                  Bantu serfs was a far lesser problem than importing Puritans to America.

                  If it were not the blacks, Harvard would have holiness-spiraled over something else.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  A. there are problems with it irrespective of harvard

                  B. there is, in fact, no equivalency in terms of propensity of things for subversive signaling feed-back loops; some things being more given than others

                  C. harvardians are not the only people and or won’t be the last people given to such kinds of behavior, which again ties back to B (and also A)

                • Aidan says:

                  I am not saying that importing bantu slaves was not a problem- it was, and there’s no way to spin it as a positive for civilization on this continent. But they are here, and removing them would not solve any problems, the way removing jews would not solve any problems. Removing the priesthood, setting up a state church and an inquisition, would solve a lot of problems.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  The american anglo has a curious relationship with that body of southrons that, generations ago, were foisted upon him. There is a broad sense of, even amongst those that rather dislike them, that they are ‘stuck with them’ – must stick with them, even. A certain mental box of assumptions that, by long ingrained habit, they can not see themselves stepping outside of. ‘Normalcy bias’, you might even say.

                  Removing the priesthood, setting up a state church and an inquisition, would solve a lot of problems. Removing them, jews, aliens in general, which necessarily become subversive in alien societies, also solves a lot of problems. There is no mutual exclusion.

                • G.T. Chesterton says:

                  But they are here, and removing them would not solve any problems

                  Dropping violent crime by over 50% would get Caesar reelected at least one more term.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  And my original point is that we need to make sure that the memetic descendants of the Puritans are completely removed from the burden of existence. The reason that the Puritans were able to be imported was that they were allowed to live. I propose that we prevent their importation by any other place in the world by killing off the worst and preventing the rest from traveling. When we start retiring people–actually retiring, not those who are “retiring”–make an ankle monitor a requirement for receiving their pensions.

                • jim says:

                  Yes we do, but we don’t want to kill Havel’s greengrocer, we don’t want to kill late converts, and everyone is going to tell us that they are Havel’s Greengrocer, or that they used to believe in the old official faith, but have seen the light, and have converted totally and completely to the now official faith.

                  And then pretty soon some of these converts are going to explain that they not only support the now official faith, but that their version of it is even holier than our version.

                  The Spanish inquisition dealt with this problem successfully. It prosecuted about one or two hundred thousand people over three centuries, and executed about three to five thousand over three centuries, which works out as about five hundred a year prosecuted, and about a dozen a year executed.

                  This seems to have been effective, and seems to me about right, and it is a fair bit less than you and The Cominator propose.

                  What happens is that the enemy faith continues underground, but as long as it is low status, unprofitable, and has to stay underground, it slowly fades away.

                  Steady pressure, rather than unsustainably extreme pressure, is how you eradicate the enemy faith. And/or you can converge it. The Chinese are now industriously knocking down old mosques, and building new, epcotized mosques, taking a leaf out of the Cathedral approach to Christianity, with its epcotized strip mall “Jesus Jesus I love Jesus” churches.

                  Halloween in England was a druidic demon worship festival epcotized by the Christian Church.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Recent history of leftism says you are wrong. Were really a lot safer if we minecraft delete 30 million or so leftists…

                  Its not like they dont have it coming. The greengrocer defense among merchant types should generally be believed perhaps, but priests except the minority of right wing dissidents should not be able to plead greengrocer.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  30 million in one go is an absurd number, but then again so is a dozen a year. The Reconquista was a pretty bloody affair, and they had expelled all of the recognizable Moors, then instituted a requirement that any state or quasi-state job be filled with someone who could prove pure Spanish blood or fake it. That is the context in which they executed a dozen a year; they had just finished a centuries long war to drive out the invaders.

                  The priesthood needs to get smashed. Probably not even a million people need go the way of The Cominator, but there are a damned sight more than 12 a year that need it. Furthermore, I keep saying that I am not going after Havel’s Greengrocer, because I would target the leadership almost exclusively. Get most of the intelligence agencies and law enforcement heads (CIA, NSA, DOJ, FBI, ATF, etc), the worst of the bureaucrats (FDA, CDC, etc.), and then do a wipe of the boards of the Ivy League and Congress. Run some social network analysis to find anyone you missed, and then you are done. You never need to target Havel’s Greengrocer, because you are zapping the “elite” true believers.

              • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                If they can produce a surplus worth keeping them alive, then I suppose slavery is an acceptable substitute. That said, slavery sounds like my position with a prettier face on it. Labor is not worth all that much these days, so you are not exactly fulfilling a vital need. All that happens is that the men are going to fail to reproduce and the women are going to become property, which is just the Thundercock Plan with extra steps and the inconvenient side effect of keeping your greatest enemies near you instead of safely in the ground.

                I am not opposed to slavery, per se, but it is a moral hazard and I do not see the utility in it. It does lower the status of leftism, but we want to kill Progressivism the same way that Arianism was killed. By killing all the people who harbor an idea, you effectively kill that idea. The Enlightenment released demons that had been suppressed for hundreds or thousands of years. To seal those demons away, you have to kill all of the people who worship them. Harvard delenda est.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  What is the recidivism rate of a corpse?

                • The Cominator says:

                  Large scale slavery was also never good long term even purely economically for societies that practiced it.

              • Pooch says:

                jim assures us that most of the elite is now composed of the stupid evil, and the smart evil for the most part have one foot in the grave.

                I think Jim is skipping a generation. I see the GenX non-affirmative action elite as still somewhat talented and smart. The millennial elite seems to be where the drop into midwittery is in my estimation.

                • jim says:

                  The GenX non affirmative action elite is somewhat talented and smart, but excludes the very smart.

                  The millenial non affirmative action elite are midwits. If you are one of the very smart, they all look scarcely distinguishable, all look like midwits, but the GenX elite are smarter midwits.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Gen X is a waste of a generation, typified by the humor of South Park. Irreverent, mocking, and without any belief in anything. Millenials are a reaction to Gen X’s complete meaningless lives. The total lack of faith in anything led the Millenials to embrace extreme faiths in all directions.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Speaking in generalities.

                  Millenials were subject somehow to more successful brainwashing techniques. Cynicism is based and Gen X is the least bad generation of the century. South Park was great (other than some of the earlier fag stuff which was voluntary) until they decided to go leftist and woke probably for similar reasons Zuckerberg suddenly decided to. I don’t think it was voluntary in their case.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Bullshit that either cynicism or Gen X is based. The greatest contribution to the arts Gen X had to offer was when whiny, faggy pussy Kurt Cobain suck-started a shotgun and painted the ceiling with his brains. Gen X is lazy, pathetic, and cynical and believe in nothing–which left them wide open to leftist attack.

                  Cynics are just people too cowardly to make a moral stand. The Boomers suck for what they did, but they at least managed to have an impact. Gen X did fuck all but spawn and influence the Millenial generation. When your claim to fame is a shitty singer who killed himself rather than face life, a low effort cartoon, and creating the worst generation, bar none, that has existed in America, you cannot be called based. They are a generation of pathetic, cowardly losers that achieved nothing, and hold nothing sacred.

                  The South Park treatment of Chef’s voice actor says all that need to be said about them. They were so horrified that someone had a moral stand on anything–no matter how ridiculous you consider it–that they publicly shattered ties and killed the character in the most humiliating and permanent way possible. Gen X have earned the fate they will recieve: to be forgotten, to have left no impact, and to have achieved nothing.

                  In short, if you are a Millenial and despise what our generation became, thank a Gen Xer.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Oh their music sucked yeah. I don’t like Boomers but their music was much much much better.

                  Kurt Cobain killing himself was a tragedy because if he didn’t do it at the height of his popularity people would have realized that he sucked and that grunge sucked.

                  “X did fuck all but spawn and influence the Millenial generation”

                  They’ve never really had all that much power. And the ones who have become powerful were specifically chosen for stupidity and fanaticism. I still maintain that broadly speaking Gen Xers are the most sane generation around today by far and contributed the least to our problems. They did ruin music, but it would have been DELIBERATELY ruined anyway and if it wasn’t deliberately bad it would have been somewhat fixed by now.

                  Cynics can take moral stands, cynicism is more about having low trust in everything which right now is a good way to be. If the NPCs were cynical they would not be NPCs.

                • HerbR says:

                  Millennials mostly have Boomer parents, not Gen-X parents, so the latter really cannot be faulted for the problems with the Millennial generation.

                  I do find Gen-X’s nihilistic cynicism to be grating, though. It’s not so much the cynicism per se, but the way they deliver said cynicism as if it is actually profound social commentary. Boomers are the blue pill, Gen-Xers are the black pill.

                  As for South Park, while their disgusting fag antics were mostly forgivable – after all, it’s an accurate portrayal of the fag lifestyle, which the lavender mafia tries hard to cover up – what’s not forgivable is how they set the debate on immigration back a full two decades by reducing the entire issue to one idiotically-uttered phrase (“they took our jerbs”).

                  Indiscriminate cynicism on every issue is not much better than the NPC gullibility that South Park constantly satirizes. In both cases you’re beholden to someone else’s memeplex and will end up believing in nonsense.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “Indiscriminate cynicism on every issue is not much better than the NPC gullibility”

                  As a pretty indiscriminate cynic myself I think its much much better.

                  One reason the Covid scam never fooled me is it had to pass my cynicism filter as every government media narrative did and once I saw the Korean data it confirmed my suspicions immediately. I could then proceed with absolute certainty that it was a scam no matter how many people even some with higher IQs than me but with residual foolish trust and idealism were taken in with it and were calling me a sperg idiot etc.

                  Teaching the masses to be cynical may not work for any ruling regime (I believe Spandrell has gone over this topic), but the top elite should totally exclude anyone who isn’t generally cynical (but it should exclude psychopaths and cowards as well, and cynics tend to be more cowardly… but its not universal and the elite are few). Idealism is akin to the blue pill and akin to utopian leftism and idealistic people in power are very dangerous. LBJ the psychopathic crook would never have been possible without the fanatical idealistic moron Woodrow Wilson the father of the Cathedral.

                • HerbR says:

                  As a pretty indiscriminate cynic myself I think its much much better.

                  Bottomless cynicism is a philosophy for the atomized weirdo, with no family, few friends and many enemies, living under defect-defect equilibrium and unable to escape the crab bucket.

                  I mean no offense, just stating a simple fact. A healthy mix of cynicism and optimism is called pragmatism or realism. Absolute cynics can’t produce anything of lasting value, because they always assume it will be corrupted or stolen or fail in some other way, so why bother?

                  Cynics are decent wage-earners but lousy merchants, worse priests, and utterly worthless as warriors. Merchants (i.e. entrepreneurs) always have to be looking at the upside, priests must inspire others to hope, and warriors need to have absolute trust in each other. The best life that a hopeless cynic can aspire to is to be left alone to play vidya, watch porn and maybe bang the occasional whore.

                  Jim is cynical about many things, but he is not a cynic, or else he wouldn’t be dedicating his twilight years to inventing an entirely new blockchain-based internet and economic model that he hopes will save civilization. Aidan and Wulfgar and all those guys talk tough, but it’s evident that they all place a high premium on community and brotherhood, and if the mob is about to descend on your neighborhood then you can rest assured they’ll be the ones putting up barricades and handing out rifles. I don’t know any of these people personally, but they show a sense of purpose, have a reason to keep on living.

                  Yes, you were right about the coof being a big nothingburger. So what do you want – a medal, a glazed ham and a big award ceremony? What is the value of you having been right about one particular thing, outside your own head? Did you save or improve anyone else’s life? Did you even persuade anyone, who will agree that it was your influence? Did your “being right” produce anything for any particular community other than imaginary internet points? Or is the reason you keep bringing it up at irrelevant junctures because the only real value is the opportunity to rub it in other people’s faces?

                  A society composed entirely of cynical spergs would tear itself apart in weeks. That the majority of individuals are NPCs is actually a very good thing, provided that they are led by the virtuous, or even the reasonably competent.

                • Dave says:

                  I’m Gen-X and my Dad was a bit too young to fight in WW2. He’s often said that I’m too cynical, but subsequent events proved that I wasn’t cynical enough. Being a cynical sperg hasn’t helped my personal life, though it’s better than being a vaxed-up NPC. I’m unfit to be a merchant, priest, or warrior in any case, so no loss there.

                  I hope Jim develops a working proof-of-stake cryptocurrency, but his greater goal of reinventing society based on blockchains is an utter fantasy. He himself admits that crypto can only protect secrets, not physical objects, so if e.g. the immutable blockchain says I owe Jim a truckload of whisky, I can just tell him to fuck off if I have men with guns to back me up.

                • jim says:

                  The great, and at present, largely untapped, potential of the blockchain is that it allows people to coordinate and cooperate without the government being able to stick its oar in – triple entry accounting with immutable journal entries and sovereign corporations

                  And men with guns cooperating and coordinating can do interesting things.

                • The Cominator says:

                  We’re in a bad situation because too many people on the right initially fell for this one, the point of reminding people of it is ALWAYS PROCEED under the initial assumption every media narrative is a lie and a scam. NO EXCEPTIONS. Doesn’t matter if they tell you its to help save grandma or whatever BS they are pitching. Its always bullshit.

                  Merchants can be cynics, priests have many specialities so it depends but a cynical priesthood at all levels is not going to last (which is a pity), generally yeah they aren’t good warriors as fighting for other than land loot and pussy requires some amount of self sacrificial idealism.

                • Red says:

                  We’re in a bad situation because too many people on the right initially fell for this one, the point of reminding people of it is ALWAYS PROCEED under the initial assumption every media narrative is a lie and a scam. NO EXCEPTIONS. Doesn’t matter if they tell you its to help save grandma or whatever BS they are pitching. Its always bullshit.

                  HerbR is right.

                  Com got COVID right(and I say that as someone very much fooled by it), but Com’s solution to COVID was to ignore it as bullshit. That wouldn’t have worked as the Democrats never let a crisis go to waste.

                  Instead Trump should have used COVID to implement his agenda. He should have shutdown the NYC subway and mass transit everywhere. He should have rounded up the homeless for spreading it. He should have pushed to shutdown big blue cities that was spreading it, while shutting down the boarder and letting Red states stay open for business. Force one set of rules on blue states while telling Red states to continue with normal life. He should have used COVID money to build the wall and use it as an excuse to Make American Industry great again. Trump should have fired his disloyal generals and CDC people and replaced them with Trump people who were “serious” about COVID. Trump should have pushed for mail in voting just so the Democrats would have opposed him on it and then let them “win” on the subject.

                  COVID was a giant trap and Trump should have stepped in and used it against the Dems. Someone who is optimistic and hopeful can see how to turn a trap into advantage, while a cynic has trouble with solutions that actually work for large numbers of people.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Wouldn’t have worked, shutting down the border yes that would have worked (but he had already mostly solved illegal immigration by then) and he in fact did that but otherwise the only winning move was not to play. Covid basically greatly empowered hostile priests and all sorts of other enemies and ruined his fantastic economic achievements, nothing about Covid solved Trump’s problem of lack of loyal people in power and it could not have been used that way. The covid emergency powers were to impose “social(ist) distancing” not to restructure the bureaucracy.

                  If Trump could not have installed loyal officers in the military before (I think perhaps he could have but while he was great at many things installing loyal people was not one of them) nothing about the covid hysteria would have allowed it.

                  The cities mostly shut themselves down and committed economic suicide on their own in the drive to worship the holy Covid demon, this didn’t help Trump. And you wanted him to do what beyond this… what would that have achieved? I’m not against all mass transit and certainly not against subways in cities, my problem with cities is that there be shitlbs. If the idea of shutting the subways down was to force everyone to leave NYC and Boston this at least in the short term would have been a very negative thing and certainly no help. Homeless bums and such are a nuisance in blue cities but putting them in lunatic asylums as a public health measure would put him no closer to achieving absolute power or anything close to it. If the idea was to create a precedent Trump had stronger precedents for getting rid of his enemies, Jose Padilla being the strongest (a citizen jihadi convert that Dubya sent to Gitmo without trial Letter de Cachet style) precedent along those lines.

                  Trump perhaps could not have prevented blue state shutdowns via Orville Fauvus methods (because of lack of loyal people) but he needed to prevent any and all red state ones and call it madness and hysteria over a glorified flu consistently from day one. This he could have done, he could have made it politically impossible for any Republican to back shutdowns but he early on was doing just the opposite. Yes Brian Kemp of Georgia was overall a bought off traitor but Trump was criticizing him not for nefariously enabling election theft via mail in voting rules but for opening the state up too early.

                  By treating it as non bullshit he lost his “frame”. It was perhaps a no win scenario for him (Bolsonarno in Brazil always loudly expressed my view on Covid from the beginning perhaps the only world leader to do so) but making concessions to the enemy did not help. We’ll see if Bolsonarno wins in 2022 if he does that will almost certainly remove any doubt that Trump should have been a 100% flubro from day one.

                • Anonymous says:

                  We’re in a bad situation because too many people on the right initially fell for this one, the point of reminding people of it is ALWAYS PROCEED under the initial assumption every media narrative is a lie and a scam. NO EXCEPTIONS. Doesn’t matter if they tell you its to help save grandma or whatever BS they are pitching. Its always bullshit.

                  In the beginning to middle of 2020 there was a media narrative thread that told us the virus wasn’t such a big deal, for you see, the real disease is racism. It went something like, “Look at all these racists being racist at Asians over a virus! Hug a Chinese person to show how notracist you are!”. So people on the right fell for it by assuming that infected Chinese were a lot worse than racism.

                  The media is bullshit. Bullshit not meaning lies, not the opposite of truth, but instead a complete indifference and disregard towards the truth.

                • Dave says:

                  The great, and at present, largely untapped, potential of the blockchain is that it allows people to coordinate and cooperate without the government being able to stick its oar in

                  The government can “stick its oar in” at any time by getting one guy past the shill test, who can then trap others, and pretty soon you’re all working for the government or rotting in prison.

                  To create, hold, and trade physical goods, you need an army, not a blockchain. Don’t use the drug trade as a counterexample because street drugs are outrageously expensive, of lethally poor quality, and a great many drug dealers are rotting in prison.

                • jim says:

                  > The government can “stick its oar in” at any time by getting one guy past the shill test,

                  Only if the shill can find names and addresses, which means only if the team is interacting in person – in which case they undoubtedly have more vigorous and effective means of detecting shills.

                  Plus the true power of the blockchain, far from yet full utilized, is that it reduces the business need for interaction in person.

                  And our shill tests seem one hundred percent effective so far, even over the internet.

                • HerbR says:

                  the point of reminding people of it is ALWAYS PROCEED under the initial assumption every media narrative is a lie and a scam

                  The set of people you’re reminding is nearly totally disjoint from the set of people who need reminding, or still need persuading, if indeed they can be persuaded at all. Cucks gonna cuck.

                  Some people on the reactionary right fell for the Covid scare. Some, like yourself, never took it seriously. Most received it at first with mild concern, then quickly saw through the illusion as the “scientific” and “public health” communities constantly contradicted themselves and each other.

                  I might even say that most people on the right, including a good portion of the normie right, stopped taking it seriously as soon as it became a media narrative. Early on, there was no narrative – or if there was, it consisted of “don’t worry, it’s contained to China / there’s no human transmission”.

                  So congratulations on being one of the first and not flip-flopping. I hope you took a bet or something, because there aren’t any other prizes, and the overall outcome would have been the same regardless.

                • Dave says:

                  Only if the shill can find names and addresses, which means only if the team is interacting in person – in which case they undoubtedly have more vigorous and effective means of detecting shills.

                  In other words, be a Mexican drug cartel. We can remain anonymous as long as all we do is talk, but to get anything done in meatspace, we have to interact in person. Whatever we’re constructing or manufacturing will attract attention, so we need to do it someplace where the government is weak to nonexistent.

                  For secure communication you can use Gmail after an in-person exchange of PGP keys. You just need to encrypt and decrypt on a device that hasn’t been rooted by the government or a rival gang, but that’s true of any solution.

                • jim says:

                  This is the complete opposite of what I am said, and I find it hard to believe I was that unclear.

                  Whenever someone says “In other words”, he is usually flatly rejecting his interlocutors meaning and imposing his own, and this is what your are doing.

                • Dave says:

                  I guess I am completely missing the point. I understand Bitcoin better than 99% of the general public, but what smart contracts and scriptless scripts are, and how they might effect real change in meatspace against the wishes of hostile governments, utterly baffles me.

                  200-IQ complexity is not a problem if your software is just a black box that does useful stuff. But social technology can’t work if people don’t understand it.

                • jim says:

                  > social technology can’t work if people don’t understand it.

                  Suppose your company’s books are triple entry accounting based on immutable journal entries, and its shares are on its blockchain, not on the records of the government regulated stock exchange.

                  Suppose your company is a sovereign corporation – it derives its cohesion not from a grant of corporateness from the state, but because all the shareholders have to follow the rules because all the other shareholders are following the rules, as every blockchain works. They don’t have to understand how the wallet works, they just have to understand that if they don’t have money in their wallet, they cannot pay, and if they don’t have shares in their wallet, they cannot sell them and cannot vote when there is a board election.

                  Suppose the company’s books are good because of triple entry accounting and immutable journal entries, rather than state regulation of accountants. Again, you don’t have to understand how scriptless scripts work, you just have to understand that if you attempt to cook the books, other people’s wallets will not show your lie.

                  This renders the company independent of the state. The state can coerce the ceo, the board, and the shareholders, the same way as it can coerce anyone else, assuming it can find them, and assuming it can discover what they are doing, but the company is not longer a creation of the state, animated by state enforcement of its corporate character.

                  This makes it vastly harder to tax and regulate, even if only 0.001% of the population understand the cryptographic protocols employed by their wallet. The government cannot simply deduct money out of your paycheck – it has to send men with guns to knock on your door and say “pay or else” – and it has to find you, which may not be easy if you are working remotely, or you are working in person at a small remote branch of the business. The board probably has its meetings virtually. They probably cannot find the board, though the CEO probably has to show up in person a lot.

                  This also puts me back in business, since startups will once again be possible. Startups have been regulated out of business.

                • jim says:

                  > social technology can’t work if people don’t understand it.

                  Double entry book keeping is social technology. It fundamentally shapes our society, even though almost no one understands it. The corporation exists through double entry book keeping.

                  A small number of partners who own a business, know and trust each other, and understand double entry book keeping can enforce it on each other, but the publicly traded joint stock corporation exists through state enforcement of double entry book keeping.

                  And increasingly what the state is enforcing is not double entry bookkeeping. Instead of tracking the creation and movement of value, the books track the creation and movement of talmudic ritual purity.

                  The block chain can enable a very large number of business owners who do not know and trust each other and who do not understand double entry bookkeeping to enforce double entry bookkeeping on each other.

                • Andy says:

                  Would Thiel (1967) be considered Gen X, or a young boomer? I always considered him more X’er in spirit.

            • pyrrhus says:

              Yes…Allende made the same mistake, letting a lot of commies go into exile, where they caused a world of trouble..

              • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                More support for my proposition. The progressive elite needs to be crushed as thoroughly as possible, because when you let them go, they just see it as weakness and an opportunity to cause more trouble. Harvard alumni delenda est.

      • Varna says:

        Probably just “EE post-socialism” which in today’s West is “literally hitlerism”, but with vestiges of Soviet-era concepts modified for the new reality.

        The “communists” and “social democrats” in places like Russia, Romania, and other “backward” EE places are pro-white pro-family non-racist national socialists now. Non-racist in the “sure everybody has the right to their own culture in their own place” sense, as opposed to “of course they should replace us” sense.

        The EE nationalist populists differ from the EE “leftists” in economics mostly. That was the main difference before the great reset.

        Right now with the vax mandates in Russia, for example, the nationalist populists aggressively support the vax, Philippines prez style, while the commies are against vax mandates.

        If Russia was an actual non-pretend federation, it would now also, like the US, have half or more states with local govts made up of commies, who would have taken on the vax mandate issue the same choices as the republican state govts have in the US.

        90% of Tucker Carlson is stuff EE reds fervently believe and support. The difference is they don’t get the point of the right to bear arms, and would deal with megacorps by nationalizing them, or at least constantly walloping them Beijing-style.

        Due to a number of accumulated quirks of fate, today’s “less developed EE” commies, socialists, and social democrats, overlap 90% with US “rightwing populism”. Hence local liberasts derisively calling them “red-brown”.

        When the remaining 10% pop up, dissonance happens.

        Beyond this, there are also the almost extinct “classical liberals” of the pre-globohomo subset, who also overlap with a slightly different 90% with the above two camps, and most of the time everyone seems to be on the same page, but then suddenly dissonance.

        • Upravda says:

          > The “communists” and “social democrats” in places like Russia, Romania, and other “backward” EE places are pro-white pro-family non-racist national socialists now.

          Lucky you. „Communists” and „social democrats” in my country are *exactly* what you expect them to be – Harvard progressives, local chapters of US DemoNcrat party, lovers of gay prides, proponents of ever-increasing Big Government.

          Last vestiges of „national socialism” in those parties was successfully extinguished on the beginning of this millennium.

          Last vestiges of “national socialism” in supposedly conservative parties, such as currently ruling HDZ, are about to be extinguished very soon. They’ve already been unbelievably cucked.

          • Varna says:


            Sometimes I think it’s to a large extent depending on whose vintage empire the relevant bit of post-commie EE was in.
            Turkey, Russia, or Austria?

            The ones who were part of Turkey’s empire — today most skeptical, “backward”, and least globohomo.

            The ones who were part of Russia’s empire — second place. The natural inclination for almost post-Ottoman-tier levels of skepticism and traditionalism compensated in some by rabid anti-Russia moods leading to forced embracing of globohomo stuff just in spite (Baltics, for example).

            And the ones who were part of Austria’s empire, well, those tend to be far too “civilized” for their own good, unless someone is also trying to play opposites out of spite.

  36. DavyCrockett says:

    Unwisely but Bravely.

  37. Prince Charming says:

    Envy is ubiquitous in communist countries:

    New Soviet Man catches a goldfish, she grants him 3 wishes…
    — “My neighbour has a big house, a beautiful wife, and three cows.”
    — “So, you want a bigger house, an even more beautiful wife, and four cows?”
    — “I want his cows to go lame, his wife to get struck by lightning, and his house to burn down.”

    (with apologies to Slavoj Zizek)

    I have always been luckier in love than I deserved, and I was fortunate to learn game. But it is hard for me to argue that incels do not have a point. And you have taught me, Jim, that what I truly wanted was to own a woman. Do incels who envy Chad and hate Stacey not burn for justice in their own flawed way?

    I have seen people outright stealing entire industrial sectors, transforming grift, lies, and corruption into fabulous wealth. Do people whose net worth is measured in monthly student loan cheques and Starbuck loyalty stamps and want to see the fatcats swing from the lampposts break the 10th commandment, or are they upholding the 1st and the 8th (I’m not a Christian, don’t hurt me plz)?

    I have never lived in a ghetto, but I have visited. I was not alive in the 1950s, but I’ve seen the photos. Are niggers not justly enraged when decrying the destruction of the Black family, the Black small business sector, the neighbourhoods that under Jim Crow were starting to get off the ground?

    Envy is not productive, but sometimes you don’t want to be productive, you just want to rage.

    • Kunning Drueger says:

      But it was negros that destroyed the Negro. They decided to listen to white professors instead of white business owners. They decided to champion WEB DuBois instead of GW Carver. I know the Cathedral has suppressed the memory of it, but it is plain as day in the works of Thomas Sowell and the primary source material of both DuBois and Carver. How many new houses do you get before your predilection for arson denies redemption?

      • Aidan says:

        The nigger destroyed the Negro- or rather, it was white leftist policing policies that destroyed the negro. In the 60’s, it was decided that the cops would not punish blacks for petty crimes, only the big ones. Which meant that a black business owner in Harlem had no recourse against the niggers selling drugs on the front porch of his store. It takes a big use of force to stop little crimes. Blacks have much higher rates of dyscivilizational behavior, so when blacks rule blacks, they need to do so with brutality. Lacking recourse to intraracial brutality, civilization collapsed in black neighborhoods.

        The black man cannot get anywhere by imitating the white man- if he starts a grocery store in a “food desert”, it is likely to be subject to constant theft, vandalism, and armed robbery, demonstrating why it is a food desert in the first place. They do not get mad about the destruction of their race because they cannot do anything about it. They listened to white professors because listening to white business owners caused niggers to predate on them, and very few of them were smart enough to succeed in the white world and escape to white neighborhoods. That proportion is approximately equal to the proportion of blacks who vote republican.

        In the 90’s, Giuliani cleaned up New York by policing blacks to the same strict standards as the cops policed whites. That stopped a lot of crime, but did not revitalize the black neighborhoods, because taking police power out of the hands of the community unmans the men of that community. A black man could open a business in Harlem under Giuliani, but if he did, he would not get laid and have kids- the thug niggas were still getting laid, and he still could not beat, humiliate, and shoot them.

        • Pooch says:

          Same problem in South Africa even with the absence of whites, strangely. The few productive black business owners cannot go too tough on the black criminals for fear of being arrested by the black police.

        • Kunning Drueger says:

          Good analysis, and Pooch accurately ties in SA. But my fundamental assertion stands: black problems are black’s problem. You know I did my time in the mist, Aiden, and you are dead on about the requisite brutality needed to rule black men. Whites either do not possess it or, more likely, are not allowed to employ it.

          I took a beating, and it was deserved, for my softness on Deletion Mechanics. But I’m not the only one that sees something is rotten with any sort of “won’t someone consider the plight of the Noble Negro?” posts. PC is playing games.

          • Red says:

            Whites either do not possess it or, more likely, are not allowed to employ it.

            Whites are very civilized and it’s disturbing to deal with the negro who are half civilized at best and straight up hunter/gather fucktards at worst. Whites can certainty deal with it, but methods have been far too soft.

            For a people to become civilized requires a governing system that removes the hunter/gather aspects form the population by killing those he need killing or enslaving them while not allowing them to reproduce. Jim Crow was an attempt at doing this, as was apartheid. Both failed because it’s not whites job to civilize niggers.

            • Kunning Drueger says:

              It could also be that they failed because they were halted before being completed, which comports pretty well with the massive Cathedral campaign against Apartheid. The progressives figured out the one simple trick that confounds the ebbil white raciss with cancelling Jim Crow. Based blacks are a force multiplier for the Right, at least they were.

              • Red says:

                It could also be that they failed because they were halted before being completed, which comports pretty well with the massive Cathedral campaign against Apartheid.

                Yes other whites stopped whites from civilizing blacks. The thing is, there’s no racial or national interest in us civilizing blacks. South Africa would been much better off working to increase their own population and keeping nig nogs outside their borders and the South would have been better off if they’d deported their slaves to Africa after Haiti.

                In any such civilizing program Blacks will just ended being a pawn for political and religious factions to play off each other. It took 1,000 years for the Germans to become civilized. Any such program on that scale by us has absolutely no chance of competition because it’s not in our self interest.

  38. The Cominator says:

    I expect a hung jury in the Kyle case, there will be at least one pussy afraid of riots or antifa targetting and at least one leftist fanatic.

    Hopefully the mistrial gets to be declared with prejudice…

    • Red says:

      Looking more and more likely. The Jury deliberation room can hear the mob outside and the city is allowing them to intimidate the jury.

    • G.T. Chesterton says:

      “Two jurors holding decision up, outright citing backlash, per US Marshal in Kenosha
      2:23 PM · Nov 16, 2021”

      I’m guessing the judge can toss those jurors for cause, and pull two alternates from the bullpen.

      • Pooch says:

        I’m guessing the jurors are being threatened. Women fold under pressure easily, only men can stand up to it.

        • G.T. Chesterton says:

          I’m sure more than 2 feel threatened. If the 2 are women jurors, they will fold under the more immediate pressure of the men jurors.* I suspect the 2 holdouts are male pussies, who will need a higher authority to thank them for their service and dismiss them.

          *The women jurors on Mike Tyson’s rape trial began deliberations thinking Not Guilty. “Why was she going up to his hotel room at 2am?,” they questioned. They were browbeat into a Guilty verdict by the white knight male jurors.

          • G.T. Chesterton says:

            The 12 are 5 men, 7 women; 11 White and one Person Of Darkness. The alternates are 3 men, 3 women. I’ll have to revise my guess at the 2 holdouts being men. They’re probably women. I’d further guess the P.O.D. is female, owing to felony rates of the male population.

            • Pooch says:

              May God help the kid.

              • The Cominator says:

                Hes not getting a guilty verdict but probably a hung jury resulting in a mistrial. If retried i expect the same result…

                Eventually likely to be a mistrial with prejudice but maybe not this time.

                • Kunning Drueger says:

                  Uncharacteristically optimistic, but maybe the VA trend will continue…

  39. Pooch says:

    If Kyle gets off, which seems uncertain to me as of now, it’s only because those 2 rounds missed that jump kicking negro by mere inches. May god watch over that great American hero now as he did that day.

    • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

      According to people watching, Binger’s real argument is going over about as well as a wet fart in an elevator. Good start, then bogged down with obvious lies and contradictions, and the jury does not care for him. The jury is probably going to have a few leftists, but as Jim pointed out, envy is uncommon. There are probably not going to be 12 highly envious people in the jury. Binger is arguing to the media and to leftoids, not the jury, and it is going to blow up in his face.

    • Andy says:

      I hadn’t been paying much attention as I assumed reality would be suspended to convict Kyle. I was surprised to see Jim’s “optimistic” blog post title yesterday. I’m still leaning towards intimidated jurors suspending reality and saving their skins. Hope I’m wrong. Still seems a jump ball at this point.

      • Aidan says:

        The prosecutor said, almost word for word: “You have no right to self defense because the rioters were heroes”.

        The jury hears that and realizes that if they convict, they are likely to be murdered by a mob, even if crimestop prevents them from thinking it in words. They can feel it.

        • Red says:

          >The jury hears that and realizes that if they convict, they are likely to be murdered by a mob, even if crimestop prevents them from thinking it in words. They can feel it.

          This gives me hope. Lots of people are switching sides right now because chaos is overflowing into their living rooms.

          • Pooch says:

            Same. I see bourgeoisie switching sides over the vaccine mandates and CRT.

            • Contaminated NEET says:

              Just today a smarmy lib at my gym, whom I’ve overheard gabbing with the Somalis about how easy we White men have it and how unfair this is to them, was telling me the vaccine mandates uncomfortably remind him of HITLER HITLER ADOLF MUSTACHE PLAYBOOK OH NO. He was singing a different tune a few months ago.

        • Kunning Drueger says:

          Do you have a link to that, Aidan? I don’t doubt you, but if you can spare me the agony of sitting through the hours of lawyer yapping I’d greatly appreciate it.

        • TBeholder says:

          And that’s exactly what Moldbug was writing about. First some “it’s okay when we are doing it” and smugness show through, now the make-up is gone almost completely and… under this brand of “pacifism” we see good old Puritan self-righteousness of being On The Right Side Of Providence. The differences wash away fast.

  40. pyrrhus says:

    The mostly peaceful attempt to murder Kyle after he provoked these mostly peaceful convicted felons and child rapists was unlawfully disrupted by Kyle’s not so peaceful defense of his unworthy carcass using a horribly un-peaceful AR-15…Got it, guilty on all counts!

Leave a Reply