Novel Corona virus SARS-CoV-2 and technological decay

The one area where technology is still genuinely advancing is DNA/RNA technology, and closely related technologies that are working towards nanotechnology from the biological end rather than the organic chemistry end.

China used ten year old technology to develop test kits for SARS-CoV-2 in a few days, and now has millions of test kits.

Australia and Singapore have an adequate supply of locally produced test kits, with which they appear to be successfully controlling the spread. Everyone coming in at the airport with a fever gets tested, even if they do not have dry cough or diarrhea, everyone exposed to someone with corona virus gets tested.

In America, almost every case that has been detected among people who have not been overseas has been detected in people who are very seriously ill. Which tells me that there is no testing on contact tracing, that people who merely have fever and dry cough who have been in contact with people seriously ill with corona virus have not been tested, or the tests just do not work. If you look at the proportion of confirmed corona virus cases detected in people who are not very seriously ill, the further from Harvard, the larger the proportion

Add this to the list of critical failures. The west has lost its nuclear technology. We cannot make Plutonium 238 any more, cannot make enriched lithium 6. If we cannot do that, I doubt that our nuclear weapons still work, though I hope never to find out the hard way. Our fighter planes cannot fly as high, as far, or as fast as yesterday’s fighter planes.

If we have a massive breakout in America, it will be because technological decline in the US will have reached the point that large numbers of people die of it, and that technology is only being preserved outside the US hegemony and in nations far from the center of the US hegemony. Inability to produce test kits, like slow flying fighter planes, indicates an absolute decline in critical technology in the US in the last area of world technological progress.

Since there is no effective treatment or vaccine, the only way to control corona virus is quarantine. Everyone who has fever and dry cough or fever and diahorea, and everyone who has had contact with someone with fever and dry cough should be tested, and everyone who tests positive (which will be disproportionately certain races) needs to be quarantined. We are already being dramatically told that this disease affects all races equally, which is a lie. Information on ethnicity of corona cases is being withheld and concealed, it being more important to maintain that all men are created equal than to keep people alive. And if we cannot produce test kits, it is because those who should be producing them were selected for adherence to the holy faith rather than competence in technology.

416 Responses to “Novel Corona virus SARS-CoV-2 and technological decay”

  1. Cloudswrest says:

    Speaking of technological decline, anybody see this?

    Here’s the satire Twitter account David Zhang commenting on it:

    BTW China recently built a brand new one of these.

    • jim says:

      Female “scientist” in charge.

      It will make absolutely no difference to “scientists” “operating” the now collapsed telescope. They will continue to “operate” it in the same way they have operated it for years. They are cargo cultists pretending to operate a pretend airport in the hope that the spirits of the ancestors would send cargo. Formerly the airport was real but not actually working as an airport. Now it is unreal, and still not working as airport. This will have precisely zero impact on them and their “work”. Their peer reviewed publications will continue, will continue to pass peer review, and will contain as much useful information as before.

  2. Dave says:

    Some years ago in July/August I attended a conference in southern Brazil. It was unexpectedly cold, only 10C inside the conference hall, and I forgot to take a hat. I caught a flu that gradually worsened over the next week. On the long journey back to the USA, I coughed up so much phlegm that I wished they’d quarantine me so I could spend a few days in bed.

    Back home, I stayed in bed for three days with feverish hallucinations. Lying outside in the hot August sun seemed to help a little, and I slowly recovered over the next two weeks. Of my wife, small children, and elderly parents in the house, only my seven-year-old daughter caught the virus. She had a sore throat for a day or two and was fine.

    So I can attest that heat and humidity won’t cure the sick, but it makes the viruses they shed a lot less potent.

  3. yewotm8 says:

    I’m seeing lots of studies (as well as a ton of anecdotal evidence) suggesting that the virus did not originate in China, as our media reports. Things like this:

    Specifically the part about there being five different strains, and Italy not having the same strain as China, who don’t have the same strain as Japan, and so on.

    I’m lead to believe that the virus has been in North America for just as long as it was in China, or longer, but that we weren’t testing for it until just recently. China caught it first because they are more generally competent as per the article we are commenting on, and because it spread way worse in China due to them all being smokers who are dirty as fuck. This winter was supposedly a very bad flu season according to the CDC, and I personally got sick for the first time in several years. Others I’ve spoken to are echoing the same thing. I would not put this forward as evidence that it did not originate in Wuhan, but I’m leaning toward it much more than “bat soup”.

    This raises my doubts as to how dangerous the virus really is. If we’ve had it since the beginning of last winter, it certainly was a heck of a cold, but it wasn’t that much worse than the common cold or flu. The worst thing about it is its novelty. The CDC uses an “extrapolation” to determine that 40 million people got the common cold last year, and of them, thousands died. But when the media is talking about COVID-19 mortality rate, they use confirmed, tested cases as the denominator, which is disingenuous to say the least.

    I’ve noticed it’s always in the nature of CDC-types and healthcare professionals to exaggerate how bad something is going to be in order to increase their own status in a priestly way. There’s also a big political bend to the impact the virus will have: my sister is a nurse in a conservative area and says nobody at her hospital is worried at all, but various diverse people I went to school with who are now becoming doctors cannot stop spamming things about it on social media.

  4. BiggusDickusBob says:

    Technological decline explains less of the current failure than outright treason on the part of the permanent government does.

    • Not Tom says:

      The phrases “permanent government” and “treason” are inherently contradictory.

      I know it’s become fashionable in conservative circles to use the word “treason” to describe the coup-like behavior, but it’s incorrect as a matter of definition. If you go around labeling every defeat as “treason”, you’ll end up confused and angry all the time.

      Instead, remember that democracy isn’t real, and just because you voted for someone doesn’t mean they have real power. What you call “treason” is merely your horse losing a race. People who do not have power can most definitely acquire power, but they are fighting a kind of war and should be expected to lose many battles along the way.

      “Treason doth never prosper, what’s the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it Treason.”

      • jim says:

        > The phrases “permanent government” and “treason” are inherently contradictory.

        The trouble is that the permanent government, being headless and lacking in social cohesion, is incapable of governing. With Biden in charge, internal conflicts will result in them imprisoning each other on frivolous charges, as with General Flynn, purely political charges as with Sheriff Joe, and Epsteining each other.

        Social cohesion in the elite has been collapsing, due to women and diversity in the elite. So the phrases “permanent government” and “treason” are not inherently contradictory. When you have an incohesive ruling elite, treason does prosper. The people who armed and funded John Brown and Bloody Kansas suffered no consequences. Stalin robbed a bank and murdered a bunch of people in order to fund communist revolution, and suffered no consequences. Similarly the mob violence that preceded the French Revolution.

        When the elite is incohesive, it is impossible for members of the elite to secure general approval of the elite for their actions, therefore the violent and illegal acts that they engage in are indeed treasonous.

        When the sovereign breaks the rules, he is making an exception to the rules, and it his job to decide the exception. When members of the permanent government break the rules with the consensus of the rest of the elite, not treason. When they break the rules without consensus, but without consequences, is treason.

        What happened in the French Revolution is that price controls on grain had the predictable and usual effect of price controls, and the elite could not agree on whether to extend price controls to bread, or roll back price controls on grain. So, price control on bread imposed by the mob, instigated and protected by members of the elite. That was treason, which soon led to the mob coming for the weak and ineffectual King who could not or would not impose order on his overgrown administration. Instigating and protecting the price control mobs in Paris, and the ethnic cleansing mob in Ferguson, that was treason. Protecting Stalin’s crime spree was treason. Protecting, arming, and funding John Brown was treason.

        When the Sovereign uses violence, that is his job. When members of an incohesive elite use violence to take action during disagreement about policy, it is treason.

        The intent of the Dear Colleague Letter was that white males at college should be punished because coeds were finding that whoring was making them unhappy. That the University of Virginia failed to give effect to the intent of the Dear Colleague letter shows that the elite was not in fact internally united on this. So, to the extent that white male students were convicted on vague rape accusations, treason.

        Treason does not prosper when you have a strong sovereign on the job. When treason does prosper, a strong sovereign will appear eventually. Perhaps Trump will make himself Augustus Caesar. If he fails, he and his family will die in prison, but the groups that took power from the King in the Russian and French Revolutions, being internally disunited, soon found themselves heading off to the guillotine, so treason in those revolutions did not prosper.

        If Trump resigns power in 2024, and Trump Junior does not take the reigns, the Trumps will face prison, death, or death in prison, but most of the the quarreling factions that take power will soon join them.

      • The Cominator says:

        Treason is often a matter of success or failure. Successful rebels become rulers, unsuccessful rebels are traitors. Unsuccessful rulers sometimes get deemed traitors (more often they are just quietly murdered).

        In theory in the Western world members of the government swear some kind of oath to their responsibilities which they treat as so much toilet paper… but if they fell it’d be easy to imagine most of those members of the permanent government being hauled in front of some kind of drumhead tribunal pronounced guilty of treason on the theoretical ground they treated their oaths as so much toilet paper and acted against the national interest.

        So its not impossible to imagine a scenario where members of the current permanent government are deposed and deemed traitors.

  5. mack's boot says:

    attention all queers, techno nerds and capital bug men:

    this is my ideology

    • The Cominator says:

      We like BAP and I listen to his podcast but I think you are a parody of BAP’s ideology.

      • Not Tom says:

        I don’t like BAP that much, but I’ll reluctantly put him in the category of “better than anyone on the mainstream right”.

        Problem is, BAP’s ideology is for other nude bodybuilders, not omega incel NEETs. These useless boils on society’s ass pretending at being ultimate alpha chads are more pathetic than the hundreds of tech companies who thought they could just adopt Apple’s strategy and win. Apple’s strategy only works if you’re Apple, and BAP’s strategy only works if you’re BAP or someone like him.

        The true test of any religion is how well the laity – and to some extent, the actual priests – can follow it without holiness spiraling or just getting it all horribly wrong. “Ideologies”, i.e. incomplete religions, all fail catastrophically on this account, because of their incompleteness.

        Christianity, despite numerous heresies, did pretty well in the sense of most followers getting it at least sort of right. Islam, while its aim is inherently destructive, also does rather well in its own domain as a religion for the low-IQ and low-functioning. BAP won’t give you a complete and self-consistent world view, only an occasionally interesting way of looking at things, much like libertarianism or r-K theory. You let it become a totalizing ideology and you’ll only end up like all the other shit-tier leftists claiming to be right wing on /pol/ or Unz.

        And this stuff destroys individuals as well as communities; libertarians were easily converted to progressivism; Anonymous Conservative has basically gone insane; Spandrell with his great Bioleninism theory has all but exited the public sphere, emerging only to deliver the occasional incoherent black-pilled rants. Don’t fall for ideologies that claim to be able to explain everything about the world in a few simple pages or YouTube videos; the world is not that simple, which is why both the Old and New Testaments were insufficient to cover it all. Cheap and easy answers are almost never the correct ones.

        Of course I say this knowing full well that “boot” is lying about being a BAP follower just like he lies about everything else; he’s a fed shill working for some NGO cutout or other boiler-room operation. But I say this for the benefit of anyone else reading: don’t fall into this trap. If you like BAP, then fine, keep reading/watching his stuff, but don’t forget to diversify your interests so that you’re getting other perspectives as well.

  6. Mike says:

    Trump having a live Coronavirus press conference on Fox News right now. Doesn’t look too shaken, but I think he is taking the problem more seriously. Not linking it because it is a livestream on Youtube, so I don’t know if the link will stay up.

  7. Cementmixer says:

    Hello. I found this while googling the corona virus. I’d be interested in reading any comments by the participants of this blog

    alternate link:

    In addition, this north korea report claims that a strong immune system can have adverse effects.


    • Cementmixer says:

      apologies for posting the wrong link for the youtube video. The claim about strong immune systems having adverse reactions is at the 6:53 mark

    • pdimov says:

      Corona damages the lungs in the same way Spanish flu does, by triggering an immune response known as cytokine storm.

      • Cementmixer says:

        thank you. that being the case, what can be done to prevent or protect ourselves from the cytokine storm?

        I bought supplements for vitamins C and D, the latter allegedly being effective in this regard according to the info I posted above.

        • pdimov says:

          There’s nothing we can do about the cytokine storm; if it comes to that, our lives are in the hands of the doctors.

          For prevention purposes, one needs vitamins C/D/B3 and zinc supplements. But I suspect that the most effective area where one can concentrate one’s efforts is in not catching the virus. (“Social distancing”.)

      • Not Tom says:

        Wait, what? I haven’t read anything linking COVID-19 to cytokine storms. If that were the case, I’d expect the mortality rate by age to be inverted, as it was with Spanish flu. As of now, and despite my warnings that this doesn’t only affect old people, it still does primarily affect the elderly and immunocompromised.

        Do you have any links on this?

        • pdimov says:

          Italy has allegedly reported success in treating patients with Tocilizumab.

          “Tocilizumab, also known as atlizumab, is an immunosuppressive drug, mainly for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis, a severe form of arthritis in children. It is a humanized monoclonal antibody against the interleukin-6 receptor (IL-6R). Interleukin 6 (IL-6) is a cytokine that plays an important role in immune response and is implicated in the pathogenesis of many diseases, such as autoimmune diseases, multiple myeloma and prostate cancer.”

          Chloroquine phosphate has also been reported as effective, and it (among other things) inhibits IL-1.

          I don’t think any of this is proven with any certainty though.

          I agree that it’s odd that it affects the elderly the most, instead of being U-shaped, or inverted.

            • jim says:

              RNA viruses evolve with remarkable speed, often evolving into their own vaccine, a milder version of the disease that immunizes you against the more serious version of the disease, under selection pressure to avoid making their host so sick that he gets isolated, reducing infection opportunities, as happened with Ebola.

              Flu is a pile of diseases that were originally deadly, and have evolved into their own vaccine. This is yet another one.

              The original version of the disease was highly adapted to infect Han Chinese. American versions of the disease have come from Europe, thus have adapted to westerners. This may explain the diversity in the American version of the virus.

              • The Cominator says:

                Apparently the malaria drug Cloraquine wipes it out… Trump’s medical advisors are idiots and even if they told him it would last until July or August (which it won’t community transmission isn’t in warm areas) he really shouldn’t have said that…

                • pdimov says:

                  Not yet proven. But it probably won’t hurt if you take the prophylactic antimalarial dose of chloroquine (500mg once weekly), and it might help if you become infected. More than that is not advisable as it has side effects.

              • pdimov says:

                >The original version of the disease was highly adapted to infect Han Chinese.

                While it’s true that the Chinese have more ACE2 receptors, the difference is not that great.

                Incidentally (and again, not proven), ACE inhibitors, a common medication for high blood pressure, upregulate ACE2 and are likely a risk factor. Could explain the high death rate among the elderly (Italians).

                So if one takes ACE inhibitors, won’t hurt to be extra careful.

  8. BC says:

    Trump dying from this virus would be the one of the worst outcomes for the US that I could imagine. He was recently in close proximity to a Brazilian diplomat who’s test positive.

    • Not Tom says:

      Fortunately, Trump is a well-known germophobe. Unfortunately, this thing appears to be very, very infectious. We’ll just have to hope for the best.

      Maybe, if Trump does catch it, and manage to survive it, he’ll be a little less cavalier about it and start actually taking positive steps to eradicate it from within our borders.

  9. Saint Jerome says:

    Dear Jim, I find your blog very interesting, I originally came across this because someone linked one of your posts on technological decay. I can’t reply directly to the comment where you mentioned St Jerome so I must reply here.

    I would be very interested in anything you would say to elaborate on your earlier comment concerning st Jerome and the Christian religion. Do you have a reason for specifically mentioning him, or would you consider the generation of writers that he belonged to as part of the same problem.

    I am not an expert on early christian writings, but I have read Ambrose and Augustine as well as Chrysostom when I was interested in christian apologetic and so I have some familiarity with the period. What should I look into, to find evidence supporting your thesis that there is something critical missing from early Christianity that was lost on account of Jerome.


    • jim says:

      Jerome was strikingly evil, hateful, nasty, and dishonest. He hated breeders and you can smell the hate on him. His rhetoric is full of lies and hatred.

      • Jehu says:

        I have to wonder if this was the reason that Paul was in eclipse for so long in the Catholic Church. A big part of the Reformation was the re-invigoration of the doctrines laid down by Paul in his letters (including that priests ought to be married, something Martin Luther himself did pretty shortly after getting the ball rolling, but also including the more familiar stuff about justification by faith and the like).
        If you read Paul’s letters, it is pretty clear that he has a doctrine of lanes. You mystic celibates, go here, use your particular spiritual gifts and stay the hell in your own lane. You are not to be deacons or pastors or bishops or God forbid, the Pope. That’s really clear. Those guys are supposed to be successful family men. But my guess is that guys like Jerome, Chrysostom and the like were not content with their lane, and argued—reasoning ‘ought from ought’ to a conclusion in clear contradiction to Paul’s word, which if pressed, they’d have to admit was inspired by God.
        BTW, on holiness spiraling, check out the history of the Donatist heresy sometime. It is almost a cartoon version of the spiral you describe, even as rendered in the Catholic encyclopedia. I almost think that you could define a heresy from a mere schism over who/whom authority based on whether it naturally holiness spirals or does not do so. By its fruits, as it were.

        • The Cominator says:

          One of the things that I pointed out that nobody else has is that the original claims of Papal Supremacy matched some of the claims of the Donatists.

          One of the Donatist slogans was “what has the Emperor to do with the Church”, and one of the slogans of the Gregorian “reformers” who initially asserted Papal supremacy might have been as well.

          • jim says:

            Donatism, like Papal Supremacy, was a power grab, and inevitably and predictably a substantial faction of the Donatists became communists, opposing private property and marriage, much as a substantial faction of the Puritans became communists, though Oliver Cromwell took care of that lot.

            Same thing happened with a substantial faction of the Lutherans, though Martin Luther firmly endorsed the princes slaughtering that lot, and urged the princes to slaughter them all.

            It was reasonable for Martin Luther to grab what was the Pope’s, because the Pope was abusing and misusing it – but once they had grabbed the Church, some of his followers started looking for more stuff to grab, and predictably things got out of hand.

            The Puritans, on the other hand, had no legitimate beefs with the established church, so they made up stuff. They declared that whenever a Bishop was having a good time, he was insufficiently holy. Supposedly, God wants us to be miserable.

            • The Cominator says:

              Charles I and Laud were very much correct to suppress the covenanters the leftist infiltrators and the killjoy puritans where they erred is trying to make the church more catholic like and less Calvinist (under Elizabeth I and then James the Church of England was explicitly Calvinist, every bishop was a Calvinist and probably 99% of the clergy at least pretended to be Calvlinist and it tended towards simple no nonsense “low church” ceremonial).

              As I’ve said before Cromwell was while not a leftist puritan he was fundamentally not a killjoy puritan (they tended to be Presbyterians not Independents and Cromwell’s killjoy major general period was short and brought about by pressure from below) he was fundamentally an anti-catholic Puritan.

              • Jan Martense says:

                where they erred is trying to make the church more catholic like and less Calvinist

                No. Calvinism is one of the trashiest Christian variants and both Charles’ were 100% correct in trying to minimize it. Just the tendency toward decentralization and “personal interpretation of scripture” is enough to utterly discredit it; a religion without an elite source of authority is the spiritual version of “muh democracy” And that’s not even going into the actual retarded beliefs of Calvinists, like predestination which has obvious ties to modern tabula-rasa insanity and leniency toward poor disadvantaged criminals. It’s not a coincidence the first Unitarian church was a Calvinist sect.

                The real “mistake” of the English monarchs here was this: in order to divorce his first wife, Henry VIII should never have officially split from Catholic doctrine, he should have just ignored the Pope and been excommunicated like HRE’s Henry IV and many other monarchs. That way he re-establishes royal authority without inviting the unhinged innovation of nonconformist Protestantism.

              • The Cominator says:

                “Just the tendency toward decentralization and “personal interpretation of scripture” is enough to utterly discredit it; a religion without an elite source of authority is the spiritual version of “muh democracy”

                Southern Baptists are essentially an old style Calvinists church who don’t like to call themselves that. They are probably the least pozzed and most pro Trump denomination there is and one reason they are unpozzed is they reject any central hierarchy including their own SBC hierarchy (and the SBC was converged by leftist infiltrators but the individual denominations won’t listen to them).

                Also Tabula Rasa and Predestination are completely unrelated.

                Predestination is a completely logical (if depressing) deduction based on any sort of belief in cause and effect and that God is all powerful… Tabula rasa otoh is illogical stupid crap AND the secular equivalent of the Pelagian heresy.

                “The real “mistake” of the English monarchs here was this: in order to divorce his first wife, Henry VIII should never have officially split from Catholic doctrine, he should have just ignored the Pope and been excommunicated like HRE’s Henry IV and many other monarchs. That way he re-establishes royal authority without inviting the unhinged innovation of nonconformist Protestantism.”

                LOL so Henry should have ensured that their would be a bitter succession war after his death and only so shortly after the Wars of the Roses. Henry VIII was completely right to act as he did.

                • Jan Martense says:

                  “one reason they are unpozzed is they reject any central hierarchy including their own SBC hierarchy”

                  First off, Baptists are still FAR more pozzed than Catholics or (especially) Orthodox Christians. For example, there is no formal opposition to lacing their women with the pill among Baptists. They also slavishly worship abominations like the Declaration of Independence and US constitution despite them being openly nonsensical and anti-Christian.

                  More importantly, even if they WERE less pozzed, it does not follow that this is due to decentralization. Unitarians are also decentralized. I assume you will at least admit the latter is, in fact, “pozzed.” It is far more rational to say that Baptists’ conservatism relative to, eg, Episcopalians comes from their cultural heritage.

                  “Also Tabula Rasa and Predestination are completely unrelated.”

                  The latter is directly descended from the former, which was popularized by the infamous Purtian John Locke. If we are born with no inherent personal qualities, then all of our actions are traceable to circumstance. Hence, we have no free will. A Christian who believes in Tabula Rasa necessarily must then believe in Predestination. (The inverse is not true, so I’m not saying all Calvinists believe in Tabula Rasa, but that they are ideologically related is indisputable).

                  “LOL so Henry should have ensured that their would be a bitter succession war after his death and only so shortly after the Wars of the Roses. ”

                  Tons of monarchs legitimized their bastards. And in any case, Mary was the eldest regardless. The succession would not have been the slightest bit different.

                • Mike says:

                  What I’m coming to the conclusion here is that there isn’t an easy solution to this problem, at least historically speaking. In the present, solving the celibate, power-hungry priesthood is easy, just give them the Jimian treatment that he’s advocated here time and time again (arguably similar to the old non-pozzed Anglican Church).

                  The problem I’m having with this is as follows:
                  There has never been a perfect Church like this that solves every issue, because we are human and make mistakes. As Jan noted, Protestant sects get rid of the plague of fags, bored monks, and universal authority of the Church, but then they suffer from a loss of hierarchy and common understanding within themselves. The Catholics do have hierarchy, but it’s autistic because they gave clerical celibacy a green light and thought that priests protect warriors and not the other way around. And finally the Orthodox are probably the best of both worlds because they have hierarchy and national churches headed by warriors, but then even then there are still issues. The Orthodox still exult monks to quite a high degree, and while they do allow most priests to marry, if you are ranked a bishop or higher you still cannot marry, even as an Orthodox. And as well know that famous passage of Paul’s in Timothy refers directly to married bishops……and here we have even the Orthodox cucking out on that.

                  My point being, Christianity has had problems for most, if not its entire history, regardless of the sect, and that searching for a perfect past version of Christianity to implement today isn’t going to be simple. You’d have to pick out various fragments of each tradition (Catholic, Orthodox, Prot etc). None of them stand up perfectly on their own in my opinion, at least from a Jimian perspective.

                • The Cominator says:


                  Nearly all active Southern Baptists voted for Trump over 90% ergo not pozzed and far less pozzed than catholics. Furthermore he even won them during the Republican primaries. And yes that is an accurate way to judge how pozzed a church is.


                  Revealations 2 and 3 seems to reveal that before the final great falling away there will still be many churches with none quite perfect. The Orthodox Church and the Southern Baptists Churches are probably the best churches remaining.

                  I do not have this view of the Catholic Church. My view is that the Catholic Church (at least as of Gregory VII and Dictatus Papae when the church adopted the Donatist Heresy… as they later via mandatory celibacy adopted an element of the Manichean heresy) with its homosexuality, blatant deviation from scripture on everything, corruption etc. is the Whore of Revealation.

                • JanMartense says:

                  You’d have to pick out various fragments of each tradition (Catholic, Orthodox, Prot etc). None of them stand up perfectly on their own in my opinion

                  This is exactly it. We have the benefit of hindsight and can see how some past decisions made by the Church have had negative social consequences. That being said, to even *consider* implementing all of the truly correct beliefs from various traditions, you MUST start with a formal and top-down hierarchy. If you don’t, the rabble will just disagree/ignore what is right and do whatever they want. Hence, any decentralized or informal “religion” can be immediately and unequivocally categorized as trash.

                  @Cominator: The reason why southern Americans are more race-aware and likely to vote pro-white is blindingly obvious and has nothing to do with religion. Pray tell me how white Acadianan Catholics in Louisiana voted?

                  To reiterate, Calvinist beliefs are directly analogous to Progressive ones, and their lack of hierarchy eliminates even the *hope* of possible redemption that state churches like Lutherans at least have.

          • aswaes says:

            Reading between the lines, post-Roman civ seems to have flowered (recovered) in late 10th, early 11th century. With developed trade networks, and industry, and consequent prosperity, we observe a classic overproduction of elites. Downwardly mobile sons of nobles and upper bourgeoisie, left with unexpectedly low status relative to their education. Deprived of normal ways of seeking status they (re)turn to “true”, austere type of Christianity. Lay piety movement. Resurgence of Christian takfiris, aka Donatists. Later on resurrection of Benedictine style: Franciscans, Cenobites, Frontier Hermetic Societies, Cisterian Movement.

            Then, as some of these men find themselves in upper positions of the clergy (like some marxist commie 68ers did later on) they start using the discontented youth against non-converged members of the clergy, and against princes. Hence neo-Donatism and Investiture Controversy.

            Peter Damiani, archetypal Trotskyite turned neocon type.

            We see a renewed interest in enforcing archaic celibacy rules. (Gregorian enforcement of the prohibitions against clerical marriage) A classic (bio)Leninist move: sexless functionaries (functionally eunuchs) are naturally low status and depend on YOU to bestow on them status.

            “[…] the practical belief that if bishops and priests did not have families, they would be more likely to devote themselves selflessly to their offices, […] rather than use their offices to get property and jobs for their children. The purpose, then, was to untangle the secular clergy from its involvement in the feudal order.”

            Communist Cultism 101. Disrupt families. In other words, remove your cadres from the prosocial status system and initiate them into your cultic status system.

            Humbert’s Three Books Against the Simoniacs lays the ideological formulation of the Gregorian revolution: against lay investiture, against proprietary churches, against royal influence over ecclesiastical appointments. And revival of Donatist heresy of course: ministration of the sacraments by an unworthy priest was deemed invalid (lay piety). So laity has the right to judge the priesthood, aka student protests against racist professors.

            So in my reading, Hildebrand (Gregory VII) was Stalin to Humbert’s Lenin. Humbert is the culmination of 2-3 generations of elite overproduction. He comes up with the crazy revolutionary doctrines. Hildebrand is also a filthy commie but he eventually understands that somebody has to put an end to the holiness spiral — whence we get Dictatus Papae. Although DP is a power grab against the princes, it simultaneously purges the takfiris from the church.

            Finally, we get Urban II, who defused the theocratic revolt by channeling pent up revolutionary zeal towards outward aggression: First Crusade. In the following centuries, we see the classic post-revolution conservative compromise: canonization of commie monastic types (e.g. St. Francis), and systematization of their orders so that their revolutionary tendencies are blunted/channeled. This is akin to canonization of Martin Luther King, except it’s more stable. We also get the tradition of Crusade (virtue) signaling as a way of culling overly holy types, and undesirables (bastards, unwanted children). If you want to purchase status today, you donate to charities for Africa and don’t bother checking if they deliver results. If you wanted to purchase status in the tradition of the crusades, you would go beat up muzzies, and wouldn’t bother winning.

            • The Cominator says:

              I love your post overall but… Humbert was Marx the writer of the Manifesto, Gregory VII was Lenin the truly evil man.

              There was no Stalin within the Papacy as Stalin was mostly a good guy except if its Francis (who has sort of agreed to Lay Investiture with China and who has massively weakened the Vatican’s political power) who is Stalin. Gregory VII was pure evil with absolutely no redeeming qualities to his life whatsoever as Lenin was pure evil without any redeeming qualities.

              Urban II was a rare good Pope… as was Julius II.

              The 1st three crusades were also all arguably intended to win (as the 1st did and the 3rd sort of did)… the problem with maintaining the Crusader kingdoms was that to want to stay in the Middle East you had to be pretty nuts… you were surrounded by all sorts of hostile muslims who wanted to kill you with no air conditioning.

              Whereas if you went back home you had status (even if you were born a peasant) as a badass crusader and you could tell the dumb tavern sluts in your village that sodomy fornication and adultery with you were not only no longer sins as of your crusade but in fact would help them get into heaven.

              • Arcens says:

                Can you expand on Lenin being irredeemable? I always thought of him as the nerd that tried to bite more than he could chew, with Trotsky a more calculating and murderously efficient individual.

                Marx was at least not a nice person, from the content of his letters (on his mother esp.), his infidelity and the way people described him when he visited the local commie club.

                • The Cominator says:

                  What is redeeming about Lenin or Trotsky or indeed almost any of the old Bolsheviks? Lenin’s autism or whatever the fuck he had is no excuse for the nightmare he created. The whole party was a convention of psychopaths that the “revolution” allowed to run amuck until Stalin stopped it in 1937 along with the mass murders that began with the revolution and never really stopped until Stalin wiped them out (almost all of Stalin’s mass murders that he ordered himself afterwords were either within the communist party… like the officers purge… or of non Russian ethnics such as when he ordered the mass execution of the Polish officer corps… Stalin consistently really hated the Poles for whatever reason).

                  I’m not justifying Marx at all but Marx merely was a theoretician (and his theories may not have been his own anyway he was perhaps just a typical jewish frontman for traitorous elites) who if not for the 1st world war and Woodrow Wilson unleashing leftism on the world would have faded into obscurity by the 1950s.

            • jim says:

              Excellent analysis.

              Conservacucks conserve ten year old radical leftism

              Tradcucks worship thousand year old radical leftism.

            • Nikolai says:


              • jim says:

                Unresponsive. We point out that these were evil priests who did evil things for evil reasons, and you make no attempt to defend their conduct, merely tell us that calling evil “evil” is absurd.

                • Nikolai says:


                • jim says:

                  Henceforth all argument and evidence about clerical celibacy that fails to address “having faithful children” and “rule in his own house”, that elides rather than explaining away Saint Paul’s command, is going to be deleted, and followed up by the relevant section of Saint Paul.

                  A priest who does not have sex is not by that rejecting Saint Paul. A priest who does not have children is not by that rejecting Saint Paul.

                  But a church that appoints a man to be a priest who does not have faithful children does by that reject Saint Paul.

                  Children and patriarchy are the issue. Sex is not the issue.

                  Further comments defending the Church’s position on sex, rather than defending the Church’s position on children and patriarchy, are going to be deleted as off topic and repetitious.

        • St Jerome says:

          Dear Jim, I did a search of your blog for comments about Jerome, and all I could find was a comment about Jerome arguing for mandatory celibacy amongst clergy.

          “Jerome was strikingly evil, hateful, nasty, and dishonest.”

          What am I supposed to know to accept this as true?

          As regards priestly celibacy, or any form of celibacy in the churches that are apostolic, — catholic,orthodox,oriental orthodox, nestorian – all of them have celibacy mandatory for bishops and catholics only have mandatory celibacy for priests of the latin rite. The catholics have eastern rite catholics of 16 or 17 other rites that have the same laws regarding celibacy as the orthodox.

          It is also pretty clear that it has been this way since before even st jerome since it didn’t just happen magically upon st jerome randomly sitting in a cave writing letters and translating scripture.

          also @jehu that first statement is pretty stupid and im not even a catholic. Also martin luther is just an idiot. He removed the book of scripture that explicitly word for word contradicted him. So fuck that idiot tbh.

          Christianity is false if any form of protestantism is the true version of it.

          • jim says:

            Read Saint Jerome.

            If his stuff appeared in comments on this blog, he would be censored for arguing from false consensus, making improbable claims without presenting evidence in support, and saying “hail fellow Christian” while denying that anyone but himself was Christian.

          • jim says:

            > It is also pretty clear that it has been this way since before even st jerome

            This power struggle has been going on since the fourth century, partly holiness spiraling, partly the gay mafia. I am inclined to believe that Saint Jerome was gay mafia because of his hostility to breeders. But celibacy was not actually imposed until the eleventh century. No shortage of married Bishops in the West before and during the great Schism.

            • Saint Jerome says:

              Jerome is gay mafia, that really did make me laugh so I have to say fair play.

              The reason I asked earlier, is it just Jerome you have a problem with, or is Augustine gay mafia as well. Augustine has works on virginity, continence, widowhood, and on the works of monks, as well as a book on the good of marriage. I almost forgot his monastic rule as well which is not that much different from the older rule of Basil. Does Augustine hate breeders and belong to the gay mafia as well?

              Or what about Ambrose, does he hate breeders because we have an extant work on virginity as well? Not to mention of various letters he wrote to monks and virgins.

              Or what about Athanasius who wrote the life of st Anthony of the desert who as I am sure you are aware was a celibate hermit who lived 2 centuries before Jerome.

              What about tertullian, I am sure you looked up his works which are a lot older than Jerome.

              I am not going to bother naming easterns on these subjects because they are much more numerous than the west but the point I am making is clear. As soon as Christians stop being killed an absolute metric shit ton of writing is produced concerning the belief of the Christianity. The writings make clear the belief of christianity in the goodness of both marriage and the celibate state in the multitude of writings about virginity and continence.

              In my view, I will say that Augustine of hippo who ended up a celibate bishop and was also one of the geniuses of his millennium, has a far greater claim to understanding and knowing the belief of the early Christians than someone telling us that the dude who sat in a cave for 20+ years translating the entirety of scripture into Latin is really part of the gay mafia.

              • jim says:

                I am unaware of Saint Augustine proposing priestly celibacy.

                The argument that Saint Augustine etcetera proposed priestly celibacy seems to be very similar to the argument that Saint Paul proposed priestly celibacy.

                No, Saint Paul did not propose priestly celibacy, and thought it unwise and bad for the Church.

                It may well be that men called by God to celibacy are exceptionally holy, but that does not necessarily qualify them for priesthood, which requires other qualities, qualities that a father can demonstrate and a celibate cannot. Nor is everyone who purports to be celibate exceptionally holy and called by God to celibacy. A lot of men are celibate because they have monstrous urges that can never be satisfied in reality, so they virtuously refrain from attempting to satisfy them, and a lot of men purport to be celibate so that they can get close to those choirboys. It seems likely that the latter substantially outnumber the former.

                The Roman Catholic Church, soon after it instituted priestly celibacy, capitulated to the Romance movement by making female consent officially essential to marriage, a program so inane and contrary to human nature that it was widely ignored until the 1950s. This old institutionalization of leftism reflects the profound incomprehension of women that one would expect from a celibate priesthood.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Augustine said that sexual passions having been like almost everything else corrupted by the fall involved sin but I know of no point where he advocated that celibacy should be any sort of organizational principle. He approved of it for monks of course but monks were not tending to regular congregants they were at least theoretically seeking individual spiritual enlightenment and perfection.

                  Given that Augustine was by his own admission (more than even the average North African Roman) a poonhound before he got this under control late in life and long after he became a Christian… its strange to think he would advocate celibacy the way the likely homosexual Jerome advocated celibacy.

                • St Jerome says:

                  Lets first deal with the issue that perhaps Jerome was gay mafia or that he hates breeders or whatever, because I think this assertion is quite wrong. There are a number of passages in scripture that I think will be appropriate to present here.

                  The first is the story of Mary & Martha in the Gospel of St Luke chapter 10. Effectively Jesus says that Mary who chose to sit down and listen to Jesus had chosen the better part. ALL of the early fathers who comment on this passage will tell you why Mary will have chosen the better part and that the life which is more devoted to the Lord is the superior one. Some of the early fathers will use the terms active vs contemplative life but basically EVERY SINGLE ONE of the fathers will explain that the contemplative/spiritual or whatever label they give it is better than the active life.

                  Many of these fathers will link this story to the 1st letter of St Paul to the Corinthians. In chapter 7 Paul says in the beginning says that it is good for a man not to touch a woman. That he wishes that all were as he is (ie a celibate) and further that the unmarried man is solicitous for the Lord and the married man for his wife. Even if they don’t link this letter to the story of Mary and Martha, every father who comments on chapter 7 will echo St Paul and explain that the unmarried contemplative/virginal state of life where you are concerned with the Lord is the superior way to live. Again EVERY SINGLE ONE of the fathers will explain the letter of St Paul this way. You will NOT find a single father saying something like “well ackchually, Paul is wrong here, its better to be married herp derp.” Further, and to link it to another place. The early fathers know their scripture and they will also talk about Matthew chapter 19. Those who can be eunuchs for the kingdom ought to be eunuchs for the kingdom.

                  There are also a lot of works of the early fathers concerning the spiritual life, concerning virginity, concerning continence, and EVERY SINGLE ONE of the fathers will be referring back to these aforementioned scripture passages to justify their teaching that the virginal state is superior to the married state of life. It is also pretty damn obvious that this is the meaning of St Paul in the letter to corinth that the celibate state is superior.

                  Does that mean that St Paul hates breeders? No of course not. Similarly, Jerome cannot be said to hate breeders or marriage either, because he is merely stating the teaching of St Paul that the virginal state is better. Jerome even anticipates people like you and the cominator when he says

                  ” Some one may say, “Do you dare detract from wedlock, which is a state blessed by God?” I do not detract from wedlock when I set virginity before it. No one compares a bad thing with a good.”

                  and further

                  “We know that in a great house, there are not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and earthenware. And that upon the foundation, Christ, which Paul the master-builder laid, some build gold, silver, precious stones: others, on the contrary, hay, wood, straw. We are not ignorant of the words, ” Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled.” We have read God’s first command, “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth “; but while we honor marriage we prefer virginity which is the offspring of marriage. Will silver cease to be silver, if gold is more precious than silver? Or is despite done to tree and corn, if we prefer the fruit to root and foliage, or the grain to stalk and ear? Virginity is to marriage what fruit is to the tree, or grain to the straw. Although the hundred-fold, the sixty-fold, and the thirty-fold spring from one earth and from one sowing, yet there is a great difference in respect of number. The thirty-fold has reference to marriage.”

                  All Jerome is doing is saying that celibacy is better than marriage, which is what he learned when he read the letter of St Paul, and all of the early fathers interpret St Paul the same way. Augustine the poonhound too, just go read his works on virginity, continence, his rule, whatever you want. No early father will be found to say that marriage is bad. But they will ALL say that the celibate state is better.

                  Now we have to deal with the clergy, well every protestant worth his salt will quote the letter of st paul to timothy, and somehow manage to overlook the fact that both Paul and Timothy are celibate bishops so it simply cannot be the case that Paul is imposing marriage on the clergy because he should then be further saying to Timothy “hey you better find me and you a wife lol”.

                  Now lets move to the council of Nicea in 325. There was a discussion on the following subject – the continence of married clergy. There are clearly married clergy at the time as well as celibate clergy, and the council doesn’t think of imposing marriage on the celibate clergy but continence on the married ones. Again when you search the early history you will find that many clergy that were ordained put away their wifes after they were ordained, and even earlier councils declaring that if you had a child with your wife after ordination that you were to lose the clerical state.

                  You will of course be tempted to classify all this as the beginning of your cherished holiness spiral, but this desire for continence, virginity, celibacy comes almost entirely out of St Paul. But these councils were codifying what they saw as the traditions coming from the apostles.

                  You have also said that the Church of the fourth century was not the one that conquered the roman empire from within.

                  Ok well the burden of proof is on you.

                  Go find any father of the church, any commentary or document of the church from that age (pre nicea) explaining that the married state is better than the virginal one which BTW would be in direct explicit contradiction of St Paul 1 Corinthians chapter 7. I will be waiting.

                • jim says:

                  You are lying about what Saint Paul said.

                  A few of the words in the New Testament can plausibly be given the meanings of that Saint Jerome gave them, but you have to throw out the rest of the New Testament.

                  They can also be given considerably saner and more plausible meanings that do fit with the rest of the New Testamnet.

                  Let us instead of endlessly talking about the words that the gay mafia can make fit, discuss the words that the gay mafia cannot make fit.

                  From here on, everything you say will be deleted until you discuss some of the passages in the bible that do not fit, because endlessly revisiting those tiny portions of the bible that the sodomites love to quote is a waste of space. You and Nikolai have already quoted them a hundred times, and we have all ignored them one hundred times. This is a total waste of space.

                  The words you keep quoting and giving evil and insane meanings can plausibly be given good and sane meanings.

                  What insane meaning do you propose to give the words we keep quoting. You just quietly toss them out, and tell us they do not mean what they say. What then do they mean? What was Saint Paul saying if he was not saying what he was saying?

                • The Cominator says:

                  You will of course be tempted to classify all this as the beginning of your cherished holiness spiral, but this desire for continence, virginity, celibacy comes almost entirely out of St Paul.

                  It absolutely is the beginning of the holiness spiral and its a lie that either St. Paul or St. Augustine would have endorsed any of this crap as they plainly did not.

                  All arguments for clerical celibacy actually sound suspiciously like the arguments of the Manichean heretics as a matter of fact just as all arguments for papal supremacy sound suspiciously like the arguments of the Donatist heretics.

                • Nikolai says:


                • jim says:

                  Except for Jerome, none of the authorities you cite directly contradict the plain, clear and direct meaning of Saint Paul. Timothy Chapter three verse five and Titus Chapter One verses five and six:

                  Find me anyone before the third century who does directly contradict Saint Paul.

                • polifugue says:

                  There is nothing in 1 Corinthians 7 which calls for mandatory clerical celibacy. Paul states that it is in the best interests of people not to commit sexual immorality, but if the temptation arises, marriage is in good order. Paul is not saying that celibacy is holier than marriage but that celibacy is holier than fornication, which no one at this blog disagrees with.

                  To make this short, at the Council of Nicaea, there were married priests because the insane doctrines of Vatican I and papal supremacy did not exist. The Ecumenical Councils were called by the Emperor, not the Pope. All the nonsense that is today’s Catholic dogma simply did not exist neither at the time of the fathers nor the time of the Councils. We had St. Jerome since Nicaea, but mandatory clerical celibacy 600 years later.

                  Whereas Progressives read Ephesians 5:21 into 5:22, 1000-year-old radical leftists read 1 Corinthians 7:1 without 7:2.

                  Catholics read mandatory clerical celibacy and papal supremacy into the Fathers and Scripture in the same way Progressives read mandatory female consent to marriage into the Fathers and Scripture. If we bring back Christianity to the West we should throw out Vatican I, and when we bring back the Fathers we are bringing back the interpretation of the Fathers from Eastern Orthodoxy.

                  Conservacucks conserve ten year old radical leftism, while tradcucks worship thousand year old radical leftism.

                • Starman says:

                  @St. Jerome

                  I can only judge a religion by its fruits.

                  And the fruit of Saint Jerome is fruits in the Church hierarchy….

                • mack's boot says:

                  christians are bug men because christianity breeds bug men


                  but it’s nothing compared to industrialisation the biggest mistake of all time

                  because it’s the economy, stupid


              • The Cominator says:

                Messes up blockquoting

                I hate not having an edit capability here…

                • St Jerome says:

                  @Anyone who disagrees

                  Go find me in any of the commentaries on scripture by the fathers,

                  Any disagreement with the following postulate.

                  That the virginal/celibate/continent state is better than marriage.

                  Tons and Shit tons of commentaries on 1 Corinthians.

                  Tons of writings on Virginity and Continence, by the fathers too.

                  It is the christian belief that being celibate for the kingdom of God is a superior state of life.

                  Its on you to find a father expressing the contrary interpretation of 1 corinthians 7.

                  I really wish you luck in your endeavor.

                • jim says:

                  You are dodging the issue.

                  Paul commanded recruitment of priests from married men with well behaved children because raising children is prior experience for the duties of priesthood and successfully raising well behaved children demonstrates competence.

                  In the language of the Dark Enlightenment, the earthly mission of the priesthood is to get everyone into cooperate/cooperate equilibrium, and to obtain general agreement on what behaviors constitute cooperate/cooperate equilibrium, the social technology of cooperation, and keeping your children out of trouble and from killing each other is prior experience and a demonstration of competence in this activity.

                  You assume, without explanation or argument, that the old Christian position on celibacy and virginity implies the agenda of the lavender Mafia.

                  Obviously it does not imply anything remotely like that.

                • The Cominator says:

                  But its funny how all the arguments for celibacy sound suspiciously like the arguments for the Manichean heresy just as the arguments for Papal Supremacy and against lay control of the church sound suspiciously like the arguments of the Donatist heresy.

                • polifugue says:

                  I have the Orthodox Study Bible, which states the following regarding 1 Corinthians 7:

                  “Paul’s personal preference is for celibacy, but he knows this is a ‘gift from God’ (v. 7) that is not given to all”

                  “Though Paul once again recommends the unmarried state, he affirms the holiness of marriage and gives the widow a choice: to be married…in the Lord (v.39), that is to another Christian, or to remain as she is (v. 40).”

                  Do not argue from false consensus that every commentary by the Fathers made in history points to the 1000-year-old view of mandatory clerical celibacy.

                • ten says:

                  I am not well read in christian theology, ancient or otherwise, so please bear with my ignorant musings.

                  If the virgin and the celibate are like the fruit to the tree of marriage, then marriage is a prerequisite for them. The fruits are meant for God and church, and the tree must be kept healthy and bountiful to bring them forth.

                  The tree is not healthy nor bountiful, the church is failing to tend to the tree, and will lose both gold, silver and wooden vessels because of it.


                  Let us agree that virginity and celibacy are the holier or better states.

                  It is in fact not what is being argued against. It is being argued that the tree is failing and its tenders are failing.

                  jims argument, which i agree with fully and hopefully represent adequately, is that improper propagation of the holiness of celibacy has led the treetenders to not know how to tend the tree. From lack of experience they can not lead by example, and their flock wanders astray. The crystal clear command of Paul is that the treetenders, shepherders, must be able to lead by example and have demonstrated this ability.

                  Pauls agreement on the superiority of virginity and celibacy has no implications for this, while the propagation of celibate priests has the implication of having no celibacy, no virginity, and no tree.

                  There is no disagreement between the church fathers and jim, and your position in the latest post is also congruent. Our argument is not “celibacy and virginity are unholy” but “the destruction of marriage is unholy”, and it is caused by false application of the holiness of celibacy in open defiance of scripture.

                • St Jerome says:

                  Jim, Paul didn’t command that priests/bishops/deacons be recruited from the men that had families.

                  If he did he wouldn’t have been able to be a celibate bishop himself and nor would timothy have been a celibate bishop.

                  My point is that the early fathers all agree with Paul that the celibate state is holier than the married state.

                  And when we look at the early church documentation on the married priesthood, it often accompanies arguments about whether the married clerics should be continent as they are supposed to be solicitous for the Lord.

                  There is no church document from the early times ever considering the imposition on marriage upon clerics, nor does any of the early fathers ever consider that this is appropriate.

                  This is just an historical fact. It is also clear that the entirety of the church in the early days never ever considered that Paul had imposed a married priesthood.

                  In fact it is always has been interpreted as a limit on the number of marriages that a married cleric should have , the greek literally says “a one woman man”,

                  I am not arguing that 1 corinthians 7 imposes mandatory priestly celibacy at all, all I am saying is that the early fathers who commented on this believed as did the early church that the celibate/virginal state was superior to the married state, and that the whole time that the church had married clergy

                • jim says:

                  > Jim, Paul didn’t command that priests/bishops/deacons be recruited from the men that had families.

                  Yes he did. Plainly, Flatly. Directly. Twice.

                  If his words do not mean what he says, what do they mean?

                  Find me a church father third century or earlier who suggests some other meaning for these words.

                  What other meaning can you ascribe to those direct and straightforward words?

                  Find me one early Church father who directly endorses Jerome’s position that “A bishop who fathers children while a Bishop is no Bishop”

                  In First Corinthians Chapter nine Paul says that his wife and sister should receive church support, and that other Apostles wives are receiving Church support. It is possible that the wife is hypothetical, but if so, the reason for the hypothesis is the wives of other apostles.

                • St Jerome says:

                  That the whole time that the church had married clergy the documentation we have concerning the discussions about the clerical life – was the discussion concerning clerical continence.

                  As you know yourself anyway, the church of those times would utterly reject the dark enlightenment and any suggestion that it had a natural mission simply to police the behaviour of peoples. It had a supernatural mission to go and baptize the pagans and convert them to becoming members of the church for the salvation of their souls.

                  What is another point worth making, is that the church considered that it could make laws regulating the clergy. This is why the easterns all have married priests but only take bishops from the monks. If you were to suggest to any eastern christian that the church didn’t have the authority to do that they would laugh in your face just as any catholic would were you to suggest to him that the church didn’t have the authority to require celibacy from the priesthood.

                • Saint Jerome says:


                  Yes the modern churches are indeed failing to tend the tree of marriage as you put it. It is a failure to teach their own doctrine.

                  All my point is, is that st paul didn’t make it compulsory to have married clergy, and were any dark enlightened dude or any protestant to go back in time to tell the early church that paul wanted mandatory marriage for clergy they would simply laugh in their face.

                  I may as well expand my challenge.

                  Find any early father commenting on the letter to Timothy saying that marriage is mandatory for clerics.

                  Pro tip – you won’t.

                  They will all say something along the lines of remarriage of clergy is not permitted, or a man who had two wives cannot be ordained.

                  If you want to believe that paul imposes mandatory marriage, then Paul himself broke his own law and as such is a hypocrite. And the very bloke he wrote the letter to also broke it.

                • jim says:

                  > All my point is, is that st paul didn’t make it compulsory to have married clergy

                  Saint Paul unambiguously made it compulsory, not that priests should be married, but that new recruits for the priesthood should be chosen from married men with well behaved children.

                  > If you want to believe that paul imposes mandatory marriage

                  Paul said nothing of the kind, and no one here suggests he said anything of the kind. It is a hiring requirement, not a disciplinary requirement. It is a test of competence. Try reading Timothy 3, though it is dangerous the Lavender Mafia to read it lest they burst into flames. It is a competence requirement, not a holiness requirement.

                  Because if a cleric does not have children, you cannot know in advance if he is going to do a priestly job well.

                  Find me a third century cleric who doubts that Timothy 3 means exactly what it says. Quote Saint Augustine directly rejecting Saint Paul.

                  You are arguing against the proposition that married men are holier than single men. That is not our, nor Saint Paul’s position. Rather, our position that is that men with children are more competent at instilling good discipline.

                  First Timothy Chapter three:

                  2 A bishop then must be …
                  4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;

                  5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)

                  12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

                  That this is a competence requirement, not a holiness requirement, is made clear in First Timothy Chapter three verse five.

                  That this is a recruitment requirement, not a continuing requirement for existing priests, whose children presumably grow up and move away, and whose wives eventually die, as Saint Paul’s wife did, is made clear. in Titus Chapter One verses five and six:

                  5 For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:

                  6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

                  He said it twice, he said it clearly and unambiguously, and the meaning is clear and makes sense. Failure to follow his clear directions has had the results one would predict.

                • St Jerome says:

                  @Jim I will accept that you have a good argument in the sense that interpreting St Paul in the way you describe is the best way to get effective and perhaps holy clerics. I do not deny that this is one way to interpret the letter.

                  However, as I have said the early church interpreted this as forbidding the ordination of someone who had been married more than once. Since you asked for a 3rd century cleric, I decided to do one better and give you a 2nd century one. You can find out who he is yourself.


                  “But, while dealing with the passage, I would say that we will be able perhaps now to understand and clearly set forth a question which is hard to grasp and see into, with regard to the legislation of the Apostle concerning ecclesiastical matters; for Paul wishes no one of those of the church, who has attained to any eminence beyond the many, as is attained in the administration of the sacraments, to make trial of a second marriage.”


                  “Now, when we saw that some who have been married twice may be much better than those who have been married once, we were perplexed why Paul does not at all permit those who have been twice married to be appointed to ecclesiastical dignities; for also it seemed to me that such a thing was worthy of examination, as it was possible that a man, who had been unfortunate in two marriages, and had lost his second wife while he was yet young, might have lived for the rest of his years up to old age in the greatest self-control and chastity. Who, then, would not naturally be perplexed why at all, when a ruler of the church is being sought for, we do not appoint such a man, though he has been twice married, because of the expressions about marriage, but lay hold of the man who has been once married as our ruler, even if he chance to have lived to old age with his wife, and sometimes may not have been disciplined in chastity and temperance?”


                  You won’t find any early church father championing your interpretation, but now its your turn to find the 3rd century cleric stating that clerics must have been married at least at some point.

                  The 4th century records I won’t give you because you think they are wrong, but they mind you are pretty unanimous that the law given in this letter by St Paul forbids the ordination of men who have been married twice, and NONE of them say that the Apostle imposes a disciplinary rule that the cleric must have at one point been married.

                  Of course it makes sense that if the guy was married he must have been a good father and manager of the household, but all the commentators specifically exclude that the law means that marriage at some point was necessary, while explaining that men who had been married twice were excluded.


                  I think I have proven my point that St Jerome didn’t hate breeders but was nestled within the entire church tradition which believes that the marriage is good but that celibacy/virginity is better.

                  And further that the early church does not receive the letter of St Paul to Timothy as a requirement that the clerics must have been married (which is Jims interpretation) but that it forbids men who have been married twice from ordination.

                • jim says:


                • jim says:

                  > I think I have proven my point that St Jerome didn’t hate breeders but was nestled within the entire church tradition.

                  Origen was accused of hating breeders, and was repeatedly declared a heretic, and repeatedly undeclared a heretic, in substantial part over perceived lack of support for sex, marriage and reproduction. He can be plausibly interpreted as supporting the modern holiness spiraled position, and plausibly interpreted otherwise, and when interpreted as supporting the modern position, was declared heretical. And if Origen was none too keen on breeders, Saint Jerome hated them with a hatred a thousand times hotter than Origen.

                  Epiphanius complained that Origen’s writings denigrated human sexual reproduction and accuses Origen of having been an Encratite. (Encratites being a heretical sect opposed to sex and marriage, which sect Saint Paul condemned.) And your spin on Origen is more or less “Origen is OK, and he sure sound sympathetic to and supportive of the Encratite position, so therefore the Encratite position is just fine and was universally accepted in the early Church.”

                  That interpretation of Origen may well be correct – but it was not fine in the early Church, and Origen covered his ass against that plausible interpretation. If Origen holds the views you attribute to him, he was indeed an Encratite, and Saint Jerome more so.

                  You are arguing that Origen’s views were those of the modern Church, which is sort of true and sort of false (he equivocated), and that Saint Jerome’s views were the same as Origen’s views. No Saint Jerome’s views were not. If Origen can arguably be interpreted as hostile to sex, marriage and children, with Saint Jerome there is absolutely no doubt.

                  Your argument is that having taken one step on the anti sex, anti marriage, anti reproduction holiness spiral, the next step is OK, then the next step after that, and the next step after that.

                  Rather, the conclusion we should draw is that the first step was wrong. That the fruits of Origen were Jerome, and the fruits of Jerome were fruits.

                  Origen’s views are not those of the modern Church, they were a first step on that holiness spiral of the modern Easter Orthodox and Roman Catholic Churches, and they were not uncontroversial and generally accepted in the early Church.

                  And Origen, like all following him to ever greater heights of madness, elides rather than explaining away Saint Paul’s requirement that Bishops have faithful children.

                  He explains away “Husband of one wife”, while, like yourself, and like everyone who took that holiness spiral even further, refusing to ever acknowledge “having faithful children”, “ruleth well in his own house”.

                  All further posts on this topic that quietly throw Timothy three in the ditch will be deleted.

                  First Timothy Chapter three:

                  2 A bishop then must be …
                  4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;

                  5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)

                  For any comment by you on this topic to be allowed in this blog, it has to contain the relevant words of Saint Paul, address the conflict, and attempt to explain them away, or quote some theological authority that mentions them and attempts to explain them away.

                  If you present argument or evidence inconsistent with “having faithful children”, you have to address “having faithful children” and “rule in his own house”, or I am just going to delete that argument and evidence.

                  No argument will be allowed that quietly presupposes that Saint Paul never said “having faithful children”, and that this view of what Saint Paul said is and was uncontroversial and universally accepted.

                  The words must be “childless”, not “celibate”. We are going to discuss childless Bishops, not celibate Bishops, and I refuse the discuss celibate Bishops any further. We are going to discuss childless Bishops and Deacons. My frame does not have to be accepted, but I will not allow it to be ignored any further.

                  Ignoring your interlocutor’s frame is unresponsive and impolite. Holding your own frame is OK, but imposing your frame on my blog is not going to be allowed. You can support celibate priests, but this blog condemns childless priests in teaching positions and preaching directly to the laity.

                  St. Paul refers to a heretical Christian sect “forbidding to marry and abstaining from meats” Irenæus calls them Encratites and indicts them because rejecting marriage, they implicitly accuse the Creator, Who made both male and female.

                  It is lack of children, not lack of sex, that is direct rejection of Saint Paul. Saint Paul also tells us that the female companion of visiting clergy should be supported by the Church being visited. Dark Enlightenment (I, not Saint Paul am speaking here) tell us that representatives of the Church without female companions who look after them are unlikely to be seen as alpha by the women of the congregation, and thus the Church will fail to control female defection. Notice that Trump uses his hot wife as a stage prop.)

                  Predictably, the Encratites holiness spiraled all the way to communism. Holiness spirals start off as “I am holier than you, and therefore should have higher status than you do”, and are apt to wind up as “I am higher status than you, therefore I can take your stuff”.

                  Maybe Origen was an Encratite, arguably not. But if we buy your version of Origen, he was mighty close to being Encratite.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  Of course they police the behavior of peoples. They said it flat out in several points that the community was to chastise wayward members of the flock that they might return to the fold. Furthermore, the way a lot of pagans were converted was by telling them they were wrong and their gods were weak, then beating the shit out of the people that took offense to prove it. Faith through superior firepower. You do not go and convert the whole world to your faith if you aren’t interested in changing behavior to the correct ones.

                • Nikolai says:

                  “The words must be “childless”, not “celibate”. We are going to discuss childless Bishops, not celibate Bishops, and I refuse the discuss celibate Bishops any further.”

                  Ok. Admittedly, I haven’t read hagiographies of all the Church Fathers, but from what I know most of them were childless bishops. I vaguely recall a few canonized Popes being widows with children. Looks like St. Gregory of Nyssa had a wife, but I don’t see any mention of a child. St. Augustine had a child with his concubine, but he viewed the whole thing as a grave sin, a stain on his record rather than a qualification for his bishopric.

                  As far as I can tell, Sts. Ignatius of Antioch, Irenaeus, Polycarp, John Chrysostom, Ambrose, Basil, Jerome, Clement of Rome, etc. were all childless and Ambrose was known in particular to stress the holiness of virginity and appointed many childless priests during his bishopric. If St. Paul required bishops to be selected from men with children, why are the Church’s best bishops almost all childless? Is there even any proof of St. Paul or St. Timothy having any children?

                  Wisdom 3 ” for happy is the barren: and the undefiled, that hath not known bed in sin: she shall have fruit in the visitation of holy souls. [14] And the eunuch, that hath not wrought iniquity with his hands, nor thought wicked things against God: for the precious gift of faith shall be given to him, and a most acceptable lot in the temple of God. [15] For the fruit of good labours is glorious, and the root of wisdom never faileth.

                  [16] But the children of adulterers shall not come to perfection, and the seed of the unlawful bed shall be rooted out. [17] And if they live long, they shall be nothing regarded, and their last old age shall be without honour. [18] And if they die quickly, they shall have no hope, nor speech of comfort in the day of trial. [19] For dreadful are the ends of a wicked race.” I think I know why Luther took this one out of the Bible

                • jim says:

                  > Is there even any proof of St. Paul or St. Timothy having any children?

                  Not only do we have no record of them having children, neither do we have any record of them having fathers.

                  Our history of the Church before it got power is vague, incomplete, and spotty.

                  Even at the time of Saint Paul, there was a holiness spiral going, which he mentions and condemns – the faction that rejected meat and marriage. And naturally, when the church got power, the holiness spiral accelerated and became more dangerous and threatening. Eventually, the Church had to do a Stalin, and ended the holiness spiral by killing off the Encratites (Trotskyists).

                  A Stalin stabilization works by saying OK, we now have the correct level of holiness, and everyone less holy than this (right communists) and everyone more holy than this (Trotskyists) gets the bullet. And the Eastern Orthodox is currently still at approximately the level of holiness on the celibacy issue that they had when they killed off the Encratites, while Roman Catholic is going closer to being Encratite.

                  The idea that everything was just fine and uncontroversial on the celibacy issue and everyone was in agreement is not true. There were bans, denunciations, and book burnings. In the end, a great deal of blood was spilled. Not as much as over the Trinity, but quite a lot of blood nonetheless.

                  And if the spiral had ended sooner, a Cromwell rather than a Stalin, less blood would have been spilled and you would probably see a lot more Bishops recorded as having children.

                  The situation was stabilized once the Encratites were killed off, and remained stable all the way to the Great Schism, when escalation on the celibacy issue set in again as a result of the power struggle between Church and Kings.

                  Part of the Stalin type stabilization is a rewrite of history that everyone (or at least everyone who was not killed) always agreed on the current level of holiness. But the bloodshed suggests a rather substantial amount of disagreement, as does the extremely poor survival rate of books relevant to various controversies.

                  We don’t really know how many Bishops had children. But we do know a lot of Bishops went right on having children up to the Great Schism which is a thousand years of Bishops having children and no one making any fuss about it – not required (and it should have been required) but not effectively forbidden either.

                  Before the Church took power, a lot of history was lost because no one bothered to record it. After it took power, a lot of history continued to be lost because books concerning the disagreement got burned, sometimes with their authors. When a faction got killed off, the discussion of the issues they factionalized around tended to vanish. The survival rate among early religious works is considerably worse than the survival rate of articles in the Soviet Encyclopedia.

                  > And the eunuch, that hath not wrought iniquity with his hands, nor thought wicked things against God

                  One of the many accusations against Origen is that he was a eunuch, so clearly at that time being a eunuch was not subject to social or religious approval, on the contrary subject to severe and stringent religious disapproval. If he was a eunuch, that was a shameful and terrible secret that would have rendered him unholy in the eyes of his colleagues. Maybe Origen was a eunuch, but I am quite sure Jerome was not.

                  I conjecture that as some point in holiness spiral, the extremely holy started to take “made eunuchs for the sake of the Kingdom of God” literally, and the others did not like the way the holiness spiral was heading, so declared it extremely unholy.

      • Oog en Hand says:

        What should be done with any copy of the Vulgate we can find? Should we give Roman Catholicism the same treatment as Islam?

        • jim says:

          The smoothness and swiftness of the submission of Roman Catholicism to progressivism, indicates a quieter solution.

          If the Pope bows down and prays to a naked Amazonian idol representing Gaia, he will certainly pray to Gnon.

  10. Halion says:

    Bad news from the south. COVID-19 could only be the beginning. Several days ago the virus arrived in the capital of Argentina and the government is made up of irresponsible and incompetent leftists who have not taken nor seem to take any containment measures. The problem with this is that in the north of the country there is already an epidemic of dengue, a viral disease transmitted by mosquitoes that causes hemorrhagic fevers … it is a matter of time for them to cross.

    • jim says:

      Dengue is a positive-sense single-stranded RNA virus virus, CORVID-19 a positive-sense, single-stranded RNA virus – they are close enough related to cross.

      But Dengue has a more complex transmission mechanism – it infects both mosquitoes and their meals. Not apparent that the transmission mechanisms are easily combined – the hybrids would likely be incapable of virulence.

  11. Karl says:

    Germany isn’t doing much testing either. It is not that the test couldn’t be done, rather there are incentives for not testing.

    Tests cost money, althought not much. However, the test result won’t help the patient and it won’t help the physician. German hospitals will note that a patient has viral pneumonia – which virus precisely is irrelevant for treatment. So there is no demand for testing from the patient or the physician.

    At the administrative level of the hospital, nobody wants to about a COVID-19 case in the hospital. If managment knows, they would have to put personal in quarantaine, close of the ward where the patient was treated. Profit margins are thin. Such measures would make a profitable hospital unprofitable.

    The physicians and nurses treating a patient for viral pneumonia simply assume that it is COVID-19, but that’s it. Hardly anybody wants to know for sure. When a patient died, they will certify that the cause of death was viral pneumonia – which is true.

    The cases that are found in Germany are simply the cases that can’t be avoided to be found. If there is a certified case, all contacts must be tested by law, all contacts placed in isolation. This law is obeyed.

    By the way, have a sample taken for testing is very unpleasant – some snot from your nose won’t do.

    • Patient zero was tracked down in North Italy, a Pakistani immigrant who was working delivery for a Chinese restaurant – a perfect position to catch and spread the virus. Back then he was ASKED to stay in his apartment, which he refused and continued working. And today the whole country is being locked down.

      Any sany government would have not nicely asked but ordered that guy into a medical quarantine, not home quarantine.

      What an illustrative example of the joke that modern government is. One guy did not want to lose a few weeks of wages, and now the whole country is getting its economy basically shut down.

      We really need aristocrats with discretionary, “arbitrary” powers because these kinds of stuff cannot be solved through long bureaucratic channels. Ideally, an aristocrat would have taken his household troops, arrested that guy without any process and escorted him into medical quarantine, told him if you try to escape you get executed, if you stay put I will pay your missed wages out of my own pocket and that would be that.

      • The Cominator says:

        “What an illustrative example of the joke that modern government is. One guy did not want to lose a few weeks of wages, and now the whole country is getting its economy basically shut down.”

        Paki muslim probably did it deliberately as a form of jihad. Muslims in our lands should get the leftist treatment (even if they are right about women) because they are similarly an intolerable and implacable problem.

      • Not Tom says:

        I don’t think this was ever verified, and I’m not convinced that a delivery boy would actually be in such a prime position to spread the virus, unless he did so on purpose like coughing inside the bags.

        The virus is most likely to spread in cool, dry, indoor locations with a lot of people in an enclosed space. That’s practically the opposite of food delivery. Where we are seeing massive breakouts is on cruise ships, airplanes, and crowded public events.

        Of course that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be careful, or that you’ll be totally safe as long as you avoid large crowds. But even if some Paki did help out with the initial transmission, it’s a facile explanation for the disaster happening in Italy right now.

        • The Cominator says:

          “I don’t think this was ever verified, and I’m not convinced that a delivery boy would actually be in such a prime position to spread the virus, unless he did so on purpose like coughing inside the bags.”

          You know exactly the kind of thing a Muslim would do.

        • Encelad says:

          My take is that the virus was in Europe significantly earlier than when the first testing began. There seems to be different strains, at least one of which almost asymptomatic in healthy people. I would say that if you could test 20 random people in Europe 4 or 5 would turn out either infected or been previously infected and recovered.

  12. BC says:

    There’s an alternative explanation why the testing and tracking has been so bad in the US: intentional sabotage by the CDC designed to spread the virus in order to hurt Trump and the economy.

    • Pooch says:

      In the US, at least, it seems to be disproportionately affecting liberal cities and states. I’m not sure if leftists would literally kill themselves to hurt Trump. I suppose it’s possible.

      • BC says:

        The state department brought very sick people from the cruise ship over to America on an airplane after telling Trump they wouldn’t and leftist talk about using the virus to infect GOP officials and older people likely to vote for Trump. I’m pretty sure they would be fine with making sure testing and tracking was ineffective if it helped remove him.

        • Pooch says:

          That’s a good point.

        • The Cominator says:

          “The state department brought very sick people from the cruise ship over to America on an airplane after telling Trump they wouldn’t and leftist talk about using the virus to infect GOP officials and older people likely to vote for Trump.”

          My solution to leftism looks better all the time doesn’t it.

          • Theshadowedknight says:

            If you are asking to be let loose in State to be an angel of death in the vein of the punishment of Egypt, go for it. It’s when you start talking about shooting shopowners for their obedience to leftist commands that we draw the line. State as an organization, and any individual working there who is not a hard right shitlord and proud is engaged in a conspiracy against the American people. Fuck them; kill them all and God will know his own.

            The Chinese have a system that I found to be rather elegant in its simplicity and utility. They censor all attempts at organization on their intranet, whether for or against the government. If a shitlib has a history of organizing people and trying to get other people to follow the party line, they get the helicopter. If not, and they swear to our party line, they are good. If, later, they start organizing again towards a leftist end, they we disappear them and that’s that.

            • The Cominator says:

              I don’t particularly care about shopowners but its got to at least be everyone no matter how lowly in a priestly job, the exceptions being those few in priestly jobs who support Trump. Nothing short of that will eliminate the cancer…

              • jim says:

                The Restoration required everyone in a priestly job to agree to conform. If they did not conform, lost their jobs. Some of those that were purged from priestly jobs moved to America, which at the time was a rustic far away place where they could not possibly cause any problems, and, among other things, they founded Harvard with the intent of conquering the world and getting everything back.

                But I don’t think that allowing Havel’s Greengrocer to switch teams caused problems. What caused problems was that the English kept getting Kings who did not support the state religion. They were worried about Kings that were furtively Catholic – and promptly got in a King that furtively supported the post puritans, in part because the post puritans were more anti Catholic than anyone. Which eventually led to them getting screwed.

                A more final solution than the Restoration, but less lethal than you propose, would be to salami slice the non conformists out of the priesthood, and then restrict the international travel of those purged – stop them from getting priestly jobs anywhere.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  He has a point. All of the non-conformists would have to be observed for the rest of their lives, and you never know where they could conspire with non-conformists that managed to hide themselves in the system. They are a point of threat to the efforts of the restoration. Their continued existence would be a net negative, unless you plan on using them as object lessons and examples of what happens to priests who step out if line.

                • Not Tom says:

                  …unless you plan on using them as object lessons and examples of what happens to priests who step out if line.

                  This has been a pretty effective strategy throughout history, has it not?

                  You do have to be careful about creating martyrs, but in general, making something visibly low-status seems to be more reliable than trying to make it disappear entirely.

                • jim says:

                  > You do have to be careful about creating martyrs, but in general, making something visibly low-status seems to be more reliable than trying to make it disappear entirely.

                  When you make something visibly low status, it does disappear entirely, in the sense that people cease to be aware that it exists. Worked with homosexuality. Gay did not exist until Oscar Wilde.

            • Bob says:

              His “system” always sounds like just him making all decisions, performing all actions, personally directing all personnel.

    • Not Tom says:

      Occam’s Razor. Incompetence and ideological blindness are the efficient, parsimonious explanation. I see no reason to believe the Alex Jones hot take.

      • BC says:

        I don’t know. Every time I see a leftist talking about wanting to get the Wuhan Flu and heading for a Trump rally it really makes me wonder.

        • Dave says:

          Not a new idea. When The Stand was published in 1978, sailors in the U.S. Navy joked that if they came down with the superflu, they’d sail their ship to Russia and surrender. Long before that, catapults were used to fling plague corpses into besieged cities. War is about killing the enemy any way you can.

        • Not Tom says:

          In that case, it doesn’t help that Trump is downplaying the threat.

          Not wanting to cause unnecessary panic in the early days made sense, but his message should have changed a long time ago from “bah, it’s nothing!” to “ok, it’s something, we need to take concrete steps to win this and you all need to get prepared, but don’t worry, we’re strong and we’ll survive”.

          Obviously the people in the State department bringing in quarantined individuals and letting them loose in the community is downright evil, but from what I’m seeing, and I really hate to say this, the median Trump voter is behaving much less intelligently than the median liberal/prog. The globohomo crowd was slow on the uptake but is starting to hunker down, close businesses, stop public events, and prepare for broader quarantine measures. Whereas nearly every Trump voter I know is still stuck on “it’s nothing, the flu is much worse!”

          The future belongs to those who show up, and many of these retarded tradcon boomers who only have a few days of supplies and are still going to crowded public events are not going to be showing up for the 2020 election.

          I understand not wanting to hurt the economy. But would you rather be like Italy (didn’t take it seriously) or South Korea (took it very seriously) right now? Besides, closing borders actually helps the economy in the long term.

          • jim says:

            If you step out of line, you become low status. Feeding Christians to the lions did not work.

            Leftism is knocking over the apple cart to grab some apples. The state religion goes off the rails when people game the state holiness status system. If you defend that apple cart, leftists will not go after it.

            We implement Saint Paul’s prescription to keep holiness status grounded on ordinary real world good conduct with family and friends. Thus, if you holiness spiral, you look like a goofball. We will need to make the existing unofficially official State Church officially official, as was done in the restoration. (When Harvard decided it was no longer a religious institution, it lied, and lie has become ever more visible) and we will need an inquisition to keep the State Church in line, but the inquisition has to be working with the culture, not against it. To make the culture something that goes with the flow of the inquisition, we ensure that the professoriat that is lecturing boys becoming men is composed of married men who have well behaved children.

            At the interview when someone is applying for the teaching job, we not only ask “will you conform”, but also “How are you doing managing your kids?” That stops them from answering that they are even holier than the archbishop and the grand inquisitor, because they support cause of the day, but even more so.

            • Mike says:

              @Not Tom
              I somewhat understand Trump and some other’s perspective on the idea of Coronavirus “not being a big deal.” The disease, at least as of right now, kills no one but the old. Hell, it rarely even brings a younger person to the hospital. The fact is, as long as the disease only affects this segment of the population, it shouldn’t trigger societal collapse (although that clearly isn’t what is happening in reality with the stock market collapse and all). People 70+ years old don’t mean shit to the future of society. I’m sorry to put it brutally like that, but they simply don’t. They’re not running government, they’re not running the economy, they’re not the future mothers and fathers of our people. In any other time-period besides our own, this disease wouldn’t make anyone bat an eye. It would be seen as any other illness that kills the old. I mean what, do the Corona panic-mongers think that people were afraid of the Black Plague because it killed 75 year olds? The idea is laughable.

              It should also be said that there is a contingent of the dissident right that actually supports the outbreak lol. Just look at Parallax Optics and Spandrell’s Twitter feeds, they are hailing the disease as the savior of the West because it will expose the retardation of our elites, the inefficiency of our bureaucracy, and will kill all the parasitic boomers. It might be half tongue-in-cheek, but I think they’re being mostly serious.

              • Not Tom says:

                The disease, at least as of right now, kills no one but the old. Hell, it rarely even brings a younger person to the hospital.

                That is indeed an important factor – or would be, if it were actually true, and not mouth-farts coming from the same people exclaiming “lol I ain’t afraid of no flu!”

                The numbers are indeed much worse for the elderly, as they are with literally every disease with a few extremely rare exceptions. They do not, however, reflect “only” old people being affected. The China numbers show:

                – 0.2% mortality rate below age 40
                – 0.4% from 40-49
                – 1.3% from 50-59
                – 3.6% from 60-69
                – 8% from 70-79
                – 14.8% above 80


                Meaning, if you are above 80, this is obviously very bad to get, but roughly 1 in 200 people between age 40-50 will still die, and while that may seem like a low percentage, it comes out to over 20 million people in the US if nothing is done to stop the spread.

                And China built a whole bunch of hospitals to deal with the escalation in patients; we haven’t.

                We do basically nothing to prevent flu transmission, and it has an R0 between 1-2. COVID-19 has an R0 of nearly 4, and a much higher mortality rate than seasonal flu.

                People need to stop being so fucking stupid about this thing. Don’t panic and buy a 12-year supply of toilet paper or 8000 rounds of ammo, that’s not going to help you or your neighbors, but you’ve got to at least be prepared for a 3-week quarantine. Even if your symptoms are mild, or you are totally asymptomatic, eventually quarantine measures will start to be imposed on anyone who was exposed, and you’re not going to have a choice even if you feel fine.

                • Mike says:

                  “Little is known yet about the deceased patients specifically, other than the fact that their median age is 81, the majority of the deceased are male, and in more than two-thirds of cases they had three or more pre-existing conditions.”

                  Damn I’m quaking in my boots, it’s killing people 15 years past retirement that already have heart problems.

                  Well thats just it, no one is prepared for a 3-week quarantine because the West doesn’t have the balls to enforce one or survive one. This outbreak is an opportunity to expose Western liberal democracy and the sick society it has created as the sham that it is. Russia closed their borders in January and only has accumulated 20-50 cases total. We deserve and frankly almost need this cleansing fire to open everyone’s eyes to how dysfunctional we are.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Correcting some bad math, that shouldn’t have said 20 million, only 200k (in that age range).

                  Total deaths could be above 5 million if controls are implemented late. Again, Cochran and friends have been looking at the exact numbers, so don’t take my word for it. Of course, if no controls, then could be > 10M.

                  Damn I’m quaking in my boots, it’s killing people 15 years past retirement that already have heart problems.

                  If you want to be a complete retard and continue regurgitating factoids that have no basis in reality, you should do it on your own blog. You’re literally replying to a post that explains how and why you’re wrong, and instead of providing any kind of rebuttal, you just restate your original point. That makes you no better than any of the Marxist spammers.

                  Either you don’t understand numbers, or there’s something wrong with your reading comprehension in general.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Look, even Teddy’s figured it out:

                  He’s in his fifties IIRC. Everybody has gotten the message except you and a handful of either retards.

                  I highly encourage you to go on a nice 10-day cruise and help thin out the gene pool. Go forth and lick all the doorknobs to prove your point.

                • Mike says:

                  >I highly encourage you to go on a nice 10-day cruise and help thin out the gene pool. Go forth and lick all the doorknobs to prove your point.

                  And I could easily do that and be just fine because I’m not 70.

                  Look, in the original post I wasn’t taking into effect the external factors enough (broken supply chain, not enough hospital beds, overwhelmed healthcare system regardless of what population is affected most). I was focusing in too much on who specifically dies vs how infectivity of everyone (regardless of age) will bring down society. I was being autistic and I admit it. I think I was just having the same knee-jerk reaction that Comintator, Trump and many others had at first, which is “LOL IT KILLS 80 YEAR OLDS” and not looking at any of the surrounding context.

                  Corona may be a godsend in a twisted sense though:

                • Not Tom says:

                  Corona may be a godsend in a twisted sense though:

                  Oh, no doubt about that. Closing borders, closing schools, closing bathhouses… doing all of the things that Trump could never do on his own.

                  Now that we’re de-escalating: I don’t promote the panicked “we’re all gonna die, it’s the end of the world” view either, which is just as much of a knee-jerk reaction. You’re right to mock that particular viewpoint, and mock the people who were out wearing masks before a single case had even been reported in the US. I do however advocate social distancing and/or masks (if any actually become available) from now on, until we can eradicate the damn thing, as well as everyone being prepared for several weeks of quarantine should it come to that.

                  And if there is an outbreak in your area, be extra careful in general; forget the virus itself, but act as though you may not have access to a nearby hospital no matter how much you’re willing to pay, because that is fairly likely to be the case.

                  Over here, the local stores are already limiting purchases of several items to try to keep the supply chains going. Not just hand sanitizer but also soap, rice, pasta, paper towel, toilet paper, etc. It might be localized to certain areas right now, but I for one am glad I began stocking up 2 weeks ago when the supermarkets were all still empty.

                  I heard that one of the U.S. drug companies finally got test kits approved, so we’ll likely know much more about the true scale in a few weeks.

  13. BC says:

    Running Biden is starting to make sense. They’re going to use the media to cover for his dementia while others, IE Obama’s Machine run the presidency. This sort of weak ruler controlled by others is ideal for the deep state and the rest of the players in DC. They’ll skip the debates, shut off Trump from twitter, and blatantly rig every vote they can with the RINOS helping.

    • The Cominator says:

      Biden is a ringer to keep Bernie from winning it (or even the most delegates) but he won’t be the nominee. Most likely the actual nominee is Michelle Obama.

      • BC says:

        That’s an even worse choice that Joe Biden or Bernie Sanders. I think you’re pretty far off base here.

      • Mr.P says:

        Hulu just launched a 4-hour documentary about Hillary called “Hillary.”

        “Odd” timing, don’t you think, in an election year?

        I’m looking for a futures contract on which I can bet $500 that Hillary will be the Dem’s nominee come the convention in Milwaukee.

        • Pooch says:

          She’s being offered in all the books at around 20 to 1.

          • The Cominator says:

            They are probably subbing in someone but I don’t think its going to be her. I could be wrong though.

            Michelle Obama is more likely…

            • alf says:

              Michelle Obama as nominee? Or as VP? Want to put your money where your mouth is? I’ll bet €50 in btc against Michelle as ninee, €100,- against her as vp.

              • alf says:

                I meant $100 against nominee, $50 against vp.

              • The Cominator says:

                If she is VP then Biden is going to resign after the nomination in favor of her…

                That is another possible scenario… Biden will not be at the top of the ticket come election day.

                • alf says:

                  I’m not saying give me more implausible theories, I’m saying put your money where your mouth is.

                • Steve Johnson says:

                  There’s no reason Biden would resign; him being elected simply means the bureaucrats will do what they please which is all that his coalition wants anyway.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Him being at the top of the ticket means they have to him out looking like the senile old moron he is all the time.

                  Yeah they’d love having a total moron who will sign anything they give him to be president but the problem is his mind is very visibly gone, hard to convince the centrist normies who decide elections to vote for that.

                • jim says:

                  We know Biden is senile, like we know Global Warmists do not know or care whether the world is warming or cooling, whether humans are causing it or not, nor whether it would be a good thing or a bad thing.

                  What they are betting is that normies will not know it.

                  We see all those shots of Biden acting senile, just like we read the leaked internal emails of the climate conspiracy. If you get your news from the mainstream media you think he is on the ball and does pushups every day.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Normie democrats (not even bernouts) even know he is senile.

                • jim says:

                  The proportion of the population that is unaware that Biden is senile is roughly similar to the proportion of the population unaware that catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is a scam by evil people who intend us harm.

                  To a good approximation, white males know that Biden is senile, white males know that warmism is a scam, and everyone else does not. So naturally the people operating both scams want to get rid of most white males

                • Not Tom says:

                  I think a lot of white females also know that Biden is senile, and if not senile, certainly not very alpha.

                  Plus you’re forgetting one important factor with Biden – the far left is becoming increasingly furious and deranged about Bolshie Sanders’s inability to win.

                  Biden will do well with black voters, which is important, but he is going to have a very hard time bringing the moderate white voters and far-left voters on board. Democrats win elections on turnout, and Biden is not getting good turnout.

                • jim says:

                  Do you actually personally know any single white females who are aware that Biden is senile or that Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming is a scam?

                • The Cominator says:

                  Bernout women definitely know it even if they don’t know why Bernie’s economic policies are crazy.

                  Living in the non urban South now the white women here generally actually (even if single) mostly support Trump but they also don’t follow politics that closely.

        • BC says:

          I’m pretty sure she’s not healthy enough to run… then again neither is Joe.

      • Pooch says:

        Biden will be announced as the nominee before the convention after Bernie inevitably drops out. The DNC is eager to start their anti-Trump election campaign.

      • Bob says:

        >Most likely the actual nominee is Michelle Obama.

        This comment isn’t going to age well.

        • Steve Johnson says:

          Saying it’ll be Michelle feels like a very normie-tier conservative take – maybe because it implicitly assumes that Obama put himself where he was rather than being the sum of a vector of forces that can’t agree on much but could agree on putting him in place but fails understand why Obama was so well suited to be that figurehead and his wife isn’t a good substitute.

          • Oliver Cromwell says:

            “Obama… [was] the sum of a vector of forces that can’t agree on much but could agree on putting him in place but fails understand why Obama was so well suited to be that figurehead”

            Sure, but what is Biden?

            And is Biden as good a figurehead as Obama? Or a good figurehead in an absolute sense?

            Michelle would be a bad running mate for a bad front man.

            Either the left is throwing the election. Or the left is not currently capable of effective coordination, unlike when they replaced meh politician HRC with spectacular actor BHO.

            • Steve Johnson says:

              Sure, but what is Biden?

              I don’t know.

              And is Biden as good a figurehead as Obama? Or a good figurehead in an absolute sense?

              Well, running an obviously senile moron does have the advantage that you get to send a very clear message to your supporters that chaos is coming and you’ll get to fight it out with the rest of the left for absolute power – because Biden sure as hell doesn’t represent any particular faction.

              • jim says:

                Priesthoods tend to wind up gerontocratic. I don’t think anyone intends that, it is just what happens.

                Don’t try to figure out a clever plan behind what is happening. The Democrats cannot implement clever plans any more.

  14. Pooch says:

    Market dropping like a stone due to coronavirus. I’m starting to think the inevitable Trump landslide is becoming less inevitable as the days pass by.

    • BC says:

      Trump’s not handling this crisis well, he should have gotten out front with doom & gloom and the rolled it backup as he handled the situation. The bureaucracy is actively working against Trump and America trying to infect as many people as possible by bringing back heavily infected people on airline flights without permission and by making it very difficult to test people properly.

    • Not Tom says:

      Democrats, not Republicans, are the party of Wall Street. While it is true that the market has rallied under Trump, that is simply a side effect of Trump being good for business in general.

      Employment is still way up, bills are still being paid, and Democrats haven’t offered any pandemic solutions than what Republicans are offering. Going by the actual indicators (private sector jobs, RCP approval, voter enthusiasm, primary turnouts, etc.) and ignoring everything we hear from the usual black-pilled shills who are consistently wrong about everything, that landslide looks as likely as ever.

      I don’t believe that stock markets were ever a major factor with Trump. He has his hardened political base who care primarily about cultural issues, and he has the new white working class flyover-state base who care about jobs and industry. If the virus leads to mass layoffs, then we should be worried. If it merely leads to investment bankers losing some profits and schools and universities closing for weeks at a time, we should be thrilled.

      • The Cominator says:

        Hysteria about Corona chan should blow over soon the warmer weather will kill the spread the transport will lock in low fuel costs and the market and economy will recover, disappointed that apparently Tucker has joined the panicmongers.

        • Not Tom says:

          The “Corona-chan” meme was funny for maybe 1 day. Why don’t you post some Dr. Evil memes while you’re at it.

    • Pooch says:

      Wall Street is apolitical. All they know is profits. Trump absolutely does care about the US stock market and it was always a major factor with Trump for Americans. It was breaking records under his national capitalism until the virus happened. Almost Every white male has a 401k and retirement investments. When those crater it’s not a good thing for any sitting President even if he has little to do with it and all other indicators are high.

      • Atavistic Morality says:

        At the risk of sounding like a retarded commie, I’m not entirely sold on the idea that Wall Street is composed entirely of merchants who are apolitical and only care about profits. Soros is an example of an alleged financier who turns out to be a priest fronting as a merchant, at the service of the State Department and its actors. And he isn’t small game, dude collapsed the pound in the 90s. I don’t find any reason to believe that the guy might have ever been a merchant who turned progressive for social status, as he is been someone’s water boy since he was a teenager where he started by ratting out his fellow Jews to the Nazis.

        Politicians are often involved with hedge funds, public banks and so on as well, so the lines can easily become blurry.

        • BC says:

          Lots of new style Oligarchs on Wall Street.

        • Pooch says:

          May be possibly be right, however, when looking at the price of any individual large or medium corporate US stock (S&P 500) we can be reasonably sure that is going to be set on that specific company’s expected future ROI (based on its future financial reports). The oligarchs may be able to influence the price of small companies for political reasons but their impact on the bigger companies is limited. They just don’t have enough capital to risk for that. The price is generally being accurately set by the market.

        • Anonymous Fake says:

          Capitalists want to make lots of money and have lots of sex. They support liberalism by nature. They aren’t forced to be degenerates by the priests, but rather force priests to be degenerates. Bourgeois decadence is a reality and is the norm now.

          Soros has a bad boy reputation. Women like that. The idea of all capitalists being autistic old misers like Scrooge is from centuries ago and wasn’t even accurate back then.

          • jim says:

            I can see that all your jobs have been low level jobs – like the job you are doing right now, which is one step above manning a help line.

            If you ever had any real contact with capitalists, you will notice that they don’t get any pussy, at least not in their role as capitalists, not through the workplace. And the reason is that our very holy priesthood stops them, Human Resources having the upper hand over the mere board and the mere CEO. In companies with fifty or more employees, human resources is a bunch of enemy spies for the secret police, sometimes literally listening at the keyhole.

            That capitalists don’t get pussy in the workplace, that they are terrified of Human Resources, reveals that priests have the upper hand over merchants.

            • Dave says:

              I suppose that in the Philippines you meet a lot of capitalists who retired early so they could enjoy some young pussy before old age sets in. If money doesn’t attract pussy, a man doesn’t need very much money; he might as well buy a cheap woodlot and build a log cabin to live in.

            • Oliver Cromwell says:

              Which begs the question why more smart people don’t own small businesses doing boring things.

              You can easily make high six figures or seven figures per year employing twenty people.

              After a few millions, it doesn’t look like money increases your attractiveness to women. Women do not really understand money, only things that it can buy, and it is hard to buy anything substantively different after some level. Meanwhile, visibility to the authorities and compliance requirements massively decrease your attractiveness to women.

        • JanMartense says:

          At the risk of sounding like a retarded commie, I’m not entirely sold on the idea that Wall Street is composed entirely of merchants who are apolitical and only care about profits.

          Yeah, it’s definitely true that a lot of Wall Street types are willing servants of the left. I mean, Steyer and Bloomburg are two more obvious examples. Big banks are definitely not our friend at present.

          I think the distinction is that the latter-day NatSoc types currently plaguing the right believe that financial incentives are *responsible* for leftism, and that merchants are the ones ultimately holding power. They’ll explicitly claim that liberalism and globalism were “created by Wall Street.” Whereas to me its obvious that merchants are simply following the dictates of their intellectual masters, the Universities/Cathedral. When, in the past, the priesthood was more right-wing, the merchants dutifully followed.

          Merchants are “apolitical” in the sense that they hold no real political authority as a class. The fact that individual merchant types obey their master’s commands, or that some wealthy people are actually intellectuals in disguise, does not change this.

          • Bilge_Pump says:

            They’ll explicitly claim that liberalism and globalism were “created by Wall Street.””

            I think that this is true but probably not how you meant it.

            The best example I can think of is American slavery. African slaves were brought to the US by Capitalists, then freed and given citizenship / entertainment gigs by liberals. Now both 100% support diversity, Capitalists because it provides cheap labor that won’t be able to organize against them, and progressives because they’re insane faggots.

  15. Alex says:

    Me: God, what is life?
    God: life is a ticking time bomb!
    Me: thanks God.

  16. TBeholder says:

    The one area where technology is still genuinely advancing is DNA/RNA technology, and closely related technologies

    Certain disciplines are allowed and encouraged to do they job, while the rest are left in the cold to be strangled by theology, underwater basket weaving or plain mold.
    This raises an obvious question: why?
    Unfortunately, the answer is just as obvious, isn’t it? Marie Stopes, Margaret Sanger, and all the merry gang… Under the busy facade, some things just don’t change.

  17. Severian says:

    On the topic of technological decay. The new defense budget is restarting the F15, a 30+ year old plane.

    Not much changing on the nuclear front.

  18. BC says:

    OT, this might lead some evidence the Jim’s idea that life came from the stars theory:

    • jim says:

      If the paper is correct, the protein has to be the product of an alien life form with a genetic code much simpler than the earth genetic code, and completely unrelated to the earth genetic code, but the same basic design – an information carrying molecule that can be transcribed into arbitrary proteins.

      A chain containing only two specific amino acids, one of them extremely rare in abiotic environments, is not going to happen in an abiotic environment. An abiotic chain is going to have many random amino acids.

      Earth life has a four bit genetic code for protein synthesis. This looks like the product of a two bit genetic code for protein synthesis. One control bit, and one amino acid selection bit. Or possibly a ternary code.

      Since the two amino acids have radically different polarization and hydrogen bonding properties, this suffices to make an arbitrary protein structure with arbitrary structural and chemically catalytic properties. It is the minimal system for implementing the same basic design as earth type life.

      A ternary genetic code would have a copyable information carrying chain molecule composed of three different monomers, which could be copied literally, or copied into shorter chains of protein molecules composed of two different monomers with one information monomer acting as the separator, and the other two selecting which amino acid.

      • pdimov says:

        The second aminoacid is hydroxyglycine, which is just oxidized glycine; this could have happened on entry in the atmosphere. So the original polypeptide could have been just glycine.

        • jim says:

          Pretty sure that that organic compounds do not abiotically oxidize on the nitrogen. They oxidize on the carbon. hydoxylgycine is a highly improbable substance to form abiotically.

          For it to form abiotically, you have to start with hydroxylamine, which does not occur naturally.

          • pdimov says:

            In addition to N-hydroxyglycine there’s also alpha-hydroxyglycine, with C oxidation. The paper only says “hydroxy-glycine”, but the picture of the peptide doesn’t show any N oxidation, and there seems to be C oxidation at a few places.

            Although on further reflection oxidation on entry is unlikely.

  19. Anonymous Fake says:


    • jim says:

      You presuppose as agreed and uncontroversial that Academia, government, and converged corporations are meritocratic.

      Argument from false consensus is not allowed on this blog. The IQ level of academia, indicated by the arguments they present, the reading level of the stuff they write when they are not speaking in postmodern gibberish, and the entertainments they subscribe to, is now about 105 – 110 among younger academics. Smart academics tend to be around retirement age.

      • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

        How smart academics are depends on how tough the job market was (in general or for their subgroup, e.g., blacks or women) when they were hired.

        Demand for positions at any school where salaries and conditions/location are good has, in the US (among other places), vastly exceeded supply for the last few decades as the job market got saturated and internationalized. It doesn’t matter how pozzed and nonsensical the material or the standards of the field, the faculty selections are still a de facto IQ test of figuring out how the system works and how to structure a resume so as to be hired over the other hundred Priests of Poz. So 105-110 is too low. Sarah Jeong and her ilk with their fellowships and thinktanks are not lacking in brain cells, no matter how stupid the dreck they emit.

        • The Cominator says:

          Navigating organizational politics is the forte of what Teddy Spaghetti would call midwits, your 115-125IQ types (with the exception of some of the hard sciences and engineering at least until recently) with a certain low cunning.

          People above this tend to hate it and the true genius types REALLY can’t stand it, James Woods has the highest raw IQ in Hollywood, when the poz in liberal areas became unbearable to the ordinary person (in Obama’s 2nd term and even worse when the 2016 primaries were ending. I can’t reference Hollywood but thats when it became unbearable in Mass) James Woods decided he was going to tell all his lemming woke buddies to fuck themselves and decided to become an internet troll.

          • mac's boot says:

            i scored 1585 (fudged) on sat. does that mean i have an iq of 180?

            no. obviously not. high but not that high.

            you must realize iq is not the same as moral character. when ivy league schools select students they’re selecting for perfect hypocrisy.


            intelligence and moral hypocrisy are uncorrelated variables. top schools don’t have to give up the one for the other. they can have both.

            naive sheeple like you and jim are too honest for your own good. pathologically honest perhaps. you see dishonesty and stupidity





            rewire your mind. reframe your perception. when everyone but you is the problem you’re the problem.

            it’s time

            • jim says:

              They are testing for sincerity. Their test selects for stupidity. If they selected for hypocrisy, they would get smart evil people. Instead they get stupid evil people.

              • Oog en Hand says:

                If you have an IQ of 150+, and they are selecting for IQ 110-130, then they ARE selecting for stupidity.

                They want double-think, not calculated hypocrisy.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Anything above 125 at the very top nowadays (with good writing skills+conscientousness) is too high, too much stupid insane crap you have to believe nowadays…

          • Not Tom says:

            i scored 1585 (fudged) on sat. does that mean i have an iq of 180?

            Let’s assume you’re telling the truth, which is almost never the case with you. The question is: when?

            Scoring 1600 on the SAT 20 years ago would imply an IQ floor around 130. Scoring 1585 on the SAT in the past few years would be more like 105-110.

            But I don’t believe you are that, either. You’re low 90s, with a supervisor in the low 100s.

            • DEL says:


              • jim says:

                Not impressed.

                • mack's boot says:

                  ok, i laughed. why not? i have it on good authority it’s impressive. to normies such as yourself ofc, i can’t tell what’s impressive tbh. supposedly your peers are flummoxed by pointers and recursion. or maybe that’s just a meme like time complexity

                • jim says:

                  My peers are not flummoxed by pointers and recursion. Your peers are.

                  If you claim to be my peer, take this test. If you pass, I might consider it possible that you might be my peer.

        • jim says:

          Smart people are inappropriately excluded – the problem being that if you give a non moronic affirmation of progressive beliefs, bestowing upon your unappreciative audience your extremely clever, ingenious. and sincerely believed rationalizations to explain away the conflict between progressivism and reality, you will be suspected of heresy. That is how Google wound up purging its smart people.

          • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

            “Too clever by half” while “not clubbable enough” has always been a bad profile for getting jobs. It’s the meta IQ test of showing that you not only know the joke, you get the joke, but are not so gauche as to have analyzed and dissected the joke for its deeper meaning. The latter would be a dangerous indicator of social autism or dangerous levels of independence. The Soviet dissidents who were (externally) exiled included a very disproportionate number of high IQ social retards who did inappropriate things like reading the Soviet constitution in earnest and genuinely taking it seriously.

            • Bilge_Pump says:

              ” The Soviet dissidents who were (externally) exiled included a very disproportionate number of high IQ social retards who did inappropriate things like reading the Soviet constitution in earnest and genuinely taking it seriously.”

              NRx includes a lot of these social retards who take words too seriously.

        • Not Tom says:

          I know you object to these characterizations of academia, but surely you believe that the correlation between IQ and educational attainment is becoming weaker over time, don’t you?

          I’m trying to ascertain whether you honestly think academia is as good demographically as it ever was, and just has some bad memes running through it, or whether you accept that academia is getting dumber but dispute the degree to which it’s happening.

      • Anonymous Fake says:

        What I said was in fact agreed upon by Christians when I was growing up. Atheist liberals view school as a replacement for mom and dad and family, while Christians see schools as a level playing field of ideas meritocracy. That *was* true for a while, but standards got suspiciously high and over time there became a 3 party split. Atheists became both working class Marxists and elites, while Christians were the uncanny valley (soon to be former) middle class.

        I blame Sputnik for increasing standards so much that honest hard work no longer mattered for becoming an elite. “A Nation at Risk” also mattered. But everyone who was ever exposed to the old ways ought to be treated fairly.

        Jim, you sound like you’re out of touch with Christians even if you don’t believe any of it. Or even anyone who isn’t an LGBTWTFBBQ atheist. The only reason sane people send their children to school is the idea of merit and fair compensation for their hard work. Any ideology is considered, AFTER this is justifiably secured.

        Conservatives who ignore talented students, especially those talented without being suspiciously so, are just positioning themselves to lose on purpose the way they always do. The home schooling fringe isn’t going to staff the court system any time soon.

        • jim says:


          Christians are painfully aware that our schools reward conformity to a hostile postchristian belief system, not merit. Watch the way the crowd roars when Trump and Barr address the issue.

          • Anonymous Fake says:


            • jim says:

              It might be more persuasive to appeal to Christianity and Christian values, and your account of what Christians believe more plausible, if you refrained from telling us how wicked, greedy, selfish, stupid and evil American Christians are.

      • aswaes says:

        Check out this thread for instance.

        Read the replies. Click on the profiles of the reply guys and gals. Lots of “dr doctor Doc AWFL, PhD” types. They typically post Harry Potter/Stranger Things type, mid to bottom tier Netflix trash pop references. Their twitter timelines are chock full of dullness and platitudes. I reckon their IQs are verbally tilted and range from 105 to 120, with a mode of 110. These people are the officer core of the Cathedral. They’re all midwits.

  20. Yul Bornhold says:

    The Atlantic Monthly has put out an article about Trump subverting the civil service:

    After reading Moldbug, all the double-think and anti-concepts are obvious but the main message of the article is good news.

    • BC says:

      This partisanship has to be understood in relation to the third enduring strand of Barr’s thinking: He is a Catholic—a very conservative one. John R. Dunne, who ran the Justice Department’s civil-rights division when Barr was attorney general under Bush, calls him “an authoritarian Catholic.” Dunne and his wife once had dinner at Barr’s house and came away with the impression of a traditional patriarch whom only the family dog disobeyed. Barr attended Columbia University at the height of the anti-war movement, and he drew a lesson from those years that shaped many other religious conservatives as well: The challenge to traditional values and authority in the 1960s sent the country into a long-term moral decline.

      Love it.

    • Steve Johnson says:

      That article is great.

      At the base humor level though the contrast between:

      “The outrageous suggestion that government officials are conspiring against the president”


      paragraph after paragraph describing how they’re conspiring against the president

      is great.

      • Yul Bornhold says:

        My favorite absurdity is the author praising Ambassador Newland for fighting corruption in Ukraine, contrasted with this criticism of Trump’s telephone call to the Ukrainian president from another swamp creature :

        “Asking another country to investigate a prosecution for political reasons undermines our advocacy of the rule of law.”

    • Dave says:

      “How Trump is destroying the civil service and bending the government to his will”

      Which is totally a bad thing because in 2016 the American people voted to put the civil service in charge of the country, and Trump is trying to overthrow these legitimate rulers.

    • aswaes says:

      I enjoyed this article a lot. This type of article, maybe this one, will be the Rosetta Stone for future historians trying to understand how Donald Trump became Augustus of the American Rome. Moldbug uses this type of article very effectively. He makes you read partisans from the period and partisan perspectives have a way of betraying what they try to conceal.

      Like, imagine being the author of this article, and not realizing that you’re describing, in excruciating detail, a decentralized conspiracy against the president. Amazing.

  21. Not Tom says:

    China also has millions of masks, and is quarantining local outbreaks. Americans can’t get masks at any price, and obvious outbreaks such as those in Washington are merely being met with furrowed brows and deep concern while hundreds of infected are either deliberately fleeing the hot zone or merely going off on travel. Businesses in which workers could very easily work from home are still telling everyone to come in.

    It’s not just the technology, it’s everything. Disease was always a potential vector considered for civilizational collapse, and while COVID-19 might not end up being that vector, the next big one can’t be that far off. It’s only been 10 years since SARS, swine flu, etc.

    • BC says:

      What to know why Washington state is a big vector? Ton’s of homeless people.

      • Not Tom says:

        Current evidence appears to be pointing to one of the hospitals as the main source of the outbreak.

    • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

      Chinese-American sources inform me that nearly all available masks in the US were bought by Chinese at an earlier stage of the outbreak to send home to their families e.g. in areas where the Party tried to “maintain calm” rather than immediate curfew and quarantine.

      • Not Tom says:

        Shitty if true, but still raises the question, why the continued shortages? 3M is supposedly an American company, we should be able to crank out millions of these things per day.

        • BC says:

          Goverment is still trying to buy most of them up from what I understand.

          • Not Tom says:

            The primary source of inflated demand does not answer useful questions about the reason for inelastic supply. Government is not imposing price controls on the masks, to my knowledge, therefore the market should be able to meet this demand – unless there is something very wrong with our industry.

            Compare these masks – a relatively simple product – to running shoes, which are never in short supply and which presumably must be produced at a rate of around a billion per year to accommodate global demand, since just about everyone in the first world owns their own pair of shoes. Not all shoes are produced by the US, of course, and almost none are produced in the US – but that’s the point. We can’t seem to produce things anymore, we have to import everything.

            I can’t say with certainty that China has enough masks for everyone, but they certainly seem to be a lot more well-equipped than we are.

            Hell, there are more than 200 million iphones sold per year. Why the fuck can’t we produce 100x as many face masks?

            • Matt says:

              Some actuary in the CDC likely calculated we need stockpiles of several billion facemasks to deal with a pandemic and the accompanying supply disruption, and the response by the people in charge of the CDC and Congress has been to do nothing other than add more Congressional pork.

          • The Cominator says:

            They probably need to go through some FDA bullshit before they can scale up production, the FDA is the worst most corrupt and most incompetent agency in the government by far and almost all failures in medical supplies are their fault.

            • jim says:

              The FDA bullshit was suspended, but the trouble is that these are insourced test kits, which means that they are priests are blessing holy water, rather than engineers building effective test devices. Private sector supply of test kits still has to jump through hoops. The problem was at the depths of government, rather than the top. It is the same problem as Obama being unable to get his website up, and the Navy keeping its ships in port because they keep running into things if they travel.

              • The Cominator says:

                While i dont know all the details i suspect the priests blessing the holy water and too slowly are still FDA, even if FDA authority is temporarily suspended all these companies are still terrified of the FDA and still complying with their Byzantine mandates.

  22. Aussie says:

    You should not hold Australia up as any sort of light for the west. Tony Abbott was Alinsky’d in the 2019 election. Our ASIO is in lock-step with the FBI regarding white nationalist and neo nazi “terrorists.” We still have a flyover Muslim, Pajeet, and assorted subhuman dumping problem seems designed to demoralise the people of any town of more than about 500 people. Mackay, Queensland is an example.

    Women and niggers are still protected species. We are importing niggers from Sudan, as criminals, and Rhodesia, as magic office niggers. Our public service is an aristocracy of stupidity. The Chinese have bought off most of our politicians and own great swathes of farming land and housing stock.

    Our banks are falling over each other to cuck left on climate change, now termed “climate crisis.” Nothing electronic works as it should, even before the bushfires, and with bushfires and droughts and virus scares we are reaching ridiculous stages of Soviet-level “ah but the plumber is coming in the afternoon” waits for essential services.

    I can only guess that Australia is doing better technologically than the U.S. because it genocided its original inhabitants very effectively, was almost 100% settled with English, Scottish and Irish, and never had nigger slaves whose descendants could eviscerate our cities as per Detroit. But it is still privy to Cathedral policy, and unlike the U.S., two cuckservative politicians (Menzies and Howard) made militias and useful firearms, respectively, effectively illegal.

    We still have to believe the same lies as you.

  23. Cloudswrest says:

    See this “in search of testing” case thread on Twitter.

  24. lavpur-davduc says:

    A few posts ago someone was asking for the Social Matter podcasts. Here are links to the ones I have.

    Sorry if posting this is not allowed Jim, feel free to delete my comment if so.

    Ascending the Tower:
    https://mega. nz/#F!RPwCDQyS!8LZNq-hxzlo2spuD9Q0yOg

    Weimerica Weekly:
    https://mega. nz/#F!0KQwBAAR!tQSqOwmU1gg_PH835iUVcw

    I am missing a few ATT episodes, so if anyone else has them that’d be great (I’m sure the hosts do but they have basically erased all evidence of their online existence):
    Ascending the Tower 9 and 17 Pt2.
    Descending the Tower 1 and 3
    Ascending the Tower – A Very Special Episode 1

    I have never really listened to the other shows, apart from the episode of the Golden Age Podcast (or whatever its called) with Luke Smith, which is still available on his channel. I haven’t seen the others and don’t think they’re up anymore.

    • Pooch says:

      Awesome. Thanks for that.

      • Mike says:

        Are these recent? I assumed everything from Social Matter had died, other than the Myth of the 20th Century Podcast.

        • lavpur-davduc says:

          Not recent, mostly from 2015-2017. Everything from social matter is dead it seems, and nothing is archived online because they have blacklisted the Wayback machine. These are just the ones I had saved, so I’d definitely appreciate if anyone has the missing episodes.

          There are two or three episodes of descending the tower with Jim, which are worth a listen.

          I knew that Myth of the 20th Century started on Social Matter, and that they are still going, but do they still consider themselves a social matter project? Or have the mentioned anything about the demise of social matter?

          I realise at least one of the founders was doxxed, participating in some retarded wignat email groups. I’m not sure if Jim’s name is really James Donald, but either way this pseudonym has been around for decades, so they could probably have taken some opsec advice from him. After Social Matter was outted they cucked and tried to pivot towards a more purple pilled position as damage control, beginning with stopping the links to Jim in TWiR. Eventually became Socialist Matter.

          As to who gave the orders, who knows? Nick B Steves was in charge of TWiR, though doubt it came from him, and you wouldn’t get an answer out of him now. Also possible that the orders came from much higher up. I heard something, perhaps from BAP, about weird things happening with the authors of old articles being changed.

          Meh, not that it matters. Jim pointed out that if anything good actually came from it someone would have bothered to archive it. And to the extent that I have archived things, I have done so as an autist moreso than a big fan of theirs.


        • Mike says:

          Ya I more or less only followed them for TWiR over the last two or so years the site existed, because none of their own content was any good, other than the occasional podcast.

  25. Kgaard says:

    How do we explain the huge blowout in cases in Iran? They are not Asian and are dropping like flies. Ditto Italy.

    The parallels with Swine Flu are interesting. I had no idea it was such a huge deal back in 2009. It was never on my radar and never really affected stock markets — which were charging higher that year after the 2008 implosion.

    • Pooch says:

      Would not be surprised if the cases in Italy are Asians. Italy is crawling with Chinese tourists. Milan was having some fashion thing which draws a huge amount of Chinese when the outbreak started.

      • Mike in Boston says:

        I don’t know how many cases in Italy are Asians, but hereis a claim that “the vast majority of Italian leather shoes and bags are actually made by Chinese factories in Lombardy and Venato run by established Wenzhounese Italians who import illegal labour from Wenzhou.” Wenzhou is less than 500 miles from Wuhan.

      • Mike in Boston says:

        The same guy makes the case that the Wuhan coronavirus’s spread in Iran is owing to large number of Arab and Persian traders who come to Yiwu, which is only a couple of hundred miles from Wenzhou and has train connections to Tehran.

        • Steve Johnson says:

          Thanks for pointing that out – fascinating reading about that rail link.

    • Mike in Boston says:

      The theory that Asians are more susceptible to the Wuhan coronavirus is best illuminated by this paper. It seems that the ACE2 enzyme, which was the receptor for SARS, is also the receptor for the Wuhan coronavirus.

      Lung tissue from 8 donors was analyzed. Two were male and six female; one of the men was the only Asian. In this sample, the Asian male had triple the ACE2 level of the non-Asian male, and the non-Asian male had twice the ACE2 level of the females, who were all non-Asian.

      This is consistent with early reports of men being seriously ill more often than women, and with Asians being more susceptible, but it is too small of a sample size for me to put much stock in it. I don’t know of any additional studies.

      • Not Tom says:

        “More susceptible” is the important part. We are talking about averages here.

        Whites are, on average, more intelligent than blacks. If you randomly select one white person and one black person to take an IQ test, you can expect the white person to do better. However, if you run the tests on millions of people from each race, you will see some blacks do better than the average white, and some whites do worse than the average black.

        This virus is likely much more dangerous to Asians than it is to Europeans. If you randomly infect one Asian and one European, you can expect the Asian to do worse. However, if millions of people from each race are infected, you will see some whites do worse than the average Asian, and some Asians do better than the average white.

        We are supposed to be the people who understand the difference between a population average and an individual case.

        If there is a factual argument that death occurs only at the very extreme tail of the Asian population, and almost no Europeans are in that range, then I don’t think I’ve seen such an argument made, and definitely haven’t seen it made competently. We know, with some degree of confidence, that this thing is more dangerous to Asians, but we don’t know that it isn’t dangerous to anyone else. And I am very worried about the amount of handwaving I’m seeing, i.e. “all of the sick people in Italy were probably Asian, and Iran is… uh, whatever, it’s Iran, they’re dumb”.

      • aswaes says:

        I’ve heard ACE2 levels in the lungs can be elevated in smokers. Asians smoke like chimneys. Virulence differential for males and females is probably due to smoking differential too.

        • Mike in Boston says:

          To muddy the waters further, reports from Hong Kong are that the latest studies downplay ACE2 as a receptor for the Wuhan coronavirus, and instead suggest that the reason the virus is so contagious is that it interacts with furin, which HIV, ebola, and mouse hepatitis also do but the SARS virus did not. A preprint (in Chinese) is here..

    • Oog en Hand says:

      Iranians have considerable non-MENA ancestry. Think Genghis Khan, Timur Lenk, e.a.

  26. Steve Johnson says:

    Every hospital in the US is equipped with the materials needed to test for COVID 19 but are not permitted to do so by the FDA. The line between technological decline and social decline is fuzzy.

    • The Cominator says:

      “Every hospital in the US is equipped with the materials needed to test for COVID 19 but are not permitted to do so by the FDA.”

      Literally the most corrupt agency in the government and its not close, the FDA is corrupt and incompetent by the standards of India, Mexico and Nigeria even.

      The reason why is because the only part of the public that understands what they do at all is medical professionals and active investors.

    • Atavistic Morality says:

      Nigger worship (and everything that goes with it) creates technological decline, that’s Jim’s point. The fact that nigger worship is also a form of social decline which further exacerbates technological decline because of corruption doesn’t mean that there isn’t technological decline.

      Your CEOs are being held at gunpoint to hire women, niggers and pajeets to become a massive burden to the few remaining white men they can hire, who also can’t be very bright, because bright men are anti-woke shitlords and fast to show it. Of course, you’re gonna have technological decline…

      Imagine being Newton and trying to explain the world your new theories but then you are told to shut the fuck up because you aren’t a nigger or a woman, then your work is buried so no one gets to learn about it. Also, gravity is offensive to land-whales, so, you know.

      • Starman says:

        The nigger-worshipping wing of the Cathedral is currently sending out shills promoting flat earth stuff.

        • The Cominator says:

          Massachussetts is Cathedral central and they hated niggers there a lot more than they do in Florida. The progressives use the niggers as pets to force whites into dystopian suburban work camps which have mostly the negative aspects of both the city and the country with little advantage of either but I don’t think there is any real worship of them. In practice sometimes democrats REALLY are the real racists.

          • Starman says:


            There is a Schism currently in progress within the Cathedral itself, which began in 1969. Nigger worship is one of those. And the nigger worshipers are now trying to stop space-travel itself but cannot do so directly, lest the schism with other elite progressives (and the generals) becomes deeper.

            I just caught a cheap pajeet fed shill on Gab posing as a flat earther. He refused to answer a multiple choice RedPill on women question.

          • ten says:

            I think you are wrong and nigger worship is indeed a dominant force in cathedral. They see a conspicuous lack of nigger rocket scientists and conclude the genius niggers are hindered by evil men from flowering – they are genuinely confused or shocked or dismayed if told there are no nigger geniuses, or at least, their geniuses are both halfbreeds and not very genial in comparison. How could this be? Why would people for any possible reason differ in mental capacity? Unheard of and outrageous, probably a remnant of primitive chauvinist hatred.

            They have been repeatedly told that it is a core important identity forming truth that niggers are not in any meaningful sense inferior, and they believe this. Maybe there is a schism as R7 says and a less blatantly insane wing exists.

            The immediate, knee jerk response to nigger behaviour demonstrates this belief is there.

            • jim says:

              > They have been repeatedly told that it is a core important identity forming truth that niggers are not in any meaningful sense inferior, and they believe this. Maybe there is a schism as R7 says and a less blatantly insane wing exists.

              No they don’t. Esr cannot mention that, and I am pretty sure that he is incapable of thinking it. None of his commenters except the social justice warriors mention the fact that the open source movement is almost exclusively white and male, and if any of them did mention it without implying that this was due to oppression of women and blacks, he would not only censor the comment, but recoil in entirely genuine horror and outrage.

              • Steve Johnson says:

                Someone linked here to a comment thread on ESR’s blog and I posted a few comments which quickly led to ESR demonstrating his insanity by trying to make up some excuse that allows him to simultaneously believe 85/100 *and* that Jim and I are horrible meanie badthinkers *and* that he isn’t a badthinker *and* that being a badthinker is the worst thing in the world.

                Here’s jim’s comment that started the thread:


                and here’s my contribution where he really goes off the rails into pure insanity:


                Bonus points for the guy who invented the term “kafkatrap” setting one up in that he threatens to ban me because I accused him of “racism” (kek – yeah, dishing out the accusations of racism is really on brand) and then the excuse for the ban is that my next post was a refusal to apologize (when the only way to apologize was to agree he was right in the first place). He then threatens to ban another commenter for pointing out that he set up a kafkatrap.

                IOW, he was really really uncomfortable that his insane definitions don’t actually work and just wanted the pain to go away – sad.

              • ten says:

                I don’t see our disagreement. My claim is exactly that they believe black, etc, underperformance is due to oppression of blacks, etc, rather than their nature, and would recoil in entirely genuine horror and outrage at any opposite claim.

                Rather than democrats cynically knowing full well what they are doing, not believing a word they say, which i argue against.

                • jim says:

                  I intended to say that you were right, and that what you understand Starman’s position to be is incorrect. If Starman means what he seems to mean, he is nuts, attributing sanity and virtue to some of the obviously evil and insane.

              • Oliver Cromwell says:

                Esr has written about the biological reality of racism, with some contorted argument for why he should be allowed to do so like it will more effectively counter the imminent threat of the South rising again.

                Esr has always sat at the right edge of what is acceptable to say in public, with the result that now he can’t say anything about politics without openly contradicting his previous posts. And indeed, he has said little or nothing about politics for several years.

                It is hard to see what any of this has got him. He seems to have little wealth, no real income, and has been purged from his own organisations anyway. He seems to be in much the same position as someone who openly stated disallowed thoughts. And in a considerably worse position than someone who started out planning to openly state disallowed thoughts and planned to mitigate the consequences, like building a big pile of money.

                • H says:

                  ESR violently rejects perfectly workable alliances with those who I believe he holds to be his true enemies, especially Christians.

                  He’s not actually very smart if he didn’t realize that a nation that had been steadily turning left when he was a novice programmer better known as Eric the Flute would bind him in the trap he’s found himself in. On that’s so very bad he can’t even openly work on open source projects, his presence is a kiss of death, like to the once promising NTPsec, a massive cleanup and hardening of the original time server software. An area he no doubt got interested in because of his previous work on GPS device interfacing.

                  His wife’s career also ended during the Great Recession when the field became way too overcrowded, as far as I know she hadn’t found anything as remunerative.

                  A squalid ending, as long as he stays so mentally wedged.

                • jim says:

                  He attempts to ally with people who will not ally with him. They will send him to the gulag or execute him before they come after me.

                  And to protect this imaginary alliance, he spits on those who would protect him.

            • Bilge_Pump says:

              Nigger worship goes far deeper than most people are even aware of. Most music people listen to is either directly made by niggers or heavily influenced by nigger music. Any music with drums or blues scales is niggerfied. This would include all your favorite classic rock bands, as well as any electronic music you listen to, to say nothing of pop music. Almost 100% nigger.

              • ten says:

                nah, the black blues origins of rock music is astroturf, the clear predecessors are scots-irish village bands.

                as for electronic music, there is a long line of very white and often gay people making disco, detroit techno being black people modifying it to be more amenable to being fukced mindless on drugs, and the entire thing turning white again.

                repetitive, rhythmic dance music isn’t black, folk music from all over europe is like that.

                • Not Tom says:

                  This is the particular kind of racial monomania that I’m not a big fan of. I’m happy to judge music on its merits, I don’t particularly care who made it or influenced it.

                  Reggae sounds terrible to my ears, I can’t stand it. Blues and various flavors of jazz can sometimes be fine. Is it so hard to believe that a lot of white people just like the music for what it is, not because it was made by blacks?

                  Contemporary pop has a lot of different influences. The Beatles-era white-bread Anglo influence is (sadly) still there. Heavy metal (the whitest music ever) has had significant influence over the rock/alternative genres. All electronic music is essentially European – in particular, mostly French, German and Dutch in origin, and pop has incorporated a lot of electronic music elements. And yes, there is also some influence from the blacker American genres – blues, funk, reggae, and so on. Some producers even like to put Asian and middle-eastern themes in there these days.

                  Western music, much like western language, is just a giant whore. It will accept, and already has accepted “donations” from just about anyone, anywhere. Maybe you think that’s a bad thing, you have some bizarre opinions about musical “purity” or culture being exposed to globalization – but even if so, blacks in particular have very little to do with it.

                • tenq says:

                  I assume this response was directed towards bilge_pump, not me

                • >nah, the black blues origins of rock music is astroturf, the clear predecessors are scots-irish village bands.

                  The *origins* of rock (and roll) are indeed not in blues, e.g. Chuck Berry’s music had nothing to do with blues.

                  But later on rock got bluesified – The Rolling Stones for example.

                  Not just any kind of blues – but the particular kind of blues say Elmore James was playing:

                  >repetitive, rhythmic dance music isn’t black, folk music from all over europe is like that.

                  Sadly not true. I really like music that is all rythm, something like techno or house but made with real instruments, but I can very, very rarely find it being played by whites. One of the many rare ones is Les Tambours Du Bronx: this really makes me move but it is one of a kind sadly.

                  There is also Scottish drums and pipes like Clanadonia but it is not really dance music.

                  Even though dance music is so easy to make that you can just do it via drumming on buckets but there is sadly no European tradition of this at all, only an African one. Too bad I really like this stuff.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The man with the best claim to have invented Rock and roll music (I can’t find an earlier song that sounds rockish then Rocket 88 here is Ike Turner.

                  The Cathedral probably doesn’t want to list him as the inventor because while he is black he was notorious for ah keeping him pimp hand strong.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Sadly not true. I really like music that is all rythm, something like techno or house but made with real instruments, but I can very, very rarely find it being played by whites.

                  Why would you limit your filter to “real instruments”? It stands to reason that as technology advances, white people (and higher IQ people in general) would be on the leading edge. Thus, white and Asian music is becoming increasingly “produced”, not “played”. And while the EDM variants embrace the synthetic form and repetitiveness, the tech has become so advanced that many if not most people can no longer tell the difference between a “real instrument” and a synthesizer when the latter is actually used to emulate the former. Many great movie scores were produced entirely on workstations.

                  Techno is German, Trance is Dutch, House is French (and American), and the first two genres are literally the whitest things ever, both on the supply side and the demand side. Blacks are all still listening to gangsta rap, various r&b variants, and “jungle” that’s in steep decline. For the most part, electronic music is white people music; doesn’t particularly matter where or how it evolved any more than it matters whether Chicken Piccata is really authentically Italian or just widely considered to be Italian food.

                • ten says:

                  >repetitive, rhythmic dance music isn’t black, folk music from all over europe is like that.

                  Sadly not true. I really like music that is all rythm, something like techno or house but made with real instruments

                  Didn’t mean “all rhythm” which i don’t think is an adequate description of house anyway, i meant fx medieval feast/dance music, which was very long, repetitive, simple “beats” with a few percussive instruments and stomping with similarly long repetitive leads.


                  this track is 1.20 seconds, and would have been repeated for “a dance”, until dancers started to lose interest, when the next song is started.

                  Imo, the structural parallels to techno and house, etc, are there, dissolving the claim that these genres are somehow inherently “black” music in contrast to symphonic “white” music (i suppose i might be ok with removing the “” around white there because i don’t really know of other cultures creating symphonic music)

                  This isn’t house but made with real instruments, just house with real instruments.


                • Bilge_Pump says:


                  I don’t know what you think about the Beatles, but they claim to have been listening to a lot of nigger music early in their career, so did Led Zeppelin, Rolling Stones, etc. Whether or not it was “astroturf” doesn’t matter; it was effective enough to influence the most popular musicians of the era.

                  “as for electronic music, there is a long line of very white and often gay people making disco, detroit techno being black people modifying it to be more amenable to being fukced mindless on drugs, and the entire thing turning white again. ”

                  I’ll quote Karlheinz Stockhausen, a German composer, when asked to give his opinion on the music of Aphex Twin, a white brit edm producer:

                  “I heard the piece Aphex Twin of Richard James carefully: I think it would be very helpful if he listens to my work Song Of The Youth, which is electronic music, and a young boy’s voice singing with himself. Because he would then immediately stop with all these post-African repetitions, and he would look for changing tempi and changing rhythms, and he would not allow to repeat any rhythm if it were varied to some extent and if it did not have a direction in its sequence of variations.”

                  Of course what you call “folk” music uses repetition, bu the kind of drum-centric repetition that has taken over pop music (modern folk music) is “post african”. The drum set is a 20th century American invention and some of it’s most well known players are nigz.

                  Even the “white and gay” producers you talk about sample niggers ALL THE TIME. Look up “amen break” on wikipedia. Used millions of times. You’ve probably heard it.

                • jim says:

                  > I don’t know what you think about the Beatles, but they claim to have been listening to a lot of nigger music early in their career, so did Led Zeppelin, Rolling Stones, etc.

                  Everyone is influenced by everyone. Great artists steal. And you could do a lot worse than stealing from Ike Turner. But if someone announces “I am influenced by X”, X is higher status than he is. It is high status and socially rewarded to be influenced by that X.

                  We don’t need to purge art of black contributions. We do need to reduce black art to its appropriate status. We don’t want to stop anyone from copying Ike Turner. We just need to stop them from proudly patting themselves on the back when they piously announce they are copying from black people.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I think Ike Turner deserves high status in the musical pantheon, probably actually much higher status then he gets, as the man who has the best singular claim to have invented Rock and Roll.

                  There is a lot of undeserved negro fetishization, but Ike Turner’s sort of musical genius is almost certainly downplayed because Ike Turner notoriously beat the shit out of Tina regularly which makes him not the short of negro the Cathedral likes… if he murdered white people they’d love him but they don’t want to playup a wife beater even if he was history’s most musically gifted black man ever. Now maybe she deserved it and was the type of girl who needed extreme beatings or maybe Ike really was just an angry sadists who drank too much and used drugs and took out whatever anger he had on her… I don’t know.

                  But unlike the Cathedral we’d acknowledge the true musical genius of Ike Turner rather than covering it up because he was a notorious wife beater. We’d also demote a lot of undeserving blacks.

                • ten says:

                  Yes, they said those things (because it was high status to say those things) and listened to the black predecessors of their music. Don’t stop the line there. Those black musicians had white influences. Their music was not conceived in a negro vacuum.

                  “akchully rock is black music, because if we stop the line of inheritance at a given point in time, it was black at that time” is the astroturf. Doesn’t stop there, not a vacuum, not an isolated invention of black genius appropriated by whites, nor a black curse infecting white music.

                  I agree about all the ike turner inventing rock’n’roll stuff, not arguing there was a secret white rock genesis. What i am saying, however, is the basic format of the band and the musicianship has a clear predecessor in 19th century appalachian scots-irish village banjo bands, which when dropping the banjo, electrifying the band and adding a modern style drum kit, and playing in the harmonics of blues, is rock’n’roll.

                  Searching backwards across a line in time until a negro is found and then stopping the search doesn’t give a good picture and can only aim at exalting the negro for the greatness later come from his line, or to denigrate the line for the sake of negro taint.

                  i listened to karlheinz stockhausens song of youth. what a piece of shit. it’s not music, it’s schizo audiospam.

                  I again object to the notion that drum monotonous repetitiveness is (post)african, it is not. drumcentric music is. A standard european preafrican dance beat would have been, fx, an endless 1-x-3 bass drum or stomp on a 3/4. It is equally monotonous and repetitive and only different by its complete poverty, and was _the standard_ for percussions outside of symphonic music or music without percussions, and it was all over the place.

                  Thank you niggers! You did great! What a marvelous development of music, in an area which we completely denigrated as a mere accessory you created intensity, complexity and wonder which we now integrate into our own musical traditions. What a great leap for humanity, truly. And it’s also evident you have some actual racial hidden talent for being insanely skilled drummers! I mean, you don’t get to say that often and actually mean it!

                  I used to be a (amateur, i mean my tracks did get played at places but i never made significant money) drum ‘n bass producer, so yeah i am “vaguely” familiar with the amen beat lol (the point being for the unfamiliar, the entire genre uses the amen beat exclusively all the time almost without exceptions)

                  Perhaps being completely mired in modern drum centric dance music tradition, and considering it a qualitative leap of obvious superiority and greatness, makes me blind to what the problem of the black influence is, because i don’t see it.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Doesn’t stop there, not a vacuum, not an isolated invention of black genius appropriated by whites, nor a black curse infecting white music.


                  Insane: “We need to dedicate an entire month of the year to honoring the art and culture that blacks invented and we stole.”

                  Still insane: “All modern music is tainted by negroes, we must purify our music as we purify our land.”

                  Sane: “Black Americans made some significant contributions to American music, perhaps even disproportionate to their demographic, but they also built on a foundation created largely by white Europeans and Americans, and most modern innovations still come from white Europeans and Americans. Let’s give credit where credit is due but not put their entire race on a pedestal.”

                  Notice that both of the insane versions are essentially the one-drop rule; if there was any involvement of a negro at any point in time, then the entire genre and maybe the entire industry is black. That’s insane.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Sure Ike Turner was influenced by music before him when he (with Rocket 88) made the Rock n Roll sound… but he was the one who made it and without him its possible it never would have been made. I also do not think (but I’m not a musician so could be wrong) that the so called pre rock and roll blues sounds really sound much like a rock and roll song at all.

                  Rocket 88 otoh sounds like a rock and roll song.

              • Atavistic Morality says:

                “Nigger music” is gangsta rap, but good music is good music not matter where it comes from. This is why I personally hate white nationalists almost as much as progressives.

                I care about competence, I don’t really care about race. Blacks on the average might be less competent, but the one that is competent is competent, the fact that he is black is irrelevant. The reason HBD is mentioned in reactionary circles is because it explains why minorities and women are underrepresented in certain areas, so it’s basically a counter-argument to progressive shibboleths presenting objective truth.

                People that disregard competence for arbitrary and worthless reasons are losers and worthless themselves. And if you consider yourself an European, you’re actually betraying your heritage by doing so, because if there’s an ethos to the European soul that is meritocracy. That is why WE came up with the scientific method, because this is who WE are, since our meritocratic Indo-European ancestors to this day. Alexander and his conquest of Persia, the Romans and Greece, the Spanish Empire and Columbus. And we could say that specifically Anglo-Saxons have shown themselves to be the most meritocratic ethnicity of all Europeans, which has brought them the greatest success. Not only they originally adopted France’s culture, but through time developed themselves and never failed to welcome all talent, as shown in America, and as shown in the lives of people like Alfred Nobel whose accomplishments have been for the benefit of all mankind.

                This is why socialism is evil, because the natural order left alone in America made for a great empire full of hearty and capable people, pruned by the hardness of the frontier, from which every man prospers and benefits instead of coddled by the perversion of welfare and regulation that is dysgenic and degenerative, leading to destruction and poverty.

                The evil of nigger worship is not that they are black, but the fact that they are incompetent and it’s being wilfully ignored because they are black. The crime is incompetence, the crime is not their race. The crime is wilfully ignoring incompetence or wilfully ignoring competence, the crime is not race related.

                If Elon Musk was black we wouldn’t care. Well, it’s likely that men like him are going to be white for objective reasons, but every black man like him will be welcomed in reactionary circles. We are to become the Imperium of Man and reach for the stars, we are not to become the Imperium of Appalachian meth-head losers and reach for peasantry, I hope you get that one clear.

                • Mike says:

                  I agree that sperging about music is weird, one thing that blacks were often very good at and respected by whites for during the Jim Crow Era was their musical ability. If I recall correctly, has it not been proven that blacks have a better singing voice than whites in general?

                  I disagree a bit on the assertion that race is not the crime however. For if their IQ is directly correlated to their race, than is not their race the same thing as their incompetence? Also, man has a natural aversion to foreigners regardless of intellectual competence anyhow. East Asians are certainly a smart people, and yet that didn’t stop us from not wanting to intermarry with them in the past, or let large amounts of them immigrate here.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Blacks can be truly gifted musically and on average have higher musical ability than whites though high classical music (Mozart etc) is beyond them. Its funny that the Irish the niggers of the white race (and I say this being part potato nigger myself) are often very good musically as well.

                  Just because modern black music is terrible (its not like the white music is good either, the last popular song I actually liked hearing when it came on was “Sweet but Psycho”) doesn’t mean black music in the past was terrible. I love early era Rock and Roll and Doo Wop. Need to get the jews out of things they are bad at like social sciences and visual arts and back into things they were good at, like running the music industry…

                • Not Tom says:

                  The Tory position on race and HBD in general, as I’ve come to understand it, is about 80% descriptive and 20% prescriptive.

                  What I mean by this is that everyone should be encouraged to perform to their highest potential, and differing outcomes for different groups are to be expected and embraced. It’s the job of either the state or the church to ensure that society is creating useful roles for everyone under its domain, and only punish, cast out, enslave or imprison the ones who’ve been given every opportunity to cooperate and still continue to defect.

                  We don’t actually need a special method for dealing with black crime. We can just deal with crime in general, and accept that there will be far more black felons than white ones making their way through the justice system. Or, if the black population insists on self-governance, they can be allowed to form communities with a greater degree of lawlessness provided that outside contact is minimized and carefully managed. Both solutions (“colonialism” and “segregation”) have proven to be viable in practice, and both are portrayed by the Cathedral as absolutely monstrous and unthinkable. But take away the Cathedral’s interference and you don’t really have a problem, at least not with a 15% black demographic – at 60%, maybe you have a bigger problem.

                  That’s where the 20% prescriptiveness comes in. We do have to be able to recognize that certain populations just don’t mix; for example, any Muslim population above 2% will be a serious nuisance and above 5% will represent a constant and escalating threat to the locals. Likewise, a significant proportion of Jews among the ruling class, as opposed to the merchant class, are liable to cause holiness spiraling; I don’t know what the actual % is, because we are not allowed to “count” Jews the way we count Muslims and blacks, but I assume it is somewhere above 0% and below 15%.

                  A ruling Tory will therefore often impose quotas on both immigration and industry. Unlike the implicit progressive quotas (affirmative action), these quotas are both explicit and negative – not minimum %, but maximum %.

                  Tories – or Reactionaries, if we want to call it that – are the only people who have successfully managed multi-racial/multi-ethnic populations for any length of time, so I believe they have the correct position on this issue.

                  “White nationalists” who don’t call themselves white nationalists, like Jared Taylor or Peter Brimelow, don’t offend me. They share the basic human impulse of wanting to live around people who are similar to them. There’s no moral polarity attached to that, it’s not good or evil, it’s just the way we all are by default, and they admit it. They seem to be good, decent people who merely admit that we are who we are and shouldn’t strive to be transcendent beings who are holier than Jesus.

                  Wignats, on the other hand, suffer from an extreme laserlike obsession with race, and show signs of profound racial resentment and an unwillingness to cooperate with any outgroup for any reason, even with one of the Tory solutions in place. These are people who would like all blacks to be sent “back to Africa” (a completely impossible task, as they are not African anymore, they are anywhere from 20-80% European admixture themselves), and all Jews to simply be killed and their property expropriated. They seem not to believe The Talk, rather they are simply disgusted with anyone who does not fit their definition of white (often ironically, as many are themselves less than 3/4 European) as well as anyone who chooses to associate with them positively.

                  In short, they view every black person as a nigger and every Jew as a kike, when in reality these terms were meant to describe a subset of the races in question.

                  There’s just no other reason to shriek about the presence of blacks in music, or the presence of Jews in banking, or the preponderance of Asians in tech. Many of them deserve to be there and aren’t doing anything wrong by being there. Where everything goes very wrong is when we see affirmative-actioned blacks in tech, incompetent Jews running the city of Chicago, and angry white-male-hating Asian chicks writing editorials for the New York Times.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Not Tom,

                  On this I agree on all points except that in most industries I would not have quotas (really only state jobs and quasi state jobs) but I would allow for 80-90% of residential neighborhoods to have racially restrictive housing covenants (but I would preserve some free residence mixed race areas as well).

                  Muslims generally would get the same treatment as leftists feminists and communists… they might get a chance at reeducation but they would not in the end be permitted to exist as muslims. I would spare certain non Koranic sufi mystic sects this treatment though.

                • Not Tom says:

                  …but I would allow for 80-90% of residential neighborhoods to have racially restrictive housing covenants

                  Sure. To me that’s such a basic default assumption that I don’t even bother to mention it. It’s really only in the past 50 years or so that we’ve had forced desegregation. It’s not strictly a Tory position; even the Whigs and Progressives held it at some point.

                  Voluntary segregation is almost always good enough, but a wise ruler might recognize the occasional need for more coercive measures. It depends on the specific populations involved.

                • Mike says:

                  Muslims can be controlled like anyone else, they’re just even more difficult due to their obsessive universalism and purity-spiraling.

                  Seems that that one of the only civilizations to successfully integrate/control Muslims was the Chinese. That plan is going awry now of course with the Uyghurs (mainly due to Western interference) but Muslims in China were pretty docile from the moment they first came to China in the 600s all the way through the Qing Era in the 1800s.

                • Pooch says:

                  Not Tom you really should start your own blog. I’d read it.

                  Muslims are a problem two-fold. First, their religion and secondly their race.

                  In a full reactionary state as Jim proposes there would be very little tolerance for non-adherents to the State-sponsered religion (Jimanity Christianity). At a minimum there would absolutely be no places of worship for them (except in there own self-goverened segregated communities if we allow that) and they would not be full citizens. At maximum they are not allowed in at all.

                  If they choose to convert, and only if they do, can they possibly be assimilated like the other browns.

                  Also, blacks absolutely can be deported back to Africa. There’s nothing stopping it. More realistically, criminal blacks would be imprisoned and enslaved. I would offer a one way ticket back though if they wanted it.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Also, blacks absolutely can be deported back to Africa. There’s nothing stopping it.

                  I don’t mean in the sense of being logistically impossible – of course there are enough planes and boats. I mean it in the sense that there is no “back”; they’ve lived here for hundreds of years and are nothing like other Africans. And even if they could fit in, “Africa” is a big place and we often have no idea which individual countries or regions their ancestors came from.

                  Imagine if Mexico somehow retook a major part of the USA and demanded that all the gringoes be sent back “to Europe”. OK, but… where? Which parts of Europe did they come from, and which European countries will actually take them?

                  History has many examples of an entire population being expelled or relocated across a nearby border, but I’m not aware of any instances of a population being successfully moved to an entirely different continent, especially a continent whose inhabitants are a full standard deviation lower in IQ and live in a vastly more primitive state. I don’t know for certain, but my gut tells me that a lot of blacks would rather go to prison than go to Africa.

                  If you told me I had to move to a different state, or to Canada, or to Australia, I’d probably grumble a little (or maybe a lot) but ultimately comply. However, if you told me I had to move to Nicaragua? No way Jose, I’m not going without a fight.

                • Atavistic Morality says:


                  No, their race is not the same thing as their incompetence, as the racial aspect only goes on about averages, not about percentages, let alone individuals. To begin with, not all blacks are the same ethnicity, and different ethnicities have different averages. Jim has talked about it here and there.

                  If you are going to say that race implies crime, then you’re saying a 120 IQ black is a criminal for being born black, you can easily see how that is ridiculous. And also, the fact that blacks have less IQ doesn’t necessarily mean incompetence, as IQ has different nuances to it to begin with and not everyone needs to be 120 IQ to be useful. It’s a crime to nigger worship some imbecile with 90 IQ to building bridges, but perhaps he can be an excellent manual worker.

                  And pointing at race instead of pointing at incompetence is most importantly ineffective, because it does nothing for you. You point at incompetence because that gets you competence. Rhodesia worked perfectly fine before progressives got in the way, and it’s not like current blacks are the same forever, let’s not forget many Europeans were very questionable before shown the light by Rome, and now we are all fine.

                  @Not Tom

                  Good points, but Muslims are not a race, so it’s a very specific case. Not only are they not a race per se, but their specific faith has specific issues that you will not find with others. Jews are somehow similar with that, there’s nuance to this.

                  Notice that I was talking about competence in general. The moment you say Muslim and the moment you say Jew, you are already saying a lot which is not necessarily true when you say black, white, brown or yellow. If Jews holiness spiral, Jews incompetent, not being ousted for being Jews, being ousted for being worthless retards at management. Just like Muslims being ousted for being bad faith savages. If so it happens that there’s only a 5% of Jews in something it’ll be because the 95% remaining are worthless at it, not because they are Jews. Believing that the percentage exists for arbitrary reasons is actually progressive thought.

                  I’m simply being very explicit about the specific perspective that I’m pointing out here. Yes, you’re right, we are going to see percentages, but the percentages don’t come first, the percentages are not the root, selection for competence is the root, the percentage is the result.

                  Of course people are going to prefer to live among their own, to each their own, as they say. But that’s not what I was talking about, this is this and that is that.

                  Also, I think it’s important to notice that the Tory quotas you’re mentioning pertain more to the general field of immigration, not judgement by competence. The King puts the quota because those people are not necessarily a group being selected by competence, but a group that comes for self-interest and the King sees that the interests of the natives are also being satisfied. The King is not putting quotas for 120 IQ blacks, the IQ is putting quotas for rando immigrants that he doesn’t even need to begin with but well, we all might benefit for it if properly controlled.

                • jim says:

                  Atavistic Morality:

                  > > Also, blacks absolutely can be deported back to Africa. There’s nothing stopping it.

                  Not Tom:

                  > I don’t mean in the sense of being logistically impossible – of course there are enough planes and boats. I mean it in the sense that there is no “back”; they’ve lived here for hundreds of years and are nothing like other Africans. And even if they could fit in, “Africa” is a big place and we often have no idea which individual countries or regions their ancestors came from.

                  Been done: Liberia.
                  Of course the American blacks did not get on with the local blacks, and being armed with a relatively white culture and significant white admixture, came to rule them, and ruled quite well by African standards – typical by American black ruled city standards.

                  Then they succumbed to genetic admixture and Cathedral ideology, and the place went to your normal black African hell hole.

                  Suppose we have a fertile white elite. Which inevitably sets up protectorates in Africa, as the Chinese are doing, and imposes better governance, as the Chinese are doing due to population pressure despite lack of fertility.

                  Then American blacks could go to those protectorates, and would find them quite congenial.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  *The King is not putting quotas for 120 IQ blacks, the King is putting quotas for rando immigrants that he doesn’t even need to begin with but well, we all might benefit for it if properly controlled.

                  Wish I could edit posts.

                • Pooch says:

                  Jim beat me to it.

                  My proposal would not force all blacks to leave, only the problem ones. I’d even be willing to give them Some start up money “reparations” if it meant they weren’t coming back.

                • Not Tom says:

                  My proposal would not force all blacks to leave, only the problem ones.

                  Sure, why not? Physical removal is a perfectly reasonable answer to sustained problem behavior.

                  But that’s not the mentality I’m criticizing.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Muslims (other than some non Koranic sufi sects) are just too much of a security risk to keep around. I remember 9/11 too well to even consider showing mercy to any muslim should it be up to me. Conversion exile or death should be their options and I’m not so sure about exile because we may just have to cleanse this problem religion from the face of the earth in the near future.

                  Luckily I think the fact that we’d reestablish patriarchy would deprive Islam of its major selling point so I think most muslims would make the sane choice.

                • Aldon says:

                  >I care about competence, I don’t really care about race.

                  Found the cuckservative/lolberg.


                  Are the ones who’ve worked hard to bring us Globohomo and are working even harder to commit racial suicide.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “Anglos… are the ones who’ve worked hard to bring us Globohomo”

                  Tradcat shill detected. Swedes and potato niggers are the most pozzed non jewish whites by far.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Found the cuckservative/lolberg.

                  Did you take a wrong turn on your way to 8chan?

                  These “found the X” comments are unfunny and gay.

                  Also pretty sure no one uses the term “lolberg” except fed shills. Is that you, jack boot?

                • The Cominator says:

                  “Did you take a wrong turn on your way to 8chan?”

                  A real 8channer would not blame “anglos” for “globohomo” and would likely call anyone who did a jew.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  I did not say that Jim, that was Pooch.

                  My personal opinion in that matter is that it’s up to the European-blood in America to decide whether they want to do it or not, but your idea sounds pretty good to me for everyone involved. Many blacks who lived under South Africa’s apartheid and Rhodesia would probably agree too.


                  >Found the cuckservative/lolberg.

                  No, you found the talented human being that respects other talented human beings. You’re either a fed or a subhuman, so you either think an 80 IQ Appalachian meth-head is better than someone like Thomas Sowell or you want to persuade us towards inefficiency and wignatism for self-destruction.

                  >Are the ones who’ve worked hard to bring us Globohomo and are working even harder to commit racial suicide.

                  Anglo-Saxons are suffering the scourge worse than anyone else, the federal government of the United States doesn’t represent Anglo-Saxons, it doesn’t represent Anglo-Saxon interests and it doesn’t even represent its founders.

                  Assuming you’re not a fed reading a script, you are very pathetic if you want to blame the Anglo-Saxons because your country is so weak that it breaks apart due to Anglo-Saxon internal power struggles. Don’t blame others for your inadequacies, there’s no one else to blame but yourself.

                  The only people putting guns on your head because you’re not following progressive dogma are your own: your own police and your own government.

                • info says:

                  “Jimanity Christianity”

                  Christianity is itself.

                  Just like mathematics of 2+2=4 doesn’t need to be more than it already is.

                  No addition or subtraction required.

                  The formula and the pattern it represents is good as it is.

                  Analysis will help but the pattern itself is perfect and needs no modification.

                • Pooch says:

                  There are many interpretations of Christianity. Ours, as Jim says, must be consistent with evolutionary psychology and Gnon.

                • jim says:

                  Not all interpretations of Christianity are equally plausible. Nikolai is unable to quote some parts of the New Testament without catching fire – at least without fearing he might catch fire.

                  Saint Jerome gives us fanfics about the persons of the New Testament which radically change the meaning, just as the New Star Wars pisses on the old Star Wars. The necessity for the fanfic reveals that holiness spiraled Christianity is a deviation from the Christianity that conquered the Roman Empire.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  Thomas Sowell voted for Obama, because tribal loyalty outweighs ideological loyalty. Sowell could easily be replaced by another Gorsuch or Kavanaugh, removing the outsider and his loyalty to outsiders. Replacing him with an 80IQ methhead is not the argument; that is a shitlib-tier false dichotomy. Replacing him with an equally or more competent American is the option, and it is absolutely the correct one.

                  By all means, put him in charge of his own people, but do not allow him to be in charge of ours.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I don’t think Sowell literally voted for Obama, but it IS a huge blackmark on Sowell (I’m sure it was somewhat peer pressure but thats no excuse) that he signed the Nevertrump letter.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  I clarified the point of my arguments down below, I’m not arguing about group membership, the discussion started solely on the grounds of competence and that’s what the discussion is about.

                  When some tries to tell me that something perfectly fine is bad because it’s made by someone black, the dichotomy is perfectly valid because it’s pointing the hypocrisy of ignoring merit and blindly judging by race.

                  I used Thomas Sowell as an example because he’s well known in America, it’s not about the specific individual and it’s not about group membership. I also don’t have anything against people in Appalachia, it’s just an easy and recognizable example.

                  Regarding group membership I’m on agreement with you.

                • Bilge_Pump says:

                  Are you Atavisionary? I go by diarrhetic_diegesis on r/DE

                  You might call me an autist. I have a sort of obsession with aesthetics and music. Ofc my autistic obsession with music theory and craft prevents me from being able to make music that most people want to hear. This probably explains my desire to establish an aristocratic class, which would require sophisticated artworks.

                  “And if you consider yourself an European, you’re actually betraying your heritage by doing so, because if there’s an ethos to the European soul that is meritocracy. ”

                  How do we establish merit in music or in art generally? Are aesthetics important? How has Socialism/Progressivism affected the music you listen to, or your aesthetic tastes? I say if you’ve accepted the cultural influence of blacks through their music, even if you listen to jazz or some other “highbrow” negro art, you’ve accepted the conditions that have allowed them to exist in the country in the first place. Are you not opposed to Socialism/Progressivism/Liberalism?

                • Bilge_Pump says:

                  Replying to “Mike” since I can’t reply directly for some reason.

                  “I agree that sperging about music is weird”

                  Idk I just felt like speaking up because that’s the one topic where I can confidently say I know more than anyone else here.

              • Nonsense. Where did the niggers learn to play those blues scales from? Wasn’t Africa lol

                • Not Tom says:

                  This almost sounds like a “cultural appropriation” argument. Doesn’t really matter where they learned the fundamentals, only that they applied them in a way that hadn’t been done before and was appealing to the (overwhelmingly white) majority population.

                  Musical talent, especially in a minority of the population in question, doesn’t excuse criminal behavior or warrant any kind of special dispensation, let alone wide-eyed worship of the entire race, but I find it equally pointless to insist that all music that ever came from any black population is bad because black.

                  That’s the distinction I’m making between race realism (“blacks, on average, are far more likely to be violent criminals, so we need a lot more prisons and police in heavily black areas”) vs. destructive racial monomania (“every black person and everything that ever came from black people is bad and should be hated”).

                  The latter position sounds like an SJW-constructed strawman, and yet some people come awfully close to it. Maybe those people are all shills, but a person’s motivation isn’t relevant to the truth (or untruth) of their assertions.

                • jim says:

                  There is much to be said for including people to do stuff on the basis of merit, and cooperating with people on the basis of virtue. Gnon commands peace on earth to all men of good will.

                  However there is also much to be said for awarding group membership on the basis of rather arbitrary criteria of similarity. It is easier to cooperate with people like yourself because you better know their virtues and their vices, and because they have the same tribal taboos.

                  The Good Samaritan is your neighbor, all those other Samaritans are not. We should not be blind to race and ethnicity, but merit and virtue matters also. Strict meritocracy undermines social cohesion, but neither should you disregard merit.

                • Pooch says:

                  That’s the distinction I’m making between race realism (“blacks, on average, are far more likely to be violent criminals, so we need a lot more prisons and police in heavily black areas”) vs. destructive racial monomania (“every black person and everything that ever came from black people is bad and should be hated”).

                  Both seem wrong. Race realism to me is blacks are far less competent at Western Civilization than whites therefore they generally shouldn’t be included in it. However, knowing that there are exceptions, we should allow for the exceptionally capable blacks to be included.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  After reading Jim’s post, I believe some might confuse the intent of my posts. So just in case, to clarify, I’m personally talking about competence and recognizing merit by its own, I’m not talking about group membership. I believe in giving credit where credit is due, discrediting and disregarding something because it was made by someone of a different race is very stupid.

                  Group membership is an entirely different thing, I’d never group membership to people of other races, it just doesn’t work. But it doesn’t mean that we can’t cooperate here and there.

                  Personally, I think it’s very wrong that a lot of American politicians aren’t of European heritage. Jews, Asians, Blacks, mestizos and so on should never be involved in politics. And the ruler of the US should be titled with something that reminds everyone that America is an Anglo-Saxon country with Anglo-Saxon culture for eternity.

                • @Tom

                  “black music” is white folk music with a black twist on it… then whites took it back and made it more appealing to whites again. Led Zeppelin sold a ton more albums than the black blues guys they ripped off.

            • Starman says:

              “Maybe there is a schism as R7 says and a less blatantly insane wing exists.”

              I wouldn’t say “less blatantly insane wing.” See: any schism event in Christianity or Islam.

              Directly banning spacetravel would immediately complete the Schism thru elite progressive ranks (PROGRESSive has the word “Progress” in it) and warrant negative attention from the generals (the generals will wonder why only the FBI can use violence to affect domestic politics, after all, the FBI is a puny armed organization, the military is a huge armed organization.)

              The investment in flat earth shills is just another symptom of the fractured elite (the other symptom is the persecution of the Trump family, arresting other members of the elite.)

              • jack boot says:

                [*deleted for entirely incoherent and nonsensical trooferism*]

                • jim says:

                  Why is it that troofers can never say anything that you cannot say when human resources is likely to read your comments?

              • ten says:

                I do simple maths; if one wing is the same as another but without one particular insanity, it is less insane

                A cathedral intentionally and consciously using the bioleninist coalition for malevolent anticosmic ends would be less insane than a cathedral doing it out of sincere belief

                • Starman says:


                  All progressive factions are feminist, and feminism is profoundly anticosmic no matter what.

                • jim says:

                  Interaction with them reveals genuine insanity. Even among cuckservatives and people like esr who think they are libertarian – though they don’t seem at all libertarian on the curious absence of realistic male female interactions in the media.

                • ten says:


                  perhaps old school commies don’t count as progressives, but their cousins or something, and while their “non-feminism” is still sort of feminist, there are small factions of communists who stick out their necks against the mainlines of prog feminism (and mass immigration) and take massive flak for it.

                  Their “non-feminism” certainly doesn’t say that the man shall be the head of the family, and women must be transferred from under one mans headship to anothers or go feral, so perhaps this is minor trivia. They however do at least understand personal sexual dynamics as well as sexual degeneracy, and the social destructiveness of these things, while being dumbfounded for a solution. At least, europe has such tankie communist parties, the ones i once was drawn to.

                  jim, yes, absolutely – again i argue for progressive sincere belief and genuine insanity.

                • Allah says:

                  Why are there so many ex-commies in here?

                • ten says:


                  because the “rightism” we encountered was either neutered eunuch neocons conserving yesteryears progressivism, a very sick and weak horse, or neonazism/other forms of white nationalism, a very dumb and low status horse, while marxist talmudism sounded smart, let us be edgy in public, gave us official blessing to play at antisocial rebellion, giving good pussy, etc.

                  But i don’t think there are all that many ex actual card carrying communist partisans here

                • Allah says:

                  Yes, a typical story of a youngster hanging out with bad boys then seeking a nice stable family after getting old. How did leftism stop providing good pussy to you?

                • jim says:

                  Leftism used to give men pussy. That stopped happening in the seventies.

                • Allah says:

                  Yes, what happened? Why can’t you run bad boy commie game now?

                • jim says:

                  Commies are not bad boys any more, but servile and emasculated servants of our masters, and women can smell it on them.

                  You cannot pass the red pill test.

                • ten says:

                  Leftism didn’t stop providing good pussy for me. The communist group i was associated with about ten years ago suddenly sprouted progressives, and have since then only been talking about whether lumpenproles and degenerates should or should not be included, whether thoughtcrime and hatefacts should or should not be embraced, if they are materialist science or lib counterrev propaganda, and especially if men are women and whether anti-trans radical feminism is a) lib bourg dyscivic idealism b) the correct socialist emancipatory science or c) reactionary white supremacist hatred.

                  Before that, passing the red pill test was possible and increased your standing. Hatefacts and thoughtcrime on immigration, sexual deviants, lumpenprole parasites and dyscivic ideology like feminism were doctrine.

                  Afterwards, it was a paralyzed, retarded place under constant progressive siege and scrutiny.

                  Had this comment section been draped in strange, obscure, ignorant marxism, and the average iq dropped by sigma, it would have looked a lot like our old internal board.

                • Allah says:

                  I was thinking the progs just cleaned up the commies after Soviet support ended and ten’s experience supports that, but you say they were already going prog in the 70s, what happened? We still have multiple communist insurgent groups so they’re doing fine here. Interesting that Western communists were so much weaker despite being suppressed far more gently.

                • jim says:

                  Something of both.

                  There was spontaneous influence of commies on prog and progs on commies, organized entryism by commies against progs and progs against commies, astroturfed commie fake progressivism and astroturfed progressive fake communism, for example Obama’s mother, who was a communist for the CIA, and you could not tell who was using whom. Lost in a hall of mirrors.

                  Naturally, when the commies lost state backing, they were absorbed, but long before the commies lost that struggle, they were overrun with cucks. Back in those days, there were indeed reds under the bed on the payroll of the Soviet government. And if you were Peking line communist you got Soviet reds under your bed. But you also got progressives paid by the US government under your bed. Socialist Matter died of entryism.

  27. jim says:

    We are not importing test kits, despite a critical shortage and massive failure to test people who have been exposed and are showing symptoms.

    • The Cominator says:

      You don’t think Corona-Chan is a real pandemic do you.

      It seems like something massively hyped by professional panic-mongers and Trump’s enemies to me. The initial pandemic announcement out of the CDC was made by Rod Rosenweasel’s sister of all people.

      • Fred says:

        The virus is being shilled incredibly hard on /pol/ – I find it hard to believe that’s just an organic natural outcome.

        Whoever is shilling it has compromised the jannies, who just let the endless stream of schizophrenic coronavirus drivel (of minimal relevance to pol’s putative mission) stay up, instead of ruthlessly purging the crap.

        The real epidemic to panic over was the 2014 Ebola outbreak (which apparently had R0 of 1.5-2.5). Not sure how they contained that.

        • The Cominator says:

          Its the same faggots who post the Zion Don type threads and the *ahem* “fuck jannies” have never been on our side (not unless you want to go to whatever form 8chan is now) at least not since Trump locked up the nomination.

          The shills spam the meme and the blackpilled idiot wignats eat it up. Spending time on /pol will make you hate unironic wignats the way having been in the engineering field will make you hate pajeets.

          • jack boot says:

            what’s a wignat? just a self identified white person who dislikes globalism? or anyone who accepts alex jones + hitler/luther/all of the saints/ford/marx/etc into his heart

            or just anyone you don’t like…

          • A says:


          • Bilge_Pump says:

            “Spending time on /pol will make you hate unironic wignats”

            spending time on /pol makes me hate everyone

        • Bob says:

          Ebola was contained because travel through Congo is very hard. Very very hard. This Belgian couple tried driving across Congo in 2008. It took something like 7 weeks to go from the equivalent of Oakland to Amarillo. Also, importantly, they were the only ones who were doing so. It’s not a beaten path.

          The story of the Belgian couple also contrasts how uncooperative Congolese are with anyone not in their village and how cooperative Europeans are with strangers, African or Euro.

          • The Cominator says:

            Corona Chan will not be contained but its just a fucking bad cold that kills old chainsmokers (which is probably at least half of the population of the world outside the US) with lung problems already the way any bad cold or flu can. Even if its more lethal now it will almost certainly get less lethal. I suppose it COULD mutate into the 1918 flu but that is unlikely.

            • Mike says:

              While I know you aren’t trying to be exact, I’ve seen some interesting statistics purporting that people who smoke aren’t hit as hard. One more score in favor of tobacco.

              • The Cominator says:

                I suppose its entirely possible the Cathedral (which hates tobacco for some reason far more than any other drug it’d be interesting to find out why, I guess its because it competes with weed and weed makes people more liberal) could fabricate information to make it look like it will kill you for sure if you smoke while in reality its more likely to do the opposite.

                I don’t think thats likely but they could definitely do that.

                • Mike says:

                  Obviously there are conflicting reports at this early of a stage, and the sample size isn’t the best, but its still interesting:

                  Smokers comprise only 7% of a 41 patient sample, and only 12% of a 1,099 patient sample.

                • Not Tom says:

                  They hate tobacco because it’s a very big apple cart owned and run mostly by deplorables. It’s not necessary to come up with convoluted rationalizations for the basic NPC impulse.

                • Mike says:

                  In the West, specifically the United States, those numbers wouldn’t be that odd, but in China, where the men smoke like chimneys, that is quite odd. Will have to see if the trend continues among larger sample sizes.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Yes I assume in China the REAL male smoking rate is like 80% (forget whatever stats because Asians notoriously lie on those, for instance the same stats say that only 2% of Chinese women smoke or something which while they smoke at a lower rate than men is absurdly low because at least 20-25% of them smoke).

                • jack boot says:

                  [*repetitious marxist spam deleted*]

                • Mike says:

                  How does one spam marxist memes over smoking, my gosh are you a faggot Jack Boot.

                • ten says:

                  <30 yrs chinese people don't smoke at all, excepting party people and goths, who still exist there, but they are not as common.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “<30 yrs chinese people don't smoke at all, excepting party people and goths, who still exist there, but they are not as common."

                  I have not been to China but from what I know of Asian people I don't believe this.

                • Smoking tobacco is probably good for you on net. It does make your respiratory tract less efficient by clogging it with mucus, but the purpose of the mucus is to keep bad stuff from getting into your bloodstream. It will make you less likely to catch airborne illnesses and protects your lungs from absorbing atmospheric pollutants.

                  I don’t trust the data that correlates smoking with lung cancer. The countries that smoke the most don’t have anywhere near the highest lung cancer rates. Japan is near the top in smoking and near the bottom in lung cancer. What does correlate with lung cancer is whether or not your country or countries near you tested airborne nuclear weapons.

                • Mike says:

                  @ten I agree with Comintator, the demographic you are describing would be the only young smokers in the United States. Doesn’t apply even to Europe, let alone China or Japan.

                • aswaes says:




                  It’s highly dose dependent, but in certain types of lung cancer, your odds skyrocket when you smoke more than a pack a day. Like, 100 folds. Since the base rate is minuscule, your chances of not getting lung cancer are still pretty good. But you absolutely do increase your odds.

                  From an evolutionary perspective, we expect prevalent cancers to be caused via chronic or acute infection. (This paper should be required reading in these circles btw)

                  By smoking you’re chronically stressing your lungs and respiratory tract. You’re sucking, dozens of times a day, fags of questionable hygiene (may be contaminated with all sorts of bugs: virus, bacteria, fungi, other). So you’re increasing the odds of a bug, or bugs, colonizing your lungs and chronically messing with it, increasing the odds of catastrophically breaking cellular machinery.

                  If you want the benefits of tobacco w/o the downside, use caffeine, amphetamines, or nicotine pills.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I suspect smoking all natural tobacco in extreme moderation is probably on the whole good for you, but that is not the way people who smoke do so in practice.

                • Niiiidriveevof says:

                  Tobacco became vilified because it’s been a symbol of masculinity, simple as that. It’s become more drastic via holiness spiral.

        • Ebola was way too lethal to spread effectively. It only spread in the first place because Africans live like animals. You literally had to get an infected person’s fluids into your body to catch Ebola, and Ebola makes its carriers immobile and very obviously sick.

          Everybody in the world is going to catch Coronachan, like everybody gets the flu every winter, and hardly anyone is going to die from it. The only interesting thing is what the panic will stir up economically and in government.

          • The Cominator says:

            Based and redpilled as you always are.

            • I also don’t think it’s as mild as you believe. A lot of people who catch it need to be hooked up to tubes and have their lungs pumped out. There aren’t enough hospital beds to pump every boomer’s lungs out. Things might get very… interesting if that happens.

              • Mike in Boston says:

                hardly anyone is going to die from it

                There aren’t enough hospital beds to pump every boomer’s lungs out.

                Those two statements don’t seem consistent to me.

                Call me blackpilled if you like, but if you put the over-under on deaths in the U.S. from Wuhan coronavirus over the next six months at a quarter million, I’d take the over.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I think its going to kill less people than the flu.

                • jim says:

                  It is the flu – there are a zillion different flus, with new ones appearing all the time, which is why they keep having to issue new flu vaccines, and frequently wind up issuing a vaccine that turns out to be quite dangerous.

                  It is an exceptionally deadly flu, and if it spreads as widely as the usual, it is going to kill a lot of people.

                  It appears to be evolving into something milder, because if it makes its host too sick, its host gets quarantined. So in the end, will be just another flu, but may kill a lot of people getting there.

                • pdimov says:

                  The milder strain (S-cov) is evolutionary older.

                • Not Tom says:

                  there are a zillion different flus

                  Which is why “kills less than the flu” is such a profoundly stupid statement. COVID-19 is one virus – two, if you believe a single unpublished study with limited data. The flu is hundreds, maybe thousands of different viruses. Of course “the flu” kills more. So what? The largest cause of death in the US is heart disease, so should we just ignore all infectious diseases based on this tortured illogic?

                  Compared to any individual flu pandemic, like the 2009 H1N1 outbreak, COVID-19 has already caused many more deaths. It’s one of many nasty viruses floating around, but is both extremely infectious and quite severe, which makes it one of the worst right now. It’s a virus with the severity of the worst influenza pandemics (except 1918) and the contagiousness of a common cold.

                  Cominator, you really need to learn to recognize when you’re out of your depth. I can forgive people for parroting things they’ve heard once or twice, or things that seemed accurate several weeks ago, like “it’s just a bad cold”. But correction after correction and you just keep digging that hole deeper. Stop it already.

                • When I said “hardly anyone will die” I spoke off the cuff. Even just 1% of the US population is 3-4,000,000 boomers. Though that probably wouldn’t impact your life very much without the panic. If God snapped His fingers and spirited four million boomers off the mortal coil, likely you would hardly notice.

                  Come to think of it, though, our medical infrastructure is already garbage and our d*ctors grossly incompetent. Hospitals are breeding grounds for disease, and I’ve seen many people go into a hospital mildly sick and be on death’s door a week later. Not to mention the clueless pajeet d*ctors stumbling around in an Indian miasma daze, the dindu nurses who can’t even pronounce “sterile”, and sadist cunts who took the job because they like watching people die. I’d trust a drunk farm vet in rural eastern europe to perform surgery on me before I’d ever voluntarily walk into a US hospital.

                • The Cominator says:

                  You are misinterpreting my words.

                  I know the flu isn’t one virus, this is arguably a strain of the flu and arguably not (as Jim has pointed out it shares genetic sequences with the HIV virus) but it will probably kill less people than the regular season flu this year. The only thing that makes me uncertain is the Persians keep licking that fucking shrine and maybe it kills 5% of the population there instead of .1% and of course it could mutate.

                  I don’t see a clear case that this is going to kill very many people, I see a very clear case that the enemy media is doing everything they can to stoke hysteria in an effort to collapse Trump’s economy in an election year. I know people in the medical field personally who I actually trust, they do not think very much of it.

                • Not Tom says:

                  It’s definitely not literally a strain of influenza – I think Jim was speaking in metaphors there. It’s a strain of coronavirus, which is a different family from influenza, and the same family as the common cold. However, in terms of symptoms, it is like a very bad flu.

                  Transmissibility of a cold + severity of the worst flu. That’s kind of bad.

                  Here’s Greg Cochran supporting one of my basic premises:

                  That is, mortality being a function of both the disease itself and the ability of the healthcare system to deal with it. COVID-19 doesn’t have to make everyone so sick that they’re beyond saving, just put enough people in the ICU at one time to overwhelm the system.

                  And if the ICUs are filled with Boomers and Hapas because of the Wu Flu, that means no beds for anyone else. Ergo, you can be negatively affected even if you’re young, white and healthy, especially if people start to panic.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “Transmissibility of a cold + severity of the worst flu. That’s kind of bad.”

                  From what I understood influenza viruses tend to be as transmissable as colds if not more so (I just looked this up, apparently they used to think the flu was less airborne than colds but they no longer really believe that my experience is that flu is airborne).

                  From what I’ve read about Corona-Chan its less transmissable in the air than either but it lasts on surfaces for a LONG time (but like colds and flu both doesn’t last very long in hot and sunny weather).

                • Not Tom says:

                  From what I understood influenza viruses tend to be as transmissable as colds if not more so

                  – R0 of seasonal influenza: 1 – 2 (mean of 1.3)
                  – R0 of 1918 pandemic: 1.4 – 2.8
                  – R0 of common cold (rhinovirus): about 6

                  Here’s a graph. Not everything is included, but it should give you the basic idea.

                  R0 of COVID-19 has been estimated at 1.4 – 3.8, but based on the sudden explosions in SK and Italy, there’s good reason to believe that estimate is low and that the only cases actually being reported are the more serious ones. It’s more likely that an R0 in the 2-3 range is if drastic steps are taken to limit the spread, like what China is doing.

                  Even the lowest R0 estimates have this as being at least on par with the worst influenza pandemic we’ve ever had, and this is after (supposedly) 100 years of advancements in hygiene and medical technology, and no crazy confounding factors like a world war. Fortunately it is nowhere near as deadly as that pandemic – at least not the known strains – but it is considerably worse than the seasonal flu, and also more infectious. The only reason the absolute numbers are lower is that we have been taking some steps to contain it, and it’s had a lot less time to spread.

      • Not Tom says:

        It is literally a pandemic. It’s spreading on every continent and in over 50 countries. That’s the literal definition of a pandemic.

        You might not think it’s a very severe pandemic; that part is still up for debate and will require continued observation among non-Asian populations. But you’re just being silly here. If you live anywhere in the US, and you aren’t already prepped for voluntary isolation during a major outbreak, then you’re a fool.

        • The Cominator says:

          No its literally hysterical faggotry and yet another plot against Trump. Its a fucking cold.

          • Not Tom says:

            Buddy, I pointed out that the common cold was part of the Coronavirus family over a month ago when this first started. The only faggot here is you for ignoring a month’s worth of news and research since then.

            Colds don’t give you viral pneumonia, and no one is being hysterical about this. It took weeks for the stock markets to notice at all, and not a single business or school in the USA has been closed. That’s the problem; we’re waiting for it to get as bad as Italy or South Korea before taking any action. By the time you see those numbers, it’s already circulating among the local population.

            It’s also a profoundly stupid argument to claim that because full containment may be impossible, there is therefore no point in partial containment. What matters even more than the total number of people infected, is the total number of people infected at one time. Even if the spread cannot be contained – and Hong Kong and Singapore seem to have proved that it can – there is a benefit to slowing it down in order to avoid overwhelming our national infrastructure.

            Swearing a lot and using bombastic language doesn’t make your position any less stupid.

            • The Cominator says:

              The only real danger from this is the danger that the reaction to the virus sinks the economy, Trump’s reelection and puts our enemies back in power. Hence no i say its typical media bullshit. Validating this stupid panic doesn’t help, nobody knows the real death rate but its almost certainly lower than the stats because of mild and asympomatic cases.

              • Not Tom says:

                You’re repeating arguments that people (including myself) were making a month ago before we had any real information. Today we have a lot more information.

                If you aren’t very interested in the details and don’t want to follow the development, OK; but then don’t pretend like you know what you’re talking about. You sound like someone who learned everything they know about the virus by spending 5 minutes reading month-old threads on The Donald.

                • jim says:

                  Current data on the virus indicates that about half of those infected suffer a mild cold or don’t even notice, half of them it gets nasty, one in ten, maybe one in five, require intensive care (and if it spreads as broadly as the flu, there is not going to be enough intensive care) one in fifty die.

                  And there are a lot of people going into intensive care and not very many coming out yet, so at the end of the day, it could be a lot worse than one in fifty.

                  So if everyone gets it, and the current death rate is indicative, a lot of people will die, one in fifty, a mighty big disaster. If the current death rate is not indicative, because people now in intensive care do not come out of intensive care, and because intensive care will be overwhelmed, could be a lot higher than one in fifty, could be one in ten. Could be that most people currently in intensive care die or suffer permanent major brain and organ damage, most people who need intensive care and cannot get it die.

                  Hong Kong and China show that the disease can be contained, but it requires a level of technology and competence that the US is not currently demonstrating.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Yes, exactly. Everyone is ignoring the fact that mortality (which is now estimated at about 3.5%, by the way) is not only based on the severity of the disease but also the availability of care. The US cannot handle 30 million people visiting hospitals for this thing. We can’t even get enough masks.

                  China had to build new hospitals to keep mortality as low as it was. Do you think that would happen here? It would be a year before the first shovel hits the ground.

                  What is with the idiotic binary thinking, that either everyone is going to die or it’s “just a cold”? Those aren’t the only options. This is really nasty to a lot of people who get it, including people who are white and relatively young. Let’s say 60% of people get it, 10% of those have what amounts to the worst flu they’ve ever had in their lives, and 1/3 of those actually die from it. That is insanely bad. It’s worse than any flu epidemic we’ve seen since WWI. And I’m not even accounting for the fact that supply shrinks as health care workers get sick and have to be quarantined for weeks at a time.

                  And just think of the political, business and supply chain disruptions. Apparently in Iran, 1 in 10 politicians are infected and several are dying. Trump is over 70; will he keep holding his giant rallies? What if he gets sick enough to be out of commission even for just a few weeks? 40% of the US population is over 45 years old, and apparently the risk jumps massively after age 50; even if you, personally, never get sick or never notice symptoms, does that sound like business as usual?

                  Fine, it’s not Armageddon. It’s also not a cold. It is a very slow-acting, extremely infectious virus that has clearly demonstrated the propensity to flare up in clusters before anybody can figure out what’s going on or where it came from. The human race will survive, but it is not going to flourish as well as it would have if we hadn’t thrown away all of our social capital and allowed technological progress, especially in medicine, to completely stagnate.

                  That’s the reality. It’s not Doomsday, but it’s going to be very bad in many countries, likely including the US.

                • jack boot says:


                • jim says:

                  The direct opposite of what Not Tom was saying.

                  Don’t tell us “I agree”, and then proceed to attribute to your adversary the opposite of his position.

                  You want to destroy Musk, and Not Tom wants billionaires to build rockets to Mars.

                • jack boot says:

                  musk isn’t a capitalist. he’s the antithesis of capitalism. you cannot praise musk without discrediting capitalism. do i really even need to explain why, honestly

                • jim says:

                  Musk is the government outsourcing stuff that needs to be outsourced. Nasa hates him and wants him to fail. The space force is a plot by Trump and the Army to get around Nasa.

                  You could argue that Xenophon’s reliance on market supply of weapons and food was the antithesis of capitalism, because Xenophon heavily intervened in the market with fire and sword.

                  But you would be wrong. The antithesis of capitalism is the food that our warriors have to eat and Nasa unsuccessfully attempting to build rockets.

                  Priests should do priestly stuff, warriors should do warrior stuff, merchants should do merchant stuff, and the sovereign should do sovereign stuff. At present we have priests intervening in merchant stuff and warrior stuff, and the overly mighty servants of the sovereign doing far more stuff than the sovereign can supervise. Xenophon relied on market supply of food because shaking down the peasants for food exposed the army to defeat in detail by what we moderns call guerrilla war. If he had relied on socialist logistics, insourced logistics, he would have had to engage in state building in order that food could be brought to his army. Not to mention that socialist food is terrible – breadlines, school lunches, and what our warriors have to eat.

                  Socialist rockets are too expensive and unreliable to make rods from God an effective weapon.

                  And when the servants of the sovereign do more stuff than the sovereign can effectively supervise, you get anarcho tyranny.

                • jack boot says:

                  pretty sure i posted hot takes elsewhere…

                • jim says:

                  Then you need to link to them, and explain what you supposedly proved in those links.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  From a study I saw from the Chinese, theoretically Asian men are 5 times more likely to get it, which would theoretically imply a reduction of the known impact by a factor of 5 in most of the US no?

                • Not Tom says:

                  I wasn’t aware that Asian men are more likely to catch it, only to have worse symptoms. That’s an interesting twist. Could you point us to that study?

                  You want to destroy Musk, and Not Tom wants billionaires to build rockets to Mars.

                  Do I even want to know my post somehow got linked to Musk and/or billionaires?

                • max boot says:

                  probably not. but i’ll give you the short if you want.

                  jim has a love hate relationship with musk. on one hand musks whole rocket program is funded by nasa and he hates government. on other hand jim wants to call musk a free market capitalist out of atlas shrugged.

                  but real capitalists don’t work hundred hour weeks and start car companies rocket companies and expect to lose all their money.

                  especially not expect to lose all their money.

                  which is why there is only one musk. capitalism is the enemy of all romance. musk is a romantic figure. someone so great he can transcend the capitalist system and do something beyond gray fog death parasitic enslavery

                  when people love musk they unintentionally reveal their hatred of the weights and measures and routines of the rationalist materialist capitalist SYSTEM

                  and their love is proportional to their hatred. if only subliminally. and never spoken aloud, or maybe even thought in the privacy of ones head.

                  like jim

                • Steve Johnson says:

                  jim has a love hate relationship with musk. on one hand musks whole rocket program is funded by nasa and he hates government.

                  Hey shill, you’re getting the shibboleths wrong. We don’t “hate government” around here – we want sane, effective government.

                • jim says:

                  A sane effective government needs to outsource everything it can, which is everything except tax collection and the military. It even needs to outsource even most legitimate violence, most law enforcement, and most judicial decision making. It needs to outsource military logistics and hire camp followers. Musk’s rockets work, and advance technology. Nasa’s rockets are in decline, and have been in decline ever since Wehrner von Braun retired.

                  Musk can give the military the space force and rods from God. Nasa cannot. Insourced logistics means that fighting men on the front line get bad food and don’t get laid.

                  Trump did not outsource medical care for vets because he hated the government, but because he loved vets.

                • The Cominator says:

                  It appears there are two strains of it one of it is a nasty killer strain, but because its a nasty killer it does not spread as effectively as the strain that which is more like a bad flu. So the one everyone is likely to get is the non-killer strain.

                  Viruses tend to become less deadly as they spread not more deadly, the 1918 flu was probably a fluke that originated in the uniquely unsanitary conditions of the trenches which probably exceeded the worst third world hellhole imaginable.

                • Not Tom says:

                  We don’t “hate government” around here – we want sane, effective government.

                  Seriously. It’s astounding just how far off the mark he is.

                  But more importantly, completely off-topic. It’s just random nonsense that has nothing at all to do with the conversation we were having. He (or rather his supervisor) just came up with a new hot take and had to post it somewhere.

                • Not Tom says:

                  It appears there are two strains of it one of it is a nasty killer strain, but because its a nasty killer it does not spread as effectively as the strain that which is more like a bad flu. So the one everyone is likely to get is the non-killer strain.

                  It’s conceivable. The evidence being…?

                • The Cominator says:


                  Alarmists headline but the actual article (this mutation wasn’t recent) supports my view it claims there are two strains of the virus and that the second less deadly strain is the one that is spreading. No I haven’t gone and bothered looking through scientific papers on the subject because I’m not that worried.

                  This is also typically how viruses work, the really deadly kinds tend to burn themselves out.

                • jack boot says:


                • jim says:


                • jack boot says:


                • jim says:

                  If you don’t have a supervisor, easy to prove it. Just answer the red pill question, or post any comment that would give your human resources department fits.

                  There are so many thoughts forbidden that it is quite difficult to avoid saying something forbidden, but strangely, you avoid all forbidden thoughts, even though forbidden thoughts are the main topic of conversation around here.

                • jack boot says:

                  “everything it can, which is everything except tax collection and the military. It even needs to outsource even most legitimate violence, most law enforcement, and most judicial decision making.”

                  An effective government could be fully vertically integrated like any other command economy you love so much. google boeing amazon goldman sachs are all command economies lol. we should talk about monopolies but that would raise uncomfortably question about capitalism lol.

                  ” It needs to outsource military logistics and hire camp followers. Musk’s rockets work, and advance technology. Nasa’s rockets are in decline, and have been in decline ever since Wehrner von Braun retired.”

                  von braun was a german. a german of fascistic inclination. soviet tech declined after they ran out of german scientists. clearly there was something special about hitler’s germany.

                  if you think apollo went tot he moon i have a bridge to sell you. the lunar module looks like a cheap prop and propulsive landing was first achieved on earth in 2015. so not really a decline until the 2000s when the space shuttle retired.

                  no one cares about furthering american imperial ventures except neocons and boomers. your rods from god are gay. we saw what happened with iran. trump pissed on the tattered remnants of westphalia treaty and lit them on fire. no one wants a world internet system to terrorize us into submission.

                  there are successful examples of government run medicine. or were before the influx into europe. it works fine where governments force corporations to useful things.

                  but capitalists hate doing useful things. so that’s what.

                • jim says:

                  > An effective government could be fully vertically integrated like any other command economy

                  Been tried.

                  Vertically integrated corporations don’t work. Hence the buzzword “core competence”. Vertical integration is current military logistics, and they don’t work either. Command economies have been tried over and over again, and have failed over and over again. Vertical integration is Nasa building rockets.

                  The problem is that the guy who knows how to do stuff needs to have power, and vertical integration denies him power.

                  A corporate entity needs to focus on its core competence. The core competence of the state is hurting people, breaking their toys, and taking their stuff. Anything else it tries, it screws up.

                • jack boot says:


                • jim says:

                  Unresponsive. Capitalist rockets did not cause Nasa to stop building rockets. Frustration with Nasa’s inability to build rockets caused capitalist rockets.

                  Socialism performs poorly at production – the extreme example being New York City subways.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  Come the restoration, we need to give The Cominator free reign to commit atrocities against the people responsible for inflicting shills like jack boot on us. The shills are just puppets repeating after the people elbow deep up their asses, and once we have our boot up his ass he’ll march to our tune just as readily, but dealing with the infestation is trying. The ones responsible will make good object lessons for the rest of the commisariat to fall in line. Jim, you have the patience of a saint.

                • Not Tom says:

                  I don’t think he’s even trying to convince anyone of anything at this point, he’s just here to derail and cause chaos. He wants to break shit, and allowing him to continue posting is, in my opinion, allowing him to break shit. I suppose perhaps there’s no point in moderating him because he’d just spam new accounts? Unfortunate.

                • Starman says:

                  @jack boot

                  ” if you think apollo went tot he moon i have a bridge to sell you. the lunar module looks like a cheap prop and propulsive landing was first achieved on earth in 2015.”

                  I wonder if the flat Earth shill who refused to answer a RedPill on women question on Gab works at the same office in India as jack boot (who also refused to answer a RedPill on women question)?

                  They both have the same incomprehensible poor English and stubborn sticking to a script. The Flat Earth Gab shill even complained that my WQ was off script!

                • jim says:

                  Lots of Marxism, a bit of trooferism, I don’t think flat earth is on script, he is just throwing it in at random because our masters despise us.

                • jack boot says:


                • jim says:

                  It would be very easy for you to prove you are not working for the government or a quasi governmental organization, since there are a vast number of things governmental and quasi governmental shills are not allowed to say, or even acknowledge other people saying. And yet, when we complain that all your output looks like an NPC following an FBI or ngo script, you ignore our challenges to take the shill test.

                  That the HR of the shills is so repressive indicates that they work in an organization with more fifty employees, since the HR of smaller organizations is subject to different regulations. Shills also, though presenting as white and native, sometimes have poor English skills. Lots of white natives have poor writing skills, but every real white native has good English skills.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  I wish I could Not Tom, I’ve tried to find it again but to no avail. I saw it originally posted in the DE subreddit, but I’ve gone back 3 months and I don’t see it. God, it has gone to shit since it got overrun by glowing wignats.

        • Theshadowedknight says:

          So what if its literally a pandemic? By the definition of pandemic, cold and flu season every year is a pandemic, and for that reason those are usually excluded. The 2009 flu pandemic didn’t bring down the world, and all indications so far say this won’t, either. If the media is hyping something, almost a sure bet that it is fake.

          • jim says:

            > By the definition of pandemic, cold and flu season every year is a pandemic,

            Novel Corona virus is bat flu. Every year, or every few years, we get a new flu due to some animal flu cross breeding with some human RNA virus. This is yet another one, but it is deadlier than usual because it cross bred with the AIDS virus instead of the previous human flu virus. If not controlled, we are going to have yet another flu season with a considerably higher death rate, but not an end of the world death rate.

            As with past flu seasons, it will be mostly, but not exclusively, the frail that will croak. Because it is a new form of flu, it will spread more rapidly than usual, infect more people, and considerably more of those infected will die. This is yet another flu season, but it is a deadlier flu season.

            • A says:

              This is yet another one, but it is deadlier than usual because it cross bred with the AIDS virus instead of the previous human flu virus.

              Do you have a source for this?


              Apparently whole genome sequences have already been done, so it will be trivial to determine which other virus it crossbred with.

              Furthermore, it was found that nCoV-2019 is 96% identical at the whole genome level to a bat coronavirus.

              Which leaves 4% for other viruses. If that were AIDS, one would think that they would have reported this. The authors are all Chinese, so Cathedral interference seems unlikely.

              • jim says:

                They did report this, close to four percent of the virus genome matches the AIDS virus, there was outrage, the report was withdrawn and stuffed down the memory hole. It was not withdrawn because of “corrections”, but because of outrage.

                Treatment of some infected people with AIDS medications was started, and instantly stopped, so we don’t know whether it would have been effective. Probably not, if the disease is 96% flu and 3% AIDS.

                This led to massive speculation that the Novel Corona virus is bioengineered, but that is not the conjecture that the paper proposed. They conjectured cross breeding, which happens every couple of flu seasons. I guess that a gay with aids selling live bats at the food market got exposed to bat virus, and then proceeded to cough all over people at the market.

                China is successfully resisting some aspects of Cathedral doctrine, but in China, as in America, gays and women can do no wrong.

                • A says:

                  Thank you. I also found a link to the original report. It has big red letters on the top of the page stating that it has indeed been withdrawn.


                  I ran a few blastp queries and the four protein sequences do indeed align with HIV-1.


                  Select “Protein BLAST” and enter “11676” in the “organism” box to run against HIV only.

                  The problem with this search is that some of the sequences are rather small. Running the sequences against the entire database gives too many matches.

                  I am not familiar enough with this tool to automatically perform an inner join on the result sets of the four sequences run against the entire database. The authors appear to be using a more powerful tool than the publicly available tool.

                  From their report:

                  Although, the 4 inserts represent discontiguous short stretches of amino acids in spike glycoprotein of 2019-nCoV, the fact that all three of them share amino acid identity or similarity with HIV-1 gp120 and HIV-1 Gag (among all annotated virus proteins) suggests that this is not a random fortuitous finding. In other words, one may sporadically expect a fortuitous match for a stretch of 6-12 contiguous amino acid residues in an unrelated protein. However, it is unlikely that all 4 inserts in the 2019-nCoV spike glycoprotein fortuitously match with 2 key structural proteins of an unrelated virus (HIV-1).

                  So perhaps they didn’t do the inner join, and are going off intuition, but I would tend to agree with their conclusion. Just based on intuition, it seems unlikely that four reasonably long sequences would match just by chance.

                  If anyone knows how to do the inner join then we would be able to see which other organisms the four sequences might align to, but in any case, the authors are probably right.

                • A says:

                  Treatment of some infected people with AIDS medications was started, and instantly stopped, so we don’t know whether it would have been effective. Probably not, if the disease is 96% flu and 3% AIDS.

                  Yes, I found an article about it. They are very evasive about why exactly the Japanese government might have thought treating the Coronavirus with AIDS medicines might have been a good idea.


                  The new coronavirus, recently named SARS-CoV-2 due to its close genetic ties to the SARS coronavirus, is made out of RNA. Other RNA viruses include the ones that cause Ebola, hepatitis C, and yes, HIV/AIDS.

                  RNA viruses come in all shapes and sizes, and those that infect humans can do so in different ways. But many of the drugs that go after HIV and the hepatitis C virus broadly target weaknesses found in all sorts of viruses.

                  They are jumping in hoops to say anything other than that one of the Coronavirus protein regions might be related to the HIV-1 protein region that attaches to the T-cell CD4 receptor.

                • A says:

                  In the comments section of the withdrawn article there are many people who do not understand that the likelihood of four simultaneous, reasonably improbable events equals the likelihood of one single, highly improbable event.

                  One Gaetan Burgio of the Australian National University writes:

                  I blasted each of these insertions to the non-redundant protein database and found over 100 hits for every single of these 4 insertions. The hits are others coronaviruses, plants, parasites, bacteria. This indicates the hits to HIV seems fortuitous and the evolutionary link between 2019-nCoV and HIV is to me not ascertained.

                  And another pseudonymous commenter asks him:

                  Can you prepare and show a list of species in which all four sequences are being found?

                  No response from the esteemed doctor.

                  You write:

                  China is successfully resisting some aspects of Cathedral doctrine, but in China, as in America, gays and women can do no wrong.

                  The implication and need for retraction are clear. AIDS is spread by gays. The novel Coronavirus has fragments of AIDS genetic code in it. The Coronavirus may kill millions of people who are not gay. Therefore, gay behavior may kill millions of non-gays.

                • jim says:

                  No one writing under his true name can speak the truth. As the list of forbidden thoughts gets ever longer, and impossible for any one person, no matter how diligent, to memorize, it becomes inadvisable to say anything on any topic that one has not read in an official Cathedral source.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Unfortunately, the true fact that Covid19 shares unique sequences with HIV became associated early on with speculative and frankly silly nonsense about it being some sort of bioweapon.

                  Maybe it was deliberately engineered, maybe it was accidentally created in a non-evil medical lab, maybe it was recombination in sick people or animals, maybe it was something else – that doesn’t really matter at this point. The HIV strands do matter because they are likely responsible for the increased severity.

                  It’s like BPA that has trace amounts of cyanide. The BPA is already bad for you, but that’s not the part that might kill you. And claiming that it is just plastic is not going to help you or anyone.

                • ten says:

                  jim, as i understand things, you have some experience with China but more with other areas of south east asia –

                  I guess that a gay with aids selling live bats at the food market got exposed

                  I have never seen bats in chinese food markets, and i have happily frequented markets far from urban centers, filled with snakes, squirrels on sticks and things i don’t know what they are, the stench of gore thick in the air and the bonecrunching of meat axes ringing incessantly, and not a cooler anywhere in sight.

                  Asking on Weibo, the chinese tell me they have never heard of anyone ever eating or selling a bat except that one e-celeb doing it for provocation and infamy.

                  In southern china, much meat is eaten by the poor that is not often marketed, for example rats, and this is known and admitted (and frowned upon) by the chinese i speak with, as well as other weird animals, but specifically bats is unheard of.

                  The entirety of the point being, i don’t think bat handling in chinese food markets exists. In indonesia and some other parts of south east asia it does exist, but not in china, just like they hardly ever eat dogs, and never cats, in contrast to popular belief. I, as well as the chinese, think the bat virus infected some other animal in the wild, why marketing of wild game was banned.

                  Of course, the aids riddled market homo handling the bat infected creature isn’t affected by the absence of bats.

                • jim says:

                  > I have never seen bats in chinese food markets, and i have happily frequented markets far from urban centers

                  I have never seen them either, but there is a pile of photos on the internet of large numbers of bats for sale in the Wuhan Hubei food market, which is where the infection started, in that all the early cases were connected to that market. Maybe bats are more popular in Hubei than in some other parts of China.

                • ten says:

                  I have failed to find photos that that actually come from hubei, that aren’t generic bat in market photos from indonesia or some other place.

                • C4ssidy says:


                  “China bat market” on YouTube has multiple videos?

                  Or are they all indonesian?

                • ten says:

                  Ironically, the video you link is indeed from indonesia, specifically from kecamatan langowan. They do not speak chinese and the video says so in the start. Comments are turned off so the fraud won’t be unveiled.

                  I have not checked every youtube video. The poster girl principle is generously applied on this blog – one lie, all lies.

  28. Karl says:

    I agree that there is technological decline, but the situation can be more readily explained with institutional decay and social decline rather than technological decline.

    Idiots in charge might well decide that is better to save a few dollars by not using available tests. I don’t know whether the USA has the means to produce test kits, but I’m sure the USA still has the option of importing test kits.

    A decision of not importing test kits would be social or institutional decay rather than technological.

  29. The Cominator says:

    While the FDA massively slows our medical research…

    Corona-chan is hyped up cold being used to try to cause a financial panic to takeout Trump.

    Xi probably okayed having the Chinese act like massive faggots about a bad cold because he decided it was worth the short term damage it to try to get the uniparty hacks back in (also it cleared out the leftist rioters in Hong Kong) power given that I’m sure the Chinese have concluded that the Democrats are too retarded to win the election against Trump.

    • Jan Martense says:

      Xi probably okayed having the Chinese act like massive faggots about a bad cold because he decided it was worth the short term damage it to try to get the uniparty hacks back in

      Come on man, posting half-baked conspiracy garbage like this just makes the right look stupid. Of course the media is hyping the coronavirus, they hype literally any news item that could potentially make Trump look bad. That doesn’t mean the virus is just a “bad cold.”

      It is related to a cold, and spreads just as fast, making it very difficult to stop. But it is far more deadly; the death rate is about 2% and that has been confirmed not only in China, but also Iran, Italy*, South Korea, and Japan(!). The President is literally Abe’s closest ally, there is no reason Abe would even want to hurt Trump, let alone join some kind of crazy data-cooking scheme against his own people on the off-chance that it might, possibly, do reputational damage. Which isn’t guaranteed, since even if COVID causes the markets to collapse, that clearly isn’t Trump’s fault. Even low-info voters can figure that out.

      (*The Italian outbreak came from the Chinese community, so a racial difference is plausible. Perhaps for whites or blacks it will just be a “common cold.” But EVEN IF this is the case, it points to lack of evidence and academic fear of being unpersoned, not a coordinated conspiracy. )

      • Fred says:

        We have absolutely no idea at all what the case fatality rate is because we have absolutely no idea at all how many people have contracted the virus.

        This is why all estimates of the fatality rate are completely phony.

        We probably know how many people have died from the virus, so the numerator of the fatality rate is probably reasonably reliable. We don’t know the denominator, though.

        It’s probably a lot higher than we think, so the fatality rate is correspondingly lower.

        • James says:

          My thoughts exactly. This is being hyped like all new viruses because people in general like to panic. I think, though, it started with China deciding to play up the coronavirus as a way to distract from the domestic economic problems caused by too much credit and an ongoing trade war with their most important trade partner.

          War is the traditional way of distracting people from domestic problems, but a novel virus outbreak is a godsend for an authoritarian government unprepared for war; it gives them an excuse to crank up their authoritarianism at home, doesn’t cause them to ruin their relations with their neighbors, and provides an excellent distraction from / excuse for domestic economic weakness.

          After that, pretty much everyone has to play along because a major world power legitimized the public’s fear of the unknown and apocalyptic fantasies.

          Well played, Xi, well played.

        • Not Tom says:

          This was true in the early days, but it is obvious that China is doing large-scale testing and has more-or-less successfully contained the spread. New cases are shrinking, not growing. Therefore we do not have “no idea”, we have a very good idea of both the number of cases and the fatalities.

          Don’t trust China? Okay, but their mortality rate is corroborated by Japan, South Korea, and the Diamond Princess passengers. Maybe Japan and SK aren’t counting all of their cases correctly, but if their mortality lines up with China, then any systematic undercounting looks like a wash – i.e. they’re undercounting deaths as much as they’re undercounting benign cases.

          Now, sure, we as in the US have no idea what the mortality rate among Americans is because we as in the US have no idea how many Americans have contracted the virus, but that’s Jim’s whole point here. Out of all the countries where this virus has showed up, the US is actually one of the worst in terms of having insufficient testing, tracking and containment.

          Perhaps Singapore does not need as many test kits because Singapore has a smaller population, but America’s larger population should correspond to a larger productive capacity in terms of test kits, masks, and so on. It doesn’t. We can’t maintain the level of technology required to support a large population through even a minor health crisis. God help us if it turns out to be a major crisis.

          • James Bowen says:

            No, they still don’t know how many people were infected. “Cases” still means people who fulfill certain diagnostic criteria (including outright pneumonia) or those who self-report. Regular testing of asymptomatic people isn’t happening, never has been, and isn’t planned. If you can show me otherwise, I’ll gladly recant, but I have heard nothing to the contrary of that situation, and plenty of evidence supporting it.

            • jim says:

              There is plenty of testing of asymptomatic people who have had contact with carriers in Australia, Japan, and Singapore.

              There is very little testing in the US of people who are showing stereotypical novel coronavirus symptoms, fever and cough, and have had contact with carriers.

              • James Bowen says:

                I looked into this, and it looks like you’re right. I was informed by news from a few weeks prior when the general level of chaos was high and China was only able to produce around 3k test kits per day.

                I’m not 100% convinced they didn’t just burn through most asymptomatic cases due to the general level of lockdown and quarantine, but it definitely looks like they’re catching them now by testing asymptomatic people who were in close contact with people who show up sick. It also looks like death rates are rising to 3-4% now that new cases are tapering off, which is consistent with the idea that there are fewer new cases than old cases. Mea culpa.

            • Not Tom says:

              Yeah, what Jim said. You’re confusing the sorry situation in the US and Western Europe with what’s happening in smarter countries, which is also why the smarter countries have either fully or mostly contained the disease.

      • BC says:

        Come on man, posting half-baked conspiracy garbage like this just makes the right look stupid.

        Found the shill.

        • Not Tom says:

          No, he’s right and Jim is right.

          It’s one thing to be skeptical of all the news you hear about this. I don’t agree that skepticism is warranted at this point, but I at least understand that position. However, it’s quite another thing to just make up total nonsense about what’s really happening.

          “Corona-chan is hyped up cold being used to try to cause a financial panic to takeout Trump” is insane, deranged, wild-assed Yellow Man Bad speculation that ignores every known fact in favor of a narrative based on no evidence whatsoever. It’s dumb and it looks dumb.

          • BC says:

            You missed my point. I agree that it appears that Commutator stuff is garbage. But no one talks in terms of it makes the right look bad besides shills. Let Cominator be wrong and slap him down on facts, but anyone talking about it how it makes the right look isn’t on our side.

            • Not Tom says:

              Fair enough, let’s stick to facts, not optics.

              I’d also like it if we were a little less quick to label longtime commenters with no history of red flags as shills.

              • BC says:

                I’d also like it if we were a little less quick to label longtime commenters with no history of red flags as shills.

                Talk like a shill and get called out like a shill. Lets not be bitches about it.

                • Frederick Algernon says:

                  Lowest IQ Jew of the JB yarmulke squad strikes again.

            • The Cominator says:

              Watch it kill less people than the flu this year and disappear from the northern hemisphere by late april.

            • Jimbo says:

              When I talk about conspiracies, I saw that Flat Earth and 18 ft. tall human giants are used to make real conspiracies look stupid. Is that different?

Leave a Reply