The Clot Shot.

It is early days yet, but it should be showing up in the death statistics. Has not killed that many so far, though it has killed far more than a normal vaccine.

Official truth is that only a thousand or so people have died after vaccination, not all them for reasons likely to be vaccine related. This data seems unlikely to be true, but it is probably not a huge number, maybe ten thousand or so, or else it would be showing up in the excess death statistics. However a significant proportion of people are reporting incapacitating and lasting side effects from the vaccine.

On the reddit, some people reporting disability resulting from the clot shot report similar issues among members of their family, not a lot, but it is not rare either. So though death is unlikely, anecdotal data indicates that disability is a significant risk.

What appears to be happening is that the spike protein is a cumulative toxin, and every additional dose you get increases the likelihood of serious consequences.

They adjusted the dosage so that two doses would not have serious consequences for most people – which means they adjusted the dosage so it is not very effective in stopping the virus. And if you then get the virus anyway, you then get a third dose, which means dosed by an amount of spike protein that is likely to do serious and lasting harm. Because if it was not likely to do serious and lasting harm, they would have used a higher vaccine dose.

It is clear that level of unpleasant and lasting side effects is very high, with a large proportion of women, a third or more, suffering some form of menstrual distress, perhaps a large proportion of babies suffering some form of spontaneous abortion. It might have long term affects on fertility. Also might have long term pulmonary hypertension, which takes a while to kill you. Deaths are up about seven percent overall, which is not a whole lot of deaths. I cannot seem to find the 20-38 year old deaths, which would give us a clear indication, since people in that age group seem to be almost at much at risk from the clot shot as older people, but their usual death rate is quite low. The excess death rate among young people should give us a good signal to noise ratio on how many the clot shot is killing, rather than the excess death rate among everyone.

On theoretical grounds, one would expect that if the clot shot has long term life threatening effects in a large proportion of recipient, this would manifest as pulmonary hypertension. Cannot find any data on pulmonary hyptertension. One would also expect a whole of strokes among younger people. Again, I don’t have any recent data on death by stroke, let alone death by stroke by age group, but I suspect that strokes are way up.

Far more common than death is long term disability, mental confusion and inability to put out much physical effort for very long. For this, again we have only anecdotal data, but it seems like it is something of the order of magnitude of one percent or so. It very difficult to get data on the incidence of this. It is far less common that disruption of the female reproductive system, which is appears to be hitting a very large proportion of vaccinated women, around a third or so. As yet we have no idea how long menstrual disturbances are going to last. Could be inducing infertility in a substantial proportion of female recipients.

The push for over vaxing is pursuit of corporate profit, but that an inappropriate and foolish vaccine technology was used for the Clot shot reflects holiness, not profit. If you were simply profit maximizing, would use actual scientists instead of priests attempting deurgic magic. But you have to use priests, not scientists, or else stuff will not get approved because insufficiently priestly.

The use of deurgic magic in place of actual technology reflects what gives status to priests, not what gives profit to corporations. That deurgic magic gets approved, and sound leading edge technology does not reflects priests seeking status and power, not corporations seeking profit. Priests serve corporate profit – the trail of money going to Fauci has been traced many times and the influence of corporate bribes on his decision has been traced many times, but the money goes from the powerless to the powerful. Fauci makes decisions that serve corporate profit, but Fauci is a priest and corporations make decisions that serve the superior status of priests.

Deurgy is an effort to steal magic from God, as for example the Kabalists making magic formulae out of mangled scripture, and the wiccans celebrating mass with an upside down cross and goat blood. I describe the RNA vaccine and the wings on the space shuttle as deurgy, because they are attempting to magically appropriate the power of science. The Kabalist and the Wiccan is attempting unholy appropriation of the power that is in holy things, and the vaccers are attempting unscientific appropriation of the power that is in scientific things.

475 Responses to “The Clot Shot.”

  1. […] at he says (referencing Gnon, the backwards acronym for Nature or Nature’s […]

  2. […] my first post of this series I […]

  3. simplyconnected says:

    This was a nice interview of Cornell Chemistry prof. Dave Collum. He’s a smart guy and doesn’t seem to easily fall for nutty theories, but still suspects there is a dark plan afoot.
    I agree with him that money likely isn’t be the primary motivation: the reputational risk to Pfizer is too large for this kind of (large, but not astronomical) upside.

  4. Pooch says:

    In his most recent piece, Yarvin namefags about vaccines but he brings up a salient point. The direction of the covid holiness spiral, and thus the vaccine holiness spiral, was entirely a reaction to Trump’s covid stance and thus a reaction to Trump winning or losing the election.

    Yarvin notes, correctly, that if Trump had won the election and claimed victory over the virus with the release of the vaccines, it’s very easy to picture the Cathedral dramatizing every mild side effect of the vax and the FDA rejecting it’s use in order to make Trump look as bad as possible.

    • notglowing says:

      I always expected that to happen regardless.
      When the vaccine were gonna come out early and Trump took ownership of that success, I always assumed they’d eventually blame issues with the vaccines on him, for rushing their development for political reasons.
      I was surprised when things went in the opposite direction, I still fully expect them to blame it on Trump if they end up having to admit to the issues.

      • Pooch says:

        I remember liberals already prepping themselves to be distrustful of the vaccine, surprisingly in the exact same way we are distrustful of the vaccine, prior to the election.

        I suppose the Cathedral blaming the side effects on Trump in the future is entirely dependent on him agitating and threatening it’s power, and not really any well-being of the populace. Now that he’s banned, deplatformed, and out of office, they seem to be, probably correctly, viewing him as not much of a threat, thus no reason to reverse course and blame any ill effects of the vaccines on him.

    • The Cominator says:

      Trump’s covid stance was not nearly as stalwart as it should have been… he should have been more like Bolsonarno.

      • Pooch says:

        Nothing short of regime change is the correct stance. In that respect, Trump woefully failed.

  5. Pooch says:

    Off topic question – what has caused the explosion of the lower race population during the last couple of centuries. Old history sources depict South Africa as sparsely populated and the Bantu population boom as a fairly recent thing. Is it simply the West feeding historic Hunter-gatherer peoples which has caused the boom across the global south?

    • Calvin says:

      Western food in part, but the biggest thing has been modern medicine. They always bred in huge numbers, it’s just that most would die in infancy and a large chunk of the survivors wouldn’t hit thirty. Let that be cut off for even a few years and watch how fast the population of, say, Afghanistan, returns to its natural limits.

    • Alfred says:

      Bantu are mostly farmers/headers not hunter gathers, though most have not been selected for civilization, so lots of hunter gather behavior still in their blood. Modern white farming and medicine while still maintaining the African version of patriarchy is the reason for their huge populations.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      The 20th century liberal order appropriated vast resources from it’s subjects in order to breed vast numbers of it’s pets.

  6. Anon43 says:

    “CDC eviction moratorium”
    a bureaucrat issue an excutive order which became law of the land . Was there ever a precedent like this?

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      This is always and already how the actual process of governance actually takes place under ‘popular governance’.

      A revolving door of merely elected figureheads of some confused mob is naturally a febrile locus of power, so instead power ends up rerouting through other outlets that are not unstable; the permanent bureaucracy, media agencies, ‘non governmental organizations’.

  7. notglowing says:

    Has anyone looked into the Johnson & Johnson vaccine?
    It seems to not be mRNA based, and requires only a single dose.
    There’s an article on the CDC site with them admitting it has led to a rise in myocarditis cases, but they specifically mention it affects mRNA vaccines and not the Janssen one:

    Since April 2021, increased cases of myocarditis and pericarditis have been reported in the United States after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna), particularly in adolescents and young adults. There has not been a similar reporting pattern observed after receipt of the Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine (Johnson & Johnson).

    Though they still recommend both.

    • The Cominator says:

      I don’t trust anything related to Covid the Cathedral endorses and definitely not from the company that poisoned fucking baby formula to save a couple cents on per unit costs. Even if its not mRNA based its poisoned in other ways.

    • Alfred says:

      J&J causes cardiovascular issues, they’re just more mild due to the lower spike protean counts, an actual virus for the immune system to attack, and only a single dose. It’s probably safer than the 2 shots, but as Cominator says, J&J has a history of killing people. Also they hire niggers in places like Baltimore to make their vaccines.

    • notglowing says:
      Seems there is also a traditional inactivated virus vaccine coming soon.
      This is promising

      • onyomi says:

        FYI I took dose 1 of a Chinese inactivated whole virus vax (coronavac) and still had pretty worrisome side effects. They might still have been preferable to a natural infection, but also clearly less innocuous than your average flu shot. I expect the nasal spray will be the good one: more of the mucosal immunity needed to repel infection in the early stages, probably fewer systemic side effects.

    • isaac says:

      To my understanding, the J&J works similar to the mRNA vaccines, but with one extra step of indirection. It’s still a novel method. The Novavax is an old school attenuated virus, but it keeps getting delayed. Last I read they are seeking the emergency use authorization in Q4 2021.

  8. Alfred says:

    Apple finally gives in to federal spying on it’s phones under the guise of protecting the children.

    Guess it’s times for a Chinese phone.

    • anon says:

      “Child abuse” is truly the gift that keeps on giving, isn’t it?

    • c4ssidy says:

      My iPhone has used machine learning to categorise images for a very long time, do you actually think that this processing is phone-side?

      • Alfred says:

        My localized security camera has onboard AI for detecting people. It does a reasonable job with far less processing power and in a far shorter time than an iPhone. Apple’s taken their rep as the anti spying phone pretty seriously for quite a while now. This is a major change.

    • jim says:

      The Chinese are struggling to prevent Google and the rest from spying on them, and are cracking down on use of contaminated computers and phones by the party elite in China. Which tells me that your regular chinese phone is probably corrupted.

      For lack of good Chinese engineers, they are struggling. At which point one might ask why a shortage? I see no shortage of good Chinese engineers here.

      Well, maybe I do. The lead tends to be Chinese Vietnamese or something, while the engineering done by pure Chinese requires less insight and judgement. Notoriously a Chinese engineer needs a specification, and, given a specification, is likely to implement it “correctly”, but without regard to the intent and purpose behind the specification. It is not that they are stupid, they are by most reasonable measures plenty smart, but that they are apt to be overly literal in following orders.

      • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

        The finest chinese thought is often especially concerned with the problem of naive systematization. Eg, ‘the way that can be written is not the true Way’. A spergmatic mind that is long on calculation but short on world formation is most especially prone to being suckered by naive systematization, where he concatenates a sophistical system, which is labeled ‘reality’ in his mind, that proceeds algorithmically from an input to an output, which he follows mechanically – but which are in reality more like sieves or apertures through which Being may pass; where some measure can be caught, while other measures escape; or where some measure can pass through, while the rest gets shorn off.

        Prevalence of this mode of thought, sometimes described as ‘autistic’, is one distinctifying difference between mongoloid and europoid folk – which is why many of the finest sages of the former so often explicitly highlight it. A squeaky wheel gets the oil.

        When looking at any cultural phenomena, one heuristic it is often important to keep in mind is, are you looking at a tendency – or a patch for the tendency?

        Does the fact that arabic muslims make their women wear burkas point to them being unfeeling asexuals – or does it point to a combination of libidity and low impulse control?

        Where one might say the general character of a nation’s cultural output is a function of that folk’s tendencies, it’s highest and most refined output is often a function of those rare men that can to some degree transcend those cognitive blindspots of their folk, and shine a conscious light back upon them. And over long generations of interface with Being, adaptive social technology uniquely suited to that folk accretes, forming it’s vitalizing Tradition.

        • Guy says:

          Interesting, what traditions practiced by Europeans would you say are set up as counters towards what behavioral tendencies?

          • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

            Simple example:

            Bluetrubesmen – lots of ‘rights and freedoms’ rhetoric; collectivist and conformatist in practice.

            Redtribesmen – lots of ‘honor and loyalty’ rhetoric (in more civilized times); individualist and disagreeableness in practice.

            • Kunning Drueger says:

              You should write a book, or pamphlet, called Tendency and Patch. I feel like I knew everything you said, but I’d never systemitized it. It is a simple and profound perspective: culture is the combination of natural tendencies and their requisite patches.

              The Book of Jim is very needed, but the Epistles of St. John are probably number 2 on that list, followed by the Book of Shaman.

            • The Cominator says:

              Indeed one problem with the hard right is the dichotomy between the cuck or establishment right (and I mean the average center right boomercon type voter not the oligarchs) and the red tribesmen.

              The red tribesman is often disagreeable and distrustful to all outsiders, very hard to really organize such people. They’ll fight but making an army out of such men is difficult and its hard for outsiders from different modes of life to really join their tribe.

              The cuck rightist tend to be the nicest and most amiable fellow you’d ever meet on a personal level… and he sort of knows the truth about the enemy but is too cowardly to admit it even to himself… because he wants to get along he can’t and won’t fight to save his life.

          • jim says:

            Scientific method.

            Europeans are more prone to inappropriately using religious thinking on falsifiable questions than Chinese.

            Including Newton and Kepler. Newtons work on chemistry was greatly harmed by religious thinking, and Kepler went off in the initially wrong direction for that reason.

            And now that the scientific method can get you demonetized, deplatformed, and cancelled, we are back in that hole.

            • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

              More broadly, europoid man is faustian in spirit, and is always trying to hold the whole world inside his head. So he develops a sense of the world, his weltanschauung, which is then retroactive applied to anything else he had not theretofore developed a sense of – the prescience presaging the experience.

              Sometimes it works; sometimes it doesn’t.

  9. Need it for school says:

    For those of us who need to take the COVID vaccine, is it a good idea to take daily aspirin beforehand? I could feasibly get a baby aspirin sized dose of regular OTC aspirin.

    What about alcohol? Alcohol and aspirin combined?

    • Need it for school says:

      Also, how long does it take for baby aspirin to build up to the point where it protects against clotting?

    • jim says:

      To inhibit clotting, a lot of aspirin, for four weeks. Which is going to be rough on your stomach and liver. Trouble is that is is alleged that the ensuing rough blood vessel surfaces are permanent, or permanent in some people. At this point, no one knows if they are, but they probably are not, or not usually.

      • Need it for school says:

        I can do 300mg aspirin daily for 2 to 3 weeks beforehand. What would that do?

        • jim says:

          The trouble is, we have no idea.

          But taking it beforehand is not useful. You have to take it during and after.

          • Need it for school says:

            Taking it afterwards makes the timing much easier.

            Why does it need to be a big dose? I’m told that 80mg and 300mg work roughly as well for people with macroclotting (stroke/heart attack) risk.

            • jim says:

              I was not aware of that. If low dose aspirin is adequate, go on low dose before hand and keep at it for for weeks.

              But you really should try both the easy course of lying and assuming that no one genuinely wants to check (the very holy tend to slack off on holiness when they assume no one is looking) and the more labor intensive course of talking to a Russian Orthodox priest, committing to apply for membership, and getting him to certify you a religious exemption. He is likely to be sympathetic to Jimian grounds for exemption, but even if he is, may find it dangerous to mention or acknowledge such grounds.

              • Need it for school says:

                I already submitted my exemption request. It does not have a priest’s endorsement but has the materials I linked (edited to remove insanity about microchipping etc.) Any exemptions will either be granted or denied before the end of the month so that move seemed necessary.

                I’ve started taking 80mg aspirin and will continue unless I get my exemption.

                • Karl says:

                  If it is denied, it will be much safer to act against the denial than to take the clot shot. You have talked to an attorney.

                  If you do not have a priest’s endorsement now, get one and file it later.

                  All you have to do is to prevent a denial from becoming final. An attorney should find ways to that

                  And start sending out applications. Lots of people work without having finshed their degrees.

                • simplyconnected says:

                  Not sure how useful it is because no one knows what the effects are or how to protect from the effects, but might be worth a listen:

    • X says:

      This is silly because you can always, ALWAYS weasel out of these things, and if you think you can’t, you could easily present fake credentials—it’s a what, a piece of cardstock some nurse scrawled on twice? Do you really think that’s hard to put together? Of course, you might be in trouble later when you’re not in any of the state databases as having had the shot, but I would bet that almost nowhere at all is going to verify that, ever.

      If you insist on maiming yourself, the smart thing to do would be to take a hefty course of ivermectin that starts a little before the shot and continues for a while after, but for…weeks? Months? Forever? No one knows! 😂 Enjoy your new disabilities!

      • Pooch says:

        The long term plan is most definitely to get you into a database eventually. Forgering the card is a temporary solution.

      • Andy says:

        For what it’s worth, I have an acquaintance who dutifully got his Pfizer injections three months ago at a large chain pharmacy and is still not appearing in the state electronic database. All he has is his little white card, and he actually hasn’t even needed to show that. As Jim and others have stated, the databases are being rather incompetently implemented. Lots of wiggle room. I find if you give the appearance of following the party line, few will ask questions. I tell people I’m all set – on the rare occasions it comes up – and do whatever I want. (Not a lie – I’ve had Covid=natural immunity.) I look like I’m true believer I guess.

        Also, keep in mind the teachers’ unions are now fighting against vaccine mandates for teachers and staff…after spending most of last year whining to be first in line for the vaccines. Take advantage of the chaos.

        • jim says:

          Never overestimate the enemy’s competence and organization. We can do this stuff, but they no longer can. They think they can do it, because they think we stole it all from brave and stunning warrior women of subsaharan Africa.

          • The Cominator says:

            I think we should assume incompetence but generally assume they are despite some infighting over this and that applecart generally cohesive and organized because they are the only people who are allowed to be organized.

            • Pooch says:

              Yes they are going to organize the full capacity of the state and private industry (big tech, big pharma etc) around getting people in databases for easy scanning of QR codes to determine vaccination status. TBD if they are competent to complete it securely but they absolutely intend to try.

              • Pooch says:

                Competent enough*

                • The Cominator says:

                  I wonder if Rudy Giuliani regrets pioneering using RICO to destroy the mob.

                  The mob used to be able for a small price to provide a refuge (for a small fee) from almost any abuse of state power in its domain (although they voluntarily were not too heavily involved in hard drugs). Although it became primarily a moneymaking criminal organization the mission of the original Mafia in Sicily was as a counterweight to a corrupt government and its original ethos was that a “man of honor” would have nothing to do with said corrupt government.

  10. 5'7 Chadlet says:

    Off topic: A militant atheist polyamorous soylord named Richard Carrier has recently claimed that Acts 4:32-5:11 advocates kibbutz-level Stalinism. How should one respond to this assertion? The relevant verses are:

    32 All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. 33 With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all 34 that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales 35 and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need.

    36 Joseph, a Levite from Cyprus, whom the apostles called Barnabas (which means “son of encouragement”), 37 sold a field he owned and brought the money and put it at the apostles’ feet.

    1 Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. 2 With his wife’s full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brought the rest and put it at the apostles’ feet.

    3 Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? 4 Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied just to human beings but to God.”

    5 When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died. And great fear seized all who heard what had happened. 6 Then some young men came forward, wrapped up his body, and carried him out and buried him.

    7 About three hours later his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. 8 Peter asked her, “Tell me, is this the price you and Ananias got for the land?”

    “Yes,” she said, “that is the price.”

    9 Peter said to her, “How could you conspire to test the Spirit of the Lord? Listen! The feet of the men who buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out also.”

    10 At that moment she fell down at his feet and died. Then the young men came in and, finding her dead, carried her out and buried her beside her husband. 11 Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.

    So the question is, how should a Jimian interpret these verses to not be vigorously advocating a hardcore version of communism, more hardcore than Stalin? Or is the Ph.D soylord correct, this is indeed communism, and those verses should simply be ignored as inconvenient?

    • jim says:

      “32 All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had.”

      Summary of Acts communism:

      In the immediate aftermath of the resurrection, they tried communism, because they were so full of holiness. After a while they figured out that their supply of holiness did not seem to be sufficient. Perhaps the Lord only gave out a limited supply of holiness to start things going, and after that they were on their own.

      So, going from the immediate aftermath of the Resurrection, to Paul on charity. Every family should look after its own, and to make sure that they do, you have to appropriately tight fisted to those in need. If someone is in trouble, why is it the community’s problem? You have to ask how come they are in trouble and what should they have done to not be in trouble, before they get a lick of community resources.

      Acts four was a temporary, brief, and transitional condition. Paul is building a Church for the ages that does not rely on the massive dollops of the holy spirit being doled out to everyone. And the permanent condition for the ages is tough love.

      The family, and the extended family, is responsible for welfare before the community is. If someone needs welfare, why does he need welfare, and if someone is short of family why is he short of family?

      Paul on widows is Paul on what we would now call “Aid to families with dependent children”, aka single mums.

      Paul tells the elders to ask them how come your are single, and how come you are still single?.

      The female head of family should be serving, honoring, and obeying some man. If she is not, no wonder she is short of resources.

      The reply to Acts communism, let alone “Aid to Families with Dependent Children” is Paul on widows. Also, Paul on marriage. If a woman follows the Pauline commands on marriage, she should have no problem getting a husband. And if she is not, she should starve.

      • info23 says:

        The early Church is basically Monastic in nature a short continuation of what Jesus’ commanded in regards to his disciples before his departure from the earth to rule at his Father’s right hand.

        Leave behind families as well as former ties and follow him. Is basically the call for them to be Monks aside from maybe the Celibacy requirement.

        Similarly to the 144,000 virgin Men selected for ministry in the Book of Revelations. Celibate Monks set apart for service.

      • info23 says:

        Jonathan Pageau(Orthodox Christian and expert on symbology) has a good video on how Christianity was never actually revolutionary in the end:

        Would like your comment on it. The fulfillment of Hierarchy as it was meant to be not its abolition.

    • Alfred says:

      Early Christians tried communism. Communism failed as always and they stopped trying it. The same mistake has been repeated by many groups many times.

      Communism was implemented for monasteries and the alike later on, but you’ll note that such holy nut jobs were kept very far away from the general public least their insanity harm others.

      Also people who virtue signal should be put to death.

      • pyrrhus says:

        Yes, then Paul, a successful businessman, came along and said WTF are you idiots doing…..Under Paul, who basically banned women from leadership positions because they wouldn’t make hard decisions, the Church became a tight ship…

    • The Cominator says:

      All scriptures that don’t work can be dismissed via my favorite verse

      “A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit; neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

      “Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.”

      Bad fruit = false interpretation.

    • Ex says:

      The text *describes* proto-communism in a very small group, where it can work because all the members fit in one person’s head, assuming you have honest organizers and other conditions.
      The text *advocates* honesty. Ananias and Sapphira are smote for lying. Peter asks “Wasn’t the money at your disposal?” – i.e. it was your choice whether to donate it all or keep some back, but don’t keep some back and then lie about donating it all.

      And then “You have not lied just to human beings but to God.”

      And then the fact that Sapphira is smote only after she lies too, not when she was merely holding back money.

  11. suones says:

    While we’re on financial topics, I just published Part 2 of my article on the origin of property and banking. This covers the need for, and development of, banking and risk-management of capital. Also has a note on “usury” and its relationship with Muslim banking.

  12. alf says:

    O/t: how old is fractional reserve lending? Yuval, a NYT bestseller author, makes this claim that Dutch independence was because of their revolutionary use of fractional reserve lending, eg that this was the first time in history lenders wrote out loans for ten times the worth they actually had. Yuval makes several other claims that I know are bs, and although this one smells like bs, I don’t know enough of the topic. Instinctively I’d say Romans and Jews did the same, but hell if I know.

    • someDude says:

      Not a fan of Yuval.

      Stole Moldbug’s work without attribution.

      And stops just short of Crimethink on the woman question when wondering why women were never in charge, but priests who are much physically weaker than warriors did have authority over warriors.

      Taleb is right on Yuval. Yuval is a quack. And his whole hiding behind his Vipassana practice for all his BS left a very bad taste in the mouths of several Buddhists.


    • jim says:

      Very much on topic

      Hard to tell because bankers have always been furtive about it, but the Knights Templar were big in fractional reserve banking.

      Term transformation was big in the first century Roman Empire. Where there is term transformation, there is fractional reserve banking.

      • Aidan says:

        Has been happening in Europe at least since the 16th century, when kings began borrowing large sums of money from banks to wage war. Nobody has bothered to look very closely at how the banks got all that money to lend to kings. Most likely, they were lending what they did not have, because the sums seem extraordinary and I have never been able to find a source that actually confirmed that some Venetian bank shipped the Roman Emperor or Henry VIII a literal mountain of cash, several million florins, in a big box. Also, have never heard of a bank, richer than kings, being broken open and looted during the sack of a city in those days. I doubt there was much cash at all in those banks.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      Practice of unbacked lending – ie, alchemical creation of new debit where none existed theretofore – is ancient, (crf. ‘big man’ economics), but a significant formal coalescence of such measures took place in Venice, with the merchant republics.

    • suones says:

      Jew claims revolutionary Jewish systems improved goyim lands. News at 11.

  13. notglowing says:
    It seems PoS in particular is being made effectively illegal in the US, with only PoW receiving an explicit exclusion from these rules.

    The first amendment proposed to the regulations excluded PoW and PoS nodes and other things, the second amendment proposed by other senators seems to only exclude PoW, and it is preferred by the white house?
    SBF himself is the second biggest donor to Biden after Bloomberg. Is his bribe not working? I wonder

  14. Pooch says:

    Cathedral attacking PoS while seemingly protecting PoW for some reason.

    • notglowing says:

      One minute before I posted the same, what a coincidence

    • Alfred says:

      I’d been wondering why Bitcoin was rising so much faster than ADA. Guess I know why.

      • jim says:

        I have not been wondering, because I don’t follow the latest news, which always results in premature action.

        When I find I have made an investment mistake, which is often, I then read what the spruikers were saying, and usually discover that the problem was not that they were smarter and better predicted the future than I did, but that they predicted the market more accurately in the short run than I did because the bulk of those buying and selling were as ill informed and unaware as they were.

        Smart investing is necessarily long term investing.

        I see some news, and say to myself “Ah ha: This thing is underpriced/overpriced, because the news about X is going to make people think Y will happen, but I know that Z is happening”. And then the investment moves in the opposite direction to that which I expected, and I do some research to find my mistake, and find that those that correctly predicted the price movement had not heard of X, Y, or Z and would not have understood if they had.

        In the long run, the effect of stupidity and ignorance on market prices cancels itself out. So I hodl. Hodling has been good for me.

  15. Fred says:

    Offtopic: Anyone know why BAP was banned?

    • The Cominator says:

      It was always going to happen eventually.

      He started talking very openly about the homosexual conspiracy and the fedcath conspiracy (I used to be like the only one on the internet who ever talked about the fedcath conspiracy). I no longer have a line of communication to him directly…

      • Pooch says:

        He’s on telegram now. Not sure if there is a DM feature on there or not.

        • The Cominator says:

          I’m aware and there isn’t…

        • Humble Acolyte says:

          Anyone know to what extent is telegram actually secure?

          • jim says:

            Telegram appears to be inscure. The CEO of Signal, on the other hand, has a strikingly hostile relationship with the security apparatus.

            • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

              Is Telegram insecure to America or to Russia? I am not opposed to Russians reading my messages, because I do not live in Russia, but I would rather USG not get them.

              • jim says:

                Telegram appears to be insecure to the American authorities. I don’t really know from cryptography if anything is secure to anyone, except that I have reason to believe that PGP is secure when used with 25519 keys, but if Telegram was actually secure, I would expect less coziness.

                Some things, probably quite a lot of things, must be actually secure short of hacking people’s phones or gaining physical access to their phones, because the authorities seem to be mighty keen on hacking people’s phones and gaining physical access to them. But I don’t know which things. It is not all doom and gloom. Not everything is broken, but a lot of stuff is broken, and you do not know which stuff, short of going open source and actually checking commit history.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  I also use Signal for anything that I do not want someone other than the intended recipients to read. Anything I do not want record of I talk about only in person. I will keep Telegram as a useful tool for innocuous conversation. I am not a doom and gloomer. I plan and build for the future I want as well as for the future I fear. I just want to know where I can say certain things, and where I should hold my tongue.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Don’t assume anything is all that private.

            • Kunning Drueger says:

              I’m a longtime Signal user, but I wouldn’t put too much faith in Moxie. Peruse his HN comments, and remember that one of the big sources behind TextSecure and Red Phone was DARPA.

    • Pooch says:

      Why is anyone banned on social media? Were you born yesterday?

      • Fred says:

        I was looking for more info on the Radfemhitler/BAP conflict. Can anyone fill me in on what happened?

      • jim says:

        The mystery is why BAP survived so long.

        I conjecture that they mistakenly assumed he was a double agent for the gay conspiracy (which I also was inclined to suspect) and when he started calling out the gay conspiracy, he lost that immunity.

        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          Strategic post-irony as a form of self-defense. Was it serious? Was it a joke? Was it performance art? Was it homosexual larping? Humorous ambiguity can go far in keeping your head above a rising tide – but also of course, only so far. At the end of the day, you can’t be both relevant and truthful at the same time in demotist environment.

          The highly ornated prose of 20th century french continentals is another example of this. So often, the greatest threat to their livelihoods would be their own students, no shortage of would-be red guards. For a long time, ‘youre not smart enough to understand what im *really* saying’ was an effective defense against being purged for crimethink by mid-wit voluntary auxiliary thoughtpolice, who liked to think of themselves as elite as well, in terms of pretensions to the trappings of the old elite. (In these latter days of course, none feel the need to even pretend to be ‘academic’, which is just a racist legacy of white male subjectivity anyways.)

    • jim says:

      It is forbidden to know what is forbidden. Actual reason for banning BAP is a narrowly held secret.

    • Justin Bieber says:

      It’s better this way. Let the bluecheck Progs believe that everyone fully agrees with them (since all dissidents have been purged) while the Reaction slowly but surely simmers in the underground. Writers like BAP should be posting on more-or-less obscure blogs and forums to an audience of the cognitive elite, rather than screaming all manner of thoughtcrime from the rooftops of pozzed social media platforms. It’s better that leftists are convinced that they’ve already won completely and that their only “real” adversaries are Sean Hannity, Ben Shapiro, and the other irrelevants; all while the legit Reaction has relocated to the “here be dragons” sphere where no leftist dares tread.

      Besides, screw Twitter; BAP would do better if he owned a blog like Jim or Anglin or if he were an admin of his own forum. It’s incredibly easy to purge someone off the mainstream platforms; not so easy to take down any random website. And, on that note, blogs/forums should ideally serve as gateways to books. Currently and for the foreseeable future, suppressing books is virtually impossible — you can always share a PDF file — so you should always organize your best stuff in one place: an easy-to-browse book format.

      • jim says:

        So you should always organize your best stuff in one place: an easy-to-browse book format.

        I have not done so, though I should. What I have done and continue to do is publicly accessible backup. It is under the artistic license, so anyone can produce his own book massively padded with material from me.

        • Justin Bieber says:

          Condensing your top-tier material into a much-awaited “book of Jim” will prevent Heartiste’s fate from ever striking you. After all, we all “expect the unexpected” to transpire sometime this decade. Heartiste erred by not publishing a book while his blog was still active and popular, with the inevitable result being that his glorious legacy is now gradually fading. (Rollo Tomassi meanwhile has already published four books; even if they are banned off Amazon, someone somewhere will ensure that copies keep circulating) Yes, one can theoretically browse Heartiste’s archives to glean its rich treasures and vast reservoirs of Red Pill knowledge, but rarely do people bother to delve into defunct blogs. The younger generation, the newly initiated, are mostly unfamiliar with the one individual who popularized the Alpha-Beta-Omega hierarchy in all its intricacies and who made the most crucial PUA concepts accessible to the wider public.

          Compiling this blog’s insights into a Red Pill compendium, to be printed and hopefully handed to every English-literate Reaction-leaning person in the world, will undoubtedly benefit the causes dear to this blog. Plus, you’ll out-alpha Virgin Yarvin, whose own book won’t even be half as interesting as yours, despite probably being immensely longer due to excessive verbosity. (A tangible ink-on-paper book ought to be anything from 150 to 800 pages, or twice as long if you intend it as a comprehensive “Bible.” Should not be too difficult to pull off. If Curtis can do it, so can you) I see great potential here, since such a book — summarizing the Reactionary worldview for public consumption in a manner that doesn’t necessitate consulting a thesaurus with every passage — has not yet been written by anyone ever.

          Aidan MacLear, assuming another pseudonym, should undertake a similar project for similar reasons.

          • alf says:

            Books are nice, but compiling one is a lot of work. And I don’t think it’s the prime mode of spread. Word of mouth is. And if word of mouth catches on enough, people will make their own books from the source material out of necessity.

            • jim says:

              On reflection, the Book of Jim is a good idea, but I have the feeling that the big important chapter has yet to be written.

              People are feeling neoreaction is over. OK, we all know that stuff now, so moving on … better put it in a book to finalize it and store it for the ages.


              Disbelief in democracy went mainstream after November the Fourth.

              The idea that you can have racial equality is going to take a similar beating, is taking a similar beating right now, though more beatings will be necessary before it sinks in on goodwhites, probably as they kneel down humbly to be arrogantly beaten up.

              The implication of the red pill is that female emancipation was a disaster. The red pill is becoming widely known. The implication has been strangely slow to sink in, but now is starting to sink in.

              That we have an official state religion and official priesthood has long been glaringly obvious, and is becoming even more glaringly obvious, but it strangely does not seem to be sinking in yet. It will.

              Finalizing it for the ages may be premature when the ages are upon us.

              And there is the cryptocurrency chapter coming up.

              • Kunning Drueger says:

                I am elated to hear this. Under a different monicker I advocated for this, quite vehemently. I am, very slowly, still working on The 26 Points. I’d like to facilitate this process if I can, so please let me know what I can do.

    • Publius says:

      He was banned for being BAP, obviously. The cathedral no longer feels obligated to even bother trying to find an excuse for banning its ideological opponents.

  16. RMIV says:


    i’m a true n00b when comes to programming.

    a post or two back i read, knowing what you know now, Rust and Javascript are the languages you’d begin with.

    for one beginning in one/both of these languages, how would he best learn to properly employ them? where would you seek work that uses these languages and what sorts of projects would be most useful to take on?


    • Pseudonym says:

      I am not as experienced as Jim, but I can give some suggestions.

      For Rust, start with the [book.]( This will give you a baseline for how the language works. Afterwards, go to [this link](, pick something interesting, and see if you can get the thing to compile. Next steps are murky, you have to *add something*. To start, maybe find a logic path that doesn’t have a unit test, and add one. Making mocks is a great way to get a good overview of how the software runs. Before or after this, you can check the issues tab on the repository. Look for tags that indicate beginner friendly issues, not all projects will have this but many do. Check the comments for the issue, if it looks good (i.e. not stale, abandoned, from a past version and no one remembered to delete it) go ahead and let the maintainer know you want to/are going to work on the issue, and get started.

      Javascript is essentially the same. I think freecodecamp has lessons to bootstrap yourself from ‘I know literally nothing about this language’ to ‘I know what most statements mean and can figure out the rest.’ Make sure to checkout Typescript based repositories as well, Typescript being a superset of the JS language. Many of the libraries for various decentralized ledgers have both a Rust backend and a JS frontend, so that might be useful to target.

      Last bit of advice is to do challenge coding practices. For me at least, they helped me identify broad patterns when I was starting out, and definitely they help you get used to the language when you are still new to the syntax. The bite-sized nature of them helps a lot to build momentum as well, it can be daunting to stare at a fairly mature codebase when you have not built yourself up.

    • Alfred says:

      In my experience the best programmers are either self taught, or basically interned under a master coder.

      Read a online help then start writing code. Decide on something you’d like to create and write the code to create it. Your creation will suck ass, but we learn through making mistakes.

      Finally, read other people’s code.

    • chris says:

      Youtube has millions of hours of free coding tutorials on pretty much every language.

      If you have specific questions about code to ask, then is a free forum where you can ask people those coding questions.

      Learning more about data structures and algorithms will also probably do you good after you get a programming language down. Just search ‘data structures and algorithms’ and you will find info on it.

  17. neofugue says:

    reply to this thread regarding iconoclasm

    Icons are sacramental conduits of grace, and sacred images are considered holy as are sacred texts. The Holy of Holies was replete with images of Cherubim and Seraphim, and the Ark itself had two huge, golden Cherubim over its lid. If images were inherently evil, the tabernacle/temple would not be full of them. Thus, the Second Command cannot mean absolutely no religious images. It forbids pagan idolatry, and the temple worship, which had images, was not idolatry. God is not railing against the inherent evil of an image, but against the practices of the Israelite neighbors.

    Which of the three is most unlike the other?

    Early Third Century Synagogue

    Modern Talmudic Synagogue

    Modern Orthodox Church

    Iconoclasm is a lesser form of Gnosticism as it denies God and the church’s ability to consecrate objects and symbols, which leads to the conclusion that God could not become incarnate. There are many horror stories from the age of Iconoclasm in which evil men would deface the holy images much like 20th century Communists.

    • info23 says:

      It could be argued that images shouldn’t be made for veneration. Neither the Ark of the Covenant nor the sacred objects were venerated.

      Because its the Glory of God upon the Ark which is the manifestation of God himself that was venerated.

      Although they are still symbolically important. And images could be good depictions of history.

      • jim says:

        It is completely obvious in context that the first commandment refers to graven images used for worship that is not unto God, and was interpreted in this manner by Jews of the first century, as well as the mainstream of Christianity throughout all history.

        Thus, for example, the Jews had no problem with Jewish kings issuing coins containing graven images, but correctly got upset when Pointius Pilate put up the equivalent of Mao’s big character thoughts of Chairman Mao, short phrases said by Caesar.

        Though they were not images, but texts, and were not graven, the Jews had fits, correctly identifying cult of personality as worship.

        • notglowing says:

          Something that a lot of people forget is that “idolatry” in ancient times involved actually worshipping the idols themselves as essentially incarnations of their gods – the people who committed idolatry completely believed their gods lived in their idols, and would offer them food and other sacrifices.

          The kind of idolatry that happened during old testament times is so far disconnected from what we think of today, that our perspective, and our standards are completely different.

          • jim says:

            First century Israel existed in the overlap between both kinds of idolatory, and even though they were willfully stupid about most of the law, handled that one correctly. They spotted the cult of personality as idolatory, even though in Israel no graven images were involved.

          • suones says:

            …“idolatry” in ancient times involved actually worshipping the idols themselves as essentially incarnations of their gods – the people who committed idolatry completely believed their gods lived in their idols, and would offer them food and other sacrifices.

            Vitriolic response to Christian propaganda strawman self-censored

  18. Need it for school says:

    I am pursuing a religious exemption with my university so I can finish my degree despite not being vaccinated for COVID. I have two options.

    Orthodox Christianity: use the documentation at and claim an exemption on the basis of the use of abortion in the most common American vaccines.

    Congregation of Universal Wisdom: I’ll soon have documentation that I am part of this group, which has a website at This exemption would simply be based on the Congregation’s opposition to non-chiropractic medicine.

    I could reasonably claim to be Orthodox since January 2020, though I haven’t been baptized or attended an Orthodox church. I can reasonably claim to follow the tenets of the Congregation of Universal Wisdom (nonviolence and no bodily consumption of medications, reliance on chiropractic care) for the past 3 years.

    Which one do you think is my best bet? Should I consider another religious affiliation?

    • jim says:

      Putin has nukes. I would go with Orthodoxy, even though the Cathedral would be far happier with religious exemption based on idiotic grounds (Congregation of Universal Wisdom), they are also far more respectful of Christian Orthodoxy. (Exemption based on not accepting the proceeds of murder).

      • Need it for school says:

        Thanks for your input.

        I will still wait to see what the Congregation of Universal Wisdom sends me; if it is really good I might use it, but it seems like it’s mostly for rinky-dink elementary school exemptions, especially because it asks for whole families to join and not just one person.

        If anyone has a second opinion he wants to give it’s very welcome, please speak your mind.

        • Anon says:

          Take it with a grain of salt but I’d say you’re vastly overthinking this. Just lie and see what happens, and correct if it doesn’t go right. It’s a compliance test from your uni and you’re giving too much credit to the people you think will be looking into it. For religious exemption, research specifically what your uni’s demanding on paper and on a free day walk into the closest Ortho church. Stay for whatever service they do. Afterwards talk to whoever is in charge of outreach. You were loosely raised Ortho or your parent(s) were lapsed Orthos, but you were never baptized and you’re now concerned about being kicked out of uni for lack of formal paperwork. Your dismal time in uni has also given you a spiritual hunger to reenter Christian fellowship

          None of that works or too much effort, claim to be Moslem and skate. Unis will bend over backward to accommodate you. Wear a turban to the one class you still need, who gives a shit

      • Thales says:

        Going with Orthodoxy seems like a smart move on many fronts. They require a serious time commitment before being allowed to join fully — a hurdle to entryists — which gives one plenty of time to fake faith before making it.

    • Pseudo_Chrysostom says:

      Objecting to a procedure on the grounds that it participates in and comes from people who participate in totemized blood sacrifice of fetuses is pretty solid grounds. I’d go with that.

      • Anon says:

        Come on now, this is setting him up for failure. The university apparatchik in charge of filing his compliance won’t be receptive to Alex Jones rants about aborted fetus parts. They will be receptive him whispering sweet nothings and appearing to comply without actually complying

        • jim says:

          My experience is that people are totally happy with you going through sufficient motions of compliance that they can pretend to believe you have complied and file their paperwork appropriately.

          But he tells us there is holy zeal against the unbelievers. Maybe. I suspect he is taking the faith at face value. There are some holiness spiralers there that want to make sure everyone complies, and their minions nod and wish that they would go away. He is going to find he is dealing with the minion who is tired of all this stuff.

    • Karl says:

      The problem with religious exemption is that you openly state that you do not have and do not want to get the clot shot. That’s an open challenge of the faith of your administrators.

      If you start down that path you won’t be able to switch to fake compliance, because everything you do thereafter will be thoroughly checked.

      So check whether religious exemption really works. Does the admistration say they accept it? Do members of the congregations you are considering report that religious exemption works?

      If you can afford, you might want to discuss the matter with an attorney – if you have a chance to find an honest one

      • Need it for school says:

        I have more counsel from an attorney than I know what to do with. Frankly he’s not been useful.

        Yes, the administration accepts religious exemptions (otherwise there would be no form to request one.)

        The groups I’m considering aren’t groups with which I’m in regular contact. I know the Congregation of Universal Wisdom won a lawsuit in NY.

        • jim says:

          You have some old connection to Orthodoxy, and they will of course be sympathetic to moral objections to using vaccines tested against flesh grown from a murdered fetus, and may well be sympathetic to the Dark Enlightenment argument that the vaccination program looks more like ritual submission to state religion than a relevant and practical response to a public health problem.

  19. Humble Acolyte says:

    A bit creepy how the clot shot is even holier than worshipping blacks. “Disparate impact of vaccine passports” / “muh Tuskegee Institute” concern trolling doesn’t seem to have any legs at all. I guess coming from our side, it’s just a variation on “dems are the real racists,” but it seems like something an ambitious young red guard could latch onto.

    • Pooch says:

      They just won’t enforce it for blacks.

      • Karl says:

        Unlikely, they’ll pass a law that says white have to get the clot shot or that only whites are punished for not getting the clot shot.

        Much easier to simply fine people for non-compliance with a vaccination requirement. Then enforcement will only bother people with assets that can be sized.

        Hiding assets is becoming more and more important.

        Crypto is a possibility for hiding assets, but then you own only crypto. Another possibility is limited liability companies. They can be created for a few hundred $ and then own any assets you want to protect. You own your limited liability company, but that is difficult to find out, especially if it is a foreign company.

    • Andy says:

      New York dining will be very interesting since it seems that vaccination rates are still low for blacks.

      As I recall, they tried something similar for LA sporting events earlier this year and had to kill it when the vax VIP areas were glaringly white and yellow as compared to the black and brown unvaxxed seating.

      Boston’s acting (black) mayor is comparing vax passes to slave papers.

  20. Anon says:

    This is far afield of my original point, which was that despite Feynman’s original intention, the phrase “cargo cult science”, or more commonly “pseudoscience”, has become a shibboleth that middling IQ people use to identify any endeavor too white and too male. Most recently it’s to claim intelligence testing, the only part of sociology/psychology that replicates, is not real science. Hence lefty memes about “calipers”, “phrenology” etc. I don’t like using the term psychometrics because it lumps IQ tests in with Big 5 and OCEAN, which are less exams and more glorified surveys, and most of psychology is an elaborate attempt to demonize normal male behavior (Dark Triad).

    As for creationist and intelligent design junk, other than being stupid their main sin was attempting to run apologetics on spiritual matters by arguing using the frame of the enemy. I think this dovetails nicely with your point about the Trinity. The correct answer to what the Bible has to say about evolution by natural selection, or how old the earth is, or how many physical corners it has, should be “Who gives a shit”, and the person asking it is missing the point at best and suspect of stirring up trouble at worst

    • Anon says:

      Whoops. Meant to be a reply to Jim in the Feynman thread

    • jim says:

      > the phrase “cargo cult science”, or more commonly “pseudoscience”, has become a shibboleth that middling IQ people use to identify any endeavor too white and too male.

      The phrase is owned and defined by Feynman. Anyone using it the manner you describe reveals himself ignorant and stupid.

      Because using it in this manner is low status among smart people, never a shibboleth.

  21. Alfred says:

    I’m guess taking down Cuomo is clearing the deck for Kalama in 2024. There’s clearly no threat he’d be removed unless he was a potential threat to the cathedrals future plans. After all, he murdered 15,000 people and got a Emmy for it.

    • Calvin says:

      Cuomo a white male. As the left gets lefter and less rational, that alone is more than enough reason to remove him. He’s lucky that they haven’t yet reached the stage of physical liquidations, but give it time.

    • Pooch says:

      It does look like that. As disgusting as a human as he is, we should be rooting for Cuomo if that’s the case and with a little luck maybe he could be our Stalin. Plenty of worse alternatives.

      • Pooch says:

        It could also just be the beginning of white males being purged from elite positions in the regime and replaced by POC. The betting markets predict the nigger bitch AG herself as being the leading candidate for the governorship if Cuomo goes down, which is kind of hilarious.

      • The Cominator says:

        Stalin does not get purged Stalin purges. Fuck Cuomo.

  22. @jim and others more knowledgeable than I am,

    I’m interested in the term “Dark Enlightenment” and its connection with “NRx/Reaction/neoreaction”. How do you differentiate between these two? Are these used interchangeably as I assume?

    And where does the “Alt-right” fit into this?

    (I reject wikipedia and other “sources” on these topics – like so many other topics – as corrupt, because they are controlled by the enemy)

    • alf says:

      Interchangeably. The alt-right is the populist nrx branch. Imo.

    • Humble Acolyte says:

      Dark enlightenment and Nrx largely overlap. If you want to break it down further, see Nick Land’s essay The Dark Enlightenment, which I think coined the term.

      Alt right is an enemy meme. Nobody based calls themself alt right. When you hear alt right you are supposed to think of “Nazis” and the bad bad evil “Unite the Right” rally

      • alf says:

        Nah they co-opted the movement of course, but the term originally was simply alternative right — those on the right who were done with cuck right.

        Course in the end a word is just a word. Spandrell had a good post on it somewhere. When the whole alt-right thing started, we too considered ourselves as part of that umbrella, even if we considered some others under that umbrella to be shills, fame hungry and/or overly activistic. And indeed, in time the alt-right as a movement collapsed exactly for those reasons.

    • Justin Bieber says:

      I’m interested in the term “Dark Enlightenment” and its connection with “NRx/Reaction/neoreaction”. How do you differentiate between these two? Are these used interchangeably as I assume?

      The term “Dark Enlightenment” encompassed a broad scope of Red-Pilled movements: NRx, HBD, Manosphere. It was primarily used by Neo-Reactionaries between 2012 and 2015. This umbrella term was pioneered and championed by Nick Land, who popularized it in the burgeoning NRx circles at the time. Land was clearly highly inspired by Jim when doing that (Land in general was highly inspired by Jim). The idea was to deconstruct the Enlightenment’s sundry false egalitarian notions about humanity by demonstrating their incompatibility with reality itself. Today it is less in use. Corresponding to NRx, HBD, and Manosphere, the central questions posed by the Dark Enlightenment at large were “What if democracy is not the best system of governance? What if the races of man aren’t identical in their capacities and propensities? What if men and women are fundamentally, inherently different?” Ample evidence has been provided to substantiate the conclusions reached by the Dark Enlightenment. The Dark Enlightenment has succeeded insofar as e.g. the typical poster on incel forums, who in 2010 would have been a shitlib, is now aware of the major flaws of the Progressive worldview.

    • Cloudswrest says:

      The most succinct definition of the “Alt(ernative)-Right is: That subset of the political Right that recognizes and accepts the biological reality of race and its consequences.

  23. onyomi says:

    FYI I got the Sinovac Coronavac first dose a couple days ago figuring its more “old-fashioned” whole virus tech would be safer than all the new-fangled stuff available in America (also anecdotally heard more reports of nasty side effects from Pfizer and Astrazeneca). I was never overly worried about catching covid, but as I am skeptical of meds in general, figured a bunch of ivermectin or hydroxycholoroquine, etc. plus natural infection would not necessarily be lower risk than an old-fashioned (but still new) vax.

    Unfortunately, I’ve had some circulatory and/or nervous system side effects, like markedly higher blood pressure, a feeling of fullness and tingling in the head, and an extreme stiffness in the neck. GP brushes it off, but I don’t think I will get the second shot, though it will make things very inconvenient (attempting bribery or forgery where I am seems culturally right out/overly high risk). Should have stuck to guns, most likely, rather than trying to figure out the lowest-risk/most innocuous way of reaching the regime’s latest goalpost.

    • Alfed says:

      They’re promising major federal jail time to anyone fakes a vaccine card now in the US.

      • onyomi says:

        Supposedly NYC’s new covid passport program won’t even accept a foreign vaccination record, so even if I completed my series here, no guarantee it would be accepted elsewhere, though the place where I am keeps very good records. It’s such insanity.

  24. Anonymous Fake says:

    Wall Street Journal over a decade out of date, as usual. They were promoting free trade, even with China, well into the 00’s like it was still the 90’s and America had permanently won the Cold War and thus all wars. Now they suddenly realize law school isn’t the conservative and respectable investment it used to be.

    I don’t know how they do it, how they can remain so ignorant for so long with so much information available. Merchants (and stock bubbles/busts) can be irrational even by their own standards for absurdly long. They are also very curiously absolutely uninterested in what their customers say.

    “More experienced associates at large law firms can earn upward of $250,000—far more than their peers at small firms or in the public sector. But more than half of entry-level jobs at high-paying firms have gone to graduates of just top 20 ranked schools, according to an analysis of American Bar Association data by Law School Transparency”

    They left out the more important information, the fact that these fake elite jobs are in extremely expensive markets and they demand 80+ hour work weeks. Even a top 20 ranking degree isn’t unlocking true elite careers anymore. Dirtbags who drop out of high school to start construction or shipping firms are the newly rich…

    The monasteries need looting. So do the dirtbags. And most of the commenters on that article too, though a couple knew about the sadistic work hour traps. When everyone needs a good looting, one realizes that one is in a pre-revolutionary state.

    And you can’t tell anyone banks were lacking in information when they made those loans. They have the most and best information in history. Destroying career and family formation is a deliberate act on their part, and conservatives are the primary target.

    • jim says:

      The banks are wicked for following the government’s wicked rules?

      Who is that got those rules made? It was not the banks.

      • Anonymous Fake says:

        [*Marxist economics deleted. We have debated Marxist economics far too many times*]

        • jim says:

          Rectification of names:

          Usury is loans secured by the person, rather than productive property. I regularly have condemned usurious lending, which tends to destroy, rather than create, value and capital, but you are condemning lending on productive property, and the existence of productive property itself. You want to destroy all non priestly wealth. To you, property that creates value, rather than holiness, is “usury”.

          Loans that are paid off are good. Loans that result in foreclosure should be error by borrower and lender, rather than only an error by the borrower – and the lender should suffer the largest part of the cost of that error: the foreclosure on a property properly cared for and maintained should settle the debt, even if the property is now worthless despite proper care. Debts against the person result in behavior by lenders that destroys value and capital.

    • Aidan says:

      Nonsense. The banks are forced to make student loans, as evidenced by the simple fact that if the 17 year old Aidan asked for 200,000 bucks to start a business, he would be laughed out of the room. Student loans are required because they are holy, even when obviously unprofitable. Who made them holy?

      And the guy who drops out of high school to start a construction firm needs looting? Are you fucking kidding me? How about you live under a bridge for a year and then decide we don’t need construction workers. Why do you care so much that a guy who runs a construction firm drives a corvette and lives in a nice house? Why the fuck shouldn’t he? Cause he didnt go to muh cawwlege?

      You are twisted and consumed by envy. I struggle with wrath, lust, and sloth, but somehow envy is one of the ugliest sins.

      • Anonymous Fake says:

        [*Deleted for endless repetition*]

        • jim says:

          Had this argument before: If the government manufactures good jobs capable of supporting a family for everyone with a worthless priestly degree in doing useless things, for example the enormous number of dumb college grads with worthless law degrees from second ranked colleges who are currently serving coffee in starbucks or greeting at Walmart, they will not be good jobs capable of supporting a family, because the economy will resemble that of Venezuela, because all the construction workers and farmers will be robbed to support the ever growing priesthood. We have a hundred times the number of practicing wealthy lawyers that we actually need, busily doing makework that they manufacture for each other, and a hundred times the number of people with degrees in lawyering than there is makework for them to do, so in Starbucks, someone with a law degree and two hundred thousand dollars in college debt not expungable by bankruptcy brings me my coffee, as they damn well should.

          And they should be angry at the college that got that money, not at me, and not at my sources of income.

      • jim says:

        > I struggle with wrath, lust, and sloth, but somehow envy is one of the ugliest sins.

        Wrath, lust, and gluttony here. All of us red pill guys have the more energetic vices. Envy is almost incomprehensible to me. If I see someone with a nice chick, I want to know how he got her.

        Which, come to think of it, is how we became red pilled.

        • Anonymous Fake says:

          The envy vice might be the worst problem because it confuses with justice all too easily. It’s an injustice for people promised a rich law career, good students who didn’t have much if any sex in school, to live in poverty and inceldom while dropout Chad plumbers get to lay all the pipe they want, sometimes on their own boat.

          Yes there can be an element of envy here, but it’s wrong to let it completely overshadow the injustice that happened. Low quality dudebros are getting rich and reproducing in excess, while the former middle class is being crushed in completely unnecessary debt due to the fake economics pushed by bankers who hate their civilization and want it dead. This didn’t have to happen.

          Government sponsored fake economics is still fake, granted, but what makes it different is the element of CHARITY. Make-work for people who were actually promised work is different from make-work for deviants looking for a handout. And at some point, you can run out of people promised work because that is a circumstantial problem, and circumstances change. Dropping out of school to stack bricks can be encouraged just as much as grad school, if the government wanted to change things. Or even if businesses actually communicated with students instead of going all-in for outsourcing and illegal alien labor and ignoring the native West.

          • jim says:

            You totally deserve everything that happened to you.

            You wanted to be richly rewarded without creating value – I gather you got a second class law degree in a second class university, which qualifies you to deliver pizza to people like me and serve coffee in starbucks to people like me.

            Get to work. I see no injustice. The priesthood lied to you and took your money, but you are not angry with them, because you figured you would be on the inside with the liars taking other people’s money. You are not angry with the injustice done to you, because you intended, and still intend, to commit similar injustice.

            When one robber robs another robber, I see no injustice, I see the will of Gnon at work. No one deceived you, you deceived yourself. You complain capitalists failed to warn you of your job prospects. Does not high school and university have an entire very well paid department that is supposed to be telling students about their job prospects? They probably told you that there were going to be plenty of jobs in telling students about their job prospects, and you were going to be well qualified for such a job.

            If you were angry with the university for taking you money and your time and teaching you ignorance, I would sympathize, I would think you the victim of injustice, the victim of wicked priests running a con. But you still want a job priesting, so are not angry with your fellow priests, you are angry with those you are unable to rob the way you were robbed.

            • Anonymous Fake says:

              Warriors do not create value, either, but are honored for their obedience to authority. I entered the Cathedral because I had to, like a draft, and did my service honorably, and spoke my mind openly about being conservative and in disagreement with much of their beliefs but without ever crossing the line into being a rebel.

              I’m a veteran. I’m not a merchant trying to grift some apple sales, or a prole looking to steal a few apples for himself. I believe in meritocracy based on some form of universal and objective truth, and if that priestly impulse fails then the warrior mode of hierarchy and authority takes over. The money mode rarely fires in my mind in an institutional setting, as it becomes suppressed by the other two.

              I would be much more sympathetic to merchants if they would only communicate as effectively as warriors and priests, and if their prized audience were Westerners rather than Guatemalans and Somalians. I do in truth reach out to them, but not much more than they are willing to reach back. Desperate grasping is futile and beta.

              • jim says:

                > Warriors do not create value, either, but are honored for their obedience to authority.

                Warriors do create value – because without warriors, you get overrun by peoples, tribes, groups, nations, and faiths that do have warriors.

                > I’m a veteran. I’m not a merchant trying to grift some apple sales.

                I am allowing this through only because some people want to see what I am silencing and why I am silencing it. Similar stuff will not be allowed through.

                You are not a veteran. A veteran is a warrior who created value by fighting for God, King, Country, and family. You attended a second rank priest school (law school) expecting a lucrative sinecure doing utterly useless priesting (lawyering), and discovered that we have a vast oversupply of priests, which is why the barista in Starbucks serving me coffee and the greeter at walmart is apt to have a hundred thousand in college debt. You are a “veteran” of a useless education that created no value and cost a great deal of time and money.

                Selling apples is the opposite of grifting. Apple sellers create value. Lawyers destroy value. Big difference. Trouble is, you want them apples from those apple sellers without being required to create value yourself to exchange. You want the value that farmers and construction workers create without the inconvenient need to create value, which is why you hate them and love the fellow priests that defrauded you.

                You keep using our shibboleths, such as “grift” and “usury” with the meanings reversed. This is an attack on the rectification of names, which is why I silence it.

                You use our shibboleths upside down. It is an attack on our ability to communicate, which is why I silence you. I don’t silence you because you are a leftist and want to be a grifter. I would let your stuff through if you stopped using our shibboleths upside down and instead attacked them from the outside as a leftist and unemployed priest who wants a job in the state religion.

                • The Cominator says:

                  He never addresses me and I got screwed the same way he did and probably worse.

          • The Cominator says:

            I did engineering and got fucked the same way. I’m also a sperg so I suck at job interviews, you are an idiot to be mad at high proles and not members of the priesthood.

            • Anonymous Fake says:

              [*deleted for all the usual reasons*]

              • jim says:

                Cut the “hail fellow member of the oppressed” stuff and attack us from the outside.

                Men trying to get into engineering are wearing very different shoes to men trying to get into priesting.

                • Anonymous Fake says:

                  [*deleted for upside down use of our shibboleths*]

                • jim says:

                  Engineers are oppressed by HR, which prevents us from producing value and filters out recruits without proper priestly accreditation.

                  You are “oppressed” because capitalists decline to give you the free ride the priesthood (professoriat) promised you, and charged you a pile of money for.

        • Aidan says:

          Yes- even when I say sloth, I’m talking about energetic leisure activities that are generally unproductive, me not being a professional warrior or priest. I could waste an entire lifetime just reading, writing, hunting, and combat training like a noble of old, which is bad because I need to work and provide for a family.

          I can’t really comprehend being tempted by the other sins, except pride, because I often affect a high degree of pride to impress women and intimidate men, but internally I keep a realistic assessment of my worth and abilities.

          • alf says:

            I thought lust and sloth were mine, but over the years it is pride that has gotten me into the most trouble.

          • Pooch says:

            Lust and wrath here but lust seems to be my biggest struggle these days. Difficult for me to focus when a young piece of ass is in my field of vision.

          • Zed says:

            “I’m talking about energetic leisure activities that are generally unproductive…”

            Good point. What activities are most productive, other than, of course, raping one’s wife, working for money, and improving one’s domain?

          • Kunning Drueger says:

            I so desperately want to list the 7 deadly that seem common here, but the cold hard truth is that my greatest afflictions are sloth and envy. Aidan knows me fairly well. I’m not a good man, but I’m aware of this and actively seek to be better. AF is a contemptible communist entryist who probably inherited the job after CR got tired of being gangfucked. That being said, his arguments appeal to something inside me, in my lower brain. Some part of me wants him to be right…

            Which is how I know he is evil; we recognize our own. I was the worst of the worst but at least I’m trying to be better. He should be purged.

        • ERTZ says:

          >Envy is almost incomprehensible to me.

          I think that is because you lack, completely or for a long time, the reasons to have this emotion activated, because you are on the top of the social hierarchy in various ways.

          For those at the bottom, envy is common and a major motivator*.

          Imagine you would be relatively short, weak ugly, low-IQ, low-impulse-control,
          sickly – therefore poor, powerless, sexless (perhaps even to the degree of incel at your age) or at least greatly lacking sexual opportunities (especially with non-ugly women).
          Not only would you not have fancy things, sexual and social success – you’d also feel constantly dominated and humiliated by others, better men.
          You’d feel “unfairly” attacked all the time.
          Over years and decades of getting nothing and being forced to observe the successes and superiority of others,
          a great desire for revenge and aggression may build up – consciously or unconsciously.

          Envy can be rather harmless by motivating imitation of others to seek success as well.
          Envy can be very dangerous by motivating selfless**, irrational** aggression, that is, desire to harm and destroy others even if there’s no personal profit from it (social sabotage, poisoning, property destruction, reputation destruction, even murder, etc.).
          Many at the top that are envied are ignorant of that threat to them, but it exists, qualitatively (some others can be extraordinarily motivated to harm the envied) and quantitatively (there are many people below the top that feel envy).

          At the bottom the “rungs of the ladder” are much closer to each other.
          People are motivated by little things to appear better than peers, for example by signalling owning luxury goods
          like Apple products.
          In the 1950s, a big US car company experimented with causing peer envy to increase sales:
          In a neighborhood of socially similar people one of those peers was given an expensive car,
          through sham lottery. It was made sure that the house with the car was well visible by the other
          peers, for example by being at the entry street into the settlement, so the fancy car was observable to everybody else.
          This alone was enough to cause an catching up of the peers in the neighborhood/street – slowly but surely, one neighbor after another bought a new, expensive car on the luxury level of the first or above.
          An informal social race to own the most expensive car was started, leading to debt-financing.
          Showing peers (it doesn’t work so strongly with non-peers, people living far away or in a much higher social class) with status-enhancing luxury items causes strong motivation to catch up or surpass.
          Even virtually, for example in ads and social media.
          It was found it works best when consumers were sexually frustrated ,at least in men – sexually highly successful men were hardly influenced by it at all.
          I suspect our rulers may cause sexual frustration in men deliberately, to increase work output and profits for the upper class.

          Actions motivated by envy to harm others can be irrational, because investing time and resources and enduring significant risks to do so often has no direct profit for the person doing it.
          But envy evolved to prevent extinction by being pushed down into the social status hierarchy, which usually means social and sexual defeat. Sabotaging or killing those above oneself in the hierarchy is a powerful method to prevent self-extinction, therefore envy is a fundamental emotion, evolutionarily stable.
          Getting rid of better rivals, or pulling them down socially, directly or indirectly makes oneself rise relatively in the hierarchy.
          Not much point perhaps in a modern, multi-million-people society, but certainly useful in ancestral, tribal settings.
          The burning desire to sabotage and kill out of envy and the euphoria from being successful with it is a very powerful force.
          (Smart rulers know this and try to redirect envy of their underlings towards other underlings, allowing the rulers to live more secure and peaceful at the top. I think the “Potemkin upper class” out of rappers, sports and movie stars etc. has such function, envy, aggression, bickering gets deflected from the real owners and industrialists, the real upper class, to a fake upper class of entertainment clowns.)

          • jim says:

            > Envy can be rather harmless by motivating imitation of others to seek success as well.

            That is not envy.

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

            Envy is hating and despising him for what he has, as for example the universal leftist outcry that Linus stole all that technology from the brave warrior women of subsaharan Africa and that Linus is a rapist.

            Does not affect me, does not affect the vast majority of voters. Look at the way Trump flaunted his hot wife and flying palace.

            Normal sane people admire those that have something good, respect them, because respect and admiration facilitates learning from them. That is how normal, sane, healthy people react. That is how most people react, a reaction Trump deployed to good effect.

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

            All Anonymous Conservative solutions are theoretically motivated by the desire to provide a good life for those who played by the rules set by the holy priesthood of Academia, and found themselves with a hundred thousand in college debt, a worthless education, and a wasted youth. But in every case, the proposed solution would be highly unlikely to have that effect. Rather, in every proposed solution, the primary effect would be to destroy the lives of those who did not suffer what he has suffered, and in every comment he reveals his hatred of those people and his contempt for them.

            The things he supposedly wants, he shows no interest in actually having. He is angry about other people having them. He does not talk about nice things. He talks about other people wickedly having nice things.

            > one neighbor after another bought a new, expensive car on the luxury level of the first or above.

            That is not envy. Envy is keying his car. Envy is burning down Detroit.

            • ERTZ says:

              If someone correctly concludes he has no hope to ever attain the success/wealth/women he sees others have (due to his genetic inferiority or some other immutable disadvantage), all he can do is either

              nothing and accept defeat and thus self-extinction;
              such losers die out quietly


              attempt to take away or destroy the superior’s stuff, status and women,
              or even kill him outright;
              such losers get defeated, end in prison, or dead – or are successful.

              Thus, only type 2 losers seem to come to exist – the destructively envious ones.

              If a man has lost all hope to get the good things, all that remains for him to do is trying to destroy the good things better men have or the better men themselves.
              This is even more so if the loser male finds himself at an advanced age, because the success, copulation, reproduction opportunities not had in the past are lost forever, his disappointment and defeat cannot be undone or compensated for anymore, all he is left with is destructive rage for revenge.

              Being a real loser, for man, is like castration, like death. He won’t reproduce, at least not with any kind of woman that is not genetic garbage, condemning his potential children to start out the socio-sexual war with a huge disadvantage.
              Being a loser, genetic dead end, is the same for him like being executed.
              With no good options left, he might as well try to burn down everything, commit mass murder, whatever – at least those offer a tiny chance for something better than 100% certain self-destruction.

              Perhaps this is not more of a social problem because such men have low testosterone (=aggression, energy) from continuous social defeat and advanced age; and tend to drown their frustration in alcohol, drugs, obesity, electronic entertainment;
              and so weakened, are no longer much of a threat.

              But tell me:
              Suppose you were born not with your genetic advantage, but into a world where all other men would be much better than you,
              condemning you to an inescapable life of social defeat, poverty and endless humiliation, with no hope for advancement;
              after enduring such an existence for decades, are you sure your personality and opinions would be the same of our world’s very successful Jim?
              Are you sure you wouldn’t want revenge, burn down people and cities?

              • jim says:

                Presumably the vast majority of voters had no hope of getting a hot young wife and a flying palace, but that made them like Trump more, not less.

                Envy is just not a normal healthy reaction. It is common, but its not a majority deviation among whites.

    • Anon says:

      Dirtbags who drop out of high school to start construction or shipping firms are the newly rich…

      The monasteries need looting. So do the dirtbags.

      I have to say, every time you do this “woe is me” routine about your financial and career prospects it puts a smile on my face. Assuming you’re being honest about your situation and not a troll or someone paid to post here (you post the same exact shit over and over again like CR, just worded slightly different each time), then you deserve what happened to you and probably worse. Woe to the dumb and wicked.

      If I could have started a business out of high school and skipped the completely irrelevant, wasteful, and boring uni process I would have done it in a heartbeat. Unlike you I don’t wish anyone that evaded formal education ill will, and in fact I hope they succeed. Good for them.

      You on the other hand were trained in a useless value transference major in a field that by all rights shouldn’t even exist. Do you really expect anyone to empathize with you for not getting into a top 20 law school, thus dooming yourself to be an ambulance chaser or community college adjunct for the rest of your life? My eyes are dry.

      • Need it for school says:

        It’s also not true what he says about law schools. Plenty of lawyers from shitlaw make tons of money, either in government or ambulance chasing. For 99% of lawyers, owning a law firm effectively makes you an ambulance chaser, AND owning a law firm is the legal profession’s equivalent of the self-made landscaping company millionaire. Furthermore it’s not a problem at all that people sometimes work 70 hours a week at the beginning of their careers. They’re young then and can recover fairly easily. Working brutally hard and making a fuckton of money feels awesome, too.

        • Anon says:

          At the end of the day he doesn’t care about money per se, he cares that someone else he doesn’t like is making it with less hoop jumping than he is. Spiritual class tattletale

          He doesn’t care about taking his lumps and being a well-paid ambulance chaser because ambulance chaser lawyers are prole and low status, and your lawyer social circle will care about the minutiae of what kind of law you practice and which firm you work for. Better to work for Faggot 1 Faggot 2 Faggot 3 PLLC Attorneys at Law that specialize in training and pumping out future prosecutors to separate fathers from their money and children and redistribute both to mothers in divorce court, or training people to take high profile cases defending dark skinned criminals from obvious murder charges

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      >[good people] who [reject the false life plan] to start construction or shipping firms are the newly rich[…]so[…]need looting.

      So people who create valuable services that increase the power and ability of society to do things ‘need looting’? One boggles at the schizmatic short-circuitry of the instinctively leftist mind.

      • Anonymous Fake says:

        No one even knows who is leftist or not anymore, as is fitting for the last days of a decadent empire. The biggest leftists in our time are natural conservatives simply obeying authority. I don’t even know myself sometimes. I mean my own self…

        Looting the elite because we want to move on is conservative. The true left just wants the loot, yes, but we want to move on. We build siege towers so that our descendants can climb ladders. We aren’t meant to build bridges or God forbid dig holes, like the merchants or laborers.

        We want to be great warriors who restore good priests.

        • jim says:

          I know exactly what a leftist is. A leftist wants to knock over someone else’s apple cart and grab their apples.

          And you want to knock over the apple carts of the few remaining people who are actually creating value, so you can grab their apples.

          So you are not angry with the professoriat who robbed you and lied to you. You are angry with those of us who have apple carts that are looking vulnerable.

        • Anon says:

          Looting the elite because we want to move on is conservative

          The dirtbags as you call them who waived formal education to start a construction or shipping business are not “the elite”. “The elite” are people like yourself who are in the proper sense elite at nothing really, and are resentful at not being handed a $70,000 starting salary for shuffling words around. Although you specifically aren’t “the elite” but just a frustrated washout, like the sperm that didn’t quite make it. You want to take it out on the other guy who isn’t in crippling debt, who was at least smart enough to discover law school is a terrible investment without being told

          Your bill for liking to be told things for 4+ years instead of figuring it out on your own is whatever your student loan statement says

      • jim says:

        Notice the one group he never says needs looting are the people who lied to him and cheated him of his youth and whopping great pile of money. There is no anger at those that robbed him, just anger at those that suffered less injury than he did.

        Not fair, he says,”I played by the rules.”

        Evil rules imposed by evil people.

    • f6187 says:

      “Dirtbags who drop out of high school to start construction or shipping firms are the newly rich…”

      That’s my favorite kind of dirt bag. I once hired a young plumber in his 20s, who showed up with his very pleasant wife in tow, and he said he was already making 6 figures, and the owner of the company was pulling in 7 figures. Mama don’t let your babies grow up to be lawyers.

    • Justin Bieber says:

      What value do you provide society? If you’re not into building stuff, which obviously you’re not, then you can still create “cultural value” like painters, musicians, authors, etc. Perhaps you should become a DJ? That’d give you Chad’s status, if not his aesthetics. That, however, does require having some semblance of talent. Well, in your case, you should’ve just opted to become a full-time academic, so you could get paid by the university directly for academic endeavors. Law school was indeed a waste of your time and money; if you’re destined to be a priest, should just go “all the way” and get a Ph.D. If you can’t manage to do that, then yeah, you deserve flipping those burgers for the rest of your life.

  25. Shitpoaster says:


    As previously mentioned here I did hear BAP mention you in one of his recent podcasts.

    Banging strippers in itself doesn’t sound too bad, but do you really do that in the club? Not meet up with them somewhere else? Sounds unpleasant.

    • Kikel Mohen says:

      Speaking of which, they finally suspended BAP’s twitter account.

      • jim says:

        Expect him to suddenly become a whole lot less gay.

        • Anon says:

          Speaking of which, I’ve noticed an outsized number of “men” who from a young age grew up with housecats, or prefer cats as opposed to dogs, or post pictures of cats on the internet, that tend to turn out to be faggots. Considering being a faggot yields a fitness hit equivalent to a bear hibernating in the summer rather than the winter, what’s the probability of the mystery faggot pathogen being something the cat literally dragged in? Haven’t looked at this in a while but I remember toxoplasmosis is probably not it, but who knows what else disgusting domesticated cats bring in to people’s houses

          • Aidan says:

            If there is a correlation between cats and faggotry, it is probably a correlation between being raised by single mother catladies and faggotry. Cats have been domesticated for a long time- if you had a farm, you had cats, so probably not the problem. I quite like cats, so maybe this is the toxoplasmosis compelling me to stan the little devils, but I like dogs about as much. And as far as I’m aware, men with toxoplasmosis have higher T and bang more women on average.

            • Anon says:

              People becoming literal faggots due to single motherhood is a normie conservative favorite, like how they say nigger single motherhood in America is the cause of nigger familial dysfunction. I think you have your causality backwards.

              Dogs were domesticated long before cats as an ancient hunting tool, and it seems obvious to me that the usefulness of “domesticated” cats would have come later when your farmers need to protect Neolithic grain silos from rats. When I most recently looked into this, hunter gatherers still use dogs as a hunting tool but aren’t familiar with “domesticated” cats and aren’t familiar with obligate homosexuality (trying to fuck same sex to the explicit exclusion of opposite sex, common enough in humans and sheep but not common in IE penguins or any other animal the left uses to claim faggotry is common in animals). When people try to explain obligate faggotry to hunter gatherers they don’t know what you’re talking about
              Upon seeing a housecat a savage would probably be concerned the cat would try to eat him. My impression of “domesticated” cats is they WOULD try to eat you if they were just a bit bigger

              If the mystery faggot pathogen works like Greg Cochran suspects, for example narcolepsy, where there is an insult to a cluster of neurons in the brain that regulates sleep hormones, the likely culprits are “domesticated” cats and sheep, both of which came well after hunter gatherers Fred Flintstoning each other to death and well into primitive farming and agriculture

              Cochran is the only one I’ve seen with an interesting opinion on this, but at the end of the day who cares about faggots. It can go undiscovered, and he plays coy about this kind of stuff because he’s a facefag and would have something to lose if he said what he really thought. I wonder if being old and fat and having multiple heart surgeries has influenced his recent interest in Covid

              • The Cominator says:

                “like how they say nigger single motherhood in America is the cause of nigger familial dysfunction.”

                To some extent it is. Niggers got a lot worse after single motherhood became the norm.

                • Anon says:

                  Function of emancipation. AFAIK nigger familial dysfunction doesn’t happen in Africa where one can still physically correct a woman for being disrespectful without spending a night in jail and money on lawyers. Their replacement rate is just fine. Even if you rolled back emancipation in America, would nigger familial dysfunction in America be on the list of my motives? No, it would not

              • Aidan says:

                I have doubts about gay germ theory. Explains gay tops. Does not explain men who are truly fixated on being dominated and abused by other men and all sorts of truly horrific shit that I won’t repeat here. If you have the stomach to read what gay bottoms have written about their sexual fantasies, you will not think “his sexual targeting neurons must be damaged”, you will think “fuck, demons are among us, call doomguy”

                • Anon says:

                  Well fortunately I haven’t read enough gay bottom fanfiction to speak authoritatively on the subject. I would guess that “gay tops” don’t really exist in the same way that obligate female homosexuals don’t really exist, and all fag males are the kind like you describe

                • jim says:

                  I would conjecture that a gay top resembles a “hypermasculine” fag, the leatherboys, and the masculinity of a leatherboy is as hilariously fake as the hyperfeminity of a drag queen at drag queen story hour.

          • Ryan Scroggins says:

            You are overthinking this man, trying to find correlation where there is none. The middle east and eastern Europe is filled with cat lovers and they are far from being faggots. Also, most people live in apartments or smaller houses with smaller yards nowadays so that makes it tough to get a decent sized dog.

    • The Cominator says:

      Yes in the club… even if you want to meet them elsewhere you get the best deal that way. BAP just got purged from twatter you know if he posts elsewhere.

      • Shitpoaster says:

        How does that even work… I’ve never been to a strip club.

        Yes he made a telegram channel which also allows comments, a great twitter account I follow, Zero HP Lovecraft, posted the link (seems legit, confirmed by other accounts):

        Maybe unnecessary to tell you but if you haven’t already I suggest acquiring a “burner phone” and using it’s phone number to create a telegram account in a VM, connected to internet only through VPN paid via monero, on a clean linux laptop (hat tip to Jim for opsec tips).

        If anyone on this blog is interested in opsec how-tos I’d be happy to share, Jim knows more than me but I know some things…

        • The Cominator says:

          You want one with a more private lap dance area… I did a detailed post a while back I’m too tired to go digging for it tonight. Its not that hard to do… the only reason it works is a lot of strippers (not all) are pretty constantly incredibly horny. The biggest rule is when talking don’t say or betray any negative judgemental feelings towards the girl for being a stripper. Strippers hate white knights more than Jim does.

          I do not believe any form of electronic communication in the US is all that secure.

        • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

          If you want to know open, the military literature on it is pretty great. Also, comsec should be pretty damned high on your list of skills to learn. Check out the survivalists, prepper, and militia communities for the links and manuals. Just do not get involved with them because they are lousy with feds.

  26. Varna says:

    The national clottery is being pushed through in Russia as well, I’m keeping an eye on their Internets.

    Their Sputnik is like the Astra, with the difference that the Astra is with one monkey adenovirus, while the Sputnik is with two human adenoviruses.
    The poor bastards are dropping dead left and right over there, sometimes whole families, but it’s always either “a statistical coincidence” or “they were already ill with the corona before getting the shot”.

    The family in question
    (“Lenta” is the local mainstream – Rus Alexa rank 19, while “Tsargrad” is the local Breibart, but orthodox and spike protein-skeptical, Rus Alexa rank 145)

    The thing with the vector clot-shots, long-term possibilities aside, is that they get trialed with volunteers chosen for space-commando levels of health and fitness, but then released into the general population which does not as a rule have space-commando levels of health and fitness.

    You get civilians juggling a dozen latent conditions which erupt after the shot activates them, with heart murmurs turning into heart attacks, histamine sensitivity turning into arthritis, fatty liver turning into liver failure, and so on. Plus too many civvie street doctors and nurses who are simply doing what they’re told and trying to give as few medical weavers as possible (we gotta get those vaxxed numbers up, these are rookie numbers). Plus businesses pressuring their workers to get the jab on pain of dismissal.

    Eastern Europe being Eastern Europe, there’s already a booming business of fake jab certificates, but the real thing keeps happening too, and athletic-looking chaps of 30 and 40 go to sleep and don’t wake up.

    Another issue is possible (probable) difference in quality between different batches at time of making, and different batches due to proper or sloppy storage. Plus the old Soviet-era habit of producing two versions of a product—a fancier one for export and a crappier one for internal consumption.
    So the clottery is exciting. Where she stops nobody knows.

    Politically the divide is the following:
    the LDPR nationalists of Zhirinovsky are aggressively pro-vax like Duterte is in the Philippines;
    the globohomo liberasts are also aggressively pro-vax like their friends and masters in the West
    the communists and social democrats are against forcing people to get vaccinated
    Putin’s United Russia is pretending all the forced stuff is done by “bad boyars” on the local levels

    Reminder: the most east you go, the more leftists become social conservatives demanding mandatory patriotic education in schools, law and order, anti-LGBT, state protection of local heritage culture and history. Around the Czech republic, Slovenia, Estonia, the leftists are borderline western-style, you go deeper east and they start turning into Marie LePen, and by the time you reach Russia the leftists in parliament are the ones who write political articles on the need to save the local heritage white population from dilution and dissolution. They’re all like “of course we are internationalists for social justice, but…”

    The commies:
    The social democrats:

    Even within the EU the LGBT acceptance research is a marker for cultural differences.
    The more you see same-sex and tranny support plummeting by country, the more you get a left-wing which is “hate-filled rightwing racist reactionary xenophobes” and focuses on worker rights and peasant rights and boomer pensions instead.

    It is precisely the pro-Soviet and pro-Putin “deep nation” heartland folks who are pushing back against mandatory clot shots, so we’ll see if this translates into less support for United Russia and LDPR and more support for the commies and the social democrats, or Putin’s charisma and blaming “overenthusiastic local authorities” will carry the day.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      >[In the Former USSR, self-named Communists are] social conservatives demanding mandatory patriotic education in schools, law and order, anti-LGBT, state protection of local heritage culture and history. Around the Czech republic, Slovenia, Estonia, the [Liberals] are borderline western-style, you go deeper east and they start turning into Marie LePen, and by the time you reach Russia the [self-named Communists] in parliament are the ones who write political articles on the need to save the local heritage white population from dilution and dissolution. They’re all like “of course we are internationalists for social justice, but…”

      The window-dressings of nostalgia parties are historical contingencies depending on time and place – but they all share a like essence as nostalgia parties.

    • suones says:

      …left-wing which … focuses on worker rights and peasant rights …

      Which “rights” suspiciously involve murdering kulaks with two cows. The Commies deserve getting sodomised by trannies — it’s what they’ve fought for, including murdering the Tsar.

      …boomer pensions…

      In Russia, boomers are actually Brezhnevians. “Boomer pension” is code for “Old Commie Pension,” like the ex-Stasi pensions of ex-DDR. Just like the Commies, when young, offered pensions and comfortable retirement to Tsarists and their families, oh wait, that’s not what happened. What they deserve is not pensions, but a few metres of rope and the nearest lamp-post (failing which, apple trees — I’ve read Nizhny Novgorod is famous for them).

      Sovleft vs Moloch is not a fight reactionaries should have any dog in.

      • Leon says:

        Who is “Sovleft?” Wouldn’t these freaky Russian tricksters be worshippers of Veles instead?

        Also, since these topics have come up repeatedly in this blog, throwing out some mythos here. I just read an angelology book that claimed Michael was worshipped as Beshter in Persia and venerated in some cults as the Metatron. There is a theory that Michael may have been the original head of the pre Hebrew pantheon, YHWH was added later by priests in an attempt to unite the Hebrew people. The common Israelites venerated him and the priests eventually caved and allowed him to have his special place (first amongst the elohim/ astja). IIRC there was even a claim that he was a proto Scythian storm, sun and war god, a middle eastern variant and counterpart of Indra, Perun, Donnor, Perkunnos, and Zeus.

        • suones says:



          I have developed a lot of my own vocabulary because I wasn’t aware of the words for them (until I found the brief online flowering of NRx). It is similar to the (Anatoly Karlin-popularised) “Sovok” term in Rus.

          Can’t discuss theology, because that triggers the few ignorant fools precious snowflakes here even worse than coronadoom.. Perun especially seems like Kryptonite, and has led to accusations of me trying to “convert to Hinduism” (lol — Perun a “Hindu” god?).

          Suffice to say that “Jewish” history and religion has undergone many changes over millennia, and take nothing of what they say in English at face value. Eg: The Father of Jews (Iudaeus pater) is described as being very long of nose (literally), and being “long of nose” is somehow a Hebrew metaphor for being “patient.” English Torah glosses over this, of course. Old gods are generally not metaphorical — we have the god with the longest nose, and his name is Sri Ganesha[1][2]. Note that he literally has a long nose. A Long-nosed pater is particularly relevant to Jews, and “long of nose” being a compliment is also particularly suited to them, and to no other race.


      • Anonymous says:

        Yup. I was pissed when I read that ex-Stasi agents got off scot free. There is and there never will be any mercy for Leftists.

        • Anonymous says:

          *There is no, and there never will be, …


        • Contaminated NEET says:

          >There is no, and there never will be any mercy for Leftists.

          There should not be but there always is infinite mercy for Leftists. In the world we live in, there is no, and there never will be mercy for Rightists.

          Leftism is kudzu, the cockroach, the snakehead – it’s the ultimate memetic invasive species. When has it ever lost a contest of ideas and influence? The only thing that ever beats Leftism is reality – not the idea of reality, or conformity to Gnon, or anything like that, but its own obvious and undeniably failure after it has crushed all opposing ideas.

          • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

            >When has it ever lost a contest of ideas and influence?

            Why aren’t you on twitter/reddit right now combing through the 10 year post history of wh*te m*les for any crumbs of non-synagogue mandated crimethink?

            • Contaminated NEET says:

              We like to say we’re the people who face reality in all its harshness; we try to act with the will of Gnon, rather than against it. Well, Gnon says that Leftist egalitarian nonsense is a really good way to organize and motivate large numbers of people so you can seize power, and nobody has ever found a way to beat it. Nobody out here in NRx land has looked that forbidden eldritch truth in the face.

              • The Cominator says:

                Our question is how to beat egalitarianism and bioleninism not denying that its somewhat effective, though I would argue that without Wilson it never would have gotten to world dominance because normally stupid governments like this destroy themselves.

              • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                You didn’t answer the question though.

              • jim says:

                Rather, it is irrelevant.

                The problem is that to have logistics, whoever is in charge of the show wants the merchant to have secure property rights. If the elite cannot secure their own women, no one is in charge of the show. A struggle for status, power and loot ensues.

                Leftism has no essence. The problem is always failure of elite virtue and cohesion. Leftism is the end state of a revolutionary movement that is itself incohesive, as all metastatic cancers look alike. It is where all holiness spirals go to die. Greek Christian Egypt fell long before the cancer looked noticeably leftist.

                A successful economy requires secure property rights in value and things over distance. Successful reproduction requires secure property rights in women.

                Stage one of recovery from a dark age is that an elite sustains and respects male property rights in women and local property rights. And as they grow, their growth is inhibited by the failure of long distance logistics. At some point some general realizes it is a good idea to shut down piracy and banditry so that merchants can ship goods to his army far away, even if those merchants do not have good ingroup connections, and we get anonymous and general protection of property rights and trade and large scale empire.

                And at some point the elite stops protecting male property rights even in their own women, indicating elite incohesion. And, if you have elite incohesion, then it starts to be a good idea to organize synthetic tribes to grab power. Which synthetic tribes, at first gradually, and then faster and faster, start to look like leftism.

                The problem is not people organizing to grab power. If you don’t want cockroaches, don’t have dirty plates and edible garbage lying around when you put out the lights.

                That leftism is the best way of conducting a struggle for power is not the problem, any more than that cockroaches breed really fast is the problem. The problem is the struggle for power.

                • The Original OC says:

                  “And at some point the elite stops protecting male property rights even in their own women”

                  In the Anglo case, sexual morality seems to have broken down in the elite first. In the 1970s Anglo proles were shocked and outraged by the sexual morality their rulers had already tasted in the 1830s and considered normal by the 1910s.

  27. isaac says:

    My remote job announced that all business related travel will require vaccination. They made it apparent that their enforcement techniques will not be all that comprehensive, so I believe it would be easy to represent oneself as vaccinated even if they aren’t.
    My dilemma is, is it better to lie to keep my head down and blend in, or is it better to stand up for what’s right, at risk to my reputation and possibly my job? The vast majority of my colleagues are leftists that would start seeing me as a kook if I had to turn down any upcoming meetings to comply with the policy, but on the other hand, lying and going along with everything seems like I am at least being somewhat complicit in evil.
    Does anyone else have thoughts on this, or do I just have too much aversion to lying?

    • Pooch says:

      Lie or find a new job. Individual resistance is going to go nowhere without elite backing. The goal now is to survive the holiness spiral until a Caesar or a Stalin stops it.

  28. Cloudswrest says:

    Not the Bee on all the cognitive dissonant “not noticing” that the general public, but not the deplorables, does.

  29. Cloudswrest says:

    Sailer has a review of an hilarious research paper about radiology AIs recognizing race even where humans cannot, and this is apparently causing the woke authors fits! The paper authors are practicing pure priestly “scientism”, to use Vox Day’s terminology.

  30. Hannah Steller says:

    I still believe that there is a “real” vaccine, one that actually works, and was developed in tandem with the bioweapon virus itself. Elite members of the CCP (including Bill Gates and Nancy Pelosi) have received this “real” vaccine.

    The poisons being pushed to the rest of us are intended to act as a genocide of white people. Once that’s finished, they can take over for good.

    • jim says:

      Our elite is that evil, but they are not that coordinated nor that cooperative with each other.

      The vaccine is failing for exactly the same reason as the Space Shuttle failed. Deurgy.

      • Anon says:


        • jim says:

          As I said in the original post:

          Deurgy is an effort to steal magic from God, as for example the Kabalists making magic formulae out of mangled scripture, and the wiccans celebrating mass with an upside down cross and goat blood. I describe the RNA vaccine and the wings on the space shuttle as deurgy, because they are attempting to magically appropriate the power of science. The Kabalist and the Wiccan is attempting unholy appropriation of the power that is in holy things, and the vaccers are attempting unscientific appropriation of the power that is in scientific things.

          • Nils says:

            Is the problem with the space shuttle just the irrelevance of putting wings on a flying brick? Or attempting reentry as a plane instead of a rocket? What’s wrong with the wings?

            • jim says:

              What was wrong with the wings was that they were an irrelevant response to declining technological capability. Development of rocket engines had peaked, and they were finding them more and more difficult to build, so were increasingly relying on solid fuel rockets that were bigger versions of rockets that were familiar to General Andrew Jackson. But that very old technology was deteriorating. So they put wings on top of a rocket whose biggest part was an increasingly unreliable and dangerous old fashioned solid fuel booster. “See, space plane. Cool!”

              Solid fuel rockets have never been useful for space applications. If someone is using them, they are flailing technologically.

              Wings become less and less useful the faster you go hypersonic. Hypersonic missiles are the limit. For re-entry vehicles, silly.

              Putting a star on top of an otherwise wholly pagan Christmas tree makes it wholly Christian. Putting wings on top of a low tech rocket does not make it high tech.

              • Upravda says:

                First idea of a space shuttle was two airplanes, one conventional which would carry the other, “the spaceplane”, to 25 km attitude. Then, spaceplane would separate and reach the orbit using it’s own rocket engines. Something like this:

                Instead of that, much more inferior Space Shuttle as we know it was developed (and soviet Buran).

                However, “spaceplane” (“raketoplan” in many Slavic languages) as originally envisioned does have wings, and I can not see any deurgy int that. The original concept then evolved into single stage to orbit (SSO) concept such as British HOTOL/ Skylon:
                …which also has wings.

                So, are those wings necessarry? I would think yes, both for SSO and space shuttle originally envisioned as two-stage vehicle. Why would it be silly for re-entry vehicles?

                • jim says:

                  A booster or first stage with wings makes sense, for the purpose of flying back to the launch site. But wings on an orbital vehicle are silly. They are just there to symbolize “this is high tech”, as the star on Christmas tree symbolizes “this otherwise entirely pagan Christmas tree is now rededicated unto God”. At re-entry velocities, wings are just not wings.

                  To be aerodynamically useful at very high velocities, wings need to be thin and sharp. At reentry velocities, thin sharp things burn up mighty fast, which is why Elon Musk’s starship is designed to re-enter belly first.

                  The spaceshuttle’s wings were designed to let it land like an plane. But once you have slowed down a mere three times the speed of sound, the rest is easy. In ascent, space and re-entry, those wings were just a massive hindrance, just a heavy, fragile, and dangerous decoration. They only performed any function once the space shuttle had slowed down to aircraft velocities. But to land like a plane, rather than rocket, was just a style thing, serving no useful function. The wings served the function of allowing the space shuttle to land like a plane, but there was no point, no useful function to landing like a plane. And if they had put wings on the booster to allow it to fly back to the launch site, it would still be stupid to land it like plane, because wings that would allow the booster to land like a plane would not be wings that could be be useful for hypervelocity change of direction and flying back to the launch site, which would require much smaller and sharper wings. Wings useful for landing would not be useful for reversing direction at hypervelocity.

                  The basic design of the shuttle was: “We are going to put wings on it, and then we will figure out something for the wings to do.”

                  And in the end, the only thing the wings could do was allow it to land like a plane. Pointless.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  The easiest way for a rocket to land is under the power of it’s own exhaust.

                  Aerodynamic surfaces are deadweight at best in space, and an active hindrance in reentry. And this is before even getting into the systemic compromises incurred in design as a whole by trying to give it aerodynamism.

                  Using a vehicle with aerodynamic lift as a booster stage to take a spacecraft up to the edge of the atmosphere is a fine idea (dirigibles can also be used for this); trying to make a vehicle that is both a spacecraft and an aircraft at the same time though, is just bad design.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Notice how the wings on the shuttle serve no purpose in it’s boost phase; they just get in the way, adding drag and weight to the equation.

                • Upravda says:

                  (I’m not offered Reply option neither for Jim nor Pseudo-Chrysostom. Is that OK?)

                  So, in other words, benefit of winged aerodynamic lift for landing (Shuttle was actually a glider, not an aircraft) are *completely* squandered by towing all that winged dead weight around. Now, when you say that, it’s obvious.

                  It’s curious how the rot set in so early, when we all still thought very highly of NASA, especially after legendary journey of Voyager 2. As kids, me and friends were fascinated with Space Shuttle. With Sojuz also, but who would’ve thought that Sojuz will outlive The Spaceplane?!?

                  Nowadays, my boys build both Shuttle and Sojuz with Lego. I’ll have to redirect their Shuttle-building efforts into something more SpaceX Starship-alike. 🙂

                • jim says:

                  WordPress UI problem.

                  Instead of tinkering around with the editor and producing ever worse and ever more unusable editors, they should fix threading.

                  But come to think of it, any part of wordpress that they touch turns to shit, so maybe they should stay away from threading.

          • Who cares says:

            “Cargo cult” would probably suffice instead of deurgy since none of these ones are familiar with Latin roots or have read Shakespeare. They are probably familiar with New Atheist crap


            People inherently unsuited to aviation build a wooden tower, wooden plane, wooden binocs and wait around like lifeboat refugees off the Titanic for the great John From to return. He doesn’t

            Funniest riff I’ve seen on this is stolen from some twitter anon who is surely banned now: going into a CVS full of squat Guatamalans while Fleetwood Mac plays gently over the store speakers is like swimming through the ruins of Atlantis

            • jim says:

              Cargo cult refers to failure to practice the scientific method – science without science, a related and similar phenomenon. Feynman did not call the space shuttle cargo cult science, rather he said “Nature cannot be fooled” – which the Dark Enlightenment would now describe as using priestly methods to resolve empirical questions.

              • Who cares redux says:

                I don’t see an important distinction: it’s all “stealing magic from God”; emulating the form without the content. Much in the same way that inherently stupid people putting wings on a space shuttle is a boondoggle project – people specifically selected for stupidity play-acting at getting things done, standing on the shoulders of giants – so with the Covid fiasco: being told how to handle a pandemic by people mostly incapable of calculus. If I accidentally sneezed and Covicided all of San Francisco I would sleep like a baby. Who cares? None of my grandparents died, no one I cared about died You’d have to pay me to give a shit, and as far as I can tell I was never consulted. Not my problem any more than wings on the space shuttle are my immediate problem

                In any case Feynman was a liar. Even if he once said something true (“Nature can’t be fooled”), he was apparently not above fooling the endless horde of people willing to believe this:


                I wonder how many people remember “Nature can’t be fooled” as opposed to everything else he’s said that’s been used as a blunt instrument in a Reddit atheist script. Don’t you know Science can only be invoked when looking down on low hanging fruit like creationists?

                • jim says:

                  What has he said that has been used as a blunt instrument in a Reddit atheist script – I would have thought that contrary to his claim that there are no miracle people, his stuff was a bit above their grade level.

                • alf says:

                  Eh if that’s the worst Feynman said..

                  I too see not such a big distinction between deurgy and cargo cult science. I guess the latter is dumb, the former is evil.

                • Who cares redux says:

                  What has he said that has been used as a blunt instrument in a Reddit atheist script – I would have thought that contrary to his claim that there are no miracle people, his stuff was a bit above their grade level.

                  His Caltech commencement speech about cargo cults has been used to endlessly (and fairly deservedly) beat the rotten stinking corpse of young earth creationism, assorted “Intelligent Design” weirdos, and by extension all white Christians, because to the college meme atheists surely Feynman wasn’t talking about dark skinned savages being incapable of science and engineering, he was talking about white “Intelligent Design” nuts! Even though college meme atheists are almost as extinct and irrelevant as creationists now, leftists left behind, it’s the bones of the old lies and arguments that matter

                  “No miracle people” was the big one I remembered from Feynman. When I just looked up other stuff it turns out I remembered wrong and misattributed stuff said by Sagan to Feynman. But “No miracle people” is still pretty bad

                  Eh if that’s the worst Feynman said..

                  Oh spare me. People are not interchangeable cogs, and part of the reason the blank slate meme won’t die is because of high profile intellectuals like Feynman saying stuff like “anyone interested in science can be a scientist”. Why repeat the lie

                • jim says:

                  > because to the college meme atheists surely Feynman wasn’t talking about dark skinned savages being incapable of science and engineering, he was talking about white “Intelligent Design” nuts!

                  Feynman was talking about white college professors – but he certainly was not talking about young earth creationists. He was talking about his colleagues, he was talking about near, and what he described does not in the slightest resemble what the Intelligent Design crowd was doing.

                  If the college meme atheists thought he was talking about intelligent design, then as dumb as I expected.

                  The problem with Intelligent Design “science” is not the ills characteristic of cargo cult science, but the ills characteristic of shills. Have a script, and stick to it.

                  Thus for example, the Intelligent Design debater argues that a species size change, for example the giraffs neck, requires thousands of coordinated beneficial mutations, and then proceeds to present an entirely valid scientific proof that that is not going to fly – skipping lightly over the absurd original claim that thousands of coordinated beneficial mutations are needed.

                  The reddit atheist meme debater says “har har cargo cult science”, because he cannot understand the entirely valid proof, nor notice the implausibility of the original assumption, because the script was written by, and for, people a lot smarter than himself.

                  Intelligent Design is a high IQ version of troofism. The troofer assumes that Trade Tower Building seven fell down on its own footprint, that there was no wreckage from the plane that hit the Pentagon, that there was no Wiley Coyote style commercial airliner sized and shaped hole in the Pentagon, etc, and then correctly deduces that …

                  And if you point out that none of his assumptions are true, moves right along to twenty more arguments that presuppose twenty more ridiculous things, without acknowledging any fault in his previous assumptions.

                  The tell that reveals shilling, rather than one of the shills many dupes, is that the shill never argues for, or debates absurd claims – he present arguments that presuppose universal consensus on ridiculous things. He stubbornly argues as if his premise was accepted by his interlocutors, and only the glaringly obviously implications of that premise are disputed. Reddit atheists are not the target audience for Intelligent Design, so can neither notice that the absurd premises are far from universally accepted, nor that the conclusions validly follow from these absurd premises.

                  Intelligent design is completely different from Cargo Cult Science – because it is trying to create false consensus, insinuating shared premises that are not in fact shared.

                • alf says:

                  Yeah no you make a good point. It’s one thing to acquiesce to the nurture uber alles zeitgeist with a wink, it’s another to with certainty endorse it. Dumb move by Feynman.

                • suones says:

                  > Feynman
                  > Dumb move

                  No. A very smart move from a very smart Leftist (Jew?).

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  I don’t think he was lying, you’re misinterpreting a phrase out of context (since we don’t know exactly the perspective and direction of the line of questioning from the interviewer from the video), ascribing him a belief in egalitarianism when he’s simply describing his own experience.

                  “…miracle ability… that comes without practice and reading and learning and study”

                  Where’s the lie? If you don’t train and take actions towards it you will not achieve the skill, there is no such thing as a miracle person that is somehow born with the “magic” of science. As far as a I know, most known high IQ people in history do come from ordinary backgrounds or low nobility at best. He is consistent with his staunch defense of telling the truth according to empirical observation.

                  What would you have him say? “Do not even bother trying to understand anything retard, you are a mongoloid incapable of addressing such high matters, better be a zombie and never think for yourself always obey your superiors”? I don’t believe that the original gentlemen of the Royal Society would have discouraged people like that either, Isaac Newton was born in a hamlet. That dismissive and arrogant line is precisely what the acolytes and cultists from the Cathedral are telling people today with their bullshit: do not watch, do not doubt, do not observe by yourself, do not engage in critical thinking. You can’t just make a blanket public statement that discourages people to not even try, if they don’t try, how do you even know?

                  Read what the man had to say about game and women, he had a very “bad” habit of presenting facts as he observed them regardless of personal preference:

                  Feynman has been criticized for a chapter in the book entitled “You Just Ask Them”, where he describes how he learned to seduce women at a bar he went to in the summer of 1946. A mentor taught him to ask a woman if she would sleep with him before buying her anything. He describes seeing women at the bar as “bitches” in his thoughts, and tells a story of how he told a woman named Ann that she was “worse than a whore” after Ann persuaded him to buy her sandwiches by telling him he could eat them at her place, but then, after he bought them, saying they actually couldn’t eat together because another man was coming over. Later on that same evening, Ann returned to the bar to take Feynman to her place. Feynman states at the end of the chapter that this behaviour wasn’t typical of him: “So it worked even with an ordinary girl! But no matter how effective the lesson was, I never really used it after that. I didn’t enjoy doing it that way. But it was interesting to know that things worked much differently from how I was brought up.”

                  So what if Reddit neckbeards use his words for their own designs? The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.

                  Cargo Cult Science is not just about substance, but also about the integrity required in the process of acquiring such substance. Because some appearance of substance can exist but still be manipulated and twisted to present what you want instead of presenting what is actually observable. Feynman was in fact not talking about dark skinned savages being incapable of science and engineering, he was talking about the progs. One of his actual examples is psychology and their fake studies where they never reproduce the conditions or ascertain the veracity of the studies in which their studies are based in the first place, they don’t reproduce them. They don’t even bother accounting for all the possible factors, they just go on making whatever arbitrary assumptions are comfortable or conducive to acquiring grant money and then he gives the example of rat running experiments and Mr.Young. In science you do not present a theory and then furiously engage in proving it, you observe all possible factors that would account for why are you right or why are you wrong.

                  As we can see in the opening post, even though it’s a blog, which is opinion, and it’s highly charged with conjecture by its very own nature, jim still tries to be a lot more scientific than any of these people ever are, telling you what he’d expect but doesn’t see.

                  Sadly, today science outside of specific fields and names it literally doesn’t exist and it’s instead a cult, in fact there is no science behind anything that has to do with Covid19 to any degree and even if you tried you couldn’t engage on it because you can never account for regular factors with similar results in any statistics you get. To this day there hasn’t been a single person that has accurately and reliably engaged and explained what has been done or hasn’t been done and how that made a difference in infections and deaths. Hell, the accounting of infections and deaths itself is manipulated and unreliable. When real science existed, a real “dangerous” pandemic like the Hong Kong flu in France 1968 was skimmed over none the wiser.

                • Anon says:

                  I’m well aware of what Feynman said about game. Notice I didn’t take issue with that but with “there are no miracle people”. It’s a lie. Feynman was a “miracle people”

                  He was smart enough to know how that would be interpreted, regardless of what the lead up question from the journalist was. A great example of why you should never speak to journalists or cops. Feynman came from a relatively unremarkable background; his father was a salesman and his mother was a “homemaker” (fancy way of saying wife), and I’m sure the intention of his statement was to say that even proles who came from a humble Queens background like himself could achieve in science (true)

                  Problem is, that’s not how “There are no miracle people” has been interpreted, and the young men of vaguely European descent like Feynman have since been shut out doing anything resembling science. Turns out that when you have a clown credentialing system (university) and aren’t simply allowed by law to give your prospective employees IQ tests, the Feynmans of the world from unremarkable backgrounds go unused, and the academic “miracle people” with mysteriously dark skin start agitating for set theory to be removed from the curriculum because they’re too dumb to understand it

              • f6187 says:

                On the subject of evolution, I do think some “randomness skeptics” are onto something when they say that random mutations tend to be harmful and not add any useful information.

                First, I think sexual selection is far more important in natural selection, and there is nothing random about it. That in itself is a form of “intelligent design.”

                Second, the mathematical types who say “there’s only a 1 in 10^500 chance some complex thing could happen as the outcome of a series of random mutations over a mere 4 billion years” make a good point. That’s why I don’t think the process IS random with a normal distribution of outcomes. I think the process is random, but with outcomes that are *skewed* in favor of greater complexity.

                Here the concept of “optionality” espoused by Taleb comes to mind, and also the related concept of the Kelly Criterion. The idea is that if you take options in life with limited downside and unlimited upside, you can be wrong most of the time and still come out ahead.

                The “10^500” argument, if true, seems to imply that in the very fabric of physical reality, there exists a bias which skews toward greater complexity with far greater probability than predicted by normal distributions. The random mutations are indeed often wrong, but with limited downside to the organism, and when they are right, they are right in a big way — leading ultimately to the development of cellular metabolism, functioning retinas, and sophisticated brains, as those wins accrue over time. A sort of “ratchet effect” if you will.

                If true, seems discoverable, and would need no explanation as to “why” it is that way, other than nothing would cohere otherwise.

                • jim says:

                  > Second, the mathematical types who say “there’s only a 1 in 10^500 chance some complex thing could happen as the outcome of a series of random mutations over a mere 4 billion years” make a good point

                  No they don’t.

                  The complex things we observe are a series of tiny elaborations on simpler things, thus the Panda’s thumb, the optic chiasma, and the blind spot. They don’t look as if designed de novo, they look like the end result of a long series of tiny elaborations. The ribosome evolved in RNA world, and has not changed that much since.

                • f6187 says:

                  “The complex things we observe are a series of tiny elaborations on simpler things …”

                  I made that exact point. I also said nothing about “de novo” anything.

                  I simply think that “random mutations” as normally understood tend to be either harmful or at best useless, and only achieve anything because there exists a bias skewed in favor of complex ordered outcomes — a flip side to the 2nd Law.

                  The much vaunted phenomenon of resistant strains of bacteria is analogous to randomly changing the lock on a door — of course the key no longer fits. No new information there. However, it is a fact that brains exist, ergo a bias toward order which competes with the tendency toward disorder.

                • pyrrhus says:

                  Well, the problem with going from the short-necked giraffe to the long-necked version in ten million years is two-fold…First, there are no intermediate fossils to demonstrate that an evolutionary event took place…Darwin recognized this as a general problem with his theory, but guessed that such fossils would turn up later on…they didn’t….Second, because many of the thousands of mutations necessary would be useless or even lethal on their own, it requires a slow process of mutations becoming fixed in the population before other mutations can take place…And there is not remotely enough time for this to have taken place…

                • jim says:


                  > Darwin recognized this as a general problem with his theory, but guessed that such fossils would turn up later on…they didn’t

                  They did.

                  We have a immense pile of intermediate fossils showing radical changes of form for some creatures. For example have every transition form for the horse evolving from a small forest omnivore. It is just that fossil preservation is kind of spotty. It is a lot less spotty than it was in Darwin’s time. And fossil preservation for the horse sequence and the many foraminifera sequences is not in the slightest spotty. Every intermediate form is present in minute gradations.

                  > Second, because many of the thousands of mutations necessary would be useless or even lethal on their own, it requires a slow process of mutations becoming fixed in the population before other mutations can take place

                  The claim that thousands of coordinated mutations are necessary to go from a short necked giraffe to a long necked giraffe is obviously as insane, ridiculous, outrageous, and absurd on its face as the claim that there was not aircraft wreckage around the pentagon, or that World Trade Building Seven fell straight on its own foundation. It is just flat in our faces crazy.

                  This is the difference that four mutations and many changes in gene frequency makes:

                  Each mutation was independently and separately beneficial for a cultivated plant.

                  See earlier discussion:



                • f6187 says:

                  “Well, the problem with going from the short-necked giraffe to the long-necked version in ten million years is two-fold…First, there are no intermediate fossils to demonstrate that an evolutionary event took place…Darwin recognized this as a general problem with his theory, but guessed that such fossils would turn up later on…they didn’t…”

                  The lack of transitional forms in the fossil records is a problem. There should be an abundance of them. The Cambrian explosion is also interesting, with its sudden jump in the number of species, followed by a tapering off due to ordinary extinctions. There I think a few “option positions” suddenly paid off in a big way.

                  Also, the much-vaunted “finch beaks” story bears closer scrutiny. In 1967, a hundred or so finches of the same species were brought from a remote Pacific island to a small atoll called Southeast Island, southeast of Midway, which belongs to a small group of four islands within about 10 miles of each other. “Twenty years later, the birds had dispersed across all the islands and were found to have given rise to populations having distinct differences, particularly with regard to the shapes and sizes of their beaks.” [1]

                  Clearly the birds did not evolve different beaks over a period of only twenty years. Instead, it appears that the birds had *already* evolved a much higher level feature than mere beak size itself: namely, they had evolved the *genetic potential* to express different beak sizes within a few generations in response to environmental factors.

                  “The ironic aspect of this example, of course, is that observations of precisely this type of variety in beak forms among finches of the Galapagos Islands led Darwin to the notion that he was witnessing the beginnings of new species.” [2]

                  [1,2] cited via James P. Hogan in “Kicking the Sacred Cow”

                • jim says:

                  > The lack of transitional forms in the fossil records is a problem.


                  We have plenty of transition forms for some creatures – the ones that have good fossil preservation

                  And human evolution now has transition forms all the way back – every time someone finds a new skeleton, he wants to name it a new species, but it does not look like a new species.

                  Human evolution is still spotty compared to the horse sequence, but it is sufficiently filled in that there is not much room left to plausibly name a new skeleton a new species. Getting crowded enough that the splitters are getting well founded flack from the lumpers.

                • Anon says:

                  The lack of transitional forms in the fossil records is a problem.

                  No it isn’t. This is all old boring creationist stuff, the same stuff every time. Every “form” is a “transitional form”. _You_ are a “transitional form”

                  And there is not remotely enough time for this to have taken place…

                  Yes there was

                  Most of this stuff starts from the reticence of some Christians to admit that humans are the top killer apes, starts with the motive to try to run apologetics for a worldview that doesn’t require humans to be top killer apes, because this is somehow morally or spiritually intolerable to them and would allegedly mean humans aren’t special. Well, they’re wrong

                  To fix this alleged tension they start with the assumption of a young earth and the assumption that “forms” are created in their current “form”, and retrofit their arguments accordingly using the language of evolutionary biology

                • f6187 says:

                  f6187 wrote: “The lack of transitional forms in the fossil records is a problem.”

                  Anon wrote: “No it isn’t ….”

                  I retract my non-essential comment about transitional forms … the only comment that people are nutsing on here.

                  Pyrrhus wrote: “And there is not remotely enough time for this to have taken place…”

                  Anon wrote: “Yes there was”

                  I agree. There was enough time for this to have taken place. It took place. I even said from the very beginning that it was the result of random processes. However, randomness as often understood as a “random walk” does not do it justice. It is randomness with *leverage*.

                  Random tinkering with already existing genetic structures can lead to disaster, mild dysfunction, no significant effect at all, or enormous advances. I just think it tends to be skewed toward enormous advances, hence the enormous advances we see.

                  As Jim illustrated, it’s only a few mutations between different forms of corn. Of course, that is an example of mutation under the guidance of the human mind, but the principle still stands.

                • jim says:

                  As another commenter said we are all transitional forms, and as I said, no transitional forms – the term “transitional form” presupposes that which is in dispute, that species inherently have a set of fixed forms. “Transitional form” is an anticoncept.

                  There are no transitional forms, and we are all transitional forms.

                  The horse sequence is complete, all the way back to the small forest dwelling omnivore. Which of those forms is “transitional”?

                  The human sequence is very far from complete but the gaps are getting small enough that when someone wants to define yet another new species in one of the gaps, it is getting rather crowded. The gap between Lucy and a chimp, and Lucy and my wife, is not all that large if someone wants to claim that Tasmanian aboriginals are the same species as us.

                • f6187 says:

                  f6187 wrote: “Random tinkering with already existing genetic structures can lead to disaster, mild dysfunction, no significant effect at all, or enormous advances. I just think it tends to be skewed toward enormous advances, hence the enormous advances we see.”

                  I further think that once a genetic structure reaches a viable level of complexity, it then *compounds* its viability by evolving the redundancy needed to make it resilient against mutations which could otherwise cause the disaster or mild dysfunction. The structure is then even more likely capitalize on random events, leading to even more probable advances. This is anti-fragility.

                • Anon says:

                  Random tinkering with already existing genetic structures can lead to disaster, mild dysfunction, no significant effect at all, or enormous advances. I just think it tends to be skewed toward enormous advances, hence the enormous advances we see.

                  No. The “disasters” as you call them wouldn’t make it to fixation in a population. Purifying selection

                  I further think that once a genetic structure reaches a viable level of complexity, it then *compounds* its viability by evolving the redundancy needed to make it resilient against mutations which could otherwise cause the disaster or mild dysfunction. The structure is then even more likely capitalize on random events, leading to even more probable advances. This is anti-fragility.


                  That’s not how it works. Stop reading Taleb and try a population genetics textbook

                • f6187 says:

                  Anon wrote: “No. The “disasters” as you call them wouldn’t make it to fixation in a population. Purifying selection”

                  Correct. The “disasters” already happened, many times over eons, and never became fixed in a population because they are all dead. Cystic fibrosis is a recessive gene, carried by 1 in 5 but only manifested by 2 in a thousand. Resilience established.

                  f6187 wrote: “I further think that once a genetic structure reaches a viable level of complexity, it then *compounds* its viability by evolving the redundancy needed to make it resilient against mutations which could otherwise cause the disaster or mild dysfunction.”

                  Anon wrote: “That’s not how it works. Stop reading Taleb and try a population genetics textbook”

                  I am probably heavily biased by my view of evolution as the evolution of fault-tolerant software. For example, I view the human immune system as an example of a structure that has radically compounded its resilience over time, to the point where a stray microbe or even a gamma-ray induced mutation is unlikely to cause any problems. Once a working stable fault-tolerant code base is established, it’s very difficult to budge it from its set point.

                  At this point in human evolution I seriously wonder how important are the effects of random mutation, when compared to the much larger effects of sexual selection.

                • The Original OC says:


                  (This idea is actually from the 18th/19th centuries outside the English-speaking world)

                • jim says:

                  Punctuated equilibrium is nonsense on stilts and is massively contradicted by the fossil record, which shows continuous flux of forms and instability wherever we have a sufficiently detailed fossil record. (Which is rare.)

                  Form A evolves into form B forcing form C to evolve into form D in self defense, which results in form E evolving into form F to counter attack form D, whereupon form B …

                  The motivation for the theory of Punctuated Equilibrium, given officially and explicitly by Gould, is to “prove” that all men are created evolved equal. It is an overtly, officially, and explicitly politically motivated rationale for Cathedral doctrine.

                • The Original OC says:

                  Yes, that’s true about Gould, but it’s also a repackaging of 19th century racial science whereby bloodline purity is necessary for population stability; mongrels are not just interpolations of numerical traits like height and IQ but often fundamentally unhealthy. Something well known to dog and horse breeders.

                  Gould’s BS is to suggest that humans evolved in a single environment, which they did not (though they have lived in a single environment for maybe 40 years now).

    • The Cominator says:

      If there is a real vaccine it will be for a genuinely deadly virus yet to be unleashed.

  31. I am glad that we have the option of traditional vaccine Covaxin in India. If there is too much holiness spiraling* on the vaccine here, it would be the safest option to comply. Though even covishield which is the Indian manufacturing of the AstraZeneca vaccine hasn’t proved to be unsafe.

    * the holiness spiraling is mainly by the media. The old socialist inefficiency has ensured that most states in India are short on vaxxes. Door to door vaccination drives will be mostly impossible to carry out effectively.

    • Varna says:

      Classical soviet joke:
      A Soviet guy and a Yank die and reach together St. Peter. He reads their files and says “both of you are going to hell, but since you weren’t completely bad, you’ve both got a choice—either Soviet hell or American hell. In Soviet hell you have to eat two buckets of shit daily, and in American hell—one bucket of shit.”
      The American looks at the Soviet, “Come on over to the American hell, buddy. Just one bucket.”
      The Soviet guy thinks, shrugs, and says “Nah, I’ll go with what I know. Soviet hell for me.”
      So a week passes and they meet up.
      “Our hell ain’t too bad,” says the American. “Just don’t whine and do what you gotta do. Me, I polish off the bucket of shit right away, and after that I’ve got the whole day free. You?”
      The Soviet guy says “Well, you know how it is. Socialism. One day there’s a shortage of buckets, the next day not enough shit to go round…”

      • Shrugger says:

        It’s the wings with the 30,000 differently-sized tiles and carbon carbon leading edges that failed spectacularly on the Columbia, and probably should have failed more often.

        • jim says:

          The tiles failed because designed by priests attempting magic rather than by engineers attempting re-entry. The purpose of the tiles was to say “Hey look at the wings. Pay no attention to the solid fuel booster”

    • suones says:

      Covaxin is under attack by WHO.

      But my surprise was the relative safety of Covishield/AZ formulation, which 1) is remarkably effective, and 2) has very little adverse effects as compared to the original AZ vaccine. Must be something in the way AZ manufactures the vaccine rather than some intrinsic fault.

    • Kgaard says:

      Thanks for the Covaxin info Dharmic. I have been digging into it. If in fact the doom scenario is mRNA technology itself, then presumably if they make you get vaccinated and you take a non-mRNA vax, you should be able to side-step infertility and chronic fatigue syndrome that way.

      Looking down the road, if this is in fact a correct way to think about it, one would want to target living in a country that accepts a non-mRNA vax in order to live normal life under the coming your-papers-please global totalitarian paradigm.

  32. Alfred says:

    Just watched a really interesting Timcast video. Tim had on a women who lived through the end of the Chinese Cultural Revolution as a child, came to the US in 88, and is pushing back against Marxism today. Very good speaker.

    The most interesting thing I took from it was watching her lose her religion when Mao died, who she described as a god, adopting Cathedral American Freedom Religion she picked up in a Chinese university(the cathedral infiltrated China’s universities after Marxism died) and then coming to America when she realized her faith wasn’t going to take over China. She still holds the faith she picked up in 1988 and there’s real power in that faith for her. She powerfully attacked the Marxists shitstains ruining America in a way most Americans don’t feel comfortable doing.

    Tim basically shut up for most of the interview which made it pretty viewable.

    There’s probably no future where her religion wins(Trump was the last chance for that), but damn it’s amazing watching someone who feels fully backed by that religion strike at her foes.

  33. Mike says:

    Been reading through this guy’s book reviews lately. While purple-pilled at points, he’s about on par with what you see from the Claremont Institute these days, so he’s about the best you can expect from a non-anon. However, a sort of offhand remark by him in this piece got me especially interested:

    “In the West, there has never been any equivalent of the “eastern” approach, typified by purdah, the separation and seclusion of women (driven by defective religious or cultural imperatives that, just as Friedan did, mar the natural order of a society). Muslims during the Crusades were famously scandalized by how the men of the Franks allowed their women not only to appear in public, but to scold them and order them about.”

    • jim says:

      “The Feminine Mystique” is not a credible source. Dig up the original writer who wrote during the crusades that “The feminine mystique” claims to paraphrase.

      Chances are that this is totally made up out of thin air, at best a paraphrase of a paraphrase of a paraphrase of a very recent translation of a paraphrase of a paraphrase of an older translation of what someone writing the time of the crusaders wrote.

      Crusaders wrote in latin, those of them that wrote at all, which was not many. Find a direct translation from the latin into english. Go with the oldest translation you can find – I find that newer translations of the same author tend to radically improve the political correctness of that author over older translations. History is being radically rewritten with startling and ever increasing speed. The Bible is being rewritten at ever increasing speed.

      • The Cominator says:

        Its certainly not a reliable source but to the extent purdah existed in western europe it was only among women of wealthier families…

        • Mike says:

          Oh sorry, I should have said that I don’t think the quote is from the Feminine Mystique, I’m pretty sure he was just quoting it extemporaneously based off of history he’s read in the past. The question at hand is whether that is progressive history or has some basis in reality, not whether it is from Betty (it is not).

          • The Cominator says:

            The answer is yes, Medieval Germanics did not practice purdah and to the extent there was anything close to it ever in Western Europe it was for very highborn girls. Even with very highborn girls it wasn’t that they were never seen or saw men till their wedding day, its that they were rigidly chaperoned when doing so.

            I doubt that knightly and above class men tolerated all that much scolding and bitching from their wives though in the crusader era, there was no law against smacking your wife around if she was a bitch.

            • neofugue says:

              > Medieval Germanics did not practice purdah

              While there is always a population of untouchables, I doubt it is indicative of Germans at large simply given the high number of engineers and male-brained men in German society. If Germans did not practice purdah then neither would the birth rate until 1910 have been >5 children per woman nor would there be the stereotype of the German nerd making rockets and fancy cars (Hans Asperger). My mother’s line descends from Germans from Alsace and Switzerland, and most of the women married at around 17-19 years of age.

              Here is a video of a Portuguese missionary in Sengoku Japan comparing women in Japan to women in Europe (this is before the Tokugawa restored patriarchy through the Ie system): Perhaps relations between men and women were different between Portugal and Germany, but considering similarities in fertility this is most likely not the case.

              • The Cominator says:

                The Spanish and Portugeese had something more like Purdah because of contacts and periods of rule by Muslims.

                The Germans did not have it and never had it, they had patriarchy but no purdah.

      • Oog en Hand says:

        So, read the Vulgate in Latin.

        • jim says:

          King James is fine. They were faithful to the original.

          What happened with New Testament and the Septuagint (Old Testament) is that they were written in Greek, and the language of orthodox Christianity was Greek. From time to time Church and state would notice that were reading copies of copies of copies, and would send for copies from all over the world, and do a merge to correct the copyist errors. So, knowing this historical process, we can be confident that the original Greek is the original Greek.

          What the moderns did is search the world for very old manuscripts that had never undergone this process. Which they found in areas with over a thousand of years of Christians being a small isolated persecuted minority. And, of course, they found no end of deviations, some of them due to copyist errors, many of them due to Muslim overlords wiping their asses with testaments. Which gave them license pick and choose and to make up crap. More seriously, they are doing a loose, liberal, translation, and the translators are consistently heretics, who are not exactly lying about what they translate, but are translating it in the sense that they understand it, which is frequently a quite unreasonable and strained sense. They translate as if the writers were modern progressive Greek academics.

          That the Alexandrine manuscripts are frequently crap due to Muslim curation and copyist errors is a big problem, and a bigger problem is that basing the bible on crap manuscripts that disagree with each other gives them license to pick and choose, but the biggest problem of all is that the translators are not Christians, and are translating loosely from within the modern frame, rather than the Christian frame.

          • Karl says:

            Sure, King James is fine, but do we understand the English of King James the same way people at that time understood it?

            • jim says:

              we had that problem almost immediately, with the enlightened reading (with a post Christian individualist frame) a first century document written from a first century collectivist Christian frame, translated by seventeenth century translators with a seventeenth century collectivist Christian frame.

              See for example my discussion of “fornication” and “whoredom”.

              The problem of a modern twenty first century reader misunderstanding a seventeenth century document written in a seventeenth century frame is far less serious than the problem of academic translators. The modern reader has a Christian frame. The modern translators of the modern editions have a hostile post Christian frame.

              If they did not have a hostile post Christian frame, they would not have chosen manuscripts whose history is likely to have rendered them full of copyist and poor curation errors – they were looking for justification to do a rewrite and to translate loosely. King James’ translators were not looking for trouble and excuses. The modern translators scoured the world looking for trouble, revealing a hostile frame. They also have a Jewish frame.

              We know that the Septuagint is more reliable than the modern Hebrew texts, because Hebrew dead sea scrolls conform better to the septuagint than the modern Hebrew texts, and the deviations look like the kinds of things one would expect, not from deliberate fraud, but from copyist errors, ordinary errors in making copies of copies of copies. (The deviations in the Alexandrine manuscripts don’t look like deliberate fraud either. They look like poor curation by Muslims curating texts they are not interested in and despise.)

              So going with the “original” Hebrew rather than the Septuagint looks like Jewish arrogance, plus the desire to find troubles as justification for a loose translation. The modern translations suffer from progressivism, judaization, and translation by translators whose worldview is fundamentally alien and hostile to the original.

              The modern translators are not capable of putting themselves in the frame of the original writer, and, more seriously, they don’t want to get into the frame of the original writer.

              The fundamental problem with the modern translations is not that the moderns went looking for source documents whose history makes them unlikely to be reliable. The differences between source documents are small and unimportant, they agree with each other as well as you could reasonably expect, given their history. The fundamental problem is that seventeenth century translators viewed the original writers with immense respect, and largely shared the worldview and frame of the original authors. The modern translators view their sources with condescension, contempt, derision, and hostility.

              If we want to revive lost bronze age social technology and lost seventeenth century social technology, need to use translations by translators who had seventeenth century social technology, understood bronze age social technology, and viewed it with respect.

              • Karl says:

                Yes, King James is better than any modern translations, but some words like “fornication” and “whoredom” have changed their meaning.

                What can a modern reader do to avoid misundertandings?

                My first idea would be to consult the Vulgate in cases where I suspect a change in the meaning of important words, but that will usually not help because modern latin dictonaries are basically the same as 17th century latin dictionaries, So it would be hard to spot a change in meaning.

                I guess reading lots of 17th century texts would be the way to go. That way the modern reader has the best chance to spot words that have changed their meaning. Essentially that means learning 17th century English like a foreign language that is somewhat related to modern English, but different.

              • guest says:

                What’s your take on Leviticus 18:7? From what I’ve seen (and I am no believer or theologian or linguist) the modernist ones say “Don’t fuck your mom” and the KJ says “Don’t take your mom’s clothes off”.

                The first one strikes me as likelier to be correct and accurate.

                • jim says:

                  Both are reasonably interpreted to mean the same thing. The original language is genteel, and the KJV is being genteel, so the KJV is closer to the original language, while the moderns are being plain spoken.

                  Nothing wrong with either translation, but the trouble is that moderns are more apt to translate to what they think the original authors must have meant, while the KJV tries to hang closer to what they in fact said, resulting in language and phrasing that is often strange, and was strange back when the KJV first came out.

                  And the moderns, being heretics, are frequently wrong about what the original authors, who obviously were not heretics, must have meant. In this case, however, they obviously got it right.

                  Loose translation also has the effect of inserting twenty first century individualist frame, modern frame, into a first century collectivist document. They don’t really try to think themselves into the shoes of the original authors. This is apt to have radical consequences whenever sex or the trinity comes up.

                  It is not that they are lying, they probably said to themselves, accurately enough, that many modern readers would find third century before Christ gentility unintelligible, and they had to make it blunter. (The Septuagint was translated from Hebrew to Greek over time between the four century before Christ, and the first century of our Lord, and is our best existing guide to what the original Hebrew texts actually said, since lots of bad stuff has happened to the original Hebrew texts over the past couple of millenia. For some mysterious reason no one understands Jews keep getting expelled.)

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  For the broad sweep of that peculiar eurasian set’s history the past millenia or so, they have set under, in concentrated microcosm, those kinds of selection pressures that more broadly produce more ‘leftist’ types of men in the cycle of societies in general.

                  Wherever the wandering skype went, civilization is something that was always and already ‘ready at hand’. His apprehension of it as like a ‘standing reserve’; something which may be drawn from, but which he has no reckoning of for furnishing in the first place.

                  One may find him as a lawyer, but not a Law Man; he may be stockbroker, but not a Steward; he may be preacher, but not a Pastor.

                  He may, in a more sophisticated example of the species, view the society in which he is embedded as like a complexified mechanism, with many levers and pulleys which, if manipulated the right way, produce desirable outputs. But he does not possess a *proprietary instinct* towards this ‘mechanism’. He might view what it can do for him as good, but he does not view it *in of itself* as a good. He is not a mechanic for such a machine, for he lacks the will to do so. He is not an architect for such a machine, for he lacks the ability to do.

                  The greater capacity for ‘surplus capital’ a civilization is capable of, the more ‘insulation’ from the basal preconditions of possibility for that civilization is possible. In conditions like these, strategies for gaining status, resources, or other forms of agrandisement, that are less reliant on possession of greater virtue – such as chronic backbiting of neighbors – become more adaptive for particular beings on contingent time scales, as the consequences of such strategies become more ‘socialized’; that is, less immediately obvious, less immediately catastrophic.

    • neofugue says:

      Progs arguing their policies as traditional while decrying actual tradition is an old tactic. Commies argue that serfdom was collectivized ownership of the land, ignoring the lord’s ability to punish his serfs at will, while denouncing serfdom. The vikings were supposedly proto-feminist while raiding and kidnapping women in forced marriages. In this case, the Franks were so feminist that their numerous children had to fight abroad and engage in empire.

      Anyone taking a feminist seriously is not worthy of my time as he lacks proper discernment.

      • The Cominator says:

        Snowniggers WERE huge simps for their own women, ALWAYS have been. They may not have been so with “thrall” women but women’s rights was always kind of a thing in Scandanavia.

        • Aidan says:

          Yes and no. Reading modern feminism into the past is always incorrect, and feminists try to do it. I prefer the more accurate “female power” or “emancipation”. For example, violation of gender roles was punishable by death in viking era scandinavia, even though women had specific and sometimes quite modern rights, like unconditional divorce. At the same time, stealing another man’s wife was not really considered much of a crime- a cause for her husband to duel you to the death, but here female consent seems completely irrelevant. In the age of chivalry, a temporary and local resurgence of female power, a noblewoman was still expected to marry and breed with who her family wanted her to, even when having lovers was tacitly accepted. And female power in Rome generally took the form of women siding with their fathers over their husbands.

          Female power crops up and is often rolled back. Malory and Henry VIII ended the acceptance of chivalrous adultury. When Henry had Anne Boleyn executed, it put an end to married ladies with favored knights enjoying a supposedly chaste love.

          • The Cominator says:

            Don’t think having lovers was all that acceptable in the middle ages, women did it sometimes of course but consequences if they were caught could be dire.

            Late 18th century and onward it was tolerated to some degree AFTER they had legitimate male heirs.

          • The Cominator says:


            Not that acceptable in the middle ages… Phillip the Fair declined to go easy on the women of his own family…

  34. Calvin says:

    So, what do you think is the endgame assuming the worst case scenario (which seems to be at least somewhat likely)? A conscious effort at depopulation/sterilization? Further social control? Or just an insane act of leftist idiocy without any conscious, rational endgame?

    • Pooch says:

      1. Exclude the unvaccinated.
      2. Jail the unvaccinated.
      3. Genocide the unvaccinated.

      • The Cominator says:

        There are whole regions where virtually nobody under 50 got vaxd so they have a bit of a problem moving forward now…

        • Pooch says:

          Yes the Trump regions. Looking more and more like this is going to be the vector to liquidate the kulaks to me.

          • Alfred says:

            They’re pushing hard on it, but I’m not seeing a lot of traction. People are starting to think they’ve been sold a bill of goods on COVID. Propaganda is effective until it is not.

      • Need it for school says:

        Based on this cogent interpretation I’ve settled on my vaccine plan.

        If I can get a religious exemption from getting vaxxed for school I’ll wait and get the novavax when it’s approved. If not I’ll get the Johnson and Johnson. I think the long term risks of not getting the shot, though entirely man-made, are greater than the medical risks associated with getting the shot. I don’t think fraud to avoid getting a shot is a good idea; there are still some very smart people working for the bad guys, or they would not have been able to steal the 2020 election. While paper fraud is easy, this cohort of experts mean that electronic fraud is not.

        This feels a lot like capitulating to a mugger, and it makes me feel suicidal. Why was I born just in time to come of age in hell?

        • neofugue says:

          Do not get the vaccine; instead, forge a card using 80lb cardstock and Gimp’s paint and eraser tools (65lb cardstock if you can’t afford an expensive printer). Remember one can always claim bureaucratic incompetence.

          The vaccine itself in my circles seem mostly harmless; all my parents and siblings got the vaccine and only my father had symptoms. However, submitting one’s soul by participating in a satanic sacrament consisting of injecting dead infants is intolerable from a spiritual perspective as the avoidance of risk does not outweigh the costs of mental anguish, learned helplessness, lowered testosterone, et cetera. Taking the vaccine will give you guilt for the rest of your life.

          We are born in an age of hell because we have been chosen by God to fight in it. If the Progs wish to vaccinate me they can inject me over my dead body, and I will take out as many satanic prog scum in the process.

          • Need it for school says:

            Is it true that the process of manufacturing COVID vaccines involves cells from aborted fetuses?

            • jim says:

              Not true. Or at least not true for the dangerous and ineffective vaccines, I have not looked at them all.

              Current data indicates that vaccination is ineffective, and other people claim to have looked at the data supposedly supporting its effectiveness, and claim it to be contaminated by the usual stuff of peer reviewed. studies.

              I have not looked at the data supposedly supporting its effectiveness – and usually with peer reviewed studies on politically sensitive topics the bit that makes all the difference is theoretically available, is required by law and contract to be available, but it is not, and then someone launches a freedom of information lawsuit, and spends and immense amount of money trying to get that information, only to be stonewalled by an opponent willing to spend millions and a corrupt judiciary. I did not look at the data because I expected to find what other people claim to have found.

              However, here is the data casting doubt on its effectiveness:

              Recent CDC data found that 74% of those who tested positive for Covid-19 in a Massachusetts analysis had been fully-vaccinated. Equally as troubling for those advocating vaccination-for-all: four out of five people hospitalized with Covid were fully-vaccinated. And CDC said “viral load” — indicating how able the human host is to spread Covid-19 — is about the same among the vaccinated and unvaccinated.

              What this tells me is that universal vaccination is not a public health measure but a religious ritual, a compliance test, like burning a pinch of incense to the Emperor.

              So that even if there is no physical risk, compliance is going to leave a mark on your soul. It will make you a less manly man, and this is likely the primary goal.

              • neofugue says:

                > Is it true that the process of manufacturing COVID vaccines involves cells from aborted fetuses?

                According to my sources here and here, all of the dangerous mRNA vaccines had abortion-derived cell lines involved in the testing process.

                • jim says:

                  Hey, religious exemption.

                  Albeit religious exemption on this ground is going to meet with a lot of resistance, though it will go down a lot smoother than religious exemption on Jimian grounds: that the vax is an act of worship to the Covid demon.

                  An effectual vaccine with only rare side effects would not necessarily be an act of worship, and you could and should take it in the same way that Saint Paul says it is OK to eat meat sacrificed to idols under some common circumstances – such as you are hungry and not too curious about where the meat came from, and no one is making a big deal and big performance about where the meat came from.

                  But the circumstances right now is that it primarily a public act of worship. You should avoid publicly defying, but should quietly evade. Being compelled to worship the false gods and demon gods of your enemies makes you weak. Nor should you drink Coca Cola.

                  Inconveniently, all vaccines in the US, including those few of them are actually useful and beneficial, are tested on cell lines derived from aborted children. This is purely an act of worship and a display of respect for the holy sacrament of abortion – there never were any show stopper difficulties on testing them on cell lines derived from consenting adults, or cell lines derived from the placenta of live healthy babies with consenting mothers. Though you can always invoke the Pauline exception for those few of them are actually valuable, but if you invoke the Pauline exception, it is Jimianity rather than the more common forms of Christianity, and you are not going to get far pleading Jimianity.

                • neofugue says:

                  Progressives killed the Waco cultists while leaving Amish and Haredi Jews alone. If one is going to school he should pretend to be a Christian Scientist, but if one interacts with those vetting him at work opposition to vaccination on the grounds of abortion might be one’s only option.

          • Shitpoaster says:

            I know people (friends of friends, not in medical field) who can provide blank vaccine cards. I think they are easy to forge, and also likely available on dark web markets although I haven’t checked.

        • jim says:

          > While paper fraud is easy, this cohort of experts mean that electronic fraud is not.

          If they were sufficiently competent to detect electronic fraud, they would have been sufficiently competent to commit electronic fraud without leaving massive tracks.

          Thirty years ago our enemies were very smart. Now they are very stupid.

          • Need it for school says:


            I really appreciate your blog and your viewpoint. I’ve read it since 2013. If I get expelled after four years of college, with a 3.9 GPA and a single class left that I need, I am going to have wasted a vast amount of labor and will be totally out of job options, with no access to campus recruiting. If the school decides to act on its instincts I will also have a criminal record including a federal felony. If what you are suggesting goes awry I could basically end up as a down-and-out.

            I am a computer science (and math) student. While this conveys no actual computer science skill it may at least show initiative. Would you hire me if I get expelled? I am smart, a hard worker, and very capable of learning on the job.

            One thing I’m considering doing is asking my advisor to let me graduate without my one required class so that I don’t have to get the shot. Do you think that would work or would it make it impossible for me to ever get away with anything due to suspicion?

            P.S. I am not that weird freak guy who wants handouts for failed college students. I just feel skeptical about the risk some of you are suggesting I take on.

            • The Cominator says:

              I would 1st ask you

              How is your school checking whether you got the shot? Are they going on the honor system.

              If you said you got it out of state would they have any way of verifying it? Do you have any friends there with a vax card?

              • Need it for school says:

                Quote from site where I’m expected to submit data.

                “To the extent my vaccination record is retained in a state immunization information system, like [*redacted*], I consent to the University verifying my vaccination status with such registry.”

                The University is in XXXXX.

                All my friends have cards but are very unlikely to let me borrow one.

                • jim says:

                  Get a “vaccination” that is not in the state registry.

                  Or just assume that your enemies lack sufficient competence and diligence to actually verify it in the state registry.

                • Need it for school says:

                  What about the parent post?

                  Also, “a state immunization system” doesn’t mean they just get XXXXXX’s.

                • jim says:

                  Ninety percent of the time, they are just bluffing and too disorganized or incompetent to follow through.

                  I have had numberless interactions with the state where I just broke the law. Once in a long while, I had to pay through nose for a good lawyer, but usually no one noticed or cared. Unless you have made an enemy somewhere in the state apparatus, the right lawyer will always be able to pull a string here or there.

                  Of course, the risk factor is that if you break the law and get into trouble, it is probably because your enemy’s eyes are on you for reasons totally unrelated to breaking the law.

                • Need it for school says:

                  Jim: please delete my above comment where I foolishly leaked my state.

                • jim says:

                  Not seeing where you leaked your state. Specify the details of the comment with a new fake email, which will show up in my moderation queue, so that I will see it and make sure no one else sees it.

                • alf says:

                  What about the parent post?

                  Also, “a state immunization system” doesn’t mean they just get XXXXXX’s.

                  If referring to this comment, I already took the liberty.

            • simplyconnected says:

              Can you take a leave of absence? Work somewhere until the insanity clears out (if it does)?

        • chris says:

          Can’t you just go to an immigrant run pharmacy and bribe the immigrant pharmacist there to not give you the shot but give you the credentials for taking the shot?

          • Need it for school says:

            We’ve sufficiently verified here that that doesn’t work.

            • jim says:

              So your enemies say, but is it true?

              Try it and see.

              • Need it for school says:

                I did and others did.

                • jim says:

                  Did you try religious exemption.

                  Unfortunately I doubt that jimianity is a recognized religion, but here is the doctrine according Jim.

                  Render under Caesar that which is Caesar’s. But today, most of our interactions with Caesar are Caesar demanding acts of worship

                  I doubt that truth will fly, so you might try Christian Science.

                • Need it for school says:

                  Like I said, attempting religious exemption. Not gonna give more info as I’ve already had bad opsec tonight.

                • The Original OC says:

                  I know of people ignoring these vaccination status and intent registration systems entirely with no consequences. I do not know of anyone suffering any penalty for ignoring one of these systems. Telling people they “must” do something is much cheaper than actually retaliating against them without a solid social and legal footing. Of course, it’s not a guarantee this will be the case for you.

                  As for getting a fake vaccination record, like buying illicit drugs I suggest you are likely to be more successful getting a tip by drinking in the right bar than propositioning someone in a business suit.

                • simplyconnected says:

                  The Original OC wrote:

                  Telling people they “must” do something is much cheaper than actually retaliating against them without a solid social and legal footing.

                  This has been my impression on this, that the thread is stronger than the execution. If they were going to force it from the start, why announce it in advance?. Obviously to get people injected because “it will be required later”. But those people would get it anyway if it were forced.

                • simplyconnected says:

                  * the threat

                • The Original OC says:

                  They might be enforced eventually if the social power swings enough toward mandatory vaccination, but by then the commenter may already have graduated.

                • neofugue says:

                  Religious exemption for school is a good idea since school is just a badge, but it is important to avoid anything serious. Progs allow dissent only for those who fit their narrative of being backwards and irrational, which is why the Amish and the Haredi Jews haven’t been Wacoed. Saying “as a Scientologist I cannot take vaccines because according to Mary Baker Eddy disease comes from mental anguish” is better than “as a Roman Catholic I cannot take vaccines because all of the ones available in the United States were tested using abortion-derived fetal cell lines.”

        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          >This feels a lot like capitulating to a mugger, and it makes me feel suicidal.

          The prefrontal cortex can be fooled and fool itself into thinking it is free, but the brainstem always knows if it is enslaved.

          Of all the injurious consequences of various perfidies regnant leftists compulsively seek impose upon their neighbors, perhaps the most injurious of all, is the progressive transfiguration of your soul into something that is capable of submitting to evil.

          Something most never recover from.

        • Karl says:

          Would getting Covid-19 and recovering from it get you out of trouble?

          It would in Germany. Anyone who recovered from Covid-19 gets a certificate to prove recovery status. Recovery status is legally equal to being vaccinated in Europe.

          If your recovery status is not accepted, you can claim a medical exemption from vaccination. Vaccinazion of recovered person is considered dangerous in Europe. Even if a recovered person wants to get the clot shot, they have to wait 6 months.

        • c4ssidy says:

          Vaccines are tested on animals and you can claim to be ethically vegan

          Otherwise go to Bulgaria or Mexico or whatever is near. You can bribe for a lot cheaper, doctors make a few hundred dollars per month in these places, more corruption and there is not going to be a database to check this type of stuff

          • neofugue says:

            Given that forging vaccine registration is high risk I would bribe a pharmacist in the US at least $20k, anything lower is not reasonable unless you know the pharmacist personally.

            • jim says:

              If that is the price, absurd to pay it, better to just not obey and spout bullshit.

              But very few judges cost that much, and most bureaucrats come considerably cheaper, and pharmacists I would expect to come way cheaper. The problem, however, is that in the US you are not supposed to bribe people directly. You are supposed to hire a “””consultant”””, and there are not yet consultants in the vax business.

            • Karl says:

              $20k is unreasonable as there is no way to detect the crime after it was done.

              How could it be proven that someone did not receice the clot shot if there is a document that says he did and he really was at the right time at the right place to receive the clot shot and one clot shot dose was somehow used at that place and time?

              If the pharmacist thinks you are an agent provocateur, he won’t do it – no matter how much is offered. If he thinks you are legit $200 is plenty for allowing a man, who fears the needle, self-adminsitering the clot shot wihtout anyone watching.

        • pyrrhus says:

          For someone your age, whose chances of dying from Covid are zero, getting vaxxed is a game of Russian Roulette, with no payoff if you win, and death or a lifetime of heart, lung or vascular problems if you lose….Do you feel lucky?

  35. Anonymous Fake says:

    Is anyone here besides me opposed to vaccines made from abortion? I notice that even conservative media, politicians, etc never mention this issue. It’s like killing someone for his kidneys because you know 2 people who need them more then he does. It something that seems to make sense at first but it never ends well for some reason, God only knows.

    It’s like noticing that pro-life politicians never present any punishment for women who kill their babies. They won’t even present mandatory murder sentencing for “4th trimester” abortions that always get manslaughter charges if even that. In more liberal countries, they explicitly have infanticide laws to water down the severity of punishment.

    • The Cominator says:

      This blog’s position on abortion is that it should be (early term anyway) a husband/father’s right to choose.

      • The Ducking Man says:

        I would be probably agree with you if I never see such cases first-hand myself. Personally seeing the gravity of emotion makes all the difference for me.

        The husband insisted on abortion as soon pregnancy is declared, the wife persist on keeping till pregnancy till birth. In the end the baby is birthed safe, but divorce soon follow.

        By the end of they day, it’s very disheartening event, both the husband and wife loses out, the children suffers even more, even though logically speaking it is the husband’s right to demand abortion.

        Very unfortunate that the bible never address abortion issue, but God never demanded abortion. He have ordered to kill newborn but never an abortion. So I don’t think even a husband has right to call for abortion.

    • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

      No, you are not the only one. It feels too close to human sacrifice for comfort. The idea of getting the shot with baby parts in it is similar to how I imagine being at a ritual where you sacrifice a child and drink its blood would be. It gives me the creeps.

    • The Ducking Man says:

      I was also shocked vaccine manufacturer openly admit using aborted tissue to produce certain vaccines.

      Of course it’s the usual excuse “there is no other way, also this is aborted tissue from 70s no one cares anyway”. There was never any info how vaccine producers obtain new tissue to culture the original tissue sample (most likely from Planned Parenthood).

      The whole vaccine industry is backed by frankenstein science that not a lot of people understand nor care to understand.

      • jim says:

        And it is stupid. We today now obtain totipotent cells from live adult consenting donors. They also, back then, could have obtained totipotent cells from the placentas of live healthy babies and their consenting mothers.

        It is done as a deliberate act of desecration. There is today, and was then, a better way than drinking the blood of children sacrificed to demons.

        The advantage of getting totipotent cells from a fetus is that a fetus is mostly totipotent cells. But it turns out that even old folks have some totipotent cells, which are needed for healing, and we have gotten better at sorting cell types. It is a lot easier if you start with fetal tissue rather than placental tissue, and lot easier if you start with placental tissue rather than adult tissue, but it was never that hard, and has become easier.

        The initial research was done with cells extracted from animal fetuses, because that is the easiest way. But when the time came for human tissue, other sources of human totipotent cells were already feasible.

  36. Aryaman says:

    Actually seeing as the ratio of neutralizing to binding antibodies elicited by the vaccine, unlike by a natural infection, is about 4:1 the dose was made unusually high so that the level of neutralizing antibodies was at least temporarily above the sterilizing threshold.

    I believe the reason they used mRNA technology over inactivated or live attenuated virus with adjuvant is that it is very easy to do so. Even the J&J shot is fundamentally the same, causing cellular production of spike protein from the same very source published in early 2020. There does not seem to be much experimenting with live viral cultures isolated from naturally infected humans, or for that matter naturally infected animals. The Novavax seems to be on sounder footing but even Novavax uses the same very source published in early 2020 to infect moths with something like the J&J vaccine and isolate the spike proteins produced by these moths and inject humans with a proprietary but more traditional adjuvant. The only exception here seems to be the French Valneva vaccine, which is an inactivated version of the whole virus.

    The reason all the vaccines trace back to the same genetic information published early on is that isolating the spike protein in its prefusion state is not easy, using the postfusion conformation is presumably either dangerous, ineffective, or both, and the problem only seems to have been solved with MERS in 2017, though never actually tested until recently. That result in hand, seems like everyone was in a rush to do what is easy — there is not much intelligent engineering required for anything that happened in development after March or maybe even February 2020. mRNA technology has been around for a while and what they have done with it is easy to do, if it were effective would have seen success using the same with other coronaviruses which have proven notoriously resistant to vaccines for reasons we seem to understand pretty well.

    We will see where Valneva goes but I am not sure that even good science and engineering would have led to a successful result. True that even though it has never been done before, we have never before so wasted resources on immunizing our way out of a respiratory pandemic. And in any case the people in charge of wasting resources do not know how to demand good science and engineering, are at best indifferent to and at worst actively solicitous of viscerally harmful shots, as it is hard to be holier than thou with something that is not viscerally harmful. For example flu shots are famously useless but they are also famously harmless — probably indistinguishable in most people from saline — thus everyone would oblige even if doing so was a little wasteful.

    With normal vaccines we very well understand the source of genuinely rare acute reactions: allergies and anaphylaxis, dangers of a live or even attenuated shot in compromised or unhealthy people, antibody enhancement with a mechanism we can actually identify. Also the source of longer-term damage: harmful cumulative effects of some adjuvants, and autoimmune responses though the latter are going to be really hard to disentangle. But the adverse reaction profile with the current shots does not remotely resemble anything we have seen before. Indeed does not seem to be especially unsafe for unhealthy or immunocompromised individuals, nor a source of anaphylaxis or allergic overreaction.

    I suspect the mechanisms for adverse reactions are a few. First is iatrogenic. The trials were probably conducted with precise care, but the vaccines were rolled out so quickly apt to involve nurses who were careless and incompetent. Moreover loose attenuated virus is unlikely to cause much problem around your body, but loose mRNA causing cellular production of spike protein may very well cause long-term damage from autoimmune self-harm. This issue is compounded by the absence of any normal virus or standard adjuvants, which is confusing to the body and the presence of which would normally serve to limit autoimmune reaction.

    They know there is heart damage caused by the vaccine. They are not even trying to figure out why, hoping to hide behind “bad things randomly happen”. But wherever there is a substantive effect there is a mechanism, I suspect actually studying the mechanism would indicate the vaccines are a lot more harmful than advertised. Likewise the plethora of absolutely strange acute reactions, which they refuse to acknowledge, even though they acknowledge the far rarer Guillian-Barre Syndrome. They recognize this because it has been associated with other vaccines, and they can pretend the existence of the similar mechanisms.

    The poster girl principle is hard at work. If young and healthy people were dying in hospitals, CNN’s flagship reporting on the fact would not involve a 400 pound nurse who looks 25 years older than she actually is.

    The trials were unblinded. Even more than that, the uptake among the control group is something like 98 percent, far more than the country average, frankly far more than the average you see in even Manhattan among the median age group studied in the clinical trials. Thus the trials were not just passively unblinded for ethical reasons, but actively destroyed to remove once and for all even the possibility of discovering adverse evidence in the only form to which the powers that be are receptive, namely peer-reviewed, double-blind trials carried out under regulation of the FDA by investigators credentialed and regulated by the FDA.

    It would be easy to prove to me the vaccine is at least reasonably safe to take, or at least do not actively suggest any reason to think they are unsafe in the long run, requiring only testing for a few cheap biomarkers on a uniform basis. That they refused to do this, that they destroyed the only chance they had of doing this is scienter.

  37. onyomi says:

    Somewhat tangential, but are accelerationists like, super excited? Seems to me like they should be. I’m not really an accelerationist, but if you wanted to speed up Westerners getting fed up with their current system, it seems like corona-chan basically added pure hydrogen to that fire? Which could be good in the sense that e.g. refugees would have continued to pour in and be rehomed in white neighborhoods, etc. even if Corona-chan hadn’t come along, so better everyone learn to hate their liberal governments and associated media propaganda mouthpieces sooner than later? Or will the anger manifest against vaccine passports in France and Italy not translate to any other issues?

    I am a bit disappointed to see, for example, that Macron’s chances of re-election seem little impacted, at least on betting markets, by all the recent vaccine passport pushback. But maybe betting markets take a Moldbuggian view of protest (they don’t work if no elite backing)?

    • onyomi says:

      Accelerationist RamzPaul does not seem excited about Corona-chan, but he also seems perennially pessimistic.

    • yewotm8 says:

      Of all the ways that globohomo could have destroyed what credibility it had left, the covid holiness spiral was one of the least harmful.

      • onyomi says:

        Yeah, I mean, I am incredibly, incredibly angry and upset about the whole global covid response outside a few, brave exceptions, like Florida and Sweden, but I do think it’s sometimes worth seeing things in terms of harm done relative to backlash provoked. E.g. you want your enemies to do things that promote maximal backlash/redpilling while doing minimal longterm harm. Worst-case are activities that promote little backlash but do big longterm harm. Corona hysteria and biological men in women’s sports seem like examples of the former, whereas third world immigration is more the latter.

  38. pyrrhus says:

    The CDC’s VAERS site showed 12,000 dead from the vaccine last week with a very low level of reporting…Dr. McCullough, Prof of Medicine at Baylor, has a large network of doctors, including some insiders at the CDC…He estimates that VAERS only catches 10% of the side effects, which would mean a huge death toll already…

    • Pooch says:

      The antidotal test tells me covid is a non-issue. I know barely any people who got it and of those it was a mild flu. I also know a lot of people who were vaxed and none of them died and they show no outwardly obvious side effects which leads me to believe death and serious side effects are rare (but of course people could be hiding their less serious side effects like menstral issues).

      • jim says:

        Everyone knows it is politically incorrect to acknowledge harmful side effects from the clot shot. Anecdote is that most feel a lot worse than they do after a normal vax, but it is not that serious and it almost always goes away.

        • S.J., Esquire says:

          I am an emergency room physician and this is my assessment. There are still a lot of unknowns, because of the way that The Establishment won’t allow it to be studied. Anecdotally, I can confirm that I’ve seen a LOT of people coming in lately saying things like, “Lawdy, I got the COVID vaxx and now me arm’s about falling off!” But it’s hard to know how much of this is actually vaxx-related, how much of it threatens to be permanent, and so forth. I have certainly seen a half-dozen cases who nearly died, or could have, from blood clots, where I strongly suspect the vaxx was to blame.

          It is 100% true that any database relying on physicians to report adverse effects is going to underreport by a ton. I follow this stuff from a dissident’s point of view and even I’ve been forgetting to ask everyone whether they just got vaxxed, and it took me an embarrassingly long time even to begin thinking that this is something I maybe should ask. I absolutely buy that VAERS is underreporting by a lot.

          The case that bothered me the most lately, was the 12-year-old lad brought by his mom, complaining that he couldn’t feel his arm.

          • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

            I’ve been seeing the same thing; people who’ve gotten the clot shot reporting nervous issues around the injection site, whether it is shooting pains, deadening of feeling, muscle spasms, stiffness and sensitivity, and or all of the above.

      • The Original OC says:

        Everyone I know has been taking days off work for each shot, which I at first assumed was performative, an ostentatious way of saying they have taken the vaccine. But maybe it is not.

        I once took three conventional vaccines in one day prior to some exotic travel, during a lunch break, and returned to work. These days off work do not seem normal to me.

        • Andy says:

          In my personal network of friends/acquaintances, side effects of the shots have included high fever, chills, sweating, shaking and body aches for several days. All resolved without hospitalization. There was one instance of myocarditis in a 20-something athletic male. Furthermore, several people reported mental fogginess for weeks/months after the shot. Those are just the people willing to share their experiences. I nod quietly but I find it incredible that so many people are willing to go along with those sorts of side effects after a vaccine. “That’s how you know it’s working.”

          • jim says:

            Observed behavior in my circle: Asking people about ill effects of the vaccine is like asking them about female conduct in the workplace. They will not give you a straight answer if other people are around, and if you do get a straight answer, they are supposedly confident that they are the rare exception.

            I can smell the fear.

            • Alfred says:

              Most of the people I knew who took the 2 shots vaccines talked about 2 days of issues while in public like it was part of a holy act. In private a close friend of mine described 2 week of painful hell from inflamed Lymph Nodes on the second shot but he never said anything public about it and he endless promoted the vaccine to others.

              People on reddit who post about serious from getting injected see their posts deleted even if they continue to urge people to get the shot. People do indeed feel fear when speaking the truth about the vaccine.

            • Karl says:

              Here in Germany I do not notice such fear. There is a propaganda compaign to get people to take the clot shot and most big companies oblige and offer the clot shot on their premises. Of those who bow to the pressure a report of slightly harmful side effects is expected which results in 2 or 3 days of paid sick leave.

        • Pooch says:

          Yes I have observed that too. When they come back they seem to be fine outwardly as far as I can tell.

    • sjfan says:

      The CDC’s VAERS site showed 12,000 dead from the vaccine last week with a very low level of reporting…

      My VAERS search (all deaths, all covid19 vaccines, all dates) found 6,183 deaths. One of us is doing it wrong, maybe me.

  39. someDude says:

    Excuse me! Anyone see Roderick? Where he go? What happen?

  40. Alfred says:

    I’ve been seeing this floating around on 4chan:

    I don’t have the medical knowledge to evaluate it but it sounds interesting.

    • d3r3k says:

      [Deleted for using christian frame]

      • jim says:

        If you are going to criticize Vox Day’s faith, make the affirmation: Jesus Christ is Lord, born in Bethlehem, died in Jerusalem, and is, is from before the beginning of the world. fully God and fully man. God is three and God is one.

        Then we will argue about the commandment on graven images.

        If you cannot take the affirmation because something other than Christian, and that something is not demon worship, tell us what faith you are arguing from.

        • Gary Morgan says:

          [*Deleted for entryism*]

          • jim says:

            “””Hail fellow Christian”””

            You are no Christian. Obvious demon worshiper.

            I will allow you to debate graven images if you start out with “Hail Satan. All Christians are going to hell”, or something equivalent. You are banned for entryism, no one gets banned for honest disagreement.

            • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

              We should not debate graven images. We need to toss those people on a pyre then light it up if they are too uppity, or send them to a monastery in Alaska above the arctic circle if sufficiently humble about it. Based on your response to him, he was uppity, so on the pyre he goes.

              You know, Jim, for a Grand Inquisitor, you are awfully reluctant to throw people on a fire. Maybe I’m too used to 40K and it desensitized me, or maybe I’m just a sociopath.

              • Jehu says:

                Nobody profits from a burned heretic, except perhaps the devil. I forget which historical inquisitor I’m paraphrasing, but I agree with his point. You burn only those heretics that you can’t get to recant and lose status. Burning them is sometimes necessary, but mostly as a least bad option available. The historical Spanish Inquisition didn’t really burn/execute very many people—less than most comparable civil authorities of the day or even our own if you express it in executions per year per million population.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Keep in mind that the Spanish had just fought a 700 year war. I would be willing to bet that a good portion of the people that would need killing got it in the fighting. We have not fought a 700 year war where we could deal with these people. Our attitude needs to be more sanguine. In 10 or 20 years after the purging begins we can adopt the more reasonable position. During the purges we need to make sure that no Puritans escape to recreate Harvard elsewhere.

                • alf says:

                  We’re not in a position to prepare for the day of the helicopter. Realistically, we should prepare for the coming dark ages.

                  But since its fun to discuss revenge fantasies: I’m on the ‘merciful’ side, which is to say, some people need killing, but I rather keep the killings fairly contained. No wide purge, at least not without direct and persistent cause.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Is exterminatus the only solution?


                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Dress for the job you want, Alf, dress for the job you want. I mean, is there any point to just laying down and dying? Why not plan for victory as much as for defeat?

              • jim says:

                I would genuinely like to find a serious debating partner about graven images. While our correct and successful counter attack against the non Trinitarians has been to just flatly assert the contradiction “God is three and God is one”, and the passion play, and just shut down discussion, by lowering the status of heretics, silencing them, and if necessary burning them, our correct and successful counter attack against legalists such as iconoclasts is to rationally explain and discuss the spirit and intent of the law, and then to out holy them about the spirit and intent. We have never silenced, let alone burned them.

                The most common attack vector against Christianity is to try to “understand” the trinity – which “understanding” always winds up with Jesus the Jewish community organizer who improved the deplorable morality of the Old Testament, and now we are going to walk in his footsteps by improving it a whole lot further. Non trinitarians start out holier than thou, pretty soon are holier than Jesus, and not long after that, holier than God. And here we are now.

                But historically another very common attack vector has been iconoclasm – which is the same basic attack vector as the Pharisees. The Jews were Jewing God, by creatively giving the law literal meanings that evaded the spirit and intent of the law, though the first commandment was not deployed in this manner by the Jews. It has been repeatedly deployed in this manner by Christian iconoclasts. The legalism heresies such as iconoclasm always manifest eventually as smash and grab, as did the similar though different in detail Pharisaical heresies.

                While we have been down the non Trinitarian road many times before and that is how we got into our current problems, we have also been down the iconoclast road several times before, though that is not where our current problem comes from.

                The iconoclast faction in the Puritans was significant, and remains significant to this day among today’s progressives, but it was never the main vector.

                The non Trinitarian heresy ends with the Church becoming a lesbian anarcho communist bookshop, and the Cathedral being turned first into a museum, and not long after into a center for the worship of some demon, these days, the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Change demon, though I suppose in future the old Aztec Gods and the Covid demon are going to be the main focus. The iconoclast heresy just straightforwardly smashes and grabs, after the fashion of Detroit. Turns out that if the commandment on graven images does not mean what Christians thought it did, neither do the commandments on coveting, theft, and murder.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The graven image debate was very hard on the Orthodox church. The Orthodox church threaded the needle by saying that “veneration” is okay but “worship” of an image is a damnable sin.

                  Orthodox iconography is extremely beautiful (truly some of the best art in existence in my opinion) otoh its hard to classify the Iconoclasts as Demon worshippers entirely as the 1st Iconoclast Emperor Leo the Isaurian was truly one of the Great Emperors of Eastern Rome.

                • jim says:

                  They are not demon worshipers. In the final stage of legalist heresies, more like the blacks burning Detroit, which is how the Jews got themselves expelled from Israel. When you out holy with pointless and absurd literal legalistic meanings of the law, it is apt to liberate the legalist faction from the inconvenience of following the spirit and intent of the law.

                  Like any heresy, starts out arguably OK – Arius was OK, and emperor Leo the Isaurian was OK, but the fruits of the heresy always follow in the end. There was nothing terribly wrong with the first wave of followers of Arius. The last Arians resembled Antifa and BLM – fatherless and childless looters and burners.

                  There was a seed of sense in the Iconoclast heresy, in that many of the Saints were in fact old local gods, and their worship was old paganism in disguise. But there is no need to go overboard in shutting down paganism. The correct and successful counter attack on paganism was to deny its followers status, and insist that they put the star of Bethlehem on top of the Christmas tree, to insist that their rituals are ultimately done “unto God”. So long as done “Unto God”, pagan rituals are fine. The problem with Pope venerating pagan idols is that it is not done “unto God”.

                  Similarly Halloween. We took a ritual venerating and propitiating demons and the evil dead, made it condescending to them, made them ridiculous, and followed it by all Saints day, symbolizing Christianity as the dawn banishing darkness. A wholly pagan Christmas tree becomes wholly Christian with a star on top, and the wholly pagan Halloween, which remains pagan, becomes innocuous because the dawn. becomes innocuous because we do not fear the dark.

                  Christmas, now the most celebrated Christian ritual, was sticking God on top of the pagan ritual of Saturnalia, and Halloween was how we dealt with a ritual that outright worshiped openly evil demons. Worked.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  You said that he was a demon worshipper. Is he a legitimate iconoclast that is misunderstanding scripture or is he a demon worshipper? I am mostly of the opinion that nits make lice, but even I can see the difference between a legitimate yet flawed belief and a belief that hides the worship of demons. Furthermore, if iconoclast heresy is a straightforward smash-and-grab, should we not treat them as incipient rioters, neglecting entirely the questions of demons?

                  Legalism should be low status and obnoxious. Lawyers are fags, and nobody likes the pedantic style of argumentation that lawyers use. When I have to use it it makes me feel irritable and unhappy. Legalist heresies should be attacked on that front, as well.

                • jim says:

                  > You said that he was a demon worshipper.

                  The commenter calling himself Gary Morgan, among numerous other names, is a demon worshiper. Emperor Leo the Isaurian was not.

                  Having a legalist position on graven images is not particularly suggestive of demon worship. There was no end of other stuff in his comments that smelled of demon worship, so I gave him a test that almost any iconoclast you have heard of could pass without ever thinking about it. And he declined the test with venom, like a vampire in a very old movie outraged and terrified by the cross. He replied as if the words burned him.

                  He reacted like a progressive reacts to sacrilege against blacks and gays.

                  He was attacking Christians for insufficient fidelity to the first commandment, and speaking from a Christian protestant iconoclast frame, but the words he used were not those a protestant iconoclast would have used. Faggot/Spritualist/Wiccan shibboleths, and misuses of Christian shibboleths as if they were faggot shibboleths. Enemy dialect of English.

                  Not only was he unable to take the demon worshiper test, the words burned him.

                • Jsd says:

                  Jim your description of entryist failures always makes me want to read the original post. Maybe you could let it through for educational value?

                • jim says:

                  They get paid, or get bonuses, in proportion as stuff gets through and gets engagement. A not very bright AI assesses the meme injection through engagement. I like to make them miss their bonuses.

                  I am also trying to pressure their supervisors to send us shills that can respond, in the hope that entryists can be turned. It would be fun to engage a demon worshiping enemy agent on the level. I promise the algorithm will score him as getting lots of engagement.

                  They are trying to sow division among Christians (though Christians do a good job at sowing division among themselves without anyone giving them a hand). Should have sent someone who could more plausibly pass as a Christian protestant iconoclast.

                • gender departments into strip clubs says:

                  Glosoli is a Judaizer, a Gnostic, and a demon worshiper all at once, and the latter category predominates the other two, because he is crazy.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “gender departments into strip clubs”

                  Oh god no, don’t pollute a profession full of fun loving amiable women I generally like with evil demon worshipping harpies.

                  Just burn the gender departments…

                • gender departments into strip clubs says:


                  Oh god no, don’t pollute a profession full of fun loving amiable women I generally like with evil demon worshipping harpies.

                  Just burn the gender departments…

                  Burning the gender departments themselves suggests that their memes are very powerful, hence potentially high status. Turning them into strip clubs or (officially designated) whorehouses is the ultimate humiliation to be inflicted on their students, and more importantly, would lower the status of the triggerati worldview, which is the primary purpose of the inquisition.

                  Spiritual pollution can be defeated with spiritual purification.

                • Shooter McGavin says:

                  Here’s why the trinity is false. It requires one to wax about hypostases and consubstantial coequal modes that are never even explicitly stated in the “I am” sayings of John. And the closest statements are only in John which is the last of the gospels to be written which is a problem. If Jesus did say that he is God incarnate why did Mark and Luke fail to mention it? Seems like an important point. Not to mention it being logically incompatible with omniscience and so forth. Mustard seeds are not the smallest seeds and the son didnt know the hour.

                  And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone.

                  Notice he said God not the Father. The liquid isn’t an ice cube but the man is saying he isn’t water.

                • jim says:

                  No it does not require one to wax about that stuff. Do you see me waxing about that stuff? Do you see Mel Gibson waxing about that stuff? When a modern Roman Catholic gives the history of Arian heresy, he does not wax about that stuff. Rather, he says it was the heretics cleverly insinuating heresy in the guise of orthodoxy – which it was.

                  It was heretics that waxed at great length, and the councils that were attempting to beat out a compromise with the heretics, which overly complicated and clever compromises have universally and invariably failed and been forgotten. One substance, two natures – or was it two natures, one substance. And what is a substance and what is nature? Does anyone remember? Did anyone know even back then? What is divine substance?

                  And if you are going to throw out John because he says things that are not said in Mark and Luke, you are going to throw out no end of stuff on similar grounds, until you are left with Jesus the Jewish Community Organizer.

                  You can find no end of contradictions in the bible between the humanity and divinity of Christ, because it is a deliberate self contradiction. The bible is full of contradictions, and if you start resolving contradictions by picking and choosing, you are going to be left with a very small bible.

                  The contradiction on the individual scale between mind and matter is a reflection of the contradiction on the cosmic scale between the divinity and humanity of Christ.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Generally I’m of the opinion we have to spare most women and um correct them Taliban and ISIS style into good concubines if on the progressive left at all… but if they went so far into madness and insanity to have or even want a gender studies degree…

                  There is a reason you have to burn witches sometimes. And I certainly don’t want them anywhere near the one group of women in clownworld I have any fondness for. Just found out Feynman apparently liked strippers too…

                • jim says:

                  > But if they went so far into madness and insanity to have or even want a gender studies degree.

                  Women conform to the women around them, which in the modern world means conformity to evil and insanity. It is just a shit test. Pass the shit test, they are fine and you are fine.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Burning some gender studies women will send a very good message in what not to conform to.

                • Shooter McGavin says:

                  Everyone has to pick and choose. The immaculate conception, transubstantiation, papal infallibility, purgatory, and young earth creationism are issues that you either believe or find retarded. Paul told us that our faith is in vain without the resurrection which is why its a witch test. Without it you have deism.

                  The problem is that you get branded a heretic for disagreeing with a pagan sounding tripartite Godhead even though you believe that Jesus is the Son of God, that he rose from the dead, and that we will be judged after this life by God the Father.

                • jim says:

                  There is massive biblical support for young earth creationism, which just has to be interpreted away, but there are two millenia of Church fathers cheerfully interpreting away such minor inconveniences, and it never caused any problems.

                  Scriptural support for the trinity is considerably thinner, but the humanity and divinity of Christ are the heart of Christianity. If you downplay one, or downplay the other, it is just not Christianity. And interpreting it away in one direction or the other, or somehow in both directions at once, caused no end of utterly catastrophic consequences.

                  Anglicanism died, and the power of English Kings died, due Socinian entryists into the Church of England. Aristocratic and Kingly power did not die from gunpowder, though gunpowder radically transformed and diminished aristocratic power. It did not die from urbanism, it did not die from Manchester Capitalism. It went from strength to strength on Manchesterism and corporate capitalism. It died of Socinianism.

                  It is the third rail. You touch it, your nation dies, the first to die of of this cause being Greek Christian Egypt.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Parts of the bible strongly imply the trinity, what i agree with the Arians on is it does not necessarily imply equality between the aspects of the trinity…

                • jim says:

                  The standard phrase is son, father, and holy ghost. No one thinks that sons are equal to fathers. This is one of those many issues where Christians should simultaneously hold two contradictory positions.

                  The son is more a person, the father more the universe itself, the holy ghost more an action and a communication, but trying to draw lines distinguishing one from the other or attempting to clarify the differences has proved fatal to many a nation.

                • Shooter McGavin says:

                  The socio-cultural claim about Anglicanism and Socinian doctrine has no bearing on the objective reality of whether Christ calimed to be God or not. Just as the past social achievements of Mormons has no bearing on the historicity of the book of Mormon. The fact that many non-trinitarians like the unitarian universalists are heretical, eclectic, and progressive is simply not relevant unless you’re arguing that the trinity is ethically pragmatic. Perhaps it is.

                  This horse is dead but it still needs beating. It is not heretical for rational people to notice that it doesn’t make sense for Christ to wonder why he is forsaken by God or to ask God to forgive his persecutors if they are essentially the same being. How do you explain it? The only explanation is to wax about arcane theological details like I mentioned before.

                  The fact that Mel Gibson isn’t talking about it is not surprising. It is always assumed that Christ is God pure and simple. The priest can explain the rest. As for Christ’s divinity and humanity the bible is full of prophets that can perform miracles. The Psalms speak of God proclaiming King David as his first born Son. Are these people not divine and human? They certainly are not God the Father.

                  In the end, perhaps you think it simply an exercise in nominalism to observe that reactionary non-trinitarians exist that are not persuaded by humanistic doctrines like Socinianism. Vox for exampe accepts the mainstream view of the atonement and justification unlike the Socinians.

                • jim says:

                  > The socio-cultural claim about Anglicanism and Socinian doctrine has no bearing on the objective reality of whether Christ calimed to be God or not.

                  Scripture says he claimed to be God and not God, and that is Christianity, then and now.

                • jim says:

                  > It is always assumed that Christ is God pure and simple

                  Claiming Christ is God pure and simple is as much a heresy as denying he is God pure and simple.

                  Mountains of ink and vellum have been wasted on the distinction.

                  Christians just don’t go where you are telling us they go, and if they went there, they would find only the confusion you quite accurately depict.

                  They tried going there to work out a compromise with the heretics. Did not work. Have not revisited in a very long time.

                  The official Christian position is officially beyond human reason.

                • neofugue says:

                  Debating theology on this blog is beyond my pay grade. If one wanted to know the proper interpretation of scripture he would already be aware of it through his own efforts. From the Arian discussion on this thread, the most relevant quote is listed here:

                  > Not to mention it being logically incompatible with omniscience and so forth.

                  Christians do not argue from logical foundations such as “omniscience and so forth,” they declare their theological positions irrespective of logic and then construct shibboleths such as logos, hypostasis, or the nature/person distinction to communicate with those around them. As a Christian, I do not see Christ being God and Man as a contradiction, but for an unbeliever, determining orthodoxy from heresy from a suspect’s “logical contradictions” is a somewhat effective means by which he can detect heretics.

                  Heresies are problematic because they originate from the rectification of logical contradictions in Christian theology, leading to holiness spirals centered around pseudo-Gnostic enlightenment rather than individual virtue. In declaring Christ not begotten of the Father, the Arians declared man separated from God, giving themselves carte blanch to engage in debauchery. The Arians would attend services on Sundays while sodomizing young boys during the rest of the week.

                • jim says:

                  > the rectification of logical contradictions in Christian theology, leading to holiness spirals centered around pseudo-Gnostic enlightenment rather than individual virtue

                  Well said.

                • Shooter McGavin says:

                  I was under the impression that omniscience was important. Otherwise God gets his information from a separate ontology leading to all kinds of problems. You have to pick yourself up by your bootstraps somewhere.

                  The problem with the trinitarians is the fact that they have effectively flown from the text and constructed a theology that prioritizes the word of Paul, the early church fathers, and theologians more than Jesus of Nazareth. Which also implies that Jesus is lying at least by omission. Did he not say that only God is good? Provide a historical argument as I did for John.

                  The constant concern with mysticism and pseudo-Gnostic ideology is also problematic. The fact that most churches are sinking obviously wasn’t prevented by trinitarianism which is the mainstream doctrine. What about the mystical sayings of Christ in the gospel? Was he lying again? He didn’t really mean that ye may be sons of the father which is in heaven. Or that I should be perfect just as my heavenly father is perfect. Aren’t you holiness spiraling by saying that he didn’t mean that? It seems unavoidable. The fact that you are busy refuting the Gnostics view of the mad god and Pneumatics means that you care about logical contradictions.

                • jim says:

                  > You have to pick yourself up by your bootstraps somewhere.

                  No you don’t have to pick you up from your bootstraps somewhere. And if you try it, it does not work. It is simply impossible to pick yourself up by the bootstraps anywhere. Just cannot be done. It is just as impossible doing it metaphorically as doing it literally. That way lies Nominalism and Gnosticism.

                  You have to take a leap of faith somewhere. And having lept, need to have leaped in a direction where you can land with your feet on the ground and your head in the air.

                  > The fact that most churches are sinking obviously wasn’t prevented by trinitarianism which is the mainstream doctrine.

                  Every Church turns Unitarian before it turns into a lesbian bookshop.

                • Shooter McGavin says:

                  Clarification: I was not making the ontological claim that Christians believe that Christ is God pure and simple but that they believe “Christ is God” as an unquestionable dogma even if they don’t know the theological details.

                • jim says:

                  The laity is not supposed to know the theological details, and the priesthood has wisely forgotten them.

                • Shooter McGavin says:

                  How are my feet not on the right ground having belief in the resurrection? I too believe that Jesus is divine and I am not entirely sure what that means. But I can know what it doesn’t mean. It doesn’t mean that he is a purely spiritual entity having no body as the Gnostics believe. Scripture contradicts it in many ways and flies in the face of the historical evidence. What I am surprised about is the fact that there is arguably a better historical case for unitarianism which is why trinitarians never actually address the scriptural and historical-critical approach.

                • jim says:

                  > How are my feet not on the right ground having belief in the resurrection?

                  What I mean is that in this life, in the here and now, Gnostics and Nominalists are unbased, which results in them being debased.

                  The problem is not whether you believe in the resurrection, but whether you believe that reality is real. The problem with your theology is not merely that your approach leads to bad theology, but that it leads to bad ontology.

                • Shooter McGavin says:

                  What is this bad ontology you speak of good sir? Omniscience? Your Jewish Community organizer is also a straw man. Have the Jehovahs Witnesses been a lesbian bookshop? They have there problems obviously. As far as I can tell every progressive Wasp I’ve ever known believes in the trinity. And they are all ready to tell you that Jesus is like water that turns into gas and freezes.

                  One of the reasons that I reject the trinity is that it is so inextricably tied to Paul’s view of Justification where one need only have faith in Christ’s status and faith alone. I believe this is also why the bears don’t like it. It inevitably leads to serial killers being saved with a quick statement while the unevangelized are simply cast into eternal hellfire. That sir sounds like bad ontology. Not to mention it being contradicted once again by none other than Jesus himself in Matthew and Luke.

                • jim says:

                  You, personally and individually, are not in contact with the reality that your hands can touch and shape and that your eyes can see. This is a predictable and widespread ailment among those who use your method of theological reasoning, and this ailment was made visible in your use of the phrase “lift yourself up by your own bootstraps” in an inappropriate context. The phrase gets it power from the fact that you cannot lift yourself up by your own bootstraps.

                  Your religion is one of a large class of religions that detach one from ones body and from reality, as well as from ordinary virtue exercised in this life. Because they detach one from ordinary virtue exercised in this life, they have results that look like they are infested with demons.

                • jim says:

                  > Paul’s view of Justification where one need only have faith in Christ’s status and faith alone

                  Is that what he said? I was under the strong impression that he said something like:

                  Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

                  Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

                  You know nothing about Christianity.

                  Yes, he did say faith alone – but he did not say grab those words, run with them, and ditch the entire rest of the old and new testaments.

                  One of the reasons the bible is full of contradictions is to stop people from grabbing half a dozen words and running with them off the edge of a cliff.

                • Shooter McGavin says:

                  Semantics: I was referring to the fact that ontological debates about divine aseity and Platonism were rabbit holes to be avoided. I was working with the assumption of omniscience. This is because the other fellow attempted to retreat to fideism and avoid the logical problem of contradictions for his case. I refuted it. And you are simply reading too much into my perhaps mistaken notion that pulling oneself up by the bootstraps was akin to agreeing on such a primitive.

                • Shooter McGavin says:

                  It is also interesting that you give nominalism such a bad rap even though you are insisting that I have veered from physical referents. That’s why Unitarianism is a very material and historical claim which I have yet to hear a real criticism of. I have only seen hand waving about contradictions in the Bible.

                • Shooter McGavin says:

                  “Then what becomes of boasting? It is excluded. By what law? By that of works? No, but by the law of faith. For we hold that a person is justified by faith apart from works prescribed by the law.”

                • jim says:

                  And you grab one thing that Paul said, and throw away everything else he said, and toss the rest of the Bible while you are at it.

                  This approach fails to fly. Not in theology, and its equivalent in dealing with empirical reality also fails to fly.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Millennia ago, church fathers judged the debate to be largely fruitless, and settled the question instead in terms of the fruits of the arguers themselves; what payloads they ultimately delivered.

                  Such a move of jiu-jitsu is, at the same time, both common-sensical, yet also, a highly esoteric point on the ultimate entangledness of ‘is’ and ‘ought’, even – or especially – when a particular being does not have the capacity to clearly chart out what the connexion(s) may be. That there must be a consequence to one belief or another – otherwise, there’d be no point to the debate in the first place.

                  Your insistence on refracturing that false dichotomy here, then, in this light, is highly suspect.

                  First ‘society’ is irrelevant to ‘objective reality’ – then objective reality is irrelevant; bake the cake bigot.

                • jim says:

                  > Millennia ago, church fathers judged the debate to be largely fruitless, and settled the question instead in terms of the fruits of the arguers themselves; what payloads they ultimately delivered.

                  A very Dark Enlightenment response, and one you have seen me vigorously pushing on this blog.

                  Eventually, reality prevails. Sometimes it takes a long time.

                • Shooter McGavin says:

                  At what point pseudo-chrysostom was I being dishonest about my views on objective reality? I believe it exists. If you rightly understand aseity, platonic entities, omniscience, and dualism then by all means make your case. I actually wanted to avoid it since I’m not sure y’all can actually explain it just as y’all will inevitably throw your hands up about the trinity. I have my model which has a truth value that can be determined.

                  You on the other hand admit that the trinity is pure illogic, that only wrests on implications in John and Paul, having still not offered a scriptural or historical-critical argument because you can’t offer one, only to speak of it being socially necessary. Which is why I mentioned it being an ethical argument. Just as Big Bear said, I’ve been quoting scripture and talking about what Jesus said, while you must remain at a very abstract level. My contact with reality is apparently lost when my hands are placed on the synoptic gospels which were written earlier than John and are based on oral traditions that made no mention of Christ being God. Like I said, “whoops we forgot that he’s God” doesn’t really fly.

                • Aidan says:

                  I am sick of inane debate on grace vs works. It is pretty obvious to me that both are necessary. Grace means that the final judgement on salvation is up to God and there is no amount of good you can do or evil you can avoid that will guarantee salvation. Works means that if you do unrepentant evil, and do not do good, how would God ever judge you favorably?

                  Grace means that nobody can holiness spiral on claims that a certain x y and z will guarantee salvation, and works means that you cannot holiness spiral on predestination and act like a piece of shit believing that faith will save you. Salvation is a mystery. You want to do stuff that makes God happy and avoid doing stuff He hates, and you also need to have faith and repentance and throw yourself om His mercy because it’s ultimately up to His unknowable judgement. Sounds good and rational to me- you easily resolve the contradiction with the phrase “necessary but not sufficient” for both grace and works.

                • neofugue says:

                  > I was under the impression that [X] was important. Otherwise God gets his information from a separate ontology leading to all kinds of problems. You have to pick yourself up by your bootstraps somewhere.

                  Christian dogma is first principles; every heresy begins with “picking oneself up” by “his bootstraps.” The Trinity is presupposed and does not need to be justified on a foundational level as it is its own foundation confirmed by dogma, history and tradition. As Solomon wrote, “the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding” (Proverbs 9:10). As post-Schism Christians adopted Classical foundationalism the West lost its faith in God, as was foreseen in Saint Gregory Palamas’ debates with Barlaam.

                  For the purposes of discourse on a secular blog, Christian theology from a secular framework is filled with “contradictions” which Christians do not see without becoming heretics. As a Christian I do not view any part of theology or scripture as “contradictory,” and my earlier misunderstanding led to a lengthy debate on this blog a while back regarding a certain Orthodox author. Effective Christians do not “argue,” they presuppose their positions in any discussion; after all, one cannot lose a debate if his foundation by necessity leads to his conclusions.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >If you rightly understand aseity, platonic entities, omniscience, and dualism

                  You don’t rightly understand aseity, platonic entities, omniscience, and dualism (but quite an honor roll of purple pill).

                  Part of the problem here is, if ‘jesus the jewish community organizer’ is not what you are arguing for, then you have not at all made it clear what you are trying to argue for.

                  I, for example, can say Jesus Christ is God, because i understand Jesus The Man as an incarnation that participates in a Divine essence that predates Jesus The Man, which is unique in degree – though theoretically not unique in kind, as Jesus can come again, and all beings in general are chiefly distincted by the degree to which they are capable of participating in the Divine Telos, an ear for and in tune with the music of the spheres.

                  Maybe this is all just a tempest in a teapot; maybe our real positions are actually a lot closer than either of us seem to think; but if so, you have not made much of an effort at expressing what your actual position is, rather just snipes at others.

                  Maybe that is not what you had thought to do, not what you intended to be doing; but it is what you had been doing, in fact, not intention.

                  >The socio-cultural claim about Anglicanism and Socinian doctrine has no bearing on the objective reality of whether Christ calimed to be God or not.

                  Actually, they do.

                  When one considers increasingly transcendent contexts – that is, the less obvious a matter in question is – the more obvious one begins to see the convergence of ‘is’ and ‘ought’ through it.

                  Christ in his time in the levant never said the sky over earth was blue either, did he?

                  This is something that i jumped on in the first place because attempts to drive a wedge between Being and it’s entailments are a recurrent ‘start of darkness’ in the catalogue of once great civilizations. Id est, assertions that judgment of value (or being ‘ethically pragmatic’ as you put it) is in some way inherently separate from, irrespective of, or irrelevant to, ‘the facts’. Maybe this again was not the sort of impression you intended to express – in which case it still bears mentioning, as it is a bad form of rhetoric one should avoid reproducing.

                  ‘Fact-value distinction’ is just leftism that is ten generations out of date. The sort of tool that subversives fittingly not in power use to undermine an existing power, and place themselves into power – whereupon they are then discarded, as they no longer serve their purpose, which is now to solidify their new-found power, by asserting the universal compulsivity of their own pet dogmas, while also repudiating any attempts by their depreciated predecessors to try using those same old tools for rear-guard action (cfr. modern libertarians – if any still exist).

                  The payload of the idea that fact is separate from value is the idea that values are interchangeable and simply a matter of taste (which will also be equally interchangeable); and the payload of the idea that values are interchangeable and simply a matter of taste is that the structure of society is interchangeable and simply a matter of taste. Thus boomers were suckered into thinking they could take their post-war utopia for granted while also being nice to rainbow people at the same time.

                  All that one sees of ‘socio-cultural’ phenomena ultimately entails from ‘objective reality’; so then first one looks at statecraft with the idea that the character of a nation is simply a matter of voluntary will; sees society – and personages within society specifically – consistently taking certain character in particular; and in defiance of this, ultimately comes into conflict with Natural Law as a whole; because of course the premise was impoverished to begin with. A set-up for gnostically carping at Being itself through backwards inference.

                • Shooter McGavin says:

                  I made a point about there being divine persons in the bible namely prophets that are chosen by God and are capable of performing miracles. The term “Son of God” is used to refer to King David which is why Matthew and Luke attempt to make a geneology leading back to David in order to confirm Christ being the Son. The Geneology is both numerically incorrect and on Joseph’s side which contradicts the fact that both Matthew and Luke are the only gospels with a virgin birth. This is why many copyists made alterations to the early Greek manuscripts that have God telling Jesus “Now, you are my son” at his baptism. The proto-orthodox Christians did this to undermine the adoptionist christology.

                  The Old and New Testaments refer to man and woman becoming one or “one flesh” in marriage. Does this mean that the man is the woman and the woman is the man? That they are literally one flesh? No. Music may only result when my guitar and myself are close but I am not the guitar nor is it me. If the whole of Christianity depended on Christ being God incarnate then why wasn’t it made crystal clear in every gospel? Does Christ himself not even understand the trinity of which he is participating? The fact that so much ink and vellum was needed to arrive at the central message is a problem. Jim has denied that the details matter but I am showing you that they do. For my thinking that there is a special relationship between God and Jesus adds only to two but not three. My rejecting the three that is one which even believers don’t understand has apparently led me into disconnection from reality and demon infestation.

                  As for the social claim I am merely stating that facts are true regardless of their social effects. Einstein’s theory of relativity has been used by many to claim that “everything is relative” therefore I can do whatever I want. The fact that Einstein’s theory may have led some to embrace moral relativism does nothing to show that his theory doesn’t work to explain a great deal of physics. So too, if Jesus said A and not B then A leading to a world of lesbian bookshops has no bearing on the historical fact of Christ having said A and not B. I don’t think that you can say that such a dichotomy is suspect because my believing in A and not B apparently determines whether I am in my body or not.

                • jim says:

                  > If the whole of Christianity depended on Christ being God incarnate then why wasn’t it made crystal clear in every gospel? Does Christ himself not even understand the trinity of which he is participating?

                  As an empirical experience of history, the whole of Christianity does depend on Christ being God and always has. And modern Roman Catholic texts on the Arian conflict take a startlingly Jimian view on the question, rather than debating theology or appealing to authority.

                  If you throw out John, you can cheerfully construct a religion based on the Old Testament and most of the New Testament (with a spot of creative but entirely plausible interpretation here and there) that ditches the trinity. But such a religion is not Christianity as traditionally understood, and the heretical offspring of Christianity suffered the judgement of Gnon.

                  The problem is that when you are facing your enemies, you need Gnon standing behind you, and the Creator is not exactly a person. Christ is definitely a person. Helps when casting out demons.

                  The peasant bowed to the lord, the lord bowed to the King, the King bowed to God, and the peasant ate God sacrificed to man. If Christ not God, the circle does not complete.

                  > So too, if Jesus said A and not B then A leading to a world of lesbian bookshops has no bearing on the historical fact of Christ having said A and not B

                  To logically deduce your religion, you start by taking your lightly edited and somewhat revised version of the bible as true, but not taking Christianity as true. But why take the bible as more true than the Koran? Religion starts with a leap of faith, not by logical deduction.

                  You are giving the bible a light edit job to reduce seeming contradictions. But the seeming contradictions are intentional. Thus for example Paul said justification by faith, not by works and he also gave us a long list of sinners who will not inherit the Kingdom of God. Faith alone, and not faith alone. The empirical experience of history is that reasoning one’s way through these seeming contradictions leads to foolishness, and foolishness leads to bad consequences.

                  More relevantly to this blog, Saint Paul also said that women will be saved in childbearing, which in context only makes sense if childbearing is a synecdoche for proper performance of the female role, and the surrounding context is proper performance of the male role and in particular the male role in relation to women. Which is a great deal more than faith alone.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >My rejecting the three that is one has apparently led me into disconnection from reality and demon infestation.

                  It certainly is mysterious how this always seems to happen.

                  But, it always seems to happen.

                • c4ssidy says:

                  9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

                  10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.

                  11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

                  12 All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any.

                  This looks pretty harmonious with faith alone. The people among them stated not to inherit the kingdom of God precede to be described as being washed and sanctified in the name of Jesus

                • jim says:

                  As I said, it is a seeming contradiction. Don’t take one set of verses, run with it, and toss all the other sets of verses behind the water heater in the basement.

                  The standard Christian approach over the past two millenia is to take both halves of a seeming contradiction and affirm both as simultaneously true without coming up with clever explanations as to how they can both be simultaneously true. Clever and excessively detailed explanations only cause trouble, and if one comes up with an explanation, safest if one also comes up with a mutually contradictory explanation, and affirm both of them as true.

                  We cannot be justified by works, but we can certainly be unjustified by sin. To be saved, have to do a reasonably workman like job. Superhuman virtue is not required, nor is it sufficient. This contradiction is less hard than most of them. And if someone tries elaborating on that explanation, I am going to come up with another equally good explanation that contradicts it.

  41. Alfred says:

    Far more common than death is long term disability, mental confusion and inability to put out much physical effort for very long.

    If the spike protean harms but does not kill red blood cells but reduces the ability to carry oxygen then this should make it very hard to do physical effort that requires an increased amounts of oxygen. If so, the effect may wear off around “Vaccine full propagation” + 120 days when all the red blood cells have been recycled.

    • jim says:

      We know the shot causes large numbers of tiny blood clots. It seems more likely that these block small blood vessels, among them blood vessels in the heart, brain, and lungs.

      Damage to red blood cells would cause low oxygen levels, but the patient would not feel out of breath. Out of breath indicates reduced ability to get rid of carbon dioxide, so lung damage, not red cell damage.

  42. onyomi says:

    Although from our perspective they may seem part of one big group of corona-chan worshippers, I read an interesting theory that there are warring factions of pro-vax and pro-lockdown holy spirallers in the US govmt. and presumably elsewhere.

    The two positions obviously undermine one another, as if vax are effective, no need for lockdowns and avoidance of need for further restrictions is the biggest pro-vax carrot.

    Those who love lockdown, though they typically also love vax, of course must emphasize the scariness of variants to breakthrough vax and spread in spite of vax to generate the fear necessary for lockdown.

    Of the two groups, the lockdowners are the holier, as the vaxers are closer to declaring victory or at least setting a target for victory, while the lockdowners are suggesting something more like eternal vigilance.

    On this theory there may have been a recent palace coup by the holy lockdowners within the Biden admin resulting in the recent switchup on mask guidance and suggestion of further lockdowns. They probably say that this is a winning issue with which to attack DeSantis, ensure continued mail-in voting, etc. On the other hand, the pro-vaxxers could reasonably assert that declaring victory sooner than later will make voters more positively disposed to the Biden admin. The lockdowners may assure Biden that it will be the “Biden boosters” that will save the day rather than the Trump vax.

    Anyway, if above is roughly true, it is a mild white pill for me, because suggests hints of corona priesthood devouring their own, which process will hopefully eventually whittle their true believers down and/or subject to defection by someone willing to sacrifice the corona faith to some other political expediencies.

    • alf says:

      Yeah I don’t even know what we’re supposed to believe anymore. The official covid narrative has more plottwists than an average telenovela episode.

      • The Cominator says:

        “Yeah I don’t even know what we’re supposed to believe anymore.”

        No source from the US government academia media etc. ALWAYS assume they are lying to you and running a scam.

        That should have been obvious to you years ago and I was screaming at people when this shit started that I couldn’t believe they were falling for it.

        • onyomi says:

          I think Alf is saying it’s beginning to become difficult to comprehend what one is even supposed to believe, as the official narrative now is internally incoherent. They are simultaneously saying delta variant reproduces just as well in the noses of the vaccinated as the unvaccinated, covid will become endemic so the best we can hope for is it evolving in a more benign direction, mass vaccination may impel evolution of more virulent strains, and everyone should get vaccinated as soon as possible regardless of risk profile.

          • onyomi says:

            Also, one should have to prove vaccination to go to work and enter crowded spaces, which completely contradicts the “vaccinated may have just as much contagious delta mutation viruses in their noses as the vaccinated and so should wear masks” findings cited by Fauci as justification for reintroducing masks.

        • someDude says:

          They’ve given up pretending to make sense

        • jbp says:

          Anybody you have not met in person.

      • Alfred says:

        Yeah I don’t even know what we’re supposed to believe anymore.

        Priestly influence crumbles without a unified message. I’m starting to see signs of it. Good opportunity to fill that void with a useful meme.

        • Pooch says:

          The regime institutions need to be discredited (why do we even have a CDC?) instead of the actual covid narritive. We need people more open to the end of democracy as the only solution.

          • Alfred says:

            I think a lot of the more mainstream right is open to ending democracy but the problem is the normal of solution putting the military in charge doesn’t work with the Woke Trannzies who are running the military. There isn’t an alternative right now.

            It’s also likely that after the highly rigged mid terms the very idea of Democracy is going to look like a joke.

      • Karl says:

        The cathedral has always been preaching contradictory things and leftist factions fighting each other is nothing new.

        I hope they will soon start killing each other, but so far this coalition is holding pretty well.

        • jim says:

          I was expecting blood pretty soon – still am, but it has not happened yet.

          The peace with Russia move was interesting. The State Department said they would obey – for a few months.

          What has happened is that the deep state and corrupt Democrats are in charge, but are letting the fanatics run provided the fanatics don’t challenge their power, I continue to predict very large scale violence in 2026 or so, as I have been predicting for decades, but I was thinking that with Trump out of the way we would continue to see escalation in the violence as left wing factions turned up the heat on each other- and in some respects we have seen more violence, for example the Churches burning, but the coalition is holding quite well. The left factions are not turning up the heat on each other. I was expecting some more Epsteins by now.

          I conjecture that we are still in the phase of coalition building preparatory for serious power struggle. Which could continue for quite a while. The plan, or a plan of several mutually incompatible plans, is to eliminate the Republicans in the mid terms, and, Republicans eliminated, then go for each other.

          • Alfred says:

            The plan, or a plan of several mutually incompatible plans, is to eliminate the Republicans in the mid terms, and, Republicans eliminated, then go for each other.

            When will they arrest Trump? Right after the mid terms?

          • The Ducking Man says:

            My opinion will beg to differ because you are assuming there won’t be common enemy in the global power struggle.

            But issue is, China is increasingly becoming common enemies for a lot of countries, US and Russia follow soon.

            The Cathedral won’t have time for internal struggle because soon China will be declared as enemy, like WW2 US and Russia will team up for common enemy this time China.

            (this is purely my opinion), unlike WW2, this time due to The Cathedral’s incompetence US will lose to China. New emperor will be appointed in China following internal collapse of CCP (recent disaster signaled me that heaven just have enough with Xi and his chronies).

            • jim says:

              > China is increasingly becoming common enemies for a lot of countries, US and Russia follow soon.

              I don’t think so. China will probably invade Taiwan soon, or blockade it, though I am not getting out of Taiwan Semiconductor just yet – I don’t think it is all that soon. And from time to time they will foreclose on keptocracies that borrow Chinese money and forget to pay it back. But the basic Chinese strategy is the silk road, for which order in Afghanistan is the central and critical requirement. They see how well the US had done out of cultural and economic domination, they recall China’s glory days of cultural and economic domination, and that is what they are after.

              They are after soft power, though they will probably soon use hard power to back it.

              • The Ducking Man says:

                China has become huge thorn on both US and Russia.

                1. China is still security threat to US even after Biden is elected that the trade restriction is not easing anytime soon. Even right now China’s state arm in IT (Huawei, etc.) are in huge trouble following chip shortages.

                2. China undermines Russia’s defense industry, if China’s 5th gen fighter program prove to successful it will pose serious threat to Russia’s air defense industry. Further issue if China’s missiles prove to be reliable.

                Though my biggest concern is, Xi’s chronies seems filled with empty headed officials that they’ll pressure to declare war even when logically speaking there is no need to.

                IMO at some point Xi and his chronies will abandon the silk road strategy abruptly, like, “what the hell?” or Xi is just really desperate for money because it seems like even Xi start doing austerity measure.

                • jim says:

                  > 2. China undermines Russia’s defense industry

                  Economic competition normally leads to cooperation, rather than violence, and there is massive cooperation between the Russian and Chinese air industries, with lots of Russian parts and Russian technology being purchased by China.

                  The fundamental conflict is between America and China, in that the belt and the silk road initiative are challenging US political, cultural, and economic domination. America does not like it, but the countries targeted rather do like it, since an increasingly arrogant, violent, and out of touch America is getting up their noses.

                  > they’ll pressure to declare war even when logically speaking there is no need to.

                  The plan is to take Taiwan, by force if necessary, and to deny the US the waters close to China so that the US cannot again execute a flanking attack by sea as it did in the Korean war. If China does what it plans to do, the US might well declare war on China. The idea that China might declare war on the US is absurd.

                  The preferred plan is to demonstrate US incapacity to interfere forcibly in Taiwan politics, and Chinese capability to interfere forcibly in Taiwan politics, whereupon a pro unification government will, they expect, “spontaneously” take power in Taiwan without the actual need for direct overt Chinese armed intervention in Taiwan. The US might well declare war in response to a dramatic demonstration of its incapacity – and a dramatic demonstration of US incapacity might well arguably be an initiation of war by China. That might well happen.

          • Karl says:

            What do you mean with eliminate the Republicans?

            Normality bias of the deep state will support a Republican presence in the senate and in congress. The inner party-outer party modell has served the deep state quite well. I assume the deep state would like to keep it. Of course, that doesn’t mean it will be kept, because there for every seat there will an inner party member that would like to have it.

            Anyway, the republicans in the senate and congress are without power. There is no need to get rid of them.

            The situation is different for governors. They might hold some real power. So I expect that no Republican governor will be elected. Is that the elemination you are expecting?

            • jim says:

              I mean permanent irrelevant minority status in Federal government, permanent irrelevant minority status in most states, rapidly becoming permanent irrelevant minority status in all states. They will not be removed every last one, but only good leftists will be elected, and those good leftists will still have an inferior and minor place.

              This assumes they fail to do what they have to do, which is to dispute physical control of polling. He who votes counts for nothing, he who counts, counts for everything.

              • Pooch says:

                Yes like California state government. Some token GOP seats are there but it is one party rule. Moldbug argues this is a good thing in terms of accelerationism as the GOP has been traditionally used as a stabilizing brake.

      • FrankNorman says:

        It’s called gaslighting.

  43. Karl says:

    I assume your official truth of only a thousand or so having died after vaccination is only for the USA?

    The WHO’s database VigiAccess by now lists more than 10000 dead globally after the clot shot.

  44. alf says:

    The unwillingness of pro clot-shots to discuss the science behind the shots they so vehemently advocate is telling. Just like in global warming, no one is allowed to talk about the logarithmic relation between CO2 and temperature, with the shot, no one is allowed to talk about its efficacy and its side effects.

    o/t — does anybody have a link to that guy who wrote about rangers and seals trainings and how stupid and suicidal they are? I’ve been looking everywhere but can’t find it…

    • Cementmixer says:

      I don’t have a link but sounds interesting. From a quick search I found this

      I wonder if this kinda thing is sensible or defensible from a military standpoint. From a civilian perspective it seems like malevolence excused as “training”

      Why worry about enemies afar they don’t hate us nearly as much as those near?

      • alf says:

        Found it!

        John T Reed. No wonder I forgot. The man could take a lesson from Moldbug in creating memorable internet names.

        • The Cominator says:

          The ranger thing was that officers got flunked for random reasons sometimes it wasn’t complaining about it being physically grueling, seals is much worse than ranger school along those lines.

          Spec ops training has to be grueling beyond endurance because sometimes they need men who need to go on in situations beyond endurance.

          • alf says:

            Spec ops training has to be grueling beyond endurance because sometimes they need men who need to go on in situations beyond endurance.

            John T Reed argues some grueling can be a useful part of training, but not all grueling, not weeks at end. These elite training camps are mostly useless, dumb and masochistic. The warrior’s version of a holiness spiral.

            • The Cominator says:


              I read it too, it wasn’t complaining that officers in Ranger school were flunked because grueling but because of random criteria. I don’t know that he commented on SEAL (or army special forces training, or marine force recon, or recondo school).

              If he criticized any of the above recondo school is probably the one that sounds like warrior pain endurance holiness spiraling more than any… as I know that part of recondo school is literally being held prisoner and tortured (yes this part of the “training” all of the people there go through, its not publicized much but they do it… you are manacled, beaten up, burned with cigarettes etc literally).

              • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                The purpose of training is not just the cultivation of particular skills, but the cultivation of discipline in general that prefigures masterful engagement with the world; a mindset where performing the right rituals in the right way secures success life and livelihood, the habituation of a feeling of control and resiliency regardless of the situation.

                The arbitrary sadomasochism one sees in modern democratic militaries on the other hand does not train men to be masters; rather, it pushes trainees towards adopting victim mindsets instead, learned helplessness, internalized powerlessness.

                • jim says:

                  Learned helplessness being exactly the opposite of the mindset one wants in one’s soldiers. You need warriors to win, so you need a victory mindset.

                  Unless, of course, you fear our soldiers more than the enemy’s soldiers, as our officially unofficial priesthood does.

                  One indication of a massive militarily disabling epidemic of learned helplessness in our soldiers is the utterly ridiculous ratio of ammunition expended to enemy casualties.

                • Aidan says:

                  There is nothing that turns a natural warrior away from the military more than boot camp imo. Learned helplessness is a good way to put it.

                  Though, Jim, the ratio of ammo expended to enemy casualties might have more to do with the doctrine of suppressing fire. For a long time, the tactic in a firefight was to shoot a machinegun at the enemy position to scare them and make them duck behind cover so that your guys could move closer. But then again, when I read accounts of the war in Afghanistan, that is not what happened. Rather, the US army would go off base and drive around waiting to get ambushed, and then sit there under fire, not advancing, shooting a bunch of ineffectual fire back, while hoping the enemy would get bored and go away.

                • jim says:

                  Suppressing fire is only useful if you are going somewhere the enemy does not want you to go, in which case you should be moving as fast as possible

                  The amount of ammo expended is so great that it is unlikely that it is being expended in this way.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Certainly I’ve never been in real combat or in the military but I have been in airsoft combats where the enemy had SAWS and was using supressing tactics (wooded area) and yeah it works…

                  That was a bad airsoft day, we were outgunned and had a very unusually incompetent commander… that was the day that made me realize that yes fragging does have to happen sometimes. We all agreed that if this was a real war we would 100% have fragged him after he made two disastorous decisions in a row (a WWI style assault that immediately failed and then putting medics on the frontline…).

                • Alfred says:

                  But then again, when I read accounts of the war in Afghanistan, that is not what happened. Rather, the US army would go off base and drive around waiting to get ambushed, and then sit there under fire, not advancing, shooting a bunch of ineffectual fire back, while hoping the enemy would get bored and go away.

                  I saw a go pro video of exactly that. Group was on patrol walking on the ridge of hill and the locals opened up on them from very far away. The guy with the go pro tumbled down the hill on the side where the shooting was coming from alone. There were a couple of decent sized rocks for cover in front of him, but instead of diving behind them and looking for cover, he sat on his ass randomly firing in the general direction that it sounded like the shots were coming from with no targets in sight.

                  This attracted attention and shots started landing within 10 yards of him, so at this point he crawled behind the rocks for cover and curled up. Video stopped at that point. I assumed he turned his camera off. He didn’t die from the attack and the only damage he had was from falling out of fear when the shooting started.

                  He was probably a dumb grunt but there didn’t appear to be anything like military training kicking in with his actions.

                • jim says:

                  I have had no military training, and only a little bit of combat and survival training, but my spontaneous and instinctive response would have been strongly oriented to my survival and the destruction of my enemies.

                  It sounds like this innate and instinctive response was beaten out of him by learned helplessness.

                • Alfred says:

                  Certainly I’ve never been in real combat or in the military but I have been in airsoft combats where the enemy had SAWS and was using supressing tactics (wooded area) and yeah it works…

                  Suppression works when you need to move. Shooting randomly towards a foe while not moving is asking to be hit with mortars or artillery.

                  During the Battle of France Rommel famously had his tanks fire left and right into the treeline whenever there was a likely spot for a hidden AT gun while moving down the road. This suppressed the AT guns but it’s only really useful for movement. If you want to defeat a foe, you need to kill them, not wait for them to run out of ammo and go home.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “I have had no military training, and only a little bit of combat and survival training, but my spontaneous and instinctive response would have been strongly oriented to my survival and the destruction of my enemies.

                  It sounds like this innate and instinctive response was beaten out of him by learned helplessness.”

                  A good % of guys are just going to shit themselves if they are really under fire.

                  I think we can say a lot about the current regime is terrible but I don’t think marine training, army infantry school etc deliberately cause people to shit themselves under fire. That certainly wasn’t their reputation as recently as 15 years ago.

                  The training has probably been degraded by pretending women can be soldiers and marines.

                • jim says:

                  > A good % of guys are just going to shit themselves if they are really under fire.

                  The normal response is to first duck and roll, and almost immediately do something as deadly as possible. Only much later does one notice one has wet one’s pants.

                  Going limp is a normal response to sudden and unexpected injury, or to expected injury which one has realized one is helpless against. In males it is a highly abnormal response to imminent threat. You don’t even go limp when certain injury is moments away. You go limp when it hits, if then. If further injury is oncoming, you don’t go limp even then.

                  If a lot of troops just shit themselves when shot at, a lot of troops are pathologically broken. It is an abnormal reaction.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  The training is schizophrenic with various parts at cross purposes. Some of it pushes towards adaptive frames, and some of it pushes towards maladaptive frames, and the latter increasingly predominates over the former as time has gone on.

                • Alfred says:

                  >The training has probably been degraded by pretending women can be soldiers and marines.

                  They roll tape of white men being “trained” by drill instructor Shaniqua in the media now. I doubt men are being taught anything besides submitting to fat stupid black whores these days.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  This must be a new thing, because I was always trained that immediate action was to turn into an ambush and storm the ambushers. You identify positions and you buddy rush them as fast as you can, then get among them and break the ambush. I’m up, they see me, I’m down, and you just repeat that. You cover your squadmates when you are in the prone and you sprint as fast as you can while you are up and running. If it is too far to rush them, you take cover and provide well aimed shots to kill the enemy, while constantly moving to better position and vantage points as you go.

                  It might be an army thing. Army was weird. They never seemed to have the competitive drive that the Marines did. If you think of yourself as an almighty, invincible slayer, irresistible to women and the bane of your enemies, then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

                  That is really what makes the Marines great. The leadership is shit and the training only gets you to acceptable proficiency, but the mentality they inculcate in the men is that they can do the impossible shit that no other men can do, so when everyone else says, “No way, that shit is impossible,” the Marines just shout, “Let’s take that fucking hill!”

                • neofugue says:

                  Full Metal Jacket:


                  In all honesty I liked Hartman, ignoring the comedy aspect he seemed to be the father figure Pyle never had and desperately needed.



                  This movie follows a young man who trains to be a sniper only to have his girl leave him and his friend die without being given the chance to use his skills in battle.

                  I don’t know to what extent these movies correspond to reality since I don’t know any military people (other than my brother’s friend at West Point) but do these films provide insight into the state of our armed forces? Or are these Progressive anti-military propaganda pieces designed to denigrate our warriors?

                • Anonymous says:

                  I dunno about Full Metal Jacket, but Jarhead is Progressive propaganda.

                  Could you imagine if that scene was done differently? If a tall, muscular white man barged in and grabbed authority from two smaller, impotent black men? If one of the two black men completely lost his marbles? Could you imagine a white man in a position of authority saying to two black soldiers, “You STA boys are some weird motherfuckers.”?

            • The Cominator says:

              Oh I think it was part of Search and Evade training.


            • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

              The Marine Corps does this for about two weeks, split up into 3 blocks. 2 during boot camp, and 1 during Marine combat training. Limited food, limited sleep, so that you can understand how far you can push. The Marines are not the most elite force in the military, but it does get them to the point they can do things that would break most other military forces. The SEAL hell week seems to be about the same thing. Hard work for weeks, and one week of misery and deprivation to get you familiar with how far you can push. Ranger school sounds like a fucking stupid place. Permanently crippling good men and ruining careers so that they can jerk themselves off about how hard they are? Stupid shit.

              • The Cominator says:

                A long long time ago I read a book on the SEALs. SEALs often do ranger school but they have to tell SEAL graduates to not laugh off the physical requirements (because SEAL requirements are so much worse).

                But failing officers for stupid and arbitrary reasons is another matter. I’m not sure how often people get permanently crippled there (shit like that happens during SEAL training to).

            • Aidan says:

              In the past, an elite warrior’s training and lifestyle was some grueling, and a lot of extreme luxury. Maybe modern people need extremely hard training because people were naturally tougher back then, maybe it’s over the top. I wouldn’t know.

              The idea behind the insanely hard training is to get people used to the stress and terror of combat without actually shooting live ammo at them. But born warriors like combat. It’s not stressful for them to the point where it could break a man. A common thread in history even through WWII is that some soldiers had a great time in pitched battle. I’ve had some soldiers confess to me that they enjoyed combat and loved killing people, it made them feel great, and some would almost piss their pants when they heard enemy fire.

              A natural warrior just doesn’t need to be broken down the way modern military training tries to do. In that sense, maybe the genetic stock going into the special forces is a bit deficient- spiritually, not physically, and they need to try and turn spiritual commoners into warriors.

              • Karl says:

                What do you mean with “in the past” in this context? When did the problem of stupid military training start?

                Did the US soldiers fighting in the Korean war already go through the same shit as recruits today?

                • jim says:

                  Training in World War II was already stupid for the allies, but not for Germans, in World War I, arguably already stupid for grunts, but not officers.

                  It has rapidly become stupider and stupider faster and faster.

                • Publius Discretius says:

                  Now that is an interesting topic. In what way Allied WWII training went stupid?

                • suones says:

                  When slapping a soldier out of a fit of cowardice became declasse, cowardice became honoured as “PTSD,” and bravery became “just doing a job.” That’s when you know your Army is cucked. Patton couldn’t help himself, of course, but the rot was well and truly embedded by that time.

                  A warrior enjoys battle. To him the thrill of action is what drives him, and the risk of death what makes it exciting. This is what separates him from a prole with a gun, which is what conscript armies have meant since Napoleon[1]. A dozen knights were sufficient to battle down a hundred proles with pitchforks. Guns changed the rules of the game for a while, and vast numbers, even if cannon fodder, suddenly became valuable. The balance is turning/has turned back towards warriors now.


                • info23 says:


                  In China the Knightly Military Aristocracy disappeared under the pressure of constant warfare and the invention of crossbows:

                  “The shi had a strict code of chivalry. In the battle of Zheqiu, 420 BC, the shi Hua Bao shot at and missed another shi Gongzi Cheng, and just as he was about to shoot again, Gongzi Cheng said that it was unchivalrous to shoot twice without allowing him to return a shot. Hua Bao lowered his bow and was subsequently shot dead.[17][18] In 624 B.C. a disgraced shi from the State of Jin led a suicidal charge of chariots to redeem his reputation, turning the tide of the battle.[17] In the Battle of Bi, 597 BC, the routing chariot forces of Jin were bogged down in mud, but pursuing enemy troops stopped to help them get dislodged and allowed them to escape.[19]

                  As chariot warfare became eclipsed by mounted cavalry and infantry units with effective crossbowmen in the Warring States period (403–221 BC), the participation of the shi in battle dwindled as rulers sought men with actual military training, not just aristocratic background.[20] This was also a period where philosophical schools flourished in China, while intellectual pursuits became highly valued amongst statesmen.[21] Thus, the shi eventually became renowned not for their warrior’s skills, but for their scholarship, abilities in administration, and sound ethics and morality supported by competing philosophical schools.[22]



                • suones says:

                  …participation of the shi in battle dwindled as rulers sought men with actual military training, not just aristocratic background.

                  This is the source of the rot. If “people with actual military training” (and ability, ofc), i.e., warriors, and “people with aristocratic background” are groups which do not have almost total overlap, the nation is going to ruin. Aristocracy should be bestowed by Victory in Battle, and a Warrior should possess the Mandate of Heaven, and all will be well. Chinese history is a tale of one priestly takeover after another, culminating in the almost elimination of aristocracy in favour of a bureaucracy that ultimately consumed tian xia.

                  If your “aristocrats” aren’t largely warriors, something has gone terribly wrong somewhere.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Dueling keeps aristocracies full of warriors even in periods of long peace.

                • info23 says:


                  The final death blow to the Aristocracy came when the Rebel Huang Chao with his Men killed them all. He also killed their whole families:


                  At minimum the destruction of the great Aristocratic Clans involved the elimination of every last one of its male members.

                  And the redistribution of the females among the victors or sold into slavery.

                • suones says:

                  Huang Chao’s rebellion interests me indirectly as it was the proximal cause for the (irreversible) weakening of Tang power. Not because he destroyed some clans. New clans come into being all the time. Tokugawa destroyed Takeda clan in japan, but the nation as a whole was none the worse off, and possibly better.

                  Reduction in Tang power weakened the Turko-Mongol (Buddhist) and Hindu entente in what is now Afghanistan and Uzbekistan, and greatly weakened the prestige of Tang-client Buddhist Turkshahi rulers of Kabulistan. It provided an opportunity for Saracens to attack across the Hindukush mountains and establish a foothold in Ghazni, which they expanded over the centuries into India. Kabulistan soon had a Hindu takeover, and so did Zabulistan and Gandhara, but they could not hold against Northern and Western onslaughts both.

                  China has learned from this history, or course, which is why it encourages Eastern Turks to abandon Baphometan insanity and worship the CCP. Too bad “CCP State Religion” is retarded Marxism-Leninism. Also why China de-facto controls the Karakoram-Hindukush nexus through its client state Pakistan.

          • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

            A grueling trial is a ritual process of transformation, when understood in it’s proper context.

            A Traditional man may, for example, have walked over hot coals to prove his mettle and become a Man of the bund; but he is not paving his streets and lining his floors with hot coals.

            • alf says:

              I’ll be the first to admit I’ve always greatly disliked hazing and grueling trials. But yes, in its proper context, no problem with it whatsoever. It can serve as a bonding and transformative experience.

              Which proper context of course is completely lost nowadays. If you look at guys like Jocko Willink or David Goggins, you’re not a man until you cough up blood for the sake of coughing up blood.

              Also, using the unnecessary deaths of fellow men at bootcamps as a bragging point seems very un-warrior like to me. Dumb role models.

              • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                Yeah, your squad mates dying is a shit thing to brag about. It means there is something wrong with you. There were other men I hated in boot camp, but they were still my guys. If someone from another platoon had fucked with them I would have gone to the mat for them. If someone had died it would be a tragedy, not something about which to boast. Sometimes men die, and sometimes it is necessary, but the way this training is done is not necessary. It is crass, unwarriorlike, and unsporting to build yourself up on the bodies of men who died because your leaders were incompetent.

        • Joe says:

          This article details a few military holiness spirals. The following passage is instructive.

          Ironically, I suspect that many, if not most, of the brass who were hosting the “command performance” parties did not want to do so. They only hosted the parties because they felt, probably accurately, that it was expected of them as commanders. They were afraid that if they failed to comply with the Army officer group norm of holding many parties per year for their subordinates, that they might get a bad efficiency report for not “building camaraderie” or some similar accusation.

          The outcome of failing to participate in such things would be predictable to many at Jim’s blog.

          That was also the unit where the battalion commander made me drive to Loc Ninh on Route 13 in a lone jeep repeatedly until we drove through an untriggered ambush.

          Back then, officers were promoted to captain on the second anniversary of their commissioning—unless, apparently, they did not eat cold supper with the colonel.

          One wonders from whence will come the colonels required for America’s colonels’ coup.

  45. Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

    A Student asks the Master: “Master, by what means can a thing be said to have power?”

    The Master was silent for a moment, then spake: “There was a day when a great magician traveled throughout the land; where he found the bumps of rolling hillocks, he raised them up into mountains; where he found the divots of ditches and hollows, he dug them down into valleys: where he found the lines of fences and dikes, he built them into great walls.”

    The Student then saith: “So the power is in imposing one’s will upon creation?”

    The Master replied: “The power was already; all that needed be done was for it to be made into what it always and already intended to be; and thus he became power.”

    The Student was then enlightened.

Leave a Reply