The spike protein is cytotoxic

We have seen a holiness spiral on China flu.

Initial medical treatment was catastrophic, resulting in a huge number of iatrogenic deaths. Which of course cast doubt on priestlyness of the medical profession. The resulting conflict was not at first left right aligned, but every conflict gets assimilated to the left right conflict, and the left naturally took the priestly side, forcibly suppressing effective low tech treatments for China flu, from chicken soup to hydroxychloroquine and zinc, while forcefully promoting inadequately tested and inappropriate high tech treatments.

And, once it became a left right issue, the left started holiness spiraling on it, taking it to ever greater and ever more evil and insane extremes, just as “lets not beat up gays” became Drag Queen Story Hour.

And, surprise surprise, vaccines based on genetic engineering generating the spike protein are disastrously inappropriate. It is a big catastrophe, and may well be a bigger disaster than the China Flu itself, because China Flu only killed people who had one foot on the grave and were wobbling on the edge, while the vaccine is killing healthy people. It attacks the brain, the heart, and circulatory system.

We anecdotally hear of large number of adverse outcomes, friends, friends of friends, contractors, random people, sometimes very serious outcomes from the vaccine. But we don’t know how many, because the number is suppressed. Whenever we hear someone telling us of a serious adverse outcome, we find that this outcome was never acknowledged or recorded.

This is the reverse poster girl principle. The poster girl principle is that if the poster girl, for example Marie Curie and Emmett Till, is fake, the event depicted, rather than being widespread, is utterly nonexistent. There are no great female scientists and there were no lynching’s of blacks for offenses that were trivial, or offenses of which they were plausibly innocent. In all of American history, not one lynching that would be suitable for a poster boy.

The poster girl principle is that if poster girl fake, no such cases.

The reverse poster girl principle is that if they are suppressing cases, there are a mighty lot of such cases.

During the China Flu epidemic (which is now over, we are hitting herd immunity among susceptible subpopulations in most of the world) there were considerable excess deaths, though it is difficult to distinguish iatrogenic excess deaths from excess deaths caused by disease. It has been a long time since we had a flu epidemic with such a large number of excess deaths, though flu epidemics with a roughly comparable number of excess deaths, fewer excess deaths but not all that much fewer, are fairly common.

The number of deaths attributed to China Flu is, nonetheless bogus. Deaths “with virus” are treated as if “of” the virus. If the common cold were treated this way, it would be the most lethal disease in history. Excess death figures indicate a much smaller number of deaths, though still quite a lot of deaths. Some portion of the excess, perhaps most of it, is, however, iatrogenic death. And it is impossible to rule out all of it being iatrogenic death. There are quite a lot of excess deaths most flu seasons. We don’t know if, without mass iatrogenic deaths, the impact of China Flu would have been similar to recent flu seasons.

Any death is apt to be attributed to China Flu, if there is the slightest excuse for doing so. There is enormous reluctance to attribute a death to the vaccine, even if it is perfectly obvious that the vaccine killed someone.

One vaccine works by injecting you with a virus genetically engineered to be incapable of reproducing inside the human body, which nonetheless produces a lot of spike protein. So your immune system learns to attack the spike protein and to attack infected cells producing it.

The other vaccine, the RNA vaccine simply causes your cells to produce spike protein by injecting you with alien RNA, but without a virus for the vaccine to target, it is doubtful that it can have much effect on the course of the infection. It can make the infection less damaging by prepping your immune system to attack the spike protein – assuming you survive getting a whole lot of spike protein in the first place. RNA technology is a really cool bleeding edge biotechnology, but you don’t want to be on the bleeding edge of really cool biotechnology any more than you would want to be a test pilot on one of Musk’s rocket prototypes.

The China Flu vaccines resemble the space plane projects, in that they decorate dumb ideas with the appearance, but not the substance, of high technology. What we have here is genuinely cool bleeding edge technology, but used more for decoration and display than because it is appropriate, or even particularly relevant to the problem.

China flu is another flu, closely related to a thousand other flues that have afflicted us in the past and will afflict us in the future. Why are we not using the older vaccine technology (which also kills people, but I never heard of horrible consequences on this scale with previous flu vaccines)?

The initial China Flu crisis was not a disease crisis, but a crisis of using high technology for magic and status, rather than using it in a practical, pragmatic, and reality based manner, causing a massive number of iatrogenic deaths. The vaccine is more of the same – science and technology being used as decoration for magical priestly incantations rather than because it provides capabilities particularly relevant to the problem at hand.

The relevant cool high tech solution would have been to genetically engineer a variant of the China flu virus that has same antigens as the original, but was knackered in some way, bearing the same relationship to China Flu as the vaccinia virus bears to Smallpox. The mRNA cellular reprogramming vaccine is the irrelevant use of an irrelevant high technology. Cool high tech, but irrelevant and dangerous, used for magical, rather practical, reasons.

It would have been highly effective to knacker the China flu virus by deleting portions of the spike protein that antibodies tend not to target, rendering it non functional, since removal of any part of the protein is apt to render the whole protein non functional, and then cheerfully infect everyone with that virus, which without the key weapon in its armory for entering cells, would be incapable of spreading. That would be just as much impressive magic high tech, and would actually achieve the desired result. They instead used mRNA based reprogramming for much the same reasons as they keep putting wings on rockets.

The priests are stomping all over the scientists and engineers:

Luigi and Derrick worked together to be the first to describe mRNA-based reprogramming in a pathbreaking paper in Cell Stem Cell, titled Highly efficient reprogramming to pluripotency and directed differentiation of human cells with synthetic modified mRNA. The work was named one of the top ten scientific breakthroughs of 2010 by the journal Science, as well as one of the top ten medical breakthroughs of the year by TIME magazine. Luigi Warren is the President and CEO of Cellular Reprogramming, Inc, a biotechnology firm based on the biotechnology that he founded.

Twitter had him delete his post on the toxicity of people vaccinated by the technology that he developed, for “spreading misinformation”. The problem being that people who have no great understanding of his work grabbing it and running with it, and then sitting in judgment over the actual scientists and engineers. Much as caused the Challenger disaster. What he said is not that important. What is important is who decides what may be said. Some demon worshiper decides he knows more about the technology than Luigi because he is holier than Luigi.

What we are seeing is not a epidemic. We are seeing the decline of science and technology, and its replacement by priestly magic rituals dressed in the robes of science. That is what killed a lot of people during our usual flu season, and may well be killing a lot of people right now.

The mRNA vaccine is another space shuttle. Wings on rockets are useful for some purposes, around mach ten to fifteen, like China’s anti carrier missiles, but for re-entry from orbit, they are like giving a fish a bicycle.

It was simply idiotic from the beginning to use wings to accomplish re-entry and landing from orbit and it was simply idiotic from the beginning to use Luigi’s mRNA based cellular reprogramming for a vaccine. It is a way cool technology that in the right hands could do wonderful things, but vaccination is not among those things. Our science and technology is being run by people like the moron who censored Luigi for “spreading misinformation”.

They made a vaccine using mRNA cellular reprogramming for much the same reasons as they put wings on an orbital vehicle.

1,186 Responses to “The spike protein is cytotoxic”

  1. Halion says:

    Hi Jim! If I understood correctly and in short, if I was obliged to get a vaccine, it should be Sputnik V or Sinopharm and avoid Pfizer and AstraZeneca at all costs, is that right?

    • Varna says:

      Sputnik V is an adenoviral vector equivalent to Astra Zeneca and Johnson & Johnson. Good enough for perfectly healthy youths, amplifies preexisting conditions, even latent ones, with everyone else.

      Sinopharm and Sinovac are trad dead virus vaccines. Half the world is using them with no problem. Word is China is jabbing their army with their own Sputnik V equivalent (CanSino), while the more fragile civilians get Sinopharm and Sinovac.

      Thus, if you’re a youth in perfect health, Sputnik V will likely not cause major problems, but if you’re just a normal adult managing a number of minor issues, better the trad vax by the Chinese. Higher odds of health stuff not suddenly erupting.

      Also, after vector vaccines like Sputnik V or Astra Zeneca, there is frequently a period of up to two weeks in which the immune system is depressed and you’ll react WORSE if hit by a virus. So after a jab like that–spend a fortnight away from people, until the immune system bounces back.

  2. Dominic says:

    Lots of market prognosticators say real estate, stocks, bitcoin, all assets are bubbles.

    So I’m supposed to hold fiat currency? Feels like at the end of the day that might be worth less, no?

    • jim says:

      Fiat is always the biggest bubble of them all, and never comes down until it does come down.

      I think fiat is the worst, real estate is very good, and, of course, you know what I am betting on.

      • Karl says:

        Real estate is good only if you do have secure rights of ownership. Many places you do not have secure rights. In some places, the police will watch a mob burning down your house and arrest you if you try to to stop the mob by force.

        When the fiat bubble burst in Venezuela, real estate wasn’t worth much, but it was in Weimar Germany.

        The question is what will the the bursting of the fiat bubble look like. Will there still be secure property rights (like in Weimar) or not (like Venezuele, Zimbabwe).

        • Dominic says:

          So I understand much public current key cryptography is vulnerable to quantum computing. How quantum-resistant is crypto? How quantum-resistant can it really be?

          • jim says:

            Quantum computing didn’t work thirty years ago, and has made zero progress since then.

            Thirty years ago they claimed to have factored the number fifteen, which was sort of true and sort of untrue.

            They have not yet factored the number twenty one.

        • Pooch says:

          May have answered your own question. It could depend entirely on the demographics of where that house is located.

          • Karl says:

            Demographics will be an important factor, but that is already factored into real estate prices.

            I expect that the holiness of the government will matter a great deal. If owning a house that is not CO2-neutral or whatever is unholy, you might find out that that house isn’t a valuable asset at all.

            • Pooch says:

              Not necessarily. Houses in rural white counties are dirt cheap. Houses in exclusive suburban/urban gated communities close to major cities surrounded by niggers on all sides are very expensive. These counties are generally minority white. It’s easy to follow that the rural white county governments will be less holy than the blue counties that the elites live in.

        • The Cominator says:

          So this is to say that areas of the country that suppress left wing riots real estate will be worth something, but areas that do not you should sell your house.

          So Florida real estate is good and Wisconsin is not.

  3. Basil says:

    The monogamy patriarchy worked because the elites to be interested in a large number of loyal and hard-working men from the bottom. Men had to 1) work and 2) protect 3) don’t rebel. For the service, the man received himself a pussy. Automation, economies of scale, and the concentration of capital are turning more and more men into useless consumers. It is a matter of time before most people simply cannot do their jobs better than machines. Ironically, women will be more in demand as workers: nannies, social workers and concubines. 2) The nature of the war has also changed. In the 21st century, drones and viruses will fight, the days of massive armies are over. 3) Also, monogamy was needed to maintain order. But after centuries of self-domestication, a global drop in testosterone, improvements in detection and identification, the transition to electronic money, porn / endless entertainment, this is no longer so important.

    Consequently, the elite no longer has the incentive to maintain order and the families of the masses. Moreover, they will destroy family through anti-domestic violence and social support laws to eliminate future clan formation and competition, and reduce the burden on the biosphere. Matriarchy will also be established in the elite, though more informal. Biotechnology to improve offspring will widen the gap between estates, so a rebellion from below will soon become impossible. Unless a crash happens in an hour, your dreams of returning the good old days will remain dreams.

    • jim says:


      The ratchet of social decay is devouring the ratchet of technological advance. Knowledge and skills keep getting lost. The tech ratchet keeps slipping. In many fields, when the old folks retire, stuff mysteriously just stops working. Tech advance continues, but is slowing, while tech loss is accelerating.

      It took an old type Christian society to create science and the industrial revolution, and what it created is starting to fall apart.

      The masses never mattered, so arguing they matter less now is irrelevant. The problem is that the elite is stupid and wicked, and is getting stupider and wickeder. The elite has been declining in quality since 1875. Look at the stuff they write, and the stuff they read.

      The prospects of genetically engineering a superior elite are not very likely when our capacity to genetically engineer an effective vaccine is diminishing. Genetic engineering peaked some time ago, with the first, and the last, creation of a living organism from wholly synthetic DNA assembled into wholly synthetic chromosomes. That was our last man on the moon moment.

      For a while it looked as if their was going to be a technological revolution with organs threedee printed from genetically modified cells. That capability is fading fast.

      And if we could engineer a smarter elite, they would instead engineer a stupider elite, docile human robots.

      • Cloudswrest says:

        Re: Technology. Never get tired of watching this.

        • Rick says:

          As the Roman empire collapsed weapons tech continued to improve. Musk’s rockets will give the country who owns them ability to claim the highest of the high ground. Though Musk is moving like a man desperate to finish his great work before the US government shuts him down.

          And unfortunately the US military is too stupid, lazy and incompetent to realize the advantage that Musk’s Starship will give them. They’ve failed to protect the Holy Star Prophet from the eye of Soros and the DOJ is right now digging through SpaceX’s employee records in order to destroy the unholy White and Asian male engineering teams.

          • jim says:

            It is not their stupidity and laziness.

            It is that superior holiness matters more than winning wars.

            Which will not change till a Stalin or a Cromwell takes charge, and perhaps not till a Monck takes charge.

      • FearTheReaper says:

        Is China suffering the same technological decline? I can’t help but hold out hope that someone will figure out life extension therapies/drugs/treatments, even if I have to move to Beijing and pay millions

        • jim says:

          China is still behind, but catching up fast. They have a substantial lead in hypersonic missiles and long range artillery. Their computers still suck, but they are promising better computers real soon now. We shall see.

          Drugs are most advanced in Russia, and continuing to advance. They have stuff Americans just do not, but I don’t know how the rest of their med tech compares.

          The Russian China flu vaccine is only marginally better than America’s (No adjuvants)

        • Rick says:

          >I can’t help but hold out hope that someone will figure out life extension therapies/drugs/treatments, even if I have to move to Beijing and pay millions

          Make babies. That’s where human immortality comes from.

          Once we’re able to clean up the oxygen damage to cells we’ll be able to live forever, unfortunately that will probably require a good copy of DNA from your youth to use as a template. Until then best to have youngins to carry on your spark of life to the future.

          • FearTheReaper says:

            Of course that’s in the cards, yet at my admittedly youthful age it doesn’t seem much comfort when facing either judgment or nothingness. I’d rather accomplish as much as I can, though I’m aware of the childishness of those thoughts

            • alf says:

              When you’re young, you want to conquer the world.

              When you grow older, you realize a pretty wife, some kids, enjoyable work and a few hobbies are really all you need. And interestingly enough, those activities tend to give you actual opportunities to conquer the world, even though that is not primary reason you engage in them.

    • Rick says:

      >so a rebellion from below will soon become impossible.

      You’ve clearly never read any history and everything you think you know about history is prog lies. Peasant revolts always fail. In all of recorded history the only peasant revolt that succeeded was in China when China had basically smashed itself apart through chaos and insanity. The elites have nothing to fear from the masses and never have. Elite on elite infighting matters, everyone else is just tools to their ends.

      > It is a matter of time before most people simply cannot do their jobs better than machines.

      This is true, but it’s mostly true because the quality of workers has been declining and the workers are becoming too stupid and poorly trained to do their jobs. Soon enough the quality of the machines will follow the decline of the people who make them.

      • nils says:

        Something which struck me as important, was the absence of famine causing successful insurrection in premodern(1500s ish) civilization. I do not understand what changed, but malthusian economics were simply not a problem for most lords (loaf keepers, aryan or redskin) in pre modern times. possibly something to do with the expansion of the franchise/patriarchy to all males as opposed to a landed/unlanded distinction which was more severe? was it the expansion of steel(even before powder) which increased the percent of males capable of duking it out in Mar’s hall? Have yet to find a good answer for this famine = burn the state, maybe just a symptom of decline into dark gods and blaming everyone. From biblical egypt to the maya starvation just wasnt that enourmous a problem. today it matters massively for the survival of the state.

        • Rick says:

          Malthus was a quack. During lean times women can’t put on enough body fat to conceive. Human reproduction rates naturally decline during bad times because of this.

          >Have yet to find a good answer for this famine = burn the state, maybe just a symptom of decline into dark gods and blaming everyone. From biblical egypt to the maya starvation just wasnt that enourmous a problem. today it matters massively for the survival of the state.

          Once we started long distance trading via ships Famine generally wasn’t a deadly issue, you just imported food from another area until conditions improved. Most truly devastating famines are the results of bad governments doing bad things like Socialism. When the reason you’re starving is the government starving you, then the logical thing to do is destroy the government. Which of course doesn’t work until you have some elites leading you. The peasants being starved in revolutionary France were unable to defeat the government that was stealing their grain.

          • Nils says:

            How does declining female fertility make crop failures non events? Food supply is not static or ever growing, populations have gone past food availability since the beginning of time. Malthus might have been a quak but you knew I meant the not enough food part, not every opinion the guy ever had. Evil governments cause terrible famines, so do asteroids and volcanos. Did societies just hang enough people that starvation wasn’t a civilization problem? What was the social technology for making hungry people stfu

            • Rick says:

              >Malthus might have been a quak but you knew I meant the not enough food part, not every opinion the guy ever had.

              The not enough food part due to poor people having kids is the core of the Malthusian ideas. He though people went right along having lots of kids while food production levels declined.

              >Food supply is not static or ever growing, populations have gone past food availability since the beginning of time.

              When food quantiles decline, people have fewer kids. Population stabilizes without too much death and almost none at all when you have ship born trade. Massive die offs from famine are almost always the result governments and warfare, not human reproduction and climate.

              Yes there was one volcano event that fucked up worldwide food production during the late Roman empire and possibly another during the still in Africa genetic bottle neck.

              Case in point, Viking Greenland. Greenland had declining crop levels over a century as the climate cooled down but the colonies hung with fewer and fewer children born every year. The thing that pushed them into collapse was a Inuit attack on one of the two colonies, which drove the people of the colony into the second one which didn’t have the food to support them. Fighting broke out and everyone starved.

              But baring that, it’s likely the colonies would have just continued to decline in size until people decided to move somewhere where the climate didn’t suck so much.

        • jim says:

          The french revolution was not caused by famine. Rather, famine was caused by what caused the french revolution.

          The rapidly escalating leftism led to price control, price control led to shortages. The shortages were then applied as justification for further movement left.

          Then the real famine set as revolutionary troops from the cities went out and seized the farmer’s food.

          • Nils says:

            Interesting, so we have two different kinds of famines, the natural or accidental type which doesn’t shake up the realm much, and the instigated false flag kind? Would make a lot of sense that there should be two words for the different forms of famine. Now I’m curious if the wicked kind has always been more common then natural events. Were famines in the middle ages often political? Outside of war I mean.

            • Aidan says:

              Famine is always artificial. I cant find a single natural famine in European history that was not caused by war or other artificial factors.

  4. linker says:

    @Caltech Dreams

    One of the reasons your posts ring false is that life strategy speed is not descriptive on an individual level. There are lots of high conscientiousness low IQ individuals and vice versa. You can divide races into FLS and SLS based on evolutionary pressures, but not individuals. And intelligence and conscientiousness are not the only traits that describe individuals; there are also the other 4 big 5 traits, mutational load, and religiosity. And that’s not even to mention the innate differences between men and women! If women want to be raped it’s because they are women, not because they are “fast life strategists”, unless you have any evidence that proves otherwise. Not even the fastest life strategy MEN want to be raped.

    • Caltech Dreams says:

      I am not disputing the majority of women having the dark triad desires. It is simply my hypothesis that having children with LLS women will naturally reinforce a return to patriarchy, solve the genius problem, and continue desirable white genotypes.

  5. ERTZ says:

    Many of you know that “liberals” have a strong out-group tendency, which is why they often support racial/religious out-groups over their own. But did you know that they also prefer inanimate objects like rocks to their own family members?

    Ties in really well with crackpot theories they feel driven to make up like

    Another point:
    Instinctively, I feel disgust and aggression towards leftists on a pre-rational level-
    I hate them even before any analytic thinking.
    Same with gays or spiders.
    I think this is about survival and sex instincts:
    When I try to find out what exactly disgusts me so much about leftists, on an emotional level,
    not on a cognitive-analytical one,
    I think it’s much about this:
    From a tribal perspective, they are more likely to get myself and my in-group killed,
    because they not only are merely weak, but accept and glorify weakness.
    Now, some guys are weak, can’t do much about it, but this is tolerable if they at least aspire to and respect strength. Not so leftists – their motto seems to be “It’s OK to be weak.”
    They even often celebrate effeminancy, incompetence, childish playfulness in adult men, weakness-increasing practices like faggotry and drug-abuse (hippies), abhor gaining strength, competence, military prowess, masculinity. They even hate weapons.

    In the ancestral, tribal environment, such men would have invited attack by rival tribes.
    Weakness invites, motivates aggression.
    Best protection against attack, best guarantee to live safely, is being seen as being strong.
    If you have leftist men in your tribe, and rival tribes observe it, they are more likely to attack
    you, enslave you, kill you, take your women and your stuff.
    I would do the same if I were to see weak neighboring tribes.
    Hating leftists may simply be an evolved brain module that prevents oneself from being killed.

    A 2nd aspect is that, despite accepting and glorifying weakness,
    leftist men still want to mate with women, producing more leftists.
    Outrageous enough in itself (imagine a feminine, incompetent weakling demanding mating rights),
    in a tribal environment, that means more weaklings, even less tribal strength, even higher chance of being attacked and destroyed by other tribes.
    Hating leftists may be an instinct to prevent self-destruction.

    Men who simply randomly mutated to feel that way, and kept leftists out of their tribes, one way or another,
    should have survived and prospered better than those who tolerated leftists.
    Hard to imagine a group of hippies making it in the ancestral environment.

    • Anonymous Fake says:

      [*deleted for grotesque disconnection with reality, tedious repetition, and random use of our shibboleths*]

      • jim says:

        You said this already and we replied already.

        You propose left wing solutions to the problems created by leftism.

        • Anonymous Fake says:

          You could at least point out the blatant fake science like I did.

          • jim says:

            No you did not. You misused our shibboleths.

            You claimed that science was fake in being insufficiently blue pilled, using our shibboleths but inverting their meaning.

    • onyomi says:

      Ryan Faulk had a good video on this somewhere like Bitchute. Basically he suggested there are a certain subset of the population whom we might call “cause-y” people, as in, people who are looking hard for a cause to devote themselves to. These contrast with “normal” people, who are culturally conservative by inclination and “just want to grill,” so to speak. The “normal” people just want the “cause-y” people to leave them alone, not make a cause of fighting the “cause-y” people’s causes.

      I think he correctly identifies that, unfortunately, white people include a higher proportion of “cause-y” people than do e.g. blacks and hispanics (not sure about Asians–they may also be quite vulnerable to holiness spirals, maybe even more than whites?). Presumably this is part and parcel of what makes white people more successful than blacks (obsession), but is also very dangerous.

      Also unfortunate is the fact that it’s difficult for us “normal” white people to have an alliance with the “normal” black people (a higher proportion of the black population than of the white, most likely!), because for black people being socially conservative, being in-group preferring, being “normal” MEANS voting Democrat. It means voting for the anti-white party. Seemingly that would be the case with Jews now as well–supporting rapid, radical social change is, paradoxically, the traditional Jewish position, at least in America.

      This relates to the question of whether a large percentage of the white population, i.e. the “cause-y” people are just, plain bad people and need to be “physically removed,” or if having a percentage of “cause-y” people is an inevitable part of being a high-IQ, high-creativity, independence seeking people and these people are just misguided by evil priesthoods. Certainly, I think that e.g. the high percentage of former Nazis who became Stasi suggest to me that the same people who were passionate Nazis could, indeed, be passionate SJWs today. So, again, the problem is probably with the priesthood and their nefarious doctrines, than with these crazy people, as much as they disgust me.

      • The Cominator says:

        If the cause-y people’s cause includes demon worship then yes they need to be physically removed.

        • onyomi says:

          I do not disagree, but I think the reason it is necessary is not to take cause-y people out of the gene pool so much as to send the signal to all the cause-y people that the current crop of causes are low status.

          • The Cominator says:

            The % of them in the white gene pool should probably be reduced by as much as 80%.

            • jim says:

              There is no leftism gene.

              There is, however, a gene for following the state religion, which is likely to be bred back into the population when the state religion backs the marriages of the faithful.

              Is there a gene for holiness spiraling? Well, holiness spiraling is a tactic. If it is high status to be holy, and likely to advance one’s career, people are going to find something to be holy about, preferably without the inconvenience of actually doing anything very holy. There are undoubtedly genes for following effective tactics. We don’t want to reduce such genes. We want to reduce the effectiveness of such tactics.

              • Pooch says:

                If it is high status to be holy, and likely to advance one’s career, people are going to find something to be holy about, preferably without the inconvenience of actually doing anything very holy.

                And open entry into the priesthood means there is a never ending line of people ready to find something new to be holy about. We need a sane state religion with a closed priesthood.

                • suones says:

                  We need a sane state religion with a closed priesthood.

                  Which spirals back to hereditary Brahminism. There are a shitton of ways to lose Brahmin caste, but only very few to gain it (specifically, being born as a Brahmin’s son, or performing some extrordinary feat of virtue). Limiting the number of Brahmins is the #1 job to prevent holiness spiralling.

              • The Cominator says:

                People who are too mindless about it only cause trouble. They are likely to be an irritant even under a good system and should be kept an extreme minority of the population.

                • Pooch says:

                  Moldbug proposes that when regime change finally comes the old regime managers will gladly take a payout to retire in peace just as old Stasi officials are receiving pension payments to this day. The will know the writing is on the wall when the time comes if they are able to maintain their quality of life in peace, ultimately realizing they are not losing much.

                  However, as Ceasar failed to realize and Augustus did realize, segments of the old unvirtuous elite, will need to be made an example of with overwhelming violence as they will have a lot to lose in land, title, and status when they are finally removed from power.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Augustus did not make an example out of a SEGMENT of them, he killed every last one of them.

                • Pooch says:

                  My understanding is he killed quite a bit of the patricians equites but not all of them.

                • Pooch says:

                  Patricians and equites*

                • The Cominator says:

                  All of them with anti-Caesarian or Republican sentiment were killed unless they managed to escape.

                  They were sometimes spared if they applied for amnesty from exile but if you were known to be anti-Caesarian during the purge and you didn’t escape you died and most didn’t escape. And you were not just allowed to escape they would have bounties out on you.

                • suones says:


                  Moldbug proposes that when regime change finally comes the old regime managers will gladly take a payout to retire in peace just as old Stasi officials are receiving pension payments to this day.

                  Take nothing Moldberg writes at face value. This specific example, ex-Stasi officers receiving pensions, works only because the State Religion followed by Stasi is still in power. Stasi are the “extremists, but they had their hearts in the right place” crowd, like the Baader Meinhof Gang. The litmus test is whether ex-Nazi officers are receiving pensions (hah!). Whatever Uncle Adolf’s boys received, Leftists are going to receive 10x from me.

      • jim says:

        This video is very wrong.

        It gives far too much credit to passionate sincerity. When a cause successfully takes power, the people who were part of that cause get status, privilege, jobs, and are able to beat up, rob, and sometimes murder, people they do not like without consequences.

        “cause-y” people do not do bad things out of passionate sincerity. They are passionately sincere because they intend to do bad things.

        This is the issue that Christ condemned as “phariseeism”, the early Anglican Church condemned as “preaching supererogation”. In the struggle between the Orthodox and the Donatists, the Donatists started off with enormous and well deserved moral credit, which credit they rapidly dissipated with no end of evil deeds. The Orthodox started off with enormous moral discredit, which credit they gradually restored by the ordinary everyday virtue of a husband, a father, an employee, and a boss. The Emperor was at first reluctant to crush the Donatists, because of conspicuous virtue, eventually crushed them because of intolerable evil.

        We have had at least three thousand years of this problem, probably a great deal longer, and have more than enough data to draw conclusions. We have been around this block over and over again. “Cause-y” people are forming a synthetic tribe to take power, status, and wealth, and intend to take power, status, and wealth away from the larger synthetic tribe, of which they are supposedly members, and whose ideals they supposedly support, only even more so.


        Charge them with apostacy, enslave them, and send them to cut sugar cane under the whip. Castrate the men.

        • nils says:

          so cancer for religious societies? Who is defecting seems to be a primordial conflict

          • jim says:

            Yes. Cancer for religious societies. Only controllable by the vigorous will to excise that cancer.

        • Oog en Hand says:

          Yes, castrate the men!

        • suones says:

          …“cause-y” people do not do bad things out of passionate sincerity. They are passionately sincere because they intend to do bad things.

          They are merely people looking to gain status. Everyone is looking to gain status. Status-seeking is simply human nature and neither good nor evil. You and I are passionately sincere yet we intend to do good things.

          If a sane Emperor and sane State Religion, people gain status through eusocial means — Brahmins advance the state of philosophy, Kshatriyas expand the borders of Empire, Vaishyas expand tax revenue, and Shudras provide crafts and products to sate the ever increasing population.

          If no Emperor and insane State Religion, clownworld.

          The #1 task for a State Religion is to channel the drive for status into a eusocial direction.

          • onyomi says:

            I agree the #1 task for a state religion is to drive status seeking in a eusocial direction and I also don’t think we’re going to be able to get rid of the sort of person who seeks status through holiness nor the need for a state religion.

            Nevertheless, I still think there is a distinction to be made between those who are strongly driven to pursue holiness, however their society defines holiness, and those who just don’t care as much, or who have the independence of mind to seek accomplishment in areas they, personally value, rather than having holiness or accomplishment defined for them.

            Right now, it would be nice if the state religion would change such that antifa and other enemies of Western civilization could be jailed and terrorized with impunity, while people promoting traditional values were accorded high status and a lot of leeway. But this is only because I find the intolerance of such people to have reached a level in the past few years at which it is becoming overly difficult for people like me to live the sorts of lives my parents and my parents’ parents were able to enjoy, to have the kinds of institutions my parents and my parents’ parents were able to participate in, and so on.

            I have in intellectually interested in politics since I was young, but had the culture war stagnated around 90s level I would never have felt urgency to want to be able to beat up anyone. I would not have been passionate and intense about it. Of course, much degeneration had already happened by then in terms of white flight, etc. but perhaps because it was what I grew up accustomed to, the existing workarounds (suburbs, etc.) never seemed inadequate.

            I mostly want to be left alone, politically speaking, to do my own thing and practice the sort of Anglo-Saxon values associated with American society at its height. On some level I DO just want to grill (and travel by air without crazy security and hygiene theater and not have my children massively discriminated against in education and employment and not have my group the villain in every pop culture product and…) and only feel very passionately about the people who are disrupting my ability to do so.

            • onyomi says:

              All the above being said, I do feel that I have only been fairly recently radicalized to the point where, rather than e.g. going on the defensive if someone calls me a racist, I feel quite confident in denouncing back with equal moral fervor. I expect I’m not alone in having been so radicalized. Especially encouraging was a recent video in which a Latino gang member is basically smacking antifa with a rosary and calling them abominations. This is encouraging both in terms of the probability that the fastest growing US demographic may be less helpful to the globalists designs on the US than expected and because it’s the right language to use, as opposed to “I just don’t want to see their penis” (uttered by a white woman protesting trans people at a spa or some such).

              • jim says:

                Ordinary people are starting to lose confidence in the holiness of our elites, and tend to be respectful of alternate claims of holiness.

                • Karl says:

                  My parents tell me that ordinary peoply have been having a very low and disrespectful opinion of members of parliament in Germany for the last 60 years or so – even of politicians those people have voted for.

                  So in a way there is nothing new here. What is new as far as I can tell is that the loss of confidence is spreading to physicians, scientists (especially if employed by a university), and high ranking members of the police and the armed forces.

                  I also note that ordinary people will first start to lose confidence in the competence of elites and only later lose confidence in their holiness.

  6. Oog en Hand says:

    Some Sunni consider Shia to be worse than Hindu.
    Some Shia consider Sunni to be worse than Hindu.

    • suones says:

      Slight misinterpretation.

      In Ishlmaelite culture, “Hindu” is an ethnographic description, and “al-Hindi” is the default surname of anyone from Hindustan regardless of faith (including “Muslims,” to South Asian anti-Hindu converts’ great chagrin).

      Old Believers are considered “Kafir,” those who’ve not received the darkness of Baphomet into their hearts. They are to be converted by any means, by proselytising, taxation (jaziya) or threats, as necessary.

      Apostates are Murtadd or mulhid, while heretics may be zindiq. This group is one who has accepted Baphomet but subsequently repudiated him — and this is punishable by death. Such people are considered a bigger threat to Baphometanism than Kufr.

      Shia and Sunni, in the present day, consider each other apostates hence deserving of death — which sometimes happens eg the execution of Sheikh al Nimr.

      • The Ducking Man says:

        I would upvote you if there is upvote button. For real this is very accurate.

        In my personal experience, Murtadd or Zindiq can be applied to person who can read bible and pointing out the inconsistency of Baphomet’s version of patriarchs story (especially the Isaac and Ishmael story). I was excluded from the group immediately.

    • someDude says:

      Not really, Mate! The Shia ayatollah Khameini of Iran recently glorified the Sunni Mughal rule in India.

  7. peter8 says:

    How many of us are aware of the huge global push toward digital IDs, meaning digital slavery? A very Chinese/commie idea.

    This video is worth watching. Every big corporation is in on it, tied to the military, intelligence agencies, govts, the UN, and all other major global players. They are after the kids, and will seek control of their lives, always watching, limiting, harvesting data.

    JUst watch the last 5 minutes or so, a brief interview with a guy who is looking to enslave Ethiopia via digital means. Truly horrible, but itz happening.

    • jim says:

      This video is tediously lengthy, and is presented by a woman who represents a different cathedral faction. Skip to the last five minutes. Not all of her information likely to be truthful or grounded in reality.

      Extraordinarily evil people who are extraordinarily confident in their holiness. All of them, both the evil people she exposes, and the woman herself.

      And Cardano, which I am betting on, is knee deep in these evil people, and is playing ball with them.

      However, Cardano is also developing capabilities that can be used for other purposes, because such capabilities can be extrarodinarily lucrative in a world where people want digital currencies so that they can get around governmental obstacles to long distance transactions.

      • The Original OC says:

        Charles Hoskinson twitter account flags his real allegiance pretty clearly. Why do they play ball with him?

        • jim says:

          Charles Hoskinson is a double agent, and no one knows which side a double agent is on, even the double agent himself.

          We shall only know when it is done.

      • Mister Grumpus says:

        Is Cardano open source enough for a badboy team to run off with their own fork someday to follow through on those anti-enemy goals, while the goodboy namefag team hangs back and says “Don’t look at me, I don’t even know those guys”?

        • jim says:

          Yes it is open source enough. And not only open source enough, but a Cardano that subverts Cathedral goals could be implemented without forking the blockchain, or without forking it in ways that the current implementation does not provide for.

          The namefag team would then cry “We are shocked, shocked. We never expected someone to so cleverly misuse features we designed in to support Cathedral goals.”

          I hope for that outcome, which would serve both my social goals and my personal finances, but I am by no means confident that it will happen. It is a very big gamble. I have another plan which is perhaps more likely to work, but will take considerably longer – nowhere near ready, barely started. I am not putting all my eggs in the Cardano basket.

          The architecture of Cardano is to give people highly trackable identities.

          The architecture of one true crypto currency will be to give people an ample supply of highly trackable identities, but to enable them to avoid leaving tracks between those identities.

          • Mister Grumpus says:

            One can express the challenge of colonizing Mars quite succinctly in terms of tons, calories, kilometers, chemical elements and years. “Simple”.

            But I imagine that before the 18th century or so, that succinct expressing was impossible. If someone tried — even if he understood what he was talking about better than anyone — it would still come out like a scattershot of scramble-talk mumbo-jumbo, because he lacked the tight concepts to “cut reality at the joints” with, like F=ma, conservation of energy and Mendeleev’s table of the elements.

            Likewise, I’m dismayed (or just lazy) that I can’t understand just what is needed to make the Darkside Weaponized Cardanoglocke a reality. You post about it, I’m sure quite thoughtfully, but to me it’s just one mysterious hocus-pocus proper noun after another. I’m unable to tell the difference between your explanations and crypto-shelf scramble-talk mumbo-jumbo.

            Is there hope for me? For someone 30 years younger? Not to contribute but to at least kinda-sorta comprehend what this is about and what’s needed? Is there a “Great Courses” for this stuff? Is a body of settled concepts settling to the bottom of the pan, or are even the IQ500’s still crashing around in a dark funhouse with this stuff? “Oh wait… shit… WHAT?”

            I just want to ensure that everyone (all what, all 200 of them?) with the raw ability to help with this has a good idea of how to help. Maybe we’re there already and I just don’t know it (because why would I)?

  8. Shorn says:

    I’ve already mostly taken the Jimpill on the WQ and LQ, but I’m looking for some clarification on how the Jimpill view fits in with the following:

    Women fantasize about being violently raped, and act in a way to maximize the chances of this happening with a high status male. Generally when we here about a rape or sexual assault, like with the #metoo stuff, its because the male failed a shit test at some point after the sex. But what about niggers who are violent and are prone to rape at will? Or the soyboy male feminists that drug or do weird and premeditated rapes? Or even the weird iron rod stuff that goes on with pajeets? How do these scenarios fit in? Are they rape?

    Are there two kinds of rape? Rape and “rape”? If we define rape in a more traditional way: as fucking an owned woman. Then what about these college “rape” cases, and the #metoo stuff? Are they rape or not?

    • Caltech Dreams says:

      Rape is effective for and desired by short life strategist women. They are more attractive, tend to want many partners, and don’t want to invest in children. For this very reason, they do not make for good genetic material since they necessarily involve more psychopathic traits. Long-life strategist women are more religious and hence patriarchal, want a monogamous relationship, and a mate that will be a good father to children. The former is not going to stay and make for poor mothers because they don’t really desire children but only sex. This means that they are more likely to use birth control and have abortions which means that they are possibly a genetic dead end. Rape is therefore not universal but most desired by short life strategists which is why it is common for niggers. Soyboys are failed, short-life strategists because they just want sex with multiple partners without children. There just unattractive and undesirable to other short-life strategist women. The rest is SLS women’s power politics when it comes to #metoo. The status variable is dependent on the strategist: more important with SLS, less important with LLS.

      • The Cominator says:

        Women rarely have life strategies, women almost always want to be “feelstronoughts”.

        Its precisely the highly functional ice queen career types who turn into old childless cat ladies. The turbosluts (even high IQ ones which do exist) never end up that way.

        • Caltech Dreams says:

          The ice queen career types are SLS. Why do you think there are so many high-functioning psychopaths in the corporate world? They are childless cat ladies because they have passed their expiration date. By LLS I am referring to women who want a patriarch and are worth having children with. Otherwise, you’ll just end up spreading the seed which is how we got to the excess mutational scenario.

        • The Cominator says:

          The high functioning career cat ladies (i mean ones with good careers that pay well) are not short term oriented they are highly conscientious but to the extent they have a life plan they are following a false life plan.

          Impulsive stripper gals at the other extreme even the high functioning ones who avoid hard drugs and manage their money well… its very rare they dont have kids (and while they should be on birth control the answer to that question is almost inevitably no they aren’t on it).

          • Pooch says:

            I think BAP shouted you out on his latest BAP-cast episode 80. Mentioned an autist who bangs strippers lmao.

            • The Cominator says:

              Yes he did lol.

            • The Cominator says:

              I think his friend was right that while alphas and omegas (autists etc, though we need to learn the good ways to do it) both have no problems seeing a pro if it suit them maybe average beta males have extreme reservations about doing this and thus even when faced with the inceldom traditionally reserved for omega males only they probably rather try to simp in tge woke cult rather than taking the stripper pill.

          • Caltech Dreams says:

            I am really not sure to what extent corporate cat ladies are just deluded mom material or are high IQ SLS. Simply too many variables involved here. No part of my argument contradicts the prevention of women from receiving false life plans. It would seem those church-attending women that want children would be more conducive for female removal from corporate offices and art history departments. The fact that girls are wanting to get raped by niggers proves that they are dysgenic and to be avoided.

            • jim says:

              They continually see in videos women successfully carrying out the false life plan, and are genuinely puzzled and outraged when what they see all the time somehow fails to work for them.

              Women are terribly vulnerable to outside influences. They are told ten times a day that the false life plan works, and they think that they see it working in front of them.

        • Aidan says:

          There are indeed real turbosluts out there, with low standards of alpha, but they are absurdly rare. I estimate the incidence to be 1/100 women. Not surprising that many believe they don’t exist, and I expect that many men can’t tell the difference by fucking them. It seems from my experience that it is caused by paternal incest starting at a very young age. They also tend to dress plain, aren’t attention seekers, and are very down to earth and pleasant to hang out with. They are also the only girls who can truly keep up with me in the sack, which is a shame because they are broken and will never make good wives, unless literally attached to a chain that runs between bedroom, kitchen, and garden.

          • The Cominator says:

            The one i do now was not molested, she surprisingly describes (and this is surprising because its normally fatherless girls or girls with daddy issues who are like that) that she had a very good relationship with her father. Otherwise she fits your profile… shed be near the perfect girl if she wouldn’t compulsively cuck her primary mate.

            I think paternal incest especially at very young ages is rare.

      • Aidan says:

        Profound lack of contact with reality. The most attractive women tend to have far fewer partners than girls a tier below them, because the really hot ones can get exactly what women are looking for- ownership by a very alpha man. The men owning them have a tough time really locking them down because the legal and social environment is hostile to it, but the sexual history of really attractive girls is usually a series of long-term relationships. Girls with lots of partners are usually fairly cute, but with flaws that prevent the top males they bang from wanting to own them.

        What women claim to want is a function of what views and life strategies are high status in their social circles. The mennonite girl I banged in college was probably your model of an LLS when at home with her family, but within two weeks of her going to school, she put away the modest clothes, bought cheap blouses and short shorts at target, and started banging. All women are like that. There is no environment in human history where what you call SLS leads to genetic success.

        • Basil says:

          Having a series of long-term relationships isn’t as bad as a bunch of partners or “lonely”, but still not very good. I don’t think a man under thirty needs to make such compromises when looking for a wife. The criteria of our distant ancestors were pretty good.

          I do not want to say that it is enough to find a young virgin from a good family for the marriage to work well, but by spending your energy on finding a young virgin from a good family, you are investing in the quality of your marriage.

        • Caltech Dreams says:

          You misunderstand me. It is not that patriarchal structuring and monogamy don’t act as checks against SLS like in the Mennonite case. They are solutions to the problem. But you are wrong to say that all women are like that. There are women who are not as status-conscious and want to invest in children as is evidenced by church attendance being historically majority female. There are plenty of women that are just turbosluts that want nigger rape. My point is that those are not the kind of women you want to reproduce with.

          • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

            And the point of people around here is that looking at the issue in those terms is like trying to steer a ship by pushing cargo to one side or another, rather than taking hand of the rudder.

          • jim says:

            Women are very conscious of what is high status.

            And what is high status in our society is very bad for women.

    • jim says:

      There seem to be a curiously large number of white women suffering injuries from their black boyfriends, and curiously few rape charges against blacks.

      • Basil says:

        White men don’t just want black women. They are too masculine, dumb, suffer from overweight problems, lose their virginity very early and age very quickly.

        • Leon says:

          For the record, white women and black men are one of the least common inter racial pairings. Its promoted by the media because it is so damn rare and is meant to humiliate white men. The most common non white men white women wind up with is actually “hispanics”, although Hispanics is a worthless terminology as it doesn’t really tell anything about a person’s skin color or genetic heritage. The most common inter racial pairings are white men and Asian women, and white men and “hispanic women” (again, for whatever the hell that terminology is worth).

          • The Cominator says:

            “For the record, white women and black men are one of the least common inter racial pairings.”

            Yeah that USED TO BE true but given what sheep women are I see a lot more beastiality IRL then in the past.

            • ten says:

              Still true. Not that some women don’t try it, but it’s very hard for them to make it stick, which is why the black men must go last resort real quick and beat the shit out of the women.

          • jim says:

            North East Asians and whites are the higher races. East Asians are sufficiently different from us that there are problems, and among those problems is a rather high rate of mental disturbance among hybrids, but, on the other hand, a rather high rate of kids combining white genes for smartness with East Asian genes for smartness.

          • Jsd says:

            Unless there is something wacky going on in the Southwest, huwhite women do not get with hispanic males. The statistics probably reflect 56%er “white” hispanics getting with darker hispanics. IRL white women mostly get with blacks, although from my ongoing tallying this is in the single digits.

            • Leon says:

              I assumed those statistics either referenced what you pointed out, and/ or whites and “white hispanics” hooking up. Either way, worthless terminology. If memory serves, the percentage for white women hooking up with black men was 4% or some other small percentage.

              There was also that famous dating app survey done (OKCupid?) that showed black men were the second least wanted race of men. It also showed white women were the second least popular group of women.

    • Aidan says:

      Women hate sex with beta males and are often traumatized by it, regardless of details, and love sex with alpha males, regardless of details. Getting ravished in public by niggers is traumatic for most women, because the niggers are of low or indeterminate status. Women usually need a little time to determine who is alpha and who is not, but it is not a lot of time unless you are on your own. If there are other men around, that decision will be made quickly.

      A woman will wander the streets at night not because she wants to be fucked at knifepoint by a gang, but because she wants to be abducted to the private residence of the gang leader and banged behind closed doors. Drugging and raping women is very rare, but usually “soyboy male feminists” are accused because of a lack of sex, because beta’d out, and the drugs are just a lie.

      • Pooch says:

        What is the deal with Bill Cosby? I haven’t been following much but didn’t he admit to drugging women? If so, I suppose he was much more beta than his perceived high status as an entertainer would seem to indicate.

        • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

          It was the 70s, and he was trading drugs for sex. “Hey, baby, let’s have a good time. I brought some stuff to have fun.” The first two accusers were full of shit, the third admitted to lying on the stand, and the rest were just women piling on. A relatively red-pilled DA saw through it and agreed not to prosecute, then a whole shitload of prosecutorial and judicial misconduct later, his replacement rigged a conviction with the help of the judge. Both judge and prosecuting DA ran on a platform of, “Get Cosby!”

          He wasn’t drugging them into unconsciousness. He was giving them a little something to liven up the party. Also to lower inhibitions. Just like giving a woman a couple drinks, so that, “it just happened!” I don’t know if he is an alpha or not, but I would suspect so. The way he behaved in the trial showed he was pretty determined that he was innocent and refused a plea deal to prove it. I think he was top dog in his day and a bunch of bitter old women tried to drag him down at the end of his life, probably to make sure he could not oppose BLM when that popped up. It has the look of organizing against a potential threat, and has political fingerprints all over it.

          • The Cominator says:

            This zippity zop jello pudding pop Bill Cosby did nothing wrong and metoo roasties are finally BTFO. Even if he did do something wrong you should not cry rape decades later.

          • Pooch says:

            Ah ok that explains perfectly why shitlib white women are going berserk over him walking.

          • Cloudswrest says:

            “… probably to make sure he could not oppose BLM when that popped up.”

            Indeed. They’ve accomplished their goal. Prison is pretty much irrelevant now. He’s been publicly and politically neutralized as far as being any sort of political force.

      • kawaii_kike says:

        I doubt women are ever traumatized by nigger rape. A brazen and violent rape is exactly what women perceive as high status. They’re “traumatized” by the fact that the rapists left and refused to stick around.

        • Rick says:

          Women are traumatized by having sex with low status men. The violent sex feels great, but then they feel like shit afterwards. I knew a girl who was kidnapped and raped by drifter for a couple of days. She talked him into letting her go and she went right to the cops. Another girl I knew got herself raped multiple times and never reported any of the rapes to the police. The difference between the cases was their after the sex perception of the rapists.

          There was a incel who gunned down a girls parents right in front her and kept her as his concubine for over a month. She had nothing much to say about the sex(likely she loved it) but soured on the guy when it became clear he had to hide her away when friends and family came over to his house. His social status was clearly low. She easily escaped since the incel didn’t really put much effort in restraining her.

          • kawaii_kike says:

            I remember that incel case, the kidnapping of Jayme Closs. It’s always perplexed me. You would think that murdering her parents and raping her would offset the status dings of having to keep her hidden. If women want General Buttnaked then actions like that should have kept her enraptured.

            • Rick says:

              She saw his true social status in relation to other males. That’s why kidnapping a virgin isn’t a viable idea, you need a tribe that will both approve of the kidnapping and give you status for doing the kidnaping to make it work.

              • kawaii_kike says:

                Maintaining ownership of a woman is trickier than I thought.
                I thought beatings and violence would be enough.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I imagine in clownworld you can only do it via 95% being convincingly psychologically intimidating with 5% real violence.

                  Since I’m not capable of larping as a low IQ violent thug and don’t have a gang that will treat me like I was the local crime boss and am a sperg anyway… well I use an alternative.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  You know, you do not have to play the low IQ thug. I am a high IQ savage and it plays well. If it was not for me being excessively holy about not fucking around, I could have gotten with e few girls from my classes. You do not have to be stupid to be violent. In fact, smarter men are more successful using violence.

                • Rick says:

                  Cominator, women like thugs. Not low IQs, not high IQ ones, just thugs. You are white man who’s entire family descends from one victorious conquest after another for thousands of years. Whites are the ultimate warriors in history and you should embrace it your linage. But remember you’re not monkey, so use weapons when you actually need to fight. And make sure to train with those weapons before you have to use them.

                • Aidan says:

                  Cominator- Wulfgar and Rick are right. You do not have to larp as a dumb thug. Your heritage as a European is smart men who were very good at war. Embracing your masculine love of violence as a high-IQ man feels incredibly good. You are going to have much more success with women within your IQ communications range anyway, so might as well learn to live with it. Go for smartiepants girls, and get yourself a group of male friends. The main obstacle for spergs socializing beside shyness is verbal diarrhea and ranting.

                  As for kike, maintaining ownership of a woman involves three things:
                  -Pass her shit tests
                  -Don’t show weakness
                  -Maintain status versus other men
                  You will rarely need beatings if you nip shit tests in the bud. Shit tests start off small and get bigger and bigger as you fail them. Pass them small, they stay small. I will often manhandle or roughhouse my woman playfully in response to teasing or a minor shit test, and I do not get many big ones because I manage to pass the small ones. Little shit test, playful violence. Huge shit test, big violence. But it almost never comes to the big violence. Not showing weakness doesn’t mean you can’t be tender or loving, it means you don’t spill your doubts, fears, insecurities, or other negative emotions onto your girl. Helps a lot if you can easily deal with your problems yourself. The third thing is where incel bride capture man went wrong (though reading reports it also seems like he betad out. wonder if he was a reader of mine?). Cannot act as if other men, even the state, have power over you, cannot let yourself get mogged in front of your girl. Need a tribe that respects you.

                  Wulfgar- you are going to need practice dealing with women, even if your self-perception of good status is accurate. Get a girlfriend at least. If you manage it first try, you get a wife, otherwise, sets you up for the next one.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “I am a high IQ savage and it plays well. If it was not for me being excessively holy about not fucking around, I could have gotten with e few girls”

                  Dude I like you but if you’re going to give advice please do so 1st…

                  I’ve fucked non-stripper girls before too, but since the woke cult really got going its a lot worse.

                  Aidan… What should I do start barfights? Once you leave school (now way back in Middle School I was in LOTS of fights) unless you are a cartel hitman most violence in clownworld is low IQ dumb shit with the only good that can come of it is the appeal to the female hindbrain? Other than it involves potential legal trouble and doctors bills… neither of which I’m all that into.

                • jim says:

                  Bar fights are not the way to go.

                  Act like a high IQ thug, not a low IQ thug. (of course if the other guy is a bit drunk, and you are completely sober, you win.)

                  Any woman I do well with absolutely believes I might kill someone, and she is not entirely wrong.

                • alf says:

                  unless you are a cartel hitman most violence in clownworld is low IQ dumb shit with the only good that can come of it is the appeal to the female hindbrain?

                  Chicks love high IQ men. Not all chicks mind you, dumb chicks especially tend to require more thuggish low iq shit than I can give, but I’ve always had a subset of women who were really into me because I was smart.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The chicks (except for the usual sub group I’m so fond of, a lot of them like smart guys) who would otherwise like high IQ men are disproportionately demon worshipping woke cultists.

                • alf says:

                  No not at all my experience. Yes there’s these political leftist chicks that are really into high iq shitlords, but there’s many more women who are just generally into smart men with interesting opinions.

                • The Cominator says:

                  New agey type chicks are sometimes like that (while leftist on some things I’ve said before how they are often the best women overall to be found in clownworld) but I do not know where to find concentrations of them nowadays.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  Com, I had one of the woke girls invite me over to her house–alone–to help her “organize.” She’s a headcase, or I might have taken her up on it, but that was my choice. She is damaged goods, but it was still available for me if I had wanted it. I’m going to keep practicing, but being a smart savage works.

                • alf says:

                  I do not know where to find concentrations of them nowadays.

                  Yea that’s the hard part I imagine… I was recently scrolling through a friend’s tinder and man am I glad I don’t have to deal with that sewer.

            • suones says:

              General Buttnaked is a force of nature and does not have an “off” switch. He keeps killing and torturing all the time for any reason or no reason. And even then he as woman problems (which he easily solves by killing and possibly eating her, ofc). You cannot LARP as General Buttnaked without actually being General Buttnaked, which is impossible for any civilised man.

              • suones says:

                Oh, and the real General Buttnaked later gave up his murderous, cannibalistic ways, gave up his patron god, and became a tradcuck Evengelical Christian. I’m not kidding. Sic transit gloria mundi. I wonder if his wife cheats on him.

      • Yul Bornhold says:

        “Women hate sex with beta males and are often traumatized by it, regardless of details, and love sex with alpha males, regardless of details.”

        Is there a ‘settle-for-him” trait that activates when a woman is convinced she won’t get anyone better? Seems like there would have to be for woman to be satisfied with the men assigned to them by alpha males. If this is true, part of patriarchy isn’t just to convince a wife that her husband is alpha but also that he is the most alpha she will be allowed to touch.

        I know one dumb slut (c. 35 yo) who keeps having children with a beta guy, pretending it’s by accident. How bad of a beta? His wife left him for a woman. Yet the slut, who doesn’t even like the guy, purposefully has children by him. Considering this blog often discusses women who kill their children-by-beta-males, this counter phenomenon deserves consideration.

        • jim says:

          I lack empirical data on this phenomenon, and am not interested in it anyway, because “settle-for-him” only sets in when her youth, beauty, and fertility is running out. Settle-for-him is not going get replacement fertility. Virgin brides will.

        • The Cominator says:

          Is the dumb slut married to a guy who is even more beta than the guy knocking her up?

          Is him being the real father a secret that you know somehow but her husband doesn’t.

          • Yul Bornhold says:

            No and no. Suppose she *might* be having someone else’s kids and pretending they’re his mistakes but the children in question seem to mirror both mother and father.

            Like Jim, I don’t find women settling on women’s terms useful of itself but, if it can be hacked for civilization purposes, very useful. Dance and, to a greater extent, dance cards which fathers filled out for their daughters, is a probably related hack. Men on the dance card represented all available mates and therefore more desirable. When the chief makes it clear he does not desire woman, she begins to be more attracted to other men, and so on.

            • The Cominator says:

              There are outlier women who are crazy in ways no group theory can account for… nawalts of insanity.

    • Rick says:

      >Are there two kinds of rape? Rape and “rape”? If we define rape in a more traditional way: as fucking an owned woman. Then what about these college “rape” cases, and the #metoo stuff? Are they rape or not?

      Rape is a property crime against a Women’s owner. If she’s unowned rape isn’t possible.

      >But what about niggers who are violent and are prone to rape at will?

      Very few of those violent “rapes” are ever reported to the authorities, unless the women raped happened during a home invasion. Which btw, home invasions almost always involve rape. Which is why men spend so god damn much money to move their families as far away as possible from niggers.

      Real rape is more common with people who are more hunter gathers than civilized, IE nignogs and spics. But rape is also very common tactic during level warfare between groups. Of course niggers are prone to rape men as well.

    • ERTZ says:

      Very deep yet short answer: “Everything is about sex and sex is about power.”

      Long answer:
      What do women want? What makes them horny and want to have sex?
      This is the riddle most can’t answer – mostly because the true answer is a taboo, because it hurts too many interests (financial, political, sexual,…) and which is deliberately answered wrongly in our culture by a system of lies, in schools, TV series, movies, media, etc.

      Evolutionary Psychology tries to answer the question why we have emotions, seeks to reverse-engineer from the existence of an emotion to it’s function.

      What makes a woman horny today must have made her ancestors achieve reproduction more likely.
      Activating those cues from the past today is the key to break through her insemination resistance.
      There exist multiple and mixed cues, because our species has a long past, many different cues are relevant.
      But one single great filter exists:
      No matter what a woman does or not does (=feels or not feels as motivation to do sth.), the kids must survive.

      Our past was violent (and, beyond superficial appearances, still is and will be), women were mostly just resources without rights,
      unprotected women were raped, their kids killed by rival men (for the same reason male lions that take over a pride from a defeated male, and many other mammals similarly, kill the offspring of a defeated male – destroy his genes, make the women fertile again sooner and force the females to invest all their resources in the conqueror’s kids, not those of his predecessor).
      Even today stepchildren are 100x as likely to be killed by stepfathers than biological children.
      Many men, especially when sexually unsuccessful, feel an urge to kill genetically unrelated children, which, in my opinion, is the motivation for many mass killings, especially school killings, and the unofficial ban in all media to show violence against children, despite general glorification of violence in media (to prevent activating that urge in men).
      This is how it works in my opinion:
      Life goal for men is to have sex, to reproduce, which is usually achieved by having sex and producing kids.
      But this is just a special case of a more general gene-level goal, generalizable as drive to increase the PROPORTION of one’s genes in the future generation – this is usually done by sex, but allows for another option, that enables sex-like, even sex-superior reproduction-like success: REMOVAL of rival genes in the future generation, aka killing.
      I think this is a major, widely unknown, motivation of men to engage in warfare – usually, the fact that men are fascinated by war, often eager to engage in it, is explained thus: If victorious, he’ll come back richer and with more status and more likely gets sex.
      But the WAR ITSELF could be seen as a sexual act for men:
      War is usually fought against rival tribes, distant-dwelling people, who are genetically dissimilar – by killing those other men a man’s own genes can have a higher proportion in the future gene pool – if he kills many enemies and thus rival, different genes, his genetic success can even surpass his success from sex quite easily.
      I think this is also the major motivation in school shooters:
      A brain module detects socio-sexual defeat and likely future sexual reproductive failure (being a loser) , and activates a mass-killing motivation.
      Notice that school and spree killers often don’t kill indiscriminately – they tend to spare certain people – “You treated me nice, don’t come to school tomorrow” – notice that humans have an inbuilt genetic-similarity detector (based on similarity of looks, odor, movement – it’s well-studied that humans can reliably detect genetic dis-/similarity even from just an animated stick model of another person’s movements/limb swinging patterns extracted from a video of walking), which motivates increased trust and altruism for those who are detected as genetically similar (and vice versa: Those that are mistrusted, disliked or bullied tend to be those that are genetically dissimilar) – if a school shooter then kills so that he mostly targets those that are genetically more dissimilar to himself and spares those that are more similar, the proportion of his genes in the future generation may well be higher than if he were just to have had a few kids of his own – especially if he kills many genetic rivals.

      From a male perspective killing and having sex is almost the same – if you don’t have sex you may as well be dead and have never lived, if other men have sex with a woman that’s one chance for having your genes/kids making it in evolution killed – your rival’s genes are going to make it, not yours.
      By having sex, you literally kill other men genetically, because you have taken a chance for transferring their genes into the next generation from them.
      For men, sex and murder are mostly the same thing.
      Therefore so much associated with rivalry and violence.

      This is the socio-sexual environment women have evolved in.
      They had no influence on it, because they are weak and stupid(¹small exception) and were just manhandled.
      Women who were attracted to the top killers had their kids survive; women who were not attracted to top killers had their kids
      killed and not survive, thus all women today are descendants of the former, and such are their instincts – women are driven to the top killers. To the most powerful men (or those they FEEL (evolved brain module that detects power cues) are such).
      Note that not only child killing is relevant, but also resource security (in the past mostly food) – POWERful men not only could secure their kids against getting killed by rival men, but also their food – and could TAKE weaker men’s/families food in times of famine…

      So, women are made horny by power. (Kissinger: “Power is the strongest aphrodisiac.”)

      Problem: Human power evolved and evolves:

      Most ancient and fundamental:
      Physical power.
      Muscles, being tall, generally large, being a known killer, physically intimidating.
      The “gorilla phase” – the big ape alpha secured his harem.
      So, hitting the gym will generally increase the odds today for men as well.
      Become muscled, tall, intimidating: Women see at once that you can kill other men physically, which increases sexual attractiveness.

      Then the mess started, things began being more complex:
      As brains grew, we became more of a social species, this brought in POLITICS:
      ALLIANCES could overpower the alpha – say, three strong betas could kill the alpha, then share the women.
      (Three because in ape close combat, more than three or so attackers would get in the way of each other.)
      So, women have inherited some interest for men who are friends with other men who seem quite powerful together, form a strong small gang,
      are potentially a bit wary of a loner alpha-type guy who is not backed up by strong allies.
      So you should be strong and have strong friends, women find that attractive.

      But then TECH got in.
      Some say fire was the biggest invention of the past, I say it’s the stick – specifically, the pointy stick, the spear.
      It not just opened up the meat locker by hunting large game, but also was a socio-sexual revolution:
      Any man, if strong or weak, suddenly had power to kill even the largest alpha male, especially in groups.
      Spears enabled being in a safe distance from the target while killing, due to the stick’s length, or by throwing it.
      A spear wound was deadly enough, but in a time without antibiotics, even a scratch could kill a man, even when a large alpha
      or beta fought much smaller men.
      This ended the reign of power of the only physically dominating human alphas and beta alliances, because the spear made all men
      somewhat equal in nominal power (later repeated by Mr. Colt).
      I think that from this time, some men and women have evolved a dislike, even outrage of alphas, seen as evil bullies, who try to rule and
      take all/the best women by force, and enabled some equality, “socialist” moral, emotional tendencies (=leftist outrage against Trump).
      Men who tried it, were met with resistance of the group, often deadly.
      Now, even more then before,
      having “social status”, that is high reputation and a large number of allies/friends, was even more important, and remained so.
      So, women like it when a man has a large and extended family, many friends, many allies.

      Power evolved further, past equality:
      Warlords, perhaps by skill or charisma, were able to command many men, that is, many spears, and killed off smaller groups of
      men with spears (and their women’s kids).
      So, women like it when a man is a leader of other men – their brain modules seem not to require a warlord cue, being a boss in a
      company who commands employees, a rock star who commands a large crowd, or a college lecturer/professor who commands an audience
      etc. all work well enough, commanding personal servants, housemaids, cooks, an army of lawyers, liveried chauffeurs works spectacularly well.
      Even eating in a fancy restaurant and ordering the waiter around can activate that cue in women’s brains.

      Agriculture, farming, domesticated animals, mining and other tech enabled resource hoarding,
      some men became rich, directly or by trade.
      Successful warlords, who became nobility and kings, saw rivals for power rise from those rich men,
      who could, among other things, pay for standing armies, or sabotage rival armies financially.
      Long story short, this selected for brain power, but the superficial selector for women’s sexual arousal was being rich.
      Even today, the rich are safer from being killed, have more killing power (if they want to execute it directly, which they tend not to
      do anymore, instead influencing politics) – rich men can pay body guards, hire assassins, make or break whole countries and
      populations; “resource security” is a synonym of being rich.
      The whole military, police and legal system greatly favors and basically serves the rich men.
      So, women like rich men – as long as they can signal superior (killing) power from being rich (if they fail that, being rich may, indeed often does,
      fail making men sexually attractive to most women).

      …and rape is about power.
      First, being physically being overpowered.
      Firstly, this signals physical power and fitness, courage, healthy masculine desire.
      Secondly, getting away with raping women socially (during rape and afterwards).
      This signals superior social power (social status), because all other men, who should resent another man having sex “illegally”,
      are intimidated and remain silent, don’t take public offense, act submissive, the rapist doesn’t face social or legal trouble.

      A man so superior is the optimum mating partner for a woman anyway – him raping her means for her at worst being attacked, subdued by overwhelming force,
      and then metaphorically not being robbed, but instead having forcefully filled one’s pockets with millions of dollars (that metaphor doesn’t work for men – it’s too
      far-fetched for men to fantasize about being ambushed, then forcefully totally subdued into helplessness by a top-attractive woman who then proceeds to force
      him to have sex with her – men instead fantasize about being the rapist).

      Women also fantasize about rape (by a superior male) because, in a twisted way, they see it AS HAVING POWER THEMSELVES:
      After all, a top-quality male, who could have had sex with any other women, was OVERCOME with desire for HER, thus proving
      her superior female sexual attractiveness: “I am so super sexy that even the top man of the world could not control himself and had to have
      sex with me at once! I am a feminine, sexual goddess! He, the most powerful man, was made weak by me!”

      Also understand that (fertile, sexy) women are kind of invulnerable (²Exception), perfectly safe from men at all times, even when raped:
      Consider a million dollar in cash, about the size of a shoe box, lying in the middle of the street in a negro ghetto, observed by all, no police in the area.
      Is that $1M safe?
      Yes. Totally.
      Because nobody is going to harm it, it’s not going to be shredded or burned.
      Only the OWNER of the money is not safe, and may be attacked, robbed, killed.
      Same with women. She may change hands, may get raped, but no man would ever harm her in a major way or kill her (she would lose her sex toy and reproduction vessel value – it would be the same as burning that $1M – men cannot evolve to kill women when they want to, need to, have sex with them).
      The men fight over the women, or over the $1M – in the end, the most powerful will win, the woman or the $1M will be in the strongest hands, the woman will receive the best genes from the strongest man, and she and her kids will be protected and provided for best.
      No wonder that porn for women, aka romance novels, are endless variations of that basic story structure.

      So, yes women want to be raped – but only from the top man.
      They usually (unless crazy³) abhor being raped from any other men.
      So, yes, women fantasize about being raped, it arouses them, and they kind of really want to be raped – just not from (likely) you.
      Note that women today obviously usually can’t have sex with the real top man, and while having sex with lowlier men, they fantasize about having sex with the top
      note that the majority of women are masochists to varying degrees, desire sex with some mild bondage/choking/slapping etc. to all the way hard violence and BDSM stuff –
      enjoy the feeling of pain, fear, being helpless, being dominated, being powerless etc. – and being raped.


      ¹, ³
      Women are stupid and weak, thus usually were easily dominated by men, treated like reproductive slaves, traded and owned like property without rights.
      But women evolved a strategy to have great influence over men, even to force men to do their bidding:
      Because men NEED women for sexual pleasure and reproduction, women have two options:
      Self-harm and suicide – one reducing her sexual attractiveness, reducing her value as sex toy for men, or even reducing her fertility; the other outright removing a man’s
      reproductive option completely.
      This strategy was evolved, not invented consciously – so women have a propensity for self-harm (bulimia, skin-cuttings,…) and suicide (usually unsuccessful attempts,
      because it’s a strong threat signal already and real suicide would destroy the woman’s genes – so women are known for doing many UNSUCCESSFUL suicide ATTEMPTS (Compared to men, who usually succeed at it at once)).
      This integrates with women’s strong instincts for craving for attention – if they feel socially or sexually under-appreciated or under-provided, women feign ills, diseases, accidents, deprivations, create big drama and conflict.
      This tendency, and the fact that there was less evolutionary pressure on women than men for being rational, intelligent, knowledgeable, reasonable – because women were the bottleneck in reproduction, and most men had to take any woman they could get – and men had to protect and provide, which requires a much higher level of competence and rationality than merely woman’s absolute minimum requirement for proper instincts to care for babies and toddlers – means that women have much higher rates of mental and emotional instability than men: In short, women are often outright crazy, and still can attract needy men and successfully reproduce, while a crazy man is apt to fail at it.

      The the modern environment is evolutionarily novel:
      In the ancestral one rape, was likely reproductively successful, if the man could get away with or from it (war, social anonymity ,… ).
      Counter-intuitively, modern policing and forensics (DNA testing, etc.) kills raped women:
      A rapist experiences a post-orgasmic clearity of mind – his sexual urges momentarily completely gone,
      he becomes coldly calculating and rational, suddenly remembers the social implications and the fact that he probably will be found and convicted, fears for his future,
      and tries to get rid of the evidence, thus killing her and trying to hide the body (perhaps under the influence of drugs/alcohol which disinhibit him);
      without policing/forensics, he probably would just flee and let her live, “as nature intended”.

      • Rick says:

        Rapists who murder women do so because they know they can’t own them. If they could rape them and keep them as Gnon commands there would be very few rape/murders.

        • Leon says:

          Possible. A good chunk of rapists, at least the serial ones, have little self control. The Green River Killer supposedly had an IQ of 85. They rape, kill, then move on to the next lady in a serial killer’s version of the alpha pump and dump.

          • Rick says:

            I think it’s more of a case that if you can’t keep her, then no one can, the same sort of destructive behavior people do towards to most loot people can’t take with them. I did some reading on gang rape + murder during warfare and there doesn’t seem to be a lot of killing fertility age women before it was made effectively illegal to keep what you rape either as a slave or a concubine.

            Solo serial killers tend to be brain damaged individuals so they’re really not good examples of normal human behavior.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      Rape, or ‘rapine’, is a classical word for stealing stuff. Googles and sandkips assaulting feral women is assault, not rape, because the feral women aren’t owned by anyone.

      • nils says:

        assault means to cause harm, isnt it simply abduction? to move or transfer ownership.

        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          When an invading army engages in rapine, they aren’t just stealing stuff, but also destroying everything else they can’t steal. The destructiveness of property is a distinctifying aspect of rape as compared to other forms of theft.

          By and large, the feral southron assaulting a feral woman can’t, in fact, take ownership of her; and in any case, the real problem is not that feral woman might (walk around the wrong side of the tracks in hopes that they) be assaulted, but that it is not gangs of europoid men who are doing the assaulting (and subsequent abducting) of feral women.

    • Noname says:

      Much of what we think we know about female Psychology is a lot of claptrap theory from old men fetishizing about mommy. All theory, no Science.

      At the visceral level, all women desire being dominated by authority. That’s the common denominator that crystalizes all their behavior. And the more they act out, the more they desire that father figure in their life.

      • jim says:

        We know female psychology fine.

        The original puas collected a mountain of empirical data. Which, knowledge of what we now call the red pill having been lost, was mysterious, contradictory, and counter intuitive.

        Then several intellectuals made sense out of this data by placing it in the context of evolutionary game theory and human evolution.

        It is not that women desire to be dominated. The shit tests keep on coming. It is that they carnally desire a man that can dominate them. It is a subtle but important difference.

        Successful reproduction requires an end to defect/defect equilibrium.

        Since there are only a small number of iterations, attaining cooperate/cooperate equilibrium requires coercion. They want a man that can own them.

        As I keep saying, the strong empowered overweight barista with a hundred thousand in college and credit card debt is going to die alone and be eaten by her cats, but if abducted by Islamic State and sold on the auction block naked and in chains would probably have seven children and thirty grand children, and die surrounded by a horde of loving family. Women are searching for their ancestral environment of successful reproduction, and not finding it anywhere.

        • suones says:

          …if abducted by Islamic State…

          Prog women had a tendency to run off to the Islamic State, get impregnated, then return to claim gibs from betacuck Western States.

          If there’s one thing Baphomet does correctly, it is ensuring high elite fertility. Even if the spawn are semi-functional and have no chance of reaching the stars, the future literally belongs to those who show up.

  9. neofugue says:

    The Synod of Gangra was held in 350 in Galatia, which condemned the Manichaeans and their practices. Its decisions were later ratified by Chalcedon, the fourth ecumenical council of the Church. The central subjects of the council were to reassert the doctrines of the church against Monophysitism and to further condemn heretical variants of Nestorius and Eutyches.

    The fourteen bishops present at the council condemned the views and practices of Eustathius, bishop of Sebaste in Armenia, and his followers. Holiness-spiraling monasticism, they were contemptful of marriage, holding that no married person “had hope with God,” refused to eat animal flesh, refused to pray in the houses of married people, rejected church worship in favor of worship in private conventicles, believed that the rich could not be saved, and encouraged slaves to desert their duties on the pretext of taking up an ascetic life.

    Here are some of the canons:

    Canon 1:
    If any one shall condemn marriage, or abominate and condemn a woman who is a believer and devout, and sleeps with her own husband, as though she could not enter the Kingdom [of heaven] let him be anathema.

    Canon 3:
    If any one shall teach a slave, under pretext of piety, to despise his master and to run away from his service, and not to serve his own master with good-will and all honor, let him be anathema.

    Canon 9:
    If any one shall remain virgin, or observe continence, abstaining from marriage because he abhors it, and not on account of the beauty and holiness of virginity itself, let him be anathema.

    Canon 14:
    If any woman shall forsake her husband, and resolve to depart from him because she abhors marriage, let her be anathema.

    Canon 16:
    If, under any pretense of piety, any children shall forsake their parents, particularly [if the parents are] believers, and shall withhold becoming reverence from their parents, on the plea that they honor piety more than them, let them be anathema.

    Canon 17:
    If any woman from pretended asceticism shall cut off her hair, which God gave her as the reminder of her subjection, thus annulling as it were the ordinance of subjection, let her be anathema.

  10. Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

    Weisselberg ‘led to court in handcuffs’; because this bespectacled desk jockey is such a grave physical threat or flight risk? No, because it looks more humiliating than not being marched in handcuffs.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      They like to repeat that line over and over again in the news incidentally. You know, just in case anyone was confused about the impressions they’re supposed to get.

      With processes like these, who needs convictions?

      • Shorn says:

        Yes, and in my (non-US) country’s news, they showed the clip of the perp walk and made special note of pointing it out. For someone most of us would never have heard of. They concluded the story with the fact that although Trump himself isn’t yet involved, it puts the pressure on Weisselberg to rat Trump out.

  11. Basil says:

    Why shouldn’t there be polygamy in restored Christianity? Scripture explicitly says, “For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety. ” It also says about marriage “Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh.” From this it can be learned that if one wife has a child, then the second wife (who cannot have children) is also his mother and this will be saved. It is also known that there are more girls than boys. We also know that not every man can take care of his wife and children. How could God, in his wisdom, allow the road to heaven to be closed for millions of good women? God hates divorce, not strong large families. We must do his will.

    Yes, some good Christian men won’t get wives. For a while. This is necessary so that we do not forget to carry the Word of God to all the nations of the world, as Christ told us.

    The ban on polygamy is only for priests.

    • neofugue says:

      Tradition of the Church over the last 2000 years.

      Akin to divorce, polygamy was given as a concession only because of the hardness of the hearts of the Jews, but was never God’s will from the beginning.

      • jim says:

        > The Orthodox aren’t interested in reactionaries redefining Orthodoxy to further temporal goals.

        I notice the sudden enthusiasm for celebrating married saints. Seems like the Orthodox are interested, and the more interested the further they are from the power of the Cathedral.

        • Yul Bornhold says:

          Jim, you seem to have edited your response on top of my comment.

        • Basil says:

          St. Valentine’s Day is much more popular than the Orthodox analogue – the day of Peter and Fevronia. Moreover, these people lived most of their lives in monasteries and died childless. The only advantage is that it is a holiday of married people, and not of all “lovers”.

          • jim says:

            The day of Peter and Fevronia becoming a big deal is quite recent – it is clear what direction Russian Orthodoxy is heading. It is headed in our direction.

      • Basil says:

        Yes, judging by the way God created man and woman, monogamy was the original plan. But then God changed his mind, because it turned out that the Jews cannot follow this and fornication is spreading on the earth, and divorce is constantly abused. In our time, people not only constantly sin for fornication and get divorced ten times, but also stopped fulfilling “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth” and have long ceased to bring Christ to the lost. It follows from this that we live in even greater sin than the Old Testament Jews.

        Of course, a monogamous marriage is ideal. But we are very far from ideal. The fact that fornication in modern Christians is far less questionable than polygamy is as much heresy as women pastors or approval of “gay marriage”.

    • suones says:

      There is no way to argue this from a “Christian” frame.

      From an Aryan frame, polygamy is never prohibited. Rather, it is considered to reduce social status. It is allowed, even encouraged, in some specific cases, eg for rehabilitation of young widows (a man can marry his brother’s widow and adopt her children, for example) or as a response to female infertility (which Aryans suffer more as we usually marry later). But it is still considered a desperate measure, that is justified only by a desperate need.

      • Basil says:

        And how would the Aryans of the chariot era relate to our reality? If an Aryan from that time would have ended up in our time, what would have confused him more – the normalization of whore / fagot / betrayal, the celebration of infanticide, the self-castration of men through watching anime / porn / prostitution / hormonal therapy, the self-sterilization of women through school / “education” / career / carousel, parents who send their children to schools to learn the latest atlas of “genders” or patriarchs with multiple wives?

        The formula “one wife and X-concubines”, which is quite often encountered among the Aryan peoples, is not a form of polygamy? Is there any difference other than the inheritance aspect?

        • suones says:

          Ten Thousand Aryans of the chariot era, transplanted into modern society, would be able to conquer the world within their lifetime. “Modern” tools and knowledge is not so difficult that a smart man couldn’t master them within a few decades.

          As for polygamy, yes, concubinage isn’t polygamy — the resultant offspring have no patrimony (unless adopted). Inheritance is the major issue with polygamy as practiced by Semites — every Muslim ruler is permanently threatened by a war of succession, and no dynasty is ever truly stable. Spiritual monogamy with male primogeniture is the correct way.

          That said, if there is a problem of too many women around, patriarchs may take multiple wives — Dharma does not prohibit it, only discourage it. Even Shri Ramchandra’s father had multiple wives (which resulted in the sort of palace intrigues over succession that are to be expected, and a whole lot of drama that ultimately cost him his life).

          • Basil says:

            This is very interesting, but I doubt that Europeans with realistic attitudes have any alternatives to Christianity. If we exclude from the option the deal with Baphomet. The return of pre-Christian beliefs in working order to the European expanses is quite a fantastic scenario. We certainly shouldn’t get rid of the working pagan practices that have entered Christian practice, as some Protestants have done. But Christianity should be our main support.

            And the Bible clearly states that fornication is sinful. Bypassing the problem of extra women without multiplying fornication is possible only by establishing polygamy. If the only practical difference between polygamy and monogamy with concubines is inheritance, we can solve this problem with the help of law. The Bible does not indicate how a father should make a material testament. I only found “If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, both the beloved and the hated; and if the firstborn son be hers that was hated: Then it shall be, when he maketh his sons to inherit that which he hath, that he may not make the son of the beloved firstborn before the son of the hated, which is indeed the firstborn: But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated for the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he is the beginning of his strength; the right of the firstborn is his. ” It speaks directly about the principle primogeniture.

            The first and subsequent wives (or rather their children) should have different rights to inherited property. Also, this will be some natural limitation for polygamy – girls will be more willing to become first wives, because this way their status will be higher, and their children receive most of the inheritance, and more importantly, fathers of girls will want the same.

            • jim says:

              > And the Bible clearly states that fornication is sinful.

              But what is fornication? The meaning of the words have been changed underneath us by our enemies.

              The words adultery and fornication need to be understood in the context of the final commandment. If surplus single women, the result is not fornication, but harlotry. Old type meaning of whore was not primarily a woman who received money for sex, but a rather a woman who engaged in what is now euphemistically called dating, in which the money is apt to be flowing in the opposite direction.

              When the Australian authorities addressed the problem of sex on the beach in the late eighteenth, early nineteenth century, they did not use the word “fornication”.

              Fornication is a woman under the proper authority of her patriarch having sex with a man behind his back. If surplus unowned women, not fornication.

              The core problem that the bible seeks to address is tying people down. If one party or both parties have the option to move on, long term cooperation is difficult, and we get defect/defect equilibrium, which is unpleasant, and impedes reproduction.

              A problem with polygyny is it gives the man the option of neglecting his old wife, and his children by the old wife – allowing something close to divorce at male whim. Privileging the first wife, and the children of the first wife, prevents that problem.

              If a man has that option, it will poison relationships with all of his wives, and result in women seeking careers in place of children and booty calls in place of marriage.

              You will notice I am using the language of game, game theory, and evolutionary game theory. The problem is that the Old Christian words have been changed underneath us, making them not very useful. We can only restore their old meanings after internalization of the corresponding game theory and evolutionary game theory meanings are widely internalized.

              To try and revive old meanings of words that have been destroyed by the Cathedral, while the Cathedral still has total power over all mass media, is pointless. To rectify names, going to need new names, and then explain and interpret biblical use of the old names in the context of the new, thus, when we have power, the new names will lead to a restoration of old meanings for the old words. Right now, not going to lead to the restoration of old meanings.

              The old solution to the problem of unowned women was to make them extremely low status and to give them little protection against arbitrary violence, which violence was apt to be applied to enforce ownership. Or state and Church would intervene to marry them off. Or lock them up in a nunnery.

              • Basil says:

                Do we not use words in a specific way to change their meaning according to how we use the word? If we talk about fornication in the old sense, gradually the old understanding of fornication will begin to return. At least in our inner circle. If we leave it, the enemies will continue to use it as they please, continuing to further poison Christianity with their bitter poison. In addition, fundamentalist rhetoric on this issue will find more supporters than rhetoric in terms of the Game.

                If sex outside of marriage is considered acceptable, we certainly cannot create an environment conducive to achieving goals. We can have widespread sex outside of marriage, we can have strong traditional families, but we cannot have both.

                If we exclude the option of polygamy, how can the problem of extramarital affairs and extra women be solved? And there will be a lot of extra women, especially when moving out of our situation. There are clearly more single experienced women 25+ than those who want to take one of them as their first and only wife. Stray dogs are unhappy and constantly create problems. Also, I don’t really understand why polygamy should spoil relationships. A man who can have many women has a high status, a man who has alternatives has a high status, a man with a large number of children has a high status, a man on whom more people depend on has a high status, and a man who is attached to his only wife has a low status. Women tend to be unhappy and ruin relationships if they question the status of the man they sleep with. If we add to the status of men, we will also increase the woman’s satisfaction with marriage.

                And I’m also wondering if surrogacy is acceptable? Let’s say the wife gave birth to her husband two children, but to avoid pregnancy problems for the wife (she has poor health, he doesn’t want to risk her beauty, it doesn’t matter) and to diversify her offspring thanks to genius material (to increase their chances of success, to experiment with the appearance of children or other) other women, the husband decides to hire an outside woman – is this a violation of the balance necessary for effective cooperation or not?

                • suones says:

                  And I’m also wondering if surrogacy is acceptable? Let’s say the wife gave birth to her husband two children, but to avoid pregnancy problems for the wife (she has poor health, he doesn’t want to risk her beauty, it doesn’t matter) and to diversify her offspring thanks to genius material (to increase their chances of success, to experiment with the appearance of children or other) other women, the husband decides to hire an outside woman – is this a violation of the balance necessary for effective cooperation or not?

                  “Surrogacy” is an anti concept. In case a wife is unable to satisfy the reproductive needs of the patriarch, Dharma practically commands him to take another wife. Thinking about “risking her beauty” is gay. It’s like owning an expensive car but never driving it. What’s the point of “owning” it then lol? Just like an old sofa becomes more comfortable when deshaped (because it gets deshaped to more exactly fit your body), similarly childbearing makes the woman more desirable to her man, on an emotional level. Any fresh pussy cravings can be satisfied with a visit to whores from time to time. Rich people can keep full time concubines.

                • Basil says:

                  Perhaps I am thinking like a boy, but I have never seen a woman become more beautiful after the third child. Which sometimes happens after the first or second. But the more a woman gives birth, the faster she ages or turns into a bedside table. It’s just a careless attitude towards one’s own things. A woman is not only an incubator, but also a decorative animal trained in various tricks, which pleases her husband with her appearance and her service.

                  If the inability to give birth to a sufficient number of children is a reason to take a second wife, I want to ask about the incentives that will prevent the husband from driving his old wife out into the cold.

                • suones says:

                  After a certain time a man needs a bedside table that can make coffee according to his taste and doesn’t throw galactic shit tests. Of course, they never stop shit testing, but it becomes more of a playful formality.

                  …a decorative animal trained in various tricks, which pleases her husband with her appearance and her service.

                  That’s an odalisque, not a wife. Marrying an odalisque is apt to end badly. Just ask any of Liz Taylor’s husbands.

                  …incentives that will prevent the husband from driving his old wife out into the cold.

                  Dharma. It is your duty to take care of your parents, house, hearth, slaves, wife, animals, and children. Dereliction of any of that duty will encumber your soul with grave sin that will burn your soul in hell for a hell of a long time. Over the long term, Dharma enforces itself. In the short term, you will lose social status among your peers and family. If the bad behaviour continues, you family elders are bound to curtail your adharmic activities. Failing that, your cohort of gentlemen will see to it that your family pays the price. Failing all that, if the matter is still out of hand, the God-King will declare your entire clan as degenerates and purge you all. Failing that, GNON will purge the King.

                • jim says:

                  > If sex outside of marriage is considered acceptable, we certainly cannot create an environment conducive to achieving goals. We can have widespread sex outside of marriage, we can have strong traditional families, but we cannot have both.

                  Gender neutral language alert. If you use gender neutral language, you wind up speaking the enemy’s lies. Not only would an old testament Hebrew find your words incomprehensible, and if hecomprehended them, find them wicked, a late eighteenth century officer in Australia would find your words strange and disturbing.

                  You are trying to say Christian things from within the frame of people who hate you, hate marriage, hate Christianity, and hate Christ.

                  You are discussing the Christian position, the red pilled position, and the evolutionary game theoretic position, from within the frame of demon worshiping blue pilled people who reject evolution from the neck up.

                  The enemy has poisoned the language to prevent us from thinking thoughts that are dangerous to him.

                  You are using words that make important parts of the problems that you are trying to talk about and think about unsayable and unthinkable.

                • Basil says:

                  I understand what you mean, but there is a problem. A man who takes someone else’s daughter or wife without the approval of the owner violates property rights. This is a crime for which punishment is provided. Of course, extramarital sex between women and men is different crimes with different punishments.

                  If a man and a woman are unmarried, they must get married. If a man sleeps with another man’s wife, this is an even greater grave sin.

                • Rick says:

                  >I understand what you mean, but there is a problem. A man who takes someone else’s daughter or wife without the approval of the owner violates property rights. This is a crime for which punishment is provided. Of course, extramarital sex between women and men is different crimes with different punishments.

                  Conflating someone taking a unbetrothed daughter and married women is a mistake. Very different cases. The later is a death penalty offense. The former is corrected with a shotgun marriage.

                  >If we exclude the option of polygamy, how can the problem of extramarital affairs and extra women be solved?

                  As we’ve been solving the issue for millennia: mistresses. A mistresses and their children are low status and shouldn’t be allowed at all if there’s a shortage of women. That’s the traditional and time tested solution.

                  >Also, I don’t really understand why polygamy should spoil relationships.

                  Women fight endlessly with each other when both are married to the same man as they both jockey for status for themselves and their children. Creates divisions between the children. Islam proved that a half brothers are more dangerous to their siblings than any sort of external foes. The history of Islamic elites is one endless stream of fratricide and family murders.

                • alf says:

                  To my mind, if polygamy were really the way to go, men and women wouldn’t be born in 50/50 ratios.

                  Which is not to say I couldn’t imagine situations where polygamy is feasible. But most of those situations sound apocalyptic, like 90% of men dying.

                  The thing with owning multiple women is that it is similar to owning multiple slaves; the power dynamic must really be in your favor to pull that off. Most of the time, it is not. American slave owners overestimated their ability to own slaves, and to this day it bites them in the ass.

                  Similarly, culturally accepted polygamy tends to overestimate men’s ability to own multiple women. You get envious men, you get testy women, and the required power dynamic is very unstable.

                  Which is not to say monogamy is perfect. But it’s fair. The deviation from monogamy are exactly that: deviations, thus a healthy sense of taboo keeps them in order. For intance, the nature of a mistress is that what happens between you and her is a secret: you do not introduce her to your family, you do not boast about her. Thus there is a much healthier power dynamic.

                • Pooch says:

                  Polygamy doesn’t scale. Every man who doesn’t have a woman loses motivation to contribute to civilization.

                • suones says:


                  Polygamy doesn’t scale. Every man who doesn’t have a woman loses motivation to contribute to civilization.

                  You’ve got it backwards. The intention is that men who don’t contribute to civilisation do not get married, don’t reproduce. To be eligible for a wife, a man has to demonstrate his worth: a Brahmin has to complete his education and become a teacher/priest, a Kshatriya has to complete a tour of duty in the military, a Vaishya has to become a taxpayer, and a Shudra has to master his ancestral trade and become an independent artisan. Failing all of that, a man can join a liege lord and become a labourer, where that lord will then arrange a marriage for him. A parasite gets no wife. Since a number of men are naturally parasites, they should be bred out of the gene pool anyway.

                  This will lead to a problem of excess women. The King and liege lords are the guardians of all excess unowned women, and Dharma commands them to marry them off to deserving underlings/soldiers/labourers. “Mass wedding” ceremonies where unowned girls are married off to bachelors are still a thing in India, and Dharma assures the benefactor of huge spiritual rewards for this. Not to mention temporal rewards by earning the eternal loyalty of a family.

                  If excess women remain still, the King/Lord is obliged to marry them. This usually happens in the aftermath of major wars where a lot of young men get killed and young widows abound, many childless. Polygamy among non-consanguinous close relations is Dharmic, in that situation (like a man marrying his brother’s widow and adopting his children).

                • alf says:

                  To be eligible for a wife, a man has to demonstrate his worth: a Brahmin has to complete his education and become a teacher/priest, a Kshatriya has to complete a tour of duty in the military, a Vaishya has to become a taxpayer, and a Shudra has to master his ancestral trade and become an independent artisan. Failing all of that, a man can join a liege lord and become a labourer, where that lord will then arrange a marriage for him. A parasite gets no wife.

                  Sounds excessively complicated. I don’t need no state system allowing me a wife, even if that way it promises me more than one wife. I just want to woo a woman, ask her father permission to marry her, and that’s that.

                  If someone were to ask me for my daughter’s hand, and he already has a wife, that man better be the second coming of Jesus, otherwise, no ball.

                • jim says:

                  > Sounds excessively complicated. I don’t need no state system allowing me a wife,

                  You do however need a state system that will return her if she gets “lost”. (The Japanese ie system. Worked great.)

                  Roman system in the old Republic was that if a patriarch killed some random person belonging to a different patriarch, the other patriarch would get upset about it, and call in the priests (lawyers) who were backed by militia. But if a patriarch killed someone in his own family, even someone great, powerful, and politically important, no one’s business but his own.

                  The latter seems excessive. Economically independent adult male children should be emancipated from their fathers to facilitate reproduction. The later Roman Republic also had a problem where father retained rights over the wife, and wife had rights against the husband. This bad. Woman need to become wholly the property of their husband, and wholly cease to be property of their fathers.

                  To be backed by the state, you should need to be able to support a wife.

                  And for the wife to want to stick around without getting lost, people who are higher status in the state system have to be able to get away with violence against people who are not. The state should protect people it needs, and not protect worthless people it does not need, and who are likely to cause problems.

                • alf says:

                  @Suones But I see you acknowledge that polygamy is not the status quo in a different comment —

                  From an Aryan frame, polygamy is never prohibited. Rather, it is considered to reduce social status. It is allowed, even encouraged, in some specific cases, eg for rehabilitation of young widows (a man can marry his brother’s widow and adopt her children, for example) or as a response to female infertility (which Aryans suffer more as we usually marry later). But it is still considered a desperate measure, that is justified only by a desperate need.

                  So there’s really not that much disagreement.

              • The Cominator says:

                Polygamy has not worked well for the Islamic world, what has been found by experience to fail should not be tried regardless of how pretty an intellectual argument can be made for it.

                By their fruits you shall know them applies to all things.

                • Basil says:

                  We cannot know for sure what caused the problems of Muslims. Possibly tolerance for incest. Or the legal system. Or the decline of the Middle East trade routes after European geographical discoveries.

                  In any case, speaking of the fruits, migrants from the Middle East and Muslim Africa are taking over technologically and intellectually superior Europe without a fight. If this is the merit of polygamy, then it is not so bad.

                • The Cominator says:

                  What allows them to take over is the leftist authorities allow them to act almost as a herrenvolk in Europe. Eastern Europe where this is not allowed and they are treated as demi niggers does not have this problem, even Russia with its large Islamic population doesn’t have this problem.

                • Basil says:

                  In Eastern Europe, fertility rates are below production levels. Nationalism will not help if your country is overwhelmed by feminism. And nationalism will end if feminism doesn’t end. The countries of Eastern Europe (from Estonia in the north to Bulgaria in the south) are the world leaders in depopulation. It is only a matter of time before Africans are invited to these countries.

                  If we talk about Russia, over the past hundred years the share of Muslims in the population of Russia has been constantly growing and continues to grow (internal birth rate of Muslim regions + to migration from Central Asia). The Slavic population is constantly decreasing (low birth rate + outflow to Europe). This is not a success story.

                • suones says:

                  Polygamy has not worked well for the Islamic world,…

                  The problem with Ishmaelites is not polygamy (which has solved its purpose of increasing elite male fertility extremely well), it is divorce. This is the Semitic poison that stops a family laying down roots, and originates in Judaism (of course), but is very common across Arabs too.

                  The concept of “divorce” has no counterpart in Aryan thought. It is as ridiculous and contradictory a concept as “gay sex.” Easier divorce == faster social breakdown. Each son likely to kill his father and other siblings. Dharma considers marriage as an indissoluble union of souls, preserved through multiple incarnations of the body. Marriage happens before any of us are born, we just have to find our soul-mate (hah![1]) to consummate the relationship.

                  This is not an indictment against polygamy, of course. But marriage is irreversible, mono- or poly-. No second thoughts allowed.

                  [1] Soul-mate: Another Aryan concept that has broad cultural currency despite marriage having been entirely debased by Semites. Blood is thicker than Church water.

                • suones says:


                  If we talk about Russia, over the past hundred years the share of Muslims in the population of Russia has been constantly growing and continues to grow (internal birth rate of Muslim regions + to migration from Central Asia). The Slavic population is constantly decreasing (low birth rate + outflow to Europe). This is not a success story.

                  This is the price Rus must pay for the deal that the witch Olga made with a Semitic demon where she sold the souls of “her” flock to Him in exchange for vengeance for her husband and temporal success for her line. Literally the definition of ancestral curse[1].

                  [1] Credit for coining this apt phrase goes to brother DharmicReality.

                • Contaminated NEET says:

                  Suones, have you ever laid out your worldview in detail in a long effortpost or series of effortposts? I’d be interested in reading a summary of your thought, and I think a lot of others would also, because you reliably come up with novel insights.

                • suones says:

                  No I have not made a comprehensive post about this. It is simply too broad to cover in a blog. If I start such an endeavour I will have to write a great tome to be able to do it justice.

                  However, I keep getting surprised that these things seem so strange and unique. None of this is my original thought — I only regurgitate the wisdom of ancients as applied to current situations. Do Western Aryans remember nothing of their civilisation?

                • neofugue says:

                  > If we talk about Russia, over the past hundred years the share of Muslims in the population of Russia has been constantly growing and continues to grow…the Slavic population is constantly decreasing

                  Restoring patriarchy is not within Putin’s ability at the moment as the Russian elite is still heavily leftist as a result of Communist baggage. Feminism was a product of the Communist revolution, initiated by Kerensky and fully implemented by Lenin. In order for Russia to fix its birth rate, Putin will need to bring enough of the Russian elite towards Christianity that they will be willing to take the hit from the resulting cold and more likely hot holy war with the United States. As of now, the current Russian elite would overthrow Putin if Russia was subjected to an economic holy war.

                  The vast majority of Russia is still Slavic and is in a far better place demographically than the United States. Rightists ought to have patience for broad political changes.

                • neofugue says:

                  > This is the price Rus must pay for the deal that the witch Olga made with a Semitic demon…

                  It would be one thing to blaspheme Christ and the saints of the Church if India were a reactionary Hindu state with a moral Hindu elite, but India is not a reactionary Hindu state with a moral Hindu elite, India is a degenerate liberal democracy with the same fundamental problems as any other degenerate liberal democracy.

                  No matter how much blasphemy or “hello fellow aryan” is vomited on this blog, all of the Hindu gods are demons, and will always be considered demons. Brahma, Vishnu, and Shambhu are all demons, and no matter how much blasphemers may attribute all the evils of Communism to Christianity, Russia suffered under Communism for only a century, while India has been subjugated under Islam for far longer, until the British conquered them.

                  One must have self-awareness before spewing blasphemy, although that is not an attribute of one who worships demons.

                • jim says:

                  Brahma is late vedic, thus only appears in the Aryan pantheon when it was obviously succumbing to demons.

                  If you want to revive the original Aryan tradition, Brahma is nowhere to be found.

                  If you go all the way back to the Aryans who conquered India, you will find a very familiar pantheon. Indira is obviously Thor and Zeus. The religion of the chariot driving Aryans that conquered India is the old familiar Norse, Greek, and Roman religion.

                  Which old and familiar religion is interpreted in terms of the household religion of the patriarch’s fathers, grandfathers, and great grandfathers, as the ancestors of all the Aryan peoples, and the physical location of those ancestors in their earthly existence was attributed by the Icelanders to roughly the location that we now know the Aryan peoples came from. Each Aryan household worshiped its dead patriarchs, and those patriarchs are ultimately descended from Thor etcetera in his earthly existence. The priesthood kept peace between the patriarchs by coordinating the worship of very distant ancestors, that many patriarchal households tended to have in common, Thor etcetera being the among most prominent common ancestors.

                  Suones religion is as much a replacement religion of the original Aryan religion as Christianity is, and the trouble is that his faith comes more from the South Indian peoples the Aryans conquered (bunch of demon worshipers) than it comes from the original Aryans.

                  This old Aryan religion does not have a creator God. The world existed indefinitely long before its gods, for its gods are merely deified fathers of fathers of fathers, than many patriarchs and households tended to have in common.

                  This old religion was replaced as a result of the decline of strong patriarchs.

                  Among those replacements was worship of the Creator. And worship of the creator incarnated as Christ turned out to be rather good at winning wars.

                  The trouble with religions that worship the creator God is the tension between God as a person, and God as the ground of being. Which tension is expressed as the humanity and divinity of Christ.

                  This tension makes religions of the creator vulnerable to both legalism and demons. Christ resolves, or at least personifies, this tension, making Christianity resistant to legalism and ritualism, and startlingly potent against demons.

                  After a few centuries of strong patriarchy, I hope that our descendants will honor us, and the creator both. Should we succeed, we are ancestors and in this sense the pre christian and pre Hindu Aryan religion will be restored. And that is the only genuine restoration it can have. Having no continuous line of deified patriarchs directly connecting us to Thor et al, any modern paganism is necessarily fake and gay. The common worship of Thor et-al only worked in a society where each family worshiped its own particular and distinct ancestors.

                  The ancestral Aryan religion is ancestor worship:

                  The absolutism of Filmer, the traditionalism of Maistre, the radical corporatism of the Third Reich, were once united in the person of the Aryan House Father, standing astride his dominion, exercising his unimpeachable will, and seeing above it none but the line of fathers in his family sepulchre, those fathers who animate his very being, who form the unbreakable chain of which he is but a link, and whom he will one day join in the hereafter. Each family has its religion, its gods, its priesthood. But, large scale cooperation between patriarchs requires a larger scale religion, so, a priesthood representing the worship of more distant ancestors.

                  This faith, however, suffered military defeat before faiths that had better coordination because they worshiped the incarnation of the creator, so could build larger and stronger synthetic tribes through adoption by God than the natural tribes, particularly after families in those natural tribes lost the connection to their ancestral gods through their deified fathers.

                  The ancient Aryan religion only worked because when the priesthood invoked Thor, the congregation was actually biologically descended from the real Thor in the male line.

                • suones says:



                  Feels good, man.

                • suones says:


                  Brahma is late vedic, thus only appears in the Aryan pantheon when it was obviously succumbing to demons.

                  If you want to revive the original Aryan tradition, Brahma is nowhere to be found.

                  It is true Brahma et al are not Bronze Age/Rigvedic gods. The chief god is the Father Dyaus/Devas Pitar, whose name sounds suspiciously similar to Deus Pater, who is the Lord of Prithvi Mata, and ultimate Father of all creation.

                  Brahma is the Father of the current common ancestor of Indian Aryans, i.e. Shri Manu, who was responsible for preserving us through the Deluge (just like Noah preserved his people). Post-diluvian Aryans spread out to the far corners of the earth and independently developed various pantheons. It is wrong to pit Perun and Indra as different gods, and different to Thor, just as Jupiter and Zeus represent the same concept. Perun is as much an Aryan god of Rus as Vishnu is of India.

                  Aryan tradition is not the worship of a specific god, but rather worship of Fatherhood in general, and one’s Father in partiular. To prevent this from spiralling into ridiculousness, Dharma commands worship of at least seven generations of male progenitors. Any gods I worship are only “legitimate” for me as far as they were part of my Father’s pantheon, and his Father’s for him. The rest of the millions of gods might, for me, as well not exist. We know this, the patron gods know this, and each god looks out for his children. They are prone to in-fighting, being gods, but just like the Samrat quells infighting among his chiefs, so does Shri Vishnu quell infighting among the gods. Failing that, they are handed over to Shri Shambhu and his consort for consumption.

                  This old Aryan religion does not have a creator God. The world existed indefinitely long before its gods,…

                  This is technically correct, but incomplete. The universe as we know it is eternal, having neither beginning nor end. As such there is no single Act of Creation, nor a “Creator” god. But everything in the universe is mortal, having been created once, and thus liable to eventual destruction. Devas Pitar is an embodiment of the Sky/Universe (ancient work “aakash,” meaning sky, comprises stars, galaxies, etc.), and all creation is the result of His natural inclinations. The entities which actually carried out creation are the gods that we worship. So our Creator god is Brahma. These gods have exceedingly long lifespans, being nigh immortal, but having being created themselves, are liable for destruction in the far, far, future. Creation is considered to have got going when Devas Pitar was separated from His consort Prithvi Mata (Mother Earth) by Indra. Post Rigvedic exegesis interprets this event as Devas taking form himself and presenting as Indra — both are Lords of Thunder, for example, with their characteristic weapons being Thunderbolts. A similar postdiluvian metamorphosis transformed Devas into Zeus in Greek, for example.

                  The trouble with religions that worship the creator God is the tension between God as a person, and God as the ground of being. Which tension is expressed as the humanity and divinity of Christ.

                  This tension makes religions of the creator vulnerable to both legalism and demons. Christ resolves, or at least personifies, this tension, making Christianity resistant to legalism and ritualism, and startlingly potent against demons.

                  The simultaneous humanity and divinity of Christ, Son of Deus sounds suspiciously similar to Aryan incarnation of Devas into Indra, or Shri Vishnu into Shri Ramchandra, even using the same word — “incarnation,” as Latin. Shri Ramchandra is at once the son of Maharaja Dashratha, was born of Mata Kaushalya and died by immersion into the holy Saryu river, while simultaneously being Shri Vishnu, immortal and beyond time and space, the Divine of divines.

                  You see “Christianity” being stripped of legalism and ritualism — I see Semitism being stripped of pilpul and Pharisee-ism. The end result is a transformation of a Semitic prophet (according to Ishmaelites) or charlatan (according to YHWHegians who executed him for his crimes and castigate him even today) into what I variously call “Blonde Jesus” or “Aryan Jesus” the Son of Deus (not YHWH), together with such Semitic anathema as incarnation, “Holy Spirit” and “Trinity.” This latter memeplex is the creation of an Aryan mythos based on a Semitic seed. Henry VIII in England and Peter the Great in Russia removed the last vestiges of internationalism and re-created essentially Aryan tribal gods in the form of National Churches.

                  Having no continuous line of deified patriarchs directly connecting us to Thor et al, any modern paganism is necessarily fake and gay.

                  Unnecessarily blackpilled. Having the blood of Thor is what counts. Unlike legalistic religions, every Aryan carries his gods within himself. Cut open Goliath’s heart, and you will find Dagon. It starts with honouring your father and mother. Enforcement of eusocial rules serves as a sacrifice to the Old Gods and will shortly awaken them. “Modern” “paganism” is cucked by definition since it acts as a foil for whatever social establishment exists — regardless of the establishment being eu- or anti-social. “Pagan” itself is a blanket term commandeered by Jews/Philosemites to target their opponents. The Latin meaning of the term is benign. (Similar to how “villain” has metamorphosed from French to English).

                  …were once united in the person of the Aryan House Father, standing astride his dominion, exercising his unimpeachable will, and seeing above it none but the line of fathers in his family sepulchre, those fathers who animate his very being, who form the unbreakable chain of which he is but a link, and whom he will one day join in the hereafter. Each family has its religion, its gods, its priesthood.

                  Come now. You just described me personally. Let’s not pretend this is an impossible goal. A jihad-complete goal, sure, but not impossible. It will only take seven generations. Kudos for understanding the concept of Aryan priesthood so well too. Even though you don’t consider yourself a Prophet, I hope and pray that if a time comes when you are tested, may your gods bestow strength upon you to embrace your destiny.

                • jim says:

                  > > Having no continuous line of deified patriarchs directly connecting us to Thor et al, any modern paganism is necessarily fake and gay.

                  > Unnecessarily blackpilled.

                  Just look at modern white pagans attempting to revive the old Aryan religion. Fake and gay. It is not working.

                  The worship of Thor and the rest was necessarily rooted in the family rituals commemorating one’s father, his father, your father’s grand father, your grandfather’s grandfather – and if you went back far enough, your family was descended from someone now part of the pantheon, though often merely in the female line.

                  Without those roots, fake and gay.

                  > Even though you don’t consider yourself a Prophet.

                  That time may come, but I hope it does not, for if I am summoned to that role, things will be bad indeed.

                  And even things do get that bad, if I am summoned, it will only be because Lord is hard up for candidates. The job I am actually hoping for, and probably better qualified for, is Grand Inquisitor, though it will probably be called military intelligence, rather than the Inquisition. The pay is better, and the survival prospects considerably better. The time for a prophet is not yet, and should that time come, I hope someone better qualified is summoned.

                • i says:

                  Monotheism. That is the worship of the All-Father alone was the predecessor for all religions on this planet:

                  All the more primitive tribes of North America. Australia and even Africa have their one eternal God that is above every other “God”. And coincidentally the Pastoral Nomads are more likely to retain this Monotheism.

                  Just like the Mongols worshipped “Heaven” or “Tengri”.

                  Most commonly the “All-Father” but occasionally “All-Mother”. Nonetheless this being that is worshipped is eternal without beginning or end.

                  This God cannot be bribed. This God demands high moral rectitude. And there is sadness that this God has departed from fellowship with Man.

                  Its the more socially complex societies that have more Gods. That could have this transactional relationship.
                  “I do this favor and you do me a favor” relationship.

                • The Original OC says:

                  “The worship of Thor and the rest was necessarily rooted in the family rituals commemorating one’s father, his father, your father’s grand father, your grandfather’s grandfather – and if you went back far enough, your family was descended from someone now part of the pantheon, though often merely in the female line.”

                  Implying that worship of the nation is the closest modern possibility to the Old Gods. In the same style, nationalisms tend to select certain real heroes from the past to personify all the sons’ ancestors.

                • neofugue says:

                  > Just look at modern white pagans attempting to revive the old Aryan religion. Fake and gay. It is not working.

                  It is not working because the West has severed its pagan roots to the point where there is no defined Western Pagan doctrine, authority or morality, all of which is necessary in a stable religion. Paganism survives in India, and as such any clear structure for Western Paganism must originate from the Hinduism, a foreign and distant religion, which defeats one purpose of Paganism as a national or racial religion.

                  Suones is using the same tactics as the Progressives, only he is a Pagan entryist and not a Progressive entryist. Ascribing to the red pill on women is akin to ascribing to the idea that human sacrifice is evil, it is not an indication of one being a moral person but rather that one is not insane.

                  When Progressives attack Christianity, they begin by decrying Christ as “racist, sexist and homophobic” while claiming Christ is “tolerant and supportive of equality and sodomy,” at which point they enter to destroy the church. Suones claims that Christianity is in his words a “Semitic” religion, poisoning the well by associating Christianity with modern Judaism to mark Christianity as a foreign religion, while claiming that Christ is in reality an “Aryan Jesus who masks the old gods.” As Christ tells us not to throw pearls at swine I will not bother with Suones’ blasphemies, but Christianity believes in one God, all others being demons in disguise, and that the world has a beginning and an end, with the faithful looking for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Christ was the fulfillment of God’s promise to Eve that one day the Son of Man would conquer death, and that he would descend from the line of David.

                  Suones lies about Peter I and the Holy Synod, which rearranged church administration but did not change the doctrine, foreign relations or practice of the church. One can ascertain this from reading Holy Synod Procurator Konstantin Pobedonostsev.

                  There is no “blonde Aryan Jesus,” Jesus Christ has historically been portrayed as of the Jewish people. Aryan Jesus is a Jesuit invention, as all historical icons portray Christ as a descendant of David:


                  This is out of place, but censoring enemies of the state religion is part of the task of maintaining a faith. The reason Russia fell to Communism was that it was not brutal enough in killing and destroying liberals, marxists, and foreigners. If Suones were to spew his blasphemy to the Russian people as a “hello fellow Aryan” he ought to be sent back, if not to India then Siberia. If this blog wishes for Christianity to be restored, it must keep Pagans and their ilk in check.

                  As a reminder the purpose of the Creed, recited in Slavonic at each liturgy, was to stop Pagan entryism:

                  We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible;

                  And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Only-begotten, Begotten of the Father before all ages, Light of Light, Very God of Very God, Begotten, not made; of one essence with the Father; by whom all things were made:

                  Who for us men and for our salvation came down from heaven, and was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary, and was made man;

                  And was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered and was buried;

                  And the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures;

                  And ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father;

                  And He shall come again with glory to judge the living and the dead, Whose kingdom shall have no end.

                  And we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, and Giver of Life, Who proceeds from the Father, Who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, Who spoke by the Prophets;

                  And we believe in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.

                  We acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins.

                  We look for the Resurrection of the dead,

                  And the Life of the age to come. Amen.

            • suones says:

              I doubt that Europeans with realistic attitudes have any alternatives to Christianity. If we exclude from the option the deal with Baphomet.

              This is an argument from pragmatism. Which is fine in itself, although I disagree with it.

              But Christianity should be our main support.

              This, however, is a moral judgement that absolutely does not derive, can not derive, from the argument above. Why should worship of a desert god be your main support? As I mentioned elsewhere, europoids actually worship someone called “Christ” who is the son of Deus, not a Jewish carpenter who claimed to be the son of YHWH, who YHWHegians executed for his crimes. Considered together with such Semitic anathemata as incarnation, “Holy Ghost,” and the “Trinity,” it’s as if the people wanted to (continue to) worship Deus pater despite Constantine’s shenanigans, and have found a way to (continue to) worship Herachrist, the Son of ZeusDeus. I only seek to remove the fig leaf of Semitic affiliation.

              • Oog en Hand says:

                It should be Dharma to learn Gothic, Old Norse and Old Slavonic.Don’t waste time to debate people who do not take the Language Pill.

                Muslims and Orthodox Jews can afford to be purple pilled because the Cathedral doesn’t understand Hebrew and Arabic.That is why the Cathedral tolerates them as flunkies/shock troops against groups who must take the blue pill good and hard.

                • suones says:

                  A Brahmin who does not know Sanskrit is no Brahmin at all. Dharma commands a priest to be a master of the language of Scripture.

                  So yes, I concur with your opinion, and rather like your “Language Pill” coinage.

                  The problem with applying this to Rus is that Old Slavonic is a derivative language created by foreign agents to impose their Semitic frame on an Aryan people. We Hindus have experienced the same, but by our Fathers’ blessings and our relatively high priestly population we have managed to maintain records, and even rediscover some thought to be lost. Rus has not been so lucky.

                  Cyril and Methodious have completely purged Rus of any mention of pre-Semitic Scripture or even culture. It is as bad as if we Hindus had to learn about our history from books written by Ibn Battuta. I find it impossible to believe that either there were no priests in Rus at all (extensive temples and idols exist), or that they didn’t manage to write anything down (stone carving was a penchant with ancients). I suspect the priests got converted/purged and the records, as far as they existed, were subjected to Year Zero treatment so beloved of Semites.

                  Unless some major archaeological discovery digs out the Russian equivalent of Brahmi or Futhark, I expect study of Church Slavonic would only constrict the mind. Slavonic today is a tool of the Semite, just as Latin has become. Fortunately for Latin (and Greek), the original, non-Semitic splendour is well-preserved. Not so for Slavonic.

                • neofugue says:

                  > Cyril and Methodious have completely purged Rus of any mention of pre-Semitic Scripture or even culture. It is as bad as if we Hindus had to learn about our history from books written by Ibn Battuta. I find it impossible to believe that either there were no priests in Rus at all (extensive temples and idols exist), or that they didn’t manage to write anything down (stone carving was a penchant with ancients). I suspect the priests got converted/purged and the records, as far as they existed, were subjected to Year Zero treatment so beloved of Semites.


                • neofugue says:

                  In all seriousness, language is an essential element of faith, and no matter how many modernists attempt to subvert the church, Old Slavonic will always be part of what it means to be Russian Orthodox, and will always be the language of prayer for the services and the clergy.

                  A more important element, however, is the calendar, “Anno Domini” and “Before Christ.” While the Western Christians gave away the Gregorian calendar, Orthodoxy retains the Julian calendar for worship services.

                • suones says:


                  > Cyril and Methodious have completely purged Rus of any mention of pre-Semitic Scripture or even culture. It is as bad as if we Hindus had to learn about our history from books written by Ibn Battuta. I find it impossible to believe that either there were no priests in Rus at all (extensive temples and idols exist), or that they didn’t manage to write anything down (stone carving was a penchant with ancients). I suspect the priests got converted/purged and the records, as far as they existed, were subjected to Year Zero treatment so beloved of Semites.


                  I mentioned it in the next paragraph. A priestly acolyte of Rus has to personally master Old Slavonic, and study ancient carvings and scriptures by himself. This is in contrast to Latin, for example, where excellent resources exist both for learning the language and non-Church literature in that language.

                  Old Slavonic will always be part of what it means to be Russian Orthodox, and will always be the language of prayer for the services and the clergy.

                  Perun typed this through your hand. I wholeheartedly agree. 🙂

                  While the Western Christians gave away the Gregorian calendar, Orthodoxy retains the Julian calendar for worship services.

                  Westerns gave away their patrimony to Pope Gregory, while the Easterns retain loyalty to Pontifex maximus Julius Caesar. I strongly suspect Russian conversion to semitism to have been a political move from the beginning, and the later schism was bound to develop sooner or later. The Old Gods never left Rus, they’re merely in camouflage[1].

                  [1] Example: Is this the mother of “god” or the sister of Perun?

                • neofugue says:

                  > The Old Gods never left Rus, they’re merely in camouflage[1]

                  Nice try, Pagan.

                  Ognyena Maria is a product of failed Pagan entryism into Christianity, and we know this because no records exist of her before Christianity became powerful in Russia. Ognyena Maria is no more relevant than Astrology, the Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny. I am a Gemini, by the way.

                  One can object stating that the Christians destroyed the Pagan texts, but then that is the fundamental problem with modern Western Paganism, that the only connection Europeans have to their pagan roots is its conflict with the victorious Christians. Paganism in Europe is dead and literally forgotten, and thus Paganism must be imported from India, as demonstrated by this blog’s comments section.

                • neofugue says:

                  Just a clarification on language. Russian services are in Old Slavonic because Saints Cyril and Methodius wanted the Rus peoples to be able to understand the liturgy. Thus, while it is an important part of tradition the church requires only its clergy to master it. While most Russians ought to learn phrases such as Gospodi pomilui (Lord have mercy) it is not a requirement for private prayer. The services being in Slavonic is a tradition, not law.

              • Basil says:

                If you disagree, what are the visible alternatives?

                • suones says:

                  I can only specluate, but here goes:

                  A son of Rus should leave all “realistic” expectations aside. We’re not facing elections, we’re not in a reality TV show. What matters is the moral right. It is morally wrong to worship strange, foreign demons, regardless of the amount of temporal success they promise, because no Kingdom is worth your soul. Also, being demons and immortal, they will eventually fuck up your kingdom too.

                  If I was a son of Rus I would investigate what they call “Rodnovery.” The movement has every hallmark of having been a Commie/Stalin ruse to counter (then-) conservative Orthodox Church[1], but its effects are surprisingly benign. It could be the awakening of an Old God, even if started “ironically” by Stalin. Unfortunately (for me, not Rus), their primary sources are all in Russian so I can’t judge their level of demonic infestation[2]. Maybe you can.

                  [1] Interesting name — as Semitism is the opposite of orthodoxy. The namegivers had some chutzpah!

                  [2] An example: I’m always on the lookout for signs of fracture in Baphomet’s armour, and a very renowned person mentioned the “Mulhid” movement that is supposedly rejecting Baphomet in Pakistan. Must be good, right? Nope. I can understand Urdu well enough that I immediately realised it’s a Molochite front, bringing Atheism(+) to Baphomet. I immediately ran far, far away. I’m very clear on this — in the fight between Boko Haram and Moloch, even though both demons are enemies of mine, yet every blow struck by Boko Haram is a blow against Moloch, which is the far more dangerous enemy. We can work out an entente with an Ishmaelite Caliph[3], but there is no negotiating with Moloch.

                  [3] The main problem with Ishmaelites is that, lacking a Dharmic succession mechanism, they are not agreement capable — which Jim observes as their being unable to Stop making war. A strong Caliphate with a well-established dynasty solves that problem and transforms Ishmaelites into a frighteningly powerful force (given their very high fertility — a genuine Blessing of Baphomet). Of course their cousins and rivals the Israelites can’t have that, so the new Caliphate was destroyed (by goy slaves) like the old one.

                • suones says:

                  *speculate lol

                • Basil says:

                  I’ll take a look, but without much hope. From a distance it looks pretty left and modern. This group does not seem to be gaining strength naturally – through the birth of new children. On the plus side, some nationalists and antisemites are clearly hiding in the ranks and I’m lying if I say that some elements of the pagan aesthetics don’t appeal to me.

                • neofugue says:

                  > This group does not seem to be gaining strength naturally – through the birth of new children

                  The idea of a mythical trad fairyland where Leftism does not exist is one of the many temptations of the demons. What one will find is that every group in a western liberal democracy is poisoned, and that the world that you seek is not found but built. Slavic Native Faith is one of the many cults that formed in the “wild 90s,” as my Ukrainian friend put it, and will not give you what you seek.

                  This evening I recently had dinner with my priest and a couple friends from my parish, among the subjects that came up my priest mentioned a colleague who had seven children, all four of his sons priests and all three of his daughters married to priests. He did this by remaining under the radar and out of sight. If you seek a community of like-minded moral people, you must build it yourself, not look for it from other people.

                • Contaminated NEET says:

                  Suones: why “Moloch”? Carthage is so long and so thoroughly gone that we only remember her people’s name as a synonym for slave. Their old god is deader than dead.

                  For that matter, what exactly do you mean by Moloch? Is he progressivism? The Enlightenment? Hubristic self-worship? The poz? The quantophrenics’ and Taylorists’ relentless drive to hammer the world into a more “rational” shape? I feel like I know him when I see him, but when I try to put it into words, it falls apart, so I maybe I don’t really get it.

                  Baphomet and YHWH are pretty self-explanatory, but I need some elaboration on Moloch.

                • jim says:

                  The worship of Moloch is alive and well, notably in abortion as a holy sacrament (stunning and brave) and the transexualization of one’s own children (stunning and brave)

                  Moloch is also the type specimen of a demonic memeplex, in that the worship of Moloch, like progressivism, replicated at the expense of its adherents’ replication.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Moloch/Baal was the God the Phoenicians sacrificed their children to by burning them alive its mentioned enough in the bible.

                  Apparently… The Romans as much as they hated the Carthraginians and as cruel as they were by modern standards, never really totally bought into the idea that they burned children to the extent they did until they overran their territory in the 2nd Punic wars. Apparently seeing the mounds of burnt bones 1st hand left such an impression of horror and revulsion on the Roman soldiers that Rome not only afterwords totally banned human sacrifice forever (which they RARELY did themselves) but became almost Wilsonian about imposing this ban on everyone around them.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Moloch/Baal is associated with the globohomo part of the Cathedral religion because of the common trend of parents making their kids gay or trans as a child sacrifice ie Munchasen by proxy and the abortion of healthy children.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Not that simple, Cohesion can make the weak strong. The post apocalyptic barbarous world does not have any cohesion beyond neighborhood street gang warlords. Gary Oldmans character not only imagines a more docile christian populace but forming some of them into a cohesive Christian army.

                  The progressives invert many things… but that part was not a simple inversion.

                • neofugue says:


                  You are right about the clip, my issue with it was more that Oldman’s character only mentioned faith in controlling weak people and not unifying his own elite faction. Cynicism is a virus, in order for a man like himself to use faith as a weapon he must genuinely believe in it even if his faith is not entirely internally consistent.

                • neofugue says:

                  Moloch and Baal were the gods of the Canaanites remembered for their association with human sacrifices and temple prostitution, thus serve as good analogies to the nameless demons of secular Progressivism. The Carthaginians used to slaughter their children with goats and lambs, burying their bones and ashes in sacred urns. Towards the end of the Carthaginian empire, the Carthaginian elite ran out of children to slay and thus would kidnap peasant children to sacrifice. In addition, the Carthaginians used to practice temple prostitution to the goddess Astarte, where the elite would send their young virgins to be ritually defiled by foreigners who would pay elaborate sums of money to the associated temples. Since said practices are formally indiscernible from those of the Progressives worshiping the Equality demon, referring to Progressives as Molochites is effective rhetoric.

              • neofugue says:

                > Semitic

                > Semitism

                Christianity is an entirely different tradition than Talmudic Judaism, the latter of which formed centuries after Christ’s death and the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem. Modern Judaism is an ethnic cult originating from the minuscule percentage of historical Jews that did not die out or convert to Christianity.

                Calling Christianity “Semitic” or “Semitism” is poisoning the well, a dishonest attempt at conflating a 2000-year-old tradition with an ethnic group having a historical reputation of subversion against Christian nations and peoples. This deception must be called out, although this is to be expected of those who worship the demon brahma, demon vishnu, and demon shiva.

                • > to be expected of those who worship the demon brahma, demon vishnu, and demon shiva.

                  LOL you sound just like a recent Missionary convert from Hinduism. Your poor comprehension of suones (who actually argues *in favour* of restoring Christianity to its patriarchial, masculine Aryan roots) is hilarious.

                  Semites see demons everywhere. It seems you are also one of those spiritually subordinated to the Semitic demons.

                • neofugue says:

                  > Your poor comprehension of suones (who actually argues *in favour* of restoring Christianity to its patriarchial, masculine Aryan roots)

                  Meanwhile, Suones:

                  > If I was a son of Rus I would investigate what they call “Rodnovery.”

                  Telling Russians to LARP as 90s Hippie Pagans is not “restoring Christianity to its patriarchal, masculine Aryan roots.” Nor is poisoning the well with “DA JOOS, DA JOOS, DA JOOS.”

                • suones says:


                  Some context, please.

                  …europoids actually worship someone called “Christ” who is the son of Deus, not a Jewish carpenter who claimed to be the son of YHWH, who YHWHegians executed for his crimes. Considered together with such Semitic anathemata as incarnation, “Holy Ghost,” and the “Trinity,” it’s as if the people wanted to (continue to) worship Deus pater despite Constantine’s shenanigans, and have found a way to (continue to) worship Herachrist, the Son of ZeusDeus. I only seek to remove the fig leaf of Semitic affiliation.

                  Aryan/Blonde Jesus owes nothing to Judaism. If he was a Jew then I’m the Queen of England.

                  The kind of Philosemitic Christcuck I hate is not hypothetical: he exists in large numbers in USA (particularly Republican Party affiliated, but common in both parties) and in somewhat decreasing quantities in Europe and Russia too. Notable examples include the Pope (obviously) and the Patriarchs of most Established Churches. The very term “Holocaustianity” was invented to mock this contingent.

                  …poisoning the well with “DA JOOS, DA JOOS, DA JOOS.”

                  Mentioning the killing of Tsar Nicholas and decapitation of Third Rome is poisoning the well? What hellish well is this anyway?

                • Oog en Hand says:

                  Talmudic Judaism is red-pilled about power and politics, and therefore entirely different trom Christianity. It may be in the wrong hands, but is a weapon. Christianity is not a weapon, at least not in the hands of these who really believe its ethical precepts. Cornelius van Til identified the Christian nature of many Molochite ideas about e.g. racism and genocide.

                • jim says:

                  > Christianity is not a weapon, at least not in the hands of these who really believe its ethical precepts.

                  Not a weapon?

                  King Alfred created England with it, and Charles the Hammer and Charles the Great created Europe.

                  Those guys knew a good weapon when they saw it.

                  Today Putin successfully wields that weapon to defend the independence of Russia, while India, despite having nuked, cannot maintain its independence.

                  I believe in the precepts of Christianity. For the good guys to defeat the bad guys, they have successfully cohere and cooperate.

                • neofugue says:

                  Referring to Christianity as “Semitism” presupposes that Christianity is the product of Jewish Talmudism and is responsible for the killing of the Tsar and the destruction of Germany, which is as absurd as Communist Revolutionary presupposing everyone agrees with true Christianity being Marxism or women as angels who do no wrong.

                  It is a dishonest attempt at evangelizing Paganism by associating Christianity with Leftism and an enemy tribe, while obfuscating the fundamental need for a “national” Paganism adopting Hindu doctrine. All of the Hindu blasphemy against Christ is foreign Indian nonsense, yet piously claims to be the trve aryan faith.

                  Christ was a descendant of David, the King of the Jews, God’s fulfillment of the promise to Eve that the Son of Man would conquer Death. All of the events of the Old Testament prefigure Christ, and the actions of the church follow from this tradition.

                  Modern Judaism forms after the destruction of the temple in 70AD and the formation of the diaspora with the development of the Talmud, where we find non-Biblical demons such as Lilith. Most of the Jews either died out or converted to Christianity, which is why Ashkenazi Jews descend from roughly 380 people 800 years ago. Aryan Jesus was a Jesuit invention, like Japanese Jesus, Mestizo Jesus and Black Jesus.

                  There is no “Aryan Jesus” in Orthodox Christianity:



                • The Cominator says:

                  “Not a weapon”

                  There was even a movie made in the very age of poz (2010) that recognized it as a great memetic weapon.

                  In “The Book of Eli” the “bad” guy in the post apocalyptic wasteland was looking for what is as far as he knows the last bible (I think its absurd that if any books survive that the bible would be that hard to find). He clearly thought he could use the bible to go from being a mere barbarian waste warlord to being something more like a real king. He does not per se believe in the bible but he openly states at one point that he can use the good word as a weapon to corral the weak and the desperate.

                  The movie isn’t that good but the premise is sound.

                • neofugue says:

                  > Christianity is not a weapon

                  The Russians conquered the Golden Horde, converted thirty percent of its population to Orthodoxy, and became one of the great powers of Europe.

                  > at least not in the hands of these who really believe its ethical precepts. Cornelius van Til identified the Christian nature of many Molochite ideas about e.g. racism and genocide

                  Progressivism is evil incarnate. the inversion of Christianity. Note the opposite of “progress” is the ancien regime, the family, God, King and country. This line of thought has been refuted countless times by numerous people far more distinguished than myself.

                • jim says:

                  Old type Christianity was divine sanction of Ancient Regime. And that has long been the norm for Christianity.

                • The Cominator says:


                  Here’s the clip… the movie isn’t that good but the “bad” guy in the movie is based and knows that he can’t base large scale social cohesion on force of arms alone. If he wants to be more than a petty warlord needs to strike at people’s minds with something more powerful than guns.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Sorry to spam post at this point but I think its important to analyze certain aspects of Cathedral propaganda carefully…

                  The good progressive looks at Gary Oldman’s character and goes he is a purely evil man trying to use evil religion to control people.

                  The smart reactionary realizes that in a world that has fallen to brutal barbarism that he is a ruthless man who has done many bad things, as of course anyone who came out on top in a state of anarchy would have to do, with a clever plan to bring it back to order and civilization.

                  Even when the progressives can recognize reality they invert good and evil.

                • neofugue says:

                  The problem with the clip is that it takes place within the Progressive narrative that religion is a tool to control the weak, when in reality it is a tool to control the strong. Faith is not about controlling the weak, as the weak follow whatever the strong tells them whether God or the Devil, but rather controlling the strong, as the strong can only be brought to submission under the power of ideas, the power of faith.

                • Rick says:

                  >The problem with the clip is that it takes place within the Progressive narrative that religion is a tool to control the weak, when in reality it is a tool to control the strong. Faith is not about controlling the weak, as the weak follow whatever the strong tells them whether God or the Devil, but rather controlling the strong, as the strong can only be brought to submission under the power of ideas, the power of faith.

                  Even the weak need ideas to follow. No man wants to admit he’s weak and afraid of the powerful, instead they obey the powerful because religion told them to obey them. Thus cohesion is achieved with the strong and the weak, because both believe in the same ideas.

                  The book Eli while a crappy film was a tale about the evil warriors trying to control religion while the magical priests where the people who should be in charge. It’s the world’s oldest conflict but told by only from the priest’s perspective.

                • suones says:


                  Referring to Christianity as “Semitism” presupposes that Christianity is the product of Jewish Talmudism and is responsible for the killing of the Tsar and the destruction of Germany, which is as absurd…

                  What confusion of the mind produced this sentence I cannot imagine. 😕

                  Killing of Tsar and decapitation of Third Rome = Marxism, which is an offshoot of Judaism, and literally committed by Jews.

                  Philosemitic Christianity = Christ as the handmaiden of Jews and Christians must protect and serve chosenites (this is literally what millions believe).

                  Talmudism = Post Christian consolidation of Judaism into an organised faith worshipping YHWH and considering Yeshua to have been a charlatan who is boiling in a vat of excrement in Hell for eternity.

                  Semitism = Catch all term for religions and gods originating in Semitic lands. By definition include Israelite and Ishmaelite branches, which are most powerful today. Other Semitic faiths are extinct or survive in minuscule numbers. Philosemitic Christianty worships YHWH, idolises those[1] who consider Yeshua to have been a charlatan who is boiling in a vat of excrement in Hell. It is the retarded half-brother of Semitism.

                  Aryan Christianity = Acknowledging that Jews unfairly executed Christ, who was the Son of Deus anyway, and is portrayed in a curiously non-Semitic way, together with such Semitic anathema as incarnation, “Holy Ghost,” and “Trinity.”

                  Christ was a descendant of David, the King of the Jews, God’s fulfillment of the promise to Eve that the Son of Man would conquer Death. All of the events of the Old Testament prefigure Christ, and the actions of the church follow from this tradition.

                  There is no “Aryan Jesus” in Orthodox Christianity:

                  You are no son of Aryas. Enjoy the fruits of YHWH, for they are richly deserved.

                  [1] Talmud view on Yeshua:

                • neofugue says:

                  > Aryan Christianity = Acknowledging that Jews unfairly executed Christ, who was the Son of Deus anyway, and is portrayed in a curiously non-Semitic way, together with such Semitic anathema as incarnation, “Holy Ghost,” and “Trinity.”

                  Anathema to all the above, straight out of the mouths of the demons. Just like the Progressives, demon-worshiping Pagans piously claim true Christianity is Paganism, just as demon-worshiping Progressives claim that true Christianity is Jesus the community organizer. No Christian in the history of Christianity believed any of this demonic nonsense, and any fool who falls for this evil could not even recite the creed, let alone any one of Jim’s anti-Prog tests.

                  > Semitism = Catch all term for religions and gods originating in Semitic lands.

                  Which conflates Christians and Christianity with the post-Christian Jews and Talmudism, an old line of attack against Christianity. “Semitism” is not a neutral descriptor it is anti-Christian rhetoric which must be called out. John Hagee and his group of Jew-worshiping Evangelicals are a relatively small fraction of Christians, yet Pagans pretend as if this government-sponsored cult is significant.

                  > You are no son of Aryas.

                  You got me. With your Aryan might of words, I have decided to follow trve Christianity by joining Slavic Native Faith. Hail Vishnu!

                  At least I’m not a brown person LARPing as a white man.

                • neofugue says:

                  In addendum, “Semitism” is a rhetorical attack on the catholicity of the Church. Christ was the King of the Jews because God promised that the Son of Man would come from the Jews, not because of the Jews being the holiest but the worst of peoples. Christianity may have had its roots in Judaea, but the church has always been a multi-ethnic enterprise; Saint Ephrem was of the Syriac Fathers, Augustine and Jerome were of the Latin Fathers, Basil was one of the Cappadocian fathers, and all of the Ecumenical Councils were convened by the Roman Emperor.

                  If Christianity is “Semitism” then Islam is “Qurayshism” or “Arabism” given that the latter does not originate from the “Semitic” lands but from the lands of the Quraysh, with Muhammad being of the Hashemite clan. “Abrahamism” would be a more accurate term given that Judaism, Christianity and Islam all claim Abraham as their own, but calling Christianity “Abrahamic” lacks the rhetorical effect of “Semitic.”

                • info says:


                  “Aryan Christianity = Acknowledging that Jews unfairly executed Christ, who was the Son of Deus anyway, and is portrayed in a curiously non-Semitic way, together with such Semitic anathema as incarnation, “Holy Ghost,” and “Trinity.””

                  Actually wrong. Because the Trinity is in all the Tanakh:

                  Starting with the LORD who rained down fire and brimstone from the LORD out of the Heavens.

                  And identified with the Angel of the LORD who appeared in the burning Bush to Moses. Who led Israel in a pillar of Fire and Cloud.

                  And appeared in Holy Glory above the Ark of the Covenant that the Israelites built by divine instruction.

                  And the “Aryan” incarnation of Jesus Christ was already prophesized before the coming of the Messiah in the (Book of Isaiah 9:6). There is plenty of other prophecies in that respect.

                • info says:


                  “Semites see demons everywhere. It seems you are also one of those spiritually subordinated to the Semitic demons.”

                  Everywhere missionaries encounter Men in contact with the spirit realm as mediums, Shamans and having true supernatural contact with their respective Gods.

                  A contest between Christ through the holy spirit and the Spirits in question breaks out. All the Spirits so far hate and fear Jesus Christ. None love him

                  But in every case the powers of the Spirits were nullified and broken. And Christ is always victorious.

      • Leon says:

        I don’t get the whole “aryans marry later” crap. Back during the 50s, people married their high school sweethearts, and even sometimes married in high school. Prior to that, they married in their early teens. Same with Europe, people married in their teens prior to the Victorian era. Aryans didn’t use to marry later. You even acknowledge marrying later causes fertility problems, something I have witnessed amongst many highly educated, well mannered and well paid couples. It is a stupid sexual plan amongst aryans to wait so long while the world outbreaks and passes then by, and it is not something they did in ancient times when life was tough.

        • Basil says:

          Even in ancient blessed times, more advanced peoples and estates entered into marriage and gave birth to children somewhat later than the proles and negros. Our time has just made the problem worse.

        • suones says:

          Aryans marrying later has been a historical fact and bane. Even Shri Ramchandra the God-King only ever had one wife and two sons. The direct reason for that has been Aryan women having higher social status than Semitic women. I would like to change that, but that is something even Augustus failed at, so I prefer to target lower-hanging fruit first.

          • Leon says:

            Again, royal families made sure, aside from times of decadence and when cultures and empires were coming to an end, to marry their children off early in life. The married ages were always political, but they were done early. No Christmas cakes. When a “higher people” turn blue pulled it is the end for that people. If arayans really are just naturally blue pilled, and I do not believe that, and just naturally fail the Jim/ red pill/ woman test then as per the rules of God or evolution they don’t deserve to live. Arayan women are fucking around in their teens and twenties same as all other women. Hell, surveys have shown that college educated women are more likely to rack up the notch count than non college educated women, so it stands to reason Arayan women are thus more likely to fucking around than.

        • The Cominator says:

          This was sung by Black People but it reflected a common thing in the 1950s (great song like most popular music from that era).

  12. Basil says:

    It seems to me that the best thing to do in our time is to create your own community / movement / church. First, it makes it possible to find a large number of guys with similar views, who in the future can become your comrades in arms. Secondly, you will become part of the tribe, which is good in protecting your own interests. Thirdly, in the most catastrophic scenario, you can escape and not dissolve. The nobles and officers who escaped from Russia disappeared into the European nations, while the collectively migrated Old Believers retained their identity.

    On the other hand, the stealth factor is lost and the chances that Satan will set his minions on you increases. But if you disguise yourself as something inconspicuous (eco\permacultural settlements, organizing festivals, literally the larping of the Middle Ages, whatever) everything should be fine.

    • jim says:

      Every group, every business, every Church, every open source project, every political party, gets targeted by state backed entryists. As soon as they get a toe inside, they use state power to get the whole camel inside.

      Your community movement is not going to stay red pilled unless it acts decisively against entryists, and if you act decisively against entryists, is going to get Wacoed.

      The Invisible College had good reason to be invisible.

      • Basil says:

        The camel can go to the desert and survive. In any case, he will be able to provide at least some resistance to the forces of evil. Yes, it’s a risky game, but it’s better than walking on roads that lead to 100% failure.

        Either way, you need to hide your apple cart. Some degree of conspiracy would not hurt.

    • Pooch says:

      Apple carts are not going to stop getting knocked over until it becomes dangerous to those who are doing the knocking over. Best you can do is find an apple cart somewhere that is going to be knocked over last or even better, no one knows is even an apple cart.

      • suones says:

        Best you can do is find an apple cart somewhere that is going to be knocked over last or even better, no one knows is even an apple cart.

        We Hindus have been individually pursuing this strategy for a thousand years. It is viable, sure, but only while fertility remains higher than the rate of attrition. This is not a long term solution. As our elite fertility declines we’re reaching the end of the viability of this strategy. For europoids with fertility already at sub-replacement levels this is a death sentence.

      • EH says:

        The biggest potential apple-cart-overturning opportunity I’ve found is the use of civil RICO laws against most large organizations.

        • EH says:

          Jim, did you mean to leave me under moderation? No reply needed.

          • jim says:

            At one point you were plausibly suspected of shilling, and then you passed the shill test with flying colors. I cannot recall, but I conjecture that I put you under moderation when plausibly suspected, and failed to take you out when you passed.

            Upon being reminded, I removed you from moderation.

        • jim says:

          What do you mean “potential”?

          Happens a lot.

          • EH says:

            Civil RICO in most states can be brought by anyone against anyone *chargeable* (not indicted, charged, or convicted) with any of a wide variety of crimes, including any that are specified as qualifying in any other state or federal law. These include not only the classics such as wire fraud (already applies to nearly anything) and all the violent crimes, drug crimes (including having dealer tenants), harboring aliens etc… but filing a false document, abuse of the elderly or disabled (which includes financial coercion), conspiracy to commit any of those crimes, and on and on – just listing the qualifying code sections goes on for many pages. In some states it can be brought by individuals against government agencies, e.g. I’m looking at one against a corrupt worker’s comp. board and the associated insurance companies.

            Civil RICO has triple damages on top of punitive damages, but also specifies that any property obtained in part through the proceeds or used in the crimes is subject to forfeiture, which potentially includes not only real estate and corporate equity but also intellectual property such as Uber’s app, iOS, Windows, domain names … anything that can be owned. For that, one has to get a prosecutor to sign off, but I believe it’s “in rem”, that is, the property itself is sued, rather than the owner, giving the owner fewer rights. Any associated loans which were secured by the property are still the former owner’s problem, the lender’s rights are extinguished, too. I’m not certain, but I believe individuals can get a share of the loot through “qui tam”.

            Apartment complex landlords, for instance, have standard leases drafted by their trade associations which amount to conspiracy to defraud the public. They billed for all sorts of pseudo-utilities such as “amenities” that were not available during the lockdowns, which is theft. Any company with a regular practice of over-billing, even $25/mo. is open to RICO suits. The whole medical industry is begging to be sacked and plundered via RICO.

            Of course, these have been *authorized* rackets in the past, not legally, but by corruption, but the question is: have the racketeers been keeping current with their bribes? And will ALL the judges and DAs stay bought, or will they realize that they and their people can get a lot more by overturning the big apple carts in finance, insurance, real estate and medicine?

  13. whizzo says:

    Crops gonna fail this year, or very low yields. Same in other parts of the world too, Brazil, Argentina etc.

    Famine, to follow the vaccine-induced plague.

    Xi rattling his sabre today, rumors of wars.

    Itz happening.

    • jim says:


      Xi is not rattling his saber. His plan “non violent” takeover of Taiwan, backed by the threat of violence.

      Taiwan is not a program of world conquest.

      Famine is not going to happen. There are shortages of everything caused by runaway expansion of the money supply – we face a threat of inflation, not hunger. But even if we get severe inflation, it will be a long way short of Weimar levels for a long time. High levels of inflation are just a way of getting rid of a national debt that has become excessive.

      Of course, having shrugged off the debt, and shrugged off social security obligations, if they still cannot balance the budget due to anarcho tyranny, things are going to go down hill from there, but it is a long way downhill before you get to Weimar.

      The plan is to get rid of the national debt and get rid of their financial obligations to old and disproportionately white people, and then, they think, they will balance the budget. Though I think it will take a Stalin or a Cromwell to deal with that problem.

      • Mountain says:

        Widespread famine is always a part of communist takeovers. For example with Mao and Stalin. The United States is now being taken over by communists. Why do you believe there will not be famine in the United States?

        • jim says:

          The famines happen about after price control of food, which always winds up screwing the farmers.

          No price controls on food yet, and our leftism is not holiness spiraling on feeding the hungry.

    • suones says:

      Famine, to follow the vaccine-induced plague.

      Don’t worry. Shri Indra the god of thunder has blessed us with an early and plentiful monsoon, and we’ll produce enough surplus food that you can buy it from us cheap. Similarly in 2020 when we had such a gargantuan yield that Govt literally had to give away food to people by the cartload (which was the reason there was no hunger/starvation despite massive COVID-related disruption).

      I see trucks laden with grain standing in line to be unloaded, I see vegetable markets overflowing, and I realise that the gods bless us still, and I say a silent prayer.

  14. restitutor_orbis says:

    Yesterday the Daily Mail ran a scary headline: “Almost 42,000 more Americans could die if half of all unvaccinated adults contract Indian ‘Delta’ Covid variant!”

    The article went on to explain that 70 million Americans are unvaccinated and “just 15%” plan on getting the shot. Therefore 50% will get Delta, and 42,000 will die. That’s based on official NHS data about the fatality of Delta so far.

    42000 / 35 000 000 = .0012 = 0.12%

    Meanwhile, at, “CDC estimates that influenza has resulted in between 9 million – 45 million illnesses, between 140,000 – 810,000 hospitalizations and between 12,000 – 61,000 deaths annually since 2010.” The table on the page shows that in 2012-2013, the flu infected 34 million Americans and caused 43,000 deaths.

    DELTA: 35 million infected, 42,000 deaths
    FLU: 34 million infected, 43,000 deaths

    This is inarguable data straight from the sources – Delta is mathematically the flu. I’ve shared this with various normies and their reaction has been either refusal to accep the facts, or to say that means we should keep masking and lockdowns for flu, too.

    • Pooch says:

      At this point any one who still buys into corona hoax isn’t going to simply change their minds with facts and logic. It’s purely ideological.

    • Wally says:

      Except of course that it looks like Delta is more, not less, deadly to vaccinated patients. More deadly by a large factor. Oops!

      • jim says:

        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.

        • Aryaman says:

          Hard to tell how effective or ineffective the vaccines are at preventing the virus from killing the people it was going to kill, since the people it was going to kill so very few. I assume they cannot get their manipulation straight between holiness spiraling about the deadliness of the new variant and holiness spiraling about the efficacy of their vaccine program, though I suspect the effect is adjusting cases up and deaths down; though in Scotland cases really are up and deaths really are down.

          I follow your logic on the dosing but not sure that is what is happening here. Maybe. More likely they really do not even understand how to standardize dosing in the case of their mRNA vaccines, not to mention the absence of adjuvants. The meaning of “dose” is pretty well-understood for old school vaccines. But I suspect they do not really understand the antigenic loading of the mRNA shots, which itself may vary with exact administration of the shot and other idiosyncrasies.

          For example, between late January and early April they seemed to have no idea how cold the mRNA needed to be kept, for how long it could be kept in slightly warmer environment. And since then have quite dramatically increased the maximum temperature from well below freezing to noticeably above freezing. Tells you at the least they had no idea well into rollout how stable the mRNA was. Or tells you they wanted to reduce the effective dosage on the fly accomplished by letting the vials warm a bit and sit a bit warmer for a bit longer. Or they had to do this because logistics of the cold storage supply chain were not good enough to satisfy broad just-in-time supply absent good profit motive.

          For example, between late January and early March they seemed to have no idea how many doses were available per vial. Originally 5 then suddenly 6. Or maybe 4 then 5. Tells you they had no idea what constituted appropriate dose. Or tells you they wanted to reduce effective dose on the fly. Or they had to do this because logistics of production and development and expiration were not good enough to satisfy broad just-in-time supply absent good profit motive.

          Midwit journalists like Nate Silver cheerily reported and but now have forgotten on and bout these little debates, as if such fundamental questions of dosing and stability would be or should plausibly have been subject to such whimsical experimentation. Without realizing that the parameters being modified could not but have affected the pharmacology and toxicology of what they were injecting.

      • suones says:

        Except of course that it looks like Delta is more, not less, deadly to vaccinated patients. More deadly by a large factor. Oops!

        Except that Indians vaccinated with Indian vaccines have mostly shrugged off the strain (very low infection rates compared to exposed population, very high recovery rates for vaccinated even with extensive co-morbidities and old age). Perhaps your vaccines are not really all that protective?

        I was surprised at the efficacy and near-zero adverse effects of Covishield, which is a derivative of Oxford/AZ formula. Covaxin, the conventional vaccine, is on another safety level entirely. Notably, neither vaccine is approved in the USA.

        • jim says:

          > Perhaps your vaccines are not really all that protective?

          They are not effective. As I said, same problem as putting wings on a orbital vehicle for re-entry from orbit. It is the decline of science and technology. The guy who invented the technology gets silenced for spreading “misinformation” about it. (Meaning accurate information about its actual characteristics and capabilities.)

          The RNA vaccine is only effective at causing immunity at dosages likely to kill the vaccinated. To avoid die off spectacularly greater than even that caused by iatrogenic misconduct in the response to China flu, they had to dial it down to dosages ineffectual in causing immunity.

          There are no end of cool and important things that could be done with RNA reprogramming, but instead it is being used as high status prop for ineffectual priestly rites by demon worshiping priests.

          The real reason they put wings on the space shuttle is because the wings made it look cool and high tech, while they were losing the capability to do stuff that was genuinely cool and actually high tech, and that is the real reason for using RNA cellular reprogramming for a vaccine.

          The actually useful RNA/DNA technology for vaccines is to create by genetic engineering live viruses that cannot cause significant harm, but which induce cross immunity to the original virus, as the original vaccine, cowpox, the vaccinia virus, immunized against smallpox.

          They should have created a live, but nackered, version of China Flu and infected everyone with it, they same way that long ago they successfully infected everyone with the live vaccinia virus, completely exterminating the smallpox virus.

          • suones says:

            They should have created a live, but nackered, version of China Flu and infected everyone with it, they same way that long ago they successfully infected everyone with the vaccinia virus, completely exterminating the smallpox virus.

            Covaxin, a killed/deactivated virus vaccine is close in mechanism of action to the highly successful polio vaccine. No wonder the medical priesthood is extremely hostile to this vaccine in particular.

            Even so, considering how much doom and gloom regarding Oxford/AZ vaccine I saw, its Indian implementation in Covishield has proven remarkably safe and effective. This leads me to suspect there is some problem in vaccine manufacture in Europe/USA.

            • jim says:

              > This leads me to suspect there is some problem in vaccine manufacture in Europe/USA.

              It the same problem as the space shuttle. The SLS rocket depends on ancient parts from the space shuttle program, because they just cannot make that stuff any more.

              Some technologies continue to advance, but some are disappearing, and every so often some critical capability just goes away, and everything that depends on that capability goes down.

    • Aryaman says:

      I believe what is happening in Scotland settles the question on the “Delta” variant. They try to manipulate these numbers in various ways so it is never an apples-apples comparison, but are not coordinated or intelligent about their manipulations so still okay to infer. Cases there are at all-time highs, and deaths have barely moved. 70 percent of the population has had at least one dose, more than 50 percent both. Proof vaccine working? Clearly there is a ton of “transmission”. Proof it stops death? Well, 30 percent of an all-time high should still cause plenty of notable death. Most likely explanation is that what was a pretty bad flu has mutated into literally the cold, as was apt to happen.

      Alternatively possible that vaccine stops virus from killing the people it might have killed, and not just 70 percent but 98 percent of the people it might have killed have been vaccinated.

  15. Pooch says:

    Pretty good long form Yarvin podcast if anyone is interested. They hit on CRT and a bunch of history.

    The host is terrible and stutters but Yarvin’s mic skills have improved I’ve noticed.

  16. The Cominator says:

    Who else is celebrating that Cosby is being freed, roasties finally BTFO!

    • Atavistic Morality says:

      Vox is whining about it, this guy is so cucked on women and is also a Qanon retard, sometimes I can’t tell what side is he on.

      • The Cominator says:

        Looking at his site even his normally slavishly loyal base of commenters are against him on this, Cosby was railroaded for reasons similar to why Malcolm X was murdered. But worse Cosby tried to buy part of the mainstream media and obviously he did not get an okay…

        And out of the woodwork comes Gloria Allred…

        • Rick says:

          Reading Sundance’s comments is pretty good as well. Looks like the Red Pill is firmly taking root in the few remaining people’s that are called “conservatives”.

      • Pooch says:

        It’s kind of hilarious that Vox is exactly what he ridicules, a Q-Anon boomer.

      • Caltech Dreams says:

        Yeah I’m not sure to what extent his alpha game was all bluff. Fencing bear is an art historian yet apparently Vox said women should only be mothers and helpmeets. He even went after the pagans for viking rape. Somehow they arent useful against the “pedo-jews.” Even though Cerno and Roosh are supposedly red pilled on the rape question. Sounds pretty inconsistent if not entirely suspect.

    • Rick says:

      On that note:

      >“After punching me several times, he then flipped me back onto my stomach and began choking me with hair,” she said, according to The Athletic. “I lost consciousness again.”

      >When she later was found to be shaking and crying, he tried to calm her and told her she was safe, she reportedly said in her declaration.

      If you’re going to act like General Butt Naked, you have to play the role to hilt.
      Trevor Bauer is going to end up in jail because he decided to beta out during their second encounter.

      • jim says:

        I did something somewhat similar – betaed out and got arrested. I allowed her beauty to unman me. I was never charged, but of all the illegal acts that I have committed, that was the only one that got me taken in to the cop shop.

      • suones says:

        ‘Roid Rage, not General Buttnaked. The General never loses frame because he’s not playing a role — it really is him, 100% of the time.

        • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

          Roid rage is Cathedral propaganda against masculinity. It does not exist. Testosterone makes men smarter and more emotionally stable. Some men are just assholes, and the Cathedral uses this to punish and degrade all of us.

          • suones says:

            Only half true. The crucial factor with our ancestors with high testosterone is also high self control. Dharma shastras relate the story of the great warrior Karna (son of Surya/Apollo) who, as a child, was bitten by a scorpion but didn’t flinch for fear of waking up his guru. When his guru finally woke up and saw Karna’s leg badly swollen and the boy in great pain, he immediately realised that this boy is of high birth.

            General Buttnaked is the Anti-Aryan archetype: high testosterone/aggressiveness and near zero self control at all times.

            An Aryan with very high testosterone should also have very high self-control. Think about the man able to give a controlled beating all night long, or one who can man a machine gun turret for 48 hours straight.

            Low-birth proles have naturally poorer self control — and lower testosterone also so it doesn’t usually cause problems. Giving this category of person exogenous steroids boosts his aggressiveness temporarily, which he is unable to channelise, and when the boost subsides he returns to his original prole/beta frame. This is ‘roid rage.

          • alf says:

            But injected testosterone also lowers fertility, so it seems roids are not the way to go.

      • Cloudswrest says:

        This reads like romance novel bullshit.

        • jim says:

          Because almost all rape complaints are (apart from “my boyfriend caught on”) really “I thought he was alpha and he was not” rape complaints tend to sound like Romance novel.

  17. Noname says:

    The High Priest of Covid has decreed the season of the Delta variant. Soon we shale be compelled to receive the holy sacrament of SARS/HIV serum again.

    Covid, a scam from its inception, a festering boil on the ass of humanity. So that if one could lance it and drain the putrid puss, at the bottom of the wound, there you would find Anthony Fauci.

  18. The ongoing battle between the Indian government and Twitter just got hotter. Twitter now booked under the stringent POCSO Act (Indian child sexual harassment laws) by the Delhi police:

    It may be recalled that Twitter has been experimenting with “Trumping” BJP leaders and censoring “right wing” accounts in India.

    • Rick says:

      Does the right have Militia’s in India? If so they need to beat up twitter employees in the street much as Antifa does to Republicans in America.

      • Unfortunately no. The few Hindu right wing militia groups in India are scattered and lacking cohesion and subject to as much official suppression as the right wing in the US. Occasionally they get in the news for some “violence” or the other.

        Alas the establishment Right in India is as cucked as the Empire counterparts.

        • Rick says:

          You better get that shit inorder. The proud boys formed far too late to save the American Republic.

      • someDude says:


        Recently, in the Indian province of Bengal, a bitter old hag won the election and the aftermath of that victory was that over the next two days, her Goons targeted and killed Right wingers in the double digits,

        Q. And what did the Indian right do in retaliation?
        Ans. P. Diddly Squat!

        American Right: Looks Tough, is Soft
        Indian Right: Looks Pathetic, IS Pathetic

        Don’t hold your breath waiting for the Indian right to act anytime soon. In all probability, the Indian Right came to an End sometime between 1818 and 1849. What they have passing for the right is just downright pathetic.

        • suones says:

          This is a fair assessment of the present situation. Blackpilled, but fair. I have argued before that there actually is no real “right” wing, as in Dharmic wing, in Indian politics. There are only various groups of Leftists, some crazier than others, fighting for the scraps of faded glory. The least Leftist leader was probably Subhash Chandra Bose, who was disappeared in 1945, and he too was a Leftist of the Mussolini-stripe.

          That said, even a single step to the right is better than two steps to the left. I never countersignal bhakts. The Demon of Doubt must be cast aside if Victoy is to be obtained[1]. Har Har Modi!

          [1] While watching out for the Demon of Pride, of course.

          • someDude says:

            Should some of us start looking into an Indian version of Islam whereby we can declare the Arabs, Turks and Persians all to be apostate and that Allah granted the Indians and only the Indians the right to Mid East Oil?

            Seeing that Hinduism is dead in the water, what is our plan B?

            We need a new religion as spandrell says. What’s your plan? if there is a plan!

            • The Cominator says:

              Isn’t that basically what Sikhism is?

              • suones says:

                OG Sikhism (Nanakshahi) is a Hindu movement worshipping god “Akal” (Timeless) in an organised way, possibly to get over the Muslim increase in status of “Monotheism.”

                It transformed in the time of Mughal Emperor Jahangir into a major religious movement involving both Hindus, and, to Jahangir’s surprise, Muslims too. This proved irksome to more fundamentalist Muslim rulers who proceeded to purge Sikhs as heretics.

                This state of affairs continued till Guru Gobind Singh when the Muslim purge finally concluded and the lineage of Gurus was replaced by the Holy Book Guru Granth Sahib, the eternal “guru.”

                The zenith of Sikhism as a political force came with the East India Company, which sponsored Maharaja Ranjeet Singh against Muslim and Hindu Rajput alike. Since then, Sikhs have broadly divided into two streams — one which considers itself Hindu and the other which is resolutely anti-Hindu. The former group has been slowly losing ground to the anti-Hindu brigade which has found powerful allies in Muslim Pakistan and Prog Canada. Dubbed “Khalistani,[1]” Sikhs were responsible for innovating the first plane bombing in modern times, the Air India 182 “Kanishka” bombing, whose conspirators were sheltered by Anglos in Canada, and still are.[2] Khalistani Sikhism is a Prog-approved religion, and Sikhs adhering to that belief are the “chosen immigrants” in Canada like Muslims in Germany.

                [1] “Khalistan” representing a “Sikh homeland” on the pattern of Pakistan that can openly become Baphomet’s/Pakistan’s bitch.

                • yewotm8 says:

                  Sikhs in Canada must be very good at hiding their support then. I grew up in an area that was majority Sikh and never heard a good word about Khalistani independence from any of them. I have no doubt progs in Canada are butt-buddies with them, indeed one of them leads the proggiest political party here.

                • suones says:

                  Support for “Khalistan” has dropped considerably over the decades, so much so that the Chief Minister of Punjab (India) refused to meet the Canadian Defence Minister, a Sikh, when he visited his native village. This is what a reduction in status looks like.

                  The problem is not “Sikhs in Canada support Khalistan.” It’s that 1) Sikhs are the “chosen minority” in Canada, serving as the tip of the prog dildo (like the NDP), and 2) Khalistani Sikhs are sponsored by progs as an anti-India tool in association with Pakistan. The heyday of Khalistan terrorism included them perpetrating some dastardly act or another every week, and culminated in two Sikh guards assassinating India’s Prime Minister Smt Indira Gandhi (a woman and party I despise, but killing her was wrong).

              • someDude says:

                Sikhism is tolerant of Non-Sikhs. That’s not what we want in the new religion to replace Hinduism.

                Besides, the sikhs are like 2% of India’s population. Clearly it did not catch on. Let’s just call Sikhism, New religion 1.0 and try to make New Religion 2.0

            • suones says:

              Seeing that Hinduism is dead in the water, what is our plan B?

              There is no “our” plan, as you’ve evidently choked on the blackpill. I’m sticking to Plan A, which is establishment of Ram Rajya. All enemies shall be routed, and their women brought back to the true faith. For every Bengal there is a Gujarat, for every Maharashtra there is a UP. Plan A is, necessarily, a muti-generational endeavour, which is why I do not put much stock in dead-ends like Vajpayee, Modi, or Yogi. But Shri Ram will prevail in the end[1].

              [1] This is what I mean by having an unfettered Will to Power. You actively have to 100% believe in Victory for it to have any chance of happening. No hedging is possible with Adharma.

              • I agree. But another reason why I disagree with someDude on a new religion to replace Hinduism. Why bother? If we cannot protect our millenia old Dharmic culture and traditions which contain invaluable truths of the cosmos and reality, what is there left to fight for? We might as well surrender entirely to Baphomet / Moloch.

                • someDude says:

                  Okay, let’s keep those invaluable truths of the cosmos and reality into the new religion. No need to throw the baby out with the bathwater. But how about the following?

                  1. Bring back the formal system of excommunication from the Faith. Prog hindus to be excommunicated as outcastes

                  2. No more of all that all religions are equal bullshit. A formal announcement that We are the best and it is our job to aggressively spread the Dharma or atleast kick out all evil doers and non believers from the sacred Land.

                  3. None of that vasudeva kutumbakam Bullshit either.

                  But can Hinduism the way it is today do it? I don’t think so. We have to first figure out a way to excommunicate the Hindu Progs. I just don’t see that happening. We really need a new religion that is the Child of Hinduism but has learnt from Islam

                • suones says:

                  someDude anna, our points 1, 2, and 3 are obviously included in Ram Rajya. I’ve proposed some safeguards on those lines.

                  1: Excommunication will not work without making the heretics low-status. In the current scenario, being a prog Hindu is high status, enforced by the courts (primarily) and by Govt (reluctantly). I’ve planned something about this, but will reveal only if Shri Ram grants me power.

                  2: There is no hedging possible with Adharma. Sparing Adharma from total destruction is a crime and a grave sin against Dharma.

                  3: The Devil can cite scripture for his purpose. This is simply cherry picking a line from Scripture and pretending it means something when it does not. This is why I advise commoners to refrain from studying Vedas/Upanishads etc and focus in Bhakti to Shri Ram instead. “All united in Brahman” is not the same as “all men are created equal.” Absent proper exegesis, any Scripture can be spiralled into ridiculousness.

                  Practice is better than theory. I practice in daily life what I preach here or elsewhere. I take every opportunity to guide the genuinely curious, and to put upstarts in their proper place. Ma Saraswati has blessed me with logic and rhetoric and I make full use of it on the side of Dharma. Sometimes my friends and i joke about starting a Hindu cult movement, in a half-serious way. But we have to make ourselves ready to withstand the inevitable attacks first, and not repeat the mistakes of Swami Vivekananda.

                • jim says:

                  > and not repeat the mistakes of Swami Vivekananda.

                  What mistakes do you have in mind?

                  He seems to me to have been converging Hinduism to poz and to have been an agent of Harvard. Harvard paid him substantial amounts of money. Harvard was then, as now, a religious institution. What is a hindu Swami doing on the payroll of a non Hindu religion?

                • Aryaman says:

                  Unfortunately there is little in old type Hindu scripture that is palpably of use to center a religion around. What we tangibly have is the inheritance of a body of rituals through pretty unworthy priests, which are only tenuously connected to the historical religious program. Frankly must have been this way since at least well before the last reports of Damascus steel production in the late 18th century, but that production itself the last dying remnant of technology from a more vital civilization, that had a fuller religion. It is pretty likely there has been a serviceably unadulterated transmission of the vedas from this era and from before this era, as evidenced by exactness of the match between what is produced by disparate groups but apt to lose that soon too, if nothing is done.

                  Until and unless you get a king that can properly marshal the old religion into something that is palpably of use, may be better off with the King James Bible and Book of Common Prayer, which probably closer evokes the spirit and meaning of the more worldly aspects of what old type Hinduism conveyed to modern anglophone Indians than translated and misinterpreted fragments of what we have.

                  Certainly, I still meditate – or try to meditate – on the Gayatri mantra every day, but not lost on me that I should keep in mind the lord’s prayer as well. What I am saying of course has little resemblance to the form of missionary Christianity that has actually developed in India.

                  But the problem here really is just that the people who have not emancipated themselves from obligation to father, husband, god, country, etc. are not very smart whereas those who have are.

                • suones says:


                  and not repeat the mistakes of Swami Vivekananda.

                  What mistakes do you have in mind?

                  He seems to me to have been converging Hinduism to poz and to have been an agent of Harvard. Harvard paid him substantial amounts of money. Harvard was then, as now, a religious institution. What is a hindu Swami doing on the payroll of a non Hindu religion?

                  Haha you seem to have enumerated the very things I mentioned as “mistakes.” I indeed meant avoiding the capture of any renaissance by Harvard. I’m especially critical of Swamiji’s attendance of and involvement in the whole “World Parliament of Religions” crap.

              • someDude says:

                Suones Bhai, You are permitting the perfect to be the enemy of the Good

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Taking already existing structures and running with them is the good.

                  Positing an unrealized but abstractly ideal novelization presumed to perfectly solve the issue is…

                • someDude says:


                  I see your point, but I’m really desperate, mate. And I have no idea what to do. Spandrell’s new religion thing speaks to me.

                  What I really want is the Bitch of Bengal to laundry all my soldier’s clothes all day long until she collapses of exhaustion. New Religion 2.0 appeared to promise that

                  Desperate times call for desperate measures and this is getting pychologically unbearable.

                • jim says:

                  Calling it religion 2.0 is a poor marketing move, and also apt to weaken its hold on ancient social technology.

                  Much better to call it Pauline Orthodox Christianity. Russian Orthodoxy is headed our way. We then say not that we got there first, but that Paul got there first.

    • I believe Twitter is merely testing the waters for a full-blown social media attack on “right wing” in India around the time of the Indian General Elections in 2024.

      They are clearly planning to “Trump” Narendra Modi.

  19. Rick says:

    I’ve loving watching the left steal the NYC election.

    • Pooch says:

      LOL…I was just about to post that. They aren’t even trying to hide it now. It’s a shame for NYC because Adams is actually sort of based when it comes to black crime.

      • The Cominator says:

        Lol they apparently threw these fake votes out…

        • Rick says:

          Did they throw out the fake votes or Adam’s votes? How could you tell difference? The first part of the steal is get the vote totals so you know how many votes you need to remove or add to win.

          • Pooch says:

            Yeah, as the least left candidate, they are trying to steal away from Adams, not for him.

          • Javier says:

            Presumably as a trial run for all elections going forward, all the ballots were fake. 100% mail-in/electronic + “ranked choice” makes recounts effectively impossible–typical NYC election worker is an 85 IQ fat black woman, they can barely count to 10 let alone 100,000. Election machine simply selects candidate and outputs a plausible vote total.

            They got caught so they’re calling it a “mistake” which everyone knows is a lie, shit if the media is admitting it you know the problem is 100x worse than they say.

  20. Vaccine Plan says:

    In order to keep my place at college I am going forward with the vaccine plan suggested by some users here. I have selected a pharmacy operated by two Persian women, one of whom administers the hosts herself. I will go tomorrow evening to receive the Johnson and Johnson vaccine. I will tip the woman $500 before she administers the injection. The pharmacy looks like it’s not making much money so my donation will hopefully be welcome.

    I’m a bit nervous and wondering if anybody has any advice on what I need to do to make the plan work out well for me. Do I need to give a more generous tip?

    • onyomi says:

      No tips, but do let us know how it goes. Thanks.

    • Rick says:

      Best I can recommend is watch the The Barbarian Invasions (2003) and make sure you don’t actually get the shot.

    • Pooch says:

      That should be enough. Be confident like you’ve bribed people before and it’s no big deal.

      • Pooch says:

        Oh and pull the money out and show it discreetly as you offer to bribe her. You want them looking at the green so they know you are serious.

    • Karl says:

      Bribery is an art, like seduction. So the advice that can be given by writing is very limited, but I’d suggest to make it very clear what the tip is for and that you expect a certification of vaccination for it. How you phrase it depends on your style and circumstances.

      If unsure, I’d first offer the tip for the possibility to inject myself without anyone present. If that is declined, you might have to clarify that you want only the certification of vaccination, but not the vaccination

    • Contaminated NEET says:

      White supremacist bioterrorists bribe public health officials to deliberately spread COVID!

      You’re playing with fire here, guys. If you’re going to commit a crime, don’t talk about it in a public forum first. So far, the vaccine bribe plan has all been hypothetical, but this is getting concrete and and actionable.

      Please do not confirm in writing if you do go through with it.

      • Vaccine Plan says:

        I took this advice and decided to tread the straight and narrow path. I will not disclose my vaccine status to my school and I will submit to twice monthly covid testing.

        • jim says:

          Complying with legality is normality bias. Most affluent, respectable, moderately successful people that I know massively and seriously break the law all the time.

          • Contaminated NEET says:

            Sure, but do they discuss it in writing in public?

            • Karl says:

              Are you aware that these commenters are all anonymous?

              Are you aware that most comments here and allmost all of Jim’s writings are crimes, depending on your jurisdiction worse crimes than bribery?

              I understand your point about playing with fire, but we are doing it in room that is already burning.

            • The Cominator says:

              Even in times of mass purges you are far more likely to go down because someone personally wanted you to go down then for actual crimes.

              In Soviet purges most were purged not because they hated the system because nearly everyone hated the system, but because someone with some influence hated you and wanted something you had. The exception was the 1937 purge when Stalin finally in full control of the state directed Beria (who said all sorts of anti-communist anti-revolutionary things during his career and made no great secret of it and rather than being purged was protected by Stalin and used by him as Stalin knew he had no problems with killing communists) to purge nearly all the true believing Marxists.

              Rightists kill their enemies, but leftist kill their friends.

        • Pooch says:

          That’s not that bad. Maybe you’ll meet some based friends doing the same thing.

        • Javier says:

          I would go the path of printing your own vaccination card–there’s plenty of examples online and you can easily create your own with some cardstock and a printer. You could even laminate it. Cost less than $500 anyway. If they actually try to verify the record you can just shrug and say, “Hospitals always screwing up, what can you do?” Zero real chance of that though. The school just wants you to go through the motions for them so they can mark their checkboxes and be in compliance. They don’t *really* care about the disease.

      • The Cominator says:

        Bah we’re not talking about deleting Cathedral grandees in minecraft. In anarcho tyranny everyone constantly breaks the law because its impossible not to.

        • Contaminated NEET says:

          >In anarcho tyranny everyone constantly breaks the law because its impossible not to.

          The tyranny portion of anarcho-tyranny is right here, right now. Enemies are reading your words, looking for a crime so they can lock you up and shut jim up. Don’t do their job for them.

          • alf says:

            It’s the recurring debate of courage versus stupidity.

            To in the face of danger have a straight back and say ‘fuck you I’ma do the right thing’ is pretty inspiring. When I see others doing that, motivates me to do the same thing. Makes me feel less alone, less black pilled.

            At the same time, if publicly announcing that you’ll do the right thing gets you arrested or whatnot, as for instance happened with businesses who resisted lockdown on instagram, kind of stupid.

            Where the line is, hard to say. The idea of this place is guaranteed anonymity, which makes saying the right thing a lot easier, even if it blatantly breaks the law (and much has been said here that breaks the law). But some reservation is never a bad idea.

            • jim says:

              Do what is needful but keep your ass covered.

              I have the nigh miraculous ability to speak to police. The cop on your beat is likely to be on your side, and you want him to feel that the crime you have just committed is totally justified, but you obviously cannot tell him “I committed that crime and it was totally justified”. He will arrest you in an instant. But I allow him to infer that, so that he will feel even less motivated than he usually is – and the cop on the beat is alarmingly unmotivated to arrest criminals in the first place. No end of paperwork is likely to ensue, even if he arrests some dumb thug, and considerably more paperwork if the criminal is someone who can afford a good lawyer, and possibly pull strings.

              But most people, if they so much as tell a cop the time of day, will wind up being convicted of every unsolved crime in the neighborhood, so perhaps I should not be giving this advice, as few people will be able to give effect to it successfully.

              But here is some advice that is likely to be more useful, and less likely to get you imprisone”

              It is hard to get arrested unless someone is individually and personally motivated to have you arrested.

              The man that gets arrested, and frequently executed, in a left singularity, is someone that some leftist was motivated to have arrested, which usually bears little relationship to thought crimes or even concrete acts of rebellion. The man who gets arrested is usually someone who is close to the leftist who wants him arrested. Being close to leftists is dangerous at the best of times, and likely to get a lot more dangerous soon.

              The Khmer Rouge killed about a third of the Khmer population. But they killed near all of the Khmer Rouge, and for the most part those people were tortured to death over several days, while the ordinary victim was killed relatively quickly.

              • The Cominator says:

                Yes i made basically the same comment about leftist purges, to quote a bad movie “they live to settle scores and they have a lot of scores to settle”. But most people should not talk to cops, cops tend to be dumb thugs who exist to ruin your day. They are lazy most of the time but they have quotas and times when they are trying to fill them.

                • jim says:

                  Thinking of the cop as a dumb thug, which is to say someone lower in social class than yourself, is going to get you arrested during an interaction with him, even if you are in fact as innocent as the day as long. You should treat him as a fellow alpha male.

                  Obvious, most cops are not the sharpest chisel in the box, and it is inadvisable to use long words when talking to them. But long words should not be relevant to the conversation.

                  Chris Rock produced a public service video for niggas “How to not get your ass kicked by police”, which depicted niggas doing dumb nigga stuff in their interaction with police, resulting in cops beating the crap out of them.

                  As an affluent white intellectual, you are unlikely to do any of the stupid stuff Chris Rock depicted, and thus unlikely to get the crap beaten out of you, but you are likely to do other stupid stuff that is likely to get you arrested and convicted, regardless of innocence. The converse behavior is likely to get you off, regardless of guilt. I think I could do a similar video “How not to get arrested”, for affluent white intellectuals, depicting upper class intellectuals doing stuff very different from that done by dumb niggas, but equally stupid.

                  The fact that I am a great deal smarter than any cop I am likely to meet does not cause me to look down upon him.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I look down on them because they are (in 4chan parlance) the tranny jannies of the regime.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I very very very much try to avoid interactions with state agents and have so far never been arrested but were I’m being questioned on suspicion of a blue collar crime (if it were a white collar financial crime or some national security “crime” it would be different, I don’t like fbi fags or glowniggers either but their average intelligence level is much higher than that of normal cops even if they are more likely to be true believers in progressive insanity)…

                  Isn’t the best thing to do is shutup and just say “lawyer”.

                • Pooch says:

                  Don’t talk to feds or fbi ever as they are extremists but beat cops like Jim said can be talked to if you are treating them with respect as a fellow alpha male. There’s a ton that work out at my gym and they are just normal alphas who are friendly enough if you are asking for a spot or advice on technique.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  If you live in a city then [s]you get what you deserve[/s]cops you might encounter are products of the city machine.

                  If you live away from cities, then your neighbors are the cops you encounter.

                • Pooch says:

                  If you live away from cities, then your neighbors are the cops you encounter.

                  Well said. If you live in the right community, ie not a shitlib metropolis, you know the cops by name and ask them how their day is going when you see them.

                • Noname says:

                  It’s probably possible to talk your way out of a situation as Jim says. But, keep in mind they would not be talking to you in the first place unless they thought you knew something or did something.

                  Not all of them are the same either. Some adhere to ideology, some are pension hunters, others are just lazy civil servants. Keep in mind they are lied to all day by real criminals and it doesn’t take a genius to sniff out a lie.

                  If you have any preconceptions or fear or just the nervous type, they might sniff that out. Your tone of voice, a quick side glance, poor choice of words could betray you.

                  Be confident, maintain eye contact, and answer directly and move on. Don’t give too much information.

                  If you’re actually in the cold room being questioned, you’re a suspect and you’re not going to talk your way out of anything. Say you want a lawyer and sign nothing and don’t unburden yourself on the jailhouse snitch.

                  Read the Ried Technique if you want to learn more about interrogation techniques.

                • Aidan says:


                  No. If you say “lawyer”, the cop thinks “guilty”, and “I have to do paperwork now” and will haul you in, and maybe throw every charge he can get away with at you. If you talk to the cops and manage to charm em, they think “he’s a good guy”. Cops sniff out guilt and fear. If you feel totally justified in your actions, -without confessing to anything-, their gut instincts will tell them “innocent”.

                • Pooch says:

                  There should be a distinction between federal and local law enforcement. The proper response to the FBI should probably be lawyer.

              • Karl says:

                Cops have very different incentives than state prosecutors. What Jim say about interaction with cops is one thing, but there are crimes where you deal directly with the state prosecution, e.g. posting stuff on the web.

                In such cases the facts are clear, and the only question is whether is its punishable or not. State prosecutors love such cases if they can show their holiness by prosecuting rightists. Usally they will finethe person (if they can stick a name to crime without much work). Most people will rather pay the fine than to fight the case through 2 or evern 3 instances.

                So for example, if some simple mind in Germany posts on facebook that Merkel’s opening of the border brought crime and terror to Germany, the prosecutor will work on it and prosecute the case no matter what the simple mind or their defence says.

                Most simple minds won’t spend the money to hear the constitutional courts on this

                • The Cominator says:

                  Even if they start prosecuting people for web posting in and of itself in the US (Rick Vaughn is really the only case of a guy they went after just for that, and if they start purging people they are more likely going to go after leftist redditors for insufficient leftism) you’re not going to be dealing with local beat cops but feds and glowies. The US attorneys are not going to have much of a difference in belief or agenda or even background from them.

                  FBIfags tend to be lawfags too.

              • Javier says:

                As the saying goes “locks are for the honest,” so too do I say Laws are for the honest.

                The most common attitude I get from real-life police is “if you commit a crime please for the love of god do it where we don’t see you and don’t tell anyone.” They know crime happens non-stop and they know their actions barely put a dent in it, and they don’t cry over dead hookers and crackheads. The Wire is a very accurate show, no one wants to catch a body, but if no one saw it it didn’t happen. Rape becomes assault, theft becomes vandalism, murder becomes missing person, etc. Most crimes are either really easy or impossible to solve, cops naturally gravitate to the former so you can get away with a lot by making yourself one of the hard cases.

                Much of it comes from misconceptions of how prosecution works. There are basically only two ways to get convicted of a crime: eye witness or confession. That’s it. All other evidence is gathered in an attempt to secure these. All that CSI bullshit of gathering 1000 pieces of circumstantial evidence to trap people in a inescapable web of proof is just too hard most of the time and too risky. You run into the OJ problem where the guy is dead to rights in every way possible yet he just maintains that iron-willed frame of never confessing and bam, he walks. Recall the Zodiac killer was interrogated by police several times. He just never confessed. No prosecutor even wants to risk that outcome, they are expected to have a 100% success rate. You can spend your whole day working on one dead hooker or go after the guy who’s an idiot and already admitting to shooting a hooker, and if you can pin more than one body on him even better! It’s all numbers to the brass.

                That’s why the old advice is still the best: STFU. Never talk to cops. Just don’t. Most people cannot avoid self-incriminating. Even if the cops have no intention to prosecute you, coming up empty makes them look bad so if they can charge you with some random dumb shit they will. The feds love “lying during interrogation” or whatever crap they charged Flynn with. Works every time. Just saying you had toast for breakfast when you really had waffles to a fed is a ‘crime.’

                In the case of a forum like this a prosecutor may show you the statement and show some IP link they have to you or an email address. Then they will lean on you with all the bad things they can do to you and hope you confess. Don’t. Just SHUT UP. Most of what they say is a lie or a bluff and they can’t do shit. If you just keep your damn mouth shut you’ll be fine. Or at least you won’t make it any worse; talking to police NEVER helps.

                • Aidan says:

                  No, not never. If you are interrogated at the police station, that is the time to keep quiet, but most of the time, the cops will accost you in public, suspecting you of a crime that recently happened nearby, or they will knock on your door without a warrant looking to “talk to you”, if you are already suspected of something, and that is the time to apply your charm and frame and avoid charges.

                  Getting charged with political crimes is a different story, but in that case there is nothing you can do to help yourself. Any situation where an individual officer’s decisions could help you avoid arrest or charges, you want to talk to them. I’ve seen B&E and burglary reduced to mere trespassing in this way, and not in a plea deal, but before charges were ever filed.

                • Javier says:

                  Maybe you’re the exception, maybe you only thought you talked your way out of something and you were never really in trouble. Either way, better off saying nothing.

                  I am not Jim, I will not charm the cops. If they knock on my door, sorry, I have nothing to say, close the door. Shit just opening your door can allow them to peek inside and drum up PC for a warrant.

                  I have a strict script I follow for traffic stops where avoiding saying anything at all is impossible (as a kid I got several tickets but it’s always worked since I started using it), but only because I scrupulously avoid admitting any wrongdoing.

                  In the case of downgrading charges, that’s just standard cop statistical fuckery. They probably had a quota, decided the guy wasn’t a real danger, so they downgraded the charge to avoid the hassle. That’s playing with fire no matter how you look at it, could have easily gone another way esp. if an actual prosecutor heard about it (cops don’t bring charges and neither do property owners.)

                  You’re right about political crimes but it still holds that talking won’t help you, only make it worse. No need to do their job for them, make them work for their dinner. Sometimes they may decide the meal isn’t worth it.

                • Guy says:

                  Having some denial of wrongdoing based script for traffic stops is unnecessary and counterproductive. I’ve been pulled over dozens of times for speeding, a couple times pulled over when obviously alcohol impaired and/or after having smoked marijuana and in a car smelling of it. I talked to the officer like a fellow man and they’ve always told me to go home, this stop never happened. If just a speeding thing, a warning.

                  Now in the conversation when ive been drinking I might have mentioned my cousin on the force. When asked if I would pass a breathalyzer I once said, I certainly hope so otherwise I’m fucked. No test of any kind was given.

                  They fuck you if they think you’re a jerk. Acting all sovereign citizen or talking about your rights is what they don’t like. If you want to go to court over a speeding ticket then I guess you can do the whole shut your mouth thing, but that means you don’t value your time very high.

              • Aidan says:

                I find that Jim’s advice is personally true, but it’s almost as hard for me to put it into words as it is for him. I have dodged some pretty serious charges just by talking to the cops. Unable to afford a good lawyer in my youth, I have charmed prosecutors, public defenders, and judges into getting me sweet plea deals in the rare cases I have been charged, charged with far more minor offenses than I could have been. And I personally know people who have gotten out of far, far more serious crimes through the same skills. Also, if you ever end up in jail awaiting trial, be on your best behavior and try to make friends with all the cops you encounter during the process. They are certainly reporting back about who is good and who is trouble.

                I think it is all about frame. Like Jim has said before, you treat the cops with the cheerful politeness of an eighteenth century gentleman, politeness that is enforced by the potential of violence between two alpha males. Do not protest your innocence or confess your guilt. You must act like what you were doing was completely normal, good, and natural, while also holding the frame that it is completely normal and good that the cops have some concern about your behavior. Treat it like a business meeting or something; a serious situation, that deserves to be taken seriously, but not divorced from a little levity and human connection. My father was very good at dealing with the police, even though he is not very alpha and not very dangerous, and I learned by imitating him, so if you have some charisma it shouldn’t be too hard to pull off.

                I act as if the cops and I are on the same side, and I very subtly imply that we are part of the same tribe. The cops will usually question you, and that is the time to throw a little small talk in. “What do you do for a living?” turns into a reply where I mention wanting to get out of the city to start a family, and so on. There is a video I often see circulated entitled “do not talk to the cops” where some law professor tells you how to avoid incriminating yourself by maintaining dead silence around police, but this is the worst advice imaginable, because it assumes rule of law, when in reality whether you get charged or not is up to the very human cops. If you immediately start off by pleading the fifth, you will get every charge on the books thrown at you, simply for being a pain in the ass. Men of the same tribe do not act like that around each other, and you need the cops to see you as a member of the ingroup and not the outgroup.

  21. Noname says:

    @suones, Horse rancher actually. But, even were he a pig farmer, that is a useful occupation if you can get over the stench. And you’re correct, the center of his universe is Metaphysics.

  22. Anonymous Fake says:

    Out of curiosity, what was the most red pilled media in the 1990’s before anyone was on the internet? I trusted The Economist and The Wall Street Journal the most then, when the establishment conservatives were perceived as the most respectable people and leftism was for dropout plumbers, welders, factory workers, basically union thugs who deserved to be replaced by immigrants and largely were.

    Things are different now. I suspect things were different then, too, but I have no source that would suggest otherwise. All I know is that the National Review has never been any damn good.

    I was just reading the most conservative media in the front of the library back then. I’m thinking the real stuff was kept in the back next to the dirty magazines.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      The age of broadcast was also an age of progroid domination; ergo, the most red-pilled media in the age of broadcast by definition would not be found without going out of your way to find it. In which case, it is more about paying attention to particular figures, and seeing what outfits at the time would publish particular figures at the time, such as Sam Francis or Revilo P. Oliver (Liberty Bell, Instauration, Chronicles, et cetera).

      >when the establishment conservatives were perceived as the most respectable people and leftism was for dropout plumbers, welders, factory workers, basically union thugs who deserved to be replaced by immigrants and largely were.

      What fantasy world do you live in?

    • Guy says:

      Jim Goad? Back then everything wasn’t necessarily overtly political and the most redpilled people weren’t really writing about national politics.

      Also, the tradesmen who were into union politics that you call leftist are a far cry from the soulless garbage that come out of universities. I’m struggling to conceive of the personality of and lifestory of someone who ends up with your positions. Your comments are uncanny. It is difficult to imagine your failure would not cause you to rethink your position, there must be some reason you hold onto your belief that you made the right choices despite so decisively demonstrating to yourself that you didn’t. What kind of person complains about leftism while claiming he deserves more money because he went to school and it’s not fair?

      • Anonymous Fake says:

        [*repetitious and unresponsive*]

        • jim says:

          I feel your pain. I sympathize, all of us have been hurt by the same forces as are hurting you, but you are blaming the wrong people. You are blaming the victims of those who have hurt you, and defending the power, the wealth, the arrogance, and the capability to inflict harm and suffering of those who have hurt you.

          And most of this stuff has been argued before. For example you claimed before that school performance causes people to buy real estate near good schools, and I replied before that “good schools” is code for “places where my kids will not be beaten up by niggers, and my wife raped by niggers” And you talked about trickle down economics before, and I replied that everyone followed Reagan’s tax policies, and continues to follow them to this day, because Reagan demonstrated that taxes on the rich and the middle class were far, far, far above the laffer limit.

          You are not responding to those arguments.

          By repeating yourself, and thus provoking other people to repeat themselves, you waste bandwidth. So censoring you.

          Education is a ponzi scheme. The only thing professors teach, the only thing they can teach, is how to be professor. And thus, because they feel for their students, because they feel for people like you, they want more professorships so that they can find jobs for people like you, which requires more kids to attend school for longer.

          You are a victim of this ponzi scheme.

          • Anonymous Fake says:

            > For example you claimed before that school performance causes people to buy real estate near good schools, and I replied before that “good schools” is code for “places where my kids will not be beaten up by niggers, and my wife raped by niggers” And you talked about trickle down economics before, and I replied that everyone followed Reagan’s tax policies, and continues to follow them to this day, because Reagan demonstrated that taxes on the rich and the middle class were far, far, far above the laffer limit.

            > You are not responding to those arguments.

            The problem is that it is so utterly low in status in the real world to complain about the blacks, and high in status to have absolutely docile children whose presence is coincidentally repulsive to blacks. This is the state of the culture. The catch is, I suspect in retrospect that there were red pill people around then, and they encouraged integration just to troll white flight money into the town from the cities, but this doesn’t matter now and it didn’t do anything for the education true believers completely clueless about race. So there’s no room for real world race realism, and if Jared Taylor can’t pull it off no one can.

            But what can be done is school reform and that’s what I’ve been trying to encourage among the right. Local schooling always means strict standards for the right and participation trophies for the left, by nature, and this is how they perform entryism on institutions, by showing off their rigged credentials. They couldn’t do this with universal standards. Shill tests always end up becoming false opposition meant to raise the shill tester’s status, not effectively filtering out any leftists at all. The alternative paths are random selection of workers and universal meritocracy, because the rules of the game we’re in now favor the left.

            Now as for defending trickle down economics, that is defending the indefensible from a moral perspective. The rich are motivated to become rich for all the wrong reasons and they threaten the careers of Christians who question these reasons. Confiscating their capital (or at least plausibly threatening to do so) so they won’t become abusive to working families is morally right even if not economically optimal according to Laffer curves or some other ‘spergery. Economics is mostly fake anyway as I’ve mentioned with cost of living rigging and fraudulent mass migrations that never would happen if accurate pricing was enforced across regions.

            Hard work and good character used to define the corporate elite. As I mentioned before, globalist competitiveness is a lot higher now and becoming an elite involves more cheating than talent now, so over time just as with Ivy League schools that used to train priests the institution became less religious and eventually completely atheist, the opposite of its original state. For some reason the right can see this happen to academia, but corporate culture is still a blind spot.

            • jim says:

              > there were red pill people around then, and they encouraged integration just to troll white flight money into the town


              Integration has always targeted groups and communities suspected of being redpilled with the intent of lowering their status by getting them and their children beaten up and their wives raped, destroying the wealth they have built in real estate, forcing them to abandon their homes and gardens. Thus the destruction of Detroit was accompanied by the demonization of the white man on the car assembly line as Archie Bunker.

              They burned Detroit and drove out its people, drove out the people who built it, in order to make it low status to complain about the blacks.

              > But what can be done is school reform and that’s what I’ve been trying to encourage among the right.

              Schools are inherently priestly institutions, and your proposed school reforms are all more power for the priesthood, more centralization for the priesthood, and more Harvard authority over the priesthood.

              We need to burn it down and replace it with enforceable apprenticeship. All your proposed reforms are confiscating power over children from their parents and giving that power to priests in the big cities, and confiscating wealth from people in the countryside, and giving it to people living off the big city economy of the finance, welfare, education, crime, insurance, and real estate sectors.

              Now as for defending trickle down economics, that is defending the indefensible from a moral perspective. The rich are motivated to become rich for all the wrong reasons and they threaten the careers of Christians who question these reasons.

              As your rightism is actually leftism, your Christianity is actually demon worship.

              Christians get rich by creating value, and a Good Christian, like the Good Woman in King Solomon’s Proverbs, and the Good Servant in Christ’s parable, creates value and capital.

              Exhorbitant taxes on the wealthy are not motivated by the need of the government to confiscate value, but the need of the envious to destroy value. It is not that they want what other people have, it is that they want other people to not have it. Income tax is a violation of the final commandment, motivated not by the need to fund the state, but by hatred and envy.

              Once again I tell the story of the little girl and pringles:

              One child opened a container of pringles, and started to take out one pringle. The little girl screamed like it was the end of the world, like she was being eaten by tigers. She charged him with a full body tackle, even though he was bigger than her, and grabbed the container of pringles from him, resulting in pringles flying everywhere, screaming continuously.

              If she wanted a pringle, she could have waited a couple of seconds, held out her hand, and he would have given her a pringle. Or waited a couple of seconds more for him to put down the container of pringles, and then picked it up. She wanted him to not have a pringle because at that exact moment she did not have one.

              Some time later she complained that another child was being unfair and greedy because he was hogging the ball and not sharing. But by that time he had stopped playing with the ball, and it was just lying around on the floor. Nothing was stopping her from picking it up. She was unhappy because the other child had had fun with the ball. Which seemed to her terribly unfair and deserving of punishment, or at least reprimand.

              That little girl is who wants income tax. The point and purpose of Income Tax is not to obtain revenue, but to destroy it.

              If a ruler taxes income, he finds he has allowed his overly mighty servants to destroy revenue.

              You, Anonymous Fake, had your life destroyed by the Education system, and instead of seeking your life back, and seeking vengeance on those that wronged you, seek rather that those whose lives were not destroyed by the education system should get their lives destroyed also. You hate those that were not destroyed, and seek that they should suffer.

              You feel yourself, not wronged by those that harmed you, but wronged by those who avoid or manage to recover from the harm that you suffered, like the little girl who felt herself wronged by the little boy eating a pringle, and the little boy having fun with a ball.

              • Yul Bornhold says:

                What do you mean by enforceable apprenticeship? The state enforcing or the guild/master? Enforced how?

                • jim says:

                  In the normal case, enforced by father and master. If the father changes his mind, he has to pay compensation to the master. If he does not pay the master, he is in trouble with the guild. If he does not pay the guild, in trouble with the state.

                  If the boy runs away from both guild and father, the state returns him to his father and expects the father to sort things out.

              • Pooch says:

                Exhorbitant taxes on the wealthy are not motivated by the need of the government to confiscate value

                It has been exposed that the elite pay very taxes as they don’t really have any taxable income. The borrow infinite dollars against their assets. The tax system is designed to extract wealth from those who do actually create value and do have taxable income, the middle classes.

                • Pooch says:

                  Very little taxes*

                • Anonymous Fake says:

                  [*deleted for the usual absurdity of Marxism*]

                • jim says:

                  We had this debate with CR, and we are not going to have it again.

                  We have already discussed Marxism You are not adding anything new by confidently repeating absurdities that I have already addressed.

                  If you make a relevant response to my article, I will allow it through. If you just confidently repeat Marxist claims already discussed and rebutted at considerable length, I am going to silently delete you the way I silently delete all the others.

                  I have been letting you through because you seem to be genuinely evil and insane, rather that working of someone else’s script, but this crap is just boring old fashioned Marxism, which is a dead horse that needs no further flogging.

                  Those lies were threadbare and worn out six score years ago. That bird will not fly, that dog will not hunt. Not only are you casting seed on stones, the seed has been dead for over a century. Further discussion is unlikely to be profitable. It has been unprofitable for over a century.

              • Anonymous Fake says:

                It’s more like being upset that the top 10% of men claim the top 40% of women, leaving behind the crazies and sluts, not a case of hogging a ball or pringles or a limo or other trivial materialistic trinkets, etc. The response to this, the Jeremy Meeks phenomenon, further makes things worse for the formerly solidly respectable middle class salary man, once the most prized of all mates in leaner times. Now both the rich and poor are more respected than the blue pilled beta male, but this can be fixed by confiscating the wealth the rich earned through bad motivations, and giving it to the poor so they have an incentive to switch mating strategies to being providers too, not thugs. Kill 2 birds with 1 stone.

                All of this is morally right and the fact that it would increase the sexual value of nerds like us is either just a coincidence or a good sign that we’re the moral people. We don’t care if the Laffer curve says it means less utility overall, if that means less consumerism and more family life. We are the right.

                I don’t see anyone getting rich by working a job and creating value. I see wealth as a result of speculation, exploitation, bad communications of pricing information, usury, etc, and even if all of this could be fixed the motivations of the rich (sex/drugs/power) are never good. Actually good uses of wealth, like flying cars so suburban red voters can get key administrative careers in the important blue cities hundreds of miles away, mysteriously never happen. Like, fusion power.

                It’s as if quality has to be determined first before quantity, and truth before power. This used to be taken for granted.

                • jim says:

                  > It’s more like being upset that the top 10% of men claim the top 40% of women, leaving behind the crazies and sluts, not a case of hogging a ball or pringles or a limo or other trivial materialistic trinkets, etc.

                  You have never been close enough to a woman to see how they act sexually.

                  The really rich, for example Bezos, fail to get pussy.

                  It is not a tiny minority of crazies waiting for Jeremy Meeks next booty call. All women are like that. All women are waiting for their next booty call until their eggs dry up and their looks fade.

                  When we see a rich person getting pussy, for example Donald Trump, he does not get pussy merely by being rich. He has to do the kind of stuff I have to do – but which Jeremy Meeks can do better than either of us, because Jeremy Meeks has no assets for the government to confiscate.

                  If the wealthy had any influence on the culture and the social order, they would manipulate the social order in ways that got them hot fresh young virgin pussy. Since quite obviously the rich are not getting hot fresh young virgin pussy, they cannot possibly be the source of the corruption and debasement. The rich and red pilled are doing what I do, and having a little more success in doing, because they have the resources to stage stuff, and they can afford an entourage (which comes in mighty handy for picking up chicks) The rich and blue pilled are having a really bad time. No one is getting what they want.

                  If there was one woman on the entire planet who was as you imagine woman to be, she would have found her way to Bezos’s office when she was hot, young, and virgin.

                  If you are in a prison cell doing life for rape, murder, and cannibalism, hot chicks will find a way to your cell. All Women Are Like That.

                  If you own a skyscraper, and you are in the corner office on top of the skyscraper, hot chicks are not going to find their way to your corner office. No Women Are Like That.

                  No hot chicks found their way to Bezos’s corner office, and hot chicks did not find their way to Trump’s corner office, rather, he set up an elaborate apparatus to manipulate them into going along with minions who brought them there, doing on an incomparably grander scale what I have done on a considerably humbler scale.

                  No Woman Are Like That. Not one woman in the entire world.

                  No women are like that, and anyone who thinks that some women like that exist is a lonely loser living in his mother’s basement masturbating to anime.

                • alf says:

                  nerds like us

                  Could you be any more ‘hello fellow white men’?

                  Noticing you try very hard to use our shibboleths. Which is somewhat impressive. But this whole cutting and pasting together our words to push leftwing ideas gives off a very Frankensteinish feel.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >Now both the rich and poor are more respected than the blue pilled beta male, but this can be fixed by confiscating the wealth the rich earned through bad motivations, and giving it to the poor so they have an incentive to switch mating strategies to being providers too, not thugs. Kill 2 birds with 1 stone.

                  You are literally insane. You lack sanity. Sanity is a coin of which you are impoverished. The degree of sanity which you possess is insufficient in comparison with other men. How else can i go on…

                • The Cominator says:

                  If you hopelessly suck with women you should have read my how to fuck strippers for non chads.

                • jim says:

                  Better to be a chad and not hopelessly suck with women.

                  Women are not that hard when you realize that contrary to what is continuously depicted in the media, women are not men, and realize that the courtship dance depicted in the media is wildly and disturbingly unrealistic.

                  If you have performed the real courtship dance, and then see the media courtship dance, it is as disturbing and revolting as a drag queen. Women seem to lap up the media courtship dance, but in real life, will not perform it.

                • Pooch says:

                  Women are not that hard when you realize that contrary to what is continuously depicted in the media, women are not men, and realize that the courtship dance depicted in the media is wildly and disturbingly unrealistic.

                  This was my exact experience. As my father gave me no good advice with women when I was young, I tried to emulate what men were doing on sit coms when it came to dating with predictably disastrous results.

                  If you hopelessly suck with women you should have read my how to fuck strippers for non chads.

                  If you hopelessly suck with women you should be reading Heartsie cover to cover. Can get it in paper form I believe on Amazon.

                • The Cominator says:

                  A blind man cant be a sniper nor a fighter pilot…

                  I do not have it in me to larp as a fake bad guy.

                • Pooch says:

                  I do not have it in me to larp as a fake bad guy

                  Not necessary. You just have to larp as a man, which is not a larp at all. Women crave masculinity.

                • The Cominator says:

                  PUA fails for me in clownworld, hell even its practicioners who used to be good reported things lately are on nightmare mood. Roosh before he went religious said things were getting hard…

                  I got sick of it and i like my alternative that is easy and works.

                • jim says:

                  My alternative is mighty hard, but it works better.

                • Pooch says:

                  Old school PUA-style leaving the house with the goal of cold approaching X amount of women is a grind and not recommended. In today’s world easier to hit the dating apps and social media and approach women who you see in your day-to-day life if the opportunity arises.

                  Roosh, although he has made valuable contributions, honestly was and is not fully red-pilled on women which is why he doesn’t own a woman now.

                • jim says:

                  Blue pilled Christianity will tell you that God does not want you to own a woman.

                  But Gnon definitely does want you to own a woman.

                • Pooch says:

                  Roosh said things were getting hard because he was doing solo cold approach game (no longer had a crew of single men), which is very hard and has always been very hard (but not impossible).

                • jim says:

                  Solo approach game is simply contrary to nature. Women are forever looking for a strong man in a strong tribe. (Albeit you can create the plausible appearance of a strong man in a strong tribe over social media, and then she shows up for a solo meeting.)

                  Just do social media of yourself in another identity (don’t attach an identify vulnerable to state power to your social media face) throwing a party, and being seen has the host and big man at the party.

                  Alpha males are naturally inclined to treat the host as the big guy, so will cheerfully be props.

                  You have to be alpha male of the group if you are hitting on a woman by herself, or else in a group of men hitting on a group of women.

                • suones says:

                  Roosh is in pain because he resists his blood too hard. Even now, if he wishes to give up material comforts provided by the West in exchange for family, he can start by learning Farsi, accepting Baphomet, moving to Iran and sharing in Baphomet’s female blessings. I have no doubt Baphomet will provide him with four wives and a dozen kids, for that is the one real gift that Baphomet gives that YHWH doesn’t. But he has to LARP as a YHWHegian, so he shares in the sad fate of all men who worship him. Iranians will even give him a scientific job in a university or research institute if he proves loyal.

                  A man who dishonours his father deserves no peace. Roosh needs to remember that.

                • suones says:

                  flying cars so suburban red voters can get key administrative careers in the important blue cities hundreds of miles away, mysteriously never happen.

                  Watching the Klein AirCar test flight gave me a strange spiritual satisfaction like the time I saw SpaceX rockets land vertically on their tails, “like God and Henry Ford intended[1].” The Klein craft is quite obviously a car that can fly, rather than a driveable plane. I would’ve expected something like this to come out of America with its sparse population and great distances to be covered, but the test is in Slovakia of all places.

                  Anonymous Fake is right that it will never get regulatory approval as a car. Aircraft “regulation” exists to strangle the aeroplane industry and prevent any innovation from happening, in the guise of “safety.” Witness how “regulation” was unable to prevent obvious stupidity from Boeing that actually got people killed.

                  [1] Apologies to Jerry Pournelle.

                • jim says:

                  We had the flying car sixty years ago, and the people who got it then got grandfathered in.

                  They have what is legally their original plane, though every part has been replaced many times, and fly it on their original license. But now they are dying off.

                • alf says:

                  Com maybe there’s a cute girl out there right now, lurking Jim’s blog, thinking to herself: omg Cominator knows so much about history, I’d wish he knew as much about my body… ^_~

                • Pooch says:

                  Alf you laugh but I’ve noticed there are supposedly based RW Twitter female accounts doing just that. Wherever there is a male space with alpha males, women strangely find themselves around there trying to smoke them out.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Alf there are no women on the internet.

                • jim says:

                  There are no women here.

                  But there are women on tinder, on facebook, lots of places. You want to pull a woman over the internet, you go where they go. Women are always posting the female role in the mating dance, so you post the male role in the mating dance.

                • Pooch says:

                  There’s plenty on RW twitter. One broad even got together with a large anon RW account and they live together now.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The one thing I do on twatter (an enemy site and unlike facebook is not tied to any RL friends) is PM BAP who is sort of an old purely online friend.

                  If I end up with a permanent woman it will either be due to meeting a foreign girl or doing what Lou Pai did…

                • alf says:

                  Every male endeavor on the internet attracts women, even world of warcraft. Quality may vary of course.

                  As for this blog… Walls of argumentative texts probably don’t attract too many women. Maybe a few autistic ones? That’d be perfect for you Com! Almost a shame we are so stringent about anonymity…

                • Pooch says:

                  As for this blog… Walls of argumentative texts probably don’t attract too many women. Maybe a few autistic ones? That’d be perfect for you Com! Almost a shame we are so stringent about anonymity…

                  Yeah text forums like this are not a good tool for women to gauge who the alpha is. Social Media is perfect for them as they can instantly see who has the most followers, likes, etc. Decently attractive women emulate BAP-isms, post with his book, and sniff all around his twitter without even knowing what he looks like which is pretty funny. Just the fact that he has a cult following gets them wet.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  omg Cominator knows so much about history, I’d wish he knew as much about my body… ^_~

                  The thought of a *censored*man in his 30s or 40s writing this is hilarious. Very enjoy, much worth, I kinda miss the old school 4chan shitposting.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Well if any commenter came here and claimed to be a woman I definitely would tell her “Tits or GTFO”!

                • yewotm8 says:

                  >but this can be fixed by confiscating the wealth the rich earned through bad motivations, and giving it to the poor so they have an incentive to switch mating strategies to being providers too, not thugs. Kill 2 birds with 1 stone.

                  I honestly thought this was a caricature of the kind of posts you make. Then I scrolled back up and saw your name. Absolutely mind blowing.

    • suones says:

      I was online in the 90s. Usenet was already an old thing by that time. Everything which Jim posts here was discussed on Usenet, with people using real names and real e-mail addresses. “Red-pill” was not a thing because the ‘net was extremely redpilled. Such 4chanisms as “There are no women on the Internet” or “Hitler did nothing wrong” predate social media.

      Mainstream lugenpresse has been cucked for as long as I can remember, definitely the 90s and possibly the 80s. 80s give a different impression due to the Reagan/Thatcher axis developing in the west, but that was only a local maximum of good in an otherwise evil time. Just like 2016.

    • Rick says:

      I lived in LA during the aftermath of the LA riots. After the riots Mexicans mass deported the nignogs out of LA with violence and areas of LA that had previously been no go zones were safe to actually visit. Not a peep about this ethnic cleansing from the liberal and conservative papers. The LA Times finally ran a story on it in 2005, almost 20 years after the process was complete and they still fucking lied about what I witnessed with my own eyes.

      Name fags never speak the truth. Not then, not now.

    • Green Fields says:

      >when the establishment conservatives were perceived as the most respectable people and leftism was for dropout plumbers, welders, factory workers, basically union thugs who deserved to be replaced by immigrants and largely were.

      Ya gotta be McKiddin me

  23. Pooch says:

    Any reason why the elites decided not to politically prosecute Trump? Because he’s playing nice with the GOP establishment perhaps? His rally was rather tame. Not much screeching about it from regime state propaganda.

    • Rick says:

      I think they’ll eventually prosecute him, probably shortly after the midterm election fraud when/if the hard left takes over.

      Right now their play is throwing his supporters, friends, and employees in jail. A man who can’t protect him own is very weak and it’s deeply emasculating. I think Rudy will end up behind bars soon enough.

      They are concerned about making Trump a martyr. Our foes are often smarter than we give them credit for.

      • Pooch says:

        That could be it.

      • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

        >Right now their play is throwing his supporters, friends, and employees in jail.

        That’s always been the play. It’s how shills take over the discourse in unaligned spaces as well. You leave the most visible figures largely alone – because those are easy schelling points for large-scale coordinated push back – while systematically rolling up little guys, until one day those bigger figures notice – too often too late – that they are standing on empty legs, that everyone else in the auditorium is shills shilling shills – and that’s when they move in for the kill openly; to thunderous applause, of course.

        • Rick says:

          That’s exactly how Reddit and twitter were purged for anyone to the right of Chairman Obama.

        • Pooch says:

          Could be a reason why large right-wing accounts like BAP and Nick Fuentes have not been banned on Twitter yet.

      • suones says:

        Our foes are often smarter than we give them credit for.

        This is what I emphasise whenever the “stupidity” of our present “elites” comes up. Not until Shaniqua is completely in power can we ever make the fatal mistake of under-estimating the ability of Molochite priests. The “average” stupidity of the affirmative-actioned Harvard dunce is not indicative of the capability of the graduate of 30 years ago who’s in some faceless organisation plotting evil.

    • EH says:

      Trump isn’t being prosecuted because he was kafaybe. The whole thing was a psy-op from the get-go. But no one wants to believe they’ve been played.

      It could be he was a knowing participant. He didn’t do much for his supporters, he rallied and unified the the left more than any of their own leaders by far. Likely he was sold a story of factions within the deep state, a believable story tailored just for him, with plenty of corroboration from different people he had known for years, and had no reason to think were responding to a common influence. Maybe he got a little too into his role toward the end and thought he could act as his own man, but then they yanked his leash. No doubt he has a gift for fooling himself first, but it’s clear he wasn’t ever planning on doing anything but a bit of pro-forma rearguard action.

      • jim says:

        Trump is not being immediately being prosecuted for the same reasons as King Louis and Tzar Nicholas were not immediately prosecuted.

        Before can say “Trump is not being prosecuted”, give it a little while.

  24. Rick says:

    Since they’re going to drop the Arizona audit any time now, I’ll reiterate that A) it’s going to be a northing burger and B) it was always designed to be a nothing burger after they cleaned up the faked ballots with the first “audit”. It’s just the method the GOP selected to get people to continue to vote for them while dumping Trump. All the signs from shitheads like Barr, Romney, Pence, indicate that that’s the play while the normal shitheads in the left give good Kabuki theater about it.

    Secondly, they probably believe that this sort of steal was a one time deal to get rid of Trump and things will return to normal now. The big test of this idea is next year’s midterm primaries.

    • Pooch says:

      Not the sense I get. The Arizona state legislature is pretty based. Bannon seems confident it’s going to uncover all kinds of stuff and just a matter what will be done about the fraud after the audit is completed. He regularly has Arizona state legislators and other plugged in people on his show.

    • jim says:

      We are still in the phase equivalent to making King Louis and Tsar Nicholas constitutional monarchs.

      And while everyone was expecting normality to return, the power struggle within the left turned increasing lethal, with the result that those elements of the left that had not intention or expectation that normality would return came out on top.

  25. Noname says:

    I’d recommend reading Chris Langan in Gab or Twitter. 200 IQ, very red pilled, lots of interesting things to write.

    Also, anyone claiming to be red pilled and doesn’t mention the chosenites, is pissing on your shoes.

    • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

      Da JOOOS! are not the problem. They are a symptom of a much larger problem. The primary drivers of leftism have been European white men, especially Anglos. The solution to the Jewish Problem is very simple. On the Day of the Rope or the Day of the Helicopter, we kill all of the leftists. This will kill a lot of Jews, but it is going to kill a lot more whites. Most importantly, it will stop the holiness spiral in its tracks and stop the madness.

    • jim says:

      Well I don’t mention the Jews, not because they are not a problem, but because they are problem that receives far more attention than it merits. We have considerably bigger problems.

      One of my sons was being taught holocaustianity when he was quite little, and spontaneously rejected it, not because he had been taught anything about it by his father, but because there had been plenty of far bigger genocides, and because a genocide was happening right at that moment with the quiet support of the Cathedral. He pointed the latter out to his teacher, who reacted as people always react when the righteous commit thought crimes.

      He was required to affirm “never again” – that there will be no more genocides because now we are all good holocaustians, to which he responded that is happening again, and everyone is turning a blind eye to it.

      If you make the Jews the center of the universe, only evil instead of divine, that is just an inverted form of holocaustianity.

      • suones says:

        If you make the Jews the center of the universe, only evil instead of divine,…

        This is a strawman. Chris Langan isn’t making Jews the centre of the universe, good or evil. I aspire to one day become as good a pig farmer as he is. But to get to my peaceful pig farm I’m forced to fight all these demons and hellspawn first. Chris thought he could avoid the fray and retreat to his pigs. Well now Moloch has come for his pigs.

        • Aidan says:

          People who are immoderately antisemetic always claim strawman when people who are appropriately antisemetic characterize their worldview as too Jew-centered. But I’ve never heard a clear elaboration on their position. What are the Jews specifically responsible for? If moderate antisemites, me at least, broadly characterize the Jewish problem as their joining the rush to grab apples from the overturned cart of Western Civ, one among many enemies, why is your position harder on the Jews? What are they doing above and beyond that?

          • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

            Furthermore, Hitler showed that the much vaunted Jewish power is all flash and no substance. If he was capable of killing so many as a side effect of his stupid socialist economic ideas, how can we seriously fear them? They are degenerate and obnoxious, which is why every country eventually expels them, but that is all. They are small and sad, nomads who betrayed their God and have been punished for their faithlessness for two millenia. The true enemy is the man hiding behind the Jew, using the Jews as cutaways and bagmen for his evil deeds.

          • Contaminated NEET says:

            >What are they doing above and beyond that?

            Entertainment. Jews control movies and television, and to a lesser extent books and newspapers, and the messages they embed in them are purest poison. We handed control of our imaginations over to a people that despises us. This was a fatal mistake.

            • Aidan says:

              Yes, jews are notably effective among our enemies and occupy what is in some respects a privileged position on the left. Ashkenazis are descended entirely from priestly stock and selectively bred themselves to be good at dissembling and other priestly activities. Seems like the natural course of events that once the Anglo left opened membership to jews, they’d assume that position. But even though the interests of jews diverge on some points from the interests of the cathedral, jewish-owned media does not side with the jews, it sides with the cathedral. Jewish media does not show jewish girls banging niggas and having mulatto babies like it does white girls, but neither does it show jewish girls submitting to jewish men and having eight little brats in kippahs.

          • The Original OC says:

            Kevin MacDonald gives a quite a few specific examples.

            His argument is that Jews are more effective than Europeans at leading social trends because they are better at creating small-ish (~10s) tight-knit movements of highly capable people, and that broad social trends are caused by such initially small, tight-knit movements.

            Nazi Party is an example of such a (non-Jewish) movement.

            Jews are probably not the original cause of social decay; their influence is a symptom, but causes many specific harms of its own.

            • Atavistic Morality says:

              Kevin MacDonald is a complete fucking retard then.

              Jews have taken over Hollywood because they’ve been more than willing to sing the song of progressivism and insert themselves in it with Holocaustianity. And Hitler got as powerful as he did because he initially had the backing of the fading aristocracy. It all comes down from power, the rulers make the culture.

              If Jews hated niggers like Walt Disney did, they would have never gotten any ground compared to him.

              • The Original OC says:

                Early Nazis had some powerful guys, which is why they did well. But Nazis weren’t that powerful until the 30s, which shows they were somewhat “real” revolution.

                Disney was a powerful guy, but just one guy. Point is you compare “Disney” (some guy) to “the Jews” (multiple semi-aligned cults each consisting of multiple high competence people).

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  No, they were not a somewhat “real” revolution, they would have never gotten anywhere without the support of the fading aristocracy that had a bone to pick with the Weimar Republic and commies. Eventually the monster they created ran out of their control and they even tried to kill him.

                  My comparison between Disney and the Jews is to illustrate the point that their tribe socialization has nothing to do with them taking over Hollywood. Disney was far more successful than they were and he was only one man, one man who was very anti-progressive. The Jews took over preaching Holocaustianity, feminism and niggers following the preferences of the progressive rulers, hence they got the position bestowed by them.

                  Mel Gibson is incredibly popular being a red-pilled Christian and everyone loves him still, but he got kicked out by power precisely because of it. There is nothing the Jews in Hollywood could ever do to stop him, but the State Department can and did.

                • jim says:

                  > No, they were not a somewhat “real” revolution, they would have never gotten anywhere without the support of the fading aristocracy

                  I know a bit about German history. The aristocrats and big business saw no significant difference between nazis and commies. To them they were all one big amorphous blob of dangerous radicals, and if radicals fight amongst themselves, signifies nothing, radicals always fight among themselves. Commies kill commies, commies kill nazis, nazis kill commies, pretty soon nazis will kill nazis, why bother to pay attention? And they did not pay attention. As far as they were concerned, nazis were commies and commies were nazis.

                  Hitler came to power because his radical left revolutionary faction got more votes than the other radical left revolutionary factions, and his stormtroopers made stuffing the ballot boxes difficult.

                  The alternative to nazism was to restore the divine right monarchy, and the military lacked the balls, and, more importantly, lacked a divine right monarch who was up for the job.

                • Pooch says:

                  Eventually the monster they created ran out of their control and they even tried to kill him.

                  Is this reference to the 20 July plot?

                • The Cominator says:

                  One thing reactionaries need to really emphasize is that Stauffenberg the guy who really tried to kill Hitler was fundamentally one of us. An ultra right wing reactionary nationalist and monarchist with no sympathy for leftists and social Democracy (the Catholicism is the only unfortunate feature).

                  Stauffenberg would fit right in as a commenter here.

                • Pooch says:

                  Was he a representation of the German elite/aristocracy at the time? I think Moldbug may have a piece about this but I can’t find it.

                • The Original OC says:

                  Early Nazis weren’t a vehicle for German aristocrats. They were created by oddball intellectuals, Russian emigres, and Erich Ludendorff. Their ideology was hostile to aristocrats. Their earliest publications attack aristocratic privileges. For sure they did not come from nowhere and with no serious support – Hitler as the one man founder and driver of the party is a myth – but nor did they come from a group that was already in power. They came from a group that had been out of power under the Kaiserreich, and was very close to being totally destroyed under the Weimar Republic.

                  Disney was very successful throughout his lifetime. His company was converged after his death, because he was just one man, and it’s impossible to stop public companies being converged. Jews in Hollywood were using it to promote their goals during Disney’s lifetime and before(e.g. to promote the USSR) and they’re still allowed to celebrate that and are not destroyed for it. They had and have their own agenda which they are able to carry on through multiple generations and across multiple institutions because they are a large group and not an individual.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  This conversation is getting stale, one side claims something someone else says otherwise, history is both fake and gay.

                  In any case the point is that Hitler didn’t rise from a vacuum of magical workers getting together and starting a revolution, a bunch of randoms working together in a tight knit group do not magically achieve things this is Marxist propaganda. It wasn’t true in the French Revolution, it wasn’t in the American Revolution, it wasn’t in Russia, it wasn’t in Germany, it never is anywhere. Whether you posit he won among the leftists elites the most support or that he was helped by unhappy elites, the point is elite involvement.

                  And you keep being entirely irresponsive to what I’m telling you about entertainment. Jews took over Hollywood because they were in agreement with peddling the propaganda of the progressive elites with feminism, niggers and Holocaustianity. Disney is simply being used as an example of one man overpowering the industry when the progressive elites weren’t so entrenched. The Jews didn’t win over Disney over time because they were better than Disney at doing Hollywood because they were a bunch of tight-knit kikes but because Disney hated niggers and they didn’t, and with time progressive elites further took power. This is why it’s now converged, because converged by power of course. To further illustrate the point, the common man loves Mel Gibson because he is better than the tight-knit kikes at doing Hollywood, but he is being suppressed by power so he can’t compete. But regardless of how much criticism and censoring he gets from power, guy comes from out of nowhere with giga thought crime The Passion of the Christ or something of the sort and destroys all of them, because if it was an organic market he wins. One man wins against the tight knit Jews.

                  Jews have never achieved anything because they were a tight knit tribe but because they’ve always sucked up to power, they’ve always done it. They are not “highly capable” in the first place, if they were a “highly capable” tight knit people they wouldn’t have been getting blown the fuck out for millennia by everyone around them.

                • jim says:

                  > Whether you posit he won among the leftists elites the most support or that he was helped by unhappy elites, the point is elite involvement.

                  Of course. There is always elite involvement. And it is always a faction of the elite making claiming to represent the masses oppressed by the elite.

                  The commie myth is that Hitler was an Aristocratic and/or Capitalist plot. Not so, Nazism was, as always, priests seeking to disable warriors and rob merchants in the name of the masses. Big business viewed this very much the way the bakers, farmers, and business owners, the actual bourgeoisie, viewed the French revolution. They knew they were going to be robbed, and were not sure what to do about it. The conservative parties were, like the Republicans, cucked.

                  Priests always strike at their enemy’s capacity to coordinate and cooperate.

                  Nazism was not a capitalist plot against the proles. Nazism and Marxism were competing priestly plots against merchants and aristocrats.

                • The Original OC says:

                  The truth is somewhat between the commie myth and the “incumbent always wins” Moldbug myth: small minorities can topple great states if and only if they are small minorities with high competence, high commitment, and high cohesion.

                  This happens to states for the same reason tiny startups frequently clear large companies out of their markets: size gives diseconomy of scale and incumbency gradually replaces the genius founders with office politicians.

                • The Original OC says:

                  I do not fully buy the idea that the Nazis were just another demagogue movement, because it assumes internal factors were the only ones in German politics. They weren’t, because Germany was a disarmed state surrounded by powerful adversaries.

                  British and Americans did not care about the idea of foreign invasion, because they thought they were inviolable and with some good justification. As a result, UK and US politics at the time was driven almost only by internal considerations.

                  Many Germans, on the other hand, really did want to strengthen their state – elites from all factions – because 1920s Germany was weak as hell. The Nazis rode demagoguery to power, and then started doing a lot of useful and socially beneficial stuff, probably because they knew that providing better governance than their neighbors was the only way they stood a chance to survive as a state, the state being a prerequisite for the party.

          • suones says:

            My position on Israelites is not any harder than that on their half-brothers the Ishmaelites. They all have their homelands now, and should live there as they see fit.

            This is the minimum acceptable position. Any crimes of the past are now only historical speculation.

            They have to go back.

            • Aidan says:

              My position is the position of my medieval forebears; the Jews can stay, but they will be excluded from the state and high status positions, and will be punished communally if they make trouble. The problem with communities of minorities in an Empire is that they tend to protect and cover for each other when one member starts doing evil things. The troublemaker needs to either be given up to justice by his fellows in the community, or the community as a whole will be subject to punishment.

              Islam, on the other hand, should be exterminated root and branch. In medieval times, and even through the Peace of Westphalia, military action against muslim nations did not require a declaration of war, because muslims are always at war with you anyway. This will likely be a task for future generations, because whites are wolf to whites; need a powerful and stable West to eradicate Islam without some other white nation stabbing you in the back. Maybe China will do it for us, once our fag empire loses its capacity to protect muslims, because it is on the bloody border of Islam and cannot escape it.


    I support anything and everything that will successfully prevent you from giving us your “Liberty in an unfree world”. Rule by demon trannies is bad, but rule by wagies is worse, and rule by autistic computer engineers is most hellish of all. Death to Jim Donald, Satoshi Nakamoto, and all his ilk.

    • jim says:

      This blog is made possible by the work of Satoshi Nakamoto, who was a very great man.

      The world, the communities and forms of social organization, that can counter the power of demon worshiping trannies is being created by the work of Satoshi Nakamoto.

      It is the will of Gnon that those obedient to his commandments shall fill the stars and subdue them. Musk has prophesied a multiplanetary species, and Satoshi Nakamoto prophesied forms of organization resistant to an overly intrusive state religion.

      I fear that the eye of Soros has fallen on Musk, and is alarmed by the distinct whiteness and maleness of those designing and building rockets. To settle Mars, then the asteroids and the Kuiper belt, and then the interstellar kuiper mass objects, we are probably going to need sovereign crypto corporations, whose shares and books will be sidechains on a blockchain. The space force that briefly protected Musk now has blue haired tranny officers, who consider their highest priority not conquering space, but proving that women are men and men are women.

      Our limited observations of small interstellar objects (three so far) are consistent with a mass distribution where mass is nearly logarithmically distributed, the amount of mass in objects in each power of ten mass range being roughly comparable. Which implies that there is enough mass between the stars to make settlement of interstellar space in the solar vicinity feasible, by a very high tech high IQ population with high elite fertility, a stepping stone to the technology and the race that will reach the stars.

      For asteroids, we can more accurately estimate the mass distribution, which is e: D^(-2.3) for the range 0.4 km to 5 km, and D^(-4) for 5 km to 40 km, implying that asteroid settlement is likely to be most interesting for quite small communities built around a five kilometer asteroid, implying we are going to need to reinvent manufacturing so that a quite small fab, or a quite small set of fabs, can make anything. For settlement of Mars, we don’t need such drastic miniaturization, but we are still going to need some mighty miniature miniaturization of the production chain. The very limited data for interstellar objects indicates a mass distribution of around D^(-3), which gives us no clue as to the appropriate settlement size.

      Mars is a stepping stone to producing the technology, the race, and the culture, capable of settling the abundance of smaller objects, and settling the abundance of smaller objects is a stepping stone to the stars.

      • Anonymous 2 says:

        I’d be interested in terraforming Venus. Convert the atmosphere and just add water — waves hand vaguely — and you have an interesting new Earth-like location with plenty of available power.

        • jim says:

          To terraform Venus, need to cool the place down (orbiting sunshields), add an enormous amount of water, and stash an even more enormous amount of carbon dioxide somewhere so that is in no longer in the atmosphere, perhaps in enormous reservoirs under the newly created ocean). Going to take a thousand years or so.

          • Venusian Settler says:

            Planetary bombardment through comets and asteroids should be able to eject enough atmosphere to both cool down the planet and introduce enough water to make it habitable at once, but refining this process would probably be a prerequisite to being able to colonize any foreign rocky planet in our local universe.

            Most interesting question that can emerge with life on Venus once set to earth-like conditions is how does biological life handle long periods of sunlight followed by long periods of darkness in an environment that is much warmer than the poles of planet earth. Almost all species observing a period of hibernation? By avoiding solar shades, you could develop a totally exotic ecosystem.

            • suones says:

              Colonising Venus is going to need far, far superior terraforming technology than we have at present, or is even on the drawing board. The only “plus” on Venus is that the easily accessible huge temperature differences can be harnessed to provide “free” power in vast quantities. Still need to develop CO2 fixation on a massive scale though. For reference, CO2 was fixed naturally on Earth, by photosynthetic organisms, in a timeframe of millions of years.

            • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

              It’s a moot point either way since all gravity wells are prisons that hold back interstellar imperium and thus ought be broken up into more manageable chunks praise gnon


        if I write a topical reply of equivalent length (yet superior intelligence) will you delete it

        • jim says:

          I will allow a responsive reply – not endless repetition of your position, without showing any awareness of our position nor our replies to you having already said almost exactly the same thing a dozen times already.

          You have said the same thing a dozen times, and I and others have replied the same way half a dozen times.

          If you say it again, and ignore the replies again, I am going to suppress it.

          • The Cominator says:

            Who is this guy?

            • someDude says:

              Oh, there’s a never ending supply of them. And a never ending supply of where they come from.

              He promises “A topical reply of equivalent length and yet superior intelligence” it seems. How fascinating! Erudite and Modest at the same time. How God fit so many wonders into just one package continues to baffle me!


            I replied to someDude because he needs it more than you.

            Then I wrote a long-ish comment and was struck by a sudden strike of thought.

            You say that the success of Bitcoin (and, presumably, of cryptocurrency generally) is a holy mission around which the fate of the world (and perhaps the human species) revolves.


            But are you truly so holy? Let’s play out a wonderfully clarifying hypothetical. There is no room for ambiguity here.

            I hand you a magic lamp. You rub the lamp and a genie appears. He gives you a big red button and describes what the button does. You may press it or not: the choice is yours and yours alone. You have five minutes to decide. What does the button do? By pressing the button, you instantly nuke the fiat financial system, freeing the world and all its races from the usury world system of literal time-life-force vampirism. Once the smoke clears you will find in its place one universal cryptocurrency with perfect attributes: private, uncontrollable, etc. But there is one catch: all currency cryptocurrencies, including your vast holdings of Bitcoin and others, are wiped from the earth forever, and the new, perfect cryptocurrency starts by evenly distributing the total share of all cryptocoins to each natural person possessing at least a triple-digit IQ.

            Do you press the button?

            Yes or no.

            • jim says:

              In an instant – in part because I figure that in that environment I would soon have once again the wealth than I have now, and not long after that considerably more wealth.

              And so would a great many other people. The economy is being strangled. Lift the noose, and not only could I breath a lot easier, but so could lots of other productive people.

              • I'D LIKE TO BUY THE WORLD A TRENBOLONE says:

                [*left wing economics deleted*]

              • I'D LIKE TO BUY THE WORLD A TRENBOLONE says:

                I did a find-search for “weird” because I remember using that word in my reply to someDude. But it isn’t on the page. Fuck you. War out.

            • The Cominator says:

              Of course.

    • The Cominator says:

      You will never be a real woman. So what do you advocate?

      Jim is also obviously not autistic (I am).

    • Contaminated NEET says:

      Are you an MPC man? You sound like one. Is the forum even still up?

      • The Cominator says:

        That site was funny but “pleasureman” was an enormous faggot who doxxed his own members.

        • Contaminated NEET says:

          >but “pleasureman” was an enormous faggot who doxxed his own members.

          Really? What a disgrace. He always had to be the coolest guy in the room – did he lose face in some stupid argument and then throw a fit and burn the site down?

          • The Cominator says:

            Not sure what happened but the sites ideology was something akin to slightly more politically incorrect cuckservatism, they did hate the priestly classes but there was too much “nerd bashing” in their hatred of the priestly managers… the bad priests tended to not always nerds but lawyer types.

            I occasionally perused the site for the comedy value (they were funny) but the ideology was cucked and being a spergish nerd who was an extreme monarchist reactionary I’m pretty sure pleasureman would eventually banned me and tried to dox me as I’ve heard he had done before. Otherwise I would have loved to debate them on why no you can’t have a democracy without extreme social entropy.

            In fact actually reading Hoppe’s Democracy the God that failed (and Hoppe is very close to us) he opened my eyes to another bad thing about Democracy that I had never considered… Democracy gradually erodes time preference among its populations too. It essentially makes its people more and more niggerish as time goes on… this is even without a faggot insane cathedral religion.

            • Pete says:

              MPC is cool but they are civnats there, and they definitely believe in the “just vote harder” premise.

              If you try to discuss anything in terms of white people, you’re shouted down as a “wignat.” No, we can’t do anything to help white people specifically. We have to propose policies that help “all Americans,” so we can get nonwhites on our side. No, we can’t separate from nonwhites and carve out a territory for our own people – what a silly idea!

              If you point out that voting is now useless due to extensive Democrat fraud, you’re a “faggot blackpiller.”

              • The Cominator says:

                MPC was right to be weary of wignats that is something I generally agree with them on.

                Their bigger problems was the reluctance to discuss taking strong measures against women and the reluctance to abolish Democracy.

                “If you point out that voting is now useless due to extensive Democrat fraud, you’re a “faggot blackpiller.”

                Does the forum still exist?

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  It still exists, but they went the way of SA and put membership behind a paywall (thus ensuring only glowniggers with taxcuck funded budgets can be the dominant voice).

                  The level of discourse around 2015 to 17 or so was good, one of the more reliable places on the net in my estimation, but evidently it’s only gotten worse over time.

                  >If you try to discuss anything in terms of white people, you’re shouted down as a “wignat.” No, we can’t do anything to help white people specifically. We have to propose policies that help “all Americans,” so we can get nonwhites on our side.

                  Looks like my instincts about the canceriousness of that memeplex were on the money.

                • Rick says:

                  Going behind a paywall is always the kiss of death for good discussion on the internet due to the namefag problem.

                • suones says:

                  @The Cominator

                  MPC was right to be weary of wignats that is something I generally agree with them on.

                  So that’s where you got it lol. It’s an enemy meme. There is no such thing as a “genuine” “wigger” nationalist. They’re all either:

                  1. Glowniggers sowing distrust — includes the vast majority of online personalities, and meatspace “activists” of the Traditionalist Workers’ Party class.

                  2. Erudite scholars like Jared Taylor and Kevin MacDonald. But they’re white nationalists, favouring the term “white” instead of the true term “Aryan” because they’re scared of Jews.

                  3. Anglin. He’s the last remnant of his type. I find it very hard to disagree with the substance of his posts, especially “White Sharia.”

                  4. “Whites-only” Marxists aka “Welfare for Whites” proles, who, being proles, aren’t worthy of our attention. They’re just manipulated by State Power to reduce the white movement to absurdity.

                • jim says:

                  > Anglin. He’s the last remnant of his type.

                  Nah, Anglin is not the last remnant. Completely the opposite. He memeticaly dominates the white nationalist movement.

                  The shills are always congratulating each other on how everyone is totally in agreement with whatever they are shilling, and anyone who doubts them are just insignificant crazies. They loudly announce a false consensus, and announce it the louder the more ridiculous their pretense. It s like the 911 troofers who just confidently announce a dozen ridiculous things, and when you point out that one of those things is absurd, just move right along to announce two dozen more.

                • suones says:


                  Going behind a paywall is always the kiss of death for good discussion on the internet due to the namefag problem.

                  Solving this problem is the Holy Grail of crypto. Bitcoin very imperfectly approaches the solution, Monero goes further.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Didn’t get it from MPC. I’ve always liked Jared Taylor but hes never subscribed to that kind of memeplex. Kevin MacDonald is worthless.

    • Atavistic Morality says:

      Maybe put down the trenbolone for a bit because its giving you serious brain damage.

      This blog supports rule by a king leading an aristocratic warrior class. And the “autistic computer engineers” are simply providing tools to facilitate that, as they’ve always done.

      Also, who are you kidding faggot? You don’t even lift.

  27. linker says:


    Playing devil’s advocate, does this debunk your technological decline idea?

    “More than 100 years ago, the Titanic was the largest cruise ship on the water. But today, a ship that’s twice as high and twice as wide is the new queen of the sea. With 18 decks and seven “neighborhoods,” Royal Caribbean’s Symphony of the Seas is the world’s largest (and newest) cruise ship. In order to fully comprehend the ship’s massive size, we put together this infographic to show how it stacks up against other historic vessels.”

    The world’s largest ship since the Titanic was built in 2015. Sails from Florida, no vaccine passport required.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      ‘Not all women are like that, I know a friend who said he once met a woman who didn’t go around shittesting people, and who he could trust to work together on a job just like a man.’

      • linker says:

        This is a significant achievement though, not just an anecdote or tiny exception. I am simply playing devil’s advocate, so there is no need to sperg out.

        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          That wasn’t playing devil’s advocate, that was sperging out.

          ‘Does this big ship debunk the idea that instrumental techne has declined in general?’

          I guess we are already in space, have working nukes, fission powered cars, and mass transit jets that can travel mach 1 (again), eh?

          There can be something useful to say about the matter, but you’re going to need n+1 more levels of nuance to say it.

      • alf says:

        All Women Are Like That, but Not All Technological Decline Is Like That. Some industries have simply not got the memo yet, although no doubt the cruise ship industry has done some catching up in recent covid years.

        Such a giant cruise ship is an impressive achievement. It is also a juicy target for grifters and liars and envious priests. Which is why, in general, such massive projects are becoming rarer by the day.

        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          It is also literally true that not literally all women are literally like that, but that is blinding yourself (blinding your targets) with nominalist blinkers when looking at an essentialist statement.

          It’s not a coincidence that those areas where there has been the most development are generally areas that are closest to depending on the ‘personal choice’ of particular consumers, and or are less contingent upon large scale coordination, such as personal electronics, personal firearms, personal vehicles…

          Impressive achievements that require large scale capital and or large scale coordination alike also depend on personal judgement to be good – specifically, the judgement of an lordly patron who would commission it in the first place. Since our present oligocracy has been assiduous in liquidating any prominent men who show signs of aristocracy, impressive developments – be they social, technical, or artistic – are all but non-existent; either no big projects exist, or where they do exist, they are up to no good.

          • suones says:

            …the judgement of an lordly patron who would commission it in the first place.

            I remember reading about this as one of the “benefits” of “Capitalism” that an “entrepreneur” no longer had to doff his hat and entertain some “lazy aristocrat” into funding his grand vision. Under “Capitalism,” the tract said, the American “entrepreneur” was freed from the shackles of the British-era feudal finance (East India Company style), and could simply take a loan from a bank to fund his dreams.

            I read this around 20 years ago, but the tract was in nineteenth or early twentieth English. I was confused about it, but later I came to see it as transferring power from your local feudal lord (who was personally responsible for ensuring your well-being so that he could extract maximum revenue over multi-generational time-scales) to a faceless “banker” (which was code for Jew) who was a foreigner and would not hesitate to strip-mine your enterprise to fill his coffers. This was one of the factors that hinted to me that “Capitalism” was an enemy concept.

            And sure enough, once the ratchet had moved far enough left, the early “Capitalists” went from being lionised as post-feudal GoodGuys to being demonised as evil “robber barons.”

            • jim says:

              > remember reading about this as one of the “benefits” of “Capitalism” that an “entrepreneur” no longer had to doff his hat and entertain some “lazy aristocrat” into funding his grand vision. Under “Capitalism,” the tract said, the American “entrepreneur” was freed from the shackles of the British-era feudal finance (East India Company style), and could simply take a loan from a bank to fund his dreams.

              The enemy payload in this version of “capitalism” being that the bankers are the wise industrious productive good guys, and the independently wealthy men who funded the East India Company, who were in large part aristocratic landowners, are the bad guys.

              One would have thought that a system where aristocrats have sufficient security of property rights that they are apt to put their assets to the highest and best use is capitalism, and if the highest and best use is often funding some entrepeneur through a joint stock corporation whose shares are traded on the stock exchange, it is corporate capitalism.

              But now that the entrepreneur is also a bad guy, that version of “capitalism” is forgotten.

              > This was one of the factors that hinted to me that “Capitalism” was an enemy concept.

              We need a concept for “not socialist”. If not “capitalism” what would you suggest.

              • someDude says:

                We need a rectification of names.

                If they corrupted the word Gay to go from from cheerful to being a homosexual and if they corrupted the word Liberal from someone who supported Liberty to someone who is a sour natured killjoy, they can corrupt any word you call in to replace capitalism.

                Rectification of names, Sir! Confucius was a Genius.

                • jim says:

                  Capitalism has a quite good definition supplied by its enemies: Private ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange.

                  Which definition however leaves out the important bits -that the owner needs the freedom, the ability, the judgement, and the socially approved duty to apply capital to its highest and best use.

                  The big innovation of Charles the second was making for-profit corporations not only legal but respectable, and operating them profitably high status, but long before we had corporate capitalism, we had private non corporate capitalism which has been the norm in every civilization of which have record, that was not spiraling down into collapse or struggling up from collapse.

                  And science has no end of excellent definitions supplied by scientists, most recently the excellent definitions supplied by Feynman, who also supplied a wonderful description and denunciation of cargo cult science, though these days perhaps the term “official science” is more descriptive than “cargo cult science”

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  I’m not convinced by this argument, like you yourself said, “non corporate capitalism” has always been the norm. And when I read some older authors I get the distinct feeling that private ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange has never been called or seen as “capitalism” in the first place, because it simply was the common sense, fair and logical thing, just like there was no “heterosexuality” and “homosexuality”, only normal sane people and sexual perverts/sodomites.

                  And you’re calling a private business where its legitimate owner gives shares of the possible profits in exchange for capital, the whole John Galt process, corporate capitalism but what we have today and is called corporate capitalism is nothing like that.

                  If the East Indian Company fucked up you knew the shareholders and CEO’s heads were all going to roll, they were held accountable for every action the corporation engaged in, which is also why it was properly managed and successful. Today a corporation could be engaged in massive ritual genocide and the shareholders will go free.

                  This is why I found myself very interested in Curt Doolittle’s Propertarianism the first time I heard of it, the concept the word elicits, though it didn’t turn out into what I expected. It’d be nice if we had a word that was fresh and not hackneyed to death by both liberals and socialists for their own degenerate agendas that simply meant what it has always been and is the honorable, fair and prosperous way. Because otherwise every time you try to communicate with another human being and use capitalism and corporate capitalism you get immediately into a muddy ground and its just unpractical and unproductive. All the leftist brainwashing garbage comes out, including “muh consumerism” and the whole enemy narrative, that is deeply implanted into their mind. The academic definition supplied by its enemies is not what they teach people it is, but rather capitalism is everything bad that ever happens to everyone that is a worker.

                  On the other hand if you say to people that you defend the right to private property and free trade among the people almost everyone agrees with you. Those who don’t are always subhuman garbage who you know immediately are in need of a helicopter ride.

              • suones says:

                We need a concept for “not socialist”. If not “capitalism” what would you suggest.

                Something to chew on. From my previous comment[1]:

                Unlike “Socialism” or any such priestly asshattery, “Capitalism” is not really an “-ism” with a Big Book, Prophet or Acolytes. It is simply the application of freedom to the field of business. I’d not go so far as calling “Capitalism” an enemy anti-concept, but rather that the opposite of “Socialism” is actually Liberty. (h/t to FA Hayek)

                I was wrong. “Capitalism” is indeed an enemy anti-concept, created by Socialists Louis Blanc and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon. I will refrain from using this poisonous term myself, and proceed to mock others who do use it un-ironically.

                “Capitalism” is the “allopathy” of the woo-peddlers — merely using the word immediately admits the Leftist frame. Socialism/Communism is a false but firm belief[2] that priests can direct the flow of resources fairly and adequately, and perhaps more efficiently, than individual actions summing up over time. This is insanity, and there is no logical answer to it. What we need is a linguistic kill shot to counter “Socialism.”

                Good thing that this does not exist in Indian Languages, yet. (“Socialism” in vernacular India means something completely different from Marxism).

                [2] Literally the definition of delusion.

            • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

              >After the disbandment of Mandala Command in May 1963, Suharto returned to Jakarta to his post as KOSTRAD (formerly TJADUAD) commander. As evidence of his seniority, he was appointed as deputy head of army advisory board on senior-level promotions (WANDJAKTI) in July 1963. Again showing his penchant for commercial dealings, Suharto used his KOSTRAD command to establish several jajasans which ostensibly functioned to raise funds to cover KOSTRAD’s operational needs. In April 1964, Suharto established Jajasan Darma Putra, which over-time acquired shares in raft of businesses from transportation, banking, and manufacturing sectors (such as Mandala Airlines and Bank Windu Kentjana).

              >In August 1964, Suharto authorised KOSTRAD’s intelligence officer, Lieutenant-Colonel Ali Murtopo, to send several officers (including future Armed Forces chief Leonardus Benjamin Moerdani) to spread secret peace-feelers to the Malaysian government. Suharto’s position in KOLAGA also provided him with more sinister commercial opportunity in organizing the smuggling of rubber, timber, and other primary products from North Sumatera to Malaysia using ethnic-Chinese fishermen.

              Wikipedia doesn’t have much good to say about the world, but you can always count on it to speak volumes about Modernity.

              A prominent man using his position to facilitate valuable activities – thus benefiting himself as well – would be a familiar sight to a man in more civilized times. To a gnostic pharisee in his bureau office however (call him liberalist, socialist, communist, or other synonym), prominent men creating value, through making arrangements between men possible in particular, but also in any way in general, is called ‘corruption’.

              For this apparatchik, having arrogated some unspecified authority over some nominally defined subaspect of society, capital should simply be taken (‘given’) wholesale from other folk to furnish (himself) his pet projects (which he is imposing upon them in the first place), as in the view of his faith, doing anything that could be construed as working for means is profaning yourself; for creating value is viewed as at best irrelevant under it’s criterion of holiness – and indeed, getting in the way of creating value, viewed so oft as not being any problem at all.

    • jim says:

      Every mega cruise ship built by that cruise line in that shipyard has been a bit bigger than the last, indicating that that shipyard and that cruise line, have been steadily advancing the state of the art.

      And of course, Musk is rapidly advancing the state of the art, but in the Musk case, he is advancing something that had been in widespread obvious decline since we placed a man on the moon.

      But the shipyard is making holiness noises to keep the priesthood away. Sooner or later the demon haunted darkness will overrun them too

      TSM is advancing the art of building semiconductor chips – by considerably less than advertised, but still advancing significantly. Intel, however, keeps loudly announcing the grand opening of its newest chip fab, but no working chips roll off the lines, and then it quietly closes. Intel died of the same thing the Star Wars franchise died of.

      Massively multilayer 3D chips are a revolutionary advance in chip design. Feature sizes are not actually getting significantly smaller, that is approaching the minimum size achievable by Argon Fluorine laser photo lithography, but Toshiba are building chips approaching a hundred layers thick.

      So, the art of building ICs is certainly advancing. They are not getting smaller in two dimensions, but they are getting more layers. But we are not seeing a ratchet of technological advance. we see tech being lost. Tech advances, then, like fast neutron reactors, dies, Organizations get overrun by holiness spirals and take their technology to the grave, as NASA did. Not a ratchet any more. Stuff can get lost, and a great deal has been lost.

      If that shipyard gets overrun by priests, and it is struggling, chances are that no other shipyard will replace them. The technology of building megaships will be lost. The eye of Soros has fallen upon Musk, disturbed by the distinct whiteness and maleness of his team.

      The ratchet of technological advance is not ratcheting, because the ratchet of social decay causes the ratchet of technological advance to slip.

      Yes, I am seeing better chips. Produced where they don’t have to flood the team with browns, because yellows are holy enough.

      But we have a problem with chips. Moore’s law broke when photolithography ran out of puff, and I am pretty sure that once you have a few hundred layers on a chip, that runs out of puff also.

      But previously, every time a technology that had been being applied to give effect to Moore’s law ran out of puff, a new technology came along to replace it. Nothing came along to replace photolithography.

      What should have happened was molecular lithography. That is what all the futurists were expecting. It did not happen.

      At very small sizes, you don’t need silicon, because in very small conductors, quantum effects give rise to new, strong, nonlinearities. You can make logic gates based on whether there are zero, one, or minus one magnetic flux quanta within a circuit loop. We are very close to the size where that works – if they were actually building seven nanmometer chips, which they are not, they could throw away the silicon, and just use wires embedded in insulator. This gives you enormously fast, ridiculously low power low voltage gates. It is almost within reach. If they were not bulshitting about feature sizes, it would be within reach. But to reach those sizes you would probably need molecular lithography.

      Toshiba’s hundred layer chips are limited by the fact that they only have one layer of single crystal silicon, which profoundly limits what can be done. If they could get the feature size down small enough that they could have gates based on magnetic flux, they could forget about the bottom layer, and we would have ics with enormously more power.

      • Guy says:

        What part, if any, does technological decline play in this new alien gambit in the media? By that I mean, is it possible that they’re bluffing, pretending to be denying super advanced craft that can pass as alien when in reality they have jack shit on the horizon?

        • jim says:

          No relationship.

          Flying saucers are how stupid people conceptualize angels and demons. People have been seeing, or thinking themselves to be seeing, angels and demons for thousands of years.

          • Guy says:

            Why do you think the media is trying to convince people these are real now? There seems to be an ongoing attempt to push the “alien craft are visiting earth” idea, do you see any motives other than distraction and confusion?

            • jim says:

              Morons talking to morons about moronic stuff. Public discourse goes senile.

              • suones says:

                This can be part of a deliberate strategy. I call it throwing a “turd in the punch bowl” that prevents people from tasting the punch. Eg: 5G->COVID stupidity masking Chinese complicity in COVID.

                …discrediting inconvenient truths by surrounding them with obvious and blatant ridiculousness, thus enabling dismissal of the whole thing as a “conspiracy theory,” rendering the truth kernels harmless.


                • Karl says:

                  I understand that strategy, but what might be an inconvienient truth that is made toxic by the addition of flying saucers?

                • Guy says:


                  Any foreign adversary will see through our UFO cover for any new tech, so that can’t be it. If it’s some sort of groundwork for a future psyop I see that being a risk and mostly unnecessary given the success of COVID. The only thing other than what Jim said about it just being morons that I can see as likely is that they are trying to maintain the illusion of top-secret advanced tech (which doesn’t exist because as Jim said, morons).

                  To the Stars Academy did have crowdfunding up at one point, so I thought it might just be grifters in the right fields getting together to see what they could get away with. Everyone in the group has impressive sounding titles, but they all are a little say the least. The interview Tom Delong did with Rogan was absurd, the fact that he was not disowned by the group afterwards means either we live in their alternate X-files reality, or there’s at least a huge scam being run.

                • jim says:

                  It is just morons talking stupidity to other stupid morons. Means nothing, no significance.

      • Starman says:


        “The eye of Soros has fallen upon Musk, disturbed by the distinct whiteness and maleness of his team.”

        The difference between a prophet vs a businessman when it comes to resisting the Eye of Soros.

        • Starman says:


          More differences between a prophet vs a businessman when it comes to resisting the Eye of Soros.

          • suones says:

            *priest vs businessman**

            **Brahmin vs Vaishya***

            ***We all know Elon’s “business” side is not very good, but his priestly shenanigans are glorious!

            • Starman says:


              ”We all know Elon’s “business” side is not very good”

              I expect such from an ignoramus about spaceflight. Wordsmiths often have trouble understanding it.

              Jeff Bezos can’t get it up (to orbit)😁. Meanwhile, Prophet Elon Musk puts the majority of mass into orbit each year and growing.

              Wordsmiths get their asses kicked by rocket landings.


              • suones says:

                Likewise I would not expect a buffalo to distinguish words of power or wisdom from trash, but as long as we’re on the same page about SpaceX, it’s fine by me.

                But tell me, isn’t it particularly galling for you that a Prophet running a priestly enterprise accomplishes spaceflight while your beloved Air Force/Space Force chooms make the world safe for tranny dick?

                Or is Star Prophet Elon an honorary “warrior” according to you? What about his acolytes? Law of gravity? Words. Newton’s Laws? More words. The sheer amount of words needed to be read and interpreted into their basic concepts to make the simplest spaceflight possible is mind boggling. For a prole they’re all just “words,” until all of them come together to make the rocket go whoooosh!

                Welding pipes is a necessary element for spaceflight. So is calculating the dimensions of the pipe, deciding materials to be used, and arrangement to be made. All of which require more words lol.

                • jim says:

                  Musk argues that most of the potential for improvement comes from building stuff that builds stuff, the final product already being highly optimized. When they were building the Tesla factory, he was sleeping on the worksite.

                  He whips up a spreadsheet that envisages what is physically possible, and then is right there in person when the spreadsheet hits physical reality. Priests are on the job of developing consensus, prophets of dreaming big dreams. Musk, obviously, is a prophet. He is also an engineer, and he is a hands on engineer.

                  In this sense, not words, so much as spreadsheets, and he does not stop when the spreadsheet is done.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  You really have a hard time preventing your partisan impulse from turning your output into hackery, friend.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  I for one do not care how we achieve spaceflight, only that it is achieved. If the Air/Space Farces have to suck miles of tranny dick to distract them while the Star Prophet lifts mankind into the sea beyond the sky, then to paraphrase Marie Antoinette, let them suck dick.

                • jim says:

                  Unfortunately they will insist on engineerettes, brown engineers, and gay engineers. A team can succeed with auto gynophilic trannies on the job. With women, gay trannies, and plain gays, the team will fail.

                  If you are attempting something difficult, one dud on the team, the team will fail, one team fails, the whole project will fail.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  ‘Why doesnt the man being tortured just pretend to cooperate with his captors?’

                  Observing the form of defection transforms the substance of the observer into the substance of the observation.

                • suones says:

                  Priest and Prophet

                  Similar to how a King is a divinely inspired warrior who forges a new path, a Prophet is a divinely inspired priest who forges a new path.

                  The essential priestly task is to give names to things, and ensuring that those names are universally observed with no ambiguity. A Prophet takes that to a whole new level, and names a Thing which does not yet exist, but is brought into existence by the very act of naming. As priests we all dream of inventing some concept or object that we then get to name — a Prophet actually manages to accomplish that on a grand scale. Muhammad was a Prophet. He was also a merchant by profession and a skilled strategist and politician — but fundamentally a priest. A priest of the evil Baphomet, but still a priest. Same with the Star Prophet. He’s a priest of an as yet occult god, he’s Muhammad while he was still in Mecca. We’re not getting off this planet without Divine help, that’s for sure.

                  I seek to prevent the extremely valuable NRx observation — “anti-evil-priest” from turning into prole-tier “anti-priest” stupidity. While the West is almost fully conquered, I see this attack vector regularly in my home country — Muslims and Progs alike attack no Hindu so rabidly as the priest, and simultaneously appear to offer an olive branch to non-priestly Hindus. The more eusocial and Dharmic the Hindu priest, the stronger the attack. Once a critical mass of the population defects to the competing evil priesthood, then they are fed to Baphomet/Moloch. Of course, then they can’t do anything about it because they’ve banished their own protective gods and removed their priests. This is what brother @DharmicReality has dubbed “ancestral curse.”

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >I seek to prevent the extremely valuable NRx observation — “anti-evil-priest” from turning into prole-tier “anti-priest” stupidity.

                  That’s all well and good, something I have done the same myself at times. We can say that every polity that has ever found actual existence in history is a theocratic military dictatorship – they differ merely in effectiveness at being theocratic military dictatorships.

                  The problem rather is that, all too often, what actually ends up being said in your output is excusing evil priest-likes from responsibility, and attempts to implicate that anyone and everyone else *except* (those) priest-likes have responsibility for contemporary travails. When, of course, they are responsible.

                  You say you want to distinguish ‘anti-evil-priest’ from ‘anti-priest’, well and good; but when you express ‘anti-evil-priest’, this expression is toothless; you evince extreme reluctance to ever actually put them ‘on-the-hook’ for anything in a non-trivial, consequential manner, and likewise, seem to try to never miss an opportunity to needle and deflect onto some other demographic(s). Almost hebraic if you will, even.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Priests have their place but even good priests need their influence curtailed because ruling priests inevitably become evil priests, warriors must rule.

                  As a dot Indian you are too soft on the idea of a powerful priesthood, we intend a very neutered and almost powerless priesthood.

                • Starman says:


                  “Same with the Star Prophet. He’s a priest of an as yet occult god, he’s Muhammad while he was still in Mecca. We’re not getting off this planet without Divine help, that’s for sure.”

                  It’s eerie how closely Prophet Musk’s ministry resembles Prophet Muhammad’s ministry.

                  A Prophet can be seen as “king” of priests, but comparing a Prophet to a Pope/Chief Priest is like comparing Prophet Muhammad to the Caliphs who succeeded him.

  28. c4ssidy says:

    We have some academic pushback starting against the vaccines

    “”Currently, our estimates show that we have to accept four fatal and 16 serious side effects per 100,000 vaccinations in order to save the lives of 2–11 individuals per 100,000 vaccinations, placing risks & benefits on the same order of magnitude.””

    • c4ssidy says:

      Continued (accidentally pressed enter):

      The article uses data collected from outside of the US where the political pressure is somewhat lower, and also references other evidence that suggests that past systems which recorded adverse vaccine reactions often severely underestimated the total cases. Fits the Jimian hypothesis pretty well. The deaths are comparable even with the flawed data which is available, let alone Brett’s observations of the potential long term complications from the spike proteins and mRNA carrier particles concentrating inside bone marrow and ovaries

      • jim says:

        The fundamental problem is priestly science, cargo cult science. The form but not the substance of science. They are not medically treating a disease, nor vaccinating against a disease, but practicing magic and worshiping demons.

        • suones says:

          The fundamental problem is priestly science…

          All science is priestly science. Science, being an offshoot of philosophy[1], is a priestly endeavour. Just like every sports league only exists under patronage of the King and pays homage to Him and His gods before every game, so does every Royal Society only exist under patronage of the King and His State Religion. If the State Religion is sane and functional, you get the Royal Society. If insane and dysfunctional, US CDC.

          [1] Science is simply philosophy of the concrete — accepting only those philosophical axioms that are verified through the crucible of experiment. If this requirement is elided, science becomes “SCIENCE!” which is indistinguishable from pilpul.

          • Aidan says:

            I consider “Science”, capital S, to be an anticoncept. It muddles method and result. (Therefore inherently cargo cult) It used to be called Natural Philosophy, and science was the method of inquiry. Now, Science means the body of theory, the method of inquiry, and its engineering applications, with the result that priestlyness has intruded on the engineering side.

            Natural Philosophy is a priestly discipline, but engineering is decidedly not. Applying theories in engineering takes a lot of practice and trial and error. Inventing a new technology or refining one is very far away from priestly science. If you read the history of great inventions, priestly scientists had very little to do with it. The Wright Brothers were not priests. Samuel Colt was not a priest. John Browning was not a priest. Nor was the guy who invented the steam engine. You’re mixing up your caste distinctions because you’ve fallen for the ‘Science’ anticoncept.

            • jim says:

              Science is not an anticoncept. The core of science is the scientific method. That is what makes science different – the social rules that enforce contact between the scientific community and observable reality.

              The scientific method has been expressed many times in many different ways over many centuries, but the core and important expression was “The Sceptical Chymist”, because that statement was issued when Charles the Second was restored, and three years later became the Royal Society, its prestige, and thus the prestige of the Scientific method, backed by the Fount of All Honors, and its physical meetings backed by his physical men at arms, privately enforced social rules backed by official status and official violence.

              Not an anticoncept, for we need a word for that method, that community, the activity of that community, and the results of that activity.

              We also need a word for the debased, fake, and gay imititation of that community and that method, and Richard Feynman gave us a phrase for that: “cargo cult science”.

              Cargo cult science, for example Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Change, and Covid 19, is nonsense dressed in strangely clean labcoats suspiciously resembling sacerdotal robes, which nonsense is usually a form of demon worship. (Labcoats that are actually used for what labcoats are used for rapidly become damaged – their primary purpose is to protect the wearer and his clothing from damage)

              • Aidan says:

                It is my belief that the word ‘science’ should only refer to that core, the scientific method, which is, yes, the important part. I do not think we need a word “for that method, that community, the activity of that community, and the results of that activity”. Scientists add to the body of knowledge concerning the physical world through experiment and replication of experiment. Artisans are inspired by that knowledge and build good and useful things. Smokeless powder was invented by a scientist, but it was not his business to figure out the proper loadings for rifle cartridges, the proper shape of the cartridge, the optimal barrel construction and lock strength for new rifles using the more powerful powder, and so on. That chemist would probably have done a poor job of it, and thus we dont want a system of names where the priest has authority to take charge of the engineering side of things. Though on the other hand there may be some counterexamples, like Oppenheimer or Von Braun.

                • Karl says:

                  I guess most people encounter the word “science” only when someone is try to sell them something and is trying to give that something a priestly blessing.

                  Not sure we need the word “science” outside of priestly discussions.

                  Only priests talk about science in general, anyone else will talk about virology, organic chemistry, solid state physics, etc. – about a very narrow part of science that is of particular relevance for a problem at hand.

                • jim says:

                  But there quite recently used to be a community with moral norms, social expectations, and social conventions based on that method, the scientific method, which social norms remain in form but not substance, and there still is a body of knowledge structured around that method. Don’t they deserve names?

                • Karl says:

                  Well, the body of work is really a plurality with names like physics, chemistry, biology, engineering, etc. Doesn’t that suffice?

                  As to the cummunity, I doubt that there was much of a community between, e.g. physicists working on superconductors and biologists studing parasits of penguins. I’d say, for several generations there have been several commnities who have not been interacting much with each other.

                  The social norms were simply the norms of a Christian society, especially do not lie.

                • jim says:

                  > The social norms were simply the norms of a Christian society, especially do not lie.

                  Not quite.

                  The scientist was a gentleman, and the gentleman is upright, yet resistant to social pressure. He does not go along to get along.

                  The scientist relies on primary sources. He does not accept that everyone knows X, or that the experts agree that X is true. He asks. How do they know X. What reason do they have to believe that X is true. The scientist replicates the experiment, and where is impractical to himself replicate, he relies on the report of someone who did it, or replicated it.

                  This was a firm rejection of the priestly norm of truth by consensus.

                  Which can easily be misapplied to tear down Chesterton’s fence. If Chesterton’s fence is up, you need to know why it was erected before tearing it down. But if something is believed to be true, you need to know why it is believed to be true.

                  The Skeptical Chymist holds that relying on the authority of experts, proclaiming that something is true because everyone says it is true, is morally wrong. That is rather stronger than the Christian rule of not lying.

                  If you honestly say you believe X, but you believe X merely because other people believe X, you are being wicked by proclaiming the truth of something as if you had evidence, when you do not have evidence.

                • neofugue says:

                  All science is priestly science as science is not and has never been a purely neutral endeavor. While there is a distinction between good and bad science, and there can be evil men who produce good science, every endeavor ultimately begins from a foundation in God or the Devil.

                  Which contradicts the lie of the enlightenment that reason is man’s central capacity. Men are fallible, given unto delusion (prelest), error, pride, envy, among other sins. Belief in “reason” independent of priests, sacred texts and tradition is akin to belief in “equality,” it is assumed on the authority of priests, sacred texts and tradition.

                  A question such as “why one ought to tell the truth in science” is akin to asking, “why should one make music beautiful.” Despite being a non-Christian, Beethoven created beautiful music because he came from a Christian world order, while Schoenberg created monstrosities as such beliefs were no longer present. Science worked because it was based in the Christian religion, and as the last vestiges of Christian social technology disappeared, we have cargo cult science.

                  Science must always point to the divine, for without God everything becomes of the Devil.

                  While scientists are engineers, not all science is not attached to the market and thus must derive legitimacy from priestly establishments. Newton, Leibniz, Darwin, Euler, Descartes among others were university-educated brahmins. Gregor Mendel was an ordained monk.

                  When a society has a good religion, priests put away enemy brahmins. If a scientist makes a claim outside the realm of his observation and against the faith, he is a priest and should be dealt with accordingly. The problem with progressivism is that it makes claims and predictions that are contrary to what is directly observable in nature, and as a result progressive science becomes corrupted.

                • Aidan says:


                  “Don’t they deserve names?”

                  Fair enough- my concern is mainly that the priestly side gets undue authority over the inventors and engineers. It could easily be argued that the word Science acts as a Schelling point to keep group cohesion around the scientific method, but I do not think that worked out so well- the decline of science coincided with the inflation of the word Science.

                  This is a delicate issue, where I pay excessive attention to semantics, because there have been many times throughout history when a given society was “ripe” for science to take off, but it simply died in the cradle. Charles II’s physical protection of the Royal Society allowed for the wave of scientific discovery now tapering off, but recreating those conditions will be an extremely tricky task.

                  For example, “Dark Ages” Christianity allowed for substantial advances in empiricism; we can note Charlemagne banning accusations of witchcraft in his Empire’s courts, because rational people just did not believe in it, but eventually the Investiture dispute, papal reform, and the Great Schism created a new priestly consensus hostile to science, which died off by 1300. By 1600, official belief was in witches and magic again.

                • suones says:

                  This was a firm rejection of the priestly norm of truth by consensus.

                  I don’t know which “priestly norm” you’re referring to. It certainly isn’t the Aryan priestly norm. An Aryan Shastri is supposed to defend his theses in front of a sabha (assembly) any time a challenger priest arises and claims him to be at fault. The ritualised demonstration is called “shastrarth” and is supposed to be able to demonstrate (i.e., experimentally prove) the validity of one’s claims in front of a mixed audience (i.e., including priests as well as laymen). It neatly corresponds with the Socratic method (which is obvious in retrospect as both draw on Aryan systems). Priests are supposed to not be in consensus over anything, and challenges and counter-challenges are made continuously[1]. You can draw a straight line from Bacon (the modern proponent of scientific method) and Descartes to Aristotle, the pupil of Plato and hence Socratic.

                  There is a Sanskrit proverb on the lines of “Evident truth needs no proof,” establishing the supremacy of experimental demonstration over speculation.

                  [1] Since the way to gain status as an Aryan priest is to be against the ruling head priest, and being able to prove oneself correct, it is natural that this is an unending process. Every Aryan priest dreams of the day when he is able to one-up his guru, and every true guru is secretly overjoyed if a favourite pupil one day surpasses him. This is the basis of Newton’s “shoulders of giants” comment.

            • suones says:

              Inventing a new technology or refining one is very far away from priestly science. If you read the history of great inventions, priestly scientists had very little to do with it. The Wright Brothers were not priests. Samuel Colt was not a priest. John Browning was not a priest. Nor was the guy who invented the steam engine.

              This is a very rootless understanding of priestly activities. Every creation is a blessing by some god upon his chosen medium. Every invention the conclusion of a hard penance. So much so that Dharma is indistinguishable from profession — it is literally Dharma for a shoemaker to make excellent shoes, and strive to make shoes more excellent than any that have been seen.[1] Every Aryan is exhorted to become a master at his profession, and such mastery is considered proof of blessing by the patron god.

              I wrote a long form article about this years ago, but cannot quote it as it would dox me lol.

              Engineering is not only a priestly activity, but it has its own patron gods and worship involving tools of the trade. Of course, it is not exclusively a priestly activity, but a part of it is.

              The history of iron and steel production is a colourful account, and reading ancient texts on mathematics and steelmaking alike will provide evidence that the creators were divinely inspired. It only became fashionable with Jewish dominance that crediting Divine Inspiration for one’s work became passe. That we Hindus, the originators of the Iron Age and producers of Wootz Steel and millenia-old corrosion-free ironworks like the Iron Pillar of Delhi, have fallen behind, is due to ancestral curse.

              [1] The “hacker ethic” captures this feeling very well, and is one of the few fields that has re-discovered the Aryan way of doing things.

              • Aidan says:

                I understand very well how every profession, and all work, were infused with religious significance and glorified the gods- artisans in particular, for blacksmiths were often seen as wielders of powerful magics. In fact, our understandings are similar. What you call dharma, I call telos, though the world is a kaleidoscope. One source of light and truth, one telos, one God.

                But this is beside the point. When I, and most of us here, talk about priests, we are talking about those whose profession is telling stories about reality, and sometimes the personality traits of this type of man. This is regardless of the religious significance of other teloi. In very ancient days, in the Aryan homeland and shortly following the diaspora, the warrior and the priest were the same person, but these roles were separated.

                • jim says:

                  Were they the same person? What reason do you have to believe this?

                • Aidan says:

                  All claims about ancient Aryan society are based on limited reconstruction from the very oldest sources in the societies they conquered and settled, noting what geographically removed places share in absolute common.

                  The very oldest laws from places as far removed as Rome, Greece, and India, take for granted that the clan patriarch, who was military leader of his clan in the days before cities, had a duty to perform the religious rites maintaining the gods of the hearth and the grave associated with his family. Even when a clan had declined, and its head sold himself into bondage as a slave, he was granted the right to return to his ancestral property and sanctify his divine ancestors on the required days.

                  This suggests that before Aryan peoples lived in cities and shared gods in common between their clans, (which became the city-state’s aristocracy) the clan’s patriarch was both the temporal authority and the head priest of the clan’s worship. This view is supported by excavations of Mycenaean palaces; they did not have separate temples, but the throne room of the king also contained the sacred hearth. Obviously, this only works for small societies and not large ones.

                • jim says:

                  Well of course the patriarch was high priest of his family. And still is in the more red pilled versions of Christianity.

                  But in order to make war, you need a coalition of patriarchs. And you need a leader with great authority. We know the original Aryans where fairly anarchic, but they must have had something very like Kings in war, albeit their Kings were merely first among equals. We also know that they had marriages over enormous distances, and during the bronze age they were probably the first to have copper, which does not require long distance trade, and among the first, probably first, to have bronze, which does require trade over enormous distances.

                  During the fall of bronze age civilization, we see Agamemnon, King of Kings, being bullied by priests.

                  If you have an army, even if it is only a quarreling coalition of patriarchs, which such information as we have indicates that it was, you are going to have a state religion – well the original Aryans scarcely had a state, but they must have had an official religion of the army. And if the leader of the army was the high priest of the army, that is rather a lot of power, and such information as we have indicates that the leaders of their armies had very little power.

                  We also know that early city formation was mediated by priests, not Kings. For the patriarchs to gather in one place without killing each other too often, they needed a shared religion. Every city started off as a temple that managed to maintain the peace among its congregation in temple grounds, and that made the temple grounds a good place for trade, so pretty soon tradesmen and merchants set up permanent residence. And the temple, and thus the city was run by priests.

                  On the other hand, legend tells us that Rome was founded by a King, who gathered men without families – who were probably in large part excess males, which you get a dangerous excess of when there is too much polygyny. But Rome was founded after the collapse of Bronze age civilization, so is late Aryan. Cities during the dark age and recovery from Bronze Age collapse tended to be Kingly, but recollected a system of absolute patriarchs. They also recollected a system of priestly supremacy in law.

                  Thus the existence of armies, and the Aryan urbanization, indicates a professional priestly class. Which during the very earliest period of Aryan expansion, bronze weapons and chariots, was able to keep the peace not merely on temple grounds, but all the way over thousands of miles between tin mines and copper mines. So we can conclude that there was priestly caste, operating a legal system governing relationships between patriarchs, with religious organization spanning enormous distances, that declared that at least some merchants could not be shaken down.

                  When priests operate the law without a King on top, their authority is enforced by clan feuding. Two patriarchs quarrel, they call in friends and in laws, pretty soon they are calling in friends and in laws who have relationships with both sides, and come under pressure to settle. A priest shows up to adjudicate, once it is safe to do so, and issues a ruling on his interpretation of ancient customary and divine law.

                  And to survive that, he wants all the people in the priesthood to have consensus on what divine and customary law is, and so wants a priesthood that spans thousands of miles.

                • Aidan says:

                  Well, that is sort of my point. The priest caste became detached from the warrior caste when multiple petty kings needed to cooperate to wage large scale wars over long distances. I have not seen any evidence that the Aryans ruled a stable society stretching over the very large trade routes required to produce bronze; rather, it seems most logical to me that individual clans, already seminomadic pastoralists, found a very natural job as armed guards and escorts of merchants over the extremely long trade routes between copper and tin. Having this role of armed escorts, they were paid in bronze, which required the copper or tin they were escorting to reach its destination safely in order to be forged, discouraging piracy of the merchants they were hired to protect. Also explains why they had chariots, which were invented very far away from the steppe, but then showed up on the steppe shortly after being invented in Egypt. Eventually, all of their armed travels made it clear that the societies they were visiting were easy pickings; and it would only be this stage of coordinated invasion and settlement that the priestly role would be detached in order to foster military cooperation. Once they conquered in a given place, they tended to become more clannish again, the role of communal priests would have declined as the family religion became more important, and then in the process of urbanization which you describe and I agree with, an external temple founded to foster alliance between geographically close clans grew to become a city, where the priestly caste again took precedence over the patriarchal faith.

                  Coulanges using logic and primary sources describes the exact process of urbanization relying on religion that De Polignac elucidated a century later through meticulous physical evidence, so I am inclined to trust Coulanges’ logic about how and why, even though the when is shaky, given that he did not know very much about the Bronze Age, simply assuming that what we now call Dark Ages Greece was the first wave of Aryan settlement, but this is easily reconciled by the idea that religious centralization and decentralization, and the importance of external versus patriarchal/warrior priests happened multiple times throughout the history of Aryan peoples. But before the Aryan patriarchs united to conquer, they fought against each other, and we have the remnants of what they believed in while they were still fighting each other; that the only gods worth worshipping were the ancestors and the hearth fire, and that the priest who managed this religion, providing clan cohesion, was the same man who led the warriors into battle.

                • Aidan says:

                  Well, I did it again and accidentally used a real email. Jim, can you please rectify before my comment gets out of moderation?

  29. Encelad says:

    I have a curious anecdote: among my peers, the ones who least bought into covid hysteria are a couple of friends of mine who are into New Age stuff and “spiritualism”. I am wary of their faith because it basically overlaps with Progressivism. With the important exception though, that they don’t trust official Science. Thus there is this odd situation in which I can freely talk about the insanity of lockdowns et cetera with them, but not with nominally “conservative” people.

    • Atavistic Morality says:

      Nominally conservative people who identify as “conservative” instead of “Christian” are normie neocon cultists who listen to Ben Shapiro and masturbate thinking of “owning the libs” with “facts and logic”. There is no practical difference between this type of person and a literal screeching progressive, they’re both midwit zombies.

      At the very least people who are into New Age stuff have enough self-awareness, genuine intelligence and perspective to disregard official progressivism and its popular culture trying to look for something else, something better. Their “faith” overlaps with Progressivism like Christianity in the west increasingly overlaps with Progressivism, it has been converged, but it’s not necessarily genuine belief on their part.

      One of the most worthy people I’ve ever met was a self-proclaimed anarchist. And you’d think he’d be a pinko, being Europe and all, but no, he just didn’t trust or have any positive regard of authority as he had known it, and who could blame him? It was a sign of intelligence and awareness after all.

    • alf says:

      Yeah there’s plenty of good folks in the hippy freedom corner. My woman found a private midwife who was like that – she was terrific. No masks, no paranoia with touchy touchy etc. And all about natural birth, unlike many protocol government nazis we were supposed to trust.

      Advantages: less edgy than outspoken rightism, can kind of fly in under the radar.
      Disadvantages: much more vulnerable to entryism, there’s a reason hippy enclaves almost always fail.

    • The Cominator says:

      New agers increasingly really really hate progressives (they have a different religion) I’ve talked about this, they are weary of big corporations (even if not arms of the state like big tech) and they believe in animal rights and such (and I kind of agree with them on factory animal farming, this is my one concession to any kind of leftism) but they hate our enemies more than they hate us. They also to some degree believe in traditional gender rules though they would reject Jim’s kind of patriarchy. Tulsi Gabbard is more what a new ager type leftist is like.

      New age women also tend to be pretty cool (though they tend to use drugs, though not generally in a horribly self destructive fashion), the only Western women I don’t generally hate.

    • The Cominator says:

      I would argue their faith is fundamentally incompatible with progressivism in several ways.

      New agers do not have the pretense that they are purely scientific materialist (but they tend to know more of real science then most progressives do, though on a surface level) they consider that there is a world beyond the percieved material and they believe there is some kind of natural law moral order/karma whatever. They know they have a religion progressives deny that their religion is a religion.

      Progressives believe that they can ignore gender, New Agers believe gender is real immutable and part of the spiritual as well as material order. They in practice believe to a large degree in traditional gender roles and their women are actually among the most pleasant women that exist in the Western world (even if they call themselves feminists they aren’t feminists the way most feminists are).

      Progressives are “humanists”, new agers tend to believe humans are one of infinite incarnations. As such to the extent they are political leftists one of their primary causes is animal rights which progressives being the hypocrites they are don’t care about. If voting mattered any Republican who promised to marginally improve animal conditions in factory farming by agribusinesses they would vote for him en masse.

      Progressives believe that experts should rule over the unenlightened unholy masses and trust the media and big institutions, New Agers though weary of big private capital… genuinely do believe in personal freedom and absolutely do not trust big institutions.

      This is why I’ve said progressives communists etc get the helicopter, but I’d spare New Age leftists. They wouldn’t be getting state jobs but the Imperial secret police would leave them alone unless they do things like topple 5G towers.

      They increasingly don’t like progressives and really really hate what we call the Cathedral. The ones I know think the election was stolen from Trump (who most were leary of but they generally consider the Biden regime worse).

    • suones says:

      “New Age” is half-baked Hinduism, when a man feels his blood call out to the All Father but doesn’t have the ancestral framework to process it. Quite literally in case of Tulsi Gabbard — not of Hindu blood but her mother “converted” to Hinduism (which is impossible).

      A lot of Aryans and Aryan-allieds naturally find Semitism spiritually distasteful, and repeatedly turn to occultism to soothe their tormented souls.[1] This is, of course, exploited by Leftists, because demons are attracted to any spiritual resource. The answer, for Western Aryans, is certainly not adopting or fetishising Eastern practices, but rather to invoke their Old Gods ex nihilo.[2] This requires a caliber of priest/paladin that hasn’t been seen since Muhammad awakened Baphomet.

      Russian Rodnovery seems like an interesting experiment, but I cannot judge their quality or demonic-infestation level as the primary sources are all in Russian.

      [1] With varying quality and success, ranging from somewhat genuine belief-systems like Theosophical Society to outright charlatans like Osho Rajneesh or self-proclaimed “Maharishi” Mahesh Yogi.

      [2] Nazis had the right idea but were quickly consumed by demons.

      • Leon says:

        Your work on religious terminology is interesting. Do you have a compilation of your religious vocab elsewhere, possibly a blog?

        Why do you extol the All Father when he is not the og godhead of the Germanic deities? It was either Tiwaz or Donner, most likely Tyr/ Tiwaz as his name bears the same etymology as Zeus/ Deus. The theory goes that Wotan and Loki were once the same god, but as the priests and nobility gained power over the Norse people Odin and Loki were split into two figures. The ancient Romans likened Wotan to Mercury (traveling, shapeshifting mystics) and Donner to Jupiter (strong, thunderbolt wielding defenders of heaven and slayers of giants).

        What is your views on the mighty Archangels?

        • Oog en Hand says:

          Wotan => Minerva
          Loki => Laverna

          Learn Old Norse, learn Gothic…

        • suones says:


          I do have a blog (linked in my username) but the religious terminology I use isn’t really “mine.” It is Aryan theology, more ancient than steel, more ancient than Christ, and at par with Ancient Egypt and China.

          I specifically avoid reference to Odin/Wodin as he is certainly not the “original” godhead. I refer to the All Father as a catch all term for one’s Father, his father, and the whole line extending back to Manu/Mannus (Sanskrit/German) and His Father who is Devas Pitar/Deus Pater (Sanskrit/Latin). Mentioning lesser gods only generates confusion among people less theologically minded.

          I find it interesting that European Aryans have been worshipping something called “Christ” who was allegedly some Semitic Prophet (according to Ishmaelites) or a charlatan (according to his own people the Israelites, who executed him for his crimes), yet they do not worship his Father the desert demon YHWH the Terrible at all! They instead worship “Deus” which is the chief Aryan Father anyway. Have been worshipping “Deus” for much longer than two millenia at any rate. It is very obvious to me that “Aryan Jesus” and His Father “Deus,” together with such Semitic anathema as incarnation, and the “Holy Spirit,” are manifestly different gods than Semitic YHWH the Father of goatherders and hater of delicious bacon.

          Despite Jim’s admirable goals to re-establish Old Testament-esque religion, it is worth pointing out that none of the OT gods and liturgy is implemented in Aryan “Christianity” that worships Blonde Jesus the Son of Deus. It is as if Aryans want to (continue to) worship the Son of Zeus but have compromised and worship Heracles in a different form. Constantine might have forced “Christ” onto his flock, but their hearts remain with Heracles.

          The creation of “Muscular Christianity” is an example of such a temporal-spiritual mismatch — where Anglos re-created the Gymnasium under a “Christian” banner of “YMCA.[1]” Attacks on Herachrist’s masculinity continue, however.[2] If Jim’s ministry is successful, as we all hope it is, I predict a similar end to it as “Muscular Christianity.” YHWH is now aligned with Moloch.

          I have no views on “Archangels” or other Semitic fantasies. I’m fine with them as long as they keep to their own nation (which in Israel they now have a State for).


          • jim says:

            Muscular Christianity is exemplified by Chuck Norris, who is still today an internet saint to whom miracles are attributed.

            The trouble with Muscular Christianity is that it tried to have manliness while ducking the woman question and bowing down before women and white knights. Predictably, they got buggered. Today the YMCA is a joke, because of bugger infiltration.

            A successful Muscular Christianity needs to have the death penalty for sodomy and humiliating public beatings for white knights. Needs to support and enforce the authority of the husband and the father. Or else its lack of muscularity becomes hilariously apparent.

            The Woman Question, rather that gymnastic performance, needs to be front and center.

            But the YMCA was successful, as long as they could keep out gays and Jews. Jews dechristianized it and gays took the out the muscularity. But Chuck Norris is still legend. And Trump’s national capitalism was successful.

            Those things, YMCA Muscular Christianity and Trump’s National Capitalism, are essential elements of the new old Christianity. But the core of Christianity in this world are the rituals of hatch, match, and dispatch, which have to be the construction of a biological tribe from a synthetic tribe. And a tribe can only have cohesion if it controls its women, and awards women for good conduct and good performance.

            The wedding, in which the bride is given away, mock abducted, or really abducted, has to be the key ritual where lay people encounter the faith, rather than the gymnasium.

            Muscular Christianity focused on a few fragments of Paul that arguably commend physical manliness, while studiously avoiding a lot of Pauline texts that are considerably more relevant to manliness.

            Physical manliness matters, it matters a lot. Fat is a reactionary issue, and so is lifting iron, and a manly religion needs to do the stuff the YMCA did – but other stuff is far more important.

            The new old religion needs to have Trump’s national capitalism, YMCA Muscular Christianity physical manliness, but, more importantly, Manosphere worldly manliness (game, frame, and lifting iron), and, more importantly still, Pauline patriarchy.

      • Himmler was possibly the only influential Nazi who took the Old Gods and his Aryan ancestry seriously. Hitler was half baked and even less interested in embracing his inner Aryan especially after coming to power. (Narrower) Germanic nationalism was the driving force.

  30. Mountain says:

    Jim Stone: Freelance Journalist

    This site claims to have inside information from many sources about major world events such as the not-vaccine, Iran and war, Biden and SJWs, etc.

    Does anyone else read this site? What is your opinion?

    • jim says:

      He is an idiot.

      His heart is in the right place, and the things he is talking about have some basis in reality, but when he tries to make sense of them, he confabulates.

  31. onyomi says:

    I think most of the NRX-inclined here would agree with me is not the problem that we are ruled by powerful elites (inevitable) but that our current elites suck.

    If we were to try to point to what a competent, brave, responsible, reasonable elite looks like as a way to contrast with what we’ve got, whom, if anyone, could we best point to (in power today)? Putin in politics and Elon in private sector?

    • jim says:

      A sovereign needs a virtuous elite around him, a businessman needs a framework of property rights, people who respect those rights, and a sovereign that does something about people that violate those rights or supports the businessman in doing something about those violations.

      We don’t have a virtuous elite, not here and not in Russia, which makes the framework for doing business fail.

      Without a virtuous elite, a ruler needs to be a pretty mean son of a bitch. And without a secure framework of property rights, a businessman needs to be something of a scammer.

      Shutting down the holiness spiral, which destroys virtue, is required before anything else can be done. After that ends, hopefully not in a dark age and without completing the genocide of the white race and the final erasure of western civilization, then we can worry about the other stuff. We can worry about redecorating the house after we put out the fire.

      The further the holiness spiral goes, the more blood is required to extinguish it.

    • The Ducking Man says:

      As a non-US citizen my personal hypothesis on current elite mess is that boomer elites created system that separates politics from capability by means of excessive nepotism and entryism.

      I’ve seen LOTS of young people rose to power simply because his father/family/distant relative is elite, actual merit be damned.

      I’ve also seen lot of entryists in my elite structure, the kind of people who will debate 4 hours to change 1 article, again actual merit be damned.

      The fast ladder in society hierarchy exists, and people who actually rose to power via meritocracy gained the power when they are already 5 years into retirement.

      • Karl says:

        Nah, that system was established long before the boomer elites were born. The problem is simply the holiness spiral which at first wasn’t all that bad, but is pretty bad now and is getting worse ever faster.

      • jim says:


        Nepotism is efficient. You bypass HR, and install someone with known abilities whom you can trust.

        The problem is that in our society, promotion on “merit” is in practice promotion on holiness and accreditation, which is apt to bear little relationship to ability to get the job done.

        The Chinese mandarinate promoted primarily on passing exams, exams which selected for characteristics that were in practice not all that desirable.

        Merit is hard to assess. All you can do is give someone a chance, and see the results. And increasingly, in large organizations, results don’t matter and/or are fraudulent.

        • The Cominator says:

          But with our elites the nepotism is more like the state department strongarms crackhead Hunter Biden into foreign corporate board memberships or Mitt Romney is the political connection that makes Bain Capital’s mafia style bust outs legal for them.

          • The Ducking Man says:

            Yes, exactly what I’m seeing right now.

            I’m.perfectly fime with nepotism, but putting brain dead relative/political supporter and obviously evil into power is crossing the line.

            • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

              The problem of bad personnel making bad decisions on personnel is not solved by ‘have personnel concoct a sufficiently advanced extra-personal apparatus whereby personal decision making is rendered irrelevant’, it is solved by Physically Removing bad personnel and replacing them with better ones.

              • The Cominator says:

                Nepotism is more like here… relatives get used as bagmen and get a huge cut.

                • Pooch says:

                  10% to the big guy

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  I’d use my relations as bagmen and give them a cut too.

                  The most meritorious talent is loyalty; naught else matters without it; indeed, any else so much the worse without it.

          • ronehjr says:

            The problem we are having is first we tried the meritocracy, and now that that the best test takers are in power, they are doing the nepotism.

            • jim says:

              That is the complete reverse of reality.

              We had meritocracy in 1875 or so, and it was dismantled because the sons of affluent white male Episcopalians were massively over represented.

              Over two centuries ago, academia was profoundly distubed that people who scored well in their tests were from certain social groups, and proceeded to do something quite drastic about it.

              They have been dumbing down academic standards for two centuries. Each lowering of standards reflects a step away from selecting the best test takers.

        • The Ducking Man says:

          But that is assuming there are plenty of capable and trusted people to shoose from. Which today is increasingly difficult to come by.

          I’ve known 2nd generation owner run the entire company into ground, trusted partner rum away with company’s fortune, and C suit nephew made very fatal mistake.

          Trump installed Jared Kushner, and what did trump get in return?

          Merit has always been easy to asses because everyone knows who to turn into when there is unsolvable problem and who to delegate actually important part of the department.

          • Nils says:

            No merit has never been easy to asses. As promotion means a different job with different demands and persons to work with. Warriors have always struggled with promoting men to incompetence then not demoting them back to competence. Nepotism is compatible with Christianity. Your meritocratic rhetoric is not even close. If men can’t pick good officers they can’t lead there family and should be replaced.

            • The Ducking Man says:

              My current workplace has a lot of nepotism (very typical in palm oil industry), manager will bring people from his clan to work for him, of course he’ll bring half-decent person with half-decent capability.

              I don’t see issue with those kind of nepotism, still normal level of nepotism, it saves time and gives assurance the new hire won’t run away (also very typical in my industry).

              But I’m having issue when brain dead son Hunter Biden put into power position then start leaking confidential information to Xi.

              Again, my current workplace has a lot nepotism. The owner install his son as CEO, but this son has decorated ahievement both academically and professionally (very ong time consultant in MBB and CEO of some smaller companies), while the owmer’s not so capable duaghter is doing office job.

              I’m perfectly happy with my workplace’s nepotism, but my elite keep putting brain dead relative/political supporter into position of power, geez I wonder why my elites were having blunder non-stop.

              • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                Then, obviously, you were never arguing against ‘nepotism’ in the first place; you were arguing against leftists, on the grounds that they will tend to promote other leftists.

                No argument there, but rectify your names, lest you promote subvertable thinking (wittingly or otherwise).

          • ronehjr says:

            The disagreement i would have with you is that the implication that Trump did not get what he wanted.

        • Anonymous Fake says:

          The problem is that the merit vs nepotism debate always happens assuming that nothing will ever be done for people who went through the previous meritocracy. The debate never goes anywhere because inexplicably the right never figures out how to treat defectors fairly, and in this case the “defectors” are just people who were forced into the old system. Actually, the best students are probably the most under-recognized natural conservatives in society, but they always get stabbed in the back.

          No one intelligent wants to be forced into school. Those who were, who performed well, want compensation better than compensation for the dopes who dropped out to lay bricks or weld pipe or practice “entrepreneurship”. The idea that schools are just daycare, and that this is acceptable, is for the lower castes and races.

          Meritocracy actually leads to more nepotism, by the way, when there aren’t universal and objective standards. Conservatives always hurt their children with strict grading and liberals get their children all the participation trophies they can. What the liberals do works. I’ve seen it. They couldn’t do it if the federal government nationalized the schools and established an absolutely transparent system of merit. This works for China and Saudi Arabia and anything in between but for some reason “local schools” and “charter schools” remain inexplicably popular for American conservatives.

          • jim says:

            Anyone who actually went through an actual meritocracy has merit, so in a free economy has no difficulty getting a pretty good job. School is not a meritocracy. It is training. Unfortunately it is training for the priesthood, with even reading, writing, and arithmetic increasingly abandoned in favor of purely priestly things. You are taught stupid nonsense.

            Those who went through the previous “meritocracy” are not the students, but the academics.

            We have far more academics than we need. The older academics are for the most part smart people, who will be able to find useful work. The younger academics are dumb and getting dumber. They have no merit. Nobody needs them, they are no use for anything. They should become hewers of wood and drawers of water, or starve.

            A lot of them, reluctant to starve, and feeling useful work is beneath their immense dignity, will instead become criminals. They will get imprisonment, death, or slavery.

            Used to be that the very smartest people tended to effortlessly acquire impressive academic accreditation, as I did, in my spare time while spending most of my time partying,playing, and educating myself with material that was actually useful and interesting. This is no longer the case. If someone is really smart, gets excluded on suspicion of heresy – not because he is a heretic, but because the commissar cannot understand his responses, so deems them heretical.

            You have been banging this drum for far too long. Future comments by you will be censored for repetitiveness and begging the question.

            Accreditation is not merit, and does not deserve reward. It is potentially an indicator of merit. Merit does not deserve reward. Work does not deserve reward. Creating value deserves reward, and merit is an indicator of potential to work competently to create value.

            • Anonymous Fake says:

              [*repetitious and unresponsive*]

              • jim says:

                You liked being at school, and want to turn the whole world into school forever.

                If we did that, we would all starve. Someone has to create value, and no one is going to create value, unless they get to keep it, rather than having it re-assigned to someone with more priest points than he has.

                • Yul Bornhold says:

                  School is the closest thing to tribe that remains in the west. Hence, great fondness among many for the school life, to which the education is peripheral. Harry Potter most popular myth of the modern age.

                  Not a coincidence that the root of the Cathedral is the university, whose form incorporates an excessively undemocratic hierarchy and which subsists in large part on tithes and taxes.

                  I suspect schools, as an institution, benefit from all kind of legal immunities and exemptions. If establishing mannerbund, perhaps it would be profitable to disguise it as a democratic school with no official leadership and new members admitted only by vote of current members.

                • The Cominator says:

                  High school is close to tribe and I liked high school (and it was not excessively totalitarian) but I never felt the other stages of school were that way.

                  Middle school socializing much was suppressed and kids that age are monsters, college I felt atomized stressed out and busy among other people who were atomized stressed out and busy (my college was not excessively leftist in nature at the time but even priestly style electrical engineering courses were not easy ).

                • Yul Bornhold says:

                  Particular school experiences vary but the popularity of Harry Potter and its imitators suggests that *as an ideal* people find the school synthetic tribe very appealing.

                  Same as the fantasy genre suggests people find the idea of being a sword wielding hero more appealing than the reality of being a bugman. Look at Game of Thrones: fictional world suffering from disease, starvation, poverty misrule, where, even if you win, you’re surrounded by traitorous and disloyal cucks, and people find this preferable to their actual lives. No wonder the mainstream left has gone insane.

                • Leon says:

                  At Yul and the Cominator:

                  High school may have bee purposely built into a form of synthetic tribe. There was a book on the subject that got published back in the early 00s, where someone went back and studied the data and concluded around the 80s people went from being all class mates with multiples hobbies to being defined by their roles in high school. Either Z Man or Rotten Chestnuts recently noted the same phenomenon.

                  Anecdotally, some of my classmates and I noted the same phenomenon back during our high school days. The various “tiers” of students all had the same lunch periods. The honors and preppy kids were in first lunch. Normal students were in second. Druggies, goths, emo kids, the super poor, etc were in the last lunch period.

                • The Cominator says:

                  We didn’t have separate lunch periods in mine… at least not that i recall.

          • Starman says:

            @A n o n y m o u s F a k e

            “Those who were, who performed well [at wordsmith shop], want compensation better than compensation for the dopes who dropped out to… weld pipe or practice ‘entrepreneurship’.”

            Dopes who weld pipe.

            More stuff made by dopes who weld pipe.

          • Contaminated NEET says:

            >for some reason “local schools” and “charter schools” remain inexplicably popular for American conservatives.

            It’s not inexplicable at all. This is because, for once, “conservatives” actually understand which side their bread is buttered on on this issue. A Federal school system would be the most pozzed, intersectional, radical-Left nightmare you could imagine, and it would have zero accountability to voters. Obviously, local school systems suck. All classroom education sucks. But the local scale gives right-wingers some occasional wins where they can muster overwhelming local superiority, which would be completely impossible with a national system.

            >The idea that schools are just daycare, and that this is acceptable, is for the lower castes and races.

            Schools are for the lower castes and races, period. Prussian education is deliberately designed to crank out obedient standardized robot-men for use in mass production and mass warfare. Read what its creators and early boosters said about it. True aristocrats hire tutors to teach their children one-on-one or in small groups. Aristocrats of the spirit teach their own children.

            >this works for China and Saudi Arabia
            1) I’m far from from convinced that it does, and
            2) China and Saudi Arabia don’t hate Chinese or Arabs, nor wish to punish them and replace them with trendier races.

            I get where you’re coming from on some level. I was a “good student,” growing up, and as you might guess from my handle, it didn’t pay off like they promised me it would. The Devil lies. You have to face the fact that you were lied to and you didn’t actually learn anything worthwhile or develop any valuable skills during your time in obedience school, and all the stupid certificates, diplomas, and credentials you “earned” don’t change that. Yeah, it sucks, but the fact that we were played for suckers at a tender age by people who said they had our best interests at heart doesn’t put anyone else on the hook to make us whole. The bricklayers and pipe welders you still(!) look down on don’t owe you a goddamned thing, and if you want their charity, you’d be wise to speak of them with a little humility.

            • The Cominator says:

              Good post CN you’re actually learning…

              Mass public education is up there with civilizational disasters with World War One and female emancipation.

              Anonymous bitter cathedral reject does have a narrow good point, if your goal is to get into the elite via Ivy League admissions you want a worthless local school system that gives everyone who can actually read and speak better than Joe Biden straight A’s and lots of meaningless fake merit titles.