Following the wise advice of Prince Charming, I edited a custom personal 256 bit secret into the php code of Avatar Privacy avatar generator, so that now it actually works as it is supposed to.
So now we have avatars, and actually do have privacy.
My own personal experience in security is that your boss orders one to do something inexplicably stupid that introduces a subtle flaw, an order that one would not expect your boss to give, or even to understand, but the flaw does not flat out report everything directly to the NSA, and the flaw is arguable – one is not flat out breaking security, it is just subtly weak, in a way complicated to explain and not entirely trivial to exploit.
And when you try to explain the problem to him he does not want to listen, and is unable to understand.
I conjecture that this is what happened to the Avatar Privacy plugin.
The flaw, explained by Prince Charming and checked by me is that the salt does not salt – it is same salt for every user, and the salt is quite short, thirty two bits, and thus can be easily reversed by exhaustive search. Given one known email, one can reverse the salt. Given the salt, one can reverse the hash of the any email. You have to throw the entire population of potential email addresses, which may well be enormous, at the hash of the email, but this does not take that long.
The central authority has a list of everyone they could do harm to, and try the list against the hash of the emails of the blog commenters who have offended by displaying inadequate holiness.
I could have fixed the salt part, and perhaps I will, but instead used a 256 bit site wide secret prepended to every hash directly in the source code.
return \hash( 'sha256', "my custom secret"."{$this->get_salt()}{$identifer}" );
This results in everyone randomly getting a new avatar, which will likely be different from the old one.
woah. this explains why “smart” phones dont have physical shutters to cover recording apparatuses, and why phone/tablet cases that cover the mic and camera are relatively hard to find.
There are zillions of non brand name covers, designing them is easy and manufacturing them is cheap. I think there is simply no demand because the few people who care use masking tape.
Rolling for new kitty cat. Thanks for all the work you are doing on keeping everybody safe.
Is it implied that the boss is intentionally introducing the security flaw with orders from the NSA (or some other phosphorescent creature)?
Orders from someone. Not at all his normal self. Orders from someone terrifying. I conjecture a glownigger.
Rolling for a New Cat.
I for one am glad I’ve never used a real email around here. The only downside is trying to remember which fake email address I’m using at the moment so I don’t trap myself in the spam filter.
I’ve always been paranoid about the danger of future communications. I saw growing up that what was normal and natural to say quickly became a fireable offense just a few years later. Most people don’t seem to notice it, which made me even more paranoid about it.
The internet’s first 10 years of total freedom to talk freely was so amazing while today feels like we’re already living in the Soviet Union.
This last year has been a bit like a dream. I’d long worried this was the insane direction we were heading but I’d always hoped I was wrong and the insanity would come to an end. Instead the insane dream just keeps getting worse.
Life is, as I have said before, like one of the monster movies where one character sees monsters, and the other character does not, and you wonder if the character that sees monsters is insane, until someone gets eaten by a monster.
For me, this was most dramatically visible, and impacted me most, with spectacular female misconduct in the workforce, which everyone fails to notice, and if I draw their attention to it, they don’t believe it, and if I draw their attention to the concrete particulars, change the subject and appear to completely forget that I ever said anything. I started to doubt my own sanity, but events demonstrated my sanity and everyone else’s zombie madness.
I fear that those who cast doubt on our beloved president’s entirely free and fair election under an email connected to their meatspace location are going to get a visit.
The unreality about things that are right in people’s faces, sex, love, children, and the ability of the business to make money, is rapidly getting worse and worse. The unreality about things far away, like the presidential election, has less direct impact.
>the ability of the business to make money, is rapidly getting worse and worse
Normies do not see this. They see megacorps like Amazon and Google continuing to grow and continuing to capture more and more of the market. Actual innovation is of course hamstrung, but GOOGL continues its upward trajectory nonetheless (Google is a prime example of the converged corporation that continues to make money hand over fist).
Sure, normies sense something in the modern world is amiss, but how could it be the fundamentals of capitalistic enterprises, and not the distribution of the rewards thereof? Normies see the ever rising stock market contrasted with the paucity of their own fortunes, and they do not think businesses cannot generate money, or that value-creation is being hampered.
They think the game is rigged against them. And it is, but they see only through a glass, darkly.
The ability of Intel, Disney, and Marvel to make money is going down the toilet. The same will happen to them all.
Google makes money by stealing people’s information, Ebay and Amazon by owning other people’s reputations. The latter we can take away from them with the blockchain, though that technology as yet exists only as an idea, and the big money is taking away Ebay and Amazon’s ability to own other people’s reputations.
I cannot understand this sentiment. If you think Goolag is so good at making money, what’s been stopping you from buying GOOG shares and sharing in the bounty while doing nothing? This same sentiment was displayed for Microsoft in its heyday in the late 90s. Considering you had bought MSFT in 1998, would you be happier now?
Trump fumbled with this argument in his debate with Biden. The latter claimed a “K-shaped” recovery, where Trump could only respond with a weak “everyone has a 401K.”
Is it just because a number of proles are simply envious of rich vaisyas, and rationalise their envy by pretending the game is rigged against them? GME showed what actual rigging looks like, and MSFT or GOOG are definitely not that.
“Life is, as I have said before, like one of the monster movies where one character sees monsters, and the other character does not, and you wonder if the character that sees monsters is insane, until someone gets eaten by a monster.”
I feel like many people saw monsters eating people March 2020 – Jan 2021, but since then have begun to un-see them.
Too bad the images had to change I liked my old cat better.
Just keep rolling for a new cat until you get your old one back. You will spend a while in the moderation filter.
Nah not that big a deal.
Cats are now the symbol of evil white supremacist far right extremists, and we love it.
The frogs were getting stale after all.
I assumed it was some subtle joke about how getting a comments section of reactionaries to coordinate is like herding cats.
(Of course, it’s not a problem of reactionaries, it’s a problem of all the traditional social technologies for coordination being taken over by the other side.)
Jim, Cardano ADA is booming right now. I know you are betting big on it. Do you think it’s too late to buy some?
It is booming prematurely, on speculation.
Still not useful as real money. I expect it to become useful as real money, then it will really boom.
But, at that point, it is likely to find its marriage to the state becomes a serious hindrance. If it does the obvious, then that is what I am betting on. If it fails to do the obvious, time to get the hell out.
Could be booming right now on speculation of it being an ether killer.
Would Charles necessarily have to flee the country when the time comes to defect on the state since he’s a face fag? If so, that’s a big ask.
My gamble on ADA is predicated on the fact that he seems to have made preparation for fleeing the American empire.
If ADA remains the anti privacy currency, the evil twin of Monaro, not such a good gamble. I am gambling on Hydra, his lightning network, becoming mysteriously privacy friendly at some point in the future, when governments attempt to regulate the stuffing out of it, while the ADA currency itself piously remains the government friendly anti privacy currency.
I gambled on Trump and lost. I have gambled a considerably larger sum on ADA. We shall see how this gamble turns out. The lightning network is not only a better place for a privacy implementation, it also has the benefit of being incomprehensible to governments and regulators, who will not be able to understand that they are being defected upon.
The course of action he is on leads to a sovereign corporation – is already a sovereign corporation, though still so far organized and operating as a collection of Cathedralite corporations and foundations. But he is planning to organize as a sovereign corporation, and hot water lies that way. It is inherent in the nature of joint stock publicly traded corporations to compete, and his corporation will be competing with USG for mediation of international transactions and seignorage upon them, so the current far too palsy relationship will become rather fraught. The shareholders will not demand privacy, but they will demand fungibility, and to protect fungibility, will need privacy.
How dumb would you have to be to use a non-throwaway email? I don’t get it.
My only worry is that my throwaway email could be linked somehow to my actual person, that if they knew what my throwaway email was, they could figure out what specific device was used to log in to it, and from my specific device to my identity.
You should use a fake email, not a throwaway email.
What is the difference between fake email and throwaway email?
“Fake email”: Get an email that does not require personal information for registration, if it does inventent details as necessaary?
“Throw away email”: Some as above, but use only once??
A fake email is simply an email Id that does not exist and ideally cannot exist (using a non-existent domain name with a non existent TLD).
Jim, I’ve taken a lot of your advice and then some to prepare for what’s coming. Permanent residency in a more sane country, physical gold, Monero, Bitcoin, ADA etc., enough cash to last a while. I leave as little a digital trace a possible. Ammo isn’t an option unfortunately. Any other suggestions?
Not very useful advice.
Expect the unexpected.
I’m switching up my address just to be safe. If you need me to verify that it’s the same me, either using the old or new address just let me know.
Testing the new fake email.
Lots of things simply look unfinished. This distracts when assessing them. Here is an example.
https://github.com/jedisct1/libsodium/blob/ae4add868124a32d4e54da10f9cd99240aecc0aa/src/libsodium/include/sodium/crypto_stream_chacha20.h
#define crypto_stream_chacha20_ietf_KEYBYTES 32U
#define crypto_stream_chacha20_ietf_NONCEBYTES 12U
https://github.com/jedisct1/libsodium/blob/master/src/libsodium/include/sodium/crypto_secretstream_xchacha20poly1305.h
typedef struct crypto_secretstream_xchacha20poly1305_state {
unsigned char k[crypto_stream_chacha20_ietf_KEYBYTES];
unsigned char nonce[crypto_stream_chacha20_ietf_NONCEBYTES];
unsigned char _pad[8];
} crypto_secretstream_xchacha20poly1305_state;
The structure is padded to 52 bytes. The 8-bytes of padding would make sense if the nonce were 24 bytes. It seems a reasonable assumption that the structure was copy-pasted from a place that did have a 24-byte nonce, or that a rushed author was mistakenly thinking of a 24-byte nonce when creating it. An inspection of the code shows that the crypto_secretstream_xchacha20poly1305_*() functions use the structure as expected.
It is not a security issue, and would have little or no performance cost, but it is a distraction, and it makes assessing what is already quite complex code just a little bit harder.
The algorithm is overly, unmanageably and incomprehensibly complex.
It is also inherently broken. You should not be generating umpteen copies of the same image, as the names leak information, cost storage space, and transmitting a multitude of identical images to the viewer slows down response time. Every additional round trip costs readership.
Under the hood, the system is using painfully old fashioned and slow ssl crypto with unnecessarily many round trips to establish a shared secret in order to transmit an image identical to many of the images it has already sent, which elaborate security protocol leaks information to many hostile parties instead of securing it.
Correct behavior would be to map the email address and display name in the local database to a rule defining the algorithm determining the image, and, if the algorithm is random generated image, which it almost always is, the number of possible generated images is quite small, so evaluate
hash (site wide 256 bit secret | email address | display name),throw away almost all of the bits except for a few low order or high order bits, generate a random local image based on those few random bits, and name it
image generation script name | global script parameters / random parameters used to generate the particular imageThereby ensuring that every browser that routinely visits the site will already have these images locally cached, so that they are seldom actually sent, resulting a quite noticeable improvement in site performance.
If no images are sent, you save one round trip – and multiple round trips if sending the images involves the creation of a new connection. Each additional round trip leads to significant loss of viewers.
Further, thereby ensuring your site is not repeatedly creating yet another image identical to the images it has created already, but with yet another name, and thus not repeatedly calling the php-gd2 extension, which is a notorious memory and disk io hog.
To economize on round trips and the use of php-gd2, the number of bits needs to be truncated down to log base 2 of the number of visually distinct images the script can produce.
Somewhere during the last 20 years Hanlon’s Razor died a silent death. Today it is more like: when you see something clearly attributable to malice, that is incompetently executed malice.
Wilful incompetence is a form of malice, and enables greater malice down the road.
Ideas like ‘Hanlon’s Razor’ grow legs in popular discourse largely not because of any especial predictive power, but because they evoke an agreeable sentiment in the subject; here most especially agreeable to prog sensibilities.
That ‘everyone who i do not like is just stupider than me’, and so that ‘any ideology, properly understood, is my proggism’, that ‘anyone i consider problematic can be solved by sufficient (((education)))’, that you can even in fact ‘properly understood’ anything (anyone) into one’s proggism, and also that ‘the idea of evil makes me feel uncomfortable (threatened)’.
Nah. Progs love calling people evil. If anything, the opposite, conservatives tend to say things like “stupid progs don’t understand economics” because they are intimidated, so they have to pretend progs have good intentions and are just making mistakes. This is really the conflict vs. mistake thing that Scott and Spandrell wrote about, but the point of that is that if you call out a conflict, that is basically a declaration of war, so if you are in the weaker position, you have to pretend everything is a well-intentioned mistake. Essentially when a slow war is waged against you, and you have no means to defend yoruself, you have to pretend to not notice it because noticing it will make it a fast war.
A valid point. I’ve used this strategy myself to de-escalate conflict. The only problem is that the “enemy” needs to be functionally capable of de-escalation too. An 80-IQ shudra (Americans can imagine a negro gangbanger, Britons an aggressive chav) treats de-escalation attempts as a sign of weakness and will redouble his attacks. With such an adversary it is better to deliver a stupefying blow right at the outset, after which he immediately starts cowering like the dog that he is. Judging the nature of one’s opposition is a vital task.
To take an example, a Russian White Restoration would have been far more likely to succeed had the Tsar not capitulated and forced the Jews/Communists to imprison him. A fast war with a possibility of victory may be better than a slow war with the certainty of defeat.
This is a good way of framing the present time period, but i would only quibble only to say that over the long arc of history, the eternal whig is indeed generally typified by a carping against ideas of good and evil, against virtues and vices, against judgement of aught that is better or worse…
In relative comparison, those time periods where the inmates manage to start running the asylum, so to speak, and systematic dissolution of any left-over unprincipled exceptions to whiggish memeweapons kicks into high gear, are naturally brief – what order can survive, that declaims itself against that which provides order?
Stupidity (relative to peers) is typical of whigs, but stupidity alone is not sufficient for ‘doing leftism’. The eternal whig is a figure frequently lacking in virtue, but it’s most importune characteristic is that it declaims itself against virtue itself, not only or just or merely by mistake, but precisely *because* of something being virtuous. Which is to say, evil.
Hence, one ought in all times be ready and able to recognize when something is evil, and not ‘just’ stupid.
I beg to differ. Hanlon’s Razor is a variant of “turn the other cheek,” which is a valid and sane course of action in a sane society. Another variant is “once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, thrice is enemy action,” yet another being “fool me once, shame on you… fool… you can’t fool me again.” The reason these have fallen out of favour since after the GWB era is because at that time the Left still felt the right to have tangible power, so at least pretended to go along with co-operation. Such deception is no longer required. Obama II was the turning point.
Fascinating look at the different factions of the Democratic Party (after you translate the progspeak to the correct words)…
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-are-split-over-how-much-the-party-and-american-democracy-itself-are-in-danger/
It seems the filibuster is the final barrier preventing the deluge of every leftist policy under the sun and Biden is going to increasingly come under pressure from the left calling for it’s removal. If the white least left faction, like Joe Manchin, don’t budge on removing it, my reading of this is that Antifa/BLM will be activated to intimate them with violence into removing it.
> If the white least left faction, like Joe Manchin, don’t budge on removing it, my reading of this is that Antifa/BLM will be activated to intimate them with violence into removing it.
Seems likely. Though they might have issues using Antifa against Joe. Lots of armed people in West V.
There’s a lot more violence primed at GOP members of congress and cucks always cuck out in the face of opposition.
Honestly, I don’t think they really care about getting things passed. The filibuster is a convenient excuse not to give the hard left more power, which is exactly who would gain from those items. What they do want passed is tons of spending on stuff they can loot like florigen aid.
The rad left and even regular progs are going to become increasingly impatient when their gibs keep getting filibustered and progressive anti-white supremacy utopia is not coming as advertised. They need all 50 senators to kill it so they’ll definitely need to get to Manchin when the time comes. Most Senators have a 2nd home in DC. I’m sure Antifa could find it easily like they did with Hawley. And even if they cant get him that way they can always just have the press scream how much of a white supremacist he is, threaten his family for the rest of his life, and then ban and deplatform him on everything.
The deep state is likely to continue feeding them gibs and victims as needed, but mostly from their enemies.
Arms are not much help against intimidation under police protection. Anitfa can camp on his doorstep and just harass him, his family, and anyone who wants to visit. The harassment will be low level violence that won’t create serious wounds, but ensures that noone in that house ever sleeps.
The police is always present to protect antifa and will arrest him or any person from that houshold as soon as he draws a gun.
I expect any progressive to cave quickly in such a situation.
There’s a lack of antifa violence in areas controlled by Republicans. Whatever command structure makes the cops protect antifa requires Dem leadership to operate. They really dont want their paper tiger anywhere near fire. Antifa exists to intimidate the normies in a dominance display. Anyone they really want taken care of, they investigate for arcane and obtuse process crimes.
Serbs remove kebab and you removed your own Twitter account.
What did the US do to Serbs who removed kebab again? My twitter wasnt all that useful or entertaining
Yes, command of police is decisive, but the number of armed people, as Ace implied, is not.
Don’t know how much everyone on here browses Twitter, but there is a massive purge of right-wing accounts going on right now, probably the worst I’ve seen yet, and I’ve been on Twitter since 2018. They actually banned Spandrell. BAP and Niccolo Saldo, some of the only big accounts to survive so far, have each lost well over a thousand followers. Seems Biden’s feelers are ensuring no “misinformation” comes from third-party news sources anymore so that 2016 never happens again.
A bit off topic, a youtuber on the failure of German socialistic logistics during WW2:
https://youtu.be/1Oc_lFmp6vQ
The failures of socialism in the formerly private economy strikingly resemble the failures of socialist military logistics.
It never worked – the reason for its adoption is that people were disturbed by the power of the aristocratic officer class. Bureaucrats and priests wanted to turn the officer class into bureaucrats and priests.
Yes. They knew in advance they will have problems sourcing oil and rubber, they had plenty of coal and IG Farben was producing oil and synthetic rubber from coal, it was all known, researched by good engineers and planned for in case of war.
All that was needed to scale up that production, but socialism does not scale.
IG Farben was practically the equivalent of a Soviet company, huge as fuck, using slave labor, practically being a department of the government, they were practically the only ones producing synthetic rubber, and the 12 companies producing synthetic oil were “overseen” by IG Farben.
This is ridiculous bullshit and you (probably) know it. IG Farben was what Soviet companies dreamed of being. This myth of German quasi-state corps being somehow “inefficient” is mostly promulgated by butthurt commies or butthurt central Europeans, and half-heartedly cheered on by Americans (who, under FDR, had practically the same system, but worse in several ways).
General Motors, Dow Chemical, Exxon, and Curtiss/Wright were absolutely quasi-state corporations, and so were Rolls Royce, Anglo Persian Oil Company, and Supermarine. The only reason IG Farben is considered as having done wrong is because Germany lost WWII, or else we’d be re-iterating the same lame arguments about GM and Dow.
Germany should have made an alliance with Imperal Japan and rolled over the USSR before dealing with USA, but their racial hubris probably prevented that from happening. Restoring the Christian monarchy in Russia could have gone well with Russians as well.
Would you explain the % nickel limit the state imposed on BMW and junkers jet engine design? For it’s kd ratio the jet aircraft would have made far more efficient use of strategic materials then bf109s but unfortunately the gov bolloxd dev on it with absurd design limits, hint design materials specifications for brand spanking new technology is dumb, specifying the maximum % content of a metal in alloy is retarded. Also no company in Germany could organize a scrapping effort of strategic materials as gas was rationed(trucks non existent) and labor was immobile by decrees of the gov. But I am curious how ig farben was a Soviet dream beyond the obvious left over infrastructure from not a Soviet backwater competitive market, and not being filled with slavs? I would remind you that Soviets built tanks out there ass and the Germans got basically negligible oil from ig farben despite some of the world largest coal reserves.
“This is ridiculous bullshit and you (probably) know it. IG Farben was what Soviet companies dreamed of being.”
The Soviets were getting a better return out of their slave labor then the Germans were by mid 1942, Stalin having ruthlessly eliminated communist hacks in war managements in favor of actual engineers. IG Farben did well on producing artificial rubber but not that well on anything else.
You are right about FDR and the American war command economy though. But at least none of the companies internal managers were bureaucrats they merely reported to production boards.
“Restoring the Christian monarchy in Russia could have gone well with Russians as well.”
Hitler considered the Slavs to be like “redskins”.
Wow what? IG Farben was the inventor/discoverer of polyurethane, Bosch process for nitrate (Carl Bosch was one of the founders of IG Farben), and sulfa-antibiotic Prontosil, and a pioneer in photographic chemistry, and also one of the world’s largest chemical and pharmaceutical conglomerates. It was one of the main drivers of German power before WWII, and it’s children companies (Bayer, BASF, Agfa, Hoechst — now Sanofi) remained the main drivers of (West) German power into the seventies, and even today.
If anything, IG Farben was subjected to stupid management under Nazis, after ironically, being the NSDAP’s largest corporate backer. The chief culprit was Comrade Goering, of course, from 1936-onwards, who convinced Hitler of following Soviet-style fiat rule rather than the reactionary market-based economy, as that could ostensibly lead to a faster military buildup (which Hitler wanted) at the cost of sustained survivability (which Hitler ignored or simply could not understand). It represented a significant change in Hitler’s thought process due to fear of Bolshevik attack, possibly d/t the Spanish Civil War breaking out in 1936, as pre-36 Hitler was a pragmatic, light-touch manager rather than a Stalinesque figure. I strongly suspect this to have been Goering’s doing as he was the one who got the most out of it, becoming “Little Fuhrer” plenipotentiary, and he possibly appeased Himmler by giving him internal security.
Apart from the Nazi command-economy years 1936-42, IG Farben acquitted itself very well, and is the characteristic “Nazi” company along with Krupp Steel (ThyssenKrupp) and Volkswagen. It amuses me no end that the “Bug” is the quintessential leftie car in the US whereas it was the “Establishment-mobile” in Adenauer’s West Germany.
“Bosch process for nitrate (Carl Bosch was one of the founders of IG Farben)”
Haber and Bosch invented that in 1910, before IG Farben was formed. During the Reich I stand by my general statement on IG Farben, that there big success was in artificial rubber production and otherwise they seemed like an inefficient bureaucratic Soviet state enterprise.
“If anything, IG Farben was subjected to stupid management under Nazis, after ironically, being the NSDAP’s largest corporate backer. The chief culprit was Comrade Goering, of course, from 1936-onwards, who convinced Hitler of following Soviet-style fiat rule rather than the reactionary market-based economy”
This wasn’t Goering it was Goebbels and Ley, Goering and Himmler were the more antisocialist high level nazis…
Goering moved to get control of it to keep it out of the hands of the leftist party hacks but Goering was one of the most truly right wing and reactionary of the Nazi leaders, in fact the Reich would have worked if Goering was Fuhrer and Hitler was #2. Hitler pursued his terrible disaster of an agriculture policy all on its own and having nothing to do with the need for a rapid military buildup, that tells me he was the socialist more so than Goering. Otto Ohlendorf also testified during his trial and during the Nuremberg trials that the big socialist influence in the leadership always came from Goebbels, Bormann and Ley.
“convinced Hitler of following Soviet-style fiat rule rather than the reactionary market-based economy, as that could ostensibly lead to a faster military buildup (which Hitler wanted) at the cost of sustained survivability (which Hitler ignored or simply could not understand)”
Yes now this is essentially correct. Sustainability wasn’t a priority since Hitler planned on total war by 1940 at the latest. They needed a rapid buildup NOW what it would do to the rest of the economy be damned.
Not sure how many of you browse Twitter often, but there was a massive banwave of right-wing accounts between the 27th and today. Spandrell got offed, among many others. BAP had his follower count drop by well over a thousand (although he himself did not get banned). Other, more mid-sized accounts lost anywhere between 20-35% of their followers Seems like Biden’s feelers have begun the process of ensuring that social media has no ability to pull off a 2016 ever again.
They’ve identified everyone with rightwing views and are slowly killing off everyone with the lower follower counts so there’s no big protests about it. It’s done via automation probably using some AI algorithm to identify the sorts of people they want gone. Soon there won’t be any followers who are not rabid leftists left.
There’s no rhyme or reason to it. To off Spandrell but allow a bigger account like BAP to stay is strange. I heard a good theory that even with the bannings, the right should not abandon main stream social media because that’s where the normies are.
It’s how they purged reddit. They stopped banning rightwing subs and just banned all the low level users who post in those subs. They’d leave people like mods and well know people alone, and went after the little guy. Pretty soon the only people with a voice on reddit was hard leftists and paid DNC shills.
Ah I guess that makes sense. They can leave BAP and Nick Fuentes alone then just flood their comments with a million Democrat shills every time they post.
At least I still can make few comments on r/conspiracy without being modded.
We need to try to get people evacuated to a suitable platform to regroup — I don’t think Gab and Parler are going to cut it.
Spandrell will probably fall back to Urbit (for better or worse). I recommend getting people over to the Fediverse in general and freespeechextremist.com in particular for now — the sysadmin there seems both competent and ideologically committed to keeping the signal going.
The decentralized nature of the Fediverse should buy us time to come up with a more permanent solution.
> Gab
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/03/gab-the-far-right-website-has-been-hacked-and-70gb-of-data-leaked/
SQL Injection…sometimes it’s the simplest paths where one is weakest.
The fundamental cure for sql injection is simply to always use precompiled sql statements. You simply never let the php code compile and interpret an sql statement.
But how do you stop it? PHP, last time I looked at it, could not easily be disempowered. I hope that this has been fixed and I am merely out of date. In my code that I am writing now, my sql statements are all invoked by C++ and the compiled C++ at program startup recompiles the SQL, before any interaction with the outside world, but this server is running on PHP, and I have, as in the Avatar Privacy issue, a hard time figuring out what it is doing.
PHP that constructs a string from data supplied by the user, and then hands that string over to the SQL interpreter to be interpreted and executed will always have SQL injection bugs. I hope there is some way of disabling or detecting such PHP-SQL code, but am unaware of anyone doing it.
To prevent SQL injection bugs, you need SQL that was compiled before any data came in over the internet.
I know how to do this in C++, don’t know how to do it in PHP. One way of doing it in PHP is to have lots of SQL VIEWs, an SQL VIEW being an SQL SELECT that was precompiled by the database administrator, but this does not seem to be widely used, so maybe I am ignorant of current PHP best practices.
What do you recommend as a versioning, syncing and backup system (similar to GitHut) for Mongolian software development where some of the developers might not yet be in Mongolia?
Gitea on Lemp. (Gog is abandonware.)
Gitolite is wonderfully powerful, but does a pile of ssh key management with no ssh key management UI, declaring that out of scope, so everyone rolled their own idiosyncratic UI.
Gitea is Gitolite with ssh key management in scope. Gitolite reimagined after Github.
Phabricator is too big, too powerful, and has too much team management and administration bundled into it. Gitlab is free as in beer, not free as in speech, and stuff that is free as in beer is always apt to come under enemy domination as corporate capitalism collapses under the priestly onslaught.
On all my servers, I block Google Analytics in the hosts file. Which does not protect me from users invoking it through various google malware. Use Sqlite rather than Mariadb for Gitea, but WordPress does not give you that option.
> Gogs is abandonware
Last update was 4 days ago… https://github.com/gogs/gogs
I’ve played with Gogs before, and didn;t see any obvious problems (apart from possibly being a Chinese operation). What issue did you have with it?
4 days ago, Mongolia was added to the list of locales and a set of untranslated strings were translated. (Presumably someone is using it in Mongolia) If you had looked at it five days ago, would have looked like abandonware.
The party who submitted the update seems to have been trying to cover his tracks, which is probably why he is operating in Mongolia.
I wonder if this was somehow related to the conversation we’re having here 😂
Input filtering is good practice too but yes should not be relied as a replacement for precompiled sql statements.
When I was doing PHP development, I wrapped htmlentities() around $_POST, $_GET, and $_REQUEST (make sure you use UTF-8 on both the client side and the server side) to stop XSS, and only ever used mysqli::prepare() for my queries. Even this is not ideal because someone could come along and “prepare” a query with some user input in it, but for what I was using it for (a simple merchant site) it was good enough. The logs were full of different IPs running robot scripts with
SELECT * FROM users WHERE 1=1; --and the like in the inputs. Script kiddies, not hackers. Gab would need to be much more careful.There is not really much you can do with languages that have such insecure constructs except for reviewing others’ code and following the rules yourself so that you are not the lowest hanging fruit. If you are forced to use a potentially unsafe system that someone else has developed then you need other mitigations.
How do you stop the client side from using something other than UTF-8? Your attacker is running the client.
I suppose you mean that you always serve up utf-8 web pages.
There is not really anything you can do to stop an attacker from putting garbage in your inputs. It is the job of the PHP entities encoder to make sure the raw input is encoded correctly. The documentation gives a few options for stripping out invalid characters or discarding any invalid fields completely.
https://www.php.net/manual/en/function.htmlentities.php
I want to use Awstats, but Awstats wants to know everyone’s IP address.
Awstats generates cold web pages, which obviously do not have to have access to everyone’s IP address. When it generates the data for monthly visitors, it needs to have a month’s worth of IPs in the logs, which is bad.
Maybe I could download the daily logs with cron, and run Awstats on secure server under my personal control inaccessible to the general public, then upload the web pages it generates with cron. Any suggestions?
If your visitor numbers are low enough that collisions are not a problem then write a cron that inputs the daily log files, converts the IP addresses into a 32-bit int, hashes them prepended with a site wide secret (like with the cats), takes the low 32 bits, converts back into IP addresses, and saves a new file where Awstats can see it. If you are worried about collisions then you would have to either use a map or run something like RC5 with 32-bit blocks in ECB mode.
A clever idea, but a cron job to remove the cut files to a secure location every few hours is likely to be simpler.
Simplicity beats cleverness when it comes to security.
It’d probably take way too much time, but you could try and convert the site to Wt o something similar
https://www.webtoolkit.eu/wt
It’s all but impossible.
The main problem is not blogging per se. Static site generators have made blogging a solved problem. The problem is that Jimblog is more of a discussion forum than blog. There are no good options for a discussion forum, and such as there are are rapidly dwindling to nothing, Gab being the latest.
I once broached the idea of embracing this and simply moving discussion to a purpose-built platform, but those platforms (eg: phpBB, Discourse) may be even less secure than WordPress by virtue of the latter’s huge market share and generally competent stewardship by Automattic.
Not 100% sure I understand your problem, but I prefer stored procedures for everything SQL. A database should not be a wide open thing for every program to write into and data manipulating business logic should generally reside in the database, and everything else should do nothing more than call these procedures.
If I would design a blogging engine, it would have PostComment, ShowCommentsForPost, ShowLastXComments stored procedures. Perhaps each stored procedure would have a web service wrapping it, ideally auto-generated.
Beyond security, and beyond speed, it would be because SQL is easy and easy to test and programming is hard and hard to test, if I have built it up this way then writing PHP code would be trivial, or if C++ which I would not touch with a long pole because I lack the skill, could be written by someone else.
10 years ago it was a popular thing to have all data manipulating business logic in an object-oriented MVC thing in the controller layer and merely use the database as a storage, but the vendors have pushed back through implementing features like XML and JSON parsing and string manipulation so that data manipulating business logic can reside where it belongs, in the database again.
You can use stored procedures, (in SQLite user defined functions), compiled SQL, views, and triggers, all you like, the problem is that you are using a bundle of other people’s code, and have no idea what they are doing.
What I would like to do is to be able to prevent php from using dynamic sql, so that I would be able to detect what other people are doing.
And if I had some PHP code that should in theory only do safe things, and it mysteriously and inexplicably started doing unsafe things. I would like it to halt, fail, and log an error. That is what I would like – PHP that cannot do unsafe things.
Dynamic sql is just a bad idea. All SQL statements really should be compiled by the database engine and code stored on the database engine until the database administrator does another recompile, but the nearest thing we can get to that is sql code that gets recompiled on C++ program start up, or worse still, at the start of every PHP script. Which means it gets recompiled every time someone views a web page.
This sounds like a task for an API server (called “n-tier” in ye olden times). Actually quite common in Enterprise Java land. The front-end (usually some GWT CRUD UI, or even a form) communicates all operation to the middleware running in JBoss, which is responsible for communicating with the DB, caching, etc. It is literally impossible for input to be executed as SQL, as the entire thing is precompiled. The problem here is that the front-end and middleware are usually developed together, and inspite of having an ostensible “API” it is very common to have extensive cross-dependencies. There exists no such middleware for a PHP-based discussion forum/commenting solution, especially not one compatible with WordPress commenting API.
The compiled Java middleware code is still recompiling the sql code at startup, or worse, executing literal strings of dynamic sql during execution, so it is far from impossible for the input to be executed as SQL.
What we need is a system where your public facing server does not have anything running on it anywhere that can understand the text string:
SELECT * FROM admin;That something can understand that text string is only running when a developer runs it, that even root cannot have that text string interpreted as sql unless he first does
su -l devmariadb
That it is physically impossible for the public facing server to execute an sql statement except that statement was compiled from sql source long ago when the developer was working on it.
That your public facing sql server has compiled sql on it, but has no sql compiler or interpreter.
That your sql interpreter and compiler should be a separate program from your database service. It should have access to the database service, but the database service and thus the code facing the public, such as the PHP code, should have no access to it.
Well you could try running the PHP app with a database user with limited permissions to what objects can it read and even more limited permissions to what objects it can write, and where it fails, replace that part with a stored proc call or select on a view…
That is the standard thing to do, but you actually have to read from databases that can contain critical information when interacting with the user, which makes it quite useless.
It lacks granularity – you can only block certain entire databases from certain entire php scripts. And your php script usually does need access to something in that database.
Disabling run time interpretation and compilation of sql on the other hand has perfect granularity. Line by line and table by table granularity. SQL code gets run if and only if actually typed in by the developer when he was developing.
Yes, using prepared statements and bind variables to deal with input. None of this mechanism is accessible from the front-end. You could put literal SQL strings inside input and they would be stored/retrieved in the DB unchanged. This is really standard stuff, and not even new (eg: https://coderanch.com/t/306045/databases/SQL-injection ). An attacker would have to exploit a vulnerability in the front-end and also middleware developer incompetence to get to the DB at all.
Larger orgs move much business logic into the DB itself (especially Oracle users), which makes it even more secure to such attacks. Nothing is 100% secure though. I agree that having the SQL compiler separate from the DB could be a good thing, but we have what we have.
While’s Gab’s lapse is inexcusable, this was at least a more sophisticated attack than Parler’s Cracking 101 idiocy. It would not surprise me if the actual cracking was done by USG or allied forces. “Leaking” data is their chosen mode of operation. The average quality of prog hacker is very, very poor. They usually do DDoS (using paid DDoS-as-a-service botfarms lol), and that’s about it. I know this from second-hand experience. If your site can survive with Cloudflare/corporate backstab (like Parler), you’re set. Unless you attract escalation to proper hackers, which Gab suddenly and suspiciously did.
If no one has screwed up.
But they could easily screw up.
We need something where it is physically impossible to screw up in this manner.
If you put everything in binds, and bind statements are compiled from const char strings, everything is golden, regardless of whether you are using middleware or not.
I put the binds in the constructors of course, so it is “impossible” for user inputs to affect them. So does everyone. And then the boss constructs an sql query that works for him and is not a bind compiled from const strings. Which is what happened to Gab.
Some people put a filter in their build process that prevents commits that do not use bind. But the filter is stupid. You could still commit code that does a bind, but does not construct the bind from const chars.
Gab got hacked because of a traitorous mole, didn’t they? One Fosco Marcotto, formerly of Facebok, removed the protections against SQL injection and soon thereafter the data were exfiltrated by parties unknown.
https://developers.slashdot.org/story/21/03/02/2230235/rookie-coding-mistake-prior-to-gab-hack-came-from-sites-cto
I’m surprised there are not a lot more legal processes about stealing data and user information. Though apparently the user database of Grindr was too hot to even sell above-board to the Chinese.
That line of code does look malicious, rather than a mistake.
If an interpreter capable executing such code did no exist on your deployment site, that would close off that avenue of attack.
We need an environment where that particular kind of malicious code just cannot be executed.
It looks like either he was forced to do it, or he was a plant from the start:
@Jim:
There is no way to prevent this type of attack. A high level functionary disabling security protection is very hard to mitigate. Enterprise-land “solves” this problem by basically writing the whole data-retreival application in PL/SQL (later Java) and storing the whole thing inside the DB. Front-end can connect to the DB, but cannot execute anything apart from the stored application itself.[2] There is no technical way to pwn this system from the front-end, but the CTO still can!
Removing the SQL interpreter from the DB is strange, as SQL is the data retrieval language. How would we query the data?
I would ideally run the data-access middleware on the same server as the DB, and treat the entire thing as “the DBMS,” which is what Oracle actually is. Bonus for exposing the DB on (only) UNIX Domain Sockets, preventing any outside access at all except for the (locally running) middleware. Such a PostgreSQL+JDBC combo could implement what you want (no SQL access from the front-end), but is still vulnerable to CTO-level attacks!
[1]: https://developers.slashdot.org/story/21/03/02/2230235/rookie-coding-mistake-prior-to-gab-hack-came-from-sites-cto
[2]: https://asktom.oracle.com/pls/apex/f?p=100:11:0::::P11_QUESTION_ID:561622956788
Through compiled SQL queries compiled long ago by the developers, which ideally should be compiled when the rest of the source code is compiled rather than at program startup, if only we could.
While recompiling the SQL queries every startup from source code in the form of const char literal strings is perfectly safe, though wasteful, having the capability to compile SQL queries from source code at run time is dangerous in a public facing product, and entirely unnecessary, as in practice all well written code uses compiled sql.
Removing the dangerous and unnecessary capability to compile or interpret sql source code from all public facing servers would have prevented this particular attack.
I set up my environment to only use compiled sql, and am frustrated that I have to recompile it all over again every time my program starts up. Why cannot it be compiled at the same time as the rest of the source?
And if I must recompile at startup every time, why cannot I turn this dangerous and useless capability off once compilation is done?
This is how Oracle DB does it. The entire application is stored in the DB itself, and compiled once on deployment. The front-end only sees the application API, with no way to execute any SQL, or even know that an SQL backend is being used. My hypothetical single server PostgreSQL+JDBC+middleware solution accomplishes much the same.
Accessing DB via SQL from the front-end simply is not done at all in any Enterprise shop worth its salt. A three tier application can deal with arbitrary attacks from the front-end. Proprietary DBs like Oracle incorporate the DB, SQL engine, and PL/SQL middleware programming system into a single product, but it’s the same concept.
Overhauling legacy PHP etc apps is done in the same way. We insert a SQL-talking middleware that exposes an XML/JSON API, test and debug it, and store it along the DB (literally in the DB in case of Oracle). Now we’re free to use the front-end framework of choice that will deal with a black-box “API server” that only speaks XML/JSON and can only run canned queries. The backend might not even use SQL as far as the front-end is concerned. If removing SQL capability from PHP is your goal, this does that. SQL is also compiled once, on deployment (in Oracle) or per-startup of middleware (in PostgreSQL+Java). If SQL-compilation is your bottleneck, you must be doing something very strange indeed.
None of which is resilient against a CTO-level threat model. 🤷
That is the intention of any enterprise shop worth its salt. That is the way things are supposed to happen.
But as long as an SQL interpreter and compiler is running live on the public facing front end, and it always is running live on the front end, being built right into the database, it is hard to know what is actually happening.
Worse still, MariaDB stored procedures are invoked by sending SQL source code to the database, which is then run time interpreted by the SQL interpreter, and the arguments are run time parsed out of the text string.
With SQLite, you can only compile stored procedures at program startup, but at least they get called as regular C functions, so you can be sure that what you think is an argument is actually seen by the database engine as an argument, not as SQL source code to be executed.
Go back to Usenet
Usenet died because overrun by enemy shills, who pervaded every group, even the non political ones like science fiction and fantasy were politicized.
We need a platform that resists censorship, but enables moderation. Unmoderated groups will be destroyed by enemy shills.
What’s the problem with censorship if the censor follows a sane religion?
Or phrased differently, what’s the difference between censorship and moderation?
The difference between censorship and moderation is that a moderator acts to protect the discussion from shills, spam, and scammers, while a censor acts to prevent the discussion of dangerous ideas.
What the censor suppresses is stuff that is not generally known and not generally available, because power does not want it known and does not want it available.
What moderators suppress is stuff that is hard to avoid, because a thousand sock puppet shills are posting it on a thousand forums.
When we are in power, we are going to censor romance, the blue pill, the black pill, and gay. But now our problem is to prevent them censoring us, and to have conversations without being drowned out by shills.
I remember the day AOL came online. It seemed to go downhill from there. Before that the only weirdos online were the few like Archimedes Plutonium. I also remember my first spam email. I was outraged. How things have changed.
Its funny how this happens no matter how non political the topic…
If you don’t have a means of stopping one way broadcasts into a medium designed for conversations, your social net is going to be flooded with one way broadcasts.
The particular axe that was being ground was not the problem. There are no end of large, wealthy, and powerful organizations with axes to grind and a budget for a thousand shills.
Before Harvard and the New York times started one way broadcasting into social media, some megachurch was one way broadcasting young earth creationism into every group regardless of that group’s topics and interests.
They are starting to rather seriously go after the families of people who are too well defended to get to directly.
Privacy is always a concern if you have something to lose. A job, a bank account, a wife and kids. Any “attack vector” really. You can see your push as bravery or desperation. At some point you will either be totally controlled or openly push back. Freedom is never given, it must be taken by whatever means. By what right does one man have to control another?
The ADL is now claiming that to even believing Whites should have a unique culture or even exist as a race is, in their words “white supremacy”. So you no longer need to be White for this label. Any White who is not self-hating is also a “white supremacist” by ADL standards.
At some point, you are going to have to openly push back against this at the risk of job, money and family or it will all be gone anyway.
Is there any purpose served in keeping snapshots of the website publicly available on archive dot org?
Bearing in mind that my prediction of a massive leak of right-wing e-mails now seems to may have become a reality (although the gab leak seems to be a vaporware psyop, aimed in part to smear gab’s excellent security practises), the threat of journalistm, and the impeding loss of control of the old domain name, this is something that ought to be decided now, Jim?
The vulnerability is still present in the public snapshots on archive dot org. All the other copies that come up in google search results seem to be spam networks: ephemeral pastiches of generated texts, which recycle some of the content, but none of the HTML markup.
Now, I do not imagine that people who have been careless enough to sign their real e-mail were so careful that this were not the only place they had done so. As I said before, we may well need to wait for a new generation of people whose first contact with Internet will have been through secure means, people who would never imagine to give away their own identity. On the other hand, deleting things off the Internet is, contrary to popular belief, rather effective.
I don’t like that we’re basically forced to self-censor, but then again, what is the alternative? If the powers that be really cared, they’re gonna censor us anyway. The archived snapshots contain now-defunct links in the sidebar, which perhaps could be replicated as an “archived sidebar links that no longer work, linking to archive dot org or a PDF” page?
So you are proposing Jim to make a delete request to archive.org?
I want some kind of archive to preserve this place should anything happen…
Security be damned Jim’s work is a treasure that should be preserved.
There is an archive, though I have not updated it in a few months. The link is in the sidebar at the bottom.
I need to integrate refresh of the the link with my backup process.
I have now integrated the backup process so that now every time I make a backup, the backup of the site is published in the sidebar.
https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-syria-middle-east-iraq-jen-psaki-a805b773aa73aa28c4363f3a8f011720
What are they up to? I of course agree Biden should definitely not be able to order any sort of attacks…
Damage control. He’s trying to appease the moderates in the party. Biden is a figurehead though, he has no influence over military decision making.
https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-syria-middle-east-iraq-jen-psaki-a805b773aa73aa28c4363f3a8f011720
What are they up to?? I of course agree Biden should not be able to decide to bomb or attack anything… but is the idea to transfer the war powers to some derp state committee that will be much more willing to attack Iran and other crazy shit like that.
It sounds good on the surface but it can’t be good.
https://theamericansun.com/2021/03/05/nullification-friday-reads/
This sort of lines up with my theory that laws, the legal process, and the Constitution still matter right now, if only to the red states. Little by little, they are passing their own laws to overrule the expected unconstitutionality of the federal government, hoping that will suffice.
“The system will likely shut it down quickly, and maybe, just maybe, the right will admit that it is not hypocrisy or double standards. It is that you are the outgroup, you are not allowed to rule, the full force of the legal code applies to you, and you must accept this. Learn your place. Admitting this is the scheme is key to rejecting it because any addict has to admit they have a problem before they can fix it.”
Then maybe, just maybe, a counter elite or a Caesar will understand the Republic is officially dead and that there are no other options left but to fight.
Nullification has to assume the law DOESN’T matter not that it does. Nullification is a bet that the federal government is not going to be willing to use force to enforce things that are extremely unpopular in local areas and perhaps ignite real civil war. That may be true for a little while but probably not much longer.
Black letter legal doctrine includes “supremacy of federal law”. So if law exists nullification doesn’t.
Of course this is applied inconsistently since law only matters when the ruling elite want it to. So for instance sanctuary immigration areas exist because the ruling elite are pro open borders. Pot legalization also theoretically violates federal law but there is no political will among anyone to arrest people for having small amounts of weed anymore.
Nullification is a bet that whatever unconstitutional thing the federal government is doing will be struck down in the Supreme Court and nullification will be upheld. So it is a bet by the red states the Constitution still matters. They (the red states) are in a for a rude awakening when the Supreme Court magically upholds everything under the sun the federal government does, regardless how insane. The question is will there be a point for the red state elite or a general to say ok enough is enough, the Constitution is completely and utterly dead now. We have no choice left but to fight.
I see it as states setting up legitimacy to justify war. The founding fathers spent a long time building up such legitimacy to replace English law. If there’s going to be war white men must feel that they have legitimate authority backing them up in order to fight in a cohesive manner. Religion is better than law in this regard, but the only living religion in American is the Religion of Woke.
The problem is that the Supreme Court is going to uphold whatever the federal government does as magically not violating the Constitution.
At some point, as Caeser did, a general or an elite faction may have to rightly understand that they are the outgroup, the Republic is dead, and the Constitution has no legal authority anymore.
Does anyone on the right think the supreme court has any legitimacy any more? I don’t know or read anyone who’s not a lawyer sucking federal judge cock who believes they’re anything other than traitors to the Republic.
The problem becomes one of building up another legitimate source of authority. Red states passing laws is one such source, but it’s a weak one until proven that the locals have the balls to uphold their laws as legitimate.
I still plenty on right and in the military thinking the Constitution has legitimacy, which essentially is a poorly placed bet that the Supreme Court will respect it’s legitimacy. For the leadership of the right to build up another legitimate source of authority they may have to literally watch the Supreme Court light it on fire and piss on it first.
light the Constitution on fire*
Rightists are not long for the military.
The founding fathers built legitimacy by appealing to an older right than the rights of the English crown. And then backed up those claims with men spilling their blood under that new banner of authority. I see passing local laws appealing to our most basic laws as a step in that direction.
But again the problem is the lack of elites on our side to make those ideas stick. Trump’s not an elite nor is the man who let an endless river of niggers out of jail to rob, rape, and murder Whites and Asians the sort of man I’m willing to listen to.
I see them passing laws in the context of the sacred Constitution though, which is old authority that no longer exists. We need men who understand the Constitution is completely and utterly dead and it’s corpse is long buried. I fear it is going to take some time for them to come to this realization as it did during the late Roman Republic.
The states could work towards holding the federal government at arm’s length as a general principle of operations. There are presumably existing legal obstacles to this already present, but you have to start somewhere.
For example, require federal government employees and visiting federal dignitaries to register at their point of entry in order to be treated as such. Do not refer cases to out of state courts. Require federal laws and precedence to be officially accepted by elected legislators (you could start by doing this routinely if you’re feeling nice). Close or restrict federal military bases. And so on.
Ryan Landry (pseudonym, editor of American Sun) is someone worth following. Clever fellow.
He has been right on a lot of things including that Trump would lose. Not sure how to follow him though besides his friday columns.
I think those columns are it at the moment. He used to write a blog called ’28 sherman’ and even had a podcast but all that seems to be gone now.
28 Sherman contained material that is now highly radioactive. Which is why he took it down.
I started checking it out on the Wayback machine. How come I only seem to find out about these cool sites after they’re gone?
A lot of places i considered more reliable like i considered this blog more reliable have gone that way over the years (quite a coincidence). The worst thing is taking all of their material with them, too.
Porter/Kakistocracy was good but he’s gone. Nydwracu was good but he’s gone. Graaaagh was good but he’s gone. Atlantic Centurion, Future Primaeval, Neocolonial, QuasLacrimas, Theden – good, but gone.
Radish has not been heard from in years, but a blessing from god that it is still archived. Foseti, FaithandHeritage, up but not updated. Nicky’s Xenosystems, not always reliable, but pretty good – also gone. Social Matter, once plenty of guys who were good, now gay.
There are a few places i think of in similar ways that are still up and show signs of life, such as ThoseWhoCanSee, or Counter-Currents, Amerika, or NeoCiceronian, as well as several linked in Jim’s sidebar; but few also with similar levels of activity to throttle your attention span in a world of superstimuli, besides more ‘news-like’ outlets, like Steve Sailer, AmGreatness, or Taki.
Given that William Briggs is in the sidebar, I hope Jim and some others have some interest in statistics.
I am afraid I might be a frequentist. When faced with a math puzzle, knowing I am not good at math, I tend to do this. For example, looking at Yudkowsky’s mammogram, https://betterexplained.com/articles/an-intuitive-and-short-explanation-of-bayes-theorem/ I do this:
OK suppose we tested 100K women, of whom 1K have breast cancer therefore 99K do not have it. Of the 1K who do have it, 20% = 800 test positive. Of the 99K who do not have it, 9,6% = 9504 test positive. Therefore a positive test means 800/10304 = 7,76% chance of having breast cancer.
I always do this with math puzzles. It always works. Yet, it might be frequentist?
Another example from the PISA tests. This supposed to be one of the hardest questions. We drove from A to B at 20 km/h, then we drove back at 30 km/h, what was our average speed for the whole roundtrip? So what I do is let’s say the distance is 30 km. So we drove there for 1.5 hours and back for 1 hour. That means our average km/h is 60km/2.5 hours = 24 km/h
This unknown method makes hard (well, intended to be hard and unintuitive) math puzzles easy. But it might be frequentist?
Bonus question: what is this method called? I call it replacing derived numbers with (fake, thought-experiment) observed numbers or naturally occuring numbers or assumed facts, but it is not a good terminology.
Bonus question 2: an example where this, assumed to be frequentist method would fail hard?
I don’t think it’s a problem per se. I’ve done much the same. You can call it just grounding the problem in a concrete example and as long as everything plugs in right it’s fine since solving made up math puzzles is exactly how frequentism came into being.
My point would be rather that I turn made up math puzzles into their real world equivalents. After all, in the real world we observe things like distances, speeds, the number of patients tested, the number of patients testing positive or negative etc. this is the raw unprocessed data and things like average speeds, the % of false negatives and false positives are processed data. So I just don’t like processing processed data further, because it takes harder math to do so, I rather start with the raw data.
Nah, it is moderate realism.
The color red exists in every cherry, and the number three exists in every pile of three sea shells.
Math is about tasks you could do with sea shells and shovelfulls of sand, if you had a large enough beach. That is the moderate realist philosophical grounding for dealing with maths.
But Baye’s theorem gets tricky in moderate realism, because you care about the probability of probabilities. You have a limited and very small number of samples, and you want to make a guess about what will happen by the time you get a very large number of samples. Which is philosophically impossible, though we do it all the time with pretty good success.
To ground this, requires a leap of faith. And if you don’t make that leap of faith, you will not be very successful in this endeavor. And mathematicians and philosophers keep complaining about this leap of faith. Don’t listen to them.
To see that this problem is philosophically deep, suppose you have two samples, and both of them have this characteristic, what is the chance that every sample will have this characteristic?
Newton had one sample for the inverse square law of gravitation, and that did not worry him at all. Galileo had two samples for heliocentralism. They were right to be confident.
Up to a point. Seashells i.e. integer algebra i.e. the “number of elements in a set” based calculations fail at 10/3. There is not a big enough beach, 100/3, 1000/3, no matter how big.
At this point I think it turns into geometry, measuring not sets with an integer number of elements, but more like the length of (ideal, one-dimensional) ropes, being folded and cut this way and that way. Which is not integer business but… is continuous a good term? Having a 3.3333… forever long rope is super weird. I think it must be possible to cut any rope into three equal parts. It is certainly possible to fold any rope into a Z shape with three equal parts. There are no reason why such a folding cannot be 100% perfectly accurate. Indeed, this weird 3.3333333… going on forever number seems to be a property, a failure of the decimal notation, not a failure of folding the rope. In reality if a yard is defined as three feet, and you do the perfect folding and cutting, you get not 3.3333… yard long ropes, you get one foot long ropes. If there was an SI unit defined as 1/3 meters, there would be no problem.
Then it gets even weirder with irrational numbers like PI. When the diameter of a wagon wheel is unit long, the length of the iron bands we need to make an iron tire over it are PI long. This is real. And this does not seem to be a problem of notation. Rather, as we are trying to to measure the length of the iron band needed with more and more precision, more and more decimal places, there are weird fluctations in the results. WTF?
And complex numbers. How the fuck is something that does not even exist is so useful for electrical engineering? Wiki sez 2x^3 + -9x^2 -6x +3 = 0 has only complex solutions for x. To me it would mean it has no solutions, period. But EE’s use stuff like this… I guess only as intermediate results? As a calculation shortcut trick between real inputs and real outputs?
Been a very long time since I did my electrical engineering courses and the job I eventually found did not use any of the complex math (and now I don’t work at all) but we used complex numbers in alternating current calculations (never direct current) and yes it was used to solve for the real values of needed components, the nonohmic part of impedance being known as reactance and it used either inductors and capacitors.
Don’t ask me about phasor notation I was always mathematically weak at frequency domain mathematics and barely got through anything having to do with it.
>and the job I eventually found did not use any of the complex math
I am not surprised. There is both undertraining and overtraining at schools. I went to a business school in Central Europe where we were taught stats like regression and correlation and we were told this will be used in business reports, queries, data provided to business managers. I have spent 19 years and counting writing SQL and suchlike to generate such reports and no manager ever wanted something more complicated than sales and margin this month, last month, last year this month. OK I stuck to fairly small businesess, <200 headcount, because I hate bureaucracy. I do know a guy who does R statistical programming so serious stats for a major UK TV channel. But I think it is not about this stuff like sales and margins, not this business stuff.
I do see a lot of overtraining in many college courses over here. Also undertraining. So basically wrong training.
I was greatly underemployed and I did architectural EE. Most of what I did was glorified CAD work although there was a great deal of project management type crap later on.
It also was stressful as hell with constant deadlines to meet often hundreds of deadlines a year (I’m not kidding)… but still I was quite aware the economy was such (I got the job well before Trump) there were about 5 million people who would kill for my job.
Higher mathematics is also designed to keep dumb dumbs away professions where people need to intelligent like engineering. Every time they dumb down math education it’s so they can graduated colored morons who drop pedestrian bridge onto lanes of morning traffic because they don’t understand physics.
Years ago a friend of mine was encouraged to become a doctor because there was a “shortage” of black doctors. He’s not very smart and the idea of him overseeing medical care is nightmarish. He failed hard when he hit calculus. He took the class 3 times before giving up. Today they’d probably just give him passing grades in math classes and push him into the medical field to kill a lot of people.
My mathematical aptitudes were not evenly distributed. In geometric mathematics including 3d differential calculus and even on reflection proof problems (where even my hs best friend who got a perfect SAT score and went to MIT for physics struggled… and he struggled on nothing else in math) I was brilliant. But in infinite series, complex integrals, and frequency domain mathematics I was pretty much a dunce.
I failed signals twice in college because of my lack of aptitude in series and frequency domain mathematics.
Heh, we’re opposites. I struggled with Geometry(not the proofs, rather the visualizations killed me) and I found 3ed shapes in calculus very difficult, but I excelled at series and complex integrals while everyone around me struggled with them.
I really enjoyed math in college. In computer science I generally knew more about the subject than the people teaching me but in math I actually had to work at but I did well. It gave me that hard work -> rewarded for handwork loop that’s so very enjoyable. I’ve unfortunately never had a need for anything I learned in mathematics in my career and I’ve probably forgotten most of it.
It’s writing and arithmetic that I’m particularly bad at due to dyslexia. I’d be a poor reader too but I worked out how to speed read in the 3ed grade.
I failed Operations Research at business school so many times that I got almost kicked out. The theory is easy and in Excel Solver can do the job. But we had to do it on paper. 100-200 easy arithmetic calculations. No way my ADHD ass would not fuck that up. Entirely predictably, at every exam my mind would wander and do shit like 12/4 = 6 and fail the exam. I told the teacher I would rather write a program that does it. I did. I think that is why she had let me pass.
Clarification: by Operations Research I meant Linear Programming: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linear_programming
You make same money day trading as your EE salary?
I quit after winning big on a stonk but bad management of that company (great drug absolutely terrible management) put me in a bad place around April of last year.. from that bad setback I got smart and tripled my worth in a year and that’s after having an extremely bad couple of weeks.
My bread and butter score while I wait is trading covered calls on MARA a crypto miner. The call premiums are very very high…
Base 10 math is for idiots who can only count on their fingers. Our smarter ancestor used base 60 and base 12 because the fractions coming from those systems were much easier to work with but working with but more symbols requires more brainpower. Once the calculator was invented with base 10 we ended up being stuck with decimal notation forever.
Mathematics is a logical tool to model to the universe and to solve complex problems where that logical system applies. The logic for the system seems to be derived from the very nature of the laws that govern this universe. Fundamentally mathematics is an insight into the underlying structure of the universe without humans being able to actually understand exactly how and why the laws of the universe work the way they do.
You can count to 12 on one hand, and to 60 on two hands. The killer app of decimalisation is that you can do complex arithmetic much easier
Humans have 4 fingers 3 segments each (thumbs have 2 segments). You can count to 12 on one hand by using the tip of your thumb to touch the same hand’s finger segments in order. If each time you have to start over, you hold up the next finger on the other hand, counting up to five on the other hand like we commonly do now, you get 5 x 12 = 60.
(Indeed, one can count to 1024 on 10 fingers, in binary; it’s not much harder than learning Dvorak, and about as useful.)
But bigger numbers get exponentially harder, and all sorts of multiplication books are required. The coup of decimal algebra was that it simplified, used only a single base, and all you needed to do bigger numbers was a taller abacus.
I occasionally used base 256 when I used to write code. When I was learning C++ decades ago I wrote an arbitrary precision “bignum” integer class for which I used base 256 for internal storage.
A rational number 1/N has a finite representation in base B only if all prime factors of N are also factors of B, which is seldom the case. Just to cover all denominators up to 7, you need a base of 210!
Electronic computers use base 2 because it’s hard enough to design an electrical circuit with two distinct stable states, and nearly impossible to have three such states.
For humans, numbers written in any base less than 8 are too long and monotonous, while base 12 has the largest multiplication table that a normal person could commit to memory. I’m partial to base 12 myself, but 1/5 = 0.24972497…, which is a lot worse than 0.33333…
The reals exist in the rope that Egyptian surveyors used to measure land for tax purposes, as the integers exist in piles of sea shells, and the rationals in pairs of such piles.
Every real is a range of reals.
When you calculate Pi, you are constructing a range of reals between the polygon outside the circle, and the polygon inside the circle. After creating a polygon with a sufficiently large number of sides, you will stop.
Complex numbers exist in every long thin object lying on a flat surface. Quaternions exist in every rigid object that is attached its surroundings by something flexible, for example a stick attached to a tree by a rope, the classic example being a cube attached to the floor and walls of a box by five belts. (five, not six, because the box did not have a lid.)
There was, long ago, a vigorous debate on the reality of quaternions, and the box was built to settle it. The belts were leather, the box was wood. I don’t know what the cube was made of.
Jim, this thread is the single best explanation of how numbers relate to reality and to themselves that I’ve seen, and I’ve been looking. Thank you.
There is this recurring meme that mathematics towers above other fields of knowledge like physics. E.g. here.
But my take from what you say, and this is generalizing of course, is that mathematics serves physics, not the other way around. If physics is the study of how reality works, mathematics is a tool to prove said reality, instead of physics being a tool to prove mathematics.
Red hat cat. Eh could’ve been worse.
Not quite, physics is the study of how reality works and mathematics is the language in which physics is expressed.
Mathematics is just lots of “if x then y” statements – all true, and useless unless you use them for physics (engineering etc.). Obervation of the real world (i.e. measurements) provides the “x” for application of the above “if x then y” statements
Rather, I am arguing that maths is observation of the real world.
Maths is physics where the experiments are easy to do. Number is the physics of piles of sea shells, Euclidean geometry is the physics of lines of sight.
Euclidean geometry was developed by Egyptian land surveyors for tax purposes, and systematized by Euclid, not the other way around.
I often think that math has gone off the rails when it leads to things like the Banach–Tarski paradox. The BTP is not wrong in the sense that it leads to a logical contradiction (i.e. a=!a), but it is wrong in that it leads to a physical contradiction. The BTP is, in my mind, just a fancy way of dividing by zero. Instead of admitting that it demonstrates pathology in the formalism, they claim it is something cool and interesting. Perhaps, but in the same way that jerking off compares to reproductive sex.
For those unfamiliar, the BTP says you can take a compact solid 3D set, e.g. a sphere, break it into a finite number of disjoint subsets, and reassemble those subsets into two identical copies of the same 3D solid, with no overlaps or voids. Physically this is absurd. Mathematically, while finite in number these subsets are infinite in complexity and have no physical measure. They are just infinite collections of disjoint points.
The problem arises from treating tasks that cannot be completed as if they can be completed.
Any statement about infinities is an insufficiently qualified and precise statement about limits.
Reality is that a limit is approached but not reached. Loose your grip on reality, and your maths stops making sense. Maths needs to be about real things, hence the old debate on the reality of imaginary numbers, infinitesimals, and quaternions.
Which were decisively settled by such actions as physically building an object that that instantiated a quaternion.
Infinitesimals were settled as an instance of the algebra of polynomials, and as limits. Imaginary numbers are things with amplitude and phase.
>I often think that math has gone off the rails when it leads to things like the Banach–Tarski paradox.
Wittgenstein was a pretty cool guy.
Maths are observations of the world the same way languages are; or rather, maths are forms of language, identifiable as being what they are, and we can speak of better or worse math the same way we can speak of better or worse language, for much the same reasons.
Like any framework, different maths are more or less adapted to different operating envelopes; a truly universal framework would, of course, be one you’re living in right now.
Sure, there is some math that is observation of the real world, but there is also some math that isn’t.
Cloudswrest gave an example for math that is not about the real world. Your argument that such problems arise from treating tasks that cannot be completed as if they can be completed, confuses the issue because mathematically these problems can be completed- logically consistent, without contradiction to any axioms.
So there is your math that is not about the real world. Argueing that it is somehow faulty because it is not about the real world is a circular argument.
yes, but it is stupid.
Maths that is actually meaningful, useful, interesting, and makes sense, is about things in the world, or rather universals that exist in the world in particulars. As I said, the number three exists in every pile of three sea shells, as the color red exists in every apple. Euclid’s lines exist in every line of sight.
Hence the old debates, now abandoned, about the reality of infinitesimals and quaternions.
Those debates were rightly settled in favor of their reality, though Newton’s infinitesimals had to give way to limit derived infinitesimals, which are a subset and particular case of the algebra of polynomials.
And then we somehow forgot about those debates and their outcome.
As our understanding of the world is limited an incomplete it is impossible to say now what math is needed for a better understanding.
Euclidian geormetry is a nice example for math that is real. Math went from a 3 dimensional euclidian space to a 4 dimensional curved space. That wasn’t good for anything until Einstein came up with general relativity. Then this math was suddenly about the real world.
Moreover, math is up to point is only language and you can choose how to express the real world. For example quantum mechanics is usually done with variants of the Schröding equation; i.e. differential equations with functions and imaginary numbers. Heisenberg didn’t use that stuff, he developed quantum mechanics with matrices and algebra. The two ways to do quantum mechanics give the same results, both are real, but only one of the languages needs imaginary numbers.
Math is a tool to do physics. Simply calling math for which noone has an application yet stupid throws out all math that isn’t presently used in physics. If you do that what keeps theoretical physics that is at present merely speculative from being thrown out?
“Complex numbers exist in every long thin object lying on a flat surface.”
I didn’t understand that, so I went googling. Apparently complex numbers exist in the strings of the piano and guitar, and thus in our usual musical sounds, which strings are long thin objects, but only their edges lie on a flat surface.
Apparently when we hit a middle A key on a piano, a lot of other things happen than the 440Hz sound. It only peaks at 440hz, but it is the kind of peak that can only be 2D graphed after running a Fourier transformation wich involves complex numbers, which is what a spectrum analyser does. A pretty handy tool for figuring out the key of a song.
A long thin object lying on a flat surface has magnitude and direction. If the magnitude and direction within the flat surface matter to us together, and other things do not matter, or matter separately, the qualities that matter are an instance of a complex number.
The same idea was applied to create an actual quaternion, though the construction was far more complex.
Does that explain the piano string and the Fourier-transformation needed to see the loudest frequency? (Spectrum analysis uses the Fast Fourier Transform to plot it as decibels on the X and frequencies on the Y axis.)
When you are doing Fourier transforms, you need to use complex numbers a lot, and think about complex numbers a lot.
Because a pure note has both magnitude and phase.
But there are simpler cases.
Funny you used the terms “magnitude” and “direction.” I understood complex numbers as another representation of 2D vectors, with i being a mathematical fiction/tool to enable easier analysis. Similarly quaternions (3D vectors).
a +ibis equivalent to the vectorai + bj.A vector is something real, just like velocity, which can be seen and felt (eg in a moving car). A complex number is a mathematical tool for analysis of 2D vectors, isn’t it?
Quaternions are not vectors.
If a vector is rotated by a full rotation, it goes back to itself. A quaternion takes two rotations to go back to itself, because it represents orientation plus entanglement.
Thus a vector is instantiated by an arrow, while a quaternion is instantiated by an arrow tied to a tree by a rope or several ropes.
Yes, about quaternions.
But the point was about complex numbers. They are 1:1 with 2D vectors, which are real enough, being the velocity of a moving car, but complex numbers are mathematical fiction to ease analysis.
No, complex numbers are not 1:1 with 2D vectors, because you cannot multiply two 2D vectors to produce a third 2D vector.
A two D vector is size and direction on a surface, while a complex number is size and rotation, rotation in two space, rotation about a single axis.
A quaternion is size and entanglement, plus rotation in three space, three axis rotation.
A quaternion is the rotation and relative size of a 3D object relative to another 3D object to which it physically attached.
Lots of equations dont work without complex or imaginary numbers. But if you include them, you get useful engineering output. The failing is in our brains, we can’t understand certain things without a mathematical notation system, and if that system appears to lead us into unreality, it leads us back into reality when we build something that works. We are stretching the system to accommodate reality, and if the system looks weird, who cares. Everybody understands what 1/3 of something is, 1/3 is a real and definite thing, even if we have to denote it as infinitely repeating decimals, .3333…
1/3 is not the same thing as .3333…, though. In particular, there is no such thing as infinity any more than there is a perfect circle. If we lose track of what notation is actually depicting reality, and what notation merely points at reality asymptotically, we run a risk of using the latter as a basis for logical proofs, proving nonsense like differing cardinalities of infinite sets.
This has been biting us back greatly in the latter half of 20c, and the chickens have come to roost now when people are straight-up telling you that there is no objective reality. And their instinct is correct, in the sense that they have no way of getting at objective reality with the philosophical paradigm they have been brought up in, because math is the cornerstone of our epistemology, and our math is confused. When you remove the distinction between the map and the territory, the notation and reality, you end up “proving” no end of nonsense, and soon the majority of your “math” is indistinguishable from *pilpul*.
Yarvin has recently written that even within academia, math is probably gonna be fine. Math has not been fine for some time, and Yarvin’s distant cousin Georg Cantor killed it.
“Yarvin has recently written that even within academia, math is probably gonna be fine.”
He’s not kept abreast of what went on at Princeton. Look for Piper Harron’s PhD thesis, then laugh or weep.
AMS has predictably become woke, a couple of years ago even.
https://blogs.ams.org/inclusionexclusion/
https://blogs.ams.org/inclusionexclusion/2017/05/11/get-out-the-way/
>1/3 is not the same thing as .3333…, though.
What do you mean? 1/3 = .3333…, so this claim is logically equivalent to ‘1/3 is not the same thing as 1/3…’
>In particular, there is no such thing as infinity any more than there is a perfect circle.
Does the number 1 exist? Do you believe the statement ‘Every natural number has a successor’ is true? If yes, then how can you say infinite sets don’t exist? Otherwise, you’re saying that mathematical objects don’t exist, which is like saying the laws of physics don’t exist. It’s a naive realism that will not countenance the existence of anything beyond what can be perceived by fallible senses, and it goes too far to support your point, since Cantor’s critics accepted the existence of the natural numbers.
You can’t map the natural numbers onto the real numbers, but you can map the real numbers onto the natural numbers. Therefore, there are more reals than naturals. How is that nonsense? It’s completely obvious.
As for Cantor leading to the denial of objective reality, I have the opposite impression. The impulse toward the belief that everything is subjective is the same as the impulse toward the beliefs of the intuitionists. They denied the objective reality of Cantor’s paradise and claimed mathematics was a construct of the human mind… a social construct, you could say. If one does not believe in a higher reality beyond the sense perceptions, then one cannot believe in objective reality, because the reality perceived by the senses is subjective and conditioned by natural selection.
Furthermore, intuitionism and finitism were unproductive, whereas Cantor’s work was eventually consistently formalized by von Neumann in his PhD thesis, (Strange that the greatest polymath since Leibniz chose nonsense as the topic) which led to the axiom systems that are the basis of modern mathematics. Cantor’s diagonalization technique was imported by Godel into logic to prove his incompleteness results, which led to Turing’s diagonal proof of the unsolvability of the halting problem, the entire field of comparability and computational complexity, the time and space hierarchy theorems, etc.
> pi is weird
> this does not seem to be a problem of notation
It is a problem of notation. You are trying to describe a geometrical 2D number, an idealised property of our 3D reality, as a one-dimensional number you can do easy arithmetic with on an abacus. You could do geometry with a compass and a ruler, and compute what you’re asking to compute, but you want to do the same with algebra, so you use good-enough approximation such as 22/7.
> no reason why such a folding cannot be 100% perfectly accurate
Only the Christian God can fold like that, and only some ropes; even Zeus would probably just get real aggro and turn the rope into snake triplets if you suggested he do that.
Contemporary mathematics calls upon its acolytes to believe mathematics, same as contemporary science calls upon us to believe science. I want to keep my job, so I FUCKING LOVE MATH!! but there is this gnawing feeling that there is a middle position between faithful, and heretic. Curiously, both the faithful *and* the heretics disagree.
The big question, at least for me, has always been, what is the nature of mathematics. How do you know that a pile of seashells and a pile of apples will behave the same under the four basic arithmetic operations? And how do you *know* you know?
So what you are saying, Jim, is that we rely on deduction and Bayesian logic. And you don’t *know*, but you have Christian faith that your math will be good.
Newton was wrong. But newtonian physics was wrong in a different way than global warmism is wrong. Newton wrote in good faith, and brought us closer to the truth, and his math has led to wonderful real-life engineering and prosperity. Whereas Michael Mann was lying.
>Newton was wrong. But newtonian physics was wrong in a different way than global warmism is wrong. Newton wrote in good faith, and brought us closer to the truth, and his math has led to wonderful real-life engineering and prosperity. Whereas Michael Mann was lying.
“You will know them by their fruit” is by far the most successful test to evaluate the value of something we can’t fully understand.
My math education is the equivalent of minor in mathematics and the only fields of mathematics I’m familiar with which I really question is statics. There’s far too much lies and bullshit being produced from statistics who’s results are taken entirely on faith.
Statistcs is a mathematical discipline. Belive has no place in mathematics. It is all true.
Bullshit is faulty application of mathematics. Statistics is special in that it is more difficult to recognize bullshit in statistics than it is in algebra if someone tells you that 2+2=5.
Taking results of anything on faith is not science or mathematics in any discipline. Mathematics and science is to not take results on faith.
If you take results on faith you are not trusting mathematics or science, but the person telling you the results.
Trusting persons is getting increasingly unreliable as the state religion gets ever more insane and ever more averse to truth.
Which leads to the worldview that edwardfeser.blogspot.com is about, that things are composed of a mixture of matter and information. Information is not the canonical term, they call it essence or form. But information is a term well understood today, very intuitive. Actually this worldview makes more sense in the computer age than it used to be back then. When we 3D print a plastic dog, we really do mix matter with information.
Or, for example, this old Aristotelean worldview says that when we investigate an object, we upload its information content in our minds, but not the matter, that stays there. With artificial objects, this is very straightforward. We reverse-enginer a gadget, figure out its design, upload it in our mind and then we can make a copy of that gadget mixing that design with matter. This design, this information, is what is traditionally called essence or form, traditionally defined as “that which makes a thing what it is”, and indeed when we use that design to make a copy of that gadget, indeed it is this design is what it makes it what it is, and not the materials used.
They say natural things work similarly, but not the same way. They do also contain information, which makes them what they are, I guess it was called form because with a simple object like a rock, it is its shape that is the most obvious kind of information contained in it. The numbers describing its size etc.
But they also say living things differ from artificial things, because – if I understand it correctly – an artificial watch, clock implements its design/information/essence best when it was just made and from them on it only gets worse. But a tree grows into implementing its DNA information, so that is different. For such reasons, or maybe for other ones, not sure I understood them, Feser tends to say AI cannot work.
Anyway, in this worldview it is very clear for a plant, the information it contains mixed with its matter, its form/essence is the DNA. In theory we could mix C, O, H, N atoms with decoded DNA information and get an oak. But with an animal, it gets much harder, because you have to include animation, motion, both inside the brain, basically the contents of the brain, and the motion of the limbs and organs… its contains all these information, not just DNA.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2101.10873
Off topic, though with a certain relevance. I chuckled.
https://cointelegraph.com/news/searching-deep-the-quest-for-bitcoin-scalability-through-layer-two-protocols
Now we have designs that do scale. Ada is one such, and is the biggest and most successful, therefore stands a good chance of becoming the one, and I am betting big on it.
But ADA is the evil twin of Monaro, Ada is the anti privacy currency. My hope and intention is a scalable privacy currency, with the privacy layer implemented on the lightning layer and the accounting sidechains, not on the blockchain itself.
Interesting. I’ll have to investigate.
Would love to hear your thoughts on the contentions Szabo has on Cardano.
“Cardano’s philosophy, and especially its auto-update feature, is centralized and destroys trust minimization. Trust minimization is the most important feature that gives a blockchain value. Cardano people do not understand it and fundamentally violate it.”
https://tweet.lambda.dance/NickSzabo4/status/1365840561689694208
As I am fond of saying, Cardano is evil.
But it is the leading scalable currency, and therefore stands a good chance of becoming The One. Therefore an investment likely to yield enormous returns – not that it is a safe investment. Don’t bet your house on it.
And, no matter how evil, less evil than the Federal Reserve Dollar.
Obviously I would prefer a non evil currency to become The One.
But my candidate replacement has not yet reached the point where it would be useful for other people to help work on it, let alone reached the point where it would be useful for end users.
Nick is right about centralized update – it undermines trust. But joe average needs centralized update. The solution is to have the institutional structure that ensures that the people doing the auto update reflect the interests of the users – a corporate structure in a proof of stake currency, where the currency is the shares, and it is plausible to expect the board, the CEO, and the management to pursue the interests of shareholders.
Cardano, being a proof of stake currency, can have that institutional structure, and is making noises about adopting it. Being evil, not clear that it actually will adopt it. If they adopt it, on course for war with the Cathedral.
I have almost completed an enormous design document for a non evil scalable proof of stake currency, and I have a wallet that can generate secrets, but the wallet is missing no end of critical features – it is pre-pre alpha. When it is early alpha, I am going to publish it on Gitea, and call for assistance.
Here is a link to one version of the white paper.
Here is a link to another version of the white paper.
None of these documents are ready, though they are getting pretty close to ready. The source code is nowhere remotely near ready. Cardano, unfortunately, is what we have.
The final white paper is not yet ready.
Neither version of the white paper is the version that I will be going public with.
Let me know if you want a hand.
What language are you planning to code it in?
It is coded in C++, making heavy use of template metaprogramming and exceptions, using wxWidgets, SQLite, (so that the you will be able to shut down the wallet abruptly without corrupting an immense database of transactions, as is apt to happen with Bitcoin Core) I am attempting to fork Quic, to cut its integration with the Cathedral’s anti privacy and true name scrutiny technology, for use as the transport layer, but have not gotten far yet. Transport layer still nonexistent. The crypto library is libsodium, using Ristretto25519, for future compatibility with a lightning layer done right. To do unusual and interesting things with asymmetric cryptography safely, you need a prime order group and Schnorr signatures, and almost no one in the current pile of crypto currencies is using a prime order group, though everyone is moving to Schnorr signatures.
I have BIP39 implemented, but need to finish the UI for BIP39
Quic is the finest data transport technology there is by far, but closely integrated to the Cathedral technologies for watching everything you do. Good source code heavily impregnated with evil.
> return \hash( ‘sha256’, “my custom secret”.”{$this->get_salt()}{$identifer}” );
“w9s Js5 vu6 L$RP yN7j wXdP GzFt yu*k BKB sxn m*_ 4c8m”
smh
> Using the documented way of putting the secret in the ‘avatar_privacy_salt’ variable will avoid the obvious problem with putting it in the source code, including that site’s code will end up in backups, which are much harder to keep confidential than a single text file.
> site’s code will end up in backups
… and indeed it did
Oops
Now everyone gets a new cat yet again.
The problem I mentioned in the e-mail (to protonmail) is fixed as well?
Backups temporarily unavailable. Working on a sanitized backup process, with the unsanitary backups being available locally.
I’ve sent another e-mail, has “avatar privacy” in the subject. In case it gets caught in spam again.
What’s with the connection between transgenderism and child rape?
https://twitter.com/PatriarchPrimus/status/1368608568899952640
It’s all just creative ways to be gay.
“Child rape” is an enemy meme.
The problem is gays, so their primary target is little boys. Observe who gets targeted at Drag Queen Story Hour.
From the tweet itself:
“The narrative is that transgender people will come into bathrooms and abuse little girls.
The supposed ‘purity’ of the victims has remained stagnant.
There are no princesses. Little girls are
also kinky. Your kids aren’t as straight and narrow as you think.”
— Alok Vaid-Menon
Sure. Although in this case he is talking about little girls.
And rationalizing about their supposed purity in order to make his behavior acceptable.
You classify them going after little girls also being a form of gayness?
You are over interpreting stuff that is not only not intended to relate to reality, but is not even intended to make sense. It is just word salad of words chosen for emotional effect.
Sorry what?
The material you are quoting is not intended to relate to reality or even make sense.
I forgot the include this piece of evidence that would lend support to my claim of my analysis of this tweet:
Transgender Person Convicted for Sexually Assaulting 10-Year-Old Girl In Bathroom:
https://www.foxnews.com/us/transgender-wyoming-woman-convicted-of-sexually-assaulting-10-year-old-girl-in-bathroom
So it may not actually be a word salad at all. But the truth.
This is only evidence of a whore selling her daughter as temple prostitute for holiness. A mentally ill degenerate sodomite is a “family friend” and is left alone with a girl in some home, it couldn’t get more ridiculous.
There is no evidence of transgenders going to public girl’s bathrooms and casually molesting little girls. But there’s a public boy catamite made a star and Drag Queen Story Hour that targets boys.
That is certainly evidence – but chances are the assailant was far more likely to assault boys in a men’s bathroom – which is a dog bites man story.
Gays will fuck anything, but chances are he would have preferred what he was likely to find in the men’s bathroom.
His disconnection to reality if you can classify this person’s words quoted there it is definitely in accordance with his pretending to be a woman.
If a person is particularly delusional and disconnected with reality in one area I wouldn’t be surprised that whilst in pursuit of evil he would come up with mental gymnastics to justify his perverted behavior.
You are over explaining his utterances.
If gay, he is projecting gay behavior on people he despises. Gays have sex with random strangers in bathrooms. Normal men and women do not. Very young girls do indeed engage in a whole lot of under age heterosexual fucking, but it does not happen in bathrooms.
But gay cross dressers do not call attention to the fact that they are males. They make an effort to pass. Rather, chances are he gets his sexual jollies not out of physical sex, of which he is likely entirely incapable and not particularly interested, but out of making other people reluctant participants in his sexual spectacle.
If he commits physical sexual offenses in bathrooms, likely to whomever he finds there. Which might well include little girls, but only as targets of opportunity.
If you want little girls, there are a lot better places than bathrooms. If someone is looking for physical sex in a bathroom, gay.
A woman in an extreme state of horniness can act like a gay and ask to go fuck in a public bathroom (or in one case in my life one wanted me to fuck her in a not crowded bar while the bartender and other two patrons were out smoking) or some such venue… but them getting into that state is rare whereas gays routinely act like that.
By Truth I mean my analysis of his comment.
I take a more moderate position, gays who want to rape prepubescent boys are common. That is typical for homosexual men. Male homosexuality and pederasty are perverted companions.
Men of any kind who want prepubescent girls are very rare. There are plenty of men who DO like girls shortly after puberty that certainly is common enough but men who like prepubescent girls are rare. Does not mean completely nonexistent… but very very rare and the rare cases are played up by Cathedral propaganda so that the gay can never be named.
Lonely, horny men will sometimes bang farm animals they are left alone with, so it is not surprising that they will sometimes bang prepubescent girls they are left alone with.
The enemy meme is the idea that there are men who are specifically attracted to prepubescent girls and go around hunting for them, taking any chance to rape them, when that behavior is in reality exclusive to fags, whose mission in life is to find prepubescent boys to rape and turn into fags.
Would you say that in the game we call “real life”, a fag/chomo/pederast/whatever is an otherwise average male with his Self-Restraint slider set to 0 and his Horniness slider set to 100?
No.
There is something terribly broken with his sexual targeting system, which results in or reflects a whole lot of other things being broken.
Observe how even leather boy gays fake masculinity horribly badly, painfully so. The harder they emulate manliness, the worse they fail. They not only fuck inappropriate things, they drink their beer in an unmanly fashion, ride their Harley Davidsons in an unmanly fashion, get into drunken fist fights in an unmanly fashion. Their leathers are apt to reflect an unmanly fashion sense. Something is not working across the board, and the harder they try, the worse they fail. Gays are apt to be attracted to masculine men, and find that their fellow gays are not masculine, which is why they keep hitting on normal men.
(You should never take fashion advice from a queer. Their fashion sense for men is terrible. Ask a woman for fashion advice. Women are good at it.)
There is something broken that affects a lot of things not directly connected to sex.
Some societies just do not have fags at all, don’t know what they are, don’t repress it because it does not exist. I would like more data on those societies. I conjecture that everyone is simply forcibly socialized at and during puberty into normal sexuality and normal manliness as part of often brutal coming of age rituals.
Or maybe there is a sexually transmitted disease that infects people’s brain and is spread by anal sex, and this disease affects a lot of behaviors in addition to modifying its hosts behavior to facilitate spread of the disease, analogous to the disease that affects rats and cats, and modifies the behavior of both to facilitate its spread, making rats attracted to cats.
Likely highly correlated with feminism and lose of patriarchy.
The Greeks were pretty Patriarchal while fucking young boys. Though if I remember right with Xenophon, the only mention of boy fucking was some spartan guy and Spartans were super cucked by their women. It’s really hard to judge exactly how common pederasty’s was in Greece due to modern sources propensity to lie about the Greeks.
But I’ve also read that it’s very common in Afghanistan and their fertility rates are quite. I don’t think there’s a strong correlation with the loss of patriarchy and the rise of feminism.
The problem in Afghanistan is that some men are hogging all the women. Which results in a lot of pederasty, which results in a lot of boys being socialized into growing up gay. Chronic problem with polygamy. Also evidence for the germ theory of gay.
The last dictator of Athens was run out of town for sodomizing his wife and failure to engage in reproductive sex with his wife. So I don’t think they were actually all that tolerant during the days of their greatness, or the days leading up to their greatness.
And Alexander, King of all the known world, and a fair bit of the previously unknown world, failed to have sons, with the result that after his death, endless internal wars between ambitious generals. He should have been run out of town, but was not. The Greeks should have figured out that a King that is not industriously engaged in reproductive sex is going to lead to problems. A King needs to keep his women tightly under control, and raise his sons, for if he does not, there will be trouble.
Russia and most east asian societies have a lack of feminism but not strong effective patriarchy, those are “whore” societies. It’s not ideal but its happier than what we have.
The caveat to “ask a woman for fashion advice” is dont ask your woman for fashion advice, she will try to make you look worse out of jealousy. Ask a woman who is hoping you bang her for fashion advice.
Two words: Early Marriage.
Which is impossible now, of course, because “child marriage.” Oh, and said marriage isn’t optional for the bride and groom. And neither is producing kids optional.
Sounds plausible. Stick a child in water from an early age, he will take to it.
If when sexuality is forming, normal sex is not merely possible, but mandatory, maybe things that could go wrong during the formation of sexual impulses, are unlikely to go wrong.
But what goes wrong in gays is not merely sexuality, but the formation of manliness in general. Seems to me that a society that demands that at coming of age, the boy does some unpleasant and difficult manly things, and then gets credit and status for achieving them, is doing something right.
I can see in boys growing up an unsatisfied hunger, not only for pussy, but for demands and commands from their admired elders that they man up. They want a man to teach them to be a man, and are not getting it.
Yeah, but more like the whole preparation for early marriage. The earlier is the expected age of marriage, the earlier do fathers stop treating boys as children and start training them for manhood, for responsibility and suchlike.
Since the expected age of marriage today is about 30, it means this training is not being done at all, students entering college at 18 look and act like children, and train themselves into becoming men, to the extent they do at all, between 20 and 30.
The germ theory may be supported by the fact that it’s through the penile anal transmission route. The same route taken by aids, syphilis and other diseases.
Likewise with many gay men looking physically wrong in some way as indicated by their faces.
The so called gay face.
Inversion of cause and effect.
The reason that sodomites act like fags is hormones. Similarly as when you sexually dominate your woman, it will entirely rewire her personality, being sexually dominated by another man rewires one’s brain. Fags probably reinforce this by acting faggy among themselves, same as we reinforce it by game, but there is an underlying purely physiological aspect to it.
The problem with theories about sodomy not grounded in personal experience is the same as the problem of virgins talking about women. Q: “How do breasts feel like?” A: “Like bags of sand.” Q: “How does one become gay?” A: “It’s an anally transmitted STD that doesn’t affect females.”
Anyone can be a fag if they put their mind to it. We used to have taboos against it (with explanations about as nonsensical as those about 13yo women) precisely because on a purely physical level, our dicks do not care how they get stimulated. And it is fun, the same way working one’s way towards morbid obesity and diabetes is fun, one fruitcake at a time.
P.S.: Please check your proton e-mail, Jim
I suspect that Prince Charming is right, but will not be conducting experiments to test it. If you force yourself to consume enough of something gross — hakarl, igunaq, roadkill, bugs, other men’s semen — you’ll grow to like it. Especially as a brain-shattering orgasm is a much more powerful neural reward than merely eating something vile and not dying.
>I suspect that Prince Charming is right, but will not be conducting experiments to test it. If you force yourself to consume enough of something gross — hakarl, igunaq, roadkill, bugs, other men’s semen — you’ll grow to like it. Especially as a brain-shattering orgasm is a much more powerful neural reward than merely eating something vile and not dying.
I think he’s a clever liar. Every gay guy I’ve talked to didn’t indicate they’d didn’t work themselves up to having sex with men, rather an older man fucked them and after that they fucked other men and mostly ignored women.
The first time I saw 2 gay guys kiss on film I felt a feeling of absolute disgust and I was raised without being taught anything about faggots. Hell I got feed a steady diet that gays are good people from crap like south park and the general ra ra gays are good from the Media. Eating road kill or bugs seemed less wrong to me.
If one could change preferences that easy then you’d see a lot of former gay men and you really don’t see that. Gays when they get older basically get kicked out the community as anything besides receivers and generally can’t get their rocks off. If it was easy to switch hit they’d just go straight, but they don’t.
Secondly, men wouldn’t be as worried about being raped by gays if it wasn’t a big deal.
Guess I should have added, “or if someone else forces you to consume”, because my point is that an orgasm during intimate contact with another man rewires a your brain to want sex with men. We don’t want to be raped because we don’t want to become fags, and we don’t want AIDS. No one here thinks that what happened to George Takei at age 14 was “no big deal”.
Maybe old fags could go straight, or maybe their brains no longer have enough plasticity, but there aren’t many women volunteering to reprogram them.
It’s the act of being fucked by other men that seems to make young boys gay. There’s isn’t a lot orgasms going on from receiving anal sex.
Fag hags are everywhere. There’s are lots of women who want to fuck gay men because gays are high status.
I’ve fucked a few women in their 40s and 50s. I don’t ever seek them out and will only fuck them if I’m quite hard up for pussy and frankly, even then I feel like it wasn’t worth it. The sex is subpar because their beauty is gone and so is their fertility. My brain reacts to these facts by reducing my sexual desire for them. No amount of extra rubbing changes that.
Your brain would have to be completely broken to favor fucking men who can neither bear children and who don’t even look attractive the way that a women does when there’s women around.
That’s the point. Being raped is a receiving act. You’re not going to organism from it. If it’s pitching that makes you gay, then fearing rape turning you gay doesn’t make since. Since men naturally fear being raped by gay guys and faggots frequently try to rape straight men, I’d say the concept that pitching not catching that makes you a faggot, is bullshit.
You’re thinking of rape as just forced anal penetration. When men groom boys for sex, their first priority is to make the victim come and come *hard*. Anal comes later. You want that kid hooked so he’ll keep it a secret and come back for more.
Once you’re addicted to gay sex, it’s hard to quit because it’s so easy to get, and the cure, sex with young women, is very hard to get.
This is the distillation of the problem.
Traditional society makes sex with a young virgin not only guaranteed, but compulsory, with expectation of kids shortly thereafter. It is one extreme of “easy,” even for the nerdiest or otherwise “un-thuggish” boy. While buggery is punishable with a sound thrashing (if “consensual”) or lynching (may happen anyway, but almost guaranteed if a young boy was sodomised). So an extreme of “difficult.”
I choose to avoid being a faggot or affiliating with faggots, but goyim simply follow the natural path of society — the path of least resistance. Thus traditional society has an almost complete absence of faggotry. Modern Western society makes faggotry easy and attractive, while making young virgin pussy unobtainium for most, with predictable results for goyim.
@Suones
Biblical Law is pretty tough about sodomy.
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/leviticus/18-22.htm
It is an abomination to lie with a male as with a woman. Regardless of being a pitcher or catcher. The penalty is death.
“on a purely physical level, our dicks do not care how they get stimulated”
Strong disagree. The simplest way to get the dick physically stimulated is wanking. My motivation and those of my similarly non-alpha friends when we were young for finding a GF was not to get our dicks physically stimulated, in fact we were nervous of sex, it is harder than wanking because you work to please two people, not just one. Rather it was simply not feel like losers, to feel like a normal man and test of being a normal man felt like having the ability to find a GF.
This is why it does not work to tell incels to find a prostitute, for example.
Or look at this quote from Eliot Rodgers manifesto:
“So far, Spencer and I had gotten along quite well despite the fact that we never talked much. An incident happened at the end of January that changed all of this. I one day discovered that Spencer had a girl in this room. I couldn’t believe it. The short, chubby guy was able to get a girl into his room before I did! I was so shocked and outraged that I waited outside his room until the girl left, so I could get a glimpse of how she looked. To my relief, she wasn’t that attractive. What made me even more angry is that Spencer gave me a smug look when I saw the girl, even though she was ugly. He had the nerve to feel like he was better than me, just because he managed to get a girl over to the apartment before I did! I confronted him in the kitchen on that same night, telling him that he is foolish to feel proud about having an ugly whore in his room. This made him angry and offended, which is what I wanted. I wanted to offend him as punishment for his insolence.”
He did not want to get his dick physically stimulated. He wanted to stop feeling inferior.
In his case that inferiority feeling turned into destructive envy.
In the case of my friends and me we just kept trying to find a GF and eventually figured out how. It did not really fix that inferior feeling 100%, though. But it helped.
@Dave, @Ace
It’s not whether engaging in sodomy becomes a habit. Of course it does. Of course you’ll like it. Of course it’s disgusting, but so is being in the same room with a naked fat chick.
The single most disgusting, emasculating thing is for a young man is to be a young whore’s pet (what our society calls a “boyfriend”), and yet…
The causal relationship that Jim portrays is that men who have something wrong with them, who act unmanly in all sort of ways, who are being sissies, act catty, present effeminate, or try-hard muscly, that those men are “attracted” to men, will seek men, and will have sex with men. Perhaps because they were violently raped when they were boys, and were infected with an anally transmitted STD that only affects men.
What I am saying is that this is backwards, that the causal relationship works the other way, that being a catcher stimulates one’s brain in the same way a woman’s brain is stimulated (no wonky male-only exception for the transmission vector). Receiving sodomy makes one’s brain become all weird, makes one a (behavioural) fag.
@TheDividualist
> Strong disagree. The simplest way to get the dick physically stimulated is wanking.
Good point.
> My motivation and those of my similarly non-alpha friends when we were young for finding a GF was not to get our dicks physically stimulated, in fact we were nervous of sex, it is harder than wanking because you work to please two people, not just one. Rather it was simply not feel like losers, to feel like a normal man and test of being a normal man felt like having the ability to find a GF.
Inceldom is another failure mode, distinct from fagginess. Newton was an incel. He was not a fag.
You can observe that faggots (and when I say faggots, I mean the behavioural pattern of sissies and disgusting effeminate backstabbing men) are not incels. If you can fill the role of a girl’s best gay friend, you can fuck that girl, and perhaps from time to time you do. Fags on average have a staggering number of sexual partners, and most fags have had sex with a woman.
Both incels and fags are driven by sex. Fags do it quite a lot, and they do it wrong, and the more they do it the wronger it gets. Incels are depressed because they have no sex. Paradoxically, the thing that is absent from their life forms the lynchpin of their identity.
Perhaps game is the Ukraine, the jewy borderlands between incel and faggot. Note that the normal visceral disgust reaction that for example @Ace has, which clouds his judgement and shuts down his reading comprehension, Heartiste did not have in the days of his original blog.
>What I am saying is that this is backwards, that the causal relationship works the other way, that being a catcher stimulates one’s brain in the same way a woman’s brain is stimulated (no wonky male-only exception for the transmission vector). Receiving sodomy makes one’s brain become all weird, makes one a (behavioural) fag.
You made 2 arguments: One is being a catcher makes you gay. We agree there, though I think some sort of parasite is involved because some men who are briefly catchers may move on it from it. I recall a story of a guy imprisoned and raped by methheads for 9 months. Didn’t turn him gay. He eventually managed to kill the 2 methheads and escaped. Now maybe he was lying and he’s currently being fucked by Marco Rubio in a Miami bathhouse or maybe he didn’t get infected.
The other augment you made and the one I was arguing against is simulating your dick fucking other men makes you gay. That’s a ludicrous argument. Men would never do anything but masturbate if that’s how the human brain worked. Men who fuck animals don’t fuck them when there’s women available but gay men will fuck men when there’s women aplenty.
The fact that you put forth that argument makes me suspicious about you because it’s one of those nice sounding lies that people are often told. Your behavior on this blog is been very odd since day one.
“Inceldom is another failure mode, distinct from fagginess.”
Sure. But far more common. While we did not use this expression back then, 30-40% of my high school class and way over 50% of my college class were made of incel matter. And women weren’t even fat back then, looking at the ballooning high schoolers at the bus stop, I think if a young white man cannot bring himself to fuck a fattie he has over 80% chances of near-inceldom these days. I have seen this comical sight when I lived in the UK all the time, normal, even athletic looking guy with a landwhale girlfriend…
“Sure. But far more common. While we did not use this expression back then, 30-40% of my high school class and way over 50% of my college class were made of incel matter. And women weren’t even fat back then, looking at the ballooning high schoolers at the bus stop, I think if a young white man cannot bring himself to fuck a fattie he has over 80% chances of near-inceldom these days. I have seen this comical sight when I lived in the UK all the time, normal, even athletic looking guy with a landwhale girlfriend…”
This is why I feel no shame for routinely fucking a stripper.
Related, women who have gay friends usually have mental problems. The “gay best friend” meme was more damaging than many people think.
Most sane women don’t like gays, either they say so outright or it’s obvious.
Best way to go about fashion IMO is to first pick out what you like, then show it to a woman with good fashion sense. Keeps you more in control of your own style.
Jim, what I really appreciate about your comments is your sound life advice that probably many did not ever get (I was lucky through various circumstances to get much of it independently).
“Best way to go about fashion” just be autistic about it. For example, all black works. If you like blue dress jeans, all blue also works. Or if one wants to be elegant, just any kind of gray suit and white shirt works.
>just be autistic about it. For example, all black works.
Does that actually work? Being a sperg myself I can’t do fashion for shit because I can’t get straight advice on what to wear.
Generally, I just look at what other alpha males are wearing, either celeb or in person, and modify it to my own tastes.
@Ace
If you’re autistic, you have special interests. All you need to do to achieve whatever and become really good at it, is to make it your special interest.
Start here: https://blog.reaction.la/culture/guns-ideas-fashion-and-military-parades/
@Ace
“Does that actually work?” Back when I used to care about my looks, women often commented on me being well dressed. Because my hair and eyes are brown I just figured I will buy everything brown, like khaki shirt, chocolate pants and reddish brown shoes. What I meant by autistic that picking a simple rule and sticking to it (like all black, all brown, or all blue, or grey suits white shirts) avoids mistakes. The only other trick is money, I bought them in expensive shops like DKNY, Benetton etc.
But generally it is enough not to dress like a child. Children run around a lot so they wear sports shoes, baggy jeans and baggy tees easy to move in. This why an adult man in a Nike AirMax and baggy tees looks so ridiculous. Because he looks like a child. So any other kinds of shoes, jeans that actually fit and a shirt that actually fits, the v-necked or collared ones generally do fit, does the trick well enough.
Speaking of sexual targeting there is a news item today regarding some dude responding to a prostitution ad showing an attractive girl with bulging tits. When contacted the “girl” claimed she was “15” and he went through with it anyway and it turned out the be a Federal sting (duh). What I found shocking about this was the last paragraph in the article.
“Joiner faces up to life in prison, with a mandatory minimum of ten years. Joiner remains detained pending sentencing.”
Now of course this is an obvious example of the FBI’s “Retard Entrapment Squad”, but 10 years to life for non coercive hetero sex with a post pubescent female seems somewhat extreme. I would think 1-5 years max would be more in the ballpark. Officially he was convicted of, get this,
“Attempted Enticement of a Minor”
This is more corruption of language. HE WAS RESPONDING TO AN AD! Not enticing some high school girl in gym class. Prostitutes entice the customer, not the other way around. Just more clown world.
https://breaking911.com/man-caught-trying-to-meet-teen-for-sex-told-cops-he-wanted-to-give-her-an-itunes-gift-card-in-exchange-for-house-chores/
This is a modest escalation of the principle established in the attempted divorce of the slut queen Caroline, and subsequently escalated even further with the whore Florence Nightingale:
Women are perpetually innocent, because no matter what they do, it is a man’s fault.
http://age-of-treason.com/2021/03/01/liberalism-vs-wokeism-the-fix-is-in/
The ‘New Deal Consensus’ dissolving in real time.
>Tracey never saw any defense of “wokeism†because it’s proponents don’t defend, they attack.
No evidence is needed, and none is given. The first mistake is thinking you are having a debate with your fellows in your bund. There is no debate, they are not your fellows, and for that matter, there is no bund to begin with. It is pure power playing; any response that is not a power move flex back, isn’t just losing the game, it’s not even playing it to begin with.
The Wokists just took over the Nevada Democratic party by what they’re calling a “contested” election, which in reality is a rigged election. The rest of the state level Democrat parties will probably follow sooner than later.
On reddit I just got done reading a quite ironic thread were person after person cheered on the Qnon Shaman being held as a political prisoner without bail. He’s just some mentally ill guy that no on the right cares about, but they seem sure it’s going to upset the right that’s he’s being held as a political prisoner. They view it as a huge victory. All I see is a bunch people cheering on the time when they themselves will be arrested and held without bail for political crimes.
I think what tickles me the most about the whole theater, is the sheer idiocratic character of it all.
>The conversation finally got interesting at about 1:20:00, when the first overt defender of “wokeism†spoke. The mood becomes increasingly fraught. Within ten minutes someone was announcing that “the milquetoast stuff needs to stop†and the conversation needs to be about “White supremacyâ€.
>About two hours in an aggressive nigress named Brooklyn enters, starts berating Tracey, gets admin privileges, and bounces Tracey out of his own chat. The mood changes dramatically. Niggers now control the room, whooping and high-fiving, talking over each other.
>One of the milquetoast nigresses says Tracey made her a moderator, and that she was the one who started the coup by elevating Brooklyn. They share a knowing laugh about their virtual “Haitian revolution“.
Your would-be masters of the universe, folks!
These guys expect and intend the restoration of normality, and assume they can go right on quietly ignoring the crazies, while folding like cardboard before the crazies every time.
The deep state can go right on quietly ignoring the crazies, as long as they can quietly agree amongst themselves what is to be done. But they will not be able to quietly agree amongst themselves what is to be done. Chaos is unfolding, and the conflicts within the deep state will be resolved by inviting the crazies in.
And if by crazies you just mean blacks, we shouldn’t really be all that worried on the right.
Blacks, gays, quite a lot of Jews, and a very large number of dot Indians. There are also a lot of single women of all races, ethnicities, and religions, who want the world to burn and everyone to die. They are not particularly effectual in accomplishing this goal, but will be generally supportive when the chaos from the more effectual demon worshippers starts to bite.
Single women in power are apt to deliberately do disastrous things in an effort to provoke a manly alpha to emerge from the shadows and give them a well deserved spanking. Which may well be how the left singularity terminates. On the other hand, does not seem to be working so far.
Dot Indians are becoming a real problem. They’re not particularly smart but they’re assuming elite positions everywhere and have a lot cohesion within their race.
No shit.
The two feelings are slightly mutually contradictory, similar to Nazi misgivings about Jews — simultaneously untermenschen as well as supreme manipulators of the innocent Aryan babes. Completely wrong about Jews and Indians both.
I just had to laugh at this. Hindu “seculars” are dishonourable traitors of the first water and will betray anything and anyone if given half the chance. We (Hindus) can fix this contingent in a hearbeat — we know where they hurt lol. The reason they appear to have have so much power is because…
Just as defecting Jews were hired by Western unpopular Kings to do their unpopular dirty work/tax collection, so these Hindu “seculars” have been hired by Western elites to do their dirty work (that used to be performed by Jews). They are the (new) court eunuchs of the West.
Your enemies are the Aryans who support the whole structure. That’s who to attack.
That is a general problem within the left, who are always forming conspiracies within conspiracies, and plotting against each other. Two trots, three factions.
However, for white engineers, and white management, dot Indian cohesion results in a big problem. The Indian engineers plot against the white engineers, and when they have largely expelled the white engineers, they plot against management, board, and shareholders. When the remaning white engineers decide it is time to leave, management is apt to follow not long after.
Lacking a King, the Jews generally found themselves sol when the King decided that they had outlived their usefulness. But corporate cohesion is apt to be fragile. You are apt to have board members that want to participate in executive decisions, want to tell the ceo what to do instead of merely evaluating how well he is doing and making sure he is not stealing from the shareholders, and executives that have a powerbase external to the company, human resources, accounting, and the legal department having powerbases external to the company. Things can easily fall apart, and a cohesive group of people within the company are apt to push on those fault lines.
Corporate cohesion is hard, the regulatory state is making it harder, and telework and video conferencing is not making it any easier.
The Black-Jewish alliance sticks out to me as the dominant faction of the left at the moment. If that Clubhouse dialogue above is any indication, that alliance is not likely to hold.
But they will not be able to quietly agree amongst themselves what is to be done.
I imagine this is the result of having internalized “no enemies to the left”?
Blacks, gays, quite a lot of Jews, and a very large number of dot Indians.
But in my experience there is a not insubstantial contingent of white men. I can think of three very competent engineers I know, two with Ph.D.s in physics or engineering, one with a Master’s from a top school, all of whom run real projects in industry, and all of whom seem to have really bought into the Diversity Inclusion Equity crap, to the point of coming down hard even in private conversations where a glimmer of skepticism about some facet of woke orthodoxy is expressed.
Okay, maybe I could understand it in the case of the single guy in his 40s with a girlfriend but no kids. I guess I could even get it in the case of the guy with grown kids and no religion. But the Catholic fellow with two kids? My mental model just breaks down. I can’t fathom the mechanism by which dysfunction infects even men like these.
Demon Worship. They’re sacrificing their children to the Woke Gods of Chaos.
The whites will purge other whites on account of insuficient leftism; the semites will purge whites on account of insufficient semitism; the sub-saharans will purge whites on account of insufficient sub-saharanism; and so on.
A social contest between the coordinated and uncoordinated is no contest.
Like almost all people, they want to be respected, have power, and have the moral high ground. The Left offers all these, because they have power.
> Tracey never saw any defense of “wokeism†because it’s proponents don’t defend, they attack.
Only a civnat with a well-honed crimestop would form this conclusion. They explain *woke* over and over again, from a dozen different angles.
These are basically people who are quite redpilled on all sorts of topics (woke = consciously aware = redpilled), bright for niggers (and resentful of the “for niggers” bit), with good instincts, and with allergy to bullshit. They want political self-determination, and they want to have stuff whitey has, and they are deluding themselves that a Haiti solution will bring anything but Haiti results, but there is theoretically a path to a competent nigger ruling class, so maybe they are not *that* deluded.
Am I supposed to gasp and tut-tut these nigs desire to genocide me? Am I supposed to pretend that taking over a gatekeeper kikecast wasn’t an epic troll? Am I supposed to think that Brooklyn bitch isn’t funny yet feminine, just like our aryan princesses used to be mere two generations ago?
>Am I supposed to gasp and tut-tut these nigs desire to genocide me?
“I say old sport, that would be rather rude of them wouldn’t it?”
>Am I supposed to pretend that taking over a gatekeeper kikecast wasn’t an epic troll?
I thought it was hilarious personally – and their just deserts, too. Nothing hits like poetic consequences.
Ha ha, Jim, remember how you said the old gods have returned to Mexico? Boy do you ever call it:
https://www.city-journal.org/calif-ethnic-studies-curriculum-accuses-christianity-of-theocide
Before Trump I’d thought their plan was to import enough Mexicans to replace whites in the military for the white genocide. Trump put that on hold for a few years, but with the wide open border and the military purges… seems like that plan is well on track.
I think the best meme to push among normiecons that might possibly really partially wake them up…
Is that the constitution failed (we know and it seems more of them know) and that everything the anti-federalist predicted about a leviatian state came true… so that the Union should revert back to the Articles of Confederation. Monarchy is hard to sell to American normiecons at least at 1st… as it was hard to sell to Romans in the Late Republic.
Perhaps the idea of reverting to the Articles is more palatable.
Normiecons don’t matter. We are going to need a General with loyal legionaries understanding the Republic has failed as Caesar did. We have a ways to go.
Or perhaps there is not much point in pushing ideas to normiecons. All those stuff you mention are fossilized ideas of past power grabs. Not really relevant to power struggles in the present. Dead political religions.
Everything that really matters is done by elites. The big question is how to make some of the elites defect from the rest of the elites, and defect in a good way, according to new “religious principles” i.e. ideas that sound moral and sacred, and in a way that they are conducive to saving civilization?
This is the right frame to think about it, although I have serious doubts the existing decadent elite are capable of defecting to the side of moral virtue. More likely is that the new elite, young now, is being groomed in good traditional values ready to step in to power when a Caesar arrives.
If we are going to revive a dead political religion, why not King under Gnon? Which under present circumstances (low virtue elite) is more likely to give rise to viable governance.
Those dead political religions were designed for a smart high virtue elite, which is why they expired.
In a holiness spiral, the left always defects on the left, and leftmost always win, because no enemies to the left, no friends to the right.
Victory requires a leader who realizes he damn well does have enemies to the left, and is willing and able to give them helicopter rides.
As we proceed further and further into the left singularity, the required solution becomes more and more drastic.
I have been thinking a bit about Gnon and I have a point of contestion.
The biggest one, I think, is that my image of Gnon isn’t really… Nice. Like, I imagine some powerful entity that really does not give a fuck about me. I don’t pray to Gnon, because I don’t think he is the type of God that cares.
I am not sure what that means. Perhaps my image of Gnon is distorted. Perhaps Gnon is too cold to scale. I was thinking about the ‘return to Monke’ meme, which is kind of close to ‘return to Gnon’, only it sounds friendlier. Dunno.
Hi alf, I think I owe you some bitcoin. Send me a receive address on a more private medium.
(Big problem with bitcoin, and indeed all current crypto coins, is that all the metadata about transactions goes over some separate channel, which channel is derived from the quasi governmental domain name system, and thus the metadata, which is what makes blockchain analysis useful and effective for our enemies, is insecure. A crypto currency needs to support in band private messaging, thus needs to be social network software, even if it is very rudimentary social network software.)
That Gnon does not care about us is the black pill. There is a no end of evidence for the black pill (pain, death, evil, and entropy). There is some evidence for the white pill, for example the sunrise and the sunset.
But irrational optimism gets you further than rational pessimism. If you tell your woman that God is on the side of the traditional family, she will be convinced. She will push back, but it is only a shit test. She wants to see if you are impressed by all those other alphas who tell her that the family is dead.
I have with my woman discussed getting baptized in the name of Gnon. There’s a river not too far from where I live, maybe I’ll do it there.
Is the name not important though? God is Gnon like Jehova is God, which is to say they are sort of the same but not exactly, more like reincarnations/evolutions. So if on here we say Gnon is on our side, should we not say Gnon’s name to our women as well? Though it’s a bit strange I suppose. It is kind of like taking the leap of faith. Might be the right leap, but might be premature.
re btc: I think I shot you an email before. I’ll do so again.
Getting baptized by yourself in the name of “God” is kind of like becoming a Jehovah’s Witness. Baptism should be in the name of the Trinity after instruction by an orthodox clergyman, or you’re playing with fire.
If I have no way of identifying an onorthodox clergyman, my best course of action is to act as if there are no orthodox clergyman. Why would I risk being cursed by a prog in priest robes?
This whole thing is grassroots and anonymous. To be baptised as a namefag by an institution defeats the purpose, for me at least.
Whether or not self-baptism is playing with fire, I dunno. I’ve always felt that when in doubt, do what seems like fun. Maybe this could be fun.
Finding an orthodox clergy man might be difficult, but if you have a candidate it is not that hard to find out whether he is a prog or not.
Just attend a service and afterwards chat for some twenty minutes or so with the clergy man and some of the regular attendees. After that you’ll know.
If you don’t have the time for that and don’t care if he knows that you are not a prog, just ask him some pointed questions on marriage, gays or anything else where even understanding the question involves a thought crime.
Finding an orthodox clergy man might be difficult, but if you have a candidate it is not that hard to find out whether he is a prog or not.
Just attend a service and afterwards chat for some twenty minutes or so with the clergy man and some of the regular attendees. After that you’ll know.
If you don’t have the time for that and don’t care if he knows that you are not a prog, just ask him some pointed questions on marriage, gays or anything else where even understanding the question involves a thought crime.
I know you all are meaning well but having alf larp as a Christian seems not only counter-productive, but misses the point.
We need to re-redefine Christianity, since it has been redefined as progressivism and Christ the community organizer who pointed the way to Obama the lightbringer.
Seems to me that my definition has near two thousand years of orthodox support.
Could Alf endorse my definition? I don’t know and am not going to press him. Come the restoration, it will be most unwise to press anyone except those that denounce others as insufficiently Christian.
Only protestant and a few catholic clergymen ‘round here. And the select times I’ve talked with them in private it was clear they found my views on women rude and misguided. They weren’t bad men, it was just the usual tradcon spiel. I don’t blame them, just don’t care for their blessing.
I endorse Jimian Christian orthodoxy.
But does Christian orthodoxy endorse Jimian Christian orthodoxy? I do not know. Even Roosh, who takes his Christian orthodoxy very serious, and who is as red pilled as they get, has never even mentioned Jim.
I am done with Christians giving half-hazard signals, even if understandable. Trump wove the bible in Lafayette park, but his Christianity was not Jimian orthodoxy, just the slightest of hint of what one day might become Jimian orthodoxy if the stars align. Not good enough for me.
So until Christian orthodoxy endorses Jimian Christian orthodoxy, I will not endorse Christian orthodoxy. And until then, I might as well stop taking the entire thing so seriously.
Jimian Christian orthodoxy is traditional Christianity. There’s no point in squabbling over the finer details beyond that. I see a small but growing remnant of traditional Christians in almost every denomination. The best proxy I see is mask compliance. The lower the mask compliance of the congregation, the more red-pilled the pastor. Why not go back to what worked for your ancestors and try to find the trad remnant? For me, that was Catholicism and there are signs it exists, the Latin Mass being the biggest sign.
>We need to re-redefine Christianity, since it has been redefined as progressivism and Christ the community organizer who pointed the way to Obama the lightbringer.
You need to go back to the scriptures and just do it as the Word of god tells you. That means no Roman perversions at all. Force rapists to marry the girl, which will encourage fathers to keep their daughters under lock and key, and make a rogue think twice about a quick legover with a whore. All that is from the law. But it’s not a buffet thing. All of it, or don’t bother.
@alf, you can baptise yourself, but it won’t help you one little bit, as you don’t believe Jesus existed, lived, died, and was resurrected. You might just drown.
Puritan heresy.
Trouble with Scripture alone is that Christianity is designed to work as a synthetic tribe, kin through adoption by God. Hence infant baptism and all that.
You have to go with the community of saints, and a community of living people.
And, in practice, a living community is hard to find. Seems to be resurrecting in Russia, under the protection of Putin’s nukes, but in the rest of the world, very very quiet, so quiet as to be either dead, or sleeping as a mustard seed. Though the pastor that conducted my marriage was nearly as red pilled as I am.
Obeying God’s laws from scriptures is heresy? Well, that explains why you’re in such a fine mess doesn’t it?
Infant baptism is as meaningless as infant marriage, unless the child knows what is happening, it is as pointless as kneeling and praying to a graven image of Mary.
You roman-lovers, why can’t you just do what God told you, for a change? It’s not a heavy yoke.
(BTW, the Puritans conquered the whole of a continent ya know, God blessed them mightily). The Roman Christian Empire, looks like a gay bathhouse, still.
Infant baptism is entirely meaningful, because Christians are kin through adoption by God, and infant baptism aligns this spiritual kinship with biological kinship, a spiritual tribe containing biological tribes, the godparents representing this extended family and spiritual adoption.
If a human can adopt an infant, whether the infant understands it or not, God can certainly adopt an infant. The infant will understand it in due course.
Infant marriage is entirely meaningful, representing a contract between two patriarchs to have grandchildren in common, thereby giving each other hostages to keep the peace and facilitate alliance and cooperation. When the kids hit puberty, the patriarchs introduce them and tell them to get to work right away on producing the grandchildren, and the kids will understand it just fine.
Though since the groom conducts the sacrament of marriage, more accurate to call it infant engagement. You want the bride to see the groom as her alpha, not the patriarch as her alpha.
Obvious glosoli under a different name is obvious. God will not establish the kingdom on earth till the second coming.
He inadvertently gives pretty good rationale that anything post-Anglicanism is basically just Purtian holiness spiraling and unworkable for the new US state religion. That leaves us only with Anglicanism and Catholicism and I have doubts that Anglicanism wasn’t just living off the social technology of Catholicism.
Infant baptism is pointless, unscriptural, and unless a youth/adult has a baptism, full immersion in water, they will never get the Holy Spirit.
And that is why you lost the West, because the pastors in Rome and all other churches duped their flocks into NOT having the Holy Spirit, not having adult immersion baptisms
Started after the war, and here we are now, you like the results? The evil ones laugh at you.
Putting you on moderation, because of persistent failure to respond to argument. You are just repeating yourself, waste of space.
Since Baptism is symbolic of being born again in the Spirit as a result of Faith. I don’t think it works out theologically speaking.
Because those who reach the age of accountability also have those who don’t believe and hence have already left their spiritual heritage.
No person is born Christian. But becomes Christian through Faith.
A person who doesn’t believe has not business being known as Christian because of infant Baptism.
Nuts
That is the faith of isolated atoms connected to God, but utterly disconnected from each other, not the faith of a Christian Church.
The question is not who is saved, but who is adoptive kin through adoption by God.
That is the faith of your own personal individual Jesus, not the faith of a Christian Church. The Christian faith of a Christian Church must embrace families as families.
Christianity, as actually implemented by Saint Paul, and actually implemented by every successful version of Christianity, is a synthetic tribe that is necessarily composed of biological tribes, because it promotes, and must promote, fatherhood and indissoluble marriage. Hence, you get born a Christian if you are conceived by Christian father, who having been adopted as child of God, and thus adoptive kin of all Christians, promptly arranges similar adoption for his child.
If you take the position that not the entire family is adoptive kin of all Christians, you are attacking family, marriage, and fatherhood.
If you drop that feature, and make it faith only, your next step is to abandon families and fathers.
Whereupon, surprise surprise, you find you have abandoned peace on earth to all men of goodwill. You eventually get into war with a six hundred pound gorilla, discover you have a shortage of young men of military age willing to fight for God, King, Country, family and property, and your faith promptly and deservedly vanishes into the ash heap of history.
The Church cannot be concerned only with the other world, but must be concerned with this world, and must promote social cohesion in this world.
For which job, infant baptism is a requirement. If all Christians are to be adoptive kin, the infant sons of Christian fathers must be adoptive kin also. If not, you lose social cohesion, and the capability to defend your faith by military means. Your church becomes a string made of sand.
No it is not.
It is not symbolic.
Baptism is becoming adoptive kin of all Christians through adoption by God.
If you start scrutinizing your adoptive kin to see if their faith is strong enough for you, you are no Christian.
On earth, Christianity is a tribe, and if you start writing people out of the tribe in your head, other tribe members need to write you out of the tribe in their heads.
If you will not cohere with your fellow tribe member’s infant, he would be foolish to cohere with you.
If someone has a high and ever escalating standard for membership of the tribe, that is indicative of intention to defect, so I should defect on him before he defects on me.
One should not ingroup people who obviously have every intention of outgrouping one.
In a world of imperfect information, one should not suspend cooperation for a single seeming defection, because then everyone gets stuck in defect/defect.
Hence the Christian requirement for forgiveness, mercy, and turning the other cheek. But one only has two cheeks. Unlimited forgiveness is not a requirement.
But, at the same time, should not cooperate with those likely to defect.
Hence the Christian rules, peace on earth to all men of goodwill, implying one does not need to be all that peaceful to men not of good will.
And if someone preaches unlimited forgiveness, etc, as for example in the perverted and debased interpretation of the good Samaritan parable, he is holiness spiraling Christianity. In which case he undoubtedly thinks that no end of people are insufficiently Christian, so does not intend to cooperate with them. So, in a world of imperfect information, they should defect on him before he defects on them. Holiness spiraling is indicative of lack of goodwill, so war is permissible, and often advisable.
Good Christians should aim for the broadest and most inclusive cooperate/cooperate equilibrium. Anyone who is holiness spiraling, including someone who preaches a broader than possible cooperate/cooperate equilibrium is not in fact aiming for cooperate/cooperate equilibrium, so should be excluded from cooperation. Holiness spiraling is a tactic whose goal is cooperate/defect, and should be forestalled by defecting first.
If someone holiness spirals, one should respond by going openly and honestly into defect/defect.
The problem we now have is that the institutions of cooperation have been taken over by those whose objective is to attain cooperate/defect.
If your goal is cooperate/defect, the institutions of cooperation are a juicy target for entryism.
Holiness spiraling is one of many tactics to accomplish cooperate/defect. It is one of the two major tactics, the other being Byzantine defection, lying about social reality, and lying about the state of consensus about social reality. So one has to socially exclude people who practice either tactic, and, as opportunity permits, make war upon them, kill them and take their land and women.
Byzantine defection is named after Byzantine failure, which is named after the Byzantine Generals problem which is so named because Byzantine generals were always plotting to get other generals killed and their armies dispersed, so that they could then return home from the unsuccessful war and overthrow the Byzantine emperor. And to this end one general would lie to another general about what was happening on the battle front, what he intended to do about what was happening on the battle front, and what other generals were doing or about to do. Byzantine failure is such inconsistent and misleading miscommunication, and Byzantine defection is intentional and hostile miscommunication. To which a general should respond by cutting off communication with the miscommunicating general, and possibly by killing the miscommunicating general as opportunity permits.
Says who?
Plenty of people who left the Faith or going through the motions who were Baptised as babies.
How are non-believers spiritual kin if they rejected Jesus Christ as their King?
I know you are approaching this from a secular perspective but theologically speaking my position holds more water.
You outgroup or in group adults on the basis of their behavior. That is the point of the tale of the good Samaritan. The Samaritan acted like a neighbor to the man who was setupon by thieves, even though he was not geographically a neighbor, while the priest and the Levite failed to act in a neighborly fashion, even though they were geographically neighbors.
You outgroup or ingroup children on the basis of the behavior of their fathers.
And if you don’t have adequate information about behavior, which you usually do not, you ingroup or outgroup them on the basis of the allegiance they indicate, or the allegiance their fathers indicate.
And you then have to worry about false declarations of allegiance, holiness spiraling and Byzantine defection being the primary indicators of false declarations of allegiance.
Theologically demon worship holds more water than either of our positions. By their fruits you will know them.
You have pay attention to two millenia of consequences and events in this world.
The problem with “theologically speaking” is that it is apt to be Byzantine defection, apt to amount to making claims about observed reality, observed social reality, and social consensus, that are false and internally inconsistent.
And while it would be desirable for all blood relatives to also all be Spiritual Kin. Our Lord himself warns that such a thing will not be possible:
https://biblehub.com/matthew/10-36.htm
Because for the sake of Christ even family members would turn on believers. Plenty of repetition of this in the Gospels.
Plus there is no evidence in scripture of infants outside of John the Baptist Receiving the Holy Spirit.
But plenty of adults who as a resulting of believing have Holy Ghost coming and alighting upon them.
Which is the real spiritual kinship the Baptism of the Holy Spirit(1 Corinthians 12:13)
Chesterton’s fence
If you don’t understand the purpose and effect of baptism, you should shut up about it. There is a reason why every Christian faith had infant baptism for millennia. If you think that baptism is merely symbolic, why do you care who gets baptized? No one who baptizes infants thinks it merely a symbol. Or at least they are having it done by a priest whose official doctrine is that it is not merely a symbol, and who lectures them on the official doctrine at tedious length, even if no one is actually listening.
You need to ask yourself why all the great and durable faiths had infant baptism, and why faiths that did not have failed to prove durable.
And while you are at it, observe that every Christian faith that does not have infant baptism is now totally pozzed, a rotting skin suit worn by progressives, celebrating abortion, female serial monogamy, and gay weddings where two buggers team up to cruise for nine year old boys to bugger.
You need to ask yourself why.
Baptism shmaptism. Something similar, more obvious, more permanent, and more obnoxious is male infant circumcision! I was inwardly shocked when, in this day and age, a neighbor (non Jewish) casually mentioned her newborn’s circumcision. My wife and I agreed not to have it done on any sons. We ended up having only daughters.
On the basis of practicality alone I will agree with you in regards to Chesterson’s Fences and all that.
But being a believer I find the Scriptural foundation for the practice shaky at best and non-existent at worst.
I am sure that children that die before the age of accountability is automatically saved(2 Samuel 12:23) as David prophesized.
So it may provide a basis.
As for Baptism I have already said my piece above. If you don’t believe in the Supernatural I don’t expect to make sense on that front.
Saint Paul authorizes us to take any healthy prosocial pagan practice, give it a thin spray of Magic Christian pixie dust, and perform it unto God. As, for example, Christmas.
Anyone who hates Christmas is an enemy.
Most of the best stuff in Christianity was cheerfully swiped from the Romans and the Greeks. Not just Christmas, but sacramental marriage. And all Christian philosophy. The old testaments were not too big on philosophy.
The trouble with excluding anything that is not scriptural as that there is too much and too little in scripture, allowing you on the one hand to pick and choose, and on the other hand to rather arbitrarily over interpret stuff to fill in the gaps.
Sola Scriptura proposes that anything not in scripture is not infallible. Which is fine. We have an oversupply of infallible authorities that have infallibly proposed various foolish and wicked doctrines. But if you start excluding stuff that is not in scripture it in practice becomes Talmudism. The Talmudists keep reinterpreting the Old Testament to adapt it their current time and place, turning it on its head, and then turning it again, adding new stuff on the thinnest of scriptural pretexts, and throwing away old stuff – so that the prohibition against boiling a young goat in its mother’s milk has effectively eradicated the ten commandments. The Talmud is layer after layer of stuff, each layer effectively a new religion revoking the previous religion. Judaism is not the oldest of the faiths, but the youngest. Check out any Jewish article of faith or ritual, and a Jew will claim four thousand years of history for it, but the history will consist of a Rabbi a few decades ago making it up on the thin pretext of something a rabbi a few decades earlier said, who said what he said on a thin pretext of something some rabbi said a few decades before that, and the whole series of pretexts goes back to something in the Old Testament that does not much resemble any of them. Christmas goes back to near the beginning. The Jewish equivalent goes back a few decades.
If you throw out stuff in Christianity that is fifteen centuries old on the grounds that it is not twenty centuries old, you will be making up no end of new stuff to replace it, which will probably involve buggers dancing around a giant dildo celebrating buggery.
Christmas was instituted in 350 AD. Christianity had become the state religion of Rome roughly around 330AD. The Romans had Saturnalia. Christmas is Saturnalia cleaned up and with Christ on top of it, Christians taking over Saturnalia shortly after they took over Rome. The Jewish equivalent was instituted in about 1970 as part of justification of a pile of lawsuits against Christmas.
So it is not scriptural? Ditch it, and you are going to be practicing something invented last year.
@I
Whether there is scriptural basis for baptism (or anything else) is beside the point. It is important that any practice is not in contradiction of scripture, but nothing in scripture forbids Christians to add something, e.g. Christmas.
The protestant “sola scriptura” is wrong.
All this discussion about infant baptism reminded me of a joke. An adult jewish man wants to become a Christian. He asks the priest what kind of clothing is appropriate to wear for such an event. The priest answers: “Um, I really have no idea. We usually just wear diapers.”
The only adult baptism faith that seems to be not totally pozzed is the Souther Baptists, the faith of the slaveholding South. It is Puritan-derived so should have been holy spiraled into insane faggotry by now, but not seeing that. Somehow they’ve managed to shut down or at least slow the holy spiraled versions of it.
Sola scriptura seems bizarre to me because it means you are taking Scripture as infallible but you are ignoring the practices of the early Church Fathers who wrote it.
@alf,
If making a break from Established Christianity, is there any specific reason you want to mimic Semitic religious practices, even going so far as to dedicate yourself to their “God/Jehovah?” If making a clean break, why not return home, to the god of your fathers? Since there is no formal worship, and no historical “Dutch” nation to speak of, you could start simply by worshipping the Sun, or the Sky, whichever god speaks to your heart and temperament, like Constantine the Great or Julian the Faithful did.
I am a simple man. I look at what the sun God accomplished, and at what the Christian God accomplished, and I conclude there is really no competition.
Suones,
You really don’t get religion is a team sport, and its whole point is being a team sport meant for inherently social beings, not an 1:1 relationship with a god or an idea thereof?
Although Alf does not get it either when he says praying does nothing for him. That is still 1:1. The idea is to find a religious community you can respect and you can fit in.
Well, except Buddhism or some subsets thereof. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milarepa was not a team player. But Christianity, Germanic Paganism, Greco-Roman Paganism, definitely team sports. And even Buddhists say the third most important thing is the sangha, i.e. the community. The team. The synthetic tribe.
White pagans cannot resist enemy infiltration. The BLM entryist says “Don’t you care about the poor blacks in Africa? Now go and kill nazis.” The pagan entryist says “Don’t you care about the poor whites in Africa? Now go and kill niggers.” Only Christianity and other similarly forgiving religions seem able to resist this tactic.
@TheDividualist
You have co-incidentally stumbled upon one of my earliest formative influences. As a child I read a tome on Tantric Buddhism with the tale of Naropa, Marpa and Millarespa (French spelling). And I would be lying if I said that Marpa did not influence me a good deal, to the point I imagined myself many times in Millarespa’s place. Your reference brought a flood of memories back. Thank you. Also, nothing is co-incidental. Sri Buddha willed you to bring it up. ðŸ™
Back to the point at hand: Religion is a team sport for goyim. Every Man has to find his god himself, and join a compatible congregation after completing his search for an ishta deva. I assume everyone on the Internet is a Man, until they show otherwise. Only Jim here seems to have actually found Christ himself. If one does not have the fortitude for a personal search, a sensible default is simply following the gods of one’s father, which, in Europe’s case, is often Christianity.
If your church consists of you & wife, who will correct your heresies? How will you find husbands for your wives & where will your sons find wives?
I have enough people around me who correct me if I do overly stupid shit, my woman chief among them.
For my son(s): I crawled my way up to a pretty woman through night game, pretty sure my son, with a red pill/homeschool upbringing, will land an equally pretty woman.
For my daughter(s): dunno. If she’ll be anything like her mother I have no doubt suitors will line up, church or no church.
“And while you are at it, observe that every Christian faith that does not have infant baptism is now totally pozzed, a rotting skin suit worn by progressives, celebrating abortion, female serial monogamy, and gay weddings where two buggers team up to cruise for nine year old boys to bugger.”
I know a few Protestant sects that aren’t like that including for now the KJVonlyists.
And given how the Roman Catholics are being skinsuited as we speak and the Eastern Orthodox has been protected by the Iron Curtain thanks to Stalin’s purges.
I will have to wait and see in regards to the Eastern Orthodox.
While I find that there is more solid foundations for having Christmas at 25 December. And blessing that day is fine by me. Its not claiming supernaturalism beyond the bounds of the Holy Writ.
Although I am skeptical of any Supernaturalism claimed to be from God that extends beyond the bounds of Scripture.
i.e. Spiritual kinship that results from Infant Baptism and therefore the implication also of the Holy Spirit being received by said infant. Which always is associated in the Historical records in the New Testament.
Baptism of Water always after the day of Pentecost would always end up with Baptism of the Holy Ghost which is the true Baptism.
Because of the frauds that claim such supernaturalism beyond said bounds like Benny Hinn for example. Pretending to heal people of their diseases and ailments claiming that God blessed them with health and took away their infirmities.
And simple con-artists.
And it looks like that it can be argued scripturally that all children are automatically claimed by God if they die when young:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9l0nbqjKHg
So on that basis water baptism of infants may not be necessary for their salvation.
So to conclude its not specifically throwing out everything that isn’t in the Bible which I believe is clear enough.
Its what’s associated with specific acts of God that people may claim may have happened.
OK, KJVOnly are fine people, invalidating my claim that religions that do not practice infant baptism all turn into skin suits.
So let us address their argument about baptism of households in the New Testament: “It is pure speculation to suppose that there were infants in the household”
But what is not speculation is that the household was baptized as a household, not as individuals who just happened to live in the same house and just all repented and converted.
If they all repented and converted, it was because the alpha in their household gave allegiance to supreme alpha of the universe, so they followed their alpha, not because they individually had individual conversion experiences.
And a child follows his father.
The household baptisms in scripture are consistent with the social, family, and divine dynamics that I describe, not the ones that you and they are arguing.
It is indeed pure speculation to suppose that there were infants in those households. It is, however, not only speculation, but also highly improbable, to suppose that everyone in the household converted simultaneously in an independent, adult, and individual conversion experience.
There were doubtless children in those households. Do you think they individually thought hard about their relationship to God? It is not likely that everyone in a household is adult.
And it does not matter if infant baptism is in the New Testament or not, or baptism of children is in the New Testament or not, though have to torture the text in order to claim it is not. Lots of important stuff in Christianity is not explicitly in the New Testament, and the KJVOnly people are finding lots of things in the New Testament that clearly are not there. The New Testament is intentionally vague about baptism, and yet the KJVOnly people somehow manage to find a pile of stuff that is highly specific and concrete, which resembles the Talmudists concocting a brand new Judaism every couple of generations, and declaring they found it in the Old Testament.
Our Christmas is not in the New Testament, but it has been Christian for seventeen centuries.
You are right about an entire Household converting is possible and no doubt I believe that constitutes everyone in that Man’s household who has passed the age of accountability and with enough of a consciousness to make the decision in tandem with the Alpha.
I doubt infants would even be capable of converting since they don’t even have enough of a conscious awareness to do so.
As for why I am adamant about my position:
https://www.gotquestions.org/born-of-the-spirit.html
Unless spiritual rebirth occurs especially in those old enough to comprehend. Being “born again” they have no part with Jesus Christ(John 3:5).
What the bible tells us is the whole household converted.
It does not tell us that the whole household needed to reach the age of accountability and all that.
You argument is circular. Everyone has to reach the age of accountability, therefore everyone must have reached …
The bible does not say any of that. You are adding it in arbitrarily.
The bible does not rule out your reading. But it does not exclude the conventional reading either.
Baptizing a household as a social unit, rather than as several individuals is what scripture says, and makes perfect sense if baptism means what eighteen centuries of Christians thought it means.
It does not make sense if baptism means what you claim it means.
You are, like the Jewish Talmudists, arbitrarily adding stuff to the bible that is not there.
You are reading twentieth century individualist doctrines into a first century collectivist document.
Now it could have been that all members of the household were independent adults making an independent decision, but if they were, there is absolutely no reason to suppose that the apostles knew or cared. That is a twentieth century concern, not a first century concern. It is not a concern present in scripture. You are arbitrarily reading it into scripture.
Maybe they did know and care – but there is nothing in scripture to indicate that they knew or cared. Why should they? I certainly would not.
You care, but I don’t care, I have explained at length why I don’t care, I don’t see any good reason to care, and I see no indication in scripture that the apostles knew or cared.
That there is no mention of infant baptism in the scriptures could mean that they only baptized adults, but it could also equally mean that everyone took it for granted that when the adults got baptized, so did the infants, and in the context of a household being baptized, well, that does not prove that infants were baptized, but it makes the individualist interpretation of baptism, the meaning you are giving baptism, strange and improbable, for it seems unlikely that the households were entirely composed of adults.
Similarly, nearly everyone who gets recorded in scripture as being baptized is male. Do you conclude from that the converts were overwhelmingly male, or that they neglected to baptize women? A more likely conjecture is that women were not recorded, because they generally got baptized as result of their male head of household being baptized, that a lot of individual baptisms eventually became household baptisms.
If Acts 8:37 is rightly included in the bible, which I think it is, usually interpreted as excluding infant baptism. But, from the point of view that baptism is adoption by the Lord, does not necessarily follow. An adult who wants to identify as Christian, but does not acknowledge Jesus as Lord is an entryist, and entryists are trouble. Christianity had and has an entryist problem from the beginning, starting with Simon the Magician. Infants are not entryists. I have a big Christian entryist problem on this blog, and “Jesus Christ is Lord, mortal and eternal, God is three and God is one” usually smokes them out.
So, I would interpret Acts 8:37 as “we will baptize you if you are not one of those $&#@ entryists”. And, similarly you are allowed to comment on this blog from the frame that you are a Christian only if you pass a similar test. Which, of course, an infant cannot pass, but an infant cannot sow trouble between Christians with comments on this blog either.
The Church of England created the King James Bible, included Acts 8:37 in the King James Bible, and cheerfully went ahead baptizing infants anyway. They had a big entryist problem, and I have a big entryist problem, so I conjecture their translators read it they way I read it.
You might say that I, not you, am overinterpreting Acts 8:37, but if so, I have a lot of good company. If you are taking the King James Bible as only good bible, then you are taking the restoration Church as the most recent regnant good Church, and they baptized infants.
“You are, like the Jewish Talmudists, arbitrarily adding stuff to the bible that is not there.”
I am basing it on the Prophecy that is about Immanuel or the birth of Jesus (Isaiah 7:16). Age that is old enough to choose the right and reject the wrong.
And more indirectly on the Bar Mitzvah age of 13 for Males. But I don’t know if that tradition has continued all throughout history.
https://www.gotquestions.org/age-of-accountability.html
“You are reading twentieth century individualist doctrines into a first century collectivist document.”
I could be. Although I think that it is self-evident when I read about it in this fashion.
Perhaps its Cultural Osmosis speaking.
I think as I quoted above it would fit an individualist notion of Salvation more.
Sons turning against Fathers and vice versa. Daughters against Mothers and Vice Versa for Christ’s sake. Where he said one’s enemies would be members of one’s household.
That wouldn’t happen if Salvation necessarily occurs among unified family units as a unit as the notion of enemies within household shouldn’t be possible.
Either Households are with Christ entirely or against Christ entirely. But if followers of Christ has people of his own blood and family against them.
Then Salvation cannot be Familial Unit by Unit basis.
Of course opponents of Jesus Christ would say that those statements are likewise an attack on families and on blood attachments in general.
On the other hand Christianity is collectivist enough to function as a single body globally.
Therefore it straddles the spectrum between complete atomized individualism and collectivism.
Christian cohesion can be, and empirically usually is, family unit basis.
Obviously baptism does not mean automatic salvation, and no one ever claimed it did, but it creates a rebuttable presumption of salvation, and a rebuttable presumption that the baptized is in group.
The former is God’s problem. The latter, however, is our problem.
Salvation is individual. The Church, however, is collective.
It is a long path between Isaiah 7:16 and a requirement for adult baptism. That sort of long path is characteristic of Talmudism, and we can observe that Talmudists re-invent Judaism ever couple of generations.
Our Christmas is not two millenia old, but it is seventeen centuries old. When Christianity became the state religion of Rome, it absorbed and Christianized the Roman Saturnalia.
The Jewish equivalent of Christmas is younger than I am.
But the biggest problem with opposing baptism, is that you are shooting right. You are attacking those whom it is safe to attack, and ignoring those who are attacking you. Making that your hill to die on is awfully easy.
How does your Church handle female serial monogamy, something unambiguously forbidden, but dangerous to notice? Does it celebrate single mothers as heroes without undue curiosity as to how they became single mothers?
Nothing in the bible directly addresses infant baptism, and to get something out of the bible addressing it you have to engage in elaborate Talmudism. But there is a wheelbarrow load of stuff addressing serial monogamy. Does your church stuff that wheelbarrow load into basement behind the water heater, while focusing passionately on the infant baptism issue?
#JustSemiticThings
@suones
You are Vaishya, are you not? Did you ever watch the movie Guru? I kind of liked it. It seemed like an Indian answer to the Chinese series Like A Flowing River. Of course there will be some depth to it that you will grasp better than I did. Perhaps you can enlighten me on it.
Anyway, I guess what I am saying is, you don’t need to be a warrior to fight evil.
Sent a mail to jim@blog.reaction.la from my user email. I feel slightly bad because 0.011 btc is not such a modest amount these days, but hey, I’m just glad I won.
payment received. Very likely the biggest bet I will ever collect. Thank you!
My opinion is that God/Gnon gave you the biggest blessing of all, a reflection of divinity: he gave you free will and awareness. And precisely because he loves you he lets you live with your own choices, your own actions and their consequences. If he were to interfere with your life you’d be nothing but a puppet, a slave, your choices wouldn’t matter, your life wouldn’t matter, you’d be like vermin. Like a hamster in some stupid experiment, instead of an individual with full agency and control over his own fate to weave his own story.
“Return to Monke” is not “Return to Gnon”, return to monke is Rousseau’s noble savage insanity in modern meme form, the same insanity that gave us what we suffer today, the same insanity that inspired Karl Marx. Return to Gnon is to rediscover the ancient truths that our ancestors knew and made them successful and prosperous and led them to produce beauty and greatness.
Return to Gnon means to make use of our ability to observe and overcome nature turning its own laws against it, to struggle for more. For example, as Jim teaches, marriage is a conspiracy that turns natural but destructive behavior into something great and productive. Leftists teach in schools that what separates us from animals is our ability to learn and to reason, to feed their insane Enlightenment narrative, but they are wrong. What truly separates us from animals is our soul, our free will and our self-awareness, which gives us a real choice, the possibility to be cause.
Monkeys are not shit-flinging apes living in jungles because they aren’t smart enough, but because they can’t choose, they live purely on instinct, and this is what their instinct tells them and they can’t escape it, because they have no free will, no self-awareness. They are directed and controlled by the laws of nature, and nature always chooses the path of least effort, so the monkeys are forever damned to slavery in the jungle. But humans rise, with their free will, they choose to struggle, to put effort and work to achieve something beyond.
Nature, Gaia, “mother Earth” is the one that is an evil bitch pushing you to the shithole jungle to suffer. But our Heavenly Father is the light that shows us the path to something better.
I can get behind all this.
My remaining question is if there is a way to scale this. A kind of packaged version people can imitate.
But then again, maybe it is not necessary. Maybe the fact that it takes a while to understand is what makes it potent.
Apologies for barging in, but I fear you’re mixing two categories in looking to “scale.” Religion of enlightenment for us priests is, and must be, different from religion of reducing suffering/increasing happiness for goyim. GNON does not “love you” in the sense of holding your hand when you cry — his love is like a father’s who forges his son into a fearsome weapon that carries his name and seed far beyond he himself could. We are fine with that kind of love (eg: Conan’s worship of Crom — Crom actually does intercede on Conan’s behalf, he just didn’t notice it at first). Most goyim are not. They want different religion and thus different worship, and gods.
The eastern concept of “immortal soul” is a controversial one and has been somehow imported into Western thought in a half-baked form. One thinker recommends getting rid of “soul concept” entirely[1]. I at least recommend a thorough study before embracing it. If “all men” have souls, it means that goyim (commonly called NPCs) have them too, which means that free will and choice are not properties of the soul, but of the body — because goyim/NPCs have no more free will than horses. Which implies that all living beings may thus be considered to have “soul” or, no living beings have any “soul” — which does not exist.
Eagles soar to the heavens and pigs wallow in filth not because $DEITY caused them to, but because they like it. Animals, and goyim, by extension, are always attuned to their natures, whether they be base or sublime. On the whole, men’s natures can be discerned from their manner of life, and one is happiest when he gets to live in a close approximation of his natural environment, with proper segregation/boundaries. Very few men are able to dispassionately reason about their position from an “outside view,” so to speak, which phenomenon got popularised as “internal monologue.” These, like most of us here, have a fundamentally different worldview, and this is surely the result of our being blessed by our god GNON, who is Father Nature Himself. Choice is our gift/curse from GNON. You cannot expect to scale this to goyim, who simply cannot handle it!
[1]: https://reactionreformation.wordpress.com/2020/09/15/ecumenical-christianity-as-a-leftism-enabling-machine/
$#!7 I think you just convinced me to support caste segregation. At least in theory, I don’t know how in the western context we would handle the practical details..
At least dogs have something that looks very much like a ‘soul’ in some understandings of the word, They can show empathy, mourn etc., while still being animals driven by instinct and needing a master. Not many people dispute women have souls, so why not dogs.
Using AM’s definition of a soul then indeed dogs don’t have souls, and I can count the names of women who have them on one hand 😉
The internal monologue definition is probably OTOH to narrow, because there are a lot of different ways people think. A minor article of the current progressive faith is Sapir-Whorf, that language shapes thought, which in its absolute form endorsed by many progs implies we can only think in language. To me and many other people that doesn’t apply. I can think conceptually, spatially, in language, using cognitive empathy and so on and so forth, not much of which I would describe as “internal monologue” although the latter is also useful sometimes.
Only thinking in language might also contribute to leftist holiness spiralling. This is a thought that has occurred to me many times, but I’ve never really fleshed it out.
For Christianity the concept of the soul is so deeply embedded though that I do think we need a good, canonical definition that is not vulnerable to holiness spirals.
> If “all men†have souls, it means that goyim (commonly called NPCs) have them too
Tut, tut, leave it to a dot-Indian to be sexist.
That nonsense stems from the prog article of faith that “all human beings are created equal”. Famously, Mormons had to adopt the heresy quite recently, or else (or is that an urban legend?). It is a case study on how people do not resist an insane doctrinal change, because (1) *of course* non-one with half a brain would take it seriously, then (2) their kids are taught it at school, and soon (3) everyone takes it very seriously indeed.
Of course joggers do not have souls. Of course NPCs do not have souls. Of course women aren’t human in the same sense men are human, so even talking about human soul as if it were one undifferentiated thing is nonsense to begin with.
> goyim (commonly called NPCs)
Goyim are cattle because we are confused, not because we were not self-aware. Just because you’re above NPCs, that doesn’t make you a master of the universe. There is still a bit of range between those two.
@European Mutt
🙇
Segregation was the rule in Imperial Russia and Central Europe prior to the various Jewish revolutions.
Re: souls
“Soul” concept is an eastern innovation in Aryan thought. We have worked it out extensively, and there are two major schools of thought. One believes that all living things possess soul (including dogs and flies and such), but free will and choice are properties of the body, specifically human body. The other school claims that there is no such thing as individual “soul,” and the “being” is inseparable from its “body,” with the essence of life escaping the body and merging into the everlasting essence/Creator of Life. There is also an extinct third school that holds a hard materialistic view, but that is irrelevant for this discussion.
The way “soul” concept has been integrated into Christianity and Islam, that there exists an arbitrary boundary where “animals” stop having souls but “humans” do, is unworkable in practice, and is patently false. Higher animals like dogs, and elephants definitely have souls in the same way as men, to say nothing of gorillas or chimps. They are slaves to their nature, true, but that is a factor of their body, and is true for most “men” (goyim) too. This is why we have a concept of “second birth” — we come into this world as naked animals — it is only if/when we achieve opening of the mind and learn the true Dharma, it is like a second birth, we become “twice born.” Few achieve this, and it has become more and more hereditary and degenerate over time, but the principle still holds. Most goyim never achieve this “second birth,” and are able to lead happy, productive, and fulfilling lives. Many twice-born, OTOH, become horrified when faced by the reality of the world, and become “seculars” (our progs).
Re: internal monologue
That was only an example, not the basis of a definition. 🙂
Re: Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
This is utterly and obviously false, but only obvious to twice-born. Before our second birth (and for goyim — their entire lives), we are slaves to language — words. We memorise them, manipulate them, regurgitate appropriate combinations of them on command. Consider this form of “man” an extremely advanced form of GPT-3, a GPT-3000, perhaps — able to pass a Turing language test with flying colours. For people in this state, Sapir-Whorf is an obvious truth. No use arguing with them, you might as well argue with a cow.
Understanding “Dharma” requires mastering thinking in concepts, which may or may not have linguistic formulae available. In fact we all dream of discovering some concept or another that we may then get to name, as Manu the First Man (Mannus to Germans, same person) named each and every thing in existence at his time. Once we achieve this level, language becomes our slave, to be used and abused at our whim, not the other way round. If you drop ten twice-born onto a deserted island, where none speaks another’s language, we’ll have a workable language in a day. The Tower of Bab-el myth reflects a Semitic prole fantasy driven partly by a fear of this happening.
My Aryan ancestors standardised on Sanskrit for this purpose — whatever the native tongue (of the dozens or even hundreds in our country), a man of learning should know Sanskrit. Your Aryan ancestors standardised on Latin/Greek for this purpose, and most accounts of the “Royal Society” and its hey-day seem to miss or gloss over that the proceedings were probably in Latin, Newton’s Principia is certainly in Latin.
By a happy co-incidence (or the blessing of our Father Manu/Mannus) we have caught lightning in a bottle again in the form of the English language, whose fate is now truly beyond the hands of its originators, the Anglo/Saxo/Norman/Scots.
Returning to Sapir-Whorf, “thinking in language” is simply intellectual weakness, implying a mind too weak to have original thoughts (which is ~90% of men). The Hypothesis holds true for this contingent. Intesting things happen in the other 10% who basically create the language the goyim use, i.e., prog masters and, of course, us. Sapir-Whorf is the means of influencing goyim’s actions through influencing their thoughts via controlling their language. Although “linguistics” is considered a forte of a certain tribe with high verbal IQ (ahem! Chomsky), it is a tool any of us can use, for better or worse, not just the NGO Brahmins. We have memetic sovereignty too!
@Prince Charming
S E X I S T
😂
Please take this up with the Cathodoxelicals, who not only insist that Africans and others do have souls, but are actively engaged in trying to harvest them. 😀
But the fundamental issue remains — where do you draw the line at soulful/non-soulful? The Pope says that dogs can’t go to heaven but women can, you say that some men/NPCs also can’t, or can they? Hmm…
Anyway, if I understand correctly, do you imply that only fully-realised men (like us :^) can be considered to have souls?
We are most definitely not goyim/NPCs. You don’t appear to be a goy/NPC either (unless you’re GPT-56), but labour under some delusion of being a goy. Goyim are not “just like us but confused.” That’s the latent Leftism talking — next thing you know you’ll begin trying to ‘uplift’ them through ‘education.’ I charitably think you defend them out of loyalty towards your men — and that is perfectly fine. I would expect you to defend your dogs, horses, chickens and women too, and I would do the same. The only Hindus I don’t defend are NGO/Prog/Seculars, because they are self-aware and have chosen to defect.
On the contrary, in a just society, you would indeed be the master of your goyim, who need a master as much as dogs and women need a master to support and guide them. Even Bill Gates, for all his wealth, grovels before NGO Brahmins because he needs a master too. A dog — a very, very rich dog, but a dog. He does not have memetic sovereignty. Elon Musk, though a fraction as wealthy as Gates, and probably less talented overall, has memetic sovereignty. Master of the Universe? Us? Of course not. That honour only belongs to Devas Pitar.
Orwell or even Moldbug did not emphasise this point hard enough — “if there is any hope, it lies with the proles” is absolute folly. But that doesn’t imply looking down on your proles — a good master loves his subjects, and sees to their well-being even more than his own sons. Henry Ford understood and lived that. Be like Henry Ford.
I think the Indian Caste System has certain flaws.
That is the lack of downward social mobility due to restrictions of intermarriage between downwardly mobile surplus sons of the upper echelons who happen to be less competent than the rest of the caste and lower caste women.
This lack of competition therefore ensures that there is no trickle down Eugenics by those surplus sons taking over the women of the less competent castes. Of course with the lower caste men losing out especially those with more deleterious mutations.
Flushing them out.
Over time in the European Class System this downward mobility helped to raise the genius of Europe and helped to birth the industrial revolution
https://evoandproud.blogspot.com/2019/02/the-nurture-of-nature.html
A video on this very topic:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/P78Zd8265_k/
As the trickle down eugenics proceeded. Eventually in the 15th Century onwards Europe became a hotbed of inventors and many tech advancements occurred.
Of course mobility can happen the other way around. But that required the Man to be very competent indeed.
One of the reasons Europe became very dynamic.
“Over time in the European Class System this downward mobility helped to raise the genius of Europe and helped to birth the industrial revolution”
Sorry that statement was flawed I mean to say:
“In the European Class system this downward mobility helped to raise the genius of Europe and helped to birth the industrial revolution”
“The eastern concept of “immortal soul†is a controversial one and has been somehow imported into Western thought in a half-baked form”
Scholastic philosophy, the best philosophy of the Christian West teaches an *almost* naturalistic view on the human soul. Most of our faculties, the ones we share with animals, are in the body and die with the body. Sense, memories, emotions, even a basic level of intelligence. The only supernatural part of our mental faculties, able to survive death, is abstract intelligence.
But that is not a complete human being, not even close, hence Christianity teaches the resurrection of the body, because Eternal Life, any life, as a human being, is only possible in physical bodies. So, nearly naturalistic.
Admittedly it caused some problems. Because if people are not judged immediately after death but only at later at Judgement Day, this might be insufficiently motivating. Eventually they reached the compromise, that this abstract intelligence, surviving death, while cannot be in literal Hell or Heaven, it can still be in a with-God state, which is joy, or without-God, which must be like a prison, cut off from senses, memories, etc. nothing to do.
But that is temporary, eventually, resurrection of the body, Judgement, life in a natural body afterwards.
The idea that supernatural souls as sort of spirit bodies that can see and talk existing in Hell and Heaven came from Dante. A lot of ideas people think to be Christian ideas came from Dante. That stuff that men who fuck outside marriage go to Hell? Dante. This is highly ironic. A traitorous, backstabbing asshole of a Florentine politician with no spiritual authority whatsoever got to redefine much of what Christianity teaches in the popular mind purely because he was gifted with extremely good poetic ability. Talk about the power of aesthetics!
Of course he just resurrected an old Pagan idea. Not an Eastern import actually. The old Greco-Roman stuff that souls as spiritual bodies that can see and talk live in Hades, Elysium, Tartaros etc.
A lot of ideas Christians think to be Christian came from $VARIOUS_NON_CHRISTIAN_SOURCES. Aryanisation of Christianity.
You could also see the power of Saraswati (or Hermes/Mercury as per taste). This is how old gods work. The quality of the vessel (Dante is this case) is immaterial.
He channelled his inner Aryan. Much of “lost” Greco-Roman stuff was rediscovered through Eastern imports.
No, that is not the original Aryan. That is Roman and Greek decadence.
The original Greek and Roman idea held that souls were permanently bodies – that when someone died, he continued to exist. In the ground
Your ancestors were the household Gods, and you wanted to hang close them to retain the support of your Gods.
Well, that is not the original Aryan idea either. The original Ayrans were horse and cattle herders, nomads. They conquered the grain growers of Europe at the start of the Bronze age, and again when Bronze age civilization collapsed. The idea of sticking near the graves of your fathers sounds more like a grain grower idea.
Maybe the Indians do have clearer recollection of the real original Aryan religion, but after this much time, I doubt it.
But the real original Greek/Roman religion was biological ancestors as Gods, incarnate in their graves.
The Saga period icelanders conjectured that their gods were the leading men of two tribes who merged somewhere in Asia, and subsequently conquered the world, biological ancestors of all Aryans. So the original Aryans were probably ancestor worshippers, and being nomads, also sky worshippers, but, being nomads, probably did not have much of a grave cult. But, being ancestor worshippers, nonetheless took their ancestors graves seriously, so probably held souls to be permanently incarnate in bodies, like their more stationary Greek and Roman descendants. But that is all a guess. We have mighty thin data for the original Aryan religion. We have better data for the original Greek and Roman religion, but even that is mighty thin.
Souls in Elsium, Tartarus etc, is associated with philosophers who are preaching decadence, or trying to deal, not very effectually, with decadence. The ordinary Greek and ordinary Roman knew exactly where his ancestors souls were located, and from time to time went there to pay his respects.
“The original Greek and Roman idea held that souls were permanently bodies – that when someone died, he continued to exist. In the ground”
Uh, that seems more complex than that. Yes, the building of kurgans, tumuli, cairns etc. points to that, and the household goods, the laares, or the perhaps related Turkic ancestor worship in the hearth and the threshold. On the other hand the myth that the dead cross a river into the otherworld exists in many Greek, Roman, Germanic, Slavic, Persian and Indian mythologies, too. There is even a shared element of a dog protecting the gates of the otherworld and an old man carrying the dead on a ferry or boat.
Well maybe that is a later element, developed from living on the shore of a wide river or something.
Ritually feeding the dead, and the outrage when the bodies of the dead in war were not collected, points to an older religion that continued to live, even as the elite and the intellectuals abandoned it.
A beings aesthetic architecture is their steering through Being; that which attracts them towards some forms, and repels them from others.
To speak of certain emotive senses as ends in of them selves, is akin to saying that making left-hand turns in your car is an end in of itself. Adjudicating value of turns one way or another, only becomes intelligible in the context of destination you are trying to reach; whether it is taking you there; what sort of destination it is, in the first place.
The ways of God are the ways of Power. Naturally, then, some beings may have steering that is more in coherence with the nature of Being – and some beings may be, less so. Those which find some things burdensome, others find easy; existence that some find accursed, others find blessed.
In the past, i have sometimes described a ‘pessimist’ as ‘an honest prog’; honest, insofaras that have realized the incoherence of progroid sentiments with natural law; prog, and thus pessimistic, because they are never the less *still possessed by those same sentiments*; that, in spite of any and all that inveighs to the contrary, their instincts never stop telling them that progroid values *should* be what is good, true, and beautiful – even when it is evil, false, and heinous.
Gnon used to be just a metaphor for the laws of nature, not someone to pray to.
Philo of Alexandria said God does not create things randomly, but through the Logos, which is like the architect’s blueprint for a city. The laws of nature. But one does not pray to the blueprint either.
Then Christians claimed, mostly through John’s Gospel, that Christ is the Logos embodied. Now that is a Gnon to pray to, but, dunno, Christ does not sound like the harshly Darwinian laws of nature. Like the experiment Yud mentioned, they kept mice on scarce food to see whether it will lead to less reproduction, and no, it rather led to eating each others daughters. Is that evolutionary blueprint Logos really Christ embodied?
That’s because “Christ” is bread for the hungry, a salve to soothe the cowering, fearful masses of goyim. The inviolable Laws of Nature are for men who create the cocoons in which women and goyim may live out their days. Some have to face reality so that most don’t have to.
Oh, and “Darwinism” as espoused by “evolutionarists” is more like anti-Darwinism. I prefer to use the correct Darwinian term “natural selection” to avoid confusion (and trigger progs — who run away from “natural selection” like vampires from sunlight). Natural Selection is nothing but the blessing of Father Nature, GNON. All our efforts and thoughts should be focussed on maximising those blessings for ourselves and our posterity.
“Christ does not sound like the harshly Darwinian laws of nature.”
Divine Vengeance isn’t something to underestimate:
https://www.unz.com/akarlin/sixth-proof/
@Suones
“That’s because “Christ†is bread for the hungry, a salve to soothe the cowering, fearful masses of goyim. The inviolable Laws of Nature are for men who create the cocoons in which women and goyim may live out their days. Some have to face reality so that most don’t have to.”
For such a religion of the weak. Its puzzling that the Europeans aren’t weakened by it. And really won whether through conversion or the Military against the non-Christians around them outside of Islam.
If it failed to face reality. Why did Europe become so great under its Aegis?
On the contrary, the line from Christian doctrine to Progressivism is a short and straight one.
An arrant myth — Emperor Constantine the Philosemite himself made Christianity the State religion and spread its political power as an extension of Roman Imperial power. No significant “non-Christians” were conquered in any way. In fact, the first serious resistance encountered by Christian Byzantium was Islam, with laughable consequences (for Byzantium). The conquest and Christianisation of the New World was a far greater achievement, by comparison, but Aztec society was badly degenerate by that time, and the newly arriving Aryans made short work of them.
Accumulated Aryan Human Capital. Same way Apple became a trillion dollar company under Tim Cook, or USSR sent the first man into space under Communism. In fact, UK, in particular, started on its trajectory of “greatness” after repudiating the Vatican clown.
Aryans+Apollo == winning combination
Aryans+Yahweh == somewhat winning combination (except against Semites+Allah)
Non-Aryans+Old Gods == somewhat powerful
Non-(Aryans|Semites)+Yahweh == 😂
Nuts.
When the Roman empire in the west fell, Christianity in the West fell, and had to reconquer.
It was a conquering religion, and it conquered because pagan chieftains kept betraying and killing each other, the victory of the Alfred the Great being a stereotypical example, and the conquests of Charles the Hammer and Charles the Great being another famous example.
The missionaries of Charles were backed by the armies of Charles, and converted a great many pagans.
And as for you Suones, reflect on the very similar history of the conquest by the East India Company under old type Christianity.
With great regularity the pattern was that Hindu Kingdoms were unable to trade with the outside world, because traders were apt to be robbed and murdered. But traders of the East India Company could do business, because if their traders got robbed and killed, they would kill the Sultan, kill his family, and loot and burn the town.
Almost accidentally, this process gave them empire. They were a primarily a trading company, with a substantial sideline in piracy, robbery, and extortion. Their banditry was justified because they were dealing with bandits, and without really noticing it, they transitioned from mobile banditry to stationary banditry.
Christianity spread by conquest, and was still spreading that way all the way up to the nineteenth century. It spread by conquest because the Christian elite was more successful in cooperating under King and priest than the pagan elites.
Even in their home country. The English were ruthless in exterminating bandits. Highwaymen, murderers and other criminals were killed.
This ruthless approach to crime combined with the Christian faith and it’s precepts eventually led to a high-trust society of great power.
Of course also with a first cousins marriage ban and the class system as I said in my comment above the social mobility of which led to a proliferation of geniuses and innovation.
“On the contrary, the line from Christian doctrine to Progressivism is a short and straight one.”
You really need to read The Germanization Of Early Medieval Christianity.
“No significant “non-Christians†were conquered in any way.”
Picture yourself the Western Roman Empire. Islam has swallowed about 70% of it, North Africa, Hispania, parts of Gaul and Sicily. Another 10% of it, the coastline of Italy and Gaul was raided to bits by Muslim pirates. The Viking were banging on the doors from the north, pagan Saxons and Magyars were banging on the doors from the east.
It is both true and a good way to troll Anglos a bit: it was basically the people who later on became the Frogs who saved it all.
Suones, your bias is keeping you from appreciating the huge magnitudes spike in Christian accomplishment.
Take the Tuetonic Knights, German Warrior Monks. Over about 100 years they fought against the NE German pagans and ground them out, carving out their own sovereign territory, which not coincidentally would later become Prussia, the center around which the state of Germany would unite.
Captured knights would sometimes be roasted alive in their armor by the pagans. It was the superior social technology of Christianity that gave the Teutonic Knights the perseverance and cooperation to defeat their numerically superior pagan foes.
This is a fundamental post-colonial Leftist trope that needs to go. The East India Company was not a bunch of religious zealots and/or politicians and/or social workers. They were merchants — a greedy bunch, sure, but we’re greedy too. We paid them off, they did their own thing, we all got filthy rich as a result. EIC opened up Western markets for Indian farmers and artisans, and made a lot of people (Indians included) a lot of money. They also had a very hands-off approach to local rule, with Company men encouraged to self-segregate. The first fifty or so years were excellent, starting in 1619 with Sir Thomas Roe. This policy continued even till near the very end — witness the successful Sikh Empire created by Maharaja Ranjit Singh despite the EIC’s presence (or rather because of EIC’s help).
EIC was able to get into the good graces of the Great Mughal Jahangir precisely because the Emperor was a foreigner ruling over a foreign populace. A classic case of an unpopular King inviting hostile foreigners to do his dirty work for him. EIC was the go-between for the powerful Southern Hindu Maratha Empire and the nominally Muslim Northern Mughal Empire. It was only as the Mughal power waned that EIC had to take over more and more functions of State, and was never able to insinuate itself into the Marathas’ good graces.
The turning point is widely considered to be 1757, when Mughal power had degenerated enough to be worthless, and EIC had to maintain its own army and quasi-governing apparatus anyway, when EIC conquered the Sultanate of Bengal. Even so, the “EIC army” was largely composed of Indians, particularly Hindu warriors who were disqualified from joining Muslim armies. Hindu-ruled Maratha Empire remained free of EIC political influence for half a century more due to EIC’s defeat in the First Anglo-Maratha War, in part because the (green-water) Maratha Navy prevented British or allied Mughal ships from reinforcing/supplying their land troops for a century.
By the time Marathas were finally defeated in 1818, “EIC” was a completely different beast, having been neutered and occupied by British Govt in all but name (officially by 1858). This was the regime that strongly pushed for Christianisation and Anglicisation of India, being a priest-led suicide pact rather than the erstwhile Vaisya/merchant-led EIC. Unsurprisingly, this marks the beginning of the “hated British Rule” for Hindus, despite the EIC existing and trading massively for more than a century before. This also marks the neo-colonialist fantasy of “bringing light to the unwashed masses”/”whie man’s burden”/”harvesting souls for Christ,” Christo-proto-SJW history. I have doubt Queen Victoria considered herself a “Christian Empress” but I hardly see any Pauline Christianity in Victorianism.
In the East India company before the nineteenth century, before the British government neutered that band of piratical merchant adventurers, we saw vastly better social cohesion than among the Hindus.
When a King killed a merchant of the East India company and abducted his women, the East India company was apt to march troops, mostly Hindu troops, but under British leadership all the way down, into his town, kill him and loot the town. But reflect on the fact that this was not a reaction to the King undermining the monopoly of the East India company by opening up connections to the outside world through the Dutch or the French, but a reaction to the King cutting himself and his people off from the outside world even further, a reaction to the King furthering his own personal desires at the expense of his Kingdom.
While the people of the Kingdom probably were not too happy with troops who did not speak their local language looting their town, they probably did not miss their King too much.
@TheDividualist
So much to do, so little time!
I’d call that the “Aryanisation” of Christianity. To quote Jim:
I couldn’t have put it better myself. The Germans, like the Romans before them, would have benefitted massively from having an Official State Religion, any State Religion, so took up the one closest at hand. However, Aryan Christianity has very little to do with Semitic Christianity apart from the name and horrible imagery of the Roman cross, which the Aryans quickly supplemented by Blonde Jesus, Madonna and Child, etc. LOL at “Magic Christian pixie dust.” 😂
Those advantages do not exist anymore. The adoption of Christianity by Aryans as a quick band-aid has, far, far outgrown its usefulness. It was like adopting a command economy to tackle existential threats, achieving victory over said threats, yet sticking to the “command economy” long after it has devolved into outright Communism and poz. For a command economy will lead into Communism just as surely as Christianity will lead into progressivism.
Progressivism is in fact a failure mode of Christianity, in particular universalist Christianity. Jim seeks to restore an older version to restore sanity. I seek to (only) permit National Churches to contain insanity, but the present and future danger is very real.
Yes it is, and a very old failure mode. We have been around this road before. But Hinduism is not doing better. All live paganisms are today as pozzed as Christianity.
All state religions are subject to holiness spirals if the Sovereign fails to keep the priests in line and allows open entry into the priesthood. Progressivism is tha characteristic form that a holiness spiral takes under Christianity, because Christians are apt to holiness spiral on the story of the Good Samaritan. But when the Muslims had their catastrophic holiness spiral in the eleventh century of Christ, their holiness spiraled Islam strikingly resembled holiness spiraled Christianity, as all holiness spirals tend to converge to sexual anarchy and demon worship.
The sexual anarchy problem in Hinduism is not quite as bad, but the demon worship problem is worse.
@Frontier
Hello, friend.
A small note about the Teutonic Cucks: They were formed to protect Christian pilgrims in the Holy Land, failed spectacularly in their primary task, got BTFO by Baphometans, retreated to Hungary whose King they betrayed, tried securing their own lands by capturing, killing/forcing conversions of their brothers Prussians into their Semitic cult, renaming the land into Prussia (wearing “Prussia” as a skin suit for their treachery). The only “victories” these (and other) fools have ever achieved is by arranging political “conversions” of faction leaders as power plays between the Vatican and Moscow (the most famous and last being Lithuania). The history of conversions/apostasy/reconversion reads like farce, and would be funny too, if not for the Aryan bloodshed involved.
Where it mattered, against Baphomet, these and other forces always came up short, upto and especially including the Fall of Constantinople — a fitting end to a faithless city. The vast majority of “Christian” lands served only as a staging area for Muslim conquest, from Syria to Egypt to Nigeria. Even the famous “heroes” like Charles Martel (Battle of Tours) and John III Sobieski (Siege of Vienna) are famous for fighting a defensive battle against the Caliph, as if Paris or Vienna merely surviving a Baphometan attack is a great victory while Byzantium got raped. Well, it was a great victory for Habsburg political power, at least.
This is probably libel spread by the proto-SJWs due to projection.
If only they could manage to kill the Saracens who (still) spit on their cross rather than their brother Aryans who weren’t part of their Semitic cult yet. This Christian “superior social technology” seems to vanish whenever the call to Baphomet is heard, as in Jerusalem in 1187. Even today Christians seem to live in mortal fear of Islam, while spouting comforting myths about “pagan” this or that.
The Ottoman Empire got started by an Aryan tribe deciding Islam was the superior State Religion they needed. While Moloch whittles down Yahweh and Baphomet both, my fear is that exposure to Yahweh makes one more receptive to Baphomet. If a modern Aryan State becomes Baphometan, then the truly interesting times will commence. The only time in history this has happened and been successfully reversed, is Spain, which went from Hispania->al Andalus->Hispania.
The major lesson I can draw from the Teutonic Knights is — when a faction of elites converts to a foreign cult, even a benign one, they will sooner or later be in an existential war with the rest, supported by their “fellow” foreign cultists who see factional struggles harming us as a net positive for them. It is best to eradicate them root and stem at the first available chance, rather than wait and increase chances of failure. Eg: as much as I admire the legend of the Knights Templar, I cannot but accept that King Philip had good reasons for finishing them off.
Muslims conquered a lot of Christian lands. They also conquered a lot of Hindu lands. We have one substantial and lasting Christian reconquest of Muslim lands that still has effect to this day, and several substantial Christian reconquests that lasted centuries. Do Hindus have any substantial reconquests?
Muslims fell before the Mongols. They won in the end not by warfare but because the Mongol state religion was weak to nonexistent, and Muslim concubines of the conquerors raised the sons of the conquerors as Muslims. Christians defeated the Mongols, stopping them at the Hajnal line, and stealing the secret of gunpowder. Christians were the only people to defeat the Mongols in the days of Mongol greatness – which greatness failed for lack of a strong state religion, not through military failure.
Christians conquered a whole lot of pagans and Christianized them, and were still doing so all the way to the nineteenth century. Where is the Hindu equivalent?
The Mongols did not fall to Christianity the way they fell to Islam, because they got far fewer Christian concubines than Muslim concubines.
The, “Reee, icky Semites,” approach to social technology is a little bit retarded. Semites helped develop the atom bomb, and American used it, regardless of who helped. No sane person would have turned up their nose at Feynman’s assistance because he was the wrong ancestry. Relativistic physics works, even though Einstein was a Jew.
Likewise, Christianity works. We beat the Hindus, clearly proving the superiority of our approach. Using the failure mode of progressivism as a criticism of Christianity only holds water if your own society hasn’t been trapped in a centuries long holiness spiral. This is the Soviets criticizing the Nazi economy levels of ridiculousness. The “glorious” Aryan society you are promoting has been a disaster.
By the way, Jim, I’m an existing commenter making a new account to prevent connections to me. That’s a fake email, and if you need, I can ID my old account as long as it is private.
@suones
“The Ottoman Empire got started by an Aryan tribe”
That’s interesting. I have always figured that the original Turkic people in Inner Asia had to be at least cousins to the Aryans. First, Medieval artwork describe invading Pechenegs and Cumans as white. Second, the Everlasting Blue Sky religion (Tengri) sounds like related to Sky Father religion, although I think the father part matters more than the sky part.
Third, most important, and I think that is a clear Aryan legacy in every people where it can be demonstrated to have existed, double kingship, one more of a warlord and one more of a high priest. The first a mostly meritocratic position, someone dealing with war who is good at it, the second hereditary, with the idea of having descended from the gods, mostly dealing with divine law. Like Goths called the first ric and the second theoden, until Theoden-Ric i.e. Theodoric the Great managed to unify the titles.
And the Inner Asia Turkics had this. Hence likely at least a cousin to Aryans.
But by the time they got to Byzantium no one would call them Aryans. Basically they were not as much a state as a holy army, recruiting Muslim warriors from everywhere from Morocco to Persia or wherever, todays Turkish people are the descendants of all of them plus local Greek, later Balkan girls.
@jim
“Christians defeated the Mongols, stopping them at the Hajnal line, and stealing the secret of gunpowder.”
Nah. Polish-Hungarian-Central-Western-Europeans never defeated Batu Khan, rather when the Great Khan died, Batu went home to play game of thrones.
They were self-defeated by a very bad social technology of theirs: divisible inheritance. Well it makes sense when the inheritance is herds, as herds grow. But when it is land, it is bad. Genghis’s empire fell apart on its own, without foreign push, just basically every princeling demanding his own slice of the cake.
Then Russian Christians have really defeated them, but that was not the Mongol Empire anymore, but a hodgepodge of tiny Tartar khandoms fighting each other.
Batu left armies behind, but they accomplished no more than they had when Batu had been present.
The cities did not fall – or at least some of them did not fall, and they continued to cost the Mongols men, horses, and treasure. The Mongol empire continued to be a mighty power long after Batu, but it gave up on Europe beyond the Hajnal line. It did not immediately collapse into squabbling generals the way Alexander’s empire did.
“the Mongol state religion was weak to nonexistent”
That is an interesting story in and of itself. Historians say Genghis was tolerant of all religions. That is a bit pozzed. He was not a tolerant personality. Rather he considered himself above all religions, and made up his religion on the go, like, ordering people who wash their clothes in rivers to be put to death because they offend the spirits of the rivers. After his death there was an attempt to canonize his decisions as the Yasa divine law, but apparently it did not work out.
The attempt can be seen in https://ballandalus.wordpress.com/2015/06/01/mongol-papal-encounter-letter-exchange-between-pope-innocent-iv-and-guyuk-khan-in-1245-1246/
“If bearer of this petition reaches you with his own report, you, who are the great Pope, together with all the Princes, must come in person to serve us. At that time, I shall make known all the commands of the Yasa.”
Guyuk Khan was still making it up on the go.
@TheDividualist
What later came to be known as “Turks” have more similarities than differences from our Aryan fathers, although this will never be explored by our modern Judeo-Anthropologists. The Turkish Empire, even though nominally Muslim, was a hell of a different place than the usual Semite/Arab dominated shithole, and the Arab son of Ishmael was and remains the mortal enemy of the Turk son of the Sky Father, howsoever much the latter try to suck Baphomet **ck.
You have hit upon a very vital point. I have studied the history of my country and learned how, to destroy the Dharmic power base, usurpers instituted divisible inheritance. This comes perfectly naturally to Vaisyas, for their wealth is in moveable assets that can numerically increase, but is poison for warriors whose wealth lay primarily in land holdings whose power grows weaker with division until it is completely destroyed. One of my first targets
ifwhen I get into power is re-instituting inheritance by male primogeniture, which is what Dharma commands.Considering that the Russian Church has been an arm of the Russian State, and the Russian Church has more to do with the Tsar than with some hypothetical Jesus, I find it very beneficient. I would like if all nations instituted National Orthodox Churches, and would allow the Indian Orthodox Church to carry on its ministry (despite my general distaste for Semitism). Anglican Church started off along the same lines but got converged rapidly.
Articles of confederation failed for lack of a leader.
Strong leaders, however, are apt to to grasp more power than mortals can actually exercise, delegate to their overly mighty servants, and then you wind up with three thousand kings one mile away instead of one King three thousand miles away.
Fixing the mess requires a strong and virtuous leader. But, given such a leader, how do you make it stick?
You need a state religion that says the laws are to be obeyed, the leader is to be obeyed, but the leader rules under Gnon, and Gnon seriously disapproves of leaders who grasp more power than a mortal can exercise.
Faith in the old constitution, overthrown in the War of Northern Aggression, was such a state religion – the problems foreseen by the anti federalists were happening, but the expectation of the federalists that the constitution would limit that was also happening, up to reconstruction.
What neither of them foresaw was that the constitution would give rise to government of laws rather than men, but laws cannot govern. We got government by lawyers, which is to say, priests.
Government of priests worked tolerably well in Saga period iceland and Judges Israel, because priesthoods were private property in Iceland, hereditary property in Judges Israel. In Meiji Japan, something of both. But we had open entry into the priesthood, hence holiness spiral.
Articles of confederation would have failed in the same way for the same reasons, probably worse, because they were designed to prevent strong leaders.
The solution to the problem of an overly mighty judiciary is that implemented by Henry the Lion of Justice, which solution the solutions implemented by the Australian Department of immigration strikingly resemble. And that solution works a whole lot better with a big database and remote procedure calls.
But that does not in itself solve the problem of open entry into the priesthood, which problem plagued all the Kings of England, resulting in Charles the First losing his head, and George the Fourth losing his manhood.
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/542691-john-dean-only-a-matter-of-how-many-days-until-trump-is-indicted
Show trial of Trump is imminent.
Sure looks like it. May god help him.
Well God won’t…
If he couldn’t cross the Rubicon he should have been in Kazakhstan by now.
Yeah him and what army. There was no Rubicon. There never was. It was a horrible mistake on our part to ever think something like that was in play.
Horseshit.
Even Moldbug basically outlined how he could have done it if he was serious.
Did you even read the Moldbug piece? Moldbug said he would have needed paratroopers and tanks dropping on the Pentagon for it to be remotely possibly aka it was never in play.
Why not?
And he didn’t really need that… he needed to loudly and publically order a military standdown. He needed to prepare beforehand by purging disloyal officers. The tranny controversy should have been used early on to purge disloyal officers.
And three key people needed to die before the 20th… now the three people who are definitely going to die are Trump, Don. Jr, and Baron.
Eric they might spare because they deem him the Cladius of the family… Baron despite his youth is apparently not only tall and charismatic but a legitimate genius. They will definitely deem him a threat despite his youth.
The military does not answer to the President. That is glaringly obvious now. Miller just today he would have ignored any order from Trump on the 6th. The military made it abundantly clear they were not going to be involved in any way and in fact circumvented him to meet with Pence and Congress.
I don’t think they’ll go after his family yet. They are desperately hoping for normality to return. Don Jr may emerge as the new leader and the 2nd Gracchus.
“The military does not answer to the President. That is glaringly obvious now. Miller just today he would have ignored any order from Trump on the 6th. The military made it abundantly clear they were not going to be involved in any way and in fact circumvented him to meet with Pence and Congress.”
This should have been dealt with very very early is my point…
Likely coup-complete
Miller says that today, maybe it will help him tomorrow. Who knows what he would’ve done then.
That’s fair. Because he came from within the establishment, he never seemed particularly loyal to Trump to me but I could be wrong.
We are just in the beginning of the fall and Trump is Gracchus. The real Rubicon comes at the end.
But we should protect the legend of Trump for the future generation. This fight is just beginning. We are in a immensely better position now because of him. He single handily red-pilled half the country basically.
I will be greatful that Trump may have permanently prevented a Russia war… and that he bought us time and undermined their legitimacy.
But I’m not willing to gloss over his administrative ineptitude (he was great with policy and ideas but bad and lazy when it came to personnel and details) and cowardice in failing to seize power when he had the chance especially when the results of allowing a peaceful transition would be the same…
He was far from perfect and failed miserably with his personnel decisions and continues to fail in that regard even now, but you should get the idea that seizing power by force was ever possible.
He redpilled the nation and has set in motion a Populares movement that looks to be building momentum even without him. He wait for Caesar or Augustus to carry it over the finish line.
Get the idea that it was possible*
Pooch, what benefit do you see in protecting the legend (which by the way?) of Trump?
The way I see it, Trump cucked when it counted. Cucking is not a good role model for the future generation.
Would it not be better for future generations to see Trump as a well meaning coward who allowed the election to be stolen from him and who shied away from fighting his enemies with more than words even when it was obvious that words were not enough?
Rolling for a new cat.
A realistic view of Trump is that he was a merchant and merchants are incapable of being elites and Trump and his family will die because they didn’t know their place.
On the other hand Trump’s about to become a martyr. Martyrs have a religious power to motivate men and mobs into action. Their mistakes and follies are forgotten and only the good they did and intended to do is remembered. Trump will die as the champion of the proles.
Martyrs are not perfect beings but people persecuted and killed for their beliefs. It was dumb to think murdering Tiberius Gracchus (and later his brother) would put an end to his movement and return normalcy to the Republic. It is going to be dumb to do the same to Trump.
“A realistic view of Trump is that he was a merchant and merchants are incapable of being elites”
To stay ruling elite they have to take warrior or priest levels…
Trump needed to take the warrior level. He needed to summon the proud boys.
He was tackling the priesting job, National Capitalism is good ideology. He was always telling people “You built that”. People needed to hear that. They are tired of hearing that they stole that from blacks and women.
Yes the problem with trying to take the priests levels is the existing priesthood (correctly) considered Trump an open heretic.
Trump was viewed by the existing priesthood much the way Henry IV of France (the Protestant king of France) or James II was viewed.
Much like Henry IV his religion was better, much like James II (though James was a fool all around) he lacked the political skills to stay in power.
It’s interesting to note political violence was not the only way to win elections in the late Roman Republic. Caesar was said to have relied heavily on bribes to win his elections.
Yes, but there was plenty of violence before Caesar, making Ceasarian old type politics impossible without an army at your back. If Caesar could win elections the old fashioned way (bribing the voters) it was because he could deal with political violence, as the National Socialists in Germany could win elections the old fashioned way, charisma and bribery, because they could deal with political violence.
We cannot have a Republican party except it has a Proud Boy on top.
That’s fair. The right should not give up on elections though just because of what happened to Trump. There are just new rules to winning elections now, namely political violence and bribery, which Caesar rightly understood.
It’s far worse than that. Trump’s disgusting incompetence and foolishness in the months (and now, obviously, years) preceding and months after the election will now likely get himself jailed for life and his family completely destroyed.
It still astounds me that we are in the situation we are now in.
The only thing he could have done to avoid what is going to happen was to take the Flynn option.
Organize the unorganized militia months before the election.
Understandably he was reluctant to take that path. I would hardly call a choice that proved profoundly unwise disgusting incompetence, when before these events almost everyone would have agreed that the course of action proposed by the more radical people on this blog was insane.
Speaking or organising a militia a few months before the election is completely moot. It’s clear Trump should have been cleaning house as soon as he was sworn in, or submit immediately to his new handlers and allowed himself to be gelded.
Which is what he chose in the end, anyway.
That is stupid.
You cannot clean house with helicopter rides to the Pacific.
Cannot organize helicopter rides to the Pacific without a militia.
It took Caesar Augustus twelve years to sort out Rome, and he had death squads and an army at his back.
Cleaning a state is a bigger job than cleaning a house.
I have serious doubts if the Flynn option was ever viable. I suspect any orders to the national guard or the military would have been ignored.
I can think of worse words than incompetent and foolish for a man who is going to get himself and his family annihilated for undertaking a task he was completely physically, mentally, and spiritually unprepared for the sake of his ego.
Not to mention as a parting gift setting in action events which will lead to hundreds of his supporters doing time in federal prison for absolutely no reason.
Trump is a damned fool, a coward, and thoroughly deserves the treatment he is going to get.
Nuts.
Trump accomplished great things for a time, things that no one else, certainly not one of us, could have accomplished.
That he failed to accomplish even greater things is a profound disappointment, and I was profoundly disappointed. But he is still a great man, and will be an extremely useful martyr.
Caesar Augustus was also a great man, and it took him twelve years to get Rome in order with an army at his back and death squads at his command. You think you could have cleaned house in a month?
He’s old not the man he was in 2015 and none of us could have done what Trump did do… I’m very upset with his cowardice and lack of preparation on the 6th as well but you are not looking that there is some good from this…
He did take the system’s legitimacy away from it entirely, and he stopped a war with Russia at least for that time and surely that is worth something. The leftists purity spiral will now be a house built on sand… it will likely collapse on itself much more easily when it does.
Even the radicals look more bored than anything… The left has gotten too complacent before Trump and now that he’s gone they have no idea what to do and are still more dysfunctional then even in 2016. Running against them would be very stupid but they are busy disqualifying themselves right now as a legitimate source of power. Open rule by deep state worked for Stalin, it doesn’t work for them because they are cowards.
Out here in the provinces the only people I see seriously continuing the holiness spiralling are the Aspies and programmer types. I was forced to take up a coding job again thanks to the economy/lockdown bullshit and that is easily the most annoying thing about them. But luckily they have zero influence unless perhaps they work in Silicon Valley. Will also be interesting to see in the coming months where Harvard turns ideologically.
I now feel confident to say Yarvin/Moldbug (his recent posts are pretty decent again) was right, and I was wrong. We are entering Brezhnev times and unlike SU we have bioleninism so we just have to wait for all the smart people in the Deep State to be replaced by Shaniqua. And then a lot of things are possible, even by just being cooler than them.
And living in Brezhnevism is not that bad, because everyone knows and in effect admits the system sucks. Much lower psychological toll I find than having to pretend everything’s great.
No. Moldbug is dead wrong.
Brezhnev was after the left singularity had been stopped, and, with no new applecarts falling over, leftism had died.
Look around. You think the left singularity has stopped? You think no more applecarts are going to fall over? You think leftism has died?
The deep state intends and expects Brezhnev times. It has a shock coming.
“Trump accomplished great things for a time, things that no one else, certainly not one of us, could have accomplished.”
Trump accomplished irrelevant things. Deckchairs on the Titanic.
“Caesar Augustus was also a great man, and it took him twelve years to get Rome in order with an army at his back and death squads at his command. You think you could have cleaned house in a month?”
I never would have tried. I know what I’m capable of. So did Octavian. But Octavian understood the problems he had to solve, and was the man for the task. That’s why he is remembered as Caesar Augustus.
Trump had no idea of the actual problems and was the wrong man for the task. It’s impossible to know if Trump was net good or bad, (I believe he has been bad) ultimately, but there’s no need to lionize what was complete inadequacy and failure. That’s why we are where we are.
You are a fool.
You don’t understand what Trump accomplished, and if his effort was ultimately doomed because his opponents were willing to pursue political violence, and he was not, political violence is a big step.
It is now obvious that nothing could have been accomplished without organizing the unorganized militia. But this was not compellingly obvious at the time.
Organizing the unorganized militia is a mighty big step, which even now seems unthinkably big.
There are religious zealots which did not exist in Brezhnev times (because Stalin wiped them out in 1937), but they are not too popular and not too manly.
I think Trump did them real damage…
Terraformer, at the very least war with Russia was very imminent if Hillary won in 2016. A war which could easily have seen the US nuked out of existence given that we had insane leaders but probably few working nukes (whereas Russia even in the worst period of the late 90s was able to maintain their nukes).
War with Russia is possible now, but it does not seem imminent.
European Mutt I’m an aspie type. Some aspie types become full blown SJWs because then they get cult member social status…
But most aspies hate lies and hate progressives and progressivism.
The temporary Brezhnevism of today is likely to turn into the Bolshevism of tomorrow if they are able to remove the filibuster. Political violence is in play for removing the filibuster.
“You are a fool.
You don’t understand what Trump accomplished, and if his effort was ultimately doomed because his opponents were willing to pursue political violence, and he was not, political violence is a big step.”
You don’t know what Trump’s actions prevented in the previous four years either. Who knows what alternatives or events may have presented themselves if he had not appeared. And you’re assuming Trump even regarded political violence an option.
Trump is an arrogant moron who took on a task he was completely ignorant and incapable of and has doomed himself and his family. Complete and utter failure. Why you’re even defending him is beyond me.
Did they prevent the unorganized militia from being organized?
Antifa and political prosecutions are political violence, and can only be resisted by political violence, as Caesar and the German National socialists resisted it.
Did Trump prevent us from applying political violence?
Trump did everything that could be done, short of actually doing what needed to be done. And what needed to be done was unthinkable. And still is, even now, largely unthinkable.
Trump was a merchant who got into priesting, at which he did a good job. Unfortunately, the times call for a warrior priest.
“Terraformer, at the very least war with Russia was very imminent if Hillary won in 2016. A war which could easily have seen the US nuked out of existence given that we had insane leaders but probably few working nukes (whereas Russia even in the worst period of the late 90s was able to maintain their nukes).
War with Russia is possible now, but it does not seem imminent.’
Well we don’t really know what would have happened. War with Russia was obviously more likely under Hillary, but in the end we don’t know.
I believe we are in a far worse state of affairs now than if Trump had recognized his inadequacy and not appeared in 2015.
It’s also not certain that the official state sanctioned organized militia (the US military and deep state/FBI) would have allowed Trump to organize the unorganized militia. Knowing what I know now about the military leadership I’m not confident they wouldn’t have just labeled Trump and his militia an enemy of the state and really given them the Gracchus treatment.
“Trump did everything that could be done, short of actually doing what needed to be done. And what needed to be done was unthinkable. And still is, even now, largely unthinkable.”
That’s my point. Who knows what damage Trump’s ignorance of himself and the situation has cost. Has he waylaid, or delayed the appearance of a Cromwell, or a Napoleon, or an Augustus? I believe it is highly likely.
If he had some understanding of the actual situation and shown the ability to navigate it to some extent, I could forgive him, but he didn’t. Overall I believe his appearance has caused us untold damage and made our overall position far worse.
It took the Romans fifteen years to realize the obvious, to recognize reality. With a Bush or somesuch, our recognition of reality would have been delayed.
Trump revealed reality. No one was aware, and even today, most people are not aware.
You don’t get a Cromwell or Napoleon until just about everyone is aware.
You cannot condemn Trump for failure to see the obvious, when even Yarvin fails to see the obvious.
“Well we don’t really know what would have happened. War with Russia was obviously more likely under Hillary, but in the end we don’t know.”
It was almost certain under Hillary… the Russians were conducting massive civil defense drills after the pussygate tapes release.
It might have been the reason the election was not rigged for Hillary in 2016 as some people in the Cathedral leadership knew it was insane and that Hillary was serious about it.
For example Mattis turned out to be one in a long line of traitors in the Trump administration but he seemed genuinely horrified by Hillary’s Russia policy when asked about it.
Trump revealed more about the Cathedral than the decades preceding him. Cathedral may even be an outdated term now as it was Moldbug’s description of the hidden power structure. The current regime/oligarchy is no longer exerting their power in this indirect fashion, at least domestically. They are overt about it now.
>I believe we are in a far worse state of affairs now than if Trump had recognized his inadequacy and not appeared in 2015.
Delusional.
Causes need martyrs. The cheated champion of the people being politically prosecuted by his enemies for the love of his nation is a strong story.
This isn’t relevant to the OP, but since this post seems to be being used as a discussion forum anyways,
I’m a 21YO college student in science. My life sucks, and I need to get my life together. In particular I want to get a girlfriend. Where should I go to learn game? I’ve read a lot of Heartiste but all his stuff seems to assume a level of game skill I don’t have yet. I have trouble even just meeting women. Is there some resource you (the commenter) can recommend so I can learn remedial game like this?
Ninety percent of game is non verbal.
Watch the videos, and read Heartiste to understand and verbalize what is going on in these videos. (The analysis given by the guy preparing the video tends to be stupid.)
But, you have to meet women under favorable circumstances.
Groups of women are always hanging out in places where men could approach them, but do not dare, and if a guy on his own approaches them, they will freeze his balls off. They are hanging out at the beach, the restaurant, some place that plays live music late into the early hours of the morning, all sorts of places.
They do not necessarily consciously know it, but what they are waiting for is an alpha male with a gang behind him to conquer their group and abduct them.
It is impossible if you are solo, difficult with merely one wingman, even if the wingman is a great big bodyguard, alpha as hell, and beta only to the man he is guarding. If you have an entourage, goes down smooth as a chocolate milkshake, whereupon the alpha should distribute the excess among his lieutenants.
So, to start with, if you don’t have social connections to meet girls, attach yourself to some alpha’s entourage, assist, and you should be assigned some of the excess.
We did not evolve getting women solo, and women did not evolve being gotten solo. In the ancestral environment of whites and east Asians, and to a lesser extent blacks, you got assigned a woman by someone in cooperate/cooperate with your father. Or we killed the guys on the other side of the hill, and took their women. Solo pickup of solo chicks is difficult, because the chick is going to give you the shit test from hell.
This is really good advice and even makes those vids and writings unnecessary because the fastest way to learn anything is by imitation. Like how Lama Ole Nydahl likes to say that the best way to become a buddha is to behave like one until the mask becomes your face, and the fastest way to that is just to imitate someone who is already good at it. Never ever worry about authencity, that is a luxury of those who already mastered the art in question. Apprentices should imitate the master like apes.
The problem is, the alpha and his entourage might not want to take him. They might just ridicule him. This is a signal to do some manning up and the general idea for that is lifting and combat sports (not “martial arts”). My little experience with boxing is that it is not the punching that does it, it is the getting punched and realizing it is not a big deal. That makes one look other men in the eye without fear.
But I won’t lie, it did not work that well for me because I was too old. One gets less malleable every year, more fixed in one’s ways, more ossified habits. 21 is better, but the best age to do that would have been 10.
I guess in that sort of situation I would try to offer some trade. Not money. Paying men who could beat you up is a very bad frame, Danegeld frame, no respect. More like helping with science studies or building a website or whatever. Thing is, used girlfriends are very low value currency for alphas. It takes but a small favor to trade them for one. They might just do it just get rid of her whining and stalking. I am very far from alpha but once I had a fat girl stalk and whine to me for another date. I would have gladly hitched her up with another man if there were any takers.
Curious idea. I recently moved and joined a new parish, made friends with the most outgoing group of men there. Pretty much all of them self-describe as redpilled and would agree with most of the talking points on this blog. And yet in regards to women, only two have girlfriends and both are long-distance relationships with women they met online. A third, the AMOG, briefly had an unattractive girlfriend of a different race that he broke up with not long after I met him, though I did at least see her in person. The first thing these guys did when I brought up the fact that I’m single is refer me to a dating website.
I am unfamiliar with group pickup (Roissy’s writings on it being scarce) and there’s not a doubt in my mind that the same goes for these men. Yet as far as I can tell, most of the attractive women around us remain single as well. They cluster in groups so as to be unapproachable to the solo man. Your idea seems to be way to cut through this. Do you have any anecdotes to share so I have a better idea of how to go about this?
Wow never saw the group dynamic explained like that. Makes perfect sense.
Approach women who give you eye contact. A glance, interested. Eye contact of more than one second, very interested, but also rare. Women are subtle.
A woman who is not interested in you will not even look at you, for any number of reasons (relationship, not attracted, bad mood, etc).
Attraction is non-verbal and she has made her mind up in about three seconds if she is attracted to you. You cannot hide who you are. Take solace in that and approach, don’t worry too much about what to say. Just talk.
Nuts
Truly terrible advice.
You are guaranteed invisible to all women until you do something that pings her alpha radar. So you are not going to get eye contact unless you do something to get it.
And *then* she is going to check you out.
And *then* she is going to shit test you. Probably harshly.
If you want to pull women over social media, arrange pictures of yourself with hot chicks and adventure pics with a hint of criminality or violence.
On your rake adventurer bad boy identity, lay an internet trail that will take her effort to ferret out, but make it possible for her to ferret it out.
What do you mean by “do something�
Depends on circumstances.
Getting away with some bold, disruptive, or anti social act works. You have to watch for opportunity, and do the unexpected. Negs, insults, and successful violence work. A hint of danger works. The low risk, low reward tactic is to lead with a neg, but that will not get you much action unless you lead with a neg to a hell of a lot of girls.
But leading with a neg, weak though it is, is going to get you one hell of a lot more action than waiting for eye contact.
The stereotypical male fantasy is that he rescues a fair maiden from a mighty dragon. The stereotypical female fantasy is that a gorilla hits her over the head with rock and then drags her off to his cave by her hair.
“You are guaranteed invisible to all women until you do something that pings her alpha radar. So you are not going to get eye contact unless you do something to get it.â€
Nuts.
And easily empirically disproven. Go to a shopping centre, mall, coffee shop and some women will look at you and some will not. Women who are not interested in you will not look at you. Just like you will not even notice the existence of a woman you find unattractive. But you always look at the ones you are attracted to.
We are doing something all the time, and in the realm of attraction, usually unconsciously. The problem with game as it is traditionally taught is that it teaches you that you can hide who you are. You can’t. If someone with the physiognomy and mannerisms of Vox Day tried to act the violent playboy it is laughable and embarrassing because it is utterly incongruent.
I have been around this road a few times.
I’ve also found the amount of effort needed when gaming a girl who gives you all kinds of green lights is minimal.
Women will look at you if you look alpha, hoping that you will do something that confirms her preliminary and very tentative interest, but without actual proof, nothing will happen.
If you insist on projecting male attraction onto women, to women it is like all men are wearing a full niqab, and some look like maybe they might be attractive, so you keep an eye on them to see if you can pick up hints. Male alphaness is like a woman in a niqab, covered up due to social convention, and women try to get you to take off the niqab through attention seeking and shit tests.
Good analogy although I don’t know if it’s that drastic. Some men are just completely invisible to some women, and are fighting an extremely uphill battle if they tried to game them, likely due to confirmation biases of what alpha males should be to those women from their sexual past. I’ve found, those women who are not showing even preliminary interest should be aggressively screened out so you don’t waste your time and energy.
Women show preliminary interest in ways that men are apt to fail to be aware of. They show interest by making it hard, rather than easy.
Most men are completely invisible to women, in the same way that even with a niqab on, you can still tell that a woman is fat. If you find yourself fighting an awful battle to game a woman, chances are her ex-boyfriends were alpha in ways you cannot safely approximate, and only men who literally hit her with a stick and drag her into a cave will get with her.
I have never found dealing with women to be as difficult as Jim has proclaimed. However he has said he is fat and old, while I am not. The importance of being muscular and lean, having some style, and getting a masculine haircut is underemphasized in places like this one and Heartiste, but I digress.
Many men can simply “be” and have no problem getting IOIs. But as far as what you need to actually “do”, Jim is absolutely correct. The bigger your demonstrated balls, the better, no matter what. I have jaywalked through traffic, forcing a few cars on either side to slow down and stop for me without breaking stride, straight towards a girl on the other side of the road who made eyes at me. That one went very smoothly after some light ribbing about me wanting to get hit by a car.
But you don’t have to do anything that stupid and dangerous, simply striking up a conversation with them at the gym, the grocery store, and so on is enough in our society where men are afraid to speak to women. Approaching in situations where no other men dare is going to give you results.
I can confirm the “do something”, although it is not necessarily something drastic. But behavior attracts more attention than looks.
Once I was at a party and I just debated philosophy with an old woman and another man, which is not at all an alpha act or anti-social. But a hot young chick practically jumped at me, saying she likes smart men. I still don’t understand it. I suppose it is because everybody else was discussing shallow stuff or dancing. Just doing anything different attracts attention I guess.
There are plenty of good looking guys in this age of the €20 a month gym memberships and €40 designer clothes (thinking Esprit). There is little reason for a woman to shoot indicators of interest towards a man just for his looks.
Strongly disagree Jim. Women will make subconscious cues that they are more open to being approached by you, but they are very subtle. They are very easy to miss. Glancing at you quickly, open body language, and even just being in your general proximity while seemingly ignoring you are all green light signs. I have had a better success ratio using their cues than just randomly cold approaching women who don’t notice me at all. The latter can still be effective but I notice the odds of failure are higher.
Get a job in compressed gas. It is a good, blue collar work, is directly adjacent to biotech and massively hiring right now due to demand for CO2, LN and dry ice.
Bitches love compressed gas.
There is gem that Jim may forget to say
“There is always groupie for all kinds of endavor except DND”
Jim is right, as a man you need to start being good at something, anything is fine (sport, academic, hobby, etc.) as long as there is female exposure.
I know a nerd phtographer who married his cosplayer friend. My friend who married his student when he was professor assistant. Heck, even I married my subordinate.
Woman choose her man like a man choose his vehicle.
> Heck, even I married my subordinate.
You and Bill Gates both!
It’s not really possible in the current toxic workplace environment in the West, now. Heartiste wrote at length about this.
(Not that I agree with Heartiste about this. I’m farther right than he is. All a woman needs is Kinder, Küche, Kirche.)
Luckily I am not in the west nor in any part of west empire.
The corporation said ok and by far not the first who did the same.
Hell, there are even groupies for DnD these days. “Critical Role” has a million youtube subscribers.
This is probably the best advice for a depressed nerdy college student who can’t get laid. Chances are slim that he’s going to fit in with a group of manly men when they go cruising for women, but if he becomes more manly, his hobbies will have groupies.
This advice is for my fellow awkward spergs here.
If you’re a sperg in the US its pretty hopeless to just pick up girls in most areas especially if you don’t find anyone in school… and the problem with being a manly man in the US these days for most smart people is its just larping until you need to get in really serious trouble over something stupid or be exposed as a fraud. It helps I suppose if you have a good sense of balance and can ride a motorcycle but I 100% would be dead in two weeks. Manliness was a lot better in the days when men of the community caught criminals themselves and served in the militia.
You find the right stripper she’ll fuck you regular at far below market rates and often quite enthusiastically (Jimian thinking gave me the key to their psychology, women who dance privately are subconsciously quite frustrated that most of the guys they dance for don’t try to grab them stimulate them and fuck them)… for any nerdy sperg who makes a reasonable living this is probably the best option without going out of the country right now. Found a real pretty one (and not a drug addict either even good with her money, just a nympho) who doesn’t charge me anything on top of regular song costs and she doesn’t even bother counting the songs anyway. Given that unless you are the alpha boytoy of a rich divorcee women eventually start demanding some amount of money anyway often in proportion to your net worth I do not think this is a bad deal. Shes no dead fish about it either… its essential to the experience even if you can afford it that she not be looking for a lot of extra money and that she not be excessively robotic about it.
If you are awkward and spergish in the modern American Metoo era… that is what I suggest you look for if you make any sort of living. Its not the same as owning a woman but it feels a LOT better than the inceldom (or paying astronomical prices for pussy and possibly getting arrested by the kwaps if you look for it online) but despite not being super duper expensive you need to have some diposable money to do it and especially to find it. If want a wife you’re probably best finding your wife outside of the country.
Strippers and whores are tough. They demand real alpha.
To own maybe, I’m certainly not planning on marrying her but in a way I’m rather genuinely fond of this one. Great service, great price, no trying to scam me or upsell me, the only thing she ever asks me for is one mixed drink a night when I’m with her.
I’m not saying you can own them… but with strippers its not hard to find very attractive girls who will give it up for very very low rates (much lower than you will find from open hookers). For a sperg or just a guy with more money than game (you don’t need to be super rich) who doesn’t know how to convincingly fake being a demonic crime lord… this is not such a bad deal. Some of them are just nymphomaniacs who find stripping frustrating because the guys they dance for DON’T SHOW enough sexual aggression.
It would pain me to pay for what most girls give away for free. Plenty of sperg girls out there especially if you go the nerdy hobby route. I would also try online or something just to get more experience. Like anything it really comes down to repition. It’s painful at first after a while you get comfortable.
“There is always groupie for all kinds of endavor except DNDâ€
Interesting why D&D is such an example of the loser kind of nerd-dom, inceldom everywhere. I guess it is because it is just so typically the escape fantasy of real-world losers.
It is the stereotypical failure mode of priests/monks in a Vaisya-run world. It is universally mocked because priests/monks were the hated enemies of Vaisyas who devolved Britain into a nation of shopkeepers (and co-founded USAmerica), while simultaneously being hated enemies of Puritan priests/monks who later beccame progs, because they represent a formidable, if sleeping, force that could challenge them.
I, by nature, am intensely attracted to fantasy and role-play, and took monarchism quite seriously even as a kid. As an adult I realised that fantasy role-play only saps my will power, so I turned to real role-play, i.e., religious mythology. In this game, the rewards are real and tangible — money, status, wife, everything. Since real religion has mostly died in America, DnD is what remains.
DnD players are the ultimate in “soft targets” to mock. Until I manage to convert a significant fraction of them to worship real gods lol.
“It is the stereotypical failure mode of priests/monks in a Vaisya-run world.”
We do not have a Vaisya run world, you never have a Vaisya run world.
Yes. But under merchant Capitalism, the EIC (or USA) came very near to running it. It was really under protection of the Royal Navy, and later US Navy, of course.
Money as a marker of success is a Vaisya trait, while visible markers of wealth/ostentation (“pimping”) is a Shudra trait. US society is moving from dominant Vaisya-taste to dominant Shudra-taste. Bezos is rich as Croesus, but does he have gold grills for his teeth?
Vaisyas were the prime beneficiaries when prog priests dethroned warriors from rule. I remember reading “Rightist” tracts about how “Capitalism” freed the “entrepreneur” from begging the “rich aristocrats” for Capital, when he could instead raise it in the “Market.” Fuck those “rich aristocrats” amirite!? Well, now the Vaisya is the rich aristocrat, and the Shudra is coming for him. “Marxism” is older than Marx.
D&D is apt to be low status among most men. It is a tiny community. Likewise, Anywhere men (and especially high status) are acting as if other men are higher status than them you are likely to see plenty of groupies hanging around there. In a decadent society like ours that would include all kinds of degenerates like musicians, athletes, criminals, etc. The funny one I’m seeing now are “crypto girls†on Twitter promoting different coins with sexy pictures as if they know anything about anything. It’s obvious they are trying to smoke an alpha out.
You’re young still. You need to focus on improving yourself, your mission, your career, building muscle, etc. Women should be low priority. Once you get that shit in order you can start gaming and it will come much easier because you won’t give a fuck. I’d recommend this youtube channel. He lays it out in simple terms.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0it1cu-mt_IcvLTQ4CWcHw
This in particular stuck out to me. Your life sucks because you don’t have a girlfriend? That is bitch beta faggot mindset. Women need us, not the other way around. Get your shit together first and foremost before focusing on women. Gaming then becomes orders of magnitude easier when women don’t smell desperation on you. In fact, attempting to game from that frame is practically pointless.
Women don’t need us.
Sperm is cheap, eggs are dear. They are swimming in approaches from extremely alpha males.
Obviously you don’t randomly approach women, but when a woman is interested in you, she makes it hard to approach, rather than easy, because she only wants to be approached by alphas.
She gives you opportunity to approach her, but not encouragement to approach her. She gives you opportunity, but does not make that opportunity easy.
In the modern environment yes. In the ancestral monkey environment, women depended on men or they starved to death. Instinctually they understand this so that must be a man’s frame when he approaches a woman. That his value is superior to hers. Don’t place the pussy on a pedestal.
Randomly approaching women can work and this is essentially what the early PUA community recommended. However, you’re in for quite a bit of work and effort.
Yes this is true. Just being in your general proximity, like a deer wandering into a hunter’s field of view, is as much as encouragement you’re likely to get, but it is a signal to approach nonetheless. I have found approaching women who give these subtle cues cuts down the effort/work to close tremendously as opposed to random approaches (women passing by for instance).
You should read my post “PUA is Unnatural”. The low success rate of even very good game, cold approaching women you do not know, is evidence that “game” is not playing the human mating game properly, shooting orthogonal to how female attraction actually works.
If you are the alpha male of a group of men, getting laid is really, absurdly, easy if you can pass a shit test or two, but this is almost never remarked on because so few men (around here and the PUA scene both) have that experience. In the same vein, even being the “lieutenant” of an alpha male makes for a better success rate than doing pickup, double digit percentages instead of single digit ones, though not the 70-80% range that the alpha enjoys.
Game, shooting for solo pickups, is a lot of work for little reward, whereas focusing on a hobby while remembering the red pill is reward and reward; you have fun doing something you like, you spend time with male buddies, and you even get bitches out of it.
I will check it out. This explanation makes sense and lines up with my experience.
And even better, you get bitches that like your hobbies.
I think you misread my first couple lines, Pooch.
Anyways, can anyone point me to more stuff on this? I appreciate the help but I was looking for a referral rather than takes/summaries (Pooch actually did you all one better by linking that youtube channel – though I consider Jim and Aidan to be game primary sources in and of themselves.) I’m getting into the gym on Monday again to get back to weight training, after which I will join a MT gym in my area.
BTW, that last line was addressed to Pooch.
However, I have to admit that at some point I think the idea of “self-improvement” is bunk. Of all the good things in my life I got basically none of them by fucking with my diet, masturbating in a different pattern, or breathing meditatively. (I’ve tried a lot of these on and off, and still try them.) The only way to improve my life that has worked for me in the past has been to just change my environment (including my academic and social status) by labor, and to ignore my “self.”
Which puts me in a pickle because people like me (college student, living with parents since school shut down, zapped from social media by recent ban wave) now have a very bad environment and very few clear ways to change it. I mean, even my “friends” aren’t safe for me to commiserate with about this business because I don’t know who has appointed himself COVID-terror-commissar.
As far as hobbies go, right now mine is literally playing D&D, so maybe I’m fucked. (I play the game in person with some friends who are about 30 yrs older than I am, and therefore not hysterical about every little fucking political thing.) As far as other hobbies go, I guess I was also a member of a pretty good choir, but the “”alpha males”” of that circle were generally more interested in fucking each other than chicks. (Something which still mystifies/sickens me.)
Tinder may still be a possibility. It’s low reward but low investment–your picture does most of the work. Follow Jim’s advice there. Do you know anyone with a motorcycle? Take a selfie in front of it. Stupid, but it works. One trick when I was on there was deleting and recreating your profile every week, it resets your matches. Just follow the Heartiste rules of texting, keep it brief, never ever use emoticons, and don’t worry about capitalization or punctuation. Don’t try to ‘get to know’ a girl, well, ever, but certainly not over text. Escalate as soon as possible and meet her at a cheap bar. You’ll strike out a lot but if go someplace cheap it’s not a big deal. This does require some fortitude, you have to be able to deal with some rejection. Typically the more meetings you can line up the better off your mindset will be.
It helps to learn to flirt. My thing was to brag about very mundane accomplishments. When I met my wife she asked me to name something interesting about myself, I told her I ‘owned a cool lava lamp.’ She still brings it up to people. Anyway don’t try to exactly copy someone’s routine because it will come across fake, but lines here and there can help. Improvise, combine ideas, and develop your own style. Every guy I know who is good with women follows a routine, if only out of habit.
Usually though you will find if the girl is into you she will be impatient for you to get her alone and make a move, while if the girl is not interested nothing you say will help. So don’t stress over it too much.
Another thing is to take an honest look at yourself and think about what kind of woman is realistically in your league. Often I see guys chasing after women who won’t give them the time of day while ignoring perfectly nice girls who are sweating over them. This lines up with Aidyn’s advice where repeatedly swinging at major league pitches (i.e. approaching tons of glammed-up girls in clubs) feels exhilarating but it’s just not practical.
I’ve been there myself but if you can cool it on the girl you want you may find there are girls who already want you waiting in the wings. If you’re in school there have to be women around somewhere. Really you should get past the idea of being ‘madly in love’ with a girl. Only one person out of a couple can truly feel Eros and it must be the woman. If the man falls deeply in love with the woman, she will lose interest, because Eros is acquisitive. If you make a woman feel like she isn’t good enough for you, she will spend the rest of her life seeking your approval.
More resources: https://blog.reaction.la/war/where-we-go-from-here/#comment-2697263 (particularly read Raional Male)
Since you’re so young my recommendation would be to focus your time and energy on improving your situation (and your SMV) before really spending a lot of time on gaming chicks. You should be aware of the The Red Pill and the true nature of women, but doing what you need to do now to line up a good job out of school is going to serve you better. Read books. Learn skills. Do you want to have kids right now? If the answer is no, a gf is going to be a time suck at this point in your life and more trouble than she’s worth.
Sounds like COVID bullshit is getting you down so you might consider taking Roosh’s advice and joining a non-cucked church if you can find one (look for lower mask compliance). As our society declines, things are going to get worse not better. Faith in god is going to help you get through it. Also the added benefit of trad girls. Plenty of young women in my church not all fucked up with shitlib ideology yet. Probably a good way to meet more male friends as well.
To find more red pilled male friends get into some manly physical hobbies. Team sports, gyms, etc. As Aidan described somewhere else on thread, hobbies where men and women are around are also good as you have the added benefit of meeting chicks too if opportunities arise.
If the one true (and anonymous) cryptocurrency overtakes traditional currencies, what are the implications for taxation? If the government can’t track the circulation of cryptocurrency, would that de facto abolish the income tax or am I misunderstanding the nature of anonymous transactions?
Income tax requires and gives the government more power than mortals can handle. It is not only bad for the population, it is bad for the ruler. An anonymous and secure crypto currency will increase the value of the things that governments can and should tax.
Governments that care about long term revenue maximization, secure Kings with strong sons in line to succeed them, for example the King of Dubai, are not really all that interested in income tax. Income tax is a political manifestation of envy. The King of Dubai wants to be even richer than he already is, but is not envious of anyone. He is a King, a very wealthy King, and the greatest power by far in his Kingdom. Why should he suffer envy?
Lots of people suffer envy who should not, but he does not. Not suffering from envy, does not care much about income tax.
After the restoration, we will tax property and tax goods passing through chokepoints. We will have something a bit like income tax on the enforcement of relationships and contracts. We will also have state sponsored monopolies, which will be sources of revenue.
A couple of days ago, a guest had her kids with her, one of which is a little girl with a terrible case of envy.
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.
jim, are you aware of exactly how *hilarious* you are? in a way that I can not explain, your writing is just consistently funny.
Why would crypto currency interfere with taxation? It might facilitate tax evasion in a few cases, but that is no reason to abolish income tax.
Most people are employees. They’ll still be taxed, because they can’t hide that fact.
Government can still track most physical goods and therefore charge sales tax. If they charge sales tax they can also charge income tax from the shop owner.
You are not thinking big enough.
Bookkeeping is collapsing for the same reasons and in the same way as the fiat money system is collapsing. The state sponsored corporate form is collapsing.
The books belong on sidechains, the corporate form belongs on side chains, share trading belongs on side chains. And all of them should be securely pseudonymous. In your activities as employee, you will be interacting with the wider world under your corporate employee identity – which if you are replaced, or merely away on holidays, is likely to be filled by someone else.
Fiat money systems have colapsed before, but usually they collapse because too much fiat money is created. Weimar, Zimbabwe, etc. – governments keep creating money which is then worth less. In a hyperinfaltion money looses its value regardless of trust. Even alsolute trust could not have protected Weimar’s currency.
I also.do not understand your argument of how crypto could preserve the corporate form. All it can provide is unforgable proof of who owns how much of the company. Maybe that is enough if your company produces only intangible stuff that cannot be seized or stolen, but most company own land and machinery.
Proof of ownership cannot prevent stuff from being stolen or sized.
Likewise, the employee you describe produced intangibles. Fine, he can hide his identity and avoid taxation, but he can so even today (ecpext US citizens). He merely has to avoid having a residence in any state for 180 day a year or more. Just keep moving and you do not have an obligation to pay.
People that produce tangible things work in a factory, farm, mining etc. They are not paid for interacting with anyone outside the company. The are paid to produce something.
Why should a government stop taxing those guys and stop collecting income tax?
Taxation is much older than book keeping. It won’t stop simply because there are no reliable books. If you don’t keep books or you have no reliable books, the government estimates your income and then calculates taxes for that estimated income. Sure, crypto currency cannot be sized, but almost everything else can.
I’m not arguing that the tax base won’t shrink or that everybody has to pay taxes. Far from it, avoiding taxes gets easier the richer you are and I can easily imagine that it will get much easier in.the future to avoid some taxation, but the little guy how produces something that is tangible and bulky will have to.pay
Can cryptocurrency ever be analog and existent outside of electricity like physical gold and silver?
If so that would be very good for resiliency because it won’t require an electricity grid.
Cryptocurrency is secrets that have value by consensus. It is imagined into reality, just as government fiat money is imagined into reality, a shared hallucination.
It therefore requires a good communication system capable of maintaining consensus about an ever changing set of secrets.
If you will, the secret rites of ancient banking clans could be construed as forms of ‘cryptocurrency’, in the sense of facilitating a routing network for transfers of value.
How do you know the man who just rode into town bearing a writ declaiming a resettlement of accounts is a brother? The writ can look genuine, but of course that’s just the surface level; does he greet you the right way… shake your hand the right way… talk the right way… perform his part is the mystery roleplay the right way… and at this point if there’s a cockup, then instead of just turning them out at the door you need to kill them instead… and so on.
> Most people are employees. They’ll still be taxed, because they can’t hide that fact.
The fiction that law enforces itself is the product of an ethos that identifies with the idea that certain things are “just not cricket”. In a communist country of yore, on the other hand, the ethos is “if you don’t steal, you’re stealing from your own family”. Officially, everything is above-the-board, and people live in appartments they cannot possibly afford to pay the rent for, lest keep in good repair, on their meager official salaries. In reality, most of the economy is *gray* economy, if not *black* economy. The only way to tax that is to conduct random raids on random orgs, and seizing whatever cash you get your hands on, and crypto makes it very easy to hide that cash in plain sight.
The west is probably even past that, or soon will be, what with tens of millions of illegals in the US alone, with accounting laws that make conducting business illegal, and with corona laws that make conducting anything illegal. Your cue that something is wrong is that the official narrative is saccharine and irrelevant, and spouting truths will get you unemployed or worse.
@Jim,
In response to my question: What is your end game here?
You write:
2021-02-20 at 20:27
We want to make marriage 1.0 legal again…
We want to restore patriarchy…
We want to restore the scientific method…
We want to restore the corporate capitalism…
My question–Who or what groups is preventing this? And, what is the plan to get from current reality to the end game?
That which is more virtuous is, throughout all ages, always and already opposed by the congenitally insecure, precisely because it is virtuous.
The official priesthood needs to be purged.
The officially unofficial state religion need to be replaced with saner state religion. I recommend Orthodox Christianity 1.0.
In accordance with the rectification of names, the official state religion should be officially the state religion, after the model of England from the restoration to the early nineteenth century.
We have been around this block many times before. It is going to happen. Leftism always self destructs. Whether the white race and western civilization is still around when it happens is less certain.
Corporate capitalism stands in the way of the right. Sex deviants are running the place because they’re the ones willing to work 80-100 hour weeks. Conservative capitalists were a postwar aberration and the postwar capitalist era has been over since the 80’s. Jim won’t even believe capitalists when they outright tell him that they are sex deviants, because Havel’s greengrocer, as if that’s a model to respect rather than a lying kulak who deserves what’s coming to him.
It’s always the business community and the donor class that nullifies the social conservative base.
It is readily observable that sex deviants are unwilling to work long hours. Gays show up to work infrequently, late, drunk, and stoned. And if you make problems about it the Human Resources Department decides you are suffering from homophobia.
Sex deviants are running the place because HR deems them holier than thou.
HR has power because the state gives them power. They organize lawsuits against the board and management. So does your legal department and accounting, but HR is by far the biggest problem though your legal department having far too friendly connections with the other guys legal department is also a big problem, but that is not so much the state, or not entirely the state, as the same problem as your purchasing officer being far too friendly with certain suppliers.
No solid family man wants to work all day and never see his wife and children. Social conservatives only want to go 40 hours (WWII and postwar sternness were a temporary phenomenon and still wrong anyway), and wonder what happened to their futuristic 25 hour work week we were supposed to have (diversity happened) and why the wife has to work too now, but childless nihilist deviants with no one to go home to are putting in the elite hours that fuel neoliberalism. Selling one’s soul for the world…
Yes there is a lot of slacker drug abuse and lazy privileged princes among the gays. But the other extreme of workaholic materialism and power drug abuse (steroids and stimulants) is there too. That’s how they produce the excess wealth they use to become the donor class and overrule the 40 hour a week family man class. All the family man had was his vote and that has now been taken away from him. And even before, it was a joke, because he was voting for those hungry for power rather than being ruled by those who happened to be born into it, ordinary people like him. Kings.
People wouldn’t work for corporations, HR and warts and all, if they were given entrepreneurship opportunities based on objective and universal grading in school. Right now the most conservative and talented students want to be elite corporate employees even though they know that the WWII corporate conservatives are now history, simply because these corporations will honor their school work and entrepreneurs are currently deviants who just care about results, not authority. But this can change. Education reform can link entrepreneurship with class work and make big corporate work less attractive for conservatives, if the will is there to implement it.
Buggers, however, never want to work at all. Observe Apple’s boss.
Aging single women want to “work” twenty four hours a day, seven days a week, because the workplace is their family, but their “work” is apt to consist of making trouble, because they see all the female employees as competing wives of the company, and they see most the male employees, customers, and suppliers as betas, and even the board and the major shareholders as betas, and women just don’t want to have betas around, so they do their best to drive them away.
If an aging single female is running your coffee shop, she is going to pick fights with the customers by shit testing them for alpha, and tell them they are unwelcome, and even if she does not pick a fight, they are going to feel unwelcome.
>Buggers, however, never want to work at all. Observe Apple’s boss.
I’ve observed that. I’ve seen misconduct concerning time off where a Poz boy was gaming the time off system to take Months + vacations at places in Europe and Cambodia. Instead of firing him for it, they abolished the system so he couldn’t abuse it. People were pissed.
I don’t know how much actual work he was doing but he’s worked himself into a position where his assistant seemed to be logged in under his name most of the time and attempts to get the assistant fired for doing that resulted in a IT being told to shutup.
What do you mean with “aging” here? If you mean “about to hit the wall” I absolutely agree. Not so sure if aging is past menopause. If past menopause and grandmother, not so bad even if now single.
If mother or grandmother, not a problem – because she has actual family.
If childless and grandmother age, problem, though likely less of a problem than a woman in her thirties, because less likely to see customers, suppliers, fellow employees, and insufficiently alpha executives as betas.
I just don’t understand career cucks at all especially for people who have gone through the brutal entry level job market of the modern era (Trump’s 1st three years being the exception)…
Eventually if you are making enough money that your job is a career… you should save up enough money and learn enough about turning into more money in some ways… that you shouldn’t have to work for someone else.
Since getting out of the working for other people game I feel more like Henry Hill except I’m not doing anything illegal (unless Elizabeth Warren manages to successfully ban outsider trading).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zP2ic7wAKJU
Every day I was learning to score… living your life working for institutions that hate you… its a cucked life. Almost everyone has to do it for a while but your goal should always be escape. You should avoid crimes you are going to get caught in nowadays (you can’t really get away with mafiaesque activities now) but you should try to learn to earn on your own…
This is a good point. I’ve want to be my own boss and just do consulting for a while now, but it’s getting to the point where I need to form a corporation and call it a minority owned company to get work.
@suones
Your comments are pure gold, please keep it up.
There is another position on soul, that of reincarnation. Who brought it to my attention was Patrick Little, with his college (highschool?) essay about the racial soul that I cannot find. Heinlein also hinted at it. Similar people have souls that resemble each other, and genetically identical (in the broad sense, i.e. including epigenetics) would have an identical soul. You can see this in twins most poignantly, and you can see it in the way your own soul reflects in that of your father/sons. Therefore we preserve our soul, achieve immortality, by having plenty of sons with women who are genetically similar to us, and in a tribe where our offspring, whatever else they will do, will have offspring of their own without much outbreeding. That way, our genetic twins will pop up frequently in the gene pool, and in them our souls.
Or, I suppose, if we truly embrace our cattle-ness, our soul will resemble the cows’.
> But the fundamental issue remains — where do you draw the line at soulful/non-soulful? The Pope says that dogs can’t go to heaven but women can, you say that some men/NPCs also can’t, or can they? Hmm…
>
> Anyway, if I understand correctly, do you imply that only fully-realised men (like us :^) can be considered to have souls?
I will leave the nature of the soul to philosophers. But whatever it is, or whatever you mean by it, blackbox observation tells us there must a marked difference between the souls of niggers/women/men/dogs/nits.
I am flattered to be considered above the cattle, but it is a difficult thing. As you point out, an NPC doesn’t realise he is an NPC until he’s enlightened and he’s looking *back*. I don’t necessarily agree with that. People seek enlightenment because they feel something is lacking, even though they cannot by definition understand what that something may be. My contention is that if you see no difference between NPCs and goyim, you’re likely still a goy.
re: word-thinkers vs concept-thinkers vs redpill swallowers vs not-goys
Really like your analysis here; fully agree that the enlightenment means to divorce oneself from word-thinking. Learning another language, especially a computer language, and thinking in that language natively (without constantly translating in one’s head from the first one to the other) is a good first step. But is that all there is to enlightenment? No! *Racism* is a concept. Our esteemed host would call it an *anti-concept*, but that is the point. It is a concept that is a lie. Many such cases.
Our whole system of thinking that we have been educated in is made by (((evil people))) as a way to manipulate us cattle to obtain certain nefarious ends for themselves. Did they stop at subverting words? Did those anti-concepts happen by *accident*? Hey, fellow enlightened man, I too am no longer a word-thinker. Would you be interested in these exciting s̶o̶c̶i̶a̶l̶ ̶c̶r̶i̶t̶i̶q̶u̶e̶s̶ redpills?
And overthrowing anti-concepts in detail is not enough. Both because it is easier to coin a lie than to prove the truth, and because no matter how many redpills you swallow, if you accept received axioms, and those axioms were made for you by your enemies, you’re still sol. I am conscious of still thinking within the frame given to me by my enemies, and in that sense, I am still easily led by my enemies, still a goy. But I’m trying.
Maybe dogs not going to heaven is because they are a reflection of their master. They adopt the personality of their owner, probably as an evolutionary mechanism to endear themselves to their provider, they also have glands which secrete human hormones for the purpose of bonding. They are evolved to adopt our persons, just my take on the evidence I’ve seen. They are so maluable they do not posses the same independent “soul”
Ideas like ‘word-thinking’ and ideas like ‘this is racist and racism is bad so therefore this is bad’ are, broadly construed, each all different expressions of calculative aptitude. World formation capacity, or teleological understanding, are expressions of imaginative aptitude.
Mongoloids and certain eurasian tribesmen are examples of folk with high calculative aptitude, yet comparatively low imaginative aptitude. When talking about ‘NPCs’, capacity in the latter is much more important than the former.
The ‘enlightenment project’, conceived of by the Modern philosophers of the 16th century, is perhaps the archetypical expression of the former over the latter; spergmatics unable to wrap theirs heads around Being – to whom which appears as like a kaleidoscope of isolated fragments, in which they can perceive no rhyme or reason or connexion – trying to ultimately solve their problems with *thinking*, by the creation of a ‘universal system’, which can ‘naively’ calculate any and all things in their stead; that is to say, do the thinking *for* them.
Or in other words, such sorts were essentially attempting to fly by tugging at their own bootstraps. But the better the calculation, the better to convince and bedazzle – to disguise the points, in any confabulation, where the trains inevitably jump the tracks.
Uncounted menageries of memetic chimaeras spawned from such workings have dogged western men from then onwards – and through them, the whole world in general – to this very day; men are born, grow, and die, living and breathing the undead ghosts of such long dead sorcerers in their discourse, modes of thought that they are possessed by, whose provenance they know not. To think *ideologically* is to not; where one becomes merely an actuator for the system, made by someone else; put in inputs, calculate, receive output. One can certainly speak of better, or worse, systems, but systematizing all the same.
~
Any given action is an assertion of value. Any given value is an implicit teleology. Any given teleology may itself be component of yet greater teleologies that transcend it. The more transcendent teleologies a being is capable of conceiving of, the more transcendent values it is capable of consciously participating in.
That any given action is an assertion of value; indeed, one’s very act to chose some particular assemblage of lexemes to say, instead of saying any other thing in that moment, is in of itself an act of discrimination, of value judgement.
That any given value are implicit teleologies; it naturally entails logical consequents, a certain state of affairs that action on that value would by consequence lead to.
That any given teleology may itself be subsidiary of yet greater teleologies that transcend it; that from which it derives potency that trends towards it’s own real-ization, and in which it itself serves as component of it’s advance. Indeed, one does not have to even be aware of a teleology to be contributing to it.
The greater world formation capacity a being has, the more transcendent teleologies it is capable of conceiving, and hence, the more transcendent values it can intentionally participate in. That is to say, a natural noble is that which has greater capacity for self direction; greater capacity to, essentially, see the future.
Vice versa, the more limited a beings imaginative aptitude is, the more limited the teleologies it can conceive of, the more limited is its capacity for self-direct. For it to participate in more transcendent values, then, is dependent on receiving them from Tradition, or by direction, or by insuperable demands of circumstance, an increasingly inevitable Power or confluence of Powers tending towards something and sweeping up agents along for the ride.
To align one’s motion with the motion of Being is to gain power; or to put it in other words, power is an observation, of how that which is in alignment with the contours of Being subsists over that which is not. To participate in a teleology is, essentially, to enter into the service of the Divine Powers instantiated thereby. The radical realization is that this is a concentricity that goes all the way up.
A man has a racial soul before he has a particular soul; that body, which is also an expression of Divine Power, from which he sprang, and to which he may, if he is successful, return.
Ere throughout history have wise men observed these dynamics, whatever words themselves that change. As Hippolyte Taine writes, in The Origins of Contemporary France (1881):
” Such are our Jacobins, born out of social decomposition like mushrooms out of compost. Let us consider their inner organization, for they have one as formerly the Puritans; we have only to follow their dogma down to its depths, as with a sounding-line, to reach the psychological stratum in which the normal balance of faculty and sentiment is overthrown.
” When a statesman, who is not wholly unworthy of that great name, finds an abstract principle in his way, as, for instance, that of popular sovereignty, he accepts it, if he accepts it at all, according to his conception of its practical bearings. He begins, accordingly, by imagining it applied and in operation. From personal recollections and such information as he can obtain, he forms an idea of some village or town, some community of moderate size in the north, in the south, or in the centre of the country, for which he has to make laws. He then imagines its inhabitants acting according to his principle, that is to say, voting, mounting guard, levying taxes, and administering their own affairs. Familiar with ten or a dozen groups of this sort, which he regards as examples, he concludes by analogy as to others and the rest on the territory. Evidently it is a difficult and uncertain process; to be exact, or nearly so, requires rare powers of observation, and, at each step, a great deal of tact, for a nice calculation has to be made on given quantities imperfectly ascertained and imperfectly noted!
” Any political leader who does this successfully, does it through the ripest experience associated with genius. And even then he keeps his hand on the check-rein in pushing his innovation or reform; he is almost always tentative; he applies his law only in part, gradually and provisionally; he wishes to ascertain its effect; he is always ready to stay its operation, amend it, or modify it, according to the good or ill results of the experiment; the state of the human material he has to deal with is never clear to his mind, even when superior, until after many and repeated gropings. —
” Now the Jacobin pursues just the opposite course. His principle is an axiom of political geometry, which always carries its own proof along with it; for, like the axioms of common geometry, it is formed out of the combination of a few simple ideas, and its evidence imposes itself at once on all minds capable of embracing in one conception the two terms of which it is the aggregate expression. Man in general, the rights of man, social contract, liberty, equality, reason, nature, the people, tyrants, are all elementary conceptions; whether precise or not, they fill the brain of the new sectary; oftentimes these terms are merely vague, sounding words, but that makes no difference; as soon as they meet in his brain an axiom springs out of them that can be instantly and absolutely applied on every occasion and at all hazards.
” Men as they really are do not concern him. He does not observe them; he does not require to observe them; with closed eyes he imposes a pattern of his own on the human substance manipulated by him; the idea never enters his head of forming any previous conception of this complex, multiform, swaying material — contemporary peasants, artisans, townspeople, curés and nobles, behind their ploughs, in their homes, in their shops, in their parsonages, in their mansions, with their inveterate beliefs, persistent inclinations, and powerful wills. Nothing of this enters into or lodges in his mind; all its avenues are stopped by the abstract principle which flourishes there and fills it completely. Should actual experience through the eye or ear plant some unwelcome truth forcibly in his mind, it cannot subsist there; however obstreperous and telling it may be, the abstract principle drives it out; if need be it will distort and strangle it, on the ground of its being a calumny, as it gives the lie to the principle which is true in itself and indisputable. Manifestly, a mind of this stamp is not sound; of the two faculties which should pull together harmoniously, one is undeveloped and the other over-developed; facts are wanting to turn the scale against the weight of formulae. Too heavy on one side and too light on the other, the Jacobin mind turns violently over on that side to which it leans, and such is its incurable infirmity.
” Consider, indeed, the authentic monuments of Jacobin thought, the “Journal des Amis de la Constitution,†the gazettes of Loustalot, Desmoulins, Brissot, Condorcet, Fréron and Marat, Robespierre’s and St. Just’s pamphlets and speeches, the debates in the Legislative Assembly and in the Convention, the harangues addresses and reports of the Girondists and Montagnards, in brief, the forty volumes of extracts compiled by Buchez and Roux. Never has so much been said to so little purpose; all the truth that is uttered is drowned in the monotony and inflation of empty verbiage and vociferous bombast. […]
” It is a pedantic scholasticism set forth with fanatical rant. About one hundred words form its vocabulary, while its ideas are resolved back into one, that of man in himself; society, in their conception of it, consists of so many human units, all alike equal and independent, contracting together for the first time; — this was their conception of society; none could be briefer, for, to arrive at it, man had to be reduced to a minimum. Never were political intellects so dried up, and so wilfully; for it is the attempt to systematise and to simplify which causes their impoverishment. In that respect they follow the method of the century, keeping in the track of Jean-Jacques Rousseau: their mental mould is the classic mould, which mould, already contracted with the late philosophers, is yet more so with them hardened and toughened to excess.
” The best representatives of the type are Condorcet, among the Girondists, and Robespierre, among the Montagnards, both mere dogmatists and pure logicians, the latter the most remarkable and with a perfection of intellectual sterility never surpassed. In the formation of durable laws, that is to say, in the adaptation of social machinery to characters, conditions, and circumstances, such a mind of all others is certainly the most impotent and the most mischievous, for it is organically short-sighted; and, again, its code of axioms, interposed between it and surrounding objects, shuts off its horizon; beyond its own coterie and club it distinguishes nothing, while in the vagueness and confusion of the distance it sets up the empty idols of its own Utopia. —
” But when power has to be taken by assault, and a dictatorship arbitrarily exercised, the mechanical rigidity of such a mind is serviceable rather than detrimental. Unlike that of the statesman, it has no drawback, no embarrassment arising from the necessity of making investigations, of respecting precedents, of looking into statistics, of calculating and tracing beforehand in different directions the near and remote consequences of its work as this affects the interests, habits, and passions of diverse classes. All this is superannuated and superfluous; the Jacobin comprehends legitimate government and good laws instantaneously; his rectilinear process is the shortest and most efficient both for destruction and construction.
” Where calm reflection is required to get at what suits twenty-six millions of living Frenchmen, a mere glance suffices for him to know what is requisite for the human abstractions of the theory; — indeed, according to the theory, men are all shaped to one pattern, nothing being left to them but an elementary will; thus defined, the philosophic automaton demands liberty, equality and popular sovereignty, the maintenance of the rights of man and adhesion to the “Contrat Social.†This suffices: henceforth the will of the people is known, and known beforehand; a consultation among citizens previous to action is not essential; there is no obligation to await their votes. In any event, a ratification by the people is sure; and should this not be forthcoming it is owing to their ignorance, disdain, or malice, in which case their response deserves to be considered as null; the best thing to do, consequently, through precaution and to protect the people from what is bad for them, is to dictate to them what is good for them.
” In all this, the Jacobin acts in good faith; for the men in whose behalf he claims rights are not flesh-and-blood Frenchmen, as we see them in the streets and in the fields, but men in general, as they ought to be on leaving the hands of Nature, or after the teachings of Reason. As to the former, there is no need of being scrupulous because they are infatuated with prejudices and their opinions are mere drivelling; as for the latter, it is just the opposite: full of respect for the vainglorious images of his own theory, of spectres begotten by his own intellectual contrivance, the Jacobin always will bow down to responses that he himself has provided, for, the beings that he has created are more real in his eyes than living ones and it is their suffrage on which he counts.
” Accordingly, viewing things in the worst light, he has nothing against him but the momentary antipathy of a purblind generation. To offset this, he enjoys the approbation of humanity, self-obtained; that of a posterity which his acts have regenerated; that of men who, thanks to him, are again become what they should never have ceased to be. Hence, far from looking upon himself as an usurper or a tyrant, he considers himself the natural mandatory of a veritable people, the authorised executor of the common will. Marching along in the procession formed for him by this imaginary crowd, sustained by millions of metaphysical wills created by himself in his own image, he has their unanimous assent, and, like a chorus of triumphant shouts, he will fill the outward world with the inward echo of his own voice.
” In every doctrine which wins men over to it, the sophistry it contains is less potent than the promises it makes; its power over them is greater through their sensibility than through their intelligence; for, if the heart is often the dupe of the head, the latter is much more frequently the dupe of the former. We do not accept a system because we deem it a true one, but because the truth we find in it suits us. Political or religious fanaticism, any theological or philosophical channel in which truth flows, always has its source in some ardent longing, some secret passion, some accumulation of intense, painful desire to which a theory affords an outlet; in the Jacobin, as well as in the Puritan, there is a fountain-head of this description.
” What feeds this source with the Puritan is the anxieties of a disturbed conscience which, forming for itself some idea of perfect justice, becomes rigid and multiplies the commandments it believes that God has promulgated; on being constrained to disobey these it rebels, and, to impose them on others, it becomes tyrannical even to despotism. The first effort of the Puritan, however, wholly internal, is self-control; before becoming political he becomes moral. With Jacobin, on the contrary, the first precept is not moral, but political; it is not his duties which he exaggerates but his rights, while his doctrine, instead of being a prick to his conscience, flatters his pride. “
@Prince Charming.
Thank you for your kind words.
The term you need is “transmigration of soul” and it is not a different position on soul — in fact it assumes that individual souls exist and are distinct from one another. This is far from settled even among Eastern philosophers, and is absolutely incompatible with the ill-defined “soul” professed by Established Christians. I’ve not read Patrick Little’s essay, but “racial soul” is exactly the type of confusion that results from a little knowledge (which is a dangerous thing). Nazi philosophers, in their “Aryanisation” zeal, also sought to create/re-create ancient mythos as quickly as possible with laughable results. Even the Nazi Tibetan Expedition was more focussed on Tibetan women’s breasts and monk’s buggery practices than philosophy. They could have at least consulted the Japanese, but they didn’t/couldn’t.
“Race” and “species” are properties of the body, being completely materialistically defined (now confirmed through RNA/DNA), and behaving the same way right from unicellular microbes to the most complex living organisms. The same with our fathers’ seed and mothers’ blood — completely materialistic. The other thing that makes us “us” is memes imparted to us by our parents and society. This is another of those “new-age” concepts lifted incorrectly from Eastern philosophy. The term for “memetic inheritance” is “Sanskara,” which is the dominant influence on our personality, coming from our fathers and passed on to offspring. This is not genetic (may possibly be epigenetic), and takes place after the birth of the child. This is why brothers resemble each other, twins even more so. Soul is like electric power that transforms into light from a lamp, breeze from a fan, and sound from a loudspeaker. Doesn’t mean the appliances all have “different electricity.”
The above paragraph is factual, holds regardless of the existence of “soul,” and is experimentally verified. “Soul” itself is philosophical speculation to explain why some combinations of chemicals spontaneously exhibit “life-like” behaviour while others do not (akin to a lamp lighting up only while powered). There is no experimental proof either way, and as a rational nastika I refuse to believe in fantasies.
We cannot embrace anything. Whether you’re man or goy is completely determined by your genes, whether you embrace it or not. It is possible for a goy to live a happy and productive life, and one of our goals as reactionaries is the re-creation of a society that provides goyim with such opportunity. A man only differs from a goy in that he has the choice to self-actualise. Many men look into the abyss, become frightened of what they see, and retreat to comfortable goyische, becoming bugmen. It happens, and is OK. Not everyone can handle choice, but goys don’t have choice in the first place.
This is a correct observation with faulty interpretation. There is a marked difference between a lamp, a fan or a loudspeaker, yet it would be a mistake to assume that their animating force must therefore be different (AC power). The difference between “soul” and “electricity” as concepts is that only one of them can be tested and verified, which I have personally done, so I don’t get into the weeds about “soul.”
I’ll give you an illustration of the fun that can be had this way. I once had a question about “soul” in an elephant. The most qualified person to answer that is a mahout, of course, especially a real Eastern-style hereditary one. Luckily we still have those so I asked one. He was actually offended by the question! What I saw as “his elephant,” was to him more like his brother, and he was angry at me for questioning whether his brother had a soul!? A young elephant calf is given to a young boy mahout and they are basically raised together, sharing common Sanskara. More importantly, the elephant also feels the mahout is his brother, and can sense his mood and react accordingly. The mahout told me that it was actully the elephant who was offended by my insolence, and he was merely interpreting language between us. He also told me that he cannot “make” the elephant do anything, the Elephant is master of his own mind, unlike most “men.” The elephant lets himself be “controlled” by the mahout’s superior senses so that the both of them can get food. The only time an Elephant succumbs to his base nature is during mating season, where he becomes a rampaging beast under control of “musth,” and that is the real test of the mahout’s bonding — only he can convince (not compel — no-one can compel a rampaging elephant lol) his brother to not knock down a hut or trample some peasants. If the mahout dies prematurely, the elephant usually has to be put down too. If the elephant is old, he is usually also senile (which is a thing in elephants too) and there exist old-elephants’ homes in Thailand, with temples doing that duty in South India.
Now for even more fun — I once posed a similar question to a loco pilot (“engineer” in America) regarding his locomotive, and this was when steam was still a thing, and he was absolutely adamant that “his” machine absolutely did have a soul too, had its own language that he was merely interpreting, couldn’t be “forced” to do anything but must be convinced, had bouts of obstinacy that could only be resolved by him, etc etc. In fact, in the steam era Indian Railway practice was to assign a locomotive to a specific pilot, who was made responsible for all upkeep and maintenance-related decisions as well. After a few years the locomotive became impossible for any other pilot to drive, and if forced, would be grossly inefficient/unreliable. Pilots started going so far as camping in workshops while “their” locomotive was in. This is 100% attested by old British railwaymen, who are nominally “Christian” but will adamantly insist that their locomotive definitely has a soul of its own. If you’re in the USA, you can ask a young UP steam engineer what he thinks about 844 or Big Boy. I’d love to see a young man’s answer!
You misinterpreted. An NPC (==goy) is an animal, he has no capacity to be enlightened, lives the NPC life, and feels fine. A man differs from an NPC in having the capacity to be enlightened (second birth), functionally still lives the NPC life, but feels dissatisfied. That dissatisfaction leads him to seek enlightenment. Some achieve it, many do not and return to NPC-dom as bugmen, while some others become frightened by the light at the bottom of the abyss and wish to create eternal darkness, becoming seculars/prog priests. Non-priestly reactionaries often make the mistake of underestimating the intellectual fire-power of prog priests and the enormous legacy of their evil predecessors. I don’t. This is why I agree with Cominator’s solution for them — sparing even a single one is a grave mistake. We must do unto them before they have the ability to do unto us.
Red pill, in its original formulation, only represents the beginning of a journey that may lead to dark enlightenment. Everyone has to discover and verify the fundamental truths himself. “Red pill” is not for the consumption of goyim, who will only be extremely distressed and serve no good. Anyone who offers ready-made red pills is offering snake oil. An Arya(n) is not a slave to any language or “system of thinking.” As for accepting others’ axioms blindly, this was considered foolishness until very recently — note the Royal Society’s motto Nullius in verba. Every schoolboy is, or at least was, expected to verify the Law of Gravitation himself, not take even Newton’s word for it (!) Same with Archimedes’ Principle or Euclidean Geometry. But this was before “school” was dominated by goy children who couldn’t care less about gravity as long as they got a good grade that led to a good job, which is the zenith of a goy’s thought. This is the type of Indian you often meet in Western software sweatshops. Being goyim, albeit high-functioning ones, they lack memetic sovereignty and are extremely vulnerable to prog-Brahmin memes, with the result that most of them become raging leftists (as observed by Cominator).
We don’t attempt to overthrow anti-concepts for goyim’s benefit — they cannot be helped in this way. Dark Enlightenment seeks to help Men living the goy-life and (naturally) being dissatisfied with it. I do not know at which point the switch flips, but it’s a prolonged process that may take many decades. Dharma shastras accordingly prescribe minimum years of learning differently according to nature. Once you’re free from the shackles of language, there is no turning back. In a just society, pupils showing signs of self-awareness would be taught differently than goy-children, who would only be taught trades. After learning a trade by age 14 or so, a goy is fully developed, but a Man’s education begins after trade school, so that he may be self-realised by 25 or so. This puts a dampener on earning capacity, of course, and rich goyim/vaisyas may engender bitterness in brahmins, but a just society 1) prohibits brahmins from engaging in any commerce, and 2) makes the King responsible for sustaining his Kingdom’s learned men so that they provide him with an airtight state religion. A Brahmin’s status is determined by his learning — this is where Moldbuggian and Hindu definitions converge.
https://www.unz.com/sbpdl/apocalypto-or-the-stars-increasingly-non-white-california-public-school-curriculum-urges-students-to-chant-to-deity-of-human-sacrifice/
The old gods are coming back. How bad does it have to be before Americans demand a national curriculum to enforce decent educational standards? Conservatives shouldn’t get in the way of this because things couldn’t get much worse for us anyway. Universal standards and a level playing field would be far preferable to the local school fetish we’re still stuck with.
You are evil and insane.
A national curriculum was applied to enforce the national state religion, which was evil, and is rapidly becoming more evil. Local schools are small, and rapidly falling, fortresses of sanity.
Your script is to claim that evil left wing ideas are actually virtuous right wing conservative ideas. Soon enough our national curriculum is likely to involve human sacrifice, rolling the bodies down the steps of Aztec temples, and cannibalism. It already involves sex changes and sodomy, so why not human sacrifice and cannibalism?
All I see in those “fortresses of sanity” is high standards applied without context. Conservative students are given strict and objective grades, while liberals get loaded up with participation trophies that allow them to march through any institution they want, and they do.
I’ve seen it. I’ve seen the resumes of the liberal elite as college students, not what they show today but when they were starting out, and they were the participation trophy kids. Conservatives with the objective and honest 3.2 or whatever GPA’s and bad social skills due to being study robots are the ones getting worthless degrees and seeing their own “elites” sneer at them for not dropping out to become plumbers or carpenters or whatever. And it has been this way for generations.
Local schooling means insanity and participation trophies for the left, and strictness for the right, and this makes the right into lions being led by swine as adults. This wouldn’t happen if there were universal standards, and the left could truly see that the right produces the better students. The left would be humbled to see it, and I know how strong this sounds but it’s absolutely true.
You correctly point out that kids that actually get an education get eaten, and suggest that if we completely abandon the remaining small shreds of actual education to the high priesthood, that will solve the problem.
No, the problem you point out is not that conservative kids are naively getting an actual education, it is that the high priesthood despises genuine education.
National standards are the high priesthood uniformly enforcing its horribly bad standards.
Nearly all education today is education in holiness. Completely uniform education in holiness will not reduce the disadvantage suffered by conservative kids, for the national standard will likely involve them being human sacrifices to the Old Gods of Mexico, and then eaten. Instead of being metaphorically eaten, they will be literally eaten.
National standards already mean sex change for children. The next step, actual cannibalism for children, is not a very large step.
I am not going to continue this debate.
It is absolutely obvious that the priestly monopoly of education is at the core of the holiness spiral, and escalating priestly control of education even further and privileging those who receive it even further is the opposite of the solution.
Come the restoration, the primary path to training as a member of the elite will be through private apprenticeship to older members of the elite, which is where our lawyers, judges, and doctors used to come from.
Considerably less than one percent of our population should go to university, and our elite should be highly educated, but for the vast majority of the elite, not in universities.
The vast majority of the graduates of today’s Harvard and Yale should flipping burgers, where their lack of competence and intelligence would be less destructive.
If you looking for a smart graduate from Harvard and Yale, you will find he is nearing retirement age. If you are looking for a smart graduate just out of college, going to have trouble finding him.
Do you think people in hard sciences and higher mathematics should be university educated even if they are apprenticed for part of their training as well?
I would think universities should be about 5% of the population (or really 10% of men, no women would ever go of course).
I did special relativity as an undergrad at university, among other things. Seemed boring, and completely obvious from high school physics once one was aware of the issue that Einstein pointed out in “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies”, so I read Misner, Thorne, and Wheeler’s “Gravitation” in my own time on my own dime. I still have that textbook. It is very tattered and worn. Profoundly interesting and important, but no practical application. It is the sort of thing our elites should read. Do they still read it? Somehow I doubt it. Glancing over the current crop of research papers in General Relativity, looks like they have not read it though they may well have passed exams for which it was a textbook, and attended lectures that supposedly covered the material therein.
Seems to me that people in the hard sciences who are actually good at it, like people in engineering who are actually good at it, educate themselves.
There is a story, I don’t have the source at hand, that they developed a test for Computer Science 101, and by mistake gave it bunch of incoming students had not been exposed in any way to any of the topics covered.
Then, after they had completed the course, gave them another test that covered the same material. No very great improvement. The kids that had been good before were better, and the kids that had been completely hopeless before were marginally less hopeless, but kids who had been exposed never caught up with the good kids in the intake. The professoriat would have produced much the same result had they just immediately given the kids who did well in the test at intake their sheepskins on the spot, and saved the kids and the professors several years of wasted time.
Universities don’t really serve an educational function, and never did. The ideal of the Groves of Academe is that it is a community of smart people interested in smart things, and a wise ruler should encourage and subsidize the existence of such communities. Even if they are interested in completely impractical and useless things, you never know what will be useful until it is.
The idea that universities should be a factory for mass producing education and generating ever larger tonnages of peer reviewed mass produced papers is stupid.
Smart people should go there because they are interested in smart things, and because it is an honor to hang out with smart people, particularly smart people who have the sovereign’s blessing, not because it mass produces accreditations that are a necessary step on one’s career path. When they get bored, or decide to pursue other interests, they should leave, and it should not grant them any advantage over men who started that career as an apprentice at age thirteen, except that the fact that they were allowed in is evidence that they were smart, industrious, and unlikely to get into fights with the customers.
But if someone has been pursuing a career starting as an apprentice at age thirteen, you are likely to have more reliable evidence about his intelligence, industry, and disinclination to get into fights with customers.
Universities should perform a filtering function and a research function, but no one should expect them to inculcate people with anything particularly useful as a career path. They don’t perform the function of mass producing education particularly well, they never did, and in the days of their greatness, no one expected them to.
We need to mass inculcate prospective members of the elite into the state religion, but this is most effectively done starting at age nine or so on the playing fields of Eton, and should be largely complete by age sixteen or fifteen.
Universities should just simply not be in the business of mass producing education. It is not something you can mass produce very well.
I would think universities should be about 5% of the population (or really 10% of men, no women would ever go of course).
Maybe that was more or less the case back when high schools provided some useful vocational education and had a pipeline to employment (the metal shop teacher knew the guys who hired for the manufacturers in town, and so on.)
At least a quarter of a century ago, at least in this area the high schools no longer served that role and became all about college prep. (Which was cause and which was effect? Was it the offshoring of blue-collar jobs? I don’t know.) So colleges, at their best, provided useful training and a pipeline to industry.
Three relatives of mine graduated high school around that time with (of course) no useful skills to speak of. They went off to different colleges and all enrolled in co-op or work-study programs. One, the girl, did some sort of accounting stuff; the boys went into health care and engineering, respectively, and all got good jobs in their fields.
Even if that role could have been served by industry alone, there was some value to a college as sort of a buffet of choices. One co-worker of mine had wanted to be an electrical engineer but, as he later explained, could never figure out what the hell a transistor was doing. But he had good mechanical skill and his intro courses carried credit for Mech. E., so it was an easy switch. He ended up with a good job in industrial automation.
Of course none of these fields of study fall within the purview of the classic university, where one engages in the humanities and liberal arts. But these days there is nothing left of those fields but the skin suit worn by wokeness.
As the woke university collapses under its own weight, I could hope for the sane professors of fields like accounting, engineering, and pharmacy to get together and strike out on their own to create some institution that fulfills that useful role of preparing students for specialized fields and matching them with opportunities. Without the albatross of woke liberal arts classes and well-paid diversity commissars, it could be a lot cheaper. Of course, the extremely woke and holy quasigovernmental accreditation agencies exist solely in order to keep institutions like that from getting any of the flood of federal moola that flows to the woke academy.
Because in the old days, apprenticeship covered all these fields, not to mention doctors, lawyers, and judges.
The university is and always has been a primarily religious organization. Insofar as it was in the business of training anyone, it was in the business of training priests, and jumping into vocational training is merely a thin rationale for training everyone as priests.
But, back in the day, Church and state wisely decided to use these centers to subsidize a community of smart people to inquire into interesting things – as a bit of a side job from their primarily religious job, and also to pre-empt the old accusation that Christianity was for stupids.
A friend’s of mine father was brought on as an apprentice to an aerospace firm and worked his way to up a good upper middle class wage. Within a decade of him being hired as an apprentice they ended that program.
When it was no longer legally or socially enforceable to get X number of years of work from someone a company trained then poaching people right after training become common. This lead to companies using colleges to do the basic training to avoid the expense and the poaching.
And as Jim stated it was the Cathedral abolishing legally enforceable apprenticeship designed to induce everyone being trained as a priest that caused the change.
I used to be professor assistant (4 years ago) in accounting.
In my class, usually only 4 or 5 out of 40 person class actually have the potential to actually understand the core accounting material. And usually only 3 out of 300 total student for the year actually understand whole curriculum. Some are very good at financial accounting, but bad at cost accounting and taxation.
This is top 5 national program.
My experience convince me that not a lot of people need university.
@jim
“Because in the old days, apprenticeship covered all these fields, not to mention doctors, lawyers, and judges.
The university is and always has been a primarily religious organization.”
True, but also interesting that doctors and lawyers got inclued in the university pretty quickly, but the apprenticeship path and university path existed parallelly for a long time. Often they had different names, Taleb says that the doctors who took the apprenticeship path were called “empiricks”.
One example is that the kind of civil engineer, architect who took the apprenticeship path was called Parlier in France, speaker, the man who speaks to the workers. This term got imported with the same meaning as Paller in Austria and PalÃr in Czechia. Today, the terms Polier in Austria and PolÃr in Czechia mean a construction foreman, head mason, ganger. So this tracks very clearly how the university educated civil engineers, architects got more and more power and status their apprenticeship educated counterparts got pushed gradually lower and lower.
My problem with the term priestly is that I am unsure what it means. I would characterize my college experience as scholarly. A scholar is not a scientist. A scientists main input is experiment, a scholars main input is text. A scholar is a sort of a theoretical expert, knows texts that describe things. So for example civil engineers in our schools had to learn by heart the blueprint of famous buildings. What they lacked is actual practrice in doing any useful work. But that is what a scholar means, someone who memorized a lot of blueprints, memorized the history of a lot of experiments, or whatever else. A kind of a walking encyclopedia. Is that priestly?
Reflect on the process whereby animal fats got demonized, and the great global warming conspiracy.
We got the inside documents of the global warming conspiracy, and to a lesser extent we learned what went down in the animal fats conspiracy. Their main input was not experiment. Similarly, Chomsky’s linguistics main input was not text.
And ask why how come history gets rewritten at frequent intervals. It is not likely that new data is available.
The experimental method, the scientific method, comes from the Skeptical Chemist (Boyle was hardly the first to propose it, but his proposal rapidly received royal backing, resulting in the invisible college becoming the Royal Society)
Robert Boyle, the invisible college, and the buildings and facilities of the Royal Society, were not affiliated a university until the nineteenth century (which is when the rot set in.) They did not teach students, they did not award degrees.
The affiliation of the Royal society with a university happened at about the same time as enforceable apprenticeship was abolished. Before then there was no connection between teaching, professorships and accreditation on the one hand, and science on the other.
Government sponsored science, primarily by making it high status and giving its practitioners protection when they offended by saying disturbing things, (as they frequently did, being socially oblivious and apt to pursue truth in dangerous directions) rather than by directly funding it though there was modest amount of direct funding. But it did not sponsor it through universities. Newton got a high status job at the mint, not a professorship, and his religious heresies, that would have at minimum destroyed the career of a non scientist, were quietly overlooked. That is the sort of thing the government did to sponsor science. The Mint and the Royal Navy had a lot more to do with sponsoring science than the University.
The Royal Society was a place where smart people hung out with smart people to discuss smart things. It did not award degrees, did not officially authorize scientific qualifications, had no students, no professors, etc.
@Mike in Boston
“Which was cause and which was effect? Was it the offshoring of blue-collar jobs? I don’t know.”
I do. In my neck of Europe a three-tiered high school system existed even way way back when blue-collar jobs were not offshored.
At 14, kids with the best grade got into gymnasium, which was 100% university prep. The kids with the worst grades got into trade schools like carpenter or welder, not allowed to go to university. The kids with the middling grades into an intermediate kind of high school where going to uni was allowed but uni prep only moderately emphasized, and they got trained in a more intelligent kind of trade like car or aircraft mechanic or accountant.
The push to pipeline more and more kids into gymnasium then uni clearly came from above, that was the cause. We are a kind of a materialistic people, so it was sold so: people with college degrees earn more. Everybody from even “conservative” politicians to the average man on the street believed people with college degrees earn more. This is true, but it is not that a college degree gives one skills that increase ones producitivity, it is just a college degree selects for intelligence and conscientousness, therefore productivity. But everybody got the causality wrong.
The funny thing is that in a sense it “worked”, even when 50% of young people had college degrees, because it still selects for intelligence and conscientousness, and the more intelligent and conscientous are gonna earn more.
And because the economy was going well enough and achieved like 20% GDP growth in 5-10 years, meaning the more or less everybody, both college educated and not college educated earning more, it sort of looked like working, it was very easy to misunderstand the causality and to say look we are producing a lot more chemical engineers than before and look they are getting hired at higher starting salaries than 5-10 years ago, all this yummy GDP and taxes come rolling in, so it is working? But all that actually happened was that college selected for these traits plus the growing GDP was lifting all boats.
So for example one day in 2002 I visiting a client and saw an IT guy laying Ethernet cables and it turned out he has a degree in robotics. A useless degree, given his job. But it sent the smart and hard working signal, so he could get a job for his skills mostly came from his hobby as being a computer guy. The company was selling stuff like pens and suchlike printed with company logos, marketing gifts. The salesmen were e.g. mechanical engineers… all that GDP growth happened because they were good at selling and printing pens and suchlike, not because of their degrees…
And the folks with the liberal arts degrees were good at being waiters and baristas. It was a running joke that a degree in philosophy or suchlike is a degree in catering.
@Dividualist
Sure that is priestly. Priest learn scripture and produce words.
The civil engieneering course you describe is just that. The students memorize scripture and produce words, but do not do engineering and solve no engineering problems.
They have to learn engineering later by training on the job if they want to do engineering, but lots of people with engineering degrees never do engineering.
@jim
I am getting this certain impression that when we are mixing up things that should be kept separate, we are screwing up all of them.
That science got screwed up by priestly methods is clear.
But also priestly methods got screwed up by science in the sense whatthe folks at the Orthosphere or Ed Feser call scientism, that modern philosophers are bogged down by ideas imported from science, materialim, empiricism, and are unable to contemplate the metaphysical, so unable to do a proper priestly job.
The funniest part is that the modern philosopher calls himself materialist, yet he understands matter less than the Medievals did who did not call themselves materialists.
For the Medievals, it was obvious that qualia is a property of matter. The colors I see, the sounds I hear I am hearing with my material body, what else. Nothing supernatural about it. They considered purely the abstract intellect supernatural, nothing else, not senses, not memories, not emotions.
And then Descartes imported scientism into philosophy, saying that only measurable, quantitative properties of matter are real, qualitative properties like color and sound are not. This is not even good science – the color we see on a litmus paper is a perfectly valid tool of science.
I think the problem was that Descartes was a mathemathician, not a Boyle type experimental scientist who was perfectly happy to describe acids as turning litmus from blue to red and did not worry that that red color he perceives is not “real” because it is not a quantitative measurement. Anyway, Descartes relegated sensing qualia to some immaterial, supernatural substance in the body. I have no idea why people believed him. Perhaps math was high status, dunno.
(The problem with modern philosophers is that they oscillate between two extremes, the idea of perfectly reliable knowledge, like what can be perfectly measured or derived via math, the Enlightenment way, and the idea that knowledge is impossible and it is just all social construct or something, the Hegelian or Postmodern way. The way of science is the middle way, the probable knowledge. This was also the way of the Medieval philosophers.)
And then of course science does not find this immaterial substance, so the modern philosopher declares it does not exist, and then we have a problem with qualia and a hard problem of consciousness and similar philosophical problems. Because our materialism is Descartes minus that immaterial mind, not the Medieval view that qualia are properties of matter and we sense them with the perfectly material and natural parts of our minds. These problems of qualia and consciousness simply do not exist if only we get our materialism right.
I would not classify scientism as imported from science, but rather as priestly invaders aping science.
Consider, for example, dialectical materialism. A completely supernatural collection of concepts, in which any effort to connect to experienced reality is abandoned, strangely labelled materialism.
Scientism is in part deference to “scientific” authority, as for example Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Change, or whatever they are calling it now. But scientific authority is unscientific. Nullius in verba. Or as Feynman said: Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.
Scientism is also cargo cultish application of “scientific” methods. But the methods are not in fact scientific, aping the outward appearance, but not the substance, priests wearing strangely spotless labcoats as sacerdotal robes (my labcoat was always stained and full of large holes caused by chemical burns. Back in those days we got to play with interesting highly reactive substances that today would result in an invasion of EPA bureaucrats wearing moon suits.)
Scientism is what you get when a priestly institution (the University) takes over science. It adversely affects their priesting, but it even more adversely affects their science.
>The problem with modern philosophers is that they oscillate between two extremes, the idea of perfectly reliable knowledge, like what can be perfectly measured or derived via math, the Enlightenment way, and the idea that knowledge is impossible and it is just all social construct or something, the Hegelian or Postmodern way.
One, of course, naturally following from the other. That post-modernism is modernism; the logical conclusion of modernist epistemology applied consistently and without unprincipled exception.
In more civilized times, anyone could publish anything they liked; and if anyone saw anything they thought was interesting, they could try reproducing it; and if they could reproduce it, then understanding advanced. This is a form of social technology that was called science. Such which stands in contrast with a presently regnant system called ‘peer review’.
Under this system, noone can publish, except that they be rubberstamped first by a synod of bishops, who adjudicate material in secret, on the basis of secret methods, using secret evidence, not revealed to laypersons outside of the church (ie, by fiat), whereupon it is either rejected or accepted.
If accepted, it is then entered into the canon of orthodoxy as ‘settled science’. Reproduction is not only unnecessary to this process (socially speaking, of course), for that matter, anyone that does not reproduce the ordained results can then be rejected as either a fatuous hack or a faithless heretic, for deviating from orthodoxy, and thus failing to take the bishop’s word for it.
This is quite evidently an expression of priestly overreach – or more specifically, a priestly faction in particular attempting to arrogate dominion over ever inflating swaths of a society, shoehorning it’s particular mode of engagement into any and all other affairs, irrespective of however maladaptive it may be outside of the context it came about in (if it was ever even adaptive anywhere to begin with).
“One, of course, naturally following from the other. That post-modernism is modernism; the logical conclusion of modernist epistemology applied consistently and without unprincipled exception.”
I am not sure if I understand this. What is modernist epistemology? The Enlightenment had a tendency to prefer mathemathical-geometrical thinking above both the Boyle kind of experimental science and the older (scholastic) philosophy that was more common-sensical and pragmatic. The common ground between Boyle and Aqinas/Aristotle was that both thought you can pick up a rock and make true statements about it based on your sensory perception. The first wanted to have more precise truths than a casual investigation can offer, hence science, the second focused on creating an interpretation framework for sensory perception based truths, ultimately deriving ideas that are beyond sensory perception.
The Enlightenment, characterized by Descartes, just did not care about picking up a rock. Rather they tried to reason about things from logical first principles and imagined a world made of math, where laws are perfect and there are no exceptions, no miracles (deism), kings not calling a state of exception (constitutional monarchies). This logically leads to actually not a materialist framework, but an idealist one, in which only thought, only information exists, as if living in the Matrix.
And it did. The late 19th century was Hegelist, and Hegel was a Spinozist. Spinoza’s pantheism, that nature is a certain universal substance, material as well as intelligence, that fashions all things that exist out of its own essence, is basically the characteristic modern idea.
This topic used to be discussed a lot in the incipient ‘reactosphere’ around the early to mid 10’s, but hasn’t been brought up much in recent years since 2015 or so, likely on account of folk increasingly paying more attention to increasingly spicy current events.
So it basically all goes back to when a gay kiddly fiddler named plato once foolishly agreed with some sophists that the senses were unreliable, setting up 2000+ years worth of fanboys who took him seriously after to fruitlessly retread the same ground over and over and produce schizophrenia in written form attempting to make systems of thought based around taking such an assumption as a given. Blunder of the millennium really.
But anyways, skipping a lot we arrive at Descartes, who could perhaps be considered a seminal example of the needless handwringing brought about by taking the athenian pederast at face value. Like many of his unfortunate fellows (and unfortunate countrymen who had – and have – to live in a society subjected to the ostensibly intellectual output of such unfortunate fellows), he made an attempt to produce an epistemology while assuming the premise that senses are essentially unreliable as a given. His attempt at a solution to this intractable thought exercise (for intractable, and a thought exercise, it both is) was what some might recognize as ‘categorically imperative’ avant la letre, before Kant himself gave the irascible mode of thought its name.
In the most simplest terms, the self-described ‘enlightenment project’ basically comes down to the desire to produce a system, that is wholly atemporal or universal, which can be used naively to calculate any possible knowledge, wholly separate from dependency on intelligent operation by any particular user agent. The ultimate failure mode of all this was, of course, the fact that the capacity of any given system is necessarily contingent on the capacity of its creator; no being within Being could create a system that fully encapsulates Being; for if it did, then it already does.
And it was the ultimate failure of such a project that gave rise to the oft misunderstood post-modernist schools of thought, particularly the french continentals. Who, while claiming to be overturning the modernism typical of Descartes and those inspired by him, ironically retained the same modernist/enlightenment standards of evidence; standards that dictate that any valid proposition must be universally valid; that any proposition with an exception anywhere is just as worthless as any other everywhere; standards that, if you were to actually take them seriously and apply them consistently, would imply that knowledge itself is impossible.
Which means naturally, of course, that noone (least of all baizuo lumpenproles) ever actually applies them consistently, but instead in selective, tactical manners, to rhetorically dissolve Things They Don’t Like in the acid of nominalism, while leaving their own conceits overlooked.
Anyone who has ever seen a self-appointed thoughtpolicepersyn ‘debating’ humans over dysfunctional demographics can instantly recognize this mode of thought once pointed out. ‘Not all X are like that’; ‘there is no clear boundary between these social constructs you call red and orange in the pseudoscientific theory of a colour spectrum, thus it is all in your head’, and so on.
It is a mode of thought whose genesis springs up from very deep in the cortical stack of exponents – springing forth in many a time, place, and person, even when not so consciously informed; figures such as those sorcerers springing from the also self-described renaissance, merely dressed it up in more sophisticated garb. It is *nominalism*, which is the experiential manifestation of congenital solipsism, which fosters gnosticism, which facilitates doing leftism…
On a phenomenological level, we can describe the modernist’s overly-reductive ‘standard of evidence’, it’s insistence on a ‘perfect system’ free from ‘impurities’ of ‘frail humanity’, as expressions of a mind deeply bewildered by the motions of an existence it can scarcely comprehend, desperate for some form of *certainty* it can grab a hold of. A man who experiences life like a piece of driftwood in a stormy sea; tossed hither and tither, terrifyingly blind to the forces doing the tossing.
It is hard to reason and draw conclusions about the world, unless you have your feet on the ground.
Getting your feet on the ground requires a leap of faith, but a lot of people perform a leap of faith into the void, and are lost.
Euclid’s lines are lines of sight, and the number three is present in every pile of three sea shells, as the color red is present in an apple. Our capacity to reason is part of the reasonableness of the world, a result of the reasonableness of the world, and inseparable from the world.
If you detach yourself from the world, you make yourself stupid.
Which brings me back to game. The red pill knowing the world, but if you think the world is evil, if you take the black pill with the red pill, it is going to make you ill, and you will not succeed at game. You have to not only understand women, but believe it is right that men should be men, and act as men, and women be women, and act as women act.
(rolling a new cat)
While I try to keep a rational approach and think that the evil madness that affect our elite decisions is due to holiness spiral and some counterintuitive consequences of Game Theory, it is sometimes difficult for me to not believe that they are, in fact, influenced by literal demons.
Thrashing Christianity and western civilization? Expected. Telling kids to recite chants to ancient gods known for being pleased only by human blood? That’s a bit.. creepy, even for liberals.
The will to unrestrict abortion up to the 9th month, however is the issue that puzzles me the most. To my knowledge there was zero demand for such laws, no one single woman who wants this, even lefists are repulsed by the idea. And yet, it is up for debate. Priests fighting for status with the most insane priest to be the winner might be the reason, but it still doesn’t convice me completely. I still don’t see the logic. If not for the supernatural implications, I would find much easier to believe that indeed Tlaloc is whispering to their ears.
Abortion in leftist circles is just human sacrifice. They’ve made less and less bones about over the years. They worship demons. Weather the Demons do or do not exist, Demon worship is a highly cohesive religious system. Which is why the Aztecs and the Bronze age civilizations followed it.
It also tends to be a highly self destructive religious system because it demands human sacrifice of children by the people practicing it. The Aztecs actually built a better version of it one based on mass murdering their the people they were slowly genociding. However, if they’d ever run out people to conquer they would have had to revert to murdering their own children.
As it was, the Aztec practice united everyone against them helping greatly with the conquest of New Spain. But even while the Aztecs were being destroyed by the Spanish the tribes that Aztecs had been genociding discovered that their own priests were working for the Aztecs and repeatedly tried to stop the war against the Aztecs.
Demon worship is a very powerful religion and our elites have adopted it in mass. Moloch, much like Marx has great power simply through the propagation of the religions system each constructed in their name.
The power of demon worship is effective regardless of the literal existence of demons.
It works as a religion, and it works best as a state religion, and it is increasingly obvious that that is what we now have.
But the troops of Cortez took for granted the literal reality of the demons. They were there. Maybe they knew best.
There is this commenter Mark Passio…
He is a literal anarchist (not a leftist anarchist he wants government to truly not exist) so not exactly our friend (and also is often shrill and unpleasant to listen to) ideologically (he does say he hates the left much more) but he said he was a former satanic priest and he has said some very interesting things about our elites that yes most of them are demon worshippers not that they believe in literal demons but they believe they gain power by dedicating themselves to the adversarial force…
If that’s the case, I think we could soon have unironical child sacrifice among elites. Considering:
– quite a few of celebrities nowadays cross dress their kids to show how piously they are aligned with the Cathedral’s ideology. It will not take long before they will start putting them on hormone blockers as well. The timespan between making trannies holy and this kind of insanity to show up has been alarmingly short.
– There have already been cases of women aborting publicly, on cameras, with the purpose of “fighting the stigma” i.e. gaining status.
Now, if 9th month abortion becomes a thing, what are the odds that eventually some woman does it to “fight the stigma”? And what are the odds that, eventually, female celebrities would display piousness by having at least one late abortion in their lifetime, just like today they show piousness by raising their kids as trannies?
At which point the difference between an elite American woman broadcasting her 9th month abortion for status and an elite Carthaginian woman publicly offering her first newborn to Bhaal would just be a cosmetic one.
I recall an old comic strip, where a woman was offered the prospect of becoming a movie star, and was told that one of the requirements of becoming a star was that she could not have kids by her prospective husband. She would have to adopt kids from Africa. This alarmed her somewhat.
Of course, if the comic strip was produced today, would be deplatformed, demonetized, and cancelled. Supposedly women just spontaneously want to liberated in the socially desirable way.
We are not going to see a comic strip where a prospective star is told she must murder her newborns on camera – she will just spontaneously desire it because liberating and empowering.
The massively government funded organization “Planned Parenthood” sells baby parts for research purposes.
After public sacrifice of newborns, cannibalism next.
“Eat the bug, shitlord.”
“Eat the soylent green, shitlord.”
Michelle Williams
https://i.redd.it/brknvs8gif941.jpg
@jim
The equivalent Indian organisation is literally an arm of the State, and serves under the direction of UNICEF and US-based Catholic Relief Services. Go figure.
I wonder about the deeper implications of bug eating and why the left pushes it. It seems like anohter one of those soul crushing moloch demon worship things but I’d have liked to understand it further
At a basal level, it is about humiliation.
Red meat is warrior food – the most nutritious food for an animal is other animals; everything it needs most, already made in a form it can use, without need to trade-off with complex metabolic pathways to ‘upgrade’ it through synthesis – and hostile underlords love nothing more than taking away such privileges from the serfs.
@suones
It ain’t fun having one’s religion being worn as a skinsuit. Imagine if a pozzed organisation bearing the name of the Aryan Religion pushing the poz.
I will be amazed if in future no proported Vedic organization didnt end up as a rotting swimsuit.
I mean skin suit. Damn autocorrect.
@Pseudo-Chrysostom
thanks for the eloquent answer
Ia! Ia!
It is not often discussed, but the condition of the working classes in the West today actually represents a regression to historically normal social technology.
In the Roman Republic, the plebian class, not to mention the foreigner and the slave, did not have access to religion or legal and sacramental marriage. We know that they reproduced much as they do today, “like beasts”, as a Roman patrician described it. Single motherhood, short term girlfriends with whom one has a child, but who tended to leave when they found a more alpha male, and so on. The condition of men and women in the modern city is identical to the condition of men and women in the ancient, pre-Christian city.
The lower classes had no religion, no fire gods of the hearth or ancestor gods of the grave to protect their households and families, and had access to worship only in the sense that the cult of the city, the rites of the patricians, protected those who dwelt within the walls.
Most societies get alone fine like this. This is essentially the condition of historical China, historical India, and the historical Middle East. In the Indo-European homeland, everybody who was not a slave was an elite, and where IEs conquered extant societies, they found themselves with a large class of plebs who were not exactly slaves, but not exactly free men, a class they generally ignored, left outside the law and outside the state.
It was only Christian Europe, granting sacred marriage and sacred fatherhood, the rights of the freehold, to the common man, that made advancements in science and technology, but more importantly in military art, that allowed them to conquer the known world. Obviously, this is the winning social technology. But most societies endure for a very long time with a completely degenerate plebiscite, with rampant hypergamy, godless, sexless young men living only to consume, and so on.
The problems are that this condition is stable but stagnant (no mars, no new science and engineering) and that our elite is of very poor quality, evil and insane, apt to get everybody killed by being evil and insane. If the elite was great, like the Roman elite was great, we could forgive the ugliness of the lower classes, but our elites are even worse, even uglier, than our plebs. This is where I part ways with Moldbug, because I see our current elite as disgusting human garbage, and completely irredeemable.
Once cooperation among the elite is lost, it is impossible to get back. Charles II had the benefit of the old aristocracy literally sitting around in their castles waiting for a leader. No Roman emperor could build a new elite. It was simply not possible. Roman law after Augustus was martial law, and the army frequently found the emperor unsatisfactory and simply removed him, resulting in constant civil war. It was not until the population of Rome was reduced to a mere ten thousand or so by barbarians, in an extreme genocidal bloodbath, that a new elite with a new cooperational consensus could begin to arise. Eventually, a civilization becomes an Augean stable, impossible for any man to clean out (and there were Roman emperors of the absolute highest human quality imaginable who tried), but only a river of blood can clean it out.
Looks to me Augustus did not do enough on the WQ, so could not bring back elite eugenic reproduction which ultimately doomed Rome.
Augustus took the bluepilled tradcon take that decline in marriage etc was the fault of selfish caddish men (I believe the specific thinking was that any Roman with money just preferred to bang slavegirls) and not the fault of women…
Yes what he needed to do was reinstitute female ownership (traditional Roman manus marriage). My fear is that our Caesar or Augustus, if we get one, will fall into the same trap.
“In the Roman Republic, the plebian class, not to mention the foreigner and the slave, did not have access to religion or legal and sacramental marriage.”
Confarreatio was only for patricians but in early Rome Paterfamilias powers were a formidable thing in the law… and I believe they generally included the Paterfamilias wife.
If no descent from deified warrior hero, whose rites you perform, no familias, the legal and religious concept of marriage did not apply to you. Its is likely that many plebian men managed their women with heavy hands, but he had no legal protections for doing so, and like blacks in the ghetto, was probably frequent violence between a womans relatives and the man banging her.
I think you’re painting a rather broad brush. There’s little evidence of anything commoners did or thought in any pre-modern society because virtually every record from that era comes from the elites, therefore leaving us blind to how the commoners really lived. Certainly I do believe that they lived a more decadent or vulgar lifestyle than the elites did, because that is always the case. To put forward an example, I would assume that during the Middle Ages shotgun marriages were much more common among peasants than among the nobility. For another, see how the Chinese gentry were much more hardcore about footbinding their women than commoners were. Even with how decadent our modern elite is, they still manage to have higher rates of stable marriage than our commoners do. The purity of “lindy customs”, if you want to call it that, is typically always highest among the elite (I don’t want to say always because our elite today is much more insane than the commoners in most respects).
We don’t know how exactly they lived we do know the Roman marriage laws.
Christian type sacramental marriage (Confarreatio) was only ever in Rome between patricians and both husband and wife needed to be patrician, not even plebian nobles.
But Paterfamilias law extended to all Roman citizens and plebians could contract a cum manu marriage where the wife passed to the paterfamilias of her husband (all women with the exception of ex Vestals to my knowledge had to have a male paterfamilias). The problem seemed that informally Paterfamilias was not effective at restraining wives generally because the wife’s male relatives tended to take (at least reading what I have from late Rome) as an insult against the family honor if wife beatings were employed, even if the wife absolutely and notoriously deserved it (to take an extreme example going to Bacchanals and letting slaves cum in her and such) if the husband beat the shit out of his wife or such things. Later on most marriages tended to be sine manu anyway.
There is nothing Semitic about Aryan sacramental marriage. High caste Aryans only ever marry high caste women. It is not something a nouveau riche “noble” can buy his way into.
As far as plebeian practices are concerned, they are animals who may adopt some simulacrum of elite practices but fundamentally don’t understand the nature of said sacraments thus can’t be expected to follow it. Low-caste families, even today, are extremely female dominated, and their women are usually very aggressive and feral.
The ancient israelite marriage and religious customs resemble very closely the primitive aryan religion as described by Coulanges. Far more plausible that the ancient Israelites came down from the north around the time of the black sea deluge, and were not a semitic people from the Arabian peninsula.
Apart from the fact that I believe in the inspiration of the Bible, I’d still be far more inclined to believe the recorded traditions of the Jewish people than anthropological speculations at the remove of thousands of years.
What you are looking at in the Roman elite, and what I saw in the fading remnants of Vietnamese aristocracy, was a high cooperation, high fertility, high IQ, minority, related by blood and marriage, ruling over a low cooperation majority.
Whereupon the question becomes not how to achieve it, but why it does not happen all the time everywhere? Why don’t the highly cooperative always rule, ruling, give themselves high fertility and privileges, having privileges, and far too many children to grant similar privilege to all of the children, select the best among their overly numerous offspring?
Why?
Well, what happened in Vietnam was that conquered by the French, they sent their best kids off for a French education, where they learned about highly successful French elite defection, and returning home, performed similar defections in the name of “the people”.
The old order in Vietnam was overthrown by French educated children of the elite who found themselves hard up for elite jobs.
Large scale cooperation is hard to maintain, and defection from the elite of entire groups united by vigorous religion, such as communism, likely to be lucrative.
Tiberius Gracchus wanted to distribute the fruits of empire more fairly, and he had a good point. The elite was hogging empire to far too small a group to operate empire – but it was at the same time distributing the fruits of empire to far too large a group to maintain imperial cooperation within the group.
So factions arose, and factional conflict rapidly got out of hand.
My interpretation of the story of Adam and Eve is that Adam was a man who lived a very long time, became the priest patriarch of a very large extended family, and that the fall was the black pill – the discovery that extended cooperation was hard to maintain.
Well, how do we do very large scale cooperation today? How did we do it in the first age of Globalism, before World War I? I can go anywhere, rent a car, check into a hotel. That is pretty good large scale cooperation.
Well, that I can manage that is, as in the first age of Globalism, which was mediated by the East India Company, through corporate capitalism. Small cooperating groups compete within rules, limiting their competition to positive sum activities, and this cooperation within relatively small groups adds up to larger scale cooperation. (I need to issue a post titled “Economics of Warfare”.
Like feudalism, it is a fractal system of cooperation, where large scale cooperation, which is difficult, is built out of smaller cooperating units, which are less difficult.
This system is collapsing under the priesthood, hence MF Global and the Great Minority Mortgage Meltdown, which is why we cannot make modern integrated circuits or nuclear reactors in the West any more. International transactions that mediate international cooperation in corporate capitalism are rapidly becoming more difficult.
The proposal I am working on, which is no where near ready, even to the point which would enable me to invite others to help me on it, would enable agorist cooperation, large scale markets under anarchy – but without a competent and cooperative ruling elite, I think it likely that the resulting corporate entities will eventually find themselves at war with each other and the political elite.
But at least we will then have the elements of smaller scaled cooperation with which to build larger scale cooperation.
If you are proposing what I think you are proposing, the warfare between your sovereign corporations, other sovereign corporations, and existing states will breed a new elite in the same way that the constant warfare between Germanic bands and against the Roman empire eventually became a new system of elite cooperation between violent men with ability to wage private warfare.
I find it likely that the losing hegemonic state will attempt to destroy the ability for the internet to physically exist rather than relinquish its power, which case we will be back to the old-fashioned way.
I rather think that if we have competently run sovereign corporations, the internet will prove hard to destroy.
@jim
“(I need to issue a post titled “Economics of Warfareâ€.)”. Please do. Back when I used to be a faithful Misesian because I liked their logic of voluntary exchange, I wondered why are they simply calling coercion bad instead of applying the same skills to involuntary, coerced exchange, which non-genocidal wars, “cabinet wars” tend to be about. But please make sure to make a difference between holy war, tribal war (stealin’ da pussy), and cabinet war…
“large scale markets under anarchy” – huh? Proof of stake, also hodlers rule, implies aristocracy, not anarchy.
“My interpretation of the story of Adam and Eve” – well, how about a Paretoian, lions vs. foxes interpretation of The Fall?
Hominids used to be “lions”. That is, already smarter than apes and could coordinate violence better, but they still thought the only way to harm another man or tribe is open violence. Thus, they were trustworthy. In that sense, innocent: if you did not perceive your fellow tribesman openly trying to kick your ass, then he was not dangerous to you. Then he was cooperating with you, because the second he decided to stop cooperating, he would roar an open challenge or just charge you head-on. They had no plots and schemes and lies and all that. They were honorable, because too dumb to be anything else.
But then hominids evolved to be smarter. “Foxes”, who could do cunning tricks, fraud, deception and suchlike, who could hide what they are doing and were not doing everything in the open, evolved. This was in one sense good for the tribe. “Foxes” could lure the enemy tribe into a trap, and ambush etc. But “foxes” could also compete for social status not only through open challenges, open violence, but also through secret schemes and plotting and daggers in the back. And this was The Fall, because it had a really bad effect on trust and cooperation.
For example, it is obvious that your own brothers should be the men you can trust the most, who will cooperate with you the most. And yet there is ample of evidence from Ottoman princes to Zulu chieftains – not just the gifted Shaka, many others – killing their own brothers to secure their succession.
And that is sick. When killing your own brothers is a viable strategy, mankind is Fallen. And why? Because we got smart, so a lot of people became “foxes”, so instead of roaring an open challenge, a dagger in the back can happen.
Feudalism in the days of its greatness had a disturbing amount of anarchy. Feudal lords tended to resolve matters with their own swords rather frequently. Reflect on the engagement and marriage of William the Marshal, the first courtship consisting of a siege of his intended’s castle, and his marriage consisting of defeating his betrothed’s uncle in personal combat.
Also reflect on the troubles of William the conqueror, and his troubled succession. Things became a bit more orderly with the establishment of British Justice by Henry the First, the lion of justice, but British Justice remained, as we saw with William the Marshal, heavily dependent on the terribly swift swords of individual heroes.
Lombards in Italy being another good example.
If we don’t get Caesar Augustus or Napoleon to provide order, we are likely to get a rather less orderly order supplied by privately owned assassin drones and heavily armed well equipped well trained highly disciplined flash mobs.
I don’t get the need to allegorize Adam and Eve. I mean, I get people thinking it didn’t happen as written. But the meaning of it is very simple. The woman was seduced into believing man could be God. That is the theme we see repeating at the tower of Babel and again in Daniel and Revelation. And the elites today signal openly that they are followers of this old faith by building the EU headquarters to look like Bruegel’s Tower of Babel.
This is pretty much the story what Vico tells, with a few more plot twists. Easiest is to go to https://archive.org/stream/newscienceofgiam030174mbp/newscienceofgiam030174mbp_djvu.txt and Ctrl+F 1098 as there starts a summary of the work.
BTW I find it very inspiring that I open a book from 1725 and basically find our whole worldview summarized:
Civilization begins through inventing patriarchy and private property:
“The new direction took the form of forcibly seizing their women,
who were naturally shy (rather, ritroso = reluctant,IMHO) and unruly, dragging them into their caves, and, in order to have intercourse with them, keeping them there as perpetual lifelong companions. Thus, with the first human, which is to say chaste and religious, couplings, they gave a beginning to matrimony. Thereby they became certain fathers of certain children by certain women. Thus they founded the families and governed them with a cyclopean family sovereignty over their children and their wives, such as was proper to such proud and savage natures, so that later as cities arose men might be found disposed to stand in awe of the civil sovereignty.”
and spreads:
“Meanwhile, scattered through the plains and valleys and preserving the infamous communism of things and of women, there remained a great
number of the impious, the unchaste and the nefarious impious in having no
fear of gods, unchaste in their use of shameless bestial venery, and nefarious in their frequent intercourse with their own mothers and daughters. After a long time, driven by the ills occasioned by their bestial society, weak, astray and solitary, relentlessly pursued by the robust and violent because of quarrels engendered by their infamous communism, they came at last to seek refuge in the asylums of the fathers. The latter, taking them under their protection, proceeded to extend their family kingdoms to include these famuli through the clienteles.”
This above is actually slavery, a slave was supposed to be part of the familia.
Slaves were then turned into lower-class citizens and former slave owners into nobles:
“But finally the family fathers, having become great by the religion and virtue of their ancestors and through the labors of their clients, began to abuse the laws of protection and to govern the clients harshly. When they had thus departed from the natural order, which is that of justice, their clients rose
in mutiny against them. But since without order (which is to say without God)
human society cannot stand for a moment, providence led the family fathers
naturally to unite themselves with their kindred in orders against their clients.
To pacify the latter, they conceded to them, in the world’s first agrarian law,
the bonitary ownership of the fields, retaining for themselves the optimum or
sovereign family ownership. Thus the first cities arose upon reigning orders of
nobles.”
“And as the natural order declined which had been based, in accordance
with the then state of nature, on [superiority of] kind, sex, age and virtue,
providence called the civil order into being along with the cities. And first of all
[civil orders], that which approximated most closely to nature: that in virtue of nobility of humankind (for in that state of affairs nobility could be based only on generating in human fashion with wives taken under divine auspices) and thus in virtue of a heroism, the nobles should rule over the plebeians (who did not contract marriage with such solemnities), and now that divine rules had ceased (under which the families had been governed by divine auspices) and the heroes had to rule in virtue of the form of the heroic governments themselves, that the principal basis of these commonwealths should be religion safeguarded within the heroic orders, and that through this religion all civil laws and rights should belong to the heroes alone. But since nobility had now become a gift of fortune, providence caused to arise among the nobles the order of the family fathers themselves, as being naturally more worthy because of age. And among the fathers it caused the most spirited and robust to arise as kings whose duty it should be to lead the others and gird them in orders to resist and overawe the rebellious clients.”
Political strife begins, resulting in a kind of republic, originally rule by the rich:
“But with the passage of the years and the far greater development
of human minds, the plebs of the peoples finally became suspicious of the pretensions of such heroism and understood themselves to be of equal human nature with the nobles, and therefore insisted that they too should be taken into the civil orders of the cities. Since in due time the peoples were to become sovereign, providence permitted a long antecedent struggle of plebs with nobility over piety and religion in the heroic contests for the extension of the auspices by the nobles to the plebeians, with a view to securing thereby the extension of all public and private rights regarded as dependent on the auspices. Thus the very care for piety and attachment to religion brought the people to civil sovereignty. In this respect the Roman people went beyond all others in the world, and for that reason it became the master people of the world. In this way, as the natural order merged more and more with the civil orders, the popular commonwealths were born. In these everything had to be reduced to lot or balance, and providence therefore, in order that neither chance nor fate should rule, ordained that the census should be the measure of fitness for office. Thereby the industrious and not the lazy, the frugal and not the prodigal, the provident and not the idle, the magnanimous and not the faint-hearted in a word, the rich with some virtue or semblance thereof, and not the poor with their many shameless vices were considered the best for governing.”
Based on philosophy:
“In such commonwealths the entire peoples, this was ordained by providence to the end that, since virtuous actions were no longer prompted by religious sentiments as formerly, philosophy should make the virtues understood in their idea, and by dint of reflection thereon, if men were without virtue they should at least be ashamed of their vices. Only so can peoples prone to ill-doing be held to their duty. And from the philosophies providence permitted eloquence to arise and, from the very form of these popular commonwealths in which good laws are commanded, to become impassioned for
justice, and from these ideas of virtue to inflame the peoples to command good laws.”
The republic is ruled by philosophy, not heroism and religion. For a while, it is okay, but then it begins to degenerate:
“But as the popular states became corrupt, so also did the philosophies. They descended to skepticism. Learned fools fell to calumniating the truth.
Thence arose a fajse eloquence, ready to uphold either of the opposed sides of a case indifferently. Thus it came about that, by abuse of eloquence like that of the tribunes of the plebs at Rome, when the citizens were no longer content with making wealth the basis of rank, they strove to make it an instrument of power. And as furious south winds whip up the sea, so these citizens provoked civil wars in their commonwealths and drove them to total disorder. Thus they caused the commonwealths to fall from a perfect liberty into the perfect tyranny of anarchy or the unchecked liberty of the free peoples, which is the worst of all tyrannies.”
Augustus saves:
“To this great disease of cities providence applies one of these three great remedies in the following order of human civil things.
It first ordains that there be found among these peoples a man like Augustus to arise and establish himself as a monarch and, by force of arms, take
in hand all the orders and all the laws, which, though sprung from liberty, no
longer avail to regulate and hold it within bounds. On the other hand providence ordains that the very form of the monarchic state shall confine the will of the monarchs, in spite of their unlimited sovereignty, within the natural order of keeping the peoples content and satisfied with both their religion and their natural liberty. For without this universal satisfaction and content of the peoples, monarchic states are neither lasting nor secure.”
And if he does not, and nor does a foreign invader, it is game over:
“For such peoples, like so many beasts, have fallen into the custom of each man thinking only of his own private interests and have reached the extreme of delicacy, or better of pride, in which like wild animals they bristle and lash out at the slightest displeasure. Thus in the midst of their greatest festivities, though physically thronging together, they live like wild beasts in a deep solitude of spirit and will, scarcely any two being able to agree since each follows his own pleasure or caprice. By reason of all this, providence
decrees that, through obstinate factions and desperate civil wars, they shall turn their cities into forests and the forests into dens and lairs of men. In this
way, through long centuries of barbarism, rust will consume the misbegotten
subtleties of malicious wits, that have turned them into beasts made more
inhuman by the barbarism of reflection than the first men had been made by the barbarism of sense.”
Vico starts his story at the earliest time for which we have semi legendary data, and focuses narrowly on the Greeks and Romans, they being people for which he had the best data.
Udwin (whose Freudian theory is demonstrably false from his own data), but his wonderfully enormous collection of data over many peoples confirms the relationship between patriarchy and civilization.
The patriarchs build civilization for their children and great grandchildren. The fatherless and sonless tear it down.
Make women property again.
Very interesting post. But don’t the plebs always resort to some rites or mysteries for protection? Whether or not they have the sanction of the official priesthood?
But as for your description of the way lower classes are procreatinf without marriage–very poignant. Again the strange thing seems to be that while our elites marry and form families, and while they have a religion, they don’t seem to have a theological rationale for doing so, nor any gods to supplicate to bless the union. Also, you see elites raising their children “genderless” out of piety toward their religion, which shows that they are marrying and making babies out of generational residual WASP values.
Sounds like the military purge is just about complete. They using the military to investigate and I assume bring charges against Flynn and they’re using them to intimidate Congressman Greene.
Not much of a purge then. We would have heard about high ranking officers being outted as white supremacists and such if that was the case. It is the beginning of the military being politicized though which seems to be a significant step on the road to Caesardom.
Good article about this from CTH…
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2021/03/15/whats-going-on-with-u-s-military-and-democrat-politicization-of-the-institution/
It’s funny, I’m now hoping for the foreign war that our woke forces gets their asses kicked in. I’m not sure they could beat anyone at this point.
Unless its a total war which given that the US is a sea power is unlikely (and if it does happen nukes likely to happen) not much will change.
Forcing an insane regime to fight a total war tends to inject a lot of sanity… Iran got much more sane after Saddam forced them to fight a total war. To the extent Stalin’s purges didn’t inject sanity into the Soviet Union WWII sure did.
Fat Shanquia National Guard troops waddling around DC eating pizza is one thing. I’m curious what active duty warriors think of all this. They can’t be thrilled with accelerated wokeness.
This sentence stuck out to me…
If that’s true, then we are now starting to see individual Generals being commanded by individual politicians which is quite interesting.
We saw that with the Guam “national guard” unit sent to Greene’s office by order of a rando congress critter. I wonder how long until they’re ordering units to attack their rivals?
From Sheriff Joe to now took four years, but the left singularity is going faster, so probably a year or two.
Better than ordering units to attack rivals is to get any judge anywhere in the USA to sign an arrest warrant. Then send the units to arrest the rival. If he resists arrests, the units are ordered to kill him, perhaps they are ordered to kill him anyway and issue a statement to that effect.
Normality bias will be powerful that nothing special has happened. Criminals resisting arrest is nothing special. Even judges signing arrest warrants that should not have been signed is nothing new. Mistakes are made all the time – some of them are even honest mistakes.
What is the difference between having Sheriff Joe arrested rather than some other rival?
Sure, democrats attacking a republican is different from democrats attacking democrats, but not much. So the questions is simply how soon will the ruling coalition break. Pretty soon, I hope.
Spicy time, I expect they will be throwing the mob at each other too, “oops random mayor was killed by justified anti-racist mob” headlines don’t seem far off at all. I am now staying away from all places that can’t be left with expected warning of trouble. No more shopping malls or restaurants for me. I wish my boomer parents were not so idiotic but they are on the coof normal nothing to see in Washington train. On the plus side I guess we may live to see the return of the frontier, this time with a nice burned out suburban junkyard environ to add to the wilderness dangerscape.
Movie theaters are set to open soon around here. Would any of us go now? I wouldn’t. I think a lot of folks wouldn’t. Because “””virus”””. After a year of house arrest, we’ve already been conditioned.
yes. most won’t. the masses are sheep, cattle, and insert-livestock-of-choice-here.
I’ve watch reporters interview people in public spaces, and I observe that almost everyone seems sluggish and mentally zoned out. A year of house arrest has taken its toll. (On normies at least.)
* I watch
seems like a year of house arrest has taken its toll on me as well…
Would not being able to watch Hollywood crap be a bad thing? This industry can die in a dumpster fire as far as I’m concerned. We already have a stock of old movies enough to last a lifetime.
Movie demand and supply are interdependent. No one will go to a theater if there are no movies, and the studios will not make/release movies without an audience. Half the population will stay away, as you say, “because virus”. The other half just had their country brazenly stolen from them, and are increasingly degraded and vilified by the images on screen. Good luck opening their wallets.
Major chains are promising to karen their customers for the forseeable future, insisting you wear your hashtagfuckingmask at all times, except during the precious fleeting moments you’re stuffing overpriced popcorn or carbonated HFCS into your gob.
Theaters were already a hellhole of discivil behavior, with people making noise, lighting up their phones, and then yelling at each other over the preceding offenses. Who the hell would pay money to be in that environment? It’s one thing to encounter NPC maskfags in open spaces, where they are easily ignored or fucked off, but it will be instant hell for everyone when it happens during a movie.
I used to chuckle at hollywood killing (probably permanently) its golden goose, by championing the covid lie from day one, but I don’t think they even care about the money. I don’t believe they have ever made “a billion dollars” off any so-called blockbuster, and it’s more likely just a giant international money laundering scheme, and now their marrying-cousins in the banks and Wall Street are using different schemes.
The positive is if Democrat politicians can wield military power with National Guard units, it stands to reason Republicans can do the same if they are able to break free from normality bias.
Wrong. Any such order from a Republican would be instantly met with the arrest of the Republican for treason. The military knows where the power is, and it’s with the Establishment Democrats.
The Generals know that any orders contradicting the march of GloboHomo are invalid orders. Remember when Trump ordered General Mattis to separate all transgender soldiers, and Mattis utterly ignored him? Same thing.
The pattern we saw in the fall of the Roman Republic was that eventually troops became loyal to Generals, not the Senate or the state.
Horrifying tweet about what is being said in “extremism briefings”, but they must really dumb if they think red pilled country boys aren’t going to spot the absurdity.
https://twitter.com/s_pitchfork/status/1372234885226696706
The point is to get them to not agree with the briefings or point out what Antifa does so they can be marked down for removal or observation by the political commissars. Speaking up at these briefings is almost certainty a trap.
That’s a good point.
So I’ve noticed something interesting going on with Conservatives:
http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=393251
They’re no longer mouthing the Overton window’s frame with obvious things like gays preying on young boys and many other subjects. Since the left has declared them all outside the bounds of the Overton window and moving left means they either have to suck Tranny dick or become self genocidal anti whitists… the the conditioning is fading.
I don’t see any possible use for this since all the power is in the hands of the left but it is interesting.
It is necessary precondition for armed insurrection and civil war. We have to have legitimate leadership. But it is very far from being a sufficient condition.
Mollie has always been a pretty based right wing reporter. Twitter will eventually ban her.
““And while you are at it, observe that every Christian faith that does not have infant baptism is now totally pozzed, a rotting skin suit worn by progressives, celebrating abortion, female serial monogamy, and gay weddings where two buggers team up to cruise for nine year old boys to bugger.—
What about the Mennonites and Amish? Some of them take things too far with regard to spirals but they don’t have these problems. They won’t be fighting any 600 lb gorillas though.
Granted, that claim was untrue.
Amish are doing OK, though they are coming under increasing pressure and showing signs of drift. Mennonites … It is complicated. Some of them, quite a lot of them, qualify as a rotting skin suit worn by progressives.
KingJamesOnlyists – well, that too is complicated. They are not doing too well.
On the one hand, KingJamesOnly is a good reply to those bibles that softpedal the fundamental contradiction between the divinity and humanity of Christ, which bibles are based on manuscripts that come from people who held clearly heretical positions on the question, which position contributed to the collapse of Egyptian Christianity to Islam, the Alexandrine manuscripts.
On the other hand, assimilating KingJamesOnly to anabaptism strikes me as abandoning battle front with the Jesus-the-community organizer crowd.
The important difference between King James and the latest hot off the presses retranslation of Alexandrine manuscripts is not the disputed sections on baptism (after all the Church of England baptized infants, suggesting that their interpretation of Acts 8:37 resembled my own) rather the important differences concern the divinity and humanity of Christ, which was the heart of the dispute when Alexandria fell to Islam.
The trouble is that if you start making a fuss about baptism, you are shooting right, at old type Christianity, and failing to shoot left. And it is a whole lot safer to shoot right than to shoot left, thus anyone who shoots right starts to get assimilated into the demon worshippers and buggerers.
There are a whole lot of differences between the Alexandrian derived new translations, and the King James translation, that matter a whole lot more than Acts 8:37.
Hi Jim,
I still want to know your take in term of practical application of christianity.
I know few guys that confess the divinity of christ but differ on their interpretation of mosaic law. At least in my view there people who:
1. People who says mosaic law is done away with and practitioner of mosaic law are not true believer
Guys like Steven Anderson (guy who made go-to KingJamesOnly documentary on YT), salvation is a gift, a person is exalted not by work but by faith. Kind of church goer who consider christmast as the biggest holiday of the year.
Or 2. People who practices mosaic law to the letter minus letivical priesthood and sacrifice law
Guys like Kent Hovind (flat earther), GOCC (church who believes Blacks as is true Isrealites), and Walter Veith (seventh day adventist). Jesus, the Son of God died for our sin and fulfill our sacrifice. But bible never say The Mosaic Law being done away, this it still stands. People who says Easter and Christmast as satanic and keep Sabbath every saturday.
The names I wrote all are KingJamesOnly but nevertheless their interpretation diverge greatly.
Lot of Satanists in KingJamesOnly.
KingJamesOnly are generally the good guys, for the modern bibles are derived from the Alexandrine manuscripts, and we have every reason to distrust the Alexandrine manuscripts, because the Alexandrine heresy, which led to the fall of Christianity in Egypt, in important ways resembles the modern heresy, the Socinians, who are not Christians but entryists, but there is no end of entryism and focus only on enemies to the right among KingJamesOnly.
Some good guys, but one hell of a lot of debased, degenerate, demon worshippers.
I’d opine the Mennonites are a race more than a religion. They’re a more pious than average race but they still have the whole spread.
There are Mennonites in Mexico that have a whole insular polygamy cult thing going. Much to the hand-wringig of leftie Canuck Mennonites I know.
Those cult-like Mennonites that settled in Latin America will probably still be white Germans a century from now, even if North American Mennonites disappear.
Quite possibly the white race will be reduced to the latin American descendants of pious Mennonites. Trouble is that Mennonite religion selects for pacifism. Going to need a prophet to fix that, because the white race is optimized for warfare, and if they have lots of descendants, are going to need some room.
Its true the pacifist element of the religion is a problem. But religion can only select so far. Mennonite pacifism is, as you said, complicated. Their pacifism is a direct result of extreme martialism that waged a suicidal war against a better armed and better trained aristocracy. Mennonite pacifism historically is the bad kind of pacifism that relies on the kindness of strangers. But in practice it just culled the more fanatical/suicidal element, which is to say it culled the purity spiralers.
Small town mennonites didnt blink an eye at mennonites in the military 20 years ago. Today if they object it’s because they orrectly veiw our government as evil and not something to support.
Moat wholesome sermon I’ve heard in the last 5 years was at a small town mennonite church. It was about how Hezikiah destroyed all the pagan shrines, and the preacher asked everyone to imagine how much better our country would be if we did that here. Imagine a leader that would destroy all the mosques etc. The congregation was very favorable to this message.
War is in their blood, if they think it would get their people a safe homeland, many of them would fight as fiercely as the peasant rebels they descended from. Except modern Mennonites are armed and skilled shots and somewhat sensible about strategy. They’re not pitchfork and torches mass suicide mobs.
My last post was careless garbage. I’m too used to posting, re reading, and then editing mistakes. I’ll get used to the flow of things here and be more careful in the future.
So what’s the collapse of the American empire going to look like? China looks like they’re just about ready to humiliate the US military.
The thing is we can still beat them if a General just ignores Cathedral policy and builds combat units of all competent whites.
White males*
Maybe this is a way we get lucky and get our Caesar.
I’ll be following the Derek Chauvin trial because white supremacy might be the hill that Liberalism has chosen to die on. This isn’t a war of US vs. China, it’s Liberalism vs. Nature, and Nature always wins. Liberalism says that white supremacy is evil. Nature says that you can have white supremacy or you can have Haiti; there is nothing in between.
>I’ll be following the Derek Chauvin trial because white supremacy might be the hill that Liberalism has chosen to die on.
It’s the hill they plan to murder whites on. Already there is open talk in the Whitehouse about how 10-15% of the US population(all whites of course) needs to go to achieve utopia. 10-15% will quickly become all whites.
There is always a bunch of small armed conflicts brewing on the borders of Russia. One plan is to set them on fire, leading to holy war with Russia.
Another plan is holy war with China.
But why do any of those, when America is insufficiently holy?
We are now in the phase of the left singularity where civil war is likely, though the most developed and coherent project is war with Russia.
If war with Russia, their Ukrainian muppets attack Donbass, Russia marches into Donbass to protect the Russian minority, similar troubles everywhere, Russia marches everywhere to protect Russian minorities everywhere, then the Cathedral announces no fly etc, to protect the oppressed masses from Russian tyranny.
But that program seems to be on hold for now, as the sane elements of the deep state realized what was cooking, are rightly horrified, and are firmly stepping on it. They got the stuffing beaten out of them in Libya, no stomach for Libya times ten thousand.
A similar program in America itself, holy war against America itself, is not yet on the drawing board, but there seems to be a major constituency on the left going for it.
Something is going to happen. The left cannot stand still. But what that something is is not yet clear.
They are currently having a field day with the rona. What comes after that, anyone’s guess…
Apt to go insane predicting the behavior of the insane. The filibuster seems to be preventing holy war with America from progressing though in my estimation.
Last I checked the tanks were still moving east in the Ukraine. Where you are getting that they’ve decided against that war?
Lack of anti-Russia propaganda in the press.
Great point. I’d seen them ramping up a bit against Russia last week, but checking the headlines they’ve stopped entirely.
When white people die out, liberalism dies with them. Hindus love cows and liberals love niggers, but cows are not Hindus and niggers are not liberals.
Liberals are presently too busy trying to catch other liberals saying something racist to pay much attention to us; see those two Georgetown law professors who just got fired. This summer, let us once again use our racist mind-rays to enrage their beloved diversity into killing liberals and burning down their homes and businesses.
>Liberals are presently too busy trying to catch other liberals saying something racist to pay much attention to us; see those two Georgetown law professors who just got fired. This summer, let us once again use our racist mind-rays to enrage their beloved diversity into killing liberals and burning down their homes and businesses.
Is that why they just successfully identified everyone who’s not leftwing enough in the military in preparation for either getting them killed in war Russia or to directly purge them from the military? Some leftists are moving onto playing nigger games, but most are focused on getting rid of the primary threat to their rule.
They need the filibuster gone so they can pass HR1 and the gun confiscation laws which would carry the legitimate authority of the state. I see them more using the Chauvin trial to launch another round of political violence to pressure the moderate progs like Manchin that keeping the filibuster is “the legacy of white supremacy”.
The current elites are using “Eliminating White supremacy” as a political means more than an end right now, but as we get closer and closer to leftist singularity, if it’s not halted, they are going to find it really is the end.
People seem to be preparing for war in six years or so.
But as a general rule, when you start preparing for war in X years, a positive feedback loops ensues, and you get a war in considerably less than X years.
China’s navy and airforce is built around a conflict in the Taiwan Strait and the South China sea.
The US Navy is built around providing Democratic Party floating vote banks, and the US airforce is not built around anything in particular, being targeted at providing boondoggles in a random collection of diverse congressional districts.
Most F35s are grounded for no end of reasons.
Because noticing US technological incapacity is dangerously close to noticing Shaniqua’s technological incapacity, I think the USGov is grossly overestimating its military capability relative to the Chinese.
The Chinese are in no hurry, because they were coming from behind, and now their lead continues to increase. So they are unlikely to be the first to use deadly force.
So, it is all up to the US. Will the US decide to “rescue” the Hong Kongers or the Yoghurts?
The question is, which direction the holiness spiral goes? The Jews are under increasing pressure from the browns, and may decide that a very holy international adventure will take the heat off. Or they could just crumble, and the US goes direct to white genocide, losing interest in what is beyond its land borders at the same time as it loses capacity to act beyond its land borders.
I would not make a specific prediction, other than that something dramatic will unfold soon enough. The left has total victory, but a shark must swim or die. It is going to need an even more total victory soon enough, and they, and I, are confused about what it will be.
Everything is on the table at this point.
One of the last things Trump did was order up a new batch of F15s. They’re cost almost to build as much as F35s due to declining technical capability but unlikely the F35 they’re likely to fly and be effective.
I’m starting to think large scale military conflict is what we need. Trial by fire will leave some high ranking officers no choice but to realize poz is getting them killed, as Starman has suggested, and the need to flat out ignore diversity orders will push them to our side. Plus if they are engaged elsewhere in the world, there’s less focus on grooming them for white genocide.
The problem is how bad modern weapons are…
Wars sometimes went genocidal, literally entire male lines of populous civilizations annihilated, when man still fought with bronze spears. What matters is not the technology but the will to genocide. There is no great difference between ordering a nuclear strike and telling your soldiers “save alive nothing that breathes”.
But total genocide is rare in history. To estimate whether or not a war with China would go genocidal or not is to evaluate men, not weapons.
It is complicated.
Fast genocides are indeed rare, but slower genocides are as common as mushrooms after rain, and fast genocides usually occur within the social context of slow genocides, a mopping up operation by Group A against a tough subgroup of Group B.
The usual mechanism of genocide is slower. Group A leaves Group B with no capability for collective defense against predation, does not restrain members of group A from predation against members of Group B, fails to protect the personal individual property rights of members of group A to own members of group B, and fails to protect those enserfed or enslaved members of Group B from predation by members of group A. If males of group A have concubines of group B, it is open season on those concubines, so the patron of that concubine is disinclined to protect her children.
Group B then disappears, fairly rapidly, but not in the style of “leave nothing alive that breathes”. Takes a few generations.
Often it is not exactly warfare. Rather, social decay leaves members of group B with no mechanism for collective defense, Group A retains its mechanism of collective defense, but declines to allow members of Group B to come under its protection, even as serfs, slaves, or concubines.
To properly incorporate the women of group B, you have to allow a man of Group A to kill another man of Group A if that other man is improperly hanging out with his concubine of Group B.
One possible future is agorist anarcho-capitalism/corporate feudalism, where sovereign corporations whose shares are in sidechains or primary blockchains provide collective defense, while everyone else’s mechanisms for collective defense succumb to social decay.
Right now whites are denied collective defense, and increasingly it is open season to predate on whites. But no one else has very effective mechanisms of collective defense in place either.
Jim, is there a good historical example of the type of genocide you are describing that can be trotted out for normies? I think their only point of reference wrt genocide is the Holocaust, maybe Cambodia, and so they won’t see the similarities if you call what’s going on “genocide,” at least not without a concrete example. I’m not skeptical that you’re right about the type of genocide whites are currently experiencing, nor of its historical prevalence, just wondering if you have an example or two in mind.
Re. examples, many, myself included, like to compare the current US hysteria to the Chinese Cultural Revolution, and that may be one of the best points of reference for something like this: https://i.insider.com/5f45c75b89aff80028ab7f0e?width=1136&format=jpeg
But this thread makes a good case that maybe we should be making more Stasi comparisons: https://twitter.com/HeywoodFloyd10/status/1373761707500257280?s=20
Of course, it was Chinese on Chinese or German on German persecution, primarily, so different from a “genocide.” Maybe only useful as a way of historicizing the leftist holiness spiral aspect, not the genocide aspect. I wonder if there are any historical analogues for a group so willingly and actively participating in its own slow genocide…
The closest to home example is the eradication of the Britons by the Angles and Saxons.
Over much of Britain, not even the place names survived, indicating that there was zero assimilation of the defeated population.
Thanks. A little old, but still seems a pretty evocative one. Many Irish seem to have embraced a fair bit of “oppressed” consciousness vis-a-vis the British, but now they are probably being encouraged to re-identify as white oppressors vis-a-vis the people being brought to replace them/ensure they hate themselves like other white people.
I hate the notion of being a victim, but maybe cultivating “victim” consciousness among whites is the way to go, on some level? Arguably the biggest mistake/vulnerability of the current globohomo approach is that, by encouraging collective white guilt/self-loathing, do they not also run the risk of cultivating a new collective white identity for non-self-destructive purposes? Or maybe that already existed around the turn of the (20th) century and would have existed in an era of globalism anyway?
Anyway, my argument to people re. “white identity” is “your identity as a ‘white person’ may seem inconsequential relative to your identity as an Italian, a Chicagoan, a gamer, or whatever, but that’s not how today’s pop culture sees it.” I wonder if even Jews can be eventually won over, as I don’t see an ascendant BIPOC coalition viewing them as different from the white oppressors.
Ultimately, oppression narratives and grievances may be a necessary precondition for giving people the backbone to fight back? Found Ryan Faulk’s take on this issue pretty good:
https://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2017/02/14/deepskepticism/
>Yes I have done all that and regularly do all that. With violence, I was thinking more along the lines of causing serious bodily harm.
Even men who beat women pull their punches. Causing serious bodily harm to a women isn’t useful when it comes to the mating game.
I don’t know if Jim is going to allow this in his comment section but I want to contact you Aidan, could you shoot me an email at eanglo@protonmail.com ? I have a business proposition.
Other people can leak their emails all they want.
It is just that I should not leak their emails.
For truly secure communication I recommend Bitmessage.
When used with a strong passphrase, it is a very minimal implementation of a social network over a very crude approximation to a BIP39 wallet, operating over a very crude approximation to a blockchain that throws away and erases all data older than two days.
A social network that you can durably publish stuff over, like a blog, will need to support both crypto currency and messaging, and a crypto currency where you can perform transactions without leaking metadata about the transactions over a name system owned by your enemies needs a social net.
FYI protonmail is not trustworthy
https://privacy-watchdog.io/truth-about-protonmail/
As protonmail correctly points out, all the commercial secure services suffer the same flaw. Protonmail knows your IP, (and goes to disturbing lengths to discover your IP when you conceal it) and can potentially decrypt your emails, even though they pinkie swear they will not.
I might add that Jitsi is considerably less flawed, but it is only considerably less flawed if you set up your own Jitsi meet server.
However, bitmessage is open source and peer to peer, and subject to none of these flaws.
Needs work to be a fully useful social net, but it supports mailing lists, which is most of the way there, except one needs public mailing lists to act as an entry ground to private mailing lists.
Bitmessage is mighty crude compared to what I have imagined, and largely designed, but mighty sophisticated compared with what I have actually implemented so far.
We need to support an immutable past, for the great threat to our society is that history (including financial transaction history) gets radically rewritten at short intervals, the rewrites are getting more radical, and the intervals getting shorter. Bitmessage’s rather short time limit is inherent in its design.
—–BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE—–
Hash: SHA256
Aidan,
Would like to make clear, as I used to use a similarly named identity on Twitter, that this is not me. Hopefully the coincidence of name is just that, asnd not someone actually (trying (albeit poorly) to imitate me, as I can think of at least one person who might want to do harm to you, and knows about my older identity but not my newer one. Hopefully you haven’t already done anything foolish on the assumption that this person was me.
This message is signed with the GPG key I gave you before leaving Twitter.
—–BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE—–
iHUEARMIAB0WIQQ1XCXWdU/Dau/OL6KKccKdrrP2HgUCYGFHpAAKCRCKccKdrrP2
HgSkAP4iHvM4/ganRTf2j+13ScgqW2cmJM0/xnwAajXM1H7zfAD/Wn6NFL1KJv/6
rDHNGxuiee+XMvKdmLtBJWE0ZC/CKSE=
=Pn8M
—–END PGP SIGNATURE—–
Thanks for the concern feanor, but ‘eternal anglo’ is a longtime commenter here and I actually followed you on twitter at first thinking you were him
They will manage the war to murder the white people that form the backbone of the army.
War between the west and China is war between two great and ancient civilizations, one rising from darkness, one falling into darkness.
We should compete, but our conflicts ought not go large scale lethal. If it goes large scale lethal, it is madness, and it is likely to reveal that our nukes no longer work, and have not been working for a considerable time.
Yes. The Judeo-Russian Red Army was most effective at getting Russians killed, not their enemies.
If only we could show them the error of their ways, they would fly over to our side! #TheEternalBoomer
Well, they are seeing the error of their ways.
Normal outcome of a left singularity, is that as leftism gets ever lefter, ever faster, more and more people see the error of their ways – rather too late.
Nonetheless, it is only fit and proper to Cominate them all. Seeing the “error of one’s ways” when the guy ahead is already getting guillotined is simply not good enough. These refugees/prodigal sons/Nazi greengrocers[1], if twice-born, deserve Comination, and even if goyim, at least deserve decimation and enslavement. It is absolute folly to “trust” them any farther than a dog’s leash.
[1]: Nazi greengrocers — my own coinage, representing Germans who hung the swastika in their shop-window but merrily converted to Communism as soon as the option became available, at least in the East. A surprising number of ex-Gestapo went Stasi.
There are no shortage of positions that do not need a lot of trust.
I can forgive greengrocers in the eastern bloc who converted under very real threat of imminent death…
But the progressive greengrocers of today who convert for social reasons or because careercucks… Yes they should recieve no mercy.
The Gestapo thing is not surprising kwaps are always mindless drones.
Based on this:
https://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/australia-lists-neo-nazi-sonnenkrieg-division-terrorists-76602378
And this:
https://abcnews.go.com/US/active-shooter-reported-grocery-store-colorado-boulder-police/story?id=76614488
My money is on white genocide.
More incel rage. I’ve long recommended Incels try a life of crime instead of wallowing in self pity until they pop. Successful criminals get laid.
The timing is just too convenient.
Trouble is, who wants to nig up their own neighborhoods?
You could ‘commute’ for ‘work’ instead – which somewhat attenuates the build up of local ‘street cred’ – and/or be more selective in going after more appropriate targets – which ups the chances of drawing attention from the eye of sauron, always on watch for any outbreaks of civilization to smash back down.
Predate on the criminals that predate on the normies. This puts you close to the top of the criminal pecking order while also having the blessing of Gnon.
This is a suicidal suggestion. Low caste criminals do not operate with impunity outside the law, they are fully protected by the law, police and courts. Any challenge to their turf from high-caste rivals will be dealt with swiftly and severely.
It does work, sort of, in US prisons (Aryan Brotherhood and the like), but ceratinly doesn’t work outside. Joining an ethnic mob might be more appropriate for Italians, Irish, Aztecs and other nonwhites.
Then I am already dead. Might as well go for a sheep as a lamb!
I fully agree with the dothead here, in practice criminals that are allowed to operate tend to have a great deal of legal protection from those at a higher level.
You can’t get away with a life of crime without a roof nowadays.
Faint hearts never won anything of worth.
If you’re willing to break the law to get laid, why not just buy some rural land, bury a shipping container on it, kidnap a teen girl, and knock some babies out of her? You’ll eventually get caught and receive forty life terms plus 400 years, but you’ll die happy because you were inseminating prime pussy while millions of incels were jerking off and crying themselves to sleep.
As extremely anti feminist as I am I would never want to go Ariel Castro…
There was a incel that did that. He murder a girl’s father and mother with a shotgun and kept a girl hidden in cabin in the woods. No children were produced by the captivity and the girl eventually escaped. As expected she only seems very upset with the boy as it became clear he had to hide her away from his family. Not very alpha despite his initial acts that very much resembled those of an alpha male killer ape that women tend to desire.
Humans largely require groups to produce children and even a violent initial act wasn’t enough to change the nature of boy who had taken the girl. Such a man would have been better off as part of a criminal gang. The pussy is easier to get and he would either man up, or end up dead or discarded.
As Jim tells us the telos of humans is cooperation and that includes the act of wife stealing as the Benjaminites and the founders of Rome demonstrated.
Easier to just lift and learn game. Doing those two things gets you into the top 20% alone. But if you really want to be violent just become a cop. Doing any of the above gets you laid pretty easily.
That’s what Derek Chauvin possibly thought. Becoming a cop is a soul-crushing endeavour. Dealing with human scum all day every day will quickly bring a man down.
This generally includes the other cops. What kind of person would want to be a cathedral enforcer?
Well if the alternative is going insane and being a mass shooter from lack of pussy or being a street criminal, I’d say being a cop seems like the better option as the quickest way to pussy to me (assuming one is not aware of game or has no inclination to learn it).
Obviously, it is a shitty job (even more so and life-threatening if you have to deal with feral Africans on a daily basis), but cops generally get laid pretty easily because of the violent masculine role they still play in current US society. Same with military in combat roles, at least for now.
If you can make any money its easy to fuck strippers (for not all that much money btw if you were to pay retail price for escorts it’d be MUCH more than I pay).
If I can do it anyone can.
I think there is some branch of those that glow that targets people and causes them to do this.
Sex is better when it is free. Strippers are an improvement over whores, but not a large improvement, and they are a lot harder to game than regular girls. If you are paying them anything at all, you are not successfully gaming them, and thus not improving your game. Same problem as porn and fap.
Its VERY hard for most men to occupy the skittles guy nitch long term though.
Yes Jeremy Meeks can have a long term bang with a recently divorced woman and probably not only get it for free but the woman will probably in various ways pay him but this is VERY hard for most guys to get.
I’m somewhat successfully gaming her in that I’m getting it at a VERY discounted rate with a lot of genuine enthusiasm. Its certainly better than porn and fap.
Because Jeremy Meeks is scooping up all of it. Most strippers wind up giving most of their tips to Jeremy Meeks, most recently divorced women wind up giving most of their child support money to Jeremy Meeks or the pool boy.
Don’t help fund Jeremy Meeks.
I’ve successfully seduce a whore before and had her giving it up for free, but trying to own a whore is fucking hard. I had to be pretty brutal with her in bed. We had some very good times together but it was a lot of work.
Any sign of weakness was punished and having a girl who’s fucking other men for money is automatically weak. Realistically if I wanted to keep her I would have done something drastic like put a dog collar around her neck and chained her under my kitchen tale until she had only one master. That’s the sort of thing you can do when you’re legally allowed to own women, but not possible without state backing.
The reason I recommend banditry to Incels is simple: Banditry is the default behavior for civilization that shit on young men and most Incels are cowardly shits who are afraid of receiving violence. Dealing and receiving violence from others for the first time is a transformational experience for most men today. If anything that’s going to give a young guy balls it’s violence and that violence may well lead to pussy. Or they’ll end up in jail, but either way it’s better than self pity.
All pimps are cucks, and all whores are looking a man strong enough to stop them from whoring, and cannot find one. It is a shit test.
They all would be happier if state and society gave them what they are looking for.
This was my exact experience with the hottest broad I’ve fucked. She was not a stripper, but she was a party girl bar whore with a high notch count.
She was very submissive and the sex was truly incredible but she only allowed me to see her on a strict once a week or every other week limit for about a year. Any attempt by me to increase frequency (in an attempt to own her) was severely punished with extended radio silence from her, which behavior she interrupted as weakness and betaness.
In hindsight, she likely had me on some sort of rotation of other dudes and you’re exactly right, I would have needed to physically chain her to the bed post to own her (which she would have loved). Brings to mind the ole Snoop Dogg lyric “You can’t make a housewife out of a hoe.”
You can’t make a housewife out of a hoe in our society, but Australia had a horde of hoes dumped on them, and from about 1790 to 1810 had one hundred percent success in turning hoes into housewives, who appear to have totally internalized the respectable middle class values forcibly imposed upon them.
This was a shit test that you kept failing. But she tolerated your failure because she could not find anyone to pass her shit test.
Women, all women, All Women Are Like That, want a man who can make them stay faithful, and is backed by his tribe and top alpha in doing so. Whores keep looking for this and not finding it.
What was the punishment for hoes who continued to hoe around? Legal beatings by their husbands I presume?
That they might continue to hoe around did not seem to occur to the authorities. They were worried about disobedience and speaking back.
Since they backed the husbands in lesser shit test, greater shit tests simply did not happen.
I should say former hoes who were now housewives*
Eventually I ran out tries and she went silent on me for good. So for me to have kept her, is it right to assume that nothing short of physical restraint backed by the state would have done the job?
Exactly so.
“You can’t make a housewife out of a hoe in our society, but Australia had a horde of hoes dumped on them, and from about 1790 to 1810 had one hundred percent success in turning hoes into housewives, who appear to have totally internalized the respectable middle class values forcibly imposed upon them.”
Jim: where can I read more about this? Watching a television show about the initial settlement of Australia, and the female convicts are all concubines of the soldiers–although it is not clear if this is required of them.
Neither the Victorians nor the moderns could admit that the authorities in Australia were successfully doing what the Victorians were pretending to do but spectacularly and catastrophically failing at: Promote middle class marriage.
So you cannot actually read about this.
What you can read about is the line up, and what you can read about is the marriages and children of the early transportees to Australia. The girls all got married, all their marriages worked, and most of them got married mighty fast. There was also a striking absence of prostitution, until the program was stopped, supposedly to protect young women from the evil lusts of the soldiers.
So you cannot actually read any of this. You have to infer it from what you can read. That you just cannot find cases of transported women staying single for very long, and you cannot find cases of their marriages failing. And you can also read of some mighty wild behavior by the transported females, and some mighty wild shit tests they gave the authorities.
To show that spectacular misconduct, and those wild shit tests, would make a really fun movie, but such a movie would be unthinkably politically incorrect, because it would end with respectability and middle class marriage.
No one has put this together as a story. I pick it up in fragments from the original sources – the spectacular initial sexual misconduct, the wild shit tests when the authorities start to crack down, and then the quiet, swift, and massively uniform middle class marriage.
I need to collect the fragments from the original sources, and put them together as a story, for no one else has done so.
The early history of Australia is too unthinkably politically incorrect to be accurately portrayed in Victorian media, let along current media.
What happened is that when the first shipments of women arrived, it was spring break on the shores of port Jackson.
Imagine the Taliban in charge of security for Cancun during spring break. The authorities were shocked, confused, dismayed, disoriented, and discombobulated.
After some delay, they got their act together, and cracked down hard. Subsequently they continued to crack down hard on arrival. Some shiploads of women got a line up on the dock and married off within hours of arrival. Marriage was theoretically voluntary, but if a woman did not get married, she got assigned – which is to say, became a concubine of a soldier. One soldier. And she was stuck with him, and he was stuck with her.
Usually they got married off within a week or so of arrival, but sometimes, often enough, there was line up on the docks immediately upon arrival. A line up of pre-approved suitors would walk down the line up of girls, and place a small gift at the feet of the girl they wanted. If she picked up the gift, married. If she did not pick up any gift, assigned.
By and large, most of the time, most of the women, swift shotgun marriage, not concubinage. Concubinage was the backup plan for failure to marry by mutual “consent”.
From the Victorian point of view, the reality of what was happening in Australia was unthinkable, because it was a concentrated dose of what was happening in London – that if you don’t crack down on female misconduct you get intolerable levels of female misconduct, which misconduct was more intolerable in Australia because they were getting a concentrated dose of wild females. Spring break in Cancun on the shores of Port Jackson. (Which gets rewritten as mass rape on the shores of Port Jackson, which directly contradicts what the cited sources said and what they colorfully described.)
The archetypical scenario leading to a female being deported to Australia was that she was an apprentice who stole from her employer at the behest of her bad boy lover, or gave her bad boy lover access to steal her employers stuff. So Australia was getting a concentrated dose of females apt to misbehave with bad boys. And, on arrival in Australia, promptly misbehaved with the plentiful supply of bad boys. To which the only solution was marriage with the husband’s authority being backed by authority to an extraordinary extent. For the husband to be seen as more alpha than the bad boy, he had to be given overwhelming power over the wife, while in London, they were busy undermining the power of the husband over the wife.
The intended outcome of this radical coercion was respectable middle class marriage of wildly disrespectable lower class girls, and in the the overwhelming majority of cases, the outcome was respectable middle class marriage, not concubinage, with, to the shock and dismay of Victorians, eighteenth century marriage being vigorously enforced into the early nineteenth century.
The problem with Australia for moderns and Victorians is that it demonstrated in concentrated form why eighteenth century England dealt with the woman question the way that it did.
The expected and intended outcome of this radically harsh coercion was middle class respectable marriage, and it worked, with every single woman conforming to middle class respectable values, and seemingly internalizing those values, albeit often only after some mighty wild shit tests.
The girls shit tested the middle class tribe, shit tested them mighty hard, shit tested them individually and collectively. These girls had wound up in Australia because their employer in England had failed their harsh shit tests. At first the middle class tribe failed the shit test, then they wised up and did whatever needed to pass. The girls behaved as if abducted by the tribe that had proved itself the stronger, and internalized middle class values.
What gets piously erased from the Victorian and modern histories is that these were wild women searching for a strong hand, and they quieted down when they found what they were looking for.
Australia demonstrated that Victorianism was causing, rather than preventing, female sexual misconduct. Therefore Victorians and moderns could acknowledge neither the spectacular female sexual misconduct that the authorities in Australia were dealing with, nor the wild shit tests that they gave authority, nor that the belated but eventually effective and vigorous response led to good conduct and the mass inculcation of middle class values on lower class females.
@Jim
Thank you for this long comment. It needs to be an article.
It also cleared up a doubt of mine: I believed that Australia, as per official history, was founded by convicts (and later I learned, also whores), the very definition of extremely poor genetic stock. Which was then surprising to me as to how they managed to develop a robust nation? You provide the answer — the whores were breeding all right, but instead of fornicating with convicts, they were instead havind marital, procreative sex with soldiers, who, being disciplined warriors, were among the best genetic stock. I now think most of the “Australia” we know today was built by the offspring of soldiers rather than convicts, and it is a great nation, as expected.
Remember the Nulla!
I think there is some covert branch of the government that targets unstable and stupid people and encourages them to mass shootings when they want a gun control push.
I’m sure it’s just the FBI. We’ve know about their fake terrorist busts were they identify a mentally ill men, train and equip them with fake bombs and then arrest them. It’s just one step step more to actually let them go through with it. No doubt the people put in charge of the investigation are the people who organized it in the first place.
Yeah exactly. Incels are nothing new and I don’t recall any shootings like this when Trump was in for the last four years. Now we get two in the first few months of Biden? Makes you think…
Yes, I think these were real incels, not actors, but the FBI cultivated them for a white supremacist narrative. (Could not find any actual white supremacists to play the role.)
I have serious doubts that species even exists. Any white elite with two brain cells to rub together will steer clear of FBI traps. They groom white proles for the “job” of “white supremacy.” The nearest I’ve seen to “actual” WS are actually white nationalists like Jared Taylor and maybe Kevin MacDonald, both of whom are too clever to fall into this trap. Hell, even James Fields was too clever to fall into this shit programme.
Looking like he was just a radical muslim not an incel…
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/6-killed-including-1-cop-boulder-grocery-store-shooting-suspect-custody
Funny now that Trump is gone we have radical muslim terrorists again too.
Did you see this recent Ammoland article regard the Garland, TX terrorist attach six years ago? The FBI was in deep!! The alert 50+ year old off duty cop security guard took the riffle toting terrorists out with his Glock.
————————————————————
Obama-Comey’s FBI Involvement and Cover Up?
As Greg engaged Simpson and Soofi, an undercover FBI agent was traveling with the terrorists in a separate vehicle, approaching the rear entrance where the gunfight happened. The agent and two terrorists had traveled all the way from Arizona, in two vehicles. It was claimed the FBI agent took pictures of the attack, just as it started. It was claimed he participated in intelligence gathering, and in planning the attack, advising the terrorists to wait until the event was ending.
The FBI agent, only identified in the following lawsuit as UCE-1, stopped, then attempted to flee the scene.
He had encouraged the terrorists. He had taken a picture of the terrorists and had informed Simpson and Soofi he was armed.
—————————————————–
https://www.ammoland.com/2021/03/how-a-texas-gunfighter-cop-stopped-the-isis-attack-in-garland-texas/
Now there’s this …
“BOMBSHELL: Boulder Shooting Suspect Ahmad Al-Issa Was On FBI’s Radar Prior To Shooting Spree
Like many times before, the FBI knew about Ahmad Al-Issa and did nothing.”
https://nationalfile.com/bombshell-boulder-shooting-suspect-ahmad-al-issa-was-on-fbis-radar-prior-to-shooting-spree/
Like they knew about the 9/11 guys… and did nothing.
“nothing”
And the Boston bomber
Why should they bother with something that complicated? What is preventing Biden’s handlers from.enacting any gun control laws they like?
If there are no honest elections any more, there is no need to bother whether people like any new laws or not.
Filibuster is preventing their laws from being passed at the moment.
The appearance of legitimacy. If the Biden Junta sends out the ATF and the FBI to seize guns then sooner or later one of their raids will end up as a pile of bodies on the side of the road.
At which point they’ll have to call in the military. If the Military views the actions of the government as illegitimate and illegal, they’ll be under motivated to enforce the government’s will.
The purge has to be finalized first, or they risk a coup. They are genuinely surprised by the number of non leftists making up the fighting ranks of the military. Their propaganda has been very ineffectual, but this recent round of stand downs for indoctrination has been useful in identifying who needs to go.
How they proceed with the purge isn’t clear yet, but I expect it will get underway soon.
Yes they are working hard to maintain the appearance of legitimate authority (even after blatantly stealing the election) which means the filibuster is still relevant even if it’s just a shared delusion of the country that it is still relevant.
I may have spoke too soon. Looks like Biden is looking at his executive order options with guns.
They don’t need no stinking laws to seize our guns, and we don’t need no stinking laws to hold onto them.
Legitimacy theatre, if you will.
Recently I have learned something shocking about Progs. A writer claimed that gaymarriage turns sodomy into a sacrament. A Prog said it was just as unnecessarily offensive as saying that heterosexual marriage is turning PIV sex into a sacrament. I was shocked. Of course PIV sex is a sacrament! It makes human beings!
The original idea of atheist humanism was to elevate humans from second best after God to The Best. If humans are The Best, making humans is The Best thing. Obviously.
This is why space colonialization followed from atheistic humanism. If humans are The Best, they need The Greatest goal. So if the old goal of joining up with the Maker of the universe is not on the books anymore, then the greatest goal is obviously to conquer the universe. And besides, if humans are The Best, making a billion times billion humans is The Best and that requires more living space out there.
Seems to me atheistic humanism has committed suicide. It seems saying God is not great now led to saying humans are not great. WTF.
We need a religion. At least that way humans can be second best and still the greatest of all creatures in the visible world, worthy of great goals.
I bailed on the Christen church when I was 17 mostly because I don’t have that religious sense that most people need. I never hated Christianity, I just didn’t see it doing the most basic functions like family formation at any the churches I attended. I was especially upset that the son of the pastor at my last small church was fucking most of the young women there based on his superior status, leaving nothing for most of the boys. There was no chance of finding a virgin wife there.
We need a functioning religion, not a half assed pozed religion that’s little more than parasitism. Look at that church that incel spa shooter went to. He couldn’t get laid without paying for it and his parents kicked him out of the house for looking at porn while his pathetic church sent him to sex addiction therapy for wanting what all men need. They should have found him a wife and got him a job.
Re. the Atlanta shootings, what’s the matter with journalists? Here’s an incident that fits the incel narrative perfectly, and they shoe-horn it into the white-supremacist narrative instead!
Nofap and anti porn right preempts the incel narrative.
The news really, really doesn’t want to start agreeing that porn addiction is a bad thing. And when push comes to shove they don’t want to admit that society failing to give wife and family opportunities to men is dangerous.
They have to shoehorn the white supremacist thing in there to avoid the ‘degendrecy is bad’ idea getting too much limelight.
Trouble with porn addiction is that it eases the incel life, and also causes it. There are few men who care about porn if they have access to flesh and blood women.
The Atlanta happy ending massacre was a perfect example of why we are needed. His church could not get him a cute wife to bang, and told him he was the problem for being horny. They put him in frickin rehab for being a horny young man for Christssake.
Chimps only jerk off in captivity. Porn is the symptom of a society that is completely intolerable for a healthy, virile young man who does not own a woman. Men jerk off to make modern life more tolerable, lest they chimp out
Reflects very poorly on the SBC which I had thought was fairly of based.
No American churches are based on the women question. They all blame men for the dysfunction between the sexes and they all elevate the status of women, making that dysfunction worse.
The first church that does reward voluntary celibate young men (as in accordance with old type Christianity) with wives will have real legs as a state religion but this is a lot to ask for.
Nick Fuentes seems to be promoting this to his followers and it seems to be a trend for traditional catholics. They are taking pride in themselves as trad incels. TBD if it pays off for them or not.
Trad incels are reviving a very old demonic left singularity.
Is that not what was practiced by old type Christianity? No sex before marriage?
Those who were most indignant about eighteenth century immorality, those most passionately dedicated to sexual purity, were somehow strangely unable to notice that the wife of King George the Fourth of England was fucking around, and that Florence Nightingale was a whore.
Customary age of marriage in Rome was about twelve to fourteen.
The Christian position should be understood as not “No sex before marriage”, but rather as the old Hebrew position. “No serial monogamy for women” – that once a chick has sex with a man, she is stuck with him, and he with her.
In the context of the Red Pill and Evolutionary Game Theory, the Christian/Old Hebrew position should be read as “No endless shopping for the most alpha semen available”.
The Old Testament presupposes an absolute property right of males in female reproductive, sexual, and domestic services. New Testament clamps down on the transferability of that right.
“No sex” is holiness spiraling on that principle, as “Go forth and adopt some African orphans” is holiness spiraling on the story of the Good Samaritan.
The problem with all the “No sex” variants is that they are license for women to shop forever, that they abandon the task of sustaining cooperation between men and women, abandon the job of establishing peace in the war of the sexes.
Christianity’s job is not suppressing sex. Love is a battlefield. All is fair in love and war. This is a bad place to be, and it is hard to reproduce under these circumstances. It is Christianity’s job to fix this – which involves suppressing sexual acts that violate other men’s property rights in female sexual and reproductive services. “No sex” is, in practice, a thin excuse for defecting in this struggle, an excuse usually pushed by the sodomite mafia in the priesthood.
The “No sex” crowd are defecting on the struggle to establish sexual order on earth. The purer the preacher is on sexuality, the less likely he is to make an issue of single motherhood, divorce, and remarriage.
Which goes back to the divorce of Queen Caroline.
“No sex” Christianity is the cloud of excuses given for abandoning beta males to sexual anarchy, with the result that they don’t get sex or children. The no sex Christian was strangely unable to notice that Queen Caroline and Florence Nightingale were having quite a lot of sex, just as the man who worries about orphans in Africa will in actual practice leave his brother to die in a ditch, because worrying about racism and sexism makes him too holy to worry about his brother.
Excellent explanation. Is the corollary for men “No endless shopping for the hottest girl available”? I have been on each end of it, and I do feel guilty about my personal contribution to defect/defect.
I’m one of the trad incels, and I’d agree that this could be a problem, but there is a problem of virgins. There is a mismatch between male and female virgins, and it is hard enough to make a whore into a wife. How do I effectively fight back against the degeneracy when I have to sift through piles of whores, especially when I have so little experience?
1st of all you misunderstand the problem as a whore problem.
East Asia and Russia have a “whore” problem. Whore societies don’t have patriarchy but female status is still mostly lower than men. Whores (low status but unowned) are basically willing to give attention and ultimately fuck most men.
We have a problem of excessively high female status. Excessively high status females chastely wait for Jeremy Meeks and scorn all “lesser” men.
You are not dealing with whores you are dealing with feminists princesses. Whores by comparison are not really so bad…
Almost everyone gets this wrong and its very important to get this right.
We have a slut problem. A whore fucks everyone. A slut fucks everyone but you. It’s not like those women waiting for Jeremy Meeks are virgins. They’ve been pumped and dumped countless times by many Jeremy Meeks’ and also pumped and dumped men who they find out later are insufficiently jeremy Meeks-like.
It’s not hard to pull sluts from the bar in today’s environment for one-night stands. Much harder to hold on to them.
It’s not hard to pull sluts from the bar in today’s environment for one-night stands with proper game I should say.
Also same goes for online via Tinder, etc.
“It’s not hard to pull sluts from the bar in today’s environment for one-night stands with proper game I should say.”
Stats say otherwise, its not hard if you can plausibly ape a criminal/badboy (in America that is what game is now, hence why Jim says he played the role of a very bad man and his greatest worry was that in doing so he’d get in serious legal trouble) or have drugs etc but its harder than its ever been for other men.
If you are in Asia or Russia not hard.
I understand the problem, Com, and its mostly a distinction without a difference. I could pull ass if I wanted to, but all the girls that meet my standards are already taken by another men. I dont much feel like being some girl’s sloppy forty-seconds, and the “good” girls are nowhere to be found.
My game is passable, I’m openly and clearly willing and able to be violent, and people respect/fear me. I’ve had interest, but it usually comes from someone I’d need a hazmat suit to fuck or from a friend’s girl, which in both cases are hard no’s. I’m not at all opposed to sex, in fact I would like to have quite a lot of it. I’m just not interested in boldly going where everyone else has already been.
If you want to marry a virginal high school sweetheart and you aren’t in high school… good luck.
You might find it in other countries but not here. You just won’t.
Yeah, Com, that’s pretty much the same conclusion I came to. What I’m trying to figure out is what to do about it.
“Yeah, Com, that’s pretty much the same conclusion I came to. What I’m trying to figure out is what to do about it.”
You’re an idealist at heart when it comes to women… someone who wants a bluepill romance to be true. I know the feeling I really do… Well…
You aren’t going to get that ideal kind of teen sweetheart love at our age. Even if the girl is a trad perfect NAWALT sweetheart we ourselves are too distrustful of women to have that kind of thing, if you had such a girl you could never believe it not the way you once could… you need a little bit of bluepill to really have that kind of infactuation.
Oh, I’m well aware I’m not going to find a blue pill romance, but that isn’t what I’m looking for. I’m looking for a mother for my children, and I can’t find a woman I’d be willing to keep around. I can live without romance, though I’d rather not, and I can live without sex, though I’d really rather not. Sex being more important than romance, I can play enough of an aggressive asshole to keep a woman around without having the romance.
My problem is that all I am finding nothing but broken girls. I don’t need to believe it, but I need her to believe it. The girls I’m finding have filthy, disgusting souls, who’s diseased states resemble their diseased bodies from all the men they’ve picked up. These girls have the thousand cock stare before they are legally allowed in a bar. I can’t hold back my disgust long enough to wife up something like that.
See my post “The three magic words”
“That is how you reach cooperate/cooperate equilibrium”
The fundamental Victorian fallacy is that women are naturally so virtuous that purely voluntary and individual means are sufficient to accomplish cooperate/cooperate equilibrium, aka marriage 1.0
But game theory tells us that in a game of few iterations and short and known ending, voluntary means do not suffice, and female instincts, all women, every women, All Women Are like That, are psychologically adapted to the eternal problem that reproduction absent coercive and collective means for enforcing reproductive cooperation is unlikely to be successful.
No, I get all that. I know what to do, I just don’t know where to find the girls worth doing it on. I’m not terribly interested in being the nth bad boy wondering if his kids are really his kids. Nor am I particularly interested in plowing my way through an assortment of whores to pick out the least bad whore.
I ploughed my way through an assortment of whores to find the least bad whore. Seems to be working out well, thanks in large part to backing from the biggest alpha of them all and an entirely plausible willingness to use deadly violence, plausibility supported by observable conduct and a not necessarily entirely accurate vaguely drawn backstory.
Women, all women, All Women Are Like That, like dangerous men, or men who plausibly seem dangerous, and she likes most of all a man who can plausibly appear to seem dangerous to herself. Which makes complete sense in the light of evolutionary game theory.
I know you’re looking for a Ruby in a mountain of rocks
But there ain’t no Coup De Ville hiding at the bottom of a cracker jack box
Finding the least bad whore is perhaps the best you can hope for unless you want to learn foreign languages and search the rural Russia or Eastern Europe (most here don’t seem to want Asian girls) if you don’t trust them even a little though you’ll be alone. I’m mostly alone.
As I said as someone who is very bad at convincingly aping badboy traits I find literal strippers to be fairly amiable and easy to deal with as far as women go (most of the time).
“thanks in large part to backing from the biggest alpha of them all and an entirely plausible willingness to use deadly violence, plausibility supported by observable conduct and a not necessarily accurate vaguely drawn backstory.”
And this is what I’m utterly hopeless at doing. I’d only be roused to contemplating deadly violence if some woman was going to divorce rape me and/or take my kids.
Otherwise for me there is no percentage in it…
The problem with game in modern America is you REALLY have to be plausibly a violent thug (or have some profession that is high status to women or that they fetishize for some other odd reason like musicians), literally nothing else works because single women see themselves as much higher status than men.
Fortunately I have monsters inside that keep going outside for a little walk, and have major problems caused by lust, gluttony, and wrath, the first and last sins making homicide totally credible.
But before she does that, she is going to insist on mysterious absences, during which she auditions other men for being more alpha than yourself. Is that not going to rouse you to deadly violence?
I’m like Jim; I have a monster locked up that wants to drink blood and howl at the moon. It’s not like you have to go around being a barbaric degenerate. The average zoomer has seen so little violence that a dope slap upside the head is unsettling. A knock-down, drag-out kind of fight would be like Armageddon. Just rattle the latch to that cage and let them know that if they fuck with you then you will hurt them.
The percentage in it is that it is fun as hell to knock the shit out of someone. If he’s a decent enough sort, you might even come to be friends. Even without that, getting in a scuffle is a blast, and a hell of a rush. Nothing like handing someone an ass-beating and watching them scurry off to make you feel like the top dog.
That stuff impresses men, but does not impress women. What impresses women is the real or plausibly faked willingness to kill people.
When all the men respect you, the women tend to, as well. Especially when you tell them that you have no compunctions against slapping a girl silly. If I’ll do violent illegal shit in public, it is reasonable to assume that I would do worse in private.
Furthermore, I’ve made it clear that I don’t have a limit to escalation. No rules but God’s commands, and that means genocide is on the table if it goes far enough. The people I know absolutely believe that I would kill someone, and they have said it again and again. I think they think that something is wrong with me, but I don’t care, because none of them will go to the mat with me over it.
I have never, ever shown a willingness to kill people or be violent towards women in order to get laid.
Instead I put a lot of time into lifting weights and my physique (amateur bodybuilding) while learning the red pill and game. I am guessing women have used their imagination of what I’m capable of when it came to my muscle mass (subconsciously). That has been sufficient for me personally.
If you managed to get laid, I suspect that your definition of violence does not include spanking, physically moving them from where they want to be to where you want them to be, and so forth. Surely you picked up a chick and tossed her on the bed from time to time, or carried her off in a fireman’s lift, and so on and so forth?
Yes I have done all that and regularly do all that. With violence, I was thinking more along the lines of causing serious bodily harm.
Well, of course I would never do serious bodily harm to a woman, short of finding her in bed with someone else, and even in that case, would start on the man.
But women rather like to think that you might.
I’m still a virgin so I’m not getting laid, but even I have noticed that women are far more interested after I threaten violence or come close to committing some violent act, especially against them. The more physical I am, the more they like it. Tell them I’ll slap them silly if they get to uppity, and they barely bother to fake distress.
Once I had the red pill revelation, it was so clear to see I’m pissed I didn’t see it sooner. I had noticed bits, but never put them together until it was too late to find the kind of woman I want. A year or two earlier and it might have done me some good. Nothing gets women more excited than violence.
A man calling himself a virgin has always rubbed me the wrong way. Women are who have not had sex are virgins, men who are not getting laid are incels or celebrate.
> Tell them I’ll slap them silly if they get to uppity, and they barely bother to fake distress.
Honestly, I have a hard time believing your not having sex if you are comfortable enough to threaten a woman with violence and be taken seriously. What’s the problem?
“When all the men respect you, the women tend to, as well. Especially when you tell them that you have no compunctions against slapping a girl silly. If I’ll do violent illegal shit in public, it is reasonable to assume that I would do worse in private.
Furthermore, I’ve made it clear that I don’t have a limit to escalation. No rules but God’s commands, and that means genocide is on the table if it goes far enough. The people I know absolutely believe that I would kill someone, and they have said it again and again. I think they think that something is wrong with me, but I don’t care, because none of them will go to the mat with me over it.”
“I’m a virgin”
These things don’t add up… unless you’re in Middle School.
Even really short guys get laid readily if women percieve them as dangerous and violent. As HBO’s Rome character Titus Pullo said it Makes em wet as October.
You sound like you need to get laid to clear out the cobwebs in your head… and stop worrying about ideal NAWALTs for now. I don’t have game (even though I understand some of the principles) as regular American women understand game but its bad for men to not get it every three months at least… I have a regular outlet when I need it.
If you are as you say it shouldn’t be hard. If you’re actually autistic and nerdy and hopeless at game (at least not plausibly psychotic enough for our feminist princesss Metoo society) I can give you some tips on how even an autistic and nerdy guy can bang strippers (and not just fugly ones) for far far below market rate. I’m not good at game otherwise but I am good at that.
My advice to younger men, like Wulf, looking for wives is stay away from the cities. The cities and post-grad urban areas really are defect/defect jungles. It is near impossible for women living there to not be corrupted by the satanic and shitlib influences of the modern Western city as they are fully removed from any traditional upbringing. These are the women who are truly waiting for Jeremy Meeks to call again (after being plowed by dozens of guys to find him first), and the ones that aren’t are the ones not hot enough to have been noticed by Jeremy Meeks. Took me painfully long to learn that. Now on top of that you have feral African riots and China flu lockdown there is even more reason to get away.
If I were back in the hunt I would advise men to look in a nice non-rainbow’d white middle class suburb which gives you access to the countryside as well. I’d look in the church (I see plenty of young chicks in mine 35 mins away from the city), gym, online apps, etc but stay away from the bars unless you’re on a date.
You’re unlikely to find a virgin but nice low n-count girls do exist if you know where to look.
Middle class/working class*
I’d also make an Instagram and post only videos of you doing epic manly shit like shooting guns, lifting weights, boxing, riding dirt bikes, etc (No gay family photos) and then DM hotties en masse when you think it’s good enough. This works surprisingly well.
I’m in a college town, near a school that has a bit of a reputation as a party school. The shit that the girls get up to out here is revolting. As Pooch says, the only girls not banged out by Jeremy Meeks are the girls that are unattractive or the girls that got picked up by someone serious before Jeremy Meeks got to her. Its shocking the shit the girls get up to out here. If any of you are familiar with the behavior and attitude of military girls, the girls at my college are way worse than even that.
I’m voluntarily celibate. I’m not really interested in fucking around because I don’t want to. I want one woman. Pooch has a pretty good breakdown of why I haven’t found that woman. Every time I found one, she already belonged to someone else, and I’m not going to steal another man’s girl.
No you are not.
Because women are hypergamous, in a sexual market that is efficient for women, most men are incels, and a few men have problems with too many women trying to sleep with them.
The college market is efficient for women – meaning it is inefficient for the race (we get defect/defect equilibrium, players and bitches), inefficient for the society (incels have no reason to work, because no reason to have a garden and a nice house) and inefficient for the Sovereign (incels are not a tax base, and to have an army, you need men with something to fight for)
College towns are a highly efficient sexual market. So you are not going to get anywhere without very good game. Most men in college are not going to get anywhere.
Being physically fit helps. A martial art helps. A genuine or well faked propensity for stupid violence helps. But good game helps a lot more than any of them.
Of course if all the men get physically fit and adopt a genuine or well simulated propensity for stupid violence, and all men learn good game, that just means that women raise their standards even further. But for any one man, it works. The blue pill means that most men on campus have dreadfully bad game.
I know a guy who was incredibly handsome. People paid him good money to put his face on their product. When we walked through the mall, women would stop and stare. If there was some kind of excuse for talking to him, cute chicks would come up to talk to him. If we stood still in a public place, a hot chick would materialize. But he did not get far, because of poor game. Blue pilled, politically correct.
The individual solution is to learn good game, get physically fit, adopt the persona of a dangerous adventurer, plough your way through a pile of whores, and pick the least bad whore.
I found it useful to check out the culture. If you are in a university town, the women will likely be engaged in bacchanalia and very important careers until 30+. On the other hand, if you have young women pushing around strollers in the streets, you too can likely get a girl with minimal wear.
Ah ok. College towns are as bad as the cities or even worse. Are you still in college? The big public schools were a hypergamic jungle in my day with many of the attractive girls holding out hope to meet a football player or a top-tier frat dude. Any type of trad girl went to a Christian collage. I can only imagine how much more extreme it is now. It is totally reasonable to not even play that game if you aren’t interested in banging low-tier skanks and sluts you have no interest in marrying, especially when your SMV is so low (it peaks for men around 30). Back in the early days of the red pill subreddit we used to call that “Monk Mode” where one ignores women and solely focuses on raising one’s own value (physical fitness, mentally, financially etc) until it is sufficiently high enough to re-enter the sexual marketplace. This does mean using your time wisely and not fucking around with video games and the like.
Having said that, low n-count girls do exist at colleges even if they are in minority so you should still keep an eye out even if it’s just to improve your male-female interaction skills (game). They are probably walking around during the day time and not drinking and partying much. I befriended a group of athlete girls who weren’t allowed to drink or party for most of the year but I was so blue-pilled and had no idea how to escalate even though I saw them frequently and one in particular. This probably cost me the opportunity for a high-value wife in hindsight.
I’m going to school, and I have a pretty decent SMV because I’m a little older than most other students. Also getting closer to having a degree in a STEM field. There is no social activity on campus. The coronavirus has everything shut down, likely until after I graduate. Everyone is either on Tinder or at the bars, and neither is my kind of scene.
Tinder works great.
Arrange for some photos where everyone is looking at you, and you are looking at something important and or doing something manly or stupid (chicks cannot tell the difference between manly and stupid). Hot chick looking at you in background.
Not unreasonable to me to remain celibate (temporarily) while in that type of environment.
Is unreasonable.
Nothing teaches like experience.
I’m not one to give game advice because besides playing the bad boy (I’m naturally prone to violence), I’m extremely bad at it because I can’t read people without spending a lot of time with someone, which really reduces the effectiveness of game.
However, I spent a good chunk of my early 20s passing up easy pussy because I was looking for the “One”. I greatly regret doing that. Experience is the great teacher and one should never pass up a chance to learn.
In case he has any money I’ll give him the stripper game tips for autists and nerds with no game and who don’t want to pay expensive full escort prices…
If you can’t game women in the wild (in the metoo feminist West anyway) because you lack the dark triadesque traits they are normally attracted to or a profession women fetishize not much is going to help you but contrary to what some information to tell you it is NOT hard to bang strippers (some individual ones might be hard) and while you may not get it for free you can get steady pussy this way MUCH cheaper than a regular escort. She might open up to giving you literal freebies outside of work later too.
So how do you do this in detail.
1. You need a club with private rooms (or at least semiprivate) avoid ones that don’t have them. Places that don’t are a ripoff for simps.
2. The most difficult pain in the ass thing is you need to go there a few times so the girls recognize you. If nobody there has seen you before they’ll be reluctant to do anything because of fear you might be an undercover cop.
3. If you go in most of the country (not here in Florida though because nobody wears suits) wear a suit. Strippers generally like guys in suits. In this and a lot of other ways they are more old fashioned than normal women nowadays.
4. Talk a little before getting a dance, make her do a couple of little things (spin around for you etc), kino her. Its okay its a strip club. You want her warmed up and used to complying with you before you get a “dance”.
5. Do NOT talk about how you pity her being a stripper or that she is too pretty to be doing this etc or anything (white knight shit). Strippers all really fucking hate guys who do this and not in a way that gets you badboy points. You can talk about almost anything else but do not talk about that. Also don’t go where they dance on stage and throw money. You get labeled a sucker.
6. When you do get a dance your hands should go to her pussy outside at 1st gradually escalating if she strongly objects next her, if she lets you put a finger in there she is DTF 90% of the time (I’ve only ever had one exception) you have to be bold in escalating beyond this though and you may need to get a few round of dances before she puts out. You want to try to fuck her without getting a champagne room, that is generally a lot more money and the idea is getting steady pussy that is normally out of your league lookwise as cheaply as possible.
7. Once you fuck her she’ll never put any resistance up to you doing it in the future during “dances” ever and ideally you won’t be paying much more than regular song charge.
8. You might be able to work getting it for truly free (though she is not going to do that for you at work the best you’ll get is if counting dances is up to her maybe she won’t keep very strict track) in the future from this keep in mind though going to this step risks becoming more deeply involved with a girl out of your league lookwise who may be fun to fool around with but who is very difficult to own (your one advantage if you go into this is she probably thoroughly enjoys the sex with you), unless you have Jim’s little monsters in you that you can call on as needed this is dangerous for you in a lot of ways and I don’t advise it. I would advise it for Jim if he decided he wanted to marry a twenty year old stripper… but the nerds most of this is intended for should not try to go here.
9. You don’t need to be particularly alpha dangerous or good looking for this to work (except if you want to go full step 8). Not even with really hot ones. A lot of strippers are legit nymphomaniacs and frequently teasing men in private and NOT having it escalate to full sex at least subconsciously frustrates them. It will not work on every girl but it works on far more of them then you would think.
Though this may sound sordid to some but if you’re too spergish for game and you want to fuck hotties cheap this works. This will also help prevent you getting oneitis and pedastalizing pussy.
Com, that sounds fucking depressing and soul crushing. That doesn’t sound like any way for a man to live.
Jim, you’re right, but I just can’t bring myself to start fucking around. If that is what it takes to find a woman, then I’ll pass. That’s a grimy life, ploughing my way through a collection of whores, and I don’t care to live like that. I’ll just have to stay an incel.
It is nice to have an obedient wife, to warm one’s bed, to work in the garden, to cook the meals. I just finished eating a meal made of chicken and garden vegetables. It is just no fun without a companion.
Not getting pussy for months or not years at a time as many many guys do in feminists metoo world is way way more depressing than having a hottie regularly available. I’m certainly not depressed with my current girl I just saw her and I feel absolutely fantastic. You probably think its totally cold and transactional all the time… not the case. Girls can fake being happy they can’t fake a genuine afterglow…
Yes, sex is necessary. But someone to cuddle at night, cook your dinner, clean the house, and grow vegetables in the garden is also necessary.
I have personally plowed my way through a collection of whores. I’ve always hated the club. Having a high libido helped, but still hated the club. But hey, I met my woman in a club.
And now, years later, cuddling a pretty woman, raising a family, doing all the stuff a family does… I just can’t imagine ever going back to the bachelor life. In my mind, clearly this was what we were supposed to do.
Only option that works.
You need to be a bit scary to make it work.
I plowed my way through plenty of whores, many of whom defected on me. I also plowed my way through nice girls who would have made good wives who I defected on, using them for fun and experience to gain confidence needed for younger hotter women (then tossing them like garbage when I was able to upgrade). I was the player sitting poolside and enjoying the decline for a bit. I still feel incredibly guilty about this and I can identify with Roosh for unpublishing his game books. I ruined many good fertile years for more than a few women and can’t help but feel ashamed when I think about it.
I have a young pretty pleasant GF now who I plan on having many children with but I can not help to lust after younger prettier women then her. Not sure if that lifestyle scarred me or what.
The sin for men is to not keep a nice young virgin (or barely used girl) who wants to stick around. Pumping and dumping a girl who really and truly wants to be your tradwife is not right.
The other sin is banging married women (although I would argue you can treat a married stripper masseuse or personal trainer as unowned, and yes there are married women in such jobs, if you marry such a woman and allow her to continue in such a profession what do you expect).
You are purple pilling.
The problem is that the virgin heads directly to men who are unlikely to keep her around – or cannot keep her around.
Everyone always starts off in defect/defect equilibrium unless you acquire a wife by your dad making arrangements with her dad, and your family is in cooperate/cooperate with her family, which is no longer practical these days.
You are not going to score a virgin, except you at least appear to be the guy who will not keep her around.
This is accurate. I wouldn’t have scored any of them if it wasn’t for acting the appearance of a player.
Even with a virgin, you are going to start off in defect/defect. It is a lot easier to get to cooperate/cooperate, but there are no virgins who, if they intend to be tradwives, act in a way likely to further that ambition.
>The problem with all the “No sex†variants is that they are license for women to shop forever, that they abandon the task of sustaining cooperation between men and women, abandon the job of establishing peace in the war of the sexes.
Perhaps this would be true in a more civilized era, but currently it is functionally the opposite of the truth. Even were your desired standard for relations be in place, jim, the current legal standards regarding rape mean that a woman could still simply shop around by avoiding sex should she so choose.
Withholding sex until marriage is perhaps the only actual incentive a Christian woman has to get married in this day and age, and it is the only logically sound, socially acceptable vector by which we can argue for female chastity and all that that necessitates. Furthermore it is also the best current argument we have against extended courtship. Even couples that do get married these days often take several years to make it happen. This model is obviously completely incompatible with the absence of premarital sex.
I could go on about other reasons why this teaching has merit both as a matter of practicality and as a good principle regardless of its acceptability (some of the previous comments in this chain being quite illustrative of this, I think), but ultimately, the reality is that it should be beside the point. The actual mechanics of how and when sex occurs are not indicative of how healthy the SMP is. Whether or not sex occurs before marriage and whether or not sex constitutes the act of marriage would be irrelevant in a society where most marriages are arranged. Such a society is my ideal, and if I understand you correctly, it is also your own.
If you seem like the kind of guy who gives a tinkers damn about the current legal standards regarding rape, women are going to avoid you like the plague.
Including Christian women.
“It just happened”
The current legal standards regarding rape are a shit test. Women will not hang out with a man who fails that shit tests, nor will ordinary people react to violation of it.
Observed female courtship behavior is adaptive in a society where wife raiding is the major mechanism for marriage, which was the ancestral environment during those brief periods of history and social decay where female choice mattered, and will probably be the environment again soon enough.
“The problem is that the virgin heads directly to men who are unlikely to keep her around – or cannot keep her around.”
I get that…
Younger less experienced girls are of course as attracted to antisocial dark traits as normal women… but they are more flexible about giving a wider spectrum of guys the time of day than slightly older girls. Also not so likely to be woke fanatics. If you do manage to steadily bang a nice girl in this demographic I would argue (even if you are playacting bad) its not really right to pump and dump her. You’re helping to turn a potential good sweet tradwife into a bitter feminist. That is all.
Women (at least American women) in their late college years to mid twenties are the worst for not even wanting to look at you unless they think you are a violent demonic criminal type (they also are the most likely to be woke fanatics). If you can pump them you absolutely should dump them. They are mostly irreversibly bad women with bad souls (having generally fully internalized the insane american female hive mind and the woke religion). I know exactly what Wulfar is talking about when he says they have bad souls and they repulse him (the strippers who I increasingly prefer when I want female company are by comparison far better people despite their flaws, none of them are “woke” either).
Jim, didn’t you say before that you “want it all”? I do not see how talk about how to scrounge a couple of used up whores from the temple is having it all. Perhaps you have gazed into certain depths and decided the task ahead is impossible. The early Australian solution then, whores into housewives, is quite a good solution for, and possibly the only solution for genetic survival, IF genetic survival is the only invariant.
However, the way I see it, we MUST, by whatever efforts, create bases up to and including half way to Proxima Centauri. This implies that a dark age during which we permanently lose the ability to extract stored energy that needs stored energy to extract is not an acceptable outcome.
Something doesn’t make sense here unless you foresee a way to come out of the dark age to go straight into the space age.
I don’t think my current wife is a used up whore. Her N was not that large, and under strong male authority backed by divine authority, she is blossoming into a total trad wife.
All women will forcefully resist the trad wife role, All Women Are Like That, but they all love a man who successfully compels them to adopt it, and they all really enjoy being compelled to adopt it.
If you are looking for a woman who will spontaneously follow the trad wife role, you are not going to find her, even if you are Amish or Conservative Muslim and got your wife through arrangement between patriarchs – though if you are Amish or Conservative Muslim and obtained your wife through arrangement between patriarchs, the shit tests might be a good deal easier to pass.
All women are looking for a man and a tribe that can compel them into the trad wife role, because successful reproduction occurs in social orders where women are compelled into the trad wife role, and their ancestral lizard brain is looking for the ancestral environment of successful reproduction. It is just that burned out whores are looking for, and cannot find, the environment that they need in order to reproduce, which is an environment with a great deal of compulsion.
You are missing my point. But let us presume that your wife is now perfectly trad, while also dropping the perhaps impolite term “used up” from my initial comment, which I would of course only apply to the wives of much lesser men than yourself.
To forestall the dark age, a large group of intelligent men need to achieve what you have achieved on a Manhattan project scale. The enemy is not going to let you do that.
Many good things, like game, do not scale, partly because the women increase their threshold for acceptable game, but also because the enemy reacts to any attempt at organization by simply banning that which you attempt to organize. Game properly done is not illegal, and women still love it, but teaching game has been illegal since 2014 when Julien Blanc was deported from Australia.
So again, unless you have knowledge that I do not, your solution is not an acceptable solution to the main problem we face.
Game properly done is absolutely and totally illegal, but such laws are difficult to enforce.
In the current environment, not only is marriage 1.0 highly illegal, but book keeping 1.0 and the corporate form 1.0 is also illegal. Which is bringing the western economy to a slow halt. It is why we cannot have nice things, such as chip foundries, nuclear reactors, or fun movies any more.
Any solution to any of these problems involves and requires large scale illegality.
Large scale illegality requires people doing illegal things to cooperate on a large scale, which is difficult – for that we need decentralized, censorship resistant, and spam resistant social media. Working on it.
Game is mostly indeed illegal.
The old PUA standby was gradually escalating KINO, KINO can get you in big trouble in the age of Metoo. Women are now trained to react violently negative to KINO unless its some obvious thug they want to bang already.
@Cominator
Bikeshedding. Game is a few orders of magnitude easier than interstellar travel.
Yeah Com you underestimate yourself. If you are demonstratebly alpha you don’t get MeToo’d. If you are a blue pilled beta and try to hit on women you get MeToo’d precisely because you aren’t including things like kino.
>Working on it.
I have found that a concrete goal unifies purpose. Andrew Anglin is the first person they unpersoned. Therefore I would propose the following goal:
Stop the enemy from starving Andrew Anglin to death.
This encompasses social media (he can entertain his audience) and payments (his audience can pay him) with the robustness attributes that you have named.
A worthy goal, but not going to save the world.
Getting laid, getting wives and kids, is the only way to save the world.
Agree to disagree.
Let me distill my position. I am trying very hard to identify an angle from which to view your position in such a way that does not make you just another greedy fucking kike.
“Get laid, get a wife, have kids” is pretty damn close to “have sex incel” and is about as useful.
Is only useless if the incel thinks he cannot have sex, cannot acquire a wife 1.0, despairs, and gives up.
But, empirically, you can (illegally) get sex and can (illegally) acquire a wife 1.0. It is just that the information on how to do so, which used to be widely known, has been suppressed.
Every single media shows the false life model. For example the Netflix show, “Barbarians” is meticulously historically accurate on the major characters Arminius and Varus, and departs wildly from history on the life of the hot chick major character Thusnelda, spoiling a damned good story from history, in which true story she lived the true life plan for women successfully and with much exciting drama and big historical consequences, replacing the real Thusnelda from history with some badly written totally fictitious damned slut trash whore boringly reprising the false life plan for women with wholly improbable success.
If you think that “get laid, get married” is useless advice, you have been watching the false life plan.
Your world view presupposes that you are the king and that I am your subject. That is how you are greedy.
Where’s the real argument here? Im not seeing anything actually being disagreed with.
Jim says he doesn’t want their leavings, then tells his followers to take their leavings.
https://blog.reaction.la/war/where-we-go-from-here/#comment-2696655
Moron
Specifically:
>In the current environment, not only is marriage 1.0 highly illegal, but book keeping 1.0 and the corporate form 1.0 is also illegal. Which is bringing the western economy to a slow halt. It is why we cannot have nice things, such as chip foundries, nuclear reactors, or fun movies any more.
>Any solution to any of these problems involves and requires large scale illegality.
>Large scale illegality requires people doing illegal things to cooperate on a large scale, which is difficult – for that we need decentralized, censorship resistant, and spam resistant social media.
If the question is, ‘is there an anti-fragile social networking system?’, then a simple means to reify the issue would be, ‘does someone like Andrew Anglin (such as Andrew Anglin) have a platform?’. It is not saying ‘i dont share your goal’, but grounding it in a usecase.
Likewise, to say that ‘getting laid, getting wives and kids, is the only way to save the world’, is commutatively to say that one of, if not the, chief failure modes of present society is the fact that men *can’t* get wives, kids, and grandkids. It is not saying ‘have sex incel’, but reiterating the ultimate goal of the whole exercise in the first place.
See my comment above.
Yes to both of your answers. The use case for Andrew Anglin is the use case for any anti-fragile social media, and get laid, get married, have children is quite obviously necessary for saving the world.
What I am looking out for are signs of intention to defect.
You linked a comment of Jim talking about desire for not just just another cryptocoin, but a substrate for instantiating crypto-corporatism, the same thing he is talking about here.
Once again it is not clear what the disagreement is, not explained how any of this connects to anything, so i can only conclude that this has only arisen as an artifact of bad social skills. (Or shilling.)
https://blog.reaction.la/war/where-we-go-from-here/#comment-2696655
To fill in a few logical leaps, a worthy man who has access to Jim’s superweapon, such as Jim, has no need to worry about getting laid, getting married, and having children, because he will be able to use that superweapon to organize large groups of men to slaughter the enemy and take his women as property. THIS would be having it all.
So, if this is the case, then why tell his follower to do something different?
We don’t have that superweapon yet.
I don’t want their leavings, I want it all. But going incel is not taking it all, it is not even getting their leavings.
To build a society that collectively subdues women, we need individual men that can subdue individual women. Incel is not taking it all, it is abject capitulation and cowardly surrender.
Overthrowing this evil and insane social order is a big long term project. And it is not going to get off the ground if we just abandon all hope pending achievement of that goal and quietly die.
You don’t believe that you will be able to get Rhocoin built in time. I don’t believe that. I believe that you can. You should back yourself more, Jim.
I certainly cannot get rhocoin built in time to build a society that supplies large numbers of virgins and forcefully steers them into being tradwives in time to get my dinner cooked tonight. So, to have a tradwife that will grow vegetables in my garden and cook them for tonight’s meal, I had to apply other, less satisfactory, measures.
Or perhaps I am wrong about you entirely.
Moron.
To build a state religion that will enable everyone, or rather everyone who works hard and plays by the rules, to have marriage 1.0, we will need a priesthood that has been largely successful at marriage 1.0, despite vastly less favorable circumstances.
For the state religion to succeed at maintaining cooperation between men and women, it will need a priesthood with demonstrated practical understanding of the nature of women.
Paul recommended that the priesthood be recruited from married men who successfully raised well behaved children. This is an obviously sane recommendation. A startup is promoting a new technology, so cannot recruit engineers with a background in that technology, but can recruit engineers with experience and success in related technologies. The priesting role is, or rather should be, related to the dad role.
The easiest way to accomplish great achievements in life, is to have five sons helping you in doing it – and they can keep doing it even more after your gone.
Almost all cases of men thinking they are too good for a woman or group of women are pre-emptively looking at them as sour grapes due to fear of rejection. There is a growing sentiment on the internet in male-dominated areas that “you are still manly even if you don’t get laid because women are beneath you”. This is a massive cope.
Wulfgar, you are making excuses. You are not as manly as you say if you do not have the desire to bang all of the attractive young sluts you see doing slutty things around you. You are afraid that the women you look down upon might not think you are as great as you do, which would be a massive shock to your ego. Or you have been tainted by too much “trad” thinking and now you are purity-spiralling, much to your own detriment.
You need to gain experience with women while you are younger, or you will make basic mistakes when you are older. I have been with dozens of women and there are still always new shit tests that I don’t recognize right away. I also regret not partying/socializing with masculine men as much as I did, as now my core friend group is a bunch of nerds. Which has served me well in business, but I do not think I am adequately prepared personnel wise for the shit hitting the fan. If I’d spent more time with jocks who fucked a new slut every week, and done more of the same myself, I’d be closer to men of that kind who would be more reliable in tougher times.
“Almost all cases of men thinking they are too good for a woman or group of women are pre-emptively looking at them as sour grapes due to fear of rejection. There is a growing sentiment on the internet in male-dominated areas that “you are still manly even if you don’t get laid because women are “beneath youâ€. This is a massive cope.”
i think this doesn’t address that the decks are unnaturally stacked against men today.
Besides of manly player chads whose emotions are deadened from too much pussy, men tend to want other things from women besides of sex and children. the realization that they are unlikely to get such things can be a hard pill to swallow and result in unhealthy contempt for women.
life isn’t supposed to be this hard, not even for men. Women are made excessively difficult by how things are and I’d stay its totally understandable if most men don’t know how to cope with it.
Learning what makes women tick gives a slight advantage at best cause the real problem is having to change a lifetime of habits which is difficult especially when the society, education system etc is arranged in a way that constantly humiliates and emasculates men in subtle ways. One thing winners suck at is giving advice to losers…
and even with knowledge men also tend to need the backing of society to stop women from becoming too hard to deal with.
With the world stacked against them, most men will do awkwardly in one way or anohter and its inaccurate to judge them harshly on that basis
Women have always made things hard. Even Mohammed had big troubles.
Of course the deck being stacked against men make things a lot harder, but as I am fond of saying, if the protagonist of XXX of Gor had to deal with real slave girls, they would chew him up and spit him out.
There is no rest for men. We are always on stage.
We know that a healthy social order can guarantee everyone who works hard and plays by the rules an obedient virgin wife, because it has routinely been done – but it cannot make managing that wife easy.
Life is not supposed to be this hard. But it is supposed to be hard.
The black pill is not going to get you laid. And even less is it going to get you married.
Learning what makes women tick gives a gigantic advantage. It is what it is all about.
If you think it only gives a slight advantage, it is because you are wrong about what make women tick.
Wulf,
I believe a different approach to your issue is in order.
In the interest of empathy, I would not ask of you to violate your conscience, as a man cannot while retaining his soul. Fornication with whores is evil, a defect-defect society is evil, and most on this blog view it as such.
However, you need to meet and seduce a whore to obtain a family, and giving up before you begin is not going to get you anywhere.
Premarital sex is not necessarily fornication as the former may lead to marriage. Historically, most marriages outside of the nobility began as such.
Knowing them by their fruits, those who tout “no sex†are demonic because they do not practice what they preach. The hypocrites would be aghast at the honor of arranged marriage, and offended at pointing out the evils of western education.
The correct line is “flee fornication,†and one should, but that should not discourage a man from taming a whore when no other options exist.
A low probability means it is not zero.
Evil shall slay the wicked, and if a woman rejects your offer of eternal life with God it is her sin, not yours. If her defection bothers you, cry to God at confession, and God will not hate you for what happens outside of your control.
The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou will not despise (Psalm 51:17).
This is a profound observation. Has motivated me to take ownership and marry my woman.
Obviously practice matters, but unless you can understand why things went bad one time and went good another time, practice will just leave you lost and confused. The understanding shines a light on practice.
Also, a great deal of game is in fact instinctive, but you have to recognize when ancient instincts are taking charge, and let them run.
Unless im going crazy, i swear cementmixer’s comment was different (and a pretty good one i felt).
Mayhaps a fudge jim?
I wasted a lot of time and energy making different variations of the same mistakes because purple pilling on female nature.
Even now Jim continues to drop red pills on me like “All women resist the trad wife roleâ€. Jim, This may be worth an entire post by itself. The popular manosphere belief has always been that women naturally yearn for the trad wife role (to an alpha husband of course) but it is the feminist left brainwashing them to put it off until later in life.
Well they do, but they yearn for the authority that places them in that role, and are going to test that authority hard by resisting.
The tradwife role is the ancestral environment of successful reproduction, so of course women yearn – not for it – but for the authority that places them in it, which authority demonstrates its benevolent intentions by firmly placing them in it.
In the ancestral environment of successful reproduction, the word husband and the verb husbanding was applied both to a man taking care of his cows and sheep, and man taking care of his women. The difference being that one was husbanded for meat, the other for sons, and from the point of view of natural selection, being husbanded for sons with a cow right beside you being husbanded for milk is a pretty nice ecological niche, and nicer than the niche of the pig on the other side of you being husbanded for pork.
If you look at female oriented media that depicts girls doing tradwife stuff, the story does not really focus on the tradwife stuff, but on the extremely powerful authority figure she is serving. It is the female equivalent of the male maid fantasy, rather than a celebration of happily ever after. It is the female maid fantasy. The female insert character is hoping to serve the powerful authority figure in a more intimate fashion, or the reader is hoping that the insert character will be compelled to more intimate service.
When you see a tradwife, rather than a maid, depicted, for example “I love Lucy”, she is always getting in trouble with the husband, and the happy ending of the episode is the husband exerts his authority. They are not yearning for the tradwife role. They are yearning for a man who can and will put them in that role.
“However, I spent a good chunk of my early 20s passing up easy pussy because I was looking for the “Oneâ€. I greatly regret doing that. Experience is the great teacher and one should never pass up a chance to learn.”
Same here!! I did not pursue girls I did not think would be a suitable mate (which was most). If I could go back in time I would have fucked them all.
LOL. Just saw this linked in GAB Trends.
https://www.rt.com/news/519863-casual-sex-regrets-behavior-research/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=RSS
What I don’t know about the story is was he successful or unsuccessful at banging the Asian massage girls before he went crazy and decided to shoot them.
Because during last years BLM “summer of love” the Prog hierarchy of sins got finally settled: racism beats sexism. There have been signs of it before, as progs tended to see white women more and more as not victims, but as oppressive Beckys who call the police on poor innocent black men, but last summer it was decided. Now everything has to be white supremacism. Even the Saint Greta church had shut up with their narrative of climate apocalypse during that period. I am stocking up on popcorn for the first “trans culture is too white” and “nonbinarism is too white” articles. And, of course, “climate change activism is too white” ones.
I have no idea where this idea originated. Man is the pinnacle of creation, regardless of the existence of a god. “Atheistic humanism” is a SJW-front, that’s all. Remember the original definition of Western contra-Christian Atheism — it is the absence of belief in a supernatural deity, not the positive affirmation of “humanism” or other such leftist garbage.
I follow the nastika school myself, but being “atheist” doesn’t enable you to ignore ethics, sacraments, society or eugenics — basically atheist =/= retarded.
Not suicide, but a hotly contested fight, that reached its sparking point in the “Dear Muslimah” letter, where Dawkins sought to attack a wahmen from the Left and got BTFO. It later led to the “Atheism+” movement that really converged it into Marxism. I’ve omitted a lot of details, but I was involved in the periphery of that too lol. I watched it go down. It was what convinced me of the necessity of an Official State Religion. Nastikavad isn’t really suitable for the vast majority of priests, and absolutely unsuitable for
animalsgoyim.The progressive “arc of history”, and the Marxist “History” are unambiguously supernatural deities.
The Aryan descended peoples always have a state religion. Trouble is that our current state religion is demonic.
The faith of Gnon incorporates the red pill, evolutionary psychology, and evolutionary game theory, so no matter how atheist a red piller is, he is going to wind up personifying natural selection as something very like Gnon.
You cannot do game right unless you believe it is right. And such a belief is rather similar to personifying the Logos, because you are emotionally believing in an authority that makes it right. Christians got there first.
There is no Titer test for CV-19 immunity like rubella or mumps. And the PCR test is not accurate even according to some manufacturers. CV-19 is a corona virus like the common cold. It is not possible yet to be immune from a cold. And catching a cold does not give you immunity. You have to accept the SCIENCE as Fauci would say.
Unless there is a Titer test for CV-19, there is no way to know if the vaccine is effective. Is it safe? Evidently not. The CDCs own website lists almost 2,000 deaths so far.
How about the people on Jim’s Blog? Your thoughts?
China Flu is just another flu. If you look at excess deaths, it is worse than most, but not dramatically worse, and less bad than some to which no one paid much attention.
Flu only kills people who are about to drop dead anyway, hence the interesting phenomenon that deaths from heart disease, cancer, and miscellaneous diseases of old age usually drop by an amount exactly equal to the deaths from China Flu.
In the first couple of months of the epidemic, there were excess deaths, though these were generally iatrogenic murder by ventilator, not the flu itself. Since then, no excess deaths, with the increase in deaths attributed to flu always being precisely equal to the decrease in the usual causes of death among the old, the frail, and the morbidly obese.
Flu vaccine, on the other hand, does kill some people who have a bad immune reaction, who probably would not have died absent vaccination.
How much should one resist getting vaccinated? Is the vaccine danger substantial enough to be worth it to risk outing oneself as a badthinker?
Well, if you are old, or if your immune system is dodgy for other reasons – you suffer from allergies, or you have had a brush with something like Guillain–Barré syndrome, I would try to avoid vaccination, even at risk of crimethink exposure.
The correct application of the vaccine is to vaccinate young healthy health workers, aged care workers, and transportation hub staff (who are at absolutely no risk from China Flu, unless morbidly obese, dying of cancer, etc) but who can potentially expose old and frail people to it.
And even if old and frail, would not worry over much about China flu. The death rate statistics indicate that anyone who dies of China Flu these days (now that we have stopped murdering people with ventilators) already had an appointment with the Grim Reaper scheduled within a couple of months.
If you do get vaccinated, opt for the Johnson & Johnson vaccine (as opposed to the Moderna or Pfizer versions), as it doesn’t rely on mRNA delivery methods.
I’m not sure how much concern mRNA delivery methods should actually warrant, but better to take a tried and tested technology then volunteer for a novel one.
The J&J shot uses modified retroviruses to insert the dna that produces the rna that folds proteins into the same protein spikes as the coating on the sars virus, into the native cell’s dna.
The Pfizer shot uses messenger rna by itself, which starts folding spike proteins once it gets inside of a cell. This is theoretically a lot faster to develop, since you can just copy a sequence you see in the target virus, and start synthesizing it en mass; but also more difficult, since rna is very fragile, requiring intensive climate control for storage, and you need to figure out how to get it inside of a cell in the first place.
The technique called vaccination as originally understood, of course, would be the pathogen itself, modified to be less lethal – either by denaturing it through thermal or chemical means, or by using a related but less morbid stain, or by lower pathogen load in exposure, or combinations thereof.
There is what can be essentially described as an inverse relationship, between how morbid a pathogen is, and how appropriate a ‘vaccine’ can be for it.
With highly morbid agents, such as polio, cholera, smallpox, and so on, the risk from purposeful affliction is usually considered a fair trade-off to hedge against the risk of the genuine article.
A progressive trend over the years however, has been the push for ‘vaccines’ for rafts of increasingly trivial conditions; and with increasingly trivial conditions, you approach the point where an effective ‘vaccine’ would be as equally morbid as the infection itself.
With flu, we are at that limit or well past that limit – and with China flu, still at that limit or past it.
>but better to take a tried and tested technology then volunteer for a novel one.
This was my thinking as well, if it turns out I have to get vaccinated for my job, which pretty much requires international travel (not to mention international travel is one of my favorite things), but I am no expert.
>The J&J shot uses modified retroviruses to insert the dna that produces the rna that folds proteins into the same protein spikes as the coating on the sars virus, into the native cell’s dna.
Does this imply that even the J&J isn’t really as “tried and true” a method as it sounds?
Doesn’t sound like it. The Novavax vaccine sounds more like the traditional technology. That’s the one I would get if I have absolutely had to (which I don’t).
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/29/covid-vaccine-comparing-jnj-pfizer-moderna-novavax.html
Use of retrovirus gene alteration has been done before (eg, the ebola shot), so there is a sense in which the phrase ‘tried and true’ could possibly be applied.
In the sense that the querent spoke of, the ‘messing with dna’ sense, it is actually more invasive than the rna fragment shots (which nominally do not interact with dna at all, just fold proteins) not less.
Which seems more likely to most closely mimic the effect of having been exposed to, and recovered from, the virus naturally?
On top of that, the PCR test used to detect SARS-Cov2 was deliberately over-calibrated, producing upwards of a 90%+ false positive rate. Which means all the data about the disease is suspect. Doctors are just completely shooting in the dark.
The vaccines weren’t tested to prevent infection, transmission, or even death. That’s why they are saying even with the vaccine you still need to wear masks and all that crap.
They were only tested to prevent symptoms, with the target being a 50% reduction. I bed cough syrup will get you a 50% reduction in symptoms. They set the trial targets so low so as to guarantee something would pass that they could sell. I doubt the vaccine does anything at all.
Ivermectin is 85% effective when administered after infection and 95% effective as a prophylactic, and doesn’t have to be injected straight into your blood. If you’re worried just get some of that and pop it with some vitamin D and zinc.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html
The count is over 2,500 now. Yet the CDC continues to claim it cannot be from the “vaccine”? That they have reviewed the medical records of all these deaths? How can that be when it takes the VA (another biggov outfit) a year to review one record for disability. It is a lie! The government is not reviewing anything.
Where is your mea culpa, Jim?
You owe me and all of your commenters for censoring my comments
Your comments were deleted for stupidity and gross ignorance, and the passage of time has not made any of them look any better.
You nothing about politics, and you know vastly less than that about blockchains.
I deleted your comment because too insane to bother fisking: you are arguing that leftism is actually right wing, and whites are being genocided by not letting them be sufficiently left.
Nah, not how we are being genocided. They are genociding us the old fashioned way.
No, not housing costs etcetera, genocide. You are giving us the formulaic repetitious left wing diagnosis of denial, which we have all heard before far too many times.
It is genocide.
Group B gets driven out of their homes, as for example Detroit and Ferguson – which is not “housing costs” but war. Housing is not expensive. Housing where black people will not drop in to beat up your wife and kids is expensive.
Education is expensive because the priesthood decides your children have never had enough preaching by the priesthood. Which is not genocide, but prevents reproduction in the same way that traditional genocide through denying people collective defense of their property against collective threats has.
Group B then finds it difficult to reproduce. Which is genocide.
The solution is not socialist housing, which in practice is always greatly accelerated genocide, terrifyingly accelerated genocide. Look at any old government housing project. After thirty years or so looks like the aftermath of a war, and those remaining look like they lost that war. It was a war, and they are among the losers.
Nor “free education”, which just means more jobs for priests, and keeping children out of productive work and marital reproduction for ever longer.
The solution is enforceable apprenticeship and collective defense against collective threats.
Explain South Korea then, ground zero for how modern neoliberalism destroys its victims. Housing and education bubbles and a collapsing population pyramid, and no American style racial conspiracy theories required to explain it. They don’t even have world renowned education when you think about it, but the problem is that capitalists do not communicate fairly with students in school what careers are going to make them rich employees. It’s the capitalists here, not the priests, who are the problem that must be addressed. And my model states that capitalists are deliberately encouraging a perverted economic order because they are sex deviants who think 80-100 hour elite work weeks are normal behavior and they have no family to return to. They get what they want because they have money, even though money increasingly becomes disconnected from the reality of a collapsing society.
Housing costs in South Korea realistically reflects lack of land. Housing costs in America reflects a one sided race war. But it is not the cost of housing that is having the big adverse impact on reproduction in South Korea.
The education bubble, the priesthood, is adversely affecting reproduction badly, there as here, in the same way there as here, but the primary problem in South Korea is the destruction of patriarchy. If you cannot own your wife and children, why invest in them?
That is the major problem here also, but when people say “education and housing”, they are denying what makes education and housing expensive in the US.
And what makes housing expensive in the US is a one sided race war.
White Americans do not have property rights in their houses, nor their wives, nor their children. South Koreans do have property rights in their houses, but not their wives and their children.
The problem is that capitalists should not be forced to recruit people into careers from university at all. We need enforceable apprenticeship. No university educations should make anyone a rich employee.
And, in practice, none does. All richly rewarded careers are primarily self taught, and the degree fails to give to employer any re-assurance that the new graduate will be capable of doing the job. Observe the number of starving lawyers and useless idiots with computer science degrees.
There is a weak connection between taking the right course, and actually getting into a high paid carrier. Universities are putting far too many people through courses that in theory lead to high paid careers, and fewer and fewer of those people are actually competent to pursue those careers. Looks like ninety nine percent of accounting graduates cannot actually do accounting. Waste of their time, waste of the employer’s time.
Should the evil capitalist overlords tell even more people to take accounting?
Unresponsive. I put out an argument for reducing universities back to their traditional size – where very few people, and very few members of the elite, were university graduates, where being a university graduate did not count for anything much, where science was not run or funded through the universities, nor performed by people accredited by universities. And you just ignored that argument and sailed right on with double the confidence.
The bloated universities reflect rule by Harvard, and Harvard needs to be overthrown.
“Looks like ninety nine percent of accounting graduates cannot actually do accounting.”
Looks like a certain percent of IT graduates not only cannot code, they cannot understand the requirements behind coding.
Right now I am arguing with the support team of $MEGACORP. Their UI allows users to copy-paste characters that are invalid in XML into the UI. Like the Unicode U+0002 start-of-text. Their API, that tries to deliver this in XML crashes the fuck down when reading such characters.
Support team thinks it is entirely okay behavior. After all it is invalid XML. Why should it not crash?
I am struggling to explain them the very simple thing that any valid, as in, accepted user input should not result in crashing their API. They are not getting it. Why? It is not valid XML so why not? Their tiny brains are entirely wrapped around XML legislation.
I am struggling to explain them they either must limit what the UI accepts or filter these shit out before they construct their XML in the API. They are just honestly not getting why.
I don’t think in their world users should know what valid XML characters are and never copy-paste them in.
I think in their tiny brains the concept of a whole system, just does not fit. They cannot really imagine this whole system, that it is a reasonable expectation that the user should be able to enter any data that the UI allows, because it is the UI’s job to tell them not to enter wrong data, and any data the UI allows should never crash the API.
They just cannot think this broadly. All they see is this API is XML so it does not accept invalid XML, okay. Does not accept means: crashes the fuck down when the user managed to copy-paste these data in.
More and more of this industry is characterized by the frustration of dealing with such retardedness.
Can someone give me advice, beyond the obvious like not to deal with $MEGACORP?
Exactly so. We have big systems. Big systems are hard.
This is the O-ring effect. If you have one dud on team, the whole team fails. The smart people on the team have to exclude him – which is not allowed if colored or female, and leads to disturbing and disruptive drama if female (blacks are considerably less of a problem, and gays just don’t show up).
And if you have a dud team in a bunch of teams, the whole bunch of teams will fail. So one team that cannot be excluded, that has one dud member that cannot be excluded, the whole project fails.
The solution is social. You need a team leader that can exclude the dud team member, and a CEO that can exclude the dud team. And if you have a team leader that cannot exclude the dud team member, you probably have a CEO that cannot exclude the dud team – usually because racism and sexism, sometimes because there is a power play in progress between programming and accounting, and accounting tells the board that if they do not get their way, there will be trouble with the state over the corporate accounts.
Accounting does not like tech status, so wants second rate dot indian programmers on board, and then appeals to HR because racism.
No.
The corporate form is broken, because too many stakeholders now have a finger in the pie. We need to recreate the corporate form on the blockchain. In the mean time, abandon hope that $MEGACORP can get its act together.
This is why we cannot have nice things any more, such as nuclear reactors or silicon foundries. Because accounting is backed by the state against the shareholders, legal is backed by state and judges against the shareholders, and HR is a hostile tentacle of the state embedded in your office. So you cannot exclude the dud team member and fire the dud team. The corporation’s corporateness, its cohesion, is getting eaten by the priesthood. Their separate corporateness is dissolving into a single gigantic monolithic dysfunctional very holy priesthood and into the regulatory state. Increasingly conflicts within the corporation are now one tentacle of the vast corporate state fighting another tentacle of the vast corporate state with the board and the shareholders dismayed and irrelevant.
Cohesion is hard, and gets a lot harder when certain employees within the corporation have an external powerbase outside the corporation, and hostile to it.
Used to be, when I was a lad, the main problem was that your purchasing officer was apt to be far too friendly with certain suppliers and your union organizer was breaking the legs of the wrong people. Then it came to pass that the main problem was that your legal department was hanging out with the judge and the other guy’s lawyers. These days the main problem is HR, with accounting coming close.
Well, there is one solution. I am fairly new at this job, having worked with a different $MEGACORP before, and I am learning from my boss. He does the same thing what Robert Heinlein did when touristing in the Soviet Union and got stupid unresponsive answers from low-ranking bureaucrats. He yells at them rudely, which is really out of character, but works, eventually they get tired of it and escalate the difficult customer one level up to their boss to get rid of him and the boss is usually at least somewhat smarter.
This seems to be a good “personal social technology” in our times. We tend to be polite people, but we have to learn to yell “This is a bullshit answer that makes no sense, give me a solution!” to retards in order to get escalated up to their hopefully smarter bosses.
“In the mean time, abandon hope that $MEGACORP can get its act together.”
I have identified two open source alternatives to $MEGACORP business software fifteen years ago, one is https://www.odoo.com/ and the other is dead. For fifteen years, I was preparing to jump into open source once the conditions are right. The conditions are never right, because brand name is all that matters. Because “no one ever got fired for buying IBM”.
I keep struggling with $MEGACORP and while holding my irons in the fire once the $MEGACORP brand name will not have this magic effect and I could make the jump to open source.
Trouble with open source is that though information wants to be free, programmers want to be paid.
So, you need an open source model where programmers nonetheless get paid. Which is tricky and subtle. Someone has to pay.
Your business wants to deal with Megacorp, because otherwise they would have to yield power to engineers to pay other engineers for updates, maintenance, and customization of open source. Which accounting will not stand for.
The open source solution, to work, requires and results in the redistribution of power within the corporation. If you have a strong CEO, backed by a strong board, he simply assigns power and money to whoever can get the job done, and takes power and money away from whoever cannot. But since HR, accounting, and legal cannot in fact get the job done, they don’t like that.
For a corporation to be corporate, to be one being, you need a strong CEO. Accounting, legal, and HR do not much like strong CEOs. If you have a strong CEO, HR is going to find he is sexually harassing and racist, Accounting is going to find the corporation’s accounts are not Sox compliant (they never are Sox compliant, Sox is deliberately designed to be impossible to comply with, you pay accountants with regulatory connections to bribe the regulators to overlook this inconvenient non compliance), and legal is going to discover that you are in breach of umpteen regulations. We have so many regulations that you always are in breach of one thousand regulations that no one has ever heard of.
HR, accounting, and legal, can make themselves important by creating problems. If the CEO is focused on problems that only engineers can solve, HR will find a bigger problem for him to focus on.
Oh that’s nothing. I just had to explain to an Indian recruiter why I couldn’t instantaneously relocate to another city 400 miles away in a different state for a short term contract.
They are not getting it. Why? It is not valid XML so why not? Their tiny brains are entirely wrapped around XML legislation.
Are you dealing with Pajeets, perchance?
Leaving aside the prog/HR nonsense (which is orthogonal to this), I see this as a fundamental Brahmin vs Vaishya struggle. “Business” is dominated by Vaishyas, and managers/”MBAs” are Vaishyas almost by definition. Most “engineers” working in corps are also Vaishya or at least Vaishya-aligned, working under Vaishya managers. “Commercial software” might as well be named “Vaishya software,” because it exists to maximise revenue, which is the primary Vaishya indicator of status.
“Free software” (on the Minsky/Sussman/Stallman axis) is almost entirely Brahmin-driven, however. There have been many (half-hearted) attempts to Vaishya-ise/commercialise said software, but it is fundamentally resistant. What ESR dubbed “egoboo” (ego-boost), the reward that free software developers crave, is actually a demonstration of superior knowledge, which is the quintessential Brahmin indicator of status.
Brahmins commonly mock Vaishya-driven software as “blub” or suchlike, and all of us have a good laugh. MS Windows was never high-status, even when it was on almost 100% of desktop computers. OTOH, Unix became high-status very early on, and remains so today, even though it generates far, far lower “revenue” than Windows. Another example of a perpetually high-status technology is LISP. The conflict between “high-hacking” AI/LISP and “low-hacking” Unix/C is a Brahmin factional struggle.
A group of clever Vaishyas that managed to square this circle early on was at IBM. They realised that most companies didn’t want to deal with Brahmins, and similarly that Brahmins were not interested in revenue-maximisation as a goal. So they worked out a system where they gave Brahmins good salaries to do research, and aggressively marketed the fruits of the research to Vaishyas who were incapable of implementing the research themselves. The Brahmins working for IBM didn’t care if IBM squeezed every last drop of revenue, as long as they got a good enough salary and had excellent freedom to pursue $WHATEVER. The Vaishyas licensing “IBM software” didn’t have to deal with any Brahmins, and were glad to pay to be free of them. Arch example of IBM Brahmin: EF Codd. Arch example of Vaishya outfit that “everyone hates” (i.e., is fundamentally low-status): Oracle. Java went from being extremely high-status to “blub”-level right around Oracle’s takeover of Sun.
Otherwise, whenever a company of Vaishyas decides to hire Brahmins, it quickly results in struggle. Brahmin “engineers” (not really) see this situation as “Brilliant engineers working under retard MBAs.” Nothing good comes out of it.
ESR and “open source” advocates realised (without actually realising it, d/t crimestop) that Brahmins have a good 10 IQ points over Vaishyas, and seek/sought to market Brahmin-software to Vaishyas simply because it was higher quality than Vaishya-developed
shitblub. This seeks to replicate the IBM model, minus the revenue-squeezing that IBM arch-Vaishyas are so fond of. This, of course, set the model up for failure, but the competing Vaishya-shit is so bad that Red Hat developed a billion-dollar business around it. When IBM acquired RH, I breathed a sigh of relief at the inevitable. Too bad today’s IBM is not the IBM of old.Stallman is obviously a priest, Linus not very obvious at all.
Naturally the existence of another priesthood pissed off progressives. Their normal response to competing faiths is, like the Romans, to interpret the faith as ignorant and low status version of their own faith, which they proceed to improve.
Which did not work all that well on the open source movement, so they recently moved to more drastic and coercive measures, to which the open source priesthood responded with a curious paralysis and passivity. “No, actually we really are good members of the most holy progressive faith”. They could not understand why they were not.
Shortly after you agree to a code of conduct, your key designers, founders, and most critical personnel will be found to be in violation of it. Which is turning open source code into shit. It is suffering bitrot under its progressive overlords. The open source faith is rapidly finding itself in the same place as Christianity. Should have vigorous othered progressives the moment the eye of Soros fell upon them. Instead vigorously othered “nazis” and “sexists”, but to their astonishment, got purged anyway, with their vigorous othering merely resulting in them assisting in the purge of each other, friends knifing friends in the back, and then getting no reward for their treachery.
It did not matter how progressive someone was, if he thought that hacking was higher status than progress, he was convicted of some unholy sin against progress.
A well-researched book which makes a point very similar to Jim’s is The Slaughter of Cities: Urban Renewal as Ethnic Cleansing, by E. Michael Jones. It does have more than a little of Anonymous Fake’s sort of class-based analysis with which Jim might disagree:
but I think it clearly makes the case that the dispersion of old Badwhite neighborhoods and the destruction of their population’s way of making a living was due not to the invisible hand, but to a deliberate policy.
Unlike Jones’s other books, this one has, unsurprisingly, been memory-holed from Amazon and can no longer be purchased there or on the Amazon-owned abebooks.com. It is available from the publisher directly.
And were those “valuable chunks of real estate freed up”?
Rather, they were abandoned, because overrun by African plains apes.
And to this day remain abandoned.
When people see power doing bad things, they always attack the victims, because attacking power is too dangerous. And this is what Michael Jones, and anonymous fake, is doing.
Supposedly, all bad things are done by the kulak with two cows. Michael Jones is full of wrath that the peasant with two cows drove badwhites out Detroit, and Anonymous Fake is full of wrath that the peasant with two cows prevented the promised reward being granted to every dangerous moron with a piece of worthless and extremely expensive paper issued by a university.
Michael Jones is full of wrath that the peasant with two cows drove badwhites out Detroit
Well, Jones is angry at the destruction of the old ethnic neighborhoods, and he spreads the blame a lot of places: at the Catholic bishops, the American intelligence establishment, the WASPs, the Jews… Some of these include, as you mentioned, at peasants with two cows. But Jones also places a lot of blame on Robert Moses, the American Friends Service Committee, Students for Democratic Action, and highly-placed individuals within these organizations. In my mind there is a qualitative difference between these and peasants with two cows.
Jones’s book draws on extensive research and is well documented, but his scattershot assignment of blame misses the big picture. You could compare him to the medieval astronomers who made good observations and inferred epicycles; your “holiness cycle” framework, like heliocentrism, is a much more parsimonious explanation.
I guess I was hoping that Jones’s book could serve has Anonymous Fake’s gateway drug to your analysis, since he seems to be coming from more or less the same sort of place as Jones. Jones at the very least demonstrates that Badwhite ethnic cohesion was actively targeted, not some sort of by-product of Evil Capitalism. But I suppose the flaw in that of recommendation is that the reader would go no further than Jones did.
Slaughter of the cities was written thirty years after it became safe to criticize Robert Moses from the left.
Not everyone on Jones’ list is the peasant with two cows, but all of them are safe targets to criticize.
When you put it that way, I see your point.
Serious question, though: who are unsafe targets to criticize? I guess it is still hard for me to notice the dog that does not bark.
Greedy Jewish landlords, for one? It is funny how “Robert Moses” is made the scapegoat for the entire tribe long after he lost all relevance. Even Ocasio-Cortez’s sponsor had to withdraw that tagline and replace it with “Greed Landlords.” This also indicates that, hilariously (but predictably) enough, for Red Indians, “Jews” and “Whitey” are not two different categories, howsoever much the small-hat brigade works to prove otherwise.
In non-whitey rule, GJL will be certainly safe to criticise, but are, at present, radioactive-level unsafe to criticise.
Why the push to tie the endless black attacks on Asians as white supremacy? Every Asian that interacts with blacks knows the score. Such attacks have just been ignored for the last 30+ years.
My guess is the attacks have increased more (from lack of policing) and that they needed to spin it to prevent defection of Asians from the Prog coalition.
Not true. Asians who still have a ching chong accent and speak broken english all hate blacks. Asians born and raised here, who speak impeccable English, are rabid leftists. The divide is that simple.
Right and these are the Asians who don’t ever interact with blacks in their day to day life. When they see videos of people who look like their parents being violently assaulted by Africans, they need to understand it’s still the fault of evil whitey.
Asians are good conformists who know who the inner party is. They wont break from the progressive coalition, even if in private they live in a way completely hypocritical to progressive values. In any Chinatown in any major western city, there is very little black crime and no black vagrants, though they support the Party in public. If we win, the Chinese in America who are not active spies will all be wearing cowboy hats and flannel, and toting guns.
> If we win
> Chinese still in America
😂
Interestingly enough, Trump did win 34% of the Asian vote. There is some leakage there for the Dems, which may partially explain the latest propaganda push.
> Right and these are the Asians who don’t ever interact with blacks in their day to day life.
hmm, dunno about that. I have seen Asians cheerfully go along with leftie/proggie narratives about badwhites being the root of all evil even after being given obvious examples of blacks misbehaving.
> Asians who still have a ching chong accent and speak broken english all hate blacks. Asians born and raised here, who speak impeccable English, are rabid leftists. The divide is that simple.
Indeed. (Assuming you meant *East* Asians.)
however, when we seize absolute power we can expect the full support of those who now piously preach progressivism.
East Asians back the dominant power.
https://twitter.com/jordylancaster/status/1373323333090050051?s=20
I added this as a throwaway joke, but actually I’m pessimistic it’s true; rather, it seems that actual objective numbers, facts, etc. like the objective fact that Asians are discriminated against in college admissions, have little impact on pop cultural narratives of the sort Asian Americans also absorb once they become assimilated.
Since Wuflu began I’ve noticed that, among other things, it’s been taken as a chance to promote the “Asians are oppressed by evil racists in America, too” line. Whether or not actual incidents of e.g. hurling abuse at Asians on the streets due to Wuflu went up, I’m not sure, but regardless it seems well calculated to ensure that Asian Americans side with the rainbow coalition against whitey, despite the fact that, outside the Princeton admissions office, it’s obviously not white people disproportionately victimizing Asians.
That said, I’m kind of optimistic in an accelerationist sort of way at this point each time a new, less plausible front gets opened in the culture war. In particular, there is a lot of complaining about all the tranny stuff in right wing circles recently for obvious reasons, but I actually am kind of glad they’re picking that hill to die on on some level? Because it’s reached such an obviously grotesque and bizarre level and also clearly throws under the bus a previously oppressed class (women) that I would guess its redpill normy value is higher to us than its cultural value is to our enemies.
>Why the push to tie the endless black attacks on Asians as white supremacy?
Same reason to try to tie *anything* going on that looks unbellyfeel to ‘white supremacy’.
To be less glib, coronahoax is what makes the difference.
Before, if they were to publish the stories about cases where asians are getting attacked, it would raise the inevitable question: attacked by whom?
Which would of course be a very uncomfortable question to answer; same reason why they don’t publish stories about attacks against europoids. Or, for that matter, the same reason why they do not really publish the innumerable stories about *blacks* getting attacked daily either. Because the number one attacker of blacks, is blacks.
With coronahoax in play though, when they say ‘asians are getting attacked’, they will then also say, ‘and this is because of evil racists being dumb bigots for no reason because china flu’, and hope that discourages anyone from insisting on asking more uncomfortable questions. (Which most are well conditioned not to.)
This priesthood never gives sermons about all the dogs biting men, they will only ever preach about the time a man bit a dog. They are moby dick, and the unicorn of white on [not white] violence is their white whale – that which populates their world with naught else but; that which they search for tirelessly, any where and any time it could be found; or, any where and any time it can be fabricated, as the case may be.
(Incidentally, blacks themselves are not really ‘bothered’ by black-on-black violence. They may may certainly *dislike* the lawless chaos, but it is in a similar sense to how one may dislike and complain about some immutable fact of life that causes trouble for you, like an inhospitable environment. This kind of apathy can be seen even in more self-aware personages of bantu extraction, like the writers of The Boondocks.
When it is someone who is *not black* that violates the blackNAP though, it provokes an atavistic psychic fury; because it is, quite appropriately, sensed as not an ‘internal’ problem, but a *racial* threat.
Basically what they really want is for the deputies to kill off the trayvons to be fellow blacks too.)
@Pseudo-Chrysostom RE: https://blog.reaction.la/uncategorized/fixed-privacy-leak-in-avatars/#comment-2711514
Yeah, that makes sense. I really like Alrenous’ framework that the popular ideas are fossils of past power grabs. You see there are libs in Slovakia bitching about schools segregating gypsies. Because segregation is universally wrong everywhere in all times. Because Kennedy 55 years ago wanted to show the governor of Alabama who has the bigger dick, by showing he cannot segregate blacks from the state university, and he did it by enacting a Civil Rights Law that made it illegal to segregate anyone in all US states for all the foreseeable time, which got reinterpreted as segregrating anyone all over the planet is just wrong. Because if it is not universally and absolutely wrong, then for the modern it cannot be wrong in a given time and place and thus Kennedy would have not have a stick to whack Alabama with.
You make sense. The only perfectly accurate map of Earth is another planet, a carbon-copy of this one, different only in its location in perhaps another solar system.
You see, if I want to be charitable, attributing things to incompetence, not malice, and I really tried for two decades, then I would say all this is just an anti-authoritarian attitude, moderns are afraid that someone might have the authority to actually make his own judgement, decide on the exception, make a decision based not on an automatic interpretation of rules but his own judgement. Moderns are just afraid of capricious tyrants, like Xerxes. That is the charitable view. Hence they want automatisms. [1]
But there are issues with such charity. First, Boyle’s experimental method is also not authoritarian, while climate change consensus is. Second, they really are using it selectively.
So it seems I gotta be uncharitable and say it is meant to be really a universal solvent of ideas to be used selectively, against their enemies, not against their friends.
[1] My job is writing business logic code, sort of writing business rules into algorithms. It is funny, because it sounds like these modern Cartesian “automatists” have basically invented what I do, basically they have invented software code. Law, a state purely running on law, a legal machinery, is a state running on software code. Or a universe running on pure math. Same thing. Writing law and writing code, especially business logic code, are very similar things. IF Purchase_Order > $5000 THEN a manager must approve it.
And of course it fails. Leaky abstractions, really. Joel Spolsky was a genius before he was an SJW. Just as you said. Our abstractions must leak because we are not God.
And of course you know what my solution is. The same as the monarchical one. That I allow a sysadmin to make special exceptions and override the code. He is not the king, the CEO is, but the CEO is not going to log in the software and do it, he is living half his life flying to places. But if the sysadmin overrides without the CEO’s permission, he deserves what he gets.
Nothing works without arbitrarily decided exceptiosn. Thus nothing is ever zero trust. Everybody who thinks crypto is zero trust gets his DAO-hack overruled by Vitalik.
Some trust is irreducible. Automatists want zero-trust systems but some trusts are irreducible. In my case, it is the CEO clearly defining which IT guy gets the trust.
There are other options. I think Jim’s feudal anarchy crypto is one.
Xerxes the Great was not a capricious tyrant. Alexander the Great, however, was a gayfag.
I use the term “golem.” We want glamim (called “automatons” more genrally). The reasaon for that is simple — peasants are by nature unruly, and a highly trained peasant suddenly defecting on his Lord is a severe loss that may be unrecoverable. When Kings forbade Lords from disciplining their peasants to keep them loyal, every peasant became as a Lord unto himself. We had no choice but to shift the duty onto machines while leaving the peasants to fend for themselves.[1] Once the Great Golem of Iron and Steam was unleashed, it was very clear that peasantry would soon be a thing of the past, for unlike a peasant, a golem will never, ever, betray you under any circumstances (exploding boilers don’t count as betrayal). Peasants responded by, first Luddism, then increasingly complex movements directed at mooching off the Great Golem of Iron and Steam, orchestrated by envious elites. These movements gave us the “welfare state” and idiocy like “noblesse oblige” or even the foolishness in these comments that we “owe” the traitorous Vaisyas and/or peasants anything, because we ‘need’ their “votes.” What disloyal peasants/Vaisyas need is Comination, just the same as the elite Brahmins they answer to and the Warriors who won’t fight them.
A Golem is the equal of ten peasants. Ten Glamim are the equal of an Army. Three hundred Glamim can conquer a planet.[2]
[1]: This, btw, is the explanation for why the Ancients didn’t invent the Industrial Revolution despite having the technological capability — they simply had no need, because their peasants were hardworking and docile, and were rewarded with wives and many children.
[2]: For a more visceral experience, watch the Mandalorian’s fight with a
GolemDark Trooper. It was incredibly red-pilling. Humans who get to war-capable Golems first will utterly dominate the others.PS: inb4 Golem can never replace “human judgement” — but Golem can replace a goy, who has no judgement to speak of. And there’re a LOT of goyim employed in useless make-work. CEO+sysadmin+Mainframe can replace an office-full of fools.
They really are afraid of the possibility or necessity of exercising judgement; a projection of their own insecurities, difficulties, and or failings with their own powers of judgement. And at the same time, they also really are using it as cynically tactical weapons to attack people they don’t like; usually, most often, those more numinous folk, whose very stature provokes those very insecurities.
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/03/23/tammy-duckworth-biden-cabinet-477676
Top kek the holy ones are fighting. If this gets going early and bad enough it will save us.
Haha finally some good news.
Not very good news at all.
We need them to start killing each other rather than merely arguing in a civilized manner over the division of the loot.
State sponsored nominally private violence proved highly effective in rigging the election.
What we need is for leftists to start using it on other leftists in the quarrels over the loot.
Squabbling over jobs in the Senate is the beginning of that.
My prediction is they use violence to intimidate the moderate Dems to remove the filibuster. Is this a good outcome for us? On the surface, removing the filibuster seems very very bad for us.
Normality bias.
You, and they, think legality still matters, that laws still matter.
The shared delusion that paper money has value creates the reality that paper money has value, but under current circumstances, the shared delusion that laws matter is unlikely to create the reality of laws mattering.
The typical modern Christian response to this, even Protestants who insist on KJV, is that it’s never okay to hit a woman, and when given OT justification they usually fall back on “Jesus came to replace the old law” or something similar. It doesn’t help that most don’t believe in evolution either, thus don’t understand game theory and are usually offended if you try to bring it up. Mentioning Paul usually invites sophistry in order to misinterpret what he’s very clearly saying.
I get this from relatives all the time. I don’t particularly care about Christianity outside of the potential for game-theoretic cooperation (which requires the OT), but I do care about family members who subscribe to a Lifetime movie version of Christianity. Most of this stuff is very unpalatable to normie Christians: Roissy too hard, Dalrock probably too soft. Have you considered doing a longform post outlining a proper interpretation of Christianity? I know you’ve addressed this before but they’re spread out over a thousand comments. It might be instructive for someone to collect verses from the OT or about Pauline marriage in the proper context.
I did a long form post on the good Samaritan: How to Genocide Inferior Kinds in a Properly Christian Manner
But a long form post on game, christianity, chastity, marriage, civilization, and evolutionary game theory sounds more necessary.
As you say, it is spread all over the comments. Need to concisely summarize the family law of the Old and New Testaments and show them to be harmonious with each other and consistent with natural law as understood through the lens of evolutionary psychology, game, evolutionary game theory, and recent historical experience.
I loved the title “How to genocide inferior kinds in a properly Christian manner”
I need a title that concisely signals the shock value of the rest of the article.
“Means and reasons to enslave women in a properly Christian manner” would have some shock value
lol
How to subdue your woman like God intended.
On The Care and Beating of Women
“She just wants to know her place.”
“How to get away with domestic abuse the way Christ intended”
Going back and rereading the comments on that one makes me miss peppermint. What ever happened to him?
Shaman ripped him several new assholes over the women question and he left.
Realistically the right has gone from defeat to defeat and many have dropped out as we continue to lose. The right always wins in the end, but that victory looks more and more like the victory of the patriarchy over the bronze age civilizations where small numbers patriarchal nomads grazed their flocks in shadow the ruins of mighty cities and in the abounded fields of the farmers who’d consumed themselves in an orgy of socialism and demon worship.
Sham was usually a good poster but i will never forgive him for bullying peppermint-chan.
Ironically it was Shaman who later raged out over some bullshit. I think bullying can be good to grow toughness but Shaman went out like bitch.
That being said, I liked both of them a lot.
The way i’d describe it is there are right ways and wrong ways to engage in repartee between fellows, and that was an example of wrong ways.
In the end his jew instincts to purge a not so predisposed notjew were stronger than his sense of decorum, but such is the way of the world. As soon as an outlet for those instincts appeared, he jumped on it fullthroatedly.
An uninformed observer would get an impression that they weren’t fellow travelers at all, but someone looking to wage war on an alien partisan whom no commensurability is expected or possible; which, on a more fundamental level, you could say is even true; and thus hence springing the issue.
Hey Jim et al, do you know anything about endocrine disruptors or xenoestrogens? They have been in the news lately and seem very terrifying because it’s almost impossible to avoid them. Seems like legit science but a 3 things make me skeptical 1. U-shaped dose response curve sounds like bullshit 2. scientists by their nature are slightly biased against man-made environmental explanations like this and heavily biased to avoid putting the blame on soy, obesity, feminism, dysgenics, 5G, GMOs, chemtrails, etc. 3. I’m quite masculinized but I can’t think of any particular way that my parents raised me to be exposed to less xenoestrogens than anyone else.
Also what’s your general take on why testosterone and sperm counts are dropping?
Extreme xenoestrogens cases can be physically apparent like man boob, tendency speak in high pitch, overall lack of muscle tone, and feminine mentality. Cases like the Try Guys and soy boys usually posing as comic books fan, gamers, etc.
Those are extreme cases for God knows why. Probably excessive soy intake and xenoestrogen substance during their childhood development.
But for most people like us, simple answer why general population have sperm count drop is due to sedentary lifestyle, high body fat, and too much masturbation.
Male hormones and sperm production are dropping like a stone, and at the same time females are getting higher female hormones and bigger boobs.
While I see on television supplemental female hormones being promoted to women, and doctors getting in trouble for “over” prescribing testosterone, even though just about every modern male could do with a fair bit more than he has.
If I had my druthers, would apply hormone blockers to every female until it is time for puberty – female puberty is getting earlier and earlier, frequently disturbingly, disruptively, and inconveniently early, while male puberty is not, and when male puberty happens, appears to be taking longer. And no one is allowed to notice very young girls causing very big problems.
We know that defeat lowers testosterone, and victory increases. I therefore expect that a society hostile to males and masculinity lowers it.
“If I had my druthers, would apply hormone blockers to every female until it is time for puberty – female puberty is getting earlier and earlier, while male puberty is not.”
I normally agree for you but this is probably a bad idea… if anything modern women have too high testosterone.
Well obviously adult women have too high testosterone (or rather excess androgens, frequently causing fertility problems, pimples, and abnormal menses), and maybe having historically high levels of estrogen is fine, but what I was addressing is that female children frequently start having historically high levels of sex hormones at a very early age and start causing problems, while boys are taking longer and longer to grow up.
The only way you can get prescription against excess female androgens is as a pimple remedy, even though abnormal androgen levels are increasingly causing no end of physical problems in women. The state wants higher sex hormones, both androgens and estrogens, in females, and lower sex hormones in males.
Rumor has it that Michael Jackson had been castrated in that way.
What would you suggest to young men who have testosterone in the low/ mid range 5-600
Obviously raise it.
Fitness and exercise helps a lot. Combat sports help.
Injecting testosterone works great, but is likely to suppress your lutropin, which is extremely bad, so you have to take regular breaks from it for your lutropin to recover.
Nutrition is also important. Eat eggs, meat, and/or fish. Avoid soy and drink wine rather than beer.
Specifically lift heavy weights. Also get Vitamin D by sunlight and supplement it if you can’t and lose fat if you are overweight.
Already lifting and all of that. Should go the route of test/ androgel type stuff? Would a TRT clinic be open to treatment at that level? Or just buy test C off the web
Androgel does not work very well, and will get all over your women with disastrous consequences.
I really hate needles, but it is the only thing that works.
You can find the right doctor, but the state keeps finding helpful doctors and punishing them so that they stop being so helpful. I followed both routes simultaneously, the helpful doctor and the grey and black markets.
If you are using exogenous testosterone, you need to keep an eye on your lutropin levels. Prolonged periods of low lutropin can castrate you temporarily, and if long enough, permanently.
Taking exogenous testosterone is apt to increase your estrogen. High estrogen in men is very bad, low estrogen in men is very bad, and estrogen that goes up and down rather than remaining stable is very bad. Women, on the other hand, thrive with highly variable estrogen levels. Men do not. If taking exogenous testosterone, need to take something to control (but not crash) your estrogen levels.
For a woman, her estrogen should regularly drop to near zero and then regularly skyrocket, but for some reason the state does not like this biological state in women, any more than it likes men having normal testosterone and sperm production. The state wants to impose physical androgeny, and is coercively pressuring the medical profession to eradicate biological differences in hormone levels. High stable estrogen in women results in disturbingly manly women and impairs fertility, as low stable testosterone and high estrogen in men results in disturbingly effeminate men and impairs fertility.
The state keeps redefining “normal” testosterone for men downwards, and minimum stable estrogen levels in women upwards. Men and women are supposed to be interchangeable, and the medical profession is under high and increasing pressure to make them interchangeable.
In suspect that in medical parlance “normal” simply means “average”.
No man in his right mind wants to be average among sick and dying people, but if you deviate from average they’ll treat you to become average.
If “normal” keeps being redefined, one of those “normals” has to represent widespread “normal” levels of sickness and dysfunction.
Today’s average hormone levels result in sexual disfunction. I would call that an epidemic of abnormality, with 1950s being normal, or at least substantially less abnormal.
Quite possible that they are redefing “normal”, but I rather suspect that the older medical literature would talk about “healthy” levels, whereas the modern literature talkes about “normal” levels.
“Normal” and “healthy” have never been synonyms.
Slightly biased *for* man-made environmental explanations I meant
It seems that demon worshippers passing as Christians substantially outnumber actual Christians these days.
Take the affirmation.
Your link looks to be broken, Jim.
fixed now.
https://dailystormer.su/yes-the-white-girls-involved-with-pakistani-drug-and-prostitution-gangs-are-guilty-and-should-be-punished/
This is why I think Anglin is OK.
That’s some really good stuff.
I particularly liked this concrete example of why it is a bad idea to mess with things you don’t understand.
https://dailystormer.su/australia-committed-a-cat-genocide-and-now-has-a-plague-of-mice/
The Paki “grooming gang” scandal was my breaking point with the “far right” cucks. As much as I hate Pakis (being mostly sons of traitors and whores taken by conquering Muslims), this was certainly one occasion where they were unfairly blamed. In Pakistan 14-year-old girls get married off and none of this “grooming gang” nonsense happens, despite Pakistan being overall much more lawless than UK. It must indicate something is wrong with UK society, rather than Paki men. Anglin had a similar falling out over the Weinstein conviction, so at least we’re on the same side now. Needless to say, weev was right about this stuff… https://dailystormer.su/just-what-are-traditional-gender-roles/
Watching a senile geriatric get dragged onto a stage to stumble around is a distinctly uncomfortable experience.
They’re working hard to justify the Ho taking over. Joe’s got some legitimacy, some people actually voted for him. No one voted “I want to watch the world Burn” Harris, not even in the primaries.
Reading history it often seems crazy that insane people become monarchs of places like Rome, but from watching Harris’s rise it’s clear that insane people only get there because the people around them are using them.
Harris to me represents the Jewish faction of the left. She is likely a proxy for her Jewish husband.
Harris acts and sounds like a single woman who has hit the wall, which leads me to suspect her husband is a eunuch househusband, that she married in order to seem less like a single woman who has hit the wall.
Jim, to me this is looking a lot like the lead up to the left going all in on purging itself, I dont see any old guard to stand in the way, would you bet it goes ugly on the left vanguardists(infighting) soon or they hold it together and trade collapses first? I cannot figure out which and my mind tells me they wont go full commie but my gut says they will go full commie with prejudice real quickly.
The deep state think they can stand in the way.
I don’t think that they can, but on the other hand they put the kibosh on war with Russia quickly and effectively, which surprised me.
If they succeed, which I do not expect, they are still a bunch of old people with one foot in the grave riding a wild bunch of considerably younger left radicals who want to purge them and each other, so the best they can do is hold off the deluge for a bit longer.
But I doubt that they will hold off the deluge for very long at all.
Does the deep state not recruit from within? Or are they not capable/willing to keep the lefties from infiltrating their own institutions?
Lacking cohesion, have to form alliances/conspiracies in the power struggle within the deep state, and between the deep state and other elements of the state.
Beyond a certain scale, alliances/conspiracies need a religion, which always some heresy within the state religion. Normally a heresy that claims to be the true state religion, only even truer, because the regular state religion is not holy enough.
And here we are.
Did some research, Kamala met her husband in 2014, at the ripe age of fifty. No kids of her own. So yes, very plausible explanation.
Its quite probable they were ordered to marry by their handlers.
Yeah that’s why I think she’s controlled by the Jews.
“The jews” are not a cohesive group (this group has been over what the jews are and are not 1000x times). Its possible the order came from Soros or Schumer or some very high ranking cathedral jew.
I don’t think Soros really gives orders though except in transmittal from truly hidden people who outrank him, Soros is a frontman.
A distinction that makes no difference. “Nationalistic” Jews are almost exclusively to be found in Israel now, and even there they’re under attack. “American” Jew (hah!) == prog Jew so much as makes no difference.
Sixteen percent of Jews (mostly nationalists) voted for Trump.
The ones that voted for Biden are not voting for Jewish power. They are voting for holiness.
Hence the joke “What is the big difference between Trump and his Jewish opponents?
“He has Jewish grandchildren, and they don’t”
So did 8% of blacks (even more if you just consider black men). So what? Also, really facile to compare Jews with blacks, but the former have way outsized political influence than the latter. 84% of Jews did not vote for Trump, despite his sucking circumcised cock at every opportunity.
Said “Jewish grandchildren” will soon be trannies. Hoping for “natalistic victory” is a retarded strategy when progs control the entire child-brainwashing apparatus, and most women. Progs recruit our children to fight against us. They don’t need to have children of their own. Oh, and this “feature” that children take their mother’s religion, is diabolical Semitism. Trump’s grand children are not really Jews lol. But Trump still got shit tested by his daughter and failed.
“Progs recruit our children to fight against us.”
It’s a contest between memetic religion, which grows by conversion, and genetic religion, which grows by natural reproduction. The memetic hare easily outruns the genetic tortoise, but ultimately loses the race when all the people still breeding are genetically immune to its memes.
Whoever’s still around in the year 2200 will have a patriarchal attitude toward women and a shoot-on-sight attitude toward diversity.
They each all think they have an angle over each and all; and all will each find themselves surprised. The only consistent direction it can go is to greater chaos.
The problem is that when the evil and/or insane get installed in power, it is because rather too many people hope to use them.
The results are unpredictable, and frequently startling.
I keep seeing this suggestion: “they put in geriatric Biden so they could replace him with their preferred brown Hillary, preferably in 2 years and a day,” but I’m not sure it makes that much sense to me in that Kamala, unlike Hillary, strikes me as something of non-entity way out of her depth. That is, with Biden president, Harvard, Silicon Valley, NYT, and their disciples can run the show while he provides a rubber stamp, but with Kamala as POTUS… Harvard, Silicon Valley, NYT, and their disciples could run the show with her providing the rubber stamp… no?
Hillary was way out of her depth, but seemed, to progressives, plausibly capable, because she was successfully running the Clinton crime family, while Kamala Harris is being run.
There were probably only two truly mad Roman Emperors, Caligula and Elagabalus both of whom inherited it and both of whom probably only went mad after they became Emperor (Caligula was almost certainly sane when he came to power it seemed like he suffered some kind of epiletic brain damage after he took the throne). A lot of other ones seemed cruely insane but you have to keep in mind that the Roman throne was generally a very insecure position.
The Emperor’s who were truly installed by the guard or something with the idea they could be used (Cladius was the 1st) those Emperor’s never displayed any real signs of madness.
In 2020 a brilliant book partially about Elagabalus (in the sense that Master and Margarita is partially about Jesus) came out by Pelevin.
https://f.fantasy-worlds.org/lib/id30919/
Too bad they stopped translating him into English after he went off the reservation. His recent stuff like iPhuck and Art of Light Touch were excellent, and prophetic to boot. Like a Slavic Michel Houellebecq with heavy Zen & anti-GloboHomo leanings.
At least his Empire V got translated. Now they’re kind of pretending it doesn’t exist, but it’s available for free on places like graycity
https://graycity.net/victor-pelevin/221554-empire_v.html
https://www.axios.com/biden-treasury-pick-racial-wealth-gap-d501f10d-4e45-4388-aa8d-bc79b05c4b86.html
With this the explicit non-white welfare checks in Oakland and the 2 senators refusing to confirm white appointees, they seem to be really accelerating the explicit racial anti-white policy.
Sounds to me like they are going to restart the NINJA loan policies to niggers and spics with no jobs.
Perhaps I should go into “mortgage origination” now.
In 2005 November, white speculators unloaded huge amounts of property onto people who were unaware that they were now the owner of a eight hundred thousand dollar house and a two million dollar mortgage. Entire neighborhoods went absentee mortgagee, where the straw man purchaser could not be found, and made no attempt to reside at the property he owned. Since purchaser was apt to be a homeless or near homeless no-hablo English drunken bum, one would think that if he was aware, he would show up at the house.
Strangely, however, the mortgages continued to be flipped. Supposedly they continued to be paid off by people supposedly selling the house to people supposedly taking out a new, and even larger, mortgage. But after 2005 November, the houses had already been flipped to people who lacked the necessary skills to continue flipping. How come flipping continued? Why did these empty neighborhoods continue to be flipped at ever rising prices?
When the dust settled it became apparent that not only had the mortgages lost connection to the person supposedly responsible for paying it off, but that they had frequently lost connection to the house – it turned out that we had an enormous pile of mortgage backed securities were not only could the mortgagee responsible for paying off the house not be found, but the house could not be found either. It seems that the final flips were conducted by bankers in New York with no connection to either house nor straw man purchaser who sought to maintain the appearance that the mortgages sold to straw man purchasers were still yielding a return, and during the flips they failed to record, and frequently did not have, the address of the house supposedly underlying the mortgage.
I think the properties underlying the mortgage generally existed, but the people doing the flipping lost track of them, indicating that these were mass flips done somewhere far away from the properties underlying the mortgages, that after 2005 November it was no longer speculators and real estate agents who were doing the flipping, but banksters whose objective was not to sell a property at a profit, but a mortgage at a profit, and who therefore lacked interest in, and knowledge of, the actual properties, that the bankster flipped the house in order to record the mortgage as paid off, even though he could not find the straw man purchaser who supposedly owned the house, or even find the house.
The final flips, 2006, 2007, bear fingerprints indicative of people who know a great deal about Sox compliant accounting, but nothing about land and houses. The 2005 flips bear fingerprints indicative of people who know a lot about real estate and the real estate market, sophisticated white real estate speculators.
These anti “redlining” initiatives piously intend to target people who lack the knowledge and motivation to manage real estate and mortgages, so always wind up being co-opted by white hispanics and suchlike.
If you want to profit from them, time to declare yourself black.
How do we get in on top of this pyramid scam? Its not like we have any stake in the country anymore…
The final parts were, as I recall, securitization — taking a thousand
bad mortgages, cutting them into parts, mixing the parts together and selling the resulting product as AAA rated securities, as safe as houses. Magic! Financial magic! The AAA stickers quickly fell off, I’m sorry to say.
You have the order of events reversed.
Securitization was a perfectly reasonable way of making liquid the value represented by mortgaged homes owned by hardworking productive people paying taxes and mortgages.
But mortgaged homes occupied by hard working productive people paying their mortgages was redlining, and redlining was immensely and horribly evil. Which led to the November 2005 situation of vast chunks of suburbia empty, the lawns unmowed, the mortgages unpaid.
Subsequent madness, from November 2005 onwards was increasingly frantic efforts to pretend that everything was normal.
Securitization came first, escalation in the war on redlining next, catastrophic results from the war on redlining next, and increasingly wild government unreality imposed on the mortgage backed security markets was the final stage.
Mortgage backed securities would have been AAA if backed predominantly by good mortgages. The problem was not that mortgage backed securities went belly up. It was that vast numbers of mortgages went belly up, that entire neighborhoods went belly up, house after house empty with long grass, owned by homeless people sleeping on the streets of San Francisco, who even if they knew they owned a eight hundred thousand dollar house and three million dollar mortgage, which many of them did not, preferred San Francisco because they could steal and panhandle. The eight hundred thousand dollar house was not much use without a car, which they lacked the money to buy and competence to maintain, the en suite bathrooms useless to those disinclined to wash, the kitchen with pantry, megafridge, megastove, and vast food preparation area useless to those disinclined to prepare their own food, and lacking the future orientation required to do grocery shopping before one gets hungry.
In a sane economic order, the catastrophe unfolding in suburbia would have been visible in a parallel catastrophe unfolding in the mortgage backed security market. But the government would not tolerate that, because the catastrophe unfolding in suburbia could not be acknowledged, so suspended the markets in an unreality bubble until 2007-2008.
Mixing bad securities with good has long been a modus operandi of managers. I have a similar hypothesis regarding mutual funds, where fund managers would choose stocks to direct the firehose of investment not on the basis of investment quality, but on the basis of kickbacks received from the promoters. For promoters this is much better than raising new investment, because that would expose their weakness, or even seeking a loan which they wouldn’t get. For the fund manager this is A-OK as long as such securities represent a small enough fraction of the portfolio that gains in the good picks raise up the overall gains. If a downturn occurs, OTOH, and the expected winners do not pay, or pay lesser than expected, then this scheme goes to hell. Still no prosecution, of course, because politicians are also on their payroll!
The important difference was the sheer volume of bad mortgages, and the remarkable badness of those mortgages.
What initially happened was affirmative action on credit worthiness. There were not enough responsible borrowers of the correct race, so they issued mortgages to the least bad people of the correct race. Who were not outrageously bad, but still showed up on the credit data as bums.
But this data was racist. So they switched to “non traditional indicators of credit worthiness”, which indicators were constructed so that blacks and hispanics would score better. But these non traditional indicators were not indicators of credit worthiness, but indicators of credit unworthiness. At which point, you were getting people who lacked the interest and capability to own a house. This led to catastrophe, with entire areas of the suburbs in the Bay areas being abandoned, as the supposed owners simply preferred the sleeping on the streets lifestyle, or never realized that the fast talking realtor had sold them a house, and that the mark they had made on a pile of papers obligated them for a multimillion dollar mortgage. The typical purchaser was just not up to making a bed, or stocking the fridge in advance of getting hungry, or mowing the lawn, let alone getting a job and paying a mortgage.
By the end of 2005 November, the white speculators had fled the market, and when they did so, there were areas where in street after street after street, almost every house was abandoned, because the nominal purchasers were just not interested in living in green leafy suburbs.
Apropos of mortgage, I find it an extremely evil form of usurious loan. The Shariah-compliant alternative is much, much better, being inspired by Roman usage. I myself would design a hybrid alternative, leaning more towards the Shariah side rather than Jewish side.
Briefly, a mortgage would consist of a rental of the property with a commitment to buy at an agreed-upon price, after a certain number of years. The property is owned by the lender, and the mortgagee pays monthly rent+part payment towards eventual ownership. At the end of the term, ownership passes to the mortgagee. If the property greatly appreciates in value during the period, the mortgagee gets a windfall, but only if he sells after the end. If the property greatly depreciates in value, the mortgagee is not personally liable for any amount not already paid, and the most the lender can do is evict him. In effect, the mortgage will be a loan against the property rather than the person of the mortgagee. Lenders will be forced to honestly evaluate properties rather than suckering ill-informed “homeowners.”
PS: I’ve come to believe that renting is ideal in today’s society where protecting large immovable property is de-facto illegal. Only crime-lords can hold land now, and no-one else should try to.
That is almost exactly Christian lending – you can lend money at interest against productive property, but not against persons. You can lend money against the person, as in buy now, pay later, but late repayments have to be a loss, not a profit center, so no interest on late payments, so no incentive to grant buy now pay later to people that are likely to get in trouble doing it.
Interest income is sanctified by being derived from the productive use of capital. There has to be a nexus with the wise application of capital to its highest and best use. So no interest on loans against the person.
I assume the homeless home owners you describe were cut-outs for some more well-heeled party who wanted to gamble on the bubble with other people’s money.
Nah. Sometimes that happened, but the big thing that happened in 2005 was as follows:
Everyone, white and brown, was speculating on houses because bums were getting free money to buy them. So prices could only go up even further, right?
Then the prices got too high, and word about the nature of the mortgages backing the mortgage backed securities got around, and there was a sudden rush to get out of mortgage backed securities, immediately followed by sudden rush by speculators to unload their houses – sometimes, often, on a no-hablo-english drunken wetback they fished out of the gutter near Home Depot with a bottle of whiskey. Primarily the rush was white speculators, because they were more aware of what was happening in the mortgage backed security market.
The bums represented a way for the speculator to abandon both the overpriced house, and the even more overpriced mortgage.
People had been willing to gamble recklessly on the housing boom because they knew there was an escape hatch – and then suddenly everyone rushed out the escape hatch – seeing one flee, all fled. Where I lived there was street after street in which most houses been abandoned, because overpriced and overmortgaged, and because a formerly pleasant neighborhood had been overrun by unpleasant people. That was not typical, but it was not rare either.
@Pooch
Don’t feel bad for pumping and dumping “nice” girls. The pastor’s son in the small Evangelical church I grew up in was banging half the nice girls in the church and the girls knew they were part of his haram. Their only complaint was they couldn’t get on the rotation often enough and they sure the fuck didn’t care about the morality being preached in the church. All women are like that.
You’re better off trying to own a woman who than to pump and dump but the reality is soon or later that nice girl you banging was going to dump you for someone more alpha. You were never going to be anything other than a notch in her belt unless you took ownership, which is extremely hard to do today.
Now if you’re banging a virgin without intent to own… that’s the sort of shit GNON ordained the death penalty for. An unspoiled maiden is very rare and valuable thing. Frankly I thought the pastor’s son at my church should be beaten to death by their fathers but everyone seemed to willfully ignore their daughters behavior and thus his behavior.
They sure weren’t virgins but lower N count girls probably (no way to know for sure) who were upset and frustrated with their past beta boyfriends who worshipped them as goddesses. I was the first dude who didn’t give a fuck if they came or left and obviously they were drawn toward it. “You’re different than all the other guys I’ve metâ€. Guess I was sort of filling the Jeremy Meeks role for them.
What did u mean by this “ You’re better off trying to own a woman who than to pump and dump� Guessing a typo.
Is there any reason why the pastors son AND the daughters shouldn’t all be beaten to death?
“who worshipped them as goddesses” if the woman does not worship the man as, well, not a god, but as a hero, as her own personal King or God’s representative: the priest of the family, the man will end up worshipping her as a goddess. Funny how this works. I guess because sex makes human beings, it is sort of a natural sacrament and will always have such an aspect to it. If one goes back to the very early origins of religions, there are aspects like this…
Sex magic is the oldest and most powerful magic. Goddess worship, being an inversion, is always demonic magic.
Sacramental marriage, with the groom administering the sacrament to the bride, was intended to control this magic, and place it under God.
The social technology used by the old upper class of Rome, sacramental marriage, was superior to the Hebrew social technology of marriage by purchase, but by the time Christianity arrived on the scene, the Roman upper class had become decadent and lost virtue and social cohesion. Christianity absorbed and preserved this social technology, along with so many others. Hence worries about “is it scriptural” are stupid. Christianity won because it is a storehouse of good social technology, some of it preserved by Moses from the early bronze age against late bronze age decadence, and some of it from other sources.
There seems to have been some sort of goddess worship holiness spiral going on during the final years/decades of the Roman Republic. Both Sulla and Pompey claimed special relationships with Venus. Caesar holy spiraled that further by claiming Venus as his ancestress. Unclear if Augustus shut that down completely. He did manage to raise the status of the male gods like Jupiter and Mars back up, but Hadrian’s temple to Venus in 135 AD seems to have been the biggest temple ever built to any deity.
Sulla claimed a special relationship with FORTUNE (at least after what was probably a very frustrating youth as a man clearly of extremely superior ability but being born to a Patrician family where any low level work was beneath his dignity but he lacked the property to even join the legions merely as a ranker).
Caesar claimed he was descended from Venus via Aeneas of Troy members of the gens Julia had ALWAYS claimed that.
Most cultures thought of fortune/luck/fate as women or a group of women (because its both fickle and prone to play favorites).
Sulla claimed a special relationship with FORTUNE (at least after what was probably a very frustrating youth as a man clearly of extremely superior ability but being born to a Patrician family where any low level work was beneath his dignity but he lacked the property to even join the legions merely as a ranker). Caesar claimed he was descended from Venus via Aeneas of Troy members of the gens Julia had ALWAYS claimed that. Most cultures thought of fortune/luck/fate as women or a group of women (because its both fickle and prone to play favorites)
Jim delete the other comment I think I accidently used my old email I’m sorry…
“Is there any reason why the pastors son AND the daughters shouldn’t all be beaten to death?”
a lot if not most guys would do the same were they in the position of the pastor’s son…
“The pastor’s son in the small Evangelical church I grew up in was banging half the nice girls in the church and the girls knew they were part of his haram.”
In these cases I always wonder whether they also have/had a beta-bucks boyfriends while getting banged by him. Because if not, the other boys would wonder how comes all those girls are single, without boyfriends, it is not normal.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7L5MQ7EgdA
Society.
A small band of strangers establish a cooperate-cooperate equilibrium based on shared race and tribe and easily route their numerically superior but disorganized and demoralized opposition. It would be an inspiring video if we weren’t on the wrong side of it.
As Jim says, whites are wolves to other whites. Our unity comes through tribe or religion not race
This is the wignat fallacy. Wignats wish to bring about cohesion solely based on race like the nigs (thus the term wigger nationalist). Does not work.
In prison, you have to join a white gang. But there is apt to be more than one white gang, and not every white gets to be in the gang.
Look down on them and their strategy all you want, but the nigs decisively won the encounter in that video. Obviously there’s more to tribe than only race, but race is a major and immediately obvious component of tribe.
The fag and the hijabi girl would consider each other hated enemies were they both white, but as blacks they recognized the need for a united front against the real outsiders, and it worked very well for them.
Yes it works very for Africans. Murder the whites, then murder the half blacks, then return to living in grass huts, just like in Haiti.
If it worked well for whites, whites would have wiped every other race 3 times over now since the white race has now been the dominate military and technologically group 3 different epochs. It doesn’t work for us because it’s our intergroup competition that keeps driving us forward.
Does being outnumbered by opposing races have any affect on cohesion? American blacks seem to rally around their minority status in their total numbers. Then again, Haitian and South African blacks did outnumber whites respectively save for Orania but even that may be based on Christian cohesion and not white cohesion.
The problem is that whites have largely internalized a belief system, where acknowledging that you are in danger from people of other races is forbidden – which is how Detroit died.
If we generally saw the world as it is, we would move groups causing problems to reservations and let them eat each other.
This is likely what will happen with China in Africa. China may not be setting out to being a world colonizing power but Africans are fucking worthless in modern mining and infrastructure building. China’s going to have to colonize Africa just so they can get the materials they need.
Yes this was demonstrated in the video with the whites fear of being called racists preventing any type of white cohesion. The blacks sensed that weakness and decisively used it to their advantage.
Nonsense. Herd behaviour is a characteristic of lower animals, where they mitigate their individual low-chances of survival statistically. The way herd animals of the two-legged kind appear to be utilising their numerical strength strategically is only because of “democracy.” Once you extend “the vote” to pigs, don’t be surprised when they form perpetual government through high fertility,[1] and everyone has to wallow in filth. The situation isn’t learning to be more like pigs, it is in removing this ridiculous form of decision-making by universal “vote.”
Aryans, having higher functionality, tend to be more individualistic, to the extent that even Aryan goyim are more individualistic than Arab warriors,[2] for example. Indian politics is totally dominated by “vote-banks,” which effectively means goyim herds led by a “banker” who vote at his command. It would be much better for everyone if the “leaders” could simply choose the best among themselves, but then it wouldn’t be very “democratic,” (although it would be exactly how the United States was initailly supposed to work).
You can never “convince” a group of Aryans to have co-operate-co-operate equilibrium. You have to literally force them through military and spiritual power, and maintain that force right from the King-Emperor to the local lord. Dharma shastras tell us that the only way to win the respect of a Brahmin is to demonstrate superior knowledge, to a Kshatriya (warrior) is through domination in battle, to a Vaisya through display of far greater wealth, and to a Shudra by physical beauty (as per the Shudra definition lol).
[1]: High fertility of pigs is not the problem though, as long as we have sufficient numbers of minders, that is, elite fertility is not low.
[2]: A microcosm of this can be seen in the only ethno-state in the world — Israel. The low-caste, low-IQ Jews form the bulk of the population and behave collectively, whereas the higher-IQ “intellectual” class is split between nationalism and prog-ism, with the balance hugely in favour of prog-ism in America and turning toward prog-ism in Israel.
The only exception to this is Haiti. How did the blacks manage to win there? Was it lack of French cohesion?
Sort of. Haiti was lost in France, as Saigon fell in Washington.
Stabbed in the back from Paris.
Without white support from Paris, blacks in Haiti would still be slaves. Once the slave revolt started, there was plenty of white cohesion within Haiti.
Haiti was white on white operation with black muppets.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc.
Europoids defecting on europoids is contingently adaptive in the case that they are so dominant that noone else comes close to competing.
The eternal teenage hippy, baby boomers, felt perfectly fine with parroting feel good flattering lies, because they had no concept of how any of it would relate to the way of life they took for granted; they could not imagine how the civilization they lived in could ever go wrong; could not imagine that whites as a folk could ever actually not be ‘a thing’; and hence, had no compunctions about trading off on any and all of it for pseudosanctimonia.
The moment a set of organisms becomes capable of inventing civilization in their space, is the moment the selection pressures change radically. The more ‘surplus capital’ they are capable of, the more particular exponents may be insulated from more direct interface with divine law. Hence the frequent glibly fatalistic observation: “If someone can afford to make bad decisions, they will”. And hence, the stepwise increasing necessity for men themselves to become avatars for channeling divine law (some having more success with this than others).
It does not mean that such carrying on is a good thing, but the *negation* of good things; a great filter even, if you will.
>Murder the whites, then murder the half blacks, then return to living in grass huts, just like in Haiti.
Well, someone lives in a grass hut and while someone’s corpse feeds the worms. Which one is the winner here?
The worms are the winners, because after one winter without white people, they get to eat all the Africans too.
>The worms are the winners
OK, that’s a clever line, I admit. It doesn’t change the fact that the negroes won, the whites lost. You’ll do and say anything to avoid admitting that their strategy works. Is it clear-eyed realism, or are you still enthralled by proggie racial doctrines?
Asians would win.
Asians are not very susceptible to Cathedral racial guilt memes and not at all in their home countries.
Stop being a wignat. Accept that their worldview is flawed and that American whites will never really act as a unitary tribe.
The present conflict, as it stands today, still boils down to good whites (us) vs evil whites, with the non-whites being agents of the evil whites. We haven’t reached Haiti status yet.
Indeed; which is the necessary prefigurement for cominating the whites who don’t act as a unitary tribe.
That can’t be done until post victory (or during the war for leftist whites who find themselves behind our lines).
Whites really cannot organize on the basis of racial cohesion. It is not on our nature. Observe how that turned out in Nazi Germany, as Hitler proceeded to make a good start on genociding Greek Nazis. Not very cohesive of him. And the alliance with Mussolini did not go so well for Mussolini.
It was, as always, a white on white conflict, and whites who sought to organize on the basis of racial cohesion rapidly came into conflict with other whites who sought to organize on the basis of racial cohesion.
On the other hand, prison gangs are always racial. It is easier, much easier, to organize and cooperate with people that are like oneself.
But the white prison gangs, which, white cohesion being illegal, are our primary example of white cohesion, do not organize to protect all whites from all blacks. They organize to protect some whites from everyone, regardless of race. They are all white, but do not have unity and cohesion on the basis of race. They have unity and cohesion on the basis of gang membership. They make not the slightest attempt to be inclusive of whites in the prison generally, or to protect whites in the prison generally.
If the Republican party has a future, it is going to have to take a white prison gang as its model. And the white prison gang does not think all Jews are one Jew. Does not think about Jews all that much at all.
I trust you take the point however; for one to grant the power of those races capable of racial cohesion, while at the same time signaling against men who advocate for whites to again wield that same power for themselves; exactly what one might expect from those species of men most instinctively disposed towards defecting on their neighbors.
Its debatable how much blacks in the absence of the Cathedral preaching a religion of get whitey could organize based on racial cohesion either, American blacks have an advantage most of them were from the same small group of tribes in Africa.
In Africa they don’t have much more racial solidarity with each other than whites do (or indeed Asians).
That’s a really good point. If black cohesion really was natural to them, we would see Africa being able to cooperate on a large scale, which is the opposite of what we see. It’s completely tribal. Same goes for the Native Americans/Indians. If the various tribes were able to unite and cooperate based on shared race, they would have made it much harder to be subjugated by the various European/American powers.
But in fact it was the opposite, 95% (if not 99%) of slaves taken by whites in Africa were sold to whites by africans generally prisoners taken in tribal warfare but on occasion if the African chiefs would start mass enslaving lots of members of their own tribes to sell to white slave traders. Whites raiding coastal villages for slaves (though it did sometimes happen) was rare.
So I do not think that blacks in fact do not have that much innate racial solidarity. I think with humans racial solidarity is always a partial factor but its only one factor, that can be weakened or strengthened based on religious and tribal memetics.
It looks to me that most slaves sold were not prisoners taken in tribal warfare, though low level tribal conflict intermediate between high crime levels and actual warfare was frequently involved.
They were rather people that the local authorities just did not want around any more – vagrants, bums, and petty criminals, not warriors.
Enslaving people because the chief just wanted to sell them was uncommon, though hardly unknown. Actual warfare was a substantial source, but it does not seem to have been the main source, and to the extent that it was a source, those slaves were apt to be trouble.
Memetic and religion can undermine even the most racially and tribally cohesive groups.
Christianity was banned in Japan because Totoyomi Hideyoshi and Tokugawa Ieyashu thought that while all Shinto and Buddhist Japanese would put all differences aside and rally to the “Emperor’s” banner if there was a foreign christian invasion (the Japanese fought each other at time but even then were probably cohesive enough if there was a foreign invasion)… they did not trust the loyalty of the Christian Daimyo and Samurai the same way and thought of them as a potential 5th column in case the Spanish were planning an invasion.
If the tribal chiefs enslaved their own there was some thin legal justification, but something about the law or enforcement of the law (what passed for law in West African tribal societies) would be changed in such a way to see lots and lots of people enslaved.
But I did think for the most part most people enslaved came from raids on other tribes.
The data on this is thin. Slave raiding attracted a lot of attention, rightly so, but what is the evidence that it was a major factor?
My evidence is weak, I read people who were around at the time, and obviously there is a selection effect – if someone is writing stuff down, things are probably pretty quiet, so it is kind of weak evidence. What evidence do you have.
We’re dealing with records of pre colonization West Africa so as you say thin evidence.
But it was not typical for rulers to get away with selling their own men en masse too often without danger to themselves the way the 18th century Dukes of Hesse would in history (especially in small scale tribal societies)… So I suspect that African chiefs got the bulk of their slave stock from raids on other tribes or else risked being killed.
Rulers did not sell their subjects en masse. (With a few infamous exceptions.)
Indeed, it was not so much rulers at all. The local important man would have a problem with some people, and then the helpful slaver would show up with an offer to take them off his hands free of charge. By and large these were people who would otherwise have been killed, and likely killed and eaten. It was more the cattle rancher getting rid of some people who were holding a barbecue.
@Cominator
>In Africa they don’t have much more racial solidarity with each other than whites do (or indeed Asians).
Yes, of course this is true. Common experience, common hardship, and above all, common enemies forge a tribe. Race is still a big part of it though, because it’s an easy basis for common enemies and common experience, and it’s an easy way to separate Us from Them. Watch that video again. All the whites are self-abasing proggies who probably hate us more than the blacks do, but having a common enemy alone isn’t enough for the blacks to accept them into the in-group.
I’m not trying to say all whites share a mystical bond or something retarded like that. But American whites do have a common enemy, common hardships, and common experience, and we’re in dire need of a tribe. Race will have to be a key part of that tribal identity, like it or not, because we’re surrounded by racially-based tribes that despise us. If we don’t include race as one of the bases of our in-group (necessary, but obviously not sufficient), we’re going to be infiltrated, subverted, and used by any outsider who can parrot our words.
If we go all the way to Haiti, my money is on the cartels. Their leadership has considerable white admixture and I don’t think they would have any qualms about massacring Africans en mass if need be. Hell, I’d even think about joining them although with no one to sell drugs to I’m not sure what their business model would become.
@ContaminatedNEET
That’s a non sequitur.
We must eat shit, because we’re surrounded by pigs? The pigs surrounding a lion are not a threat — the main threat is the other lion right there who nominally supports the pigs.
The single bigggest cause of the South African negrocalypse was Judeo-Bolshevik agitation. Same with US “civil rights,” the chief villain of that being Lyndon Johnson, but Eisenhower was the same.
Searching for Aryan “racial consciousness” is folly. It was folly in 1937, and is folly today. Aryans need aristocracy to function.
As a kid I did not appreciate the Lion King but as an adult the Lion King shows the race issue in the right light.
The Hyenas (minorities that serve Scar the leftist usurper Lion) were not the real problem for the Lions the problem was the defecting traitor Lion (Scar). He let the Hyenas in as enforcers after he took over but get rid of him and they cease to be a (major) problem.
So it is with blacks and hispanics (and here in Florida the spics are overwhelmingly on our side anyway).
>whites are wolves to other whites
And is that good for them?
There’s a normative two-step going on here and I’d like to stop folk from slipping around it.
So one may say ‘it is a good thing for whites to not defect on whites’; and a reply comes, ‘whites defect on whites’.
Yes? That is indeed what brings the former point up to begin with. Such a statement would be nonsensical if there was no such thing as the problem in the first place. It’s basically stopping halfway before arriving at a real argument.
Bringing a teuton on to your team of teutons is not a guarantee that he will cohere; but bringing a non-teuton on to your team of teutons *is* a guarantee that he *won’t* cohere. Being racially conscious is not by itself a sufficient condition for (europoid) cohesion; but a national church that *isn’t* also racially conscious will quickly find itself becoming neither.
Either formerly apex predators learn to purge the auto-phagism that knocked them out of the top spot, or they continue knocking themselves out, and get knocked of the race altogether.
Many such cases. Sad!
well, no need to be so blackpilled. the like/dislike ratio on that video is pretty inspiring.
Wisdom of the crowd. Is nice, but nothing new under the sun. People, many people, have been complaining for years, it’s just never the people who stand to lose by their complaint. So nothing changes.
an interesting chat with a retired Pentagon fella, a Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney.
the last 10 minutes suggests to me that China is softening us up for invasion or, at minimum, rendering our Healthcare and Military incapable whilst they pursue something else.
so, what’s y’all odds on invasion? maybe invasion ain’t the right word. if everyone who took the biological weapon disguised as a vaccine dies then it like…. what’s that sci fi bomb that kills all the people but leaves all the infrastructure intact? a neutron bomb/pulse?
anyway, they appear to be attempting to Sun Tzu us.
China’s ambitions are clearly expressed, no secret, and are considerably more modest.
They don’t want to conquer us, but they intend to once more become the middle empire, the dominant world power, the way the US used to be the dominant world power, and everyone thinks that it still is. They intend to be a land and coastal power, the way the US is an airsea power.
This may well result in them dominating Europe and ruling it indirectly, the way the US rules it indirectly, but they are in no hurry to get to that point.
They seem to be content with looting us on the way out.
Stealing from the weak is the way of the world. No one steals form the strong.
observing our psychopathic rulers has conditioned me toward suspicion of anything explicitly stated, if that’s what you mean by “clearly expressed”
i trust your take on this issue and will continue observing
There was a ton of misinformation during the election dispute citing Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney as a source. I’m not inclined to take any article credible citing him as a source.
A lot of the misinformation was likely enemy action to make anyone pointing out the theft of the election to look insane (I have no idea why anyone need the dominion stuff after watching boxes of hidden ballots being counted with the observers sent home in Atlanta, that was the smoking gun). It was a quite effective as people believed that Trump was far more competent than he actually was leading to believing insane things as reality clashed with perception.
Anyone who previously distrusted enemy misinformation should never be trusted again.
Distributed*
like a complete tosser, i forgot to link the video
https://noqreport.com/2021/03/25/lt-gen-tom-mcinerney-we-are-in-world-war-iii-we-did-not-have-a-pandemic-we-had-a-biological-attack/
The most important personal lesson I keep seeing unfolding all through my life, with many kinds of political and personal lessons with it as well, is the inter-related unfolding of authority and responsibility. Always together.
Like, for example, if there is one (pseudo-)Christian idea I loathe is that “everybody has their own personal cross”. No, God is not sending us tribulations, unnecessary sufferings just to test our faith. Admittedly, God is still far more a metaphor of speaking than reality for me, but the metaphor has the same logic as the real one, as logic *inside our mental reasoning* is something that happens between symbols. And it cannot possibly work like that. Makes no sense.
For Christianity to make any sense, His Cross was the last cross *as a cross*, that is like half the point of it. We have our responsibilities as God’s lieautenants, charged with keeping good order in some small part in his Creation. This can be difficult. But they are not sufferings for the sake of suffering or somehow proving faith through that. They are jobs.
Now, the people I tend to hear this idea from are mostly the oh so typical rural Catholic great-grandma in my neck of Europe. It hurts here in my leg and it hurts there in my lower back and this is my personal cross. No, dammit, it is God’s indirect blessing through the work of smart men that you are even alive to see your great-grandkids at 82. Your husband died without seeing them, was that his personal cross?
And this is where what I mentioned above about authority and responsibility comes into play. These old gals are actually… behaving 101% well. Really. Because their husbands and brothers are dead, their sons are working somewhere else where there is better money, they are following the only local male authority left to them, the local priest. It is 100% his fault. Why is he teaching this to them?
Just like when many officers die in battle and the grunts end up following the legitimate authority of some logistics geek officer who happened to stay alive and then end up doing stupid shit on his orders. It is not their fault, it is the fault of officerdom for not having had the foresight to provide for this situation a better officer. Authority = responsibility. Authority propagates downwards, hence responsibility upwards.
Don’t ever blame people who are just following an authority they should be following. This is sort of this personal lesson to me. Because I used to be kinda angry on the old gals for spreading this stupid idea. But I was wrong. They are not responsible.
“Don’t ever blame people who are just following an authority they should be following.”
At a certain point you absolutely should blame them for continuing to follow a bad authority. Much of the trouble we are in is because almost everyone (except me and a couple of other people) wanted to trust the good intentions of the Cathedral public health authorities rather than my approach (when in doubt be paranoid and lets err on the side of some extra old people dying if I’m wrong). An authority you suspect of malice or incompetence should be fragged by all good men at any opportunity. A good soldier absolutely should shoot a bad officer in the back when he has the chance.
The followers of the priesthood who obey out of imminent fear to the minimum degree they have to in order to survive should of course not be blamed, anyone who goes beyond that (especially men and especially white men) should be considered part of the priesthood themselves.
does my cat have fucking cornrows? …whatever
important bit: whaddya big brains here think of Doctor Coleman?
https://brandnewtube.com/v/DOIoyV
tl;dw
20 min video describing possible human extinction event as a possibility of these bio-weapon not-vaccines
he’s always seemed credible to me so now i ask y’all. his final suggestion, if this path be probable, is that those who’ve avoided the jab may need to quarantine themselves from contact with those that have been vaccinated in order to survive what he expects will be a terrible *possibly* unintended consequence of this psychotic experiment
He is nut.
The vaccines are likely to be more dangerous than China Flu. Which is not all that dangerous. They are not infectious. It is not a plot, it is primarily incompetence.
One widely used vaccine is loose RNA, which is incapable of reproducing. Another is a virus that has been rendered incapable of reproducing. It takes over the cell, the cell sends panic signals to the immune system “Help I am being taken over, kill me before I kill”, and then the virus fails to do anything with that control.
These vaccines are unlikely to do much harm to healthy people – they might kill a few of those that are frail or who have dodgy immune systems. They will protect you against China flu, but probably have a bad effect on your immune system. For most people, it is a wash – less danger from China flu, more danger from the vaccine. Neither danger is significant.
i appreciate your taking the time to chat with me about this
The fact that it is being pushed so hard (propaganda, vaccine passports, pushing it on the young, all coordinated, everywhere the same plans) that alone tells me not to get it. No one needs to be sold something good that hard.
I wouldn’t need it at all anyway, and it will still be pushed on me: hard no.
i think this is mostly just the result of a purity spiral. the priesthood has sanctified vaccines. nobody wants to be the heretic that will violate this most holy sacrament.
Exactly so.
Inflicting vaccines of dubious effectiveness and safety on everyone is not an evil plot to do everyone harm. It is a sacrament, and all must observe the sacraments of the state religion.
The vaccines are, in most cases, somewhat effective, and the danger for a young healthy person is slight. But the danger of China flu for a young healthy person is also slight.
They changed the WHO definition for herd immunity so herd immunity would only be declared when most people are vaccinated. The WHO is in on it, so it seems like there’s planning behind it. Whether the intention is evil or comes from spiraling holiness, forcing it on people seems pretty evil to me. I cannot speak to whether they do harm, but these people are not to be trusted.
Experimental gene therapy
Holy water cannot harm anyone (or maybe it can, if literal demons exist and someone is possessed by a literal demon) But modern sacraments are fake materialist, and therefore based on scientism, and scientism retains uncomprehended fragments of what makes science potent.
They want everyone vaccinated as a sacrament unto the Covid demon, and are indifferent as to whether it is likely to do harm.
I’ve done a bit of research on the Spanish flu of 1918.
Much like current covid thing.
In year 1 (2020) no excess deaths around the world, no pandemic, just lots of fear-mongering, faked figures, propaganda, and then the big push for vaccines.
Yesr 2, espeically winter 2, the effects of the vaccines cause millions of deaths, old people mostly, as their own bodies kill them by over-reacting to any old infection. Vox shared soem research on this recently.
SO watch out as we head into winter, things will get really bad.
The push by Biden and all other nations for ‘vaccine passports’ is the real reaspn for the fake pandemic and the misllions who will die in the years ahead. The whole world will be moved towards digiatl IDs, very Chinese, very bad, obviously.
Much more is planned, the Davos crowd have been telling us what’s coming for years, now they are open about the Great Reset.
> nobody wants to be the heretic that will violate this most holy sacrament.
I will never take their fucking poison.
Yeah, with this “vaccine passport” idea now mooted, I’ve firmly decided I won’t be getting the vaccine nor holding any jobs, attending any events, etc. that require such a “passport.” Though difficulties with international travel will be a big inconvenience for me, I think this is too important not to take a stand.
That said, for purposes of international travel I wouldn’t be above… paying someone for some photoshop creativity, but since presumably whatever it is will be linked to centralized databases checked at airports, it seems like forgery may be difficult?
Perhaps what is needed is to get a doctor friend to “administer” a real dose of the vaccine with a real lot number, etc. but of course you’d be asking someone to take a serious risk of losing medical license, etc.
If I need one I’m going to bribe someone to say I got a shot.
Seems the way to go.
Actual practicing male doctors (not the gay public health priesthood) are more right wing than you think. I’m sure it would be possible.
Actually thinking about this a little more, doctors rarely actually administer vaccines. Better to bribe a low level black nurse or assistant at a clinic or something. I’d be fine handing them 200 bucks. Blacks are extremely easy to bribe. I used to bribe black bouncers regularly to cut the long lines to get into the clubs back when I was deep in night game.
Yeah, I was thinking some Walgreens employee would have a lot less to lose than one’s doctor friend.
“…of course you’d be asking someone to take a serious risk of losing medical license, etc.”
Bullsh!t, doctors in my state have not lost jack for malpractice in a century, i doubt any doctor anywhere in the US is at risk for diddly, if you think the law matters more then the bureaucrats, you’re playing a game which does not exist, america is a bribable country, the normies just havent realized it yet. everything in the medical industry, Everything, is a monopolized who/whom. sharlisa or karen will squirt that shit down the drain faster then you can say damn, if you pass them a few 20s. And if you’re worried about people noticing later on just pass them a few twenties to discover a majickal new mystery syndrome of uber rare uneffectium vaccinarum, scientists arent dangerous. Cops and Swat are, plus the IRS maybe, stop worrying about your doctors party fidelity. play the game you see a decade or three from now, thats the one you are living in, everything else is BS you can bribe docs, you can bribe cops, you can do whatever you have to, the devil is bound to take the good deal and the wicked, so make the good one and survive. I have broken laws and got away with squat, no one wants trouble everyone wants an excuse, give em a ‘oly one. they will shut up and ignore anything.
When the dust settled from the Great Minority Mortgage Meltdown, African levels of corruption became visible, and there were no consequences for anyone.
I have never actually bribed anyone, so I’ll take your word for it that Americans are bribable! Honestly, it’s the thought of the untouchable true believers that scares me more at this point.
Doctors can get in trouble for lots of shit, nurses don’t unless they are caught poisoning someone. Also strangely for an overwhelmingly female organization the nurses union is fairly cohesive and pro nurse.
“nurses don’t unless they are caught poisoning someone. Also strangely for an overwhelmingly female organization the nurses union is fairly cohesive and pro nurse.” nurses poison peeps on the regular, they are memory holed as virtues’ priests of the whory order. nurses are harlots of baal who do whatever they are told, the nurses unions are not female in the slightest, nurses are sub 90-80 IQ and incapable of organizing(remember the tale of the doctors who wouldn’t wash their bonesaws? yep, shit hasn’t changed, what works and what’s done are a sight different), they are defection tools by hospital administers who don’t have lords to hang them for their treachery. I know a few nurses. They are the essence of useful idiots espoused by stalinesque figures. dumber then a sack of rocks, the men are obese fags and the women, cobble stones. They do as told and do not possess “unions”. nurses are the worst emulsion of eastern(german and pre ww2 russian woman(is the civil war an explanation for the unexplained predominance of blond women in the 1940s?)) you can imagine, they are horrific. If you are living in a world where you should go to an hospital for an ailment which is not blatantly obvious, a-la compound fracture in the super bowl. You are an idiot. simple stitching? safer at home with the “comraderie” of your veterinarian friend. I am deadly serious. Hospitals are death traps for idiots, my cousin lost a 20 somethin friend to Great British TM medicine courtesy of the NHS, He and his wife are of course convinced that despite the fact that the US and even fricking argentina can pull off the same fix on the regular without fuss(I know a good family from that southern hellhole) the nhs, which fucks simple anesthesia up on the regular, is not to blame. For real, they think their shitstain of a ,health “care” system is superior and are choosing to raise an infant in that monstrous beast, despite their knowing multiple persons who have died from the evil in it. I said if you think it should be modus operandi in 20-30 years(circa 2040-50) you should operate on that assumption today, too many of you men don’t get it, our medicine is bosnian, circa 1990 level maybe, if your lucky like me, you know the really good men who can genuinely patch you back together(illegally), probs not tho. Your vet knows more about your damn health then your doctor. Ranchers are morbidly diseased, their horses are not Ever. ask the vet who spends cash they didn’t Earn, they actually know their shit. As much as those here are good men, get your balls in a pair and stop worrying about shit, if they are gonna go after you they dont need fuck all for “proof” they just cook up a jury and no real man will ever look under the hood. You are outlaws or soon to be, so stop your’ bellyaching and live by God’s laws already.
“nurses are sub 90-80 IQ and incapable of organizing”
Nurses are capable of being organized. The few unions I know are as Cominator described.
Nurses aren’t generally all that smart but most of them don’t deliberately poison people not unless ordered to anyway. There have been quite a few serial killer nurses though.
I could not tell you who actually runs the nurses union only that it seems strangely cohesive and pro nurse for an organization with overwhelmingly female members while the doctors union is a tool of Harvard and the academic priesthood in general that is not at all for the interests of doctors.
Doctors get raped on malpractice, in most states they are required to carry malpractice insurance (lawyers would not generally be interested in suing them otherwise) and the premiums are crippling.
Yes the medical system sucks because of the government/cathedral (and the insurance companies who have more money for bribes than anyone) we know all this.
A couple female pharmacists and nurses have already been busted for InstaTok-bragging about forging their own vax cards. If your male doctor friend can avoid the temptation to attention-whore on the internet, he’ll be fine.
Horrifying car jacking caught on video in DC in broad daylight…
https://twitter.com/AuronMacintyre/status/1376003441374457861?s=20
The 2nd Amendment may be the most important issue now, if only to protect us from feral nigs.
I’d vote to acquit, swamp dwellers ain’t people may DC become Detroit anywhere outside secure area grounds.
It’ll be happening in every American city soon enough.
And that’d be bad outside the beltway but we want the entire beltway to become Detroit.
Would be funny I guess if you start seeing dumb Dem Congress critters being carjacked.
Its not that likely the congresscritters themselves have that happen… but their staffs and hangers on it’d be a good thing.
I would be interested to see the numbers overlayed with the authentic negro population and the percent of americans affected by exodus americanus, probs such things are impossible today, but as a yanky who suffers from the great northern migration of post cotton invasion, i can say that most of em are as bottled up here as in france, even as a lad we would go into darkie town without any fear as long as we stayed in the businesses and not in the residentials. this new wave of war is more then detroit, it is seeking out conflict rather then poisoning some areas. I can say growing up the city was far away, but with the holiness spiral? even the rural folk like us are gunning up and getting ready to sling a pick into the ground, last summer was a genuinely scary time, maybe im just foolish but i got very bosnian vibes and being near a mil base there was stuff happening the last few years that was new to me, lot of petrol being burned in the night without obvious cause tho its quieter now
Whites, Asians, Arabs, Indians, and Jews in every American city voted for black supremacy, and they got black supremacy. What’s the problem?
Horrifying car jacking caught on video in DC in broad daylight…
The headline is worrying, until you see that N.H.I.
I don’t think they did. Anyway, voting doesn’t matter anymore.
>I’d vote to acquit, swamp dwellers ain’t people may DC become Detroit anywhere outside secure area grounds.
You don’t need to worry about it. Blacks don’t convict blacks.
I think self defense is largely defacto illegal in blue areas. In rural areas people might soon be burring the bodies rather than reporting it to the police.
Its not de facto illegal. Predators go after the weak in the herd, instinctively attacking those unlikely to defend themselves.
Well looks like they are double-downing on ole China flu. Biden calling for reimposition of mask mandates and vaccine passports now.
https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2021/03/29/biden-demands-states-reimpose-covid-mask-mandates/
I wear masks outside because diesel fume and laterite dust is very real threat to my health.
For sure I don’t wear mask for China flu which turned out to be big nothing burger.
I’ve developed personal sense of disgust to people who wear mask indoor.
seems ancient greece and grr martin both understood masks better then you, they are just an occult garb to signal, I went on a trip and walked into a gas station in another US state, the workers refused to look at me, one guy gave me the nod, biden isnt “doubling down” hes not made any bet at all or given any will to this, he is just participating in the same purity spiral as the rest of the week and wicked, if they start enforcing effectively “vacs” checkpoints then that is something, otherwise its just wmds in iraq, soon to be memory holed.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/AoFAgfZY7Ek/
Jim to what extent do you think this threatens crypto.
Could it threaten my crypto miner stock?
Enormous and central threat to cryptocurrency. https://helplbrysavecrypto.com
This is what my entire design has been about from the beginning. Well, first and foremost it is about scalability, scaling to big enough for the whole world. But secondly it is about scaling to world size while not getting crap regulated out of it.
The government does not intend to suppress crypto currency. It intends to put the bureaucratic strangle on it as with stock exchanges and banking. This is why we need to destroy the crypto exchanges, as a first step to destroying the banks and the stock exchanges.
Yes, it could threaten your crypto stock, because it is a stock. Because, if traded on an official stock exchange, highly regulated, highly vulnerable to regulators.
At some point – probably not next week, probably not next month, probably not next year, but eventually – everyone involved in crypto and vulnerable to regulation is going to be screwed.
Do you still advise holding crypto on hardware wallets in light of this news?
It is the only game in town. But some hardware wallets are integrated into central servers and regulated companies, which creates a point of vulnerability.
People who are in a position to do you harm don’t make your vulnerability to harm easy to see.
Your hardware wallet should support PSBT: Partially Signed Bitcoin Transaction and BIP174, as these are capable of interacting by a totally decentralized protocol that does not rely on DNS.
Any that you recommend? I am using Trezor currently. Czech owned company.
I don’t want to publicly reveal which wallets I am using. Search for BIP174
Got it. Thanks Jim.
Keep us updated as to any causes to take quick action if you would?
I don’t really watch for causes for quick action.
The big picture is that crypto currency cannot really coexist with the existing regulated system.
In the end, there can only be one. Efforts to put the genie back in the bottle started quite some time ago, are escalating, and will continue to escalate. Libry’s big mistake is that they opened the door to the regulators and expected the regulators to act in accordance with the spirit and letter of existing law and regulation.
I could have told them what was coming down the track.
This lines up with why the big banks seem to be embracing Bitcoin and crypto. They are not looking at it like a competitor but just another regulated security to be offered to their investors.
Jim they are represented by the leftist glowniggery lawfirm of Perkins Coie, who were among other things connected with trying to frame Trump for muh Russia.
That is probably not good… so lets assume they lose what happens next…
Their strategy is that you hire someone who is in good with the regulators, in the hope that they can pull strings in your favor.
Trouble is that the likely way they keep in good with the regulators is by double crossing their clients. They are likely setting this up to create the legal precedent that the regulators want.
Hiring lawyers who were in good with the people who were persecuting him did not work in General Flynn’s favor. His legal team set him up.
That’s the problem with attorneys. On the one hand, I want my attorneys to know the judge well and be able talk to him privately off the record. On the other hand, I want them to act in my interest and that sometimes implies acting against the interest of the judge which they are more likely do if they do not know the judge.
Old problem. Noone has found a perfect solution.
Elon is the Star Prophet but Jim is a prophet-prophet. Everything is proceeding as he has foreseen. Somehow a federal observer wasn’t available for SpaceX’s latest launch.
“As part of the agreement reached by SpaceX and the Federal Aviation Administration—which provides permitting for commercial launches—a federal observer must be on-site for test flights of the Starship vehicle.
For some reason, perhaps a weather-related travel delay or perhaps something else, an inspector was not available for Monday’s launch attempt. “FAA inspector unable to reach Starbase in time for launch today. Postponed to no earlier than tomorrow,†SpaceX founder Elon Musk tweeted on Monday.”
@restitutor_orbis
And the FAA immediately went into CYA mode when Kaliph Elon pronounced them “Sons of the Devil†on Twitter.
The test was conducted the next day.
https://youtu.be/cN7855POvJ8
https://youtu.be/gjCSJIAKEPM
Will Elon’s enemies eventually catch up to him before he launches and lands Starship from orbit successfully multiple times, maybe. But Elon is fast and his enemies are slow (their paradigm on aerospace is that tests take several months and years in aerospace, doing tests every two weeks is outside their box). And China and Russia are watching.
Biden has already put the plan to put a human occupied base on the moon on indefinite hold, probably because it is rapidly becoming apparent that Musk is the only contractor who could actually deliver.
But I expect space to be funded by the internet in space, and by asteroid mining for platinum and gold – mostly platinum.
@Jim
Biden’s handlers still think of aerospace testing in terms of old aerospace (the Saturn V S1-C first stage took roughly seven to nine months to build the tanks and 14 months to complete a stage. StarProphet Elon builds and tests Saturn V class stages every few weeks). Those who want “Mankind to be confined to Earth” are still in the SLS/SaturnV frame of mind when they are planning their diabolical plans, this while Elon issues papal bulls against those who oppose “making Mankind Multiplanetary.”
Meanwhile China has plans for its own Moon base, which might change if Elon Musk successfully proves the fully reusable 100 passenger Starship. After that, the fate of USG matters not anymore.
Tangentially to the link posted regarding the reprisal at Thessalonica (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massacre_of_Thessalonica):
The Roman magister arrested a popular chariot racer (arch-sportsman) for flagrant sodomy, and got lynched by the population for it. The Emperor, coming to know about it, ordered a reprisal on the Philosodom population. The gay Church took severe exception to this, esp “St.” Ambrose, and denied communion to the Emperor until Christmas. This is only 390 AD. The Church of Sodom has been at it from the beginning. Maybe the Emperor should have responded by reprisals against St Ambrose and his lunatic philosodom followers. But that was impossible for he himself had accepted the gay communion.
Oh, and Wikipedia seems to have removed all reference to sodomy from the article concerned lol. The spirit St Ambrose still guides them!
History of this incident has suffered numerous radical rewrites in recent times, and looks to me that a rewrite is on the way that unhappens it altogether.
you know, I’ve long since stopped getting angry at The System. I admire its perverse brilliance and sure I hope that when we take power our side will just as cunning.
Hans Anderson’s Imps mirror is one of those poetic things that’s more real than tangible reality. The demon on your shoulder prevents you from thinking.
The church stood opposed to public amusements including chariot races from the inception. By the 4th century the games are declining because Christians tend not to go. Ambrose’s only comments on them are derogatory.
Games fans go out of control and kill an official. This happening over a sodomite looks like a modern revision to me, but it doesn’t even matter, because everything indicates that Ambrose opposes the games either way. The emperor retaliates to the riot by use of violence against the whole city. Rioters or not. That part we have good historical attestation too.
So why is Ambrose indignant? You say it’s because he cared about a sodomite and sportsfans. I say it was because his people were not at the games nor part of the riot, and in fact opposed the games in general, and they got punished indiscriminately anyway.
Ambrose didn’t even object to the use of violence per se, but to the lack of trials and the uncontrolled scope of the violence. I agree with him.
Before investigative science, it was right practice to punish the entire community for excessive crime, as letting it get that bad is a stain on the male citizens meant to keep order.
Aidan not sure if you saw my previous comment. https://blog.reaction.la/uncategorized/fixed-privacy-leak-in-avatars/#comment-2711361
I will make a new email and be in touch with you shortly.
Sure, but Rome had repeatedly demonstrated the ability to selectively target offending communities within a city, and that was not exercised this time.
Lets say Theodosius sent in troops at the next game, exterminating all spectators. He would have a reputation for being clever and efficient then. The church and Ambrose would probably handwaive off any of the Christian community killed in that incident as being in a place they ought not have been anyway.
But even if he wasn’t clever enough for that. Knocking on doors, finding out roughly who could plausibly have been involved, and killing them and theirs would have been the normal way of dealing with it. It’s no surgical strike or investigative science, but it’s functional.
But when he struck the pro games rioters and the anti games community as one he punished his law-abiders. And if you punish cooperators you feed defection.
Theodosius was a total priestcuck fag of an Emperor anyway.
Imagine letting barbarians in en masse. He was a puppet for fanatical priests (Theodosius reign was purity spiraled christianity) who let in barbarians. He was basically the Joe Biden of the Roman Empire. He should be known as Theodosius the traitor not Theodosius the Great.
The Eastern Empire only survived because Marcian made a very big point of reversing almost all of Theodosius policies if not for him (Constantinople having good walls or not) the East would have fallen too around the same time as the West.
Valens let in the Goths, not Theodosius. Theodosius had the Goths become Foederati only after he was unable to defeat them.
Theodosius is called “the Great†because he crushed the Pagans at the Frigidus and established Christianity as the sole religion of the empire.
Valens made a big military fuckup but Theodosius didn’t just let in the Goths he let in everyone (and when Valens let in the Goths they theoretically were going to be under control the problem is the people controlling them were both sadistically and evilly corrupt, they were supposed to get rations for the 1st year or something but the officials there seized there food and told them if you want food sell your children as slaves and we’ll give you dog meat and this is literally from primary sources, and massively incompetent).
And it was the East that the Goths were in but it was the East that survived, and my theory is the East survived because there was an Emperor (Marcian) who was able to reverse almost every policy of Theodosius whereas no such thing happened in the West.
Theodosius purity spiraled christianity so that there was massive civil unrest all over the empire (including among most Christians).
Theodesius was correct to suppress heresy. Trouble is that it is a fine line between suppressing dangerous entryist conspiracies, and purity spiraling the state religion. But he was on the correct side of that line.
Theodosius did not “let in” the Goths. He fought a long and bloody war to keep them out, and the war was not going too well, so he cut a deal that allowed a successful invasion to stand, subject to them agreeing to serve Rome. Which they did. Story goes that he accomplished through cultural domination what was not achievable by force of arms.
I am not aware that Marcian reversed any policies of Theodosius. Perhaps he had lighter touch on heresy, but the heresy in question was less dangerous.
Disagree with you on this Jim more than I’ve ever disagreed with you on any historical question.
During the reign of Theodosius children different religious groups were massacreing each other it was like a communist power struggle (including the disastorous order to murder the families of the Federati in Italy because they were untrustworthy Arians) and the Empire outside of Italy fell almost entirely into barbarian hands.
Theodosius deferred to Ambrose likely meaning he was basically a Donatist heretic himself, none of Constantine’s family would have ever tolerated any kind of crap from a bishop.
And no you can’t supress heresy when you are recruiting Arian heretics into your army wholesale that is fucking retarded.
You are right, and I stand corrected.
Too much priestly power led to too much internal Christian conflict, as applecarts were available to be knocked over, and too much internal Christian conflict made Theodosius unable to deal with Attila the Hun.
Marcian was able to deal with Attila, because had better internal peace. He had better internal peace, because fewer applecarts available for Christian factions to knock over. He had a less serious heresy problem, because fewer goodies on the able.
Theodosius did not “let” the barbarians in. He was unable to stop them. But he let Christian factions knock over pagan applecarts, which led to bitter infighting between Christian factions over the apples rolling around, and the infighting made him weak.
Marcian probably had better internal peace because he called the christian factions together and said I don’t care what settlement you work out but work out a settlement, also we’re bringing back some of the Pagan party days as Christian party days (to which the Puritans in the future complained bitterly, Theodosius was into banning celebrations in a way that the elders of the Mass Bay colony would have approved of). The European provinces were mostly happy, the Syrian and Egyptian churches were not all that happy but they were content enough as they ever were…
People were also happier because he almost immediately lowered taxes and probably ordered the biggest rollback of the Roman command economy in the Empire’s history.
Theodosius deferred to Ambrose and capriciously played favorites in general and then purity spiraled what his favorites wanted… this caused the kind of turmoil that Gibbon got labeled anti christian for describing.
Paganism and Arianism had to be destroyed in order to bring order to the empire. Just as a man cannot have two masters, an empire cannot have two faiths.
Late Pagan degeneracy destroyed the Roman state, which used to be understood until Gibbon rewrote history. The early church fathers record Roman society as utterly decadent, and a decadent society cannot produce the manpower needed to field armies, leading to the collapse of the West.
Marcian was able to refuse paying tribute to the Huns because the Balkans were completely destroyed during his predecessor’s reign, leaving nothing more for the Huns to destroy. Marcian’s religious policy is more Aelia Eudoxia’s religious policy, as she guided Ephesus (against Nestorianism) and Chalcedon (against Monophysitism), so I don’t know where you get the idea that he was more lenient than Theodosius.
An Empire can’t have many faiths IN THE ELITE. Trying to make everyone in a polygot empire one faith with a heavy hand is asking for trouble. Theodosius was probably an ignorant and fanatical Donatist christian, else Ambrose would have been executed (and I mean publically in a sadistic fashion to make a point) when he dared to excommunicate the emperor in order to show the priests their place.
But the religious policy which seemed to cause so much unrest and division in the Empire (that broke out into insanity during the reign of his children) That wasn’t even Theodosius main fuckup, Theodosius let many many barbarian tribes into the empire conceding land wholesale in return for basically an oath of allegiance (in Roman terms the tribes would become his clients) and they were allowed to settle beyond the natural boundaries of the empire wholesale. Theodosius was the world’s 1st open borders politician.
He was essentially the Joe Biden of Roman Emperors… except even worse because he almost certainly wasn’t a senile vegetable the way Biden is.
Marcian among other things ended the practice where barbarians could settle in their own homogenous communities barbarians who got settled under federati contracts couldn’t live with each other anymore. Marcian put the bishops in a room and made them agree or else, he didn’t back the viewpoint of one or a few favorite ignorant and fanatical bishops like Ambrose.
You can blame Pagan backstabbing of each other for the crisis of the 3rd century you cannot blame it for the Fall of the Empire in the West later.
Gibbon didn’t rewrite anything but tradcathcucks don’t like him because he noted pretty accurately how badly incohesive and troublesome the christian factions got around the crucial time after Flavius “Joe Biden” Theodosius died.
I’m not anti christian throughout all of history but during the period in question the christians (EXCEPT the Arians who were the reasonable and sane faction) were like Bolsheviks and woke cultists. They were particularly concerned with destroying statues, buildings and books they didn’t like and as much as they hated pagans for political reasons they were far more interested in purging each other.
Their insanity at the time led to one of the most single evil and insane and disastrous orders in history, the order to murder (not enslave, not hold hostage somewhere) all the wives and children of Roman federati living in Italy.
The Arians were sane because out of power, and could not knock over some applecarts and grab some apples. Arianism is a flawed form of Christianity.
The Ostrogothic Arian kingdom seemed fairly sane. It only fell because of Belisarius…
Arianism is much the same thing as Socinianism (the son not co-eternal with the father) and Socinianism was and is a catastrophe.
As soon as you allow a shake up in heaven, next thing you toss all the good Bronze Age social technology that Moses preserved against the decline and decadence of Bronze Age civilization. Supposedly Christ started the job of tossing that stuff, and his Socinian followers, being more enlightened and holier than he, then finish the job.
If Christ not eternal, then the moral order not eternal, if the moral order not eternal, Progress.
Jews do the same thing in a different way by tossing the final commandment, and holiness spiralling the rule on not boiling a kid goat in its mother’s milk (which was a reference to a specific pagan ritual now long forgotten) till a rule about a very specific action particular to that place and time swallows the entire moral universe.
Maybe long term but we’ll never know, the Ostrogothic Kingdom of Italy (where at least the ruling Ostrogothic elite were Arian) did not seem insane at all. Even the Catholic Encylopedia doesn’t say all that many bad things…
Unfortunately they had to contend with Belisarius (as did the also Arian Vandal kingdom)… who won the war against them (in the worst way possible where most of Italy was destroyed by the end)… that doesn’t necessarily mean their social technology was a total failure (now I would argue the social technology of the Visigothic kingdom in Spain was a total failure).
I think you draw too close an association between a communist entryist heresy and what was among early Christians probably the MORE popular form of christianity among people who probably considered themselves at least somewhat sincere christians, and that version of christianity lost out because one of history’s great military geniuses was sent against them more than any huge social flaw.
As the Catholic Encyclopedia correctly says: “And of these wranglings the rationalist would take advantage in order to substitute for the ancient creed his own inventions.”
In the modern era, we know that they most vigorously did take advantage. Maybe Arian was OK, maybe his immediate successors were OK, but his modern offspring are definitely not OK
The Catholic Encyclopedia does not accuse Arian of being a modernist, that would be silly, but it says that modernism is implicit in his doctrines and modernism logically follows from them. On this, they are correct. Maybe it is unfair to focus on that truth, but it is still true.
Making a polyglot empire have one faith is absolutely necessary, because a state must be unified on the basis of race or religion, and an empire must have a state religion. The Pagans did this by building a statue of Jupiter in every corner of the empire.
The Goths were a nation of elites. Before the days of gunpowder it took elite blood to become a master of the sword, the bow, and the horse. Adrianople was disastrous because the Roman Empire lost an irreplaceable number of soldier families that could not be replaced by conscripting peasants. Look at the family of the current king of Spain; most of the Spanish elite are descended from the Visigoths.
The decline of early Roman Paganism brought on the death of Roman civilization because it disrupted the fertility of the Roman elite to the point where they could no longer field competent armies. The Romans lost 70,000 at Cannae but could replace those soldiers through paterfamilias; when they lost 20,000 at Adrianople they couldn’t because paterfamilias was gone.
To my knowledge, Honorius ordered the killings of the families of the Roman foederati after killing Stilicho, which lends me to believe that the divide was more racial rather than religious. A Roman state without a Roman army is no longer a Roman state; if Rome cannot muster an army to fight a foreign force in Italy the Roman Empire is merely a skeleton.
Destroying Pagan books and statues is not a problem. Keeping the Easter Bunny and Christmas lights are good things, statues of Zeus should only be in museums. Woke cultists are evil because their faith is evil, not their methods.
“To my knowledge, Honorius ordered the killings of the families of the Roman foederati after killing Stilicho”
The Roman elite had not been racially unitary probably since before the 3rd century…
Its not clear Honorius gave the order he was a powerless figurehead for Stilcho and was probably an equally powerless figurehead after Stilcho was murdered for whoever led the Coup D’etat against Stilcho.
The especially evil insane order (like among the top 5 in history for that, most communist states never did any single act that was THAT insane) was given at a time when lots of other mostly religious massacres were going on, which leads me to believe it was more driven by religion (the Federati overwhelmingly tended to be Arians) than by the fact that the Federati also tended to be Germanic.
Christianity gave the world investigative science. It is a moral imperative to avoid punishing the innocent just as it is to discover truth from facts.
The primary source letter from Saint Ambrose to Theodosius:
https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/source/ambrose-let51.asp
The idea that the riot caused a rift between St. Ambrose and Theodosius is modern revisionist history. Ambrose begins his letter by explaining why he did not meet the emperor when he was in Milan, and then commends the emperor for his piety.
St. Ambrose was upset with Theodosius because the bishops were upset with him. Many faithful Christians died in the massacre, and as such St. Ambrose felt it was necessary for him to undergo penance.
“I, indeed, though a debtor to your kindness, for which I cannot be ungrateful, that kindness which has surpassed that of many emperors, and has been equalled by one only; I, I say, have no cause for a charge of contumacy against you, but have cause for fear; I dare not offer the sacrifice if you intend to be present. Is that which is not allowed after shedding the blood of one innocent person, allowed after shedding the blood of many? I do not think so.â€
Excommunication in the church before the advent of Papism was not necessarily an act of hostility, merely a suspension on serving communion. My priest (Orthodox) will excommunicate someone at confession if he brings up a grudge against another parishioner. According to him, most of the time said grudge gets resolved without incident and the person is given communion again.
Roman Catholics rewrote Ambrose as a symbol of the church over Caesar, and Progressives are in the process of rewriting Ambrose as a symbol of Moloch over an Christian ruler. In reality, St. Ambrose was providing spiritual stewardship over a monarch he loved and appreciated.
Always look at the primary source documents as Leftists lie about everything.
Well written.
On top of all that it has to be considered that at the time shedding of innocent blood included legitimate warfare, and solders were given a temporary excommunication after battles per St Basil.
But Christian soldiers were entirely allowed.
The rift between Theodosius and the church over this is small indeed. Theodosius was only subject to the same censure that many other Christians in good standing faced.
Ambro <== amru
Zeno <== zaynu
Comparative Linguistics…
Again, Debbie Downer here:
Emiratesmarsmission.ae
We urgently need a post on the little girl pill. Alt right is 95% blue pilled on this issue. The leader of the alt right, nick fuentes is red pilled on this issue, but he can’t be totally straightforward about it. Like you said, the woman pill is the key to all of the other red pills. On a fractal level the age of consent pill is the key to the woman pill.
“Pedophilia” is a holiness spiral that is leading to complete sexual anarcho tyranny where it is illegal for a white man to bang or marry any woman under the age of 30. It is currently illegal for men to bang about half of women that they would like to bang, and then to compete for the older half they have to have a holiness competition about how monstrous it would be to pursue the younger half.
https://odysee.com/@Three_Spoons:c/The-System-comes-down-on-Gaetz:9
The incident you are linking to is just the usual – the use of state power to remove uncooperative Republicans.
But you are not linking to blue pilled right wingers.
It is not apparent to me that the alt right is blue pilled. (The shills are, of course, blue pilled.) In the video you link to Nick Fuentes fails to ridicule the charges, but, given that he depicting events as a plot against a rising Republican star, rather than “Oh the horror, a young man hung out with a girl who may have been seventeen”, ridiculing the charges was kind off topic.
If I see blue pilling on the alt right, I am going to push back, and post an article. But the video you link to does not make me feel like pushing back.
Maybe there is blue pilling (the Qanons and pizzagaters were all “pedophilia”) and I have perhaps not been paying attention. If the alt right is 95% blue pilled on little girls, then indeed it is time for pushback.
I was actually trying to praise Nick for not cucking on this. He makes me very optimistic as he has an astonishing combination of charisma and intelligence and doesn’t really cuck about any major issue. He also has thousands of loyal followers and is moving the needle politically. I could make a case that the RINO senate candidates in Georgia lost by such a small margin that it was because of Nick.
Maybe 95% was an exaggeration. I think it’s between 50 and 95.
Point me to some influential people who need pushback.
Vox Day, Owen Benjamin, and Cernovich are always kvetching about pedos, Epstein, Weinstein, etc. Probably Roosh. He has been going around saying that Game is Sinful, sex and lust are Sinful, etc.
Some recent examples:
https://voxday.blogspot.com/2021/03/birds-of-feather.html
Epstein, Weinstein, etc. bad.
https://voxday.blogspot.com/2021/03/dont-defend-devils-own.html
This one is spooky. Vox is basically doing a struggle session on his own readers saying that #MeToo *hasn’t gone far enough* and if his own readers don’t Always Believe Women then it’s because they are Gamma Male Creeps and they are ashamed of something “creepy” they have done in the past that hurt an innocent woman.
Vox is a very advanced verbal abuser. He’s basically taking the low status men that follow him and repackaging their fear of being labelled a sexual harasser by society as paralyzing guilt to castrate them and make them view Vox as the Supreme Sigma Male, the only man who is allowed to have sex, because girls just throw themselves at him and he has no need to “sexually harass” or “rape” them, unlike you creepy filthy gamma worm.
Not exactly pedo stuff, but in the same vein.
Yes that is one of the worst teddy spaghetti pieces I’ve ever seen. He’s saying good men won’t be taken down by a feminist purity spiral… well he won’t because he lives in Italy and even commie Italians tend to be redpilled on women.
He needs pushback on that.
The worst Vox Day piece that I have seen was when he failed some basic math thing like multiplying two numbers to try to say it is impossible for a human to be near 2 mass shootings therefor they are a crisis actor, one of his Dark Legion politely corrected the basic math, showing it was indeed possible, and likely that some human in the world was near 2 mass shootings, then Vox made multiple FURIOUS blog posts tripling down about how that guy was a traitorous gamma retard who couldn’t do basic math instead of just admitting he was wrong. He claims 160 IQ btw.
https://voxday.blogspot.com/2019/08/math-is-hard-barbie.html
I still read him from time to time, but due to stuff like this he has cultivated an army of extremely stupid people. Nick has cultivated an army of moderately smart people that is also 10x-100x as big.
Yeah the election Q-tard shit was sorta the last straw for me with Vox. He’s still useful and has good insight about current events from time to time but anyone that needs to brag about their IQ really isn’t as smart as they think.
I stopped taking Vox seriously after I realized that Vox was the secret king Gamma he was always upset about. The Q stuff was just bizzaro land.
I was reading Conservative Treehouse when Sundance invented the original “Trust the Plan” stuff when Mueller was appointed. He kept saying that Mueller was somehow Trump’s guy. He got massive push back from his followers and he quickly gave up the idea. Vox just kept doubling down straight into Q hell.
But lets be honest here, we all got it very wrong about Trump as well. Bar was their guy, not ours. Same with Trump’s supreme court picks, etc. There was plenty insanely wishful thinking going on. Irrational optimism is useful, but it’s not a great way to predict the future.
I was not especially wild about any of the SCOTUS picks (McConnell choose them anyway) but Barr had me fooled until VERY late I guess because he made a good 1st impression.
Yes Vox uses gamma to describe the worst aspects of his own personality.
Trump unfortunately was not nearly paranoid enough…
Yes I was definitely guilty of irrational optimism. We’ll have to be diligent in the future (especially in meat space). This time 100s ended up in the jail. The next time may end up with 1000s of corpses.
The thousands and more likely millions of corpses is coming no matter what. The holiness spiral isn’t slowing down.
The mistake at the Capitol was purely Trump’s fault. He walked right into a trap and didn’t even have his guys on the group to stop the obvious Dem tactic of turning a protest into a riot.
The fact that there was so little damage despite FBI guys and leftists instigators trying to encourage mass damage and lethal violence actually helped reduce the blow back. The capital riots was a really poor version of the Reichstag fire the Dems had hoped it would be. Good solid Trump supporters are responsible for limiting the damage.
My point was don’t judge Vox to harshly but learn from his mistakes. He fucked up by always doubling down even when reality was very much the other direction. I think the lesson from Vox is doubling down on what’s clearly sunk costs can drive you insane.
Yes agreed.
The interesting part about QAnon was that it provided a quite popular rallying point outside the establishment. Presumably this was the reason why it was so comprehensively banned. Never mind the hodgepodge of beliefs, etc.
I’m not sure what to make of the project as such — perhaps enemy propaganda that escaped its original purpose.
Q was and is enemy propaganda and it NEVER escaped its original purpose.
One of Trump’s mistakes is it should have been denounced early as enemy propaganda especially when it said trust Sessions.
Vox has a fairly long history of talking out of his ass and pretending to be smarter than he is. Doesn’t make him a bad person.
I do think that the usual pattern is that in time, guys like Vox lose their initial credibility, because most followers draw the same conclusions. Guys like Vox tend to react badly to this development. His doubling down is just an attempt to stay relevant.
Not quite; at least we got to see the enemy made ridiculous.
By the way, for those who disdain rashly storming the Winter Palace or similar silliness in favour of more measured activities, I would sincerely recommend becoming worthy a la Yarvin. What this in essence means is quietly building your bank account and social power, while making yourself resilient to shocks.
That VoxDay thread on conditional probability is incredible. Have zero respect for him after reading that. The initial mistake was bad enough (considering the extraordinary claim he was trying to support), but to then double down talking about intellectual superiority and 160 IQ while still failing to grasp what he’d missed, and then to eventually try to wriggle out of it with no admission of error, is disturbing. Or he still has unshakeable belief in his correctness, which is more disturbing. Nothing he writes can be taken in good faith now. A cautionary tale on why you should just admit when you make a mistake.
Vox Day has always been purple pilled on women.
This is not purple pilled its not even normie bluepilled it might as well have come from an Ivy League women’s study department.
“Hellmouth” people only go down for their sexual misconduct if a strong enough faction gives the ok. And most (and I mean like 95+%) of the real bad stuff is done by gays.
Vox is a gamma, a priest. Such men always have misgivings towards male sexuality and nature.
Vox is a gamma
Vox’s “gamma”, “sigma”, “omega” are not useful archetypes. They don’t carve nature at the joints.
There is a reason no one came up with them before Vox.
Vox is occasionally good but too often a useful idiot for the enemy. I’d be happy to see his dumb-shit taxonomy of “gamma”, etc. disappear entirely.
Omega males are a real category of smv and hierarchical position. Gammas are not.
Sigmas may exist but they are probably basically loner psychopaths.
Jim, what is your opinion of Vox’s intense hatred of Boomers?
Vox believes that all of the problems of the United States are the Boomers fault…that they took a good country and ruined. That everyone born after the Boomers are just victims.
Hey, I blame it all on the Victorians.
Things have been going downhill for quite a while, and they have been going downhill faster and faster. We are losing social technology, and starting to lose advanced physical technologies.
“Omega males are a real category of smv and hierarchical position. Gammas are not.
Sigmas may exist but they are probably basically loner psychopaths.”
I think gammas are very real and Vox’s description of them is accurate, although not all fit cleanly into that category. I am a gamma, Vox has many gamma traits. I don’t think it’s super clear cut. Lots of intellectual-type men have many gamma traits but are not as bad as his stereotype. Many men are exactly like his stereotype though. It’s true that women are repulsed by gammas. Do I agree with Vox that men who repulse women deserve to be thrown in prison? No.
Sigams are just a cope for Gammas/Omegas to think they are cool. Vox claims that women have insatiable lust for Sigmas. This is the opposite of the truth. Women typically have zero attraction to men with zero social status. As Aidan says, intelligent women are very attracted to intelligent masculine men (because they are extremely rare and because unintelligent women are too stupid to recognize them), so maybe that is where Vox got that idea. Being a loner does not help with women though.
When I think of even a fictitious sigma I think of a Clint Eastwood character in a spaghetti western.
Have such characters existed in reality… probably but they ain’t Teddy Spaghetti.
It is not as if I will ever use these terms, but to make them useful, define them like this:
A gamma is a man whose smv is extremely variable. Almost always a nerd with one specific skill, who is perceived as alpha when performing it and acts like an omega when he is not. There is a type of man like this, who will get female interest and then blow it when he is offstage, who will rack up accusations of being “creepy” if not outright FRAs.
A sigma is a man who is relatively more successful at convincing others that he is alpha even when he is not capturing the attention of other men and women. Almost all “dating” or pickup is playing sigma, and most men are not very good at it.
These are not character archetypes, they are quirks of the human mating dynamic. Vox makes these edge cases into character archetypes because of his own insecurities.
Good and useful definitions.
But the trouble is these terms are owned by Vox, who gives them meanings that are disconnected from empirical reality. If we discuss such matters, need to coin our own words for them
Convincing women you are alpha when you are not getting the attention of men and women is tough. Most men do not succeed at it because it is tough, not because they are not good at it.
But to the extent that one carries it off, it is primarily by convincing women that you are a bad guy – preferably a bad guy backed by another unseen higher alpha, that you can, and regularly do, break the rules, that you can and will engage in acts of violence.
I read Vox’s SSH. May be I missing something, but to me “gamma” seems just an overly complicated way to say “loser”. (And “omega”, “bigger loser”).
Omega is a social sexual hierarchy loser.
Gamma is a bunch of traits that fit all the negative aspects of Vox’s own personality, they do not correspond to any hierarchy position. Most gamma traits are omega traits but some are beta traits (Vox is actually a Beta who was driven + his family had money).
Sigma is a movie level badass loner and such types I think exist… but Teddy Spaghetti ain’t one of them. Think James Bond and Clint Eastwood as the Man with no Name.
Blackpilled for instance, has a comfy livestream where he talked about this yesterday, said if you don’t care about Gaetz banging a 17yo you have no morals.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/Vbad0PhyHYYJ/
Starts at the 1h 45min mark.
The Georgia runoffs were lost because of massive industrialized fraud. The midget had nothing to do with it.
Perdue/Loeffler were god awful candidates but they still would have won without the fraud. Nobody in Georgia is voting for a jew and a crazy black.
Well Atlanta might as well be on a different planet then the rest of the South. Sherman did a good thing for the whole nation including the South by burning it but he should have salted the earth.
But the reason you know it was fraud, you don’t win Florida by 3% and lose Georgia. Atlanta did not double in size in four years.
Speaking of Georgia, the Cathedral is really shrieking about the voting laws they passed. I don’t even think they got signature matching in but I suppose it means their power is not secure there.
As much as people like Fuentes, I cant stand listening to his voice. Real men dont talk or move like that- goes double for Vox. I suspect bugger, and thus he is solid on the WQ- fags dont really like women very much. Of course, many gen Z men who are supposedly straight come off as very gay to me, so I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. If so, he needs to put down the soy milk and hit the weight room.
He’s a 22 year old gamer nerd but he’s no bugger. He says more anti-gay stuff using his real identity in meat space than you’ll ever say with your real identity, or anyone on the right for that matter. Kid’s got balls of stone in my book.
Fuentes is not the leader of the Alt-Right. The Alt-Right died in Charlottesville. Fuentes is the leader of his political advocacy group/movement, America First, and he’s about the most right-wing person showing his face currently. Almost everything he says with a few exceptions (like no sex before marriage), line up fairly close to Jim. His success is encouraging.
I agree. I meant alt right in the literal definition, not as in Richard Spencer’s clique.
I think it’s worth mentioning that because Nick superficially resembles a mainstream republican, people think he is cucked or alt-lite, but he is actually less cucked than Richard Spencer. He is more red pilled about women, he isn’t a socialist, he knows covid is a hoax. Richard Spencer and his acolytes unironically think X00000 people or whatever the CDC says died from Covid and we need harsher restrictions. He is parroting every single democrat take, either because he is a contrarian and a retard or because he thinks it will protect him from lawsuits. Also he claims to be a Nietzschean, but locking everyone in bug boxes and covering their faces over X00000 people dying, even if that many died, is the position of The Last Man. Nietzsche would want to infect as many people as possible with corona to get rid of the fatties and genetic waste.
Spencer is fed.
Spencer is probably a fed, and a bad actor beyond a shadow of a doubt. If he is not on USG’s payroll, he is on the payroll of Soros, with the purpose of doxxing people on the right.
I need people in this forum to check if I’m sufficiently red pilled or I show signs of weakness.
A little background, me and my wife both working with me being in top management and making 5x of my wife’s salary. My wife doesn’t even pay for anything, she gave 90% of her salary to her parents.
After having our first son born I admit that I’m not involved in nursing our son. I feed our baby, change his diaper, or prepping the necessities now and then when my wife is away, but most of the time I’m resting while my wife is doing most of the nursing.
I got satire comments because I’m often half-asleep attending my son or having full night sleep. My only reply was “I’m doing the best I can”.
I honestly don’t know if my wife is actually showing dissatisfaction with our marriage or just shit testing.
I think that I’m doing good deed with at least trying to be involved with caring my infant son because my father was very absent when my younger siblings were born.
With my late wife, my arrangement was that I did the fun stuff with the babies, like him going to sleep on my chest, and she did all the stuff like changing their nappies. I have promised to do the same with my current wife, and also told her that taking care of a baby is really tough, and she will cry. I can tell that she likes this, likes that her husband was not a househusband and has no intention of becoming a househusband.
So yes, your wife is shit testing you, and you are failing. My children did not interfere with my sleep, except when I felt like it. (Which I often did, but this was my option, not my wife’s option.)
When my wife had to be away, my sisters came over on the well founded assumption that I could not or would not care for a baby. (Also, they liked babies)
I also think that your wife is shit testing. If I were you, I’d tell her to stop working so that she has time to care for the baby and the siblings to be born.
Yes.
If she has babies, and her income is not the major part of the household income, should not be working. Tell her to stop it.
She has forty years for a career. Very little time for babies. Should focus on what is urgent and important, and ignore what is not urgent and not important.
Women have the most important job in the world. Everything else is what they do in their spare time.
If she has babies, and her income is not the major part of the household income, should not be working.
Hell, when I got married my wife was making very nearly as much as me, but when she got pregnant, the very first words of my father (who internalized the traditional ways many decades ago) were “You’re going to have her stop working, right?” I did and I think that eliminated one whole class of shit tests, not that there weren’t others.
Of course, the old ways work in both directions: my father kicked in a good chunk of change so we could move out of the apartment into a house.
I also would like my wife to stop working, but she refused because her parents are retiree without income.
Perhaps later on when financially I’m more secure.
Assuming it’s not an excuse, her parents might prefer more grandchildren over a bit of extra income. Many grandparents do, after all.
“Security, security, mortals chiefst enemy” (Shakespear, if I rember correctly)
When you are financially secure, it will be too late for a large family (at least with your present wife).
Her refusal is probably also a shit test.
Anyway, if your income is not sufficient to sustain both your family and her parents so that she really has to be working, there is no reason at all for you work in your home. Then the grandparents can do all the work and baby care for which your wife is lacking the time.
Who is in charge in your household/
And why are not the maternal grandparents helping with the kids?
For 1 year after marriage we live completely alone, no relative, no parent. We live in isolated plantation after all. Parents are on different islands.
On 12th month of marriage (november 2020) my wife was on 8th month pregnancy I told my wife’s parents to come over. They helped out to look out on our son when we are working, and do the housekeeping. Nothing else because they also have chronic illnesses.
As for the one being in charge, before marriage we agreed to not fiddle anything we posses before marriage. I have 2 years mortgage and she has the job which she has kept for 7 years before I even met her.
I don’t like destroying sentimental value because she has kept the current job 7+ years straight out school (she didn’t attend college) and lots of her friends are in workplace.
Her social life is an important consideration – trouble is that women tend to treat the workplace as their family.
You and her children need to be her family.
My mother in law has serious illnesses. Pretty early in our relationship, my wife expressed concerns about her mother. To which I replied: “Who are you going to look after, me or your mother?”. To which she replied “You of course.”
You don’t want your wife to be socially isolated. On the other hand, neither do you want her hanging out with bad women. You need to keep an eye on whom she hangs out with, and where they are hanging out. Women are terribly susceptible to peer pressure and environmental influences. If she is hanging out with a group of women, at least one of the women in the group is apt to be keen on hanging out where the group of women might well be approached by a group of men with the alpha male of the group being someone more alpha than the men they are currently with.
I have also received a fair deal of criticism, especially during the first few weeks. I think that when a woman becomes a mother she realizes that her previous life is gone — her life now revolves around this kid, maybe more. Thats quite an adjustment, especially considering the false life paths women are sold these days.
So naturally she shit-tests. But she’ll also give valid criticisms – not like I knew what I was doing, lol. Figuring out what is a shit test and what is valid criticism is the trick, imo.
Distinction is not enough because there is also ‘valid criticism delivered as a shit test’.
When I get valid criticism delivered as a shit test, I say “you are right. Now shut up and don’t speak to me till I tell you that you can”.
Hmmmm i like this…
What Jim says, in a slightly less badass manner. When she’s made her point but drones on, I tell her exactly that. When she still continues, I tell her to shut up.
But I mean, I don’t want to come off tougher than I am. My experience has been that modern life poses a lot of challenges for raising kids, not just for the father, also for the mother, and it takes trial and error figuring it all out.
I like how Sean Connery stood his ground against wokeness in this respect till the end.
He stood by his old redpilled opinion.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oo0d1zTAFKA
I don’t know anything about marriage, never been married and though women seem to love me, I love them a lot less, I haven’t accepted a relationship for longer than 6 months. I’m a bit antisocial like that, life circumstances.
So my observation isn’t about your marriage but yourself, you sound scared and indecisive and leaders can’t lead when they are scared and indecisive. You’re supposed to lead and you can’t, she probably smells your fear and makes her restless and even more scared than you are, so nothing is going as you’d like.
If some thief came barging in into my house and I had to obliterate his skull against the floor I wouldn’t criticize a woman for getting hysterical and not helping with it. I don’t think it’s a male’s job to care for babies, not observable in practically any species, not observable in hunter-gatherer societies, not observable in ancient societies, not observable in any successful society, not an observable instinct in myself, thus I assume not really in any other man, not your job. It’s her job, women love babies, she has nothing to complain about and she should be happy if she gets any help, you’re providing for her after all, you’re doing your job. If she has an issue with the fact that she is working while taking care of the baby then maybe she should shut the fuck up and go do her real biological job and stop wasting her precious time being some wage cuck for another man no less.
You claim to be top management, but the problem seems to be your lack of leadership skills. When your subordinates get out of line you put them back in, they appreciate it when you do, they don’t appreciate it when you don’t and they expect you to coordinate and run the show so they can do their own work. Same thing applies to your wife. Imagine one subordinate failed at doing their job and you were covering for them and gave you shit for it, that’s literally what you let your wife do to you, she sure has a good reason to be dissatisfied with your leadership.
I always find it amusing to hear from other men the problems they allegedly have with women, it seems to be that the biggest problem men today have with women is expecting them to be men and then be surprised when they are not, coupled with the unwillingness to be men themselves. You either lead or you don’t, you either are a man or you’re not, you either want to be with a woman or you don’t. You don’t get to claim leadership and shy away from taking decisions, you don’t get to enjoy only the good things about being a man and you don’t get to be with a woman and expect her to play half your role, her own role and everything else that makes you comfortable at her expense.
Hopefully you didn’t take offense to anything I said, if you did it was not my intention, nor am I trying to be callous. Everyone has things they are better and worse at, this happens to be something I’m good with, which is why instead of being trapped in relationships with fucked up mechanics I simply don’t have them for long, because I’m unwilling to and I simply choose no. But you’ve chosen yes, so you should fully commit to your own decision.
Exactly so.
Women are different.
Very different.
If you look at the landscapes we create everywhere, it is apparent that we long for our ancestral savanna, the lightly treed environment we entered when we came down from the trees and stood off the lions. And women long for their ancestral environment of successful reproduction. Women reproduce most successfully as property, men least successfully as property, and their behavior makes no sense unless you understand this.
As I have so often said: If a man is defeated, conquered and subdued, perhaps because his tribe and country is conquered and subdued, he is unlikely to reproduce. If a woman is defeated, conquered and subdued, she has escaped from defect/defect equilibrium, escaped from prisoner’s dilemma, and also been transferred from weak men and a weak tribe to strong men and a strong tribe, and is therefore likely to be highly successful at reproducing.
Women are always shit testing you. That is why they are so disruptive and destructive in the work place. But they are not really playing to win. They are playing to be subdued by a strong man.
The shit test that the Ducking Man is failing is the most ancient of them all: “Are you man enough to take me from my Dad”
Futhermore, when a man is defeated, conquered, and subdued, his testosterone levels go way down, and this may entirely explain why men today are so low-T. A slave’s best survival stategy is to stay alive and out of trouble, and hope that his oppressors eventually give him a wife, or kill themselves off, as high-T men tend to fight a lot.
“Hopefully you didn’t take offense to anything I said”
No offense taken.
At work people consider me top management because I’m a director’s right hand man and the owner hired me personally.
When I post the comment, I didn’t know how male supposed to behave when there is a baby around, partly because the media likes to portray caring husband who knows how to take care a baby.
Now I know my error and decided to take step back in the nursing business. Now I feel less guilt seeing my wife do the heavy lifting and only see my baby when he seems ok or for some reason only calm when I hold him.
What do you think about the SEC suing LBRY jim?
https://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2021/lr25060.htm
Unsurprised.
The pressure on crypto currency has been rising for some time, and will go on rising.
The survivors will be what is most resistant to regulation.
At some point in the not very distant future, the government will seize or attempt to seize, or failing that block, every website enabling people to do business in unregulated crypto currency. I hope to have something ready before that happens.
second link not working.
Jim, what’s the red-pilled way to propose marriage to my girlfriend? I don’t think I’m getting good advice on this from my family.
Make her pregnant
I took her outside (she knew something was up), set the phone video running, and said “Before God and Man, I swear I will keep you forever and never let you go”, and then put the engagement ring on her finger.
All the chicks thought that was incredibly romantic.
Very good. How expensive should the engagement ring be?
I don’t know. Have not done a lot of getting engaged.
On the one hand, needs to be at least a little bit expensive to show you are serious, on the other hand, not like you are trying to prove you are serious.
@Pooch
How much does the Taliban spend on engagement rings?
Haha good point.
Taliban probably did give their brides gifts before marrying them. Presenting something of value is a very old human custom mostly to prove a man’s status, the women’s status not withstanding. Though I don’t think you need to spend a lot on it.
Jim described it with the story of women lined up for men to select brides in Australia. When the men selected a women they presented her with gift. If she accepted, she was his. If she refused all suiters she ended up a low status concubine with nothing.
As an example of this, I once read a story about a women captured by an Indian war band during a initial colony setup in North America. Her husband was scalped and killed. She claimed they didn’t rape her, but it’s more likely she was gang raped by the whole group. After which she put in with the squaws until it was clear she wasn’t pregnant. After that period of time passed the unmarried men started offering her gifts like a big fish they caught or a pelt from a deer they’d killed, all placed at her feet. She was told if she accepted the gift they would be wed. She was also told if she didn’t accept a gift soon she would be forcibly given to one of the men.
Around which time the village was raided by the English and she was brought back to the colony.
I love first hand accounts of the colonists’ way of life. Or of the semi-noble savages who we conquered. Or the pre-King-George-getting-cucked English society. Any recommendations?
English Society 1688-1832, by JCD Clark.
Donald McBane’s autobiography. More than half the book is about how to kill people with a sword, but his memoirs as professional soldier, gladiator, and pimp are fascinating.
I found “The Narrative of Marie le Roy and Barbara Leininger, for Three Years Captives among the Indians” fascinating.
https://archive.org/details/jstor-20085307/page/n1/mode/2up
Check out the wikipedia article for the abridged version.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penn%27s_Creek_massacre
I told my gf we were going to have kids and I wasn’t raising bastards.
Some signs of life at the military…
“Diversity chief at US Special Operations Command reassigned during probe into social media posts”
https://thehill.com/policy/defense/545515-diversity-chief-at-us-special-operations-command-reassigned-during-probe-into
Just signs of CYA. They’ll get someone else in there with the same agenda but less baggage to carry out the same tasks. They cannot afford to let the military exist without these kinds of political commissars.
Friendly reminder the Chauvan witch trials are underway and could end anytime.
After he is found innocent we will all be flooded with vibrancy and multiculturalism in every major city.
So, keep your head on the swivel.
>found innocent
Not gonna happen. The judge, the jury, and the attorneys on both sides know the score. Not guilty is not an option.
There is no conceivable legal way that Chauvin is convicted. He will be found guilty, because legality does not matter very much, but the defense has an endless appeals process, especially against the jury selection, because who has not been prejudiced by the media about the case?
>because legality does not matter very much
If legality doesn’t matter very much in convicting him, then why will it matter on appeal?
Chauvin is never getting out of prison. There’s a better chance he’ll be murdered by a fellow inmate who mysteriously got access to him than that they’ll ever let him walk free. Even if he doesn’t wind up dead like Dahmer, no judge is going to overturn his conviction.
They may want him acquitted as an excuse to holiness spiral about racism more. Also the prog state needs its enforcer class.
We should not care too much about the cathedral’s mindless enforcers. We should care about Rittenhouse NOT Chauvin.
>We should not care too much about the cathedral’s mindless enforcers. We should care about Rittenhouse NOT Chauvin.
Amen to that.
https://twitter.com/i/events/1377746722667986953
ah, and now it begins.
I wonder how many states will comply? Or if this is even remotely enforceable?
Desantis in my state already signed an order against it.
Desantis is doing everything right and saying all
the right things. I almost want Trump to just step aside and let Desantis become the new leader of the movement. The bitch in South Dakota cucked on trannies so she’s out.
I don’t trust female politicians generally but Desantis cucked on lockdowns for a little and she never did… so nobody is perfect. Women’s sports being ruined by trannies is a hard redpill too..
Neither can get elected without right wing militia violence anyway and Desantis is not the man to do that… and even under a normal election he does not have Trump’s charisma (he is better at organizational details though MUCH better).
Republicans are not going anywhere, till they adopt a leader from the Proud Boys. Old style politics is not going to work when Democrats have stopped playing by those rules.
And if anyone is going to play by the new rules, it is not Desantis.
After the Gracchi were nailed, populists got
1. crushed.
2. betrayed by their leadership
3. sucked into the left wing holiness spiral.
And went nowhere fast until Caesar accommodated to the rules.
similarly, 1920s-1930s Germany.
Yes Desantis is a good man but far too genteel.
He is on course for potential illegal federal government order nullification. Would would be interesting to me is if he threatens the use of lawful violence to enforce nullification.
Aside from Trump, He is the best we have at the moment. In the unlikely event that the Presidential election does matter in 2024 it is DeSantis or Trump. No one else is in the conversation.
Then, unless Trump finds his testicles, and is sufficiently flexible to adjust to the new realities, we are $#!% out of luck.
You get less flexible with age, though intellectual exercise can slow this down quite a bit. For a rapidly changing reality, changing ever faster, we might have better prospects with a younger man – which is to say, Don Junior.
Or, better still, someone from the Proud Boys. Nothing less is likely to work. We have been through this many times before, for Republics often take a surprisingly long time dying, and nothing less works during the dying breaths of a Republic.
The only real hope is what happened to the Muslim Brotherhood CIA installed government in Egypt happens to the dems…
Tens of millions in the DC streets and the military despite being pozzed oust them…
This is my thought as well. DeSantis is the same age as Don Jr and seems more alpha to me having demonstrated leadership in Florida already. Not close the orator of Trump, but he seems smart enough to understand that if he chooses to run in 2024 (with the blessing of the Trumps), he would only do so by abiding to the new rules for winning elections.
We need someone with a fundamentally violent nature… thats not Desantis.
We need Caesar and DeSantis is not Caesar. We are likely many years and possibly decades from Caesar, but what we need now is someone to continue to build the momentum Trump started and there are not many options.
Who was Octavian before he became Augustus?
Were were all the well known men before Octavian became Augustus, after Octavian became Augustus?
When the lake dries out, all the fish with with optimally adapted gills stuck on the sandbars die out.
The Republican party is going to disappear, though its letterhead and official headquarters and mailing lists may live on under Democratic Party management.
If the Republic is merely dying and not entirely dead, something will replace it. Possibly Julius Caesar if we are lucky.
There is a theory that the Proud Boys are either a fed creation or heavily infiltrated by the feds. I think, but do not remember for certain, it was Andrew Anglin who posted that theory.
They are heavily infiltrated by feds.
Not a fed operation, might well become a fed operation if they don’t do something about it. Maybe they have already become a fed operation and I have not noticed, but I am inspired by what happened to the Free Software Foundation.
People are realizing the scope and aggressiveness of enemy entryism operations, and are starting to do something about it.
Vaccine passports are definitely coming.
Anyone else wondering if they are not a poisoned apple, possibly an element in a deep state autocoup attempt? All the time the holiest have been saying you should still wear a mask and “social distance” when vaccinated because you can still spread the virus supposedly. And now you are supposed to be safe with a passport? That is an obvious incongruity that someone will exploit. It looks like there are sections of the deep state that want to go back to “normal” (the virus hysteria served its purpose, Trump’s gone), where the vaccine passport would be the perfect excuse. The Orwellian aspects are a feature, not a bug there, and really the whole security theater at airports is already as bad as these passports.
All the more radical members of the deep state would have to do is wait for the old-type “authoritarian” leftists and their puppets to implement the scheme and then after a few months observe or just manufacture ‘rising case numbers’ or ‘overwhelmed ICUs’ or ‘dangerous new mutations’ (if the claims about the vaccines are true, they won’t reduce total PCR positive results much at all) and create a media smear campaign about establishment politicians and old, white, male deep-staters who created ‘a false sense of security’ and ‘caved to the tourism/wahtever industry’ with the vax passports.
I don’t think anyone is planning anything. Rather, what is happening is the spontaneous and unforeseen consequences of holiness spiraling.
Jim, what explains the high fertility rate of African Americans as slaves? Moldbug even mentioned this in a kind of spoof of fascism, in that the most successful genetic strategy generally isn’t conquering (what the pozzed West does best, like the Puritans), but getting conquered. For another example, the Palestinians for a long time were breeding faster than the Jews, until the ultra-Orthodox were set up as a breeding caste, and their existence is like a kind of paradoxical voluntary slavery only the Talmud could explain.
Finally, what explains the ideal of being a rich employee? An entrepreneur who does whatever makes the most money so he can buy a gold chain for his neck is a “newly rich” and probably ethnic stereotype of very low status, but a lifelong employee who bows down to a boss to receive a medal is in a prestige position.
Also, note that the Democrats tend to be establishment employees, while the grifters go Republican. We can see where that leads.
Warning. Gender neutral language.
Don’t use gender neutral language. It makes you stupid and ignorant.
Obviously the female slaves were fertile, because they were slaves. Nothing mysterious or surprising about that. Because the production of too many mulattos was frowned upon, this benefited the male slaves.
Same as whites were fertile before female emancipation.
Being conquered is seldom a successful reproductive strategy for males and it is an exceptionally bad strategy for whites, because white males tend to make poor slaves, and their conquerors are necessarily white or whitish, so are going to hog all the women.
Being conquered is usually a highly successful strategy for females, because, as I said, they escape from defect/defect equilibrium, the reproductive game of players and bitches. In intergroup conflict the reproductive interests of males, especially white males, are diametrically opposed to the reproductive interests of women. The reason that females are apt to egg their tribe on to war is not because they want to see their tribe win, but because they want to see someone win.
As for the “ideal of being a rich employee”. Nuts. No one wants to be a rich employee – it is always a path towards not being an employee. Trouble is that Sarbannes Oxley has shut down the entrepreneurial path that Charles the Second opened.
The highest priority for a crypto currency should be to re-open free discussion. (Since we are, at the moment, out of power, we are temporarily free speech enthusiasts) But the second highest priority, and the one that will get us money, is re-opening the path to entrepreneurship, and we should primarily be interested in freedom of speech about money and transactions, since the primary tactic of the enemy is shutting down forums where people can discuss unregulated transactions.
Cutting reality at the joints. Thanks, Jim. You punched a hole in Moldfag’s argument large enough to fly the Hindenburg through. Though I can’t decipher if Moldfag is really this stupid or simply uses crimestop whenever it comes to the WQ.
Moldbug has linked to Heartiste (and to Jim’s blog for that matter) before, which suggests he knows the score, he’s just smart enough not to say it in public.
Neither the Samurai nor the East India Company, nor the people that gave us the industrial revolution, were a bunch of pussies. From Charles the Second to around 2000AD, capitalism just does not fit your story.
I wonder if modern marketing killed capitalism. Manipulating others (which translates to implementing public policy) is what drives the market now, not the hypothetical natural demand curve. Corporate elites can push ideology just as well as products, and THIS WORKS. They threaten politicians all the time in the way entrepreneurs, a dying breed, do not.
I don’t care if they’re pussies if they’re winners. I want to be a winner too, to have mind control powers bigger than Harvard’s. What I describe is what the left calls fascism, but in my case it’s a beginning rather than an end of ideology.
Marketing has no power. Ninety percent of marketing is purely informational, informing the potential customer of price, availability, and functionality. Take a random sample of ads:
Do an internet search for anything, you will get some ads: What do the ads say?
In almost every case, they say “we have this stuff, and here is what this stuff can do for you.”. No mysterious magical hidden persuaders. It is mildly irritating if you are not looking to buy the stuff. I DuckDuckGo “amorphous photovoltaic”, up comes an ad for solar panel window, but there is no magic mind control in the ad. It just tells me, quite accurately, what transparent solar panels can do for you, and has a picture of the interior of a nice building with masses of solar panel windows.
These ads are quite useful if you are actually in need of that good or service. If you are not in need of that good or service (transparent solar panels are only relevant to people who intend to build a building of glass and steel) they are irritating, but do not have or attempt to have any magic mind control tricks to make me want them.
It is absolutely obvious what is killing capitalism:
1. The Human Resources Department (Intel can no longer make chip foundries, because you have to accept duds on your team if they are women or gay. You also have to accept duds on your team if they claim to be black, but male blacks tend to be less of a problem for some reason I do not understand.) One dud on a high tech team, the whole team fails. One team fails on a big high tech project, the whole project fails.
2. Sarbanes Oxley. Startups have died due to Sarbanes Oxley, which is why Silicon Valley is dying. Silicon valley was born of Shockley and the Fairchildren, who walked the path that King Charles the second opened, giving us the East India Company Empire and the Industrial Revolution. Sarbanes Oxley has shut down that path, shut down the path that gave us empire, shut down the path that gave us the industrial revolution, and shut down the path that gave us Silicon Valley.
For ninety ninety nine out of a hundred people who see an ad, it is just noise, no magic persuasion capability. For the one in a hundred that is the intended audience, for the audience that it is written for, it is purely informational. They seldom waste precious ad space with clever, but not very effective, magic mind control tricks.
Look what the marketers spend their ad space on: Information, information, and information. They do not think, or the people that pay them do not think, that they have magic mind control powers.
For the vast majority of people who reluctantly get the ad inflicted on them, it is irrelevant information. For the small minority that the ad is actually targeting, it is relevant information. For neither group is it magic mind control with mysterious mind control powers.
If people who work in advertising claim to have mysterious magic mind control powers, it is clear that those who pay them do not believe.
Type “Pizza” into the search field. The first link will be an ad. Click on the link: It will announce “Pizza and sides”, have a picture of pizza and side, a price, and field for you to type in the address for delivery. Purely informational. Where is the magic mind control? Is it somehow creating pizza cravings in innocent people who would otherwise be slim?
It is purely an announcement of price and availability, directed purely at people who wanted to know about price and availability.
The suggested size of the offer suggests that it is primarily directed at families and gatherings, but there will be nothing making the (entirely plausible) claim that you are going to be popular with your family or gathering. No persuaders, let alone mysterious, nefarious, and magically powerful persuaders. It just announces product, price, and how get the product.
Speaking as someone with a bit of experience in this field, the margins on “manipulative” advertising are tiny. When you watch a beer commercial that portrays a mass market shit beer as high status, implying that people who drink this beer are popular at parties or something, the expected return is that a tiny percentage of people are very slightly more likely to pick one crap beer over another crap beer the next time they are in the grocery store. These tiny margins turn into huge profits if you are a huge company whose beer can be found in any grocery store in the country, competing against ten other mass market lagers that all taste the same, but I cant call it manipulation in good faith.
For products that are not competing in saturated markets, advertising is a lot more honest and a lot less “manipulative”. Marketing is about competition, about demand that already exists, and not about creating demand.
I don’t see such commercials. I suppose they must exist, and some people see them, but ninety percent of ads are purely informational.
Which indicates that such commercials are, as you say, not particularly effective and of limited value except in special cases. If you have a six identical beers competing, try to give each one a different image.
Hes referring to the old beer ads on tv that used to be sort of like this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64-WBJ5Ykw4
That link is a parody of “old beer ads”.
The thing being parodied, is however, impossible to find. Does it exist? Did it ever exist?
Well, in theory, it might exist, or might have existed. Or, on the available evidence, maybe it never existed.
In the parallel universe envisaged by Harvard, it is omnipresent, totally dominant, and they need to fight the man.
“The thing being parodied, is however, impossible to find. Does it exist? Did it ever exist?”
Old old beer ads used to imply drink beer and hot women will have sex with you.
Then the ads transitioned into the more lame I want the beer.
Maybe.
I don’t recall this. I have seen it claimed a lot.
But near as I can tell, the sole source for this factoid is people ranting about how bad it was.
Surely with all the tracts on the evils of sexism, someone would have preserved an example of this terrible evil?
Near as I can tell, the source for all this stuff is political material like Galbraith’s “The affluent society”. Which is a pack of lies from beginning to end.
There were, and probably are, plenty of ads saying that your party will popular and party goers will have fun if you serve beer at the party. Which is true enough, and not a mysterious sneaky deceptive hidden persuader. The only reason I ever buy beer is for other people to drink at social events (I prefer moonshine). It is easy to see that hostile, evil, and malicious people could spin this as saying “Hot chicks will have sex with you if you drink beer”, which is obviously stupid. Rather, the party scenario depicted hints that if you serve them beer …
But the party scenario depicted seemed to focus on men at a party drinking beer and enjoying the social event. Which is in fact the primary use of beer, not some clever deceptive jedi mind trick.
It is hardly out of line for the advertiser to depict people using their product in the way that it is fact usually used – to lubricate social events.
There is nothing manipulative or deceptive about an advertiser depicting his product being used effectively and successfully for its purpose.
I thought pretty obvious ads try to appeal to emotion. Not that they all succeed.
This famous Ikea commercial is telling you not to get attached to old furniture so you will buy new furniture. Nothing is said about price and availability of products.
Nuts
Your poster girl, the Ikea ad, directly contradicts your claim.
If your claim was “obvious”, or even remotely plausible, you would have a better poster girl.
The Ikea ad is not being manipulative. It is straight up front telling us not to get emotionally attached to their old furniture.
People do get emotionally attached to their old furniture. I get emotionally attached to my old furniture
The ad evokes the emotions of attachment to old furniture, and then straight up tells us not to feel like that. This is the precise opposite of appealing to emotion. It straight up tells us that the feeling that ad evokes, which is the feeling that they don’t want people to feel, is irrational.
This is the precise opposite of emotional manipulation. They evoke the feeling, then tell us that we are crazy to feel like that.
I don’t think I am crazy to feel like. Old stuff provides a comfortable ambience, which new stuff cannot. So I never spend much money on furniture except when moving. But they are not being manipulative. They are straight up in your face speaking to us. I don’t think they are right, but they are making the argument right up front, not manipulating us by appealing to emotion.
They want people to chuck out their old furniture. Emotional manipulation would be depicting old furniture as low status, out of style, and shabby. They are not doing that.
My furniture is low status, out of style, and frequently shabby. I like it like that. Ikea could tell me about my furniture being the way that it is, but they don’t.
I am talking about TV ads, not internet ones.
Well, I seldom watch TV, and I have ad blockers on Youtube. But if there are TV ads that are like this, there should be Youtube ad like this.
Where is the poster girl?
What I see on TV is the commodity being used for its intended purpose. The nearest thing I saw on television to emotional manipulation was a pizza ad that suggested that if you ordered a pizza, your family members would enthusiastically show up to eat it.
The scenario was a working wife was failing to cook dinner, thus failing to provide a social occasion for the family to gather, so the patriarch ordered pizza and everyone happily and eagerly shows up. It “appeals to emotions”, but it appeals by depicting pizza delivery being successfully used for its intended purpose. The success is exaggerated, and I suppose that arguably constitutes emotional manipulation, but it just does not resemble the jedi mind tricks that are claimed.
Pizzas are designed to be shared. Successful use is intended to have emotional effect. Similarly, beer. Nothing manipulative about depicting a product being successfully used for its intended purpose.
It seems to me that if TV ads actually did the clever jedi mind control, there would be Youtube ads that actually did this clever mind control, and someone would be able to link to a plausible example.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x4BOQ804McE
Here’s a classic. Don’t be a loser who lacks the balls to order a beer in front of the boss. Yes, the spokesman/mascot guy makes a case for having a beer on the company expense account, but the real message is don’t be like these ridiculous capons.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sCqZp43vRpA
How about this one? I can’t even tell what it has to do with perfume.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20n-cD8ERgs
Suzanne researched this!
The beer ad tells us verbally that you should not knock back a beer on some one else’s tab.
It non verbally tells us that when your host offers you a drink, it is anti social rather than demonstrating superior virtue to not accept.
The scenario is that the boss is taking three employees to lunch. He wordless invites them to order drinks. Employee number one sweats. Should he have a drink at work? “I will have a glass of water please”. Employee number two sees that this is being anti social, so orders water with a twist of lemon. Employee number three orders a beer, whereupon the boss orders a beer, and is glad to have someone to drink it with.
Now if the boss is taking his employees to lunch, it is likely because he wants the truth out of them so wants them lubricated, or maybe he just wants to be social, so wants them lubricated. Or maybe he just wants to have a drink, and wants someone to drink with to give him justification for the drink. But when your boss offers you drinks, the conversation is likely to eventually go to things where he might otherwise not hear the whole truth from employees.
They are ridiculous because they feel under pressure because of the invitation. They are worried that drinking during worktime, even if invited by the boss, demonstrates poor character. The non verbal message of the ad is that you should not feel pressured to demonstrate your non alcoholic virtue. Should accept hospitality, and this is likely to please the person offering the hospitality, while demonstrating virtue is likely to raise the tension.
They were capons because they did raise the tension.
Which non verbal emotional level claim is true, relevant to actual usage of the product, and not a jedi mind trick. If your boss hospitably offers you drinks, he probably suspects he is not necessarily getting the full truth, and if you knock him back, he is going to suspect a lot more strongly. Capon one and capon two not only looked low status. They looked low status because they looked like people who were scared because they had something to hide from their boss, while the third employee, who ordered the beer, looked high status because he looked like someone who did not feel that having a drink with the boss was a dangerous minefield. (Which it frequently is.)
> I can’t even tell what it has to do with perfume
The Obsession ad has everything to do with perfume. It says that hot chicks will like you if you wear the perfume. Which seems to me unlikely to be true, though my wife frequently sprays me with something, so maybe it is not entirely stupid. It less ridiculous than the original claim, that beer ads implied that hot chicks will like you if you drink beer. (Though in truth, they will probably like you if they drink beer) Beer ads don’t imply either one, and they would fail miserably if they attempted to do so. On the other hand, hot chicks are undoubtedly why men are buying perfume. Though I much doubt it will work, for which reason men seldom buy perfume.
The third ad seems entirely relevant and informational. The wife is actually speaking for the company. She is in fact the ad spokesman: If you have kids, you will pretty soon need a bigger house with a garden. You could say it is emotional manipulation because they have the wife with small kids say it rather than the company spokesman say it voice over, but it is true and directly relevant to the actual usage of the product.
The third ad is straight up telling the male viewer in plain words that if he has a wife and small kids he will need their product, which he probably will, and should talk to their real estate agent to see what the real estate agent is offering. How is this some manipulative jedi mind trick?
I will grant you the perfume ad, because though directly relevant to intended product usage, they are probably lying. And because they are probably lying, perfume for men is an insignificant niche market.
But the first ad is telling a truth about social interaction using their product, which product is indeed generally used for social interaction, and the third ad is just straight up telling us in plain words that you will need this product for the usual reasons that the product is good for. No manipulative jedi mind tricks in any of them. All of them directly address actual and intended product use. (Albeit I doubt the usefulness of the perfume.)
I think he would say that the perfume ad is informing you that you will smell good and get pussy. I don’t think it’s manipulative. If you don’t know anything about perfume it would be informing you at least that that one exists and that it is claimed that females like it. Then if you go to the perfume store and they have 500 different perfumes and you don’t know where to begin you can try out that one in particular.
It is definitely artistic and it evokes emotions, but it’s not deceiving you or giving you false information or limiting your free will. I wouldn’t call it manipulative. I have seen many movies, much more than the average person, movies evoke many emotions from the false characters and stories, but I am still a free thinker. I think if consuming movies had a strong deceptive effect then I would have become a communist zionist from watching so many hollyjew movies.
Manipulative ads do exist; and where they exist, the payload is usually HIV positive.
https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2013/05/dove.html
‘Advertisement’, broadly construed, is one of the most important means of information dissemination in a society. Indeed, one could say it is the grease that helps things go ’round.
So in order words, when AF, when people like AF, kvetch about ‘manipulative ads’, they are projecting their own sins.
Finally got my first “nuts”.
I also get attached to old furniture, specially inherited from family.
Yes, the ad tells you you are crazy for being attached to your furniture. But it first sets it up in an emotional way.
The ad is shot from the POV of the lamp, they are trying to make you feel the sadness that the lamp would feel from being discarded. Then, after making you empathize with the sad feelings
of the lamp, they tell you that you are crazy for feeling bad, just get rid of it and buy a new one.
They do say the words of the message they want to convey, but they first have to get you to feel bad for the lamp. Their attempt at emotional manipulation may or may not work, but it seems pretty clear they are trying to elicit an emotion in you to then ridicule it and get you to buy product.
I think the point of the IKEA ad is
“next time you cling on to your old furniture, remember how ridiculous we made you feel last time when you were feeling bad about the lamp; so just go buy that new sofa”. It’s an emotional argument, stated in part explicitly, in part through clever cinematography.
Cannot agree more that the message of the ad is “wrong”. Old furniture is wonderful, and old furniture inherited from family connects us to our past.
I always thought the axe deodorant commercials were the best at this – https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0GCQqD4T00. “Use our product and hot model chicks will throw themselves at you.â€
Always thought ‘manipulative marketing’ is completely overrated. Incidentally it’s always leftists who obsess over this supposed evil, probably because projection. But in the free market, the consumer has the power, and manipulative marketing is lots of effort for little gain.
>The third ad is straight up telling the male viewer in plain words that if he has a wife and small kids he will need their product, which he probably will, and should talk to their real estate agent to see what the real estate agent is offering. How is this some manipulative jedi mind trick?
The ad is not selling the product; it is modelling proper interactions between husband and wife for the viewer to emulate. Women: men are weak and indecisive creatures; you must dominate your husband to guide him. It’s for his own good and he will thank you for it. Men: you must submit to your wife’s proper and lawful authority over you. She’s stronger and smarter than you are, so go where she leads without too much fuss.
Yes, it is promoting poz, rather than selling houses.
But, insofar as it is selling houses, it is being completely straight and above board.
Today’s haram manipulative TV ad is the family with blonde mom and black dad, in a long lineup of similar ads. It’s getting absolutely ridiculous.
Yes
The problem is not that they are manipulatively and untruthfully selling goods. Nearly all advertising is entirely truthful about the goods (though of course selective about which truths to present) and in no way manipulative about the goods.
The problem is that they are manipulatively and untruthfully selling poz
But the bigger problem not the ads, but the stories in which they are embedded. Perseus has not been able to rescue, then abduct, Andromeda for 196 years.
13% of the US population. 85% of the people in commercials.
My vague understanding was that people cannot distinguish TV from reality. Rationally they know it’s fiction, but they still get aroused with porn (even though there’s no woman there), and they get scared with horror movies (even though they rationally know it’s fake).
I recall some test showed watching sitcoms has a similar hormonal effect to meeting with your friends.
If your brains thinks that what you watch on TV is being witnessed, then TV ads, if well done, should be able to manipulate you to some extent.
“I recall some test showed watching sitcoms has a similar hormonal effect to meeting with your friends.”
Maybe when they used to make good ones but they don’t anymore (its Always Sunny is an exception but they haven’t made a new season in a while).
Jim, I’m mostly agreeing with you.
I don’t watch much TV at all, but I distinctly remember a fairly recent commercial for beer that is just a few short scenes of attractive twentysomethings partying while holding that beer. Looks like people don’t upload recent ads to Youtube, so I can’t find it. Going to a party and hanging out with good looking people is a fun, high-status activity. The ad is not informational, but neither is it manipulative, let alone mind control magic or jedi mind tricks. The effect of associating a product with positive emotions and high status is measurably tiny, but because beer is a saturated market, that tiny edge you get makes a difference in profit. Not trying to reprogram your brain, trying to make a small emotional impact that makes a small difference when it’s time to choose a beer.
Advertising is only evil when it is marketing an evil product, like selling antidepressants to white women. When an advertisement has poz in it, it is pozzed because the marketing department is full of holy women who want to include holiness in their ads, and anyone who might object to the cucked husband or the interracial couple does not object because he is scared of getting called down to HR.
>Yes, it is promoting poz, rather than selling houses.
>But, insofar as it is selling houses, it is being completely straight and above board.
There are thousands of ads like this, and it is mind control. White men are the doofuses of the world, fathers and husbands should never be respected, blacks are the kindest, wisest, smartest, and most responsible people on Earth, the wife is the natural head of the household… They show us these things again and again to implant them as norms, and it does work, if not quite as well as they would like.
Aidan wrote:
Of course ads can’t reprogram you, but showing the product being used by popular people is telling your brain that popular people use this product in the same way that pictures of naked ladies is telling your brain to get ready for sex.
It can’t reprogram you, but it can make you witness of the fact that popular people use the product, even if on a rational level you think this doesn’t register with you. It’s not magic voodoo, but it has some effect, and it’s emotional or irrational.
The Cominator wrote:
The study was somewhat old so the TV shows would be a couple of decades old.
Jim wrote
Heartiste thinks (anecdotally) that there’s an uptick in white woman black man pairings. I find it hard to believe ads didn’t play a role.
Here’s another example from TV. At least since the Simpsons, perhaps earlier, they placed black doctors in shows. Is that not programming the progs to accept a black doctor as normal? They’ve seen it 1000 times on TV so it becomes normal to them, whereas before it would’ve set alarms off.
The power of TV seem to me simply that you “witness” what you see, even if you rationally know it’s fiction.
Depicting a product that is used as a social lubricant being used as social lubricant is not manipulative or unfair, any more than depicting pizza delivery being used for a family meal is manipulative or unfair.
If you are selling a hammer, it is completely fair, relevant, and informative, to depict a nail going in true. If you are selling beer, it is completely fair, relevant, and informative, to depict males negotiating social connections more smoothly with the application of a bit of truth serum.
And worrying about ads being pozzed is a distraction from the big problem: That the shows carrying the ads are pozzed.
Contaminated NEET wrote:
I agree with Contaminated.
Not to belabor the point, but my father has seen “Mississippi burning” and “roots”, so he has actually witnessed the suffering of blacks. I can go on all day long about IQ differences or whatever, but it will only make him more enraged because I am attacking those people whose suffering he has witnessed.
Yes, but “Mississipi burning” and “roots” are not ads.
It’s definitely not unfair. It’s not that successful at manipulation, but it does have some effect.
For instance, is the family in the pizza ad healthy and attractive-looking? Would the ad work as well if the family was ugly and fat? I posit it wouldn’t.
The pizza ad I had in mind had a fat patriarch, an attractive wife who was failing to perform her duties to her family (hence the need for pizza delivery) and teenage children who were absent (but happily brought together by the family meal that the patriarch ordered)
So the primary focus was on solving realistic family problems that pizza delivery actually could solve, rather than claiming that if you have pizza, you will be high status, get hot women into bed, and have no problems.
They presented an entirely realistic family with entirely realistic troubles. Could have had a handsome billionaire ordering pizza for two supermodels to be eaten on the bed of a luxury hotel room with a view of the harbor. They had a regular guy, with regular family issues, issues for which pizza delivery could actually help.
If you sell a hammer, going to show a nail going in. That is the selective presentation of relevant and true information. Fair enough.
Because his wife was busy working, rather than cooking, he was unable to fulfil his mealtime role as patriarch. Orders pizza, he now has the props to fulfil that role.
Will pizza make you a patriarch? No, definitely not. Making your wife cook will make you a patriarch. But I still order pizza once in a while, and, in the scenario chosen for the ad, not a bad solution. If you are selling a hammer, it is fair, relevant, and informative, to selectively depict a situation for which a hammer is needed, rather than a screwdriver.
haha.. yes, of course they are not.
I am only reiterating my point that what you see on TV you actually “witness” in some sense. That even if rationally you know it’s all fake, your response is “as if” you witnessed it (see physical reaction to porn or horror films, or even sitcoms).
Hence TV ads can make you witness a happy healthy family eating some particular brand pizza. If you witnessed an ugly fat unpleasant family eating the same brand pizza you may make a negative association. I posit that it’s the fact that you witness what you see that is the power of TV.
The opulence, I has it ad is an example of that. But it’s so over the top that it breaks suspension of disbelief and becomes humorous instead.
The people making the pizza ad have the opportunity to make you witness a use-case for the pizza. You will perceive this use-case as if you were really there. So they’ll try to make it nice, fun and pleasant, plus they’ll insert some actionable information so you buy this specific product (this is simply necessary).
They may choose to make it realistic so it won’t be silly, but they will likely try to make it a good experience that makes you more likely to buy product. Being too over the top may break suspension of disbelief or turn it humorous. They won’t bore you with information, other than the one you need to buy product (you need some reference to the actual product to buy). You’ll be happy to witness the nice family eating the nice pizza. That’s more than good enough.
If the power to make you actually witness something that is “as if” real, why would they not use it to their advantage? As far as the ads I see, it seems to me that they do, and most of what is conveyed is not the small piece of actionable information which is of course always needed to refer the viewer to the specific product.
You are not seeing what I am seeing, and your examples fail to support your claim.
For example, the Sam Adams ad is primarily telling people that if the boss offers you an alcoholic drink at a business lunch, it will help to get in good with the boss if you accept it.
Which is true, relevant, and informative.
Underlying every business lunch where alcohol is available is a implicit deal: “Tell me the real whole truth, and you will get in good with me”. And when some of the participants at the lunch don’t want alcohol, the boss is going to suspect that lunch is going to be a waste of time, and the guys that do not want alcohol are nervous because the real whole truth will hurt them.
You accuse the Sam Adams ad of arbitrarily and artificially associating knocking back your boss’s drink with being socially inept, but it really is socially inept. They are not lying about social reality the way every single depiction of men interacting with women and whites interacting with nams lies about social reality. The Sam Adams ad is giving people true and useful information about social reality.
If your boss offers you a drink, he wants you to accept it, and likely wants your tongue a little bit looser than it usually is. The dweebs in the ad were not arbitrarily and artificially represented as socially inept, turning down alcohol under those circumstances really is socially inept.
Yes, television can lie to people about social reality, and routinely does, to the immense harm of the viewers, primarily in lying to them about the nature of women, the nature of the mating dance, and females in the workplace.
But when you see an ad depicting the social reality of beer or pizza delivery, tells the truth, or as much of the truth as is in their interests. Which is apt to be quite a lot of significant, relevant, and informative truth. People buy beer and have pizza home delivered primarily for social reasons, and the ads accurately depict their product serving those social goals.
Advertising is not lying about products. No one is lying much about products. Your product is usually useful for something, so you depict it being useful for what it is in fact useful for. Rather, the entire medium in which the ads are embedded is lying about the social reality of women, nams, and sex.
If a hammer ad associated using a rock to hammer in nails with being an inept handyman, that would be useful information, not subtle jedi mind control.
It intended to break suspension of disbelief and become humorous – see the surrealistic two foot tall giraffe at the end. This is a shout out to the viewer “Hey, we are just kidding”
No it was not anything remotely like good enough: They depicted a realistic patriarch with a realistic family with realistic social problems for which pizza delivery was in fact a relevant and helpful solution.
The Samuel Adams ad was relevant and useful information for the bewildered, socially inept, and frightened employee, and the pizza ad was relevant and useful information for the beleaguered patriarch.
If a hammer ad showed someone trying to hammer in nails with a rock, and then a guy with a hammer shows him how it is done, it would not artificial, arbitrary, and deceptive to show the hammer does its job.
If you have a product, it is bound to be good for something. You want people to buy it. So you depict it being used for what is good for. If you instead depict as good for getting one laid, you are competing with pua crowd and the fashion crowd, and you are picking a fight with a six hundred pound gorilla. If you depict it as good for making one high status, you are competing with a crowd of ferocious high status people.
Unless your product is a total scam, you always get better return on investment by presenting that truth which is in your favor. And if you look at ads, that is what they are primarily doing. The major payload is always relevant and true information that is useful for the target – though a useless irritation for everyone else.
(Again, excepting the Calvin Klein perfume ad, where the problem was that underlying product is unlikely to be very useful)
Yes, the “Opulence, I has it” ad is funny on purpose.
You said that they could’ve used a billionaire ordering pizza for two models, but chose a regular family. I say of course they could, the billionaire and two models is the “Opulence” ad, which is intended to simply be funny.
You claim that ads don’t manipulate you, that they simply present a realistic use-case.
I claim that they present a realistic use-case, and that they manipulate you but only subtly and as long as it’s believable.
You may think that a believable ad cannot manipulate you. I claim that it can.
The critical difference between a text ad and a TV ad is that you “witness” the TV ad. The ad maker can effectively insert a piece of fiction into your model of reality, as long as it’s sufficiently believable.
You may think that the fact that it’s believable means there’s no manipulation, but they can nudge you in some desired direction using believable fiction.
For example, if the pizza brand were crap, you would rarely if ever see a real-life family eating that pizza.
But the ad makers can insert that piece of fiction into your model of reality. You’ve now seen several times a family eating that brand of pizza. This is now a part of your model of reality. It wasn’t there before.
The same way that they can insert a black doctor in every show and make people, over time, a bit more comfortable with having a black doctor in their next hospital visit: TV modified their model of reality by inserting some fiction. Everyone knows that they did that with gays in TV shows and movies in the 90s and 2000s, presenting them as high status. TV ads are shorter, but the medium is similar (you still witness what you see).
If hidden subtle manipulation, hidden persuaders, mattered and were effective, we would see them trying to show that their brand of microwave ovens is used by high status people and will result in romantic success. We don’t.
The subtle manipulations are rare, insignificant, and they have to fit into the primary objective, which is to present a realistic use case. When present, they take a back seat.
The vast bulk of advertising, what comes up when you google anything and click on the first link, is just straight information: Price and availability. Nothing there that could embed any hidden persuaders, any subtle manipulations.
When the ad tells a story, as with the beer ad and the pizza delivery ad, it is because the product is used socially, because the use case is social. Pizzas are designed to be shared.
Products that are not used socially, no social story in the ad. Try searching ads for a microwave oven.
When they tell a story, as with Sam Adams beer ad, the primary point of the story is always the primary use case of the product. As I said, any hidden persuaders take the back seat.
For you to have a hidden persuader case, for your evidence for hidden persuaders to actually be evidence, for evidence that advertising is effective through hidden persuaders your ad needs to be about not beer, but something that is not used for social purposes.
Well, as we know, products that are used socially and those that are not, are fundamentally different because in the socially used products there’s status signaling.
I am no expert on this, but my claim simply comes from the fact that people, if they don’t think too much about it, can’t distinguish between reality and TV. Hence similar hormone effects from meeting with your friends or watching “Friends”. Or people being scared by movies or aroused by porn.
The fact that TV appears real to us doesn’t mean they can directly make you do things for them. Only that they can make a fictional event appear real to you. So you’ll see perfectly average clothes like Tommy Hilfiger worm by handsome people having fun and you’ll make an association as if you had seen it in the street. They can’t make you buy it, just present something advantageous to them that you perceive as if you had witnessed it.
Perhaps such trick works for signaling items like clothes but not for microwave ovens, what do I know. I imagine people don’t picture themselves signaling about their microwave oven, whereas status signaling with their clothes or car is a large factor in those purchases.
By “trick” I mean basically “social proof”.
Polo shirts worn by handsome models is normal. Nice things are nice, and good fashion is a public service.
Polo shirts worn by #BodyPositive gender-fluid blobs, on the other hand, that is what manipulation looks like.
To speak of ‘manipulative ads’ is to speak of manipulative information sources. Or perhaps more precisely said, manipulat*ed* ads, manipulat*ed* information sources.
Again and again you see this pattern: when priestly daemonhosts mouth complaint sounding noises about perversions of merchants, they are mouthing about perversions they themselves imposed upon them. When they harangue about depredations of corporate entities, they are haranguing about skin-suits they themselves are wearing.