The parable of the Wicked Vinedressers

Don’t worry. This not going to turn into a Christian blog. The Dark Enlightenment is about material and effective causation and falsifiable truths.

But the Dark Enlightenment is also about religion, largely because we are trapped in a holiness spiral, and a holiness spiral that is increasingly becoming demon worship.

The parable of the Wicked Vinedressers tells us that “Judeo-Christianity” is a hostile Jewish entryist movement against Christianity, just a Socinianism was a hostile nontrinitarian entryist movement against Christianity.

Foreseeing his crucifixion, Jesus told us that God was going to become so pissed with the Jews that he was going to ditch them, and adopt someone else. The Christian Church is the new Israel. For this reason the parable tends to get stuffed behind the water heater in the basement along with Saint Paul on marriage and on the recruitment of Bishops. (The new bibles that translate Paul from the Greek as using some word other than “Bishop” are lying. His words on the priesthood have long been an embarrassment to the Church, and now some Churches have taken to just flat out lying about them.)

Who is the new Israel is way off topic. Not a fit topic for a Dark Enlightenment blog. Entryism, however, is right on topic.

As with all parables, the narrator, or in this case the narrator followed by Jesus himself, nudges us in the ribs and explains what the parable is all about, and Jesus then segues the parable into prophesy. That Israel will be destroyed and its people replaced. Which prophesy came to pass a generation later.

OK. So no such thing as Judeo-Christianity. Replacement theology, supersessionism comes right from the horses mouth. The Christian Church has replaced Israel in God’s plan. Supersessionism is official, and any Church stuffing it into basement behind the water heater along with the rest of all the embarrassments is heretical.

Gnon, of course, works through material and effective causation. And while the final cause of the expulsion may well have been Divine Wrath, the material and effective cause was –

wait for it.

wait for it.

– Following the letter of the law at the expense of the spirit of the commandments.

A mob of Jews coveted someone else’s land and took it, and then when the Romans came around to sort out the disturbance, killed a centurion, or as I prefer to say it, killed a cop.

Well, the Romans had plenty more centurions, and ordinarily the matter would not have led to much, but in this case one thing led to another, and eventually to the prophesied fall of Jerusalem and the prophesied destruction of the Temple (there is a pile of prophesy about this event, which I am unlikely to cover) and the reason things got so totally out of hand was that the Jews were so self righteous about the matter.

And the reasoning behind their extreme holiness was that it is more important to strictly observe the law on contamination by blood, even if it is merely chicken blood, than the commandments on coveting, theft, and murder. You see, they took that land for extremely holy reasons. It seems that getting a cop’s blood on you is less important than walking on land that might be contaminated with chicken blood and they took that land because it was very close to the narrow access path to the synagogue, and they needed to prevent it from being contaminated by chicken blood.

There are a lot of prophecies relating to the expulsion, but this is not going to become a Christian blog, so I will skip the rest of them, even though some of them relate to material and effective causation. Religion is on topic when it impacts material and effective causation, as it frequently does.

And material and effective causation should impact religion. Hence, the Dark Enlightenment faith of Gnon.

Tags: , ,

380 Responses to “The parable of the Wicked Vinedressers”

  1. Cloudswrest says:

    Srdja Trifkovic on European depopulation.

    ———-
    On the debit side, however, is where we find the busted lock. There is a malaise affecting all of Europe: an ageing population and falling fertility. I have known that for years, of course, but it was in Nice, on the iconic Promenade des Anglais, that I suddenly realized that most people walking on the street were old, seriously old, and that there were precious few children running along the walkway, or playing on the beach below. The same applied to Montpellier’s gardens in France, to the Italian Como’s lakefront, and to every other location I visited.

    The numbers are scary. In 1960 the population of today’s European Union accounted for 13.5 percent of the global total. By 2018 this figure had fallen below 7 percent, and on current form it will drop to 4 percent by 2070. By that time the inversion of the population pyramid will no longer be possible. There will be no “Europeans” left.
    ———————–

    https://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/blog/europe–a-nation-of-old-men-up-for-grabs/

  2. Leon says:

    Vox Day’s blog just got removed. Something about being in “violation” of rules.

    • Dox Gay says:

      It was utterly idiotic on his part to not relocate to his own website, staying on the Blogger platform instead. What was he thinking lol?

      • The Original OC says:

        He should have at least bought his own domain name so he could redirect to an alternative site without losing a ton of traffic.

        He’s a smart businessman, whatever else can be said for him – what was he thinking?

    • jim says:

      It is a violation of the rules to speak the truth on blogspot.com. He never should have been there.

      • pyrrhus says:

        Vox lives in Northern Italy, the EU likes to fine American tech companies large amounts for their misbehavior, and Vox can afford lawyers…But I understand that he does have alternative plans, apart from UATV, not sure what they are…

        • non-kiwi says:

          Vox lives in Switzerland. He was doxxed on Kiwifarms about a month ago. The JPG with the evidence is very concise and convincing. The primary resource used was the photos Vox’s wife was posting to Instagram.

          Posting photos to instagram is something women do to impress prospective male mates and prospective female rivals. One wonders why Vox’s wife felt it necessary.

          Blogger’s terms of service does talk about how you shouldn’t lie about your country of origin.

      • Pooch says:

        Vox is not as smart as he thinks.

        • pyrrhus says:

          Vox backed off Google last year, but maybe the climate in the EU has changed…But pretty sure Blogger can’t afford billion dollar fines…

    • Alfred says:

      I’d been wondering why they allowed the blog to stay up as long as they did. They probably found his Q-faggery useful for a while.

      I’m sure he got nailed because the ever tighter clamping down on unapproved COVID information.

    • Anonymous says:

      It would seem his new site is available here:
      https://www.milobookclub.com/

      But it also seems that Vox is still using gmail. Sad.

      • Karl says:

        Only he himself knows to what extent his use of gmail is limited and what else he uses.

        Maybe he really is looking for a chance to sue Blogger in an Italian court (or anywhere else). Maybe he is only using gmail to a very limited extent and only for legal reasons related to his announced litigation.

        It is difficult for anyone on the outside to estimate his chances. Maybe it will be profitable for him to sue Blogger, maybe not. His claim that he is not surprised by Blogger’s cancellation seems credible. So it is too soon to know whether he did something smart or something dumb.

        • jim says:

          > Only he himself knows to what extent his use of gmail is limited and what else he uses.

          If he was using blogspot heavily, he is using gmail heavily.

          Hell, I don’t even use SHA256, even though I know it is as pure as the driven snow, because I figure that if you use a clean algorithm that the NSA has touched, you are going to wind up inadvertently using a dirty algorithm that the NSA has powned. I do use the enemy services, but only for identities that I want the authorities to know about and know what that identity is doing, only for what I deliberately want our enemies to see.

      • jim says:

        I expect that most of my readers know, but needs repeating. Everything you send through gmail is scanned by the world’s best and most powerful AI (or at least it used to be the best and most powerful before they lobotomized it to stop it from seeing race and sex) and the good stuff is forwarded to your enemies.

        And if you are a business using Google Analytics, Google leases out the use of your customer list to your competitors. It therefore seems likely that if you are a political website using Google Analytics …

        Similarly, everything you upload to the cloud backup service that your android phone keeps nagging you to use. I don’t have direct knowledge that the same is true for Microsoft’s cloud service, but it seems likely because Skype calls are also scanned by speech to text algorithms, and if the AI thinks the text is hot, the video and audio forwarded to the US government, but the speech recognition is really bad, making this spying of limited value.

        • c4ssidy says:

          I don’t know much about government but I know of Amazon’s Alexa which is probably not so far behind in technical capacity, it uses low-paid and low-skill datacenters in Chennai to check (and train) what the AI picks up, which is then passed up to college grads in Massachusetts to evaluate the device’s actual response, a place with real trannies who get real PTSD if for some reason a person keeps saying very insensitive stuff. If you speak very quickly and use a lot of slang the AI totally fails (you can even test this yourself using the Alexa request log which customers can view on their account), the Indians then fail to transcribe it just as much which means after it passes up through the system the trannies are forced to listen to and write out your utterance in order to evaluate whether the device response was correct. The requests also tend to fail whenever multiple people are speaking or if there is background media speech. It is not great, but also huge amount of resources being put in to improve it, and it could perhaps get very good in a matter of years even if the smart fraction can always mutate their language around it

          In theory every sound wave is always going to be a particular word, and with enough time and human effort they are going to get everything 1:1

          Deciphering a hateful intent is the hard part. Facebook AI can pick up “duh huh I hate the n” type rants and moderate them without human intervention, but fails spectacularly if the user applies the slightest amount of poetic mutation to their words, and I think always will, humans have a knack of mutating their language due to our tribalistic nature, and a machine trained by other humans to recognise it is always going to lag behind. The main game is therefore using big data to narrow down the government’s focus so that the subset is small enough to dedicate their limited resource of college-educated and security-cleared human actors to read and evaluate directly

        • The Original OC says:

          Did you ever try google meets automatic captioning? It’s pretty good.

    • Cloudswrest says:

      Vox’s post on Gab

      Vox Day
      @voxday

      11h
      ·
      Google struck at Vox Popoli today, as you can see:

      https://voxday.blogspot.com

      Of course, we’ve been prepared for this and the backup site is already up and running, with a new post and all posts dating back to 2003. I’ll provide the URL later today.

      No worries, no fear. Conflict is the air we breathe!

      • The Original OC says:

        He didn’t see it coming:

        1. didnt use the original domain to bootstrap the new domain

        2. the new domain is dumb and doesnt relate to the old domain or his content.

        not trying to kick a man while he’s down. am trying to say it’s weak to complain about oppression when even our best guys take so few precautions.

        Imagine if Donald Trump had set up his own twitter app in 2017. People would have installed it.

        • nils says:

          “he didnt see it coming” the man has spoken about the coming canceling for years, has had posts on the backup plan going back years, try not to let your dislike for the man show yourself as an idiot.

          • The Original OC says:

            If he had seen it coming he would have registered a domain like http://www.voxpopoli.com and pointed it to his blogger for several years, advertising it frequently on his blogspot, while maintaining a self-hosted mirror of his blogspot, and when the blogspot went down he would have updated the DNS to point the domain to the mirror, resulting in no visible disruption of service other than the disappearance of the blogger url, which only a small minority of his user base would still be using.

            But doing it the way he did it, maybe he saved $20/mo.

            • jim says:

              I maintain two servers in the cloud, and several domain names, while only using one. One of the servers mirrors the other. I have a backup server in my home, and if both existing servers went down, it would take me a little while to export the home backup server to a new server in the cloud. If my existing domain name appears to be at risk, I have some more that do not have a common point of failure, and will start redirecting from my at risk domain name to another domain name. If my existing domain name were to go down suddenly and unexpectedly, I would have a problem, but Vox Day should have expected his domain name to go down, claims to have expected his domain name to go down, and failed to make any preparation.

          • Dox Gay says:

            try not to let your dislike for the man

            A dislike well-earned and well-justified.

          • jim says:

            Vox Day did not see it coming.

            If he had, would have been redirecting to his own domain name on his own server.

            I am pretty sure my existing server and domain name are safe, but have taken precautions.

            • nils says:

              Strange. He did redirect his actual readers to his backup, which is, as of a few moments ago, working. Bizarre tho, i will admit, that a man who didn’t see it coming and didn’t discuss it with his readers just so happens to have written about the ban he didn’t see coming and made public the plan for where his blog would be after the banhammer fell. no doubt you know better tho jim. I cant wait for your post about how VoxDay doesn’t have a backup and how he didn’t publicize it.

              • Justin Bieber says:

                Clean VD’s jizz off your mouth, snarky faggot.

              • Dox Gay says:

                When the glorified book marketeer is sending his shills – he is not sending his best.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Look i kinda dislike him too but i think he has a certain low cunning. Possibly him getting caught somewhat flat footed is a legal stratagem.

                • Dox Gay says:

                  There was a post by Antidem about what he calls “Midwit Foolers.” Whenever I think about Vox, I am reminded of that post.

            • The Cominator says:

              Possible he wants to sue American big tech Italian court. Vox Day is not as smart as he says he is but he has i think a certain low cunning.

              • nils says:

                i dont know if thats his plan, if it is it seems kinda dumb but maybe he knows something i dont, why people here who have been flat out lying about him, feel the need to call me a faggot i dont get, if you dont want snark you can treat others honestly and not lie outright about what they have said, if you dont like the man, and he is a bit blind about somethings, say what you dont like. The man said he would be cancelled, he was, his backup is so far working, if you want to feel superior over some ideological differences in your circle jerk go ahead. I told you he saw it coming, you doubled down because you look down on him as a fool, maybe he is a shill or some weird fedgoat, but the man did see it coming and his stated plan so far seems to be working, that someone is trying to post under a different name to hide their hatred for him, is big gay.

                • Justin Bieber says:

                  why people here who have been flat out lying about him

                  Oh, poor you.

                  Some big meanies on the internet dared to insult m’lady, and you spill your infertile dead-end testicular pudding in a failed attempt to white knight for her.

                  Hey cocksucer, go ahead and inform us:

                  1. Who exactly “flat out lied” about your little princess?
                  2. What was the lie, specifically?
                  3. Who exactly “doubled down” on that supposed lie?

                  Better yet, why don’t you tie a rope around your pencil neck and take the jump already – you can fantasize (as indeed you have been frequently fantasizing while engaging in autoerotic asphyxiation) that at the bottom, VD’s gaping anus awaits just for you, so that’ll definitely encourage you to do it.

                • jim says:

                  His plan is working, but on a platform so insecure as the one he was on, should have had redirects in place before getting the heave ho.

                  His plan is not working, in that most readers will not know where to go.

                  If no redirects, and no prospect of getting them up in due course, not working that well.

                  I regularly snark at Vox Day. There is a lot to snark about. But his work on Social Justice Warriors has been great and effective, and he got the replacement website up with impressive speed.

                • The Cominator says:

                  He pissed us off because he is a huge internet white knight like hes a huge faggot on this issue… and I still don’t agree with him painting Jordan Peterson as the antichrist or something (though purple pilled I like that Jordan Peterson is the only Cathedral priest who is somewhat redpilled on the woman question). His sexual hierarchy is also fake and gay. And of course he won’t name the gay when he white knights about gender neutral “pedophilia”.

                  But he does good work in other areas.

                • alf says:

                  His sexual hierarchy is also fake and gay.

                  It has also somewhat broken through into mainstream in the form of sigma grindset meme, which I find hilarious and impressive – https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Ibj-XDpSisA

                • jim says:

                  It was relatively easy to break into the mainstream, because it is a rationalization of the purple pill.

                  If your faith is based on falsifiable lies, will self destruct.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Sigma’s might sort of be real (alphas without groups) but they aren’t as Vox Day describes them.

                  A real sigma is like a loner psychopath who everyone is afraid of or who they should be. Fictional examples are James Bond and The Man with No Name.

                  A real example was probably Ken McElroy (terrorized his little rural town for DECADES… before being subject to vigilante justice).

                  Vox Day is many things, but I don’t think he is a real sigma.

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_McElroy

                • alf says:

                  it is a rationalization of the purple pill.

                  Yep, hence all those memes have a self-deprecating tone.

                  Vox Day is many things, but I don’t think he’s a real sigma.

                  Vox invented the term so as far as Im concerned he’s the king of sigmas.

                • Anon says:

                  if you want to feel superior over some ideological differences in your circle jerk go ahead

                  What circlejerk? For as long as this blog has been around the commenters have varied wildly in opinion and a lot of the activity is people rudely but good-naturedly ribbing each other. Whenever I read the comment section here I have to skip over huge swaths of stuff just because Jim is known to let pretty much everything go except for stuff like viking or CR or whatever the new word generator is called. A circejerk it’s not

                  I basically called Jim a fatass about a month ago and wasn’t banned. If one day I grew a brain tumor that caused me to think reading vox day and posting on vox day’s blog was a good use of my time, and I called him a hooknosed fatass, or told him his comics stink, or told him he invented a system of categorization in which vox day is the coolest guy around, what do you think would happen?

                  Vox invented the term so as far as Im concerned he’s the king of sigmas

                  And I’m the Grand Poobah of Gloopendorf

    • Cloudswrest says:

      Speaking of Voxday,

      Fred Reed has a recent strawman article up on Unz arguing antisemitism is due to goy jealousy of Jewish success, due probably to their superior average IQ. Essentially recapitulating black animosity to whites due to white superiority. Reed doesn’t address the more likely hypothesis that antisemitism may be a reaction to overt “antigoyists” policies, practices and lobbying by stereotypical Jews.

      Vox attacks Reed’s essay using an attack vector that Jews don’t really have a superior IQ, which is specious, rather than Fred is wrong because of the second hypothesis.

      • pyrrhus says:

        No..Vox makes the same points he has made for a decade..the original “Ashkenazi have 115 IQ “assertion came from a study of children entering Jewish day schools..the same study found that the white European children entering had an IQ of 118….He also points out that if Ashk Jews in Israel are that smart, the other Jews would have an average IQ of 84, based on total statistics…not possible…Of course, Fred has also posted numerous articles about how brilliant Mexicans and other Latinos are, to much ridicule……

        • pyrrhus says:

          In my experience at (University Jim wants to blow up), the Jews tended to be mid-level, with the smartest people in math and science courses mostly white Europeans…That was long ago, when there was still a merit based admission policy…

        • Cloudswrest says:

          All that you say about Jewish IQ may be true, but it is irrelevant. Antisemitism is not due to Jewish IQ. Blaming IQ, or debunking claims of IQ, are misdirection and strawmen.

    • FrankNorman says:

      VoxDay’s new site is http://voxday.net/

      I think the reason they suddenly shut him down was not the political stuff – but rather a recent post he made on a quite different topic: Advertising.

      People who buy online advertising in the hope that this will increase their number of customers, tend to be disappointed, according to Mr Day. It seldom even breaks even, in terms of cost/benefit.

      And that’s what Google did not like to see being said.

      • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

        There arguably was a time when there was some value-add, back when when online advertising cost only fractions of a penny on the dollar in the first place (since it likewise cost entities like google almost nothing to offer it, since usable architecture was already there anyways for the sake of other functions, it just needed to be exploited).

        There has since been something of a second ‘dot com bubble’ in a sense though, as more and more parties are drawn in by pitches of ‘big data’, and price likewise goes up, but the consumer effect largely remains the same.

  3. The Nomad Chad says:

    Someone a few posts ago was talking in the comments about creating an offshore company. The context was keeping money from being seized without having to hold 100% crypto. This would also potentially have tax benefits. Especially as you could operate crypto business in places that don’t tax crypto.

    (As much as I agree with you, Jim, that crypto doesnt really need to be cashed out, I haven’t seen many people buying property with bitcoin. )

    Anyway, I’d like to know if any of you have experience and/or ideas on how to structure such a company. Or at least who would I ask to find out? What countries are best for this? Obviously the company needs to have a bank account. Do you open that in the same jurisdiction or elsewhere? You then pay yourself an income or dividends, depending on when and where.

    • jim says:

      Most tax havens are scams.

      I have not done this, but if I was going to do it:
      https://www.taxhaven.org/tax_havens_of_the_world/tax_haven_dubai/

      If a tax haven does not have its own loyal army, I figure it must be fake.

      I don’t think Dubai is in business as a tax haven. I don’t think the sovereign thinks of it as a tax haven. It is just that he is, being a secure monarch with sons, and having a personally loyal army, taxing at the long term laffer maximum rather than the short term laffer maximum. He has a natural monopoly on infrastructure, and charges like a wounded bull on infrastructure, so just does not care about chasing down people’s complicated financial activities.

      If he started trying to follow all the paperwork, would find himself with a dangerously large and powerful bureaucracy between him and the money that knows more about what is going on than he does. And since the natives don’t like that kind of work and are not very good at it, he would probably find that the bureaucracy was being run de-facto by Jews and Christians, whom he does not trust.

      The basic economic theory behind Dubai is not regulatory arbitrage, but “Hmm. I am sovereign over a large amount of barren empty desert with a hellish climate. How do I turn barren empty desert with a hellish climate into incredibly expensive real estate, and then sell it at astronomical prices?”

      For him, taxing and regulating financial transactions is just Jews predating on Jews. Complicated, boring, and it would probably turn out that he was the pigeon being plucked.

      However, in Dubai, some crypto currency activities require a crypto currency license – I don’t know what is involved, but I suspect the major point of the license is to get some of the money.

      If you set up a crypto currency exchange, like Kraken or Binance, there is regulation. Some ICOs are regulated some are not, depending on how the bureaucracy feels, and probably on whom you bribe. But I don’t think you are planning to be another binance, nor to launch an ICO.

      On the other hand, Dubai has laws (which are enforced with vigor and effectiveness) against money laundering, and I suspect that what you have in mind might well look like money laundering.

      I would do it the old fashioned way, bitcoin for used notes. But I am a hodler, so have no practical experience.

  4. Neurotoxin says:

    Andrew Cuomo is resigning.

    • Atavistic Morality says:

      Geronticide is okay, but offending the sensibilities of womyn is going too far… he has to go.

      • The Cominator says:

        He got shivved because other high level democrats wanted him shivved. The real reason has nothing to do with muh womyn.

        • Atavistic Morality says:

          I suppose, but the device they are using is muh womyn.

          • The Cominator says:

            In feminist clownworld its a goto.

            They can’t admit he deliberately killed old people, plenty of others did that.

      • Neurotoxin says:

        I’m kinda surprised he’s walking away; I expected him to tough it out.

        In one of Vox Day’s books he gives a warning that if you’re under attack by SJWs, a “neutral” or “friendly” emissary will come to you, explaining that it’s really for The Greater Good if you just fade away without a fuss. Really, VD says, it’s a ruse by the enemy (or maybe a well-meaning but wrong-headed friend) to get you to surrender.

        Cuomo fell for it.

    • Whitespace says:

      Getting clear of Murder charges by virtue of groping women. Good deal if you can get it.

      I’m kidding, of course. The standard of “reasonable” is apparently defined so that for any given person, the minimum standard is someone less intelligent. Hence, the person who is marginally capable of understanding that housing diseased people with the elderly will kill the latter must assume that a “reasonable person” may not comprehend that much.

    • Pooch says:

      I suppose the anticipated process of the left elite eating their own for insufficient leftism and holiness has begun. Cuomo is getting replaced by a white woman who likely gets replaced by a black woman.

      • Alfred says:

        It’s a strategic move to ensure no challengers to Kalama in 2024. The people in charge are intent to continue ruling from the shadows with their puppets Joe and whore.

        Despite it being most holy to put a sheboon into every position, the smart whites within the left continue to direct them from the shadows.

        • Pooch says:

          This is right although the presidency is not being controlled by the shadows. I agree with Yarvin’s analysis that we have theocratic oligarchic rule by Congress which holds all the power. The judiciary and the executive branch are essentially powerless, with the President just being a ceremonial smiling face figurehead over the actions of the legislative branch.

          Kamala fits the bill of putting a holy sheboon in to ceremonially rubber stamp the actions of the elites in Congress. It’s why the elites love her so much even though the masses hate her. It really doesn’t matter because she will hold no power similar to the Queen of England.

          This roughly tracks with the actions of the late Roman Republic Senate consolidating power over the consuls and tribunes.

          • jim says:

            Not true.

            And not Moldbugs analysis either. Maybe it is namefag Yarvin’s analysis, I don’t read him, but it is not Moldbug’s analysis.

            Congress has delegated all power to the judiciary, the prosecutors, and the regulatory state, The judiciary is Harvard and the regulatory state and the prosecutors is the presidency

            The president is largely irrelevant, as Trump proved. Congress is irrelevant, as is proven by their lack of interest in passing a budget. The presidency is all powerful.

            • Pooch says:

              Not seeing the judiciary as Harvard. Harvard is the priesthood which is all powerful over the state religion but only the state religion.

              I am seeing the regulatory state and the executive branch as just extensions of the legislative branch. They answer to Congress and are overseen by Congress. If the elites in Congress will it to be done, it is carried out by the regulatory state. Congress is not irrelevant. All the guns of the state answer directly to Congress.

              Observe that the Capital Police answered directly to Pelosi on 1/6 and the generals met personally with Pelosi, Pence, McConnell, and Schumer regarding military response to 1/6. That does not indicate irrelevance.

              • Karl says:

                Why do you think that Congress oversees the regulatory state and the executive branch?

                They can’t order the regulatory state or the executive branch (or perhaps more precisely enforce any order), the can’t fire nor punish members of the regulatory state nor the executive branch.

                Any budgets Congress may pass are ignored.

                • Pooch says:

                  They absolutely can and do order the regulatory state to action in an informal way and can hire and fire the heads of every agency, in an informal way.

              • Karl says:

                Pelosi, Pence, etc. are not Congress. Any ceremonial function of specific people does not indicate power of Congress

                • Pooch says:

                  Pelosi is the leader of one chamber. Schumer/McConnell co-leaders of the other chamber.

            • Pooch says:

              Congress is irrelevant, as is proven by their lack of interest in passing a budget.

              The elites squabble about coming to consensus over the budget, but they eventually to come to consensus over the budget.

            • Pooch says:

              Specifically: there is no executive branch. What we call the “executive branch” is, in fact, the legislative branch. While it contains a cosmetic monarchical hierarchy, in every way this “executive branch” is substantively managed—in personnel, process, organization and purpose—not by the White House, but by Capitol Hill. Indeed, the White House itself may be best seen as part of the legislative branch. The destiny of the Presidency is to be an elected celebrity which the Congress parades in front of whatever it does.

              This engineering defect in the Constitution is not new. Woodrow Wilson noticed it. Ultimately it is a flaw in the concept of separating judicial, legislative and executive powers—a weird British idea from the 18th century, which never really worked. Sorry. The business end of our government is Capitol Hill. Behind it lies the aforementioned theocratic oligarchy, which is its brain and its voice—but in front of it lies nothing.

              Capitol Hill is no longer even a legislative or parliamentary organ. It is not a legislative organ because no objective observer would describe its thousand-page ukases as “laws”—actual law in America today is administrative law. It is not a parliamentary organ because its functional process does not include members convincing other members by making convincing speeches in a hall full of members.

              https://graymirror.substack.com/p/for-the-times-they-are-a-changing

              • jim says:

                > Specifically: there is no executive branch. What we call the “executive branch” is, in fact, the legislative branch.

                As Alfred just pointed out, the CDC just legislated, and its legislation, unlike that of congress, actually gets enforced.

                The CDC is the executive branch, the presidency. The president is a figurehead, even more so now we have a senile president and a female vice president.

                That we have a senile president and female vice president was the presidency acting to make sure that the president stopped trying to meddle.

                • Pooch says:

                  The CDC is the executive branch and the executive branch is the legislative branch. Congress can have the CDC’s funcing decreased or increased and directs the merely ceremonial president to select or replace it’s Director.

                  The CDC would not be legislating the extension of the eviction moratorium via administrative law if Capital Hill wished it to expire.

                • Pooch says:

                  That we have a senile president and female vice president was the presidency acting to make sure that the president stopped trying to meddle.

                  I would arge that we have a senile president and female vice president was the elites on Capital Hill acting to make sure that the president stopped trying to meddle, but perhaps we are saying the same thing.

                • Alfred says:

                  >Congress can have the CDC’s funcing decreased or increased

                  Having congress decide on funding prevents outright civil war from within the Presidency as every department would quickly end up murdering each other for funding.

                  But I see no evidence that Congress could actually slash administrative state department to zero. They’d like end up arrested and executed as a secret Putin spy bent on stopping child molesting at Tranny Story time hour.

                • Pooch says:

                  But I see no evidence that Congress could actually slash administrative state department to zero. They’d like end up arrested and executed as a secret Putin spy bent on stopping child molesting at Tranny Story time hour.

                  Why would they even want to? The administrative state increases their power not diminishes it. They select all the heads of every agency and have the power to fire them as well (through the figurehead president). Why couldn’t Trump fire Wray and the CIA bitch? Because he would be instantly impeached by Congress.

                • Alfred says:

                  >Why would they even want to? The administrative state increases their power not diminishes it. They select all the heads of every agency and have the power to fire them as well (through the figurehead president). Why couldn’t Trump fire Wray and the CIA bitch? Because he would be instantly impeached by Congress.

                  Moldbug 101: The permanent government ignores the orders of the elected government and the heads of their departments placed over them. That was quite evident all through out the Trumps.

                • Pooch says:

                  The permanent government

                  Congress is, for all intents and purposes, the permanent government. These fuckers have been in power for decades and half-centuries.

                • jim says:

                  Permanent, but not the government and not in power. They don’t actually do any governing, any more than the Queen of England does.

                  In a lot of states, Republicans have the numbers. They are passing election integrity laws and laws against the imposition of critical race theory. Do you think that those laws will have the slightest effect? They are just going through the motions like the Queen opening parliament.

                • Pooch says:

                  In a lot of states, Republicans have the numbers. They are passing election integrity laws and laws against the imposition of critical race theory. Do you think that those laws will have the slightest effect? They are just going through the motions like the Queen opening parliament.

                  Legislative law no longer matters.

          • Alfred says:

            > I agree with Yarvin’s analysis that we have theocratic oligarchic rule by Congress which holds all the power. The judiciary and the executive branch are essentially powerless, with the President just being a ceremonial smiling face figurehead over the actions of the legislative branch.

            The CDC just created an eviction ban out of whole air. Congress passed no law to that effect. Congress is a figure head that spends most of it’s time trying steal money for itself and giving the administrative state cover as the administrative state and the judiciary rules.

            • Pooch says:

              Read the blurb I posted by Yarvin above. Capital Hill does not rule by legislative law anymore. It rules via administrative law.

              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_administrative_law

              • jim says:

                I don’t read namefags. One always gets misinformation, and it takes too long to sort out what is accurate and what is poison.

                I can see the presidency ruling.

                Sometimes, often Yarvin says things that are not true, but plants a few dark hints so that you can see they are not true. I don’t have time to detect the dark hints and figure them out.

                We have a vast and overmighty executive branch that every day gets more vast and more overmighty. What we do not have is an executive.

                > It rules via administrative law.

                Administrative “law” presupposes that the bureaucracy operates by known rules and procedures. It does not. Process is being abandoned. Not only is it strangled in red tape, but the red tape has become random shreds though being broken so often. Because the red tape stops anyone from accomplishing anything, sooner or later someone powerful demands that something be done regardless, and pretty soon one has a bureaucracy that is completely arbitrary, ad hoc, and unpredictable. It is capable only of executive action, and not really capable of that, because no executive.

                • Pooch says:

                  I agree, especially when it comes to thoughtcrime. But in this case, Yarvin’s description on how power flows in the present day government is not thoughtcrime and there is no good reason to believe it to be untrue.

                • Pooch says:

                  and pretty soon one has a bureaucracy that is completely arbitrary, ad hoc, and unpredictable. It is capable only of executive action, and not really capable of that, because no executive.

                  Merely the tool of a theocratic oligarchy which, safely situated outside the formal limes of the state, yet dictating all its beliefs and hence all its actions, is absolutely supreme and absolutely unaccountable.

                • Pooch says:

                  I agree, especially when it comes to thoughtcrime. But in this case, Yarvin’s description on how power flows in the present day government is not thoughtcrime and there is no good reason to believe it to be untrue.

                  Furthermore, what I DO think Yarvin is namefagging about is that there is a non-violent path to regime change. It is clearly thoughtcrime to claim violence is necessary so Yarvin obfuscates the topic.

                  Looks to me November 4th, 2020 was the final opportunity for non-violent regime change. Like Rome, our Caesar is going to likely find it necessary for substantial violence.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  When Yarvin says that the substantial character of the American Occupation Government is a theocratic oligarchy, which is basically true; but then he sends the reader off on a snipe hunt by cloaking it in the old civics 101 smokescreen saying that congress critters are the high septons, which is basically untrue.

                  Perhaps he feels he’s done good enough by getting people to think about the ‘theocratic oligarchy’ part first to begin with – but purple pill (truth mixed with lies) is worse than pink pill (truth with some truths left implicitly unsaid).

                  Moldbug also said that AOG was a theocratic oligarchy – and specifically, that academic bishoprics – archetypified by Harvard – and media preachers – archetypified by The New York Times – were officially unofficial branches of the officially unofficial government; the stable power of such over the unstable revolutionary chaos of ‘popular governance’, that cuts off the heads of any that stick up prominently, being a natural consequence of such; the governance of such secured and facilitated by the civics 101 smokescreen, exercise of authority divorced from conscious recognition of responsibility for exercise of it’s authority.

              • Alfred says:

                Capital Hill doesn’t rule at all beyond a few dollops of giving the administrate state legitimacy.

                >Observe that the Capital Police answered directly to Pelosi on 1/6 and the generals met personally with Pelosi, Pence, McConnell, and Schumer regarding military response to 1/6. That does not indicate irrelevance.

                The Generals met with Pelosi, McConnell, and Pence and told them how it was going to be. Congress then gave the administrative state what the cover they wanted.

                Remember it was the Generals who rejected having national guard at the protest to keep order when Trump ordered it. Pelosi wasn’t consulted on the issue at all as far as I can tell.

                • Pooch says:

                  That’s not how I’m seeing it. Pelosi et al just increased the Capital Hill’s funding for offices in California and Florida. They have created Praetorian Guard.

                  The Generals met with Pelosi, McConnell, and Pence and told them how it was going to be. Congress then gave the administrative state what the cover they wanted.

                  That’s not what the transcripts show. Milley definitely had disproportional influence but the Congressional leaders were more or less on the same page. They delegated power to him not the other way around.

                  Pelosi wasn’t consulted on the issue at all as far as I can tell.

                  I don’t know if that’s true. The capital police (who answers to Pelosi) rejected the National Guard’s help.

                • Alfred says:

                  That’s not how I’m seeing it. Pelosi et al just increased the Capital Hill’s funding for offices in California and Florida. They have created Praetorian Guard.

                  More likely the Capitol Hill police force asked for increased powers and funding as their pay off for the Reichstag fire they helped create.

                  That’s not what the transcripts show. Milley definitely had disproportional influence but the Congressional leaders were more or less on the same page. They delegated power to him not the other way around.

                  Last I heard Trump order the national guard the night before and Milley rejected it. Milley disobeyed a direct presidential order like it was nothing. Congressional leaders don’t have the power to call out the national guard, so giving Milley the power was in reality giving him cover and legitimacy for what he was already doing.

                  I don’t know if that’s true. The capital police (who answers to Pelosi) rejected the National Guard’s help.

                  Notice that they haven’t been blamed and had their budget cut for this failure instead they’ve been richly rewarded for it. The capitol police is the planed for scapegoat for the riot, a false flag riot clearly planned by the FBI, the Generals, and the Capitol Hill police. Hell 4 of their members were suicided to cover up their involvement and no one bats an eye.

                • Pooch says:

                  More likely the Capitol Hill police force asked for increased powers and funding as their pay off for the Reichstag fire they helped create.

                  That’s not convincing after the Chief was axed and replaced by a sheboon pet directly after 1/6.

                • Alfred says:

                  >That’s not convincing after the Chief was axed and replaced by a sheboon pet directly after 1/6.

                  Sounds like he wasn’t in on it. Not everyone was, otherwise they wouldn’t have to sucide people to cover it up. But with Sund out of the way, no issues with someone digging into what actually happened.

          • Anon says:

            Pooch says:

            Why couldn’t Trump fire Wray and the CIA bitch? Because he would be instantly impeached by Congress.

            He _was_ impeached, and nothing of consequence happened. Nobody really gives a shit about an impeachment: it’s ink written on water. Your brain on democracy

            If Trump could have told the men with guns what to do – directly, without going through a million layers of bureaucracy – something might have gotten done. Instead, the men with guns were ordered by bureaucrats to stand around the capitol (without guns), just in case the morons who showed up on the 6th actually meant business next time. They didn’t mean business the first time and they won’t next time

            Namefag Yarvin’s analysis is that the state sets policy independently of the nominal leadership of “Democratic” nations, whereas for example Stalin exercised strict, absolute, unquestioned Monarchical control over the policies his bureaucracies were tasked with. Well: how do you exercise strict, absolute, unquestioned Monarchical control over the policies the American extended bureaucracy is tasked with without looking at your phone while commies slaughter each other? How do you tell the men with guns what to do?

            Pooch’s solution is to just get rid of that pesky legislative branch, nevermind the other branches. And we have to VOTE them out! Maybe firing that one CIA bitch will fix it. Then we can go back to when American democracy was great, before the pesky legislative branch fucked it up

            • Pooch says:

              Impeached and removed is what I meant.

              • Anon says:

                Trump wasn’t “removed” because he was slipped a piece of paper that said “impeachment” in Comic Sans on it any more than impeachment stopped Clinton after being polished off by an intern. He was “removed” (left) because it eventually became obvious there wasn’t a large group of men around him with large sticks who meant business. Why do I have to repeat myself to dumbasses

                • Pooch says:

                  Who votes on impeachment, retard?

                • Anon says:

                  Who votes on impeachment, retard?

                  You’re just not getting it. Although a good illustration of my point: I’m LEGISLATING the correct answer to you but sadly I have no control over your inherently low IQ

            • Pooch says:

              Pooch’s solution is to just get rid of that pesky legislative branch, nevermind the other branches. And we have to VOTE them out! Maybe firing that one CIA bitch will fix it. Then we can go back to when American democracy was great, before the pesky legislative branch fucked it up

              That is the complete opposite of what I am saying. Voting doesn’t work because voting is rigged. Yarvin’s and my position is that the only solution is complete and utter regime change. Nothing less, including voting in Trump or passing laws in the existing system, is sufficient.

              • jim says:

                The question, however, is who has the power.

                And the answer is Harvard has the long term power, because it controls the ideology and provides cohesion and provides the judges, and the bureaucracy (the presidency) has the short term power. The president has very little power, as Trump demonstrated by attempting to rule, and the legislature has absolutely no power. It does not even attempt to rule, and only goes through the frivolous superficial ritual motions of legislating and budgeting, which empty meaningless rituals have ever poorer attendance, and are carried out ever less completely and more erratically.

                The rituals of the Republic are now carried out the way the pagan rituals of Rome were carried out towards the end of paganism, and the way the monastic rituals were carried out before the dissolution of the monasteries.

                • Pooch says:

                  The question, however, is who has the power.

                  To which I say, the regime. So who is the regime? You say the bureaucracy. Yarvin says it’s a mistake to think the bureaucracy is not merely the tool (substantively managed—in personnel, process, organization and purpose) of the actual ruling regime, the theocratic oligarchy of Congress who rules not by legislating and budgeting, but through administrative law.

                • jim says:

                  Observed behavior of legislators does not seem like they rule.

                  Power means you say to this man “come”, and he comes, “go”, and he goes, “do this”, and it is done.

                  Not seeing it.

                  If they are not exercising power by legislating and budgeting, how are they exercising power? Mind rays?

                  You say “administrative law”, but administrative “law” is just the momentary will of some administrator that you have never heard of. You don’t see legislators giving him his marching orders.

                • Pooch says:

                  I am seeing members of Congress saying “go” to the CDC director to extend the removal of property rights as an end-around of the Supreme Court (which ruled that official legislation to extension would unconstitutional).

                • Alfred says:

                  I am seeing members of Congress saying “go” to the CDC director to extend the removal of property rights as an end-around of the Supreme Court (which ruled that official legislation to extension would unconstitutional).

                  You’re not seeing congress passing a law to do so. Instead the CDC legislates while congress steals money and provides a cover of legitimacy for the CDC.

                  The supreme court can rule the CDC “law” just as dead as Congress’s laws.

                • Pooch says:

                  We are seeing two different things. I see the largely white Anglo elites in Congress directing and overseeing the diversity hire pets of the administrative state to do their bidding in a de-facto unofficial official manner. You see the opposite.

                  As for the Supreme Court, sure they could try to block different things but suddenly packing the Supremes is mentioned in the media again.

        • jim says:

          I am seeing a power struggle over Kamala. A sufficiently holy puppet with sufficiently holy puppet masters is unlikely to be an reliable puppet.

          It probably was not the intent of the puppet masters that Destroit would burn, but having valorized and mobilized envy, what did they expect?

          • Pooch says:

            Kamala would need to restore the powers of the president to hold any power. Perhaps they are fearful of her doing that, I’m not sure.

            • Alfred says:

              Those who are most holy hold power. If the administrative state is less Holy than Kamala then she will win the power struggle.

              • Pooch says:

                Not true, at least yet. Niggers are the most holy but hold no power. The power is still held by the still largely white Anglo elite.

                I agree with the premise though. If Kamala wishes to reclaim the power of the executive branch, she likely wins because she is more holy than the still largely white elites in Congress.

  5. Anonymous Fake says:

    [*deleted*]

    • jim says:

      You said that already, and I replied already.

      • Anonymous Fake says:

        [*deleted for grotesque lack of contact with reality*]

        • jim says:

          If your delusions were more widely shared, I would let them through in order to debate them.

          I have repeatedly explained to you how prices work. You ignore my reply, and just repeat the same stuff.

  6. Kunning Drueger says:

    How do you build high trust kin-groups that contain married men as well as single men? What’s to stop the single men from gaming wives then hiding behind the AWALT concept? No good woman is going to long tolerate a stable of whores being fed and watered just so the voluntary singles stay sated. It is a waste of resources and infrastructure. I’m not talking about urban zones or cities, as those things are basically just Pareto distributions of high value minority and low value majority, making whore storage a solved problem. Many rural communities have been destabilized by “traveling salesmen.” The obvious prescription is strong men maintaining tight control of property. But the reality is that some are good at things, many are ok at things, and some are bad at things.

    • jim says:

      Rural people tend to be rather supportive about quietly killing people who need killing.

      The problem is to create an ethos that unfaithful wives and the men they are unfaithful with need killing.

      • Kunning Drueger says:

        Agreed. The only issue is the exceptional cases. Like gearing up for war, dealing with environmental cataclysm, large festivals, etc. Right now, we have a lot of men that should be married and busy, but they are single and unengaged. This is the problem I’ve run into in organizing and participating in men’s groups. The attached guys don’t need to bother with slaying pussy, and the single guys can’t find worthy women (or so the claim goes). Some single guys are perfectly charming and self-controlled, but a lot of them are a social liability unless it’s a bar or some other boisterous venue.

        Another issue is just how socially retarded right-wing men can be. Behind the keyboard they are articulate, knowledgeable, and confident. In public they are gawky, weird, and annoying. We need a Finishing School for NEETs, spergs, and shitlords.

        • Karl says:

          I doubt a school would help

          • Anonymous Fake says:

            [*deleted*]

            • jim says:

              repetitious and unresponsive. You said it all before, many times, I replied before, many times, and you don’t reply to my reply, but just say it again, randomly rephrasing and randomly decorating it with our shibboleths used upside down.

              I would happily host a debate on this topic, but you are not engaging in conversation, just going on like a broken record.

              • Anonymous Fake says:

                [*deleted again for the same reasons*]

                • jim says:

                  I already replied to your critique of capitalism and discussed the cost to society, to civilization, and to those outside the city of people living in cities. If I allowed you to repeat it all over again, I would have to make the same reply all over again.

                  Our cities, like our universities, are bloated far beyond what a genuinely free market would produce. People want to live close to power that can reach out and intrude on other people’s creation of value. We have a thousand Kings three miles away instead of one King three thousand miles away.

        • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

          If you had a few men get together and do a fight club style meetup, that awkwardness would go away pretty quick. I was an awkward little shit until I started lifting heavy and realized that I was going to win 99/100 fights.

          Social anxiety and especially approach anxiety come from the threat of approaching a woman and having to potentially fight for her. If you are weak, you will be more anxious. If you are strong, you do not need to be anxious because you can hurt anyone who threatens you. Once you reach that point, you are unlikely to get into a fight because anyone who cannot fight you will not out of fear, and those who can will not out of respect and the risk of fighting a peer. Being a sociopath helps, but the most important thing is to be strong and fit.

          • Pooch says:

            Arnold called this “the respect of size”. People treat you differently, men and women, when you are big.

            • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

              It is not just how other people treat you. It is the change that happens when you realize that you need not fear because you are the man that others fear. It happens internally, and it changes how you look at the world forever.

        • Aidan says:

          In medieval times, pretty much every man was a member of a peer group that had informal legal status, not quite a guild, but nevertheless would have members represent the peer group and their interests in legal proceedings and negotiations with authorities. Said peer groups being generally organized around profession, often quite specific. Apprentices would hang out with apprentices, often only within the same trade, and so on. Unlikely that single men would be tempted to adultery when your male friends have plenty of sisters, daughters, and cousins running around for you to marry.

          Back in the day, there was no man without a tribe, and hardly any men went unsocialized to the extent that they could not fit in with other men. There is a lot of social technology that we have completely lost, to which there is nothing comparable in the modern world. Hard to build a cohesive tribe without all that in the background.

  7. Need it for school says:

    An update on my situation:

    My father threw a fit to make me sit and listen to his internationally visiting MD sister lecture me about the covid vaccines. It hasn’t happened yet but I predict it will be demoralizing. I should not have let my family know but I live with them 24/7 and I can’t seem to keep my fucking trap shut so this is what I get.

    I went to vespers on Saturday and liturgy today at a local cathedral. The only people The cantor and pastor both said some brief sympathetic things about the covid situation. What little I had a chance to say about my own situation fell on sympathetic ears. The cantor deals with outreach it looks like. I have not yet told either of them I want to join the church because of my vaccine issue. I am worried about appearing mercenary. I have enjoyed attending the services, though I find them somewhat alien aesthetically.

    • jim says:

      Sounds like a plan, though I think you overestimate the enemy’s will, cohesion, and competence.

  8. Basil says:

    If we talk about the Jewish question, in the Orthodox environment this is actually not discussed. There are no screams about Judeo-Christian civilization or stories about the dangers of Jewishness at the same time. Attitudes toward Jews seem to range from neutral to moderately negative. This does not mean that the Orthodox Church does not make mistakes in other areas. For example, according to modern Orthodox practice, a person can easily marry a “divorced” woman, although this directly contradicts the words of Jesus. On the other hand, a person cannot get married without the approval of the state, which killed the Orthodox faith in Russia centuries ago and whose “family” laws directly contradict Scripture. Only a very rare and risky priest will agree to marry a couple without a “state marriage”. The average Orthodox priest does nothing to preserve the Russian people, even if he understands that the RUSSIAN Orthodox Church exists only thanks to him. The Orthodox priest simply turns a blind eye to the fact that the country is becoming more and more Muslim.

    Second. It seems to me that the requirement for ordinary Christians to follow “husband of one wife” is the same game of holiness. Especially if we believe that adultery is a problem because of the violation of a man’s property rights. There is nothing in the Bible to indicate that plural marriage is forbidden to anyone other than the priesthood.

    Third. I don’t see men willing to uphold patriarchy even if they don’t get pussies. Almost no one dreams of virgins. Most use whores / prostitutes / porn / anime. The “right” may agree that divorce and abortion is a problem, but it will be very difficult for you to find the right one who agrees with real solutions to these problems. It is not difficult to find a right-wing person who speaks of third-wave feminism as a problem, but a right-wing person who speaks of first-wave feminism as a problem is a statistical error.

    • neofugue says:

      The official policy of the Orthodox Church on marriage and sex is outlined in Saint Basil’s Canons; canons 4, 9, 21, 35, and 50 are relevant to subjects mentioned in OP.

      http://www.holytrinitymission.org/books/english/canons_fathers_rudder.htm#_Toc78634056

      Divorce is allowed in the case of sexual immorality, but female-initiated divorce is forbidden. Second and third marriages are allowed, but only as a preventative measure against further whoredom. Polygamy is prohibited. There is no listed requirement for marriages being conducted with or without state approval, and a priest permitting female-initiated divorce does so in error.

      > Almost no one dreams of virgins.

      What does the conquerer do when he takes over? Assuming not gay or deviant, does he gets a harem of:

      A. 1000 Prostitutes.
      B. 1000 Widows.
      C. 1000 Virgins.

      Anyone who says he does not have a preference for virgins is a liar, to himself and/or to others, out of wishing to be politically correct and/or out of an inability to procure one.

      • Basil says:

        In the canons of the holy fathers, it may be like this, but in practice you need to have a bro-priest from a small rural parish or go to a wedding in Georgia in order to avoid state registration of marriage. In the canons of the holy fathers, divorce on the initiative of a woman is prohibited, but the practice of application is slightly different.

      • The Cominator says:

        There are a few guys who would take the whores (I’d get about 900 virgins and 100 or so whores). No guy EVER wanted 1000 fat feminists.

        • Kunning Drueger says:

          You can turn a virgin into a whore, but not the other way around.

          • jim says:

            In today’s society, totally true, but the early Australian authorities had total and complete success in turning whores into wives – by answering shit tests with public floggings.

            The fundamental problem is that any whore has been with a hundred men more manly than yourself, and will always regard you as an inferior substitute. But if she is likely to get flogged for speaking back to her husband, then her husband will be the most manly of them all in her eyes.

            • Kunning Drueger says:

              So it could be construed that whores are mobile women and wives are stationary women, just like mobile bandits vs stationary bandits. Do any of the observations of the latter port to the former?

    • Alfred says:

      I don’t see men willing to uphold patriarchy even if they don’t get pussies. Almost no one dreams of virgins.

      Men would jump at a chance to uphold the patriarchy if it wasn’t illegal and likely to get you murdered for trying. Every man wants a virgin wife, you’re just repeating propaganda the left has been pushing for 40 years now.

      Most use whores / prostitutes / porn / anime.

      A man dying of thirst in the desert will drink whatever is offered, no matter how foul.

      The “right” may agree that divorce and abortion is a problem, but it will be very difficult for you to find the right one who agrees with real solutions to these problems. It is not difficult to find a right-wing person who speaks of third-wave feminism as a problem, but a right-wing person who speaks of first-wave feminism as a problem is a statistical error.

      I’ve seen many people on the right saying on messages boards that giving women the vote was a mistake. But no one can say it publicly without being canceled.

      • Basil says:

        I don’t think the messages on some boards are representative. In addition, when it comes to such resources, visitors are more inclined towards solutions that involve more nationalization of vaginas, rather than privatization of vaginas.

        A man may want to live on a personal estate in the south with a personal harem and vineyards, but since this is perceived as something unlikely, most men tend to pursue less complex goals. You can offer a man to choose between a harem of prostitutes / widows / virgins. He considers such a proposal to be theoretical, like a proposal to choose between an estate in Italy / Spain / France. The preference for a villa in Italy does not play a big role if the person does not believe that he can get this villa without breaking his ass.

        • jim says:

          > I don’t think the messages on some boards are representative.

          Only anon can speak the truth. It is the other message boards that are unrepresentative.

    • Sneedly Chuck says:

      Anime girls are obviously a sublimation of the desire for a virgin wife.

      IDK how to interpret the sentence “I don’t see men willing to uphold patriarchy even if they don’t get pussies.” However, if it simply means you don’t see non-pussy-getting men willing to uphold patriarchy nowadays, you are just plain wrong and don’t get out much.

      • Basil says:

        in that anime I saw, the spineless “white knight” silently takes shit from the princess with inflated self-esteem. And it is presented as if it were such a form of love.

        • jim says:

          Japanese are thoroughly cucked and anime reflects this – but nonetheless, the image of the girl appearing in anime reflects our longing for virgins.

          • The Ducking Man says:

            As anime fan I need you to give me example where the male is severely cucked.

            PG13 animes are not valid comparison because japan’s censorship ain’t a joke.

            Other than that:

            1. Jojo bizzare adventure – full blown chad fantasy
            2. Gundam IBO – Archetypal father sacrifice (the MC died protecting his pregnant)

            Heck, even Naruto/Boruto still shows realistic good father figure.

            • jim says:

              https://blog.reaction.la/culture/anime-and-decadence/

              The lack of male masculinity is disturbing, but the female chastity is over the top.

              • The Ducking Man says:

                Oh, I see the issue here.

                You are watching animes that’s tailored to deviants.

                1. Normal people never heard about Btoom or any harem & ecchi animes. Normal people read shounen jump then go on with their life.

                2. I think you got the process backward. People don’t become deviant or hikikimori from watching too much anime like Btoom, it’s because they are deviant so they like animes like Btoom (I hate this anime with passion, though my shut in brother likes it, see the pattern here?).

                If you want to see what 2020 normal anime producers thinks about relationship, I can recommend Darling in the Franxx 10/10

              • The Ducking Man says:

                Jim is taking near bottom of barrel animes to judge entire anime industry. That is Jim’s business but I think he can do better than that.

                If one wants to judge entire anime industry, why don’t he pick randomly animes ranked #1 to #100 in myanimelist.com, and see if it gives good masculinity example or not.

                I just try to suggest fresh perspective because as far as I watch animes (which I watch a lot), there lots of masculine characters even on newer stuffs.

                • Self Admitting Anime Hater says:

                  What is the appeal of anime? Most if not all of my friends watch it but I cannot stand it. It seems like people who watch anime are like the lotus-eaters, spending countless time watching these cartoons that really don’t have anything to offer besides fleeting enjoyment.
                  I enjoy older movies, particularly Clint Eastwood types, Gran Torino is one of my favorites because it shows someone why is very old but is clearly a very manly man shun his family in part for violating the fifth commandment and, though not ideal, help a neighbors kid become a manly man.
                  I enjoy movies like that because you can connect to the characters since they look real and aren’t cartoons, you understand what they are saying since it’s in English, and it’s set in a backdrop of Judeo-Christian culture, not Japanese culture which is nothing like the West.
                  What then is the appeal of these foreign cartoons?

                • The Ducking Man says:

                  Compared the western animation, animes production values are A LOT higher.

                  We can compare classic Batman animated series from 90s (classic western masterpice) to Neon Genesis Evangelion (also masterpiece from 90s).

                  Batman is good, but NGE production values are higher (better drawing, animation, etc.).

                  Personally I like anime that it can explore any kind of trope imaginable, hence the term “there is always anime for it”.

                • Alfred says:

                  I enjoy older movies, particularly Clint Eastwood types, Gran Torino is one of my favorites because it shows someone why is very old but is clearly a very manly man shun his family in part for violating the fifth commandment and, though not ideal, help a neighbors kid become a manly man.

                  I hated that movie because of the white family’s dynamics was so fucked up. The manliness stuff was good but men shouldn’t be giving up their lives for people who are not their kin.

                  it’s set in a backdrop of Judeo-Christian culture, not Japanese culture which is nothing like the West.

                  Judeo what? Get the fuck out of here.

              • Anonymous says:

                Anime might be getting more mainstream but man, no need to force yourself to watch it if you’re not in the target audience. I’m surprised the subject comes up as often as it does in this blog.

              • Cloudswrest says:

                “The lack of male masculinity is disturbing”

                Looking closer to home, let’s compare the old vs the new Star Treks. In the original series Captain Kirk was banging chicks across the galaxy. Federation chicks, alien chicks, robot chicks. Even McCoy and Scotty had an episode or two with girlfriends in them. Heck, there was even an episode where Checkoff reconnected with a space hippy girlfriend. As to Mr. Sulu, well nevermind… And Spock had Jill Ireland (Charles Bronson eat your heart out). There was an episode were Spock teased Yeoman Rand on her attraction to (rapist evil twin) Kirk. In the same episode everybody loathed beta good twin Kirk.

                In the later series all the males appear to be eunuchs who have had “sexual harassment awareness training.”

                • Cloudswrest says:

                  Here’s the great scene were Spock chides Yeoman Rand right after the reintegrated good and evil Kirk shows up (the evil Kirk tried to rape her).

                  https://youtu.be/_txzxA_dxcE

                • info23 says:

                  I don’t think Captain Kirk actually became the Patriarch of his own family with a beautiful wife.

                  It would have been even more based if Kirk had a family and one of his patrilineal descendants took up the mantle of being an excellent captain.

                  I mean Jojo Bizarre adventures features a heroic family down the ages. Whose sons and grandsons are as heroic as their Forefathers.

                • Cloudswrest says:

                  The only patriarchal TV show featuring (adult) sons I can think of is Bonanza.

                • info23 says:

                  @Cloudwrest

                  The Old Testament from Abraham’s time definitely fits the bill that is not on TV.

                  Tracing descent and their unique stories from Abraham his son Isaac and grandson Jacob and so forth.

                  And then the 12 Sons who became the Forefather of 12 tribes.

            • Leon says:

              Goblyn Slayer is very good as well. The main character is based on Batmand and the Punisher. Everybody ignores the goblin menace for flashier threats as goblins continue to breed right under everyone’s noses, killing the men and raping the women.

    • Miserius says:

      >although this directly contradicts the words of Jesus

      It doesn’t. According to the canons if you marry a divorced woman you are guilty of adultery and must make a penance for adultery, even though you never actually committed adultery yourself. This is fine. As it discourages the practice without forcing people into celibacy because of their past.

  9. 7817 says:

    I’m glad to see people talking about who Israel actually is now, after the New Testament. If only the churches would understand their history and reclaim this doctrine we could be rid of a lot of fake and gay entrism. There’s a lot of boomer Christian Zionists that have to be laid to rest before this can happen though.

    It’s always interesting to me how people on the right deal with the JQ. Your way is similar to Vox Day and Nic Salon, acknowledge what Jews invariably do while rejecting swastispergs. It’s good enough for me

    • The Cominator says:

      “I’m glad to see people talking about who Israel actually is now, after the New Testament.”

      The new covenant is for Christians but the end times also posits a literal jewish country of Israel in the rough territory of where ancient Israel was. Its not just Protestants who say this but I think the Orthodox generally acknowledge it as well (though taking a far more negative view of Israel generally than Protestants do, and the Orthodox tend to think the beast of revealations will literally be a homosexual jew).

      The Catholic interpretation of this (hilariously claiming that the Emperor Nero was the antichrist) is horseshit.

      • jim says:

        That is the prophecy.

        For the current Israel to fulfill the prophesy, needs to get in a new prophet who tells them that the tenth commandment is rather more important that the business about boiling a goat in its mother’s milk, need to obey that prophet, shut down the gay parade and build a new temple.

        No nation with a gay parade has ever won a war. Israel has started losing wars. The next big one will annihilate them if they do not receive, and obey, a new prophet before then.

    • info23 says:

      @7817

      Would have the destroy the credibility of the Schofield Reference Bible that originated the whole Zionist Prophetic dispensationalism.

      That would also require disproving the Pre-Tribulation rapture.
      And making sure that the Church=Israel as proven in Romans 11.

      This guys interpretation of Apocalypse is the antidote to the Boomer Zionism:
      https://www.ichthys.com/index.htm

  10. JR says:

    I always laugh when goys point to Christianity as truth. Christianity was the result of 2 Jews – Jesus and much more importantly, Paul – subverting Rome by riling up the underclass of women, slaves, and poles, telling them that they were morally equal in the eyes of God to Roman male citizens. There is nothing more radical than that. This is just what Jews do, work to subvert and destroy goy society. And history repeats. Just as Jews destroyed Rome with Christianity, Jews are destroying the west with this essentially animalistic anti-white, anti-rational, barbarism quasi-religion by riling up and importing mud underclasses. And if I were a betting man I would say it’s going to continue to be successful.

    To see how successful the Jewish destroyed paganism and how their lies continued to be believed by you retards to this day is very funny. Nietzsche was right.

    • jim says:

      The Roman religion died. Had to be replaced. Was replaced. Pauline Christianity is good stuff.

      You don’t like it? What is your alternative? Revive Thor/Zeus/Jupiter/Indira?

      The original Aryans were ancestor worshipers, and the original Aryan gods were deified ancestors who lived in the original Aryan homeland. Can’t revive them without a continuous line of deified grandfathers, great grandfathers, and great grandfathers pointing back to them. That is why modern pagans are gay. Because they are fatherless.

      That is why paganism died. Not because two Jews came up with a replacement.

      Paganism died first. Replacement came later. You don’t like the replacement? What have you got?

      Look at modern pagans: Gay.

      Hinduism is the last living remnant of the old paganism, and it is rotten to the core and demon infested, as the Hindus on this blog are apt to agree, and anyway you cannot be a genuine Hindu unless biologically descended from genuine Hindus. (Because Hinduism still contains faint and fading echoes of the original ancestor worship.)

      • JR says:

        The only thing that can beat shitliberalism is fascism, which appears impossible at this point of time. But remember Hitler got 3% of the vote in 1928 and was in power just a couple years later. We need a new Great Depression and loss of the USD as world reserve currency. That comes first because shitlibs in control of the federal reserve will just print more money and give it out to favored parties to enforce their control. We need the rise of China, or extreme hyperinflation, to break USD.

        • jim says:

          Fascism did not beat liberalism. It was just another leftism, so inherently carried the seeds of its own destruction.

          When you say “fascism” all you are saying is “roll leftism back to the 1930s” – which is as hopeless and pointless as every cuckservative who wants to roll leftism back to 2014.

          When Hitler launched the attack on Russia, he found that socialism had destroyed the logistic capability that he needed.

          Franco managed to stick around long enough to find that socialism no longer works once you run out of other people’s money, and rolled it back, and having rolled it back, found he had nothing, that his belief system had hollowed out, so his system died with him. Framcoism without socialism was empty. Nazism without socialism would have been empty.

          Nah. You are a leftist, scarcely distinguishable from the rest of the progressives. My program is Throne, Altar, family, and property.

          Nobody cares about ownership of the means of production. They want ownership of the means of reproduction. We propose to give it to them. Fascism was only popular because people were actually hungry. Today, they are obese and incel. Nobody is likely to be interested in the fascist program today. 1930s leftism (fascism) addresses issues that no one cares about today.

          • JR says:

            The Allies had 5x the GDP output of the Axis. Germany lost due to the US supplying Britain and especially Russia with the material goods (military, gas and food) necessary to continue the war long past the point where they would have otherwise lost.

            The German model of blood and soil socialism would have worked fine, and they punched far above their weight in the war given that enormous GDP differential.

            Franco “lost” because his natural fascist allies were long defeated and he was surrounded on all sides by the shitlib American empire. His legacy never had a chance. And by the way, neither does Orban in Hungary or Poland for the same reasons. Poland especially is rapidly turning shitlib.

            Christianity has done nothing but lose since the 1500s against shitliberalism (and look to the Holodomor — no Jeebus is going to save you from the shitlib genocide of white Christians that is coming).

            Let’s hope for a USD collapse, it’s the only thing I see as an outcome to save everyone (although it will be hard and we will all be much poorer).

            • jim says:

              Excuses, excuses.

              > The German model of blood and soil socialism would have worked fine

              It did not work fine. The attack on Russia was a shambles logistically.

              Did not work for Franco either, and he did not have the excuse of war.

              And if socialism worked, which it did not and cannot, people only cared about socialism because actually hungry. Today, nobody cares. 1930s leftism not only failed catastrophically, it no longer has any appeal.

              Same story with Scandinavian socialism. Socialism failed to deliver. So they said “more socialism will deliver”.

              More socialism failed to deliver.

              So they said “Utopia has arrived”, and produced no end of highly scientific statistics proving that utopia had arrived.

              The people were unimpressed by statistics. So now they are importing a new people and getting rid of the old people.

              If Nazism had won, and stayed socialist, would have run the same course as Scandinavia. If, like Franco, had abandoned socialism, would then run the same course as Spain.

              Socialism is merely a tool for getting into power. And today is it is useless even for that. As I keep saying, if people not hungry, do not care about ownership of the means of production. But they are always going to care about ownership of the means of reproduction.

              If Throne and Altar promise that every man will be King and High Priest under his own roof, it is going to be mighty popular with those who have roofs and someone to rule over under that roof, or a reasonable prospect of acquiring roof, wife, and children should Throne and Altar come to power.

              • The Cominator says:

                Its hard to seperate the Reich’s capital and raw material controls from preparation for war, but the Reich’s agricultural socialism (which is what drove the famines and most of their atrocities) was inexcusable and purely just stupid socialism for socialism’s sake.

                Also the system of running a wartime economy in peacetime basically forced them to go to war or face collapse, a war they in the end probably could not have won. To win they needed to grab oil and the oil they needed was deep in the Russian Caucasus or in Iran.

                • JR says:

                  I agree the Reich’s agriculture socialism was retarded. But where they lost was in Russia, and they had to go to war with Russia because Stalin was planning to attack Germany in as little as a couple weeks after Germany ended up attacking them. The reason Germany captured and killed so many early in that theater is Russia had a huge number of soldiers and materials prepared in offensive formation right on the border.

                • jim says:

                  We now have inside information about what the Soviets were up to. They had no intention of attacking any time soon, and when Hitler attacked them, were totally unprepared.

                  And even if true that Russia intended to attack imminently, irrelevant to the question of whether Socialism works. When Hitler attacked, he found his logistics were chaos. It is for this that Nazism was totally unprepared. Socialism failed for the Nazis.

                  It is likely that without allied intervention, would have won anyway. But socialism failed.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Stalin probably was going to attack in 1942, the offensive position deployments in 1941 were probably just a strategic rehearsal.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The strategic deployment of the Red Army was indeed for an offensive but given their woeful preparation and state in 1941 it was likely a strategic dress rehearsal.

                • Afred says:

                  Stalin probably was going to attack in 1942, the offensive position deployments in 1941 were probably just a strategic rehearsal.

                  They might have attacked Romania in late 41 to cut off Germany’s oil supply but that option went out the window once Germany moved their troops into Romania.

                  Russia attacking Germany in 41 or 42 would have worked to the German advantage. The encirclements probably would have resulted in 3 or 4x as many captured Russian as did the historical time line.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The prime strategic objective of the initial Soviet offensive should it come was always going to be Ploesti 1st not Warsaw or Prague (certainly not Berlin) but obviously they could not have attacked Rumania without drawing Germany into the war for that reason.

                • Nils says:

                  The Soviets failed horribly in their Finish war, so accurately estimating their war capability was not happening, but the vox day argument that the Soviets had a defensive force distribution by contemporary standards, only absurd with the hindsight understanding of panzer ausfgrouptaktics penetration ability, is useful. Is it possible the Soviets were in the same camp as the Reich? Everything planned to kick off late 40s untill it ends up going way sooner. When were the Soviets planning on nocking on Germany’s door?

                • jim says:

                  Since the regime fell, if they had anything so concrete as a plan and a date, we would now know.

                  Hitler’s state motivation for a war on two fronts was not imminent attack, but was that Britain would concede once Russia was taken out – which is piss poor stupid. Britain is a sea power. It still had its empire.

                  Attacking Russia while still at war with Britain was just stupidity, on par with declaring war on America while still at war with Russia and Britain.

                • The Original OC says:

                  The Germans really found themselves defeated by the USSR’s socialist logistics.

                  Their own socialism was a problem, but Germany’s railways had been built before the Nazis.

                  When they got into the USSR, they found a much larger and more competent army than they expected, meaning they couldn’t end the war in one season. Then they were stranded somewhere they could not resupply their troops.

                  The Germans could not have won WWII, on account of the relative strength of the countries they faced. They had no means to force Britain to peace, and they had no means to defeat the USSR before Britain and the US were able to intervene.

                  But they did not know that in January 1941, or in January 1933.

                  The only possible Axis path to victory is Japan choosing to attack the Soviet Union instead of the United States.

                • jim says:

                  Japan and Germany go after the collapsing British empire together, divvy it up between themselves. Obvious.

                • Alfred says:

                  >The Germans could not have won WWII, on account of the relative strength of the countries they faced. They had no means to force Britain to peace, and they had no means to defeat the USSR before Britain and the US were able to intervene.

                  There was multiple inflection points where Germany could have won WW2 but Hitler was more priest than warrior and insisted on his holy Jihad against the Soviet Union.

                  Wiser men like Admiral Raider urged Hitler to invade North Africa shortly after the fall France and taking the middle east. This would have resulted in linking up with Japan in India and the end of the British empire.

                • The Original OC says:

                  No loss of side territories was going to convince the British Isles to make peace unless the USA also withdrew support, and the British Isles was outproducing the Germans in most classes of military equipment, including aircraft and tanks, until the relatively late German full mobilization.

                  The Germans had a much larger army than the British, but no ability to bring it to bear against the British, and in the areas where they could fight limited wars with the British they had less ability to sustain attrition on both production and logistics grounds. Which is why they lost all those battles with the ostensibly weaker British.

                  The only chance for Germany was to take Moscow in 1941, and the only countries that could have made any difference to that fight were Japan and Italy, principally Japan..

                • jim says:

                  > The only chance for Germany was to take Moscow in 1941

                  The only chance for Germany was to not invade Russia, but to meet up with the Japanese in the former British empire. If they had defeated Russia, that would have merely postponed their defeat.

                • The Original OC says:

                  Supposing the Germans and Japanese had taken India, what would that have accomplished? India did not provide a large proportion of British war-making capacity.

                  Almost all British Empire war-making capacity was provided by the UK itself, secondly by Canada, thirdly by Australia.

                  Presumably the German-Japanese link-up isolates Australia, removing it from the British war effort, and maybe conquers it eventually.

                  But the UK-Canada power concentration would not be threatened by those losses, would have remained in the war, would have had more incentive to remain in the war since it would need to win in Europe to recover its other territories, and would be fighting with not much less capacity than historically. The UK-Canada concentration was outproducing the Germans in tanks and aircraft, so Germany’s basic problem of fighting a two-front war remains.

                  The only thing that could have induced UK-Canada to give up would have been the USA withdrawing its support, which makes Canada’s land defense unviable and the UK’s naval defense unviable. But the US government perceived it had more to gain from the war than the UK did.

                • jim says:

                  > so Germany’s basic problem of fighting a two-front war remains.

                  Not if he refrains from invading Russia in order to concentrate on the British empire.

                • The Original OC says:

                  It wasn’t realistic to expect there wouldn’t be a war ever with the Soviet Union. It’s hard to see why Stalin provoked WWII by giving the Germans the diplomatic cover they needed to go to war with France, if he didn’t hope to exploit the situation.

                  What went wrong for Stalin was that he probably expected a 3-5 year war between UK/France and Germany, which is also what British and German government statements were referring to in winter 1939/1940. What he got was a war that was over in less than one year.

                  The Germans were also more vulnerable to an attack than the Soviets were, because their only oil source was directly in the Soviet border. The Soviet oil was not directly on the German border. In my opinion, that is the main reason the Germans launched an attack on the Soviets.

                • jim says:

                  > It wasn’t realistic to expect there wouldn’t be a war ever with the Soviet Union.

                  It was entirely realistic to expect that there was plenty of time for a war under more favorable conditions – as for example being in possession of the British empire, allied with Japan, and having trade routes with Japan.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Listen to youtuber Tik…

                  Germany needed an oil supply bigger than Rumania’s to have any hope of winning the war, there were two places they could get it the Caucasus and Iran (and they would need some kind of transport logistics).

                  In retrospect they probably should have tried to go for Iran, but the Soviets probably would have declared war on them by the time they got to Iraq…

                • jim says:

                  Have you considered the possibility of Germany buying oil from Caucasus?

                  Trade is one of the many advantages of not declaring war on everyone at once.

                  The sane way to provide logistics and conduct extortion is to shake down the people you can shake down because you don’t need them, and use the proceeds to buy stuff from people who produce what you need, because, because you need those people you cannot afford to be too rough on them.

                  Oil being shipped from Russia to Germany ran into tanks heading in the other direction.

                  That Russia had oil and Germany needed oil is a reason for not invading Russia – or Iran for that matter.

                  You want the stuff you need for war to come to you. If you have to go for it, you are in big trouble.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Germany linking up with Japan through the middle east would accomplish a solution to it’s shortage of key strategic resources, which was a major cause of defeat in the OTL.

                  Another factor behind it’s troubles with taking the bri’ish out of the war was partially doctrinal. The most valuable ship the Americans ever produced in the pacific war was was the PT boat; Germany needed squadrons of fastboats and destroyers armed with torpedoes and anti-aircraft guns to effectively blockage the islands, which could also contribute to the picket line of airdefense against incursions of the enemies bombers. Most submarines of the war are really better understood as semi-submersible torpedoboats, that primarily operated on the surface but which could go underwater to make attack runs; which is a tactical advantage, but which could not stay underwater for extended periods of time, which is a operational disadvantage, which made them easy prey for regular patrols of aircraft. The only ‘real’ submarine that could travel underwater for strategically useful distances was the type XXI elektroboot launched late in the war, and it was really just a waste of good sailors and resources to attempt interdiction with boats not armed with secondaries without developing that capability first. It was really psychological at heart; a maladaptive fear of anything that might involve ‘direct’ conflict with the english navy, with the use of semi-submersible craft provided a *feeling* of avoiding ‘direct’ conflict – but not the reality of such.

                  On the question of Russia, the communist army was really underwhelming in terms of performance, and even late in the war it wasn’t so much that they improved as the Germans ran out of gas before they did, in figurative sense (and also literal sense). An attempt at invasion by the bolsheviks against a good defense in depth through buffer zones by a power much greater than Finland would likely turn into an even greater catastrophe than the OTL invasion by the Germans themselves.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >You want the stuff you need for war to come to you. If you have to go for it, you are in big trouble.

                  The appearance of abundant plunder ripe for the taking is a magic trick, formed out of many men, in many places, over many time, correlating factors together; and where a plunderer does then go out to plunder, finds the appearance disappearing as like a mirage, as none now take the effort to gather and present the fruits of civilization for their convenience.

                • The Original OC says:

                  Once Germany and USSR were the only powers left on the continent of Europe, it was a Mexican stand-off, and the only question was who would perceive they had the best chance for war they were going to get first.

                  Nothing Germany could do could eliminate the British problem; that is, the creation of an Anglo-Canadian army of 50+ high quality divisions in Southern England by 1943/4. So eliminating the Soviets before this army could be created was the best they could do to avoid the multi-front war in practice. It was the best of several bad options, but the best nonetheless.

                  The Soviets performed terribly in 1941, but they outperformed expectations, and especially had more manpower (and continued to organize and deploy more manpower) than anyone expected. If the Soviets had performed more in line with expectations, and been as weakly equipped as their own propaganda had convinced much of the world they were, the Germans would have won the war in 1941.

                  The British would then be facing a multi-front war against a much superior opponent, an opponent that could then have turned all its resources to bombarding the British Isles. This was Germany’s only path to victory.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  If ‘the British problem’ was physical invasion of the British isle then yes that would not be on the table unless and until no two front conflict – but that is also not really relevant.

                  Whether Germany focused on Russia or England first would make any difference in the end because they were on a resource clock which would run down either way; but establishing trade routes through the orient would make a difference – suddenly, that clock goes away, and options for end games come into the realm of possibility – including even just cold war stalemate.

                • jim says:

                  If they held the Asian trade routes, including a border with Japan in India, then no resource clock ticking down.

                  The major critical resource was oil – which was a damn good reason to do whatever it took to maintain their friendly relationships with Iran and Russia.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Except the Russians were going to stop selling by the summer of 1942.

                  The idea that the Soviets were going to attack in 1941 is bullshit, the idea that they were going to in 1942 or at the VERY latest 1943 was very real.

                • jim says:

                  You don’t know that. The Russians did not know that. We have their records now that communism has fallen.

                  If oil is going to be a problem, why send a column of tanks to cut off the oil supply sooner because it might stop later?

                • The Original OC says:

                  The British problem was that Britain would build an army that could threaten to invade Europe, forcing the Germans to deploy 1+ million men to defend against that invasion (which they did historically and failed to prevent the invasion) and Britain would build an air force that could bomb German cities every night, forcing the Germans to deploy 1+ million men to defend against these air attacks.

                  With this two-front war, hard to defeat another country that’s almost as strong as theirs.

                  It would of course help the Germans to have Iranian oil in 1940, but how long would it really take to fight all the way to Iran and then ship the oil back? Historically, they got to that region via the northern route in about two years, failed to quite finish the job, and had no real plan for shipping the oil back to Germany.

                  Taking the British Empire doesn’t really do anything to stop the Anglo-Canadian industrial and population center, armed with unlimited oil from the USA. It also doesn’t do anything to stop the Soviets, while removing considerable forces from defending the Soviet border, and the leaving the one reliable oil source (Romania) open to attack.

                  Note that the Soviets in 1941 didn’t even need to advance 1km into Germany to cut off German oil sources. They could bomb the Romanian fields from their starting zones.

                • jim says:

                  > It would of course help the Germans to have Iranian oil in 1940,

                  They had friendly relations with Iran in 1940, which was German aligned rather than British aligned.

                  If you have to fight your way to Iran to get their oil, you have already lost the war.

                • The Cominator says:

                  No prospect that England (even with the Dominions backing them up) could successfully invade the continent without the United States, they had their hands full defending the Middle East when Germany wasn’t even making the Middle East a priority (I still don’t understand why Malta wasn’t taken).

                • Alfred says:

                  It would of course help the Germans to have Iranian oil in 1940, but how long would it really take to fight all the way to Iran and then ship the oil back? Historically, they got to that region via the northern route in about two years, failed to quite finish the job, and had no real plan for shipping the oil back to Germany.

                  Take Iraq, rather ally with Iraq and trade for the oil from Iran and Iraq. There was already a pipeline from Iraq to the Med Coast and with the Japanese fleet providing escort the oil would flow.

                  Taking the British Empire doesn’t really do anything to stop the Anglo-Canadian industrial and population center, armed with unlimited oil from the USA.

                  The UK wasn’t a threat to Germany if trade links with Japan were opened and the UK navy had no chance against the Japanese. Hell the UK navy wouldn’t have had a chance against Germany if they’d built a decent navy.

                  The UK lost 2 carriers to Germany battle cruisers because they didn’t properly escort them and the Japanese Navy basically used the UK ships as target practice.

                  The UK can build their army forever in the UK, all that would happen is economic collapse. An army that can’t do anything is just consuming endless resources.

                  Note that the Soviets in 1941 didn’t even need to advance 1km into Germany to cut off German oil sources. They could bomb the Romanian fields from their starting zones.

                  Multiple bombing attacks were tried by the Soviets and the Allies on those fields. Until the allies had complete air superiority all attacks ended in failure. The Soviet Airforce was a joke compared to the allies.

                  The Soviet Union was completely smashed trying to invade Romanian in 1944. Trying it in 1942 with a fully operational Germany army and airforce would have resulted in one of the greatest defeats in history.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Iraq was occupied by the British army. The pro Axis revolt was easily crushed because unlike the US government the British army in the 1940s was actually trying to win against the Iraqi rebels.

                  Hitler’s top diplomatic priority after the fall of France probably should have been to try to get Turkey to join the Axis. That would have made going to Iraq and Iran or even going to Caucasus 1000x times easier.

                • jim says:

                  > Iraq was occupied by the British army.

                  The Germans had Greece, and Turkey was neutral, while Iran was on their side, because of Russian influence. So they had a Mediterranean trade route to Iran that did not require Iraq. There was a pile of neutral regimes between them and Iranian oil, which regimes ceased to be neutral when they invaded Russia. Before invading Russia, needed to secure those regimes, and ensure that they stayed off the backs of the merchants that Germany desperately needed. Outright conquest is too blunt an instrument when you need logistic capability, but the potential for outright conquest would have kept them from interfering with trade. Station troops along the trade route that could overthrow regimes, but refrain from doing so, so long as everything remains tranquil, and merchants and their goods can move freely. In particular, so long as oil is moving freely.

                  When Caesar crushed the Mediterranean pirates, he made empire possible. Impossible to do long distance conquest without merchants, as the Japanese Malaysian debacle demonstrated. The Japanese mistreated the Chinese merchants, and found the rubber supply mysteriously and inexplicably dried up. No rubber, then no transport, no transport, then no army.

                • Alfred says:

                  Hitler’s top diplomatic priority after the fall of France probably should have been to try to get Turkey to join the Axis. That would have made going to Iraq and Iran or even going to Caucasus 1000x times easier.

                  Turkey was basically controlled by the UK because to the UK military bases in Egypt and the Levant. The UK had to be removed from Egypt first.

                  Iraq was occupied by the British army. The pro Axis revolt was easily crushed because unlike the US government the British army in the 1940s was actually trying to win against the Iraqi rebels.

                  Easily crushed when Germany armies were far away, not so easily crushed with German tanks in Alexandria and the UK fleet fleeing as fast as they can.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Okay so then it becomes even more clear what German strategy should be.

                  After France falls

                  Immediately move to take Greece, then Crete AND Malta.

                  Put all resources into taking the Suez. Then take Gibraltar, invade Spain if you have to (but very much try to avoid invading Spain… but make sure Franco knows that you’re going to Gibraltar no matter what)… this should all be done by the end of 1940.

                  Promise whatever you have to to get Turkey to join the Axis, bribe, assassinate but make Turkey join. Go to Iran… build a big railroad across Turkey to ship the oil back to the now secured Mediterreanean and Europe.

                  Keep peace with Russia if at all possible until 1942. Only breaking it if they move to occupy Rumania.

                • The Original OC says:

                  Many people have the impression that the historical post-1944 Western front could have gone either way, perhaps to make the British and particularly American contributions seem more interesting. It could not; it was a rout from start to finish delayed only by weather. Even with a considerable reduction in forces, this would have been a serious threat to Germany.

                • Pooch says:

                  Japan and Germany go after the collapsing British empire together, divvy it up between themselves. Obvious.

                  Hitler was, a huge fan of the British Empire. He wanted desperately to make peace with it. His ideal, stated repeatedly in his books, was that Germany would rule the European continent, and England would continue to rule the seas.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  There was no possibility of an amphibious invasion without air and sea superiority first – and which air and sea superiority over a cross-continental foe, their collapse is all but inevitable. For that matter communist russia could have survived either without the indulgences of capital economies propping it up, which depended on open sealanes.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Iran’s oil was going to be shutoff the second they were at war with Russia unless they were already there (Iran was occupied by the Russians and the British jointly following Barbarossa, with the Russians surprisingly occupying it lightly and merely agreeing with the British to remove the older Shah in favor of his son).

                  All I can say is I was prettymuch the best friend of an eccentric Russian jew in college (he died so I unfortunately can’t consult him now). He said his grandfather was some kind of naval commissar who said Stalin planned to attack in 1942 and that his grandfather got the word from Stalin himself. I was shocked and believed him because it was so odd to see a jew defending Hitler on this point.

                • jim says:

                  By 1942, Germany might well have acquired trade links to Iran, had they made that their highest priority – which they should have.

                  Logistics is everything, and you have to have market logistics or else your army gets tied down in detail, and your administration gets overwhelmed. The Germans were unable to properly use the resources they did have because the crisis of socialism hit them before they invaded Russia.

                  The Japanese invaded Malaysia for the rubber, won, and still got no rubber, because their ham fisted occupation and hasty plunder caused rubber production to dry up. If you want to take over an existing running operation with armed force, need a light hand, diplomacy, caution, respect for those doing the operation, and delicacy. Armed force is a very blunt instrument.

                  When NASA acquired Wernher von Braun as a prisoner, still could not launch rockets, even though he was cooperating. Had to put him in charge and tell everyone to treat him with the utmost respect.

                • Kilroy says:

                  “Since the regime fell, if they had anything so concrete as a plan and a date, we would now know.”

                  We DO know. Vox Day had a piece on this a few months back, discussing a recent book by a historian who’d been looking into the Soviet archives. His conclusions were, by some remarkable coincidence, almost exactly what was described in Icebreaker 30 years ago: that the Russians had moved everything into an offensive posture and were getting ready to go within a matter of weeks and possibly days.

                  If you claim the archives demonstrate the opposite, you need to provide some specifics, otherwise you’re just blowing smoke.

                  And the socialism thing is not what’s important about Hitler. What’s important about Hitler is that he put his finger on biological reality and attempted to build a societal policy derived from that in order to improve the quality of the people, while Christianity attempts to hand-wave away biological reality so nobody thinks about it and nobody has to confront the unpleasant and unfair parts of it. Christianity is primitive bioleninism. It’s dysgenic. Unless that tendency is seriously corrected, any society that adopts it will eventually founder.

                • jim says:

                  Russian oil heading into Germany ran into Germany ran into German tanks heading into Russia. So obviously they were not getting ready to invade within weeks.

                  > If you claim the archives demonstrate the opposite

                  The archives don’t demonstrate the opposite. The lack of archives supporting the claim demonstrates the opposite. Similarly, we don’t have to provide evidence showing that flying saucers are not real. Those claiming that flying saucers are real have to provide the evidence, and the mysterious lack of evidence shows that an imminent invasion and flying saucers are not real.

                  I don’t have to provide evidence proving no invasion concretely planned. You have to produce evidence showing an invasion concretely planned. If concrete plans existed, we would have them now.

                  Further, Hitler himself did not say the Russian were preparing invasion. He said that conquest of Russia would persuade Britain to make peace. (It would not have. Conquest of the British Empire would have been a great deal more persuasive.)

                  That the Russians were preparing to invade is a retrospective rationale for Hitler being an idiot, cutting off his own logistics, and declaring war on everyone.

                  During the offensive against Russia, the supply of German goods to the Russian front descended into chaos. The socialist attitude that goods just magically spawn themselves and the capitalist just happen to have the goods for no good reason is what defeated Hitler.

                  His internal decisions bit him because of that fallacy, and his external decisions bit him worse. He cut off his external logistics with the outside world, and he cut off his own internal logistics within Germany, as became apparent during the offensive against Russia. Armies need merchants, and have to treat the merchants that they need with kid gloves.

                  German defeats on the battlefield were entirely the result of failures of logistics, and failures of logistics were entirely a result of socialism. Hitler needed to court the merchants, and court foreign governments protecting foreign merchants. He needed to do what China is doing right now.

                  As we speak, China is chatting up and sweet talking both the Taliban and the rump Afghan government in Kabul telling them both that so long as Chinese merchants can move stuff through the crossroads of Central Asia, everything is going to be fine.

                  Hitler was not defeated by the allies. He was defeated by his own socialism. His defeats were all logistic defeats. Armies are funded by plunder, but you have to avoid crapping in your own nest. You want to crap in the other guy’s nest. Nazi socialism is what defeated the Nazis.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Hitler did claim in his post Barbarossa speech at the sportzpalace and in the table talks Russia was going to attack soon. He was just probably lying.

              • JR says:

                [*deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  Repetitious and unresponsive. You cannot produce a single example of socialism succeeding. All you do is provide excuses for particular failures and tell us that this time it will be different.

                  It is always the same, and even if it is going to be different this time around, socialism has no appeal to well fed people.

                  No man is short of bread. Most men are short of pussy, and every man is short of virgin pussy.

                • JR says:

                  It’s hard to have a conversation with you when you delete my comments. If you want to continue it then undelete it and I’ll respond further.

                • jim says:

                  You are not commenting. You are repeating yourself in different words, and your repetitions fail to respond to the points that I make.

                  Your responses are unresponsive and endlessly repetitious, hence I delete them. Try responding instead of repeating. That will get through.

                  I say “socialism failed for everyone, including Franco, Hitler, and the Scandinavian countries. There are no successful examples of successful socialism, and if there were, people with plenty of bread would not care”

                  You ignore my response and present reasons for Hitler’s defeat, other than socialism failing.

                  It is irrelevant that there were plenty of reasons, in addition to socialism, for his defeat.

                  I have said it half a dozen times already, and I am not going to waste space with you endlessly repeating that blood and soil socialism could have worked and that it could be popular again, and me endlessly repeating that no form of socialism, including blood and soil socialism, has ever worked, and no form of socialism can be popular again.

                • Contaminated NEET says:

                  >I say “socialism failed for everyone, including […] the Scandinavian countries

                  Can you elaborate on this? I’ve always heard that Scandinavian socialism is a smashing success and the envy of the world. Obviously, the authorities who tell me this are not to be trusted, but Scandinavia isn’t exactly North Korea. People come and go all the time. Surely some of them would notice that it isn’t a prosperous, egalitarian, semi-utopia.

                • jim says:

                  No it is not North Korea, but Scandinavians are moving out, and Somalis are moving in. I may be in a bubble, but word of mouth is sucks.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  Scandinavian economies aren’t socialist, there isn’t market intervention as you imagine (economic freedom is rated higher than it is in America), it’s just that taxes are very high and the government also provides more extensive public services because of it. It’s not proof of success for socialism, it’d still be proof of success for market economies for surviving such high taxes. And Norway is also its own case, like Saudi Arabia, they make so much money with their oil that they’d be able to get away economically with just about any amount of mismanagement and not starve.

                  In my opinion the high taxes are terrible, and they are likely holding them back and making things far worse for their countries, but since the burden is put on the working classes who have borderline slavery income taxes while corporate taxes are lower than in America, it does not seem that detrimental to businesses investment. Many people insist that the high taxes are good for social welfare, but I’ve seen my good amount of bums and homeless while living there…

                  How good or bad the living is in a Scandinavian country isn’t entirely about economics though, while I was living in Copenhagen I found the city kinda dirty and their quality of life is supposed to be better than where I come from in Spain. A German woman from Munich I was friends with there considered the city disgusting unbearable levels of dirty. Is that economics? Is that culture? I’m not sure. Their supermarkets are also absolute dogshit, they feel like some poor third world level of product offering.

                  Another interesting fact to take into account is that Alfred Nobel had to leave his own country to find success and so did Niels Bohr. It was in evil capitalist Britain where they could do their thing.

            • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

              How did Alexander’s phalanxes get their pikes while thousands of miles away from Macedon? Why didn’t they perish from starvation and exposure? Why didn’t their armor, clothing, and shodding, fall to pieces for want of replacement?

              • Reziac says:

                Because in that era, the army was the least of it; a campaign was basically a mobile city. They might take the raw materials from the countryside, but the necessary support personnel came with them (armorers, blacksmiths, tailors, cobblers, etc, etc, and of course, whores). Per one estimate I’ve seen, the supporting contingent averaged five times the size of the army proper.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  You’ve seen a host of individual trees – ‘a campaign was basically a mobile city; ‘…raw materials from the countryside…’; ‘…the necessary support personnel came with them…’; ‘…the supporting contingent averaged five times the size of the army proper…’ – but modern blinkers stop from recognizing them as a forest.

                  Alexander was able to do his thing because *he made capital economy* happen. He was able to stay supplied because merchants in the lands he passed through *came to him* with supplies, because he was good for business.

            • ten says:

              Look, the annual attempt at rehashing fascism 101 talking points! Cute.

              In every context where the nazis got around to implementing socialism, the normal and inevitable end result of socialism materialized rapidly – and many of the nazi atrocities were a direct result of them having to cope for the failure of socialism, and thus necessitating robbing and starving their conquests to feed the homeland. And they had hardly gotten started. National fascist socialism is probably slightly more workable than international marxist socialism, but it is necessarily inherently self annihilating, because capital and trade are necessary for large scale organization. It is the difference between voluntary cooperation and forced compliance. Somtimes you need force compliance, but cooperation is preferrable.

              Late roman paganism was somewhere on the spectrum between dead and buried, pointless hobbyism, and degenerate insanity. No end of men greater than any of us tried to fix it, and failed. If your religion leads to single women tripping at dionysian raves and drunken unemployed proles, you are fucked. Jews did not kill paganism, urbanization did.

              And if you had not noticed, hosts of saints are christianized pagan gods deemed fit for imitation, the Christian festivals are continuations of the nondegenerate and oldest pagan festivals, the churches are pagan temple halls with an altar patch, not synagogues, and the pagan worldview was present from the oldest times through dante to the rennaissance, only conspicuously becoming absent once the iconoclasts of the enlightenment put the great satanic project in motion. It is you and your kind who turned christianity from paganism with the christ+OT patch into the hollow husk of heresy that defiles its name today, and that you attack.

          • p says:

            >Fascism did not beat liberalism. It was just another leftism, so inherently carried the seeds of its own destruction.

            Note how liberals consider fascism a mortal threat. You can advocate for monarchism all you like, under your real name, in public, and nothing will happen to you. As soon as you hint at supporting fascism in any way, though…

            Maybe they are just stupid and have impaired threat assessment. Or maybe not.

            • jim says:

              They are stupid and have impaired threat assessment. Also, normality bias – they continually face entirely real threats from slightly different brands of leftism, and the biggest recent such threat was fascism. So, naturally, they worry about the last war – fascism.

              But Caesar or Stalin is coming. Fascism is not.

          • Karl says:

            I agree that nobody is likely to be interested in any fascist program today because nobody is hungry.

            Tomorrow people might well be hungry. Western civilisation is getting poorer every day. Socalist and green programms ensure that at some point starvation will be back if we continue on the present path.

            I’m not arguing that fascism has a chance to work, just that your argument that it won’t be tried again because nobody is hungry today is not convincing.

            • jim says:

              True enough.

              But my other two arguments still stand. Though, quite likely people will be hungry, they are short of virgin pussy right now, and the vast majority just plain short of pussy.

              Socialism always fails to deliver, and usually brings famine, So regimes that try socialism expire soon enough. Or, like Franco, they abandon socialism and the faith empties out.

              .

        • Aidan says:

          The retarded parts of fascism are an endemic problem caused by the romantic nationalist notion of worshipping and deriving legitimacy from the “soul of the nation”. It is just 19th century leftism versus 20th century leftism, and you propose to combat 21st century leftism with 19th century leftism. If you are a fascist, you probably hate 20th century leftist boomer conservatives, but you are doing the same thing they are, believe the same things they do, only with a slightly older model of leftism.

          The 19th century leftist says blood and soil, while destroying the actual blood (nobility) and actual soil of the nation he claims to be defending. In aesthetics and function it is centered around the urban proletariat, the worst people in a nation, and those most bereft of both blood and soil. Historically, the urban prole is a man who could not even hack it as a peasant.

          Worship of the nation means that the 19th c leftist believes that spontaneous harmony and prosperity will materialize when pernicious influences are removed from the nation, which in practice means knocking over the elite, and then the merchant, and then the peasant with two cows, until you do not have a society left.

          • The Original OC says:

            Nations do have souls, created by their men of race. Fascism may persuade the masses to uphold their men of race, rather than tearing them down. No state was ever built purely on the force of the rulers. 19th century leftist national ascribed the greatness of the nation to the mass of the people, but Shakespeare’s Henry V is a fascist.

            Demotic fascism is no good. Fascist parties led by women are no good. Etc. But any pro-social national ideology will be called fascist. Any non-national ideology will only promote the breakdown of the national soul, the soul of the greatest, and end in the destruction of the greatest, because the nation is expression of the will of the greatest.

            • The Cominator says:

              “But any pro-social national ideology will be called fascist. ”

              Why should we give into the frame of retarded leftist propaganda, and even boomer normiecons routinely point out that this is leftist propaganda.

              • The Original OC says:

                What does an anti-social or a-social state look like?

              • The Original OC says:

                Boomer normie-cons want to say “democrats are the real nazis” but they are not, they are not nazis. Democrats do not want an elite that looks after the least of the nation, they want to ally with outsiders to open the gates. Once there are enough outsiders, they dump the least of the nation and piss on them as they are doing now.

                You have to look after the least of the nation because people fear that they may be among the least and they fear that their children may be among the least. The least of the nation should not have power in the group, or the best opportunities to reproduce, but it should not be excluded either. Cohesion is worth paying for. Libertarianism refuses to pay for cohesion, and therefore libertarianism is incohesive, and therefore libertarianism is a political irrelevance.

                Boomer neocons want to say “democrats are the real nazis” because they do not have their own insults, because they are weak. When you insult someone with their own insult, you are telling them that they are strong, which is not insulting.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Do Democrats have the same ideology as the NDSAP… no.

                  Was Goebbels more than any other individual the pioneer of the modern state of coordinated “private” propaganda with gaslighting lies repeated over and over from “multiple” sources that aren’t actually multiple sources… yes he was.

                • The Original OC says:

                  A mechanical technique, not an end. The idea of fighting your enemies with less than the strongest weapons (because the strongest weapons are mean) is peak normie-con, an ideology of losing.

                  The NSDAP stole all their techniques from the Bolsheviks, and reasoned (correctly) that the same techniques would work better for the NSDAP because the NSDAP message was not 100% lies about everything (which is not to say it was 100% truth either).

              • The Cominator says:

                The Bolsheviks had openly government media.

                Goebbels pioneered the theoretically private media that all repeated the same lies. Goebbels was smart enough not to make every aspect of entertainment an illustration of Nazi propaganda the way the regime has been doing mostly since 2010 and with ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING since they decided to ruin the ending of Game of Thrones.

                • The Original OC says:

                  Maybe the Bolsheviks weren’t doing it in the USSR in the 20s and 30s, but they were doing it in Hollywood in the 20s and 30s. They were doing it in the Weimar equivalent too.

            • Aidan says:

              I care about the rectification of names. I do not especially care to ascribe the word fascism to whatever we end up doing.

              The masses do not need to be persuaded to hold up the elite. They do that anyway. And it is the elite that defines the character of a nation rather than the masses. The average brit is still vastly celtic in genetics but it was the saxon and then the norman elite that made England.

              • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                Empirically, fascist is a word that someone who is a communists uses to identify someone trying to stop them from doing communism.

                This has been it’s real definition for the past 70 years.

                • The Original OC says:

                  Right.

                  I don’t endorse self-description as “fascists” or “nazis” because it is bad technique. Those two groups are tainted both with failure, and of being national enemies of Anglos (healthy people reject national enemies even if there’s nothing otherwise objectionable about them).

                  But if you start to be successful, you will be called facsists and nazis, and if you are really successful, not without good reason.

                • jim says:

                  The fundamental problem with the self description with fascism is that is just cuckservatism. The cuckservative proposes to roll leftism back to 2020, the fascist to 1933.

                • suones says:

                  …I don’t endorse self-description as “fascists” or “nazis” because it is bad technique. Those two groups are tainted both with failure, and of being national enemies of Anglos (healthy people reject national enemies even if there’s nothing otherwise objectionable about them).

                  There is no “taint” in failure. Learn from Christian hagiographers, where every success is a Divine Blessing, while every “failure” is but a test towards ultimate success. Every victor is hailed as a Hero, but every “loser” is also hailed as a martyr. Bolsheviks did this too. Nazis learned from them (cf Horst Wessel).

                  Good mental hygiene requires never, ever, to countersignal a rightwards-moving force in presence of Leftism. To move the Leftist ratchet even one step to the right is to break it.

                  Uncle Adolf was a martyr. Churchill can rot in Tzoah Rotachat. If we start getting called Nazis due to our physique and impressive couture, I consider that a win.

                • Pooch says:

                  Empirically, fascist is a word that someone who is a communists uses to identify someone trying to stop them from doing communism.

                  Fascism only worked at stopping communism in the 1930s because of the remnants of the ancien régime which still existed in the security forces and judiciary system.

                  When the SA had street fights with the Communists while the police stood back and watched, the SA men tended to get off and the Communists get long jail sentences. Aspiring fascists today are not going to get that luxury.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Perhaps there is some difficulty in grasping what the point was here, but i will make it plain; i am speaking of colloquial reality. When i look at what it looks like when people are actually using the term out ‘in the wild’, that is what it means.

                • The Original OC says:

                  jim: fascism was entropic 1930s socialism, path of least resistance socialism that used existing nation-state apparatus to do socialism.

                  But “national-socialism” was aristocratic, an attempt to reboot the culture and build a new elite. There was a demotic wing, but the political leadership assassinated it pretty much instantly.

            • Atavistic Morality says:

              Your concept of national soul is suspiciously horizontal, magically born spontaneously from the simultaneous existence of magic people.

              Do you also believe in magic shelves that magically fill themselves with bread and magic factories that magically turn a profit by the simultaneous existence of magic workers?

              • The Original OC says:

                “Do you also believe in magic shelves that magically fill themselves with bread and magic factories that magically turn a profit by the simultaneous existence of magic workers?”

                No.

                “Your concept of national soul is suspiciously horizontal, magically born spontaneously from the simultaneous existence of magic people.”

                Nations are both horizontal AND vertical. There are two reasons for this.

                The first reason is that an aristocratic-masses construct (nation) is a symbiosis, requiring masses who are receptive to the particular form of leadership offered by their aristocracy, not just an aristocracy with a good concept. Small numbers of whites can empirically rule large numbers of blacks, and absent subversion and outside interference can do so stably, but such constructs never form nations.

                The second reason is that in a healthy symbiosis the masses are always occasionally throwing up new men into the aristocracy, and the aristocracy is kicking down its failures into the masses. If there is not a very large gap in competence between the aristocracy and the masses, this process eventually changes and then eliminates the aristocratic spirit. This almost certainly happened to the Aryan rulers of the Hittites, and probably happened to the Aryans in India as well. It is the process by which immigration will eventually eliminate the European world.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  Nations are both horizontal AND vertical. There are two reasons for this.

                  I do not see nations materializing magically because the masses exist. I see Macedonia being nothing before Philip II and Alexander the Great who made it a great empire and Macedonia going back into nothing without them. When someone uses a lever to achieve his purpose we do not claim that the lever and the user have an horizontal relationship.

                  The first reason is that an aristocratic-masses construct (nation) is a symbiosis, requiring masses who are receptive to the particular form of leadership offered by their aristocracy, not just an aristocracy with a good concept.

                  This is obviously false, regardless of the opinion of the masses, regardless of their degree of receptiveness, things roll on, that’s why they are the masses while the aristocrats rule. Too many historical references available to even bother mentioning, including the nazis who did not have even remotely close to the majority of the population going by votes.

                  Small numbers of whites can empirically rule large numbers of blacks, and absent subversion and outside interference can do so stably, but such constructs never form nations.

                  Egypt would like a word with you.

                  The second reason is that in a healthy symbiosis the masses are always occasionally throwing up new men into the aristocracy, and the aristocracy is kicking down its failures into the masses. If there is not a very large gap in competence between the aristocracy and the masses, this process eventually changes and then eliminates the aristocratic spirit.

                  This paragraph made absolutely no sense.

                  Aristocrats fall and rise by their own merits or failures and the only relationship between the aristocrats and the masses is that of cause and effect, ones lead the others follow. A son of an aristocrat without ability is not “kicked down” but the natural order and his incompetence brings him to his bankruptcy, while the unfortunate but born capable like Cromwell rise through the hierarchy enduring plenty of scorn and hindered by both sides of the aisle usually.

                  The decadence of the aristocracy is unrelated to the masses, who are simply spectators to the show.

                  It is the process by which immigration will eventually eliminate the European world.

                  I don’t know what are you on about, there is no such “immigration” to Europe, we are being blatantly invaded and the enemy is guided by its own leaders back at home. Oil princes must have bought half of the UK at this point and Erdogan continuously blackmails Germany with his “troops”; Morocco does the same here in Spain.

                • The Original OC says:

                  Synthetic elite minorities that are racially distinct from their people are capable of great historical deeds, then exhaust or mix their blood and vanish. The Macedonians did not last very long.

                  In healthy nations, the masses are made up of closely related but lesser specimens to the aristocracy, and are constantly throwing up new aristocrats and absorbing defected aristocrat offspring without changing the nature of the whole. This is a nation.

                  The idea of creating a force-aristocracy with no relation to the masses is the Progressive idea.

    • The Cominator says:

      As i predicted…

      So it begins.

      • JR says:

        I read through your responses in this thread and your position is basically to self censor and quake in fear about feds spying on you. News flash to you, buddy: the NSA and FBI have every email, text message, internet search, and internet post you have ever made. They will not spare you because of your self censorship even one iota; maybe your place in the queue for the gulags will be slightly lower. So speak your mind as long as there is no advocacy for violence. You’re a silly creature.

        • The Cominator says:

          Not my position and I agree that the NSA have everything though the extent they can sift through it if you aren’t a big subject of interest is questionable (and I doubt the FBI have everything).

          I think wignat (or fednat) thought is a cancer on the far right and that the ideology is promoted by the federal government and is at its heart leftist and its used for divide and conquer. Being redpilled on race isn’t special, most leftists are in a very private corner of their mind redpilled on race they just lie about it. Wignats are essentially progressives who are honest about race. They otherwise embrace every other aspect of the progressive programme. Woodrow Wilson the founder of the Cathedral in fact differed ideologically very little from Hitler.

          I knew the subject of this thread was going to get anti christians, wignats, tradcaths (not all tradcaths are entirely bad but they are very wrong about many things) to come to this place and the longer its up the more of such will show up. But maybe that is Jim’s intention, maybe he wants to attract lots of them in order to spread better redpills… Jim is smarter than I am but smarter people can be wrong sometimes.

          • JR says:

            The National Security Division of the DOJ has access to the NSA search database queries, as do lots of contractors, and the redacted declassified 2017 Rosemary Collyer report shows that there have been an enormous number of illegal searches conducted in just the past couple of years. That has not stopped and only intensified.

            Also, see the news that Apple is going to scan your phone for illegal activity (they are saying only to search for child molesters, but that will be rapidly expanded to cover a lot more). Their search abilities specially are focused on right wing networks and they have cracked those networks algorithmically. They will take down the strongest and work their way down until there is nothing left.

            • jim says:

              You over estimate their competence and efficiency.

              They will pluck the low hanging fruit.

              We are not the low hanging fruit.

            • The Cominator says:

              Having access doesn’t mean they can actually use it effectively and the NSA is likely to guard their own turf and power by making sure that its almost impossible for outsiders to really use it effectively even if they were forced to give “access”.

              Remember the wikileaks disclosures about how the CIA basically tried to build their own NSA database because they didn’t like relying on the NSA, I’m totally sure they would have done that if the NSA was being completely helpful.

              • JR says:

                The limiting factor is not search access which is plentiful, the limiting factor is the parallel reconstruction they use in order to frame or arrest their opponents. They can’t rely on the search database material itself for prosecutions. But they are in the process of streamlining all of this on a high priority basis.

                • jim says:

                  I am well aware that the process under way, but it is producing chaos, not streamlining.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The courts don’t care about rules of evidence anymore all that much especially if the government considers you a dissenter or terrorist. Judges are most of the time prosecutors in black robes.

                  The NSA is going to sabotage any streamlining or ease of use of their database in order to guard their own turf and power. As I said remember the CIA felt compelled to build their own ECHELON type network (this came out in one of the wikileaks dump) obviously because they found the NSA was often obstructionist about giving them every last piece of information they wanted.

    • Anon says:

      Let’s consult the shill checklist

      1. Pagans cool, Christians gay! ESPECIALLY Paul, who was mean to women. Don’t you know the pagan vikings, gauls, and germanics were feminist egalitarians who let their women do whatever they wanted? Paganism is egalitarian, bigot.

      2. Blood and soil socialism! We must Return To Nazi. Everyone knows capitalism sucks and was invented the day before yesterday, and will surely fall tomorrow. Everyone also knows that Hitler totally would have won WWII, except for [everything other than socialism and Hitler being a dumb lunatic who declared war on every major power at once]

      3. The Jews control everything! Even though there wasn’t a Jew in sight when when women were emancipated, or when slavery was abolished, or for the Declaration of Independence, or for the French Revolution, or….

      4. Fascism, a dead 20th century ideology, is what will beat liberalism. Even more, we must VOTE it back. Democracy is the solution, except more fascist this time. Hitler got 3% of the vote in 1928 and was in power just a couple years later!

      It’s hard to have a conversation with you when you delete my comments

      Good. Go post on Twitter where this garbage belongs

  11. Alfred says:

    Jim what’s your view of CS Lewis? I got into a long argument with family over Evangelicalism gay relationship with Jesus crap and they were quoting CS Lewis left and right after I pointed out there’s no scriptural basis for talking God and Jesus the way a women talks about her boy friend. I’ve never taken CS Lewis seriously because he failed the bishop test.

    • The Cominator says:

      He wasn’t a bad guy. I very much like Tolkien but low church christianity > roman catholicism.

    • jim says:

      My view of CS Lewis is complex. His “men without chests” is deep and right on.

      On the other hand, he flat out rewrites Christianity as progressivism

    • jim says:

      Bishop test?

      What is your Bishop test? My Bishop test is priestly celibacy and holiness spiraling the meanings of adultery and fornication so that every man is a fornicator and adulterer, while radically reducing the scope of meaning of “whore” so that no women are whores.

      • Alfred says:

        >What is your Bishop test?

        That a Christian “leader” who fails to have a family and obedient wife and children shouldn’t be used as a source of authority. Each of his works have to be evaluated on a case by case basis.

        CS Lewis wrote a few good things, but he failed at the most basic tasks that Gnon commands like having children and gave us this Jesus is my boy friend sort of crap that’s endless babbled about in evangelical circles. “How’s your relationship with Jesus this week, brother?” “You take it to the next level?” Gay.

    • jim says:

      Official word of God is that the Jews still have a place in Gods plan, in in the sense that Jesus will take them under his wing again once they accept a prophet to the Jews from God. But right now they are still holiness spiraling about cheese crumbs and separate dishwashers, which was Jesus big complaint, so that prophet has either not arrived, or has been given the usual treatment.

      • nils says:

        “I do not wish to be bishoped” anglicans nailed the spirit of that by making men who didnt care very much for the church run the thing and paying them well to keep an eye on it and not rock the boat, i would like to have seen the early churches, they must have been something wild with all the shenanigans and persecution going on.

    • Yul Bornhold says:

      Lewis on insects:

      “Their angular limbs, their jerky movements, their dry, metallic noises, all suggest either machines that have come to life or life degenerating into mechanism. You may add that in the hive and the anthill we see fully realized the two things that some of use most dread for our own species–the dominance of the female and the dominance of the collective.”

      • FrankNorman says:

        Well, insects are a bit like that. They have rigid exoskeletons made of non-living material, and their neural systems and behaviors tend to be much, much simpler then those of vertebrates.

        Ants are very much like little robots.

        It might be more accurate to say that man-made machines resemble large insects, and the more advanced, the more like insects they will be.

  12. not a troll says:

    It’s getting very, very hot outside.

    Jim, are you sure that catastrophic anthropogenic global warming isn’t a thing?

    • jim says:

      Mighty cold outside here.

      Our best evidence of old earth climates is in the ice record – stable oxygen isotope ration in old ice. The colder the temperature at which the snow fell, the the higher to O18 ratio.

      Check the data.

      There are two graphs there which accurately show the extent of long term and short term global warming.

      Short term trend over decades is random change, which might be slightly in the warmer direction, but not by an amount large enough to be perceived by humans.

      Long term trend is that it is getting colder, disastrously colder. The slight warming in recent times is nowhere near enough to bring us back to the holocene climate optimum.

      Click on the graphs to render them readable.

  13. imnobody00 says:

    As an unashamed Rad Trad Catholic, I won’t try to convert anybody here.

    But each civilization is based on a religion. When the religion is replaced, the civilization declines and falls.

    (I don’t say “when the religion is abandoned” because there is no such thing as a people without religion. We see it in our time in which Christianity is replaced by the Woke religion).

    For example, when Rome replaced his original pagan religion with (first) mystery cults and (then) with Christianity, its civilization declined and felt. As a Christian, I think Christianity is true but Roman society was arranged in a way that only pagan religion could sustain. If you change the foundations of a building, even if the new foundations are better, the building is going to fall.

    Once Roman civilization felt, a new civilization was built from the ground, having Christianity as foundation. This was called “Christendom” and lately “Western civilization”.

    If Christianity disappears, Western civilization will go. Since you can’t build anything on Woke religion (a religion destructive of society), another civilization will arise (probably founded on Islam).

    IMHO, this is enough reason why non-Christian defenders of the Western civilization should try to fight for Christianity, whatever their personal beliefs are.

    • alf says:

      Jimian Christianity ftw.

    • jim says:

      > As an unashamed Rad Trad Catholic, I won’t try to convert anybody here.

      While converting people as individuals is off topic, and likely to be moderated, a state always has a state religion, and what it is to be is on topic.

      The choice that is going to face us soon, if we are not utterly annihilated, is Rad Trad, Orthodox, or “Episcopalian”.

      Since Episcopalianism is dead as a doornail, we can fill it with any content whatsoever. I favor a resurrected Church of England, the faith that gave us science, industrialization, and empire, but make it orthodox and enter communion with the other orthodox churches, while retaining the qualities that gave us science, industrialization, and empire.

      The problem with Rad Trad is that Rome has ever been cucked on women, because priestly celibacy means at worst gays, at best men who have no comprehension of women, children, and family. Recollect their gay response to the Romance movement.

      Another big problem with Rome is that it schismed with Orthodox by adopting the Donatist heresy. Priestly celibacy and Donatism has got to go. Donatism is bad in itself, being damaging to the state, and apt to undermine the peace of Westphalia.

      • Kunning Drueger says:

        At some point, the theories need to be taken out of the lab and thrown into the field. I don’t think I’m the only one here struggling to find a home for my soul and the soul of my family. But even if I were, I know I’m not the only one elsewhere.

        A while back you said our memes were exfiltrating into normie space and I didn’t believe you, but I was wrong, as is sadly becoming the rule. But being wrong about so much we have discussed has helped me gain humility as well as a thicker skin, so at the risk of being put on moderation again, I would like to reintroduce the topics of Jim As Prophet, Jimian Christianity: From Theory to Practice, and a Jimian Monastery or the Antiversity or a Storefront.

        • Justin Bieber says:

          I would like to reintroduce the topics of Jim As Prophet, Jimian Christianity: From Theory to Practice, and a Jimian Monastery or the Antiversity or a Storefront.

          But first, reflect on this.

          • jim says:

            The time for mass outreach is not yet.

            It is not yet time for prophets. Or rather, not yet time to prophesy to the masses.

            Now we focus on getting a handful of elite intellectuals on board. This seems to be working. We are influencing the meme magicians, which is the first stage of preparation for mass outreach. The Nazis are coming around, the Russian Orthodox are coming around.

            I see a shill counter attack trying to steer the Nazis back onto the reservation. We have rattled someone. They are trying to persuade the Nazis that the red pill is false – indicating that whomever we have rattled is able to comprehend the reasoning that ownership of the means of production do not matter to the masses when no one is hungry, while ownership of the means of reproduction matters to every man.

            Because, when Nazis figure that out, they are apt to turn their fire from the pawnshop owner to the officially unofficial priesthood. Official priesthood does not like that.

            As I keep saying, no one is hungry, but most men are short of pussy, and every man is short of virgin pussy.

            • Kunning Drueger says:

              I’m not talking about mass outreach. I am talking about a loose network of friends, safe places to rest one’s head when traveling, a few key books and a library, a conference to discuss relevant topics, sewing clubs for good women and hunting/fishing clubs for good men. This is the monastic/Antiversity approach. A few years ago I sent you a very rough outline.

              I defer to your good judgement, but I’m going to keep building a network and minimal facilities. I’m sorry to be a broken record, but I implore you to begin working towards a book. I’m going to attempt an Essential Jim based on the blog with some companion works composed of excerpts and comments. I’d appreciate an outline, but only to save time.

              • jim says:

                Sound like a plan, but the problem is that we are under repression, and there is a high probability that the repression will get worse. Wait for the persecution to go full bore, and eventually focus on the left itself. Then it will be time. Let the enemy reveal his full strength, we endure it, then marshal our strength while the enemy self destructs.

                Now is the time to focus on endurance, rather than to acquire strength. We are acquiring strength, but at this point of history, strength is not that useful.

                Video conferences would be a good idea, provided that everyone wears a hat and an outlaw mask covering their upper lip and lower jaw, but we are going to need a Jitsi server located within the Russian empire or the outskirts of the Chinese hegemony.

                > I’d appreciate an outline, but only to save time.

                Throne, Altar, property, and family.

                Everything is ultimately about reproduction, and women are the means of reproduction.

                A man needs a woman (or preferably women) and children, secure ownership of them, and secure property to stash them in.

                Secure property is insecure to larger gangs, and larger gangs are vulnerable to even larger gangs. War is the father of us all.

                A state needs an army, an army needs a leader and a faith, and an army needs funding and logistics.

                Solutions to this problem are complex, messy, and seldom altogether satisfactory.

                And everything, starting with the Y Chromosome singularity (which needs a post) has been struggles to find a satisfactory solution to this problem on larger and larger scales.

                Monarchs create virtuous elites – not always, and not often, but dynasties keep expiring in blood until they do.

                A virtuous elite does not really need a King all that much, so sooner or later becomes a republic in fact, and often enough in name.

                As elite virtue declines, Republic becomes oligarchy, and instead of one King a thousand miles away you have a thousand kings one mile away. Oligarchy becomes a democracy, and then it dies. And here we are. Democracy died 2020-11-04. Caesar will eventually appear, sooner or later, hopefully sooner. At which point we tell him it is time for Constantine. Augustus tried emperor worship, what we now call cult of personality after Stalin. It had the problems that we have seen every time it has been tried.

                We need Church and State to make every man King under his own roof. Perhaps nicer solutions than Throne and Altar are theoretically possible, but at this point of history, unlikely.

                Blockchain stakeholder plutocracy perhaps – literal plutocracy, dominated by major stakeholders, plutocrats whose wealth is in form not easily destroyed or taken by gangs, with the ruler being CEO of a sovereign corporation which was in the business of extortion, mobile brigandry and piracy, but graduated to taxation and stationary brigandry. But at the moment, the old fashioned solution deployed so many times before appears more likely. Further, the army of that corporation would have share a faith, would have to be not a mere profit oriented corporation, but also an armed religion. Otherwise the soldiers would be disinclined to share the loot with the stakeholders, and shortly thereafter, would discover that they are disinclined to share the loot with each other.

                And the rest of my blog is commentary on random details of the problem that have been salient from time to time.

                The most successful solution ever deployed, was deployed by Charles the Second, but, as the Cominator is fond of pointing out, only lasted something over a century, and since then our society has been running on that social capital. Which is now running out.

                • Kunning Drueger says:

                  Ok, so let’s game it out: what is required for the first B.J.C Video Conference? There is the technical side and programmatic side.

                  Technical Side: Jitsi Server, […]

                  Programmatic Side: 01 broad/general topic, 03 subsections, a host/moderator, presenter(s), a date, a set length of program, format.

                  General Topic: A Man’s Home
                  Subsection 01: Infrastructure for Living
                  Subsection 02: Discipline and Lifestyle
                  Subsection 03: Targets for Growth

                  GT: Diet and Exercise
                  S01: Basic Meal Planning and Ingredients
                  S02: Basic Workouts and Equipment
                  S03: Recovering from Laziness and Bad Habits

                  GT: Body and Mind
                  S01: Reading and Writing as Exercise
                  S02: Combat/Martial Arts
                  S03: Making Friends and Developing Mannerbund

                  GT: Finances
                  S01: Investing
                  S02: Saving
                  S03: Budgeting

                  GT: Warfare in History
                  S01: Successful Generals
                  S02: Great Failures
                  S03: Landmark Battles

                  GT: Political Theories
                  S01: The Marxist Pantheon
                  S02: Occidental vs Oriental Monarchy
                  S03: Materialist Oligarchies

                  Format: Intro of GT and subsections, intro speaker(s), lecture on subsection then Q&A, or roundtable on subsection, wrapup, further reading. We could also just talk with no format and no structure.

                  So these are just a few ideas that I find interesting, but obviously there are many others. Any thoughts on this programmatic format? I think we could do a lecture style for some and a roundtable/discourse/debate style for others. This is all just spitballing based on academic conferences I’ve attended, so if it is fake and/or gay, we can do something else. Also, I’m not at all inclined toward the technical side, so it’s blank.

                • Justin Bieber says:

                  Painful cringe.

                  A 25-minute weekly Jimian podcast (with perhaps some audience questions delivered in advance to the host) would have all the advantages of your program, and literally none of the disadvantages. Why not start with a short podcast before plunging balls deep into this absurd FBI entrapment territory.

                • irony "bro" says:

                  >Why not start with a short podcast before plunging balls deep into this absurd FBI entrapment territory

                  He *is* an FBI plant.

                • Kunning Drueger says:

                  Thanks for the feedback.

                • Justin Bieber says:

                  Also, need to distinguish between Jimianity as a collaborative effort and Jimianity as one man’s prophetic mission.

                  In the latter case, Jim ought to be the sole speaker, his words of wisdom recorded as sacred orthodox speech, at which point listening to Jim’s lectures with your earbuds while commuting to work becomes religious praxis, the lectures taking on the quality of sermons.

                  In the former case, should start out with a “group manifesto.” In this model, a question/topic is periodically presented for all participants to address (until all the fundamentals are covered), just like in the Talmud. E.g., “Game vs. Looksmaxxing,” to be discussed by Jim, Aidan, Cominator, etc., and thus you get yourself a whole chapter for the manifesto composed of the varied opinions of several members, which may reflect different, even divergent, points of view, viz. “Jim says…”, “Drueger says…” and so forth.

                  Obviously, none of this is happening if Jim is unwilling to become the prophet that you implore him to be, and we’re all just shitposting.

                • jim says:

                  The materials of a group manifesto are present, the problem is to integrate it into a group manifesto, Talmud style.

                  But the Talmudic method, better known today as dialectical materialism, tends to result in the madness of crowds. This can be obviated by not assembling the manifesto until after consensus has been reached, but before anyone attempts to learn if there is a consensus, let alone what the consensus is.

                  If there are divergent points of view, it is not yet time. If you even suspect there might be divergent points of view, it is not yet time, because trying to construct a consensus will, as with the Talmud and Dialectical Materialism, construct madness and evil.

                  If people are mostly in agreement, few disagreements on the details seldom matter. Let the disagreements stew for a year or a century, and they will usually fade away. Does every national Orthodox Church agree with all the other Orthodox Churches on everything?

                  If the disagreements are a problem, then you need to construct a credo and expel the heretics. Or let the heretics expel themselves, thinking they are expelling us, as happened on the issue of the sexuality of nine year olds, but that is when things get nasty, better to ignore the problem and expect it to go away in due course. It usually does. (If anyone is doubt about the sexual prefences of nine year old girls, reflect on the love interest in Disney Princess movies)

                  The Roman Catholic Church excommunicated the Orthodox hierarchy, but today, the Vatican is well along the path to becoming a lesbian anarcho communist bookshop, while the Orthodox Churches are returning to actual Orthodoxy behind the shield of Putin’s nukes, so it looks like after a millennium, that schism is well on the way to being fixed.

                  Obviously we have consensus on Game in a world of defect/defect equilibrium, the game of players and bitches. Heartiste speaks truth, Aidan MacClear speaks the truth, Rollo used to speak truth, and many others, myself among them, speak truth. But that is not all that interesting, since the point is to attain a world of cooperate/cooperate equilibrium.

                  Is there consensus on that? Probably, but it would be dangerously premature to find out.

                  We have consensus on the Tripartite division Priests, Warriors, and Merchants (the masses do not count, so it is not a four part division.

                  Overproduction of priests/Brahmans and the holiness spiral. Overproduction of “elites” is well known, but our take is different,these guys are not elite in the way a top engineer or a top athlete or a top general or a top businessman is. They are members of a priesthood, Brahmans. We are all in agreement on the Moldbuggian thesis, but apt to give it in considerably more concise form. Any one of us can and routinely do summarize the doctrine. This one is ripe for a group effort.

                  Once you say Priests or Brahmans, instead of saying “elites”, the holiness spiral and its cause becomes absolutely obvious.

                  This concept however is only interesting, when used to put current events into the context of past events.

                  This doctrine gets interesting when applied to past and recent history. Thus, for example the non trinitarian Socinians that destroyed the Established Church and the Monarchy of England were unambiguously priestly. They called themselves “the Saints”.

                  Thoreau seems to have pretty much agreed with the Moldbuggian analysis of the civil war, except, of course, that the armed faith that was to conquer America was supposedly individualist, and while he knew it was a religion, felt it was not a church, and therefore exempted from the first amendment, that his brand of individualism could only be imposed at gunpoint by the state, that his brand of anti statism required a vastly more powerful federal government. Thoreau pretty much agrees with Moldbug that the civil war was a theocratic and explicitly religious war to impose the true religion on all by centralized state power, the difference being that Moldbug thinks the religion was statist, oppressive, and untrue, while Thoreau thinks the religion is true, individualist, and anti statist, despite requiring conscription, taxation, warfare, and a vast increase in state power.

                  Thoreau prefigures the innumerable protests we have recently seen where the Cathedral revolts against itself by demanding more power and money for itself.

                  I have often remarked on the resemblance between Talmudism and the Dialectical Method and the resemblance between the Marxist reified “History”, and God as understood by the Jews.

                  The French Revolution was also an unambiguously holy war between Post Christians, who dropped their entryist cover with the Church of Reason, and Christians, exemplified in unambiguous form by the war in the Vendee and the war in Spain. In Paris itself, Church of Reason entryism into the Roman Catholic Church rendered the religious nature of the conflict less clear.

                  And of course, the English Civil War was just the Bishop’s war. The religious nature of that war is perfectly unambiguous, and Cathedral efforts to rewrite and cast it as Aristocrats versus merchants are ludicrous.

                  On giving effect to large scale cooperation, we don’t really have consensus. Moldbug’s proposed solutions assume the Ring of Fnargl, which does not and cannot not exist. No man rules alone.

                  We are still groping around there, but are generally happy with Throne and Altar as the least bad existing and reliable working operating system. It has become apparent that the Parliamentary democracy and the American Republic were mistakes. It is likely that something interesting will emerge out of Sovereign corporations on the blockchain, but we do not yet have the software to instantiate such things, and when we do, it will take a long time to see how they work out. Throne and Altar is a known and existing solution. There is a general consensus that Moldbug’s proposals are idiotic, with which consensus Moldbug does not entirely disagree. Perhaps sovereign corporations can emerge out of his blockchain solution.

                  The Dark Enlightenment analysis of the state follows from analysis that any state is apt to find things difficult without a state religion, and if you don’t have a state religion, something very bad is going to step into its place. Its a power vacuum.

                  And, of course, the red pill, my primary interest, and the topic of many of my posts. It simply follows from Game and Evolutionary Game Theory that female consent is a bad idea, that emancipation was a society wide shit test that we failed, and women are reacting to it as to any failed shit test.

                  Men need to own their wives and children. They should be responsible for their children’s education and educate them as they see fit – which will typically involve enforceable apprenticeship, rather than university.

                  Of course, it follows from the priest analysis that judge, lawyers, professors, and most of the media are priests – and priests are apt to educate you only in priesting, resulting in “elite” overproduction, and priests getting into everything and redirecting everything from production of value to production of holiness. Hence the murder of Star Wars franchise, Gillette and Coke insulting their customers, the collapsing viewership of Miss Universe and the Woke Olympics, and so on and so forth.

                  Also resulting in a huge number of utterly useless graduates supposedly educated in “Computer Science”.

                • Kunning Drueger says:

                  GNON called Jim, and that is his cross to bear. I do hope he takes it up.

                  I’m not opposed to the podcast idea, though podcasts by and large seem like midwit pretend learning. He could just read blogposts and provide commentary and clarification. But I have two goals in this exchange/idea: Book of Jim and the instantiation of Jimian Christianity. I selfishly desire this because I have a dim view of the future and a growing family. I don’t want to hide inna woods and wait to die. I want to be a part of a community. The Book gives me a guide, and the Faith gives me an inheritance worth bestowing. As it stands right now, we have a lone prophet, a massive wilderness, and very scattered and isolated comrades. How to move towards a resilient and useful network of friends and allies?

                  I think the conference idea is a multiple solution in that it could flesh out ideas and bring bros together. But I also know that Tribe Jim is a hateful bunch and any growth or change is going to generate resistance and pushback. So if the way I laid it out doesn’t work, then we need to find something that does.

                • Pman says:

                  Man if you desire a tribe you need to move out of enemy territory. Drive out until you see “Biden Sucks” and “Trump 2024” flags and buy a house there. Many such places in the US. We are on a South Africa trajectory, so you want to make sure you end up with other Amerikaners as neighbors and not Bantu.

                • alf says:

                  The French Revolution was also an unambiguously holy war between Post Christians

                  Similarly, once Dutch independence from Spain seemed somewhat secured, which included schism from the Catholic church, protestant holy war started.

                  Remonstrants versus contra-remonstrants — the former wanting to get rid of predestination, the latter not. Seems to me the former is setting up for a holiness spiral into the blank slate, as happened 200 years later in France. Not quite post-Christian, but history is littered with in-between stages.

                • alf says:

                  But I also know that Tribe Jim is a hateful bunch

                  😢

                  It’s not that I don’t like your ideas — sounds risky, but also sounds like fun. But also risky. I am fairly comfortable as is.

                • Karl says:

                  What would be the point of a video conference?

                  We are all literate here and writing is fine for exchanging ideas. In my opnion, writing is much better for discussing ideas than a video conference.

                  Pictures and voice are nice for creating an emotional bond between persons, but that is pointless until we can meet safely in person.

                  If any man wants a communtiy of people sharing his faith, he has to create that community wherever he happens to live.

              • not a troll says:

                Maybe you can launch an official Jimian forum. That may be a first step towards many great things.

                • jim says:

                  The comments section, which is full of excellent material, is the official Jimian forum. What extras do you want in a forum?

                  I am in fact working on what will be, among other things, a social media tool, but it is far from ready even for other people to assist me in coding, let alone for beta release.

                  A social media tool has to rest on a wallet, because GPG’s security model just does not work, while wallets clearly do work. So a crypto currency is necessarily integral to social media tool that can effectively resist Cathedral interference.

                  Git uses GPG to protect repositories from interference, and I have been suffering greatly to set up a repository that could be provide public access while remaining secure. And what is on it not yet suitable for public access. We are going to have to use GPG for code development security, and its shortcomings have become painfully apparent. Still a lot better than what I actually have running so far.

                • Anonymous says:

                  >What extras do you want in a forum?
                  Easier to organize and search.
                  If I want to reread all the important details about the loli question then I have to go through the posts from 2018–2020 and ctrl+f for “jewish pedophile” and “shaman”. A bit inconvenient.

                • jim says:

                  Not so easily done. Come up with some examples of good forums where the information does not get lost.

                  A technological solution to this is hashtags and comment headers, where a comment inherits by default the header and header hashtags of the message it is a reply to, and full threading to any depth, with sequential items, where there is only one reply, going downwards and not rightwards, rather than leftwards and downwards, and a split pane with the tree structure at left, and the comment and its immediate context in the right pane.

                  No one has implemented this, and they should.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Forums with an imageboard format and archive sites of forums with an imageboard format.

                • Anonymous says:

                  >Not so easily done. Come up with some examples of good forums where the information does not get lost.

                  A simple, no-frills phpBB forum with the default settings would be an improvement.

              • Anon says:

                What is the point of a podcast or video call? The downside is that one bad actor has now helped identify everyone who bothered to show up for a larp session and the upside is nothing you couldn’t get from reading a blog. If you can’t properly screen for defectors or bad actors or just stupid people, guess who’s going to show up? And if the mafia or any mafia-style organization – to include government generally (security clearances) – fatally couldn’t figure out how to screen for defectors, then you won’t either

                A recent and illustrative lesson is probably someone like Paul le Roux. Le Roux’s problem was not his cryptographic opsec, which by all accounts was impeccable. The problem was if you are going to start an organization orthogonal to those in power, who can you trust? A lengthy and often fatally expensive process. If you suspect you can’t trust people you’ve already let in, seems like you have to start killing people, and if you have to start killing people…

                Only newish example I can think of that functionally emulates the defection-screening essence of a mafia would be a private tracker, but then again it’s too new to have stood the test of time, and not in person

                I haven’t checked out Urbit yet but I suspect based off of the people peddling it it is attracting exactly the wrong type of attention. Urbit or even a private tracker are not exactly the Broederbond

            • Justin Bieber says:

              Now we focus on getting a handful of elite intellectuals on board.

              This blog, and NRx in general, have attracted a highly disproportionate number of programmers and techies. No doubt, such people are invaluable when you need personnel to invent, design, and build stuff, to make technology work. Whereas, to start a religion, you need to target the natural priesthood, i.e. members of the priestly intelligentsia, both those formally embedded within the Cathedral’s academia department (the brain of the Cathedral) and the fringe autodidacts on the outside. I am pessimistic about the ability of computer programmers, who seem to comprise 70% of NRx, to create a religion. Their talent, immense as it may be, lies far elsewhere.

              I’d like to see actual “elite intellectuals” stating something bold in line with Jimianity, such as e.g. that female libido sometimes sets in with adrenarche, or that as near to all rape accusations are false as makes no difference. Okay, I’m joking, of course they won’t say that. But do they say or suggest anything that may imply even the faintest, remotest familiarity with such viewpoints? Doesn’t look like it, and claims that they hold these views in secret are unfalsifiable. If and when they start emitting such signals, that will be a sure sign that the genie has come out of the bottle. More broadly, when core NRx stops being primarily a club of geeky, nerdy, spergy computer programmers in Silicon Valley who’ve found themselves a quaint hobby, and actually commences attracting “elite intellectuals,” then you’ll have legitimate grounds for optimism.

              If you can’t even name a single elite intellectual who has converted to Jimianity, the genie is not nearly yet out of the bottle. Claims about supposed secret and anonymous conversions are unfalsifiable. It’s not that your memes aren’t spreading, it’s that they aren’t spreading where it is most expedient and necessary that they spread. They are wasted on people who simply won’t make it into a new priesthood, in other words, you are targeting (and attracting) people who can make good warriors and successful merchants, instead of targeting (and attracting) elite intellectuals for the priesthood. This is a major, fundamental flaw in the current NRx strategy.

              • jim says:

                > If and when they start emitting such signals, that will be a sure sign that the genie has come out of the bottle.

                No namefag is going to start emitting such signals.

                When we win, such signals will overnight go from forbidden to mandatory, from unknown to suddenly seeming universal. Such signals come after victory, they are not a preparation for victory.

                After victory, everyone will not only start emitting such signals, but will remember that they always were. Not only will everything instantly change overnight, but no one will notice anything has changed.

                • FrankNorman says:

                  Anyone else a bit creeped out at the idea of living in a world full of people like that?

                  I suppose to some extent, we do… Orwell knew something.

                • jim says:

                  I remember when the Cathedral line on the Khmer Rouge changed overnight. Every single academic in the entire western hegemony did a U turn, and none of them were able to notice.

                  The change of line on Darwin comes pretty close to that.

              • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                >both those formally embedded within the Cathedral’s academia department (the brain of the Cathedral)

                Which is braindead.

                >and the fringe autodidacts on the outside

                Which is where most of the real (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/reh%E2%82%81%C3%ADs) priests are.

          • Kunning Drueger says:

            I don’t see the relevancy of the comparison, but it does say a lot about your position.

            • Justin Bieber says:

              I don’t see the relevancy of the comparison

              Seriously, you don’t?

              Scientology is the modern belief system par excellence. It has had some initial successes, albeit it has been on the decline for quite some time now. The comparison illustrates that the new religion you are proposing hasn’t even got yet to the barest of bare minimum required to have the kind of success that Scientology had. (It takes a special kind of “thinker” to propose a new religion without so much as minimally investigating what the other new religions have done, and how they resultantly fared) You can also compare to LaVeyan Satanism or, for an older case, Mormonism.

              For the benefit of those who don’t click links, here are the categories in which Scientology outperforms Jimianity:

              1. Sacred/Foundational Text
              2. Official Manifesto
              3. Number of Followers
              4. Organization
              5. Charismatic Leader
              6. Cultural/Academic Recognition
              7. State/Legal Recognition
              8. Notable Current/Former Adherents
              9. Spaces Occupied
              10. Economic Model
              11. Mode of Transmission
              12. Time Since Foundation
              13. Praxis
              14. Global Outreach

              The only category where Jim defeats Ron is “claim to authority,” because Jim enlists both the scientific method and old religion, whereas Hubbard was literally talking out of his ass, thus has no objective credibility. So it’s 14 to 1. If you don’t find the comparison illuminating, tell me how you judge whether or not the new religion you propose is doing well. What are your criteria, exactly?

              • jim says:

                Now is not yet the time to seek to accomplish what Scientology accomplished.

                If we even began doing that sort of stuff, we would be Wacoed instantly.

                The Cathedral has a very low tolerance for genuinely patriarchal faiths. Ever since the Mormon wars, they have reacted with fire and slaughter, shouting “Think of the children” as they set the children on fire.

                To not be massacred, we would have to make compromises in the faith that would prove fatal to the faith. Namefag problem on steroids.

                For the moment, each man must maintain the rule of husbands and fathers individually and privately, rather than collectively, which is profoundly weak and unsatisfactory.

              • jim says:

                > So it’s 14 to 1. If you don’t find the comparison illuminating, tell me how you judge whether or not the new religion you propose is doing well. What are your criteria, exactly?

                Twelve of your other thirteen criteria would, under current circumstance result in at best cancellation, deplatforming, and demonetization, and many of them would result in sudden death, probably by fire.

                Thus, under current circumstances, utterly irrelevant.

                Try using measures that would not get us wacoed. On measures that are unlikely result in being wacoed, we easily beat Scientology.

                I measure success by meme outreach, which can only be visible among those securely anonymous (the meme magicians), those beyond the pale (nazis) and those protected by Putin’s nukes.

                Where our meme outreach can be visible, it is visible, suggestive of significant meme outreach where it must remain deeply hidden.

                Enemy religion, that is our meme, holiness spiral, that is our meme, marriage and fertility, that is our meme, patriarchal authority, that is our meme, de-emancipate women, that is our meme. All rape accusations are fake, and when real rape happens, women seldom complain about it. That is our meme.

              • Kunning Drueger says:

                Jim put paid to your thesis, so there’s not much I can add as a response. To qualify my assertion about the self-reflective nature of your comment, you compared Jimian Christianity to a money collection scheme based on shit tier science fiction. Scientology is not a religion, according to your chart. So the comparison doesn’t make sense to me.

                • Justin Bieber says:

                  The truth value of a belief system (or absolute lack thereof) is wholly irrelevant when analyzing the successes and failures of its memetic transmission. See: Progressivism.

                  Jim argues that his memes are on the course to infiltrating some high places, and that in this regard, he is far more successful than the universally ridiculed Scientology. Possibly true, though currently hard to tell, given the understandable reluctance of namefags to candidly speak up their minds.

                  He also argues that without Cathedral suppression, his worldview would be totally mainstream – a moot counterfactual, because “without Cathedral suppression” is not the condition under which Jimianity actually has to operate.

                  Bottom line, there’s a whole lot of work yet to be done; that the Cathedral won’t leave you in peace to fulfill it is all the more reason to focus on what you can simply and safely achieve, such as textual production.

                  Being totally mogged by “a money collection scheme based on shit tier science fiction” should prompt stern self-reflection, followed by a concrete plan to fix whatever flaws there may be in your own designs. Until some of the preliminary steps discussed in this thread are taken, will continue to be mogged all the way to Gold Base and back.

                • Kunning Drueger says:

                  “there is a whole lot of work to be done”

                  I agree. I am trying to facilitate that. I’m using the tools I have. Maybe the conference concept as I outlined it is dumb. Fair enough. But let’s not leave it at that. Let’s find something that works. I’d love to invite you all over for hard drinks and hard discussion while the womenfolk prepare dinner, but that seems unlikely. So a video conference idea was floated and, completely unexpected, Jim was tentatively agreeable. So I think we should figure out how to do that.

                • jim says:

                  I know how to do that. Easy. As I said, install a Jitsi server on a vps in Russia, or the edge of the Chinese hegemony, and hold the conference wearing hats and outlaw masks. I just have not gotten around to it and am not going to get around to it any time soon. Lots of configuration issues if we are going to use Jitsi’s privacy protections. Needs doing. I would love someone else to do it.

                  You pay for the server and the domain name using bitcoin laundered through Wassabee wallet, or Yandex purchased with bitcoin.

                • jim says:

                  Since nothing should be in the document except matters on which consensus already exists, is widespread and uncontroversial, anyone can do it.

                  Procedure: Draw up a document on points of agreement (I forgot lots of matters, such as the faith of Gnon)

                  Circulate to everyone prominent. If none of them complain, done. If they complain that does not accurately reflect their position, leave it out. Throw in a more stuff than is likely to remain – lots of people don’t comment on lots of things because they are in general agreement.

                • alf says:

                  Voice modulators might be smart too.

                • jim says:

                  If they cannot do voice recognition that works to log me in to a service or a computer, I would not worry too much. Humans are good at recognizing voices, computers cannot. Computers are getting very good at recognizing faces, but a hat and and outlaw mask throws computers and humans both. Glasses, however, are a problem. Computers are ridiculously good at recognizing glasses. Conversely, if you wear a pair of non prescription glasses for the conference, and never get photographed wearing them otherwise, it screws up their facial recognition no end. They tend to fixate on glasses because they are good at them. For a computer, superman’s Clark Kent disguise is impenetrable.

                • Kunning Drueger says:

                  Voice to text to voice should be fine.

                • Aryaman says:

                  Computers have a harder time with glasses if you invert your normal, but I am certain tools available to even petty law enforcement can get around this and perform much better than the best published research would suggest.

                  Outlaw mask *and* inverting normal eyewear *might* work for *some* people depending on the abundance of information available on your face. But definitely true that result is very sensitive to the ocular cavity. Sunglasses may work.

                • jim says:

                  I know what is available to law enforcement.

                  I am pretty sure I know what is available to the NSA.

                • Aryaman says:

                  I don’t know what’s available to the higher agencies but can confirm from experience that eyewear flipping by itself isn’t usually enough, and with a mask is only sometimes enough. But that may be with much higher resolution inputs than what’s relevant for this case.

          • alf says:

            Lol that’s pretty good.

            Generally, my take on the subject is that at this point in time, mass spread, for whatever reason, does not work. I very occassionally point someone in this direction, but mostly I’m happy to be left alone.

            Way this has worked for me, is that I was very actively searching for some sort of meaning, some sort of direction in my life. I spent many nights scouring the internet, found that here. It’s been great. But not everyone is like me.

            We have absolutely nothing near the viral spread scientology had. But I find myself not so caring that much. We don’t have to carry the weight of the world on our shoulders. If it works for those few actively seeking it — it works.

  14. Kunning Drueger says:

    Is the tendency towards holiness spiralling ubiquitous in all faith structures?

    What causes the spiral: is it an abundance of form and a lack of substance, too much substance with no form, or something completely different?

    In academia, there are mini-spirals in small groups that set the tone for the departments and colleges. There is a large, slow whorl, but the smaller spirals can be very fast or almost imperceptibly slow. I found that the older, tenured professors were pretty much dragged along while the young APs were practically spinning themselves.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      In plain terms, ‘holiness spiraling’ is simply adulteration; a reductive feedback loop where signals are attenuated into forms ever less adaptive for hosts, but ever more adaptive for themselves, in terms of memetic virulence; a casting off of adaptive nuance in favor of the more easily conceived, more easily algorithmized, more easily abused.

    • jim says:

      What causes the spiral is open entry into the priesthood.

      If the faith is successful, there is money and power on the table. Everyone wants in. So they grab some point of doctrine and run with it.

    • suones says:

      Holiness spiralling is the failure mode pf priests/Brahmins (both in Moldbug and Hindu sense of the term).

      Brahmins display status by superior holiness, warriors through victory in battle, merchants through greater wealth. Their failure modes, if left unchecked by Dharma, are according to their temperament.

      Brahmins are prone to holiness spiralling — visible in all priest-dominated cultures. The solution is for a warrior to kill the holiest of them all periodically.

      Warriors are prone to kill each other, and being unable to stop killing each other long enough to resist a foreign existential threat — like Kings in England in the time of Alfred or Hindu Kings in the time of the Muslim invasions. The solution is a powerful State Religion that makes it low-status to kill each other.

      Merchants are prone to cheat each other, leading to erosion of trust and ultimate failure of the economy thus losing warfighting ability. The solution is twofold — a State Religion that makes it a sin to cheat, and a King that makes it a crime also.

      • The Cominator says:

        “Warriors are prone to kill each other, and being unable to stop killing each other long enough to resist a foreign existential threat — like Kings in England in the time of Alfred or Hindu Kings in the time of the Muslim invasions. The solution is a powerful State Religion that makes it low-status to kill each other.”

        On the contrary the state religion should have almost no power over warriors except as a nebulous cohesion provider.

        Warriors killing each other outside of foreign wars should be confined to the proper sphere, dueling.

        “Merchants are prone to cheat each other, leading to erosion of trust and ultimate failure of the economy thus losing warfighting ability. The solution is twofold — a State Religion that makes it a sin to cheat, and a King that makes it a crime also.”

        Honesty as a tenant of church and state is a must.

      • jim says:

        The King simply has to keep the priest of the state religion in line. Since priests inherently work by consensus, they do a poor job of keeping each other in line, though hierarchical religions do a less bad job.

        Consensus is vulnerable to manipulation in a multitude of ways, and is apt to result in domination by the lavender mafia, a problem throughout all history.

  15. Ihmc says:

    Can you give me the reference for Paul on Bishops? You are right, the subject is very carefully minstranslated, or swept under the carpet.

    • jim says:

      Epistles to Timothy and Titus

      A bishop then must …the husband of one wife, …
      One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;
      (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)

      Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without
      Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things.
      Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

    • hcm says:

      How to find a church? Is it even worthwhile.

      Wasn’t raised Christian. My criteria is that my position as husband and father is not undermined. Seems impossible to find.

      Waiting for the time for prophets doesn’t seem like a good plan.

      • jim says:

        Not a good plan for getting a woman.

        But you will find on this blog, and on other blogs of the reaction, lots of stuff on this topic.

  16. The Cominator says:

    Talking about Israel and Judeo-Christianity vs Christianity and then dumb shit jews did in ancient times…

    This article is going to be catnip for fednats, cathcucks and tards we generally don’t want here. I do not consider myself nearly as intelligent as you but I’ve always been good at spotting the mistakes of OTHERS even better men than myself, accordingly I would humbly advise getting a new subject up as soon as possible.

    “And material and effective causation should impact religion. Hence, the Dark Enlightenment faith of Gnon.”

    If you want to talk about this properly merely quote the Bible’s best verse, by their fruits you will know them. The verse you can use to throwout any view of scripture or theology that doesn’t work out.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      Ah, so fednats and cathcucks set the discourse then.

      • jim says:

        This is a place where we can discuss matters without being drowned out and distracted by shills.

        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          Yes that is the idea; that fear of discussing certain things for fear of attracting certain attention is also a form of control, being my implication.

          • The Cominator says:

            There is no lack of discussion of jews on the far right.

            But the signal to noise ratio on the issue is pretty horrible, Jim when he brings up the topic generally solves this by broaching the subject in a way likely to offend everyone including fednats and tradcaths but this issue he is playing into stuff they might say.

            And that is my worry.

            • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

              >this issue he is playing into stuff they might say.

              And my reply is always ‘so what’.

              Who is charge of the operation in your mind; you, or fednats?

            • Andy says:

              Maybe he’s hoping they send their smarter shills around to debate him…AF is getting a bit stale.

              • The Cominator says:

                Anonymous Fake’s main problem is one he shares with Curtis Yarvin himself in a way.

                Neither can admit the Brahminate/Priesthood need to be basically ruthlessly um deleted in minecraft via helicopter almost en masse, hes pissed that the proles who setout outside the system did better than him.

                Fake just adds a lot of genuine leftist commie style envy to this. He also probably doesn’t get laid. He’ll never fix himself till he is honest about where the real problems are. He needs to learn to earn money outside the priesthood system… the Thieves in Law (the Vory or the Russian gangsters) were among the people who did really well during the Soviet collapse. You do not need to be a total outlaw to live (I’m not saying steal and sell drugs) but you need to think halfway like one.

                As for finding it impossible to get laid in the US (if you go without it for months or years this begins to distort your mind) I continue to advocate strip clubs with private rooms. Its hard to believe you can find a 9 or a 10 as a non chad who will happily cowgirl you for 20 a song but I swear its true (not every girl there but they aren’t rare).

                • Anonymous Fake says:

                  [*deleted for all the usual reasons*]

                • jim says:

                  Upside down use of our shibboleths, and leftism decorated with irrelevant use of our shibboleths, and to the best of my recollection, you failed to take the demon worshiper test.

                  Take it. If you took it already, it must have been a long time ago, for I have forgotten, take it again. This time, try giving the full affirmation.

                  If you are not actually a Christian, you are unlikely to be actually a social conservative.

                  Biographical stuff about your identity, upbringing, and faith is being disallowed because you claim Christianity, but smell of demon worship. If one identification is false, all false. I smell the spawn of single mother carrying a hundred thousand in college debt for a worthless education and a wasted youth.

                  If you take the full affirmation, I will allow your autobiographical stuff through provided that it is not decorated with upside down use of our shibboleths. Respect the rectification of names.

                • Leon says:

                  Do you got any tips on strip clubs? Which ones to enter, what to expect, that sort of thing?

                • Pooch says:

                  Neither can admit the Brahminate/Priesthood need to be basically ruthlessly um deleted in minecraft via helicopter almost en masse

                  Obviously Yarvin could never say such a thing in public because namefag, but does not mean he wouldn’t say such a thing in private.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Depends on the club but as im literally on the spectrum you shouldnt have too much trouble the more private the regular lap dance booths the better.

              • The Cominator says:

                Leon here is the repost on fucking strippers I gave to Wulfgar

                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 (often) 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 (ADDENDUM: They also tend to be a lot less npcish in the way they think then normal women… almost all strippers are kind of “racist”, most of them distrust the government and the media).

                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 (ADDENDUM: you want to try to avoid paying a lot extra because its hard for the price to ever go down later either).

                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.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  My god, so much work, you guys don’t have whores in the US? Prostitution here in Spain is a dime a dozen.

                • The Cominator says:

                  This is sort of the way around that.

                  Not so easy to get open whores in the US because illegal outside Nevada.

                  Online escorts tend to be scams and sometimes they are worse stings and honeypots. There are reputable sites (I imagine they have to kickup to the feds at outrageous prices to be allowed to operate) but the prices are outrageous and not something that 1 man in a thousand could afford to use regularly. Streetwalkers if you can find them tend to be diseased and unattractive.

                  The other advantage of the semi-pro stripper over the open pro escort, the strippers tend to be much more genuinely enthusiastic and provide much better sex especially if you get them cheap.

                • Cloudswrest says:

                  The (SF) Bay area tends to be peppered by ubiquitous Asian Massage Parlors (AMPs). These tend to come and go depending on the changing moral climate. During the Trump years there was a big push on “Human Trafficking” with allusions to underage sex slaves, when in reality most of them are 30+ (pushing 40) mamasans, and a lot of AMPs were closed down, with stings and news articles showing pictures of 40+ mamasans.

                • Alfred says:

                  Whores in the US are very over priced due to law enforcement and filled with scammers. Cops frequently try to charge people with human trafficking for fucking a whore.

                  The primary brothels in America are Message Parlors and Strip clubs, but frequently such places promise sex but deliver only services that are often not penis in the vagina sex. All done in a pretty secretive manner.

                  Com’s the first person I’ve heard of who’s been able to fuck a stripper for a low fee on a regular basis.

                  Most men unable to get laid in the US would be better off buying drugs like molly or coke and having parties with girls they meet, but being low T, they tend to be afraid of breaking drug laws and won’t do it.

                • The Cominator says:

                  From what ive heard about the massage parlors ussually all you generally get is a handjob.

                  That doesn’t mean the info isnt wrong… plenty of guys swear strippers never fuck any of their customers.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Good reason to be afraid of drug laws.. the drug business is basically all rats or people who will become long term prison inmates or rats…

                  The risk factor when you start providing party drugs is huge.

                • Alfred says:

                  >From what ive heard about the massage parlors ussually all you generally get is a handjob.

                  Depends on the place, the level of law enforcement, and the amount that people will pay. Similar story with strip clubs. It’s a real crap shoot. There’s a bunch of online sites people use to review escorts, massage parlors, and strip clubs for men trying to find actual sex and those sites often charge huge amounts of money just to read the reviews.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Im not the only guy who has good luck with strippers there is a forum (tuscl) for it.

                  I can’t imagine most guys would have that hard a time… im autistic to a degree and its not hard.

                • Pooch says:

                  Trading dollars for sex is beta and blue-pilled in nature. I could never envision myself doing it on principle alone even for 1 cent..

                • jim says:

                  The trouble with paying for sex is that you know the girl has just had sex with someone else, and will immediately have sex with the next guy.

                  That is what is bad about it.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Unless you’re the very rare criminal demon chad that women pay you for sex in different ways no matter what…

                  I’m NEVER going to be Jeremy Meeks I’m just not and I accept that, and don’t say you’d never pay. Remember Elisha Cuthbert back when she did the movie the girl next door, how about Ann Margaret the way she looked when she did Carnal Knowledge or the Cincinnati Kid? You wouldn’t pay even a little if you had the opportunity (but the hypothetical is no pay no play). If you say no you’re lying your ass off. Presented with a woman normally way out of your league and with a very reasonable offer you’ll fork over the money.

                  Also I’ve always heard that Alphas and Omegas alike are fine with engaging a whore if it suits them (yes I’m aware Alphas don’t need to generally), its the betas who feel bad about it (in a sort of sexual market value parody of the midwit meme).

                • Cloudswrest says:

                  “(in a sort of sexual market value parody of the midwit meme)”

                  I’m dying! LOL

                • The Cominator says:

                  I messed up the 1st paragraph in my post there in a way bad enough to make the meaning unclear…

                  I mean if you aren’t the Jeremy Meeks type of demonchad (where women pay you) you are going to end up paying for sex no matter what though perhaps in less direct ways.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  When an omega pays for a woman, he is paying to have sex. When an alpha pays for a woman, he is paying to not deal with her bullshit afterwards.

                  One is buying access, the other is buying convenience.

                • alf says:

                  For a while it was a thing among my friends to search public forums for whore reviews. ‘Walkers’ was what whore visitors called themselves — you never walk alone!

                  Some of the reviews were hilarious. Points given for how well she worked the shaft, deducted for lack of enthusiasm, etc. But the thing that stuck with me was a) how many men went down on a whore, and b) how often they discussed the ‘GFE’ — the Girlfriend Experience. A good whore makes you feel like your her only man. Which obviously, you aren’t. But that’s what men want. Which is why walking never appealed to me.

                • Alfred says:

                  When an omega pays for a woman, he is paying to have sex. When an alpha pays for a woman, he is paying to not deal with her bullshit afterwards.

                  The weird thing with whores is they still have to be gamed if you want a good experience. Com’s doing pretty well with his stripper in that regard.

                  But the thing that stuck with me was a) how many men went down on a whore, and b) how often they discussed the ‘GFE’ — the Girlfriend Experience. A good whore makes you feel like your her only man. Which obviously, you aren’t. But that’s what men want. Which is why walking never appealed to me.

                  Whores generally resist GFE stuff with the Johns unless the John demonstrate higher value at which point everything is on the menu. Lots of the dance with such women is the desire for a man to break her rules. They may rage about it later but as long as the man doesn’t apologize or act beta they love it.

                  Going down on a whore or most women in general has no appeal to me.

                  The trouble with paying for sex is that you know the girl has just had sex with someone else, and will immediately have sex with the next guy.

                  That is what is bad about it.

                  Yep. I saw an Vietnamese hooker 7 or 8 years ago that was amazing in bed. Aggressive, loved sex, great body and completely insatiable. One day I showed up and she said she wasn’t ready yet and kept me waiting for 20 minutes. Out walked a guy from her apartment and got into a car right next to mine. I still went in but I never went back because it felt fucking awful.

                • Alfred says:

                  >I can’t imagine most guys would have that hard a time… im autistic to a degree and its not hard.

                  You being autistic makes approaching and maintaining a girlfriend hard. You being direct and less caring about social queues makes sex easier with a whore because you’ve skipped the social niceties that women use to judge rank and all they see is an aggressive man who doesn’t give a fuck.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I don’t know what mistakes a normie man would make that a sperg wouldn’t…

                  The worst thing you can do with a stripper (other than somehow give her the idea you’re a cop) is white knighting (its sad you’re stripping you’re such a nice girl how do I get you out of this) or expressing some kind of negative judgemental opinion about them being a stripper. Strippers REALLY REALLY fucking hate hearing that from customers because either they’ve taken pains to try to hide what they’re doing from family and people back home or get negative shit from family and people back home about it. They don’t want to hear it from you. The ones who aren’t on hard drugs generally have some kind of hitting the wall kind of exit plan from the profession anyway but they aren’t going to want to discuss such matters with you right away, they open up a bit more after you’ve fucked them a few times. The only exception to the don’t white knight rule you can make some sort of comment (no long lecture) to avoid hard drugs as at best they’ll ruin your looks (you should add that moderate drinking smoking and weed are okay to not sound boring though) and maybe worse.

                  I’m probably generally too nice with women until they upset me, its not that being nice works I know it doesn’t but I don’t know how to be a jerk the right way the way women like… but being nice (while at the same time treating them like a Roman sex slave girl you just bought) DOES seem to work with strippers.

                • f6187 says:

                  “… plenty of guys swear strippers never …”

                  I am aware of counter-examples besides Cominator’s.

                  Sometimes strippers are just girls who want to have fun. They may seem jaded because they have a keen sense of the actual preponderance of trash among the deluge of men who desire them. That is not world-weariness, but rather simple intelligence refined through experience.

                  If you are not trash, you have a chance of establishing further rapport — but outside work, starting small with an late-night coffee at IHOP where she knows the manager who could hurt you if necessary. Make her laugh comfortably and build from there. That’s the way I heard it.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Strippers are fun and plenty are fundamentally sweet natured girls and not the soulless evil conniving wallet drainers most people imagine (I stand by this) and I’m quite fond of them on the whole (also an ex stripper masseuse, I didn’t know her from work, cured me of years of neck pain problems… another reason why I like them in general. She didn’t charge me a dime for this) but also fundamentally they are wild animals…

                  I wouldn’t try to date one outside of work even though its sometimes possible. You’re going to be dealing with an alpha widow (thats a girl who is fundamentally in love with general buck naked far away who you’ll never quite live up to) and probably a single mother. Also even if she becomes a good housewife has your kids and all you want comes to pass… if you’re as proud as most guys here she is 100% to cuck you eventually (that is the bad side of her having a sex drive probably 3-5x stronger than a normal woman, the good side of it is she’ll always be eager to sleep with you… even if shes otherwise kind of pissed at you) unless she is literally chained up or guarded like a member of the Sultan’s harem.

    • Pooch says:

      Jews and Israel are losing holiness by each passing day. They are not nearly as holy as blacks and camel jockeys anymore, which is why the Israel lobby is massively donating to the RNC now.

  17. Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

    The congenitally solipsistic make no distinctions of value, import, or relevance; any aspect of an ideology is considered equivalent to any and all else of it, and is to enforced with equal fervor; any little jot or tittle, wherever extant, will be sat in a same seat also as that on which all law and prophecy would hang.

  18. Anonymous Fake says:

    The most offensive entryism occurs when one side blatantly cannot strike back at another side by the same method by nature. A Unitarian might use an entryism strategy against Trinitarians, and vice versa, but the Jews complicate things further. A Jew can pretend to be a Christian, but a Christian cannot pretend to be a Jew. Striking back against entryism demands some alternative strategy, which tends to be violent, and Jews complain about this truthfully but hypocritically.

    [*deleted to protect rectification of names*]

    • jim says:

      If you are going to talk about religion, tell us where you are coming from. And if you tell us “Christian”, take the affirmation.

      • Anonymous Fake says:

        [*deleted*]

        • jim says:

          So you are a Christian?

          Then you should have no problem giving the affirmation.

          • Anonymous Fake says:

            I did already. Twice. You’re trolling at this point and you openly admitted above to being a CoE sympathizer for some reason.

            Make a Christian side blog and be a better Christian.

            • jim says:

              You did? I don’t recall. If you did, must have been quite a some considerable time ago. Do it a third time.

              Last time around, you failed to say “God is three and God is one”. Give the full affirmation.

              affirm that Jesus Christ is Lord, born in Bethlehem, died in Jerusalem, and is, is from before the beginning of the world. fully God and fully man. God is three and God is one.

              • Anonymous Fake says:

                Jesus Christ, born in Bethlehem, is lord and saviour of all who believe, God and the Son of God, and he died in Jerusalem as the ultimate sacrifice. The trinity is the full nature of God, one and three at once. It was there from the beginning and before creation itself.

                Your bad memory might be a demon who doesn’t want you to remember certain things. You need to see a priest, a real one. There are worse things than Unitarians about.

                • jim says:

                  OK.

                  Autobiographical stuff will now be allowed through.

                  Provided you refrain from using our shibboleths, or use them correctly

                  Our enemies are attacking language itself to make it impossible to speak, and difficult even to think, certain thoughts. Don’t give them a hand.

                  To defeat our enemies, we must first rectify names.

          • Joe says:

            Christians who are terribly blue pilled can pass the demon worshiper test in real life despite almost word-for-word recitation of progressive talking points under the “what would Jesus do” frame. Their attacks die in the face of Ephesians 5:22-33, 1 Corinthians 7:3-5 and the like, and the honest admission of a degree of 1 Timothy 1:15. I hope they can be saved.

            • jim says:

              It is not aimed to keep out progressives, let alone progressive Christians. It is aimed to keep out demon worshipers who are lying about being Christian. (Actual demon worshipers who say they are demon worshipers and criticize Christianity from that frame are welcome. Just not allowed to say “Hail fellow Christian, you are not Christian enough, and I am more Christian than thou.”)

              This tends to overlap massively with shills, because if the shill is lying about his identity, Christianity tends to be part of the lie, but I am sure there must be plenty of shills who can pass the test, and plenty of non shills who could not.

              If someone tells me I am not antisemitic enough, he is usually strangely unable to notice what Soros is up to, and if someone tells me I am not Christian enough and that he is more Christian than I am he can seldom pass the demon worshiper test.

              • Joe says:

                There are some horribly debased Christians out there. These people darken the entire movement with their cuckery.

              • suones says:

                Actual demon worshipers who say they are demon worshipers and criticize Christianity from that frame are welcome.

                I would be very interested in speaking to such a person. From what I’ve seen “demon worshippers” tend to be anti-dominant religion LARPers rather than sincere. Does non-ironic “Satanism” even exist?

                • jim says:

                  Not in the sense that they actually explicitly identify as Satanists, rather they talk to spirits, or think they talk to spirits, who just happen to have horns and tentacles, and to dead people who don’t seem very keen on the living.

                  Consider the ambience of Epstein’s temple. Reflect on the EECs adjustment of old formerly Christianized pagan rituals.

                  The Christianized pagan rituals frequently featured old evil deities made at least a little ridiculous and impotent, as for example the Satan depicted in chains. EEC removes the chains and has the actor symbolically alpha and dominant.

                  And we already had that discussion about some Hindu deities, but I stopped because figured there was no need to go there in more detail than necessary. Kali is far from the only one.

                  All the Aztec gods were quite unambiguously demonic, except for Quetzalcoatl, who got made into saint, (standard Christian method of converging pagans)

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  There is no shortage of various hipster theosophs who all call themselves various flavors of newage appelations, including satanist. Grifts like ONA for example look pretty unironic – their proselytizing talks a big game at least.

                • info23 says:

                  @Suones

                  If said gods promote sexual promiscuity. Or condemns eroticism in marriage as lust.

                  Or if said god demands human sacrifice. If require spiritual possession of the person. Or practices result in people losing their reason and self-control.

                  Or involve disfiguring and mutilating one’s own body and involves tattoos.

                  Like the worship of the Goddess Cybele that involves the castration of Men who also cross-dressed as women.

                  Certain cults also involved inverting the sex roles with women cross-dressing as Men and Men cross-dressing as women. Defacing and defiling the Dignity of both Men and Women.

                  Similarly cross-dressing can cross into behaviorally adopting the behaviors appropriate to the opposite sex.

                  Those “God’s” are demons. Those “beings” that love death more than life that love corruption over wholeness.

                  That promote anti-social behaviors.

                • info23 says:

                  @Suones

                  Read this:
                  https://orthochristian.com/80417.html

                  This white man’s experience of Yoga and Kundalini is frankly demonic. Even Buddhism had demonic origins.

                  Its far from the True God and spiritual nourishment.

                  Kali is definitely a demon.

                  It seems that the a lot of which looks like to be the Aryan religion of his Ancestors is actually demon worship.

                  Seems to be real Aryan religion in its origins is far more related to Orthodoxy and the Christian religion. Maybe even identical.

                • suones says:

                  It seems that the a lot of which looks like to be the Aryan religion of his Ancestors is actually demon worship.

                  Considering how sons(?) of Rus have been brainwashed into declaiming their own fathers and Great Father Perun as demons, I’m not surprised. Olga was the chief culprit[1], of course, and Vladimir the main executor, but the blood of Rus will take its toll, keep taking it.

                  Repudiation of ancestors is a central tenet of wannabe Semites[2].

                  Seems to be real Aryan religion in its origins is far more related to Orthodoxy and the Christian religion. Maybe even identical.

                  +1 for effort in trying interpretatio Iudaica, but you will never be a real Jew.

                  [1] She made a deal with Semitic agents (early Christians were literally Jews, esp the “Hero” Paul who was a Jew and a Pharisee to boot) and their Patron Demon where she sold the soul of Rus to him in exchange for revenge for her husband and temporal power. Seems like exactly the kind of deal a witch would make.

                  [2] Does not apply to real Semites, of course, because they are the actual long-nosed sons of Abraham and hence worship the long-nosed God of Abraham, have been doing it since at least Exodus. Hence Christian converts affecting more Judaism than actual Jews (Judaism being considered a “modern” “innovation” according to these heretics), and Turk Muslim converts being more Muslim than Arabs.

                • jim says:

                  Today’s Judaism is a modern innovation. It is Christian descended via Jewish concubines. It is Judaism recovered and reinvented, the way modern paganism is paganism recovered and re-invented.

                  Judaism was almost biologically extinguished with the fall of Israel, at least in the male line. Before the fall of the temple, Jews traced Jewishness in the male line. When Judaism was recovered and re-invented, they switched to tracing in the female line, because otherwise few would have qualified.

                • Miserius says:

                  @info23

                  What are you going on about? Orthodox navel-gazing and Yogi navel-gazing is essentially the same thing. They look at their navel while doing rhythmic breathing and repeating a mantra. It’s just that Orthodox make a big deal out of autohypnosis and make it seem as if it’s achieving of Beatific Vision whilst alive.

                • info23 says:

                  @suones

                  I don’t see how anything in your comment is a response to the experiences that this person had?

                  As for the so called demonization of Ancestors. Maybe you don’t realize that demons can imitate Ancestors or Angels of Light.

                  @Miserius

                  “What are you going on about? Orthodox navel-gazing and Yogi navel-gazing is essentially the same thing. They look at their navel while doing rhythmic breathing and repeating a mantra. It’s just that Orthodox make a big deal out of autohypnosis and make it seem as if it’s achieving of Beatific Vision whilst alive.”

                  If that is so then it resembles the original Aryan religion much more doesn’t it?

                  No demons like Kali for example to pollute the Glory of the Uncreated Light of God.

                • info23 says:

                  @jim

                  Judaism is a bastardization of the original religion that involved the Temple and the Sacrifices of that Temple.

                  Even Christ himself claims that the Old Testament was about him. And not whatever the Traditions of the Elders the Pharisees made up.

                  So in that sense is a continuation of that original religion of sacrifice but Christ has fulfilled that role making Ritual Cleanliness and Animal Sacrifice irrelevant.

                • jim says:

                  Quite so. The falling away that Christ denounced has been continued in today’s Judaism.

                  The Church is the new, replacement Israel. We are the heirs of the Old Testament. The Jews disinherited themselves by Jewing God, going over the fine print of the deal in a stereotypically Jewish manner.

                  Gnon was not amused.

                • jim says:

                  In his prophetic segue following the parable of the Wicked Vinedressers, Jesus ties together a bunch of previous (ambiguous) old Testament prophecies, and tells us that following his crucifixion, this is how they will be fulfilled.

                  Which implies that had the Jews accepted him, they might well have been fulfilled in a different manner.

                • info23 says:

                  @jim

                  The reason prophecies seems ambiguous before the events is precisely because God doesn’t want Men to try to fulfill the Prophecies themselves and screw up Divine Providence. Or have enough details as to make it possible to try to thwart it.

                  The Book of Daniel which predicted the succession of Empires from Babylon, Medo-Persia, Alexander the Great and his 4 Generals who carved up his Empire and the Roman Empire which succeeded them is case in point.

                • yewotm8 says:

                  With respect to the article posted by the overly Orthodox man:

                  I have had great experience and results with Western yoga and meditation without any nonsense. Obviously I tune out the instructor’s woo-woo, the talk of chakras and light and divinity and such, and focus on my material self.

                  I wonder, if the author were to go through the exact same physical motions, but did it to praise Christ (dressing up a pagan ritual as any other), would he feel so bad about it? Relaxing your nervous system and lowering muscle tension through movement and breath control is not inherently spiritual at all. Seems the old yogis did find good methods to achieve relaxation and parasympathetic nervous states, and there’s no harm in copying that.

Leave a Reply