Trump has said the coup word.

Of course, it is not really a Democrat coup until they send a bunch of guys dressed in freshly issued police uniforms and equipped with a subpoena from some judge in Hawaii and give him the perp walk without bothering with the old fashioned inconvenience of a senate supermajority impeachment. And if one coup once, chances are there will be another coup, this time without bothering with the freshly issued police uniforms and subpoena.

But it is a creeping coup. In a creeping coup coupists do bad things, get away with it, and, getting away with it, people dare not stop them when they do worse things. And so far, the Democrats have gotten away with it, which inevitably results, and is intended to result, in an escalation of those bad things.

And if he starts arresting Democrats for their numerous illegal acts, they will certainly think it is a Trump self coup – and it will be, regardless of whether Trump intends it to be or not.

The Roman Republic died when the Gracchi defied term limits, and the senate murdered them.

When Augustus attempted to revive the Republic, or pretended to attempt to revive the Republic, he was not attempting to heal a gravely ill patient, but to perform necromancy. He revived the forms of the republic, but those forms were full of imperial content, for the imperium was the only thing that could make them function.

The presidency has grown and swollen the American government, and the only thing that can make it function is if a president swallows it.

The Mueller report was a dud. Not only did it find no Trump collaboration with efforts to influence the US election, nor any obstruction of justice – the allegations of obstruction of justice are just mind reading that Trump thought about killing off the Mueller investigation, but whatever he thought about, he did not in fact obstruct it, and even if he did obstruct it, which he did not, you cannot have obstruction of justice without an underlying crime.

Further, extraordinarily, the Russian government did not attempt to influence the American election – unlike one hell of a lot of other governments, or if they did, Mueller could not find any such attempts, and is lying when he claims that he did. The people being charged are accused in the Mueller report of being Russian agents, but when he actually brought charges which a hostile lawyer might cross examine, he did not charge the offender with being an agent of the Russian government, revealing that he knew that under hostile cross examination, the charge would sink like a stone. Instead the offender is charged with incomprehensible legal technicalities under vague and sweeping laws in an unsuccessful effort to get them to rat out Trump – which they were unable to do, having no connection to Trump, and no connection to the Russian government that Mueller was willing to present in court.

Mueller has been caught lying about two of the supposed Russian agents, one of whom is in fact a Mueller agent. If one lie, all lies.

The behavior of the democrats show that they are not actually interested in the contents of the Mueller report – they failed to read the minimally redacted redacted report issued for limited non public distribution. They know it is a dud. They want the attorney general removed because he is investigating them, and are just trying to link his removal to supposed Russian intervention in US elections. They are working on a coup because the perceive Trump as working on a self coup, and Trump is working on a self coup, or perceived to be working on a self coup, because the Democrats are working on a coup.

Everyone pretending there is some substance in the Mueller report is doing a Point Deer Make Horse – including the numerous republicans going along with the pretense. Point Deer Make Horse is a classic part of a coup: if people go along with the blatant lie, this shows they will go along with the coup. So everyone who talks as if the Mueller Report was not a dud, is signaling he is on board with an anti Trump coup.

So either Trump does a self coup – takes control of the FBI and turns it on his enemies, or will be removed in a coup – which will initially only arrest him, but such arrests lead to escalating drama, which eventually result in the arrested leader and various people close to him being executed.

If Trump does a self coup he will say, and perhaps believe, he is preserving the Republic, but once struggle within the political elite goes violent, it is going to get more violent. If Trump succeeds, the general public will not see a coup, but the Democrats and the left generally will, and even if they quietly submit this time, and everyone gets into line, we will be in the situation of the Roman Republic after the Gracchi: the political elite lacks cohesion, and will no longer play by mutually agreed rules, which inevitably results in political conflicts turning violent.

The Democrats have deleted God from the house of representatives. For a nation to be one nation, people need a big daddy on top. If no longer “One nation under God”, going to need a cult of personality leader to be one nation. The state religion of progressivism cannot provide for the orderly transfer of power, so we are inevitably moving towards disorderly transfer of power.

Augustus had to be deified to make the Roman government work (steel alone did not suffice) but the trouble is that when your state religion is based on flagrant lies, it is fragile so has to be repressive.

631 Responses to “Coup”

  1. pool builder says:

    pool builder

    blog topic

  2. The Cominator says:

    I lol’d at the pic… Traddom is admirable but has Roosh forgotten that marriage in the West for men is basically putting your head in the crocodile’s mouth and that unfortunately unlike in the past you generally need to have sex with women in order to date them rather then date them in order to have sex with them.

    • Dave says:

      Like any rule book, the Bible is useless if the other side won’t play by it. You have to do what it takes to get laid, or check into a monastery and spend the rest of your days in chastity and prayer.

  3. alf says:

    To get this straight (correct me if wrong).

    The favoring in power of Shah Shoudjah-ool-Moolk happens at the turn of the 19th century, around 1800, when Europe is in turmoil because leftism took off explosively in France.

    In England, King Charles II and his Royal Society are hundred and fifty years in the past (1660 – 1685). The recent past is King George III (1727 – 1760), who slept with his aristocrats’ mistresses.

    The events involving Shah Shoudjah happened under the watch of George III (1760 – 1820), who lost the American colonies. From what I gather, George III lost the struggle for power with parliament.

    After George III comes George IV, but from hereon the monarch has become a figurehead and England cares more about faraway strangers than its own people.

  4. eternal anglo says:

    O/T, but Roosh has taken his forum in an interesting direction:

    “Casual sex and hooking up can no longer be discussed on the forum: You can no longer discuss fornication or pre-marital sexual activity.”

    I suppose it’s good Roosh has taken the Godpill, but this is hardly what winning the War of the Sexes looks like.

    • shaman says:

      >pumping and dumping young virgins is a bad idea
      >therefore, don’t talk about how EvoPsych actually applies to the modern sexual market


  5. Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

    If one lie, all lies.*

    Why do you give a free pass to phone zombies Jim?

    * My interpretation of this phrase is that if 99 truths support a final lie then those 99 truths are immaterial.

    • jim says:

      If you put a cup of wine into a barrel of sewage, you have a barrel of sewage.

      If you put a cup of sewage into a barrel of wine, you still have a barrel of sewage.

      One lie, all lies, the other ninety nine supposed truths are just harder to disprove, but there is no point in bothering to disprove them, since he can lie faster than you can investigate. He can come with one hundred new lies faster than you can examine one lie.

      • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

        I understand your interpretation. I am also giving my own.

        I am trying to work out why you argue against what seems emotionally and even logically obvious to me, and many others, which is that society, while moving downhill for some time, fell off a cliff around 2014 or 2015.

        • jim says:

          Yes, things suddenly started getting worse faster around 2014 or so.

          But things have been suddenly starting to get worse faster from time to time at ever shortening intervals.

          I would say that teenage social life falling off a cliff in 2014 was fallout from the infamous “Dear Colleague” letter in 2011, when the universities came under massive pressure to generate and punish rape accusations against white heterosexual males.

          • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

            Why do I react emotionally to a smartphone in the hands of an enemy priest the way an occupying soldier would react to an unidentified object in the hands of an unknown individual?

            Why do the enemy priests, on seeing my phys, react instantly by drawing their phones, the way an insurgent would react to a patrol by drawing their weapon?

            Is the Twitter-equipped smartphone not as effective at ending a life in a western nation as a rifle is during a conflict?

          • The Cominator says:

            2010 or so not 2014…

            But I was in Massachusetts in 2010 so maybe happened there a little faster.

          • vxxc says:

            2014: Bundy Ranchers rebellion, Feds fail to crush white uprising.

            *War on cops agitprop /Ferguson
            * Border Patrol stops enforcing border, becomes migrant hostel.
            *Dec 1, 2014; Obama WH Ferguson review meeting. After which Sharpton announced they have marching orders. BLM/Left begins to scream Dead Cops Now.
            *Dec 20,2014.1300: NYPD Liu/Ramos gunned down.
            *Dec 30.2014.1500: NYPD turns backs on DeBlasio in hospital.
            This was the key moment- Police Power deserted the Left.
            War on cops shooting war begins, lasts 18 mos. stops just before DNC convention.

            2014 was the key year.

        • shaman says:

          2011-2015 was when the Cathedral’s worldview officially crystallized around blue haired Tumblr SJWism clad in academic garb (aka “identity politics” and, not any less ideologically significant, victimology). Before that, it was obvious that Cthulhu would swim left, but not entirely obvious what “left” necessarily entails. The left’s inner dialogue went:

          “Okay, so are we doing a full on Hammer and Sickle Revolution against the wolves of Wall Street? Must we all go strictly eco-greeno-enviro-vegan and worship Gaia, now? Hey, shouldn’t we proceed to legalize polyamorous marriage and normalize the cuckold lifestyle, now that World Wars Gay and Trans are finally over with? No, actually, while these issues undoubtedly require our heroic solidarity, we’re just gonna go ahead and kill all white heterosexual males, who are victimizing us all by having penises.”

          It is said that fringe movements never stay fringe for long: they either disappear completely, or go mainstream. Holiness spirals being what they are, it was inevitable that SJWism would not disappear, but would occupy Harvard, the inner sanctum of the Cathedral, and that the rest of the million-tentacled beast would follow suit. What started as edgy rebelliousness during Dubya back in 2006 could only grow into a fully fledged predominant weltanschauung by Soetoro’s 2014. Gen Z was born just in time to watch the world burn.

          • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

            The exact date that Russia entered the war in earnest was 27 July 2015 or within a week or so of this. My intuitive assessment of when the local war became hot, made at the time but not knowing about the Russian involvement, was made within a week of this date.

            In my opinion, the enemy, realising that he would not be able to continue business as usual against a fallen nation that had once again risen, declared war on his own people, and transmitted that declaration to his soldiers and priests through the numerous channels he controlled. I do not believe that these agents have ever been fully deactivated since.


      • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

        Here is some empirical evidence to back up my position. I am assuming (yes I know) that the researchers are somewhat independent of the Cathedral and somewhat competent, and that their methodology did not change over the survey period.

  6. vxxc says:

    Yeah it must be…

    Thing is if they keep reading long enough…
    Its worked before

  7. Neurotoxin says:

    Eli wrote,

    You don’t have to have a Leftist Singularity.

    Actually you do, starting from where we are now: The game theory of holiness spirals is ineluctable at this point. It cannot be avoided.

    For there to be even a chance of stopping it, the vast majority of leftists would have to suddenly exhibit
    (1) a concern for telling the truth,
    (2) an indifference to what is socially approved among their fellow leftists,
    (3) the intelligence and foresight to see where the current trajectory is taking us, and
    (4) the patience and self-control to refrain from engaging in holiness signalling even when such behavior is in their immediate interest.

    You might as well expect them to flex their leg muscles really hard and jump to the moon.

    There is no chance that the spiral will stop by itself.

    • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

      There is no chance that the spiral will stop by itself.

      True, but I believe we can use it as a weapon against them. Their holiness is false, a simple con to delude themselves and others. Ours is true, in that reaction will indeed build a beautiful world, in as much as it is possible. There are a lot of progressives out there who have grown disillusioned with the horrors of progressivism. By showing them the truth we can draw them to our side.

      • jim says:

        You know, and I know, that caring deeply about people you cannot find a map is an extremely cheap virtue signal. But we are not really getting this message across – that warmists and suchlike tend to be very bad people, because cheap virtue signaling is actually an inverse indication of virtue.

        • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

          We will never convert such people. Instead we can draw away those who are on the fence and make the zealots look ridiculous.

      • Neurotoxin says:

        I believe we can use it as a weapon against them.

        Certainly; in fact they’re already using it as a weapon against themselves, as e.g. lesbian feminists and transvestites fight over who is more oppressed, etc.

        As Jim has noted, the holiness spiral is going to defeat its participants eventually. The interesting question is what happens to the rest of western civilization.

  8. vxxc says:

    To wait for Collapse to form associations of men aka Honor Matrixes is simply delusional. BTW you can form food banks be volunteer FF etc now.

    Collapse is Syria. Srsly this is simple laziness of the easily cowed.

    To wait for collapse aka Coming of Dark Jesus to form families ROFL.

    No risk, no voice, no woman, no kids, no respect…

    Grow up.

    • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

      Chill dude, I’m hitting these thots as hard as I can!

      • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

        My other comment got moderated so I’ll outline the challenges. There is nobody in real life who is socially competent. I repeat: Nobody. This means that I have to go back into the matrix and metaphorically hit them until they emerge. This wastes time and energy that I could be using on, let’s say, building infrastructure or practising my survival skills or mixing with a food production group. I have no idea why Jim loves smartphones so much and until I work this out I will not be able to fully support his religion.

      • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

        Another day, another roll call of brain dead thots. There is no level of stupidity I can sink to that I cannot find a woman who is already there.

  9. Vxxc says:

    You’re debating the gender of angels here, I thought we were discussing an abortive coup?

  10. Friendly Fred says:

    Zman’s obsessed with someone named “Ben Shapiro”. He also ignores the interesting part of the Shakespeare-theory that he dismisses today — the female-genius aspect of it, which derives its plausibility from the way in which the writer morphs all thoughts into expressions of personal peculiarity.

    I like Zman, but I feel bad for him because he seems to be stuck in an almost airtight mental box.

    • jim says:

      The proposition that Shakespeare, Homer, Beethoven, Hannibal, Augustine, et cetera were female, trans, gay, black or member of whatever group whose status needs to be raised is transparently nuts.

      • Friendly Fred says:

        I don’t care about that, of course. Please ignore present-day politics for now, Jim — think about the morphing of all thoughts into expressions of personal peculiarity that one finds in Shakespeare-plays, as opposed to the morphing of all personal peculiarities into expressions of thoughts that one finds in Spenser’s FAERIE QUEENE. Spenser is a typically masculine writer; “Shakespeare” is typically feminine, although not necessarily female.

        It’s not an accident that Shakespeare became the official Genius of mid-20th Century “humanities” programs, while Spenser was relegated to the status of footnote.

        • Frederick Algernon says:

          It is an interesting thought, but largely pointless IMO. Men are better at being men than women. Men are better at being women than women. Look at Bruce Jenner.

          • Alrenous says:

            Most women are better at being women than most men would be. But like the best everything are men, all the best women are men.

  11. Mister Grumpus says:

    Don also said the “military industrial complex” word on Fox News, of all places.

    “Don’t kid yourself. You do have a military industrial complex. They do like war.”

  12. Vxxc says:

    In what always swims Right the swimmers get laid, get rich, get the corner office and the G_N is HR.

    And believe me the “Alphas” take care of the rest of the pack.
    Their lives depend on it.

    Yes ah it requires ah WORK and RISK and will at times appear TOO HARD and all those other disqualifiers and barriers. But the payoffs are survival, pussy and riches, and the right to form families.
    No one fux with Strong Men who weather Hard Times families.
    The other strong men won’t allow it.
    Directly against our interested.

    Being worthy means showing up for work.

    • Contaminated NEET says:

      >Being worthy means showing up for work.
      I show up for work every god-forsaken day of my god-forsaken life. This is demonstrably untrue.

      >Not that kind of work, I mean like, HARD WORK and RISK to found a FAMILY and CREATE wealth and power!
      Yeah, fuck you and your meaninglessly vague self-help power-of-positive-thinking garbage.

      You’re like those Leftists who go on and on about PUTTING IN THE WORK and WORKING their ASSES OFF to overcome their own privilege and EDUCATE themselves to be tolerant enlightened good and NOT SHITTY people. It’s never clear what exactly all this WORK actually involves nor when or how it actually pays off with forgiveness for the original sin of Whiteness (obviously because it never does).

      • Koanic says:

        If you’re not appreciated where you are, go somewhere else. Don’t feed the system that enslaves you.

      • vxxc says:

        Mr. Neet,

        Do read again; I said what always swims Right- an oblique reference to War.
        Since you need it spelt out; War always swims Right.
        That’s nearly Shibboleth on RW blogs.

        “In what always swims Right the swimmers get laid, get rich, get the corner office and the G_N is HR.

        More; The Gun is HR.

        And believe me the “Alphas” take care of the rest of the pack.
        Their lives depend on it.”

        I mean in a band of warriors everyone takes care of each other.
        We even help each other get laid (mostly) when young and later protect each others families. To further expound about the payoffs; the big payoff that we can’t secure without being feared (violence) is the right to form families safely. However I mentioned pussy as it seems to be a motivator around here and of course children requires fucking, etc.

        We will never regain the right to form families safely without redeemkngbit in blood- nor should we. Not even Trump could do so.

        I hope my self help advice is less vague now.
        Oh and its not “self help” – its….



        Holy fuck its painted on fucking caves in France for 35000 years.

        And wouldn’t it be nice if all the work paid off in getting the world we shamefully let slip away back ?

        • The Cominator says:


          Organize into POTENTIALLY dangerous bodies of men… being dangerous short term will get you murdered by the Feds.

          • Vxxc says:

            Potentially accepted.

            A welcome corrective Sir.

            Mind you one can organize logistics as food banks and accomplish the same thing. Whats lacking is organization.
            Danger is provided by nature.

            • The Cominator says:

              Yes the corrective is needed. But we may avoid a long civil war yet… I think the left will be destroyed for real in Trump’s 2nd term… the frustrations of the 1st two years that shills and blackpillers have made so much of were mostly Sessions fault. Things are going smoothly with Barr in… and I can sense the real despair and terror of shitlibs.

              Trump 2020 – Fire and Blood*

              * 8×04 and 8×05 never happened and as much as it may be good propaganda for a female ruler to morph for no reason into a psychotic commie SJW it didn’t make sense. Cersei Lannister was the Hillary Clinton of Westeros. Dany was always based until the bad writing of the last two episodes.

              • jim says:

                It is often said that Trump has not got it in him to make himself holy emperor Trump, and that is true. But times make the man.

                Right now he is building a wall by state of emergency powers, investigating the crimes of the Democrats, and ordering his people to refuse subpoenas.

                This is a creeping countercoup in response to a creeping coup.

                These things always escalate, even if no one wants or intends that they escalate, so a creeping coup becomes an outright coup, as Democrats attempt to give Trump the perp walk without bothering with a supermajority in the senate, and a creeping countercoup becomes an outright countercoup, as he drains the swamp to prison.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I think the Cathedral/Ruling class will in desperation try to launch organized street violence but have no chance against the military and it will end up consolidating Trump’s power in a way he perhaps didn’t intend and will allow us to physically remove a lot of leftists…

                  Trump 2020 – Fire and Blood…

                • vxxc says:

                  Yeah let the military get it..

                  Works – if you’re in the military.
                  In war non military are bugs on our windshield.
                  Sorry whoever you were.

                  Guys Shut up, keep moving. Don’t talk about it, never happened. If anyone cares (they don’t).

                  You’re really some dense, dumb shits to knowingly contemplate Civil War and remain passive.
                  That’s ok.
                  People like me can deal with survivors.
                  They’re educated.

              • jim says:

                The Mother of Dragons’ character arc was clearly always intended to wind up as tyrant intent on saving the world through fire and blood. Trouble was that the transition came too fast without character development, and that the transition was written badly. It was merely announced, rather than genuinely shown. Dragons are napalm bombers. You give a character napalm bombers, you are planning to have her target women and children.

                What we got was a highlights reel from the planned story, instead of the planned story.

                • The Cominator says:

                  A better story would have ended up with her marrying Stannis and they established an absolute post bastard feudalism absolute style monarchy after defeating the undead and Dany has that selfish c*** Sansa who ended up as queen burned (another thing I hate about the ending is that Sansa survived) for disloyalty and treason. Stannis being in charge of course and Dany loyally assisting him with her dragons…

                  They also made her some kind of communist utopian in her final conversation and while I like that her sudden leftist utopianism was portrayed as evil… to the extent Dany ever had any utopian sentiments she wised up about them when she decided to reopen the gladitorial games in Slavers Bay. So while I know we disagree on abolitionism and maybe you see Dany’s abolitionism as evil (and it was indeed messily implemented and led to other evils) she was no utopian.

                  There was just no good way to write the transition of Dany to the mad queen because it would have taken her years to get there and it should have been dropped… lacking any male advisors she still trusted she might have gone off the rails quicker then that (as women in power without males blessing their work tend to do) but not so quickly she suddenly decide to burn a city for the lulz.

                  Trauma over losing people wouldn’t do it because her childhood was generally supposed to consist of frequent random beatings and possibly frequently being sodomized by Viserys and shes lost everything a couple of times in the show… if that could drive her mad she would have been batshit already. But Dany was if anything unrealistically sane and clearheaded as far as women go.

                • jim says:

                  Transition the Mother of Dragons to an evil tyrant was totally realistic and reasonable. It was baked into the cake in Slavers Bay. Just the transition was badly written and done as a highlights reel instead of a study of the corrupting effects of power. You could see the way the wind blew when she first took power in Slaver’s Bay.

                • The Cominator says:

                  It may have been “foreshadowed” but it was out of character, I think they just couldn’t have the person responsible for the downfall of Hillary Clinton Lannister come off looking too good…

                  Her problem in slavers bay was that she was too humane to people who were always going to be long term implacable enemies, should have been more Octavian and less Julius Caesar. Because the Yunkai nobles were in the relatively benign slaving business of making and selling whores (Danerys having been subjected to something similar herself and having fond memories of it did not think they were on the same level as the boy torturers of Astapor) they were all spared for instance… but it was a mistake they plotted against her.

                • jim says:

                  It was out of character, because they skipped over her character arc. But the person who kills people in order to free slaves she does not know is going to wind up burning cities. Instant tyranny was indeed out of character, but creeping tyranny would have been entirely in character.

                  They needed to give her motives to do bad deeds – “We have to move our troops elsewhere, and we don’t want this obviously hostile city to fall back into the hands of our enemies, so we burn it and drive out the people”, and then lesser motives to do worse deeds.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The question is why the Cathedral deliberately ruined her character in a way that outraged the shows fanbase and for what political reasons and why it matters (and yes I think it does)…

                  I mean surely as a strong wahmin and the most genuinely popular strong wahmin character that has probably ever existed they should like her right.

                  But on closer examination I think she was not in line with the kind of social engineering they want and I’ll tell you why.

                  We all know white male patriarchs in modern media have to generally be portrayed as buffoons at best and if not buffoons something sinister.

                  Popular female characters have to be at heart selfish cunts or annoying sanctimonious busybodies (they have a hard time making the latter popular).

                  Genuinely sweet girls are sometimes allowed but they have to end up victims who nothing works out for.

                  Danerys as a girl is excessively obedient and dutiful with her older brother despite being badly mistreated. And her only real ambition is to be a happy tradwife with a stable nest and children somewhere. Shes not super interested in becoming queen (despite being told she should be interested).

                  Obedient and eager to please as a wife to a barbarian (who she begged not to marry but obeyed and married anyway without resisting).

                  Day to day ruled closely at all times consulting with male advisors (unlike Cersei or Sansa aka future Cersei) and though she occasionally made decisions apart from them (the Astapor bait and switch and sack)

                  She might have had very briefly had leftist utopian ideas in governing slavers bay (in which in the books I think she is around 13 years old) but very quickly rolls most of it back. While like Pol Pot she might have seemed saintly to everyone who met her she did not double down on leftism when it became clear it wasn’t helping (though maintaining the ban on outright slavery). The heart of gold was genuine and was not a leftist fanatic…

                  She was to always be the eventual downfall of Cersei (aka Hillary Clinton) and the undead bugmen (though I think Stannis should have been spared and allied with her). And she compromised her own interest to do both because far from being obsessed with the Iron Throne she is constantly begged by anti-Lannister exiles for years to go in and invade though she is actually less then eager to do it… and almost immediately diverts from the invasion to go fight the bugmen.

                  She was too selfless and overwhelmingly positive a heroine to fit the feminist propaganda model they had to ruin her because she was too popular and at least some women (who are easily influenced by media and fads) would adopt her as there goto heroine and it would lessen their inclination to be entirely selfish feminist cunts… and even worse it could snowball over time. Making her some sort of insane commie in her last conversation was just a way of hiding the motive for it.

                  Maybe I’m thinking too much into it but I don’t think so… ruining Danerys seemed a lot like ruining Star Wars to me. Political and deliberate.

                • jim says:

                  Maybe both theories are correct. She was always intended to turn into a commie tyrant, but they did not have time to show a psychologically and socially plausible path to her becoming a commie tyrant. But they decided to stick with the commie tyrant outcome anyway for political reasons, when they should have ditched it for lack of time.

              • Alrenous says:

                always based

                >freed the slaves


                • The Cominator says:

                  Slave based economies suck even if it seems like a solution to some individuals. Individuals who can’t function in the free market should be sterilized. So I’m fine in principle with what she did and also there was political expediency in her creating a 5th column behind the enemies lines anyway. If I were a ruthless conqueror trying to conquer a place called Slaver’s Bay I for completely non-altruistic reasons would say I intend to free the slaves.

                  If it comes to civil war we cannot kill all the shitlib young women though so for them a lifetime non-hereditary slavery (one where they are limited in terms of jobs) is probably the best way.

                • Alrenous says:


                • shaman says:

                  Maybe I should take a page off peppermint and do obscurantism, copying his writing style and even his motifs while at it, albeit sans his underlying motivation. Here goes:

                  If I were a ruthless conqueror trying to conquer a place called Slaver’s Bay I for completely non-altruistic reasons would say I intend to free the slaves.

                  hey numbnutz, the (((20th century))) was when the central intelligence agency fully became the puritan intelligence agency, prior to christcuck and boomerkike memetic hegemony we could still informally possess all the dakimakura the muds have to offer. WOTAN willing we’ll make the PIA CIA again, and you’ll strain hard to find (((pathological altruism))) among Aryans

                • kawaii_kike says:

                  >”Individuals who can’t function in the free market should be sterilized”

                  If they can’t function in the free market then that means that they’re just taking up space by being useless. Sterilizing them prevents future problems but does nothing to solve the current problem of them being useless. Slavery can provide someone with a sense of purpose rather than toiling away with no sense of purpose. Slavery can be humane.

                  And of course we can kill all the shitlib women. There will be enough women to go around when the Restoration comes.

                  I’m not sure what specifically Alrenous is facepalming at.

                • The Cominator says:

                  It creates externalities for free workers though the way mass immigration does.

                • kawaii_kike says:

                  Just make the slaves do busy work then, like smashing rocks in a quarry. Or make them compete for entertainment.

                • Alrenous says:

                  In an industrialized economy, having a slave is normally more expensive than doing it yourself. Debatably, this is ~always true.* Meanwhile, sterilization provokes less resistance (irrationally) and is thus cheaper than slavery.

                  *There’s a wide continuum between Dixie-style slavery and emancipation. Lifelong, hereditary slavery is a far outlier. Given historical economic conditions, many, perhaps most slaves would have lived the same life if their employment had been voluntary, meaning the slave laws were irrelevant. Islamic slave raiders notwithstanding. Indeed this was close to true even of Dixie’s slaves, as after being ‘freed’ they had to turn to sharecropping, which was slavery except more expensive for everyone involved.

    • Vxxc says:


      What if I said: Men organizing is The Civilizing Principle.
      The Daemon, the Kernal of Civilization.

      Men organizing is the civilizing principle.
      The Principal essence of Civilization.

      • Koanic says:

        A meaningful Ku Klux Klan has been illegal for quite some time. Writing ORGANIZE in all caps doesn’t change that. Tough to ORGANIZE when even a patriarchal nuclear family is illegal.

        The collapse will gradually change this, but I don’t like to do things by halves. The balance of power between bureaucratic institution and honorable tribe is what it is. I accept that, and use technology to change the odds.

        LaFond has written a guide to forming a neighborhood watch. The kind of thing that got Zimmerman made an honorary white. Hard to form a tribe when all the white rabbits keep running. Hard to stop the running when the state forces them to be neutered prey.

        He winds up with a collection of trusted individuals, known from work and the boxing gym. Just fellow atomized wanderers being ground down by the system.

        ORGANIZE. In a dishonor matrix like that, who are you going to trust? Patriarchal honor is founded on the promise of David to Jonathan: to preserve his line after him. No line, no honor, no brother, no tribe, no point.

        Should’ve drawn the line and fought long ago. Once you’ve lost family integrity, you’ve lost everything. As Moses learned, turning slaves into men requires 7 miracles, 40 years in the desert, and a civil war.

        • jim says:

          > LaFond has written a guide to forming a neighborhood watch. The kind of thing that got Zimmerman made an honorary white.

          Anyone who was raised by a white man, upholds order, is culturally white, and can put one shot directly through the heart of an assailant while his head is being pounded on the concrete and blood is running in his eyes is indeed white.

          Zimmerman was made an honorary white by those who intended to destroy him for defending order because he acted white. They thought they were condemning him for the crimes of which they accused him, but they were rather acknowledging his virtues.

          • Koanic says:

            US mestizos are good at ethnically cleansing blacks. Doing the jobs Americans won’t do!

          • vxxc says:

            Works for me.

            Honorary white by proof of deed.

            Koanic as far as Rabbits ignore them and all just go to the local gun club. Listen and wait, shoot.
            They’ll find you.

            According to some of you we’re already in prison.
            Well join or form a gang.

            Honor/Dishonor matrix my ass.
            Put the work in, stop with the theory.
            And yes collapse is the RW Rapture Jesus will get it jez sitback and get popcorn (Jesus is Mestizo after all I guess) …

            And who’s the backup to Collapse 2d coming ?

            Mom bring me a hot pocket and can you save WestCiv too please?
            Thanks Mom, I mean Gnon…

            • Koanic says:

              Concrete advice re gun ranges is sound. Work ethic criticism is irrelevant to me personally. Martial arts with real sparring is another good venue. And hunting.

              • vxxc says:

                I have been unintentionally obscure and apologize.

                I don’t mean work.

                I mean war. Show up for war.
                Not work ethic literally but war ethic- thats the mens work I mean. Thats hard, its hard, dirty, dangerous.

                I’m trying not to frighten off the Fedophobic, simultaneously explaining that like every other job you must show up.

                Literally: we are at the start of civil war.
                The threshold of a campaign of political killing was crossed by BLMs terror campaign against the police 2014-16.
                This was done to serve the American Left and with political topcover (DOJ Civil Rights Division under Holder) and does constitute war. Quite meets the definition.
                It is folly to remain passive – organize to fight or execute flight. It is delusional to wait for “Collapse” (TM) to organize and form alliances (gangs) in particular as others do not.
                If you weren’t interested in politics or war you wouldn’t be on this page. This post is titled “Coup”.
                So decide. Fight or flight.

                At the same time its folly or suicidal sacrifice to act before its really going – so organize. Wait, its quite coming.

                >For the Feds I remain loyal to the Constitution as it is my oath and there is no replacement, something some of you perhaps have not considered.<

                • Vxxc says:

                  Not knocking you koanic fyi.

                  The gun club – getting a man who has none to buy a gun is the most radicalizing breakthrough the RW has comes from The American Sun blog. They’re correct.

                  If you hang out at a sporting club long enough their politics (guess) will reveal itself.

                • jim says:

                  The constitution has been radically re-interpreted. We will re-interpret it again, as Augustus did.

                  Federalism is correct – running a vast state as unitary entity runs into the usual problems with scale. Centralism killed the King of France. It is very noticeable that projects become more expensive and are done less well the further away the people writing the cheques are. Elections are OK provided you have elite franchise – the more restrictive literacy tests tested not merely ability to read and write, but IQ, ability to communicate and ability to understand, excluded roughly everyone below 105-110 – which implies that back in those days the elite was mighty smart, as is also indicated by their entertainments and their personal letters. Our elite enjoys entertainments characteristic of the masses, and their writing style indicates midwits, with the older top elite being 120s, surrounded by 110s who would have found the old voter literacy tests challenging, and the younger top elite contains many people who would certain have failed the old voter literacy tests, as for example the woman who gave the reply to Trump’s State of the Union speech. Obama would have found the test challenging, but passed.

                  But we are too decadent and disunited for democracy to work, though it would fail less miserably with smart voters. The momentum of history is that we are likely to wind up with a Stalin or Napoleon, at best an Augustus, who allows voting to continue, but makes it even more ineffectual and irrelevant than it already is.

  13. Kgaard says:

    Alf and Jim … All right … I am convinced re your arguments against the category of sigma.

    • Friendly Fred says:

      My sense of how Mick Jaggers (class clowns) succeed is that it seems to women as though having sex with such men would be just a sort of fooling around and diverting episode (equivalent to playing a game of volleyball or watching a TV show), so that it wouldn’t really matter or count — it would just be insignificant fun and no one could possibly be very concerned about it.

      • jim says:


        They succeed because everyone is paying attention to such people, and to crude sense of status that women have, this looks like high status.

        • Koanic says:

          Additionally, entertainer is a anthropological tribal role that indicates high sociosexual status. It is either performed by the tribe’s pack, or by outsiders invited by the tribe’s pack. Sometimes it is explicitly courtship.

          As atomization has destroyed tribal territorial control, and media has divorced entertainment from geography, this signal is now false, but women continue to believe it.

          • pdimov says:

            It’s much simpler than that. Alpha – leader. Beta – follower. (Omega – outcast.) Has followers -> alpha.

        • Friendly Fred says:

          But on the street I often see puny-looking high school and middle school aged class-clownish boys wrestling with and playfully tormenting girls — the kind of thing you couldn’t imagine happening with leader-ish-looking power-projecting boys.

          • jim says:

            I think your status perceptions are whacked. Status is a status does. Conformity to authority in boys is accurately perceived by girls as low status.

            • Friendly Fred says:

              I didn’t say anything about status (although I’m sure that my perceptions of pretty much everything are indeed “whacked.”) My suggestion is that on the one hand women want to belong to men whom they perceive to be leaders or potential leaders of men, while on the other hand they want to have what they take to be innocuous fun with class clowns.

              “Status” just doesn’t seem to be a category applicable to a lot of the slick sloppy flippy floppy tricky kicky small men of the Mick Jagger / Iggy Pop that women like to have fun with regardless of whether they become famous — I see this all over New York City and I saw it all through my grade school years and in college too. Mick Jagger and Iggy Pop probably because famous in large part because they were so effectively class-clowny and girl-loved for it, rather than becoming girl-loved because they were already famous.

              • jim says:

                Mick Jagger is perceived as innocuous?

                This is on par with claiming that Shakespeare, Homer and Milton write like black women, and therefore must have been black and female.

                That is definitely not how women see these guys. (And not how Shakespeare, Homer and Milton write either.)

                You will notice the “clowning” that you are seeing small boys do to pubescent girls largely consists of beating them up. Pretty sure that is not the way to be perceived as innocuous, silly and harmless.

                Rather, the problem is that women are responsive to indications of status that were more meaningful when we looked like apes.

                • Friendly Fred says:

                  Where did “black” come from?

                  Milton is a masculine writer; “Homer” as well as “Shakespeare” are feminine. (Dickens is masculine, Dostoevsky feminine.)

                  Mick Jagger is obviously a silly harmless dancing prancing monkey-man (consider the expressions of the Hells Angels watching his antics at the Altamont Festival in Gimme Shelter) — and very clever, and writes great lyrics, and I love the Stones.

                  The girls and boys shove each other around — of course the girls careen further, which they enjoy — and both girls and boys giggle a lot.

                  By the way, I absolutely regard you as a Leader of Men, Jim, and take it for granted that you’re a Leader of Men because of your extraordinary intelligence and creativity as well as because of your social competence. (I think that you might be annoyed at me because you suspect that I attribute your success with women to your Mick Jaggerishness as opposed to your Attila the Hunnishness, so I wish to make it clear that I take you to be an Attila the Hun with a Mick Jagger side-superpower, deployable when necessary. I suspect that the women you’ve cared most about were attracted to your Attila the Hun core, while those whose company you merely enjoyed for a while were attracted to your Mick Jagger side-superpower.)

                • jim says:

                  > Mick Jagger is obviously a silly harmless dancing prancing monkey-man

                  That is obvious to you and me, but it is not obvious to women. He is a dancing monkey, and so am I, and he is dancing the big tough dangerous guy which you and I are inclined to doubt that he is.

                  I doubt that Mr Rodgers of “Mr Rodgers Neighborhood” scores. They are both dancing monkeys, but one dance scores, one dance does not score.

                  And the proposition that “X is a feminine writer” has always seemed nuts to me. I read women authors and male authors, and the women write differently – their men are women. Women lack insight into male nature and this shows in the characters that they write. Also women find alpha males interesting irrespective of whether they are actually doing anything particularly interesting, so tend to spend far too much coverage on alpha males just living boring alpha male lives.

                  If a woman is writing the story, there will be a lot of female characters, and females talking to females, even if she gives them male names and tells us they are men. The story written by a woman is about a woman hanging out with alpha males, even if she calls the protagonist a man.

                  Which is not to say that women are bad writers – a lot of female authors are pretty good. But just as any normal man is stronger than any woman, with near zero overlap, there are areas were every female author is different from every male author, and resembles every other female writer in that characteristic.

                • shaman says:

                  Where did “black” come from?

                  Don’t you know, brutha? They wuz kangs n’ sheeeit. Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad mup da doo didda po mo gub bidda cof bin dub ho BLAQQ MAN.

                • Neurotoxin says:

                  women find alpha males interesting irrespective of whether they are actually doing anything particularly interesting, so tend to spend far too much coverage on alpha males just living boring alpha male lives.

                  Quite. Including
                  alpha males planning a birthday party (WTF?) or one alpha literally just saying hello to another.

                  Based on one female-authored novel, chicks find this drool-inducingly fascinating.


                • The Cominator says:

                  Women don’t find the mundane details fascinating in itself. They are looking for clues into who the alpha male is having sex with or wants to have sex with.

              • Neurotoxin says:

                Women don’t find the mundane details fascinating in itself. They are looking for clues into who the alpha male is having sex with or wants to have sex with.

                I doubt it’s even that. It’s more like “Look! Alpha males!!!”

                Of course, men have the same reaction to hot chicks. But men don’t write novels in which entire chapters are basically “You should have seen this chick’s rack!”

                • Not Tom says:

                  Do they? Without a doubt, men like to see hot women. But generally I think we like to see women doing feminine things. Men being excited by Action Girls like Lara Croft and Wonder Woman is a recent phenomenon. Maybe that’s because it requires high-fidelity visual media like TV and video games to be effective, but capeshit was actually pretty fringe until maybe 10 years ago, and before that, I find no evidence that any substantial group of men were excited by hot women doing un-feminine things in the same way that nearly every woman is excited by alpha males doing un-masculine things.

                  Even blue-pilled men today are, on the whole, a lot less deluded about this. Aside from the same idiots who used to claim to read Playboy for the articles, we all know it’s mindless entertainment with eye candy, not serious and sophisticated storytelling.

                • Neurotoxin says:

                  I find no evidence that any substantial group of men were excited by hot women doing un-feminine things in the same way that nearly every woman is excited by alpha males doing un-masculine things.

                  I suspect that serious alphas – in the novel I referred to above it was Kings and Princes – are so rare that their just existing is attention-grabbing to women.

  14. Friendly Fred says:

    What’s the best way to ensure that the abilities of those men (the great majority?) who aren’t good at hustling and looking around and making connections won’t go to waste in a rapidly-techno-evolving social landscape?

    By “abilities” I don’t mean anything necessarily more impressive than competence at some range of technical tasks.

    In the comments to the last essay I ruefully noted the advantages of a feudal-looking patronage system — the patron could assess the young guy and direct him to an appropriate workshop. But the establishment of a patronage system would be a distressing break with the Anglo-American past and would have a humiliating feel to it for a lot of people who think of themselves as “free” in the ordinary Anglo-American sense.

    The doing-what-your-father-did (farmer, baker, shoemaker) solution seems great to me, but it assumes technological stasis.

    So what alternative is there to (1) wasted lives; (2) doing-what-your-father-did; (3) patronage? Or, if patronage is the best way to go, how might a patronage-system be set up in a way that doesn’t violate Anglo-American dignity?

    • vxxc says:

      Best way to get any of these ideas a fair hearing never mind implemented is to pursue power. The Old way.
      The RW way.
      What always swims Right?


    • Friendly Fred says:

      A vague thought — a big company-building would have lots of different rooms in which people are doing different kinds of things: book-keeping, making the product, making marketing-materials, trying to sell the product. So, why can’t a 16 year old go to the Work-Assigner and have a lengthy chat with him — and then the Work-Assigner sends him to what seems to be the most appropriate place? (As opposed to at least 8 more years of credentials-accumulation and very very specifically focused applications involving lots of lengthy supplementary procedures including a job search involving use of complicated job search websites and job search agencies?) And the same for an 18 or 24 or 55 year old — just go and talk to the company Work-Assigner?

      Maybe if free association and free dissociation were permitted, so that companies could hire or not hire as they pleased, all of these credentials-accumulation-processes and complex focused application-procedures would be unnecessary and would be discarded, and something like what I’m suggesting would be possible.

      It wouldn’t be a patronage system, because there wouldn’t be a single guy to whom you have to go for any work anywhere (a guy who operates above the level of any of the companies to which he might send you); rather, each company would have its own Work-Assigner and you’d choose which company to go to.

      • Dave says:

        You still have the problem that employers won’t treat their employees like assets if they don’t own them in some way. “We’re all in this together but I can quit any time I see a better opportunity” just doesn’t cut it.

  15. sheman says:

    Shaman wrote, re Koanic

    ‘Here’s your history: in your ill-conceived quest to prove how “above it all” you are, you have alienated a dozen or so people who might have been sympathetic to you, initially. I am one of those people, and unlike those who instantly crap their pants when a sad-sack like you says, “My IQ is THIS high,” I responded by calling you a pudding-brained dipshit right then and there.’

    Gamma rejected by sigma. Gamma will never get over it. Sigma still here posting, gamma rages, declares his secret King victories, so many of them, all in his own tiny mind.

    Don’t be a gamma, be a Simga, ZFG.

    • shaman says:

      Congratulations. You took the bait:

      Me: oh no, I’m so upset about this guy’s arrogance.

      Dimwit: muh VD’s Greek Alphabet socio-sexual hierarchy.

      It is ridiculous how the 110-120 IQ crowd has non-ironically embraced VD’s autistic classification of personality types, and genuinely considers it to be a valuable means of analyzing their interlocutors.

      “You are a gamma!” “No, I’m obviously a sigma!” “Pffft, everyone knows that we’re all epsilons over here.” “Nah, that’s just lambda projection.” “You’ll never guess what I am: a delta.” And so on and so forth.

      It is meaningless gibberish, and it’s incredibly easy to get the dimwits to expose themselves (e.g., by playing into their preconceived expectations) using their own half-baked analytic prowess against them; a counter-goonlord ju-jitsu, if you will.

      Thanks for playing.

      • sheman says:

        Makes no difference whether we use VD’s classifications or not.

        ‘I am one of those people’

        Yes, you really are.

        He hurt your feelz, and you will never ever forget.

        Good chance everyone here knows it too.

        • shaman says:

          Makes no difference whether we use VD’s classifications or not.

          And yet, strangely enough, you used them precisely.

          He hurt your feelz

          How so? Nigga, please. He has insulted a bunch of people, including me, and now has been insulted by a bunch of people, including by me. The notion that anyone takes this tit-for-tat, piss-contest game seriously is absurd. Move on, she-boy.

          • sheman says:

            Most people insulted by Koanic don’t write poems about him, as they don’t really care, but you’ve carried a grudge/torch for him for years.

            Yes, try to move on, hopefully you can do so.

            • shaman says:

              don’t write poems about him

              You know full-well that the list of people who received the legendary “Mirror Treatment” (including peoms, parodies, etc.) is long enough. People encourage it, because they enjoy it.

              carried a grudge/torch for him for years.

              Lol, don’t flatter him. I only noticed him a few months ago. What motivates you to resurrect this beef, anyway? Still upset about having a precious e-daddy brutally ridiculed? Put some ice on it, it relieves the butthurt.

              • sheman says:

                ‘you have alienated a dozen or so people who might have been sympathetic to you, initially. I am one of those people’

                You wrote the words above. At least be man enough to admit you liked him, he didn’t like you (presumably because you’re so stupid), and you were upset enough to show it in this thread, to zero effect.

                Turn that mirror on yourself.

                • shaman says:


                • sheman says:

                  Gamma tell.

                • shaman says:

                  Let’s test something…

                • sheman says:

                  I know who you are by this ‘test’, not the first time you’ve used it is it.

                  Explains everything on this thread.

                • shaman says:


                  I know who you are by this ‘test’, not the first time you’ve used it is it.


                  I tried embedding a certain image, but that didn’t work.

                • shaman says:

                  I know who you are by this ‘test’, not the first time you’ve used it is it.


                  I tried embedding a certain image, but that didn’t work.

                • jim says:

                  Irritatingly, WordPress suppresses images in comments.

                  You can however link to an image like this
                  <a href=”” rel=”noopener” target=”_blank”>link to an image like this</a>

      • Samuel Skinner says:

        It isn’t really complicated.

        Alpha- gets laid
        Beta- not so much
        Gamma- people who repel men and women
        Sigma- a trap to smoke out gammas

        • shaman says:

          Seems to me that, as a result of VD’s malevolent goonery, people now mix up sexual classification categories and personality classification categories. These are distinct classifications, and using them interchangeably leads to unnecessary confusion.

          The sexual categories, as used by Roissy, are alpha (gets laid a lot with hot women), beta (gets laid occasionally with 5/10s), and omega (incel). Even that classification is inferior to the binary Chad-Virgin spectrum, because you really just need a positive ideal to strive towards, and a negative counter-ideal to seek to avoid being.

          VD’s personality classification categories, on the other hand, make about as much sense as anyone else’s random made-up heuristic to classify personalities. It’s unbelievable that people still take that stuff seriously. Moreover, whenever I see dimwits referencing VD’s spergphabet, the shoe hardly fits at all. Even the DSM-5 carries more empirical weight.

          • The Cominator says:

            Roissy’s system is correct, Vox’s is not. Virgin chad works is if you see it as a spectrum except its not very easy for people who are not natural alpha/chads to become that…

            • shaman says:

              Yes, I agree. Both Roissy and Chad-Virgin are helpful to understand the sexual marketplace. They both map to actual people you can witness in real life. In contrast, VD’s drivel is a complete distraction; it detracts from one’s ability to read socio-sexual situations, rather than contributing to it.

              The only good thing about VD’s classification is its usefulness in screening out the dumbasses who resort to it from people with IQ>125.

              • Kgaard says:

                Well … I am going to weigh in here for no particular reason. I find Vox’s categories useful. The distinction between beta and delta is useful. And absolutely gamma is a category that advances the ball. Gammas are just weird. You don’t want to be around them. That is different from beta.

                And Omegas are seriously deranged gammas, I think. And then the Sigma concept is also worthwhile, because there is definitely a type of guy who is not socially dominant with men, but still does well with hot women.

                All these map to things you can see in the real world.

                One idea is occurring to me: Freud posited five types of neurosis, one of which is the “perverted” personality. This type of person takes pleasure from seeing other people uncomfortable. Again this is a very specific sort of behavior that is very different from garden variety beta. Gamma captures this.

                Anyway … feel free to shoot this down. The alpha/beta continuum also works fine.

                • BC says:

                  > Again this is a very specific sort of behavior that is very different from garden variety beta. Gamma captures this.

                  Other systems call them Omegas or Incels. Nothing but bad stuff comes from men unable to get laid or form families.

                • shaman says:

                  Even assuming, for discussion’s sake, that all that is correct, the issue still remains: it is not a socio-sexual classification. In which case, the confusion should be dispelled by VD explaining that he uses the Greek Alphabet to sort out various personality disorders or archetypes. But then, why use his classification rather than more accurate, precise categories, e.g., “sadist,” “narcissist,” “sperg,” “schizo,” “borderline,” and so on?

                  It just doesn’t tell you which man gets his dick wet, and which man doesn’t. It also has an extremely low predictive power: judging someone to be, e.g., “sigma,” doesn’t tell you how he will behave in any particular social setting (except those actually specified within the category itself), whereas judging someone to be, e.g., a narcissist, helps quite a lot; such a person’s expected behavior does not need to be explicitly spelled out within the category itself.

                  VD wastes bandwidth.

                • sheman says:

                  ‘VD wastes bandwidth.’

                  Apart from his publishing, his internet broadcasting, his infogalactic site, his blog, his comics, and his assistance to gamma males, coupled with relentless truth-telling on 95% of key issues, he’s achieved very little.

                  You…? Anyone ever tell you you tend to gaslight others?

                • The Cominator says:

                  “I find Vox’s categories useful.”

                  Nope they are bullshit, they confuse some personality traits with sexual marketplace hierarchy and confuse certain aspects of the male hierarchy with what women value in terms of the sexual hierarchy.

                  Gamma is not a legitimate sexual hierarchy classification, an omega is an omega is an omega they don’t get laid. That is their hierarchy position. Gamma was a projection Vox made up of traits he hates about himself.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “Other systems call them Omegas or Incels. Nothing but bad stuff comes from men unable to get laid or form families.”

                  Tell that to Sir Isaac Newton will you. It would be best if they weren’t incels but we intend to solve the incel problem and not by blaming men.

                • jim says:

                  > the Sigma concept is also worthwhile, because there is definitely a type of guy who is not socially dominant with men, but still does well with hot women.


                  There are men who are not socially dominant with males but do well with women, but they are not Vox Day’s sigmas.

                  Roissy’s hierarchy will get you laid. Vox Day’s wont.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Roissy’s view is accurate but getting laid in the feminist west now is truly nightmare mode unless you find a way of paying for it.

                  So unless a natural Alpha its very hard even if you know everything intellectually.

                • shaman says:


                  Gamma was a projection Vox made up of traits he hates about himself.

                  Exactly so. And everyone who regularly uses this category, including some people in this thread, is likewise projecting his own unpleasant personality traits onto people they dislike. In general, whenever people make up random classifications out of thin air, they simply reflect their own personality traits, falsely generalized as “archetypes.”

                  The typical VD follower looks like this:


                  And even those who don’t physically look that way, still look like this on the inside. In other words: goons, goons, goons! There’s also something quite feminine about insulting people by invoking this gay-ass classification and making insipid, unfalsifiable insinuations about their placement on the socio-sexual hierarchy; masculine men use insults directly and creatively, rather than categorizing people along some con-artist’s alphabet.

                  Just look at VD’s flame-wars in the comment section: “You’re a gamma!” “No, you’re a gamma!” “No, both of you are gammas.” “I’m the least gamma person here.” “You’re a gamma, but he’s a bigger gamma.” Etc., etc., etc. It’s goonery through and through.

                  It’s all so tiresome.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “In general, whenever people make up random classifications out of thin air, they simply reflect their own personality traits, falsely generalized as “archetypes.”

                  Be careful here shaman. There are useful archetypes… Jims “warrior” and “priest” archetype is very useful.

                  Its just there are a lot of BS ones which aren’t useful as well… and also Vox Day doesn’t seem to present his “gammas” as an archtype at all. He seems to insist its some kind of legitimate specific classification rather then a mere “archetype”.

                • sheman says:

                  ‘Just look at VD’s flame-wars in the comment section: “You’re a gamma!” “No, you’re a gamma!” “No, both of you are gammas.” “I’m the least gamma person here.” “You’re a gamma, but he’s a bigger gamma.” Etc., etc., etc. It’s goonery through and through.

                  It’s all so tiresome.’

                  You speak out against flame-wars, whilst being a flame-warrior here. Like all gammas, you have no self-awareness. Did VD ban you?

                • The Cominator says:

                  Sheman=Koanic I assume

                  Shaman didn’t speak out against flame warriors…

                  Shaman spoke out against lame flame wars where the gamma category is taken seriously and everyone is calling each other a false abstraction that arose out of projection in Vox Day’s mind.

                • shaman says:


                  his publishing, his internet broadcasting, his infogalactic site, his blog, his comics, and his assistance to gamma males, coupled with relentless truth-telling on 95% of key issues

                  Beep boop butthurt fanboy detected.

                  Listen, dickface. Has VD done some positive things? Sure. You can’t be a successful serial con-artist without providing some value to your audience. At the very least, you have to be able to keep people’s attention and produce a prolific output.

                  But in a cost-benefit analysis, I’m far from convinced that VD’s influence is more positive than negative. Just look how many dipshits he has attracted, and look what arrant nonsense he’s filled their heads with. Perhaps he’s not as bad as Tex Arcane and similar “types,” but ultimately he is still a waste of time and a navel-gazer. The VD-sphere is a carefully crafted trap for dimwits, and his ideas are pure “dimwit bait,” in that if you’ve embraced them, you’re definitely not the cream of the cognitive crop.

                  Hence “McCain was assassinated and Democrats wear ankle monitors,” on top of his regular Q-tardation and Blue Pills about the WQ. Piss off, she-boy.

                • jim says:

                  Vox Day has accomplished good and great things – but Gab has accomplished better and greater things, notably Dissenter. (Why don’t any of the people I censor use Dissenter? I would reply to them there, but having their spam on this blog is a waste of reader bandwidth.)

                  And Vox Day, seeing someone else do great things, has a hissy fit.

                  And, by the way, install the Dissenter extension on your browser.

                • shaman says:


                  Be careful here shaman. There are useful archetypes… Jims “warrior” and “priest” archetype is very useful.

                  Of course. Many archetypes are useful. I object to random classifications intended as “general theories of society,” when these random classifications absolutely fail to map to actual people in the real world, and subtract knowledge rather than increasing it. Warrior/Priest/Merchant is incredibly useful, and for that matter, Moldbug’s BDH-OV classification is also useful. In sharp contrast, VD’s categories make very little sense, and should be disregarded.

                • shaman says:


                  Did VD ban you?

                  Never commented on his blog.

                  Meanwhile, it’s very obvious that you choked till unconsciousness while giving VD a “most passionate” sucky-sucky, and as a result of prolonged oxygen deprivation, became even more ‘tarded than you had been initially.

                • alf says:

                  I like Vox’ classifications, like I like Jung’s MBTI classificstions. Some people are incredible gammas, its fun to put an easy label on that.

                  But I have noticed that sigma/alpha is not such a useful divide, because to girls its really all the same: either your the type of guy they’d fuck or you’re not. ‘Sigma’ turns out to be a prime way for Vox and his commenters to convince themselves they’re in the first category.

                • The Cominator says:

                  My understanding of Alpha and Sigma is that both are guys lots of women want to fuck but Alpha has more male hierarchy value.

                  But in “the current year” not that useful to your SMV to women. So if you must classify them best to characterize Sigmas as a special subcategory of Alpha.

                  Men who have high female SMV but low male hierarchy value tend to be musicians or other artistic types women like, criminals and lowlifes tend to go out to nightspots with other such types so the women at least percieve high male hierarchy value from at least some criminals and lowlifes.

                • jim says:

                  Quite so – but Vox’s Day’s sigma fails to describe what makes musicians and criminals so attractive.

                  It is a blue pill rationalization of female behavior, and if you try to act in ways that the blue pill predicts women will like, they don’t see you. You become invisible to them.

                  A more accurate account is that female perception of male status is more attuned to the days when we still looked like apes, that female perception of status is primitive, or, as I am fond of saying, women perceive status as a small evil child raised by cannibals would see it.

                  Or, as I am also fond of saying, if General Butt Naked showed up wearing his trademark necklace of fresh human eyeballs, his AK-47, and absolutely nothing else, I would be $#!% out of luck.

                • shaman says:


                  Sheman=Koanic I assume

                  Possibly, but this guy acts even dumber than Kookanic. Another hypothesis, equally likely, is that he only started this pointless beef with me because he’s very deeply impressed by the top-notch quality of my insults (if I may brag some), and decided that the best way to elicit another epic bullycide is to receive one himself. Welp, I’m only happy to comply.

                • sheman says:

                  ‘Never commented on his blog.

                  Meanwhile, it’s very obvious that you choked till unconsciousness while giving VD a “most passionate” sucky-sucky, and as a result of prolonged oxygen deprivation, became even more ‘tarded than you had been initially.’

                  It’s weird that you spend so much time reading VD’s blog and the comments there, given the obvious disdain you have for the man and his ideas. Likewise, you have obviously trawled through Koanic’s old blog and his gab account. I suspect you have commented at both blogs and were bitch-slapped by both VD and Koanic in years past.

                  Perhaps you have a sad life, so you obsess over those who are obviously geniuses. You also seem to have a fixation on oral sex with men, using it more often than is normal in insults.

                  You’re all bluster here, but quiet elsewhere, also odd. I wonder if you’re a glow-in-the-dark? Something about you doesn’t smell right.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Vox Day is right about how to deal with SJWs. Right that the right (despite the fact that this is not natural for us) needs to build our own non-Cathedral cultural institutions. Right about conservatism inc.

                  He is wrong to prioritize ethnonationalism over the woman question solving the WQ would almost immediately solve the other.

                  He is both a natural beta male at best AND a nerd who is terrified of being labeled as either and says all sorts of shit in desperate but futile attempts to cover this.

                  I also disagree with Jim here (Jim has said he largely agrees with JP)… he is wrong to attack Jordan Peterson the way he does even though some of his criticisms of Peterson are true.

                  I disagree on Peterson because (and once again I know Jim disagrees I am NOT arguing from false consensus) I think even slight agreement with even the watered down Ev. Psych of Jordanetics will in time destroy all progressive belief. Jordanetics religious character makes it compete with progressivism… I believe all this is good even if JP is somewhat leftist himself (though I believe he is largely genuinely with us on the woman question).

                • alf says:

                  And Vox Day, seeing someone else do great things, has a hissy fit.

                  Ooh that’s what that was about.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Oh yes I had almost forgotten that Vox Day is a QTard.

                  Thats another reason I’m convinced hes something of a lunatic. Hes not stupid (though also not as smart as he claims to be) and only stupid people and lunatics believe in “Q” so…

                • shaman says:


                  It’s weird that you spend so much time reading VD’s blog and the comments there

                  You’re lying. I only know what’s on VD’s blog through exposure to alt-right hearsay. For instance, I’m only familiar with his socio-sexual hierarchy by observing his dimwitted fanboys constantly use it. And I only know that he’s a full-on Q-tard because Kookanic explicitly brought that up. I don’t actually follow VD’s writings, except on very seldom occasions to check whether or not I might’ve missed anything of value there. (Nope)

                  you have obviously trawled through Koanic’s old blog and his gab account.

                  This one is true. I did so… a week ago, for the purpose of this little take-down, which by the way, would be over if you didn’t insist on interjecting yourself into it.

                  I suspect you have commented at both blogs and were bitch-slapped by both VD and Koanic in years past.

                  I’ve already told you: I only noticed Kookanic a few months ago; he deleted his blog years ago. As for VD, again, I’ve never commented on his blog, however, it is indeed true that I have been bitch-slapping him (his ideas, at least) for quite a long while, and I’m glad to report that it’s worked great. Notice, for example, that while Jim appreciates VD’s work, he doesn’t disagree with some of my take-downs of VD, because he knows that VD is a very flawed individual.

                  you obsess over those who are obviously geniuses.

                  When VD first sodomized you and gave you AIDS, did he ask you to wear a bra with fake tits and a wig, so that you would pass for his private little “she-man,” or, conversely, was it a case of straight-up “Gimme dat hairy ass, boy,” without further deliberation and preparation?

                  quiet elsewhere

                  How would you know?

                • sheman says:

                  1.’Just look at VD’s flame-wars in the comment section: “You’re a gamma!” “No, you’re a gamma!” “No, both of you are gammas.” “I’m the least gamma person here.” “You’re a gamma, but he’s a bigger gamma.” Etc., etc., etc. It’s goonery through and through.

                  It’s all so tiresome.’

                  2.’For instance, I’m only familiar with his socio-sexual hierarchy by observing his dimwitted fanboys constantly use it.’

                  You’re full of shit. the two comments above show you’re a liar, you read VD’s blog and all the comments every day, despite it being so ‘tiresome’.

                  ‘I don’t actually follow VD’s writings, except on very seldom occasions to check whether or not I might’ve missed anything of value there.’

                  ‘actually’, a classic gamma tell. Make your mind up, do you read it or not? Why is it tiresome in the comments if you don’t read it?

                • jim says:

                  I read Vox Day often. He is entertaining. He is, after all, an entertainer.

                  He has accomplished great and good things, but he has notorious character flaws which have adverse political impact – for example his hostility to Gab. That his socio sexual hierarchy is a projection of his own virtues and flaws makes it inaccurate. That he is purple pilled makes it terrible as a guide to getting laid.

                  However his insights into what makes leftists tick and how to deal with them is brilliant. Vox Day on the sociosexual hierarchy is deceptive bullshit. Vox Day on social justice warriors is great. SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police (The Laws of Social Justice Book 1)

                  His portrayal of what women like is misleading and will cause you to fail with women.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “You’re full of shit. the two comments above show you’re a liar, you read VD’s blog and all the comments every day, despite it being so ‘tiresome’.”

                  Well I do read it sometimes…

                  Gamma used to be the go to insult… increasingly he is using “midwit” though.

                • shaman says:


                  do you read it or not?

                  Damn, that question really piques your interest you, doesn’t it?

                  Okay, here is the full answer: I used to check up Free Northerner’s “Reaction Times” aggregator (, and VD’s blog very often appears there. So, before I finally concluded that VD is absolutely worthless and a waste of time, I had sometimes looked at his articles, and on very rare occasions even glanced at his dimwitted shit-show of a comment section, in which I never participated myself due to its offensively low quality. That was all true in 2014-2015 or so. Since then, however, I’ve positively figured that there’s nothing valuable to be found in his vicinity, so it’s been quite a while since I last read anything by him.

                  Having said that, I’m still often exposed to his retarded fanboys — for example: you — so despite the fact that I stay away from his site, and have been staying away from his site since 2015 or so, the putrid brain-rotting mental diarrhea that he produces still, lamentably, reaches me.

                  Why is it tiresome

                  It is tiresome that retarded fanboys like you pollute the discourse, flood many comment sections such as this one for instance, with incessant “U A GAMMA” “NO, U A GAMMA” “NO, U AND U GAMMAS” acrimonious accusations whenever people tolerate your presence.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “His portrayal of what women like is misleading and will cause you to fail with women.”

                  Hes an artist and his wife is a groupie. Artist types who get girls because they are groupies and who don’t understand that the women are groupies often have less understanding of women then sperg incels like me who can learn how the game works but because of personality traits often fail in the execution.

                • sheman says:

                  My work with you is done, thanks for making it so easy.

                • shaman says:

                  My work with you is done

                  Sounds familiar. You know what the sincerest form of flattery is, right?

                  Anyway, don’t let the door hit ya where the Lord Almighty split ya.

                • offended sigma says:

                  [*deleted for using someone else’s gravatar and email address. Blocked until you change gravatars]

                • alf says:

                  ? Whose that guy and why does he have my avatar.

                • jim says:

                  He posted under your email address and from your IP

                  Which is why he has your avatar.

                  By the way, have you received my messages about the .htaccess file of

                • alf says:

                  It is a complete mystery who made that failed troll comment, how this malevolent person found my email address and my ip.


                • eternal anglo says:

                  Hell, how could he have known that?

                • alf says:

                  I have and I will get on it

                • eternal anglo says:


                • alf says:

                  @Eternal Anglo I was responding to this.

                  By the way, have you received my messages about the .htaccess file of

                  As to the nature of this evil hacker, some might say he was really me doing a failed attempt at trolling (e.g. typing in his own email as to evade the spam filter but forgetting that the gravatar image is linked to the email), but those people are lying, evil communists.

                • shaman says:

                  Eternal Anglo:

                  Hell, how could he have known that?

                  Well, for one, anyone can know the IPs of all those of ever commented on one’s blog, assuming they used their regular IP addresses. (E.g., if you ever posted on Alf’s blog, he can know your IP) Now, how to change your IP to a specific address is rather more complicated, and may ever require glownigger technology.

                  Alternatively, someone who shares Alf’s IP address, such as his waifu, or even — and this possibility is the most shocking and breathtaking of them all — Alf himself, may be behind the troll. We clearly need a detective to solve this puzzle. Where are the Q-tards when they’re needed?

                • Koanic says:

                  > Roissy’s hierarchy will get you laid. Vox Day’s wont

                  Roissy’s hierarchy is in the eyes of women, Vox’s is in the eyes of men. Men have a more sophisticated social pack structure than women do.

                  The more nonverbal and autistic the audience, the more they tend to deny Vox’s sociosexual hierarchy. Now that the YouTube videos are out, there’s really no excuse. The same reasoning that can be used to reject the existence of Vox’s hierarchy can be used to reject the existence of Roissy’s.

                  > And Vox Day, seeing someone else do great things, has a hissy fit.

                  Not true. Vox’s issue with Torba is about the Alt-Reich making gangbang cartoons with Spacebunny’s face, and also making pedophilia libel, and Torba not taking that down. Therefore Vox regards Torba as pond scum.

                  I supported Gab there from the beginning, and am pleased to have been proven right contra VD. But the one acting like a girl with regards to the conflict has been Torba.

                  > My understanding of Alpha and Sigma is that both are guys lots of women want to fuck but Alpha has more male hierarchy value.

                  No. Sigma is someone with alpha status whom the hierarchy wants to promote to alpha, but he declines. It’s a behavioral distinction, since most of what an alpha does is about managing his pyramid of followers.

                  James Lafond is a Sigma. He’s written about how he consults and assists other martial arts masters in a way that doesn’t undermine the alpha’s authority, but allows him to train their students. His version of the hierarchy is simpler, so he calls himself Omega, but he is too high status for that. Men and women seek him out for leadership and sex, respectively. But he steadfastly refuses all group affiliations.

                  Criminals tend to have a functional violent pack structure, which makes them more masculine and ALPHA than neutered corporate drones, whatever their rank within that underworld hierarchy. Musicians receive massive situational ALPHA from the stage. A musician can be any rank of the sociosexual hierarchy. Neither intrinsically has anything to do with sigma.

                  > It is a blue pill rationalization of female behavior

                  Nonsense. VD explicitly distinguishes between Roissy’s SSH and his own by using the terms ALPHA/BETA and alpha/bravo/delta/gamma respectively. That is to distinguish female perception from male behavior.

                • jim says:

                  > > Roissy’s hierarchy will get you laid. Vox Day’s won’t.

                  > Roissy’s hierarchy is in the eyes of women, Vox’s is in the eyes of men. Men have a more sophisticated social pack structure than women do.

                  Vox is deluded about female perceptions of hierarchy, and his hierarchy is a poor fit to the hierarchy of men, alpha being his virtues, and the lower grades being his own faults.

                • shaman says:


                  The same reasoning that can be used to reject the existence of Vox’s hierarchy can be used to reject the existence of Roissy’s.

                  Nonsense. Roissy’s tripartite hierarchy (alpha-beta-omega) maps to real individuals in the real world. Respectively: charismatic men who are naturally successful with the ladies; men who — due to their supplicatory nature — don’t do very well with women, but still periodically get some; autistic and/or otherwise misfitted and/or very ugly men who are permanent virgins.

                  Meanwhile, VD’s 7-letter-hierarchy merely reflects varying degrees of possession of VD’s own unsavory personality traits, and has very minimal predictive value. It’s a “just-so” model that has never been demonstrated to successfully explain social and sexual dynamics. You can’t actually fit most real people into the model, because VD’s archetypes are wholly arbitrary, and one can easily come up with an entirely different set of archetypes, which will be no more and no less valuable than VD’s.

                  “You are a beta male” carries heavy analytical weight. “You are a delta male” absolutely does not. People following VD — about any issue, and particularly about this one — have trouble distinguishing authentic intelligence from pseudo-intelligence. It’s not surprising that VD’s blog keeps churning out cranks.

                • Neurotoxin says:

                  Alf said:

                  ‘Sigma’ turns out to be a prime way for Vox and his commenters to convince themselves they’re in the first category.

                  As long as we’re all weighing in, here’s my read:
                  “Sigma” is VD’s way of calling himself alpha without having to commit the social dorkery of saying “I’m alpha.”

                  (On other matters, his energy and accomplishments are indeed impressive.)

                • Not Tom says:

                  Sigma is just the epicycle of VD’s hierarchy, isn’t it? Hey, here are some guys who get good trim despite clearly not being alpha according to this classification system, so instead of admitting that the model is flawed, let’s just add another variable we can use to fudge the results.

                  What he calls gamma is definitely a real thing, but seems to describe pretty much any people or traits on the BPD spectrum. Which he himself manifests several of, but is high-functioning enough to work around, therefore “sigma”. And a “delta” is just an introverted or low-functioning beta.

                  I don’t think his Greek hierarchy is the worst thing ever, it just violates the principle of simplicity and creates unnecessary categories. And as Jim says, won’t really get you laid. On the other hand, his intelligence classifications (“VHIQ”, “UHIQ”, etc.) are completely retarded and have no basis in reality.

                • shaman says:

                  There’s no need to revive the Peppermintocalypse, but a man who insinuates that post-pubescent underage girls are unattractive to normal heterosexual men is either a liar or an abject idiot; and VD has denounced a number of men for that issue, i.e., “pedophilia” that has nothing to do with actual pedophilia.

                  Reminder that even Kookanic, whose writing I’ve recently investigated, once said:

                  Next we come to a more controversial figure, Jimmy Savile. Sort of the male equivalent of sleeping with celebrities, he banged hordes of underage (post pubescent, as far as I can tell) girls. In other words, the hottest around. Keep in mind, this was in Britain, where they get shaggy quick.

                  Unlike Tex, I am not quite prepared to condemn Savile as a monster for his proclivities. For Cro Mags at least, I think puberty was the time girls start banging. I have few illusions about 15 year old girls, for example. I haven’t paid enough attention to know whether he crossed a line I’d be uncomfortable with, but I’d wager the vast majority of his bangs were legal but not actual pedophilia, putting his sexual proclivities solidly in line with the vast majority of men’s cocks, if not their lying words.

                  In other words, he lived the dream, and did so by exerting a massive Melon social reality distortion field throughout his lifetime, that only vanished after his death, revealing the massive extent of his sexual conquests.

                  Well, in absolute contrast to this surprisingly sane and non-gelded position, VD regularly denounces men for being into fertile teenagers with boobs, and VD also denounced Jimmy Savile specifically. I’m bringing this up because it just adds another reason to dislike VD and whatever he stands for; this issue appears to be yet another litmus test separating those whose thought-crimes are unbearable from the Cathedral’s perspective (see: Roissy) and who therefore must be censored, apart from the Controlled Opposition.

                  And by promoting all those other internet hoaxes that he has promoted, VD has helped shape the alt-right into the Controlled Opposition movement that it has become, obsessed with sundry fake news rather than focused on the important issues, and infested with feds looking for gullible targets who would be willing to believe anything written by a “fellow anon.” See, that’s what happens when you knowingly lend credence to any and every theory that comes by merely due to it “sounding nice” to you, regardless of the glaring lack of supportive evidence: you attract a bunch of people whose judgement is in very substantial part impaired.

                  (Yes, Nikolai, when you randomly push the “child sex trafficking” meme without checking whether or not it even passes the smell test, that is pedo-hysteria, and it is extremely counter-productive. It is for this reason that Cominator has a very good point when he calls the wignats “white knightionalists”; that’s exactly what they are, and exactly what they are always engaged in. White knighting a bunch of thots and whores needs to be abysmally low status, or the WQ won’t ever get solved. If dumb American conservatives, instead of hysterically shrieking that “Liberals secretly plan to normalize muh pedophilia,” said the diametrically opposite thing, that “Liberals not-so-secretly constantly raise the AoC and manufacture ever more draconian anti-male and anti-testosterone legislation under the convenient pretext of fighting child sexual abuse,” which is the pain and simple truth, we would be so much closer to restoring young families and raising the TFR, rather than sitting here with blue balls and/or subscriptions to pornography sites. Consider this crazy idea, Nikolai. You’re not an idiot)

                  His Greek hierarchy is a distraction whose sole purpose is to fatten the capricious ego of the comment section, and unlike Roissy’s classification system, it definitely won’t make it into 2030. Go on any incel forum (the Manosphere is now officially the Incelopshere, by the way), for instance, and check if the folks there are acquainted at all with the idiosyncratic and ad hoc hierarchy that VD pulled out of his hat; the answer is “No, they aren’t.”

                  Not saying that VD should commit suicide, though I obviously wouldn’t shed any tears if he did. However, he really should just stick to doing the one thing he does that actually contributes to the cause: marketing books written by people more intelligent and knowledgeable than him. Ah, but that would require him to radically diminish his bloated ego to much, much healthier proportions, several orders of magnitude smaller than it is right now. Not gonna happen. He’ll keep pushing one bad idea after another, throwing hissy fits left and right, and so on, and since people will keep taking him seriously despite his distasteful track record, he’ll keep proving that, as per the adage, there really is a sucker born every minute.

                • jim says:

                  The problem is not so much the nutty theory that normal men are not attracted to every fertile age woman, including women that are way “underage”. The big problem is the nutty theory that underage girls – including underage girls who actually are underage, who are nowhere near fertile age, are not attracted to alpha males, and usually alpha males much older than themselves.

                  I read a news story about a fellow who was sentenced to a long term in jail for “assaulting” two underage girls, actually underage, nine and ten, who had crept into his bed in the middle of the night while he was drunk and sleeping. This is absolutely typical of sex between heterosexual men and girls that are actually underage.

              • alf says:

                It is a complete mystery who made that failed troll comment, how this malevolent person found my email address and my ip.

  16. Eli says:

    Jim, I’ve been re-reading some of your old writings. Really good stuff, from almost three decades ago. Particularly, this:

    Do you have anything you’d like to add to or change in it, in light of the developments in the world and, perhaps, your own thinking?

    • jim says:

      Nah, unlike Moldbug, I think we are always in a state of nature, and the state is a shared illusion that we sustain for fear of the chaos beneath, a fragile ship on a storm tossed sea. Notice that Xi gives orders, and something very different happens – he is in a much stronger position than Trump, but still his power is far less in reality than it is officially.

      And similarly, any place where you rely on the police to protect you is a very dangerous place.

      The state is effectual to the extent that reflects the will of a cohesive tribe, and in large states that is always a synthetic tribe. Thus a precondition for an effectual state is that members of that tribe are well behaved towards each other, which we are seeing less and less of.

      If you have a inner group of elite people, people who are both able, and also well behaved towards one another, it looks like the state is all powerful. But this is an illusion.

      The anarcho capitalist point of view, which I expressed in that essay, assumes rational and independent individuals. But individuals group up, and fairly regularly they group up to take other people’s stuff, which is a problem that anarcho capitalists tend to ignore. The Moldbug view on the other hand, presupposes the group to be all powerful – and in a sense that is true, and the anarcho capitalists are horribly wrong. But how does the group itself cohere?

      So, you have to add to that analysis who/whom, near/far

      Of the ten commandments, the latter six follow from the natural law arguments of that essay. And the first four are ways of identifying the ingroup, which is also the group of people you are inclined to expect will follow the latter six. By making everyone take time off on the same day, they got to spend time with other members of the ingroup, and not with members of the outgroup, and also got to identify those following the first four, which is a hint that they might well be following the latter six.

      • The Cominator says:

        You said at one point in that essay that man is a rational animal… I hope you don’t believe that now.

        Man is a rationalizing animal who a very small amount of the time is rational (and women are of course worse).

        • jim says:

          I am rational most of the time, and it is easier to get on with other people who are rational.

          • The Cominator says:

            But most people are not, you were definitely far more bluepilled when you wrote this.

            You said good things about Locke. Locke was a lunatic and his beliefs were nonsense or as I believe was said in the 19th century by most nonsense on stilts… Hobbes was only wrong if you interpret him as saying that the sovereign should rule by force alone which he didn’t say.

            You are right that certain natural rights derive from gnon, animals have things they think of as their property and will defend themselves and their property but force overrides all right even if it is blunt as a governing instrument.

      • Eli says:

        It would be very interesting what things you believe today vs what you believed then, expressed in a more clear form. Something like a table.

        I can see from your essays that you were more pro-Locke, and not as much now. Nonetheless, it’d be nice to know where that dividing line is, what it’s predicated on.

        Personally, I buy into your thesis of Natural Law, especially as viewed from evolutionary theory (describing ESS). However,
        1) It looks like at different times/locales/modes of existence in humanity’s history, different ESS applied. This was expressed by Rich Hanson over a number of essays, among which is this:

        2) As societies evolved their military, medical, transportation and other technologies, scales changed drastically and a whole slew of new issues have come up. Especially, in the last 150 years.

        3) I found support for your Lockean thesis in some of Moshe Koppel’s essays, like this one:

        4) Further, I find that in order to reconcile your other position of “Closed, Heritable Priesthood” and Moshe Koppel’s very good Lockean position above, it is necessary to break Jewish practice into 2 modalities: A) local clergy, elected by communally-trusted representatives (akin to gentile “Low Church”); B) State Priesthood (Cohens) who would maintain the Temple. Make that division super-strict, disallowing movement between the two.

        5) I’m still unclear on whether the state ought to monopolize the policing function. It looks to me, the answer is NO. Does this go against the Moldbuggian view?

        • jim says:

          Totally goes against the Moldbuggian view.

          It is difficult to have effective policing unless you tolerate some private violence. Britain’s crime wave escalated massively when they cracked down on private violence by homeowners facing home invasion. Hard to stop shoplifting if Walmart security cannot detain shoplifters in the parking lot.

          A strict centralized state monopoly on violence fails the same way any strict state monopoly fails. It provides insufficient violence and provides the wrong kind of violence, targeting the easily targetable, taxpayers and warriors, rather than their difficult and unprofitable to target enemies.

          As with any state activity, you need to outsource as much as possible. The central government should deal only with large scale group violence, as for example union violence, and crimes against the central state, and the local cop should back up the family patriarch, rather than substitute himself for him.

          The state is not a real thing like a wall, but an idea, a shared pretense, like a fiat currency. And, like fiat currency, if you push it too far, trouble ensues.

  17. Friendly Fred says:

    Suggestion for the NeoAnglican Creed that I think Jim anticipates enforcing as Archbishop: All points of the official Anglican body of doctrine of (some year in the 18th Century) are “meta-literally true” — everything said in the Old and New Testaments is meta-literally true. It’s heretical to declare that these things are not meta-literally true, so it’s therefore heretical to say that these things are literally true as well as heretical to say that these things are false. To those who demand some clear account of “meta-literal truth,” reply that the nature of meta-literal truth is Mysterious, just as “homoousios” is Mysterious.

    This approach will promote a content-full religious life without the vagueness and half-heartedness consequent upon the declaration that “it’s all symbolic.” It’s NOT just symbolic — It’s meta-literally true!

    Punishment for heresy: you can’t use the internet or devices such as portable phones that allow you to use the internet.. So, you can’t hold jobs that require using the internet or such devices.

    • jim says:

      Sounds like a plan. I love “meta literal”. Saint Augustine had the same idea, but he called in “Literal”, which is bad because it obscures a distinction that matters.

      But we don’t want too many genuinely sincere martyrs either.

      People who want governmental or quasi governmental jobs (other than low status jobs) will have to affirm a catechism of the official religion – which is already the case, it is just that the religion is progressivism, it is officially unofficial and the catechism is officially not a catechism.

      Heretics who are far from power will be allowed, but treated like barking dogs.

      If people with power subsequently commit heresy or apostasy, then we nail them, and we nail them hard enough to deter, and in ways that lower their status. I am inclined to favor rustification – send them far away from the centers of power – and with the internet you are never far away from the centers of power, hence internet restriction is needed, with considerably more drastic remedies in hard cases.

      Peer review is truth by consensus, thus inevitably religious truth, as with global warming, environmentalism, and dietary “science” The official religion needs to be true or unfalsifiable, thus needs to come down hard on people incorporating potentially falsifiable doctrines about this world into the official belief system, which they are always tempted to do, because people are always trying to game the official religion to get more power and status for themselves, and to damage and lower the status of status competitors.

      We need to incorporate Gnon into the official religion as natural law (natural law in the sense of Aquinas, not Newton) – which inevitably means taking a position on the facts of this world. In particular, All Women are Like That. We just have to make sure that our position is well based on empirical evidence. So, under the justification of re-examining Aquinas and the doctrine of fallen man under the scientific method, Game Theory and Evolutionary psychology is going to go into the official belief system.

      You will be given sufficient elbow room to doubt the literal and concrete existence of Adam, provided you are not too obnoxious about it – but you will not be able to doubt or his meta-literal existence – or even get unduly clear as to the difference between literal existence and meta literal existence. For this, we have excellent Christian tradition in Saint Augustine, who declared himself a Biblical literalist on the Garden of Eden and all that, and proceeded to interpret it in ways that foreshadowed Darwin’s account and is entirely compatible with Darwin’s account.

      So we will slide the reactionary worship of Gnon into the official religion under the precedents set by Saint Augustine and Saint Thomas Aquinas, with a truckload of empirical studies on human conduct and human nature.

    • kawaii_kike says:

      Can you elaborate on what you mean by “meta literal”?

      • jim says:

        If I get to be grand inquisitor, elaborating on what meta-literal means will, like elaborating on what it means that God is Three and God is one, be heresy.

        Meta-literal will mean what Saint Augustine meant by “literal”, and what he meant by “literal” was not entirely clear.

        • Koanic says:

          Real Christians won’t go for it. “Meta-literally true” sounds like a joke and a dodge. This is exciting primarily to people who aren’t actually Christians. And such people are not permitted to rule the Church.

          • Koanic says:

            You could go with “essentially true”, with the “meta-literal” variant being an accepted subset thereof, for the Doubting Thomases.

            • jim says:

              It is delicate – but Constantine shut down debate over the persons of the Trinity with a hammer, and that worked quite well. It was a stupid debate.

              But before he did so, he engaged in long consultation with the bishops. We cannot resolve the problem of literalism without discussion with the priesthood, and without that discussion taking place with the power to shut it down looming over them. We will eventually have to shutdown discussion of literalism, but should do it the way Constantine shut down discussion of the persons of the Trinity.

              • Koanic says:

                I haven’t followed the issue closely, but settling on a good enough answer and skipping the wars sounds good to me. I support the institution of state churches, of course. The concept of not having one is totally un-Biblical, in the sense that it doesn’t even occur to anyone.

          • jim says:

            Real Christians went for Saint Augustine.

            • Alrenous says:

              Real Christians go for whatever the State tells them to go for.

            • Koanic says:

              There are a lot of real Christians who believe the Bible is literally true, but that is stupid, because the Bible employs figurative language heavily. Using the adverb “literally” will generate heat not light. “Meta-literally” is literally an oxymoron:

              taking words in their usual or most basic sense without metaphor or exaggeration.

              • jim says:

                A lot of the bible is obviously metaphorical. As Saint Augustine points out, there is no mountain from which one could see all the nations of the earth.

                But arguing over which parts are metaphorical and in what sense, and which parts are not, is as unprofitable as debating the relationship of the persons of the trinity, so we need a doctrine that stops that argument, and which allows us to take advantage of evolutionary psychology. It just will not be a reactionary religion unless we incorporate red pill doctrine on the nature of women.

                • Koanic says:

                  I don’t think you can create a doctrine that substitutes for reading comprehension, which is too bad, because that is exactly what people lack.

                • The Cominator says:

                  There are certain parts which I imagine it will be very important for us to state clearly whether its to be meant literally or metaphorically.

                  A general rule should be that… if a biblical statement is conclusively scientifically falsified it MUST have been metaphorical.

                  Along the same lines if the bible seems to imply some policy that is a social disaster and has been conclusively shown by history to be one… metaphorical or at least not literal.

                • jim says:

                  Most of the biblical laws are pretty good, but they screwed up on usury:

                  Usury is indeed a problem, as for example student loans, which encourage wasteful and irresponsible expenditure. But solving that problem without shutting down legitimate and necessary expenditure, like young people buying their first house, is tricky, and we know that ancient Hebrews never found a satisfactory answer.

                  The Christians farted around with stupid answers for centuries, eventually arriving on a pretty good answer, but their economic justification for it was incoherent and rather silly.

                  Debts against the person shall be non interest bearing, or else enforceable only against their credit rating. Loans on property can be extinguished by retuning the property. If the house is less than the value of the loan, the lender should not have made a stupid loan. Loans against the corporation can be extinguished by wiping out the existing shares, making first tier debtors into shareholders, and second tier debtors into first tier debtors.

                  But Christians did not find their way to the answer on usury till fairly late.

                  The risk should be shared between lender and borrower in such a way that making bad loans for irresponsible or unwise expenditures penalizes the lender, rather than trapping the borrower.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Bad Old Testament laws aren’t a problem because Christianity is not Islam and has never been a code of laws though some laws in Christendom have drawn biblical inspiration.

                • Koanic says:

                  I don’t see why young men should be permitted to hock their future. Better to tie their wealth and independence to completion of an apprenticeship, like Jacob. As for a house, that is an inheritance. Those without land or inheritance are slaves, not debt slaves.

                  As for usury, there is no need to charge usury of one’s brethren, to profit by their failure and loss. IT has rendered transnational personal lending trivial.

                • Koanic says:

                  We have tried making the dollar the fundamental unit of society, and the result is social disintegration and socialist revolution. The landed patriarch is the fundamental unit.

                • Koanic says:

                  If every US citizen received a landed inheritance, how big would it be?

                  327m = pop USA

                  (/ 327.0 2)
                  164m men

                  9834000 sq km = area of USA

                  (/ 9834000 164000000.00)

                  .06 sq km per man.
                  or 14 acres

                  Sounds good to me! Who cares if it’s wasteland, so long as it’s mine. Even Jews can make the desert bloom.


                  Now subtract the natural slaves, nonwhites, minors, elderly, by-preference urbanites, etc…

                  The real trick would be sorting people into adjacent genetic clusters, to preserve some semblance of European evolutionary diversity. If I understand correctly, evolution proceeds faster when there is semi-permeable local integrity. Adaptive genes propagate through barriers, but the geo-genetic diversity isn’t violently blended into homogeneity.

                • Koanic says:

                  It might be impossible to make heads or tails of the American melting pot genetic stew. But since we are patriarchs, we can simplify by focusing on the Y-chromosome DNA. Major clusters can then be allotted appropriate geographical regions. Grant the Y clusters political autonomy, and voila, we have our American tribes.

                  Give the peripheral whites a buffer zone somewhere between Texas and Central America. Native Americans can either head north and play Eskimo like the Sami, or south past the peripheral whites.

                  Then maybe, just maybe, we’ll unfuck ourselves in time to hold North America against Chinese expansion. Let them eat Asia and Africa instead. There’s plenty of room for the 100+ IQ races to expand before space elevators make exporting surplus terrestrial meatbags trivial. Fare half-price for double-amputees! One small lop for man…

                • Dave says:

                  There won’t be any “Chinese expansion” until they solve their woman problem and achieve a healthy birthrate. So far the only sentient humans not headed for extinction are the Amish.

                  Jim, do you think any race will ever create an industrial society that doesn’t contracept itself out of existence? Industry requires cities, and cities are a vast buffet of mating opportunities for young women, making them loathe to settle down with one man until it’s almost closing time.

                  All the solutions I can think of would make “The Handmaid’s Tale” look like a feminist utopia.

                • Cuddlepie says:

                  > The real trick would be sorting people into adjacent genetic clusters, to preserve some semblance of European evolutionary diversity. If I understand correctly, evolution proceeds faster when there is semi-permeable local integrity. Adaptive genes propagate through barriers, but the geo-genetic diversity isn’t violently blended into homogeneity.

                  Utter drivel.
                  You frame your comments so it appears you are privy to some secret knowledge, in order to cultivate a following. (It is clear you have a messiah-complex (you once styled yourself ThalMoses (good grief)). What you cannot seem to grasp is that you are not as intelligent as the majority of commenters on this blog, so your comments read like someone trying to appear intelligent (like reading the essay of an “educated” black), and any memes you try to create are simply bad. It is also widely known you are a kook who has been wrong about almost everything he has tried to specialise in.
                  Here’s some friendly advice.
                  1. Make your sentences easy to parse.
                  2. Use concepts that are well-known or at least used by more people than your sample of one. Jim can do this and he is several standard deviations above you in intelligence. There is no excuse for this.
                  3. Drop the idea that you are going to be a star in this sphere of ideas and simply attempt to interact with the other commenters with the underlying motivation of simply trying to understand the concepts involved.

                • Koanic says:

                  Here’s a friendly tip, gamma – if you don’t understand something, ask a question.

                  Good trick with the constant name changes, I accidentally read that one.

                • shaman says:


                  Good trick with the constant name changes, I accidentally read that one.

                  It wasn’t me, you pissy twat.

                  if you don’t understand something, ask a question.

                  You see, “If you disagree with me, then don’t criticize me; just send me your questions and wait for my answers” is one of the oldest con-artist tricks in the book. No, shithead, you don’t get to unilaterally set the conversation’s frame. People will point out the flaws in your account, and you will either respond to the critique, or disregard it. You don’t get to decide whether or not there will even be critique, because you’re nobody’s guru, and certainly not here.

                • Cuddlepie says:

                  > gamma

                  You fled to China because you could not compete in the socio-sexual hierarchy in the US.

                  > if you don’t understand something

                  It is not a matter of understanding. You possess zero insight, but pretend you do to draw people into your frame of lunacy to ask for guidance.

                  No one interacts with your posts, so I can only conclude you’re here to attempt to gather a following. Won’t work. Not intelligent enough.

                • Koanic says:

                  I don’t have the genetics expertise to know the right keyphrases to search for a citation for the evolutionary effect to which I was referring. So I’ll just describe the concept from memory as best I recall. Maybe later I’ll find it when I organize the science section of my notes.

                  Think of normal human evolution like a honeycomb, with each village being a cell with semi-permeable barriers. Cells are each a mini-selection engine. Winning genes sweep slowly through the cells, without wiping out the local diversity.

                  Now stick the honeycomb in a blender, such as Ellis Island. Instead of finding these advantageous genes, selection is mostly about who’s best optimized for the scaled environment. Selection is busy modifying the population proportions of all the different local genomes that have been blended together, and culling the dissonant hybridizations. It is no longer sensitive to small advantages.

                  For example, one major trend is that Neanderthal genes are being selected against. Whereas if Neanderthals were segregated and concentrated somewhere, then they could continue their genetic drift and innovate advantageous mutations based on their unique heritage.

                  Whatever one may think of this idea, it certainly isn’t mine. I recall being surprised upon reading it.

                • shaman says:


                  one major trend is that Neanderthal genes are being selected against.

                  Your model of the Neanderthal / “Star Child” / “Melon Head” / Cro-Magnon / etc. classification is based on your own character and physical traits, and on almost nothing else, in the exact same manner that VD’s model of the socio-sexual hierarchy is based on his own personality traits, and on nothing else.

                  You attribute to Neanderthals traits that they didn’t actually possess, and you pretend to possess typically Neanderthal traits that you don’t actually possess, all in an effort to make your self-centered theory somehow cohere, and to suck in dimwitted loners eager to know that they are “Neanderthals,” perhaps because they suffer identity crisis and need an e-daddy’s approval.

                  You have already admitted to being a con-artist, so it’s not clear why you keep this game up.

                • Cuddlepie says:

                  > So I’ll just describe the concept from memory as best I recall.

                  Why would you post a comment about an evolutionary concept you cannot recall and do not understand? Why would I even be interested in reading it. Why would anyone?

                  This essentially summarises your contributions to this blog. Idiosyncratic, deliberately obscure, and without insight. You post with the air of someone who is considered an expert by the community, despite being wrong about everything you’ve set your mind to.

                  Of course this critique will be ignored, and you will continue posting.

                • shaman says:

                  Kook-boy the Neandertard had to flee all the way to Hong Kong, where he no doubt played his “just be white” card, which is the only card in his possession, to at long last receive occasional low-energy sterile sex with some obese gookette (who has already dumped him for someone significantly more alpha). But despite being a sickly, diseased, infirm, frail nutter whose sole sexual outlet is cheap ricecorts, he has the gall to tell other people here that they’re aren’t alpha enough. Neandocrite!

          • Koanic says:

            Really, though, there’s no reason to doubt the Adam account. It’s clearly a description of cloning. Anaesthesia is applied, and the regenerating short rib is taken for bone marrow to clone XX Eve from XY Adam. The trees are other nations of peoples, same as the figurative language in Ezekiel 31. Adam was a fusion of divine DNA with earthly evolved races, corresponding to an anthropological great leap forward, probably in the linguistic, religious, and self-awareness areas of human behavior. He was the first rightful king of Man, who fell. The nation corresponding to the serpent mascot was probably equally advanced, but already decadent. Their history is lost to us, although suggestive fragments remain. The forbidden fruit was spiritual and sexual congress therewith.

            The story is compressed into figurative language for multi-millennial transmission, and no doubt conveys multiple layers of truth, as similar Biblical communications tend to do.

            • The Cominator says:

              Ancient astronaut theories of the bible while I certainly can’t prove or disprove them don’t belong as part of the official religion.

              • Koanic says:

                That’s nice. Nobody said anything about astronauts.

                • The Cominator says:

                  You mentioned cloning genetic engineering etc.

                  Ancient astronaut theory is implied.

                • Koanic says:

                  No it isn’t. Lucifer fell like a star from heaven. Jesus ascended into heaven. Neither was an astronaut.

            • shaman says:

              2019 is one of the more boring years, so I decided to go over your blog archives and dig for material with which to troll you. There’s plenty in there. In the context of this discussion, I’d like to address the issue of rib periosteum regeneration.

              You wrote:

              Genesis indicates modern surgical knowledge. There is absolutely no reason for a pre-anaesthetic, pre-antiseptic society to know which bone in the body is best at regenerating for purposes of reconstructive surgery. Such societies do stuff like trepanning and childbirth. Context suggests the significance of the rib was completely lost on those who recorded and transmitted it. It seems to be the casual perfectionist competence of a deity, nothing more.

              Look, I’m not here to ignite a fedora/fundie war, but this is crap reasoning.

              First, when dealing with extraordinary claims such as this, there are two question one must always bear in mind: 1) is the extraordinary proposition the sole explanation for what we’re seeing?, followed by: 2) is it the most likely explanation for what we’re seeing?

              In this example, the proposition that the Biblical narrator’s description of Eve’s creation-from-rib can only be explained by awareness of “modern surgical knowledge” is retarded. It’s ridiculous mumbo-jumbo that embarrasses sane, non-kook Christians who don’t need to rely on hokum to have religious faith.

              Let’s place ourselves in the shoes of an Early Iron Age Israelite. Inspired by the Lord’s Holy Spirit, he’s writing down the creation account for all generations to come. His objectives, while perfectly compatible with the Divine plan (and, so we say, intended to advance it), are also perfectly human. What are these objectives? Briefly:

              1) To actually explain how humans were created;
              2) To teach us a moral story about the need to get wives, and be fruitful and multiply.

              If that is so, then already it makes instinctive sense that, if any organ out of the Adamic human should be chosen for the creation of Eve, that organ should be a bone. Why? Because bones — definitely in the view of someone living in antiquity — are akin to the frame of the whole body. I mean, the skin is the outer part, followed by flesh, and deep inside you have the bone. If you wanted to tell the folks in your audience that women should naturally be suitable for reproduction (see: objective 2 above), you would certainly prefer to tell them that there’s an anatomically “deep” “non-superficial” — thus instructive — connection between male humans and female humans; furthermore, bones remain long after all the rest disintegrates, which magnifies this idea. Recall Ezekiel 37.

              If we agree that choosing a bone, rather than any “soft” organ, makes sense, then the next question should be: Which specific bone? Once again, it makes instinctive, simple sense to choose a bone that has a pair. If we use Adam’s skull, or spine, or breastbone – we’re running into a pretty big problem, now, don’t we? Okay, so you may now ask, “Then why not use the knee bone or the elbow or suchlike?” To which the answer is twofold: One, the audience would be quite disinclined to imagine a paralytic and/or amputee Adam or something similar. Two, the ribs are visibly located at the center-most part of the skeleton and the body (except the spine itself, which is — needless to say — of absolutely no use here), which facilitates our imagining Eve as coming from the “center” of Adam, rather than from his “margins”; there’s no need to belabor why that’s useful for our purposes here.

              So, see, without any “modern surgical knowledge,” it’s possible to arrive at the logic of making Eve out of ribs, rather than out of any other organ.

              Again, this is not at all intended as “beep boop fedora propaganda” or anything of the sort. Just saying that there’s no need to resort to explanations of the Young Earth Creationist mumbo-jumbo variety to explain things that make a whole lot of instinctive sense without this kind of bunkum.

              That you choose to dwell on the weird and counter-intuitive stuff, and at that, make huge leaps of reason to get there, again shows that you are not a serious thinker. Actual intelligent Christians, which you are not (that is: you are neither intelligent, nor a Christian), do not dwell on the kook stuff, because they simply don’t need it.

              • shaman says:

                I should have proceeded to ask, “Do you imply that the ancient Greeks received divine knowledge about the regenerative faculty of the liver, given the myths about Prometheus and the eagles / Tityus and the vultures”?

                If one thinks that the Genesis account must surely allude to deity-imparted modern surgical knowledge of rib regeneration, then according to the very same process of “logical inference” that has led one to arrive at such a far-fetched conclusion, one should likewise maintain that the ancient Greeks must have “received from above” modern surgical knowledge about liver regeneration.

                Then again, maybe Kookanic does imply that.

                [Graham Hancockism Intensifies]

          • shaman says:

            Real Christians won’t go for it. “Meta-literally true” sounds like a joke and a dodge.

            When you say “real Christians,” do you mean like your very close friend, glosoli? Is glosoli the realest of real Christians? Do you consider glosoli’s version of Christianity to be the most authoritative, and follow it wholeheartedly?

  18. hcm says:

    Jim’s ability to attract crazies is impressive.

    The commenters’ willingness to and persistence in arguing them down is even more impressive.

  19. shaman says:

    Nikolai wrote:

    >From anecdotal experience, 28% strikes me as a lowball estimate. If you control for occasional one night stands with unattractive women, I’d bet that number would shoot up above 50%.

    Interestingly enough, Andrew Anglin said a very similar thing to me on The Goyim Know BBS; he wrote:

    >Man, there is no way 72% of young guys are having regular sex in America. I don’t even think that was true when I lived there 15 years ago. These numbers are self-reported and no one wants to say “I haven’t had sex in a year and this was against my will.”

    Jim, what is your take? Has involuntary celibacy always been so common?

    • The Cominator says:

      Inceldom was not common before the 1960s because people were married off young.

      For the remaining single men not common then either because its easier to seduce married women then single women (recall the story of the postal worker who turned out to have 1500 illegitimate kids).

      Not common after the pill and before aids because I’ve been told women weren’t all that picky in that era and sexually harassing women was okay and white knighting was less common.

      I think it really became common in say the 1990s…

      • jim says:

        Male status drops relative to female status, as a result fewer males get any, and fewer children are conceived.

      • Dave says:

        My dad was incel before the 1960s, but if you asked him then, he’d probably just say he was saving himself for marriage, though he had no girlfriend despite excellent career prospects. Then his best friend’s wife filed for divorce and the friend drove his car off a bridge. My dad married the widow and adopted her two children of different fathers because she was still pretty and he “wanted to do the right thing”.

        When she ditched him, he joined a computer dating service, met my mom, and she liked him because he resembled her brother, a lifelong incel nerd born before WW2, a war my dad was almost old enough to fight in.

        There have always been technically adept but socially awkward men who could not marry unless their families found wives for them. Isaac Newton, Hans Christian Anderson, Nikola Tesla, and many others.

    • Nikolai says:

      Great minds think alike. The metric itself is obviously a bad measure of inceldom. I think most people would agree that a guy who manages to bang a different 4/10 girl every three months is still sexless at heart. The same could be said, arguably, for men who resort to prostitutes.

      I just don’t see many young guys with girlfriends, and most single guys look like they get laid rarely, if ever. But I frequently see women complaining about trying to secure a guy who’s currently sleeping with 10 other women.

  20. vxxc says:

    The truth about talk vs action is its long past talking – forever in truth.
    We have long known the Left is sociopath level deceitful.
    Talk should have ended by the late 60s.
    It did not.

    Does this mean it is time for action?

    It is time to organize.
    There are many things such as finance, logistics, communications networks that can be organized that have nothing to do with illegal acts. We’re just like minded people who are banding together for mutual support in food, fuel, etc. No guns needed.

    Mind you some of us do go to the gun club on the weekend*
    but that’s just a sportsman’s club…

    *also the most important step in RW radicalization process into what we may daresay could be a recruiting pool is getting a virgin non gunner to buy a gun.

    For instance: the caravan that Trump stopped at the border consumed tons of water, food and similarly generated tons of waste daily.
    That was organized and paid for…
    You learn to do these things by doing them and ORGANIZING them by joining organizations that do them- if mil or police turn you off there’s Red Cross, volunteer fire fighter, cajun navy etc…

    It might be healthy for some of you to get out into the fresh air for a bit and you’ll learn valuable skills, make allies, etc.

    I’m being positive here – you guys can own being negative and doing whatever high school girls contest yer doing…

    And Koanic ? Rock on.
    At least if you really did something they mention above.
    Oh it would mean yer probably nuts.
    But 0>

    Jelly much “guys”?

    • Anonymous 2 says:

      “It is time to organize.

      I suspect you are right, because this is what makes the ruling clique most uneasy. They work exceedingly hard at deplatforming, dividing, picking off.

      • vxxc says:

        You don’t need twitter to organize food banks…

        • Frederick Algernon says:

          Would you invest in a trailer park, and if so, how much?

          Trailer parks are a pretty solid investment if done correctly. They expand during both booms and busts. They are magnets for bad actors who have a way of disappearing from society into their depths. They are a magnet for fertile, rutting females whose only real contribution to society is headcount. They collect men of strong back/simple mind. They are offspring factories. And they are overwhelmingly white.

          Imagine a trailer park, radially oriented, with a 15′ fence and 4 openings; 2 entrances and 2 exits. Inside, the trailers spiral inward. The periphery are single wides and simple structures. as you wind closer to the center, the trailers become more robust and sturdy. In the center is a sort of castle made of shipping containers. Inside lives the park manager and the support staff. The facility has a simple medical facility, exclusively a substance abuse out-program. The denizens of the park can be anyone. They get bonus cash and subsidy for pissing clean [x] weeks in a row, attending workshops with their children, maintaining employment, getting married, etc. Ne’er-do-wells will be given one chance after a fuck up, then it is For The Road after contractual seizure of surrendered property. Ditto with unfaithful spouses. A small security force keeps the local constabulary on speed dial, as well as the closest hospital. Work gangs and temporary labor pools will be made available to both county and state entities, background checks, biometrics, and resumes in hand.

          Coupling this entity with orphanages, prison halfway house programs, and other constructs, an intentional community of The Weak could be the Wellspring of a very capable and well trained Darkly Enlightened Lower Caste.

  21. Anonymous 2 says:

    I get the impression that Trump wants to slowly squeeze his Deep State enemies to death or submission, presumably for reasons of legitimacy. We have to do this by the book! etc.

    Meanwhile his enemies (who mostly control that book) want to run out the clock on his presidency and, of course, install someone more amenable. For instance, it is difficult to see the systematic removal of popular alt-right accounts and blogs as anything but preparations for the next election. There will be no more pepes. (But not only that — it’s also installing a ‘new normal’ for the longer term. Part of the taming the internet, if you will.)

  22. Frederick Algernon says:

    SAT adding an Adversity Score component honk honk.

    • jim says:

      Since these days the SAT tops out at 115-120, that seems hardly necessary. But I guess that rather than having average people graduating summa cum laude from Ivy universities, they want rock stupid people graduating summa cum laude from Ivies.

      If you have a majority of females getting advanced degrees, and a curiously large number of black people getting degrees, you are already unofficially doing this. If anything, its good that they make it formal instead of just rigging the results of supposedly merit based criteria.

      In the events leading to the great minority mortgage meltdown, they initially tried to select the best of the minorities for mortgages – which led to embarrassingly obvious fact that almost every white rejected was better than almost every brown accepted. So they concluded that their criteria for a good borrower were discriminatory, and adjusted their criteria to be non discriminatory – which tended to result in granting multi million dollar loans to drunken unemployed wetbacks with no english, no assets and no id cards. Instead of getting the best, or the least bad browns, they got the worst.

      Perhaps they have figured that making the SAT ever less discriminatory is leading to the same results as the great minority mortgage meltdown, and have decided that formal and overt affirmative action will produce less bad results.

    • Anonymous 2 says:

      Imagine not getting into an Ivy if you’re a POC, woman or gay.

  23. BC says:

    Jim’s analysis continues to be spot on for the primary reason for Trump’s troubles: He can’t find people who act as Trumpists outside of judges from the Federalist socity:

    On Their Way Out the Door, Kirstjen Nielsen and Other Officials at DHS Sabotaged Trump’s Plan to Depart Thousands of Illegal Aliens

    • Jehu says:

      Indeed, its been historically impossible to get administrative political positions if you even smelled like a Trumpist. I understand that the Trump administration has been bringing in substantial numbers of interns that MAY be Trumpists though, or at least disposed to be favorable to same. Saw a story last week about how colleges like Patrick Henry were getting a lot more internships from his administration than in previous admins.

  24. Eli says:

    Yes, I give an A for the effort also. Sheer talent right there. As to “grimace” rhyme, perhaps “contorted face” might work slightly better? On the other hand, it does make it too long.

  25. shaman says:

    >CR gets treated better than this.

    CR has been bullycided a trillion times, but he’s too dense to figure out what’s going on, so everyone eventually got tired of dealing with him, and he’s been relegated to the blog’s resident “sad clown.” One need not invest much energy in trolling the sad clown, because his mere presence is a self-troll.

    >Koanic’s only crime was having kooky and eccentric ideas

    Kookanic’s crime (in the internet sense; IRL he’s been up to some other stuff) is persisting in kooky, eccentric, *idiotic*, and *dangerous* ideas, which he does with unwavering conceit — hubris, even — and extreme condescension. If he were mentally capable of dismounting from his high horse of clever-silliness, there wouldn’t be a need for “Now I’m your latrine.” Unjustifiably arrogant noses must be stomped to the ground, repeatedly, until the lesson is learned, if ever that happens.

    • kawaii_kike says:

      >IRL he’s been up to some other stuff

      What are you referencing? Has Koanic been up to kooky hijinks IRL or are you just joking?

      • shaman says:

        Here’s one example. After praising Robert Bowers, Kookanic wrote:

        “I was too smart to get caught.”

        That Kookanic murdered some random Jew or whatever can be tolerated, though. That’s not his biggest issue, from the perspective of healthy participation on this blog. His biggest issue, as I’ve pointed out time and again, is his *unjustified arrogance*, in that he holds dumb ideas, and offhandedly dismisses the more intelligent ideas of more intelligent people. Case-in-point is pizzagae and Qanon; in both instances, not only was he wrong (which is, of course, totally forgivable – everyone’s wrong sometimes), but extremely conceited too. That’s why he receives backlash.

        • Simon says:

          You are doing God’s work, shaman. Koanic has needed a good curb-stomping for years. I do regret your destruction of peppermint though. There was at least a high quality brain at work there, and he made me laugh.

          • BC says:

            I do regret your destruction of peppermint though. There was at least a high quality brain at work there, and he made me laugh.

            I feel the same way.

            Koanic on the other hand has always been a loonytoon. I though that Vaultco blog was a hoot, but Koanic took Texas arcane’s stuff seriously. Some people are just a bit loony and Koanic and Tex are in the same nuthouse together.

            • David Jewk says:

              Speaking of vaultco, does anyone know where he operates now? Or have archives or links to his better old stuff?

          • Anonymous 2 says:

            ‘Jewish pedophile’, eh. Yes, I see the similarities. I regret that we have acquired a worthless volunteer community policeman.

            Part of the trouble with this fool is, he has arrogated a power for which he lacks a loicence. Instead of taking it upon himself to work out who is allowed to speak here or not, I suggest he report these unacceptable commenters directly to the blog sovereign for further action, if any.

            • shaman says:

              I’m not going to confirm or deny anything about myself; what I’ll say is that, on those occasions that “Your shit is all retarded, and you talk like a fag,” don’t be surprised that some people may warmly advise you to piss off, and may even hurt your oh-so-delicate fee-fees should you refuse to heed their kind suggestion. That’s part of life, for better or worse.

              When someone wisely remarks, “Kookanic is a little fag-boy who’s wrong about everything” in direct response to Kookanic being a little fag-boy who’s wrong about everything, that’s not the same thing as being “volunteer police.” It is more like being a particularly enthusiastic morale booster. You don’t yet need a special license to engage in ardently pro-social morale boosting, now, do you?

              Jim is doing fine censoring those who violate his rules. Kookanic, at any rate, is being a crazy-in-the-coconut crank, and faces ridicule as a natural consequence. That happens precisely because Jim allows everyone to debate freely, rather than expecting everyone to kiss the ass of some “esteemed commentator,” which Kookanic shouldn’t be in the first place, and indeed – he isn’t.

            • Eli says:

              Peppermint’s output was 3/4 trash. Or it appeared close enough as trash to me to be worth to parse. A lot of it might have been because he was a self-admitted autist. Or maybe said claim was a cover for bullying people with very hard-to-understand items. The host of this blog liked him (has stated so explicitly, when B raised this issue, for instance).

              I’m glad that guy is gone. He definitely was blue pilled on (White) women and was incoherent. Besides, if someone knows in their very heart that they state the truth that needs to be stated, it shouldn’t be possible to just bully them on some virtual arena.

              Now the quality of comments has improved, even if the overall frequency of replies has gone down. This is my perception, at least.

              • shaman says:

                By the way, let me just point out that I’m not responsible for Baruch’s departure. Although he behaved despicably in Winegate, he was still a high value commenter; he should have stayed, if only to remind the audience that “chutzpah is real.” Really tho, he is very knowledgeable, more than many others here. Perhaps you can bring him back?


                Tell him, jokingly or otherwise, “Jim is now a full-on Mossad blog. Your friends, Eli, Ron, Ilan, Ezra, Samuel, and others are waiting for you over there. All is forgiven! Let bygones be bygones. Come back, ach sheli ha-yakar.” That may work.

                • Eli says:

                  “Winegate?” I don’t know what this refers to. Do you mean the whiskey bet?

                  B was very high-value. I ended up fundamentally not agreeing with some of his positions (almost never made said disagreement explicit, but my positions on this blog fairly clearly show that I have a diverging view; plus, I was fairly new here and still had been fleshing it all out for myself), but it was excellent to have him here. His departure has more to do with his disagreement with our host than anything else.

                  My hypothesis is that Jim would’ve rather paid a sum equivalent to a decent whiskey bottle vs physically shipping it to him. Protection of identity is really important — certainly, to our host. Perhaps, Jim can agree/disagree? And B took it as a sign of Jim not wanting to come through on his commitment.

                  I definitely would’ve liked him to come back. It is an excellent forum, nothing else like elsewhere, after all. I hope we can make it happen someday.

                • shaman says:

                  Oh, was that whisky? Damn, misremembered the type of alcohol. And yeah, they should’ve just bet on money in the first place.

              • shaman says:

                A tl;dr of Winegate for those who don’t remember or haven’t been there.

                Jim and B had a bet about the war in Aleppo (the details of which are irrelevant) which, believe it or not, Jim lost. So, a wine bottle found its way to Israel. Alas, to claim it, B had to pay a tariff to the Israel Customs Authority. He was unwilling to do that, so Jim generously offered to compensate him with the sum of the tariff, in advance. Inexplicably and rudely, B refused. Shortly thereafter, he ragequit the blog.

                That is a prime example of chutzpah. Still, B had more IQ in his pompous arse than people like Kookanic have in their entire cerebral cortex. If only for that reason, it was fun to have him on.

                • Eli says:

                  Oh, I remember. Was the bottle actually, physically shipped?

                  Even if so, it is not despicable for B to refuse to pay the tariff. It is unfortunate that he chose to do it that way, but it was his right to choose to do things that way. When I buy someone a gift, or lose a bet, I don’t make anyone pay extra money to take their gift/winnings. It is completely OK.

                  But I also see Jim’s situation: I don’t see any way in reality how he could’ve made that tariff payment without it being traceable to his real life identity, a big no-no. If so, Jim *should’ve* made the reason explicit (unless he had).

                  All parties could take things in good faith here. Jim, tell me if I’m mistaken. I’m sure we can get to the bottom of this and find a way forward, to a win-win-win compromise.

                • jim says:

                  Yes, the bottle was physically shipped all the way to Israel, and at the Israeli border, complications. The Israeli government wanted to B to pay. And did not want to bill me.

                  I had no means to make the payment – have you tried dealing with the government lately? It is complicated. The government makes it hard to pay them. I wanted to send money to B and B would then make the payment.

                  I could not just pay them. They would have had to bill me. Maybe B had a bill that he could have sent me, and I could have paid that bill, but he did not send it to me, though I asked him to.

                  I could have tried harder, and I should have tried harder, but B was not making it easy, and the government does not make it easy for anyone and B did not make it easy for me. It would have been difficult and complicated for him to pay the government, and a lot more difficult and complicated for me to pay the government. If he had simply sent me a bill, would have paid it, but if I understand the problem, they were not simply sending him a bill. He would have had to jump through hoops to get sent a bill, and he wanted me to jump through those hoops for him, and I did not know how to do so.

                  I am underwhelmed by Orthodox Jewish resistance to gay marriage, transexuality, and all that, but they are, as B claimed, holding up a lot better than Christians.

                • shaman says:

                  That’s the point Eli: Jim *agreed* to pay B a sum equivalent to the tariff! In fact, he offered to do so in advance, that is, before B would even go to take the whiskey bottle. Hence B’s rude behavior being completely inexplicable, so inexplicable that even sympathetic fellow Jews couldn’t defend it.

                  Whatever – the personal morality of the members here is irrelevant. (Moralfaggotry in general is a lame business, at least during these troubled and insane times) What matters is high value vs. non-high value, and B does indeed possess high value; his stubborn contrarianism was a blessing in disguise. While his worldview and conclusions were wrong, one could learn a whole lot just by seeing him explicate them.

                  I’d swap a thousand Kookanics for one B. And so would Jim, I believe.

                • jim says:

                  > Jim and B had a bet about the war in Aleppo

                  No, the bet was on Orthodox Jews capitulating to gay marriage. I predicted they would capitulate. They have not, though they have been very busy making appeasing noises.

                  On Aleppo, we could not agree on the terms of the bet, which I think was a reflection of the fact that B’s position shot down by events occurring as we discussed Aleppo.

              • Peppermint Admirer says:

                Peppermint was a genius. He wasn’t bullying anyone; he thought in terms only a select few would ever understand. I understood about half, and it was glorious. Miss that faggot.

                Tell B. that no one blames him for 9-11, that Jim’s blog will never be sufficiently Iudaic in his absence, and that that lantern jaw is the envy of even the manliest goy.

                Woe to the vanquished.

                • shaman says:

                  B’s real blind spot, which has been pointed out to him time and again, was his complete willingness to drop all race-realism whenever intra-Jewish diversity has been discussed.

                  The problem of sandnigger Jews in Israel has been presented to him, and he was asked, “Had Israel absorbed millions of North African and Ethiopian Jews in 1948, would it be a functional state nowadays, or not?” He found a convenient excuse to ignore that question by dismissing it as a counterfactual. In so doing, he deliberately avoided reaching the necessary conclusion regarding intra-Jewish genetic inequality.

                  Another blind-spot was his belief that, if a group of Jews arrived in or passed through a certain country in antiquity, it logically follows that all Jews, from everywhere in the world, should forever be allowed to settle in that country. It’s this kind of ethnocentric, entitled sentiment that greatly contributes to antisemitism.

                  Basically, he got pwned whenever some inconvenient Jewish topics were brought up, because he was both intellectually and emotionally invested in the mainstream Jewish historical narrative, and wouldn’t deviate from it, lest uncomfortable thought-crimes might ensue.

                  He also has often been accused by Jim of misrepresenting his own sources, of saying, “It says here X” despite it not being the case. Was he deliberately lying? Perhaps not; possibly, he was just so convinced that his mental image of reality was correct, that he didn’t bother to actually investigate whether or not the facts supported that mental image.

                  Regardless of these flaws, the long arguments Jim and B would have were edifying; even when B misrepresented his own sources, he still provided those sources, so you could learn a lot by checking them directly, rather than relying on B’s accounts thereof. I believe that it was Mencken who once observed that, to paraphrase the observation, Jewish learning far exceeds Jewish wisdom; that stereotype is certainly correct in B’s case. Yet, great learning can be valuable in itself, if you — the one who critically examines it — possess the cognitive capacity to register it properly.

                  B is wanted, not so much because he tells the right answers, as much as his usefulness in formulating the right questions.

                • Eli says:

                  B had the guts to disagree w Jim. Frequently and strongly. Usually, people who do it here, don’t last beyond a short time (CR is also an exception, admittedly). He did it irreverently, energetically, and w material for support.

                  And he had some good cases. For instance, the whole Aleppo thing. B was proven right. Same for gay marriage among the Orthodox Jews.

                  Now, of course, he was wrong too. Eg: He had overly low expectations of Trump. Too pessimistic. He was proven at least partially wrong (fortunately for all!) But, so far, Jim has also been wrong, perhaps even more: Trump does not appear to be the “God-Emperor” that he was hoping he would be. We are still on the path towards Brazilification, according to the latest data on fertility and trends. Trump keeps talking about how much he wants women to be successful work-drones, while parading Ivanka’s business acumen and feminist activities. Does he believe in it himself? I think he does: he’s a high-status man, with no reason to advocate an exotic (for today) arrangement for marriage. In fact, he’s been quite the beneficiary of female emancipation himself!

                  B did provide a lot of sources. And I do remember some occasions where those sources conveyed the exact opposite of what he was trying to prove. Like in the case of Elephantine papyri. Also, not infrequently, the supporting material provided merely anecdotal examples. It was ok sometimes, but definitely not for cases where the responsibility was on him to provide far greater support (such as the case regarding Haredim being successful scientists; sans a very limited amount of rather marginal examples, it’s generally not the case that the Haredim make for good, esp world-renown scientists)

                  Curiously, both B and Jim seemed to agree that a major social upheaval in the US is brewing in the next decade or two. I’m, actually, not so certain. Brazil, after all, is still the shithole that it is and will be for a long time. Until whatever malaise that’s reducing the TFR of normal-looking smart people is healed (and, of course, it is female emancipation). You don’t have to have a Leftist Singularity. It can keep on steaming and decaying, w people running away, to East Asia or islands of conservatism and civility in the agrarian interior and bribing officials to hide their wealth from taxation and get protection from the zombies. As long as people have too much to lose by rebelling, it’s not going to happen. In today’s world, I don’t see it. There is also plenty of tasty food, anti-depressants and entertainment to take one’s mind off of whatever one isn’t happy about. So, as long as the PTB don’t do anything overly stupid or an external trigger of some sort doesn’t happen, it’ll keep on going.

                  B, despite his weak position on female emancipation and some of his strange beliefs in the all-powerful *multi-generational* Wall Street NWO conspiracy (where Jews are victims, cultural and physical, actually), was onto something: Namely, if all the conventional reasons for falling TFR are either BS or epiphenomena, then feminism, which is much closer to the actual reason, is *still* not it. Accordingly, in a general climate of nihilism, even putting women into direct slavery will not result in a successful society. As he said: “You can’t have a hierarchical order without a suprahierarchical purpose, unless you are living in conditions of adversity and privation.” You still need the recognition of the First Cause then.

                  Maybe, indeed, intelligence just all by itself is too costly of an evolutionary adaptation. For if , in utterly dark caves, fish lose their eyes over generations, the same can be said about IQ. It took tremendous amount of suffering to get where we are. We can lose it in a century. But… it won’t be the end. Humanity will return to its proper condition someday, because there is no other way and life is quite adaptable for survival. But it might take a few centuries (or millennia) to reorient back on the right path. The later it happens, the more painful it’ll be. But it’ll be. I don’t subscribe to “cosmo-horrorism.” Given the lack of conclusive extraterrestrial signals, I believe that we are one of the first civilizations in this Universe. Civilization prevails, because it’s a positive attribute, where positive = life-sustaining-and-spreading. And, per above and per Gödel, civilization and its positive entailments are inevitable (even if it’s not on this planet)ödels-ontological-proof

                  Also, in a theory inspired by B’s passionate argumentation, it is probably better to live next to traditional Ethiopians that respect law rather than next to tattooed SJW thots defending their gerbil-killing homo friends. I haven’t discovered the former yet, but have a pretty good idea of the latter. It’s, again, a speculation at this point, but I wouldn’t throw it out just yet. (I still like too many amenities and dislike dark faces. Plus, Blacks tend to stink more and shit doesn’t work well with them in charge.)

                  It appears, B is busy w more important things in his life at the moment. I hope he will get into those disputations again someday. For now though, it appears that a lot of the good and interesting ideas have been advanced and developed, and there is only so much one can argue about blue-pilling vs red-pilling and the woman question. (How many times do we need to propagate it to a CR or a pmint, and does it matter much?) Honestly though, I am extremely grateful for the opportunity to learn so much.

                • jim says:

                  > And he had some good cases. For instance, the whole Aleppo thing. B was proven right.


                  Aleppo fell, approximately as and when I predicted, and in falling, proved that guerrila warfare is ineffectual against an army that is not infested with lawyers that are busy making sure that the war is unwinnable, as I predicted, and as B denied, that being the main point of dispute. Guerrilla warfare never got off the ground in Syria, not withstanding B’s confident predictions.

                  Almost immediately B proceeded to lie barefaced about his previous positions, adjusting our conversations in his favor, instead of conceding that he was thoroughly and drastically proven full of bullshit.

                  I said that short of open invasion by Turkey, Aleppo would fall pretty soon, and that would be that, and it did fall pretty soon, and that was that.

                  > Brazil, after all, is still the shithole that it is and will be for a long time.


                  Brazil is improving dramatically, thanks to heavy handed policing backed by Christian priests, and heavy handed Christian priests backed by police. It is a spectacular demonstration of the benefits of Church getting behind the state, and the state getting behind the Church. If members of criminal gangs want to stay alive, they convert to official Christianity and act Christian. For a converted gang member, apostasy is apt to be fatal.

                  The economy is improving rapidly.

                  The leading lights of the previous government are in jail for all the usual crimes that members of the ruling elite routinely commit and routinely get away with.

                  I would call that a spectacular social upheaval. Still has a feral woman problem, but even that is under pressure, and the huge criminal problem is being taken care of. That is a radical transformation.

                • Eli says:

                  Numbers talk. Provide the statistics w links. If I’m ignorant of the situation in Brazil, I’ll retract. You seem to wield “nuts” way too freely nowadays.

                • jim says:

                  I cannot find any statistics that compare Brazilian crime post election to pre-election, all the data is old, but Thiago Ribeiro lives there, and he says that the new measures are working.

                  And the new measure are drastic, so his claim seems plausible on the face of it.

                  Whether or not crime has changed, the measures to stop crime have changed. The new Brazilian president is doing what I hoped Trump would do. He is doing the right thing and that is a radical social transformation.

                  The priesthood of lawyers, academics, and judges who favored criminals over law abiding citizens is out of power, and a priesthood of actual priests is in power. That is radical social change.

                • Alrenous says:

                  The priesthood of lawyers, academics, and judges who favored criminals over law abiding citizens

                  No word fits quite so well as Satanic, for this kind of behaviour.

                • Eli says:


                  From a Cathedral rag:

                  Looks like the drop in crime rate *may* have preceded Balsonaro. Whether it’s true or not, not clear to me, as I’m neither from there nor follow the news from there. And when the crime rate is so abysmal, any improvement is nice.

                  Nonetheless it’s kooky to use 1 Brazilian guy’s assertion to insinuate that Brazil is somehow not a shithole. Brazil is still a shithole. It remains to be seen whether Balsonaro will be successful and, if yes, how much.

                  About Aleppo: if I misunderstood/misremembered something, I apologize.

                • jim says:

                  You are being stubborn the way B is stubborn. I have repeatedly said that B was right about Orthodox holding the line at gay marriage. Say what B failed to say, that I was right about radical change in Brazil, and right about war in Syria.

                  B was not only incorrect about Syria, we all make mistakes about the state of the world, but he behaved disgracefully about his error. Don’t be like B.

                  Guerrilla warfare is war between the weaker party and the stronger party. If the weaker party is not instantly minced, it is because someone is putting their thumbs on the scales. If that someone is just boosting the weaker party with arms and money, you get conventional symmetric war. For it to be guerrilla war, someone has to be holding back the stronger party.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The drop in crime under Bolsonarno is most likely genuine… he is allowing private citizens to arm themselves. One thing that even bluepilled conservatism inc. gets right is more guns = less crime.

                • Eli says:

                  And best of luck to him. I’ve been refusing to visit that country so far, because of the crime and the shemales. If it becomes a Catholic paradise, well, great. Maybe I still won’t visit, but it’d be good to know that civilization is winning.

                • Eli says:

                  > You are being stubborn the way B is stubborn. I have repeatedly said that B was right about Orthodox holding the line at gay marriage. Say what B failed to say, that I was right about radical change in Brazil, and right about war in Syria.

                  1) I believe you were correct about Aleppo. (Furthermore, I actually agree that, given the capabilities of modern military technology, a weaker party is in a much weaker position that it would’ve been 70 years ago. I’m no military expert, but it looks like unless the weaker party has huge territorial depth and plenty of natural cover, a determined strong party — when not being held back — can wipe them out within weeks, if not days or hours).

                  2) Brazil: you called me nuts for calling Brazil a shithole. I don’t know the extent of ongoing (positive) changes, but even *IF* the improvement is substantial, there is quite a lot to go. I’m basing this conclusion on the numbers presented in the FP article. Brazil is still a shithole, and I don’t care what a few Brazilians might claim. Now, if things continue at the same pace as you/some Brazilians claim they are going, I will review the situation in 5 years and might be able to come to a different conclusion. I doubt I will, but I’m open.

                • jim says:

                  > 2) Brazil: you called me nuts for calling Brazil a shithole.

                  I did not call you nuts for calling Brazil a shithole. I called you nuts for saying that nothing much has changed under Jair Bolsonaro, that radical change is impossible.

                  Obviously Brazil is still a shithole. But radical change has happened, and is likely to make it considerably less of a shithole.

                  Jair Bolsonaro is draining the swamp. The equivalent would be Trump putting most of the Democrats in jail for assorted crimes that leftists in power always commit and always get away with, and using the military to round up illegals and dump them on the Mexican border.

                  Bolsonaro is making big changes.

                  The current world order is unstable and headed for a crackup – probably for the worse, possibly for the better. It is time to expect the unexpected. Radical change is inevitable, for the Overton window heads lefter ever faster. The current trends are very bad but they are also very unstable. The way to bet is more leftism faster, and such bets are usually correct – until they are not.

                  The conservative position is “more leftism, but a bit slower please”. Not going to work. Bolsonaro is not slower leftism. He is raising the status of approved Christian priests, and lowering the status of the progressive priesthood of judges, academics, lawyers, and educationists, a change that is going to prove far more fundamental than arming law abiding citizens, disarming, imprisoning and killing criminals, and imprisoning formerly powerful criminals of the political elite.

                • Alrenous says:

                  The current world order is unstable and headed for a crackup – probably for the worse, possibly for the better.

                  You can think of Proggies as maintaining a dam holding back a lagoon of their own shit. Partly because of some vestigial shame, partly so they can say, “Look at what will happen if we’re gone!” but mainly due to the fact if a president buggers the economy, he wants the actual economy tanking event to occur during the following president’s term.

                  When in 1991 the Somalian UN patsy suffered from fatal incompetence, while the long-term effect was astounding growth and prosperity, the short-term effect was hundreds of thousands of deaths.

                  There’s no way to clear away the Proggies except that also busts up their dam and floods the area with their accumulated social debts. For example it’s basically impossible not to lose the welfare rolls in the fighting. Which means millions of former welfare recipients will all of a sudden not know where their next meal is coming from. In the long term this will be highly eugenic, but in the short term most city-dwellers will live through interesting times.

              • Alrenous says:

                Peppermint was worse than CR for intentionally misrepresenting his opponent’s views.

                • shaman says:

                  Peppermint was worse than CR for intentionally misrepresenting his opponent’s views.

                  That, plus argument from fake consensus, plus sneaking presuppositions under controversy past the reader, plus deliberate misuse of shibboleths, plus ad hominem in lieu of genuine discussion, plus “Look, a bird!” whenever he started losing the debate.

                  It is expected that CR would poop in the punch bowl, since that’s what retards do for fun. Peppermint not being a retard, it was sad to see him out-CR CR.

                • Alrenous says:

                  It is expected that CR would poop in the punch bowl, since that’s what retards do for fun. Peppermint not being a retard

                  This exactly.

                  CR is actually trying to push ideas. Peps was indifferent to ideas, he was out for social points. His every comment, regardless of actual content, meant “I am higher status than you.”

                • jim says:

                  CR pushes ideas by illegitimate means: By appeal to fake consensus, and telling us we already agree to factual claims that imply that Marxism or Cultural Marxism is the right conclusion, and we are failing to draw the obvious implications from things that we supposedly already agree with.

            • Nikolai says:

              On one hand JP’s takedowns are usually well deserved, funny and clever. Some obnoxious commenters need a little more bullying than just being called stupid and a fag.

              On the other hand he went after peppermint and the comment section just isn’t the same without his autistic, jovial and often contrarian screeds (even if a third of his comments were borderline indecipherable). And I’m not exactly crazy about the guy who can’t stop posting about ‘pedo-hysteria’ being the self-appointed commenter policeman.

              • alf says:

                If someone wants to pick a fight, let him pick a fight.

                Perhaps Peppermint is still reading, perhaps he’ll return one day, but it was up to him to defend himself. Same with Koanic.

                • shaman says:

                  >perhaps he’ll return one day

                  By the way, Bryce Laliberte has returned, and… he’s an even bigger and madder lolcow right now than when he took a 5-year-break. Like, he openly and unabashedly supports gays, trannies, and even Feminism now. Yes, he is right that some in the inner circle of NRx backstabbed him and twisted the knife, but a) he is being too much of a whining faggot about it, almost Anissimov-tier; b) given his deep drift to poz-politics, it was probably clear to inner NRx that they would be better off ejecting him.

                  He also claims that the FBI, who appearedly have visited him multiple times, have fucked up with his mind – that, I can certainly believe. Indeed, he’s like an MKUltra’d version of his former self. Lel. Whoever bullydcided him the first time (“Shaman, why are you winking right now?”) should have been infinitely more brutal.

                • jim says:

                  Bryce Laliberte?

                  I don’t recollect that drama.

                • shaman says:

                  >I don’t recollect that drama.

                  Long story short: Ted Colt went through Bryce’s old archives on his original blog and found that he “struggles with same-sex attraction” (he claimed to not be a full homo, but bisexual). It got posted on /aristoi/ because that’s where all the drama was, and everyone was uproariously laughing about it for a week; we trolled him and we trolled him *hard*, but then again, pretty much everyone gets trolled, so who cares? Well, this prompted Bryce to quit the internet for 5 years.

                  Recently, he’s returned to the scene both on WordPress and Twitter, but while his blog is typically incomprehensible, which is not very unusual for people in this sphere, his Twitter feed is thoroughly and completely pozzed; I guess he decided that if he can’t resist his inner perversions and inclinations, he may as well wear them on his sleeve and parade them.

                  And he claims, justifiably, that the guy who tried to screw you over — Nick B. Steves — has conspired with the rest of the Hestia gang to both plagiarize his work and silence him when he complained. (Since they had also plagiarized Spandrell and then ignored his complaints, that makes perfect sense; it’s their modus operandi, apparently)

                  Be that as it may, right now there’s no point reaching out to him; he exhibits severe mental illnesses. If ever he returns to his long-lost senses, he can be invited here. But I wouldn’t hold my breath about this one.

                  And speaking of Michael Anissimov, probably his only article worth discussing is “Reconciling Transhumanism and Neoreaction”:


                  Yes, he too went cray-cray following his “meltdown of all meltdowns,” and became an unironic nazi; but his argument about how a transhumanist future necessitates an intelligent and legitimate elite to possess a strict monopoly on various types of weaponry is at least *plausible*. Here’s a key quote:

                  “Considering the likely long-run consequences of unrestrained, worldwide molecular manufacturing, I was horrified by how many ways this story could go wrong. Untraceable killer cybernetic mosquitoes for anonymous assassinations. Mobsters with fullerene muscles a hundred times stronger than steel. Nuclear enrichment centrifuges you can build in your basement. Combined with a largely unrestrained, laissez-faire anarcho-capitalist or simply neoliberal capitalist system, we have a recipe for disaster. Only through embracing Traditional structures and patterns did I see a way out of this conundrum.”

                  The article has its flaws and “shaky premises,” and perhaps Anissimov only reaches right political conclusions from wrong political axioms, but at least it proposes an interesting and unconventional thought experiment. I’d like to see more of these in NRx, if only to be intellectually titillated, but perhaps we’ll have to wait for Moldbug’s reemergence to see NRx return to its former days of glory.

                • Anonymous says:

                  >And he claims, justifiably, that the guy who tried to screw you over — Nick B. Steves

                  Would you mind sharing what this was about? All I know is that Jim suddenly stopped appearing in Social Matter’s This Week In Reaction.

                • jim says:

                  > Social Matter’s This Week In Reaction.

                  Socialist Matter’s weak in Reaction. Which reaction indignantly complains about the tranny problem while failing to notice the feral woman problem.

                • Dave says:

                  My guess is Nick’s girlfriend got offended by something you wrote, and told him to stop linking to I was once banned by a blog-owner’s girlfriend. The funniest part is that the blog was called “A Voice for Men”, and a woman was deciding what men were allowed to say there.

                • jim says:

                  If so, that was $#!% test that he failed, hence the tendency of socialist matter to go blue pill.

                  As I have frequently remarked, alphas make better reactionaries. If one is successfully handling women, one is rebellion against the current social order.

                • Steve Johnson says:

                  Nick has written on many occasions about his personal life – married with 8 kids.

                • jim says:

                  That is pretty good evidence that he is alpha. But Social Matter fails to promote politically incorrect alpha character.

                • Nikolai says:

                  I hope there’s a reconciliation between Jim and Hestia. Always enjoyed listening to Jim’s takes on the yearly descending the tower new years episode.

              • shaman says:

                >the self-appointed commenter policeman.

                That I mock people who deserve mocking doesn’t make me that.

                And I’m not going to comment on my role (or lack therefore) in the Peppermintocalypse, but it is objectively a good thing that someone with his positions on the WQ received a roasting. Right now, Nikolai, at least 28% of American men aged 18-30 are sexless. Reflect on that, will you? We’re sitting on a YUGE powder keg, and when it finally explodes, gonna be quite “messy.”

                Peppermint’s views were fundamentally incompatible with any sane program to restore sexual sanity in the West. The Peppermintocalypse *had* to happen, and in fact, it was way more important than the recent drama with Kookanic.

                • Anonymous 2 says:

                  “That I mock people who deserve mocking doesn’t make me [the self-appointed commenter policeman].”

                  Then proceeds to show why he is.

                  The changing of sock puppets with targets is an interesting extra touch on top of that though. You’re not just someone concerned with loicences, are you?

                • Nikolai says:

                  From anecdotal experience, 28% strikes me as a lowball estimate. If you control for occasional one night stands with unattractive women, I’d bet that number would shoot up above 50%.

                  >Peppermint’s views were fundamentally incompatible with any sane program to restore sexual sanity in the West

                  Don’t think so. While I agree that the WQ is the most important question and people who are bluepilled on it should be relentlessly bullied, like Glenfilthie or viking. (Though I think the threats against the latter’s daughter were uncalled for).

                  However, Peppermint wasn’t bluepilled. Sure he exaggerated the chastity of high school girls, but on adult women, I don’t think he significantly deviated from any of Jim’s positions. He referred to women as ‘sexbots’ and went on, at length, about how feminists not-so-secretly want abusive sex with low life scum and to be forced to submit to wealthy patriarchs.

                  His comments weren’t always coherent, but even when they were incomprehensible, you could tell that he understood women and that he understood them from experience.

                • shaman says:

                  Talk shit, get hit.

                • shaman says:

                  >Don’t think so.

                  It’s not possible to reconcile “girls misbehave because men make them misbehave” with restoration of sexual sanity; furthermore, when he deviated from Jim’s and Heartiste’s clearly stated positions about the desirability of fertile females, *but claimed to not deviate from these positions*, he was absolutely dishonest, as he later admitted himself. The Victorians tried his approach, failed catastrophically. So it has been explained to him — with, ummm, varying degrees of politeness — that a different approach is required.

                • shaman says:

                  By the way, contrary to the Anon2’s mischaracterization of my conduct, I don’t actually have magical powers to kick anyone out of someone else’s blog. I’m not a “literal shaman.” All I do is put mirrors up people’s faces, which often enough suffices to make them quit the game; I wouldn’t be able to do that if the reflection in the mirror looked good. It’s not really possible to bullycide high-value individuals, because they’re well liked, nor would I want to bullycide high-value individuals. Look at the list of individuals who “talked shit and got hit,” and tell me with a straight face that they didn’t all deserve it.

                  But again, I can’t force anyone out of someone else’s blog, and trolling gets boring after a while anyway. Nothing prevents all the people who left from coming back. They don’t come back for their own reasons.

            • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

              The cryptic leftist impulse: ‘for the good of the ingroup i will engage in conflict with member(s) of the in-group’.

              • jim says:

                It is much more leftist to engage in conflict with members of the ingroup for the supposed good of some outgroup.

          • kawaii_kike says:

            I’d been wondering what happened to peppermint, I must have missed your roasting of him. (Could someone link the destruction of peppermint?) Well for better or worse it seems like shaman or Jewish pedophile or someone out there is the hero we didn’t ask for but possibly needed.

            • Contaminated NEET says:

              Generalissimo Peppermint is gone?
              Another crime that the boomers must pay for.

            • Frederick Algernon says:

              The battle occurred throughout 2018, or rather the final stages. The way JP wrote it seemed like it had been ongoing. The core of the final discussion was that Pepper believed no healthy, red blooded male was attracted to any female under 17. JP systematically took him apart.

              To pepper’s credit, he, at the end, admitted he was wrong, apologized for wasting bandwidth, then said he was taking a break. No ragequit, or promises of absence and hellfire IIRC. This makes him so much better than Koanic or CR IMO. I do miss his comments, if only for how they always seemed to skate between gibberish and brilliance.

              In the time i’ve been paying closest attention, glenfilthie, CR, peppermint, glossoli, and Koanic have all been murderfucked in the same way: they develop a reputation for stupidity, then one person does a takedown, then there is a chainswarm, then they are silenced.

              I wonder who will be next…

              • shaman says:

                You know what? I do feel a bit of regret about some of my “excesses.” So, final bullying of Kookanic, and then I’m done – this time for real.

                Kookanic… is a brony.


                (Funny post, actually; it is humorous and not meant to be taken seriously. Anyway, I’m done)

                • Frederick Algernon says:

                  Jesus Christ you have two speeds, don’t you m8? What a fucking fedora that lad is. I was just about to ask you to give me the mirror treatment as a check up on myself… nevermind. No prisoners, shaman.

                • Koanic says:

                  I haven’t been paying much attention, but I certainly despise those who use the fedposting trope to chill all advocacy for violent resistance. They are cowards covering their own inaction with a cloak of virtue, and utterly un-American.

                • Koanic says:

                  Friendship is Magic is one of the better eusocial kiddie entertainment options; I’ll torrent season 1 now for that purpose. One certainly should not leave one’s tots’ indoctrination to Disney. The Disneyland experience is a blend of ancient pagan festival, new-age Progressivism and undead Americana. All hail the rat god.

                • Frederick Algernon says:

                  Butt out, Koanic. only 4SD and higher are allowed to ride this ride.

                • Simon says:

                  > lives in China.


                • Simon says:

                  > I haven’t been paying much attention


                  You’ve read every comment. You’ve got nothing else to do.

  26. Cuckanic says:

    They call me a “tough nut,” that’s not in vain
    I’ll fedpost your site come all pleasure and pain.
    A mind so diseased as to merit some rhymes,
    Your blog’s the right platform to boast of my crimes.
    I start pointless flame-wars which I never win
    Well, then I bend over and Vox Day goes in.
    When I was made, contraception was used
    My dad’s spunk from my mom’s ass-crack just oozed.
    As sharp as a nigger and equally uppity
    Conceived by mistake, an odious oddity.
    Pretend to be “stoic” to show ’em who’s boss,
    Unaware of how ‘tarded I must come across.
    My mediocre output offends your intelligence,
    But when I’m called out, I lash out in belligerence.
    My skull shape’s so twisted and weird and concave,
    So how many chromosomes do I even have?
    Now I’m your latrine, so feed me your bowels
    My Gab account’s identical to that of Robert Bowers.
    My predictions collapse like a Gay Doomsday Cult,
    I spread endless drivel from “Neon Revolt.”
    A nincompoop midwit whom nobody likes,
    Cartoonishly blame all my troubles on KIKES.
    With sentences garbled like finely-chopped liver,
    I threatened some Muslims and couldn’t deliver.
    Abandoned my loved ones to flee in disgrace,
    On Imgur upload my severed head’s grimace.

    • kawaii_kike says:

      Oh this is just mean, CR gets treated better than this. I think you have to butcher the pronunciation of grimace for the rhyme to work, overall an “A” for effort. Who would have thought that Jim’s blog would be the birthplace of reactionary fanfiction and poetry alike.

      Koanic’s only crime was having kooky and eccentric ideas, that’s not so bad. I think he’s smart, but what do I know, I am but a humble janitor.

  27. simplyconnected says:

    Noticed your sidebar link to spandrell isn’t updated to:

    • simplyconnected says:

      He moved the blog there to avoid being heartisted, as you had suggested in previous post.

  28. lalit says:

    Jim, I don’t believe any of your Grandkids are 14 yet, right? The first thought that came to me was, “Jim’s Grand-daughter”.

    • The Cominator says:

      I think Jim would be opposed to any female relatives of his getting involved in politics and would want them to be housewives…

    • ironic says:

      That is scientifically impossible, lalit. Only adults are mature enough to possess a political worldview, and people become adults exactly when their brains stop maturing – at the age of 25. If you disagree with this, you are a pedophile.

  29. Friendly Fred says:

    Globalism is like Roman Imperialism — Progressivism’s service to the present NeoRoman Empire is comparable to Christianity’s service to the Roman Empire in the 4th Century?

    So the present NeoRoman Empire might in principle function without Progressivism just as the Roman Empire of the 4th Century might in principle have functioned without Christianity? But in fact the NeoRoman Empire in inextricably Progressive just as the Roman Empire of the 4th Century was inextricably Christian?

    (Possibly Jim’s Blue and Red Empires correspond to the Roman Imperial bureaucracies and military establishments respectively?)

    And the ethnic nationalisms of Europe and the US are comparable to the Germanic, proto-Slavic, Pictish, etc. anti-Roman-Imperial tribal forces of the 4th Century?

    Secular Jews tending (as would be expected) to be loyal servants of the NeoRoman Empire?

    And America might become a New Thing but is at present a scene of struggle between Roman and Euro-barbarian tendencies? Its possible New Thingishness perhaps centering on space-colonization?

    (I like the idea of Globalism as NeoRoman Imperialism or as the persistence and perhaps reflowering — following the Enlightenment — of the Roman Imperial Spirit because the historical drama’s more enjoyable when the antagonists are all honorable in their own way.)

    • jim says:

      There is an important difference between progressivism and Christianity. Christianity was stabilized against doctrinal innovation, and holiness spirals when they occurred were directed into harmless activities that were merely ridiculous and self destructive, like Simeon Stylites, rather than ridiculous and destructive. The very holy were sent off into hermitages and such like, rather than getting into the Archbishop’s palace.

      Gibbon ridicules the emperor patronizing the ascetics, but there were far more dangerous holy men around, and the emperor probably had to patronize someone for superior holiness.

      An imperial religion is unavoidable. An imperial religion that is insane and rapidly becoming more insane is avoidable, and will self destruct in the near future. The only question is how many of us will it take with it in its death throes?

      The Roman empire and the holy Roman empire had warriors on top. We have priests on top. Priests have difficulty restraining holiness spirals, and holiness spirals are inevitable when you have open entry into the priesthood.

    • The Cominator says:

      If globalism is the goal then progressivism is supposed to make it work by making differences between groups heretical the problem is this doesn’t work.

      • Friendly Fred says:

        It’s the Feminist side of Progressivism that really bugs me, which is why I like Jim’s essays so much — he’s primarily interested in sex (as well as in natural male class-differences) rather than in ethnicities (apparently the major interest of writers such as Zman).

        Not that ethnicity is altogether insignificant. But sex and natural class (Priest-Warrior-Merchant-Peasant/Laborer) go deeper.

        The Feminist aspect of Progressivism is what bugs me most because I like women a lot so it’s upsetting that they’re cruelly prevented from being sweet and helpful, which is God’s intention for them and their own natural inclination (which I guess has to be nurtured and disciplined if it’s to be fully expressed, just as the natural Warrior realizes his Warrior-potential only if he’s guided through the rigors of Warrior Academy).

        Maybe the Feminist side of Progressivism is just the logical limit of an equalism that starts by denying class-differences then goes on to deny ethnic differences … so that stopping short of the denial of sex-difference would seem arbitrary to those who have gone that far already.

        (Hmm … the Priestly class empowers itself by convincing people that there are no class-differences … how does that work?)

        • The Cominator says:

          Feminism is the purity/holiness spiral of it taking over. Of course they’d do better meet less resistance etc. if they abandoned feminism but the internal logic of a religion of egalitarian insanity means they can’t do that.

  30. It’s very clear now that Nixon wanted to drain the swamp / remove the Cathedral and the swamp / Cathedral couped him w/ Watergate because he was stupid enough to take the blame for something he did not order. He had this old-fashioned loyalty, feeling having to defend anything anybody does in his government. This would be a virtue if it would have actually been his government, but it wasn’t and he didn’t notice that.

    The big question is now if Trump > Nixon.

    One goods news: swamp/Cathedral 2019 is surely < swamp/Cathedral, 1974. They were smarter back then. Jim is convinced about elites having became stupid and I think this is what he is putting his hopes into.

  31. Friendly Fred says:

    Beginning of story for The Cominator (who is its protagonist):

    “It’s the first day of 2036!” I told my slave.

    “Shh,” she mumbled; “I’m still sleeping.”

    “Oh, come on; don’t you want to get up early with me and welcome the new year?”

    “I welcomed it last night,” she grumbled; “leave me alone now.”

    “You were just watching the ball drop on your phone; that doesn’t count!”

    “It does for me, so go away. Wake me up in an hour and half, okay?” My slave turned over onto her other side and went back to sleep.

    I headed into the kitchen to make myself some coffee. Watching the steam rise from the pot I wondered how I’d be spending the day with my slave. Perhaps she’d be willing to clean the bathroom while I did some reading, but probably not. She’d mentioned needing another pair of shoes, so we’d no doubt be heading to the mall at some point.

    I chuckled, remembering Our Mentor Jim’s advice to “spank” disobedient slaves. Several months ago I’d finally gotten to the point of following Jim’s instructions … and she’d said, “Stop! I’m really NOT in the mood for this right now!” So that had been that.

    On the whole, though, I’m quite fond of my slave. I enjoy the way her brow creases as she strives to remember some sub-detail of a conversation she’d had with someone else’s slave that morning, a conversation she’s already been repeating to me for the past thirteen-or-so minutes — one which doesn’t seem to be approaching its presumably dramatic climax.

    And I enjoy opening jars for her when she’s unable to open them, and taking down objects from high shelves for her – things she can’t reach. Sometimes I suspect that she makes a point of reaching for things that she knows to be beyond her grasp – so that her T-shirt will rise up high enough to reveal the Antifa-sign tattooed below her navel, which inevitably results in my tickling her there.

    My slave always giggles when I tickle her Antifa-sign. This strengthens and perhaps in some hard-to-articulate way deepens our Master-Slave relationship.

    • The Cominator says:

      ???? What is this????

      • Eternal Hebrew says:

        He has convinced himself that Jim’s instruction to physically discipline disobedient spouses is ironic, and refuses to comprehend otherwise.

      • Dave says:

        It’s hard for a man to beat a woman he loves. Perhaps necessary at times, but hard.

        • jim says:

          “beat” is the wrong mental image, and implies a wrong, and wrongful, act.

          The correct word is spank.

          And I confidently predict it will be mighty easy to spank a woman you love.

      • Friendly Fred says:

        Cominator, you made me smile above by imagining a doling-out of attractive leftist women as slave-companions to the victorious rightist heroes after the war has been won, so I was imagining what it would be like to be the possessor of such a slave.

        Of course I’m imagining my own likely experience were I to possess one, but I attribute this experience to you because you, not I, will be a victorious rightist hero rewarded with a slave-companion — and in order to make you smile as well.

        Eternal Hebrew, I don’t think that Jim’s being ironic about it — I just think that he and his girlfriend are having fun — sounds cute and makes Jim all the more lovable.

        • Eli says:

          >“It does for me, so go away. Wake me up in an hour and half, okay?” My slave turned over onto her other side and went back to sleep.

          *That’s* your mental image of a *slave* woman? Oh man, you really need to free up your mind there.

          If anything, that’d be ME saying this to the woman.

          • Friendly Fred says:

            Eli, it’s a humorously-intended imagining of how a supposed slave-woman would inevitably become a wife, with one’s relationship to her being pretty much that of husbands to wives in ordinary marriages. So the repeated uses of the word “slave” are supposed to make you smile.

            Augustine lived for years with a “concubine” with whom he had a son — she was basically his wife, and he says so (in the Confessions). I don’t know whether “concubine” in these translations is supposed to indicate that the woman was legally his slave or whether it’s just supposed to mean something like “live-in girlfriend” though. Presumably the word in the Latin original is almost the same.

            • Eli says:

              Fred: yes, I think I got it. And yes, I partially agree that even a nominally slave woman, once she becomes de facto wife, can get away with much more than just an ordinary slave.

              However, it’s also a personality thing. In other words, if a man isn’t the kind to let things slide and, in fact, is the one who is demanding, there is going to be much less of that fresh attitude from the wife/slave.

        • kawaii_kike says:

          Lucky Cominator gets his own fanfic.
          But in reality any former antifa bitch would need to be disciplined a lot harder than simply tickling her. I hope the actual Cominator keeps his women in check better than his fictional counterpart.

          The connotation of spanking seems too playful. If someone told they spanked their wife, I would think they were just kinky fucks. And the connotation of beating conjures images of a man pummeling his wife with closed fists. Hitting and slapping conjure the appropriate connotations of stern but appropriate force.

          Don’t describe Jim’s sexual domination of his women as “cute”, the domination of women is a serious issue not some quirky fetish.

          In case anyone needs a reminder, Here’s Jim’s post on the proper etiquette for discipling your women.

          • Friendly Fred says:

            “Charming”, then? I didn’t use the word “cute” with any kind of diminishing intent. But all flourishing couple-relationships look cute in a puppies-playing kind of way to outsiders.

  32. Pseudo-chrysostom says:

    Cuckservatives fear victory.

    They fear ‘going too far’; they fear being the first one to pull the trigger; they fear taking steps outside of the ‘business as usual’.

    They prefer losing safely, to winning dangerously.

    Like many sentiments, it can be adaptive in it’s proper operating envelope, it is adaptive to have rulership that avoids foolhardy ad-ventures.

    It is not adaptive, however, for rulership that wishes to *retain* rulership; to *regain* rulership.

  33. yewotm8 says:

    So what’s your take on all this bullshit about invading Venezuela and Iran? John Bolton and Mike Pompeo and all those other jewlovers that Trump allows into his inner circle all pushing for needless wars reminiscent of the Bush era?

    • The Cominator says:

      Bolton is a lackey Trump uses to scare foreigners.

      Pompeo being a deep stater that Trump seems to have some odd respect for him is far more dangerous and is the biggest secret enemy who still remains in the Trump administration.

      Trump should have kept on Tillerson who despite whatever personal dislike they had for each other did the right thing and purged the state department.

      We should not invade Venezuala but it would not be a disaster if we did.

      It would be a disaster if we attacked Iran but its not realistic to do so without 10 divisions (and probably 20) and we would need to bring back the draft to allocate that amount of forces to Iran…

      A ground invasion of Iran isn’t going to happen. Don’t get too fixated on Jews.

    • jim says:

      Trump has ended one endless war, and has not started any new ones.

      • vxxc says:

        Trump knows losing wars are a snare for the President.
        That’s why State makes sure we lose.

    • Pompous Aristocrat says:

      I do remember Jim saying a while ago that Venezuela would in an ideal world become a holding of ExxonMobil, after military conquest.

      I have to agree, it would be a shame to let those resources go to waste.

  34. Oliver Cromwell says:

    Trump does not understand well enough what is going on to qant a Reichstag Fire, and he has made himself much less worth killing.

    It has become much more likely than not that the Democrats will now just run out the timer.

    Trump has not used his position to establish a successor or enduring organisations.

    • The Cominator says:

      Sessions caused him to lose two years and unfortunately he felt he couldn’t politically get rid of him (Q-tards were a part of this problem because angry mobs at Trump rallies should have been demanding that Sessions be fired AND shot afterwords)… things are going better now with Barr in place.

  35. Zach says:

    Barr’s letters are worth reading. This is a decent read, don’t forget to check the links:

  36. […] on the potential coup…perhaps by Dems, or by Trump […]

  37. vxxc says:

    Trump’s not a coward.
    He has a picture we don’t.

    This isn’t GOT.
    It’s Reality.

    Sir Jim et al – there is something missing in your analysis: America is a FEDERATION and always has been. We are not saved or doomed by the fate of one leader or the Capitol. America politically and administratively looks like The Internet – because the Internet is also a Federation – because the Internet Internet evolved in America. I’m just trying here to find a way to explain this….

    Fish rots from head down doesn’t hold.
    We’re not even a school of fish.
    We’re an enormously advantaged in geography and resources ecosysystem and it will take more than HR to kill us.
    Indeed the only group ever to seriously consider our destruction was the USSR and their solution was nuclear saturation bombing.

    We’re just too big. Too many want to live.
    Islam did not destroy Spain, ultimately even Greece.?
    Communism didn’t destroy Russia or China.
    Communism will not destroy us.

    It has harmed us and will keep harming us.
    But that’s all.

    Trump falling means war, that’s all.
    We’ll win.

    Then again Trump forced into coup may mean war (he will have to be forced) but you see wars always come sooner or later.

    • Samuel Skinner says:

      “Sir Jim et al – there is something missing in your analysis: America is a FEDERATION and always has been. ”

      It really isn’t. Trannism extends across the entire country including the South. The only areas Poz takes time to enter are rural areas and religious enclaves that depart from the mainstream (which include the Mormons to a degree). The only successful resistance is the Ultra-Orthodox and Amish.

      “Islam did not destroy Spain, ultimately even Greece.?”

      Because their stint was short. Egypt got permanent Islamic rule with the result the current population is dumber then blacks in the US (IQ 81).

      “Communism didn’t destroy Russia or China.”

      If the TFR doesn’t climb back it, it will have.

      • vxxc says:

        America is a Federation politically: Articles of Confederation.
        Federal Constitution of 1789.
        The Southern Confederacy.

        Also socially, ethnically.

        That the Left picks off weaklings from FUpped families wherever they find prey does not mean we are universally tranny or pozzed.
        You are equating that they exist with our annihilation which it is not.
        Should they be exterminated or at least repressed?
        You’re watching the water go out now from the Left as the Right wing Tsunami approaches. These things take time- but not forever.
        It would be helpful to perhaps consider conflict and war the human normal as indeed they are and not conflate conflict with the apocalypse.

        The Leftist coup failed. A farce really.
        They’ve been exposed not just as corrupt traitors but failures.
        They Failed.

        What happens next isn’t up to them.
        Its up to the rest of us.
        My recommendation is above.

        • The Cominator says:

          My recommendation is for leftist males ESPECIALLY leftist white males to become part of The Final Solution to the Leftist Problem..

          Leftist women who are physically attractive will be auctioned off as “bound companions” to right wing men (who can sell them too). Lifetime non-hereditary and non-commercial (its not allowed to put them in most aspects of the workforce) slavery for them.

          • Friendly Fred says:

            Be kind to your slave — buy her nice clothes (she’ll tell you what she prefers) and give her hugs, and listen to her while she describes the details of her day. Take her for walks in the park on Sundays.

          • Deus Vult says:

            Deus Vult.

      • jim says:

        > Trannism extends across the entire country including the South.

        The USA ceased to be a federation in the War of Northern Aggression and the Mormon war, in that a uniform state religion was imposed everywhere.

        That state religion was originally fairly sane, but rapidly got crazier. It is now heading to infinite craziness, as each leftist strives to be lefter than the next.

        A state religion with open entry, no archbishop, and no grand inquisitor, is going to suffer a holiness spiral. Whites always have a state religion, so always have to have closed entry to the priesthood of the state religion, an archbishop, and a grand inquisitor. And if the grand inquisitor decides you are a heretic, or engaging in doctrinal innovation, you at best are excluded from statal and quasistatal jobs, and worst executed.

        • vxxc says:

          You are only looking at religion.
          And only the official religion.

          You are ignoring the power and hence politics of our federation.
          The Left harms those who put themselves in its nets, usually for money, status or power. – and preys on the weak.
          Not so successful with the strong.
          Truly these are weak tyrants.

    • Eynon says:

      >The US looks like the internet

      Not really. Every American city over 500,000 people is basically the same city. It’s a remarkably uniform country considering it’s size and population.

      The issue here isn’t the US being destroyed in ballistic war, it’s Brazilification.

      • Alrenous says:

        Every American city over 500,000 people is basically the same city. It’s a remarkably uniform country considering it’s size and population.

        Incredibly impressive, and equally tedious.

  38. Will he cuck? says:

    If Trump doesn’t move now then he is a coward.

    • jim says:

      The time to move approaches, but is not here yet.

      I would not second guess Trump.

      • The Cominator says:

        Trump’s weaknesses are trusting people he shouldn’t sometimes (most of them are gone but Pompeo is still around and I consider Pompeo a secret enemy) and being somewhat lazy when it comes to handling details personally even when there is not anyone else he can trust to do so (normally at his level he SHOULD delegate things but sometimes such as with vetting people he really can’t trust others).

        But Trump in terms of timing and planning attacks is almost infallible as he is almost infallible when it comes to economic questions.

      • Will he cuck? says:

        Would the take down of your site suffice as a signal that the time has come?

        • jim says:

          Other sites more vulnerable than mine will come down first – though the closure of Heartiste and the pressure on the internet archive is a chill wind blowing.

          I am making preparations for my Internet presence to be entirely located outside China but inside the Chinese hegemony, which has the nearest thing to free speech you can get.

          • Neurotoxin says:

            I am making preparations for my Internet presence…

            Jim, can you say more about this? I’ve been thinking about it since the Heartiste purge.

            • jim says:

              As I said on gab:The following domain names are in the Chinese hegemony, or playing the Chinese hegemony against the US hegemony and the Soviet hegemony: *.hk, *.th *.vn *.kh *.la *.mm *.mn, or *.ph The following domain names are in the Soviet hegemony: *.by or *.kg. I am not currently aware of hosting services with reasonable prices in the Soviet hegemony, though they probably exist. There are a bunch of reasonable cloud hosting services in Hong Kong, with the huge advantage that they speak English, of a sort, and market to English speaking people. I recommend you administer your server through the command line and logon by SSH, as this involves fewer potentially hostile people in the chain controlling your website and blog. But outside of the US and Europe, cpanel access is probably safe enough, and the linux command line tough for many people. Also, command line access generally costs more, but there is a reason why it costs more.

              Not moving my blog domain name, but making preparations to change names in a hurry.

              • Dave says:

                Might be a good idea to create a .onion domain (cost: $0) and share it with us now so we can find you after the censors shut down

                • jim says:

                  I probably should in case the heat gets intense, but for the moment, just going to get a domain outside the US hegemony.

              • Neurotoxin says:

                The following domain names are in the Chinese hegemony, or playing the Chinese hegemony against the US hegemony and the Soviet hegemony…

                Cool, thanks.

          • Neurotoxin says:

            Sweet! Trump is aware of the problem! We knew he was from things he’ said, but this is a big step and a very good sign:


            White House Creates Online Portal For Reporting Social Media Censorship

            “This afternoon, the White House launched a new online portal that will allow users who have been banned or suspended from social media platforms to share their stories with the White House.

            The portal, called the “Tech Bias Story Sharing Tool,“asks users if any social media platform – Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Youtube, or any other – has taken action against the user’s account.”

  39. Chad Thundercock says:

    If a Congrefs can be created once, it can be created twice.

  40. Chad Thundercock says:

    At this point they’re probably wishing that they’d blamed the Israelis rather than the Russians.

    • jim says:

      Yes – would have found no end of Israeli government sponsored contacts with Trump.

      • Mister Grumpus says:

        Dude. Wait. Hang on a second.

        Could pivoting to Israeli Collusion actually be their winning move here, or at least be vaguely perceived as such? To smite Trump and the right-wing Zionistas with the same stone?

        Crazy like a fox? Eh?

        • jim says:

          Trouble is that “Israeli Collusion” is going to smite the white and disproportionately Jewish wing of the Democrat party.

          One way ingrouping for progressive Jews is a great big unprincipled exception that could blow up in their faces at any moment. Jews are in continual danger of being deemed white by browns. At the moment they get to be deemed white or nonwhite as convenient, and this privilege is starting to piss off the brown wing of the Democrat party. “Israeli Collusion” could result in the political coalition fracturing on racial lines, which is the natural order of things and bound to happen sooner or later. If they try “Israeli collusion”, going to happen sooner.

          Holocaustianity is brown status for Jews, and if you think we are tired of it, actual browns are really tired of it.

          • Mister Grumpus says:

            > Trouble is that “Israeli Collusion” is going to
            > smite the white and disproportionately Jewish
            > wing of the Democrat party.

            I know. But that’s why the Ascendents over there might just flip their shit and go for it one day. Knockout game, remember? Executive function.
            Impulse control.

            But I wasn’t sufficiently clear-headed to put it into words as succinctly as you have. So thank you for that.

  41. Bubbasmith says:

    Point of correction: the Mueller report confirms that Russia DID try to forge relationships and collude with the Trump campaign, but was rebuffed or ignored each time. It’s to be expected that the Russians would try, as its in their interest to do so and such is life in the international system. What I think the report neglects is that the obama admin tried to facilitate their efforts to entrap Trump and his campaign.

    • The Cominator says:

      Its a lie that the Russians were trying to do this, US and Five Eyes intelligence agents maybe some of who were originally from Russia and who pretended to be Russian agents tried to do this in order to try to frame Trump.

    • jim says:


      The Mueller report “confirms” no such thing.

      Mueller is making shit up. One lie, all lies. Show us the evidence. Don’t show us Mueller telling us that there is evidence.

      If Russia got involved in US politics, Mueller would have charges in court.

      It is analogous to “A rape on campus”. The point of the “Rape on Campus” story was that the University of Virginia was dismissing rape victims. They had thirty rape accusations and in each case chose no disciplinary action – therefore either all rape complaints are false, as near to all of them as make no difference, or the University of Virginia is ignoring an enormous rape problem. But they went with a case where the “victim” had made no complaint.

      Which tells you that all the other complaints smelled even worse than the complaint they went with.

      That the cases that went to court were frivolous and involved no charges or accusations of Russian government involvement, should tell you that Mueller’s evidence in all their other allegations is even worse.

    • shaman says:

      >It’s to be expected that the Russians would try, as its in their interest to do so and such is life in the international system.

      Colluding with the Trump campaign *directly* would have been stupid; Putin is astute and experienced enough to avoid newb blunders of this sort, as they are prone to massively backfire. If the Russians did interfere for Trump, they could rather have done it by instigating an online influence campaign, and it would be excruciatingly difficult (basically next to impossible) to pinpoint the specific culprits and link them to Moscow. Five Eyes is not omnipotent; an anonymous Kremlin-paid troll temporarily residing in e.g. Micronesia and going “behind 7 proxies” cannot be successfully identified. This gives a heavy clout of plausible deniability to any government that seeks to interfere in another’s politics, be it Russia or even Israel.

      In 2020, expect many governments, and probably private companies too, to utilize online psyops to influence American public opinion; don’t expect the FBI to come up with anything other than rough speculation about it all.

      • jim says:

        But the Russians did not try, or if they did, Mueller could not find anything plausible.

        • shaman says:


          Personally, I take it for granted that all governments, or nearly all of them, engage in cyberspace influence campaigns aimed at foreign audiences. Regarding the 2020 elections, I have little doubt that Iran will try to interfere in favor of the Democrats, for instance. It’s a matter of scope and expertise, for the most part.

  42. George says:

    Over two years into his presidency* you’re still preoccupied with its day to day political events. What would it take to convince you that Trump is irrelevant? The step-change upward in illegal immigration is apparently not sufficient and I wonder if anything would be.

    Trump did one and only one thing: bought a little time, a little delay in the inexorable process. The US and the West in general are beyond saving. Get out while you can.

    * Not really the right word since he is not in control of events.

    • Samuel Skinner says:

      The presidency is important as long as people believe it is important. Because if they believe it is important they will be willing to escalate in order to possess it or deny it to their enemies; in the case of the presidency, this involves taking apart the last vestiges that prevent things from going to hell.

      “The step-change upward in illegal immigration is apparently not sufficient”

      Those people haven’t lived here any amount of time. They can be expelled relatively easy if there is will at the top. They only matter if the situation is stable long enough for them to become entrenched; one or two years is not enough.

      • Chad Thundercock says:

        Anyone who came here from somewhere else, we can send back, unto the nth generation. If you think that there’s some semi-mystical process of “entrenchment”, you haven’t read much history.

        • Samuel Skinner says:

          I don’t mean it can’t be done. I mean it has a significantly higher chance of requiring more then just Operation Wetback.

        • Dave says:

          E.g. the Dominican Republic, whose 2010 Constitution retroactively revoked the birthright citizenship guaranteed in the 1929 Constitution. Thousands of black families who lived in the DR for generations have been rounded up and deported to Haiti, and Dominicans are glad to be rid of them. See also the Rohingya in Burma.

    • RDG says:

      Get out where George?

  43. Neurotoxin says:

    Heartsie just got purged.

    Wow. Heartiste being purged was inevitable sooner or later, but I still got a mini adrenalin surge just now when I went to his page and verified that it has happened.

    This is a test to see what they can get away with, since he’s one of the lynchpins of the Alt-right, and of course they’ll get away with it. I mean, what’s he going to do, sue? It’s not like banning someone from your blog service is illegal.

    I have some notes from our host on blogging ant-fragility. Time to dig em up.

    • The Cominator says:

      As I said on the other thread. Cathedral and glow in the darks are flailing desperately in panic because the Barr tab is due.

      • Neurotoxin says:


        What are you referring to regarding Barr? I can’t tell.

        • jim says:

          Barr is investigating Democrat crimes.

          So far, not putting the squeeze on low level operators. Needs to do that to get some results.

          • The Cominator says:

            Lisa page will flip and Coney being a double agent will flip immediately when the time is right.

            • Neurotoxin says:

              Con(m)ey being a double agent…

              Come on!

              • Neurotoxin says:

                Whoops, meant to close blockquote.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I have no idea what the code system for this board is…

                  Comey’s actions mostly seem batshit insane if he were on the other side for real but very explainable if you work backwards from the theory hes been a double agent (on Trump’s side or the pro Trump faction in military intelligence) all along.

                • jim says:

                  The code system for this blog is, of course, a subset of html:

                  <blockquote>for blockquote</blockquote>

                  <em>for emphasis</em>

                  <b>for bold</b>

                  &lt; for <
                  &gt; for >

                  Thus &lt;/sarcasm&gt; for </sarcasm>

                  As it is tricky to write </sarcasm> in html, the unsmily /s is good sarcasm marker. On the internet, hard to tell sarcasm from genuine insanity.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Testing blockquote.

                  CR says

                  Communism is great and everyone agrees except the Jews

                • alf says:


                • alf says:

                  <blockquote>test two</blockquote>

                • alf says:

                  I don’t see what I did wrong with test two.

                • jim says:

                  &gt; displays as >

                  To get actual indentation, use actual <blockquote>, not &lt;blockquote&gt;

                  &lt;blockquote&gt;this &lt;/blockquote&gt; displays as <blockquote>this</blockquote>

                  <blockquote>this</blockquote> displays as


                  And, by the way, email your .htaccess

                  <em>this</em> displays as this
                  <b>this</b> displays as this
                  <b><em>this</em></b> displays as this

                • shaman says:

                  <blockquote>This is a test designed to provoke your emotional response</blockquote>

                • shaman says:

                  <blockquote><p>This is a test designed to provoke your emotional response</p></blockquote>

                • shaman says:

                  This is a test designed to provoke your emotional response

                • shaman says:

                  Capitalism was invented in the 18th century by the filthy, rat-faced, hook-nosed kikes. Join me so that together we will abolish it and then I will slaughter your entire family we will live in eternal paradise. Hail fellow proletarians.

                • alf says:


                  But what if I want to say &gt ; without the in-between space?

                • pdimov says:


            • Neurotoxin says:

              Comey’s actions mostly seem batshit insane if he were on the other side for real but very explainable if you work backwards from the theory hes been a double agent…

              Please. Comey’s actions are those of a careerist who just wanted to keep his head down and thought Clinton was going to win. He does have swamp sympathies though. Not surprising, since that’s the sewer in which he swam.
              Now, no one regards him as reliable, which is sensible since he’s not.

              • The Cominator says:

                He sabotaged the birch badly twice.

                • BC says:

                  You’re mistaking his stupidity for slyness. The man harassed the wrong guy for the Anthrax attacks for years because a fucking dog altered on him. He’s a fucking idiot who hurt Hillary while he was trying to help her.

                  So what evidence did the FBI have against Hatfill? There was none, so the agency did a Hail Mary, importing two bloodhounds from California whose handlers claimed could sniff the scent of the killer on the anthrax-tainted letters. These dogs were shown to Hatfill, who promptly petted them. When the dogs responded favorably, their handlers told the FBI that they’d “alerted” on Hatfill and that he must be the killer.

                  You’d think that any good FBI agent would have kicked these quacks in the fanny and found their dogs a good home. Or at least checked news accounts of criminal cases in California where these same dogs had been used against defendants who’d been convicted — and later exonerated. As Pulitzer Prize-winning Los Angeles Times investigative reporter David Willman detailed in his authoritative book on the case, a California judge who’d tossed out a murder conviction based on these sketchy canines called the prosecution’s dog handler “as biased as any witness that this court has ever seen.”

                  Instead, Mueller, who micromanaged the anthrax case and fell in love with the dubious dog evidence, personally assured Ashcroft and presumably George W. Bush that in Steven Hatfill the bureau had its man. Comey, in turn, was asked by a skeptical Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz if Hatfill was another Richard Jewell — the security guard wrongly accused of the Atlanta Olympics bombing. Comey replied that he was “absolutely certain” they weren’t making a mistake.


                • jim says:

                  We are prone to everestimate the intelligence of our ruling elite, because the aura of power makes stupidity seems smart, so we look for clever explanations of simple incompetence and stupidity.

                  Selection for political correctness tend to select for stupidity. Since the candidate is required to affirm absurd and mutually contradictory beliefs, the smarter the candidate is, the more he is apt to come up with response that attempts to make sense of nonsense, which to the dimmer members of the committee examining his answers, looks like a retreat from the bailey to the motte. And since you are not supposed to retreat to bailey except when under attack, fails to get the job.

                • The Cominator says:

                  There is a certain mediocre level of intelligence people in top Cathedral job were selected for back when Comey got his job (they’ve started selecting for outright retarded stupidity lately though). Though Biden was in the past selected for outright stupidity most of them in the past were selected for intellectual mediocrity and conformity but not per se extreme stupidity.

                  Comey’s actions are incredibly stupid not those of a mediocre intellect but IF hes a double agent they would all make sense… thus I still believe my double agent theory Comey also strikes me as mentally odd but not incredibly stupid but I realize other people will find it incredible.

                  I think we shall eventually find out…

                • Alrenous says:

                  We are prone to everestimate the intelligence of our ruling elite

                  Power is always competitive. Absent extraordinary luck, the smarter person will win the competition.
                  Yes, their flunkies are amazingly stupid. And there’s a lot more flunkies than actual elites. Actual power, extrapolating only slightly from Foseti, is held by someone you’ve never heard of. As an example, you’ve heard of three-letter agency heads, because they don’t have the power to stop the press from talking about them.

                • jim says:

                  > > We are prone to overestimate the intelligence of our ruling elite

                  > Power is always competitive. Absent extraordinary luck, the smarter person will win the competition.

                  If your coworker is appointed by a committee, you will find he is at least as stupid as the most stupid person on the committee.

                  If people got their positions by ability to move heavy sword around faster than the reflexes of other people seeking the position, as William the Marshal acquired his wife, his lands and his job as Marshal, we would at least be selecting for reaction time, which correlates better with IQ than the SAT does these days.

                  Committees sometimes work better when, as is often the case with the board of directors, their own money depends on choosing a smart man.

                • Steve Johnson says:

                  Power is always competitive. Absent extraordinary luck, the smarter person will win the competition.

                  That’s not true at all. Play a 3+ player game and see who wins – the typical pattern is that the feared player never wins because the other players gang up on him knowing that if they don’t band together the better player (in this instance the smarter person) will beat them individually and win but if they gang up on him then they each have a shot to win.

                • Alrenous says:

                  Play a 3+ player game

                  Seems you don’t know how intelligence works. The smart thing to do is not to look fearsome. Which, if you’re smart enough, is not difficult.

                  Part of doing this IRL is to look fearsome in games, so by contrast you look even more like a teddy bear IRL. Or vice versa, e.g. I deliberately throw poker games and Diplomacy because winning these games isn’t worth having anyone work out how amazingly good at lying I am.

                  appointed by a committee

                  The point of stupid committees is to be easily manipulated. Committees aren’t real and don’t have power. They have to follow a ‘thought leader’. The thing to do is to pick say eight complete idiots and one lesser idiot they all look up to, and make sure the lesser idiot’s mind is in your pocket. You achieve total control but all the responsibility is dissipated. Plus the lesser idiot gets to feel important and talk himself up to the press and so on.

                  Of course occasionally the committee is picked wrong and their decision goes off the rails, but that’s simply a cost of doing business the proggie way.

                • jim says:

                  Reflect on the Challenger report. NASA was run by idiots.

                  So evidently the cream does not rise to the top, at least not by individual action.

                  Governments and corporations do not find it at all easy to accomplish meritocracy

                  Among the problems: It is substantially easier for people to cooperate if they are at roughly the same IQ level – hard to cooperate across a twenty point IQ gap.

                  A committee effectively acts as a stupid person, dumber than its individual members.

                • Koanic says:

                  Past a certain point, IQ is poorly correlated with generic success because honesty * heresy is negatively correlated with generic success, and high IQ is correlated with heresy, and some of the high IQ care more about honesty than success.

                  In an advanced holiness spiral with a bio-Leninist component, high IQ itself is eventually targeted as heretical, due to the translation problem across a 2-SD gap.

                  This results in the amusing spectacle of the intelligent Leftist Jewish man getting devoured for his high IQ. The Jews had a hand in starting this process, of course, as the Weinstein biography of Bob Dylan’s life illustrates in its deconstruction of last-generation’s leftist square, whose character is the focus of “Ballad of a Thin Man”.


                  Today’s “Dark Web” is that same club, still trying to be hip. What would Weimerica be without Jewish cultural leadership? Rise Amereicha.

                • Alrenous says:

                  NASA isn’t about hurting people and breaking their stuff. Impact zero. Nobody ambitious wants to work there. Which is why it basically doesn’t work.

                • jim says:

                  Army does not work either.

                • Alrenous says:

                  Yes. In the army you’re only allowed to bully stupid foreigners. Hence nobody ambitious wants to be a general, and they’re all functionally retarded. It’s a punishment detail.

                • shaman says:

                  What would Weimerica be without Jewish cultural leadership? Rise Amereicha.

                  By the way Kookanic, what’s with your endless Nazi LARPing on Gab and elsewhere? You’ve previously claimed to be 14% Ashkenazi, which is not insubstantial. Get a grip on yourself, dude.

          • The Cominator says:

            Jim you think Barr is screwing up things seem to be going well?

            • jim says:

              I think Barr is not screwing up – like Trump, moving cautiously. I see fear among the Democrats. Applying the screws to low level enemy agents who will turn on their superiors is going to be perceived by them as a Trump self coup, so have to have all your ducks in row when you start applying the screws.

              But if he does not apply the screws soon, then no Trump self coup. If no self coup, likely a Democrat coup.

              • The Cominator says:

                I don’t think they need low level operators I think the evidence to hang them is there, I think Lisa Page will sing and I think Comey had planned to sing at the 1st opportunity years ago. I percieve the big obstacle at this point being getting the potential trials transferred outside of DC.

                The DC jury pool hates Trump and loves the swamp… that is the most difficult problem if they are all acquitted it does no good and for Trump to order military tribunals and for that to go over he would need an ironclad public reveal of something much like pizzagate.

                • jim says:

                  Pretty sure that a great deal more dirt will be revealed under pressure. Pretty sure that the elite uses shared participation in blackmailable activities to generate cohesion – so that they can trust people because who might go to jail if their cabal loses power. And even if they don’t their arrogance and confidence in their eternal rule, and their inward feeling that justice is purely a matter of who/whom guarantees a lot more crimes where those came from.

  44. […] More madness to come. […]

  45. Samuel Skinner says:

    Heartsie just got purged. I know, I know- hard to predict what is next this close to the event horizon. Still, I can’t help feeling that things are going to come crashing down soon and not in the 2030s or 40s.

  46. […] Source: Jim […]

  47. mobiuswolf says:

    That’s why he is disassociating from the investigation, like he’s watching with us.
    Think that’ll work?

  48. vxxc says:

    Trump should be and can be looked at from results over time.

    He wanted to not build sub prime housing but instead palaces and casinos and he did.

    He wanted to be President and is.

    He wanted tariffs on China and lo we’ve got them…and they’re mysteriously becoming permanent tariffs – which will cripple China’s ability to surpass America as we’re no longer going to pay for it.

    Trump so far just wants to be President.
    If he becomes a tragic figure it will be due to that not being enough…

    Or perchance it is enough.
    Or perchance they reach for him … nearly certain exploding America into insurrection and war. The Progs will not have victory and competent government will.

    Or perchance they reach for him and again fall short .
    They’re not really good at this you see.
    No prog survives what they’ll unleash.
    We here may not either but them?

  49. alf says:

    > That John McCain was executed, and various Dems are wearing ankle monitors.

    Amazing news, good to hear the war is already over. I’ll be sure to sleep like a lamb tonight.

    • shaman says:

      With an IQ of 170, Koanic must be knowledgeable about such matters.

    • Koanic says:

      Your ejaculation is premature. Trump and Qanon act to preserve the USA, concealing crimes that would discredit her institutions, extending the miscegenatory phase of decadent empire.

      • alf says:

        Once again, your 180 IQ has proven me wrong. Forgive me for being so brash, but I must admit I am curious: how did McCain really meet his end? A secret injection, administered by Bannon? A rogue doctor, excising part of his brain instead of his tumor??

        And I realize that the exact names of dems with ankle bands is level 6 classified (if not level 7), but one cannot help but wonder: Nancy Pelosi? AOC?? Ooh such exciting times!

        • Koanic says:

          CNN – Kasich Saying John McCain Was Put to Death

          • shaman says:

            Oh wow, that’s all the evidence I need: a 7-second-clip, run in a loop, in which Herr Kasich — who, presumably, is in on it all (???) — says “put to death,” which may or may not have been a way of saying “put to rest,” or whatever.

            I need to apologize for the 6 gorillion times that I insulted you to your face, and insinuated that you’re not as intelligent as you like you to pretend. With each and every post, you demonstrate such spectacular brilliance as only a goofy doofus such as myself would deny.

            • Koanic says:

              You are implying some sort of history between us, but I have no idea who you are.

              • shaman says:

                If there’s one thing everyone enjoys, it’s the spectacle of a blow-hard nincompoop edging for the tried-and-tested “tough guy act” after being resoundingly humiliated in an otherwise convivial setting.

                Here’s your history: in your ill-conceived quest to prove how “above it all” you are, you have alienated a dozen or so people who might have been sympathetic to you, initially. I am one of those people, and unlike those who instantly crap their pants when a sad-sack like you says, “My IQ is THIS high,” I responded by calling you a pudding-brained dipshit right then and there.

                Which, incidentally, is what I’m doing here.

                • Koanic says:

                  Oh no, a dozen!

                • shaman says:

                  I’m not done with you just yet.

                  As every Pick-Up Artist (and/or CIA deception planner) will tell you, people can’t help but assume that “rare = precious.” This is known as the Scarcity Principle. It’s one of Robert Cialdini’s 6 Principles of Persuasion, and one of Robert Greene’s 48 Laws of Power. Perhaps you’re familiar with that stuff.

                  One need not be a professional shrink to be able to infer why you keep peddling nonsense, like you did ITT: you constantly fall victim to kook bait, for no reason other than it (the kook bait) being presented as “secret knowledge” that only a select few luminaries are privy to. Indeed, you take pride in supposedly being “smart,” yet one of the oldest tricks in the book — disguising one’s ruse, or psyop, as a crumb of unique wisdom — gets you. Every single time.

                  (*Now* I’m done with you)

                • Koanic says:

                  The high IQ are hardly immune to tinfoil hattery; moreso, if anything. Vox’s excessive indulgence therein was one of the reasons I parted ways with that faction. Nevertheless, reality is weird. As for Mossad, it’s possible they were involved in 9/11, and other events on American soil. The muzzies weren’t exactly subtle about it. But Mueller’s betrayal is by far more relevant. He left the door open, and the details of who entered and why hardly matter.

                  “When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none. 44Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished. 45Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first.”

                  As for midwit incredulity, anyone high IQ rapidly learns to stop caring about it.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “The high IQ are hardly immune to tinfoil hattery”

                  If you really are high IQ and believe in the nonsense known as “Q” you are proof of that.

                  When “Q” said “trust Sessions” it told you all you need to know. Posts believing in “Q” and especially those that imply that all on this board believe should be treated like CR’s posts claiming that we all agree that capitalism is bad.

                • Koanic says:

                  You really, seriously, have not studied the high IQ at all if you haven’t noticed that a very substantial percentage of them are absolutely bonkers.

                • jim says:

                  Pretty sure that this is just the effect of low status and social exclusion. When smart people hang out with other smart people, they do OK.

                  You also have to learn to deal with normies, and there is no one to teach you.`

                • Koanic says:

                  Think about how born rich people, or super-attractive people, tend to be out of touch with reality in significant ways. With IQ it’s even more so, because they are neurological outliers, not just physiological or circumstantial.


                • Not Tom says:

                  What is this nonsense about high IQ people being crazy, Koanic? I’m sure there are a few crazy ones, just as there are a few crazy people in nearly any group of humans, but high intelligence correlates _inversely_ with neuroticism and the various mental disorders. Aside from ASDs, which hardly classify as “tinfoil hattery”, I haven’t seen a single bit of evidence linking high IQ with any form of mental illness.

                  Highly-intelligent people may initially appear to be crazy to the less-intelligent who simply can’t fathom them, but those doubts are usually resolved very quickly after noticing that the supposedly-crazy person’s predictions are always right – a circumstance which is noticeably absent in your case.

                  Stupidity and gullibility go together like peanut butter and jelly. Smart people take one look at the average troofer piece and immediately spot dozens of false or misleading facts and hundreds of logical inconsistencies, and promptly dismiss it as the garbage it is.

                • jim says:

                  Highly intelligent people are apt to deviate from the consensus of less intelligent people, therefore tend to be perceived as weird. Sometimes they internalize this, which is bad for them. For a highly intelligent person to function in a group of less intelligent, he needs a certain amount of arrogance, assholery, and alpha.

                  It is a bit like peacocking. A costume that is gay on a man you could call gay, does not look gay on a man who might be able to take you in a fight.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Deviating from the normie consensus is great. I enjoy hearing novel theories about what’s really behind the Trump kayfabe. It’s often just idle speculation, but sometimes there are real insights to be found.

                  I don’t consider Qtardery and trooferism to be in that category. Those are also consensus narratives, and believed by people every bit as ignorant and gullible as the average CNN viewer, but who happen to be anti-establishment rather than pro-establishment. That may make them more relatable, but not more intelligent.

                • jim says:

                  If Troofers were anti establishment, they would have noticed the strange obliviousness of Mueller’s FBI to terrorists who were hilariously open about being terrorists.

                  Troofers are FBI shills. They always blame Mossad, for whom there is nothing that they could spin as evidence, and not the FBI and Mueller, for whom there is no end of stuff they could quite reasonably spin as evidence. If they want to claim the terrorists were actors, there is plenty of stuff that could reasonably be argued as evidence that the terrorists were FBI actors hired by Mueller, though in reality of course, the reason that Mueller and the FBI ignored Islamic terrorists is not because the terrorists were actors, but because the FBI had been told by Mueller and his predecessor to find white male Christian terrorists, irrespective of whether they existed or not, and ignore non white male terrorists and ignore non Christian terrorists even if the terrorists were getting in their faces.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Yup, most troofers are probably FBI shills. Pre-seeding ludicrous conspiracy theories as a way cover up real misconduct is a tactic older than feudalism. But the feeb wouldn’t keep casting those nets if they didn’t catch at least a few fish. I’ve even known one in person – from an occupational setting, 9-5 job, almost no chance he was moonlighting as a paid shill, just wasn’t the sharpest knife in the drawer.

                  Q is probably not a government operation, but the people who fall for it are of the same constitution as those who fall for trooferism. A mark is a mark, regardless of who’s running the con.

                • jim says:

                  Well, doubtless the troofer’s catch a few suckers, that being the objective of the scam, but any time any time a troofer tells me “hail fellow anti establishment right wing racist misogynist reactionary”, he is blue pilled on women and hates Trump. He also focuses on Israeli Nationalist Jews, who are not causing us any problems and have no real motive to cause us problems, and ignores the progressive Jews overrepresented in Harvard and in the permanent government who perceive themselves as in exile in a hostile country among hostile people whose destruction they seek.

                • Steve Johnson says:

                  He also focuses on Israeli Nationalist Jews, who are not causing us any problems and have no real motive to cause us problems

                  I take minor issue with this – Jews like Max Boot, Bill Kristol and Ben Shapiro cause us lots of problems and actively sabotage efforts to solve problems and they’re very much focused on Israeli Nationalism.

                  The key distinction is that they’re “focused” on Israeli Nationalism as a substitute for actually moving to Israel – they’d rather take out their malice for whites in ways they can tell themselves will help Israel without much worrying about whether or not they do any good.

                • Eynon says:


                • jim says:

                  Deleted for appeal to fake consensus “We know that …”

                  No, we don’t know that. It is a story that no one ever supports, they just tell us we already agree with it.

                  If you want to argue it, present evidence for it.

                • Eynon says:

                  >Jared Kushner isn’t causing any problems

                  Come on Jim.

                • jim says:

                  So tell me. What has Jared Kushner done?

                • Eynon says:

                  >Deleted for fake consensus

                  My post made zero reference to consensus. The two facts that I mentioned are both well-documented and easily verifiable. Which did you take issue with and why?

                  Yes, 5 Israelis; Sivan Kurzberg, Paul Kurzberg, Yaron Shmuel, Oded Ellner and Omer Marmari, working for the shell company Urban Moving Systems, were seen dancing, high-fiving, and celebrating as they filmed the burning twin towers. In their van, police found $4,700 in cash, box cutters, and multiple foreign passports.

                  They were subsequently arrested by Bergen County NJ police, imprisoned, and interrogated for 71 days before returning to Israel. Paul Kurzberg initially refuses to rane a lie detected test, then finally took it after 10 weeks and failed it.

                  “When the men were transferred to jail, the case was transferred out of the FBI’s Criminal Division, and into the bureau’s Foreign Counterintelligence Section, which is responsible for espionage cases, ABCNEWS has learned.

                  One reason for the shift, sources told ABCNEWS, was that the FBI believed Urban Moving may have been providing cover for an Israeli intelligence operation.

                  After the five men were arrested, the FBI got a warrant and searched Urban Moving’s Weehawken, N.J., offices.

                  The FBI searched Urban Moving’s offices for several hours, removing boxes of documents and a dozen computer hard drives. The FBI also questioned Urban Moving’s owner. His attorney insists that his client answered all of the FBI’s questions. But when FBI agents tried to interview him again a few days later, he was gone.

                  Three months later 2020’s cameras photographed the inside of Urban Moving, and it looked as if the business had been shut down in a big hurry. Cell phones were lying around; office phones were still connected; and the property of dozens of clients remained in the warehouse.

                  The owner had also cleared out of his New Jersey home, put it up for sale and returned with his family to Israel.”

                  “Vince Cannistraro, a former chief of operations for counterterrorism with the CIA who is now a consultant for ABCNEWS, said… many people in the U.S. intelligence community believed that some of the men arrested were working for Israeli intelligence. Cannistraro said there was speculation as to whether Urban Moving had been “set up or exploited for the purpose of launching an intelligence operation against radical Islamists in the area, particularly in the New Jersey-New York area.”…”


                  Yes, the first person believed to have been killed on 9/11, seated directly in front of one of the hijackers, was an Israeli-American named Daniel Lewin who was a former member of Sayeret Maktal, a special operations unit of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate with a long history of operating behind enemy lines by disguising themselves as jihadists.


                  To repeat my point- this doesn’t mean Israel was involved in 9/11 (it merely means that the response from Israeli intelligence agents to thousands of Americans dying was delirious joy that caused grown men to literally spin and dance in the streets), but it does mean that comparing the possibility of Mossad prior knowledge of the event to “terrorist actors hired by the FBI” is unfair. Apples and oranges.

                • jim says:

                  None of your links support your claims. They merely say that there are rumors.

                  But the actual evidence provided by mainstream news sources is that witnesses did not claim dancing, FBI did not claim spies.

                  They were charged with overstaying their work visas. All the rest is rumors based on nothing at all. They attracted suspicion because watching the trade towers burning while speaking a foreign language, and were investigated as suspected terrorists. They were instead charged with overstaying work visas, and left in a hurry because illegally doing business in the united states. You are supposed to leave promptly when caught overstaying your work visa.

                  If they were actual spies, their visas would have had every i dotted and every t crossed.

                • Eynon says:


                • jim says:

                  Lets have a link wherein an identified witness who actually saw them dance tells a newsman or a cop they were dancing, and not some troofer saying someone saw them dancing.

                  Lets have the FBI report – and not a link where some troofer tells us what is in a supposed FBI report on dancing Mossad agents without telling us how he knows what is in the FBI Report. If troofers can get this report, why can’t I?

                  When troofers tell us what is in the official report on the fall of World Trade Center building seven, it bears no resemblance to the actual contents of the official report on building seven, therefore I would like to read this FBI report, if it exists, rather than relying on someone else’s account of what is in it.

                • Eynon says:


                • jim says:

                  The link you posted appears to be an actual FBI report, but I don’t see any support in it for any of your claims about dancing Israeli Mossad agents.

                  It seems to be a boring routine report about a boring routine police inquiry concerning a boring moving company and a boring moving van doing nothing very unusual or out of the ordinary, just as the official report on the fall of tower seven reports a tower falling as a result of fire and terrorist damage, and not any of the things the troofers say it reports.

                  Could you perhaps direct me to the exact page, section, and paragraph of the pdf file where they dance and suchlike?

                  If it supports your claims, exactly what page and paragraph has them dancing and so forth?

                  Exactly where does it support your claims?

                  Where in this pdf file do they dance and high five?

                  You tell us “the FBI report details these items line by line”.

                  Does it? Where?

                  Where exactly are all those lines detailing all those improbable and astonishing things?

                • Eli says:

                  > Jews like Max Boot, Bill Kristol and Ben Shapiro

                  Notice, however, how completely cucked out they are on the issues of female rights, equality of man, and democracy. A lot of these types move to Israel and become de facto leftist, other than on the issue of land outside of Judea, perhaps.

                  Ben Shapiro is a bit more special, because he’s religious. Nonetheless, the above still applies to him. In some sense, probably more, because he comes from a Modern Orthodox background, and most these guys have reinterpreted a lot of Orthodox dogma to suit the modern Western lifestyle and sensibilities, including having women de facto emancipated. Their fertility rate — which inches ever so closer to the American Jewish secular one — is a proof of how cucked their ideology is. For instance, Ben has only 1 sibling. He only has 2 children, as far as I’m aware. For 35 y.o. Orthodox Jew it is unimpressive.

                • Eynon says:


                • jim says:

                  Don’t give us what purports to be the plain text of the FBI report, unless you also give us the corresponding page and paragraph in the pdf file, for I am finding it difficult to match up your plain text with your pdf file.

                • pdimov says:

                  >Could you perhaps direct me to the exact page, section, and paragraph of the pdf file where they dance and suchlike?

                  From a quick look that would be page 77.

                • jim says:

                  Dancing Israelis?

                  Multiple passports?

                  Immediate plane tickets out to multiple destinations?

                  Attached photos of them high fiving?

                  I seem to have missed those. Where are those photos? Where in the pdf file does it say that such photos exist?

                • Eynon says:


                • jim says:

                  I am not going to allow you to post the alleged text file allegedly corresponding to the pdf file of the fbi report unless you give us the corresponding page numbers in the pdf of the alleged scan.

                  When you tell us what is in the FBI report, tell us where to find it in the pdf of the scan.

                  If you establish that the scan contains these remarkably improbable facts, that will appear in the comment section of this blog (though with claims not yet established redacted) but the claim that the scan contains these claims will be allowed, if supported by page numbers and, where appropriate, sections, within the pdf of the scan.

                  And I will then inquire about the provenance of the scan. But at the moment I am inquiring about the connection between troofer claims about what is in the alleged scan of the alleged fbi report, and the scan, and will allow comments establishing that claim.

                • Eynon says:


                  The Israelis celebrating, horsing around, high-fiving, smiling, hugging each other, and acting jovially while filming the towers: 33, 64, 65, 83, 86, 87


                • jim says:

                  That is not what I see on page 33 of the scan.

                  Maybe you have given us the wrong scan. If so, give us the right scan.

                • shaman says:

                  Even if an authentic FBI scan really does show that some Israelis who appeared to be cheerful were questioned under suspicion of being connected to the Mossad, that does not actually prove that they were Mossad agents. The FBI investigates all kinds of possibilities “just in case,” especially in times of urgent crisis. There’s no smoking gun here, either way.

                • Eynon says:


                • jim says:

                  The scan does not support the claim that they had plane tickets to leave the country. One of them had one plane ticket to return to Israel, leaving the US on the suspicious date of September the twelfth, but booked months in advance.

                  The claim of multiple tickets appears in the report, but it appears to be a lie – an FBI lie, not a troofer lie.

                  You have established, assuming the scan to be real, that the FBI wants very much to find someone not brown and not Muslim involved in 9/11, and that they found some suspicious Israelis – though not, however, suspicious enough to charge them with any of the things that they wanted to find.

                  But nothing that they found is nearly as suspicious as the FBI itself turning a blind eye to the alleged hijackers.

                • Eynon says:

                  Here is the scan file I’m looking at:


                  Page 33, paragraph 2 says, quote:

                  “According to [redacted], one of the males appeared to be taking still photographs and video of the other males with the WTC in the background. All of the males appeared to be jovial in that they smiled, hugged one another, and gave high-fives (see attached photos).”

                  Once again, additional pages are:

                  [Deleted. Three passports for five Israelis is not “multiple passports” There is nothing odd or suspicious about a foreigner having his passport on him.]

                  Flight tickets: 34, 100, 101

                  [*That one of the Israelis intended to fly back to Israel the day after the attack is an odd and suspicious coincidence, but it is not “multiple tickets to multiple foreign destinations” Notice also that his flight was booked several months earlier, and it is unlikely that the conspirators knew the exact date of the attack several months in advance.*]

                  And one of the most interesting things in the entire report comes on Page 39: a DIFFERENT New Jersey moving company, Classic International Movers, was believed by the FBI to have been used by one of the 9/11 hijackers: the employees that the FBI interviewed were all Israeli nationals who had served in the Israeli milita

                  [and why did the FBI believe this? Assuming it to be true, the hijackers would not need a friendly moving agency that was part of the conspiracy, because they were not carrying anything suspicious, so the alleged coincidence, real or imagined, suggests a far stretch on the part of the FBI – an FBI determination to implicate someone not brown and not Muslim.]

                • jim says:

                  Supposing this to be a real FBI report, what it establishes is that the FBI were looking rather too hard to connect someone not brown and not Muslim to the 9/11 attack, but could not dig up anything substantial.

                • Eynon says:

                  For reference: I’m using file number 1 which is what automatically comes up first and seems to be the longest and most comprehensive file. The one you linked seems to be a shorter version.

                • jim says:

                  OK, when giving us page numbers of a scan, give us the link to where this scan can be found.

                • shaman says:

                  Jim, you’re looking at section 2 while Eynon is looking primarily at section 5. If these documents are legit, then the troofers are correct when they claim that the FBI considered the Israelis to be, well, “a bit out of place” in the whole affair. The troofers are still mistaken and/or deceitful when they announce that this is some conclusive evidence that Mossad was involved; it really isn’t.

                • jim says:

                  OK, give us the link to the scan of section five, and where in section five these claims can be found.

                • Eynon says:


                • jim says:

                  Deleted for repetition: You already said that, and I already allowed most of it.

                • shaman says:

                  Jim, extraordinary claims about cheerfulness and possible foreknowledge are indeed all over section 5. E.g., pages 54-55, 62, 86.

                  However, let’s cut to the chase: in pages 58-59 it is determined by all the investigative forces that the suspicions purporting to criminally link the Israelis to terrorism against the WTC were absolutely unfounded (for some strange reason, troofers always neglect to mention that specific part):


                  As far as I’m concerned, that strongly suggests that Mossad was *not* involved, at least not in a way that can be plausibly proven. Sundry fears were raised, the FBI was paranoid as f**k, but ultimately nothing damning was actually discovered. The FBI desperately tried to pin the blame for 9/11 on some non-Muslim Caucasians, but the Israelis were of no avail in this regard. Case closed.

                • Eynon says:

                  >OK, when giving us page numbers of a scan, give us the link to where this scan can be found.

                  It was the first link I gave. Section 1 is what comes up automatically when you click the link.

                  >The FBI was trying to implicate someone not brown

                  The report and witness statements continually describes the suspects as “dark-skinned males”. Additionally, Jews are a significantly higher ranking protected victim class than Muslims in the US.

                  The statement I made was not that Mossad carried out 9/11 or knew about 9/11 ahead of time, but that questions about a measure of Israeli awareness of the attack do not fall into the same category as holographic planes and hired actor pretend terrorists. That’s been shown several times over by an objective standard. No hired actor terrorist in a moving van with no moving equipment, nor 5 holographic planes with forged student travel cards, were imprisoned and interrogated by the FBI for 71 days.

                • jim says:

                  > Jews are a significantly higher ranking protected victim class than Muslims in the US.

                  Jews are a protected class. Israeli Jews are not.

                  Some, like Ben Shapiro, try to have it both ways, keeping Israel and Israeli Jews under the Jewish umbrella, and supporting the leftist position for everything and everyone except Israel, and this approach is to some extent successful – but we are seeing increasing pushback. Recollect the drama over moving the US embassy to the Israeli capital.

                  Protection for Israeli Jews is mostly supported by Democrats, but there is increasing and vociferous resistance to this on the left and within the Democratic party.

                  Similarly, recollect the Crown Heights pogrom. Orthodox Jews, like Israeli Jews, are losing the Jewish exception.

                • Eynon says:

                  > in pages 58-59 it is determined by all the investigative forces that the suspicions purporting to criminally link the Israelis to terrorism against the WTC were absolutely unfounded

                  In the first moments there was suspicion of terrorist charges but those were quickly dropped, obviously no one thinks they were in the towers at the time or flying planes. As ABC cited at the time, once they were actually imprisoned the case was transferred from the FBI criminal division to the foreign counterintelligence division.

                • Eynon says:

                  Regarding the new theory that this was a conspiracy by the FBI trying to cast blame on Jews instead of Muslims- to the limited extent that this deserves to be given brain processing power, why did the FBI not release the photos that they took? They show them posing with their arms around each other in front of the burning WTC, celebrating and pointing at it- if the goal was to cause negative feelings among the public toward these Jews, why not release the pictures?

                • jim says:

                  Maybe because these photos do not in fact show anything of the kind?

                  That troofers and the FBI are so excited that one of the alleged hijackers used an Israeli moving company, while ignoring the FBI ignoring the hilariously open alleged hijackers, tells me that not only do troofers have a hard on for detecting Israeli complicity, they have a severe allergy against detecting Mueller and FBI complicity.

                  That allergy indicates troofers are Mueller/FBI shills, therefore, the priorities of the troofers are indicative of the priorities of the FBI and Mueller.

                • shaman says:

                  Yeah, Eynon. Which is why I explicitly linked the page (58) that says:

                  “Furthermore, Newark and New York determined that none of the Israelis were actively engaged in clandestine intelligence activities in the United States.”

                  I briefly went over the 7 sections. My conclusion is that paranoia was extreme (understandably), but there was simply no — or no sufficient — “there” there, so they had no choice but to drop the Israeli connection completely, as agonizing as that must have felt to people hunting for a non-Muslim culprit. Your conclusion may differ.

                • Eynon says:

                  Shaman- obviously we know that after 71 days they were released, but your quote is not on page 58.

                • Eynon says:

                  > Maybe because these photos do not in fact show anything of the kind?



                  [*Deleted This is not a photograph of Jews dancing nor high fiving nor celebrating. When you post evidence, give a description of that evidence that is supported by the evidence*]

                • jim says:

                  Poster girl principle applies. If this is the poster for the evil Jews celebrating 9/11, they did not celebrate 9/11.

                  If this is what the FBI has, and I am pretty sure it is indeed what you say it is, the FBI are lying about what the FBI has and the troofers are an FBI bullhorn for that lie.

                • Eynon says:

                  [*deleted for Motte and Bailey. When you figure out what you are accusing the Jews of doing, let us know.*]

                • shaman says:

                  Beware of changing the goalposts, Eynon. Seems to me that the more evidence is uncovered, the less culpable Israel appears.

                  It goes from “Israel did 9/11” to “Israel didn’t actually do 9/11, but it was nevertheless involved in it” to “Israel was not actually involved in 9/11, but some Israelis were celebrating it” to anything that may serve to distract from the fact that Islam seeks to conquer the world by bloodshed and the Cathedral is in bed with Islam.

                  (Well, to be fair, you initially started from the 3rd proposition, so maybe you didn’t shift the goalposts. It just looks like a whole lot of people are grasping at straws to connect Israel to 9/11 in more or less disingenuous ways, for the reasons outlined by Jim)

                • Eynon says:

                  >Beware of changing the goalposts
                  >maybe you didn’t shift the goalposts


                  I’m still looking for the quote you mention on page 58- not seeing at any page 58 in any of the sections. Different page maybe?

                • Eynon says:

                  I see it now- yes, as mentioned before, ABC at the time cites the US and Israeli governments working out a deal and after 71 days the suspects were deported to Israel without charges.

                • jim says:

                  Does it?


                • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                  “recollect the Crown Heights pogrom”

                  The slightest bit of research illuminates the behaviour of the blacks in this case. I’ve never heard a more disgusting, anti-black example of institutional Jewish privilege.

                  Anyone who takes the side of the Jews in the Crown Heights case is a Jew themself.

                • jim says:


                  The Crown Heights Pogrom demonstrates that though Jews outrank non Jewish whites, blacks outrank Jews. Recent events illustrate hispanics elbowing Jews and blacks, and it is now clear that Muslims outrank Jews.

                  Similarly, though females outrank males, and women and gays are elbowing each other to decide which of them has higher status, trannies outrank females.

                  When you tell me that the Crown Heights Pogrom reflects Jewish privilege, the privilege that so enraged the blacks was that the Jews had better services than the blacks – which services they organized and paid for. So, if you tell me that Crown Heights Pogrom represents Jewish privilege, that implies that black people are entitled to trash the white people toilets at Starbucks, and do so without buying coffee, because Starbucks toilets are white privilege as much as the Jewish ambulance service in Crown heights were Jewish privilege.

                  When people get indignant about separate drinking fountains and toilets for black and whites in the Old South, they forget that whites paid for both, and the reason the black drinking fountains and toilets were generally in poor shape was that blacks tended to trash them.

                  Jews in Crown Heights organized their own ambulance service because the government ambulance service did not work – and the largest reason that the government ambulance service did not work was in Crown Heights that Jews paid for it and blacks trashed it. That was Jewish privilege in Crown Heights. The Jewish privilege that led to the Crown Heights riots was that a Jewish ambulance decided it was more important to save a Jewish life, than to give blacks adequate opportunity to murder and rob Jewish ambulance workers – very similar to white privilege and male privilege.

                • Carlylean Restorationist says:


                • jim says:

                  Unresponsive. I made an argument that it was right and necessary for the Jewish ambulance service to prioritize Jews over blacks. Respond to that argument.

                  The same argument applies for white “privilege” in pizza delivery and white “privilege” in public toilets and drinking fountains. You are attacking our ability to maintain islands of civilization in a sea of subhumans. You are attacking the right and ability of superior groups to maintain superior conditions for themselves in the presence of inferior people incapable of maintaining those conditions.

                  Your position presupposes and takes for granted that social justice requires that in the presence of vicious, subhuman, and destructive savages, we are required to be vicious, subhuman, and destructive also, and that your interlocutor agrees with that moral principle.

                  Present an argument for that moral principle instead of presupposing it.

                • Koanic says:

                  > high intelligence correlates _inversely_ with neuroticism and the various mental disorders.

                  The problem is the ambiguity inherent in the phrase “high IQ”. From 100 IQ to midwit IQ, everything generally improves. From midwit to ultra high IQ, there’s scarcely enough data to establish correlations, and the demographics of the fatter portion of the bell curve outweigh the thin tail. So this rule doesn’t apply to the context of the discussion, which was UHIQ tendency to deviate from sane norms.

                • shaman says:

                  So Kookanic, when you wrote on your blog:

                  Certainly Larry Silverstein knew well in advance. He deserves to die.

                  Giuliani appears to have been clued in on a need to know basis, i.e. very little – only warned to move away from the buiding because it was going to collapse, and he was too close. Various important people probably received warnings to be elsewhere or to not fly, but that hardly constitutes complicity.

                  We could imagine a scenario similar to Pearl Harbor, in which key intelligence providing advance warning was passed up the military chain of command, then withheld from those who would act on it.

                  Certain financial parties knew, and placed large bets against airline stocks and affected financial firms. They did it within enough sophistication to play off the resulting investigation, which looked only for direct ties to Al Qaeda.

                  The payoff in this version of events is 7 billion for Silverstein (more than double what he paid for the complex), heroic status for New York brass, reelection for Bush, legislation enhancing state power, a war to fill everyone’s pockets, and control over an oil rich region.

                  When we begin to consider the selection of targets, however, a more sinister picture emerges.

                  How convenient that a sparsely occupied, newly renovated/reinforced wing of the Pentagon was hit – the only wing reinforced to resist a blast.

                  How convenient that massive documentation on corporate fraud went up in smoke with WTC 7’s SEC offices, and that the Pentagon’s accounting offices likewise vanished one day after Rumsfeld announced that 2.3 trillion was missing from the Pentagon.

                  In light of the targets, it seems more likely that the entire operation was initated by Americans, and only carried out by Muslim patsies.

                  In this version, Rumsfeld knew as well. He too deserves to die.

                  So far we have a small conspiracy giving orders to a larger group of people who for various reasons follow orders and look the other way. Bits leak out here and there, but the size of the lie is its own defense. The idea that this operation requires lots of people with full knowledge is false.

                  It’s very plausible that 9/11 was not the first false flag attack on American soil, but rather the work of a well-oiled machine that had successfully staged several already, giving them the confidence to go for the big payday. Prime suspects would be the mysterious anthrax attacks, the Oklahoma City bombing, the first WTC bombing, etc. If so, they have a record of successfully suppressing dissent and expanding state power and budgets.

                  Prior to that, our intelligence service already had experience running a similar operation in Western Europe – Operation Gladio. This whole thing could be viewed as Cold War chickens coming home to roost.

                  The buildings did not topple. They were blown up and imploded, instantly transforming huge amounts of concrete into dust.

                  It would’ve taken only a small team with building access to attach canisters to the supports of WTC 1, 2 and 7. Given the buildings’ security, this would have most likely been the work of the CIA, cooperating with Silverstein.

                  Beneficiaries of the attack included the highest officials in the New York City and Federal governments, and corporations benefiting from policies enacted by those officials.

                  Which IQ were you using – the 125 one, the 135 one, or the 145 one?

              • Eynon says:

                >Jews are a protected class. Israeli Jews are not.

                The recent controversy with the Somalian woman suggests otherwise. All of her statements revolved around Israel and she was vociferously condemned by all but the brown wing of the Dems (and even then support was tentative and measured).

                >Protection for Israeli Jews is mostly supported by Democrats

                Yes, and it’s near universally supported by Republicans. “FBI anti-semites were trying to blame the Jews” doesn’t hold water.

                • jim says:

                  The FBI was not trying to blame the Jews because anti semitism. It was and is trying blame someone not Muslim to cover its policy of ignoring Muslim terrorism.

                • Eynon says:

                  The USG that never, ever, ever talks about the USS Liberty, the Lavon affair, or hostile Israeli intelligence is not a USG that searches for ways to actively vilify Israelis. And again, if there goal had been to make the Israelis look like the villains, they would have released the photos that made them look like villains, rather than sitting on them for 18 years.

                • jim says:

                  The FBI has not been sitting on these photos for eighteen years. They have been loudly telling everyone that they depicted Jews high fiving, dancing, and celebrating 9/11, when, in fact, they do not.

                  Maybe the reason they did not release these photos earlier is that the photos would blow their story.

                  The USS liberty incident occurred when the US was not allied to Israel, and there have been plenty of incidents of armies firing on their own forces, let alone neutral forces, in the fog of war. War zones are bad for your health. It is entirely normal for innocents to get shot up in a war zone.

                • jim says:

                  The republicans made hay out of brown wing of the Democrats attacking Israeli Jews, because they are for once trying to split the Jewish wing of the Democrats from the brown wing of the Democrats, but I am not seeing this vociferous condemnation from the Jewish wing of the Democrats. The Jewish wing of the Democrats failed to split when Israeli Jews came under attack from the brown wing.

                • Eynon says:

                  >but I am not seeing this vociferous condemnation from the Jewish wing of the Democrat

                  Then you should have looked in the direction of Eliot Engel and his response to the resolution initially condemning anti-semitism (clearly directed toward Omar) being watered down into a generic tolerance resolution that mentioned a score of victim groups. Same with Ted Deutch, Nita Lowey, and numerous other Democrat Jews; and the response from the Jewish left in the media was far stronger than that from those among sitting politicians.

                • jim says:

                  > Being watered down into a generic tolerance declaration that mentioned a score of victim groups.

                  Exactly so.

                  Now if Omar had been deplatformed and demonetized, you would have a point. Compare and contrast with what happens if you notice an affirmative action employee not working.

                  If Omar can make hay going after the (Nationalist and Orthodox) Jews, the FBI can make make hay going after Israeli Jews.

                • Eynon says:

                  Off-topic. Whatever ones opinion on the details of the USS Liberty attack, the Lavon affair, Israeli theft of intelligence and Israeli spying in the US, if the USG that you’re describing existed- one that actively seeks to villainize Israelis as a way to take heat off of Muslims- then topics like these would be public conversation, rather than virtually nonexistent in the public sphere. Russia has been successfully villainized for far less than that.

                • jim says:

                  Topics like this are public conversation.

                  Troofers are not oppressed victims under the all powerful Zionist Occupation Government any more than feminists are oppressed victims under the mighty patriarchy.

                  No one gets demonetized and deplatformed for talking about the USS Liberty or trooferism. Omar is likely to be a future president. What has happened to her?

                  Do universities and university cops sponsor angry mobs to beat up people talking about the USS Liberty or trooferism?

                  Heartiste get deplatformed for talking about tribalism. Roosh V gets deplatformed and demonetized for telling the truth about female nature. Milo gets deplatformed, demonetized, and angry state sponsored mobs to beat up people for – I am not sure what for, nothing he said seemed terribly controversial except that he was on the side of people like Heartise and Roosh.

                  Have not seen any angry mobs after you guys. Your platforms and monetization are doing fine.

                  It is not Zionist Occupation Government that is oppressing you, any more than it is the patriarchy oppressing feminists. It is reality that is oppressing feminists, and reality that is oppressing troofers.

                • Eynon says:


                • jim says:

                  Unresponsive – also you seem to be dropping your “hail fellow reactionary” mask. Did you mean to tell me that Milo, Heartiste, and Roosh are white supremacists and that therefore repressing them does not count?

                • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                  The right-wing Jew will transform into Noam Chomsky as and when required.

                  Israel is a colony of the United States don’t you know lol

                • jim says:

                  Yes, Israel is a satrapy of the United States. If it was not a satrapy, would have solved the Gaza problem and the Hamas problem overnight.

                  When Jews were deported from Gaza by the Israeli government for the crime of maintaining islands of peace, order, and high technology in a sea of savages, that demonstrated compellingly that Israel is a satrapy of the US government, and you are outraged that they are an insufficiently compliant satrapy.

              • Eynon says:

                >The FBI has not been sitting on these photos for eighteen years. They have been loudly telling everyone that they depicted Jews high fiving and celebrating 9/11

                Source this claim. Show me where the FBI said they had photos of high-fives.

                • jim says:

                  > > The FBI has not been sitting on these photos for eighteen years. They have been loudly telling everyone that they depicted Jews high fiving and celebrating 9/11

                  > Source this claim. Show me where the FBI said they had photos of high-fives.

                  Page 33
                  “All of the males appeared to be jovial in that they smiled, hugged one another, and gave high-fives (see attached photos).”

                  If these are the attached photos, and I am pretty sure that they are, I am not seeing any hugs or high fives.

                  So the FBI lied, and then hired the troofers to shout the lie through a bullhorn for eighteen years.

                  The FBI puts a spin on their evidence that their evidence fails to support, and then hires troofers work that spin for eighteen years.

                • Eynon says:

                  Sounds like the FBI says they have pictures showing the suspects in a jovial mood, then goes on to characterize a jovial mood. The pictures that I see show the men in a jovial mood.

                  There is no reason to believe that these are all the pictures the FBI seized, but how would one even photograph a high-five, with an 18 year old camera? By having two people stand still with their hands pressed against one another to simulate the action?

                  Once again, the obvious: if the goal of the FBI was to villainize innocent people to take heat off of Muslims (since you switched from “this was a boring and typical police report” to “this was a conspiracy by the FBI to frame Jews” at some point in the last 10 posts), pictures showing them happily posing in front of the burning WTC would have been released, with their faces, 18 years ago.

                • jim says:

                  You are engaging in Motte and Bailey – the Bailey is “Dancing Israelis high fiving and hugging to celebrate the fall of the towers”, and then under heat, you retreat to the Motte, the Motte being “Jovial mood”. Hard to tell if someone is in a jovial mood or not, therefore unfalsifiable.

                  But what is interesting is whom you are pulling the Motte and Bailey maneuver for.

                  You accurately reporting what the FBI said is not a lie. The FBI is lying, but you are defending them as if you uttered the lie, showing that you identify with the FBI. The FBI is you, you are FBI.

                  You are a fibbie – if you were just someone using FBI claims as evidence you would not care whether the claims were made in good faith or not, only if they were true or not. One defends oneself by retreating to the Motte, one does not defend someone else. If someone else’s Bailey comes under heat, one either sticks to the Bailey, or throws the guy who’s Bailey it is to the wolves.

                  When you pull this maneuver, it reveals that you identify with the FBI, that when I say the FBI lied, you react as if I say you lied. The motte is for defending oneself, not the other guy.

                  The FBI says of the photos they took out of the Dancing Mossad Agent’s camera:

                  “All of the males appeared to be jovial in that they smiled, hugged one another, and gave high-fives (see attached photos).”

                  And they are not shown hugging or high fiving, though we cannot tell whether or not they are smiling.

                  And, under heat, you say that they FBI is merely telling us the photos depict the Dancing Mossad Agents being jovial, despite the total absence of any jovial body language. That is not a defense of your position, it is not a defense of trooferism, it is not a defense of yourself. It is a defense of the FBI. When I say “The FBI lied” you hear me say “You lied”, and instead of bringing a defense of trooferism, a defense of the position being argued, bring a defense of the good character of the FBI.

                  The way Motte and Bailey works as a fallacious argument is that one day you truthfully say you won the Motte argument, and then the next day you pretend you won the Bailey argument. But this only works if it is your argument, not the FBI’s argument, only works emotionally and as a deceptive fallacy if you are the FBI.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “Yes, there are multiple unrelated witnesses who stated to law enforcement that they saw the Israelis horsing around, celebrating, smiling, high-fiving, posing for pictures and acting jovially.”

                  And 99% of the MSM was insisting for months that Russia “hacked our elections” when no such thing was true.

                  Same kind of bullshit. The Cathedral wasn’t going to let either the FBI (and their masters) or the Saudis take unambigious blame for 9/11 so they had to muddy the waters.

                • Eynon says:


                • jim says:

                  Unresponsive Motte and Bailey: “Jovial mood” is not equivalent to “dancing, hugging, and high fiving”

                  No dancing, no high fiving, no hugging.

                  Odd that.

                  Looks like our sole source for dancing, high fiving, and hugging is the FBI claim that they took photos of themselves – and the FBI lied when it claimed that the photos taken from the camera showed high fiving and hugging.

                  You are still pulling a Motte and Bailey – retreating from dancing, hugging, and high fiving, to “jovial mood”, while pretending the two are equivalent, and that therefore the FBI did not lie. Further comments that equivocate between the two will be silently deleted.

                • Eynon says:

                  [*deleted for unresponsively moving on from the question of the FBI’s depiction of the photographs it took from the Dancing Mossad agents and misrepresenting your interlocutors position*]


                • Eynon says:


                • jim says:

                  Not what I said.

                  And Motte and Bailey.

                  Deleted for telling me what I said, deleted for Motte and Bailey, and deleted for being unresponsive.

          • alf says:

            Of course! A fifteen second soundbite on CNN! Why hadnt I thought of that. Blast that John Kasich for having figured out Trump’s plan! Thank God the dems don’t seem to take this cuck seriously..

      • shaman says:

        Sick burn, Koanic! After all, you were right about 9/11 being perpetrated by Mossad, you were right about pizzagate being something other than a partisan e-hoax instigated by 4chan, and surely you must be right about Qanon being a reliable source of information about the ins and outs of USG’s undisclosed machinations. With a solid IQ of 240, and a track record of being “correct regarding all issues,” it’s befuddling that people here dare to disagree with you about anything at all.

        • The Cominator says:

          Pizzagate is far more authentic then the others of those.

          • shaman says:

            Since you love the glow-in-the-darks so much, consider the following, straight from the horse’s mouth:

            “[A] hypothesis can never be proved by the enumeration of even a large body of evidence consistent with that hypothesis, because the same body of evidence may also be consistent with other hypotheses. A hypothesis may be disproved, however, by citing a single item of evidence that is incompatible with it.”


            See also hypothesis no. 14 of the Hypotheses on Misperception, by Professor Robert Jervis. In other words, “actors tend to overlook the fact that evidence consistent with their theories may also be consistent with other views.”

            That’s your pizzagate right there.

          • shaman says:

            The principle, alluded to above, is quite simple.

            1. Come up with your own crackpot theory that confirms your audience’s expectations, or even better, its hopes.

            2. Frame said theory in esoteric terms. E.g., “This is a highly classified matter that only insiders like myself would know anything about,” or just “Keep digging, anon.”

            3. Pull off a CR, and ceremonially announce that everyone already agrees that your theory merits discussion and exploration, and is legitimate. Accuse skeptics of being paid shills who seek to suppress the troof.

            4. Congratulations: people who don’t grasp the expediency of the Scarcity Principle — and can’t recognize its employment in real time — are now positively convinced that they possess profound insight, despite it merely being kook bait that any bored troll with a modicum of creativity could devise.

            • The Cominator says:

              I’m not doing that in regards to Pizzagate but at least admit there is a little bit more there to pizzagate then all the others.

              Podesta’s use of “pizza” “walnut sauce” “hot dogs” etc. in his emails don’t make sense in context if read literally… they are code for something. The Podesta’s brothers taste in art is interesting…

              James Alefantis connections are mighty interesting for a pizza shop owner and taken together with everything else very interesting.

              None of it adds up to proof but its interesting…

              • Rollory says:

                I read through all the pizzagate documents a while back. The people involved are definitely weird, very possibly engaged in something shady, and I would not want them for neighbors or indeed in the same state. The problem with Pizzagate as it is commonly formulated though is that the investigators do not have a single specific identifiable victim. Particularly in the aftermath of the Catholic Church and Boy Scout events, that calls the premise into question – victims would be much more willing to admit it, given that it’s been in the news as something that has happened to others.

                Also the Catholic and BSA cases tend to be cases of bureaucracies protecting themselves, and the perpetrators knowing how to manipulate those bureaucracies. The basic premise of the hyper-evil secret conspiracy manipulating everything has not had any supporting evidence turn up.

                (“But, you see, that’s proof that they’re so evilly competent! They’ve successfully hidden ALL the evidence of their activities!” Uh-huh)

                • The Cominator says:

                  Lets say that its initiation into a mutually assured destruction through blackmail cult and the child sex slaves are always snuffed at the end of it.

                  I’m not saying its true, but I’m saying there are more points of interest to pizzagate then to 9/11 trooferism or Qanon (both of which are definitely pure horseshit).

              • shaman says:

                >is a little bit more there to pizzagate then all the others.

                There is no more and no less to it; at best, it’s 5% signal and 95% noise.

                >Podesta’s use of “pizza” “walnut sauce” “hot dogs” etc. in his emails don’t make sense in context if read literally… they are code for something.

                The references to “walnut sauce” and “hot dogs” make perfect sense in their original contexts. The references to pizza, specifically, may be construed as a code for something. However, they may also indicate that Podesta, who is half Italian and half Greek, is a “foodie.” Have you ever met a self-described foodie? That’s exactly how they talk about various foods. So this is neither here nor there, and even if pizza happens to be a code for something, it is by far more likely to reference dude-weed-lmao than what 4chan and reddit claim it references.

                >The Podesta’s brothers taste in art is interesting…

                The Podestas are degenerates, there’s no denying that. Then again, compared to the average 8channer, they may well be paragons of moral decency and virtue. To see the folks on /pol/ denouncing the Podestas for being sickos is hilarious. If hypocrisy were a sport, chan-tard pizzagaters would certainly receive a medal.

                >James Alefantis connections are mighty interesting for a pizza shop owner

                No, they aren’t. If you’re a famous, successful, lifelong chef in Washington, D.C., you’re inevitably going to be well-connected to the swamp (that’s your base of operations, after all); and if, additionally, you’re a flaming and flamboyant faggot, you’ll probably make quite a few close friends among the top Democrats. Indeed, it would be quite surprising if Alefantis did *not* have those connections.

                If pizzagate was merely the humble suggestion that “The Democrats are a bunch of depraved weirdos,” I’d say – sure, of course they are. Duh. As it is, though, pizzagate is total crap.

                • Anonymous 2 says:


                • shaman says:


                  I’ve yet to see any evidence-based argument that proves that anything in the pizzagate narrative (as narrated by the towering geniuses and expert sleuths on Reddit, Voat, etc.) is real. It all comes crashing down on close inspection. And I’ve seen lots of empirical and logical refutations of that narrative, suggesting that it’s the work of clever trolls, and nothing more than that.

                  Do we need to (once again) go over the leaked Podesta emails, and analyse them one by one? That can be done (again), but it might be a distraction from more fruitful endeavors.

                • jim says:

                  Something is certainly smelly about the Podesta emails, but the trouble is that when people are speaking in code, efforts to decode them are apt to go off the rails.

                • alf says:

                  I still lean towards Cominator’s take, but have to admit evidence is flimsy.

                  These people worship metaphorical demons, that much is obvious from their taste in cannibalistic art and child sexualization. So to make the jump and conclude they partake in literal demon worship, not that big. But eh. You’d expect more evidence to have come out by now.

                • shaman says:

                  Well Alf, I don’t dispute the metaphorical (which, by extension, may as well be literal) demon worship claim. I dispute the notion that various pizza parlors in D.C. are used to trade child sex-slaves, which is blatantly false.

                  When Alex Jones alarmingly reported that Hillary Clinton and Barry Soetoro both “smell like sulfur,” I chuckled, and still chuckle to this very day about that. But was it really necessary to take that sort of stuff out of the comedy department, which is where it belongs, and put it in the “serious business” department?

                • Koanic says:

                  Obviously the Dems are into underage sex, if only because forbidden fruit is sweet and US age of consent laws are insane. They also obviously embrace the homos and Nambla types, who include serial killer types. And the witches and Satan worshippers. And there’s your pizza gate, plenty to galvanize Democrat white normies into switching to Trump.

                • Steve Johnson says:


                  >James Alefantis connections are mighty interesting for a pizza shop owner

                  No, they aren’t. If you’re a famous, successful, lifelong chef in Washington, D.C., you’re inevitably going to be well-connected to the swamp (that’s your base of operations, after all); and if, additionally, you’re a flaming and flamboyant faggot, you’ll probably make quite a few close friends among the top Democrats. Indeed, it would be quite surprising if Alefantis did *not* have those connections.

                  Also shaman:

                  I dispute the notion that various pizza parlors in D.C. are used to trade child sex-slaves, which is blatantly false.

                  Not looking good when you’re using rhetoric like this. “You’d expect this guy to be connected to all prominent Dems because he’s a celebrity chef” to an implication that he runs one of “various pizza parlors” (implying low status pizza by the slice place that sells to a lunch crowd and drunks leaving bars).

                  Either might be right – both absolutely aren’t and the rhetorical trick in the second is indicative of knowing dishonesty.

                • shaman says:

                  Steve, I don’t think any pizza parlor in D.C. — high status or low status — is used to trade children for sexual purposes, and I don’t consider Alefantis’ connections (or lack thereof) as relevant. Regardless of Comet Ping Pong’s status, there is simply no evidence that it’s involved in whatever pizzagaters accuse it. I want facts, not roundabout casuistry.

  50. Koanic says:

    My understanding from Qanon is that Trump’s faction was ready to do a violent coup if they failed to win the election. That the coup is already complete and the Mueller Report etc has been a managed PR process. That John McCain was executed, and various Dems are wearing ankle monitors.

    • The Cominator says:

      “My understanding from Qanon ”

      • Rollory says:


        If you’re not capable of looking at the facts of what has visibly happened over the last 2 years, the facts of what Qanon was claiming as predictions and secret plans, the absolute impossible discrepancies between the two, the total nonexistence of any logical connection between what Q was claiming as goals and its visible and measurable actions, and understand that Q is and always has been bullshit for the amusement of a con artist somewhere – if you can’t see that, you’re just not capable of making any kind of sentient decisions above the level of feeding yourself and going potty.

        It was an interesting possibility. It has been experimentally disproved, multiple times over.

        • Alrenous says:

          It’s exactly the same as time-travelling claims, except supposed to keep you strung along for longer. /pol/ being nazi is also a troll meme, but it got out of hand.

          • shaman says:

            >/pol/ being nazi is also a troll meme, but it got out of hand.

            There are some very good reasons to be pissed at Jews, and some very bad reasons to be pissed at Jews, and what usually happens (that is, when there’s no central Moderator) is that, even when one starts out by dwelling exclusively on the former, the situation tends to “escalate quickly” to exclusive discussion of the latter.

            It just goes from “Jews seek to be in-grouped unilaterally” to “white women work in pornography because USG is occupied by ZIONISTS” all too rapidly. If I may flatter Jim a little bit, he’s doing an excellent job separating the wheat from the chaff, in this regard; allowing intelligent criticism of Jews, while ensuring that the debate doesn’t slide to crazy-in-the-coconut frothery.

            • Alrenous says:

              The Christians were right – Man is Fallen. There’s good reasons to be unimpressed by every race.

              Though perhaps be glad that it was Europeans and not Bantu or Han who ended up owning the world. It sucks, but it could be worse.

            • Good point. What bothers me about the typical Voater/Channer answering every question with “it is (((them)))” (and that them could be any secret group, not even necessarily Jews, there was a period when many Anglos used to think it is the Jesuits) that it show they have a magical worldview where everything is caused by intent and happens exactly as intended. And that is tribal Africa level magical thinking. Dumb as fuck.

              The greatest achievement of white men was figuring out the laws of nature, precisely those “mechanical” things that are independent of intent, and if NRx seems kind of not very interested in Jews it is because we are trying to figure out the laws of nature wrt socio-political dynamics and paying less attention to how which groups are trying to play them. Because this is something few are capable of. Many can spot shape-shifters and fellowwhitemen etc. that is easier.

              • Alrenous says:

                have a magical worldview where everything is caused by intent and happens exactly as intended. And that is tribal Africa level magical thinking. Dumb as fuck.

                You’re going to make yourself stupid getting that emotionally invested in something impurely correct.

                For example, Prussian school works exactly as intended. Dewey wrote down that he intended it to do this.

                • jim says:

                  That world view is impurely correct – which means it is in substantial part correct.

                  Classic example being King Louis’ attack on the grain market. I am sure he did not intend to cause famine, or sponsor revolutionary movements against the bourgeoisie.

                  Maybe he did intend to attack the bourgeoisie, but he surely did not intend the revolutionaries to cut his head off.

                  Leftists find themselves in a holiness spiral with consequences that they do not expect and do not intend. The major victims of #metoo where men who had sponsored and supported the movement.

                • I don’t think America actually borrowed the Prussian education system. Lookie here:

                  “Criticism: class-ism
                  The German tripartite system of education has been widely criticized for separating children along class lines at a very early age. For instance, in some German states, a decision is made in the sixth or even the fourth grade about whether a child is to continue in the Gymnasium, the Realschule, or the Hauptschule. Only the Gymnasium is a university-preparatory school, so critics argue essentially a decision is made as early as the fourth grade about whether a child will be allowed to attend college.[6]

                  The system is considered so onerous outside Germany that the OECD even sent a special envoy[7] to Germany to condemn current German practice.[8] Specifically, the Brazilian expert found that German schools basically separate children according to social class, with children of academics and professionals more often being sent on to a Gymnasium, and working-class children being sent to a Realschule or a Hauptschule.”

                  Of course classism was a feature, not a bug, a feature of the classic “ständisch”, social class oriented, almost caste oriented Prussian conservatism. And rest assured, for the upper classes it was not all that military drill oriented stuff but far more independent thinking.

                  Similarly how while on the soldier level the Prussian military was all about drill and obedience, but at the officer level, they invented a very independent approach:

                  The American public high school is not classist, in fact, it is so not classist that it seriously weirds me out that in the same classroom future lawyers who are typically the children of lawyers are sitting side by side with future burger-flippers in the high school at 18 years old. This either means the burger-flippers are taught independent thinking which is bad, or it means the future university students are not taught independent thinking which is also bad.

                • Alrenous says:

                  There is classism in the schools, but it’s done at the school level. There’s one or two high schools in D.C. or thereabouts which teach independent thinking. For the most part, Dewey et al imported only the Gymnasium because they didn’t want the peasants thinking independently.

                • Alrenous says:

                  Ninety-nine [students] out of a hundred are automata, careful to walk in prescribed paths, careful to follow the prescribed custom. This is not an accident but the result of substantial education, which, scientifically defined, is the subsumption of the individual.

         Fourth commissioner of education.

                • Dave says:

                  Ninety-nine percent of humanity is better off following prescribed custom because it’s better than anything they could come up with on their own.

                  The present group consensus is, of course, stark-raving insanity, but that’s largely because the 99% were allowed to collaborate on it.

                • Alrenous says:

                  And thus Dave submits himself and his children willingly to the man who wants to make him a mindless automaton. It’s Customary.

                • shaman says:

                  better off following prescribed custom… The present group consensus is, of course, stark-raving insanity

                  the man who wants to make him a mindless automaton. It’s Customary.

                  Hard dispute between “a legitimate priesthood should erect Chesterton’s fence” (Jim, 2019) and “top-down social engineering is never pro-social” (Jim, 1999).

                • jim says:

                  It is not social engineering from the top down when Church and State engineer it by protecting and supporting people building a social order from the bottom.

                  Chesterton’s fence was not erected by a priesthood, but was endorsed and protected by a priesthood.

                  And was subsequently demolished by a priesthood. The demolition was social engineering from the top down. The construction was not.

                  It is social engineering from the top down when the police throw men out of their houses because their wives don’t like them any more. Would it be social engineering to forcibly return a woman to her husband when she attempts to trade up?

                  Marriage and property was not created by social engineering, but state and society can choose whether to attack it or defend it.

                  Forced collectivization was social engineering. The homesteading law was an attempt to recognize, regularize, and legalize what the pioneers were spontaneously doing, not social engineering.

                  In that sense, social engineering from the top down is never prosocial, because you are treating people like things.

                  When the King shared some of his status with the Invisible College, making it the Royal Society, he was granting a status subsidy to the scientific method, to make the scientific method the high status way of resolving factual disputes. That was not social engineering. When the puritans attempted to lower the status of the scientific method by sending thugs to break up meetings of the Royal Society, that was social engineering. If the King had ordered his bureaucrats to create the Royal Society from scratch, that would have been social engineering.

                  If the state coercively returns a runaway wife, they are coercively protecting what a husband has built. The state is not building it.

                  Social engineering from the top down runs into the usual problems of socialism. What state, church, and society needs to is back some bottom up social engineering, and not others.

                  This is analogous to my frequent argument that insourcing logistics was a hostile attack on the status of warriors, part of the Florence Nightingale propaganda attack on the military, and the military should outsource logistics.

                • shaman says:

                  I see. So the priesthood’s role is not to create social technology from scratch, but to formalize social technology whose utility has already been established. And, in the Current Year, to rebuild lost social technology that has been demolished by social engineers (e.g., coverture). We’re searching for social technologies not socially engineered by a despot a la CR, but that have survived myriads of small scale trials-and-errors throughout generations of spontaneous bottom-up “experimentation.”

                  The priesthood should not innovate, but should also not interfere in the exercise of Natural Law via freehold. If a tradition has endured for long enough, the priesthood may sanctify it. Priests need to know that they don’t perform social science, merely formalize its conclusions and solutions; social science is performed by society itself, always in the long run.

                • jim says:

                  The priesthood is the opposite of the kind of organization you need for doing science and engineering.

                  Having priests build Chesterton’s fence is a bad idea. Having them man Chesterton’s fence is a very good idea.

                  I have often remarked that the best way the state can support science is not by directly funding science, but buy buying high tech stuff. If it attempts to be a scientific patron, as great men and aristocrats were patrons of science in the past, it will wind up funding grantsmanship.

                  Same rule applies for social technology. You can raise the status of one social technology and lower the status of another, you can back some agreements with violence and others not, you can suppress some social institutions with fire and steel, for example gay bathhouses, and sometimes there is no sharp line between that and flat out top down social engineering.

                  But if we look at past Christian social institutions, and today’s progressive and recent communist institutions, there is an obvious and dramatic difference.

                  Kind of like there is no sharp line between limiting people’s right to dump raw sewage into the stream, and forced collectivization. OK, there is no sharp line, but there is a line nonetheless.

                • shaman says:

                  The rule needs to be that the priesthood won’t uphold any custom that has not already been proven to be sound and workable on a small scale.

                  That’s the crux of the difference between what the Church did versus what the Left is now doing: the Church adopted a collection of tried-and-tested customs practiced by sundry groups and sects, and merely gave them a newfound Christian veneer; it thus universalized customs that were initially rather localized.

                  The Left, on the other hand, is almost intrinsically opposed to “tried” and to “tested,” as — following Marxist historiography — it positively perceives itself as inherently revolutionary, as trying to reach a novel “dialectical synthesis.” Thus the Left always makes big cultural leaps without regard to their tenability or lack thereof.

                  Now, if a custom or institution works great on a Dunbar level, there may be grounds to surmise that it can also work on a society-wide level. That’s really the only thing that the priesthood should ever be allowed to “innovate”: extrapolating social technology from the smaller scales to the bigger ones. (In other words: it won’t construct a new Chesterton’s fence, but it may enlarge an extant one)

                  And even that may be excessively dangerous, and must be conducted with extreme caution, if we are to remain principally inclined towards conservatism. Still, in this we have the example of Church to emulate. Come the restoration, the priesthood will concern itself with the following question:

                  Are we:

                  a) introducing an entirely unprecedented custom or institution;
                  b) expanding the scale of a small and well-established custom or institution;
                  c) merely formalizing (or “legitimizing”) an existent custom or institution?

                  Category C is the least problematic of the three, as the priesthood exists precisely for that purpose: upholding successful social technology. Category B is controversial, and should be regarded as a fundamentally risky endeavor, one that clearly necessitates the preemptive formulation of contingency plans. Category A is, of course, absolutely verboten.

                  In short, more precedents = superior prognosis.

                • jim says:

                  Yes, the difference between top down social engineering, and such “social engineering” as state and society supporting family, property, and God, is conservatism and humility.

      • Koanic says:

        The people who claim Q has been “disproven” never point to any specifics. It is an obviously silly claim, like the people who constantly claim that Trump has been caught lying. Obviously a head of state and his team will not display perfect predictive accuracy and policy consistency, particularly one involved in a coup-countercoup as Trump is.

        I supported Trump as an honorable and serious candidate when he was a laughingstock at Vox Populi, and I’ll support Q through the same here. You chuffing of midwits hasn’t bothered me since… I was a kid and noticed that I seemed to be surrounded by the cognitively impaired.

        • Koanic says:

          replace “you” with “the”

        • shaman says:

          >You chuffing of midwits

          Is that a habit you acquired while sucking off VD?

          Like, back then it was, “Everyone who disagrees with me is a gamma male,” and now the Ultimate Argument has been transformed to “Everyone who disagrees with me is a midwit”?

          Be more respectful to your intellectual superiors, bitch.

        • jim says:

          Q said to trust Sessions. Should we have trusted Sessions?

          Q said to trust Mueller. Should we have trusted Mueller?

          Q acts like an enemy plant. Trump is not as deep in the woods as the black pillers depict him, but he is a lot more stuck in the swamp than Q depicts him. Trump is surrounded by enemies who say they are his friends, and Q tells us that they are secretly his friends.

          • The Cominator says:

            Q Is enemy propaganda trust Sessions alone proves that. Either that or real morons larping.

            • shaman says:

              IIRC, he also said that pizzagate is real, and when asked about the illuminati, said that they too are a real modern day cabal. Makes sense, PR-wise; there’s no need to alienate fans of any specific kookspiracy when one can simply embrace them all. It’s a large enough tent to allow for nutters of every shade and hue to join in, evidently.

            • Eli says:

              >Either that or real morons larping.

              In 99% of cases, I pick that as the most salient cause.

              • The Cominator says:

                Trust Sessions is the phrase that makes me think it may be otherwise…

                It was such harmful and divisive propaganda when every Trump voter and every republican needed to be screaming for his head so Trump would have cover from the senate cucks to fire him.

                • Eli says:

                  Possible, I give you that. Nonetheless, to me, it is just another testament of how gullible people, when allowed to spread their hysteria and hoaxes, can hurt their own world.

                  It works both ways, by the way. When the whole pizzagate was developing, I gave it about 10 to 20% chance of actually being true — but did it in private. However, since I saw the spreading of this hoax as beneficial to the overall-good cause of spreading the idea how morally decrepit and mentally sick the leftists are (an idea that is factually true), I thought that I’d rather keep quiet and enjoy the fruits. And I did, with quite the quiet entertainment :-)!

                  Does the above make me evil? A little bit, yes. But only a tiny little bit.

                • shaman says:

                  White lies should only be used tactically, not strategically. When making stuff up about your opponents becomes your go-to policy, you’ll inevitably end up hoisted with your own petard. CIA has this problem: they spread disinfo so skillfully that eventually they can no longer disentangle it from the truth.

                • Eli says:

                  Yes. I hate hoaxes and disinfo, in principle. I never spread them myself, but keep quiet if there is no particular benefit in unraveling them.

          • The Cominator says:

            Most of Trump’s secret enemies are gone at this point. Sessions and Paul Ryan were the big ones I don’t like Pompeo.

          • Koanic says:

            My methodology for investigating Q’s legitimacy was simple. I read Gab daily, and follow various Q followers, most notably Neon Revolt. I save lots of text into my PIM, and the Q stuff gets filed under Trump or Qanon. I’ve noticed enough times confirmations that Q has privileged access to the Trump administration to convince me they are the same.

            This is the correct way to do it. Trump puts loyalty first and runs a tight ship. His inner circle doesn’t leak. He can thus run gambits that bamboozle both left and right.

            If Q is real, then he has access to huge amounts of privileged information, and the right must reevaluate its interpretation of events in light of his statements, including their takes on Sessions, Rosenstein, Mueller, etc.

            Looks to me like Trump is succeeding in destroying the credibility of CNN and the New York Times. He used the Left’s own champions, Mueller and Rosenstein, to string them along with Russiagate and then crush them. Q hinted all along that this was the goal.

            Deciding beforehand that Sessions or Mueller or Rosenstein are bad guys, and then evaluating Q’s legitimacy based on his stance on them, is a backwards epistemological method. It places too much confidence on outsider analysis.

            The realness of Q doesn’t change the truth of NRx’s principles, it merely changes the circumstances to which they must be analytically applied.

            Trump requires the right’s full support for reelection, so much that is hidden will be revealed before then, to get everyone on the same page again.

            I feel no need to organize my notes and present a defence of Q’s legitimacy. Events will prove that, as they proved Trump’s seriousness as a candidate. My time is better spent making things happen that would not otherwise eventuate.

            > Trump is surrounded by enemies who say they are his friends, and Q tells us that they are secretly his friends.

            Q is as fallible as Trump. The fact that Q is real and on Team Trump means this MUST be true. But Q knows what secret leverage Team Trump has on Dems, and the NRx does not.

            • jim says:

              Q Anon not only tells us that Trump’s enemies are his friends, he tells us Trump’s friends are his enemies.

              Events have demonstrated that things are as they seem. Q Anon is misinformation.

              As with global warming Q-Anon promised that future events would show the truth of his claims. If he had inside information, events would have confirmed some of it by now. Instead we get disconfirmation.

              If QAnon had inside information, that he had it would by now be convincingly demonstrated.

              • Koanic says:

                There doesn’t appear to be anyone specializing in Q proofs here, but they certainly exist.

                As we can see from Trump’s failed attempts to flip Comey, I doubt Trump fully appreciates NRx’s lesson on how the holiness spiral tends to turn human resources against him. Q may therefore be similarly susceptible to overestimating his control over actors. However, this is not the same as Q being fake.

                • jim says:

                  If Q proofs existed, I would have seen them. As with flying saucers, if Q Anon was real, we would have compelling evidence. Q Anon’s prophecies have all turned out false. If he had inside information, would have produced some good ones.

                  Like the day of global warming judgment, his prophecies keep getting postponed.

                  The problem is not that Q Anon got some things wrong. The problem is that he has not gotten anything right. If inside information, would have made at least some accurate and surprising predictions.

                • Koanic says:

                  I am not motivated to take up this case, but I have issued your challenge on Gab:


                  This looks like the canonical compendium:


                • jim says:

                  I clicked on the first and second “proof”

                  Seriously underwhelming and entirely unpersuasive. If Q-Anon was what he claimed to be, would have something enormously better.

                • Eynon says:

                  >They want you divided by race, culture, and religion. Together we are strong.

                  Q is Hillary Clinton?

                  Read through some of those posts, I was vaguely aware of Q in the background but I had no idea it was this bad. This is a level of progressive pablum that makes Fox News look like Evola.

                • Koanic says:

                  That site has everything, apparently. Whereas I find only bits and pieces here and there compelling.

                • jim says:

                  Well, if there is some proof of Q you find compelling amidst all that rubbish, show the one best proof.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Failed attempt, if you look at Comey closely there is a very good case that Comey has secretly been /ourguy all along. I don’t know why he was fired (especially to be replaced by the wishy washy Wray) but it might have been impossible for him to maintain his cover if Trump didn’t fire him.

                  So Q is wrong again.

                • Koanic says:

                  I don’t know what the one best proof is, and I’m not about to specialize in Qanon to find out. It would be a giant waste of time. I’m pretty sure Trump will unveil Qanon for the 2020 election anyway. He needs to.

                • jim says:

                  If there was one best proof that Q-Anon was real, everyone, including me, would know of it. The “proofs” I have seen are all rubbish. If there was one that is not rubbish, would have heard it.

                • Eli says:

                  You’re arguing with a guy who seriously believes that putting out the other cheek after the first one got slapped was demeaning to the *person slapping it,* in the Mediterranean/Near East.

                  Q Anon is a load of wishy washy nonsense likewise.

                • shaman says:

                  I always wonder why people who suffer from the condition colloquially known as “Wrong About Everything” refuse to shut up. Perhaps that’s the koan.

                • Koanic says:

                  It’s surprising that there isn’t a readily available succinct apology. That makes it more worthwhile. I’ll add it to my list of PR generating activities, but no guarantee I’ll get to it before the 2020 unveil. The number of people who can sift a fever swamp like this for its kernels of truth is small.

                • Koanic says:

                  This is the best Qanon starting point I’ve found:


                  Nothing amazing in terms of evidence jumped out in my skim. I’d expect it to take a day or three for me to isolate the best bits of evidence that Qanon has top clearance.

                  Neon is not a succinct apologist; he’s a woo extrapolator. The Qanon community tends to turn hardnose skeptics off. Even with all the priviliged info Qanon has available, I feel he gets a bit fruity at times. Also, I suspect he lies outright at times for disinfo purposes. Spooks are not known for their honesty

                • jim says:

                  > Nothing amazing in terms of evidence jumped out in my skim

                  I find it easy to conceal my surprise. </sarcasm>

                • Koanic says:

                  Q intends to subcommunicate with a specific audience, and providing a simple clear proof would compromise his ability to do so. Jesus did the same.

                  Eli> You’re arguing with a guy who seriously believes that putting out the other cheek after the first one got slapped was demeaning to the *person slapping it,* in the Mediterranean/Near East.

                  My interpretation is tame enough to have a Wikipedia subheading [1]. It is you whose interpretation of the Bible are nutty, as Jim recently pointed out in one example. Hypocrisy, thy name is Hebrew.

                  The relevant passage is Matthew 5:38-42, part of the Sermon on the Mount to a crowd of commoners who had followed Jesus there.

                  Three specific examples are given. Two are clearly legalistic turnabout – forcing to go two miles violates Roman law, and taking the cloak violates Mosaic law. The latter explicitly applies to the poor, and the former one can presume generally burdened the poor as well, if only due to demographics. It is incredible to believe that “turning the other cheek” violates this pattern and is merely a sign of abject submission, not heretical legalistic resistance. (Heretical here in the sense of resisting a superior on the social hierarchy.)

                  This is borne out in the practice of both Jesus and Paul, when struck in the face. When an official struck Jesus’ face during his trial, he answered in a manner that brought the striker into legal jeopardy – John 18:22-23. And when Paul was struck in the face by a Jewish official in another trial, he used the same verbal tactic – Acts 23:3.

                  Both of these men were experts in the Law, not commoners. For a commoner, such verbal facility cannot be expected. However, the act of turning the other cheek would nonetheless be heretical. For example, imagine a culture in which it was customary for a father to discipline his son by slapping his face once. If the son, who had in the past routinely submitted to such blows, instead turned the other cheek, that would inform the father that the son was prepared to initiate combat. If the father then backed down publicly, this would tacitly ratify his son’s independence and manhood. And in a manner that would not expose the son to the legal jeopardy resulting from a son striking his father. Which, under the Law, carried the death penalty.


                • alf says:

                  > comparing Q with Jesus

                  Everytime I think I don’t need any more popcorn…

                • shaman says:

                  >the 2020 unveil

                  Milo Yiannopolous had once loudly advertised that he would have had a “big reveal” about pizzagate. Supposedly, right when he was about to spill the beans, spooks warned him not to do it, because the matter had already been under investigation, and would be exposed by them in due course. (In other words: he realized that he had been conned, and that’s how he permanently excused himself from further promotion of the con)

                  Q-tards will go the same way in 2020 or sometime later.

                • shaman says:

                  >Q intends to subcommunicate with a specific audience, and providing a simple clear proof would compromise his ability to do so.

                  Kudos for the “totally unpredictable” esotericism. May as well go full chan-tard and enjoin, “Just keep digging, anon.” Heard it all before; people with concrete evidence — or even a coherent theorem — to substantiate their proposition never speak in this manner.

                  You don’t even attempt to make any sense: why would “clear proof” (or tentative proof) that he isn’t a bluffing con-artist full of s**t compromise his ability to “sub-communicate” with the “specific audience” that coincidentally happens to lurk on 4chan and 8chan?

                  Remember the “sealed indictments” nonsense? Remember the illegal migrant camp which ‘tardos proclaimed to be a “child sex-trafficking site” owned by the Rothschilds? (And the list goes on) Is there any hoax you *didn’t* fall for, Kookanic?

                • Koanic says:

                  Both Jesus and Qanon subcommunicated in order to talk over the heads of a hostile holiness spiral.

                  Here’s Vox’s reaction to the CNN Kasich McCain execution slip.


                  For some reason his site’s search bar does not return reliable results. But using a Google query with “ foobar” does work.

                  Kasich’s intonation at “put to death” makes clear his shock and outrage, before he quickly changes tack.

                • shaman says:

                  >Both Jesus and Qanon subcommunicated in order to talk over the heads of a hostile holiness spiral.

                  HAHAHA. It’s 8chan, damn it. He can say whatever the heck he wants to say on that medium. Since he provided no evidence, there is no evidence. Simple as that.

                  >Kasich’s intonation at “put to death” makes clear his shock and outrage, before he quickly changes tack.

                  You suck at cold reading. It’s not his intonation. He meant to say “laid to rest” or “put to rest” (which is a polite way of saying “dropped dead”), but clumsily uttered “put to death” because Kasich is not exactly well-spoken. There’s no outrage or shock there, just Kasich being his oddball self.

                  Moreover, the suggestion that he — of all people — is even marginally involved in a conspiracy to discreetly assassinate McCain defies credulity.

                  You’re a moron.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “The Qanon community tends to turn hardnose skeptics off.”

                  You know or people who tend to rationally look at evidence.

                  The Qanon community is probably a great place to sell timeshares, magic beans, pyramid scams and such.

                • Eli says:

                  You gave me a link that references pontifications by a nutty pastor from a so-called “Progressive Christianity” school of thought.


                  Heh, I wasn’t aware that thoughts of a cuck have such a strong bearing on you.

                  I’ll reiterate: Jesus’s Christianity was a movement within Judaism that explicitly promoted excessive meekness and lowliness.

                  What is excessive meekness/lowliness?

                  Here: take a walk at any major metropolitan downtown area in the US. Do you see all these disgusting, relatively young non-invalids, begging for money, holding up signs with quasi-BS stories? Do you understand that by merely being there, all decrepit and NOT ashamed, while not being kicked out, these scum demean not only themselves but *the very city and its citizens*, too? This is the modern, exaggerated version of what Jesus stood for, in my eyes. It is by *acquiescing* to their presence, just as one acquiesced to the pushy slave who turns his other cheek, that one truly demeans oneself. The vision of a slave who dares to expose his lowly abject state and gloats in it is what Jesus essentially preached, while declaring himself a King of the Jews (I’d go for Herod anytime!)

                  There is nothing demeaning in punching the other cheek and even the whole body of a masochistic slave. And it is that very masochism, elevated to status of holiness, that sickness — that Jesus wanted his adherents to carry within them.

                  I’ve told you before and will repeat, with slight modification: while the Pharisees were actually *protective* of Jesus/Yeshua, the Sadducees hated him and what he stood for, including his BS claims for kinghood. I would side with the latter group on that issue anytime.

                • shaman says:

                  Neon Revolt / Neon Nettle is a pathological liar who spreads fake news more rapidly than you can say “not this shit again.” That Kookanic uses his article to substantiate his latest inanity tells you everything you need to know about Kookanic’s ability to rationally evaluate information.

                  Kookanic is a Wishful Thinker.

                • alf says:

                  > Kasich’s intonation at “put to death” makes clear his shock and outrage, before he quickly changes tack.

                  While this on the whole seems like a topic I do not intend to touch with a ten meter pole, I have paid you the honor of watching the seven minute segment.

                  So, just to get this straight: you believe that Trump, in secret, is in complete control of the government, that he is successfully plotting to end democracy, get rid of the democrat party and crown himself god-emperor, and that Q, as an insider is spilling this info to the people, such info as that Trump actually ordered the execution of John McCain, which execution is confirmed by John Kasich saying that ‘John McCain was put to death’.


                  That is some delusional thinking. Well maybe not delusional, I can see how you might infer such a conclusion from bits of information, but it is heavy, heavy wishful thinking.

                  OK it is delusional.

                  I mean, take this John McCain business. So your belief is that everyone on the left knows Trump murdered McCain, but because they are silenced and have ankle bands on they dare not speak out about it? So when John Kasich accidentally admits John McCain was murdered, he immediately silences himself out of fear for the Trumpenführer?

                  Work out those thoughts. Follow them through. You are claiming that:
                  – the left has been defanged by Trump
                  – the left cowers in fear of Trump
                  – Trump is literally killing high-ranking Republicans
                  – We are actually secretly in control! (heyy now wouldn’t that sort of stuff appeal to gammas? 😉 )

                  If the left is willing to invent a thousand lies to get Trump impeached, not a snowball’s chance in hell they wouldn’t use the truth of Trump murdering John McCain to get him impeached.

                  So, Occam’s razor: how about… John Kasich just mixed up his expressions? As in, he meant to say ‘put to rest’, e.g. his chemo was canceled? Pretty sure it’s a mix-up I could’ve made.

                • Eli says:

                  >It is you whose interpretation of the Bible are nutty, as Jim recently pointed out in one example.

                  Kookanic, stop bullshitting and provide an actual link to where Jim said any such thing to me or about me. Fucking liar.

                • Koanic says:

                  > Kookanic, stop bullshitting and provide an actual link to where Jim said any such thing to me or about me.

                  You’re correct, I was thinking of Kawaii Kike.


                • Eli says:

                  OK. I’ll give you a point for your honesty here, if nothing else.

                  @Jim: I submitted a comment a few hours back, but it’s still “awaiting moderation” or something. Is it in spam?

                • shaman says:

                  Kookanic, 5/12/2019:

                  My methodology for investigating Q’s legitimacy was simple. I read Gab daily, and follow various Q followers, most notably Neon Revolt. I save lots of text into my PIM, and the Q stuff gets filed under Trump or Qanon. I’ve noticed enough times confirmations that Q has privileged access to the Trump administration to convince me they are the same.

                  Kookanic, 5/13/2019:

                  I’d expect it to take a day or three for me to isolate the best bits of evidence that Qanon has top clearance.

                  Faggot and irredeemably stupid. Admit that you were wrong about Qanon, (and wrong to rely on serial fake news purveyors and their lackeys on Gab,) as you were wrong about previous, similar affairs. Your “methodology” is indistinguishable from “a certain chan-tard once said.” You’re totally full of shit, you know perfectly well that you’re totally full of shit, and that’s why you won’t commit to any coherent narrative of what’s happening; you are no different — and certainly no better — than your Fellow Fed Travellers on 8chan.

                  And to think that there’s now a whole “Neandersphere” (kek) where dipshits take your words as gospel. When you finally graduate from asshole to merely asshat, consider not wasting everyone’s time with kook stuff.

                • Cuddlepie says:

                  Koanic is irredeemable. A man posted three or four videos claiming to be a fed, who had evidence that the US govt had contact with aliens or the world was going to end in the next three weeks or something. Koanic spent a week cold reading the man in minute detail and claimed that everything the man was displaying showed he was telling the truth.

                  Needless to say the man came out a week after and said he was an actor, playing around with his craft.

                  This is the level of arrogance and stupidity he possesses.

              • The Cominator says:

                Q could also have inside information if it were run by high level government enemies say by allies of John Brennan still within the CIA.

                Q said “trust Sessions” open and shut as either bullshit or enemy propaganda. A true source would not have said trust not only a traitor but a traitor on the level of Judas Iscariot.

                • Eynon says:

                  Sessions was good on immigration and out of his league on everything else. Considering how much immigration matters, that’s not ground to declare him Judas. He should’ve been at DHS and not Justice.

                  Regarding Q- for years on /pol/, every few months would see a new LARP campaign of someone claiming to be an “insider anon” of one color or another, with some privileged access to secret information that they could never speak about in plain terms, naturally, but that they could hint at in a series of wacky fun clues.

                  There were a dozen of them. Q was the first one after the 2016 influx of new posters to /pol/ due to the Trump phenomenon. They seemed to follow the Q show because they were eager to believe and less experienced in board culture. It also seemed to me that people flocked to the phenomenon because contrary to the edgy nature of /pol/, Q painted a picture of comic book morality where there were no hard choices to make, no presuppositions to be critically re-evaluated, no complex issues with the nature of progressivism: just democracy-loving Patriots versus the bad guys.

                  That was my impression when it first started and I haven’t seen much need to change it.

                • The Cominator says:

                  FBIanon was an authentic source (another reason I tend towards mostly believing pizzagate it is one of many things FBIanon predicted that came true that we would find something much like pizzagate if we looked into the Podesta emails and Clinton Foundation).

                  He predicted a lot of things that came true. FBIanon made a few outrageous predictions and revealations that turned out false but he outright said he would be making a few of those in the name of plausible deniability (for instance he played to /pol by claiming the US government knew that the 3rd Reich didn’t kill all that many jews… when historical evidence overwhelmingly backs most things about the main holocaust story but is a lot more wishy washy about the gas chambers).

                  Q has not made any testably true predictions, he has said many things which are likely to have been enemy propaganda.

                  Sessions did too many hostile things to not be considered Judas. Even if you subtract Mueller and the recusal what about the Awan case… the key to locking up the whole leadership of the Democratic party. The traitor motherfucker let that go…

                  If Trump becomes king I don’t care if Sessions is an ICU invalid he needs to have his ICU ass drawn and quartered. Sessions is absolutely a Judas.

                  For immigration to be solved Trump needs absolute power, Sessions was not good on immigration because he was preventing Trump from getting into real power.

                • Eynon says:

                  >For immigration to be solved Trump needs absolute power, Sessions was not good on immigration because he was preventing Trump from getting into real power.

                  True. But as matter of immigration policy positions Sessions was as good or better than anyone in mainstream politics and media in the country. There’s no question that his tenure was ultimately destructive but my impression has been that you ascribe actual malicious intent to him, which doesn’t align with him hiring Stephen Miller right out of school, mentoring him, and eventually “lending” him to the Trump camping as his office quite literally wrote Trump’s excellent immigration policy paper.

                • jim says:

                  Better than “mainstream” is a mighty low bar to jump, and in the end he signed up with the enemy.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Nobody is a traitor until they are. Sessions may not have been malicious originally but after he turned traitor he certainly was.

                • Zach says:

                  Not a chance in hell Comey is our guy. He thinks he’s Jesus Christ except more Jesuslier.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “Not a chance in hell Comey is our guy. He thinks he’s Jesus Christ except more Jesuslier.”

                  A guy whos hated by everyone but who did more to sabotage Hillary from the inside then anyone else and who also sabotaged the spygate plot (wrote in his book that there was no credible evidence to be suspicious that Trump was a foreign agent but then he says he was mean, so what he just blew the entire spygate case) then anyone and who is probably fixing to rat them all out.

                  Maybe he is HOLIER then everyone, maybe hes batshit. I don’t know but his actions have matched what a very good double agent would do.

                  Its my pet theory you don’t have to believe it.

                • shaman says:

                  >another reason I tend towards mostly believing pizzagate it is one of many things FBIanon predicted that came true that we would find something much like pizzagate if we looked into the Podesta emails and Clinton Foundation


                  This is backward reasoning. FBI Anon is one of the professional trolls responsible for pizzagate in the first place, together with his colleague Q Anon. Here’s a very decent summary:


                • shaman says:

                  Wikipedia is run by shitlibs, so it is usually unreliable and unauthoritative about such matters, but there’s not a single lie in this specific account:

                  “On October 30, 2016, a Twitter account that posted white supremacist material that presented itself as belonging to a lawyer based in New York, claimed that the New York City Police Department (NYPD) discovered a pedophilia ring linked to members of the Democratic Party while searching through Anthony Weiner’s emails.[12][3] WikiLeaks leaked John Podesta’s emails throughout October and November of 2016. Proponents of the theory reading over the emails alleged that some words in Podesta’s emails were code words for pedophilia and human trafficking.[2][13] Proponents also claimed that the ring was a meeting ground for Satanic ritual abuse.[14]”

                  This is how pizzagate started (seriously):


                  You’ve been trolled hard by chan-tards.

                • shaman says:

                  Interestingly, according to the following account, the woman who started pizzagate — Cynthia Campbell — claims to have had her Facebook page hacked:

                  “Amanda and Cynthia Campbell, a.k.a Carmen Katz, talked for like 20 minutes. We didn’t get permission to use that call, so I’ll just like basically tell you what she told us. She said that she did create the Carmen Katz Facebook page, but she claimed it had been hacked. She said she didn’t know anything about the specific anti-Hillary/pro-Trump posts, she didn’t know about the NYPD source’s Pizzagate post. She said, “Yes, I created that account, but I didn’t create those specific posts. I think I was hacked. I don’t really understand what this is all about.” And she was very nice. And so Amanda hangs up the phone.”


                  Make of that what you will.

                • Eynon says:

                  >This is how pizzagate started (seriously)

                  I never paid a whole lot of attention to pizagate but it started on the chans, not twitter. And Wikipedia calling something “white supremacist content” is meaningless, as every single person in this comment section would be called a white supremacist on Wikipedia.

                • shaman says:

                  The “Carmen Katz” post on Facebook *preceded* the chan brouhaha.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The basic theory of Pizzagate is neither proven nor disproven.

                  Since its not proven neither way its best to say I’m not saying that top Democrats rape and snuff children in demonic rituals… but there is a good chance they do.

                  Rather then saying that Democrats are innocent.

                  Trooferism is disproven because absurd and based on lies and Qanon disproven the second he said “trust Sessions”. So not in the same category.

        • shaman says:

          >I seemed to be surrounded by the cognitively impaired.

          Speaking of the cognitively impaired, when you wrote this:

          Do you think that you evinced much intellect, to say nothing of sanity?

          • Eli says:

            Whoa. This guy is either an utter nut or a moron. Or both.

            • shaman says:

              It’s been obvious for a while that he’s both. Check out all the “quality content” that he has posted on Gab just throughout this past week:


              There’s a cuckoo’s nest inside his deformed skull.

              • Eli says:


                • shaman says:

                  Look on the plus side; he can make for an excellent case study in decapitation, since his brain is all useless anyway.

                  Recently, I read an interesting account:


                  “Picking up the head to show to the crowd was customary, and occasionally the executioner showed disrespect to the head as well. This was the case with Charlotte Corday, a woman executed by guillotine in France in 1793 after she assassinated the revolutionary leader Jean-Paul Marat.

                  After her head was severed, the executioner smacked its cheeks while he held it aloft. To the astonishment of the crowd, Corday’s cheeks flushed and her facial expression changed into the “unequivocal marks of indignation.”

                  Most recently, in 1989, an Army veteran reported that following a car accident that he was in with a friend, the decapitated head of his friend changed facial expressions: “First of shock or confusion then to terror or grief.”

                  Both King Charles I and Queen Anne Boleyn are reported to both have showed signs of trying to speak following their beheadings (by executioners’ swords, rather than by guillotine). When he spoke out against the use of the guillotine in 1795, German researcher S.T. Sommering cited reports of decapitated heads that have ground their teeth and that the face of one decapitated person “grimaced horribly” when a physician inspecting the head poked the spinal canal with his finger.


                  But the question arises: would a rotten brain like Kooknic’s keep lucid post-decapitation, or not? After all, it’s half gone already. Now, it is often said that post-birth abortion is immoral, and surely we can’t just go back in time and split his pregnant whore-mother’s belly in half; however, volunteering a shit-stain like Kookanic to SCIENCE! might not be immoral at all. Food for thought, at any rate.

                • Eli says:

                  The imagery is disgusting while, simultaneously, managing to be laughter-inducing!

                  Actually, over the years, I’ve developed a theory along similar lines. However, my conclusions are different, possibly diametrically opposite. In my hypothesis, the smarter and more sensible / neocortically-sensitive the person is, the more interconnected his low-level functionality is with his high-level one. Hence, in line with this, the dumber person’s severed head would be more capable of displaying signs (albeit of more primitive kind) of life than the head of the truly intelligent kind. Similarly, with sexuality and its turn-on/turn-off aspect.

                  It’s kind of like Ferrari vs old trusty Toyota. You can get much more from the former, but need to have everything just right — no extra dust particles allowed in the engine or the transmission.

                  This, of course, merits an actual study… of which, presumably, you’d be the chief scientist, come the Reaction.

          • Eli says:

            Btw, if you are the same guy as “Jewish Pedophile,” thank you for your service. If not, thanks either way.

        • shaman says:

          >I was a kid and noticed that I seemed to be surrounded by the cognitively impaired.

          By the way, given your crass display of Dunning-Kruger here, which you implausibly project onto all of your interlocutors, has it even occurred to you that you don’t come across as intelligent *because you aren’t*?

        • jim says:

          > The people who claim Q has been “disproven” never point to any specifics.

          Sessions and Mueller are specifics.

          But asking for a disproof is irrelevant. If Q was the insider he claims to be, there would be proofs.

          The lack of proofs of Q is the primary disproof of Q.

          • Koanic says:

            That’s not disproof, it’s your interpretation of events. I don’t follow Sessions closely enough to have an opinion. As for Mueller, his report has deflated CNN, the NYT, and the Democrats. AFAIK your main objection was Mueller recusing himself for something, which I suspect paved the way for said deflation.

            • The Cominator says:

              Sessions is not defensible Koanic compare how badly everything went under him to how favorable things are going under Barr.

              Defending Q and defending Sessions is a good example of the kind of thinking that has convinced everyone here that you are a lunatic despite your occasional flashes of insight.

              The recusal was not Sessions only crime, remember the Awan case?

            • Koanic says:

              I meant to type “was Sessions recusing himself”.

              Obviously things will appear to be going better as the plan reaches fruition. Trump needed to look embattled for the Democrats to press their suicide charge into the killing field.

              • jim says:

                It is absolutely clear that Trump does not merely look embattled. He really is embattled.

                • The Cominator says:

                  At this point Trump is less embattled then he was and IMHO clearly winning the war but he’d be doing even better if Sessions didn’t betray him.

                  Jim I have a comment false positived under moderation.

                • Koanic says:

                  All good deceptions are based on a grain of truth.

                • shaman says:

                  >All good deceptions are based on a grain of truth.

                  Well, let’s consider your entire blogging career. You’ve been writing for years — 2011 to 2016 — about how you’re a Neanderthal, and how people whose facial and cranial features are similar to yours are also Neanderthals. Now, can there be a grain of truth there? Sure: everyone who’s of European or Asian ancestry (not Africans) has some degree of Neanderthal ancestry; and Europeans probably more than Asians, who have Denisovan ancestry.

                  But here’s why you’re a typical con-artist: 23andme completely disproved all that you’ve been telling people. For years, you’ve been asking them to send you pictures of their faces, and told them if they are Neanderthals, Starchildren, Cro-Magnons, Melonheads, and all that other stuff you’ve been saying. And then 23andme came along and demolished you; you took the test yourself, figured that there’s nothing exceptionally Neanderthal about you compared to other North-Western Europeans (you ain’t close to 4%), and more importantly, people started writing very nasty comments about how you’ve fooled them all these years, so you deleted all your writings.

                  You know that you are crazy:


                  And like many wignats, your girlfriend was Chinese. Chinese! Seriously though: if you realize that for years, you — with promotion by Tex and Vox, who’ve pretty much become “usual suspects” at this point — have been telling people that they are Neanderthals based on nothing other than their facial similarity to you, when you’re not even particularly Neanderthalic, and that all these people now have 23andme to verify that you’re simply a con-artist, perhaps you should just admit to being fundamentally untrustworthy?

                • Simon says:

                  Link broken.

                • jim says:

                  Link works for me. Pile of florid full on insanity from a

                • Koanic says:

                  NRx engages in binary thinking regarding Q and Trump. Q can be real and wrong, just like Trump. Trump and Q are both partially-pozzed civnats. Should NRx “Trust the plan”? That depends on what NRx trusts it to do. NRx can trust the plan to grind up the loony Left using the gears of state, because a competent civnat crew is a surprise shift in the power balance. In this, Trump is a step towards the return of kings. But the plan aims to extend the civnat “Republic”, and that is counter to the aims of NRx. This aspect of the plan is doomed to fail. So the plan is guaranteed to succeed in the short term, and to fail in the long term.

                  Trusting the people Q says to trust means trusting at least partially-pozzed civnat agents of partially-pozzed civnat leaders. Should NRx trust those people? Depends on what trust means.

                  It’s the same sort of cogdis that “loyalists” use to oppose a king’s policies – blame it all on the evil ministers. NRx is monarchical, therefore Trump must be supported, therefore Q must be denounced as fake and evil. But they are the same. And Q’s coup is a step towards the return of kings, which NRx supports.

                • alf says:

                  > And Q’s coup is a step towards the return of kings, which NRx supports.

                  John McCain was not murdered, democrats are not wearing ankle bands, there is no such thing as Q’s coupe. Q is fake.

              • The Cominator says:

                Sessions betrayal was not part of the plan. The Awan case would have nailed the Democratic party worse then anything you can imagine and Sessions let it go. Barr and Durham will get some of them but it won’t be like the complete en masse treason case assfucking the Awan case would have administered to them.

                Q puts bits of truth (Trump having a faction of deep state military types who back him) with catch-all conspiracy bullshit and harmful disinfo like “Trust Sessions” and “Trust Mueller”.

    • If Q is real, then he’s a Red Empire stooge. Red Empire is not our friend.

Leave a Reply