I should not post on the news of the day, for it is best understood months, years, decades, and usually centuries after it has happened. But every day I have been predicting the uselessness of the FBI for Trump’s anti terror measures. Its command structure is full of lunatics, and Kash Patel does not look capable of addressing this problem. It is not that they are lefter than regular leftists, they are not all that far left, it is that they are even more seriously detached from reality than regular leftists.
Instead of attempting to clean out the Augean stables, Trump is bypassing the FBI with the Department of Justice and the military. And this is working. Suddenly, Antifa is being arrested, and suddenly its financiers are are being stopped. The Antifa now being arrested are going to facing real charges, and suddenly their deep pockets sponsors are going away.
Now I am shutting up about the news of the day. Back to your regular programming with less frequent but more thoughtful updates, made in the light of information less likely to change the following day.
And, in not news of the day:
the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that—
(A)involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B)appear to be intended—
(i)to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii)to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion;
This law has been sitting on the books being thoroughly ignored for two decades, but it allows the government to go after not just the particular individual who commits a particular crime, but the entire apparatus mobilising him, organising him, equipping him, and funding him. As, for example, Soros.
We have heard the announced intent to apply it, but Trump announces a lot of things that do not happen, or happen only after years, and then happen on a much smaller scale than promised, but, news of the day, stuff is happening right now, because the seriously deranged and thoroughly useless FBI has been bypassed. In a few months we shall be able to see where the stuff that is happening right now leads.
We shall see if Ubuntu turns its attention from sponsoring terror back to sponsoring open source software.
An increase in the purchasing power of money is not pernicious. That’s the way it always was during America’s Golden Age. Except during war time, idle cash money would rise in value about 1% per year.
Mom could hide a $5 bill in a coffee can, and a year later it would buy $5.05 worth of stuff. A 1% return for doing nothing other than just saving.
But why oh why should Mom be rewarded for doing nothing instead of engaging in risky investment or lending? It’s simple. The productive men around her were increasing their productivity, producing more goods and services for the same amount of money. That is GOOD.
But then wouldn’t people just sit on their laurels and not invest in businesses? No, that’s silly. Dad could take the $5 and lend it out at 4%, and get a 5% real return in a year. Voila, $5.25.
The good thing is that Mom and Dad had the option of keeping some of their money free of investment risk without getting robbed by government money printers.
Why is it good for government to rob people of their societal productivity gains, and then another few percent on top of that? That’s not good, that’s bad. It’s evil to constantly rob people through inflation just for the purpose of “stimulating” risky investment — forcing them to take risks just to keep their heads above water. No, you can take that scheme and put it right back in the hole it came from.
The mild deflation of productivity gains encouraged saving. That’s good. Savings are the pool of capital needed for lending and investment. Not like this stupid Federal Reserve scheme which pumps out new fake and gay “money” like they’re animating a dead frog with an electric probe. That’s straight from the pit of hell, as sinful as moving a boundary stone.
Savings are the way the economic cycle rebounds. You get a hot “summer” of high valuations, high leverage, high production. This summer inevitably cools, the most leveraged and the least prepared “get margin called.” Those that noticed everyone around them was engaged in overly risky business at the top of a cycle deleveraged, traded the least interesting assets for cash, like a tree ditches green leaves in Autumn. Then, when prices drop low, those that saved reinvest, restarting the cycle.
With these cycles we have the least forward minded and most greedy lose captial, and the most forward looking and most patient gain capital. This cycle kills dysfunctional zombie institutions, and allows room for the birth and growth of new functional ones.
The inflation tax is the dumbest, most distortive, most destructive tax a government can engage in. It has completely hollowed out the economy, and destroyed the dollar system that allowed the empire to function. They lit a fire at the base of the tree they are sat on, and like it or not they are going to have to face the consequences. You cannot fix this by jiggering with credit interest rates, fed balance sheets, incentive schemes, or stealing even more from the peasants.
As I see it, the basic problem with fiat money is human nature. No matter how honest the central bank is there will always be pressure by the sovereign, friends, associates, class members, etc. to bail them out. Including threats and blackmail. Also there is the temptation to use the money supply as a variable to tweak the economy rather than as a foundation on which to built it. Both Bitcoin and precious metal specie get around this problem by making difficult for any one person or organization to directly manipulate its value.
Time and again, we’ve seen people come here and declare they’re Nazis and expect the audience here to be suitably impressed. Well, time and again, they have been disappointed.
Of course, National Socialism as a governing mechanism is much better than Globohomo communism, but leftism is still baked into National socialism which eats away at whatever gains Nationalism can bring.
Truth is, National Socialism is Socialism as the True Religion with Nationalism as the unprincipled exception. That is not going to work out in the long run is it. The unprincipled exception almost always get culled out by the true believers. Most National Socialists accept the socialist premises without question and indeed assume that their interlocutors also accept the premises of socialism.
In any case, Nazism is neither really revolutionary nor very unique. Almost all “right wing” governments since WW II have socialistic principles baked in and a few which are explicitly nationalistic which means National Socialistic in a broad sense are dubbed as “far right” Fascism/Nazism by the left, which they really aren’t. Adding Race identity to National Socialism doesn’t really make it a much better State Religion, since Socialism is still baked into the cake. And Jim has a treatise on why socialism always fails and leads to death camps/killing fields.
Hitler should have declared mandate of heaven and declared himself God-Emperor of Greater Germany and reinforced the old classes and Monarchy, instead of seeking to make “All Germans Equal, except the Jews of course”. The Socialist state really didn’t work out and he got repeatedly out-holied on the socialist question which forced him to carry out purges.
Also pure Nationalism cannot be a state religion because “I love my country above all else” is not a religion. It is a seed of a faith but not a faith in itself. Neither is race identity. So neither “White Nationalism” nor “National Socialism” can work as alternative to having a genuinely virtuous elite with a sane state religion based on principles of natural law and a Monachy based on mandate of heaven.
Cohesiveness is important. That’s why the religious element matters much more.
There is no point in adding race identity to national socialism. Race identity is inherent to national socialism; it is already in it. National socialism is national. A nation are people who have common ancestors; they are of the same race. All nationalist are very aware their race and their nationality.
Yes, you are right in that natural nations are racially and ethnically homogeneous.
But modern nations have artificial borders and nationalism has been redefined accordingly.
My point is that race based nationalism is a specific type of nationalism. Since “nationalism” itself has been redefined to include civic nationalism, “my nation is a multiethnic multicultural nation” etc I thought I should be specific in which kind of nationalism I was referring to.
I see your point, but terms like “civic nationalism” were coined with an intention to mislead and obfuscate. There is no nationalism in “civic nationalism”. Jim once wrote, don’t use enemy words, you will be misunderstood. Well, he was right. You were misunderstood.
In related news, Trump has renamed Indigenous Peoples’ Day back to Columbus Day, a holiday created in 1892 as a way of expanding the “American nation” to include millions of Italian immigrants.
The problem with ‘national socialists’ is that they kept redefining, watering down and subverting ‘nationalism’ from time to time according to the “need of the hour” wherein the very word ‘nationalism’ has been rendered meaningless far subverted from its original meaning.
Why did Hitler and other national socialists want empire eventually? It’s the very antithesis of a homogeneous racially pure and strong nation. The answer lies in the socialism part.
That is a problem of progressives in general. They are always redefining, watering down and subverting the meaning of words according to the “need of the hour”. Let’s try to keep using words according to their original meaning – otherwise a meaningful discussion is impossible (which is one of the reasons why progressives keep tinkering with language).
Anyway nationalism is older than national socialists. National socialism, at least least initially was truly national. My understanding of German history is that Hitler wanted an empire, but not an empire wherein all nations were equal. Such empire would be compatible with nationalism, wouldn’t it?
The problem with empire is that eventually “those” people will become your people since nationalism has been watered down.
Every empire starts with the vision of ruling over a slave people and commanding their resources but eventually ends up with globohomo communism.
Point being nationalism is not the issue. Socialism is. And national socialists are always sincere socialists in practice.
Progressives threaten everything and will destroy everything, if they are not stopped. Empires are not special in that respect.
Not every empire started with the vision of ruling over a slave people. Some started as an alliance to stop a powerful enemy, e.g. Delian league to defend against Persia or Austria-Hungary to stop Islamic expansion.
I worded that wrong. Sure, not all empires start with the same objectives of course. I am sure most Empires start off with even practical and benevolent motives, but eventually all empires fall into the same problem of ever-expanding scope/definition creep of “our people” and eventually Universalism.
Besides a military alliance of equally strong states is not necessarily an empire; only when one of them is militarily and eventually culturally dominant over the others.
NatSoc is the most anti-“social” ideology ever conceived because it is the ultimate adversary to ultimate socialism as exhibited by Christianity, Buddhism, and other world-rejecting ideologies based on compassion.
Compassion is the basis of all religion (com-passion = suffering Christ’s “passion” with Him). Ideally we would care about all creatures, but true compassion for all means oneness with God which is what Christ experience during His passion: “we are done playing this game, Father into your hands we commit our souls”
True compassion is being in the outermost ring of this study: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-12227-0
For those of use who want to keep playing, NatSoc is the logical conclusion of belief in one’s self above others -> belief in one’s family above others -> belief in one’s race above others. It is the logical conclusion of any and all lack of compassion that is necessary to exist in this world.
When you e.g. mass slaughter cattle for meat, you exhibit such a lack of compassion because you are playing the Darwinist game of which NatSoc is the logical conclusion.
NatSoc is the ultimate victorious ideology in our material world, the world run by Satan/Gnon (Satan/Gnon represent the natural/material world, as opposed to the supernatural).
The Holocaust represents the ultimate masters of the material world (Aryans) exerting their dominance over the ultimate losers/cucks/world-deniers (Jews). You either accept this world (Nazism), or you deny it (Christianity). Accept our world, and its logical conclusions, or reject it all.
Every time you have a child, it’s like inserting another quarter into the arcade machine. Accepting our world and its consequences with life-affirming ideology (NatSoc) or rejecting it all, not having kids, becoming a monk and denying the material world as much as possible.
All this is to say, NatSoc is actually the most anti-“social” ideology possible, because it is the logical conclusion of prioritizing oneself, one’s family, one’s RACE above others. NATIONAL SOCIALISM stands primarily in opposition to INTERNATIONAL SOCIALISM, i.e. ultimate compassion/Christianity/world denial. One prioritizes one’s race for the same reasons that one prioritizes one’s family, or one’s self, above others. For the same reason one eats other creatures: because that’s how this simulation is designed, that’s the best strategy for our little game here that we’re all forced to play.
You are either a NatSoc, or you are being crucified by them, or you haven’t yet chosen a side. Do you want to keep playing or not?
This sounds like an argument for veganism, international socialism and similar autogenocidal programs.
Please clarify your position on on these ideologies, and explain why international socialism has an enormously higher murder rate than national socialism.
If you are arguing in favor of autogenocide, please respond to the criticisms of the suicidal belief systems that have been made on this blog in a way that acknowledges that those arguments have been made.
National Socialism is leftist, because socialist, but rightist in being enormously less murderous than international socialism. The left hates Hitler partly for killing the wrong people, but mostly for not killing enough people.
[*deleted for not conforming to the moderation policy*]
Those programs are all the logical conclusion of world-denying compassion.
I believe that life is worth living. I would like to insert another quarter into the arcavde machine. Most people in developed nations do not believe life is worth living and are not inserting quarters into the arcade machines. This is the logical conclusion of being evolved enough to experience true compassion: you begin to think that this world, this game, is no longer worth playing. You would rather die than harm another being to prolong your own life. You no longer believe life is worth living.
Developed countries exhibit autogenocide as a direct result of their increased evolutionary capacity for empathy. It is the great filter.
International socialism has a higher murder rate because it is a world-denying ideology and wants to put as many people onto the cross as possible, as quickly as possible. It is a death cult, like Christianity. National socialism only kills what it needs to, like a predator that only kills to eat.
Your criticism of veganism, international socialism, and such are based on your own belief that “life is worth living”. This is not immoral- it’s life-affirming. If you accept that life is worth living, then you accept that you will have to fight, and kill, and eat, to survive, and therefore you must reject veganism.
If you are a monk, and you reject this world and it’s consequences, then veganism is indeed the logical conclusion. But I would like to keep playing, and therefore I reject veganism and other forms of autogenocide.
Where the hell do they get you people? Such a wide array of colourful characters.
Lysergic acid diethylamide.
See you all in a few weeks.
The Hitlerist plan, to the extent that we can call the ever-shifting megalomaniac improvisations a “plan”, included, in imperial terms, two broad objectives: 1) force the “civilized whites” into a racial brotherhood, 2) exterminate the “defective whites” all the way up to the Ural mountains (Generalplan Ost). Hence the attempted chivalrous warfare on the western front, and the grotesque horrors of the eastern front.
Crude, death-culty logic of the colonialist type, and not the uplifting “we build them up and civilize them and goods and services will circulate” type, but the degenerate “we exterminate them and keep the survivors as illiterate coolies and sex slaves” type. It’s like someone saw the Belgian Congo genocide at the start of the 20th century, and thought “Now *that’s* how you do it! Those filthy Slavic subhumans are next.”
While the rounding up of Jews into camps was an improvised war measure, due to the eastern blitz bogging down, with the original idea being shipping them off to Madagascar, Palestine, and other far off places (after a quick, painless victory on all fronts), the extermination of the Slavs was a very real genocidal plan from the start, which did not reach its culmination simply due to battlefield outcomes.
In this sense, at least the Kraut 1930s-40s version of national socialism, was ‘ethnic solidarity at the expense of other ethnicities’ with local eggheads providing the needed sciency justification according to the needs of the moment about whose skull shape makes them worthy of being a brotherly nation, and who gets to be exterminated for the greater good.
The lower death count of national socialism compared to internationalist socialism is only lower because it was directed outward, instead of inward (like in Russia, China, Cambodia, etc), and while inward directed genocide works fast, especially against disorganized citizens/peasants, outward directed genocide works best against technologically inferior opponents, which the Slavs turned out to not be.
If Stalin had not managed to crush Hitler, national socialism would have indeed achieved internationalist socialism heights of genocide. In a somewhat perverse reversal of acts compared to creed, internationalist socialists genocide their own, while national socialists were quite pumped up to genocide “the other”. Manic internal solidarity at the expense of hundreds of millions of “useless eaters” judged to not belong to the solidarity bubble, and hence evolutionary dead-ends that need to be exterminated.
The difference in the dividing lines between “our own” and “the other” for trad national socialists is skull shape and other forms of crude genetics, while for the trad internationalist socialists is socioeconomic class. Both schools of thought claimed total scientific accuracy in deciding which category covers whom, and who needs to flourish at the expense of whose eradication, but of course their impeccable and objective science kept changing according to the needs of the times.
Today’s globohomo uses both the trad internationalist socialist and the trad national socialist categories to divide and subvert, trying out constant new mutations, bioleninist and other, all the time.
One of the strands of globohomo also is constantly pushing for 19th century eugenics, from trad euthanasia to bolder and craftier manipulation strategies, packaged in an upbeat cloud of symbols and moods, with ideally first an euphoric kid chopping off their dong or tits, then riding some plastic dog dicks for a while, preferably in front of a camera, and then once they get very sad — tranquilizers and a sympathetic handshake as they take their place in the death pod.
“the Belgian Congo genocide at the start of the 20th century”
Uncertain if there ever was one, I’d say. “King Leopold’s Ghost” and various UK propaganda is not what I’d call reliable evidence.
https://radishmag.wordpress.com/2013/04/12/come-back-colonialism/
Good old Radish, I should have thought of that. If I ever meet the man, I’ll shake his hand and buy him a drink.
Both national socialism and international socialism are extentions of (build upon) the sin of Cain.
Genesis 4:
“If only [the Other] is removed from the picture, Divine Favor will bestow on us!” True enough, it’s often indispensable to physically remove the violators of Divine Law (and, perhaps, their instruments); hence, the Other to be removed from the picture should be defined along spiritual lines. The heirs of Cain, however, seek to grab favor — divine or otherwise — by committing fratricide; that’s how you arrive at the atrocities of national/international socialism.
The reply to any type of socialism is “not even once.”
Well, I’m not going to justify Hitler’s treatment of Slavs. Subhumans don’t write Brothers Karamazov or compose Rachmaninov’s 2nd Concerto. I can only say that the anti-Slav propaganda was an effective wartime strategy and therefore served a real purpose beyond base cruelty. All a part of their struggle.
NatSoc is an evolving ideology like any other- just because “trad” NatSoc is primitive does not make it misguided. Eugenics is very real; dysgenics equally real. Biology is real; class is a social construct. One is a conceived boundary and the other is written in our bodies’ every cell. I object to your equivocation of the two, and to your last paragraph classifying obvious dysgenic warfare as “eugenic”.
Eugenics is a good thing, but like any form of human progress, our reach will often exceed our grasp, and a noble goal will be undermined by flawed implementation. The devil is in the details.
Since you’re such a great fan of “heresies,” here’s one:
Following blue-piller life advice sometimes yields much better results than following red-piller life advice, and those pursuing the former are often more valuable than those pursuing the latter.
(“Whaaa, I can’t believe shaman actually wrote that!”)
I spent a lot of time reading Game Blogs. Had I been a normie following normie advice, would have gotten my dick wet far more often, and today would probably have an altogether different kind of Family.
Horrible, horrible heresy. Crucify me!
I have been at this for a very long time, and I can say with complete certainty that in every social environment that I have experienced, and I have been prowling for pussy in quite a few social environments, the red pill will get you pussy and the blue pill will get you frustration, embarrassment, humiliation, and quite possibly criminal charges, as you will be charged with doing all the things that the red pill man does, and you failed to do. The only time a chick complained to police about being raped was when I backed down and did not rape her.
Put another way:
Scientists, who do actual science rather than philosophy, theology, etc., usually have normal families, and are not confined to the realm of inceldom.
Female sexual instincts may not be great – they are also not nearly as disastrous as the redpill/blackpill “sphere,” made of weirdos and freaks and mutants (and conmen), claims.
Civilizationally valuable men do not, generally speaking, fail to reproduce. Quite the opposite.
(To be clear, and sorry for writing 3+ posts in a row, we are experiencing dysgenics right now. But it’s not because “women only breed with GORILLAS!” – nah, it’s a bit more complex than that. Again: some Reactionary solutions are good, and I support them. The full-retard version, though, is just incorrect, and misses crucial details. And leads to societies of full-retards. Ask the false prophet Mohammed about it.)
Nonetheless, that women will attempt to breed with gorillas given half a chance is a big and important part of the truth.
/videos/JuliaRoberts_with_orangutan.mp4
Obviously, to fix both dysgenesis and failure to reproduce, female sexual choice has to be given a firm steer, or altogether suppressed, by patriarchal authority.
If a chick is prevented from meeting males that are not close kin, and then required to do ballroom dancing or similar with parentally selected males, she is going jump their bones given half a chance, so, provided we firmly control female sexual opportunity, and restore marriage 1.0, that consent to sex is once and forever, we can have parental mate selection wearing the skinsuit of female consent.
So, we have a rule that if a girl is behind closed doors for sixty seconds with a non kin male, we assume that sex took place and was enthusiastically consensual, and dad breaks out the shotgun. And then we ensure that they only get the opportunity to do that with males to which they are engaged. Engagement can be cancelled at whim by either party, or by either party’s parents, but only if it is provable that no actual sex has yet taken place.
OK, that solves the dysgenesis problem. What about the reproduction problem? Dad may have unreasonably high standards for his precious daughter because he wants to keep her around and protect her, and his daughter is going to have unreasonably high standards because female, albeit those standards and her knickers are going to drop on physical contact, whether the contact be parentally supervised and socially required ballroom dancing, or abduction and assault.
Just pick up a chick in a fireman’s carry, carry her off, toss her on the bed, start fooling around, and behavior difficult to distinguish from consent to more intimate fooling around is likely to ensue.
We know that ancient Assyria and ancient China applied legal coercion to get women married off, presumably because at some point they suffered a shortage of men, and so conscripted women to provide men with sons. If an Assyrian man had not married off his daughter, or she eloped, by a reasonable age, he was required to auction her off to the highest bidder, though we do not know what that age was.
For ancient China, we do know. If a girl was fifteen or over, and yet still single, and a man was twenty or over, and yet not yet taking care of a wife, the Magistrate was required to shotgun marry them.
That would do it. Problem solved.
I don’t know whether to laugh or cry at this. Yes, the women aren’t going to be a problem, but a very “offended on their behalf” progressive man will absolutely try to fuck you… pun intended. But this may very well just be an exception to the military.
“If you are arguing in favor of autogenocide, please respond to the criticisms of the suicidal belief systems”
Jim, “debating” with someone like this is taking tolerance to an absurd extreme. As Aidan said, when you encounter someone spouting “ideas” like that, you don’t debate, you hit with stick.
Perhaps I should clarify what I meant by “Satan/Gnon”, because the figure of Satan has different meanings to different people.
To me, Satan/Gnon represents lordship over the material world. In this world, God splits his consciousness into different lives, different bodies, and the free will that we are each given. Satanism is an acknowledgement of our free will- the goat figure represents the self-determination of all living creatures, as opposed to the supposed “mindlessness” of sheep.
Unfortunately, Satanists often choose to use their free will in ways that maximize suffering and distance from God- they are testing the boundaries of their free will as far as they will go, exhibiting the lowest amounts of compassion possible and trying to achieve the greatest distance from God via brute force. They are like a predator that kills for fun rather than for food, without consideration for the needless suffering they cause, or perhaps reveling in it, ignorant of the fact that they are ultimately inflicting it on themselves.
Isolation from God is isolation from each other. Hell is “other people”, because we are each fragments of God’s consciousness, and hell is separation from God. Our world is hell and Satan rules over it, and to transcend hell means to reject Satan’s game entirely, reject the world, and become a vegan Christian with infinite compassion, achieving reunion and oneness with God and with each other (as a side note, go watch Evangelion, it illustrates why one might reject oneness with God via life-affirmation).
Women are “satanic” in the sense that they represent attachment to the material world. Love of women is love of the material, and leads to putting quarters into arcade machines, so to speak. Female psychology is fine-tuned towards creating the ultimate “beasts”, the ultimate anti-Christs- women decide who succeeds in the material world (Satan) and who loses (Christ) as a conscious reflection of Darwinism natural law. Female selection = eugenics.
Female selection is satanic because it is a reflection of Darwinian natural law, which is the law of Satan i.e. the god of this world. Female selection punishes life-denying ideologies like Christianity and rewards life-affirming ones- which are ultimately satanic in nature because they are the logical conclusion of the laws of Satan’s world.
Jimian Christianity is satanic in nature because it affirms life, existence, and the material world. Please understand that your “Christianity” stands in opposition to what Christ actually preached. Christ hated the world and rejected the world, whereas Jimian “Christianity” is a life-affirming ideology that is fine-tuned towards success in the material world. Christ preached infinite compassion whereas Jimian “Christianity” preaches poofs off roofs.
Satan crucifying Christ represents all life-affirming ideologies exerting dominance over life-denying, autogenocidal ideologies such as Christianity, faggotry, international socialism, etc. A person or nation can only choose one of the other, therefore Christian National Socialism is impossible as they have fundamentally divergent goals.
Also: Christianity is not just a life-denying ideology, it is THE life-denying ideology. Christ’s death is God’s suicide. God brought himself into the world, and God ultimately decides when to stop playing.
Christ willingly going to the cross is the ultimate reflection of autogenocide. Christianity is suicide, the willing sacrifice of the material self, and Christ’s death represents the ultimate conclusion of God’s experience in the world. His life is the last life, he is the Son of Man, and he represents the culmination of all human actions against each other, all our sins born of free will.
Where do Jews, the supposed enemy of NatSoc, play into this, you might ask?
Christ rightfully accused the Pharisees (who are the ideological ancestors of modern Jews) of being the synagogue of Satan, and their ideology can be summarized as “achieve the highest distance possible away from God”, in opposition to Christ’s compassion. They are the ones who crucified him, Christ’s death is upon them and their children. Jews as a race, and the nation of Israel as it represents their collective self-determination, are literally the anti-Christ.
Israeli national socialism (the dominant ideology amongst Israeli Jews whether they realize it or not- what irony!) is the ultimate in satanic ideology- the ultimate dominance and material success given by Satan to his most diligent followers. Israel strives for maximum control, maximum land, maximum resources. It is what normies believe Hitler was- mindless dominance at the expense of all compassion, mercy, and other Christian principles.
Thus, their extermination of Palestinians is a modern-day Holocaust, they are Satan crucifying Christ. Make no mistake- this new “peace” is temporary and amounts to a tactical retreat by Israel. They fully intend to eventually cleanse Palestine and anyone else that gets in their way, per Darwinian law.
Israel is the most satanic nation in history. It is the predator that revels in inflicting needless suffering. Jews are behind all wars in the world and the Protocols of Zion might as well be the Satanic bible.
A time is coming when men will go mad, and when they see someone who is not mad, they will attack him, saying, “You are mad; you are not like us.” – St. Anthony the Great
Nonsense jews are at worst alien middlemen for people of greater power, thats how it was in the middle ages and as reactionaries we generally believe that not much in that respect has changed.
I suspect you’ve misunderstood Christ’s self-sacrifice.
4 Maccabees 6, for instance, tells us about Eleazar, martyr for Israel and for the Law,
It is no vain suicide, but death for the sake of others’ Life, and for the sake of the Law.
That is the essence of righteous martyrdom (not the Islamic bullshit of fucking 72 virgins in Heaven), including the ultimate self-sacrifice of the Son of God.
Dolfin writes… “Christ preached infinite compassion whereas Jimian “Christianity” preaches poofs off roofs.”
Humungus believes you conveniently skipped over the Scripture on stoning and their blood is on their heads to support a misdirected thesis.
Have you told us about Soros yet?
Well, Hippy Jesus is a baizuo Buddhist, so that may be where the “infinite compassion” allegation comes from.
The Red pill on WQ should become mandatory again for new commenters.
If satanism is life-affirming, how come every example of satanist you can find is someone promoting death and destruction?
Well, literally just lying about everything is part and parcel is satanism, too.
Yes, since destruction is easier than creation, sometimes it’s easier to give yourself an advantage over those you consider to be opponents by sabotaging their efforts, instead of improving your own.
Hence the left’s insistence on tipping over the apple cart, instead of starting their own.
Hence politicians and preachers that profess self-sacrificial Christianity while being greedy degenerates in private.
Hence the synagogue of Satan promoting leftism in foreign countries, and ethno-nationalism in their own.
Perhaps “self-affirming” would be a more accurate term than “life-affirming”, since it more directly contrasts Christian principles.
You could at least have made your Gnostic Satanism entertaining in addition to muh theological exercise.
E.g.,
https://youtube.com/watch?v=_wreL5h2SEM
Excellent band, Deicide. Especially the early stuff.
For amplified Reddit Fedoraism (on top of the Satanism) you have,
https://youtube.com/watch?v=xxH5vx6jnqY
INTELLIGENCE WON HAHAHAHAHA!
(Yeah, I don’t think so. But blasphemy used to be much cooler back when testosterone levels were healthier.)
When you think deeply about these lyrics — popular culture is but a degenerated reflection of elite culture — you can really sense that this heresy originated from the meme pool of post-Christianity. Atheists from non-post-Christian backgrounds would have issued somewhat different complaints than these. Since Christianity is the closest thing to the Will of God, and used to be culturally dominant in the West (now Progressivism is culturally dominant), its heretical — now pretty much inverted — versions get to be “classical Satanism.”
It’s probably my proximity to the Devil that allows me to understand him so well; as a Dark Elf, I understand what conservatards are actually fighting against much better than they do. Conservatards don’t (usually) know the Devil so well, because Wholesome Chungus is naturally at a certain safe distance from the Devil. I, however, am a stoner gooner kike from Tel Aviv.
Humorous timeline.
As a Buddhist, I object to your mischaracterization of my faith.
From the Gospel of Buddha:
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/35895/35895-h/35895-h.htm
That is not what the hippies are preaching, unless those are Israeli hippies who serve in the IDF and avail themselves of psychedelics in trance parties.
Welcoming Satan into the Church of England!
https://x.com/KeithWoodsYT/status/1976595414565466254
Great Stonetoss tweak on this issue!
https://x.com/Durrrrrcules/status/1976652176345960581
The full jigaboo wedding of Harry and Meghan was just a prelude.
No doubt the new archbishop will work to rectify this vandali– oh never mind.
https://archive.ph/yH0wp
And that really is the purpose of all this: giving a spiteful mutant the opportunity to write a gleefully triumphant article.
What a fag.
Striking how the evil always use the same justifications to desecrate the beautiful.
“Disruptive”
“Raw”
“Language of the unheard”
You could take a shit on the altar and say the exact same things.
If they go through with this, I’m blaming you for giving them the idea.
The archbishop is a woman, an abortion rights advocate, and gay marriage advocate. She will not shit upon the altar. She will sacrifice babies to Moloch upon it.
The main marginalized voice:
https://patriots.win/p/1ARJYJCge8/this-is-apparently-the-artist-al/c
I doubt that altar is untainted at this point.
King James, in his Daemonologie, refers to Satan as “God’s Ape” when discussing how evil cannot create but only corrupt. Twisting the sacred through demonic inversion of prayer, ritual, and hallowed ground during witches’ conventions is touched on in this context.
The English may have to burn it all down to start anew due to this demonic corruption. A bit ironic as England, unlike the majority of Europe, hanged instead of burnt its convicted witches, historically speaking.
Burning you say?
“The triumph of the Recovery was marked most clearly by the burning of the Episcopal bishop of Maine.
She was not a particularly bad bishop. She was in fact typical of Episcopal bishops of the first quarter of the 21st century: agnostic, compulsively political and radical, and given, to placing a small idol of Isis on the altar when she said the Communion service. By 2055, when she was tried for heresy, convicted, and burned, she had outlived her era. By that time only a handful of Episcopalians still recognized female clergy, and it would have been easy enough to let the old fool rant out her final years in obscurity.
The fact that the easy road was not taken, that Episcopalians turned to their difficult duty of trying and convicting, and the state upheld its unpleasant responsibility of setting torch to faggots, was what marked this as an act of Recovery.”
They’re getting close.
https://x.com/RadioGenoa/status/1976982070074523899
Raw and disruptive!
[*deleted for not conforming to the moderation policy*]
You, emiratss, have posted hundreds of comments, all of which I have quietly silenced, all for the same reason.
[*deleted for not conforming to the moderation policy*]
A proposal for a pan white ideology and a pan white nation — borderless to all white people everywhere. A proposal strangely free from crime thought. The blandest and most inoffensive white nationalism possible.
My last word on Modern Monetary Theory:
In 2020 macroeconomist Gregory Mankiw (W’s Chief Economic Advisor 2003-05), read a textbook written by MMT advocates, and wrote up his reaction to it. (PDF file.) One of the authors was MMT big shot L. Randall Wray, so the MMT crowd cannot disavow the book on grounds of credentials.
Mankiw quotes the authors:
In other words, it’s 200-proof Marxism. I’m in shock to discover this!
We’re done here.
The link to Mankiw’s interesting conference paper is appreciated. The paper is quick to read, which is even better.
I think that I can subscribe to Mankiw’s view.
In other world news:
https://archive.ph/rCNOu
India has quietly cultivated friendship and upgraded diplomatic ties with Taliban and now the desert cultists to our north west are at it with each other. Though of course, the Taliban represent old-type Mohammedanism while the Pakis are just CIA shills which, along with racial differences between the two people, is the root of the Afghan-Pakistan conflict.
Friendship with Taliban is of course, based on geopolitical strategic consideration rather than common ideology or state religion and so I would always keep one eye on them in the long run.
Still, keeping the Pakis stressed out through their fellow desert cultists is an amazing achievement for the Modi Government.
The Germans must have thought they were awfully clever when they shipped Lenin back into Russia and a communist revolution took them out of the war a short while later.
These enemy-of-my-enemy moves are endlessly appealing to rulers who see themselves as pragmatic, intelligent, and ruthless, but they have a tendency to come around and bite you on the behind.
This unresponsive. Who do you think is proposing an enemy of my enemy move?
I think that was meant to be a reply to my India-Afghan Taliban ties post above. Must have missed the reply button.
Yes indeed.
As Moldbug would say, there’s an infinite amount of dumb policies to choose from in the democratic era. Early 20th century German politics being no exception.
Israel is such a “based” country that it has Palestinian and Palestinian-sympathizing members of parliament, who just interrupted Trump’s speech.
We need that ethnic cleansing more than you know, but it’s not happening.
Trump just nuked the Israeli Left from orbit. Total Shill Death!
He should do the same to the Lefts of all countries, certainly the Western ones, fostering alliances with the Right globally. Hopefully he will, one way or another.
> Trump just nuked the Israeli Left from orbit. Total Shill Death!
It would be easier to install Trump as king in Israel, right now, than in the USA, and it would demonstrate the advantages of this governance model. He could even do it remotely from DC, as a hobby on his cell phone, tweeting out orders (fire leftist X, jail leftist Y) periodically when the mood strikes him. This would clearly work better than dysfunctional Israeli parliament-ism (plus spiteful judges and attorneys) and does not require adding Israel as a US state.
Yes. By far the greatest help he can provide Israel is not sending Heritage Americans to “die for Israel” in Middle-Eastern wars (no Real Israeli wants to see American blood being spilled. Seriously, please do not “die for Israel”), but rather to help us somehow dismantle the leftist deep state concentrated in the judicial system. It is Israel’s number one problem. The tyranny of the Supreme Court must end, and the current degenerate “elite” must be ousted from power. If Trump can facilitate that, he will probably become more popular than Netanyahu, if he isn’t already.
I’m 100% supportive of Trump being made King of Israel, and if he so desires, he can even be titled King of the Jews. As Jim says, “All must kiss the ring of Trump, Holy Emperor of the Ocean Lands” – and the Holy Land too.
Physiognomically speaking, Ofer Cassif’s sole legit accomplishment in life is high score on Frogger at a pizza parlor.
Spiteful mutant theory is valid. These are absolute abominations, and it’s often clearly visible to the eye. It is Jewish Leftists like Cassif who are indisputably the Synagogue of Satan, not Likudniks who, while possessing their own flaws (who doesn’t, really?), at least seek to cooperate with the American/European Right.
And unsurprisingly, you will notice that the Left’s propaganda machine always depicts Likudniks as insatiable war-mongers dripping with blood, while presenting the Cassif-types as the “good guys.” And yet, reality is, even the hawkiest hawks of the Israeli Right go along with Trump’s Peace Plan (whatever reservations they have) and pay respect to the American President, while the “””anti-war””” Left would obviously have preferred that the Butler Bullet hit its target.
The Left are the Pharisees, the evil that calls itself good. It is so in every country and among each nation. They should be defeated on a planetary scale if humanity is to advance to Galactic Conquest.
Netanyahu, like Modi and Putin doesn’t hate his people and tries to run his country for their benefit and for that of their posterity. That’s the kind of leader I’d like to see in the US and in the various Euro countries. I don’t expect them to bow and scrape for the US president, I expect them to do what’s in the best interest of their people. Trump is a lot closer to that than any president probably since Eisenhower of ‘Operation Wetback’ fame, but like Eisenhower, he’s still a long ways from coming up to the Calvin Coolidge standard.
>Spiteful mutant theory is valid
The spiteful population tend to form distinct subgroup cultures that view themselves as an outgroup, and by virtue of elites, in saner times, not wanting to associate with them, also viewed them as such. Sufficiently big populations will produce enough of them that even in seemingly homogeneous populations, you still end up having to prune the outgroup. Perhaps, if Duton’s theory for the reason of Witch burning is true, much more harshly than conquered peoples.
It’s been discussed here previously that while Xi is interested in reversing the fertility decline, he lacks political power to do so.
It looks to me like he’s just a moron leftist bureaucrat instead. Here’s some recent CPC media to make my case:
https://english.news.cn/20251013/a9ce938022c340b5abbf825c83d965c6/c.html
https://english.news.cn/20251010/d62edc39df6d4f17a7b6df9413c4ed42/c.html
This is just from the last few days, and in the context of two different stories. It’s clear he does not have what it takes to save his country. Maybe next leader will be a Deng but for marriage and children instead. Not holding out hope for the Han here, my bet is that they are incapable of seeing the evidence in their face unless some other civilization is doing it.
Xi is very much a product of Maoist China which pushed gender equality so hard it made women dress like transvestites. In some ways, they are very much like America, but with a much rougher start. During my time in graduate school where half the student population was foreign East Asian students, I noticed the Chinese were in some ways far more similar to Americans, just a lot more crude. It was the Korean and Japanese that were the most likely to hold traditionalist views. Case in point, look at clothing as just one example. Traditional Chinese garment is only now starting to make a comeback whereas it was always common in Korea and Japan for special occasions. Korean and Japanese progressivism largely come from GAE influence, while Chinese progressivism is domestic. Consequently, they potentially have a longer road back to sanity because they have to clean house. Conversely Korea and Japan “only” need to see GAE be dismantled.
“Conversely Korea and Japan “only” need to see GAE be dismantled.”
I’m gonna be honest with you bro, this itself is not enough. You remember saying that South Korea is trying to make a comeback from their fertility crisis? It still keeps dipping.
I have a sinking suspicion that it is not enough to take the Cominator solution on the libtard problem. You are gonna have to force at gun-point a lot of gooners and gacha addicts to fuck real women because they have gotten comfortable being manchildren addicted to pixels on a screen.
I look at the afghan tribal structure and see the boys go through a lot of ‘rites of passages’ basically before they are betrothed. They also restrict cellphone use a lot (smart), which I think other people should pick up on. These are vectors for mutating a person’s psyche, which is why our insane priests recognize this and do their best to ban it from schools, wouldn’t want the kids not picking up the correct lessons right?
I still don’t think Jim realizes how mangled most boys are these days, you could put a woman naked on the bed for them and they still wouldn’t know what to do. Maybe stutter and ask if they can put a blanket on them. Not their fault of course, no one taught them better, and whatever is left of real society is just a scorching nuclear wasteland like fallout, so you got to explore the bunkers to find any useful stuff worth keeping in your brain.
But seriously, how do you keep the super autist gene alive in the current environment? If you don’t arrange marriage them off, they die off fast. Look at Linus’ kids, none of them have children of their own… and what can he do about it? The social structure isn’t there for him to shotgun marry them off. Musk will face the same issue with his kids if nothing changes. The one good thing about the state’s fiscal capacity going into poverty is it loses control, so even if shit looks dire, someone, somewhere, must realize the importance of not just having general buttnaked have kids, and hopefully we don’t end up having to import Asians in the future because all our autists died off and only wiggers survived.
You’re more pessimistic than is warranted. Talk to some nips and gooks online, they’ll take a government assigned wife without issue.
The nips are much further along the decay, they’ll need something like an inner party coup, from a geriatric and defeated inner party. The youth is aimless, and the actual leadership has accepted the lib narrative as Morally Right and is, like Rhodesia long before, trying to ease the slide into decline to avoid too much splashing. The gooks have a more recent memory of military rule, and in general seem more willing to take drastic measures. They haven’t fully bought into lib moral narrarive, and they are more set up to have a coup install sanity than any other industrialized nation.
Grorious Nippon will need a restored USA to lead the way, possibly twist their arm. Goryeo might just find themselves fixing the issue while GAE is distracted with something or other.
Family has collapsed, so property rights in female sexual, reproductive, and domestic services have been extinguished. Family is property rights in each other. To conjure families back into existence, state intervention will be needed.
The normal social environment of reproduction for homo sapiens, the ancestral environment of evolutionary adaptation, is that a woman’s sexual, reproductive, and domestic services belonged to her parents — (meaning she belonged to her mother but her mother belonged to her father and she was not supposed to play one parent off against the other.) Her parents would then assign this property right to a husband.
They might take the daughters opinion on this into account, or might not, but what made the marriage was the head of household consenting “Who giveth this woman to this man?” (Of course there was also marriage by abduction, and marriage by mock abduction)
Females are maladapted to reproduction as “Strong empowered independent women”, and it is hard to see how they could adapt to it. You just get trapped in Defect/Defect Equilibrium. Hence the bitterness and rage of women against men and men against women you see online.
A woman complains “why don’t men love us the way we love them, why do they keep discarding us like used condoms?”
The answer of course is that she is Miss Average and is one of thirty Miss Averages who love Mister One In Thirty, and Mister One in Thirty is not going to love all of them, and probably not any of them. He is going to love Miss One in Thirty. Who, unfortunately for him, loves Mister One in a Hundred.
So no one gets sexual love, and no one gets children. Female emancipation sounds great in theory but it just does not work in practice.
Sexual love and reproduction is prisoners dilemma with finite and few iterations, hence you get defect/defect equilibrium. The solution to defect/defect equilibrium is well known: Enforcement by state, state church, society, and family prohibiting such defection. And such enforcement should be tolerant of private violence. If you can shoot a home invader, you should be able to shoot an adulterer. Female adultery has to be a crime, not a sacred human right.
When you have total collapse of property rights in female sexual, reproductive, and domestic services, then sometimes there was state fixup. “Choose by noon, or the choice will be made for you. And you are stuck with the choice for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health.”
This is going to be very rough on people who find themselves stuck in a bad marriage, but if the option exists to get out of a bad marriage, the existence of that option makes every marriage bad.
Often this is how the argument plays out in real life.
“You want to ban divorce? Well I know couple X and they were so terrible together that a divorce was a huge improvement.”
Maybe yes, maybe no. Maybe they could’ve tried better, would’ve done better under an actual patriarchal system that encourages and rewards sound property rights in women. Then again, people are sinful and some marriages are just miserable by nature of the people involved. But indeed it is infinitely more preferable to have a few marriages be miserable than to have all marriages be fake and gay.
I am reminded of this anecdote of how ultra orthodox Hisidic Jews get their young men to breed. On the day of their wedding they sit them down and say something along the lines: ‘your father did it, your grandfather did it, every male ancestor of yours did it, this is how sex, now go make baby’.
My grandfather had 8 kids with his wife and a few with his concubines. Then American sponsored democratization happened. His children’s fertility dropped to ~2. This was a single generation. Patriarchal values are still very much alive in Korea and Japan. The men largely support it, the politicians support it when they campaign. Nearly everyone that matters is anti-feminist. It’s only when they get into office and now have to deal with the international community they maddeningly become docile mutes on the topic. Unshackle them and in a single generation fertility will bounce back massively.
I was able to confirm it’s GAE when I talked to a few Senior Advisors in one of those countries. They had, off record, by GAE verbage, the most ‘horrific’, ‘misogynistic’, ‘male chauvinist’, ‘patriarchal’, ‘etc etc etc’ views on women and their proper role, but when pushed on why they are letting the country die they could only brokenly repeat, ‘but the international community…’ Their own Government thinktanks constantly skirt around deep thoughcrime, and regularly get NGOs mudslinging them for it.
“you could put a woman naked on the bed for them and they still wouldn’t know what to do. Maybe stutter and ask if they can put a blanket on them. ”
They probably think it’s a trap of some sort. (And not the troon kind. Well, maybe in some cases.)
Female sexuality tends to be “reactive” or “responsive,” meaning that oftentimes one needs to physically/mentally activate it to make that pussy wet and that clit throb. Alas, our rabidly anti-heterosexual overlords effectively prohibit the majority of men from successfully, consistently triggering the female libido, resulting in a (civilization-annihilating and joy-killing) pandemic of female frigidity, both within and without matrimony.
Need testosterone in the water supply, metaphorically and/or otherwise.
The problem is combining female free agency and privilege with an extreme overemphasis on consent, when the sexuality of most women seems to be aroused mostly by the idea of a man taking away their ability to not consent.
Yes, the combination of unrestricted female mate choice with access to infinity demonlovers and criminalization/tabooization of SNUGGLE WITH A STRUGGLE (even within relationships) — plus the entire memetic edifice of sexual victimization drilled into everyone’s mind since age 0, “thanks” in large part to the Trad Tard simp enablers of Feminism — is what has ultimately rendered women as sexually unreactive as they have become.
I’ve been to some nice parties with female friends from the friendzone, dancing all night long with drugs n’ sheeeit. It’s not that they reject me but go on to fuck alpha male chads. They reject everyone and time after time go home alone, to sleep lonely and sexlessly on their beds with none besides them. A collective loss of sexual interest, judging by these experiences, which moreover extends to marital relations aka the curse of the Dead Bedroom, if regular online complaints by blue-balled husbands are reliable, which I believe they are.
It is not collective loss of sexual interest — observe the massive consumption of truly disgusting porn by women. It is loss of interest in realistic alternatives. They got banged by General Bucknaked once, and are holding out in case General Bucknaked shows up again.
To a women, if she goes dancing all night long with drugs n’ sheeeit every few days for a year, and then finally makes it onto the bottom of Mister One in Thirty’s booty call list, it is a win. And then she stops going out dancing all night long with drugs n’ sheeeit, and instead makes sure she is hovering by her phone 24/7.
Female sexual conduct is not the result of conscious intent and is not optimised for creating and sustaining the relationships necessary to bear and raise children. It is solely optimised for quality of semen, because in the ancestral environment of evolutionary adaptation, female choice meant defect/defect equilibrium, then as now.
Women hunger for relationship at an emotional level, and without the love of a husband will wither and die, or turn into evil witches. But this does not result in sexual conduct optimised to create and sustain such relationships.
Women are preset for defection, because their sexual preferences are irrelevant except in an environment where defect first is the rational strategy.
Men are not preset for defection, defection being a bad strategy for wives acquired by negotiation or violence.
We have an enormous body of media that presents a woman being assigned into a relationship as really bad, and something she will bitterly resent, but we observe that this was entirely the norm thoughout most of history, and female literature is always set in a fantasy universe where the female protagonists is somehow relieved of the burden of choice — an egregious example being “beg, or better yet cry” which is a romance that consists of a grossly underage slave developing Stockholm syndrome for her cruel owner.
And, personal experience, women are remarkably amenable to being assigned a fixup by the alpha male of the group. They like to have it decided for them.
Women are uncontrolled bumper carts that inevitably, by design, go off the rails. Men have to act as the side rails.
Proverbs 30:18-19:
That’s why I keep myself volcel in this day and age. I read Roissy, Rollo, and Roosh — I even read LaidNYC back in the day, have you heard of him, Alf? — but ultimately I find it too damn complex to deal with the foids, and would rather take “matters” into my own hands.
Yes he was an excellent blogger. My first blog name was inspired by him.
I really don’t mean to be the Jiminy Cricket of this comment section, but I do have some thoughts on this.
As Paul says, celibacy or the unmarried life, if not the way for most men, is the way for some men, including himself. Sure.
But I consider myself a true believer of Jim’s Christianity. Which definitely builds upon Pauline Christianity: both emphasize priests should be respectful men who manage their household. But Jim’s major addition, among many, is an explicit solution to the women question that currently plagues the world: why are women the way they are and how do we deal with that. Jim’s Christianity propagates itself as an answer to the epidemic of divorce, only fans, spinsters, incels and women whoring themselves out to mr 1-in-30. It tells us: you can marry, you can have children, you can turn a whore into a housewife.
We are ‘patient zero’ of that information. We are true believers, we are showcases to the world whether or not this belief system works. I mean that more than just metaphorical: look at where Moldbug is now. Guy used to be just another programmer with a blog. Now he’s talking with Thiel, Vance, Musk. Will not our moment come too?
When it comes, will we represent the values we so highly espouse? Will we be able to say: yes, women need to be property again, as you can tell from my household which follows those exact principles. Or is it a ‘do as I say, not as I do’?
And really to stress, I am by no means perfect myself. But some of these things just strike me as too big to say nothing about.
Well, if you seek one day to discard the anonymity and serve as Literally Archbishop, then sure, you should represent as a living example the Pauline instructions and the Jimian insights. Personally, I’d rather not become Famous in Israel and just remain a shitpoaster on this platform (maybe there will be other platforms in the future, but right now JB it is), but if you have real-life plans to become the High-Priest of Reaction in an actual hierarchical religious organization with state authority, whether in the Netherlands or in America, then of course living the Paul+Jim life is the way to go, and I’m glad it’s working out for you.
There is much irony in being a self-admitted divorced volcel who finds it ‘too damn complex to deal with foids’ while at the same time being one of the most prolific commenters on a blog that gives the answer on dealing with women.
If you want to hide behind shitpoasting, who am I to say otherwise. But life isn’t one big shitpoast.
Yes, it’s quite ironic; many things in life, even in my own private life, are. I just prefer being honest about it. I mean, it’s not just me; I’d say around 75% of the frequent commenters here do not live the Trad Life whatsoever. Kali Yuga! Since I don’t actually plan to reveal myself to humanity as the Christ/Antichrist/both — it will benefit no one — and my words here are my contribution to the discourse, I don’t consider that to be all too problematic. Lacking worldly ambitions, I don’t seek after nor boast of worldly rewards; and my humor is self-deprecating at times.
If only Trad Lifers participated here, there wouldn’t be a whole lot of engagement. And it’s not a coincidence, by the way.
Your preferred solution is just feminism but pretend it’s patriarchy, then you henpeck everyone here about it. I mean it, game is still what Jim refers to as “the game of players and bitches”, with some idea of an end state in mind going in. Ape out to conform with female limbic pathways, which get ever more deranged as time goes on. It’s clearly not advice everyone can follow, or else we all would have been successful at this point.
If you want to help, go mentor some young men or something. Where you can directly observe the action effect chain.
While it is true that female desires have become ever more deranged and perverse, it is also true that males have become ever more wimpy and emasculated. This is something we as men need to address.
That female preferences are getting weirder is in substantial part due to lack of exposure to normal stimuli. Of course the state forbids normal stimuli, because sexist, misogynistic, homophobic, transphobic, et cetera.
Your preferred solution is to excuse men from being manly.
Looking at female fantasies, they are often perverse and sick, but are usually set in a world of harsh patriarchy and strong men, where women are relieved of the embarrassing and unwanted requirement of consent.
They are rather too keen on demon lords, vampires, werewolves, minotaurs, serial killers, and sadistic slave owners, but they are at least extremely manly demons, werewolves, sadists, necromancers, etc.
Looking male fantasies — we see weak sexless men and horny warrior action girls.
To be fair to you Mossadnik (I did not know this about your personal life) being married to most jewish women for any man is difficult. Jewish women though some are genuinely very charming in their younger years tend to be horrifically disagreeable and domineering post wall years (though a few seem to escape this fate for whatever reason).
Yarvin in one of his better moments advised (I assume to his fellow jews) that he recommends a gentile wife to everyone.
To be fair to foidhood (Jewish or otherwise), I really do have my own unique personality flaws, and that I got married in the first place was pretty much a miracle. In recent years I have accepted that, at least under the current conditions, family life is not for me. Perhaps that will change some time in the future. Anyway, declining fertility is emphatically not one of Israel’s problems. Lol.
Saint Paul said that priests should be recruited from among Trad Lifers; the reasons are obvious. He said nothing about shitpoasters who have absolutely no intention of running religious hierarchies. I’m just here to discuss ideas.
And I shouldn’t be a priest either, if Jim were made Emperor what I should (yes this is all a wild scenario) be in charge of is counterintelligence and internal security… after which I suspect I find myself considerably more attractive to women (and also assassins and spies, some of which will be women). And I suspect I would have a very successful tenure of rounding up leftists after which I would be thrown to the wolves and executed for treason in order to sooth hurt feelings of the relatives and “friends” of lefties.
I would also be kind of okay with this.
Every single possible mannerbund has been destroyed, we are under constant state surveillance, and more social life is found online. The only options for resolving social conflict are reputation attacks, brigadeering and ostracizing. Even without women shoved into every male space, the very nature of the modern environment is the small village under the eye of the matriarch, the longhouse.
Hence my call to allow men to clean up their neighborhoods independently, instead of setting up yet another cop agency to do it. You need the state to declench it’s white-knuckled grasp on our collective balls.
Can’t have a mannerbund, except of manly men. If it is not OK for men to be manly, that is a problem that has to be addressed before complaining it is not OK for men to have mannerbunds.
That is a fair accusation. ‘Wade through a sea of whores until you find a woman you like’ is indeed what I am advising. It isn’t pretty, but worked for me, and there is no way you can convince me that it is not preferable to giving up. That said I recognize the situation isn’t actually conducive to healthy relations so while I henpeck all incel/volcel commenters at one time, I don’t henpeck one commenter multiple times.
Unsurprisingly, show always wins over tell. To be sure, I have been playfully accused by a friend of being a Chinese mother who always eggs everyone to have children. But much more importantly, I am the guy with the pretty young wife who is known to be a hardcore patriarchist.
Giving up might not be preferable in general, but some men would be better off recognizing that they — personally — aren’t husband/father material (be it essentially or due to circumstance), and adjust their choices accordingly.
I suspect that even in Jim-World, I would not be husband/father material. Under Actual Patriarchy, instead of having to impress a foid, I’d have to impress a foid’s father. Would that substantially improve my own individual odds of acquiring and maintaining normal family life? I doubt.
One can be a mutant without being spiteful.
In the absence of Rubicon, it might be worth start deprogramming the enforcers of foid whims, who are men. But there’s clearly a lot of work to be done.
What gets me specifically about you is that you are clearly a religious man, so no doubt aware that God has made a covenant with us, that covenant including both a promise and a duty for us to procreate.
But it is what it is. Makes me wonder about the marital status of commenters like PC and Daddy Scarebucks. Perhaps we are really raising an incel army.
If your religion is that every biological entity, no matter how dysfunctional, must maximize its procreation, then I’m literally a Satanist.
That statement reveals much more about how you perceive yourself than about anything I believe.
I did not refer to myself in this comment.
Or more accurately, made a general statement, which may or may not apply individually. And then announced my view.
To elaborate a little bit:
Gnon made a general rule. Rules have exceptions.
No need to go further.
I mean, it’s never a good idea to argue with a Mod.
It’s also not a good idea to argue with a God.
Do you want to discuss any particular Biblical verse, Alf?
Matthew 19:3-12
Excellent choice.
What do these verses recommend that someone separated from his wife do – seek another one, or not seek another one?
Stop digging, retard.
These verses do not address the question — however the law of Moses permits multiple wives.
Mossadnik: “some men would be better off recognizing that they — personally — aren’t husband/father material”
Alf: “Perhaps we are really raising an incel army.”
Obviously raising an “incel army” would be extremely bad for several reasons. That said, it raises many possibilities for political action among the men so afflicted, since they don’t have to worry as much about consequences for other people. For example, you could [fedpost suggestion elided] or [legally questionable advocacy censored] without having to worry about reverb effects. Lenin said the ideal revolutionary doesn’t have a family, for exactly this reason.
The verses tell us you shouldn’t have divorced in the first place.
True. And unresponsive.
Alf, your ambition is to be Archbishop. I support you! I’m with you brother!
If this is the quality of your preaching, Hell will freeze before you get to be Archbishop.
Oh come on. Am I really talking in hieroglyphics? Is it that hard to understand what I’m getting at?
I’ve never held the position that it is everyone’s imperative to spread their seed in every womb they can get their hands on. There’s rules to this game, set by natural law and God. These rules are given in the bible: when you marry, you become one flesh. Don’t put asunder what God has joined together. Jesus elaborates: bad people get divorce. Jim elaborates further by emphasising the evolutionary mechanisms behind these rules.
All of which you have studied intently. You had all the puzzle pieces, yet failed to make the puzzle. Which, you know, it happens. It’s dumb, but it happens. But you come across rather callous when you just throw your hands up and go: ‘puh dem ‘foids, amirite’ when there’s plenty of signs going around that, and correct me if I say this wrong, you were getting high and shitpoasting on the internet instead of attending to your marriage.
The circumstances of my divorce are none of your (and the internet’s) business.
Again: does Jesus permit/recommend/instruct some people — a minority of people! — to be volcels, according to these very verses?
Yes or no.
The answer is “yes.”
Now, what are the criteria? Verse 9 says what it says about remarriage, which may or may not apply in my case – that doesn’t matter, since my bedroom life is none of your business anyway. Verses 11-12 are even more pertinent, basically translating to “You should generally be living in matrimony, but it’s not necessarily for absolutely everyone – some men [dysfunctional or otherwise, mostly dysfunctional] might be better off living as eunuchs.”
It’s right there in the text, man.
If you want to henpeck married couples to have children, or more children, you may do so (tactfully). Insisting that a divorced and dysfunctional internet stranger should stop being celibate, and seek another wife, is not fitting behavior for Archbishop.
I have been henpecking you not into rushing into whatever crazy second marriage, but rather to find peace with the women in your life, be that your ex-wife or whoever you might happen to meet. Which is all the more important when children have entered the picture. I apologize if I phrased that sloppily at the start of this debate.
You have a right to privacy, and a right to be a volcel.
Sure, no problem. I want you to succeed at your role! And perhaps more importantly, I want the (suspiciously silent) lurkers to hold the right perspective.
That’s true, in the sense that they speak of men who put away their wives, not men who had their wives (with the progressive state as their proxy) kick them out willy-nilly. The larger point still stands. In fact, my attitude is more permissive than Christ’s – I think you should remarry if conditions are proper. But for some men, conditions may not be proper, and volceldom is preferable.
How did I get roped into this? I happen to agree with you. I also avoid using denigrating terms like “foid” because I consider them black-pill/incel markers; women are good at being women, are wonderful to be around when properly owned, and only turn everything to shit when they are forced into male roles that most of them would not even want to be in were it not for the megaphone blasting girlboss propaganda at deafening volume.
And I believe bootycall-cel (Meekscel? Piratecel? Alphacel? We need a catchy term for this, because most men still don’t get it) are as much victims of the system as the incel men. None of them are happy, and all of them would, even within this broken system, be immensely happier if they just put in a little effort–the women to stop figuratively waiting for Mr. One-in-Thirty’s phone in call and go out once in a while, or better yet, ask a paternal figure to set them up–and the men to suck it up and do the monkey dance once in a while, because that’s our lot in life.
I do sympathize from a legal point of view, though. Mossadnik says he’s been divorced twice, thus probably is viscerally paranoid about divorce-rape in a way that you wouldn’t understand. Some people are unlucky (or make bad decisions) and it completely burns them out.
Nah, only divorced once. Well, in modern Israel that’s like being divorced seven times. Anyway, internet drama is boring; what is interesting to me is, as usual, Divine Law. In my view, which I believe aligns with the NT (perhaps not perfectly, but close enough), volceldom is proper for some men. Faggots, obviously, but not just them – some men just are not husband/father material, whether that’s a lifelong condition or otherwise. Hence, “He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.”
We’re far too late in the game to be arguing about this. We have less than four years before The Event. In the 90s and early 2000s, into the early 2010s even, there was need of game. Now, there’s need of tight networking with local men, infiltrating important institutions, sharing concentrated samizdat, and steeling your psyche for the worst.
We are not in some steady state ruleset that needs concise analysis and repeatable rulesets to maximize profits of followers and contributors. We are about to be pushed over the cliffs edge by a stampeding crowd, and need to do everything possible to not get thrown down into the abyss.
If Trump 2.0 fails, and currently it is, we hit the real crisis. Good luck keeping your pregnant wife safe as the state steals your house and throws you into a weather exposed fenced enclosure for failing to believe hard enough in whatever the current thing was on the Tuesday before.
I’m not certain whom this was supposed to have been directed at, but in any case:
Sure, a pregnant wife is a liability in the event of “The Event”. A tribe of eight children and fifty grandchildren? Starts to look a lot more like an asset.
You speak of “tight networking with local men”. Well, family connections certainly aren’t the only way to do that, but they are and always will be the best way.
It is unlikely that most men, in most communities, would be able to form an armed and trained militia without incurring a brutal crackdown, even if they had the resources and the ambition. But try as they might, the state cannot really prevent men from forming large families, and there’s nothing suspicious about two or three large families getting together for the occasional shindig.
And even if you find the idea of armed resistance to be utterly ridiculous, people with blood ties are going to find it easier to psychologically resist being “thrown into the abyss” than atomized, demoralized incels.
I wrote three very concise paragraphs and even still you completely glossed over the context.
Please, by all means raise an army of toddlers to face the gulag stage leftism. In all seriousness, if you have a family, keep it. If not in possession of a wife, then do not worry too hard at this particular moment, not never, but just our current moment as the singularity approaches, because we are going to see radical change one way or another.
If we get something like a gray/blue Stalin, a Thermidorean willing to murder everyone who strays too far from whatever his personal leftism is set at, an outcome I personally see as the most likely, then we can resume the conversation about game and marriage in a world where it must remain covert. In the meantime, it’s arguing about college football while the south sudan blackguard sharpens the machete.
I didn’t gloss over it, I just chose not to take it literally, because the literal meaning came across as autistically alarmist.
You don’t know that “The Event” is going to happen in four years (or less), and if it does, you don’t know precisely what “The Event” is going to be.
This goes back to what I said earlier, i.e. being early is the same as being wrong. We all agree that something must change, and what it changes to may be very ugly; what can’t continue, won’t continue. But collapses come in many forms, and happen at many speeds, and affect many different scopes in terms of geography and demography.
Preppers have been around for more than 50 years and the ones who prepped 50 years ago look mighty silly today, although of course they would argue that they had good reasons back then (threat of nuclear war, etc.). Trump 1.0 was unexpected, and Trump 2.0 was even more unexpected, so who can say what will happen in a few years? It may look nothing like what you imagine; or it may look a hundred times worse than what you imagine, so much worse that any notions of resistance or escape are utterly futile. If get an outcome like Mao or Pol Pot then we are all fucked anyway.
I don’t know what it is you’re even advocating. It doesn’t sound like you really have a plan, other than “expect very bad things” and not liking Alf’s plan. You’re claiming rhetorical supremacy, for a vague and indeterminate strategy, not because of something that has actually happened, but something that you assure us will happen and according to your projected timeline. That’s not very persuasive. You might be right, you might be wrong. You might be directionally right but wrong on enough of the particulars that whatever tactics you have in your head right now prove counterproductive in practice. No plan survives contact with the enemy.
Men fight wars for two basic reasons: to protect what they have, or to loot, burn, rape and pillage that which other men would protect. If you have nothing to protect, then any war you fight will be in the name of looting, burning, raping and pillaging, and let’s just call that “aggression” for rhetorical convenience. The incel army, should it come to exist, is an army of aggression. Obviously, pure aggression can be victorious over pure defensiveness, because it has happened many times, and all it takes is vastly superior numbers or morale. But defenders have a natural advantage in terms of territory, logistics and baseline morale, and more importantly, defenders can be decentralized, whereas aggressors need to be organized under a high-performing leader.
There is no denying that the incel army would have a lot of energy, possibly enough to overpower or at least resist the depredations of a stagnant bureaucracy turned Stalinist–if a leader were to emerge capable of organizing and training them properly, and focusing all that energy on one or more meaningful targets. Such a person/phenomenon has yet to emerge, and in its absence, the incel army appears to me to be largely ineffective and even self-destructive.
I reject your arbitrary four-year timeline and arbitrary nebulous vision of the collapse, and maintain that I would sooner put my faith in family men who stand for something and share a religious worldview (even if it is a rather vague and weak something, and a watered-down religion) than in the atomized, unfocused and faithless incels, who presently don’t seem to be able to move the needle much regardless of which path we end up on.
This presupposes that the side defending has a system of property rights that enables effective utilisation of property, that both sides are in agreement about the system of property rights, they just disagree on who the owner shall be. This is seldom the case, resulting in wars being fought over issues far less clear.
In the hypothetical case of an incel army, obviously have no motivation to fight for anything except pussy, so would only fight for property rights in pussy. And any system of property rights in pussy is going to result in more successful utilisation of reproductive services than no property rights at all.
Ignoring other people’s points, especially lynchpin points from which the rest of their rhetorical exposition derive their meaning, is not a charity of discussion.
I am saying that hot struggle for power is happening now, just not yet at full fruit. That ‘our team’ losing a 2028 election will bring something like Rwanda to America, the Ukraine war will end at the English channel, and the Yewkay will be a new Pakistani caliphate. That such a thing could even occur if they steal 2026 to such a degree that the Senate and media complex could plausibly convince the grunts and such that Trump is illegitimate and impeached.
Asserting that we are in a steady decline and we have to find a way to cope with the decline, I claim is normalcy bias. We are not in a steady decline. We are on the cliffs edge.
My plan is to see what is on the other side of the major and obvious flashpoints coming very soon, before comitting myself to fishing for flakes of copper in the sewer. If we pass calmly, or even with great clamour but with little change in political and or social landscape at the end, through next year and the 2028 election, I’ll eat my words. I suspect strongly we will not, do you want to formalize this and put some BTC up for a bet?
Seems clear to me. Maybe you are saying that the original casus belli is often vague and confusing, which it is. But even holy wars, or wars fought in the name of some civic principle such as property rights in pussy or the independence of a nation, are ultimately fought to either destroy the other or wrest control of the authority that allows such principle to be enforced.
Sometimes you get multiple aggressors who are all curiously unconcerned about their own defense, but I didn’t claim that all wars have a clear aggressor and a clear defender, only that whichever side one is on, it tends to boil down to one of those two things.
Indeed, and to reiterate my point from earlier, I see no leader currently offering or appearing capable of offering this to the incel army, therefore my conclusion that incels as a group will continue to be ineffective and self-destructive for the foreseeable future.
Fidelis is framing this as a comparison between henpecked child-burdened grillers and hardened radicalized incel warriors. But every husband and father will fight with whatever lethal force is at his disposal in order to protect his family, whereas the MGTOWs and xitterati aren’t going to lift a finger on their own; the barking chihuahuas need a master.
What exactly would be the conditions of this bet? If we are all either dead or scratching in the dirt with sticks, then it hardly seems like either of us would be in any condition to settle any bet.
And I guess that’s partly my point. What, in your mind, constitutes an outcome in 2028 or earlier where any reasonable person would retroactively consider it a mistake to have started a family? The fact that you mention the 2028 election in particular implies a dull old election bet, which–if that is in fact what you had in mind–I have no interest in because I don’t consider it relevant to the question of “is it better to have/start a family or live the incel life”.
What you are telling us is that something so catastrophic is going to happen in the next 4 years that unless one’s children are already full-grown adults, it is a mistake to start any new relationships or have any more kids. That sounds suspiciously like “we can’t afford another kid” or worse, “how could we bring a child into this forsaken world”, which is a blackpill suicide meme.
You’re making a claim that that sounds very specific but seems vague and subjective to evaluate, i.e. that young families are going to have negative utility in the near future. I would say that first of all, that’s a category error, and smells suspiciously like motivated reasoning, but I still might take you up on your bet if you want to explain your criteria, and assuming that it is not a silly bet like a democratic election.
I don’t believe in either of those as meaningful categories, and never was trying to discuss what makes a warrior spirit.
I don’t know how to do quotes but “relieved of the embarrassing and unwanted requirement of consent” made me realize that’s why it never feels right to ask out girls, it always seems awkward and unnatural. Using words to get her consent. Of course this presents certain problems, if anyone knows a way around it it’d be appreciated
It is curious how, out of all the nations listed, Chinese media is the least woke. Their movies and games tend to be free of outright degeneracy (because it’s literally banned), rarely employ female protagonists, and when they do employ female protagonists, usually emphasize their feminine rather than masculine qualities. They even, sometimes, portray the mating dance accurately.
Maybe their “export media” is like some sort of Potemkin Village, and internally they’re just as bad as we are. But trends point in the opposite direction, such as the recent example of Japanese game publishers complaining about the “A/B body type” idiocy and telling us outright that they know it is stupid but caved to international pressure. Observation is that the more “westernized” or “western-exposed” the media is, the more progressive and woke it is; so it is hard to explain why China bucks the trend, if it is as rotten as you say on the inside.
I have to wonder if Xi is just trolling the western countries when he says this stuff. But who knows; he’s been unsuccessfully trying to resurrect a dead religion for the last decade, so maybe he’s finally given up and decided to embrace the “communism” half at the expense of the “Chinese” half.
https://x.com/Feliciamtang/status/1977520771187847473
The hiring pipeline is still broken at the faucet I see (default to rejection email, she makes 200k to make sure she hires no one btw). But here is a question Jim, what exactly is wrong in the capitalist sense for a a company to hire dot indian labor for cheaper?
I know the arguments already, they break down everything, they hire their own, they run the company to the ground, yada yada. But still, companies go on to hire them, and if you just want some deliveroo or mangled ebonics manning a gas station, dot indians are the go to for this.
But if you stop companies from hiring dot indians, isn’t that infringement on capitalism? Companies should be allowed to do whatever they want right? I’m thinking how you could respond to the guy making bank telling you its all good fun to hire Somalis in his hotel, after all, the public looting and raping are someone else’s problems right and he can just privatize the profits.
Putting aside the fact that we aren’t Libertarians, with raging boners for big corporations, the bigger the better, nor even libertarians, with a lowercase “l”, who convince themselves that a policy of ultra-strict non-interventionism is even possible, let alone a good idea; putting those issues aside, the main problem I see here is that you seem to be confusing capital with labor.
The most fervent Anarcho-Capitalist, who believes that there should be no restrictions on capital, anywhere, ever, does not necessarily believe the same thing about labor. There is no inherent inconsistency in the claim that borders should be open for trade, but closed for migration. It is a very common policy, historically.
And if you are a National Capitalist, formerly known as a Mercantilist, then national borders are not strictly open for trade either. Mercantilism usually involves largely unregulated intranational trade, with considerably more regulated and/or tariffed international trade.
In any case, it is not “capitalism” to abuse overly-permissive and poorly-managed government programs originally intended to import small numbers of “skilled workers” during times of labor scarcity in order to import infinity mediocre browns who happen to be willing to work for less pay than the reasonably skilled and rather abundant locals. This is only “capitalism” in the same sense that bribing police and judges in order to be able to commit heinous crimes is “capitalism”.
Capitalism does not equal anarchy and corruption, except in the eyes of a Marxist. This degenerate form of capitalism cannot even exist outside of a structurally weak government burdened by egalitarian ideas and democratic processes that permit “lobbying” and other cronyism. In saner times, if a corporation wanted ten thousand Indian workers, the Sovereign would have laughed and told them to go hire their own mercenaries, conquer some Indian provinces and set up shop over there instead–which is exactly what they did, to everyone’s mutual benefit at the time.
‘Cheap labour’ is expensive.
When a higher form of life gets paid they accumulate capital and enrich the community around them, can engage in business and value-producing activities, et cetera. Whereas, when you pay a natural slave it’s essentially wasted money, because it never goes anywhere good. They lack stewardship, don’t take care of their own things or things around them, are profligate and remain poor, are to petty vandalism or burglary of public goods when there are no apparent consequences for doing so, rendering many social technologies impossible, et cetera.
When you employ a valuable human they create more value and conditions for growth and expansion of civilization, resulting in even more potential ’employment’, as a banal economist might put it. Whereas when imported slave races are used as mercenaries by factions of defective elites it really is a ‘stolen job’, because they don’t exponentiate value and can not create the conditions for higher levels of civilization in their own right – in essence being parasitically dependent on the conditions for the very existence of those ‘jobs’ in the first place being arranged for by the others – resulting in stagnation and negative sum competition for rent seeking.
This is all of course even before the higher order problems of social technology with respect to mutual compatibility or incompatibility of psycho-spiritual architectures, that all multi-kulti societies fail from.
“when you pay a natural slave it’s essentially wasted money, because it never goes anywhere good.
Humungus concurs. These nuevo Americanos send their money home and decorate their real estate with junk cars. Which I plan to use at a later date for spare parts.
Cohesion.
You will find that Indians cohere with other Indians of the same caste. “Why does everyone in our IT department have the same last name?” and not with the white board, white CEO, and white shareholders. And you wind up with the Indian castes plotting to take the companies away from their white owners and other indian castes.
Also, very hard to hire good Indian engineers because everyone lies all the time
Should companies be free to dish out residence and citizenship in their native land to all and sundry? Should not the other residents and citizens have a say in that?
The moment you start arguing this is violating consent, you open up to the rebuttle: the hindus and the corporations consent, so the citizens should just get over it.
Politics by consent is always and forever going to be a losing game. You gather consent one time, when erecting the edifice, and forever after it is paternalistic dictatorship. No other way to reliably end coordination issues such as this, where members of the supposed ingroup can ally with the outgroup in order to gain a competitive edge.
He never used the word consent. Jim’s point is that deciding who gets into the country and who doesn’t is the right of the state, not the company.
The point is precisely that it has nothing to do with the freedom of the company to conduct its own business.
I’m not trying to be unduly combative, nor put words in Jim’s mouth, but this reads to me as a form of ‘consent by the commons’, or at least could plausibly be interpreted in such a way by a passerby. Group consent and consensu can work on very small scales, with decisions that require careful thought and low immediacy. With large societies, composed of many many interest groups, you frequently get conflict resolution through alliance with the ‘other’. Ironically, this is how modern India was forged: EIC entrepreneurs found themselves allying with one cousin against another, and taking the whole thing.
So I thought it prudent to clarify that consent politics is fundamentally flawed, we need benevolent dictatorship to solve our modern coordination problems.
Of course. The nation as a whole is incapable of making decisions for the nation as a whole, so has no choice but to delegate that authority to the sovereign, who himself represents the law and the nation, just as the father represents the family.
Consent of the commons/consent of the governed is somewhat of a paradox. Democracy doesn’t work, and attempts at democracy always turn fake and gay, but Hobbes wasn’t entirely wrong either. A king whose troops refuse his orders is just a man in a funny hat, and the likelihood of said orders being refused grows ever higher as he becomes more tyrannical and his popularity sinks lower.
Democratic government tries to formalize this into the process, but it is the formalization that makes it fake and gay–turns the process of governing into a process of memetic warfare, information warfare and constant psyops, and turns respectable statesmen into carnie trash politicians. However, informal challenges to the sovereign’s authority are still relevant and important; Sufficiently odious rulers are apt to be overthrown by elites, who conduct their coup in the name of the people.
In the short run, the peasants don’t matter, but the sovereign should never come out and say that, or by inaction allow that belief to take hold, because noblesse oblige is necessary for a virtuous aristocracy, and a virtuous aristocracy is necessary for political stability. Nobody, neither the peasants nor the elites, want their country being flooded with foreigners (unless the elite are themselves foreigners, in which case you’re already neck-deep in it), and so even if a powerful sovereign believed that he could flood the country with foreigners, and believed that it might be good for business/the royal treasury, does not mean it is overall a good idea for him to do it; and history shows that it is almost never a good idea.
Even if the foreigners are productive, which they often aren’t; and even if they cause no immediate negative externalities, which they usually do; what always ends up happening is that they do not assimilate, are not loyal to the sovereign, and either conquer the country they were “invited” to (whether by direct conquest or the gradual formation of a ruling overclass) or cause escalating strife leading ultimately to civil war, unless mitigated by a costly mass expulsion.
The sovereign should ideally understand the entire chain of cause and effect; but even if the sovereign is totally insipid, dull-witted and politically inept, he is usually still capable of understanding the maxim of “don’t piss the people off too much” which is actually a pretty reliable (albeit lagging) indicator of the effectiveness of the sovereign’s rule, because if everyone is miserable and pissed off all the time, then it means he is doing a shit job of ruling.
“But if you stop companies from hiring dot indians, isn’t that infringement on capitalism? Companies should be allowed to do whatever they want right?”
I’ll choke down my strong words and just say companies are not allowed to do a lot of things so why become all principled in this specific case? The current situation in the West is far more corporatism than capitalism.
Limiting the deep state? Apparently the Supreme Court just overruled Humphrey’s Executor v. United States in favor of Trump. Link originally from VoxDay.
https://x.com/Whiplash437/status/1976857609962418238
Hasn’t been ruled yet. They just delayed it to December.
It is a shame that Trump seems to have aged out of his prime in the last few years; a lot of fundamentally leftist thermidorean wormtongues surrounding him, and no fiery energy to turn his ears and rout them out.
There are many reasons for why, historically, we rarely ever see societies undergoing breznevian stagnation turn themselves around. Be it coordination problems of circular firing squads, incumbents suppressing internal competition by interfering with the ability to coordinate build organizations and display leadership in general, and so on.
But perhaps the most prosaic reason of all is: most humanoids are baby goldfish with no object permanence.
The moment the most dedicated daemonhosts stop getting in the faces of their ‘fellow travelers’ and saying the quiet parts aloud, the moment that they stop simply telling SWMs that they are going to be stripped of life and or livelyhood, and go back to just lying about not doing what they are doing, then all the thermidoreans and cuckservatives, ‘moderates’ and ‘centrists’, all the panoply of normie establishmentarianism, go right back into the boiling pot, adjust to the ever newer ‘new normal’, and continue down the trend of feminism, socialism, and third-worldism to zero, just ‘managed’.
They literally forget that that creature standing next to them literally was – and is – going to kill them, strip their wives and children, and salt their fields – not necessarily in that order. They don’t recognize them as a permanent object that is what it is and will do what it will do, now, and in the future, if not dealt with whenever you make the chance. The moment the ‘thing-as-such’ is no longer in front of them, the recognition – and the implications – disappears.
~
Levying tariffs makes lots of sense if it means you are cutting and eliminating most other taxes in exchange.
But there are innumerable sinecures bound up in all those wealth-transfer apparati, and a bureaucracy will fight to the last to resist any reduction of the bureaucracy; and so instead, and as usual, new codicils are eternally stacked up on top of an edifice of mutually overlapping codicils, and bureaucratization slowly consumes all vital civilization.
We may observe, historically, that a bureaucracy is rarely ever eliminated once established. We can see them eliminated by accident, when their hosts collapse or are liquidated by outside actors. But rarely ever as an act of specifically focused deliberation. And indeed, at times, an undead bureaucracy can even outlive its old host itself, such as that of Rome, or Babylon before it.
There are a number of reasons for this; structural incentive for expansion of rent-seeking, spite-based coordination failures where direct leadership is eliminated in favor of rule-by-committee, solipsist-based coordination failures where judgement and responsibility are replaced by proceduralism, and so on.
But perhaps the most prosaic of all is this: it’s difficult for many people viscerally recognize bureaucrats as the execrable villains they truly are, in the first place.
People may see a bureaucrat in front of them as annoying of course. But they are rarely ever directly in front of them (object permanence strikes again).
They can see them as obstreperous, as useless, as impediments, and so on and so on; but when people see bureaucrats, they can’t see them as immanent, existential threats to life as they know it. They don’t see bright shining colours and symbols that get their blood pumping. They see featureless beige uninteresting gray. They don’t see murderous cannibal biker gangs in suits, nor do they see figureheads of envious wealth or power. They see faceless functionaries who will all argue that they are ‘just normal men’ ‘just doing their jobs’. They simply can’t muster sufficient giveashittatude to treat the problem with the seriousness that is commensurate to it.
Indeed, one may even say that this is the spiritual characteristic of bureaucracy; the deadening and negation of active energy. Revolutionary fever is a ‘high energy’ thing, whereas bureaucratization is a deliberately ‘low energy’ phenomena. There is something of a perceptual mismatch there.
If you go after the problem of bureaucratization with a frame of mind like, ‘I need to fire these bureaucrats’, you will fail.
Because this is merely procedural thinking, and the bureaucracy will out-procedure you.
A mass of functionaries in innumerable bureaucratically subdivided sectors will, with some credibility, argue that a blanket mass firing is unjust. That you need to deal with everything on a case-by-case basis. And so it will never be dealt with.
Thus, the retrospectively obvious conclusion: the only successful clear-cuts of bureaucratization came from people who wanted to literally kill bureaucrats. You have to want to literally kill bureaucrats, specifically because they are bureaucratic scum, and then you can succeed at stoppering any outbreaks of bureaucratization in any organization.
Huh?
Not what I see. Compare Trump Cabinet 2.0 with Trump Cabinet 1.0
In particular and especially, compare Trump Vice President 2.0 with Trump Vice President 1.0.
A much better cabinet yes. But there’s a whole government and ‘civil service’ and extended ‘non’governmental org ecosystem full of people who all have their own arguments for why Trump can’t be too hasty or excessive in doing what needs to be done, and after the initial days of thunder, they evidently made headway in helping to cool tempers and making the world safer for bureaucrats. The sort of people who would be embarrassed by the blackmail collected by bagmen like Epstein for example. Not ultimate underlords, but all doing their part to ensure the system remains exactly as it is, doing what it does.
So first of all… breathe.
“It is a shame that Trump seems to have aged out of his prime in the last few years”
What are you talking about; he’s going after the left infinitely more seriously now than he did his first term.
>What are you talking about
Vibes. The speeches aren’t as energetic and entertaining as they used to be.
>he’s going after the left infinitely more seriously now than he did his first term.
That’s right, and don’t get it twisted; this was never alleged. Nor that it’s not a huge improvement over what could have been with kameltoe, either.
Possibly age, but the man seems exhausted, not dulled. He’s been trying, and succeeding in many cases, to put out fires everywhere.
If I’m speculating, he learned not to trust his delagates, but of course one cannot be in all places at all times. Looking at his business life, he never really succeeded in preparing his sons to inherit the Trump empire. Hard to tell if this was lack of interest, out of the sons or out of the father, but none of his children seem to be taking on any serious responsibilities over the family fortune in a meaningful way. Perhaps they manage the property managers, but I do not see them managing the Trump brand in the same way. Similarly in his political life, he appears to lack focus in choosing and “training” a successor, not that he has much time to truly train any of the already well-aged men that would be taking the reigns. I didn’t pay as much attention to his public appearances as 45, but as 47 I’ve watched just about every one of them. I’ve noticed he brings and mentions his Secretary of War to many events, including the most recent “Peace Conference” or whatever they’re calling it.
I think it’s fair to say he is likely concerned for his posterity. I have no doubt that on more than one occasion some swamp creature will have intimated that if he goes down a needful route, things might ‘end badly’ for the people he leaves behind.
The old canard goes that old men don’t start revolutions. Not even out of fear for themselves, but for all the attachments they have built up over life, were Interesting Times to come. Observe the nigh universal disdain of NPC baby-boomers in later days. Inertial dampeners are helpful when times are good, but can become impediments when times are bad.
Is there a way to save America while also taking a Safe and Secure route that doesn’t rock the boat too much or cross any line that can’t be uncrossed, in the process? He is certainly going to try. And many he will speak with will encourage this.
As a commentary on Trump 2.0, I say “bah, away with ye”. As a commentary on the evil of bureaucracy, there are some useful insights.
Bureaucracy as a form of evil is very novel, from a tides-of-history point of view. Before 20th-century communications and technology, it didn’t really “scale” and therefore wasn’t really an existential threat. It starts looking more like an existential threat only when armed with spreadsheets, PowerPoint, digital media/communications and multivariate mathematical models; and to the untrained normie, the soul-crushing outcomes present more as comical ineffectiveness than methodical evil.
We don’t really have good myths, language or imagery to describe it. Bruce Charlton tried to coin (or merely popularize) the term “Ahrimanic”, appropriate in the sense of Ahriman being a literal devil/demon figure but also unfortunate as the qualities attributed to him (materialism, blandness, apathy) are nowhere present in any of the original depictions, but later made up in one person’s revisionist interpretation. So it is extremely obscure, most people do not understand it, and even I have a hard time remembering it.
Nonetheless, his aim of giving said evil a face and a name is laudable, and this is a project that we really do need to work on, because even though most people do instinctively feel that there is something “wrong” with the Bureaucrat archetype, they can’t articulate what it is. It is a type of demonic, but these are not the typical demons working to corrupt the soul, merely to enslave it by first diminishing it and then later putting it on a metaphorical hamster wheel, so that in the end you aren’t technically possessed, but you willingly work for them by your own free will, because you believe that you have no free will.
For any post-21st century state religion to be successful, it will need to have a category for the sort of person who wants to reduce all human individuality and creativity to cells on a spreadsheet, and will need to ruthlessly cull those people.
Well said. I can only remember Ahrimanic easily because Conan’s arch-nemesis Thoth-Amon bore the baleful artifact the Ring of Ahriman.
Terry Pratchet’s Discworld novel Eric depicts in comedic manner Ahrimanic evil as Charlton intends. One’s taste for remorseless punning may influence satisfaction from the book.
Correction: I conflated the Heart of Ahriman from The Hour of the Dragon with the Ring of Set from The Phoenix in the Sword.
A common mistake!
Trump himself isn’t even the main focus here really. Everyone is just fixating on that part because it was the first sentence (regardless that it is true anyways).
The biggest problem is that thermidoreans themselves had a change of heart. Because they are goldfish. They literally forgot that the true believing activist class daemonhosts that they were so worried about ruining the empire as they knew it 1-2 years ago haven’t changed or gone away. They lost all the nerve and conviction that saw them support a second trump term in the first place, and have turned from uneasy allies back into further obstacles. Turned back into tutting regressives.
That is, “Turned back into tutting regressives, sawing off the branches they themselves sit upon. Just like they were before.”
Musk was brought in to eliminate bureaucracy, and he achieved victory in some mighty big battles indeed in the opening movements of the war. Eventually, the bureaucracies managed to stabilize the retreat into a stalemate, which grew into a point of contention that in time would see Musk ejected and doge defanged.
As Leibniz would say, everything that happens happens for a reason. And this is elucidation of the reasons.
Furthermore, most of those thermidoreans are themselves functionaries in the bureaucratic ecosystems to begin with. The very things that needed eliminating. And their misgivings about the future notwithstanding, they are perfectly willing to sacrifice the future if it means saving their bureaucratic sinecure today. Such is the nature of their evil.
I know; that’s why I only dedicated one sentence to it out of a page-long effortpoast.
You’re wrong; they didn’t forget, they never understood in the first place. And they never had any nerve and conviction to lose.
They saw their empires burning, and turned to Trump and said “please save our empires”. Their contribution was to very slightly raise their thumbs off the scales prior to the election, to slightly reduce the level of censorship imposed, and so on. Not one of them voluntarily cleaned house after the inauguration; they only did so in half-hearted fashion after Trump proclaimed an end to DEI, and many refused to even go that far.
Thermidor is the old left. They cannot forget what they don’t know, and cannot lose what they don’t have. They look at what Hegseth is doing in the military and can only exclaim “horror, cringe, blasphemy!” Maybe they secretly wish they had the backbone to do the same, but I think they believe exactly what they say they believe.
Trump, however, and despite having more energy than his Thermidorean “allies”, doesn’t quite realize that he is actually in a very similar position himself. The empire he wants to save is America, not just his personal corporate/bureaucratic empire; and he finds his unconventional and clearly uncomfortable alliance with “far-right” elements difficult to maintain, or even admit to in polite company.
And just as Thermidor really needed Trump in the moment, but has never really stopped feeling embarrassed by him, Trump really needs the reactionary right in order to make any change that will actually stick, but has never stopped feeling embarrassed by them/us. All of that coalition, save for maybe Hegseth and Miller, still view the most pious progressives as their moral betters, even as they question their own faith. That is the problem; not cowardice, not forgetfulness.
But ultimately it is not about how they feel, or what they are comfortable with; it is about the slow, grim realization that there is simply no alternative. Thermidor, particularly the tech and finance factions, can easily back off and say “it’s the government’s problem/they made us do it”, but Trump doesn’t have that option. If he wants to survive, and wants his family line to survive, he is going to have to fight this holy war as a holy war, whether he likes it or not, and whether he understands it or not. And that is more or less what we see happening, albeit in excruciatingly slow motion; he is getting dragged along reluctantly, but to his great credit, has never folded his hand.
I don’t know what you were expecting/hoping for, but what I’ve observed so far greatly exceeds my former expectations, even if it falls far short of my utopian dreams.
Rather than expectations or appointments thereof, I speak of retrospective and prediction. Which makes The Phenomenology Of Moderate Experience a relevant concern.
I feel you are being a bit precious by observing the phenomena of thermidoreans changing their courses, then declining to describe it as changing their course. Empirically that is simply exactly what happened. You could say that it was entirely *predictable* that they would change their course, because they never truly believed to begin with (and are likely constitutionally incapable of such, in any case), but it leaves the fact again; at one point they were concerned, then those concerns fell to the way-side in favor of other concerns (like piously signaling how much more leftist than thou they are). We empirically observe the fact of them forgetting what they were concerned about. Unless we want to say they were actually *faking* their once support for Trump, for some furthermore unknown sinister design – but that is a much further bridge to cross in imputing motives, I’d say.
And of course, the cuckservatives and all the rest, inner and outer party, business or government, media or academia, normalgroids of the world united, are like in kind. With Trump riding herd on the worst excesses of later-day demonology, they stop thinking about it. Stop being concerned by it. There’s no object permanence. They are, I might allege, literally not even conscious of the world in the same way you might be. So indeed, anything not presently held under their nose is literally forgotten about. Whether that’s the inevitable doom that leftists will bring about if not dealt with in particular, or really, anything else, in general.
>We empirically observe the fact of them forgetting what they were concerned about.
Even though, logically speaking, those concerns are still present, and that if they truly believed what they had once believed back then, and followed the implications to their logical conclusions, then they would lot let up the moment the temperature in the pot drops a little, but take the opportunity to secure even more decisive and permanent victory against a weakened enemy.
But it is the nature of the eternal fellaheen to let up the moment the temperature drops. Neither past nor future exists in its mind; only the eternal current year.
Do they? Which notable Thermidorians have openly opposed Hegseth masculinising the military? What makes you think that any Thermidorians oppose it? Link me to a Thermidorian opposing it.
We might be using different definitions of Thermidor. I am thinking for example of Jeff Bezos and the Washington Post, who were a notable defector (in favor of Trump, or at least not in favor of the Democrats) in the 2024 election season. Their current headlines about Hegseth are, in general, rather negative, although I do see the occasional dissenting op-ed.
I would like to direct-link, really, but their site has the stupid popup/paywall thing and I can never access the archive.xyz sites from this browser or VPN. But it’s easy enough to see what I mean from a simple “hegseth site:washingtonpost.com” query.
I also consider many if not most of the major tech companies to be a predominant (if not the predominant) faction of Thermidor, e.g. Google/Alphabet being one of the first to drop the woke holidays from its calendar and Facebook immediately getting on board with ditching the “fact checking” regime, and so on. And I cannot link public sources here, or say precisely which companies I hear about non-publicly, so you can take my word for it or not, but I know from trusted contacts that the mood has changed, and there was a lot of snark re: the September meeting.
Public examples are hard to dig up because Thermidor was and is a secretive movement. Just as I can’t show a ton of examples proving softening support, I doubt you could produce a ton of examples proving the support was there in the first place. Everything comes through the grapevine, or by indirect observation. I’m sure you have some sources too, so the fact that we are hearing different things may indicate even further splitting among the various Thermidor factions.
The visible part of Thermidor is Musk, the tech lords, and the influencers. Who are not very secretive at all.
The archetypical Thermidorean, the very type specimen of a Thermidorean, is “Big Balls”. Secrecy is not in his nature, so found himself on the Democrat death list, so signed up with Thermidor. If you have big balls, the Democrats are coming after you.
As I said, “Used to be that Thermidor was horrified by Charlie Kirk and Pete Hegseth, but now they are starting to figure out that they are going to need such people to keep them alive”
And you can see that in the Post articles on Hegseth, which are distinctly schizophrenic, as though a regular mainstream newsman wrote a regular mainstream article on a Christian Nationalist, and then someone else went over it with a red pen.
“Oh the horror Hegseth is politicising the military, well actually he is depoliticising the military.”
Musk is an exception, which is what makes him the visible part. Joe Rogan (who I assume is the Rogan you mean) is a soft-left pundit with a long history of not taking sides nor stacking the deck in his interviews. Asmongold, Critical Drinker et al are just the disgruntled peasantry, notable only for the fact that they are allowed to remain on the platform, which has to take into account the fact that they primarily critique only the most obviously unpopular, unprofitable ultra-woke media, and don’t have much to say about politics in the broader sense (nor should they–but the point is, they don’t).
Please understand that I am not doing the Contaminated NEET act here; you know I am firmly on the opposing side, and that I see more good than bad right now. But I don’t think your personnel model of Thermidor is very persuasive. Certainly Elon Musk belongs in it, yes, but even if we take Musk in isolation, we must recall his spectacular sperg-out over the H-1B program a few months ago, which he subsequently was forced to walk back (indicating that balls, no matter how big, do not always trump real pressure), and his falling-out with Trump/exit from DOGE shortly afterward. Musk is one half big balls, and one half sperg with no filter, often with embarrassing results. I like him, but his inherent unpredictability makes him difficult to use as a weather vane.
Some time ago, I posted my own educated guess at what could be a representative sample of the Thermidorean personnel, including:
– Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg; representing the “somewhat reliable” tech faction, who are liable to be very uncooperative on issues like immigration, but seem to genuinely feel that things had gone too far in terms of censorship and culture wars, and believe (whether strictly true or not) that they only went along with it at the time because they were forced to.
– Tim Cook, Sergei Brin, Larry Page, Peter Thiel, and a few others of the “extremely unreliable” tech faction, many of whom are fags, others attending Burning Man and being closely linked to the pervert left, have strong sympathies for the perverts, but ultimately consider mere politics to be dirty and beneath their station, and don’t really give a damn about who is in charge, but have a keen sense of which way the wind is blowing and how to profit from it.
– Almar Latour (of Dow Jones/Wall Street Journal), Warren Buffet, David Solomon (of Goldman Sachs) and some of the other “Finance Bros” who tend to make their money from actual productivity, albeit it is the productivity of others, and their profits heavily involve leverage and arbitrage and other unpleasant things; but these are people who, I believe, took notice that Bidenomics were crashing the economy and were eventually going to put everyone, including themselves, out of business, and want Trump to fix the economy without making it too difficult for them to keep skimming off the top.
– Rupert Murdoch (News Corp), Patrick Soon-Shiong (of the LA Times) and a few others whose names and institutions currently escape me as the recalcitrant old-school “news bros” who still believe that the news should at least occasionally be about the News, and should only be partly about the Narrative, part of the time, not all Narrative all the time, and felt themselves being pushed out of the business by younger, dumber, browner radicals.
And these names should be contrasted with the ones who clearly are not part of Thermidor and wanted full steam ahead on the left-singularity: Bill Gates, Jason Citron (Discord), Jack Dorsey (who ragequit Twitter to found BlueSky) in tech; Larry Fink and the BlackRock bandits in finance, along with Robert Klaber (the #1 “Sustainability Researcher”, aka ESG) and the Parnassus C-listers; Adam Miller (NBCUniversal COO), AG Sulzberger and the New York Times Editorial Board.
I emphasize that many of these are not, and cannot be, confirmed. Some may be entirely wrong, some may be only partially correct in the sense that they are not personally connected but someone in their inner circle is. But this is what I mean by secretive. These are the actual kinds of people likely to be making up Thermidor, or opposing it in the case of the counterexamples; people with serious political connections and real (though obviously limited) power and influence, who would have been feeling the metaphorical gravitational distortion and oncoming annihilation from the left-singularity in 2020.
And they don’t post retarded comments on Xitter. They don’t post anything at all. If a few of them appear to post anything, it is probably some social media intern posting it. There certainly are records of many of them making semi-public statements suggestive of their political alignment, and by “semi-public” I mean in some internal memo or town-hall meeting. “People know”, but we don’t have clean and unambiguous access to that information as we do with someone like Musk who runs his mouth off (again, metaphorically) on social media.
I assume you have at least one or two inside sources that enable you to make an educated guess about what the individuals named above, or the people in their orbits, are thinking and planning. If so, and if those sources tell you they are still all-in on Trump 2.0, then we are getting conflicting information and there may be further fragmentation of the factions down the road; if not, then you don’t really know Thermidor and are only getting a highly unreliable and frequently distorted signal from the dancing clowns on social media.
To be clear, I don’t hear that any of these people have abandoned Trump 2.0, have relapsed into TDS or are trying to resist the #resistance; just that some of them appear to have been going soft, getting complacent, grumbling about this or that grift becoming more difficult to pull off, or simply wavering somewhat in their former support. That’s where I think P-C is partially right, and you are having a hard time seeing due to lack of public visibility.
“resist the #resistance”, ha ha, obviously that was supposed to say “restart the #resistance”.
Scarebucks:
“…even if we take Musk in isolation, we must recall his spectacular sperg-out over the H-1B program a few months ago, which he subsequently was forced to walk back (indicating that balls, no matter how big, do not always trump real pressure)”
I just want to note (not having read the rest of your comment yet) that that was pressure from the base. Doing a U-turn due to pressure from one’s own allies is totally different from doing a U-turn due to pressure from one’s enemies.
I interpret this not as a statement driven by evidence, but a statement about what you’re worried might be true. It’s important when reasoning to keep a clear distinction between observed events, speculations about what unobserved events might be occurring, and probabilities one attaches to events that could occur in the future.
What’s up with this bro. I’m using words to describe patterns of behavior, and the happenstance of changes between one pattern and another. If you don’t like those ones, what ones would you like better?
Point to concrete examples of this pattern, of people actually doing this.
E.g. Jon Leibowitz types who used to quietly countersignal their fellow travelers late Biden, but don’t do that anymore. Often doubling down on TDS again.
Jon Leibowitz is not a Thermidorean and never was a Thermidorean. He has had permanent and unchanging Trump Derangement Syndrome since Trump came down the escalator, and continues to campaign for “Internet Privacy” — by which he means that internet privacy must be eradicated so that all thought criminals can be eradicated.. He is a Democrat who was on the revolving door between regulators and regulated under Obama, but has lost any power and influence he might have once had under Obama.
I wasn’t aware that Liebowitz ever countersignaled his tribe. You might be thinking of Bill Maher, who–as far as I know, but could certainly be wrong here–has not retreated from his lukewarm “Trump isn’t all that bad once you get to know him, really” position.
No, I’m aware of Bill Maher too, and as you say, he’s not an example because I don’t think he’s ever walked back that position.
@Jim
The Jon Leibowitz referred to here goes by ‘Stewart’ on stage for anglo-presenting.
I feel like I’m going to be unsuccessful at trying to straddle a middle position here, but is there a clip or some evidence of Jon Liebowitz ever turning away from TDS, before, as you claim, turning back to it?
It’s just hard for me to imagine that particular man doing such a thing, although there certainly were a lot of unexpected turnarounds in early 2025. And unlike the tech C-suiters who are generally careful to never get caught on record, Jon is a public figure and there must surely be some saved clips of his come-to-Jesus moment if that happened.
My take is that there is definitely some complacency and regression-to-mean setting in, but no more than what should have been expected, and actually somewhat less than what you imply and what I might have expected, all things considered.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TKBJoj4XyFc
The Daily Show ~1 year ago: ‘dems lost because too woke’.
Jon Stewart, the entirely unfunny comedian with a miniscule viewership, was never a Thermidorean, and there is nothing Thermidorean about the episode you link to.
In particular, he pushes back on the theory that Democrats lost because too woke. He ridicules the theory. It is impossible to be too woke because woke is goodness and niceness and kindness, and every single person everywhere in the world completely agrees that it is uncontroversially goodness kindness and niceness, and if anyone disagrees we nice good people are going to enforce goodness niceness and kindness by by pooring gasoline over that evil hater’s hateful children, setting them on fire, and then burning out his eyes with a blow torch so that it is the last thing he ever sees.
Well, he did not actually say the bit about the gasoline and the blow torch to the eyes, but I felt he implied it.;
He introduces the show with “Welcome to the Resistance” What is the evil totalitarian dictatorship that he and the audience will be resisting — well it is Trump, but mostly it is Thermidor.
The Democrats expected that in 2024 they would be massively stuffing the ballots as in 2020 — and yet mysteriously and inexplicably, ballot stuffing did not happen, or at least not on the flagrantly in-your-face 2020 style.
Thermidor was that someone critical was a no show. And not only was someone critical a no show, but you could smell in the air that there was going to be a no show. But Jon Stewart did show. In every show campaigning against Orange Man Bad, and in this show that you link to, campaigning against Democrats who thought that you should slow boil the frog rather than flash fry it, while Thermidor is the frog seeing he is about to be slow boiled.
He was never part of any alliance of any kind with Trump or his associates certainly. My meaning is that it’s a bellwether amongst others for the climate of the times. Not long ago many people were very – rightly – concerned about the direction the country was going in general and the immanent danger from the actions of the activist class in particular, and Trump won because of it. Even many erstwhile bluetribesmen as we have seen were more circumspect about what some of their more zealous fellow travelers were doing. And without that immanent danger under their noses much of that circumspection disappears. It’s pretty simple really.
We observe the historical fact of breznevian stagnation having dogged persistence in many cases, where an organization or larger society in general cycles between dips and troughs of defective excess and managerial reaction without ever fundamentally overturning the overall trend to greater defection. I think it’s fair to say that normism of this kind is a contributing factor.
Not seeing it. Jon Stewart wants to murder everyone, and is blissfully unaware that he is also on the list to be murdered. I could smell the climate of the times. Jon Stewart remained utterly unaware of the climate of the times. Musk showed the climate of the times Paul Rogan showed the climate of the times. Asmongold showed the climate of the times. Jon Stewart remained stalwartly and utterly detached from reality, which is what makes him unfunny. As for example the section I just linked to denying that the Democrats lost due to woke. The only way reality will penetrate his skull is when his fellow comrades of the resistance shoot him through the head.
Look at Jon Stewart on the Ukraine, and on his response to Tucker’s visit to Russia. The man is driven mad by lust for the blood of innocents.
He included slide-shows of numerous dems doing exactly that. I’ll grant that the man himself is certainly fallen to the core and a perfect target for fellow communists due to not seeing them murderous savages (like himself).
On a tangential digression, old media used to be lot more sophisticated in how it conducted narrative control. As NNT once quipped, ‘the facts are true, the news is fake’. The very act of choosing what things to report on or not report on, more or less often, in the first place, shapes a captive audience’s impression of the world. The inability of many later day inheritors to simply not wave their shitdicks on air and gleefully indulge in ‘shocking the bourgeoisie’ is a major impetus behind the crackup of the washington monoculture.
In order to push back on and ridicule the less evil, less insane, and less murderous faction of the Democrats.
We can subdivide the mainstream political spectrum roughly as follows:
1. Those who want to destroy everything and kill everyone, and say so, as for example Governor Newscum, Hasan Piker, and Jimmy Kimmel.
2. Those, such as Jon Stewart who will not tell us they want to destroy everything and kill everyone, but are strangely unable to notice anything untoward about those who do tell us, and vigorously push back against any criticism of those that want to destroy everything and kill everyone.
3. Those Democrats and Rino Republicans who campaign on right wing positions like funding the police, building a border wall, and a border moat full of alligators, while voting in congress to release repeat murderers with no cash bail, to fly in ten million black male Mohammedans screaming for infidel blood and white pussy, and put them all in luxury hotels at government expense. This faction will sometimes tell the kill everyone faction to tone it down a little. Which is to say, they are far, far to the right of Jimmy Stewart et al,
4. Those former Democrats who found the the Democrats were sending their militia to murder them, and looked around for political leadership that might prevent them from being murdered. This faction is Thermidor. Musk is the most famous and most powerful element of Thermidor, though Asmongold and Paul Rogan are the most visible influencers. Most of the power lies with the tech lords, who ran dead on a 2020 style steal,
5. Trump and Maga.
6. Christian Nationalists, as for example Charlie Kirk and Pete Hegseth.
Used to be that Thermidor was horrified by Charlie Kirk and Pete Hegseth, but now they are starting to figure out that they are going to need such people to keep them alive. And it is starting to occur to some of them that their prospects for remaining alive are better, if the prospects for Jon Stewart remaining alive take a turn for the worse.
In 2024 the Democrats were massively lawyering up for another hanging chad election, but somehow failed to manufacture the hanging chads. It was not that everyone got together and decided not to steal the election this time. It was that some people decided to not steal the election this time, but somehow neglected to mention this to the Democrat party.
Pseudo quotes Jon Stewart/Leibowitz as follows, with a link to the video:
I just watched the entire 14:44 of the video at that link and Stewart says the opposite: He says, at the 10:33 mark:
“I only have one problem with the ‘woke’ theory: I just didn’t recall seeing any Democrats running on woke shit.”
So no, there was never a turnaround by Stewart. In any case, calling him Thermidorian is crazy.
Yes, I remembered the video but mixed up the contents; it wasn’t liebowitz himself signaling circumspection, but a raft of various D functionaries consultants and talking heads he was quoting who were all signaling circumspection, at the time.
He quoted them in order to mock and dispute them.
(And the people he is mocking are not Thermidor.)
And not only dems; amongst the melange of voices were also fox news commentators, nyt columnists, rnc consultants, and assorted other ‘centrists’ (ie, establishment left, people on network news are all on the same side), which just illustrates the larger point beyond digressing over what the term thermidor refers too; broad swells of sentiment across social circles, across times.
It may or may not have been broad. It probably was broad. But as always, only a small handful of people actually mattered.
Elon Musk reflected a secret preference cascade amongst billionaire tech bros. Then he went public, which led to a public preference cascade among ordinary people. But ordinary people do not matter. Never have mattered, never will matter. If it was possible for ordinary people to hold a preference cascade against DEI it would have happened long ago, since DEI made the workplace a brutal terrifying hell for straight white males long before the tech lords realised that, like their straight white male employees, they were slated for eradication also.
Certainly.
> Jon Stewart, the entirely unfunny comedian with a miniscule viewership, was never a
> Thermidorean, and there is nothing Thermidorean about the episode you link to.
Thermidoreans in overtly leftist professions (say, 95+ percent of political donations to Democrats) are not merely sensible Havel’s Greengrocer pragmatists, they are those leftists who have gotten death threats or know that they are going to the camps the minute the left ever takes explicit power again (e.g., White House or Congress). The Twitter Files journalists for example — Taibbi, Weiss, Greenwald. Matt Taibbi got raided by the Biden IRS. Their views haven’t changed but they have acquired “skin in the game” and prefer staying alive.
Hardly anyone from films or television is in Thermidor. Certainly not people like Stewart, Maher or any other of the employed TV hosts.
Squinting at the events we’ve unburied from the bronze age, looks like overmighty bureaucrats are perennial. Why else would Ahkenaten, a man powerful enough to declare a new state faith and not have it erased from history, move the imperial capital, if not to escape a bughive of bureaucrat priests.
In China, like clockwork you get a dynasty that grows a thick network of mandarins that then choke out all life and ability to act, up until natural disaster or conquest by nomadic tribes. Lets take the case of Zheng He. He receives a treasure fleet from the emporer, sails all the way to East Africa, documents everything. Maps, trade networks, beginnings of diplomatic ties. Well, the imperial magistrates dislike this, go out of their way to have his fleet dismantled, then close off all trade they can. All out of what seems like spite, though of course from the distance of centuries and civilization you cannot say for sure.
“Yes, but…”
Bureaucrats were always a problem, but they were an isolated problem. The predecessor to the bureaucrat archetype is the court eunuch, who were frequently a pain in the king’s backside, and in some case brought an end to his kingship.
But the intrigue was mostly confined to the court. The peasants weren’t affected, and even many of the local lords barely noticed. At least insofar as I can glean from the historical records, bureaucracy didn’t spread through entire civilizations like particularly vigorous cancers, crushing the souls and choking the life out of all inhabitants.
It’s like one of those fictional paleo-viruses, trapped in ice for thousands of years and suddenly re-emerging to infect and slaughter a civilization with no natural immunity whatsoever. Yes, it’s old, and yes, it claimed victims before, but it’s of a magnitude far worse now than it ever was before.
It is unfortunately not just a few over-mighty bureaucrats anymore; it is a sprawling, self-sustaining, self-replicating and self-aware engine, and the only way to defeat it is a coordinated attack on the egregore from which it draws power, not just a few bureaucrats or even their institutions.
For the slow class, could you flesh out a bit what such a coordinated attack on the egregore might look like? Or rather, what the visible clues might be of it happening?
Seems to me that bureaucracy was a major factor in the collapse of Bronze Age civilisation.
Aristocracy seems to prevent bureaucracy, but the Chinese mandarinate is pure bureaucracy.
Prevent seems to be too strong a word. I’d rather say aristocracy is the only known way to limit the spread of bureacracy.
Not sure about your comment about mandarines. The way I understand it, the mandarins weren’t aristocrats, and China in generally was lacking aristocrats of the formal European sort of way. China -as far as I know- had wealthy and powerful people, but not the hierarchical, inheritable structure of European nobility.
What I meant, and I think what I said, it that the Mandarinate was a bureaucracy, and Chinese dynasties kept falling because strangled by their own bureaucracy.
To expand on this, the mechanism by which aristocracy prevents bureaucracy is [*communism*]
No it is not. The mechanism by which Aristocracy prevents bureaucracy is that an aristocrat or his ancestor obtained power by the sword, instead of obtaining it through attending innumerable committee meetings, generating mountains of paperwork, and gaming mountains of paperwork.
I have been advocating CAPITALISM here. People forced to perform work in school should be paid for it. [*deleted*]
That is the labor theory of value, which is pure Marxism, and the opposite of capitalism. Work deserves no payment, because work does not inherently create value, and frequently destroys value.
The creation of value deserves payment. Which usually requires a considerable amount of work. Also a considerable amount of judgement, knowledge, skill, forethought, and capital. Without which, work is unlikely to have any substantial value and is likely to have negative value.
Bronze Age kings and Chinese emperors came and went, and the common people barely noticed. Bureaucracy was a court profession–and yes, frequently a highly destructive one—but not an all-consuming pestilence covering the land.
It’s like being a front-line worker at a mid-sized company and hearing that there’s a new VP of Finance, or even a new CEO. Ho hum, big deal, as long as I still get paid, or in the case of the peasant, as long as my town is not being overrun by rodents, bandits or invading armies squatting in my home.
I have more to say on the whole “Ahriman” thing and rectification of bureaucratic demon names, but spiritual prose is not my forte, least of all when there is so little prior art on which to draw, so it might be a while before I come up with something semi coherent.
Bronze Age Kings went in the Bronze Age collapse, and in most cases so did the cities and the language of the people that they ruled, which would suggest that the people that they ruled all died. However, although Bronze Age Kings clearly had a problem with bureaucratic dysfunction, there is no good reason to suppose that this was a major factor in the Bronze Age collapse.
The fall of Chinese dynasties tended to be accompanied by burning cities and massive depopulation, though the ensuing dark age was less dark and less total than that following the Bronze Age collapse, and, because literacy was not lost, we have a lot more information about what caused the collapse. At least some Chinese collapses, though far from all of them, were in substantial part the result of a dysfunctional mandarinate, which is to say, bureaucracy.
The Chinese have more written history than anyone
We have the best data from China — the role of bureaucracy in other collapses is hard to estimate with confidence. But in China, bureaucracy frequently was an all-consuming pestilence covering the land.
And that Augustus need eight to twelve years of the vigorous application of death squads to get the government of Rome somewhat functional would suggest it had a problem with bureaucracy, as does Constantine’s decision to relocate the capital away from the existing viper’s nest.
Fairly strong evidence that there was excessive bureaucracy as the Roman Empire transitioned into what we of the western tradition call the Byzantines. Reforms put lots of little officials in charge of lots of little municipalities, and they all collected taxes and fees and had their little regulatory fiefdoms. Then suddenly the empire starts mysteriously missing money despite the tax burden, fails to build anything, and fails to organize itself.
You are all missing the point. At no point did I ever say “bureaucracy wasn’t a problem”. I said “bureaucracy wasn’t the same kind of problem then that it is today”. More specifically I said “bureaucracy was not recognized as a form of evil”, i.e. it was considered to just be a kind of institutional failure or at worst a sign of dysfunction from other sources, not a malign entity in and of itself, and even today we are only just beginning to understand the distinction.
Today every peasant has to listen to bureaucratic lectures every day at work, navigate bureaucratic systems every time they need to get help or lodge a complaint, and file mountains of bureaucratic paperwork with multiple governments year after year. And since so much waiting is involved, it is not that much of a stretch to say that every hour of the day is spent thinking about the bureaucracy somehow, even if it’s just venting frustration about the futility of it all.
It is pervasive. It does not just affect people indirectly, in terms of the overall stability or prosperity of the nation; everyone has to learn personally and directly how to navigate and interact with the bureaucracy, just to be able to get by, day to day.
That is not the same as the peasant farmer having the screws put to him by a nasty tax collector. It is not even the same as having the village burn down around you–although I question how much “burning” was really going on, as opposed to dramatic descriptions of more subtle social collapse–but regardless of one’s perception of badness, they are simply not the same animal. I’m not arguing about which was better or worse for the peasant; I am saying they are of different kinds.
It’s the difference between spraining an ankle/breaking a leg every ten years, vs. getting a paper cut every morning. Except that the soul-draining effect of pervasive bureaucracy is in many ways far worse than a mere paper cut.
It looks shockingly, agonizingly, common in the historical record. Look closer at the Roman administration as it passed Constantine. The elites all moved out of the cities, the level of commerce dropped, the physical development of the cities dropped. Look at the specific case of Zheng He, it’s clear and in-your-face evil that can be extrapolated to explain why China was reduced to naught but peasants scratching in the dirt.
You’re claiming that it did not weigh on the peasants, and I agree. We are not peasants. The Amish are peasants. We are something like one of the many inhabitants of the multitudinous cities of Constantine’s rome. I imagine all of us discussing here are far from self sufficient, nor connected in a village setting where all life needs are met through informal relationships with neighbors. So, not a peasant, and therefore very much in the scope of potential bugocrat targets for leeching.
Bugocracy when it reaches a terminal cancerous stage starves off all civilizational energy, and makes the only profitable activities into fighting to get into the bugocracy, scratching in the dirt, or banditry.
Interesting thesis, not sure if I agree.
Certainly the scale is unique. But you are arguing that its ‘nature’ is different, that today’s bureaucracy is distinctly evil in a nature different from the past.
Is it really?
Seems to me that the phenomenon of a thousand kings one kilometer away is as old as civilisation itself and by nature lends itself to evil. Entropy manifest. ‘Rules are rules’, the bureaucrat says as he throws your child into the fire of Baal.
Strong comment.
Ahrimanic evil is the type of evil most likely to latch onto power and then long-term stay in power, because bureaucracy is (initially) “useful,” though its usefulness tends to disconnect from its original purpose as it optimizes for ever increasing bureaucratization. So you end up in a Kafkaesque nightmare run by control freaks. It manifests as a faceless and nameless sort of demonism, because anti-charisma is inherent to it. “You can not just do things” is its motto.
Perhaps the best way to counter it — besides donating bureaucrat organs to scientific experimentation — is to inculcate (and make high status) Virtues that are anathema to the Bureaucrat; those generally overlapping the Virtues denounced as Vices by longhouse karens with a bobcut.
“Ahrimanic evil” from what I pick up on it, would be the mindset of someone like Sauron. Not wanting to destroy the world, but to rule it and order it, according to what he thinks best.
Openly wanting to “kill everyone and destroy everything” would be something quite different. There’s a difference between being opposed to Freedom, and being opposed to Existence.
Regarding Newsom and people like him: are they really so consumed with hate as that?
Nah. Newsom isn’t Sorathic. He’s an old fashioned Luciferian who thinks he can use Ahriman to further his ends. He wants status, power, money, women, and he’ll do and say whatever it takes to get them. If Jim were emperor of America, Newsom would be bloviating about the need to restrain feral women and giving commies helicopter rides, and he’d barely notice the difference.
This comment got me thinking, the flaw in old-school Yarvin’s weltanschauung was his insufficient familiarity with (or insight into) the deeper, more malignant types on the Left. When he wrote UR, he didn’t quite grok the Sorathic evil of spiteful mutants. Otherwise, he would have reached a conclusion at least slightly more radical than “recruit the youth camp,” even if falling short of Full Cominator.
You can’t, as a general rule, recruit spiteful mutants. Sorathics just are not realistically redeemable. “Struggle then, O general, courageously; and fight thy battles vigorously.”
Yarvin saw them as O’Brien, and the older generations were indeed quite like O’Brien. That seems to be how you describe the spiritually void specimens with which Yarvin is highly familiar – “Lucifer utiziling Ahriman.” But that’s not the end stage of Leftism. The leftist singularity selects for utterly bad trees which cannot bear any good fruit under any circumstances, and therefore must be hewn down and cast into the fire. That is Sorathic evil, for our purposes.
The thing about increasing levels of demonism is that you start out attempting to use them for your purposes, but you always end up hijacked for their purposes. Controllable social entropy rapidly becomes uncontrollable social entropy. Memes are “parasitic.” Thermidor can be seen as the non-Sorathic Left attempting to arrest the inexorable march to Sorathicism. But they need to be willing to “stop digging” and then turn backwards, and if it looks like the Sorathic danger has passed from immediate view, they might not be quite willing to do so. Cthulhu may be dying, but even so he doesn’t — of his own volition — swim right.
Even the relatively redeemable leftists cannot, for the most part, be expected to redeem themselves. Social entropy needs to be actively reversed by those willing and able to reverse it, which is obviously not your average shitlib. To survive, Thermidor must break right, or perhaps more accurately be made to break right. Or else the Dems will just kill them all if and when they manage a comeback. You kill the demon, or the demon kills you.
I read KD’s latest troll and P-C’s latest posts as, “We have not yet defeated the Devil. We are not out of harm’s way.” This is also, obviously, the vibe one gets from Yarvin, whether or not we agree on the solution to the problem. The important thing to bear in mind is that there is a problem.
This might sound like music to your ears if you like the blackpilled worldview to be vindicated, but the point is not to blackpill, but to seize the God-given opportunity and actually finish the job.
Are you quite sure that these are all alts of the K-D character? I looked up some old threads and to be honest, my impression was that he is (was) neither of the right temperament to do so nor clever enough (in that low-cunning sense, no pun intended) to pull it off effectively.
But it was before my time, so maybe you are familiar with some patterns that I can’t make out. I only clearly see it for the two hundred schizo “Rod” sock puppets and the one transhumanist faggot who keeps coming back with names like An[im]us.
This is internet drama, and I really shouldn’t engage at all, but if I’m wasting my time debating what everyone else knows to be a sock puppet then that would be good to know, and avoid.
I won’t insist on the point, since he is doing it for a good cause, or so it looks. It’s just that it’s become rather cringe and a little boring, so I call it out. But maybe he knows what he’s doing, so I say just let him.
I want to speculate about a certain poster who IS, in fact the new and improved K-D, but I don’t want to burn anyone’s new ID if he adopted it for a serious reason. Hmm.
Correction:
“who IS, in fact the new and improved K-D”
or so I have been thinking lo these many months.
Nuts.
Burning Hollywood to the ground and then forbidding the rich and powerful allies that he had rendered homeless from rebuilding was purely Sorathic evil, self destructive self hating evil, not rational egoistic pursuit of status, power, money and women.
When Newscum arranged for people living in the Exurbs to be burned alive, I figured he just hated his enemies, which is rational, but in Hollywood, he was driving away his allies.
Analogously war in Ukraine. Killing as many Russians as possible, regardless of the cost in Ukrainian lives, is a rational objective, but as the war grinds on it becomes increasingly obvious that the objective is to kill Ukrainians and to set the nukes flying. If you wanted to maximise Russian deaths you would be using very different tactics. The Ukraine just sent much of Azov on a suicide run north east of Pokrovsk. Which makes as much sense as governor Newscum burning down Hollywood. It is only rational if the objective is to kill near rather than kill far, the Russians being far, and Azov being near.
Because people are reluctant to recognise purely demonic evil, they rationalise the suicide run as done to justify bullet points on tomorrow’s power point presentation in Washington
We see a whole lot Youtube videos that presumably correspond to the the powerpoints presented to Trump announcing a huge victory over Russian forces northeast of Pokrovsk. But the Ukraine could have manufactured the rationale for those powerpoints and Youtube videos while still keeping an escape route open for the Azov brigades. Their tactics only make sense if they not only wanted those powerpoints and Youtube videos. They also wanted the Ukrainian troops featured in those powerpoints and Youtube videos dead.
Permanently. I read they want to import 10 million Indians to replace the dead Ukrainians.
The Palisades fire was a mix of Lucifer and Ahriman. Sloth and avarice mixed with an intricate rat’s nest of rules disconnected from the actual real-world ends they were supposed to accomplish. The people responsible for fire preparedness were crooked, lazy, incompetent, and more interested in following procedure and filling out reports than preparing for a fire. The slow-roll of the rebuilding permits is the same. The crisis presented an opportunity: thousands of acres of the most valuable real estate in America available to divert into the portfolios of your friends, family, donors, and cronies, facilitated by the same Byzantine regulatory labyrinth. Newsome and Co. don’t give a damn about the people affected, regardless of who they vote for, but they didn’t deliberately burn them down out of love of destruction.
You are perhaps arguing that because Newscum did not personally run through dried vegetation upwind of Hollywood, sloshing gasoline and throwing lighted matches, he had no intent that Hollywood should burn. It was just that no one in the Democratic party, including large numbers of Democratic party activists and personnel who live in Hollywood, could be bothered to prevent it from burning.
But leftists sponsored and protected by the Democrats were running through dried vegetation upwind of Hollywood, sloshing gasoline and throwing lighted matches. Your argument is kind of like arguing that Newscum did not personally shoot Charlie Kirk in the throat.
Some leftists most certainly did intend to shoot Charlie Kirk in the throat, and some leftists most certainly did intend to burn Hollywood, and I can see no daylight between them and the leadership of the Democratic party that funds, protects, and enables them.
You say there was merely a curious lack of energy about making it not burn. But there was also some quite impressive energy about making it burn.
Sauron technically had a positive vision, not positive in the sense of good, but in the sense of having a concrete end state or telos he was trying to accomplish.
The ahrimanic bureaucrat doesn’t play like that. It doesn’t matter what the ends are to ahriman, only that The Procedure was followed. In fact, concern about ‘ends’ and ‘results’ and such is rather stressful and imposing altogether. Much better to forget about that nasty business and spiral further into pure Intermediated Nirvana of ritual cargo-cultism, totally insulated from and uncontaminated by any contact with The Outer Darkness outside the world of the bureaucratic spiral, where paper can chase the tails of paper, forever.
Please give some examples of societies undergoing breznevian stagnation and failing turn themselves around.
Didn’t the Soviet Union turn around by recreating Russia? Did the Roman republic suffer from bresnevian stagnation? If yes, didn’t that society turn around by becomming a monarchy?
Most preexisting bronze age kingdoms besides Assyria and partially Egypt.
Western Roman empire.
Later, Eastern Rome too.
Zhou, Tang, and Qing dynasties, and several other less notable examples.
Not on the scale of nations, but most old corporations that die, die from bureaucratization too, especially after publicly trading.
Much the same dynamics, on all scales.
Which successful clear-cuts of bureaucratization are you refering to?
Gengis Khan maybe? To the best of my knowledge he wasn’t specifically killing bureaucrats of conquered cities. Alexander the Great? Likewise, he conquered, but did not try to exterminate bureaucrats in his conquests.
That is to say, you look at the examples of it happening by accident, and do it on purpose.
For fuck’s sake, Pseudo.
What is this referring to?
Is it not discussed at length?
In 2020, the establishment decided who the president would be, and it wasn’t Trump.
In 2024, the establishment decided who the president would be again, and though far less unanimous, most of the most important players either came down on the side of Trump or stood aside knowing what that would mean.
And in 2025, many of those same people are acting like it’s 2020 again.
The moment they stopped fearing for the immediate future of their gravyboat, is the moment they felt safe enough to indulge in their luxury beliefs again.
In 2024, they acted like they were concerned about how their fellow travelers operating The Biden had been steering the ship of empire. And one year later, they act like those concerns never existed, almost as if they had forgotten there was anything to be concerned about.
Tranny easter at the whitehouse was convicted whigs trying to take a victory lap over the grave of old America; but it turned out there was still some bark left in that dog, that old America still had blood to raise, and so the overt humiliation rituals get walked back. You don’t see homilies to DIE being shoved up the noses of everyone (as much) these days from ‘public’ platforms, thanks to Trump and several of the other people he brought with him or appointed. But because it is also not being shoved up their noses, they forget about it. Trump is what is under their nose these days, so that’s what they are concerned about, irrespective of the rationality of any of it. Lack of overt stimulus leading to ignorance of the underlaying structural conditions and personnel responsible that led to it before and will lead to it again.
The inherent norm-ism typical of both thermidorean and cuckservative types is what makes them hesitant and unreliable leftists; but it is also what makes them unreliable in general. Those with the souls of villagers at heart have little to no object permanence.
They get in the way of Trump draining the swamp despite allowing him into office because the reason most preferred a Trump admin over The Biden 2.0 Desi Edition was because they wanted him to *save* the swamp. They don’t want the swamp drained because they *are* the swamp. They just made a bet they could survive him better than fullracecommunismnow. They didn’t vote to make America great again, but to keep America 2008 forever, which is why they still object to any of Trump’s ventures to keep America 1985 forever. It was a vote for normism. That is the kind of people they are.
A lot can change in 3 years though; the DNC is practically rudderless in any case, bluetribesmen have literally no great unifying figure of any worth, and regardless of intentions, making Trump 2.0 happen did indeed prevent far worse calamity. If there is any further lesson to this, it’s what you’ve already known from the start: ‘la peuple’ do not spontaneously ‘wake up’ and make The Comination happen if ‘things get bad enough’; it only happens like how all things happen: if men of conviction lead men to make it happen. And there is ever greater opportunity for making it happen.
In 2024, they acted like they were concerned about how their fellow travelers operating The Biden had been steering the ship of empire. And one year later, they act like those concerns never existed, almost as if they had forgotten there was anything to be concerned about.
I’m told that some of the people who did crazy drugs back in the 1960’s are in senior positions in the American establishment today. They might not have taken a “trip” for decades, but the long-term brain damage would still be there.
Lacking the ability to remember a danger when it’s not right in front of them might well be a symptom of that.
Good point. Furthermore, there is the Adderall epidemic — disappeared out of the news after Biden, of all people, strangled it, but what happened after that? A few years ago a startup CEO was fired because he was microdosing LSD at work too openly. And who doesn’t need healing weed from their local dispensary? Getting high is presumably not uncommon.
“Is it not discussed at length?”
It is now, discussed above.
In October 2023, the establishment realized that if the USA becomes another Haiti, or even another Argentina or Brazil, then Israel becomes Islamic Palestine, and “Greetings, fellow Chinese people!” would not secure them a new host.
Too much stock in the jew theory, not too many big jews changed sides Bill Mahrer sort of did but only after the election and he isn’t that important.
There’s an interesting bruhaha going on on X right now. Two popular right wing accounts got permanently suspended due to a personal public complaint to one Nikita Bier Head of Product at X, by some Muslim with obvious asabiyyah to Muslim terrorists and obvious lack of asabiyyah to America.
For a full summary see: https://x.com/Anc_Aesthetics/status/1978094633541337381
Looking at Nikita Bier’s visage via web search, he obviously appears to be one of Edward Dutton’s spiteful mutants. He should’ve never have been hired for such and executive role purely based on physiognomy alone. He also looks like he’s never lifted in his life. He’s also an Indian.
The problem is that Thermidor wants to hire and promote without regard to faith or ethnicity, while the children of Satan hire strictly according to faith, and will fraudulently manufacture any records necessary to justify their hiring and firing choices. So if you let one demon worshipper in, pretty soon it is all demon worshippers.
What the Thermidor fails to realise is that a state apparatus has to be staffed by adherents of the state faith, so you need a university that will certify prospective members of the elite as adherents of the state faith.
Tanks in Harvard.
Gentlemen, you think this can be real?
This is way more based that I expected from this US administration.
I like the reference to Carl Schmitt’s Friend-Enemy Distinction. Your goal is not to make a deal with the enemy. Your goal is to smash them. Deals you make with a neutral, not with an enemy.
I think the link is broken. It is not showing up properly for me.
Seconded link not working. Whether you can make a deal with an enemy depends on the kind of enemy… religious fanatics particularly demon worshippers… no
Copy the entire address of the image from “https” all the way to “png” – it does work.
This is partially a reply to Bix and partially a new thread on the subject of bureaucratic evil.
I have been racking my brain and consulting every demonology, mythology and pantheon I know of in order to find a more suitable avatar, and one example stands out above all others.
From Mark 5:1-20:
It is a curious turn of phrase: “My name is Legion, for we are many”. It is also always translated this way, no matter which translation I look at. Many distinct entities are all speaking with a single voice, and acting with a single purpose. When these entities are physically dispersed, they lose cohesion and become suicidal. Legion is equally willing to possess man or swine; what little we are told about it suggests that it is ageless, sexless, speciesless and generally featureless.
Does this sound familiar to you? Because it sounds familiar to me. This is the voice of a collective consciousness, or hive mind. Ancients, lacking such technologies as computer networks and other mass communications, would not have understood this very well; but we have, and we do.
Are there memeplexes and ideologies that glorify, rather than castigate this arrangement? Absolutely; they are everywhere.
* Marxism, the Cult of Labor, says that “social consciousness” is the only consciousness; everything that makes you unique is determined entirely by your environment and the people around you. It also says that your labor is interchangeable with anyone else’s. You are a figurative cog in the communal machine.
* Managerialism, the Cult of Process, says that individual skill, talent and personality are irrelevant–as well as sex, race and nationality–and that arrangement of all individuals into an assembly-line process is both a guaranteed way and the only way to achieve excellence. You are a literal meat cog in the organizational machine.
* Transhumanism, the Cult of the Machine, says that our biological bodies are primitive, and that we must “upgrade” them by becoming machines, whether that means “mind uploading”, man-machine chimeras (“cyborgs”), or the replacement of human judgment with networked artificial “intelligence”.
It is just the same memeplex over and over again, adapted for different social classes: the peasant, the bourgeoisie, and the progressive elite. “You are not you”, it says; “you didn’t build that”. Your creativity, your sweat, your very soul, are only valuable as components when assembled into the Great Machine. There is no “you”, only “we”.
For any gamers out there, Castlevania uses a lot of biblical references; this is Legion. It is excellent, and horrifying, imagery: a nearly uniform mass composed of undifferentiated zombie bodies, any one of them being entirely disposable and interchangeable. And appropriately enough, the “core” that is inside this “shell” is some Eldritch horror, not remotely humanoid.
A more contemporary and far less original reference is, of course, the Borg from Star Trek. They are Legion from the future: a networked machine (or chimeric) intelligence who have nothing to say to you other than “you will be assimilated”, and can never stop growing or assimilating. Their preferred structure is the Cube, i.e. the Box. Also, they say will with the cold confidence of a programmed machine, like one of ChatGPT’s hallucinations. Compare: you will live in the box, you will eat the bugs, and you will be happy.
So, Legion: the Demon of Unity, who would like all of reality to be collapsed into a point singularity so that everything can be a part of everything else, but in the short term seeks to strip away all your individual characteristics and notions of free will and plug you into the machine. It says that everything is socially constructed, that consciousness is just information, and that process/policy/instructions must always be followed regardless of circumstances. It pursues order by uniformity and indifference, as opposed to the harmonious order of Gnon; a dull monotone where no instrument matters, as opposed to a great symphony where every instrument matters.
It seems that Lucifer and Legion both stand in opposition to each other as well as Gnon/God, “we are part of a larger community” could be an answer to Lucifer just as “non serviam” could be an answer to Legion. What we have to remember is that the community we are part of is the divinely-ordained community of family and kin, not Legion’s infernal machine; and the masters whom we refuse to serve are demons and men possessed by them, not the Almighty.
A better answer to Legion is probably “I think, therefore I am.” We are not a hive mind; it is simply not our nature. This alien intelligence might be able to coerce or trick us into a physical arrangement resembling a hive mind, but we will never actually cohere into one, and it would be ugly and boring anyway. Not our nature, and not an improvement on nature.
—
Whether or not anyone else thinks Legion is a useful avatar, I’ll state again that I do not think Ahriman is. The Charltonite/Theosophy depiction is entirely inconsistent with the original Angra Mainyu, is obscure and inaccessible to Christian/western audiences, and has imputed characteristics like value-inversion and truth-inversion that don’t track with the Bureaucrat archetype–who, as P-C quite rightly pointed out earlier, do not care about values or outcomes, only that the Process is followed. They don’t seek destruction per se, just the dissolution of responsibility via the dissolution of agency.
The “Charltonsphere” put in valuable time and effort and I give them all the credit for being the first to conceptualize it as a distinct form of evil, but unfortunately their ideas were/are a disorganized mess, and it is extremely difficult to figure out where “Ahriman” is supposed to end and “Sorath” is supposed to begin in practice, as we can see in this very thread from people arguing about who and what constitutes this or that. It’s simply confusing.
I say, keep Lucifer, but ditch the esoteric crap and replace the other two in the trinity with Legion and Abaddon. Lucifer is still the avatar of vice; Legion is the avatar of the soulless machine; and Abaddon is the avatar of death and destruction. Their individual traits/responsibilities are very clear, with little to no crossover, and because they are biblical references, the names and imagery should be accessible to Christians and westerners.
Indeed, “know thyself” is anathema to Legion. Very useful insights, thanks.
Good stuff. Bruce Charlton’s mind is very colorful; he produces novel insights, but they tend to be “all over the place.” Your thinking is more systematic, and indeed your system is an improvement: Lucifer-Legion-Abaddon. Yes, that’s more accurately descriptive than Lucifer-Ahriman-Sorath.
Lucifer/Legion/Abbadon is a big improvement over Lucifer/Ahriman/Sorath. Charlton’s trichotomy of evil is rock solid, but you’re right that the names are not great. Ahriman was never the demon of bureaucracy/stifling order, and nobody has ever heard of Sorath.
The Tower of Babel seems to be the first Biblical description of Legionic demonism.
Genesis 11:
I can sort-of guess why Charlton chose Ahriman as representing soul-crushing, dysdaimonia-inducing Anarcho-Tyranny, given the Mesopotamian context. But naming that impulse after the Legion of the NT fits better and more intuitively.
Legion’s primary, most potent possession-instrument nowadays is the Public School, in my view. Every child will become a paper-shuffling Bureaucrat! It needs abolishing if Legion is to be defeated.
There’s no mystery there; Charlton always credited the idea to Rudolf Steiner, and it’s when you follow that trail of breadcrumbs that things start to go a little loopy. I don’t have any of the Theosophy websites bookmarked anymore, but the ones I remember were pretty schizo-coded. Charlton himself is, obviously, quite earnest and sane, but the movement he borrowed those concepts from had some certifiable loons.
But ultimately it’s not about the provenance or etymology, it’s about rhetorical effectiveness. Any one of my neighbors would immediately understand a reference to Lucifer. They would not immediately understand the reference to Legion, but I predict that after being reminded of the quote (which they would remember word-for-word), they would quickly connect the dots. I intend to test the hypothesis eventually, if an opportunity comes up.
You’re quite right about Marxism, transhumanism, etc. all being memetic descendants of the Babel cult, and many other pundits have drawn the connection between Babel and Globalism. It makes for a good “origin story” and a way to connect the OT and NT. And interestingly enough, if we conceptualize the Tower of Babel as the first but incompletely-documented manifestation of Legion, it appears that God dealt with them in much the same way Jesus did later: by dispersing them, forcing them all out of contact with each other in order to destroy the collective’s cohesion.
There might be another lesson here, but it’s only a germ of an idea right now.
I do hope that Nikolai, a convert to Roman Catholicism, reads and grasps your comment here.
Nicely written. If I might add *militarism to the mix, as it seeks to create the hive mindset intent on destruction.
Yeah, by predisposition I lean more toward the “non serviam” variety of personality, hence while most Israelis complete their military service in their early twenties, I completed being divorced (+1) in my early twenties; and while some of my gorillion tattoos may be Satan-coded, they are definitely not Legionic.
Thank you for your reply.
Humungus is not qualified to render an opinion on IDF.
I am familiar with USmil. My comment was a general one. Military expects followership and its primary goal is to destroy. It is the prosecutorial arm of political discourse and was never intended to win hearts nor minds. It is there to instill fear.
Well, for what my opinion on the matter is worth, consider that while the top brass of the IDF derives from the original elite — who are, in 2025, a bunch of globohomogenized soy sipping libtards with Netanyahu Derangement Syndrome — the rank and file nowadays primarily comes from religious and traditional backgrounds, and they (very correctly) see our wars as not “just” wars for physical survival, but as holy wars, at least in the defensive sense of defending against the onslaught of Mohammedanism. (Now, Bibi is really something in between these two poles.) Point is, “Israeli Militarism” just no longer conforms to whatever image one might have thereof if one is ignorant of demographic trends. In the early days, “national socialism” could well describe the Zionist egregore. Not any more, on any level.
How did the conquering asskicking early Israeli kibbutz farmer warrior jews (who yes were basically jewish national socialists) turn into globohomo jew fags? Yes they were a certain kind of jewish leftists but they were a very ultra masculine martial race of jewish leftists…
Life in Israel has never gotten so comfortable that survival based values could be forgotten to that degree.
I really have no better explanation than Jimian Holiness Spiral / Cthulhu Always Swims Left. The ability of the leftist elite to disregard reality was fully manifest on October 7; with each successive confrontation with the enemy, they have only ever turned more solipsistic. Granted, there are still a few relatively sane heads around, which is why we have not totally collapsed, and why occasionally we still do kick ass. But the elite has clearly degenerated, memetically if not also genetically. Such is the nature of leftism, I guess; the congenital solipsist is fully immunized against any and all aspects of existence, regardless of circumstance, and generationally grows ever more solipsistic. (Those who are not congenital solipsists tend to become Thermidorians when Abaddon is about to strike.)
Regarding cognitive decline in the Israeli elite… how vaxxed are they?
Their decades-long decline is spiritual before it is cognitive, and considering the usual anti-vaxxer demography (around 80% of whom being leftists), probably less vaxxed than the general population.
It’s not that. Nor is it psychedelic use, for that matter, it too being now more common down the street than among the elite, albeit it was originally introduced by the elite back in the day. The people down the street are relatively sane compared to the ruling class.
I believe the problem is primarily memetic. Ephesians 6:12:
That is the issue indeed.
We are at war with DROM (demons real or metaphorical), have been at war with DROM for a very long while, before we are at war with this or that laboratory chemical.
[*deleted for not conforming to the moderation policy*]
And why are you deleting this post? Too much of a coward to tolerate the truth?
If you are such a big supporter of Putin and hate the Jews so much, can you tell us how Maidan happened, and what the consequences were? That is a topic that should be near and dear to your heart, and had you led with that topic you would have been in compliance with the moderation policy.
The reason that I silently delete 99% of “new” commenters (most of which are the same large language model generating a new identity every time) is that the purported beliefs of the purported commenter are internally incoherent and mutually inconsistent, generated through focus group A/B testing rather than by actually thinking about the issues, let alone actually caring about the issues.
Recall the hilarity when the Democrats were wondering why young men found them unappealing and spent fifty million dollars to figure out why? Most new commenters look like their ideology was generated by a similarly mindless, robotic, and uncaring bureaucratic process.
Your comment looks to me like the product of Democratic party A/B testing. “How do we split those damned Putin lovers and JooJooJoo haters away from Trump?” If someone actually believes, as I believe, that they only way to settle the Ukraine war without nukes flying is to give the Russians what they want, he believes it because he believes that twenty five years of western misconduct towards Russia has created a situation where Russia and Russians view winning this war as fundamental and existential, that they view themselves as the wronged party who dare not endure any further wrongs, for if they endure yet another wrong, there will be no end to them. So, if someone believes, as you purportedly believe, that Trump’s policy on the Ukraine is too warlike, which is not a thoughtcrime because Orange Man Bad, he is going to also believe that the past twenty five years of western policy towards Russia has been too warlike, which is a thoughtcrime, and in particular that Maidan was an act of aggression towards Russia that was always going to inevitably lead to the nukes flying if the west does not back down, that the only way to peace is do undo Maidan or kill every Ukrainian, every Pole, every Lithuanian, and every Moldovan, that if Russia cannot persuade the West to undo Maidan, it just has to kill everyone in the general vicinity of Maidan.
>how Maidan happened
That was a blatant CIA/SOROS coup. The first step in the jew-neocon plan of conquest of Russia, which is a step needed before the jew-neocon conquest of China.
And you know I already mentioned that more than a few times. [*deleted yet again*]
No I do not know that because you change your username, your email address, your IP address, your ideology, and your belief system in every comment.
Stick with one username and one email address, have that username lead with a thoughtcrime (and that Maidan was a Soros coup is almost a thought crime, but falls short of a thought crime by omitting certain things, things that Putin is apt to mention a great deal) and continue with that email address, username, IP, and ideology consistent with the original thought crime then I will allow your stuff through.
Pick a username, do not use the username as a comment header that changes with every comment. I am not going to whitelist a comment header because you are just going to change it yet again.
Even if you had directly given us the Russian line on Maidan, I would not have white listed you for lack of a username to whitelist. And I am not going to whitelist this email address because too many people with too many wildly different and internally inconsistent ideologies have used it.
Hundreds of different entitities have used this username before, and you have probably never used it before and will probably never use it again. Hundreds of different entities have used this email address before, and you have probably never used it before and will probably never use it again.
Pick a username and email address that I can white list, a probabilistically unique username and a probabilistically unique email, and lead with an actual thought crime, and they will be white listed.
> you change…your IP address
I’m using tor, as you should obviously know, and I changed usernames because I can’t tell for sure if you see my messages or just block them. Also I didn’t keep track of which email I used for any username. But OK, I’ll stick to the current one.
>and that Maidan was a Soros coup is almost a thought crime, but falls short of a thought crime by omitting certain things,
Bullshit. You keep looking for an excuse to delete what I wrote.
>things that Putin is apt to mention a great deal
Can’t know what exactly you have in mind, and I actually don’t listen to everything putin says. Here’s a real thoughtcrime for you though : until the SMO was launched I regarded Putin as pretty much a traitor on the west’s payroll. I changed my mind when the liberation of Donbas started.
But as per your own rules, here’s a copypasta thoughtcrime
“women are feral, blindly following ancient instincts from prehistoric times, which instincts tell them to cruise for rape by alpha male Chads, and to resist kicking-and-screaming all attempts to restrain them from pursuing alpha male Chads. Stable monogamy has always been a way to allow each man to own a woman so each man can start a family and raise a future generation for civilisation’s survival. If women are emancipated, Miss Average will waste her youth, her beauty, and her fertility fucking Mister One in Thirty, thus a people, a race, a nation, a faith, or an empire that emancipates women will perish for lack of families, leading to lack of sons. Men have to impose stable monogamy on women with a stick.”
OK, whitelisted. And the next time you comment, it should be immediately obvious you have been whitelisted.
This blog is under massive attack from the enemy. Unless you take reasonable steps to be distinguishable from the enemy, your stuff just gets automatically deleted.
Women are feral, blindly following ancient instincts from prehistoric times, which instincts tell them to cruise for rape by alpha male Chads, and to resist kicking-and-screaming all attempts to restrain them from pursuing alpha male Chads. Stable monogamy has always been a way to allow each man to own a woman so each man can start a family and raise a future generation for civilisation’s survival. If women are emancipated, Miss Average will waste her youth, her beauty, and her fertility fucking Mister One in Thirty, thus a people, a race, a nation, a faith, or an empire that emancipates women will perish for lack of families, leading to lack of sons. Men have to impose stable monogamy on women with a stick.
OK, whitelisted. And the next time you comment, it should be immediately obvious you have been whitelisted.
Fine, now, do tell :
What kind of ridiculous excuse can you make up for neocon trump and his continuation of the war against Russia?
and while you are at it, what about trump’s planned invasion of Venezuela (a Russian ally).
Trump is not going to invade Venezuela. He is going to sink their drug smuggling and people trafficking operation at sea under the president’s inherent war powers to respond to hostile acts without needing congressional approval. Invading Venezuela would require congressional approval (not that that would trouble any other president).
Would you like to bet 0.1 XMR on an invasion of Venezuela before 2025-11-15? Or 0.3mBTC?
Trump has been winding down and trying to get out of the war with Russia. Were you all this outraged by the regime and policies that got us into this war?
I have been complaining about Cathedral Imperialism before Orange Man Bad got into the act. Creeping coup in the Ukraine, Cathedral imperialism revealed
You only discovered Cathedral imperialism when Orange Man Bad failed to deliver the promised overnight peace.
Not this year, especially not next month, but does look to me like they want to do more than shoot down drug boats. Venezuela has nice things, and is rather uncomfortably close to Panama and Mar-a-Lago. Trump dislikes war, so probably would do this through means that look similar to PRC slowly whittling away at ROC unless the Venezuelan regime itself escalates.
>sink their drug smuggling and people trafficking operation
That is a CIA lie. The only reason Venezuela is being targeted is oil. The alleged “drug smugling” country is COLOMBIA. But hey I don’t expect you to even be able to find South America on the map.
>Would you like to bet 0.1 XMR on an invasion of Venezuela before 2025-11-15
No, but you were already wrong when predicting that neocon trump wouldn’t attack Iran, which of course he did.
Oh and speaking of Iran, the handful of people in the US who are not blatant neocons, that is judge Napolitano and company, are predicting a new jew-trump attack against Iran within months.
>Trump has been winding down and trying to get out of the war with Russia.
Self-evidently factually false. The jew neocon trump team is at this very moment planning to strike Russia with their own long range missiles, so called “tomahawks”.
>Were you all this outraged by the regime and policies that got us into this war?
I’m not sure if you are playing dumb or what. I don’t discrimante between “left wing” jew demrats and “right wing” jew rethuglicans. To me they are all the same kind of garbage. The whole of the US deserves to be nuked.
Not to mention that your war against Russia has been waged since 2014 until today. Meaning in case you somehow fail to notice it, it was also waged in the 2016-2020 period, under jew trump. Do a joogle search for “trump javalin”
If oil the reason, then invasion the action. And yet you are strangely unwilling to bet on invasion, because you know you lie.
I predicted no Americans to die for Israel on the bloodstained sands. And no Americans died for Israel on the bloodstained sands.
“attack” can mean no end of things. I continue to predict no Americans to die for Israel on the bloodstained sands.
Brown Toast 2.0:
Nothing like that will happen “within months.” It may happen in a few years; or it may not happen at all. Most importantly, no American blood will be spilled, so why the Concern Trolling now? Are you (or your handlers, such as they are) nervous about certain peaceful developments, perchance?
None of these Joo hating opponents of the neocon war on Russia were all that worried about the neocon war on Russia when (((Soros))) and (((Victoria Nuland))) were launching it.
Translation: You did not give a tinker’s dam about this war until you had half an excuse to lay it at the feet of Orange Man Bad, while I have been consistently condemning America’s hot war against Russia since 2014, regardless of who was president at the time.
Notice how you keep ignoring what I say. I made it pretty clear that to me “right wing” garbage like you is no different than your “left wing” nuland-blinken-zelenksy-SOROS cousins.
The war in the ukraine started by those “left wingers” is continued by your “right wing” orange daddy.
And as I said in a deleted post, you pretend to take the Russian side, and nominally acknowledge the US attempts to conquer Russia, but you are also a trump cocksucker and trump is the leader of the war party against Russia. And so you hold two positions that when combined make no sense at all.
Yes but you never had any problem with it until Trump started winding it down, while I have had a problem with it regardless of who has been in power.
You piously say you had a problem with it back when your buddies launched it. Well? Prove it. Show you have control of an identity that complained about the war before you could blame Orange Man Bad.
If you objected to the war before Orange Man Bad, why did you not comment on this blog complaining about it back then? Did you comment somewhere else? If so, claim that identity and prove you have control of it. Or just claim the identity — I can usually tell by style, though style may change according to social context and environment.
To the best of my recollection, the tankies are late converts to opposing the war on Russia. They were fine with Obama Biden making war on Russia.
Show me a tanky, any tanky, that was complaining about this war back in 2014 the way I was.
Show me someone who is now complaining that US policy is unchanged, or has changed for the worse, who was complaining about US policy in 2014 back when the to US overthrew the democratically elected Ukrainian government and installed a brutal totalitarian terrorist dictatorship.
>Yes but you never had any problem with it until Trump started winding it down
Two lies in half a sentence. First, trump isn’t winding anything down. Second I’ve had a problem with your piece of shit empire since way before 2014.
>You piously say you had a problem with it back when your buddies launched it
Your buddies, not mine. Jew garbage of either the “left wing” or “right wing” variety are not my buddies. And the anglo garbage who cooperate with and enable the jews (i. e. you) are not my buddies either.
>If you objected to the war before Orange Man Bad, why did you not comment on this blog complaining about it back then?
Dude, I’ve been posting before orange monkey was reelected. Check your own records. In case you didn’t figure out who I am, your mossad pet did. I don’t mean to sound too self centered but the answer should be kinda obvious.
>Show me someone who is now complaining that US policy is unchanged, or has changed for the worse
As I already told you multiple times, McGregor (army), Larry Johnson (CIA), Davis (army), McGovern (CIA), Ritter (navy I think), Matt Hoh(army), Mearsheimer, Napolitano – and others. These are a well known group of “kremlin apologists” who have no trouble telling the truth about trump’s neocon policies and routinely laugh at trump’s claim to “end the war in one day”.
Anyway, you deserve some credit for not censoring this, though I imagine your aim here is to “debunk” reality and reinforce the faith of your followers in the orange saviour by proving that I am a “shill”. Good luck.
Yes indeed you have. You had a huge problem with the US maintaining peace and protecting freedom. But you loved the US crushing freedom in the Ukraine in 2014 and continued to love it all the way to the inauguration of Orange Man Bad in 2025.
If you had a problem with the US making war on Russia before Orange Man Bad, prove it.
Or show me someone who now claims that US policy towards Russia is unchanged, or has changed for the worse and who also complained of that policy when in 2014 the US crushed democracy in the Ukraine to install a regime that Russians view as a threat.
Have you? Then tell me who you were. But if you were posting here long ago, you would have a white listed identity here from long ago. Which clearly you did not have since you have been posting, and I have been silently deleting, a huge amount of stuff that stylistically sounds like you, and seems to come from a gay commie Jew, or gay commie Jews, who want all white people murdered. And since the 2014 coup was a major step towards exterminating large numbers of white people, I would have expected you to support it back in 2014. If you were posting here from long ago, you should be able to prove it.
I linked you to me on Maidan in 2014
Link me to McGregor on Maidan in 2014
Here is conservapedia on Maidan. Link me to the leftist equivalent.
From the other side of the world Trump still appears as a flag bearer for the GAE overseas however much he may be different policy wise in domestic affairs.
Is Trump doing anything to dismantle the GAE power structures around the world? Seems to me, he still wants empire though one that is not rooted in globohomo communism. And his chasing for globohomo awards like the Nobel Peace Prize tells me that he still believes in the old International “rules based” order.
We’ve been over this a thousand times.
Putin has recommended Trump receive the nobel peace prize for his efforts to stop the war. Obviously, Trump would rather not have war than have war. But there is only so much he can do. Zelensky has the support of globohomo-in-exile, and being kneedeep in a mountain of cocaine he has little sympathy for the coming extinction of the male Ukranian population. Trump sort of knows what is going on, but also sort of doesn’t. So like Pontius Pilate, he has washed his hands clean of the whole thing and has moved on.
GAE powerstructures around the world are all underlined by usm/ic adventures to kill people. break stuff, and induce chaos.
So Trump simply declining to continually expand the conga-line of Washington entanglements around the world alone gives a lot of breathing room to more civilized people. Though, of course, as you say, this is mainly also because his frame of mind is to take the idea of the American empire seriously and run it as if it is supposed to be productive without throwing good money after bad, rather than as a fetishistic masturbation tool for reveling in the feeling of impact on Others regardless of cost that the incumbent inheritors of empire had really been using it for.
And as I said in a deleted post, you pretend to take the Russian side, and nominally acknowledge the US attempts to conquer Russia, but you are also…
Jaggard, Jim is not Russian, so why should you expect him to be on Russia’s side?
Getting into a “nukes fly, cities vanish under mushroom clouds” level war with the Russians is something the saner American rightwingers like Jim do not want because it would be bad for Americans.
Also because the people who really want to destroy Russia, are also not friends to people like Jim.
In general, one nuclear power should not stick its oar into a matter that is far from itself, and close to another nuclear power.
Great powers should have buffer states between them, and those buffer states should be mindful that when elephants fight, the grass gets trampled.
>why should you expect him to be on Russia’s side?
Jim himself says he’s on Russia’s side, which is actually fine and probably one of the very few things he gets right.
The point I was making and that you apparently ignored is that Jim is also on trump’s side – and trump keeps executing the neocon plan to conquer Russia. So.
My position is that the Ukraine is none of our business, and it is reasonable for Russians to be alarmed at us meddling in matters far from us and close them, so we should let them have their way, rather than alarm the citizens of a nuclear power. And in that I say we should let them have their way near Russia, I am on their side. But I am not on Russia’s side. I am on America’s side, and America’s best interest is to not be at war with other nuclear powers.
https://x.com/DeepBlueCrypto/status/1970863307155509395
Trump was thinking to say the unsayable word, but failed to do so.
Maybe some day we’ll get a “white nationalist” here who identifies as such or a anti Trump antisemitic paleocon who isn’t a shill. Its unlikely, but hell I met a female lawyer lately who is unlike other female lawyers seemingly a very nice chick (when I expressed shock that so seemingly sweet natured a girl was a lawyer she said she wasn’t nice at all at work but she doesn’t make it her whole identity, I’m sure shes batshit in some way but no girls who ever like me aren’t) so I guess exceptional miracles are possible.
Yeah, I can appreciate the authentic antisemites, and I sometimes (not always) agree with their view of the JQ. But no – every single thread here must be inundated with Fake Nazis. It’s tiresome.
I mean as I said if a female lawyer chick can be sweet natured and cool (im sure shes nuts as i said, also i havent inquired but 50% shes a jew too, seems too intelligent to be a gentile white girl) than a non shill wignat type must exist somewhere…
Heh.
Being a kookoo-magnet has its bonuses, for sure. But, as you well know, better be careful around them.
Tiresome indeed, and sometimes I think the goal is literally to tire us out.
Perhaps some of these characters really are not shills, just bitter and deluded monomaniacal men. After all, “they passed the test”, which involved 5 seconds of copying and pasting a prewritten paragraph.
Or perhaps at least some of the very stupid shills, who can never pass the test, are part of a Boris and Natasha act, sent in as patsies, with every intention of being caught and ridiculed, so that while we high-five each other and laugh about the stupid gopniks, no one notices the real caper going down elsewhere.
If it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then shoot it like a duck. No need for polite forbearance just because it went to the trouble of restarting Tor and locating the Ctrl, C and V keys on its keyboard.
“Or perhaps at least some of the very stupid shills, who can never pass the test, are part of a Boris and Natasha act, sent in as patsies, with every intention of being caught and ridiculed, so that while we high-five each other and laugh about the stupid gopniks, no one notices the real caper going down elsewhere.”
I just assume they do this. If they don’t, they’re even stupider than I thought.
On the CTL, C, V thing: I don’t think they should be allowed to pass the shill test if they include quote marks with the passage they copy. That makes it too easy for them to avoid the ire of their supervisors. I want them to get into trouble and have to spend time trying to argue their way out of it with a bitter cat lady feminist supervisor because they didn’t include quote marks around their thought crime. That will lead to a rapid decrease in false passes of the shill test, I’ll bet.
Good point: Could be that HR is allowing you to quote thoughtcrimes. But I don’t want an affirmation (except on Christianity, where I am sick of gay Jewish demon worshippers lecturing us on what Christianity, rightly understood, is.)
So, will enforce, and in particularly obnoxious cases retroactively enforce, that the only permitted way to distance yourself from the thought crime is to criticise it responsively — to disagree with it in a way that reveals what it is. That you have to affirm the thought crime, or rebut it, in a way that reveals its content.
Sweet.
These two feeds seem to be relevant, at least as far as the last weeks worth of CIA/FBI Tulsi news goes, and much more
https://x.com/Real_RobN
https://x.com/WeBoycottNow
The cuckservatives are REALLY trying to bring back the culture of losing on the right by endorsing cancelling some low level footsoldiers of ours over a group chat leak and saying we need to do more of it…
I don’t get it is this organic losing worship among cuckservatives or part of some shadow campaign to coup Vance.
Also I kind of agree that yes we don’t want unironic Nazi believers (since we’ve much experience with the real problems with Nazis) to take over anything important but the cuckservatives have the problem that they cannot really attack Nazis from the right (since the Nazis are genuinely to the right of cuckservatives on some issues) they end up attacking them from the left and that causes all sorts of problems.
What’s the best predictor of future behavior?
Past behavior.
Sure but its a little more complicated since the timing is just weird. It actually seems like we’re winning, there is no primary ongoing now and yet they seem to be waging a coordinated cunt campaign now. Makes me think that rather than losing being a consequence of cuckservative ideology they are worse controlled op than that as losing is actually the essence of cuckservative ideology.
There’s a reason why almost every single effective, successful right-winger was at some previous point a left-winger, including Jim, Moldbug, Land, and probably BAP too. (Not really familiar with the latter.)
Elves win. Hobbits lose. The Dark Enlightenment is — for the most part at least — the Dark Elf faction. Cuckservatives, those congenital losers, are not the Dark Enlightenment.
https://graymirror.substack.com/p/you-can-only-lose-the-culture-war
Yes, Moldbug paints too rosy a picture of his own class, and I lean more toward P-C/Cominator-inspired solutions, at least when it comes to certain elements of the Left, such as the Abaddonics. Nevertheless, you cannot expect conservatards to know how to win. Kvetching about oven jokes is loser behavior. (Arguably, making those jokes is also loser behavior, but less so, and I’m a moonman-poster myself.)
They don’t know how to win.
(“But Mossadnik, how does that square with some of your previous writings?” – It doesn’t. I’m a man of reversals and contradictions. Deal with it. But at least I’m honest enough to admit to such, rather than running a gorillion alts to air out a split personality, ahem ahem.)
I mean look, either you guys actually seize power by capturing the institutions and/or replacing them with your own institutions — and then you can proceed with the Comination all you like — or this is all LARPy online bullshit, and you should just follow the Yarvin/BAP strategy and shut the fuck up about your Revenge of the Hobbits fantasies.
You can (perhaps) slaughter the youth camp. You can (perhaps) recruit the youth camp. If the current strategy, such as it is, is preparation for either or both, great. Musk’s X does function as a kind of Antiversity; and the Army of ICE could well serve as a Trumpian militia. But looks like you don’t actually have a real plan, because hobbits gonna hobbit – you literally just want to grill, not to rule. Which means that if the Dems get their act together, admittedly a big “if,” you’re quite screwed and NEET will be vindicated.
Thank you for your attention to this matter!
That Fox News still regularly mixes Journolist news articles in on its website tells me GOPe has a dagger ready to plunge in Trump’s back. They’re waiting for the opportune moment to go back to business as wickedly usual. Mammon demands it.
https://x.com/martianwyrdlord/status/1979382655276777487
Yeah this is an attempt by the Bush/Romney/Neocon (I dislike the word) faction to regain control of the party
https://oogenhand.wordpress.com/2012/03/15/weak-heel-of-white-nationalism-young-marriage/
The need for young marriage mentioned almost fifteen years ago, before it was cool.
This Bullshit is going down in the USA too, at least alt-media like Zeee are still free to talk about even surface level stuff, for now…
https://x.com/VigilantFox/status/1978981931275444537
The necessity of long prison terms for conspiracy and treason cannot be understated, talk and hearings change nothing, people must go to jail…
https://x.com/Bannons_WarRoom/status/1978683569015804339
The biggest issue with conservatards, above everything else, is that they just will not mount any effective resistance to Feminism. Often enough, they are its greatest collaborators and enforcers.
Eli told me in a previous thread,
One can argue that there isn’t enough political will to go all the way to 18th century patriarchy. But that’s not the issue. Feminism is an all-encompassing pervasive force in society reflected in all strata of the Regime, at each step of the way harming men, families, and broader society. By design. From media to police to courts to bureaucracy to politicians, it’s all gynocracy all the time. And among young red-blooded men there is political will to reverse at least some of the pernicious influence.
At least I hope that President Vance will actually advance some anti-Feminism. I don’t expect him to literally MWPA [Make Women Property Again], but there is so much that can be achieved on that front using currently existing levels of political will. Young men have had enough of the gynocracy. Although it doesn’t offer the reactionary solutions, the manosphere has long been pointing out the myriads of ways that Feminism destroys society. Men have been reading and the young generation “gets it.”
But I don’t expect conservatards to fight this war. By and large, they are somewhere between simps and white knights. Once again you need the Dark Elves of the Dark Enlightenment to do the thinking and set in motion the processes to reverse the policies of the misandrist regime. The Hobbit Right just will not do anything effective on this issue. They aren’t constituted to be effective, or even to understand the nature of the problem.
Zoomers are tired of slutworld and seem to be figuring out from first principles the causes. Give the censorship regime a bloody nose and they’ll be calling for the Handmaids Tale MAGA breeding pits without much if any external input. The talent left the propaganda divisions long before the internet revolution, and so they lost control of the narrative with the young. We have the furry transtifa and the Nazi Christian Nationalists, for better or for worse.
That is certainly the impression one gets from browsing the web. Most regular normies I interact with, however, just don’t strike me as resembling either of these two poles, but of course YMMV. Effecting political change requires political will, and what I identify is political will to go some of the way on some of the issues, not necessarily all of the way on all of the issues. This is not bad, because going some of the way will then make it easier to go further and further.
The cuckservatives I complain about don’t even go some of the way. They literally abet Feminism. Is it just a generational thing? Is the whole world simply waiting for the Day of the Pillow?
Only player characters can write history. Normies will go along with what they are told by those with energy and power, and those with energy find themselves in power one way or another.
I have never met a boomer even slightly on point with this, and I really do not understand why. Jim is the only one I know of. My guess is the propaganda arm did a better job. There is an occasional Gen X I come into contact with that gets it, while most millenials are buck broken spiritually, and the zoomers bifurcated.
Good points.
Since we’re not actually living in Jim-World, at least not yet, I’m trying to figure out how to realistically go from “here” to “there.” One of the biggest obstacles is people on the Right mounting no effective resistance to social entropy of the Feminist variety, and in fact exacerbating the problem with “solutions” that do more harm than good. As Chesterton famously said (I quoted it before. It’s a good quote):
I’m not saying that Vance or Hegseth or whoever should announce that female mate choice has been abolished and that coverture is back, but I do expect some real-world planning to solve, at least partially, at least some of the problems caused by Feminism. Not seeing anything of the sort in the Westernized World. It’s all just endless talk on the internet, which I’ve been following since I was about half my current age.
“Just wait for the zoomers bro” might not be the most effective way to go about reversing this sort of social entropy. Hence my appeal to a future President Vance to at least consider going some of the way on some of the issues.
>I’m trying to figure out how to realistically go from “here” to “there.”
Civil war. Instability. Real threats to property and livelihood. Anything that destabilizes mouse utopia.
Trump is not going to make a dent in hoeflation. It will have to come about naturally.
Legitimate and proper male authority over women has to be empowered, and women have to be disempowered.
We always have a state religion, and the state religion is always going to generate and express a social consensus on the proper roles of women and men, and who has legitimate and proper authority over women.
So: Tanks in Harvard.
What the Taliban are doing is not decreeing the social consensus from on high and then directly enforcing it. They are just giving a bit of a nudge to the actual existing social consensus in the preferred direction, and ensuring that the usual and normal social mechanisms for ensuring female conformity to the actual social consensus have some teeth. If dad thinks his daughters should be strong, independent, highly educated, and childless, dad gets what he wants — but dad is not pressured and coerced to pretend that that is what he wants, and if dad does not want his daughters to be strong, independent, empowered, and to die alone and be eaten by their cats, he is has considerably capability to marry them off to someone he judges will care for them and support their children.
Simply announcing it would not in itself have the desired effect, and would fail disastrously, absurdly, and impotently.
Obviously you have to implement it first, then announce it years or decades later.
How did the Taliban deal with all those strong empowered independent women? Well, all the strong independent empowered makework jobs went away, and the Taliban told the fertile age woman that they had a duty to live with their male kin, to obey their male kin, and their male kin had a duty to look after them. And then the male kin frequently married them off, sometimes to the Taliban who shipped them back home.
You will read that the Taliban have forbidden women from doing this, that and the other. It is all lies. What they have done is back the authority of the male head of household, who may, according to what is customary in his social environment in his part of the country, for people of his social class, forbid the women of his family from doing this, that or the other. For women, Afghanistan is 1950s America with teeth. By and large, Afghan women are forbidden from doing what a respectable women of good family in 1950s American would not have done.
Women refrain from doing this that and the other, because other women might look at them funny, because Dad might spank them, and because the Taliban might have a word with Dad. Women are naturally disinclined to stick out, and sticking out can result in an unwanted trip back home to meet male kin.
The president announcing the abolition of female mate choice and the return of coverture is unimaginable, except we have a civil war situation and we want to guarantee our soldiers have pussy waiting for them. The law enforcement apparatus quietly giving teeth to patriarchal authority, and patriarchal authority quietly returning us to the 1950s by weaponizing the female propensity to social conformity, that is entirely imaginable.
Yes, that sounds right to me.
Even before positively giving teeth to patriarchal authority, the Legionic state should be quietly disallowed from interfering in family affairs in behalf of the poor damsels-in-distress and against patriarchal or male kin authority, as is the current state of affairs. As one commenter (Your Uncle Bob) often points out, that in itself will go a long way toward solving the WP. So really the first step, arguably the most crucial one, should be to quietly minimize and eliminate the progressive state apparati’s unsolicited and destructive involvement in family matters. If nothing else, Republicans should be able to make that modest achievement. It does not require a total regime change, merely regime diminution.
My complaint is that, unlike Putin, they aren’t even doing that.
“Looking male fantasies — we see weak sexless men and horny warrior action girls.”
And why do you think this is Jim? The horny warrior action girls who get their way and do the courtship dance for the man rather than the other way around. I remember someone telling me in an earlier blogpost this was to sneak in a mannerbund through the female vessel (so put male qualities into a girl so it goes through all the audit checks without problems).
Yes, obviously. They are not allowed to depict men acting male, so they depict females acting male.
But not only do we lack masculine men in fiction, we lack masculine men in real life, particularly among younger men, and the younger, the more effeminate. The reason why female fantasies tend to be vampires, werewolves, demons, and so on and so forth, is that just as boys cannot imagine themselves hitting on a realistic woman in a realistic situation, girls cannot imagine a realistic male hitting on her in a realistic situation.
The epidemic of effeminacy among males is rough on women in a way comparable to way the epidemic of obesity among females is rough on males.
I explained why we lack masculinity.
Ingredient one: A man acting like a man alone is naught but a martyr in our hell society. Men are far more brave in groups.
Ingredient two: All male spaces and activities have been suppressed to the highest degree possible by the state. Male groups dwindle into nothing.
Ingredient three: All social life becomes non-violent and depends on the implicit threat of violence from someone else; the everpresent camera eye threatens the everpresent obese man in blue, threatens the everpresent team of obedient men with guns to surround your house and shoot you dead. Social media and cameras everywhere means that
you cannot even have a slug-it-out moment without someone recording it and potentially having you lose what liberty and property remaining. This means you must solve social disputes in female ways, even in male groups– reputation destruction, brigadeering, ostracization.
These are the far, far more important, prevelant, and relevant causes to effeminacy in men. The action girl bullshit is astroturf.
Finally, would like to finish by mentioning that I am friends with manly zoomers. It does not matter and does not help much with actually keeping a woman. It looks like luck and being early are the determinant factors in all somewhat stable and healthy zoomer relationships I’ve seen. Maybe I’m dense, but I did not pick up on any actionable or replicable configuration from observation, nothing to recommend besides sticking with your highschool sweetheart if at all possible.
The man in blue is very far from omnipresent. He is also lazy and incompetent, and the judiciary is corrupt. I have slugged it out quite a few times, often enough with lethal weapons. So far my criminal record remains spotless despite all the usual manly acts that the law forbids.
While I doubt I could get away with everything Jim has got away with hes kind of right about how hollow omnipresent surveillance is. Yes surveillance can possibly prove you guilty in court, but someone in authority has to want to get you badly enough to do the tedious work of digging through surveillance footage.
This feels like a small nitpick that does not address the overarching thesis of the argmuent I put forth.
Are you claiming that the social environment is not set up to favor feminine behavior over masculine, with masculine behavior sought out and punished? That the vast majority of social conflict can only be reasonably solved through feminine games? Are you trying to express a different argument entirely?
What I am saying is that it takes balls. And it always will take balls.
Yes, conditions are really adverse, no doubt about that. But is not masculinity meeting adversity head on?
If enough men act bravely individually, then they can take collective action to make it easier for everyone to act bravely.
But if someone stands back and says “ah, life is just too hard, doing anything about it is too difficult and dangerous”, then they are going to lose, and if most people do that, they make it harder for anyone else to win.
Seize a woman, then defend what is yours.
We are having two different conversations. I am addressing the general feminization of behavior, and now appearance, of men and boys. This is a systemic and coup-complete problem that individual defection solves about as well as individual violence solves leftism.
Yes, the general problem is caused by the collective causes you list. But there is no hope in sitting back and waiting for a collective solution unless men individually strike out for individual solutions.
We cannot solve the collective problem with individual solutions, but we can solve the individual problem with individual solutions. And unless we act individually, we certainly do not have the balls to act collectively.
The ship of state rides on a storm tossed sea of anarchy. Collective solutions grow out of individual solutions.
That depends on what leftism and what individual actions. Individual violence against individual officers of the family court and child protective services is highly effective at preserving individual family, and individual game is highly effective on women.
Preventing American men as a whole from being turned into pussies is a coup complete problem. Preventing oneself from being turned into a pussy is not.
I see how we clash. We pretty much have opposite worldviews on this topic.
My view being that, throughout history, there’s always been times of dramatic upheaval. Yet throughout every such period, the world moves on, and we forever and always are descendants of the men who formed families, even in such periods. It is the fate of men to make their own luck, no matter how unfair that might seem when compared to better periods. That’s just how in my opinion the world works.
Plainly false. If this were true, you would have several dozen success stories of high IQ men with large families stemming from this blog alone. I count maybe one, Alf, and I don’t know about his IQ ( ;^) ). The other success story, Aidan, is clearly a natural that would have been fine in any circumstances.
Looks to me to be either a stochastic process, or something that can only be taught by apprenticeship. The only successful “game” I’ve witnessed in meatspace is wiggers and niggers with long strings of baby mommas behind them. The men born after the peak of sexual revolution saturating the culture with more than two or three children were all in religious communities. So game is perhaps highly effective in getting lays, I’ve read roissy and it definitely helped in that, but keeping them around after for long enough to raise children is an unanswered problem. Looks to me like we only solve this through collective action. If not state action, then probably some “intentional community” nonsense. Need to make defection hard to do.
Which concedes that you have in your real life observed what I have observed in my real life. That game works on women.
Sure it is answered, and I have answered it repeatedly in this blog.
Granted it is way tougher than getting them into bed in the first place, and getting them into bed in the first place is far from easy to start with, but the analogous methods for getting them into bed, though not the same methods, work for getting them to stick around.
I witness other males successfully performing game in meatspace. I do not witness other males successfully starting families in meatspace, except with women whom are far past peak fertility, or in the case of accidental pregnancy. That, or insular religious upbringing.
I’ve seen it slowly creep into high status on the internet right to be a patriarch, and yet the number of patriarchs is few. I’ve translated roissy into limited success, mostly with women I don’t care for except as a cum rag, and yet I do not see how the performance can possibly be translated into a lasting situation. Perhaps if I could see the dynamics in flux in meatspace, I would have a better idea, but I’ve read all your writing at least twice over and find it impossible to string the lemmas into a theorem here. I’m not alone, there was a prominent right-adjacent writer, delicioustacos, that clearly could use to get laid, and yet lamented his inability to turn it into children and family.
Therefore, because of the scarcity of confirmed results of game turning into biblical marriage instead of game turning into plate spinning jesters, I would say it is not extremely effective. I would have witnessed it in meatspace, and the players would not be burning out.
I do. Not as many or as successfully as the previous decades, mind you, but I still get invited to weddings, most of which do not end with a quick divorce. None of us should reveal our locations, of course, but I have the sense that you are in a place like DC or the SF bay area, and if so, that is a big part of the problem.
Those are the plates, and obviously you do not marry the plates. The purpose of the plates is to keep you in right frame of mind so that when you actually meet potential wife material–who is not going to be some perfect angel, just a reasonably attractive woman with functioning maternal instincts–you know intuitively how to start a relationship, and don’t radiate beta signals all the way into deep space.
It’s always a numbers game. You are playing the role of Mister One In Thirty, so you are naturally going to run through a lot of Miss Averages. The game of players and bitches gets you fifty pages of search results, and the one that is relevant to your interests may be all the way down on page forty.
More like left-apostate than right-adjacent. The ostentatious, DGAF anti-virtue signaling of Heartiste, DT and friends made them natural allies of the right, but not of the right, and this is more than just a nitpick, it is a crucial issue. Even Dalrock was more like a Churchian apostate than a genuine reactionary.
What was always lacking with the popular PUAs, is the faith. They learned, and generously taught others, how to run a slick marketing campaign, and even score a big pre-order bonus, but not how to actually deliver the goods. Because they didn’t have the goods.
What goods? Well, for example, there used to be a blog, “How to Spank your Wife”. It may still be up, but I don’t have it bookmarked. It was explicitly about Christian household discipline and went into all the fine details of when to do it, how to prepare the field (discipline is always in the context of tasks and goals), what implements you can use, how hard to do it (spoiler: quite hard, not enough to cause permanent injury but enough to disabuse her of any notion that it is sex play), what sorts of things to say during and afterward, etc. There was tons of material, and I can scarcely remember it all nor do it justice in a single paragraph.
These are goods that people like delicioustacos didn’t/don’t have, because they learned to operate in the secular progressive frame where it is all a cheesy act. A cheesy effective act, but still an act; they learned how to be the better defector in a defect-defect relationship, not how to convert it into cooperation. Marriage is, by definition, a cooperative relationship, it cannot be defect-defect, and so she is eventually going to call you on your bullshit and test if you really have the goods.
Reading the comments on the aforementioned blog back then was illuminating. While it had the predictable feminist and white knight shills, doing their fainting-couch and m’lady acts, there were also more than a few comments from wives affirming that this was, in fact, essential to their marriage, and that without the occasional harsh discipline, they would never be able to get anything done. It was on the internet, so maybe all fake; then again, maybe not.
Spanking is obviously not everything, and some wives don’t need it at all (or so I hear). But the point here is that PUA game is simply one side of the coin, the other side is the (Jimian) Christian faith and discipline that is not only the husband’s right, but his duty.
I’m sure there’s some atheist/materialist formula out there that works, in theory, but in practice, that’s what doesn’t seem to have a great track record when it comes to marriage, and only works for the plate-spinning (mutual defect) phase, drawing it out to eternity. Which really should be obvious in retrospect, because how can a man make his own future without a positive vision for that future?
Maybe Elon Musk’s bizarre quasi-marriage/custody arrangements could be an alternative, secular template, but we don’t yet know if they work long-term, and might require considerably more resources to execute than the average middle-class man has in possession. It’s much more straightforward and time-tested to appeal to the supreme alpha.
It is tough. It is very tough. And it got tougher as I got older, both because I am old, and because women are worse.
But it is doable, and I have issued plenty of posts on how to do it.
Most of the internet stuff on game is for operating in defect/defect.
But this terribly stressful and causes players to burn out. You always wind up wanting to move to cooperate/cooperate. Which requires the man to conquer and the woman to surrender.
Jim: “individual game is highly effective on women.”
Fidelis: “Plainly false. If this were true, you would have several dozen success stories of high IQ men with large families stemming from this blog alone.”
Game is undeniably effective. At its best it is like having god-like powers.
As to the question of high IQ men with large families, some men do not want to provide details of their families, to thwart doxing. In saying this, I am not speculating.
“because of the scarcity of confirmed results of game turning into biblical marriage instead of game turning into plate spinning jesters, I would say it is not extremely effective”
It is a truism that short-term game and long-term relationship game are different. Roissy was saying that 15 years ago.
“put male qualities into a girl so it goes through all the audit checks without problems”
That’s not helpful. We don’t want male qualities attributed to girls; we want male qualities attributed to men and female qualities attributed to women.