The end of empire

Britain was a sea power and sea empire, the US an airsea empire.

And it has just suffered a defeat from Yemen, following the awesomely incompetent flight from Afghanistan. Global American Empire ships now have to sail around the horn of Africa. Not a good look for the unipower.

All countries lie about GDP and CPI, though some lie a lot more extravagantly than others.

Flying into the airport and looking out the plane window, America does not look like a wealthy, technologically advanced country. Walking through the airport, let alone the subway station, looks poor. Walking through a high end shopping centre, does not look all that high end.

Looking at the arms it is able to supply Ukraine, does not look like a wealthy, technologically advanced country.

The best indicator of real GDP per capita is energy usage per capita, because everything about a comfortable modern lifestyle takes a lot of energy, energy comes into everything people do and consume. This was rising exponentially to 1972, when the rise suddenly halted. It then started fall, slowly. And suddenly it has now started to fall rather more quickly and dramatically. It looks like three trend regimes: Exponential growth starting in the seventeenth century, then stagnation and slow decline starting in 1972, and now it looks like the beginning of dramatic collapse, looks like the beginning of a sharp break in the trend of slow and gentle decline.

This reflects a regime ever more hostile to the men who made it great, to the faith that made it great, the culture that made it great, and race that made it great.

The collapse in military recruitment reveals that the grandsons of the men who conquered the world for America know the regime hates them.

As its lies failed, it resorted increasingly to terrible coercion, as in Serbia. Now coercion is failing abroad. How long will coercion continue to succeed in the heart of empire?

233 Responses to “The end of empire”

  1. Mister Grumpus says:

    Off topic but I can’t resist:

    Steve Sailer on Twitter recently:

    “The reason that my saying ‘airlines are dropping Captain Sully in favor of Captain Shaniqua’ makes you angry and makes other people laugh is because everybody recognizes they’d rather have Captain Sully than Captain Shaniqua as their pilot.”

    I’m just happy that the word “Shaniqua” is getting memed so well. Just one word and everyone knows what you mean, and agrees with you, whether they want to or not. You read it here first, folks.

  2. Cloudswrest says:

    OFT. Solder getting chased and blown up by small drone.

  3. Fidelis says:

    I’ve been thinking a lot about the position on the nature of women taken here, and it seems incoherent.

    The basis is, women are feral by nature, and their instincts are inherently wicked and lead to destruction. Then the proposed solution is, well just lock them up under the authority of men who are not wicked.

    Well, that’s a pretty insane conclusion. Let’s take pitbulls. Pits are prone to feral aggression and destructive behavior, and this problem is worse with a bad owner. Sure, they are very loving and loyal dogs when raised correctly, sometimes, but even in good conditions a pit may one day succumb to bad instinct and devour your child. Is it sane to keep them around? Of course it isn’t. If you want a family dog, you breed out the feral traits. You don’t keep a spontaneous source of destruction in your home. Yet this is exactly the same logic we apply to women here?

    So, if you take it as a conclusion the instincts of women are wicked, the only rational reaponse is to breed less wicked women. Not to subdue and lock up wicked creatures — it doesn’t work. How many times has Jim repeated that a King with 1000 concubines, with the power to enforce life and death, still gets destroyed by an outbreak of this wicked nature they failed to control?

    We either have to conclude that the nature of women is not wicked — which I don’t agree with, the evidence is substantially in the opposite direction — or that those of a better nature must selectively breed out the wickedness. Holding a source of evil in your home is just waiting for something bad to happen.

    • jim says:

      The nature of women is not wicked. As I have repeatedly said, women are wonderful.

      However, their nature is ill suited for large group socialisation. Great within the sphere of family, way better than men. If they get into the male sphere, bad things ensue.

      I, like quite a few other men, have a propensity to kill people, which I endeavour to keep under control and express in pro social ways, but like controlling my weight, it is not easy. Pretty sure very few women have that propensity. Men have an innate tendency to violence, and women have an innate tendency to shit test, which causes in our society a great deal more problems that the male propensity for violence, but that is just that in our society the characteristic female failing is socially encouraged, while the characteristic male failing is forcefully discouraged. The characteristic male failing is a great deal more wicked than the characteristic female failing, it is just that in our society it is subject to severe constraints. If our society celebrated male violence and lionized the man with the most kills, which some societies have done, we would have bigger problems than feral women.

      As for sexual conduct, men want to bang as many women as possible, while women want to bang mister one in thirty. If either side gets their way, reproduction fails.

      • Fidelis says:

        Oh yeah, cruising for alpha dick until your womb shrivels is not wicked behavior. Slaughtering your children in the womb because the tingtings weren’t just right, not wicked. Destroying your family because hey the government offers cash and prizes and if my husband can’t order the cops enforcing the divorce to go away that means he’s a weakling, totally fine and not wicked. It abounds. What does option 5 on your shill test say? This is their nature.

        Whataboutism isn’t coherent. When men behave wickedly, we do our best to remove them from the gene pool. You hang murderers. You don’t employ retards, and in a sane society you don’t let them breed with your daughter. Shit testing to the point you destroy yourself and your family is wicked behavior. The worst cases should be bred out, even if you could feasibly put them in a box and prevent them from acting out that instinct. Doesn’t make sense, just like throwing feral men with the minds of beasts in big complexes and feeding and caring for them until they gracelessly expire doesn’t make sense.

        The discussion should be, how do you breed out stupid, wicked behavior, without destroying the tension that promotes health. Right now shit testing is doing a wonderful job of destroying itself, except when the lands get overrun by inbred retards those shit testing genes will get passed on. Not working to reduce the wicked instinct is as insane as holding a grenade in hand with no safety pin: it’s only dangerous if you let go, and that tension builds strength of mind. Right?

        Totally incoherent. We expect men to not be wicked by their own will, and we expect women to not be wicked because men enforce it on them. Well, if we are enforcing good behavior, better to do it from the blood.

        • jim says:

          > Oh yeah, cruising for alpha dick until your womb shrivels is not wicked behavior. Slaughtering your children in the womb because the tingtings weren’t just right, not wicked. Destroying your family because hey the government offers cash and prizes and if my husband can’t order the cops enforcing the divorce to go away that means he’s a weakling, totally fine and not wicked. It abounds.

          That is female behaviour without social constraints. Male behaviour without social constraints is not pretty either. If society promised cash and prizes to whichever man had the most kills, which some societies wound up doing, the results would not be pretty either.

          The big difference between innate male and innate female misconduct is not the extent to which either sex is tempted to its characteristic and innate misconduct, but that subtle social constraints work better on men, for it is our nature to build large group coalitions. Social constraints on women are not all that effective unless directly imposed by the male in direct authority over her. On the other hand, their compliance with male authority is better than that of men, provided that the male in authority passes the inevitable shit tests, which if he was dealing with men, he would not have to face.

          • Fidelis says:

            Ignoring the core of the argument. I acknowledged yours, which is that we do in fact address wicked behavior out of men by removing their genes. We hang murderers in a sane society.


            Not working to reduce the wicked instinct is as insane as holding a grenade in hand with no safety pin: it’s only dangerous if you let go, and that tension builds strength of mind. Right?

            Totally incoherent. We expect men to not be wicked by their own will, and we expect women to not be wicked because men enforce it on them. Well, if we are enforcing good behavior, better to do it from the blood.

            We do not simply discuss ‘society as it is now.’ We discuss how society could be better. Makes no sense to me to only select for behavior out of one set, it just leaves a weak pillar waiting to fall.

            • jim says:

              Most women behave well when securely under strong male authority. In this sense, women are wonderful. As I said, the authorities at Port Jackson had one hundred percent success in converting whores into wives. Dangerous men need to be eliminated. Difficult women merely need to be subdued and put to work cooking, cleaning, bearing children, and taking care of children. They will be happy. That is what makes women wonderful.

              Many men, on the other hand, do not respond too well to strong male authority.

            • Mayflower Sperg says:

              Fidelis is right, it would be far better in the long run to hang bad women as we’ve hanged so many bad men. But in the short run any nation that attempts it gets conquered and replaced by more populous nations that took the more expedient path of coercing women into good behavior instead of selecting for it.

              Now if you tied their tubes and impregnated bad women with eggs from good women…

              • jim says:

                Men have been selected for good behavior, because we are apt to kill bad men. Bad women, however, get subdued and put to work pumping out babies. On the other hand, there is an indirect effect of selection for good conduct when under strong male authority, since women who act up tend to get cut loose, whereupon in the ancestral environment, the next man will kill their children, or just let them starve.

            • alf says:

              Shit testing to the point you destroy yourself and your family is wicked behavior.

              Generally, nine times out of ten, when a women is being an unreasonable bitch, it’s a sign of a man failing to assert dominance. At the same time we’re planning on unironically bringing back witch burnings, so it’s not like your argument goes completely unheard.

              But witch burnings have always been, and will still be, fairly rare. The kind of misbehavior women are prone to indulge in is not the kind of misbehavior the state generally wants to be involved in. It’s a messy business of he-said she-said. Would you have Amber Heard hanged?

              • Fidelis says:

                The body is apt to develop cancers of many sorts, and therefore has methods of cleaning up defective cells before they reach the state of critical mass.

                I don’t have any good ideas, but to pretend this isn’t a problem makes no sense to me. It’s as if you have a tumor waiting to erupt at any moment, the second the state gets slightly weak. Evolution preferred the creatures that managed cancer as opposed to simply dying to it every time.

                To take Jim’s counterpoint, male defection as murder and senseless violence is extraordinarily rare among whites. We killed all the ones that couldn’t control themselves. The state is slipping, you can much easier than before simply go on a spree. We don’t see much of it. We do see lots and lots of irredeemably wicked behavior out of women. Says to me we should divine a way to clear out those genes so that when we eventually reach a civilizational failure mode again, as will always happen, it’s not such a knife edge problem. How many generations are we going to need to return to a state even remotely close to where we were before this mess? It’s possible we go into a dark age spanning millennia.

                I don’t necessarily see a state level solution, but with new technology we have both basic gene editing and hyper fertility. Theres probably a tool or two we can use here.

                • alf says:

                  We do see lots and lots of irredeemably wicked behavior out of women.

                  Can you dumb down the argument by giving me specific examples of irredeemably wicked behavior of women that in your opinion deserve culling?

                • Fidelis says:

                  The Ukrainian women cucking their boyfriends and husbands on the frontline.

                  The thousands if not millions of cases of college girls killing their children to keep their options open (I suppose culling themselves, but at such a scale it’s catastrophic).

                  The millions who divorce their husbands and then abuse their own children.

                  Do I have to pull out poster girl examples or can we agree these are widespread, wicked, and catastropic? Arguing, oh but the state encourages this, meaningless to me. The state encourages me to cut my balls off, somehow I manage to not be self destructive. Needs a solution so that when the state becomes wicked again, it’s not an immediate drop off the cliff, there is at least time for families and such to reorganize themselves.

                • jim says:

                  > Arguing, oh but the state encourages this

                  The problem is not that the state encourages this, but that the state disempowers husbands and fathers.

                  The state cannot stop this, nor do much to directly cause it. Women are profoundly unresponsive to state pressure, except that the pressure is transmitted to them by people directly in their lives. Men live in a larger social world than women. If the state wants to alter the behaviour of women, it has to have to give the men in their lives the power and inducement to alter their women’s behaviour.

                • alf says:

                  Needs a solution so that when the state becomes wicked again, it’s not an immediate drop off the cliff, there is at least time for families and such to reorganize themselves.

                  When the master is wicked, the women are wicked. When the master is virtuous, the women are virtuous. There is no solution to this problem, it is cause and consequence. We mitigate the current wickedness of the state by silently and secretly being virtuous masters of our own household.

                  The Ukrainian women cucking their boyfriends and husbands on the frontline.

                  Oh come on. As if the behavior of the Ukranian men in charge is any better. Wicked masters, wicked women.

                  As for abortion and divorce: we plan to get rid of both. Although would you not be of the opinion that abortion is a self-serving genetic-culling solution to those who practice it?

                • Fidelis says:

                  nor do much to directly cause it

                  Nuts. The state empowers goons to show up to your house and emasculate you at a phone call. The state empowers a well paid network of judges and lawyers to crack open families and suck all the wealth out. The state uses the nature of women against men explicitly. These tactics would not work if steps were taken to, over many generations I suppose, eliminate this nature. A pit might spontaneously eat your toddler, a golden retriever would not.

                  Im not arguing that we need a state to fix this, I don’t trust some random soverign with the bloodline of an entire race. I’m saying we should acknowledge the fact it’s a problem first, and devise a strategy for fathers to employ so that their distant descendants do not have to deal with this every civilizational turning.

                  Pitbull vs golden retriever. You’re arguing that ‘dem pibbles is gud bois jus needa gud massa.’ If we are saying that men are responsible for controlling women’s behavior, perhaps we should actually do that. Not chain the pitbull up and hope for the best, but breed better women. I did mention that it is in a way self selective, but the problem is at current scale its catastrophic. I would care less, celebrate in fact, if it were a steady 1-5% bleed out of these traits while the rest of the population did well. Instead we are looking at autogenocide even without the imports stepping in.

                • jim says:

                  > Pitbull vs golden retriever. You’re arguing that ‘dem pibbles is gud bois jus needa gud massa.’ If we are saying that men are responsible for controlling women’s behavior, perhaps we should actually do that.

                  That is not something the state can do. Any more than it can breed better pitbulls. Breeding better pitbulls can only be done by individual owners of pitbulls, and breeding better women can only be done by individual owners of women.

                  So the state has to re-enable male ownership of women.

                  And, having done that, individual owners of women have no incentive to breed better women, because a woman under secure male ownership is already wonderful. They are happy, comfortable, helpful, loyal,and useful.

                  I repeat, again, my story of Port Jackson, whose authorities addressed the problem of female misconduct with one hundred percent success overnight.

                  Disturbed by sex parties on the beach, the authorities punished neither the men nor the women. Instead they forced the women to get married immediately, and punished women who spoke back to their husbands with disturbing severity. What they would have done had a woman cuckolded her husband, nobody knows, because none of the women did.

                  The state breeding better women is a long term solution with uncertain success. Forcing women to get married and backing the authority of the husband is an overnight solution much applied with complete success.

                • Adam says:

                  Every female acts badly around low status men, and the state has made all men low status. The problem is male status. When a woman fears the man more than the demons in her head she will police herself well. When she does not fear the man, the man is confronted by her demons. Awalt.

                  So long as women are around men they fear, they behave well and are wonderful creatures.

                • alf says:

                  You’re arguing that ‘dem pibbles is gud bois jus needa gud massa.

                  Unironically, yes.

                  A good woman will raise a big family. A bad woman will raise half a bastard. Eugenic breeding will solve the problem. As for the really rotten apples, do what our ancestors did and burn the witch, Marina Abramovic comes to mind. But not too many women like her, and like most women, likely to change her tune when the regime changes tune.

                • kawaii_kike says:

                  A good woman would seek out a virtuous master. The fact that they have to be viciously coerced just to stop cruising for alpha cock means that women are wicked and vastly more depraved than men. Wicked dogs seek wicked masters.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  The idea that women are not wicked is plainly false. Women are plenty wicked, and much more wicked than men. Men rarely kill their own children, while women–despite their entire existence being designed to bear and care for children–do it all the time. Every great society acted like men could rather trivially be convinced to be virtuous, while women required levels of draconian control akin to the worst despotisms of history just to be manageable. Coveture is the codified, legal denial of women as persons in their own right; you have to give them legal status of less than man in order to thrive and grow.

                  Now if we start culling women for bad behavior, then we are apt to end up with a severe shortage of women. Let us say we kill every woman who had an abortion. We end up with a sex disparity worse than China’s One Child plan. Does that seem like a good idea? if you kill every woman who sets the husband versus the state to see if she married a winner, you are going to end up with a existential threat to your people’s survival and a lot of furious husbands.

                  Hard eugenic systems fail for the same reason that command economies fail; insufficient information and the necessity of more absolute control over every aspect of life. That is not even getting into the potential for a holiness spiral with the “improvement” of women. Women are not improving at an acceptable rate? Better kill more, amirite?

                • jim says:

                  > The idea that women are not wicked is plainly false.

                  Finding themselves under strong and secure male authority, women are very good, way better than men, who are unhappy in that circumstance.

                  Women are very very good. Good when they are doing what nature and nature’s God created them to do. When attempting to do what men are created to do, very very bad.

                  Male standards of good conduct apply to men. Different standards are appropriate for women, who were created for a different function.

                  Paul tells us that to inherit the kingdom of heaven, men must rightly perform the male role, and women the female role. He does not tell us that to inherit the Kingdom of heaven, women must be capable of performing the male role. If that was required, none of them would inherit the Kingdom of Heaven. No women are like that. This does not make them wicked. It makes them women.

                  The project of breeding women to be virtuous as a virtuous man is virtuous is not like breeding a breed of pitbull that is unlikely to kill. It is like breeding a breed of pitbull that can fly.

                  You can breed chickens to lay more eggs. You cannot breed dogs to lay eggs.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  It’s not something you can do in a single generation, but ‘background pressure’ of most egregious examples at any given time being cut across generations is salutary.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “Women are profoundly unresponsive to state pressure” they are very very responsive to state propaganda especially if they are unowned.

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  When men are set free from

                • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

                  When men are set free from all restrictions, they seek to fulfill their telos, even if it is limited in scale. When women are set free, they seek to violate their own tells in the most horrifying ways. Both sexes have their problems, but those of women are far more depraved than those of men. Such as fucking dogs or the incest fantasies so many women seem to have.

                  I do not dislike women, but I have seen what they do on their own. They must always be watched with a cautious eye. I am not criticizing them for failing to live up to the male role. I am criticizing them for failing to live up to the female role. That they have to be all but caged to be good, then they are not good of their own will, but by someone else’s will imposed upon them.

                • jim says:

                  > When men are set free from all restrictions, they seek to fulfill their telos, even if it is limited in scale. When women are set free, they seek to violate their own tells in the most horrifying ways.

                  Destructive and self destructive female behaviour is a shit test. A shit test we are massively failing. Adam failed his shit test, and we are failing ours.

                  Women do stupid wicked and self destructive things to force men to put a stop to it.

                  When women are free, they cannot fullfill their telos. So they create difficulties so that the alpha male will come out of the shadows, give them a well deserved spanking, and attach them to a chain which is attached to a wire that runs between the bedroom, the nursery, the kitchen, the dining room, and the bathroom.

                  which corresponds the ancestral environment of successful reproduction for females, and the terminal environment of unsuccessful reproduction for males.

                  Observing bad behaviour in the workplace, it is obvious that they are unconsciously looking for a strong man who will give them a smack, then toss them over his shoulders and carry them out of the workplace.

  4. Whitelist request: Allowing women to be free agents means we have regressed into a techno dark-age. When most men have no prospects of securing a mother for their children and keeping her, the hunter- gather default, never-ending low-scale war, re- asserts itself. Men are already responding to the scarcity of females and the scarcity of control over females by lining up into tribes that will look for excuses to kill each other so the herd can be thinned and war brides distributed in a way that promotes stability. The 21st century by historical standards has been remarkably placid so far, but it will make up for lost time.

  5. Ash says:

    Britain is a historical nothing.. a nation protected by ocean

    the Spanish were expelled by the Dutch from northern Europe as Rome laid claim on the world. the Dutch travelled world wide due to promises of riches in various nations while wiping out many Spanish and Portuguese colonies.. in doing so the Dutch currency could be exchanged for gold, becoming the first world currency.. then the Napoleonic wars, many good things including the English winning big time, the Dutch nation fractured, maybe for the good of Europe.. before even world war 1 includes a new nation Belgium, nothing like the Netherlands which is fine (I am aware people proclaim the attrocities of this kingdom in Africa after the 1800s)

    but was it really necessary that every Dutch TV channel advertises and shows hardcore pornography after 9 pm since the USA conquered Germany in the 1940s ? wtf is wrong with the English and Americans ?

    • Ash says:

      pardon me… this was 100 years before the founding of the USA

    • alf says:

      The Dutch, having above average experience with water, had an edge over its competition when sea empire totally became the big thing in the 16th/17th century. But as other empires copied what worked, the Dutch lost their edge. And of course, took them too long to establish a monarchy. Also, likely related, they were never able to establish a sovereign church, as the British did.

      every Dutch TV channel advertises and shows hardcore pornography after 9 pm


  6. skippy says:

    Milei speaks at the WEF. It’s a good speech.

    But cannot help feel this is an attempt at an orderly – and temporary – retreat.

    Increase production, war with China.

    • Kunning Druegger says:

      American Caesar was never going to magically appear, convert the elites, and ride off to the stars in a blaze of cinematic glory. making history is a messy process, writing history glosses over the anxiety, down time, and interminable interregnums. Any legit motion to slow the spiral, or stop the leftward lurch, sends tremors through the whole superstructure, which in turn jars people loose. We don’t need Milie or Trump or Putin or Orban to pretend to be something they aren’t, it wouldn’t work anyway. The daemonic leftists have been building their principality for decades, centuries actually, but women and faggots are terrible at building things, so it doesn’t take much to rattle it and make cracks.

      A great war is inevitable, it will either be external to the GAE, or internal. It is hard to say which will be worse. We will pay the price of our grandparents cowardice regarding the Woman Question, the Race Question, all the core questions. What we do now is going to land squarely on our grandkids, and more and more leaders larping populism, or being legit, gives us options. This is no guarantee of anything, but blind optimism beats clear eyed pessimism almost every day of the week and twice on Sundays.

  7. Fidelis says:

    Musk or someone in his circle reads this blog. This is very on the nose, where else do people criticize the NSDAP for socialism?

    • Steelkilt says:

      That is the standard Austrian critique of the NSDAP. Not saying your are wrong but one can find the same critique on or from reading Mises himself.

      • The Cominator says:

        We agree on most things with the Austrians (and with Hoppe on over 95% of things).

        • Steelkilt says:

          Where do you disagree with the Austrians?

          For me it’s the argument that the market is a purer democracy than any political democracy (it is) and that this is good (I am not so sure it is good).

          • The Cominator says:

            The biggest ones.

            The Austrians (we will assume we are talking merely about minarchist Austrians here) think the sovereign can and will be able to permanently disinterest themselves from the currency of choice in their realms and no really they can’t. When the stars line up right they can and should do it temporarily but its not a permanent thing they can do.

            The Austrians like most libertarians (except based Hoppe) believe you can sort of tolerate left wing dissent and you can’t. Leftism is a disease and the state must maintain a security apparatus that find and kill leftists as the body must maintain an immune system.

            • jim says:

              The state does not need to find and kill ordinary leftists in the general population, unless they are making trouble in pursuit of power. The problem is apostates within the state apparatus, people who nominally adhere to the official faith required of all holders of state and quasi state office, but believe that their faith his holier than that of sovereign and his high priest. Those, you have to kill. If someone running a donut shop thinks his faith is different from, and better than, that of the state, not a problem.

              Iran has efficiently repressed more Islamic than thou movements outside the state apparatus, but it still has a problem inside the state apparatus – albeit it also has Old Type Mohammedans inside the state apparatus who are, for now, keeping the more Islamic than thou movement inside the state apparatus in line. Which way it will break is unpredictable, but on the history of the past few millenia, likely to break right. Could continue in brezhnevian stagnation for a long time.

              • The Cominator says:

                The priestly classes must be kept free of leftism even if outside the state…

                • Jehu says:

                  You can’t really separate anything priestly from the state. When you try you get religions that pretend they’re not religions, like we have now. I hate that this is true but it is.

  8. Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

    Filed under: literally The Current Year.

  9. Calvin says:

    So apparently the would-be Thermidorian elites include the CEO of JP Morgan:

    Reporters GASP live on-air as Americans most powerful Banker praises Trump policies, defends the MAGA movement and BLASTS Biden for demonizing 75 million Americans.

    “Trump was right about NATO, immigration, the economy… Democrats need to GROW UP”

    Jaime Diamond, JPMorgan CEO

    There may be more of them than some suspect.

    • jim says:

      JP Morgan is very close to the heart of the deep state. The wealthy comfortable left, fat on the gravy skimmed from empire, don’t want the eschaton immanentized right away.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      The gerontocrats have been having some loose lips lately. Normally a guy like Kissinger giving the word would make it ‘safe’ for everyone else to start saying the same thing. But they’re yesterday’s men, have on on the out-and-out for a while now, and their replacements to share the same weltanschauung, so the effect is muted.

      • jim says:

        The gerontocrats have been stepping on the brake, while the Obama generation floors the accellerator. And on the one hand, the gerentocrats are energised by the collapse of the Global American Empire and the now starkly visible (though piously denied in official statistics) collapse of Global American Empire economies, but on the other hand, they all have one foot in the grave, and the Obama generation knows they will soon no longer be around.

        • Kunning Drueger says:

          Jim, We have had our disagreements recently, and I still think my analysis is actually very accurate, and the following perfectly illustrates how uncannily accurate you are when it comes to long range/ wide scope:

          “There’s something extremely important here that is not being recognized, but those who can read between the lines are realizing it and it’s scaring the shit out of people:

          Elements of the Davos class **are preparing to defect to the Trump/populist movement.


          ….the legitimacy of their system (“meritocracy”/expert rule) is collapsing (“adults in the room” is now a joke), the international environment can’t hold (see: Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan, the Red Sea, etc), the rainbow coalition at home is starting to tear itself apart…


          Moreover, what if the Trump admin were to start confiscating businesses?

          Boeing is already in deep shit because the planes are literally failing. People are getting worried. The anti-monopolist left is already calling for nationalizing and breaking up the company….”

          There is a lot more in there, and I’m sure some of it is off base or backwards. But it absolutely is a proof of assertions you made easily a year ago; They are scrabbling for thermidorian options. One refinement I will suggest is that it is not conscious, they aren’t sitting there weighing things out and saying them plainly as is our habit here, obviously because they can’t, not even to themselves. This is one aspect of inside the herd v. outside the herd that we have to take into account. We here are rather comfortable thinking and saying things that many others would be afraid of or unable to, but when you are inside the herd, you don’t even recognize that there are rules of the road, you just follow them and instinctively know when someone is straying. This is why art and artists are such a powerful tool, because they give people a lexicon for self-expression and rationalization, a way to say what they are feeling, a method for justifying all of the petty violations they intend to commit in order to survive or thrive. has more and more people of varying celebrity status start to test the waters of being not quite incomplete opposition to Trump, more and more of the powerful elite will have the lexicon and tacit permission to start doing less suicidal things.

          as a rampant optimist, I also must humble myself and accept that, though I think my strategy is better, you are not wrong in saying that minor victories, like thermador, are not at all real victories, and can just as easily facilitate worse spiraling and collapse after brief interludes of faux order. Harvard President is an excellent example of this: it wasn’t a victory, it was just a signal of dissension. We can point and laugh, we can think thoughts of exploitation, but if we start thinking that victory is just around the corner, we will end up in the noose even faster.

          • alf says:

            They cannot happily play ball with the devil for years on end and then one day decide they don’t like where this train is going and change its direction. Cannot break the laws of societal physics. Cause, consequence. Cause: they were happy to ride the gravy train when their pockets were being lined. Consequence: now that that gravy train is heading off a cliff, so will they.

          • skippy says:

            They want to ride a trend they cant stop without losing control.

            No compromise with these people. Total personnel replacement is the only meaningful victory.

          • The Count of Montecristo says:

            LoL. I just found that thread and was going to post it here…

          • jim says:

            Iran is a both a proxy and an enemy of the Global American Empire, being, like the Soviet Union, a Global American Empire sponsored strand of leftism, but also a competing strand of leftism, Islamic leftism. It is now deviating further and further from Global American Empire leftism, because, like the Soviet Union, stable and stagnant, while the Global American Empire continues to go ever lefter, ever faster.The path to autogenocide, the end state of leftism, is obvious, and on the cards, and a lot of people see it. They are bringing in large numbers of young male military age subsaharan Africans.

            Leftism gets ever lefter, ever faster, and so eventually must conclude that the path to immanentize the eschaton is to eliminate ever larger categories of people deemed obstacles to making the eschaton imminent.

            It is usually, but not always, halted before this end state by Thermidor. But Thermidor is shaky, fragile, unstable, and unpredictable. Where it goes, nobody knows.

            The Iranian revolution was postIslam leftism, sponsored by Global American Empire postChristian leftism. It very rapidly holiness spiraled to postIslam ever more demonic. diverging rapidly and radically from both Islam and postChristian leftism, and the Ayatollah cracked down hard, much as the left Christian Cromwell cracked down on postChristian leftism.

            Initially the Iranian regime used the normal twentieth century instruments of political repression, arresting people for peaceful protest, banning opposition parties, arresting opposition leaders, right and left.

            This did not work, and eventually they executed people on the basis of faith. They required trouble makers to affirm the basic tenets of Islam in short and simple form, analogous to what I ask commentators on this blog who are more Christian than thou, and if they would not affirm, despite whipping and all that, killed them, This worked.

            Thermidor is now stably and securely in power in Iran, as it was in the Soviet Union, resulting in Brezhnevian stagnation, as in the Soviet Union.

            Thermidor believes in last year leftism, and finds it difficult to repress current year leftism, because it tends to have its instruments of control and repression staffed by last year leftists who feel in their bones that current year leftists are misguided and impractical, but nonetheless holier than themselves. No enemies to the left, no friends to the right. You cannot stop leftism from going ever lefter that way.

            To crush current year leftism, you need a white terror. And white terrorists are always reactionaries. You have to bring a gun to a gunfight and a faith to a holy war, and Thermidoreans are merely insincere and wobbly leftists. There are substantial old type Mohammedan elements in Iran’s instruments of repression, and they have considerable power, but they are not in power.

            The reactionary elements of a Thermidorean regime are apt to take power, as Deng took power in China, and Monck took power in England. But the reactionaries did not take power in France. They were crushed by Napoleon, who was a last year leftist, who very efficiently crushed the reaction on his right, and the current year leftists on his left.

            In Rwanda, the Tutsi were unable to organise within Rwanda, because of political repression. Organised violence beats unorganised, violence, so the Tutsi, despite their potential superior organising capability due to a substantial racially higher IQ and a substantial racially higher IQ standard deviation than your typical nigger, were slaughtered like sheep, until Tutsi from outside Rwanda intervened.

            Because of ocean, intervention by exiles is likely to be difficult in America. Our best hope is that Thermidor appoints a reactionary to crush current year leftism, and he becomes Caesar, possibly in revolution and civil war, that we get a reactionary Napoleon, rather than a last year leftist Napoleon – a Sulla.

            A potential hope of survival now opens up.

            The possible scenario is that Trump takes power, gets a rough ride, which rapidly gets ever rougher, appoints a Sulla to take care of the problem. Sulla takes care of the problem. Trump retires, dies, or is forcibly removed, and his successors find that Sulla makes them uneasy. Attempt to remove him. Sulla takes power, possibly through revolution and civil war.

            If Trump is allowed to be elected, this does not mean it is all sunshine and roses from here on. He is going to run into the same headwinds as last time, a presidency full of his enemies, many of them utterly fanatical.

            Last time around he completely excluded reactionaries, alt rightists, alt leftists, and the radical right from power. If he does that this time around, he is going to fail again this time around. He needs the reaction, and the reaction needs a faith.

          • The Count of Montecristo says:

            Good follow-up thread just posted here trying to defend this view to normiecons.


            Ending up with Jim’s point, Sulla is coming and that is a good thing…

            • jim says:

              Trump is no Sulla. But he may appoint one. If he does not, things will play out the same way again.

              Last time around he completely failed to appoint any reactionaries, alt rightists, or alt leftists, and so was utterly helpless to deal with the fanatical enemies within his administration.

  10. […] It’s rapidly becoming readily apparent to everyone, not just me, Wang Hunin, Simplicius, and Andrei Martyanov, that the decline of the imperial United States is both a) inevitable and b) observable. […]

  11. The Cominator says:

    Kek me (and Jim) weren’t wrong about there yet again being no strategy for victory here.

    • alf says:

      Thoughts on the idea that the Saudis can or will solve the problem instead of the US?

      • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

        Prior to 2020, they were solving the problem, with the usual ‘International Community’ organs running interference and providing material and moral support to the rebels, like in Gaza, and once The Biden took the reins this implicit trend of third-worldism was formalized by taking them off the list of ‘terrorist organizations’. Pretty funny how that worked out eh.

      • Aidan says:

        “Leave it to the saudis” has been the plan since the Houthi rebellion first occurred. The plan of letting the retarded saudis handle it has given Iran the capability to close the Red Sea to global shipping.

        The US is evidently fine with this status quo of the saudis ineffectually dropping bombs on Yemen, because brown bodies are now too sacrosanct for the USM to blow up for any reason. Hence why the Houthis were warned about “US strikes”.

    • Kunning Drueger says:

      Fascinating cognitive dissonance: You see and declare that there is obviously no central planning, yet you confidently assert there is a central conspiracy.

      “There’s no such thing as a sky, and it’s definitely falling.” lel

      • jim says:

        There are more conspiracies than you can shake a stick at.

      • The Cominator says:

        Why the midwit takes, the conspiracy could well have scripted Biden to ruin the country by failing at everything.

  12. Contaminated NEET says:

    > How long will coercion continue to succeed in the heart of empire?

    A man who knew the answer to that could set himself up as a warlord, or even a king. Nobody can say with any certainty how long the current order will hold sway, but it could be a lot longer than anybody here would like to admit. Countless states have held themselves together for decades or even centuries with less competence, far less wealth, and equally ridiculous and destructive official religions. Brazil is poorer and more incompetent than USG by a long shot, but its government is in no danger of losing sovereignty over any of its territory. India is the same, and so are many Third World states. You might respond that they are all propped up by the GAE, and will wobble and fall as the empire’s support wanes. But GAE’s genuine adversaries manage to hold themselves together without that support, and they don’t seem particularly competent, wealthy, or sane: North Korea, Iran, Libya (toppled by GAE intervention, not lack of GAE support). If they play their hand well, or even just moderately poorly, GAE could hold in North America, Western Europe, and Australia for centuries.

    • jim says:

      Muppet states of the Global American Empire.

      The interesting thing about the recent run of coups in Africa is that the coup replaced foreigners and minorities, paper locals, paper locals belonging to highly unpopular minorities, with actual locals.

      The paper locals running the provinces of empire do not have a substantial internal power base, because the Global American Empire does not like them to have a substantial internal power base.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      A declining hegemon can still stop anyone else from becoming hegemon, long after the days of its best men are behind it.

      In the first millennium, the existential threat to assorted dysfunctional despotates in Europe was conquest by the Carolingians. In the second millennium, the existential threat to the Aztec empire was conquest by the Spanish. In the third millennium…

      All the Brasilian Occupational Government has to contend with for the moment is brazilians. A much more manageable state of affairs than the usual perils of history. In 1951, Korea could potentially have been conquered by West Point; but West Point was soundly defeated by Harvard. At the same rate, Harvard of course had a Type Disadvantage to conquering anyone who is not europoid. Point in fact, it had a hard time figuring out if it even wants too. One hand piles clay while another hand knocks it over.

      What makes the case of the Soviet Union a remarkable historical phenomena is not the fact that it imploded by 1990, but that it didn’t implode by 1930, or every other point thence. Harvard kept the faith long after it had already died in Muscovy, and worked very hard to keep its continental scale Potemkin Village inflated, in a way unmatched by any other before or since.

      But unlike the 20th century, there’s no gravy train forthcoming in Harvard’s later days; gone the same way in the Americas as it has ever gone with every Eternal Revolution throughout history. Vassals of the GAE receive nothing from it in our most current of years, asides the solipsim of a world where their only targets are the natives they’re colonizing. Yet as this too begins disappearing, as we have been seeing… well, Interesting Times portend.

    • S says:

      GAE’s true adversary is the same as it has always been- the people responsible for its power in the first place. It is an insoluble problem- get rid of WASPs and the issue is white men, get rid of whites and black males are ‘the white males of the black community’. So GAE can’t hold territory long term because it seeks to destroy those who make it possible to hold territory.

    • Unz says:

      I would not describe Brazil or India as comfortably sovereign. The GAE can and does frame the narrative in both countries that is internalized by that country’s elite. I’ve personally witnessed the feminist project metastasize across India for the past three decades, to its ruin. A lack of memetic sovereignty is just a lack of sovereignty.

      The only countries in the world that exercise substantially independent sovereignty are Russia, China, Iran, which, due to the GAE ruling elite’s incompetence, appear to be coalescing into a de facto GAE-resistance. But even for these three, I would be worried about the continued corrosion of modernity. When Pandora’s box has been opened there’s no going back, only through.

      It will be painful.

      To the point about the GAE’s continued existence, I do not think they can hobble along in a South African or Brazilian manner. South Africa would certainly be taken by its still potent private security firms – sprung up to replace the utterly ruined state institution – if it wasn’t for GAE’s overlordship. The GAE still has tremendously functional organizations operating within it, doing highly sophisticated work that is mostly useless or wicked because the sovereign is useless and wicked. Tremendously functional organizations that are ruled by completely shambolic bureaucracies are breeding grounds for a counter elite.

      But it will certainly be painful.

      • Unz says:

        Why do women misbehave? Why are men and women not getting sex and family?

        Woman misbehave because of desires and instincts honed in her from long years of sexual selection, which drives her behavior far more then she consciously realizes, and infinitely more than she would admit to. The female desire for alpha dick and alpha sons breeds in her a temptation to cruise for it, often before she’s even fully pubescent, and certainly for the rest of her breeding years, including after she has married. Women fantasize about being raped because it’s something they find tremendously arousing, and she is likely to act out her fantasies if she thinks her man is weak.

        Because female defection cuckolds a man it is a much more serious matter than trivial male defection. It is on par with serious male defection such as men committing murder-suicides on their own family, which is also something we see more of these twisted days.

        Taming female misbehavior through shame and submission to men is the basis for large-scale civilization. And civilization must cultivate the virile masculine spirit, and the submissive feminine spirit, and honor them; else the monogamous family unit, upon which it all rests, is torn apart, and the sexes retreat into a cool hostility to each other; just as it has been all over the world.

      • S says:

        Iran isn’t sovereign; compare its family planning campaign under the Shah versus after the 1980-88 war. The former was lip service to American pieties, the latter a full embrace of demon worship slamming TFR down to below replacement.

        • Adam says:

          Iran is gay. Tehran is the world capital of gender mutilation surgery.

          • Kunning Drueger says:

            That sounds like GAE D&C propaganda. I’m not saying it absolutely is, I just wonder how a Shia theocracy can compete with the American penchant for gelding children & men. I’d have equal skepticism if it was reported that Kabul is the “rape capital of the world based on statistics” because who would be reporting/recording “rapes?”

            • A2 says:

              Oh, I thought that was Stockholm.

            • Adam says:

              It is their solution to the fag problem. That is the story anyway, and I just assumed it was voluntary, but perhaps some of it is compulsory.

              • Unz says:

                If eunuchs have low status, it’s working.
                Eunuchs rule the GAE status hierarchy. It’s not working.

            • Sher Singh says:

              TFR in West Iran is supposedly below 1 in many places now.

            • Fred says:

              >Shia theocracy

              “Iran is a theocracy” is globohomo propaganda. The truth is that Iran is just another bluegov client, full of liberated women, as evidenced by their fertility rate.

              Jim had a great bit on Iran being a globohomo client state a few posts ago.

        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          It is an important little detail to remember that the revolution that toppled the Shah those decades ago had significant instigation as a ‘Student Led’ phenomenon; which is to say, soviet sponsored phenomena; which is to say, international whiggery phenomena.

          Watch GAE media broadcasts at the time and you can tell they’re barely holding themselves back from openly celebrating their fellow travelers in defiance of ‘their’ ostensible foreign policy initiatives.

          • The Cominator says:

            Yeah the “Islamic” revolution was green on the outside but red on the inside. Though they made a great effort to make the green look real.

            • Mayflower Sperg says:

              As with Stalin, this “great effort” included mass imprisonment, torture, and execution of those deemed excessively red. You no doubt enjoy reading accounts of these events, as both a catharsis and a how-to guide:


              • jim says:

                Very interesting. The prisoners were arrested for the normal political crimes, ranging from peaceful protest to as large scale armed organised warfare with heavy weapons, but they were executed on the basis of their faith.

                The Iranian authorities asked them an Islamic equivalent of the affirmation of faith that I ask from people claiming to be Christian and claiming that their Christianity is holier than mine, and a huge number of these people, belonging to various supposedly Islamic leftist movements, would not give it, even under whippings and the threat of death.

                The executed were hardcore believers in postIslam. Those who committed merely political offences, such as large scale armed organised warfare with heavy weapons, got off by simply giving a quite short affirmation of faith, and in some cases were required to pray five times a day.

                That they had to execute so many reveals that the lefter thou, more Islamic than thou, were an enemy religion. On which faith the ruling faith had to do a Cominator.

                • Kunning Drueger says:

                  Jim, can you clarify your position on Iran? someone above stated that you think it’s a GAE proxy. That doesn’t track at all with my perspective. A now forgotten episode was the GW professor turned State Department upper cadre turned Patsy for the “Iran spy/influence ring” in DC. He was a back channel fo the Obama Regime to double dip on the “normalization” with Iran. Iran definitely has faggots & feminists, but there is a commensurate converse that in some sense balances out the atheistic excesses. Factions vie for control.

                  This is probably rather obvious to the more brilliant, But I constantly have to remind myself that no nation is all one thing. There are factions, there are trends, there are seasons of domination and submission. America is a doppelganger for Sodom, But it also has the seeds of a Christian nationalist space empire. I wonder how similar or different Iran?, or Russia or China, is…

  13. A2 says:

    For those who want a peek at what’s coming up, there was a leaflet provided with a recent Financial Times with the title Responsible Business Education. If you now feel a cold hand gripping your heart, you are entirely right.

    The target audience is future MBA students and it is packed with articles and ads like (literally) “What does your nature-positive transformation look like?” and “Nature is our life-support system on Earth. It is time to accelerate nature-positive business practices.”

    The articles are, for instance, “Rip it up and start again”, which means ripping up MBA education and replacing it with something more nature friendly; “A brighter future. By combining hands-on experience with tools such as VR headsets, and AI … to teach more effectively about sustainability and the climate crisis”; the Responsible Business Education Awards; “On a mission. The best schools have shown commitment … through sustainability-driven courses, lower-carbon campuses, and a willingness to evolve” (attached image: three young women, two browns and an immodest blonde in the middle with a spaghetti top); “ESG ratings: where next?”, and of course, “Furthering the cause”.

    Photos are of women and brown people with a smattering of treacherous grinning boomer men who already have got theirs. The former are your next middle managers.

  14. A2 says:

    Off topic but topical: “No, no, Shlomo. Don’t be so literal. That is not how you undermine society.”

  15. Barack Obama is my moral compass. Whatever he says, believe the opposite. Whatever he does, do the opposite. He is exceptionally reliable in this way.

  16. i says:

    Come across this book that is described in the Twitter thread:

    And this book claims that marriage by mutual consent is actually codified unwritten Germanic custom. Which endured in Britain the longest. Is this true?

    • Fidelis says:

      I posted about this a few comments down. Didn’t read the book yet, here it is if anyone wants to go first, ipfs link from cloudflare fyi

    • jim says:

      We have precisely zero evidence for Germanic mutual consent, and an enormous pile of evidence for moderns flat out lying barefaced about it.

      I have seen this widely claimed, but no one has any supporting evidence for it. They interpret Tacitus as claiming it, but he is silent on the subject, and reports extraordinarily severe coercion against female misconduct.

      He praises the virtue of Germanic women – but observed behaviour is that mutual consent being required leads to massive female misconduct. The normal standard throughout all of history, except during periods of decay and collapse, is that mutual consent is desirable but not required.

      If mutual consent is required, the normal female behaviour is to bang the most alpha male around, while keeping her options open for an upgrade. This behaviour has to be dealt with by public shaming and a good whipping.

      So if a woman has banged someone, she has to “consent” to marriage, or be disgraced and whipped — and among the German tribes, a good deal worse than being whipped.

      • Fidelis says:

        There’s historical anecdotes here, in the thread, second post, a story about the daughter of a noble family contracting to marriage with the bailiff agaisnt the will of the parents.

        I suspect the difference lies in exposure to suitors and ability for women to freely fuck whomever. ‘Consent’ in the sense of a father lining up suitors and the daughter picks her favorite seems reasonable. Seems like a custom that mitigates bugman bureacrat type clannishness and allows for some innate biological compatibility instinct, while also filtering out the retards. Interested if you see flaws in this, hypothetical as I havent dug enough into the history to be certain, sort of system.

        • Aidan says:

          The thread describes a conflict between church and state, the state siding with fathers and the church with suitors. It has little to do with ancient germanic tradition in England

          • Fidelis says:

            I can see that, though it’s a bit deeper a discussion than purely ‘state’ as the church tried to do many things in regards to controlling breeding. However I am less interested in that discussion, and more interested in discussion on the differences a very clannish high patriarchal system of daughter exchange produces versus a system of nuclear families filtering suitors before sending the husband off with the daughter. I do believe there is something there worth investigating in regards to the success of the English. Is it mere correlation?

            • Aidan says:

              The success of the English was high elite fertility- higher than positions could be found for all the sons, and noble husbands for all the daughters. Downward mobility of elite sons and daughters enriched the gene pool of the middle classes. This may have been facilitated by the relative ease of eloping in England, but requires high elite fertility. If you have low elite fertility, a noble daughter running off with a musician is catastrophic to the elite gene pool. With high elite fertility, a noble daughter eloping with a cop as described in the original thread is good at least for the gene pool of the middle class while having no effect on the gene pool of the fertile elite

              • Fidelis says:

                Is this *not* true of the rest of Hajnalian Europe?

                Further, what I am interested in is just how England managed to more freely colonize by sending more Englishmen instead of merely enslaving the locals. Why did the French and Dutch not have the same success? Why wasn’t the Louisiana territory brimming with Frenchmen the same way the Northeast was with Englishmen? Why did the Dutch not settle Australia, despite getting there hundreds of years before the English? There are a few exceptions, Afrikaaners, French in North Africa, etc. But for the most part Europeans settled very few of themselves abroad. Except for the English.

                Was it merely that the English happened to be relatively on top of the geopolitical world at the time that we had cratering child mortality? It seems like an insufficient explanation. I think that they bred themselves into a type of human that is capable of living well in nuclear families, that is capable of living apart from large ‘support networks’, and has a desire to move to opportunity. I am interested in not destroying such inclinations. We’ll need them when it’s time to subdue the stars.

                • Aidan says:

                  It is true to a lesser extent. Germany was much the same way- but many forget that Germany was actively colonizing the East from the time the Huns were broken at the battle of Lechfeld, expanding into Slav lands to a great extent. Most were ethnically cleansed after WWII.

                  The pressure that makes excess nobles marry down is the same pressure that drives colonization. Germany and England have engineering supremacy, engineering supremacy being what happens when you breed aristocratic traits and high IQ into the artisan class. French, Spanish, Irish engineering? A joke. Scandinavian engineering? Pretty good, but second to Anglo-German inventiveness.

    • Aidan says:

      Obviously not. Consent does not mean today what it meant in 1000 AD. Ponder the difference between consent and assent. Consent meant “not resisting”. Literally “going along with”. Going along with what? We can directly observe pagan Norse marriage customs by reading the sagas. Women did not have a free choice of husband; women were allowed to veto their father’s choice of husband for her. Not go out and pick their own. In practice, it looks like the veto was rarely used, and there is no recorded evidence that the veto was used more than twice. Presumably these fathers, who did functionally own their daughters, would get quite scary if the daughters kept turning away suitors in the vain hope that a far more high-status man would propose to her.

      It is not ideal patriarchy, but it is nothing like the modern notion of consent and modern marriage.

      • Mayflower Sperg says:

        Girls in 1000 AD “consented” to marriage in the same sense that girls today “consent” to having their tits cut off. They do what society expects of them.

      • A2 says:

        Getting married, for the normie girl, was the way to get out from under thumb of your parents and start your real life. One can read about this in 20th century works even; the authoresses may still be alive.

        If you simply refuse to marry, well, stay home and do the household drudgery as a spinster until death. (Sorry, no spoiled teenager life until 35.) Or elope with some local and hope for the best. Or run away and see where you end up. As a whore perhaps?

  17. […] It’s rapidly becoming readily apparent to everyone, not just me, Wang Hunin, Simplicius, and Andrei Martyanov, that the decline of the imperial United States is both a) inevitable and b) observable. […]

    • alf says:

      Do my eyes deceive me or is this the first time Vox Day publicly acknowledges he reads jim? I mean sure, still in the form of ‘this Jim guy is almost as smart as I am”, but a happy moment nonetheless.

      • someDude says:

        He just links. He does not mention Jim Blog by name. He can’t bring himself to acknowledge Jim Blog, it would appear

        neither doesAnglin

        Neither does the Zman

        Hell! neither does Severian on his own blog even though he comments here by name.

        • alf says:

          Linking is as good as naming.

          Anglin advertises on Jim’s blog under his own name. That’s acknowledgement in my book. Severian comments here, that’s acknowledgement — it’s not that men are obliged to advertise other men.

          Zman is absolutely horrified by the misogynistic opinions we hold of women, so will probably never acknowledge.

          • someDude says:

            No, not obligated to advertise other men.

            I’m merely observing that while while Vox, Zman, Anglin and Sev do mention others by name, they don’t mention him by name on their blogs.

            But props to Sev and Anglin for commenting here in their own names.

            Zman seems silent on the woman question. Is that how you conjectured that our misogyny horrifies him?

            • alf says:

              He mentioned it once, in the lines of ‘as I listen to cheerful Christmas music and my wife is cooking dinner, I am once again disgusted by how some people on the internet have horrible ideas about treating women as property.’

              • someDude says:

                Hahahahaha! Such is Female power. Only an exceptional male can understand and appreciate that power and how it is exercised.

                For whatever it is worth, I found more Hindu reactionary blogs referencing Jim directly than western reactionary blogs doing the same.

                The notable exception was the now defunct Social matter that essentially treated whatever Jim wrote (posts, comments, the lot) as sacred scripture. Hindus can identify with that sort of thing. As Suones used to say, in spite of his antipathy and unflattering comments about Christ Himself, “Jim is a respected Elder, even if from the other side”

  18. gaikokumaniakku says:

    From Al-Jazz

    >The Biden administration has provided Israel with military and diplomatic support since the Gaza war began, without drawing “red lines” for how those resources can be used. It has also blocked UN resolutions urging a ceasefire and rejected a case at the International Court of Justice accusing Israel of genocide.

    >Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, a think tank in Washington, DC, also told Al Jazeera in a television interview on Thursday that the Yemen attacks highlight a failure on the part of the US and UK to push Israel to end its war in Gaza.

    >“The question that has to be asked is, ‘Why is it that the British and American governments prefer to escalate and go to war essentially in order to prevent the Houthis from attacking ships, rather than actually [taking] the path of a ceasefire in Gaza?’” he said.

    Just to play the role of Captain Obvious:

    The answer to the question of “Why do Yanks avoid a ceasefire in Gaza?” is “Yanks are bribed and/or blackmailed by Israelis.”

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      The obvious answer for why the tranzis try to start conflict in Yemen is the same reason they don’t want to stop conflict in Gaza; they are pro-chaos, and try to cause it and keep it going everywhere.

      Both peace *and definitive victory by one side or another* are things they will work to prevent.

    • Kunning Druegger says:

      This is a normie/dumb take.

      US/UK (GAE) cannot come to any resolution in Israel because half (at least) of the establishment is on the side of Palestine and the other half supports Tel Aviv. Further complicating this is the dividing line runs right down the center of the Biden Regime. A while back I introduced the concept (written by someone else, somewhere else) of The Biden, a collection of advisors, administrators, staffers, consultants, and family members that are actually in control of the Executive. They are all Yes Men as a matter of course; they can only get support if they in turn support, and they cannot oppose or they will be opposed. If something comes up that there is unilateral consensus on (Russia Bad, Putin Evil) then they can act in concert and set things in motion. But they cannot move independently, intelligently, forcefully, or creatively. So it’s trivial to get involved in the war in Ukraine but impossible to manage it intelligently.

      The underlings across the Executive are revolting over the support for Israel. Walk outs and demonstrations are going to increase in frequency. But these are useless people doing pointless things in positions that don’t matter. So long as the MIC is ok with what’s happening, it will continue to happen. The Border Crisis is a perfect example of the inability of The Biden to act. The more intelligent ones can see that the situation is untenable, that the waves of mud people are only undercutting regime legitimacy, and that even with all the social programing and decades of mass mind control, white people get activated really quickly by the images of useless mouths to feed with crime in their wake streaming across the border. But the Radicals love it, they love every bit of it, and they get what they want be things proceeding with no change. If anyone tries to be just a bit reasonable, they will be seen as betrayers and forced out.

      The situation in the Bab el Mandeb is basically the same. The Biden refuses to delegate to military control, which caused the French, Italians, and Spanish to pull out. The Biden is compromised because King Nigger at DOD is a literal retard with a staff of retards, and their dumb choices and inaction are delivering yet another American defeat at the hands of goat fuckers. The situation could be rectified very easily, either diplomatically or militarily, but doing so would make elements of The Biden feel undercut, and so it just limps onward.

      The temptation to believe that jews run the world from their secret tunnels is overwhelming to anyone that isn’t redpilled on power, but I think it’s rather obvious that the jews in Israel are downstream from real power, which is one reason why they can’t even effectively go after Hamas, much less try and beat them. of course, there are jews in power, but they are almost all liberal atheist kikes, and they hate Israel as much as, if not more than, your garden variety Arab.

      • gaikokumaniakku says:

        >This is a normie/dumb take.

        I have often been told I have dumb takes, but this might be the first time anyone has told me I have a normie take.

        >The temptation to believe that jews run the world from their secret tunnels is overwhelming to anyone that isn’t redpilled on power, but I think it’s rather obvious that the jews in Israel are downstream from real power…

        My claim was that Israelis bribe and blackmail Yanks. Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell are the obvious examples.

        I am not sure how you jumped from what I typed to “Jews run the world from their secret tunnels.” You might be exaggerating for comic effect, and alluding to the recent NYC scandal with unauthorized tunnels under Chabad.

        I assume you’re being serious when you write:

        >the jews in Israel are downstream from real power…

        What is “real power”? Is it a group of people? Are a disproportionately large number of those people Jewish? If so, how is your claim of “real power” running the world different from Jews running everything from secret tunnels?

        • Kunning Drueger says:

          Harvard is the Vatican of Progressivism. The GAE is a theocracy. Jews are bagmen and dirty work specialists. If you boil it down to one group, it’s neo-protestant whites from new England, but of course there are jews mixed in. jews are the roaches of the white leftist ecosystem; as the latter grows/spreads, the former multiplies.

          • The Cominator says:

            Unraveling the hierarchy is complicated and speculative… but blaming everything on the jews has a huge timeline problem…

            • Jehu says:

              The biggest problem with blaming the jews for everything is that it encourages the incorrect belief that unleashing the Daleks on them would solve all our problems, which it wouldn’t. Although it is manifestly true that any path to lesser insanity is going to have a disproportionate impact on them.

          • gaikokumaniakku says:

            >it’s neo-protestant whites from new England, but of course there are jews mixed in.

            Thanks for the clarification. I suppose there are at least two theories of the power structure within the Harvard-centered elites: either old-school non-Jewish WASPs are at the very top, with Jews as their underlings, or Jews are at the very top, with old-school non-Jewish WASPs as their underlings. Either way, the ideology grips them with cult-like fervor.

            • The Cominator says:

              Covid convinced me that

              1) Yes there is to some degree a centralized conspiracy and it spans the earth Alex Jones style, it is not always acting globally as it wants to mostly stay hidden but with Covid it tipped its hand…

              2) Jesuits are at the top of this. Fauci is a pretty obvious Jesuit given his background and continued association with the Jesuits and the Vatican. Since the Jesuits are a spy agency masquerading as priests and many Jesuits masquerade as laymen, and since the Jesuit spy agency is by nature global lacking any real country this is far less absurd than you think. Ethnic groups can have general ingroup preference and outgroup hatred (Dot Indians have this to an EXTREME degree) but that is not enough for a conspiracy you need well defined unity of command. Jews don’t have it, WASPs DEFINITELY don’t have it… the Papal glowniggers DO have it.

              • skippy says:

                Jewish organizations with organization hierarchy and discipline are much bigger than the Jesuits, e.g. Chabad-Lubavitch. I am not suggesting C-L is “the one” but it is a bigger group of coordinated priests than the Jesuits.

                The problem with the Jesuit conspiracy theory apart from the fact it’s obvious misdirection to take the attention away from Jewish conspiracy theories is the complete lack of relation of anything going on to Catholic objectives, preferences, or modalities.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Chabad Jews were hardcore Trump voters and anti Covid and anti vax. Also don’t they have many different rabbinical bloodlines each little group of them follows instead of one…

                  So they don’t seem to be our enemies (they don’t exactly love outsiders but they seem unlike most Jews to pretty consistently hate the left) and they don’t seem to have unity of command.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “is the complete lack of relation of anything going on to Catholic objectives, preferences, or modalities.”

                  Also you seem to assume the Catholic Church gives a shit about religion doctrine etc other than as a way of scamming for money and power. The Jesuit Pope doesn’t hide the fact that he doesn’t give a shit. Papal supremacy is the only doctrine they actually care about since without that it all falls apart.

                • skippy says:

                  Deflection. The point isn’t that Chabad is necessarily the organization controlling everything but that disciplined and large Jewish organizations do exist. Jews are not all a bunch of individuals who disagree with each other about everything.

                  The Catholic Church is a universalist religion. Its goal is to convert everyone to Catholicism. What we are seeing is destruction of all outsiders, which makes sense if the coordinating group is ethnonationalist. Also, we are seeing the Catholic Church being deformed and degraded every year, while Jewish culture is promoted more and more.

                • Fidelis says:

                  Is there a particular sect that wants to destroy the Ashkenazim in Israel and also has power and influence? There’s far too many arabs et al. in their supposed land, and they are too tightly controlled by the GAE command, to make me think the Ashkis are in charge of much. Could believe a small sect that hates the others grabbed the reigns, but a mere ethnonationalism conspiracy doesn’t match the situation I can see.

                • skippy says:

                  Zionism/Anti-Zionism is a debate between pragmatists and Halakhists. State of Israel is not a religious state according to Jewish Law, which is the only strictly legitimate Jewish State.

                • Fidelis says:

                  This is a weak answer in my opinion. If an ethnonationalist conspiracy, you wouldn’t kill your fellow ethics just for following a different plan. So it’s at least already become a subset of the socalled Jews, which is not necessarily an ethnic conspiracy in scope. Just a regular conspiratorial operation, run by regular demon worshippers.

                • The Cominator says:

                  A universal religion based on outright historical lies (there were no Popes before the 11th century, the donation of Constantine was fake) that uniquely

                  1. The head cleric has his own state still for some reason
                  2. Is staffed almost entirely by homosexuals and by design (won’t abolish celibacy even though it wasn’t even originally a church rule)
                  3. Has its own spy agency which was deeply involved in the Covid hoax, its also really the oldest spy agency in the modern sense there is. Today it denies its a spy agency though in the 19th century it was well known even among Catholics it was a spy agency (hence got kicked out of even Catholic monarchies multiple times).
                  4. Has a pretty consistent leftist effect compared to other forms of Christianity (

                  Seems pretty sinister to me…

                  Explain to me why the Catholic Church isn’t viewed in the same negative light as the Jews generally are. A true right winger who knows his shit kinda has to be very anti-catholic (yes I agree Tolkien and Mel Gibson were/are good people).

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  The confounding variable with vaticanism is generally based laity and HIV positive clerisy.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Look at the link I posted the “based laity” is largely a myth. And why should a based laity if it existed defer to the authority of a bunch of communist homosexuals… somehow that makes it seem even gayer.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  There’s a lot of really great anti-modernism that derives from or is adjacent too the catholic tradition. This is not to say that it is not an unmixed bad, it is to say that it is very mixed. A reductionist argument for vaticanism being an unmixed bad has more hurdles to jump over than most other usual suspects, such as your other example of skypes, even though it is bad.

                • alf says:

                  Been watching Peter Kreeft’s ‘7 reasons why everyone should be a catholic.’ He does not really address the major critiques that are passed on this blog. He addresses papal corruption (‘something so corrupt that has endured for so many centuries has to have divine backing’) and claims that despite this corruption, scripture has never changed. Which in light of recent changes at the vatican seems like an outdated argument.

                  One of the few arguments he makes that I like is that catholic churches are better looking than the protestant.

                • alf says:

                  Also, he stresses the importance of the liturgy of the eucharist. Do we have a strong opinion on that? Seems to me like a more innocent version of Jewish circumcision: a ritual meant to designate group membership. Which I have no big problem with, but I’m guessing the protestants dropped it because they wanted to differentiate the kind of group they were a part of?

                • skippy says:

                  “Explain to me why the Catholic Church isn’t viewed in the same negative light as the Jews generally are.”

                  Well, they did. E.g.

                  At some point, though, it became clear that this organization did not have a lot of power, since it was being diminished year-on-year and failing to achieve its goals.

                  As late as the pre-WWII, the Vatican conducted diplomacy like a state, indeed, like a great power, signing agreements with Germany as if it were the UK or the USSR. Like many things, that did not outlast WWII. Did they stop doing things like that as part of some clever plot to advance goals that are totally different to their apparent goals by means totally different to their historic means, or because they lost power?

      • Fred says:

        This is the correct take. It’s not that globohomo specifically supports chaos, it’s just that half of globohomo (the smart white/Jew faction) supports Israel, and the other half (the dumb brown faction) supports the “Palestinians”, and the result is chaos.

        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          It is not just foreverwar in Israel, it is foreverwar everywhere the GAE has ever gotten involved, including and especially in cases where they are nominally unanimous in Message.

      • gaikokumaniakku says:

        President Joe Biden (Jewish in-laws)
        Vice-President Kamala Harris (Jewish spouse)
        Chief of Staff Jeff Zients (Jewish), replacing Ron Klain (Jewish, Harvard)
        Secretary of State Antony Blinken (Jewish, Harvard)
        Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen (Jewish, Yale)
        Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin III (Black)
        Attorney General Merrick Garland (Jewish, Harvard)
        National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan (White Gentile, Yale)
        Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines (Jewish)
        Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas (Jewish)

        in 2013 Harvard Hillel had claimed a Jewish undergraduate enrollment of 25%, while one of my sharp critics noted that a Harvard Crimson survey indicated that only 9.5% of the entering freshmen Class of 2017 were Jewish, seemingly representing a huge discrepancy. However, that survey referred to being religiously Jewish, which is entirely different than being Jewish in the broader ethnic or ancestral sense, especially since Jews are among the most secular populations in American society and a full 42% of the Harvard students described their religious beliefs as atheist, agnostic, or “other.” Indeed, a worldwide survey found that only 38% of (ethnic) Jews follow the Jewish religion. So if the Crimson survey were correct and Harvard Jews were typical in their religiosity, this would imply that 9.5% / 0.38 = 25% of Harvard freshman were ethnically Jewish, exactly the percentage claimed by Harvard Hillel. This strongly suggests that the Hillel figures were roughly accurate.


        This is not meant as definitive, but it gives us both non-quant and quant ideas. The non-quant part is that many non-Jewish elites have intimate Jewish connections (in-laws, spouses, etc.) and the quant part is the percentage data on ethnic Jews versus religious Jews at Harvard.

  19. Fidelis says:

    An interesting thread on the oddities of English marriage practice. A bit light on important details but the sourced book is listed, so should be easy to interrogate for more information on what exactly ‘marriage by consent’ means here

  20. Johnny5 says:

    The GAE is dying, and thanks to the GloboHomos, [*held, not deleted, but held pending passage of the shill test.*]

    • jim says:

      Indeed it is, but what is that is causing its death, and why is the economy collapsing?

      Pass the shill test described in the moderation policy and get white listed. Anyone can pass this, regardless of his religious or political beliefs, regardless of what issues he wants to speak about, anyone who is not reading from a script with a supervisor standing over him, can pass this.

  21. White Nationalism says:

    [*held, not deleted, but held pending passage of the shill test.*]

    • jim says:

      What is the problem that white nationalism the solution to? Explain to us why whites cannot live with inferior races. That will require the thought crimes that you strangely failed to commit.

      Pass the shill test described in the moderation policy and get white listed. Anyone can pass this, regardless of his religious or political beliefs, regardless of what issues he wants to speak about, anyone who is not reading from a script with a supervisor standing over him, can pass this.

  22. Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

    I’ve noticed news channels and public access tv have been rerunning docudramas about reparashuns lately.

    Even as the empire disintegrates, the race-communism factions keeps rolling full steam ahead. Imagine trying to run a conspiracy where it has become impossible to even articulate reservations, even at the highest levels.

    Used to be that ‘just shut up and do it racist’ was something only the peons had to suffer after The Narrative was handed down. Now the management classes have to bear the indignity too. And amongst the jet set, the closest figleaf to strategy that can even be deigned to offer is rationalizations about how this can serve as pretexts for motivating janissaries for the coming de-kulakization.

    • Adam says:

      Today I heard a PSA notifying me that a certain percent of blacks do not have enough money to retire, a problem apparently being solved by an NGO and some sort of education initiative. First time I’ve heard them bitch about not having enough money to retire.

  23. Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

    Aidan, you asked on X if there are any men left that believe in secret stashes of decent women. I do not believe that there are. Not in any serious numbers. I think that the grift is dying. None of the comments I see online from men are hopeful. Right or wrong, the zoomers and Gen Alpha take it as a given that nearly all women are disloyal whores. They are either bitter or resigned to the fact that women are trash, but they consider it a fact.

    • jim says:

      All women are trash if you are not alpha enough and they do not feel securely owned, and the more cocks they have had up them, the higher the standard of alpha.

      If you are the kind of guy who is cheerfully willing to some serious lawbreaking (which is doable without to much danger if you can afford a good lawyer, understand how the system works, and have the ability to talk to cops without getting charged with every crime in a three hundred mile radius) then you will find a reasonable supply of good women.

      Lawyers, by the way, are fixers. If you actually wind up in court, you or your lawyer has screwed up, or you hired an insufficiently well connected lawyer, or someone in power got a hard on for you. A lawyer’s job is to make the case go away before it happens.

      Obviously this is a less than satisfactory solution. What we should have is a system where marriage caused a woman to be securely owned. Which is how the authorities in port Jackson solved the slut bitch problem overnight, turning whores into wives on a dime.

      • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

        While I am with you on that, most of the young men I interact with have never heard of you. Their experience is one of not understanding women and not understanding the legal system. They are not kindly disposed towards women, and I am starting to see a lot of young women complain that they cannot find men to approach them. The hikikimori phenomenon is making its way to America because the women largely are trash and the men are realizing they will never be alpha enough and are checking out.

        • The Cominator says:

          Also a lot of people really really shouldn’t try talking to cops and if you know any ex cops or even current cops in private life they’ll advise you that if the cops ever want to talk to you… don’t talk to them. Consent to nothing and say lawyer.

          • Karl says:

            That depends on the situation. If there is a crime to be solved, I wouldn’t talk. If I’m routinely stopped, e.g. while driving a car, I’ll show my driving license and talk, even if the cops claim that I commited a traffic violation (neither admitting nor denying it).

            Not talking ensures that the matter will not be dropped now by the cop. If he can’t drop the matter, no point in talking to him. The cop can always drop misdemeanor, like traffic violations. So talking to him might help.

            • jim says:

              It is remarkable what cops can drop. Even if they need to call an ambulance, they do not need to charge anyone.

              • skippy says:

                My understanding is that cops have KPIs, and this, rather than any ideological factor or desire to be nice to you, is going to determine their behavior.

                Unless you actually know how their system works, difficult and risky to try to game this.

                Not talking always makes it harder for them to charge and convict you, which probably offers the best bet for getting charges dropped and/or acquittal when dealing with unknown cops. Harder it is to get any kind of result, less worth it it is to try. That’s just general fact.

                Perhaps you have better idea of a general approach, or perhaps you had some inside knowledge how the cops you dealt with were managed, or perhaps you are just much more charismatic than me. All believable.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Not sure what KPIs are but looking them up… sounds like quotas and yeah cops have quotas at least for traffic tickets don’t know about arrests (arrest quotas btw are one of the most surefire signs you live in an awful evil regime) but they probably do.

                  I’m sure Jim is way more charismatic than me and most people because general advice on cops even by lawyers and ex cops who know the system is consistently this, shut the fuck up other than to say the word lawyer whether you are actually guilty or not (as the cops often don’t really care). Just don’t fucking talk to them.

              • Karl says:

                In Germany, they can only drop misdemeanor charges. Anything else can only be dropped by the state prosecutor, but there are many crimes where they only have to investigate if the alleged victim explicitly requests the cops to investigate.

                So whether it is a good idea to talk to the cops also depends on which country you are in.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Cops can’t drop charges once you are charged, but the cops don’t have to charge you unless the prosecutor orders them too for some reason…

                • jim says:

                  As I said, if someone in authority has the hots for you, doomed. But, correcting my incorrect phrasing, it is remarkable how violent and potentially deadly things can get without any charges being brought, and remarkable how perfunctory the investigation of the suspicious disappearance of someone not very desirable can be.

            • Karl,
              Exactly, it does depend.
              When Michael Franzese was going away for 10 years, his dad gave him a single piece of advice about handling himself in prison.
              “Remember five words: Please. Thank you. Excuse me.” None of those words are statements.

              What you say can get you in trouble, but I don’t understand the literalism. Snapping “Lawyer” connotes an unstated “, asshole.”
              You aren’t asking for forecepts during surgery and you aren’t a gang banger.

              Oh yea, Abundant latitude. Our current police Chief was Internal Affairs and the cops love him. Why do you suppose that is?
              The Pink Floyd parties of 2020 were organized by communists agitators and Chavin got railroaded. But the strategic latency is not fake. Granted, they would have been better off showing their kids Chappel’s “How not to get your ass kicked by the police” than burning down their own cities, but that’s neither here nor there.

              Let Let me relate one little story – there are no formal records so I won’t be doxing myself here:
              There was a misunderstanding, I was tackled by cops, cuffed. I was genuinely perplexed surprised them. As we get into the cruiser I had a good idea what happened and *I told them the essence of the situation*. If they didn’t believe my story, prosecutors could technically charge me for home invasion and assault. *I did not discuss potential charges*.

              They look at each-other and before going to the station, pulled onto quiet street and had me step outside the vehicle.. That, gentlemen, is when you talk to the police. I got lucky. If I had been carrying identification, would have run my name by habit. As it was, I told the truth and they dropped me off at a doctors office.

              There are no hard and fast rules. If I had been a wise guy, it would overnight in jail, my name back in the news papers and months of litigation and tens of thousands of dollars.

              It just stands to reason. You treat someone as a professional who deserves respect, they’ll be more likely to act that way.

              On the opposite pole: I’m told Masaad Ayoob is a good guy and good expert witness, but he’s also a cop. Do not take his f—ing advice on how to handle police encounters.


              • jim says:

                > It just stands to reason. You treat someone as a professional who deserves respect, they’ll be more likely to act that way.

                If you get tackled and cuffed, you are on path to being arrested and charged with something, even if they have not the slightest reason to think you guilty of anything they can always find something. Obviously you want to avoid starting on that path. Even if cops were watching you attempt to kill someone, you don’t need to find yourself on that path.

                On the one hand, you can get on that path even while pure as the driven snow, and on the other hand you can stay off that path even if there is blood all over you.

                The thing to be mindful of is that cops are always encountering people who are violent, dangerous, and often armed. So your number one job is to put them at their ease. You approach them alpha to alpha, with speech and or body language that signifies that you are not going to attack them. “Do you wish to speak with me?”, while showing open palms to signify that you are not armed (or if you are, that you want to talk, not fight. Try to get into a seated position, while they are likely to position themselves to be standing between you and anything useful as a weapon. Be mindful that they are afraid. Give them dignified re-assurance.

                Obviously being unpleasant is a bad idea. But the kind of courtesy you need is the courtesy appropriate between dangerous people.

                The dynamic underlying these unfortunate encounters is that cops are required to show up when there is trouble, and they do not want to show up, still less arrest anyone. But, given that they have to show up, often the safest thing to do is for them to tackle and cuff someone. But that is dangerous, and it is work, and the poor cop has no end of paperwork with charges. If there is a path where they can be there, and be seen plausibly doing their job, but do not have work and not have danger, they will take that path.

                Cops want the path that is least work and least danger. Give them that path. Palms open and facing, Polite, respectful, and dignified. You will get off. You don’t actually have to tell them anything, but you do have to be courteous. If they are talking, they are not busting. They have to show up and be seen do something, and don’t want to. A pleasant chat is something. They don’t want to bust and cuff you because you merely happen to be guilty of a major crime. They want bust and cuff you to remove danger and unpleasantness from the situation.

                Cops are afraid. They are always afraid, and with good reason. They are walking into the unknown, with bad people around and crazy people around. You need to put them at their ease.

        • Adam says:

          Aaron Clarey was on Michael Sartains podcast recently talking about how kids now will be “dating” and yet never ever interact with each other in person, even though they go to the same school. I guess it is common. They are too scared in general, socially to interact in person.

          • jim says:

            Kids these days have never seen the mating dance correctly performed in person or in media, and boys have been taught that each of the necessary steps in the mating dance will result in the female running away screaming in horror and him being arrested.

            Hence, no sex, no marriage, and no children.

            • Adam says:

              Is that really why though? I mean yes in a way but I remember by the time I was 14 I was doing whatever I could to be alone with a girl and at least get her shirt off.

              Female status has never been higher, and male status lower. Fear is the determining factor, which is status. I don’t think showing these kids the mating dance is going to fix anything. When being unmarried at 20 or being a single mother for any reason results in overwhelming shame and a complete absence of status for women, that would make a big change.

              • skippy says:

                Zoomers appear to be afraid of everything. Recently encountered chad-looking zoomer who started talking to me basically because he was on his own and afraid to enter the bar without some kind of “permission”. When I was young, I was not buff or chad-looking, and guy like this would’ve stormed in and cleaned up without looking twice at me. There is something mighty weird going on.

                • Epimetheus says:

                  Our society is an open-air concentration camp run by demon-possessed psychopaths. Our spiritual crisis has led to mass spiritual starvation, so many people are turning to spiritual cannibalism.

                  Children, being helpless, are often targeted for consumption ie. they are being psycho-spiritually tortured at an unprecedented rate in the electronic screen-world and at school. The world seems like an increasingly dark place to them – a Night Land patrolled by monsters, with no one to protect them. But maybe I’m wrong – I’m a bit of a schizo

                • Contaminated NEET says:

                  None of the ab-humans around me on a daily basis can speak the Master-Word.

    • Aidan says:

      It was a rhetorical question- most men are quite blackpilled and the tradcuck position that “there are tons of good girls out there if you just move to a rural area and go to church” never went down all that well and it is going down less and less. That said, our position has never been all that popular, and both the blackpilled and the trad will sperg out at us

      • The Cominator says:

        The blackpilled won’t sperg out because the blackpilled share the general position of Jim on what needs to be done at a civilizational level make women property again and have the male feminists, simps and white knights all killed (I would add put all fat women in fat camps and make all women grow shoulder length hair and until they do make them wear wigs, tattoo removal is too expensive to do to all women and men will just have to tolerate them for now but they won’t be allowed generally in the future).

        Spergs and the blackpilled will point out that for a white guy to try to openly and be notoriously appear like a dangerous criminal (Jims individual solution) in a state that hates white guys… it isn’t something every guy can do without ending up dead or in jail. Everyone knows past the age of 20 girls love thugs but being one is dangerous especially if you’re a sperg and isolated from your boyhood mannerbund. Also in our state of the future we will not so much have thugs in the current sense what we will have are duellists…

    • Reinhard von Lohengramm says:

      While this advice may not received well on this blog, the move is second generation immigrant asians/latinas. Third generation is too slutty. First gen too un-assimilated. Second gen is the sweet spot where they’re Americanized but still retain some tradness from their parents influence. Plus these types tend to be hard working high IQ strivers, so if you can deprogram the libtardism you’ll be ok.

      The cons are obvious, though I’m less worried about race mixing than many reactionary types, so idc.

      • Adam says:

        If you reason that most women will have children one way or the other, it is acceptable for a male of a greater race to have children with a female of a lesser. As the rest will be better than if the female had a child with her own kind. What is never acceptable is a female of a greater race having the child of a lesser male.

        • Vendat Tunicam says:

          I have been to Mexico and a few other places in Latin America. Want to know when the last time they built buildings worth living in? Within a generation or two of the last conquistadors showing up. That’s the future of those marrying into the lesser races.

          • Adam says:

            The future would be 50% better than Mexico should a white male father a child with a Mexican woman. Potentially more given the children will be raised by a white male father.

            But it was more of a practical argument. The women will have *someones* kids. The better the quality of father, the further the leap forward in terms of genetics.

            • Handi says:

              Who cares about the quality of some spic or gook woman’s kids. That is an utter non sequitur to anyone’s interest here. Chancing death in one of Aidan’s beachfront bridenapping raids would serve a higher expected utility for a White man’s bloodline than tossing it into a mud pit.

    • Mayflower Sperg says:

      Lots of nice young women in the tropics, if you don’t mind your descendants all being brown and stupid. For white men who aren’t willing to race-mix, it’s pretty grim. Russia and Eastern Europe had a lot of nice women in the 1990s and early 2000s, but they are old now and have no daughters.

      Ladies, if men won’t approach you, maybe you should lose the expensive clothes, jewelry, makeup, perfumes, shoes, handbags, etc. and go for a simpler, girl-next-door look. Those accessories don’t signal your value, they signal your price, and if no one’s buying, the price is too high. In the old days, young women lived frugally and saved their earnings for a dowry.

      • Fidelis says:

        I stand by the fact if you are ‘trained’ in the American dating arena, anywhere outside North America it’s possible to find a girl that’s acceptable. It’s not a paradise anywhere, but it’s also not the same sort of absolute hell I was left with. Any white man with decent intelligence, looks, and masculinity can make it fine in even Western Europe. Personal experience and second hand witness. There’s something defeated in most, not all but many, Euro men that makes an unbroken american stand out. Talk about dumb red tribe stuff like guns and hunting and trucks, guns especially, easy way to initiate and pass the first shit tests. Girls in low English countries will want to talk to you because you speak English (obviously not a thing in say, Netherlands or Denmark, but true enough in Balkanoid places).

        The tropics are for obesoids and lowwit normies. Don’t want to try at all? Tropics. If you can stand tropical life at least, I certainly cannot last more than a couple weeks in any country populated by them, they imbue their cities and towns with the jungle they came from. Friendly enough, but the life will eat your nerves fast if you come from cold places. Your kids will be instantly upper middle class unless you royally fuck up.

        Chinese, specifically the sichuan and surrounding provinces type, will outright chase you, perfect for the really shy spergy types. Seen more than one acquaintance get hitched to a yellow family this way, one Dutchie one charmingly spergish Germanoid. Good luck imparting your culture into your kids this way, you’d have better luck with your 90IQ half-phillipino kids, but hey at least you passed on something. As far as I can tell Korea and Japan are westernized to the point you may as well just go with Western Europe, your chances are similar enough. Maybe you get an edge by being a foreigner, therefore a beacon for their own outcast women, but unless you’re truly desperate I don’t see why you would want that. Plus the ones who will speak english will have learned it either abroad in anglo countries and or from consuming a ton of netflix propaganda, good luck with that. Definitely chinese if you’re chasing east asians, spandrell will tell you the same.

        • Mayflower Sperg says:

          I’m white, so not pursuing East-Asians, though Pax ought to consider it.

          My wife will tell you, “Oh come on, he’s in Russia, he has a girlfriend, he’s just lying to protect my feelings!” On my way to meet her family in Russia, I stayed with a Russian fellow who looked about 60, intelligent but not rich, lived apart from his wife, and had a 28-year-old girlfriend who wore a permanent scowl but was otherwise slim and bangable.

          But that was twenty years ago, and times have changed. Russian women go to college, they have careers, they date their own age plus or minus five, and they don’t seriously think about marriage before 30. The women available to me are very low quality, and the women not available to me are only slightly better.

          YouTuber Wild Siberia agrees with me up on this, though he eventually found a plain-Jane wife.

      • Doom says:

        The problem is the dialectic shovelled into young womens heads.

        All women are equally beautiful (WE ARE ALL 10’s!!)

        A “10” woman should have a “10” mate (rich, handsome etc).

        The major issue is the focus on the importance of female sexual satisfaction, IMO. We know well that women feel the “most” sexual satisfaction “when they are attracted”.

        The reason young south east asian women will date/ marry a foreign, old, white man is because the white man is assumed attractive.

        We’re not solving this problem until either a) women come to their own red pill realisation that getting resources and loyalty from men is more important than the sexual enjoyment of being with a “hot” guy
        b) there is a social change that shames women for chasing their sexual feelings over pragmatic mating feelings.

        Good luck with either, I guess.

        • Mayflower Sperg says:

          And by the time women are ready to settle for an average Joe, they’re too old and sterile to get even that. Nothing special happens when you cross the event horizon of a very large black hole; there’s no sign there saying “abandon all hope ye who enter”, but all your possible futures now end with you being torn to pieces and crushed into the singularity.

        • someDude says:

          Guys, this problem is coup complete as Jim has shouted himself hoarse

  24. Basil says:

    Jim, if you use the method you gave, Canada is now richer than the United States, which is simply absurd, and you know it.

    • jim says:

      I have wandered through a fair bit of the US, and I see a whole lot of absolutely shocking mass white poverty in the US, which never existed before. Huge numbers of whites are falling out of the middle class into the working class and the underclass, and the former working class is now very substantially underclass.

      I don’t see that in Canada. I don’t see mass poverty in Canada. Maybe I have not visited the right areas. I saw the usual dregs of white underclass in a Canada hospital, but they seem to be usual drug addicts and mentally disturbed that tend to use hospital as food and shelter, particularly when it gets cold on the streets – I did not see any bad areas where poor white people lived, where the environment revealed that most people living in that area were poor, just bad areas at centres that service bad people.

      I don’t see that in Canada. Yet. But on the other hand, It is been a while since I did much wandering in Canada.

      But last time I visited, it was absolutely obvious that a very large proportion of ordinary white people were considerably poorer in the US than in Canada.

      Canada’s high energy usage might reflect the need for heating, but that it is a difference in standard of living is consistent with my general impressions wandering around.

      • yewotm8 says:

        The quality of non-white is higher in Canada. Mostly >105 iq Indian and Chinese. Used to have a very strict “points” system in immigration where all of the applicant’s job history and education credentials were added up. Was added in around the same time as immigration acceptance from Europe started to be excluded as a policy. No idea on the status of it now, but they’re probably not bothering with it so they can meet the increased immigration quotas.

        Whereas in the US you tend to have blacks and Amerindians.

        • The Cominator says:

          > Poojeets
          > Higher quality
          No poojeets cannot live in any numbers with other people period. One poojeet gets into the management of a company he will immediately try to fire all non poojeets and replace with poojeets (no matter how unqualified). I would prefer niggers to poojeets and I stand by that.

          • someDude says:

            We love you too, Man!

            • The Cominator says:

              May not be you personally but the vast majority of pajeets are like this… they seem to have a deep but hidden hatred of whites (and even Asians) they get into a management position and they try to replace everyone. Its like the stereotype of the extreme Jewish ingroup preference that Jews generally don’t have (to that degree and some jews fucking hate other jews) but pajeets do.

              • Dharmicreality says:

                This is a general phenomenon of a priestly class that is cut from its roots and allowed to flourish on alien soil. Made worse by the evil state religion/education in the globohomo system in particular.

                I don’t see deep rooted hatred of whites among Indians in India in general and particularly Hindus. Maybe the desert cultists hate whites, but even most of that hatred seems directed at the GAE.

                The cream of subcontinental browns who arrive at your shores are selected for defection. The Hindu nationalist in India normally has a commitment to his nation and people and will generally ally with nationalists in other countries when their interests coincide. The Hindus who emigrate West generally, but not always, end up as priests of globohomo hating India *and* the country they immigrated to. Even many Hindu “nationalists” in the US who support Modi at home are leftists when it comes to American politics.

                • Mayflower Sperg says:

                  Dual-citizens vote right-wing in Indian elections, to strengthen their beloved homeland, while voting left-wing in American elections, to weaken the country they hope to take over.

              • someDude says:

                As Aryaman has repeatedly pointed out, and dharmic has re-iterated, the worst among Indians is making its way to the west. They don’t hate whites, they’re just amoral opportunists whose main thing is looking out for number 1. And part of looking out for Number 1 is to express hate on their country of origin and it’s BadHindus in the cowbelt even more than they express hate against the Badwhites in the Bible Belt. They are absolutely being selected for defection.

                He who defects on his own, why would he not defect on the other? Cue our resident pseudo Sikh

                They are no problem at all in Dubai or in Singapore

                • The Cominator says:

                  But many support leftists here (in fact I think 95% of Indians in the United States support the Democratic party) but not over there as Mayflower points out. And while I dont support mass immigration from anywhere defecting by infiltrating existing companies and firing all non Indians is a uniquely Indian thing. Not even foreigner Jews do this.

                  Indians just cannot be allowed to live anywhere outside the subcontinent.

                • someDude says:

                  We’ll, in that case, thank you for granting us the subcontinent.

          • Aryaman says:

            But many support leftists here (in fact I think 95% of Indians in the United States support the Democratic party) but not over there as Mayflower points out.

            I am not sure that’s true. (They support leftists here, and I am pretty sure for the most part they support leftists there as well). The counterexample to your point are Gulf and Arab countries where Indians make up a large part of management and technical positions to the very top and are not a problem. (As for here, even though it’s clear they have ruined Intel and Cisco and the like with ethnic nepotism, your general claim is not the case at a variety of smaller, quality companies I am rather familiar with).

            It’s true a shocking number of them (nevertheless much less than a majority) have obscene issues with ethnic resentment, though I attribute a lot of that to the fact the west filters for absolutely noxious people (by rewarding scams) and then bathes them and their children in gay race communism from the get go

            The quality of non-white is higher in Canada. Mostly >105 iq Indian and Chinese.

            The quality of Indian in Canada is conspicuously poor.

          • Doom says:

            Can confirm. Happened to my mate. He was friends with his pajeet manager, even, but there was another guy who had higher “social” class than him who made him fire my buddy.

      • Mayflower Sperg says:

        There may not be mass poverty in Canada yet, but millions of future NDP voters are gathering across the border. When the USA runs out of food and fuel, they’re coming north:

        And if there’s a disused warehouse at the end of your quiet suburban street, burn it down before someone thinks to use it for housing migrants.

  25. FrankNorman says:

    Losing one or two battles doesn’t by itself mean The Empire Is Falling.
    For example, the Romans didn’t always win.
    In fact there were enemies against which they lost over and over, long centuries before their final collapse. The Parthians, for example. They also tried – and failed – to conquer some Arabian kingdoms.
    When they gave up on trying to keep control over Caledonia (because no point, nothing there of value) it did not mean the Picts got to sack Rome the next day.

    • jim says:

      Empires routinely deem some place that is too much grief to subdue irrelevant, unimportant, far away, and forgettable, and everyone forgets them.

      But Yemenis are disrupting Global American Empire trade worldwide.

  26. Sher Singh says:

    Neo Cicero times needs no explanation.
    Main theme of the article is decentralization.

    Secondly, the new bills preventing private training.

    Please discuss


    • jim says:

      Neocieronian Times says “culture” when he means race, and is unable to commit certain important thought crimes.3

      But he makes a point worthy of discussion: The regime is leaking power, and people are picking it up. Greg Abbot tossing out the border patrol is reminiscent of the “law of the wars” that led to the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and eventually its fall.

      Greg Abbot is not on our side. But not on the regime’s side either. If he gets away with picking up power that has fallen onto the street, he will not be the last to do so.

      Power is falling into the street. And if a member of the Thermidorean faction picks it up, he is going to find that he needs reaction on his side, as the original Thermidoreans needed the white terror, Cromwell needed Monck, Stalin needed Beria, and Zou needed Deng.

      Deng and Beria needed a faith, and did not have one. General Monck did have a faith, so he was more successful than they were.

  27. simplyconnected says:

    I suppose there are many such graphs out there. This one is quite important in Europe [KD link]

  28. Pax Imperialis says:

    Gentlemen, I’m (mostly?) bowing out for an indefinite period of time.

    The discourse here has been an absolute intellectual joy. It’s one of the few places where real debate can occur without being drowned out by mob noise. Where ideas can be intelligently exchanged and sussed out in an open forum. It is far superior to any official academic circle, and is in complete contrast to how dreary “polite” society can be.

    Thanks to all the regulars here for most excellent company in these uncertain times.

    Many thanks to Jim for hosting us and somehow tolerating my less than great moments.

  29. A2 says:

    “Flying into the airport and looking out the plane window, America does not look like a wealthy, technologically advanced country. Walking through the airport, let alone the subway station, looks poor. Walking through a high end shopping centre, does not look all that high end.”

    Not in the US but over here, taking this route looks like visiting the third world. Not the jungle but decaying and uncaring and arabs and browns and blacks everywhere.

    • Pax Imperialis says:

      Pretty soon it’ll be crashing into the airport. GAE’s DEI workforce can’t tighten bolts correctly.

      • S says:

        Posted here before, but worth reiterating

        Tldr- they started purging whites/asians from new hires for air traffic controllers in 2017 (there are now 10% fewer controller then in 2017) and are working on pilots.

      • Vladamir Spankovalot says:

        There is something more to your statement. Maybe 10% of products I have ordered, services too since 2021 have shown up either damaged, assembled incorrectly or malfunctioning. This includes everything from high end storm doors for the house, to patio furniture to a $100K high performance vehicle made by a Big 3 company. It goes all the way down to completely jacked To-Go orders from local higher-end restaurants and missing/lost shipments.

        At some point it becomes obvious we are being sabotaged at all stages of our supply-chains. This is big, this is war.

        • jim says:

          Some things, notably meat production, are being deliberately sabotaged.

          But mostly it is falling IQ, and loss of corporate cohesion.

          As I say in sox_accounting

          The state has been attacking the cohesion of the corporation just as it has been attacking the cohesion of the family. Modern corporate capitalism is incompatible with SoX, because if your books are detached from reality, lies that hostile outsiders demand that you believe, the corporation has lost that which makes it one person. When the books are lie imposed on you by hostile outsiders you lose cohesion around profit, making things, buying, selling, and satisfying the customer, and instead substitute cohesion around gay sex, minority representation, and abortion rights. Notice Musk’s tactic of making each of his enterprises a moral crusade, and also of giving them a legal form that evades SoX accounting. Which legal form does not permit their shares to be publicly traded.

    • A2 says:

      This thing with bolts and doors flying off in-flight Boeing 737 Max’s seem a bit concerning too. Time for some white-level quality control again?

      • jim says:

        White male quality control. The team responsible for bolts and doors flying off is one hundred percent proudly female.

    • A2 says:

      Passengers detect missing bolts on wing before take off. Virgin Airways would however like to add:

      “The safety of our customers and crew is always our top priority and this was not compromised at any point,” the rep said in the statement. “We always work well above industry safety standards and the aircraft is now back in service.”

      (From the statement of an engineer it was possibly not a critical part of the wing that could have fallen off.)

  30. Karl says:

    Energy us is more about manufacturing than comfortable lifestyle. Empire and FIRE economy were able to provide a comfortable lifestyle with little energy use as almost everything was manufactured abroad and imported.

    When those imports are getting difficult, no comfortable lifestyle anymore.

    • Zorost says:

      Good points, but I’d add that a FIRE “economy” requires the petro dollar, which requires petro nations to be deathly afraid of the GAE. It’s not a coincidence that the 2 leaders of oil nations that talked openly about selling their oil for gold or similar non-dollar money ended up getting murdered and their nations blown up by the GAE (Saddam, Qaddafi.)

  31. Pilgrim says:

    At this point in the cycle, replacing whites in the military is by design. Mercenaries will obey orders that native born white patriots would not.

    From recent events, I’ve been sensing that GAE is just one decisive defeat from pivoting to crush dissent within the empire. They can already track us everywhere with cellphone signals, and have been doing so during COVID.

    It’s very hard to perceive their actions as anything but a trial run for full military response on heritage Americans.

    • Zorost says:

      People who say the military of today is worse than the military of 2000 don’t know the metrics that GAE values: which military is more likely to obey orders to carpet bomb Omaha, NE?

      If we don’t have states with comparable military power to back them off, the West will be the neo-USSR.

      • Collapsed Shopping Malls says:

        [*held, not deleted, but held pending passage of the shill test.*]

        • jim says:

          You imply a thought crime, but you will not actually state the thought crime.

          If you tell us why malls staffed by diversities are a problem, and if you state the glaringly obvious reason, I will white list you and allow your comments through

  32. Kunning Drueger says:

    Does El Salvador have a nuclear energy program? I wonder how challenging it would be to build one from square zero, assuming you could get the incentives lined up properly.

    • jim says:

      Nuclear reactors are not that hard. The problem is that the first one, or first three, that you build might blow up, so an army of nancies come out of the woodwork and strangle you in red tape. We really need a program that is as relaxed about prototype reactors exploding as Musk is relaxed about rockets exploding. Test them on barges far out in the ocean over deep water.

      This is easier with fast breeder reactors, because they inherently can be built much smaller. The aim should be to mass produce fast breeder nuclear reactors that fit inside a standard shipping container, and can be transported on a standard truck.

      • /pol/watcher says:

        Yeah, I think the Chinese and Indians were looking into Liquid Fluoride Thorium reactors, it definitely won’t be the West thanks to Greenspace and the indelible link between ‘nukes’ and nuclear power.

        Sad, because only going to dense energy sources can improve standard of living
        wind/water -> chemical energy (coal, oil) -> nuclear energy is the logical path.

        • Kunning Druegger says:

          In a formal and official sense, you are not wrong. The historical sources of innovation, industry, and construction are in the throes of parasitic internal collapse, external attack, or full convergence. I have been able to see a portion of this, and the rot is ubiquitous. Name any big company you’d like, in any industry you prefer, and you will fiend the DEI markers on their boards, in their marketing, and at every level. It is foolish to expect anything nimble or creative from dinosaurs that are in death cults worshipping meteors.

          Sticking with that metaphor, the future of tech and industry is small, feral, and hidden. here is an interesting company:

          I am neither engineer nor electrician, so I can’t comment on the feasibility or scalability of their model. If what is publicly available about the company can be trusted, they are booked solid with custom jobs based solely on the performance of their single prototype. they have just recently offered a engine customization kit for personal/smaller trucks. They appear to be killing it. Let’s look at the company itself: a small team with no dead weight. The public face of the company is not a woman, or migrant, or faggot; he’s an industry insider (big rig operator) with internet savvy and good physiognomy. The company is using the raiment of Climate Change Cult as a cover for what appears to be very low hanging fruit: trucks are big, they need torque, so they have a diesel generator, deep cycle batteries, the gear to charge the batteries and all the extras, all bolted onto a platform designed ground up with modularity and replaceability (as opposed to highly customized, single source parts). This company loves to go after Musk/Tesla Truck, which is a good propaganda line, but from a thirty thousand foot level they are trying to use the same exploit he/they did: make sure the public knows you are “trying to save the world” while moving furtively to use hard science and logical approaches to out class the extant technology providers.

          Can the same thing be done with nuclear power? I think so. In fact, I think it is already being done. The “magic formula” seems to be the ability to use the lexicon of the cargo cult, keeping the niggers, broads, sodomites, and grifters out, and going after low hanging fruit that’s been forgotten or spurned by The Science. reusable rockets, rockets that take off and land vertically, are a concept as old as Jules Verne (kudos to Jim pointing this out, I never even thought of how Buck Rodgers and all early scifi had rockets taking off & landing the same way). It’s not SSTO masturbation, that’s what Space Shuttle was, it’s just a simple approach that required lots of testing and rapid iteration with the right people free of oversight and annoyances.

          As the South Africanization of North America continues, there will be more and more elites looking for modular and maintainable power that has nothing to do with the Grid. Solar is a bad joke, wind is even dumber, coal fired and gas fired are too big and sloppy; Gen4 Salt-Thorium seems like the lowest hanging fruit. Proof of concept already occurred in the 1960s, it was far too cheap and easy when the goal was big, expensive, and complicated. Starlink is about to roll out the Back Pack Unit, and I think this will be a trend in Real Science & Tech across the spectrum: small, simple, cheap, and effective. The rodentlike teams will be better adapted to an environment where dinosaurs are crashing around, celebrating their imminent demise.

  33. Collapsed Shopping Malls says:

    [*held, not deleted, but held pending passage of the shill test.*]

    • jim says:

      Pass the shill test described in the moderation policy and get white listed. Anyone can pass this, regardless of his religious or political beliefs, regardless of what issues he wants to speak about, anyone who is not reading from a script with a supervisor standing over him, can pass this.

Leave a Reply