Today in America it is the year in Rome fifty eight years before Christ. We are here. The mob is on the streets, which the courts decline to put down, courts and legal processes of the Republic politicized and defunct, carrying out political vengeance and refusing to enforce law, elections blatantly fraudulent and discredited.
Caesar crossing the Rubicon was the culmination of more Rubicons than you can shake a stick at. Before Caesar crossed the Rubicon, Clodius and Pompey crossed the Pomerium.
And before they crossed the Pomerium, Rome had the grossly dysfunctional courts, the undue process, and the rigged elections, that we have right now.
Soros and Hunter Biden are Clodius. Trump is Pompey, Cato, and Cicero. The Insurrection Act is the Senatus Consultum Ultimum.
When Pompey crossed the Pomerium fifty two years before Christ, he rolled up the useless, cowardly, weak, and undisciplined mob, and enforced order without mucking around with the useless and discredited courts.
But, since Pompey was an idiot, he then stepped down from the job of dictator, expecting normalcy to return. It did not. And everyone else acted like idiots also. Seeing order return, they thought that democracy, legality, and due process had returned, though obviously it had not.
Order seemingly restored by Pompey’s dictatorship and the Senatus Consultum Ultimum, Rome went on a conquest binge, dropping the pretext of self defense, and pissing off all its neighbors. One of its neighbors, the Parthians, revealed that they had been advancing the art and technology of war, while Rome had been quietly regressing. But the Parthians were content to grossly humiliate Rome, and merely returned their borders to where they were legally supposed to be, though there was absolutely nothing to stop them from rolling up the the entire eastern empire, and perhaps Rome itself. They still had and observed the legality that Rome had abandoned.
Eight years later, forty nine years before Christ, massive abuse of the courts and lack of legality forced Caesar to, with extraordinary reluctance, cross the Rubicon, after several years where legality was not in effect, but people still deluded acted as if it was. And finally, belatedly, remarkably belatedly, people after the assassination of Caesar recognized that legality, due process, courts, laws, fair trials, and free elections are finally gone and are not coming back any time soon.
Political violence continues to grow, eventually resulting in total war, immensely destructive civil war carried out by extraordinary and unprecedented measures.
After eighteen years of ever escalating chaos and ever more massive and extraordinary bloodshed, after a civil war that turned total, Caesar’s adopted son, Augustus, made himself dictator, but having learned from Pompey’s error, did not step down from the job expecting normalcy to return.
Legality, due process, free elections, and peaceful transfer of power, once lost, are hard to restore.
But despite the imperium, the swamp went on being swampy, the state religion went on being hostile, legality did not return. And things stayed like that for two and half centuries, till Constantine built a new capital, and made a new religion the state religion.
My hope is that our Pompey will be our Constantine, that we do a fast forward over Rome’s centuries of war and ruin.
For anyone who is feeling bad or blackpilled right now I’ll remind you of four important facts
1. The Democrats have made it clear they intend to prosecute and imprison (and yes eventually probably murder but they aren’t saying that part yet) Trump his family and anyone around him. They’ve made it clear they will not respect his pardons either.
2. Trump has said recently “Biden can’t be President”.
3. Trump immediately after the election installed a loyalist command structure in the Pentagon and cut the perfumed princes out of specops command entirely.
4. The military has refused Biden’s transition access to intelligence.
Big Talk Barr stepping down now that he’s job of protecting the deep state is done:
https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1335734947198464004
Early on some RINO once said that Trump should be taken out like Cesar, get someone close to him and then knife him in the back(metaphorically). That was Barr’s job.
Flynn MI team forces way into Antrim County Courthouse, copies Dominion hard drive, squashes Sheriff’s attempts to stop them….http://voxday.blogspot.com/2020/12/flynn-team-collects-mi-dominion-data.html
If we want a play-by-play of Teddy’s blog then we can visit it ourselves. He’s a good guy, but he links to Qtards and isn’t a reliable source on the election saga.
Not Tom, Your continued use of the word “Qtards”, Q being a highly successful morale operation that has caused the Cabal to expend resources in an unsuccessful attempt to squash it, and complete lack of knowledge of what Vox actually thinks and advocates, raises serious questions about your usefulness…
caused the Cabal to expend resources in an unsuccessful attempt to squash it
A “morale operation” that lulls our side into inaction, telling them to trust some nonexistent plan? No thanks.
The “Q” grift, like the Republican party, seems to have two purposes: to channel and dissipate the energy that could otherwise be used to productively oppose the Cathedral; and to make money for its principals.
I’m sure our side has poured more money and effort down the rathole of “Q” bullshit that whatever trivial expenditures the Left has made in the process of half-heartedly aiming a few desultory blows at it.
Ok mister complete stranger newfag, your opinions about my usefulness are very important, we’ll all stop noticing and pointing out that Q is enemy propaganda because we want Jim’s blog to be a carbon copy of Ted’s blog. Thanks so much for your valuable input.
Trump has to cross a Rubicon, and needs a general.
Looks like he has a general.
But Steve Gruber is not a reliable source.
Do we have independent confirmation that General Flynn’s team is taking action?
Whatever happened in Antrim County, gen. Flynn is just fine with Trump invoking the insurrection act:
https://www.westernjournal.com/exclusive-gen-flynn-dont-act-2-people-control-98/
That is to say, if gen. Flynn’s team really forced their way to the voting machines, things are well on their way to becoming kinetic.
But the question is: Is it true that Flynn’s team forced their way to the voting machines?
The legal judgment for Antrim actually happened, and I can believe that they tried to ignore that judgment and some force was required. The rest seems made up. The best disinfo tends to incorporate little tidbits of truth so that disinfo agents can play motte and bailey.
Notice also how quickly they pivot from the magic German server to the magic Antrim machine. Very similar narrative, the Antrim machines actually exist but they are wanted for auditing purposes, not for the gay Qtard muh-algorithms narrative.
The Qtard stuff does not matter. What matters is “some force was required”.
They surely would have tried ignore that judgement. Was force required, and who applied that force?
Trump says big things happening in the next couple of days.
Big things are not going to happen without the application of force. Is force being applied, and who is applying it?
I would assume local police. If Trump stormed in with military troops, we’d be hearing about it in the legacy media, not fringe wacko sites.
Trump always says big things are happening, I tend not to put too much stock in it. He signals as a dictator then acts moderate. Whatever will happen will happen, but I’m just enormously tired of all the tea-leaf reading and confirmation bias. This disinfo campaign has been relentless, I just want to stick to independently verifiable facts. This is what they do, even if you don’t fall for their bait directly, it wears you down over time until you just stop caring.
No. We would not hear about it from the mainstream media.
But we would hear about it from more than one wacko site.
On the other hand, for the court’s order to be actually acted on, someone had to storm in with military forces. Has the court’s order been acted on?
Dude, legacy media would be shrieking at the top of their lungs about any military troops in a civilian office. We know they would, because they did exactly that any time there was any federal or federally-deputized presence during the 2020 Festival of St Floyd.
They didn’t want to open up, so some local cops busted down the door, and one or two wackos invented a ridiculously complicated fairy tale to go along with it. Occam’s Razor, case closed.
Nuts.
Mentioning any coercive investigation of ballot fraud would undermine the no evidence of ballot fraud narrative.
you are suffering from normalcy bias.
Nuts:
No damned way are some local cops busting down that door.
“A group of patriots from northern Michigan answered Mr. Bailey’s call for help”
This is not normality happening.
One source says patriots, another source says troops with Flynn in charge. Two sources reporting something highly abnormal, not clear what, and whatever went down, that machines were secured at all could not have happened unless something highly abnormal went down.
Laws, legality, elections and due process ceased to matter on 2020-11-04 04-05 Any time something like this happens, it is someone pointing guns at someone.
War is upon us. The only question is are we fighting back. If the machines were seized, and I still do not trust that information, someone is fighting back.
How so? Their narrative is “Trump is trying to overturn our totally fair and legitimate election and disenfranchise millions of voters”. They’d love to be able to show military intervention.
And it was locals, the clarification from Pooch had already come in before you replied. They were escorted by some local sheriffs. Sounds like they didn’t really have to break down the door, just have law enforcement physically present.
“Normalcy bias” isn’t taking police into a ballot office to take away a machine for forensic analysis, no matter how it was precisely organized. Give us a break.
I’m not hearing anything about this outside of this Gruber guy. As of now, it’s just an internet rumor.
Never mind here’s another source…
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/breaking-exclusive-michigan-attorney-gives-behind-scenes-update-inspection-antrim-county-dominion-machines/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=PostTopSharingButtons&utm_campaign=websitesharingbuttons
Says nothing about them being Flynn’s team or force being. Sheriffs escorted the IT team to the airport.
May have been fake news…
https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1335981940474867712?s=20
Ever get the feeling that the WWII “greatest” Generation did everything right, and still lost their country and civilization because they did not fix the schools? And do you ever get the feeling that you (probably a Boomer) aren’t as good as they were? And the latest generation, well…
I say that the school are the weak link in this civilization’s chain, the single most important point of failure, and they aren’t being fixed by the right because there still isn’t a plan to fairly compensate their victims. The “solution” is to flood the country with uneducated immigrants in an attempt to lift up the salaries of college graduates to what they feel like they were promised. We see where that ends. It ends so badly that WWII veterans can look back with regret at everything they thought they were fighting for, to see it all taken away.
Allowing this through because it is an actual argument, rather than presupposing we agree with cultural Marxism..
What the schools are doing wrong is that instead of educating people they are training an enemy priesthood in an evil religion, producing a gross oversupply of priests, who then intrude into the activities of warriors and merchants.
“Compensating” the miseducated means supply priestly jobs for evil priests of an evil priesthood.
To suppress the hostile enemy religion, we have to penalize its adherents with loss of wealth and status, not reward its priests. It is time for the dissolution of the monasteries, which is not actually all that rough the competent monks and nuns, because they get jobs, marriages, and children, which the schools are denying them.
But those who have no capability to create wealth, only the capability to be holier than thou, just have to suffer humiliation and hunger, or they will continue to afflict us, and even the competent former monks and nuns will fail to produce, fail to get married, and fail to have children, and will continue to suffer. We have to suppress the oversupply, which is necessarily rough on those with no capability to do anything else. In order to have value, we must reward those who create value, and punish those who cannot or will not create value.
At the time of the dissolution of the monasteries, England had far too many monks and nuns, who had an alarming amount of worldly wealth and power.
Theoretically they were supposed to focus their attention on the next world, and theoretically they had a round of rituals that were supposed to keep their attention focused on God and eternity, but in actual fact there was only one nunnery, and no monasteries, in England that were actually conducting this round of rituals.
The vast majority of the monks and nuns got productive jobs and marriages. Some of them, a significant minority, became vagrants, beggars, and thieves. It was a minority, but a large enough minority to cause considerable problems. For which they were publicly whipped, branded, and sometimes publicly hung. That is the cure.
Experts in priesting simply have to lose their jobs. We cannot operate a functional society with this many people trained primarily in holiness. They will just have to find other jobs – which may well be greeter at Walmar or barista at Starbucks, as a great many people with a hundred thousand in college debt training them for a job in Human Resources imposing critical race theory on the corporation already wind up doing, because of the gross oversupply of stupid people trained only in holiness and priesting.
For the productive to get their rightful reward, the value that they create, the unproductive have to suffer hunger and humiliation.
That is plausible argument for Marxism, rather than robotic npc spam, and if Marxism was serious opponent, I would debate it.
But Marxism has lost both to rational and evidence based argument, and, more importantly, lost because everyone has enough bread, but no one has enough virgin pussy. So, I am ruling that debate a distraction and a waste of space. What happens when the state crushes the merchant class is evident and undeniable. Want to debate that?
The powers are crushing the merchant class. I know because I am one. This morning I woke with thoughts that I’m a small business that is being snuffed out by the never ending lockdowns, “peaceful†protests (yet another marched by this past Saturday and killed the weekend by chasing patrons away) and outright unanswered crime. Somehow I’m supposed to pay bills and the latest property tax has a 15% increase and the tax is now much more than I make.
How does flooding the country with uneducated immigrants lift up the salaries of US college graduates? You mean, even though labor is oversupplied at the bottom end the priestly jobs will be uplifted relative to that mass of uneducated serfs? I don’t think that’s how it’s worked in practice, as academic and other “priestly” jobs have gotten more competitive and less remunerative in recent decades even as the total number of societal resources sucked up by student loans, administrators, and otherwise turning college campuses into resorts has ballooned.
Jim is probably right that there’s no avoiding diminishing the social cache of Harvard et al. and especially of the four-year degree as a stepping stone to a good job (they are working on that already by trying to phase out the SAT and other elements of rigor at the selection phase, which is the real sorting mechanism). But it seems to me a good initial step is cutting immigration across the board, including of the sort of H1B1 visa that tech companies use to compete with the local talent. Even people that get what they assumed to be more practical degrees, like STEM now have to compete with an unlimited supply of Indian and Chinese candidates who will work for less, not make waves, not unionize, mouth the right pieties…
Wrong. We have a very good solution to the problem of the academy: eliminating it, i.e. dissolving the monasteries. Trade schools and perhaps engineering may be allowed to remain, if they are willing to shed 100% of the pozzed administrators.
It’s obviously a solution you don’t like, because you feel entitled to other people’s money, and formalizing your worthless degree as worthless will make you lose status and opportunities for more parasitism. But it is not only a great solution, it’s the only practical solution.
Problem? School is turning out useless fuckwits.
Your solution? Compensate “victims” for learning how to be useless fuckwits.
How is this not basically a more cynical and honest version of Communism? Who do you think you’re talking to?
>the right…flood the country with uneducated immigrants in an attempt to lift up the salaries
Schizophrenia is funny to laugh at a distance; annoying to see in person. Clean yourself up.
Some very mixed signals from the Trump admin that I find difficult to draw any overall conclusions from.
As others have said, the Georgia speech seemed pretty complacent, pretty afflicted by normalcy bias. But then Trump clears house at the Pentagon and appoints loyalists, seemingly preparing for a non-democratic power struggle of some kind. Anyone willing to hazard a guess as to what Trump’s game is?
https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/1336084268330659840
“Sullivan ignored the law when he refused to grant DOJ’s motion to dismiss Flynn’s charges, he ignored the D.C. circuit when he refused to even rule on the motion, and now he’s ignoring the full pardon of Flynn. He needs to be removed from the bench.”
Blatant disregard for the law.
We’re definitely at a point when the left ignores any law, any decision that is not to its advantage.
Trump most definitely sees this, also.
At this point, him not invoking the insurrection act would be treason of the american people.
I think hes going to wait until the left fraudulently wins the Georgia senatorial elections so the GOP cucks get the message… january 6th or 7th. The left will be celebrating… best time to take them out.
The Cominator
Yours is an interesting idea. For a surprise attack, the moment is ideal.
But is a surprise attack needed? Especially when january 20th is so close to january 5th?
This depends, of course, on what forces Trump has, and what forces the left has. We have no idea of the behind the scenes plotting.
Of course, the worst case scenario would be for Trump to only follow the legal and legislature paths.
Perhaps because he has faith the republic will right itself, or because he thinks he doesn’t have enough forces?
But I simply do not think Trump is so naive, so foolish. The left’s behavior was and is too in the face; Trump must know by now what’s coming if he abdicates.
As for the GOP:
A convincing case can be made that the GOP made a deal with the democrats: the never trumpers cheered the prospect of geting rid of Trump in favor of Biden and the return of business as usual. And the GOP gets to keep the senate, therefore keeping power.
See for, example, how the hundreds of thousands of ballots from the night of november 4th were for Biden only. I don’t think it was because the left operatives didn’t have time to fill all positions. They just wanted to project the appearance that they are keeping their alliance with the GOP – needed in order to cover up this blatant, shameless fraud.
That is to say, evidence presented at the legislatures showed that the left had a much better hidden system of election fraud put in place. And with it, they did steal votes/positions from the GOP. It’s just that Trump won in such a landslide, that he overwhelmed any cheating that could be more or less hidden.
Also, see how much of the GOP was strangely silent and inactive since november 4th, or outright traitorous in covering up the election fraud.
I think they are getting nervous, though, especially after the revelations about the left’s hidden election fraud. The Georgia secretary of state just started a lot of investigations aimed at elimination of leftist cheating – but only for the january 5th election.
In my opinion, the GOP is idiotic. They lost their electorate with their refusal to help Trump in this stolen election.
And without the electorate, the only way to keep their positions is by electoral fraud. But the left controls the electoral fraud system, and the left has the fanatic operatives that have no problem stealing hundreds of thousands of votes. The same left that really wants its political opponents gone.
And the GOP has, what? The DOJ, perhaps? Without Trump winning now, the GOP is fucked, even if they manage to keep the senate, short-term.
“But is a surprise attack needed”
Its always an advantage, particularly when the enemy is liable to be mostly celebrating and drunk…
“Of course, the worst case scenario would be for Trump to only follow the legal and legislature paths.
Perhaps because he has faith the republic will right itself, or because he thinks he doesn’t have enough forces?”
The left has made it clear with the phony pardongate story, and the phony refusal to allow Flynn’s case to be dismissed even that he has nothing to lose. He might have cucked before but I can’t see him surrendering peacefully now. I really don’t think he wants to get on a plane to Kazakhstan on January 19th.
“As for the GOP:
A convincing case can be made that the GOP made a deal with the democrats:”
In Georgia Kemp did (and either Raffensperger did or he was an enemy agent from the beginning) did but mostly they are just kind of cowardly. I think the ones who were in a position to help us but showed cowardice in the face of the enemy should suffer the same fate as leftists though.
“In my opinion, the GOP is idiotic. They lost their electorate with their refusal to help Trump in this stolen election.
And without the electorate, the only way to keep their positions is by electoral fraud. But the left controls the electoral fraud system”
They’ll realize this when the left steals the two Senate seats as well.
I’m not so convinced that Trump is planning some elaborate trap, but I do think he should let them lose the Georgia elections purely on principle. Let them reap what they have sown. That’s the real reason I found his Georgia speech kind of sickening, not because he believes in the system (or pretends to) but because he appeared willing to reward their abject cowardice and/or treachery. If they can’t deliver a few electors, why should he deliver them Senate seats?
Not that establishment Republicans really mind losing elections, it’s practically part of the job description.
I took it the same way. That’s why my hope is Trump is falsely signally that he’s going to place GOP king maker and leave office as the GOP has been offering him in exchange for leaving. I hope instead he’s giving the appearance of giving up while readying his counter stroke.
The problem with cowards is they only react to the people currently threatening them. As far as I know there’s no one on the right threatening to harm the cowardly GOP cucks. As such, they’re likly to continue to cuck until they’re murdered by one side or the other.
Well a surprise coup will put them between the devil and the deep sea now won’t it.
I rather hope it puts them up against the nearest wall. Rigging an election and committing treason against one’s own people should never be treated lightly.
“In my opinion, the GOP is idiotic. They lost their electorate with their refusal to help Trump in this stolen election.”
Indeed. Not a good look when you’re selling “standing by muh principles, even if uncomfortable”. I suppose principles will be resumed after this short break, please stand by.
Wow genius. Now this is one of your predictions I can get behind. Complete 4D chess if true.
Trump tweets that Sullivan has finally dismissed the case against Flynn. I don’t know if this means anything bigger, but obviously it’s better if judges, for now at least, don’t think they can simply ignore presidential pardons.
Hey jim, thoughts on Curtis’s newest piece?
https://graymirror.substack.com/p/5-the-land-its-people-and-their-dogs
I don’t think much about what namefags write.
Why exactly? Like, I get where you’re coming from, that people who use their real names are unlikely to say controversial things out of fear of retribution from friends, employers, universities etc. But Curtis is economically independent due to Urbit, so he has no reason to fear any such retribution.
He fears for his life.
I compare what Curtis says with what Moldbug said.
Curtis is a namefag.
But how exactly do they differ? Can you provide any examples?
Not trying to be rude, but I really think you’re being unfair. If Curtis were really such a namefag he wouldn’t have moved UR from Blogspot to a snazzy new website and he wouldn’t be selling parts of UR as ebooks on Amazon. He would be trying to distance himself from UR as much as possible, which he isn’t. Curtis doesn’t run any more risk from saying something controversial today than from the mere fact of having said equally controversial things a decade ago, because everybody knows that Curtis is Moldbug.
Observed behavior: Since Moldbug has been doxxed, not saying anything interesting, and when he re-runs his old stuff, it is full of gross and politically correct inaccuracies. Not expecting him to say anything interesting or useful, and have observed that he is a major source of misinformation.
For example “Trump would have to cross five Rubicons”. Only one Rubicon, and it has been crossed so often already, starting with Lincoln, that the bridge is getting worn. Not worth the time and energy to read someone who writes anything that matters heavily coded, and keeps inserting misinformation.
After saying Trump would have to cross five Rubicons, he then kind of says, in a heavily coded way, that the one Rubicon Trump needs to cross has been crossed every eighty years or so since the founding of the Republic, so, in heavy code, he corrects the misinformation, but it is just too much work to decipher the code and detect the lies, even though he probably wants us to detect the lies he is compelled to tell.
>After saying Trump would have to cross five Rubicons, he then kind of says, in a heavily coded way, that the one Rubicon Trump needs to cross has been crossed every eighty years or so since the founding of the Republic, so, in heavy code, he corrects the misinformation, but it is just too much work to decipher the code and detect the lies, even though he probably wants us to detect the lies he is compelled to tell.
But neither of these statements contradicts the other. Curtis has indeed pointed out that America changes its regime every eighty or so years and we’re due for the next one. He just doesn’t think that Trump can or will pull off a successful regime change. This is a perfectly valid opinion even if you disagree with it, and it’s extremely uncharitable to characterize it as a “lie” or “misinformation”. None of us knows for certain what the President will do, because none of us knows the President’s mind, so any guess as to what the President will do between now and January 20th cannot possibly be a lie. Nor can it be some kind of politically correct motivated opinion, because Curtis still condemns the current regime and still wants it to be replaced. There’s no reason to believe that Curtis’s views on the election are anything other than an honest opinion based on his own understanding of the facts. And, honestly, it’s been a month and still no autocoup or Rubicon-crossing, so if anything Curtis has been vindicated.
Nuts.
Whether Trump can or will pull it off or not, it is not five Rubicons.
>because Curtis still condemns the current regime and still wants it to be replaced
yeah, and so does the DSA. Would you extend such charity to them?
Didn’t Curtisfag also say Coronavirus was going to kill everyone?
He did and he managed to override my intuition and convince me it was not just a heavy flu. Will take a while till I trust him again on anything.
To be fair, a pandemic response is a mind-hack for the right. On the right you are unlikely to be criticized in the short term for coming down too hard on a potential threat, which is not always a good thing. I still think leftists would never have come up with lockdowns on their own.
The very concept of “a Rubicon” means that there can only be one. Making an irreversible declaration of war, a declaration that you are done with negotiations, cannot happen 5 times. Unless he was declaring it separately against 5 different enemies, but he appears to have only one enemy “faction” that he needs to deal with.
He hasn’t written anything interesting and true since he was outed.
Eh, all he’s writing now is Old Moldbug, repackaged to be even more circumspect, safer, abstruse and meandering. I mean, Unqualified Reservations had that quality, but it was breaking new ground, so it was worth the slog. This one’s just an obscenely long elaboration on the peace/security/order hierarchy, the modern caste system and coup-completeness.
I don’t really understand whom he’s even speaking to; the far right already knows this stuff, the cuck right is gonna keep on cucking, and the left ain’t listening anymore. What’s the point of trotting out 15-year-old ideas and slapping on a new coat of paint? Ok sure, they’re actually much older and timeless ideas, but the point is, the time for that kind of talk has long since passed.
Some people just like to listen to the classics all the time, man. This time around he’s pretty explicit about turning the enterprise into an e-grifting scheme. The final book might eventually have as much as 5% new content, we’ll see.
Wasn’t he saying he would vote for Bernie in an interview?
He is afraid (who wouldn’t be?) Anyone writing under their real name has a filter, it would be unlikely that filter is not affecting his writing, and even if it didn’t affect his writing, there would be no way for us to know.
Moldbug’s shtick was always packaging reaction in such a way to avoid the left’s immune system (i.e by continually retreating to abstractions and redefining common terms with new names randomly pulled from SF novels.) He’s pretty good at it, which is why he’s never been “cancelled” with any serious effort yet despite his name having been public knowledge for a long time.
But it’s unclear who he’s trying to reach — are there even any “open-minded” progressives left? Maybe there were ten years ago, but now? Reading Gray Mirror feels like watching a man write a book while avoiding using the letter ‘E’ — kind of impressive, artistically, but also pretty much pointless.
He was canceled from speaking at programming conferences after he was doxed.
I’m aware of that, but the cancelling was pretty halfhearted (he’s gone to other tech conferences after that one), and they didn’t try and destroy Urbit completely, which leads me to assume that most of the people who would normally have gone after him just weren’t smart enough see the wrongthink in his writing.
It strikes me that the “namefag” problem is a microcosm of a more general problem we see nowadays (maybe a perennial problem, but I expect it’s worse in decaying societies): something like, if a candidate or elected official doesn’t inspire seemingly hyperbolic, apoplectic rage among “respectable” people, he’s probably no good. If a policy doesn’t inspire chicken little cries of doom it probably will have no effect. If an idea is allowed to be printed in the NYT or shown on Fox News, much less CNN, it’s probably not dangerous to the powers that be, if an election commissioner lets you conduct a “recount” or “audit” without a vicious fight, it’s probably going to be useless or they’ve already figured out how to game it… and if someone with a wife and kids is willing to put his name and face on an article it’s prima facie unlikely, again, his ideas, at least as expressed explicitly, are a danger to the status quo.
I guess it’s called “you know you’re over the target.” Recently, the threats leveled at anyone with a name, face, and good aim have intensified greatly.
From what I understand, Leftism has created an illusion of a worldview in which the most Holy Left of a particular time determine the topics that can be debated, the manner in which the debates can take place and the limits to which you can safely go, all while keeping up the pretence that “normality”, “dissent”, “freedom” and “democracy” are alive and kicking. Some people can recognize this evil but are forced to consciously walk the “safe” path for their own safety because they know that this evil knows no limits and will go to any extent to silence them, while others cannot even recognize the evil and think that there is no other worldview other than that constructed by Leftism and deludedly think that they can debate or fight Leftism by the means constructed by Leftists themselves to cripple all opposition.
“Overton Window” seems to be the name of this “safe zone.”
Only a rare few are foolish or brave enough both to notice the extent of the evil they are up against and also speak the truth with their real identity revealed.
Also whenever convenient, Leftists create some illusory targets for their “opponents” to practice on if only to keep them away from real mischief. If the opponent has internalized the same illusory framework as the Leftists intended, they fall for it, thinking they are fighting Leftism, while actually they are only fighting an illusion created by Leftists for their enemies to be distracted and confused by.
It’s the old weapon of adharma – Maya or illusion. Illusory weapons cannot be efficiently defeated by old conventional weapons.
The reason I’ve consciously framed it in terms of Dharma-adharma is because, as a Hindu, this is the absolute reference on which morality can be determined and is incorruptible. Of course, Jim is one of those who has internalized the Reality by other names from a Christian perspective while even a large section of those who call themselves reactionaries/NRx haven’t.
Jim’s argument as I understand it, and he can correct me if I’m wrong, is that the problem is two-fold: one, we have a pernicious state religion (liberalism) in the West, and two, we have an open-entry priesthood (academic-media complex) that by its nature encourages holiness spirals of “lefter than thou.” A redditor whose name I forget now argued that social media has greatly accelerated such spirals because it makes it super easy to call out hypocrisy and unprincipled exceptions, which are actually not always bad, as necessary to keep any system functioning in the real world.
A question I’d like to ask Jim, or maybe someone can point me to one of his older blogs if it’s answered there, is whether the badness of our current state religion and its tendency toward holiness spirals are related, or if holiness spirals are just a fact of life that can only be controlled by eliminating the open-access priesthood and not causally related to the nature of our current state religion.
For example, if Jim-ism became the new state religion, my understanding of Jim’s position is that we would still need some inquisitors or limits on entry to the priesthood of Jim, otherwise we’d eventually get an out-of-control spiral of Jim-er-than-thou, such that even Jim would be judged insufficiently Jim-ist or, at best, not the beneficiary of our superior understanding, within a generation or less. The fact that Jim-ism was, to begin with, a big improvement on our current state religion might not prevent it growing pernicious eventually?
The above makes sense to me because I think the urge to virtue signal is probably universal; it does raise the question of whether even “truth” and “objective moral good” can be standards to cleave to. Though not religious, I tend to think objective moral truth exists. At the same time, human psychology and status competition may be such that even pursuit of truth may become twisted, as we see it has with leftist cries of “believe the science!” So maybe just “our state religions pursues truth!” is not enough.
If this is true then even if we had e.g. a nation ruled according to the principles of the Bhagavad Gita, we could still run into a problem of more-dharmic-than-thou holiness spirals unless we restrict access to the priesthood (maybe traditionally this was by birth into Brahmin caste, etc.). So perhaps, paradoxically part of the truth/dharma/proper way is realization that excessive zeal on the part of too many in pursuit of the truth/dharma/proper way can actually lead one astray?
At the same time it seems to me that running a society according to traditional principles is just better, because Lindy, in an objective sense? Also, most of the out-of-control holiness spirals we see in history seem to take on a particular (usually egalitarian) character, which would suggest it is leftism per se, rather than holiness spirals per se that is the bigger problem?
I am also curious to hear more about how non-open-entry priesthood could work? Perhaps the key is to get the priesthood back to focusing on moral and metaphysical questions with no objectively verifiable/falsifiable answers and somehow kick the scientists out of it/diminish the fetishization of science without actually stopping people doing science? The idea of e.g. only allowing those with the proper pedigree to research and publish on academic/scientific questions doesn’t sound very feasible.
Actually in ancient India, Brahmins were NOT the ruling caste. This is a huge misunderstanding in the West that has perpetuated a lot even in NRx circles.
Kshatriyas ruled exclusively and Brahmins were mostly relegated to the temples, ashrams and dealing with the religious and spiritual affairs alone.
In the strict traditional hierarchy, Brahmins were prohibited from accumulating wealth and had to earn on a day-to-day basis only for satisfying their basic needs, forbidden from indulging in luxury and barred from most professions except religion instruction and performing religious rituals. Brahmins had no entry into politics, except only the Raja-Guru which was a hereditary position of advisor to the King, who could be overruled by the King anyway.
There are also tales of how Kings of those days used to dress up as commoners and visit his subjects incognito to get a feel of the general mood of the public and also to not be totally reliant on his subordinates. Also how the King could be directly petitioned by the common subjects when they did not get justice from his subordinates.
I think Hindu kingdoms of ancient India did not fall into holiness spirals, because it was recognized that the priests should not rule. When that social balance was upset, things started falling apart.
Yes, I know the Brahmins are not the traditional ruling caste; I guess then there is a third aspect of the problem Jim identifies: priests (rather than warriors) ruling, open-entry priesthood, and the actual content of the priesthood’s religion being bad. I would guess these are all interrelated to some degree.
Priesthood should necessarily demand sacrifice of personal comforts (but not Celibacy), accumulation of money except to the extent of satisfying basic needs like food and clothing, luxury and a lifestyle detached from worldly affairs especially politics, except to the extent of providing purely spiritual guidance in respect of worldly actions.
Not sure how these rules can be enforced, except by a Monarchy though.
Of course, this may lead to a shortage of priests, but it is better than having too many priests each with too little to do.
Forgot to add, the role of the Raja-Guru was to limited to providing general spiritual guidance in respect of the worldly actions of rulership and to provide divine sanction to the Monarchy. Not to micromanage the affairs of the state.
Spandrell has written extensilvely about holiness spirals. I try to summarize.
There is always a tendency to holiness spirals as they are a rather safe way to increase status. If there is a general agreement what is “good”, being a “good” man gives status, being a better man gives more status and a way to attack competitors.
Being “good” is especially important in priestly professions. In these professions the incentive to be a more holy is larger as the top job is often given to the most holy. The more people compete to be most holy, the faster the standards for “sufficient holiness” increase. Hence, open entry priesthood suffers more quickly from holiness spiral.
Entry to priesthood can be limited by having a hereditray priesthood or by creating a barrier to entry into priesthood. Barriers may for example be a requirement of a lifestyle that will not be attractive for many applicants, e.g. celibacy, or a significant investment of time and effort, e.g. memorizing hundreds of pages of scriture.
Holiness spiral, leftism, pharisees – all words that describe the some thing.
Celibacy is not in the natural order of things, so I feel that celibacy cannot be demanded of Priesthood. However, the other aspects like sacrificing personal comforts, accumulation of wealth and not being allowed to most professions except religious practice and performing religious rituals can be made mandatory..
Limits to entry work.
But if Jimism was the state religion, and open entry, it would rapidly go off the rails.
I think the more I think about it, Right is not analogous to the Left. The terms Left and Right are downright confusing sometimes because I think Right is neither an ideology or religion.
Leftism is actually an evil religion whether or not of actual literal demons or metaphorical ones it does not matter, nonetheless an evil, godless one. And a religion without an absolute God tends to spiral because every priest wants to become God.
Is actual holiness spiralling even possible to the “right”?
I think almost every religion in history has been subverted by demons and not by holier Gods.
Leftism = evil religion out of touch with reality and holiness spiralling is actually a kind of lunacy spiralling with each spiral further and further detached from reality.
Right = neither evil nor a religion.
But mostly religion has been subverted by entryism (always to the Left) and then holiness spiralling but the movement has always been leftwards.
Leftism works by subversion of existing religion by out-Holying it, but only further to its Left.
By the very definition, any holiness spiral which is actually better defined as lunacy spiral (being moving further and further away from reality) is subversion and that can only happen to the Left.
If somebody is really more “Right-wing” than Jim, then it means that the said person actually recognizes some greater truth of Gnon that Jim has not and actually both parties would discuss it in a sane and reasonable way. And actually that’s not holiness spiralling. It’s moving closer to reality by definition.
If somebody claims to be more “Right-wing” than Jim, but actually speaks holy language of the Left to out-holy Jim, then it is simply somebody subverting Jim-ism. If somebody subverts Jim-ism by out-holying Jim without being actually to his Right then I would 100% state that the person subverting it is a Leftist entryist.
At it’s core Leftism is the exercise of power for short term gains, while Rightism is the exercise of power for long term gains.
Sometimes power needs to be executed for short term gains but it’s destructive when used and is best used sparingly and long term assets should seldom if ever be given up for something short term.
While I can get this, from the point of view of explaining holiness spiraling how does this model work?
To answer the specific question you’re asking, it’s best to use the model of leftism as social entropy. It behaves just like physical entropy: always increasing, always moving in the same direction, and requiring vast amounts of energy to “reduce” (really just move) in any complex system. It may have very different effects depending on what it’s affecting, but it is always the same force.
Holiness spiraling is defection, it’s a form of social entropy and therefore always moves left. But there are other failure modes on the right, such as the Cominator failure mode of expending enormous amounts of energy on diminishing returns in the hope of completely eliminating leftism, which can’t be done, as surely as one can’t eliminate chemical entropy. Complex systems instead require frequent maintenance, which is, more or less, the Jimian position of a state religion with occasional Inquisitions, in which we take the unusually holy and send them to Siberia on missionary work.
But does entropy have a direction? I find it hard to wrap my head around this concept because as per the holiness spiral theory, Leftism heads towards a singularity while entropy is complete chaos.
But maybe the Left singularity is actually complete chaos.
Anway, I get the point that we are all using different mental models to map the same thing, but the analogies used tend to lead to some confusion.
Entropy is in one sense the absence of direction. But that on a large scale, in all high entropy states look boringly alike, it has direction.
As I regularly say leftism has no essence, and what is “lefter” at any one time and place is the shakiest apple carts with the shiniest apples.
During the age of empires, to the start of World War II, the shakiest apple carts with shiniest apples were curated by men in splendid and colorful military uniforms, and nationalism was leftist. Now nationalism is rightist and globalism is leftist.
International order between nations, each with its own state religion, is the peace of Westphalia. Globalism is universalism, an attack on the peace of Westphalia.
The peace of Westphalia, plus capitalism, implies national capitalism. Multilateral trade agreements are an attack on the peace of Westphalia, which manifest as corporations being turned into priestly instruments whereby one state religion assaults someone else’s state religion.
“But there are other failure modes on the right, such as the Cominator failure mode of expending enormous amounts of energy on diminishing returns in the hope of completely eliminating leftism”
Um I have said you cannot eliminate “natural” envy based leftism but Marxism and Progressivism are religions and can be eliminated in the same way the Cathars were eliminated.
Jim wants the re-instatement of Christianity. Alf felt that Christianity is Sol Invictus 2.0, beyond recovery. I know that Christianity is a holiness-spiralled version of Antique Judaism, and contains the seed of Leftism. Jim reconciles this with observed reality by explicitly prohibiting religion from indulging in any temporal claims, particularly any falsifiable claims, at all. While I agree this is a good requirement for religion, and Christianity starts spiralling only when it ventures into the temproral realm, yet I do not believe it is sufficient. Only time will tell.
Crumbs for the brave/inquisitive: #SuetoniusWasRight #NeroDinduNuffin #Chrestos==Christ #ClaudiusDinduNuffin #TacitusIsFake
“#TacitusIsFake”
What is your basis for claiming Tactitus is fake?
@The Cominator
Not that Tacitus himself was fake, but rather that the main tract we have of him regarding Chrestians has been tampered with by Chrestian monks.
Suetonius mentions a Jewish community organiser suspiciously named “Chrestos” who incited
CommunistJews in Rome, who were being ‘excessively holy’ (literally superstitio — holiness spiralling) to riot and therafter they were expelled from Rome by Emperor Claudius. Chrestian apologists say “Chrestos” could not possibly be “Christ” becausehe was already dead/resurrected in Judeabecause the spelling of the name is different, and not “Christos.” HOWEVER, Tacitus doesn’t mention “Christians,” but rather Chrestians, where the ‘e’ was changed to ‘i’ by Chrestian monks.Also, the
CommunistJewish menace continued in Rome, culminating in theReichstag FireGreat Fire of Rome, after whichgoodevil Emperor Nero purged theterroristsChrestians, oops, Christians, by feeding them to lions. Of course, modern (((historians))) all believe that it wasHitlerNero himself who lit theReichstag fireGreat Fire of Rome as a false flag operation to scapegoat his enemies the goodCommunistsChrestians. Also, that Nero played the lyre while Rome burned is a 100% confirmed historical Factâ„¢ and totally not slander.Finally, Chrestianism gained enough power that Romans thought it capable of driving a wedge among Jews, and Emperor Nerva made them tax-exempt. This was de-jure recognition of their power, as Jews themselves remained subject to tax. This is how to build a new religion: fight in the streets, survive when they try to purge you, make peace with the remaining power, take power when
Constantinea vacuum presents itself.Nuts.
We have plenty of early historical records of Christians, and for each one someone has a clever – and improbable – rationalization explaining it away.
Christianity was a live and significant movement at the time that Josephus wrote. This stuff that you are claiming might explain away one historical record, but when they all get explained away, it is obviously motivated reasoning.
If Tacitus had been tampered with by Christian monks, the tampered writings would have spelled the name in the same way Christian monks did. The rationalization is absurd. And so are all the other rationalizations for all the other records.
That the early history of Christianity is much as it is depicted in the Book of Acts is not in doubt by anyone seriously interested in the evidence.
What do you mean by this?
Whatever he means by it, he is wrong.
The pharisees were holiness spiraling the letter of the law to violate the spirit and intent of the law.
The counter offensive of Jesus against this can reasonably be interpreted as holiness spiraling the spirit of the law, but Saint Paul and early Christians led by Peter came down hard on this interpretation, arguing that the crucifixion was Christ being very holy so that you don’t have to.
When Jesus Christ was holiness spiraling the spirit of the law, he was laying down an impossible standard so that you would seek and receive the forgiveness of Jesus Christ for not being able to live up to it.
@suones
No need to continue being salty about the British invasion.
Thank you.
Jim Tacitus also despite being the most unambigious confirmation of the historicity of Christ and that he was in fact executed (probably around 30ish AD not 0 AD because Tactitus says that Tiberius was Emperor when it happened) its also clearly not a forgery because Tacitus (a reactionary oldschool Roman who admires ancient Agrarian Rome and hates the Rome of his own time, he clearly also admires the Germans as a virtuous martial people, hating only their lack of work ethic, and seems to predict that one day they are going to overrun and conquer the Empire) clearly despises the Christians and thinks of them as an evil subversive cult that caught on among the population of Rome because Rome in its affluent subsidized peaceful decadence is where “all things hideous and shameful in the world gather and become popular”.
Perhaps it would be better to use the term “progressives” rather than “left”. The progressives are those at the leading edge of the holiness spiral. The opposition -right or whatever you call them- are those who want to stop the holiness spiral.
In those terms it is easier to see that it can apply to any religion.
I want to bring up another manifestation of this that’s going to rustle a few jimmies but needs to be said: if the judiciary allows or grants any relief in litigation, it is because they think it will have no negative impact on the establishment.
Thus, they are happy to allow forensic examinations of voting machines because they know it will turn up nothing of interest. But try to get a hearing on signature verification and there are a million and one reasons why it can’t be done, most of them being bullshit procedural issues around being either too early or too late.
SCOTUS refusing to hear the Pennsylvania case means they really do not want that evidence to be heard or that argument to be made, because they have no legal argument against it, and believe that any additional public attention whatsoever would be damaging.
I think Scott Adams was right, unfortunately, that the superficially positive reshuffling of SCOTUS regional assignments was actually designed to make cucking easier, because “Alito declines to hear Trump electors’ appeal” doesn’t sound as bad as “Kagan declines to hear Trump electors’ appeal.”
So clearly cucking is their first instinct; my optimistic take is that we could be entering into a “no good cucking option” zone where e.g. there is a big public outcry if SCOTUS agrees to hear a case on election integrity brought by a bunch of state AGs, but also a big outcry if they refuse to hear it.
The basic message the GOP is sending to it’s voters is yes they rigged the election, but you just have to live with it because fighting it would be worse. The base hates this message, but they need a leader if they’re going to fight back and Trump still hasn’t committed to this role.
So apparently they can still hear the PA case, only the injunction was denied. Don’t know if that changes anything though.
https://twitter.com/JennaEllisEsq/status/1336451735150350336?s=20
It does not. There’s isn’t time for the normal process. If the SC was going to hear it, then they would have.
So apparently the state of Texas qua the state of Texas has sued the states of Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania over how they conducted/are conducting their election procedure, as I understand with the goal of forcing them to allow their legislatures to select electors if they want to, as I thought the Constitution demanded. Anyway, don’t know the details, but as an explicit interstate conflict this seems a very positive step in terms of escalating things beyond “normal” procedure about the transition from one POTUS to another, possibly toward the (hopefully brief, decisive, not too bloody) civil war that seems inevitable, and/or maybe even secessions.
In other news, Ted Cruz says he will argue the PA case in front of SCOTUS himself if they grant certiorari, which may be a kind of showboating, but at least indicates a certain degree of GOP support, seemingly decreasing the likelihood, to my mind, of SCOTUS just punting on everything.
Clever girl to force this on SCOTUS via original jurisdiction, but it’s not clear how TX gets a legal say in how other states select their electors.
Texas is asserting that the other states are violating the US Constitution by allowing their courts and governors to direct the manner of appointment of electors, when the Constitution vests that right exclusively in state legislatures. Their doing so violates the right of Texas citizens to equal protection of their right to vote.
I think it’s a strong case, personally.
Legality only matters to the extent that it will add to credibility of Trump’s claim to be restoring the Republic in the eyes of the warriors. That from 2020-11-04 04-05 onward, guns matter, and courts do not.
I am reluctant to make predictions, though I have some money riding on Trump – quite a lot of money, if you count my investments, a small amount of money, if only count my bets with friends and net acquaintances.
That his legal case is compelling matters not at all. Who is securing the Supreme court is what matters. And, if he wins in the supremes, the verdict only matters if he can make it stick, if he is willing and able to do what it takes to make it stick.
I agree with all of the above. It’s a matter of power, not law.
But the presumption of legitimacy is a type of power. It seems to me that having the imprimatur of a Supreme Court judgment in his favor is helpful in the same way having the Pope declare your war to have God’s sanction was helpful in the Middle Ages. You can go to war without the sanction, you can win the war without it, but it helps your army’s morale to have the sanction.
For my part I’ll march on the Emperor’s command I don’t care whether he and I are excommunicated for it or given a crusade banner.
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.26.116111v2
“Genome-wide sequencing of human populations has revealed substantial variation among genes in the intensity of purifying selection acting on damaging genetic variants. While genes under the strongest selective constraint are highly enriched for Mendelian disorders, most of these genes are not associated with disease and therefore the nature of the selection acting on them is not known. Here we show that genetic variants that damage these genes reduce reproductive success substantially in males but much less so in females. We present evidence that this reduction is mediated primarily by cognitive and behavioural traits, which renders male carriers of such variants less likely to find mating partners. These findings represent strong genetic evidence that sexual selection mediated through female mate choice is shaping the gene pool of contemporary human populations. Furthermore, these results suggest that sexual selection accounts for 21% of purifying selection against heterozygous variants that ablate protein-coding genes.”
They obviously won’t admit the unwoke implications (that civilization being more than a bunch of mudhuts depends on women having their reproductive ability kept under control).
>depends on women having their reproductive ability kept under control
My question is if the current abortionarian mindset and contraceptive technology represents something new or if it is a regression back to matriarchal values of the pre-Aryan world.
Abortionarianism is a regression back to the problems that prefigured the collapse of Bronze age civilization, depicted in the Admonitions of Ipuwer.
There were methods of abortion via inducing miscarriage that were fairly reliable going way back, whores in the Roman Empire and Middle Ages would find a lot of trouble earning a living if they didn’t have a fairly reliable way to take care of things, so obviously they did.
You are never going to have zero abortions, legal or illegal. There is an argument for not banning abortion but heavily discouraging it via the church. That’s what Russia is doing. They still have one of the highest abortion rates though iirc.
The problem is not abortion in itself, but female control of reproduction. Women are maladapted to having control, and not happy when they have it.
Well since I can remember I considered abortion murder, was my biggest heresy against the left for a while. Feral women are a far bigger problem of course, abortions are the symptom. Feral women will always exists just like stray or aggressive dogs, but on a much smaller scale.
Russia has plenty of feral women still. I think in Russia they just figured abortion beats single motherhood in that regard. Traditional marriage is plenty protected now for the men who want it with no divorce rape and domestic violence legalized.
Russia’s feral women (and feral women in most of Asia) are different than Western feral women.
As Russia and most of Asia do not have firm formal patriarchal authority the single women are still feral. But they do not make single women high status either.
Asia and Russia thus have a “whore” problem. The women may be fickle and uncontrollable but men are higher status then they are and thus they are more amiable and more likely to sleep with you even if you aren’t a celebrity billionaire vampire psychopath who looks like Jeremy Meeks. A “whore” problem is more livable than what we have. These women are more likely to get married in the end as well but its not as stable. After you are married they may be slightly MORE likely to cuck you than Western women… but less likely to initiate divorce (and much less likely if you have kids).
The US and most of Western Europe make single women high status, this is much much worse than a whore problem as the women just aren’t interested in most men at all.
Yes for example in Russia women can have careers but only if they are married. Otherwise they simply don’t get promoted.
Divorce is very frequent in Russia but divorce rape is not really possible by design. It’s largely an artifact of Soviet naive feminist law, from the POV of the state marriage is mostly an official version of “boyfriend and girlfriend”.
Russian and American whores aren’t too different in the end, but Russian whores are much more pleasant from the get go. Therefore American and Western European women are eager to label them as gold diggers.
Many facets of feral female behaviour changes based on low or high status. Even their self destructive behaviour will change.
Feral Russian women are much less likely to get tons of tattoos (I can tolerate this one but its not attractive and lots of guys REALLY hate it), gain tons of weight or cut their hair short than women in feminist countries.
Feral Russian women are far more likely to decide since that since they don’t want to get fat but need to suppress their appetite that a diet of zero calorie soda and 2+ packs of cigarettes a day is a good idea (to be fair its probably better for you than obesity even if you are smoking heavily at the 2+ pack a day level) and more likely to decide that getting drunk in public every night on some zero calorie form of hard liquor is a good recreational activity (now I hear British women do this too and they are plenty feminist except its not low calorie booze).
https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1336362551177830404?fbclid=IwAR0X4_SZz8116mgLgKoavObpcUN6y6zWacbbunMsg1CT8X9g2HEVAC6du9k
1. Why does the GOP have so many abject cowards in it.
2. How the fuck do you get this attitude in a Southern State which recognizes a wide variety of threatening circumstances that justify defensive deadly force. I’m not in Georgia but NOBODY in Florida was worried about left wing rioters at all… the rednecks (even some of the broads) and some of the Cubans were outright hoping they would riot because they wanted to blow them away.
3. Atlanta is a cancer on the whole region anyway.
I think the real reason is they are compromised and corrupt and also afraid of receiving the same treatment as Harrison Deal.
A very small step towards the dissolution of the monasteries:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/dec/07/florida-police-raid-data-scientist-coronavirus
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/12/07/rebekah-jones-covid-19-dashboard-florida-desantis/
Looks like she wanted to fudge the numbers together with some other local swamp creatures. Finally the taboo against arresting very holy ‘scientists’ is breaking down.
Looks like the scientist went with classic “number of cases” scare mongering tactic which we all know pretty much pointless and don’t scare the masses anymore.
A senator had enough of china virus demons, the priest won’t budge. All is well, the priest got what she fucking deserve.
Nah, she needs to be made into an object lesson. Perp walk the bitch in front of her kids and set the precedent that if you fuck with us, we humiliate you in front of your family and peers, and saddle you with brutal court costs. Those are the rules now, so we need to be the ones enforcing them on our enemies.
Get the co-conspirators in the government, too. Walk them all out in handcuffs.
She has kids? I’m surpised. Usually such bitches have only cats or -at most- one child.
lol just a few days ago they switched their rhetoric to the number of deaths, with coronavirus as a justification for lockdowns. Probably exactly for that reason, it sounds scarier to them. Completely retarded even according to week-old official science that at least admitted death numbers are a lagging indicator. Holiness spiral now moving in daily increments.
the states of Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina and South Dakota have joined the state of Texas in its suit at SCOTUS.
seems a bloc of trump states with friendly governments is forming.
Trump is still going to have to cross the Rubicon anyway, the court is probably going to be too cowardly to reverse the fraudulent election.
This isn’t blackpilling its just saying that the legal system isn’t Trump’s way out of this, Trump’s way out of this is using force in a very illegal and unprecedented way to overturn a very illegal and unprecedentedly fraudulent election.
Probably the closest they will come would be to nullify the results in the contested states allowing them to send unbound electors. They could also not allow those electors meaning neither trump or Biden get 270 and the house decides.
Imagine: The house elects Trump 26-24, Riots in the streets and the nation burns, Washington DC in disarray and the west coast starts to seriously talk about secession. Intel agencies rebel.
Trump would have to cross the rubicon to keep control.
If they throw it into the house, trump will probably win because these things historically are almost always decided on a partyline vote which he wins. however enough Republican legislators are likely compromised corrupt or afraid of getting the Harrison deal treatment, that I can’t feel confident in this. if he loses in the house that would be bad, although I would hope he would still invoke the martial law option.
I have no confidence in the house. The GOP is full of cucks and they will cuck unless Trump’s people have guns pointed at them.
I still rather have SCOTUS’s blessing because along comes with it is the Senate’s blessing, as cowardly as they are they are important for Trump being viewed as restoring the Republic and bringing to Justice the mass amount of traitors.
In the same way Augustus brought to Justice the treacherous outlaw Mark Antony, enemy of the Senate and the Republic.
The right needs to psychologically reorient itself to a more machiavellian and will to power mentality…
The morality mindset (I blame Burke for this) has hurt us badly…
Burke was no rightist.
He launched lawfare against the East India Company, denying its right to rule, denying it the authority granted by Charles the Second. This was an attack on order in the British Empire, and corruption of the legal system in Britain, the first major attack of many major attacks under many rationales on the apple carts full of shiny apples and on the men in splendid colorful uniforms curating those apple carts.
Yes he was a fake rightist the 1st cuck as you called him but his mentality has deeply hurt the Anglo right IMHO.
What I expect and hope for is that court reverses the fraudulent election. And then the court is ignores, allowing Trump the pope’s imprimatur for a crusade.
If the court reverses the election and its reversal is actually followed, which I would love to see but do not expect to see, then the Republic is not dead. But it looks like it has been dead for quite a while, the corpse is starting to stink, and is in urgent need of decent burial.
In the event the Republic is truly not dead and Trump gets a completely regular second term, what are his options for cleaning out the deep state and civil service? Does he have to take the slow route then, via criminal investigations etc.? If I’m not mistaken then ironically conceding the loss would be the best play for the left in the medium term. They would show weakness but keep some power. Of course I can think of no historical example when they did that.
Right now the bureaucracy is slow walking schedule F, and it will continue to be slow walked until and unless some unpleasant people with guns take those slow walking it away from their offices for a little chat about policy decisions by supposedly non political permanent bureaucrats.
After a few such chats, schedule F will be fast walked, and then the awesome power of the presidency will be in the pocket of the president.
Absent such chats, the presidency is going to continue to ignore schedule F, and thus continue to ignore the president.
All these problems are coup complete, and the Trump family staying out of jail and avoiding eventual execution is also coup complete.
Thanks.
This is looking increasingly unlikely, given that the same Supreme Court rejected the Pennsylvania case without giving any reason.
Unless they are looking at it as being redundant to the Texas case, but I’m not all that hopeful.
SCOTUS moved the Kelly PA case aside for the Texas lawsuit against WI/MI/PA/GA. A whole host of Trump states have joined that lawsuit.
https://twitter.com/TWPundit/status/1336476790865485828
https://www.supremecourt.gov/search.aspx?filename=/docket/docketfiles/html/public/22o155.html
I’m aware of the expansion of the TX case but they cited no such rationale and there is no reason they couldn’t hear both cases.
And, per the heuristic I recently mentioned in another comment, if indeed they are sidelining the PA case for the TX case, it is because they think the TX case has less merit and will be easier to dismiss without a public outcry.
Regardless of the merits/content, I don’t see how a case filed by the attorneys general of multiple US states against multiple other states will be easier to dismiss without a public outcry than a case filed by some individuals against the SC of a single state.
In terms of news headlines, I can’t see how “SCOTUS tells Kelly and Parnell to take a hike” could cause more public outcry than “SCOTUS tells Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi, South Carolina, and South Dakota to take a hike.”
Normally SCOTUS would rather make a decision on the less broad case over the more broad case, but we are not in normal times.
So we’re clear: I think the Texas complaint looks great, makes specific claims, shows tons of evidence, even explains how and why Democrats benefited from the fraud in order to preempt the “you can’t prove damages” argument.
But my heuristic now is that SCOTUS would only prioritize the case if it saw that case as somehow less harmful, maybe saw it as a way to crush all the other cases at once. Thomas and Alito are clearly on the right side but these Federalist Society guys are proving to be 100% cucks and traitors.
Trump has more in-party support than he’s ever had, many congresscritters and pretty much all of the state legislators backing him, but it’s not enough to win through the old and decrepit and dying system. It’s not over till it’s over, but I don’t think Trump wins without a war, and don’t think he survives without a win. While I’ll continue to wish for a SCOTUS blessing, I hope Trump is ready to take on the Supremes in the likely event that such blessing fails to materialize.
If he wants to live, must cross the Rubicon with or without the supremes.
I worry that his irrational optimism may bite him, but probably it will not bite him this time.
His base awaits the emperor’s command.
Caesar offered the senate a deal in which he would have not have been prosecuted until after he attempted to win an election that would surely have been rigged to make sure he lost, but the Senate, not being agreement capable, just went after him anyway. While the US is in the situation of the Roman Republic before Pompey was made dictator, Trump is in the situation of Caesar before he crossed the Rubicon.
Cross or they will imprison him, then eventually, probably a few years down the road, kill him.
Before the actual event consumes all debate the world over, I just wanted to pop in to tip my hat to Cominator, whose post here (a month ago?) was the first and only I had seen, suggesting Trump States should sue the Fraudulent Six in the USSC. I thought it was brilliant then, and never heard it anywhere else — until it happened.
Good call, sir.
Nah, Trump has ways out of this using very legal forms of violence, namely riot act and 14th amendment.
The violence would not even be unprecended as there has already been a civil war.
The South will rise again…minus Georgia
At least any sort of “passing the torch,” “moving on,” “cementing the legacy,” “accepting the inevitable”-type vibes we may have got at the Georgia rally do not seem much in evidence here, though perhaps what Jim describes as Trump’s excessive optimism is:
https://twitter.com/TrumpWorld2017/status/1336415003927187456?s=20
“Irrational optimism,” that is–he still sounds potentially irrationally optimistic that state legislatures and/or the Supremes will pull through for him, though he’s also not necessarily giving off vibes that other options are off the table if they don’t (though he probably wouldn’t regardless; just glad to hear him firm in his “we won and Biden can’t win” messaging, which could be part of his “say it till it becomes reality” power–the more he publicly says “I won; Biden can’t be president” the better I feel about him not giving himself an easy out).
I think there is a huge gulf between Western politics (and US politics in particular) and politics at home.
In India, a Trump-like figure being backstabbed by his party would have led to Trump splitting the party and taking a whole bunch of loyalists to form a separate party based on his own unquestioned leadership and leaving the traitors leaderless and discredited. This happens so often that almost every state in India has a party that was formed by dissenting leaders in the Congress party which was the uniparty of India after independence.
I think this is where Western countries differ. Your politics seem oriented around Priestly ruled political parties where individual leaders are severely restricted in power by the priests whereas in our parts, political parties are headed by dictatorial leaders who impose their unconditional leadership on the party and will not tolerate internal dissent.
I think this is why our politics has not fallen prey to holiness spirals, because any time an Indian political leader is threatened by a holiness spiral, he either throws out the dissenters from the party or if they are too strong, takes away his loyalists and forms a new party which owes allegiance to his own leadership.
Note how many times the Congress party in India has been split by dissenting leaders and even the Dynasty itself (Indira Gandhi).
The question is, is it possible for Trump to form a “Trumpist” party based on his own image and win an election? Or is the priestly elite of the US too powerful to allow this?
With massively rigged elections and the FBI ready to jump on any non Democrat who tries to rig them, there’s no point of forming a Trumpist party.
Though America has had many charismatic presidents (and many more uncharismatic presidents), cult of personality seems comparatively inimical to our cultural DNA. Even charismatic leader figures like Reagan and FDR end up sublimating themselves, to a degree, to a political party, even if they end up transcending or remaking that party to a degree.
Trump is definitely a leader with a degree of cult of personality and also an awkward fit for the Republican party as it exists today. One can blame first-past-the-post, no ranked order voting, Duverger’s law, lack of a coalition system, etc. but whatever the reason, systemic, cultural, or historical, it seems historically much harder (at least since the Civil War) to break off and form a whole new entity in US politics as compared to remaking an existing entity from the inside. Maybe this is symptomatic of a bigger civilizational decay/malaise, whereby dominant entities/industry players, etc. keep gobbling up enough of whatever vitality new competitors offer without ever thoroughly reforming themselves, top to bottom (Silicon Valley giants that stop innovating but manage to remain profitable by acquiring innovative startups, for example).
Though America is a relatively “new” country, the Democratic Party of the United States, I’ve heard it claimed, is the oldest existing political organization in the world. Of course, the Democratic Party of today bears little resemblance to that of Andrew Jackson, but the fact that it’s even nominally the same entity may say something about antifragility of US political institutions, for better or worse.
As a (somewhat reformed) libertarian, my instinct is to distrust “strong man”-type figures (Putin, Bolsonaro), but honestly it seems today like they are the only ones posing any real threat to a much more sinister cabal of global elites working more in the shadows. This is probably related to the shift Jim describes whereby nationalism (and with it, presumably, “national greatness” charismatic leaders like Lincoln?) ceased to be leftist sometime around WWI.
Lincoln’s charismatic leadership was bad because it ruined the regional character and self-determination of US states in favor of a unified US identity. Trump (and Putin and Bolsonaro and Duterte’s) charismatic populist nationalism is good because it fights against the forces trying to force the US and all developed countries to give up all their regional character, exclusivity, and distinctive wealth and culture in favor of the globohomo utopia.
I think “cultural DNA” is right. In the “Orient”, strong leaders have always been worshipped and idolized while ideologies have traditionally subordinated to leadership, though it’s always been a struggle. While one-man rule leads to other problems, the problem of priestly rule and holiness spirals is relatively absent in our political setup.
Reading Indian history from this angle I find it fascinating how strong leaders have always nipped holiness spirals in the bud. Indira Gandhi is a prime example. Ironically the Nehru Dynastic leadership of the Congress party has probably kept the Congress from spiralling leftwards at ever increasing speed.
Dynastic politics is the only thing where I unironically support the Congress way of doing things, and vehemently oppose the RSS/BJP way, where to reach the top one has to be childless/family-less, to “prevent” dynastic politics from arising.
The majority of Congress party’s problems arise from the current dynast’s ineptitude, rather than some inherent problem. Indira Gandhi’s Congress remains widely respected even among nominally opposition figures.
I was thinking the same thing. The BJP’s criticism of Dynasty politics is an imitation of the Progressivist media’s criticism of Congress from the left but more from a wrong sense of “duty” to the nation which is a leftover from the older Jana Sangh politics wherein the sacrifice of independence fighters was still fresh in memory. Which I don’t think will serve BJP well in the long run, because Dynastic politics is not the enemy. They’re just beating a dead horse at this point.
Though we may oppose *this* particular Nehru Dynasty as they are on the wrong side of history, we definitely want a restoration of a Dynasty of the Right.
“Ironically the Nehru Dynastic leadership of the Congress party has probably kept the Congress from spiralling leftwards at ever increasing speed.”
This is kind of surprising to me. I’ve heard a lot of talk about how feminist laws and female empowerment memes are worse in India than they are in the US.
I’ve heard India is sort of like a pefectly corrupt anarcho tyranny with no real law (I mean the US increasingly doesn’t have real law either). The laws such as they are are byzantine incomprehensible and insane and everyone in the government can and expects to be bribed.
I remember seeing a YouTube vid a while ago about how difficult it is to start a business in India compared to the US (can’t find it on YouTube because it has changed so much in the last 10 years). They were trying to start a business selling toys and kick-knacks, took them several years in India and they had to deal with tons of red tape and bs.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCme-Jk9rwliVoaBhRvxr_xw Channel called MGTOW Indian. Full disclosure I’m not MGTOW, used to be, but have decided that getting laid is more fun than choosing not to get laid. MGTOW are great at finding problems with women, but their ideology is individualism, which I disagree with on a fundamental level.
200 years do not a people make.
There is no such thing as “cultural DNA.” Just that USA was created by people who were traitors to their King, and the sort of people who would attack an enemy Christian Army in the middle of the night on Christmas Eve, and the sort of people who would celebrate this act of brazen cowardice as bravery. This backstabbing continued throughout history, with their Libyan ally (“shores of Tripoli” fame), and the latest being Mujahideen, where America can’t seem to decide whether they are friends or enemies (former Caliph al Baghdadi was an “austere scholar” per NYT).
The fruits of treason are many, but they are all evil. Since they metaphorically kiled their King, they’re haunted by the spectre of a King arising naturally, and expend continuous, and more and more ridiculous, effort into preventing that from happening. In this way, they’re very like Republican Rome, where the elites feared and hated The Return of The King, and in fact Julius Caesar got murdered for fear of becoming a “King.”
A similar conundrum faced Russian Whites. Who could claim to stand for what was right, when they all had been complicit in betraying the Czar?
Every single nation the “Americans” come from has a bona-fide monarchy of long standing, and it is only in “America” that this King-less experiment has been tried for two centuries, with the resulting global plague of progressivism. You might say that the actual DNA, so far as it influences politics, is monarchical but their cultural milieu forces them to deny it.
Sanity can return only when Americans get over their betrayal of their King, and install a new King of their own.
In war, winning is everything, closely followed by grabbing all the land and the women, not necessarily in that order. If attacking an enemy christian army on Christmas Eve gives us victory, so be it. What has bravery and cowardice got to do with it? It is this confusion of ideas that causes idolators to lose every single time.
Jo jeeta wahi Sikandar, (He who wins, that’s the one and only Alexander)
Jo haara woh bandar (He who loses, that’s the monkey. It rhymes in Hindi)
Which army would you join If you want to win? George Washington’s or PrithviRaj Chauhan’s? Don’t know about you, but I’d pick Jorge over Prithvi every single time. I like winning, see?
Come of out this sentimental mush, idolator! As if polytheism wasn’t enough of a handicap, you want to add sentimentality to it as well.
Well said! This is literally Islamic fighting doctrine. A Muslim army knows no “Peace,” only “sulh,” a cessation of hostility until better circumstances prevail. Europeans misinterpret this as them being “agreement incapable” or some such. They only know total victory, and have not yet faced total defeat in 1500 years.
The irony in attacking a Christian army on Christmas eve was only that the attackers themselves claimed to be Chrestians, and their successors continue that tradition.
That said, we will try to not repeat the mistakes of Nero and Prithviraj Chauhan. The
finalonly solution is in fact to Cominate them all. If we don’t get gulaged first, that is 🙂I see that you are also an admirer of the Cominator. Even though that man makes me nervous, I can’t help admiring the clarity and decisiveness he brings to his thinking. Cominate is hereby declared added to the reactionary dictionary like Jim-ism.
What PrithviRaj did is not a mistake. Reminds me of this Englishman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Maldon
The difference between the Indian and English is this. While Indians in their maudlin sentimentality still see PrithVi as an honourable man, the English correctly accuse Byrhtnoth of the sin of pride and hubris. Contrast the clarity of the Anglo-Saxon with the confusion exhibited by the Sons of Bharata? If Prithvi wanted to exhibit compassion, he could have freed all the outcastes or elevated their condition however slightly.
Between the Anglos saxons and the Bharatas, who ended up conquering whom?
If it guarantees victory, you should attack the enemy when he leasts expects it. If that means attacking on Ramadan, so be it. If it means attacking on Diwali, so be it. If it means temporarily or deceptively claiming to be a monotheist/atheist/polytheist/deist/trinitarian/whatever, so be it. You can always revert after victory. After victory, who dares contradict you? Their is no honour in defeat. None! Who will survive to tell your tale of courage if you lose?
The Polytheists need a cult of victory at any cost.
A holiness spiral is a society wide problem rather than a party problem. A holiness spiral is something like a carrot and stick thing. In the US, the leading edge of the holiness is democrats chasing the carrot, the trailing edge is republicans fearing the stick.
If you say that India is at present less affected by a holiness spiral, I’ll take your word for it, but I assume that the reason has more to do with lack of a common religion. A Muslim who tries to more be holy than other Muslims won’t impress a Hindu – and vice versa.
Once a holiness spiral gets going within any of the religions in India, you’ll get get civil war very quickly because going after the insufficiently holy is a sure way to score holiness points.
I think it’s a bit more fundamental than that. For instance, among friends or family it’s common to discuss unironically about politics by saying that we need a dictator to get rid of all our problems. Indeed, the idea of a strong leader taking control of our country pervades our social consciousness that the idea is casually discussed. I don’t know if political conversations in the US among normies tend to that level of cynicism or not.
Apart from that, the reason why I think holiness spirals don’t work here is that, the bureaucracy or “permanent Government” in India is too corrupt and too submissive of the in-power political masters (Indira Gandhi’s “committed bureaucracy” really did submit the bureaucracy strongly to the political dispensation and she almost managed to submit the judiciary also) so the official state religion seems to change with every change in Government and even the official state religion tends towards the personality of the leader rather than the pure ideology.
In India, bureaucrats who don’t listen to political diktats tend to get “transferred” out of their posts to less important or trivial posts. “Punishment transfers” as so common in India, that it’s almost become a joke. The uncompliant diplomats keep getting shunted out of sensitive posts, and the ones who get to the top are usually political appointees, of the party who is in power at that moment.
Leaders who tend to be loony either leave mainstream parties and form some other party which quickly becomes irrelevant.
For example, what we have today in India is Moditva, not Hindutva, though Modi officially is a BJP leader. But no BJP leader can even think of criticizing Modi at least in public, unless he himself has plans of leaving the party or getting expelled.
Heh! Looks like Trump could use some of that Moditva thing. But I guess with Modi prematurely congratulating Biden before the legal question got settled puts paid to friendly collaboration leading to a free and fair exchange of ideas in the future, eh what?
You’re imagining that this is culural or emotional in nature when it is actually structural.
America is the political, economic and formerly industrial center of a large empire. In the provinces, including anywhere in Europe and yes, also India to a large extent, political parties are just political parties. There isn’t that much power to fight over, just taxes and law enforcement and maybe some industry. That’s not the case in America; political parties here are proxies, not for blocs of voters but for national and international interests.
Surely you’ve read up on the “bluegov” and “redgov” metaphors by now. Democrats are the party of government, they represent the State department, the Intelligence Community, the academy, the media (both “news” and entertainment), the banks, and everything else normally referred to as “soft power”, though there is nothing particularly soft about its administration. In other words, the party is the public face of the Cathedral. Republicans, in turn, and notwithstanding increasingly frequent and successful entryism by the Cathedral, are the party of the military-industrial complex, including the treasury, the military itself, private contractors, corporations and multinationals, industrialized agriculture, resource exploitation, and everything else normally referred to as “hard power”, which does not just mean fighting wars but also economic supremacy, US dollar as reserve currency, etc.
This should tell you two things. First, why the party can’t simply be split, because the party is just a façade, and it would be like cutting the top slice of bread in half and claiming you have a second loaf. And second, why the Republican party is so obviously out of power, because half of what it is supposed to control has been partially or entirely co-opted by the Cathedral.
And if something formerly controlled by “redgov” now belongs to “bluegov”, splitting from “redgov” to create a new “Trumpgov” isn’t going to get it back. It either has to be taken back by force, or eliminated and rebuilt, and both of those are going to be much easier to do under the umbrella of the entire faction, not some silly new political party.
Does the POTUS have legal powers to shift personnel in sensitive positions in the bureaucracy to carry out his bidding? Because if he does not, it seems that it’s a mighty weak post. Before reading NRx and being familiarized with this concept of Cathedral, I actually used to think that the US President was the most powerful head of Government in the world.
The office of the President is referred to as the “Executive” branch, and its role has traditionally coincided with that appellation. Presidents are normally concerned with enforcement of policy passed by the legislature and have quite limited ability to enact policy of their own.
The president is the one who gets to appoint most unelected members of the government apparatus and has various departments that answer to him, referred to as his “cabinet.” His appointees, however, have to be confirmed by the legislature before they can take office. The process of seating Trump’s appointees to like half a year after he took office to complete because of how much resistance and stalling there was from Congress, and when they were seated, many of them ended up stabbing Trump and America in the back anyway. Three of the nine justices currently on the United States Supreme Court were appointed by Trump, and whether or not Trump remains in office under the present system rests on whether two of them will take his side (the third, Brett Kavanaugh, has been dogmatic in making rulings based advancing the nationalist agenda and is unlikely to defect; I’ve never heard of a bad ruling from him).
The president has almost total legal authority over certain other matters, such as immigration and the deployment of military forces, however even with these the legislature has the ability to challenge him, such as a bill that passed just yesterday which prevented Trump from appropriating funds to withdraw US forces from Syria
This is roughly accurate from a constitutional point of view, but even the constitution doesn’t matter anymore.
Since the late 19th century, the President has been extremely limited in his ability to hire and fire personnel. And since FDR, the entire political pipeline is largely owned and operated by the left. The power that the President has in reality is even less than the power he has on paper, which isn’t much.
And yet, the President is the commander in chief of the military, so can essentially enforce any arbitrary command he wants, even through entirely legal means like the Insurrection Act. The question is whether or not his personnel will obey his orders. All of the paper in the world doesn’t change the fundamental law of power: “You and what army?”
The Military-Industrial Complex still has power, but is considerably weaker than the Cathedral. Still, it’s a lot more powerful than a bunch of newfag politicians with no army.
In America we don’t often splinter, instead we re-align.
It was very likely that Trump was going to realign the Republicans into an explicitly nationalist party, as is already under way. This would solidify the working-class base as well as numerous disaffected democrats who are getting red pilled and angry. The Democrats would fracture and bleed off into multiple sub-parties like the greens, libertarians, and socialists, with eventually the socialists gaining full control.
However the uniparty clearly had more ammo left in the magazine. With the Biden fix they have plugged the socialist leak temporarily and stopped the hemorrhaging of normie votes, at least in the public eye if not reality. Notice Biden has also co-opted several Trump talking points such as America First, even though no one actually believes he will go through with them. Meanwhile the republicans are playing their old shell game of backstabbing voters on one hand and saying “vote for us or you’ll get socialism!” on the other.
The next step will be to start a war, big enough to draw public attention away from worsening chaos and unrest, but hopefully not big enough to matter too much geopolitically. It’s the most reliable way to get Republicans behind a left agenda. “Support our troops!” becomes the mind-fogging rallying cry that prevents any real disagreement from occurring.
Trump could form a loyalist sub-party and go to local city and state elections to start winning seats, just like the Tea Party did, but the Republicans are good at co-opting such uprisings. They will all change their spots to insist they agree with Trump just long enough to fend off the challengers then go back to sucking the globalist dick. Trump also lacks the discipline for that kind of slow 10-20+ year plan, though he could pass on something like that to his sons.
None of that is going to matter though if the left imprisons and executes Trump. Plus the left has no way to stop Antifa/BLM or the worsening crime situation in every single city (disbanding police means ceding control of urban areas to local warlords and red guards), the covid scam bankrupting everyone and leading to a guaranteed recession in two years.
Revolution is coming, one way or another.
I get that at present it may be too late for any new political party solution. But was wondering what was it about the US that you could not have more than two major national parties vying for power and also why there are no strong regional/state parties (if at all) representing regional interests.
There’s no real legal reason why the United States runs on a two-party system and indeed there are many minor parties that have attempted to break into the mainstream and failed (though a few have had minor success in taking state level positions at times; there’s even been third party governors here and there). A lot of it simply comes down to the mass media refusing to give them any coverage, but nonetheless, that doesn’t mean third parties have no influence. It has often been said, for example, that Al Gore lost the 2000 presidential election because of a few thousand leftists in Florida that decided to vote for the Green party instead of the Democrats. This year, Democrats mounted fierce legal challenges to the Green Party and forced them off the ballot in several states to prevent a repeat of this situation (and a similar thing happened with the Kanye West bid, which would also have been bad for them). Previously, they’ve used softer methods to prevent this from happening, such as adopting some of the Green Party platform to dissuade the radicals from needing to feel like they should vote against the Democrats. The Republican Party has faced similar challenges from the Libertarian Party and to a smaller extent the Constitution Party and has often adopted positions of the former.
You can only have two real parties in a winner take all election system. The problem with the GOP is that since William F Buckley its been mostly a fake and gay opposition to the Democrats.
Trump and Newt Gingrich have been the only exceptions.
This is a feature of Harvard style democracy in general. Parties are pure grift there, not much relation to actual policy. India seems to have a somewhat different system though I don’t know how it came about exactly.
In most American empire countries parties are eligible for government funding, but only if they are over a certain threshold in a federal election. This discourages small and regional parties. It’s not uncommon for mayors etc. to be unaffiliated, but regional politicians and above are almost always in a party.
This leads to all of them being rather big tent organizations focused most on winning elections, and as a result the leadership generally lacks control. For example the greens in Germany are generally the party of extreme zealous progressivism but they have Boris Palmer who runs a sort of anti-sanctuary city (no rapefugees policy) in the more conservative south and is at least against some covid restrictions, so well to the right of Merkel who is technically in a conservative party.
In the US additionally parties are funded by campaign finance and Democrats stay big because donations to them amount to a protection racket. Jim has talked about this. Trump donated to the Democrats for years so they would leave him alone. To fight Democrats in a winner take all system, Republicans can’t risk splitting their own party.
Historically India was never part of the American empire, which may explain a lot of things. India, though technically non-aligned in the cold war era, was more or less in the Soviet sphere of influence.
Though Indian democracy wears the skinsuit of western democracy, the roots are not Harvard.
If you are interested, the Emergency imposed by Indira Gandhi is a great way to understand how India’s “democracy” evolved post independence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emergency_(India)
Of course, the wikipedia article contains the usual Prog narrative, but substantially you can read between the lines and understand that Indian politics has revolved around cult of personality and how the bureaucracy is completely subservient to the political masters in power at any given time.
In India, political parties/alignments are formed around the personalities of leaders, caste, regional/ethnic identities and religion. But mostly the cult of personality remains the biggest difference between Western democracy and India.
In India, after the decline of the Congress party, even though we have a winner takes all system, this has kind of leaned more towards small regional outfits with powerful leaders who want to control National politics through alliances, either with the major national parties, or by forming a “Third Front” with the Communists and other regional parties. From the Congress’ decline until the big BJP win in 2014, this has led to governments formed by coalition of parties, rather than a single largest party.
If India’s isn’t an American Client state, why did the not to long ago abolish Patriarchy? That smacks of Harvard.
I was talking history. After the fall of the Soviet and the end of the Cold War, the Harvard influence has substantially increased in Indian politics, though not to the extent of Western democracies.
Prog ideology is in infancy at present in India. At present, India still runs strongly on the unprincipled exceptions. And among the common folk (not the English speaking city elites) prog ideology has not penetrated.
The English media in India is substantially ahead of the curve in terms of imposing prog ideology. But English is still the language of elites in India. Large sections of Indian people are not English speaking. The regional language media of the masses still does not speak much prog language as the English media.
Over the years, the Cathedral has been buying up media houses in India. But it is clear that with the Democrats in power in US, the Harvard machinery will be increasing their influence unchecked with renewed vigour.
The Indian elites becoming POZed is bad news for India far more so than the average person becoming POZed. Once your elite goes bad it’s nothing but civilizational destruction on a massive scale.
Hmm.. if your analysis true, Modi would not have won two elections by appealing to the proles. And the Congress, which has the most “pozzed” elites, has been destroyed in numerous elections in recent times barring one or two exceptions.
In India, there is still a substantial gap between the political “elite” and the “educated” elites.
And the political elites mostly win elections without any support from the educated elites. It seems that there is a different dynamic working here than in the West.
In the longer term, you may be right. Maybe if the US empire shrinks considerably after this 2020 election and if the predicted civil war comes to pass, this problem of Harvard dominance world over may solve itself.
I think you’re already in trouble if Modi has no family and children. That’s a bad example to set. It’s generally the failure of elite reproduction that dooms a civilization or a failure of having a virtuous elite. One of the strongest signs of virtue in a man is a having family with many obedient children.
The first law of Gnon is:”And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein.” and Modi appears to be failing that law.
Disclaimer: I don’t know anything about Indian politics.
This is true. Modi needs some succession plan. He cannot stay forever.
The problem with the old Hindutva was they believed that to “serve the nation” they needed to be free of family worries. This was mostly derived from the Indian Independence movement, where sacrifice of personal life for the freedom of the nation was seen as the highest virtue.
Modi comes from that old Jana Sangh/RSS tradition. They are staunch old-school Nationalists, but sadly unequipped for handling the onslaught of the “New Left”.
The Old Left was cleaned up by Moditva politics, but the New Left which is still in infancy needs a stronger challenge which cannot be dealt with by the old-style.
The elite fertility problem is the biggest issue in India today.
We have our Trump just as you have your Modi. And though the federal government is full of rats, it still has many people who support Trump and his agenda (though sadly not anywhere near as many as it needs). Elections are not the issue unless one happens to live in a country like Canada or the UK (even Sweden’s parties are better, despite the memes). Of course, it’s bad if they win elections, but do not expect the progressive agenda to pursue only one avenue of attack. They will infect every part of your society. Literally everything.
As an example, we have, in the United States, a large population of Mennonites and Amish. These people are basically what you get when you combine anarcho-primitivists with fundamentalist Protestantism. They are against the use of modern technology and believe it leads to sin. I went to a web page once searching for more info on these people and lo and behold, there is an organization with a mission statement to “fight racism” and “make amends for the sins of race.” Mennonites and Amish are, of course, almost entirely white.
It’s not going to stay confined to those English speaking channels for long.
@BC @A Honest Indian
India has been Cathedral client ever since a certain frail, bald, bespectacled half naked fakir with a penchant for fasting appeared on the scene and managed to masterfully convince Hindus that “Hinduism, correctly interpreted, is really western Progressivism.” Of course, at the time that The Great Bald Faster appeared on the scene, Cathedral HQ was Oxbridge rather than Harvard.
Fast forward to 2020, where women are joining the Indian Army on droves and Netflix is churning documentary after documentary about these Brave Amazons and the travails they face and overcome in the sexist, misogynistic, patriarchal culture of the Armed forces. For the first time in memory the Armed forces are being portrayed in a negative light in any Indian media. Earlier they used to be untouchable and off limits to media criticism the way their Judiciary is even now.
How is this not Classic western progressivism? How is India not a Prog Client state? A Honest Indian is just deluded like the rest of his countrymen. He just happens to be more articulate than the rest of them.
At the moment, their entry into infantry positions is blocked by the fact the Rural Hindus who make up the bulk of the enlisted men will NOT take orders from a woman whatever Her rank. But I expect this to change within a generation. Soon Pakistan’s ISI will be flooded with mujaheddin recruits salivating at the prospect of snatching Hindu Pussy right from the frontline.
@someDude
I dispute your claim about Gandhi’s influence on Hindus culturally. His stock fell low when his appeals for peace during the Partition fell on deaf ears. Indian Hindus may have idolized Gandhi as a freedom fighter but I doubt whether his cultural ideology actually perpetrated to the extent you claim. The assault on Hinduism was more Marxism than progressivism at that time.
The actual Western progressive influence is more recent though.
@someDude,
The myth that Gandhi was universally loved by Indians especially Hindus is as much a myth created by the British as his supposed influence on Hindu culture to the extent that Hindus accepted “Western progressivism” as the same as Hinduism.
To be sure, the fakir had some influence on the political sphere at the time, but his constant assault on Hindu orthodoxy earned him enough disgust and distrust among traditional Hindus at the time of independence (and there were still a lot of traditional Hindus those days). I have no doubt that the few Hindus who actually believed in “Gandhianism” was a very small, uninfluential minority.
All of those people got absorbed into the Socialist-Marxist axis of “intellectual thinkers”, who attacked Hinduism from a different perspective. To be sure, I’m not claiming that Hindus were not assaulted on all directions even in those days – they were. The Jana Sangh/RSS politics was clearly a reaction against the old Left. But to state that the main influence on that was Harvard/Western Progressivism from the 1950s to around the 1980s-90s is incorrect.
There is a clear distinction between the intellectual framework from which the old Socialist-Marxists worked and the framework of the modern Progressives.
@someDude
In any case, I find your interpretation of Indian history very weird and quite blackpilling. You attribute some kind of universal “mind rays” to Harvard/Oxbridge at an era without the advantages of mass communication to an extent that exists in the world today, and without looking at the causes nearer and more immediate that existed at the time.
There is no straight or direct causal line between the Gandhianism that supposedly “progressivised” Hindus as you (falsely) claim and the fact that Indian women are being recruited in the army in 2020. That Indian women are being recruited in 2020 in the army is 100% Harvard but that particular influence is more recent than you suggest.
This is probably going too off-topic for this blog so this will be my final post on this particular subject. Out of deference to our host, I will stop this discussion on Indian politics here.
Ghandi was Harvard mind rays. Indian Marxist economics was not Soviet, it was Oxbridge transmitted through the London School of Economics. Ho Chi Minh spent his formative years in Moscow as part of the Soviet mind control apparatus, but the people who screwed up the Indian economy came from Oxbridge and the London School of Economics.
Ho Chi Minh was Moscow mind rays – he came out of Moscow. But Indian socialism was Oxbridge mind rays. The Indian socialists came out of Oxbridge and the London School of Economics, which is part of Oxbridge, not Moscow. Mind rays are transmitted primarily through universities.
Oxbridge was an independent power within the left before world war II, independently descended from Cromwell’s puritants, descended from the priests that failed to leave England after Charles the Second’s purge, a puppet of Harvard after World War II, a puppet of the faction expelled from England by Charles the Second.
The London School of Economics regarded the Soviets as their proxy. And so did their agents of influence in India.
Indian socialism was not Moscow socialism. It was London School of Economics socialism. India was not Soviet aligned. It was London School of Economics aligned.
@Honest Indian
In India, Power has to bend to Gandhi, or at least pretend to, at least verbally. Every nominally Hindu politician from across the spectrum has to pay homage to his, even if it is lip service. Even Modi. What is the nature of this sort of power? It’s the same as even skeptical Christians being forced to proclaim that Jesus Christ is Lord publicly in a Jim-ian Theocracy.
What matters is what Powerful people say and do, not the the hicks in the Cow Belt or the meek overtaxed middle class in cramped apartments in smoke filled cities. They never mattered, don’t matter and never will. Morally, As the King is, so his subjects will be. ‘Nuff said
It’s a straight line from Gandhi to Harvard, maybe with some intermediate steps. I’ve looked up Hindu history since the seventh century AD or so. It does not encourage optimism. If that does not cause black-pilling, I’m not sure what does. Your friend @Suones seems to have made it halfway to the Black pill.
I’m not saying you can’t win. Only that you most probably won’t. God knows how much I want you to win. You have to figure out something that works and figure it out fast. You haven’t figured it out in 1300 years and you’re showing no signs of being able to do so in the near future. And the near future is all you have left. Demographic decline and civilizational collapse is accelerating.
There is a difference, but it does not matter.
The left has a hundred factions, and they continually conflict, which conflict frequently becomes lethal, but every leftist is the ally of every other leftist, because they all support each other in knocking over apple carts even as they fight over the apples rolling around.
It is the fighting over the apples lying around that drives the left ever leftwards. Once new applecarts are no longer being knocked over, leftism dies, as it died under Stalin and Cromwell.
The Soviets were a Harvard proxy to attack Harvard’s near enemies, or at least Harvard thought so. Vietnam was a proxy war between Red State and Blue State. The last people in the world to know that Soviet economics was a disaster were Academia and the mainstream media.
Indian Socialism-Marxism was primarily a tool of the London School of Economics, and the London School of Economics a tool of Harvard, not the Soviets. The Soviets may have thought the London School of Economics was their tool, but the London School of Economics thought the Soviets were their tool.
Communism derives from Judaism, and progressivism derives from Christianity, but Marxism did to Judaism what the leftmost faction of the Puritans, whom Cromwell suppressed, did to Christianity. They have much in common, and each engaged in massive entryism against the other. Mao and Ho Chi Minh won in Washington, not in Moscow. They were thoroughly defeated in China and IndoChina.
If you pay attention to the infighting, you are looking at the apples rolling around, and failing to look at the apple carts.
@jim, @someDude,
Even suppose it is true that India was a client by proxy of Harvard post independence, it does not explain the massive influence of the anti-Hindu but equally anti-Western Socialist-Marxists on Indian politics up until the 1990s.
Even today, there is a prominent South Indian political leader quite unironically named “Stalin”.
There are plenty of Indians who named their children “Lenin” and “Marx” in that era and some who do so even today.
The literal Communists were in power in a few states in India up until recently their power declined considerably.
Is it a coincidence that the “old Left’s” powers declined considerably post the Soviet collapse?
The theory that India was a proxy of Harvard doesn’t quite explain how is it that they allowed a literal Dynasty (which is the opposite of the Western ideal of “liberal democracy”) to rule India for nearly 50 years past independence.
They liked the policies of that dynasty, which policies bear a clear and distinct “Made in Oxbridge” stamp. If the dynasty had pursued more authentically Indian policies, the outrage at the existence of a literal dynasty would have been unimaginably shrill.
Thanks for the pointers. My impression is that Oxbridge, Harvard and the Soviets were always struggling over supremacy in India. This infighting resulted in a comparatively ‘unmanaged’ democracy. To an extent I think this mirrors what happened in the Weimar republic. If you impose democracy over a former non-democratic country and don’t control it from outside you should expect people to take it to its logical conclusion fast and turn it into what it is on paper–elected dictatorship in the name of the people or your own ethnic group.
This does not happen in ‘mature’ democracies simply because in reality either the civil service rules there or they are ruled from outside, or both.
The left is always at war with the left.
The result is not ‘unmanaged’ democracy.
Before World War II, Oxbridge and Harvard were fighting over India. Oxbridge had the upper hand.
After World War II, Oxbridge shut up and did as it was told, and ran India as a client of Harvard.
Take a look at Indian socialism. It is not the socialism implemented by Moscow’s agent, Ho Chi Minh. It was the socialism of the London School of Economics. But socialism is always socialism, the differences do not matter. The economic outcome was similar, but there was a velvet glove around the iron fist.
I can see that in economic policy certainly. Permit Raj, British price controls and regulatory madness after WW2 and the current EU agrosocialism and regulatory thicket share the same LSE DNA and they are not exactly incompatible with Harvard but have a different focus.
I just realized when writing this reply that I have to agree with you. It’s pointless to discuss leftist infighting. It doesn’t matter to history or to the future.
Nevertheless, if you have an explanation for why Indian democracy tends to be rather more ‘raw’ than in the west I would be interested in hearing it. My theory obviously sucks.
The only authentically leftist faction that is truly truly different from the others enough to be worth discussing are the post 1937 Stalinists if only because they were sane and realistic in SOME areas and knew the informal purity spiraling hierarchy had to be replaced by an actual hierarchy.
Of course the modern left absolutely hates them and uses them as a scapegoat for the crimes of communism, even though the crimes of communism went DOWN after Stalin got into real absolute power.
@jim,
Even suppose you are right that India was a client of Harvard by proxy and that there is no material difference in outcome between Soviet socialism and Harvard socialism, my point is that India hardly resembles a western liberal democracy as I explained earlier. As European Mutt says I would be interested in how that can be explained.
Certainly Nehru and Indira Dynasty was autocratic and Indira’s Emergency was more in the style of a Stalinist purge and takeover though it proved abortive. Surely Harvard wouldn’t have approved such “illiberal†politics.
Harvard’s outrage at illiberal politics is strikingly selective.
Wikipedia is the voice of Harvard. Let us see what Harvard says about Nehru.
Surprise, surprise. Totally democratic.
It does mention, very briefly in passing, widespread atrocities during Indira Ghandi’s state of emergency, neglecting to tell us anything about those atrocities, but “In 1980, she returned to power after free and fair elections. … “In 1999, Indira Gandhi was named “Woman of the Millennium” in an online poll organised by the BBC.”
Her social reforms are described in absolutely glowing terms, and the disastrous economic policy is unmentionable.
@jim,
If you say that Soviets themselves were a proxy of Harvard, then I would have to defer to your judgement, but certainly the styles of the two left factions differed considerably even if the net result, as you say, wasn’t a whole lot different.
The Soviet Union was and was not a literal proxy. Both sides engaged in entryism each against the other, both sides manipulated the other.
But the Indochina war was or became a red state America versus blue state America proxy war.
Dont think jim thinks the Soviet Union was a client of Harvard especially post Stalin.
Moldbug theory is that Soviet Communism was very much inspired by US leftism calling it as “American as apple pieâ€.
And vice versa.
I forgot to add, Indira Gandhi’s prime motivating force was her first son, Sanjay Gandhi, who was the biggest factor in the Emergency and kind of a dynamic force behind Indira. After his death, she kind of became a shadow of her old self.
Her other son, Rajiv Gandhi was never a leader. He was more a playboy type who was pushed into politics and that’s what led to the Dynasty’s decline.
My feeling is that Oxbridge/Harvard, despite their overall approval of the policies of the Dynasty, were deeply uncomfortable with an Indira Gandhi style dictatorship. While today it is papered over by the Cathedral, a strong dictatorship, had it succeeded in India, would not have suited Oxbridge/Harvard at all particularly with India acquiring nuclear capability around the time.
My feeling is that they did not give a tinker’s dam. I don’t recall the New York Times decrying her dictatorship, or any dictatorship that did their bidding.
That’s incorrect. Moldbug said that lowercase-c “communism”, which he went to great lengths to distinguish from capital-C Soviet Communism, is as American as apple pie. In other words, that the mostly Puritan founders were accomplished apple-cart kickers and that the impulse for “democracy” and “equality” runs in American DNA.
He also argued, with pretty conclusive proof, that American elites expected “convergence” between American and Soviet Communism – which itself implies that they were distinct species and that both the Americans and Soviets knew it.
Both possessed of the same basic leftist impulse to take take take, but strikingly different in several important areas which eventually caused a big enough rift to start a cold war. The US made war on the Soviets precisely because they weren’t a client of Harvard, refused to be, and wanted to do Communism their own way. Yes, the left is exactly that petty and jealous.
Re this comment: “But the Indochina war was or became a red state America versus blue state America proxy war.”
I’m reading the new Richard Holbrooke biography and it’s fascinating on this point: The young (later to become) proto-commies in the 60s seem to have been right about Vietnam … arguing against it for reasonably patriotic reasons — and yet as they rose to power in the years after they coagulate into an anti-American fifth column.
So it’s like they morphed into a different and evil thing as they became self-aware of their influence and power.
If Vietnam was a proxy war between red and blue America it’s not clear red America was on the right side at that time … though later on red America would become the right side.
@jim,
Post the cold-war a lot of history seems to have been rewritten in the West minimizing the Soviet influence in many parts, where it suited the modern Harvard narrative.
India got its nukes from the Soviets. India got most of its military tech from the Soviets. Indian Communist Parties practically answered to their bosses in Moscow, not Harvard (some fringe Maoist parties answered to Chinese bosses). I was born in the Soviet era and in my childhood I remember that there were a lot of Russian children’s books (translated in English by Russian authors) in book stores. Russian literature was quite popular among the elites. Indian doctors those days used to get educated in Russian universities if they couldn’t get into medical colleges in India. I remember Indian newspapers carrying quite a lot of anti-American editorials in those days, especially because it was argued that America was supporting Pakistan militarily against India.
Are you saying all that was Harvard’s bidding? If so, I am baffled, because Indo-Soviet cooperation was close and it was real.
And Harvard Soviet cooperation was close and it was real.
A lot of Western newspapers were outraged at Indira’s dictatorship. It was controversial.
But it was not controversial at the New York Times. Meaning it was not controversial at Harvard.
You are looking at leftists fighting over the apples rolling around. You need to look at leftists cooperating to knock over apple carts. Indochina fell because Harvard overthrew it, not because Russia overthrew it.
It was the armies of North Vietnam that gave Pol Pot part of Cambodia, and the armies of Vietnam that removed him from power, but it was Harvard, not North Vietnam, that installed him in the capital. That is a lot more than Harvard did to India.
Theoretically India was following a course midway between the Soviet Union and America. Meaning it was following a course aligned against red state america, the military industrial complex, and fully aligned with blue state america, Harvard and the New York Times.
Being aligned against Red State America was controversial in the West. Not controversial at Harvard.
To be fair, I’m not painting a picture that there was practically *no* Harvard influence. There sure was.
But I think the truth lies somewhere in between, in that, it was probably a struggle between Harvard/Oxbridge and the Soviets for gaining traction in the region. Obviously Harvard won this battle.
Which may explain why we are seeing the same thing from different perspectives. Ultimately of course, it all boils down to the fact that Harvard is definitely on the ascendancy in modern India.
@jim,
Here’s an Indian Leftist newspaper with a fairly recent article (2018) on how the US and UK reacted to Indira Gandhi’s emergency,
https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/indira-gandhi-us-uk-media-on-indian-emergency-5244597/
So was Harvard really approving of the Emergency?
I feel horrible and nervous about this situation. I’ve found my christian faith again and I’m praying every day that Trump’s team wins this. I don’t know what I’ll do if the election theft goes unpunished and the corpse is inaugurated. Maybe I’ll leave the country, but doing that would severely impact my career. This business is making it tough for me to focus on my final exams.
A ton of people I know on Twitter got banned today for electionposting. I’m excited for the Texas lawsuit. Maybe these are good signs. Maybe in anticipation of needing to cope with the fraud going unpunished, I’ve been glued to old moldbug. Does anybody remember what year it was when Yarvin got doxxed? I’d like to see how his writing changes that year.
Im not 100%, but I think he kind of selfdoxxed. He linked another post from his “friend” discussing his new computer language (something Urbit related, Nock maybe). It then became more and more obvious that they were the same person.
It was immediately obvious that they were the same person.
https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2010/01/urbit-functional-programming-from/
I would not despair. What has been set in motion cannot be stopped. The day to day minutae of the news affects only the timing of what is to come, and even then not by all that much. We would of course prefer Trump to prevail. But regardless, we will see open war against the cathedral within our lifetimes. You will wake up to the sound of distant artillery fire and the scent of downtown burning. Heads will be put on spikes in public just like in the old days. There will be screaming, and seiges, and blood. God will call on you to help restore your nation, and you will accept God’s call. It will be righteous and glorious. A cathedral victory in 2020 will not and cannot stop these events. The elite become more corrupt, more holy, more numerous, and more deranged every year. The rate at which they do so increases geometrically. This process cannot continue much longer. Something will break soon with or without Trump in power, and when that break comes, we will restore the order of God and nature, serenaded by the sounds of cruise missile launches and helicopter turbine engines spinning up. It will be very physical and will happen in our lifetimes.
Faith in god. Trust his plan.
https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/supporting-the-2020-us-election/
So youtube is upping the ante, Leftie wankstains are not giving up yet.
I wonder if any legal channels that support trump who merely present the cases of texas et al, will get removed. I mean presenting a case might be a violation of this.
Hard censorship is a sign of weakness.
Interesting opinion article calling for Insurrection Act on the Epoch Times…
https://www.theepochtimes.com/case-for-president-trumps-invoking-insurrection-act-to-restore-election-integrity_3610513.html
His idea is for Trump to call it and use the military to seize and audit all ballots in the disputed cities which likely shows a Trump win. Not sure if that would work instead of just shooting people, but it’s a good sign we are seeing articles like this calling for Insurrection Act now.
Normie Conservative comment sections that are not currently overrun by paid shills shows almost universal support for a “GO” order from Trump. People are just waiting for the command.
Everyone knows this election was rigged and that the way forward isn’t going to be peaceful.
Yes this is the unanimous consensus in the comments for this article. A few are saying let’s wait and see what happens with the Texas SCOTUS case first, but if that fails then it’s go time.
What is the deal with Epoch Times? They are pretty solidly rightist (or have been since 2015 when I first became aware of them) but can still display Google ads and nobody really criticizes them. A case of it being too rightist so it goes over leftists’ heads?
Even if Falun Gong is a religion that makes for great cohesion (I have no idea) their English-language writers are probably Christians or atheists.
Falun Gong is a Chinese religion with many western followers. It has great internal cohesion.
Epoch Times is the voice of that religion, as the New York times is the voice of prog. If there are are Christians or atheists on the staff, their bosses are Falun Gong.
Falun Gong have sufficient internal discipline to not suffer from the holiness spiral of prog. There is a significant chance that when the $#!% falls down, they will come out on top, though it would be better if a Christian sect with similar internal cohesion and discipline came out on top.
Someone is going to come out on top. Leftism is going to be stopped eventually, if only by driving the bus at one hundred miles an hour over a ravine, and hitting the bottom of the ravine. The trouble is that it may take a very long time for someone to come out on top. Christianity never got deep roots in Roman Britain, and they suffered centuries of chaos before Alfred the Great put things together.
“Christianity never got deep roots in Roman Britain”
Kind of ironic since Constantine conquered the empire by raising the legions of Britain in revolt.
Possibly Christian troops kept getting pulled out to reconquer the empire. Our last fragmentary records as the dark age descends tell of, then hint of, would be emperor after would be emperor coming out of Britain, and then not coming back. Our knowledge of the last days of Roman Britain are legend rather than history.
Britain also had a more turbulent dark age than most places militarily. The Saxons decided that Britain was a good permanent refuge away from both their fellow Germanic tribes in the far north (with better land) and any Eastern Horse Nomads who might attack them if they moved further South.
But when they took over Britain they unusually decided not to rule over the natives as a herrenvolk and take the women (or a certain %) as slaves so much as that they wanted to keep their own superior warrior bloodlines pure and not mix with them. So the natives were told to go to Wales or Scotland or die.
Looks like you’re right. When I look at photos of Falun Gong practitioners what strikes me most is how normie they look, especially the whites. That is a sign of a religion that is alive and well.
The Cathedral is STILL clearly quite angry at Zuckerberg, they obviously don’t like the fact that he won’t ban people who say the election was fake (even if they won’t allow full promotion of it) or that covid is fake.
The Sheboon NY AG is now suing facebook.
Why is Zuckerface even pretending to be neutral? He paid off tons of Dem operatives to fraud the election for Biden. He clearly is a raging leftist, so why doesn’t he just cave to everything they ask for? Never understood that.
I don’t think hes a lefitst, hes greedy but otherwise naturally apolitical. Being apolitical at this point means he actively hates our enemies.
Zuck is IMHO operating entirely under coercion. Including the payoffs… he was probably told the payoffs would make this and whatever else they have planned for him would go away… but our enemies have no honor and even if an individual member of them does the hydra of many heads is not agreement capable.
Zuckbot is a capitalist. Like most capitalists he gives in to state power, but he’s hedging his bets both ways since the center of state power may quickly shift.
Globalist Inc well aware that Google, Twitter, FB can manipulate elections via algorithms and censorship alone, well before votes are even cast. They aren’t foolish enough to think such power will never be deployed against them should Zuck and crew else decide better fortunes lie elsewhere.
This may be the 2020 version of “sending the revolutionaries to Siberia.”
>The right needs to psychologically reorient itself to a more machiavellian and will to power mentality… The morality mindset (I blame Burke for this) has hurt us badly…
The more moral ways of doing things are in fact the ways of more powerful civilizations; as it happens, the chronically insecure have a compulsive attraction to promulgating false morals that lead to the weakening of others, for if there is one thing that is endemic in the weltanschauung of modernity, it is phobia of power.
As with many such things, it is a strain of thought that bears out it’s influence in all sundry of circumstances.
Consider the classic example of superhero media. By and large, the only people you see building up organizations for themselves – ie, civilization – are depicted as villains; while, those depicted as heroes are often loners, atomized and unconnected with any larger social superstructures; likewise, they so often act in ways that sub-ordinate what is needed for greater powers, in lieu of that which is lesser.
Because that fear is inside, you see? *They see themselves as losers*, even when, and most significantly when, *they themselves might have power of others*. In the back of their minds, a semi-conscious part of themselves constantly torments them with the feeling, that if or when people ever start having standards, *they would be among those left out on the ice floes*. So they dream of power that renders good to the bad, and bad to the good.
Ironically, it is exactly that mode of thinking that makes them exactly the right targets for turning such projections into reality.
Consider also the ‘hearts and minds’ mythology, which starts to make a lot more sense when you look at it in terms of people who advocate it, themselves, looking at it in terms of what would make them happy if they were an enemy insurgent. Ie, as such a person, it would be very pleasing if the enemy you were seeking to defeat were fools who purposefully avoided actually trying to fight and win against you; were gormless cuckolds who refrain from every actually doing anything that could be construed as imposing power over you; how nice it would be if they were to even deliver their own blood and treasure to you, instead. All the better for cutting their throats in the end. One would raise a glass in toast to such men, as you danced over their graves. With enemies like those, who would need friends?
Most such beings are not really self-conscious of the way they are thinking; it is reflexive, instinctive, rather; the mindset of an insurgent backbiter seeking to hobnail power – which is to say, civilization – *is* their default mindset; including and especially when they are your neighbors.
I just don’t see superhero stuff the same way.
Comics and superheroes have only been recently pozzed as Vox Day (for all his shortcomings) has often pointed out. Organizations for evil and to overthrow civilization are a very real thing… what do you think communism was originally, the leftists may be in power now but they started off as subversives.
The superhero motif is not wrong to point out that good people in big corrupt cities and such often are loners… I’m a loner to a large extent. Rightists in the modern age tend to be cynical if somewhat noble loners.
The broader point is that people with superhuman abilities in reality *wouldn’t* be loners; the utility of abilities would not go unexploited – whether it’s throwing fireballs or superintelligence (another trait one may significantly note is commonly placed in them in designated badguys). Whether it’s akin to knights on one end, and or lords and ladies on another, the reality of power comes into alignment with the formality of power, whether it’s synthesis with an existing structure, or creation of a new one.
The background ‘set up’ of many superhero stories only makes sense in the sense of folk purposefully avoiding doing those things; avoiding ever actually cooperating to build up greater social superstructures of civilization. That’s the projected desire, see? Of power that acts powerlessly.
The increasingly schizophrenic double-think that arises from increasing dearth of world-formation capacity is not the only sufficient cause of leftist modes of behavior, but it is a frequently necessary potentiator; they see themselves as oppressed even while wielding power; they see themselves a loners even while organizing in parties; they see themselves as doing X even as they do Y; all the easier for them to loudly and repeatedly claim, without niggling reservations, that they are doing X.
Note that Vox’s superheroes do engage in collective action, and frequently explicitly think and talk about the moral rules that facilitate collective action.
The original superman, when in moral doubt, just thought about what his adoptive father said and did. (Current PC heroes are the typical products of single motherhood). Vox Day’s superheroes talk to each other about what is right, which is the mechanism of priestly cooperation in a priesthood that is actually functional, rather than dysfunctional.
We are merely a commentariat, for the time for action is not yet, but the values of the Royal Society and the Sceptical Chymist are essential to keep us in contact with reality. Reliance on highly derived sources, as Wikipedia does, is not merely unwise, but evil.
Yes, the implication is definitely not against the premise of stories involving folk with fantastic abilities altogether, rather, that there exist today too many of such stories which present worlds that can only exist in a pozzed frame of mind.
The presentation of worlds where, if someone has power, they either, don’t take advantage of it, or, if they do, it is for nefarious purposes; those who would fain to place a mantle of superior holiness on that which is weakest, or that which acts in ways that render them functionally equivalent to the weakest – except for when it comes to cutting down anyone who starts appearing too potent.
>The broader point is that people with superhuman abilities in reality *wouldn’t* be loners
That doesn’t hold up against the anthropological data, except in one very special and important case. Shamans and smiths, along with their primitive counterpart the witch-doctor, are always isolated members of a community, even when socially integrated. Witches, in the most extended sense of the term (heterodox female mystic aka vaginalist) tend toward social margins as well. The exception is of course the Divine Emperor or King, or in classic Roman terms, he who is Felix, favored. This supernature is not transient and participatory, like that of the Shaman or Witch, the former who moves through territories outside and the latter who allows external things to move through her, but a “passive” radiant process from him (and it is always he. The female equivalent is the sibyl) that signals his Participation.
So in capes terms: Superman is solar, he is himself Revelatory of a reality. Batman is lunar, he himself has to BECOME to partake in revelation.
I wasn’t banking on getting lost in the weeds when giving illustrations of the mindset im talking about there, but perhaps it was inevitable.
How isolated is the brave stronger in arm than the other warriors of the tribe? The merchant keener of wit? The preacher smoother of tongue? The captain greater in vision?
Idealized forms one may arrive at by way of analogy from this or that figure are not the same thing as the actual examples as instantiated that i am talking about, the ways that they are used, the ways the writer implies one ought to follow, that i am talking about.
Just to refrain, a hardbroiled loner working against a corrupt city machine makes sense in the context of things like detective stories; well, they killed the noir genera pretty quickly after the second war of internationalist aggression; stories like that threatened to too accurately depict the way of things.
They are preparing for a repeat of the ballot fraud, this time in German state elections.
The national TV web site gave it away by admitting they printed more mail-in ballots (3.2 million) than there are legal voters in the state of Rhineland-Palatinate where there will be elections on March 14: https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/briefwahlen-corona-101.html
The article also says mail-in voting might become mandatory. In-person voting in Germany is positively fascist by American prog standards, you even need a valid id. So makes sense they will get rid of it. Federal election will be in late September and you can bet they will use the same tricks.
If the American fraud is allowed to stand, not just every American election, but every election worldwide will be fake and gay. The era of democracy is over, regardless who wins.
Yes I was thinking that as well. If they can steal elections in Rome openly, there’s no reason they can’t steal elections in the provinces throughout the empire now. RW people in America have more in common with RW people in Europe than they do progs right down the street.
Germany is a puppet government of the US permanent government to some extent and has been since WWII. I would advise if you are in Europe to get East. Its not that far to visit home if you really want to…
For us Americans if we go into exile we will have to go into lands much farther away and much less familiar.
I’m making a stand at the Alamo, wherever that will be.
I would advise if you are in Europe to get East. Its not that far to visit home if you really want to…
It’s not worth it probably. You wouldn’t like living in Russia. And here in post-communist central Europe we are just a decade or two behind Western Europe. Things are getting worse and we are closing the gap. We won’t be able to make a turnaround unless America makes a turnaround.
I have made some preparations to flee if necessary. Have been making them to a degree for 10 years. I’m also very whitepilled on Russia.
But if Trump prevails or if the American empire shows signs of crumbling, I’ll stay and fight.
Germany is an interesting case imo. It was mostly under Red empire control in the 50s because on the Soviet border, and was allowed to have a rather sane economic and social policy, unlike e.g. France or Italy. Then the Blue Empire increased its influence and turned up the poz and Nazi guilt in the 60s and 70s. The entire permanent government had been appointed by conservatives in the 50s because the Nazis had removed all of the old one and was therefore not a good target back then, so they rather turned to astroturfing and propaganda for the masses.
In 1990 then, as is a meme behind closed doors in many German households, the West joined the East, which meant the overgrown intelligence apparatus of East Germany (that even the Russians were kind of uncomfortable with) spread into the West and caused all sorts of problems. They continued their Nazi false flag strategy they had in East Germany (this is well-proven) and engineered astroturf neo-Nazi movements to make right-wing opinions unpalatable.
When supreme alpha Schröder in the 2000s attempted to forge a closer relationship with Russia and in general reintroduce some mild sanity, USG truly made Germany a puppet state. They ousted Schröder* who now lives in Korea with a young hot wife (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b5/Soyeon_Kim_Gerhard_Schr%C3%B6der_8751.jpg) and doesn’t give a fuck any more about his country. I do not blame him.
Merkel has been under close supervision of USG her entire 15-year term and I think they are threatening her life now if she goes an inch against what they want. Her most recent speech where she announced a ‘hard’ lockdown sounded like a hostage recording.
Pretty much every normie ethnic German in West Germany, even those who did not even live during the 50s, is nostalgic for that time, no matter which political opinions he pretends to have. Those people are ready for a restoration, for something that is even greater than the 50s ever were. And in the East normies hate socialism and secret police.
*I have no hard proof for this, but the 180 degree turn in the my social circle against Schröder was spectacular. Everyone was saying his welfare reforms were a good thing, lazy people should work, and then suddenly they started mouthing the opposite. Made me first suspect something wasn’t right.
So it looks like the right is coalesce around the idea the China’s calling the shots for the Democrats and the Democrats are traitors. This is a pretty decent idea when it comes to motivating people and has the beauty that the Democrats are absolutely selling the country out to China, even if China’s isn’t calling all the shots.
I think it’s both accurate and rhetorically effective. Foreign influence and political opponents selling out to foreigners are easier targets than power-hungry local officials if needing to justify something like Insurrection Act.
As long as it doesn’t border on “Russia, Russia, Russia†hysteria used against Trump. The Democrats are plenty evil without any Chinese influence. Having said that, there is a startling amount of Chinese money going into their coffers.
On the one hand, yes, “Russia, Russia, Russia!” was ridiculous, but, on the other, it seems like the lessons of 2020 (if not much earlier) are: a. SJWs always project and b. hysteria works.
The fact that your opponent gets hysterical about the very thing they’re doing to you as a conscious or unconscious form of deflection doesn’t mean you shouldn’t attack them back just as hard or harder for what they are actually doing (though I’m open to better suggestions about rhetorical strategies to combat hysterical projection-deflection).
Lying fucking works, doesn’t it? We went from “Russia-Russia-Russia†(2016) to “Defend the Election†(2020). I began to hate them.
Well, the more total your control of the flow of information the less you have to bother with making persuasive arguments based in reality and the more you can just straight-up gaslight most people, it seems. I’ve stopped bothering to “debate” on non-“right wing echo chamber” platforms because the mainstream left opinion has become so braindead and indefensible.
I stopped reading or trying to reason with the left after they rigged the election on such a massive scale and demand that I accept it. I’d rather see them dead at this point.
For me the lockdowns were a clarifying moment. I can debate with a person over the minimum wage or socialized medicine or even immigration and multiculturalism and still be friends at the end of the day. I don’t know how to deal with people who think shutting down the world, putting people under house arrest, stunting children’s psychological development, destroying small business to enrich Amazon and weaken peoples’ ability to support themselves without joining a major organization plugged into woke orthodoxy, etc. all for the sake of slowing down a particular respiratory virus (and pwning Drumpf) is reasonable.
The advantage is, it’s clarifying, as I feel comfortable dismissing without further consideration anyone who still supports lockdowns at this point. The disadvantage is tons of people in my social circle belong to this category of people about whom I now “can’t even,” so to speak. Not sure how to interact with them anymore, other than by never bringing up current events, which is increasingly difficult.
I fell for the lockdown myself. Just staying honest.
What got me was the HCQ thing. Here’s a cheap medicine that’s helping people, and then… nothing. No one cares. Not only that but they’re doing fake studies obviously constructed to make sure they don’t help anybody. And persecuting pharmacists who fulfill prescriptions for it. And Neil Cavuto is on Fox News shouting “you can lose your life from taking it!â€
That was it for me. That’s when I was too disgusted and horrified to stay on the bus any farther. Fuck it I’m walking.
I’d thought I was cynical, I’d thought I was with it, but I’d never “seen the elephant†up close like that and I bailed right out of the nest forever.
After the initial lockdowns in India from March to around the end of July, there has been a lot of lip-service paid to lockdowns, mask wearing and social distancing, but very little compliance in reality.
In cities, people are going about with masks reluctantly. In rural areas, I see zero masks and almost no social distancing norms.
It seems that this urban/rural trend is almost worldwide.
After a lot of hue and cry over travel restrictions post-lockdown, governments have backed down quietly.
Even the media have become bored of this COVID talk and in fact, India seems to have reduced the number of active cases recently.
There is still talk about fresh lockdowns in India, but so far thankfully nothing in action.
Closing the schools was the only good thing about this.
I came to the conclusion I think in early 2018 that nearly all people who were still Democrats or leftists at this point with the exception of your very rare Jim Webb types or your mostly apolitical new ager/hippie types (and since the lockdowns they increasingly really hate the Democratic party even if they don’t quite like nationalism or industrial society) would have to go.
>As long as it doesn’t border on “Russia, Russia, Russia†hysteria used against Trump.
I don’t see why not. Religious fervor is useful. In this case it has the utility of both being true with China and that it’s easier to rally around an outside source instead of something created by our own people. The Military’s going to be reluctant to kill Americans, but killing traitors working for China is probably quite compelling.
The major downside is possible war with China, but China brought that on themselves with their COVID hoax. This also neutralizes or limits China’s ability to assist the left if it turns into a long civil war.
Same trap as “guerilla warfare”, “hold them to their own principles”, etc. Bad idea.
They were able to keep up Russiagate because they’re in power. Not because it was a good narrative.
I don’t care about the morality of it. But trying to form a cult (and you literally refer to it as “religious fervor”) around claims that are empirically disprovable will lead to internal fracturing and holiness spiraling, same as them. And without power to hold it together, we lose.
China is a problem, but Chinese election influence/interference is a shiny distraction designed to make you look silly and forget the real evidence (as outlined in the Texas suit, now the most convenient reference for all this).
While the recent events involving Swalwell have made it topical, I still see the China nonsense as misdirection. It’s good for them that a story like that comes out because it’s not tied directly to the election and because it allows them to reframe this as a partisan issue when we just had Mike Lee passing out a bunch of green cards to Hong Kong and India last week. Already that video where David Perdue practically begs the Chinese to come to Georgia seems to have been memory holed.
The best messages are simple and bringing foreign governments into things is a good way to throw a wrench into the proceedings. Always kill traitors before you kill your enemies and all. Unless they plan a direct strike on us in the immediate future (which is within the realm of possibility), Trump should cross the Rubicon well before even beginning to think of dealing with China.
It worked for the nationalists in Spain.
Our elite is just generally corrupt and incohesive.
Everyone except the American public is calling the shots.
As far as covid planning AND probably planning the election fraud almost certainly it was China… that honeytrap spy who the FBI tipped off to flee the country so they wouldn’t have to arrest her… wonder if the plans were given to Pelosi through Swalwell via her.
https://www.opensecrets.org/parties/expenddetail.php?cmte=DPC&txt=Fang%2C+Christine&cycle=2016
Lol she was on the payroll for the democrats… holy shit she probably was the intermediary for chinese coordination with the democrats.
Making this about China is a “permission to say ‘no'”.
The Chinese aren’t lefties, muslims, negroes or Jews, so they can still be the Bad Guy in the current year.
Plenty of people just can’t handle seeing the Ds (and most Rs) as we do. It’s just too frustrating, humiliating and scary. What they can handle, though, is seeing this blatant Chinese bribery and infiltration going on. The Chinese are a “safer target” for the normie’s ire.
By pointing his Insurrection Act outward, at China, rather than inward, at the D’s and RINO’s, Trump gets more buy in, or at least acquiescence. It’s more “national defense” than “civil war”, more “gang busters” than “helicopters”, even if the results will be the same.
Because really, who’s going to “Resist” Rubicon Don because they love China so much? How does CNN sell that?
Its easier to see the Democrats and many corrupt and otherwise worthless Republicans as we do (in non urban Florida from what I gather anecdotally the Democrats are widely hated the way we hate them) if we can say they are agents of a foreign power.
In this case it has the virtue (unlike muh Russia) of being largely true.
It is true, but less important than is convenient to make it out to be.
The concentrated interest can get its way over the dispersed interest. China is the concentrated interest, the deep state is the dispersed interest.
If power is dispersed within an organization, no one individual power holder has much interest in the organization being successful.
The grotesque corruption and dysfunction of the American elite was displayed most spectacularly in the earthquake relief of Haiti, where the relief was vastly worse than the earthquake, because the ngos brushed aside the government that was already in the pocket of the US, and ruled directly.
The unspoken theory was that since the US puppets were a bunch of dumb thugs, they should step aside for a bunch of nice Harvard PhDs with billions of aid money in their pockets.
But the dumb thugs lived there, had family there, so had some interest in the place being nice, while the Harvard PhDs were carryon baggers, and just stole everything and destroyed everything, because they intended to leave in a month or so. Their behavior reflected each one’s individual interest.
For an organization to act as one, it has to have a CEO with absolute power. The successful forms of organization allow the CEO to be removed, but very seldom, and he is all powerful until he is removed.
A religion and a priesthood is a way of manufacturing cohesion. So what we see when power is gravely dispersed in a state – the King has fallen – is both vulnerability to outsiders who have better cohesion (Chinese), and vulnerability to ever purer versions of the faith (the puppet masters whose front women are AOC and Greta Thunberg)
Chinese influence is disproportionately transmitted through Jews, which I attribute to Judaism being in large part a religion of exile, instead of being what it is supposed to be, a religion of Israel. Exiles perceive themselves as permanent carryon baggers. It is truer to attack Chinese influence than Jewish influence, and attacks on Jewish influence keep being redirected to the mythical Rothschilds, who have been out of power since before World War II, and are rapidly running out of money, and against Jewish pawnbrokers and such, who never had power in the first place.
Vulnerability to Chinese influence has the same root as vulnerability to ever purer versions of the holy faith.
The deep state think that if they remove Trump, they will have power, as the nobility of the robe thought when they used the mob to remove King Louis XVI. But to remove Trump, they rely on the cohesion of a group of people to steal the election, and that group is far more cohesive than they are.
The Chinese are rightly confident than they can exercise power through the swamp. But Soros is also rightly confident.
Didn’t Feinstein have some longtime staffer who also turned out to be a Chinese spy.
It seems like at least among the West Coast Democrats having a Chinese spy close to them is pretty common.
Yes, Feinstein’s driver was a Chinese spy.
It’s mildly amusing Biden’s diversity pick for Sec of Defense is being attacked from the left for basically being too much of a military man. They won’t be satisfied until there’s she boons holding office in every single position of significance.
They won’t be satisfied after that, either. It’s more about the journey than the destination.
Who would attack them for advocating sheboons in any and all positions of impact?
They see people making some feelgood argument, see people agreeing with the premises of that feelgood argument, in order to agree with that feelgood argument, and simply take the implications further to their logical conclusions. On what grounds would any of their fellows speak otherwise?
Like a kid seeing a festooned box light up with blinking applause lights whether they push them in the right combination; they don’t need to actually understand anything about what is happening – and frequently don’t – they just impulsively converge towards whatever it is that causes more lights to blink back up, in the milieu they’re embedded in.
It’s not positioning relative to greater Being, but relative that lesser subset of which, which is other beings. Less of a destination, more of a vector; always being a vanguard of a new wave; and so there must always be a new wave; eternal revolution.
Pity the poor undertakers of the 20th century liberal order, who would fain to stand athwart history and yell, ‘stop!’.
“Soros and Hunter Biden are Clodius”
BTW just noticed this. If you are referring to Clodius Pulcher nobody in our ruling class is as interesting a corrupt degenerate as Clodius Pulcher was.
Bill Clinton would be the only one who remotely would have come close in our lifetime… but even Bill Clinton wouldn’t say sneak into some democrat progressive woman’s organization that men were banned from in order to rape his colleague’s wife in blatant offense of progressive pieties… manage to make a spectacle of the resulting trial and get off with a slap on the wrist and make a political ally of the colleague whos wife he planned to rape there.
Giuliani thanked Dr Zelenko as one of the doctors advising him in his rapid recovery from WuFlu.
OT, is this true?
https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-xi-clampdown-private-sector-communist-party-11607612531?mod=hp_lead_pos5
Sounds like China’s re-embracing socialism again.
Yes, Nazi style socialism, which is marginally less dysfunctional than Soviet style socialism.
This is extremely bad, because I had hoped we could relocate to the Chinese hegemony if the US hegemony became intolerable.
The problem that will become apparent is that party apparats in the private sector will steal everything and destroy anything they do not steal, because they have no economic interest in the continued function or success of the firm.
When you have people in the firm that are answerable to both the state and firm (in the west accounting and human resources) they are theoretically required to pursue state interests at the expense of the interests of the firm, and apt to take advantage of the ambiguity of the source of their authority and job security to rob both state and firm.
The lines about forcing companies to follow state plans or quotas is indeed alarming, but I wouldn’t read too much into them putting more CCP commissars on company boards. It would be the equivalent of Western nations forcing women/minorities onto company boards…..except for the CCP isn’t the US Democratic Party and so those commissars are apt to enforce “Socialism with Chinese Characteristics” which is mostly in-line with Gnon. The planned economy signals could forebode those commissars becoming toxic though.
Given this development, what do you suggest is the best short term and long term resiliency strategy for individuals? Is it to join the party and learn to camouflage? Is it to genuinely join? Is it to isolate? What opportunities or options / skill development would you suggest / locales to focus on?
I hope for and expect the emperor’s command, for a crusade to restore the “Republic”.
But if this does not come, the shit will hit the fan, and sometimes the shit is really bad.
When the shit really hit the fan, the people who did best were those who fled to someone else’s hegemony. Havel’s Greengrocer is the least bad option for those who remain.
Get more passports, more residence permits.
But the shit may not go all the way to that. It frequently does not. Best outcome is it is terminated by a Sulla. Second best outcome is that the shit is stalled for a few years by a Pompey, or the shit gets somewhat bad but is stopped by a Cromwell before it gets really intolerable.
Thank you for this. I had not heard of Havel’s Greengrocer. What a marvelous story.
This makes it clear what China’s plan is (unlike progs they are still smart enough to be capable of long-term planning). I had that thought for a few weeks now but there wasn’t any real evidence for it, now there is. Their market reforms were always intended to be temporary, to allow them to overtake the West economically and then destroy it. Wu flu just made it much easier for them.
CCP is the enemy and needs to be eradicated. Falung Gong are right about this.
Called it, Barr’s a traitor. I can’t believe the amount of push back I got from people who should have known better:
https://www.wsj.com/articles/barr-worked-to-keep-hunter-biden-probes-from-public-view-during-election-11607653188
I’m not impressed with Barr lately, and this certainly could be true, but since when is WSJ a reliable source?
Out of all the remaining mainstream outlets, the WSJ does seem to be the most level-headed, but that isn’t saying much of course.
Hard to see Barr any other way after this tweet:
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1337379719872974852?s=20
Tim Pool literally shouting into the microphone today about the corruption of the media (re suppression of Hunter Biden scandal) and the outrage of a “Biden crime family” presidency installed by the MSM.
https://hooktube.com/watch?v=G_bZsaNdxEU
Everyone’s ready for the GE to make the call.
As people wait for the signal, they send signals that they are waiting for Go, and signals to others to signal that they are waiting for Go, and … (add as many layers as needed).
Speed the cascade!
The media trying to tell us that the nig nog who just got executed was a good boy and dindu nuffin. Not surprising. But the interesting part is the emphasis being put on the supreme court’s role. This is a good sign as it points to them being worried that they will lose the court decision, and so wanting to discredit the court in advance.
My sense is they are scared. I’m still not all that confident though. It’s hard to be white pilled right now.
I’m confident Trump will cross the Rubicon if he has to because he has no choice unless he wants to flee to Kazakhstan the night of January 19th.
I hope, no I pray that you’re right. I’ve been watching our leader cuck out my entire life and this is the moment where they absolutely cannot cuck out.
Even if Trump is a coward as unfortunately it seems most right wing American politicians are…
Even a rat finds its courage when cornered, the Democrats who can’t shut up about wanting to prosecute Trump are our greatest asset here.
I’m not confident about SCOTUS doing the right thing, the state legislatures had far greater motivation to do so and did not. Trump will have to use force and use force with absolutely no legal basis as Caesar did.
I am not confident that Scotus will do the right thing either. But Trump does have a legal basis.
The insurrection act and article four – preserving the Republican form of government.
Why do you keep repeating that Trump has no legal basis for the violence necessary? There is the riot act and there the 14th amendment. Violence on the scale of the civil war has legal basis. No US court ever said that the North had no legal basis for waging war on the South.
And if I rember correctly previous admistrations have created the right of the President to assasinate suspected terrorists.
Victory can post legalize Trump’s coup (rebellion against the government is always legal IF YOU WIN) and the insurrection act can be used to call the militia, but its hard to say that then using the militia to force state legislatures to pass an amendment at gunpoint and then murdering most of Trump’s enemies within the government was legal within existing law.
What amendment is needed from the state legislatures?
Anyway, there is no need to murder his opponents. There is legal basis for arresting them with as much force as necessary. Do you think his enemies would comply with a few thousand arrestes and rely on the courts to be set free right away? I think not.
No a coup where your enemies within the government live is a coup that fails, the only intermediate stage where you win is if your enemies flee the country.
Trump has 3 people who others could consider legally to be President on January 20th, without the SCOTUS ruling in his favor they have to go… by January 20th.
Trump will need to force an amendment to the constitution legalizing his takeover of the government by force and confirming at least a temporary grant of emergency powers if he goes the route of using force.
The guns will be decorously kept off stage, as Monck did. And we do not need to kill the enemies if they are indefinitely detained in Alaska. Abbot got away with indefinitely detainment of visa jumpers and border crossers, with every court quietly stopping lawfare against it, realizing that judiciary had overreached by legalizing illegal immigration.
At the very least the three people have to go…
But if he removes those three probably will have to remove others to settle things…
Why do burger flippers and welders make almost entirely different orders of magnitude different salaries, despite being basically the same kind of mindless blue collar work? An illegal alien in a kitchen might make $5 an hour, a welder $40 an hour, and yet they are doing fundamentally the same work. I can understand if merchants refuse to fairly distribute information in schools about careers, but why don’t they do this, well, in careers?
Why won’t welding firms poach talent from burger joints? Why doesn’t the free market work in this case? And what does socialism do wrong when it is limited to simply information distribution?
I have done a little bit of welding in my home workshop, and a lot of programming for a salary. My programs are good, my welds are crap. If I had done a lot of welding my welds would be better, but I doubt that they would be very good. No one should ever hire me to do welding.
Allowing this post through because you are making an argument instead of giving us mindless robotic npc shill crap.
You obviously can flip burgers. Equally obviously, you are far too stupid to do a decent job of welding.
Welding is a skilled job. Not everyone can do it. Takes a lot of practice and a fair bit of talent to do it well, and while anyone can with a little bit of practice make some sort of weld, not everyone can do a good weld no matter how much they practice. Pretty sure that someone who writes the way you write cannot do it. I doubt that I could make a good weld even with a great deal of practice, though I think I could eventually do one that is a good as second rate welder who can earn money doing it. There are good welders and not-so-good welders, and sometimes you just have to hire a good welder. They are in short supply and high demand. Sometimes I just had to hire a good welder.
When a good welder is done, it looks like the metal pieces just grew together like the branch of a tree. I cannot do that. Most welders who work for a salary and have done it for years cannot do that either. And when I needed that done, I was happy to pay for it to be done. I would not weld anything where it mattered that the job be done well.
You’re overthinking. I don’t mind that welders would make $15 an hour, for example, because I know they’re like elite burger flippers, but at the end of the day they’re working with their hands, not their head, and the number difference just doesn’t add up.
And when I go to work, I go in a suit and tie. I don’t work in a shop, either. I’m of very comfortably high-normal intelligence. What I’m saying is that capitalism doesn’t seem to exist at the middle class level (culturally, even if overpaid working class people make more money these days), while it isn’t relevant for the lower class because their political opinions do not matter. They just exist in their own little world. But there’s something going on when white collar employees can’t figure out what their own coworkers on their own floor make.
The political ideal we’re looking for is for the government to shine its light on all the apple carts so we know where they are, but also to not let this information be used to topple them. The conservative can only think in terms of owning or seizing a cart, but he perversely joins with the liberals (even selling them the rope eventually used to hang himself) if it means suppressing the kind of person who just wants to manage a cart, and probably just because that’s what he was taught in school.
I, unlike you, have had to pay for good welding, and I, unlike you, have attempted, not very successfully, to weld. It does not seem to be any easier to get a good welder than to get a good engineer. What I paid did add up.
You think that only priests deserve pay, and the only thing that deserves value is priesting.
No, creating value deserves the value created, and a good welder on a job that needs a good weld creates more value than any priest.
Your fallacy is that you think virtue deserves a salary, and you think holiness is virtue.
No, holiness frequently is not virtue. In today’s religion, no one is holier than the demon worshippers. And the reward of real virtue should be cooperate/cooperate equilibrium, which equilibrium frequently creates a great deal of value.
But value should be the reward for creating value, of which welders create a considerable amount.
The fact that you are talking about “overpaid working class people” is all the proof we need that you begrudge normal decent people their normal and decent lives.
The price of the burger flipper’s labor is depressed by the fact that everyone can flip a burger. If the price of a burger gets too high, like, say, if the state mandated that burger flippers make $40 an hour, the McDonald’s customer will not pay for a burger, but go home and make it himself. That’s why it’s called unskilled labor; because anyone can do it, it has theoretically zero demand, theoretically infinite supply, and therefore a theoretically zero price, except that the convenience of having someone else do it for you has a price, which is why burger flippers are paid anything at all.
I used to climb and cut down trees for a living. I made substantially more than a burger flipper, because the skill and nerve it takes to operate a chainsaw when tied to a branch fifty feet in the air, and avoid damaging life and property, is in very low supply, to the point where companies were outbidding each other in order to obtain my skills.
We do not even need to talk about value added, since people are incentivized to get maximum value for minimum price; a customer who needs a weld done would be happy to pay his welder burger flipper wages, except that his need for a good weld- high demand for a good weld- means that he will pay a good welder what the welder asks for, because the customer is unlikely to find another good welder who will do the job for less. Because the welder’s skills are in high demand and low supply, the price of his labor is high.
To put the master artisan in the same category as the burger flipper is a massive distortion of reality, characteristic of all marxist distortions of reality, and you will have to enforce this unreality at gunpoint, which will result in millions of people dying and civilization being destroyed. In short, you are evil.
“I’m of very comfortably high-normal intelligence. What I’m saying is that capitalism doesn’t seem to exist at the middle class level”
Skilled office jobs are underpaid because we’ve been pretending women can do them (sometimes they can but its rare) for a long time and in the case of engineering letting in too many immigrants who company’s prefer to hire because they are bound to their job, even though they generally can’t do the work either.
You are not getting screwed because skilled laborers (or laborers who are not super skilled but do jobs that are genuinely dangerous such as say work high steel) are “overpaid”. Skilled laborers do have the advantage over skilled office types in that you can’t pretend even for a moment that women and unqualified minorities can do their jobs well… whereas in office jobs the incompetence can be concealed and excused for long periods of time and then fixed by people who are actually competent at a late stage.
Yes, pay has been getting lower for office jobs because companies are no longer permitted to inquire too deeply into whether or not employees are actually doing the job or not, because they will find that women and minorities are contributing no value to the company. Moreover, they are prohibited from testing applicants for the ability to actually do the job.
So, underpaid because the majority of them are doing nothing. Instead of hiring one competent white man for 150k, they need to hire a sheboon, two white girls, a pajeet, and a white man, and pay them each 30k, and the white man acquiesces, lives in a 6×10 box with three roommates sharing a bathroom, because no family and no hope of starting one, though he hopes that living in the city will let him crush pussy, but it is rare that he ends up crushing much pussy.
Sometimes HIRING qualified people is impossible. Oftentimes nobody can do the job until they’ve had the job for a while they just must learn through experience, and sometimes some women and minorities do do okay especially at the more drudgery/entry level work (before I left my job that was a halfway between cad and engineering management I gave my boss an honest very good report on our voc highschool interns, one guy who wasn’t white and three women but I was very pleasantly surprised by their performance and had to give them all a good report when I left because I honestly had no complaints with their work and I had a lot of really terrible coworkers over the years at that job) but parachuting women and minorities into high level work they are not experience for or suited for is a disaster and it cuts into the wages of qualified people.
It was a lot easier to crush pussy in the city 15 years ago (women did not quite yet all have the idea that they would neccessarily end up with a vampire pirate demon billionaire king celebrity with a 16 inch dick), Roosh before he went tradcon talked about this he posted a thread about how “dating” had changed. The only positive change in the 15 years was that if you did get a woman in bed she was likely to be open to doing almost anything you wanted.
The thing is, skilled office jobs aren’t underpaid, even with all the affirmative action. They’re overpaid, because of the financialization of the US economy. Obviously they’d be even higher paid if the companies were allowed to run efficiently, but it’s the blue collar trades that are being underpaid relative to office workers.
If you’re an office worker and feel underpaid, in the sense of being genuinely unable to afford any comforts as opposed to being jealous of the CEO, then you probably aren’t very skilled. Granted, housing is far too expensive, largely thanks to the same affirmative action policies contributing to lower pay, but it’s expensive for the burger flipper and the welder alike. Ignore the artificially-inflated housing prices and the pay scale is not low.
Unskilled office jobs don’t pay great, for the same reason unskilled manual labor doesn’t pay great.
Hahaha, the eternal cry of the useless fucking parasite, “I don’t mind that [skilled profession] makes a bit more than me, but how can they make so much?”
I had those kinds of thoughts when I was eight years old, before I understood anything about the world and had never had to even buy anything myself, never mind sell. Literally, the economic mentality of a Marxist is the same as the mentality of a toddler.
The irony is that this mentality can only develop in people who have incredibly easy lives. Try being somewhere there is scarcity, where you need something done and just finding anyone who can do it seems like a miracle, never mind their price. But to the Marxist, food comes from a supermarket, electricity comes from a plug, water comes from a tap, internet comes from the little doohickey with lights. Nothing can possibly be hard to do, therefore nobody deserves to be paid more than anyone else. “But I wear a suit and tie!* All form, no function.
Go find some other applecarts you sad, lying little faggot, these apples aren’t for you.
$15 an hour is perfectly fine for a welder when/where accountants make $25 an hour. Marxist union thug wages don’t exist everywhere.
Most accountants create no value – their job is realistically tracking the movement of value, and they regularly fail to do so – they are agents of the state, rather than agents of the firm, and they cheat both state and firm. A chronic problem with the interface between state and firm is that it is full of parasites stealing value.
Welders create value. Bookkeeping is important, and we truly need bookkeepers, bookkeepers create value – but a good welder should have a substantially higher wage than a good bookkeeper for the skill and ability required to be a good boo keeper is far less than the skill and ability needed to be a good welder.
It is a lot easier to get a good bookkeeper than a good welder, and a good welder creates more value.
I deleted your other spam which presupposes, rather than arguing for, the progressive account of how progressivism crushed the proles. Supposedly the proles demanded it. Much as the peasants supposedly demanded collectivization and the liquidation of the kulaks.
I have repeatedly addressed the school question at considerable length. Instead of addressing it, you pretend that no one ever could think such terrible crime thoughts.
If you want to address the school question, address it in the context that there is a reactionary orthodoxy on the question, and you are challenging the reactionary orthodoxy, rather than in the frame that everyone loves the progressive solution and that it came about spontaneously and voluntarily.
If you think that even more progressivism can fix the problem, you need to explain why vastly less progressivism will not fix the problem.
Again, the battle cry of the human garbage known as central planners. “I just know what this work is really worth, even though I’ve never done it or hired anyone to do it or watched it or googled it”.
You know nothing, you contribute nothing, you’re worth nothing, and whatever you claim to get paid is far more than you’ve rightly earned. I’d take your salary and give it to welders in a heartbeat.
“[welders] work with their hands, not their head”
“And when I go to work, I go in a suit and tie. I don’t work in a shop, either. I’m of very comfortably high-normal intelligence”
As someone closer to suit-and-tie / office world than the welding world, this is likely BS. You’re not really doing anything of much value: you’re just mad your degree didn’t do what you thought it would, and judging by the way you write you are not of “comfortably high-normal intelligence”.
I’ve seen this same whining elsewhere:
https://twitter.com/FredNietzky/status/1329803228381372421?s=19
https://twitter.com/FredNietzky/status/1329824021433741314?s=19
Like this mentally disturbed baby academic, the fact is that you’re actually just an idiot with an inflated sense of your own abilities and station in life. I work with people like this. You’re not an engineer of some kind, or a physicist, or a quant, or a mathematician, or probably even an accountant. You most likely have some meme degree that you took a government loan for because you thought it was your ticket to a comfortable lifestyle that would allow you to look down on the type of people who weld. Now you complain because you have to pay back your loan on a middling salary. Too bad.
The majority of people who think they get paid to “use their head” are in fact stupid, and almost certainly doing makework that the world wouldn’t miss if it disappeared entirely tomorrow. You’re the reason meetings last an hour instead of ten minutes.
“You’re too dumb to get paid to use your brain”
Oh here we go, the lefty faggot reveals himself to be secretly an elitist, but only when he’s dealing with “stupid Trump supporters”. When it comes to minorities who probably are dumber than him, he will allow any number of them to fuck his wife whenever they want.
I can’t even read this shit. You go make a burger. Done? Ok now you go weld something. Never done it in your goddamn life and would be a total failure at it? Then stfu. There’s a reason trade schools exist to train welders (and other tradesmen), whereas a burger cook at McDonald’s can be trained in a couple of weeks.
This guy is a troll, idk how he thinks people who read your blog would take him seriously. Usually when I read his crap I can’t even get to the part where he tries to make a point because everything leading up to that is so retarded.
I apologize for taking the Lord’s name in vain.
Been here 10 minutes. Spotted the NPC shill.
In what universe is welding “mindless?” To address your actual question, improperly done welding has the capability of permanently disfiguring the welder. Getting your hand seared by fry oil isn’t comparable.
Also, and far more commonly, permanently disfiguring the weld.
Welding is more dangerous than burger flipping (though I suppose you could injure yourself on a fryer) and its not mindless nor something anyone can do.
I being the uncoordinated sperg I am couldn’t do it. I can’t solder well either.
I have done a lot of soldering and a little bit of welding. My welding is crap, my soldering not much better.
You haven’t a clue as to what you speak. In two years of training you probably couldn’t cut it as a rig or pipeline welder. It’s talent and training and often inhospitable weather. I’ll assume all your comments are equally ignorant.
Apparently its being reported that the Federalist cowards have cucked for “lack of standing” on the Texas case.
Trump must now call his people to the street, order the specops to um do what it does to the false presidents elect and takeover the state by force.
Not surprising given their failure to fast track Trump’s lawsuits. The civil war is likly to be very nasty because of it. I’m sure Joe’s handles promised not to pack the courts if they sided with him.
Trump is Caesar in that he stands alone with no organ of the sate willing to backup his lawful claims.
The ones who voted no (I’m pretty sure Thomas will be safe) need to be treated as traitors after this…
The Donald win is saying only Alto and Thomas voted for it. I still haven’t seen an official source on it.
Source?
Freerepublic has a thread that says Fox News and Fox Business are reporting it.
Its not unexpected to me…
https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/121120zr_p860.pdf
Oddly brief given the case’s importance. Will wait a little longer before giving up on The Robes.
So it is. You would think these Federalist “originalist” judges would take stock of the fact that “standing” is in no sense part of the original constitution, but I can’t say I’m particularly surprised. As I said earlier, if SCOTUS prioritized this case over other cases, it likely meant they considered it an easily-dismissible non-threat. Far more important to work on Goldman Sachs et al v. AR Teacher Retirement et al.
One way or the other, it was always going to come down to Insurrection Act or No Insurrection Act. Does Trump have what it takes? Was this all just a pretext to prove that he tried every possible legal avenue, or did he really think the same establishment he campaigned against in 2016 was going to save him in 2020?
I think it’s been a shock to even people on this blog that the judiciary has been completely corrupted. I think that was beneficial to point out to normies through all these absurd dismissals.
I don’t see any prospect of judicial examination of the overwhelming evidence that the election was massively stolen. How do you see a prospect?
From what I have read, the other way is USGov vs States, which is unlikely to happen. DOJ would have to spearhead and this particular spear has been pointing other directions recently.
On a lower level there are still state SC cases not yet finished, which will also probably go nowhere.
Evidence does not seem to matter at this point as it will never be presented. State representatives have not been making any obvious moves towards assigning electors on their own. What I do not know much about is when the state delegations would get a chance to vote, so that could still be an option. Ultimately, the swamp is too deep and it will take fire and brimstone, not a drain, to get rid of it.
This kind of ameliorates it:
https://twitter.com/Balensphere/status/1337543071018442753
Translation?
It’s possible that it was a procedural quibble, i.e. Texas has no standing to dispute the election laws of a fellow state, and only the Trump admin does.
Which, even if this is the case, is absurd reasoning. As if a state has no interest in laws that affect a national election.
Wasn’t Trump a plantiff as well too?
He applied to be one. The standing argument is bullshit. That’s just the supreme court ducking out.
It then relies on either the Trump campaign (doubt they have standing) or DOJ filing against those states. Given its recent behavior, why should we expect any action from DOJ? Also mentioned in that thread is the possibility that the “big beautiful lawsuit” will be backed by data from NSA et al. which I also find improbable. It would be fun though and it is really not over yet.
The legal battle is over Trump must use force now.
Legal battle is still ongoing, this effort was completely unrelated to all the state cases.
Trump must use force eventually, but not quite yet.
Yeah the TX case kind of popped up out of nowhere. There were cases ongoing before it team Trump was pursueing. They are rapidly diminishing though.
To think we will win the legal battle at this point is to be Hitler in the bunker believing in the Endsieg in 1945.
We can win but not ah through the legal system, we must appeal to a higher authority…
Yes of course but just for the sake of exhausting all paths completely, there are still few left.
Interesting statement by Texas GOP
“Perhaps law-abiding states should bond together and form a Union of states that will abide by the constitution.â€
https://twitter.com/adamkelsey/status/1337549501507264515?s=20
Jim had suggested that Supremes’ behavior might depend, to a degree, on Trump’s perceived ability to guarantee safety within the boundaries of DC. I wonder if this had any bearing on the decision or if it’s just cucks being cucky.
They’re just being cucky. Joe promised them that he won’t pack courts(he will) and that everything would continue as normal. DC is like the Senate was in Rome before Caesar ended their power. They are only only interested in their own gift and unable to see that the writing is on the wall.
@Mike in Boston: On your comment about the forcing of gay marriage and tranny crap, the reason that sort of shit is forced is sexual humiliation. Sexual humiliation and degeneracy is a classic trickster tactic of breaking men, thus destroying societal trust and preventing men from grouping together to fight back. When Babylon was near its end all women were required to go and whore themselves out at least once to rich men at the temples of Ishtar. When Rome was near its end all manner of degeneracy prevailed. And of course, Jim has talked about the Ottoman empire and the sexual degeneracy near its end.
If they had hanged Taney and the other Dred Scott judges of the majority opinion after the civil war we wouldn’t be in this position.
Here’s a debate topic for you. In 1994 Anglo-Dutch South Africa came out and agreed to sign themselves over as negro property, in exchange for some Status Relief promised by the Cathedral. (If you’ll allow my amateur demagoguery.)
Rhodesia was right next doo so they knew what they were getting into.
How is today different? How can it be made different?
Learn from history, to avoid repeating it.
[…] Source: Jim […]