Disputes over sovereign authority inherently escalate until decisively resolved.
Thermidor has unity, because they agree on restoring the Republic — which would be FDR’s version of the Republic, with the president regaining control over the immense, immensely powerful, and lawless, presidency that FDR created. The Republic, however, is dead, and what can be restored is a zombie Republic like that of Augustus Caesar.
The founders created three equal branches of government. Which of course does not work. It can sort of work by “separation of powers”, where you have small islands of state power in a sea of private actors, and each branch cautiously refrains from venturing too far from its own little island, but as government swells, the branches inevitably overlap, and one must conquer, subjugate, and crush the others. You cannot have three infinite objects in the same location. One must eject the others. Trump shakily presides over an unruly presidency that has been allowed to limitlessly expand. At the same time as the presidency was limitlessly expanding its power, the judiciary has been limitlessly expanding its power. One must be destroyed. Perhaps right now the Trump presidency is too fragile to destroy the judiciary, and must continue to postpone the inevitable confrontation, but sooner or later, one must destroy the other.
The presidency, as Musk has been exposing is corrupt. The judiciary is also corrupt, apt on the one hand to lawlessly, unpredictably, and capriciously destroy innocent people, but on the other hand, if you have the right lawyer with the right connections, and pay him well, you can get away despite being caught red handed. I have a lot of circumstantial evidence suggesting that a large part of that rather high payment somehow winds up enriching judges. A lot of Youtube bloggers have noticed that judges lawfaring Trump have curiously many connections to people who seem to have been substantial beneficiaries of corrupt presidency payouts, which may explain how during the Biden years an expansive judiciary managed to get on fine with an expansive presidency. With Doge curtailing this essential lubricant, the proverbial will now hit the fan.
Right now, news of the day, the confrontation is happening over Tren de Aragua. Tren de Aragua has been used for proxy war on its neighbors by the Venezuelan government, and Trump has plausibly declared it a hostile proxy force in the USA, which activates limitless presidential foreign policy powers immune from judicial review, and prohibits the judiciary from meddling. The Judiciary has declared Tren de Aragua an oppressed hostile class and a victim minority, which according to long established, but obviously unlawful, precedent, activates limitless judicial powers. The difference being that Trump’s limitless foreign policy powers come from the constitution and written law passed by congress, while the limitless judicial powers purely come from judge made law, so this is the most favorable ground on which to crush the Judiciary. Probably the supremes, seeing this are going to duck this confrontation, will have ducked it by the time you read this, but will merely postpone the confrontation over judge shopping for expansive judicial rulings to another day, for an Obama Judge and a Trump judge have a lot more in common than two appointees, one of whom is a judge and one of whom is not. The supremes will rule in favor of limitless, arbitrary, and ever expanding judicial power, even if they retreat on Tren de Aragua.
The proper judicial remedy for Tren de Aragua would have been Habeas Corpus, the long established island of judicial power fortified against the president and the presidency. But that would have required them to apply to the judge and the court that had jurisdiction over their place of detention. And they were detained in Texas, where the judge was likely to have a very short way with a bunch of illegal immigrant criminals, and they wanted to go judge shopping, so went shopping for the limitless and vast expanse of victim minority status, which allowed them to pick the most favorable, and most Trump deranged, court. Which also happens to be the most blatantly corrupt court system, which appears to have received the greatest amount of USAID lubrication.
A peace compromise would be a decision by the supremes that stopped people from shopping for a court that wants to launch an adventure in massive expansion of judicial power. That would delay the confrontation for another four to eight years. I expect a supreme decision that avoids immediate confrontation by depriving Tren de Aragua of protected minority status, but which leaves the door open to judge shopping for judicial adventures in vast expansions of judicial power.
In the end, the Judiciary must be destroyed. If the supremes make a tactical retreat by shutting down judge shopping, this confrontation can be postponed many years to a more favorable time. If they will not retreat, if every judge remains free to launch his own adventure in judicial imperialism, the confrontation will have to be held soon. In the unlikely event that the Supremes should fail to cancel Tren de Aragua’s protected minority status, it will have to be destroyed now.
Pretty white girls used to walk the Embarcadero in San Francisco cruising for alpha dick. Jose Inez García Zarate murdered Kate Steinle on the Emarcadero because he was brown and she was white, and was acquitted because he was brown and she was white, and pretty white girls ceased to walk the Emarcadero. Back then, when I noticed the sudden absence of pretty white girls cruising the Embaradero, I concluded that it was time to kill off the judiciary and institute a new system for enforcing laws. Later I read up on the system of Henry the Lion of Justice, the founder of British justice. He instituted a unitary system, where the King was the supreme judge and supreme lawmaker. Seemed to work rather well. Henry’s system was a reaction to the system of William Rufus, which worked rather badly. William Rufus was also the supreme judge and supreme lawmaker, but he had a propensity to make law and issue justice from horseback, which led to his sudden and mysterious death, while Henry the Lion of Justice made law after consultation with the great men of the Kingdom and issued justice after careful consideration of the evidence.
No system can provide an institutional substitute for virtue. The founders attempted to do so. The idea of separate and equal branches of government was that: “ambition will check ambition”. Which seemed to work with a virtuous elite, but with a corrupt and criminal ruling elite, that is not working too well.
Nihangs have begun countering CIA Khalistanis.
In the theme of Gnon-compliance the trias politica is also a bit silly. The division of power between the nobles and clergy was based on precedent, on that which worked. The trias politica on the other hand was conjured up in thin air, like the border lines they drew up in Africa with rulers. Where was the historic precedent?
>The founders created three equal branches of government.
Did they now, can Jim post evidence and quotes of that either from the constitution or Federalist Papers? I see claims of equal branches of government all over the place but strangely no evidence. It appears to be a myth. I do see evidence the claim is false.
>Where was the historic precedent?
Trias Politica is just reskinned SPQR. In both systems, the legislature/senate rules supreme. The president/dictator serves at their pleasure. The judiciary/oracles providing ethical guidance (which can be overruled). Which works fine so long as the legislature is constituted of men who are both capable and desiring to rule supreme. Which stops working when they are both incapable and undesiring to rule supreme… which historically leads to executive solutions to deal with dysfunction.
Is this really a point of contention? The 1787 constitution seems rather clear on the matter:
article 1 – All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States. (but can be checked by the executive and judicial)
article 2 – The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. (but can be checked by the legislative and judicial)
artilce 3 – The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court. (but can be checked by the legislative and executive)
Articles 1-3 describe the original Republic of ‘checks and balances’. That is not the same as the Republic of ‘equal branches of government’ which appear to be a 20th century invention. There is no constitutional basis by which, for example, Judges can legislate from the bench, and yet that’s what has been happening since ~1945 under the guise of ‘equal branches’. Nor is there constitutional basis for the ‘presidency’, in the form of the administrative state, to effectively have legislative powers as well. ‘Equal branches of government’ was first and foremost a political formula, and later a myth, used to justify ‘imperium in imperio’. A power struggle between competing branches within the state whose authorities overtime expanded into each other’s domains mostly at the cost of Congress.
Again, I’ll point out who has the power to hire and fire in the original constitution. Power is clearly meant to be largely vested in the Congress, and up until Lincoln where it tilted the balance towards the executive, it was. Article 1 contains a lot more powers than you summarized, and Article 2 a lot less power than you assume. The most stark of which is that it is Congress that technically has primary military leadership and authority, not the presidency. The president is only the Commander in Chief “when called into the actual Service of the United States”… and guess who has the authority to call or not call the president into service, it’s Congress. The president doesn’t even have the authority to call up the militia to enforce law (which modern legal theory redefined as the National Guard), again, that power is vested purely in Congress. Congress has constitutional authority to, in theory, call up the militia, have them march into the White House to ‘execute the Laws of the Union’ in the stead of the president, and conduct a soft palace coup. They don’t even need impeach him to effectively impeach him. In practice though…
There are many sound constitutional law arguments for labeling Lincoln a tyrant, but few today would seriously entertain them. Precedent has been set extremely strongly in the American custom pertaining hard power that it is only the President who can legitimately wield it. Besides, can anyone credulously believe anyone taking orders from the geriatric congress they/them committee today? They are incapable of wielding hard power.
Well yes, that’s the whole point — that the way the trias politica was meant to work in theory did not work out in practice.
In theory it is not strange that congress was meant to, relatively, have the most power. After all the legislative actually makes the laws, the executive ‘only’ implements them, the judiciary ‘only’ checks if they are being followed.
But in practice, instead of having three branches of government being accountable to each other, we have three unaccountable branches of government competing with one another, and the concurring arms races with its winners and losers has made it so that they are unrecognizable today from what they were once meant to be.
Almost all monarchies at least in the Western tradition had parliamentary bodies by the late middle ages but they generally were not supposed to rule they were basically supposed to make easier to take the rich in cases of emergency or to change customary law as the monarch could explain what dire reasons of state made it so taxes or customary law needed changing and they as the leading men of the realm would generally agree but could tell a bad king to fuckoff (which they did do sometimes). They could sometimes formalize the removal of bad kings in case of their defeat so that there theoretically would not be endless succession disputes (though in the Wars of the Roses in England this did not stop the succession disputes as the house on the losing side of the time would always deny the right of parliament to disbar them being of course the legitimate house to remove them from the succession and crown the usurper).
The congress was based on the British parliament but the parliament without a monarch is like a chicken with its head cut off.
The founders were aware of that problem, and intended a strong president would fill the gap. But really, unless the president is the supreme judge and supreme lawgiver, it is mighty hard to fill the gap.
The vast presidency that FDR created, like the nobility of the Robe than the Sun King, Louis XIV, created, just did not like having a King. Or a Congress. A vacuum ensued, which the Judiciary has stepped into.
Now, suddenly, there is no longer a vacuum.
In retrospect, it is apparent that the many, many, powerful men that FDR created just did not like having one powerful man on top of them. Which has led to predictable moral decline and ever worsening incohesion and incapacity.
So what prevents this from repeating yet again? Trump is obviously facing huge resistance from the administrative state, the legacy media, and the judiciary. And they can play a long game, that continues for president after president.
Historically, the usual solution is rule of the sword. Hard power rules directly. Time for the Judiciary and substantial parts of the bureaucracy to get long distance swimming lessons. Historically, this is not a very satisfactory solution. If it sets in permanently, a dark age is apt to result. On the other hand directly relevant military technology does not decay during a dark age, and a dark age with AI drones is going to be very different this time around.
The constitution gave the overwhelmingly supreme power to congress, which could barely rule even back when we had a virtuous ruling elite, and now is incapable of ruling, and not particularly interested in doing so. They have been long been blissfully unaware that their primary power, the power of the purse, was merely ceremonial, which in retrospect is startlingly oblivious. The administrative state, while piously saying that nothing can be cut, because congressionally authorised, has been paying no attention to the minutely detailed congressional budgets, which turn out to have been a meaningless ceremonial ritual of merely symbolic power. As should have been obvious from what happened every time there was a “government shutdown”.
The obviously solution is back to Throne and Altar. What else have we got? That was the solution to dark age chaos last time around. With luck we might be able to skip a long dark age and go directly to Throne and Altar. But with Vance lined up to replace Trump, and a bunch of very strong leaders in the Trump cabinet, this becomes less urgent.
As I said in another post legislative bodies have a long history in the West even in monarchies but they are fucking terrible at directly ruling their proper role is that of the royal parliament under a king who is actually ruling precisely because the incentive of every man in a legislative body are to do dishonest things to enrich himself or to form some party organization and try to claw his way to the top of it (virtually the only way a member of a legislator can actually get real power).
What makes you say so? The two exemplary dark ages, the end of the bronze age and the collapse of the western Roman empire, seem a result of massive and widespread collapse of elite fertility and long distance trade. Rule by sword leads to a dark age? When the Mongols attempted getting off their horses, they quickly picked up writing, engineering, many such disciplines they had little previous experience of. Is it that rule by sword leads to many small territories and no way to capture the returns to larger scale cooperation?
Cominator, I’m seconding Bix Nudelmann from the previous thread: Please, a little punctuation.
In retrospect, the Framers envisioned a benevolent dictator subject to the following caveats:
– the Treasury exists before the President and he can’t raid it without Congress’ saying so. But Congress gave up its power to watch money long ago.
– the President is the unitary power, but he can’t invest and delegate that status to other people other than as provided for by law and to such people they deem alright. (He can just fire them, though).
– the process for Impeachment is a real trial, with necessarily political charges drawn up by the House, which charges are tried in good faith by the Senate as if law, unless flagrantly obscene.
– The law provided for by the Constitution is the only conspiracy to exist. That is, members of government act as individuals and do not collude amongst themselves into parties, which can govern themselves (and act collectively through coercion) and watch their power jealously. What’s at issue is not “factionalism” so much as failing to be suspicious of the other branch.
– Money exists as a rivalrous good that can be debased, but for the most part in transparent ways obvious to people around.
– States exist as real sovereignties, are a not quite but near co-equal conspiracy, and are largely organized like the above and are liable to be expelled sacked if they stray too far.
Of course this requires a pretty virtuous people, but I think could have done better than it did if they took rules against partisanship seriously since any successful such enterprise requires overt form and structure.
“Due process” depends on the person in question and is not a right to have an Article III judge hear every plea, as much as habeas corpus of some kind and the right to be heard by a competent non-retard of some kind, outside of the immediate chain of command responsible for making a certain decision, to glance at a case and make sure there wasn’t a genuine mistake of some kind.
If you have a system for making decisions that can produce a single result reflecting “the general will” it can be gamed by a group that colludes, against a group that fails to collude.
And so you get parties, and within each party, if the party is designed to reflect the general will of party members, rather than the will of one charismatic leader, the same process repeats, resulting in caucuses within the party. And caucuses within the caucus. Which problem has been known to go many levels deep.
Which brings us back to the problem of violence and coercion. Or as a libertarian economist might say “bads, goods of negative value”.
Obviously you have to forbid bads. Assuming everyone agrees on what is a bad. Well they are not going to agree.
In anarcho utopia, everyone magically agrees on what is a bad, and if someone does a bad, he creates a liability that the offended party, or anyone authorised by the offended party, can things to him that would otherwise be bads, but are not bads, because offended party has a property right to do those bads. So you necessarily have a system of property rights in what would otherwise be bads, which system is apt to get more and more elaborate, obscure, ill defined, and gameable, as in Saga period Iceland.
Previously existing societies that somewhat approximated anarcho utopia had enormous, and often enormously complicated, systems of property rights in what would otherwise be bads — thus a gentleman could get away with doing what would otherwise be a bad to a lowly person, and aristocrat could do what would otherwise be a bad to a gentleman, and a king to an aristocratv. The King could theoretically create law from the back of his horse, but there was an enormous system of custom, of written law, unwritten law, and unspoken law, and the King would consult with many before issuing a law or a judgment.
If power is too narrowly concentrated, it is too much for one man to hold, and it is apt to lead to violent conflict over power, as with the Roman Empire, or power drifting off into a vast a unaccountable bureaucracy, or both problems simultaneously. If power is too broadly distributed, you get faction. We have the problems of faction and of unaccountable bureaucracy at the same time, and are likely to soon also have the problem of violent conflict over power, all at the same time.
FDR seized Kingly power, seized too much power, and it slipped from his fingers into the hands of a faceless sea of bureaucrats. Lesser men succeeded him, and it slipped from their fingers even worse. And Biden was the least of them all, and now we have what we have got.
‘Political party’ is just another word for an army or a church or something of both; power organizing to do power.
@Aryaman
England had political parties at the time; the colonials claiming they were more virtuous then the English while betraying their oaths and murdering their neighbors for not going along is peak shamelessness.
@Aryaman
>the Framers envisioned a benevolent dictator subject to the following caveats
There are a lot more caveats to such an extent that it’s a figure head dictator that rules at behest of congress. The president isn’t even the commander in chief unless called upon by congress. They could in theory deny the president that status, raise their own army, appoint their own commander, and oust the president and it would be completely constitutional. Of course such course of action is completely crazy and impossible to action upon by a congressional body that is factious, and so those powers and authorities drifted over to the president hence modern accusations of an ‘imperial presidency’ so to speak.
In short I’d argue the framers were far more delusional than what Jim states, and that while he is narrative and thematically correct is saying:
It is historically inaccurate.
The founders created three ‘coequal’ (meaning is closer to equal **social status** rather than equal power) branches of government (**but congress was firmly first among ‘equals’**). This quickly came undone for reasons Jim lays out
But again, he is wrong to claim that
Their primary power is to enforce the law (state violence) which they merely delegate to a president if so desired. The power of state violence was, in retrospect, startlingly obliviously not viable by committee. War creates Kings. The very nature of war requires a command structure that is inherently top down and hierarchical, and America was born in war, and soon after faced new wars. Note the Whiskey Rebellion of 1791 in which the president was reliant on state governors to raise an army, an action that only occurred after a judge notified the president that since the laws could not be safely executed, the president could call forth a militia under the tenets of the Militia Act of 1792. Note the role of the Judicial branch in this was merely to inform the president that he was authorized to act on Congressional direction. The act would be modified in the Militia Act of 1795 such that presidential authority to call up the militia was changed from a 2 year authorization at congressional approval to permanent authorization.
Congress lost the power of state violence first, though it’s more accurate to say they lost the power at a faster rate. Losing the power of the purse progressed far slower. You can sort of see that in the historic debt to GDP ratio. Balanced budgets were the historic norm and appropriations were completely at congressional direction. It was the Budget and Accounting Act of 1921 that saw the power of the purse slip mostly into the presidency, which mandated that the President submit an annual budget to Congress and created what is now known as the OMB under executive power.
Power of state violence was not merely ceremonial, though it became so in a mere ~8 years. Power of the purse also was not merely ceremonial, though it became so in ~135 years. Vitality is lost first, then virtue. This all may seem like splitting hairs, and it likely is (autistic), but I think credit is due to the founders in noting that they were relatively far more virtuous than many are today, though it’s also more important to also recognize, their failures are what led to, on a historical scale, very fast decline. It’s an object lesson that virtue, without the requisite faith and Kingly structure to uphold it, is apt to crumble and crumble fast.
Ultimatum has been delivered to Iran to dismantle nuclear program. American nuclear capable assets have been positioned and drills are being conducted. It’s difficult to tell at this point how Iranian leadership will react, but possibility of a major (and relatively cheap) war is on the table.
Should a war break out, likely to be profitable for US. Already in a managed retreat from global ‘leadership’, and getting routed would be unpleasant. Going scorch earth as US repositions should help prevent that. It would also tighten US stranglehold on remaining interests in Europe as we’d be their only choice of trade partner besides Russia… if only as a means of diversification.
Oh yeah, a nice, short, easy, fun little war in the Mideast is just the ticket! How many times have they sold this to us, and how many times are we going to buy it?
An Iran war would be a disaster, and the end of any power or effectiveness for the Trump administration. It’s probably why they put him in there, but that does not make it a good idea. If Trump is the man you think he is, he will renege on the poison promises he made to get the Thermidoreans, neocons, and Jews to put him in and dare them to do something about it. If he is the man I think he is, he will give them their idiotic war and then make the shocked Pikachu face when they predictably plant their daggers in his back. Let’s see what happens.
The planning involves conducting an air war with tactical bunker busting nukes and directly targeting Iranian leadership. In some ways, not that different from how ISIS was wiped out by Trump in a nice and short tidy way. After destroying Iranian nuclear infastructure and their political class, Iran will be left to stew in their newly shattered reality. We won’t be occupying them. We’ll be salting them, and then leaving.
The war would be a disaster, but not for America. It’ll plunge the region into chaos, but that’s just fine for the US. It hurts our competitors in Europe who have largely become GAE’s government in exile.
>It’ll be a neat and clean little air war; with our mighty technological superiority, we’ll devastate them at nearly no risk to ourselves.
Yeah, I’ve heard that before too. America has not won a war in decades, and Iran is quite a bit more competent and serious than Iraq or Afghanistan. The enemy gets a say, and they will hit back. Assuming that things will escalate exactly as far as we want and stop there is moronic.
Worse, this war isn’t even remotely in our interest to begin with. I can see why Israel wants it, but Israel is not the 51st State, and isn’t even really an ally.
>Iran (IQ 90)
What’s the IQ of the USA at this point? You are living in the past; we’re half-Third-World ourselves by now.
The enemy does not have nukes yet. They don’t have much of a say. We hit their nuclear infrastructure with nukes. Maybe some of their other critical infrastructure. Then get the fuck out. It would a matter of a few days. That’s how you win.
US has won nearly every battle of significance since WW2, but has practically lost every war as well. This isn’t a matter of capability, but moral willingness.
Not our problem.
If tech advance continues, many many entities will have nukes, or worse. We have to learn to avoid large scale general war. If we cannot learn that, we will not fill and subdue the stars, for the tech needed to fill the stars and subdue them involves control of enormously greater energies, and will build enormously larger and more fragile extended phenotype. We can learn, not peace, for there will always be war, but methods to avoid really large scale violence where everyone is forced to sign up with one side or the other side. The model I have in mind is the concert of Europe, which avoided large scale general warfare from the end of the Napoleonic Wars to the first World War. We did it before, we can do it again.
Jim wrote:
> The model I have in mind is the concert of Europe, which avoided large scale general warfare from the end of the Napoleonic Wars to the first World War
I don’t think there’s any clear reason why that period was relatively peaceful. I would point out there was something called the Franco-Prussian war which looks to me like the test run for the Great War. I would also point out that the Great War was fought by christian monarchies who nicely illustrated the moral bankruptcy of so called western civilization and the obvious problems with the crime syndicates known as states.
It seems obvious to me why it was peaceful, and how and why it failed. They were very mindful of how they managed to more or less mostly keep the peace. They figured out how to do it after the horrors of the Napoleonic wars, and proceeded to consciously, mindfully, and intentionally give effect to what they had consciously decided. Preserve the balance of power, and keep talking to each other, keep understanding each other. And when they stopped doing that then the proverbial hit the fan.
You get world war when one side wants to increase its power relative to the other side, by means short of war. And the other side resists, by means short of war, and the conflict escalates to war. And because both sides have been signing up everyone they can, you get a very big war, hence the world wars. The concert of Europe was based on the principle that it is impermissible to set foot on that path, for world war lies at the other end of that path.
Jim wrote:
> They were very mindful of how they managed to more or less mostly keep the peace. They figured out how to do it after the horrors of the Napoleonic wars, and proceeded to consciously, mindfully, and intentionally give effect to what they had consciously decided. Preserve the balance of power, and keep talking to each other, keep understanding each other.
Well the balance of power was somehow preserved that much is true. Not sure who you mean by “they” though. The top criminals of the ruling oligarchies and christian monarchies?
As to the Napoleonic wars, they certainly could have play a role. There’s a cycle of savagery. People and resources are destroyed, so war stops. Not because of any rational and moral decision on the part of the ruling oligarchs but because they run out of cannon fodder.
But assuming that the oligarchs somehow kept “understanding each other”, then the question is, why did that happen? What caused the murderous “leaders” of “western civilization” to actually be somewhat civilized for a short while?
>If tech advance continues, many many entities will have nukes, or worse.
True, but not now. Now problem is that US is at great danger both abroad and at home. US cannot afford a rout abroad. US cannot afford to maintain Empire abroad. US can barely afford Empire at home. Trump is acting in such a way that indicates looting everything possible we still can while scorching earth as we retreat. Hence talks of replacing the Internal Revenue Service with the External Revenue Service. Hence talks of strong arming those abroad while we still can. Hence talks of nuclear war with Iran (which in some ways is more of a threat to Europe to get leverage on them than to Iran itself). I cannot express just how desperate the mood behind certain closed doors is. If I have to help incinerate a million Iranians to merely prove America is still viable, so be it.
Fuck Europe. Fuck Israel. Fuck the gay GAE. There is no actual American interest served by a nuclear first strike on Iran.
> If I have to oversee a scorched earth approach to retreat to prevent a rout, so be it.
What are you talking about? In order to avoid a (metaphorical) route in its (metaphorical) retreat, the USA must nuke the (metaphorically) pursuing Iranians? Get more concrete, here. What is this potential “route” and how does this insane Dr. Strangelove plan avert it? Is it as simple as: the GAE must pull back from some of its idiotic overseas positions, but this will make the USA seem weak to the world, so a bit of fusion fire is just the thing to scare it into respecting us? Is that it, or is there something smarter here?
*rout
Goddammit.
>What are you talking about?
Our bases in Europe get hit by the Russians because we don’t halt the escalation train which Trump doesn’t even directly control.
War with Iran (or even just the prospect) has given the presidency a legitimate domestic reason for reorienting away from war with Russia. War with Russia is suicidal. Plans were being drawn up for direct attacks on Russian assets by American forces based in Europe. While US/NATO was a part of the kill chain in Ukraine, it was still deniable enough in both directions. US could claim it wasn’t (really) waging war on Russia. Russia could save face in avoiding striking US bases in NATO. Ukraine losing was forcing the matter as seen in NATO talks of deploying troops. US could either choose to openly lose, or escalate with Russia… or Iran.
We were always at war with
RussiaIran and that bypass the issue ofAmericanUkrainian defeat. The problem the US faces with errant vassal states gearing up for war with Russia now has a solution. An open break with that would force US withdrawal from Europe on less than ideal domestic terms. How to avoid the Europeans from starting shit and dragging US in via their proxies in US. Escalate in Middle East. Starve them of energy and trade as a knock off effect. They are less likely to do anything stupid with Russia should they be tracking US-Iran trouble, and if they do, kicking off a war with Iran gives a good excuse to jettison Europe.However, Trump can’t afford losing such a war if it escalates beyond proxy war. That requires going nuclear at some point.
Why on Earth would we want to stick our dick into the beehive that is the Middle East?
A short, easy, fun little war? Come on, man.
I don’t say this a lot; in fact my saying it may be a sign that someone cracked the Seventh Seal, but: Neet is correct here.
The idea would be to drop nuclear bunker busters on Iran, maybe throw in a few tactical nukes on their critical infrastructure for good measure. Then let them smolder as they take potshots at shipping. Better yet, let the whole region smolder. Goodbye Saudi oil. Pack up and leave for good. Idea being the region becomes too unstable and chaotic for stable, agreement capable governments to exist for a good long while. A parting gift for our global ‘partners’.
EU would face a choice, either make peace with Russia or have no energy. They would have no alternatives… well maybe American LNG could be an option but I’m not optimistic about that. A bit tongue in cheek, I’ll even claim to be an effective altruist by advocating this. This would in a sense save our Western ‘brothers’ by forcing regime change by economic means.
But in a more Machiavellian sense, I can sense the US is dangerously close to getting routed, which is extremely dangerous. We still must retreat. Current scope of empire is far too large. If I have to oversee a scorched earth approach to retreat to prevent a rout, so be it.
“The idea would be to drop nuclear bunker busters on Iran, maybe throw in a few tactical nukes on their critical infrastructure for good measure.”
The mind boggles. I have no idea how to respond to this.
I have stated what the intent and the game plan is multiple times before. Is your mind so boggled that you only just realized what I’ve been saying? Did I not communicate it well enough. What the administration at the top level has been quietly but publicly contemplating.
No one is saying this will be a fun little war, though it may very well be an ‘easy’ war. This is a scorched earth retreat with the hope that such action will prevent a rout. That such an action would metaphorically ‘salt’ the region and remove any real competition or threats while undergoing reorganization at home.
Such an action in Iran would not merely affect Iran. Think about what Saudi oil flow would look like. What Suez transit would look like. What European trade would look like. Not just in the instance, but decades after.
Iran is a civilized country; which is to say they are powerful enough to be a relevant concern rather than a by-stander to history; and that is also why it profits noone good for america to turn into a mad dog (again) attacking civilized people.
“Mad dog” is exactly right. There’s no US interest served here – certainly nothing compelling enough to justify a nuclear first strike. That is foaming madness. If this is really being seriously proposed at the top levels, then I have been far too whitepilled.
Trump has to keep the mad dogs in the coalition, and it is difficult to predict what price he will have to pay, and what price he will be willing to pay. But I doubt he will be willing to pay the price that Pax suggests.
Almost everyone at the top levels have turned into mad dogs, and what’s being felt at the top flows down hill. I keep trying to explain how bad the situation is and why such a war makes domestic political sense, but sadly I gave Alf some pooch flashbacks. Trump has to navigate that energy and direct it somewhere, preferably the least bad direction, otherwise he will be disposed. Iran is ideal for that purpose. It’s not Russia (which is nuclear) and it’s not China (which is nuclear) and it extracts us from Europe because
we were always at war with Russiawe were always at war with Iran which will force them to make peace with Russia regardless because of what will happen to their energy supply.Listen to Iranians on Youtube. They have had some terrible wars, and very much do not want to fight another, but they are entirely willing to fight another terrible war is you push their back to the wall. Starting a war with Iran is going to be, at best, a dreadfully long and terrible war. They fear war, because they expect it to be long, terrible, and enormously costly. And expect to win,
War with Iran is like war with Ukraine, only worse. They claim that they are all ready to have nukes, but are holding back because they fear nuclear escalation. Sounds plausible, and I am sure the people claiming that believed it, though they might be drinking their own Koolaide. If they are not drinking their own koolaide, then if we attack Iran, big war, goes on and on, and then the nukes fly.
Yes, lot of mad dogs in the Trump coalition, who signed up because they were dismayed by a gay parade military and defeat in the Ukraine. But I think Trump can get away with telling them to shut up and wait until America has an industrial base capable of sustaining war.
“I have stated what the intent and the game plan is multiple times before. Is your mind so boggled that you only just realized what I’ve been saying?”
Perfectly clear: “Nuclear war. What could go wrong? It can only end well!”
– – – – – – – – – – – – – –
“What the administration at the top level has been quietly but publicly contemplating.”
If so then they’re insane.
Doesn’t threatening to nuke Iran get Russia and China to immediately back them and trigger WW3 if the US goes through?
[*deleted for not even attempting the shill test described in the moderation policy*]
> Doesn’t threatening to nuke Iran get Russia and China to immediately back them and trigger WW3 if the US goes through?
No, because both RU and CN have MAJOR problems with Islam in their Lands, same as the UK/EU and US do. They all want Islam out, and are waiting to see who among them is going to take the lead on that. If whoever takes out Iran’s facilities, they are all perfectly fine with that, but they will faux-bitch about it just for show.
Who is the biggest threat to America’s power, to the prosperity of Americans, and American freedoms? Mohammedans or liberal Americans? Obviously liberal Americans.
Who is the biggest threat to Europe’s power, to the prosperity of Europeans, and Europeans freedoms? Mohammedans or liberals? Obviously liberals. Starmer is hell bent on turn England into a third world shithole overnight. Look at Youtube videos of British streets. Garbage, crime, and vandalism everywhere, and the economy of physical production of material goods and the economy of the production of services used by ordinary people is being systematically smashed and criminalised.
Who is the biggest threat to China’s power, to the prosperity of Chinese, and physical safety of ordinary Chinese from crime, war, and “Islamic” terrorism? Mohammedans or American Liberals? Obviously American Liberals All “Islamic” terrorism in China is US sponsored, not Saudi sponsored, let alone Afghan sponsored. Chinese working on the Chinese belt and road initiative are frequently killed by terrorists, but the terrorists do not even pretend to be Islamic. They are affiliated with “non violent” USAID and State Department sponsored “pro democracy” movements and “environmental” movements.
Russia had big problems with Mohammedans. Killed or expelled all the Mohammedans who were giving them problems, and the remaining Mohammedans are big Russian patriots.
> Muhammedans are Russian patriots
No. The Muslims are simply biding their time, weasling in, growing their numbers, quietly this time instead of instantly Beslan’ing again. Then RU will have an even bigger problem with Islam again by the time all those ‘loyal patriotic russian speaking muslims’ have made Moscow look like London and Malmo.
Nobody wants a Nuclear Islam, because they all know that will be the shield that Islam uses to protect and ram its Hijra invaders into your lands. The Muslim Nation in your lands will CRY “our rights” and their Nukes will enforce them over and against you.
Grozny, the major Chechnyan city, does not look like London and Malmo. It looks like Moscow. London is being destroyed by liberals, not Mohammedans.
> liberals
Have nothing to do with it.
War with Islam is already a foregone event of future history.
The timeline for that currently depends entirely on estimates of roughly the T-minus-1-month Event Horizon Date of Iran going Nuclear.
Either the non-Muslim world ends up in war with Nuclear Islam tomorrow, or in war with non-Nuclear Islam today.
The non-Muslim world will not allow a Nuclear Islam.
And it will go in to bomb the nuclear facilities either before or immediately after Iran announces.
If people had been watching the rhetoric and calculus over the past decade they would know this is the likely scenario.
Not really. If liberals remain in power, there will be no one in the west for Islam to fight. They will just walk in, and when they start throwing Drag Queen Story Hour from the Empire State Building, the few remaining Americans will cheer.
When feminist propandist Rachel Zegler gets assigned to a jihadist harem, she will be surprised to feel an inexplicable peace and happiness.
It is only a forgone conclusion if we restore a Christian America first.
Pakistan has had an “Islamic bomb” for ages, and it hasn’t been a problem for anybody except India.
>It’ll be a neat and clean little air war; with our mighty technological superiority, we’ll devastate them at nearly no risk to ourselves.
Is that insane neocon crap for real or is mr. imperialis being sarcastic?
I had a very tiny pooch flashback
This is (probably) not neocon crap. Multiple nuclear assets have been moved into the region. An additional carrier group, B52s conducting unusual operations, and a quarter of the B2 fleet. This is on top of the Ohio class sub that has been operating there since late last year. Trump has demanded total nuclear disarmament from Iran in 2 months otherwise bombing will commence. Pentagon has made it clear such a war would have to be nuclear in nature. This is on top of recent escalation in the proxy war with Iran. Bombing in Yemen has significantly intensified with Houthi leadership being targeted (Trump is posting war porn related to that) and Gaza ceasefire has fall apart.
The neocon position is ground war and regime change. This is not that. This is a scorched earth threat, likely with the intent of using it for withdraw from the region and/or threatening the Europeans. See ‘Signalgate’ messages where the primary cause for bombing Yemen again was related to 40% of European trade going through the straight relative to the 2% of American trade. This is happening at the same time actual US support for Ukraine is declining at the rising hysteria of European leadership.
So at the same time that we’re walking a tightrope not to use nukes against Russia, Trump ought to use nukes against Iran? You’re not making it sound any less insane.
America’s GAE machine is insane. Just as Ukraine induced a sharp U turn with Covid, war with Iran is can be used to induce a sharp U turn with Ukraine. Dismantle GAE operations in Ukraine by pivoting to a less insane target. This is already happening. US already at war with Iran via proxy, and as I’ve pointed out Trump has been escalating. Merely a question of how much escalation, and escalation can get much hotter than expected. Need to be willing to take things nuclear, hence why, as I’ve pointed out many times, nuclear assets have been moved to the region.
Going nuclear would be less expensive than regime change and occupation. Going nuclear likely gets us out of middle east entirely.
If America nukes Iran out of the blue, every country on earth is going to get nuclear weapons very quickly. If America leads up to it with a big war and nuclear sabre rattling, It is possible than the Iranians can complete their nuclear program very quickly. Maybe they cannot, but I am not keen on finding out.
Their rockets work great. They allegedly have the fissionables. Not much left to be done.
A sharp U turn from war with a strong power with nukes, to a less strong power with potential nukes. Not a big improvement.
And in war, the enemy gets a say. Could find ourselves at war with two nuclear powers. As I say in the following article, Latvia and Poland are up next. Russia is serious about Nato not coming one inch closer. Could well be serious about Nato being way too close.
I remember the mostly true joke that GAE is power point driven. At the moment, not possible to fully dismantle GAE. There will be slides. Only question is what are on the slides in the short term.
Nuclear war need not happen in Ukraine. Likewise need not happen with Iran. But in Ukraine there was incentive not to escalate and walk tight rope. In Iran there is only power point incentive… which drives toward escalation maxing.
“Trump is posting war porn”
Someone is posting war porn. Fun game: see if you can figure out who!
How about we fill the slides with:
– steel and electricity output
– industrial robot numbers
– successful rocket launches
– crushing DEI permanently
Those are all tenable. People can make money and grab power with those goals. They’re all firmly within The Window of acceptable discussion. Attacking Iran is some actual ZOG bullshit, not a 4D chess move.
You don’t fix a problem of overextended warfare by escalating another war. This isn’t a solution, this is not even a real redirection. Russia is going to see Iran get nuked, decide the GAE is even more of an agreement incapable mad dog than before, and fight all the way up to and perhaps past the English channel. China is going to laugh, throw up a missile blockade over Taiwan, Korea and Japan, have them get hungrier and hungrier, and wait for them to kick all GAE presence out in order to make a deal.
This is fucking insane. Absolutely fucking insane. This is Judea poking the eye of the local 400lb gorilla because they think they can get away with it. Don’t lie to us and don’t lie to yourself that this has anything at all to do with the interests of America, America the empire or America the people.
War is the supreme IQ test. White people got smart by fighting wars with each other, then used this superior intelligence to build sailing ships and conquer the world. War with Iraq (IQ 80) was an absolute rout*, while war with Russia (IQ 100) is proving considerably more difficult. How would war with Iran (IQ 90) turn out? Only one way to find out.
Chinese score well on paper IQ tests, but their military performance is sub-par. They had so much warfare 2000 years ago that their natural warrior class was wiped out. Since then they’ve conscripted rice-farmers, and when defeated, they paid tribute with great numbers of beautiful rice-fed Chinese women until their enemies were thoroughly Sinicized.
*The subsequent occupation of Iraq failed because liberal democratic Americans could not bring themselves to apply scorched-earth tactics to their conquered subjects, like the British did in India.
Judiciary/Legislative issue stems from the 800 year failure of “Our Democracy”, such failure being its natural and only possible outcome.
West/US fails wars because they don’t finish the job, and can’t finish the job because Ghey and unbased.
So they go in, pussyfoot around, colour/depose a few randoms, flatten a few random buildings, and leave. Other than the randoms, everything else is left like before, including vast swaths of the top ruling political class, and barely disables any core infrastructure units.
Perhaps worst of all, they leave no lesson on display, and don’t even bother taking any women or booty.
Of course re: MidEast, those re-harbored women would have to first voluntarily fully and sincerely embrace Jesus Christ before you could print babies with them safely… can’t risk breeding Islam into your own lands. Islam is why you don’t see Western troops taking Muslim women as wives it’s radioactive, only Vietnam and Japan region women were taken as wives, and Euro women taken by Euro troops long before US existed. Now maybe if you marched into Islam with the Christian Flag flying standard, Hospitalier Arms, a good Maltese… maybe their women would see you as stronger than Muhammad and thus throw themselves at you, but you forgot how to do most of the based stuff after the Crusades were finally lost in 1718.
Point is, study history.
That a Civilization must embody internal peace and self-sustainment to develop and succeed, but employ often drastically harsh measures to fend off or at least manage the outside in order to survive.
The Ghey West has correctly recognized a present need to address the power balance it lost to the outside, but has no inside left to manage it with, thanks to turning Ghey, which allowed for the unfavorable balance to occur in the first place. So for 75 years it has lost every geopolitical contest, most of them utterly manufactured or at least grossly mismanaged.
The situation is so dire that it may in fact need another Miracle to succeed. However those only come to the pious, not the Ghey.
Survival has always required a unique blend of Faith and King, those Civs with it live, those without it die off.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_history
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Christian_flags
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Crusader_castles
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presentation_of_Jesus_at_the_Temple
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Dante_Gabriel_Rossetti_-_Before_the_Battle.jpg
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_war
The last have not yet been.
And until last there will be.
Any war with Iran is very very very unlikely imho. Under Bush II you had a purely neocon administration, the military was not in such terrible shape as it is now and the whole army was right there in Iraq. I find it unbelievable that it will happen now.
No need for the army. There will be no boots on the ground. Current movement of military assets backs up suspected war planning. It would be purely a war of missiles and bombs. Naval and air assets only. Nuclear is being threatened but time will tell if the administration has the balls to do what is being implied.
Aerial bombing alone does not do anything militarily useful. You can bomb a country flat, and it will continue to fight. We might be able to take out Iran’s nuclear capabilities, maybe, if our bombs still work, but anti-air has gotten very good. The B-2 may prove shockingly obsolete.
Iran’s anti air is quite good. It is going to be very difficult to hit their nuclear resources. And everything not easily replaceable is likely to be massively hardened. Why should we stick our dicks into the Middle Eastern beehive?
The middle east will go nuclear eventually. Let them all nuke each other.
We are going to have to learn to live with the occasional nuclear war. Our objective should be to avoid it becoming a world war. Concert of Europe strategy.
>Any war with Iran is very very very unlikely imho.
Don’t underestimate the infinite evil of neocons and the general stupidity and lack of empathy of US subects.
This is especially ironic because FDR’s version of the Republic is already a dead republic. The Republic of the Founding Fathers had ‘coequal’ branches of government. Coequal in status, not in power, similar to how individual states are ‘coequal’ in enjoying the same constitutional rights, but some states have more political power than other states. Congress was supposed to rule supreme. After all, they can fire a president, but a president cannot fire them. Same with judges. The Judiciary was at best a mechanism for enforcing congressional will, and at worst a suggestion free to be ignored at congressional will.
FDR’s Republic cemented the presidency over Congress (the Founding Father’s Republic), but his succession plan sucked. Truman was chosen for his mediocre and non-threatening existence. Subsequent executive picks by the political machine carried on that trend all the way to literal dementia. This created an ever growing power vacuum within the presidency that got filled in by the administrative state over time. A system which operates on proceduralism first and foremost, which is how the Judiciary became powerful, and became in effect a legislative branch passing decrees and policy decisions out of thin air.
Restoring FDR’s Republic is really just The Return of the King, but does
AragornTrump have a succession plan that selects for competency? Monarchy tends to have that feature built in by virtue of biological inheritance more often than not passing down ‘ruler genes’. The restored “Republic” will not, and chances are one finds an administrative state problem again some 80 years down the line.Congress’s primary power was theoretically the power of the purse, but Doge revealed that this was as fake as the Queen opening parliament in a stagecoach, in that dispensed funds are not dispensed against Congressional micromanaged allocations. Congress budgets a billion for this and a billion for that, and the adminstrative state has been completely ignoring this.
Doge directed that all funds should be dispensed against a congressional allocation. The president and the cabinet ordered that this would happen, the secretary of the treasury ordered that this would happen, and it did not happen. A big power struggle ensued to make it happen, and it has now been announced for the umpteenth time that now it is happening. Maybe it is, but we have seen this announcement rather too many times.
The power of the purse has long been in hands that no one is quite able to identify, and Trump and company have been struggling to get a hold of it. They were still struggling as of a couple of days ago. Maybe they have gotten hold of it now, but I suspect there is quite a way to go.
Congress’s power is far wider than just the purse. They could legally and in theory run the government as a secondary executive branch and soft coup the president. They could legally call the national guard up, appoint loyal officers, and have them enforce the budgets and laws they pass with or without presidential approval.
Their primary power was theoretically being the law of the land, but close to a century of Judicial activism, growth in the administrative state, decline of congressmen from being statesmen to something much more symbolic, has decentralized the power of congress outside of congress into what we call the Cathedral.
But this is all besides my point that it’s ironic that for all the idealism of the Republic, no one in the colloquial sense wants to return to it or even knows what it was. The Republic is completely dead, and what Thermidor wishes to return to is just a temporarily functional version of what we currently have. In short, not a solution.
First of all, crush the Judiciary. Deep reform clearly needed.
Some Sunday reading. The meandering post I am quoting at length has a historical subthread which is astoundingly near the ‘deal with the devil’ stories.
Let us begin with rocket scientist Jack Parsons, also “occultist” (satanist) and Crowleyite magician.
“In June of 1942, [Parsons] and his wife moved into a house at 1003 S Orange Grove Avenue in Pasadena with a group of other Thelemites. Parsons conducted scientific research in the garage, sacrificed animals raised on the twenty-five acre grounds in rituals, and hosting a science fiction club in the kitchen.”
Said club included L. Ron Hubbard and, I believe, Robert A. Heinlein (at least for the ‘free love’ part). Hubbard steals Parsons’ wife, but Parsons doesn’t mind.
“Working with Hubbard and Northrup, [Parsons] commenced what is known as the Babalon Working, a series of magical rituals to manifest Babalon, the Mother of Abominations, and in doing so create a Moonchild as suggested in Crowley’s 1917 novel. The first of these rituals lasted twelve days. On one of them, Parsons and Hubbard observed a seven-foot column of brownish yellow light in the kitchen, which, after Parsons banished it with a magical sword, left Hubbard with a paralyzed arm for the rest of the night. Shortly after the first ritual was completed, Parsons met Marjorie Cameron, whom he quickly married.”
Marjorie looks kind of oily and nasty yet with an underlying attractiveness in the photo. One would suppose the poor girl became the vessel of Babalon. Afterwards, Parsons gets fleeced by Hubbard, who disappears with the proceeds of selling Parsons’ house. Parsons has to get a job.
“In June of 1952, [Parsons] received a rush order from a film crew looking for explosives. Working on it, he dropped a coffee can of mercury fulminate, which detonated, triggering a further explosion that destroyed the entire bottom floor of his house. Parsons was pulled from the wreckage, horribly injured, and was dead less than forty minutes later, his last words being “I wasn’t done.””
No longer useful, he has been discarded.
Meanwhile, author William Burroughs
“Burroughs’s biographer, Barry Miles, argues that Burroughs would have viewed the 1928 injury [due to a chemical explosion] as a point of entry for the Ugly Spirit; twelve years later, during a psychotic episode, he would cut off the top joint of his little finger on the previously injured hand.”
“Burroughs would battle this Ugly Spirit throughout his life, eventually blaming it for his killing of his wife, Jean Vollmer, in 1951.”
Human sacrifice to seal the pact, presumably success as a writer.
“As he put it in 1985, “I am forced to the appalling conclusion that I would never have become a writer but for Joan’s death, and to a realization of the extent to which this event has motivated and formulated my writing. I live with the constant threat of possession, and a constant need to escape from possession, from Control. So the death of Joan brought me in contact with the invader, the Ugly Spirit, and maneuvered me into a life long struggle, in which I have had no choice except to write my way out.” ”
Thus possessed, he turns to homosexuality and is briefly in touch with Babalon (note the extremely creepy cover photo of ‘Semina’ in the article). He after some years of drifting develops an interest in occultism (well, admits it in public) and gets in touch with Hubbard — now the founder of Scientology — though they fall out. In a subsequent article, he asks.
” “As set forth by Mr. Hubbard this consists of a number of quite ordinary phrases. He claims that reading these phrases, or hearing them spoken, can cause illness, and gives this as his reason for not publishing this material. Is he perhaps saying that these are magic words? Spells, in fact?” ”
(Spells who were basically propaganda or PR slogans.) With this, his arc is done. Burroughs in turn spills over to celebrated comic book writers Alan Moore (known “occultist”) and Grant Morrison (presumably “occult” dabbler and nowadays also some sort of pansexual or something, i.e., possessed). Mostly work founded on various parts of nihilism, occultism, cosmic horror and psychedelic hallucinations.
Towards the end also an amusing picture of the leftist attempt to levitate the Pentagon in 1967.
https://www.eruditorumpress.com/blog/last-war-in-albion-book-two-chapter-ten-where-the-moon-and-the-earth-were-joined-two-riders-were-approaching
Note: blog written by Elizabeth Sandifer. whom I seem to recall was previously known as Phil Sandifer. So basically from one also demon possessed, but the history does seem to check out.
So what happened to Babalon? Wikipedia tells us the vessel after Parsons attempted suicide several times and was institutionalized for a time, but emerged to form new occult groups and to bear first “the Wormwood Star” (which miscarried) and subsequently the prophesied “Moon Child”, government name Chrystal Eve Kimmel. I can’t find much about the Moon Child, except she’s appears to live in Desert Hot Springs, CA at age 69. Babalon’s vessel physically and mentally declined after this but died only in 1995.
Now go to church.
https://x.com/StephenM/status/1906024686674133371
Stephen Miller sums up the justification which should be used to assume emergency power…
If every foreign trespasser gets to have their own federal trial prior to removal then there is no liberation. There is no restoration. The invasion will be made complete.
“It was on the tip of everyone’s tongue. Tyler and I just gave it a name.”
Judiciary has neither Money nor Guns, so it will lose any fight, unless the American People view it as the only honorable branch left, in which case they will rise to physically back it up. Which is rare in any history anywhere.
Or they are viewed as honorable by the competing Princes and somehow survive on bench that way.
They usually just abandon the bench during the conflict, and end up being dissolved or cleared out by the new King.
The Left appears struggling to pay even obese Democrat retirees to “fill the streets” in “protest”.
https://x.com/LangmanVince/status/1906083974583103509
While on a large scale that may be temporarily true this week.
However the Schwab, Soros, ClintBama, Gates type group of GloboHomo Elites still have at least $100B in entirely disposable ready reserve. (Further backed by a ton of $USD held by China in FX/Bonds they can repudiate back through various channels as they wish. And already ganked the Panama deal.)
Left only lost a portion of their corrupt redistribution scheme (free income) from the early takedown of USAID et al, not their ill-gotten wealth, nor their investment income from it.
They’re currently deciding if they want to spend from their wealth.
Nature and History of Leftism… because unlike honest work and advances, the corrupt graft and tax of the Left doesn’t cost them any actual real work labor talent or business to replace. Thus they view stored capital as replaceable, thus expendable.
Which means they’re still very dangerous.
Be ready for anything.
You are still on moderation for failure to attempt the shill test described in the moderation policy, therefore subsequent posts from this email address are likely to be silently deleted or snarkily edited.
It appears that, with the river of money from USAID terminated, the Democratic party mass protest machine is facing hard times, and with Musk’s seizure of inner sanctum of USAI, their C3I was destroyed, and they have been struggling to organise a new c3I. This leaves the judges without any muscle.
Obviously Trump, Holy Emperor of the Ocean Lands, has the physical power to dispose of the judges as they deserve, but this would severely stress the Thermidorean coalition, which contains large numbers of leftists who just want their old unprincipled exceptions to leftism back.
But if the migrants have to be deported court case by court case, America will cease to be America.
The Laken Riley act allows the expedited removal of violent criminals. But we have to expedite removal of all of them.
At this point, what is the danger of coalition breakup? Say Trump declared a state of exception and emergency, dismissed congress, ignored the judges. There would be far more men willing to shoot for him than shoot at him. Probably by several orders of magnitude, the numbers of fighting men are in his favor.
So why tiptoe around this coalition? Musk seems on-board, and he has a satellite network for global near instant communications. Hegseth seems on-board, and the fighters love the guy. The current group of men serving as secret service seem to be ride or die loyal, so no one close by will be shooting.
It looks like the hesitant one is Trump. He may know that if he doesn’t go all the way it spells his death and the death of his family and followers, he likely understands the gravity. That doesn’t mean he’s excited to do it, that he wants to dismiss congress, dissolve the courts, sack the universities. It means that he understands that it is necessary, and so may be taking his time to do it.
That’s great to know, Marbon; it means that Trump could abolish income taxes for a decade and fund the government entirely with confiscated liberal wealth. Aiding and abetting a foreign invasion is treason, and the penalty for treason is death and seizure of all assets.
Trump should replace the entire judiciary with 1/6ers, and The Cominator if he’s available.
Precedent for those type of remedies were set by Left, AOC tax the rich, unrealized capgains, destroying Tesla’s, importing burdens and violence, jailing redress seekers, etc.
Welfare programs were slid in with Tax, both of which intentionally destroyed strong private, Church, and community charity structures that always worked for thousands of years.
Hesitant? Trump has a good gut feel, but does look around the room when he speaks it, his last team was terrible, whereas this team quickly articulates and builds on those words. He’s also better at delegating and overseeing. And hopefully better at firing than before too.
The Executive needs the people on its side as well. The people need more knowledge of the toplevel scam, and hard data, before they will join in any corrective or kingmaking activity. That takes time to disseminate.
Give it another three months of exposing the corruption, see if the people are talking about housecleaning then.
There is no toplevel scam. This is why our enemies are having such difficulty getting their act together and acting as one, and why the looting of the corpse of the Republic got out of control.
You are still on moderation. Please take the shill test and get white listed. I am tired of the need to evaluate each of your comments individually for enemy action, and when I get tired, I am apt to silently empty my moderation queue wholesale.
The looters were insufficiently cohesive to keep new looters out, and the more looters and moochers got in, the easier it was for even more looters and moochers to get in.
We are currently in the excellent situation that everyone on our side is required to kiss the ring. And for all Trump’s grievous faults, he always had the warrior spirit, and when they tried to kill him, finally became the warrior he was always meant to be. So we now have a warrior leader. Lots of people on our side have lots of legitimate complaints about him, but this is far better than we could have hoped. We have a leader, whom for all his grievous faults, is still a very good leader. We have a warrior leader whom warriors will gladly follow. And our enemies do not.
Speaking of corrupt money, grifterism, manufactured “protests”, colour revolution. Here’s one money trail…
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13MOGhdMPc-_lGGdEGkS0QVSayczGG7Z5rlk_LUxdCTk/edit?pli=1&gid=1384937108
There also seems to be a bit of hactivism targeting the Left now.
Bottom line. Elon is cutting four billion a day in wast, corruption, and fraud. The major beneficiaries were leftist groups like these.
Machiavelli tells us that if the prince takes away his opponents fortunes, he has to kill them, for they surely will attempt to kill him, that the enemies of the prince will forget about the death of a father, a son, or a brother, before they forget about the loss of an estate.
gewgle docs links like this are going to scrape the IP and even names and addresses of those that click on them, even inadvertently. This guy is more likely than not a shill based on this alone.
Somewhat similar to the problem Bukele has in El Salvador isn’t it – you’ve rounded up all the gang members / cut off their funding. Now what? The people are still there. What are you going to do with them? Aren’t they out for vengeance?
I know what Machiavelli would say…
A far as I can tell, in ES at least, the people are not still there. Members of the gang had easily identifiable face tattoos and so were thoroughly rounded up, without trial. They also made for terrible neighbors, no one liked them. I doubt there are any sympathizers outside of the global leftists.
I guess that means Bukele is obligated to help in the roundup of the global leftist cartels.
Jim made the argument that mass imprisonment is really more of an intermediary step than a final one. Now you’ve got thousands of men in jail – what do you do with them? You either have to offer them a path of rehabilitation, or termination.
Rehabilitation looks like keeping them in prison until they meet their maker.
Tren de Aragua would be a good place for a confrontation, but ultimately a confrontation over a legal matter doesn’t resolve anything. The courts may rule that Trump is well within his rights in this specific matter or Trump may ignore the ruling of the court. So what if he does? Any lawyer (or even a chat bot) will easily produce long winded arguments that Trump is in fact complying (even if he is not) and then nothing is settled.
At most, Trump will call out the courts, ignore them publically in a specific case. Well, even if he does that, the courts are still there and the police will enforce the courts’ rulings in any other case not involving Trump. Maybe Trump will issue a few pardons in criminal cases, but that doesn’t solve the problem. The courts will keep ruling against any Trump supporter in any way they deem fit. Bad behaviour only stops when behaving badly is painful for whoever behaves badly.
A different way for the confrontation would be if Trump goes after the judges, one after another on whatever charge he can make up, like corruption, perversion of justice, etc. Problem is that judges decide whether a judge is guilty of anything. Unless there are a lot of judges in Thermdior that problem is not easily solved; and certainly not solved by filing submissions with legal arguments.
If Trump becomes an Augustus, he can solve that problem. Augustus could voice a legal opinion in a friendly chat with any judge and the judge then found that opinion so convincing that it would be applied immediately. A president does not have such powers of persuasion, at least not until some judges have taken long distance swimming lessons.
The French branch of the empire-in-exile has outlawed Marine Le Pen and National Rally. Smells of desperation, while providing an opportunity for Trumpism to go global.
Leftist judges signaling that they are good leftists is sufficient explanation. How is this providing an opportunity for Trumpism to go global?
Trump beat and is beating the leftist judges. Trump tells politicians under leftist attack in random EU countries, come align with me and we will conquer together. LePen/NR, AfD, Georgescu, Bolsonaro, Farage/UKIP, create anti-GAE alliance under Trump flag, creates a schelling point with nativists in each country who dont want to import the third world…
Come to think of it, Trump could leave Vance to run the US presidency in 2028 and rise to become the true ruler of the free world,
Hail Trump! Ave Imperator!
The Left is very dangerous in more direct ways too:
https://x.com/EnochBurke/status/1905761363676594452
https://x.com/BGatesIsaPyscho/status/1903033869529424373
Teacher Enoch Burke refused to endorse transgenderism in his school.
Enoch’s problem has already occurred in the US, to many hundreds of people on the political Right.
Most people probably haven’t bothered to set aside enough Gold, Bitcoin, Cash… liquid mobile hard assets… nor mobility… to survive such an attack. Or when the system implodes resulting in a haircut grab from everyone. History always repeats.
The people at the top that are behind destroying Enoch are the same behind destroying Ireland and the rest of the West:
https://x.com/real_eire/status/1906669494841344278
If only there were an Encyclopedia Wiki with all the Left scum, that did nothing but quote their codespeech, interlink their whitepapers, funding, actions, meetings, etc… the average populace might see it and evict them.
The “Democracy” psyop is very good at making sure people never actually think to do that, to react, let alone fight, till it’s too late.
Judiciaries mostly follow orders from above, from whoever does have the Money and Guns, moreso during times of instability.
The West have lately been huge net-national, anti Right-individual, pro Left-individual, victims of that.
Not enough citizenry have realized the massive extent of the damage, nor who the perpetrators are, so they’ve not yet joined the fight.
They tried to cancel Trump election 2024 but couldn’t.
They canceled Romania election, and just now did France too.
And managed to extend UK and CA and most of EU till they all collapse harder.
Trump seems to be losing weight.
Has anyone else noticed this?
Wonder what he’s added to or removed from his routine?
And who’s helping him do it?
There is only one way to lose weight. Cut snacking (including snacking on zero calorie artificially sweetened drinks) Fast for at least most of the day, and every now and again for longer. When breaking your fast, break it with meat or eggs. This is well known on the alt right, and he is obviously getting information and analysis about politics and history from the alt right, which he failed to get during his first term. So maybe he is getting information and analysis on losing weight also.
The current vangard of right wing dietary science is centered on Ray Peat. Ray Peat, like most dissidents, is extremely eccentric, and his advice and writings over the decades includes lots of very strange prescriptions. Many of these less core prescriptions — recommendations of aspirin, methylene blue, carbon dioxide therapy, specific exercise advice which says to avoid lactic metabolism and eccentric motions — I haven’t investigated deeply enough to say whether or not they are agreeable. The core, however, is quite good.
A ‘Peaty’ diet consists of: lots of saturated fat, especially dairy and coconut oil, meat and eggs, avoiding grains and vegetables high in insoluble fiber, preferring starches that are quickly digested and pairing them with saturated fats, and — probably controversial here — lots of sugar.
Peat focuses on metabolism, and his core thesis seems to be that health is beget by a high degree of metabolic output, and so recommends tracking thyroid hormones and body temperature, and supplementing thyroid hormones, sugar and caffeine as necessary to boost metabolic rate. Conversely, he recommends reducing stressors, which dampen metabolism, which is why he prescribes exercise high in neural output, yet low in lactic metabolism, extended duration aerobics, and eccentric motions. All of latter do indeed lead to a disproportionate degree of corticosteroid response.
Peat also focuses on fungal and bacterial infections in the digestive system. He believes that these colonies produce exotoxins that lead to higher stress levels and a reduced metabolism. Thus, one should reduce fiber and starches that break down further along the digestive tract, as these feed the fungal and bacterial colonies that ultimately produce the harmful exotoxins. As most people eating a standard diet are likely to have a large volume of these infections, he also prescribes a dietary remedy, the famous carrot salad. Carrots, adapted to a dark moist environment favored by fungus and bacteria, have adapted to be indigestible to these organisms. Thus, when grated lengthwise, serve as a physical cleaning device, pushing them out with the feces. There is also some detail of the fiber bolus serving to clear out the human metabolic byproducts as well, such as excessive liver biles in the upper tract, and serotonin and related catecholamines in the lower. Paired with the carrot fibers is coconut oil and vinegar, but especially coconut oil. Coconuts, evolved in a hot and wet tropical environment, have adapted powerful antifungal antimicrobial properties, to the point coconut oil is used industrially for this purpose. So, paired with the carrot, this serves to disinfect the digestive tract as it physically expells the organic mass and its products from the digestive system.
In all of this, I neglected to mention that Peat seems to be the origin of the knowledge on harms of unsaturated fats, particularly seed oils, and the harmful effects of estrogens. His writings on the mechanism of toxicity of unsaturated fats, too easily oxidized and so make for terrible and leaky cell membranes, seems correct. His writings on the mechanism of harm expressed by estrogens less so, yet the core concept seems correct: estrogens lead to cancer-like and cancerous cell proliferation, and an excess in serotonin production, an imbalance in the direction of serotonin leading to neurotic behavior and a stress-like metabolic response.
Peat is the vanguard only of a tiny vocal minority, and gets entirely too much credit. He has some good ideas, few of which are original – for example, keto diets were used at least as early as the 1920s, albeit for the wrong reasons, and Dr. Atkins rediscovered a lot of the same ideas in the 1970s. There was also quite a lot of research into the negative utility of fiber and extended aerobics in the 70s, but it went against the “scientific consensus” so it was ignored.
Like most kooks, he is right about a small set of things, and highly suspect on a much larger set of other things. Great if you ignore 90% of what he says and stick with the small and obvious changes (high fat, moderate protein, low carb diet; exercise emphasizing heavy weight and functional movements) which you could discover just as easily by doing your own research.
He’s not inherently more trustworthy than any rando on the Life Extension forums. Read him if you want, try out his more esoteric prescriptions if you think the data is that compelling (though I’d urge you to go to the effort of actually evaluating the studies, looking at sample sizes, searching for conflicting studies, etc.), but overall, don’t take him excessively seriously.
Don’t get me wrong here: every one man who is willing to do his own research and design his own scientific experiments to run on his own body is more valuable to the scientific/health community than ten thousand doctors reading from the same government-approved script. I’m not against what Ray Peat does, but I don’t like the personality cult that seems to have formed around him, because it never acknowledges his flaws. To wit, he claims to speak with certainty about biological processes that are still very poorly understood, and he rarely if ever acknowledges that outcomes can be gene-dependent or even situation-dependent.
Maybe some of his more “out-there” ideas will, in the fullness of time, prove to be 100% true, but I think the majority are duds, and his followers have a confirmation-bias problem.
As far as I can tell, the Seed Oil Hypothesis, that unsaturated fatty acids have deleterious effects on multiple levels of the biological system, can be attributed to Peat. Not that he was the first to claim such, but that the current popularity of the idea, and thus Steak n Shake now frying their potatoes in beef tallow, can be directly attributed to him. I wouldn’t call that a tiny minority opinion. Given more time, I expect more of the more workable and reasonable pieces of his writing to proliferate just as widely.
I agree with you, he had many quite insane and unsubstantiated claims, and many of his internet cult followers are even more out there. I wouldn’t say he was 90% bad and 10% good, more like the reverse. For example, looks like thyroid supplementing does increase healthspan, excess serotonin in the gut is responsible for a large spread of nervous disorders, and excess fiber causes leaky gut and mycotoxin buildup. There are other voices echoing the same, but his is the loudest, even though he now rests eternal, and is responsible for far more people coming to realize these facts.
There is a lot of excitement abound with young guys discovering that dietary science encompasses the entire organism, from hormone to digestive organ to cellular organelle, and young men on the internet (and grifters attempting to differeniate themselves by all means available) tend towards extremes. Thus, Peat ideas are now presented as a tiny kernel of sanity in a sea of insanity, but if you skim the writings from the man himself he is majority sanity with a few walks down some insane paths. I tried to capture the core concepts that seem directly attributed to him in my post, and I expect that in the coming years many of his ideas on thyroid, estrogens and serotonin, and the focus on markers of metabolic health over concern for only bodyfat percentages will gain steam. Right now, the younger and passionate right wing internet youth are fascinated, and next it will filter down to normie consciousness.
On keto, I couldn’t weave it in well rhetorically, so I’ll address it here. He is against ketogenic diets. Says they’re excessively stressful, and in the long run will tank your metabolic rate. This matches my experience. Very few people deal well with the strict keto diet long term, especially when they’re physically active (though it can work rather well for a long time if youre sedentary, it is exceptionally rare to see someone stick to a very low carb diet for many years on end). They usually start losing performance and feeling run down, then either add rice and/or potatoes with dinner, occasional fruit, or have periodic large refeeds with hundreds of grams in a relatively small window.
Seed oils are convenient shorthand for high levels of omega-6 PUFAs (relative to omega-3) and researchers were looking into this decades ago.
Here’s a random one I dug up from ’89: Divergent effects of omega-6 and omega-3 fatty acids on mammary tumor development in C3H/Heston mice treated with DMBA. It’s a lot of medical mumbo-jumbo that most people aren’t going to want to read, but it essentially boils down to: “supplementing with seed oils like corn oil seems to cause cancer, while supplementing with coconut oil doesn’t, and we think the X factor is omega-6”.
Saturated fat was still being demonized back then (and in many ways, still being demonized by bureaucrats and lazy/complacent doctors today) so often the research had to be couched on “monounsaturated vs polyunsaturated” terms but came to the same conclusions.
Some really bad shit happened between the 1970s-1990s in the realm of “public health”, the set of facts and dietary recommendations labeled acceptable by the bureaucracy, creating a kind of low-grade Lysenkoism that elevated both grains (food pyramid) and seed oils and PUFAs in general (war on cholesterol) way above their rightful place in the nutritional hierarchy; but there were always researchers going against the grain (heh) and Peat is just one in a long line.
Again, not trying to say Peat is a bad guy or a grifter, but he gets more credit than he deserves. Regardless of his/your opinion on keto diets and other low-carb diets, that is the mechanism by which the majority of health-conscious right-wingers come to understand that animal fats and coconut/avocado are relatively good while seed oils and excessive fiber are extremely bad. The “Peaters” are much more fringe than the keto/paleo/carnivore crowd who follow many of the same guidelines.
On reading the linked article by Peat, I instantly recognise a bad guy and a grifter. He is trying to impress with science, but the incoherent irrelevance of his learned references reveals he does not understand them and is not interested in understanding them.
I know and understand all the pile of stuff he learnedly references, and the randomness of his pile reveals that he does not. When I report science facts, I organise them to tell a story, and express them in a way that makes sense as part of that story. As I said below, compare the way I present science facts, and the way he presents science facts.
“Fact salad”.
Well, the way I see it, and try to be as tactful as possible, is that he probably believes that what says is well-founded, and occasionally (again, I peg it at about 10%, maybe 20% if we’re being generous) manages to be more right than wrong.
There’s a state in between real science and pseudoscience, where a person starts from real or accepted scientific facts, and makes increasingly less plausible intuitive leaps from those facts toward a suspiciously implausible conclusion. Unfortunately this often turns into grifting because it becomes highly profitable to push ideas like string theory that are impossible to prove or disprove with the means currently at our disposal.
I’m maybe not as well-versed in the particulars as you are, so maybe it really is complete BS. My impression is more often along the lines of seeing the argument “A and B, therefore C” and going “wait a minute, neither A nor B actually prove C, either separately or together”. And a single article may go on and on like that, using A and B to “prove” C, then C and D to “prove” E, all the way up to Z, leaving behind an enormous pile of unstated and unproven assumptions.
In other words I see logical errors and self-delusion, not necessarily a deliberate attempt to mislead. But maybe it is deliberate. It’d certainly be consistent with some of the other grifts. But if it’s a grift, then what precisely is he “selling”, how does he benefit?
His writing strives to impress, more than inform. What he is selling is his superior status.
He’s selling his newsletter. The guy was a serious eccentric in the first place, made many fantastical claims. Two fun ones: a dog regrowing a lost eye after consuming goat milk, Peat himself consuming 10,000+kcal and the heightened metabolism creating an EM field around himself and interfering with electronics in the vicinity.
I’m not saying everyone should go read his writing. I’m claiming that the current vanguard, as in the younger more energetic right wing youth, are more heavily influenced by memes propagated from him and his forum than from any other particular source. Hence saying “seed oils” rather than “Omega-6”. I’m betting you’re going to see more of these memes, because they’re easily digested, they’re ‘edgy’ in that they contradict the current old guard advice, establishment and dissident, correct enough that people switching to the memeplex from the Standard American Diet will find themselves far healthier, and with a clear schelling point of the man himself.
So look for increasing popularity of carrot salads, thyroid supplementing, estrogen as carcinogenic, etc.
No. “Seed Oil” is him imitating alt-right shibboleths, not the alt right adopting his shibboleths.
He was talking about seed oils/pufa before I was conceived. I always considered the alt right to be a phenomenon emerging in the early to mid 2010s.
Not particularly interested in running defense for Peat, I was reporting on the evolution of the memes as I saw it. Looks to me like he is very influential on the right wing youth crowd. Annoyingly so, because they also adopt strange neuroses about thyroid metabolism and pseudo-shamanic practices justified by treating his writing like tea leaves to divine advice from. You can falsify this by observing counter to my claims: no carrot salad memes among the right (a particularly identifiable flag), no increasing interest in thyroid, no sudden interest in aspirin and methylene blue, etc.
According to AI, dissent on seed oil began with Saladino in 2016-2018. I do not believe Peat was talking about seed oils before 2022. Peat is chasing the crowd.
Alt right, in the sense of dissent on female emancipation, gays, and all that, emerged as dissent on alt.seduction fast, to my recollection in 1996. We thought that Mystery’s faggot peacocking was unmanly, and that the secret of leading with a neg was women secretly liked to be in their proper place.
Not what I see. Peat is chasing the crowd.
The thought leaders generate seminal ideas, the meme warriors pump them out to the masses, the masses buy in, and then after the masses buy in, Peat hastily reinvents his beliefs, decorating the crowd’s beliefs with an entirely random salad of science facts.
Mary Enig and Sally Fallon were condemning seed oil around 1996, at the same time as the alt right emerged, though initially it was not yet an alt right meme. However it very rapidly came to overlap with the alt right prescription — lift iron, don’t eat seed oil based products, and take no crap from women. A woman’s place is cooking, cleaning, sex, and bearing children.
Alt right thought leaders were opposing seed oil a long time ago, Jack Donovan, the Bronze Age Pervert, then in 2019 there was massive meme warrior promotion that seed oil made one unmanly. And then Peat belatedly joined the party.
Jack Donovan, alt right thought leader, fused 1990s seed oil dissent with 1990s alt right masculinity dissent, then Bronze Age Pervert and the meme warriors. The meme warriors penetrate the masses, then the masses penetrate Peat.
Peat notices that the original 1990s seed oil dissenters were science heavy, so when chasing the crowd bedecks his chase with a salad of random science factoids whose meaning and relevance he does not understand so as to sound like the original actual 1990s thought leaders.
I am a bit too young to speak on the thought leaders of the 90s and whom Peat may have been riffing off of, but fom the looks of it he’s been consistent since the early 2000s. If he was attempting to steal specific audiences, wouldn’t you expect contradictions and changes?
Peat really got famous on the right after BAP started talking about him, the man himself is an old school academic tankie leftist from the looks of things. He wasn’t trying to court the internet right. Most of his writing is on thyroid, aging, estrogen, even menopause. I bet most of the people paying for his newsletter were hippy-ish old women.
I don’t mean to drag this discussion out, I suppose I just don’t like to see what I perceive as mischaracterization. Even mischaracterization of a years dead eccentric academic. It looks to me like he was just some guy with intentionally strange ideas and a newsletter, and being intentionally strange happened upon some dissident truths, which he then dressed up in the academese he learned in whatever tankie rathouse he attended. Then some internet right guys, coming in a decade after you remember from the 90s, found his writing, decided they liked the kernels of truth in it. Eventually the BAP memesphere got ahold of the material, and now it is currently being digested and spread.
Has he? Give me Peat’s earliest on seed oils. Give me a link.
Richard Spencer called seed oil “part of the globohomo diet” in 2017, unifying 1996 scientific dissent with 1996 masculinist cultural dissent. Real men eat real food and real men keep women in their proper place. Presumably Spencer got it from the 1996 science dissenters, and I just don’t see Peat as having any influence or following among the science dissenters. He simulates science dissent randomly and incoherently.
I don’t think Peat took it up until his audience pushed him. Which would not have happened until the meme warriors joined the fray.
https://raypeat.com/articles/articles/unsaturated-oils.shtml
At the bottom of the page it is copyrighted for 2006. It’s unclear if this means that was the time of original publishing, or just when he last updated the article on the website, or whatever else. Metadata rot.
OK, Peat was onto seed oil ten years before the masculinist alt right was. But ten years after the science dissenters were onto it. So still a follower, not a leader.
The Masculinist right appear to have gotten onto the threat from seed oil from Nina Teicholz’s 2014 “Big Fat Surprise”, which popularised the science dissent on diet. That is where I got it from. Her book is famous and influential on the Alt Right. And Nina Tiecholz does not appear to be in any way influenced by Peat, or even aware of his existence.
I was unaware, until now, that Bronze Age Pervert cited his influence. OK, I stand corrected. Peat did influence the alt right through Bronze Age Pervert. But I got it through “A Big Fat Surprise”. Which book actually makes sense scientifically, while Peat is random science salad.
I have been influenced by alt right dissent and science dissent since the 1990s, and until you brought Peat up, never heard of him.
Bronze Age Pervert cites the same sources as Jack Donovan cited: Paul Saladino (Carnivore MD), Nina Teicholz (Big Fat Surprise) and Gary Taubes. And yes, also cites Peat. I was unaware of Peat, and I see no indication that Jack Donovan was aware of him. “Big Fat Surprise” is a very big, fat, accessible book that sold a way lot of copies. That is your biggie right there.
You say the rights ideas on food came from Peat. No, they came from the big three, which came from 1996 dissident science. Nut science (Peat) has a lot in common with dissident science. I was unaware that it had any influence on the alt right. Well, obviously had some influence on Bronze Age Pervert, but the big three are the popularisers of dissident science, and Peat is off to one side selling craziness to crazies.
Also Peat is a tanky, and the Right does not like people who remained tankies. All the tankies who had an ounce of decency in them came over to the libertarian right or something like that when the Indochinese blood bath unfolded. Anyone who remained a tankie is evil.
Can confirm that ‘peaty’ is the brand with the biggest meme energy on frog twitter and related spheres wrt to dietary health. There are many voices saying similar things, but lack the same ‘typifying’ aura.
Jack Donovan’s sources on seed oil seem to be primarily Weston A. Price Foundation, which is Sally Fallon and Mary Enig, who have been science dissidents on seed oil since the mid 1990s.
Peat is a Johnny come lately.
Today, the nutcases are making more noise, because never ending controversial stuff. But the alt right came to be anti seed oil from science dissent popularisers, not science crank noise makers. And the number one science dissent populariser on seed oil (bad) and saturated fat (good) was and is “Big Fat Surprise”.
I first found out about fats from the book, “Fats That Heal, Fats That Kill: The Complete Guide to Fats, Oils, Cholesterol and Human Health” by Udo Erasmus, 1993. This is where I first learned about cis and trans fats, saturated fats, mono-saturated fats and omega 3s and 6s, and that the Cholesterol theory was bullshit. Up until then I had been living on corn dogs! I process the information in that book, made changes, and lost 30lbs in 3 months.
This part is probably true. Frog Twitter has a long and colorful history of false idols and I doubt that trend is going to change.
They’re a channel for reactionary ideas, but one with a very low signal-to-noise ratio.
https://archive.org/details/mega-master-ray-newsletter
Small selection from above with dates, on seed oils/polyunsaturated fatty acids:
“Unsaturated fatty acids should probably be controlled in the diet… Decreasing the use of dietary unsaturated fats protects against oxidative stress.” 1976 Ray Peat
Chimpanzees developing “symptoms resulted from poisoning from the large amounts of unsaturated vegetable oil they were being fed.” 1986 Ray Peat
“Any unsaturated oil will tend to inhibit the thyroid.” 1988 Ray Peat
“Unsaturated oils have deleterious effects.” 1988 Ray Peat
“But it is very important that linoleic acid, and related oils, in the amounts recommended by Udo Erasmus, are known to cause: impaired brain development and learning; damage to skin and bones; accelerated aging and age-pigment accumulation; damage to the circulatory system; increased cancer incidence; suppressed immunity; endocrine dysfunction.” 1989 Ray Peat
“Unsaturated fats promote the release of histamine, while shortchain saturated fats, and glucose, inhibit it.” 1991 Ray Peat
During estrogen dominance “oxygen tension is relatively low, and as a result, unsaturated lipids are rapidly changed into “age pigment” or lipofuscin through lipid peroxidation.” 1991 Ray Peat
“OBESITY
Several years ago, the death of a young physician from blood clots, while she was using a linseed oil supplement, caused me to realize the urgency of getting more information on the toxicity of unsaturated oils into an easily understandable form. While I was writing my dissertation, more than 20 years ago, I saw that there was already abundant research on their toxicity, but commercial propaganda for the “health benefits” of the “good unsaturated oils” (from seeds, nuts, and fish) had caused many people to overlook their harmful effects. At that time, it was clear that they promoted cancer, heart disease, and various degenerative diseases, and even premature Agricultural research had demonstrated that they promoted obesity, and biochemists could demonstrate a specific interference with our most essential respiratory enzymes. Although I knew of experiments in which rats grew fat according to the degree of unsaturation of the fats in their diet, regardless of quantity, and grew lean in proportion to the percentage of (relatively saturated) coconut oil in their diet, again regardless of quantity, I didn’t get around to making practical use of these facts until I had spent several months reading the whole history of research on the biological effects of dietary fats.
The idea of “essential fatty acids” (sometimes called “vitamin F”) appeared in the 1930s, as a result of tests in which rats developed a skin disease on a fat-free diet, and recovered from the skin disease when fed unsaturated fats. (Other researchers at that time observed that the rats became hypermetabolic on the fat-free diet, as though they were taking thyroid hormone; it was later discovered that the unsaturated fats inhibit the secretion and transport of thyroid hormones, and block the ability of tissues to respond to them.) Shortly after the concept of “essential fatty acids” was proposed, another group recognized the rats’ disease as the typical changes produced by a vitamin B6 deficiency. They fed rats a fat-diet until the symptoms appeared, then cured the disease with a vitamin B6 supplement, without any of the supposedly essential fatty acids. The high metabolic rate of the rats, on a diet without the inhibitory oils, made them eat more, and they needed more vitamins as well as more calories. The high metabolic rate of animals fed coconut oil simply reflects the fact that coconut oil doesn’t contain a toxic amount of the anti-thyroid, anti-respiratory unsaturated fatty acids.” Ray Peat 1993
“High estrogen during pregnancy causes fetal brain damage and retardation. Too much unsaturated vegetable oil during pregnancy has the same effect. Both of these interfere with energy production: wasting oxygen, altering the effects of thyroid hormones, etc.” Ray Peat 1993
There is evidence that “unsaturated oils (via prostaglandins and a variety of other hormonal derangements) and estrogen (via promotion of prolactin) have a role in causing osteoporosis.” 1994 Ray Peat
“A vitamin E deficiency increases oxygen consumption, and too much unsaturated fat has the same effect… The thyroid hormone, which governs respiration, is suppressed by estrogen, and by unsaturated fats. The wasteful metabolism of estrogen dominance tends to use up glucose, and is likely to activate the stress hormones, including cortisol. The main features of aging can be produced directly by administering excessive amounts of cortisol… Ultraviolet light interacts with unsaturated fats in the skin to accelerate aging and to produce cancer… Avoiding excessive intake of unsaturated fatty acids will decrease the damage caused by unavoidable stress.” Ray Peat 1994
Whole chapter titled “Unsaturated oils: toxic and estrogenic” Ray Peat 1997
“Unsaturated fats react with excess iron as it accumulates leading to stress during gestation and during aging… It’s interesting that one of the long-chain highly unsaturated fatty acids, DHA (docosahexaenoic acid), also increases the light sensitivity of the retina… When the mother has been given iron supplements during pregnancy, along with unsaturated oils in the diet, the baby is likely to be born with a vitamin E deficiency and suppressed thyroid function, increasing the probability that it will be jaundiced.” Ray Peat 2002
Highly consistent on this point since 1976 and carried on in the same vein on his website until his death. Definitely no Johnny-come-lately to the seed oil topic. The idea that he is reacting to Saladino, Teicholz, or research from 1996 is completely untenable in light of these quotes.
I stand corrected
I have a hard time believing anyone understands what Ray Peat writes well enough to evaluate it. I am almost dubious that he does. Looking at one random article https://raypeat.com/articles/articles/fatigue-aging-recuperation.shtml it begins with an interesting idea but there is literally no way I can make any headway of the vast bulk of it. Is there anyone here who actually can? There is no way all the chuds into him can. It seems like they are suckers for quirky personalities who have a couple good lines and are otherwise gobbledygook (Jordan Peterson, Nietzsche)
Also does he talk about heavy squats and deadlifts? I am suspicious of any health expert who doesn’t
This article is a random collection of true scientific facts, which fail to add up to anything meaningful or point to anything in particular. I am already long familiar with all the facts he learnedly references, and conclude he is learnedly referencing to impress, rather than to provide evidence or argument for anything.
In short, the article you link to is bullshit.
I could easily spray forth a whole lot of learned references to dazzle the easily overawed. I am not interested in what the easily overawed think, and do not care whether I impress them or not. Notice that in the previous article “We shall fill the stars and subdue them”, I made the science as folksy and ordinary as it could be. Irrelevant and distracting technicalities are a sign that someone wants to impress, but has nothing to say.
I would guess he’s on Ozempic, just like the rest of the celeb class. Also holds for the models, by the way. The plus size model is literally dwindling away, thank the Lord.
That’s the way to bet. What would a boomer do? Take health-destroying quick-fix pills pushed by the media and the medical establishment.
I have family members on these drugs. Whatever negative side effects there are, are vastly outweighed by the positive effects of weight loss. It’s a net good. They work by tuning digestive metabolism down which reduces appetite. Our environment constantly stimulates the appetite, hence Jim’s prescription, which I agree with, of habituating to fewer meals with a high proportion of saturated fat. This trains the brain, the ultimate metabolic regulator, to tune the appetite lower, at the same time it trains you behaviorally to avoid the excessive eating caused by too many easy aquired and quickly digested foods in the environment.
The better more permanent fix is the behavior change, however this is incredibly hard to do when you have a large and growing list of other obligtions saturating your ability to direct behavioral change. Taking a drug that forces you into this change without expending a limited pool of attention and willpower is not a bad option given the circumstance.
Yes, almost anything is better for your health than obesity. Fasting works great but not many Americans live a lifestyle that can support that level of stress.
There are three things that worry me about the GLP-1s:
1) After you start, you’re supposed to stay on them for life.
2) You lose a lot of fat, but you also lose a huge amount of lean body mass.
3) The kakistocracy is promoting them like mad.
All true but not so alarming in context. As far as I can tell, weight rebound is not as severe as that experienced from stimulant withdrawal. It’s a return to baseline, which happens all the same with the diet and exercise approach.
LBM is a sort of misleading term, because its everything that is not pure adipose tissue. If you take a diuretic you piss out a lot of LBM. We are concerned about muscle tissue, heart tissue, etc. Does not appear to cause real tissue loss, at least not moreso than the diet but no exercise approach to weightloss. You do lose some muscle, but this is normal when you fall away from obesity. Gut check, looking at the many people who went from obese to normal BMI, they do not look particularly emaciated. They look like any other skinnyfat body, any other person that doesn’t overeat nor exercise.
I have no real explanation for the third flag. Perhaps money to be made is enough of an incentive. Perhaps the RFK Jr. effect, its cool to hate Big Company that is Making Us Fat, the left is shedding the worship of this particular form of biodegeneracy in to focus on other more effective leftisms.
Its possible he is on Ozempic, its also possible that the rumor news story he sort of agreed to go on a health regimen urged by RFK Jr (who was backed by Melania and probably his sons on wanting him to do this) and its been working.
Trump has the curious effect that all the women around him get plastic surgery, so him using ozempic wouldn’t be the strangest thing.
It is clear that Trump 2.0 has heard a lot more alt right thought than Trump 1.0. Losing weight through diet and exercise is a substantial part of alt right thought. Sneering at ozempic is also a part of alt right thought. Though it works, and the side effects of Ozempic are less than the side effects of being fat.
He is not an alt righter. We identify him as another Cromwell and Napoleon, a leftist who want leftism rolled back to the saner 1980s leftism, and it seems to me he identifies as Cromwell and Napoleon, rather than Monck. The time is not yet ready for Monck. Now is Cromwell time. But he knows how we see him, and the time. So probably knows what we think about fitness and weight loss.
[*arbitrarily deleted because you have not attempted to pass the shill test described in the moderation policy.*]
Comments by people whose email addresses are not white listed are likely to be arbitrarily and silently deleted. Please comply with the moderation policy and get white listed.
Losing the pudge seems like an easy edge for any politician on the right. For votes from women as well as from men, just for different reasons. I wish Vance would, if he is indeed next in line. Cruz was never a contender, but I knew he had really given up when he started looking like Steven Seagal’s final form.
It seems like it should be standard advice from political consultants. Maybe the people giving advice are even fatter so don’t go there, or maybe the advice is given and we’d have even more obese politicians without it. But I can’t shake the feeling it’s the electoral equivalent of, not a hundred or a twenty, but at least a one and maybe a five dollar bill lying on the sidewalk.
War is the supreme IQ test.
Personally I don’t care who goes to war with whom, because it has no effect on my grandchildren, but war between the Fifty-one United States and Iran would be an interesting experiment. Nations with gay parades can’t win wars because they lack manliness, but nations with high inflation can’t win wars either because they lack strong, competent leadership.
Defeating foreign enemies is hard; defeating inflation is easy. Suspend all payment on the national debt, print just enough money to pay the men with guns, and tell everyone else to get a fucking job.
Iran is already waging war by proxy, and losing badly. Assad fled into exile, Hezbollah got decimated by exploding pagers, and Hamas is about to be wiped out to the last crying baby.
Time to crush HR too.
I swear. If Trump wants to grow the economy, just ban HR somehow.
Imagine 100,000 companies hiring who they actually need, and cutting loose their dead wood, with no homos, Karens or Indians in the way.
It’ll be like winning a war. Because well, it will be.
“…and also, HR Delenda Est.”
Hegseth, after yielding on barring women from combat jobs in the military outright, now moving to impose sex-neutral fitness standards for combat MOS’s. Which if it sticks should have much the same effect.
The identical policy was a step on the slippery slope on the way down, but with a different wind in the sails I’m somewhat optimistic.
Thinking about the ridiculous rulings from the judges:
Trump is probably holding off on explicit Andrew Jacksoning because he’s still putting more people into key positions – both in positions of authority, and at the pointy end of the spear. Recall that military recruiting spiked upward after he won the election. This would explain why he’s not Jacksoning even on politically favorable cases like judges saying, “The Secretary of the Treasury is not allowed to work at the Treasury” and “You’re not allowed to deport criminal illegal aliens.”
But presumably the Left has also figured this out, and this may be why the rulings are so blatantly unreasonable: They’re trying to provoke him into Jacksoning sooner rather than later, before he gets more key pieces into place.
Of course the real, operative reason leftists act like assholes is that they’re assholes. But it is still interesting to war-game the situation from the point of view of sane leftists at the top, if there still are any sane leftists remaining at the top.
Man I don’t know. Are they really thinking “We don’t want Weimar results, so we need to Weimar even harder”?
Explain? Was there a problem with judges in the Weimar Republic?
Weimar was a massive attack on reproductive sexuality (straight sexuality with stable relationships) and a massive giveaway of paper money to the politically well connected, and was incapable of acting like a state, act unitary. And as a result, destroyed its economy and went broke.
So Biden America was Weimar — going broke fast.
But the judiciary issuing lawless national injunctions overruling the executive is a crisis peculiar to the American constitution. Three branches — which were not coequal. Original design was that congress was theoretically supreme, but the founders knew it was incapable of exercising that supremacy so created a strong executive, and an independent judiciary, intended to be the least powerful branch. Naturally it proceeded to claim equality, and exercise supremacy. And we now have umpteen very minor judges exercising executive power. Which is not what happened in Weimar.
The FDR presidency snatched Kingly powers, but just like the Sun King of France, the power was too great for one man to hold onto, and it slid away into an unaccountable and unidentifiable sea of bureaucrats. Which parallels what happened with the Kaiser — whose power slid away into the bureaucracy, and Weimar was unable to gather it back into cohesion.
To fix the mess, you need a sovereign who is the supreme judge, source of law, and the fount of all honors mortal and divine. And is actually competent to usefully use such dangerously awesome power, of which men there has been a short supply.
The bureaucrats will shit test him, seeing how much they can get away with. That’s what they always do. The King needs to be able to – literally – behead those that try it, and to actually do it frequently.
One of the judges, the RI one, Judge McConnell has issued ruling after ruling trying to get FEMA money flowing for illegal immigrants, and so far none of the plaintiffs have seen a check.
He’s about had it, and he’s issued yet another ruling:
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.rid.58912/gov.uscourts.rid.58912.175.0_4.pdf
Im guessing this ruling wont get any checks written any more than the last three or four rulings.
Agree, they are clearly not doing a full Andrew Jackson, but it appears they are trying to do a soft AJ if SCOTUS gives them cover for it, but ready to go full AJ if needed.
In a way, the Supreme Court is in the same position that Jim’s overburdened sovereign is in the comment before yours: The sovereign has a problem of power dispersed among too many bureaucrats to be manageable. The Supreme Court has too many judges below it to be manageable. There are too many insane judges who are willing to issue any ruling with any justification; the Supreme Court can’t swat them all down. Or it can’t do so quickly enough to solve the problem.
No, it’s not that there are too many judges below the supreme court. The problem is that they can’t be removed no matter what they did.
“North Korean officials in Nampo are forcing unmarried women over 28 into arranged marriages, declaring that remaining single is a “non-socialist act” that shirks patriotic duty.”
here
they have nukes so it will stick, but it is amazing that we will see an example of jim australia solution theory of shot gun marriage in our life time.
now to see how the TFR going to be in the next 5 to 10 years. current TFR at 1.79.
if the theory is right we should see sudden increase in the next few years -assuming the DPRK are serious which knowing them they don’t play around -.
if TFR reach 5+ in the next 10 years , the implications are huge.
Best Corea wins again.
At last, my prediction is coming true. Governments will give up on incentives and just force women to make babies.
Circa 2030, when the last pockets of Ukrainian resistance are crushed and annexed, Russia will have millions of war invalids, millions of unmarried childless women, and millions fewer babies than it needs to fight the next war. Whatever will they do?
We’ve been smelling it around the corner for years now. Both Handmaid’s Tale and Max Max Fury Road were plausibly-deniable fantasies around forced concubinal reproduction.
We’ll know that shit’s really real when roasties start defecting to North Korea for the babies, like they were (and are?) to ISIS.
But seriously folks, if Best Korea pulls this shit off, the shrews at Slate.com will NOT be able to shut up abou tit, and will start sneaking over there to shit-test Emperor Kim themselves, so that they can FINALLY lose for once.
This shit makes me so furious.
Every stupid fucking whore I see walking around I have involuntary daydreams of smashing her soyjack father’s face in with a ball-peen hammer. Why do we need King Donald to force this at gunpoint, you obviously had testicles at one point or you couldn’t have had children. Men should be chomping at the bit to have rights over their family, instead they whine and cry about the most inane fucking shit.
The Spanish kings gathered loyal warriors and taxpayers by giving them property rights in their wives and the especially talented got to manage land. You couldn’t do that in America, the men are no longer men. You have to get the 0.001% men to force the rest at gunpoint to stop being obese waddling eunuchs. If the Norks offered this deal to the south and chinese and russians, they would be the global superpower in a single generation.
The entire reason we have a church, the reason for the pastors getting fed, was to teach the good life to the people and help the natural NPCs. Instead the soyjack pastors wring their hands and lament no one marrying the fat single mommies who did no wrong, and take glownigger money to replace the people they’re supposed to be helping with voodoo haitians.
At some point this will be fixed, probably rather soon, and I will not stop hating all these masses of animated shit. Hate has seeped into the very marrow of my bones. I will die, and you can saw my femur open to analyze what a life of hate and disgust does to shape the calcium deposits.
>you obviously had testicles at one point
>Men should be chomping at the bit to have rights over their family, instead they whine and cry about the most inane fucking shit.
Implying testicles and Men exists…
I once told a young male service member to form up properly in formation and stop talking. He’s response to me was that I was being mean and condescending. The younger guys are much more sensitive than older generations were at that age. The women regularly bitch and complain that the “men” don’t have a thick skin and are easily offended.
I really don’t want to be a doomer about this, and I believe there is good reason to be optimistic, but at times I find myself despairing at the state we find ourselves in.
It’s going to take some serious balls on a select elite of men at the top to force the issue. Communist states in the process of reform may very well have an easier time restoring masculine energy than democratic societies because all such states that exist today only do so having gone through a ‘Stalin’ moment in reaction to infinite leftism. Of course backsliding into infinite leftism is always a possibility as Xi appears to be doing, but at that point it’s a top down choice rather than democratic fate.
How dare you think their little princess doesn’t have the right to be a giant whore? You’re not a real man! You should be kissing the ground she walks on! That’s what a real man does!
They’ll even threaten to shoot you for stating otherwise.
You’re completely misreading this. They do not desire it to be different, but lack the balls to change it, they want it to be this way and think that saying so makes them real men.
Real men marry the fat, old single mom and like it!
Real men should die for globohomo! Not them, ofc, they are too old for the military, but they’ll gladly give you away to the gestapo and think themselves real patriots for it.
Nah. That is what people are supposed to think. Observed behavior is that they do not think that in real life.
By “that”, what specifically are you referring to, and by what observations are you basing this on?
My observations show parents extremely proud to send their daughters off to whore school, encouraging them to join the police or marines if daddy was a tough guy without any sons, and repeating the mantra that kids are trouble you’re better off as a DINK hyuckhyuck. That’s the parents. The guys whom are just now getting married or looking to, have fear in their eyes when discussing anything serious about male female relations. They can joke about bad behavior out of women, but they cannot act on it, are terrified to act on it, are in a state of learned helplessness such that they cannot even consciously think of acting on it.
We really do need an explicit, no room for any misconception, top down implementation of patriarchy. At gunpoint. I don’t see the normies shaking this off otherwise.
“North Korean officials in Nampo are forcing unmarried women over 28 into arranged marriages, declaring that remaining single is a “non-socialist act” that shirks patriotic duty.”
Wow.
Peds Gonna Die
https://x.com/nofiltersnick/status/1875404167222575147
Fags and Aborters and Adulterers and Murderers too.
Old Laws Great Again
On moderation for implying the gender neutral, thought crime evading enemy word “pedophile”. The actually meaningful word is “pederast” The difference between “pedeophile” and “pederast” is the difference between our race and civilisation surviving, and going extinct for lack of sons.
Corrupt Supreme Court
https://www.kunstler.com/p/you-wouldnt-want-to-be-him-on-that
Roll `em.
white listing this email address, because the link is to a blog that seems thought crime adjacent. But you seem to be using a different fake email address and different fake name for every comment and different name for every comment.
So all your other comments are likely to be silently deleted or snarkily edited, as per the moderation policy.
By using a different fake name and fake email address for every comment, you are making too much work for me. You do not appear to be a shill, but you are doing what shills do, so your comments are likely to bve silently deleted with all the others.
https://x.com/EndWokeness/status/1909381987413999787
Supreme Court rules Trump has the authoritah to use the Alien Enemies Act against illegals. Judge Boasberg has a sad.
Note that we have been getting a five four judicial majority, with the four of nine minority all in on Brazil style Judicial dictatorship.
We have been repeatedly one judge from the court ruling that any court in the land can overrule the executive on any matter without any pretence of a hearing or due process, subject only to appeal to a higher court.
Had they gotten away with that, Brazil style gag orders forbidding anyone anywhere to disagree would have immediately followed, followed by Brazil style judicial election rigging.
And the rulings are always narrow in scope. The message is clear: “we’ll allow you to assert executive power, this one time, on this specific issue, but may transfer your executive power over to any kangaroo court judge in the future if we are dissatisfied.”
It’s brinksmanship thinly disguised as civility. Despite these cases breaking “our way”, nominally, the actual mechanics by which they are playing out can only lead to continued escalation of the power struggle.
It is judicial brinkmaship. Trump is soft jackoning, with transparently silly claims he is pro forma complying with transparently outrageous and flagrantly illegal and unconstitutional TROs, the supreme court is trying to be a soft Brazil dictatorship which permits the mere executive to do this one thing this one time.
Sooner or later, one side has to kill or imprison the other side. If Trump does not want to be shot again, he is going to have to shoot them. Sooner or later, a struggle over sovereign authority is going to be decisively resolved, one way or the other way. If the losing side is unusually lucky, they get exiled or imprisoned, but usually, they die. Or enough of them die that the remainder quiet down.
This conflict will escalate until resolved. If Trump does not want be Epsteined, he needs to shoot some judges.
By the way, Germany has declared war on Russia. Again. Like Hitler declaring war on America, they think it is just a dramatic gesture with no consequences. Everyone thinks they can do this stuff, and nothing will happen because nothing is real. But there is power and money at stake, real violence is happening, real people are dying, and the people in power are oblivious to prospect of a drone coming in their windows. The wars their symbols create are far away, and could never come home to them, they think.
No one seems to have noticed, “Hey, just one more noisy symbol among so many others.”
Something about it reminds me of the old Soviet refrain, “we pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us.”
They pretend to have authority, we pretend to comply. They pretend to clarify, we pretend to understand. Pretenses upon pretenses, lies upon lies. Everyone knows the other side is telling outrageous lies, and responds with even more outrageous lies. Nothing about the process is real or authentic.
What can’t continue, won’t continue, and even if violence was not on the table (though violence is always on the table when it comes to sovereign authority), the internal contradictions of a system where everyone lies will eventually tear that system apart.
We are governed by people who think that reality is not real, that existence does not exist. They are likely to get a reminder.
A lot of people are dying far away, as a result of their struggle for power far away. Now they are struggling for power here.
This really reminds me of Jared Diamond’s book “Collapse”. It was supposed to be a sciencey Gaia Worship Manifesto, but read it through a Jimmian lens and it’s about how there’s always a way to keep climbing the status ladder by “playing pretend” better than anyone else and against all “factual demand”, right up until the very end when GNON saunters in through your busted front door and rapes you to death.
Ancient Rome still had a nice neighborhood, right up until — heck, make that “even as” — the Visigoths came in and started looted the place. Look at all the “no go” neighborhoods out there, all funded by the surrounding white victim class, and how the fuck is that any different? And yet, even WHILE all this is going on, you can still edge into the fancy white neighborhoods by waving the “correct” bullshit flags and chanting the “correct” bullshit lies more sincerely than the competition.
(God I hate people sometimes.)
The fancy white neighbourhoods in the blue states are getting overrun by crime.
Well technically-ackshully, Trump could just give up tomorrow and let the judges have everything forever. Or is your point that even if he tried that, they’d still Epstein his ass (and his kids and Elon and Elon’s kids) eventually anyway?
I’m STILL not processing how crazy 2020-2021 was. Still. Them painting “BLACK LIVES MATTER” across DC so you could see it from space, breaking and burning all that stuff, about to add DC and Puerto Rico as states=Senators, and all that. I don’t just have normalcy bias about the future, but even about the recent PAST. It’s embarrassing!
The enemy is not agreement capable. Surrender is suicide.