War and Covid

Russian invasion of Ukraine caused an immediate relaxation of the enforcement of Covid worship.

Russian annexation of portions of the Ukraine caused immediate abandonment of enforcement of the jab on international travellers. The signs were still up, the announcements were still coming over the loudspeakers, but no one checked my jab status. At one border I was theoretically tested for infection, but not in fact tested.

This is prep for World War III, as the quiet disappearance of feminism in the Anglo world when Hitler was elected in Germany was preparation for World War II.

When the Soviet Union fell, we got a unipolar world, but the Global American Empire saw itself as a benevolent hegemon that relied on soft power rather than hard power, a self image that was not entirely true, but had substantial elements of truth. The US had immense soft power, and the Soviet Union fell largely because of that soft power.

But the soft power of the US rested on stuff like the Star Wars movies, the first Indiana Jones movie, the Disney Princess movies, jeans, rock and roll, Marvel Comics, and such.

As this soft power was applied increasingly forcefully at the expense of art, entertainment, and story, the Global American Empire came to rely increasingly on direct violence, notably the genocide in the Congo and the destruction of Libya.

The Global American Empire sponsored coups and “revolutions” all over the world, often attaining a bloodless victory, but the bloodlessness of its victories relied on fear – relied on the fact that resistance was apt to be extremely bloody, as in Syria, the Congo, and Libya.

And then the capacity to overthrow regimes, after running into ever more bloody head winds, came unstuck after the Global American Empire installation of a Jewish International Globalist regime in the Ukraine, a regime that, it rapidly became apparent, hates Ukrainians. Since the coup and color revolution in the Ukraine, all color revolutions and Global American Empire coups have failed.

What made that capability come unstuck was that if the regime or the people resisted the coup or the revolution, Russia was likely to assist them. So it was no longer the case that attempted resistance to US regime change would result in terrible and bloody failure.

The Global American Empire therefore even more vigorously sought regime change in Russia. At the same time its military incapacity was becoming increasingly obvious in Afghanistan.

The Global American Empire intended a low level forever war on Russia’s borders, notably in the Ukraine. Russia got sick of this, and went to high level warfare, seeking quick victory. It failed to attain the quick victory, and found itself in a high level war of attrition.

The Global American Empire switched its strategy to high level forever war of attrition. Since official GDP figures showed Global American Empire GDP enormously higher than Russian GDP, they figured that Russia would be rapidly exhausted by the cost of war. They would fight a war of attrition in the Ukraine, and higher GDP would mean the ukes would have much more artillery, much more rockets, much more shells. In war of attrition, the grunts soak up enemy artillery to protect their side’s artillery, and the victor is the one that wins the artillery duels.

This did not work out. Russia seems to be shooting off a lot more shells, and deploying a lot more artillery than the Ukraine, while sustaining the war of attrition is rapidly exhausting Global American Empire military stockpiles. I conclude Global American Empire GDP data is fake and gay, and they have been drinking their own koolaide.

Covid is a bioweapon created to terrorize the subject peoples of the Global American Empire. The intent was that people would gladly submit to totalitarian controls, for fear that the Awesome and Mighty Covid Demon would get them.

The Awesome and Mighty Covid Demon turned out to be less awesome than his billing, and the project, while sort of successful, was running into some rough headwinds.

In 1933 when Hitler was elected, first wave feminism in the West softly and silently vanished away, and not a dog barked. Obviously a policy decision was made from on high that they needed manly men to fight wars.

This time around, it looks they have drunk so much of their koolaide that they think they do not need manly men to fight wars, but are still worried about a two front war against their internal population and an external enemy.

It is apparent that the Global American Empire is cultivating the Patriotic Front the way it cultivated the Azov brigade, probably for the same purpose – killing as many goyim as possible. This prefigures a retreat on many issues. Unfortunately free and fair elections and the restoration of the family do not seem to be on the table.

Probably free and fair elections would be on the table if a candidate was prepared to use organized violence to secure an honest election. They are worried about a two front war, and are prepared to retreat on the home front.

They have retreated on Covid. What else might they retreat on if pressed? They are cultivating and funding the Patriot Front, which is full of very good people but under the thumb of very evil people. They tolerate the memes of the Patriot Front, which were formerly thought crimes, and are still officially thought crimes “neo nazi hate group”. Unfortunately the Patriot Front is only memeing the stuff that the shills are allowed to say – they can complain about Jews, blacks, and women, but cannot point to the problems caused by Jews, blacks, sodomites, and women who push their way into the male sphere looking for a spanking that they never receive.

If someone is in the Patriot Front, that does not mean he is a shill or an entryist, but it does mean he is under the influence of shill memes and is dangerously accepting of shills and entryists.

And when I say dangerous, I mean danger of physical death, as so many members of the Azov Brigade have died for a Jewish Globalist. Holy war is coming, and failure to watch for enemy entryists will get you killed.

698 Responses to “War and Covid”

  1. Red says:

    I can’t tell if this video is staged or not but either way I’m impressed at his cool:

    https://gab.com/TrevorGoodchild/posts/109701679391538399

  2. Reziac says:

    It’s not that the American GDP data is fake and gay (other than including Services, which are a Cost, not a Product). It’s that the American GDP is too broadly distributed, so the Masters in D.C. are having trouble redirecting it to better pursue proxy war against Russia. They’ve been able to generate fake cash (to mostly distribute among themselves) but they have not convinced a skeptical America to shift all production to the “war effort”.

    Russia, being basically a few concentrations of industry and a lot of rural peasants, had no such difficulty, and was able to gear up manpower and production as required.

    We should be grateful that the average productive American thinks, “You want me to leave off making my own profit, and start making military junk to throw away in Ukraine? Are you mad?” and goes back to what he was doing, so D.C. is stuck with only the existing military contracts, therefore the “war effort” cannot easily expand to consume the entire GDP.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      Considering that ‘services’, of varying stripes, are in fact what constitutes the large majority of recorded ‘Gross Domestic Product’… pretty fake and gay.

      Intel can’t make new chips, Boeing can’t make new planes, NASA can’t make new rockets, and all of them can only buy steel from China; nothing that remains of America’s old post-war technocracy is capable of even so much as carrying on their ‘core competencies’ in times of peace, never mind rising to the occasion in a time of war.

      • Reziac says:

        Services were about 30% of GDP as now figured, last I paid attention. Nuts to include, yes.

        There’s still a lot of American industry (I was rather surprised when I saw stats, still the largest industrial base in the world), but the problem is most of it goes for export, so the rest of the world gets the benefit and we import Chinese junk. The big companies that sent all their manufacturing overseas can no longer make their own product, but that’s not the case with the smaller and local companies.

        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          And under what definition is the FIRE economy falling under in this scheme?

          The whig theocracy worked hard to create a totally atomized populace totally powerless to do anything to stop them, and this is now just reaping of what they sowed. There’s simply no assabiyah for any kind of world war style ‘retooling of industry’ like this to become possible – and to the extent such a thing does become possible, it is necessarily entangled with and would entail an end of that whig theocracy.

    • jim says:

      &gt It’s not that the American GDP data is fake and gay (other than including Services, which are a Cost, not a Product). It’s that the American GDP is too broadly distributed,

      Been to China, which supposedly has lower GDP than America. Just walking around, obvious that American GDP data is fake and gay.

      • c4ssidy says:

        I’ve been going between west and eastern Europe. While people may attribute the clean streets and low crime to the lack of diversity, there also seems to be a significantly better embrace of technology in the east, faster data connections, more contactless payments and so on, like everything is being built and improved faster and everything is working, even though these places are supposed to have half our GDP and salaries. I had a similar experience in St Petersburg.

        I know that energy consumption has been brought up here already, but how about rate of building construction? According to one 4chan poster, the amount of construction in square foot per year happening in St Petersburg (not even the capital) was something like 50% higher than Berlin. I am not sure where to check this claim, though someone here might

        • jim says:

          Moscow skyline seems to be changing pretty fast. New buildings are real GDP. New workarounds for new building regulations are not.

  3. Mister Grumpus says:

    “JUST IN – Pentagon drops COVID vaccine mandate for troops.”
    –@disclosetv, Jan 11 2022

    Fuck can you call them or can you call them?

    I have simply no excuse for being amazed right now.

  4. Pax Imperialis says:

    The liberal American elite. There is nothing glamorous about them, there are no debutante balls, there are no prim and proper social dining, or ethical values based fraternity building. Its drugs and whoring. Bard College is a founding member of the Open Society University Network and received a $100 million gift from Soros in 2020. It used to be an Episcopal parish school.
    https://youtu.be/FxBi5U_ocII?t=170
    to 6:55

    Bipartisan group of congressmen crowned Rev Sun Myung Moon as King of America in 2004. Unification Church created the Washington Times newspaper in the 80s and reportedly Reagan was a daily reader. High levels of influence for only 3 million members world wide and 50,000 in America proper. Wacky shit. Goes to show that high levels of cooperation is more important than pure numbers.
    https://youtu.be/FxBi5U_ocII?t=2050
    to 40:00

  5. Trump 2024 says:

    In which Anton discusses various possible nuclear scenarios in reference to historical analogies:

    https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/nuclear-autumn/

    My favorite part of the essay came under the “Can We Survive?” subhead, where Anton discusses the Kahn v Sagan hypotheses of what global nuclear war would mean for humanity. The white pill is that if you’re not in a megapolis CBD or on a military base on that day you’ll probably be okay. The black pill is that Ann3 Appl3baum is also privy to this information:

    Appl3baum, “Fear of Nuclear War Has Warped the West’s Ukraine Strategy, ” The Atlant1c, Nov 22.

  6. Kunning Druegger says:

    First off… Covfefe, he back. It’s like seeing a brother after years apart. Miss you, dude.

    Second, let’s break down his link, seeing as the Fight Discussion that will not die has… not died lol.

    Here’s the video:
    https://twitter.com/UnnecRoughness/status/1363848125920784384

    00:58 duration

    00:01- Mr Chadley Footbalson looking pretty suave, ego is inflated, ready to whip it out and slap it down. Pothead MMA has a bloody nose and a look I have personally come to be rather wary of, the “Oh, so that’s how it’s going to be” look. (I have neither time nor the energy to go through and tease out the dialogue, so we’re just going off of body language and actions) Over the next ten seconds, Chadley and his boyfriend do the big posture, seemingly quite confident they can take the pothead and his sparring partner (or butler, I don’t follow MMA culture).

    00:10- Chadley’s boyfriend makes the first (second?) move with a pretty solid shove. This is posturing as well, it’s a test to see what the response will be, not a move in a fight. Pothead MMA does a little posturing of his own; he seems to notice his bloody nose for the first time, observes what’s outside that should stay inside with a smile, woman slaps Chadley with a left (which completely wrongfoots Chadley) then starts jabbing with his right. Pothead MMA sticks with his right, using his left hand to stabilize/balance. That is smart, given the confined space and the size of Chadley, and he needs to start doing damage ASAP to level the playing field. If you look closely, Chadley doesn’t seem hurt, just kind of surprised. If Pothead MMA jabbed my like that, I’d be booking reservations for a return to consciousness next Tuesday. Chadley is in the business of taking abuse to his head, so it’s not surprising that he doesn’t collapse or even recoil really. Pothead MMA gets three jabs on target before Chadley figures out he’s in trouble and pulls MMA in close to stop the abuse while he retreats. Chadley’s boyfriend is super loyal (footballers and faggots always look at their QB in times of distress) and attempts to interfere, only to get head locked by Pothead MMA’s butler. He never recovers from this act of wanton retardation, and is eventually slammed into a wall and the floor in quick succession down the road. It must be stated that Chadley’s boyfriend spares Chadley from a quicker defeat, as Pothead MMA nearly annihilates Chadley with some sort of martial arts move only to have the boyfriend spoil the brutal slam.

    00:18- Chadley is now on the ground, and Pothead MMA is about to demonstrate there might be just a *tiny* bit of utility to MMA training, however contrived and “dancey” it may appear. Pothead MMA rides Chadley like a fat hooker, mercilessly pounding the football star while keeping good body position by locking his legs around Chadley’s waist. Chadley’s boyfriend tries to steal the spotlight like the power-bottom he is, but when we return to our regularly scheduled program, Pothead MMA is still on top, still in position, and still pounding away at Chadleys face and head, Chadley takes a pounding just as well as his boyfriend, bearing up just like his Mom did that one time, but Pothead MMA is relentless, and given that he’s been doing stuf *very similar to this* for ~10 years, he forestalls any attempt by Chadley to change the dynamics.

    00:24- Pothead MMA goes for a choke of some kind, and Chadley pours his soul inot picking up their combined weight from the ground while slowly being asphyxiated. Pothead MMA takes opportunities to continue punching Chadley in the fucking face, which may or may not be a “move” in martial arts. The butler and the boyfriend are dancing or some shit, and Chadley final gets an opportunity when a rogue catamite distracts Pothead MMA for a brief moment. Chadley uses this unexpected gift to somehow get himself into an even worse situation, as Pothead MMA is now doing what is purported to be a “rear naked choke” witch sounds like a Karate move that David Carradine might have been familiar with. This gives Chadley an opening to “go after the eyes” or some other “illegal attack,” but he only manages to land the equivalent of a few weak backhands before Pothead MMA abandons the choke and locks up the arm that’s swinging at his face

    00:41- the audience is treating this like a traditional fight and thinks Pothead MMA is going to let the guy up if he taps, so they start counting down like it’s boxing? The butler and the boyfriend make a surprise appearance at the end with the boyfriend getting slammed into the wall and the floor and going limp, so probably atypical end to his night. This surprise entry gives Chadley another chance at redemption, and he starts swinging at Pothead MMA’s face, definately connecting more this time, but it is obviously a desperation play, which is swiftly rewarded by Pothead MMA doing some more “play fighting” by mounting his chest and… well, we have to assume this is where he removes Chadley’s eye with an oyster fork or something because the footage cuts out.

    This is one example, but it has two distinct fights in it. All four participants are not slouches. They all seem to train at something. Football at a collegiate level requires significant endurance as well as high pain tolerance. The size of each combatant appears to go Chadley, his boyfriend, the butler, and Pothead MMA. Pothead MMA and his butler win hands down, though I wonder if the butler got lucky that Chadley’s boyfriend tried to get involved in the other fight instead of playing the man (as opposed to the ball, which is an actual football reference but still sounds like sodomite entendre). If we make the assumption that the butler is also MMA, or MMA adjacent, this is pretty clear evidence that applied martial arts moves are quite useful in an actual fight.

    Things to consider: very tight spaces; lots of other dudes that could have jumped in, no weapons seem to be present, egress didn’t seem to be a physical or social option for any of the participants. Notice sink guy, the urinal stooges, and the phone fags. Notice that the throws were effective and ineffective, and that they influenced the other fights in unexpected ways. Notice that it was traditional fisticuffs that did the net damage, and that the chokes and holds, while effective, were not fight enders, though this may be due to environment and external factors.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      The ben askren look-alike hit a pretty sweet polish throw there (ko soto gake/gari and ura nage for any weebs in the audience).

      Attempting to go for a schoolboy headlock is one of the most common instinctive reactions there is for uninitiated plebs in a tangle, which gives the other party this slam practically for free.

      Human biomechanics are naturally well developed on the front plane, and practically nonexistent on the back plane. Approaches that attack the back angle is a general principle underlying the success of one party over the other in many different grappling conditions. Moptop got his hip behind his victim’s hip, and that was all she wrote.

      • Kunning Drueger says:

        The nose wipe to girly slap to right hook seemed almost ritualistic, like marking the sacrifice with his blood before dropping the hammer. I wonder if the distraction slap was something he’d talked about/thought about before, or if it was an impulse. It completely wrong footed Chadley. MMA seemed to be moving from goal to goal the whole time: “I’m going to do this then I will do this and I will do this…” Even when he gets distracted, surprised, or overpowered, he continued to move with intention.

        The first few times I watched, it seemed like MMA was getting damaged by Chadley’s hits because his eyes are wide and he scrambles to react, like he’s desperate. I now think it is because MMA is treating Chadley like a fellow fighter, not a normie, so he’s responding as fast as possible to avenues of reversal. From our perspective, we see that Chadley has no real options, but in the moment, he was ready for the fight to get dirty.

    • Zach says:

      lol

      If one indulges in fake warrior displacement activities like hockey, football or baseball, for the love of god, please know that you are not a tough guy. Anybody indulging in Man vs Man combat such as wrestling or MMA will viciously destroy anybody that does not, including gym rats.

  7. Aidan says:

    I don’t mean to reignite the fight autism (which has a long and proud tradition among men, back to George Silver’s epic spergrage in favor of the broadsword against the Italian rapier) but here is a video in which a champion powerlifter is killed by a much smaller MMA fighter.

    https://twitter.com/FightHaven/status/1443339372443709445

    In PC’s favor, the solidly landed kick is effective in dropping a huge and jacked man, who later died from his head hitting the concrete. In Jim’s favor, we note that the powerlifter was not using his strength and size to his advantage- in fact, he did not fight back at all. Probably would have gone quite differently if the lifter rushed in and laid hands on the fighter. And Jim’s points, I think, stand in situations where killer instinct is being applied.

    • notglowing says:

      Goes to show that in a real fight, anything can happen. The outcome is never set before it starts.

      The relative size of the two fighters didn’t matter, and the clearly much stronger powerlifter died, rather suddenly I might add.

      Reminds me of Dürrenmatt’s great book, Das Versprechen. The real world is not like a game of chess and you can be dead at any time.

  8. Libianus says:

    > In 1933 when Hitler was elected, first wave feminism in the West softly and silently vanished away, and not a dog barked. Obviously a policy decision was made from on high that they needed manly men to fight wars.

    What evidence do you have that feminism “silently vanished away” in 1933?

    • jim says:

      In 1932, Amelia Earhart gets a ticker tape parade and presidential medal for flying across the atlantic.

      In 1937, she dies attempting to circumnavigate the world, and no one much notices.

      To 1933, wives in movies are never spanked by their husbands. From 1933 to 1945, wives in movies are sometimes spanked, but it is shocking, unexpected and unusual. From 1945 to 1963, wives in movies and on television are sometimes spanked and it is routine, respectable, and usual. From 1963 to present, never spanked, and “I love Lucy” reruns were edited to delete the spankings. Feminism re-appears quite suddenly in 1961.

      • Pax Imperialis says:

        Few people are familiar the pre1990 movies. Very rare to find anyone who’s seen iconic movies like Gone with the Wind or Birth of a Nation.

        Easier to point out Flappers of the 20s, their near disappearance by the 40s, and the reemergence of women of loose morals by the 60s with the Hippies.

      • This seems odd. Are you saying that holiness spiraling on feminism could be rolled back by the ruling priesthood at Harvard as and when convenient? Who was the Stalin at the time who could do this? FDR?

        Or is external war a natural brake on leftism? Yes, covid demon has been rolled back now but if it is a general rule, is tranny worship being rolled back in the GAE due to the Ukraine war?

        • dave says:

          the Stalin at the time that could do this was probably actually Stalin. our state department and intelligentsia were infested with communists during the 30s and 40s. the NYT was covering for Stalins genocide in the Holdomor. We were quite content to stay out of WWII until Hitler launched Barbarossa and we were suddenly all in on war production.

          • Dharmicreality says:

            By all accounts FDR was a great admirer of Stalin. But were the Communists (uppercase C) really in so much control of the Harvard priesthood at the time that they could halt and roll back holiness spiraling on feminism? Not a rhetorical question. I am genuinely curious.

            • dave says:

              Walter Duranty – Pulitzer Prize winner, 1932, NYT, water carrier for Stalin.

              Henry Wallace, VPOTUS, 1941-1945, and notably USSR friendly, member of the FDR war cabinet. Fired for being too friendly to the USSR even for FDR, replaced with Truman. His Grandfather may have been the first no kidding Social Justice warrior (look up Social Gospel).

              Harry Dexter White – Jewish Lithuanian, Columbia, Stanford, Harvard, Served US Treasury Secretary Morgenthau. Identified Stalin agent via Venona transcripts.

              Venona proved much of this and more, but yeah USG and press was infested with communists reporting to stalin at highest levels.

              • Dharmicreality says:

                Ok, but why would these Stalin agent Communists want to roll back feminism in America? Did Stalin anticipate a European war even at the time Hitler got elected and wanted American participation in the war?

                • dave says:

                  your changing the question…

                  your first question was to cast doubts as to the group or groups that could effect a policy decision as you say here:

                  “This seems odd. Are you saying that holiness spiraling on feminism could be rolled back by the ruling priesthood at Harvard as and when convenient? Who was the Stalin at the time who could do this? FDR?”

                  when showed that there are indeed direct linkages between the US cathedral priesthood and Stalin controlled communism, you shift the question as to ok WHY would they do this… Not sure where you are going but we should probably tackle one thing at a time.

                • jim says:

                  > Ok, but why would these Stalin agent Communists want to roll back feminism in America?

                  The moment Hitler was elected, someone, possibly Stalin, possibly FDR, possibly a conclave of Harvard professors, formed the intent to take him out militarily, and back then the left was sane enough to realize feminism was in the way.

                • zero says:

                  I think Dharmics question is whether the soviets were the holiest, I have wondered about it too, FDR was a bizarre charecter, I think that there is another possibility, communists hate each other but is it possible that FDR and Stalin saw each other as allies? FDR definitely had an american version of soviet communism but he also was a political beast, there are a very few records of his political dealings in deleware that survive, but there are some and he was leading elite familys with massive banking and media control. His presidency also involved total media control (interviews with military officers after the war openly confirm washington was directly choosing scripts) and he even nationalized almost all businesses under the blue eagle. that influence in holywood and control over american corporations has been erased by whatever group fronted pbs. I think the elite back then still had better morals and the will to stomp on the snakes tail and fdr really was running things with complete authority, and using the communists to do his dirty work with stalins support. there are even audio recordings of him blackmailing senators. the evidence of how fdr governed is a bitch to find but i researched it way back when google still worked and i had to dig, also stalin was extremely disturbed by fdrs murder, I think the soviets were less in control in america then is realized because the most succesful communists were american, i have no evidence but it seems to me like the soviets were the unclean cousins to the truly hoy fellow travelers in america, and the cold war was succesful in building the MGIC as well as the total surveillence faux democratic state, the US elite just never got credit because they were more competent and left very little evidence. Jim talks about havel’s green grocer’s the blue eagle was exactly like that, blue eagle signs went up in every shop window and then one day vanished but fdr was absolutely bullying the hell out of anyone that caused him a problem and that op was completely home grown.

                • dave says:

                  Both Stalin and FDR stopped holiness spirals and deposed everyone to the left of them, whether Trotsky or Wallace. Im sure they both thought they were using and manipulating each other and maybe they were.

                • @jim, Dave,
                  Yes, I was curious as to how and why feminism was rolled back at the time and also whether it fitted with the holiness spiraling theory.

                  Makes sense that FDR and/or Stalin saw Hitler as a threat and wanted to take him out.

                  So according to Jim, that feminism holiness spiral was at an early stage and could be rolled back with relatively milder measures than would be feasible at the present. Am I correct in my understanding?

                • jim says:

                  > that feminism holiness spiral was at an early stage and could be rolled back with relatively milder measures than would be feasible at the present. Am I correct in my understanding?

                  It could be rolled back because they pivoted from feminism to socialism, then from socialism back to niggers, then niggers plus feminism, then niggers plus feminism plus faggots, then they added Covid worship socialism to the stew. But sanctions revealed that GDP was fake and gay, so now they are backing off from Covid socialism, while escalating on the right of black people to rob and kill white people without punishment, and without resistance being permitted.

                  The leftism train can swerve in new and surprising directions, but it cannot stop. It has an accelerator and no brakes.

                • Red says:

                  > So according to Jim, that feminism holiness spiral was at an early stage and could be rolled back with relatively milder measures than would be feasible at the present. Am I correct in my understanding?

                  Feminism wasn’t at an early stage, it was already killing the birthrate in the 20s. FDR pivoted hard to socialism after 1933. The spiral always continues, but it often takes new forms. Socialism continued until 1941 and then resumed in 1945. The Republicans rolled back the worst of it in 48, by which time the holiness spirals was niggers.

                  Initially during the war FDR tried to setup war socialism, which would have gimped the US economy much like it gimped the Nazi economy. The US military ignored the war production boards and signed contracts directly with industry which rather gimped war socialism. I don’t know who told the US military they could that, but everyone just accepted and continued to pretend the war production boards mattered while ignoring their every proclamation. Harry Truman lead the war socialism faction which is probably why he was selected as VP.

                • Red says:

                  Formatting issue with the original post:

                  So according to Jim, that feminism holiness spiral was at an early stage and could be rolled back with relatively milder measures than would be feasible at the present. Am I correct in my understanding?

                  Feminism wasn’t at an early stage, it was already killing the birthrate in the 20s. FDR pivoted hard to socialism after 1933. The spiral always continues, but it often takes new forms. Socialism continued until 1941 and then resumed in 1945. The Republicans rolled back the worst of it in 48, by which time the holiness spirals was niggers.

                  Initially during the war FDR tried to setup war socialism, which would have gimped the US economy much like it gimped the Nazi economy. The US military ignored the war production boards and signed contracts directly with industry which rather gimped war socialism. I don’t know who told the US military they could that, but everyone just accepted and continued to pretend the war production boards mattered while ignoring their every proclamation. Harry Truman lead the war socialism faction which is probably why he was selected as VP.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  > It could be rolled back because they pivoted from feminism to socialism, then from socialism back to niggers, then niggers plus feminism, then niggers plus feminism plus faggots

                  Demotist rulership is about always having a pretext for something that is never exactly that something.

                  In order for your management apparatus to liquidate rogue spiralers firing outside the lines of the new Message, a pretext is necessary. In 1933, feminist spiralers could be liquidated under the pretext of being insufficiently socialist. In 2023, the pretextual real-estate short of total event horizon is running mighty short indeed.

      • Jehu says:

        The spanking thing shows that a lot of artificial control is being applied. As recently as 2015 or so, the Outlander series showed that it’s women fans go seriously gaga for spanking scenes. So there’s massive amounts of entertainment money being left ‘on the table’ by tabooing spanking of wives and half-wives. The only reasonable explanation for that phenomenon is some sort of pretty powerful central control.

        • Red says:

          Holywood is a self funded propaganda machine for the Cathedral. Because it has Cathedral backing they rob investors, lie, steal and cheat themselves into a lot of cash.

    • alf says:

      Strelkov makes fun of Retired Colonel Macgregor and dismisses him as one of the “clever plan” believers

      So much for Macgregor as a reliable source?

      • Red says:

        So far the idea that Putin is cleaver leader hasn’t proven to be true. Though again I don’t know if Roloslavskiy is a reliable source.

        I’m beginning to think that spies don’t make good rulers. Russians might want to think about making the Russian General who wins the war their Czar.

        • Fireball says:

          He is 70 and from the cold war you cant fault the man for not being Constantine.

          • Red says:

            Good people are dying from Putin’s mistakes because he’s been too soft. Maybe he’s the best Russia has to offer and it is traditional for Russian to fuckup wars for a while before they get their shit together and win.

            I will sing Putin praises to the heavens if he defeats the anti-American empire and restores the US to sanity, but given his track record, that defeat might consist of nuclear fire scouring the country with it’s purifying light. Not my preferred outcome.

            • Kunning Druegger says:

              I want to disagree, but I can’t. I think he is so much more than we could hope for, but not really up to the task. Maybe Kadyrov will take over or something, but it would be sad to see Russia have to become Muslim to survive, both for the crying shame of it and the precedent it would set.

            • Fireball says:

              Good people are always dying and many times better people than you, get use to it.

              I am not singing praises to Putin i am just saying that people are expecting too much. He had to rebuild a ruin nation and rule a pack of wolves.

      • Nikolai says:

        MacGregor is definitely a bit over optimistic on Russia, but Strelkov is a turbo doomer. Russia could liberate the entire DPR tomorrow and Strelkov would still say that the situation is hopeless and that Russia has no chance.

        He was the former defense minister of the DPR, so obviously an expert on fighting in the Donbass. You can’t outright dismiss all his complaints. But everything he says should be taken with a grain of salt.

    • jim says:

      Stormcrow tells us that attacking Bakhmut is costing both Russia and the Ukraine dearly.

      Could be, but if it is only costing the Ukraine dearly, and is efficiently exhausting Global American Empire military equipment supplies, it is a good idea.

      Allegedly, there is massive artillery inequality – Ukrainian artillery in and near Bakhmut gets blown up fairly quickly. If true, working.

      Russia recently took a tower in a small town that controls one of the approaches to Bakhmut. If that tower is still standing, there is indeed massive artillery inequality.

      • Pax Imperialis says:

        Ukraine supposedly relocated their entire offensive force organized in Zaporizhzhia meant to cut the Russians off from Kherson to Bakhmut and surrounding areas. That increased the previous 20,000 to 60,000. Meanwhile the Russians continue to mass forces in areas other than Bakhmut. Seems like it’s costing Ukraine far more.

        • jim says:

          So, the Ukrainians were planning another rapid advance, by applying concentrated force somewhere the Russians were not expecting and prepared, and this plan fell apart due to high costs in Bakhmut.

          If so, looks like Bakhmut is worth it to the Russians, even if no significant movement ensues any time soon. It is forcing the Ukraine to fight the Russians where they are, when they would much prefer to fight them where they are not.

    • Trump 2024 says:

      I’m glad you asked, because I was about to drop a post about “fellow based Ukraine War enjoyers” insinuating themselves into our circles.

      Rol0 Sl@vskiy is the shill formally known as “V1ncent L@w,” who wrote for R1chard Spencr’s altright dot com back in the day. Real name: B0gd@n 0legov1ch P0l1shchuk. Ant1fa cites P0l1shchuk as a “Kremlin shill.” Maybe he once was; maybe he is a limited hangout. What’s Spencer, who led chants of “Russia is our friend” at Charlottesville, up to these days? Promoting vaccines, President Biden, 2020 election integrity and N@TO’s war on Russia. He has divorced his Russian wife, and is starting a pagan religion. Again, maybe a limited hangout, or maybe blackmailed/accepted a better offer from the feds.

      Sl@vskiy appeared on Grug Johnson’s podcast a few months ago. His schtick is to do “fair and balanced” commentary on Russia v Ukraine, which always seems to shake out as the N@TO party line. I think Grindr Grug is operating in better faith, which is to say he has supported Ukraine for a decade, which isn’t to say he doesn’t glow, but just that his narrative on Ukraine has been consistent, in contrast to Spencer who in the space of 5 years has done a 180 on Russia.

      Sl@vskiy is an excellent writer. That’s bait. He also says a lot of BASED things about muh plight of da White man in da West. Further bait. Many such cases.

      A lot of these “Russian expert” limited hangouts run a “black pill”-style shell game. “It’s, like, so over for Putin, nooooow, oh well” doomerism. Telegram is full of these people. A lot of holdovers from the glory days of the 2015-2018 moobment. A lot of desperate guys looking to get a carrot, or not get a stick.

      Another common example is mercenary recruitment. BAP recently warned us of this in an excellent piece everyone should read: https://theamericansun.com/2022/07/29/bap-on-the-abuse-of-war/

      The guys at Myth of the 20th Century went on a podcast this week with a guy who is promoting ZOG mercenary recruitment on his channel. (This is completely stupid, what are you thinking, Adam & Hans?)

      There’s a lot of this kind of promoting going around.

      Remember everyone:
      1. Russia is losing (they never tell you what Putin’s goals are).
      2. Ukraine is winning so hard that NATO is hiring schizoid frogs to do paid presentations.

      • jim says:

        Bronze age pervert presents some pretty good evidence that state or quasi state elements have been funding elements of the alt right.

        Or, as I say, shills and entryists.

        They realize that the purge of rightists from the US army has resulted in something missing, and want us to die for demon worship and globohomo as the Azov brigade are.

        • Guy says:

          what was the event that made the GAE decide it was wartime? Xi rebuffing them? Some sort of wanna-be Foundation projection in the future that they basically had to?

          • Red says:

            They’ve wanted to overthrow the Russian ever since Russian took Crimea back from the GAE coup. The fags in DC were sent to loot Ukraine and especially Crimea to the ground, while pointing a dagger at the heart of Russia but Putin fought back. Trump got in the way with his refusal to attack Russia in Syria. Once Trump was out of power they just needed to needed to line their ducks up.

            They realized it was going be an actual war rather than a color revolution after Russia started aiding various states in order to stop American soft power from overthrowing them. With color revolutions out the question, only hard power remained.

        • The Cominator says:

          Specifically the Nazi types especially the ones who make anti capitalism a point of emphasis… and the political papists what he calls fedcats.

          Both groups being promoted indictate the American elite plans to throw the Jews under the bus. The latter is more evidence the Jesuits are the ultimate villains…

          • Trump 2024 says:

            Yeah, it’s suspicious that the same people who say Biden was legitimately elected, and that the vax is safe & effective, are the same people who say our main problem is “neoliberal corporate capitalism.”

            Yep, if there’s one thing wrong with America, it’s definitely too much capitalism!

            They also promote White victimology, which is not only not open to us as a strategy, but if we were to adopt it, would make us no better than kikes and niggers.

      • Wolf says:

        What is your opinion on Anatoly Karlin? He predicted the SMO and was first optimistic on Russia’s efforts but now is as negative as Rol0 Sl@vskiy.

        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          Whenever i’ve seen something written by AKarlin it always felt like he mixed in bits of feces together with the soup he’s serving up, so i never bothered to pay much attention too him.

          There are a lot of cardboard cutouts in the ‘vaguely dissident leaning’ sphere that are like this.

        • Trump 2024 says:

          Dunno about Karlin. He could just be stupid. His poor podcasting skills would indicate that. This might sound nitpicky, but the medium is the message. If a person has a bad English accent expressed in mealy mouth, with bad audio production, whilst having a 35k audience, is it likely that person has any self-awareness, let alone any awareness of what’s going on in Eastern Ukraine?

          He was one of the pro-Russia guys who in the opening days of the war was saying, “Kiev will fall in a matter of days.” We know now in retrospect that this was a N@TO disinfo line. We know this because, for example, N@TO paid presenters talk about “the battle of Kiev” which Ukraine supposedly “won.” There was no such “battle.” No leading Russians said “Kiev will fall in three days,” but many low-info pro-Russian Westerners did. They didn’t get such talking points from the Kremlin. It’s analogous to all the election hacking disinfo in November 2020. Giuliani and Sidney whatsherface were talking about Venezuelans hacking machines, rather than what actually happened — niggers ballot stuffing.

          Fact of the matter is that very few people even now know or say what Russia’s goals are. Even the biggest pro-Russia shills. They either make it up as they go along, or deliberately obfuscate. Very few people read, and even fewer have reading comprehension. Putin makes one significant speech every month or so. Everyone should read them. Please also read Medvedev’s Telegram, going back to February ’22. Translate and read every post. Reading Putin and Medvedev will give you a better understanding of what’s happening than listening to any pundit.

          Yet we still have small brains out there, like Erik Ztriker for example, who say, “all Putin wants is the Donbass.” Now, Ztriker is stupid and a liar, but who is paying him? Could be the Kremlin, or could be N@TO for opposite reasons, for purposes of demoralization. Most likely is that Ztriker, being stupid, is just parroting N@TO disinfo, thinking it is pro-Kremlin info.

          The real Kremlin line is:

          they are taking the whole country (decommunization)
          they are doing regime change (denazification, which includes changing the ideology of the Ukrainian school system from anti-Russia to pro-Russia)
          they are kicking N@TO the fuck out of the country (demilitarization)

          The primary reason the Kremlin are doing all of this is national security. There are several other resource, geographical, social, etc. reasons for what they are doing, but these are all secondary. Their national security concerns are what makes this war existential for them, where as it is not existential for ZOG. Yes there are kikes who want their Eastern European Israel back, but there are others, such as the Claremont Jews, or Kissinger, or Mearsheimer, who whilst they wish to restrain Russia, don’t wish to destroy it.

          Note that I am talking about what “Russia/Kremlin” wants, rather than what “Evil insane cancer ridden Putler” wants. That’s another trick the Western media plays. Any reasonable Russia leader would have taken the course Putin did, given the conditions.

      • Red says:

        This makes sense. Thanks for the info.

  9. Red says:

    https://twitter.com/GraduatedBen/status/1612282966285389824?cxt=HHwWgMDUrZm0_d8sAAAA

    BRAZIL – TupiReports is reporting that some police and military forces are refusing to carry out orders to expel protesters.

    Status: Might be happening.

    • Fireball says:

      Someone is ready to do some house cleaning. Might not be the side that one would like.

      • Red says:

        Ya it stinks of another J-6/Reichstag fire. If the military actually gets involved, whole different ballgame. Though it’s likely the US bribed the military in Brazil to stand down.

        • Fireball says:

          I wouldn’t trust the military that much, i dont think they have in them to do what is needed.

          The problem is that the brazilian right is fighting a old rigged game but this affair is likely more organic than J-6 because the result of this election was way too much for half of Brazil. What i am not sure is how aware they are that their intellectual class is ready to kill them all.

    • Hesiod says:

      https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1612492776741998601

      “JUST IN – Brazil’s Bolsonaro admitted to hospital in the US.”

      Covid death count +1

      • Red says:

        Bolsonaro disappoints me. He knows he’s going to end up dead in a jail cell while commies rape and murder his children. He should have done the right thing and taken them out even if he died in the attempt.

  10. Dr. Faust says:

    “They put in 2.05 megajoules of energy and got out 3.15 megajoules. ”

    And that is the best I could find on the breakthrough in fusion which was reported last week. That is all of the specifics released about it. Searching the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory website produced nothing more specific than the yahoo articles and no papers were published. No data was given just “trust us, bro.”

    My conclusion from the information is that they’re fishing for more funds. At some point they’re going to have to release what they did to the world at large.

  11. Hesiod says:

    Looks like Jan. 6th came a couple of days late down in Brazil this year:

    https://twitter.com/sotiridi/status/1612158927101124609?s=20&t=8haOtVBJxDeu438x1L4EnA

    Conflicting reports of numbers of supporters and locations occupied but apparently there is a Happening.

    Stay thirsty for righteousness, my Brazilian frens.

    • The Cominator says:

      If they don’t start mindcrafting everyone on the other side they can find they are fools. The treatment of the January 6th showed that once you’re in for a penny you’re in for a pound… of flesh and blood.

      • Red says:

        It’s a GAE op. Congress wasn’t enough around that day. It’s far to easy for false flaggers to use mobs.

        • The Cominator says:

          Mobs of millions cannot be entirely false flags but they can easily be manipulated by false flaggers.

          • Red says:

            That’s my point. 99% of the people at J6 where just suckers. I’m sure it’s the same here.

    • Red says:

      Are they seriously running the J6 GAE op in Brazil? SMH.

    • Starman says:

      Thanks to the protesters rummaging thru the Brazilian Supreme Court, we now know that Supreme Court Justice Moraes keeps a stash of anal beads and dildos in his Supreme Court desk.

      More like Supreme Court Πούστης Moraes, amirite…🙃🤣

      • Red says:

        LOL.

        John Roberts probably keeps a young boy chained up in his office, but one can’t expect Brazil to be as progressive as the US.

      • Hesiod says:

        IIRC, Chesterton, in his book Heretics, claims that Oscar Wilde once said that beautiful sunsets are valueless because you can’t put a price on them. Chesterton observes that we do indeed pay for beautiful sunsets by not being Oscar Wilde.

        • Hesiod says:

          Errata: The book is Orthodoxy, not Heretics; and the Wilde bit is in chapter 4 “The Ethics of Elfland”.

          Can’t go wrong with Chesterton even if we admirers often do.

  12. Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMOLg_E9Fh0

    CBS puts together a #diedsuddenly greatest hits for 2022. Some spicy examples of schadenfreude there.

  13. Pax Imperialis says:

    In a burst of nostalgic desire, I dined out at Waffle House for the first time in years. What was typically $7 is now $17. As far as I can tell from online sources, the >100% price increase happened in the last two years. This is a price increase that is significantly larger than what I’ve seen in middle and higher end places.

    I’ve got a feeling, and I would appreciate feedback on this, that initial “7%” inflation of 2022 were intensely concentrated in the lower socioeconomic parts of the economy, and that price adjustments haven’t yet fully worked their way up the economic ladder. Meaning this year will be the year of middle class inflation.

    • The Cominator says:

      It will once the fed starts printing again, Pooch despite whatever way he was compromised was right that the Fed was I guess stupid enough to stop printing money despite the debt bomb making controlling money via interest rates impossible in the long term (since the government has no option but to default on debt via inflation)…

      • Karl says:

        Maybe stupidity was involved, but I assume that the bureaucrats managing the Fed know how difficult (impossible really) to resolve the monetary problems are and are first and foremost interested in passing the blame. If they stopped printing for a while they can at least claim that they tried to prevent hyperinflation.

      • Red says:

        They haven’t stopped printing, they’re just forcing the inflation onto the empire and crashing the economy to reduce demand.

        • The Cominator says:

          They have been net sucking money out for at least the past six months… they are printing government debt service but they are also quantitiative tightening… this will eventually cause something major to break and be unsustainable but they’ve gone FAR beyond what I thought they would in this.

          • zero says:

            I stopped paying attention to stocks a few years ago, I made the mistake of assuming massive underlying financial insolvency mattered, took me a long time to realize the big money was aware of the failure point and just did not care because the crash was another oppurtunity to shake down the ponzi scheme, the elite and wall street are playing by the assumption that the empire is backing financial assets because their collapse would ignite a debt bomb that would force either total nationalization or crippling poverty, I do not know if it is even possible for the financial sector and lenders to be triaged, they are so politically integrated that the american and global economy is affectively held hostage, I think the game plan is to rape the american state into benifiting the financial investor class with most of the value of monetary inflation, which was exactly the plan in weimar which got jewish bankers in hot water. I dont see how any rule or political act unwinds the boa from the kneck, It is a shame henry ford isnt alive to see his predictions come true, I wonder if america hadnt had such absurd growth in wealth if the old generation of men who saw the danger coming would have been proven right earlier. Are the elite aware of the chaos thats being sown and planning to use it for an october revolution? I dont think we see it go tits up untill the last ounce of impirial competence is squeezed out and it all explodes.

            • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

              In the early 20th century a lot of European radicals, like Evola or indeed Hitler as well, predicted that USG would not be a significant threat in case of war since its body politic was infested with seeds of degeneracy that are rotting it from the inside out. Which predictions eventually came true, but on Musk Time; they got the kind right but the degrees wrong.

              • jim says:

                > predicted that USG would not be a significant threat in case of war since its body politic was infested with seeds of degeneracy that are rotting it from the inside out.

                I would say they would have been dead on correct, had the anglosphere not done an abrupt U turn. Nazi Germany was way more feminist than America. Someone in the USA agreed with that prediction, and did something about it.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Yep. There are intimations of similar attempts wrt Russia today, but the assabiyah to make such a move possible just isn’t there anymore; it does not prevail over the prevailing trends. Which begs the interesting question of what is different between the two pictures.

                  From the 100,000 foot view, one of the first most obvious differences is demographic differences. It can be hard to overstate just how fantastically abrupt the transformation to [current year] conditions was as a result of the polygon’s large scale (re)imposition of third-worldism in the 60s. And likewise, one of the most fantastically blinkered facts about America for anyone born within the last three decades to appreciate, is that fact that, for all that there was a highly visible (en-visibled) population of imported bantus (naturally overemphasized in informational sources), the united states right up to the second war of internationalist aggression was essentially a white ethnostate with a ~90% population of europoid extraction, mostly germanic and saxon.

                  While more prescient men of the times saw the gallows being built and the noose being put around the neck, the patient had not yet been kicked into the hole, so to speak. There was yet a deep well of competence to draw from, organizational legacy between men with a natural ability to more easily cooperate with each other, if merely allowed too; which is why it worked when they were allowed too.

                  Another factor, related to this, being that for all that it might have been misplaced, there was a level of reflexive identification with the institutions and the men embodying them that could scarcely be imagined today. Anti-interventionist sentient was the most popular sentiment going in America (another memory-holed fact of the time), but once FDR succeeded in getting all the old battleships at Pearl Harbor blown up his clique managed to shame everyone else into silence.

                  Whereas today, the average zoomer frog sees gayto mercenaries getting blown up in queef and thinks ‘lol sucks to be you’. The same systematic atomization of every respect of life and society that the polygon worked so hard to wreak, now by the same stroke leaves its primary victims unmoved by its plight, the very core demographics it would need to prevail in a war in the first place.

                  Meanwhile, the average social media addicted bluecheck puts an ooocrane flag on their profile, but is also in no hurry to lift a finger anywhere near the line, nevermind their necks. And at the same rate, the average voluntary auxiliary thoughtpolicepersyn is feeling their oats when it comes getting dopamine hits from exercise of social dominance through acceleration of officially unofficial ideological goals – anyone who contradicts the imanetizing of the eschaton is canceled for being hitler; any bill cuckleys standing athwart history and yelling stop are also canceled for being hitler; and any scott alexanders who gently suggest that we might possibly potentially in some circumspect way be a slight little bit more reasonably reasonable in our reasoning for the imanetizing of the eschaton, is canceled for being hitler. What passes for middle management classes of today are herds of cats that simply won’t be herded.

                  Back when the old liberal order was ascendant, the way this would normally be done would be for a Roderick Seidenberg figure to come out of the woodwork and quietly drop a Message. This Message would be picked up by The New York Times, in a book review, or op-ed. At the same time, the Message would be making the rounds of peer-review citations in the Academy. The Message rapidly ping-pongs around the discourse without any exactly clear provenance, they all just happened to feel like this was something to talk about now. The management classes would read their News, peruse the latest Studies, and pick up the Message. Any manager in some capacity somewhere acting like they did not get the Message would get a talk from someone who got a talk from someone who got a talk from someone who was party to sending the Message.

                  This system has significantly deteriorated in later days. In the normal point of interface between top-out-of-sight and rubber-on-the-road – broadcast entertainment, journalism, academia – it is fellow members of the upper-middle management classes that are now cancelling each other too for saying anything in contradiction of the officially unofficial eschaton in order to advance position, or simply because they gleefully rejoice in tearing down others from their positions. A new Message for reversing course cannot come out, because any part of the Megaphone that attempts to communicate it gets silenced; and at the same time, the lawfare enforcement apparatii for putting the teeth to such silencing, are themselves suffering from the same dynamic; leaving the remnants of the old liberal elite deaf and dumb, increasingly cut-off from their customary methods of reaching out to the empire they notionally command.

                • Kunning Druegger says:

                  In a better world, books would be written on these two U turns (Germany and America), but as it stands, absolutely no one outside this comment section will even entertain the notion, no matter how much evidence I provide.

    • zero says:

      Just my 2 cents, I think fertilizer and energy prices have been having a massive effect on prices including futures. but there is that weird shenanegans with burning food infrastructure, not sure if a hostile actor but i think it was possibly insurance fraud, look up how many meetpacking plants in chicago were torn down, most burned and the insurance payout was taken to the bank once the writing on the capital assets future value went negative, i think people have been getting out of food because they saw the future of getting hammered on inputs, inflation, and price competition in a market with price expectations below actual cost. Have seen the same thing, cheap food is skyrocketing in price but what i normally buy hasn’t changed that significantly. not sure tho if its 4gw

    • Red says:

      I’m seeing prices are starting to drop on most middle class goods. I think it’s economy crashing and is the feds forcing inflation onto it’s vassal states. That doesn’t mean we’re seeing deflation it just means that the price adjustment for anticipated inflation turned out to be more than actual inflation.

      Food inflation is baked into the pie due to the basic inflation of inputs over the last few years. First fertilizers and transport goes up, then grain, then meat but all of this lags due to growing time. During the first part of inflation the cost of basic food items didn’t rise right away. McDonalds is a basic indicator of this with their prices remaining mostly low until about 6-9 months ago. Now McDonalds prices about double what they were in 2018.

      As far as future trends go, I have no idea.

      • notglowing says:

        McDonald’s low margin items are almost twice the price they were one and a half years ago. On the order of 90% more expensive. A year ago they were up only 20% compared to the “normal” price.

        Regular items like the Big Mac have not gone up as much.

  14. simplyconnected says:

    Just want to make a clarification on the WQ shill test that we discussed earlier.
    From the latest WQ shill testing, it looks as though “women should respect and obey their father, later their husband” works because “women should […] obey” is the shill-kryptonite part.

    The first statement we discussed (“women should not have same rights as men”) lacks sufficient kryptonite, which is what would make it work as shill test.
    The statement obviously follows from men and women being very different (forged in a different anvil for a different purpose, as Jim says), since applying the same rules to very different creatures would be extremely cruel.
    In conversation with normies, I can say “men and women are very different”, and everyone nods. They have no problem admitting it, but cannot bring themselves to draw any conclusions from it, unless the difference in rights appears to favor women.
    I suggest finding a specific right that women should not have, which would serve as shill-kryptonite. Say the right to unilaterally terminate a gestating baby’s life, blow up a marriage on a whim, accuse of rape without consequence, etc.

    • jim says:

      And now the shill test starts looking more like a catechism. Not that there is anything very wrong with that, but catechisms are for educating one’s own people, shill tests for detecting entryists.

      • Doom says:

        I got a good one that makes people squirm.

        Roosh’s old consent test.

        If a woman goes home with a man to his private residence, or allows a man into her private residence, sexual consent is implied.

        “Can’t rape your wife” is a pretty strong shill test IMO.

        • simplyconnected says:

          What you say seems to me much more effective than “men and women should have different rights” (too vague).

    • notglowing says:

      > accuse of rape without consequence

      Suggesting that women be punished for false accusations is something you can say in many places without issues. I see it all the time. It is not even wrongthink, and frankly I think it’s pretty pointless in reality.

      Women being punished for false accusations might even be more bad than good, since in almost every case I have seen of a man being cleared of lies against him, it’s because the female regret it and decided to confess. There’s a few stories like this.
      In any case the real issue is that men are assumed guilty, and it’s impossible to prove a negative.

      What’s ironic is that you will get a lot more backlash for suggesting that men should not be assumed guilty until proven innocent when it comes to rape. But even then, both of these ideas are things you can suggest without too much danger, because they are logical deductions from liberalism.
      To begin with it presupposes thinking that rape is not an anti-concept. Dead end logic.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      For any given shibboleth one will naturally in time see groups of subversives attempt to innovate legalistic rationalizations for saying the words but meaning something subversive instead. That is why shill-testing in the long term always leans more towards the underlying teleologies you try to draw out through call and response than a set creed used amongst the in-group who all have a shared language.

      Some things are harder to rationalize than others. A communist’s nominalistic profession of equality between all peoples (all things) for example, while having the obvious tactical utility of rationalizing his attacks on men higher status than himself, and peoples with greater ability to potentially to challenge his power once he has it, is also deriving substantially from his own insecurities, feelings of inferiority or despair (the existence of others of similar temperament in kind, if not degree, being a substantial part of what makes it possible; a receptive audience who will accept or support the use of such tactics). In this sense his ‘faith’ is genuine and he will pursue it to his advantage if he can but also regardless of the practical consequences, bringing themselves and anyone they can drag with them down in nihilistic self-destruction, as their conceits run afoul of Natural Law.

      A good shill testing touches the shill in the amygdala, rubbing those raw nerves; if he is truly fallen then he or the daemon possessing him will simply not be able to allow himself to accept devalidations of these innermost conceits. Any given form of rhetoric will have a certain cardinality; implications it leaves open, and implications it closes off; and a shill will simply not be able to accept implications that close the door on his conceited intention, the whole reason he is there in the first place. As it is said, it is not that they cannot lie, it is that they cannot truth. His need to rationalize a way to leave a door open for his fallen conceits is a chain of dominos that inevitably closes the doors on what is true, good, and beautiful.

    • Red says:

      At my local McChristain church one of their articles of faith is that Adam and Eve was tempted by the serpent and fell into sin.

      This is a direct contradiction of scripture:

      13 for Adam was first formed, then Eve,

      14 and Adam was not deceived, but the woman, having been deceived, into transgression came,

      They’re so desperate to make man and woman equal that they’ll lie about the most basic fundamentals of Christianity. Adam knew what the serpent was about but gave into Eve because pussy. Worse Eve having discovered she’d been deceived decided to condemn Adam to death so that she wouldn’t suffer for her sins alone. Evil behavior and the sort one always expects from a woman.

      I think it’s necessary to proclaim that women are morally, intellectually, and spiritually inferior to men. How to phrase that in a way that triggers crime think defenses and thus detect shills, I’m not entirely sure.

    • Neofugue says:

      > I suggest finding a specific right that women should not have, which would serve as shill-kryptonite.

      This mindset of thinking in empirical as opposed to moral terms is why so many shills have been “passing” the WQ test.

      When I was baptized into the Orthodox faith many years ago, I was a stupid and unwise youth who got into an argument with my former priest regarding the deleterious effect my woman priest of my childhood had on my spiritual growth. At the time, I did not know that he descended from the intelligentsia. He did not seem to understand why I thought women priests were evil, so I told him: in order for men and women to live moral lives, there must be a patriarchal order that maintains strict roles regarding men and women. Women priests are evil because any church with a woman priest will never have a virgin bride enter through its doors.

      Owing to my youth, I refused to shut up, and as a result he excommunicated me for 8 weeks for a recatechism. Eventually after a couple years later I moved to a healthier parish, and though I remain on good terms with my previous parish, my initial experience, while good for me in countless ways, was quite difficult.

      My point is, what offended my priest was not me espousing patriarchy, but phrasing it in moral terms.

      This statement is conservative: “Girls should not be allowed into the Boy Scouts because it is only fair since boys are not allowed into the Girl Scouts”

      This statement is of the shill: “Girls should not be allowed into the Boy Scouts because men and women should have separate organizations”

      This statement passes the test: “Girls should not be allowed into the Boy Scouts because putting teenage and pre-teenage girls in unsupervised close proximity to adolescent boys is immoral”

      Saying that women are morally, intellectually, and spiritually inferior to men is insufficient. Saying that people and communities who reject that women are morally, intellectually and spiritually inferior to men are themselves immoral is sufficient.

      • jim says:

        I think you have put your finger on the core thought crime that the shill can never pass.

      • Starman says:

        @Neofugue

        “This mindset of thinking in empirical as opposed to moral terms is why so many shills have been “passing” the WQ test.”

        So far, no shill has passed a “women misbehave” multiple choice Redpill on Women Question. (this raises moral hackles about what motivates a woman to misbehave).

        And definitely no shill has passed a “lolita consent” multiple choice Redpill on Women Question. (This one goes strikes straight at the core of feminism, the notion that women consent and have moral agency).

        Women misbehave Q:


        Complete the following sentence:
        Women misbehave because –
        [A] Capitalism makes them misbehave, by economically incentivizing reckless high time-reference behavior over long-term planning. The capitalist class benefits from one night stands and sterility, as it benefits from third world immigration of spendthrift cheap labor to replace frugal Whites. If it weren’t for capitali$m, women would totally be completely sinless angels.
        [B] The (((jews))) make these totally innocent angels misbehave, since the jews own the media and the entire entertainment industry from Hollywood down to the tiniest pornography studio, and use them to direct propaganda at women, telling them to fuck Blacks and lowlifes. There’s no way that pure White women desire to be on OnlyFans to whore for money. The jews forced these angels on that website.
        [C] Sorry, but this is a misleading question. Women don’t misbehave at all. All misbehavior is done by men, who are vile pigs.
        [D] Lecherous men make them misbehave, since men are ultimately responsible for all female behavior (including misbehavior), and unlike women, men have self-control and moral agency. Thus it logically follows that any female misbehavior would merely reflect bad decisions taken by irresponsible and lustful men. It is men’s fault entirely, so men must be forced to pay for every bad decision done by any random women.
        [E] They are feral, blindly following ancient instincts from prehistoric times, which instincts tell them to cruise for rape by alpha male Chads, and to resist kicking-and-screaming all attempts to restrain them from pursuing alpha male Chads. Stable monogamy has always been a way to allow each man to own a woman so each man can start a family and raise a future generation for civilization’s survival.

        Lolita Consent WQ:


        Should the AoC (Age of Consent) be raised from 16-18 to 21-25?
        [A] No, because an AoC of 16-18 is just perfect.
        [B] Yes, because that will prevent the jews from pimping out young white women as prostitutes and porn actresses. The jews are able to control our women by getting to them young, so just by waiting a few years longer before we get to have sex, we can prevent jewish corruption from reaching the impressionable minds of college-age women.
        [C] No, and in fact, there should be no AoC, certainly no AoC higher than 10. Because women cannot consciously consent. Women seek to score alpha male dick from a disturbingly young age, and are apt to succeed when they grow boobs. The solution is young marriage, shotgun marriage, and in some cases marriage-by-abduction.
        [D] Yes, because it has been scientifically established that the brain only finally stops developing around age 25 or so, and before one’s brain is fully developed, one is simply incapable of giving genuine consent to sex.
        [E] Yes, the AoC is the best tool we conservative fathers currently have to protect our daughters from predatory men. The higher the AoC, the more legal power we fathers have to stop bad men from defiling our daughters and spoiling our precious property. In fact, since women should marry at 30 or so, the AoC should be 30.

        • Pax Imperialis says:

          [C] Sorry, but this is a misleading question. Women don’t misbehave at all. All misbehavior is done by men, who are vile pigs.

          Absurdity to the point of hilarity. Do people seriously believe that outside the most deranged hardcore man hating feminists? Probably a waste of time to include because it’s so narrow and specific of a demographic that even if they are reading the options they already got triggered by [A] or [B]. Or you might want to push it to the first option [A].

          • Red says:

            [C] is the McChristain position. I’ve encountered it a lot.

            • Pax Imperialis says:

              I’m having a hard time wrapping my head around that position being common. Is this a nondenominational thing?

              What is their position on women cheating on their boyfriend/fiance/husband? Surely they see the woman’s misbehavior in that.

              • jim says:

                Cheating on their boyfriend is not a big problem with women. Rather, the problem is serial monogamy, they wander around where other men can chase them, and when someone they feel is more attractive than boyfriend shows interest, they stop fucking their boyfriend.

                Men will have a sex relationship with as many women as they can at the same time, but women tend to stop fucking one man preparatory to starting to fuck another. Sperm is cheap, eggs are dear. Thus men are polygynous, women are serially monogamous.

                In an environment of material plenty, an average woman is likely to prefer to be number fifteen on mister one in thirty’s booty call list, than to be fucking mister average. That is female immorality.

                • Pax Imperialis says:

                  > not a big problem with women

                  The size of the problem is irrelevant. I’m asking if what McChristians believe survives an edge case that shows [C], an absolute, is clearly wrong. From there one can work towards your position.

                • jim says:

                  Christianity just is not Christian if it accepts female emancipation. That is the show stopper. That the single mom who got pregnant to mister one in thirty when she was number twenty on his booty call list is the oppressed victim of an evil male.

                • jim says:

                  On the contrary, if one accepts that serial monogamy is fine, and that choosing to be number fifteen on mister one in thirty’s booty call list is fine, while fiercely denouncing polygamy, then it follows that women are virtuous, men are immoral, leading to position

                  [C] Sorry, but this is a misleading question. Women don’t misbehave at all. All misbehavior is done by men, who are vile pigs.

                  being empirically well founded and realistic.

                  There is nothing in Old Testament rejecting polygyny. There is nothing in the New Testament that says anything unkind about polygyny for the laity, but the old testament position on serial monogamy and polyandry is that sluts should be burned at the stake and gays should be stoned, and the New Testament position is that they will not inherit the Kingdom of heaven.

                  In order to reject position C while remaining in contact with reality, one has to reject serial monogamy and a woman sleeping with a man who is in no position to be a father to her children – that single moms are sluts who should be burned at the stake, not saints who should be celebrated, while being cheerfully tolerant of as much polygyny as is compatible with mate guarding and being a father to one’s children.

                • Red says:

                  @Jim said:

                  On the contrary, if one accepts that serial monogamy is fine, and that choosing to be number fifteen on mister one in thirty’s booty call list is fine, while fiercely denouncing polygamy, then it follows that women are virtuous, men are immoral, leading to position C.

                  That’s exactly what they believe. They never verbalize it but their actions prove this to be the core of what they believe.

                • jim says:

                  “Their actions” being accepting unrepentant single moms (who were usually near the bottom on mister one in thirty’s booty call list), women who have one boyfriend after another, and women who divorced or left their husbands.

                  If you think those women are fine, then position C, women are sexually virtuous, men are pigs, is empirically well founded.

                • Pax Imperialis says:

                  > Christianity just is not Christian if it accepts female emancipation.

                  Hence the deriding term McChristian. I’m not familiar with those people. Therefore I’m asking someone who is.

                  > On the contrary, if one accepts that serial monogamy is fine,

                  Christians do not accept serial monogamy in anything but the most extreme edge cases because serial monogamy outside exceptions is adultery.

                  > and that choosing to be number fifteen on mister one in thirty’s booty call list is fine, while fiercely denouncing polygamy,

                  is hypocrisy and not logically consistent.

                  > then it follows that women are virtuous, men are immoral, leading to position

                  Only after extremely convoluted and erroneous a priori. Accepting those positions is anticivilization.

                  > the old testament position on serial monogamy and polyandry is that sluts should be burned at the stake […] position is that they will not inherit the Kingdom of heaven

                  I will need to reread, but pretty sure it was stoning.

                  Punishment implies that female misbehavior does in fact exist. Therefore accepting the notion [C] means not only rejecting what the Bible says, but also ignoring reality.

                • jim says:

                  > > Christianity just is not Christian if it accepts female emancipation.

                  > Hence the deriding term McChristian. I’m not familiar with those people. Therefore I’m asking someone who is.

                  I am familiar. All the mainstream churches (which is to say all the churches that are dying, few baptisms, only one or two families in the pews) accept divorced women and happily celebrate their remarriages without asking who initiated the divorce, or whether they stopped sleeping with their husbands and obeying their husbands prior to the divorce.

                  > > On the contrary, if one accepts that serial monogamy is fine,

                  > Christians do not accept serial monogamy in anything but the most extreme edge cases because serial monogamy outside exceptions is adultery.

                  All mainstream churches accept serial monogamy, in that they are untroubled by women who have one boyfriend after another (“season of singleness”) and happily remarry divorced women without inquiring if they initiated the divorce, or stopped sleeping with and obeying their husbands prior to the divorce. Dalrock has a vast collection of sermons enthusiastically endorsing this behavior (“wake up call”).

                  > > and that choosing to be number fifteen on mister one in thirty’s booty call list is fine, while fiercely denouncing polygamy,

                  > is hypocrisy and not logically consistent.

                  All mainstream churches celebrate single moms, the vast majority of whom were near the bottom of mister one in thirty’s booty call list. By their priors, mister one in thirty is an immoral male chauvinist pig, while miss bottom of his booty call list is an ill treated saint.

                  > > then it follows that women are virtuous, men are immoral, leading to position C

                  > Only after extremely convoluted and erroneous a priori. Accepting those positions is anticivilization.

                  Obviously the priors of all mainstream churches are that serial monogamy is fine, and that sleeping with some man who is in no position to be a father to his children or to husband his women is fine, provided that miss bottom of his booty call list is not taking booty calls from several such men, which she usually is not. By which priors, position C, women are virtuous, men are immoral, logically follows.

                  The reason women are marrying late is that as they lose their looks and their eggs dry up, they fall off the bottom of mister one in thirty’s booty call list, then they fall off the bottom of mister one in twenty’s booty call list, then they fall off the bottom of mister one in ten’s booty call list, then they will reluctantly marry mister average, and hate him for it.

                • Red says:

                  Christians do not accept serial monogamy in anything but the most extreme edge cases because serial monogamy outside exceptions is adultery.

                  I attended 20 or so different evangelical churches growing up. They all accepted female serial monogamy and blamed men for it. Evangelicals make up 42% of the American population, it’s the largest Christian group. I call them McChristains.

                  Punishment implies that female misbehavior does in fact exist. Therefore accepting the notion [C] means not only rejecting what the Bible says, but also ignoring reality.

                  McChristains don’t punish women. Ignoring the reality with women and is a long traditional in progressive America.

                • Pax Imperialis says:

                  Well I just looked up my grandpa’s old Episcopal church back east. My views match pretty well with his. He left it about 10 years prior to the church supporting the Civil Rights Act in the 60s. Today its gone full woke. I’ve bounced around a few foreign Presbyterian churches. None ordained women, had single mothers besides a few widows, or excepted divorce. Based on the membership numbers that appears to be unusual.

                  Looks like I’m 70 years out of date and completely out of touch with mainline American churches. Probably anything I say about Christianity today is highly suspect. Hadn’t realized the bubble I was living in was this sheltered.

                • Kunning Druegger says:

                  Yeah Pax, way out of touch. I was actually getting angry reading your posts because I thought you were being a massive sperg. I’m still miffed at how this is news to you, as it is almost impossible to find a church that isn’t lousy with beta soi preachers and deacons, tatted up roasties, I heart UKR stickers, and a million other indicators of pozz and compromise and convergence.

                  Trying to find a church for my family now, visiting many different establishments. I have a sort of checklist I go through while eliminating candidates. Not going to post the whole thing, but here’s a string of indicators:

                  -the church has digital signage like a bank
                  -the church has a band playing like a bar
                  -the church has missionaries converting blacks, browns, and yellows while whites suffer within a couple miles of their building
                  -the church’s pastor has misbehaved children and/or slovenly/off-putting wife (fat doesn’t count if 3+ kids… I know, I am a big softy lel; bad hair is a red flag worse than mommy milkers)
                  -the church uses anything but KJV (I think there are other acceptable translations, I’ll leave that to the Devout here as I have no place to speak on such matters)

                  I don’t have enough data to build a real checklist that’s of any use, not yet, but I am finding that American churches seem to have really leaned into “all have sinned and fallen short…” super fucking hard, like, they are treating it as a competition or something.

                  Here a few things that make the building off limits for my corporeal being:

                  -female pastor
                  -rainbow flag
                  -UKR flag
                  -BLM anything
                  -“hate has no place here” signage

                  Talking with my wife, we have come to an unsettling (possible) conclusion: we might be better off going to negro church for the sole reason that they refuse to tolerate trannies and gays of any stripe, while what churches keep getting monkeypox from demonstrating god’s love.

                  I was genuinely excited to return to The Faith, but this process has been… frustrating, to say the least.

                • zero says:

                  if there is a time for the old testament and the new testament, is it heretical to build the earthly church in your own private life. I ask at least in part because there are no congregations i know of that the authorities allow to even touch on the harder parts of the old or new testaments as being Gods word. the Bride of Christ and its ministry is to me something that should not be messed around with at all but I am looking around and I do not want my children to be un-learned about how the world really is, and i am personally aware of extreme spying in one of the american denominations that the priests on top have used to target families whos children commit wrongthink, assuming its happening to catholics too and maybe other protestents. Can the church be old testament without your family being burned by keeping to itself? a few years ago i would have considered it gross heresy but i have seen so much immorality recently that its got me pretty worried.

                • Pax Imperialis says:

                  >it is almost impossible to find a church that isn’t […]
                  >we might be better off going to negro church

                  Woah, hold on there. No need for being that drastic.

                  Try looking around the Asian “American” Presbyterian Churches. Some got Americanized/converged and split off from the first generation churches, but most are still conservative with all male elders, no gays, no women authorities, and pro family. Although it might be difficult for you to navigate them as many do their sermons in non-English; however, some have a separate English sermon with vetted guest (White) preachers that can be very based.

                  Admittedly I’ve been in the process of jumping ship yet again and have been looking into Eastern Orthodoxy because of the recent convergence in Asian Presbyterian Churches.

                  >way out of touch
                  You’re lucky my father isn’t posting here. He didn’t know that nearly all the college age women during my university years were wearing short shorts/hot pants until I directly pointed it out to him. I grew up with no TV in the home. I could go on, but I think you’ve got the picture.

                  >I’m still miffed at how this is news to you

                  My family has been jumping sinking ships and not looking back since they got here. That’s how the pilgrims got here in the first place, how the west was settled after the east coast got too governed, and how there are still some pockets of WASPy Amerikaners left in America. Heck, jumping ship is how we’re not all Africans with Bantu IQ. Some mutated higher IQ Bantu probably thought “fuck these people, I’m out of here” and migrated north. Eventually you get Babylonians doing the same as their culture converged. Problem is that we’ve run out of new lands to escape too. Don’t get left behind when Mars gets colonized.

              • Red says:

                With cheating on their husband it’s because he wasn’t a godly enough of a leader to prevent her from feeling unloved and cheating. If only he had been more filled up with the love of Boyfriend Jesus she never would have cheated!

                There was tons of Evangelical charlatans selling that shit all day long when I was growing up. Though I think most of it stemmed from when the churches decided to let single mothers in, they had to rewrite the rule book to blame the men who fucked them instead of the saintly sluts in the pew. They were single mothers because the evil man refused to marry her! And this happened to her 6 times with 6 different men! Men are evil!

                The thing is, it’s not exactly wrong. Female misbehavior ultimately ends up being thrust upon some man to deal with it because women are morally inferior, much like children. But when the tools needed to control that behavior have been stripped, a man has no way to control his woman. But when it doubt, blame the man is the motto of Feminists and McChristains everywhere.

                • Pax Imperialis says:

                  The first and last time I was in an Evangelical church I was in culture shock when they started playing rock n roll music videos and swaying their arms above their heads. I didn’t stick around long enough to hear the sermons on women.

                  >when the tools needed to control that behavior have been stripped, a man has no way to control his woman.

                  Ergo, female misbehavior still exists, but only because men allow it out of a misguided sense of morality driven laws. That negates [C] on two counts, that misbehavior absolutely does not exist, and that it’s because of piggish men.

                  It is exactly wrong.

                • Red says:

                  Ergo, female misbehavior still exists, but only because men allow it out of a misguided sense of morality driven laws. That negates [C] on two counts, that misbehavior absolutely does not exist, and that it’s because of piggish men.

                  The evil men tricked the virtuous women into fucking and then took off. That’s the story I heard over and over again. Of course it’s bullshit, but it’s amazingly consistent story between McChristains and Feminists about all of women’s misdeads being caused by men who tricked them. Pretty sure Eve had the same story about the serpent.

                  The first and last time I was in an Evangelical church I was in culture shock when they started playing rock n roll music videos and swaying their arms above their heads. I didn’t stick around long enough to hear the sermons on women.

                  You don’t really find anything different in most churches in my experience when it comes to single mothers. Though one of the catholic churches I briefly visited it was pretty clear the priests where fucking the alter boys. They had that look the adopted children of faggots get.

                • alf says:

                  They had that look the adopted children of faggots get.

                  not familiar with that look. Could you expand?

                • Red says:

                  @alf

                  I can’t really explain it. I saw a picture of a faggot couple with 3 little boys who had the look the other day. I’ll post it or the alike when I come across it again.

                • Pax Imperialis says:

                  >not familiar with that look
                  Newton and Truong if you can find the uncensored image.

          • Adam says:

            I have had the same experience as others here, a hundred different churches, a hundred different worthless castrated pastors.

            As far as I can tell, every church that claims to be Christian preaches that Jesus was a progressive Jewish social worker, and the difference between the Old Testament and New is that Jesus came to give us the magical power of make-believe. And if you are failing in any way, insufficient make-believe.

            If I were to come to power, these pastors are going into the wood chipper feet first.

        • Red says:

          Starman is correct, I haven’t seen any shill pass the full woman question test. It’s an outstanding test. I’ve taken it 3 times and you really have to rack up the thought crimes to pass it.

          The point of reducing the women question test is to make it easier to use in general forms and on twitter with midwits. It’s far too long and in depth and chocked full of useful concepts that only the reactionary right would know.

          Shortening the test may not work, but given that short articles of faith are pretty common during religious wars even for normies, there’s a good chance it will work.

          I think we should continue using the full test here and on gab, but in moral normal environments we need something shorter and more midwit friendly.

          • Starman says:

            @Red

            “Starman is correct, I haven’t seen any shill pass the full woman question test. It’s an outstanding test. I’ve taken it 3 times and you really have to rack up the thought crimes to pass it.”

            I have seen shills pass the pictorial Redpill on Women Question, but that question is used to detect low quality faggot troon shills. It has an effect on tranny fags that is very similar to anime cute aggression.

            • jim says:

              The pictorial test is a more reliable faggot detector than shill detector, but there is a whole lot of overlap between these categories.

      • Red says:

        I think you nailed it. Nothing triggers a leftist as much as describing a belief or behavior as immoral.

        The left spent a great deal of effort in the 90s with things like South Park and Libertarianism working to drain the moral messages from the right. This wasn’t hard because the men calling out the immorality didn’t know why it was immoral and their morality was often yesterdays progressive bullshit. They still had Chesterton Fence but they did not know why the fence had been built and thus were unable to defend it against attack.

        • jim says:

          Perhaps the reason the multiple choice question works to well is that it presupposes that moral issues and choices are meaningful.

    • Adam says:

      Quote from a Muslim man in a movie-

      “You should beat your woman every morning. If you do not know what for, she does.”

      Final boss level shill test.

  15. Help (completed) says:

    Orthodox Christmas Converged Priest Field Report Final Update:

    This is the final post in a series regarding a converged Russian Orthodox priest.

    Despite my priest failing the Demon Worshiper test, despite the humiliation of being forced to be lectured by a woman during the Divine Liturgy, I have decided to remain at my current parish. The reason is I’ve built too many connections at that parish, I’ve spent too many years at that parish, and starting over now wouldn’t be good for me psychologically, socially, and spiritually.

    Sometimes, though this is difficult to accept, there are certain evils that one must face even in the Holiest of places, that one must accept for himself. This doesn’t mean that we ought to approve of them, rather we ought to understand that satan and his demons are everywhere trying to distract us from what we needed to do. Sometimes, one must have the maturity and humility to say, “this is wrong, this is evil, but it is not my place nor my right to oppose it,” just to view it as satan trying to divide and distract me. I do not “deal” with it, I simply shield my heart from it.

    At the end of the day, I believe my priest is a combination of “demon worshiper” and “normiecon.” Jim, while I have also appreciated many of your contributions, I think approaching every “normiecon” as if he would simply change his mind as if he was only seeking validation is wrong. I did tell him the Bible, the communion of the Saints, and the voice of Holy Spirit, but with respect to persuasion there are more important things than all of that, such as status, rank, and hierarchy, and being an unmarried 24-year-old male, my rank is quite low. My priest is part-Russian intelligentsia through his mother, but also part-normie through his father, a bit of both, and a bit of neither.

    Neofugue, while I have appreciated many of your contributions, I think your approach in this comment was wrong. Just because my priest is not willing to leave me alone and “agree to disagree,” doesn’t mean that I should automatically find a new parish. Maybe you have a nice parish and a good priest, but that doesn’t mean that a bad priest is necessarily a dealbreaker.

    Maybe one day I will leave the parish, but I will do so on a good note. It’s nice to have friends in the church even if they are “demon worshipers.” Right now, my best bet is to stay within my parish, humble myself so that I can “deal” with the problem, and wait until the right moment to leave.

    At the end of the day, I appreciate the contributions from all those who commented. I’m more of a numbers person so I will avoid commenting much in the future.

    • Fidelis says:

      49 I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?

      50 But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!

      51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:

      52 For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.

      53 The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

      54 And he said also to the people, When ye see a cloud rise out of the west, straightway ye say, There cometh a shower; and so it is.

      55 And when ye see the south wind blow, ye say, There will be heat; and it cometh to pass.

      56 Ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky and of the earth; but how is it that ye do not discern this time?

  16. i says:

    Argument on why Beauty, Truth and Goodness cannot exist without each other:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QywPkUWjF0&ab_channel=LeatherApronClub

    The Trinity must be together to work.

  17. Kunning Drueger says:

    Hey lads.

    I want to apologize up front for fag posting. Had a spot of vodka.

    I want to say thank you right now to every regular and Jim for the stubborn commitment to posting in the face of heinous and evil deeds done proudly in the light of day. A cursory review of our era does not recommend much optimism or hope for any worthwhile future. I know we spend a lot of time talking about evil, dissecting the awful, and keeping tabs on everything wrong with society and culture and being. I know this won’t make sense to many outsiders, but BJC has been a permanent source of optimism and hope for me through some pretty terrible times. I know it won’t last forever, I know we aren’t perfect, and I definitely know that the wonderful and worthwhile things we’ve discovered here will most likely never see the light of day. but never once has that stopped us from putting in the good work to make good things a reality for good men.

    I want to say thank you to everyone here. You’re a capital lot of fellows and I’d gladly shoot any stranger at the drop of a hat just to make you lads giggle. I’m obviously kidding, shill faggots, This is a blog of peace. but seriously, just named the caliber.

    Stand tall, lads. Our business here is hope, no matter how much it may seem otherwise.

    • notglowing says:

      Only an exceptionally stupid person would trust a system made up of evil people, regardless of the rules they pretend to follow.

  18. Red says:

    This map is interesting:

    https://twitter.com/EthicalSkeptic/status/1611471555837427713?cxt=HHwWgoCwtfK1jN0sAAAA

    https://archive.ph/wip/87ccf

    The introduction of the idea that the NE states (orange) got the mostly-saline first run vials, and the lowest-risk petal run (given Delta hit the south in the summer months) states (yellow) got the dregs/LNPs…

    • S says:

      I heard this before (Anglin), but the map is weird. The amount is constant for the first 15 states despite varying from 750 to 650.

      That said the graph doesn’t start at zero and if you correct for it…
      .18 at 750 (1 per 4166)
      versus
      .12 at 450 (1 per 3750)

      If there is some insight that ties everything together, I don’t see it.

  19. drearwatch says:

    [*deleted for irrelevance. We don’t care about obscure namefags*]

    • jim says:

      Who is Rod Dreher? Who here cares about Rod Dreher, who here has written about Rod Dreher, and why should any actual right winger care when a supposedly right wing facefag gets in trouble for being a little too right wing? All facefags are silent about anything that matters, or they are going to get the Andrew Anglin treatment.

      Rod Dreher has not said anything new since 2013, and if he now being unpersoned, it is because Overton window has moved on. 2013 was a decade ago. Nobody cares. He lacked the balls to walk Andrew Anglin’s path. Five years ago the legacy media was promoting him, because he was mild mannered sell out whom they wanted to represent the Christian remnant. That they were promoting him revealed he did not represent the Christian remnant.

      • Pax Imperialis says:

        It has been funny seeing him react to revelations of his father’s KKK membership. According to Dreher, his father was around Blacks far more than he ever was and more effectively caring. Whereas for Dreher, Blacks were mostly an abstract concept. Seems like the father sheltered the son too well. Typically one sees this shelteredness among White Northerners, but to see it from a White Southerner is hilariously sad.

    • Kunning Drueger says:

      Mr. drearwatch

      Hello! welcome to Jim’s Blog! You probably found us through some well intentioned but ignorant lad. Or maybe you stumbled upon this place because you are a deeply autistic researchfag. Whatever the case, beinvenido faggot.

      Regulars are free to bring up news of the moment, I do it often, and others as well. it is usually relevant to some ongoing discussion, or mildly interesting, or genuinely fascinating.

      Dreher is none of those things. Personally, I hope he dies slow and it’s livestreamed, but that’s just me. I recommend you take some time to read deeply into the comments, go back through the archives, and spend some time figuring out where the fuck you have found yourself.

      We here at BJC HR department have one goal and we pursue it relentlessly: to use dead nigger bodies to beat sodomites into pulp. We have a sideline in commenter placement. Our state of the art machine learning AGI job placement bot app has informed us that you are an excellent candidate for the Lurkmoar program. Consider lurking moar, and, after a few years of research and dedication, I am confident you won’t get blown the fuck out on your first poast the second time.

      BJC HR wants to thank you for your weak attempt as no amount of PowerPoints achieve quite the impact of a newfag with too much confidence. Take care, and remember: hippity hippity, dat bitch is property. Also you just lost the game.

    • Pax Imperialis says:

      I’m purely responding to jim and KD and not drearwatch. Don’t know what drearwatch posted.

      >Who here cares about Rod Dreher, who here has written about Rod Dreher, and why should any actual right winger care when a supposedly right wing facefag gets in trouble for being a little too right wing?

      I’ve posted Dreher stuff here before. Mostly because it helps measure how much the Overton window has moved. He is interesting for the same reason Yarvin remains interesting though mostly in the public reactions from the regime they elicit. That makes them diagnostic tools that measure what the regime is thinking (at least in a knee jerk response). If a person is in a particularly hostile area to actual right wingers, it helps to know where the boundaries are and for what reason.

      >Andrew Anglin treatment

      Is not useful because all you see is an automated response. You can easily extrapolate the reasons for the response, but it’s not the same as seeing regime figures choke up and get red in the face as they flail around in literally-shaking-outrage. Anglin remains good at diagnosing the regime in what he says.

      >you stumbled upon this place because you are a deeply autistic researchfag

      Why do I feel attacked? 🙃

      • Kunning Drueger says:

        That’s how I got here too, though I am now convinced it was God and I just thought I was in control.

        • notglowing says:

          I came here by pure chance, after finding a bunch of rather funny memes about this blog on twitter. They were all under the hashtag #BasedWorld, I believe, and spanned a few months, most accounts having groyper avatars. It was a long time ago, perhaps late 2018, either way before the twitter purges.

          That stuff is long gone and I wish I had saved the images because they were good. They never linked to the place or even spelled out the address, but several images contained a screenshot of the blog’s header with the title, and I found it from there.

          The topics of the memes were somewhat adjacent to the topics discussed here, but not even close to being direct quotes. Some were images with text, others were pure text tweets.
          It read like a parody, but a parody meant to attract people rather than deride.

          Some notable topics were: a future where women are property on the blockchain, history as a millennia long “sexual meta-war”, some stuff about freedom, evolution, I only vaguely remember the exact ideas. The more I think about it the more I realize how much I forgot.

          • Starman says:

            I think it was somewhere in 2010 or after when I got on Jim’s blog, I read his Usenet debates before.

            It was a long while ago, so I don’t remember the exact details.

    • The Cominator says:

      This is wrong in many respects, QAnon is bullshit, the White Working class is already a GOP voting bloc but voting doesn’t matter…

      Its very right about the fucking Indians…

      • Pax Imperialis says:

        Isn’t really weird how there are still some non-Jewish White democrats who truly believe they are the party of the working class, yet the vast majority of their base is the White nonworking class?

      • Leon says:

        What is the Hapakenazi race? Is this author claiming Jews and Anglos have merged into one race? Same with his definition of “Yankee.” And yeah, the Indians are going to be a big problem. Are they and the Jews starting to fight for positions of authority?

        • S says:

          Hapakenazi is Jews + Asian. He thinks they will form a group identity because of the size of marrying out; notably he doesn’t provide the number of kids. Liberal Jews don’t have kids so it isn’t relevant.

          • Wolf says:

            They have enough given the infertile and dysgenic condition of the rest of the population Besides, it’s not only the liberal Jews marrying Asians. Visited my very wealthy half-Jewish brother, his Chinese wife, and their 4 children over the holidays. I believe in the Hapakenazi elite race.

            • S says:

              The issue isn’t eliteness, it is numbers and the ability to work together. He doesn’t provide any evidence of either and the fact these people come from the least fertile and clannish part of their respective populations suggests they aren’t.

              • Wolf says:

                That’s true, there isn’t any reason to believe that they will be cohesive. After all, they’re first-generation products of parents who opted out of their ethnic group.

          • pinochet's ghost says:

            [*deleted for insanity*]

    • Pax Imperialis says:

      The GOP already runs on Chinese-American money. As the effects of this continue trickling down, the GOP will advocate more and more for Chinese interests in order to secure donor money and the support of ballot harvesting kingmakers. Chinatowns will become GOP strongholds.

      I don’t see evidence for this. Also pretty sure that American Jews are on their way out of power.

      • Leon says:

        if Jews are losing their power, who is taking it from them? Hispanics? Indians? Chinese?

        • Wolf says:

          Indians if Jews are stupid enough to let too many H1Bs in. Otherwise, don’t see it happening. Orthodox Jews are still the most fecund elite group. See their net worths. And the slightly too liberal Hassidim are a pipeline. If things get really bad, there’s no ethnicity more cohesive than the Hassidim. I give them an edge over the Amish.

          • Pax Imperialis says:

            >Orthodox Jews
            >elite group

            Pick one. The more Orthodox the Jewish group, the less elite they are. At the extreme are the Hasidic Jews who are nearly completely apolitical preferring to stay in their near complete isolationist religious community. The Hasidic are not a pipeline to elite Jewish circles. They are too uneducated, too poor, and too strange to fit in.

            >if Jews are losing their power, who is taking it from them?

            Late 20th century American elite group was about half areligious Ashkenazi Jewish, half White. The complete callaspe of the Jewish part due to miscegenation and low birth rates in the short term means a combination of greater concentration of power among the Jewish part, but also more space for liberal Whites. Hindu Indians are making inroads as seen in Silicon Valley CEOs, but translating economic power into political takes time and effort.

            Likely to see a power vacuum and much infighting among the White elites.

            • Kunning Drueger says:

              I am convinced that almost all of the seeming success in silicon valley and elsewhere by Americanized Indians is due to the abandonment of cultural identity and a penchant for mimicry unsurpassed due to lessons learned under British domination. every example of an Americanized Indian CEO is such an embarrassing caricature of a brown skin white person trying way too hard. I don’t think it will translate to cultural domination, and I have far more respect for the dick hole Indians that run 7-Elevens and other small businesses. They are hella racist, genuinely amusing, and generally good citizens that I am happy exist but want nothing to do with, which is the most any immigrant can hope for in terms of native response.

              • Pax Imperialis says:

                >an embarrassing caricature of a brown skin white person trying way too hard

                So embarrassing it enters severe cringe territory, but even worse is seeing Asian American liberals denounce White supremacy all the while behaving, talking, and living like White liberals more than the White liberals.

                They say shit like wealth disparity is proof of oppression while making more money than both White and Black demographics. I hate those people.

                • Fidelis says:

                  Having interacted with a few, it’s hard to imagine any conscious cynicism in their imitation, pure NPCs. Maybe the difference in features makes it hard to sniff out the subtle tells of a bluff, but my gut says they’re painfully honest. It’s almost endearing, in a way, how closely they mimic the ruling class when carrying out their instinctual decision functions. If order gets restored top down instead of through collapse and barbarism, they will all in total lockstep and without noticing at all, switch the slogans they cheerfully recite.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “If order gets restored top down instead of through collapse and barbarism, they will all in total lockstep and without noticing at all, switch the slogans they cheerfully recite.”

                  And we’ll hang them anyway.

            • pinochet's ghost says:

              Judaism is a group strategy.

              The Jewish religion not only does not condemn but trains them in speaking out of both sides of their mouths (pilpul).

              *No group of Jews is anti-Jewish* even if they have many other differences and even if their disagreements seem real.

              Reform/secular Jews poison the rest of the world while Orthodox Jews are the only high IQ group with a high birth rate (other than Amish).

              This is a combined strategy! They are not opponents! #metoo and feminist NGOs are not looking at the Hasidim or Israeli ultra-orthodox settlements!

              Aryans are genuinely fractious and also genuinely generous to their Aryan opponents in war and in victory. Jews are not genuinely fractious for all they sometimes affect to be, and they are merciless to both (non-Jewish) “friends” and enemies as soon as they have the upper hand.

              • jim says:

                The Jews had control of Russia, probably because of Rothschild funding. Lost it because they were busy murdering, torturing, and robbing each other. That is genuine fractiousness.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  The Jews wrecked Russia and then moved to the USA because they could make more money there.

                  I did not say these people are competent. The Genesis – Exodus cycle itself depicts them taking over a country, wrecking it, but then losing power and leaving to somewhere more appealing.

                  They will make mistakes and they will even damage their own cause but groups of Jews are not *intentionally* damaging other groups of Jews. The Orthodox are happy with Reform spreading harm in the Aryan world and Reform are happy with Orthodox overbreeding Palestine.

                  Reform Jews are not somehow opposed to the Jewish People. They are having their cake and eating it too by getting the partake in terminal decadence of the Aryan world in the knowledge that they are also serving the group purposes of the Jewish People.

                • jim says:

                  In so far as there is Jewish cohesion in Israel, it is because it is surrounded by enemies that want it destroyed. And despite being surrounded by enemies that want it destroyed, there is a large and powerful Jewish faction within that want it destroyed, and that faction is way larger and way more powerful in the US.

                  I just don’t see any Jewish cohesion in the US. That is how they lost the diamond trade.

                  If Jews are so cohesive and rational, how did they lose Russia?

                  > The Jews wrecked Russia and then moved to the USA because they could make more money there.

                  Not what happened. They wrecked Russia, lost power within Russia, and were stuck for a very long time in a wrecked Russia where they were out of power and under suspicion as wreckers and trotskyites.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  [*deleted for sounding like a Soros shill*]

                • jim says:

                  I keep hearing this script from people who are clearly Soros employees.

                  Can you tell us what Soros has been up to. Can you tell us what we say Soros has been up to?

                • jim says:

                  > I said no group of Jews is anti-Jewish. . I did not say they never make strategic mistakes.

                  It is completely obvious that Soros and company are anti Jewish.

                  > The Old Testament history of the Jewish people depicts them as a people very good at staging revolutions in other peoples’ countries by infiltration and co-option, very bad at managing those countries once they have possession,

                  That is not how I read it. All of Bronze Age civilization went down the tubes at the same time as the Moses, Exodus, and Joshua. The Hebrews were merely yet another group of armed and dangerous refugees that, over period of half a century, destroyed every city in the ancient world from India to what is now Portugal.

                  Joseph’s shenanigans look stereotypically rather like modern Jews, doing the elite’s dirty work against the natives, and then getting the heave ho once the dirty work is done, but Bronze Age civilization was in similar decline everywhere, from one end of the civilized world to the other.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  Soros funds Cathedral “non-government” political activism in various countries, including Eastern Europe and the US.

                  You believe Soros launders US State Department money into these activities, rather than acting purely on his own initiative, and that he would not be wealthy if not for the US State Department affiliates providing him with insider tips and bailing out seemingly bad investments he has made after the fact.

                • jim says:

                  Hmm, yes, in a sense, but I am rather more specific about the “non government political activism”, and what those “political activists” are doing, which is, among other things, murdering people, destroying property, and overthrowing government foreign and domestic.

                  Can you be more specific.

                  Holding your other post pending you telling us rather more concretely what Soros has been up to.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  You believe that Soros directly funds Antifa. I wouldn’t disbelieve this, but have not investigated it personally have not personally seen evidence of this.

                  In the US Soros definitely funds the election of DAs who withhold the police power from protecting innocent people against real criminals, while imposing the police power on innocent people guilty of bureaucratic infractions or who are politically undesirable to the Cathedral.

                  Outside the US – and in 2020 probably in the US as well – Soros’s organizations build and direct protest/riot movements that act as the “good cop” in efforts to overthrow non-Cathedral governments, the US’s military power being the visible or invisible “bad cop.”

              • The Cominator says:

                This is stupid, only the Orthodox Jews (who are outside the political media etc establishments) even manage to marry each other. Without the ethnic religion of ultra Orthodoxy there is no real cohesion, with ultra Orthodoxy they can’t be in the elite.

            • Wolf says:

              1. Modern Orthodox (not secular, reform, conservatives, or Haredi) are quite elite. Median household income: 188k. I don’t think there is another ethnicity with money, fertility, and low out-marriage.

              https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-orthodox-jews-financially-fragmented-but-mostly-secure-survey-finds/

              https://www.pewresearch.org/religion/2015/08/26/a-portrait-of-american-orthodox-jews/#:~:text=About%20half%20of%20Orthodox%20adults,4%25).

              2. Both Modern Orthodox and Haredi are very political if we define it as the struggle for money and power. But their efforts are focused locally which is more effective. They already control important swathes of important cities. As their numbers grow, their political reach will grow.

              The demise of American Jewry has been exaggerated. Cope.

              • The Cominator says:

                They make money but do they control any institution… they USED TO run the diamond trade (but the dotheads moved in) what else is there?

                • Wolf says:

                  1. HHI was to show that they are elite, not.
                  2. Institutions: They are embedded throughout mainstream institutions.They are not apolitical like the Amish and not focused exclusively on local politics like the Haredim.

                  Sample
                  “Modern Orthodox Jews have outsized visibility not only in pro-Israel crowds at White House events, but also within the administration itself. Members of the community, whose religious orientation falls between the Conservative denomination and the more stringent traditional-Orthodox world, have been appointed to posts such as senior White House adviser, peace envoy and US ambassador to Israel.”

                  https://www.ajc.org/news/us-modern-orthodox-jews-and-muslims-find-common-ground

                • S says:

                  @Wolf
                  The Modern Orthodox Jews you are talking about are listed as 3% of the Jewish population or 150,000 people. They have the highest levels of identification with Israel of any portion of the Jewish population.

                  So seeing them involved with Israel isn’t a surprise. What American institutions do they control?

                • Pax Imperialis says:

                  @S

                  Guy sounds like a Nazi. Copious use of ‘goy.’ Even has ‘Wolf’ as his name. Most Nazis are shills. Makes me wonder.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  The institutions are entropic. The Modern Orthodox and expanding and are preserving low social entropy while everyone around them dies out.

                  What you are saying is based in the assumption that the Modern Orthodox have an interest in preserving the USA institutions OR that the USA institutions are capable of effective action to preserve their loyalists and damage outsiders.

                  Modern Orthodox do not care if USA survives or not. USA does not reward its loyalists with children, and has been unable to take away the ability of Modern Orthodox to have children (the only political power that matters).

                • jim says:

                  The same could be said of Mormons, but the Mormons have capitulated to the current year, and the Orthodox are in the process of capitulating.

                  We had an orthodox Jew on this blog, who denied that Judaism gets reinvented every generation, and a long argument ensued. He was full of clever rationales for the latest compromise with the current year.

                • Anonymous says:

                  Guy sounds like a Nazi. Copious use of ‘goy.’ Even has ‘Wolf’ as his name. Most Nazis are shills. Makes me wonder.

                  Strongest telltale sign of a Nazi is lumping together all Jewish groups as a unified collective; Nazis well-read on the literature know that Hitler suggested in Mein Kampf to always present distinct groups of perceived enemies as a single group with a single mind, a single will, and a single agenda (not because it’s true — it’s patently not true — but purely for propaganda purposes), and ever since, the followers of this weltanschauung do their best to explain how different Jewish groups are surely unified in their political ambition, all pursuing the same objective by minimally differing paths, evidence to the contrary be damned.

                  Having finished Mein Kampf, they move on to Culture of Critique, which happens to argue a similar thing, albeit less for propaganda reasons and more out of genuine (misguided) conviction, conclude that “the science is settled,” and dare not consider alternative explanations for what they see.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  Culture of Critique presents a great deal of cited quotes showing that many apparently secular Jews, including those behind a lot of the harmful ideologies afflicting the GAE today, remained loyal to “the Jewish People.” While it may not be the case for every individual, it’s the typical case, and it is tricky to find even individual counter-examples.

                • jim says:

                  Every Jewish faction says to other Jews “Hail fellow Jew, we are in this together against the Goyim”, as Bernie Madoff told his marks. And the Russian Jews that thought the Bolsheviks were on their side got tortured for their hidden gold, and when they had coughed up all their hidden gold, got tortured some more till they croaked, just in case there was some more gold.

                  The Jews lost the diamond trade because it turned out they were not in it together against the Goyim and they lost Russia because they were not in it together against Stalin.

                  Bernie Madoff told his marks he was making out like a bandit front running his goy clients, and being loyal to the Jewish people against the Goyim, he would let the mark in on it.

                  The Jews held the diamond trade when their daughters married the man they were told to, and stayed married. So, to get wives for sons, a Jew and his sons had to impress the patriarch as being of good character. Today, has to impress the chick as being of bad character.

                  The Jews had cohesion when they had their wives and daughters under control. But they drank their own poison, and no longer have their wives and daughters under control.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  I am not asserting Jews are magical omni-competent humans whose schemes always work. Since Jews have been acting in the same old style since at least Babylonian times, and describe themselves doing so since Ancient Egyptian times, if they were magical and omni-competent they would have succeeded in conquering/destroying the world already.

                  All I am saying is that no Jew (or as close as makes no difference) has the intent to harm the Jewish People and all Jews (or as close as makes no difference) celebrate Jewish political successes accomplished by ideologies other than his own.

                  While many Jews are anti-communists, ~all Jews celebrate the destruction of “the Tsar.” The Tsar presided over the deaths of ~50 Jews in programs by his subjects, but really they celebrate his destruction because he excluded Jews from political power.

                  Jews will be libertarians, communists, Zionists, or anything else, but all their ideologies facilitate Jews taking political power.

                  I never claimed they used it wisely if they succeed. If they did, maybe it would be fine for them to be the world-aristocracy they want to be. But their own books say their aims are predatory destruction.

                • jim says:

                  > All I am saying is that no Jew (or as close as makes no difference) has the intent to harm the Jewish People and all Jews (or as close as makes no difference) celebrate Jewish political successes accomplished by ideologies other than his own.

                  It is completely obvious that Soros and company do not celebrate victories accomplished by Israeli nationalists.

                  Jews suffer from the same abusive relationships as conservatives. When their fellow Jews do the dirty on them, as in the 1906 Russian revolution, they will blame anyone other than their fellow Jews. But then their fellow Jews, as in the 1916 revolution, just do the dirty on them again.

                  Jews have been ruthlessly and cynically exploiting their fellow Jews’ sense of cohesion for a century.

                  Yes, some Jews, a lot of Jews, do “celebrate Jewish political successes accomplished by ideologies other than their own.” And they regularly get their asses pounded.

                  We have long known that whites are wolf to whites, always have been, always will be. Jews are starting to realize that Jews are wolf to Jews. They had cohesion when they controlled their wives and daughters. Now they do not.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  Soros is indeed an outlier, probably the most anti-Jewish Jew you are likely to find.

                  “In 2007, Soros wrote, “I am not a Zionist, nor am I am a practicing Jew, but I have a great deal of sympathy for my fellow Jews and a deep concern for the survival of Israel.””

                  https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/what-you-need-to-know-about-george-soros-center-of-conspiracy-theories-641553

                  He’s clearly not a Zionist though. He is most accurately seen as on the extreme left of an ideological spectrum where the “left” is the diaspora/globalist strategy and “right” is the Israel/nationalist strategy. They’re different approaches, they’re not in opposition on every point. Soros is still protected by the “anti-Semitism” shield, except that Zionists will allow Jews to criticism him for anti-Zionism and non-Jews to support them in doing so (but not make independent attacks).

                • jim says:

                  > “In 2007, Soros wrote, “I am not a Zionist, nor am I am a practicing Jew, but I have a great deal of sympathy for my fellow Jews and a deep concern for the survival of Israel.””

                  He lies, for the same reason as Bernie Madoff lied. Jews have been milking other Jews’ expectations of solidarity for a bit over a century.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  Jews competing with other Jews inside a presumptively Jewish system, even at the cost of destroying that system unintentionally, is not “opposition to the Jewish People.”

                  What makes the system work is that even when their rule in Russia, for example, falls apart, it still leaves the Tsarist system in ruins, a civil religion justifying harmful social policies that remains in the minds of the non-Jewish subjects, and a springboard to go somewhere else (without which, cohesion or more accurately *fear of failure* likely re-established).

                  So in 2022, Jews Kagan and Nuland and Jew Blinken are able to use Jewish Zelensky President of a state (as Putin said in his war speech) that exists only because of Lenin and Trotsky to pummel the rump of Russia which would have four times the population if not for communist feminism and four times the industry if not for communist economics and (principally Jewish) post-communist looting.

                  This is not a conspiracy in the sense every move is necessarily planned in advance, but it is a highly effective mutually-supporting strategy.

                • jim says:

                  The Trots may not have “opposed the Jewish people”, but they murdered a whole lot of Jews.

                  Berne Madoff may well have been in favor of scamming the goyim, he may not have “opposed the Jewish people” but he did not scam the goyim, he scammed Jews.

                  The trouble is you are making a motte and bailey argument. Your motte is a definition of Jewish solidarity defined so far downwards as to be entirely consistent with Jews being wolf to Jews, like Bernie Madoff, Jews working to destroy the state of Israel, like Soros, Jews murdering and torturing Jews, like the Trots, and your bailey is that Jews are a single being with a single will.

                  Jewish solidarity in practice tends to manifest as it did in the 1906 revolution, where the Jews blamed the Tsar who was protecting them instead of blaming the Jews who were murdering and robbing Jews, and as it did in all those Jews who invested enormous amounts of wealth in Bernie Madoff.

                  Such solidarity is not a manifestation of a single being with a single will.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Jewish chronic backstabbing disorder leads to lots of own goals. Since that clade of eurasian tribesmen is relatively small in number, and the fact that most of that number has spent a great deal of effort trying to insinuate themselves into europoid societies, most of that backstabbing is turned on whites.

                  But they can’t help themselves when it comes to each other either. That is just the nature of the beast.

                  The propensity to be subversive to whites requires the propensity to be subversive, tout court. Subversion always comes home to roost. The revolution always eats its own children.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  I don’t believe that “me against my brothers; me and my brothers against my cousins; me and my brothers and cousins against the world” is lack of cohesion. It’s a particular scheme for cohesion, which is not the Aryan scheme.

                  Madoff scammed his brothers or his cousins. He indeed came to them saying “trust me, for I am your brother or your cousin,” but this in itself is not a breach of the rules, it is just a dishonorable thing to do within the rules.

                  If Madoff had allied with “the world” against his brothers and his cousins, different thing entirely.

                • Pax Imperialis says:

                  > Soros is indeed an outlier, probably the most anti-Jewish Jew you are likely to find.

                  How to say you don’t know any liberal Jews. Soros is an outlier because of his level of influence, not because of his anti-Jewishness. He is quite Jew friendly when compared to many academia Jews like this woman for example:

                  Sara Kershnar

                  I have spent thirty-plus years working on social justice, community health, and human and civil rights. After my father tested positive for HIV, I became involved in ACT-UP and started a life-long commitment to social justice activism and organizing. I have a background in reducing drug-related harm, transformative justice approaches to addressing intimate and community violence, prisoner solidarity, and anti-racist organizing. I built two youth centers – Youth Uprising in East Oakland and RYSE Center in Richmond. Disability justice is close to my heart and experience as the sibling and guardian of a creative and wonderful sister with disabilities. I am also the queer mother of a fabulous five-year-old.

                  She is the founder of the International Jewish Anti-Zionist Network and openly supports pro-Palestinian groups.

                • Anonymous says:

                  PG, let me entertain you with an amusing thought-experiment, seemingly a bizarro world scenario: the Jews are doing everything possible not to survive, but to be genocided and disappear. That’s right – there is no Jewish survival strategy, but Jewish suicide strategy. Let’s examine some movements to see if that crazy idea can hold up:

                  Communism – extremely harsh on the Jewish intelligentsia and middle class, almost obliterated the Jews from the former USSR, China and NK being free from Jewish influence.

                  Anarchism – Jews being weak and unwarlike, doing away with the state means doing away with protection for Jewish nerds from gentile bullies, thus facilitating pogroms and genocide.

                  Antiracism – Jews have the highest verbal IQ and will rise to the top in any meritocracy, so in order to thwart themselves, the Jews want society to think that disparate success is the result of racial prejudice.

                  Civic Nationalism – leads to normalized endogamy (intermarriage) since all citizens are equal, thus threatens Jewish continuity, given that Jews are a minority and will be submerged into the host population.

                  Progressivism – Jews make the most vociferous and radical Progs, and given the extreme inverse correlation between Progressivism and reproduction, it’s obviously part of the Jewish plan for auto-suicide.

                  Feminism – the destruction of the family leads very rapidly to the destruction of the nation, so by embracing and implementing Feminist politics in highly disproportionate numbers compared to the goyim, Jews are leading the charge to collective suicide. Feminism will thus kill Jews, especially smart Jews, much faster than it kills goyim.

                  Orthodox Judaism – a religion incompatible with holding real power in any modern political structure, basically rendering you defenseless and powerless against state-facilitated pogroms and persecution.

                  Atheism – a religion is needed for group cohesion, and by embracing pure atheism, the Jews are seeking to undermine their own cohesion and undermine their chances at survival.

                  Zionism – clearly, putting all the Jews in a single tiny packed location in the Middle East, where a few nukes can literally kill every single Jew in existence, is a top-notch suicidal strategy.

                  Monarchism – obviously intended to bring back the Tsar, who (so the Jews believe) will oppress them and curtail their rights. This has been Yarvin’s devious plan all along.

                  Freudian Psychoanalysis – the Jews are the primary targets of Freudianism, which convinced scores of Jews that they are mentally ill and in need of talk therapy, thus preventing Jews from getting real help by channeling their money and time into useless mental masturbation.

                  Antinatalism – the people most vocal about it, and most likely to heed the message, are Jews, who get vasectomies and contraceptive implants more than the stupid goyim breeders.

                  LGBT/Transexualism – Jews are the ones most likely to go tranny, just look at “Rachel” Levine and other prominent Jewish trannies. Faggotry is particularly normalized and tolerated among Jews, and ass-babies can’t be born.

                  See where I’m taking you? The Jewish group strategy may just as plausibly be conceived as an anti-Jewish group strategy, a mirror image of KMac’s thesis. Every Jewish political action can be seen as an anti-Jewish political action, Jewish attempts at survival may well be Jewish attempts at suicide, every single Jewish ideology is disproportionately harmful to Jews, Jews being the primary victims of Jewish ideologies, far more-so than non-Jews. Jews are their own greatest danger.

                  ***

                  I’m not actually seriously arguing that Jews are trying desperately to commit collective ethno-religious suicide. This is entertainment. But the point being, the extremely broad GES model offered by KMac is not any more empirically tenable than completely different explanations for Jewish behavior, including Jews being totally suicidal and always coming up with crazy ideas to get themselves killed.

                  Given that (as per your numbers) there are 30 million Jews and 700 million whites, rather than 30 million whites and 700 million Jews, you can argue that the Jewish suicide model is closer to reality than the survival model. But really, any theory so broad as to see Judith Butler and Meir Kahane as having even remotely overlapping political goals is just nuts.

                • jim says:

                  Sounds right. Obviously facilitating Muslim immigration into Europe is autogenocidal. Muslim domination is a lot rougher on Jews than on Christian whites, but they just hate Christians, and generally sided with the Muslims during the crusades, with much the same results as siding with the Muslims today.

                  > I’m not actually seriously arguing that Jews are trying desperately to commit collective ethno-religious suicide

                  I have been seriously arguing that for years. There is a lot of demon worship among the Jews, and autogenocide is a common, near universal, characteristic of demon worship.

                  > the extremely broad GES model offered by KMac is not any more empirically tenable than completely different explanations for Jewish behavior, including Jews being totally suicidal and always coming up with crazy ideas to get themselves killed.

                  On the contrary, that Jews are, in large part, autogenocidal demon worshipers is a far better explanation of Jewish bad conduct than Kevin McDonald’s explanation.

                  To the extent that they have abandoned control of their women, they have gone demon worshiper, to the extent that they have gone demon worshiper, they have gone autogenocidal.

                • Mike says:

                  @Anonymous

                  This is just silly, of course you can generalize about Jews. We generalize about women and blacks don’t we? Why is it suddenly “Nazi shill” when one one notices that yes, generally Jews make the most fanatical communists? They don’t need to of course (as you point out with the example of the Haredi and other Orthodox Jews) but they often do, and as Jim has pointed out before, Marxism itself (one of the main strands of excuse for Leftism) is in essence a secularized-Jewish heresy.

                  Otto Weininger was a Jew himself, and thought there was a deep spiritual sickness at the heart of his people, which he thought, yes, horror of horrors, could be *generalized* as a general affliction of all Jews and the “Semitic spirit” ever since Jewry became a Diaspora. https://counter-currents.com/2018/03/otto-weininger-on-the-jewish-question/

                • Mike says:

                  Although, to defend you @anonymous, as I noted in the last sentence, *since they became Diaspora* Note how Weininger talks about Zionism being impossible for the Jews because he thinks it is impossible for them to let go of their transformation to a Diaspora people. The implication being, in the Jimian sense, if Jews could settle down, get rid of their mongrel, wanderer roots, and become a real people again (as they used to be so long ago) the problems would be much less severe, if not disappear altogether. Which is probably what you argue I assume.

                • Anonymous says:

                  of course you can generalize about Jews.

                  Of course; but you missed the point entirely – Jewish ideologies no more facilitate Jewish survival than they facilitate Jewish suicide. KMac’s model could, potentially, make sense, if we didn’t know the actual real-world results of Jewish behavior. The actual results of Jewish behavior is Jews getting themselves killed again and again and again, Jewish continuity being constantly imperiled and on the brink of giving out, which suggests that “GES” is perhaps not the likeliest explanation for Jewish behavior.

                  If you insist, as KMac’s acolytes always insist, that there is a common ideological denominator, a shared framework of thought and psyche, to all Jewish movements, from fringe to mainstream, antireligious to ultra-religious, and anything around and in between, then that common denominator may well be something other than “group survival,” e.g., its diametrical opposite. I suggested that as a funny thought-experiment, to demonstrate how GES boils down to KMac’s just-so-story, which just-so-story is not especially convincing, given how easy it is to turn it on its head, with results whose explanatory power is equally robust, if not (as per Jim) even more robust than the original.

                • jim says:

                  Jewish ideologies no more facilitate Jewish survival than they facilitate Jewish suicide

                  On the contrary, it is completely obvious that they facilitate Jewish suicide and arguing that they facilitate Jewish survival requires quite a bit of mental gymnastics. During the crusades, essentially all Jews sided with the Muslims, while handful were kidnapped to Spain to translate dusty books looted from Muslim libraries, which were translations of books the Muslims had looted from Byzantine and Indian libraries.

                  Most Jews in the world today are descended from that handful.

                  And today, in Europe, once again siding with the Muslims, who are generally expelling the Jews as soon as their numbers are sufficient.

                  There is one Jewish ideology that positively definitely promotes Jewish survival, and that is old type orthodoxy, now called ultra orthodoxy. The rest of them are at worst auto genocidal, at best ineffectual in promoting Jewish survival. Israeli nationalism would promote Jewish survival if Israel was Jewish state, but it is not a Jewish state if it allows non Jews to hold state, quasi state, and quasi statal office. As I have said many times before, Israel will finish what Hitler began.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >I don’t believe that “me against my brothers; me and my brothers against my cousins; me and my brothers and cousins against the world” is lack of cohesion. It’s a particular scheme for cohesion, which is not the Aryan scheme.

                  Rather, this is exactly the Aryan mode of cooperation, placed in other words. Observing the ordinals of conflict. Observation of certain modes of competition along certain ordinals. Turning on nearer in lieu of farther is naturally subversive while farther is at large.

                  Aryans are animated by faustian spirit, which drives them with dreams of expanding and making the stars above their dominion, to divine the utmosts of Divine Law, to reach towards theophantic communion with God, which is predominance over, through, and throughout this plane of Creation. Fallen forms of a desire for mastery unalloyed by any virtue to recommend it result in destructive authophagy rather than expansive success.

                • BlackFlag says:

                  @S yes the small number is a good criticism finally! The MO are about 1/3rd the size of the AMISH iirc.
                  I was just pointing out a sub-population that is:
                  1) Based
                  2) Has good TFR
                  3) Elite
                  4) Politically involved
                  5) Lacking weird hang-ups (e.g. Amish, Hassidim) that might prevent accumulation of resources and power.

                  A healthy people.

                • Adam says:

                  Just a general comment-

                  There is no more expensive and worthless belief than “I am special”. You can find it in addicts of every type, and at the root of every spiritual pathology. It is why Jews are Jews, boomers are boomers, and drunks are drunks.

                  The Jews seem to have the belief that “we are special”, with the in-group and out-group not particularly well defined.

                  I am special is a suicidal belief if there ever was one.

              • Anon says:

                Massive levels of Cope by you, paragraph after paragraph. Ironically Modern Orthodox are the LEAST influential group of Jews politically, with the exception of the even less important ultraorthodox.

                • Wolf says:

                  The two least influential groups are still more influential that any White goy ethnicity. And they’re growing. Mormons were doing well but they cucked. Amish will have trouble competing since they are unable to harness tech.
                  Why are you coping goy? Go build a cohesive competent collective or STFU.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  Posts like this reveal the poster’s real objection to the Cathedral is his own status neurosis within its hierarchy, not a deep opposition.

                  Modern Orthodox do not have positions in the GAE structure because they have something better i.e. a biological future. They do not have neurosis about their status in this dying structure.

                  The question is whether Cathedralized Jews who promote “no future” for all Cathedral subjects are willing to tolerate “no future” for themselves because they know other, biologically very similar, Jews in groups like Modern Orthodox and Israeli National Religious will continue to have a biological future anyway. Meanwhile, their most competent rivals – the Europeans – are reduced in number and mogrelized.

                  The Jews are well aware that even with the immense power they currently have over Europeans, a crushing and perhaps fatal power, they are still only perhaps 30 million facing around 700 million more or less pure Europeans. They must not lose a single battle or risk complete destruction. Even a brief loss of power risks complete destruction. This forces them to act as mobile bandits even though they appear to be well entrenched in state hierarchies. Since 30 million cannot defeat 700 million this really means they must *avoid* every battle rather than win it, which is why they are bandits of fraud rather than force.

                • jim says:

                  > The question is whether Cathedralized Jews who promote “no future” for all Cathedral subjects are willing to tolerate “no future” for themselves because they know other, biologically very similar, Jews in groups like Modern Orthodox and Israeli National Religious will continue to have a biological future anyway. Meanwhile, their most competent rivals – the Europeans – are reduced in number and mogrelized

                  It is completely obvious that Cathedralized Jews who promote “no future” for all Cathedral subjects particularly and especially desire no future for orthodox Jews. They are converging the orthodox. The orthodox are losing cohesion, which caused them to lose the diamond trade, because they are losing control of their women. The ultra orthodox are reproducing. The orthodox are, like the Mormons, suffering declining fertility, which will be considerably lower still in the next generation. Their priesthood is half converged on faggotry, and converged on women. Not all the congregation is converged on women, but they will be.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  I am not convinced Orthodox Jewry is being defeated, whether despite the best efforts of Jews in the Cathedral or “despite the best efforts” of Jews in the Cathedral.

                  The Amsterdam Orthodox won’t even lift their death sentence on Baruch Spinoza.

                  Is there any Orthodox congregation with gay marriages or a woman Rabbi?

                • jim says:

                  Nah, but pretty much all Orthodox rabbi insist on divorce at female whim. For Christians, took a while to go from divorce at female whim to single moms being declared saints and then to openly gay bishops, but the Orthodox are walking that path. The one leads to the next.

                  Having accepted divorce at female whim, they are walking a path that will result in gay married rabbis transsexualizing their children in due course.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  “but pretty much all Orthodox rabbi insist on divorce at female whim”

                  This is an ancient Jewish practice, not something due to the Cathedral pressure.

                • jim says:

                  Jews reinvent ancient Jewish practice at alarmingly frequent intervals.

                  It is not ancient Jewish practice.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Get_(divorce_document)#Mesorevet_get_(Get_refusal)

                  It’s old enough to be mentioned in the New Testament:

                  “It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:

                  “But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.”

                  The Jewish Law in principle allowed the man to divorce at will, while denying women the right to divorce. But the Rabbis came up with a typically Rabbinic solution, whereby the man could refuse, but the Rabbinic courts could punish him until he relented.

                  Christ tries some wordgames to put enforceable marriage back, and actually strengthens Christian marriage to essentially prohibit divorce in almost any circumstance.

                  The writ of divorcement under the control of the man is in Deuteronomy.

                • jim says:

                  You are arguing like a Jew. Argument from brazen chutzpah. Most of the Talmud is similarly frivolous lawsuits against the commandments of the Lord and against normal human decency and civilized conduct.

                  Your claim was that Rabbis insisting that wives have the right to divorce at whim was an ancient Jewish principle. It is a late twentieth century principle, and the evidence you cite is not evidence for its ancient existence, it is evidence against its ancient existence.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  It is not a late 20th century principle. It is a principle that dates back to before New Testament times.

                  If you believe it is a late 20th century principle adopted in response to Progressivism in the gentile and secular world, show me the evidence.

                  If anything the mandatory no fault divorce that is now everywhere in the world is a world convergence on Rabbinic practice in marriage law, just as peer review is a world convergence on Rabbinic practice in truth-seeking.

                • jim says:

                  One cannot prove a negative. You have to produce evidence of pre twentieth century rabbinical female initiated divorce I do not have to produce evidence of absence. Absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Jews invent a brand new ancient Jewish tradition at short and frequent intervals. A twenty first century rabbi claiming that earlier rabbis did it is not evidence. You need a nineteenth century rabbi.

                  When the twenty first century jewess wants divorce to shit test her husband, or because she thinks it might get her another midnight booty call from the pool boy, the rabbi demands that the husband go through the forms of male initiated divorce.

                  Judaism was invented in the sixth century of our lord, and has been reinvented at frequent intervals ever since.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  [*unresponsive*]

                • jim says:

                  I asked for an old Rabbi writing on divorce, a Rabbi from centuries ago. Not what twenty first century rabbis claim earlier rabbis said.

                  Judaism gets reinvented at alarmingly frequent intervals. It is the most recent major faith.

                  For someone who purports to be a raging anti semite, you sound mighty Jewish and strangely trusting of twenty first century Jewish sources.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I thought Orthodox Jewish women couldn’t divorce without the husband agreeing, to the point there was a mafia of Orthodox Jews who had a business of taking the woman’s side and who would kidnap and torture the husband until he signed the agreement. And Orthodox can only testify against other Orthodox with the rabbinate’s permission… which is rarely given and not in this case.

                  For once the Feds were somehow on the side of the family as these guys were arrested (can’t remember how they got them some sort of sting) and shut down.

                • jim says:

                  You thought correctly. But as Jewish Orthodoxy came under ever increasing heat it suddenly discovered it had an ancient tradition to the contrary 🙃.

                  They are holding out on female rabbis and gay marriage, but have recently discovered an ancient tradition that no one should say anything unkind about gays, and that gays should not suffer social exclusion – nor be denied social contact with other people’s children, which leads me to expect female rabbis and gay marriage before long, though it is taking considerably longer than I expected.

              • Pax Imperialis says:

                >elite
                >household income: 188k

                Some elite have high incomes, some have average incomes, other have low incomes. Trump is rich yet was never accepted into the New York elite and later in life never accepted into the political elite. The elite tend to be richer than the plebs, but not always. Orthodox Jews tend to be wealthy because of near monopolies on very niche markets such as New York rental real estate, but such work has always been seen as dirty and low class by social political elites.

                You have shown that the Orthodox Jews are wealthy, can you show they are powerful? How many Jewish senators and Jewish congressmen wear the Kippah or Streimel at all times? It’s pretty close to zero. That’s because they are not Orthodox.

                >The two least influential groups are still more influential that any White goy ethnicity.

                How many Jewish Presidents? All presidents, with the exception of Obama, have been White of Christian origin. There are more Black senators than there are Jewish. There are currently 54 African-American representatives in the congress compared to 27 Jews. Not only do Orthodox Jews have close to zero representation among the Jewish political elites, but the Jewish political elites are outnumbered by Blacks. Moreover, White liberals remain the dominant elite faction in America. Jewish influence is only possible with the consent of White American elites.

                Modern Orthodox Jews have outsized visibility not only in pro-Israel crowds at White House events, but also within the administration itself. Members of the community, whose religious orientation falls between the Conservative denomination and the more stringent traditional-Orthodox world, have been appointed to posts such as senior White House adviser, peace envoy and US ambassador to Israel.

                Outsized visibility compared to what? Another minority faction? Does visibility mean power? Orthodox Jews are very visible with their hats, but outside of pro-Isreal crowds they seem to completely disappear. Moreover, you point to the Trump administration as evidence of Orthodox elite. Did Orthodox power persist after Trump? How pro-Isreal is the Biden admin. I hear that libs are getting triggered over Isreal’s new government. They are pushing the Biden admin to take action.

                I’m sure the pro-Isreal crowd (which btw is mostly White Evangelicals) is doing well.🙃

                >Why are you coping goy? Go build a cohesive competent collective or STFU.

                A collective you say? Are you a fan of collective farming? Can you tell me what the National Socialists did wrong?

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  [*deleted for sounding awfully like a Soros shill*]

                • jim says:

                  I will debate these claims if you can tell us what Soros has been up to.

                  The story you are telling us is, in its core utility to Soros, that there is a absolutely no way Soros, Zelensky, and Victoria Nuland would fund and arm Nazis, but obvious they are funding and arming Nazis.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  On Soros: see my previous post.

                  Zelensky and Nuland do not mind funding “Nazis”* provided they can be crushed afterwards. A Ukraine-Azov victory would not result in Ukraine emerging as a non-aligned Nazi country, but the rapid destruction of Azov and Ukraine’s transformation into a Prog state like Romania (i.e. depopulated into GAE megalopolises further west). Why should the Jews Zelensky and Nuland fear their own golem?

                  *It is unclear to me what these people actually believe. The original Nazis were clearly not Wotanists (the equivalent of Slavic Old Belief), if you look carefully at their ideologues. Many “Neo Nazis” have as much in common with Ur-Nazis as Irving Kristol has with HL Mencken.

                • jim says:

                  Can they be crushed afterwards? They are the only martial group in the Ukraine with internal cohesion. “Crushing” them seems chancy.

                  A more plausible explanation is that they do not need crushing, because they and Soros worship the same demons – and that demon worshiping Jews do not particularly feel cohesion with Jews that worship the God of the Old Testament.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  Sure. Just stop paying them. If they rebel the US military can destroy them. Uprising against the Holy Ukrainian Democracy. Also, we are shocked, shocked to discover Nazis in this establishment.

                  Azov has never had a path to establishing a Nazi state and this should have been extremely obviously to anyone considering joining them with the real intention of re-establishing a sovereign Nazi state.

                • jim says:

                  Can the US military destroy them? Its recent performance has been underwhelming. Libya and Afghanistan.

                  If the US military was so mighty and omnipotent, the Global American Empire would not be in the poop that it is in.

                  The main difference between the original Nazis and Azov, is that Nazified Christianity was clearly Christian, while Nazified paganism is clearly demonic.

                • pinochet's ghost says:

                  If a single regiment of Nazis can conquer the GAE today then maybe they should.

    • Kevin C. says:

      I can’t be the only one who, upon reading that bit about “Hapakenazi,” was reminded of the “Judeo-Hapas” in this /pol/ meme, “Races of the USA – 2121”:

      https://ia803403.us.archive.org/24/items/5147723206c-187da-48cf-44644d-742e-3a-129333922ff-30bffe-152621ea-11a-88e-1/5147723206c187da48cf44644d742e3a129333922ff30bffe152621ea11a88e1.png

      • Anonymous says:

        This meme is suspiciously silent on kebab demographics.

        • Kunning Druegger says:

          After you get past the thin veneer of humorous neologisms, it becomes obvious that it’s just anti-white propaganda. The lack of kebab is a pretty interesting tell, good eye.

  20. Red says:

    Pretty good Anglin article on Poland being forcibly converged:

    https://dailystormer.in/poland-deputy-justice-minister-threatened-by-university-for-opposing-faggot-armbands/

    KD link:
    https://archive.ph/LRTON

    Poles are known for being stupid, and it appears that stereotype is very true.
    Apparently, they are so stupid, they thought they could ally with the United States and not have hardcore gay anal forced on their entire nation by the government.

    • Fireball says:

      “Yes! revenge, revenge, revenge on the enemy With God – and even in spite of God!”

  21. Kunning Druegger says:

    tl;dr martial arts good because practice + endurance + cooperation good

    The “martial arts” sub-threads are fascinating, excellent sources of information and should be read by everyone. There are at least 3 places ITT that have the whole discussion spread out between them, so I want to elevate the discussion here.

    First, and foremost, men of good will carry guns they know how to use with confidence and restraint. Period. If you don’t, you are not who and what you need to be. If you can’t, same problem. No excuses. Arm yourself and carry always.

    Second, outside of the dojo/ring/circle, fights are sloppy. If you are uninitiated, you will be terribly surprised with how tire you are before the first jab/kick/grab/swing even flies. The adrenaline rush of an impending altercation is intense. Endurance + luck wins between the untrained every time. Endurance + training wins every time with rare exception. The biggest posse wins every time almost without exception. Luck is always a factor, and luck is where preparation meets opportunity almost all the time. There is good luck and bad luck, and good luck in a street fight can be bad luck in a courtroom. On the whole, in current year, it’s almost always better to avoid the fight, spot the trap, flee the mob, and deescalate the conflict. But sometimes, you have no choice but to fight.

    Third, you lose nothing by training in martial arts. But, what is a martial art? It is not karate, or any of the highly technical “martial arts.” They are like dancing, as compared to fucking, which would be actual fighting. If you are an accomplished dancer, you will probably have the capacity to be a stupendous stud in the sack. But being a good dancer has no bearing on your double back beast performance necessarily. You may not have time to strew roses about, light candles, and serenade that qt3.14 with your songs. You might have to just hike her skirt up, thumb lock that gusset, and pump ‘er clean in under a minute. You never know when you might need to fuck, and you may not have time to prepare or plan, so best to be ready.

    Fourth, you lose nothing by training in martial arts, and that training is a few different things. Part of it is the dojo or gym where you spar and learn and practice. But it is also the building of endurance, the training with weights, and the recuperating and rest between injuries. So when we say “martial arts,” we are lumping many things together for efficiency’s sake. Don’t think of bathrobes and belts and mats and medals; think of two dudes eye to eye, looking for an opening, while a circle of friends and enemies hollers out encouragement and derision. Think about running with weight, pushing through pain, studying anatomy and practicing blade placement. There are martial arts out there, practices and methods that fit within a semantic definition of “martial,” as in making war or of warlike things.

    I’m not telling anyone they are wrong, nor am I saying who is right. I am sure there are karate guys who could kill people and MMA guys who couldn’t. But I am saying, categorically, that there is an undeniable utility to having a shared physical language between men. Being able to square up and off in the manner taught with BJJ, GKD, kickboxing, and others, will make you dangerous. That dangerousness comes from technique of course, but also from having strangers unmet inches from being allies with a minimum amount of discourse. You will be dangerous with fellows beside you who you have submitted in the ring, and in turn have been submitted by. And you will have endurance + technique, and thus will be a terrible opponent for whichever dumbfuck nigger/wigger/spic/wop stupid enough to think they can take you because you were polite but firm.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      >McDojo was an arrogant asshole who figured that because he was good at karate, he could take me[…]he was a total stranger who showed up out of nowhere

      This is a telling detail. Very likely, for all the years he has been larping in his dojo, they have never actually gone fully live against each other, and so he was spoiling for an opportunity to really ‘let loose’ and ‘prove himself’.

      It’s kind of similar to the 20 somethings who volunteer to go to ukraine to get blown up by mortar fire in the name of globohomo, simply because they are seeking some kind, any kind, of outlet for their desire to fight.

      In guys who train in things like judo, or wrestling, or boxing, or muay thai, or mma, and so on, you rarely ever find this same kind of insecurity, because they get their fill of going hard without inhibitions every week, and don’t need to shit where they eat in life seeking the same experience.

      • alf says:

        That is exactly the point i am trying to impress here; this belief that there is some special and insurmountable distinction between ‘sport’ and ‘reality’, when *there isn’t*.

        PC not to throw oil on the fire (who am I kidding I’m totally throwing oil on the fire), a recurring accusation seems to be that while you have experience in the ‘sports’ department, you don’t in the ‘reality’ department,while Jim claims experience in both.

        • Karl says:

          It’s great to have experience both in sports and in real fights. Problem is his disdain for martial arts training in general. Of course, there are plenty of styles that are useless or even harmful to the practitioner, but there are some that teach useful skills and prepare the student for a real fight.

          Another problem is that because Jim claims that he has been in real fights and had some training, he might not realize the benefits he had from his training and discount them unjustly.

          • alf says:

            Isn’t krav maga supposed to be a martial art meant for real life fights with no rules?

            • Karl says:

              Yes, and it suffers from lack of sparring

              • alf says:

                Hm OK. So that begs the question for jim: if not with martial arts, how does one practice for real fights?

                • jim says:

                  Well of course martial arts are the best one can do, though lifting iron and related exercises matter more than martial arts training.

                  It is not that it is useless, it is that people grotesquely overestimate the extent to which it makes them more effective, and, deluded, will go up against superior numbers, or against someone bigger and stronger – who has perhaps been lifting iron and using testosterone, and get killed or permanently injured.

                  That you would win a friendly combat in a completely one sided fashion is not a reliable indicator that you would win an unfriendly combat. That you can in fact only train for friendly combat does not mean that the training is useless, but it does mean that its utility in unfriendly combat is considerably less than friendly combat would lead you to believe.

                  I am particular pissed by gaming the rules – by using moves that vulnerable to countermoves than any real life normie in a real life fight are going to apply, likely causing serious injury or death. You are taking unfair advantage of the fact that in friendly ritualized combat seriously hurting you is off limits. This always pissed me off every single time, because my adversary was taking unfair advantage of the fact that I am reluctant to permanently injure or kill him. He should not use my restraint for his advantage.

                  Gaming the rules is not learning to fight well. It is learning to find badly. It makes you “better” at ritual friendly combat at the cost of making you worse at unfriendly combat, and this is the issue that I am disputing with Pseudo-Chrysostom. He advocates moves that in real life are going to get you seriously and permanently injured, and quite likely killed.

                  It is not that all martial arts moves are dangerous and ineffective in real life. It is that some martial arts moves, quite a lot of martial arts moves, rely on your opponent following the rules. And these are dangerous and ineffective in real life, and I also feel that they are unfair in martial arts, violating the spirit of the rules by following the letter.

                  It always felt unfair to me when someone took advantage of the fact that I am not going to make like his head is a bowling ball, that I am not going to hit him on the back of the neck just below the skull, that I am not going to do a focus strike on his temporomandibular joint.

                  I will grant Pseudo-Chrysostom that it is unlikely that a normie is going to go after your temporomandibular joint, but a normie is absolutely going to go after the back of your neck and make like your face is the grip on a bowling ball. Making like someone’s face is the grip on a bowling ball is second only to kicking people in the head when they are down. A normie generally will not fight, but if he does fight, his moves are a punching your head if you are up, kicking your head if you are down, and making like your face is the grip on bowling ball if he needs to control your position. It is instinctive, like sex.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >Gaming the rules is not learning to fight well.

                  This is a funny situation because this is the exact same argument i often make in my own circles.

                  I won’t go so far as to say that training a point-fighting style is not better than nothing… but they were not effectively training themselves in preparation for something like a fight, and in some respects you might say were even making themselves worse.

                  Now should I take the fixiation on calf kicks in particular a tacit admission of the superiority of everything else being said? (That is a rhetorical question.)

                  You have raised the plaint that i have at one point misrepresented what you meant to say, so i can only wish you could extend me the same charity.

                  There is noone who fights using only low kicks to the exclusion of anything else, in any serious format. To suggest such a thing is patently ridiculous and it is pretty low down to imply that it is an argument i was making. It is like anything else always something used intelligently in accordance with the looks your opponent is giving you.

                  There are a lot of things that can happen in a fight between professionals that very well can never even enter into the picture in a tussle with a hothead outside the club by simple fact of them never even becoming necessary in the first place; the matter is already decided by something much more basic and fundamental because the untrained hothead has no idea about all the holes he is leaving open.

                • Jehu says:

                  I had a friend back in college who studied martial arts, and their sensai, who was from Korea explained the practices there in the 60s and 70s among martial artists.

                  You’d learn a new move, combination, or form from your own master, and the first thing you’d do was go out and pick a fight with someone to try it out under real conditions. Ironically, usually that someone was another martial artist doing the same thing. He of course didn’t recommend this practice to his students, but it does aptly demonstrate the difference between the techniques that will work in real conditions from the ones that only work because of competitive rules of engagement.

    • Neofugue says:

      Andrew Tate on Martial Arts

      TL;DR: If you need to fight, learn boxing, because you need to always be on your feet and prepared to run in an emergency. BJJ is useless and a waste of time.

      • Adam says:

        I can appreciate his skill and accomplishments but these kind of conclusions while reasonable are useless. Fighting doesn’t work like math works. It’s a roll of the dice and a game of poker all in one.

        • Neofugue says:

          My TL;DR was inadequate, so let me outline all of what Tate says:

          1. Learn to box. It is rare to kick in combat. If in a club, there is simply not enough room to kick. If in jeans, it is impossible to kick. If on grass, there lies the risk of slipping.

          2. BJJ is useless because the rules on the street are different than the rules of the cage. You never want to be on the ground because you don’t know if he has a knife, if he has a friend who will kick you in the face, if the police are going to show up, or if a gang is going to turn at the corner. There is biting, there is eye gouging, there are weapons. If you grapple someone, he can throw you on concrete, not an octagon.

          3. Real fights aren’t fair. Almost all fights are against multiple opponents. 1v1 you may win by grappling someone, but in real life you can only grapple one person at a time. If you cannot fight multiple opponents at once, you can get yourself into serious injury or death.

          • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

            Whenever you see examples of ‘trained athletes’ getting murked, it is almost always cases where an IBJJF player tried to pull guard on someone, or a karate point fighter who doesn’t know how to fight past one touch and got pressed in the clinch, so on along those lines.

            Balancing, positional dominance, riding and escapes, these are all fundamental preconditions of possibility. Whenever you see things go wrong with someone in a tussle, it is all but always because of failure in one or more of these aspects; everything you would want to do or not do depends on it.

      • Karl says:

        That “you need to always be on your feet” sounds a lot like “you need to avoid being hit”. In a real fight, you will be hit and you might end up on the ground.

        Of course, you need to learn boxing, but if you only learn boxing, you are very vulnerable to a man who also learns some grappling.

        • Pax Imperialis says:

          The problem with most martial arts is that they encourage one to end up on the ground and stay there. Of course being skilled at ground work is good to have, but the purpose should be to get off the ground and not stay there. In a real fight you have to get back up.

          • jim says:

            That is one symptom of the fundamental problem, not the fundamental problem itself.

            The fundamental problem is providing a realistic emulation of the art of inflicting death and serious injury without actually inflicting death or serious injury.

            That they encourage you to go to the ground and stay there is because no one is allowed to kick you in the head, or to punch you at the joint between the spine and your brain.

            Similarly, they encourage stupid holds, because your adversary is not allowed to treat your head like a bowling ball and use the skull recesses for eyes and nose as the grips on a bowling ball, a hold that is very popular in real combat, one of the most popular holds, perhaps the most popular, just as kicking people in the head when they are down is the most popular strike.

            These problems are inherent if you want to have combat without lasting damage, and become much worse when people cleverly game the rules, using the shield provided by the rules as an offensive weapon.

            A huge problem with the striking arts, other than boxing, is that they are necessarily scored by strike, rather than by actually harming the opponent, which encourages deluded beliefs about the effectiveness of strikes.

            These problems are few of the many problems of fundamental problem of providing a realistic emulation of the art of inflicting death and serious injury without actually inflicting death or serious injury.

            Pseudo-Chrysostom is telling us that ritualized symbolic combat is the same as real combat, or, for unarmed combat, adequately similar. This is the voice of of a man who has never been in real combat.

            In real unarmed combat getting kicked in the head or one’s eyes and nose being treated as the grips in a bowling ball are major considerations, but an even bigger consideration than either of those is that anything becomes a weapon in the hands of someone willing to wield it, that unarmed combat always swiftly becomes armed combat if it goes on for very long at all.

            • Karl says:

              In a fight, all holds are stupid. Locks are for breaking something and are a different matter entirely.

            • Starman says:

              In a fight without my gun or some other weapon, my instinct is to grab the nearest pointed object.

              • Kunning Druegger says:

                Same here. If I don’t have my gun… well I guess I’ll need to use my other gun. “What if you lose that gun?” Going to secondary backup. “Ok, fine, but what if you…” WHAT PART OF I AM GOING TO USE A GUN ARE YOU NOT GETTING.

            • Pax Imperialis says:

              >symptom of the fundamental problem, not the fundamental problem itself.

              I’m very ignorant on martial art sports. I never paid attention to it, so you’re more informed than me.

              I just know that eye gouging is extremely traumatic to survivors and methed-up addicts are liable to try to chew faces off. Tumbling around on the ground as BJJ would suggest one should do is incomprehensible to me.

              I also see that, even in highly controlled ritual combat, kicking is very risky to attempt against a standing opponent. It can quickly lead to being on the ground with all that entails. Better to keep both feet on the ground in most cases in contrast to the pathological obsession most martial arts have with extremely fancy kicks.

              >that unarmed combat always swiftly becomes armed combat

              From what I’ve seen, most unarmed combat starts with someone getting jumped by a pack of “youths.” It’s after the combat and they are knocked out on the ground that the “youths” decide to pick up bricks or other shit and smash the guys head. It rarely gets to the point of being armed because they feel safety in numbers.

              Of course this only happens to people who are actually unarmed. Trayvon Martin, among others, found that out the hard way.

          • Karl says:

            Of course, you have to get up as quickly as possible because someone will kick your head while you are on the ground with his buddy. Problem is that it is difficult to get up, when the man you are grappling with does not want you to get up. Difficult when you trained grappling on the ground, much more so if you didn’t

            • jim says:

              > It is difficult to get up, when the man you are grappling with does not want you to get up.

              Yes it is, but in a real fight, he has to prevent you from getting up while keeping his face and testicles out of reach of your hands. Which can indeed be done, and is not that hard, but it is not the standard way of keeping people down in which martial artists are trained. It should be. It is also considerably less easy to get people down in the first place in a real fight – the most effective means being a boxing style blow to the head sufficient to cause the guy to fall down. Throwing them down with the usual throws is apt to expose you to countermeasures forbidden in friendly ritualized combat.

              If someone has a pretty good punch, he can probably make a normie fall down, and as I have said, you can make a drunk fall down by breathing on him heavily. But it not all that easy to take someone down with a punch to the head. It is not a reliable way of taking someone out unless you have a big physical strength advantage. It is a whole lot easier if you blind them with a big heavy tactical flashlight and then bang them on the side of the head with it.

              • Karl says:

                You misunderstood my point. I mean that it takes skill to get up while an untrained man is grappling with you on the ground.

      • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

        When folks ask questions like ‘what style of melee combat is best for fighting 20 people at once’, it’s one of the most common noob traps there is.

        There’s no particular arrangement of deck chairs that is stopping the Titanic from sinking, so to speak. Like you aren’t in the right ballpark anymore in terms of what you should have been focusing on. Trying to base an approach in such things around the idea that you are going to be dealing with this kind of question is just gimping yourself in those cases where it can actually become relevant.

      • SJ says:

        Let’s do a shallow dive on Andy real quick since zir is an obvious psyop. Oval face, sloping forehead, shallow eyes and lack of brow ridge. Check. Hmm also does the Yoni over zir’s crotch and apparent mastectomy scars. Verdict? A follower of the divine principle and a horse, of course, a horse is a horse and not a deer. No sir that is one manly man. The only question that remains is, is it more gay to be attracted to Andy or to Taylor Swift? The real questions of our times.

    • Red says:

      First, and foremost, men of good will carry guns they know how to use with confidence and restraint. Period. If you don’t, you are not who and what you need to be. If you can’t, same problem. No excuses. Arm yourself and carry always.

      Indeed, but it’s not enough these days:

      https://archive.ph/3wZJw

      Shooting a nigger who’s beating you is going to land you in jail for a long time unless he has a knife or a gun. You either need blunt weapons weapons or you need to be able to win a fight with your fists. Brass knuckles is kind of the killer app in this regard, but quite illegal.

      • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

        Roll of quarters is the classic hack.

        It’s very easy to break your hands on someone’s forehead, which is why holding something in your hands to brace your knuckles makes such a huge difference.

        A long heavy maglight built for bludgeoning people is another classic workaround.

      • Starman says:

        @Red

        The National Justice Party (NJP) is fed shill operation. They pushed the frankenvaxx and continue to do so. Their members blocked me when I ask a Redpill on Women Question.

        • Red says:

          @Starman

          I’d wondered why they allowed in Duckduck go search for the story when everything else was the censored version. Also their version left out how the nig groped his girlfriend. This story received the Emit Till treatment, even though it was a clear cut case of self defense caught on video.

          • Kunning Druegger says:

            I can’t be arsed to dig into it, but I bet there is more to that case than meets the eye, at least on the legal/enforcement side. In no way am I saying the nog is innocent, and timing is a strange beast, so it could very well be the case that the murderous cracka is completely innocent. But if that were the actual case, I would fully expect a successful appeal that never gets reported on. BLM and Soros DAs prey on the weak and stupid. I wonder what case files and court docs are available…

            NO. Nope, not doing it. No time and no desire to become ever more depressed.

            • Red says:

              >I would fully expect a successful appeal that never gets reported on.

              Ya, not how things work after BLM. Trials are outright rigged and so are the appeals. Consider what happened to General Flynn. That’s normal.

    • Karl says:

      First, and foremost, men of good will carry guns they know how to use with confidence and restraint. Period. If you don’t, you are not who and what you need to be. If you can’t, same problem. No excuses. Arm yourself and carry always.

      Do you mean that as absolute as it sounds? Even in the US, it is not always and anywhere legal to carry a gun. In many countries, carrying a gun is illegal (unless you have a special permit which is extremely hard to get) and if you are caught you will go to jail.

      I recommend to carry a gun only if it is safe to do so. If not, carry a knife and learn how to fight with it.

      • notglowing says:

        Carrying a gun is illegal in many countries, including here. Permits are for owning and handling weapons, but you’re not allowed to carry them unless you are a police officer.

        Some Americans don’t seem to understand how it actually *is* impossible to legally defend yourself with a gun in much of the west. Unless you are within your own house, perhaps.

        • Kunning Drueger says:

          My statement was absolute for a reason. When I misspeak I try to correct it. If you inhabit a place wherein you cannot be your best possible self, you need to have some pretty compelling reasons. I love my BJC eurobros, I love my European heritage, please keep that in mind for this next part.

          I will never understand, not have I ever heard a good reason for, why men of good will insist on living in Europe. The battle is over, the continent has been lost. With the single exception case of Switzerland and Swiss Type enclaves (Basque, Roma, underground/underworld communities) there is no reason to stay.

          Orania is a noble endeavor, I hope it is the first of many. But besides that, every single white male of good will and value should pack up, right now, and illegally immigrate to the USA. Every single one. Worst case scenario, the liberal status quo actually creates and enforces effective immigration curtailing law. Best case scenario, my homeland gets flooded with Alfs, Notglowings, Carl’s, and Western Talibans. FUcK YES. That would based on levels that shouldn’t be possible. Governors would issue blanket pardons. Demographic inversion to make the mudskin enablers blush. An unadulterated infusion of EVROPA into the US would be a victory unparalleled.

          America is not a ShangriLa. Things aren’t perfect. But what we lack is density of baseness. We need concentrations. If one sixth of Denmark, Sweden, Spain, England, and Italy showed up in Texas or Idaho or Florida… holy shit, what a bonkers way to kick off the Day of the Rope, Rake, and Pillow.

          Think about it, bros. Guns, pussy, and space. It ain’t God’s country… but it could be.

          • Karl says:

            I see your point. I guess I just love the land of my ancestors and my people there. Moreover, in my country I have a circle of friends and relatives. I feel safer in a group than alone as a stranger in a foreign country, even if I’d then be an armed stranger.

            True, I can’t legally carry a gun, but I have not yet been in a situation where pepperspray and a knife would not have been enough. Moreover, there are plenty of guns in Germany, even more so in neighboring countries to the east. When the need for guns arrives I’m confident that within a few days me and mine will have guns. I think it is easier to get rifles for my friends here than it would be to get friends for my rifles if I were a stranger in a foreign land.

            I have thought about moving, but moving farther out to the fringes of the empire or even outside looks more appealing to me than moving closer to the center.

            • Kunning Druegger says:

              I totally understand. I’m not advocating for you, Karl, to just up and move. I want every Karl and Karl-type to move.

              Knives and tasers are allowed to you because there’s no way to build an army with European males using knives or tasers. Once the imported Muslims become a problem for the Cathedral, the rules will change because you actually can build an army of muzzies with knives.

              • Karl says:

                It is illegal to carry tasers in Germany. They can be legally bought, but if you want to carry a taser you need a permit like you need to carry a gun.

                Don’t think this has to do with Muslims. As far as I know, they aren’t interested in tasers.

          • alf says:

            I will never understand, not have I ever heard a good reason for, why men of good will insist on living in Europe. The battle is over, the continent has been lost.

            Honestly fair point.

            I’ll nuance slightly — Europe has had centuries of civilization that upholding Christian values. You’ll still find semi-functional vestiges of that civilization. Yes you have to know where to find it. In the cities, all the nice buildings are overgrown with twentieth century grey drab, and its inhabitants in large part replaced with foreigners. But European countryside… It’s beautiful. I love it. It has the kind of scenery you just can’t build in one lifetime. Like a real life shire.

            America is younger, and since a large part of it’s life has been spent under progressive rule — well correct me if I’m really off-mark, but it is ugly. Just the way stuff like cities, highways, suburbs, everything is built. Not meant to please the eye.

            That said everything you say stands. Europe is spiritually dying. Gaia worship is especially prevalent here. There is an air of passive acceptance of our supposed fate that I encounter less among Americans.

            • Kunning Druegger says:

              >America is ugly
              Lol, be careful what you take as truth. Yes, NYC is disgusting, LA looks like a landfill, and DC is gross. But the country itself is massive. We don’t have castles, true, but there are scores of quaint small towns, vast rolling hills with communities nestled inside, and geography spanning the gamut from Tropical (FL) to Arctic (AK) and everything in between.

              I think Euro bros need to enact the Iberian Method. When the Moors conquered Spain, they took everything but the Basque regions in the Pyrenees and a little chunk up North. Fortress Europe needs to identify these potential redoubts, as that is the only hope. If Greater Evropa can organize, reconquista is inevitable.

              America is not ugly, yet. Europe is not lost, yet. Orania endures, and maybe we all just need to go to Best Korea and become their mercenaries.

          • notglowing says:

            I live here because it is my land and there is nowhere else I would rather stay. My relatives who lived in other countries eventually came back as well.
            There are many issues but I wouldn’t consider leaving except temporarily, unless the situation was truly apocalyptic.

            The suggestion of moving to the US seems absurd to me when seen from a larger perspective. It’s not really sustainable for a large portion of europeans to just move away and enter the US to begin with; an influx of europeans might be good for america in one way, but they would 100% cause an even more significant leftward shift in politics, maybe less anti white but certainly more european social democrat. It’s like californians leaving for Texas and voting blue in Texas.

            If our people have a government that treats them like slaves it is frankly because they deserve it. Collectively, anyhow. I wouldn’t negatively impact your countries but many europeans would.
            Though, the ones moving would be better than the ones staying. The average european would be moderate when it comes to radical social justice stuff, but fairly extreme when it comes to socialist economic policies.

            Secondly, illegally immigrating the US reduces you to the status of a migrant worker slave, and you don’t get the same sympathy as beaners do. Literally both sides of the political spectrum will be happy to boot you. No sympathy from right wingers. And your job prospects are even worse than they are in Europe.

            If I entered the US legally, and got a job in my sector, I would be making 4-6x what I can make working for a local company here. I know this because I work for an american company from here and make that much. My tax rate in the US would definitely be lower than what it currently is (a little under 70%).

            However, I would have to say goodbye to some of my international bank accounts and similar things that don’t accept US persons, and in general trade away gaining some freedoms for other shitty restrictions americans face.
            Americans might be more free overall but it is really a trade-off.

            It’s not obvious whether or not I would be better off. In my country, people are fairly tolerant of wrong think, and authorities are less competent in enforcing the law.

            I am probably better off escaping to a third world or mid tier country if shit hits the fan.
            In which case, what does it even matter if I can bear arms here? Not gonna wait for the purge to happen for sure.

          • ten says:

            This is insanity to me. Europe is indeed lost – to america. It is the american political program that is fucking us. Soon america will be too preoccupied with crashing and burning to apply soft power to kill us, and i relish the opportunity of this vacuum. Bluegov manages the external empire, and soon it will manage us no more.

            Actual socialism was a live faith in Europe, but it is dead now. American tranny niggerism and global domination is an implanted metastasis.

            There is literally not a single place on earth i wouldn’t prefer before america.

    • alf says:

      I just want to say I will die regretting that we cannot resolve this with an IRL PC vs Jim fight.

      • Western Taliban says:

        Anyone who has ever been in real fights can spot the nerds pretending to be warriors and the people who have actually been in fights, you only need to skim over, it’s too obvious.

        Jim has very likely been in real fights and he has very real concerns, I’d bet good money on him. The most telling is how he points out that unhanded combat becomes handed quickly.

        Bottles, chains, bats (and similar bludgeon type things including rocks, but even chairs) and even skateboards were common weapons in my area, regardless if they were group fights between gangs or only individual and spontaneous. Less popular were butterfly knives, tasers, retractable batons like those used by police and even something that we called “vipers”, I don’t know how to translate to English but it’s an even better and deadlier form of taser, but this was very occasional since people weren’t literally trying to catch a body.

        For that I’ve seen the terror of switchblades, a man that knows how to use that and is malicious enough can turn an unsuspected individual into a corpse in an instant, it’s very scary. The most socking case I’ve seen was in the hands of ex-military, that guy knew how to stab to the heart with precision and it was truly shocking how easy he killed the other guy, we didn’t even realize he was dead until the whole thing was over, he died so quick it took like two seconds for him to keel over from a standing position.

        In America there’s easy access to gunfire so I’m guessing serious fights go to guns easy. But even nigger chimp outs I’ve seen in video go quick to throwing furnishing around.

        But no one really fights barehanded, first advice the military will give you is to arm yourself with whatever you can get for a reason.

        • Pax Imperialis says:

          >skateboards were common weapons

          A favorite among American leftists. Is it the same in Europe?

          >For that I’ve seen the terror of switchblades

          Sharp stabby things are intrinsically scary to humans for the same reason snakes are. Lots of evolutionary pressure to avoid being on the receiving end. Back in the days of line infantry and bayonets, there were instances where both sides refusing to bayonet charge each other. They would just exchange volleys of fire even in close proximity. The potential of getting stabbed was more frightening than being shot.

          Quite possible it’s the reason why a surprising number of people will attempt to argue with a man with a gun. The genetic based fear of being shot hasn’t been selected for over a long enough period.

          >chimp outs […] throwing furnishing

          lol, you innocent, naive, pure soul. Those aren’t fights. Those are their temper tantrums.

          >But no one really fights barehanded

          In America they do. Rampant perception of safety means lots of completely unarmed people roaming about in the cities. Even during riots as crazy as it is. Urban sprawl and paved over surfaces means little or nothing immediately available to pick up to whack the other guy as most fights occur on the streets. Just look at the first guy to attack Kyle Rittenhouse. He was unarmed and trying to tackle the guy with a rifle. Absolutely insane, and 99% of the crowed chasing after Rittenhouse were also likely unarmed.

          • Western Taliban says:

            No, switchblades are terrifying because they fit comfortably into a pocket, are very inconspicuous and can kill you in a swift and unsuspected motion, the receiving end is not the problem. Butterfly knives aren’t very impressive and also “stabby”, especially when the guy has to “jump it” to use it, it gives you time to prepare, it’s a lot more manageable.

            • Pax Imperialis says:

              >the receiving end is not the problem.

              Might be communication issue. The receiving end is the person getting stabbed. Getting stabbed is a problem.

              >switchblades are terrifying because they fit comfortably into a pocket

              Many knives fit comfortably into a pocket. Swords fit comfortably in a jacket (see machete attacks in America). Anything that can easily poke holes into you are terrifying when used by a willing opponent.

              >guy has to “jump it” to use it, it gives you time to prepare

              That time is when most people start to reconsider whether or not fighting is worth it in similar fashion when most people start to reconsider getting into confrontation when a man draws a gun. It’s a massive back off signal which is useful.

        • alf says:

          Jim has very likely been in real fights and he has very real concerns, I’d bet good money on him. The most telling is how he points out that unhanded combat becomes handed quickly.

          These are valid points. We must however also take into account that Jim is very old. For instance, would he be allowed to keep his walking stick during the fight? Some might consider this cheating through handed combat, but others might argue that he will spontaneously fall over without it.

          • Kunning Druegger says:

            Disrespectful Dutch asshole, I’m genuinely breathing heavily through my nose.

          • Karl says:

            There is no cheating in a real fight and there are martial arts that train the use of weapons like knives and sticks.

            Don’t blind yourself that martial arts is only unarmed

              • Pax Imperialis says:

                Interesting similarity between the Germans and Japanese. Both have the same family structure and inheritance tradition. Authoritarian family and first born son typically inherits everything. Strong emphasis on bloodline. Similar humor that relies on esoteric wordplay. Both are among the few countries to go fascist.

                Lesser know similar people are the Koreans (Park Chung Hee’s people) and northern Spanish (Franco’s people). Italy was the odd one when it came to being fascist.

                Lastly, that video is very, very disrespectful. You should be ashamed of yourself alf. The Germans, Spanish, Japanese, and Koreans are very funny.

                • Adam says:

                  Cabinet making and woodworking are trades dominated by Germans historically in Europe, similar to Japan in Asia. Woodworking is a discipline before it is anything else, and it is called the art and science of nuance. All of the best tooling is from Germany, Austria or Japan.

                  My mothers side is German, and whatever that discipline gene is I have. It is a sort of compulsive adherence and perpetual seeking of mastery above all else. It irritates a lot of people but the results speak for themselves.

                • Karl says:

                  Well, I liked the video and I am a German.

                  Your idea about inheritance traditions is true for the north, but not for the south

                • alf says:

                  Glad to have made you smile Karl.

        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          Where is this stubbornly recurrent presumption that i am making arguments i have never made coming from?

          I am more than familiar with all the popular narratives, theories, and stereotypes that flock in and around the world of the fight game, ‘self-defense’, and ‘tactical’ circles – which is presumably what people are responding too in the stead of anything *I* have actually been saying.

        • Aidan says:

          Knives are great, and cops tend to go easy on them. I’ve talked my way out of weapons charges several times over carrying illegal knives. Two trained knife fighters against each other will typically end with two casualties, but a trained knife fighter against somebody untrained is much safer.

          Knife fighting is like wrestling, but with the goal of controlling your opponent for just long enough to stick a knife in their vitals.

          • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

            Most historical martial arts grew out of the practice of grappling between men armed with swords or other weapons. That’s where the privileging of takedowns and pins in wrestling styles come from; being taken down and unable to immediately escape the man riding you was essentially a death sentence.

            Systematized practice of fisticuffs are relatively recent developments in the scale of millennia; and you could say was mostly done for sport from the beginning.

            • Aidan says:

              Indeed- I used to train historical martial arts. The spirit behind the historical texts is “how to most effectively kill without dying”. In that sense, using a gun is the deadliest martial art.

              However, the logic behind wrestling over fisticuffs as the “noble” martial art comes from Ancient Greece. It is a lot easier to wrestle under rules that avoid permanent damage. When men punch each other bare knuckled, permanent damage is apt to result, and this defeats the purpose of training for war.

              • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                Yes, forms of boxing were part of the ancient olympics as well.

                However, it’s not limited to the Ionians alone; you see the same trend in martial arts to native grappling styles in other civilizations like India and East Asia as well.

          • efl says:

            I’ve heard juries are even more hostile to knives than to guns

            • Aidan says:

              If you are good at talking to the cops, you will never see a jury, and cops are a lot harder on illegal guns than illegal knives, despite the fact that having a knife that is an inch too long or has an assisted opening mechanism is the same felony

              • Karl says:

                Sure, but why commit a crime just to have another inch of reach? The legal knife isn’t much worse than the illegal knife.

                Of course that depends on jurisdiction, but in general I’d go with the legal knife because cops might drop a charge when nobody was hurt with my knife, they can’t if I used it one someone. With a legal knife I can argue self-defense, with an illegal knife I can’t.

            • Red says:

              Trials are so rigged these days that you really should do everything possible to avoid them, IE don’t get arrested in the first place.

              Rittenhouse only walked because he actually got one of the few remaining somewhat fair Judges(A fair judge would have tossed the trial after the prostitution rested) and the whole trial was broadcast on national TV.

        • Kunning Drueger says:

          WT brings up some very good points. I would like to add, and the evidence will support my assertion here, that you can easily tell when you are watching an intra tribal squabble versus a fight between strangers. intra tribal will stay physical, even if death dismemberment and heavy damage results, whereas stranger on stranger goes very quickly to any possible object to hand that can be a weapon. I’m sure you can find exceptions, but I stand by the fact that when you are fighting with a tribe member, even if you do want to kill them, you will still abide by the unwritten rules that are burned into your brain. When you are struggling with an outsider, they dehumanize almost instantly. When someone goes out to kill someone with premeditation, they bring the weapon with them. When someone decides that they must kill someone in the moment, they find whatever weapon is available.

          I used to think that martial arts were this amazing skill set that allowed you to dominate any given situation. after getting my ass kicked up to but not quite at the point of permanent injury, I learned a few things about myself and life. that was when I became a complete believer in guns. prior to that, I stupidly believed there was honor in fighting. there is not. but working with a lot of law enforcement, something I noticed is that the guys who trained jujitsu or some other gritty martial art tended to walk away from physical squabbles in a much better state than the guys who relied on their utility belt being the deciding factor in who won any engagement.

          I think martial arts training is the most useful for developing mannerbund, And it’s utility in street fighting is secondary at best. that being said, I cannot get behind the idea that because you don’t kill someone every time you spar that it is therefore useless. If it were indeed that useless, I don’t think you’d see as many militaries, paramilitaries, and police forces dedicating the time and resources to training.This is probably a function of my experience, but I absolutely stand by the idea that the most important thing in any kind of fight is endurance. It’s that last little bit of metal you have inside you. when everything else says it’s time to give up or quit. that carries the day in so many situations.

          all theory and postulating aside, I think the most important takeaway is when it comes to fighting, the guy that wants it more and is willing to do anything to get it will win. whether that’s Mr. BJJ, Esq. or Mr. Niggory N. Nogg is kind of a crap shoot.

          • jim says:

            > it’s utility in street fighting is secondary at best. that being said, I cannot get behind the idea that because you don’t kill someone every time you spar that it is therefore useless.

            It is not useless. Speaking from experience, it is very useful. But in real fights, considerably less useful than one might hope.

            A physically fit man is going to whack the tar out of someone who is not physically fit, but a martial artist is not going to whack the tar out of someone who is comparably fit, but not a martial artist. It makes a difference, but not as much difference as physical fitness, and many martial arts, notably bjj, teach stuff that is worse than useless, is going to get you killed or seriously injured in a real fight.

            • Kunning Drueger says:

              yeah, I can’t see anything that I disagree with in what you said. My whole schtick relies on endurance being the most important thing, and what’s funny about endurance is that you can’t teach it, you just have to do it, and everybody has a capacity that they can train up to and a little bit over. It’s different for everyone.

              there are some very interesting parallels to shooting in this massively protracted discussion we’ve been having on martial arts. going to the range is always a good time for me. I can’t think of a single time where I was like ” I’m so glad I didn’t shoot guns” and even the times where things went kind of bad, I have never once in my life thought ” I really wish I didn’t have guns.” range time does not make you ready to kill people with guns. It can give you a lot of subconscious capacity for reaction, which is about the only thing you can train into your guys. I have never been in a war zone, I have been shot at but I have never shot at anyone. but every instructor I have ever had who has shot people has said the exact same thing: it is purely instinct and action without thought. You have to drill constantly so that when the fan hits the shit You are moving light years before you are thinking. In that sense, I see how you are more correct than St. John, and I also see how St. John is more correct than you. typical fag prevarication, right lol.

              for me, the book end here is that every man of good will should be training martial arts and shooting guns and fucking women with no protection and working with the soil. We may do one thing more than the others, and we may not be the best at any given thing, but doing the thing will make us more ready for the Thing, whichever thing pops up first.

              • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                The revelation that Jim’s initial blanket condemnation of all fight training or competition as meaningless play-acting substantially derives from having had to suffer through the traumatic experience of patronizing an EMA larpfest for some time is leaving me feeling pretty vindicated tbh.

                • Kunning Drueger says:

                  let’s indulge the assertion that you are only speaking from a theoretical and technical place: You went 25 rounds had to head and, though both men are bloody, neither is beaten. that alone suggests that training is quite influential.

                  obviously I’m making light here, and I really appreciate the effort you put into discussing this, the same for Jim.

                • jim says:

                  Did I blanket condemn all fight training?

                  Nuts. I did no such thing.

                  What I did blanket condemn was your absurd and dangerous claim that play fighting in the dojo or the ring is as real as a real fight where everything is on the table.

                  All fight training is necessarily unreal, and all fight training is necessarily vastly less useful in a real fight than in friendly combat. This does not make it useless. It makes the absurd inflated claims for it, “smashing your attackers face on the concrete”, “knockdown with a calf kick”, stuff like that, ridiculous, foolish, and likely to get you seriously injured or killed. It makes the vast majority of the specific moves that are taught useless in a real fight.

                  In a real fight, everything is on the table. In a play fight, it is not. This makes a huge difference, a difference that can never be trained for.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  I’m willing to accept that’s not what you meant, though when halfway through the discussion categorical denials of the relevance or applicability or even reality of any examples from any form of competitive fighting came up, that really made it feel like that was the argument.

                • jim says:

                  Yes I categorically deny the relevance, applicability, and reality of any form of competitive fighting as an indicator or evidence of whether particular moves and tactics are likely to be actually useful, effective, or relevant in a real fight, and consider your continual use of such evidence to be an irritating waste of time and page space, and obstinate and objectionable unresponsiveness, a form of argument by false consensus.

                  I have denied this over and over and over again, in a dozen different ways, using a dozen slightly different wordings, and you just endlessly keep sailing right on using game experience as an authoritative source of information about what works in reality, as if I totally agreed that the martial arts were a realistic emulation of real fighting.

                  General attributes, like the ability to take a punch and stay on your feet, will certainly carry over from the game to the real thing that the game emulates. Most specific particular moves, throws, and tactics will not

                  Obviously I total completely reject the proposition that the fact that tactic works in competition is evidence that it is likely to work in the real world, or even that it will not get you killed or maimed in the real world. That is what the debate has been from the beginning, and you keep telling me I am arguing something completely different and obviously stupid, and I keep telling you again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again exactly what I am arguing, and you keep sailing right on and telling me I am arguing something completely different and completely stupid, something that presupposes shared agreement on the realism of martial arts.

                  We do not agree on the realism of martial arts. That is what the dispute is all about, and applying moves that work great in martial arts to a real fight is likely to result in serious injury or death. Some martial art moves will work great in the real thing, some will not work, and some will lead to serious injury or death.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >absurd and dangerous claim that play fighting in the dojo or the ring is as real as a real fight where everything is on the table.

                  Oh right, Nuts. I also did no such thing.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >Some martial art moves will work great in [a] real thing, some will not work, and some will lead to serious injury or death.

                  This is exactly my position on the matter so the apparent disconnect is frustrating. Or maybe this is just vehement agreement.

                  A human has four limbs, one head, and one torso. There are only so many different ways they can work. The supposition that some martial art moves will work great in the real thing, some will not work, and some will lead to serious injury or death, is in tension with the supposition that nothing done in any kind of competition can be considered as anecdotally relevant in any way to any other context outside it, one way or another. It is not at all obvious or uncontroversial and no i don’t agree. When you speak of competition it sounds like a singular thing in your mind while it is many things in my mind, which sounds like an argument from ignorance. If different forms of practice are not all equally meaningless then the necessary conclusion is that yes actually there are cases where something done in one context can be informative for another.

                • jim says:

                  Lets review how this discussion began: A normie in combat has three primary moves. Hit you in the face when you are up, kick you in the head when you are down, and grab the face cavities in your skull like a bowling ball grip to reposition your head. He will also bite if you give him the chance.

                  You proposed various gentle civilized delicate clever complicated embrace and dance moves that were obviously suicidal in the face of standard normie tactics. You are not going to be able to embrace and dance while being punched in the face. I pointed out that these moves were suicidal. You told me that they obviously would work, and as evidence that they would work, pointed out that they work in the ring, where none of the standard normie tactics are allowed.

                  The wonderfully trained martial artist who can take any man in the room in civilized sporting combat that observes limits and rules is apt to wind up on the ground getting his head kicked in. The karate artist goes down because he high kicks when the normie punches him in the face, the wrestler because he is trying to embrace and dance. Embrace and dance works poorly when you are being punched in the face, and considerably worse when your opponent’s fingers are in your eyes and nose.

                  Normie tactics simply work, and they work great against someone trained to not use them, someone who is trained to use tactics that just cannot be carried out successfully while being punched in the face. I have made this mistake in real life. Every very clever throw is defeated or rendered vastly more difficult by a punch in the face, and most holds come undone because your adversary grabs your face like a bowling ball. These normie tactics just simply work, your stuff does not work, and the fact that your stuff works great in the ring is irrelevant.

                  Reflect on the terribly clever leg sweep dance you described. Now visualize carrying it out while your dance partner is punching you in the face. Similarly, all those holds where the one you embrace grabs your face.

                  Every martial art except boxing forbids every standard normie move, and boxing only allows the punch in the face. This renders them all utterly unrealistic, so anything that is the slightest bit complicated is not going to work in the very different environment of real fighting.

                  What normies do works, and what martial artists do does not work while being punched in the face. It is just too complicated to be done while normies are doing what normies do.

                  High kick: Normie punches you in the face, you go down, because you gave up a stable stance to kick.

                  Clever complicated throw: Normie punches you in the face, you go down, because you gave up a stable stance to throw.

                  Clever complicated hold: Normie grabs your skull by the face cavities as if it was a bowling ball, you go down because he repositions your skull to the horizontal.

                  Martial arts moves are not superpowers unless the standard normie moves are forbidden.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >pointed out that they work in the ring, where none of the standard normie tactics are allowed.

                  Right, this is the point where the train is going off the tracks.

                  >Every martial art except boxing forbids every standard normie move, and boxing only allows the punch in the face.

                  You’re showing a lack of depth here, because how many different organizations involve punches to the head (besides other things) besides boxing promotions? Quite a lot.

                  The idea of ‘he can not take me down because i will just punch him out first’ is one of the oldest ‘style vs style’ memes there is. It is certainly theoretically possible. In a fight anything can happen, and in the odd case it has happened. But when put to test, it has been proven a deathly mistaken belief over and over again over decades of vale tudo style competition and outside. Guys like Dan Severn or Mark Coleman barely trained anything besides pure wrestling when they made their debuts in the 90s, and they immediately started dominating the field over every other guy from every other sort of background. Punches to the head and every other strike for that matter were on the table yet guys were getting taken down left and right.

                  Things have improved since then of course, there’s far less siloization of methodologies, guys can pick up things from all over, and modern MMA is less ‘mixed martial arts’ and becoming more like its own holistic practice, with different gyms and different fighters having different strategic approaches to success, rather than literally different sports crossing over. The bottom line is if you do not wish to be taken down to the ground then there is no substitute for actually training takedown defense; because when you do practice taking people down, you can take them down. It’s as simple as that.

                  In kickboxing or muay thai or vale tudo promotions we can see what happens when punches to the head are on the table in addition to kicking and other tactics. If one may easily counter any attempt at kicks by way of simply punching them, whereupon they immediately drop, then we may naturally expect to rarely if ever see any kicks, and when we do, that they so often result in immediate destruction by headpunch. In the event, we often see lots of kicks, and that they don’t all result in immediate destruction by headpunch. We don’t see it happening most of the time, or even some of the time. It can happen, but not with anything approaching regularity. A whole fight can go by without it happening. A whole card of fights can go by without it happening. Kickboxing fights where a guy looking to use punches alone against a guy using all his limbs rarely end well for the puncher. There are a number of reasons for this but perhaps the simplest is the fact that legs are longer than arms, and the range at which you can time a kick is outside the range at which you can time a punch, and that at the same rate the range at which you can move in to punch can quickly turn into the range at which you or him can move into the clinch, at which point arm control elbows knees dirty boxing and takedowns come onto the table instead.

                  You do see kicks less often in most forms of vale tudo; not because guys are getting punched out when they do it, but because groundfighting focused fighters can catch their legs and take them down if they do it, and also because you have a lot more areas of concern to spend training time on than striking alone, and depending on their gameplan may not have invested the training time to use them effectively anyways. The wrestleboxing metagame is one of the oldest strategic approaches to vale tudo success, largely because of the straightforwardsness of its approach and the ease with which many different guys may implement it. He may not be using more ‘idealized’ tactics for any given situation, but by focusing his limited training time more on developing a few areas to high proficiency he can gain ‘good enough’ strategic overmatch against many kinds of more specialized opponents; taking down the guy who wants to out strike him, and out striking the guy who wants to take him down.

                  These confident prognostications on how to easily defeat this or that competitive tactic show a lack of familiarity with the subject matter, the ways and means and history of examples of men trying to do exactly that to each other in various settings. You are projecting your own feelings when declaring that which you are unfamiliar with to be too complicated to bother with.

                • jim says:

                  > The idea of ‘he can not take me down because i will just punch him out first’ is one of the oldest ‘style vs style’ memes there is.

                  You are ignorant of reality.

                  You assume the normie punches you, then stands quietly while you get your turn.

                  The problem rather is that very few martial arts moves can be successfully carried out while your opponent is punching you in the face, and if you attempt to carry them out while being punched in the face, you will probably wind up on the ground getting your head kicked in.

                  These clever martial arts moves require precise control. You get punched in the face during a move, the move goes wrong.

                  The problem is not that you get punched out before the throw, the problem is that you get punched in the face during the throw.

                  The normie sucker punches you in the face, and you do not fall, because you are solidly based. Because he punched you and is continuing to punch you, you attempt to throw him, and, attempting to throw him, you are no longer solidly based, and because he continues to punch you in the face, the throw goes wrong, your head, and thus your body, was deflected by his punch, and, head being wrongly placed, you are off your base, you go down, he does not go down, and now he is kicking you in the face and stomping on your head.

                  All these terribly clever complicated martial arts moves are disrupted by a punch in the face, and usually result in you going down. You don’t go down because he punches you in the face. You go down because he punches you in the face while you are doing something terribly clever that renders you no longer solidly based.

                  Martial arts are civilized ritual combat. Real combat is very different.

                  Your terribly clever martial arts throw depends on your head and body moving exactly where you want them to move. You get punched in the face as you are moving, your head is deflected, now it is moving somewhere else, you are off balance, now you are on the ground and a boot stomps on your face.

                • jim says:

                  > The idea of ‘he can not take me down because i will just punch him out first’ is

                  Not what I said, not what anyone said, not what anyone ever says, not what anyone who has ever experienced a real fight has ever said.

                  Telling the other guy he said something completely different from what he said is a dishonest method of debate that leads to endless waste of space because it forces the other guy to repeat himself again and again and again, to which you will respond by lying again and again

                  The next time you lie about what I said, or give a response that presupposes that I said something utterly different from what I said, you are getting censored.

                  You are now on moderation for repetitiously lying about what I said, and repetitiously failing to respond to what actually I said.

                  I have cut you a great deal of slack, assuming genuine misunderstanding. After wasting screen after screen after screen repeating myself over and over and over and over and over and over again, it is clearly not genuine misunderstanding, but disruptive lying, which wastes my time and everyone’s time.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >The problem is not that you get punched out before the throw, the problem is that you get punched in the face during the throw.

                  This is exactly what i am talking about. The imagination of some ‘meanwhile’ where you can act with impunity while things are happening too you. If things are happening too you then you *can’t* act with impunity.

                  If your reaction to someone shooting in on you is to try and rabbit punch them then you are going down in the snap of a finger. If you wanted to stop him then you should have been using your arms to downblock and sprawl instead, then you can start working a counterattack.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  [*projection deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  You confidently say the evidence exists, and that me not knowing it exists demonstrates my ignorance. Show me. Your last bunch of videos was underwhelming.

                  If someone is getting banged on the face, he is wearing a face protector or has a bloody nose. Show me a video of someone carrying out martial art throws or high kicks while his adversary is pounding away on his face – real street fight or real competition that allows real blows to the face, people trying to win, not people demonstrating “this is how my really cool martial art would hypothetically work in a real street fight”

                  The better a martial art approximates street fighting, the more they dance their moves, refraining from actual physical contact, rather than having competition bouts, and the less they attempt to use throws or high kicks.

                  I have done quite a bit of dancing fight moves that would be useful and effective in a real street fight. I would not say such training is entirely worthless, but its value is very limited. Actual street fight contains similar moves, but an actual fight is very different from martial arts dancing.

                  I have seen, and have participated in, no end of dancing that theoretically simulates what might happen in a street fight with blows to the face permitted. Such dancing does not count. Don’t show me those videos – there could well be such a video with me in it.

                  If you post a bunch of videos, and I open the first video, and it is martial artists dance fighting rather than actually fighting, will delete it with the comment “been there, done that”.

                  Show me blood, or show me a face protector getting suddenly knocked this way and that. If there is a bloody nose or the face protector is getting jerked around, there will be no high kicks or throws.

                • jim says:

                  You have a valid argument on kickboxing. Obviously kickboxing has punches to the face and high kicks, contrary to my claim that no martial art had both.

                  though they make sure that they have sufficient range to not be punched out while kicking, or they have the ropes behind them so that if punched out while kicking, will not fall, and falling is not so bad because ref instantly halts the fight allowing the fallen party to get up at his leisure, while in a real fight, if you fall, you are going to get kicked in the face.

                  Kicking fallen people in the face is instinctive, you will notice the referee interposes himself, lest their instincts carry them away.

                  Not apparent to me that you have a valid argument on throws. The wrestlers have bare knuckles, bare faces, and yet I see a strange lack of bloody noses. Maybe you are allowed to hit certain parts of the head in a certain way, but you are not allowed to just punch someone in the face.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  [*unresponsive*]

                • jim says:

                  You claim people would make that argument “what else would he say?”

                  Probably he would say exactly what I in fact said.

                  You are refuting a hypothetical ignorant stupid moron with no fight experience. Refute me.

                • Anonymous says:

                  Jim, do you think that strength and resistance training (with or without roids) would serve one better at winning fights than martial arts training?

                • jim says:

                  A bit of both is a good idea, but I think strength and resistance training, and roids, matter more.

                  Also, the superman delusion will get you killed. When everything is on the table, where there are no rules to prevent injury or death, it is a very different kind of fight and all your practice, where you practiced without getting punched in the face, kicked in the head when you went down, and without anyone trying hook his fingers into your skull cavities, is not all that relevant.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >Not apparent to me that you have a valid argument on throws. The wrestlers have bare knuckles, bare faces, and yet I see a strange lack of bloody noses. Maybe you are allowed to hit certain parts of the head in a certain way, but you are not allowed to just punch someone in the face.

                  Yeah, the vid from the NCAAs slipped in there by accident when i was copy pasting. I’m a big fan of american folkstyle though so maybe it was the hand of providence. One of the few competitive formats involving grappling – besides mma itself – that explicitly incentivizes ability in riding and escapes.

                  Rest of the examples are all from vale tudo or muay thai formats without restriction on facepunching.

                • jim says:

                  The main martial art that I trained in was akin to the far better known Krav Maga, but with a bit less fight dancing and bit more sparring.

                  Krav Maga is essentially all fight dancing, since it teaches techniques that if used in actual sparring, would result in most of their students being maimed or killed.

                  The main thing I learned from sparring is that dancing is piss poor preparation, but that the techniques you can spar with are woefully inadequate against the techniques for which the only preparation is dancing.

                  Because Krav Maga is almost entirely fight dancing, it is on the various lists of useless and ineffectual martial arts. But it would be interesting to see what would happen between Krav Maga martial artist, with a merely theoretical background in horrifically dangerous and effective moves, and a mixed martial artist, with actual practical experience in far less dangerous and far less effective moves. It is a test no one wants to run, because of the if Krav Maga turned out to be the winner, the mixed martial artist is going to be in hospital.

                  But it seems to me that normies running on instinct can use at least some really dangerous moves at least somewhat effectively. The instincts to do it right are there, and when the shit goes down, those instincts rule people.

                • Covfefe Anon says:

                  Pseudo-Chrysostom is entirely correct here.

                  Here’s a brawl in a bathroom where one of guys who gets destroyed is a college football player at a major football program – basically a pro athlete as far as strength and conditioning go – their opponents are trained in MMA and ultimately dominate them with grappling while the two fit, strong guys are “allowed to” punch away.

                  Both of them get grappled and can’t “grip the face like a bowling ball” – it doesn’t even come close to happening.

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70UcLUPvotU

                • jim says:

                  Can’t or won’t?

                • Covfefe Anon says:

                  Literally can’t – watch the vid.

                  They’re standing for a moment and exchanging punches then the MMA guy goes for a wrestling take-down – a form of a suplex.

                  Once on the ground he takes the football player’s back and puts the hooks in and the football player tries to reach the guy’s face and simply can’t – his arms don’t reach that far. That’s the back position.

                  Mount works the same way – the guy on the bottom can’t reach up to the guy on top’s face (and he’s working against gravity if he’s trying to punch up).

                • jim says:

                  The title of the video is “football player nearly loses eye” so I don’t think the MMA players were being all that faithful to MMA rules after they noticed their adversaries, being unfamiliar with MMA rules, were not observing them

                  While rolling around on the floor embracing with his adversary, the MMA fighter gets continually punched in the face, so he could have gotten his face grabbed by the skull sockets and repositioned (which would have been more effective in detaching him than punching him in the face) He eventually gets into a mount position where his much pounded face cannot suffer any more damage, but it takes a while getting there.

                  Those MMA holds worked. The MMA fighters won. But getting there was not easy and was far from safe.

                  MMA was undoubtedly useful, but it was not a superpower relative to those football players.

                  For high kicks, a punch in the face is highly effective at disrupting the high kick, or making the kicker fall so that the normie can low kick his head, but the high kicker is likely to be out of range of a punch, so the normie charges him, prevents him from keeping range. For grapple, not so effective. The grappler just goes on grappling until the normie cannot punch him in the face any more, which is what happened to the football player in this video. For grapples, the normie repositioning the grappler’s face by gripping the grapplers skull by the sockets is effective, but the football player refrained from deploying this tactic till too late, instead attempting to reposition the MMA fighter by punching him in the face.

                  So, I would say, on the basis that during the grapple the football player unsuccessfully attempted peel the grappler off by punching him in the face, that it was not that the football player couldn’t use the face grab, but that he refrained from using the face grab. Had he, instead of punching the MMA fighter in the face, grabbed the MMA fighter’s face and repositioned it, would have likely successfully peeled him off.

                  The mma fighters eventually got into hold positions where the person they were holding could not reach their faces, but it took a whole lot of rolling around on the floor getting punched in the face to get there. The mma holds worked, but it took a whole lot of street fighting moves at which they had not trained to get there.

                  Going to floor worked because

                  1. Both football players were taken to the floor at the same time. If one had remained up while the other was down, the mma guy on the ground would have been kicked in the face.

                  2. The football players rolling on the floor in grapple attempted to peel the mma fighters off with face punches. Face punches work against kicks, not against grapples. It was not that they could not grab the mma player’s skulls through their faces, it was that they chose a different tactic. When the grapple was complete, then indeed the football players could neither punch their opponents in the face, nor grab their opponents’ skulls through their faces. But while struggling to complete the grapple, the mma fighters took a whole lot of punches to the face.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  The fact that his instincts did not in fact prod him to go for the eyes and that he was incapable of doing so when he tried is pretty damning condemnation of the hypothetical theory.

                • Covfefe Anon says:

                  >But while struggling to complete the grapple, the mma fighters took a whole lot of punches to the face.

                  Did you not watch the video?

                  He didn’t take *any* punches to the face.

                  The mma fighter had a bloody nose to start – the football player started the fight before. He then keeps taunting the guy saying something like “what do you got?” and the MMA guy just drops into actual fight mode which is one of the main advantages to MMA training – going from off to on immediately *unlike people who don’t train* who have to mentally psych themselves up with shoving and posturing. He then closes on the far larger, far stronger guy *taking no punches*. The football player then goes for a headlock – which is the instinctive reaction to a fight by someone untrained – to grab and hold the head with an arm – *not* grabbing the face with fingers which wouldn’t even come close to working anyway because it takes absurd fine motor control and doesn’t offer much control because fingers are weak and small compared to neck muscles. After the takedown – at this point MMA has still eaten zero shots – he immediately gets into a dominant position and chokes the guy out. In the background, you can see another fight with the football player’s buddy who is even larger and *he* doesn’t land any blows and *also* goes for (you guessed it) a headlock to control his opponent and *he* gets dumped on the ground and does zero on the ground when the other guy (in the jean jacket – the brother of the main fighter) gets him in the mount and punches him at will.

                • jim says:

                  > He didn’t take *any* punches to the face.

                  At fifty seconds into the video he takes a lot of punches to the face, and when, in the course of rolling around, we get to see his eye after those punches, he is going to have a very swollen black eye.

                • Covfefe Anon says:

                  Video of the incident on twitter since you have to sign into youtube to view it there and it’s not super easy to search up the actual video.

                  https://twitter.com/UnnecRoughness/status/1363848125920784384

                • Covfefe Anon says:

                  >At fifty seconds into the video he takes a lot of punches to the face, and when, in the course of rolling around, we get to see his eye after those punches, he is going to have a very swollen black eye.

                  No one is getting a very swollen black eye from punches aimed in the general direction of a head that the puncher can’t see that is at least 6 inches behind his own head.

                  Once he kind of gets the aim right which he has to do by feel because he can’t see the guy’s head because it’s behind him the MMA guy instantly and effortlessly wraps his arm up and he can’t even keep flailing.

                  Try it yourself – try to punch a target behind your own head that you can’t see – then look at that position and realize that on top of having no power on the punches because of the angle he doesn’t even have full range of motion because the top of the lever of his humerus is under the guy’s armpit.

                • jim says:

                  > No one is getting a very swollen black eye from punches aimed in the general direction of a head that the puncher can’t see that is at least 6 inches behind his own head.

                  Look at his eye shortly after the pounding at fifty seconds.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Near the beginning of the video moptop notices that his nose is bleeding. There was likely some kind of altercation before the cameraman started recording (prompting him to start), which is probably where the damage occurred.

                  There are a number likely factors for this. One is the fact that while it is possible to get a black eye from even a single impact, it still takes a minute or so for the blood to pool and fill in the bruises; they don’t appear instantly.

                  Another factor is the fact that arm punches are basically nothing, and often only slightly better than not bothering to waste your energy burning your arms out at all.

                  Big power in a strike comes from whole body motion in use of full kinetic chain, from the tip of the toes, to the drive of the glutes, to the end of the knuckles, all turning solid at the moment of impact, where the explosive force of weight and effort in momentum is fully transferred into and through the target, without any ‘squish’ anywhere in the chain acting as cushions or energy leaks.

                  (Some guys lose power because they are too uncoordinated, and don’t use their full kinetic chains properly; some guys lose power because they are too stiff in motion, different muscle groups in the chains of motion acting against the motion; some guys lose power because they are too loose on impact, seeming like they have pillows in their fists; and some guys are more like kinesthetic naturals who can do all this just like that, and can seem like they have magic dynamite in their fists. All of which can of course benefit from a knowledgeable coach who understands the mechanics of all this, and exercises for each part and all together; some more than others of course.)

                  Something which tends a lot less in play on the ground naturally, though the man on top does of course have the advantage of gravity and space to wind up.

                  Basically a lot more real damage can be done by even one good solid punch that lands clean, than ten or even fifty shitty arm punches tapping the guy.

                • jim says:

                  Sure – punching from that position was stupid, though mma guy looked considerably less pretty after taking those punches.

                  Which makes grabbing one’s opponent’s skull through the orifices and repositioning it to a more convenient location more useful in a grapple. Which is why normies generally face grab when grappled and face punch when kicked by a vertical opponent, the kicker being inconveniently far, and the grappler inconveniently close.

                  When too close, as the mma guy was, cannot get a decent force behind a punch, when too far, cannot get a decent hold on the skull though the flesh. It is quite instinctive. Kittens are born knowing how to pounce. The reason dancing the moves is no substitute from sparring is that one already intuitively and instinctively knows them below conscious level, so martial arts dancing cannot teach all that much. It certainly teaches something, but ultimately, dancing the moves that can never be done in sparring is not all that helpful. It certainly has some value, but is not going to give you superpowers in a real fight, where killing or permanent maiming is on the table.

          • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

            In a lot of cases, much of the biggest difference between a more proficient and less proficient man is in fact made by differences in their more fundamental capacities; ability to balance in a melee, ability to hit with power, ability to fight through high pressure situations without gassing, ability to anticipate the opponent, ability to execute with smooth force, their proprioception, matsense, ability to intuitively feel how they and the opponent are moving in relation with each other, intuitive sense of how to apply the right pressure in the right places the right way, et cetera et cetera.

            It’s not just about ‘moves’ in a superficial sense, it is about the capacities any given move participates in, that brings them into and out of the realms of possibility in the first place; the capacities that are touched upon and only really developable to such degrees in such matters by such practices that more specifically select for them.

            To use the example of balance, if someone wants to do gymnastics, tapdancing, playing soccer in their local rec league, they can by all means if they like, it’s not bad exercise, there is utility as accessories there; but at the end of the day, there is simply no substitute for actually getting the experience of coming to grips with someone and keeping your feet while jerking and being jerked around.

            Someone without experience in neutral game, in takedowns and takedown defense, is simply not prepared to handled themselves properly, they are at grave risk of losing their feet in a critical situation; by the same token, if you have had that experience, then putting someone who hasn’t on the ground is practically child’s play. I can’t think of a single example of a public scuffle where the belligerents did not fall into a clinch with each other, whether accidentally or on purpose. The cultivation of ability in such regards is a gamechanging area of concern.

            • jim says:

              Yes, the general skills developed in mock fighting, in ritual combat, are useful in real fighting, such as keeping your balance while under assault, and anticipating your opponents moves. And just getting used to people hitting and kicking you a lot makes a big difference. Toughness in the face of getting thumped is substantially innate, but practicing it can help a lot.

              But the specific moves and attacks, the particular specific skills, are, for the most part useless. Locks that threaten to break someone’s joints or cut off the blood supply to their brain, obviously useful. What boxing teaches, punching the head, and preventing your own head from being punched, obviously useful. The rest is for the most part useless in a real fight, or actively dangerous.

              Mister bjj martial arts expert is never going to “smash an attacker’s face on the concrete”. For leg sweeps and such you need to pay attention to the other guys legs. Since the other guy is punching you in the face, you are apt to be distracted from his legs.

              If someone is kicking one, one might think it would be a good idea to pay attention to his legs, but this has not been my experience. If you control his head, he will soon be in no position to continue kicking, and even if you merely hit him in the face during a kick, he is likely to go down. Watching his kicks is a dangerous distraction. Other people may had different experiences. If so, I would like to hear.

              • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                It’s not so much an act of conscious awareness as such.

                Your picture of the opponent in a fight, especially in scrambles, is filled in as much by imagination as it is direct perception. Some guys are better at this than others. Those guys tend to be the better fighters – and better other things.

                You know the right situation to hit a move because you just know it; you’ve practiced it, experienced what the conditions are like when it doesn’t work, and what the conditions are like when it does. You’ve practiced proactively making the conditions for it to work.

                There are some throws that, while often reliable, can also involve a great degree of ‘selling out’, in terms of moving your center of balance a farther distance relative to your base, which can result in bad losses of position in the odd instance it doesn’t work.
                I’m a personal fan of sweeps and dumps, because it is very big pay off for very little investment. You can just attack and attack between attacks up one way and down the other, because the only real penalty for the first attack not working is you have to settle for the next attack working. They can be used in a wide variety of situations with pretty much any set of grips or tie-ups, or with very little set up at all, including just jumping into it on first contact. This ‘suckerpunch’ ability is actually what i consider part of its biggest value beyond pure grappling, where they are relatively rare compared to the more common approach of shooting for leg grabs. Upper body work in general becomes more important when strikes and other things are involved.

                The simple act of pushing someone around in the clinch has profound effects that can’t be underestimated. When a fighter is set and has his base under him, he is dangerous; he is ready to strike, throw, or execute some other attack with power. When your mass is moved away from your base though, then your only two choices are to fall over, or move a foot to regain base. Most of course will try to do the latter. But every time he is moving to regain his base is time he is *not* set to strike, throw, or do anything else with power, while you are pressing your own attacks. These cycles of attack, turn, attack, turn, can be seen in all the best clinchfighters, punishing their opponents while never giving them opportunity to retaliate. The moment he needs to move his foot to keep balance is also the same moment you can introduce your own foot to the party, and flip him arse over teakettle.

                Takedowns that can be done with forwards momentum like this, like kneetaps, foot sweeps, polish throws, underhook throwbys, high dives, et cetera, that don’t require your opponent to oblige you by looking to get stuck in and attack his own takedowns, are especially pertinent outside pure grappling, where swift forcefulness of action in imposing your gameplan first most often carries the day.

                • jim says:

                  This analysis reveals that you are not familiar with real fights. In a real fight, you are not going to see the participants embracing and dancing for long enough for this analysis to be applicable. Pushing on opponent for any length of time means you are in sufficiently close contact to administer serious injury to each other – and in a real fight probably will.

                  In a real fight, the winner is the man who can administer the greatest damage in the shortest time, so a whole lot of damage is likely to be delivered in a rather short time. Thus real fights tend to be short and explosive.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  A longer dance assumes a more proficient opponent resisting competently.

                  Given an improficient opponent not resisting competently, then it really will be over with a great deal damage done in a very short amount of time. Nothing says hello like elbows to the upper lip, whether standing or on the ground.

              • Karl says:

                Hitting someone in the face while he is kicking is a good counter.

                Unless you are a kick artist yourself (or armed), I see no other way of fighting a kicking opponent than getting closer than kicking distance, i.e. to start punching or grappling. Kicks are a lot less dangerous at closer distance. Difficult to see his legs at close distance and hands are more important at close distance than feet.

                When I’m not yet at close distance, I’ll see the whole opponent including his feet. Of course, I’ll react to anything I see and always try to see as much as possible.

                The leisure of deciding what part of my opponent’s body to focus on, I have never had after closing to punching or grappling distance.

                • Aidan says:

                  Grabbing a kick is not that hard if you are expecting it. I used to train muay thai, and my instinct was always to grab the leg I was kicked with and bring my opponent to the ground, which is illegal. If a kick lands extremely solidly on the head or ribcage, cannot grab it, but it is rare to get a clean hard hit like that against somebody who is moving and has arms and especially elbows in the way.

                  The most useful technique in a real fight is doing something the opponent does not expect, and as Jim says, trained martial artists often do not expect how normies will react, and get taken out.

                  Weapon using martial arts are inherently more honest in training, because one can simulate real combat with fake weapons, whereas real combat in unarmed fighting is likely to lead in permanent injury.

                • Bill says:

                  Classic street fight video by Bas Rutten: https://youtu.be/mosX7L25HV8

                  I’d love to find the original unedited video somehow.

                • jim says:

                  This is not a street fight video. This is two actors.

                  The speaker claims knowledge of street fights, so perhaps realistic. On the other hand, he is obviously boasting, so maybe not.

                  He says that the fight is apt to start with a knee to the groin, so you have to keep your eye on your opponent. (No one has ever successfully kneed me in the groin when it seemed plausible that they might) and then punches to the head, which sounds accurate enough to me, but the video is not evidence that it is accurate.

                • Karl says:

                  True, mid-kicks can be grabbed and I’d also try do so. Grabbing a low kick is impossible in my opinion and grabbing a high kick is difficult.

                  In view of Jim’s question whether it is a a good idea to watch an opponent’s kicks, maybe it is sometimes a good strategy to wait for his kick and watch his legs.

                  What surprises a trained martial artists largely depends on how narrow his training is. Grabbing a leg is legal is some arts, illegal in others.

                  Anyway, the best training is to separate competition training from self-defense training and to do both. Training for a tournament you use only some techniques on a resisting opponent. Complement that training with training that uses crippling or lethal techniques in a defined situation, where your training partner does not resist after his initial attack and you either stop your technique before he is hurt or you miss intentionally.

                  I agree to your point about weapon using martial arts. If the goal of martial arts training is self-defense knives and sticks should be trained. Always a good a idea to carry a knife

    • Your Uncle Bob says:

      >bjj

      There’s a rock-paper-scissors thing where, one on one and nobody’s friends step in, a decent bjj student is a credible threat to many other martial artists. And yet, I’ve seen too many fight videos to want to go to the ground even briefly, so I don’t at all recommend it as a primary pursuit. Tertiary after target practice and boxing. And yet, if someone else is trying to take you to the ground some exposure to it is helpful.

      (If I were advising someone with sons I would say put them in wrestling early, not as an end point but as a decent grounding for later.)

      Then, some bjj defenders would say their goal isn’t to grapple outside the dojo, it’s to slam the other guys head on the concrete and make their escape. Which gets at a general question, what if a martial artist decides to fight dirty or practical? I think they’ve got a better chance at doing so than the typical guy who talks about real fights and no rules and going to the death.

      I think this is the disconnect in this the debate – I’m used to hearing “if the guy draws a knife you’re fucked,” “here’s a weapon disarmament move, now don’t use it, buy a gun,” “get out and run and lift,” “youths fight in packs,” and more from martial artists. And I’m also used to hearing part of Jim’s take on martial arts from guys who aren’t Jim, who aren’t close to being Jim, who in fact I could take in a fight either social or real. But that I could take an out of shape barfly gives me no illusions about taking an ex-con with a knife.

      Credentials – poor but not nonexistent. I’ve been in two “real” fights, neither was to the death but both were serious on the other person’s part, I “won” both at least to my satisfaction (walked away uninjured). But neither was, to my knowledge, an ex-con.

      Also I’m pretty sure they both looked ridiculous and maybe even slapstick from a distance. It looked nothing like what I practiced, but it all flowed logically out of what I practiced. So that’s another possible disconnect, I’m not saying learn a martial art so you can do a kata in a fight I’m saying study a martial art at a place that spars, then take whatever’s open in a fight.

      >eye gouges and nut shots

      I’m not specifically aware I faced those, but I couldn’t say I didn’t either. In both cases I had the distance to treat those as just another strike or attempt to close.

      I absolutely can imagine things going worse for me, and having gotten worse fast, I just can’t imagine how not being exposed to martial arts would have made that less likely rather than more.

      • jim says:

        > Then, some bjj defenders would say their goal isn’t to grapple outside the dojo, it’s to slam the other guys head on the concrete and make their escape.

        Except I am not seeing videos where the bjj martial artist slams the other guy’s head into the concrete. I am seeing videos where he throws the other guy and gains a couple of seconds to make his escape while the other guy is getting up again, and I am seeing videos where the bjj martial artist fails to throw the other guy, and loses a second.

        The “slam his face into the concrete” move just does not seem to be working – perhaps because you cannot practice it. The bjj guy gets the other guy off his feet, but hard to keep him off his feet without going to ground. And going to ground in an unfriendly combat is a bad idea.

        The “throw the other guy” move works. But “slam his face into the concrete”? Not happening. And “throw the other guy” frequently does not work, perhaps because the move assumes that other guy is not doing anything extremely unpleasant, which the other guy very likely is.

        I absolutely can imagine things going worse for me, and having gotten worse fast, I just can’t imagine how not being exposed to martial arts would have made that less likely rather than more.

        Overll, martial arts will make it less likely. But there are a whole lot of moves and tactics that are very effective in a friendly bout conducted under rules, that will get you killed or seriously injured in a real conflict. As for example any move or tactic that results in going to ground, and any hold where you cannot apply pain and serious injury, and your face or nads are in range of the other guy’s free hand.

        You cannot go to ground because getting kicked in the head is on the table, and a whole lot of holds do not work, because the hold where the other guy uses your face holes like a bowling ball grip is on the table.

        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          It’s not uncommon to see many BJJ stans try to have their cake and eat too in discourse; on one hand, they acknowledge the power and utility of takedowns, of being on top, of riding and escaping and all that, by saying they will do these things in a ‘real fight’; yet at the same time, they do not seriously train to cultivate ability in these things, and do not compete in a ruleset that rewards of even requires ability in such areas.

          It’s hard to explain the exact twists of logic that go into this thinking but it goes something like: ‘this is theoretically possible in BJJ, so BJJ can do this, which makes BJJ good, and guard pulling is BJJ, so guard pulling is good’. They look at guys like Khabib Nurmagomedov and say, ‘that could be me’, then go back to drilling their sumi gaeshi guard pull into a berimbolo from reverse de la riva (which is a very great technique at what it does, it must be said).

          The number one weakness in practically every guy with a background in BJJ who has tried their hand at MMA at some point, if they don’t just try to be a bootleg kickboxer and try to use their grappling proactively, is this weakness in actually putting down and keeping down opponents. I can’t count the number of times i’ve seen a BJJ based fighter hit a sweet guard pass then immediately lose position as the opponent just takes the opportunity to escape once his legs are no longer occupied.

        • Kunning Drueger says:

          This exchange has led me to the conclusion that something needs to be incorporated into martial arts training: instructors need to keep a 200 lb bag laying around, and students need to spend 15 minutes of every training session, picking it up and slamming it on the ground as fast and as hard as possible. They should be on the edge of vomiting at the end of this training. This should be done at the end of sparring when a person wins the match, as in the other guy taps out and they immediately jump up, grab the 200 lb bag and slam it as hard as they can against the ground. It should be second nature for fighters to be ready, willing and able to grab something heavy and slam it into the ground as hard as fucking possible.

          In a lot of different qualifiers and training that I have done, there’s always this part of the routine where you have to grab a body shaped bag, sometimes it’s 150 lb, oftentimes it is more, and drag it an interminable distance, upon which you go around a pole or a cone and drag it right back. You have no idea how terribly awful your quads burn after doing this. This is thrown in on police, military, and firefighter qualifiers for a very specific reason. No matter what you confront in any of these types of jobs, if you are ever in the shit, there’s a very good chance you’re going to have to drag somebody you care about away from the danger. I absolutely hate every time I’ve had to do this, and it has made me throw up and be sore for days afterwards. but outside of shooting, it’s the one drill that I think is the most empowering for real world situations.

          Does anyone have any other recommendations for things that should be incorporated into martial arts training? I genuinely think “heavy bag throw” would be super useful.

        • Karl says:

          BJJ has been mentioned several times in this discussion, but in my opinion somewhat beside somewhat beside the point.

          If the martial artist throws an opponent, the logical follow up is kicking or stomping on the head of the thrown opponent, repeatedly if necessary.

          In those videos where the BJJ artists manages the throw and then wastes his advantage, it is not the martial art that failed him. It is his mind as he has treating a real fight as a friendly sparring.

  22. Leon says:

    Was Carl Jung a fraud? I read a bunch of quotes from him that sounded like feminism. Women are smarter, more spiritual, blah, blah.

    • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

      As a general rule, take any figure who wrote in the 20th century with a grain of salt.

    • TiredTom says:

      First post, so let’s do the test first:

      Women are not equal to men, should not be treated as equal to men. They should obey their fathers until married, should obey their husbands once married, and should be the wife of the first man they have sex with, preferably a man chosen with her father’s guidance and no later than age 16.

      Re:Jung
      Carl Jung was the only non-jew in Sigmund F’s circle of psychoanalysts. Pretty clear from posthumous private papers that he considered himself guided by a demon. His “science” writings are midwit nonsense. He was evil.

      • Kunning Drueger says:

        thank you for reading before you posted, and putting in the effort to do what she’ll test before asked.

  23. Neofugue says:

    On the subject of technological decline, what are your thoughts on the new semiconductor facilities developed in Arizona by TSMC?

    Biden recently paid a visit to Phoenix. Will they be able to produce chips as desired, or will they fail for the same reasons Intel failed? As a non-techie, I was wondering if this would be worth an investment.

    Also, Boeing can no longer build a new airplane.

    With a 30-year-gap between developing new civilian aircraft, it seems that the 787 will be Boeing’s last contribution to civilian aerospace. Compare that to Boeing in the 1960s, when the company created the 727, the 737, and the 747 in a span of less than a decade.

  24. blind archer says:

    So, for example, I found a girl who didn’t terrify me with the weight of a sumo wrestler, short dyed hair, and phrases from feminist agitation. I can’t afford to wait for her to agree to the marriage to get her, because that would greatly impair my chances of marrying. I slept with her. Presumably she is a virgin.

    Should I marry her? Or I can send her away if I find any flaw in her that was revealed to me later (let’s say I found out that she is in debt / her mother is crazy / she cannot have children …) I can send her away? How long can a “trial period” be? How to avoid abuse on your part with postponing marriage for years / endless enumeration in search of a better option somewhere else?

    • jim says:

      If you sleep with a virgin, should keep.

    • Adam says:

      I second what Jim said. Keep and impregnate. Don’t be afraid to start chastising her for bad behavior now don’t let that slide you will regret it.

    • SJ says:

      Study how to pass shit tests. At some point you will be shit tested though it will be later and less severe with a lower n count. You must lead and this means you must command. You have the veto power at all times and you make the decisions. Be fruitful and multiply. Read up on the duluth model of domestic violence it is like a guide on how to keep and control your wife and you need to keep and control her.

  25. Pax Imperialis says:

    Yarvin rarely says interesting things today. He does get interesting reactions out of people. That makes him an interesting diagnostic tool. He should still be watched.

    • jim says:

      Namefags are not allowed to be interesting or truthful. Andrew Anglin is interesting and truthful, but look what happened to him.

      • Pax Imperialis says:

        Utility as a diagnostic tool is separate from saying interesting things.

        I’m asserting Yarvin remains an interesting diagnostic tool because of how people react to him. That is in part due to his relative accessibility to power. Anglin’s relative isolation and unpersonhood blocks off access and limits utility as a tool.

        • Kunning Drueger says:

          This is particularly insidious, as Anglin has so many valuable things to say, but it is wasted on groypers and feds.

          • Mike says:

            As long as Anglin continues shilling for that nigger Kanye, I will continue to not listen to anything he says.

            • Pax Imperialis says:

              That type of mentality gets you this:

              “Anglin says the sky is blue and niggers steal, but he supports Kanye so I will not listen to anything he says”

              This is no different from how the left behaves when they dissect every single facet of a man’s life to find that one thing they did in the past to character assassinate.

              Get comfortable with people not being perfect. No one is ever perfect. Learn to judge based on overall character and action.

              • The Cominator says:

                Kanye is batshit not just against our commie rulers and supporting him makes dissident right views look nuts by association.

                The difference between Kanye and a street schizo is a few hundred million dollars.

                • Pax Imperialis says:

                  Sure, still doesn’t mean people should completely ignore Anglin. People have bad ideas all the time and they should be called out for their bad ideas, but people also have good ideas, and Anglin has more than most.

                  Was Anglin being ironic with his Kanye support? I don’t know Anglin well enough to know his reasoning. I just know that Anglin is on target most of the time.

                • Mike says:

                  I agree with you in principle, I loved Anglin’s articles on Weinstein and Epstein back in the day. Excellent redpilling material for the WQ. But it is pretty inexcusable to support some dumb nigger for Pres and the dying corpse of Nick Fuentes that serves only to beat the deadhorse of the “Zionist Threat” (not real).

                • Red says:

                  The moment I saw Milo was involved with that insanity I knew only bad things would come from it. Faggots turn everything to shit.

            • S says:

              What exactly is bad about what he is doing? Elections don’t matter and ‘support people your enemies are trying to destroy whose destruction would make it easier to kill you’ is principle to stick by.

  26. Ash says:

    as a past time I enjoy reading, and many of the Chinese social apps direct stories toward Russia and unfortunately due to my human short comings (only capable of memorising x amount of words of a certain language to put into patterns for me to digest and process) I had to machine translate Russian news sites and information sites..

    I was struck profounding by authors stating (example) if people are removing statues of Catherine the great in Odessa, then clearly these people are squatting on the lands of the natives..

    since age 20 or so I stopped translating to western euro people, because the moment you translate normal thoughts of people outside of USA and Europe, it is automatically just “racism, sexism” or some other sort of terrorism

  27. Zorost says:

    One huge data point in favor of this all being planned out at the top is the convenient withdrawal from Afghanistan. This freed up our military for other tasks.

    There was also a stench of Chinese collusion about that, as well as the current Russia/Ukraine thing. China seems to have a lot of influence with the current faction in control of DC. For example, China benefitted greatly from our pullout as they had deals ready to go for rare earth metals. One of the Chinese corps set to benefit the most had 20% of its stock held by Hunter Biden.

    Much of what we are currently doing is pushing Russia into China’s arms, and I’d bet that China not only planned for that, but is planning on how to make Russia into it’s bitch in the coming decades. This whole Ukraine thing might not really be US vs. RU, but China setting up US and RU to weaken each other, leaving the Chinee untouched. And probably in control of Taiwan, with little fight needed. Although I bet the chip factories mysteriously blow up anyway, as cabal faction(s) are spending billions to build chip plants in the US.

    ===

    It is virtually impossible that morons rose up to control the West. Therefore the initial assumption should be that they are acting rationally. It may seem irrational to us, but only because we are projecting our values and goals onto them. It is hard to analyze current events, but if one looks at past actions of the Left, in hind sight virtually everything they did made perfect sense once you realized that the only goal of the Left is power for its own sake. I am sure that once most of the facts are revealed, hindsight will show that the Left’s current actions also make perfect sense from the perspective of a group whose goal is power for its own sake.

    • Karl says:

      Funny how you use words like “we” and “our”. Are you part of the US government?

      • Zorost says:

        If you have nothing interesting to say please don’t shit up my comment.

        • jim says:

          The question makes an important point.

          I always talk about what the Global American Empire does, from the frame that they are the evil insane enemy, that they intend to harm me and mine, that, for example, Covid was a bioweapon created by them to make war upon us.

          You talk of them as “us”. This makes it very hard to comprehend the world.

          • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

            I do the same. We are Amerikaners, and the GAE is not one of us.

    • jim says:

      > Therefore the initial assumption should be that they are acting rationally. It may seem irrational to us,

      Demon worshipers always act irrationally, having faith in their demons. The faith in demons is frequently fulfilled, but the fulfillment tends to be backhanded, as when Agamemnon sacrificed his daughter.

      Aryan paganism was ancestor worship, and a key part of that ancestor worship is that you had to know the lineage connecting you to your gods, and the lineage had to be legitimate, by birth within marriage or by adoption. If you don’t know your lineage all the way back, you are worshiping demons.

      • Wolf says:

        I’ve been reading a bit on paganism and the ancestor worship has some raw, primal attraction but I can see how it would get messy as ancestors start to pile up. The gods, however, and the fables that come with them seem ridiculous and not very inspiring. It’s hazy which god governs what realm. I like the idea of fate/wyrd.
        What do you think of it as a religion? Is it practical? What are the drawbacks vis-a-vis Christianity?

    • Dharmicreality says:

      Not power for its own sake and certainly not in rational self interest. The West under the globohomo doctrine is fighting to impose gay parades everywhere at any cost, even at the cost of its own people.

      • Untimely Observer says:

        >even at the cost of its own people

        it’s worth remembering that a large percentage of state department and CIA types are themselves homosexuals (the rest are overeducated cosmopolitan heterosexuals) who do not consider regular Americans to be “their people”. They view average Americans as troglodytes and retards. Making the world safe for gay sex is thus a vital element in protecting and advancing “their people”, which they define as other cosmopolitan homosexuals.

      • Zorost says:

        Homo doctrine and all the rest of it is nothing but a tool to achieve goals. It’s the old Soviet playbook (I’m sure far older than that, but Soviet is the most accessible to study.) Check out Yuri Bezmenov’s videos on Soviet propaganda on YT. Basically, it is a 4 phase plan. The first 2 involve creating chaos and weakness in the enemy through subversion, such as with homos and other deviants. Phase 3 is taking control due to people begging you to provide order. Phase 4 is “Normalization”, where the new rulers exterminate all the degenerates that were so useful in the first phases. Then the people are happy because the new rulers brought order out of chaos, forgetting or never knowing that it was the rulers who created that chaos.

        Machiavelli relates a similar story, where a Prince sent in a brutal general to root out disloyalty in a city. His brutality created chaos, then the Prince came in, acted surprised and shocked at what his general had done. Then executed the general in the town square, and all the people loved him. In part because the ones that hated him had been killed by the general.

        As with the covid nonsense, when degeneracy has outlived its usefulness it will be purged hard.

        • S says:

          If you have the power to create chaos, you have the power to seize control. Observe how long it takes between a color revolution kicking off and taking control of the government.

          The example Machiavelli gives is something that can only be done once. Executing subordinates for doing what you told them to do is an incredibly effective way to lose power.

          • notglowing says:

            Stalin seemed to get away with doing this several times.
            Yezhov wasn’t the first and he would not have been the last to be killed if not for Stalin’s untimely death.

            • S says:

              I think Stalin had those people shot for suspected disloyalty, with the stated reason being a bureaucratic formality.

        • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

          ‘Cynical consequentialists’ promote faith in fakeness and gayness, ‘just as a joke hahah’; become shocked to find themselves replaced by even more faithful believers in fake and gayness, in the name of fake and gayness.

        • The long sweep of history tells us that “degeneracy” has never outlived its usefulness and impossible of getting purged hard.

          I’m sure the 1950s leftists would never have imagined this kind of gay parades and legalization of gay marriage and pederastry, and yet here we are. If they could have purged the “degeneracy” at their will after assuming full power then why are we here?

          Adharma is not controllable. Every leader thinks and acts like they control adharma, yet adharma eventually consumed them.

          The “spiraling” in Holiness spiraling implies it is out of control.

          • i says:

            Christianity grew up among the degeneracy of the Roman Empire. Managed to survive relatively intact but in a constant battle with that degeneracy.

            But aided by disasters like the Huns and various plagues:
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=od66vzA1L24

            The rotten edifice of the Roman Empire was burnt down. Similar to the massive annihilation events of the degenerate human sacrificing Aztec Empire. Which had 90% or more population decline.

    • Pax Imperialis says:

      >planned
      >Afghanistan

      The convenient DoD plan was to wreck shit and leave within a year. The State Department plan was, if I remember correctly, “Belgium Style Liberal Democracy in 10 Years.” After that plan went bad there was not plan. Whole thing was a shit show withdraw included.

      > This freed up our military for other tasks.

      Like pursuing a PR campaign about Emma and her two moms? Not sure if you’ve noticed but pretty much as soon as Afghanistan wound down military ads got GAY and a recruitment crisis set in.

      >planning on how to make Russia into it’s bitch in the coming decades.

      Is Saudi Arabia America’s bitch? We ever sever diplomatic ties over Khashoggi? China is far more energy import dependent than US is. Russia oil will be too powerful should the Chinese find themselves cut off from Southwest Asia.

      >in control of Taiwan, with little fight needed.

      More likely to see the whole island reduced to ruble and air sea blockade induced famine after which negotiations.

      >It is virtually impossible that morons rose up to control the West.

      You have no idea what has happened, and is happening, to the civil service. The people who actually run the government. The smart ones are retiring or dying and the replacements are diversity morons. Where are the Kissingers?

      • jim says:

        > > in control of Taiwan, with little fight needed.

        > More likely to see the whole island reduced to rubble and air sea blockade induced famine after which negotiations.

        China can easily blockade Taiwan any time. Invading might well turn out to be costly and do a great deal of damage. China has been engaging in a whole lot of entryism in Taiwan, and a blockade might simply give excuse to an entryist takeover. Color Revolution script.

        There is nothing the US can do to break a China blockade of Taiwan, but what it could well do is mount a counter blockade of China. A blockade would eventually starve Taiwan out, but it would take a while, and there are various things the US could do to apply pressure to China. On the other hand, blockade and pressure does not seem all that effective on Russia.

        • Pax Imperialis says:

          Too much democratic fervor in Taiwan to kneel over to a Color Revolution in the early stages of a blockade and siege mentality would likely take over. Going to need to starve them for a while. Taiwan isn’t self sufficient in raw industrial inputs, has food self-sufficiency of 35%, and no strategic depth. All those food storage warehouses are easy targets for incendiary shelling.

          The Taiwanese are mostly Han Chinese. Just saying the fight, even without a land invasion, has the potential to get pretty nasty. Whether that’s the Mainlanders getting fed up with the Taiwanese obstinance and deciding to continuously ratchet up the shelling, or the Taiwanese descending into a cannibalistic holdout full of purges of traitors remains to be seen.

          • Kunning Druegger says:

            What about a hybrid blockade? It would need a different term as not to trigger any literalists at the UN, as an explicit blockade is an act of war. Let’s call it Socio-Industrial Mediation. Picture this:

            China announces some such of a something very not good is happening/about to happen in Taiwan. Chinese proxies on Formosa either make this seem to happen, or take up the same call. Out of an abundance of caution and with nothing but love for their wayward province, the Chinese establish a defensive perimeter around the island. No foreigners are allowed to enter by air or see, but anyone with a Chinese passport, or a Taiwanese passport (no duals) can get to the island after a quick stop on the mainland. At no charge to the “Chinese” citizens on the island, and at great cost to themselves, China keeps the island well supplied both nutritionally and industrially. As well, they facilitate trade from the island, imposing no duties or tariffs, though they cannot in good conscience allow malign foreign interests to profit off the situation, nor can they allow subversive elements to interfere, so they only allow Taiwanese businesses to sell directly to China or to countries on a list of pre-approved governments/businesses that are “verified.” Everyone else must buy Taiwanese products/services third party through China. No Chinese military or police will come to the island unless requested.

      • Zorost says:

        “After that plan went bad there was no plan.”

        I don’t think you understand what was really going on. The Plan isn’t what was published in the newspaper. The Plan involved endlessly converting tax dollars into MIC contracts and political kickbacks, along with the CIA taking out an estimated $1T in opium. From that perspective, the war was wildly successful. This next war will likely be wildly successful from that perspective as well, assuming Vlad doesn’t blow the Hoover dam or light off an EMP over California.

        ===

        “We ever sever diplomatic ties over Khashoggi? China is far more energy import dependent than US is.”

        You need to understand the concept of “domestic consumption” in regards to propaganda. There are some things that governments say that other governments know is bullshit as it is directed at its own people, not other governments. Those in charge of our government couldn’t care less about moral nonsense, they are making a show for the peasants.

        Yes, China is far more energy dependent than the US. Which is why they are desperate to make RU it’s bitch. Which under normal circumstances they couldn’t do. Fomenting a war with a superpower is just the kind of abnormal circumstances where RU might be desperate enough to subordinate itself to China to avoid being exterminated by the US. I think Putin would EMP the globe before he let either happen, but that might just be my wishful thinking.

        China is becoming less dependent on RU and shipping lanes with its BRI program.

        ===

        “the replacements are diversity morons.”

        Who is choosing those replacements? Those are the people really in charge. Replacing competence with incompetence is an old trick of tyranny, as it increases loyalty although at the cost of efficiency. Competent people have options, and can say “no.” Incompetent people that would be in a loony bin if the other side was in charge can be relied on completely, as they know they have no other options. This is why the Left is always harping on about how the Right will combine the 1950s with the Handmaid’s Tale: they want their incompetent degenerate minions to feel that their job and their status is threatened by an enemy.

        • jim says:

          > The Plan involved endlessly converting tax dollars into MIC contracts and political kickbacks, along with the CIA taking out an estimated $1T in opium

          That was not the plan. That is what happens when an organization loses the capacity to act as one. We cannot build infrastructure any more, because the same thing happens.

          > Who is choosing those replacements? Those are the people really in charge.

          The replacements are choosing the replacements. Our elite is stupid.

        • The Cominator says:

          I agree with some of what you say but Khashoggi wouldnt be popular in the US (jihadi Bin Laden friend) he had CIA buddies like scumbag Brennan. So the stink was his powerful scumbag insider friends not domestic consumption.

          You are right about why are our government promotes the worst people.

        • S says:

          “The Plan involved endlessly converting tax dollars into MIC contracts and political kickbacks, along with the CIA taking out an estimated $1T in opium. From that perspective, the war was wildly successful.”

          The US could do that without a war. Nothing prevents the Fed from printing more money and giving it to whoever they want; you don’t need to produce anything.

          Opium can just pay the local Afghan commander to look the other way and have the CIA fly it out.

          “This is why the Left is always harping on about how the Right will combine the 1950s with the Handmaid’s Tale:”

          The Handmaid’s Tale is a frustrated women’s sexual fantasy- women desire men who can make them low status. The 1950s had a sodomite proposition the future leader of the Muslim brotherhood; the left doesn’t hate the 50s because the times were based, but because it involved white men having families.

          • The Cominator says:

            Leftists and women are masters of doublethink… the Handmaids tale is both a feminine hindbrain fantasy where they are insane and forcibly bred by high ststus men and that something in their exoteric identity as “good” leftists and feminists that horrifies them…

            That leftists women secretly shove vibrators into themselves when they watch the show shames them and they flaggelate themselves later into greater levels of progism and feminism.

        • Starman says:

          @Zorost

          [In reply to Pax Imperialis’s statement, “the replacements are diversity morons”]

          “Who is choosing those replacements? Those are the people really in charge. Replacing competence with incompetence is an old trick of tyranny, as it increases loyalty although at the cost of efficiency.”

          The jew brahmin rulers have no idea how the wunderwaffen works.

        • alf says:

          The Plan

          You are free to argue that our elite only seems to be incompetent while actually playing 5D chess. It is not regarded as a very persuasive argument round here. A century ago this argument would’ve been more persuasive, but not today. Our elite is stupid and evil, and entropy will overtake them sooner or later.

          • Pete says:

            If the elites are that stupid, why don’t they ever make any mistakes? Maybe they do, but nothing ever seems to go wrong for them. They never pay any penalty for anything.

            In the absolute worst case they lose their positions, like Pelosi. Oh poor Nancy, she gets to retire peacefully into a parachute of hundreds of millions of dollars and pay zero penalty for a lifetime of evil.

            I say if they were stupid, they would occasionally make a mistake that lets us get a break. But no, every time you think they’ve “made a mistake,” you look again and it was something that increased their money and power.

            • The Cominator says:

              Acting openly like mobile bandits all the time is not a stable situation…

              • Pete says:

                It seems quite stable. No one is killing them.

                • Kunning Druegger says:

                  I don’t recognize you, but I am going to assume Good Faith.

                  Brother, you need to stop watching news, stop talking politics, stop seeing the ever passing moment as the only moment that matters. It is, but you cannot command the Moment from the moment.

                  Take some time to recognize that, in a very real sense, you are already dead and we have already won. read about heroes, watch growing things grow, try and see the sun move across the sky. Then come back to The Struggle.

                  Let not your heart be troubled.

                • alf says:

                  What KD says. The loudspeakers are loudly announcing our ship is strong as ever. Turn them off, take a close look for yourself. The ship is sinking.

            • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

              Crushing internal opposition is always easy, if you don’t care about how weak it leaves you afterwards, you can keep doing it all the way to autogenocide without any of your victims being able to stop you.

              The problem of course is doing this without having crushed all external opposition too. The old elite thought that China would be gotten on-board with gay anal democlapcy through the plague of carry-on baggers that swarmed the CIS world in the post-soviet collapse.

              When it started to become obvious that that wasn’t happening, the plan should’ve changed. The fact that none of the trends they’ve set in motion have changed, and that they are going through with ‘great resetting’ ‘their’ countries while China and Russia are waiting in the wings to just take their place, demonstrates a widespread chaos of stupidity in the ruling classes.

            • Neurotoxin says:

              “If the elites are that stupid, why don’t they ever make any mistakes? … I say if they were stupid, they would occasionally make a mistake that lets us get a break.”

              They do. Just off the top of my head:
              – Trump got elected.
              – Their response to Pres. Trump in 2020 burned their credibility on “democracy” with the majority of Republicans and a significant chunk of Democrats. (This is per official media polls, by the way.)
              – Their withdrawal from Afghanistan was an acknowledged humiliating failure even in their own lapdog media.
              – Inflation is officially at a 40-year high and this is a political problem for them.
              – Their handling of Russia’s SMO is rapidly depleting their military stockpiles. And for what? Gay parades in Moscow? They’re paying a real, and serious, cost for… nothing.

              So far they’ve managed to stay in power, of course, but fending off disaster – self-created disaster, at that – is not the position of a competent elite who has everything under control. If you’re being subjected to a barrage of bullets and so far you’ve managed to mostly dodge them without receiving any immediately lethal injuries, you don’t have everything well in hand.

              I share your frustration that the evil and insane demons who took over our society haven’t gotten their comeuppance, yet. But: patience.

              • notglowing says:

                I think the problem in the reasoning is in fact the idea that blunders or real world issues stemming from elite mistakes result in elites losing their power.

                It clearly does not work that way, never did. You need someone ready to take power, with enough influence in order to exploit the weakness, in order for any of it to matter.

                You can run a country into the ground, kill millions of people, and still remain a ruler for decades. Plenty of examples of that.

                • Neurotoxin says:

                  Yes, it’s not enough for them to screw up. There must be some sort of organized alternative waiting to take advantage.

            • Ted says:

              [*deleted*]

              • jim says:

                You might be right, but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You provided no evidence.

            • alf says:

              Adding to Neurotoxin’s list:
              – they botched Corona virus — it was supposed to be much deadlier.
              – they have destroyed trust of their media
              – they were unable to agree on a public figurehead that is not dementing.

              All of this is clearly eroding their money and power. How much do you trust the dollar these days?

              Their list of mistakes is growing exponentially. I’d wager the smarter among them are more concerned with bug-out contingency plans than they are with world domination. Although they are quite dumb, so probably still delusional with world domination.

              As for punishment. Would you want to trade positions with them? I would not. I might envy certain perks of their positions, like dining in expensive restaurants or the ability to make people disappear.

              But I would not trade. They are in a demon worship cult, and demons always take more than they give. No amount of crack will make Hunter happy, no amount of ‘disappearances’ will fix Bill and Hillary’s marriage. Evil people have unhappy lives. Makes it easier for them to inflict pain on others.

              Obviously if I were in a position to fully punish them for their evil I would. But we are not in that position. So I settle for their suffering in the meanwhile.

              • The Cominator says:

                I personally think Biden and his complete lack of any good qualities and open dementia and stupidity was meant to be insulting and humiliating to Americans so his dementia is a feature not a bug.

                • Neurotoxin says:

                  LO, dude, you’re overthinking it. He was the only choice all the factions could agree on.

        • Kunning Druegger says:

          Something about the way Zorost is writing is kicking off warning sensors in my brain, like he’s successfully deploying shibboleths but in a clunky way, as in “It’s an old code but it checks out.” The tenor of his proffered observations have that “American Exceptionalism As A Given” flare so common amongst the handful of actual fed shills, like our resident DIA shill (your lying/you lie/jim is a liar). Boomers also do this too, though, so maybe it’s just that. And, of course, could be a false positive. My gut checks have been good over the past few months, so just thought I’d at least get it out there if he starts delivering glowing payload.

          • Red says:

            You’re not wrong.

            One huge data point in favor of this all being planned out at the top is the convenient withdrawal from Afghanistan. This freed up our military for other tasks.

            That’s an enemy talking point. Doesn’t prove he’s a shill, but he’s at least been duped by shills.

        • Neurotoxin says:

          “Replacing competence with incompetence is an old trick of tyranny, as it increases loyalty although at the cost of efficiency.”

          Quite. And as expected, they’re losing efficiency.

        • ten says:

          “Noone who makes decisions believe the stated rationales for decisions made and noone who believes in the rationales makes decisions, it’s all a masterfully crafted marvel of evil genius” etc

          You need to explain (to yourself, idc) why every decisionmaker anyone has a personal view of is a clueless retard bathing in kool-aid. Maybe there is a supervillain with a superplan, maybe there is a grand clockwork. I rather think this is a masturbatory cope by a mind that achieves pleasure from systematizing.

          We are war apes. When we attempt to construct grand clockworks, they only work after myriad failures, heroic effort and continuous maintenance, and they fail rather spectacularly.

          “lol lmao the cia sold opium for gorillion dollar so war on terror was actually profitable” fails to recognize that the cia has way better options to deal heroin than invading afghanistan and way better ways of making money than dealing heroin. It’s chemtrails tier. If the government wants chemicals to reach you, they will not disperse them 10km up in the air.

          There are would-be supervillains with would-be grand plans, and lots of them fail spectacularly with obviously disastrous consequences for the supervillains all the time, and they get away and dump the consequences on other people all the time too.

          Power insulates you from the consequences of your actions until it doesn’t.

          “I am an evil bastard, and all my friends are also evil bastards – we will cooperate harmoniously for centuries in secret and always win!”

          Not how it works. You need God.

    • Neurotoxin says:

      It is virtually impossible that morons rose up to control the West… if one looks at past actions of the Left, in hind sight virtually everything they did made perfect sense once you realized that the only goal of the Left is power… I am sure that once most of the facts are revealed, hindsight will show that the Left’s current actions also make perfect sense from the perspective of a group whose goal is power.

      A couple of points:

      (1) The left in the past, say 50 years ago, was operating in a context with a lot more societal capital than now. That functioned as a brake on their insanity. E.g. 50 years ago the left would not have provoked an all-but-open war with the world’s largest nuclear power based on a philosophy that bad-ass 90-pound women soldiers can kick the crap out of Russian veterans.

      (2) The closer the left gets to absolute power, the more tempting it is for them to betray each other because there’s more at stake. We are already getting, at the very least, strong hints of increased factional conflict within the left.

  28. Red says:

    Sort of interesting video speculating about the backwards collapse seen with some vaxtims.

    https://twitter.com/MedSciPatriot/status/1610451423321522176?cxt=HHwWgIDQ8a7CvNksAAAA

    • notglowing says:

      A vaccinated friend of mine and several in his family seem to have suffered from labyrinthitis recently. Could be related. Some old people I know had this years ago, it’s not new, but I never saw a healthy young man with it.
      I feel like people on our side are exaggerating the issues though.

      Everyone around me is vaccinated. Their health has not gotten worse in general, but their immune systems definitely have. They are sick more often, several got covid, but it was really mild, and same for when they get the flu. Still they recovered without issues.

      I have not gotten anything beyond a cold in the meantime, despite being exposed more than they are. Usually I am the one who gets sick more often, that is no longer the case.

      • jim says:

        > I feel like people on our side are exaggerating the issues though.

        It is not like the jabbed are dying like flies. In this sense we are exaggerating the issues. But the number of young people who just keel over has risen enormously. Sudden adult death syndrome used to be damned near unknown in young people. You just did not see athletes suddenly keeling over on the playing field, airline pilots dropping dead at the controls.

        But though it is no longer rare, it is not like everyone, or even a large proportion, of the jabbed are croaking. Sudden adult death is no longer rare among young people, but remains not all that common. But it is enough of them to be quite noticeable. All of them, all the jabbed, are suffering noticeably from impaired immune system function. A significant proportion of them have prematurely developed assorted old person ailments. Everyone jabbed suffers some heart damage, but usually not enough to meet the clinical criteria for myocarditis. Many of the jabbed have brain fog. It looks to me that all of them suffer some impairment of intelligence, but this is merely my highly biased and subjective impression.

      • simplyconnected says:

        Since the multiple mechanism of injury usually take long to manifest, we still don’t know if there will be actual depopulation or just a lot of injured people. It’s possible that the goal was depopulation but their manufacturing was too sloppy.

      • Guy says:

        Is everyone else seeing the cancer diagnoses among people they are close to? I just learned of another yesterday. Other than the odd immune system issues that’s what I’m seeing. Tons of breast and skin cancer. People don’t necessarily broadcast that to the world (though that probably depends on the circles you run in), but I have a lot of cousins and aunts/uncle’s, and I’m also high enough up at my employer that I hear the word on what this or that person is out of work. It’s dramatic, and among people<50, sometimes much less than 50.

        • SJ says:

          My father’s liver failed after the first vax. He does not drink alcohol and never has. It manifested by him almost bleeding to death from his stomach lining. The doctor at the hospital new immediately it was the vax causing it and that nothing could be done except to wait and his liver began working again. The only test they ran was the d-dimer and an MRI to check for a stroke. They knew what to test for immediately because they knew what the vax was doing. The doctor also told me to not get the vax. This all happened during the lockdowns so the hospital was, of course, completely empty aka “overwhelmed”.

        • simplyconnected says:

          Two cases of cancers in remission coming back in about three months, dead in two weeks. Everyone else in my extended family fine or not talking about their issues.

        • Red says:

          My aunt already had pretty bad cancer before she got the first jab, really didn’t change how the caner was playing out. She didn’t get a second shot before she died.

          I’ve heard that 2ed shot and on is when things get really bad with cancer.

        • Vendat Tunicam says:

          My grandfather developed a rare blood cancer shortly after getting the vax. He was certainly old enough that he could have developed it without the vax, but the timing was suspicious. Of course he died of a heart attack within a couple of months of his second dose despite having no heart problems his whole life whatsoever.

          Nothing I can say to my extended family will get them to see reason, they only believe something if it’s on TV or a legacy media website.

  29. Red says:

    Power Substation attack in Washington State was a couple of tweakers trying to rob a business by shutting down the power. Looks like they were just copy catting for profit.

    https://komonews.com/news/local/two-men-arrested-for-attack-on-pierce-county-substations-christmas-puget-sound-energy-tacoma-power-graham-elk-plains-kapowsin-hemlock#

  30. Kunning Drueger says:

    please check out starting at 18:25:

    https://youtu.be/p79a34I8AjM

    Does anyone have any familiarity with this guy Wranglerstar?

    • Doom says:

      Giving a take at the time stamp – agree strongly with the sentiment and indeed it is a powerful statement.

      But on the other hand, criticising the church and Christianity is not crimethink, it’s practically encouraged.

      “Leave the church” – even if it’s bad, is definitely a desired outcome, division.

      Then again.. his prescription for what to do afterwards is perfect. Also giving me further “this is a real person” vibes is his willingness to admit women lie, but his tact in saying it.

      Good find, I will listen to a few hours of his content today and let you know.

      • Adam says:

        I have and older boomer friend, a purple pill pastor, Protestant tell me “women never tell the truth”. He was on the “man up and take responsibility” side of things. It was kind of shocking to me, not that he said it, but that this didn’t seem odd to him, and didn’t seem to be in conflict with “all women are wonderful”. He’s a simp, and a good provider, and a pretty good dad. Has no end of rationalizations to why his daughters are whores. They have done no wrong, despite promiscuity, adultery and divorce. He’s a weird guy though and practices some kind of energy work that I can only describe as witchcraft, though claims it is scriptural and Christian.

        • Red says:

          Christian boomers where fucking brainwashed as hell about their daughters. Almost every family I know put all their resources into sending the girls to higher ed where they all become whores or druggies.

          • Adam says:

            They emasculate their sons, and teach their daughters to act like men. Same guys will refer to a woman as a bad-ass and a man as a sweetheart. Suicidal obedience to the feminine imperative. I hate to lump all boomers together but the day of the pillow can’t come soon enough.

            • Red says:

              The boomer cult of daughters is so bad that I know a family of boomers who just retired who are moving away from a house they’ve lived in for 30 years to live near their 40 year old PHD cat lady daughter who has no kids at the government make work job she’s doing. They’re ditching their sons in the vain hope a 40 year cat lady will give them grandkids. Of course their emasculated sons don’t have kids either.

              • Fireball says:

                The everything for my daughter and nothing for the other guy’s son was something i never understood about american culture.

              • i says:

                Exemplified cartoonish chivalry exemplified with their enthusiasm of teaching their daughters to be men and to shoot better than any man:
                https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2017/04/10/kickass-conservative-gals/

                https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2018/06/19/chivalry-and-the-kickass-conservative-gal/

                And there is also the borderline or even incestuous “Purity Balls”. Creepy as:

                A man who is closed off from psychological feelings of intimacy by his wife will often transfer some of his libidinal energies to his daughter.

                In doing so he gets to transcend a feeling of shame or failure in his loveless marriage.

                The daughter, too, gets something out of it. She gets to regress into a more infantile state, letting daddy take care of her emotional needs, rather than learning to take care of herself and pass into adulthood.

                If you’re wondering why you meet grown women who haven’t progressed beyond the emotional age of 13, well, this might be a reason in some of those instances…

                Again, it’s not necessary for the father and daughter to have physical sex or anything approaching that. In a strange way, that’s why this unhealthy process is so insidious. It masks itself as a normal relationship, with nothing outwardly untoward; but, at the deep structure, it’s unhealthy for all parties.

                https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2017/02/02/romance-is-sexual/

                That is also because of the strange notion that Romance isn’t inherently erotic:

                The reason this isn’t more widely recognized as twisted is the widespread belief that sexual passion can be neatly divided into two forms:

                Sexual emotion (romance): This is considered pure, non sexual, and if not outright holy then nearly so.

                Physical sexuality: This is considered dirty unless sanctified (purified) by romance.

                But romance isn’t non sexual. It is always sexual.

                This was understood when the concept of romantic love was originally distilled out of sexual passion, but that was nearly a thousand years ago.

          • Anonymous Fake says:

            Griggs v Duke Power makes high school worthless for career purposes, but acceptable for atheists who just want a place to dump their kids they don’t like. But for Christians, college is absolutely necessary to justify all the hard work and grind of K-12 schooling as well as (historically) to secure a rich paying career.

            College in some form, ideally online, is absolutely a part of the Christian identity except for those never exposed to K-12 school work who have a truly blank record.

            • jim says:

              I would normally censor this garbage for all the usual reasons, but allowing it through because it deserves rebuttal.

              Rich Christians did not generally send their sons to college until the twentieth century. They got apprenticeships to important jobs. For example Sir Henry Bessemer seems to have been educated by working for his father in his dad’s business. Possibly he had tutors. Sir Stamford Raffles finished his formal schooling at fourteen.

              The function of universities has always been inculcating the state religion, and obviously you want your elite inculcated in the state religion, so in this sense, yes, necessary for an elite career.

              College is not part of the Christian identity. It is part of the state religion identity. Which is fine if your state religion is Christian. Which it is not, and has not been for quite some time.

              • Anonymous Fake says:

                [*Deleted for rectification of names.*]

                • jim says:

                  You keep using the word “meritocracy” to mean an anticoncept. I have responded to this usage several times already, and am not going to respond again.

    • Guy says:

      He used to do streams with Owen Benjamin here and there. Homesteader, been at it a while now. if he’s a fed he’s exceptionally patient and boring. Seems like just a good man, though I tend to assume anyone doing videos on the Internet is a homosexual I think he’s legit.

    • Red says:

      I haven’t heard of him before, but I found the video interesting. I forwarded to my mostly McChristan extended family to see what they thought. I don’t have any particular experience in forming new groups but I think his idea of forming a group will fail unless he become a prophet and founds his own religious order or fathers enough sons to build a strong group.

      Abraham was a Prophet of God and the core of men around him where gathered on that basis. In a debased world he provided unity, stability and righteousness to those who joined him because he was serving a greater power. The decline of bronze age civilizations where already underway at that point and men were looking for righteous men to follow.

    • Doom says:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Lwqj-bXuaE

      Seems very “modern” christian on the surface (it’s mens fault women are bad)

      But! The blame he places is something I criticise Tate of. So I’m tending to agree with the overall argument he’s making.

      Tate says “you take a girl on a private jet that’s the end for her, no other man can top that experience”. He acknowledges the alpha widow effect. He justifies why virginity is prized in this way, innocence.

      And yet he does it. He knows he’s alpha widowing women, which fucks other men over, and does it anyway. Exactly what I don’t like about Tate, he talks out of both sides of his mouth. “Many men don’t get to touch a woman”, and yet what’s his body count?

      If men are to be leaders, why then would we accept men like Tate who lead women so readily into the path of sluttiness just for cheap entertainment? She wanted to be lead… he stepped in and lead her down the wrong path.

      “But they were already sluts” – Tate made it worse.

      I digress.

      Overall so far Wranglestar doesn’t seem to be a shill or purposefully dishonest. He does seem to try to be careful with his words, so, he must have knowledge of the pop culture arguments. He does seem to try and address the major pain points during his discussions. Not bad.

      Regarding the video I linked, I think I have to conclude that he is saying that you can’t whine that you can’t find someone to lead when you don’t understand anything about who it is you expect to lead.

      Pretty much a soft red pill IMO.

      • Adam says:

        Tate is alpha the way females perceive alphas, but I suspect a lot of that is superficial and came with money and fame. Take away his money and put him in a room full of convicted felons over 6’ and 200lb. and he folds.

        • The Cominator says:

          Nah he was a champion kickboxer dude.

          • Red says:

            Every time I see a MMA guy or the alike attacked by street criminals the criminals just get wreaked. Tate seems legitimately dangerous.

            • jim says:

              MMA is a close to realistic martial art. You are allowed to use potentially lethal grapples, but in a way that gives the option of tapping out.

              • Karl says:

                I think you mean locks, not grapples. Lethal locks are applied to the spine or neck. As far as I know these are not allowed in MMA.

                Anyway, the point of a lock is that it can break a joint. If you break another man’s ellbow, wrist or shoulder you have won. If you know how to apply a lock, you can easily move another inch in a serious confrontation instead of stopping and giving the option of tapping out. A serious martial art trains you to apply a lock even while someone is trying to punch you in the face.

                A man who can keep his fine motor skills while someone punches him has a huge advatage in any fight. Even if you don’t want to apply a martial art technique, you need fine motor skill to draw and use a weapon. Most people lose their fine motor skills when punched, unless they have been punched before and are used to it. I doubt there is a way of aquiring that skill outside martial arts training.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  ‘Grapples’ is not a common way of speaking about it in martial art circles but is understandable. Use of the term ‘lock’ in reference to grappling holds comes from anglo-saxon martial traditions, specifically catch wrestling in America and Britain, which basically means any kind of solid hold that is difficult for the opponent to break out of in general, not just necessarily ones that are bodily threats in particular.

                • jim says:

                  Does not seem like good usage in reference to real fights. If you have a solid hold on someone, but cannot instantly maim or kill him, he can probably gouge, bite, or claw. Hard to have a solid hold while keeping your eyes, testicles, jaw joint, ears, and so forth out of range.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  If you are in a position to hurt someone, you are in a position to kill someone. Dominant position is dominant position. If someone you are sitting on in mount tries to escalate the fight with cute shit, you can escalate 100x’s better than he can.

                  The man with greater ability in positional control, with greater ability to determine what phases the fight does or does not end up in, can hurt his opponent with impunity. The course of the encounter, or even if there is an encounter at all, is up to him to decide. Whether his aim is to merely hold them down to cool off, or to maim them, or to kill them, is a choice for him to make, and his victim to suffer.

                • jim says:

                  > If someone you are sitting on in mount tries to escalate the fight with cute shit, you can escalate 100x’s better than he can.

                  He may not necessarily care. And if your eyeball is hanging on your cheek, you may not care either.

                  From his point of view he is not escalating the fight. The fight, having begun, just has to be fought by whatever means he can. He is unlikely to be aware that you intended a limited and gentlemanly combat fought under rules that guarantee the victory of a man trained in fighting by those rules and ensure that no one suffers serious and lasting injury.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  He can try. His problem is that *he is in no position to try*. Feeble efforts as easy to deal with as a bucking bitch you’re fucking while pinning her wrists.

                • jim says:

                  That depends very much on the hold. Most of the approved holds bring your eyes in range of the thumbs of the man you are holding and leave at least one of his hands free, while both of your hands are engaged.

                  In a real fight, everyone goes for the eye gouge whenever you do a grapple that brings them close. Every time. They are not going to be quelled unless in immediate danger of death or lasting injury, and that danger brought to their attention by great pain. And you will be shocked by how much pain it takes.

                  You are probably vastly more skilled than me in martial arts. But I suspect that I likely have more experience of real combat. The martial artist is apt to be discombobulated by his opponent’s disinclination to fight by rules he is entirely unfamiliar with. From the opponent’s point of view, he is not escalating, he is not transgressing the rules. What rules? It is a fight. Everything is on the table and there is no limit to the stakes.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  I’m not sure how else to explain this. The you who thinks he can win with eye gouges vs the you who thinks he can win with eyegouges and has actually trained is no contest. The latter takes the former’s eyeballs home with him 95 times out of 100.

                  Spend some time on worldstar looking at what people fight like ‘out in the wild’ some time. You’ll see everything i’m talking about here.

                • jim says:

                  > the you who thinks he can win with eye gouges vs the you who thinks he can win with eyegouges and has actually trained is no contest.

                  After your eyes have been gouged, winning ceases to be the issue on your mind. It does not matter whether the other guy thinks he can win by eye gouges, it does not matter whether he is right or wrong should he think that. He is going to do it if he can. He is not going to be deterred because in your mind you think he is escalating. When a real fight begins, deterrence has failed. Deterrence is not going to start working without pain that signals imminent death or injury.

                  in a real fight, everything is on the table. In martial arts combat, it is not. I was in a fight with someone who had really impressive karate skills. I found myself enormously impressed by what he was able to do. But he was trying to incapacitate me with leaping flying kicks to the solar plexus, and I was trying to kill him with my bare hands. In the end, came down to strength and the capacity to endure pain, rather than skill, and I was, in that fight, stronger, though skill mattered a little, in that I knew where the blood supply to the brain is most vulnerable to pressure.

                  Mixed martial arts is, however, a fairly good preparation for unarmed combat, provided you are mindful that some of the holds expose you to eye gouges or loss of testicles, because in mixed martial arts you win by the other guy tapping out, which requires a hold that can apply pain. From my experience with that karate artist, I would say karate is useless in a real fight because nothing a karate artist can do is going to make the other guy stop, but the application of pain that indicates imminent death or serious permanent injury will quell your opponent. Less threatening forms of pain, as in karate, will merely make your opponent even more pissed off. Karate trains the karate artist to apply pain that fails to threaten death or serious injury. All such martial arts are useless in a real fight.

                  That said, unarmed combat is always a bad idea. The only times I was ever in unarmed combat was when someone attacked me suddenly and unexpectedly in an environment where I felt safe and comfortable. Anything is a weapon in the hands of someone willing to use it.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Most normies are scared of actually getting into a fight, and will back down in the face of trouble, or are drunk (which is a lesser concern). Someone who is actually going around spoiling for a fight is going to be pretty obvious ahead of time, and very likely they are also training something in their off time too.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >After your eyes have been gouged

                  Presupposes ability to gouge your eyes.

                  >He is going to do it if he can.

                  And his problem is that he can’t.

                  You are a respectable man Jim. The annals of martial arts in general and combat sports in particular, however, are filled with mall-ninjas whose thinking has all fallen into the same trap you are here. The popular resurrection of NHB fighting in the 90s woke a lot of people up from the fantasy worlds they were living in, but hold outs remain; because noone is born knowing anything, and the eternal september of each new generation brings new opportunities for uninitiated noobs to fall into the same old traps once again. (That’s one reason why ‘lineage’ matters at any rate; the transmission of accumulated wisdom from master to apprentices, including perspective on things not necessarily directly relevant to whatever competitive formats you are nominally training for.)

                  He can’t gouge your eyes because you just dropped him with a teep.
                  He can’t gouge your eyes because you just dropped him with a lead strait.
                  He can’t gouge your eyes because you just dropped him with a calf kick
                  He can’t gouge your eyes because you just dropped him a round kick to the head.
                  He can’t gouge your eyes because you just tied him up in the clinch and dropped him with a knee or elbow.
                  He can’t gouge your eyes you just tied him up in the clinch and dropped his head on the asphalt.
                  He can’t gouge your eyes because you just changed levels on his hips and dropped his head on the asphalt.
                  He can’t gouge your eyes because you just stomped his head on the curb after taking him down.
                  He can’t gouge your eyes because you just have wrist control and rolled an elbow over to cave his face in.
                  He can’t gouge your eyes because you just have a crossface underhook locking him in place and choking him out at the same time, leaving you free to do whatever you want to him with your free hand.
                  He can’t gouge your eyes because you are just riding his back like a two dollar whore grinding his nose in the pavement.
                  He can’t gouge your eyes because you read Bruce Lee’s book and jab-poked him in the eye first.

                  All the ideas people thought would let them ‘easily’ defeat opponents without having to ‘lower’ themselves by ever stepping foot inside a gym, worked a lot less well than expected back when people were competing in promotions where all that kind of stuff was still legal. Turns out, like always, there’s no real shortcuts to superiority; the only way you could ever be in a position to successfully use such tactics to defeat a trained opponent, was if you actually knew how to use and defend against your opponent’s techniques properly in the first place.

                • jim says:

                  > > After your eyes have been gouged

                  > Presupposes ability to gouge your eyes.

                  It is completely obvious that a great many martial arts holds grant your opponent the option of removing your eyes or testicles at his leisure.

                  Martial arts combat assumes the opponent is not going to go for your face, because forbidden. Guess what. He is going to go for your face. Especially if you have in a hold that grants him a free hand, and your face or testicles not very far from that hand.

                  > He can’t gouge your eyes because you just dropped him with a calf kick

                  I have been kicked by experts. Never slowed me down noticeably. Most of the moves you list are moves for the application of pain that fails to threaten death or serious injury. In a real fight, these are useless, and applying them is merely going distract you from what actually matters. Blows to the head can drop someone, which is what boxing is all about, but the other blows are unlikely to be much use in a real fight, and knocking someone down with a blow to the head is not all that easy. Getting someone’s legs out from under them also works, but you are likely to wind up on the ground with them, in which case it has not worked.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >Anything is a weapon in the hands of someone willing to use it.

                  Very true.

                  The highest art of Mars is the power of friendship; rolling with a posse, and having a bigger posse than the other guy.

                  Being aware of your environment and having a weapon is always a game changer too. Even a simple stone held in your fist will turn a punch into the crack of a mace.

                  If you are packing heat (which I assume every good fellow here has the means of doing so), it’s better to just draw right away in case of trouble, because if you get into a scuffle and the other guy realizes you have a weapon he will try to steal it and use it against you.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >It is completely obvious that a great many martial arts holds grant your opponent the option of removing your eyes or testicles at his leisure.

                  Certainly, that is the theory. We all know it. We can all see the logic of it.

                  The thing is that every time this theory is tested, it never actually plays out the way it is expected too.

                • jim says:

                  > The thing is that every time this theory is tested, it never actually plays out the way it is expected too.

                  I speak from the battlefield. I am pretty sure you do not.

                  I have been kicked by experts, numberless times in ritualized combats with martial arts experts, and in a few real combats, one of them with a martial arts expert. Never slowed me down noticeably, not even once. Most of the moves you list are merely moves for the application of pain that fails to threaten death or serious injury. Your opponent is not going to drop. He is not even going to slow down. You are just going to piss him off.

                  In a real fight, these are useless, and applying them is merely going to further enrage your opponent while distracting you from what actually matters. Blows to the head can drop someone, which is what boxing is all about, but most of the other blows you listed are unlikely to be much use in a real fight, and knocking someone down with a blow to the head is not all that easy, though it works well enough if the other guy’s guard is not up. Getting someone’s legs out from under them also works, but you are likely to wind up rolling around on the ground with them, in which case it has not worked. Elbow locks work because you are threatening to break his elbow, which will quell him, unlike a calf kick, but in a real fight, you will not have the luxury of precisely applying the correct threatening but non dangerous amount of force.

                  I won the real life fight with the karate expert because he kept on delivering flying kicks to the solar plexus, which at first I attempted to counter with non dangerous grapples, as if we were in martial arts training, rather than the real life fight which it actually was, which grapples he easily, indeed effortlessly, evaded or countered. Eventually he pissed me off sufficiently to actually start using effective measures. He must have delivered ten or twenty flying kicks to the solar plexus, without any effect other than to piss me off enough to start fighting for real.

                  Martial arts combat is unreal, and using unreal methods in a real fight is going to lose.

                • alf says:

                  I was in a fight with someone who had really impressive karate skills. I found myself enormously impressed by what he was able to do. But he was trying to incapacitate me with leaping flying kicks to the solar plexus, and I was trying to kill him with my bare hands.

                  lmao Jim how do you keep getting yourself in those situations.

                • jim says:

                  I am an asshole.

                  And, in the company of women, apt to act as if I am the most dangerous man in the room, which may lead someone else to find out if it is true, though I do my best to avoid such unfortunate outcomes, preferring to be seen by women as dangerous, but not seen by men as dangerous.

                  And, as I have mentioned many times, I suffer from lust, gluttony, and wrath. Lust and wrath is apt to get one into trouble that could have been avoided. And that I do try to avoid, but I slip up from time to time. Gluttony nearly killed me, and wrath has nearly killed me several times. I avoided a criminal record only by miraculous ability to talk to police and when this failed, expensive lawyers. I now have gluttony mostly under control, and am currently about six pounds above my ideal weight. From time to time I get down to my ideal weight, and then relax and slip up, particularly due to Christmas, birthday parties and suchlike.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >I was in a fight with someone who had really impressive karate skills. I found myself enormously impressed by what he was able to do. But he was trying to incapacitate me with leaping flying kicks to the solar plexus, and I was trying to kill him with my bare hands. In the end, came down to strength and the capacity to endure pain, rather than skill, and I was, in that fight, stronger, though skill mattered a little, in that I knew where the blood supply to the brain is most vulnerable to pressure.

                  Striking carries an inherent risk of chronic traumatic encephalopathy, so likewise there is an inherent tendency in many striking traditions to minimize this risk by innovating ways of developing capacities relevant to success without as much full contact, fully live sparring.

                  But the dark side of this trend is that by that minimizing liveness, by that same token, opens the door for charlatanism to come in and make niches for itself, insulated from ever being exposed by pressure testing. Most EMAs, like karate, have suffered the most from this trend, where mcdojos that cater to people who want the validation of being a ‘martial arts master’, without having to do any of that icky warrior stuff, take over the gross of the market share.

                  There is a place for point fighting, where contact is one-and-done rather than continuous, it can be a good occasional drill for placing more specific focus on concepts like distance management and agility in your fighter’s mind; but it can’t be a complete replacement. Nothing replaces ability to handle yourself in the clinch when no holds are barred.

                • jim says:

                  there is an inherent tendency in many striking traditions to minimize this risk by innovating ways of developing capacities relevant to success without as much full contact, fully live sparring.

                  But the dark side of this trend is that by that minimizing liveness, by that same token, opens the door for charlatanism to come in and make niches for itself, insulated from ever being exposed by pressure testing.

                  Kicking, kneeing, or striking with bare hands just does not seem to do very much in a real fight, except that a blow to the head or the back of the neck can drop someone. So I would say that all the striking traditions are rather useless. Except, of course, traditions like Arnis and Krabi that use short sticks. The long stick traditions are also useless.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >Getting someone’s legs out from under them also works, but you are likely to wind up on the ground with them, in which case it has not worked.

                  I wouldn’t say so personally; for one thing, there’s a reason why pinning was considered a death sentence in every historical martial art; there is nothing the other guy can do to stop you from stabbing your dagger between the gaps in his armor, and nothing he can meaningfully do to hurt you on his part either; your leverage beats his leverage.

                  For another, if you are on top of someone, he can’t really stop you from not being on top of him, either. Whether the fight is pursued or disengaged, it’s once again the choice for the man with superior positioning to make.

                • Pax Imperialis says:

                  MMA is 40% ground game. Ending up on the ground is the last thing you want in a serious fight. MMA style irl gets you killed.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Well yes, again, that is the theory.

                  The evidence your honor?

                  Let’s be frank here: cellphone cameras exist. All the old wushu myths that have persisted are becoming a lot like all the old alien visitation stories that persisted. There’s nothing stopping anyone from seeing whether the theories comport with the evidence anymore. And there has been a lot of evidence.

                  Not only are people not losing eyeballs and testicles left and right, we also see, with few exceptions, innumerable examples of people with even a novitiates experience in a live-trained combat sport easily dispatching their hapless counterparts.

                  Why should we have expected any different?

                • jim says:

                  If you think you can take someone out by the moves you listed, you are not in contact with reality. And if you see videos where someone took someone out with those moves, they were staged. Those moves merely piss your opponent off. I have been kicked by experts a lot.

                • Pax Imperialis says:

                  The trained guys depend on kicks against standing opponents and ground game. Licking is liable to send you to the ground. Not a big deal in padded controlled setting.

                  Plenty of evidence that when it gets to grappling on the ground others (niggers 90% of the time) tend to join in by kicking heads. That’s when things start to really go south. Just my 2 cents. Stay off the ground unless forced and keep it simple with pummeling the other guy’s head.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  The real problem in cases like that is being alone against a crowd with no posse of your own. I agree that keeping it simple with rides and gnp is best in any case.

                  To harp a little more on this issue because i can’t let it slide; there are a number of selection pressures to high level competition in combat sports. One of them is succeptibility to damage.

                  Noone can make it at a high level in a sport like boxing or vale tudo or so on without being able to take a punch; even the best in the world will get caught clean at some point or another, and if they can’t shake it off and recover, they simply won’t have consistent enough success to be a contendah.

                  The average schmuck tends to be a lot more sensitive to impacts, especially if they have had little to no experience in taking a hit in the first place. A great many ‘street fights’ are started and ended in little more than a single exchange, where one party grazes the chin of the other. There are exceptions of course.

                  Like the saying goes, when people are put under pressure, they don’t rise to the occasion, they fall to the level of their training. So what does someone who has never trained anything do? They spaz out. Whatever plans or ideas or expectations they had going in, they’ve all gone out the window. While someone who *has* put the time in to drill something will reflexively execute their gameplan, against minimal resistance.

                  You train how you fight, because you will fight how you train.

                • Adam says:

                  I have been in a few street fights as a teenager, and wrestled a little. Eye gouging does not seem like it would be a huge problem unless on the ground, either from mount or mounted. Hard to do if mounted though and if you have position it still leaves you defenseless as both hands are occupied. Not that it really takes long I suppose.

                  I am about Jon Jones size maybe a little bigger and I am on gear. No way am I getting into a street fight as an adult if I can reasonably avoid it. Hitting someone in the head with bare fists is not a good idea. May as well hit a bowling ball. If I had to, I would tackle them first chance I got and strike with forearms/elbows.

                  If I go anywhere potentially dangerous I have a belt knife at the minimum. Fist fight or grappling is a last resort. But I have not had someone look at me as if they wanted trouble since I was a teenager.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >Kicking, kneeing, or striking with bare hands just does not seem to do very much in a real fight, except that a blow to the head or the back of the neck can drop someone. So I would say that all the striking traditions are rather useless. Except, of course, traditions like Arnis and Krabi that use short sticks. The long stick traditions are also useless.

                  As a booster of rassling supremacy, i of course find denigration of my punchkickingly preoccupied rivals to be copacetic, especially when you consider the addition of weapons to the equation.

                  Never the less, i happen to know a lot about the wily tricks of my adversaries (any evidence of me *using* such tricks myself should of course be understood as merely an extension of colonization of the fight-game by the rassling imperium), so my knowledge of the relevant affairs yet compels me by principle to produce apologia for those aspects of the truth in the spheres they are relevant.

                  >I have been kicked by experts.

                  As a general rule, folks who haven’t acclimatized their limbs to repeat impacts over the course of their experience are easy prey to someone who knows how to hit with impact; which isn’t contradicted by your own admission.

                  For that matter, a good leg kick is as much a matter of timing as anything else as well. Even if you were kicking robocop or the terminator, you will still drop them like a sack of potatoes if you time their steps.

                  https://www.youtube.com/embed/uekrcCE3T9I
                  https://www.youtube.com/embed/2fPxr25AdWE

                  This is one of my favorite wrinkles, because it is useful in just so many situations. Like when working as security and needing to take down a belligerent drunk with no fuss or muss; or if that same drunk pulls a shiv on you and you need to make space to grab a chair and bash his head open.

                  I should note that very few people actually do train kicks. What i mean by this is, sure they might throw a few roundhouses in here and there while doing their heavy bag conditioning; but they are not actually doing specific exercises to develop their strength and dexterity through their full range of motion, to be able to kick with power, poise, and control. If you can’t raise your leg up and hold it at your chosen kicking height, move it around in slow motion, you can’t actually kick that high. Most people when they try to ‘high kick’ are really just using momentum to ‘throw’ themselves into the kick, which can cause a lot of problems.

                  If you have the dexterity to kick people in the head with good technique, that is a big advantage, because noone really reacts properly to head kicks unless they have been specifically trained in how to deal with them. Knocking someone’s block off with a boot to the head is one of the surest and easiest stoppages there is.

                  I wouldn’t be so quick to underestimate body work too. Of course most people, if given the choice, would likely rather take one to the ribs than one to the chin; but if you know what you’re doing and give them one in the liver or bread basket, they’ll regret that choice.

                  It may seem counter-intuitive, but a flying kick can actually be less impactful than one thrown from standing, because there is no solid rooting for the impact. As well, given that the man you tussled with was training in a point-fighting style (or perhaps even worse, a kata only gym), it’s unlikely that he spent a lot of time on training to specifically hit with impact either.

                  One single teep might not take the fight out the hothead starting shit with you; but then, it’s not like he can stop you from just continuing to teep him to death anyways. He’s already 100 years too late in learning how to deal with it; at which point you drop a feint to question mark kick on him to boot; sudden changes in expectation like this are another thing that people don’t really handle well unless specifically trained for it.

                  ~

                  None of this should of course be considered as an endorsement of punchkicking supremacy, merely an imputation of more learned nuance into what i am seeing as a wide range of incautious and shakily-grounded proclamatization.

                  My own Party Line on the gouging question is naturally that you are riding him like a two dollar whore, and if he tries, you simply stop him, because your leverage beats his leverage; and if you try, he can’t stop you, because your leverage beats his leverage. It’s as simple as that.

                  I am seeing you fixiating on leg kicks in particular, which is regrettable since i was overzealous myself and did a lot of name-dropping of different things of not necessarily equivalent comparability (not that i don’t have reasons for everything i mentioned anyways), so you single out one of the weakest examples and use that to throw shade on everything else.

                  At the same rate, you have made a lot of hay out of an encounter with a man who quite possibly has never even been in a hard spar in his life; i hope you understand the weakness of this example; or rather, that if anything it just goes to show the point of some of the things i have been trying to illustrate here.

                  This is also, just to preempt any misunderstanding, not advocacy that everyone should be dedicating their lives to mastering Heavenly Fist Style or some such. Merely, again, the act of informed prudence in pushing back on the implications of hasty overstatements like ‘training to fight is pointless because training to fight does not help you win fights’.

                  I have had an interest in fighting for a long time, in case it wasn’t obvious. It’s one of my favorite hobbies, and so of course i can’t let an opportunity to expound at length about the wonderful world of fighting and fighting accessories in all its fulsomeness past.

                  ~

                  Like mentioned elsewhere, a great deal of the altercations that people get themselves into are in reality ‘social combat’. When you threw down with Mr. Mcdojo, you were willing to do whatever it took to put him down; but did you actually kill him in the end? You and him reached an impasse over something, and you settled it with your fists. It happens. Knowing how to spank someone who steps to you is a great life skill.

                  Of course, some people can go their whole lives without ever crossing anyone; a far larger number of people never get into a tussle because one party or the other loses their nerve first, or cowardly submits to the impositions of the other; and furthermore some people who can’t seem to go any length of time without crossing someone, through some ratio of never backing down and lacking in any tact or propriety in the first place (or because of niggerfaggotry).

                  But in any of these cases, there is a benefit (well, except for the last one) to the experience of training to fight; of testing yourself against a counterpart with full force; of placing yourself into worlds where there is no longer any hope of solipsistically offloading all personal responsibility for your destiny; of overcoming adversity and exercising will to stay a course towards accomplishment; of venues for the channeling, the cultivation, of martial spirit, so often frustrated by lack of any real outlets in GAE societies. Even for someone who would never need it, learning how to fight is good for your soul.

                • jim says:

                  You can take down a belligerent drunk by breathing on him heavily. That these tactics cause drunks to go down is not an indication that a sober adversary is going to go down.

                  > Like mentioned elsewhere, a great deal of the altercations that people get themselves into are in reality ‘social combat’. When you threw down with Mr. Mcdojo, you were willing to do whatever it took to put him down; but did you actually kill him in the end? You and him reached an impasse over something, and you settled it with your fists. It happens.

                  Such combats are stupid. I have never been in such a combat since I was a child. If such a combat were to occur, doubtless martial arts training would work, because the combatants would be observing limits and will stop fighting when they get hurt in the expectation that the other guy, being a gentleman too, will also stop fighting. As for using fists, I never once attempted to punch or kick McDojo at any point. (He was way better at that stuff than I was, was expecting punches or kicks in return, that being his training, and was all prepared for them) I grappled.

                  McDojo was an arrogant asshole who figured that because he was good at karate, he could take me. His intent probably was just to take me down. But he was a total stranger who showed up out of nowhere, and I had no guarantee that me voluntarily taking a fall would end it. He must have landed ten or so flying karate kicks in my solar plexus. But I was disinclined to go down. It is likely that had I voluntarily taken the fall, that would have ended the fight, and it would have made a great video showing how martial arts works against the untrained, for it was certainly working in the competition sense, that he was landing no end of kicks and punches, and was effortlessly avoiding my grapples, which were initially merely aimed at control, and I suppose he had also been trained in avoiding non life threatening grapples. So long as we were fighting within limits, he was totally winning in the competition sense, and I was totally and completely losing in the competition sense, but I was not going down, not even slowing down, and was ever less inclined to end the fight by voluntarily taking the fall. Maybe if he had been an acquaintance, I would have voluntarily taken the fall, to acknowledge his martial arts were a great deal better than mine, and because I was getting hurt a lot, and then we could drink over it and laugh.

                  But in the end, when the gloves came off, neither his nor my martial arts training mattered much, except that I intellectually knew some things about anatomy and knew certain moves in theory, never actually practiced, because they could never be practiced.

                • Kunning Druegger says:

                  Enough chatter! Let’s review some evidence!

                  https://twitter.com/FightHaven

                  Plenty of evidence in that single account for almost everything discussed above. More evidence is always welcome.

                  I have been in fights, I have lost fights, and I have stopped fights from happening. I am quite confident that positional control of the opponents body is the absolute best place to be. It doesn’t mean you will win, or that his fellow nogs won’t smash the back of your head, but if given the choice between mounting and being mounted, there is no situation in real life fighting where the latter is preferable.

                  I have never witnessed to well trained/pro fighters go at it in the street, but I have seen courage (liquid and otherwise) go up against experience, and experience wins every single time.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  I can’t help but feel like you are being purposefully obtuse at this point Jim. ‘Settle it with your fists’ is a euphemism for fighting, it doesn’t mean ‘literally use punching and nothing else’.

                  >You can take down a belligerent drunk by breathing on him heavily. That these tactics cause drunks to go down is not an indication that a sober adversary is going to go down.

                  I am not talking about methods that let you take down a belligerent drunk, i am talking about methods that let you take down *a fully prepared opponent who has spent years or decades training specifically to not be taken down*, let alone anyone else.

                • jim says:

                  > ‘Settle it with your fists’ is a euphemism for fighting, it doesn’t mean ‘literally use punching and nothing else’.

                  It is you are being purposely obtuse, in that you are obfuscating the difference between pretend fights and play fights. Real fights do not settle disputes. They drive away or destroy enemies. Friends have disputes. Enemies need to be destroyed or driven out.

                  If you practice a martial art, and you have this great move or hold that is really effective against someone who is not prepared to make the counter move that threatens life and limb, but useless against an enemy who means harm, you are preparing to fight your friends, but you will find yourself utterly unprepared to fight your enemies.

                  And if you think you are a great fighter, because you can take down “any man in the room”, you can take down any of your friends, and then you get in a fight with a stranger, whom you know you could take down if you both fought within the rules, but he does not trust you to refrain from killing or maiming him, so does not fight within the rules, you are going to suddenly find yourself out of your depth.

                  I have fought in the dojo, and I have fought for real. There is a huge difference. Winning against friends does not matter, and martial arts techniques that focus on that are stupid. And they all, necessarily and unavoidably, tend to focus on that, some more than others.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  You are falling into nominalistic thinking here when you think that any kind of rule is the same as any other kind of rule.

                  In reality, boxing is different from bjj, muay thai is different from sumo, 1980 judo is different from 2020 judo, pride rules are different from ufc rules are different from onefc rules, so on and so on it goes.

                  There are real significant differences in the character of different traditions, as informed by the character of their outlets for competition, the character of training done in preparation for accomplishment of one objective or another.

                  Do not solipsistically mistake lack of knowledge of differences with lack of reality of differences. There are real things out there with real effects. You don’t have to dedicate your life to these things, but you can acknowledge the good ideas generated by the people who do dedicate their lives to them, and incorporate it into your own praxis.

                  When you see examples of how muggles end up on the ground in niggorydiggory, and how initiated athletes end up on the ground in competitions with more grappling element to them, you will see overlaps of all the same underlying dynamics, principles, and critical conditions – though of course far more consciously pursued and better executed in the later case.

                  Put plainly Jim, you are simply in the wrong here. Every dumbass mall-ninja in history has masturbated to the idea that they will have some special ‘anti-grappling’ trick that will stop them from getting grounded and pounded which will excuse them from having to take the trouble of practicing anything. They are all wrong, every single one, as near enough to make no difference.

                  Intention to do whatever is meaningless when you have no power to do whatever. Positional control is the foundation of all melee combat. Wrestling, broadly construed, is the most ancient and primal martial art of humanity. Go ahead and try to give your opponent a handjob when your face is eating dirt and his elbow is caving in the back of your skull.

                • jim says:

                  This is repetitious and unresponsive.

                  Every word you write reveals you are utterly and stubbornly ignorant of the topic under discussion, for I talk of fighting enemies, and no matter what I say, you give my words a new and stupid meaning, unresponsive to what I said, reinterpreting my plain words as if was talking about fighting friends. This reveals you have never fought enemies, and therefore do not know of what you speak.

                  You gave a long list of ways of taking someone out by violent means, which list by the utter idiocy and complete ineffectiveness of most of the methods reveals you have never taken someone out by violent means. The methods listed simply are not going to diminish your opponent’s will or capability to fight, revealing you have never actually used them in real combat. McDogo man probably expected that flying karate kick in the solar plexus would take me down. Yes, getting your enemy down while you are still up works, but the methods listed are not going to accomplish that. They are going to get you killed by an enemy that is still vertical, still fully capable of fighting, and is now angrier than he was.

                  You talk of fights between friends and within limits or rules, and no matter what I say, it gets interpreted in terms of fights between friends within rules. And therefore gets interpreted as something stupid which is wildly different from what I said

                  Obviously I don’t think that the likelihood of getting your eyes gouged out renders grapples irrelevant. It renders some grapples irrelevant if what you want to do is defeat enemies, rather than friends.

                  And if you don’t care about maiming or killing the adversary, some highly effective grapples become possible, that are forbidden. In a grapple, you want to grab hold of something. And grabbing hold of the head is, of course, highly effective. But how do you hold onto someone’s head with one hand?

                  Notice the striking resemblance between the human skull and a bowling ball.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  That is exactly the point i am trying to impress here; this belief that there is some special and insurmountable distinction between ‘sport’ and ‘reality’, when *there isn’t*.

                • jim says:

                  When you take advantage of rules designed to prevent injury to “defeat” your opponent, there is a difference that can only be surmounted by refusing to game the rules, by fighting as if your opponent was allowed to do what any random schmuck in a real fight is going to do.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >The methods listed simply are not going to diminish your opponent’s will or capability to fight

                  What else can i say except you’re wrong?

                  I don’t mean to make the tone too heated, and i don’t mean to argue like a dictionary where the longest list wins, i endeavored the clarify the essence of the point in later posts, but every single example i listed there i can show you examples of it happening, not just against random schmucks, but against the best fighters in the world too.

                  That’s not to say it’s all created equal or anything, just that all of it can be shown to have grounding in reality. That i can, as Starman would like to say, ‘post video’.

                • jim says:

                  > > The methods listed simply are not going to diminish your opponent’s will or capability to fight

                  > very single example i listed there i can show you examples of it happening, not just against random schmucks, but against the best fighters in the world too

                  Show me a calf kick taking down a random schmuck in a video not obviously staged.

                  Taking down the “best fighters in the world” does not count, because likely what took them down was not the blow, but obedience to overly elaborate rules intended to prevent injury, rules that were being ingeniously, legalistically, elaborately, and cleverly abused by their adversary.

                • Pax Imperialis says:

                  >The real problem in cases like that is being alone against a crowd with no posse of your own.

                  A problem that is only getting worse. Antifa and niggers have DoJ on their side. They can organize with impunity against isolated individuals. There is no quick solution to that problem. Proud Boys act in self defense but end up in prison for decades. Even in groups, the chaos of the situation can cause one to be separated and isolated. In the meantime one must prepare to have to fight alone.

                  >The average schmuck tends to be a lot more sensitive to impacts

                  Depends on how much adrenaline got dumped and how they react to it. I’ve seen people behave as if they couldn’t feel pain. I’ve also seen people break down and cry immediately. Pain threshold in normal circumstances varies widely too. I’ve seen guys run around with leg/foot fractures for multiple weeks during military training that involved 60 miles of running per week, much of it under load, before being ordered to go to medical. I’ve also seen guys asking to go home over dried out hands. Point is that you really don’t know how people will react until put in the situation and there’s enough variation that focusing on the average is detrimental. So I think you’re wrong when you say”

                  >Noone can make it at a high level in a sport like boxing or vale tudo or so on without being able to take a punch

                  My personal belief is that training helps with endurance, strength, and muscle memory. It doesn’t help with being able to take a punch. That largely boils down to personality and culture which are themselves outgrowths of genetics. Training doesn’t change the foundation; it can only build on top.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  > because likely what took them down was not the blow, but obedience to overly elaborate rules intended to prevent injury

                  [*endless stubborn unresponsiveness deleted*]

                  >you just dropped him with a calf kick
                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFV-5_pKMJQ
                  [*more endless stubborn unresponsiveness deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  I asked for a video of a calf kick taking down a random unfriendly normie in real life combat, not a calf kick in ritualized combat between friends under rules.

                  I asked “Show me a calf kick taking down a random schmuck in a video not obviously staged”

                  The claim I make, and that you deny, is that reality is different, that combat between friends under rules and limits is not real fighting. Videos of unreal combat are not relevant evidence of what happens in real fights.

                  If it worked in real life, there should be videos of it working in real life.

                  If you cannot provide the requested video, absence of evidence is evidence that real life is different. If it was effective in real life, people are going to use it in real life.

                  Your argument is that MMA is a good emulation of real life. Not it is not. It is arguably the least bad emulation, but they are all very bad emulations.

                  Our dispute is over the question of whether martial arts provide a good emulation of real life combat. You cannot use evidence from martial arts alone to support your claim. You have to compare real fights with martial arts combat. No real fights, no evidence.

                  Lack of evidence is evidence of lack of resemblance between real fighting and martial arts combat.

                  Some who has a good punch can make someone go down in one hit to the head, but for a mixed martial artist to take someone down with a calf kick, he has to kick him all day before he falls down, and in a real life fight, would be dead or seriously injured before it happened. Real life fights are over far more quickly than martial arts combats.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >A problem that is only getting worse.

                  The problem of organization is always the most perennial problem. If you are alone, then the best thing is to just be self-aware and avoid problem situations altogether; or if for some reason you can’t avoid them or need to be there, you bring your AR-15 with you.

                  >training helps with endurance, strength, and muscle memory. It doesn’t help with being able to take a punch.

                  I didn’t spell it out explicitly but that was the implication yes. There is a pre-selection filter at work there. When you see two guys going 12 rounds deep into the night eating shot after shot, one should understand that they are looking at percents of percents of humanity in terms of such capacity.

                  Muhammad Ali won his toughest fights with his chin as much as he did with his skills. Floyd Mayweather could have retired 49-1 as a great boxer instead of 50-0 as an icon if he wasn’t able to withstand that cross counter Maidana crunched him with.

                  Far less known are those amongst the ranks of also-rans who, while they may have had disproportionate levels of capability in other areas relative to their nominal level of competition, their inability to survive tough situations result in highly spotty records as gatekeepers at best; the sort of guys who the next generations of champions beat on their way to the top, but not their real dance partners.

                  I agree there are all kinds of people out there and reactions to adversity can vary widely; just speaking in terms of the general rule.

                • jim says:

                  The first video is obvious staged, a demonstration of a martial arts technique, not an actual combat. If it is an actually combat, it is not a martial art, but a sucker punch against a non aggressive non resisting opponent.

                  In the second video, that the wrestler was not instantly squished was impressive.

                  Yes, the throw worked, but the normie opponent was not incapacitated, not out of the fight, just discombobulated for a few seconds, and as the wrestler attempted, unsuccessfully, to throw the second opponent, he found himself about to face four opponents once again.

                  Yes, the very cool impressive martial arts method worked in a sense, but martial arts man was back to square one, four opponents coming at him, in a few seconds.

                  Martial arts certainly worked in the sense that he was able to throw one man of the four coming at him. Very impressive. But the result was not much different from if no cool martial arts had been employed at all. He still wound up as one guy trying to get away from four guys. Further, that he was able to throw the first man coming at him but not the second indicates sucker punch effect. The first normie was overconfident, not expecting resistance, so was easily thrown, the second was expecting resistance, so the attempt by the expert martial artist to throw the second normie failed, wasting a precious second in a situation where the martial artist did not have seconds to spare.

                  So yes, his martial arts expertise mattered, it made a noticeable difference. But really, not a huge difference. He would have been better off focused on running like the wind.

                  Further the normies were not a bunch of feral savages, they were not trying to hurt, but to subdue, the martial artist. Everyone was fighting within civilized limits and restraints. Had they been trying kill and maim, his martial arts would have made considerably less difference, for that is the situation that is very hard to train for, while he could, and presumably had, trained for the situation that he faced.

                  So video 1: Martial arts demonstration or sucker punch, not a real fight

                  Video 2. Real fight with civilized normie opponents fighting within limits. Martial arts noticeably effective, in that the inevitable outcome of four against one took a few seconds longer than it would have otherwise taken.

                  But, since civilized and fighting within limits, not really the case we care about. And if it had been the case we care about, the difference martial arts made was not all that much difference.

                  By your rhetoric, normie #1 should have been smashed, should have been taken out of the fight. He was momentarily inconvenienced.

                  Suppose it had been one on one, rather than four on one. Then obviously martial arts guy could completely dominate normie #1. They were both using non damaging fighting methods, but martial arts man is just way better at such methods. Way way better. The throw showed that though he could not dominate four normies, or even two, he could certainly dominate one. But he would have to go on dominating normie #1. Normie #1 is not out of the fight. And if Normie #1 gets sufficiently angry and or frightened, he is going to start using methods that may cause death or permanent injury. Methods that martial arts man has no more training or experience in dealing with than anyone else.

                • Adam says:

                  If two trained fighters were to fight to the death without rules, which is nearly what the early UFCs were, the fights would begin the same and the fighters would not change their strategy all that much other than incorporating certain strikes that are forbidden, such as what has been mentioned earlier as well as knee/kick/stomp to the head of a downed opponent.

                  It would look like MMA looks, like the early UFCs looked, and Pride looked, with additional strikes to sensitive areas, and it would be wise for fighters to train the same way fighters train today.

                  I agree there is a level of determination and an extra gear when you fully engage your killer instinct and completely silence your inner policeman. But this does not radically change what works in a fight. Setting the dial from 9 to 10 is not the difference between walking and flying.

                  Every fight that doesn’t end in death is ended by the inner policeman. There may be moments of fear, that when met courageously can drive you forward faster and harder until the threat is neutralized but it is not perpetual. If you did not set out initially to kill your opponent, you are not going to kill him. Even if your intent is to kill you still may pull up short.

                  The rules in an MMA fight and your awareness of them are not what stops you from violating them. You stop yourself from violating them. As risen killer apes we value life, ours and others even if we don’t know that we do. There may be moments that push us to ignore this rule, but that doesn’t radically change how fighting works.

                  If one is in a position where they must violate this rule, that life is valuable, things change, consciousness opens up and new paths are available, but it does not radically alter how one would train for a fight, or attempt to fight. Fighting would look just like MMA, only with eye and groin strikes, strikes to the back of the head, and to the head of a downed opponent.

                • alf says:

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wM9G0hk_Zmk
                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILOt5Ui1XOw

                  This footage is slightly underwhelming. Two of the three examples are suckerpunch sweeps — very clean and certainly not without merit, but still, suckerpunch. The one with the kids wrestling is not a suckerpunch, but looks kinda convoluted…

                  I guess it’s hard to provide exactly the kind of footage Jim asks for. You’d want a street fight with evenly matched men in terms of size, in which one man uses instinct, the other martial arts training, and show the one with martial arts training convincingly win on his technique.

                  The fact that such videos are apparently not as ubiquitous as, say, the outcome of a knife versus gun fight, is, I think, decent evidence in favor of Jim’s argument that martial arts training is not as important as some make it out to be.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Tsk tsk jim. You’re doing a whole lot of theorizing there, but none of those things happened on video, see?

                  >This footage is slightly underwhelming.

                  That’s just how it is. We aren’t looking at world-beaters here. If you do want to look at what this stuff looks like against legitimate world-beaters, i can provide plenty of examples.

                • jim says:

                  You are showing videos of friendly combat, the first video is either a completely staged martial arts demonstration, or the normie victim did not think he was in a fight, did not want a fight, and did not expect a fight. In the second video, multiple attackers want to restrain and control the wrestler, but they are not trying to hurt him. Friendly combat is what martial artists train for, because it is very difficult to realistically emulate unfriendly fighting, without your students getting injured or killed. The martial artist has a huge advantage in friendly combat.

                  Most street fights are unfriendly. The absence of unfriendly combat videos suggests that the martial artist was unable to successfully execute any obvious martial arts tricks in unfriendly combat, or that something horrifying happened to him when he tried such tricks.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  This is just special pleading Jim – which i have no problem with engaging with, but if you are going to delete and or disregard my own special pleading, then there aren’t a lot of ways for this conversation to move forwards.

                  Lets try to pull things backwards somewhat. I’ve endeavored to describe examples of the sort of things i would be talking about; I would say things like ‘positional dominance determines the possibility of both and your counterparts ability to do something’. In response, you would say ‘that depends very much on the hold’ or ‘fighters are only winning by gaming the rules’.

                  When you say these things, can you describe an example of what exactly you are thinking of when you say it?

                • jim says:

                  Every time in a martial arts bout someone would use a move that in a real fight would expose him to a massively damaging countermove, I felt really pissed because my opponent was gaming the rules, taking advantage of the fact that we were fighting by rules that did not allow me to maim or kill. I particularly remember one fight, don’t recall the exact move because it was a long time ago, where my opponent kept diving in under my arms, so that the back of his neck was directly under my hand. You see, we were allowed to strike certain areas, and he kept shielding those areas that we were allowed to strike with the areas we were not allowed to strike. In particular and especially the back of his neck.

                  And striking the areas we were allowed to strike was pretty useless. People could hit me all day long and it hurt, but it did not slow me, let alone incapacitate me, or even gravely disrupt my moves. I never protected myself. OK, I was up against fellow idiots, but they were physically fit idiots. I expect if I was ever up against a national champion or something it would really hurt a lot, that I would be utterly devastated, but if you were a regular martial artist, your permitted blows were like a gentle summer breeze to me. Some people, quite a lot of people, seemed to take impact from my blows, even though they were no harder, and perhaps weaker than their blows. And quite a lot of people seemed to be no more affected than myself.

                  Never done bjj or any other art where one is likely to go to ground, because it always seemed obviously suicidal to me, but any move likely to result in going to ground. You don’t want to be on the ground in a real fight, even if you are on top of your opponent.

                  Karate. Kicking works until your opponent’s body slams into your body, or he smashes your head in the middle of a kick, whereupon you go down. If you are kicking, you don’t have secure footing, and your opponent is likely charging you in the middle of your kick.

                  All those moves where you are tightly embracing your opponent, holding your opponent down from behind, his hands are free, or one of them is free, and your face and head are directly above his face and head. Suicide in a real fight. Even if you have cut off the blood supply to his brain, he has about ten seconds to remove your eyes. Which is a long time in a fight. You don’t want to hold his torso down relative to your torso, you want to hold his torso up relative to your torso so that you can shield your eyes with the small of his back.

                  Which, since you don’t want to fight horizontal, means all those moves where you climb up on your opponent from behind, pushing him down and yourself up. You need to lift him up, not climb him.

                  Now let us suppose one on one, no one else around, or no one who cares around, you have your opponent down, you are holding him securely on the ground, and you have him well pinned in a position where he cannot take out your eyes and testicles. What are you going to do now? Stay there forever? If you let him go without first maiming him, he is going to get a weapon, if only a rock or something, or get his friends, or something. And you and he are equally untrained in combat aimed at bare handed maiming. You have studied the art of fighting people without hurting them and without them trying to hurt you. Which is OK if you are having a friendly fight, because you just end it by agreement. But with strangers out of nowhere, no agreement is possible. How is it going to end? What is your exit strategy?

                  You and the bjj guys talk about smashing the other guy’s face into the concrete, but you have trained to throw the other guy, you have not trained to smash his face into the concrete, and it is in fact considerably more difficult to smash someone’s face into the concrete than to throw him, and it is not that easy to throw him, and in fights between martial artists and normies, the throw frequently fails.

                  And if you did smash his face into the concrete with your throw, which is never going to happen in a real fight, it is not going to take him out of the fight. It is just going to give you a few more seconds than if you throw him and he falls well. If you hope to smash someone’s face, hit him in the face. All those clever martial arts ways of causing impact to someone’s face are unlikely to work, even if you could train them, which you cannot.

                  Martial arts do not, cannot, train you in an exit strategy, because in a real fight, the only exit strategy is to do such terrible harm to your opponent that he does not wish to continue, or cannot continue. And did I mention a gentle breeze? The trouble with all martial arts is that you cannot train what needs to be trained, doing real harm to someone who is doing his best to do you real harm. You are training to win a friendly contest. You may become very very good at winning friendly contests, without necessarily much improving your capability to win unfriendly fights.

                • Adam says:

                  The cage in the UFC is a massive advantage to ground fighters and not representative of a street fight, but in Pride they fought in a boxing ring. Knees to your opponents head were legal, and from the north/south position quite effective. The best thing you can do on the ground if you cannot knee your opponents head, is get to your feet first and stomp or soccer kick his head.

                  Not to say BJJ is not without merit. I had some high level wrestlers and judo players roll me around some (one had several amateur wins in a defunct cage fighting organization). On my back with a trained grappler on top is the last place I would want to be, it is frustrating and disorienting. They don’t just control your body they always go for your wrists too. It is not pleasant if you do not know what you are doing.

                • Red says:

                  I was talking to a guy I’ve been working with on powerlifting. He’s been in more than his fair share of bar fights and has rep as someone you don’t want to fuck with. Fun guy and very popular with the girls. He’s not very tall but strong, I’d be happy to lift a 1/2 of what he lifts.

                  I asked him about how he fights. He basically said all the same shit Jim was talking about, fights like he’s trying to kill or maim the guy right down describing how tried rip the the other guy’s balls off, ignores pain and just going for the kill. No no martial arts training.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >I particularly remember one fight, don’t recall the exact move because it was a long time ago, where my opponent kept diving in under my arms, so that the back of his neck was directly under my hand. You see, we were allowed to strike certain areas, and he kept shielding those areas with the areas we were not allowed to strike. In particular and especially the back of his neck.

                  This sounds a lot like boxing, was it?

                  Guillermo Rigondeaux was infamous for doing this, borderline turning his back in very deep ducks to avoid strikes. Lomachenko exposed him for it though.
                  It’s not really a very common strategy though, not at a contender level anyways, partly because even in boxing without the ability to just take the back or knee them in the head there are still ways of dealing with it (shifting around the opponent with digging hooks, Mike Tyson style), and partly because there are very few offensive options from that position in a boxing setting in the first place; it’s more like a way to stall, than actually win.

                  Like with many things, there is a debate about the place of head movement in different contexts. Some say you should not bother with it on account of the possibility of inadvertently ducking into a head kick. My own view is that there are degrees to the kind. A missed punch has the same impact no matter whether it missed by two inches or two feet. A slip just off the center line does the same job as dramatic windmilling up and down and around – though it might not show up in highlight videos – while also keeping you balanced with much better mechanics, in position to continue moving and attacking and remain defensively responsible. The simultaneous attack, slipping while sticking a straight at the same time, is one of the most basic but effective wrinkles in a boxing toolset at all levels, from the moment someone wanders in off the sidewalk looking to throw down, to the moment they are tangling with Sergey Kovalev for the strap.

                  An other angle to the dynamic is that while it is obviously not an option in boxing proper, any case where you would change levels to avoid a strike, is also an opening to shoot in and take their hips. GSP himself made a career out of this wrinkle, piecing people up with the jab because they were so cautious about being taken down, then when they opened up and start swinging back, hitting the counter double and taking them down.

                  >let us suppose one on one, no one else around, or no one who cares around, you have your opponent down, you are holding him securely on the ground, and you have him well pinned in a position where he cannot take out your eyes and testicles. What are you going to do now? Stay there forever?

                  Well, that depends on how you feel about him, innit? If you have dominant position and feel like killing him, then there isn’t a whole lot he can do to stop you from rearranging his face. Once he is concussed and unresisting you can finish the job however you like, strangulation, throwing him in the woodchipper, dashing his head against a rock, whatever.

                  You can do both at the same time even. Hand control is a major factor to success in both clinchfighting and ground fighting, with and without strikes. One of those things pertinent to success in a bout, that can be even more pertinent outside it. Control his wrists, pin his hands to his chest, and roll your elbow over into his face. All time classic wrinkle.

                  Half guard, full mount, mounted crucifix, back ride, and wrist ride, are perhaps the most common positions where gnp finishes come from, with an honorable mention to knees from front headlock and north/south positions. A position like half guard might seem less valuable than the other options, which in some respects is true; a skilled opponent potentially has many options for reversals from half guard; but the difference is made by the fact that because you are turking one of his legs, you can control his hips with your hips, letting you ride him out to keep him down while freeing up your hands to do work.

                  People often get lost in the weeds by looking at a bunch of different individual finishing holds in isolation; you get into finishing position first, then you can worry about what kind of finish you want to use.

                  >The cage in the UFC is a massive advantage to ground fighters and not representative of a street fight

                  Im not so sure about that; how often have you gotten in a fight on a football field? (Don’t answer that question.)

                  Folks spend their time in and around walls and other vertical obstacles everywhere. Something else that i would say is if anything even more pertinent in outside contexts.

                • jim says:

                  > This sounds a lot like boxing, was it?

                  Nah, it was something with some funny Chinese name, which translates to “tiger claw”. It attempted realism, but practicing the real moves was just dancing, and dancing the moves likely to be effective in a real fight revealed the unreality of the moves in the friendly combat bouts.

                  Its efforts to teach us real fighting revealed the unreality of the combat we could actually practice on each other.

                  They were very conscious of the gap between martial arts and real fighting, and attempted to close that gap by various means, dancing moves likely to be effective, and having bouts where one guy wore full body armor covering all his vulnerable bits, and you were allowed to do stuff that would actually hurt if he was unarmored, and it was scored as if he was unarmored. Perhaps they closed it as successfully as one can, but were not very successful.

                  The dance moves revealed the unreality of the moves used in actual friendly combat, the actual friendly combat revealed that dancing a move is no substitute for using it in an actual fight.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  >Nah, it was something with some funny Chinese name, which translates to “tiger claw”.

                  Shoot, my condolences then.

                  I am unfortunately more than familiar with a lot of what passes through wushu circles. The spread of Hong Kong cinema and the EAM boom of the late 20th century created a huge market demand, and a great deal of flattering charlatanism sprung up to fill it. The self-perception of ‘we are only concerned with life-or-death struggles with no holds barred, unarmed melee tho’ is a widespread cope in later days. As more and more outlets started disappearing up their own assholes with less and less live training, the guys going around looking to pick fights ‘style vs style’ would be getting fucked up by guys in ‘harder’ traditions who went live, which was of course responded too by doubling down on ‘that shit is for the birds’ and retreating even further into cloud-cuckoo-land, leaving them in an ironic hell where they neither had anything good to offer in terms of mutual combat *or* anything beyond that. That someone could enjoy practicing a live combat sport like boxing or wrestling or so on without any thought about its relevance to self-defense at all and still end up better prepared in the case of a confrontation anyways.

                • ten says:

                  My meagre list of street fights:

                  Guy rushes up set of stairs with his posse in tow. Tries to punch me in the nuts. I move aside a little, he misses, i knee him to the face, he falls backwards over his posse and hurts himself rather badly on the stairs.

                  Guy smacks me in the face from behind and trips me to the ground. Stomps on my face. I grab his foot and twist and roll, trip him. I get up, groggy as hell, guard up, he comes at me again, i realize he’s really shit at this, punch him a few times, he grows wary. I did MT for a long time, kick him in the side, ribs crunch, he can’t breathe and falls over, limps away, his friends get off of my friends, they escape.

                  Guy with large posse shouts insults to me from across the street. I am in a suicidal mood, so walk up to him and break his nose. They stomp me on the ground for a while. I get up, they are upset, nose guy is sitting and bleeding. I break the next guys nose. They stomp me again, shouting “stay down” this time. They didnt stomp joints or head, pretty nice guys. Apparently cops were nearby, as well as a fuckton of onlookers. They fucked off, cops were very angry that i refused to tell them what happened, then i went to a club and hooked up with a girl who thought it was cool that i had been in a fight.

                  Guy sits at table, i flip his glass of beer into his face and punch him, he flips the table, it lands on my foot, he tries to throw me, i clinch and knee him many times in the stomach while he pulls my hair, i push him backwards over the flipped table, while he gets up i find a vodka bottle and smash it over his face, he goes down again, is sad and bleeding. Guards start making angry noises, i run away.

                  Guy is inappropriate towards my gf. After a while i get pissed and loud. He gets thrown out from the place. An hour later he is still angrily loitering outside. I want to beat him up, but suddenly, his tiny gf jumps onto my back and pulls my hair and rides me like a hobbit on a cave troll while i fail at reaching her drunk ass guy. Ok this wasnt really a fight but incredibly comical.

                  My notes: none of these fights were life or death. I didnt expect them to hurt me badly, except the guy who stomped on my head, i’m sure they didn’t expect me to hurt them badly, except the guy i vodka bottled, who immediately stopped fighting once hurt. I have also been in a more serious fight which i will not describe. I think my muay thai training prepared me well. A lot of the sparring is moves in a game. If you try to kill someone, skip the game moves. I did not train anything that would be detrimental except thai clinch which will get you stabbed.

                  I also have trained a bunch of other martial arts since childhood. I think judo throws are useful to get people off you and run away. Otherwise i reject everything i have learned in martial arts.

            • Adam says:

              Best MMA fighter I would say ever is Jon Jones. The difference between Jones and his opponents was that Jones is legitimately alpha to the core and went in trying to hurt his opponents and not just win. He’s a despicable human being otherwise.

              I’m sure Tate is very dangerous in a kickboxing match, and outside of it in a fair fight. Pussy doesn’t care about fair fights and seems to gravitate more towards the unfair fighter, and towards the malicious.

              • Red says:

                I’m sure Tate is very dangerous in a kickboxing match, and outside of it in a fair fight. Pussy doesn’t care about fair fights and seems to gravitate more towards the unfair fighter, and towards the malicious.

                You’re missing the point. Tate is a fast apparently smarter than the average nignog. With those sort of advantages it’s not hard to win fights against dim witted slow thugs. A blow when someone doesn’t see it comes typically ends a fight.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Nine times out of ten altercations are decided by whoever strikes first. Suckerpunch wins championships.

                  That’s why reading the room (and never letting a Character in your personal space) is way up there in the list of real security TTPs.

              • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                Jones fought out of jackson-wink, and all those guys were inflated with gear.

                Of course the substance tests are more like IQ tests, you can pass them if you are smart about it, and everyone at a high level is using a little something or other to keep their edge. He was using so much so indiscriminately he failed even the passable tests, which says all you need to know really.

                I’d rate guys like Fedor and Sakuraba over him. In his own organization GSP was a better champion, and that guy had huge Awkward Kid vibes.

                • Adam says:

                  Yes Jones is a cheat in and out of the ring. He is an incredible fighter though, and a good example character-wise of female perception of alpha.

                  I could see Fedor rated over him maybe. Both in their prime would be a tough fight. And I think there are guys who could have beat Jones, only maybe Fedor could duplicate his success at that weight class.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  Well, there’s a reason Jones never wanted to fight at heavyweight; he had very large frame for his weightclass, and had little confidence in fighting without that advantage (much like a lot of his choices).

                • Adam says:

                  In every way he embodies the bully archetype, insecurities and all. Would have loved to see him in Pride though, with soccer kicks and stomps. I still have all my old Pride DVDs and pull them out occasionally. That was as good as combat sports will ever get in my opinion.

            • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

              The difference between someone with even a few months of training in pressure tested combat sports and the unwashed masses of uninitiated muggles is dramatic. Like it can hardly be overestimated. People who have never stepped foot inside a gym are legitimately helpless against someone who knows what they are doing. Like sheer ability to just keep your balance alone is practically a superpower. Untrained people will practically trip over themselves when getting into a scuffle; you barely even need to help them along.

          • Adam says:

            Very respectable but somewhat more how males view status than females. There is overlap but kickboxing is a highly controlled sport.

            They guy willing to stab the kickboxing champion in the back to steal his belt is more alpha to females.

            I could be reading him wrong but honestly he looks too skinny and not someone I would ever be afraid of. I just don’t get that vibe from him.

            • The Cominator says:

              Obviously the guy who is like Tommy from Goodfellas no matter if he can fight barehanded or not scares everyone until hes dead or in jail…

        • Doom says:

          Hah. No, Tate is Alpha the way men perceive the way females perceive Alpha. As you said at the end of your post – put him against the convicted felons. Frame depends on situation.

          The thing I don’t like about Tate is that he puts himself out as a red pill leader- this is how men can get what you want – while simultaneously advocating for pissing in the well.

          How can he reasonably expect to argue that, on the one hand, what men should value is “wife” material, while at the same time bragging about triple digit body counts? (Well. Assuming what he says about himself is true. Maybe not.)

          All those women are ruined! What a leader, what a proponent for families and social cohesion!

          He has said : “Men want a woman they can’t have”

          Why then, has he had so many women? Just mindless destruction.

          His advice for women is to not squander their youthful power.

          By the same token, “Alpha” men should not exercise theirs so readily.
          The argument cuts both ways – to be meek is to restrain your power.

          Is that not what makes an attractive woman? She knows she has power and yet does not exercise it just for fun.

          It doesn’t make a man “Alpha” to constantly show his power level. That makes a man insecure, no different to a woman doing it.

          • Adam says:

            I mean he’s getting lots of pussy so he’s alpha. But you can also get that same pussy and have no money, no fame and no gimmicks. And he doesn’t seem like one of those guys. He doesn’t seem like someone to fear, more of a good time charlie.

          • SJ says:

            Men should do whatever they want to unowned women. By advocating that men exercise mental castration you only harm the weak men who you are able to mentally castrate thereby leaving the women to give their virginity to the current local middle age criminal who isn’t in jail at the time. The more pins whose points you dull the more balloons will be popped by fewer pins. Do whatever you want to unowned women, treat them as badly as you can possibly imagine, and learn from how the fall madly in love with you. They become only madder and more desperate for your validation the worse you treat them. Don’t try to harm other men for using unowned women.

            • The Cominator says:

              I mean the rare girl who is very young and sweet natured should not be treated by as a pump and dump even if you can by any good man… all other unowned women (and any women owned by enemies) are fair game.

              Where Tate is perhaps hypocritical is as much as he claims to like virginal women.. he likes good looking and perhaps nice but slutty ones OR at least those are most of the ones he meets. By his own admission his original stable of girlfriend were kickboxing ring girls and hes made most of his money by managing (pimping) camgirls.

    • alf says:

      I’ve watched some of his DIY stuff which is good, notably his instructions on soldering.

      He has one video in which he advices to eat charcoal that falls out of the woodstove. That seemed a bit weird to me.

  31. Kunning Drueger says:

    I would like to assure all regulars and shills that I’ve had no significant change of heart on any issue or topic, small or great.

    I think that chubby kike with the bad attitude visiting the “mosque” is kinda based. Here are some angles:

    https://youtu.be/Bn_dHI5ses8

    https://youtu.be/vO_LqYLgr1I

    Now, I just watched it when I first saw it, no commentary. The shrieking/mourning harpies crybaby overlay confirms even more my thoughts that it’s based. Here’s my defense, and I still think kikes by and large suck, so I’m not going to make a big deal defending these points.

    >rolling with the lads to your enemy’s spot is an absolute dick punch
    Just taking the risk that Tyrone, or Abdul, of or Ching Ma Chong, or whoever can slap at you, and just pacing around, pointing at stuff and taking pictures, cracking jokes is awesome. Seems like a good time. Like if a bunch of us kitted up and strolled through… well, any city really, waving the Christian flag with a “Soon” pennant attached to it, that would be based. It would be a promise for the future in a reference to the past.

    >the specious concept of No Go Zones is as gay as monkeypoxx
    We are so thoroughly bamboozled by bureaucratic broads that we just accept that there are places that the leaders of the country don’t deserve to go to in that country. Imagine having to explain to your ancestors that there are places in your home country, the land you call your own, that you don’t go to because niggers poop there habitually. “No Lord Deadingone Yetremanz, I don’t go to that place because people that actively seek my extermination have normalized my absence.” I don’t know what’s gayer, No Go Zones existing, or Us respecting them. If there was any politician who kitted up his detail, called a few lads, then walked through gangland to sightsee, that would be power optics on a level unaccustomed.

    >sacred cows should be mocked, and their sacred cow pastures should be violated and defiled
    We should be having ham sandwich picnics at mosques. We should take our children sightseeing at abortion clinics. We should do puppet shows of throwing sodomites off of roofs at pride parades. We should be mocking, harassing, insulting, and blaspheming 24/6/375 (Sunday is rest day). There should be crosses scrawled on every mural. There should be red paint splattered on every rainbow.

    >telling your enemy “Soon”, even if it’s 100 years in advance, is always a power move
    That chubby heeb is sending message. He’s saying “I won’t be the last.” That’s the kind of optics a man needs to pump out more babies, make more friends, and fly his flag higher.

    We know here that jews aren’t The Enemy just as we know that jews always seem to be well represented with the enemy. Jim has pointed out that American kikes hate Bibi just as much as they hate us, and that is more than just a tool for shill detection, it’s an admonishment of /ourguys/; we should be getting that level of vitriol from women on camera. We should be making harpies screech. What’s that old quote? “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they revile you, then they are in your kitchen barefoot, pregnant, with a dog collar on and happier than they’ve ever been.”

    Our collective 2023 resolution should be to Make Women Rave Again.

    • Karl says:

      I don’t understand your point about No Go Zones. Maybe the situation in USA is different, but the term No Go Zones is also used in Europe. There are some No Go Zones in most European cities. These No Go Zones have been European, but have been conquered by non-European men, European laws no longer apply in these zones, Europeans are not welcome in them and the police largely treats them as foreign country.

      What’s fake about losing territory to conquest? We are not in position to reconquer them. Do you think it is fake to acknowledge the reality of that conquest? Or do you think these No Go Zones are still European?

      Sure, our governments pretend that they are governing those zones as well, but I don’t think you wanted to say that our governments are gay. Anyway, many European heads of state obviously are, e.g. Macron.

      • A2 says:

        So, ambulances or firetrucks that arrive will get blocked and rocks thrown at them until they go away. Police vehicles may be destroyed if the policemen leave them on a call, and may also get rocks thrown at them while patrolling. If you do those provocative things listed above, don’t be surprised if a crowd of angry bearded brown men start a riot. So be ready. The reporters will not be on your side, of course. Nevertheless, I wonder what would happen if a bulldozer one night met a mosque.

        I talked to a guy who did deliveries (furniture etc) to a no-go zone a few years ago. Apart from the recipients being general bastards, after a while the company had to include a third guy to sit in the truck while the others were away or it would be robbed and smashed up when they came back. At that point, he basically changed city and jobs.

    • Basil says:

      Why are these progressive Jews, who allegedly hate Bibi more than Europeans, are engaged in subversive work in the US/Europe/Russia, and not in Israel? Why are Jews much more likely to oppose Christianity than Orthodox Judaism? And you know about the position of Judaism itself on the question of Christ, right? Muslims who claim that Issus is just a prophet do not go so far in hatred and desecration. Jews must be baptized. And those who refuse to do so, we must thank for not sending their daughters to whore schools – they will alleviate the shortage of good Christian brides who have not yet had time to be born.

      Yes, sometimes Jews drink some of their own poison, but this is only an indirect result of their activities in Western countries. In addition, we have ample historical evidence of Jewish subversion prior to progressivism.

      • jim says:

        They are engaged in subversive work in Israel, for example Israel’s supreme court.

      • pinochet's ghost says:

        Much of what you write seems like shill demoralization but I agree with this. There are Jews who hate Bibi and even anti-Zionist Jews (a large part of Israel’s population is anti-Zionist) but there are no anti-Jewish or pro-Aryan Jews.

        • jim says:

          Obviously there are no pro Aryan Jews, but I would say that a Jew who wants all Orthodox Jews dead, and/or wants Israel ruled by Muslim Arabs, is indeed anti Jewish, and by this criterion there are a great many anti Jewish Jews.

          • pinochet's ghost says:

            Jews are split between their nominal scriptural imperative of restoring the Judaean state in its original location and feeding off all the nations of the world and eventually destroying them all (which is actually also a scriptural imperative).

            To some extent these strategies are complementary, but the diaspora people absolutely do not want all Jews to move to Israel. That’s all it’s about.

    • Red says:

      We should be having ham sandwich picnics at mosques.

      A guy in England tried that once. Got 1 year in jail for that hate crime where the Muzzies in jail tortured and murdered him. No one was charged with his murder. Openly defying power when we don’t have power is a great way to get yourself killed.

      • Pax Imperialis says:

        >Openly defying power

        Oi mate! Ya got a loicense fer dat silent defiance.

        A woman arrested by British police faces charges of “protesting and engaging in an act that is intimidating to service users” for standing still and praying silently outside an abortion facility.

        Isabel Vaughan-Spruce was arrested in Birmingham, UK, on Dec. 6.

        Video footage of her arrest was published on social media. The video shows an officer asking Vaughan-Spruce if she was praying, to which she answers: “I might be praying in my head.”

        Following a further exchange with police, the 45-year-old was arrested and interrogated. Vaughan-Spruce is the director of March for Life UK.

        She was charged Dec. 15 with four counts of breaking a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) around the abortion facility. A PSPO is intended to stop antisocial behavior. The terms of the PSPO include prayer under ‘protest,’ which is banned within the ‘buffer zone’ around the clinic.

      • Kunning Druegger says:

        It was a poor parody of a meme, Red.

  32. Happy Puppy says:

    The really funny thing is that when you watch the various translations of Russian news shows, and then read Jim articles, the claims and talking points are absolutely identical. Jim and the Russian news talking heads see things exctly the same. I mean, zero daylight betwen the positions. Often practically identical phrasing.

    It’s impressive.

    • jim says:

      I don’t think so.

      Obviously we will report Global American Empire aggression the same, since that is just simple facts that are seldom reported in the US. But equally obviously, different positions on religion, Covid, women, blacks, and Jews.

      They also view Global American Imperial adventures as merely a great power seeking dominion, while I see it as demonic faith attempting to convert the world at swordpoint.

      • Fireball says:

        Are they actually trying to convert at the sword point anymore?

        • jim says:

          They have been shelling Donbass since 2014 for failure to hold a gay parade.

          • Fireball says:

            Yes but the all divide russia in little chunks and genocide the russians talk doesn’t sound like want to convert them,

            • Red says:

              They’ve given up on converting them.

              • Fireball says:

                They failed on converting them which is quite interesting by itself.

                • Pax Imperialis says:

                  I walk back my previous agreement on this being a holy war. It’s an attempted extermination.

                • jim says:

                  Holy wars tend to turn into attempted exterminations, but that is not, at first, the conscious intent.

                • Pax Imperialis says:

                  At a certain point it stops being about religion and becomes just pure desire to exterminate the hated people.

                  It may have started as a holy war, but the conflict has progressed into something else.

                • Pseudo-Chrysostom says:

                  I mean, exterminating heathens, heretics, and apostates is absolutely not something that is incompatible with the concept of ‘holy war’; rather, it is so often the norm more than anything else.

      • Doom says:

        If it’s not obvious, happy puppy is accusing you of being a paid Russian agent.

    • pinochet's ghost says:

      RT is a 1960s leftist publication. It condemns racism in the frame that in any case non-whites will never have any *real* influence around these parts.

      Russia is mentally stuck in the Sputnik era.

      Obviously this looks nice compared to what we have in the west, but it’s also not a tenable position. They have to go back to Fyodorov or forward to Kamala Harris.

      They’ll probably end up going forward, but at least they have a chance.

  33. Zorost says:

    “What made that capability come unstuck was that if the regime or the people resisted the coup or the revolution, Russia was likely to assist them.”

    As predicted in the book, “Hybrid Wars: Geopolitical Conflicts in the Postmodern Age” by Andrew Korybko

    A fascinating book that studies the way America indirectly fights its wars, and how the response to that way is likely to change as the targets become closer to Russia and hence more worth directly fighting over.

    • Mister Grumpus says:

      The synergy of PMC’s with fundamentalist religion has been a real surprise, but makes sense as a beyond-death moral system is required once actual bullets are involved.

      Wagner : Orthodox
      Sadat(sp?) in Turkey : Islam
      ISIS/Taliban/etc : Islam also
      Azov : Weirdo runic pagan fuckery

      And on the fake and gay “side” (is there really a clear line though?), LARPing like

      Extinction Rebellion / Antifa : Gaia worship
      BLM : Negro worship

      Who am I missing? What about China? What about Japan? What about what about…

      • Mister Grumpus says:

        Hot Guess: Ukraine-Russia is going to end up PMC-PMC, with AFRU and NATO ending up the truck-drifting camp followers.

        • Kunning Drueger says:

          Wagner has black dudes fighting in Artemovsk.

          https://t.me/BrokenNews1/8532

          Picked them up in Mali. Comedians and Culture love to harp on the lone wh*te boi that bird dogs a negro pack, but the reverse is quite often the case, particularly when there’s no media cacophony telling young black men to despise quality and strength 24/7. Wagner in Africa is really interesting, definitely worth looking into. Russians are far too welcoming and accepting of negroes, but I think it’s because they know most of them lack the capacity to follow them back home to snowy Russia.

          I would like to take a stab at addressing your initial thought in this chain. I could be wrong based on ignorance, but I think the reason you weren’t able to mention any East Asian groups in your list is because the East Asians are basically predisposed to self-sacrifice for the better of the group. for occidentals, we need something more to pull that sentiment and tendency out of our genetics and put them into our everyday lives.

          yet again, we see that history doesn’t repeat, but it does rhyme. We also see that we have advanced a little bit since the last great collapse. We are getting a head start on some of the things that took a while to develop after the fall of the Western Roman Empire.

      • Fidelis says:

        The nips had a syncretic pagan buddhist thing going on during their brief but explosive mid century expansion. Extremely dormant today but could be dusted off should they ever find themselves free of a certain yoke.

        Not sure china has anything at all they could use as a basis for a healthy martial metaphysics, which I think is a partial explanation for their history. Most of their moral philosophy is on social harmony as the ultimate good, the real slave morality. Feel free to correct me here.

        I wonder about the hindoos. There are plenty of pieces there but I’m not sure anyone has successfully put them together for a millennia.

  34. notglowing says:

    I will say this, although you are correct that the narrative suddenly shifted after the Ukraine war started, the inflection point, and I really mean *inflection point*, not turning point, was before that.
    Covid policy was already decelerating here in late January, and I pointed this out, through comments on this blog. Hard to find them at this point though, but it was somewhere between the beginning of 2022 and the invasion.

    The war in Ukraine resulted in a sharp change in direction, but the underlying religion was already losing steam, especially with the admission that the latest variants were “less” deadly and were infectious enough to “even” affect vaccinated people.

    I happened to be flying around Europe through the start of the war, so between before the war started, and after.

    My covid pass was not checked at the Italian airport I departed from. This is *before*. In contrast, in late 2021, it would be checked no less than 3 times at different points.
    Measures were stricter on paper, and more measures were being added, but they would expire in shorter times, and complacency had set in on the ground. The tacit understanding was that we were nearing the end of it.

    It’s debateable whether or not the trucker protest would have received harsher government suppression a few months earlier, and whether it made a difference or not. I am not sure.

    I do believe the war made a big difference, and that it immediately shifted public attention, ie the attention of journalists instantly rotated 180 degrees. But I think there is an element there of them taking the *chance* to shift focus, of one faction seizing the opportunity to divert from the other faction’s cult. A cult that had already started to irreversibly lose *momentum*.
    It still took until *June* for us to return to normality, with them clinging to some of the last remaining restrictions every time they would expire.

    • jim says:

      > But I think there is an element there of them taking the *chance* to shift focus, of one faction seizing the opportunity to divert from the other faction’s cult. A cult that had already started to irreversibly lose *momentum*.

      “Shift focus”, yes. “lose momentum”, yes.

      But what mattered was actual rollback of the rules, such as being able to fly to Canada without a jab passport. That was not newsmen losing interest in one story to focus on another, that was the medical priesthood suddenly suffering loss of power. And that had a direct and obvious connection to Russian moves on the ground.

      Covid Worship was losing momentum naturally and organically, still is. But, as with elections, they just carry on regardless. When Russia moved, suddenly not permitted to carry on regardless.

  35. Dr. Faust says:

    https://dailystormer.in/after-gay-sex-party-trump-now-promoting-abortion/

    “After Gay Sex Party, Trump Now Promoting Abortion.”

    Serious question. Any chance Trump is suffering vaccine side effects which could explain his recent behavior?

    • The Cominator says:

      His mental acuity started seriously declining in 2019 imho. Trump is deluding and doublethinking himself into thinking voting matters.

      If however voting did matter hed be right that a hardcore position on abortion is a loser.

      • notglowing says:

        Trump always held an ambiguous and rather not explicit view on abortion, even being in support of it a long time ago.

        He made sure to leave it to people’s imagination during the campaign though, and appointed judges that might reverse RvW. Which they did.

        We don’t know what he *actually* believes. But what matters is that he is publicly coming out in favour of some form of abortion. And when it comes to that, I think the issue is he is wavering, in general.
        He lost the 2020 election. His courage failed him when he was being screwed by the system an