When the rot set in

The priesthood exists to serve the army, by providing legitimacy, moral guidance, and social cohesion. When the priests undermine army officers, pretty soon you get what we have got.

Priests are supposed to supply asabiyyah. That is their number one job in this world. What we have is priests destroying asabiyyah .

The problem is not so much elite disloyalty to the masses, nor a Jewish plot against members of the elite not of their own race, as elite disloyalty to the elite. When the priesthood seeks to destroy the common man and return flyover country to wilderness, their real target is not lumberjacks and coal miners, but military officers. Lumberjacks and coal miners are just collateral damage.

We are always ruled by priests or warriors. When priests get on top, there is military weakness. When they get on top, there is also an incentive and ability to go into a holiness spiral.

So, when did the rot set in?

This interpretation of events is largely based on Volume 55 of the North American Review, page 45, “The English in Afghanistan” by Summer, who quotes extensively from contemporary primary sources

Before the British intervened in Afghanistan, the most recent news that most people had of it was records of Alexander’s army passing through two millennia ago.

The empire of the East India company was expanding, and the empire of the Russias was expanding, and it was inevitable that the two would meet. And so it came to pass that the Kings of Afghanistan encountered both, and played each against the other.

When the British became aware of Afghanistan, they interpreted its inhabitants as predominantly white or whitish – as descendants of Alexander’s troops and camp followers and/or descendants of Jews converted to Islam.

Afghanistan was, and perhaps still is, a elective monarchy, and the fractious electors tended to fight each other and elect weak kings who could scarcely control their followers, and so it has been ever since Alexander’s troops lost Alexander.

Mister Mountstuart Elphinstone, in his account of is mission to Kabul in 1809, says he once urged upon a very intelligent old man of the tribe of Meankheile, the superiority of a quiet life under a powerful monarch, over the state of chaotic anarchy that so frequently prevailed.

The reply was “We are content with alarms, we are content with discord, we are content with blood, but we will never be content with a master!”

As Machiavelli observed, such places are easy to conquer, but hard to hold, and so it proved.

To conquer and hold such places, one must massacre, castrate, or enslave all of the ruling elite that seems fractious, which is pretty much all of them, and replace them with your own people, speaking your own language, and practicing your own customs, as the Normans did in England, and the French did in Algeria, starting 1830. The British of 1840, however, had no stomach for French methods, and were already starting to fall short of the population growth necessary for such methods.

So what the British could have done is paid the occasional visit to kill any king that they found obnoxious, kill his friends, family, his children, and leading supporters, install a replacement king, and leave. The replacement king would have found his throne shaky, because Afghan Kings have usually found their thrones shaky, but the British did not need to view that as their problem, knowing the solution to that problem to be drastic and extreme. If the throne has been shaky for two thousand years, it is apt to be difficult to stop it from rocking.

After a long period of disorderly violence, where brother savagely tortured brother to death, and all sorts of utterly horrifying crimes were committed, King Dost Mahomed Khan took power in Kabul in 1826, and proceeded to rule well, creating order, peace, and prosperity, and receiving near universal support from fractious and quarreling clans of Afghanistan.

The only tax under his rule was a tariff of one fortieth on goods entering and leaving the country. This and the Jizya poll tax are the only taxes allowed by the Koran, at least as Islamic law is interpreted in this rebellious country which has historically been disinclined to pay taxes, and because this tax was actually paid, it brought him unprecedented revenues. On paying this tax “the merchant may travel without guard or protection from one border to the other, an unheard of circumstance”

However he did not rule Herat, which was controlled by one of his enemies, who been King before and had ambitions to be King again. He therefore offered Herat to the Shah of Persia in return for the Shah’s support against another of his enemies, Runjeet Singh. He was probably scarcely aware that Runjeet Singh was allied to the British, and the Shah was allied to the Tsar of all the Russias.

Notice that this deal was remarkably tight fisted, as was infamously typical of deals made by Dost Mahomed Khan. He would give the Persians that which he did not possess, in return for them taking care of one of his enemies and helping him against another.

The British East India Company, however, saw this as Afghanistan moving into Russian empire, though I am pretty sure that neither the Shah of Persia nor the King of Afghanistan thought they were part of anyone’s empire.

So Russia and the East India Company sent ambassadors to the King of Afghanistan, who held a bidding contest asking which of them could best protect him against Runjeet Singh.  He then proceeded to duplicitously accept both bids from both empires, which was a little too clever by half, though absolutely typical of the deals he made with his neighbors.

Dost Mahomed Khan was a very clever king, but double crossing the East India Company had in the past never been very clever at all. No one ever got ahead double crossing the East India Company. It was like borrowing money from the Mafia and forgetting to pay them back.

Russia and England then agreed to not get overly agitated over the doings of unreliable and duplicitous proxies that they could scarcely control – which agreement the East India Company took as permission to hold a gun to the head of the Shah of Persia. The East India company seized control of the Persian Gulf, an implicit threat to invade if the Shah intervened in Afghanistan to protect Dost Mahomed Khan. It then let Runjeet Singh off the leash, and promised to support his invasion of Afghanistan.

So far, so sane. Someone double crosses you, then you make an horrible example of him, and no one will do it again. Then get out, and whoever rules in Afghanistan, if anyone does manage to rule, will refrain from pissing you off a second time.

The British decided to give a large part of Afghanistan to Runjeet Singh, and install Shah Shoudjah-ool-Moolk, a Kinglet with somewhat plausible pretensions to the Afghan throne, in place of Dost Mahomet Khan.

Up to this point everything the East India Company is doing is sane, honorable, competent, just, and wonderfully eighteenth century.

Unfortunately, it is the nineteenth century. And the nineteenth century is when the rot set in.

His Majesty Shah Shoudjah-ool-Moolk will enter Afghanistan, surrounded by his own troops, and will be supported against foreign interference, and factious opposition, by the British Army.  The Governor-general confidently hopes, that the Shah will be speedily replaced on his throne by his own subjects and adherents, and that the independence and integrity of Afghanistan established, the British army will be withdrawn. The Governor-general has been led to these acts by the duty which is imposed upon him, of providing for the security of the possessions of the British crown, but he rejoices, that, in the discharge of this duty, he will be enabled to assist in restoring the union and prosperity of the Afghan people.

So: The English tell themselves and each other: We not smacking Afghans against a wall to teach them not to play games with the East India Company. On the contrary. We are doing them a favor. A really big favor. Because we love everyone. We even love total strangers in far away places very different from ourselves. We are defending the independence of Afghanistan by removing the strongest King it has had in centuries and installing our puppet, and defending its integrity by arranging for invasion, conquest, rape and pillage by its ancient enemies the Sikhs, in particular Runjeet Singh. Because we love far away strangers who speak a language different from our own and live in places we cannot find on the map. We just love them to pieces. And when we invade, we will doubtless be greeted by people throwing flowers at us.

You might ask who would believe such guff? Obviously not the Afghans, who are being smacked against the wall. Obviously not the Russians. Obviously not the Persians. Obviously not the British troops who are apt to notice they are not being pelted with flowers.

The answer is: the commanding officer believed this guff. And not long thereafter, he and his troops died of it, the first great defeat of British colonialism. And, of course, the same causes are today leading to our current defeat in Afghanistan.

The commanding officer of the British expedition made a long series of horrifyingly evil and stupid decisions, which decisions only made sense if he was doing the Afghans a big favor, if the Afghans were likely to appreciate the big favor he was doing them, and his troops were being pelted with flowers, or Afghans were likely to start pelting them with flowers real soon now. The East India company was no stranger to evil acts, being in the business of piracy, brigandry, conquest, and extortion, but people tend to forgive evil acts that lead to success, prosperity, good roads, safe roads, and strong government. These evil acts, the evil acts committed by the British expedition to Afghanistan, are long remembered because they led to failure, defeat, lawlessness, disorder, and weak government.

As a result, he, his men, and their camp followers, were all killed.

Progressives tend to judge people by their good intentions, and the intentions of the British Empire in invading Afghanistan were absolutely wonderful, but the man who does evil because insane is a worse problem than the man who does evil because he expects to profit. The rational profit seeking evildoer, you can pay off, or deter. You can surrender on terms that will probably not be too bad. The irrational evildoer just has to be killed. Before 1840, the East India Company was sometimes deterred, frequently paid off, and frequently accepted surrender on reasonable terms. In 1841, just had to be killed.

This illustrates the importance of the rectification of names, of formalism. If you lie to yourself, you are deceived. I have been reading the Clinton emails, and one of the most striking features is that Clinton and company were deluded and deceived by self flattering lies, that despite having vast spy networks in far flung places, were seriously out of contact with reality, as their circle told each other what they want to hear.

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle. Hillary and her advisers, and therefore I suppose the entire state department, know neither the enemy nor themselves. They dream grandiose delusions, in which they are the terribly smart and virtuous people, rather than a drunken old sow surrounded by lying flatterers.

The East India Company did not realize that it was about to be recast, or was recasting itself, from being a for profit company, empowered to make war and engage in acts of piracy and extortion for private profit, to being the British government’s instrument of holy do gooding, benevolently carrying the white man’s burden for the benefit of a bunch of strangely ungrateful foreigners. In place of a ruthless mafia with uniformed soldiers, the East India Company was about to become an NGO with uniformed nursemaids.

Yet strangely, the greater the good intentions, the more they were to be resented. </sarcasm> The East India Company seems to have been more popular when they were pirates and bandits than when they were pious do gooders. No one seemed to appreciate the East India Company doing good to them at gunpoint. The ridiculous part of the white man’s burden was the striking ingratitude of the supposed beneficiaries, resembling the striking ingratitude of Middle Easterners towards meddling by presidents Bush and Obama in the Middle East. Those @!^&$ Middle Easterners just somehow do not know what is good for them, unlike far away strangers, who, being terribly clever, know exactly what is good for the Middle East without ever having lived there.

In the Clinton emails there is an awareness that everything is going horribly wrong and a suspicion that things are about to get a great deal worse, but that cannot possibly be caused by any mistakes of the current leadership, who are of course the smartest, wisest, noblest, best, and most beloved leadership ever.

282 Responses to “When the rot set in”

  1. […] the comments at Jim’s blog, https://blog.reaction.la/war/when-the-rot-set-in-2/ there was some back and forth about suttee/sati – the old Indian practice of a widow being […]

  2. vxxc says:

    Speaking of rot:

    Deadwood: the Movie.

    Way to go HBO. Turning Deadwood into The Waltons.

    • The Cominator says:

      Was planning to watch it tonight, sorry to hear its bad but IMHO it slipped after the 1st season. Swearengen went from brilliant Alpha Gangster to indecisive drunk with a big mouth.

      But everything is ruined nowadays. I’m STILL very very angry about the Game of Thrones ending. Stannis gets ruined back in season 5 Daenerys (a strong wahmin character that for once I actually liked… my theory is she was deemed too positive and selfless a heroine to go out so popular) goes nuts for no reason and the cripple and Tumblrina in the North become monarchs.

      • Steve Johnson says:

        But everything is ruined nowadays. I’m STILL very very angry about the Game of Thrones ending. Stannis gets ruined back in season 5 Daenerys (a strong wahmin character that for once I actually liked… my theory is she was deemed too positive and selfless a heroine to go out so popular) goes nuts for no reason

        They gave Daenerys Stannis’ story too. Wants the throne, has the most legitimate claim to it. Rather than seize the throne, goes north to deal with the threat to the realm. Dany goes nuts basically the same way Stannis does too – commits a crazy and evil out of character act for no benefit to herself – exactly like Stannis did.

        • The Cominator says:

          Dany had no blood claim to the throne because the Iron Throne existed under a form of Salic Law (she would have claim if EVERY male descendent of Aegon was dead but that was not the case every great house male in Westeros was descended from Aegon). She had no claim but via conquest.

          But yes Stannis and Dany were both ruined in similar ways. And they somehow made Dany a mad commie at the end.

          My theory is that bad writing aside Dany was way too popular with women for an essentially selfless and positive character (who really only wanted to be a model tradwife to boot and only invades after years of being told shes the only alternative to allowing endless civil war but despite being told her whole life she should want to be queen shes not very enthusiastic) to let her go out the hero. The most NAWALT like chick I’ve ever known was a pretty obsessive Dany fan…

          Not sure why they ruined Stannis like that (Stannis was a positive man of duty and bravery sure but men are not as easily influenced by the media) but it was very similar.

      • dani for president says:

        yass queen slay
        you go girl

  3. Neurotoxin says:

    vxxc, while you’re here, any thoughts on a first firearm?

    • vxxc says:

      At neurotoxin: yes sir.

      First all around is pistol. Recommend 9mm and something small you can carry like ruger EC9 or something of similar dimensions such as SCCY CPX1.

      Less rounds but more practical. Small but stops them.
      Small is practical. Large is not (unless your large and wear loose clothes).
      Even a snubby .38 revolver is good.

      You want small and start with pistol for practicality esp self defense.

      You will simply not be allowed to take rifles where and when you need a gun the most.

      If you’re suspecting you won’t get much training time or for the very unfamiliar shooter S&W EZ shield .380. Smaller but very user friendly interfaces such as overlarge slide grips.

      After that shotgun 12 ga. Any brand name pump or auto is fine.

      Thats for the home defense.

      After that rifle. AR15 or AK action.
      Stay I recommend with .556 for AR and 7.62 x 39 for AK.
      Learning to use the rifle takes training and practice so invest in time and training.

      As with all machines learn to use it and maintain it properly.
      Since you operated a device to post the question you are quite competent to learn the firearm. More than competent.

      Simply read the manual, watch youtube, get training and coaching at gun club, or redneck buddy etc. even the best take a coach/spotter to range.

      I emphasize again a practical pistol to start.
      Large exotic pistols only cops can legally safely carry are not practical.
      An assault rifle or longarm not practical outside the home.
      In states and legal environments where you can routinely carry long arms or open carry you probably are already safe.
      I’m discussing unsafe places and legal environments rapidly change.

      Practical pistol then invest time and work from there, youtube has lots of free education.


      • jim says:

        The best gun is the one you practice with, so the best gun is the one with cheap ammunition. The smallest gun, used well well, is better than the largest gun, which you have seldom used.

        Stopping power is in the man, not the gun.

        A .22 Long Rifle round from a pistol with a four inch barrel can kill a man quite dead. Aim and rate of fire beats big bullets.

        Consider the 15 round Beretta – which is about as small a form factor as you can pack fifteen rounds into. By far the most important determinant of lethality is the number of rounds you shoot. Heavy recoil means you get fewer rounds off.

        A big gun firing big bullets needs some kind of shock absorber resting against your shoulder to maintain a reasonable rate of fire while aiming.

        • Vxxc says:

          Familiar weapons do work best.

          A 9mm is a good all around pistol choice.
          A .22 to be a reliable stopper or killer requires excellent shot placement.
          Or luck.
          He may not have the time or experience.
          Time and training he can invest.

          Experience to be that cool or lucky when the shock of someone is coming at you to kill you or do great harm: this experience is expensive.
          Only crime and war are jobs that will provide it.

          • jim says:

            If he can get more rounds off in a given time while retaining aim, he will have considerably better luck.

            Unless you are a sniper, a bigger magazine does more than bigger bullets.

            • vxxc says:

              If this is an old guy who’s been shooting most of his life and he’s comfortable with shooting his .22 then ok.

              He asked about first gun. In context of this blog I gave my best practical advice. Bear in mind not cops, most crooks and no soldiers use a .22. If it was effective overall we would.
              If stats are used I would like to see them winnowed for crime/self defense as opposed to accidents. More people may be killed by .22s but if your subtract accidents and suicides what’s the result?
              The Tradesmen use bigger. There’s reasons.

              Now if .22 is your carry and you’re justifiably confident then rock on. Some are. Most criminals will run.

              First gun: 9mm or thereabouts, small pistol.
              There are so many. I’m just trying to offer practical advice.

              I’ll add: if you want to learn rifle and spend a lot of time at range then buy a .22 – the ammo is so cheap and will teach you the fundamentals. For men? To stop or kill?

              We’re not even touching on barrier material of any type.
              Or bone. It ain’t happening dude. The round isn’t going through.
              He’s still alive.
              Now he’s pissed.
              Real pissed.

          • Koanic says:

            Stopping and killing are not the same thing. Hitmen use a .22 to kill, but they are not worried about stopping, since they are the ones starting. Stopping is psychological, and much depends on whether the target knows he’s been shot.

            • Cuddlepie says:

              It may be time to change tack, Kookanic. Jim has confirmed he thinks you’re a froot loop, so there isn’t much point following him around the comment section trying to impress him with your 145+ contributions. A better strategy may be to randomly spread your peculiar brand of non-sequitur after randomly selected comments for a few weeks, at least until things die down.

            • jim says:

              A rifle or a shotgun has way better stopping power than any handgun. But the differences between handguns are underwhelming. .22 is fine for self defense. It’s one shot stopping capability is similar to or better than much bigger guns. If you hit someone on a vital point with any common caliber bullet, he is going to stop. If you don’t, maybe he will keep on going, but probably he will stop anyway.

              Bigger handguns have better one shot stopping power in some senses, but the differences are unexciting. Against a really determined attacker, a bigger round will be more effective, but not hugely more effective, and most attackers are not all that determined.

              No handgun or handgun bullet caliber is markedly better than another handgun or handgun bullet caliber, so might as well go with something smaller and with much cheaper ammunition. Go with the gun that is convenient and comfortable to use. Except that really short barrels are not effective.

              Smaller handguns had a substantially larger proportion of attackers that did not stop, but the same or better performance on other measures of deadliness. My interpretation of those surprising results is that an inexpert shooter with a small gun performs worse than an inexpert shooter with a big gun, but guns with cheaper ammo tended to have more expert shooters.

              • Koanic says:

                I am open to data-driven contradiction. However my understanding is that pistols and knives are often lethal in a similar way – by delayed exsanguination due to injuries not decisive during the fight, often not even noticed. This is for several reasons, here is the least obvious: Some vascular tissue can contract in response to shock, limiting initial bloodflow until the muscles relax. Hence it is important not to underestimate the danger of fresh holes in one’s body.

                I believe a 9mm is more effective than a .22 for self defense because the attacker is more likely to notice, due to sound and impact, that he has been shot. A stupid thug may not even believe a .22 can be lethal.

                Thus deadliness is a particularly deceptive metric here, because a smaller handgun will require more rounds to cause stoppage, and more holes are more likely to cause delayed exsanguination.

                However it may be desirable to have a dead plaintiff, a murder charge, and a lower calibre weapon in court.

                I reject your shooter-experience interpretation in favor of a delayed exsanguination one.

      • Neurotoxin says:

        Thanks for your thoughts!

  4. Vxxc says:

    Contractors most assuredly coordinate.
    In the case of PMCs both as warriors and as capitalists.

    To call a replacement administration sitting at its desks that delivers on guns (and the dirty work) and the butter irrelevant because it doesn’t confirm to modeling is Federal Reserve level miscalculation.

    And yes we should organize and recognize you go to war with the army you’ve got- in fact you can quite have war go to you army or not.
    If you think you feel lonely now try it in a war zone.

    That’s a new level of loneliness and alienation….

  5. Neurotoxin says:

    Well, that and we can organize to start creating mini armies before CW2 really starts in earnest. Thus his exhortations to ORGANIZE in other recent threads.

    But as he says, we are not going to re-establish Queen Anne (or whoever) before CW2 goes hot.

  6. Neurotoxin says:

    All vxxc is saying, is

    You go to war with the army you’ve got.

    • jim says:

      The army we’ve got got hammered. Need a better army and a better plan.

      • Neurotoxin says:

        “The army we’ve got got hammered.”

        I don’t catch your meaning. Elaborate?

        • jim says:

          You have to bring a gun to a gunfight, and you have to bring a religion to a holy war. Hitler could put a nazi in charge of every trade union and every boy scouts troop, but Trump, though adequately supplied with federalist society judges, cannot put a Trumpist in charge of the border.

          • Neurotoxin says:

            You have to bring a gun to a gunfight, and you have to bring a religion to a holy war.

            Of course. We need guns and religion. Vxxc has been focusing more on the guns part. You focus a lot on the religion part. Both are necessary.

    • Neurotoxin says:

      The army we’ve got got hammered.

      Not sure what you mean, but if it’s gone then it’s not the army we’ve got. The army we’ve got, or more precisely, will have when the Left starts *actively and openly* trying to genocide us, is whatever is in place at that time.

      I don’t know what army that will be, but I do know it won’t be English society of the 1600s.

      What the alt-right is doing on blogs like this one – seeding the intellectual landscape with certain ideas – will be valuable if and when we win CW2, but that’s not the same thing as preparing to fight CW2.

  7. vxxc says:

    I’m interested in solving the problem.

    The problem is removing our out of control government.
    The contractors exist.
    They exist now in non-priest, non protected civil service form.
    They deliver on the guns and butter as the priests cannot.

    They currently and not forever exist in this form, CR is right about that.
    They are not admiring of civil servants/priests they despise as frauds.
    They do not admire those they serve.
    They subsist from the state, they despise them, they vote Republican.

    They exist. Factor this into calculations.
    The contractors look (and dress) like the Cajun Navy.
    They should be preferred to actual bandits mobile or stationary who look, dress and in fact are MS13.

    We and you don’t have the power to hold outsourcing Colonels* accountable.
    Nor more than we have power to restore Queen Anne.
    We have to work with what, and who exists.

    *actual outsourcing Colonels behave predictably as CR mentions above.

  8. Neurotoxin says:

    Vxxc is right about at least this:

    Stationary bandit doesn’t solve the problem that those who crave power (the left) will infiltrate and subvert powerful institutions. It’s what they do.

    • Vxxc says:

      I’m gonna give on this: the Contractors aren’t stationary bandits.
      The contractors are contractors.

      They are NOT natural leftists – nor the administrative state.
      Not natural leftists: results and profit oriented, not process and power oriented.
      The actual power remains in the administrative state. As for their processes they are not holy – they exist so the Holy can’t produce tangible results (by unholy methods).

      That they are not the administrative state: they only exist because the administrative state utterly fails to deliver the goods.

      So the contractors deliver the butter and the guns, they do not hold power.

      Now: do we avail ourselves of this resource or wait for collapse (TM).

      • jim says:

        Contractors are capitalists. Capitalists do not naturally cohere. We are always ruled by priest or warriors. The contractors are just the turf over which the battles are fought.

        A class is a type, but it is an organizational type. Warriors cohere and back each other up, and priests cohere and back each other up.

        So a bikie in a gang is a warrior, a bikie with no gang not a warrior.

        And a priest needs a priesthood. It is the coordination that makes the job. For the merchant class, the coordination mechanism is the market, which is less cohesion of a different kind.

        When members of the priestly class cooperate to project the same story, then then they are priesting. When a cop goes into a potential conflict knowing he has backup should things go south, he is warrioring.

        What makes a priest is exercising power through stories coordinated with other priests.

        What makes a warrior is exercising power through the threat of being able to hurt people and break things through coordination with other warriors.

        What makes a merchant is creating value and capital through market coordination with other merchants.

        So when a newsman is just reporting events that he looked into, not a priest. When he is spinning events according to a centrally coordinated line, is a priest.

        When, in the climategate files, Michael Mann told academia to adjust the past temperature record to remove decades of cooling, because it looked like the temperature fluctuated naturally for reasons other than the sin of western civilization, he was priesting.

        If you raise pigs on your own farm feeding them food grown on your own farm, and eat them, not a capitalist. If you buy stuff for your farm, sell stuff from your farm, and if you buy young cows and raise them into big cows, capitalist.

        A capitalist creates capital in market coordination with other capitalists. A priest coordinates his story behind closed doors with other priests. If a scientist does peer review, the result is theology, not science. And a warrior coordinates his violence with other warriors through authority and small group cohesion. If no platoon, no sergeant, and no discipline, then no warrior. If no market, then no capitalist, no matter how industriously he creates capital. And if no peer review, no priest.

        Warriors have discipline, priests have peer review, and capitalists have marketplace profit and prices. A class is a form of coordination, and a member of that class is someone who participates in that coordination to do what members of that class do.

        And what contractors do is irrelevant to the issues we face.

        • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

          Hidden groups.

        • Bilge Pump says:

          Not sure how formatting here works. Pardon me.

          “If a scientist does peer review, the result is theology, not science”

          Not sure what you mean here. What is science if results can’t be verified by other scientists? I know you think that human-caused global warming is a Cathedral hoax, but surely you don’t mean to undermine the scientific method? Maybe you’re just talking about the modern phenomenon of “peer-review”, whereby truth is valued less than conformity to Cathedral narratives.

          • jim says:

            Peer Review is not the scientific method.

            Peer Review is the theological method.

            The scientific method is that described by Robert Boyle in “The Sceptical Chymist” summarized by the Royal Society as “Nullius in verba”: “take nobody’s word for it”

            Peer Review means we take the word of a secret committee meeting behind closed doors on the basis of secret evidence that they usually refuse to show us even when faced with freedom of information requests. There are a pile of lawsuits ongoing demanding the evidence.

            > Maybe you’re just talking about the modern phenomenon of “peer-review”,

            There is no older form of peer review. All important scientific progress occurred before peer review was imposed in 1944. Peer Review is a modern phenomena, and was the second great loss of social technology – the first great loss being marriage.

            No mention of anything resembling Peer Review in “The Sceptical Chymist” and Galileo had some harsh words about science by committee.

            We did not have Peer Review in science until 1944, when US military victory and the fall of the British empire gave Harvard the upper hand over the Royal Society.

            If I get to be Grand Inquisitor, any state, quasi state, or state supported scientists that engage in something resembling peer review will be charged with heresy or apostasy and lose their jobs. And if the conclusions of their peer review implies that they are holier than the Archbishop or the Emperor, because their result implies that the authorities are insufficiently holy and need to be more holy, as the conclusions of Peer Review is apt to do, not only their jobs, but their heads.

            Merchants coordinate through the market.

            Warriors coordinate through discipline, small group cohesion, and formal chain of command.

            Priests coordinate by meeting behind closed doors to get their stories in agreement, so that they can tell everyone the same story.

            If scientists or newsmen coordinate, they are priests, not scientists or newsmen, and they are competing with, undermining, and attempting to enter the priesthood of the state religion.

            We intend to shutdown open entry into the priesthood of the state religion. Shutting down peer review is part of that program. If you have open entry into the state priesthood, you get an oversupply of priests and while merchant competition drives down prices, priestly competition results in holiness spirals.

  9. vxxc says:

    Here we agree: “Far too many people exercise the full and awesome power of the presidency, mostly people the president has absolutely no control over and indeed has never heard of. Instead of one king three thousand miles away, we have a thousand kings three miles away.”


    Now what is to be done?
    Who shall do it?

    As it happens all the pieces of the solution including replacements are present.

    Including replacement bandits.

    • Carlylean Restorationist says:

      I haven’t been here for a while so am very late to this controversy but it’s a very interesting one.

      You’re both partly right and partly wrong. You agree, and so do I, on what the problem is with government in terms of how it’s behaving, and you both agree that the private sector is very often superior – again in terms of how it’s behaving. In other words, pure government – the socialist state – is inefficient and wastes money, at least from the perspective of a citizen. Business, in its pure form – a guy bringing goods and services to market and voluntary customers taking him up on them – is efficient and produces value.

      I assume that’s what you agree on anyway. Not trying to put words into your mouths: no doubt you have idiosyncratic ways of framing such things but I get the feeling everyone’s on the same page with that.

      Your disagreement seems to be around the value of out-sourcing and the presence-or-otherwise of ‘stationary bandits’ able to enforce order over a particular domain, whether geographical or defined in some other way. Again no doubt you could both nit-pick and refine that definition but in broad strokes that’s the game we’re playing here.

      Well like I said, you’re both partly right.

      Out-sourcing, right now, is getting the roads built – somewhat. The bad news, from Europe, is that this is a temporary matter. As out-sourcing progresses, it begins to resemble the old “paint the shed first then knock it down” mentality of the old unionised public sector departments. Example: a road in a town I visit was getting busier and one of the junctions had become an accident black-spot (we can speculate as to the genetics of that lol). Anyway it was agreed that a small roundabout was needed, so a budget was handed out and a timescale agreed. The budget grossly overshot and the target finish time was extended by six months and in the end no roundabout just traffic lights, and meanwhile a lot of key infrastructure ground-preparation work for nearby related homebuilders.

      In other words, the usual Tom Woods model boondoggle of political engineering across multiple departments, over-promising and under-delivering, combined with good old-fashioned banana republic corruption.

      So out-sourcing doesn’t solve anything long-term: it offers a short-term advantage to the state and that’s about all. They get to say they innovated and solved a difficult problem – and compared to them doing it themselves, this is true: at first!

      OK let me stop beating about the bush. What IS going on?

      Well there’s a proximate cause and an ultimate cause.

      The ultimate cause is that the state isn’t afraid: nobody’s going to get shot if they screw up, so they do, and then they have an investigation, commission a report, and lessons are learned, training undertaken and funding increased. They’re protected. Now Vxxc understands that in the context of official state employees, but it’s as true of out-sourcers: they’ll get audited, have to write even longer tender proposals, and be monitored more often, but get shot? No way.

      Well we can’t do too much about the ultimate cause right now, shame and would be nice if we could but we can’t, so what’s the proximate cause?

      The way it’s funded.

      Vxxc thinks the name badge is very important. I expect on some level Jim probably agrees. If the work’s being done by proper government idiots then of course they’ll be wasteful and inefficient, whereas if a decent upstanding bootstrapping firm marches in and gets things done, they’ll be chasing the dollar and this’ll keep ’em honest.

      Sorry guys that’s just wrong-headed. The name badge actually doesn’t make the slightest bit of difference!

      The reason the pure private sector (say an ice cream stand owned by one guy, with no regulatory oversight, in Ancapistan) is efficient is that that’s where the money comes from: the customer pays *for an ice cream* so the less crap you have to do in order to get from raw materials to finished ice cream and cash in your pocket, the better, so that’s what you do.

      The reason government WORK doesn’t work that way, irrespective of the name badge or the profit/not-for-profit structure, is that payment comes from the state (this would be as true of payment by a housing association and so on) not from the people who use the service. You’re not getting paid per ice cream – or to use a governmentish-sounding example you’re not getting paid by every car that uses your bit of road. You get paid by some central funding body for having done the work, irrespective of the opinion of the users of the finished product. Road users can GFTs for all you care: you were paid for making the road, not for pandering to their petty needs.

      THAT, under the kind of government we have, is the proximate cause, and it’s just as true if Hinchingbroke Hospital is out-sourced to Circle Healthcare as it is if Huddersfield Infirmary is delivered by people all of whom wear the NHS logo and are employed directly by the Department of Health with job titles like “Administrative Officer Pay Band H (substantive) seconded to Executive Liaison Office”.

      This is why Ancaps believe in full privatisation, not out-sourcing. Pay as you go, with little bits of insurance to cover catastrophes. That’s for everything, not just ice creams, roads and healthcare. Toll roads all the way.

      Now I’m not an Ancap and I doubt many here are. We would all, I assume, prefer to correct the Ultimate Cause, which is distributed and weakened power unaccountable and often in radical conflict.

      Ultimately I’d love to see Universal Healthcare in the USA and everywhere else, as well as a whole range of other socialistic measures. As things stand, that would be a total disaster, because they wouldn’t be afraid of anyone: they’d all be ‘kings’ competing and conflicting, lining their pockets.

      One more thing, and apologies for the long post but I’m really not here any more, just throwing a couple of details into the fray:

      The other thing to bear in mind is that we shouldn’t impose our own frame on notions of ‘waste’ and ‘efficiency’.

      For the individual working in the out-sourcing company OR the government department, there’s nothing at all ‘inefficient’ about having to employ ‘too many’ people. On the contrary this is genuine career capital: I line-managed three junior managers, each of whom managed four admin workers and a labourer. I developed two of them towards advancement and took one through disciplinary performance management procedures. Tick, tick and tick.

      If you’re an out-sourcer, you may also get a cut of all activity – typically a VERY SMALL one – so the bigger the bloat, the better.

      I should also add that in Britain at least, most of the big out-sourcers (and they seem to be global so I’m assuming this is true for you guys too) are massively indebted and loss-making, often teetering on the brink of insolvency, one government contract away from collapse, eg. Carillion. Interserve isn’t much better and I wouldn’t buy stock in Serco or G4S either frankly.

      Anyway you get the point. Incentives, perspectives and fear of authority are important considerations, while name badges really aren’t.

      A ‘communist’ country with Henry VII at the top would be barely different at all from a ‘minarchist’ country with Henry VII at the top. Things would be done slightly differently but they’d all get the job done to avoid the block!

      • jim says:

        The problem is centralization and span of control. The further away the guy signing the checks, the worse the result, and the more and bigger the cheques he is signing, the worse the result.

        When I build a road for myself, it does not cost that much.

        When the local council builds a road, it costs a great deal more.

        When the local council in coordination with state and federal governments builds a road on a federal grant, it costs fifty to a hundred times as much, and that they are using private contractors does not help much. One private contractor blocked a road for six months while totally stoned out of his brain on drugs and pissing away unimaginable sums on gambling. Eventually, and very belatedly, fired, but not in jail. Having a lot more money to piss away resulted in worse, not better, service.

        I regularly argue that military logistics should be outsourced – but they should not be outsourced by the Department of Defense. They should, as far as possible, be outsourced by the colonel who is receiving the logistics to the camp followers who are following his camp around. The man on the spot has to make the decisions, and has to personally benefit if those decisions are good, and personally lose if those decisions are bad.

        • Carlylean Restorationist says:

          It’s worth remembering that the USSR was not only divided into ‘autonomous soviet socialist republics’ but that these republics were subdivided into fully autonomous soviet socialist oblasts, and that interference from central government was pretty much forbidden precisely at the times when the worst extremes of communism were going on, eg. 1920s.
          Localism, devolution and decentralisation were not foreign concepts to one of the most bureaucratic states that ever existed.

          Arguing against my own argument, it’s also worth noting that people *could* be shot! Weirdly though, to channel Solzhenitsyn, the work reports were almost always insanely exaggerated, with individual half-starved zeks apparently humping ten tons of rock in a day and living on half a slice of bread, so while people were certainly being shot, it wasn’t for ‘inefficiency’ – it was generally understood that government bloat wets a lot of beaks. Today’s the same story.

          I’m 100% with you about being sceptical of out-sourcing as a panacea. David Cameron was faced with a vast structural deficit and he used out-sourcing (which he lyingly called privatisation) to simply shift a lot of the borrowing from the government’s books to the books of whatever mug was willing to do the work at a loss. Given that most corporations today run at a loss all the time, this wasn’t a problem for companies like Carillion: do things at a loss and keep on getting new work – that way the CVs of everyone involved will look great and this year’s revenue’s higher and higher: at these rates, worry about the debt later. (Is this a Misesian ‘malinvestment’ argument? Actually it’s more of an argument that capitalism is inherently short-term even in good times with ‘rational’ interest rates.)

          It was a cynical accounting trick and nothing more. I mean really if you think about it, everything involves *some* degree of out-sourcing. Any bureaucracy that uses paperclips and red tape has to buy them from someone who isn’t the government: even in the Soviet Union some of the strategic materials and even some finished goods were imported from overseas. As Ricardo rightly counsels, there’s no point inventing the German chemical industry in Russia when you can just get the Germans to stick barrels full on a train at half the cost.

          Your idea of having individual government bureaucrats commission work out of their own budget certainly has merit. John Major tried an ‘internal market’ experiment in the 1990s whereby NHS procurement offices treated every referral as a genuine trade transaction with full accounting practices. It actually made no difference, but if there’d been no in-house provision it could have been different. They’d have to take the hit personally too though, otherwise they wouldn’t have any reason to care about losses. On paper, there could be a link between profitability and promotion, but in practice there’s always reasons why funding has to be increased (not every penny the general spends will come out of his own pocket, I assume – or if so, great that’s even better – legitimate privatised Lords, very ‘early Moldbug’) and getting those increases would end up being the true goal, as it is under mostly pure government.

          Ultimately the source of the money is pivotal *unless* they’re scared of the consequences of not doing what the *publicly stated* goal is. KPTs also don’t help with that because success can easily be manipulated, whereas when money’s voluntarily handed over, that’s rarely possible.
          Example: we sent out twenty appointment letters to this junkie but he didn’t turn up to any of the appointments even though he kept on saying he still wanted to be on the books, so that’ll be $2000 kthxbai.
          Now swap that out for “you get paid when the person does turn up” and suddenly the junkie gets the standard two appointments then excuses are found not to bother anymore and because the service provider takes a $200 hit, they screen for likely junkies and avoid doing business with them.

          Anyway I need to redisengage before I trigger people. This new person seems interesting but pretty sure you can win this one ^^

          Out-sourcing is a huge dead end and certainly doesn’t result in ‘stationary bandits’. They’re just stationary until they’re not, which is true of all bandits.

          • Carlylean Restorationist says:


            John Major’s ‘internal market’ failed because even though the commissioners/procurement-czars were buying the services out of a fixed budget, the budget itself came from central government and so getting that budget increased became the true goal of the whole endeavour.

            ‘Payment by results’ as an extension of the KPT system also doesn’t work because what happens is that service providers structure their activities to maximise the guaranteed parts of the contract and treat performance related income as a luxury to be invested in….. getting more service contracts lol

            (I’ve done this from the inside as a third sector tender-writer and the cynicism’s astonishingly brazen, yet perversely nobody involved ever realises they’re acting in a cynical way, let alone a self-serving antisocial way!) (Long ago, when I was a sort of anti-PC ‘blue labour’ Blairite)

          • jim says:

            Outsourcing works. Corporations successfully outsource all the time. Government outsourcing works when it is done right. Compare the disastrous failure of NASA with the success of SpaceX

            When the government outsourced getting into space to Musk, that worked. When the government outsourced one little part of the space shuttle to one contractor, and another little part of the space shuttle to another contractor, with each contractor located in a particular federal electorate, with an unstated requirement to hire enough people who fitted the profile of voters likely to vote for the guy representing that electorate, that failed. It failed because you can see if Musk is reaching space or not, but you cannot see if one little contractor is preventing you from reaching space, or another little contractor is preventing you from reaching space.

            If you outsource all the little pieces, but all those little pieces are controlled from the capital, does not work, because those attempting to control exceed their span of control.

          • Bilge Pump says:

            I’m tired of this talk about “stationary bandits”. Wtf is a stationary bandit exactly? The only examples I could think of would be security forces, criminal outfits or some govt bureaucrats. Can we really call some guy who fills in potholes for a living a “bandit”? In what world would this guy not be a bandit?

  10. Vxxc says:


    You realize I’m in MIL right?
    Deployed (again) now in Red Empire sandbox?
    I’m not nuts – I’m present.

    Most of the military is competent and functional, as I’m sure most people in your job are competent and functional. You simply have to work around idiots who are are over-promoted protected lessers.

    In any case the point isn’t the military: its the Federal government.
    You may quite disregard the military if you like and look at the civilian side. These contractors are the replacements.
    Certainly few in government get things done.
    They are also the real stationary bandits.
    They may not be called Goths and Vandals but they are quite the Teutons filling in behind the Romans.

    They exist and will do just fine.

    The military you describe does not.
    We’re not of course being defeated in war but failing in the mission to make wogs into white suburbanites: but none have done so.
    Iraq and Afghanistan are simply the ghettoes of our foreign policy.
    It works with Europeans and Asians, fails with wogs.

    >>The conditions for victory all exist, including a replacement government sitting at its desks. The administrative government can quite be defeated and replaced officially without chaos.

    This is my main point.

    (Not a tangent about trannies with machine guns or whether sailors are fucking girls or boys. Rum, sodomy and the lash and the Royal Navy still functioned. ).

    • jim says:

      > They are also the real stationary bandits.

      A stationary bandit is stationary because he has the power to exclude other bandits. These guys don’t.

      They don’t even have power at all – they have improper and excessive influence.

      • vxxc says:

        The replacement government whether they are stationary bandits or not is sitting at their desks.

        They have already replaced the ENEMY aka The Administrative State.

        Like Trump and The Federalist Society – suggest take what you’ve got.
        Not (oddly) Dark Age Warlords we haven’t got, and since they’d be genocidal wogs don’t want.

        They’re usually white BTW.
        And the ones who aren’t are by behavior.

        • jim says:

          Your error is that you attribute cohesion and the pursuit of rational collective self interest to our enemy.

          The problem is precisely that our enemy is incohesive and incapable of the pursuit of rational collective self interest.

          • Vxxc says:

            I don’t attribute that to the enemy at all.
            I am saying they are absolutely redundant already.

            They can be seamlessly replaced.
            Their work is being done for them on any matter of import.
            To paraphrase Moldbug – the government already runs better with a titular civil service that has farmed its work to businesses.

            There’s nothing but our phantom fears to stop us niw.

            I actually all you say and far worse to the enemy especially insanity.

          • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

            The problem is precisely that our enemy is incohesive and incapable of the pursuit of rational collective self interest.

            Then why do you fear him?

            • Frederick Algernon says:

              chaotic enemies produce a wholly different fear than methodical ones. Would you rather face a PCP addled Korean or a well connected Scotsman? For me, the answer depends on where we are and what i have access to.

            • jim says:

              Crazies are the most dangerous. White people were driven out Detroit and many other places. Marriage has been destroyed. Reason enough to fear him

              • Alrenous says:

                They were weak and are suffering for their sins. There was no good reason to surrender these things.

                • jim says:


                  There was terrifyingly good reason to surrender these things. Whites in Detroit had their houses burned down around their ears.

                  Democratic Community Organizers coordinated blacks to attack whites with a huge advantage in numbers, but any attempt by whites to coordinate defense was crushed mercilessly.

                  During the expulsion of whites a lot Detroit was burned down and never rebuilt. Had the white people of Detroit been cowards and weak, the Democrats would not have had to burn down so much of it.

                  The assaults and arson were organized and collective. It was impossible to defend against as individuals. Democratic party cops were running the police, Democratic party community organizers were running the arson and attacks on individual whites, and the right hand was coordinating with the left hand.

                • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

                  I once met a man who was the only white man in an entire expanse of a vanquished American city, as you describe. He was surrounded entirely by blacks, yet no one would mess with him because they judged that any white man who had kept his house when the area was taken over by blacks should not be messed with.

                • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

                  our enemy is incohesive

                  assaults and arson were organized and collective

                  These two statements are incompatible Jim. Can you please clarify?

                • jim says:

                  A gang of blacks functions less well than a gang of whites. Democrats, including white democrats, could get together on removing white people from Detroit, but the process involved a whole lot of them turning on each other.

                  If whites had been allowed to organize to hold Detroit, they could have easily held it, and in this sense, the enemy was incohesive.

                • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

                  The correct response to defeat is to get up, again, and again, and again, and again, and again, until you are dead, or until you win.

                • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

                  If whites had been allowed to organize to hold Detroit, they could have easily held it, and in this sense, the enemy was incohesive.

                  True, but not worth worrying about. We must work with what we have.

                  Democrats, including white democrats, could get together on removing white people from Detroit, but the process involved a whole lot of them turning on each other.

                  So what strategies and tactics fall out of this?

                • jim says:

                  Organized violence beats individual violence. Cop violence beats impromptu organized violence. Soldier violence beats cop violence. (And one can then go through all the military levels to fighter planes beating ground support planes. And obviously a fighter plane is no good against a mugger, or for that matter, against cops.)

                  So, we could not win in Detroit because cop violence crushed our impromptu organized violence, and stood back and looked the other way when Democratic party mobs rampaged, after the fashion of Charlottesville and Ferguson.

                  So, the lesson is: soldier violence.

                  The restoration succeeded because of General Monck. Pinochet did not want a coup, but when the junior officers forced his hand, he reluctantly came on board. They had to conscript the top officer into their cause. Would have worked a whole lot better if they had a General Monck instead of a Pinochet, but it worked well enough for a time.

                  The Klu Klux Klan succeeded because the state officials were quietly relaxed about Klu Klux Clan violence, analogous to what Democrats and the judiciary did in Detroit and are doing today with antifa and black mobs. Maduro is in power today because he has ground attack helicopters.

                • Eli says:

                  But who is actually running the army?

                • jim says:

                  Military cohesion at the top comes from membership of a synthetic tribe, a religion, and all state institutions in our society are controlled by progressivism. To reach high rank, you have to be progressive. But military progressives are not quite the same kind of progressive. Anyone seizing power is going to have to act like Augustus and Monck: He supposedly is not seizing power, just preserving our progressive society, progressive institutions, and beloved constitution against chaos.

                  Indeed, that is the tale of the traitors – that Trump is doing what they are attempting to do.

                • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

                  So, the lesson is: soldier violence.

                  What do we do while we wait for the soldiers Jim?

                • jim says:

                  We are auditioning for the priesthood, not the army. We make moral claims and analyze events into a moral story – a story in which warriors, not priests, should have primary authority. Some warriors are listening.

                  The Federalist society was just a talkshop, until Trump start filling the judiciary with federalists. This is the event that they were waiting, planning, and preparing for. We are waiting, planning, and preparing for rather more dramatic events.

                  And when they come, we will say that the Republic is still in effect, or is being restored, as Augustus restored the Republic.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “Some warriors are listening.”

                  Erik Prince I’ve heard has been one of us for a very long time.

                • jim says:

                  Let’s not speculate about which identifiable people close to power are listening.

                • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

                  Some warriors are listening.


              • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

                You have to be crazier than him, even (and especially) if he is attacking you six on one, or forty on one, or whatever the odds may be, as they they have been found to be in real life. The greater the odds, the greater the required insanity. In my experience that is.

        • Vxxc says:

          On power: the contractors have money power.
          The PMCs have also violence power.

          When Generals want something done thats unholy the PMCs do it.
          Same with Intel.

          And State (yes, of course they do. Like back alley abortions before Roe the rules are made to be spoken).

          This is at least as much power as State AS, and more than say FBI SAIC.

          If we’re Rome I really prefer Cajun Navy cousins (yes) as our Teutons, as opposed to Salvadorians and Somalis.

          ^Is this really a hard choice?^

      • Neurotoxin says:

        They don’t even have power at all – they have improper and excessive influence.

        Jim, this sentence is not like you.

        Call it whatever you want, but if functionaries in the fed gov’t had no power, influence, or whatever, then – to name just one example – the whole Russia “investigation” never would have happened.

        • jim says:

          The smoking gun in the Russian “investigation” is “insurance policy”:Treason and coup. It is clear that the FBI and Mueller wanted to overthrow the president and Sessions declined to stand in their way, but Obama was probably just spying for scandals that could be used to prevent Trump from being elected in the first place – which is also illegal, but not treason. There is no one person who can make a decision and make it stick. Treason was kind of diffuse. Lots of power in one sense, but in another sense, no one could actually make things happen, which is why the coup keeps falling apart. Hard to make a coup unless you draft a dictator and put him in charge of it.

          Trumps ability to make things happen is limited by the fact that he is surrounded by enemies – but he actually can make things happen.

          • The Cominator says:

            Obama was an actor he read his script and signed what he was told. He did not make any decisions.

            Any decisions “he” made were actually made by Valerie Jarrett. The coup actually centered IMHO on John Brennan but to a lesser extent McCabe and Jarrett.

            Sessions and Rosenstein joined up after the fact…

          • Neurotoxin says:

            Lots of power in one sense, but in another sense, no one could actually make things happen, which is why the coup keeps falling apart.

            It fell apart because Trump is an exceptionally clean man, so their dirt-digging mission didn’t turn up anything.

            Also, the coup attempt *has* done something for the bad guys: It distracted and occupied Trump for two years (admittedly not as much as they were hoping), probably convinced a normie or two that “where there’s smoke there’s fire” about Trump, and let them learn lots of things about his finances, contacts, etc. And none of them has suffered any punishment after all this, even the flagrantly illegal raiding of Trump’s lawyer’s office.

            Think about this: They tried to use falsified evidence to subvert the legitimate outcome of a U.S. Presidential election. They should have been executed for treason by now. Actual result: Comey got a book deal.

            I’m still betting on the good guys in the long term, but our enemies are not powerless and we’re not going to win by underestimating them.

            • The Cominator says:

              Its more like they were trying to frame him but they were stupid and couldn’t come up with anything plausible even to them.

              Trump 100% was at least loosely “connected” back when he was building skyscrapers in Manhattan. Nothing happened on a construction site back then in Manhattan unless the Mafia gave the okay so of course Trump had to deal with them.

              If Mueller was smart would have projected Trump’s small degree of 1980s mafia ties and spun a tale of how the Trump organization is actually a front to launder money for organized crime and that he has used his position in the executive branch to do this further.

              But Mueller and the current establishment are too stupid. If the people who framed Nixon were in charge of the effort to get Trump they would have been able to do it…

  11. vxxc says:

    Seriously- when did RXN become the Federal Reserve?
    Life doesn’t meet models.

    Adjust model to reality RWfolk.

    They exist.
    They actually HAVE replaced the figurehead administrative state.
    They quite so enforce the monopolies they are interested in…
    There’s more to government than the annoying bitches in HR.

    Reaction is interested in what is; contractors are.
    Rxn wants govt that works: they work.

    Work with what exists.

    • jim says:


      That is not what exists.

      What exists is anarcho tyranny. Far too many little emperors, none of whom are responsible for the results of their actions. The Department of Defense is not running at a loss because of the nefarious influence of contractors. It is running at a loss because it is teaching Afghan girls to put a condom on a banana, because it is trying to pretend women and transexuals are soldiers, because it puts women in charge of planes and ships which they then crash into things. If the world was the way you describe it, Venezuela would instead be called Exxon’s southern division, and the DoD would be making a profit from the US empire.

      The US navy is in port operating as floating brothel and Democratic Party vote bank, because if they went sailing around, would crash into things. That is reality. Contractors would still make a profit, and actually have legitimate justification for making a profit, if the US navy could sail straight.

      Undoubtedly the nefarious influence of contractors contributes to us getting into stupid wars – but wars are a lot more stupid when you cannot win them, and the contractors are not to blame for that. They would make a lot more money if we could win them.

  12. vxxc says:


    They exist.

    Whether they meet your model or not.

    Actually your model is MS13 holding territory.
    Hard pass.

    Take the contractors. They even obey the constitution.

    Forms are important.

  13. Vxxc says:

    Jim et al;

    My main point: the Stationary Bandits are present.
    Not just DOD: most government concrete functions are contracted out.

    Broadly: DOD* , redistribution/benefits, soon enough VA health care, etc.
    State too in many ways, Intel* too. Logistics. L
    Anything practical that must be done is contracted.
    The Contractors work for profit. The contractors=Stationary Bandits.
    They also aren’t protected as civil service, etc. At will.

    *any nasty work govt can’t do like extra killing or effective interrogations is contracted.


    Whether their names are Odoacer or Smith YOUR LONG AWAITED STATIONARY BANDITS ARE HERE.

    Now kindly recalculate.
    Yes it happened while you were obsessing about fat chicks.
    But it happened.

    Thank you for giving me the “frame” to categorize the facts.
    Now kindly adjust calculations.

    • jim says:

      Most government functions are not contracted out. The great big obvious one is that camp followers are classed as soldiers.

      Another great big obvious one is that a great deal of law enforcement that should be done by states is done by the federal government, and a great deal of law enforcement that should be done by local governments is done by state governments, and a great deal of law enforcement that should be done by private security and heads of family is done by local governments.

      A stationary bandit has, and enforces, a monopoly of banditry within his territory. We are not seeing stationary banditry, but anarcho tyranny. Far too many people exercise the full and awesome power of the presidency, mostly people the president has absolutely no control over and indeed has never heard of. Instead of one king three thousand miles away, we have a thousand kings three miles away.

      Because a stationary bandit cannot personally supervise the pizzas in every pizza parlor, he has to contract stuff out, has to outsource everything. Stuff not being contracted out, not being outsourced, means his span of control is far too great, so that he is unable to control the innumerable nameless and faceless functionaries who exercise his full power, who become a threat to his power, a threat to society, and eventually a threat to the stationary bandit’s life.

  14. […] on When the Rot Set In, for Ms. Clinton and the East India […]

  15. BC says:

    Why is the left letting their streets fill up with piles up human shit? I know it creates jobs for a few of their supporters, but that seems like an insufficient answer for while they’d allow the practice to continue.

    Any ideas?

    • jim says:

      Atrophy of the disgust reaction is a requirement of leftism. If you are not happy with streets full of human shit, your bona fides as a genuine leftist are in doubt. So even if the left would like the image of leftism not be streets full of human shit, the spread of medieval diseases, and the lights going out, and even if it is in the interests of the left to keep the lights on, human shit off the streets, and restrain the spread of medieval diseases, it is not in the interests of any individual leftist to actually oppose streets full of human shit, the spread of medieval diseases, and the lights going out.

    • Anonymous Fake says:

      They use filth, often literal, to gross conservatives out, often literally, out of the cities where all the important corporate and government jobs are. Conservatives proceed to leave the cities behind and build unimportant commuter subdivisions no one cares about, politically impotent.

      Crime and pollution and immigrants and pre-prison public schools are a feature, not a bug, of cities. They are designed to drive out nice peaceful conservatives. These features all too easily go “full bug” and anarchy ensues, putting the next group of leftists into power.

      Conservatives not only fail to clean up the streets, but they fail to build new cities, especially new capital cities. The conservative base is probably 80% obese to the point where they couldn’t live without cars and diabeetus pills. Their subdivisions and lawns and zombie apocalypse bunkers are their best resistance to the poz, and in some sense they are in fact using the same strategy against the left. They disgust their enemies away.

      • jim says:


        There is an obvious correlation between obesity and leftism. Conservatives are generally less fat and physically stronger than leftists of the same age, and reactionaries markedly fitter than conservatives. The right not only has more guns, but stronger punches.

        This is because the chief vices of the modern era are gluttony and adultery (only females can commit adultery, since only female sexual immorality obfuscates fatherhood), and leftism, being the party of defection, infanticide, sodomy, adultery, and treason, is also the party of vice.

        A leftist chick in a “long term relationship” is far more likely to be cruising for an upgrade, and a leftist, male or female, is far more likely to be fat and weak.

        • Anonymous Fake says:

          Where are the deep red islands on the political map, the densely populated urban power centers for conservatives where everyone walks to work and marches on the streets on the weekends? Where is the conservative Manhattan?

          Yeah, exactly.

          • jim says:

            Conservatives build cities. Leftists take them by violence and then destroy what they have taken, Detroit being the most extreme example, the Bay Area another good example.

            Deep blue cities are surrounded by conservative refugee camps, the suburbs. And now, in California, we are being driven out of the refugee camps.

            • vxxc says:

              Conservatives are responsible cowards.
              Leftists are irresponsibly courageous.

              • vxxc says:

                My God.

                The bottom of the Arab world’s own rankings is tge Palestinians.

                Who do defend their refugee camps, however.
                My God.

                Find your fucking balls.

                This is why my unit has dick punches: don’t be a cunt.

            • Steve Johnson says:

              Los Angeles is a much better example than San Francisco. SF was always Yankee puritan to some extent – LA was much more middle class paradise.

    • shaman says:

      Why is the left letting their streets fill up with piles up human shit?

      That’s like asking in 2039, “Why is the left letting roving bands of apocalyptic zombies terrorize pedestrians?”

      As the left moves ever lefter, more and more aspects and manifestations of sub-human dysfunction can no longer be noticed in polite society. You’re not an intolerant bigot, now, are you? Leftists being hypocrites, all the affluent ones must have already fled the hellscape, which inevitably worsens the problem; those left behind are scummy low-lifers and a few nutty True Believers, who — pointing at the deer, and making it a horse — will certainly tell you that the lush atmosphere smells just like perfume (patchouli?) in San Francisco.

      Joke: Inhaling pozzed fecal matter is revolting, and living in it is hazardous.

      Woke: Olfaction and hygiene have been privilege-enabling cis-het social constructs all along.

    • Alrenous says:

      Legitimized coercion => sophistry => democracy => bioleninism => San Francisco.

  16. vxxc says:

    By refresher course I mean I just got warned away from someones entirely legal ah.. pot…of gold…

  17. vxxc says:

    BTW the proto East India company exists:
    Its called “The Pentagon.”

    Now of course this is done by “contractors” and the profit is is “contracts” and weapons, aid deals. But it exists in many pieces instead of one and most assuredly profits. Saudi and the rest pay out the ass for our weapons.
    In return PMCs and Generals, DC make money and we get to deny the Mideast’s oil from competitors like China.

    Trust me I’m at an outpost now, and just had a refresher course in practical ah, er civics. $$

    I don’t wanna play golf, so I stay downrange.

    But it exists.
    Cheer up, I think..,

    • The Cominator says:

      > Claims DOD is for profit rather then a massive machine for pissing away money to crony capitalists and congress pork.

      Nigga, what are you smoking?

      • jim says:

        > Nigga, what are you smoking?

        If only the DOD was run for profit, it would be great.

        • vxxc says:

          I’ve got 2 decades of smoking DOD.

          I’m smoking a cigarette in Red Empire right now.
          Our entire actual government is run for profit: Thats how the Clintons garnered such support. DOD was the first to reinvent.

          Yes the official government is useless- except for generating contracts.
          The contractors then do the work.
          This was called reinventing government.
          This includes war not just killing but logidtics.

          Also your welfare checks: SNAP/EBT comebfrom banks.

          • vxxc says:

            “DOD is for profit rather then a massive machine for pissing away money to crony capitalists and congress pork.”

            That’s profit nigga.
            That’s profit. Not free market but profit.
            Given your premise that’s not profitable then neither was East India, the colonies, slave plantations or piracy, the mafia…

            Of course there’s profit. Lol.

            Jim: the government is a failed legacy system except for payroll, HR, BILLING, and VENDOR CONTRACTING.

            Its essentially a front company for vendors who do the work.
            This has been happening since 1993.

            The Era of Big Government is over said Clinton.
            Then he made it so.

            Now by government here I mean actually getting anything done.
            That’s contracted out.

            Benefits transfers ala SNAP, EBT, etc – the cards work cuz Goldman, JP Morgan etc issue and run the cards.
            DOD travel and expense cards: CITI.

            This isn’t new, and it isn’t news.

            Now is this an asset or liability?
            To us? Asset.

            You see the contractors can be hired or fired.
            They thus have to get results, why they exist.

            The contractors actually deliver on government, BUT they are not protected and nearly invulnerable from being fired.

            What this means: the entire part of government that is in rebellion against the Executive – the Administrative government, the Deep State, the welfare handouts Depts can all be let go or allowed to stay home with pay (Moldbugs payoff solution) both ending the political power struggle and restoring Constitutional government.

            > a word on Constitutional government; until your replacement EXISTS kindly do not undermine The Founders Chesterton’s Fence.
            You don’t have… anything. Even the Cathedral exists: its Chief Vice being no one’s in charge or can check it; this being its corresponding Virtue for its sinecure holders.
            Of course its chaos and looting all round.
            The Left takes advantage and yes caused this exact chaos.
            But it does exist… and the fantasy world of restoration discussed here DOES NOT EXIST.

            But what does exist is the contracted out, reinvented government I described, a Constitutional government with legitimacy sitting at its desks, a loyal police and military, and an armed and awake people.
            And a loyal President of great ability.

            Now of course the Constitution is imperfect.
            But it exists.
            Queen Anne does not..

            All that is politically essential is the Administrative government be forced to acknowledge ANY MASTER to become controlled and solvent, restrained. It is resisting this – and failing.
            The question is which Master can win- and to win he would need to actually exist, have followers, have legitimacy.
            Blessedly he does, we do.

            So this is the path to follow.
            Because it exists, has legitimacy, has a leader, has an army, has a people.

            This is why I reaffirmed my Oath, why I’m sweating it out in Red Empire for all its flaws.

            May I suggest you join us?
            Volunteers always favored over conscripts.
            Never mind press ganged work crews.

            And spectators to conflict are bugs on windshields.

            • jim says:

              Mafia is obviously profitable. East India company was for the most part very profitable until it started carrying the white man’s burden.

              If the DoD was operated for profit, Venezuela would be peaceful, prosperous, and it would be called Exxon South division, instead of Venezuela.

              Contracting out, outsourcing, is the effective way for government to get stuff done, and until after the Crimean war, every government outsourced logistics. Doing business with the government is extremely difficult and dangerous, and that is why the government finds it has to pay far more for goods and services than private businesses do. It should not be difficult and dangerous. We need to push as much contracting as possible down to majors arranging logistics with camp followers.

            • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

              Moldbugs payoff solution

              Moldbug’s payoff solution ascribes an agency to these people that they do not possess, or if they possess it, gives them licence to oppose us, since they would face no repercussions for losing, and will see us dead if they win. It is 2019, not 2008, and the past 11 years of victories have left them stupidly assured of their victory, even more than they ever were, and even less willing to negotiate, if even they would before.

          • Steve Johnson says:

            Our entire actual government is run for profit: Thats how the Clintons garnered such support. DOD was the first to reinvent.

            You have it backwards – DOD’s contractors and retired generals are in it for profit but DOD’s operations piss away money.

            DOD being in it for profit means DOD seizes and sells Iraqi oil and Afghanistan’s strategic gravel deposits. It doesn’t – it makes its vendors and clients and retired flag officers rich.

            DOD exists to bribe potential Cathedral enemies to keep quiet and maybe to lose spectacularly so as to lower the status of Cathedral rivals.

            • vxxc says:

              DOD reflects govt: runs for profit of the govt.
              I love how you tell someone present what he’s seeing is not what he sees. Are these RXN Hatefacts?
              I should adjust my lying senses to fit the ideology?

              As far as losing: Priest power- it is holy to lose.
              Also politics: DOD obeys POTUS.
              By law and custom, constitution (these matters matter to us).
              POTUS is the target of our “losing”; losing and stalemated wars weaken POTUS. Which is why its been happening since Korea.
              (Not well known but Truman gutted New Dealers, created DOD).

              • Steve Johnson says:

                No one is challenging your facts – it’s your interpretation that’s off.

                A laundromat that’s used for money laundering isn’t being operated “for profit” either but it “makes profits”.

                DOD doesn’t make a profit from its operations, it gets paid off by USG. DOD doesn’t have a revenue stream from Iraq or Afghanistan. Are you saying you’re witnessing large payments going from Iraqis to DOD? Or does DOD hand out pallets of cash some of which find their way back into the hands of contractors and administrators? The former is profit making, the latter isn’t.

                • vxxc says:

                  When money changes hands with profit as motive and indeed the driving motor force: its for profit.

                  Do the Iraqis bring us tribute?
                  If only they could.

                  In the Army if you have an improvement that will enrich the Generals it will be heard and considered.
                  If no money in it, no General will entertain it.

                  (Me) “This doesn’t cost any money, there’s no money in it.”
                  COL: “ Then no General will listen to it.”

                  This isn’t one datapoint, its not even pattern.
                  This is policy.

                  Actually I was disappointed he said that; I knew it already. He disappointed me personally. Crass.

                  I have to disagree that a front company isn’t run for profit. Our government is for profit as is the mafia.
                  Now if you don’t look at the facts of our government leads to my interpretation then consider who is present (even from motive of duty, gritting teeth waiting for dawn) – I am present, if you are not then weight who is physically on the site and who is not.

                  Now this is still tangential to my main point:
                  The Administrative State that is the (treasonous) enemy has the long awaited stationary bandits here.

  18. Vxxc says:

    I must amend above.

    I’m being horribly unfair to the 5th century.
    Its difficult to find true historical examples.

    These people are parodies.

  19. vxxc says:

    Dear Jim,

    You don’t progress from social technology of 5th century Western Europe to 17th century social tech without passing through the 13th century…

    I’m being generous.
    Our actual social technology is much worse, but there’s hope.

    Our actual social technology resembles Berlin April 1945 with the Left moving phantom armies in the bunker whilst Magda plots to poison her daughters…or perhaps the Jacobins 1793…

    But the good news is its pretty much concentrated in the elites.
    The country suffers but is not fatally wounded.

    Not sure about mass Leftist killing either.
    The Right has a lock on warrior trades as strong as the Lefts lock on Academia.

    • jim says:

      > You don’t progress from social technology of 5th century Western Europe to 17th century social tech without passing through the 13th century…

      The social technology of fifth century Western Europe was what I meant when I said “if the $#!% really hits the fan”

      I don’t think we have regressed irrecoverably from 17th century social tech.


      • The Cominator says:

        It would take a very hardcore ruthless right wing dictatorship or monarchy to really reverse things and they are going to need a lot of helicopters…

        And while I think some of your policies on the woman question go a bit too far for a desirable steady state solution (I think wife beating should be legal but not if you break bones or send her to the hospital… I think adultery should allow for more severe beatings and public humiliation but should NOT quite result in death…) your ideas may indeed need to be a temporary solution given how bad the cancer is.

        • jim says:

          I don’t think so.

          Charles the Second had to burn one irritatingly holy woman at the stake, but for the most part, he merely lowered the status of the excessively holy and denied them state and quasi state jobs.

          We are going to need helicopters, but on past experience, not a whole lot of helicopters.

          The shotgun marriage program of the late eighteenth century early nineteenth century authorities was theoretically backed by extremely harsh measures, but they seem to have been rarely used. What happened was that the thots tested authority harshly, but upon authority passing the test, internalized respectable middle class chaste wife values. Women want an alpha male, but are quite comfortable being assigned to another male by an alpha male. They reject their husband when he is weak and not supported by alpha males – hence the propensity of females to set up conflicts between their husband or boyfriend and males in authority.

          • The Cominator says:

            Charles ii benefited from the disillusionment of the real extremist having been repressed extremely harshly by Cromwell we won’t have the benefit of this.

          • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

            not a whole lot of helicopters

            Unless we wanted to implement a long-term (genetic) solution to the problem…

            • jim says:

              The genetic solution is elite fertility and an elite selected for intelligence and prosocial qualities, not helicopters. To ensure differential elite fertility, state, society, church and family should back up your patriarchal authority on the basis of ability and willingness to look after the women under your authority. If a woman has sex with a loser, she gets assigned to someone and put under his authority, which assignment and authority will make him sexy in her eyes and the loser unsexy. The experience of Australia indicates that they will still test that authority hard, but if he passes, will internalize chaste middle class wife values. As university turns virgins into thots, the Australian colony turned thots into wives.

              I am favorably impressed with how smoothly The Restoration went. One burning at the stake, a few imprisonments, a few executions, a lot of “voluntary” exiles, and a whole lot people fired from the church and the state apparatus.

              Of cause, one big downside of the restoration was that a huge number of religious dissidents went off to North America, which eventually led to a disastrous outcome.

              So, not that many helicopters, but we will have to prevent those excluded from forming their own societies with their own institutions, as they now prevent us from forming communities that oppress women and exclude outgroups.

              • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

                It could be so.

                If you are volunteering to run the reeducation camps then I will not stand in your way.

                • jim says:

                  Again, The Restoration did not have reeducation camps. They just had everyone in sensitive parts of the state apparatus re-apply for their old jobs, and in effect asked them whether they were Havel’s Greengrocer. If Havel’s Greengrocer, they got their old job back or a similar job. If not, became unemployed, and unemployable in any job within smell of power and influence. If you purge everyone who was complicit in the old regime, you lose too much institutional continuity, skills, and knowledge.

                  Also, if we do a thot roundup, then anyone trying to operate an old regime type society will find himself mighty short of pussy. We won’t send fertile age females away, we will embed them in patriarchal families and institutions.

                • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

                  Again, The Restoration did not have reeducation camps. They just had everyone in sensitive parts of the state apparatus re-apply for their old jobs, and in effect asked them whether they were Havel’s Greengrocer. If Havel’s Greengrocer, they got their old job back or a similar job. If not, became unemployed, and unemployable in any job within smell of power and influence.

                  I defer to your expertise on this matter.

                  If you purge everyone who was complicit in the old regime, you lose too much institutional continuity, skills, and knowledge.

                  Competent people are hard to come by, so I agree.

                  Also, if we do a thot roundup, then anyone trying to operate an old regime type society will find himself mighty short of pussy. We won’t send fertile age females away, we will embed them in patriarchal families and institutions.

                  Again, if possible, I would prefer your solution to the alternative.

                • Koanic says:

                  > Again, The Restoration did not have reeducation camps. They just had everyone in sensitive parts of the state apparatus re-apply for their old jobs, and in effect asked them whether they were Havel’s Greengrocer. If Havel’s Greengrocer, they got their old job back or a similar job. If not, became unemployed, and unemployable in any job within smell of power and influence. If you purge everyone who was complicit in the old regime, you lose too much institutional continuity, skills, and knowledge.

                  When Elijah slew the priests of Baal, he only slew the priests of Baal.

                  Similarly, when Jehu slew the priests of Baal, he only slew the priests of Baal and the deposed royal faction.

                  Moses initiated a civil war under Mt. Sinai to punish the faithless, however this reflects the severity scaling of punishment caused by Jehovah’s proximity, for which we should be thankful that He remains far away.

              • Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

                The genetic solution is elite fertility and an elite selected for intelligence and prosocial qualities, not helicopters.

                This is a good solution, longer term and better than mine, and better on a moral level as well.

              • The Cominator says:

                The right always fails to cement its power because too merciful. We should not be this time. Particularly if they push things to civil war.

                Trump 2020 – Fire and Blood

        • Steve Johnson says:

          You’re missing the point entirely.

          The state drawing a line around “this is permissible treatment of your wife” is the problem – not where the line is drawn. Don’t want your sister or daughter beaten to that point? Then make sure her husband knows that although he’s responsible for her, you still have bonds of affection and will step in if he crosses a line. Private dispute resolution works much better socially than having a big giant power granting machine available for psychopathic status maximizers to co-opt.

          • The Cominator says:

            This is what happened with Rome. Theoretically women’s husbands had absolute power over them but in practice their whole original extended family was going to kill you as a point of honor if you even slapped her not matter what she did even if they know she had it coming.

            In practice it meant not possible to discipline women, so if we want patriarchal control we need to generally discourage the father’s family from interfering in a marriage once women are married off.

            • Steve Johnson says:

              You want to discourage it socially but not formally. Having it exist is a good way to stop white knighting. “That poor woman is abused by her brutish husband” “Are you her father? Her brother? What business is it of yours?”.

              This is one of many things where exactly clear rules can’t really work but everyone has to feel each other out – men will have to come to peaceful understandings with the other men they deal with in life.

              Point taken about late Rome though.

              • The Cominator says:

                The old Anglo system is better.

                Wife beating for no good reason is socially frowned upon under normal circumstances but perfectly legal.

                BUT it is only legal up to a point, not legal if you break her bones or send her to the hospital. Also her original family is not supposed to interfere.

                You don’t want the Roman system where the wife’s blood family is going to as a point of honor kill you if you discipline her (which “dishonoured” her and therefore them, no matter how much of a bitchy lying adulterous megaslut she might have been) either.

                You want men to be able to discipline their women, but at least 99.9% of the time you don’t need to kill em you just need to hit them, the worst you should ever need to inflict is black eye. Dothead broads may be a bit different but not my concern.

          • If one of your female relatives for whom you are responsible behaves the way that any modern woman currently behaves then I will hold you solely responsible and inflict on you the punishment I would have given to her.

            • The Cominator says:

              That has the potential to spark blood feuds and such. The husband should have disciplinary power with any outside interferenced discouraged he should be the sole alpha to his wife with the power to beat her and rape her if need be…

              But the disciplinary power should have some limits.

              People (other then Arabs and such) just won’t accept their sisters and daughters beaten to death or routinely sent to the hospital by sadistic husbands so must put some limits on the power or accept that the wifes family will interfere.

              • shaman says:

                Once you give your daughter away to a husband, you don’t own her anymore, and should not stick your nose into her husband’s management of her – it’s not your business. She’s in a different clan now, and should stay with that clan permanently; excessive romantic (so to speak) attachment to one’s own progeny is apt to go very wrong, though it’s an understandable phenomenon on the mammalian level.

                So discipline her well, and choose a good husband for her.

              • jim says:

                > just won’t accept their sisters and daughters beaten to death or routinely sent to the hospital by sadistic husbands

                I am just not seeing this alleged misbehavior by husbands against faithful wives. At all. Ever.

                It makes no sense from the point of view of evolutionary psychology.

                Feminists have been looking mighty hard for a poster girl for two hundred years. Have not found one.

                When they open a battered woman’s shelter they are trawling for poster girls, and all they get is some woman who frivolously divorced her husband, handed out his children like party favors to a rapidly changing succession of men, including the gay couple she had the hots for, and was beaten up by her seventh pimp for plying her trade with too much enthusiasm.

                They have been looking for a poster girl for their story that main danger to women is old fashioned patriarchy for two centuries. No credibly old fashioned patriarch has been found.

                This reminiscent of the supposed rape crisis on campus. Thirty complaints at the university of Virginia, no disciplinary action taken in any of them. Rolling Stone went trawling for poster girls – which indicates that not only is there no rape campus on campus, but all rape complaints are false, as near to all of them as make no difference.

              • BC says:

                > People (other then Arabs and such) just won’t accept their sisters and daughters beaten to death or routinely sent to the hospital by sadistic husbands so must put some limits on the power or accept that the wifes family will interfere.

                Growing up I had a couple of friends who were half black. Their mother was a white Irish woman and their father was black. Oddly they lived together as a nuclear family until the kids where grown. It wasn’t by any means a stable relationship as both cheated on each other frequently which seemed to be a issue in the marriage (shocking).

                The wife liked to be beaten. She would do things to try and provoke the sort or reaction from her husband which I observed first had when I was a child. This wasn’t a man being violent towards his woman, this was a woman goading her Husband into violence.

                The worst instance of this came after she put a live rattlesnake in her husband’s bed. He hit her so hard that she ended up in the hospital with a broken jaw. Even then, he probably didn’t hit her full force as that would have probably killed her.

                Now I didn’t observe this, but as related by my friends she was as happy as could be for almost a year after this happened.

                I’ve never actually observed the Hollywood style sadistic husband, but I have observed multiple cases of women trying to push their men into beating them.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Attempted murder would justify a much higher level then normal of violence.

                • jim says:

                  For some women, spanking just is not enough. They want more punishment. I wish women had an off switch, like the television.

  20. Booker says:

    Reactionary delusions again I see. Try thinking about reality.

    The East India Company was not some pure free market company. It was frequently supported by government intervention yet had constant problems with finances. It lost money even at the height of its rule in 1803. That’s why the state had to take over.

    Also in real reality under Trump’s control of the DHS real change is brought home:

    “Acting Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kevin McAleenan confirmed to Congress this week that his agency is merely acting as a checkpoint for adults crossing the United States-Mexico border with children, as “100 percent” are being released into the interior of the country.

    At current rates, more than 445,000 border crossers and illegal aliens will be released into American communities by the end of the year.”


    • jim says:

      I am not unduly worried. The left wants them in to vote Democrat, but the left is also tearing down the system where votes matter.

      When Cairo was ruled by white people, it was a very nice place, even with a vast majority of low IQ Muslims. And, similarly, Rhodesia and the Belgian Congo.

      You say that if things continue on this path, we are doomed. Well, yes, if our enemies were sane, competent, and rational, we would be doomed. But even though many of our enemies are individually rational, they are collectively insane.

      Our real problem is not a flood of low IQ migrants brought in to live on crime and welfare. Our real problem is low elite quality (it is amazing how many dumbasses MIT gives computer science degrees these days) low elite reproduction, and dysgenic fertility – the woman problem.

      Our current technology for social control, killing people, and breaking stuff favors a system more similar to thirteenth century English feudalism. I hope, rather, to get to the seventeenth century social and political order, seventeenth century social technology, which is what we need to conquer the universe, but if the $#!% really hits the fan, thirteenth century social technology will be the solution, though that social technology was not good for the economy or for technology.

      • Koanic says:

        Why does it favor 13th c feudalism? The killing ratio of skilled to unskilled combatants?

        • Cuddlepie says:

          So close, Kookanic: the pretence of naivete ultimately undermined by faux-intellectualism – nice try, though!

        • shaman says:

          Now that even Anglin mocked both Qanon and pizzagate in the same post, insinuating that they are little more than propaganda schemes, how does it feel, Kookanic?

          • pdimov says:

            Koanic follows VD’s “big tent” approach. Never mock conspiracy theories as it would drive parts of your potential audience away.

            “Ancient Aliens” does the same thing. They always mention – if only in passing – all kinds of ridiculous theories and never outright disprove them.

            • Starman says:

              “Ancient Astronaut Theorists say…”

            • shaman says:

              Never mock conspiracy theories as it would drive parts of your potential audience away.

              Yes, you’re right – that’s his strategy.

              The opposite, minimalist approach would be to automatically reject all of them, or all of them that can’t be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt, which naturally can’t be all too many. Given the alt-right’s track record of falling for an endless succession of hoaxes and pranks, from a purely cost-benefit analysis it might be more beneficial to take this route, even at the risk of disregarding genuine conspiracies. No, I don’t expect this idea to gain popularity any time soon, and obviously I glow in the dark like a f**king lava lamp myself, so pay no attention to this ridiculous suggestion.

              Notably, however, old conspiracy theories had an obvious humorous effect, e.g. the Ancient Aliens you mention. The problem with the post-2015 crop is that none of them is even particularly funny. That the moon landing was faked in a Hollywood studio, Paul McCarthy died and was replaced by a lookalike with much inferior musical skills, and Area 51 had little grey extraterrestrials – these all had elements that can be easily incorporated into a typical Jewish dweeb comedy series.

              There’s a bitter irony when people’s thinking goes, “Sure, all the previous generations believed absolutely insane things – but our wise conspiracy theories are clearly logically consistent and hold up to empirical scrutiny.” Yeah, ummm.

              It must be common enough to start out believing in all the mainstream conspiracies, and after several years of investigation, believing none of them. Pro-tip: if you rely on either the mainstream media or the organized conspiracy community for your tinfoil, you’re doing it wrong.

              “Wait, so what is there left to rely on? If the mainstream media wouldn’t dare or even be able to touch real conspiracies, and the organized conspiracy community acts as a kaleidoscope of controlled opposition distractions, then there’s no way to uncover the real conspiracies.”

              The cynical pessimist in me would answer: Right, you can only rely on the occasional screw-up and the occasional whistle-blower, and sometimes not even on that.

              But the more cheerful take is that it actually is possible to uncover some of the real conspiracies, but: only if you’re intelligent enough (IQ<130 can't uncover anything) and possess healthy non-schizo reality testing — these would be the preliminary conditions, without which your enterprise is abortively futile — and only by paying attention to the revealed behavior of interested parties, rather than to speculative "dot connection."

              For instance, the revealed behavior of USG, particularly DoS, is to constantly seek to shift blame away from Cathedral proxies, and unto those who supposedly mistreat them; thus you should assume that USG employs shills to spread disinformation that "just so happens" to paint Cathedral proxies in a positive light, and their supposed persecutors negatively. Here's a real conspiracy theory, which coincidentally you can find on Jim's blog, but not on Above Top Secret.

              If Moldbug had a post about conspiracy theories, that's exactly what he would tell you: Forget about random dot connection; "the fish rots from the head down," and to decipher just which pieces of chess the master's hand may be moving, one must first locate the head of the serpent. (Sorry for mixing my metaphors)

              According to this rule of thumb, you can outright disregard the bulk of modern tinfoil theories, because they invariably posit that the head of the serpent must reside among spell-chanting black-robed sinister cultists whose maniacal cackle would make Dr. Evil blush, rather than among "decent" people who are sincerely convinced that they alone are the paragons and standard bearers of goodness and virtue.

              In other words: the scary thing is not that Obama and Hillary destroyed the planet after supposedly having performed fellatio and cunnilingus on kidnapped immigrant newborns, who were then ritually cannibalized in a ceremonial feast — a veritable Black Mass — featuring Kissinger and Rockefeller and Zuckerberg, but that they destroyed the planet while considering themselves to be morally upstanding. The scary thing, the truly politically incorrect idea, is that it’s not unspeakable monstrosity, but excessive holiness, that drowns the world in blood.

              It’s a forbidden thought-crime, because if you notice that it’s not hardcore motherfuckers who embroil themselves in shady and spooky businesses, but well respected members of the Brahmin class; and that their motives are priestly (they are “good people”), and not something out of Dante’s Inferno, then you may well become a Neo-Reactionary; next thing you’ll suggest that “We are always ruled by warriors or priests, and currently we are ruled by the latter,” oh my!

              Anyway, let’s go back to the topic of conspiracy analysis.

              As of now, the only recent conspiracy theories that I’m willing to believe — which is not to say that I fully buy into them — are that the periodic Assad gas attacks are a false flag, and that British Intelligence has something to do with the Skripal poisonings. Notice that these specific two did not originate on 4chan. In both instances, the motive — while superficially militaristic — can also be interpreted as fundamentally priestly. How come?

              Well, regarding the first instance, I assert that the Five Eyes agencies are not “tricked by Mossad” but, if anything, inclined towards Arabism (surely they have a copy of Edward Said’s “Orientalism,” one of the worst books ever written; in other words, “Behead those who insult the Prophet, whose name is Thomas Friedman”), and really are stupid enough to think that Arab Muslims can assimilate into Prog democracy.

              According to this explanation, CIA and MI6 want to demonize Assad not because they are full of unhinged neocon war-mongers allied with Israel, but because they are full of leftists who love Arabs so much that they want them to “enjoy our freedoms,” even when the results are, to put it mildly, less than stellar. I believe this post makes that very point.

              As for the Skripal thing, I dunno – seems to me that the Cathedral’s hatred for Vladimir Putin has a direct positive (if you pardon the upcoming pun) correlation with Putin’s attempts to liberate his nation from the poz. Why else would he be “the New Hitler”? By the way, Xi Jinping is also a New Hitler, as is Donald Trump.

              (But then again, here I’m not convinced that it was a false flag, not least because all the manifold false flag narratives contradict each other: they range from “Skripal was ordered by his handlers to poison himself, and MI6 gave him an antidote,” to “He became a triple agent, and was planning to go back to Russia to expose some dirty dealings, so MI6 sought to silence him, but botched the execution,” to “It all started as a drug overdose,” and so forth. If anyone here has conclusively made up his mind about this affair, feel free to educate me on it)

              Be that as it may, Jim’s worldview provides a sufficient (or at least mighty plausible) explanatory causation for why these things are happening: leftists are running the show, and leftists want to bring Progress and Enlightenment to all 4 corners of our flat, turtle-supported, 6,000-year-old Earth. Everything else is a distraction, and regardless of the nitty-gritty details of this or that affair, the overall power center is unequivocally the intellectual Brahmin class, preoccupied as it is in its acceleratory holiness spiral, and not the soldierly Vaisya class.

              (By the way, “How do you do fellow nutters, let me tell you something: Steven Paddock was left-handed and had attached earlobes, therefore he must’ve been a psychopathic pedophile extorted by the deep state” was a hilarious, if peculiar, way of mocking both the phrenologists in the crowd and the modern Satanic Panic enthusiasts)

              Run of the mill tinfoil has not only been discredited whenever close examination thereof has been instigated, it also has been rendered politically obsolete by the NRx substitution of the “cultists cackling in the dark” narrative with the much more erudite and facts-compatible “enlightened progressive intellectual priests fiercely competing for superior holiness status” narrative. If you grasp that, it should become obvious why Kookanic deserves to be bullied off the internet and into Bigfoot’s haunted forest.

              • BC says:

                >Steven Paddock

                There’s something really odd about the Steven Paddock story, but the reality about it is likely to be something mundane like paid FBI informant/CIA ops plane flyer. Which unsurprising the actual conspiracy theories all seem to track right away from the FBI and CIA, almost like the FBI or CIA are planting the conspiracy theories to cover up their own crimes and embarrassments. Either which way, it’s not worth the time digging into to.

                • shaman says:

                  I’ve been digging deep into Paddock.

                  My conclusion is that, like “-john” on 4chan, he was perfectly aware that in May, 2017, ISIS had threatened to do the derka-derka in Vegas (presumably on 9/11), so he deliberately timed his action close enough to September to cause Islam-related confusion; recall that everyone’s initial assumption was that Mohammedans did it. Clearly intentional.

                  His acquaintances, and a prostitute of whose services he regularly availed himself, have claimed repeatedly that he was a fanatical troofer — chemtrails, 9/11 stuff, FEMA camps, the whole bit — with more than a few screws loose, and one of them recounted that Paddock had desperately wanted to prove to the world the veracity of troofism; that suggests that everything he’s done was intended to maximize the impression that this is a psyop, including e.g. the vanished hard drive from one of his two computers. Incidentally, the second computer contained CP, which fact proved useful in trolling 8chan.

                  Immediately after the shooting, there appeared a bunch of people who made various weird, unverifiable, or outright false claims: that a random Hispanic woman had hysterically screamed “You’re all gonna die!” right before the event (unlikely); that there were simultaneous shootings in multiple other locations in Las Vegas (absolute rubbish); that suspicious people on motorcycles were spotted fleeing the scene (ambiguous), and so forth.

                  The brouhaha exacerbated when an old neighbor of Paddock went on Michael Savage’s radio show and opined, “It looks like a set-up.” Moreover, Stephen’s brother, Eric Paddock, always behaves like a coke-snorting lunatic in all the interviews he gives; this has provided us with numerous lulzy moments, and it instantly ignited the “crisis actor” speculations among the usual anons. Paddock’s other two brothers also happen to be criminals. That makes it four fucked up sons, apparently born to a “most wanted” heavy criminal father.

                  Basically: a whole lot of noise; very little useful signal. Pertinently, the FBI’s inability to produce a clear-cut open-and-shut motive soon enough (or, we now know, at all) greatly fueled the tinfoil’s excitement. By the time a final timeline of the event has been settled on, Paddock’s probable mission — disseminating troofism far and wide — had already been achieved.

                  Still, is there a “smoking gun” or inexplicably exceptional oddity in all of it, solidly tying the event to spooks? The evidence accumulated so far suggests otherwise. It’s a case that I’ve investigated pretty well; the details are still fresh in my mind. If anyone wants to present a compelling argument for it being anything other than a whackjob snapping out, let’s talk about it.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I do not know what the real LV story is I only know the real story is bullshit. Officially he was a “professional video poker player” impossible only suckers buck the tiger and nobody can make a living as a sucker if one lie more lies.

                • shaman says:

                  I’m open to the possibility that the real circumstances of the event have not been disclosed by law enforcement. What interests me is a counter-narrative to the official narrative.

                  The story as reported on by the mainstream media is that “a bizarre and abrasive old man, psychiatrically treated for anxiety, who used to regularly hang around similarly disreputable individuals, has been suffering a prolonged mental break down for several years, eventually culminating in him committing a terrible mass shooting.”

                  I’ve seen no indication that it’s not the case, or that “the spooks did it.” At any rate, here’s what Wikipedia (which, as we’ve established, is far from reliable) says about his career:

                  Paddock worked as a letter carrier for the U.S. Postal Service from 1976 to 1978. After that, he worked as an Internal Revenue Service agent until 1984. He was a Defense Contract Audit Agency auditor for one year, in 1985. Toward the end of the 1980s, Paddock worked for three years as an internal auditor for a company that later merged to form Lockheed Martin.[19] He is known to have run a real-estate business with his brother Eric.[20]

                  Paddock lived in the Greater Los Angeles Area and owned personal property in Panorama City, Cerritos, and North Hollywood from the 1970s to early 2000s.[19][9] He also owned two apartment buildings in Hawthorne, California. In addition, he owned an apartment complex in Mesquite, Texas, which he sold in 2012.[9]

                  Relatives said Paddock was worth at least US$2 million when he sold off the real-estate business.[21][22] Among his most profitable investments was an apartment complex purchased in 2004, which gave him more than $500,000 in annual income by 2011. IRS records show he made $5–6 million in profits from its sale in 2015.[23]

                  Paddock was an avid gambler,[24] and although the extent to which he profited from it is not clear, his reported gambling winnings might have been substantial.[23][25] He was sometimes seen in high-limit rooms, but he was not well known among high-stakes gamblers in Las Vegas and was not considered a “whale” (high roller) by the casinos.[26] His game of choice was video poker, which he had played for over 25 years.[26][27] He usually gambled after dark and slept during the day; he disliked being out in the sun.[28]

                  Assuming this is all correct, I see no reason to believe that he couldn’t have been pissing away lots of money on video poker, while still having plenty more to spare. A multimillionaire, as his brother described him, could afford that. If Wikipedia is not lying through its teeth here, then the official story holds up. If not, why not?

              • pdimov says:

                >That the moon landing was faked in a Hollywood studio

                Note that VD pretends to believe this. (I’m fairly sure that it’s just a pretense.) We can infer that the belief is prevalent among his audience and he doesn’t want to challenge it.

                I’m not entirely sure whether Koanic copies the pretense of belief, or, being slightly less verbally transcendent, goes all the way and believes. Whatever. Believers sometimes have interesting things to say (Texas Arcane, for instance.)

                >As for the Skripal thing

                The circumstances of Dawn Sturgess’s death strongly confirm the official story.

                • jim says:

                  I think Koanic believes whatever is handy to believe – for much the same motives as VD pretends to believe.

                • Zach says:

                  VD probably doubts the moon landing. Not buying the meta explanations. He talked about this recently – maybe a month ago?

                • shaman says:

                  Zach, you just don’t get VD’s stratospheric, interstellar, intergalactic, multi-dimensional IQ. When Darklord Larpalot spoketh the following in April, 2019:

                  I haven’t believed in the veracity of the Moon landings ever since seeing the interview with the Apollo astronauts. And, of course, I always reject every Official Story endorsed by the U.S. government on principle, because it has always – ALWAYS – proven to be less than entirely true for one reason or another.

                  He could only have been (to borrow the words of another intellectual giant, Kookanic, a truly formidable Gulliver among us miserly cognitive Lilliputs) “sub-communicating with a specific audience,” namely that of prospective co-conspirators in the Upsidownosphere.

                  The signal has been transmitted!

                  But wait, why stop there? It is the Official Story of the U.S. Government that nukes are real. As such, it logically follows that nuclear weapons are simply a big fat nothingburger of a hoax. It all makes sense now. Indeed, the entire US army is a Potemkin Village; the tanks are like balloons, inflated with helium.


                  Once again, VD proves that by paying close attention to interviews, be it those of John Kasich, astronauts, parents of school shooting victims, and so on, you can ascertain in, well, no-uncertain terms, that… things are not as they seem.


                • shaman says:

                  The circumstances of Dawn Sturgess’s death strongly confirm the official story.


                  Also, the alternative explanations — e.g., that the counterfeit Nina Ricci perfume bottle was deliberately planted by British Intelligence to reinforce the official narrative, or maybe negligently discarded because the British agents were just totally unprofessional and outright oblivious to the prospect of endangering civilians with Novichok poisoning — do not seem to stand up to scrutiny, and are overly convoluted. Underwhelming stuff.

                  Yeah, I guess this one can rather safely be marked off the list of plausibly real conspiracies.

              • eternal anglo says:

                shaman = jewish pedophile = Roberto?

                • shaman says:

                  Have I made mistakes? Sure. However, the bottom line and the crucial point is that we share a worldview, re: that all political strategies may be morally permissible if they ultimately serve to increase the odds of unlocking an exponentially intensifying bio-singularitarian positive feedback loop; or as you termed it: “techno-eugenic takeoff.”

                  Most of the rest of what I’ve been up to, with the notable exception of my 100% sincere and fanatical advocacy of normal male sexuality, is just boredom-defying theater and buffoonery; clownishness in clown world – and c’est tout.

                • Nikolai says:

                  I thought Roberto was a different guy, but now that you mention it, they both write the occasional effortpost and have both perfected the art of the diss track.

        • shaman says:

          I mean, the guy knows how to satirize your brain dead ideas, doesn’t he?

          Trump Orders More Troops to the Middle East to Expose Pizzagate

          I could try to explain how this is part of a 57-dimensional chess plan to retrieve the Pizzagate documents being hoarded by the Ayatollah, but you wouldn’t understand.

          But you will see: after the war with Iran, when the cache of documents on child rapists being held by the Iranians (who are also elite deep state pedophiles themselves) are exposed, Trump will finally pull the rug out from under the globalists.

          The Iranian threats are kept secret because he can’t let his enemies in the deep state know when he’s planning to expose them. If they find out, they’ll move their stash of kidnapped children to a new pizza place.

          The actual purpose of the troops is to get “attacked” by Iran. John Bolton and Mike Pompeo are planning to stage a fake attack on American troops, which will allow them to bypass the Democrats so they can invade Iran to retrieve the secret documents showing the locations of the underground pizza tunnels.

          Because you know why Obama did the Iran deal, right?

          He sent John Kerry over there to oversee the digging of underground tunnels to smuggle children through so they could be used in the sacrifices. That’s why Trump pulled out of the deal – he was stopping pedophiles.

          Sure, the Iranians are the ones escalating as you move huge military deployments to surround them. Send in troops to prove to them you don’t want war.

          Trump is almost too smart to comprehend.

          The whole world believes that Iran is the one doing the threatening, while they are actually trying to deescalate the situation, because they want to protect Hillary Clinton’s child sacrifice room, located beneath a pizza shop in Tehran.


          Just trust the plan.

          The deep state is on the verge of finally being exposed.

          Once we uncover the Iranian pizza tunnels, Hillary Clinton will have nowhere to hide.

          Trust the plan.

          To borrow a phrase from peppermint: “when all of this is over,” you will see whose assessment of reality was the truthful one. In the meanwhile, Kookanic, you’ll keep spreading your dangerous and counterproductive hoaxes, of course. But mark my words: you won’t win, and your game will massively backfire.

  21. pyrrhus says:

    The entire West has become a virtue signaling competition, with minorities being given elevated status… Merit is disregarded and even disparaged as white or Asian privilege…The hidden benefit of this state of affairs is that people are gradually learning to ignore credentials and status, correctly assuming that, as in the case of fake Harvard student Jared Kushner, those credentials are probably a result of bribery or connections.

  22. Grand Inquisitor Bob says:

    My nation is being looted by boomers and (certain) Jews with the blessing of our politicians at a rate that will turn us into a third world client state within a matter of years. I know this is not really related to this article, and probably not what you want to hear given your age bracket and affiliations, but you need be aware of the situation on the ground.

  23. Frederick Algernon says:

    Fascinating piece, Jim. It would be very interesting to read a book documenting martial actions such as this, wherein the leadership basically sets up the enterprise to fail.

  24. alf says:

    To get this straight (correct me if wrong).

    The favoring in power of Shah Shoudjah-ool-Moolk happens at the turn of the 19th century, around 1800, when Europe is in turmoil because leftism took off explosively in France.

    In England, King Charles II and his Royal Society are hundred and fifty years in the past (1660 – 1685). The recent past is King George II (1727 – 1760), who slept with his aristocrats’ wives.

    The events involving Shah Shoudjah happened under the watch of George III (1760 – 1820), who lost the American colonies. From what I gather, George III also lost the struggle for power with parliament.

    After George III comes George IV, but from hereon the monarch has become a figurehead and England cares more about faraway strangers than its own people.

    • jim says:

      Restoration, Charles the second in 1660.

      Royal Society immediately created by Charles the Second, raising the status of the scientific method.

      In 1661 Robert Boyle in “The Sceptical Chymist” argues not only the scientific method but for social enforcement of the scientific method. You are not supposed to say “Everyone knows such and such is true”. You are supposed to say “So and so tells us he saw such and such”.

      1660 to 1670 status, power, wealth, and social acceptability of corporations making money improves markedly. Notably King Charles the Second gives the East India Company power to make war and peace, and to enforce justice. It becomes legitimate for a corporation to be an instrument for getting rich, though it still has to get rich by pursuing the specific profitable activity for which it was chartered.

      Before 1750, “whig” was a reference to an out of power religious faction descended from the puritans, who like the left keep changing their name, because whatever name they employed mysteriously develops a bad smell. History has very recently been rewritten to give the whigs ancient and glorious origins in the Glorious Revolution, which is a barefaced lie.

      In 1750 this treasonous and hostile religious faction infiltrated the corridors of power. In 1760 King George the Third ascended the throne, and like Trump, faced chronic treason and obstruction. He almost immediately got started on freeing his regime from whigs, but really did not do a very good or thorough job of it.

      George the Third faced Whig Treason, notably lord Howe supplying George Washington with gunpowder and using tactics that seemed aimed at getting his own men killed rather than defeating George Washington, and responded weakly to it.

      Then, unfortunately, he went mad, leading to the regency, rule by his fatass adulterous son George the Fourth, who was too damned lazy to be effectual. With the failed divorce of King George the fourth, women got license to cuckold their husbands and demand continuing economic support.

      In 1820 under King George the Fourth, we see women left off the leash. It becomes socially acceptable to allow virgins out because everyone knows they would never sleep with bad boys, and being cuckolded is the husband’s fault.

      In 1840, under Queen Victoria, the East India Company, in a fit of holiness, supports Shah Shoudjah-ool-Moolk for the throne of Afghanistan. The entire expedition gets killed man woman and child. Death to those with good intentions! For good intentions towards far away strangers are always a mask for the destruction of people whose destruction you would have difficulty openly justifying.

      In 1853, Whigs attempt to lose the Crimean war and murder their troops in order to lower the status of warriors, attempting to repeat their successful murderous and treasonous activities of the American Revolution. The Tories win the war, defeating both Russia externally and the Whigs internally, but the Whigs set about successfully lowering the status of warriors anyway. Camp followers such as Florence Nightingale are put in uniform and called warriors and military logistics was insourced.

      If you think that insourcing logistics was a response to military necessity and practicality rather than an attack on warrior status, ask yourself why military logistics has been outsourced for the past few thousand years, and ask yourself why you have heard of Florence Nightingale and not heard of the Highlanders marching into Kerch.

      That should tell you that camp followers came to be designated soldiers and put in uniform as an attack on the status of warriors by priests, not a rational military reorganization made for military reasons, just as the fact that you have heard of Madame Curie but have no idea who made the similar, but vastly more important, discovery of radon should tell you that women scientists are not scientists.

  25. Mister Grumpus says:

    Thank you for another convincing “rot example” that has no Jewish characters. Really. These data points help keep me sane. No one in my ghetto is doing these but you.

    Maybe it’s just my brainstem perceiving danger and looking to escape, but I still suspect that the Stormer, et al, might be some kind “Troofer Elite” operation, embellishing and echo-polishing cherry-picked facts to groom my dumb ass into some Useful Idiotry.

    Comments welcome as always.

    • Koanic says:

      They are sincere and sincerely persecuted. Jewish power is real, it’s just not the whole story. Few people can grasp the range of major causal abstractions at play during current events. Given the prominent Jewish role in destroying the European genetic heartland, it’s difficult to argue that their vehemence is unwarranted.

      • Mister Grumpus says:

        > Few people can grasp the range of major causal
        > abstractions at play during current events.

        I don’t consider myself one of these few people. For my benefit, please close your eyes and brainstorm a “top-10” of said causal abstractions here. Just the “marquee titles” would be fine. Maybe some I’ve never even heard of, in which case I’ll get to work on searching-up the first-cut “For Dummies” elaborations on each.

        • Koanic says:

          That sounds like a fun read, but I don’t want to do it. A helpful cognitive policy, I’ve found, is to avoid generalization not dictated by a specific context. This reduces accumulation of cognitive errors due to arbitrary elision.

        • alf says:

          Grumpus, you’re not supposed to ask for specifics, merely to consider yourself as a person who doesn’t understand, or to consider the person mentioning the ‘major causal abstractions’ as one who does understand 😉

          • shaman says:

            The thing with Kookanic is, if he actually came out and declared:

            “Guys, for over a decade now I’ve been working on a complex, intricate, sophisticated, mentally sisyphean, cognitively taxing, very long-term, high-risk and high-reward, carefully crafted and expertly executed, IQ>155 plan to fucking terminate USG once and for all. Part of my plan involves making an utter ass of myself by leading a movement of completely deluded schizophrenics convinced that they are Neanderthals, Melon Heads, etc., and also spreading cheap conspiracy theories picked from 4chan on my Gab account, and suchlike and so forth. Yes, I am a clown in this clown world of ours, but it’s all perfectly strategic and calculated, trust me. The end-result of this Master Psyop will be great, and you’ll all deeply thank me when it comes to fruition, in 2040 or so.”

            Then we could consider the notion. If he’s actually so intelligent, that’s definitely within the realm of possibility. I mean, if you were IQ>155 (perhaps you are), you would probably design something like that, right? (Perhaps you did) At the very least, if he were really so bright, he would be able to excuse all the retarded things he says by reminding us that “It’s all part of the plan, no worries; I’m not actually a crazy dipshit.”

            But he says nothing of the kind. There’s no indication that he doesn’t believe his own bullshit. Therefore, Occam’s Razor is that he really is a mere crank.

          • shaman says:

            And just to give you one small example — out of a veritable galaxy of such cases — why I hold him in absolute disdain and consider him intellectually worthless, take the issue of Neanderthals and sexuality.

            If you go search the web, you’ll find endless well-researched articles about the Neanderthals being sexually promiscuous and high-testosterone, relative to homo sapiens. This is the consensus among virtually all those who seriously studied the matter, and makes perfect sense given the Neanderthals’ suicidal openness to sex with other hominids, as well as their high muscle tone and robust bone structure, not to mention their relatively short life-spans which could only have entailed a high time-preference reproductive strategy.

            Well, one of Kookanic’s “greatest epiphanies” was that the Neanderthals were — you’ll never guess — K-selected compared to homo sapiens, and that therefore they must have been less prone to sexual promiscuity! Yeah, some +3SD cognition right there; wow what an amazing insight, totally, totally smarter than all the rest of the world combined. Facts and logic can henceforward go straight to hell: Kookanic has an axe to grind about how he’s such a special snowflake whizz kid, and he certainly won’t allow empirical evidence, and basic rationality, to disabuse him of his self-obsessed notions.

            It’s tiresome.

            • Steve Johnson says:

              Anyone who talks about r vs K in a context other than racial / ethnic differences is a liar or a fool. Anyone who denies its import in the context of race is also a liar or a fool.

              • Gordon Freeman says:

                R^K is a mathematical model with letters and punctuation, and you think with it you’re insulting n’s, but in the 50’s W’s reproduced faster than n’s while George Jetson said with a smile he was raising a family of beatniks, beatniks being Jetson’s contemporaries the parents of Ned Flanders, Jetson was actually raising hippies, as Boomers thought they were raising hippies when they were raising trannies. The Civil Rights was predicated on the assumption that demographic trends would continue, but R^K has you thinking that “she a good girl she gwine college finna turn she life aroun” is an intrinsic fact about our people to be celebrated.
                Back when engineering was popular, people talked about schematics and Tab A and Slot B. In a few decades, people will drop the R^K, but not before insulting leftoids by calling them the slow selecty thingy.

                • Gordon Ramsey says:

                  By the way peppermint, where do you stand on the NQ (Neanderthal Question)?

            • alf says:

              I guess my position on Koanic is that he is a bit of what the Dutch would call a ‘praatjesmaker’, a ‘talk-maker’, which is a euphemism for conman. But, sometimes he says interesting stuff. I dunno. As long as our host has no major beef, I have no major beef.

              • shaman says:

                (Jim, you may want to retrieve the comment I left here that’s been spam filtered by WordPress)

              • shaman says:

                Again, if Kookanic said, “All I’ve been doing so far is part of a genius strategy. Moreover, my pseudo-scientific writings are primarily humorous,” then what we’re seeing might be excusable.

                When Kookanic strongly argues that Bigfoot is real, amidst a bunch of other sheer psychoses, it is hysterically amusing – right until it dawns on you that he isn’t joking at all. Then it becomes pathetic, and you realize that you’re dealing with someone whose self-description as “neuro-divergent” is a wild understatement.

                As someone remarked somewhere, “Nuts.”

                Edit: two failed attempts to link to the post where Kookanic argues that Bigfoot is real and other madness. Welp, no link then; use your search engine to verify this claim.

                • alf says:

                  If Koanic wants to argue that Bigfoot is real over here, by all means. I’m sure we’ll have lots of lulz.

                • shaman says:

                  Exactly so, Alf. I want to have these conversations. I’m extremely bored lol, and I’m trying to trigger this guy into dropping the hydrogen comedy bombs here – alas, to no avail.

                • jim says:

                  My assessment of Koanic is that he is high functioning crazy – nuts, but not so transparently nuts that he cannot get midwits to take him seriously. Tends to associate with other nuts. Poor reality testing, and hangs out with people who also have poor reality testing.

                  The proofs of Q Anon are a dribble of madness, and they impressed him, but when I asked him to find a proof that was persuasive, he rapidly realized that none of them were persuasive – he can be sane when pressured to be sane.

                • Koanic says:

                  I realized no such thing. It is exactly as I said – I will get to it if it serves my interests to do so, but right now my queue is full. I think doing a Qanon apologetics for skeptics would make a good PR stunt. The only thing that surprised me is that someone hadn’t already made it easy.

                • jim says:

                  If a proof for Q Anon existed, it would be in the form of a link, and you would have that link at your fingertips.

                  If Q Anon was the real thing, the proof would exist, and the link would exist.

                • Koanic says:

                  To be clear, I’m reserving the Qanon proof to do under my real name, to support a separate project. The two names will get linked sooner or later, but in the meantime it defeats my interests to do it here. The whole point of Qanon is to get his stuff to get mainstream, so it belongs under my mainstream name. It’s the kind of thing that can appeal to normies, and should be aimed at them for maximum effect.

                • jim says:


                  If there was a Q Anon proof, everyone would know it, just as if there was a flying saucer proof, everyone would know it.

                  If Q Anon truly was an insider, he would have inside information that was unexpected, yet proved to be true.

                  He does not. As with flying saucers and Uri Geller, the immense pile of dubious evidence reveals the absence of genuine evidence.

                • Cuddlepie says:

                  So regularly taking the time to post abject garbage that no one interacts with on Jim’s blog is of high rank in your queue. You must be working on some groundbreaking stuff.

                • Cuddlepie says:

                  A person generally comments here to either add to the conversation because of their expertise or ask a question because of their lack of expertise. It is obvious Koanic has no expertise or insight to share on any topic of any importance or relevance to this blog (perhaps with the exception of the OT). Yet, he never asks a question or seeks confirmation that a certain hypothesis of his is true, rather, he posts comments with the frame of his opinion being wholly valid and true – that he is an expert.

                  He does not respond to criticism, and has been observably wrong about every topic he has tried his hand at. When asked to justify a belief he states he does not have the time (highly dubious considering his time spent commenting arrant nonsense here and his extreme social isolation).

                  What motivates such a man? A desperate need for attention (so much so that he has self-doxed) and to be worshipped (the creation of a cult with himself as the leader and styling himself the Neanderthal Moses).

                  Koanic is a man beyond redemption – redemption requires the ability to recognise ones errors, and to repent of the behaviour that led to it, something Koanic is observably wholly incapable of doing.

                  Truly satanic. Little wonder he feels a kindred spirit with glosoli.

                • shaman says:

                  TardMoses’ cult of personality is predicated on his insatiable need for affirmation of his brilliance; he desperately wants his identities to be associated with genius, and is willing to sign off on anything — Bigfoot, Annunaki, Qanon, whatever — that he deems to have a potential audience. Also, he’s trying to recruit fellow high-functioning nutters by proposing that INTJs (or high IQ introverts) may really be Neanderthals, so they should all dox themselves to him, to get “typed.”

                  These are typical con-artist tricks. And as con-artists always do when the business reaches its cul-de-sac: he moves on to his next targets by re-inventing and re-branding his entire worldview. Notice that he uses different platforms to sell completely dissimilar “products”: on Gab and Twitter, he is a prolific Jew-obsessed wignat; on the Edenist Altrugenics forum, he’s all about saving the Neanderthal genotype from extinction by promoting his idiosyncratic brand of phrenology; here, he is a Sola Scriptura fundie and “Christian Identity” sympathizer; and so on and so forth.

                  I guess it’s false to suggest that he’s simply a dumbass. Rather, while he has a weak grip over reality itself, while he is delusional and egomaniacal, nevertheless he more-or-less successfully uses Machiavellian tactics to extract as much as he can from his followers: gratification of his self-esteem, personal information, fame which can be leveraged to expand his outreach, or whatever else he needs at the moment. When these behaviors are pointed out, he instantly feigns humility, but that mask keeps slipping every time he lets his delusions of grandeur determine his interactions with other people, which is all too often.

                  For him, objective truth is absolutely irrelevant and an inconvenience (thus, associating critique of USG with Bigfoot is no big deal); what matters to him, as he is reluctantly forced to admit here, is “Public Relations.” He will support each and every kook idea if he thinks that he can self-promote thereby, and will just as easily discard of those kook ideas that seem to no longer serve a self-promotional purpose; thereafter, he will cynically pretend that he never supported them in the first place. The only thing that really matters to Kookanic is Kookanic, and consequently, he will LARP as best he can to sell the Kookanic product — whatever it may be at the moment — to his unwitting deception victims.

                  All his political aspirations and intrigues ultimately revolve around his craving for recognition. Anonymity is absolute anathema to such people; as far as he’s concerned, whenever he does something — e.g., producing implausible apologetics for the latest fleeting madness — the world must be made aware that “Kookanic is behind this.”

                  He vehemently desires credit, and will do any unscrupulous and intellectually dishonest deed to get it; first and foremost: compromising on his ideological integrity by pushing every random kook bait out there, retarded and insane as it may be, and a few original ones on top of it; and concocting the most scholastic arguments possible for the existence of various wholly imaginary phenomena, like his Scientology-inspired “billion-year planetary terraformers” and suchlike; it’s schizophrenia made manifest, disguised as esoteric wisdom and articulated with deliberate obscurantism – but midwits do, unfortunately, buy into it.

                  Well, he sought attention, so now he has only earned it fair and square. Ultimately, Jim’s assessment is the most precise. Kookanic is a high functioning nut.

                • pdimov says:

                  >the Qanon proof

                  I don’t know if Posobiec’s article has been posted: http://archive.is/Ia93v

                  Interesting that it’s been deleted from OANN though.

                • jim says:

                  There is a reddit dedicated to disproving Q

                  But disproof is the wrong approach. We should demand proof, and not be contented with confident announcements that proof exists elsewhere and everyone agrees that what is elsewhere constitutes proof.

                • A.B Prosper says:

                  Koanic is a weird dude with some even weirder theories but his belief in Bigfoot is not part and parcel to that.

                  Many cryptids fall well within the realm of hard science possibility and Sasquatch is certainly one of them.

                  I can’t say the same for Koanic’s human speciation extrapolations though.

                • shaman says:

                  Koanic is a weird dude with some even weirder theories but his belief in Bigfoot is not part and parcel to that.

                  It’s all together. Had he stuck to 2 or 3 well-formulated non-random crackpot theories, ones that he had come up with independently (as can be expected from someone whose IQ is 145+) rather than picked off 4chan or Tex/Vox, then it would have been possible to find merit in his activism.

                  A big part of the problem is that he’s a cognitive sloth, so he bothers neither to research whether or not his auditory and visual hallucinations make sense, nor to provide a coherent explanation of what he even believes in – I don’t expect him to spoonfeed the crowd, but at least to produce a succinct “Kookanic 101.”

                  Is it wrong to expect someone who claims to be IQ 145+ not to be “all over the place” regarding his beliefs? If he said, “My brain is made of soft pudding – I am not a serious intellectual,” then it would be possible to treat him as a jolly ol’ fool. But no, he acts very earnest about his supposedly superior mental faculties, despite literally proposing that women have inherited their boobs from boars.

                  I’m not even mocking him for being a dipshit; what bothers me is that he has the audacity to insult the smarts of his intellectual superiors with no sense of self-awareness, as if it’s obvious to everyone that “Anyone who disagrees with me is a midwit, a gamma, and must be envious of my wisdom.” Like his mentors, his Dunning-Kruger is completely off the charts, and also like his mentors, he actually projects his Dunning-Kruger onto all his detractors.

                  And as if that wasn’t abhorrent enough, he also exhibits a callous and calculating ability to manipulate his fans into seeing in him qualities that he doesn’t possess whatsoever and consequently to get sucked and suckered into his psychologically-paralyzing orbit of stark kookery. No less of a con-artist than Larry and Morrey Haber, he spins tall tales about being X and doing Y, without recourse to any sort of facticity; he’s a serial purveyor of “just so” stories. However, unlike the fantastic Baron Munchausen, his materials aren’t even purported to be original!

                  Worse yet, he’s not even particularly funny. I mean, yes, he has his humorous moments, but — if we’re still seeking some redeeming values in him — he is overall only 1/8 of a comedian, which may or may not correspond to him being 1/8 Ashkenazi Jewish. In fact, at 14%, he’s probably slightly more Jewish than John Bolton (but less Jewish than weev, admittedly). But did that stop him from conducting LARPfest after LARPfest on Gab about how Jews are snake-like death-deserving nefarious villains who should have their babies slaughtered by the millions? No, it didn’t – his special cocktail of 1488 is very fedposty even by wignat standards. Kookanic would sneak bombs into daycares for Jewish toddlers if he could – or manipulate his followers to do so.

                  It seems that his crackpot ideas are all designed to give atomized, deracinated individuals like himself a sense of identity. He calls himself an “ingenopath” because he desperately needs to play the special snowflake about everything – in this case, it’s his neuro-atypicality; in the case of the Neanderthal spergery, it’s about explaining to himself that he isn’t just a regular Amerimutt; in the case of his 100% heretical and demonic brand of Christianity, well, spirituality-wise he needs to latch on to at least one stable thing, never mind that it’s a figment of his fervent schizophrenic imagination. (He can’t join an existing religion because fundamentally he’s a low-trust misanthrope, so he founded a cult loosely based on the Bible, with himself as its “Moses”)

                  So disdainful he is of everyone else here, that approximately 80% of his conversations are with Jim alone – he is “too good” to spend his precious time debating the commenters, whom he considers to be way beneath him; he directs his well-calibrated (but still obtuse) messaging at Jim, trying to influence or win him over to the Moon-Bark Side. He then pretends not to notice how deeply he is disrespected here, even though it’s stupendously obvious that he reads every single comment, and that all we’re saying about him is so innately logical as to count as pure mathematics.

                  And so, with all that being true, he goes out and huffs, puffs, and chaffs about biological concepts he can’t make heads or tails of, twisting himself into knots about various incoherent fantasies that haunt his diminutive mind, and with the airs and aura of a self-assured mongoloid, retches and excretes his grandiose delirium for the whole world to witness and laugh at. In the long chain of nutty notion he’s been marketing, bigfoot is perhaps indeed not the most acute example of his Mediocre Madness; it’s just a poignant reminder that he is intellectually bankrupt, as detached from reality as any a convulsing psychotic, no less eerie, and no more trustworthy.

                  Always half-baked, forever discredited, and never insightful – that’s the “Kookanic Soul.”

                • jim says:

                  > Kookanic would sneak bombs into daycares for Jewish toddlers if he could – or manipulate his followers to do so.

                  Carlylean Restorationist is probably an academic entryist – the academia equivalent of a fed shill. Kookanic, however, is not a fed, but is a genuine nutter. High functioning enough to impress the easily impressed.

                  His 1488ing is “I am holier than you”, a move characteristic of entryists, because entryists are sent in from an environment where superior holiness and purity is crucial, and so they project that onto us. But in his case, I think it is just an effort to score status points.

                  I don’t think genetic purity is particularly important. The white race, the newest and most highly evolved toward the human ecological niche of the races, evolved from a population mixing event, when neolithic middle eastern grain farmers turning into pastoralists invaded the land of European hunter gatherers turning into pastoralists. Mingling with east Asians is not going to be bad in the long run. Mingling with subsaharan Africans and the descendants of South American Indians is going to be very bad for a very long time. Mingling with Ashkenazi Jews is not going to be bad at all.

                  I, however, am, according to 23andme, am less than one percent Ashkenazi Jew, the rest all European, and descended in the male line and in the female line, from “Caspian horse herders” – their euphemism for Aryan. I am as Aryan as you can get in this age. But I am fine with my descendants being part east Asian with a touch of Ashkenazi. We will found a new race, as happened several thousand years ago.

                  As Darwin prophesied:

                  At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.

                • Koanic says:

                  > Mingling with east Asians is not going to be bad in the long run.

                  False. It will be terrible for liberty. The long nose’s independence is not a trait the short nose shares. It will also likely be bad for innovation.

                  The Boomer readiness to cede North American whiteness to various invasive races, whether Mestizo or Sino, disgusts me.

                  As for entryism, I don’t care. If I was going to join a group, I’d have joined Vox’s. They are real Christians. I seriously considered it, but I’ve never considered joining this group, if it even is one.

                • shaman says:

                  Jim, I absolutely concur with your (and Darwin’s) vision.

                  What I was trying to get at by bringing up that point was that Kookanic’s Dark Triad proclivity is not being employed in positive and constructive way; his personality is cancerous. It’s okay to be Dark Triad, and there are a whole lot of people in Neo-Reaction who are Dark Triad, but they have all learned to distinguish between reasonable targets vs. unreasonable ones.

                  Meanwhile, Kookanic thinks that toddlers in a Jewish daycare are excellent targets for bloody and gory massacre (while himself being 14% Jewish) – hurrah! In fact, it’s all the more astounding, given that for many years he’s had a Chinese girlfriend. At once a race mixer and racially mixed himself, he calls upon white Americans to instigate violent and illegal terrorist attacks on US soil in the immediate future, and while at it, to butcher Moldbug’s children — and perhaps your grandchildren — until only severed and mutilated corpses are left lying motionless on the ground.

                  That, he consider perfectly morally legitimate: “IT’S A NEANDERTHAL REVOLUTION AGAINST THE SATANIC MELON-HEADS,” that’s his line of reasoning and argumentation; that he’s utterly abominable and satanic himself doesn’t seem to register in his unfortunately non-scalped cranium.

                  Heck, most Palestinian terrorists these days are better than that; it’s often the case that a lone Palestinian attacker has the option to slay lots of unarmed Israeli Jews, but instead chooses to deliberately assault armed-to-the-teeth IDF soldiers, knowing that this can’t end very well. When a Palestinian purposely goes after an IDF soldier, despite there being unarmed Jews nearby who can be slaughtered like ducks swiftly and smoothly, that Palestinian terrorist — with his meager IQ of 85 and with his 15% Sub-Saharan African admixture — displays infinitely more honor than Kookanic, a despicable pussy and coward.

                  Zero sympathy and zero mercy for such wretches.

                • shaman says:


                  The long nose’s independence is not a trait the short nose shares. It will also likely be bad for innovation.

                  Interesting. Did you tell that to your non-Westernized, non-English-speaking, non-Christian, Chinese girlfriend?

                  My girlfriend watches a lot of Chinese television with an on-demand streaming program called PPS. This is great for me. But I also wanted to shape her mind. So I got her a Sony e-reader, which was a huge hit. I’m having her read the Chronicles of Narnia to improve her written English and also indoctrinate her in basic Christianity, thus killing multiple birds with one stone.

                  Lol. As you once wrote here:

                  Hypocrisy, thy name is Hebrew.

                  So, so true.

                • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

                  Unlike our forebears, we do not have the luxury of 10,000+ years of selection mechanism ironing out kinks and bringing out the best (or at least non-bad) to invent a new people; rather, we are currently benefiting from that luxury.

                  Miscegenation is something that causes trouble right now when it happens (not the least of which in the being that is produced as a result), and if anyone gets to benefit from 10,000+ more years of selection mechanism ironing out kinks and bringing out the best (or at least non-bad), better to not be a cuck and hand over existential priority to blood less your blood.

              • shaman says:

                Before you go all, “Get out, shaman. There’s only so much nonsense I can take. Kookanic obviously doesn’t literally argue that the famous video of Bigfoot is…”

                This shared proto-humanity explains why so few hunters have shot bigfoots:

                “Dozens of reports are on record where hunters find themselves in position to shoot a hominoid, but invariably they say it strikes them as wrong in some fundamental way, and they don’t shoot. Frank Hansen was not that kind of individual.”

                The pictures of the Ice Man (the hominoid Frank Hansen shot) in the book stink of murder. It’s no wonder that he concealed his crime. He came near to being arrested a couple of times.

                That picture of terror, the arm upraised over face, is another reason we don’t find bigfeet/hominoids. Our less savory element has been hunting, killing, enslaving, raping and eating them for a very long time.

                Genetic engineering – the who and why

                Of course nobody knows whether it was genetic engineering or some kind of solar evolutionary spike. But if it was engineering, then it seems unlikely that the billion-year planetary terraformers are the same agents as the crude Earthly slave-lords.

                We might suppose that the Fore-Melons created the hominoids with an initial splice of their own DNA onto apes, then left them to evolve bodies with sufficiently large brain size but adapted to Earth conditions. Sort of like growing a space suit. When the hominoids became sufficiently advanced, the Fore-Melons used their genes to create a version of themselves adapted to Earth. These Earth-Melons then instigated the creation of slave hominoids to handle the physical labor.

                It does seem that the slow evolution of the Neanderthal football skull represents a natural progression from primate intelligence, whereas the rounded ball of the Sapiens skull is an aberration, with the soul (occipital) cut out.

                One can understand why aquatic low-gravity Earth-Melons might feel intimidated around an animal with the strength to rip apart lions combined with inviolable integrity and independence.

                I wonder what sort of environment would possibly have induced the evolution of the melonheads? It seems more likely to me that they themselves are the product of extra-dimensional genetic engineering, where the priority was to preserve as much spiritual capacity as possible, rather than design a practical organism. Somebody didn’t like the idea of living in meat.

                Thus it could be:
                Extra-dimensionals -> Fore-melons -> Earth-melons -> Sapiens
                Fore-melons -> Hominoids -> evolution -> Neanderthals

                I conclude that Neanderthals, while perhaps not 100% intervention free, are the natural sons of Earth.

                Bigfoot is real

                All this has a testable prediction. When (not if) one of the thousands of hominoids roaming every continent is finally captured or killed, it will have 46 chromosomes and be very near to human DNA. We shouldn’t have long to wait; DNA studies should be released beginning in 2013.

                It’s easy to scoff at Bigfoot until you start paying attention. Then you realize that the time between the first and second killing of a panda was 60 years. Before that, experts ridiculed reports of a black and white bear that ate bamboo. Even after we had one stuffed in a museum, we couldn’t catch one – and they’re slow moving, highly visible, dumb animals that aren’t nocturnal.

                By comparison, a hominoid is a million times stealthier, and has been avoiding human terror for millennia. They see in the dark, move as fast as a horse, communicate with a language, and have intelligence near our own. Plus, our ecological niches don’t overlap – just like the panda. These are massive, furry, muscle-bound hominoids, and need to stay a lot cooler than people. They prefer to live in a colder, forest ecological niche with lots of rainfall.

                Why don’t we have bigfoot fossils? Because they live in forests, which for chimpanzees have yielded a grand total of three fossilized teeth. Everything breaks down on the acid forest flood, including bone, in a matter of weeks – assuming animals don’t get to it first.

                Thus I find myself in the surprising position of believing that bigfoot is real. The footprints and video prove it. Microcracks that show flexing fleshy foot rather than wooden mold, sometimes with dermal crests. An arch that flexes downwards rather than upwards, just like eons-old fossilized tracks in volcanic ash.

                This famous footage is unfakeable without a serious special effects budget, and is anatomically accurate. That 400 lb knees bent gait with the longer-than-human arms and smooth glide, foot arches flexing down instead of up, muscles rippling under fur, primate shaped skull, pendulous breasts – that’s some serious evidence. They took casts of the prints, too, and those hold up.

                You decide if this is high IQ or not. Nor is it the craziest thing in that link. By the way, I’m only dredging this up because it legitimately amuses me; I don’t actually even hate the guy, to be honest. He gets mirror’d solely due to it being mentally jarring to see someone LARPing as a genius when one clearly isn’t. I don’t even want him to ragequit.

                • alf says:

                  OK I’ll admit I’m laughing out loud.

                • Steve Johnson says:

                  Well if I didn’t read that I wouldn’t have read up on pandas and learned that Teddy Roosevelt was the first westerner to shoot a pands so there’s that.

        • Koanic says:

          Current events are an interplay of four elements: God, gold, genes and tech. Alt-Reich is weak on God and gold.

          • Koanic says:

            Someone asked me a while back to give 10 major abstract causal factors of current events. I declined at the time, since such things should not be forced. However, by happy coincidence, one of my cogitations has resulted in ten lines, with minimal massaging:

            Consciousness, dualism
            Thermodynamics, sun, evolution, hybrid stabilization theory
            Race realism, human biodiversity
            Singularity, IT explosion from rocks
            Scale, civilization, domestication, atomization, emasculation

            Impossibility of socialist calculus
            Holiness spiral, always a state church
            Glubb’s cycle of empire

            Resurrection of Jesus Christ
            OT Law – private violence, patrilineages bound to land, patriarchy

            • Koanic says:

              Add anacycosis and socionomics to the Glubb line.

            • alf says:

              yes but what about floobnomics (don’t tell me you’ve never heard of floobnomics).

            • shaman says:

              Where does the bigfootpill fit in all this?

            • shaman says:

              Kookanic should go over this rather comprehensive collection of genius discoveries and check which ones are and aren’t true.

              • jim says:

                That of course is the core of the problem: That he does not do reality testing. Vox Day has the same problem, but unlike Koanic, actually does make genius discoveries, which are mixed in with a substantial amount of bullshit.

            • shaman says:

              Or what about this one?

            • Alrenous says:

              These lists remind me that I believe in something even crazier than bigfoot. Something so nutty it’s unmentionable even this far into the outer reaches of the internet.
              Difference being, of course, that I know better than to admit to believing it.

            • shaman says:

              hybrid stabilization theory

              A lot of people probably have no idea what that means, so perhaps you should explain this concept, using your legendary IQ 180, but simplified for the unwashed masses. Oh wait, you already did:

              Boar raped Bonobo = First Human: The Horrifying Implications

              It’s all very fantastic and neat. I advise everyone to check it out and figure for themselves just how smart Kookanic definitely is. Really, I shouldn’t have called him all those bad names and suggested that his mother sorely regrets not aborting him. Hey, here’s a true gem – a pinnacle of unparalleled wisdom, straight from the horse’s pig’s mouth:

              It’s not all bad. You might be a pig if are/have…

              1. A nightowl. Apes sleep at sundown.
              2. A swimmer. Apes (and blacks, gorillas) sink.
              3. Alcoholic. Apes drink in moderation.
              4. Bronchitis or heart attacks
              5. Morbidly obese.
              6. Fastidious and naturally housetrained; apes don’t bathe and shit everywhere.

              Deaf children develop permanent mental handicaps if not exposed to written or spoken speech early enough. Thus the birth of human intelligence was the combination of pig vocal cords with chimpanzee, to produce a voicebox capable of speech.

              Pigs form strong, deep attachments, even to separation-anxiety death. Pigs cry, chimps don’t. Chimps don’t form deep attachments outside the mother-infant period. Even romantic courtship is a brief, casual affair.

              Cryptic estrus is pig, not primate. Year-round sex is the foundation of pair bonding and thus family.

              We owe lengthy sex and female orgasm to the pig. Humans are intermediate on both between pigs and bonobos. Oh for the stamina of an hog!

              The female human breast is due to the interplay of sow and chimp breast structures. For this alone, the experiment was worth it.

              Yes, I finally understand “the master plan”: using a lot of verbiage and some humor to convince your readers that they are literally the descendants of boars. Gotcha, mate. Solid stuff.

              Just one question: didn’t you say that Neanderthals such as yourself possess unbreakable integrity or some s**t like that? Well, that’s hard to reconcile with knowingly spreading such arrant inanity all over the place. Unless, of course, you actually believe that nonsense to be true – in which case, you may have integrity, but would be better off confined in an asylum.

              • Hebephrenic says:

                Yep. MT vs TT humor all over this one. Packing max horror just this side of the line vs wandering blithely 8 miles past it.
                E.g. mine could be interpreted sex with 16 year old girl and then proving to judge she’s animal, but sounds extremely disturbing.
                MM – moves the line, elicits dominance laughter
                MT – leans over the line to elicit offense or dark laughter
                TT – “Oh, I didn’t know there was a line. But a line extends infinitely in two directions, and the Earth is a sphere. So wouldn’t the line cover the whole Earth? Or would it stabilize into a pattern? Hmm, the Earth bulges at the equator. First I’ll need to invent a programming language intrinsically adapted to 3d modeling. Then I can separate all lines into subets of stable and unstable on an idealized oblate spheroid. The next step, of course, it to upload Google Earth’s altitude data…”
                TM – Drawing a blank. Past my hardware event horizon.

            • shaman says:

              Kookanic wrote:

              I’m afraid of facing a member of the Other Side without protection.

              At least one or two demons have prowled around my family for years, searching for openings. We were a high-value target. And they haven’t walked away empty handed. But they’ve completely failed to stop me, and I’m going to extract 10 pounds of flesh for every one – because I don’t believe in limited cruelty.

              Anyway, the last thing I wanted was to meet one while outside grace. And I did.

              Was it real? Who knows. All I know is that I’ve never experienced anything like that before or since. And if it was my imagination, then I have a very healthy respect for imagination.

              Interesting that both Kookanic and glosoli report personal interactions with demons. I mean, I’m not one to automatically dismiss the paranormal, but it is a “strange coincidence” that precisely those people who appear to be somewhere on the schizophrenic spectrum also happen to be the ones who encounter infernal entities. Maybe demons just pick up on schizophrenics intentionally, because they know that nobody will believe their stories anyway.

              Or maybe Kookanic and glosoli are both cranks.

              • Frederick Algernon says:

                I remember reading somewhere that schizos in India and parts of SSAfrica were analyzed and found to be much more comfortable with the voices and visions. I can’t remember where i read it or what the veracity of the claims made were, but it would not surprise me to hear that polytheistic/animist/godless cultures would be more comfortable with a projected “other” inhabiting their consciousness.

                Slightly related and very interesting; you may have already read it:

    • The Cominator says:

      The jew thing is mostly a matador cape and yes I suspect its similar to trooferism.

      Yes jews are disproportionately shitlibs but were they decisive… even in second wave feminisn where all the prominent early feminists were Jewish women… it turned out that all those early Jewish female feminists were on the CIA payroll.

      If things go wrong the Jews are setup to take the fall for the rest of the Cathedral elite…

      • Iudicalicker says:

        Which Jews? Mischling Moldbug introduced cladistics as a means of analyzing political structures in order to establish the axiomatic premise that Puritans founded America therefore America is Puritan, a very clever A ⊆ P, A ⊇ P, A == P relation carefully crafted into infinity mirror recursive tautology of electrons zipping infinitely \ resistance or field.

        When Nerdis Xarvin shifted nervously on stage, fidgeted sweatily and promoted RAGE, it failed to note that consciousness is information and information is energy and energy is at the heart of all things. From the Eon of Ygg to the Time of Industry, government is an excuse to tax and tax is occasionally a reason to govern.

        Which ademocratically nonelected bureaucracy rules without ruling, taxes without taxing, lends without lending, and predates all the rest?

        • shaman says:

          Mischling Moldbug

          Phew, good thing that Moishe Moldberg is the sole mischling in NRx. (Sarcasm)

          axiomatic premise

          If 19th century memes didn’t persist into the present, and it was all (((20th century))), you’d be right. But 19th century memes — most notably, the inherent virtue and angelic quality of women — have persisted into the 21st century. The Jews promoted their own memeplex, without substantially altering or doing away with the Puritan memeplex. Obviously the result (Judeo-Puritan memplex) is grotesque beyond all measure, but squabbling about “whose memeplex is worse?” is pointless. Everyone screwed up, royally. Now’s the time to fix things.

          You should criticize Moldbug for not going hard enough on the WQ. That’s his primary flaw, and good thing we have Jim — and some others, probably — to correct that. Moldbug should use his legit 160+ IQ to fanatically incentivize fecund reproduction among high-IQ people before civilization collapses.

          • The Cominator says:

            Moldbug just didn’t say anything on the woman question he wasn’t FOR feminism he just avoided the topic. So you can criticize him for being silent and agnostic but not for his position on it… he just didn’t have one.

          • Iudicalicker says:

            Fungusburgh is a legit genius, and he deserves more respect than you’re giving him, but no verbal IQ, no matter how obscenely high, will ever contravert the incontrovertible fact that feminism was utterly toothless until 1963 at the v. earliest, when the OSS complex had yet accumulated enough power to enact large-scale domestic hope and change. They called it the Sexual Revolution and dated it to 1964 because that’s the year after the Kramer was magically loogied and the Civil Rights lodged as a direct consequence. Dare to disagree and I will show you John “English, Scottish, and Irish Presbyterian” fucking Wayne hisself virtuously spanking wombs onscreen as late as 1963, three years before NBC nearly and justifiably nerfed Spock because his appearance was devilish and satanic.

            It’s easy to project the current pathology du hour into the past. It’s also a mistake. The smartphone didn’t put the killing bullet into the Internet until 2007, as late as five years ago it was still hard to get good WiFi in hotels, the American Outer Party wasn’t always Israel’s groveling bitch, and as recently as The Matrix (1999), the special agent black-suited jackboot’d thugs of Teh Reich were still using phrases like “we’ll need a warrant” and treating a wiretap as a seriously big deal. Now, as we rapidly careen into the third decade of this hellish nightmare, we all increasingly want smartphones to just go away and we secretly kind of pine for the days of camera phones and shitty WiFi or better yet dial-up, to say nothing of the imminent pervasive inescapable and unrelenting n-penetration of the 5G dragnet IoT dong.

            As LifeLog became Facebook and marriage became anal marriage became t(y)ranny, WestWorld will be revered as a utopian guidestone in the jackless iGlass coolaid-soymilk zeitgeist of the future jour.

            • shaman says:

              the incontrovertible fact that feminism was utterly toothless until 1963 at the v. earliest, when the OSS complex had yet accumulated enough power to enact large-scale domestic hope and change.

              You’re talking out of your ass. First Wave Feminism, and its predecessors in earlier periods, is not an invention of the Jews or of the OSS. Was William Wilberforce’s Society for the Suppression of Vice biologically or culturally Hebraic? Was the Social Purity Movement a retrochronic CIA hypersition? When the Puritans prohibited domestic discipline, the Victorians announced female virtue, the Quakers went hippie, and the Shakers went celibate, which le happy schlomo was rubbing his hands behind the scenes? Heck, just look at the Suffragists – not a Jew in sight.

              The problem with Hipster Nazbols like you is that you think that Feminism was not a problem until the 60s. In fact that is true, if you mean the 19th century rather than the 20th. The Sexual Revolution happened between 1820-1890, and your unwillingness to recognize that speaks to your enthusiastic support for the Social Purity Movement’s agenda. You are fully and wholeheartedly on board the Social Purity Movement’s old shticks, which old shticks collapsed birthrates back in the 19th century, as even Lothrop Stoddard noted, though he was unable to pinpoint the exact cause, because Anglos are notoriously blind to their own Vagina Worship, in the same way fish don’t grok water.

              It’s easy to project the current pathology du hour into the past. It’s also a mistake.

              The present is a direct consequence of the Social Purity Movement and similar 19th century Anglosphere worldviews, whose influence secular Jews failed to decelerate, and clearly did not try to decelerate, because had secular Jews tried to decelerate Puritanism, secular Jews would have been looked at the way Orthodox Jews are looked at – they would have been ejected from the Anglo Puritan elite for being horrible and oppressive reactionaries. The Jews were PWNED by Puritanism, not the other way around, and it happened exactly when Jews officially joined the elite in 1910, after Puritanism had already become fully fledged White Knight pussy-pedestalizing Feminism.

              “Abloo-abloo! A boo-hoo-hoo! Muh 60s, muh 60s! Jewish Hollywood! Hook-nosed CIA bankers in service of Zionism! How do you do fellow anons, let’s do anarcho-primitivism yesterday because Uncle Ted ‘MKUltra’ Kaczynski was sane! A boo-hoo-hoo-hoo-hoo!” – every single Nazbol cunt when it’s explained to him that Feminism became a life-and-death problem in 1820, not during the 1960s.

              Not here, pal.

              • Iudicalicker says:

                Somewhere in the bowels of the think tanks and their Foundation patrons there exists a department, which may or may appear on any org charts, in which the social policies of the apparatus of social engineering are set. Like any discipline, the engineers have their own peculiar dialect, with their own unique words, unique meanings of common words, and moderately divergent grammar and syntax. The unique words are technical, the unique meanings are boring, and the internal publications are mind-numbingly dry and dopaminergically sterile, but the results, once applied to the society through the memetic repeaters of the Netflix and the Instagram and the Facebook, are profound.

                If you had ever bothered to read period literature, such as Etiquette (1922), you would have discovered that the WASP elite of New York of 1922 were still chaperoning their daughters to the movie theater. Let me repeat that. Chaperoning. Their daughters. To the movie theater. This was custom, routine, status quo, necessary to maintain respectability in that time and place. Where is your feminism here?

                If you had ever bothered to watch period moving pictures, you would have discovered that Clint Eastwood raped a bitch onscreen (1973), and everyone cheered. Where is your feminism here?

                Even in TYoOL 2019 A.D., the most progressive Jews in the most progressive publications will tell you that, well through the fifties and into the sixties, the uptight, upright WASPs (n. pejorative White Anglo-Saxon Protestant) ruled with the same iron fist that had characterized the previous half-millennium of their civilization.

                These things are not difficult to discover. Consider no-fault divorce. What better metric of feminist success and very real power than no-fault divorce? I can’t think of any. A 10s negro search will reveal that “The first modern no-fault divorce law was enacted in Russia in December 1917 following the October Revolution of the same year.” How very interesting: for some reason, even Wikipedia feels the need to specify that no-fault divorce (the very first no-fault divorce in the world!) followed not the February but the October Revolution. And just three sentences later, Wikipedia states that the first no-fault divorce to occur in America was in 1969.


                Tooth. Less.

                Consider child support. A 15s negro search: “The Office of Child Support Enforcement (OCSE) is a United States government office responsible for overseeing the U.S. child support program. Child support is the obligation on parents to provide financial support for their children. OCSE was established with the Federal Government’s enactment of Child Support Enforcement and Paternity Establishment Program (CSE) in 1975, which was enacted to reduce welfare expenses by collecting child support from non-custodial parents.”


                Tooth. Less.

                My grandfather’s generation married and stayed married.

                My father’s generation married and divorced.

                My generation didn’t marry.

                For some reason, though, you can’t see the forest for the Jews.

                • shaman says:

                  We’ve been through with this. You can read the 90 IQ nigger Wiki entry on the Social Purity Movement and discover a revealing chunk of 19th century Feminism, which had nothing to do with Mossad memes.

                  Also, here’s a treat for you:

                  Theodore Dreiser (1917):

                  “As a fourteen or fifteen year old boy, I listened to sermons on hell, where it was, and what was the nature of its torments. As rewards for imaginary good behavior I have been given colored picture cards containing exact reproductions of heaven. Every newspaper that have ever read, or still can find to read, has had an exact code of morals, by the light of which one might detect at once both Mr. Bad Man and Mr. Good Man, and so save one’s self from the machinations of the former! The books which I was advised to read, and for the neglect of which I was frowned upon, were of that naive character known as pure. One should read only good books—which meant, of course, books from which any reference to sex had been eliminated; and what followed as a natural consequence was that all intelligent interpretation of character and human nature was immediately discounted.

                  A picture of a nude or partially nude woman was sinful. A statue equally so. The dance in our home and our town was taboo. The theater was an institution which led to crime. The saloon a center of low, even bestial, vices. The existence of such a thing as an erring or fallen woman, let alone a house of prostitution, was a crime, hardly a fact to be considered. There were forms and social appearances which we were taught to wear, quite as one wears a suit of clothes. One had to go to church on Sunday whether one wanted to or not.

                  We were taught persistently to shun most human experiences as either dangerous or degrading or destructive. The less you knew about life the better. The more you knew about the fictional heaven and hell, the same. People walked in a form of sanctified maze or dream, hypnotized or self hypnotized by an erratic and impossible theory of human conduct, which had grown up heaven knows where or how, and had finally cast it amethystine spell over all America, if not over all the world.

                  Positively, I stake my solemn word on this, until I was between seventeen and eighteen, I had scarcely begun to suspect that any other human being was so low as to harbor the erratic and sinful thoughts which occasionally flashed through my own mind.

                  My concern is with the mental and critical standards of America as they exist today, and of England, from which they seem to be derived. England—the home of bourgeois art and bourgeois accomplishment. The average American, as I have said before, has such an odd, such a naive conception of what the world is like, what it is that is taking place under his eyes and under the sun.

                  As a matter of fact, in spite of the American constitution and the American oratorical address of all and sundry occasions, the average American school, college, university, institution, is very much against the development of the individual in the true sense of that word. What it really wants is not an individual, but an automatic copy of some altruistic and impossible ideal, which has been formulated here and in England, under the domination of Christianity. This is literally true. I defy you to read any college or university prospectus or address or plea, which concerns the purposes or the ideals of these institutions, and not agree with me. They are not after individuals, they are after types or schools of individuals, all to be very much alike, all to be like themselves.

                  No country in the world, at least none that I know anything about, has such a peculiar, such a seemingly fierce determination, to make the Ten Commandments work. It would be amusing if it were not pitiful, their faith in these binding religious ideals. I, for one, have never been able to make up my mind whether this springs from the zealotry of the Puritans who landed at Plymouth Rock, or whether it is indigenous to the soil (which I doubt when I think of the Indians who preceded the whites), or whether it is a product of the federal constitution, compounded by such idealists as Paine and Jefferson and Franklin, and the more or less religious and political dreamers of the p re-constitutional days. Certain it is that no profound moral idealism animated the French in Canada, the Dutch in New York, the Swedes in New Jersey, or the mixed French and English in the extreme south and New Orleans.

                  But an odd thing in connection with this financial and social criminality is that it has been consistently and regularly accompanied, outwardly at least, by a religious and a sex puritanism which would be scarcely believable if it were not true. I do not say that the robbers and thieves who did so much to build up our great commercial and social structures were in themselves inwardly or outwardly always religious or puritanically moral from the sex point of view, although in regard to the latter, they most frequently made a show of so being. But I do say this, that the communities and the states and the nation in which they were committing their depredations have been individually and collectively, in so far as the written, printed and acted word are concerned, and in pictures and music, militantly pure and religious during all the time that this has been going forward under their eyes, and, to a certain extent, with their political consent. Why? I have a vague feeling that it is the American of Anglo-Saxon origin only who has been most vivid in his excitement over religion and morals where the written, printed, acted, or painted word was concerned, yet who, at the same time, and perhaps for this very reason, was failing or deliberately refusing to see, the contrast which his ordinary and very human actions presented to all this.

                  One of the interesting phases of this puritanism or phariseeism is his attitude toward women and their morality and their purity. If ever a people has refined eroticism to a greater degree than the American, I am not aware of it. Owing to a theory or the doctrinaire acceptance of the Mary legend (Mary olotry, no less), the good American, capable of the same gross financial crimes previously indicated, has been able to look upon most women, but more particularly those above him in the social scale, as considerably more than human—angelic, no less, and possessed of qualities the like of which are not to be found in any breathing being, man, woman, child, or animal. It matters not that his cities and towns, like those of any other nation, are rife with sex ; that in each one are specific and often large areas devoted to Eros or Venus, or both. While maintaining them, he is still blind to their existence or import. He or his boys or his friends go —but—.

                  Only a sex blunted nature or race such as the Anglo-Saxon could have built up any such asinine theory as this. The purity, the sanctity, the self abnegation, the delicacy of women —how these qualities have been exaggerated and dinned into our ears, until at last the average scrubby non reasoning male, quite capable of visiting the gardens of Venus, or taking a girl off the street, is no more able to clearly visualize the creature before him than he is the central wilds of Africa which he has never seen. A princess, a goddess, a divine mother or creative principle, all the virtues, all the perfections, no vices, no weaknesses, no errors—some such hodgepodge as this has come to be the average Anglo-Saxon, or at least American, conception of the average American woman. I do not say that a portion of this illusion is not valuable — I think it is. But as it stands now, she is too good to be true; a paragon, a myth! Actually, she doesn’t exist at all as he has been taught to imagine her. She is nothing more than a two-legged biped like the rest of us, but in consequence of this delusion sex itself, being a violation of this paragon, has become a crime. We enter upon the earth, it is true, in a none too artistic manner (conceived in iniquity and born in sin, is the biblical phrasing of it) , but all this has long since been glossed over ignored—and to obviate its brutality as much as possible, the male has been called upon to purify himself in thought and deed, to avoid all private speculation as to women and his relationship to them, and, much more than that, to avoid all public discussion, either by word of mouth or the printed page.

                  To think of women or to describe them as anything less than the paragon previously commented upon, has become, by this process, not only a sin—it is a shameful infraction of the moral code, no less. Women are too good, the sex relationship too vile a thing, to be mentioned or even thought of. We must move in a mirage of illusion. We must not know what we really do. We must trample fact under foot and give fancy, in the guise of our so-called better natures, free rein.

                  Yet this is a democracy. Here, as in every other realm of the world, the individual is permitted, compelled, to seek his own material and mental salvation as best he may. The trouble with a democracy as opposed to an autocracy, with a line of titled idlers permitted the gift of leisure and art indulgence, is that there is no central force or group to foster art, to secure letters and art in their inalienable rights, to make of superior thought a noble and a sacred thing. I am not saying that democracy will not yet produce such a central force or group.

                  The most significant and, to me, discouraging manifestation in connection with the United States today, is the tendency to even narrower and more puritanical standards than have obtained in the past. In all conscience, up to this year of our Lord nineteen hundred and seventeen, they have been bad enough. As a matter of fact, America, in its hundred years of life, has not even reached the intellectual maturity that goes in individual cases with a stripling of eighteen.

                  The American, by some hocus pocus of atavism, has seemingly borrowed or retained from lower English middle-class puritans all their fol de rol notions about making human nature perfect by fiat or edict—the written word, as it were, which goes with all religions. So, although by reason of the coarsest and most brutal methods, we, as a nation, have built up one of the most interesting and domineering oligarchies in the world, we are still by no means aware of the fact.

                  Indeed, ever since the Mayflower landed, and the country began to grow westward, we have been convinced that we were destined to make the Ten Commandments, in all their arbitrary perfection, work. One might show readily enough that America attained its amazing position in life by reason of the fact that, along with boundless opportunities, the Ten Commandments did not and do not work, but what would be the use? With one hand the naïve American takes and executes with all the brutal insistence of nature itself; with the other he writes glowing platitudes concerning brotherly love, virtue, purity, truth, etc., etc.

                  A part of this right or left hand tendency, as the case might be, is seen in the constant desire of the American to reform something. No country in the world, not even England, the mother of fol de rol reforms, is so prolific in these frail ventures as this great country of ours. In turn we have had campaigns for the reform of the atheist, the drunkard, the lecher, the fallen woman, the buccaneer financier, the drug fiend, the dancer, the theater goer, the reader of novels, the wearer of low-neck dresses and surplus jewelry—in fact, every human taste and frivolity, wherever sporadically it has chanced to manifest itself with any interesting human force. Your reformer’s idea is that any human being, to be a successful one, must be a pale spindling sprout, incapable of any vice or crime. And all the while the threshing sea of life is sounding in his ears. The thief, the lecher, the drunkard, the fallen woman, the greedy, the inordinately vain, as in all ages past, pass by his door, and are not the whit less numerous for the unending campaigns which have been launched to save them. In other words, human nature is human nature, but your American cannot be made to believe it.

                  He will not give up the illusion which was piled safely in the hold of the Mayflower when it set sail. He is going to reform man and the world willy nilly, and, while- in his rampant idealism he is neglecting to build up a suitable army and navy wherewith to defend himself, he is busy propagating little cults whereby man is to be made less vigorous, more the useless anemic thing that he has in mind.

                  Personally, my quarrel is with America’s quarrel with original thought. It is so painful to me to see one after another of our alleged reformers tilting Don Quixote-like at the giant windmills of fact. We are to have no pictures which the puritan and the narrow, animated by an obsolete dogma, cannot approve of. We are to have no theaters, no motion pictures, no books, no public exhibitions of any kind, no speech even, which will in any way contravene his limited view of life. A few years ago it was the humble dealer in liquor whose life was anathematized, and whose property: was descended upon with torches, axes and bombs. Now comes prohibition. A little later, our cities growing and the sections devoted to the worship of Venus becoming more manifest, the Vice Crusader was bred, and we had the spectacle of whole areas of fallen women scattered to the four winds, and allowed to practice separately what they could not do collectively. Then came Mr. Comstock, vindictive, persistent, and with a nose and a taste for the profane and erotic, such as elsewhere has not been equaled since. Pictures, books, the theater, the dance, the studio—all came under his watchful eye. During the twenty or thirty years in which he acted as a United States Postoffice Inspector, he was, because of his dull charging against things which he did not rightly understand, never out of the white light of publicity which he so greatly craved. One month it would be a novel by D’Annunzio; another, a set of works by Balzac or de Maupassant, found in the shade of some gravelly bookseller’s shop; the humble photographer attempting a nude; the painter who allowed his reverence for Raphael to carry him too far; the poet who attempted a recrudescence of Don Juan in modern iambics, was immediately seized upon and hauled before an equally dull magistrate, there to be charged with his offense and to be fined accordingly. All this is being continued with emphasis.

                  Then came the day of the White Slave Chasers, and now no American city, and no backwoods Four Corners, however humble, is complete without a vice commission of some kind, or at least a local agent or representative, charged with the duty of keeping the art, the literature, the press, and the private lives of all those at hand up to that standard of perfection which only the dull can set for themselves.

                  Several years ago, when the White Slave question was at its whitest heat, the problem of giving expression to its fundamental aspects was divided between raiding plays which attempted to show the character of the crime in too graphic a manner, and licensing those which appealed to the intelligence of those who were foremost in the crusade. Thus we had the spectacle of an uncensored, but nevertheless approved, ten-reel film showing more details of the crime and better methods of securing white slaves, than any other production of the day, running undisturbed to packed houses all over the country, while two somewhat more dramatic, but far less effective distributors of information in the way of plays were successfully harried from city to city and finally withdrawn.

                  Shakespeare has been ordered from the schools in some of the states. A production of “Antony and Cleopatra” has been raided in Chicago. Japanese prints of a high art value, intended for the seclusion of a private collection, have been seized and the most valuable of them held to be destroyed. By turns, an artistic fountain to Heine in New York, loan exhibits of paintings in Denver, Kansas City, and elsewhere, scores of books by Stevenson, James Lane Allen, Frances H. Burnett, have been attacked, not only, as in the case of the latter, with the invisible weapons of the law, as might be expected, but, in regard to the former, with actual axes. A male dancer of repute and some artistic ability, has been raided publicly by the Vice Crusaders for his shameless exposure of his person! No play, no picture, no book, no public or private jubilation of any kind, is complete any more without its vice attack.

                  To me this sort of thing is dull, and bespeaks the low state to which our mental activities have fallen.”

                  Now tell me where the “wife beater” meme originated. Where did the “sex trafficking” meme, in all its variants, originate? Where did Women’s Suffrage originate? Why did they originate? Who originated them?

                  Ah, but you support all those things, so you don’t care. You’re an intelligent agent of the controlled opposition, not seeing the forest for the Puritans. I’ll leave it up to Jim to refute the other points you’ve raised.

                • shaman says:

                  Let me repeat that. Chaperoning. Their daughters. To the movie theater. This was custom, routine, status quo, necessary to maintain respectability in that time and place. Where is your feminism here?


                  My grandfather’s generation married and stayed married.

                  Can you mentally picture the abstract notion of “process,” A –> B — > C? Now ask yourself when patriarchal marital life started crumbling and becoming increasingly late, unobtainable, untenable, and unstable – not when it finally collapsed. You’re looking at the explosion, rather than the centuries old buildup leading to it. The explosion is still ongoing, and has been going since the 19th century, when women were declared angelic, leading to ever more depredations on men, and ever less curtailment of female misbehavior.

                  And thus you tell me about “chaperoning,” as if I’m supposed to be impressed. No, I’d be impressed if you stated that it was “custom, routine, status quo, necessary to maintain respectability” to get women married off by 17 or so, and that coverture was still legally in place.

                  When was coverture abolished? Let’s see:


                  This situation continued until the mid-to-late nineteenth century, when married women’s property acts started to be passed in many English-speaking jurisdictions, setting the stage for further reforms.

                  In the United States, many states passed Married Women’s Property Acts[46] to eliminate or reduce the effects of coverture. Nineteenth-century courts in the United States also enforced state privy examination laws. A privy examination was an American legal practice in which a married woman who wished to sell her property had to be separately examined by a judge or justice of the peace outside of the presence of her husband and asked if her husband was pressuring her into signing the document. This practice was seen as a means to protect married women’s property from overbearing husbands.[47]

                  Yep, 19th century it is.

                  Still not get it?

              • shaman says:

                Somewhere in the bowels of the think tanks and their Foundation patrons there exists a department, which may or may appear on any org charts, in which the social policies of the apparatus of social engineering are set. Like any discipline, the engineers have their own peculiar dialect, with their own unique words, unique meanings of common words, and moderately divergent grammar and syntax. The unique words are technical, the unique meanings are boring, and the internal publications are mind-numbingly dry and dopaminergically sterile, but the results, once applied to the society through the memetic repeaters of the Netflix and the Instagram and the Facebook, are profound.

                This is a sophisticated academic shillage, not unlike ISGP Studies: “Everything that ever happens is committed by Ford & Rockefeller & Carnegie, via the CIA.” I reject that unsubstantiated narrative, for which you provided no evidence other than a cool but unoriginal story.

                Leftism is concocted by the Brahmin class — specially the professoriat — embedded in the universities. Since these make for the cognitive elite’s cognitive elite, if the professors decided that patriarchy and young marriage should return, they would return within a generation, and being a cat lady would once again be considered low status. However, individual members of the professoriat have no personal incentive to oppose the holiness spiral, so that subversive class — which has been subversive since the 19th century — needs to be subdued by warriors, armed with their own priestly class.

                Let’s start with evidence for “there exists a department… in which the social policies of the apparatus of social engineering are set.” This is a big-if-true tale, which you should elaborate on, by (as a preface) explaining how you came to know about it, or how you logically deduced it, or what have you. Since I don’t share your unsubstantiated premise, you can understand why I attribute leftism to more mundane factors such as human vice and ignorance.

            • shaman says:

              the incontrovertible fact that feminism was utterly toothless until 1963 at the v. earliest, when the OSS complex had yet accumulated enough power to enact large-scale domestic hope and change.

              You’re talking out of your ass. First Wave Feminism, and its predecessors in earlier periods, is not an invention of the Jews or of the OSS. Was William Wilberforce’s Society for the Suppression of Vice biologically or culturally Hebraic? Was the Social Purity Movement a retrochronic CIA hypersition? When the Puritans prohibited domestic discipline, the Victorians announced female virtue, the Quakers went hippie, and the Shakers went celibate, which le happy schlomo was rubbing his hands behind the scenes? Heck, just look at the Suffragists – not a Jew in sight.

              The problem with Hipster Nazbols like you is that you think that Feminism was not a problem until the 60s. In fact that is true, if you mean the 19th century rather than the 20th. The Sexual Revolution happened between 1820-1890, and your unwillingness to recognize that speaks to your enthusiastic support for the Social Purity Movement’s agenda. You are fully and wholeheartedly on board the Social Purity Movement’s old shticks, which old shticks collapsed birthrates back in the 19th century, as even Lothrop Stoddard noted, though he was unable to pinpoint the exact cause, because Anglos are notoriously blind to their own Vagina Worship, in the same way fish don’t grok water.

              It’s easy to project the current pathology du hour into the past. It’s also a mistake.

              The present is a direct consequence of the Social Purity Movement and similar 19th century Anglosphere worldviews, whose influence secular Jews failed to decelerate, and clearly did not try to decelerate, because had secular Jews tried to decelerate Puritanism, secular Jews would have been looked at the way Orthodox Jews are looked at – they would have been ejected from the Anglo Puritan elite for being horrible and oppressive reactionaries. The Jews were PWNED by Puritanism, not the other way around, and it happened exactly when Jews officially joined the elite in 1910, after Puritanism had already become fully fledged White Knight pussy-pedestalizing Feminism.

              “Abloo-abloo! A boo-hoo-hoo! Muh 60s, muh 60s! Jewish Hollywood! Hook-nosed CIA bankers in service of Zionism! How do you do fellow anons, let’s do anarcho-primitivism yesterday because Uncle Ted ‘MKUltra’ Kaczynski was sane! A boo-hoo-hoo-hoo-hoo!” – every single Nazbol cunt when it’s explained to him that Feminism became a life-and-death problem in 1820, not during the 1960s.

              • Iudicalicker says:

                Mushroomberg’s crowning achievement is convincing Boomers and their malcontents that normal and natural Protestant efforts to shore up their civilization’s morality actually caused its degradation. The precise mechanism of action is never explained, but the hand waving is sufficiently vigorous enough to generate a proper maelstrom von zeitgeist.

                • phoneposter says:

                  If you think the 90s were great and the Boomers inexplicably threw it away, and things only really started going wrong in the 60s, then feminism is no big deal.

                  If you would rather live in Salisbury, Rhodesia than Portland, Oregon, then quantity of non-Whites isn’t as important a factor as men being men.

                  Moldbug didn’t make his position on these issues clear enough, so now there’s Shaman.

                • phoneposter says:

                  ps. is The Twilight Zone really all that much less netflix than Black Mirror? Watch a bunch of episodes and tell me those men wouldn’t pass those 60s laws you presumably blame Jews and protesters for.

                • shaman says:

                  It’s not just Moldbug’s cladistic analysis. The WASP worldview contains the seeds of its own destruction. You can argue, perhaps plausibly, “The Jews have accelerated the process.” But they neither started the process, nor would the results of WASP-self-destruction have been prevented if all the Jews had stayed in Israel (which you’re against, because you’re doing “Anti-Racist Hitler” here).

                  There is this guy, who calls himself “Hipster Racist,” who keeps attacking NRx without even grasping what it stands for, or pretending not to grasp what it stands for. He keeps kvetching and kibbitzing about how some Israeli woman produced CGI for 9/11, or something. Is that you, perchance? Or is it a mere coincidence that all the shills here have a raging hate-boner for Israel and support Palestine, ironically or sincerely?

                  Or maybe you’re a legit early-20th-century leftist. In which case, “Boo hoo.”

                • jim says:

                  We were screwed starting 1820, when the King could not divorce his wife for flagrant adultery, because women can do no wrong, therefore nothing can possibly constitute evidence of adultery.

                  We had a brief respite, the gap between first wave and second wave feminism, which ended in 1963. And yes, 1963 was pretty good compared to today Female protagonists get spanked by their husbands, or the spanking is implied. And pretty good compared to 1906.

                  But first wave feminism was Marie Curie getting not one but two Nobel prizes for washing her husband’s bottles, and Amelia Earhart getting a ticker tape parade for being flown across the Atlantic like a sack of potatoes. Marie Curie was King George the Fourth not being able to divorce his wife for flagrant adultery.

                  Things got better from 1933 to 1969, because they figured that they needed men to fight the wars, and involuntary celibates are not going to fight. But around 1963 they stopped worrying about the Soviet Union, and here we are now.

                  We are now back in the Marie Curie Amelia Earhart status quo, and Jews had no role in that.

                  That families are destroyed, and men cannot have relationships, is not the fault of the Jews. It started in 1820.

                  When Jews converted from Judaism to progressivism they became more progressive than thou, but the evil of progressivism was apparent in 1930 long before they let the Jews in. Indeed, it was apparent in 1820, it just got worse in 1930. At least today they have not given a black woman engineerette a ticker tape parade for pestering the men who build Musk’s rockets.

            • shaman says:

              Fungusburgh is a legit genius, and he deserves more respect than you’re giving him, but no verbal IQ, no matter how obscenely high

              See, you’re proving my point for me. Moldbug should have stated, in clear, no uncertain terms: “Feminism became a problem in the 19th century, with the advent of proto-Feminism. The Jews had nothing to do with it, although the Jews could at least have tried to decelerate the femi-narcosis, which they obviously did not. And then, that would have shut the f**k up all those entryist ankle-biters who deliberately disregard the Puritan core within modern victimology, because “muh 1960s.”

              The reason FBI wears a chastity belt and cries in the corner while niggers fuck his wife, while FSB doesn’t, is because FBI grew up with the Social Purity Movement, while FSB inherited his steroid laboratory from Joseph ‘Teen Pussy Slayer’ Stalin. Jews were prominent enough in both spheres, which means that the striking difference can only be explained by there not being Anglo Puritans in the Soviet Union.

            • shaman says:

              They called it the Sexual Revolution and dated it to 1964 because that’s the year after the Kramer was magically loogied and the Civil Rights lodged as a direct consequence. Dare to disagree and I will show you John “English, Scottish, and Irish Presbyterian” fucking Wayne hisself virtuously spanking wombs onscreen as late as 1963

              Yeah-yeah-yeah, heard it all before, “Everything had been going fine until the Alan Watts and his CIA handlers [citation needed] told my boomer parents to try some shrooms and acid.”

              No, everything was not fine. Things have been getting progressively worse since the Enlightenment, and the brief deviation of 1930-1960 cinema doesn’t disprove that. Women became holy in 1820, became angelic in 1890, and have become divine by 1930. That it took some time for the meme to trickle down to all strata of society from Harvard, and that Jews were okay with shitlordism between 1930-1960, doesn’t change that one bit.

              Nazbol has always been the backup plan for when things get bad and a scapegoat is needed. “Jewish capitalists” it is, then. That’s why Benjamin Garland will never, ever, ever write a single word in condemnation of the Social Purity Movement – because Benjamin Garland is a Puritan, and so is most of the “Alt Reich.”

              • Iudicalicker says:

                If you weren’t a raging lunatic, it would be much easier to respond to you. Unfortunately you display so many false premises and assumptions about my knowledge base and basic that I don’t even know where to begin.

                I guess I’ll have to settle for A) you’re scapegoating Jewish capitalists, not me, B) the owner of the monopoly right to issue currency is definitionally not a capitalist, he literally exists above capital C) I guess “nazbol” is part of your parody?, D) literally who, E) the Puritans had dispersed by 1740, 50 years before the Naturalization Act of 1790, F) that’s an awfully antisemitic thing to say, G) the similarity between the two Harvards, one before WWII and one after, is the name and some of the buildings, F) if you’re backdating The Decline(tm) to the Englightenment you might as well go full Ted Kaczynski, because most of the change since then (probably >90%) has occurred as a direct result of the Industrial Revolution And Its Consequences, the ideological posturing mostly window dressing.

                • shaman says:

                  Why is it that you attack Moldbug rather than Mencken? The latter wrote a whole lot about America’s temperamentally puritanical roots, and certainly with no less force or influence. You don’t seem to understand Jim’s critique of modern sexual morality, and you’re not familiar with Jim’s chronology of its advent, which apparently you think are both based entirely on Moldbug’s cladistics (lol, no), rather than on independent research. Or perhaps you play dumb purposely, because you need to muddy the waters about what the 19th century, so that people think the problem started no earlier than 1960 or 1975 or whatever absurdly late and historically illiterate date you have in mind.

                  if you’re backdating The Decline(tm) to the Englightenment you might as well go full Ted Kaczynski, because most of the change since then (probably >90%) has occurred as a direct result of the Industrial Revolution And Its Consequences, the ideological posturing mostly window dressing.

                  Enlightenment championed progressive ideology, the French Revolution pioneered its implementation, Romanticism accelerated it, and the Puritans reproduced it in their own image. Yes, Marxism has played, and now keeps playing, an enormous role in the Prog scheme. But it’s not the be-all and end-all of the story, and socialism precedes Marx anyway.

                  Again, you don’t seem familiar with this community’s classification of the different “branches” of Progressivism. Or maybe you reject it, in which case, you should provide an alternative historical account.

                  Now, have there been other factors? Yes, definitely, but they’re less significant than the tripartite trend of Franco, Judeo, and Anglo leftism.

            • shaman says:

              when the OSS complex had yet accumulated enough power to enact large-scale domestic hope and change.

              Instead of bitching about the bankers, you should try to convince the Anglo-Judeo CIA-plex that we shall support even the wildest version of their totalitarianism if — and only if — they let us have our way regarding the WQ.

              Unlike FBI, which is so pozzed up its butthole with Puritanism-Feminism that it’s not even funny, CIA is more open-minded, bio-diverse, and “neuroplastic,” if you catch my drift. CIA and NSA don’t arrest you for failing to defer to women – FBI and the pigs do, because it ups their budgets. Your proposed CIA omnipotent puppeteers should be doing pro-social psyops in as thorough a manner they now do anti-social ones, which will allow us enough orgasmic bliss to never abolish them.

              If all men become Manosphere, CIA will have no choice but to accept that our cummies make all the difference between “your sovereignty may continue” and “violent revolution NOW.” The ideal scenario is getting everyone in CIA to read Jim’s blog and realize, “Wow, the FBI are such pathetic cucks. We BASED CIAniggers can do way better.” Maybe you should strive to get that done. Who knows.

              • The Cominator says:

                The CIA leadership is insane, they didn’t start 1st wave feminism but they sure as hell started second wave feminism they hate Trump and they wanted to provoke a hot war with Russia and still do.

                Expecting sanity from them on the woman question is like expecting crazed Al Qaeda terrorist to keep their religion in proper perspective.

                • shaman says:

                  CIA is insane, but more sane than FBI, and more concerned with strategy and low-time preference planning; higher average IQ.

                  If you really believe that America is the way it is because of CIA psyops, then the most logical thing to do is to try to recruit the CIA to your ideology; especially given that the criminalization of heterosexuality does not serve the CIA’s interests, only the domestic police-surveillance state’s interests, i.e. the FBI and the police.

                  That’s what 4chan gets wrong and Moldbug gets right.

                  4chan (IQ160): “CIAthedral is not monolith, e.g. even my Zionist Jewish father worked for DoS, there are conflicting factions within it, and we want there to be a NRx faction too.”

                • shaman says:

                  (WordPress screwed up my words)

                  4chan (IQ lower than 130): “Let’s alienate CIA lurkers by telling them that they are irredeemable.”

                  Moldbug (IQ higher than 160): “CIAthedral is not monolith, e.g. even my Zionist Jewish father worked for DoS, there are conflicting factions within it, and we want there to be a NRx faction too.”

                • shaman says:

                  Or, more accurately, “When things fall apart, we want supporters from within the current regime.” If CIA is running the show, then recruit the CIA, or at least some insiders – that’s sure as hell more practical than outright abolishing the Inner Party, which holds all the power.

                  You know, if CIA is really chock full of Jews and Mormons, then the problem is smaller than we think. Jews and Mormons can be brought on board Jimianity by convincing them that this is what being a “Light Unto the Nations” means. Maybe Archbishop Alf is right, and Jim should declare himself a literal prophet.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Milint is redeemable and I believe supported Trump, and I believe there is a literal NRx faction in milint… CIA with its present people is not redeemable.

                  Trump needs to launch a full scale purge of the CIA it should begin with Brennan’s arrest (and I’m confident Brennan will be arrested within the next six months). Yes the CIA has a higher average IQ then most government agencies but IQ is no guarantor of sanity and they are not sane. Yes supporting the war against men is not in their interest but they do it anyway and continue to do it because they are mad.

                  I honestly don’t know about the ethnic composition of the CIA, when they launched second wave feminism it was still overwhelmingly Ivy League WASPs.

                  Up until very recently if the CIA was full of Mormons they would not be supporting feminism but Mormonism has recently become very pozzed and I maintain my prediction that we are twenty years off from seeing Mormon Elders march in gay pride parades and slutwalks.

              • Iudicalicker says:

                If I had but one bullet and were faced by both a Wall Street-sponsored genocidal Bolshevik Jewish NKVD commissar and a bootlicker, I would let the bootlicker have it.

                • shaman says:

                  Supporting the conventional NRx narrative, according to which leftism flows from academic priests, not from a shadowy cabal of hyper competent ex CIA/Mossad spooks working for Rothschild and Rockefeller and the shape-shifting space-lizards, is not “bootlicking.”

            • phoneposter says:

              Powerless until ’63?

              > Lips that touch liquor shall never touch mine
              This differs from pussyhats bragging about their willingness to abort how?

              At 15, a little pet
              At 20, a little coquette
              At 40, not married yet
              At 50, a suffragette
              Shaman would probably prefer 11 for pet, 16 for coquette, and 32 for not married

              And don’t forget George Jetson following Judy on dates instead of telling her who to date, precursor to the feminist dad she makes the rules t-shirts.

              If this thread continues, I’ll try to find more early 20th century feminism, but here’s what Sir Arthur Conan Doyle said about the 21st century
              > for I am one of those who believe that the folly of a monarch and the blundering of a minister in far-gone years will not prevent our children from being some day citizens of the same world-wide country under a flag which shall be a quartering of the Union Jack with the Stars and Stripes.
              Did he ever write about trouble caused by a bad woman? As far as I’ve read he’s always given at least sympathetic portrayals of the fairer sex.

              • pdimov says:

                It differs by having or not having federal government support.

              • pdimov says:

                Although on second thought the Prohibition did get imposed, so this wasn’t a very good explanation for this particular example. 🙂

        • shaman says:

          From the Eon of Ygg to the Time of Industry, government is an excuse to tax and tax is occasionally a reason to govern.

          Which ademocratically nonelected bureaucracy rules without ruling, taxes without taxing, lends without lending, and predates all the rest?

          We’ve been over this. Merchants can’t coordinate political action on the sovereign level, because the merchant class lacks both cohesion and uniformity of interest. Moreover, your proposed Zio-Cabal aka Military-Capital Nexus is not in control, because if it were, elite reproduction would certainly be above replacement level. We see with our eyes that priests are in control.

          *Wears Roberto hat*

          The hypothetical Red Empire and Red Empire-aligned MIC overlords could economically out-compete Big Pharma aka Big Scamma by legalizing all drugs and taxing them as they see fit. That we can’t kill niggers and other low-lifers with cocaine is the result of there being a priestly class in control, not capitalists. It is the priestly class that prevents me from building the crack factory straight in the middle of the ghetto, because “niggers are human too.” Sinister, nihilist capitalists would have legalized cannabis and psychedelics in 1900, or at least by 1950, thus taking the winds out of Big Pharma’s sails. And they would have legalized methamphetamine, heroin, MDMA, and cocaine to make money and to kill inferiors, thus making the nation richer and stronger. Instead of a war against drugs, there should be a war by drugs; a Drug War that is also a decent Race War, not to mention all the faggots and junkies and whores who’ll perish as a result.

          *Wears jewish pedophile hat*

          I seek to abolish the AoC and legalize sinister pixels; after that is accomplished, government will be able to tax the prostitution industry and the pornography industry, including the “child prostitution” and “child pornography” industries that I’m personally going to establish when I have power. I call it the “pedonomy,” as in “pedo economy,” and it’s gonna be YUGE. So many taxes! My bleeding-heart adversaries oppose me for moralistic, puritanical, and essentially priestly reasons, because they are blue pilled, blue balled, and blue uniformed (and sometimes blue haired) White Knights who think that women are naturally chaste and only misbehave because Jewish pedophiles make them misbehave; in short, my enemies believe that big-boobed teenage females aren’t whores with drooling wet pussies who use their mom’s dildo to climax for the camera, even though big-boobed teenage females are indeed whores with drooling wet pussies who use their mom’s dildo to climax for the camera. Ergo, “MUH DOLLAR” is not in control, priests are in control.

          *Back to shaman hat*

          Being a Marxist, you can’t see that modern society is not structured in a way that maximizes tax revenue. You think that Capital is in control, and that he’s done everything possible to optimize his governmental-corporate income. Patently false. If Capital was in control, he would do things much differently – he would be Moldbug’s Fnargl, not the current Big Sister we have. We live under Big Sister because priests are in control, and they resent both capitalists and warriors. Now, capitalists alone cannot slay Big Sister, and it has nothing to do with Capital dying his hair with the shades of the rainbow and being Woke, and everything to do with the inability of the merchant class to coordinate unified political action. Therefore, only the warrior class can supplant priests.

          We are not ruled by Fnargl, because Fnargl is a detached and aloof motherf**ker, whereas Big Sister constantly tells us what to do and how to do it, what with her ever bloating bureaucracy of soulless drone NPCRs (that’s a portmanteau of “NPCs” and “CR”). If Zio-Capital was in control, many — by no means all, but many — of the current problems would not exist. But Zio-Capital does not rule, and in fact, merchants principally cannot rule; we are now ruled by priests, and seek to replace them with warriors.

          • Iudicalicker says:

            As late as 1913, the power and prestige of New York banks was diminishing at an astonishing rate, the victim of entrepreneurs doing entrepreneurship in the South, Midwest, and West Coast.

            After 1914, banks began a century-long consolidation with continues until this day.

            What changed? What great historic watershed was achieved sometime during 1913? The sane man would look at the thing and say — hey, wait a sec, it looks like a cartel was formed, I bet a cartel was formed, an OPEC of banking.

            Ever heard of such a thing? “Cartels don’t exist, they can’t exist, they defy the known laws of God the Universe the free market”, sez he.

            Cactus, anus, ???, profit.

            P.S. In China they had court eunuchs. Someday the Chinese historians will notice that in the land formerly known as America they had LGBTIQCAPGNGFNBA.

    • vxxc says:

      The problem with Victimology is it’s Infallible.

      It always, always works.

      The current situation seems to be a tragedy of three parts: 1. convinced a gentile state will turn on them they weaken its defenses, or outright betray it.
      Logical enough if your convinced that your neighbor is going to kill you instead you kill him first.

      Its logical, its also insane.

      2. Also convinced that Israel is a shaky refuge (Israel is both Sparta and Outremer) they want borders open so they can flee as needed.
      This has the tragic opposite effect.

      3. Trotsky again is bringing Hell down upon Bronstein but misplaced tribal loyalty prevents Bronstein from checking Trotsky.

      Does this mean the American Reich?
      Probably not: we’re a Federation to begin with and will remain one.
      We’re also not cornered, poor and land hungry like Germany.
      However no good will come of the evils above.

      • Iudicalicker says:

        Victimology only works when you have the currency, the television studios, and the open mind of your host’s state apparatus.

        Israel isn’t a refuge, if Henry “Fleer of Germany & Shanker of Rhodesia” Kissinger is to be believed.

        The perpetuation of a Hitler-established state is a stain on the face of the world. All Hitlerism everywhere is a threat to all economological usurers anywhere.

        • shaman says:

          Victimology only works when you have the currency, the television studios, and the open mind of your host’s state apparatus.

          Is that why 19th century Puritan memes about the virtue of women triumphed?

          Oh wait, you think that we only believe that because the serpentine slick-tongued (((Moldberg))) whispered it into our ear, right?

          Nope, we believe that because Feminism was cancer in 1820, was cancer in 1920, and will be cancer in 2020, and that arch-demon has not been spawned by the Jews – it has been spawned by whites, particularly Anglos, particularly Anglo Puritans.

          Who whispered thundered into our collective headphones that male-female relations are inherently victimizing to the females involved, and that therefore it is male sexuality, not female sexuality, that must be suppressed?

          Victimology is 19th century par excellence.

  26. lalit says:

    Jim, Looks like Trump is going after all the guys who tried to Russia Gate him. And it seems they are already in two minds about whether to squirm and rat out their co-conspirators.

    You got some special aged wine in the cellar to pop when they go to Jail? That being said, we don’t see Hilary in an Orange jumpsuit Yet.

    • jim says:

      We are on the path to deadly violence, and Trump knows where it is going. He wants to avoid the end of that road, but his enemies lack the self control and discipline that would allow him to avoid the end of that road.

      As things get hotter, Democrats are going to escalate. Trump does not want to be holy emperor Trump, but when Democrats refused to accept the election outcome, the republic suffered a death blow, even though its death is not yet that close.

      • BC says:

        May the God-Emperor Trump and the Holy American Space Empire rise from the ashes of the American Republic.

      • vxxc says:

        Trump: ease confinement terms for SEAL Gallagher, review other pending military ROE, “war crimes” cases.

        Cathedral Lawyers esp JAG and White Knight Vets: OUTRAGE!
        We must hold our military to STANDARDS.
        Standards as realistic as their plans for gender dysphoric soldiers…

        (Now lets be clear: JAG simply made a priestly grab for power…and latgely missed.)

        Edge: Trump.
        You see…. Trump wants to LIVE.

        The others are squeaking rabbits who have betrayed the very dogs that guard them… forgetting that Dog to Wolf is a short trip.
        Worse: Feral Dogs are far, far worse than wolves.
        They have no fear of men.
        Or Priests.

        We learned patience from the Arabs.
        I suspect we learned cruelty as well.
        Time and Strife will reveal.

        (We can’t wait. I’m salivating at the thought…)
        And smiling…

  27. >Priests are supposed to supply asabiyyah. That is their number one job in this world.

    Or when that army is fighting with the army of another country, to undermine the asabiyyah of the enemy. Psy-ops. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_legend_(Spain)

    This is one angle rarely investigated. Before Anglo elites were calling Anglo elites evil racist colonalists, they were calling the elites of the arch-rival Spain evil racist colonialists.

    I don’t have good evidence but a chain like maintain asabiyyah -> destroy the enemy’s asabiyyah -> destroy own asabiyyah sort of makes sense. That is, when soldiers tell priests to run psy-ops on the enemy, they find out this actually works and is quite powerful and priests start wondering why they are not using this to take power at home.

    Or take feminism. There was this practice of sati, widow-burning in India. I agree that it had to be stopped, it is terrible. But the whole subtext is “Those other guys are treating women badly.” So William Wilberforce goes to the House of Commons, In think in 1813, talks about sati, and the horrified MPs vote a law to legalize Christian preaching in India. “Our religion is sublime, pure beneficent”, he said, “theirs is mean, licentious and cruel”. While India wasn’t quite an enemy, this looks very much like cultural, memetic conquest. Excuse? “They are treating women badly.” So caring about how women are treated is first a weapon to use against Others, not a weapon to use in internal power struggles in the West…

    • jim says:

      What do you know. Attack Sati in 1813, Attack English marriage in 1820

      One day it is terribly oppressive to burn Indian woman alive so that they don’t go on to marry someone else, and the next day it is terribly oppressive to penalize English women for adultery.

    • shaman says:

      Most people don’t know that Sati was a natural and logical response to an uncontrollable epidemic of husbandicide, of wives poisoning do death those husbands who were maritally arranged to them, in order to hop on a cock carousel. When women intentionally “become widows,” makes perfect sense to put a stop to it by burning widows; and loyal wives didn’t mind the practice, because they believed in reincarnation and Karma and all that. The Brits should apologize for doing away with a vital social technology.

      • S.J., Esquire says:

        ***Most people don’t know that Sati was a natural and logical response

        And yet, I think I speak for us all when I say we are totally and perfectly unsurprised.

      • Friendly Fred says:

        The guys who compiled the long Wikipedia entry on Sati don’t seem to have been aware of this interesting fact!

        • shaman says:

          Well, this guy has several different sources, which look reliable to me. See, the problem with Wikipedia is not that it lies by commission — it usually avoids that — but that it lies by omission. And half-truths are no better than full lies.

          • Alrenous says:

            When La Wik lies directly it’s amusingly inept.

            Critics cite these passages to portray Harris as a proponent of self-alienation in order to better serve the great industrial nation of America. In fact, argue supporters[citation needed], it can be found that quite the opposite is true of Harris when you are able to go beyond the surface of his educational philosophy.

            The Sophists certainly were not directly responsible for Athenian democracy, but their cultural and psychological contributions played an important role in its growth.

          • Friendly Fred says:

            The sources in the thing you link are two guys who report what the locals told them about the supposed situation thousands of years ago and an ancient historian transmitting material from another (lost) ancient historian who presumably also reported what the locals told him.

            Still, the Wiki should have mentioned what those guys said, just as the Wikis on various ancient-historical topics should mention Herodotus’s amusing anecdotes.

        • jim says:

          Whenever Wikipedia gets onto a political subject, it lies, and these days just about everything is political.

      • info says:


        Should have been replaced by proper detective work and rightful conviction of murder.

        • Koanic says:

          OT Law solves the problem of husband murder by placing the widow at the disposal of the nearest patrilineal kin of the dead husband. Private justice prevents crime.

          • FAR better solution than just burning some poor chick alive whose husband was mauled by a tiger. Remember, we are the good but realist guys, unsqueamish about cruel solutions when necessary: but not into unnecessary cruelty.

            • shaman says:

              Sure, but if your subordinates are fond of burning witches, sacrificing virgins to the gods, or foot binding, it’s better to just let them; perhaps they have a good reason to do it. That’s Chesterton’s fence right here: if you have a practical solution, don’t abolish it in favor of rationalist experimentation devoid of empirical grounding.

              Thus in these instances: burning witches makes sense because old women dabbling in alchemy (poison) are obviously up to no good; sacrificing unmarried teenagers to the gods is an excellent incentive to encourage young marriage and minimize inceldom; binding the feet of girls will prevent them from physically fleeing from their husbands, as often happens. Et cetera.

              You can say, “There are better solutions than these.” But if that is the case, you should still let the witch-burners figure them out on their own; until they do, if ever they do, what they’ve developed after centuries of trial-and-error is what suits them the most. They have no need for Progress and Enlightenment, so unless your intentions are malicious (priestly) rather than economic and military, it doesn’t make sense to inflict Progress and Enlightenment upon them.

              White knighting is never justified, and forcibly preventing people from working out their own solutions to their Women Problems is cruelty. Just as the King should not interfere in the internal household affairs of his productive citizens — that is: should not tell patriarchs how to handle their families; the King should adhere to the freehold principle, even when a certain patriarch legitimately mistreats his own wife — the Emperor or Hegemon should let the sundry vassals manage their own respective cultures, even if he personally doesn’t like those cultures.

              Universal hyper-moralizing is the mother of all the Cathedral’s sins.

              • Eli says:

                Come to think of it, the only non-cruel way of fixing those societies and their abhorrent ways is by physically replacing them with your own, more perfect people.

                • BC says:

                  That’s what the Spanish tried in Mexico.

                • shaman says:

                  And they probably would have succeeded, if only they could stop themselves from muh-dikking the natives for long enough.

              • jim says:

                The trouble with witch burning is that it enables busybodies sticking their nose into other people’s business to burn anyone. The Inquisition had the right approach to witch burning – they demanded proper methods of investigation of the accused witch, leading to a radical reduction in the number of witches burned. They did not outright say “No such thing as witches”.

                Footbinding, on the other hand, was generally done by the mother, hence the state meddling in the practice was obviously unwise.

              • Alrenous says:

                The Cathedral universalizes because it’s about power, not rationality. What you do if you’re genuinely good intentioned is lead by example, either using your own community or a small group of volunteers. You do not impose your beliefs by force, and you certainly don’t impose your beliefs on everyone at once.

                In other words you can tell Prusso-American schooling is malicious purely because it isn’t voluntary. If it was actually a good idea, Harris, Dewey et al would have adopted it for their own children, and enticed followers because their kids ended up better. You can tell people like Lenin and Saloth Sar are malicious purely because they don’t say, “Let me be Communist,” but, “Let you be Communist.”

              • J says:

                You assume a totally agnostic position regarding foreign or native peoples social arrangements. You dont know if burning widows was good or bad, and the British should have let the natives doing it. In Mexico, the Spanish should have let the Aztecs (after robbing their gold) keep sacrificing a virgin each day to make sure that the sun should rise in the morning. Or let the Papuans eat each other. Maybe Muslim practice of clitorostomy is right, maybe it is imperative to curb sexual impulses of those oversexed dark girls and it is a necessary social hygiene measure. What about the castrati? If you do not believe that there is good and there is evil, then everything goes. Read Plato’s Critias dialogue.

                • shaman says:

                  If you do not believe that there is good and there is evil, then everything goes.

                  Regulating the customs of out-groups presupposes basic commonality with those out-groups. That’s the moralistic premise behind universalism.

                  White/Jewish leftists tell niggers to abandon their trademark cannibalistic habits, tell spics to desist from superstitiously sacrificing people and pets to demons, and tell dunecoons to treat their soon-to-be-liberatyd womyn with greater dignity, because all those groups are thought to be “imago dei” (or the progressive equivalent thereof), so let’s help them rise to our highly advanced civilizational level and become worm-ridden incontinent GRIDS faggots.

                  And because race is nothing but a social construct and Somalians’ average IQ will instantly jump from 65 to 100 once Somalians step on magical Western soil, we need to import as many Somalians to the West as 3-dimensionally possible. Now, racist bigots will object, “Universalism, particularly unrestricted immigration, always precipitates race war and racial conquest,” but that’s only because they irrationally hate the pigmentation of the skin.

                  And because we all agree with Cultural Marxism, it follows that species is also a mere social construct (as is the animate/inanimate binary), so we should uniformly see eye-to-eye about Lysenkoism being the correct evolutionary theory; thus it’s surprising and mysterious for us that Koko the gorilla — who was perfectly fit to become an acclaimed Harvard professor, or at the very least, a low level substitute pedagogue, if you ask for my humble opinion — did not literally become Hominini by 2018, despite our concerted efforts, which deplorably did not include inter-species coitus.

                  Presumably, Koko needed additional subsidies fo’ them programs, and we all agree with CR that Koko remained a gorilla because Coca Cola had brainwashed her to retain her false Gorillini consciousness, so that’s more reason to ban and banish the (((capitalists))). Dear comrades, we need to convene the Politburo to discuss this urgent and potentially volatile issue, methinks. After all, if Koko with her IQ 85 did not become human yet, how will Somalians? In fact, rumor has it that Koko used to eat bananas, rather than wrapping them in condoms and sticking them in her ass. Shocking stuff.

                  (Some sarcasm was used throughout the preceding paragraphs)

                  Seriously though, if you accept that out-groups are essentially alien, then forcibly imposing your moral framework on them makes about as much sense as trying to impose your moral framework on lions in the safari. What is right and wrong depends on who and what you are; “right” and “wrong” are meaningless outside the context of “Which moral imperatives suit those like myself the best?” If for example you’re an Englishman, the practices of anyone else — be it sophisticated and inscrutable chingchongers or oogabooga tribal headhunters — should not matter to you, as long as those populations don’t move in to England.

                  Should Israel import millions of Pashtuns, Lembas, and Igbos claiming ancient Jewish descent?

                • Alrenous says:

                  Regulating (shaming) the outgroup presupposes the ability and will to impose your values on them by force of arms.

        • Samuel Skinner says:

          India’s average IQ is 82. And that is with the higher caste people dragging up the average. You might as well ask why the Arab world doesn’t have proper detective work.

        • shaman says:

          Sati among Hindus shouldn’t have been replaced, and FGM among Mohammadans shouldn’t be replaced. Let the 75-85 IQ darkies solve their respective Women Problems however they see fit. This bleeding-heart evangelizing “We are the global morality police” thing is a cornerstone of our NGO-dominated Clown World.

          And if you think, “Well, we’re only subverting some faraway low IQ foreigners, so who cares?” then observe how the same rationale used to subvert faraway low IQ foreigners always inevitable ends up used against the civilized white and East Asian societies, whose TFR is rapidly collapsing.

          Feminism: not even once.

          • Starman says:


            The Whiteknights really deserve a good beat down.

          • Alrenous says:

            Infant genital mutilators do not switch to using anaesthetic when it becomes available. This rather strongly demonstrates it’s about sadism, not Chesterton.

            Similarly, you will find that Sati was not replaced by lethal injection, had it survived long enough for that to be an option.

            As it happens, do-gooder busybodies are even worse than these horrific (Lovecraft level) sadists. Know them by their fruits and so on.

            • Samuel Skinner says:

              If the point is to kill women who poisoned their husbands, pain would be part of the deterrent effect.

    • info says:

      Sati originally existed to stop husband murders.

      But yes they should have replaced that with better practices involving investigation and detective work so that the woman is rightfully convicted of murder and put to death.

      • BC says:

        >But yes they should have replaced that with better practices involving investigation and detective work so that the woman is rightfully convicted of murder and put to death.

        It’s a well known fact that the best way to keep crime down is to ensure that crimes appear to have close to a 100% conviction rate. So nations with sane legal systems keep a few petty criminals around and convict them of any crimes they can’t solve immediately. The result is even criminals who escaped punishment think it’s a fluke and rarely re-offended. Keeps crime down with minimal costs.

        Older solutions worked better than modern detectives achieve considering how much lower crime was back then.

    • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

      Subversion always comes home to roost.

      It’s like a button that lets you win a game instantly, but lose every other game 10 years from now.

      How many people are going to resist pushing that button oftenly and repeatedly?

      Why kind of person would resist?

  28. Big Brutha says:

    Can confirm. Stupid ideas have real world consequences. I work at Foggy Bottom. I was in D.C. after the debacle of the Arab Spring in Egypt made the folks evacuate most of the people working there Stateside.

    Upon arrival in the U.S. I worked as a lowly functionary in the front office of the NEA bureau. Jeff Feltman was the A/S for the NEA bureau at the time.

    That poor schlub had to deal with the 7th Floor leadership at State under Hillary. The whole crew was either willfully blind, legally retarded, or so hopped up on their own Kool-aid as to make rational thought impossible.

    I remember one week when Libya was starting to become a thing of its turn. State was also dealing with the tsunami in Japan at the time so things were strained around the Department already.

    Everyone had decided that there was no point meddling in Libya. State’s NEA bureau was against it, the NSC was against it, SecDef Robert Gates was against it. Even the President was against it. I left work on Friday and everyone was clear that the U.S. was not touching this thing with a 10 foot pole.

    Lo and behold, Monday rolls around and the word is “go”. At first nobody in the office could figure it out. The administration had done a 180 over the weekend and nobody knew why.

    Then it startled to trickle out: at some point during the weekend Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, and Samantha Power had got President Obama into a room together and jawboned him into intervening. Three stupid, narcissistic women and their idiotic ideas about the world carried the day with a weak, narcissistic president.

    After the screw ups in Egypt and Tunisia, these three women decided to add Libya to the list. Samantha Power had developed some “duty to protect/intervene” doctrine. While there was much European chicanery to go with it, this was the argument that got the U.S. involved in Libya.

    U.S. handling of Mubarak in Egypt created the conditions for Libya. U.S. handling of Muammar al-Qaddafi set the stage for Syria and ISIS. If the U.S. had handled Mubarak as it had the Shah: abdicate, take your billions, enjoy a pleasant exile in Paris or Geneva or something, then we could have done a deal in Libya. Instead, al-Qaddafi ended up dead, and then we started running guns through Libya to Syria and then Bashar al-Assad decided he didn’t like the idea of what happened in Libya happening to him and his Alawite minority.

    Fast forward to that conflict squirtting millions of displaced Syrians and Iraqis from their homes and headed for Europe.

    In short: stupid moronic ideas by stupid moronic women moved a Middle Eastern problem into the heart of Europe. And Mutti Merkel obliged with idiocy of her own.

    Foggy Bottom couldn’t find its own buttcheeks with both hands. Tillerson was trying to downsize it but he forgot the job and got into a pissing match with the President. Which is too bad since the reforms weren’t even half done. Pompeo is a conservative-“business-as-usual” swamp creature.

    Clinton was horrible by any measure as Secretary of State and it is a sign of the brain rot damaging much of the American public that she was ever considered a viable candidate for president.

    The problem now is that President Trump doesn’t want to accept what reality has dictated: you can walk away and hope they don’t kill you and yours, you can join the Swamp, or you can do unto them before they do unto you.

    I don’t think he has the killer instinct. I think he really does want to leave some kind of legacy as the good guy who Made America Great Again rather than the guy who tore the guts out of the Deep State and broke their power permanently. The problem is, if he doesn’t do the latter, he has no hope of achieving the former.

    • Koanic says:

      This has the ring of truth to it. The tinfoil hats love to sperg about the Illuminati etc, and I’m sure that witch Hillary has ties, but if you don’t account for the idiot consequences of feminism, bureaucracy and democracy, you aren’t playing in reality. It’s both and.

    • jim says:

      Trump has the gift of seeing the situation as it truly is: “coup”. “Mueller report do over”. The system is drifting towards deadly violence. He does not want to go there, but if he finds himself there, it will not take him by surprise.

  29. info says:

    “To conquer and hold such places, one must massacre, castrate, or enslave all of the ruling elite that seems fractious, which is pretty much all of them, and replace them with your own people, speaking your own language, and practicing your own customs, as the Normans did in England, and the French did in Algeria, starting 1830. ”

    One example is this:

    2 Kings 9:7-8
    “7And you are to strike down the house of your master Ahab, so that I may avenge the blood of My servants the prophets and all the servants of the LORD shed by the hand of Jezebel. 8The whole house of Ahab will perish, and I will cut off from Ahab all the males in Israel, both slave and free”

  30. Wilbur Hassenfus says:

    How much dull gabble is there to wade through in those emails, to get to anything amusing or instructive?

    • jim says:

      There is nothing there amusing or instructive. The main thing one learns is that our enemies are grossly deluded, and not terribly bright.

      • Mister Grumpus says:

        Thank you for your willingness and gumption to dig into those Clinton emails. Even if it’s all dumb and banal, I still hope you’ll somehow be able to boil down and interpret that dumb banality into a presentation here, in your way, through your style. I look forward to it.

Leave a Reply