New Canon on Church and State

May 26th, 2016

I hearby declare Citadel’s statement on Church and State to be neoreactionary canon.

A lot of neoreactionaries are Christian adherents of organized religion – or wish they could be Christian – or wish they could be adherents of some organized religion or other.  I suppose all of us wish that.

Trouble is that today’s Roman Catholicism and the rest are heretical, satanic, and are committing institutional suicide as fast as possible.  The pope wants “speaking ex Cathedra” to become yet another letterhead of Acorn, the Vatican to become a museum run by Havard with tour guides giving spiels written by Ivy Leaguers explaining how stupid and wicked things were in the bad old days, and the Church buildings where once Catholics met to receive the Eucharist to become Marxist Lesbian bookstores, as most of the Churches in San Francisco already have.

Speaking as a believer, Citadel argues the same conclusion I have less convincingly argued as an unbeliever, that I argued less convincingly because an unbeliever.  The Church should be subordinate to the good state as a woman should be subordinate to her husband.

The Church inevitably succumbs to the state religion.  See the Pope kiss Harvard’s feet.  And back when the Church arguably had some independence, and real earthly power, when the Holy Roman Empire had lost all power, but the Church had gained far too much earthly power, we got indulgences and Chaucer’s summoner.   Henry the Eighth was doubtless a bad man, but you got no indulgences from his church, and his summoners were subject to discipline.

The worst of the Roman Catholic Church was not the pornocracy, when Popes were succeeded by the sons of their mistresses.  Hereditary priesthood is an excellent system, and normatively celibate priesthood a horrible mistake.  The Church was great, faithful, orthodox, glorious, and virtuous under the pornocrats and under the Holy Roman Emperors.  The worst of the Church was indulgences and corrupt summoners.

All slopes are slippery

May 20th, 2016

Just as overt discrimination against blacks was replaced with overt discrimination against whites with no intervening period of neutrality, when people opposed the double standard and started socially enforcing chastity on men, they abandoned social enforcement of chastity on women.

In the social world, everything is a feedback loop, and all slopes are slippery. The resulting equilibria rarely involve “equality.”

Either men are morally superior to women, and women’s sexuality is restricted, or women are morally superior to men, and male sexuality is restricted. Someone is always in charge, both at the societal level, and at the individual level.

The only time someone is not in charge is when the two sides don’t know each other very well, and don’t know how hard they can push. This is why dating is a process of the woman figuring out what she can get away with. They want to progress to the power shakeup so they know who is in charge.

Once someone wins an initial dispute, and gets defined as the party with the most valid needs (or greatest grievances), then their moral superiority turns into power. Once the first Schelling Point has been crossed, it’s very hard for the losing party to hold other Schelling Points, and will lose as much ground as the culture/subculture allows and the virtue of the winning party (e.g. upper class, lower class, and feminist women will take different amounts of flesh if they win at moral superiority).

Once one Schelling point goes, there can be no natural equilibrium at some new, nearby Schelling point.  The new equilibrium is not a new stationary Schelling point near the old, but rather is unending retreat.   Retreat under fire always turns to total rout.

One possibility would be to give both men and women moral status in different spheres of society. This seems like it could work, but isn’t it what the Victorians tried? Women were given great prestige and moral authority in the home and education, but that moral authority expanded, as Mencken makes clear. Women’s moral sphere got bigger and bigger until eventually it swallowed the male sphere, and we now have Codes of Conduct in tech.

Blacks and whites could separate, and be in some sense equal if apart.  But men and women need to be together, and being different, either men will rule women, or women rule men, and for obvious biological reasons women ruling men does not work very well.

Shit tests are designed to be passed

May 13th, 2016

This is not a PUA blog.  Not going to tell you how to recognize a shit test or how to pass it.  I myself am not all that good at such things.  But I will tell you that you need to know such things.

Mostly the red pill is the rediscovery of stuff that back in the fifties and sixties everyone knew but no one would plainly say.

Shit tests, however, represent a new and clearer understanding.  The Taming of the Shrew is all about passing shit tests, so this is not a completely new discovery, but we understand shit tests better than men in the past.

Girls cannot help shit testing men that they like, any more than a man can help looking at a woman’s breasts.  When acquiring a girlfriend, you will be hit by shit tests.  When trying to keep your wife or girlfriend in line, you will be hit by shit tests.

A shit test is a power struggle.  If the girl wins, for example getting you to apologize, making you hold her bag, making you try to please her in ways that can never please her, she loses.  If you win, you win.  Never apologize, never explain.

I think girls are genuinely unconscious of shit testing men. They think their supposed attitudes are sincerely held, though their attitude evaporates in a puff of smoke when you blow off their shit test.  (Some shit tests, like showing up late, or going home to mother, require a bit of patience before you will see the attitude change.)

And it is hard to tell the difference between a shit test and girl really not liking you, or really not wanting to have sex with you.  Except that shit tests are designed to be passed.

And shit tests are often horrifyingly harsh.  It is often hard to pass a shit test, because they are really meant to be hard to pass.  And if you fail a shit test it is likely to become retroactively true that the girl really did not like you, or really did not want to have sex with you.  Hard to tell the difference between a thermonuclear shit test and a thermonuclear rejection.  Except that one will reliably get you laid and the other one will not.

I am not going to tell you how to detect a shit test.  You just have to intuit it.  After a while you get a reflexive feeling of resentment “Hell, this girl is out of line.  She is behaving improperly”. But you should not react to a shit test by getting hostile and angry since such an attitude assumes in advance you will fail the shit test, rather than pass it and claim your startlingly generous reward. Rather, you should assume she will be happy to be gently but firmly put in her proper place.

Not going to tell you how to pass them.  I am not particularly good at passing them.  They are hard to pass, particularly in a society that gives women nuclear weapons.

Consent does not make sex right, and lack of consent does not make sex wrong.

A porn star is apt to wind up feeling mighty bad about sex and her life, even though she gets formally videotaped giving explicit verbal consent to absolutely everything. Most women married by abduction or by arrangement feel pretty good about their marriage, and all the better if husband firmly insists on sex every night.

Women do not really like needing to consent to sex, let alone consent moment to moment. Which is one of the reasons you will probably strike out if you try to get a woman to give you explicit verbal consent. They much prefer “It just happened”.  Women really don’t want to succeed in getting their own way on sex, because if they get their own way, that kind of implies that the person they are having sex with is weaker, needier, or lower status that they are.  In the environment of evolutionary adaptation, if a woman really does not have much choice in who’s semen gets thrust into her pussy, it is probably better quality semen from the standpoint of Darwin, and more honorable and legitimate sex from the point of view of the God of the old Testament.  They like to be dominated and commanded into sex.  So a girl losing shit tests is her warm up to getting nailed.  Just as every time a man looks at a girls boobs, he is thinking about having sex with her, every time a girl shit tests a man, she is thinking about being overcome, overpowered, dominated, and submitting sexually to that man.

I took a lady friend, and her good friend, to a resort, because I hoped for a threesome.  This was extremely stupid of me, because one is never going to make a threesome with one’s lady  friend’s good friend, because they will fear breaking up their friendship, but, hey, all the blood had as usual rushed from brain to my little man.

Let us call my lady friend girl 1, and her good friend who failed to have sex with me and distracted the attention of girl 1 away from me girl 2.

I met a man at the resort, and he wanted to join my group, and that was fine with me because he, being an outsider trying to join the group, was unavoidably confirming my alpha male status with every move he made, so I asked him to join us.  We will call him beta man.

Eventually he very delicately sort of asked which girl was surplus to my requirements, which girl was the third wheel on the bicycle.  To which I straightforwardly replied that girl number 2 was the extra, but he could not have her.  He should hit on some other girl.

And, predictably, everyone acted as if I was being completely reasonable and had rightful authority over girl 2’s life.  But, of course, girls do not take this kind of treatment lying down. Or rather, standing up.  If you tell a girl she cannot have something, she is going to want to have it.

Predictably, after a while girl number 2 just happened to wander off so that she is as far from me as she can be while still remaining in line of sight.  And I pretend to not look at that line of sight.

And Beta man disappears, takes a circuitous route while out of sight, and just happens to reappear near girl number two.

I pretend to not look, while glancing every now and then out of the corner of my eye

I know he is going get an absolutely brutal shit test, because, he, and she, are literally sneaking behind my back, and thus he is acting beta.  To get enough alpha cred to nail her, he needs to pass a brutal shit test, and she is going to give him the opportunity to gain enough alpha cred to nail her.

So he chats to her, she chats to him.  I cannot hear them and they are too far away to see very clearly, but suddenly he acts has though she has stabbed him with a spear, the spear is sticking all the way through him and out the other side, and he is coughing blood.  He flees in shame and horror.

The poor man was severely traumatized, perhaps for life.  The next day we saw him in town, and my girls called out to him to join us, and he acted like we were opening fire with a machine gun.  He fled again in abject terror.

But I know girl number 2 liked him, and wanted to spend a night in his room at the resort, because she was disappointed when he fled.

Had he joined us again, he would have faced an even more brutal shit test, to give him the opportunity to gain the alpha cred he lost by being beta to my alpha, and failing the first shit test.  But if he had passed – well, it was obvious to me that girl number two had plans, though I don’t know if it was obvious to her.

Maybe like Roger Elliot he spent the rest of his life creepily staring at women from a great distance waiting for them to approach him, then fleeing in terror if approached, and finally broke down, killed a bunch of people and committed suicide.  Maybe he became a hairy hermit in the depths of the Amazonian rainforest.  But it was obvious to me that girl number two had conscious or subconscious plans to spend the night in his room, rather than on the spare bed in mine, and was visibly disappointed when her plans fell through.

The moral of the story is:  Pass your shit tests.  The rewards are great.  The punishment for failure is dire.  And it is easier to pass your shit tests if you believe in the chain of being:  Beasts < blacks < children < women < men < angels.

But the trouble is that society arms women with nuclear weapons against being hit on by upper class males, and in particular white males.  This makes upper class men less sexy than lower class men, and lower class men less sexy than underclass men, and white men less sexy than black men.  It is harder to pass a shit test the higher your social class.

Libertarianism

May 12th, 2016

Most neo reactionaries are ex libertarians, or ex anarchists.

Indeed, if you are a feudalist you are not even an ex anarchist.  You are an anarcho capitalist who doubts that most people should be allowed authority in the anarcho capitalist system of enforcement and justice, or are likely to receive a substantial voice.

“I pencil” is a famous criticism of socialism, which shows how difficult it is to centrally plan a pencil.

The problem is made much easier by good fences – and the occasional armed rentacop and fierce guard dog keeping an eye on those fences.

The socialist looks at those fences and says “the fences are unproductive, and the guard dogs are not only unproductive but costly and dangerous. They also look unfriendly and uncomradely, they divide us. Let us therefore abolish them”

And then the socialist, attempting to produce a pencil, produces instead many miles of red tape and a severe pencil shortage, frequently followed by a gulag full of “wreckers” that he blames for the pencil shortage.

The fences and the dogs serve a purpose, that purpose being to subdivide big problems into subproblems small enough to be manageable.  Central regulation, on the other hand, bureaucrats claiming the power to meddle in what goes on behind fences, turns many small tractable problems into one gigantic mess.

Libertarianism works provided you have fences, and often enough you also need rentacops and vicious junk yard dogs to make libertarianism work. And it is the only thing that does work to make a modern economy function – apart from terror and mass murder, and terror and mass murder does not work nearly as well as libertarianism and fences.

Libertarianism does not work where you do not have fences. Public transport in America fails because of blacks. To make it work again, you really are going to have to send blacks to the back of the bus. Whites just will not ride buses with significant black ridership, for excellent and glaringly obvious reasons that no one dares mention. You wanted integrated buses, got buses with no white ridership.

Similarly “integration” was in practice black workers in Detroit riding on the backs of white workers in Detroit, shortly followed by the dispossession and ethnic cleansing of whites in the inner city and Detroit.  Detroit’s car industry failed because they were forced to treat productive and unproductive workers alike and were forced to hire unproductive workers.  Ayn Rand depicts this, without, however, mentioning the overwhelmingly predominant race of the unproductive workers.  When Detroit was thriving, she accurately predicted its future as a desolate ruin, abandoned by all civilized people.

If you have blacks and whites in the same classroom, the blacks are very much louder, take up more space, and are dangerous and threatening, disrupting education and forcing the white kids into submissive roles.

Further, the kind of discipline required to make it possible for blacks to learn in a classroom is a lot more severe than the kind of discipline required to make it possible for whites to learn in a classroom. Few blacks are capable of learning without being whipped. Successful black schools are harsh, and the harsher they are the more successful.

And of course, at a certain age, the blacks are into, or have completed puberty, and the black pupils are man sized and able to beat up the teacher, while the whites have not begun puberty, or have scarcely begun it, and are still child sized and still behave like children.

And if you have twelve year old white boys and twelve year old white girls in the same classroom, the twelve year old girls are well and truly into puberty, and the twelve year old boys are not, creating a profoundly disruptive environment, though not as severe as that caused by twelve year old white boys, and twelve year old black adult men in the same classroom.

But the biggest failure of libertarianism, the biggest failure by far, is marriage and the family. Libertarianism is basically incompatible with family formation, children, and grandchildren, with the continued existence of whites and east Asians, for white and east Asian women are psychologically incapable of breeding near replacement in a libertarian environment.

The problem is that for a man and a woman to raise their children together, to provide their children with a mother and a father, they have to form one household, no fences. But if one household, then one captain. The man has to be boss. Further, they have to be stuck with each other for incentive compatibility. Consent to sex has to be once and forever. If consent to sex is moment to moment, then marriage is moment to moment, and you get serial monogamy, which means that husbands have no incentive to care for and nurture their wives, and wives no incentive to please and obey their husbands. Which means that women get their way sexually until they hit a certain age and become cat ladies, and men do not get their way sexually, and means that children have only one parent, and a lengthy succession of violent and abusive step parents.

A libertarian solution to marriage and the family would mean two separate households with visitation rights. A lot of people are trying that today, and it is not working. This stuff just fails. Broken families, empty buses, hellish schools.

If you cannot solve a problem with fences, guards, and guard dogs, the solution is unlikely to be libertarian.

Duerte Harry

May 9th, 2016

If the votes are honestly counted, Duerte Harry will be the next president of the Philippines.

He was previously mayor of Davao, where he solved a crime problem, in substantial part a problem of Muslim criminals predating on Christians, by killing criminals.  A lot of criminals.  Of all religions.

When I was in Davao, some people threatened him with lawfare, and he responded in his newspaper that if they sued him, he would kill them, their wives, and their children.

Motorized tricycles are the major form of public transportation in some parts of Davao and most places near Davao.  My tricycle driver stopped to buy fuel, and told me how a street kid had snatched a fuel payment, equivalent to six US dollars, and subsequently been killed by one of Duerte Harry’s death squads.

I wonder how many other payments that kid snatched before they nailed him. Also, how big was this “kid”?  Had to be strong enough to snatch, and fast enough to get away.

The people who were allegedly death squads were wonderfully disciplined, always perfectly polite and courteous, their uniforms extremely neat, their guns and decorations shiny.  I felt very safe with them, whereas I don’t feel safe with western police, who are conspicuously undisciplined and discourteous.  I always get the feeling that western police may capriciously decide I have done something illegal (after all, there are so many things that are illegal) just to show me who is boss.   I have always been able to talk my way out of trouble with police even when caught red handed, except for traffic offenses, or else my lawyer was able to talk me out of trouble, but why the hell should I need to talk my way out of trouble? I am an honest decent guy.  Anarcho tyranny is that they enforce all sorts of laws against people like me, and not against the kid who snatches six dollars.

When car-burning riots raged in Sweden, police had a policy of deliberately doing nothing about the rioters while cracking down decisively on so-called “vigilantes” who tried to stop immigrant rioters burning cars and neighborhoods. To add insult to injury, authorities issued parking tickets on burned cars.

In America, a four year old boy was groped in a bathroom.  His father slugged the groper.  Father arrested, groper not arrested.

See Will’s anarcho tyranny blog for a long long list of what police do while allowing criminals to run amuck.  He tends to focus on tyranny.  Here is some anarchy. And more anarchy.

Duerte Harry’s death squads don’t do anything like that, any more than they would let the brass on their uniforms get dull, or drink while on duty, or wear uniforms that were less than perfectly neat and pressed.  Their scrupulous neatness and rigid discipline is a symbol that they do not engage in such self indulgent bullying.  Their perfect courtesy and crisply pressed uniforms are a promise that they do not threaten people like me.  They threaten people who would snatch six dollars out of my hand.

There a pattern all over the West of excessive force against the innocent, the weak, the law-abiding, and those defending themselves and others but excessive deference to actual violent criminals.

This reflects a more general problem of the state, and members of the state apparatus, displaying ever less discipline.  Which problem starts at the top with fireproof senior public servants.

 

 

Adulthood by race

May 9th, 2016

Eyeballing the graphs in the Journal of Endoctrinology, looks like American blacks become physically adult roughly four years earlier than American whites.  Which makes them approximately intermediate between chimps and men.  This is consistent with black females typically experiencing menarche at nine and white females typically experiencing menarche at twelve.  Data on puberty in black males seems curiously hard to find, suggesting that it is horribly politically incorrect.  Just eyeballing American blacks, looks to me that black males experience puberty at about the same age as black females or close to it, while white males experience puberty about two years later than white females, but that is just a wild assed guess.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has issued a study that says the difference is only one year, as measured by the start of testicle growth.  Maybe I am prejudiced, but I find that hard to believe.   The interesting measure that people should care about is not growth of testicles, which no one can see, but growth in bones, which everyone can see, and which can be objectively measured far more accurately.  Maybe there is not much difference in the age and which testicles start to grow, but there is surely a pretty big difference in the age at which bones have substantially grown.  It is also kind of suspicious that there is a only a one year difference in the start of testicle growth, which is hard to define and hard to measure, and a three year difference in menarche, which is entirely unambiguous to define and measure.  Much as indications of climate change are more alarming the less they can be accurately measured, and the less alarming the more they can be accurately measured.

Which makes educating whites and black children in the same classrooms segregated by age, rather than by physical development, pretty much insane.

Similarly, stupid to put girls and boys in the same classroom by age during puberty, though not as stupid as putting whites and blacks in the same classroom by age.  Indeed, it is pretty obvious that during puberty, kids should be sorted by their puberty stage, not by age.

The reason we don’t do what we obviously should do is that what we are doing advantages female children over male, and young black men over white male children.

Formalism

May 7th, 2016

Moldbug argued for Formalism – that the official reality of political power should match up with the actual reality.

And I would add to that the rectification of names: That words should cut reality at the joints, rather than lay a comforting layer of snow over what everyone knows but no one can actually say.  We need to bring back words like “bastard” to accurately describe the consequences of fatherlessness.

The advantage of formalism is illustrated by comparing Dubai with North Korea.

If you say your hereditary King is King because he personally owns the right to rule Dubai, which he inherited from his father, works a whole lot better than if you say your King is democratically elected to give effect to the will of the people of North Korea.  Because if you say your King is democratically elected and so forth, you have to shoot anyone who shows signs of noticing reality.

We are increasingly in an informal situation since Harvard exercises informal power – for example making it illegal for white males to have sex with their wives is an immensely unpopular law which is being backdoored in through the endless redefinition of rape, sexual assault, and domestic violence, since any politician that openly stood for such a law would be instantly reduced to a smoking grease spot.

The more the actual distribution of power differs from the nominal and formal distribution of power, the more political repression is needed, and the more those that exercise power need to act illegally.

The need for widespread and frequent hypocritically and corrupt acts lead to criminal acts done for profit, as for example the looting of Haiti and the looting of post Soviet Russia.

Because your entire real government is acting illegally and criminally even when it is filling in potholes and managing the water supply, tends to act illegally by stealing and raping.  I am not aware of the guys from Harvard raping – seems that our male ruling elite is increasingly forbidden to have sex at all, and you cannot make it into the elite unless you have abnormally low testosterone, but the high in the high low alliance turn a blind eye to rapes by their low political allies.

However, though the high have not been raping, and high males are increasingly not having sex at all, they have been stealing on a grand scale that gets steadily grander.

Since lies, fraud, and violent repression needed to just do the routine everyday stuff that governments are supposed to do, particular members of the government are apt to use lies, fraud, and violent repression to get ahead and benefit themselves.

Informal government is thus apt to suffer lack of cohesion, thus those that actually own the government are apt to have trouble defending their ownership.

If property rights poorly defined, violence apt to ensue.  Who owns the government is bound to get nasty sooner or later.  Informal government has been fairly peaceful in recent times, but has a potential for apocalyptic violence.

The Summoner’s tale

May 5th, 2016

Chaucer depicts three priests:  The Friar, the Summoner, and the Pardoner.  All of the them are corrupt and avaricious.  The Summoner and the Pardoner are low testosterone gays, and the Pardoner is a predatory pedophile gay.  The Friar has seduced many women, and been forced, therefore, to pay dowries to get them married off.

The Moldbug canon is that the professors rule, with the mass media as the mid-level priesthood.  But lately Donald Trump and the alt-right have been giving the mass media a hard time.

Which tells me that the world is starting to lose faith in the superior virtue of our priesthood.

The disturbances in Hong Kong were a good example of priestly power.  Cathedral astroturf protestors were able to disrupt the city because backed by police.  The police did what was virtuous,  (they supported democracy and all that) rather than what their duty required.   (The police should have arrested criminals and troublemakers,  and kept the roads open.  It was police, rather than protestors, that closed the roads.  When a tiny handful of protestors declared a road closed, if police had walked away, drivers would have driven over the protestors.)

Had the same thing happened in Tiananmen Square, the Cathedral would have successfully mounted a “democratic” takeover of China, and Wall Street would have looted China the way it looted Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union.

Contrary to Cathedral myth, nobody got killed in Tiananmen Square.  The authorities, having the warriors cheerfully obey them, were able to quell the protests with very little fuss.  You only get real violence when the priests succeed in sowing disunity among the warriors.  Recall what happened when “Occupy Wall Street” ran into Wall Street rentacops.

What happened, I hear you ask?

Answer:  Absolutely nothing happened, because Wall Street rentacops were certain of their duty and the righteousness of performing their duty.  If you are a rentacop, you believe in private property rights.  It is part of your training, and if you don’t believe in private property rights, you fail your training.  So when Occupy showed up to violate private property rights, the rentacops said “No” and Occupy failed to violate private property rights.  And similarly, nothing happened in Tiananmen Square.

Priestly power rests on moral authority, on superior virtue, while warrior authority rests on the ability to kick ass. We know the priesthood is virtuous because they are ceaselessly nagging us to be virtuous.  All of us white males are racist and misogynist, and should be ashamed.  Our evil thoughts lower black and female self esteem, and thus cause black and female misbehavior and underperformance.  All black and female misbehavior is evidence of just how bad we white males are, and how ashamed we should be.  Similarly the extremely high death rate among gays from disease, suicide, and gay-on-gay violence is all our fault.  HIV is a heterosexual disease because it is caused by heterosexuals thinking bad thoughts about gays and denying them the opportunity to make blood transfusions.  When blacks burn down the cities built by white people that they stole from white people, and drive out the few remaining whites, that demonstrates what evil racists we whites are.  Whenever females get in trouble through underperformance and bad behavior, in particular when they render children fatherless, we males should pay the costs of female decisions.

All of which goes to show how much more virtuous the priesthood is than you and me.  Their standards are so very very high that it is very difficult for sinners like myself to live up to such high standards.

I notice that the going price for refusing to take rapeugees in Europe is about  250 000 US$ per rapeugee rejected.  Diversity is good for you and if you don’t want the immense benefits of diversity you have to pay 250 000 per diversity. Which is about the same as the price that our priests pay to live far away from the victims of white oppression.  Which, realistically, sets the value of diversity as negative US$250 000 per browner person.   It is harder to perceive prices for avoiding single women, since men like to meet them and visit them while not living too close to them, but I would guess the price for living away from women lacking male supervision to be about US$100 000.  The traditional connotations of the word “bastard” implies that female misconduct has substantial negative externalities, and residential patterns suggest a willingness to pay a substantial amount of money to avoid these externalities.

Remember all that indignation about blacks being forced to go to the back of the bus?  Well now, we don’t force blacks to go to the back of the bus … and whites don’t ride buses where they are likely to encounter significant black ridership, for excellent, obvious, and entirely unmentionable reasons.

In the time of Chaucer, summoners had the job of punishing people for their sins against religion, pardoners had the job of selling people indulgences for their current and future sins, while friars had the easier and more popular job of forgiving people their recent sins, supposedly conditional on repentance – thereby giving them immunity against the summoner.  Of course, you found the friar more easily impressed by your repentance if you made a small donation, but this was generally cheaper than buying an indulgence or bribing a summoner.   So friars, summoners, and pardoners were in competition and did not much like each other.

Chaucer’s Pardoner cheerfully admits to his own evil and corruption.  Chaucer’s Friar exposes the corruption of summoners, whereupon the Summoner gets vehemently stuck into friars, root and branch.  The summoners excessive interest in assholes becomes apparent.  Recall the conspicuous lack of testosterone and the popularity of gay sex amongst our priesthood today.

And then in due course we had the protestant reformation and the wars of religion.

Fertile age women should always be under the supervision and control of husbands or fathers, and if due to misfortune or misconduct, a fertile age woman is not under such supervision, she should be placed under male supervision one way or another.  If you don’t believe this, you will find it hard to handle women,  will be inclined to credit our priesthood with immense virtue, and will be ashamed of your irresistible sinfulness.

People whose misconduct adversely affects other people’s property values should suffer various forms of exclusion, segregation, and apartheid. Persistent petty criminals and vagrants, people profoundly disinclined to earn a living, should be enslaved.  In profiling individuals for their likely adverse affect on property values, and their likely future criminality and potential for productive free employment, race, sex, and ancestry (such as bastardy) should be legitimately part of the profile.  The deserving poor should be taken care of.  The undeserving poor should be dealt with.  Since the apple does not fall far from the tree, it should be legitimate to discriminate in favor of the children of productive people raised by their parents, and against the children of unproductive people and people who caused problems.   If you don’t believe this, property prices and living patterns make no sense, you will unnecessarily expose yourself to danger, will be inclined to credit our priesthood with immense virtue, and will be ashamed of your irresistible sinfulness.  Why won’t your ride the bus, you wicked man?

 

American Law Institute Sexual Assault Draft

May 2nd, 2016

You have probably heard that congress makes law. It does not, it has not for a long time, and were it to start doing so it would be a revolutionary act. First there would be tanks in the streets. 2201 C Street would be on fire and full of bullet holes and dead bodies. Blood would be running out the doors into the gutter.

Harvard makes law, and when Harvard, having decided in general form what the law is going to be, gets to working out the details of that law, a committee of the Ivies meets to draw up the fine print, and that committee of the Ivies is the American Law Institute.

And right now they are drafting a law that says that an explicit verbal no outweighs any amount of non verbal yes, and that any sexual act without an explicit verbal yes is sexual assault.

Since this is the internet, I assume that some substantial portion of my readers are unfamiliar with the normal way that sex goes down between a man and a women.

You never get an explicit verbal yes from a normal decent women, only from whores and hard core burned out sluts.

The human mating dance is innate, instinctive, pre verbal, and pre rational. You get a woman into a sex place, (such your bedroom) using lots of touching and gentle caresses but also all the human arts of words and persuasion. (Where are your etchings? I thought you were going to show me your etchings?) But once she is in there, words soon stop.

If you try to get explicit verbal consent, at best you are breaking the mood and interrupting the playing out of your and her sexual instincts, and at worst you are very likely just not going to get it. And it continues to be that way with your wife and girlfriends, except that the full mating dance gets abbreviated.

Normal decent people just don’t do sex in accordance with Harvard rules and they are not going to start. They are going to go right on doing it the way it always has been done.

We are all criminals now.

Rabid Puppies and My Little Pony

April 30th, 2016

For a long time the major science fiction publishing houses have been vomiting forth tedious hate filled political lectures that patronizingly scold the traditional audience for science fiction and fantasy: White males. The only part of what they produce that actually sells is romance porn for women where the female protagonist or gay bottom protagonist gets nailed by demons, dinosaurs, vampires, zombies, and werewolves.

(I have only just now discovered that dinosaur porn actually exists. I thought it was a joke of the Rabid Puppies. You would think it would be ironic, but porn does not do irony. Girl gets nailed by carnivorous dinosaurs with grotesquely large equipment.)

The Hugo awards have generally celebrated the most pompous and worst written political lectures, works that are very little read, plus a few celebrations of grotesquely deviant female perversion, works considerably more widely read.

The Rabid Puppies are akin to Gamergate, in that social justice warriors don’t like anything that white males do for fun, and intervene to stop it from being fun and instead make it morally improving. Thus, for example, Title IX is largely aimed at stopping white males from engaging in physical team sports. Apolitical white males get pissed with this and become political. Hence the rabid puppies want good science fiction and fantasy to get the awards. And particularly good science fiction and fantasy that pisses on social justice warriors.

And among their nominations were a two episode My Little Pony story.

Social Justice warriors took this as a troll, that the Rabid Puppies were nominating something bad just to show that they could, much as Social Justice Warriors stage revolting and disgusting events to see how far they can force people to degrade and humiliate themselves, but of course that is not Rabid Puppy style. If they nominate it, has to be good, or something they think is good.

So I downloaded this My Little Pony Episode, “the cutie map”, And it is pretty good and very deep. 1984, Brave New World, and Harrison Bergeron, written for ten year old girls.

A commie pony has established a commie utopia, and our major characters drop in to investigate.

There is the mandatory official happiness of “Brave New World”, the destructive equalizing downwards of “Harrison Bergeron”, and the poverty, ugliness, and lying authoritarianism of “1984”. All depicted for ten year old girls.

Of course “My Little Pony” is in the business of teaching little girls prosocial lessons, and the first lesson that we are beaten over the head with is “people can disagree, and still be friends”. Which gets repeated numerous times. Sounds pretty bland and innocent as a lecture to ten year old girls. Right? Except that it is set in a society of terrifying political correctness where everyone agrees with everyone or else. Which makes it not at all bland and innocent.

In other words, Social Justice Warriors, the mob who wants to no platform Moldbug, the rioters trying the shut down the Trump rallies, are behaving like naughty, unpleasant, bad, nasty children. Like naughty ten year old girls.

Another lesson, less heavily thumped, is that some people are better than other people, and that some people can be better than other people, and still be friends. Also, the commie utopia has no choice in goods, and what goods it does have are no good. The equal ponies are dressed in identical coarse sacks, and eat identical bad food. Since everyone is supposedly equally good at muffin production, the cook is in fact dreadful at cooking muffins.

At eighteen minutes in the first episode, we find that the incompetent muffin cook has, like Harrison Bergeron, been deprived of her special talent that once made her better than others.

We also encounter the Overton Window “that sounds extreme”. Or rather “that souNDS EEEXXXTEEEEEEEEME!!” – for views that before the communist revolution would have been utterly ordinary and taken for granted. Even those plotting counter revolution are incapable of crimethink. They want moderate and reasonable counter revolution – nothing EEEXXXTEEEEEEEEME!! They are cuckservative ponies. Communism is horrible, brutal, and failing disastrously, so they want just slightly less communism. But nothing “EEEXXXTEEEEEEEEME!!”

Yes, My Little Pony features a cuckservative.

And then, at the end of the first episode, they discover there is no leaving utopia,

At the start of the next episode, we hear propaganda broadcast by loudspeaker. “Exceptionalism is a lie” say the loudspeakers. But the ten year old girls viewing the episode know the major characters are exceptional – leading to a moral unusual in shows directed at ten year old girls “Don’t trust the mass media – it is probably propaganda.”

But the major characters have had their special abilities, their superiority, magically removed from them. They are handicapped down to the lowest common denominator. They find that they like dull books and crappy soviet style goods.

Then comes the pressure to rat out your fellow reactionaries and counter revolutionaries.

Then Fluttershy discovers that some commies are more equal than other commies, reveals it, and counter revolution ensues – an ending that I fear is far too optimistic. We already know that some commies are more equal than other commies, and no one is revolting.