Ferguson chimp out

August 17th, 2014

Short recap of the Ferguson story:

Michael Brown, a huge black man helped himself to some tobacco in a shop, then strong armed the shopkeeper rather than paying.  He then walked down the street, expecting traffic to get out of his way.  When a policeman told him to stop jaywalking, he attacked the policeman, forced his way into the policeman’s car, and attempted to take the cops gun. The cop shot him.

According to heavily tattooed gang members wearing clothes intended to intimidate, after being shot, Michael Brown ran with his hands in the air, and the policeman shot Michael Brown again while he was holding his arms in the air and running.

This might well nonetheless be true, at least the part about him being shot while running, though not the part about his hands in the air, for if Michael Brown attacked me I might well do the same thing.  He is big, scary, violent, thuggish, and crazy.  Yeah, it would be the wrong thing to do, but when a big crazy guy attacks one out of the blue, one is apt to do the wrong thing.

The blacks proceeded to loot and burn.  The local police, facing collective criminal conduct, responded militarily, engaging in collective violence to crush collective violence – a military style response.

This “military”, which is to say collective, violence of course horrified the press, who blamed the police, and in particular the white cop in charge.  So a black cop was put in charge, and a huge round of news stories proceeded about peaceful protests and how everything was wonderful in peaceful civilized harmony, blithely ignoring events running contrary to story, blithely ignoring that the blacks were taking out one cop after another by collective violence, which the individual violence of the cops was ineffectual in preventing.  And then, contrary to story, the black cop had to resort to collective military style violence to keep his cops alive.

This is analogous to events in Gaza.  One might well believe that Israel blockades Gaza because they are evil racists, but when Egypt blockades Gaza, people of the same race and religion as themselves, it’s pretty obvious that the problem is terrorists operating out of Gaza, not Gaza’s neighbors.  And, similarly, the problem in Ferguson is individual and collective black violence, which collective violence has to be met by collective violence.

The larger story is that blacks destroyed Saint Louis, then, fleeing their own destruction of the city and each other’s violence, proceeded to move into a white suburb, which they are now in the process of destroying in turn.

This is a reason that the cost of housing is so high.  If wealthy people got to live where they chose, and poorer people got to live in the less desirable places, the inner city would be full of rich people, and poor black thugs would live in the exurbs.  The city would be safe and orderly, while slums far away from the center, places that no one ever goes to or cares much about, were dangerous and disorderly.  If, however, we look at where people live, it is clear that black collective violence trumps money, which forces up the cost of housing as white people bid up the small and shrinking pool of safe housing, which is usually located in places inconveniently far from the city center, forcing them to perform long commutes.

The white man buys a house.  To support his crushing mortgage he makes a long commute every day, along a highway with big wall to protect it from black people living much closer to his workplace than he does.  And then some section eight women and her nine kids by nine different thugs is plonked beside his house, and while he is at work, the section eight woman terrorizes his wife, breaking one of his windows and threatening to force entry.

This makes it hard for white men to reproduce, that white men are not able, not allowed, to protect their wives and children, in part because blacks can engage in collective violence against white people, and white people are not allowed to collectively defend themselves.   To have a safe place for one’s wife and children, it has to be possible to run bad people out of that place.

That blacks live close to where white people work, while white people are forced to live far from where they work, tells us that blacks have the upper hand over whites.  Slavery worked.  Jim Crow sort of worked.  Civil rights has been a disaster.

 

The Spandrellian trichotomy

August 13th, 2014

trichotomy

Technology capitalism: libertarianism

As the left gets ever lefter, it gets every crazier.  Since the libertarian tries to make a separate peace with the left on behalf of capitalism, its craziness necessarily flows into libertarianism.

Libertarians notice that capitalism, in particular the joint stock corporation based on double entry accounting, provides a great, humane, and highly productive system for creating wealth, advancing technological progress, and maximizing liberty. They therefore propose to accept the entire left wing program, only without its anti capitalist elements.  Supposedly the non aggression principle supports all left wing conclusions, except anti capitalism.

Thus a libertarian believes that people should be able to make binding contracts. So a young and naive woman can bind herself to an enormous debt for a PhD in hating dead white males and capitalism, a debt which cannot be expunged by bankruptcy

However, because leftists believe that female sexual autonomy is sacred, therefore has infinite utilitarian weight, absolutely trumping all other human, moral, and utilitarian considerations, a libertarian also believes that that same woman cannot bind herself to always be sexually available to one man, and never to any other, to submit to him, and to bear his children, in return for him protecting her, loving her, looking after her, supervising her, and fathering his children by her.

But it turns out that without the capacity to make a binding contract, it is mighty difficult to reproduce.  It also turns out that the reproductive contract has to be unequal.  A ship cannot have two captains, and neither can a household. Read the rest of this entry »

Arab Spring

August 13th, 2014

The Cathedral, believing itself to be the holiest of them all, unleashed a power struggle in the middle east to be the holiest of them all.

arab spring

At present, their religion is worse than ours, but the appointment of a Caliph, elected for life, may stabilize them, while we continue to drift to ever greater heights of holiness.

Secularization

August 11th, 2014

Eric Kraufman argues that the religious are inheriting the earth.  The religious are reproducing faster, and despite the fact that many of their children are captured by progressivism, the number of people who say they are religious is increasing.  According to Kraufman the number of people who adhere to moderate religions is decreasing, and shows every sign of altogether vanishing.  The proportion of the religious, and the absolute number of religious people who adhere to fundamentalist religions is increasing.

But he ignores the fact that “fundamentalist” religions are rapidly being captured by progressivism.

In 1960 or so, all Anglicans believed, or purported to believe that divorce was shocking, and that a divorced woman should never remarry.  They believed that in marriage, the wife promised to honor and obey, and failure to do so was disgraceful.  Today, hard to find “fundamentalists” so fundamentalist as to believe in such old fashioned idea.

Moderate religions are disappearing because no one can tell the difference between adhering to a moderate religion and progressivism.  Pretty soon the only Roman Catholics will be sedevacantist rebels, as the Vatican becomes a museum and left wing book store – but the ultra orthodox will be celebrating gay marriage with leather, chains, and giant condoms.

The sedevacantists’ priest shall say:

I now declare you husband and husband.  You may now insert these giant vibrators up each other’s asses.

The great silence

August 9th, 2014

There seem to be no great obstacles to intelligent life devouring the galaxy.  So why are we here.

If life on earth arose on earth , and produced humans in a few billion years, why not on some other planet ten billion years ago?

Simplest and most likely explanation is that life is unlikely – requiring a stupendously improbable assemblage of molecules to form.

No one has constructed a plausible high probability origin of life.

Indeed, it looks to me that water based life just cannot form spontaneously. The minimum complexity of life in water is just far too high.  RNA based life just does not work without DNA and cell membranes, and you don’t get RNA and DNA spontaneously forming in water.

Here is what I think happened:

There is some environment, perhaps a mixture of liquid cyanide, liquid formamide, and polyphosphoric acid with star tar dissolved in it, in which life can form spontaneously.

Cold temperature origins seem most likely, since cold temperature life can easily spread from planet to planet, because cold temperature planets with liquids are smaller and lower gravity than warm planets with liquids.  Volcanic eruptions etc can easily spit rocks into space.

This low temperature, non water based, life evolved, over ten billion years or so, to adapt to environments increasingly alien to its origins, eventually becoming water based life living in hot deep rocks on asteroids.

From which it infected earth. To produce complex life, you need an oxygen environment so that cells will gang together for defense and attack.  For an oxygen environment, you need a water environment.  We are the first, because it just took that long.  And, in due course we, or some other earth species if we fail, will devour the galaxy.

 

Why the art, literature, and science of decadent civilization is decadent

August 7th, 2014

Gibbon called the art and literature of the latter days of the Roman Empire “the second childhood of human reason”.

Back in the days when European art was the greatest the world has ever seen, the wealthy and powerful Cornaro family patronized the artist Bernini because he was a great artist.  Because high status people like the Cornaro family patronized great artists, great art was high status, and, circularly, the Cornaro family gained status by patronizing great art, such as The Ecstasy of Saint Teresa, which features the Cornaro family as much as a Coca Cola advertisement features coca cola.

Similarly, in Restoration England, high status people patronized science because it was high status, and it was high status because high status people patronized it, starting with King Charles the Second.

Then the government gets into funding art.  But the large bureaucratic government funding organization inevitably gets captured by recipients, as Cornaro family could never be captured, as King Charles the Second could never be captured.  Funds are distributed for grantsmanship, not art quality.  The greatest experts in grantsmanship could draw no better than a small child.

So drawing like a small child comes to be deemed high status.

Neo reactionaries are fond of authority, but need to remember that there is lot that centralized authority cannot do, starting with operate a modern economy.  Large organizations suffer from diseconomies of scale, and a severe agent/principal problem.  Without aristocrats, kings are not much good.

Death of Christendom

August 4th, 2014

Calvinism in New England was scorned by the heresy of Unitarianism, which deemed itself holier, but Unitarianism only lasted about a generation before it collapsed into Emersonian subjectivist Transcendentalism, which then swiftly (in less than a generation) collapsed into politics (abolition, feminism etc).

If we look at the New Testament position on slavery it is of course passivist and pacifist. Christians are encouraged, but not required, to free their slaves. Slaves are discouraged from rebelling and running away. Masters are required to be benevolent.

What happened when many Christian Churches adopted an activist position on slavery, a clearly heretical position on slavery?

An activist position on slavery requires war. War requires dreadful means, requires lies, terror, murder, and artificial famine – all in an undeniably good cause, of course.

Lo and behold, those churches that adopted an activist position against slavery ceased to be Christian. So that heresy, quite predictably, turned deadly.

But, once anti slavery became the law of the land, then a good Christian should of course support that law, so anti slavery did not destroy Christianity.

But now, however pretty much all Churches, have adopted the modern marriage vows, implying a clearly heretical position on marriage, which vows undermine and disrupt marriage, which in turn results in preaching that is fundamentally hostile to marriage as a binding contract.

Equality requires fences, that is to say, requires the dissolution of marriage. An actually functioning marriage is always patriarchal. Show me a man who picks up fifty percent of the socks, and I will show you a man who sleeps on the couch, while once a week or so his wife’s lover drops in to rough her up and take her money.

A genuinely Christian Church can no more support modern marriage, than it could support holy war on slavery. In so doing, is necessarily holier than Jesus, and so, runs through unitarianism to vagueness to leftism, and the Church building is remodeled to become a left wing bookstore. Read the rest of this entry »

Demonic possession and Donald McCloskey

July 31st, 2014

I am a materialist.  I don’t believe in demons that come from outside.  Demons come from within, a part of oneself that hates life, hates the living, and, most of all, hates oneself.  Sometimes people indulge such a part of themselves, and it takes them over, possesses them.  This happens a lot to leftists.  It happens one hell of a lot to transexuals, hence the high suicide rate.

Spandrel recent wrote of one such, McCloskey The voice of evil

So I attempted to look at a McCloskey video – then very quickly shut it down in horror and revulsion, because I could not bear to look at it.

Donald McCloskey, now “Deidre” McCloskey, is a trannie leftist.  Which does not necessarily prove he is demon possessed, but should make one suspicious. Read the rest of this entry »

Who is allied to Israel?

July 27th, 2014

Egypt proposes a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel in which everyone ceases to fire.

The (Jewish) US Secretary for state proposes a ceasefire in which Hamas gets a new route to import rockets, now that Egypt is trying to stop them from being smuggled through Egypt, and a big pile of money with which to import them.

There are a lot of things wrong with Jews, but being sneakily cohesive is not one of them.

Need to kill a lot more civilians in Gaza

July 22nd, 2014

One of the things that the fans of the theory of Democratic Peace, the theory that democracies tend to be at peace with each other, tend to forget is that Gaza and Israel are both democracies.

If you are a Muslim, you demonstrate superior holiness by voting in favor of wars with infidels that may well result in your death, just as if you are white, you demonstrate superior holiness by voting for your country to become non white.

If Gaza was ruled by a King, then if that King was to decide for war, that decision would make him holier, but might well get him killed.

But if a voter in Gaza votes for war, his vote makes him holier, but makes absolutely no difference to his chance of being killed, since it is only one vote of millions. From the point of view of the voter, the ideal outcome is that he votes for war, but is, alas, outvoted, by all those inferior people less holy than himself, much as from the point of view of a white voter, the ideal outcome is that he votes for his country to become brown, but gets outvoted by all those ignorant racist hateful stupid whites.

Thus we get Californication, as Californian whites flee California to whiter and more conservative places, and then vote for those places to become progressive and nonwhite.

To stop a democratic Gaza from making war, need to kill a large proportion of the population. Very possibly all of them.

If you get competition for superior holiness, the holy people get ever holier until eventually the most holy position becomes suicidal. And in a democracy, the holiest position, despite being suicidal, will win the election.