Leftism, suicide, autogenocide, and cosmocide.

If all men are created equal then it logically follows that all white males must die, because they keep emitting evil thought rays that cause blacks and women to underperform, blacks to commit crimes, and render women incapable of agency.  If you believe all men are created equal, you are going to pursue the goal of the death of all white males regardless of whether you are Jewish or not. This was obvious in the French response to the Haitian slave revolt.

Working class Trump voters must be bitter clingers who are worse than Hitler simply by existing.

The left has always been autogenocidal. When the Populares allied with the Samnites that showed they wanted to kill all free Roman males.

Indeed, cosmocidal. They want to immanentize the Eschaton, and the only way to do that is to kill everyone and destroy everything.

Your ordinary leftist, for example Scott Alexander is undeniably a nice guy.  But he has no enemies to the left, and no friends to the right, which means that all his friends are his enemies, and all his enemies are his friends.  He is incapable of seriously criticizing those to the left of him, and does not dare allow himself to comprehend those to the right of him. Thus Scott will completely and accurately identify some problem with leftism “but still, quite sincerely, ritually abase himself to it.  He writes long sincere thoughtful screeds pointing out that baby sacrifice is lowering the birth rate and causing family trauma, though of course he fully understands and endorses that Lord Moloch must be sated with the only food acceptable unto him.”

Leftism is holiness, and in any discussion, any consensus, the holiest leftist or cuckservative always wins, so nice leftists always lose to evil crazies, and piously agree that they deserve to lose, since the holiest, being holier, should get their way.

And if you want to immanentize the Eschaton, you are holier than anyone like Scott, who might be suspected of thinking that immanentizing the Eschaton might be difficult.  Only a total asshole like myself could possibly oppose immanentizing the Eschaton altogether. And if one wants to immanentize the Eschaton soon, one is holier than anyone who merely wants to immanentize some time in the distant and indefinite future.  And if one wants to immanentize the Eschaton right away, one is the holiest of all, and every leftist and cuckservative wants to be one’s friend, and none of them dare offend one, even though one will undoubtedly take offense anyway.

And thus the Khmer Rouge.  And thus Chang Hsien-chong

Angela Merkel hates Germans and Germany – is viscerally repulsed by them, clearly wishes all Germans and all memory of Germany and all German culture to end with her. Remember her revealing reaction to the German flag. She reacted to the German flag like a vampire doused with holy water, or exposed to the rising sun.

Leftism is inherently cosmocidal. This suicidal, destructive, and self destructive tendency is as common as dirt even among the non Jewish left. Granted, the Jewish left is worse, but the difference is nothing to get excited about. They all want to kill you and everyone like you.  And if, like Scott, they are not completely 110% on board with killing you and everyone like you, they are nonetheless trying to avoid falling overboard for fear that those who are completely 110% on board with killing you and everyone like you might take offense – or rather might take even more offense than they do already.

109 Responses to “Leftism, suicide, autogenocide, and cosmocide.”

  1. Harold says:

    “If all men are created equal then it logically follows that all white males must die…”
    Yes, the power of the left derives from their power in promoting this lie.

    “Thus Scott will completely and accurately identify some problem with leftism “but still, quite sincerely, ritually abase himself to it.”

    Find me a gentile as intelligent as Scott and as capable of accurately identifying problems with leftism but who yet ritually abases himself to it.

    • peppermint says:

      what, you mean like a cuckservative?

      • Harold says:

        I don’t know any as analytically competent and willing to at least consider the other side’s arguments as Scott nor are they as leftist.

        • jim says:

          Scott subjects foolish left wing arguments to rigorous analysis.

          He refuses to comprehend or acknowledge right wing arguments, responding with either flat incomprehension, childish demonization, or sheer refusal to acknowledge that such an argument was made.

          Faced with a thoughtcrime argument, he mentally substitutes a non thoughtcrime argument for the argument that was in fact made.

          • Harold says:

            Scott isn’t willfully blind enough not to see there is no reason to beilieve in racial equality. His Anti-Reactionary FAQ and it’s prequels and sequels constitute some acknowledgement of right wing arguments. I don’t think he would still hold the postitions he holds if he wasn’t Jewish.

            Scott once refered to the right’s dislike of “scary foreigners” a complete bullshit, and typically Jewish, misdiagnosis of the motivations of the right. Does he actually believe it?

          • Oliver Cromwell says:

            Scott recently made a slatestarscratchpad post in which he lamented that if he pointed out that IQ differences explained 90% of distributional inequalities, all his friends to the left would devour him.

            The post disappeared within hours.

            He knows.

            He is also more exposed to RL consequences than us.

            He is probably also, judging from his personality, more dependent on external validation than most of the alt-right. That is not necessarily to say he is unusual, more likely we are unusual independent of external validation.

          • Trying to ‘convert’ him is futile, nor should we. He will do his thing; we will do ours. Through his anti-reactionary FAQ and other posts, he has brought more attention to NRx than most bloggers, as his blog is immensely popular.

          • Oliver Cromwell says:

            But accepting that inter-group IQ differences exist is the red pill in a nutshell. Having accepted that, all of the left’s oppression stories collapse, including the old and dead ones like intra-white class war. People get roughly what they deserve, they’re just biologically unequal, so deserve different things. You can still reject all of NRx’s political ideas at that point but you can’t remain a progressive, nor think progressive policy prescriptions are anything other than insane. Leftism is a set of common sense responses to the false belief that there are no biological differences between humans, not a set of crazy responses to correct factual beliefs.

            Given Scott accepts such IQ differences exist, and invalidate much of what progressivism is saying about the world, is it really reasonable to conclude he’s a progressive on the inside? Seems to me that, when he writes a post pointing out all the flaws inherent in baby sacrifice and then at the end concludes that it’s still worth it to appease progressivism’s baby-hungry gods, he is practicing ketman, not internal crimestop.

            When he writes an unapologetic statement of disbelief in biological equalism in which he complains that he can’t write stuff like this because leftists will devour him, then deletes it, I can’t but think it’s the policeman outside who is important here.

            And I’m not sure reactionaries should be unhappy about this. If Scott were yet another reactionary blogger, his posts wouldn’t be getting 800 comments and tens or hundreds of thousands of hits. He probably brings more intelligent people to the truth than any reactionary blogger, even if having found it the truth-seeker loses interest in what he has to say.

          • peppermint says:

            you can believe in IQ differences and still think Whites owe muds free everything forever, that’s the position of the 19th century English and Scott Alexander, as seen in his patchwork LARP

            the real red pills are that leftism is signaling and White supremacy comes from White cooperativeness and agency

          • jeremy says:

            Didn’t the 19th century English believe in differences in cooperativeness and agency also? I might be using the world ‘agency’ differently than you, but I can’t figure out how.

          • Zach says:

            Yup.

            Why bother analyzing these silly scientific articles, when duh, they’re obviously false.

            It gets to the point when the question arises: who are you going to believe, your lying eyes, or silly scientific journals in the social domain.

            Scott is pathetically apologetic. Poor guy.

          • StatusWhore says:

            Putting aside IQ, how is it that other races are dumber than whites given they’ve managed to extract trillions upon trillions of dollars from them?

            Many like to protect white intelligence by cordoning off part of it as a character flaws i.e., being “gullible” & “trusting,” depending on whether they wish to make them look victimized or noble. But it really is a form of stupidity.

            From an outsider, I can’t even begin to grasp how someone who has the intelligence above a cretin could possible take the Bible seriously.

            • jim says:

              Leftism is inherently suicidal and self destructive. Leftists will always find some faraway mascots to supposedly do good to in order to justify doing harm to those close to them.

          • Morkyz says:

            People who moralize/fetishize intelligence are, without exception, retards ime.

            There is a reason why the left likes to say IQ doesn’t exist, and they sort of have a point. Still, you are a retard if you think IQ does exist and there’s some mystical attribute called “intelligence” that can only be quantified by seeing if a person agrees with your political opinions.

          • Morkyz says:

            shit, posted that comment by accident, guess I’m the retard

            what I mean is, quantifying intelligence needs to be done according to some rule

          • peppermint says:

            Cooperativeness and agency are harder to quantify than intelligence.

            Without a theory of how monogamy led to the beauty of the Aryan woman and the cooperativeness of the Aryan man, all the leftists had to do was baldly assert that the difference was purely cultural, or the observation of a difference was purely due to cultural differences, and find particularly White-acting muds to parade around.

            And when the muds still wouldn’t behave, they would blame an oppressed upbringing, or suppress knowledge of the misbehavior. Thus Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and Eldridge Cleaver.

            Without the theory, the only way to argue for White supremacy is to say, well, we are the Whites. And the leftists will say, okay, unless we give up our privileges voluntarily, the others, who are just like us, will be angry when they wrest the privilege away from us forcefully.

        • Scott does a much better job entertaining opposing views than most or all mainstream leftists. Scott at least discusses topics that we may find interesting, even though we may disagree with the conclusion he arrives at, whereas many leftists wont even consider them, pretending they don’t exist and completely cutting out debate.

      • Jorgen Schmidt says:

        I prefer the moniker “Cockservative” or someone who’s just chicken.

  2. TheBigH says:

    >Leftism is inherently cosmocidal. This suicidal, destructive, and self destructive tendency is as common as dirt even among the non Jewish left. Granted, the Jewish left is worse, but the difference is nothing to get excited about. They all want to kill you and everyone like you. And if, like Scott, they are not completely 110% on board with killing you and everyone like you, they are nonetheless trying to avoid falling overboard for fear that those who are completely 110% on board with killing you and everyone like you might take offense – or rather might take even more offense than they do already.

    Jim have you considered that attacks on leftist Jews is easier than an attack on leftist whites? People are much more likely to accept the need to purge a system if the cause can be identified as a foreign infection.

  3. But he has no enemies to the left, and no friends to the right, which means that all his friends are his enemies, and all his enemies are his friends.

    ——————–

    not really..many on the ‘right’ respect him, or at least as evidenced by links, commentary, etc. Some don’t, but I think there ‘s a mutual respect and camaraderie between Scott Alexander (and also Scott Adams), who represents the ‘rational middle’, and those on the ‘rational right’. The rise of centrism and the likes of Scott is about a ‘return’ of the pendulum to the middle after swinging too far to the left in 2012, now with the post-2013 SWJ backlash and gamergate, moving to the middle again, online at least . The ‘rational left’, unlike the welfare left ,is generally opposed to Communism, collectivism and other elements of the ‘welfare left’.

    I don’t see the same problem you do. I don;t think Scott is your oridianry SW-lefist.

    • Oliver Cromwell says:

      The right likes Alexander but Alexander (at least publicly) dislikes the right. Hence all his enemies ste his fiends and all his friends are his enemies.

      Notice how in his hatemail post he posted a bunch of pure vitriol from SJWs and a lot of “he’s almost there but…” from rightists? And I don’t think the balance in numbers was an accident either.

  4. Oliver Cromwell says:

    What happened during the Haitian slave revolt?

    • Mackus says:

      I also am quite interested. What French did?

      • Gentile Ben says:

        What they did was get slaughtered by blacks.

      • Minion says:

        Presumably, the mighty French Kingdom would have crushed a few uppity negroes if they actually wanted to, instead of letting the local slave owners out to dry. Jim is right, assymetrical warfare only works if there is a rival power giving aid to the rebels, if there are elements within the dominant power undermining the efforts of their principal power, or if the dominant power simply has no will to win.

        Thankfully, in 1865, Edward Eyre, the British governor of Jamaica, learned from the Haitian revolt, and brutally crushed the Morant Bay rebellion, killing over 500 uppity negroes. His ruthless, but appropriate, approach, ensured British civilization continued in Jamaica for another 98 years, before the negroes ran Jamaica into the ground again.

        Of course, Edward Eyre’s heroic rescue of Jamaica caused significant amount of (classical) liberal butthurt, leading to a committee, lead by JS Mill, Herbert Spencer, and Charles Darwin, to prosecute him. Just another reminder that libertarians are liberal enablers.

    • jim says:

      Haitian slave revolt came from guilty reluctance to crack down, lack of support and active subversion from outside.

      • Mackus says:

        Well, republic did abolish slavery, and was not interested in helping aristocratic landowners in Haiti. Aristocrats on Haiti could be considered enemies of republican government, so it was less guilty reluctance, but supporting enemies of your enemies.
        Napoleon on the other hand, unlike liberal republicans, just wanted his sugar, but British were supporting rebels… was it not for them, he’d crush the rebels. Also, some soldiers sent to crush uprising have defected to the rebels.
        So asymmetric warfare in Haiti was just proxy warfare between France and UK.

  5. […] Jim on a striking lesson from the history of ideology: […]

  6. Jack says:

    >Granted, the Jewish left is worse, but the difference is nothing to get excited about. They all want to kill you and everyone like you.

    Jewish leftists aren’t simply more radical than non-Jewish leftists. They consciously radicalize the latter. Jewish leftists always wanted to “kill you and everyone like you”. Non-Jewish leftists, although despicable and oven-worthy, did not always desire to commit genocide against all White males everywhere. Jewish leftist extremism, combined with intellectual dominance, a keen sense of social nuance (non-spergs), and a proselytizing ambition, incentivizes the radicalization of non-Jewish leftists, who are very often the subordinates of the Jewish ones.

    You believe that Jews can easily switch between ideologies: Progressives yesterday, Reactionaries tomorrow. Does that ever actually happen? Look at Jonah Goldberg and the sinking ship of Neoconservatism (cuckservatism): have the Jews behind cuckservatism shown any willingness to un-cuck their movement? They haven’t, on the contrary, they rigidly defend their ideology and even double-down when under grave assault. Or look at your own example: why can’t Scott Alexander un-cuck himself? Most leftists are 115 IQ idiots obsessed with signalling; Scott Alexander, with an IQ of around 150 and a streak of tone-deaf autism, is not one of these, so what gives?

    I take the view that Jewish leftism is sincere. Unlike the devout acolytes of KMac, it is my firm conviction that leftism is inherent to Ashkenazim rather than a mere by-product of being a minority within Gentile society. See: leftists in Israel, often ignored by alt-righters. Or look at Reform Jews: is there any sick abomination they won’t inflict upon their miserable congregations? (“Adonai Elohim is a crippled black lesbian and dragon-kin pederast transsexuals are all Tzaddikim, go educate yourself, douchenozzle bigot!”)

    There’s no question that for many a White Progressive, liberalism is totally organic, stems fron an inner impulse. Yet it is the overall shape of liberalism, the total sum of all its nitty-gritty particles that make it what it is, the actual contemporary *manifestation* of the neurologically-derived sentiment, that has been dictated by the Jews, without whom modern liberalism couldn’t have become what it has become. Whites invented liberalism, but for the last century and a half, what was initially a corrosive mistake, or a misguided excess, has been hijacked by the Jews and transformed into a bloodthirsty monstrosity of international scale, a civilization-wide force of destruction intent on devouring all that is good, healthy, and beautiful.

    The false notion that “all men are created equal” is Gentilic in nature. Some would blame it on Christianity, which the Jews inspired to some extent, but in my opinion Christianity’s universalist untenable elements are rooted in Greco-Roman Gnosticism rather than in non-Hellenic, authentically Semitic Judaism, a non-egalitarian creed if there ever was one. Having said that, it is a fact that Progressivism in its biology-denying, greed-motivated, dialectical materialism-ish manifestation is thoroughly Jewish (Marxism-Leninism, Boasian Anthropology, Second-Wave Feminism, 21st century Social Justice). Whatever it was, and could have been, without Jewish influence, liberalism today accurately reflects the vengeful, neurotic, and hysterical-genocidal psyche of collective Jewry much more so than the Occidental Faustian mentality which initiated it three centuries ago. It seems that Ashkenazim, who are 40% White generally speaking, have absorbed the worst elements of their ethnic progenitors: European egalitarianism and Semitic death-wishing consequence-blind destructiveness.

    The White male intellectual terrorists who championed “liberte, egalite, fraternite” did not intend or secretly desire to exterminate all cishet-scum everywhere. The Jewish intellectual terrorists do indeed want that, are working towards that, and will happily murder one another and then commit suicide to serve the cause of Social Justice. This is Semitic to the core. You have, for instance, Israeli Ashkenazim beating themselves up for Mizrahi underpermance (when not denying it altogether), including B on this very blog who blames Mizrahi crime on secular kibbutzim 60 years ago and “cultural discrimination” by Ashkenazi Labor party 50 years ago. B won’t murder Ashkenazi males and then commit suicide, but plenty of his brethren would do just that, judging by their blog-entries and Twitter feeds, and like Scott Alexander, B won’t offer any resistance against the Social Justice Warriors, even when they come after his specific community, which, if they ever rise to power, will be among the first to be Enriched with Justice, considering it’s a settlement. This isn’t White behavior. White behavior is hypocritically championing liberalism as long as it doesn’t visibly adversarially affect you, and when it does visibly adversarially affect you, you have White Flight* and gated communities. Jews would have you march straight into Hellfire, which has been kindled with overpriced Shabbat candles, right away.

    So at best, Jews have “accelerated the decline” (from 30 KPH to 150 KPH), at worst, and more likely, made you arrive at a destination infinitely farther — and completely unrecognizable at that — than anywhere even your wildest and most ecstatic adventurism would have gotten you.

    *”Perhaps the most striking feature [of the English-speaking world. – Jack], however, was a marked cultural tendency to settle disagreements in space, rather than time, opting for territorial schism, separatism, independence, and flight, in place of revolutionary transformation within an integrated territory. When Anglophones disagree, they have often sought to dissociate in space. Instead of an integral resolution (regime change), they pursue a plural irresolution (through regime division), proliferating polities, localizing power, and diversifying systems of government.” – Dark Enlightenment, by Nick Land

    (contrast that with Jewish ideologies and strategies!)

    • Aristocles_Inv says:

      Agree with this, Jews aren’t simply better leftists. They manipulate the essence of leftism and drag Gentile leftists along with them. Jews are always at the forefront of political revolutions. For an analysis of this see E. Michael Jones – The Jewish Revolutionary Spirit and It’s Impact on World History: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0ByozX7MhYBO5UUlaLWJseldCenc/view?usp=sharing

    • peppermint says:

      So yeah, let’s come up with a theory of Jew behavior.

      Jews are parasites that attach themselves to a host using social signaling, and can attack Whites in particular, since Whites are particularly cooperative, due to the evolutionary history of monogamy.

      They evolved through contact with other nations (“goyim”) that would have assimilated or destroyed any other group, but survived by comfortably dispersing themselves through other communities while retaining loyalty to their group and having the social skills to pull it off.

      Getting that level of loyalty and social skill is difficult, and they are incredibly neurotic.

      They probably started off as just another group in their region, but one with more loyalty than the other groups, and slowly developed their other characteristics in response to the rigors of living at the crossroads of empires.

      • Jack says:

        The best theory I know of is that Jewish history, Ashkenazi history to be precise, has selected for high verbal IQ and low performance IQ, which roughly tells you everything you need to know about Jews: intelligent and socially-savvy yet detached from any sort of commitment to the truth, of which the Jew has a weak sense. Jews can casually ignore facts, or even feelings such as disgust, that they find threatening or counter-productive. An example of Jews ignoring facts is Jews who convince themselves that race differences don’t exist – these are the overwhelming majority, perhaps 98%. An example of ignoring feelings is the ability Jews have to tolerate Feminists, homosexuals, transsexuals, and pedophiles, despite how viscerally repulsing they all are – even Orthodox Jews tolerate them quite well.

        The Aryan is in tune with nature (and his own inner nature) as well as with society; the Jew is only in tune with his immediate society, on whom he very often professionally leeches – he has neither any grasp of the actual, material world, nor awareness of his own natural inclinations, which he takes for granted anyway. Read Andrew Joyce’s series about Jewish self-deception at The Occidental Observer to get a sense of the latter. In Jim’s words: the Jews are Priests.

        Jews are only really interested in Power, are completely dispassionate about other things. When a Jew looks at something, his only question is: “does it give me power?” But the Jews have deluded themselves, in a very religious, Semitic fashion, that zealous adherence to certain ideologies would yield infinite power, so they support abstract, pure ideologies that, in the material world, are harmful to themselves. This also has to do with pettiness and the resultant vengefulness which characterize them: a willingness to harm themselves because someone whom they believe have wronged them in the past will be harmed along with them, hence Ezra Klein supporting sex-legislation which he acknowledges discriminates against the male sex, of which he is a member. He’ll punish himself, as long as those brute jocks, with their blonde hair and broad shoulders, will be punished too, and as long as Feminist ideologues cheer, see also Hugo Schwyzer the Jewish male Feminist, they’re all driven by Power (which they achieve by emitting rays of holiness), delusional thinking (hence, for instance, they tend toward outright liberalism which hates Israel rather than cuckservatism which loves it), and vengeance – not empathy like Whites.

        In short, delusional yet intelligent White-ish Semites who hold a grudge against all of humanity.

        • jim says:

          Supposing all this stuff about Jews to be true, it is irrelevant. I want to undo the enlightenment, not get a slightly less leftist dictator. Fashism is just mid twentieth century leftism. Installing Hitler is not very different from electing Romney.

          The destructiveness of leftism is not motivated by a Jewish grudge. It is self destructive. And it goes on being self destructive even with Hitler in charge.

          • pdimov says:

            “I want to undo the enlightenment, not get a slightly less leftist dictator.”

            And how do you do that without passing through a phase of fascism?

            • jim says:

              You are arguing incrementalism. That is like arguing “how do you propose to do that without electing a republican president”

          • pdimov says:

            I’m asking you, not (yet) arguing. And no, it’s not the same. Electing a Republican president is not a necessary step to anywhere.

          • Stephen W says:

            Multiculturalism dissolves nations and leaves a big door open for SJWs. A healthy natio deports all foreign cultures.

        • peppermint says:

          Jews were jewing people and retelling legends about how they jewed people long before those particular Jews took Italian wives, settled in Poland, and became the Ashkenazim

    • Tj says:

      I am not sure I agree with you but suppose you are right about the role that Jews played in shaping modern progressivism. How can you reconcile that to one’s satisfaction with the fact so many (half) Jews have been involved in NRx, including Moldbug himself?

      One hypothesis that would account for both is that Jews take their politics, defined broadly as prescriptive thinking about sovereignty and physical security, further no matter what direction. Maybe they, for whatever reason of nature or nurture, take a more formal, more, shell I say, legalistic approach to politics and actually run with the conclusions they arrive at. This is all post hoc, of course, but compare Moldbug with your run of the mill paleocon or Yudkowsky with your average utilitarian. That is a recipe to achieve “extremism”, whether aligned with the truth or not.

      • Jack says:

        >How can you reconcile that to one’s satisfaction with the fact so many (half) Jews have been involved in NRx, including Moldbug himself?

        If they bring down the Cathedral and stop White Genocide, I’ll be the first to recognize these Mischlings as righteous Jews. Since from the beginning NRx has been engaged in signalling to the powerful, and the powerful are disproportionately Jewish, allow me to retain, for now, my deep skepticism about the whole endeavor.

        To rewrite a scene from the parodical and utterly silly Jewish movie “This is the end”:

        NRx: “the power of Moldbug compels you!”

        Jewish elites: “does it?”

        NRx: “the power of Moldbug compels you!”

        Jewish elites: “does it, NRx?”

        NRx: “the power of Moldbug compels you!”

        Jewish elites: “is that what’s happening? Are we being compelled by Moldbug’s power?”

        NRx: “the power of Moldbug compels you!”

        Jewish elites: “do we look compelled, NRx? Well let us tell you something – it’s not very compelling.”

    • jim says:

      Non-Jewish leftists, although despicable and oven-worthy, did not always desire to commit genocide against all White males everywhere.

      There are plenty of moderate Jewish leftists, for example Scott, and plenty of immoderate non Jewish leftists, for example Margaret Meade.

      The left is autogenocidal, rather than genocidal. That is not a Jewish characteristic. Only converso Jews are autogenocidal.

    • jim says:

      The White male intellectual terrorists who championed “liberte, egalite, fraternite” did not intend or secretly desire to exterminate all cishet-scum everywhere.

      The red terror considerably predates substantial Jewish influence on the left.

      Jews are famously genocidal, but only converso Jews are autogenocidal. It is not their evil mind control rays corrupting us, it is our evil mind control rays corrupting them.

      • Harold says:

        “It is not their evil mind control rays corrupting us, it is our evil mind control rays corrupting them.”

        One doesn’t preclude the other.

      • bob k. mando says:

        “The red terror considerably predates substantial Jewish influence”

        wut?

        i haven’t done a study on this, but i’ve always heard that the Jews were neck deep in all of the Communist take over of Russia.

        • jim says:

          The red terror was the culmination of the French Revolution.

          • bob k. mando says:

            *blinks*

            listen, you may consider it the ‘culmination’ of the French Rev, but i have to say that a certain Marx publishing a certain Manifesto in 1848 had a certain something something to do with it.

            it’s also interesting to read the CM … and realize that the US has implemented a majority of it’s 10 thesis … against the law of the Constitution.

            • jim says:

              The original and infamous red terror, that gave its name and symbol to communism, happened in 1794, long before the communist manifesto, long before Karl Marx, long before significant Jewish involvement in leftism, long before Jews adopted it to symbolize their conversion from Judaism.

      • Jack says:

        >Jews are famously genocidal, but only converso Jews are autogenocidal.

        Jewish mythology has the Levites massacring the other tribes due to the golden calf and Jewish tribes almost annihilating the Benjaminites; Jewish prophets and the various writers of the OT spoke incessantly about God’s genocidal intentions regarding His Chosen people; Maccabees and Hellenists massacred one another with no qualms; Jews engaged in various atrocities against each other when besieged by the Romans; Christian Jews during first and second centuries A.D were somewhat auto-genocidal against the rest of Jewry; the Talmud has some “very” unkind pronouncements about unorthodox Jews and specially about the Christian variety; Karaite Jews volunteered to fight for the wehrmacht and gave in Orthodox Jews to the Germans; and finally, Orthodox Jewish rabbis lied to their own followers about the impending genocide while preparing themselves to flee for the US during WWII.

        The common denominator here, with the exception of the last example, is always attacking those “other”, rival Jews. Whites do the same thing actually. Can’t blame it on Progressive mind control rays.

        • Eli says:

          To call Russian (Turkic) Karaites “Jewish” is like calling Muslim Arabs Jewish.

          The Polish Rabbis didn’t know about the magnitude of the atrocities that were to come. From what I read, anecdotally, Polish Jews considered Germans to be a very cultured people, quite above the primitive Poles among whom they resided, including various other Slav peasantry and animals to the East.

          Btw, the etymology for word “slave” points to “Slav.”

          The Benjamites were punished for maliciously breaking their covenant with God and people of the Israelite nation.

          • Jack says:

            >To call Russian (Turkic) Karaites “Jewish” is like calling Muslim Arabs Jewish.

            Nah, pretending they are not Jewish-descendent but rather pure converts who just happen to follow the Mosaic creed is nothing but propaganda conducted for crypsis purposes, propaganda which they themselves no longer believe. All evidence points to them being as real Jews as the Ashkenazim, and perhaps even descended from the Zaddokite priests – which btw the prophet Ezekiel glorified, though I presume you know that. Anyway, if Subbotniks can be Jews, so can these folks, and their improbable lies about their non-Jewish origin point to them indeed being Jews.

          • Eli says:

            Provide the evidence.

          • Eli says:

            Btw, Subbitniks are not considered to be Jews unless they go through formal conversion. The Ethiopians had to undergo giur , also, in order to be recognized as Jews by serious rabbis.

          • Jack says:

            You need evidence that Abraham Firkovich, originator of the Turkic-hypothesis, was a self-interested forger of documents?

          • Eli says:

            You’re conflating.

            The khazar hypothesis has been thoroughly debunked by relatively recent evidence, of which I have proof.

            Nonetheless, the above doesn’t imply that there were no Turkic/Khazar converso/Judaized groups, however small their number was in reality. This is supported by both Jewish and non-Jewish sources, and there is no controversy about it (other than above mentioned Khazar hypothesis).

            In some sense, per Patricia Crone and Pipes, Islam itself started out as a Judaizing movement among the Arabs, only to mutate something very different, acquiring its own identity.

    • Oliver Cromwell says:

      The Jews are high IQ people who are good at social organisation and work with their minds rather than their hands.

      Which is pretty much the description of that part of Western civilisation that is worth saving. Note that no one is worried about losing soccer hooligans if/when Sub-Saharan muslims take over Britain. Nor does any sane person expect to lose them, change in precise slogans and banners notwithstanding.

      NRx points out that leftism is absolutely horrible for people whose comparative advantages are high IQ and social skills suited to operating within and managing large organisations. I.e. that leftism is horrible for the people who originated, control, and propagate leftism, disproportionately but not exclusively meaning Jews.

      Leftism is a mind virus for high IQ/high trust people in general; Jews, as the highest IQ/trust ethnic group, are disproportionately targeted by this mind virus, not benefited by it. Stands to reason that leftism is no more intended by Jews as a weapon against Anglos than it is intended by them as a weapon against Jews, since that’s precisely what it is, and no engineering effort has been made to discriminate better with respect to target.

      What is more likely is that Jews 100 years ago jumped onto equalism to protect their own standing, at a time when they felt it was truly threatened, and when any consequences of overpromoting blacks and Amerinds were distant and uncertain. Especially intelligent, non-conformist Jews like Moldbug starting to peel away from this orthodoxy makes perfect sense today.

      • Steve Johnson says:

        “The Jews are high IQ people who are good at social organisation and work with their minds rather than their hands.

        Which is pretty much the description of that part of Western civilisation that is worth saving.”

        Work done with skilled hands:

        http://www.allposters.com/-sp/New-York-City-Architecture-Posters_i6579884_.htm

        versus

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilization_and_Its_Discontents

        work done with the mind.

        I’m sure I know which of those two is worth preserving and it sure isn’t the “work of the mind”.

      • peppermint says:

        Jews are not high trust people. They screw and scam each other all day long in Israel.

        Whites are high trust people, which is why Jews can take over White countries.

        We are worried about losing soccer hooligans. Your dismissive attitude towards the work they do is as typical of effete leftists as claiming to champion them. In reality, the class structure of White society is not fixed. They are the children of richer people, and their children, if White, could be capable of anything.

        The nation is a biological thing and you dismiss them as the brain dismisses the foot.

      • Jack says:

        >Jews are not high trust people. They screw and scam each other all day long in Israel.

        Exactly. And when not screwing each other in an explicit manner, are nevertheless busy being rude and condescending to each other, feeling themselves entitled. Jewish behavior is solipsistic whether surrounded by Goyim or by other Jews, probably even more so when surrounded by other Jews, since there aren’t any repercussions.

        >Stands to reason that leftism is no more intended by Jews as a weapon against Anglos than it is intended by them as a weapon against Jews

        This is true, leftism is part of inherent, ingrained Jewish nature just as surely as amputating innocent people’s limbs for honor’s sake is an integral, indispensable part of the Arab existence.

        • Oliver Cromwell says:

          If Judaism were inherently self-destructive it wouldn’t have survived for two thousand years without a homeland, against considerable effort to destroy it.

          • Jack says:

            First of all, the historical attempts to destroy Judaism are greatly exaggerated: the Church has protected the Jews more often than not, and Muslims were content to subjugate the “people of the book” without, usually, wholesale extermination. Also, Jews had no homeland because they made a collective decision to abandon their mythological homeland by not returning there; it took a Shoah to change their minds.

            Secondly, “Judaism” has indeed self-destructed: the Talmudic Judaism of the seventh century A.D and the Aristotelian Judaism of the eleventh century A.D were basically new religions altogether dissimilar to Second Temple Judaism. It’s not that Judaism refuses to die; it’s that it dies but keeps resurrecting in new form. It’s like Communism collapsing only to arise from its grave as Cultural Marxism.

            Judaism is like herpes – just when you think you’ve finally gotten rid of it, here it is again, sneaking back in, rejuvenated, from an unexpected, novel location. Like herpes, it’s better to simply avoid it by not letting the Jew into your base in the first place.

          • Eli says:

            Judaism-practicing Jews are, longterm, the best hope for survival of civilization and, therefore, you (by “you” I include whatever you procreate). The sooner you realize it, the more chances are for you to survive.

          • Jack says:

            >Judaism-practicing Jews are, longterm, the best hope for survival of civilization and, therefore, you (by “you” I include whatever you procreate). The sooner you realize it, the more chances are for you to survive.

            Wait, how does my ‘realization’ or lack thereof of Jewish supremacy affect the survival prospects of my progeny? (It doesn’t) Is philosemitic inter-generational karma implicated, perchance? Lol.

            Anyway, I’ll believe it when I see it. So far, those “Judaism-practicing Jews” have not acquired a reputation for cultivating any sort of civilization.

            Considering the overwhelming majority of the exceptionally intelligent Jews renounce Orthodoxy and fail to breed — in stark contrast to the last two millennia, it is the dull Jews who outbreed the smart ones, it is the dull Jews who are more likely to retain their Jewish identity than the smart ones — and given increasing openness among Orthodox Ashkenazim to marry Orthodox non-Ashkenazim, particularly among religious Zionists, your designation of “Judaism-practicing Jews” as the last refuge of civilization seems preposterous.

          • Morkyz says:

            You need to understand, Jewiah sperm is currently the most valuable known substance in the universe. Imagine an arab prince with half a brain, what would be the first thing he did? Anyone smart would kidnap a Jewish man to use as a spermjack to impreggnate thousants of arab women. imagine a social program that can increse your nations IQ like that, the soudis would become one of thee greatest nations in the history of the world, just imagine!

          • Eli says:

            Not to diminish the importance of IQ, but you made it into the guarantee of survival. You are confusing an important effect with an even more important cause.

            I am saying that since your societies lack cohesion and are hopelessly lacking a strong framework to build cohesion upon, your best bet is to stick with Jews — those who are Halakhic.

          • Jack says:

            >You need to understand, Jewiah sperm is currently the most valuable known substance in the universe.

            As the second-in-command Reptilian Overseer of the Reticulum Galaxy, I

            Seriously though, are you sure you’re not confusing White sperm with Jewish sperm? High verbal IQ is not everything, fyi.

          • B says:

            >Seriously though, are you sure you’re not confusing White sperm with Jewish sperm?

            American black people are the result of lots of application of white sperm to slave women.

            Anyone who has dealt with African immigrants to America and with Africans can’t fail but notice that the difference is in favor of the former.

          • Jack says:

            A) Recent, first generation arrivals are usually better behaved than their assimilated descendants. It’s not the genes.

            B) Mongrels are dysfunctional, news at 11.

            C) Breeding with Blacks ruins everything, but that doesn’t tell you anything about the quality of pure White sperm and its superiority to Jewish sperm.

          • B says:

            >that doesn’t tell you anything about the quality of pure White sperm and its superiority to Jewish sperm.

            you’re supposed to add some kind of disclaimer, like “no homo.”

          • Jack says:

            No, homo.

            It is strange that people here, ostensibly Goyim, actually buy into Jewish superiority. Commenters “Dick Wagner” and “Morkyz” may be trolls, but the sentiment is all too real: Jewish abstract intelligence is held in such a high esteem among some alt-righters that it is deemed as the pinnacle of human quality, surpassing all other traits.

            But the industrial and scientific revolutions are not because of Jews, and besides, there’s more to civilization than Nobel Prizes. Most folks here have probably been bullied relentlessly by idiotic classmates, so became ardent IQ-worshippers, became emotionally-invested in elevating IQ scores above all else, ergo feel inferior to Asians and Jews. This has to stop though, Jewish nerds like Scott Alexander are not your allies, and White soccer hooligans are not representatives of high White civilization. People here have a twisted sense of who’s an ally and who’s an enemy, imo.

          • Morkyz says:

            Lmao “Jack”, taking a leaf out of AJP’s book now?

            Listen, what does it mean to be a “reactionary?” The core of it is, you accept a hierarchical society. This means that any given group of people should be and inevitably will be dominated by their genetic betters. When you see that some group of people own and control a society to a significantly higher proportion than your kind do, you don’t feel bitter or cheated. You celebrate that you have such wise and superior masters to shepard and guide you.

            I’m not Jewish. Not a single drop. I just can’t stand white trash, of which 99% of the anti-semites on the internet are. Objectively speaking my race (not me personally, but my race generally) is far inferior to the Jews and East Asians . It’s clear as day. Whites suck compared to them, which is why the vast majority of the people I associate with are Asian or Jewish.

            There is no way you can call yourself a reactionary unless you understand the need for western society to be owned and controlled by those of Jewish descent.

            By definition a reactionary must accept that Jews are superior to gentiles, and therefore have the right to rule them.

            The core of Reaction is the belief that power must be concentrated in the hands of the best people in society.

            A reactionary therefore must by definition be willing to submit to his superiors. To relinquish power and embrace servitude to your natural masters.

            Is there anyone here who seriously thinks that if the franchise was restricted to Ashkenazi Jews, East Asians and upper-caste South Asians that the country wouldn’t immensely improve immediately? If you disagree you are clearly delusionally racist.

          • Jack says:

            >Lmao “Jack”, taking a leaf out of AJP’s book now?

            No idea what you’re referring to, “””Morkyz”””; furthermore, I have determined that, as a result of a secretion-process whose name begins with the fourth letter of the alphabet, a certain salvia-comprised substance has leaked upon the clavier at your disposal (+ an exclamation mark).

            >You celebrate that you have such wise and superior masters to shepard and guide you.

            No white person in his right mind, besides a few incorrigible white niggers whose mind isn’t ever right, would object to Jewish hegemony if Jewish hegemony yielded higher standards of living, enhanced scientific progress, and a finer quality of culture than White hegemony. Since that is the very opposite of the case, socially-aware and knowledge-possessing individuals naturally grow more and more inclined to desire the gassing of the kikes, race war now. If Jews were to clean up their act and rejoin the fold of humanity after a 2,000 year long absence, most “anti-Semites” would no longer harbor any reservations about their influence. Alas, that doesn’t seem to be forthcoming. Therefore, lampshades.

            >Objectively speaking my race (not me personally, but my race generally) is far inferior to the Jews and East Asians

            A stupendously wrong statement. To repeat my point: those “dumb hicks” may not leave a particularly sympathetic impression after declining ever so impolitely your offer to embark on yet *another* endless session of D&D for experts, but they get civilization done better than all other ethnicities. That’s why the only countries you’ll ever wish to reside in, and the only communities you’ll ever enjoy living among, are majority White – notwithstanding the ethnic composition of your local D&D circle.

            >Is there anyone here who seriously thinks that if the franchise was restricted to Ashkenazi Jews, East Asians and upper-caste South Asians that the country wouldn’t immensely improve immediately? If you disagree you are clearly delusionally racist.

            It is the nuanced subtlety of your trolling that renders it so efficacious.

        • Minion says:

          When it comes to most social metrics, including social trust, aren’t Ashkenazim basically whites in that regard? Ashkenazi culture is very low context culture, causing tons of miscommunication problems between them and both Mizrahim/sephardic Jews, as well as Arabs.

          “amputating innocent people’s limbs for honor’s sake is an integral, indispensable part of the Arab existence.”
          There is nothing in Arab culture that warrants the amputation of innocent people’s limbs. Guily people, however…

  7. […] Jim on a striking lesson from the history of ideology: […]

    • Dave says:

      So what? The last independent European state died in the Führerbunker; since 1945 they’ve all been Russian or American vassal states. In the old days Russia was the worse master because it required a command economy with state ownership of all capital assets. Today America is worse because it requires replacing the native population with millions of third-world vermin.

      • R7_Rocket says:

        Russia *is* an independent European state. And it has already initiated step one in re-establishing its sphere of influence in Europe at the expense of The Cathedral.

  8. R7_Rocket says:

    h t t p: //www.businessinsider.com/putin-is-infiltrating-europe-2014-12

  9. Dan says:

    Scott Alexander was dating a tranny last I heard. That puts him in the bottom 10% of Americans on a sanity scale. He is as much to be respected as a well-spoke and intelligent resident of an asylum.

    • jim says:

      It is even worse than that. He was cuckolded by a tranny, and while being cuckolded continued to be nice, civilized, and courteous to the man that was cuckolding him and the thing that was cuckolding him.

      When we call him a cuck, he is literally a cuck.

      • Mackus says:

        Naah…
        There can no cuckolding if there are no ovaries involved.
        That’s why most gay dudes are cool with their boyfriends fucking other dudes, and then they are being courteous to them. Nothing to be jealous about.
        Cheating? Sure, but not cuckolding.

        • jim says:

          She has ovaries. Claims to be a man but has all original equipment.

          • Jack says:

            She’s a heterosexual, non-dyke female who chopped off the boobs and took some hormones; now she LARPs her whole life as a “gay man”. Since Scott only wants to cuddle asexually non-discriminately, this was fine with him. They’re both autistic, probably. Really, no one was actually cucked, because it’s more of a friendzone situation than a romantic relationship.

            I feel sorry for Scott, his brain abnormality (there has to be a brain abnormality involved in this creepy affair) channels all his sexual energy toward intellectual pursuits, so he’s extraordinarily intelligent yet decidedly wretched.

          • Mackus says:

            I see. When one uses word “tranny”, people generally assume MtF.
            Still pretty fucked up.

      • Zach says:

        Didn’t know that.

      • Steve Johnson says:

        I’m missing part of the drama – who was the man cuckolding him?

        • peppermint says:

          It is fairly common for autistic women growing up in consent culture to conclude that they would be better off as men and try to larp as men, since, being autistic, they don’t feel the biological drive of femininity as strongly, but are more able to and have the biological drive to accept arguments from the powerful. They are encouraged in this behavior by the academia, media, and their teachers, and their parents are browbeaten into accepting it.

          This sliver of senseless cruelty is one of the many reasons that social science academics and the psychology profession must be executed.

          Scott Alexander’s xgf is probably autistic. She was convinced to permanently disfigure herself in order to feel good about being a slut, which is, after all, what consent culture and the men she hooked up with, including Scott Alexander, wanted from her.

          I hope after the revolution, Scott Alexander is forced to marry her.

          • jim says:

            She was convinced to permanently disfigure herself in order to feel good about being a slut

            Exactly so.

            Consent does not make sex right, nor lack of consent make sex wrong. She made bad decisions about sex, felt bad, felt that gay men could do what she did without feeling bad, decided to disfigure herself to cure her bad feelings.

            If not under male authority and supervision, women make destructive and self destructive decisions about sex.

    • Minion says:

      Not to mention he is a literally cuck (not even a meme “cuck”) , since his “girl”friend is polyamorous and is spinning 30 plates or something of that nature.

      Cucks should hang. Whoever has no ghayra (protective jealousy), kill him

      • Jack says:

        >There is nothing in Arab culture that warrants the amputation of innocent people’s limbs. Guily people, however…

        >Cucks should hang. Whoever has no ghayra (protective jealousy), kill him

        So when you discover some dishonorable behavior by someone, albeit discreet and bearing absolutely no relation to yourself, you should nevertheless commence the severe amputation of limbs right then and there, right on the spot, because of the negative emotion of disrespecting someone. Oh man, the Europeans are going to be celebrating the enrichment and the vibrancy for decades!

        • Minion says:

          The only crimes that are punishable by amputation in the sharia are theft of goods beyond a certain value (punished by amputating the right hand), mayhem (punished by amputating the same limb that the victim had been amputated), and highway/armed robbery (punished by amputating a foot and a hand).

          All such incidences require at least 2 Muslim free male witnesses of good repute to convict, and need to be convicted in a sharia court. Has nothing to do with “negative emotions”

      • Mackus says:

        “She’s” not his wife, or fiancee, or anything that would imply he owns her or is responsible for her.

        • Minion says:

          Its still degenerate, but whatever

          • Mackus says:

            Well, yeah, why you should punish someone for _not_ getting jealous over a degenerate?
            That’s like stoning fag-married men… for cheating on each other with other men… completely missing the point of what was wrong with their behavior.

            • jim says:

              Scott’s inappropriate tolerance contributed to her degeneracy. Some beatings and coercive sex would have straightened her out.

  10. Alan J. Perrick says:

    I’ve understood autogenocide to be the destruction of a certain social or ideological group, not a racial group which would be only “genocide”. You used the example of destruction of all of the Roman males, which appears to be that racial group, so the right wording would be the second term…

    A.J.P.

    • Oliver Cromwell says:

      Auto = self

      Autogenocide = destruction of group by that group.

      E.g. Russian Jews, who took over the country in 1917 and then decimated their own population. There are about 1/10 as many Jews living there today as survived Hitler.

  11. Hans Wagemueller says:

    ITT: the JV cheerleading squad swapping rumors about the homecoming queen.

  12. […] Leftism, suicide, autogenocide, and cosmocide. […]

  13. […] big, sweeping, impressionist work of art this week: Leftism, suicide, autogenocide, and cosmocide. This ☀“Official” #NRx Best of the Week Honorable Mention☀ is not without […]

Leave a Reply for R7_Rocket