Archive for July, 2018

Socialism

Sunday, July 29th, 2018

Leftism necessarily goes ever lefter. But what is “lefter”? Leftism has no essence, it is just a coalition to knock over the apple cart in order to grab some of the apples, so “lefter” is whatever direction looks like some apples could be knocked loose. “Lefter” could be almost anything, head off in almost any direction, depending on fashion, opportunity, and perceived vulnerability of people who have stuff.

Leftism necessarily goes ever lefter, because having knocked over one apple cart, there is now an apple shortage, and people then need to knock over another, and because of the broken window effect – when leftism works, in the sense that apples were rolling around, they go looking for something else to knock over, since that apple cart is already smashed up. Leftists perceive wealth as a snapshot in time, as if it were a gift from God. The ways that wealth is created are meaningless to them, it is a pie to be sliced up and enjoyed.

Right now “lefter” is heading off towards ethnic cleansing of whites and desexing of males. Many leftists find this alarming, being white or male or both, so are trying to find some other direction, any other direction – and socialism is some other direction.

Socialism is not currently a threat, being so thoroughly and totally discredited:
Socialism is bread lines

Socialist economic development

But what Democrats hope to do is run on a program of Ferguson and Krystalnacht, and then, instead of delivering Ferguson and Kristallnacht, deliver socialism. “Instead of burning down the supermarkets in Ferguson, leave them standing and we democrats, being such nice caring people, will order them to give you free stuff. So much nicer. Please don’t burn my house down, kill me, and rape my children.” Might work, but the dynamics of leftism are likely to get away from them. Venezuela promised socialism, wound up delivering socialism plus Kristallnacht.

People keep telling me that socialism works great – the statistics always improve enormously under socialism. Thus, for example, Venezuela has cured inflation and put everyone on a pension, and given everyone a university education, and provided universal healthcare. UN statistics always show socialist countries doing wonderfully well on the Human Development Index.

Of course they cured inflation by setting official prices, and you cannot actually buy anything worth buying at official prices, and universal healthcare gets you a bed to die in. Universal healthcare provides abundant caring, but a distinct shortage of health, and universal university education produces ignorance instead of knowledge.

In a thread on my blog, a supposed reactionary has been telling me how socialist agriculture worked great in Russia long ago and far away, and they had to do it because the climate being harsh, they had to have collective agriculture because it works so much better. And, similarly, lots of leftists will tell you how great socialism has been for Cuba and Venezuela – though the internet makes this story a bit more difficult to get away with than when they tell it about far away places and long ago times.

Barnacling

Friday, July 27th, 2018

Leftists have a word “entryism”, which they use when privately talking amongst themselves. They never plainly state what entryism is, but if you are part of the in group, it becomes obvious that they are talking in code. If the chans got hold of some emails about “entryism”, would probably interpret it as referring to satanic rituals involving sex with children.

I don’t know what “pizza” means in the pizzagate emails, other than that it obviously does not mean pizza, but I know what entryism means:

  1. Identify a respected institution.
  2. kill it.
  3. gut it.
  4. wear its carcass as a skin suit, while demanding respect

Since outsiders have never heard the word “entryism” used, they invented their own word for this: “Barnacling

Science died with peer review, and is now a skin suit worn by a demon. As social justice warriors moved into technology companies, the same has happened with technology. If you are a gamer, you will have noticed that you no longer need new hardware every year. If you are a fan of self driving cars, you will have noticed that they can self drive just fine 99.99% of the time, which is 0.01% less than is useful, and that impressive as this is, it is not getting any better, nor is it likely to get any better. Similarly, Google Translate was a gigantic achievement, but no real progress has been made in automatic translation since Google went social justice, quite a long time ago.

Musk is a serial scammer, always hyping technology that does not exist and that he has no real intention of producing, but his reusable booster was a real technological achievement. It was, of course, produced by male geeks, and now that the eye of Soros has fallen upon them, they are finding their job redefined from producing a reusable earth to orbit rocket, Musk’s proposed, and genuinely intended BFR, to proving that black muslim women produced all technology, and whites stole it from them. Musk’s electric cars and solar city are scams, which could have only produced a profit through Hillary’s crony capitalism, but he really did intend the BFR, the re-usable earth to orbit and back again rocket. Reading between the lines, I feel him giving up hope for it now, which is going to destroy the lives and careers of a horde of really great rocket scientists. If no BFR, there is not much for them to do now. Their careers are going through the same dead end arc as a Fortran engineer’s, or a nuclear engineer’s or a climate scientist who tells peer reviewers what he actually observed, instead of observing what they tell him he observed.

The term “Barnacling” was coined in reference to the Social Justice takeover and destruction of the Star Wars mythos and intellectual property, but I have seen the same thing happen to various open source projects that adopted a contributor code of conduct. Instead of the objective being to produce good software to serve some valuable purpose, the objective becomes giving black women STEM credits, and the project suffers bitrot and technical debt. The creators are, sooner or later, accused of mansplaining, sexual harassment, rape and racism, they become radioactive and permanently unemployable. And without them, the project mysteriously languishes while being used to adorn the resumes of progressives who do not know what a dongle or a fork is.

If you adopt Github’s community code of conduct, your STEM career is going to die, because you are giving people who hate you and everything you stand for, who hate your race, hate your sex, and hate the entire civilization that your ancestors created, the tools with which to destroy your life.

If you have heard leftists talk about entryism (and you will have only heard them talking about it if they are confident you are a fellow leftist) it swiftly becomes obvious that they are talking in code about something that gives them great pleasure. You might suppose that the code is code for satanic rituals and diddling little boys, which is probably how the chans would interpret it, but they are talking about something more fun that that: They are talking in code about destroying the lives of people that they hate. And they hate you, and they hate everything you represent.

Stealing from the best, here is a detailed description of how social justice warriors destroy games and movies:

  1. SJW CRITICISM – The intellectual property is criticized by SJWs for being racist, sexist, misogynist, homophobic, and a smattering of other things.
  2. Intellectual property IS ABOUT TO UNDERGO REBOOT – or reimagining, or remake, or whatever term is fashionable at the time.
  3. THE BARNACLING – SJWs barnacle themselves to the intellectual property both within its production and without in the fan base, and start lecturing long time fans.
  4. FAN CRITICISM – Long time fans of the intellectual property voice legitimate criticism of the new direction.
  5. SJW RESPONSE TO FAN CRITICISM – A large fan backlash is created when SJWs both within and without the production falsely accuse critics of being racist, sexist, misogynist, homophobic etc.
  6. DISMISSING THE BACKLASH – Media publishes pieces declaring the backlash doesn’t exist.
  7. IGNORING THE BACKLASH – Media publishes pieces instructing others to ignore the “tiny vocal minority.
  8. SUPPRESSING THE BACKLASH – Blogs and websites delete or otherwise “redact” critical comments and posts in discussion forums under the aegis of “hate speech.”
  9. BACKLASH INTENSIFIES – As an inevitable side effect of suppression, backlashers seek out other venues to express their criticism, and some publish their own, growing the backlash exponentially.
  10. HATE HOAXES & FALSE FLAGS – The rank and file SJW activists get heavily involved in shouting down critics, and creating false flags and hate hoaxes in an effort to discredit critics.
  11. Intellectual property FAILURES – The intellectual property starts to falter as fans drift away and sales plummet.
  12. THE DAMSEL IN DISTRESS – A female member of the production (it could also be a gay man) is granted victim status over a fishy event in order to deflect from the failures of the intellectual property, and shame critics into silence.
  13. DESPERATE PLEAS FOR COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT – “White Knights” in the media call for creative authorities to smack down the backlash and restore control of the narrative in response to The Damsel In Distress event. Media publishes multiple articles with the same talking points and buzzwords such as “toxic” in an effort to mischaracterize the fan base. Major news outlets report on the story, and quote these “think” pieces as authoritative.
  14. ANSWERING THE CALL – Celebrities and creative cast & crew answer the media’s call, and make public statements admonishing critical fans, typically over false accusations.
  15. THE FINAL PUSH – Media entities, and rank and file SJWs tell long time fans to go find something else if they don’t like it anymore, in a last ditch effort to push critics out of the “community” once and for all.
  16. Intellectual property BLEEDING – The intellectual property continues to hemorrhage money, as long time fans continue to abandon the intellectual property in droves.
  17. FANBASE OBLITERATION – The fanbase is utterly destroyed, leaving behind only the small handful of SJWs who don’t make any purchases.
  18. THE END – The new incarnation of the intellectual property comes to an end. Since the majority of the fan base has abandoned it, there’s no more controversy or discussion about it. It’s over. The best case scenario is that the original intellectual property is largely forgotten with the exception of a few die-hards who still carry the torch. The worst case scenario is that the new incarnation of the intellectual property overwrites the original intellectual property, and the original intellectual property is forgotten altogether and overshadowed by the new incarnation in all future media mentions.
  19. MIGRATION – The remaining SJWs jump ship to devour a new intellectual property that is popular, and undergoing a transitional phase.
  20. REBIRTH – The process begins anew.

If you are working in tech or science, as for example Musk’s rocket, expect the same, though with far less reporting by major newsmedia. I have seen the same at Google and at projects that adopted a community code of conduct, and reading between the lines of Musk’s tech announcements, I can feel his reusable earth to orbit rocket fading from a real project that would create income, purpose, dignity, and status for a great many rocket scientists, to yet another of his many tech scams. (As, for example, his self driving car: When Musk decided to produce a self driving car without lidar, it was obvious he had given up on the possibility of producing an actual self driving car.) Today, only a scammer can produce science and technology, because you have lie to social justice warriors, and scammers are apt to scam all sides, scamming those who have high hopes for science and technology, and scamming those who hope to have income, purpose, and dignity in creating it. Trump is the only notable scammer who seems to be genuinely on our side.

Game

Wednesday, July 18th, 2018

This is not a PUA blog.  To learn PUA, read Heartiste and Rollo, But, I seem to have been conscripted by the Dark Enlightenment

How to deal with woman, the pitch.

Call +31 J-I-M-I-A-N-I-T-Y right now and order our #1 best-selling product, how to deal with women.

to issue a post on how to deal with women in a relationship, what do with women after picking them up, and how the religion should deal with women, how the true religion should treat women and support husbands and fathers.  So here it is:

Women are wonderful, much better than men in some respects.  A woman wants, a woman needs, to serve and obey.

Women are terrible, much worse than men in other respects.  All Women Are Like That.

This is the dark enlightenment, so I am leading off with the bad news.

Women are hypergamous.  Men want to bang every fertile age chick. My little man salutes most of them. Women, however, only want to bang the very best. So men tend to be nice to every fertile age chick, while women give every attractive man a hard time, to see what he is made of, including the more attractive men in their place of employment, including the boss in their place of employment, so will invariably disrupt the working environment. They will give their husbands a hard time, to see what he is made of, and if you don’t pass the test, you become invisible to her.  And if you are her boss, also invisible to her.

A lustful man, such as myself, is nice to every fertile age woman he meets.  A lustful woman does the opposite. Like Kate in “The Taming of the Shrew”, her disruptive behavior and misconduct reveals her hunger. And I see a great deal of disruption and misconduct in the workplace, which disruptive misconduct seems to be strangely invisible to everyone else.

Women pay alarmingly little attention to the male hierarchy of status.  They want an alpha male, but in our society, alpha males are severely restrained from violence, aggression, and misconduct, which restraint registers with women as not alpha.  All Women Are Like That.

Hypergamy never sleeps, a man must always perform, can never relax, is always on stage, can never let his guard down. I generally maintain the semblance of a charismatic arrogant asshole playboy with potential for violence and crime (Marlon Brando in The Wild One) but if General Butt Naked showed up wearing an AK 47, his trademark necklace of human eyeballs, and absolutely nothing else, I would be $#!% out of luck.

You will be $#!% tested, often brutally, and you have to pass your $#!% tests. $#!% tests are hard to pass, and are subconsciously intended to be hard to pass. There is no easy magic trick for passing $#!% tests. Anyone who says it is easy is lying, because women intend it to be hard. They want to separate the men from the boys, and the top men from the ordinary men. If you have an easy magic trick for passing $#!% tests, then as soon as chicks figure it out, it will not work any more.

Although women pay alarmingly little attention to the male status hierarchy, that is because our existing hierarchy fails to register with them as real. They are nonetheless much impressed by males backing the status of other males. If you have a driver, you score pussy points because you dominate the driver. If you have a bodyguard, you score huge pussy points because the bodyguard registers on women as alpha, and because he implies the potential for violence. Similarly, cops impress women, but you will not be able to get a cop to treat you as high status, though you may well be able to get a security man to treat you as high status. Observe the theatrical way in which Trump deploys presidential security. He is very good at this.

God, of course, is the ultimate high status alpha male. So the husband should be the priest of his family. Say grace, don’t let anyone start eating till you start, and don’t let family leave the table till you are done.

Paul commanded: 1 Timothy 3:

  1. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, …
  2. One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;
  3. (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)

The Church should support the Sovereign in his state, the husband in his marriage, and the father in his family. And has not been doing that. We got Romance, celebrating adultery, at the same time as the Church undermined the power of the Holy Roman Emperor, and tried to require mandatory female consent to marriage.  Priestly celibacy is a Christian holiness spiral, without support in the New Testament or the practices of apostles, which has been blowing up in scandal since it was introduced, because, as Paul observed, God calls very few men to celibacy.

Female consent should only required for virtuous women. Female misconduct should be dealt with by shotgun marriage, and in practice, despite near a thousand years of Church opposition, misbehaving women were shotgun married until quite recently.  The holiness spiral that led to Romance, mandatory female consent, and priestly celibacy resulted in a Christianity that has failed to support proper earthly authority for husbands, fathers, and Kings, and in recent times has become dementedly and dangerously hostile to the authority of fathers and husbands.

All marriages that actually work are quietly eighteenth century.  If your Church is hostile to such relationships, and it very likely is, you just cannot go there.  Because then your wife or girlfriend sees you emasculated by other men, and by the the most alpha male of them all, God, and then she starts cruising social media looking for someone more alpha.  The Pauline rules of worship (that women should cover their heads, and should not speak in church, nor exercise leadership positions) provide psychological support for the proper relationship of men and women, thus  provide social support for durable relationships, thus make it possible for men and women to cooperate to conceive and raise children.  If a Church deviates from these practices, it is likely not just failing to support, but aggressively undermining, the relationships necessary between men and women to form families.  Dalrock has a great pile of horrifying anecdotes on this topic.  Don’t get burned.  Do not let your wife or girlfriend see you bow your head before enemies who hate you.  You need a God that backs you, not a God that emasculates you.  If your church edits Ephesians 5:21 into Ephesians 5:22, and then drops Ephesians 5:23-29, they are your enemies, they hate you, they intend you harm, they intend to deny you children and grandchildren.  Ephesians 5:21 is part of Ephesians 5:19-21, referring to the congregation, while Ephesians 5:22-29 refers to the husband and the wife.  If they cannot say 5:22 without first saying 5:21, they are evil people who intend you harm, they twist the words of the bible to emasculate you before your women.  By quoting 5:21-22, without quoting 5:19-21, or 5:22-29, by joining these two verses, and separating them from their context, they place a false context on 5:22, which false context is intended to harm you and poison the relationships between men and women, for the context of 5:22 is 5:22-29, not 5:19-21.  Whosoever does this is is a heretic and a white knight. White knights are evil and dangerous, and need to be punched out whenever you can get away with it.  The God of Saint Paul’s Church backed husbands and fathers.  Accept no substitute Gods.  The usual substitutes will destabilize your sexual relationships, impairing your ability to reproduce.  There is no better ground for violence than that some male is impairing your sexual relationships and capability to reproduce.  You need to defend your extended phenotype.

For your relationship to survive, you cannot be hardcore asshole all the time. From time to time you have show her a bit of nice guy beta provider. But not too much. Hard exterior, soft inner core that only she can reach. It is easy to overdo the nice guy. You have to make her earn it, or she will not appreciate it. You have to keep her on her toes. Having gracefully handled an exceptionally brutal $#!% test, then it is a good time for a generous chivalrous action. Having failed a $#!% test, then it is a really bad time for any action that is the slightest bit chivalrous.

Women want attention.  They want a lot of attention.  I wish women had an off switch like a television and could be put in a closet, but unfortunately they do not.  Women want to help you.  They want to be valuable to you, and you have to find ways to keep them busy, and then spend time appreciating what they have done.  Quite frequently she will however not do stuff you have told her to do.  This is both a $#!% test (she is daring you to make her do it) and also a cry for attention.  Hear that cry.

Yes, you have to give a woman lots of time, energy, and attention, or she is going to go looking for attention on social media, where she will find a hundred males richer than you, handsomer than your, and with bigger tools (which they will show her) than you.  But at the same time, Poon Commandment Number Three:  “You shall make your mission, not your woman, your priority”  The natural order is that a woman’s focus is her man, and a man’s focus is something higher.  If your focus is her, suddenly and mysteriously she will lose interest in your interest.  You have to give her attention, but you have to keep her on short rations and make her earn it, because you are an important person with important things to do.

When you get her doing stuff for you, reward her liberally with attention.  When not satisfied, turn your face away.  She wants attention, but also wants to earn it, not simply demand it.  Shouting and spanking is attention and drama, and women love attention and drama, so shouting and spanking is not very effective in getting compliance.  Women love to be made to comply.  Just as you tip generously so that you can not tip when displeased, you should supply attention generously so that you can not supply attention when displeased.  This is more effective in obtaining compliance.

But some kinds of attention are bad.  If you are looking at her, and she is looking at her task, this is the wrong dynamic.  She should be looking at you, and you should be looking at your mission.  Reversing the dynamic will make her unhappy.

A woman wants you to use her, to exploit her, to take advantage of her.  At the same time she is going to make it difficult for you to do so.  Life would be so much easier if  women had an off switch, but since they don’t, you just have to get on with the use, the exploitation, and the taking advantage.  She wants to please you, so you need to give her avenues and opportunities to please you.  At the same time, she is going to test you for weakness and neediness, and the tests are going to be hard.  You cannot be weak or needy.  Have to be arrogant, not weak, and demanding, not needy.  You should want lots of things from her, and communicate that you are pleased when you get those things – while at the same time being totally entitled to get it, pleased but not grateful, because you are completely entitled to get whatever you want from her.

And, of course, there is that soft inner core.  You should care, not about what she wants, for that will only irritate her, but about what she should want, as though she was your own flesh.

You will notice that for everything I have told you to do, I have also told you almost the opposite:  Be an asshole and cherish her.  Give her attention and don’t give her attention. But it is worse than that.  The difference between what I am telling you to do, and telling you to not do, is pre verbal, and by expressing the difference in words, I necessarily oversimplify and exaggerate the difference.

 

 

The murder of the Czar and his family

Monday, July 16th, 2018

A hundred years ago the Czar and his family were murdered, which murder foreshadowed and led to the murder of huge numbers of ordinary people.

Progressives, including supposedly very moderate centrist progressives, made, and continue to make all sorts of myths justifying and rationalizing the murder, revealing their intent to do it all over again.

Myth:  The Czar was brutal and oppressive, but the soldiers refused to fire on the revolting masses, so he was overthrown, and thus the communists, representing the masses to power.

Reality: The Czar was a cucked progressive.  He had Lenin and Stalin in his hands, guilty of all sorts of crimes that gave him grounds for execution or indefinite imprisonment, but let them off because letists are holier than thou.  There were no revolting masses, just a series of coups made in the name of the revolting masses, and such riots and looting as occurred, occurred Ferguson style – the police were ordered to stand back and let the mobs loot stuff and smash stuff.

The February revolution was no revolution – rather the elite allowed the mobs to knock over a few breweries, to provide an excuse for them seizing power from the Czar while he was away at the front.

The communists did not overthrow the Czar.  The Kadets overthrew the Czar.  Then Kerensky overthrew the Kadets with a policy of no enemies to the left, no friends to the right, which meant he disarmed the military officers, and armed the communists.  Then the communists overthrew Kerensky.  The leftism of the Czar led to his overthrow by the even lefter Kadets, the indecisive leftism of the Kadets led to their overthrow by Kerensky, and the radical leftism of Kerensky led to his overthrow by the even lefter communists, who then murdered the Czar, and millions of peasants, until the madness ended with them murdering each other.

What happened to Russia was leftism leading to more leftism.

Progressives agree that serfdom was absolutely horrid, and perhaps it was.  If it was horrid, the solution should have been to free the serfs and leave the land with the lords.  Or perhaps give some of the land to the more competent, successful, and wealthy serfs.  But this solution was considered unthinkably horrible and inconceivably reactionary, which implicitly acknowledged that most serfs were not ready to run their own lives.  What progressives wanted was the serfs freed with the land.  But quite obviously, most serfs were incompetent to operate a small farm.  So progressives wanted them to operate the land collectively.  But if one man trying to run a small farm is hard, one hundred men trying to run a large farm is considerably harder.

So, Alexander the liberator freed them with collective ownership of the land.  Which was predictably a disaster.  And there was thereafter a succession of ever lefter government measures to try to deal with the problem, each of which made the problem worse.  Russian agriculture still has not recovered.  By freeing the serfs and giving them the land collectively, but not individually, Alexander the liberator set in motion a slide ever leftwards that continued steadily all the way to the liquidation of the kulaks.

The liberation of the serfs with collective ownership of the land created a crisis, for which the solution was always more leftism, which led to more crisis. This created an expectation that the way to power was to be lefter than thou. The Czar’s generals and bureaucrats outflanked him on the left. Kerensky’s socialists outflanked them on the left, and the Communists outflanked Kerensky on the left. Then the communists proceeded to outflank each other, till Stalin put a stop to that.

If at any time any of Alexander the Liberator’s successors had been so horribly repressive as to demonstrate that lefter than thou was a seriously bad career move, as Stalin belatedly demonstrated, the slide leftwards would have halted and stayed halted. But instead the Czars allowed to the progressives to guilt them into doing whatever the progs demanded, which merely excited progressive bloodlust.

Thermodynamics of Social Entropy

Saturday, July 14th, 2018

Entropy is always increasing. A fully disordered society is illustrated by wild animals and primitive peoples such as the Tasmanian aboriginals, where all other creatures except for close kin are enemies, obstacles or sources of raw materials – Hobbes state of war.  So if you look back in history, you can always see entropic processes, bringing us back towards that condition.

So, how come ordered societies exist, how come surviving and prosperous societies are generally at least somewhat orderly?

You cannot make something clean without making something else dirty, but you can make any amount of stuff dirty without making anything clean. Order for the ingroup always comes at the expense of someone else: Thus, for example, chastity and monogamy requires men hitting badly behaved women with a stick. (Dalrock banned me for pointing this out.) Thus, for example, in Africa we saw societies that herded cattle and planted crops had to enslave, or kill and eat, vagrants that were apt to hunt other people’s cattle and gather from other people’s gardens. The shift from hunting and gathering to herding and gardening involved extended cooperation – and a fair bit of brutality to hunters and gatherers.

As birds are born to fly, humans are born to cooperate. That is our key capability. Our telos is various forms of cooperation, as the heart’s telos is to circulate blood.  The whites of our eyes are white, so that other people can see what we are looking at. We are vulnerable to choking, because our throat is optimized towards making a wider variety of distinct sounds than other animals. We have a more muscles in our face than other animals, so that we can unfalsifiably communicate our emotional state, just as every feature of a bird’s anatomy is optimized for low weight and high metabolic output. This cooperation manifested as tribes cooperating to kill other tribes and capture their women. Order consists of extended cooperation. Because entropy naturally tends to increase, because there are a near infinity of ways for society to be disordered, but only a small number of ways for it to be ordered, maintaining order requires a fair bit of ruthlessness towards disorderly people and towards outgroups whose cooperation is unlikely.  Gays undermine male solidarity.  David’s mighty men could cohere because David could love Jonathan.  David could love Jonathan because gays were put to death.  Peoples who have gay parades do not win wars.

The ten commandments consist of four commandments concerning man’s relationship to God, five commandments that had the effect of ensuring that congregation of the Lord operated on a cooperate cooperate basis, and the final commandment, the tenth commandment, prohibited coming up with clever rationales for undermining, subverting, and re-interpreting those five.

The four commandments that facilitate cooperation are:
Exodus 20:

  1. Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
  2. Thou shalt not kill.
  3. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
  4. Thou shalt not steal.
  5. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.

The rule on honoring thy parents and committing adultery secured ownership of family, thus cooperation within the family. The rules against killing, stealing, and false witness enabled economic cooperation on the basis of property rights and the market economy.

And the final commandment:

  1. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.

prohibits people from concocting ingenious theories as to why someone else’s property or wife is rightfully their own – forbids the entire ideology and program of Social Justice.

Compliance to the four commandments concerning God made fellow members of the congregation readily identifiable, and by complying with these four commandments, for which compliance was as visible as possible, one gave other members of the congregation reason to believe one would comply with the other five commandments, for which compliance was less visible, and thus reason to believe that cooperation with people who complied with the first four would be reciprocated and rewarded by cooperation, resulting in cooperate/cooperate equilibrium.

Social Justice Warriors have turned the tenth commandment on its head, making envy and covetousness a sacrament. This explains their chronic failure to cooperate, explains why rallies to save the earth leave a snail trail of trash behind them.  Social Justice declares that what people have is “privilege” and should be taken away from them.  Which creates a society in which people have no reason to have wealth or family.

A religion is a synthetic tribe. If the priesthood has power and status, and also has open entry into the priesthood, one gets holiness spirals – as for example priestly celibacy. Cooperate cooperate equilibrium, giving every man his due, makes all good members of the religion equal in holiness though unequal in property and power, thus a holiness spiral is going to redefine holiness away from forms that promote cooperation. The tribal religion has to reward exceptional and unusual holiness with honor, but not power and wealth. Send saints to live in a hermitage with spartan living conditions on a remote island as far from the capital as possible, where they can demonstrate superior holiness without subverting and undermining social order.  On the one hand, to encourage good behavior, the society must honor supererogatory holiness.  On the other hand preaching superogatory holiness always threatens to redefine holiness in ways that undermine order, making holiness a force of disorder instead of order.

As for example:
Lucas film hates its customers

Starbucks hates its customers, and LucasFilm hates its customers, which subverts cooperation on the basis of exchange.  While practicing supererogation should be honored, preaching it needs to be forcefully suppressed.  People who preach supererogation should not be martyred, which might increase their status, but rather treated like a stray dog that chases chickens – punished in ways that lower their status.

As example Russia dealing with Pussy Riot:

If the Sovereign is forced to punish someone who preaches supererogatory holiness in a way that might potentially increase their status (and Charles the second was forced to burn one conspicuously and irritatingly holy nonconformist woman at the stake) the Sovereign should lock the body in a mortuary for three days, and on the third day ironically check the body to see if they have risen from the dead.  But it is as dangerous to martyr those who preach supererogatory holiness, as it is to tolerate them.  The Sovereign must always strike at primarily at their status, as Russia dealt with Pussy Riot and European University.

While entropy always increases, it is always possible to locally reduce entropy, usually at the expense of someone else less effective and successful at extended cooperation (as, for example, women, pussy riot, gays, or hunter gatherer outgroups).

The highest and best example of this is western civilization, which is anglo civilization, which is the restoration of Charles the Second. The restoration gave us science, technology, corporate capitalism, industrialization, and world empire, which represent the highest level of extended cooperation ever achieved.

The restoration cured the disorderly tendencies of the protestant holiness spiral by putting priests under bishops, and bishops under the King. Which was the imposition of order, at the expense of “non conformists” – whose very name implies their disorderly tendencies.   “Non conformists” were priests, professors, judges, and suchlike who were disinclined to accept this hierarchy, on the grounds that the King at the top was conspicuously lacking in holiness.  We need to do something similar with our university system, as well as radically reducing its size and the amount of time it sucks out of people’s lives – we need to do Charles the Second’s Bishops, and Henry the Eighth’s dissolution of the monasteries.

Universities have always had as their primary job inculcating people in the official religion, and giving people cultural and scientific knowledge has always been merely their secondary job. Lately, their secondary job has largely been abandoned.  It used to be that giving people job skills was entirely irrelevant, since this was done by enforceable apprenticeship.

We shall restore the enforceable apprenticeship system and divest universities of the task of giving people job skills, in the process divesting them of the power to accredit people to jobs. We shall give considerably higher, but still secondary, priority to the task of giving people cultural and scientific knowledge, and change the official religion to make it saner, by erasing all doctrines that are potentially falsifiable by the realities of this world.  Members of the elite will still be required to adhere to the official religion, as they are now, but the task of checking adherence will not be outsourced to the universities. Instead, people in state jobs and quasi statal jobs will be required to recite a catechism and take an oath.

Contrary to the myth about the plymouth rock puritans, that early puritans supposedly filled the North American continent, where we have genealogies, puritans are descended from those who left restoration England to establish their own dissident theocracy, not from the pre english civil war wave of migrants fleeing Charles the first, but from the post civil war wave of “noncomformist” migrants fleeing the restoration, fleeing Charles the Second and subsequent Kings.  The first wave, the pre civil war wave, left very few direct descendants.

Restoration England was successful at elite eugenic reproduction, because women were kept under control, and cured the disorderly propensities of the protestant reformation by keeping “non conformists” under control, thereby enabling the extended cooperation that made science and industry possible.  Immediately after the restoration, we see Ayn Rand’s heroic archetype appear, the scientist engineer CEO, mobilizing other people’s capital and other people’s labor to advance technology and make that technology widely available.  Often these were people who before the restoration had competed for superior holiness, (analogous to Musk’s subsidized and money burning tesla, solar panels, and solar batteries), but after the restoration competed for creating technology to produce value (analogous to Musk’s reusable booster rocket.)  This form of order was made possible at the expense of “non conformists”, such as the excessively holy woman that Charles the Second burned at the stake.

In order for society to have cooperate/cooperate equilibrium, the science, industry, and technology that we see promoted by the corporate form, in order to promote cooperation with cooperators, the sovereign must promote defection on defectors.  One such defector being a holy woman conspicuously holier than Charles the Second.  Charles the second successfully redirected status competition from unproductive channels into productive channels, as for example members of the Royal Society gaining status by discovering truth and speaking truth, while previously puritans had gained power and status by having a Christianity that was purer than the other man’s Christianity.  You will notice that Putin dealt with Pussy Riot’s weaponized supererogatory holiness preaching in a way that deliberately maximized disorder – maximized outgroup disorder in order to sustain ingroup order.  That is the way to do it.

The restoration created a society that had the greatest cooperate/cooperate equilibrium ever, where people were able to engage in positive sum cooperation, which was made possible by severely negative sum uncooperation – you cannot get more negative sum than burning an excessively holy woman at the stake. If Charles the Second had not burned a holy woman at the stake for excessive, conspicuous, and obnoxiously superior holiness, he would have had the William Wilberforce problem.

Humans are inherently tribal.  We have ethnicities and religions, all of which are in substantial part the same phenomenon.  A millet is a smaller tribe (religion) within the empire that the empire recognizes and grants some limited self rule and autonomy.

Two tribes cannot co-exist in overlapping territory, except they create little zones for themselves, for example the black table in school cafe.  One tribe will always rule, and another will always be ruled.  Segregation and Jim Crow was an effort to give blacks autonomy and self rule, make them into a millet, conditional on the black rulers assimilating to white middle class values and behavior. Integration proved to be black dominion. When the blacks were allowed to the front of the bus, they inevitably wound up forcing white people off the buses.

This tribalism is the problem with libertarianism – if you allow liberty, people will use it to synthesize smaller ingroups within the larger group in order to dominate the detribalized majority. William Wilberforce and his “elect” destroyed what the restoration had accomplished, undermining the small scale cooperation between men and women to have children, and the cooperation between elites and individual members of the elite to maintain an empire that kept large scale economic cooperation over the oceans.  His successors transliterated the religion of the elect from the next world to this world, creating modern progressivism.  Since the transliterated tenets, such as equality, are transparently false to this world, this required them to reject truth telling and truth speaking, resulting in peer review and the replication crisis that has destroyed science.

The earthly telos of holiness is to promote the broadest possible cooperate/cooperate equilibrium.  Holiness competition results in people finding grounds to declare other people unholy, thus Starbucks and LucasFilms declare their customers unholy, thus holiness competition destroys the earthly telos of holiness.  Therefore we cannot allow excessively holy people to gain power in the state religion.  Instead, need to send Social Justice Warriors away from the universities off to a hermitage in a remote island and honor their superior holiness from a safe distance.  If someone wants to demonstrate superior holiness, it should be costly for himself, rather profitable for himself, and costly for everyone around him.  Superior holiness and performing superogatory acts has to be made unprofitable.

The axis of deplorables

Friday, July 13th, 2018

Until recently, everyone in power everywhere in the world was culturally aligned with the Blue Empire, or at least reluctant to be openly unaligned.  Every government, every head of government, every government school, every university everywhere, every television station (including Fox), every newspaper (including the Murdoch newspapers).  The Cathedral would from time to time go into high dudgeon because not everyone was as enthusiastic as they would like, but anyone who outright opposed them was low status and powerless.

Universities and their endowments are still converged, and all the mass media and internet giants are converged. Trump has few loyalists among his political appointees in government.  But it is a start.   A start that denies the inevitability of Blue Empire power, a start that tells us that surrender is not the only option.  That Trump had the last laugh over Gay Mulatto gives every man a shot of testosterone.  That Melanie is hot, while Michelle belongs in a zoo, makes every progressive everywhere look and feel bad.

When we successfully do the Dissolution of the Monasteries on the universities, confiscating their endowments, and ending their power as gatekeepers to high status high pay jobs, when we are no longer ruled by the clergy, that will be victory, and the rest will be mopping up operations.  It is a long way from here to there, some very bad things will happen on the way, and there may well be a red terror and a civil war along the route, but in the far distance, we can see hope for victory.  If Trump fails, he will nonetheless have pointed the way for one that will follow.

The best outcome would be that Democrats launch a coup prematurely, leading to civil war prematurely, and lose it, leaving Trump as King, as happened in the Social War of the Roman Republic, when the Populares played their hand too soon and too recklessly. Worst outcome would be that they launch their coup, get away with it, leading to a rapid succession of coups by ever more extreme factions, as in the coups against Czar Nicolas and King Louis XVI, and, as in those coups, we launch the civil war too late, and lose it.  But we have something that they did not have.  We can see the pattern, making it possible to step off that path early rather than late, getting an outcome more like that of Social War of Rome, than the French and Russian Revolutions.  That would buy us time enough for technological progress in gene editing technologies to save the day, assuming we can fix the fertility problem.  The failure of the Roman elite to reproduce led to endless waves of elite replacement, resulting in chaos and instability, so Sulla’s restoration failed to last.  To fix the fertility problem, we have to restrict sexual female choice.  We have to force women to get married, to stay with their husbands, to refrain from sex with anyone other than their husbands, and to obey their husband.   Even if we have gene editing, still takes two to raise a child.  A high IQ species necessarily has a long childhood, which requires cooperate/cooperate equilibrium between husbands and wives, which equilibrium requires substantial external enforcement.  Peoples that allow female sexual choice disappear.  Rome got in trouble despite Sulla’s restoration because its elite kept disappearing, resulting a dangerous degree of social mobility at the top.

Testosterone and weight loss

Monday, July 9th, 2018

Exogenous testosterone can cause your testicles to shut down – and possibly shut down permanently. Hence the need to get off testosterone from time to time.

I learned that my sperm production was down – not so low as to render me entirely infertile, but low enough to significantly impact my prospects of having another child.  So, I stopped taking exogenous testosterone on May 14th. By May 27th, had gained ten pounds and my abs were no longer visible. So, on May 27th, adopted the carno ketogenic diet.  Extreme low carb, with an eight hour eating window each day, and longer fasts from time to time. One and half grams of protein per day per kilogram of ideal weight.

I have now lost the weight that I gained, and it feels like my testosterone levels are recovering.  But it was a struggle to lose that weight without exogenous testosterone to strengthen me.  I miss carbs terribly, and now that I can see my abs again, am going to slowly go back to eating a little bit of carbs.   I will retest my testicles in August or September.

I have done weight loss with and without exogenous testosterone.  Weight loss is never easy for me, even with exogenous testosterone, but without exogenous testosterone it is mighty hard.

Technological decline

Friday, July 6th, 2018

As societies enter a dark age, military technologies are apt to be the last to be lost, and in the recovery from a dark age, the first to advance.

In dark ages, art declines, great buildings decline, ordinary people’s living standards decline, people harrow the ground with stones tied to bits of wood instead of iron plows, but weapons technology usually goes right on improving.

Our art is crap, we no longer build Cathedrals, but until recently, weapons were good and improving.

The 2018 Nuclear Posture Review has recently appeared, revealing that we have lost all nuclear military technology:

U.S. production of tritium, a critical strategic material for nuclear weapons, is now insufficient to meet the forthcoming U.S. nuclear force sustainment demands, or to hedge against unforeseen developments. Programs are planned, but not yet fully funded, to ease these critical production shortfalls.

This is euphemistic.  Recent attempts to produce tritium were fully funded, but failed, which failure resulted in new plans for new attempts to produce tritium, which have not yet been fully funded.

I have regularly remarked on America’s inability to produce tritium.  All existing nuclear weapons require tritium to juice their detonation, and without tritium, would produce a low yield explosion.  Tritium decays over time, and so fresh tritium continually needs to be added.  The US is out of tritium, has repeatedly attempted to produce more, and repeatedly failed.

Fully funding the Obamacare website did not produce an Obamacare website, and I doubt that fully funding proposed new tritium production facilities will produce tritium.

In the absence of sustained support for these programs, including a marked increase in the planned production of tritium in the next few years, our nuclear capabilities will inevitably atrophy and degrade below requirements.

The U.S. is also unable to produce or process a number of other critical materials, including lithium and enriched uranium. For instance, the United States largely relies on dismantling retired warheads to recover lithium to sustain and produce deployable warheads. This may be inadequate to support the nuclear force replacement program and any supplements to it.

So, our enrichment facilities have ceased to function across the board.

And, recapping my previous remarks on technological decline:

Fighter planes are getting slower, and can no longer fly as high or as far.

We need Pu238 for nuclear batteries. The 2006 New Horizons mission to Pluto and the Kuiper belt was launched without enough Pu238 to keep all its equipment live during the Pluto flyby, and without enough Pu238 to do its Kuiper belt mission,

Existing nuclear weapons have not received maintenance for a very long time, and it is unclear whether there is anyone with the relevant skills to perform maintenance and adequately test them for readiness.

Fusion weapons require lithium enriched in lithium six to juice them.  Enriched lithium does not decay, but the US has lost the capability to make more of it.

Attempts to build new nuclear reactors in the US keep running into indefinite delays.  To make significant amounts of plutonium 239  will need new reactors.

Plutonium 239 is the stuff used in nuclear weapons, plutonium 238 the stuff used in nuclear batteries, plutonium 240 is the stuff you don’t want because it spontaneously fissions.  You want to produce your plutonium using enriched uranium in a sodium cooled fast neutron reactor because then you get considerably more of the plutonium you want, and considerably less of the plutonium you do not want.  The US used to build fast neutron reactors, but all recent attempts to build a fast neutron reactor in the west have failed, and all existing fast neutron reactors in the West have stopped working.  The only existing fast neutron reactors that are working well enough to produce significant amounts of plutonium are in Russia and China.

If all existing fast neutron reactors have ceased to work, if all our existing isotopic enrichment plants have ceased to work, should we really believe that our existing nuclear weapons will work?

Money, “full funding”, is unlikely to be the issue.  Obama threw stupendous amounts of money at the Obamacare website, and the site did not come up.   It only came up when a conspicuously undiverse team of white and east Asian heterosexual males led by white heterosexual males took over the job.

Nuclear weapons were produced by western civilization, and since 1972 the core project of our universities has been “Western Civilization has got to go.”

Science requires a level of trust and trustworthiness that a diverse society is incapable of, and a level of truth speaking that a progressive post christian society is incapable of.

 

When the west started losing wars

Friday, July 6th, 2018

The Victorian theory that women were angels, therefore no coercion was needed against naturally saintly women, only against demonic males who make saintly women do bad things, led to an intolerable flood of bastards and women giving birth in the rain in dark alleys, which in turn led to “Oliver Twist” and “Les Miserables”, which brought us the welfare state, and the replacement of the nuclear family with child support.  As people in the eighteenth century were aware, people need marriage in order to reproduce, and marriage needs coercion to make it stick, and the primary victims of this coercion need to be women, otherwise they will have sex with one man, then sex with another, making it difficult and unpleasant to father children.

Similarly, “White Man’s Burden”, and “la haute mission civilisatrice” was the death of colonialism.

It led the British general who was invading Afghanistan to believe he was doing Afghans a favor, and if he was sufficiently nice to them they would throw flowers at his troops.  So he forbade his troops to take necessary measures for self defense, and, as a result, he and his troops died.

The white man’s burden was profoundly counterproductive to social cohesion, because it led to them sacrificing near (British officers and troops) for far (afghan officers and troops)

If it is a burden, then you proceed to conspicuously display your holiness by burden carrying – which is apt to mean making your troops carry burdens.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

If an elite attempt to rule distant places, they will rule them very badly, unless some of the children of the elite move to those places, and stay there to rule them.  Carpetbaggers who come and go tend to leave horror and devastation in their wake, as for example the looting of Haiti by do gooder ngos after the earthquake.   If you are not going to stick around, the incentive is to take everything and smash everything, which is what happened to Haiti when the US State Department ngos got coercive quasi governmental power.  Haitians wound up eating dirt, sleeping in the rain, and got cholera.  So, not going to rule well, unless you have a fertile elite, which needs more governmental and quasi governmental jobs for its excessively numerous offspring.   In which case good rule will naturally follow from the desire of that elite to make a nice place for themselves and their descendants.  This is necessarily going to be rough on the existing local elite, but  an ideology of doing good to far away strangers does not result in doing good to far away strangers, but at best to famine, destruction of property, and disease, as recently demonstrated in Haiti.