Archive for the ‘culture’ Category

Time for a second Dissolution of the Monasteries.

Sunday, September 22nd, 2019

In French Revolution, they smashed the enforceable apprenticeship system, and in the nineteenth century, the British smashed their enforceable apprenticeship system. After the enforceable apprenticeship system was ended, the quality of workmanship declined with each generation for several generations, as revealed by old furniture.

This was a move to priestly power. The priestly class were seeking to force all children to spend endless hours at Church school. And ever since then education has been getting longer and longer, and sucking up people’s entire youths, when they should be working and having children.

It is time for the Dissolution of the Monasteries.

The priestly myth of education is that there is some magic juju with education, that there is a special magic secret way, and if your kids do not get it, they will be irreparably harmed.

From time to time, drinking their own Kool-Aide, they have experimented with various magic formulae for teaching children, but each experiment produces the null result

On the face of it, this would seem to show that education simply does not work. But this is an obviously absurd conclusion, since it is obvious that when you do stuff, you generally get better at it, and it is obvious that when a child does stuff under the supervision of an adult who is good at that stuff, he gets a lot better at it.

Rather, the conclusion should be that there is no magic special sauce for education, and that priestly education is only good for teaching people to be priestly. If your dad makes furniture, and makes you help, you will get better at making furniture.

The control test for formal education is unschooling and Sudbury school, Sudbury being a school that just does not school children. There are 50 years of anecdotal evidence that the original Sudbury Valley School works very well, at least for middle class kids who are already probably of above average intelligence, and the numerous imitators produce similar results. Also works with parents volunteering in place of staff, which approximates the deliberately less formal and less organized unschooling programs.

Reading surveys of the unschooled, looks like the results are similar to schooling, supporting the null hypothesis, and that the results are better than schooling to the extent that it leads to the child spending a lot of time with adults, and worse to the extent that it leads to the child being socially isolated – that a child learns more spending time one on one with a random adult, than in a class of thirty kids and one teacher, and learns more in proportion as he spends time with several different adults. Bad outcomes occur if the only adult contact is the mother, and the mother does not know much or do much, but even bad outcomes are not conspicuously bad. An unschooled boy who has had bad unschooling is not obviously and radically worse off than the boy who has had good regular schooling. The worst unschooling does not make a dramatic or consistent difference, short of locking the kid in a dungeon and feeding him through the keyhole.

Unschooling is often combined with, or a result of, a theory that children don’t need discipline. If you have an undisciplined four year old in your house he will make a mess, break stuff, and hurt people. Starting at a quite early age children need to be stopped from doing lots of stuff they want to do, and made to do some stuff they do not want to do. Otherwise they will occupy the entire house and leave no room for anything or anyone else, and occupy everyone’s entire attention, and leave no time for anything else. But the priestly class does not have any magical special high value formula for stuff that children should be made to do. Most of their magic rituals are a great big waste of child’s time, when he could be actually learning something, such as learning how to do useful work by actually doing useful work. When kids transfer from unschooling to schooling, as often happens with college, they seldom have any problems catching up on all the stuff that the college kids were supposed to learn, but frequently failed to do so.

There is nothing obviously very wrong with unschooling. Most unschooled kids do OK. If a child spends a lot of time with adults who know stuff, he will learn stuff – but he will learn a whole lot better to the extent that those adults have loco parentis authority over him and he is compelled to treat them with respect. The most educational activity of them all is child labor under adult supervision. It is not that teaching does not work, but that a special cast of priestly highly trained specialist teachers using special magic juju methods does not work. Children spontaneously soak up knowledge from adults like sponges, and they soak it up better if compelled to treat those adults with respect. The rest is details that the priestly class, the educationists, have no special knowledge of or ability at. If the knowledge is around, the kids will pick it up.

In practice most stuff is learned from Joe Random, where Joe is not an educationist, but you glommed on to him because he was good at something you needed to do.

The professor is high status, and he tells people that everyone can be high status, thereby propagating his religion to other people’s children – and producing an oversupply of priests. Throw more money and power at the professor, and supposedly everyone will be affluent and high status like the professor. Probably writing essays on hermeneutic lesbianism in seventeenth century French poetry, and getting master of arts in intersectional basket weaving.

We obviously want to cut off open entry into the priesthood, and cut the priesthood back to reasonable numbers.

Assume an apprenticeship system. We used to have something very like apprenticeship for the officer class. That is a path to high status. We have something very like apprenticeship in the judiciary, with judicial clerks tending to become judges. And then Trump’s show “The Apprentice” marketed apprenticeship as a path to high status in the merchant classes. That was a path to high status. Most people are not going to get high status positions, but a plumber probably makes more money than you do. We are going to get excess demand for apprenticeships to high status positions, and the solution is to filter the applicants for intelligence, diligence, pro social qualities, and good breeding.

We want all kids to learn reading, writing, and counting. Not all of them, left to their own devices, will, but it seems that most will, much as all white kids and most black kids pick up human speech without any elaborate state intervention. It does not follow that we need to incarcerate all kids through most of their childhood and young adulthood. Maybe we should detect and incarcerate problem children, and the children of problem parents, into low status institutions for low status people.

Education obviously works, in the sense that if you practice something, you get better, and if you practice under the supervision of someone who is good at it, you get a lot better. The null hypothesis is not that education fails, but that if you try to bureaucratically mass produce it and make sure no one slips through the cracks, the results are not much different from what happens if kids educate themselves under the supervision of parents and adult associates of parents, that mass produced education fails to produce the expected and hope for results.

Education is not only “book learning” of various sorts, but socialization. Morals and ethics. Religion. Asabiyyah. Thus, for example, most American children still pledge allegiance to the flag every day. This sort of ritual binds the nation. We can do that for an hour on Sundays, and when people are being hatched, matched, and dispatched. Also various special occasions, such as thanksgiving and Christmas. We don’t have to suck up everyone’s childhood.

Reading old books, stuff written before 1935, it is obvious that the elite and upper class did not think the stuff taught at elite upper class schools mattered. The important thing learned at Eton was sportsmanship and forming social bonds with other upper class kids and social cohesion within the upper class. Some time during the twentieth century, we forgot the joke. People wanted to believe that if you gave everyone the right education, everyone could be upper class. It was said that “the battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton”. In the book “When Worlds Collide”, written in 1932, the author takes it for granted in his character descriptions of upper class characters that that is the elite attitude to education, that elite believed that the sports and ensuing elite social cohesion was what mattered, that the educational material at Eton and Oxford was mostly pointless, not very useful or high status, and that the elite is correct to believe so. The null hypothesis of education is what all gentlemen believed back then. The trouble was that the priesthood running Harvard did not like people to know that truth. And now people don’t.

Classic Chinese, is I am told, a shared body of allusions and in jokes to poetry, history, story, and legend. Looks like the mass production of a shared elite culture, to hold China together against the centrifugal forces of empire. That is a legitimate and useful function of mass education, though cramming is going to give you a shitty elite culture of test optimizing grinds who are not actually all that good at anything.

But teaching engineering does not give you engineers. I know this well, for I was in on the dawn of software engineering, when no one was trained in software engineering and academics had not yet reinvented it as an academic discipline, and I subsequently had to interview no end of people who were trained in engineering by academics. Doing engineering gives you engineers. It is all self taught or learned by apprenticeship. If East Asian grinds think otherwise, they are all wrong.

#ClintonBodyCount

Monday, August 12th, 2019

People who know too much about the Clintons have been suiciding with remarkable regularity, and no one paid much attention, but the suicide of Epstein was just one too many convenient suicides.

Attorney General William P. Barr issued the following statement:

“I was appalled to learn that Jeffrey Epstein was found dead early this morning from an apparent suicide while in federal custody. Mr. Epstein’s death raises serious questions that must be answered. In addition to the FBI’s investigation, I have consulted with the Inspector General who is opening an investigation into the circumstances of Mr. Epstein’s death.”

That there are going to be dual, and dueling, investigations into Epstein’s convenient suicide suggests that Barr, like myself, suspects that the FBI may have given Epstein a bit of help suiciding, in which case he probably also suspects that a whole lot of other people who knew too much about the Clintons may also have had a bit of FBI assistance in their similarly convenient suicides.

Now, everyone is a “conspiracy theorist”.  We are now in the latter days of the Soviet Union, when no one believed the narrative that everyone was required to believe.  Twitter has shadowbanned #ClintonBodyCount.  All other conspiracy theories about the Epstein alleged suicide are allowed, but not the obvious one: that the FBI arranged for his suicide to protect the Clintons and a host of other members of the elite. The suggestion that Mossad murdered Epstein is disinformation from FBI shills, and the suggestion that Epstein is still alive is just nuts. People who know too much about the Clintons don’t get sent to a remote tropical island. If that was not Epstein’s body on the slab, it would be because the real body showed indications of strenuous and violent disinclination to commit suicide.

That the story got out of control reflects loss of cohesion on the left – the crazy left went after Epstein because they deluded themselves he had something on Trump – every major media outlet was loudly announcing a nonexistent Trump Epstein connection, while ignoring the Clinton Epstein connection, and the connections between Epstein and all the usual rich and powerful older and more moderate progressives.  Epstein died twelve hours after this narrative predictably collapsed.

Epstein knew too much about too many important and powerful people. In particular he knew too much about the Clintons.

His continuing usefulness depended on him being pals with Trump, and thus potentially having the goods on Trump. The mainstream media was salivating over the Trump connection. So they put the heat on him to give them the goods on Trump. And then it comes out that though he says he is pals with Trump, though he told his girls he was pals with Trump, they never saw Trump palling with him.

Hence not useful. And, a few hours after this comes out, a few hours after it becomes known he is not useful, there is a convenient camera malfunction and he hangs himself in a room with nothing to hang himself from.

Yet another tragic suicide by someone who knows stuff about the Clintons. But this time, something is different.

Hating whitey is the KKKrazy glue that holds together the coalition of the fringes.  The very white and disproportionately Jewish progressive elite cultivated the crazies, and predictably, like Frankenstein, found themselves unable to control their monster.  The crazy left joined with the sane right to let the Epstein cat out of the bag.  It was crazy for them to do this, and sane for us to do this.

Used to be the left had all the smart people, because they had the elite universities, and they selected the smartest people for the most intense indoctrination, starting as early as possible, and then promoted smart leftists to high positions in the power structure. Recruiting the smartest people, however, led to embarrassing results. If you select the smartest and most civilized 0.1% of whites, and the smartest and most civilized 0.1% of blacks, the smartest black you recruit will be rather obviously dimmer and less civilized than the dimmest and least civilized white you select. For one hundred and fifty years, they have been tinkering with university entrance criteria to make them more inclusive, looking for criteria that will enable more members of under-represented groups to qualify, which tinkering has in recent years become alarmingly drastic as leftism has become alarmingly holy, with the result that elite universities are no longer recruiting the best, the left is no longer recruiting the best. They are recruiting the craziest. All the smart people in the progressive establishment have one foot in the grave. The left has long been the anti white party. It is about to have an anti white face.

Going after Flynn was crazy, and is predictably blowing up in their faces, and going after Epstein was crazy and has predictably blown up in their faces. Chances are that more crazy stuff is on its way.

The Flynn affair and the Epstein affair are good places to start draining the swamp, to purge the FBI of leftists. If Trump gets control of the justice department and the FBI, Trump will have a self coup. Once he has the FBI, if he gets the FBI, social media will then fall.

I have been predicting a Trump autocoup for a very long time, and my predictions have been wrong. I have also been predicting the great wall of Trump for a very long time and my predictions have been wrong. But now construction on the great wall of Trump has started. We now see you tube videos of the great wall of Trump, and it is starting to look great.

Trump is still not in a position where he dares hire Trump loyalists. Hence no one wants to be a Trump loyalist. But the prospect of him, or his dynastic successor, being able hire Trump loyalists, gets closer.

Gay needs to be suppressed

Tuesday, August 6th, 2019

Gay simply did not exist until the late nineteenth century, and when we are in power, they will no longer exist, and people will not quite remember that they ever existed, much as they do not quite remember that pre-2008 Obama was opposed to gay marriage and was born in Kenya, or that before Christmas 1978, the Democrats and every single tenured academic in the entire US government hegemony supported the Khmer Rouge, or at least politely remained silent while his academic institution supported the Khmer Rouge, taught students a pro Khmer Rouge version of recent events, and required them to affirm that versions in essays.

Chesterton’s Fence: All functional societies either look down on homosexuality, or altogether strictly prohibit it, executing the offenders, and those that stop suppressing it, soon go into decline. Likewise, all successful religions that last for a long time prohibit it. Those societies that manage to reproduce most fruitfully invariably restrict gay activity.

The reactionary state will in theory throw men who lie with a males as with a woman off skyscrapers, or publicly hang them, or something like that –  something terrifying, deadly, and, most importantly, publicly humiliating.  Without the public humiliation, nothing we do will have the desired effect. No society has ever managed to kill off gays as efficiently as they kill off themselves and each other, thus merely killing gays is of limited effectiveness. It is essential to kill them in a way that lowers their status.

In practice, however, we should only do that to people who obstinately and persistently shove the gay in our faces despite lesser punishments and lesser humiliations, because those are the ones that cause problems.  If gays stop shoving gay in other people’s faces, if gays let us pretend that they do not exist, things are fine enough, even if a whole lot of bad things may be happening behind closed doors.  We don’t need to poke our nose behind everyone’s door.  They would love us to pay them that much attention, and we would fail their fitness test if we did pay them that much attention. We do need to poke our nose behind the doors of people who are ostentatiously shoving the gay in our faces, and use what we find as an excuse to throw them off a tall building so that they will damn well stop shoving the gay in our faces.

We need to terrorize gays, not into not existing, which would require far too much terror, and give them far too much attention, which attention they would enjoy far too much, but we need to terrorize them into allowing us to pretend that they do not exist, as successful societies routinely pretended.  Our ancestors knew that sodomy happened, but denied that those involved were attracted to males.  Rather, they assumed that those guilty were attracted to concave surfaces, or concave surfaces that were part of children.  They did not quite forget the joke (after all it is right there in the Old and New Testaments, so it is hard to forget) but did not quite remember it either.

This post stolen wholesale from this excellent comment, which reminds us of Chesterton’s fence.  All societies that survived suppressed homosexuality.  Failing to suppress it presages decline and collapse.

So why do societies that tolerate gay then collapse?

Signalling Hazard: If you allow gays, David cannot love Jonathan. If David cannot love Jonathan, hard for the mighty men of David to stick together. If the mighty men cannot stick together, the state cannot cohere. If the state cannot cohere, you get anarcho tyranny, a thousand Kings three miles away instead of one King three thousand miles away.It’s just no longer possible for men to hang out with each other, especially in intimacy, without the lingering suspicion that something of the “poop-dick” variety must be going on. Gay destroyed men’s friendships. It used to be possible for men to walk together down the street and even invite each other for sleepover without anyone having the faintest suspicion that anal sex is involved. To have successful cooperation, we have to be able to meaningfully bond with each other, but meaningful bonding is absolutely impossible when signalling “I love you bro” translates to “I want to fuck your ass.” Without gays in society, we would be able to express legit affection and signal brotherly loyalty to each other, and without the nagging need to perpetually explain that we are “no homo.”

If gays are free to speak, I am not free to speak. “Just bake the cake, why don’t you.” If you tolerate homosexuality, you must tolerate free speech by gays about sex and sexuality, whereupon you cannot, in practice, tolerate free speech by straights about sex and sexuality

Multnomah County Library offers a series of programs called Drag Queen Storytime. These events seek to explore ideas of difference, diversity and inclusion through stories, music and costume. The library serves a diverse population with a broad range of interests, preferences and needs. We strive to reflect our communities’ needs in selecting programs, books and other materials.
Evidently biblical marriage and the heterosexuality of old movies is not “diverse”. If men dressed as women having sex with small boys in public on the Multnomah County Library floor are officially incuded, Perseus rescuing and abducting princess Andromeda must necessarily be officially excluded.

Normalizing perversion inevitably leads to and requires abnormalizing normal male sexuality. Thus normal male and female sexuality (men conquer, women surrender, but men perform and women choose) can no longer be depicted. You cannot depict the Han Solo of the original Star Wars movies or the original Indiana Jones any more. A society that allows homosexuality to be depicted is unable to to allow heterosexuality to be depicted, except by having the heterosexuals act gay, as for example in the recent star wars and avengers movies. If society makes space for gays act gay, it cannot allow space for straights to act straight. If gays are included, straights are necessarily excluded. There is no room for both them and us. For us to have room to be ourselves, we have to deny them room to be themselves. Even in porn, you will not see female submission to the conquering male realistically portrayed. You have not seen male conquest and female surrender since “McLintock”, and “Gone with the Wind”. What you will see portrayed is males and females following the gay bondage domination and submission script. Bondage domination and submission is a hateful gay parody of the inherent inequality of the courtship dance, as drag queens are a hateful gay parody of femininity. You are not allowed to depict Han Solo hitting on Princess Leia If you were to attempt to create something like the first Star Wars movie today a whole lot of men and women with no children will complain that depicting men and women following very different mating strategies, (men conquering and women surrendering, men performing and women choosing) is oppressive. If those complaining get declared normal, I get declared abnormal. There is no room in the world for both them and me, for they will not permit room in the world for Han Solo, Indiana Jones, Rhett Butler, and McLintock. A world with no room for heroes has no room for me. If it is legal for gay to exist, then it is illegal for me to exist. It is legal for a person who identifies as a man to have sex with a person who identifies as a woman, but it is illegal for me to act as men act with women, as men and women in old movies acted. It has proven impossible to include gays without excluding straights.

Denormalization of biological families: Whenever homosexuals are allowed, they inevitably argue, “We are normal, just like everyone else. We should be allowed to have kids.” And when they do get children, what happens? For one, the children grow up in confusion about what normalcy is and what it isn’t, leading to dysfunction later in life as they try to make sense of the world. Secondly, state and society face endlessly weird, even absurd, “Clown World” dilemmas in dealing with homosexual “families,” e.g. when homosexuals fight over custody over children donated by sperm or egg or adopted. Thirdly, the traditional family unit itself is wholly unraveled as the door is now opened for whatever bizarre sort of household one can imagine: “Why can’t transsexuals be parents too? My single mother has already transitioned to a single father and Xe still loves me!” and so on and so forth. And fourthly, allowing sex freaks to raise children is prone to result in sexual abuse, whether it’s diddling by gay “parents,” or anti-testosterone hormonal torture by lesbian “parents,” or growing up in a whorehouse attended by fetishists of every shade, hue, and color.

Consent Culture: Women don’t really like consent. They prefer “It just happened”. If consent is defined as normality, then biblical marriage is defined as abnormality, as a crime. Consent culture makes Paul’s first Epistle to the Corinthians 7:3-7 crime instead of law. If consent defines what sex is right and what sex is wrong, this effectively abolishes marriage, making it hard to reproduce. Women don’t like to be beaten and don’t consent to be beaten, but they like men who might beat them regardless of consent, like men who will take them sexually regardless of consent, and sometimes, some women, some of the time, will make you prove it. It is not that women want to be mistreated, but they want to be alone and in the power of a man who might well mistreat them, or alone with him, his minions and his numerous concubines. Under these circumstances, “No” is merely a fitness test. Gays invert this by consenting to being beaten. BDSM is a hateful gay parody of the inequality characteristic of normal sexuality and of divinely ordained biblical marriage. As Drag Queens get off on an ugly hateful gay parody of femininity, BDSM gays get off on an ugly hateful gay parody of biblical marriage. In order to attain sexual liberty, the LGBT crowd have signed off on “consenting adults” morality. Hence their enthusiastic embrace of whatever the latest installment of Feminist dogma is, without which they would be condemned as “rapists” by the Feminist system. Perverts benefit from Consent Culture, because it allows them to do as they please (“consenting adults”) while preventing evil privileged heterosexual men from forming stable families with young women. Thus, all homosexuals regardless of political affiliation adhere to the Consent Culture Feminist dogma. Consent means that a drag queen can have sex in public with a six year old boy on the floor of Multnomah County Library, but Perseus cannot abduct Princess Andromeda. If drag queens get to molest small boys on the floor of Multnomah public library, then I do not get to abduct Princess Andromeda. If it is legal for drag queens to molest small boys in public on the floor of Multnomah public library, then it is illegal for me to marry in accordance with Saint Paul’s letter to the Ephesians 5:22-33, First Peter 3:1-7, and First Corinthians 7:3-5. If we don’t throw gays off tall buildings, or hang them in public, or something similarly terrifying and status lowering, then they make biblical marriage illegal, making it difficult for us to have children. We have to suppress them, for if we fail to suppress them, they suppress us. If they get away with secretly having sex with small boys behind closed doors, that does not cause problems for us, assuming it is fatherless boys, which it always is, but if they can get away with having sex with small boys in public on the floor of Multnomah public library, then we cannot get away with divinely ordained marriage. We have to stop them, so that they cannot stop us.

Diseases: Gay sex is unhealthy, and moreover, the typically promiscuous habits of most gays—triple digit partners are par for the course among the vast majority of them—vastly exacerbates the spread of venereal diseases. STDs, particularly the serious ones such as AIDS, are essentially a homosexual phenomenon, though it’s also shared by other degenerates and reprobates that choose to come into regular contact with them. Gays, whose sexuality is undiscriminating and impulsive, and who are prone to heavy drug use (they do condom-less “chemsex” orgies with complete strangers), are the petri dishes of humanity, carrying assorted manifestations of God’s wrath. Like rats, wherever they go, disease follows; thus homosexuals, especially when unrestricted, are a public hazard. Furthermore, through their normalization of queer practices (cunnilingus, anilingus, etc.) among normal people, and through bisexuality, the gays have managed to infect some members of regular society with their abominable filth, which infection is useful for the gays, as it allows them to scare-monger society about the diseases that they themselves spread! Then they ask us taxpayers to invest resources into solving their sicknesses. Gays, knowing full well that they’re disease-ridden, steadfastly sought to receive the “right” to donate blood.

The ever increasing rage and repression directed against men attracted to fertile age women, and men to whom young girls are attracted is a displacement activity for the rage which ensues when people are forbidden to notice, and forbidden to prevent, gay sexual activity with eight year old boys. Because the state of Florida dares not stop drag queens from having sex with small boys in public, the State of Florida gives a mandatory five year sentence if you induce a woman who looks twenty two, but who is actually seventeen years and nine months, to send you a naughty selfie on Facebook Messenger, even if you have never met her in person and had no way of knowing her age. Going after straight men interacting with fertile age woman is displacement activity that they engage in because they cannot do what they inwardly wish to do, punish gay men having sex with eight year old boys, just as they punish men in the vicinity of misbehaving women because they cannot do what they inwardly wish to do, punish misbehaving women.

We seek to restore young arranged marriage. The homosexuals and their leftist supporters will viciously fight tooth and nail against arranged marriage, because “What if someone is gay?” In a society in which everyone is assumed straight, gays being either all dead or hiding deep in the closet (or not born in the first place), there is no such problem; but when gays are tolerated and accepted, and their presence is constantly celebrated, then any attempt to restore arranged marriage will be met with fierce opposition and cries of “Not everyone is heterosexual! Therefore, you oppressive bigots need to allow people to voluntarily choose their sex-mates, and only upon reaching fully mature adulthood!” – thus, modern Liberal Marriage. Gays are heavily invested in sexual liberalism, in allowing all adults to consent to sex with all other adults, and to withdraw consent to sex at their most frivolous whim, hence rampant divorce and defect-defect equilibrium. Liberal Marriage is absolutely incompatible with the reactionary program to make real young patriarchal marriage legal and easily attainable again.

Shamelessness: The behavior of gays is lacking in shame, a trait for which they’ve been infamous from time immemorial; they proudly wear their deviance on their sleeve. Whereas a normal person doesn’t parade around his sexual proclivities, the gays constantly shove theirs in everyone’s face. When gays are present, the atmosphere itself becomes gay, because they keep broadcasting their gayness in broad daylight. They emit an incessant sexual noise, forcing the rest of us who are naturally averse to faggotry to seek refuge from it, psychologically or physically. Can you imagine straight men parading around giant sex toys and so on?

Perversity: It’s extremely common for homosexuals to possess plethoras of aberrant fetishes, which, like their “main” deviance, they also seek to normalize. The BDSM world (gimp suits, sexual torture, etc.) is inextricably linked to gays, who pioneered it, and who were embraced by it. They relish dangerous, risky sexual behavior that leads to harm and death. Gays host scat parties in which the participants shit diarrhea and vomit on each other; they are fond of various sexual gratification toys that most normal people want nothing to do with; they are often sexually attracted to prepubescents, even toddlers (nepiophilia); there is the whole queer “furry” thing; and in all aspects, their sexual behavior is abnormal and depraved, bearing no resemblance to that of most heterosexuals.

Subversion: A fundamental political problem with homosexuals is that they always seek to upend sexual mores and morality to make them as favorable as they can be to their own death style. One can say that this is understandable and sympathize with it, but why exactly is it in society’s interest to abandon its own healthy ways to cater to the deviant desires of sexual minorities? Homosexuals never cease trying to converge everyone and everything to their death style, hence why they insinuate themselves into sundry political movements and undermine the dominant, pro-social morality therein in order to suit their special agenda. They attempt to turn all political and cultural niches incompatible with homosexuality to “gay friendly” – and, if that doesn’t work, they frantically endeavor to destroy said niches.

Homosexuals generally don’t conform to natural sex roles, because faggots are effete and dykes are masculine; consequently, they have long been the most vociferous and ardent advocates for turning all social institutions – and, indeed, society itself – into “sexually neutral” domains. They champion the entry of women into the workforce and oppose patriarchy and patriarchal marriage for that reason; they support coed education and coed workplaces; they want women to have authority over men; Homosexuals and Feminists share the same goals, and needless to say, there’s great overlap between these two categories. Most feminists are ugly childless lesbians, and the rest become cat ladies when they are no longer hot enough to bang musicians and criminals. Effete men want to be allowed to do whatever women traditionally do, and masculine women likewise want to be allowed to do everything men traditionally do, thus gays and lesbians are deeply embedded in Feminism, particularly the “classical” Feminism of giving women “equal rights.” Homosexuals as an integral ingredient of the Feminist poison. Long before gays parodied marriage by marrying each other, preparatory to winging each other while searching for nine year old boys to transexualize, lesbians made heterosexual marriage gay, in the name of the rights, freedom, and safety of married women, which rights were demanded by women who were single and unlikely to ever get married.

Infertility Normalization: Homosexuals usually have little to no children. The omnipresent celebration of the LGBT alphabet soup has resulted in a normalization of singlehood and childlessness; it’s no longer possible to say in polite society that reproduction is good and lack of reproduction is bad, because, among other things, of “homophobic overtones.” Whenever we critique low TFR, we critique a condition that is part and parcel of the gay death style, one that incessant propaganda, particularly aimed at young women and nerds, propaganda often produced by actual fags, has successfully transmitted to the entire society. By being loud, proud, and childless, and by attaining high status in society, the gays have turned childlessness into a “legitimate life choice,” indeed, as many leftists will tell you, a preferable choice than breeding. Homosexuality marches shoulder-to-shoulder with anti-natalism.

Gays are annoying. Gays predate on straight men constantly; they are offensively extroverted (gays) and aggressive (lesbians); their manner of speech is disgusting; their body movements are always exaggerated, ostentatious, and sexually non-conforming; they always manufacture more drama than they are worth. Their character’s virtues-vices ratio is horrible, as they possess more vices than one can count, and little to no virtues. Everything about them signals “Bad News.” They are also extremely petty and politically domineering, hence their going specifically after nice Christian bakeries and forcing them at the government’s gunpoint to “Bake the cake.”

Lack of Pair-Bonding: It is normal for humans to pair bond. This is another aspect of basic human decency which is conspicuously absent in faggots: They switch life (death) partners without the tiniest bit of attachment to anyone who came before. It’s just a “mood,” you see? Every day, nay – every hour, can bring someone new to take the place of the previous “sex mate.” Gays are never “couples” after the heterosexual model: They are always inexclusive friends-with-benefits looking for a novel sexual sensation. Deep affection and amorous loyalty are altogether foreign to their mentality. This has ramifications for normal society, as gays – especially during the Baby Boomer generation – have contributed their part to normalizing divorce, swinging, and promiscuity.

Disinhibition: Again, they just can’t help themselves: They constantly sexually harass normal people, and have absolutely no control over their own aberrant inclinations. Their behavior is wholly impulsive and high time-preference; they are unable to refuse drugs, unable to refuse condom-less sex with AIDS-positive strangers, and usually unable to plan anything ahead – they “live for the moment,” and as one would expect, die young. They are entirely controlled by Satan.

Cultural Marxism: The Frankfurt School Cultural Marxists and the like-minded Freudians have pioneered and disseminated advocacy for homosexuality and various bizarre sexual behaviors. These guys hate us and intend our destruction, therefore anything and everything they advocate is intended to destroy us.

Bad Aesthetics: Homosexuality is viscerally repulsive. Knowing that the dude right next to you engages in anal sex with men is vomit-inducing. Beauty is truth, and evolution has instilled in us natural aversion to the unhealthy; we can tell ugliness and vileness when we witness them, and instinctively know to back away and stay away. Those whose instincts don’t tell them to avoid homosexuals have something wrong with their brain-wiring and/or brain-structure. By tolerating gays around, society makes itself disgusting. While this alone may not be, and may not register as, a sufficient argument to ban the gays, it does point us to a valid field of inquiry: Why does homosexuality intensely trigger our healthy disgust reflex? Of course, beyond it being a dead-end reproductive strategy, it’s also a recipe for quick premature death from disease; it’s also eerie, like seeing mutants, androids, or cadavers, alerting us that something is terribly wrong. Gay is in uncanny valley, and our aversion to uncanny valley is generally healthy.

Leftism: Homosexuals are naturally prone to leftist politics, as leftism is, by no means exclusively but in substantial part, a project to normalize the abnormal for this or that reason; being abnormal themselves, homosexuals are automatically inclined to support general left-wing causes, be it race-denialism, socialism, Feminism, and really any form of artificial egalitarianism or war by the unsuccessful against the successful. Notice how homos constantly blame everyone else for their afflictions, instead of examining their own behavior; so no surprise they’re in a coalition with like-minded anti-civilizational forces against civilization. Gays are pro-black, pro-brown, and pro-Muslim. Muslims hate gays, but gays like Muslims because Muslims hate us. Gays inherently and naturally tend to treason, so need to be excluded from power, and, more importantly, excluded from status, for if gays are high status, treason is high status, and if treason is high status, it appears that treason prospers, and if it appears that treason prospers, then treason will prosper. Gay status is the overthrow of King, Crown, Throne, Altar, and the massacre of our soldiers.

Objectively Aberrant: Homosexuality is a natural dead-end. If a man is attracted to other men, and is not attracted to women, he is not very likely to pass his genes forwards. It’s an evolutionary death sentence.

Slippery Slope: “acceptance” of gay has led to Gay Marriage, normalization of “sex change” disfigurement, Drag Queen Story Hour, and so on. Once sodomy is tolerated, a Pandora’s Box from Tartarus full of Hell-spawn is opened, and other perversities follow suit. For example, cuckoldry, which cuckolds now call “polyamory.” Presumably, one reason that some people support faggotry is because they themselves are perverted in some or other way, and by clamoring for homosexuality to be normalize, they seek to thereby open the door for their own perversity, as with World War Tranny.

Confusion: Just generally, having gays around creates endless confusion about what is sexually normal and what isn’t. People are being bombarded with all kids of nonsense about “orientation” and “gender identity” and so on, and some are lost in the confusion and can’t sort out what is going on. We seek to usher in clarity: People need to know what is expected of them and where they are hierarchically stationed. Homosexuals disrupt clarity, bringing turmoil and vagueness into both day-to-day life and into the political scene. Being neither fish nor fowl, being sexually inverted, they’ve intentionally proceeded to insert “queerness” into manifold aspects of life, from clothing to school curricula to 56 different sexual identifications on Facebook to whatever else.

Preference Politics: The homosexuals have made it impossible to discuss sexuality in a logical way, because sexual politics have been marred by “preference politics”: The idea that your political objectives correspond to, and merely boil down to advocacy for, your personal sexual proclivities. Thus, when I say “Attraction to 13-year-old chicks with boobs is part of normal healthy male sexuality,” most readers automatically assume that I have a “fetish for jailbait,” and will call me “hebephile” or “ephebophile” for it; I will then have to spend ages explaining that my own preferences (or lack thereof) have nothing to do with it. Since gays are all about preference politics, politics in service of a specific sexual preference, people assume that all discussions of sexuality must likewise necessarily revolve around preference politics. Yes, it is frustrating to be unable to say “It’s normal for men to be aroused by 13-year-olds” without people assuming that I, personally, have a specific fetish for 13-year-olds, and am saying what I’m saying solely due to my own personal fetish. That “This person is engaging in preference politics” is now most people’s null hypothesis is the result of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and so on similar perverts forcing themselves on normal society. Even though gays are a tiny minority, they soak up all the cultural space, leaving no room for straights.

Hypersexuality: Gays are hypersexual, and invest tremendous efforts acquiring more and more sexual experiences, to the exclusion of other pursuits. Their excessive lust leads them, and whoever is politically influenced by them, to prioritize gay sex above e.g. scientific-technological advancement and cultural creation. The faggot’s quest to attain ever greater sexual pleasure takes precedence over whatever else he wants to do, so often they end up doing nothing else but cruising for sex. Individually, that’s self-destructive; on the political level, it results in gay parasitism, e.g., gays using our tax money to subsidize gayness, instead of other things. By and large, homosexuals are not “also gay,” but rather, are “gay above all else.”

Biological Leninism: Another reason that the homos support left-wing causes is because of Biological Leninism: Since their status under normal circumstances is low indeed, gays attach themselves to and promote whatever political faction that promises to artificially raise their status. They are natural members of the left-wing coalition, and are status-invested in maintaining the Cathedral, for without the Cathedral’s elevation of the gays, they would rapidly lose their social prestige. They may not rank as highly as transsexuals and abortionists on the Progressive Totem Pole, but under any healthy system they’d be absolute pariahs, or dead, so they side with the Cathedral. Moreover, they need a Cathedral to normalize homosexuality through “point deer, make horse,” i.e., by collectively and unanimously pretending that homosexuals are totally normal. Without the Cathedral, people will once again notice that the deer is not in fact a horse – that gays are not anything remotely normal.

Pedo-Hysteria: Hysteria about “pedophiles” is in large part a consequence of Gay Liberation, as many homosexuals have a distinct preference for prepubescent boys. The current witch hunts against “pedophiles,” which result in multitudes of normal heterosexual men getting sent to the slammer for bogus sex-crimes, is facilitated by both the presence of homosexuality in the social atmosphere (leading to the invention of the “pedophilia” anti-concept) and by actual homosexual predation on boys who are often prepubescent. Pedo-hysteria doesn’t allow us to notice that Humbert Humbert doesn’t creep into the bedrooms of 9-year-olds, but that it’s the other way around. Furthermore, LGBT politics are fundamentally hostile to male sexuality and to heterosexuality in general, because inherent to LGBT politics is a re-definition of normalcy to exclude old-fashioned normality.

Priests vs. Warriors: Homosexuals give power to the leftist priesthood, the lawyers, the judges, the professoriat, official science and the official mass media, and in turn are supported by the leftist priesthood, because acceptance of homosexuality rests on rule-by-priests. A society ruled by warriors does not tolerate faggotry and male effeminacy, so faggots are naturally inimical to warrior rule and to warriors; they feel much more comfortable when society is ruled by priests, and are adept at playing holiness signalling games. Any Priesthood not explicitly anti-homosexual sooner or later becomes homosexual. Hence the problem with the Roman Catholic priesthood.

Conspiracy: Gays always conspire, form secret cliques and secret clubs, as for example the band of perverts now running the Vatican, which gives them leverage over those not in the know; that’s one way in which gays acquire power. Their conspiratorial behavior makes them dangerous, because in order to govern effectively, the government – which is fundamentally a conspiracy – needs to eliminate other conspiracies that vie for power. Government being a conspiracy, it should be the only conspiracy in place; thus, by having secret societies, the gays undermine the government, and it’s in the interests of the ruler to uncover the gay cliques and to eliminate them.

Cosmopolitanism: Homosexuals are atomized individuals not invested in the prosperity of their tribe; generally leaving no descendants behind them, being genetic dead-ends, they freely associate with members of other tribes, and form alliances based on homosexuality, rather than on ethnicity, or geography, or religion. They are outsiders and outcasts within their own societies and among their own ethnicities, so they tend to ally themselves with other outsiders and outcasts, and with any global power promising to advance their agenda, perceiving their in-group to include fellow gays and perverts, and to exclude most everyone else.

Suicidal Ideation: Gays are not only apt to self-destruct, a quintessential feature of their psyches; they also flaunt their self-destructive proclivities before everyone else, seeking – and, through propaganda in the media and in the entertainment industry, succeeding – to normalize suicidality. They are sick, morbid people, and they spread their morbidity around; misery doth love company. By making suicidal ideation “cool,” they have wreaked damage to whoever absorbed that idea and became depressed, dysfunctional as a result. By inflicting their suicidal ideation and self-destructive modes of thinking and behavior on the rest of society, they have further reduced the fertility of all those malleable to be influenced by fashion, which is now determined by gays. The TFR, and overall happiness and satisfaction in life, suffer under the homosexuals’ cultural domination; gays aggravate civilization’s downward spiral.

Marriage

Sunday, July 28th, 2019

The core of the reactionary program is to make marriage legal again. Without marriage, the higher races cannot reproduce successfully, and reproduction is dysgenic.

Leftist marriage, modern marriage, is gay. Marriage has been gay since 1928.

Obviously reactionaries must reintroduce marriage that is suitable for heterogamous organisms, and we will have to introduce it as a matter of faith and morals before we can introduce it as a matter of law.

The left offers your wife cash and prizes for destroying the family assets, destroying you and destroying your children. The lawyer and the marriage counselor will tell her she is oppressed, and she can get a court order that gives her cash and prizes, raises her status, and will result in her marrying a six foot six billionaire athlete with a dong the size of a salami.

Modern marriage is gay. Everyone who gets married gets gay married. If your wedding vows are symmetric and interchangeable, the same of the man as for the woman, your marriage is gay and you are being gay married.

If your wedding has a master of ceremonies or a priest who acts like he, rather than the groom, is the big important man at the wedding, that he is the alpha male, your wedding is gay, and you are being gay married. (And the master of ceremonies is usually gay, and if he is not gay, he thinks that two males pretending to marry each other with the intention of cruising for nine year old boys to transexualize is smart and fashionable.)

The wedding organizer appoints a gay master of ceremonies whose main job is to define the groom as Homer Simpson, to emasculate him in the eyes of the bride. The minister conducts a gay wedding ceremony that treats the bride and groom as equal and interchangeable, even though experience has demonstrated that wives will not tolerate househusbands, and will invariably leave a domesticated man for a wild man who beats her, rapes her, and rapes and beats her husband’s children.

The worst thing progs did ever was remove “Honor and obey”, “submit and reverence” from the marriage ceremony.

The book of common prayer purged the wife’s vow to honor and obey and purged Paul’s letter to the Ephesians 5:22-33 in 1928. That, not female suffrage, was the worst thing ever, effectively abolishing marriage.

One household necessarily has one captain. If the wife does not promise to honor and obey, to submit and reverence, you are not actually getting married, because you are not actually forming one household, so no point in the ceremony, and, surprise surprise, people stopped holding the ceremony, just as they stopped turning up to Church when the pastor started telling them their husbands were Homer Simpson and if you showed up at Church you were likely homophobic.

We have to restore the marriage ceremony to what it was before first wave feminism.

The marriage ceremony needs to include “honor and obey”, and it needs to once again include Paul’s letter to the Ephesians 5:22-33

  1. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
  2. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
  3. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
  4. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
  5. That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
  6. That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
  7. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.
  8. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:
  9. For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
  10. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
  11. This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
  12. Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.

And once again include the first epistle of Peter 3:1-7

  1. Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;
  2. While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.
  3. Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
  4. But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.
  5. For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:
  6. Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.
  7. Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered

And we also need to have 1 Corinthians 7:3-5, though the book of common prayer does the same thing in a different way:

  1. Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.
  2. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.
  3. Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.

Because without the obligation each to sexually gratify the other, no marriage.

The need to bring marriage back implies a familist movement will look awfully like a religion.

Another important aspect of family is eating together at the same time. Everyone, kids, wife, and guests, holds off from eating until the patriarch says “Amen” then they all eat together. Grace is a ritual that ensures that everyone eats together and that presents the alpha male as backed by the ultimate alpha male, God. Women inherently like their alpha male to be backed by a bigger alpha male, and they are astonishingly comfortable with being assigned to another man by a higher alpha.

So any effective familist movement necessarily has religious rituals that are going to qualify it as a religion. But, like the Masons and progressivism, will probably have to pretend that it is not a religion.

On the other hand, to inculcate the appropriate attitude in women, to make the rituals work, have to tell them “God says do it this way”, which kind of gives the game away.

OK, if God is three and God is one, familism can be a religion and not a religion. If AA can be not a religion, familism can be not a religion.

The Anglican Church died, as the Congregational Church died as a Christian movement long before them, and the Roman Catholic Church is dying in the west. The Pope defends priests having gay sex in a great big pile by saying “consenting adults” and “Global Warming”. Well, if Global Warming is the great moral crisis of our times, why should anyone show up at Church. And they don’t. And if the Church abolishes marriage, why should anyone get married. And they don’t.

The Christian and biblical position is that Christians are kin by adoption and by marriage, that Christians are adoptively the children of God, and the Church is the bride of Christ. So when the pastor abolishes marriage and attacks the authority of the father and the husband, he saws of the branch on which he sits, and it looks to me that every Church dies after it abolishes marriage, though its death takes a bit over a century. The longer ago they abolished marriage and the family, the longer ago they died. Congregationalism was the first to abolish marriage and the family, and the first to go.

We want a synthetic tribe, because we are detribalized. God backing dad comes in mighty handy for making the family a family, particularly for making people eat meals at mealtime. And God comes in mighty handy for promoting ingroup cooperate/cooperate equilibrium by making people kin. These two functions of God seem to be connected in practice.

It is recorded that Christianity spread in the early Roman empire in large part through conversion of women. It is also recorded that marriage had collapsed in the early Roman empire. I suspect these two facts are connected, that Christian marriage may have been a familist movement in the early Roman empire. Similarly we notice that today white female Christian converts to Islam are overwhelming fertile age single women. Roman women converting from dead paganism to live Christianity in the Roman Empire may well have been similar to white Christian women converting to Islam today. They are joining a synthetic tribe where the ultimate alpha male will assign them a husband and ensure that they have a family. While the ultimate alpha male of today’s Christianity is going to give them a “season of singleness”.

If we look at the marriages depicted in the bible, they are all marriages in which the top alpha male assigns the woman. Which is what women want, even if they don’t know they want it.

In Genesis, God, the ultimate alpha male, marries Eve to Adam.

Abraham, a powerful alpha male who successfully made war with kings, marries Rebecca to Isaac. Rebecca is not consulted until afterwards, and Isaac is not consulted at all.

In the book of Ruth, Boaz is a powerful male who is the top alpha in the environment where Ruth is working. Ruth sneaks into Boaz’s bed while he is drunk and sleeping, asks Boaz to marry her, and appears to believe he has authority to perform marriage on the spot. He declines to do so, saying he has to resolve some legalities first but they spend the night together anyway. In the morning he goes off and successfully resolves those legalities, and later assembles witnesses and marries Ruth. Ruth’s mother in law (Ruth is a widow and the adoptive daughter of her mother in law) gives the bride away. Boaz, a powerful alpha male, is the one who presides over this ritual, not a judge or a priest. The elders witness, but they don’t emcee. If Ruth is present at this ritual she does not speak, but before the ritual she had plenty to say to her mother in law and to Boaz in private.

Chicks like the man who is throwing a party, because he is top alpha at the party. As “Setting the Record Straight” tells us, game boils down to three simple things.

  • Pass her shit tests
  • Don’t show weakness
  • Dominate other men

It is obviously optimal for marital harmony if the wife always sees her husband in social contexts where he is top alpha. When you throw a party, other alpha males act at the party as if you are the top alpha, even if in other social contexts you are not. So having someone else preside over the marriage is not a good idea. Marriages should resemble the marriage of Boaz and Ruth – unless the bride actually is being assigned to someone else by a powerful human alpha, as tended to happen during the early days of Australian settlement. If we look at first millennium Christian doctrine on marriage, it appears that marriage is a sacrament performed by the husband with the priest being wedding organizer, rather than presiding over the wedding. Existing Catholic doctrine is that marriage is a sacrament performed by the husband (which was very recently re-interpreted as the husband and the wife), but the priest presides over the ceremony, with the husband not being the alpha male in that context. Anglican doctrine back in the days when it was actually functioning as a religion is that marriage is and is not a sacrament. The articles say it is not a sacrament, but the preamble given by the priest in the book of common prayer treats it as a sacrament, and in the ritual the husband performs that sacrament.

He takes the brides hand, and

With this ring I thee wed

And then the priest tells the congregation what just happened, describing it terms that make it sound mighty like a sacrament performed by the husband. So, marriage is a sacrament or something very similar performed by the husband. And we know from evolutionary theory, PUA theory, and PUA empirical observation that this is in fact what women want – which suggests that the husband, rather than the priest should preside over the marriage, with the priest acting as wedding organizer and second in command at the party.

To get women to collectively behave better, women have to be informed as to what behavior is good.

Depict wives and children interacting with husbands and fathers the way they were depicted on television and movies after 1933 and before 1963. That will inform them. We cannot do that till we are in power. But while out of power, can restore the marriage ceremony to what it was before 1928: Wife promises to honor and obey, husband promises to love and cherish.

And let us go back a bit further, nine hundred years further. Husband administers the sacrament of marriage. Technically he still does: Takes wife hand. “With this ring I thee wed.” Places ring on finger. But that has been heavily played down for many centuries. It was a big power struggle in the Church of England after Henry the Eighth. They keep trying to make the marriage contractual (“I do”), when it should be sacramental (“with this ring I thee wed”). Women really hate contractual marriage. Contractual marriage is failing a shit test right at the starter’s gun.

We also need to restore the tradition that is implied in the story of the wise and foolish virgins, where the husband mock abducts the wife to a big party which he emcees, and everyone at the party treats him as top alpha male. Abduction, or else someone with family authority over the bride gives this woman to this man, leading her to the man. “Who giveth this woman to this man?” Women do not really like consensual and contractual marriage, hence the need for the bride to be given away or abducted.

The Faith

Friday, June 28th, 2019

Holy war is coming, as the poz gets ever more extreme, ever faster, and our ruling elite increasingly uses state coercion and the FBI to accomplish political outcomes, coercing fellow members of the political elite for political reasons.

Have to bring a gun to a gunfight, and a faith to a holy war.

Deus Vult.

Whites are detribalized, and contrary to the white nationalists, “white” is not a tribal identifier. Whites are wolf to whites. A religion, defining religion broadly to include things like communism and poz, is a synthetic tribe. To win, we need a faith.

With our enemies going further and further into delusion, we have to form a faith on the Truth of Gnon, the Will of God as manifested in the natural order, the Logos manifested in the order of the world, natural law as the will of God. We will, in accordance with the Christianity of about a thousand years ago, interpret Christ as, among other things, the incarnation of the Logos, and thus interpret his words as in accordance with game theory and evolutionary psychology, and divine prophecies as the predictable outcome of cause and effect.

One can deduce ought from is, which is exactly what the Book of Solomon and the copybook headings do, what every reasonable person does in practice.  If one is a strict atheist materialist, then “good” is what game theory and evolutionary psychology tells us that we should desire in our  kin, our friends, and the character of those that we should ally with.  If God created the world then “is” was created by God, and cause and effect a manifestation of the Logos.  And if a Christian, then cause and effect manifested as  wholly man, and that man ended Talmudic legalism, ended the practice of deducing “ought” from some other “ought” taken as given and absolute and then deducing ever sillier and ever more repugnant conclusions from the first “ought”, whether one takes that given “ought” as the “greatest good for the greatest number”, or takes as that given “ought” that one should not boil a goat in its mother’s milk.

The expulsion of the Jews by the Romans illustrates the Divine Logos telling us “The letter killeth but the spirit giveth life” The divine will manifested through entirely natural causes, because the natural order of the universe reflects the will of God. And the spirit of the law, being manifest in cause and effect and manifest in the natural order, needs to be understood with reference to natural law, game theory, and evolutionary psychology. When the Jews obeyed the letter of the law while massively violating the spirit of the law, they were, in accordance with prophecy, expelled from Israel – which reflects the will of God and divine prophecy, but also reflects the fact that if you violate the spirit of the law, you will get into stupid wars with your neighbors, and eventually war with one of your neighbors that happens to be a six hundred pound gorilla. The Jews got into war with Rome not because of corrupt Roman tax collectors, oppressive taxation, harsh Roman law enforcement, and all that, but because they were so scrupulous about avoiding contamination by blood that they wound up getting covered in the wrongfully spilled blood of a Roman cop whom they murdered in the performance of his duty while he was attempting to impartially enforce a just, reasonable, and necessary law that applied to everyone. Which would not have led to war had they not felt so very righteous about it because they were being so faithful to rule about avoiding blood – so faithful to it that they spectacularly disregarded the commandments on coveting, theft, and murder. Attending synagogue while avoiding walking on ground contaminated by chicken blood was so terribly important that they could do anything they liked to accomplish these holy goals, including theft and murder, and their great determination to accomplish these holy goals demonstrated their superior holiness.  And their stubborn self righteousness over this incident eventually and predictably led to the Romans going Roman on them.

In Christianity, the rot set in on women about a thousand years ago, with romance and contractual marriage, with natural law increasingly being tortured to fit church doctrines that were increasingly arbitrary, unreasonable, and out of contact with reality, and with contractual marriage quietly and subtly replacing sacramental marriage, though Christianity only went really progressive on women during the twentieth century. We endorse old style contractual and old style sacramental marriage right now, at least as a moral standard and ritual solemnization, even though we are in no position to enforce it collectively, and after we gain power, start by rolling contractual marriage back to the late eighteenth century, while celebrating sacramental marriage at least symbolically, and eventually go all the way back to sacramental marriage.  We approve of and support husbands and fathers unilaterally enforcing it, even though such enforcement is highly illegal and subject to social disapproval, and we will have our marriage ceremonies proclaim it.

Evolutionary psychology and game theory implies that the family law of the Old Temple Hebrews and the first Millenium Christian Church was entirely correct, and the eighteenth century Christian position on family, war, identity, and the establishment of religion was quite good.

Pozzed Christianity, which dumps on fathers on father’s day and tells us we are Homer Simpson, and which thinks that Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming is far more important that a bunch of priests having gay sex in a great big pile, because the priests were all consenting adults, is not Christian.

Chaos is coming.  Chaos is already here, and will get a lot worse.  Eventually order will be restored through Caesarism, that being the cycle of history.  I hope this happens soon, with Holy American Emperor Trump, but if it does not happen soon, it will happen eventually, possibly after a century of blood and ruin.

When it starts happening, and I hope it is beginning now, we should catch that tide and sail it to victory.

Revolutionary movements never get anywhere without backing from a substantial faction of the elite. So what section of the elite is going to back us?

Warriors need priests, and priests need warriors. We are always ruled by priests or warriors, so they tend to struggle for power, priests destroying the military, instead of sustaining it and giving it cohesion. The recent stupid wars where the military fought for no sane, useful, or achievable purpose, with one hand tied behind its back, were attacks by the priesthood on the military, as was insourcing logistics, putting camp followers in military uniforms.

To explain these stupid wars, people say they were fought for Israel, but if fought for Israel, would have been fought to win, rather than lose. If fought for Israel, we would not have women in the military, Israel would not have women in the military, we would not have kicked Israel out of Gaza, and logistic workers would not be wearing warrior uniforms.

We are priests who believe warriors should rule (using the term “priesthood” to mean any knowledge faction that internally coordinates its story in order to give the story more effect and in order to gain power, analogously to using the term “religion” to include communism and poz.)  We are therefore in a good position to catch the coming tide.

The time of Ceasarism approaches. Caesar, Napoleon, or Augustus will need priests who say and believe his rule under God is right, because God said so, because one stationary bandit is better than mobile banditry, and because one King three thousand miles away is better than a thousand kings three miles away.

Trump’s state visit to England

Tuesday, June 4th, 2019

Ideas are more powerful than guns, and fashion is more powerful than ideas.

The main weapon and instrument of successful rulers is their role as the fount of all honors, mortal and divine. Because of the problems of scaling, their bureaucracy, rather than being the instrument of their rule, tends to become the main threat to their rule.

Trump’s visit to England is primarily a status parade.  Trump bestows status on the queen (which is useless, but required, because one should always give one’s host top status, even though it is only useful to bestow status on one’s host if the host is a man), and the Queen bestows status on him.

They also bestowed status on the other people assembled.  And guess who is not there?

Hollywood, the media, and for the most part, woke capital is not there.  Capital is there, but the media and such are mere onlookers  The Queen and Trump bestow status on the military and on merchants, but somehow merchants whose activities overlap with the priesthood generally seem to have been neglected.

Depressingly, the Queen’s speech was about universalism, framing World War II as a holy war to establish the rule by the “international community” over the entire world – and that this was a good thing intended to thereby end war forever.  Of course, in fact, World War II was so horribly bloody precisely because it was a holy war by universalists seeking to rule the world, and universalist rule has been terribly bad, destroying men’s families, ending science, suppressing the scientific method, and causing technological progress to stagnate. As promised universalism has so far avoided large scale horrifying wars, but war is a bursty phenomenon, and the recent period of relative peace has so far lasted no longer than previous periods of relative peace that follow a terrible war in which one hegemon gains overwhelming dominance. China now has radar coverage of the South China sea, and is building a fleet of artificial islands as unsinkable aircraft carriers – a strategy that suggests that they believe that aircraft carriers are eminently sinkable, that in a war between technologically advanced wealthy powers, each side will be able to deny the other side the air and the sea, a vision of conflict that if accurate makes it hard for one hegemon to dominate the entire world. We have already seen how Russian anti air capabilities limit US reach.

But then, to my considerable relief, she segued onto Anglosphere nationalism “Our strong cultural links” … “British descent“.

And then “Economic ties”, a hat tip to Trump boosting brexit with a promise of a US-UK trade deal. Trump nods.

And then a toast to Trump and the prosperity of the United States (not universal peace, nor universal prosperity). The start spangled banner plays. Trump and his wife stand with their hands over their hearts. Behind the queen stands a British warrior, a member of the Coldstream Guards, costumed in seventeenth century dress uniform. The Coldstream guards were General Monck’s Praetorians when he secured parliament and ensured the restoration of Charles the second, a coup well dressed in the costume of legality and constitutionality, steel on the inside, legality on the outside.

The guards are recruited from those parts of England and Scotland where General Monck recruited his praetorians, so they tend to have family ties to each other and to ancestors who were part of the Coldstream guards.

The guards behind Trump, the Queen, and Melanie salute the playing of the star spangled banner.

Hollywood and the media will call this all silly low status obsolete rigmarole, but it is hard to say “low status” to someone with warriors behind him and powerful and wealthy men assembled before him.

Then Trump speaks, remembering World War II. Trump, however, frames world war two as as a war for our civilization, where “our” is, in context the Anglosphere, and tells us that the British fought to hold their destiny in their own hands, another nod to brexit. Then he gives a nod to universalism – liberty in all lands – which looks remarkably like all lands having the culture of Harvard imposed upon them. Then it is back to the Anglosphere winning World War II for the Anglosphere. “Shared Victory”.

And then, after piously giving the nod to universalism he starts redefining universalism to not be universalism, much as the progressives have redefined Christianity to be exemplified by the right of women to freedom from husbands, moment to moment consent to marriage, unilateral abortion on demand to birth and immediately afterwards without the consent of their husbands, and the right of men to have gay sex in a great big pile.

This is the reverse of Pope Francis defending gay priests having gay sex in a great big pile by pointing out that they were all consenting adults, and look, Global Warming.

Nah, supposedly this great crusade was not about the international community making everyone into clones of Harvard. It was supposedly about “Freedom, Sovereignty, self determination, the rule of law, and reverence for the rights given to us by Almighty God”. (Which is pretty much the opposite of what the great crusade accomplished). So, if brexit fails to go through, you are falling short of the noble goals of this great crusade. And just in case you failed to notice, he said the bad word “crusade” again – and then that other bad word “God” – the ultimate patriarchal alpha male that stands behind the authority of each patriarch when he summons his family and guests to eat and says grace, the patriarchal alpha male that stands behind the ruler making his people one nation under God.

And then another bad word “patriotism”: “The patriotism that beats proudly in every British heart”. Yet another nod to brexit. So if you are against brexit, you are against God, country, and the goals of the great crusade, not to mention against a man who has a warrior standing behind him, a warrior of a group of warriors who put the current royal line back on the throne.

And then a toast to the Queen. Being an alpha male, he gives her a little pat, which she much enjoys.

The polls were wrong about the brexit referendum, indicating that our priestly elite had successfully made support for brexit wicked and low status.  Trump proceeds to make it virtuous and high status.

Fat is a reactionary issue

Sunday, May 26th, 2019

Facebook recently purged a facebook group for advocating healthy eating habits – right wing healthy eating habits – adequate protein, plenty of animal fats and less or no snacking, especially snacking of overly processed foods made from unknown ingredients, which tends to be what snacks are made of.

Leftism being the party of defection, infanticide, sodomy, adultery, effeminacy, and treason, is also the party of vice.  And the most common vices of today are gluttony, sloth, and adultery.

Gluttony, as well as being the most common vice, is a highly visible vice.  And usually indicative of other vices.

A leftist chick in a “long term relationship” is far more likely to be cruising for an upgrade, and apt to go right on cruising long after the wall has made an upgrade improbable, and a leftist, male or female, is far more likely to be fat and weak. Adultery is primarily a female sin, since female sexual misconduct is far more likely to obfuscate paternity and obstruct fatherhood.

Obesity is epidemic in the modern world.  How do you fix it?  The solution to obesity is now well known – well, well known in some circles, but oddly unknown in left wing circles, in the mainstream media (but I repeat myself).  And now unknown on Facebook.

The primary cause of obesity in the modern world is the cafeteria diet, snacking, especially snacking on foods that contain a lot of carbs, vegetable oil, and not much protein.  (And what protein there is tends to be soy.)

The formula for losing weight is fewer meals, approximately one hundred grams of protein per day for a male, which is approximately a pound of meat, and plenty of animal fat, as for example bacon, eggs, cheese, and butter.  You should go about seventeen hours, if socially possible, before breaking fast.  And since dinner is usually socially required, that likely means skipping breakfast.

Too little animal protein makes you weak, less muscled, and impairs healing and body regeneration, but too much protein stresses your kidneys and liver, and if you are eating too much protein, you probably will find you don’t like it. People on very high protein diets get sick, and find it hard to keep meat down.  For most men, one hundred grams of protein per day is about the right amount.

Some white people, and most Asians and middle easterners can handle carbs just fine, but a lot of white people cannot. Cut the carbs. You will find it far easier to control your eating on a very low carb diet, one where you mostly eat low carb vegetables like broccoli roasted with butter, or mushrooms fried in lots of butter, rather than high carb vegetables.  And most fruit is a bit on the high carb side, if you need a very low carb diet to control your appetite.

Don’t eat vegetable oils, except for olive oil, coconut oil, avocado oil, and palm oil.  Nuts are generally OK, even peanuts, but peanut oil not so much.

Our metabolisms are primarily designed to handle saturated fats – the short chain fats generated by our bowels, and our own fat stores.  Animal fat is what we are designed to metabolize as our primary energy source.  Apes consume a lot of fibre which gets metabolized into short chain fats in their large intestine, and our ancestors lived on their own body fat between kills.

Avoid soft drinks, especially zero calorie soft drinks.  It is a mystery to me why zero calorie soft drinks are fattening, but just looking around, you can see that they are.  Maybe they stimulate insulin secretion.  Notice that people who is insulin secretion is defective (as in type one diabetes) don’t get fat even if they eat a lot, and are apt to lose alarming amounts of weight unless they inject themselves with insulin.  That, however, is just a wild assed guess.

Or maybe it is that sweet drinks cause you to overeat. I drink Mountain Dew with moonshine on social occasions, and Mountain Dew always makes me eat and drink too much.  Likely Coke Zero would have similar effect.  Maybe that is the problem.  That is just another wild assed guess, but looking at fat people’s eating habits, you can see that substituting zero calorie soft drinks for sugary soft drinks is not a solution.  Get your caffeine fix from black coffee or unsweetened tea.

These specific prohibitions don’t matter that much, and do not necessarily apply to everyone, provided you follow the general rule which does apply to everyone:  The main thing that makes people fat in the modern world is continual snacking – the cafeteria diet.  It is snacks, and, for white people carbs, that make you fat.  Don’t do that.  Go for long periods, at least seventeen hours every day, and every now and then forty two hours, where you eat nothing and drink nothing but water and zero calorie tea and coffee. On a forty hour fast, you will lose about two pounds, and a seventy hour fast about five pounds but doing it too often can stress you, resulting in diverse non specific illness.  You should not lose weight too fast over the long term.

If you are trying to lose weight, you need to weigh yourself every morning.  What you do not measure, you will not control.  Scales are cheap.  I have three of them, two of which I use – the two that usually give very similar results.  They lean against the wall facing the sunrise, and I weigh myself at about the time that I watch the sun rise, and record my weight every day.  (I have big problem with lust, gluttony, and wrath, and have managed, with some difficulty, to control gluttony.  My current weight, as of this morning, is four pounds over my ideal weight.)

 

Analysis of a Chinese video

Monday, March 25th, 2019

You will never see courtship realistically portrayed in videos made for the west in anything made since the sixties, but they are still allowed to do romance realistically in China.

Episode seven: Hat tip Spandrell.

At 1:12 the pre fertile age chick is trying to attract his attention while simultaneously directing an expression of disdain and boredom at him. Obvious fitness test, which means she is after him. If a chick does this to you, you have to pass her test, which he does by commanding her to see him after class.

At 2:13, her boredom and lack of enthusiasm suddenly vanishes while his back is turned, only to instantly reappear when she positions herself in front of him. When the girl moves to the direction that you are facing, moves into your field of view, you know its on – and you also know that she is going to hit you with something unpleasant.

At 2:44 she references the previous episode six failed fitness test with an expression of maximum possible disdain and boredom, retesting him. He fails again. He apologizes, even though she is and was obviously in the wrong. Needless to say, at 3:03 apology not accepted. She doubles down on the fitness test, giving him another chance to pass. At 3:09 he changes direction, and starts a counter attack. At 3:13, seeing what is coming, she perks up.

At 3:52, she launches a new shit test, but she is simultaneously flirting, which takes the sting out of it.

At 4:17, she launches a physical attack, which cannot possibly succeed, hoping to provoke him into physically overwhelming her, but he allows it to succeed, failing the shit test, and she wanders off with entirely genuine boredom and disdain. End of the pre fertile age romance for this episode.

At 4:35 we get a boring promotion for Deng’s new China and new market economic order. But you are not going to see the American market order promoted on American television, only denigrated and condemned.

Then at 7:39, a different romance thread involving a different couple: beta male (beta with her, alpha with everyone else) approaches the fertile age chick, who of course hits him with a blocking fitness test at 8:11, then gives him the lets be friends pushoff. He plows on, and she walks away at 8:39 with him chasing after like a lost puppy. If hit with an unpassable fitness test, do not plow on.

He keeps on plowing on, making a bad situation worse. And plow, and plow. Boring. More plugs for the new economic order. Then at 12:57, the video proceeds to denigrate the old economic order – its enforcers are the bad guys, who are mucking up the economy by restraining the pursuit of the self interest. Again, you are never going to see socialism portrayed realistically on a video made in the west. At 18:15 Dongbao courageously announces he will fight politically for the market order and the pursuit of self interest. You are not going to see that on American video.

At 18:39 romance thread with the fertile age chick resumes. Watch her perk up as she imagines, that he is going to pass her shit test, that his mission is more important than she is. Now she chases after him, entertains him, and serves him. He brushes her off, because his mission really is more important than she is, and she chases after him.

At 22:44, encouraged by this, he resumes plowing. Watch her enthusiasm instantly fade. She shrinks away from him. He resumes his mission, and she switches back to wanting to follow him.

Then it is another tedious propaganda pitch for the new economic order. Yes, yes, we know already. Instead of thanking the party planning committee for assigning you a new tractor, you thank the party for creating a political and economic order that enables you to buy your own damned tractor. Yeah yeah, it was mildly interesting the first time because we see the opposite of that on US television. On US television the videos condemn the evil old white males for avariciously maintaining a social order that enables someone else to buy themselves a new car, but thanking the party for an order that rewards hard work and wise decisions gets old really fast.

At 31:31, the party praises raising capital and individual economic initiative. Probably not news to most readers of this blog, but you are not going to see that praised on US television. Excruciatingly dull lecture of economic activity follows. “It is totally within reason for your brigade to be be rich”. Yeah, yeah, not news to us reactionaries, but you are not going to see such a statement on US television. More thanks to the party. What you get on US television is “You did not build that”. And then they thank the party some more. And thank the party some more. Well, better than having a transexual on every show and in every comic strip. Then more thanking the party. And did I mention they give thanks to the party?

38:07 Switches back to the romance with the fertile age female. Now everything is fine – once he stopped plowing and focused on his mission.

Sound economics, sound romance stories. Far too much praising the party.

Episode 8
3:28 Pre fertile age chick “accidentally” runs into her love interest. He brushes her off, and she sticks like glue. Then she menaces him with another fitness test, which he passes by being amused, rather than menaced. Things then go smoothly.

Skipping forward over more cheering the party for its market oriented economic order, and more cheering the party, and nothing terribly interesting happening with romance of the fertile age love interest to 14:54, where the pre fertile age love interest is lurking to intercept teacher. This time, runs gleefully up to intercept him. No more boredom and feigned disinterest. She follows him around like a lost puppy, while he focuses on his mission. 19:58, hits on him. 22:24, asks him for a date. It is implied that they date.

Main romance, fertile age couple, proceeds to married happily ever after – boring. More boring, then at 41:44 we see the lead up to missionary position sex between happily married people which is, by wildly inflated US standards of consent, not very consensual. She shields herself with bedcovers and multiple layers of clothing, and he pounces on top her and starts forcefully removing them ignoring her protests and her demands to take things more slowly. She is, of course, entirely delighted with this, video fades to black, before she loses much clothing.

In the US video, she would, of course, be horrified by this. You will see full frontal full penetration on US videos, but even when they show a porn of sexual exploitation of illegal border crossers, it is explicit consent every step of the way. You will not see female submission to the conquering male realistically portrayed.

Episode nine
Boring happy marriage of fertile age couple. Then at 7:09, second date of the pre fertile age chick.

And, what do you know: A product placement for Coca Cola. Pre fertile chick tells her love interest:”Taste of a smile”. “Tastes really good”.

It really is the new economic order. I wonder how much Coca Cola paid for that one. Not quite as boring as praising the party for the new economic order. Love interest poses holding the can with the logo directly facing the camera. The people making this video are not just preaching the new economic order. They are putting it into practice.

11:36 During the second date, love interest tells pre fertile age chick, with the coca cola can placed prominently on the table, “We can stand on the shoulders of giants like Copernicus and Newton”

You are not going to see that on US videos, or hear that in US university. What you hear is that Western civilization is a shame and a disgusting rape of the earth that needs to be smashed as soon as possible, and we are way superior to those ignorant prejudiced bigots.

Further dates to be postponed till she reaches a slightly less inappropriate age. And then it is all the new economic order, educating the viewer in capitalism 101.

Episode 12

1:09 Bad old socialists causing trouble. At 1:20 They beat up a peddler for capitalism and confiscate his stuff, much as Trotskyites killed the cows of the peasant with two cows, and Carlylean Restorationist wants to shut down your local Domino’s pizza franchise. Socialist rabble rouser declaims, as the cops arrest the poor peddler and the mob make off with his pile of goodies:

“Strike a severe blow to speculation and profiteering!”
“Be determined to amputate the tail of capitalism!”

Are we ever going to see a rabble rouser on USA television who is not a heroic good guy fighting power, or a mob that are not heroic good guys fighting power, but are just there to knock over the liquor store and set fire to the supermarket?

Having framed the socialists as rabble rousers and a mob who will burn down the supermarket to grab a case of beer, or rather beat up a peddler to grab his hot buns, rest of episode 12 is politics and economics.

Natural Selection is reactionary

Monday, February 4th, 2019

Vox Day has been campaigning against evolution, arguing that like Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming, it is fake science, demon worshiping religion dressed in the sacerdotal lab coats of science.

Vox is a great man, and I am a huge admirer of his. He had the courage, doubtless strengthened by his faith in God, to take on the enemy and show that the enemy can bleed. He should be an inspiration to all of us, and you would be wise to buy SJWs Always Lie: Taking Down the Thought Police (The Laws of Social Justice Book 1) I can report from personal experience that this is how you survive attack by social justice warriors. Long before this book was written, I dealt with weaponized sexual harassment complaints (directed against other men, not against me, even though I am the only male in any workplace I have ever been who actually does sexually harass women) in a fashion similar to that advised by this book, with the result that the complainant “resigned”, and I did not get fired.

But on evolution, Vox Day is full of crap, and it is getting in the way of his understanding of women, with the result that he is purple pilled, and his novels feature kick ass action girl who rescues lad in distress.

Yes, the evolutionism of Gould, Jerry Coyne, and Richard Lewontin is demon worship wearing lab coats as sacerdotal robes. But Darwinism is true. Species originate by natural selection. We became human through a thousand genocides. We are risen killer apes. Jerry Coyne theoretically does not go full Gould, but rejects the obvious implication of Darwinism that subsaharan Africans are substantially less distant from chimps than whites are distant from chimps. He kind of knows its true, but favors silencing anyone who mentions it, having his cake and eating it too.

It is impossible to understand the nature of women except from the point of view that humans and races of humans were formed by natural selection over an immensity of time. Believing in the curse of Eve gets you half way there, but one can theoretically believe in the curse of Eve and still be blue pilled. Natural selection explains the desire of women for invasion, conquest, and rape, while the Curse of Eve merely tells us that husbands should rule wives.

The origin of species by Natural selection, Darwinism, is true science.

“Evolution” is indeed fake science: – the doctrine that humans arose from non human forms without the inconveniently racist and sexist conclusions that flow from the idea that humans arose from lower forms by natural selection.

Hence my koan: A creationist, an evolutionist, and a Darwinist were walking in the woods

You will notice that in this koan the evolutionist is depicted as, like Global Warmers, unscientific, indeed hostile to science, and, like a gnostic, hostile to reality and the world.

Gnosticism is an anti human, and anti this world Christian heresy. Reaction worships Nature’s God, and to understand the will of Gnon, have to see men and women as they truly are, and one can only see them as they truly are if one accepts Darwinism. The red pill on woman only makes sense from the point of view of natural selection – that for women abduction and enslavement is an escape from prisoner’s dilemma, and that their resistance to rape, enslavement, and the authority of their husband is merely a fitness test.

Reaction 101: The reactionary red pill on women.

Friday, December 7th, 2018

The basics of Reaction need to be stated, and they need to be stated in a way that excludes our enemies, because we are seeing a whole lot of people saying “Hail fellow reactionary”, who are clearly hostile to us, and not hostile the media/academic/judicial elite that we seek to overthrow, blaming various groups that tend to be allied or sympathetic to reaction for the problems caused by our holier than thou elite, urging reactionaries that the real enemy is group X, where X is anyone who is plausibly an ally or likely to become one.  They want us to ingroup our enemies, ingroup those that outgroup us, and outgroup each other.

So, starting with the concepts most likely to offend: The reactionary red pill on women. Which are also concepts that have practical application even while our enemies rule. Next articles in the Reaction 101 series will be more directly political and have less individual application in daily life.

Emancipation was a bad idea. Feral women behave badly and are psychologically disturbed. They need to be redeemed by becoming the property of some man. Women are psychologically maladapted to independence and equality

In any marriage or long term relationship, the woman will endlessly launch physical, emotional, and legal power struggles against her husband or boyfriend, shit tests, which power struggles she wants to lose.

If she wins, she will break up, looking for someone who can conquer her. You just have to win. If the only way to win without going to jail is to send her away, send her away and go dark. But she would rather you beat her. You have to wear the pants. This is the PUA analysis of negs and shit tests, applied to long term relationships.

Women are maladapted to equality. That women find male apes sexually attractive and men do not find female apes sexually attractive indicates that among those humans that whites and east Asians are descended from, females have not been allowed to make sexual choices since the days we looked rather like apes. Since female sexual choice is quite common, we should conclude that groups that allowed women sexual choice failed to reproduce or suffered dysgenesis, and perished.

In order to reproduce, and particularly in order to reproduce in the white and east Asian ancestral environment, in a cold climate with severe winters that require food and shelter over winter, husbands and wives need cooperate/cooperate equilibrium, and if you have free women, you get defect/defect equilibrium. To impose cooperate/cooperate requires external coercion, in particular that women have to be stuck with the first guy that they have sex with, and are not permitted to be permanently on the prowl to trade up throughout their fertile years.

When allowed to be permanently on the prowl, they tend to practice serial monogamy until around thirty or so when their eggs start running out.

All businesses with women in power are destroyed, unless they are the beneficiaries of some state favor that artificially keeps them in business. Female executives are only useful if under the authority of a sexy alpha male, otherwise they turn on the shareholders, the employees, and the customers, perceiving them as betas.

Subjective personal observation: All sexual harassment complaints result from horny women shit testing terrified men, and then getting frustrated because the terrified men fail their shit tests. This personal observation is statistically confirmed by the fact that a far larger proportion of women complain about sexual harassment in workplaces where the women substantially outnumber the men. There has never been one complaint of sexual harassment against me, and if sexual harassment complaints resulted from what social justice warriors tell us constitutes sexual harassment, there would have been a pile of them.

Subjective personal observation: All rape complaints are false and all rape convictions are false, not because real rapes do not happen, but because women do not really mind real rapes and fail to complain. This personal observation is confirmed by the University of Virginia complaints process: The university of Virginia dealt with a big pile of rape and sex complaints, and dismissed every single one without disciplinary action. So Rolling Stone investigated them looking for poster girls and trouble, came up empty.

Men and women very much want to form families and want those families to last into their old age. My wife was eighteen in my eyes all her years, except near to the very end.

If you look at any successful family, no one is equal. Dad is in charge, mum picks up the socks. In principle, it is possible to form families in a society where men and women are equal, by freely contracting out of equality, but in practice, it is hard, and I see how hard it is for my sons. We have prisoners dilemma with few iterations, so the natural equilibrium between men and women is defect/defect. To prevent defect/defect, to ensure cooperate/cooperate, requires heavy handed coercive intervention by state, family, and society, and this heavy handed coercion necessarily bears far more heavily on women than on men. If you want a society where men and women know sexual love, or if you want a society which has above replacement total fertility rate, women just cannot be allowed to follow their pussies. And this requires a lot of supervision and coercion, primarily keeping women under control, rather than keeping men under control. For most women this requires that they be subject to the potential threat of physical discipline by the men in their lives. For a great many women, this requires that they be subject to the actuality of physical discipline by the men in their lives. So women should never have been emancipated, and some “violence against women” is legitimate, proper, and proportionate. Women, like children and dogs, need discipline and supervision and are never happy if they do not get them. A spoiled child, or a spoiled woman, or a spoiled dog, is never happy. The dog and the woman bark all the time.

Further, sexual impulses set in in girls at a disturbingly early age, usually well before puberty though there is a great deal of variance, while male sexual impulses set in at puberty, as reliable as clockwork.

Ever greater vigilance against “pedophiles” is like telling a chicken farmer he should not fence or cage his chickens, but instead should make the world safe for his chickens to wander wherever they please. When nine year old girls go to an Ariana Grande concert without being accompanied and supervised by male kin, they are going there to get nailed. Restraints on female sexuality have to restrain females, have to be oppressive to women, because being oppressive to men is not likely to work, and is conspicuously and spectacularly failing to work.

The family law of the Old Testament got it right, and modernity is surrealistically deluded, and flat in my face insane. I see in front of my nose stuff that no one else sees, so either I am insane or the world is, and the statistics are strangely consistent with me being sane, and difficult to reconcile with the world being sane. If you are using words for human things and human conduct that the people of the Old Testament had no words for, chances are you are using words for things that have no real existence, anticoncepts, words that are lies, that you are speaking madness and delusion.

The family law and family institutions dictated in Deuteronomy and depicted in the Book of Proverbs lasted for thousands of years. Our current social order is extremely recent. Within living memory, within my memory, it has changed radically in ways that are horrifying, tragic, and terrifying, and everyone is acting like this is normal and nothing is wrong.

Modernity is for me like one of those horror movies where one character sees monsters and another character does not, and you wonder if the monsters are real or just delusion, until you see someone get eaten by a monster. And I see people getting eaten by monsters, in the sense of transparently false rape, sexual assault, domestic violence, sexual harassment et cetera charges, and I also see people who tell me men have nothing to fear, because women never lie, while women have much to fear because they so very very much dislike rape, sexual assault, domestic violence, and sexual harassment. But I also see these men acting terrified, while I am bolder than any of those men who supposedly believe that men have nothing to fear. In part of their minds they must see what I see, because I see their fear, and in part of their minds, the part that speaks and constructs a narrative, they do not see what I see, even though it is right in front of them.

This repression, repression of awareness of what is in front of everyone’s face, and repression of male sexuality, is depressing every male’s testosterone levels and sperm production, though if you consciously recognize it and consciously reject it, this reduces the impact on your testosterone levels a bit.  Men go overboard on repressing each other, as a displacement activity because they are denied their deep desire to control women.

Women get angry because they do not get the supervision, command, and guidance that they crave. Sometimes this anger turns inward, as with cutting and other self destructive acts, and sometimes it turns outward. She feels really badly treated, because she has in fact been really badly treated, but because the real causes of her discontent are unthinkable, she concludes she must have been sexually harassed or sexually assaulted, when in fact her mistreatment was lack of sexual assault, lack of a strong hand to discipline her.