Archive for the ‘culture’ Category

Game, Dark Enlightenment, and Reaction

Sunday, May 19th, 2013

You will notice that the Pick Up Artist Community and the Christian Reactionary movement get along mighty well, despite the fact that Heartiste claims to be a minion of Satan, and despite the fact that they are in total disagreement about ultimate ends.

The thesis that Game works is logically equivalent to what used to be the right wing view of women, before the right became the left that is lagging four to eight years behind the mainstream left in moving rapidly ever leftwards.

Rightists used to believe that fertile age women were uncontrollably and self destructively lustful, and therefore needed male adult supervision to prevent them from self destructively howling for their demon lover like cats in heat, that given half a chance, a woman will bang a total stranger like a barn door in a high wind, should he superficially appear sufficiently high status, with utterly disastrous results for her family, her children, and herself. And, of course, game is largely about superficially appearing to be sufficiently high status. (more…)

The ideological cause of the Benghazi bungles

Wednesday, May 15th, 2013

When Pizarro hit the Incas, they just could not see him unless he got in their faces and started poking swords into them. They could not see him, because they could not believe in him.

The attack on the Benghazi embassy was not a terrorist attack. It was a conventional military operation by the uniformed and well equipped troops of an organization that frequently engages in terrorist attacks. They used truck mounted artillery, not box cutters, and were dressed as Al Qaeda armed forces, not civilians. If you cannot say “War with Dar al-Islam”, or even say “War with Radical Islam”, you cannot see Islamic armed forces. (more…)

Even more evidence that women should never have been emancipated

Tuesday, May 7th, 2013

Heartiste finds even more evidence that women should never have been emancipated.

On what used to be called marriage

Sunday, May 5th, 2013

On what used to be called marriage back in the days before marriage was something disgusting that gays did to épater les bourgeois.

My personal observation is that every successful marriage is quietly and furtively eighteenth century, so thoroughly politically incorrect as to be illegal.

And a little reflection reveals that the New Testament/eighteenth century form of marriage, in which both parties give consent to sex once and forever, and the wife submits to the husband, is simply the only kind that can work.

All is fair in love and war.

Love is a battlefield

Love is war.

If the male does what is best for himself, and the female does what is best for herself, the outcome is likely to be unsatisfactory for both parties.  To solve this problem, the New Testament commands an indissoluble contractual commitment to mutual support, and sexual availability, so that, once married, you are stuck with each other, for better or worse, and required to have sex according to the other’s desire.  “Marital rape” is not only permitted, but absolutely mandatory. This contract changes the incentives, creating an incentive for good behavior, among other things giving the man the ability and incentive to invest in his children.  (more…)

Steve Sailer channels Heartiste

Thursday, May 2nd, 2013

More evidence that women should never have been emancipated.

What unites neoreaction?

Monday, April 29th, 2013

Firstly, why neoreaction, rather than reaction?

Because the principles and social organization that we want to restore are completely dead, available only in dusty old books whose language is a little bit strange. We are not reacting to the latest outrage, but to outrages that were a fait accompli a hundred years ago. Since what was an fait accompli a hundred years ago has led to the disastrous consequences predicted, the possibility now opens of reversing what was supposedly irreversible. The Neoreaction is heavily influenced by books long, long, out of print, and previously inaccessible.

Neoreactionaries, all of them, respect the past. Traditional solutions derive from Nature, or, some would say, from Nature’s God, and embody unspoken and difficult to explain wisdom. Sweeping them aside was apt to have disastrous consequences, and, in substantial part, did have disastrous consequences.

Reactionaries, all of them, are realists, seeing the real, not the official truth.

Neoreactionaries, all of them, recognize that races are different, the sexes are different, and man is a hierarchical animal.

Neoreactionaries, all of them, regard the official truth, the Cathedral as highly unlikely to have any connection to the truth, indeed as evil and insane. If all academics and the New York Times agree on X, the neoreactionary assumption is that X is likely to be a lie. The only way one would get such agreement is if it is enforced, and, if enforced, must be untrue.
(more…)

Against female sexual choice

Thursday, April 25th, 2013

Heartiste and Steve Sailer provide compelling evidence that females should not be allowed to make their own sexual and reproductive choices. Their hormones make them stupid. Thus we have a bunch of baby murderers running around who will doubtless repeat their parent’s choices. And here is another video of raging hormones on parade. Most females, upon meeting a seemingly high status male, will jump his bones given a few minutes of opportunity, which is why societies where virginity was important and illegitimacy disastrous kept fertile age women on a very tight leash. (more…)

The thirty nine articles and the second book of homilies.

Sunday, April 21st, 2013

The most successful recovery from a left singularity was the restoration, which created a counter theocracy, restoration Anglicanism, which lasted from 1660 to 1828.  (more…)

Dark Enlightenment and the Endarkenment

Sunday, April 7th, 2013
The Dark Enlightenment:
The movement that concludes that the Enlightenment took a bad turn, or that the Enlightenment itself was a bad turn.  I take both positions: That the Enlightenment was wildly and dangerously wrong to proclaim all men created equal, and that restoration England was a pretty good political system, which gave us the scientific and industrial revolutions, and the British conquest of most of the world, and it has been downhill since the restoration, with things going to hell in a handbasket around 1800 or so, and getting steadily worse since then.
Dark Enlightenment:
Forbidden knowledge about society.  For example that while women want their husband to do woman’s work around the house, they don’t want their husband if their husband does woman’s work around the house.  If you realize the truth of some hate fact, you have been darkly enlightened (verb).
The Endarkenment.
Plain meaning: The coming dark age of the west, and perhaps the world, the rise of magical and superstitious thinking, for example Hillary Clinton and Oprah Winfrey, the transformation of science into theocracy, the stagnation of an increasing number of technologies.
Ironic meaning: A sarcastic reference to the enlightenment, implying that it blinded men, rather than enabling them to see. Roger Bacon and Galileo popularized rationality, but Voltaire and Rousseau abandoned rationality. That the planets go around the sun follows from the evidence. That all men are created equal defies the evidence.
The Left Singularity:
Leftism leads to more ever more leftism, ever faster. If the process was not interrupted by dictatorship, civil war, or social collapse, it would end with everyone torturing each other to death for insufficient leftism, Khmer Rouge style, and the last torturer committing suicide for his failure to inflict infinite torture in finite time.

History interpreted as left singularities

Friday, April 5th, 2013

History is one damn thing after another, and any attempt to make sense of it necessarily leads to leaving out lots of important stuff.  Thus making sense of it by looking at it in one way does not necessarily falsify making sense of it by looking at it in another way.

The trend from around fourteen hundred AD to the present has been for states to become ever stronger.  On the other hand, was not the trend from four hundred AD to one thousand AD. Of course, it might be a bad idea to bet against a trend that has been running strong for well over six hundred years, but here is why I am betting against it: (more…)