Jewish overrepresentation among badly behaved elites.

When whites are driven out of affluent middle class areas which then become terrifying run down burned out urban jungles, it is not Jews that they are fleeing.

The inner city used to be where the affluent, the rich, and the upwardly mobile lived. It is not Jews that destroyed the inner city, Detroit, Ferguson, and are now destroying Chicago.

Female bad behavior comes from desire to fuck taciturn narcissistic assholes, starting at age eight or nine. If it was Jewish influence, they would want to fuck neurotic talkative dweebs resembling Woody Allen. Margaret Mead fucked people of both sexes and numerous races, but did not fuck Franz Boas.

Blaming Jews is yet another good news religion, because it is easy to gas the Jews, but considerably more difficult, and more disturbing, to keep women under loc parentis supervision from eight to menopause. So the program of restoring civilization sounds a lot easier if all you have to do to get things back on track is gas the Jews.

If we blame the Enlightenment, in particular and especially the extravagantly absurd claim that all men are created equal, if we blame blacks, single women, and the holiness spiral, then it looks like a harder problem, that requires us to do things that are inherently unpopular and unholy, whereas exterminating a market dominant minority is always popular, and you can very easily get away with representing it as holy. Jews are a market dominant minority, and we whites are about to become a market dominant minority.

People who hope to win an election with a universal franchise have to blame the Jews, or else blame whites in general. You cannot shut down a holiness spiral in a democracy except with another holiness spiral.

Muslims in Europe and America are very close to successfully representing gassing the Jews as holy, and shortly thereafter will go to work on similar representation of whites.

Notice eager Jewish collaboration in Muslim efforts to represent gassing the Jews as holy. This falsifies the doctrine that Jewish misbehavior is collectively rational behavior that advances the interests of “the Jews”.

I have often said that going after the Jews is goring the matador’s cape, rather than goring the matador. You have to shut down the holiness spiral itself, rather than a category of people that contains a disturbingly large proportion of exceptionally enthusiastic demon worshipers.

Shutting down the holiness spiral requires something like an inquisition. We don’t need to burn people at the stake, though Charles the second did need to burn a few people at the stake, in particular one alarmingly and excessively holy female heretic, whose holiness was inconveniently and irritatingly genuine, and whose Unitarian Christian derived belief system was alarmingly twenty first century. But mostly what Charles the second did was fire everyone in state and quasi state jobs, and invite them to re-apply for their old jobs. In the job interview, the applicant was asked whether he would “conform” – conform to the new standard of moderate holiness, which prohibited excessive holiness in general, and the old form of holiness in particular. If one declined to say he would conform, he did not get burned at the stake – but neither did he get his old job back. Many who declined to conform departed under their own power to New England. A few said they would conform, got their old jobs back, but then engaged in apostacy, and those ones Charles came down on pretty hard, but usually they got ridiculed and their careers got ruined, rather than burned at the stake. Looks to me that only one genuinely sincere and genuinely holy heretic got burned at the stake by Charles the Second, and all the others that were burned were two faced slimy lying hypocrites, and that most of the apostates just got laughed at and their careers stalled, rather than burned at the stake, or even fired. But you really do need to sometimes take firm measures against stubborn and excessively ostentatious holiness.

The problem with Jews is that they are a market dominant minority with a strong identity. Being a market dominant minority with a strong identity they are particularly subject to potential persecution, plus, in even in the absence of actual persecution, they still have an extremely strong persecution mythos, which makes them paranoid and hostile. Since one is going to get treated as a persecutor no matter what, one feels inclined to actually persecute them.

Jews are are inclined to attack the fabric of the host society, because when it’s strong it attacks them, and when it’s weak it lays off. The fabric of society is essentially everything “fascist”, so they are naturally anti-fascist insofar as they identify as jewish. Obviously this pattern has been reinforced. The reform jews most so because they are actually trying to integrate, which they can’t if everyone is Nordic Catholic “Fascists”.

When they engage in a holiness spiral, they don’t have any personal attachment to the things that their utopian schemes will destroy, or any concern about the reasons it won’t work. Whereas a white man would say “what about my job, family, community, ancestors, people, church, business”, your typical academic jew would say “Certain elements of the bourgeois will feel the move to equality as oppression (and I never liked those dumb goyim anyways)”.

Their talents make them useful to short-sighted elites, which puts them in the position of High, but with more mobility, more of a mobile bandit; they can always go elsewhere and feel just as at home. In addition to the insecurity they feel as a persecuted minority, they are naturally aligned with High which has in our recent history been engaged in destructive anti-fascism.

Their talents further mean that they are quite good at the subversion, which, lacking attachment to their host society, they naturally get into.

But the problem is not Jewish participation in subversion, it is that subversion is profitable, respected, and rewarded. Make it unprofitable, despised, and dangerous, and there will not be a Jew in sight.

Civilization is the art of people living together in large numbers: The basic problems of civilization are shutting down violence, ensuring that men and women agree to stick together for richer or poorer, or better or worse, and are forced to stick by that agreement, and securing property rights. Leftism is an attack on all of these, leftism is siding with the forces of entropy for political advantage, and Nazism is just leftism that has been left behind by a hundred years of movement even further left. “Fascism” is freedom, freedom is made possible by law, law is made possible by first establishing order, order is made possible by peace, peace first require victory, and victory requires war. Leftism reverses this chain of causation and moves us back towards the war of all against all. Leftism weaponizes covetousness and envy to attack property rights and female sexual lust to attack marriage. Single women, rather than Jews, vote for the mass import of rapeugees, because unconsciously they hope to be sold naked in chains on the auction block.

Observe what is happening with the Rohingya. The Rohingya correctly believe that a good Muslim should live under Muslim rule, and that a Muslim should establish Muslim rule wherever he lives. They attempted to establish a Muslim state in Burma, the Burmese were not having any, and are now expelling them. The expelled Rohingya don’t want to go to the USA. They want to go to a Muslim state, but Islamic states fear that if they accept the Rohingya, the Rohingya will decide that their hosts are insufficiently Islamic, or the wrong kind of Islamic. The US government wants them, wants to dump the on marginal electorates in flyover country, and you really cannot blame the Jews for this. You cannot blame the Rohingya for this. They don’t want to go to an infidel state. It is single female lust for men manly enough to subjugate them. If a bunch of east europeans were fleeing some place, I bet the PUAs would be keen on bringing them here.

82 Responses to “Jewish overrepresentation among badly behaved elites.”

  1. Oliver Cromwell says:

    OK.

    1. Creating a diaspora non-conformist population in New England was a huge disaster that destroyed the first British Empire and might result in the annihilation of the white race. It is not really an example of the approach working.

    2. Although there is no New England for them to go to anymore, one wonders if it will then be even less effective in the old England.

    I recall a museum I visited in Belgium about a very holy man, who in order to become holier joined the church. In the church, he was told that in order to become holier he must move to a leper colony to tend to the lepers. He did so, caught leprosy, and died not long after. For his efforts he got a museum dedicated to his life and story, which is more than most people get. But he did not have any children, and he did not win any elections.

    What needs to be done is to enforce feminism on non-conformists, and enforce patriarchy on conformists. I call this aggressively enforced freedom of conscience.

  2. Cavalier says:

    >The inner city used to be where the affluent, the rich, and the upwardly mobile lived. It is not Jews that destroyed the inner city, Detroit, Ferguson, and are now destroying Chicago.

    The inner city used to be where the Jew, Pole, Italian, and Irish blue-collar post-American immigrant ethnics lived. Who, whom.

    >People who hope to win an election with a universal franchise have to blame the Jews, or else blame whites in general. You cannot shut down a holiness spiral in a democracy except with another holiness spiral.

    When did last an election matter? When did last politicians fulfill their campaign promises? When did white people vote to abolish their marriages and enrich their living-spaces?

    >they can always go elsewhere and feel just as at home

    Sly.

  3. Cavalier says:

    >Leftism reverses this chain of causation and moves us back towards the war of all against all.

    It really is a war of all against all. The only quelling force is the hegemonic capacity for violence of one entity over another.

    >Single women, rather than Jews, vote for the mass import of rapeugees, because unconsciously they hope to be sold naked in chains on the auction block.

    Single women do what their master bids them do. Democratic approval (whatever is the opposite of “divisive”) represents permission, not causation.

    • jim says:

      Women are chronically non compliant. We with great regularity have societies in which women are legally absolutely property, and their owners still have a hard time.

      The emperor may have a thousand concubines and the power to execute any of them or all of them for any reason or no reason and he still gets shit tests from hell.

      There is no respite for men. We are always on stage. We always have to perform. We always will have to perform. But in a society where women are legally property failing a shit test is less of a disaster.

      • Cavalier says:

        Did women suddenly become 800% more noncompliant, or did the Great Patriarchy in the Sky nationalize the women?

        It seems to me that this is simply the white trash iteration of “those niggers will be voting Democratic for the next 200 years”.

        Why would the state want a brave new world of fatherless men? I wonder.

      • Poochy says:

        Shit tests are necessary and good. Nature’s way of testing the reproductive fitness of the male.

        • Poochy says:

          Unfit males should not have the right to reproduce and pass on their shitty genes. This is the problem I have with traditional marriage.

          • Cavalier says:

            Male selection produces Europeans.

            Female selection produces Africans.

            Choose wisely.

            • Samuel Skinner says:

              Door number 3 has ‘marriage arranged by the parents’. I suspect this might be the best option.

              • Cavalier says:

                Parental veto, nothing more.

                Every social arrangement must be devised with consideration for the selection that it ultimately manifests in future generations. Female sexual agency with a predilection to stable monogamy is a desirable trait.

  4. Cavalier says:

    >Their talents make them useful to short-sighted elites

    Is it more evil to destroy your enemies or to leave them alone?

    >But the problem is not Jewish participation in subversion, it is that subversion is profitable, respected, and rewarded. Make it unprofitable, despised, and dangerous, and there will not be a Jew in sight.

    What is subversion, really?

    >Civilization is the art people living together in large numbers: The basic problems of civilization are shutting down violence, ensuring that men and women agree to stick together for richer or poorer, or better or worse, and are forced to stick by that agreement, and securing property rights.

    Civilization is the art of optimally farming the sheeple.

    White flight, for instance, is one of the most profitable industries going.

    • jim says:

      > > But the problem is not Jewish participation in subversion, it is that subversion is profitable, respected, and rewarded. Make it unprofitable, despised, and dangerous, and there will not be a Jew in sight.

      > What is subversion, really?

      Among other things, a “domestic violence” law that rewards breaking up marriages with cash and prizes, which law creates an enormous “domestic violence” industry that creams off a substantial proportion of this cash and prizes.

      Observe that near zero men, as near to none as makes no difference, are actually convicted in a court of law for giving their wife a black eye, while huge numbers lose their homes and their children for “domestic abuse”. Lots of “domestic abuse” convictions, strangely few assault convictions, a curious shortage of convictions for violence. The wife theoretically gets the home, and the husband gets a restraining order to stay a hundred miles away from his home and his children while continuing to somehow pay for them, but then his wife somehow loses it in short order, rendering herself, her husband, and her children homeless, and the numerous people engaged in the domestic violence industry considerably richer.

      We have a large industry theoretically dealing with domestic violence, but all actual convictions are for “domestic abuse”.

      • Paul Bonneau says:

        That’s just the typical end result of institutions – in this case the institution of marriage dissolution. It probably was somewhat reasonable in the beginning, but all institutions turn to shit over time, become scams, and usually end up causing more trouble than existed before they began. Pournelle’s “Iron Law of Bureaucracy”…

        We really need a revolution to break these scams up. Hang some assholes from lamp posts.

        • peppermint says:

          It was never remotely reasonable. Also all Boomer men are either divorced or henpecked, while many Millennial men have gf’s who want to cook for them.

          • Cavalier says:

            My parents are fine. Their parents were fine. Their siblings and their mates are fine. SES is paramount.

            • jim says:

              Women who get a high status degree, and then set foot on a high status career path, are not fine.

              • Cavalier says:

                It depends. The good ones eject pretty quickly. It’s mostly the ones who miss the boat who stick to it. Though, it also depends on the career; some are easier to drop out of than others. Even in fairly high brackets, the homemaker is of moderately higher SES than the one who strains to have the career and the children, thanks to the superiority of her husband.

                • jim says:

                  See Roissy’s discussion of what I call lawyerettes, and he calls “Lawyercunts”.

                  Compare and contrast with his discussion of truck stop strippers.

                • Cavalier says:

                  Affirmative action does not, in my humble estimation, successfully influence SES.

                  SES is more than merely income or putative occupational prestige. SES has a large social component.

                  If a lawyercunt cannot or does not succeed in family formation with an appropriate partner, she can hardly be said to have high status. If she is promiscuous, she can hardly be said to have high status.

                  Getting into the right college does not necessarily bestow any SES, nor does getting a job with the right company.

                  Similarly, lottery winners do not suddenly acquire any SES along with their windfalls, [a href=”http://www.nber.org/papers/w19348.pdf”]nor do any of their descendants[/a].

                • jim says:

                  Pretty sure that lawyercunts see themselves, and are seen by others, as high socioeconomic status, but their rate of family formation is low.

                  Getting a high paid, high status job, in a high status company is what most people define and perceive as socioeconomic status, and by this standard, high socioeconomic status women do very badly at family formation.

                  Female doctors do OK. Female executives do very badly. Female lawyers do even worse. That is pretty much proportional to socioeconomic status.

                  Also, high education is high socioeconomic status. There is a simple and strong relationship between education and fertility. More education, less children. Higher status education, fewer children.

                  Highly educated women are markedly less reproductively successfull. Women with high status education are markedly less reproductively successful. Women with most high status jobs (doctors excepted) are markedly less reproductively successful.

                  Women married to high status men are markedly more reproductively successful, but that is more like being a lottery winner than being genuinely high socioeconomic status.

                • Cavalier says:

                  Men in high male status occupations are high-status. Women in high male status occupations are not necessarily themselves high-status. Women in high male status occupations are often trainwrecks. Women in high male status occupations, if not trainwrecks but instead nevertheless sane and functional beings, are impressive, but when did impressiveness make women desirable?

                  >Women married to high status men are markedly more reproductively successful, but that is more like being a lottery winner than being genuinely high socioeconomic status

                  You have just explained how women inherit their status from their husbands. High-status women are whoever manage to snag high-status men; how? often, by being smart, and pretty enough.

                  >Getting a high paid, high status job, in a high status company is what most people define and perceive as socioeconomic status

                  Most people are a bit thick.

        • Garr says:

          I think that what motivates destructive Progressive trends is a tendency to focus on and worry about unusual cases in which an individual person is suffering what he/she shouldn’t have to suffer and has no way out. When divorce was very difficult and women were dependent on their husbands there were in fact rare cases of individual women being sadistically or just chronically ultra-abused by cruel husbands. That did happen occasionally — Doestoevsky’s outraged by a case of this sort in DIARY OF A WRITER. When homosexuality was suppressed there were in fact rare cases of intelligent creative reticent (content to be in the closet with door only open an inch or two) homosexuals being hunted and unjustifiably persecuted. When there was enforced subordination of Colored people there were in fact cases in which well-behaved Colored people were unjustifiably abused.

          So Progressives focus on these cases and destroy the overall social structure in order to make it impossible for such cases to occur. Maybe there’s some proper, non-Progressive remedy for such cases — abused wife goes to her Dad or brothers for help, homosexual goes to the Bishop or Lord for help, nice Colored man goes to his Scotch-Irish supervisor/sponsor for help. Or maybe the world is just deeply flawed and these horrible exceptions just have to be accepted because the alternative (destruction of social structure) is worse.

    • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

      >What is subversion, really?

      Subversion is running your rival across the street out of business when enemies from out of town looking to move into the market share still exist.

      Ordinals of conflict.

  5. Your Wife's Son says:

    >The reform jews most so because they are actually trying to integrate, which they can’t if everyone is Nordic Catholic “Fascists”.

    Or — and this is not the “orthodox” view proposed by MacDonald, merely common sense — they fail to integrate because their observant, separatist, zealous, strongly-identified kinsmen keep reminding the Gentiles, day after day, interaction after interaction, that Jews are a distinct nation, not an organic part of the host society.

    Only a 100% consistent Jewish strategy can work long-term within a single host society: either total assimilation, or total separation.

    Any situation where Jewish group A attempts to assimilate into the host, while Jewish group B maintains its ethno-religious separation from the host, will perforce lead to antisemitism, because the Gentiles will feel themselves infiltrated by a foreign, self-interested, parasitic, and often downright hostile out-group.

    If Jews want to drastically minimize antisemitism, then the assimilators should genuinely, honestly, completely assimilate into the host, while all the rest — which is 75%-85% of Jews — need to make aliyah.

    But Orthodox Jews don’t want to minimize antisemitism, because antisemitism prevents Jews from successful assimilation; hence, Judaism is a parasitic meme in the Dawkinsian sense – it compels its hosts to behave in a self-destructive manner, but this very self-destructive manner of conduct has ensured the continuity of Judaism in the exile so far.

    When alt-righters say: “the problem is secular Jews, not Orthodox Jews, because it’s the secular Jews who engage in subversion,” they misdiagnose the real issue: if there were no Orthodox Jews, there also wouldn’t be secular Jews, as secular Jews would eventually blend into the host society. Thus, need to separate the Orthodox Jews from the secular Jews, by sending all the Orthodox Jews to Israel, thus allowing for successful assimilation of secular Jews into the host society.

    Note: this is the most humane proposition, but the Jews themselves will reject it, because the Jews — for the most part — are invested in international parasitism, and anything that may hinder their MO of international parasitism shall be deemed “bad for the Jews.” It follows that antisemitism will be maximized, rather than minimized, the more Jews remain among their Gentile hosts. That, in reality, is what happens.

    Your and MacDonald’s respective theories are:

    Jim: “the problem is the leftist holiness spiral, which incentivizes ever-escalating subversion.”

    MacDonald: “the problem is resource/status competition between Jews and Gentiles.”

    Both of you are correct. Need to end the leftist holiness spiral, and need to end the resource/status competition between Jews and Gentiles. These are two distinct (but related) problems which require two distinct (but related) solutions: sane, functional, and enduring state religion for the former; actual separation from the separatist xenophobic Jews for the latter.

    Actually, you can catch two birds with one stone by devising a healthy state religion which is inherently incompatible with separatist Judaism. That’s one reason why I am fond of Jesus – it’s not because I’m a Christian, but because Jesus, the “Jew anti-Jew,” has devised a healthy state religion which is incompatible, in theory if not in practice, with separatist Judaism.

    • jim says:

      But Orthodox Jews don’t want to minimize antisemitism, because antisemitism prevents Jews from successful assimilation; hence, Judaism is a parasitic meme in the Dawkinsian sense – it compels its hosts to behave in a self-destructive manner, but this very self-destructive manner of conduct has ensured the continuity of Judaism in the exile so far.

      Exactly so. Behavior leading to anti semitism sustains the survival of Judaism memetically, undermines the survival of Jews biologically.

    • jim says:

      Yes, always going to have a state religion. Better if the state religion does not contradict common sense and casual observation too flagrantly.

      “Christ died for our sins” and “God is three and God is one” are harder to disprove than that “all men are created equal”.

  6. Reluctant Dissident says:

    Those auctions sound fantastic. I desire them quite, quite consciously.
    (Sadly I doubt infidels will be allowed to bid on shariahBay. We’ll be in the corner wanking and crying. A bit like now really….. which is why we, collectively, aren’t fighting.)

    • Contaminated NEET says:

      That doesn’t sound very “reluctant” to me. I wouldn’t worry about being shut out of the slave auctions on account of your lack of faith, though. The shahada is very easy to say, especially when you already consider yourself a defeated and broken man. You don’t even have to attempt Arabic for it to be official. Of course, the whole point of conquering is to take other men’s wealth and women, so you still might end up on the wrong side of the bidding: best to get on the winning team early if you’re so certain how it’s going to shake out.

  7. It is important to note how in e.g. Russia Anglos are actually seen as similar to Jews. I think Nazis hardbored similar ideas.

    Consider Dugin’s whole land vs. sea power thing. His land power is agricultural, hierarchical, martial, aggressive but honest, and whole thing comes a bit across as a “come at me bro” type simplistic masculinity. His sea power is the opposite, the smart faggot who does not dare to challenge you openly but screws you over with sweet words and dishonest contracts, outsmarts you, undermines you, and behave in a dishonest and unmanly way.

    Or the whole culture vs. civilization WWI German thing, that Germans and Russians and suchlike are people of culture, spirit, basically soul and emotion, fueled by emotions like loyalty to their race and love of country. And Anglos (and French) are the people of civilization, something soulless, cold, calculating, businesslike. Again, the Anglo and the Jew seen similarly, the Shylock.

    Personal confession: on the Internet, both Jewish and Anglo Libertarians often feel a bit weird to me, yes, sometimes even Neoreactionaries, because they are too much into calculating stuff like incentives. Like the famous Neoreactionary theory that in any system but absolute monarchy elites are incentivized to compete for power and will harm the interest of the nation doing so. I understand it and sort of agree, but my emotional Mitteleuropean soul is thinking: can’t we expect that elites should be actually patriotistic, loyal to their people, and not harm their interests while competing? And if elites put their personal interest above the national interest, they are traitors. And why can’t we have a culture where being a traitor is extremely shameful? So you see this is how that logic, while I agree with it, is a bit alien to me, and this logic that elites will somehow inevitably not feel ingroup with their people, not feel loyal to them and will betray their interests without shame feels too Anglo and too Jewish to me, at the same time. Too calculating, not emotional enough.

    Another example. You see there are a lot of articles online saying stuff like, American and Japanese business culture is different, Japanese firms are loyal to their vendors even when they get a better offer, American firms choose the best offer and dump their vendors if they get a better one. For my Mitteleuropean soul the Japanese way seems obviously the normal, of course one should be loyal and not betray a long, trusted, mutually beneficial relationship for a small temporary gain. So I see it more emotionally, more on the human level that it is not just business between firms but work friendship between people, and that disloyal, overly cold and calculating attitude seems both Anglo and Jewish to me.

    Am I making sense? These perspectives are not necessarily true. They are an outsider view. And yes a bit of a loser view, Anglos won history, so far, for a reason. But all I am saying different perspectives exist, and people critical of Jim’s “philosemitism” should not be so sure a “Nazi Anglo” perspective of Jews is correct, given how there are perspectives in which the Anglo and the Jew is very similar.

    • jim says:

      You are making total sense. The neoreactionary perspective is methodological individualism, as in Austrian economics, and ruthless cynicism, which leads to the conclusion that the least bad government is extremely bad, but anarchy is likely to be even worse. A secure stationary bandit with the capability to bequeath his Kingdom to his son will tax at the long term Laffer maximum, whereas an insecure mobile bandit will take everything not nailed down, then set fire to what is nailed down and take the nails.

      So how well does this model of human conduct fit observation?

      Consider tax levels in Dubai, and compare them with democratic tax levels. Fits with modeling democracies as an anarchy of insecure mobile bandits.

      • Yes, this is absolutely true. As long as we can have only bandits for aristocrats, and not patriots. What, exactly, prevents aristocrats from feeling ingroup with their own blood-related people and actually care about not behaving like reckless traitors?

        To be fair, they are not blood-related. Elites have an extremely long history of international marriage, as accurately simulated by “Crusader Kings 2”. They are easily an inter-nation in themselves. Example: Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina, it is really shocking how un-Russian those Russian nobles were.

        I’ve read somewhere medieval peasants were entirely okay with their lords as long as they lived amongst them, led them, judged them, even though they were harsh. When they moved to the city, court, started dressing and talking sissy, and become entirely alien from the peasants, that is when they got hated, even though they were far more humane with them by then. And I suppose that also meant marrying a similar noble from far away, easily abroad, not the hottest local peasant girl.

        So perhaps we can track back the rot of modernity to aristocratic elites giving up on their job of being local rural leaders and becoming urban sophisticates, becoming an ingroup of their own instead of the top ranking members of the local rural group, say, the count acting as the leader of the county. This is what led to peasant revolutions and so on. At least partially. I know it were kings who undermined the aristocrats by allying with citoyens and even peasants, but this was still a part…

        Sorry if I am rambling, I am just trying to make sense of the to me seriously weird fact that we cannot expect nationalistic loyalty from elites… there are certainly similar processes today.

        • Cavalier says:

          No way, man, you’re not even close to rambling; you’ve absolutely nailed a very important facet of reality.

        • Cavalier says:

          Consider the nature of the catwalk, for example. Why, Ivanka Trump?

          • Garr says:

            Cavalier, I wish you’d make more straight-forward assertions, supported by clear arguments and explanations — I’m not bright enough to follow your allusions and get your hints, and even when I’m inclined to think that I sort of see what you’re hinting at I’m not sure that I really do see it.

            (In this catwalk/Ivanka Trump case I have no idea at all of what you’re pointing to. Is it that she’s an example of international aristocracy because her mom’s Eastern European?)

            I only say this because you seem to have an interestingly different set of political preferences from most other commenters on these blogs, but I’m not sure what these preferences are because your presentation of them is so allusive and arch. [This is a friendly gripe, not a snarling swipe.]

            What are you for? Why are you for what you’re for?

            • Cavalier says:

              Thanks for the praise.

              The catwalk does bear a certain resemblance to the traditional social season, does it not?

              I’m for everything and nothing, for no reason besides that I enjoy toying with the fabric of received and perceived reality. Nothing should be taken entirely seriously or at face value, nor entirely disregarded, for deep truths hide in tall tales.

    • Your Wife's Son says:

      Do you sometimes imagine a parallel universe where it was Mitteleuropeans (or Dugin’s “Land powers”) and not the Anglo who conquered the Americas and Australia? I do, and tbh, the vision looks pretty delightful.

      Anglos are a (or “the”) master race, and it’s not a coincidence that all of us here debate in English; but there is a dark side to their moon.

    • Contaminated NEET says:

      >And Anglos (and French)

      That’s funny, because the French are always saying the same about the Anglos. “La perfide Albion” and all that. I suppose it’s a matter of degree. The Frenchies are about halfway between Russia and England on the land-sea axis.

      • jim says:

        Yes, we Anglos have a lot in common with Jews. Notice that Episcopalian IQ in the US is very close to Jewish Ashkenazi IQ, while Jewish Mizrahi IQ is down around typical middle easterner IQ. Comes of selection for quasi statal jobs, back in the days when state and quasi statal jobs selected for smarts. Around 1870, 1880, the elite started to become less and less IQ selected, and these days elite IQ selection is negative or insignificant.

  8. viking says:

    1) it really look s like the jews must have anticipated the reaction and installed you moldbug land etc to keep it from turning on the puppeteers of leftism.

    2) all this hyperbole about gassing and robbing the jews is nothing more than another leftist calling me a nazi. dont ever recall one person in any branch of new right ever suggesting anything like that. Understanding that jews see themselves as others that must dominate us is not gassing and robbing it is stating the obvious truth.

    3)Put all of leftism aside. It is simply intolerable that another race should dominate the european race, if you do not get this with every fibre of your being please go put a gun in your mouth because you are a worthless self hating faggot.

    4) If jews were asians doing what jews did/do you would get this, but you have been pwnd.Whats worse is jews through leftism are orchestrating just this scenario, asians are dominating us in our own universities and research and other elite institutions and economically, this is going to lead to a order of magnitude more intense domination of europeans because, there are so many more asians, an they are even more racially aware than jews.

    5) But all of that aside back to leftism. Jew leftism is much different the european leftism. christianity and the enlightenment are leftist yes , whites are leftist, we evolved openness, trust, high female status, democratic tendencies,etc. we evolved mediating traits that as well that allowed us to flourish our leftism is our genetic edge. we are sophisticated enough to manage it when those traits expressed in the environment of christendom, britannia, rome america etc.
    Those traits are by definition exploitable by outsiders and jews are the perfect exploiters of europeans. because a) its their religion we borrowed talk about installing buttons to push b) they co evolved with us specifically to exploit us they are a re parasitic species to us. They save the effort of building their own nests and defending them and simply control us.(which really does bring into question how legitimate all that wealth they acquired is but I don’t want to be accused of gassing and robbing so just saying) c) they look so much like us that they evade what outside warning systems we still have this too is a classic predator trait in nature.d) shit is always complicated jim that doesnt mean there cant be some greater truths, so yes jews are also in a sense part of us,after thousands of years we have mixed genes and cultures to some extent and at individual granular its complicated.african americans are even well dug into american culture so what.
    e) the jew leftst! vs euro “leftist” memes and tactics and goals are while diametrically opposed they are cleverly similar enough that poor thinkers such as yourself and moldbug cant seem to see ones been the edge of western civilization and the other its destruction.
    6) the salient fact is that jews themselves see themselves as others and work for jewish interests, the efforts of those interests have brought the european race to the brink of existential collapse; this is not hyperbole we are literally about caught up to south africa, we have had a nigger president its respectable to call for our destruction at every level of power, and we are indeed being slaughtered with impunity and robbed in the streets and turned out of our places of business in sham and humiliation. It may be a multicultural coalition of browns and yellows supported by feminists and faggots but it was organized directed and controlled by jews. To this day jews could in days completely turn leftism around within weeks. seriously if jews decided to reverse leftism they have that power.They own the power of opinion because the purposely targeted it and used it to create leftism.
    7)White leftism is nothing like jew leftism, white leftism is trying to help others with excess resources, jew leftism is trying to use that impulse against whites for jew interests.To posit that a bunch of slaveholding aristocrats that denied the vote to most white men were serious that all men were created equal, well its specious a casual read of the debates make clear they were quite afraid of the idea of democracy and were simply trying to either tweak representative monarchy or carve out a kingdom of their own. Slavery was wrong it was such a bad idea it was bound to end and politics and repatriation of millions on wooden ships, well shit happens. blame southern whites and their british ancestors for stupidity and cupidity.These types of do good because we can leftism, that you jew apologists want to equate with cultural marxism, feminism, multicultural immigration, communism are orders of magnitude more morbid.
    8)One could argue what to do now, but that argument has to begin from the above premises.
    9)Your ideas to treat the symptoms rather than the illness is stupid and frankly suspect. are you too married to a jew with jew children jim?
    10) The very first line of code in this morbid jew leftisms DNA is what begins the first movement; that this leftism is the same leftism as euros christian/ enlightenment leftism.and that all good men jew and gentile should help its cause.So a)most jews don’t fully get the play but they get it enough, as most jews have amply demonstrated an ability to get these subtle power plays when it suits their interests
    b)many of the white elites that support this fall into three camps.
    The useful idiots like yourself that think all leftism is the same and motivated by wanting to be/do good,some think it actually accomplishes good, while others like yourself think it doesn’t actually. none of you see it for the machiavellian mechanism it is you’re either mystified it hasn’t gotten more admiration or mystified its gotten as much as it has.
    You’re right when you occasionally point out the camp that simply want s to keep their head down and go along to get along, but you conflate these with the ones who are actively participating by insisting on the jew mold bugs holiness signalling distraction. This group is simply signalling beta status to the hegemonic culture, signaling group cohesion, in mammals yawns,sneezes barks and other signals are signifiers of no more than assent to the group.The third major group are the race traitors, the wasps in academia and business, the carpetbagger trash like the clintons These usually know full well whats going on and whats at stake, and dont care as long as they get a cut.There are very few of these and most are who should have been our elites. This would be a good place to reflect for a moment about competition, jews could have dominated africa more easily, they could be worried about islamic africans but instead import them. We are the jews only real competition (asians like jews cant really build their own nations they need to parasitically copy us, though they are better at doing it more in their own territory its still cloning white ideas) so our elites only real competition they can beat is other whites.jew and elite white interest are aligned against other whites. Now this is a problem for those of us who understand the importance of hierarchy, but most of you stupidly assume every smart white is already up their in jew heaven, theyre not.
    11) despite all this high IQ jew and white efort and 40% non white allies, the rest of whites have used democracy not to demand muh free shit as moldbug and land and jim would have it they have used their limited power to do things like; exit to white areas, homeschool, gentrify, brexit, prop 187, tea party, Trump, Reagan, nixon, alt right,welfare reform, I could list pages of attempts by average whites not in support of leftism for general good or personal gain but against leftism
    at great cost. Its simply untrue as the jew moldbug posits that white democracy is the problem. in fact his argument of a elite cathedral that manipulates and circumvents democracy is a direct contradiction of his assertion that white democracy is the problem, nigger jew democracy might be a problem, but most whtes vote against leftism.
    12) and of the whites that vote for leftism, most sincerely believe the lies that the cathedral teaches them and if they came to understand that those premises were lies (redpilling) they would not be leftists.And of course the other major group that is signally acquiescence would signal acquiescence to the new hegemony,leaving only the race traitor elites. I have no particular love of democracy its simply not the actual problem, its just another medium the jew leftism has spawned on like christianity, the jews managed fine pwning kings as well.And democracy is a euro trait I hate to fight the tape.
    13) whats really got a lot of you larping reactionaries clutching your pearls is the thought that if all this is true we must gas the jews.Thats such nonsense it makes one wonder if its not another leftist brown scare tactic. A nation with the resolve to not die could easily encourage with carrots and sticks well short of gas chambers non whites to leave our nation. As I said the jews themselves could in a matter of weeks reverse leftism and make white nationalism respectable. you faggots are gasping how can WN ever be respectable!!!!???? because you faggots are owned by the jews you cant see the answer is the same way it became unrespectable, there’s nothing inherently immoral unnatural or extreme about WN just the opposite its how every other people and nation on earth is today and has always been, a ethnic people form a nation and engage with other peoples from that perspective. All that is necessary is to state that we wish to live as the rest of the world has always lived.No one but a small percentage of ourselves (and most of them are operating under false information) would think it odd n fact they all think is crazy or fools for multiculturalism as it is. Theres no jew gassing needed, they can have their property that didnt involve the looting of the west’s economies through leftist multi generational redistribution of wealth and the monetizing of the needed debt, that they cant have. Those few who have demonstrated they are white first and jewish second and have not supported the jewish directed leftist conspiracy could even stay as whites under certain conditions of course

    • Eli says:

      The goyim know! Shut it down!

    • Samuel Skinner says:

      Obvious disclaimer is obvious. Long post, but I’ll focus on one item:


      11) despite all this high IQ jew and white efort and 40% non white allies, the rest of whites have used democracy not to demand muh free shit as moldbug and land and jim would have it they have used their limited power to do things like; exit to white areas, homeschool, gentrify, brexit, prop 187, tea party, Trump, Reagan, nixon, alt right,welfare reform, I could list pages of attempts by average whites not in support of leftism for general good or personal gain but against leftism
      at great cost. Its simply untrue as the jew moldbug posits that white democracy is the problem. in fact his argument of a elite cathedral that manipulates and circumvents democracy is a direct contradiction of his assertion that white democracy is the problem, nigger jew democracy might be a problem, but most whtes vote against leftism.

      That is the US. Notably in countries that there wasn’t a colored underclass you had whites voting for socialism. Germany went from the legalization of the SDP in 1890 to its domination of the government in 1912 (without universal suffrage democracy!) It took 45 years from the founding of the British Labour Party to when they started nationalizing industries.

      You can see this even in the United States- excepting urban areas, the areas that have the most white left are the white regions of the country.

      • Cavalier says:

        No kidding. People act like there weren’t reds, loud and proud, in 18th century Europe.

      • viking says:

        yes europe went a bit socialist and is still recovering in places, but lets be fair they went from medieval serfs to starving freemen with no rights to capitalist tools in a 100 years. then were used as cannon fodder.despite all that they have mostly thrown of socialism weep for their royals fight for their nations work pretty hard in most nations. And most importantly of all they do all that while every institution of authority has been lying through their teeth to them from cradle to grave. So yeah it took a bit to adjust to modernity, it might have helped if elites had done their part

        • Contaminated NEET says:

          Even leaving aside the fact the whites have often voted for socialism, there remains the fact that whites voted for “nigger jew democracy.” Whites gave blacks the vote; gave Jews the banks, the universities, and the entertainment industry; and stand by these choices even as it becomes clear they were dreadful mistakes that are killing us. White democracy is problem, even if it’s not quite the disaster that is black democracy. All democracy is a problem.

          • viking says:

            Well picking back up the white socialism first.

            I find it odd that a group founded on the insights of HBD seems to think they are above the fray.As I said above whites seem to be selected for things associated with leftism. These tendencies seem in fact to have been our edge until recently.While a thing may outlive its usefulness and be rightly despised sometimes a thing becomes used improperly. Some of these leftist tendencies that once served us well are to reiterate.

            Higher than average female status,with which came romantic love, family over tribe, greater investment in children, outbreeding.

            Openness; characterized by curiosity and willingness to learn and adopt explore, tolerate debate and experiment, and allow tradition to give way to progress.

            Democratic tendencies; greece rome celtic/ germanic/ nordic structures, italian city states, dutch republic from the same period on, the magna carta even earlier, and of course the reformation,and then america.Is it just me or do these periods correlate strongly with the highest achievements of the highest achieving race on earth?

            christianity and law a search for justice, this of course comes before the others in some sense and informs the other in another. and the more complex societies enabled by the openness trust etc required more nuanced rules, our adoption of roman culture and the jewish religion gave us the framework that allowed more complex political and economic and social development. The idea that there were laws higher than the priests and kings.That contracts were binding corporations were people too,that the lowest commoner had some rights, that there was a common law a natural law, even an endowed by creator or inherent law. We can take any of these things above and stop half way through describing them and start sputtering proto communism burn her dunk her. But the reality is these are the things that got us thus far made us great and worked really well. These were things until the middle of my life conservatives bragged about many still cant bring themselves to question these, while others want to toss them all in the rubbish as if we could even do that. we can no more shrug these tendencies off than a nigger can pass the SATs

            These things had consequences like capitalism and communism, a low threshold for suffering and inefficiency, a constant need to improve a situation,and a thousand others.Democracy was an attempt to mimic evolution through meritocracy over dysgenic monarchy, not really such a bad idea at a time when 99% of the human capital was as wasted as the agricultural capital and practically everything else of value.The upheaval caused by the explosion of all these traits success which we reduce to communism and capitalism yeah we have a problem houston, but its sort of expected the transition from serfdom to web surfing might be a bit rough. yeah certainly todays vector is even existential for whites in short time frame. so more important to get it right.

            Can we whites actually transcend what seems to be our HBD, do we really need to? Is the problem these traits or that we allowed the environment within which we operate to deteriorate. Where is the problem really coming from; capitalism ( and I count myself one) probably has been a bigger problem than communism its arguable capitalism is the handmaiden of communism. Again maybe we dont need to get rid of capitalism but we might need to address where it is hurting us.

            Our traits are exploitable by those who do not share them, but they give us the power to keep those apes in check if we recognize this. enough socialism to extract the high IQ chimney sweep is akin to our farming development that today have productivity 100000% increase in climate controlled soilless greenhouses, but that doesnt work when you have somali chimney sweeps.

            white democracy did not vote for niggers and jews, greedy elites for 500 years voted for an oversupply of labor and to occupy the continent of n america and elsewhere. they got niggers and jews and polluted the white environment and now we have a problem of bio hazard. the jews subtly warped all of the above created communism socialism and leftism. In europe where there was no frontier and the serf transition was cushing the jews had some success with communism it dovetailed well with our other healthier projects like decentralization, industrialization democracy and the rationalism over religion.Socialism in places like the nordic countries is not so bad without niggers. Its not for me but they like it they still get things done. In places like greece its should have been checked by the inability of the state to afford much welfare but elite capitalist globalists lend them welfare money to control the territory through debt. Ultimately the jews communism failed because white people are simply too productive and independent to want it, but meantime because the jews had such a foothold in the usa and noticed the niggers needed communism they transitioned into racial communism civil right call it what you will, they began importing niggers wherever they could find them and spread the meme to europe through colonialism reparations they also created niggers out of whole cloth like women and faggots.

            The white voters HAVE NEVER FUCKIN SUPPORTED THIS and to the tiny extent they do its under cathedral false information.What happened is jews supported this and jews were intellectuals so they got white elites confused about what wer our actual white values and what were jew fast talking values, and then about the 80s as true communism collapsed they began to convince the capitalist there was money to be made in neo communism, that paying lip service to AA and modern viewpoints was a cost of doing business for the benefits of globalism. offshoring immigration fiat finance, larger markets, all of this appealed to capitalists and that brought conservatives on board, with jew lies about natural conservatives, spreading democracy,freedom is equality. It all jew doubletalk thats subtly but morbidly different from our core competencies.now you think the answer is to exit to the land of serfs again. Its not possible they wont even let a pissant nation like philippines or bosnia exit you think they’re going to let a bunch of high IQ white guys with smart mouths mock them from some island? Besides there no island and you’re all too faggy to try anyway. There is only restoration of white lands to white peoples so our HBD works for us again.

            If you want to jerk of to arcane social political problems solve capitalism. Capitalism would be the most destructive force if one had to pick one its also the most creative force. civilization is hard and fragile culture ought to subordinate capitalism without subverting it.

            • Cavalier says:

              You were doing very well until nationalism and Jewry, and to a lesser extent Scandi socialism, took you off the rails.

              Nationalism, especially, which is least common denominator crap.

              Nigs are irrelevant, though they make excellent servants.

              There is no particular reason not to have a kind of multiculturalism, so long as all “multikulturi” are firmly subjected and indisputably subjects, in every aspect, in the classical sense. The whole Third World population explosion thing is absolutely impermissible. Overpopulation is a real thing, and loving and tender, careful control is essential to the maintenance of a stable, healthy ecosystem.

              • jim says:

                > There is no particular reason not to have a kind of multiculturalism, so long as all “multikulturi” are firmly subjected and indisputably subjects,

                Multiculturalism on the model of the Roman Republic, the early Roman Empire, and the Turkish empire before it came to be ruled by slave girls.

                • viking says:

                  wasn’t rome overrun by immigrants, maybe not invade the worl invite the world maybe build the wall deport them all

              • viking says:

                yeah well that’s a big “as long as” slavery apartheid jim crow benign neglect and pandering have all failed, in fact the trend is the better you treat them the worse they get so there a a reason you cant have multiculturalism the other races either devolve into a angry and dangerous underclass or a bitter and resentful overclass. Its really basic civilization is fragile it needs every chance it can get as closely alike. so when you get this group that got so alike because they were all fucking each other and only each other ,
                what do you call them – a nation. well you used to before multiculturalism and theoretical nations.
                as for jews see the above its simply impossible and worse still its happening all over with the asians Im not being ruled by others what kind of man is for that? its odd youre always the first to knock your fellow whites a trash but youre defending non whites,Land pulls that shit WTF?
                anything not explicitly right wing will turn left wing

                nordic socialism is ridiculous but they like it let them have it. There’s aspects of it that sort of the correct response to capitalism, not the confiscatory part the neglectful part the part where they want to enjoy their lives and families not work 70 hours a week.

                • jim says:

                  > yeah well that’s a big “as long as” slavery apartheid jim crow benign neglect and pandering have all failed,

                  Slavery, Apartheid, and Jim Crow worked fine.

                  You need to have different rules for people who are different.

            • jim says:

              Moldbug is fond of saying “America is a communist country”.

              I similarly say “The nearest thing to capitalism that is allowed to exist, exists under China’s nuclear umbrella”.

              The historic niche of the Jews is that elites disloyal to their own people give Jews a nominally private state monopoly, tax farming, money lending, and such, figuring that if the monopolists get out of hand, it will be easier to kill them off than if they give the monopoly to local servants who have roots in the soil and kin among the people. The Jews then squeeze the locals and give the King a share of the loot, until things go pear shaped, then get the hell out to repeat the operation somewhere else.

              And today’s American administered “capitalism” is operated on that model. It is not actually all that Jewish, but it is operated on that traditionally Jewish model – not so much by biological Jews, though due both to talent and tribalism Jews are massively overrepresented, but memetically on the traditional Jewish quasi statal business model – Jewish business memes, rather than tribal biological genes, or even tribal nepotism, though there is a significant amount of tribal nepotism: It is not so much biologically Jewish, but it is very much state linked rootless cosmopolitanism – jewish style, even when middle eastern muslim NGO employees are implementing it.

          • viking says:

            whites did give niggers the vote to keep other whites down,but no one voted for that one side voted to die before freeing niggers the other voted to send the niggers back to africa.but war has a way of fucking shit up both your thinking leading to war and wars aftermath. no whites thought neiggers were human equals, but even i who has no qualms about literally eliminating the nigger from earth thinks slavery was a good idea or ought to have been allowed or allowed to continue.

            we certainly never gave jews anything, let alone by vote. elites wanted cheap labor and to hold the continent and imported immigrants a lot of who turned out to be commie jews, who capitalist jews already here made alliances with and thus jews took over the levers of power and wealth. It happened in britain too with out a vote. when you are not explicitly white nationalist white traits expressed as law and custom allow this to happen. the traits are our edge and genetic cant be gotten rid of get rid of the niggers and jews instead

          • jim says:

            To say the same thing more conciselyt: Nazis are commies.

            Nazis believe that all whites were created equal. This nazi doctrine is a useful corrective to the prog doctrine that blacks affirmative actioned into the middle class have middle class values and middle class behavior, and that proletarian whites are as dangerous to blacks as blacks are dangerous to whites – but though the nazi doctrine is a valuable corrective, it is nonetheless untrue.

            • Your Wife's Son says:

              >Nazis believe that all whites were created equal.

              You know this is not true.

              There are intra-white hierarchies, but intra-white hierarchies naturally become de-prioritized the more non-white a society becomes.

              You’ve said yourself: we will defend our faggots from ISIS, so that we could throw them off the roofs ourselves.

              Likewise, a German supremacist may think that Ukrainians should be “reduced,” but he would want Germans, not Congolese, to do the reducing.

              Alliance with near against far is often ad hoc, and this is no different.

        • Samuel Skinner says:


          but lets be fair they went from medieval serfs to starving freemen with no rights to capitalist tools in a 100 years. then were used as cannon fodder.despite all that they have mostly thrown of socialism weep for their royals fight for their nations work pretty hard in most nations.

          I don’t think you grasp how popular socialism is. The Japanese Communist Party (established in 1922) got 13% of the vote in the 2012 election. Socialism was popular in the 19th century, it was popular in the 20th century and it is popular in the 21st century. The only reason things look different now is governments in the west no longer make a pretense of bothering with the will of the people and the importation of foreigners has edged whites out of the loot pie.

          • jim says:

            Yes, socialism is extremely popular. And usually results in famine, frequently results in death camps and the red terror.

            That is an argument against democracy, not an argument for socialism.

    • jim says:

      The Total Fertility rate tells me that there is no sharp distinction between evil bad Jewish leftism and virtuous good non Jewish leftism.

      Leftism is alignment with the forces of entropy in the pursuit of political power. Harvard has always been on the side of the bad guys every single time, starting with the flood of exiles fleeing the restoration.

    • jim says:

      To this day jews could in days completely turn leftism around within weeks.

      Leftism is these days dominated by Islam, and Islam is far more hostile to Jews than you are. And I see Jews kissing Muslim ass.

      • viking says:

        sure jim now i know youre a jew, muslims dont own half the wealth and power of the west, what muslim media outlet or university or banker is pulling strings jim?

        total fertility rate? do you know what agrilculture was about jim well if you ever raised pigs and things youde know why it doesnt take farmers long to think more kids would be useful. In cities no so much.
        Now feminisms,environmentalisms,consumerisms, pornographies, wefarism, and immigrationisms,. faggotyism,etc effect on total fertility rate more recently those are jew leftism acting on white tfr

        • Contaminated NEET says:

          Seconded, viking. Islam does not dominate Leftism these days. Muslims rank high in the victim-hierarchy, but that does not mean Islam is calling the shots. It’s somewhere between an indulged pet and a cynically-employed ally of convenience. The Left is smugly certain it can geld the Muslims just as it did the Christians once the White Male Question is solved. Of course, the Muslims are just as certain they will subjugate the Left when the time comes, just as they did throughout the Mideast. One hopes we will prove them both wrong, but only time will tell.

          • viking says:

            yes exactly elites think will ride Islam like they did christianity then shoot the horse and get another. However christianity was literally designed to be cucked islam not so much.
            ((((The left))) fears white men as well they should I do not count them out, but It seems really hubristic of the left to think they can survive in a brown world they intend to create. There’s (((davos left))) and (((low left))) I suppose the hi left thinks they will remain rulers through raw power and low left truly hate themselves or hate us enough to not care what happens to themselves post blacking. they are both stupid fucking juews and white men will eventually rouse themselves and restore order.

  9. Paul Bonneau says:

    “freedom is made possible by law”

    I don’t know… it seems to me that freedom is mostly trampled by law. The only case where freedom is arguably helped by law, is laws against “mala in se”. But (for example) is the outlawing of murder really even needed? Or do people simply need to learn to defend themselves – and those who refuse, are just removed from the gene pool?

    Some people think freedom gives rise to order, some think the reverse. I would say freedom plus wealth gives rise to order, since “Principles have no real force except when one is well-fed.” Probably, freedom, wealth and order all rise simultaneously, reinforcing each other on the way. Or fall simultaneously, when the mutually-supporting props are removed.

    • Samuel Skinner says:

      Imagine you don’t have a law against murder. So people kill each other. Eventually you get people who are strong who offer to protect individuals in return for tribute. Eventually the system becomes formalized and you get laws against murder and taxes.

      • Cavalier says:

        Law is not just one thing, not merely some words carved on erected stele. Law is the entire grinding, gearing, clanking, and groaning apparatus. Law is sane only where it acts as an extension and refinement of the already-existent common morality, because order precedes law, not law, order.

    • Your Wife's Son says:

      >But (for example) is the outlawing of murder really even needed? Or do people simply need to learn to defend themselves – and those who refuse, are just removed from the gene pool?

      A very good point. (“Murder is eugenic” – quoted on Land’s twitter)

      Pedophilia should be legalized precisely because it’d force parents to finally take care of their children meaningfully, will force mothers to stay at home and force fathers to get guns and training, and the pernicious Prussian School System would instantly collapse as parents would be totally afraid of sending their kids to school or even outside. Then, as the question of “who actually harms kids?” is sorted out, and it turns out that there is no tangible pedophile problem — there’s a mud-shitskin-nigger problem, rather — kids will again be able to go outside, with no need for *legal* protection as that’s what *fathers* armed with rifles and pistols are for, and there will be no more muds, shitskins, and niggers running around in society.

      I’m not sure if legalization of murder will decrease dramatically the murder rate, but I’m 100% certain that legalization of all “sex crimes” (yes – all of them) will be followed by a lot more FREEDOM as the natural protectors i.e patriarchs will again be protecting their property i.e wives and children, and the Orwellian state will shrink considerably as a lot of “services” and “agencies” will close down shop. By legalizing rape and pedophilia, genuine patriarchy can be restored. It’s because of instinctive emotions such as those you are feeling right now as you’re reading this very shocking truth that the Western world’s modern predicament has been brought about.

      Legalize rape, legalize pedophilia, legalize slavery including concubinage of children, legalize violence against women and children – or at least define violence against women and children as similar in nature to violence against slaves i.e define both as “property damage,” in short: the West shall be *more extreme* than the Muslims rather than more soft-heartedly cucked, and when the West is more extreme than Muslims, pretty much all other problems will cease to exist.

      Arabs may be dumber than whites, but Arabs have no substantial Jew problem and no substantial nigger problem, because Arabs have their women and children under control, which is the key to everything else. Be more extreme than the Arabs – make Arabs look like problemglasses purplehaired triggered gender studies majors in comparison to the West’s “oppressivenes.” Out-ISIS the ISIS, and consequently, you’ll live in real liberty.

      “B-b-b-b-b-but that’s not the k-k-k-kind of s-s-society I want to l-l-live in” – faggot cuck who is too much of a weakling to defend his own property aka family

    • Your Wife's Son says:

      The state has non-eugenically, rather dysgenically, murdered the family by rushing in to “protect” it; thus, it logically follows, state protection of those family members which are by nature under one’s control, i.e women, children, and the elderly, should cease, so that the family could live again. It may sound paradoxical but actually that’s the most red-pilled of truths. The road to anarcho-capitalist paradise runs through the de-criminalization of something like 90% of crimes, including 100% of the so-called sex crimes. When the gargantuan state no longer even pretends to offer any “protection” to its citizens, they huddle together into small organic high-trust communities defended by militias, which is excellent, and within every such small community there will be very immense personal liberty and security also, and free trade will sort out everything else.

      Naturally, the big bureaucratic state hates my idea, which is why you have niggers, shitskins, and muds running around everywhere, while the state is coming up with law after law and bogeyman after bogeyman which only serve to expand its might.

      “Legalize everything” is not what I literally believe, but figuratively that’s the best slogan ever. Peppermint needs to understand that if he wants to abolish Inter-Galactic UBI, he needs to legalize everything. There can’t be “universal basic income” if the concept of universality is gone and all the most basic lowest common denominators between compatriots are erased as each member of society joins a locally-governed private community for his protection’s sake.

    • Your Wife's Son says:

      The best way to abolish schools is to legalize pedophilia, then make pedosex mandatory as part of school sex ed. Instantly, won’t be any schools.

      • jim says:

        We are most of the way there already – check out the “anti bullying” campaign – and yet the schools continue.

      • peppermint says:

        Homeschooling has been growing since integration. Homeschooled kids are more curious and less doctrinaire than schooled kids, because they haven’t been terrorized. This is not a solution for everyone. If most parents weren’t terrorized, we wouldn’t be living under a reign of terror worse than anywhich has ever existed.

        Schools will cease to exist once people realize that school is a waste of time, and not before then. Before then, school will finally be justified because kids need to be terrorized, just as immigration is now justified because Whites must be punished.

        Mere rape, just as mere beatings by niggers, will change nothing, even if everyone knows that everyone knows that it’s happening.

  10. Cloudswrest says:

    Even if a groups is not the proximate “cause” of some pathology there’s something to be said about positive feedback. If a group’s influence is critical for producing a gain of greater than 1.0 it means the difference between some pathology growing exponentially or damping down.

  11. alt-right academic jew says:

    It would be useful, especially in Europe where anything right is identified with Nazism, to have a branch of alt-right headed by an ultranationalist, Meir Kahane-like (but preferably secular) Jew, a Bibi Netanyahu on steroids. One who loudly asserts that Jewish and white European interests are convergent or identical (e.g. by calling Jews white, European, Judeo-Christian, and Western), and who calls on insane prog Jews to repent and “convert” to political sanity rather than siding with Moslems and globalists. Bibi is starting to do this against Soros, but it is weak medicine and he is too leftist. Kahane advocated reducing the Arab population by expulsion (and increasing Jewish fertility through religiosity), and the neo-Kahane should advocate the analogous secular demographic policies for Europe and the Anglosphere.

    The point being to build something that is a priori immunized from charges of Nazism, and to provide a means for aligning more Jews on both sides of the Atlantic with reality. This is important even if it would be called fascism. Kahane was called a fascist (and assassinated, and his party outlawed in Israel, which of course are possibilities outside Israel as well). His political views were clearly correct in hindsight, and also in foresight for people who did the demographic calculation he kept insisting on. This would be a good time to revisit that line minus the Orthodox religious component.

    • Your Wife's Son says:

      Troll response: Kahane was absolutely right about Israel’s Arab problem, and likewise, Hitler was absolutely right about Germany’s Jewish problem. #nationalismforeveryone

      Serious response: you don’t deserve a serious response, because you are a shill, trying to co-opt the alt-right for the benefit of the white race’s most determined racial adversary. I know what’s going on on Twitter: you guys are constantly trying to ingratiate yourselves with the alt-right, with the express purpose of making the alt-right more friendly towards Jews. If you were serious about your pro-Whiteness (or at least: if you weren’t *typical* self-interested Jews), you wouldn’t be bringing up your own Jewishness constantly – on the contrary, you would be pretending to be non-Jewish, and you would be supporting KMac, who is correct 100%. Instead, you do the “look at me, I’m a based Jew” trick, and then you shit all over KMac, because he made you butthurt by writing books and blogposts documenting your conduct.

      Take your credentials elsewhere, “academic” faggot.

      • alt-right academic jew says:

        Kmac is nowhere near 100 percent right, but I think it would be valuable to make a 20 times shorter extract of the correct stuff from his books and get Jews to read it and take it seriously. (Very few people will read it for any reason at the current length, unless already preoccupied with Jews or HBD.) The over-representation in destructive radical movements is an important fact whether or not it is part of a “group evolutionary strategy”. Neoreaction argues that progressivism doesn’t originate or become powerful due to Jews, but Jews are drawn to it regardless of whether the infection vector in their case is the Talmud or the Gentile universities.

        As for shilling and conspiring to take over the Gentile thingies: I have been arguing for secular Kahanist type of positions (not only for Israel) since long before the alt-right existed, and in the USA I would like Jews to be less involved rather than more in the national politics. It’s not clear to me that they have much effect or are particularly leftist in Europe (see current thread at Steve Sailer’s on the relative conservatism of Euro Jews, probably due to fear of Moslems).

        • peppermint says:

          KMac needs to learn from the evolution since 2010 and stop being tl;dr. His books should be 20 pages plus endnotes and hyperlinks. The idea that anyone who isn’t already sympathetic to an idea will read a book is retarded. The reason I read everything Revilo Oliver wrote isn’t even because I agree with him but because he’s not from the here and now, and I’m cosmopolitan at heart despite being forced by circumstance to be a hardline nationalist. KMac offers me nothing but hundreds of pages of “I am a real academic”.

          There are tens of thousands of books and some of them will teach you why you can’t expect every polynomial to have roots expressed in radicals or why you can’t expect to compute whether a polynomial has any integer roots. I’d rather just re-read The Brigade by Harold Covington over and over.

        • Your Wife's Son says:

          Yes, Judaism is not a group evolutionary strategy, it’s a meme-propagation strategy. Other than that, KMac is spot-on.

          • alt-right academic jew says:

            If it’s just a meme (what isn’t?), Kmac’s tomes lose their point and he his academic expertise, turning him into just another amateur Jew-tracking obsessive.

            His whole thesis is that biologically defined Jewish group interests predict Jewish behavior more accurately than nominal political or religious affiliation. If that’s not the case and there is not the biological evo-psych phenomenon he claims, then it turns out that all these years MacDonald was only compiling a 1000-page polemicized list of Jewish contributions to dysfunctional politics. Which is interesting and useful only insofar as he gets his facts and interpretations right. The correctness rate is nowhere near 100 percent, but as I said, a much shorter extract of the stuff where he’s right could be useful for deprogramming true believers.

            • Your Wife's Son says:

              You misunderstand the issue. Jews are a distinct biological ethnicity, but *Judaism* is a meme-propagation mechanism, which propagation may or may not be confined to biological Jews.

              Halachism is a type of Judaism confined to Jews, although affecting Gentiles insofar as Jews and Gentiles interact. Marxism, Freudianism, etcetera etcetera. are types of Judaisms which technically are not confined to Jews, but which are very highly correlated with Jewishness. All of these worldviews are Jewish-originated memeplexes, hence “Judaisms.”

              If Judaism is a meme-propagation strategy, then everything makes perfect sense: Marxism *is* Judaism for 20th century leftist Jews, just as Halachism was the Judaism of rabbinic Jews.

              I actually have written a long post about it as a reply to you, but as it sometimes happens, decided against publishing it, and assumed that a sentence composed of 20 words would suffice to convey my general idea. If you’re interested, I can explain in great detail why Judaism, as I understand it, cannot possibly be a GES, but rather, must be conceived of as a mechanism of memetic transference. Yes, exactly like many other things.

              If I am to be succinct, for now, there’s no point in explicating why Halachism (a designation I use to refer to “traditional religious Judaism” from the 8th century onward) is a meme-propagation strategy; that much is pretty obvious – obvious from the fact of Halachism’s own survival, which is definitely NOT biology-dependent as intra-Judaic biological diversity proves.

              When you say GES, you say that Jews are using Jewish memes to advance Jewish biology. That’s incorrect. When you say MPS, you identify the memetic *manifestation/s* of Jewry, regardless of the biology behind such memetic manifestation/s.

              The larger point is this: just as Halachism was a resilient meme in the past, and is still a resilient meme, so also modernity has brought about a plethora of other more-or-less resilient Jewish memes. All those things are Jewish strategies, and all those things are mechanisms of memetic propagation. Thus “meme-propagation strategy.” These things stem from biology, but on the meta-level, biology is in fact instrumental to Jewish memes; I’d go as far as saying that Ashkenazi biology, which is what KMac refers to as “Jewry,” has been formed (through unnatural selection) specifically to facilitate the propagation of Jewish memes.

              I’m terribly tired, so everything I say sounds unclear and rambling, and raises more questions than are answered. The bottom line is that KMac is close to 100% correct about the symptoms, but as for the cause of those symptoms is concerned, he’s wrong about Judaism (regardless of version) serving Jewish biology, rather than — as I propose — Judaism utilizing Jewish biology (and, let there be no doubt, stemming from it) for its own purpose of memetic propagation.

              • alt-right academic jew says:

                I (and probably not only I) am interested in the long post. It will be easier to reply to it if you add it directly under Jim’s blogpost so as not to start the replies at 6 layers deep of indentation.

                It will take me some time to think about what you wrote, but in general, explanations based on memes are suspect (especially compared to some sharper definition, such as the quasi-biological notion of Jewishness that aligns several objective classifications such as genetics, religion, language, culture and nationality).

                Memes in this case are an after the fact history applied to the result of an evolutionary process, and working in hindsight gives too much freedom to pick the teleology. That is why when Moldbug treats progressivism as a meme, he attempts to define it intrinsically, independent of the Protestant historical roots, so as to try to capture the mechanism without the teleological fallacy. (There is still the same problem in that he takes the currently most powerful ideology, and defines the mechanism as pursuit of power. But at least he greatly reduces the wiggle room for “fitting an elephant” by trying for a clean definition.)

                There is also a lot more freedom to include or exclude particular movements when using memes instead of biology. By your definition of JudaismS as movements started or operated by Jews, there are many other meme-Judaisms that go in the opposite direction to the destructive commie ones that Kmac theorizes about. Examples include Hasidism or Meir Kahane-ism or Likud (Israeli militarism). Kmac’s stuff is about a more specific claim that Jew-originated memes are especially likely to harm Gentiles, so being founded or run by Jews is not necessarily enough to define a movement as Judaic for his purposes. If the definition is to take any major *deleterious* movement that had a lot of Jews and define it to be a meme-Judaism that is clearly unsatisfactory and it has the same problem of hindsight. (For me, the mere historical fact of high Jewish involvement, without any biological or memetic theorizing, is important enough that Jews should be confronted with it as an argument for converting to sanity).

                Anyway, I will re-read your post and hope to see the long version.

  12. lalit says:

    “They attempted to establish a Muslim state in Burma, the Burmese were not having any, and are now expelling them.”

    Jim, I’m impressed. Not many westerners know this. Their first such serious attempt, was in 1947 or there-abouts where they tried to parley with Mohd. Ali Jinnah, soon to be first Prime minister of Pakistan to break of Rakhine state from Burma and join Pakistan. Needless to say, this was with passive British encouragement.

  13. viking says:

    What are you saying rich whites are more likely to marry foreigners and jews? yeah because they can afford to travel and meet lots of jews in elite circles, humans consort like that half my friends are jews, why, Im a high IQ new yorker all my girlfriends have been high IQ upper class women many with advanced degrees and I have an 8th grade education but Im smart and my family was artsy intellectual upper class ish so i pass except when i try to type.So Im “cosmopolitan”

    But thats nothing like what jews are doing. they network not to socialize they network to deconstruct western civilization, they are like soros, wealthy communists that fund anything and everything that will destroy us an when not doing that they are networking to get each other rich and frankly keep us not rich,now that sounds resentful but its not ive made plenty but i did have to learn to never do business with jews. but usually they dont anyway if somethings a good deal they keep it in house if they are approaching you watch out.It would be an annoyance if they were not o good at it that they’re actually about to wipe us off the face of the earth with their nigger army.
    China actually also has a sort of solution to the capitalism problem as you say they let it run unregulated in the alleys, until they dont. But lets not get too carried away on the chinese they have lousy products you cant trust, they steal their core tech and print money to build ghost cities and at some point they are going to have to figure out what they are going to do about things like healthcare and freedom.Or maybe not just keep running people over with tanks might work

  14. Ppseudo-chrysostom says:

    At the end of the day you need to get where the rubber meets the road; more system level thinking can be an amusing intellectual exercise, but will oft ultimately find itself circling the drain or even being turned back on itself, until you actually stop the train somewhere, meaning the more object level.

    It’s the perennial failure mode of the conditionally solipsistic; the gnostics, the communists, the liberaltarians, the spergmatics, the jews, and other synonyms. It is a phenomena, you might often observe in nominally intellectual communities (or ‘intellectual’ communities), where there is an attitude of, ‘i might not actually know what the true good and beautiful is, but if i can concoct a *right set of rules*, the naive observation of which will lead inevitably too it’.

    Well no, you can’t make the right set of rules unless *you already know what the right is*; what a system can easily do is help others engage up to the level of the genius who created it, but for genius to exceed itself, is a much more considerable proposition.

    Tl;dr kill xenos.

Leave a Reply