The natural limits of monarchy.

Throughout history, the normal and usual form of government has been monarchy. Republics and such have been rare aberrations that have usually ended disastrously. The neoreactionary position is that nothing very much has changed. Our republic is decadent, corrupt, disunited, and lawless. It suffers from anarcho tyranny and lack of asabiyyah. Pretty much like most republics before they collapse to Ceasarism, external enemies, or internal disorder.

The neoreactionary position then is that we will be in monarchy soon enough, one way or another way, and the problem then is to make the transition go relatively smoothly, and the monarchy adequately functional.

Kings are usually theoretically absolute, and if they are not supposedly absolute, if they are not the final judge, the final legislator, if they cannot appoint judges that please them and fire judges that displease them, then problems ensue.

But government that is actually absolute, rather than merely formally absolute, works poorly. Mortals cannot really exercise that much power.

The Patriarch is not the ruler of his family because the King makes him so, rather the King is ruler of the state because the patriarch is ruler of his family.

And similarly, the King owns the state because the farmer owns his garden. The farmer does not own his garden because the King grants him title.

And if the King develops overly grandiose ideas, he find himself dangerously dependent on a dangerously powerful bureaucracy or aristocracy.

Taking power from the father, the businessman, and the landowner, does not grant that power to the King. It grants it to dangerously powerful people dangerously close to the King.

Which is how the Romanovs died.

Therefore, the wise King needs to let society run itself as far as possible, applying state power only in exceptional cases, when there are large scale organized challenges to state, society, legitimacy, property, the status of the King, and law.

We are vastly wiser than our ancestors in matters of technology, and the biggest break through was the limited liability company and double entry accounting. While the limited liability company is a disaster for banking and insurance, because of the obvious moral hazard, which results in banking and insurance companies becoming quasi govermental, becoming defacto socialist, the limited liability company and double entry accounting made possible Rand’s heroic scientist engineer ceo, who mobilizes other people’s capital and organizes other people’s labor to advance technology, and make those improvements in technology widely available. We first see technological advance mediated by limited liability companies, we first see Rand’s hero scientist engineer CEO, immediately after the restoration of Charles the Second.

But today, this social technolgy, fundamental to the triumph of white civilization, is being undone by an ever more lawless and intrusive government, by anarcho tyranny. HR is socialism, a branch of the state intruded into every limited liability company and standing between the entrepeneur and his employees, and Sarbannes Oxley is making accounting into the same kind of thing, a branch of the socialist state intruded into every limited liability company and standing between the entrepeneur and his investors, remaking every business into the kind of quasi state thing that banking and insurance already is.

Technology, and the limited liability company that made technology widely available, are real progress, but when it comes to morals and government, no progress is apparent. After two thousand years of failure, people are still trying socialism, figuring it will be different this time.

Looks to me that the no coveting commandment was a reaction to late Bronze age Egyptian socialism and counter measure against it, and “Proverbs” (the famous wisdom of Solomon) a reaction to and counter measure against legalism and bureaucracy.

So, since then, regress in the fields of morality and governance. Since we are evidently no wiser about socialism, bureaucracy, and absolutism, it is unlikely that the old pattern, where monarchy was the norm, and Republics dangerous and short lived, will change.

123 Responses to “The natural limits of monarchy.”

  1. Iviking says:

    evolution dictates that instinct to survive radiate out from self to children to siblings and cousins to clan to nation/race.This s good because evolution survival can only take place at the individual level though population trends emerge from that. its also good that it also applies excess resources to next closest copies concentrically as a backup. the software hat administers the hardware culture should reflect that, your instinct that this is out of balance and total defection is being allowed is correct but it seems like youre not cognizant that despite its well known problems that survival ust radiate out not in. You are correct comfort leads to this being out of balance complex societies succes give wrong impression comfort is default condition and group cohesion and cooperation not necesary

  2. peppermint says:

    When people get too comfy, they turn towards being concerned about their own ego instead of the 14w, i.e. they become leftoids.

    GenXers like Vox Day are especially vulnerable to this. VD, and most GenX conservatives, think they can demand various ideological and other conditions of the movement to 14w.

    Thus TRS’s refusal to countersignal socialism too hard, TRS wants to lead by example in not demanding conditions, though they do sign off The Daily Shoah with a Pinochet song.

    But this isn’t just a GenX thing. The king of England who could have countermanded Churchill’s insane war decided to TTGH over wanting to marry a commoner. If he could see the level of faggotry the monarchy has reached as a result of his decision, he wouldn’t have done it, but he was too wrapped up in his own ego.

  3. Nationalist Perspective says:

    Jim, please talk about Sean Spicer’s appearance at the Emmy’s, where he posed with celebrities that obviously hated his guts and wanted him dead while he beamed a shiteating smile. Even Darnell fucking your wife while you watch isn’t up to this level of cuckery. It’s truly an astonishing sight to behold. I wrote an analysis about it here:

    https://nationalistperspective.wordpress.com/2017/09/19/stomach-churning-cuck-sean-spicer-poses-w-libs-who-hate-him-emmys/

    The daily mail article is here:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4895158/Sean-Spicer-poses-celebs-Emmy-parties.html

    • jim says:

      Looks like he proceeded to sell out Trump in return for being flattered. Which is not quite the same thing as cucking, which is selling out in return for being kicked in the teeth.

  4. Oliver Cromwell says:

    What are we aiming for? All seems vague.

    We want monarchy but not a monarchy with a monarch, a monarchy with something less than a monarch because advisers rule.

    We dislike the current democracy, partly because democracy averages the opinions of lots of ignorant people, but also partly because democracy provides a mechanism for a hostile aristocracy to rule in the name of ignorant people.

    What we want is propertarianism: ownership of that for which one is responsible. Who wants to own the country? It is OK for it to be a group of people, perhaps even a large group. The problem with the current aristocracy isn’t that it is too broad, or even that it is wrong on various points, bu because it is responsible – it exercises power – without ownership.

    • Samuel Skinner says:

      The problem with a large group of people is that addition owners dilutes ownership. The problem with any group of people is past a certain point there is an incentive to add addition owners in order to have more power.

    • Iviking says:

      Now your are at the NRx rub, there is no real plan, moldbug critiques better than he engineers. He rejects democracy for moral hazard and libertarianism for entry inevitability, then he gives a couple throw away scifi ideas about a patchwork sov corp, and since he was such a fun read we have chased our tails for a decade since while rome burns.

      Despite his description of this “patchcord” being a ceo that answers to a board and shareholders, we went off on monarchy tangents.It’s all based on the idea of owners vs renters take better care, but I buy and sell stock on a dime, ceos come and go, and the list of capitalists making short sighted moves is endless. Besides they already own the joint.
      And it all depends on convincing 200 million armed yankees to bend the knee, (good luck with that) and on enforcement technology decades or centuries off.

      But its worse even the technical idea is archaic. he wants exit he wants decentralization, yet he proposes to give one patchlord a conglomerate of everything in a realm, the communications transportation energy industry media to street sweeping and nanny licensing, thats a one dimensional corporation, today we have owned patches divided infinitely in time and space by specialty, a much better approach than giving one guy ownership of it all.

      And worse still to grease the wheels to this larp he proposes to give these patches to who he claims already actually own them. So basically the same elite leftist billionaires who are the problem as merely rich and influential assholes that meddle in what is not their specialty will own entire cities to do with as they please. We yankees are supposed to be consoled that zuckfag and joogle will be brilliant and benign rulers and if we don’t like our patch we can have our old patch back (if we can find a lefty billionaire who owns one and will grant us an estate and we upend our lives and move). -No thanks.

      The whole things absurd but on they larp into decade two while rome burns

      • jim says:

        Now your are at the NRx rub, there is no real plan, moldbug critiques better than he engineers. He rejects democracy for moral hazard and libertarianism for entry inevitability, then he gives a couple throw away scifi ideas about a patchwork sov corp, and since he was such a fun read we have chased our tails for a decade since while rome burns.

        Rome has been burning for two centuries.

        Democracy and mass movements are not going to work this time around any more than socialism is going to work this time around.

        • Cavalier says:

          Democracy isn’t going to work this time around, but is that because it makes the proles overwhelmingly powerful, because there is no more impact to distribute, or because it leads to the seizure of the state by secret societies?

          • Oliver Cromwell says:

            Trump and Brexit: democracy can create random outcomes, some positive. But once democracy begins to create positive outcomes, it is suppressed. The problem isn’t that democracy lets secret societies take over, but that secret societies took over and then created democracy for short term tactical reasons in much the same way the 1st amendment mythos was invented in the early 1900s and is now being destroyed again.

            • Cavalier says:

              Probably true, considering how much Freemasonry symbolism is baked into Washington, D.C. and American symbolism generally.

              • Your Wife's Son says:

                I’m converting myself to Thelema, LaVeyan Satanism, and Frankist Judaism so that the Illuminati will finally realize what an *asset* I am and recruit me.

              • Your Wife's Son says:

                Btw, your reply shpuld be: “I thought you were an Esoteric Michael Jacksonist… because you pretend to be white and you’re a pedophile.”

                • Cavalier says:

                  You know, the Washington Memorial has always, always bothered me, even when I was a little tyke, ever since I first saw it with my own eyes, long before I had any thought of Aleistercrap or anything else. Think of it: we honor the greatest founder of our country with a tall gray obelisk with a mirror.

                • Your Wife's Son says:

                  Masonic aesthetics are eerie by design – you’re not supposed to feel instant gratification upon exposure to them, rather the opposite.

                  Even without sinister motives, abstracted worldviews — “philosophies” — make for crappy visuals. So it is with modern art: the more focused on “the idea” — the more logic oriented — the less artistically appealing is the product.

                  So, the Masons made a bunch of creepy, jarring symbols, but don’t modern-day progressives do the same? Yes, Jewish talentlessness has something to do with it, but even white progressive artists are generally shit. Or perhaps current proggies are just cladistically Masonic, whence their “creepspiration.”

                  But let’s take the log out of our own eye here – the Pepe/Kek cult isn’t, well, jovial amiable Santa Claus.

                  Also, if you’re prone to conspiratorial pattern-noticing (you are), then whatever you do, do *not* google “Meditation Room United Nations Headquarters.”

                  .
                  .
                  .

                  “But the stone in the middle of the room has more to tell us. We may see it as an altar, empty not because there is no God, not because it is an altar to an unknown god, but because it is dedicated to the God whom man worships under many names and in many forms.”

                • peppermint says:

                  Ironic esotericism may still be esotericism, but Shadilay is a cool song and fashwave is a great A E S T H E T I C

                • Cavalier says:

                  >if you’re prone to conspiratorial pattern-noticing (you are)

                  I disagree.

                  >don’t google Meditation Room United Nations Headquarters.

                  I won’t.

            • Iviking says:

              yes democracy is a way for secret societies to avoid pitchforks,they are planning far in advance and maneuver voters so they can claim whenever they can swing the vote through immigration or propaganda and other tricks that hey you voted to be replaced, lose your jobs,have your wife take your kids.

              and for those not tricked the illusion of democracy makes them think they lost fairly so should suck it up, also even when they see the manipulation by the courts the media the academics the corporations etc they think oh well theres nobody to pitchfork so many are too blame.
              But thats an illusion we could go out tomorrow and round up ten thousand and hang them and this shit would stop.well that and sending the ringers they imported back to niggerland

        • Iviking says:

          its funny no matter how many times you guys concede that yeah its not really white prole votes causing this you always circle back to youre a demotic serf that needs to be crushed. So Ill say it again -ITS THE ELITES STUPID.

          democracy is just one of the cultural mediums they use and it only sometimes work because they import nigger ringers and lie.and when they cant claim democratic cover they file lawsuits or begin propaganda campaigns that go on for decades.They use whatever social medium they can religion myth science race its all the same shit to them democracy isnt the problem they dont respect votes anymore than scripture or scientific facts

      • Oliver Cromwell says:

        What Moldbug says is that our problems are not solvable, but does not say that out loud, probably because he cannot bear to admit it.

        In the 21st century the patchwork will be created by a proliferation of nuclear weapons. This will be partly a result of technological advance making it plain easier to make nuclear weapons, and partly a result of the increasing weakness of the US and friends as enforcers of the system of non-proliferation.

        All the patchwork states will be deeply flawed, but will eventually improve under competition.

        The white race will become the Russian race, as no other white state with nuclear weapons will exist.

        All the North East Asian nationstates will probably survive as patchwork states.

        The US will become an English-speaking Latin American country, and probably politically unify the whole Americas. This will be one of the independent patchwork states.

        Africa will be reenslaved and probably repopulated. Even if you just gave Africans nuclear weapons, they wouldn’t be able to maintain them long enough to fire them, and if they did they would miss their target. Who comes after America won’t fetishise them the same way.

        Europe and the Middle East will become someone’s British Raj. Probably Russia’s, but the UK might become part of Latin America.

        • Iviking says:

          Actually he says the solution is not good for the jews so Im going to design an elaborate trap for just the type of whites most likely to be able to save themselves. At some point an alexander is going to appear and chop that blog in half and simply issue 30million one way tickets divided by the 375 seats on a boeing 767 and suspend the normal 80,000 flights out of the USA for one day and voila problem solved in a day and the jews are still alive in tel aviv and the somalis in somalia and mexicans in mexico

          • Oliver Cromwell says:

            Then you go back to turning into wiggers.

            • Iviking says:

              By chopping the 40% of the population tail whose average IQ is a SD below the wigger, (to say nothing about all the other traits of the non whites which might be worse than their stupidity)is progress not seen in a civilization since the history of humankind.
              Can you not see the power that releases. The trillion a year in welfare is not a tenth of what diversity costs. our best and brightest are almost universally employed as apologists rather than scientists.We are powerless to cultivate our lower classes even to their expected output let alone whats possible with todays knowledge because the money must be spent on niggers and whites must be made worse not better to narrow gap. The lost opportunity of all classes of our people is probably 50% at least.and probably 75% of our GDP since not only do we have the lost white 50% but then spend 50% of what whites do produce is wasted on the nigger races. take something as little as their crime trait. the impacts on business expenditures, insurance, medical costs, dead an injured worker losses,fraud,the fact that nigger races routinely pay no taxes, deduct dependents they dont have dont support are not citizens, immigration fraud crime,real estate and environmental costs from nigger crime, immigration costs from nigger immigration fraud and law breaking, the cost of the hundreds of law enforcement agencies, the prisons, the jails, the courts, the public defenders, the parole, the parole support system, whats worse if we were free to correct our own people the way a normal nation used white crime with today’s tech would be practically non existent, but we cant shame, punish, execute, and force socialize freely because it would have to be done to niggers as well and if whites responded and got better niggers would look worse. Im sure if i tried for even an hour I could double or triple the above with only costs associated with the nigger races criminal behavior.

              Then you can start to think about some of the other costs of divershity, the entire interest on the debt is easily the result of money spent on niggers we didnt have and couldnt make because too busy managing diversity.the cost of staffing all levels of our government with nigger race affirmative action hires,cost tens of thousands of “programs” from nigger farm aid to nigger art aid to head start and obama phones, the cost of welfare and medicare programs, the money sent out of the country by nigger race immigrants,the defaulted loans by nigger races,the higher medical expenses of nigger races, the medical funding inefficiencies largely due to nigger medical fraud,the cost of niggers in the armed forces,the cost of communication transportation etc infrastructure from 40% more people than we need,or the loss of taxes of 40% more productive whites.The entire cost of leftism that would get 40% of its votes without nigger races.All those mixed race babies that ought to be white.the cost of adopting nigger culture to dumb ourselves and raise them,the dumbed down education system, the school meals now up to three all year long, the wastes of time that is nigger sports watching, the lost opportunity for our own to compete in sports because nigger superior athletic ability,The nigger placement in our media,The cost of chaos in the world from having to pretend niggers are human because they live next door so we cant say sand niggers are apes if we need to war with them we exterminate them en masse but we dont need to war with them because we dont even notice them and if we needed the resources over there or anywhere we would no more negotiate with them than we would with the other large fauna in the land they occupy.
              Or we could pretend like NRx because designed by jews that prole whites are really identical to nigger races

              • Oliver Cromwell says:

                I grew up in a country that was effectively 100% white, so I don’t see restoring that as as big progress as you, an American, do. I appreciate the validity of both our perspectives.

    • jim says:

      Pretty sure I want a monarch where the monarch rules.

      When advisers rule, you get instability and the monarch loses power, followed by a left wing holiness spiral

  5. PrinzEugen says:

    North Korea appears to be well on its way towards becoming a solid monarchy as the world’s 4th Sovereign state. Beside the obvious nukes, KJU has been known to execute high-ranking officials that he didn’t like and, at the same time, he is solidifying his own personality cult with some novel elements and even Game(tm) techniques, like preselection:

    https://youtu.be/CH50E-oHdWI?t=95

    Should there be a coup, even if they manage to assassinate KJU, the plotters will be unable to exercise power. The people will remain loyal to their beloved Leader they have known for all of their lives, they will not listen to some faceless apparatchik.

  6. Iviking says:

    Yeah I was a teenage Ayn Rand fan still am nostalgic, and pretty sure most of the NRx neckbeards were teenage antifa, so when I say capitalism is problematic its not coming from a socialist perspective simple decades of trying to sweep the embarrassing problems under the rug.
    The social constructs Jim rightly argues support civilization were disrupted at least as much by capitalism as socialism.at this point let me remind you reactionary larpers that aristocracies you revere saw capitalism as a threat , and for good reason. Now certainly capitalism has some great features its sort of mock evolutionary selection process being the starting point.But lets not forget to some degree socialism is also an evolutionary trait probably older than trade and property instincts. Again I am not promoting socialism, listen carefully. I am reminding us that we are based on HBD and reason, so cant simply discard the inconvenient parts. Now it seems that from proto trade/ property and proto socialism which are genetic and instinctual, we of course develop a supporting cultural umbra and penumbra and probably have by now incorporated those culturalized modification genetically.Its not ridiculous to say the modern bad socialism is a reaction to capitalism, I cant think of any communism that is not inherently dependent on capitalism as its doppelganger.certainly the disruption that capitalism brings creates the fertile soil for communism.Its too soon to say if communism in the toxic sense as opposed to the natural variety is going to last or was a temporary reaction to the beginning of the modern era. It certainly looks like it peaked maybe the 50s. Its worth noting it only got as far as it did because the financial and industrial powers the biggest capitalists and the nations they controlled financed the soviets from the beginning, in fact they were building the soviets arms factories while fighting the soviet arms up through korea and vietnam. It may be that socialism is dead unless the power hungry and bring in enough niggers to revive it, and as we noted above the capitalists and elites are doing that not the proles.One wonders if socialism is not simply a way for the power hungry to exploit the disrupted, did anyone at the top ever believe this shit or were the jews just trying to kill some whites and take over russia.

    The bigger problem it seems is capitalism, because we need capitalism yet it destroys us. Now the jewbug you worship claims all we need to do is allow zuckfag, Joogle, Goldman,etal run the world (by the way the chinese think jews already run the world but chinese are stupid and known anti semites) -and all will be fine, because captitalism is so smart. Since i know you jewpwnd neckbeards wont consider this might be just another jew con,now the commie gambit failed, lets look at it strictly from an economic social perspective. Capitalism is not smart,Like evolution its dumb, yet works brilliantly for certain thing, survival under changing conditions. As Life is to the genetic DNA Profit is to the capitalist DNA. Like genetic DNA capitalist DNA cant do anything in future time only in present time it reacts to the current environment, like GDNA it tries to have options if circumstances change but like GDNA it puts most of its efforts into the short term profit.ITS STUPID. it doesnt care if a nation of niggers in 50 years will have no talent no productivity no wealth to make its products let alone buy them, it will worry about that in 50 years, surviving this quarter is what it needs to focus on.Capitalism has destroyed us, ok well its almost destroyed us. You recover from a communist economic collapse in a couple decades, what capitalism had wrought we may never recover from(in fact some of your gloating about the demise of white culture is as disgusting as the left faggots gloating). We could throw caution to the wind (because that’s what conservatives and reactionaries are about right) and wager that we can find suitable replacement cultures to the ever changing capitalist controlled world.Your dark prince Nick Land ex commie jew lover thinks simply doing away with humans is a no brainer (and this passes for brilliant conservatism Hmm)
    Or we could admit that we are capitalism right or wrong types mostly because well its seems not left. And maybe consider that capitalists are natural conservatives is maybe as true as spics are natural conservatives. Capitalism is a tool as smart as a hammer, neither good not bad but capable of destroying or building things when subordinated to a creator or destroyer.
    Im not so sure joint stock corporations were a bad thing for insurance co, insurance co have grown astronomically since corporation flowered, but publicly monetizing private debt is certainly a point about capitalism’s problems worth getting into. But it raises another issue, which is directly tied to jewbugs thesis culpability and feedback loop, joint stock corporation evade more than the results of their bad economic decisions they evade the moral choices they make as well, forget the big picture above of general cultural destruction. When they simply sell subprime as prime,destroy the environment, rig the LIBOR, no one ever goes to prison. we conservatives say hell yeah corporations are people and should have the right to assert their interests and yet when they commit heinous crimes they were only following orders of the what? Putting capitalists in charge of the world patchlord monarchs in a really stupid idea that only needs looking at the chaos and destruction they already cause and asking honestly isn’t that sort of the system we already have anyway? capitalism needs to be subordinated to culture.I dont pretend to have the best method, i do know its common knowledge kings were never any match for bakers

    • Samuel Skinner says:

      I feel a strong urge to launch the Rectification of Names. Socialism versus Capitalism covering all economic systems is too vague to be useful.

      Lets be explicit what we want. We want prices and we want to market so resources are used efficiency. We don’t want all markets to exist because we want certain resources to not be monetized. We want social relationships to be loose enough that people are ‘free’, but we don’t want them loose to the point they are meaningless.

      Agree, disagree, miss an axes we need to cover?

      • peppermint says:

        What does looseness of social relatonships have to do with freedom?

        Instead of theories, I want to ensure the existence of our people and a future for White children.

        • Samuel Skinner says:

          Quitting work/being fired. We want bad employees to be fired. We want good employees not to worry about being fired so they can plan for the long term.

          “Instead of theories, I want to ensure the existence of our people and a future for White children.”

          Do you mean an economy that innately supports patriarchy or do you mean state capitalism like in East Asia to keep the nation strong?

          • jim says:

            People call what happens in East Asia state capitalism, but in actual practice their Human Resources and Accounting Departments are not as large, intrusive, and disruptive as in the west. In the West HR is an arm of the socialist state, intruded into every nominally private company, and since Sarbannes Oxley the same has been happening with accounting.

          • Cavalier says:

            >Quitting work/being fired. We want bad employees to be fired. We want good employees not to worry about being fired so they can plan for the long term.

            >We want [unprofitable] [draft horses] to be [sent to the glue factory].

            >We want [profitable] [draft horses] not to [whinny] about being [recycled] so they can [continue to quietly serve their masters].

      • Iviking says:

        exactly lets critique capitalism from the right. lets examine our premises. Why do we love capitalism? is it because we admire its gleaming mechanism? because our enemies claim to hate it? or because it serves us? So while its OK to admire its evolution like efficiency and indulge schadenfreude regarding the lefts hatred of it, we should like capitalism when it serves us and not when it is not serving us.
        we tell ourselves lies like capitalism gives us what we want, it doesnt it sells us what it can profit most from, thats not the same thing. If we are honest many of the things leftists say are bad about capitalism are true.
        Now heres the rub. while we dont want admitting that truth to admit an opening to communists that’s a false choice, and not admitting the truth and allowing intolerable conditions to fester might more likely lead to another outbreak of communism.
        another lie, capitalists are natural conservatives. THEY ARE NOT they will adapt to any system they have to and they will in fact undermine unthinkingly the best system for themselves they are short term single minded. today they are unambiguously aligned with leftism.They were historically recognized as wreckers to order and a threat to hierarchy.
        so what other lies do we tell ourselves about capitalism.
        we say that any capital controls are bad and are a slippery slope to communism, we know we don’t really believe this, we usually oppose some controls whether they be cartel price fixing truth in advertizing no slavery drug dealing arms sales monopolies.

        • jim says:

          Capitalism gave us the industrial revolution. Capitalism continues to advance technology. Even state technological initiatives in communist countries, for example nuclear weapons, are utterly dependent on the products of the limited liability company.

          • Cavalier says:

            Was the Industrial Revolution an unadulterated good? On one hand, it lifted the 4-foot-tall, dank, dark, and dirty Bastille-prison-cell Malthusian limit. On the other, it lifted the 4-foot-tall, dank, dark, and dirty Bastille-prison-cell Malthusian limit.

            Why should we not expect capitalism to prodigally burn through the accumulated human capital of untold centuries of brutal feudalism? If you’re running a company and you don’t exploit to the max, your competitor will, and become richer and more influential than you, and buy you out, drive you out of business, or simply render you economically irrelevant in terms of market share.

            It seems entirely plausible to me that capitalism is in essence a bunch of competing power centers engaged in metaphorically slashing and burning their way through a great genetic commons, the greatest the world ever saw. Natural selection, yo.

          • Iviking says:

            Pretty sure i said repeatedly that capitalism does a lot of good when directed to do good, that no ones suggesting socialism in form or degree, that the problem is not getting rid of capitalism, but rather figuring out how to handle it more safely without the unintended consequences that socialist controls create.

            Because when left to its own devices who knows what it will do besides make a buck, maybe porn, maybe liar loans,maybe pushing oxycodone and prozac,maybe sitcoms with toddler trannys with ball gags at breakfast table as punchline,maybe polluting,maybe partnering with leftists in our destruction,maybe ponzi schemes and fraud,maybe spying on us multiple orders of magnitude worse than stassi then selling info to other corps and police state,maybe military industrial states,maybe forcing nations into debt and trade agreements at gun point then shorting the nations currency and starting runs on their banks then buying up their nation at a discount,maybe demographic replacement,maybe offering to employ your wife for half of your salary,maybe bribing governments to fuck over their people, or maybe selling our highest technology to our enemies.

            You know how evolution is a blind watchmaker, well capital is a blind buckmaker, the good it does is accidental, it only intent is to make a buck by any means necessary.It does not make us what we want it sells us what it wants, if we wont buy that it figures out how to make us want it.No one saif 15 years ago hey you know id really like to spend 4 hours a day staring at my telephone to see if that I finally friend i got rid of years ago has uploaded cat pics

            • jim says:

              Capitalism was a hell of a lot less regulated back before 1830 or so (consider what the East India Company, the canal companies, and the railroad companies got away with) and yet the supposed evils of capitalism did not happen.

              What was good for the East India Company was good for England. Back then companies were theoretically branches of the state, given a company charter or some good public purpose, but because the ruling elite was not industriously redistributing wealth from blacks to whites, from men to women, and from rich to poor, this did not result in conflict with private ownership, private control, and the pursuit of private profit. People expected the East India company engaging piracy and brigandage to make Britain great, and it did make Britain great. People saw no big distinction or separation between troops raised by the East India company, paid by the East India Company, and under the command of the East India Company shaking down rajahs for private profit, and government troops raised by the government, paid by the government, and under the command of the government – because the East India Company directors and the Government Generals had gone to the same school, and attended the same clubs – and were not trying to use state power and the state church to demonize and destroy each other.

              The perception that capitalists are doing harm in the ruthless pursuit of profit is left wing rhetoric. Before the rise of the left, we saw a lot of legal power to intervene, but a striking lack of interest in using that legal power. Conflicts between state and capitalism are now more litigious, legalistic, and rule bound, because bitter, hostile, destructive, and angry.

              • Cavalier says:

                So… capitalism:

                * Piracy

                * Brigandage

                * Shaking down wealthy outsiders

                * Private military contractors

                * Owned and operated by the same class of people as the official state

                * Being unconcerned with harming the out-group in the ruthless pursuit of profit

                * The rich get richer

                * The poor get poorer

                What a system. Oh well, at least it isn’t around any longer.

                • jim says:

                  Your statement is accurate except for the last. The rich got richer and the poor got richer. Even the outgroup (mostly dot Indians) benefited immensely.

                  At first the East India company were European mobile insecure bandits replacing native mobile insecure bandits, and would take everything not nailed down, set fire to anything nailed down, and take the nails, but after a while they settled down to stationary banditry – built roads, imposed law and order, provided security of property, and lowered taxes to the long term laffer limit, which is well below the tax levels typical of democracy.

                • Cavalier says:

                  Are coercive monopolies capitalistic?

                • peppermint says:

                  M$ keeps coasting on IBM’s mistake in the 80’s and Blizzard’s Windows exclusives (hilariously, M$ got them to hold Destiny 2 for two months to bolster console sales). Blizzard is meanwhile trying to make their games less fun in response to SJW criticism.

                  CrApple just released the iPhone to make all iPhone users look like retarded assholes because their CEO is a faggot.

                  Goolag has been trying to destroy YouTube and Search for some time. They have also been destroying maps and mail through neglect as the quota of incompetents needs non-core responsibilities.

                  Amazon hasn’t done much to be less useful yet, but we all know it’s coming.

                  It’s hard to imagine now that monopolies could do predatory things instead of corrupt things, but M$ once tried to charge OEMs per CPU shipped instead of per copy of Windows installed.

              • pdimov says:

                “Back then companies were theoretically branches of the state…”

                So capital was subordinated to the state.

                “People call what happens in East Asia state capitalism, …”

                Because capital is subordinated to the state.

                There is a word for that, by the way, and the word is fascism. It’s not used though because fascism is Bad and East Asia isn’t Bad so it obviously can’t be fascist.

                “… but because the ruling elite was not industriously redistributing wealth from blacks to whites, from men to women, and from rich to poor, this did not result in conflict with private ownership…”

                “… but in actual practice their Human Resources and Accounting Departments are not as large, intrusive, and disruptive as in the west.”

                The alternative explanation is that state control in the West can’t be overt and transparent (this would be fascist/socialist and we can’t have that), so it’s covert and unaccountable.

                • jim says:

                  I just don’t see this overt and transparent state control of capital in East Asia.

                  Could you give me a concrete example, as in “In 2008 The Chinese People’s Committee for Enobling the Masses ordered Huawei to produce ten million smartphones for the oppressed masses in its directive H7 56454 BC35”

                  Descriptions of how the East Asian states run state capitalism tend to resemble a description of an invisible intangible twenty ton pink elephant.

                  By and large, it seems that the East Asian states control east asian capitalism through mind control rays.

                  When the King of Dubai has stuff built on land that he owns, and then rents it or sells it, yes, that is in a sense state capitalism, but he does not seem to meddle in the business activities of the people he rents it to or sells it to.

                  Huawei sells the equipment to cell phone operators to support LTE, and sells smartphones that use LTE, and devices to connect LTE networks to wifi and laptops, and one might suppose that LTE is a state capitalist partnership, but in practice, LTE seems to be rolling out most smoothly where bureaucrats meddle in cell phone networks the least – and that does not seem to be Europe and America. What tends to happen is that if the cell phone operator buys the latest equipment, he find himself with the option to provide LTE data to some or all subscribes, so he just flips the switch, and if something bad happens, calls the Huawei rep. What seems to be happening is that people who build cell phone network equipment try to build consensus with people who build cell phones, which is a whole lot easier if you make both the network and the cell phone, which is how Huawei got into building cell phones, so that it could get a seat at both tables, and have its right hand sock puppet talking to its left hand sock puppet.

                • Cavalier says:

                  >Could you give me a concrete example, as in “In 2008 The Chinese People’s Committee for Enobling the Masses ordered Huawei to produce ten million smartphones for the oppressed masses in its directive H7 56454 BC35”

                  Yeah. Political appointees airlifted from the Party into the the nominal top spot or near-top spot of the company or college or miscellaneous organization. They’re not domain experts, some of them, and in some cases they don’t have any formal qualifications for their supposed position whatsoever, but they don’t need to, because they’re really just there to keep an eye on things, and act as a relay for central command if needed. It has nothing to do with “oppressed masses” or other similar bullshit because frankly the slant-eyes just don’t give a shit; they really are more sensible than we are.

                • jim says:

                  This sounds like bribery, “decent from heaven”, not the state running the business – highly paid high status jobs where the princeling from the party is not expected to show up very often. Maybe once a week for cocktails and a round of golf.

                  If airlifted in to the actual top spot, with actual authority and actual responsibility, this would be the state running the business, as for example, Jon Corzine and Long Term Capital Management. Name a nominally private sector business with a party princeling airlifted to CEO, the way that State Department employees and people from Harvard get airlifted into top jobs in other people’s governments.

                  Name a Chinese Jon Corzine, a Chinese Long Term Capital Management.

                • Cavalier says:

                  I know of these second-hand. The purpose is not the provision of high-status jobs to loyalists, but the insertion of Party apparatus into every hall of power. They set expectations and monitor for disloyalty. I’m not sure about the lackadaisical princeling thing, but that doesn’t strike me as how the Chinese Communist Party conducts its affairs. I don’t know. Ask Spandrell.

                • jim says:

                  Well I know of Jon Corzine, because in the news. Where is the Chinese princeling in the news?

                  Everyone says these countries openly and overtly practice state capitalism, but I just don’t see it. East Asian state capitalism is like an invisible intangible weightless pink elephant.

                  Show me this elephant.

                • Cavalier says:

                  The Party acts like it has absolute control over which companies (over some certain threshold of size) succeed and which fail. If the companies further the will of the Party, they are allowed to continue to succeed on their own merits. If they thwart of the Party, they are told to reform or suffer the consequences. The will of the Party, clearly, is to eclipse the American World Order. I have submitted second-hand knowledge of Party bureaucrats installed in most (all?) significant institutions, with at least one case in which that bureaucrat occupies the top nominal position despite his lacking of formal credential in the field, and Chinese piety being what it is, hilarious formality backflips ensue.

                  Besides that, I don’t know what to tell you. Ask an expert, or something.

                • jim says:

                  Everyone claims this is true, but I just don’t see it. As I said, an invisible intangible weightless pink elephant.

                  I see corruption, and the daily routine, minute and tyrannical intervention into the day to day activities of western companies by the American government. America is a communist country. Just not seeing anything similar in East Asia. Maybe in the Philippines, yes, but China, Singapore, Korea, and such? I just don’t see it.

                  You say there is overt intervention. If it is overt, there should be something people can point at. There does not seem to be much that people can point at.

                • jim says:

                  > The Party acts like it has absolute control over which companies (over some certain threshold of size) succeed and which fail.

                  Perhaps. Give a concrete example of such an action.

                • pdimov says:

                  This is the first time I see someone claim that the CCP does not rule over Chinese capital. But I can give no specific examples.

                  “… for the oppressed masses…”

                  There are no oppressed masses under Communism.

                • jim says:

                  > This is the first time I see someone claim that the CCP does not rule over Chinese capital. But I can give no specific examples.

                  No one seems able to give specific examples. Obviously there is lots of government intervention, but it is not obvious to me it is unusual, or even very substantial, by American standards

                  > There are no oppressed masses under Communism.

                  Comrade, you are wrong, and may have to undergo thought reform. There will be no oppressed masses under true communism but in order to achieve the glorious ideal we will have eradicate all the wreckers and kulacks that are oppressing the masses.

                  Similarly as ever more micro microaggressions need to be rooted out. The final victory over racism and sexism requires that we deal with all those evil nanoaggressors.

                • pdimov says:

                  “Comrade, you are wrong, and may have to undergo thought reform. There will be no oppressed masses under true communism but…”

                  I’m afraid you’re who is wrong, comrade. The Party has clearly stated that we live under Communism, and so it is.

                • pdimov says:

                  “Starting in 2001, every private-sector firm with at least three C.C.P. members among its employees was required to have a party unit. Much like the party cells in the Red Army decades earlier, party units in companies were expected to “firmly implement the Party’s line, principles and policies,” as the Constitution of the C.C.P. stipulates.”

                  “Official figures for 2015 show that nearly 52 percent of all nonstate firms had party cells in-house. Such cells are now also common in foreign companies, and even foreign NGOs, at least among bigger, more established ones.”

                  https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/12/opinion/china-the-party-corporate-complex.html?mcubz=0

                • jim says:

                  So what is an example of these party units doing something that makes Chinese capitalism “State Capitalist”.

                • pdimov says:

                  “No one seems able to give specific examples.”

                  The examples you want to see just don’t make sense to me.

                  Why would the CCP order Huawei to produce smartphones for the oppressed masses? The point of Obamaphones is to bribe people to vote Democrat. China doesn’t need to bribe people to vote CCP.

                  Why would a party princeling be airlifted into the position of a CEO in a private company? There are more than enough CEO positions for party princelings in the state-owned companies.

                  If you don’t maintain the pretense of democracy and private property == power, you simply have no need for any of that.

                • jim says:

                  OK then. So in what way is Chinese, Korean, and Japanese Capitalism “state capitalism”? Give some concrete event that is an example of China being substantially less capitalist than the USA.

                • pdimov says:

                  China is “state capitalism” because the state officially and nominally rules over capital. Not because it exerts more control over capital in practice than in the US.

                  The Federal Reserve is nominally private. PBS is nominally private. Jon Corzine was nominally the CEO of a private enterprise.

                  It’s about rectification of names, not substance. China is state capitalist because it admits it. America does not.

                • Alrenous says:

                  http://www.businessinsider.com/china-ghost-cities-satellite-images-2017-3

                  2017, not old.* As mentioned in the article, some of them have filled in. By coincidence, it was a good or at least reasonable idea to build a city there. Most, not so much.

                  China does fudge its econometrics substantially more than USG.

                  Ironically, I still get the overall impression it is less communist than USG. Big mac index et cetera – Chinese wages are in fact going up, while USG real wages have been dropping since the 1970s.

                  *(I also found photography from 2015 which is naturally not useful.)

                • peppermint says:

                  » China does fudge its econometrics substantially more than USG.

                  how is that possible?

                  There are 320M mouths to feed in the US. 60M are White men between 17 and 64, 20M are White boys under 17.

                  Official unemployment is 5%. Actual unemployment is 12M out of 60M White men between 17 and 64. Official inflation is tiny. Actual inflation in actual costs of healthcare and housing are vastly higher.

                  There are like 42M Blacks, which is almost 1:1 with working White men. There are like 30M illegal aliens.

                  If Trump doesn’t turn this situation around, the federal government is unlikely to survive very long.

                • Alrenous says:

                  It’s possible when you build entire cities nobody wants and chalk it up to ‘production.’

                • Anony-maus says:

                  CCP is nowhere as unified as some posters here seem to believe.

                  Extrapolate from Russian corruption, if you wish. The idea is that it has fingers in everything, but the loyalties are complex – there’s a lot of loyalty to Xi to purges, but there’s probably more loyalty to local provinces at times than to central committee. Some party overseers are more loyal to the company than the government.

                  The attitude is essentially leaning toward a kleptocracy, but it doesn’t become Russia due to a higher caliber of civil servant and ruthless anti-corruption measures.

                  The idea that the government can neatly control the corporations in a fantasy. The documentary Datong is a pretty good first-hand example of how a government official of some power was being completely blown off by one of the state run construction companies(to add insult, the foreman picked his nose while the mayor was talking to him). In the end, all the mighty CCP representative could do was to fire the company and look for another company.

                  Some powerful state influence, eh? Incidentally, the documentary is suppressed inside of China, partly because they don’t really want their own people to realize how toothless the CCP can be at times.

                • Oliver Cromwell says:

                  American official media is stunned and incredulous at the level of property rights in China: http://www.cnn.com/2015/05/19/asia/gallery/china-nail-houses/index.html

                  This is unthinkable in America, because you could not develop without being politically connected, and you could not be politically connected without the ability to compulsorily seize the houses. Apparently in China, at least one of those does not hold.

                • pdimov says:

                  I saw that on the same topic the other day: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-41303312

                • Oliver Cromwell says:

                  The house being demolished after the owner agreed to an acceptable price, a price much higher than the one originally offered. Is it just an observation, or meant to be rebuttal?

                • jim says:

                  Sounds like China is a hell of a lot less state capitalist than Europe or the US.

                  America is a communist country. If you want to practice capitalism, need to be under China’s nuclear umbrella.

                • pdimov says:

                  Not sure how anyone could possibly consider this a rebuttal. It took them 14 years to get rid of a house on a road. 14 years.

                • pdimov says:

                  “Sounds like China is a hell of a lot less state capitalist than Europe or the US.”

                  This may well be so, but houses-on-roads don’t necessarily signal it.

                  I know next to nothing about China, but my guess is that the house in which one lives enjoys much stronger legal protection than other forms of private property.

                  Houses-on-roads are good rhetoric to cite to “Red China!!~1” neocucks, but no more than that.

                • jim says:

                  Houses on roads are compelling evidence, and a businessman picking his nose is even more compelling evidence.

                  But the strongest evidence is that whenever I challenge people for concrete examples of Chinese capitalism being state capitalism, they come up empty. They just tell me that everyone knows it is so.

                • pdimov says:

                  Well the fact that (nominally) 30% of the economy is state-owned has to count for something.

                • Oliver Cromwell says:

                  “I know next to nothing about China, but my guess is that the house in which one lives enjoys much stronger legal protection than other forms of private property.”

                  In cathedral countries, do businessmen have stronger property rights than homeowners, or are property rights just weaker for everyone?

                  Of course, we only need look at all the large corporations that openly oppose cathedral ideas…

              • Iviking says:

                Because something had a generally good effect does not mean it was anywhere near the ideally or rather the theoretically possible good that could have emerged if done differently. slavery was a short term profitable economic good n the long run it sucked.But thats not to say allowing every liberal idea to be piled on to a business is a good idea either. we seem to do too little of the short term bandaid capitalist control and not enough of the long term strategic controls.

                • jim says:

                  Slavery was a humane and appropriate way of dealing with people disinclined to work for a living, for dealing with the undeserving poor. The replacements for slavery have been disastrous.

              • Iviking says:

                and now they see no problem with you broke the towel heads you own the towel heads. but is it the descendent of the east india shareholders that built the Downton Abeys that are living with the towel heads or is it the scullery maids descendents.what destroyed the British empire that she had to bend the knee to her former colony, did that have anything to do with the east india companies tactics? Dont have a dog in this just saying empire at first glance seems to be problematic down the road

                • jim says:

                  You cannot blame today’s race replacement policies on those that conquered India.

                  What is happening now is a result of demonizing the East India Company, which was demonized not for the bad things it did, but for the good.

  7. Alrenous says:

    While the limited liability company is a disaster for banking and insurance, because of the obvious moral hazard

    No. The (honest) bank merely prices the moral hazard into the interest rates, exactly the way a life insurance company prices smoking into the premium rate.

    The limited liability company, dismayed that the bank will not lend them unlimited amounts, lobbies the government to guarantee the bank’s loans. If the government is John Cowperthwaite, they say no, and tack on, “Ha! Good joke!” There was only one John Cowperthwaite, so they said yes.

    • Iviking says:

      Id say yes and in the long run, (which never interests capitalist be they banks or stock corps) bankruptcy is good it forces dead money and sunk cost and frees talent. Socializing that debt is another discussion involving how big is in our interests.

      • Cavalier says:

        If the MacLeod lifecycle is correct, then in good bankruptcy, the kind that cleanses the useless old cruft of an old, overweight, sclerotic, tottering, detritus-ridden behemoth, the organization is bereft of talent… which is why it collapsed in the first place.

        • Iviking says:

          some times its brimming with talent just not experienced in business they may be young they learn and try again do we really want them in the debtors prisons. Look outsiders invest in a business to make a profit they assume some risk for some reward. They invest in various levels of risk and reward which courts try to recognize in dissolution.Fraud by distorting the facts is a crime. nothing works perfectly of course. and frankly I think a lot more executives ought to go to prison but hopefully infotech will tighten the loops

  8. Iviking says:

    On the other hand the high points in human history have a couple of things in common white people’s republics. Greece Rome, post magna carta Britain, The Dutch, the italian city states, America, and the anglosphere. Further if you look at the prehistory of most euros,its is proto democratic. Thats not to deny theres problems with democracy but to point out it correlates with success and with white people.
    But theres even more problems with the jewbugs thesis you neckbeards lap up.
    1)Its false to think monarchy ever solved the problem of bureaucracy,Ministers be ministers, But its really stupid to think one man in todays multi order of magnitude more complex world could sensibly rule.
    1A) kings were never absolute, attempts to make them absolute like appeal to (divine) authority) always backfire and remind people of higher authorities,and empower priesthoods. Sans religion kings had to compete with culture and tradition, common law,ancient rights, etc
    1B) a kings authority always ultimately rests on his ability, there’s a laffer curb of application of ability to out maneuver through real and implied violence rather than application of ability towards effective governance in the interests of competing powers be they fellow aristocrats mercantilists or the the people generally. Counter this curve is another curve of the competing powers of how badly said monarch is administering their interests vs how difficult to remove him.You can kill most of the people some of the time you cant kill all of the people, tyrants dont last long.
    1C) The people are sovereign,And the more aristocratic a nation becomes the more sovereign the people because they grow more numerous in relation.Now its true pre information industrial age they were less apt to exercise this authority they always did sometimes. More importantly its not a coincidence that democracy has increased with information and technology, it empowers the people as individuals and as a group.No doubt this has problems, but pretending you can simply turn them into chattel again is stupid.
    2) monarchy was phased out for very good reasons;
    2A) A good king is hard to find,unfortunately you can even choose him he chooses you.
    2B) a bad king is hard to fire (I know this is a feature not a bug- until its not)
    2C) a good king is hard to find, one that has a good prince happens once a millenia
    2D)Kings act in their own interest not the nations except incidentally or rather accidentally if at all (again a feature not a bug – until it isn’t, and BTW the same problem jewbugs thesis concerning letting the jew techlord capitalists rule us as monarchs)
    2E)aristocracy is a waste of human capital, its genetic rent seeking.expedient perhaps pre capitalist industrialism absurd at this point.
    2F)aristocracy is anti national, aristocrats particularly monarch level aristocrats preserve and cultivate their own interests internationally, and this cause problem for the nation like war, empire, foreign entanglements,etc.Lower level aristocrats tend to status signal against their fellow co nationals which is not cohesive.The more urbane city aristocrat signal against the country aristocrats and so on.
    Democracy was an attempt to use a market system to source natural aristocrats, cull bad choices easily,spread monarch selection authority among aristocrats and natural aristocrats, avoid the need for war to decide elections which lead to ruin and foreign invasion.
    3) Democracy isn’t really the problem. Oh its got problems that correlate but the majority of the problems sane people who object to the synagogue cathedral cause, are really problems caused by today’s aristocrats. JewBug cant have it both ways.He claims the cathedral is a open conspiracy of peti aristocrats that have developed a mind control machine that subverts the will of people.That media, art, academia, and the intellectuals employed by the NGOs, civil service,International quasi governmental bureaucracy,legal communityetc produce propaganda that can control elections, public policy,opinion, as they see fit. If mold er jewbug is correct, which he is, then blaming the people for falling for this is hardly fair. But its worse,because they dont really fall for it only some do.In the empire the vast majority of whites routinely vote against these elite scheemes, they throw the bums out regularly and vote in candidates ever more forcefully to really really exert the peoples will this time,They become frustrated with politicians and maneuver the right to write their own laws through propositions,ballot initiatives etc. They form organizations to use the aristocrats own tactics and file lawsuits and freedom of information requests, they too try PACs and media In short they have fought tooth and nail against the peti aristocrats for common sense government in their own interest and that of their nations, but The aristocrats prevail. Over the course of this the people learned a lot about the tactics and the extent of the lies. and the aristocrats have resorted to demographic replacement, we are on the brink of civil war in the west.
    If you want to build a case its the will of the people not the petit aristocracy that is expressed in the shithole that the cathedral has engineered besides destroying jewbugs cathedral thesis in the process you have to play fast and loose with who is a people and who is a petit aristocracy.
    One of the ways this is complicated is the unholy truce turned alliance between the socialist and capitalists over the past 30 years or so.The game NRx tries to play is to pretend Soros type socialism is the will of the people clamoring for muh free shit.when in fact and he is a god example there has developed a common interest between those who seek social control and those who seek economic control and profit.we live in a time when the billionaires and bolsheviks are the same people.communism was a lost cause in the high IQ productive west and eventually even the east of the eurosphere, but the tactics the commies were using to deconstruct and destabilize the west were working well by the collapse of the USSR it became apparent a change of tactics was needed from class redistributionism to race gender faggot redistributinsism. Thisd was so successful eventually they were running out of niggers and began importing them as well as developing the correlative model to nigger slaves in europe of colonialist oppressor so they too could get niggers imported. while this was happening capital was commoditizing the counterculture, really getting the third world extraction going,developing outsourcing offshoring and asia was rising. It was a perfect storm of mutual interest. the billionair socialist merge against the interest of the people of western nations.And History was on their side in the sense reasonable people were questioning things like why are niggers so useless can we fix that, why is my wife hooked on valium in the suburbs and suicidal, why does my life seem so materialistic and shallow.Should we be eating this plastic food and polluting our nature Now dont start, I in no way am supporting the conclusions many came to, just pointing out we were at an inflection point historically where new information was catching up with the last cycles innovations and we were genuinely in need of a reassessment- and boy did (((they))) take advantage of that

    • Garr says:

      Two vague thoughts —
      (1) Maybe the artistic/theoretical achievements of Ancient Greece, Renaissance Italy, and Victorian England are a byproduct of social collapse — an effusion of waste-energy?
      (2) Belloc seems to see the English Civil War as a case of King+People against the Rich. So maybe an American King (he wouldn’t have to be called “king”) would be good for the yeomen of Idaho?
      (Thanks for your response to my expression of concern in the last thread.)

      • Samuel Skinner says:

        They are three different things.

        Greece produced large amounts of natural philosophy. The best comparison is Waring States China which had a similar output. The most likely explanation is a combination of
        -smart people
        -contact with large numbers of neighbors
        -established previous history to draw examples from
        -unsettled social order
        -language future generations are invested in

        Created what we see.

        Renaissance Italy is famous for its artwork and architecture. Unlike the Middle Ages with stained glass and Cathedrals.

        The Victorian era is the triumph of science and industrialization. Explaining it is beyond my capability, but its roots certainly reach back centuries; the Victorian era is when the pace increased, not the start of the changes.

        • Iviking says:

          Greece systemized thought.
          Rome systemized power.
          Northern europeans intervened by systemizing piracy then systematized religion to legitimize booty
          Early renaissance Italy particularly, but also low countries, britain and others systemized money;double entry, stock corporations and other finacial instruments for investment, paper fiat, fractional reserve banking.
          American and British industrial revolution put it all together

        • jim says:

          Science appeared in the restoration, died shortly after world war II. Science is evidence being high status, and arguments that persuade by finding and presenting evidence being high status, and a variety of fallacies, such as argument from authority being low status. Which is the opposite of stuff like dietary science and climate science, where scientists cheerfully refuse to make available the evidence on which “the scientific consensus” is supposedly based.

          Hard to say exactly when industrialization and technology started, but the key social institution of industrialization, the hero scientist engineer chief executive officer of a limited liability company, mobilizing other people’s labor and other people’s capital to create value by making a new technology useful and widely available, appeared in the restoration

          Science and Industrialization first appeared in the thirteenth century, but then went quiet for some centuries with Roger Bacon being imprisoned for science, and the Knights templar tortured and robbed for being buisnessmen. Got moving again after the restoration. Science immediately after the restoration, industrialization … it is hard to pin down the date exactly. But Silicon Valley type institutions advancing industrialization appear quite suddenly after the restoration.

          • Iviking says:

            even greece and rome had some pretty good science and if not collapsed we might have had Iphone 1000 years sooner, greeks had steam technology that opened temple doors and other novelties, they had water wheel factories of a dozen or more wheels in succession down a hillside.yes dark age wasnt as dark as we were told.

            • Cavalier says:

              Yeah, and why didn’t they put the steam engine to work? I’m pretty sure Molyjew once said that it was because the plutocracy had tons of slaves to do everything, and engineering was a decidedly low-status occupation. I don’t know, maybe that was just his inner lolbergtardian talking, but it stuck with me.

              • Samuel Skinner says:

                It could be there wasn’t any way they could use it. The steam engine in England was originally used to pump water out of mines. The Romans used

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_overshot_water-wheel

                Now, steam engines are better, but for them you need coal. I don’t think the Romans had underground coal mines. Without that there isn’t an intermediary step and no reason to spend on steam engines; after all there is a labor cost either way.

              • Iviking says:

                I am no Gibbon but my casual observation is Rome was pretty proud of its engineering.a lot of scitech is luck, but I wouls think without remembering the details dates etc that they had just not gotten around to it yet, our internet was pretty useless for a while.I think machining was fairly well advanced metallurgy maybe was a problem.

      • Iviking says:

        I have always thought that its cyclic, a nation is founded and forged under great stress if it succeeds its must have been strong in many ways.The success of course breeds a space for advancement,not everyone needs to be a badass anymore, a little faggotry advances a culture, even badasses take notice and power shifts to the technical the intellectual the artistic the mercantile. a civilization reaches its apex when the martial ethic has not yet been lost, and by martial its not simply badassery, its the male ethos of loyalty duty perseverance conservation honor tradition and yes valor and all the rest to numerous to mention are still held in high esteem, yet not to an oppressive degree.Whites are good at this balance we can be quite badass and quite faggy simultaneously.But if course eventually too many generations of privilege and safety decay the youth and faggatry becomes the norm and the civilization collapses. Now some civilization find ways to continually renew the male instinct. Empire is one. through wars of expansion the male ethos is continually regenerated however the increased wealth of empire also exerts greater and greater counterforce, so empires usually succumb well so far they all have. Other methods have been religious revival, civil war,Im sure theres more. So to answer your question I would say yes in a sense achievement is forged in the same fire that destroys the question is can you learn to master the fire or be consumed by it and for how long.
        Sure one game kings play is against their aristocratic rivals hi low against middle so to speak.Of course the economies were less well distributed then so its seems that game takes on a more moral? hue.But I think kings who think they have no chance with the low also play high middle against low. call me an idealist perfectionist but i think all these combinations are are less efficient than all for one and one for all. certainly not in a socialism sense but in a nation is a people that needs its head its arms its feet its body to survive. One good thing about monarchy is it mimics what is (or ought to be) to some extent weakly true genetically a nation is a family and families have fathers, however as tolstoy noted about families the prescription for happiness is narrow and all fathers are not created equal so kings can be problematic as well.
        regarding last comment jewboy 🙂 you do know as serious as I take the threat from jews, its not personal in fact its with great reluctance, and at least regarding the western jews of which we speak they are genetically closer relations to most europeans than say greeks are to icelandics, certainly we needn’t argue culturally we share huge overlaps. Its simply jews can not seem to make that anselmian leap of faith, Its a bit more though for me pesonally, unlike most westerners today I was raised to revere my own european culture both specifically and generally (which allowed me an appreciation of other cultures since i was raised to value culture rather than sneer) however I also value a certain ethnic militancy, (and understand it correlatives ) which means while I certainly get why jews may not want to assimilate to the extents needed and possibly arbitrarily insisted on i don’t give a shit. Which is to say Its simply intolerable my nation should be ruled by non europeans no matter how smart well mannered or even if they rule in my interests, its intolerable to be ruled. Jews have enough DNA of europeans to be as white as an italian if they can plausibly be shown to have forgotten they are still slightly other fine if not as jews they can only be guests. That may be taken as an insult but its was meant as the opposite.The thing is its not your fucking country its white peoples so as long as you’re recognizable to yourselves and so to us as outsiders and you’re dominant your an occupation.Ans as I keep saying but everyone ignore this part the precedent of this jew rule acceptance is worse than the jew rule, because the east asian rule that’s being established under jew rule rules is going to make the lads at stormfront beg for zog to return. Now all that said how to deal with the mess jews made crating leftism is another matter. I think strategically the fastest best way is to force jews into an about face squeeze them between the woke saxon and the nigger hordes that have never been asleep about jew privilege and are just now gaining enough power to do what whites can which is name the jew. I think idf jews were smart they would become white nationalists and reverse multiculturalism, I think without multiculturalism leftism dies on the vine.

        • peppermint says:

          It is well known that multiculturalism is workers of the world unite designed to overcome the failure of White populations to vote for communism, it is furthermore well known that Boomers, Xers, and many Millennials explicitly support or tolerate multiculturalism because they want communism.

          Indeed, the TDS and TRS plan of blaming Jews alone for multiculturalism while tolerating or promoting socialism is clearly a way to groom those socialists to pro-White activism and eventually to abandonment of socialism.

          • Cavalier says:

            Yeah, but are Russians white?

            • Your Wife's Son says:

              Worked with a Ukrainian who looks just like you (dunno what you look like, but according to my imagination).

            • Iviking says:

              you have to draw a line somewhere and its always going to be to a degree arbitrary. Youve probably all heard my diatribes why Hajinal snobbery is stupid so I want repeat.it all But Rome Greece Byzantium and the Anglosphere all fall outside the Hajinal line many of the “hajinal Greats ” were genetically not Hajis, today its only the Non Hajis who seem even have a gene for survival left.So IQ isnt everything.And its not written in stone as the jews prove. While Im for as granular ethnic autonomy as possible where possible (go Cats) places like the US must settle for for Identity over no identity, and all of us should recognize the rst of humanity is out for our lunch because that how nature intended, and co operate like we do because thats our edge. That said Im not about crossing the bisphorous anytime soon, my bjiggest problem with russia is not rusa but their geopolitical reality has forced them into empire or die for mllenia so russia has a lot of native american equivalents ratio. however they have better injuns and handle them better instead of killing all the reindeer they let the injuns manage them.I think its better to think of our less successful co ethnics as potential northern euros if cultivated with nobilese oblige no not socialism fraternite.cedeing vast swaths of the globe to nigger races is equally as stupid as giving the US coast to the commi jews. Its war and territorial matters and you hold it with people

            • Alrenous says:

              White don’t real.

              Russian aren’t inside the Hajnal line.

            • peppermint says:

              The fact that Russians have the blue eyes and blond hair and large boobies implies that they evolved under extreme selective pressure for females for beauty, implying White marriage, implying male selection for competence. Yes, Russians are White.

              • peppermint says:

                In fact, from the racetheistic perspective, the Slavs and Russia are arguably the holiest subrace and nation of the White race. Though communist, they only betrayed Whites in funding Angolan rebels through Cuba during the Cold War, they resisted the Jews more than any other and overthrew Jewish coups twice, and their only loss to muds was a small war with the Japanese.

    • Samuel Skinner says:

      “On the other hand the high points in human history have a couple of things in common white people’s republics. Greece Rome, post magna carta Britain, The Dutch, the italian city states, America, and the anglosphere.”

      Those are bad examples. Greece was a bunch of city states that fluctuated between different political organizations (ditto with Italian city states), Rome was non-autocratic for the first part of its history but Sulla and Ceaser killed the Republic. England wasn’t ‘republican’ until the 18th or 19th century.

      Also a bit provincial. Ignores the high points for Spain, German, Austria and France which were all autocratic.

      “More importantly its not a coincidence that democracy has increased with information and technology, it empowers the people as individuals and as a group.”

      That is a bit like claiming the same thing about the Reformation and Protestantism. The result of declaring people could interpret the bible wasn’t people becoming more free and empowered but the opposite.

      “He claims the cathedral is a open conspiracy of peti aristocrats that have developed a mind control machine that subverts the will of people.”

      No, that isn’t the claim of reaction. The fundamental claim is there is no mind control machine. People worship power. And you demonstrate you have power by causing people to suffer. By destroying things that others consider important. By gradually eroding civilization.

      “In the empire the vast majority of whites routinely vote against these elite scheemes, they throw the bums out regularly and vote in candidates ever more forcefully to really really exert the peoples will this time,”

      I’m almost positive there wasn’t a mass movement to re-institute segregation. The amount whites are willing to fight against the elite is exceptionally limited. They don’t try to overturn the rules of the game, merely complain they aren’t being treated fairly.

      “The game NRx tries to play is to pretend Soros type socialism is the will of the people clamoring for muh free shit.”

      The United States has black people (who do desire Soros type socialism). In Western Europe they didn’t have a black underclass and so you had social democracy.

      Of course the United States ‘only’ has social security. Which is paid for by a tax on employment. Combined with Medicaid I’m not sure what the difference is between this and ‘socialism’.

      “we live in a time when the billionaires and bolsheviks are the same people.”

      Lenin was a noblemen. They were always the same people.

      • Iviking says:

        “Greece was a bunch of city states”- for that matter america is a bunch of city states, the top five empire n the history of humankind a bit provincial?

        “That is a bit like claiming the same thing about the Reformation and Protestantism.”- I would argue hell yeah like the reformation perfect example, information technology you cite wrests power from papacy (you know the guys that crown kings) the people now have seized have the co power structure in effect they now crown kings, in a few years they in fact do crown kings.

        “No, that isn’t the claim of reaction.”- If anything Characterizes NRx its the terms “Cathedral” and its antidote “red pill” by which is meant the propaganda conspiracy and its antidote HBD informed reason.Sure there’s a followup thesis of how this happened (muh right to vote) and what to do about it (nothing), the democracy critique and patchcord scifi fantasy. But the point I made and you so coyly diverted from is that if the propaganda is the problem then democracy is not. In fact jewbugs only realy concrete solution that not dependent on AI controlled crypto locked sewers is the Antiversity to essentially de propagandize elites. Notice he doesn’t want to depropagandize (redpill) the proles. That’s because he knows the elites believe their own propaganda and the proles never bought it and are powerless despite their votes.Its worth noting all NRx success is essentially that you former jews and lefty’s getting red pilled while continuing to express your eeewwww its a redneck prole esthete status signalling.

        “They don’t try to overturn the rules of the game, merely complain they aren’t being treated fairly.” – Charlottesville, Little rock, Fort sumter, the entire history of civil right s you can google is an endless list of whites opposing it at every turn everywhere in the world. The fact they have so far continued to lose doesn’t mean they haven’t fought valiantly. And lets not forget as i said historically it made sense for reasonable to people to want to try to fix the nigger problem more humanely than slavery apartheid jim crow even today in order to get lefties to keep trying they have to suppress truth science statistics and create an endless supply of fake money to hid the costs.

        “The United States has black people (who do desire Soros type socialism). In Western Europe they didn’t have a black underclass and so you had social democracy.” – well this is making the problem its own cause, so elites give blacks vote but now blacks vote for free shit ts not elites proxies voting it “the people” NIGGERS AINT PEOPLE NOT JEW NIGGERS NOT BROWN NIGGERS SAND NIGGERS ETC. white americans don’t vote communist not even during the depression could the union organizers admit communism. Europe I would say had less options for those disrupted from feudalism than the frontier anglo spheres. While social security is supposed to be a dully funded insurance policy as is medicare I have no problem accepting new bugs AIACC, whats important is who made it that way, elites and jews not a communist revolution – oh wait that was jews too.But i also pointed out -maybe it was the other comment, that socialism is an evolved trait of humans, and while socialism as a power play by jews is a bad thing the human trait has a purpose and at ant rate is a fact to be dealt with.Im as capitalist as you can get and I love love love insurance. I dont want to save for a cuckservative medical savings account I want a set price per month to have gold plated medical insurance i want to have the same for all catastrophes that might threaten my hard won privileged position, life accident, unemployment, retirement, you name it Ill buy it and I notice most people agree, UNLESS some elite offers them free shit at which point they do exactly what this capitalist son of a bitch would do I take that free shit cause shits free. The answer to jew socialism is to satisfy genetic socialism with capitalist insurance. That said theres a discussion to be had that always breaks down over knee jerk politics over whether it might be best to recognize people like insurance and hate to see suffering and to thwart letting that devolve into jew socialism maybe bite the bullet and enforce minimum insurance participation. I hate Ocare as much as the next but the point was some were freed riding the system, while it was true they made a calculated decision to nor need insurance its also true when you hipster faggot millennial without a pot to piss in cause you spent it all on perpetual childhood crash your beamer you’re going to show up at the hospital an gt that leg fixed, you can force people to save for retirement through SOC SEC or you will have the crybabies demanding the elderly be fed and housed.I am personally into radical libertarianism but Im willing to admit few can hack it, soc security and medicare are going to be maybe only 20% of my retirement but i’m willing to be involved to be sure when those who will solely depend on it cant claim the rest of y retirement haul. and what if I had invested with bernie sanders at least i dont eat cat food.

        “we live in a time when the billionaires and bolsheviks are the same people.”

        Lenin was a noblemen. They were always the same people.- so stop blaming the proles. proles want to work and raise families, you drag them off the land and put them on a treadmill then replace them with nggers because capitalists and communists want it all. I hope they fucking chop all your heads off one day

        • Cavalier says:

          You make a lot of good points.

          • Cavalier says:

            Except for the Jew thing, a mischaracterization unless you specifically specify a caveat such as my generalized “rootless cosmopolitan” redefinition of “Jew”.

            • Iviking says:

              how about united states jews excepting the few dozen reactionary and and paleo jews

              • Cavalier says:

                Sure, but there are a lot of “white jews”, people who are more stereotypically jewy than actual jews.

                Consider me: my homeland, to the extent that it ever existed, is swallowed up by the mists of time. I have no particular attachment to any one location. I have a reasonably high IQ and I earn my bread by labor-eroding symbolic manipulation. I can live in Berlin today, Brussels tomorrow, Paris the day after that, and then again in Prague or Vienna or London and feel at home everywhere.

                Do I qualify as a United States Jew?

                • Your Wife's Son says:

                  Do wiggers qualify as black, in your view?

                • Iviking says:

                  A lot of questions and assumptions Ill try to unpack.
                  I certainly have no problem beheading , or if you prefer helicoptering the likes of white criminals like the clintons and subversives like al gore or tom brokaw. Im not even opposed in the worst case scenario where jews do not convert and are deported to giving good jews like say Auster and say Yarvin (if it turns out Yarvin is not an elder of zion)

                  I think in my replay to Garr about causes of decay I make clear the cosmopolitanism of a nation in the right proportion is a good thing, its when its allowed to subvert the masculine the martial the national the specific ethno cultural and then the racial cultural that its becomes morbid.Its really tough to maintain that balance and the constant renewals by the methods i described seem to be what works but thus far haphazardly applied until failure.
                  erode labor but also find new labor or a new model for our people. Until you have found a way whites can hold on to the parts of the earth we hold while living n standard and systems that preclude inner and outer threats in perpetuity then labor destruction is simply giving enemies am opening if it does not come commensurate solutions to the disruption.we are still in the disruptions begun from the enlightenment industrial revolution. The low tech solution is white bodies holding white lands in some semblance of bourgeoisie approximation to older standards. Im doubtful no matter what labor saving we come up with genetically can we stray too far from this model until we can safely re design our instincts.I think Trump accidentally hit on the solution which is not to outsource everything and to regain the monopoly on the cutting edge tech but also development and manufacturing of that tech.if we make the ai robots for the world we will have jobs. schemes like guaranteed income will be despotic and dystopic.

                  I suppose youre saying youre one of those mutt whites who has no particular micro ethnicity, interesting you chose a fairly ethnic avatar. I think as I said first of all we have to accept that some nations like the usa are going to have to settle for “white” but if we are explicit and encourage all micro euro races to be as specific as possible we will again make granular race cool again so people like you will on one level be prroud to be a yankee an ameican but will start to mention that youre 1/4 whatever you are that appeals and many of us will possible end up marrying ourselves back because it will again become important and not shameful to want a thede.This already happens with most whites who are healthy many of us are fibbing when we say we are say irish, I come for instance from a loong long line of “irish men” who consistently marry germans anglos and vikings, I thought it was just my mother and paternal grandmother but have since found its been going on for a couple centuries we maintain this militant Irishness and since most of these other races are celtic or proto celtic we still have that irish look. Frankly I find this anglo snobbery to be absurd theyre celtic mutts who claim is being conquered by barbarians but there goes my Irish side and I hold a british as well as US passport lol.

                • Cavalier says:

                  >cosmopolitanism in the right proportion is a good thing, etc. etc.

                  Reasonable.
                  >Until you have found a way whites can hold on to the parts of the earth

                  I don’t know, man, I just see a great white civil war… which is why:

                  >preclude inner and outer threats

                  Doesn’t make any sense. The whole ethnonationalist in-group thing is pointless unless or until all “whites” are governed by one coherent power structure, necessarily including the power to, on some well-established basis, authoritatively regulate the “citizenship” of the clearly demarcated “white” in-group.

                  >then labor destruction is simply giving enemies an opening if it does not come commensurate solutions to the disruption

                  Then you have to deal with technology, outsourcing, and the slow dying of New Deal collective bargaining, the last of which you yourself owe your standard of living to.

                  >The low tech solution is white bodies holding white lands in some semblance of bourgeoisie approximation to older standards.

                  Sure, if the goal is maximize white biological expansion. I like it, but is it the goal? What are these white bodies holding lands in opposition to? One Almighty Gov, remember? Hopefully, what is good for the shepherd is good for the sheep, but there are no guarantees, especially with Information Age tech, especially especially with non-human intelligence.

                  >I think Trump accidentally hit on the solution which is not to outsource everything and to regain the monopoly on the cutting edge tech but also development and manufacturing of that tech.

                  “accidentally”

                  >if we make the ai robots for the world we will have jobs.

                  Man, AI is a job for, like, the top 1,000 AI scientists, and no on else.

                  And then, pretty soon, factories will be making themselves.

                  >schemes like guaranteed income will be despotic and dystopic.

                  Probably so. But the alternative may well be unimaginably worse.

                  >I suppose youre saying youre one of those mutt whites who has no particular micro ethnicity

                  Nope.

                  >interesting you chose a fairly ethnic pseudonym.

                  It’s a big fat hint.

                  >so people like you will on one level be prroud to be a yankee an ameican but will start to mention that youre 1/4 whatever you are that appeals

                  I’m one-eighth German minor nobleman. Do I get super cool street cred whatever appeal, or is that not ethnic enough? (unrelated to the pseudonym btw)

                  >I come for instance from a loong long line of “irish men” who consistently marry germans anglos and vikings, I thought it was just my mother and paternal grandmother but have since found its been going on for a couple centuries we maintain this militant Irishness and since most of these other races are celtic or proto celtic we still have that irish look.

                  Oh, wow, I’m sorry, I thought you were purebred Scandi; I didn’t realize you were a half-breed potatonigger. :^)

                  >Frankly I find this anglo snobbery to be absurd theyre celtic mutts who claim is being conquered by barbarians but there goes my Irish side and I hold a british as well as US passport lol.

                  Were the Cavaliers Anglos at all? Srs question.

                  William the Conqueror, from whom all English property titles theoretically descend, was a Norman invader from across the narrow sea. House Plataganet was from France. The Stuarts were from Scotland, originally France. House Windsor, before it was renamed in the early twentieth century, was named Saxe-Coburg… originating in Germany. Was Prince Rupert of the Rhine, nephew of King Charles the First and first cousin of King Charles the Second, merely an astonishing historical anomaly, or was he really the archetypal Cavalier?

                • peppermint says:

                  》New Deal collective bargaining, the last of which you yourself owe your standard of living to

                  fake and gay

        • Samuel Skinner says:

          “for that matter america is a bunch of city states, the top five empire n the history of humankind a bit provincial?”

          I mean exactly what I said- Greece was a bunch of independent cities that fought among themselves.

          Greece was never an empire (the Macedonians who conquered them were), nor were the Italian city states. The Dutch were an empire but not one of the top five in human history. You are ignoring Spanish, Chinese, Russian, Mongol, French and German (depending on the criteria you use).

          “But the point I made and you so coyly diverted from is that if the propaganda is the problem then democracy is not.”

          Saying propaganda isn’t the issue is not a diversion. It is disagreeing. I’m not sure what your objection to power that is unstable leads to status competitions which involve screwing over the population.

          “and what to do about it (nothing), ”

          The people in power are evil and block and attempts to change things does not have a solution. If it did people in the past would have attempted it. The fact civilizations rise and fall suggests there is little that can be done. Unless you have an idea of how some new technology has changed the rules of the game that still holds true.

          “Charlottesville, Little rock, Fort sumter, the entire history of civil right s you can google is an endless list of whites opposing it at every turn everywhere in the world.”

          They didn’t turn out to vote for George Wallace. They give a shit if they are called racist and sexist.

          “And lets not forget as i said historically it made sense for reasonable to people to want to try to fix the nigger problem more humanely than slavery apartheid jim crow even today in order to get lefties to keep trying they have to suppress truth science statistics and create an endless supply of fake money to hid the costs.”

          Assuming the left was sane and reasonable during the time periods you can’t examine but crazy and unreasonable during the time you can observe is wrong.

          “well this is making the problem its own cause, so elites give blacks vote but now blacks vote for free shit ts not elites proxies voting it ”

          Americans got social security before the 1965 civil rights act. Medicaid was established in 1965; it is doubtful any significant number of black votes were involved.

          “white americans don’t vote communist not even during the depression could the union organizers admit communism.”

          Eugene V Debs got 6% of the vote in 1912 (high water mark). The communists did worse in the United States because the USSR was so over the top- executing 12 year olds doesn’t play well with the public.

          ” you can force people to save for retirement through SOC SEC or you will have the crybabies demanding the elderly be fed and housed.”

          Or you establish imprisonment for debt. People respond to incentives.

          “so stop blaming the proles.”

          The leadership of the Bolsheviks was disproportionately upper class. They had plenty of proletarians as card carrying members.


          By 1905, 62% of the members were industrial workers (3% of the population in 1897[16]).[17] 22% of Bolsheviks were gentry (1.7% of the total population),

      • jim says:

        There was a mass movement to re-institute segregation, and desegregation was never popular even with black people. It was just crushed at bayonet point.

        • lalit says:

          Can you please link to any citations showing that de-segregation was not popular even with black people?

          • peppermint says:

            Unfortunately, all you’re likely to find are push polls asking Blacks if they believe they are equal in dignity to Whites.

            There was Black resistance to integration, but, if course, it wasn’t organized. The Black support for integration was astroturfed by Jewish and White commies who I know some of the children of.

            Though the Blacks who knew it would happen are largely irrelevant, it is clear is that Blacks do poorly in White schools and the Black community is made poorer by Whites taking the most talented fraction to show off for affirmative action.

            Black resistance to migrant invasion of Black areas and spics taking Black jobs is also unorganized. Blacks are on some level aware that it’s happening and no one cares. Meanwhile BLM is organized by those same commies and I don’t think it escapes the notice of Blacks that BLM is mostly led by White catladies and churchladies and Talcum X. Consequently many Blacks (I know some of these) don’t actually care about BLM and just want to work for a living. In fact, the gangster culture of rap music had a libertarian bent before it was coopted by the music industry, and identifying as a gangster and talking about having been arrested for having done things (the way this one Black guy I know did to his Black female paramour is a way for Blacks to express their masculinity and also reject the BLM astroturf narrative.

          • jim says:

            If you google up a song about desgregation, it sung by white people for white people. The desegregation movement was swipple white, and blacks just did not show up. The busing movement not only relied on white schools being forced against their will to accept black students, it relied on black students being forced against their will to go to white schools.

            Students did not want to be bused to desegregation, blacks no more than whites. Without coercion, blacks failed to bus.

            Desegregation was in practice busing, the weakest and most vulnerable black people forced into white spaces, and the weakest and most vulnerable white people forced into black spaces. Initially the swipple whites organizing busing expected huge numbers of black people to spontaneously choose to go to these wonderfully better white schools, and they just failed to show up without coercion.

            Polls are irrelevant. Behavior matters. Blacks passively resisted, and participated unenthusiastically and as little as possible.

            To this day traditionally black universities give blacks a better education, which is to say, a black with a degree in computer science from a traditionally black university was actually taught computer science, rather than how to hate whitey and blame him for everything. The former training is actually useful for the black man, the latter training more useful for the white people training him.

            • peppermint says:

              The Black kids bused in to my suburban elementary school in the early 90s were there because their parents competed with other parents to avoid the urban school they would otherwise go to.

              Whether or the teachers or parents on the PTA or school board liked them – I don’t know what they thought – the administrators certainly never missed an opportunity for virtue signaling.

              That’s what’s needed for it to happen. Incentives to urban Black moms to send their kids out, given by virtue signaling school administrators, and no one can say no because it’s racist and illegal to.

          • Iviking says:

            sure go to any nigger neighborhood and start asking around if there’s any houses for sale and report back, then we will cite you.

    • Sig Sawyer says:

      Aristocracy is indeed anti-nationalism. Peasant culture is aristocrat culture filtered down until low-IQs can utilize it. Letting ‘the people’ decide the destiny and character of a nation is an absurd farce on the level of letting a woman run a family.

      Nationalism was used as a weapon against aristocracy and Europe has still not culturally recovered. It would be infinitely preferable to our current Communist hellhole, but its still the first step in a degeneration towards communism.

      • Iviking says:

        Every time i point out glaring inconsistencies in fucking moldbug and NRx its reduced to I want redneck rule.NO ONE WANTS REDNECK RULE ( well actually for entertainment value I am looking forward to kid rocks campaign)

        I just want to point out rednecks are not the problem that needs solving. Elites are the problem, WHICH IS NOT THE SAME FUCKING THING AS SAYING COGNITIVE ELITES SHOULD NOT PLAY A LARGE PART IN RULING, it means they don’t fucking rule they loot, they fight each other for power,, they dream up utopian schemes like patches and communism,they acquire wealth by any means possible,and they develop methods of remaining elite way past their expiration date.

        turning it over to capitalists is redundant and stupid, kings is going back to old problems,blaming democracy is a distraction and if your only way to replace democracy is king arthur or AI youre a larper.Now go solve the problem

    • peppermint says:

      Greece was decadent and when Greek decadence reached Rome, Rome became decadent as well. Rome’s collapse was when citizenship was expanded by Marius and the generals became powerful, followed by patricians importing foreign labor to replace Romans.

      The fact that Greeks wrote down a bunch of things first doesn’t make them wise.

      The Roman republic was founded with the accusation that a king had violated a noblewoman, who killed herself afterwards. I wonder if the noblewoman didn’t violate the king and was murdered by her husband in response.

      It was about status and sex.

      The English monarchy was great. Parliament sucked. Caesar amd Constantine were needed to salvage what could be salvaged after the Republic. Athens lost wars and Philip and Alexander preserved the glory of Athens. The US was given a continent and managed to force Europe to import niggers and give barbaric “sex change” operations to its own children.

      This is not open for further theoretical debate.

  9. guest says:

    >HR is socialism

    This whole “Human Resources” dynamic is reminiscent of the good old times in eastern block countries, where companies were mandated to have “political commissars”, a political position parallel to the director, staffed by the communist party. Their job was to uphold the socialist spirit, enforce ideological conformity and to make sure nobody in the workforce stepped out of line. Things which “Chief Diversity Officers” or “Inclusion Directors” now seem to be doing in the US. And instead of quota hires, there were workers who were in the party, good luck complaining about them slacking off, or outright stealing, to your politkomisar!

  10. Antlitz Grollheim says:

    We must go through a cleansing fire. Gird your loins.

Leave a Reply