Thermodynamics of Social Entropy

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

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

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

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

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

The four commandments that facilitate cooperation are:
Exodus 20:

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

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

And the final commandment:

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

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

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

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

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

As for example:
Lucas film hates its customers

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

As example Russia dealing with Pussy Riot:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

57 Responses to “Thermodynamics of Social Entropy”

  1. […] Thermodynamics of Social Entropy […]

  2. eternal anglo says:

    “We shall restore the enforceable apprenticeship system…”
    “We shall” – I like this new tone. But Jim never deviates from his trademark stone cold sincerity. How much of this is bravado, and how much… something else?

    Also, I don’t get “millets”. What does grain have to do with it? Am I missing something obvious?

    • Mike in Boston says:

      “millet” was the term used in the Ottoman Empire for precisely what Jim describes.

    • peppermint says:

      Currently parents or the government pay, the children choose, the employers get what they get. Obvious result is vastly excessive price for negative value product, probably the worst market in the world.

      The employer should pay, choose, and consume.

      People already make contracts with employers stipulating that they won’t just up and leave. It’ll be like an internship.

  3. Bc45 says:

    You don’t kill an uppity slave. You whip him till he cries in front of his friends.

    • jim says:

      It is not official while he is lying to both sides.

      The Musk solar city tesla project only makes sense if Democrats in charge. Until that goes down the tubes – as it is likely to do with Trump in charge – he will continue sucking up to the left, while keeping the lines open to the right.

      The Democrats want everyone to 100% cut off any interaction with anyone insufficiently left, including one’s parents and children, and are outraged that Musk has line to both sides.

    • Frontier says:

      When you get big enough it’s not unusual to pay off both sides, so no matter who gets in power they owe you favors. Or as Musk is currently trying to spin it on twitter “Just enough to keep the lines [of communication] up.”

      So not official. But the amount seems more than nominal and the specificity of the PAC in defending republican House members in contested elections would suggest that Musk is drifting away from the far left.

      • Mister Red says:

        30k is chump change, frankly.

        Which feeds into a larger point: the really depressing thing about all this is that the price to buy Congress is so low.

  4. Joe says:

    Jim, the second to last line of your post is missing “than”:

    If someone wants to demonstrate superior holiness, it should be costly for himself, rather **THAN** profitable for himself, and costly for everyone around him.

  5. Glenfilthie says:

    Ah, Jim. Jim Jim Jim.

    LOL.

    “The bible works in the trailer park, so it was written for the trailer park! And the whole world is a trailer park!”

    Yes, your women probably DO need to be hit to make them behave and probably all your men too. The reason you got banned at Dalrock’s was probably because you insist that his women need to be hit too.

    Honestly – you guys are like the republicans in the last election, trapped in your own bubble of BS. They offered candidates like Jeb and other cucks without the slightest idea that the electorate was ready for a man like Trump.

    You watched the childish skanks of Pussy Riot kicked and slapped into submission and totally miss the well behaved women that Are Not Like That. You view history clinically, like a dead cadaver, viewed with 20/20 hindsight because you don’t want to touch it. You bend it and revise it to support your theories the way holy rolling charlatans twist the bible. Don’t be surprised if it is you that ends up getting burnt at the stake.

    Sorry boys, it’s been fun but the reactionary movement has definitely jumped the shark. The Dissident Right movement is definitely more promising… at least for now.

    • Mister Red says:

      Many believe that some men are beyond redemption.

      I disagree. Anyone can be rehabilitated, provided a good heart and an open mind.

      https://ibb.co/diw9KJ
      https://ibb.co/fOeUKJ

      Read and understand.

      • jim says:

        These two articles are totally true, and I enthusiastically endorse them.

        But they are deliberately written so as to be capable of being misinterpreted as a purple pill account of female nature.

        They de-emphasize important factors, terrifyingly important factors, which I tend to harp on a great deal: Hypergamy, the resulting often brutal shit tests, and the necessity for passing those shit tests.

        The article is written from the perspective of the alpha male, from the perspective of someone who successfully gets his women to see him as the alpha male, and the behaviors it endorses are alpha male behaviors, which you need to adhere to keep your woman seeing you as the alpha male.

        But, the trouble is, the great majority of women want a small minority of males. All women are like that. Hypergamy never sleeps, a man must always perform, can never relax, is always on stage, can never let his guard down. If General Butt Naked showed up wearing an AK 47, a necklace of human eyeballs, and absolutely else, I would be $#!% out of luck.

        I tend to emphasize the bad characteristics of women, that women are hypergamous and attracted to assholes. This is a necessary corrective to the women are wonderful narrative. This is the Dark Enlightenment. I am going to report on the dark side of women.

        The true, valuable, and useful information in the links you provide emphasizes true facts about the nature of women that do not directly confront the women are wonderful narrative, but are a valuable, indeed essential, addition to the rather one sided account that I give. He is reporting the light, I am reporting the darkness. Light pink pill versus blood red pill.

        The author piously tells us don’t be an asshole, even though women will richly reward you being an asshole.

        Well, yes, I am not really an asshole. But I have to play at being one, and you have to play at being one.

        The author fails to mention that you will be shit tested, often brutally, and you have to pass your shit tests. Shit tests are hard to pass, and are subconsciously intended to be hard to pass. There is no easy magic trick for passing shit tests. Anyone who says it is easy is lying, because women intend it to be hard. They want to separate the men from the boys, and the top men from the ordinary men.

        • lalit says:

          “He is reporting the light, I am reporting the darkness”

          Light –> Vishnu, also the element of preservation
          Darkness –> Shiva, also the element of Destruction

          • jim says:

            We must destroy the system that enables badly behaved women to seemingly prosper, and which makes them high status, while creating a space that enables well behaved women comfort and safety.

        • Nikolai says:

          “The true, valuable, and useful information in the links you provide emphasizes true facts about the nature of women that do not directly confront the women are wonderful narrative, but are a valuable, indeed essential, addition to the rather one sided account that I give.”

          Could not agree more, I’ve been having some problems with the gf for a couple months and those posts were a real eye-opener. She behaves much like the post describes, taking random off-handed comments I make and treating them like Gospel while simultaneously disregarding me when I make clear-cut statements or commands, no matter how much I emphasize them. She seems not to really acknowledge what I say unless I say it off-handedly or subtly and I have no idea how to effectively communicate my wishes in that manner.

          I’ve been trying to change her since we started going out because I saw her as a diamond in the rough. A woman with great potential who needed to make some adjustments. Her hair was 5 different unnatural colors when we first met, I got her down to black hair before our first date. And over the months I’ve gotten her to make various other changes of a similar nature. They’re all clearly improvements, but she resents me for improving her. She, rightfully, claims I’m changing her, but I can’t have her go back and I also can’t have her keep feeling like I’m trying to change her because I don’t love her. Definitely have not been showing her enough appreciation either, which is only exacerbating the problem.

          I wish you wrote about this side of women more often Jim. It’s easy to attract women by acting like an asshole, it’s very hard to keep them for more than a few months. Lot’s of subtleties I’ve failed to notice until reading those posts and the whole acting like a threatening and offensive jester routine isn’t exactly conducive to paying attention to small details. Still not 100% sure how to fix the relationship, and it might not even be salvageable at this point but I definitely gained some new perspective.

          • jim says:

            > but she resents me for improving her.

            No she does not. She might think she does, but it is a shit test. Are you man enough to get your way? (And do you value her enough to make her into the women you want?) Are you preselected enough that you are prepared to risk losing her by demanding what you want. (And if you are that preselected, will you invest enough time and energy to show willingness to stick around?)

            • Theshadowedknight says:

              Jim speaks truth. Women live in a world of fear and uncertainty, a strong man comforts them. They check how strong a man, to make sure that they need not fear. Are you strong enough to make her feel safe? Then she will crawl on hands and knees to serve you.

          • peppermint says:

            Try making her watch seasons 1-6 of The Simpsons, King of the Hill, I Love Lucy, and especially the 1970s Little House on the Prairie.

          • Mister Red says:

            You have not been having any problems with your GF, she has been having problems with you.

            Disregard for value judgements (aquariums), requests, and commands are very different things. Disregard for a command is a blatant shit test. Don’t issue a command you suspect won’t be obeyed. If you do issue a command that isn’t obeyed, turn it playful but get it done.

            She should not be making any changes she truly doesn’t want to make. Emphasize this. If she prefers neon hair and pants more than unbesmirched hair and skirts, she should leave. Communicate this subtly at first, gradually escalating until you say it in as many words. Supposing you reach that point, you will speak it as an ultimatum, because it is.

            But just reading text on a screen may not be very helpful. This stuff operates at a much deeper level. I recommend watching as many Cesar Millan videos as necessary. That may be hundreds of hours of footage. It’s great stuff. It’s worth it.

            And, unironically, get a dog. White German Shepherds are pretty great.

        • TBeholder says:

          > But, the trouble is, the great majority of women want a small minority of males. All women are like that. Hypergamy never sleeps, a man must always perform, can never relax, is always on stage, can never let his guard down.
          > I tend to emphasize the bad characteristics of women, that women are hypergamous and attracted to assholes. This is a necessary corrective to the women are wonderful narrative.
          Not wrong.
          More samples from the same late post-Protestant madhouse will show exactly the same trends, sure. That’s enough for fishing in said madhouse.
          But how much of this comes from instincts working correctly, how much from instincts working incorrectly? And how much is plain Hollywood indoctrination (teh princess is a tomboy, except not really, and deserves some prince on a white horse who will bow to her, and will eat the cake and keep it too, and all that rot)?
          That’s what important for any larger-scope conclusions.
          My guess is that “attracted to assholes” is mainly Hollywood crap, more straightforward than usual because, well, they are mostly assholes themselves. =] But the grain of truth buried under it is that assholes have more opportunities to demonstrate “selected for” qualities (whether entirely “for real” or not). Like confidence and aggression.

    • Roberto says:

      Glen, you leave me no choice. I must now go “full Snoop Dogg.”

      Jim’s teaching you how to furnish the best aesthetic
      And you respond by petulantly calling him a “hick.”

      Get triggered when Jim says “my girlfriend with a stick I beat!”
      Well that explains why Trayvone’s dick doth smell like your wife’s shit.

      Now memorize all those sick rhymes that on your chest I’m carvin’
      With such a flight of tongue I may as well be Curtis Yarvin.

      Viking is your boomer-pal whose soul I slay with zingers
      Both of you are High and Low versus my Middle finger.

      He tried to shut down Jim by loudly calling him a “pedo”
      When he gets home he’s all alone with cats and Rachel Maddow.

      A brain so dead just can’t be read, punctuation’s anathema,
      Such walls of text — should I troll him next? — I got here a dilemma

      No remorse and it gets worse, you got your ass gang-blasted
      Though a fag like you in-all-likelihood enjoyed it while it lasted.

      Your daughter’s a fat dyke, forests grow within her armpits
      Check her for throat cancer ‘cuz she munched on all those carpets.

      When Roberto’s here you should feel fear, I make you look uncouth
      And your daughter’s pussy still gets licked by another woman’s mouth.

      Told us you’d disowned her, expecting to receive applause
      But we know you cry and deep-inside you die after hitting the sauce.

      A boomer-cuck is telling us “you gotta hit the bricks!”
      Has not been looking for a job for-at-least 2,000 weeks.

      Now go ahead tell me I’m wrong or say I am misguided
      But I’ll keep-on the pressure strong until you’re deaf and blinded.

      And next time when you go to Church say “hi” to all the ladies
      Because I heard their legs get spread like margarine in Hades.

      Don’t bide your time, you know that it’s your one last chance to shine
      You failed as a dad and will soon be dead, don’t tell us “it’s all fine.”

      Now I’ll be gone and you’ll be left as clueless as you were found
      An old dog can’t be taught new tricks, can barely make a sound.

      But one last thing I’ll tell the readers as I’m done dissing thee
      Do all you can and then again to not become “Glenfilthie.”

    • jim says:

      1: Personal observation is that high income high SES career girls behave one hell of a lot worse than the girls from poor white rural areas. Successful lawyerettes from a high status university are worse than truck stop strippers, and in the unlikely event that they have children, their daughters take after their mothers at a disturbingly young age.

      2: This data from my personal observation is supported by statistical data on divorce and marriage rates for high SES career women.

      3: Murray’s data showing the white upper class is better behaved than the white lower class conspicuously fails to break his data down into white male upper class and white female upper class. The high divorce rate and low marriage rate of lower class white males reflects inability to compete with Uncle Sam the Big Pimp – that child support is more attractive than marriage to lower class male. My personal observation is that lower class white males behave worse, but the behavior that you are calling “Trailer Park” is characteristic of females of two income families, children of single females and divorced women regardless of class.

      4. Personal observation is that regardless of class and parenting, regardless of whether they are raised by a single mother or a good Christian family, all chicks behave alike when they go overseas, away from the eyes of parents, family and friends to a major tourist center. They all behave badly, and I am pretty sure that the chicks you find in a major overseas tourist center are not from trailer parks.

    • Theshadowedknight says:

      Glen is status signaling. He has to think that he is better than “trailer trash.” His sad little status game is the only way he escapes the reality of his own life of failure. Without his artificial status, he has to face the facts: he is as or more fucked up as the people he criticizes, and he just happens to have more money.

      • peppermint says:

        Old losers who can’t deal with their station in life are the #1 source of communism. Opposition to the red pill is for pinkos.

        At some point Glen will need to understand that a man must fuck bitches make money and should secure the existence of our people and a future for White children, and the status signaling that caused the first part to be neglected caused the second part to be jeopardized.

        • Theshadowedknight says:

          Hard to convince a man with no future to look to the future and sacrifice for it. The decent boomers get taken care of by their children. The ones like Glen get abandoned when social security stops paying.

          • Glenfilthie says:

            LOL. I can see that your parents are S.O.L. too!

            What’s your retirement strategy, Shadow? Bumping them off when they’re old and vulnerable and then inheriting their stuff? Or are you an independently wealthy polymath like Jim?

            Never mind, I’m gonna do ya a favour, Shadow. Your unpopularity with the ladies isn’t because of hypergamy or lack of game – it’s because you’re a ropey mouthed unlikeable dolt. Acting like an asshole is only going to get you hurt some more.

            • Theshadowedknight says:

              I honor my mother and father, as the Lord commands. I can support myself, and when the time comes, I will take care of them. I have my duty, and I will uphold it. My parents have a son they can rely upon in their old age. You have a rug biter daughter. Good luck with that.

    • Frederick Algernon says:

      The Eternal Boomer rides on. Everything he deigns to include himself in must be viewed through the Hippie Paradigm: there is an intial pure phase, an expansion on iteration, a Thompsonian/Keseyan high watermark, a long period of disillusionment, then a slow decay of “rememberwhenism” and shallow nostalgia. It is a purity spiral made manifest in the lackwit inaneries of an objectively values-less non contributor. Each jumble of poorly formed words an attempt at some bastardization of Eastern thought. Each anecdote a parable from a build-your-own-messiah kit hastily bought from some penny-charlatan professor for the low price of one’s dignity and soul. A depressing lump of aging mediocrity with a past full of “maybes” and a lifetime of mistakes.

      …or maybe Glenfilthie is just a dimwitted masochist.

      • Glenfilthie says:

        Perhaps. But, were that true, your heads would not be exploding like popcorn. How utterly desperate and forlorn you must be, to listen in awe and reverence as fakes like Vox and Roosh lecture you on how to put the moves on bar flies, trollops and lounge lizards. I get that you’re angry, desperate and broken hearted. But you’ve become bitter and cynical too – and women of worth won’t touch that with a 10 foot pole and that is why Jim will never see them. You need to reset, and get back in the game and have some pride and hope for yourselves.

        LOL. I’m a boomer. And a hippie. If this is an expression of your intellect boys, you can bet your sex lives will be nothing but one great big long shit test. 🙂

        • jim says:

          Again, you claim to know that upper class girls don’t act like that.

          But obviously, they do, and your claim reveals lack of contact with women.

          Men who look for blue pill women always wind up losers.

        • jim says:

          You are repeating your lies. You declare yourself victor ad nauseum, when you have been repeatedly humiliated, hoping that other people will get bored with pointing out your humiliation.

          Stop it. Further repetition is a waste of reader bandwidth, and will be censored.

    • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

      Filthie wants to believe that ‘some women are just like that’ and ‘some women are not just like that’ because that would conveniently exonerate him from responsibility for having a technicolour tire-biter in place of a daughter, and perhaps also for not having fucked his wife(?) to make more.

      (Incidentally, i’ve noticed that a lot of comments [i’ve] put out the past few days seem stuck in the cache; i know because you can double check by reentering and you get ‘duplicate comment detected’ as a response, so they’re there somewhere)

  6. Doug Smythe says:

    In order to prevent supererogatory holiness syndrome we need to foster both a well-defined hierarchy of social standings *and* aggressive values of equality within each standing. People who put on airs above their station need to be dealt with within their own peer group as the first line of defense, on a “just who the hell do you think you are” basis, subject to ridicule and/or being violently beaten bu the others for their disruptive and insulting behaviour.

    • Doug Smythe says:

      Those who think they’re holier than the Pope or King start by thinking they’re holier than their fellows. Nobody likes being bossed around by their equal, and the natural corrective response to such behavior (ridicule and/or violent beating) should be encouraged, not discouraged).

  7. Mister Red says:

    I doubt very much that any of this “Pussy Riot” stuff is real.

  8. A.M. says:

    Jim continues to demonstrate the fitness of biblical religion and non-cucked pre-19th Century Christianity for life in the real world.

    One objection. Jim says, “change the official religion to make it saner, by erasing all doctrines that are potentially falsifiable by the realities of this world.”

    Official doctrines should be falsifiable but not falsified by the realities of this world. Falsified doctrines should either be discarded or modified to accommodate reality.

    • peppermint says:

      Do you think you believe that anything that isn’t falsifiable is nonsense? This sort of reasoning is from such faggots as Descartes and Popper. Falsifiability isn’t a simple matter that can be resolved easily, the Church thought Adam and Eve was unfalsifiable once but now everyone knows it’s retarded.

      A doctrine could be defined as something that is currently unprovable but agreed upon.

      Try to make official doctrines as unfalsifiable as possible to prevent the need for future revision.

      • glosoli says:

        >the Church thought Adam and Eve was unfalsifiable once but now everyone knows it’s retarded.

        Oh Minty, there you go again with your sweeping rhetorical statements. Wrong, far from everyone thinks Adam and Eve’s creation story is retarded, in fact some of us think that you who *believe* in the wonders of science to disprove the bible are prone to blind faith in said *science*, even as you read Jim repeatedly telling you that science is no longer science anyway.

        Regarding Adam’s rib used to make Eve, is it not a very strange coincidence that Jehovah chose a bone that is now known to have miraculous regenerative properties? Or is it once again divine design?

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2756968/We-regenerate-Researchers-reveal-ribs-regrow-damaged-say-true-entire-skeleton.html

        https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ajh.22005

        One day, you and others like you will realise you’ve been duped by the father of lies, and the truth was always there, and science is barely able to keep up with God’s skills. Or at least I pray you will wake up, nothing is certain, you may remain permanently retarded.

        • TBeholder says:

          Well… you know humans of either sex have even number of ribs, right? So what was removed? There is a bone that some mammals have (walruses, for one) and humans don’t, however. The “rib” was an euphemism. ;]

  9. Dave says:

    Reminds me of the restaurant manager scolding a waitress for only wearing the “minimum” fifteen pieces of flair, while her co-worker Brian is wearing thirty-seven pieces of flair. “Then why don’t you change the minimum to thirty-seven?”, she replies.

    In a holiness spiral, Brian is not only praised for his flair, he is given the manager’s job, and all employees concentrate on collecting flair instead of cooking and serving food.

  10. lalit says:

    Hmmmm, unfortunately we were unable to get Gandhi to stay in a hermitage far away from normal people trying to get by. That Frail, Bald, Aged, Perverted enemy of the Hindus had to preach his supererogatory holiness right in the middle of the city. A supererogatory holiness none of his prominent flunkies actually practiced, which he himself probably never practiced (the propaganda piece of a movie Gandhi notwithstanding), but which has nevertheless thrown a whole mass of Hindus into a mental Fog of confusion. A fog we cannot seem to find our way out of. A mental fog that will eventually end us. The British had to protect that Pervert since he served the interests of the leftist Brits in their internal civil war against the Imperialist Brits.

    Have to respect Islam and Muhammedans since they never fell for this pervert’s supererogatory Holiness.

    Have to respect Islam’s declaration of Muhammad as the last prophet as it prevents a Gandhi like figure from weakening them.

    Oh, the Hindus are doomed.

    So this is how we die

    Instead of a honorable death in battle, we will die via the self inflicted 1000-cuts

    Fuck You, Mohandas KaramChand Gandhi, you Pox on humanity, you blight on civilization, Oh, most evil spirit to have ever graced this planet. Seriously, Fuck you and may you Rot in Hell.

    If there is a Hell

    • jim says:

      Hindus have had a priests out of control problem for a very long time. Sikhs eventually did something about it. So did King Charles the Second.

    • Singh says:

      Listen, stop crying We’re going to conquer the Whole World & The Stars Too||

      The Brahmin Holy thing happened cuz Sullahs destroyed Rajputs which is just a title left over from Gupta Empire.

      Which actually lasted a long ass time & in any place but India would be called a Millennial Dynasty like the Han’s are.

      https://twitter.com/Parikramah/status/1017115753768800256
      https://twitter.com/DeplorablePagan/status/1017336893363507201

      The Gods first created Kshaatra Dhaarma before creating other dharmas. Since all toehr Dharmas are encompassed in this dharma, the wise ones regard it as the Most Exalted – Mahabharata

      Guru Gobind Singh Ji told us that Akal Purakh Maharaj Created the Khanda before the Universe||

      So Sikhii is the a RETURN to the True Vedic Dharma||
      Doesn’t require conversion, go pick up a sword & commence physical training||

      https://www.powerliftingtowin.com/greyskull-lp/

      If you keep us this Randi Rona just gonna consider you a woman||
      ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂਜੀਕਾਖਾਲਸਾ।।ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂਜੀਕੀਫਤਹਿ।।

      • lalit says:

        Hahaha, okay mate. Point taken.

        It’s just that that Bald Bastard and the Family they inflicted on India, including that Bitch ………. enrage me in impotent Fury.

        Powerlifting it is.

    • Contaminated NEET says:

      One bad prophet isn’t necessarily the end of a people, especially a people as numerous as yours. You guys have front row seats for the Decline and Fall of the West; with any luck you’ll learn enough from it to stop following us into the abyss.

  11. A true social science, a predictive science of human behavior is rather obviously the hardest endeavor in the sciences, for society is the sum of decisions made by human brains and per definition we don’t have the necessary brainpower to build a model of millions of brains making decisions.

    There is one principle I learned from HH Hoppe that I think is the most useful piece of social science so far. I think you are all a familiar with the concept of time preference: do you want 10 bucks now or 11 in a week? It is also called time discounting. Note that a high time preference – taking what you can now – is also what one would call impulsivity. IQ plays a role. Conditions like ADHD play a role – I have it and I understand perfectly why ADHD people tend to be vulnerable for addictions, alcohol in my case. Crime, too, is typically an impulsive thing, there is a saying here “opportunity makes the thief”.

    The point is, a low time preference, future-orientedness, is what we call normally virtuous burgeois behavior: study, work hard, save money, not spend your life drinking, doing drugs and whoring. Everything from obesity to cramming for exams has a time preference aspect.

    There is an even more important aspect: low time preference behavior correlates with good ethics: even if a merchant is 100% unethical selfish, if he thinks you could be made a returning customer he won’t cheat you. And you can generally not count on people behaving ethically just because of their conscience. But long-term selfishness is reasonably ethical enough.

    Another necessary element is a predictable social environment. This is what sucks today. You cannot know how much tax you will pay in 5 years. How to invest and think in long term that way?

    Unpredictable social environment means chaos. You cannot make long-term plans. Thus the rational choice is to take and enjoy what you can now. Drink up, do drugs and visit bareback whores because the future is random, only current pleasure is sure. Also, it means only conscience can be keep you from committing unethical acts. In an unpredictable social environment people will cheat, thieve and kill because they consider only the immediate gain, not the longer-term cost.

    So chaos literally kills. This is the most important thing I learned so far. There isn’t really a creative friendly nice cool chaos. The more chaotic things are the shittier people will behave, both with each other (no ethics) and themselves (self-destructive hedonism).

    • peppermint says:

      True social science is the most ancient of philosophy and begins with the Greek theory of the kyklos that today isn’t so much rejected as ignored and forgotten, it could have begun in the 19c but instead Darwin was rejected in favor of lies.

      Time discounting is a mathturbatory notion of the virtue everyone knows it’s proxying.

    • TBeholder says:

      Why do you think “ADHD” does exist?
      And wasn’t it name-juggled almost as much as “global warming”?

  12. Pseudo-chrysostom says:

    To say that ‘people are stupid’ is a common truism you might ironically hear from folks of all walks of life; that is to say, folks wishing to signal their intellect. And for many different demographics it can even be true. But, there is one thing that can so often hang over the trajectory of a being’s life prospects (or more importantly, their reproductive prospects), one area above all that most species of humans as a whole are highly developed in, perhaps the most highly developed cognitive application there is… and that is, peoples ability to sense which way the wind is blowing when it comes to social tectonics. In this matter, people are infact quite adept. They can see which way the winds blow, and align themselves with them.

    When civilization is invented and the experience of life becomes increasingly distant from day to day hand to mouth struggle for subsistence, the most grave threats of mortal peril start to come from… other clades of civilized humans. Thus, being able to tell who is supporting who, what things are being validated, and aligning yourself with the ‘big crowd’, can become literally a matter of life or death. And to any range of degrees less pressing and more trivial, be it a matter of career position, or be it a matter of parochial social difficulties.

    Havel’s Greengrocer does not really think much about the inwardness of replacing his stencil of the Czar on his shopfront with a slogan declaring ‘workers of the world unite’, he does not ponder much about the ideological implications of whatever shibboleths he might be signaling at the time… and he does not really need too either. Because for his own purposes, for his own situation, he knows something that can be even more important: who has the most power. And as a general rule, a strategy of serving power can be relied upon when all else seems uncertain to one. It is a low investment high pay-off gambit cognitively. The rationality of the seemingly ‘irrational’. Post-rationality.

    Most people are not chronically inveterate status whores like a dyed in the wool shitlib; if they ever engage in signaling (or perhaps more often, are prompted to signal), it is not so much for the purpose of advancing position, or gaining power, or glorifying themselves, but rather, to avoid censure. What a normie is generally concerned about above all in social spheres is *self-defense*.

    That is, ironically, why when a spergmatically unhinged mattoid starts engaging in vituperous pseudosanctimonia, so often, a large crowd of normies *will come to align themselves with the disruptive minority*. Because their instincts for sensing social phenomena is telling them that they are in danger, and their instincts for navigating social currents is telling them that danger is solved by aligning with it.

    The normie’s normie friends won’t help them en mass, because *they don’t want any trouble either*. Their perfectly normal (white) instincts are in favor of just keep on keeping on, the avoidance of conflict, the minimization of group dis-coherence. Sometimes, this can even give rise to kafkaesque situations where the person being harassed by the disruptive minority *is blamed by the rest of the crowd for causing disruption*.

    Thus, how thedes can smoothly and easily slide into new, different, increasingly reductive and dysfunctional sets of schelling points to organize around over time, unless chaperoned by hierarchical authority that self-consciously supervenes such dynamics.

  13. TBeholder says:

    > making envy and covetousness a sacrament. This explains their chronic failure to cooperate, explains why rallies to save the earth leave a snail trail of trash behind them.
    It doesn’t, as such.
    That their beliefs are completely fake (being demonstratively practiced for virtue signaling only), however, does.

    > Two tribes cannot co-exist in overlapping territory, except they create little zones for themselves,
    It’s a much wider principle than this, IMO. Having a need for framework.
    Territory only makes sense if your home is in it, but clashing rules and hierarchies are a headache for everyone.
    This may also be related to hierarchies of men (on hunt or field work) and women (on gathering or house work) working in very different ways (“hardwired” to do so) and normally having little to no direct interaction… until fairly recently. Suddenly, more headaches?

    > If someone wants to demonstrate superior holiness, it should be costly for himself, rather profitable for himself, and costly for everyone around him. Superior holiness and performing superogatory acts has to be made unprofitable.
    See also: The Merchandising of Virtue by Taleb.
    «Virtue without courage is an aberration: in fact you see cowards endorsing a public face of “virtue” as defined by the mainstream media, because they are afraid of doing otherwise.»

Leave a Reply