Draining the swamp

“Bring the jobs back” Done
“Build the wall” Started
“Drain the swamp” Starting

Trump, because Biden is the most electable Democratic Party candidate, drew attention to the fact that Biden used taxpayer money to shut off the light on his families corruption. So, naturally they accuse Trump of doing what Biden did, and are now attempting to impeach him for it – which draws further attention to what Biden, and other Democrats, and the assorted ngos closely connected to the Democrats and the State Department, got up to.

What triggered this is that the new administration in Ukraine is now in a position to shine the light on the dirty deeds of the previous administration, which looted the place in conjunction with assorted American carryonbaggers.

Trump called the new Ukraine administration up to shine the light on the dirty deeds involving the Clintons, Obama, Victoria Nuland, Vice President Biden, and the roots of the Mueller investigation.

Naturally the very holy panicked, and proceeded with the worst possible response:

Their response is an effort to protect their self delusions of moral superiority and competence. It is not a response directed at external reality, but at protecting their internal delusions.

Trump’s real crime is of course insufficient wokeness, which is illegal in the current year, and getting more illegal every day, but pegging the charge on the Ukraine was to hang it on the worst possible peg. Visualize an impeachment hearing featuring a large cast of ngo carryonbaggers with Clinton, Obama, and Biden connections, caught like deer in the headlights.

One of the many hurtful effects of a state religion that requires you to disbelieve in what is seen, rather than merely believe in what is unseen, is that it drives the adherents mad and makes them stupid.

We are required to disbelieve in things things that get right in our face, such as female misconduct in the workplace, disbelieve things that expose us and our children to substantial physical danger like the black problem, and to believe in things that lose buckets of money, as illustrated by the destruction of the Star Wars franchise that Disney paid four billion for.

Notoriously, social justice warriors always project. If they are doing something bad, they will accuse other people of what they are doing – thereby alerting you to what they are up to. If they are caught doing something bad, they will accuse twice as loudly, even if it is absolutely obvious to everyone else that they are doing something bad, often with bad results for themselves. Their projection is primarily to defend themselves from becoming aware of their own conduct, not to deflect accusations.

They are, of course, going after Trump for insufficient wokeness, and if they ever return to power, will imprison him, imprison his family, then the Republican party, and then kill them. But they are going after Trump on the Ukraine connection to protect the color revolutionist self image as bringing freedom and democracy to the oppressed masses, when in fact they are just knocking over apple carts to grab some apples. It is the worst possible strategy for protecting their image in the eyes of public, but they are trying to protect it in their own eyes.

Another side effect of a state religion that requires you to believe in absurdities is that those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. Every color revolution, at best winds up with carryonbaggers knocking over the apple cart to grab some apples, at worst, in genocide. Despite the frequent and loudly announced claim that western elites are squeaky clean, unlike those terrible third world regimes, we observe that ngos in color revolutions and international assitance projects are generally a cause of corruption, rather than a cure, the aftermath of the Haitian Earthquake being a spectacular example. The ngos did far worse damage than the earthquake did. Since you are always telling big lies, why not tell some big lies that enable you to grab the food out of the mouths of starving people?

Attempting to impeach Trump on this enables Trump to focus everyone on the swampiness of the swamp.

“Well,” said Br’er Fox, “it looks like there’s no water around here to drown you in. I guess I’ll skin you instead.” “Okay, Br’er Fox, no problem,” chattered Br’er Rabbit, “Go ahead and skin me, cut out my eyes, cut off my legs, just don’t throw me into that briar patch!”

Looks like Trump is already reveling in that briar patch.

457 Responses to “Draining the swamp”

  1. Karl says:

    Another case of progressives believing progressive lies. I get the impression that the junior priests believe in the latest impeachment show and all the lies that go with it. Whether the senior priests also believe this and don’t rather see a tactical blunder that should better be stopped, is another matter. I suspect that at least some of the senior priests do not suffer from delusions to the same extent as the junior priests. In part because they are older and smarter, in part because they do not have to convince superior priests of their own holiness that often.

    Anyway the most import effect is on adherents of the state religion that are very low in the hierarchy, below junior priests. These people loose least by breaking away from the state religion. They can afford to loose faith.

    • jim says:

      Delusion goes all the way to the top – for example the Mueller investigation continued to believe that Flynn had the goods on Trump even though it became absolutely obvious that he did not, and flew into insane rage and did stupid stuff when reality finally penetrated.

      It is people near the top who are threatened by people digging around in the Ukraine, and their reaction was seriously disconnected from reality.

      • Mister Grumpus says:

        It’s the disconnection from reality that unnerves me the most.

        Speaking of projection, everyone laugh at me now for imagining a “high trust evil” elite of plain-speaking know-it-all emotionless super-geniuses — the Kissinger/Jones/Icke model — rather than blindfolded crazies high on their own supply and throwing knives around.

        Evil I can imagine navigating somehow. Move to the next school district away, render unto Caesar and Tony Soprano needs a favor, fine. But crazy? Crazy can cook your favorite dinner, suck your dick and stab in your sleep. OK maybe next time, then. You never know.

        But I was wrong. If they weren’t crazy then they’d have sat down, made a plan, blamed everything on Expired Straight White Married Male Biden, kicked him to the curb, pretended it never happened, and replaced him with someone else, like, I don’t know, Jeb or somebody. But nooooooo.

        • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

          They’re sane, rational and cunning locally, although crazy in the large.

          House of Representatives rules were changed immediately after the 2018 Democratic majority came into office, specifically to enable one-party impeachment. There will be no cross-examination of NGO and State Dept witnesses, in fact they will be questioned privately and depositions taken in secret, with all proceedings conducted by lawyers for Democratic members of the House committees, without the knowledge or participation of Republicans. The procedural rights of the House minority no longer exist for committee work. Only after a vote of the full chamber to initiate impeachment hearings as a housewide matter can the Republicans try to exercise some fraction of the procedural rights Jim is imagining, but they will not be able to go back through every witness due to “time limits” and the like.

          Now, this can all backfire too. Internet and non-MSM media will in the meantime circulate information on Biden and the Ukrainians or Giuliani can blow open the DNC shenanigans in 2016. Trump can use the abuse of procedural power and Undue Process to bang the drum for a Republican takeover of the House in 2020. But for now, Democrats will only gain by pursuing these things in their new (2018) ex parte oversight structure prior to an actual impeachment process.

          Trump needs to figure out whether Barr will assist him or not with massive declassification ASAP. If not, appoint a bulldog AG or do the job himself.

          • jim says:

            They can railroad impeachment through the house, but if they do, it goes to the senate, and then you get a full court trial, Brer Rabbit in the Briar Patch.

            The Senate, with impeachment on the Ukraine, is the briar patch that Rudi Giuliani, Trumps personal attorney, hints that Trump has been plotting to be thrown into for six months.

            He tells us “the Democrats have walked into a trap”.

            • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

              Giuliani has not been reliable in his past boasts of imminent crushing victory. Hopefully he’s right about this one and is holding back some devastating bomb we will see in due time, but the trap he says Democrats are walking into could be just Biden being destroyed by a Trump investigation. That isn’t a trap, it is a gift to the likely nominee, Elizabeth Warren. For Trump to win with a “briar patch” strategy he has to lower the boom with shocking revelations about the conspiracies against him, including extremely damaging information about the activities of the impeachment leaders.

              Unless Trump already has such information in hand, the devil is in the details from here onward, in both the House and the Senate. What steps happen in what sequence, triggering what other steps (e.g., do Mueller 2.0 special counsels against Giuliani or Barr take them out before they can nuke Trump’s enemies). Impeachment in the House is tied to all kinds of other lawfare, such as providing Nadler’s committee the ability to obtain Trump’s tax returns, ability which was recently denied by a judge because of the lack of formal impeachment process. In the Senate, it’s possible (and people are starting to analyze the options) that some lawfare application of the rules can prevent impeachment for coming up to a vote or something.

              If Trump can prove tomorrow that Joseph Mifsud was an FBI/CIA asset assigned to smear him, he wins. Barr is in Italy now, so…

            • Mister Grumpus says:

              “He tells us ‘the Democrats have walked into a trap’.”

              OK look. I believe this. I really do. Something is happening, But real talk time. Giuliani? OK (((Zelensky?))) OK. Fine.

              But let’s just say I have a huge hunch that not one single solitary Jew is going to get in the slightest bit of trouble in this whole entire affair.

              I expect I’ll be right on this, but I’m not bringing this up to show off. Rather, I’m asking you to remind me, via your perspective on these things, why I shouldn’t feel angry and humiliated about that. You’ve done exactly this before for previous events, and I’m asking you to do it again for this one.

              For example, maybe something like “Stop your sperg tantrum, grow some patience, and understand that Utopia on earth is impossible, and that the weakest-networked swamp creatures would get drained first. How could it go any differently?”

              • jim says:

                > But let’s just say I have a huge hunch that not one single solitary Jew is going to get in the slightest bit of trouble in this whole entire affair.

                Trump mentioned Nuland in his phone call to the President of the Ukraine, and Giulani mentioned Soros. Not seeing any magic immunity for the Jews involved. The Clintons probably had Epstein murdered.

                The traditional and ancient role of the Jews is to do the elite’s dirty work, and then get thrown to the wolves when the shit hits fan. Mueller’s troofers scapegoat the Jews for Mueller screwing up in 9/11

                • Mister Grumpus says:

                  OK OK. So even if no one goes to jail, the fact that they’re being successfully called out in public, and with evidence no less, is still the most meaningful and important part of all?

                • Mister Grumpus says:

                  And furthermore, since I was indeed in fact thinking of ethnic Jews Victoria Nuland and George Soros while typing my complaint above, that certainly suggests that I’ve got my own crimestopping going on over here on my end.

                  But how would you describe it?

                • jim says:

                  Treasonous elites always hire Jews to do their dirty work, because Jews are less likely to be loyal to the nation that they seek to destroy. Soros is a State Department cutout, and Nuland was assistant secretary. Trump wants to get their employers, but to get their employers, will have to bring charges against their employees.

                  When he does so, if he does so, expect lots of complaints by shills that the employees were actually working for Tel Aviv or the elders of Zion and a massive rise of Democratic Party anti semitism, because the reflex tactic of every such elite when it gets in trouble for its treasonous activities is to throw the Jews to the wolves.

                • R7 Rocket says:

                  @Mister Grumpus

                  I think getting strangled by a Clinton assassin (Jew Epstein) is worse than merely going to jail, don’t chase think?

                • R7 Rocket says:

                  Dontcha think… not don’t chase think. Stupid autocorrect.

                • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

                  I like Jim’s analysis of the Jewish Matter but it needs to be said that by this point, some Jews actually are in the elite, and are hiring their own Jews (or goy equivalents) to do the dirty work that will get those hirelings thrown to the wolves. Asians seem even more eager than Jews to fill that role of functionary cum wolf-fodder. Between meritocracy and elite intermarriage there is a not inconsiderable class of Jews who cannot be viewed as a separate category from “the actual, apex-of-pyramid, elites who call the shots”.

                • jim says:

                  > Asians seem even more eager than Jews to fill that role of functionary cum wolf-fodder.

                  I don’t count the Indians as Asians. Maybe the southern Indians are South Asians, but the northern Indians, and most of the Indians causing problems are North Indian, are not exactly Asian.

                • Mister Grumpus says:

                  This is great stuff. Thank you.

        • It is delusion all the way to the top. I once knew a guy, very high level in the NGO complex that “advises” the state. Ex-mil. On the surface a solid man. This was right before the 2016 election, and I figured it would be very interesting to pick his brain on certain things, so I feigned political innocence and tried to feel him out after a few drinks.

          I was hit by a deluge of crimestop and delusion. Despite theoretically being a libertarian and a Christian, his life was eaten away by cuckery. He could not control his kids (I was fucking his daughter and his son was a loser) nor his wife (only had two kids). I felt kind of sorry for him. There was a glint of the old fire in him, a bit of masculinity shining through, but all of his competence had been directed to bugman things. He had no power over that which mattered.

          Be careful infiltrating the elite, it might just infiltrate you.

          • I AM says:

            [*deleted*]

            • jim says:

              You are allowed to present evidence and argument that Washington is a puppet of the Zionist occupation government located in Tel Aviv, but you are not allowed to simply assume it, any more than I am going to allow people to simply assume that World Trade Tower building seven fell down on its own footprint as if obvious and unarguable.

              • I AM says:

                You’re projecting your view of world power. And you’re wrong. (The important bits of) USG are run from London.

                • jim says:

                  Whatever.

                  It is absolutely obvious that Britain is a puppet of the state department, and Brexit is a Trump authorized independence movement, much as Kemal Atatürk allowed and encouraged the provinces of the (anti)Turkish Empire to revolt.

                • I AM says:

                  And it’s equally clear that Brexit is a (pathetic but existent) rebellion of England against the City of London.

                  But of course no one lives in London full time. The well-coiffed classes split their time between London, Basil, the Riviera, Luxembourg, and a few other places.

                  I ski in the Alps. Get off my lawn.

                • jim says:

                  If you look at any remainer, they hate Britain and hate the British. Remain hates London too, they hate it all. And, as you correctly say, they don’t live there.

                  Therefore, brexit is not a revolt against London, but against empire.

                • I AM says:

                  Maybe they hated London. It’s pretty much cleansed these days. There are a few pockets of upper-middle-class Britons living betwixt low-end vibrants and huge reservoirs of Russian, Saudi, etc. cash. The Russians and Sauds aren’t even the most significant, just the most obnoxious. The point is that hatred of London is basically an anachronism, if it persists at all.

                • jim says:

                  The remainers hate Britain, all of it. London is alien to the elite. The British are alien to them, the Saudis are alien, and the Russians are alien. The low end vibrants are imported to attack the people that they hate, and are dumped on places that they hate. The knife and acid attacks are not a bug, they are a feature.

          • Still married in the age where 2/3 marriages end with divorce, wife did not turn him into a “parent of a fur baby”, has two kids who are like most kids today (most girls are sluts, most boys are losers)… that is a pretty average level of competence at being a man for $current_year. I thought you are going to say NGO types have extreme lifestyles because having very extreme delusions, but what you described just sounds like every average truck driver these days. Not something unusual.

            As a comparison, I know a business CEO who never really had any kinds of political views, looks pretty low T, just looking like someone who always almost failed gym class, and still managed to get his wife to give up her corporate career to stay home and have four kids. The catch is that the wife is ugly.

            These things are neither correlate that strongly with ones outward level of masculinity nor with ones political opinions.

            I mean, in a way, they do, surely controlling wife and kids is harder if one is not very masculine and surely believing in egalitarian bullshit makes it harder, but at the end of the I don’t see that the result correlates that strongly with these things.

            • He is a member of the elite. On paper, he would sound like an extreme alpha male. He probably has more personal ability to “manipulate procedural outcomes” than any elected congressman or senator. But he cannot control his wife and kids and his brain is owned by crimestop.

              My point being that our rulers are neither cunning enough to circumvent their leftist principles nor strong enough in character to put up any resistance to a coup by a competing elite.

          • Anon says:

            I have been in organisation, and can attest to the fact that the normal élite within an organization do have the need to invent prosocial rationales to justify both their obedience to who’s above and their addiction to power over who’s below.
            However, these are people of fairly limited amplitude of views and self-awareness. I most strongly doubt the people who get to have power over imperial/continental/international issues feature those limits. How would they get to the top, if they did?

  2. Dave says:

    ““Build the wall” Started.”

    Israel walls on the Golan heights maybe.

    • jim says:

      We have videos of the wall going up by executive order and state of emergency funding, and of very long stretches of wall.

  3. A Reader says:

    Do you plan on covering the whole situation about China, Xinjiang and the Uyghurs that’s been in the news recently? I’d like to see a Jimian take on it.

    • jim says:

      The short of it is that it seems like a sound way to deal with the Muslim minority. Detain the men, marry the women. What is not to like?

      • Allah says:

        Isn’t it coveting and race mixing?

        Also, it’s not a religious but an ethnic conflict.

        • Samuel Skinner says:

          Taking stuff from foreigners you are conquering isn’t coveting.

          The rules for race mixing are don’t do it at home. Copying the conquistadors is fine. Given China’s male surplus this doesn’t even hurt the Han.

          • Allah says:

            Mostly agreed. How far would you stretch the definition of conquering?

            Given China’s male surplus this doesn’t even hurt the Han.

            Jim insinuates that such things will lead to feelings of envy/inadequacy going out of control and ultimately end in the killing of everyone and the destruction of everything. I question him on this.

            • The Cominator says:

              Uigur arent a market dominant minority they are a muslim one. Muslims are trouble and the desire to purge them is nationalist not socialist.

              • Allah says:

                Again, this is an ethnic conflict. Ask the Mongolians, Vietnamese, Manchus(if there are any left), Tibetans, Japanese, etc. what they think of being occupied by the Chinese.

                Crimethink: Market dominant minorities are worse than underclass minorities.

                • jim says:

                  Chinese are, like Jews, a market dominant minority. Muslims make war, until you crush them.

                  Majorities should tolerate market dominant minorities in the market place, while ensuring that their ruling elite is ethnically homogenous and of their own ethnicity. They should defeat minorities that go to war, and eradicate those who surrender but then promptly unsurrender the moment one’s back is turned.

                • I AM says:

                  “Chinese are a minority”

                  In what paradisiacal universe? Can I borrow your timeline machine? Consider it a loan of indefinite term.

                • ten says:

                  The mongolians (of inner mongolia) have their country filled with mongolian nationalist monuments, paid for by the chinese, and mongolian nationalist museums, they have their right to their language constitutionally enshrined and all shops must use the möngyul script even though 80% of the country is han chinese, not mongolian, and much land is kept free from exploitation to reserve them for traditional mongolian life, ie, horses, yurts and motorcycles.

                  Traditional mongolian attire and folk customs are everywhere elevated, and nowhere chinese such things, even though the country is 80% han chinese.

                  You are projecting the muslim mind on the chinese, and knowing you would have genocided the mongols you moronically assume the chinese does too.

                  The mongols of inner mongolia will eventually be entirely absorbed into the perpetual infinite han, but the chinese certainly aren’t accelerating this process by any other means than making it pleasant for the mongols.

                  So you lie, like a filthy turk moron, or perhaps you are stupidly ignorant, also like a filthy turk moron.

                  Manchuria and tibet, same thing.

                  And china has of course never occupied japan.

                  I fully support forcing you to watch your daughters being raped while slowly feeding you to dogs, you lying, crazy, evil moron.

                • Allah says:

                  Obviously, I also want you tortured to death but why do you feel the need to share your fantasies with me?

                  Looking up “inner mongolia separatism” tells a different tale. Of course, if the Uyghurs had kept their heads down and accepted assimilation the Chinese might’ve reacted in a similar way and turned Uyghur culture into a tourist attraction also. Such magnanimity.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Oh look, it’s Mr. Totally-Not-Actually-a-Muslim defending yet another wave of Muslim uprisings and terrorism in yet another country that never invited them. Quelle surprise.

                  I’m happy for the Chinese that their rulers are doing what needs to be done. I only wish our own leaders had the stones.

                • Allah says:

                  in yet another country that never invited them.

                  Dafuq? They are the natives, they are under foreign occupation.

                • ten says:

                  And of course you flip the script. Subjugation and assimilation of the uighur comes after and because of muslim terror – the terror always comes first, and then the muslims blame their victims when they fight the terror, justifying ever more terror.

                  While islam was not used as an attack vector against china, china did not suppress islam among its civilized hui chinese and other muslims, whereas filthy turk uighur scum always was a problem. Now people scream “China bad! China mean to muslims!” so china bans the use of arabic script etc, so the conflict surface is removed. They are very smart and very right in their treatment of islam, but maybe too benevolent.

                • Allah says:

                  Projection. You are the one trying to flip the script. You’re believing your own lies. You use vague and deceptive language to blur the difference between the Communist Party of China and minorities.

                  It’s really simple. Chinese want to turn their minorities into Han ant people and do not tolerate separatism. Why are you surprised by this?

                • ten says:

                  Many of my coworkers like talking about issues they know nothing at all about, they like engaging in analysis of their popular shows or news, but they are cheap and amateurish and cause me to choke on my lunch, and make me feel compelled to drop my civilized mask and dismantle their nonsense.

                  They often talk about China. I think you would like them.

                • Allah says:

                  Tell me more about your coworkers. Any gossip?

              • The Cominator says:

                Allah: All those non-muslim Asians hate Muslims for no reason at all. Muslims dindu nuffin.

                Also Allah: C’mon guys adopt the wignat philosophy of killing the jews and taking their stuff… I totally want you to do that because I’m on your side.

                • Allah says:

                  Me: Obviously, I also want you tortured to death.

                  You, an intellectual: He’s pretending to be on our side!!!

                • Not Tom says:

                  It’s more like “I admit that I hate you and want you and your children enslaved or dead, but you should still tolerate me being here and telling you how to think and act as if I were someone sympathetic to your interests”.

                  Your twisted logic seems to be that because you’re honest about your ethnic hatred, that automatically gives you credibility, and compels others to assume your sincerity on other points. It don’t work that way, hombré; progs play the exact same game, but better, and we don’t fall for their act either.

                  Seriously, can you give one good reason why you deserve a platform? Why anything you say should be given greater than zero weight and consideration? Aside from, I suppose, being a constant reminder of how your people think so that we remember never to drop our guard.

                • pdimov says:

                  Whoever “Allah” is, he’s entirely correct in mocking the mindless overuse of the “entryist” accusation here.

                  Entryists use ingratiation, not confrontation.

                  But, it’s a 4D chess move to feign confrontation to gain confidence!

                  Right. Pro tip: 4D chess doesn’t exist. If something appears to be X but you’re told it’s Y for complicated 4D chess reasons, it’s probably X.

                • Not Tom says:

                  He literally never used that word. pdimov. You’re attributing ideas and statements to him that never came from him.

                  And entryists use many different techniques, ingratiation being just one. For example, businesses do not hire HR and Diversity departments because they’re so charming, they hire them because they are forced to in order to fend off lawfare or literal mobs. The employees are not welcome, they know they’re not welcome and the boss knows they’re not welcome; all of that is irrelevant to the entryism.

                  “Allah” is claiming to be of a hostile ethnicity but falsely claiming that it is merely reciprocally hostile and really, “we aren’t so different, you and I”. While it is far from the most common tack, it’s not as esoteric as you appear to think.

                  Any of the following can be the foot in the door for entryism:
                  – You like me
                  – You need me
                  – You’re stuck with me
                  – I was here first
                  – You’re just confused
                  – etc.

                  None of those are, in and of themselves, entryism; after all, everybody wants to be included. Entryism is simply seeking entry into a group to which you are hostile and intend to subvert or destroy, regardless of the exact methods employed.

                • pdimov says:

                  I agree in principle that “Look, I’m openly hostile, not covertly hostile like those entryists” makes certain sense as a strategy.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  He is trying to gaslight us. “The problem is you maniac Christian’s with your intolerance and hate for my peaceful Muslim brothers has forced them to attack in self-defense.” “9/11 was a Jooo plot.” “You hate us for no reason, because the Joois have twisted you against us. Let us kill your enemy, the Jooo with two cows.” That last part start to look like something else, when I phrase it that way?

                  To which I pointed out that Arabs and European Christians coexisted with Jews in the Holy Land until Muslims invaded. Moreover, we were attacked for centuries before the Crusades started, including the sack of Rome, and now the Crusades are supposed to be Christian aggression. He is a lying desert rat, and he is trying to mess with our perceptions.

                  It is not so much, “hail, fellow reactionaries,” that he is doing. More like, “hail, fellow enemies.” Which still doesn’t work, because we have pretty good bullshit detectors, and we are more learned of history than his usual target.

                • Allah says:

                  It’s more like “I admit that I hate you and want you and your children enslaved or dead, but you should still tolerate me being here and telling you how to think and act as if I were someone sympathetic to your interests”.

                  Seriously, can you give one good reason why you deserve a platform? Why anything you say should be given greater than zero weight and consideration?

                  Notice how you gentlemen constantly work yourselves into a frenzy describing what you want done to me and my people in graphic detail while the older or more accomplished commenters do not engage in such trivialities. If you think my opinion is worthless, don’t reply.

                  Personally, I’m a keep your enemies closer kind of guy. Not that I don’t want friends around but vast majority of my online time is spent with people I disagree with. Why do you find this weird?

                  “we aren’t so different, you and I”.

                  One big difference is you lie and I tell the truth.

                  Moreover, we were attacked for centuries before the Crusades started, including the sack of Rome, and now the Crusades are supposed to be Christian aggression.

                  Not Christian vs. Muslim. It was Christian and Arab vs. Turk. This has been the case ever since.

                  You say we, but I don’t think you are a Christian. If Christians were on the defensive, it’s because they couldn’t go on the offensive. You mistake weakness for kindness. Not to imply that kindness to the outgroup is good. Indeed, why are you offended at the thought of your people being aggressive? So what if it was Christian aggression?

                • jim says:

                  > If Christians were on the defensive, it’s because they couldn’t go on the offensive

                  The peace of Vasvár in 1664 shows that the weakness of Christians is merely that we are reluctant to use democidal methods when such methods are necessary, clearly justified, and were the boot on the other foot Mohammedans would have not the slightest hesitation in using such methods.

                  If we had used such methods whenever they were necessary, justified, and easy to carry out, no one except a few historians would remember that Islam ever existed.

                  America fought innumerable Barbary wars, each of which started by weak Mohammedans carrying white Americans off into slavery, and each of which ended in America easily defeating the Mohammedans, still not getting peace, then paying, despite easy and overwhelming victory, tribute to Muslims in return for a peace that they instantly broke. The Barbary problem was swiftly ended when the French used firmer methods than the Americans, methods that the Americans could have easily used, more easily than the French, and stayed ended until the French were no longer willing to stomach such methods.

                  If the Americans had responded to the Mohammedans repeatedly surrendering then unsurrendering during the first Barbary war by going Roman on them, there would have only been one and half Barbary wars.

                  The near universal tactic of Mohammedans warring with Christians has always been to surrender then unsurrender. This only works against an opponent excessively restrained by Christian considerations, and the use of this tactic shows that Mohammedans are weaker, because Christianity facilitates cooperate/cooperate equilibrium better than Mohammedanism.

                • Allah says:

                  Why do you say we? Since you are not a Christian, do you admit this is an ethnic conflict?

                  Also you once upon a time:

                  Remember that the full might of the Ottoman empire was turned back from Vienna by one Christian prince of one minor Christian nation, under dire threat that other Christian nations would take advantage of his distraction, as indeed they did.

                  I’m reluctant to believe your interpretation of historical events. How does Peace of Vasvár show that?

                  were the boot on the other foot Mohammedans would have not the slightest hesitation in using such methods.

                  Was the boot on the other foot at any point? What happened then?

                  methods that the Americans could have easily used, more easily than the French

                  How so? Was it easier for Americans to genocide north Africans than it was for the French? You are talking about pirates and you’re surprised they are duplicitous?

                  The near universal tactic of Mohammedans warring with Christians has always been to surrender then unsurrender.

                  Exactly like our Christians back in the day then. They’d capitulate then immediately revolt again when they smelled foreign support.

                • jim says:

                  > do you admit this is an ethnic conflict?

                  The Barbary pirates were mere pirates when it was convenient for Dar al-Islam for them to be mere pirates, and they were Dar al Islam the rest of the time. And these conflicts are mere ethnic conflicts when it is convenient that they be mere ethnic conflicts, and wars between Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb the rest of the time.

                  The expulsion of the Rohingya from Burma was a war between Dar al-Islam and Burma that Dar al-Islam lost because the Burmese were prepared to do what it takes, and all the Muslim nations were scared to take in the Rohingya refugees for fear that their guests would soon deem their hosts to be insufficiently Islamic.

                  The reason that the Burmese were willing to do what was prudent and morally justified is that Buddhists have fewer inhibitions than Christians or progressives, and Burma was in the Chinese hegemony, not the American hegemony.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Notice how you gentlemen constantly work yourselves into a frenzy describing what you want done to me and my people in graphic detail

                  Written in response to a post that said nothing whatsoever about things being done to you personally, never mind your “people”.

                  Are you even capable of telling the truth, or are you compelled to lie with literally every sentence you utter?

                  “If you don’t like me, just ignore me”. No, it doesn’t work like that, especially not with Mohamedans. Ignoring you is an invitation to continue your gaslighting and general hostility, in an eternal effort to damage our own social cohesion which you can then exploit to your advantage.

                  Not one of us here is seeking inclusion into Muslim groups, yet here you are seeking inclusion into Christian and reactionary groups, even demanding that no one even criticize you, just ignore you so you can continue shitting up threads with “gas the jews” nonsense. And then you say we are the aggressors. You need to leave.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  As is said, duplicitous rewrites of history to claim moral equality between Christianity and Islam. Muslims surrendering when their invasions fail and then promptly unsurrendering and invading again is morally identical to the Christians they successfully conquered trying to free themselves when given the chance. Moving of the goalposts from European vs Arab to European vs Turk when I point out that Europeans and Arabs can coexist.

                  Entryist.

                  Allah, I talk about killing you and raping your daughters because it bothers you and worries you. I talk about your lies and tricks for my fellow commenters, and I talk about raping and murdering your people out of existence because it amuses me and distresses you.

                • Allah says:

                  The Barbary pirates were mere pirates when it was convenient for Dar al-Islam for them to be mere pirates, and they were Dar al Islam the rest of the time. And these conflicts are mere ethnic conflicts when it is convenient that they be mere ethnic conflicts, and wars between Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb the rest of the time.

                  I said this conflict, you switched to these conflicts. Didn’t expect clash of civilizations nonsense from you, but you’re adamant about it.

                  I doubt your take on Burma also. Aren’t the Buddhists there attacking Christians as well?

                  Not one of us here is seeking inclusion into Muslim groups, yet here you are seeking inclusion into Christian and reactionary groups, even demanding that no one even criticize you, just ignore you so you can continue shitting up threads with “gas the jews” nonsense. And then you say we are the aggressors. You need to leave.

                  No one here is Christian or Muslim. It’s a bunch of materialists larping.

                  Allah, I talk about killing you and raping your daughters because it bothers you and worries you. I talk about your lies and tricks for my fellow commenters, and I talk about raping and murdering your people out of existence because it amuses me and distresses you.

                  I think you’re starting to imitate me.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Buddhist arent by nature a religion militant if a buddhist country goes after a religion it is causing trouble. So if they are going after christians likely the churches are centers of subversive activity.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “I said this conflict, you switched to these conflicts. Didn’t expect clash of civilizations nonsense from you, but you’re adamant about it.”

                  You assume Jim and the rest of us thinks like wignats who are willing to believe Mueller shill lies that Muslims dindu nuffin and if they did its all the fault of the Jews.

                  Stop assuming we think like wignats. If you are going to argue with us try to understand our actual philosophy, more then any other political group our philosophy is based on how humanity actually believes historically (and based on that how to optimize society for efficiency).

                  Knowing Muslim history Muslims always “clash” except if you are in a position of overwhelming strength AND they realize you’ll use that strength up to and including a Final Solution to the Islamic Problem if they don’t behave.

                  Hulagu Khan did literally nothing wrong.

                • Allah says:

                  Buddhist arent by nature a religion militant

                  There are multiple Buddhisms.

                  our philosophy is based on how humanity actually believes historically

                  Bullshit. You’re just manufacturing mythology as its convenient. If in the future you start having problems with Buddhists, you will discover that they are in fact a very dishonorable and cruel people, and have always been that way.

                • Not Tom says:

                  No one here is Christian or Muslim.

                  I am almost starting to believe you on the latter, because something about your style and debate tactics remind me of our old friend Communist Revolutionary. I can’t quite put my finger on it, but I wonder if an IP lookup would even put you somewhere outside the good old U.S. of A.

                  Actual Muslims (or “culturally Muslim” Turks, whatever) tend to be more about action than talk. I think it’s time to administer the WRP test – anyone from the Islamosphere should easily be able to pass it.

                  You’re an interloper and civilization-destroyer either way, but being able to communicate a couple of red-pill facts about women would at least convince me that you are the specific enemy whom you say you are.

                • jim says:

                  His IP lookup puts him in Turkey.

                  If he is a Turk, he knows red pill truths, if resident under the governance of Turkey, he can say them. If he is FBI or ngo, he cannot say them. He could be a State Department ngo in Turkey, which is to say genuinely a Turk, but still not the enemy he says he is.

                  So, Allah, explain why chicks are up in arms about non existent rape by frat boys, and totally relaxed about Rotherham and the New Year rape festival in cologne? If you are the enemy you say you are, that should be a no brainer.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I don’t think hes a religious Muslim because a religious Muslim would absolutely not refer to himself as Allah. I think any religious Muslim would find that to be incredibly blasphemous.

                  One of the tenets of the moon worshippers barbarian religion is that they aren’t even supposed to draw pictures of living things, otherwise they will be challenged on judgement day to bring them to life and cast into hell when they fail.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “Buddhists, you will discover that they are in fact a very dishonorable and cruel people, and have always been that way.”

                  Asiatics indeed have a great capacity for cruelty often worse then whites (I can’t fathom the way they treat dogs) but I see no evidence this has to do with Buddhism.

                • Allah says:

                  His IP lookup puts him in Turkey.

                  https://i.redd.it/2a60r02t19s21.jpg

                  If he is a Turk, he knows red pill truths

                  Why?

                  So, Allah, explain why chicks are up in arms about non existent rape by frat boys, and totally relaxed about Rotherham and the New Year rape festival in cologne?

                  Onun yerine anayın amını açıklasam nasıl olur? Because they are young women who want and need to be shut down and filled up. I wanted to write more, but I just can’t bring myself to do what you tell me to do, and I definitely do not want to do what Tommy tells me to do. Beğendin mi arslanım? Daha ister misin?

                  Asiatics indeed have a great capacity for cruelty often worse then whites (I can’t fathom the way they treat dogs) but I see no evidence this has to do with Buddhism.

                  That’s the beauty of it. Don’t need to.

                • jim says:

                  You failed the test.

                  On the other hand, it is possible that the language barrier got in the way of passing the test.

                  Since 1910 Harvard ngos have been allowed to say that women have sexual desires, but forbidden to acknowledge shit tests. “No” is a shit test, and women love men passing their shit test. Which is why rape needs to be defined as sex contrary to will of the man who has rightful authority over the woman, rather than the woman’s will, because female will is opaque, and because they fail to cooperate with men who want to shut down other men’s bad sexual behavior. If you make rape and sexual harassment crimes against the women, they complain against the men who are not raping or not sexually harassing them and fail to complain against the men who actually are raping and sexually harassing them, the latter problem, unfounded complaints of sexual harassment against men who lack the stones to sexually harass women, being obvious in every female majority workplace.

                  The propensity to overflow with indignation about imaginary frat boy rape is just the extreme edge of what you see in any workplace with a substantial number of women. It is always blue pilled guys with blue balls that get accused of sexual harassment by fertile age coworkers.

                  This inclines me to believe you actually are Turkish, and identify with Mohammedans, but are nonetheless an ngo employee, and your ngo is ultimately run from Harvard and/or the State Department, possibly through a cutout such as Soros. If not an ngo employee, would have been able to pass the test, since your IP is in Turkey. If FBI, your IP would be unlikely to be in Turkey. But maybe you were passing the test – in Turkish.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Google translate may not be doing justice to the Turkish, but it appears to be just a string of obscenities and taunts, not an answer to or anything really related to the WQ.

                  I don’t believe it’s a language barrier. In fact, the language aspect is what makes me so suspicious. Allah writes highly proficient college-level English, reveals none of the weird idiosyncrasies of non-Anglosphere speakers such as confusion over tenses, articles, prepositions and overall spelling, yet when it comes to reading, never fails to demonstrate the comprehension level of a mentally-challenged chimp.

                  Writing proficiency requires reading proficiency. It does not make sense that we observe the former without the latter. That means something is being deliberately obfuscated. There is fakery in here somewhere, even if we don’t know exactly where it is.

                • jim says:

                  Excellent writing proficiency is a requirement for ngo employees, not so much FBI employees, which is how you know troofers are FBI and not Harvard.

                  Inability to comprehend thought crimes is a requirement for both ngo employees and FBI employees, so “Allah” looks like a Turk working for an ngo.

                  If so, what is his mission? Manufacturing a link between “right wing extremism” and Mohammedan terrorism would be my guess. He is probably in Turkey primarily to subvert the Erdogan regime, and frame it as linked to Islamic terrorism the way they tried to frame the Trump campaign as linked to Russian spies, by trolling Erdogan supporters for terrorist sympathies. Since that was probably not going so well, they sent him to troll “right wing extremists” for terrorist sympathies. Since it became obvious we don’t have any sympathies for Mohammedan terrorists nor believe there is any separation between Mohammedan terrorists and Mohammedan “I-am-a-moderate-progressive-Muslim-and-you-had-better-not-piss-me-of-or-my-terrorist-buddies-might-get-on-your-case” that dead ended quickly.

                  What I think he wants is “Oh, it is entirely understandable that you murdered those evil Jews, (not to mention those evil Armenians).” Nah, Jews are irritating and need to return to Israel, but that is not a capital offense. The Turks murdered the Jews and the Armenians out of envy and covetousness. They wanted to take their stuff, but when they murdered them, were frustrated to find that their capital was primarily in forms that are only worth anything as part of a continuing and reasonably well run business.

                  Which is why private sector Jews should move to Israel with their money, because if you confiscate their stuff it gets trashed, and because if you confiscate their stuff, you are allying with very bad people, motivated by envy and covetousness, which always bites you. Don’t ally with wicked people. It is always a one way alliance.

                • Keep Crying "Joo Joo Joo" says:

                  Probably FBI/JTRIG disruption troll, his Turk identity being fake or half-fake. These people are known to manipulate their own IP addresses and assume fake identities to give themselves credibility. I guess Agent Shawarma had figured that pretending to be a Nazi antisemite is not going to fly here, so he proceeded to pretend to be a Muslim antisemite, his Muslim Turk antisemitic monomania looking no more genuine than run-of-the-mill Fed Shill Nazi antisemitism. Nice cover story, though.

                • pdimov says:

                  Test results: inconclusive.

                  If you ask a Rotherham Paki why white chicks do X or Y, he’ll tell you “because they are whores.” If you command him to explain same, you’ll get obscenities. Which is pretty much what you got here.

                  These people are utterly uninterested in what women think (*). What women think simply doesn’t matter. “WRP” is a Western phenomenon, because in the West, what women think matters, so it’s worth analyzing.

                  BTW, it’s Agent Döner.

                  (*) For a fairly expansive meaning of “think.”

                • jim says:

                  I guess you are right – if he is what he claims to be, he might simply not know the answer, rather than being in denial about it.

                  Yes, test result inconclusive.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  No, I think he actually passed the test. He said it was because women were horny and wanted to get fucked.

                  Because they are young women who want and need to be shut down and filled up.

                  That is about where we stand on the subject, but with a little more nuance because we actually had to recodify our knowledge on that point. Correct me if I am wrong, but that looks to me as if he said they want to be dominated sexually. Credit where credit is due, after all.

                • jim says:

                  Female consent is complex and self contradictory, which is very strange to men.

                  It has been acceptable to notice the lustfulness of women since 1910. To notice that their decision making processes on sex are irrational, indeed counter rational, and self contradictory is what is forbidden.

                  The concepts of rape as a crime against the woman, contractual marriage, and Romance, is based on the primacy of women making decisions. But women are contradictory. They say they want one thing, and act to obtain a contrary thing. The red pill is deeply offensive to progs because it denies that females are competent to exercise agency in matters of love and sex.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  It depends on what you consider to be their decision making process, what they say or what they do. I go with what they do. They loudly claim to be against rape, then wander to where they are likely to find rapists in order to test the men there. At a frat party, expecting to find their sufficiently alpha rapist, they are frequently disappointed, hence regret, leading to false claims of rape. The Muslim invaders are willing to rape women, and so the women are satisfied with the dominance of the men.

                  Assigning a quality like decision making regarding sex to women is like assigning it to female cats. All their claims, cries, and actions are to find the male capable of dominating her, whatever else it may seem, for females of either species. To the extent that a “decision” was made, it was made by deep level programming in the brain, not the self-aware, rational part.

                  Girls go to frat parties and Muslim slums because they are horny and want to get filled up, and they can get it both places. They only get raped at one of those, so they complain because they did NOT get what they wanted.

                • eternal anglo says:

                  their decision making processes on sex are irrational, indeed counter rational

                  Counter-rational – bingo.

                  Females behaving perversely for the implicit purpose of testing for strength is an example of functional counter-rational behaviour. Men showing courage that defies self-preservation, Mucius Scaevola before Porsena, is another example. You win a game of chicken by putting a brick on the accelerator, getting into the passenger seat, making your peace with God and blasting Wagner.

                  It’s quite odd to think that no ancient, simple word exists for this concept of functional irrationality in the service of a higher, unconscious rationality. ‘Shit test’ is new. Maybe it is that our concept of rational behaviour (not rational thought, pretty sure that is old) is a newcomer, and in the old days, functional counterrationality was the air people breathed. The newer cuckiness is “Don’t punch that bully back, don’t spank that misbehaving girl, everything can be resolved if everyone is reasonable” – the Redditor mindset. (Well, yes, but one party has already demonstrated that he/she is unreasonable, and what are you going to do about that?)

                  Come the restoration we are going to make some truly spectacularly masculine movies and shows to cure the zoomers of this. “Conan the Axe Rapist versus the Earth Mother Crone-Priestesses: A Corded-Ware Epic.”

                • The Cominator says:

                  Yeah we should have a lot of movies where the good guy outright commits rape.

                  Actually there is ONE movie where this actually happens, High Plains Drifter Clint Eastwood does it.

                • 4DChess 150IQ MossadOP says:

                  Hey Allah, I have a question.

                  What happened on 9/11?

                • jim says:

                  That is a good test. We can be sure whether he is the enemy he says he is, or a very different enemy, if he answers that one. Or if he dodges it.

                • The Cominator says:

                  This video shows relevant clips from “High Plains Drifter” a movie that is actually redpilled on what women want…

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=318&v=RjFuN00yGzI

                • Oak says:

                  “Yeah we should have a lot of movies where the good guy outright commits rape.

                  Actually there is ONE movie where this actually happens, High Plains Drifter Clint Eastwood does it.”

                  I’m not sure we need ‘outright rape’. We need culltural depictions of high-status men who show an understanding of female consent.

                  Closest example I can think of is Polanski’s ‘Tess’ where from what I can remember the girl repeatedly signals interest in a high status man while also showing disnterest. He proceeds to pass all of her shit tests, notices the tacit IOIs and completely ignores her overt disinterest, ending with him taking her to the woods to fuck her.

                  He’s overtly portrayed as the big bad rapist. But Polanski seems to make it quite clear what’s really going on.

                  Notice the look she gives him after he passes her strawberry shit-test (0.30):

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60aBPBS6flE

                  Polanski portrays the male-female seduction dance very well, but in the context of a bluepill script.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Turban niggers are very prone to doublethink on 9/11. They are happy and proud it happened yet often sincerely believe the Mueller lie that theMossad did it.

                • jim says:

                  If he is the enemy he says he is, I have already written his answer, and if he is an FBI or an ngo, I have already written his answer, but I will not post what I have written till he answers.

                  The words of a doublethinking Mohammedan are superficially similar to the slippery postmodern words of a Harvard derived ngo, they may well ostensibly be saying the same thing, but the subtext is fundamentally different.

                • Not Tom says:

                  These people are utterly uninterested in what women think (*).

                  So Islam is right about women… accidentally? Well, it would explain an awful lot.

                  I’ll back the 9/11 and ask a more cerebral WQ that can’t be answered purely with vulgarity and obscenity:

                  What is the problem with women in management and CEO positions?

                • Allah says:

                  Your test is designed to check for NRX membership. Go ahead and do that test on anyone on the street, precisely 0 will pass.

                  I thought you were asking me about women, not what leftists say about women. I purposefully kept it short, writing more to satisfy a command is too much. I’ve read that copypasta multiple times before. What I know of frat boys, progressive history or NGOs comes from you and none of them are very relevant to us.

                  If he is a Turk, he knows red pill truths

                  I also want to know why you think this, this seems like another one of your caricatures. My coethnics are often perfectly progressive.

                  I don’t believe it’s a language barrier. In fact, the language aspect is what makes me so suspicious. Allah writes highly proficient college-level English, reveals none of the weird idiosyncrasies of non-Anglosphere speakers such as confusion over tenses, articles, prepositions and overall spelling, yet when it comes to reading, never fails to demonstrate the comprehension level of a mentally-challenged chimp.

                  Thank you, Tommy. It might not be a language barrier, but simply different mentality and cultural differences.

                  He is probably in Turkey

                  Eh? Do I need to post time stamped pictures of my unibrow and chest hair? Yoksa sizi entellektüel olarak sikebilmeme inanamadığın için Batılı olduğumu mu ima ediyorsun?

                  What I think he wants is “Oh, it is entirely understandable that you murdered those evil Jews, (not to mention those evil Armenians).” Nah, Jews are irritating and need to return to Israel, but that is not a capital offense. The Turks murdered the Jews and the Armenians out of envy and covetousness. They wanted to take their stuff, but when they murdered them, were frustrated to find that their capital was primarily in forms that are only worth anything as part of a continuing and reasonably well run business.

                  More Western diarrhea. We defended ourselves from genocide. Armenians deliberately try to manufacture a connection with Jews and the Lolocaust to gain sympathy from the West.

                  These people are utterly uninterested in what women think (*). What women think simply doesn’t matter. “WRP” is a Western phenomenon, because in the West, what women think matters, so it’s worth analyzing.

                  Not necessarily. Obviously we care what our wives and relatives think, sexual matters are entirely different. Ideally they should never be in the company of other men, so it’s useless to pontificate on sexual harassment or rape. They are broken regardless of whether they wanted to have relations with inappropriate men or not and the men they were with are to be punished similarly.

                  What happened on 9/11?

                  If the official story is true, I have immense respect for Sheikh Osama. Imagine a hundred Osamas.

                  What is the problem with women in management and CEO positions?

                  You are accepting leftist version of events. You give them ground then try to debunk what they once upon a time violently forced to be the “normal” position. It’s even worse for women to be in a subordinate position to other men. Women should not work with other men regardless of whether she has authority or not.

                • jim says:

                  > If the official story is true, I have immense respect for Sheikh Osama. Imagine a hundred Osamas.

                  Your answers are in character for the enemy you claim to be. I no longer think you are fbi or ngo.

                  Your answer on the women question was evasive, but your answer on 9/11 had a different subtext to the fbi or ngo subtext.

                • R7 Rocket says:

                  @Allah

                  “ Your test is designed to check for NRX membership. Go ahead and do that test on anyone on the street, precisely 0 will pass.”

                  I asked rural White Southerners in Dixie, RedPill on women questions, most passed.

                  On the MEMRI videos, Islamic mullahs regularly pass the RedPill on Women test

                • Allah says:

                  But they didn’t say anything about Harvard, progs, NGOs, and so on which was what Jim was apparently looking for.

                • pdimov says:

                  >We defended ourselves from genocide.

                  Could you perhaps go into specifics? So far your claims were extremely general and vague, along the lines of “we’ve been genocided from 109 unspecified territories by evil right wing European Christians at earliest opportunity due to absolutely no fault of our own.”

                  Now obviously where have I heard that before, but still, any specifics? A few instances of genocide, the territory and the year named?

                • The Cominator says:

                  Killing the Armenians had little military purpose outside of the border areas with Russia it was mostly the slaughter of a market dominant minority, however it should be noted Armenians more so then Jews or Chinese tend to be consumate swindlers and crooks and get ahead that way more then the Jews (who as Jim notes jews rarely lie or break promises outright, but like dealing with a devil or an evil genie you must word any deals with a jew very carefully).

                  Everyone who has contact with Armenians for very long generally begins to hate them (this is NOT true for Jews)…

                • pdimov says:

                  >Everyone who has contact with Armenians for very long generally begins to hate them (this is NOT true for Jews)…

                  Debatable.

                  I can’t however help but admire the quintessential Turkishness of claiming that the Armenian genocide was not only not genocide (unlike all those other occurrences where “we” were genocided), it was in fact preventing a genocide of the reverse polarity.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Well I don’t see the Turks as a particularly dishonest race either (especially for Muslims and Muslims are in general very very dishonest) but its very funny how they all maintain that they dindu nuffin to the Armenians.

                  Even that shitlib Turk immigrant pundit Cenk Uygur of the Young Turks denied the Armenian genocide until he didn’t, though if you’ve ever suffered to listen to his colleague Ana Kasparian you then realize why the Turks thought they had to do it.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Your test is designed to check for NRX membership.

                  Actually, it’s designed to test for all sorts of memberships. Progressives, conservatives, libertarians, wignats and reactionaries will all answer differently. And anyone who has actually followed Jim for some time, and is not merely here to cause trouble, would know that.

                  Your refusal to answer and sudden catastrophic loss of English verbal skills when confronted with those questions is a strong indicator that you are, in fact, here for no other reason than to subvert and destroy.

                  You’re welcome to answer with “here’s what you oafs believe, but it’s all crap because ___”. But currently you are unable to articulate what any of us believe, which implies crimestop.

                • jim says:

                  Yes, probably fbi or ngo, at any rate, not the enemy he claims to be. A different enemy.

                  My guess is that he is an ngo whose main job is Turkish color revolution. He is probably telling Turks that Erdogan is not the real nationalist and Mohammedan he claims to be, just as fake rightists tell us Trump is an Orange Jew.

                • Not Interrogator says:

                  What happened on 9/11?

                  If the official story is true, I have immense respect for Sheikh Osama. Imagine a hundred Osamas.

                  Evasion.

                  Final “yes or no” question: Should men be imprisoned for possessing erotic videos of 12-year-old sluts off the internet?

                • The Cominator says:

                  “He is probably telling Turks that Erdogan is not the real nationalist and Mohammedan he claims to be”

                  Hes not entirely lying in that case, you can be a nationalist and you can be a muslim but you absolutely cannot be both. Islam is absolutely anti-nationalist as anti-nationalist as Trotskyism if not more so.

                • Anonymous says:

                  The Muslim invaders are willing to rape women, and so the women are satisfied with the dominance of the men.

                  It is more because the Muslim invaders are allowed to rape women whereas Christians get Waco’d.

                • alf says:

                  If so, what is his mission? Manufacturing a link between “right wing extremism” and Mohammedan terrorism would be my guess. He is probably in Turkey primarily to subvert the Erdogan regime, and frame it as linked to Islamic terrorism the way they tried to frame the Trump campaign as linked to Russian spies, by trolling Erdogan supporters for terrorist sympathies. Since that was probably not going so well, they sent him to troll “right wing extremists” for terrorist sympathies. Since it became obvious we don’t have any sympathies for Mohammedan terrorists nor believe there is any separation between Mohammedan terrorists and Mohammedan “I-am-a-moderate-progressive-Muslim-and-you-had-better-not-piss-me-of-or-my-terrorist-buddies-might-get-on-your-case” that dead ended quickly.

                  What I think he wants is “Oh, it is entirely understandable that you murdered those evil Jews, (not to mention those evil Armenians).” Nah, Jews are irritating and need to return to Israel, but that is not a capital offense. The Turks murdered the Jews and the Armenians out of envy and covetousness. They wanted to take their stuff, but when they murdered them, were frustrated to find that their capital was primarily in forms that are only worth anything as part of a continuing and reasonably well run business.

                  If that is true, how convoluted and stupid. Insane that there is so much money going into people’s pockets for this kind of work.

                • Allah says:

                  I no longer think you are fbi or ngo.

                  My guess is that he is an ngo

                  Hmm..

                  Could you perhaps go into specifics?

                  I would like to, but my curiosity was not indulged so I will give as much as I get.

                  You’re welcome to answer with “here’s what you oafs believe, but it’s all crap because ___”. But currently you are unable to articulate what any of us believe, which implies crimestop..

                  Am I? Didn’t you tell me I needed to leave? Your enemies can’t articulate what you believe because you can’t articulate what you believe.

                  Erdogan is not the real nationalist and Mohammedan he claims to be

                  You just shit the bed when it comes to anything involving Turkish history or politics. If your analysis of Anglo history is of similar quality you’ve been taking your disciples for a ride for years.

                  Final “yes or no” question: Should men be imprisoned for possessing erotic videos of 12-year-old sluts off the internet?

                  As long as they’re not our 12-year-old sluts, no. It’s no different than regular porn. I think females who are involved in such “erotic videos” should be considered unowned and up for grabs. This should give fathers and husbands plenty of incentive to crack down on girls with no need for jail.

                  If that is true, how convoluted and stupid. Insane that there is so much money going into people’s pockets for this kind of work.

                  Exactly. Could it be that this blog is not as obscure as it once was and is inevitably going to attract non-NRX?

                  When I submitted this comment it said “This site is experiencing technical difficulties”, not sure if I’m going to doublepost.

            • jim says:

              Muslims cause trouble until they rule. If one does not want them ruling, one has to get rid of them. Jews will find a creative interpretation of a contract. Muslims will drive a stolen truck into a crowd of shoppers on Christmas.

              At ten percent Muslim, one has an intolerable crime problem. At thirty percent one has a low level civil war which from time to time erupts into high level civil war. This is the way it has been ever since Mohammed started raiding caravans and it is not going to change.

              Muslims always start it, then rely on Christian forbearance, that Christians will refrain from finishing it.

              • Allah says:

                This is what you chose as a summary of your position in this topic? Atrocious copypasta.

                • jim says:

                  Yes, it is a summery of my position on the Muslim problem. Muslims always start it. The Chinese are finishing it, and in the end, we are going to have to do the same.

                  Market dominant minorities are fine in the market place, and getting rid of them from the market place is covetousness and envy, which results in ruin. But when they get into the state apparatus, it is a problem, because they are not loyal to the state or the nation. Muslims are a problem merely by having them around.

                • Cockroaches are Ugly says:

                  Where’s the lie, faggot?

                • Allah says:

                  What did Uyghurs start, exactly? Why do non-Muslim non-Chinese keep getting genocided by non-Muslim Chinese?

                  Market dominant minorities are not fine. We both agree they are a fifth column but you assume they will be a net benefit assuming you’ll keep them in line. I do not. I say giving away such a critical niche is a massive disservice if not treason to your ingroup.

                • I AM says:

                  [*deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  Deleted for telling me what I think and what I say. You need to realize that not every conversation is about Jews.

                  My meaning was entirely clear. I and “allah” were discussing Chinese minorities outside China – neither of us suffer from your Jewish monomania.

                  The specific country I had in mind was Philippines, which has both a market dominant Chinese minority and a terrorist Muslim minority, but the Chinese are a market dominant minority in every nonwhite country where they are a minority, and the Muslims are a terrorist minority in every country where they are a minority.

                • I AM says:

                  [*deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  Deleted for telling me what I think. Not what I think. I have said what I think often enough and plainly enough.

                • I AM says:

                  [*deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  Deleted for telling me what position I am defending. Not my position, and also a strange off topic swerve in the conversation.

                  You need to explain why certain boring and well known facts of no obvious relevance to this blog or this thread refute me, rather than presupposing I acknowledge that those facts refute me and claiming I deny those facts.

                • I AM says:

                  Humans are group-selected creatures optimized for mass-mobilization warfare, and there is no compelling reason to permit the entry of foreigners likely to dominate your economy unless you are yourself a foreigner, a turncoat, or a positionally hostile oligarch ruling over an abysmally subject peasantry.

                  In the economic zone formerly known as the West, every argument for pluralism, individualism, and so on is really an argument for infinity immigration in order to better displace native Anglo-Germanics from their cities, from their schools, from their country.

                  The origin, whether you recognize it or not, of your idea of the intrinsic goodness of a “market-dominant minority”, is the puppy love of every Boomer everywhere to every Jew everywhere.

                  The very concept of a “minority” as commonly understood is a reflection of degenerate boomerist multikulti. In reality, the only difference between the Arab and the Oriental as a “minority” is that the Oriental requires a larger fraction of the population before he starts throwing his weight around, and as a consequence of his temperament, his strategy when he does so is far more subtle.

                  In small numbers, every “minority” is a “model minority”.

                • jim says:

                  But equally, there is no good reason to expel a market dominant minority, plenty of bad reasons (covetousness and envy) for doing so, and plenty of good reasons for not expelling them.

                  There are good reasons for expelling those not of the state religion from the ruling elite.

                • I AM says:

                  Newsflash: 30% of Australian students are Australian.

                • jim says:

                  I find this hard to believe. Prove it.

                • pdimov says:

                  >But equally, there is no good reason to expel a market dominant minority

                  The obvious good reason to expel a market dominant minority is to save them from being eventually murdered.

                • Allah says:

                  My meaning was entirely clear. I and “allah” were discussing Chinese minorities outside China – neither of us suffer from your Jewish monomania.

                  I was discussing minorities in China. Hence me mentioning the Manchus, Tibetans, Mongolians. Non-Muslim neighbors of China would also very much oppose being minorities in China for good reason.

                  there is no good reason to expel a market dominant minority

                  Of course there is, but it’s better to kill them and take their stuff before they get away. How in the world is it a good idea to have a foreign upper/middle class?

                • jim says:

                  > Of course there is, but it’s better to kill them and take their stuff before they get away. How in the world is it a good idea to have a foreign upper/middle class?

                  The question presupposes that stuff just magically appeared, and those dirty Jews somehow scarfed it all up, and if they are not around to scarf it up, someone else would have it.

                  This has been frequently tried, seldom works out.

                • Allah says:

                  Once again “market dominant minority” becomes an euphemism for Jew. This is your slippery slope argument against gassing the Jews all over again.

                  What it presupposes is dependency on foreigners is likely to end up catastrophically badly, as you think harming Jews is likely to end in apocalypse.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Jews already are not the market-dominant minority in many regions of the west; Chinese are. If we look at companies owned by either Chinese or Jews, they tend to do fine.

                  Another emerging market-dominant minority is Indians, and that isn’t fine. Why? It’s not because of market-dominance, it’s because of regression toward the mean. They have children who are dumb and low-functioning, not violent but generally incompetent and unpleasant to be around. Moreover, since intelligence seems to vary by a crazy amount in early adult years but normalize back to a ~0.8 correlation with genetics by age 50 or so, these same Indians who seemed exceptionally smart in their 30s are quite literally dumber in their 50s.

                  This isn’t the case with either Chinese or Jews. The qualities that make them market-dominant are clearly heritable.

                  Oh, but they’re all nepotistic, you say. Aside from the profound lack of evidence (Jews intermarry at a suicidal rate; Chinese managers rarely demonstrate hiring bias), there’s a very simple solution: make sure they stay a minority, by limiting any further immigration, and strongly encouraging them to intermarry by making the native men and women higher-status.

                  Which obviously means, as Jim has repeatedly pointed out, keeping them away from the state apparatus and significant positions of influence. It’s really not that hard; let them freely transact, make sure they aren’t cheating the locals, and limit government positions to those who can prove native ancestry for at least 10 generations.

                • Samuel Skinner says:

                  Jews are the western Market Dominent Minority. Chinese are the Southeast Asian, Igbo the African and Syrian the Haitian versions. Not surprisingly the state of the Igbo isn’t very important to Westerners.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Yeah I agree that dotheads are a BAD market dominant minority in general because unpleasant liberal and dishonest and tribal with each other (more so then with Jews).

                • Not Tom says:

                  Jews are the western Market Dominent Minority. Chinese are the Southeast Asian, Igbo the African

                  In fact, all three of these are market dominant minorities in the western market. It just depends on locality.

                  Not surprisingly the state of the Igbo isn’t very important to Westerners.

                  It should be. Or rather, it should be very important to black Westerners and the Good Whites who affect to care so deeply about them. The same people who created the slave trade are now dominating the Affirmative Action programs originally intended for descendants of slaves.

                  Affirmative action shouldn’t exist. But if it is going to exist, it definitely should not be extended to Nigerian immigrants.

                • Allah says:

                  regression toward the mean

                  Into the trash it goes. You talk a lot but don’t say much.

                  There is an even simpler solution: Gassing The Jews.

                • Not Tom says:

                  “Blah blah blah I’m not listening joo joo joo”.

                  You’re not tall enough for this ride.

                • Anonymous says:

                  Jews are not dumped on flyover cities. Jews do not form up into large groups of military-aged males at their inner-city mosques and conduct raids into the suburbs and surrounds. Jews do not fly airplanes into tall buildings.

                  We will genocide the Muslims for invading and helicopter the leftists for letting them.

                • I AM says:

                  “30% of Australian students etc.”

                  I retract on grounds of unsubstantiability. Nevertheless, I would not be surprised if it were literally true at the highest levels, taking into account Asian hyper-performance on standardized tests and credential-striving.

                • I AM says:

                  “Jews are the western Market Dominent Minority. Chinese are the Southeast Asian, Igbo the African and Syrian the Haitian versions. Not surprisingly the state of the Igbo isn’t very important to Westerners.”

                  LOL, “the state of Igbo isn’t very important to Westerners”.

                  Don’t you know? it’s the sacred duty of every good Judæo-Christian Christian everywhere to support the Christ-killers Jews in their holy land Israel for when Jesus the Messiah finally returns comes!

                  Here’s a chilly fact: only antisemites successfully predicted the onslaught of trannyism (weimarism).

                • Allah says:

                  Explain how regression to the mean works then, Shaq.

                  We will genocide the Muslims for invading and helicopter the leftists for letting them.

                  You are trying so hard to direct attention somewhere else.

                • The Cominator says:

                  You just keep beating your head against this wall that we should want to gas all the jews but sorry we think differently on this issue then wignats because we’ve examined the jewish problem, the leftist problem and the problem of minorities in general in more depth.

                  Most jews are leftist jews, so most of them in the West will be killed.

                  Why does someone who claims to be a non-religious Turk hate Jews especially anyway, Turkey and Israel got along just fine before Turdogan and his gang of Islamic retards (that the military should have shot) took over what was previously one of the few semi-decent Muslim countries.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Mass murder is when you can’t coexist with a group long term without the risk of uprising the minute the boot is off or subversion.

                  Leftist fit the risk of subversion, the argument for not wiping them out is that leftist is based on envy and that it cannot ever truly be wiped out. Also there is the unfortunate fact that creative people… people that society does need to some degree skew heavily towards leftist and sort of did even before it was the state religion.

                  Muslims are not very effective at true subversion because Islam only really spreads in prison where Muslim gangs can convince people with violence (or through protection from violence others would otherwise suffer) but a small Muslim minority is a crime wave and terrorist threat and a large one is a constant risk of uprising and civil war (this does not apply to certain Sufi sects who reject taking the Koran literally). Unlike with leftists if you wipe out Muslims they will be truly gone. They do not contain any subgroups of useful people.

                • Allah says:

                  Well, you think wrong. I was content to play along with their “market dominant minority” game until they dropped the mask and just said Jew. I see the goyim here mocked, deceived and intimidated into silence by some very sensitive and neurotic people whenever the JQ comes up.

                  Why does someone who claims to be a non-religious Turk hate Jews especially anyway, Turkey and Israel got along just fine before Turdogan and his gang of Islamic retards (that the military should have shot) took over what was previously one of the few semi-decent Muslim countries.

                  I don’t hate Jews. There are many Jews I respect. I don’t need to hate Jews to want them gone. The West got those Islamic retards in power and makes sure they remain there. It’s West+Islamists+Minorities vs. Nationalists.

                  Mass murder is when you can’t coexist with a group long term without the risk of uprising the minute the boot is off or subversion.

                  The justification for coexisting and not mass murdering are one and the same. Because you can’t get away with doing otherwise.

                  As for the hostility here towards “wignats” aka lower class whites, it seems entirely artificial. There were attempts at manufacturing a category that ingroups both whites and Jews but they kept failing one by one so now the fashion of today is “elitism”. It’s supposed to Make Jews Safer by ingrouping at least whites with power and Jews(with east Asians thrown in to keep appearances).

                • The Cominator says:

                  Wignats always always lose politically because they are stupid, undisciplined, indifferent to optics and their leaders are feds. That is why we hate wignats.

                  Their obsessive focus on “its the jews” is merely a byproduct of their stupidity and control by the feds.

                  The feds use wignatism to taint more effective nationalism… luckily we are effectively pushing them aside.

                • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

                  I did see an article several years ago that academically prestigious selective high schools in Australian cities
                  were taken over by Asians, with percentage of students similar to the examination schools in New York City (60-80%). This may be what “I AM” was talking about.

                  I would like to know what he means by antisemites (alone) predicting trannyism. Certainly it was a common idea in the tradcon and Christian right that tolerating gays, and especially legalizing gay marriage, was a lubed slippery slope toward further collapse of the family, and would lead to endless acceptance and promotion of ever more extreme forms of degeneracy.

                • Allah says:

                  As if to imply you aren’t losing and not obsessed with Jews? Do you hate conservatives, libertarians, etc. also?

                  The feds use wignatism to taint more effective nationalism… luckily we are effectively pushing them aside.

                  Ingrouping Jews and outgrouping lower class whites is not nationalism. You support something else. You can debate how to genocide inferior kinds in a properly Christian manner all day, yet you feel uneasy and stressed when it comes to the JQ because it’s bad optics, strange isn’t it?

                • jim says:

                  No one here is ingrouping Jews, let alone outgrouping lower class whites. The kind of people that make up the Trump coalition should, as I have repeatedly said, be high status. Yes, I outgroup whiggers, but they outgrouped themselves by definition. Unlike some here, I don’t outgroup wingats, who are absorbing our ideas and are on the path to salvation. I outgroup socialists. Left socialists murder their allies, right socialists ruin them.

                  I wish reactionary Jews well in their project of creating a genuinely Jewish Israel, but we have our own project. If we succeed, it will be fine if they succeed, and if they succeed, it will help us succeed, and also help ease our Jewish problem. It will go easier to exclude Jews from state and quasi statal jobs if Israel reserves statal and quasi statal jobs for Jews. I support reactionary Jews in their project, but we have another project, one that a great many Jews will not like. Westphalian nationalism will likely result in a Christian America allied with a Jewish Israel against various troublemaking Mohammedan Middle Eastern nations, but is not going to mean that anyone respectable will think that there is such a thing as “Judeo Christianity”, or that under the Peace of Westphalia we will pay much attention to foreign entanglements far from home.

                • pdimov says:

                  >Wignats always always lose politically because they are stupid, undisciplined, indifferent to optics and their leaders are feds.

                  That’s circular. It’s basically saying that stupid people are stupid because they are stupid.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “As if to imply you aren’t losing and not obsessed with Jews?”

                  We are absolutely winning right now, the idea of unironically ending the Republic and replacing it with the Trumpenreich grows more popular by the day as the left grows stupider weaker and more insane by the day.

                  “Do you hate conservatives, libertarians, etc. also?”

                  Normie conservatives are useful for some things they are okay “line troops” they just can’t lead (now the Ben Shapiros and Mitt Romney’s of the world are a different story they are controlled op like wignats). Libertarians can go a couple of ways, good libertarians eventually become reactionaries (as do people on “game” forums with a high IQ and some political awareness). Wignats just consistently drop live grenades in our own trenches and also they can’t even consistently be against leftists because they want socialist economics.

                  “Ingrouping Jews and outgrouping lower class whites is not nationalism.”

                  We support Westphalian nationalism not the nationalism that caused the world wars which is the kind of nationalism wignats support.

                  “You support something else. You can debate how to genocide inferior kinds in a properly Christian manner all day, yet you feel uneasy and stressed when it comes to the JQ because it’s bad optics, strange isn’t it?”

                  We have an answer to the jewish question we will solve it the Byzantine way. We are not going to allow envious yahoos to smash up jewish property.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “That’s circular. It’s basically saying that stupid people are stupid because they are stupid.”

                  I did not attempt to go into the causality of why wignats are stupid at all I just noted that they are and how it manifests itself.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Explain how regression to the mean works then

                  It’s very simple, really. Any given population has genetic traits that express along a bell curve. Intelligence, in particular, has been found to be about 80% heritable, but we still don’t understand what makes up the other 20%. Thus, average families can have extremely smart children, but assuming there’s no actual intermarriage going on, their grandchildren will be much closer to themselves than their smart children were.

                  This is supported by current and historical evidence. Wealth correlates extremely well with IQ, and it’s been repeatedly shown that most nouveau-riche families lose their wealth within a few generations. Their elevated intelligence either was not a genetic mutation at all, or is simply too complex to be heritable. We don’t know exactly why, and don’t need to know, it’s simply a fact.

                  Given a country like India with a billion people and an average IQ of (IIRC) about 85, you will certainly find outliers who ended up 4 standard deviations above the average, but their traits are not highly heritable, and their descendents will regress back to their average of 85, unless of course they intermarry with a more intelligent population, but then the product will still only be somewhere in between their average and the absorbing population.

                  I was content to play along with their “market dominant minority” game until they dropped the mask and just said Jew. I see the goyim here mocked, deceived and intimidated into silence

                  Yeah, that’s believable. The Muslim Turk was totally well-behaved and amicable until he sensed the presence of evil Jews and philosemites, then felt compelled to come to the aid of the poor goyim. Seriously, white Christians, I am your friend, here to protect you from the lies of Uncle Shlomo! Even though I have repeatedly stated that I am not your friend and that Christians should be killed for always aggressing against us!

                  It’s like you think you we’re all wignats and you can just throw out buzzwords to impress us. “Oooh, he said goyim, that means he totally gets us!” The verbal skills are there, but the situational awareness, logical consistency and analytical ability are all completely absent.

                • Not Tom says:

                  The justification for coexisting and not mass murdering are one and the same. Because you can’t get away with doing otherwise.

                  Ladies and gentlemen, the mind of a Muslim. The only reason not to commit mass murder against anyone and everyone is if you can’t actually succeed at it. Never mind borders, never mind separation, never mind concepts of sovereignty; no matter where you are, convert or die.

                  The peace of Westphalia truly is a Christian ideal. I wanted to believe it was universal, that it obviously makes sense and why wouldn’t anyone agree to it, but clearly it was that very naivete which prevented the crusaders from doing what really needed to be done.

                • pdimov says:

                  >Given a country like India with a billion people and an average IQ of (IIRC) about 85, you will certainly find outliers who ended up 4 standard deviations above the average, but their traits are not highly heritable

                  Not true for India with its stratified castes. Bell curve reasoning only works on a homogeneous population. Indian-Americans used to have an average IQ of 100+ and it didn’t regress, because they were Brahmins.

                • pdimov says:

                  >Ladies and gentlemen, the mind of a Muslim. The only reason not to commit mass murder against anyone and everyone is if you can’t actually succeed at it.

                  Ironically, not even correct for Muslims in general. The Ottoman empire could easily have converted-or-killed its Christians, but it obeyed the Koran and did not.

                • I AM says:

                  “I did see an article several years ago that academically prestigious selective high schools in Australian cities were taken over by Asians, with percentage of students similar to the examination schools in New York City (60-80%). This may be what “I AM” was talking about.”

                  Yes. Supposedly there was something to this effect in one of Jared Diamond’s books, but I was unable to turn it up with a search on Google Books.

                  The moral of the story is that even given equivalent intellectual capabilities, high-variance persons cannot coexist in the same system as low-variance grinders-and-strivers, and the decline and fall of academia can be directly linked to it beginning as a haven for eccentric innovators and ending as a circle-jerk of hyper-strivers.

                  “I would like to know what he means by antisemites (alone) predicting trannyism.”

                  It’s pretty clear that different races have different inborn psychological routines. For some reason, the Ashkenazim have a gender-bender template that goes nuts when not ruthlessly by either their native hardcore Orthodox Judaism or the Old Protestantism that they worked so hard to destroy. My ethny is literally incapable of inventing trannyism, and most of us are incapable of tolerating its very thought-conception. In many it arouses a nightmare-lust for wooden stakes and bonfires.

                • jim says:

                  That is not evidence that anti semites alone predicted trannyism. To my recollection, it was those complaining about the holiness spiral predicted trannyism, and anti semites fail to acknowledge the holiness spiral.

                • Not Tom says:

                  For some reason, the Ashkenazim have a gender-bender template that goes nuts when not ruthlessly by either their native hardcore Orthodox Judaism or the Old Protestantism that they worked so hard to destroy.

                  How convenient that this only leaves the progressive Jews, who are infected by the same progressive memeplex that is causing white gentiles, east Asians and even blacks to go all in on trannyism.

                  It might be true that there are higher than normal instances of homosexuality and other sexual deviance among non-religious Jews. It’s hard to separate that from progressive ideology, but there do appear to be some differences in e.g. the GSS between Jews and white liberals on certain matters of sexuality. So let’s grant that this is a hypothetical possibility.

                  Even so, aren’t we better off looking for ways to suppress or eliminate buggery in all races, rather than focus on just one? It’s been done successfully before.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Not true for India with its stratified castes.

                  Brahmins ain’t what they used to be. Believe me, I know; I’m around them far more than I care to be. We aren’t getting Sanskrit pandits, we’re getting bobs and vegana and plz send the codes. The caste system does still exist, of course, but the biological lines aren’t as sharp as westerners think they are.

                  Besides, we’re not just importing from the Brahmin caste. We’re importing Indians, period – anyone who can qualify for an H-1B, which is basically anyone from any caste who isn’t dumb as a bag of hammers. There are Vaisyas in India with 130+ IQs, and they all want to move here.

                • pdimov says:

                  >Besides, we’re not just importing from the Brahmin caste. We’re importing Indians, period…

                  That’s correct; the quoted IQ figure for Indian-Americans is irreversibly in the past tense.

                  Still, reversion to the mean doesn’t revert to India’s mean. It will revert to the mean of the subpopulation that is homogeneous enough.

                  Reversion to the mean happens because, roughly, IQ is parents’ IQ +- luck factor. If you win the lottery, you’ll be smarter than your parents, but your kids will revert to your parents’ average – which isn’t necessarily going to be the country average, and probably isn’t for anyone commenting here.

                  TL;DR if you only import 120+ IQ Indians, they will not revert to 85. But they’ll still be Indians.

                • Allah says:

                  Of course you are ingrouping Jews. You treat Jews as if they are your schizophrenic close relative. You clearly feel close to them and hate to see any harm come to them.

                  The rest is another copypasta. Are you writing some sort of chatbot for this blog or what?

                  We support Westphalian nationalism not the nationalism that caused the world wars which is the kind of nationalism wignats support.

                  Don’t you support world conquest?

                  Tommy, you are denying evolution. We are mighty different from the first life form, are we constantly regressing back to it? How did we escape its gravitational pull anyway?

                  IQ bell curves are not relevant here. All it shows here is there are fewer smart people, it doesn’t show smart people magically having more chance to have dumb children. Indian elite aren’t idiot savants or whatever you had in mind.

                  Yeah, that’s believable. The Muslim Turk was totally well-behaved and amicable until he sensed the presence of evil Jews and philosemites, then felt compelled to come to the aid of the poor goyim. Seriously, white Christians, I am your friend, here to protect you from the lies of Uncle Shlomo! Even though I have repeatedly stated that I am not your friend and that Christians should be killed for always aggressing against us!

                  Christianity is a big fat lie and should be erased with fire and steel. I quite like white people and do not want them to go. Life would be much duller without white girls. Gassing the Jews is mutually beneficial, Don’t you like that kind of thing?

                  Reversion to the mean happens because, roughly, IQ is parents’ IQ +- luck factor. If you win the lottery, you’ll be smarter than your parents, but your kids will revert to your parents’ average – which isn’t necessarily going to be the country average, and probably isn’t for anyone commenting here.

                  That’s not reversion or regression to the mean. That’s just randomization.

                • jim says:

                  As is typical of Muslims you are ignorant. You don’t understand reversion to the mean, nor evolution, so when conversing with better informed people you technobabble.

                  Reversion to the mean means that the children of smart parents tend to reflect the mean of their great grandparents. A related, but different phenomenon is that an unusually smart kid of not-so-bright parents, is apt, as he grows older, to revert to a level closer to the mean of his grandparents.

                  Evolution to smartness results from dumb people not reproducing, so the mean of the present day population reflects the mean of those who reproduced in the previous population, not the mean of the previous population.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Jews have some very good and useful qualities and some very bad qualities. The type of government we envision will keep them out of the government and the social sciences where they in general do great harm and put them in trade and the hard sciences where they do great good.

                  Their role in various creative arts (the arts being softly quasi state but not hard quasi state) books media music etc. (and I argue music was at its best in America when the Jews had the strongest hold on it in the 1950s and early q960s) requires more care and not a hard line. I do not want to censor the Moldbugs, the Larry Nivens, the Billy Joels of the world. I very much want to censor the Betty Friedans of the world.

                  With Gene Roddenberry I would allow Star Trek but the progressive vision of society would have to be severely toned down.

                • Allah says:

                  If it’s their brains you want, you can just gas the men only and take the women.

                • The Cominator says:

                  What kind of Muslim/Turk/Arab whatever the fuck you are are you that you think female brains are worth anything close to male brains.

                  Women can be good writers, they are not good scientists, inventors philosophers etc.

                  Mischlinge IQs revert to the gentile IQ mean not the mean IQ of jews.

                • çevirme says:

                  Tommy, you are denying evolution. We are mighty different from the first life form, are we constantly regressing back to it? How did we escape its gravitational pull anyway?

                  A sufficient quantity of mutations needs to accumulate for trait selection to occur; among complex organisms (such as dogs and Pajeets), that happens progressively over several generations.

                  Sorry, mid-witted shitskin; your children will own shawarma parlors.

                  https://i.redd.it/thmrcagczfh01.png

                • Not Tom says:

                  TL;DR if you only import 120+ IQ Indians, they will not revert to 85. But they’ll still be Indians.

                  Might be correct in a nitpicky, “we don’t have good per-caste IQ data and can’t identify the exact proportions of each we’re importing anyway” sense.

                  Incorrect in the very empirical, visceral, “all Uber and Grubhub jobs are dominated by Indians and none of them can follow simple directions, and Indian ‘programmers’ and ‘consultants’ are 97% dogshit” sense.

                  You can put me in the IKAGO bucket too. Hell, I even know some extremely smart blacks. But I also know what a mean looks like. The mean for blacks is Chicago, the mean for Indians of all castes is Calcutta, and the mean for upper-caste Indians is Hyderabad, which is better but not that much better.

                  And also true for Jews and Chinese. While there isn’t an IQ problem with either, there are cultural problems with both, and second-generation immigrants are prone to de-assimilate. Steve Sailer thinks that “flight from white” is a completely cultural phenomenon, but I think it has at least something to do with children of immigrants simply being less assimilable than their parents.

                  Those who do not understand RTM are doomed to repeat it. Over and over and over again.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Tommy, you are denying evolution. We are mighty different from the first life form, are we constantly regressing back to it?

                  It’s called fixation, you blithering idiot.

                  Honestly, you come to debate evolution with a group whose religion is based on it? I don’t know whether I should be annoyed or dying of laughter. You didn’t even bring a knife to this gunfight, just started swinging your dick around claiming it was a knife.

                • çevirme says:

                  If it’s their brains you want, you can just gas the men only and take the women.

                  Women can be good writers, they are not good scientists, inventors philosophers etc.

                  That’s true, but the more relevant point in this context is that both ends of the intelligence bell curve are overwhelmingly male, thus if one intends for those unique Jewish-descended geniuses to sprout within one’s own kin, it would be more beneficial to genetically assimilate Jewish men than Jewish women. Of course, regression-to-the-mean largely offsets that effect, but in large enough numbers, it might still be statistically significant.

                  Mischlinge IQs revert to the gentile IQ mean not the mean IQ of jews.

                  Close, but not exactly; ceteris paribus, it reverts to somewhere in-between (which is roughly 105 if we take regular whites and regular Ashkenazim), but somewhat closer to the gentile IQ, because the genetics of intelligence are fragile.

                • Allah says:

                  Mischlinge IQs revert to the gentile IQ mean not the mean IQ of jews.

                  This again. It should be roughly in the middle. No hocus pocus IQ “regression” is involved here. It is simply the combination of both.

                  Reversion to the mean means that the children of smart parents tend to reflect the mean of their great grandparents.

                  Is regression to the mean simply “people are likely to resemble their close ancestors”? One problem is Tommy confused one’s own ancestors with one’s countrymen.

                  Honestly, you come to debate evolution with a group whose religion is based on it? I don’t know whether I should be annoyed or dying of laughter. You didn’t even bring a knife to this gunfight, just started swinging your dick around claiming it was a knife.

                  Isn’t your religion Christianity? Yes, I am somewhat making it up as I go along but isn’t that the point?

                  That’s true, but the more relevant point in this context is that both ends of the intelligence bell curve are overwhelmingly male, thus if one intends for those unique Jewish-descended geniuses to sprout within one’s own kin, it would be more beneficial to genetically assimilate Jewish men than Jewish women.

                  More cuckoldry, as expected. Is çevirme shaman?

                • Not Tom says:

                  One problem is Tommy confused one’s own ancestors with one’s countrymen.

                  Kin, not countrymen. Don’t try that country/nation/tribe legerdemain here.

                  You are very subtly trying to smuggle in the assumption that race isn’t real, and that we cannot assume anything about one X based on a million or billion other X – unless, of course, X is “jew”. Your position is therefore not only facile, but incoherent.

                  Regression to the mean is about heredity, and race/ethnicity is an excellent proxy for heredity.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Actually, let me amend that before someone else decides to nitpick: regression toward the mean is literally a mathematical law, but as applied to biology, its prime mover appears to be the divide between genetic and environmental influences. Nurture eventually gives way to nature.

                • Allah says:

                  Kin, not countrymen. Don’t try that country/nation/tribe legerdemain here.

                  You are very subtly trying to smuggle in the assumption that race isn’t real, and that we cannot assume anything about one X based on a million or billion other X – unless, of course, X is “jew”. Your position is therefore not only facile, but incoherent.

                  Regression to the mean is about heredity, and race/ethnicity is an excellent proxy for heredity.

                  Do you have any Jewish ancestry? You appear immediately when someone says things that could Make Jews Unsafe and your style of argumentation is Jewish. You put Brahmins and dalits in the same category and played yourself, now you’re trying to claw out of that.

                  Regression to the mean is about statistical noise, nurture in this instance simply contributes to it.

                • jim says:

                  > Do you have any Jewish ancestry? You appear immediately when someone says things that could Make Jews Unsafe

                  Nuts.

                  Not Tom said nothing in defense of Jews. He said unkind things about Mohammedans. Whenever you Mohammedans or Harvard ngos, whichever you are, hear what you do not want to hear you say “Joo Joo Joo” – not because ngos hate Jews nor because Mohammedans hate Jews more than you hate us or less than you hate us, but because you figure it will make us fall upon each other.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Further to Jim’s response, I “appear” in many different conversions regardless of whether or not they relate to Jews. Whereas, so far, you have only ever made posts that are either directly about Jews or steering the conversation in that direction. If I were a bettin’ man, I’d guess that it was your obsession.

                  The problem I have is not with criticism of Jews, it is with hostile ideologies such as Marxism and Islam (which are barely distinguishable these days) attempting to make Jews the center of every conversation, as opposed to women, progressives, the Cathedral structure, coups and countercoups, priests and warriors, general statecraft, or anything else that actually matters. 80-90% of Jews in western countries will get very wet during the great helicopter tour of 2024, we all accept that and don’t particularly care about the rest.

                  I eagerly await your response to the red pill challenge. Let’s see if you’re capable of discussing anything that is not either opposition to Christians or opposition to Jews.

                • pdimov says:

                  >Incorrect in the very empirical, visceral, “all Uber and Grubhub jobs are dominated by Indians and none of them can follow simple directions, and Indian ‘programmers’ and ‘consultants’ are 97% dogshit” sense.

                  This is a recent development caused by scraping the bottom of the H1B barrel. It wasn’t like that in the past.

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income

                  Eugenics works. Assortative mating works.

                • pdimov says:

                  >Of course, regression-to-the-mean largely offsets that effect

                  For values of “largely” approaching 100%.

                • Keep Crying "Joo Joo Joo" says:

                  More cuckoldry

                  Apparently, you can’t differentiate between description and prescription; a common failure of half-wit shitskins.

                • ten says:

                  Allah the filthy stupid turk, just as his namesake the unholy desert spirit, enemy of mankind and final darkness to wrap the world in everlasting ignorant stasis, is an unentertaining blight and pure nuisance.

                  Where Craigslistean Rectalist has some sense of heart, Kookanic was great fun and peppermint.. well, i dont know, he seemed ok to me, when i read old posts and see him paganfagging years ago he does not seem ok though, Allah is nothing but an idiot mongrel, a great disturbance and a towelhead faggot.

                  Stop the cancer.

                • info says:

                  The greatest mistake Europe made was confining Jews to money lending.

                  In this way Kings and Nobles took out loans from them due to them allowed to do usury.

                  And allowed Houses like the Rothschilds to gain a lot of influence.

                  Now if they were confined to manual labor and agriculture. Matters would be different.

                  Jews would also likely wouldnt have been so exposed to the virus of leftism.

                • ten says:

                  info:

                  The problem with usury is hard. Due to its profitability and usefulness to the one who can front load his assets, it is very difficult and hindering to outright ban usury.

                  Externalizing the entire process to a minority that can be expelled and killed and have all their shit stolen, and the general populace loving the lord more, not less, for doing so, is in fact a very strong solution, compared to rampant usury.

                  The jews live under the threat that if their usury becomes too unappealing to lord or aryan, all their shit may get fucked. Thus, when the system is harmonic, aryans get the capacity to front load assets, jews get profitability of lending, and aryans carry the pains of usury. If the pains get too intense though, the system is disharmonic, and jews get to carry the pains, and whatever profits they didnt manage to liquify and remove is retaken.

                  Europe did not, for the longest time, figure out any better solution, and islam, of course, misfigured out a retarded non solution.

                  The obvious “solution to the jewish question” is that if we have solved usury and no longer need them, and they cause trouble, they should go.

                • jim says:

                  Did not in fact work, due to regulatory capture. Hence the frequent complaint that Jews were the Kings sponges.

                  Eventually the Church figured out a good solution to usury: You can charge interest on loans against property, but not against the person. (I drastically oversimplify a complicated system which is not easy to explain and involves all sorts of concepts and abstractions about property and obligations.)

                  The problem with usury is that it gives the usurer the incentive and opportunity to take advantage of other people’s weaknesses and bad decision, and to facilitate and encourage weakness and bad decisions.

                  I would qualify that by making interest bearing loans against the person enforceable against honor only. The recipient should always be able to say “buzz off”, with no consequences other than that no one will make an interest bearing loan to him again.

                  If interest bearing loans are against property only, then if the mortgage is underwater, and the householder returns the house in good order and condition, then he has fulfilled the mortgage, as much as if he paid it off. Which means the lender has an incentive to not make loans on property that might well be a bad or unwise investment.

                  Loans should share the risk between lender and borrower, so that the lender has no incentive to facilitate weakness and foolishness. Christian usury law allowed interest bearing loans on property and to for-profit corporations whose shares are private property, which are the uses for which interest bearing loans are important and useful.

                • info says:

                  “The jews live under the threat that if their usury becomes too unappealing to lord or aryan, all their shit may get fucked. Thus, when the system is harmonic, aryans get the capacity to front load assets, jews get profitability of lending, and aryans carry the pains of usury. If the pains get too intense though, the system is disharmonic, and jews get to carry the pains, and whatever profits they didnt manage to liquify and remove is retaken. ”

                  It still manages to be an utter failure nonetheless. Its too bad we couldn’t stick with sound money.

                  And Kings get too trigger happy with their wars that would require loans with Usury.

                • info says:

                  @jim

                  What’s your thoughts on the regular Jubilees that is required every 49 years?

                  (Leviticus 25:23-38)

                  Of course combined with the requirement for sound money:
                  http://vftonline.org/VFTINC/frn/unabomb3.htm

                  In accordance with the Law mandating Just Weights and Measures.

                • Allah says:

                  I repeat what I said: He appears immediately when someone says things that could Make Jews Unsafe.

                  Whereas, so far, you have only ever made posts that are either directly about Jews or steering the conversation in that direction.

                  Projection. You act as if people are threatening you personally when you see negativity towards Jews. Jim acts as if his close relatives are being harmed when he sees similar content.

                  we all accept that and don’t particularly care about the rest.

                  Ah, but you do care about the rest. If you didn’t you’d just dump them all and let Jesus sort it out.

                  And you still haven’t answered my question. Do you have any Jewish ancestry?

                  Allah the filthy stupid turk, just as his namesake the unholy desert spirit, enemy of mankind and final darkness to wrap the world in everlasting ignorant stasis, is an unentertaining blight and pure nuisance.

                  Where Craigslistean Rectalist has some sense of heart, Kookanic was great fun and peppermint.. well, i dont know, he seemed ok to me, when i read old posts and see him paganfagging years ago he does not seem ok though, Allah is nothing but an idiot mongrel, a great disturbance and a towelhead faggot.

                  Stop the cancer.

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1UtRnGn5hc

                • Not Tom says:

                  Ah, but you do care about the rest. If you didn’t you’d just dump them all and let Jesus sort it out.

                  You argue just like Communist Revolutionary. Tell me what I think, then ignore everything that’s been said so far and loudly repeat your original premise.

                  There’s literally not an honest bone in your body.

                  And you still haven’t answered my question.

                  No one here owes you answers, especially when you are stubbornly refusing to provide any of your own.

                  All you need to know is that we follow The Faith.

                • Allah says:

                  You argue just like Communist Revolutionary. Tell me what I think, then ignore everything that’s been said so far and loudly repeat your original premise.

                  No one here owes you answers, especially when you are stubbornly refusing to provide any of your own.

                  These are exactly what you do.

                • The Cominator says:

                  If you aren’t NRx and want to torture us to death BUT are not a religious muslim what exactly IS your agenda here? From what i see you want us to adopt wignat thinking for some reason but average wignat IQ is not much higher then the nigs they hate. Average NRx iq is probably above 120 and weve been much more effective then wignats and were more effective politically…

                  What ARE you trying to do?

                • The Cominator says:

                  Allah is not like CR, it was very vert clear that CR was a communist who would stubbornly and robotically argue that to really be right wing you had to endorse the economic programme of Pol Pot and that if you disagreed with this you were probably a jew.

                  “Allah” doesn’t seem to have a clear agenda at all., other then he thinks NRx should be a lot more anti-semitic the way the retarded wignats are. Does Allah even know Moldbug the founding philosopher of NRx was a jew? If we were interested in being hardcore anti-semites we probably would not follow a political philosophy founded by a jew.

                • pdimov says:

                  CR is not a communist. I would classify him as a national socialist (in the nominal sense, not in the Hitlerist sense.) His belief is that the fuehrer should protect the worker (the salt of the nation) against capital predation.

                  Like capitalism, this is an ancient arrangement; the king protecting the peasant from noble predation. HLvM, except stable rather than revolutionary.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “CR is not a communist.”

                  He is absolutely and quite obviously a communist and defending him makes me suspect that you are also a communist.

                  His belief is that the fuehrer should protect the worker (the salt of the nation) against capital predation.

                  And the ways he has expressed that the government should “protect” the worker and the peasant sounds very similar to the way Pol Pot protected them.

                  He had a profoundly Khmer Roguesque post (one that would definitely would have had him being shot by a more sane communist like Stalin) once saying that in essence he would make the eco-fascist look like real pansies if he could… I wish I remember which thread it was under.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Allah is not like CR, it was very vert clear that CR was a communist

                  His stated agenda is not the same – at least in the areas where he’ll clearly state his agenda – but his language and tone are very similar and his debate tactics are nearly identical.

                  I don’t suspect they’re the same person, but they might as well be. They both lie about their identity, they both lie about their beliefs, and they both come here for no other reason than to divide, distract, and if possible, subvert. And they probably both work for some NGO.

                  the king protecting the peasant from noble predation. HLvM, except stable rather than revolutionary.

                  I’m not aware that this ever happened, and I don’t see how it would be stable. What exactly are you talking about? When did kings intervene to promote the interests of peasants above dukes, barons and knights? Maybe if you were talking about vassals, who had certain legal rights, but they’d be considered middle by today’s standards, not low.

                  More importantly, as all of us including Jim have repeatedly explained here, capital does not rule today, and arguments that presume capitalists rule and that we accept that this fact are both false and inherently communist.

                  This sounds like some kind of argument of the form: “okay, maybe capitalism is ancient, but so is Marxism”, which is false. Covetousness existed, of course, and has always existed, but was considered a sin, not a virtue.

                • pdimov says:

                  >He is absolutely and quite obviously a communist and defending him makes me suspect that you are also a communist.

                  🙂

                  The new America, with you in charge of solving the Communist Question, is going to be great.

                  Let me be more precise. The political formula he espouses here I classify as clearly national socialist.

                • jim says:

                  > The political formula he [CR] espouses here I classify as clearly national socialist.

                  National socialists do not go after the guy who owns your local pizza franchise.

                  National socialists are not in denial about who is engaging in knife and acid attacks in Britain.

                  National socialists do not reify the Marxist classes.

                  National socialists do not have any strong beliefs about capitalism being recent.

                  National socialists notice the race and ethnicity of people who are making the streets unpleasant, unsafe, and ugly.

                  “Allah”, on the other hand, despite me initially believing for reasons of style that he was fbi or ngo, not the enemy he claimed to be, has been consistent with the belief system of the enemy he claims to be.

                  On the other hand, “Allah” has so far failed to commit any thought crimes that would definitely prove he is not fbi or ngo, so the matter remains unresolved. He could be an ngo who is good at passing as a real Muslim in order to commit entryism against real Muslims. But if so, good at passing.

                  For CR, we have positive evidence that he is a commie entryist. For “allah”, only a lack of evidence proving that he is not.

                • pdimov says:

                  >What exactly are you talking about?

                  AFAIK Europe, Russia and China all had traditional systems whereby a commoner could complain, in writing or in person, to the king/tsar/emperor that he’s being treated unjustly.

                  I remember reading somewhere that listening to such complaints took half a day for the Chinese emperor, but I can’t find it now. It was probably on Spandrell’s blog somewhere.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “AFAIK Europe, Russia and China all had traditional systems whereby a commoner could complain, in writing or in person, to the king/tsar/emperor that he’s being treated unjustly.”

                  When commoners would petition or have audience with a monarch and complain about someone it was generally about someone abusive within the royal bureaucracy (such as it was) or downstream from the king in the feudal hierarchy not their boss if their boss was outside the government, also peasants theoretically were not to petition the Tsar directly and it tended to go badly for them when they did it anyway.

                • Not Tom says:

                  traditional systems whereby a commoner could complain, in writing or in person, to the king/tsar/emperor that he’s being treated unjustly

                  Okay, I can sort of see where you’re coming from now, but would strongly dispute that this constitutes HLvM or any form of Jouvenelian conflict, because it’s not really conflict at all.

                  HLvM implies class warfare – the high deliberately using the low as pawns to diminish the middle’s social status and property rights. The petitioning you’re referring to is simply the essence of a civilized legal system. If a sovereign wants to maintain order – specifically, to maintain compliance with any legal code – then nobody except the sovereign himself can be above the law. Thus, if nobles were abusing their privilege and acting outside the law (given some wiggle room, because of said privilege), they could be held accountable.

                  In England, at least, this is consistent with the development of a common-law constitution; the laws didn’t need to be written down, people generally knew how things were supposed to operate and when someone – anyone, including a noble – was not on the up-and-up.

                  Neither high nor low acted against the middle, they just held the middle accountable. Think “retirees and the SEC vs. Bernie Madoff”, not “goodwhites and nonwhites vs. badwhites”.

                • pdimov says:

                  >Neither high nor low acted against the middle, they just held the middle accountable.

                  That’s correct, and I didn’t mean to imply otherwise.

                  Similarly, in the (Platonic) national socialist system, the fuehrer holds capital accountable.

                  It appears that I have to add here a disclaimer I thought wouldn’t be needed. I don’t advocate for said national socialist system. I just observe people believing in it and notice the similarities with the traditional arrangement.

          • I AM says:

            “Copying the conquistadors is fine.”

            Really? You’re satisfied with the outcome in Mexico, Central, and South America?

            You’re satisfied with the “white” muttification of the city on the hill formerly known as New England?

            Are you also satisfied with the outcome of the Book of Enoch?

            • Samuel Skinner says:

              Yes I’m satisfied. Having thousands of many and conquering continents is a win in my book and gradually making the population more like you is a good long term plan.

              Inviting in foreigners (New England) is not copying the conquistadors.

        • Theshadowedknight says:

          Nothing to see here, folks, nothing to see. Move along. No religious conflict here. Definitely not an example of other Muslims picking a fight and losing. Nothing to see.

          Even you put barely any effort into that. Shows that even you cannot deny the reality of what is in front of you besides cursory formalities.

          Looks like the Chinese are implementing a plan similar to my own. Excellent! We will be able to observe it and learn from it.

          • Allah says:

            Do you feel like a man now? Did Muslims write the Orkhon inscriptions?

            • Theshadowedknight says:

              Irrelevant. Yes, conflict between ethnic groups is a constant. Especially when an ethnic group picks up Islam and starts cutting throats and murdering children. Christian Europeans and Christian Arabs shared the Holy Land for centuries until you Muslim rats crawled out of your holes and screwed it up.

              Good fences make good neighbors, unless the neighbor is a Muslim. Then the fence is oppressing his religion because it is his religion to kill his neighbors and the fence makes it harder to kill, so the oppression justifies him trying to kill you. When you have a Muslim neighbor and want peace, you have to let him know that if he looks at you funny you are going to make him watch while you rape his daughters, then feed him to your dog.

              Consider that permitting your daughters to exist is a kindness. My preference would be to kill you all, man, woman, and child. Make a desert and call it peace. I, personally, am not interested in soiling my gene-line with your inferior genetics, but mercy is my Christian duty. Consequently, when I fuck your daughters, I will have to lie back and think of England. You should be appreciative that I am so kind and generous.

              • Allah says:

                But first, can you talk back to your women? I repeat: This is an ethnic/racial conflict. Not a religious conflict.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  Repeating the lie makes it no more true. Especially when it comes from a habitually deceptive religion.

                • Allah says:

                  Agreed.

                • jim says:

                  The Chinese police are scrutinizing people of a certain ethnicity for indicators of Islamic belief. Such indicators result in the males being sent to camps. It is a religious conflict. They are repressing Islam, not the the ethnicity as such.

                • Allah says:

                  Chinese are eradicating the Uyghurs in much the same way they eradicated and are eradicating other non-Muslim non-Chinese. It is an ethnic conflict.

                • jim says:

                  Not seeing large numbers of Tibetans sent to camps for showing indications of their religion. Flooding Han Chinese into Tibet is a different kind of operation. In Tibet, they are just settling lightly populated lands.

                • Allah says:

                  Both places are strategically important and it’s better to have loyal Han there than unreliable locals.

                  indications of their religion

                  Are the Uyghurs be left alone if they show indications of nationalist sentiment?

  4. Mister Grumpus says:

    We’re deep-diving on this one. If Solzhenitsyn had a blog.

  5. Not Tom says:

    Not just accusing Trump of what Biden did, but accusing Trump of what Clinton did. Some of them have actually employed language along the lines of “colluded with a foreign power to dig up dirt on a political opponent”. Uh, hello, Steele Dossier? Did you think we’d forgotten already?

    Somehow, I think despite their reptilian nature, there must be at least a couple of reporters out there who feel just a little unclean reporting that narrative. If not, then there truly is no redemption for them.

  6. The Cominator says:

    Strongly disagree Biden is the most electable Democratic candidate.

    Biden has always been very stupid but now add senile to the mix, Trump would love to run against Biden but he knew that Biden would NEVER be the nominee. Getting to Biden is a good way to get to the rest of the DC crime family as Biden was probably too stupid to cover his tracks and unlike Hillary hes not thorough about putting his witnesses underground…

    • Samuel Skinner says:

      It isn’t Biden is a good candidate- it is that the rest are even worse.

      • The Cominator says:

        Bush the younger the idiot… Is still within living memory Bidens stupidity and senility would make him even weaker then Warren.

        Tulsi would be the hardest Democrat to beat by far but because she maintains a sliver of sanity the democrats would never nominate her.

  7. The Cominator says:

    Barr in Italy on official business, Trump knows a big problem with locking up Democrats is the DC jury pool… I think the plan is to have the swamp indicted in foreign countries when possible.

    • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

      The ideal scenario would be to extract Mifsud from Rome, where he is at risk of being Epsteined, and bring him to the US for testimony (where there is still some risk of being Epsteined, but probably a lot lower). If he testifies to what everyone suspects, it will burn down the House.

  8. simplyconnected says:

    Their [SJW’s] projection is primarily to defend themselves from becoming aware of their own conduct, not to deflect accusations.

    This is very interesting.
    I wonder if this information can be used to somehow force them to face reality.

    Perhaps a relevant example is the reaction to “islam is right about women”, which was to say it’s hate speech, even though they also say they don’t understand what it’s trying to say.

    • Mister Grumpus says:

      Welcome to the subtle but profound power of the thoughtcrime model.

      I can accuse you of shoplifting without shoplifting something myself. Obviously.

      But I can’t accuse you of thoughtcrime without revealing to everyone in that same moment that I’m guilty of the very same thoughtcrime. That’s the trick.

      “He just thought of a purple elephant, and thinking of purple elephants is illegal! Arrest that man! Oh shit wait!”

      This is the crazy, this is the power of words, and this is why no one knows who Jim is.

      • simplyconnected says:

        This is the crazy, this is the power of words, and this is why no one knows who Jim is.

        Perhaps the ideas expressed here are too far off the mainstream. The SJWs have more immediate targets for now.

        Yes, it’s interesting that understanding what the thoughtcrime is requires committing thoughtcrime.
        I recall that exchange with Aaronson, Moldbug and Jim. Aaronson didn’t even really understand what was being said, then started banning. Aaronson is arguably an extremely smart person, but then he has his own IRL job to protect.

        • jim says:

          Scott’s thoughtcrime filter meant that the only thing he could actually hear us say was “orange man good”, but he was wordlessly aware that some terrible thoughtcrime was being committed, even though he had no idea what it was.

          Because Scott had a feeling that an unspeakable thoughtcrime was being committed, he accused Boldmug of various speakable thought crimes that bore no noticeable resemblance to what Boldmug was saying.

          • simplyconnected says:

            I distinctly remember you saying something to the effect of “I implore you to listen to the people who just won the election”.
            A conversation between very intelligent people in which communication was not possible. Chilling.

            • jim says:

              And Scott’s response to “I implore you to listen to the people who just won the election” was, predictably, to ban me.

              • Bilge Pump says:

                Thanks for pointing out the Boldmug comments. This one stood out to me:

                Aaronson: “The basic idea is this: for those of our Iranian colleagues who wish to stay in the US, we can force the Trump thugs to literally drag them out kicking and screaming, creating a visual spectacle for the world. Like, imagine if Maryam Mirzakhani, the world’s first female Fields Medalist and a Stanford professor, were escorted onto a plane in handcuffs by ICE agents. How much play would that get on CNN? How many YouTube views?”

                Boldmug: I’m afraid the straightforward sentiment you’re describing here, which I can only read as *eminent scientists should be above the law*, will play very well on CNN and not very well at all among the deplorables.

        • Mister Grumpus says:

          “Perhaps the ideas expressed here are too far off the mainstream. The SJWs have more immediate targets for now.”

          Look closer. To go after Jim verbally, with anything more articulate than a stick of dynamite under his bathroom, is to also incriminate oneself for the crime of knowing who he is and what he’s about. Just exposure to Jim’s ideas already makes his attacker suspect and untrustworthy to his own side. This is 4D shit.

          The Virginia shills who come in here to debate him can’t, because their bosses are watching, and they’ll get fired by HR if they actually address his core message. Even if they address it well. Especially if they address it well, because then they’ve already been tainted with the thoughtcrime.

          In extremis, if I was a Khmer Rouge guy, but revealed to my colleagues that I could read (let alone read English or French), then they’d probably have to kill me because maybe I’d someday start reading the wrong things. And therefore I would know — my instincts would know, right next to heartbeat and digestion — not only to hide my literacy from them, but to also hide it from myself. I would genuinely forget how to read until the Vietnamese had counter-invaded, taken over and granted me a safe space. Until that safety had arrived, a book would look to me like scribbles.

          I have my recovering-Stormer-reader weakness for Jews, right? But let me guess, I bet there were left-behind Jews in Germany and Poland who genuinely forgot how to read Hebrew or speak Yiddish until WW2 was over. It wasn’t hiding. It was “survival forgetting”. It was crimestop.

          What have WE, you and I, what have we forgotten in the same way? There’s truth inside us, right now, for which our instincts are waiting for sufficient safety for us to remember and know again. Whoever can release such cowering that truth in people will, in effect, be leading a revolution.

          This is why “Islam is Right about Women” posters are so powerful. These guys are dropping grenades down the rabbit hole.

          • Anonymous says:

            Perhaps they cannot go after us for thought crimes, but they can still go after us for hate crimes, and crimes against man’s law. Note that James Fields had a car meme from his Facebook brought up at his trial. Nothing about this required the prosecution to commit thought crimes.

            I am still a little suspicious about this WRPQ thing. It smells somewhat like the old fallacy that undercover police officers have to tell you if you ask them if they are cops.

            • jim says:

              > I am still a little suspicious about this WRPQ thing. It smells somewhat like the old fallacy that undercover police officers have to tell you if you ask them if they are cops.

              Have not seen it fail yet. The policeman inside not only will not let them say it, but will not let them understand when you say it. And if the policeman inside let them say it, the policeman inside everyone in Human Resources is not going to allow them.

            • Mike in Boston says:

              So what, besides (apparently) a radio station in Wisconsin, is WRPQ?

              • Samuel Skinner says:

                Women Red Pill Question (guessing)

                • Mike in Boston says:

                  slapping forehead Of course! A++ neologism, Anonymous.

                • jim says:

                  We ask the suspected shill a Women Red Pill Question. He not only cannot answer it, he cannot be asked it. He reads the question as “Do you hate and despise women?”

            • Not Tom says:

              An admittedly superficial, but tangible example of this is the way that bans on “hate symbols” often play out in practice. When YouTube or Twitter decides that something is not allowed, like the swastika or iron cross or Pepe the Frog, the ban actually sweeps up more criticisms of the ideology it’s supposedly associated with than endorsements, and eventually expands to symbols that merely look like the banned symbol, such as the Maltese or Celtic cross.

              And there is no redress, and no way to stop the cycle, because explaining why the use of the symbol should be OK in some cases (critiques, documentaries, satire, historical uses predating WWII, or not actually that symbol, etc.) generally requires actually using the banned symbol, or demonstrating an understanding of what the banned symbol actually means. The documentary-maker or satirist can’t do that, and even if he could, the censor on the other hand would be unable to listen.

              You can see this happening in real time on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube; you can see articles written about it, you can see it with your own eyes, it does not require any deep insight or careful analysis.

              To understand and believe the crimethink hypothesis, one need only extrapolate a tiny bit farther. We’ve already gone from concrete acts, to concrete statements, to abstract statements, to abstract symbols, so why not abstract ideas? It is, after all, the ideas that they really wanted to kill in the first place.

          • simplyconnected says:

            This is why “Islam is Right about Women” posters are so powerful. These guys are dropping grenades down the rabbit hole.

            True. Don’t don’t even dare touch it.

            • simplyconnected says:

              -> They don’t even dare touch it.

              • Mister Grumpus says:

                Right. There’s this straaaaaange sort of immunity at work. Like an invisibility cloak or something. The rabble might jump you, but the rulers will never have even heard of you. It’s wild.

              • The Cominator says:

                Yeah it forces shitlibs to commit thoughtcrime on women either way if they are forced to acknowledge the statement exists.

  9. […] Jim seeks Ukrainegate as just the beginning of draining the swamp. […]

    • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

      Thanks for the pointer.

      Peak Moldbug, by the metric of (probability to persuade new readers)/(number of words + 1000*number of neologisms), was his appearance as “Boldmug” in the long thread at Scott Aaronson’s blog that also included comments from Jim.

      The latest piece is largely a retread of those explanations, with a hard editorial limit of 4 sentences per paragraph (doesn’t fit his style) and new terminological coinage. “N-story state” for various small N is excellent, an instant classic to spread far and wide. “Political core” is nowhere properly defined.

      It’s interesting to see Moldbug try to straightforwardly mass-communicate while wrestling, with mixed results, to suppress the inner professor/comedian that he was born to be.

      • Mr.P says:

        There may be others, but here is one thread I found on Scott Aaronson’s blog in which “Boldmug” weighs in against the Progs.

        https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3167#comments

        The Cominator might want to skip glancing at the thread — it’ll only increase his determination to rev up the helicopters.

        In his comments, Moldbug is ever gracious, persistent, erudite as he pisses in the Prog wind.

        • alf says:

          I like this part by Scott:

          You know, I actually like the modern world.

          I like the Internet, I like seedless watermelons, I like the historically-low levels of violence that Steven Pinker documents in The Better Angels of Our Nature, I like legal rights for gays and blacks and women, I like my Iranian colleagues, I like being part of a global scientific enterprise.

          translation: ‘Guys I have prestige, money and friends. I have a good thing going on. Why do people want to ruin that! >:(‘

        • pdimov says:

          I finally went back and reread that.

          It’s beautiful.

          “For instance: there’s a very small number of writers who are on the record predicting, from the very start, that the Arab Spring would end in massive bloodshed and destruction. It’s like the Big Short. Except that we didn’t make any money. Oh, and no one learned anything. (You could say that of the Big Short as well.)”

          To paraphrase a saying, the advantage of having imperfect memory is the ability to enjoy Boldmug over and over again.

      • simplyconnected says:

        Peak Moldbug, by the metric of (probability to persuade new readers)/(number of words + 1000*number of neologisms), was his appearance as “Boldmug” in the long thread at Scott Aaronson’s blog that also included comments from Jim.

        That was the most interesting thing I ever read on the internets.

        • Mr.P says:

          Agreed and highly recommended.

          It took hours, but I read every Moldbug post entry.

          Beyond impressive on innumerable dimensions.

    • What is a bit weird this: “The most dangerous outside stories (a) are completely true, (b) aim at rogue gentry, and (c) exalt commoners and/or disparage clients”

      Hinting at both in this paragraph and in planning future articles that this dangerous outside story might be some kind of fascism. But I’ve yet to see any kind of fascism that would be completely true. And often not even having a consistent enough doctrine that you could call true or false.

      I don’t really see them aiming at rogue gentry either.

      • Not Tom says:

        His point was obviously that truly threatening factual narratives, such as Jouvenelian conflict (near-far/HLvM) are replaced with cartoon versions like Fascism.

        How many of you have even heard of Bertrand de Jouvenel? He was a philosopher who died in 1987. The Wiki entry on him acknowledges that he was a philosopher, but aside from claiming he “supported fascism”, says literally nothing about his philosophy. Other encyclopedias have placeholder pages on him, tacitly acknowledging his existence but declining to offer up even a single word. I’m not gonna lie, it took me a solid 5 minutes to dredge up his name from memory, and that was with the help of a few web searches.

        The wiki entry on “class conflict” does not mention Jouvenel a single time. The wiki entry on “fascism” does not even mention Jouvenel. The Cathedral has very carefully constructed a narrative that technically acknowledges his existence but insists that he isn’t important or interesting and is just another one of those bad people you should ignore.

        Fascism isn’t the threatening narrative, it’s the cardboard cutout of the threatening narrative. Truly threatening narratives aren’t allowed to exist in a 3+ narrative system; narratives 3 and up have to be stupid, incoherent and low-status to normal people. Trooferism/ZOG is another n-narrative.

        • Mr.P says:

          I read Jouvenel’s *On power* last year. It’s a bit of a grind in the middle chapters but comes together brilliantly in the end.

          *On power* details, conceptually and historically, Jim’s elaboration of Leftism.

          Big picture: Intellectuals who do not rule inform low-status kulaks with one cow that kulak neighbors on other side of town, who have two cows and slightly higher status, have two cows and higher status only because of exploitation. Intellectuals implore: If kulaks-with-one-cow join the revolution, everybody will have equal status and one cow. Kulaks-with-one-cow join revolution. Intellectuals and kulaks-with-one-cow genocide kulaks-with-two-cows, burn their crops, steal their cattle, confiscate their seed corn. Millions die. Everybody cheers. Intellectuals declare god is dead, anoint themselves high priests of revolution, and rule over paradise. Until, that is … wash, rinse, repeat.

          Great book.

          • pdimov says:

            >Intellectuals who do not rule inform low-status kulaks with one cow that kulak neighbors on other side of town, who have two cows and slightly higher status

            This reminds me that we never finished our discussion with Jim about the cow number. My alternative hypothesis was that the power base of the intellectuals wasn’t the one-cow peasant (mobilized against the two-cow peasant) but the zero-cow peasant (mobilized against the nonzero-cow peasant).

            Which of these is true has interesting implications about countering the intellectual. Since inequality is eternal, one against two will always be with us. In contrast, making the majority nonzero is achievable, depriving the intellectual of path to power.

            • jim says:

              We want to make the man who pays taxes, has a wife and a job and a little bit of property the high status core of our society. And we want him armed, and the rest disarmed.

              We want the middle to beat the fringes, not the fringes to beat the middle, because the middle is what you need to accomplish anything external. Merchants, workers, fighters. When this group is at the bottom of the status pile, your society is headed for ruin.

            • Not Tom says:

              Whoever has the fewest number of cows, whether it’s zero or one or ten, incite them against anyone who has more cows than them, but fewer cows than you.

              It’s metaphorical; the precise number of cows is not significant.

              • pdimov says:

                Sure, if you assume that the precise number is insignificant, you can then conclude that the precise number is insignificant.

                I assert (for the sake of the debate) that zero is significant, in that it’s much easier to incite zero against nonzero than it is to incite one against two.

              • jim says:

                Again, remember that Trotsky, a failed urban money lender, claimed to be a peasant.

                Turned out that the peasant’s real enemy was not the peasant with more cows than he, or even urban Jewish moneylenders, but the people who wanted to subject land and agricultural labor to political control.

                Whenever a commie tells you he is your friend and is on your side against the evil X, he is plotting to rob you and murder you. The vast majority of the people murdered in the immense crimes of the twentieth century were murdered by the people supposedly on their side.

                The progressives say they were not on the side that murdered those people, although commies and progressives are inextricably intermingled, but as the twenty first century rolls on, the progressives are starting to commit some gigantic mass murders, though so far only in third world countries with cutouts between them and the mass murders, albeit cutouts that they supply with funds, arms, air support, and close artillery support.

        • I was literally taught a version of HLvM in a Commie school behind the Iron Curtain! Of course with the emphasis that it was a very good thing because it helped the low. Why would this be very dangerous? Didn’t both Soviet and American Communists manage to convince most people that everything that helps the low is a good thing?

          Another thing is… of course they focused on class. And I must admit the way they have put it was not entirely wrong as class does matter.

          So in the first example we were taught, Senators/Patricians were really the top class before Caesar came around. Hard to call them Middle. And after that, Caesar did not constitute a class as a just one man. And the Low, while the Commies presented them as starving plebs, the real low were the slaves, being a free citizen already meant a middling status, and many populares were very rich merchant cavalry who were just pissed they have to sit behind the Senators in the circus. So in reality, it was Power + Middle Class against the Top Class.

          The other two examples we were taught, kings + lower nobility against aristocrats, kings + bourgeois (actually, bourgeois-class nobility of the robe, intellectuals) against aristocrats. From a power viewpoint, it is HLvM, but from a class viewpoint it is Power + Middle Class against the Top Class.

          Well, that’s Commie history. But is it entirely wrong? Power matters, but class also does.

          Now today HLvM is precisely true. Now the Middle is struggling suburban middle class whites. The Low is the ghetto. And the High is not only more powerful, it is often far richer as well, and also stands out for the prestige viewpoint of social class i.e. prestigious Ivy League degrees. Today it is harder to present the suburban whites as oppressors. Still, if they just focus on talking about the Low, I think HLvM means little danger for them.

          It was drilled into people that only the Low matters.

          • Not Tom says:

            The lie is not the low, the low is the high. Progressive and communist ideology requires a particular form of doublethink, wherein its adherents are in power and not afraid to exercise that power, but also sincerely believe that the middle is really in power and responsible for the plight of the low. This is very obvious if you read anything written by progressives since the 1920s or so; for example, every feminist still believes we live in a patriarchy.

            Progressive governance has not actually helped black people. It has certainly not helped poor white people. It has not helped women, who are now deeply unhappy and wasting their fertile years. Kicking over apple carts only makes things worse for everyone. So leftists of all stripes must believe they are helping. Jouvenel helped unmask this ideology as the cynical realpolitik that it really is.

            The high do not actually want to help the low, and will kill off half the low when all of the middle are dead and the top of the old low becomes the new middle; the cycle never ends. The Kulaks weren’t well off, they were slightly richer peasants.

            The high claims to want to help the low, but actually demands that the middle give up their status and possessions in order to help the low, while the high contribute nothing. Then enslaves or kills the middle when they refuse. HLvM is just a simplified version of Jouvenelian conflict; you really should read the whole thing, then you’ll understand why it’s dangerous.

            • True now, 20th century, wasn’t quite true in those old historic cases. My point is, Commies taught this because they had nothing to fear from it. What would they have to fear now from people realizing HLvM? The only dangerous truth is precisely what you said, that it does not actually help the Low.

              Well, okay, there is the aspect that HLvM shows that it is not “unintended consequences” and “the road to Hell is paved with good intentions” but more like “the road to Hell is paved with will to power and the give no fuck about the consequences”.

            • Mister Grumpus says:

              > Progressive governance has not actually helped black
              > people. It has certainly not helped poor white people.
              > It has not helped women, who are now deeply unhappy
              > and wasting their fertile years.

              If I were a Russian serf in 1850 I’d have a decent chance at a teenage virgin bride of my own in an Orthodox Christian marriage celebrated, supported and enforced by our entire community.

              The Bible says to cherish the wife of my youth. Today, Star Trek is more believable.

              Tell me again about progress.

              • pdimov says:

                Progress has granted status to those (and other) groups (*), not tangible benefits.

                As another example, fat/gay/trans acceptance doesn’t increase life expectancy, but it does elevate in status.

                (*) Except poor whites.

              • I suppose one big reason of the popularity of the Left is that a lot of men today actually do not consider that a better alternative.

                When I was like 18 I did not. And I wasn’t even really much leftist, I sort of tried to build myself a kind of Nietzschean Social Darwinism as an ideology, although I still hated religious social conservatives. But I was 99% sure that I will be rich, famous, and will have like 10 top model girlfriends at the same time. I would not want to be a nobody even with a hot wife but no chance to fame and status and riches and all that.

                Playing the lottery sort of makes people feel rich. Democracy sort of makes people feel powerful. A lot of other things make people sort of high status. Modern egalitarianism is basically a false promise: “You could be anything!” It is hope. And hope is a strong drug.

                I suppose part of this big rightist Internet backlash is white men realizing the lie in that promise. They are like 28, realize their sexual success and future chances of it are worse than marrying a teenage bride at 20 would have been back then, that they will not be famous, rich or anything, they are sitting in a studio apartment playing videogames and have no community, antidepressants and pot are a very poor replacement for religion, many on 4chan say they have service jobs, they get shat on as white men, and realize that yes, even that would have been preferable to all this. Sex, kids, community, religion, and some pride, far better. (While assuming modern technology, dentistry etc. nobody is against tech progress, just social “progress”.)

                • welcome to the circus of values says:

                  Oh come on, you were in it for the same office job and modestly hot girl as everyone else. Social conservatives told us we could only have sex with our gfs after going through their bizarre and humiliating wedding ritual, and couldn’t bone hookers or masturbate, but had to tell women who got knocked up while single not to abort and presumably marry them and raise the baby as depicted in a few movies. Well, we made fun of the underage camwhores and their dads, and that 15 year old whose dad coached her to cry rape on her 22 year old boyfriend, she was a bitch and her dad was an even bigger bitch, and we called moot a cuck for carrying that bitch’s bags, and made fun of the women in game development for their aids and fail. That’s the right wing backlash from the next generation of social conservatives. Some of us turned into the pepe with the wojakina and baby and some into the wojak of whom the wojakina asks who is that man, he looked like he knew you?
                  Even those of us who don’t have that studio apartment should be able to bring the wojakina to their boomer’s house and feed her the boomer’s tendies. 28 is a perfectly fine and historically normal age to get married to a teenage girl, and even Boomer women who started having babies when they were 30 could have two or three. The problem is she has the right to walk away and contraception is the default, the solution is to find a preacher to tell her that God despises putting away and having children is the obviously natural thing to do.

                • the circus of values talks back says:

                  hard to argue with that

                • anon says:

                  Yes, peppermint wrote a relatively decent post here.

        • pdimov says:

          >Fascism isn’t the threatening narrative

          Fascism isn’t a narrative, it’s an immune reaction to communism.

          Which makes me wonder what will Moldbug present as its narrative in the fascism essay.

          • >Fascism isn’t a narrative, it’s an immune reaction to communism.

            Consider Hitler’s “I am more leftist than Roosevelt!” speech: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/hitler-s-speech-declaring-war-against-the-united-states

            “I understand only too well that a world-wide distance separates Roosevelt’s ideas and my ideas. Roosevelt comes from a rich family and belongs to the class whose path is smoothed in the Democracies. I am only the child of a small, poor family and had to fight my way by work and industry. When the Great War came, Roosevelt occupied a position where he got to know only its pleasant consequences, enjoyed by those who do business while others bleed. I was only one of those who carry out orders, as an ordinary soldier, and naturally returned from the war just as poor as I was in Autumn 1914. I shared the fate of millions, and Franklin Roosevelt only the fate of the so-called Upper Ten Thousand.

            After the war Roosevelt tried his hand at financial speculation: he made profits out of the inflation, out of the misery of others, while I, together with many hundreds of thousands more, lay in hospital. When Roosevelt finally stepped on the political stage with all the advantages of his class, I was unknown and fought for the resurrection of my people. When Roosevelt took his place at the head of the U.S.A., he was the candidate of a Capitalist Party which made use of him: when I became Chancellor of the German Reich, I was the Führer of the popular movement I had created. (…) arrogance of the millionaire circles around him (…) for this is a world of labour and not of cheating and trafficking (…) with all his hatred for Socialist Germany (…) These men, who live in the most socially backward states, have misery and distress enough in their own countries to occupy themselves with the distribution of foodstuffs. (…) That the Anglo-Saxon-Jewish-Capitalist World finds itself now in one and the same Front with Bolshevism does not surprise us National Socialists: we have always found them in company. ”

            That *is* a narrative. Though not a very consistent one.

            • pdimov says:

              This is a narrative that Hitler has produced, on demand, in response to an event. He was good at that.

              The fascist narrative needs to be a general one, not specific to Nazi Germany. It needs to be common to all fascist regimes. It needs to have existed beforehand and to have been the animating force of the regime formation.

              The only thing in common I see among all fascist regimes is that they appeared in response to communists (or Marxists, or international socialists) either taking over, or being on the cusp of taking over.

              • Not Tom says:

                All fascist narratives ape leftist language and doctrine, starting with the originator, Mussolini. Fascism is rightism disguised as leftism, which eventually becomes leftist because that is how the ratchet works. To put another way, it’s autocratic ambition chained at the hip to demotistic populism.

                Now, I’ve got no problem with autocracy, it’s better than democracy at least. But if fascism is an immune reaction to communism, then it’s a failed immune reaction. It is, depending on one’s perspective, either an attempt to vaccinate the patient after the disease has already progressed, or simply a very weak prescription with terrible side effects.

                I have a lot of sympathy toward people who find those ideas attractive, but it’s a broken narrative for all of the reasons Moldbug explained 10 years ago. It’s internally incoherent, and even if it were coherent, the virus has already evolved a resistance to this particular drug.

                • pdimov says:

                  >the virus has already evolved a resistance to this particular drug.

                  Debatable. I don’t think the virus can evolve resistance to it.

                  To clarify, I don’t here mean Nazi LARPing, esoteric Hitlerism or similar stupidities. What I mean is what happens when small private property owners lose trust in the political arrangement and decide that the way things are going, they are going to be murdered and their property confiscated.

                  America is not there yet; liberal democracy is still legitimate. But the trend isn’t reassuring. First they ban you from Facebook, then they punch you for having the audacity to vote for the wrong person, then…

        • I have skimmed BdJ. His main idea is not HLvM it is the constant historic growth of the state, expressed as a % of manpower of the given country in the military and the % of GDP spent on them i.e. taxes, as taxes used to be mostly spent on the military, the welfare state is a fairly novel thing.

          I don’t remember he talking about the cause of that, but it seems obvious: arms races, military competition, war between nations as a driver of history, which is indeed the most obvious driver of history to me and I suppose to everyone, there is a reason so much of of my high school history tests was about memorizing the dates of battles.

          Arms races drive centralization. Absolutism is more centralized than feudalism, democratic republics are more centralized than absolutism, fascism/nazism and communism even more centralized. Although that later is a tad more complex. John Keegan wrote that the after the Soviet Union the most centralized WW2 economy was Britain. That’s right, more war-socialist than the National Socialists. So fascism/nazism was not the most centralized, it just seemed they are driving in that direction.

          This seems to be BjD’s central idea, that e.g. democratic republics created a more centralized and thus better at war state than the monarchies, all in the name of liberty and equality. HLvM is just the method! H is who centralizes, L is whom getting centralized like conscripted and taxed, M resists centralization so they get crushed.

          Also, this stopped being true after 1945. Fewer men in arms. Conscription going away. And Adenauer was in the enviable position of both affording to build a welfare state and cut taxes at the same time because the Nazis before him just used to spend so damn much on war, so Adenauer got his economic miracle both from the supply and demand sides.

    • Crocodilian Rottweilerist says:

      Two: some mysterious force seems to ideologically coordinate this system. All these prestigious institutions, though organizationally quite separate, seem to magically agree with each other. When they change their minds, all change together, in the same direction. We cannot say that Harvard is on one side of Yale; we can say the Harvard of 2019 is on one side of the Harvard of 1989. This force is not centralized, but works like a center. It could just be a totally sick level of collective wisdom. But is it?

      Finally, even the Zionist occupier Moshe Moldberg has come around to the grandest of all realizations: the (((mysterious force))) behind it all can only be… capitalism.

      You’re welcome, everyone.

      Pic related:

      https://imgur.com/mc59pge

  10. Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

    For people interested in the Boldmug (and Jim, et al) thread at Aaronson’s blog, the relevant subset of comments is archived at

    http://gist.github.com/anonymous/7022ee224729569cf91fcdd528f00d3e

    It strips some formatting (italics and boldface are removed) but is otherwise much shorter and easier to follow than the original.

    • alf says:

      Thx. Re-reading this makes me feel like it is one hundred percent Moldbug at his most genius. Just a ten thousand word long flex. He makes Aaronson look ignorant and dumb, but does it with such a nice smile and wink.

      • jim says:

        I don’t use the smile and the wink, and I try to avoid making my adversaries look ignorant and dumb. I reject their superior holiness, and accuse them of being adherents of a bloody and brutal religion of human sacrifice that requires their adherents to disbelieve their lying eyes, thereby driving its adherents mad, that their supposedly superior holiness is demonstrated by failure to see, with the result that they commit appalling crimes in their blind spots and are apt to get into stupid wars.

        Moldbug does not like this approach at all, and thinks it terribly rude, compared to his more subtle put down, but we need to build a cohesive counter elite, to replace the our increasingly incohesive current elite. Their insane and escalating holiness is the core of the problem. How can you overthrow a religion unless, like Jesus, you deny the holiness of its priesthood?

        Moldbug criticizes the increasing tendency to commit gigantic crimes and engage in stupid wars, and points to the brutal crimes that they are unable to see, but fails to point out the mechanism underlying it.

        • simplyconnected says:

          I try to avoid making my adversaries look ignorant and dumb.

          Yes. There was no possibility to change Aaronson’s mind, why adulate or humiliate.
          The biggest impact of the exchange will be by far on the people listening in.

          Two statements:
          * “crime rates are 100x now compared to Victorian times”
          * “we can’t make Victorian houses but we still love the ones we have”
          were so shocking (both the statement and the fact that I didn’t know it) that I had to go read Moldbug and Jim.
          That’s what I took away, not whether Aaronson or Moldbug and Jim “won”, or who humiliated whom.

        • The Cominator says:

          I see Moldbug maintains the orthodox NRx pessimism about Trump id say even if he fails hes bout us a lot of time while actively redpilling the right.

        • Not Tom says:

          Moldbug’s not going to cause any trouble. Even the most militaristic, masculine elite needs a polite face. Moldbug will be the friendly representative that citizens can call up to air their grievances, and while the Jimquisition is burning through thousands of tonnes of helicopter fuel, he will stay on the phone for three hours listening to various grievances while explaining calmly but firmly how these actions are not only completely necessary for human flourishing and national sovereignty and really quite civilized by historical standards, but also essential to the shark ecosystem in the Pacific ocean, and therefore our environmental duty.

          He is probably not going to be a reliable Inquisitor, but that job can be performed by people of lesser intellect and charm.

        • At the root you both are good at converting / enlightening different kinds of people.

          You are good at converting / enlightening people who are already angry, who hate the system, who desire no status in the system. Who do not care about sounding like one of the baddies or sounding like someone who is tinfoil-hat, because they already know people who determine who sounds like a baddie or people who determine who sounds like a tinfoil-hat is are the evil elite they already hate and they desire no respectability in their eyes. Your article on how to commit genocide in good Christian way was a brutally strong shield against entryists (strange how it did not work on CR), turns away everybody who has any amount of the sensibilities of the current elites lingering in them. It was a bit tough on my stomach too…

          Moldbug is good at converting / enlightening people who are still fairly comfortable, just wonder about the contradictions of the narrative. People who hate being lied to, but it does not yet harm them much personally. Who still have many of the sensibilities of the current elite left in them. Convering someone like Foseti. Who was outright accused by a commenter that he sees the Dark Enlightenment merely as an intellectual exercise and does not care personally about the struggles of lower-status whites. Well, yeah. You could never convert ESR, Moldbug might stand some chance to do it. Moldbug converted me first, then through those lenses I saw you too are far more often right than wrong, although I still had to translate your words to the less harsh language I tend to think in.

          Looks like you are converting people who will be the warriors of Restoration and Moldbug is converting people who gonna be its clergy, or loyal bourgeoisie.

        • alf says:

          Moldbug is great as a gateway drug.

          A gateway drug to what?

          To the fact that we are ruled by an unofficial, evil state religion.

          Everything he does and says dances around this fact. Aaronson goes: ‘huh no what are you talking about!’ And Moldbug extends his arm, points at *literally anything* and explains how its existence can only be explained by an unofficial evil state religion.

          It’s watching a magician performance. Great fun.

          But, we want the next step: replace the unofficial evil state religion with an official good state religion. In this department, Moldbug lacks. He has ideas, but what has stuck? Split up the US in city states? Ehhh. Government as a joint-stock corporation? I guess, but I’m not seeing how radically different that is from a monarchy.

          Moldbug’s best prescription has been: become worthy. That works, that is something we can follow. But just that is not enough; observe how neoreaction was basically Moldbug’s cult, but every neoreaction flagship (like Social Matter) has collapsed.

          • The Cominator says:

            Moldbug is perhaps best for converting

            1) Bluepilled tradcons

            2) People who are still sort of on the left but find the recent purity spiral very scary

            Jim is best for people who are already in some stage of redpill to get the right redpills, but he is probably too much for people who ain’t part of the way there yet.

            • Not Tom says:

              I’m really looking forward to his follow-up essay aimed at conservatives. His previous ones were really all aimed at progressives. If he can actually slap some sense into the obnoxious muh-principles crowd, that would be an impressive feat.

              • The Cominator says:

                Is he doing that… It would be awesome of course moldbug redpilled me as a small l libertarian.

              • He said constitutionalists, not conservatives as such, although in the US they tend to be one and the same. Anyway, this has already been on UR. Briefly, texts don’t rule, people interpreting texts rule, and the real constitutional law based on SCOTUS decisions as precedences is just a Prog canon.

                I found it impressive that it was before the infamous gaymarriage SCOTUS decision. He said the SCOTUS is basically the sovereign, the absolute king. And this prediction got 100% true with that ruling. And indeed, if the SCOTUS was able to say that a document written by men who tended to favor castrating or killing gays somehow means gaymarriage is okay, they can basically say anything. They should focus on the SCOTUS, not the text.

                • Not Tom says:

                  I guess you’re right, in that he has already written about capital-C vs lowercase-c “constitutions”, and “constitutional law”, and so on. Somehow, none of it seems to get through their thick skulls.

                  Actually, what I’d really like to see him eviscerate is tech determinism. “Liberal progress = tech progress” is such an unbelievably stupid argument, it takes all of my self-control not to fly into a blind rage every time I hear it, but conservatives are obsessed with this idea even more than progressives are. It pretty much prevents them from hearing any other red-pill truths, which all require admitting that things are actually getting worse, and that this isn’t actually the best time to be alive.

                • @Not Tom

                  Dunno about CY, my take would be this. Tech change merely creates instability. Leftists exploit instability to grab power. We fight them, so end up reflexively defending the old system. That is bad, because the old system should be reformed to restore stability, but via good reforms, so while fighting the Leftists bad reforms the Right never gets around to think much about the necessary good reforms to restore stability.

                • Not Tom says:

                  I’m not entirely convinced that technological change creates instability. It might create instability, but might only do so when it is not managed properly, i.e. when the sovereign/government is out of touch with its people and out of touch with reality in general.

                  Today’s elite want to go all-in on automation of industries like logistics, where the biggest bulk of middle-class jobs lie. But then again, the same elites did the same thing with factory and mining jobs, which were not lost due to technological change, but lost due to insane trade policy, insane environmental policy and crushing corporate taxes. So I think the problem is not technology, but governance.

                  Competent rulers can manage technological transitions carefully, to minimize social instability without limiting innovation too much. Even in more recent history, the internet was transformative, but did not itself create a lot of social instability until social media. And anyone with basic red-pill knowledge could easily have predicted the negative impact of social media; women should never perform freely in front of large audiences, we already know that from Hollywood.

      • pdimov says:

        Boldmug’s ability to argue without stepping on a crimethink landmine is an impressive display of skill.

        • He just summed up most of the landmines as “clients” because that is their political function, sidestepping what they really are and their social functions and consequences. It is not hard if you focus on the purely political. What makes it hard is that focusing on the purely political is hard when it is society that gets fucked up all around us. It requires a certain level of detachment.

    • Atavistic Morality says:

      Good read.

      I know some people here find Scott reprehensible for his beliefs, but at the very least he is willing to engage in some form of communication, though quite lacking since most of the time he didn’t answer the points being made.

      It goes to show that it’s truly a religion, with its own dogmas, whose adherents blindly follow for unapparent reasons and it’s impossible for them to change gears through reasoning.

      Under better circumstances these people are actually intelligent, but right now they are like a calculator with a button broken that continually inputs into the processing. If you give them 1+1 they quite quickly answer the logical result with astounding velocity, only they perceive a 5 also being pressed somewhere there and it’s actually a 7, not a 2.

      It’s laughable he accused Jim of threatening him to have an excuse to ban him, when he was simply describing the current political climate and its practical implications.

      Also, how can anyone deny the US State Department’s involvement in Libya when there’s audiovisual evidence such as this:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlz3-OzcExI

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILxOF8f6Ask

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04MDYW1oEe0

      Okay, I guess videotaped confessions do not constitute valid evidence, the insanity of the progressive.

      • pdimov says:

        Jim’s post was very powerful, but the helicopter reference at the end ruined it because it gave Scott an excuse to pretend to not have read it.

      • Javier says:

        Yep. Jim pointed out that leftist violence would lead to right wing retaliation, which prompted the “free speech” host to ban him.

        Classic example of “Look how vicious this animal is, it fights back when struck.”

    • Nikolai says:

      Thanks a lot for posting that, just spent the last few days re-reading it. Moldbug at his finest. I can’t imagine how he had time to read all those books with a job, wife and kids.

      This quote really stuck out to me, “Societies which become dominated by their priest classes, theocracies basically, tend to be overthrown in titanic and horrible orgies with massive amounts of indiscriminate monk-slaughtering.”

      A very Jimian comment from Moldbug, I wonder if he still reads this blog.

  11. Red says:

    Impeachment is sure looking like a point deer see horse type of event. You may want to another look at how it’s starting to play out. Note, I’m not predicting the future, but a lot of people have been driven to exaughstion over the anti-Trump madness and may accept point Biden corruption see Trump impeachment just to make the media frenzy go away.

    • jim says:

      Point deer see horse blows up in the face of the people trying it if enough other high status people complain that it is a deer.

      • Anonymous says:

        Believing it is a horse is still higher status than believing it is a deer.

        • jim says:

          If the Senate rules that is a deer shortly before the 2020 election, which Trump wins by a landslide, everyone who swore it was a horse looks like the lunatic that they are.

    • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

      The threat from treacherous Republicans is real. There may be enough weasels ready to flip and convict in the Senate in the event of impeachment, but they would have to be severely deluded to not grasp the severity of the consequences. It would be either a Trumpist political revolution dwarfing 2016, or a physical civil war if the Senate takes the additional (simple majority, 2/3 not required) vote to disqualify Trump from future office.

      I think this is the meaning of Mitch McConnell’s statement that he would be compelled to conduct a trial if Trump is impeached; it is a signal to the House Democrats that not only will the “briar patch” strategy come into play and harm them if they keep pushing, but that if they advance the process too far, he cannot stop things from getting out of hand in a way that can permanently and catastrophically destroy them.

      Of course, the House is TDSed, spiraling left, and smells Trumpish blood not realizing it will be their own. So Schiff’s committee is racing to knock Barr and Giuliani out of the game before they can expose the anti-Trump corruption of 2015-6.

      • The Cominator says:

        Romney being the commie traitor piece of shit that he is will certainly vote for impeachment as long as one other Republican Senator does but I don’t think too many of the others want to commit political suicide (and be marked for death in the coming civil war as traitors). The two broads maybe (Murkowski especially since she actually WAS primaried and survived)…

      • R7 Rocket says:

        Actual text of the US Constitution where the word “disqualification” appears.

        “The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeach- ments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.
        Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.”

        The simple majority for “disqualification” is made up by the priestly class. Which means Trump can ignore it and make up his own interpretation.

  12. The Cominator says:

    Stephen Miller (like Moldbug a jew so based I would strongly advocate that come the Restoration they’d be given a dispensation from having to join the official church to be a member of the government) clearly sees total victory…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlqx1n_k6ts

    • jim says:

      Moldbug is not only atheist, he is so atheist that he finds it hard to put himself in the shoes of the religious. So will his Jewishness will not stop him believing in Leprechauns if socially required to do so. It is easier to believe in the unseen, than to disbelieve in the seen. Observe everyone in your workplace disbelieving in the seen.

      Stephen Miller is close enough to power he cannot possibly be orthodox, hence an equally easy convert.

      If everyone can believe that feral women in the workplace are wonderful, everyone can believe that God is Three and God is one. It is a lot less stressful on your sanity.

      Anyone as close to power as Stephen Miller disbelieves in no end of things seen, so he will have no problem with a state religion that all the right people believe, and which only requires you to believe in unfalsifiable things.

  13. Anon says:

    we observe that ngos in color revolutions and international assitance projects are generally a cause of corruption, rather than a cure,

    They aren’t a cause of corruption, they are corruption embodied. I mean, corruption (power + money) is their only fuel, and goal, it’s not a side thing.

  14. Carlylean Restorationist says:

    It’d be easy to see this as dumb Trump train boomerism, but it’s not: Trump genuinely has been brilliant, from a certain (((perspective))).

    The fact they’re not even trying to impeach, merely to investigate with a *view* to impeachment, says everything that needs to be said: it’s just another fake gayop.

    As for a cool assessment of Trump’s performance, one only need look to the car industry: no tariffs on Japanese cars after all.
    Why?
    You’d have to ask Bibi I guess. Let him sleep in your bed and he’ll tell you about Abe and the shoes. Very funny stuff. Haha funny.

    • jim says:

      Observe that Trump promised to bring the jobs back, and the jobs immediately came back. He knows what he is doing.

    • Not Tom says:

      Ah, right; Trump didn’t raise tariffs on Japanese auto imports because the Prime Minister of Israel said so! It makes total sense! Because of all the… um… cars, that Israel exports… through… Japan? JUST ASK BIBI!

      …whom Trump was conspicuously unable to protect from State Department meddling. But I’m sure all of the astroturfing and trumped-up “corruption charges” affecting Bibi right now are all just part of Bibi’s own master plan, just like the Russian Collusion narrative was all part of Trump’s master plan, which technically was also Bibi’s master plan.

      It’s all the layers upon layers of the conspiracy that make it so perfect and so beautiful. Who needs consistency when you’ve got the Mossad? Wait, remind me, is the Mossad on our side or theirs?

      • Carlylean Restorationist says:

        Not Tom needs to do some homework.

        Trump was elected on a promise to place tariffs on Japanese cars imported into the US, in order to protect domestic production.

        I’m an Austrian, contrary to lies, and I understand that this will only harm consumers, but there’s a bottom line here: if production workers lose their jobs and end up degraded, this affects society as a whole. Here in the UK, steel workers in Scotland were laid off and moved, in goodwill, to the midlands to work there. They were laid off again and invited to get off their lazy arses and work at MacDonald’s. They hit the bottle instead.

        That’s bad for society, not just consumers.

        Why no tariffs then on Japanese cars? There’s no particular logical explanation readily available other than ‘Trump is fickle’, which is not unreasonable.

        However, Shinzo Abe decided, for no reason at all, to go and pay tribute to that ultimate uber-oil exporting country Israel. (Remember Japan imports pretty much all its oil.)
        He had dinner with the Netanyahus. Dinner was served in special artisanal SHOES.

        Does anyone here know the first thing about Japanese culture?

        Right after that totally not humiliation ritual, the tariffs were dropped.

        Almost like Abe, but not you lot, understands that the US is a puppet of Israel, not (pace Noam Chomsky) the other way round.

        • jim says:

          Your version of history is absurd lies mixed with genuine insanity.

          Trump was, of course, elected on no such promise. He did not promise to impose new tariffs on Japanese cars, nor has he imposed new tariffs on Japanese cars. He successfully brought the jobs back by using economically sounder means. To the extent that he has raised tariffs, these have largely been trade war tariffs, where trade war is intended to lead to trade peace on fairer terms. He threatens trade war tariffs ten times for every time he actually imposes them.

          I followed his campaign enthusiastically, interpreting his words with the interpretation that made sense assuming him to be as or more knowledgeable about economics than myself, and nothing he said led me to think he was proposing tariffs on Japanese cars. If you were an ignorant idiot, as the press generally was, as most academic economists are, due in part to Trump Derangement Syndrome, you might misinterpret him as proposing tariffs on Japanese cars, but such interpretation rests on the interpreter being a total moron, or torturing Trump’s words on the assumption that Trump is a total moron.

          Trump never promised to raise tariffs on anyone. He said he would use the threat of tariffs to induce good behavior in trading partners, which he has done with great success. Trump sold himself as a man who could make good deals for America, with the result that, as promised, the jobs have come back. Committing himself in advance to raise or to not raise tariffs would be contrary to making deals. Only people driven mad by Trump Derangement Syndrome, or total morons, could hear Trump and think he was promising to raise tariffs. He promised ready resort to that weapon when needed, if needed, and has used that weapon readily when needed, and just as readily refrained from using that weapon when the threat sufficed. He is the deal maker he always was, and always said he was going to be.

          Given Trump’s history, his promise to be a deal maker and a successful deal maker was always the most believable of his promises. He promised to bring the jobs back, and he did, and he promised to do it in large part by making good deals, and in large part he did it by making good deals.

          I heard Trump say he was going to bring the jobs back. I never heard him say he was going to unsuccessfully attempt to bring the jobs back by doing the stupid shit that the press and enemy academics such as yourself attribute to him. He brought jobs back by doing the things I understood him to be promising to do.

          I heard Trump’s promises and saw him carry them out. You are telling me that Trump broke his promises in that he failed to do the things that academics who fall down to the ground frothing at the mouth and screaming with murderous rage at the sight of a Make America Great Again hat promised he would do.

          • Carlylean Restorationist says:

            [*deleted*]

            • jim says:

              Debating you is like debating a troofer about Building Seven. The troofers will not acknowledge that Building Seven fell onto the square to the south of it the way firemen in the square said it was going to fall, nor that the firemen said it was going to fall that way, and you will not acknowledge that Trump’s economic policy is the policy he campaigned on, nor that he campaigned on that policy.

          • Carlylean Restorationist says:

            [*deleted*]

            • jim says:

              Your reply presupposes as undisputed and uncontroversial fact that Trump’s economic policy on the campaign trail was that attributed to him by enemy academics driven mad by Trump Derangement Syndrome, rather than the economic policy that I heard him repetitiously, unambiguously, and forcefully telling us on the campaign trail. Your reply fails to acknowledge that Trump sold himself as a deal maker who makes good deals. The rust belt voted for a deal maker, and got what they voted for.

    • Frederick Algernon says:

      There are no tariffs on Japanese cars because American Rice stays in the western hemisphere. Notice, too, that there are no tariffs on Canadian cars.

      Why do you still post? Does it hurt to see Allah get completely ass raped and not censored once?

      Also, Allah should be hellbanned. I am not saying why, nor will I give any evidence to support my position, but I maintain that it is paramount that he be excised.

      • jim says:

        One need to talk to one’s enemies to avoid war, though with Mohammedans, apt to get war regardless.

        • ten says:

          Allah does not count for a good representative of any enemy, he just states that he wants to torture us all to death and that this is the only reasonable state of any nation, so for example the 50k lapps must of course by matter of self interest attempt to annihilate the 40k tornedalings, in the shadow of the titan 9m swedes and 5m finns, as my family must whenever chance arises torture my neighbours family to death.

          Nonsensical stupid internet edge lord. His stupidity is obviously prevalent in his accursed corner of the earth, but that does not make him a good representative of turks or of islam – just a nutjob nightmoth drawn in by the light of occasionally murderous rhetoric.

          Hellbanning, i like it.

          • Allah says:

            u mad?

            he just states that he wants to torture us all to death

            Liar. You shared your violent fantasies with me and I simply said I would reciprocate.

    • zio-heeb ephebo-molester says:

      So CR, since you have loudly and proudly told us about “your” — i.e., her — decision to never have any mutual children (dat bitch must be the local Pakistanis’ butthole concubine, so she’s naturally just “not in the mood” to take in your rotten, inferior seed), what interests me is, specifically:

      What’s her account on clips4sale?

      Admit it CR, your domineering morbidly obese wife, who has such YUGE lungs that they even allow her to be a mediocre opera singer, is habitually producing lots of amateur pornography, and is — PLOT TWIST! — capitalizing on it. Look, this is a support group here, a 100% non-judgmental forum, and if you share with us her channel, we promise to totally not use that as abuse-fodder with which to torment you.

  15. Frank says:

    What are the good women red pill questions to ask people?

  16. Jehu says:

    Functional irrationationality in the service of a higher unconscious rationality—sounds pretty close to wyrd.

    • eternal anglo says:

      Maybe this is where the concept of destiny comes from. Irrational optimism beats rational pessimism, and the belief one is fated to achieve something, or to die only after certain conditions are met (though I don’t think the concept of destiny/wyrd is as simple as this, perhaps it can’t be understood rationally at all except at the meta-level that it is functional), is the best possible mindset to support irrational optimism.

  17. Red-Pill Injection says:

    Off topic: Selected passages from the Book of Sirach.

    Ch. 7:

    24 Do you have daughters? Be concerned for their chastity,
    and do not show yourself too indulgent with them.
    25 Give a daughter in marriage; you will have finished a great task.
    But give her to a man of understanding.
    26 Do you have a wife who pleases you? Do not cast her out;
    but do not trust yourself to one whom you detest.

    Ch. 22:

    3 It is a disgrace to be the father of an undisciplined son,
    and the birth of a daughter is a loss.
    4 A sensible daughter obtains her husband,
    but one who acts shamefully brings grief to her father.
    5 An impudent daughter disgraces father and husband,
    and will be despised by both.

    Ch. 23:

    22 So it is with a woman who leaves her husband
    and provides an heir by a stranger.
    23 For first of all, she has disobeyed the law of the Most High;
    second, she has committed an offense against her husband;
    and third, she has committed adultery through harlotry
    and brought forth children by another man.
    24 She herself will be brought before the assembly,
    and punishment will fall on her children.
    25 Her children will not take root,
    and her branches will not bear fruit.
    26 She will leave her memory for a curse,
    and her disgrace will not be blotted out.
    27 Those who survive her will recognize
    that nothing is better than the fear of the Lord,
    and nothing sweeter than to heed the commandments of the Lord.

    Ch. 25:

    13 Any wound, but not a wound of the heart!
    Any wickedness, but not the wickedness of a wife!
    14 Any attack, but not an attack from those who hate!
    And any vengeance, but not the vengeance of enemies!
    15 There is no venom worse than a snake’s venom,
    and no wrath worse than a woman’s wrath.

    16 I would rather dwell with a lion and a dragon
    than dwell with an evil wife.
    17 The wickedness of a wife changes her appearance,
    and darkens her face like that of a bear.
    18 Her husband takes his meals among the neighbors,
    and he cannot help sighing bitterly.
    19 Any iniquity is insignificant compared to a wife’s iniquity;
    may a sinner’s lot befall her!
    20 A sandy ascent for the feet of the aged—
    such is a garrulous wife for a quiet husband.
    21 Do not be ensnared by a woman’s beauty,
    and do not desire a woman for her possessions.
    22 There is wrath and impudence and great disgrace
    when a wife supports her husband.
    23 A dejected mind, a gloomy face,
    and a wounded heart are caused by an evil wife.
    Drooping hands and weak knees
    are caused by the wife who does not make her husband happy.
    24 From a woman sin had its beginning,
    and because of her we all die.
    25 Allow no outlet to water,
    and no boldness of speech in an evil wife.
    26 If she does not go as you direct,
    separate her from yourself.

    Ch. 26:

    1 Happy is the husband of a good wife;
    the number of his days will be doubled.
    2 A loyal wife rejoices her husband,
    and he will complete his years in peace.
    3 A good wife is a great blessing;
    she will be granted among the blessings of the man who fears the Lord.
    4 Whether rich or poor, his heart is glad,
    and at all times his face is cheerful.

    5 Of three things my heart is frightened,
    and of a fourth I am in great fear:
    Slander in the city, the gathering of a mob,
    and false accusation—all these are worse than death.
    6 But it is grief of heart and sorrow when a wife is envious of a rival,
    and a tongue-lashing makes it known to all.
    7 An evil wife is an ox yoke which chafes;
    taking hold of her is like grasping a scorpion.
    8 There is great anger when a wife is drunken;
    she will not hide her shame.
    9 A wife’s harlotry shows in her lustful eyes,
    and she is known by her eyelids.
    10 Keep strict watch over a headstrong daughter,
    lest, when she finds liberty, she will make use of it.
    11 Be on guard against her impudent eye,
    and do not be surprised if she sins against you.
    12 As a thirsty wayfarer opens his mouth
    and drinks from any water near him,
    so will she sit in front of every post
    and open her quiver to the arrow.

    13 A wife’s charm delights her husband,
    and her skill puts flesh on his bones.
    14 A silent wife is a gift of the Lord,
    and there is nothing so precious as a disciplined soul.
    15 A modest wife adds charm to charm,
    and no balance can weigh the value of a chaste soul.
    16 Like the sun rising in the heights of the Lord,
    so is the beauty of a good wife in her well-ordered home.
    17 Like the shining lamp on the holy lampstand,
    so is a beautiful face on a stately figure.
    18 Like golden pillars on silver bases,
    so are shapely legs and steadfast feet.

    19 My son, keep sound the bloom of your youth,
    and do not give your strength to strangers.
    20 Seek a fertile field within the whole plain,
    and sow it with your own seed, trusting in your fine stock.
    21 So your offspring will prosper,
    and, having confidence in their good descent, will grow great.
    22 A prostitute is regarded as spittle,
    and a married woman as a tower of death to her lovers.
    23 A godless wife is given as a portion to a lawless man,
    but a pious wife is given to the man who fears the Lord.
    24 A shameless woman constantly acts disgracefully,
    but a modest daughter will even be embarrassed before her husband.
    25 A headstrong wife is regarded as a dog,
    but one who has a sense of shame will fear the Lord.
    26 A wife honoring her husband will seem wise to all,
    but if she dishonors him in her pride she will be known to all as ungodly.
    Happy is the husband of a good wife;
    for the number of his years will be doubled.
    27 A loud-voiced and garrulous wife is like a trumpet sounding the charge,
    and every person like this lives in the anarchy of war.

    Ch. 42:

    9 A daughter keeps her father secretly wakeful,
    and worry over her robs him of sleep;
    when she is young, lest she do not marry,
    or if married, lest she be hated;
    10 while a virgin, lest she be seduced
    or become pregnant in her father’s house;
    or having a husband, lest she prove unfaithful,
    or, though married, lest she be barren.
    11 Keep strict watch over a headstrong daughter,
    lest she make you a laughingstock to your enemies,
    a byword in the city and notorious among the people,
    and put you to shame before the great multitude.
    See that there is no lattice in her room,
    no spot that overlooks the approaches to the house.
    12 Do not let her parade her beauty before any man,
    or spend her time in the midst of women;
    13 for from garments comes the moth,
    and from a woman comes woman’s wickedness.
    14 Better is the wickedness of a man than a woman who does good;
    and it is a woman who brings shame and disgrace.

    (Read old books, folks)

    • The most important passage for the WQ is Genesis 3:15-16

      “I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he shall bruise your head, and you shall bruise his heel… yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you”

      Men and women fundamentally want different things and have different reproductive strategies, and men need to collectively own women, who in turn like being owned. There is no Victorian-era “natural harmony” between virtuous men and angelic women; civilization is the sandal of a Bronze Age pastoral warlord stepping on a woman’s face forever.

  18. alf says:

    Allah gives a pretty good answer on the WQ, as far as I’m concerned. I’ll throw in my question Allah, if you don’t mind.

    Why choose the handle ‘Allah’? Seems like a weird troll for someone who claims to not really be Muslim.

    • The Cominator says:

      Alf if anything his taking the name is the best evidence he is not a religious muslim.

      I imagine that a religious muslim I imagine (though I’m not an expert on Islamic law) would consider that taking upon himself the name of God would be EXTREMELY blasphemous.

    • Not Tom says:

      I’m not impressed. His answer was just “chicks want dick”, which everyone other than a lesbian or male feminist could produce. That’s not an acquittal, it’s a mistrial.

      Let’s see some insight into how chicks chase dick, not just the mere assertion that they do.

    • Allah says:

      It’s funny.

      Let’s see some insight into how chicks chase dick, not just the mere assertion that they do.

      Let’s see some insight into your ancestry, faggot.

      • Not Tom says:

        You are, by your own admission, not reactionary and not our friend or ally, so you don’t get to ask the questions here. You answer them, and if we like what we hear, we grudgingly tolerate your presence.

        Get it through your thick sandnigger skull: uninvited guests don’t have rights and don’t make demands.

      • jewish shaman says:

        Not Tom is one of the best commenters here, you goat-fucker from 8chan. If you somehow bait him into an admission of a mischling variety, it won’t make people here suddenly dislike him – it will just make them like mischlings ever more.

        I’ll gladly rape your sister with my dick and your mother with my knife.

  19. alf says:

    Another question, open question, off-topic: What is our plan with the media? Dismantle the New York Times? Or a take-over? Thinking aloud, the media is naturally staffed by priests, people who want to tell stories. So, if we have a state religion, shouldn’t we officialize journalists as a branch of that state religion?

    • jim says:

      The mass media has always been joined at the hip with the priesthood by its nature, but this is only a problem when the state religion requires belief in things that are falsifiable and false.

      We will do with journalists what every regime always does. If you want a big high status platform and a paycheck, you toe the line, because the board will always have people who aspire to the state religion, and if the state has an officially unofficial state religion as we do, and as England had from the execution of Charles the First to the restoration, you toe the officially unofficial religion, because adherence to the state religion is always a requirement for state or quasi statal office.

      The White House press core are de facto government employees. They sit at government desks serviced by government workers. We will give them the same treatment as every other government employee. They will be invited to re-apply for their old jobs, and during the job interview, they will be asked if they conform. Which, as in the restoration, means conform to the now official state religion, rather than having their own heretical and apostatic interpretation of it – we will have the equivalent of the thirty seven articles, which were tests for Puritanism and Judaism. We will test for Islam, progressivism, communism, Demonic Gaiaism, Judaism, and new heresies as they arise.

      Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming is similar to the Aztec religion: If you don’t let the priests make human sacrifices, you will suffer the wrath of Gaia. The urgent and pressing need for human sacrifice, with the priests deciding who gets sacrificed and who gets carbon indulgences, always results in demons being substituted for the angels of nature.

      We will allow nature worship. Hard to stop it. But if you want a quasi statal job, you will have to see God behind the sunrise, rather than demons in storm. Which is why I specified Demonic Gaiaism, rather than Gaiaism. You will not be allowed to look too hard for doom that can be averted by urgent human sacrifice, nor excessively hard for indications that the second coming is imminent. Those who claim that the end is nigh for whatever reason will not get state or quasi statal jobs, and the best paid and highest status jobs in journalism are always quasi statal.

      And ye shall hear of wars and rumours of wars: see that ye be not troubled: for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet. Premature alarm will disqualify you for high status state or quasi state employment. But I suspect that once the priestly class becomes second in status to the warrior class, doomster faiths will spontaneously fade away. Demonic Gaiaism will spontaneously cease to be.

      • The Cominator says:

        I would have them on trial for their lives, 90% at least would be found guilty and no way theyd get their jobs back… If you want to spare ordinary shitlibs i understand but enemy priests… Dont spare them.

        • jim says:

          We need to be careful not to give Havel’s greengrocer a helicopter ride. The new regime is going to need Havel’s greengrocer.

          • The Cominator says:

            Let our own people take their priestly jobs… Other then top scientists and true artists they are very replacable. Getting rid of them allows jobs for the boys.

            • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

              Different professions have different amounts of necessary know-how that is passed from generation to generation. Much less in journalism than engineering, but you still need to keep around enough of the old guard (neutered and watched as necessary) to keep performance from severely declining. Otherwise you get Soviet farms, Cultural Revolution hospitals, and Deutsche Physik. The de-Nazification in Germany is the model; not a lot of executions, a lot of firings, but competent people kept employed as long as they recant and obey.

              btw, the Aidan McLear paraphrase of Orwell above is genius. Jim should give it visibility in one of his future posts.

              • The Cominator says:

                Nah if we killed ALL the journalist and ALL the lawyers literally (this is just a hypothetical because those who supported Trump would be spared of course) as far as civilizational economic, scientific and military potential nothing of value would be lost.

                Engineering, science, farming and medicine are essential professions where you need real expertise. With journalists and non-techical parts of the priesthood otoh its far more important that they be loyal then that they be good. The new priesthood should be built entirely with new people (with the exception of the few Trump supporters in those professions).

                There will be no holiness spiral in purging them either, there was none when Suharto wiped out the Indonesian left to the man.

        • Not Tom says:

          Say you are an engineer who works on the drones being used to endlessly bomb Libya and Syria and so on. A new regime says, these “wars” were immoral, and the people who started them (Obama, Bush Jr, neocons in general) will be hung out to dry. Literally. Does the new regime offer you a new job working on different drones with different capabilities to monitor and defend the southern border, or does it execute you for helping the old regime conduct its immoral war?

          If it does the latter, it is going to run out of people who know anything about drones, and give up a valuable tool for the military.

          Some people priest to pay the bills. It’s a real thing. That’s not the same as saying capitalists rule, but for a lot of people, a job’s a job. If they convert, and pass all of the ideological tests, and are actually pretty good at promoting the new state religion, then why should a good ruler execute them?

          I know why you want to execute them, you’re angry and you feel aggrieved. But why would an actual ruler want to execute anyone who pledges fealty, does their job well, and shows no signs of causing trouble after a suitable probationary period?

          Should we have executed all of the Soviet defectors?

          • YPACILRYT says:

            If there isn’t exile or severe separatism or Cominator’s Solution or X the problem will arise again.

            Journalists are natural leftists. Political orientation is biological, hereditary:

            https://medicalxpress.com/news/2013-12-twins-genetic-role-political-belief.html

            On top of the hereditarian aspect of the journalists the medium of the media leads to manipulation of the masses and the surface ruling class by optics.

            The medium itself is leftist and will trend that way over time.

            You can put pressure on like with McCarthyism but you’ll be back to the same troubles in a few generations, likely only one or two.

            • jim says:

              Leftism has no essence. Whichever direction apple carts are getting knocked over and apples are rolling around is leftwards.

              The media are inherently priestly, but absent a holiness spiral, priests are naturally inclined to rightism, rather than leftism.

              If a holiness spiral is rolling, priests will holiness spiral. And, when the holiness spiral starts knocking over apple carts, then priestliness, holiness, and leftism converge.

              Stop the holiness spiral, and stop people from knocking over the applecart to grab some apples, and all the naturally priestly professions will become naturally conservative.

              • The Cominator says:

                There is ONE place where leftism never rose again… Indonesia… And indonesia implemented the most thorough and bloody purge of leftists in history.

            • Not Tom says:

              Eradicate the entire leftist gene pool, and you likely eliminate many of the genes responsible for western innovation and creativity.

              Some willingness to question authority is a good thing. The East Asian races don’t seem to have much of this anymore, which makes them much slower to innovate most of the time, i.e. when the west is not in steep decline. The leftists most in need of a salt bath are the ones with extreme versions of this trait, i.e. those literally unwilling to accept any authority that they don’t personally control. The ones who think they are holier than God.

              Are some journalists natural leftists? Undoubtedly, and quite probably in higher frequency than other professions. Are all of them? I really doubt it. Many don’t have the tiniest shred of independence; you tell them to write about X, they write about X.

              Most of the anchors and editors will probably need to go, yes. Rachel Maddow and Carlos Maza are not going to convert, and even if they showed willing, they’ve already committed serious crimes. I doubt there is much to salvage on the New York Times editorial board, who were so eager to hire and retain Sarah Jeong.

              But those are just the visible ones, the power players. Some of the woker outlets also tend to have woke staff – Vox, BuzzFeed, Fusion, etc. – but the typical reporter is (a) working for a local outlet, not a national show/publication, and (b) just trying to get their next story, whatever it happens to be. If their paymasters allowed it, many would go back to silly human-interest stories (“6-year-old saves drowning couple at community pool!”), crime beats (not that there will be any crime after the reaction), profiles on local entrepreneurs, and boring corporate press releases of the sort that are already prevalent.

              Just because you’ve got a target-rich environment doesn’t mean everything is a target. There will be more than enough vengeance to go around without outright genocide. When the conqueror sacks a city, he wants to preserve as much infrastructure as possible.

              • Samuel Skinner says:

                But leftists don’t question authority, they all have the same beliefs.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Trad-cons all have the same beliefs. Libertarians have, roughly, the same beliefs. Ideological conformity is not the same thing as asabiyyah, which itself is not the same as obedience to authority.

                  Remember, the genesis of leftism is regicide. Even when progressives are in charge, there are always other progressives who believe they are more progressive and willing to kick over a thousand more apple carts to prove it.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Belief in clear hierarchies is not the same as belief that all authority is wise, we clearly do not think the cathedral is wise.

                  The army cannot be democratic, but sometimes it is good if bad officers are fragged.

                • Steve Johnson says:

                  The army cannot be democratic, but sometimes it is good if bad officers are fragged.

                  Bullshit – that just means you have priestly norms in deciding whom to commission.

                  Tell me that an army run this way would have to frag bad officers:

                  https://www.quora.com/Were-US-Marines-tougher-than-elite-German-troops-in-WW2/answer/Joseph-Scott-13

                • The Cominator says:

                  There is no priestliness when experienced noncoms decide to frag incompetent line officers. It can’t be legal but sometimes its a good thing.

                • jim says:

                  But fragging tends to be a response to priestliness in the officer core. Make the officer core warriors, rather than priests, and no fragging will occur.

                • Steve Johnson says:

                  >There is no priestliness when experienced noncoms decide to frag incompetent line officers.

                  That’s the point of the link – a proper warrior culture has officers with the authority and experience superior to noncoms. That noncoms have more knowledge and experience and are outranked by less competent officers but the officers are expected to listen to the noncoms is partly an evolved solution and partly an intentional priestly insult calculated to lower the status of competency relative to credentials and official approval.

                  Read that link – a real warrior culture army has officers that are listened to because they’re the most knowledgeable and make the best decisions.

          • jim says:

            Havel’s Greengrocer goes to Religious Reorientation class to prep for the job interview where he will re-apply for his old job:

            Teacher asks him a question.

            Havel’s Greengrocer replies:

            Four legs good, two legs bad.

            Oops, I meant to say Four legs bad, two legs good.

            Oops, I meant to say Four legs good, two legs better.

            Teacher corrects him:

            No, it is that four legs needs the care and supervision of four legs.

            To which Havel’s Greengrocer replies with total and genuine sincerity:

            Well, of course, I always believed that. Doesn’t everybody?

      • alf says:

        OK. Good pointers on Gaiaism.

        So we don’t rock the boat too much regarding journalists. But what happens long-term? Journalists used to be graduates from progressive monasteries, where do they come from now? Apprenticeships as well?

  20. Anon says:

    Some people seem to have forgotten why the unanimous consensus on Jim’s blog is that Patrick, aka peppermint, aka cuckermint, is not, and will never be, part of the NRx priesthood.

    Some people seem to have lost track of what Jimianity is about, thereby allowing Blue-Pilled entryists (who worship Satan, but pretend to worship Christ) to subvert it, because said entryists hide behind postmodernist gibberish babble. This, despite the fact that Jim told us, explicitly and clearly, to refrain from postmodernist crap; yet there are those here who tolerate and celebrate it “because tee-hee, it’s a cool meme bro.”

    Peppermint is now making desperate, unconvincing, and utterly pathetic attempts to rehabilitate his anally-blasted image by flattering himself anonymously using various “ironic” handles. So let’s look at who and what he is, exactly.

    He wrote:

    Fucking girls before they are hot can damage them.

    Patrick, who is now trying to pretend that he has always been “one of the right-wingers,” is telling us that young women are shockingly, horribly psychologically traumatized by sex, which they absolutely do not desire. Thus, if a horny teenager — which Patrick, a bisexual with an abysmally low-T, naturally considers to be unattractive — happens to fuck the entire Football Team, she must really, really suffer from this experience. Because… women are innately chaste.

    Fucking girls after they’re hot and before they’re fully capable of giving birth isn’t really the best idea either, because sex that isn’t intended to lead to reproduction is a moral hazard.

    Pussy-mint, no doubt with an “extremely concerned” look on his Pale Pimpled Pig face, now denounces all men who did not spend their teenage years in total celibacy (like himself, as he has admitted) as hazardously immoral, because Women Can Do No Wrong, and if girls misbehave, it’s because evil men made them do it. If Jim is hosting a party where unaccompanied sluts show up and start oozing their vaginal moisture all over the damn place, Jim needs to be sent behind bars, according to Patrick’s Pussy Philosophy.

    Therefore, Massachusetts only lets people fuck 16+ girls if the girls are not trying to live a chaste life i.e. are girls of good breeding, well kept and well behaved.

    Keep reading, and it will dawn on you that peppermint — who is worse than CR, Kookanic, and “Allah” combined — thinks that 16 is too young for sex, as the discussion herein quoted centered on women aged 17. Yep, he believes that women can be kept chaste indefinitely, because women are innately asexual. Thus, he is telling us here in no-uncertain terms that sex at 16 should be a rare exception; “normal” women would only have sex after 18, according to this little stain of dog shit.

    Pedo will never be acceptable, ever, anywhere, except in extreme, civilization-ending degeneracy, like Weimar.

    Understand this, peppermint: You will never be rehabilitated here, no matter what sleazy tricks you attempt to pull off. You will be reminded of your real worldview, expressed here for all to see, in 2020, in 2021, in 2022, and forever. Not only do you accuse all non-eunuch men everywhere of being “pedophiles,” you also in the same breath accuse your own ancestors of the same. Because up until recently, it has been the universal consensus that teenage girls are sexually uncontrollable, are fuckable, and should get married. And “teenage” here includes the early teens, too. Indeed, Jim and others see with their own eyes girls even younger than that predating on high status men with adult female pre-selection. Your little “pedo” hoax will collapse, is already collapsing, and come the Restoration, non-ironic use of this anti-concept will get you knocked out and slashed, if not worse.

    You should only have a video of a 17 year old girl giving you a blowjob if you’re her husbamd

    Yes, FBI, keep telling me which videos I am allowed, or not allowed, to possess. Because if there’s one thing you truly care about, it’s your sacred and unquestionable right to hunt down every penis-haver on Earth and throw all of the ewww-men in prison for having private porn collections. This is why we have police, right? To imprison men for having sinister pixels on their devices? Right? Yes, peppermint tells us, if a little wet whore sends you her nudes, you should go straight to jail. Plain and simple. Thanks for clarifying.

    and why would her parents choose you instead of a nice 21 year old man starting a career as a construction worker?

    First of all, you know nothing about me, and all your guesses so far have been widely off the mark. Secondly, Patrick here sleazily sneaks in the Blue-Pilled Trad-Con lie that you can control women’s sexual behavior at 17, or even long past 17. Thus he is telling us that a 17-year-old whore who’s already fucked the Soccer Team, Football Team, Basketball Team, and even a few Tennis players, is still sexually controlled by her parents (notice the use of “parents,” he is not even trying to say “father”), who can keep her a virgin for as long as they so desire. I mean, I did not write these words, did I? I’m not making this stuff up. This is peppermint. This is his ideology. This is what naturally comes to his mind.

    But a nicer 21 year old is far from being settled into his career and isn’t going to marry until he’s 23, when he’ll find a 19 year old.

    More Trad-Conism, more expectation of indefinite chastity, more denunciation of young marriage, more allergy to both male sexuality and female sexuality, more limp-wristed lisping-voiced pozzed impotent temper tantrums by this Eternal Gelding. Apparently, he’s never even considered the idea of enforceable apprenticeships starting early in life indeed. I was going to write “peppermint is balls deep into the Prussian School System and Modern College System,” but then I remembered that I had just called him a gelding, which he is. Anyway, you get the point: this little cock-sucking bitch-boy is selling us the life-plan of the 20th and early 21st centuries as ideals to aspire to implement, even though we are vehemently and consistently opposed to these grotesque systems.

    So the whole concept of a 17 year old blowjob vid implies that something is wrong. 17 is too young to be consigned to whoredom unless the chick is a jew or something.

    Again, he is telling us that women are inherently chaste and that even at 17 they do not usually sexually misbehave. Literally what he says, in plain language. He also tells us that if a teenage slut whores it up with someone, or with several such someones, it’s because the evil men — or maybe the KIKES — had “consigned” her to it. Because, of course, women are innately chaste, are unblemished sweet-pumpkin princesses, and if they happen to suck a dick (like peppermint sucks dicks, for instance), well, it obviously only ever happens because they’re corrupted and defiled by “child-molesting kid-fucking sex-predators.” If you ever received a blowjob from a 17-year-old slut, or a video documenting such a deed, you’re a P-P-P-P-P-P-PEDOPHILE, according to peppermint.

    This is what our never-ending beef with him is all about; he is a Blue Pilled, Puritan, Feminist, White Knight, low-T deviant and this is what he will always and forever be, no matter which ploys he may attempt to somehow remain relevant. Peppermint is not merely a producer of verbal diarrhea; he himself is ideological diarrhea, and as such, should be flushed down.

    • The Cominator says:

      “Keep reading, and it will dawn on you that peppermint — who is worse than CR, Kookanic, and “Allah” combined —”

      He sucks but not worse then CR… CR stated platform so far is almost identical to Pol Pot’s. Bluepilled tradconism sucks… but its better then literally enacting the killing fields (for productive businessmen engineers and such like he wants).

      • A says:

        To a limited extent, you have a point, in that CR’s worldview vis-a-vis women is scarcely distinguishable from Faggotmint’s, plus he’s a frothing commie who should be kept in a straightjacket until the Helicopter Holiday, y’know, just to be “safe and secure.”

        Nevertheless, what is currently annihilating the West World, driving it to absolute oblivion, is the failure to reproduce — it is the most urgent issue plaguing society — and this total collapse of reproduction is the result of demonic Blue-Pillers like Faggotmint having the power to socially engineer society to their liking, them being the officially unofficial priesthood. Faggotmint’s shrieking and shrill pedo-hysteria against healthy men with normal T-levels is inextricably linked to the advent of all types of Feminism, making normal heterosexuality illegal, and making deviant repulsive transsexualization of 9-year-old boys mandatory.

        Whenever genetic abominations like Cuckermint tell us high tales about “pedophiles,” they simultaneously tell us that being a regular heterosexual man should be impossible and illegal, while being a bisexual deviant who fucks little boys up the ass is excellent and commendable: Being an effeminate bisexual, someone who is sexually attracted to both men and women, Cuckermint is naturally also excited and keen on young boys, and he feels a twisted need to project his attraction to young boys onto his enemies (that is, onto us), by vociferously denouncing us as “child molesting pedophile sick creeps.” He gets unwanted, raging boners around young boys, and instead of treating his “same-sex attraction,” e.g. by offing himself yesterday, he goes on tirade after tirade after tirade against men like you, me, Jim, and everyone who still has his testes attached.

        Cuckermint tells us that Jimianity is illegitimate, because he projects his desire to fuck prepubescent boys up the ass onto us, thus he claims that Jim is a pedo-rapist who wants to harm and traumatize little innocent girls due to being so very evil. Notice how whenever we’ve discussed the issue of sex with young women, he decided to interject himself in order to gaslight and disrupt the conversation by bringing up gay sex with young boys, even though our stance on sodomy of all ages is very clear, and sodomy was not relevant to the topic under discussion. That’s what effeminate queers do: They prevent normal men, men who are attracted to women and not attracted to men, from debating the matters we seek to debate, by telling us that we are “child predators” with abnormal inclinations. Obvious projection is obvious, but it’s truly damaging to our ideological coordination as a priesthood.

        It is often the case that the individual telling us that attraction to 16-year-old women is “unnatural” is himself attracted to 10-year-old boys; in this case, based on Cuckermint’s many confessions, the shoe fits exactly. Cuckermint feels the urge to diddle little boys whenever he sees them, and this causes him to be absolutely unable to tell what normal sexuality is and what it isn’t, and therefore he tells us that attraction to teenage women with big beautiful boobs is “unnatural.” It is projection and confusion by an effeminate queer deviant who is attracted to both sexes, a real sicko with dysfunctional sexual instincts. He is telling us that attraction to 17-year-old women is abnormal, because he is himself attracted to 10-year-old boys, and is projecting his proclivities and weirdness onto us.

        This is actually very common; a certain blogger calls such people “pedocrites,” that is, hypocrites who denounce men for attraction to sexy teens of the opposite sex to deflect attention from their own pederast lust for prepubescent boys. That’s why the people working at the various “anti-pedo” organizations almost invariably get caught up diddling boys themselves and having CP involving prepubescent boys on their computers. Pedocrite Peppermint allows us a glimpse into the mind of a representative of this phenomenon.

        It is because of such perverse abominations that men lost the liberty to be men, and women lost the liberty to be women. Neither sex gets what it needs, because heterosexuality has been criminalized, and the family has been criminalized, thanks to abhorrent sexually deviant Puritans and Feminists like peppermint.

        Another thing: Post-Restoration, the danger posed by the CRs of the world will disappear with the helicopters, whereas Puritanism will remain an active threat, because that’s an inherent failure mode of all patriarchal societies. So we must be on guard not only against obvious enemies who wear their hostility on their sleeve, but also against wolves in sheep’s clothing such as the pedocrites.

        • The Cominator says:

          “Nevertheless, what is currently annihilating the West World, driving it to absolute oblivion, is the failure to reproduce”

          Another quibble… It is the failure of the genetically good to reproduce while the idiots and hostile due to at a degree reproduce.

          Japan fails to reproduce but not having a lot of foreigners and given that the intelligent and successful in Japan at least reproduce as successfully as the lower class Japan will be just fine with a somewhat lower population in the future… whereas the US and Europe now are giant IQ shredders.

          • jim says:

            Japan, like Singapore, is now a giant IQ shredder. It is the smartest Japanese, or rather the smartest Japanese women, who are failing most to reproduce.

            They don’t have the problem of dysgenic replacement, but they nonetheless have the problem of dysgenic reproduction. We are producing wiggers. They are, or soon will be, producing jiggers.

            • The Cominator says:

              I think the highest status for a Japanese woman is still housewife to a high status man, Japan (or rather the conquering forces) gave women too many rights but it doesn’t have a state religion and culture that truly believes in female equality (Ian Fleming’s You Only Live Twice novel goes into this in some detail that ideas of female equality were not something the Japanese really adopted at all even if legal equality was forced) and at least some of Japan’s problems along these lines is most of the population is urbanized to the level of New York City.

              I think if things (they won’t but this is a hypothetical) continued as they are in world with feminist social democracy surviving but without giving way to either full on communist terror or a return of Caesar… Japan will be a LOT better off then we are.

              • I’ve noticed that you tend to fall into an apex fallacy when discussing IQ shredders and elite fertility. Yes, the top 1% have a lot of kids, but that is not enough. We need the top 20% outbreeding the bottom 80%, and especially the bottom 20%. Right now, it is the bottom 20% and the top 1% having lots of kids, and simple math will tell you that the net eugenic effect on intelligence and prosociality is negative.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Perhaps you are right, in the US and Europe the top 1% doesnt reproduce either so i would argue japan is still better off but you are probably right bout the other 19%.

                • jim says:

                  As in the US, top males reproduce, but top females don’t. And in the middle, no one reproduces.

    • Anonymous says:

      I don’t have a problem with you stringing up peppermint by his blue balls for being a white knight. My complaint is more like a property dispute, with enemy matadors (Clinton) and their capes (Epstein) tainting property that in a post-restoration state would be rightly belong to our warriors, merchants and workers.

      Your old handle implies that you are Jewish. Are you entitled to Israeli citizenship?

      • jewish pedophile says:

        Your old handle implies that you are Jewish. Are you entitled to Israeli citizenship?

        That’s a rude question to ask, יא חתיכת בן זונה. Why don’t you ask me for my exact GPS coordinates while at it?

        You know the incel culture that suddenly everyone’s talking about? Yeah, while you were busy chasing your own tail with Qanon and Qanon-tier nonsense, some serious people put their minds into cultivating that incel culture. Take a hint.

        • Anonymous says:

          >spray and pray

          I am mostly interested in why you could answer the WRPQ but I could not. My hypothesis is that you have a second nationality to fall back on.

          Why don’t you ask me a WRPQ and see how I go?

          • shaman says:

            I am mostly interested in why you could answer the WRPQ but I could not. My hypothesis is that you have a second nationality to fall back on.

            Answer them?

            I wrote them.

            That I openly commit thoughtcrimes that might risk FBI predation should suggest that I’m outside the US and generally outside the Cuckosphere, and therefore wouldn’t need a “Plan B” for the type of scenario you’re clearly afraid of, i.e., fed-pigs knocking on my door to interrogate me why I wrote some naughty stuff about women on an anonymous pro-monarchy blog. Where I actually am is not relevant.

            Why don’t you ask me a WRPQ and see how I go?

            I never suspected you of being an entryist of the Blue-Pill White Knight variety. And instead of asking you, I’ll give you a short exposition of what the WRP is not. Make of that what you will.

            One of the central Blue Pill lies is that “a fertile female does not need a man to satisfy her sexual needs.”

            1. For typical Trad-Cons, it is followed by, “Therefore, AoC legislation and enforcement should protect my precious pumpkin of a daughter from all those sexual predators outside.”

            2. For slightly edgier (but still utterly retarded) Trad-Cons, it is followed by, “Therefore, as a father I shall be able to preserve my daughter’s chastity long past puberty by chasing away all her suitors.”

            3. For Joofers, it is followed by, “Therefore, we must gas the kikes for using evil mind control rays to artificially make our daughters slutty; without EMCRs emitted by Hymiewood, our daughters would never sexually misbehave.”

            4. For Progressives, it is followed by, “Therefore, we must Teach Men Not to Rape, that Lack of Enthusiastic Consent Means It is Rape, that Once She Said ‘No’ It is Rape, and that Victim-Blaming is NEVER OKAY.”

            5. For Purple-Pilled libertine doomsters, it is followed by, “Therefore, all men should wave the white flag, declare themselves MGTOW, and only have sex with prostitutes until they die lonely and childless.”

            Since reactionaries reject the Blue-Pilled premise, reactionaries do not reach any one of these false conclusions. Take heed.

            • The Cominator says:

              In practice given i adhere to #5 personally but that is not the world i want…

              • shaman says:

                A lot of men adhere to #5 in practice; the question is whether they adhere to it because they are involuntarily celibate (many such cases), or because they have genuinely convinced themselves that no woman whatsoever is interested in sex, “so why even bother.” Incels are some of our closest allies, whereas people who deny what’s in front of everyone’s nose – are not.

                • BC says:

                  There’s another group you haven’t considered: Men who’ve gotten married and had no kids because they’re wives are too old or refused to have kids. They’re getting laid every once in a while, but they certainly have no future. Of the guys I’ve grew up with only 1 of them has kids and he lucked out by marrying a women who could have kids 41. The rest have wives who don’t want kids or who can’t have kids or had kids and my friends are now raising another man’s children.

                • Eli says:

                  Those would no longer be incels — but would be cucks. Different degrees of cuckoldry, of course. Men, for whom attachment to or perceived possession of one woman is more important than their legacy.

                  Infertile women should be dumped, unless they gave up their youth, their prime years, to be with the husband.

                  I am sorry, it doesn’t make me happy to say such things.

                • BC says:

                  Harsh but fair.

              • shaman says:

                Put another way, you can differentiate between people whose celibacy stems from a Victorian perception of women, and people whose celibacy is the result of other, non-ideology-related, conditions.

                A good rule of thumb is that a legit incel is likely to tell you, in whatever terminology he may choose, “Sexual liberation allows women to pursue Chad, or Mr. 1-in-30, and since I don’t fit the definition, I am invisible indeed to women – but other men are not invisible.”

                In contrast, a Blue-Piller recognizes neither Chads nor Betas; he thinks that all women are totally asexual towards all men, that women don’t behave in ways intended to attract high-status (as it’s ferally perceived by women) men’s sexual attention, and that therefore pursuing women might just be futile and one should rather stick with porn and hookers.

                A subtle, but crucial, difference.

    • jim says:

      Late virgin marriage requires controls on women that were unthinkably drastic to moderns.

      A system that keeps women under wraps until young men have the means to support a family, and a place to keep a family incentivizes productive and prosocial behavior, but, reading between the lines, that system ran into massive resistance from women, and frequently failed, with shotgun marriage being exceedingly common, and hinting at quite a lot of bastardicide.

      The bluecon delusion is that you can have that system without coming down on women like a ton of bricks. Instead, they propose to come down on men. If a nine year old girl sneaks into someone’s bed, no consequences for her, but if a girl who is seventeen years and nine months sends you naughty pixels, potentially big consequences for you.

      • info says:

        @jim
        Certainly possible if one is the replicate the Germanic example:

        “20. The children grow up in every home, naked and dirty, to that strength of limb and size of body which excite our admiration.

        Every mother feeds her child at the breast and does not depute the task to maids and nurses.

        The master is not to be distinguished from the slave by any pampering in his upbringing.

        They grow up together among the same flocks and on the same ground, until maturity sets apart the free and the spirit of valour claims them as her own.

        The young men are slow to mate, and their powers, therefore, are never exhausted.

        The girls, too, are not hurried into marriage. As old and full-grown as the men, they match their mates in age and strength, and the children reproduce the might of their parents. ”

        -Tacitus (Germania)

        https://www.ourcivilisation.com/smartboard/shop/tacitusc/germany/chap1.htm

    • alf says:

      My God you are without mercy.

      For the record, I don’t think Pep is worse than any of the names you mention. But that’s just like, my opinion man.

      • A says:

        For the record, I don’t think Pep is worse than any of the names you mention.

        CR = Communism
        Kookanic = Trooferism, Wignatism
        Allah = Jihad
        Peppermint = Blue Pill

        I absolutely, 100% consider the latter to be worse than the other 3 combined. It is the ever present tumor within the body of all human civilizations and societies, threatening to metastasize at any given moment, and indeed, it has been metastasizing within Western Civilization since at least the 19th century, with results more catastrophic than anything inflicted by those other villains, horrible as they are.

        Insofar as he has consistently represented the last category, yes, he is without a doubt worse than those other guys. That he is sometimes “likable” makes it all the worse, because that makes people lower their guard. Insidious nemeses cause greater harm than the louder, overt types.

        • eternal anglo says:

          Or rather, metastasizing since the advent of Courtly Love in the dark ages, per Dalrock. On a related note, I’d love to see you take on “Saint” Jerome (is decanonization possible?)

          • Nikolai says:

            Decanonization is possible (there have been instances of people being removed from the list of saints), but it would be practically impossible to take St. Jerome off the list. He’s one of the most renowned and celebrated Church Fathers; it’d be like trying to decanonize St. Paul or St. Augustine.

          • shaman says:

            On a related note, I’d love to see you take on “Saint” Jerome

            I haven’t delved into his oeuvre, and moreover, I’d rather not offend the sensibilities of the traditionally pious here all too deeply; nevertheless, I’m inclined to assert that degenerates-turned-ascetics repulse me to the bone, because these are invariably individuals whose perspective about all things sexual is tainted by their deviance, and as such, all their fruits are rotten, and will be rotten no matter what they do. A case in point is Brian Uecker, the admin of My Posting Career, who is intimately familiar with the sickest perversions, and who is childless at age 55 or so, yet has the audacity to vocally preach (the Puritan-Feminist version of) sexual morality to his coterie of low-T ass kissers.

            Someone like Heartiste, who has his sexual instincts intact, should be permitted to ruminate and cogitate on sexual morality all day long, because he is in tune with normal men’s nature. Heartiste’s position about men’s natural attraction to fertile young teen females, for instance, is well known. In contrast, deviants — e.g., those who tell us that people only develop sexuality in their 20s, or that all men are innately bisexual, or similar factually false crap — should have their teeth knocked out of their lying mouths. And worst all is when those deviants dress as ascetics, and tell us that, because their sexuality is depraved (which it is), it then follows that everyone’s sexuality is likewise and similarly depraved, and that therefore God commands us to have permanent blue balls and rot in prison for possessing normal male sexuality.

            People who aren’t comfortable with their own sexuality — perhaps rightly so, because their sexuality is indeed abnormal and disgusting — should have no say whatsoever on male-female relations. “Hey everyone! I used to be the biggest degenerate in town, but now I’m a totally celibate ascetic and my testicles reside in a jar! So let me tell you all about why you should wear a chastity belt. First of all, …” – Nope, not in NRx.

            The early Christians kicked out the Gnostic heresy, according to which the world is completely Satanic and one should therefore shun the world and go full schizo; and the early Jimians kicked out the Peppermintian heresy, according to which every man might immediately become a sodomite “given the right circumstances,” and according to which it’s only atrociously evil and ‘creepy’ men who are attracted to lustful teenage chicks with perky tits, fertility-signalling hips, and a sweet pink pussy. One of the crucial missions of the burgeoning Jimian ideology is to make Peppermintism (in all its manifestations) not only low-status, but literally unthinkable on the neuro-biological level.

            It should be automatically assume that whoever tells us blatant lies about normal male sexuality, such as “all men are one step away from gay sex,” or “only a small minority of dastardly men find teens attractive,” is doing so to legitimize his bisexual or homosexual deviance, and to ‘protect’ little whores with gaping anal rosebuds from marital sex.

            Any deviant telling us “I only fully developed a sexuality at age 17,” or “I was never attracted to 13-year-old chicks with budding boobs; not even when I was 13-year-old myself and they were my everyday classmates,” or “My girlfriend has told me #TrueStories about being sexually harassed by evil men when she was a totally asexual and angelic 15-year-old, and I believe her stories (hashtags: Me Too, Women Never Lie About Sexual Matters, Roman Polanski Scandal),” and so on and so forth, is instantly disqualified from ever being even remotely in the vicinity of the priesthood, period. There are, unfortunately, some people here who secretly plot to one day resurrect Peppermintism from the worm-replete grave in which it is buried forever, and it must be made clear to them that their plot shall fail.

            Come the restoration, degenerates-turned-ascetics will be forced to take permanent vows of silence, at least about sexual issues. Imagine not having to hear their Satanic heresies ever again! So it shall be.

            • I AM says:

              Fake and gay. peppermint is a genius, and don’t even try to deny that you would give your Hitlerian testicle for half of his natural writing ability.

              Furthermore, you know as well as anyone that when you were 13 you furiously jerked your tic tac to 19s, because all 19s were fucking hot in comparison to all of your 13 peers. Given the choice, the choice is obvious.

              The higher races mature later, and the higher elements of those races later still, and abstain from sexual activity longer, and nowhere has this been more in evidence than amongst the dozens of “white” races infesting the American public schools since the turn of the twentieth century.

              Girls feel bad about giving it away, and even in college, after a dozen years of subliminal and not-so-subliminal sex-positive propaganda assaulting the childrens’ minds courtesy of the fat lesbians at the front of the classroom, the electronically engineered lower-than-tribal “music” pumped over the airwaves, and the incredibly creepy fruits of the YouTube algorithm, most fucking is lubricated by alcohol for this simple reason.

              And then, and only then, do they go completely feral.

              But they do go completely feral.

              • jim says:

                > Furthermore, you know as well as anyone that when you were 13 you furiously jerked your tic tac to 19

                Nuts.

                When I was fourteen, I banged younger women, and I did not think much about older women, because I did not get to meet them.

                Yes, agreed they get hotter as they get older. But plenty of fifteen year olds are way hot, and anyone who denies it is a lying pervert. Girls get hot at thirteen, which is to say they get hot when capable of conceiving a child. They then get hotter as their fertility improves, and then less hot as their fertility eventually declines.

                If a girl is having regular sex before menarche, which a significant minority of them are, and she takes no contraceptive precautions, there is a small but significant likelihood that she will get pregnant before her first menstruation. Which these days usually results in forced late abortion, when it should result in early marriage.

                > Girls feel bad about giving it away,

                Bullshit. If a girl does not give it away, she does not like you and is never going to like you.

                If your initial sex does not happen in the context where you give no indication of fidelity or support, then she does not desire you and never will. You should only go with beta provider game after she is sleeping with you, serving you, and obeying you.

              • shaman says:

                peppermint is a genius, and don’t even try to deny that you would give your Hitlerian testicle for half of his natural writing ability.

                The deadliest sin is Pride, so I’d rather say nothing at all about my writing talents or lack thereof.

                Furthermore, you know as well as anyone that when you were 13 you furiously jerked your tic tac to 19s, because all 19s were fucking hot in comparison to all of your 13 peers. Given the choice, the choice is obvious.

                Oh, so you’re a binary-thinking midwit. Nobody here has ever suggested that girls aged 13 are hotter than those aged 19. (It’s sad that you’ve bought into the fake and gay “hebephile” meme) It is simply the fact of the matter that there are plenty of hot girls aged 13, and when you’re next to them all day long, you’re either gonna have sex with them, or fap to fantasies about having sex with them. That you’re also into older and sexier women means nothing in this regard.

                The higher races mature later

                Not again with this Hajnal Hoax. You see, while superficially true, this lie obfuscates the meaning of “mature.” That black girls start puberty at 10, and white girls at 12, means very little; that black males grow physically BIG much faster than white and yellow males is obviously true, yet absolutely irrelevant to this issue; and when it comes to overall intellectual maturity, the inferior races become ‘adults’ (so to speak) by 11, while the higher ones take it a bit slower – which still doesn’t mean jackshit as far as sexual and marital readiness are concerned. Congratulations for buying into this particularly disingenuous propaganda, though.

                Girls feel bad about giving it away

                It’s irrelevant how they “feel.” They do give it away, and have been giving it away for well over a century. Denying the reality that screams into your face won’t change that.

              • Anonymous says:

                Thou shalt not covet, faggot.

        • jim says:

          It is true that the blue pill failure to reproduce is widespread. Sparta rapidly became very short of spartans, and under the empire Roman women notoriously behaved in ways that would have promptly resulted in execution by husbands under the Republic.

          But what causes it? Right now it is part of the holiness spiral (consent culture) but it just does not feel to me that this was ever the primary driver.

          Now it is obvious how the holiness spiral works: if priests on top, superior holiness gets you to the top. If holiness provides wealth and power in this world, priests inventively discover ways to out holy each other. And pretty soon anyone insufficiently holy gets sent to the guillotine by those who deem themselves holier. In the events leading up to the English civil war, men of God seeking the goodies of the Anglican Church acted like a bunch of chimps.

          What happened in the events leading up to Victorianism is that in an effort to make women virtuous, they attributed virtue to women. And the next generation failed to get the joke.

          If women get their way, they are all apt to have sex with Mister One in Thirty, so to the other twenty nine males, it looks kind of as if women are being virtuous.

          In the old west, it was common to kill a man for “insulting” a woman – meaning flirting with someone else’s wife, or flirting with someone’s daughter without her father’s permission. So the next generation is apt to conclude that women suffer excruciatingly agony by being “insulted”. As in the current ludicrous sexual harassment panic.

          Another factor is of course that the mating dance is simply counter intuitive. When a man is interested in a women, he can assess her potential fertility in a few seconds. Having determined she is desirable, he is nice to her. When a woman is interested in a man, she wants to see what he is made of, so she gives him a hard time. The blue pill is in part male confusion caused by shit tests, which are intended to be confusing.

          The mating dance is men conquer and women surrender, but men perform for women and women choose. This is counterintuitive and contradictory, so other men see Mr One in Thirty conquering and say “Oh, those poor women, they must be suffering terribly from the terrible predation of Mr One in Thirty, so lets give women a social superweapon that they can use to repel and punish Mr One in Thirty.”

          And then, of course, they use it not against Mr One in Thirty, but against any man they are interested in to see if he can deal with it.

          The blue pill is men giving women social superweapons, which are then used against the men who gave them these superweapons. Men expect women to use these superweapons to preserve their precious chastity, and then, surprise surprise, they don’t.

          In the sexual harassment panic, it is obvious that women are complaining about male behavior that we do not want to stop, and failing to complain about the male behavior that we do want to stop. Laws against rape and sexual harassment are intended to preserve women’s chastity, and you are just not going to get cooperation from women in preserving their chastity, so you are not going to get female cooperation n suppressing the male behavior that you actually want to suppress. So you have to give the social superweapon to the husband or the father, not the wife or the daughter.

          Because if you give women a social superweapon, they will use it on prospects, looking for a prospect that can handle it, and then they are going to fuck him. And the guy who can handle it is probably the local pimp or drug dealer.

          • eternal anglo says:

            The mating dance is men conquer and women surrender, but men perform for women and women choose.

            I believe that in a future eugenics pursuing space conquering society (but first steps first of course), this will be tolerated no more than we currently tolerate scurvy or wolves in the streets in winter. That no society has ever been too patriarchal suggests that no society has ever been patriarchal enough.

          • Ron says:

            This comment should be a post all on its own. And translated into multiple languages. Specifically Hebrew.

          • White Man says:

            Jim, I think you are over analyzing. If a woman wants you, they let you know. Just be yourself around them and if one is not interested don’t be pushy. Move on. There are lot’s of them. If they are the type that goes for 1 in 30, you don’t want them in your life. They will step out on you later.

            • jim says:

              Nuts.

              They don’t let you know, they don’t know themselves, and you first have to make them want you.

              If you are unusually handsome, wealthy, or powerful, then they will hit on you, but that just gives you a foot in the door, that is just a starting point. You still have to play the fish before the hook is set.

              And even after it is obvious to you that they want you, it is still not obvious to them.

              And beta provider comfort game will scare them off if you start it too early.

              You are obviously not white, and obviously in no position to give people advice on women.

              • White Man says:

                You can always continue to believe that. But, there are plenty of poor and homely men who have raised families. No white man should ever sell himself short. There is a white woman out there for you. I believe in you.

              • White Man says:

                That’s twice you claim I am not white. You have no way to prove that as I have no way either. I tell you I am. Why question it. I know something about women, I have been married longer than most of you have been alive. I can tell you for a fact you don’t need to be wealthy or good looking to have a wife. So don’t make excuses.

        • The Cominator says:

          Mass bluepilling is a result of commie/cathedral control of the media and education its not organic or natural (whereas some of your more crude smash and grab forms of leftism are somewhat natural).

          If you have all the CR’s in the media helicopter rided and you abolish public education beyond literacy and arithmetic altogether then peppermint can remain bluepilled if he wants but society won’t.

          Bluepilled tradcons have bad ideas, but they aren’t the ultimate evil.

          • The Cominator says:

            Peppermint is merely badly deluded in that he cannot accept some of the more grotesque aspects of female psychology.

            CR and Kookniac in various ways worships demons (kook didn’t used to as wignatism isn’t demon worship wignatism is just stupid, but then he started buying into glosoli’s demonic twisting of christianity and glosoli worships demons), Allah if he is a genuine mohammedian also worships a demon.

    • Anonymous 2 says:

      First of all, you know nothing about me, and all your guesses so far have been widely off the mark.

      Well, Anon, we actually do know something about you.

    • Nikolai says:

      Eh, I’ll stick up for ol’ Peppermint. I’ve been reading this blog since ~2014 and I remember peppermint commenting his usual indecipherable screeds since I started reading. He’s not the bluepilled tradcon you make him out to be. You quote his comments and tell us he’s preaching the bluepill when he’s doing no such thing. Often you tell us he’s saying the exact opposite of what he’s actually saying.

      “Patrick, who is now trying to pretend that he has always been “one of the right-wingers,””

      Cringey paganism aside, he always has been. He was going after actual bluepilled tradcons far before you were and with an attitude almost as polemic as yours. Proof that he was a member of the ingroup is that Jim himself “cheerfully” stole a post from Peppermint. https://blog.jim.com/culture/kates-wall/

      That and he always had people supporting him in the comments. I seem to recall that you yourself took his side when glosoli got into a beef with him a couple years ago. If he was such an obvious bluepilled puritan, why did nobody (including you and Jim) notice until 2018? Why didn’t somebody accuse him of all these things when he first started commenting instead of five years later?

      You also argue from false consensus “unanimous” “our never-ending beef”. The way I recall it is that is was mostly just you and him fighting about teenage girls with a couple other commenters occasionally chiming in and eventually he got tired of arguing with you. All this hate you have for him just makes me respect him more tbh. It’d be so easy for peppermint to mud-sling and backbite, but he just bares these wrongs patiently. Very admirable.

      Btw any proof whatsoever that he’s bisexual or is that just more blatant calumny?

      • The Cominator says:

        The attack on peppermint goes too far and is a bit unfair yet at the same time its important to tell bluepilled tradcons they aren’t with us and they aren’t welcome unless they cease being bluepilled tradcons.

        When you start talking about how women wanting to join nunneries and thus become useless to men you rightly get the same treatment. If that becomes an option many will take it and it will fuckup the pool. Peter the Great did not let young women enter nunneries (older widows only) and neither shall we.

        • Nikolai says:

          >you rightly get the same treatment

          Lol. You and kookanic autistically screeching Bible quotes and begging Jim to censor me is less than a twentieth of the treatment peppermint is getting. Kookanic would’ve actually been a decent bully if he didn’t constantly own himself with his own insanity.

          In any case, all I advocate are the social institutions of pre-reformation Europe, where yes the vast majority of sisters were widows or damaged goods that nobody wanted to marry. Also, very obvious that nuns directly serve men in that they staff hospitals (especially during wartime), catechize your children in the Faith and above all else they pray unceasingly for our immortal souls.

          • shaman says:

            You and kookanic autistically screeching Bible quotes and begging Jim to censor me is less than a twentieth of the treatment peppermint is getting.

            And justifiably so, Cuckolai. You’re here to transparently and unabashedly shill for your denomination, but you’re not promoting a civilization-destroying society-annihilating cancerous faggofeminist heresy (at least not overtly); there’s no reason to spend lots of precious time on your flaws, any more than there’s reason to spend time on the flaws of most others here. It is only the dangerous heresies that receive absolute relentless brutalization; little fish like you should really be glad for even the faintest bit of attention from your cognitive superiors, whether negative or positive.

        • Mike in Boston says:

          Nikolai said nearly all that needs to be said. Go back and re-read your Russian history: Peter the Great was a Puritan progressive and the opposite of a reactionary.

          • The Cominator says:

            Dont stickup for the international church of open borders and faggotry, letting women join nunneries will let them avoid their arranged marriage with beta bux and we will not allow that if it becomes an option many will take it. We dont believe in female choice at all.

            Russia had to modernize its military… You cannot look at Tsar Peter as if hed be in favor of slutwalks because he pushed military modernization. He also stopped the Jesuit plot to takeover the Orthodox Church by imposing strict Imperial control.

      • shaman says:

        You’re asking disingenuous questions (because someone insulted one of your homosexual e-daddies, abloo) and I just don’t feel like addressing all that boring crap you’ve blurted and farted here. When you cease being such an incorrigible ass-kissing scrotum-licking nepotistic fanboy of everyone who pretends to be “TRAD CATH” like Nick Buttboy Steve and peppermint and the rest of these fifth columnists with muh podcasts, maybe your interlocutors here will treat your inquiries with greater seriousness.

        Rather, I’m going to explain to you once and again why Jim’s blog will continue serving as Dr. Josef Mengele’s official internet clinic for bluepillers, and while we’re at it, also for people who think that forcing state-mandated police terrorism and TFW NO GF on 50+% of the male population is: “A great idea, because asceticism feels as good as snorting cocaine off a stripper’s ass, and Nikolai surely feels deep Slav guilt for masturbating to videos of creampie impregnation on PornHub, so let’s guilt trip him into supporting the enslavement of the male sex.” Yeah, no, you’re not holier than I am for possessing those conceited fee-fees which you possess, nice delusion tho.

        You see, the 3 last consecutive generations have been taken for a ride all the way to Cucksville County: boomers, gen-X, and millennials. The boomers all divorced, which is why you (Nikolai) don’t have a normal father figure, so you look up to a bunch of cigarette-choked overweight LARPers with podcasts to shine your way forward. Gen-X are “boomers lite” and have done absolutely nothing to reverse boomerism, in much the same way the Jews have done almost nothing to resist Puritanism, despite the Puritans’ incessant bitter-bitch whining about the Frankfurt School; Kevin MacDonald should’ve become a lawyer rather than a psychologist-cum-polemicist, because he certainly argues like one. And finally, peppermint’s generation, the millennials, are gay soy-fed faggots who shove various oblong vegetables into their ass such as carrots and cucumbers and so forth. No, peppermint, having that cucumber super-glued into your anus does not, in fact, magically turn you into “a man.” Quite the opposite. And what we are trying to do in this Kultur KAMPF is raise the zoomers to put an end to the boomer-X-millennial faggotry once and for all, by establishing and disseminating a new and reactionary (neoreactionary) meme-structure that will render the Cathedral’s memes low status. We’re stretching the Overton Window as wide as a Harlem heroin tranny-hooker’s GRIDS-infected rectum at 4 AM.

        We’re bringing back rape, sex slavery, and teen marriage. However, whenever some of us try to advocate the necessary policies, and to oppose policies detrimental to the program, there are lady-boys like peppermint who arrive on the scene, having crawled out of the woodwork and out of the closet, to tell us:

        “BUT SHAMAN, MY IQ AND ANALYTIC PROWESS ARE DEMONSTRABLY HIGHER THAN YOURS, SO I’M ABLE TO USE MY VAST ENCYCLOPEDIC KNOWLEDGE OF PSYCHOLOGY, PSYCHIATRY, AND SOCIOLOGY (I’VE BEEN EDUCATED IN A UNIVERSITY AND WATCH OPRAH) TO DETERMINE THAT THE SOLE REASON WHY YOU WANT TO SEE 17-YEAR-OLD MEN MARRY 13-YEAR-OLD WOMEN IS BECAUSE YOU, PERSONALLY, ARE A PEDOPHILE, A HEBEPHILE, AND AN EPHEBOPHILE, AND THEREFORE YOU, PERSONALLY, SEEK TO INSERT YOUR PENIS INTO THE VAGINA OF A JAILBAIT AND, THROUGH THE FRICTION OF GENITALIA, CLIMAX INSIDE OF HER IN A PROCESS KNOWN AS “COITUS,” BECAUSE YOU ARE CLEARLY A JEWISH HEBRAIC YID, AND AS TACITUS FAMOUSLY REMARKED IN 110, YOUR PEOPLE ARE “SINGULARLY PRONE TO LUST.” YOU SEE SHAMAN, I OBVIOUSLY READ YOU AND YOUR POOR RATIONALIZATIONS LIKE AN OPEN BOOK, AND I CAN CLEARLY TELL THAT YOU’RE ONLY DRIVEN BY YOUR BASE, CARNAL INCLINATIONS, AND NOT BY ANY SINCERE DESIRE TO SEE YOUNG HEALTHY PEOPLE FORM STABLE FAMILIES IN A SANE ENVIRONMENT WITHOUT THE PERPETUAL THREAT OF BEING SENT TO PRISON FOR BOGUS VOODOO CRIMES. NO, OBVIOUSLY YOU JUST SEEK TO PERSONALLY GRATIFY YOUR OWN INDIVIDUAL PERVERTED SELF, AND THEREFORE I SHALL OPPOSE YOU AND YOUR VILE PREDATION ON MY PRECIOUS LADIES WHOM I DEARLY PEDESTALIZE BECAUSE I’M A CUCK.”

        How can our memes proliferate in the new culture when this kind of mindset is permitted to pollute our inner sanctum, the safest of all spaces – Jim’s blog? If we allow the bluecons and their lies to thrive on our platforms, we won’t be able to coordinate our memes to make for an effective force that can convert zoomers to the reactionary side. We need to send our most concerted Dark Triad bully-efforts down the way of the bluecons, in order to filter their toxicity out of the ideological atmosphere. Yes, that means that I’m going to write scat-homosexual-BDSM fan fiction about my enemies, diss tracks, neologisms, and all that stuff. Look dawwg, I know well that I’m not going to time-travel to age 14 and get a 12-year-old waifu for myself. This is not the reason why I’m doing what I’m doing, whatsoever. Rather, I recognize which methods are effective for influencing people, and I’m employing them here and elsewhere, to varying degrees of success; I urge you to compare and contrast the comment section of 2019 versus 2016. Y’know, somebody did something. You only get one shot at life, and winning the sex war looks like a mighty worthy cause to me.

        Are you going to keep being a massive faggot castrato shill and suspected Opus Dei entryist or can you accept that there’s a method in the madness?

        • jim says:

          Meme pollution is not a problem. Our memes are stronger, because they rest on evolutionary psychology, and game theory and are backed by the voice of God in the Old Testament. And because they resonate human nature and the human soul.

          Enemy memes prevailed by the application of power, by a holiness spiral, and by power giving status to deluded ideas that support their power.

          The blue pill argument is not that their ideas are supported by evidence, or even consistent with what you see in front of your face, but that if you notice what is in front of your nose you are a wicked person and low status.

          We can allow them to tell us their memes, just have to push back when they tell us that our memes are wicked and low status.

        • shaman fan account says:

          Yay shamans back! I know he’s always here but it’s exciting when he switches to the iconic “shaman”.

          @Nikolai
          While the Jimian Faith (the NRx faith?) isn’t 100% in line with the sexual morality of Catholicism, it is far more preferable to the current state of affairs. And will overall lead to a reduction of sins committed.

      • Scatlord Mobutu says:

        Perhaps Nikolai deserves a less condescending reply to his explosion of subpar shilling here; I declined to set him straight when he protected Nick B. Steves and misrepresented the demographics of NRx as if 80% are Catholics (nah) by “inexplicably” giving a list of random NRx bloggers that just-so-happens to be overwhelmingly of his own background. Just to be clear, when there was a Jewish commenter here who constantly praised and linked to fellow Jews, I called him out on his tricks also. Disingenuous nepotism is disgusting.

        Eh, I’ll stick up for ol’ Peppermint.

        Of course: He has never properly answered any one of your repeated WP-related questions, but you’ll stick up for him regardless because he is one of your internet daddies – abloo. Do you even possess any independent thinking or do you always rely on some Virtual Papas to ideologically instruct you?

        I remember peppermint commenting his usual indecipherable screeds since I started reading.

        Undoubtedly, since you don’t seem to give a flying fuck about the quality of discussion, you’ve never felt the urge to tell him to cut the crap and start writing like a man instead of writing like an ovulating teenage Tumblrina who flickers her twitching clitoris to gifs of Benedict Cumberbatch and Ashton Kutcher.

        He’s not the bluepilled tradcon you make him out to be.

        He is by far worse, in fact; he serially switches ideologies according to what is convenient at the moment, albeit sexual confusion and detachment from normal masculinity remain as the common denominator, a permanent fixture, in all the ideologies that he has ever adopted and discarded. The only thing worse than a blue-piller is a thoroughly dishonest and shifty blue-puller, and that’s precisely what he is, and he himself knows it.

        You quote his comments and tell us he’s preaching the bluepill when he’s doing no such thing. Often you tell us he’s saying the exact opposite of what he’s actually saying.

        Now you are lying through your tartar-filled cavity-riddled teeth: I have given the most accurate representation of his views innumerable times, and the fact that you can’t follow threads to verify “who-said-what” does not mean that it isn’t so. Anyone can go to the original threads and read for himself what was said and by whom in which precise context. If you have an example of misrepresentation of a view (bearing in mind that cuckermint’s views are incredibly unstable, except when it comes to being a blue-piller), you can bring it up for discussion.

        Cringey paganism aside, he always has been [a right-winger].

        Not according to my definitions; yours may vary. I don’t consider postmodernist militantly anti-religious White Knight spammers who vociferously denounce their own race and their own ancestors as “pedophilic” to be right-wing at all. I consider them leftists, and if they sometimes incompetently and inconsistently pretend otherwise, then they’re sheep in wolf’s clothing.

        He was going after actual bluepilled tradcons far before you were and with an attitude almost as polemic as yours.

        Nuts. His little back-and-forth with the occasional typical boomer or SJW is wholly meaningless in this context; actual bluecons had been gathering on this blog like a swarm of worms on a disintegrating reeking carcass, and while I was doing my best to take out the garbage, he was growing more and more bluecon by the day, almost initiating a bluecon singularity on this blog – until enough really was enough. You either haven’t actually been paying attention, or you’re lying yet again.

        Proof that he was a member of the ingroup is that Jim himself “cheerfully” stole a post from Peppermint.

        Strike two (your second lie in a row): That Jim proudly steals from someone doesn’t mean that Jim generally recognizes that person as an authority or considers him to be X or Y. Apparently you think like a gay academic journalist, so you assume that using a source equals unconditional approval thereof. It really doesn’t.

        That and he always had people supporting him in the comments.

        That’s not a total lie, but it’s just grossly inaccurate: What he has is people who find him amusing. Believe it or not, I’m one of those people myself – Jesus told us to love our enemies, and I definitely love some of peppermint’s jokes. That doesn’t mean that he is not a White Knight enemy who deserves to be ass-raped to death with glass shards and thermal lances in front of his mortally terrified family, only that even stains of AIDS-positive diarrhea like cuckermint can have some positive qualities, which none denied.

        I seem to recall that you yourself took his side when glosoli got into a beef with him a couple years ago.

        Maybe; I don’t remember that, but certainly glosoli doesn’t get any sympathy from me, so if cuckermint told that Gaia-worshiping Doomster Demoniac to quit ‘tarding, perhaps I supported that. That doesn’t prove anything – we’re not in kindergarten and it’s “permissible” here to occasionally agree with people whom you otherwise consider to be despicable scum of the Earth. Again, that does not imply unconditional support. Recall the saying about broken clocks.

        If he was such an obvious bluepilled puritan, why did nobody (including you and Jim) notice until 2018?

        Strike 3 and you’re out. He was assumed to be a girl by Jim and others (understandably, needless to say) when he started posting, and he was called out for his pedo-hysterical faggotry in 2017. Still more importantly, the reason he was largely ignored is known to you, and suddenly pretending that you don’t know the answer is truly disingenuous: It’s because he all too often writes unreadable and annoying gibberish spam, so people usually gloss over it and pay little attention to the content thereof. In 2018, I had enough of his blue-pilled blabber, so I pointed it out and excised the cancer. Are going to cry like a bitch about it forever?

        Why didn’t somebody accuse him of all these things when he first started commenting instead of five years later?

        Again: When he started writing, he was understandably assumed to be a woman, not a man. Secondly, his Feminist Faggotry reached its peak and climax in 2017 – before that he had mostly ranted against Christians and Jews, though in 2017 and early 2018 he decided to vomit his liver out of his nostrils in a shrill cacophony about “pedophilia.” Enough was enough, then.

        You also argue from false consensus “unanimous” “our never-ending beef”.

        Lie #4; it’s like a pattern! Also, you’re now confirmed for midwit-IQ, since you can’t tell that:

        1. It’s not an “argument,” but casual observations;
        2. It’s not false; it is indeed the true consensus.

        I get it Nikolai, you looked very hard for a “gotcha” and you thought you had it. Nah.

        The way I recall it is that is was mostly just you and him fighting about teenage girls with a couple other commenters occasionally chiming in and eventually he got tired of arguing with you.

        Check for Alzheimer’s, then. Because what actually happened, every single time, is that 90% of the commenters called cuckermint out for his effeminate White Knightism, and eventually he figured out that almost everyone here (certainly Jim and the best commenters) vehemently disagrees with his low-T insanity as it is reflected in his repeatedly stated positions about this issue, so he switched tactics. Did that surprise you? Seems to me that every time I state the healthy and sane position about the matter, you act as if I’ve somehow “gone too far” – and then Jim states clearly that, not only is my position correct, but in fact, reality is even more red-pilled than stated, and I actually did not go nearly far enough. Gosh, you must be in constant astonishment, as befits a dementic.

        It’d be so easy for peppermint to mud-sling and backbite

        Please, everything but that! Truly I am horrified of the prospect.

        Btw any proof whatsoever that he’s bisexual

        I can’t seem to find the rather ambiguous post where he wrote something to the effect of “If homosexuality means X, then I am X,” but what I (and everyone willing to dig through the dung) can easily find is endless confusion from him about this issue, and indications that said confusion stems from various personal experiences. We can go over his spam-post history and I’ll show you that my hypothesis is mighty solid indeed with several examples, but this drama is boring; what is more pertinent is that sexual confusion goes hand in hand with Blue Pill positions, suggesting that — surprise surprise — those who denounce normal men as “pedophiles” are invariably legit deviants. Peppermint is merely a case in point, a useful “in your face” example of this sickening phenomenon.

        or is that just more blatant calumny?

        You wouldn’t be caught telling the truth even if your directionless life depended on it, and this is more projection on your part.

        Note to everyone: This is not even a bullycide, but a mere debate. Nikolai is (presumably) not a completely hopeless case, despite everything stated above. But he needs to learn that lawyerly, lie-abundant advocacy on behalf of White Knight subhuman degenerate garbage like cuckermint will massively backfire on anyone who attempts it. By the way, it’s not the intention here to influence the zero-contribution ankle-biters who occasionally make themselves manifest and then scamper off like rats; rather, the important thing is that those with a functional brain on their shoulders — be they regular commenters or just readers — will grasp that Blue-Pill memes are low status and lame, and that Jimianity is high status, interesting, and triumphant.

        • Nikolai says:

          Two walls of text for the price of one. I wonder if I can get a third, I’m sure you have more Jewy psychoanalysis and homoerotic fanfiction left in the tank.

          • Anon says:

            low-effortpost, (you repulsive) newfaggot

            put some thought into the next one

            polite sage

          • Raped by Gay Dad, Now a TRAD-TARD says:

            You’d get 10 effortrolls if you were interesting enough a target, Cuckolai. I’m so sorry that your gay and alcoholic dad raped you and subsequently abandoned you, but Nick B. Steves can’t really replace him.

    • info says:

      This link attests to this too:
      http://voxday.blogspot.com/2019/10/it-is-worse-than-you-imagine.html

      This shit is worse than we think.

      • jim says:

        Gay conspiracy. They have sex with each other, and plot with each other to procure little boys. So the gay mafia in the arts starts a “children’s theater”.

        They are not pedophiles, they are gays. They plotted together while naked together in a great big pile. They are not procuring children. They are procuring boys.

        That is gay.

        • info says:

          “They are not pedophiles, they are gays. They plotted together while naked together in a great big pile. They are not procuring children. They are procuring boys.”

          True and those boys are also children. It is gay and it is against children.

          • The Cominator says:

            Hetrosexual males who want prepubescent girls exists but is VERY rare with homosexuals it is common.

          • Theshadowedknight says:

            The driver behind the behavior is buggers looking for someone to bugger. The prey are boys because buggers go after boys. If you talk about the children, then the shitlibs use it as one more reason why we must control men instead of what it should be, one more reason to throw buggers off of rooftops. #gravitywins is the solution to the #lovewins problem, and this is a manifestation of the #lovewins problem.

          • jim says:

            When you say “children” you concede to the frame of those who criminalize receiving a naughty selfie on Facebook Messenger from a seventeen year old woman.

            It was boys.

            And when you say “pedophiles”, you concede to the frame of those who claim that men attracted to fertile age women are as dangerous and as evil as gays.

            • info says:

              “And when you say “pedophiles”, you concede to the frame of those who claim that men attracted to fertile age women are as dangerous and as evil as gays.”

              If I use it than I am only using it in the clinical sense of the term.

              Otherwise its Voxday and the general right-wing of the West who buy into the worldly narrative in regards to this. The vast majority of them.

              “When you say “children” you concede to the frame of those who criminalize receiving a naughty selfie on Facebook Messenger from a seventeen year old woman.”

              Then this “17 year old woman” is not a child. And our modern understanding of such is utterly mistaken.

              Indeed the general right-wing especially among those who consider themselves Christian concede the frame.

              • jim says:

                > > “And when you say “pedophiles”, you concede to the frame of those who claim that men attracted to fertile age women are as dangerous and as evil as gays.”

                > If I use it than I am only using it in the clinical sense of the term.

                There is no clinical sense of the term. “Pedophile” is an anti concept. The term “Pedophile” groups unlike things together, and separates things that are alike, and was created for this purpose. It is a propaganda term.

                Google’s ngram viewer indicates that the word did not exist before 1944. Do you think some new sexual preferences appeared in 1944?

                It is a word created by the enemies of the family to destroy families, by the enemies of heterosexual males to destroy heterosexual males.

                > Otherwise its Voxday and the general right-wing of the West who buy into the worldly narrative in regards to this. The vast majority of them

                So much the worse for Vox Day, who is purple pilled.

                • info says:

                  Perhaps there it has always been a propaganda term. However I am not mistaken that it is a clinical term according to the DSM-5:
                  https://infogalactic.com/info/Pedophilia

                  It may not even be valid as you said. But I am curious as to how you come to such conclusions in your statement on the 1st place.

                • jim says:

                  > it is a clinical term according to the DSM-5

                  And homosexuality is no longer a clinical term.

                  > I am curious as to how you come to such conclusions

                  I gave you the reasons already. Seems to me I was entirely clear. Perhaps I was less clear than I thought, but I cannot clarify unless you explain your understanding of what I said.

                • Info says:

                  What is your take on “The last closet” by Moira Greyland?

                • jim says:

                  Reviewers say of the book “Greyland clearly has major issues with homosexuality, gender roles and paganism”. In other words, she comes disturbingly close to speaking the truth on these matters. But she is not allowed to speak the truth, and instead is required to say “pedophilia” and gets paraphrased as saying “pedophilia”.

                • ten says:

                  Gay doctrine says there is a gay bit and a pedo bit in sexuality, male/straight/pedo and female/gay/normal being sexual configurations. Recently realizing this is ridiculously insane, they fix the problem by going infinitely more insane, adding cis/trans cathegory, and claiming all the things to be spectral rather than binary.

                  This says that a straight man and a straight woman are straight in the same way, that they share a sexual configuration. This is glaringly, obviously, insanely false.

                  There should not exist a word “straight” shared by normal male sexuality and normal female sexuality, which are not similar things.

                  It also says they might be gay in the same way, which maybe is less insane, i don’t know. Seems like it shouldn’t exist either.

                  It also says a gay man and a straight man can be “pedo” in the same way, making them both want to fuck children, of their preferred sex. While there exists men who want to fuck little girls who are not gay, they are not similar to gays, who all want to fuck boys, which is a normal part of being gay, and the word pedo is camouflage for them and their buggery, while also attacking normal correct sexuality, because they say it is pedophilia to fuck sexually mature and active girls, while patriarchy to stop them from fucking, so the word should not exist.

                • Scatlord Mobutu says:

                  “Pedophilia” is a codeword for patriarchy.

                  Progressives hate young marriage, hate heterosexuality, and hate traditional sex roles, so they tell us that transferring ownership over your daughter to a husband is “pedophilia,” supposedly because she is “not mature enough for sex,” and if you dare suggest otherwise, it must be due to a sexual perversion.

                  “Pedophilia” is an exceptionally convenient meme for gays, because they are prone to argue, “Oh, I’m only into sodomy involving consenting adults, so I’m okay.” That’s a blatant lie, but the more important point is that this meme legitimizes sodomy and at the same time delegitimizes young patriarchy, doing a service to deviants and a disservice to normals.

                  It’s also an anti-concept, for reasons explained at length a zillion times.

                  When Progressive entryists tell us that “Pedophilia will never ever ever ever be acceptable,” what they really say is “Patriarchy will never ever ever ever be acceptable.” Notice how uncomfortable and quite they become when we answer them: “No, sodomy will never be acceptable.” The Progressive entryists have inverted Christian morality 180 degrees, telling us that gay sex should be treated with tolerance and compassion, and in contrast, that shotgun marrying one’s sexually uncontrollable daughter, who is a 13-year-old orgiastic buttslut, should be strictly illegal.

                  The Satanic Progressive entryists are “suspiciously silent” about sodomy, but wax lyrical about how normal male sexuality must be suppressed by all means. We are being told that sodomites are not a problem, or at least not a significant problem, whereas red-blooded masculine men are the worst thing to ever happen. We are being told that “bi-curiosity” is totally normal, but that attraction to boobs, hips, and pink pussy is “perverted.”

                  In this upside-down world, men who get erections for other men, and don’t get erections for pink pussy, are teaching us sexual morality. Men who are turned on by smelling hairy unclean anuses, and are not turned on (and are even repelled) by the intoxicating scent of fertile wet snatches, are telling us what sex-crime legislation we should have! They hide their deviance behind postmodern babble, and fear the focused limelight for the same reason.

                  These entryists are “full of forgiveness” (and full of excuses) for gays who seek to diddle little boys, but steam with uncompromising wrath for straight frat boy ‘rapists’ who are seduced by lying whores cruising for salami-sized dick.

                  When their wife, if they have one, tells them “I’m wet, come to me,” and they can see the blushing on her cheeks, and can even smell her increasingly smooth pink pussy, that simply does not influence these low-T Satanists. But when they see a 10-year-old boy playing soccer in his shorts, that gives them such a raging boner that it rips out of their underwear. Then they have the audacity to tell us that we are the deviants, because we are “pedophiles.”

                  Our Progressive enemies hate young heterosexual patriarchal marriage, and they hate healthy masculine testosterone levels, denouncing both of those things as “pedophilia”; and at the same time they love (or “tolerate”) sodomy – it is because they are of their father, the Devil, who was a murderer from the beginning and the father of lies, or in naturalistic terms, because they are sick effete mutants with dysfunctional hindbrains who take orders from their domineering wife, and as such should be totally erased from the gene pool, permanently.

                • jim says:

                  > When Progressive entryists tell us that “Pedophilia will never ever ever ever be acceptable,” what they really say is “Patriarchy will never ever ever ever be acceptable.”

                  Notice that Drag Queen Story Hour involving genital to genital contact through rather thin clothing between Drag Queens and nine year old boys is totally acceptable and not at all suggestive of pedophilia, but an older man getting a naughty selfie on Facebook messenger from a seventeen year old woman is totally pedophilia.

  21. Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

    OT found-art, inadvertent comedy. More than you ever wanted to know about the life of an upper tier Washington DC sausage-maker, as recorded in his monomaniacal Wikipedia user page.

    Mr Dauster is the husband of perfidious FEC chair Ellen Weintraub (who is currently agitating to tailor the FEC “interpretation” of election law as a pseudo-law to nail Trump). Certain commenters here will be happy to know that, in addition to having been at the epicenter of American legislated decay, Mr D is a very enthusiastic member of the tribe. Other than that, the whole biography reads like everything you ever imagined about the prog academic-governmental nexus, proudly documented by one of its own.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dauster

    A perfectly preserved taxidermic specimen of Homo Progressivus.

  22. Mister Grumpus says:

    OT:
    There’s this interesting flare-up going on with this movie The Joker.

    It reminds me of the whole thought-crime/status-crime/WDS(*) phenomenon. We can “detect” this phenomenon by high-status people lining up to publicly denounce something, but their reasons why not matching up or making much logical sense.

    Their offense is at a more pre-verbal and reptilian level, where Jimmian Analysis could be especially useful in diagnosing and understanding.

    (*) WDS: White Derangement Syndrome

    • jim says:

      Obviously some progressives sense an intolerable thought crime in this movie, and others do not.

      My guess is that Bruce Wayne’s dad is identified as a Wall Streeter, rather than a trust fund baby like themselves, which runs against the commie narrative that all capitalists are one being, “capital”, including, of course, the man who owns your local Domino’s franchise and the peasant with two cows, who all deserve death. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, all commies are progressives, but not all progressives are commies. Generally, commies are watermelons. Mann is not a watermelon, he just wants to destroy industrial civilization in order to shake down the power grid for a few bucks, but by and large, they are increasingly communists who want to institute strict socialism and eat white babies.

      (Not joking about the baby eating – proposed as a method of reducing population by the fringe watermelons. Supposedly global warming is going to cause famine, and we have to eat the babies. Of course at some level they know it is socialism that causes famine.)

      Of course, if a leftist singularity is not shut down, yesterday’s fringe watermelon becomes tomorrow’s mainstream. 97% of scientists agree!(And those that don’t agree are fired.)

      • The Cominator says:

        Its good to see movies with intolerable anti-progressive thoughtcrimes starting again… it might mean that those who glow have a weakened hold on the media or have been somewhat replaced by non-progs.

        I haven’t seen any movies with thoughtcrimes in them really lately except for Thor Ragnorok (I don’t know how that one ever got through as its a profoundly anti-progressive movie).

      • Mister Grumpus says:

        > (Not joking about the baby eating – proposed as a method of
        > reducing population by the fringe watermelons.)

        Seriously?

        In particular, what do you make of the “We need to eat the babies” chick at the Alexandria of Color press conference?

        Fake somehow surely (surely?), but what kind of fake? Is she a pro-life plant trying to make AoC look bad? Or rather, is she a test balloon, sowing the meme into the ground to see if it sprouts?

        You explained once that the herd runs leftward, but doesn’t know which WAY leftward it’ll be until it’s actually running that way. If someone knew ahead of time, they’d start running that way themselves to get out in front and snag a Ted Talk invitation. This certainly implies, to me, that there’s a clique of (competing?) far-ahead psychos who experiment with trying to steer the leftward direction, like political insider trading.

        • Samuel Skinner says:

          I’m going to agree with Anglin- it was probably some conservative plant to show how evil leftists are. It doesn’t work since people already believe leftists are evil, are leftists or don’t pay attention to the news.

          • jim says:

            You underestimate the madness.

            It makes logical sense assuming that humans are a cancer and are pollution etc, and holiness sense in that the holiness spiral always heads off into destruction and self destruction, like the Jews burning their own food supplies while under siege by the Romans in Jerusalem.

        • jim says:

          There has always been a “humans are cancer” thread in the greenie movement, and the watermelons have adopted it with great enthusiasm.

          Humans bring our beloved ancestral savanna with us everywhere we go, and the greenies are anti savanna. They don’t want it anywhere.

        • Omar is just a Trump card now. says:

          The French student riots of 1968 were started by a fellow who was affronted by a parietal rule against bringing girls overnight to his dormitory, and ginned up protests to press the school administration about it. One thing led to another and it expanded and mutated from that nucleus to a nationwide protest.

      • Nikolai says:

        It’s more like the Joker is a somewhat sympathetic portrayal of men who feel left behind by society. He’s an unskilled worker with no friends who can’t get a gf.

        Unsurprisingly journalists interpret the film as glorifying incel terrorism because it’s the only piece of media since Fight Club that isn’t an unqualified demonization and condemnation of such men.

        Boomers, even right wing ones, don’t seem to get it either. They look at the joker and see a loser, but they don’t understand that plenty of millennials with 6 figure incomes and fancy cars and apartments feel the exact same way, just with a higher standard of living. We lack the social cohesion that boomers had so they’re fundamentally incapable of empathizing with millennial/gen z struggles.

        • jim says:

          That is the rationale that they give, but the incoherence and flailing of their rationale indicates that this is not the actual reason, that the actual reason is something that they cannot say, or even think.

        • Ron says:

          Not having seen the movie, but having read about it (fwiw), I respectfully disagree that that is the message of the movie. The message of the movie is “get with the program or be an insane psychopath who society has to hunt down”. The second message is “all incels are incurably damaged bc of their own nature.”

          These messages preclude anyone from taking a hard look at themselves or society

          Show me the movie where an incel meets a coach/mentor who will take the time and trouble to teach him. Show me the movie where the incels friends say to him “hey man. You are fucking up, get with the program” and the incel after a lot of struggle realizes they are right.

          Instead the message is one of resignation. We can’t help this guy and there is no point in trying to help yourself.

          It’s an awful message.

        • Javier says:

          Based on the trailers, the main character has no resonance with me, the film does not look frightening or engaging, only boring. But the left sees the same trailer and goes into panic mode. What is going on?

          It seems like they created an image of the ur-White Male they fear, which has little resemblance to reality, so you are only frightened if you are one of them.

          • Nikolai says:

            Watching the trailers, the main character definitely resonates with me. And not just me, but basically all of frogtwitter. So much so that almost all of them jokerized their avis and have been tweeting nonstop about it for months and calling the movie incel black panther.

            What’s going on is that neets and spiritual neets are finally getting a movie that portrays them somewhat sympathetically, that actually sheds light on their wholly legitimate grievances. And the elites lose their minds over it because they can’t admit guys like that have legitimate grievances, they just insist that they’re irredeemably evil.

        • alf says:

          Haven’t seen the movie, haven’t read about it, but I’m guessing it’s something like this – https://gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/009/503/292/original/1ee4a96b93b1a7e7.jpeg?1570411479

      • Encelad says:

        They don’t even try to hide it anymore, all the green movement is just an excuse for killing us and destroy our civilization.

        http://archive.is/BUdZX

        • jim says:

          We need to call out this lie, and stop treating them as sincere. They know full well that they are lying – the world has been getting greener and climate milder since the little ice age. Extreme weather events have been getting steadily rarer. Today’s top hurricanes have lower winds, today’s most terrible droughts are not as dry. Forests are appearing in places where formerly a sheep or a goat had trouble getting a meal. I thought I was misremembering, then I noticed that all the trees were younger than myself. Not one of those trees had been a sapling when I walked those lands as a lad. There are patches of old forest near the coast, but inland, all the forests are new.

          They intend to destroy western civilization and murder hundreds of millions in order to shake down the energy companies for a few bucks. They consciously know this. You can tell they that know that they are lying by their methods of argument – not the methods that someone who believed what he was saying was true would use. And you know they intend to destroy western civilization and murder hundreds of millions because they say so.

          As it says in the copybook headings “When the fox preaches, it is the geese he wants”

          These guys have been told the facts often enough – the older ones can see the facts in front of their eyes, a greener and milder world than their youth – and they don’t respond to the evidence in the way that they would if they believed what they are saying. They don’t debate in the way that someone sincerely deluded would debate. Someone who was sincerely deluded would find contrary evidence more surprising and disturbing. They just go right on assuming that no contrary evidence was presented, that everyone agrees, including the man who pointed out that their stuff was untrue.

  23. info says:

    Interested in your thoughts on this video?
    https://www.bitchute.com/video/AU6ELyRBqDri/

    • jim says:

      Your link is trying far to hard to link evil Jews into the story. The evil Jews your link points at did not cause these evil words to placed on the statue of liberty and read into the constitution. How those words got onto the statue of liberty is a far more important story, which your link discusses in the passive tense, avoiding pointing, while vigorously pointing at any Jews somehow connected to the story.

      In 1903, the words are cast on to the statue of liberty. By whom, and for what purpose?

      In 1940, the words are read into the constitution, but not initially for the purpose of opening the borders. Probably to re-orient american nationalism to universalism, that we have a mission to the world. At some time, they were transformed into the right of two billion black male military age subsaharan Africans to immigrate here, that liberty equals open borders. None of this happened merely because somebody Jewish wrote those words.

      • info says:

        Ok. Are you also familiar with E Michael Jones?

      • pdimov says:

        >In 1903, the words are cast on to the statue of liberty. By whom, and for what purpose?

        I found this question interesting, so I looked into it. The answer is, apparently, Georgina Schuyler:

        http://www.jewishmag.com/93mag/emmalazarus/emmalazarus.htm
        https://www.nyhistory.org/exhibit/georgina-schuyler-1841-1923
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schuyler_family

        Three links, hopefully the spam filter won’t frown.

        • jim says:

          These links fail to establish that fact – could you explain how Georgina Schuyler caused this stuff to happen?

          • Cloudswrest says:

            If Wikipedia is to be believed it appears Joseph Pulitzer was involved.

            ———————————————————
            Excerpted from “The New Colossus” article.

            “The New Colossus” was the first entry read at the exhibit’s opening on November 2, 1883. It remained associated with the exhibit through a published catalog until the exhibit closed after the pedestal was fully funded in August 1885,[6][7] but was forgotten and played no role at the opening of the statue in 1886. It was, however, published in Joseph Pulitzer’s New York World as well as The New York Times during this time period.[8] In 1901, Lazarus’s friend Georgina Schuyler began an effort to memorialize Lazarus and her poem, which succeeded in 1903 when a plaque bearing the text of the poem was put on the inner wall of the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty.[4]

            • jim says:

              > Joseph Pulitzer’s New York World as well as The New York Times during this time period.

              “Pulitzer”, “New York Times”. Do these words sound familiar?

              If you are looking at the Jews, you are looking at the matador’s cape, not the matador’s sword.

              Treasonous elites used to hire Jews to do their dirty work. Now they are starting to dispense with Jews and hire dot Indians, the common factor being that if you hire someone to destroy your country, you will get better service from someone who is not of your country and has community ties that are not of your country.

          • pdimov says:

            I don’t have any more information than what’s in the links. All other articles I found use the passive tense.

            • jim says:

              That, the passive tense, is the problem: Anyone who zeroes in on Jews is using Jews to distract you from the matador’s sword. When people use the passive tense, they are usually avoiding something.

              When you hear the passive tense, ask yourself “What is he avoiding saying, and why is he avoiding it?”

  24. BC says:

    Having now watched Joker, I think I can identify why they’re losing their shit over it: The Joker is a incel crazy loser trying to do his best for his insane mother while being shit on by everyone around him. He snaps, kills some people who beating him and discovers personal power in murder. Hallucinates that this results in him having a girl friend, giving him the confidence to do a successful standup act, and an invitation to a national TV show to showcase his standup. All while surrounded by a background of anarchy and destruction encouraged by his acts.

    Incels are dangerous because they burn down the civilization that birth them once they reach critical mass & start working together and once they learn that violence results in women.

    This movie isn’t the incel anthem yet, but it may soon be.

    • The Cominator says:

      Also you allude to why the Final Helicopter Ride of the leftist is necessary. Deus vult thou shall not suffer a leftist to live.

    • The Cominator says:

      Having seen it I think I can explain the thoughtcrimes in more depth but don’t want to spoil it just yet…

      I think I’ll discuss it in two weeks…

    • RedBible says:

      So after reading/watching what several have had to say about what they think the cause of outrage is, I think this youtube video sums it up best: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp1pUlmNaz0
      He basically says that the movie holds up a mirror to the Media’s face and tell them “You helped to make the Joker become the villain. You are creating the problems and monsters of today.”

    • White Man says:

      He gets laid so he’s not incel. The writer, director, and lead actor are all semitic. Why choose this movie when there are so many better ones like the Dirty Harry series. This movie reminded me of Taxi. This character does not represent the disenfranchised white. It is very cringy, violent, and psychotic. This country has lost its perspective of art and theatre. Much like Germany did in the 1920s. We have a cultural infection. Try some of the old John Wayne movies.

      • Anonymous says:

        >hallucinates
        >he gets laid

        You dumb nigger.

        • White Man says:

          You don’t know that. You could say the whole series of events where a figment of the character’s imagination. At any rate, you miss the point. This is not a good movie to characterize whites. You fit the description of your name calling.

          • Anonymous says:

            >You could say the whole series of events where a figment of the character’s imagination
            >where

            😂😂😂😂

Leave a Reply