Evolution

August 4th, 2018

Evolution is on topic for reaction, for the nature of women makes sense and is explicable in terms of Darwinian evolution, in terms of evolutionary psychology. You can also explain it as the curse of Eve, but if you explain it as the curse of Eve, it is rather arbitrary. Why did God curse women that way, and not some other way? (Answer, because we are risen killer apes, not fallen angels.) And because women are cursed in this fashion we cannot trust them to make sexual and reproductive choices. Nor can we trust them to vote, for they are going to vote for invasion, conquest, and the extermination of their menfolk.

Reed criticizes evolution on the basis of irreducible complexity – that living creatures could not have evolved in small steps because its functionality is inherently complex.

This criticism is bunkum. No one has produced a single example of irreducible complexity in living creatures. Complex systems in living creatures are excessively and unnecessarily complicated, not irreducibly complicated. The reason for the unnecessary complexity is that they are adapted from a system that did something else. For example, inside the the dolphin’s flipper is a hand for climbing trees. Hence considerably more complicated than the fish’s fin.

The dolphin’s fin is not the simplest possible fin. It is the simplest possible fin that you can derive in small steps from a hand for climbing trees.

This all too reducible complexity is compelling evidence for evolution, not an argument against it. That the dolphin’s fin is overly complicated is proof that the ancestors of dolphins climbed trees, and that the hands of the tree climbers were themselves adapted from the bottom gripping hands of first tetrapods.

However, while we have compelling evidence that existing living creatures evolved from simpler creatures of lower evolutionary grade, that all the animals you can recognize as animals evolved from the urbilatarian, a creature with jelly like flesh, a quite complicated brain, a heart, a liver, two very simple eyes that could barely see anything, a quite good sense of smell, and a single orifice used for sex, birth, eating, excreting, breathing, and smelling, Reed nonetheless has a compelling argument in that we don’t have a plausible example of life that could have evolved from non life. Current earthlike conditions could not support forms of nonlife capable of evolving into life. While the complexity of existing life forms is quite certainly reducible, no one has produced something simple enough to appear spontaneously from nonlife. In this sense, yes, irreducible complexity.

Maybe during the Hadean era of the earth high energy life forms appeared that could not exist in current earthlike conditions, and as the earth calmed down, evolved into forms capable of existing in current Earthlike conditions. Maybe on the comets low energy life forms appeared that could not exist in current earthlike conditions, and evolved into creatures capable of existing in current Earthlike conditions – I tend to the latter theory, and think that the first forms of life were low energy, lived in conditions very far from earthlike, in places very far from earth, and existed long before the sun was formed.

Or maybe God created the first urbilatarian. Reed’s argument is an argument in support of that position But if God did create the first urbilatarian, evolution has been running since then, as is proven by the Dolphin’s fin and the Panda’s thumb. So, even if God created the first urbilatarian, Darwinian evolution still explains the otherwise mysterious nature of women.

Vox Day asks, as if it was a killer argument, what is the mutation rate?

Roughly ten per generation. However most of these are either neutral or harmful, which means that evolution has to run mighty fast to stay in the same place.

If he is asking how many mutations favored by evolution occur, how many mutations go to fixation, the answer is something in the ballpark of one every thousand years or so. However, we get lots of evolution by changing the ratios of large numbers of alleles of small effect, and describing this kind of evolution in terms of mutation rate is not very meaningful, since it is not accurately described in terms of mutations, and since the ratios rarely go all the way to fixation.

Vox Day’s advice on handling women is not very good. It may well have been adversely affected by his reluctance to believe in evolution. Similarly, his faith in the sexless character of females under eighteen.

While I am delighted that #metoo is devouring those who funded it and sponsored it I know perfectly well that every notable #metoo allegation is a malicious lie, for the targets are always the men whom women very much want, wealthy and powerful men, and the accusers are mostly washed up narcissistic whores that men no longer want – the accusations are directed against those men who are most likely to be sexually contacted by women in a sexually aggressive manner, and the accusations come from those women who are most apt to sexually contact men in a sexually aggressive manner.

While we should never interrupt the enemy when he is making a mistake, and should enthusiastically cheer our enemies as they devour each other, Vox Day is a blue pilled sucker for failing to identify vicious lying whores as vicious lying whores. Weinstein and company deserve what they are going to get – but they deserve it for sponsoring the movement that is now devouring them. Similarly, when Stalin sent those who set up death camps to their own death camps for “objective fascism”, it was a good thing that they were sent to their own death camps, but one should not be persuaded that they were actually were objectively fascists. And it will be a good thing if Weinstein and company are convicted of rape, but they are no more rapists than Trots were fascists, and if Vox Day thinks they are guilty, he is ignorant of the nature of women, to which ignorance his rejection of evolution has likely contributed.

Defining Restoration and Reaction

August 2nd, 2018

Social Matter, without changing its claim to be the blog of the restoration, has gone commie. Having been linking to centrist cuckservatives and pozzed libertarians for some time, is now linking to out and out communists pushing race revolution to implement Maduro style socialism in a brown and universalist world ruled by the international community.

The literal meaning of poz is a reference to the practice of political gays of deliberately infecting themselves with HIV in order to be holier than the next homosexual. Means intentionally becoming HIV positive to get intersectionality points. The metaphorical meaning of poz is the adoption of policies and programs likely to destroy one’s ethnic group, one’s friends, one’s own career, and oneself, as for example a project code of conduct for one’s own project.

So it is time to define the reaction and the restoration. Who is in, who is out:


The reactionary position is that leftism was evil, absurd, and mad in 1820, has been getting more evil, more absurd, and more mad, ever since, and the Restorationist program is that we need to be ruled by Kings.

The central insight of Moldbug was to look at anglosphere movement left starting the clock with the overthrow of Charles the First, rather than starting with the Nazis.

Nazis were and are leftists, just leftists who have been left behind by ninety years of movement further left, so if you start the clock at Nazism, the trend is less obvious, and less obviously headed towards catastrophe, mass murder, and social collapse. Hitler was weak on the women question, turning the clock back to early Weimar or moderate Weimar, rather than pre Weimar, while America and Hollywood from 1939 to 1963, after first wave anglosphere feminism and before second wave anglosphere feminism, was far to the right of Hitler, and far more red pilled that Hitler, whose beta orbiter propensities were notorious. Thus, for example, in the immensely popular show “I love Lucy”, it is frequently implied that Lucy is going to be spanked for her many amusing misdeeds, that domestic discipline is a normal part of a normal and healthy marriage. The plotline of an “I Love Lucy” episode is that Lucy is a naughty girl, who does something naughty, which always turns out badly, implying that women need rule by husbands to keep them from getting into trouble.

If, however, you start the clock at Charles the First, the trend line is clear. Puritans are holier than thou, and Social Justice Warriors are holier than thou. Puritans make war on marriage, the family, and Christmas, and Social Justice Warriors make war on marriage, the family, and Christmas.

The restoration of Charles the Second in 1660 rolls them back and keeps them back for one hundred and sixty years in England. Hence our program of the Restoration.

The left has continuity of organization, personnel, and institutions all the way from the Puritans. Harvard was their theological headquarters, their Rome, once exiled from England by Charles the second. The American Revolution was a bad thing, and the founders were bad people, because it gave the Puritans control of a large part of America, and the War of Northern Aggression a worse thing, the Puritans conquering those states whose state religion was different from their own to impose a single unified state religion, headquartered in Harvard, on all of the United States. The War of Northern Aggression was not fought to make slaves free, nor to impose tariffs on the South, but to erase the Episcopalianism of Charles the Second and to capture the schools and universities for Harvard.

Progressivism is not Judaism, but is Christianity, a Christianity that first became holier than thou, then holier than Jesus, and is now holier than God. The founding fathers were Deists because they were holier than Jesus, and the progressives are holier than God. If you endorse the founding fathers, you endorse leftism. If all men are created equal then our civilization is going to be erased from history, and white people are going to be ethnically cleansed. If all men are created equal, it is totally unfair that not everyone in the world is free to move to America, vote in American elections, and get their share of my stuff. The failure of the founding fathers to torture each other to death for insufficient leftism was an unprincipled exception, and every unprincipled exception gets rolled back by those even more holy.

People adopt evil and insane principles to make themselves each more holy than each other, because proclaiming extravagant principles is easier and more visible than actually conducting oneself well to family, friends, and allies. The principles swiftly become so noble that they have horrifying implications. Those espousing those noble principles refuse to notice or carry out the horrifying and insane implications of those principles. And having successfully grabbed power on the basis of the extreme holiness of those principles, find themselves outflanked on the left by those even holier, who do notice and do carry out, and this holiness spiral has been driving our history since Charles the First. The extermination of white people, the destruction of Western Civilization, and the castration of males are logically implied by the remarkable purity of the Christianity of those seeking jobs in the state religion under Charles the First, which logic they failed to notice at the time, but are now starting to notice.

If you blame men for the misconduct of women, you endorse leftism. Women need to be under male authority in order to flourish and form families, and males need authority over their families to flourish and form families. Women should remain under the authority of their fathers till transferred to the authority of their husbands. If state and society fails to back legitimate male authority over females, you get defect/defect equilibrium, and everyone, male and female, finds it difficult to form families and have children. Cooperate cooperate equilibrium is inconsistent with moment to moment consent to sex. In order to reproduce, men and women have to agree to stick it out for richer for poorer, for better or worse, in sickness and in health, which means that people should be incapable of making sense of the self contradictory thought and phrase “marital rape” – it should be inexpressible and unthinkable.

Progressivism and the enlightenment is a religion, an evil, crazy, ugly, ignorant and stupid religion, worse by far than snake handling, speaking in tongues, young earth creationist Christianity, for that Jesus rose from the dead is unfalsifiable, and it takes a fair bit of thought and work with a crowbar and a sledge hammer to falsify young earth creationism, while anyone can and routinely does falsify that men are created equal. Similarly, speaking in tongues is not nearly as ugly and stupid as modern art, or modern architecture.

The timetable of movement left is as follows:

Holiness struggle for jobs in the state Church under Charles the First. Charles’ bishops come under attack for insufficient holiness. Alliance with with far against near ensues as English holier than thou heretics forget about religious, cultural, ethnic differences to ally with Scots, who dislike Charles the First and his Bishops for completely different reasons. Charles the first fails to crack down on treason, so treason flourishes until it is too late to crack down on it. Loses his head.

Puritans rapidly get ever lefter, with war on Christmas and desecration of marriage. Cromwell takes fright when he sees the levellers, who resemble modern Republican cuckservatives, and the diggers, who resemble modern communist hippies, and cracks down, halting the holiness spiral at levels that are not all that crazy.

Restoration: Charles the Second regains power, institutes a sane Church of England under himself and his Bishops. Exiles the Puritans to America. If you check the genealogies of Puritans, they are all descended from those who fled Charles the Second, not the Mayflower crowd. When someone claims descent from those who came across on the Mayflower, he is actually descended from a relative of those who came across on the Mayflower, which relative stayed in England or returned to England to rule with his fellow Puritans, till he got kicked out by Charles the Second.

Charles the Second does a Deng, instituting the corporate capitalism of the joint stock corporation. We see Ayn Rand’s hero engineer CEO mobilizing other people’s capital and other people’s labor to advance technology and make it widely available appear, which in time gives us the industrial and technological revolution. We also see the East India company formed to begin the conquest of the world. Charles the Second raises the furtive Invisible College to become the Royal Society, making the scientific method high status. With the Royal Society it becomes high status to win arguments by finding evidence and presenting evidence. The scientific, industrial, and technological revolutions get rolling, along with the British empire.

This is the restoration that we talk about. We want Trump or some general to do a Deng, to do a Charles the Second. We need democracy to end so that the mess can be put right. George the Third was on the right side, continuing the sane, sensible, and successful program of Charles the Second. The founding fathers were on the wrong side. Charles the second was Deng Xiaoping. Locke and Jefferson were Trotsky and Lenin, knocking over the apple cart to grab some of the apples.

Things go wrong in England with increasing unwillingness to discipline upper class wives. George the fourth screws the wives of aristocrats, while his wife cuckolds him. In 1820 he attempts to divorce his wife, in the process revealing that he is massively cuckolded, and becomes a figure of ridicule. His divorce is denied, because women are supposedly naturally so pure and virtuous that they can only do bad things because bad men make them do those bad things. The power of Kings ends when George the fourth goes massively public with how badly he has been cuckolded, instead of locking his wife in the tower. When George the Third told Pitt to take a long walk off a short pier, that showed Kings in charge. When the adulterous George the fourth could not divorce his flagrantly adulterous wife, that showed kings absurd.

Immediately British fertility starts falling, and has continue to fall to the present day, because if women are saints, they should rule men. Hence the current condition of marriage.

In 1840, the status of warriors comes under attack, and the British empire starts to be transformed into the anti British empire, as the American empire is the anti American empire, with hostile elites using the empire against their own people.

In 1854 Lord Cardigan, upon receiving suicidally stupid orders, personally led the charge, getting far in front of his men. Ordered to make an attack that was certain to fail with horrifying casualties, he carried out the attack by personally whacking the leading enemy officer, then immediately retreating, before all of his men had arrived, thus complying with orders to the letter, while ensuring that as few of his men as possible got killed by those stupid orders, in the process by exposing himself to more danger than any of his men. For this, he has been ridiculed and condemned ever since. Lord Cardigan, who in obedience to stupid and suicidal orders, led the charge of the light brigade was demonized. The whore Florence nightingale was made into a hero. Camp followers were deemed to be actual soldiers and put in uniform, with the inevitable consequence that proportion of actual soldiers in the military has been falling ever since. The British army, which has about two hundred generals, can now today field only about two hundred actual fighting men.

We are always ruled by priests or warriors, and giving camp followers the uniforms of warriors is a priestly blow at the status of warriors. Harvard is priests, being a theological college founded by Puritans for the purpose of religious rule by the extremely holy. Putting camp followers in uniform is a blow to the status of uniforms, to prevent rule by warriors, as is denigrating men like Lord Cardigan because he demonstrated both his loyalty to both his men and his superior officers when those loyalties came in conflict.

If you learned about men like Lord Cardigan, you would start to think that being ruled by such men, rather than ruled by those that hate us, sounds like a pretty good deal. For this, he has been condemned and ridiculed ever since. If to wear an officer’s uniform, a man had to show loyalty to those above him, display loyalty to those below, and to show courage in battle, you would be inclined to obey the man in an officer’s uniform. And so, the supply of uniforms to camp followers, and officer uniforms to camp follower bureaucrats. But if you can get the same uniforms, same pay, same status, and same honors, without battle or loyalty, who wants to get involved in battle? Hence the current ridiculous condition of the British army. There is no danger of British military takeover, because their officers are as absurd and contemptible as Lord Cardigan is depicted as being.

After World War II the American Empire got the upper hand over the British Empire, with the disastrous result that Harvard got the upper hand over the Royal Society, replacing the scientific method by peer review, by the the theological method of consensus building. It ceases to be high status to win arguments by finding evidence and presenting evidence, and instead becomes high status to win arguments by having one’s argument incorporated into the state religion. Science died then, hence Global Warming and all the rest, and by 1972, the death of science began to afflict one technological field after another. Hence the reproducibility crisis.

The reactionary position is that leftism was evil, absurd, and mad in 1820, has been getting more evil, more absurd, and more mad, ever since, and the Restorationist program is that we need to be ruled by someone like Lord Cardigan.

Poz, capitalism, and free markets.

August 1st, 2018

Is there a connection between free markets and Poz. Is a sound reactionary polity somewhat socialist?

In the comments some have been making the stupid argument that poz is the result of evil Jewish capitalists pursuing profit, that gay marriage was promoted to sell wedding cakes, which argument scarcely deserves a reply.

But others have been making more sophisticated arguments, which arguments deserve to be promoted into a post.

Obviously sound economic policy is trade with outsiders, which requires the Christian program of peace with outsiders, which is apt to result in the hyper Christian holier than Jesus program of surrender to outsiders.

Obviously the Libertarian Party promotes free markets, and also promotes poz that will at best result in whites being ethnically cleansed out of America, and males being spiritually castrated, and at worst could result in whites being physically genocided and males being physically castrated. This started with the nineteenth century English prime minister Gladstone building a coalition between economists and the hyperpuritan leftist evangelicals, which was swiftly devoured by the left, and ever since then libertarians have been trying to revive that coalition by accepting ever greater levels of ever more suicidal poz and ever more emasculating poz.

So in this sense, obviously there is a connection between sound economic policy and suicidal poz, manifest in the logic of trade, manifest in the holiness spiral of Christianity, manifest in Gladstone and manifest in the Libertarian party.

(But not however manifest in capitalists selling wedding cakes to gays, nor in capitalists selling mortgages to cat-eating illegal immigrants with no income, no job, and no assets. Obviously making marriage gay reduces marriage, does not increase it, obviously gays do not get married except to humiliate Christians and prevent straights from getting and staying married, and obviously selling mortgages to cat-eating unemployed illegal immigrants loses money. Obviously very few non Asian minorities can successfully handle a substantial mortgage, thus attempts to provide a substantial number of non Asian minorities with substantial mortgages inevitably and entirely predictably blew up in the loss of a trillion dollars. Whiteness predicts loan repayment better than credit history, except for the longest and most stringent credit histories. Even Asian nonwhites have substantially higher levels of credit scam for the same level of credit history, and non Asian non whites are all scammers, as near to all of them as makes no difference, just as all female CEOs and board members blow up the company as if it was a marriage to a beta male. If a non Asian nonwhite repaid a mortgage, it is solely because he flipped the house for a profit, and the real estate agent had to take the back payments on the mortgage out of the sale, in order to deliver a clean deed to the buyer. If he had a clean credit history before he took the mortgage, it was faked up. All women are like that, and all non asian minorities are like that.)

Carlylean Restorationist argues

Are you happy with Poz so long as there’s a free market liberated from central planners?

I’m sorry but I’m just not, at all. I’d rather live in 1988 Berlin not because I love five year plans, Soviets deciding what brands of breakfast cereal will be on the shelves (if any) and tanks on every corner.
I’d rather live in 1988 Berlin than 2018 Berlin because 2018 Berlin’s violent, rapey and full of filth, while 1988 Berlin isn’t.
I’d feel safer, more at home, in the 1988 version of Berlin.

(I use Berlin rather than London not because of any preference for it – quite the opposite in fact. The reason is that 1988 Berlin had the worst kind of economic policy imaginable to one of our mindset. The thing is, in spite of that policy – or (red pill) because of it – it doesn’t suffer from what 2018 Berlin suffers from under global relatively free trade.)

Well yes, but the brown face of the Democratic party, like Venezuela, has close to the worst economic policy imaginable, and also at the same time has poz at ethnic cleansing levels, in that the whiteish minority is being driven out of Venezuela Kristallnacht style.

Eighteenth century England had reasonably sound economic policy, and also far less poz than any twentieth or twenty first century society.

So, if we compare 1988 Berlin with 2018 Berlin, or with the suicidal ethnomasochist globohomo policy of the Libertarian party, looks like a strong connection between sound economics, and suicidal poz.

If we compare eighteenth century England, with Gladstone’s England, looks like a strong connection between sound economic policy, and seriously damaging levels of poz. Gladstone began today’s attack on the family, began the replacement of marriage with child support, and turned the British empire into the anti British empire, foreshadowing today’s anti American “International Community” empire.

If we compare the Libertarian Party with almost anyone, looks like a strong connection between sound economic policy, suicidal ethnomasochism, and globohomo self castration.

On the other hand, if we compare Trump’s America with Venezuela, or Trump with the brown face of the Democratic Party, or eighteenth century England with almost anywhere, looks like a strong connection between sound economic policy, free markets, and lack of poz. The libertarians attack Trump for insufficient capitalism, and insufficient poz, while the brown Democrats attack him for excessive capitalism, and insufficient poz.

The emancipation of the Russian serfs was simultaneously suicidal poz, and bad economic policy. I read that the “lavish lifestyles” of the nobility were harshly curtailed, and I also read that famine followed so it would seem that the lavish lifestyles of the serfs were also harshly curtailed. Which only makes sense if leftism did exactly what it always does: Knock over the apple cart to grab the apples. The emancipation of the serfs was a disaster for almost everyone in agriculture, particularly the serfs. The emancipation of the serfs was a disaster from day one, and steadily got worse and worse all the way to the liquidation of the kulaks, because the emancipation was accompanied by the introduction of collective land ownership. The correct solution was to emancipate serfs without land, converting them into agricultural laborers, tenant farmers, and sharecroppers. But the left was already campaigning vehemently against emancipation, and had it been done that way Alexander would have gone down in Whig history as worse than Vlad the impaler. So in Czarist Russia we see a connection between unsound economic policy, and poz leading to suicidal poz. Bad economic policy, in the form of collective land ownership, led to more poz, which eventually led to a disproportionately Jewish communist party taking charge. (Albeit Stalin continued bad economic policy while massively reducing poz.)

So yes, there is a connection between sound economic policy and ethnomasochistic rule by globohomos, since sound economics favors peace with outsiders, and favoring peace with outsiders is apt to blur into favoring surrender to hostile outsiders.

But Charles the second introduced sound economic policy at the same time as he exiled poz, and burned poz at the stake for heresy.

Socialism

July 29th, 2018

Leftism necessarily goes ever lefter. But what is “lefter”? Leftism has no essence, it is just a coalition to knock over the apple cart in order to grab some of the apples, so “lefter” is whatever direction looks like some apples could be knocked loose. “Lefter” could be almost anything, head off in almost any direction, depending on fashion, opportunity, and perceived vulnerability of people who have stuff.

Leftism necessarily goes ever lefter, because having knocked over one apple cart, there is now an apple shortage, and people then need to knock over another, and because of the broken window effect – when leftism works, in the sense that apples were rolling around, they go looking for something else to knock over, since that apple cart is already smashed up. Leftists perceive wealth as a snapshot in time, as if it were a gift from God. The ways that wealth is created are meaningless to them, it is a pie to be sliced up and enjoyed.

Right now “lefter” is heading off towards ethnic cleansing of whites and desexing of males. Many leftists find this alarming, being white or male or both, so are trying to find some other direction, any other direction – and socialism is some other direction.

Socialism is not currently a threat, being so thoroughly and totally discredited:
Socialism is bread lines

Socialist economic development

But what Democrats hope to do is run on a program of Ferguson and Krystalnacht, and then, instead of delivering Ferguson and Kristallnacht, deliver socialism. “Instead of burning down the supermarkets in Ferguson, leave them standing and we democrats, being such nice caring people, will order them to give you free stuff. So much nicer. Please don’t burn my house down, kill me, and rape my children.” Might work, but the dynamics of leftism are likely to get away from them. Venezuela promised socialism, wound up delivering socialism plus Kristallnacht.

People keep telling me that socialism works great – the statistics always improve enormously under socialism. Thus, for example, Venezuela has cured inflation and put everyone on a pension, and given everyone a university education, and provided universal healthcare. UN statistics always show socialist countries doing wonderfully well on the Human Development Index.

Of course they cured inflation by setting official prices, and you cannot actually buy anything worth buying at official prices, and universal healthcare gets you a bed to die in. Universal healthcare provides abundant caring, but a distinct shortage of health, and universal university education produces ignorance instead of knowledge.

In a thread on my blog, a supposed reactionary has been telling me how socialist agriculture worked great in Russia long ago and far away, and they had to do it because the climate being harsh, they had to have collective agriculture because it works so much better. And, similarly, lots of leftists will tell you how great socialism has been for Cuba and Venezuela – though the internet makes this story a bit more difficult to get away with than when they tell it about far away places and long ago times.

Barnacling

July 27th, 2018

Leftists have a word “entryism”, which they use when privately talking amongst themselves. They never plainly state what entryism is, but if you are part of the in group, it becomes obvious that they are talking in code. If the chans got hold of some emails about “entryism”, would probably interpret it as referring to satanic rituals involving sex with children.

I don’t know what “pizza” means in the pizzagate emails, other than that it obviously does not mean pizza, but I know what entryism means:

  1. Identify a respected institution.
  2. kill it.
  3. gut it.
  4. wear its carcass as a skin suit, while demanding respect

Since outsiders have never heard the word “entryism” used, they invented their own word for this: “Barnacling

Science died with peer review, and is now a skin suit worn by a demon. As social justice warriors moved into technology companies, the same has happened with technology. If you are a gamer, you will have noticed that you no longer need new hardware every year. If you are a fan of self driving cars, you will have noticed that they can self drive just fine 99.99% of the time, which is 0.01% less than is useful, and that impressive as this is, it is not getting any better, nor is it likely to get any better. Similarly, Google Translate was a gigantic achievement, but no real progress has been made in automatic translation since Google went social justice, quite a long time ago.

Musk is a serial scammer, always hyping technology that does not exist and that he has no real intention of producing, but his reusable booster was a real technological achievement. It was, of course, produced by male geeks, and now that the eye of Soros has fallen upon them, they are finding their job redefined from producing a reusable earth to orbit rocket, Musk’s proposed, and genuinely intended BFR, to proving that black muslim women produced all technology, and whites stole it from them. Musk’s electric cars and solar city are scams, which could have only produced a profit through Hillary’s crony capitalism, but he really did intend the BFR, the re-usable earth to orbit and back again rocket. Reading between the lines, I feel him giving up hope for it now, which is going to destroy the lives and careers of a horde of really great rocket scientists. If no BFR, there is not much for them to do now. Their careers are going through the same dead end arc as a Fortran engineer’s, or a nuclear engineer’s or a climate scientist who tells peer reviewers what he actually observed, instead of observing what they tell him he observed.

The term “Barnacling” was coined in reference to the Social Justice takeover and destruction of the Star Wars mythos and intellectual property, but I have seen the same thing happen to various open source projects that adopted a contributor code of conduct. Instead of the objective being to produce good software to serve some valuable purpose, the objective becomes giving black women STEM credits, and the project suffers bitrot and technical debt. The creators are, sooner or later, accused of mansplaining, sexual harassment, rape and racism, they become radioactive and permanently unemployable. And without them, the project mysteriously languishes while being used to adorn the resumes of progressives who do not know what a dongle or a fork is.

If you adopt Github’s community code of conduct, your STEM career is going to die, because you are giving people who hate you and everything you stand for, who hate your race, hate your sex, and hate the entire civilization that your ancestors created, the tools with which to destroy your life.

If you have heard leftists talk about entryism (and you will have only heard them talking about it if they are confident you are a fellow leftist) it swiftly becomes obvious that they are talking in code about something that gives them great pleasure. You might suppose that the code is code for satanic rituals and diddling little boys, which is probably how the chans would interpret it, but they are talking about something more fun that that: They are talking in code about destroying the lives of people that they hate. And they hate you, and they hate everything you represent.

Stealing from the best, here is a detailed description of how social justice warriors destroy games and movies:

  1. SJW CRITICISM – The intellectual property is criticized by SJWs for being racist, sexist, misogynist, homophobic, and a smattering of other things.
  2. Intellectual property IS ABOUT TO UNDERGO REBOOT – or reimagining, or remake, or whatever term is fashionable at the time.
  3. THE BARNACLING – SJWs barnacle themselves to the intellectual property both within its production and without in the fan base, and start lecturing long time fans.
  4. FAN CRITICISM – Long time fans of the intellectual property voice legitimate criticism of the new direction.
  5. SJW RESPONSE TO FAN CRITICISM – A large fan backlash is created when SJWs both within and without the production falsely accuse critics of being racist, sexist, misogynist, homophobic etc.
  6. DISMISSING THE BACKLASH – Media publishes pieces declaring the backlash doesn’t exist.
  7. IGNORING THE BACKLASH – Media publishes pieces instructing others to ignore the “tiny vocal minority.
  8. SUPPRESSING THE BACKLASH – Blogs and websites delete or otherwise “redact” critical comments and posts in discussion forums under the aegis of “hate speech.”
  9. BACKLASH INTENSIFIES – As an inevitable side effect of suppression, backlashers seek out other venues to express their criticism, and some publish their own, growing the backlash exponentially.
  10. HATE HOAXES & FALSE FLAGS – The rank and file SJW activists get heavily involved in shouting down critics, and creating false flags and hate hoaxes in an effort to discredit critics.
  11. Intellectual property FAILURES – The intellectual property starts to falter as fans drift away and sales plummet.
  12. THE DAMSEL IN DISTRESS – A female member of the production (it could also be a gay man) is granted victim status over a fishy event in order to deflect from the failures of the intellectual property, and shame critics into silence.
  13. DESPERATE PLEAS FOR COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT – “White Knights” in the media call for creative authorities to smack down the backlash and restore control of the narrative in response to The Damsel In Distress event. Media publishes multiple articles with the same talking points and buzzwords such as “toxic” in an effort to mischaracterize the fan base. Major news outlets report on the story, and quote these “think” pieces as authoritative.
  14. ANSWERING THE CALL – Celebrities and creative cast & crew answer the media’s call, and make public statements admonishing critical fans, typically over false accusations.
  15. THE FINAL PUSH – Media entities, and rank and file SJWs tell long time fans to go find something else if they don’t like it anymore, in a last ditch effort to push critics out of the “community” once and for all.
  16. Intellectual property BLEEDING – The intellectual property continues to hemorrhage money, as long time fans continue to abandon the intellectual property in droves.
  17. FANBASE OBLITERATION – The fanbase is utterly destroyed, leaving behind only the small handful of SJWs who don’t make any purchases.
  18. THE END – The new incarnation of the intellectual property comes to an end. Since the majority of the fan base has abandoned it, there’s no more controversy or discussion about it. It’s over. The best case scenario is that the original intellectual property is largely forgotten with the exception of a few die-hards who still carry the torch. The worst case scenario is that the new incarnation of the intellectual property overwrites the original intellectual property, and the original intellectual property is forgotten altogether and overshadowed by the new incarnation in all future media mentions.
  19. MIGRATION – The remaining SJWs jump ship to devour a new intellectual property that is popular, and undergoing a transitional phase.
  20. REBIRTH – The process begins anew.

If you are working in tech or science, as for example Musk’s rocket, expect the same, though with far less reporting by major newsmedia. I have seen the same at Google and at projects that adopted a community code of conduct, and reading between the lines of Musk’s tech announcements, I can feel his reusable earth to orbit rocket fading from a real project that would create income, purpose, dignity, and status for a great many rocket scientists, to yet another of his many tech scams. (As, for example, his self driving car: When Musk decided to produce a self driving car without lidar, it was obvious he had given up on the possibility of producing an actual self driving car.) Today, only a scammer can produce science and technology, because you have lie to social justice warriors, and scammers are apt to scam all sides, scamming those who have high hopes for science and technology, and scamming those who hope to have income, purpose, and dignity in creating it. Trump is the only notable scammer who seems to be genuinely on our side.

Game

July 18th, 2018

This is not a PUA blog.  To learn PUA, read Heartiste and Rollo, But, I seem to have been conscripted by the Dark Enlightenment

How to deal with woman, the pitch.

Call +31 J-I-M-I-A-N-I-T-Y right now and order our #1 best-selling product, how to deal with women.

to issue a post on how to deal with women in a relationship, what do with women after picking them up, and how the religion should deal with women, how the true religion should treat women and support husbands and fathers.  So here it is:

Women are wonderful, much better than men in some respects.  A woman wants, a woman needs, to serve and obey.

Women are terrible, much worse than men in other respects.  All Women Are Like That.

This is the dark enlightenment, so I am leading off with the bad news.

Women are hypergamous.  Men want to bang every fertile age chick. My little man salutes most of them. Women, however, only want to bang the very best. So men tend to be nice to every fertile age chick, while women give every attractive man a hard time, to see what he is made of, including the more attractive men in their place of employment, including the boss in their place of employment, so will invariably disrupt the working environment. They will give their husbands a hard time, to see what he is made of, and if you don’t pass the test, you become invisible to her.  And if you are her boss, also invisible to her.

A lustful man, such as myself, is nice to every fertile age woman he meets.  A lustful woman does the opposite. Like Kate in “The Taming of the Shrew”, her disruptive behavior and misconduct reveals her hunger. And I see a great deal of disruption and misconduct in the workplace, which disruptive misconduct seems to be strangely invisible to everyone else.

Women pay alarmingly little attention to the male hierarchy of status.  They want an alpha male, but in our society, alpha males are severely restrained from violence, aggression, and misconduct, which restraint registers with women as not alpha.  All Women Are Like That.

Hypergamy never sleeps, a man must always perform, can never relax, is always on stage, can never let his guard down. I generally maintain the semblance of a charismatic arrogant asshole playboy with potential for violence and crime (Marlon Brando in The Wild One) but if General Butt Naked showed up wearing an AK 47, his trademark necklace of human eyeballs, and absolutely nothing else, I would be $#!% out of luck.

You will be $#!% tested, often brutally, and you have to pass your $#!% tests. $#!% tests are hard to pass, and are subconsciously intended to be hard to pass. There is no easy magic trick for passing $#!% tests. Anyone who says it is easy is lying, because women intend it to be hard. They want to separate the men from the boys, and the top men from the ordinary men. If you have an easy magic trick for passing $#!% tests, then as soon as chicks figure it out, it will not work any more.

Although women pay alarmingly little attention to the male status hierarchy, that is because our existing hierarchy fails to register with them as real. They are nonetheless much impressed by males backing the status of other males. If you have a driver, you score pussy points because you dominate the driver. If you have a bodyguard, you score huge pussy points because the bodyguard registers on women as alpha, and because he implies the potential for violence. Similarly, cops impress women, but you will not be able to get a cop to treat you as high status, though you may well be able to get a security man to treat you as high status. Observe the theatrical way in which Trump deploys presidential security. He is very good at this.

God, of course, is the ultimate high status alpha male. So the husband should be the priest of his family. Say grace, don’t let anyone start eating till you start, and don’t let family leave the table till you are done.

Paul commanded: 1 Timothy 3:

  1. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, …
  2. One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;
  3. (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)

The Church should support the Sovereign in his state, the husband in his marriage, and the father in his family. And has not been doing that. We got Romance, celebrating adultery, at the same time as the Church undermined the power of the Holy Roman Emperor, and tried to require mandatory female consent to marriage.  Priestly celibacy is a Christian holiness spiral, without support in the New Testament or the practices of apostles, which has been blowing up in scandal since it was introduced, because, as Paul observed, God calls very few men to celibacy.

Female consent should only required for virtuous women. Female misconduct should be dealt with by shotgun marriage, and in practice, despite near a thousand years of Church opposition, misbehaving women were shotgun married until quite recently.  The holiness spiral that led to Romance, mandatory female consent, and priestly celibacy resulted in a Christianity that has failed to support proper earthly authority for husbands, fathers, and Kings, and in recent times has become dementedly and dangerously hostile to the authority of fathers and husbands.

All marriages that actually work are quietly eighteenth century.  If your Church is hostile to such relationships, and it very likely is, you just cannot go there.  Because then your wife or girlfriend sees you emasculated by other men, and by the the most alpha male of them all, God, and then she starts cruising social media looking for someone more alpha.  The Pauline rules of worship (that women should cover their heads, and should not speak in church, nor exercise leadership positions) provide psychological support for the proper relationship of men and women, thus  provide social support for durable relationships, thus make it possible for men and women to cooperate to conceive and raise children.  If a Church deviates from these practices, it is likely not just failing to support, but aggressively undermining, the relationships necessary between men and women to form families.  Dalrock has a great pile of horrifying anecdotes on this topic.  Don’t get burned.  Do not let your wife or girlfriend see you bow your head before enemies who hate you.  You need a God that backs you, not a God that emasculates you.  If your church edits Ephesians 5:21 into Ephesians 5:22, and then drops Ephesians 5:23-29, they are your enemies, they hate you, they intend you harm, they intend to deny you children and grandchildren.  Ephesians 5:21 is part of Ephesians 5:19-21, referring to the congregation, while Ephesians 5:22-29 refers to the husband and the wife.  If they cannot say 5:22 without first saying 5:21, they are evil people who intend you harm, they twist the words of the bible to emasculate you before your women.  By quoting 5:21-22, without quoting 5:19-21, or 5:22-29, by joining these two verses, and separating them from their context, they place a false context on 5:22, which false context is intended to harm you and poison the relationships between men and women, for the context of 5:22 is 5:22-29, not 5:19-21.  Whosoever does this is is a heretic and a white knight. White knights are evil and dangerous, and need to be punched out whenever you can get away with it.  The God of Saint Paul’s Church backed husbands and fathers.  Accept no substitute Gods.  The usual substitutes will destabilize your sexual relationships, impairing your ability to reproduce.  There is no better ground for violence than that some male is impairing your sexual relationships and capability to reproduce.  You need to defend your extended phenotype.

For your relationship to survive, you cannot be hardcore asshole all the time. From time to time you have show her a bit of nice guy beta provider. But not too much. Hard exterior, soft inner core that only she can reach. It is easy to overdo the nice guy. You have to make her earn it, or she will not appreciate it. You have to keep her on her toes. Having gracefully handled an exceptionally brutal $#!% test, then it is a good time for a generous chivalrous action. Having failed a $#!% test, then it is a really bad time for any action that is the slightest bit chivalrous.

Women want attention.  They want a lot of attention.  I wish women had an off switch like a television and could be put in a closet, but unfortunately they do not.  Women want to help you.  They want to be valuable to you, and you have to find ways to keep them busy, and then spend time appreciating what they have done.  Quite frequently she will however not do stuff you have told her to do.  This is both a $#!% test (she is daring you to make her do it) and also a cry for attention.  Hear that cry.

Yes, you have to give a woman lots of time, energy, and attention, or she is going to go looking for attention on social media, where she will find a hundred males richer than you, handsomer than your, and with bigger tools (which they will show her) than you.  But at the same time, Poon Commandment Number Three:  “You shall make your mission, not your woman, your priority”  The natural order is that a woman’s focus is her man, and a man’s focus is something higher.  If your focus is her, suddenly and mysteriously she will lose interest in your interest.  You have to give her attention, but you have to keep her on short rations and make her earn it, because you are an important person with important things to do.

When you get her doing stuff for you, reward her liberally with attention.  When not satisfied, turn your face away.  She wants attention, but also wants to earn it, not simply demand it.  Shouting and spanking is attention and drama, and women love attention and drama, so shouting and spanking is not very effective in getting compliance.  Women love to be made to comply.  Just as you tip generously so that you can not tip when displeased, you should supply attention generously so that you can not supply attention when displeased.  This is more effective in obtaining compliance.

But some kinds of attention are bad.  If you are looking at her, and she is looking at her task, this is the wrong dynamic.  She should be looking at you, and you should be looking at your mission.  Reversing the dynamic will make her unhappy.

A woman wants you to use her, to exploit her, to take advantage of her.  At the same time she is going to make it difficult for you to do so.  Life would be so much easier if  women had an off switch, but since they don’t, you just have to get on with the use, the exploitation, and the taking advantage.  She wants to please you, so you need to give her avenues and opportunities to please you.  At the same time, she is going to test you for weakness and neediness, and the tests are going to be hard.  You cannot be weak or needy.  Have to be arrogant, not weak, and demanding, not needy.  You should want lots of things from her, and communicate that you are pleased when you get those things – while at the same time being totally entitled to get it, pleased but not grateful, because you are completely entitled to get whatever you want from her.

And, of course, there is that soft inner core.  You should care, not about what she wants, for that will only irritate her, but about what she should want, as though she was your own flesh.

You will notice that for everything I have told you to do, I have also told you almost the opposite:  Be an asshole and cherish her.  Give her attention and don’t give her attention. But it is worse than that.  The difference between what I am telling you to do, and telling you to not do, is pre verbal, and by expressing the difference in words, I necessarily oversimplify and exaggerate the difference.

 

 

The murder of the Czar and his family

July 16th, 2018

A hundred years ago the Czar and his family were murdered, which murder foreshadowed and led to the murder of huge numbers of ordinary people.

Progressives, including supposedly very moderate centrist progressives, made, and continue to make all sorts of myths justifying and rationalizing the murder, revealing their intent to do it all over again.

Myth:  The Czar was brutal and oppressive, but the soldiers refused to fire on the revolting masses, so he was overthrown, and thus the communists, representing the masses to power.

Reality: The Czar was a cucked progressive.  He had Lenin and Stalin in his hands, guilty of all sorts of crimes that gave him grounds for execution or indefinite imprisonment, but let them off because letists are holier than thou.  There were no revolting masses, just a series of coups made in the name of the revolting masses, and such riots and looting as occurred, occurred Ferguson style – the police were ordered to stand back and let the mobs loot stuff and smash stuff.

The February revolution was no revolution – rather the elite allowed the mobs to knock over a few breweries, to provide an excuse for them seizing power from the Czar while he was away at the front.

The communists did not overthrow the Czar.  The Kadets overthrew the Czar.  Then Kerensky overthrew the Kadets with a policy of no enemies to the left, no friends to the right, which meant he disarmed the military officers, and armed the communists.  Then the communists overthrew Kerensky.  The leftism of the Czar led to his overthrow by the even lefter Kadets, the indecisive leftism of the Kadets led to their overthrow by Kerensky, and the radical leftism of Kerensky led to his overthrow by the even lefter communists, who then murdered the Czar, and millions of peasants, until the madness ended with them murdering each other.

What happened to Russia was leftism leading to more leftism.

Progressives agree that serfdom was absolutely horrid, and perhaps it was.  If it was horrid, the solution should have been to free the serfs and leave the land with the lords.  Or perhaps give some of the land to the more competent, successful, and wealthy serfs.  But this solution was considered unthinkably horrible and inconceivably reactionary, which implicitly acknowledged that most serfs were not ready to run their own lives.  What progressives wanted was the serfs freed with the land.  But quite obviously, most serfs were incompetent to operate a small farm.  So progressives wanted them to operate the land collectively.  But if one man trying to run a small farm is hard, one hundred men trying to run a large farm is considerably harder.

So, Alexander the liberator freed them with collective ownership of the land.  Which was predictably a disaster.  And there was thereafter a succession of ever lefter government measures to try to deal with the problem, each of which made the problem worse.  Russian agriculture still has not recovered.  By freeing the serfs and giving them the land collectively, but not individually, Alexander the liberator set in motion a slide ever leftwards that continued steadily all the way to the liquidation of the kulaks.

The liberation of the serfs with collective ownership of the land created a crisis, for which the solution was always more leftism, which led to more crisis. This created an expectation that the way to power was to be lefter than thou. The Czar’s generals and bureaucrats outflanked him on the left. Kerensky’s socialists outflanked them on the left, and the Communists outflanked Kerensky on the left. Then the communists proceeded to outflank each other, till Stalin put a stop to that.

If at any time any of Alexander the Liberator’s successors had been so horribly repressive as to demonstrate that lefter than thou was a seriously bad career move, as Stalin belatedly demonstrated, the slide leftwards would have halted and stayed halted. But instead the Czars allowed to the progressives to guilt them into doing whatever the progs demanded, which merely excited progressive bloodlust.

Thermodynamics of Social Entropy

July 14th, 2018

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

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

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

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

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

The four commandments that facilitate cooperation are:
Exodus 20:

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

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

And the final commandment:

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

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

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

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

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

As for example:
Lucas film hates its customers

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

As example Russia dealing with Pussy Riot:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The axis of deplorables

July 13th, 2018

Until recently, everyone in power everywhere in the world was culturally aligned with the Blue Empire, or at least reluctant to be openly unaligned.  Every government, every head of government, every government school, every university everywhere, every television station (including Fox), every newspaper (including the Murdoch newspapers).  The Cathedral would from time to time go into high dudgeon because not everyone was as enthusiastic as they would like, but anyone who outright opposed them was low status and powerless.

Universities and their endowments are still converged, and all the mass media and internet giants are converged. Trump has few loyalists among his political appointees in government.  But it is a start.   A start that denies the inevitability of Blue Empire power, a start that tells us that surrender is not the only option.  That Trump had the last laugh over Gay Mulatto gives every man a shot of testosterone.  That Melanie is hot, while Michelle belongs in a zoo, makes every progressive everywhere look and feel bad.

When we successfully do the Dissolution of the Monasteries on the universities, confiscating their endowments, and ending their power as gatekeepers to high status high pay jobs, when we are no longer ruled by the clergy, that will be victory, and the rest will be mopping up operations.  It is a long way from here to there, some very bad things will happen on the way, and there may well be a red terror and a civil war along the route, but in the far distance, we can see hope for victory.  If Trump fails, he will nonetheless have pointed the way for one that will follow.

The best outcome would be that Democrats launch a coup prematurely, leading to civil war prematurely, and lose it, leaving Trump as King, as happened in the Social War of the Roman Republic, when the Populares played their hand too soon and too recklessly. Worst outcome would be that they launch their coup, get away with it, leading to a rapid succession of coups by ever more extreme factions, as in the coups against Czar Nicolas and King Louis XVI, and, as in those coups, we launch the civil war too late, and lose it.  But we have something that they did not have.  We can see the pattern, making it possible to step off that path early rather than late, getting an outcome more like that of Social War of Rome, than the French and Russian Revolutions.  That would buy us time enough for technological progress in gene editing technologies to save the day, assuming we can fix the fertility problem.  The failure of the Roman elite to reproduce led to endless waves of elite replacement, resulting in chaos and instability, so Sulla’s restoration failed to last.  To fix the fertility problem, we have to restrict sexual female choice.  We have to force women to get married, to stay with their husbands, to refrain from sex with anyone other than their husbands, and to obey their husband.   Even if we have gene editing, still takes two to raise a child.  A high IQ species necessarily has a long childhood, which requires cooperate/cooperate equilibrium between husbands and wives, which equilibrium requires substantial external enforcement.  Peoples that allow female sexual choice disappear.  Rome got in trouble despite Sulla’s restoration because its elite kept disappearing, resulting a dangerous degree of social mobility at the top.

Testosterone and weight loss

July 9th, 2018

Exogenous testosterone can cause your testicles to shut down – and possibly shut down permanently. Hence the need to get off testosterone from time to time.

I learned that my sperm production was down – not so low as to render me entirely infertile, but low enough to significantly impact my prospects of having another child.  So, I stopped taking exogenous testosterone on May 14th. By May 27th, had gained ten pounds and my abs were no longer visible. So, on May 27th, adopted the carno ketogenic diet.  Extreme low carb, with an eight hour eating window each day, and longer fasts from time to time. One and half grams of protein per day per kilogram of ideal weight.

I have now lost the weight that I gained, and it feels like my testosterone levels are recovering.  But it was a struggle to lose that weight without exogenous testosterone to strengthen me.  I miss carbs terribly, and now that I can see my abs again, am going to slowly go back to eating a little bit of carbs.   I will retest my testicles in August or September.

I have done weight loss with and without exogenous testosterone.  Weight loss is never easy for me, even with exogenous testosterone, but without exogenous testosterone it is mighty hard.