Marriage

July 28th, 2019

The core of the reactionary program is to make marriage legal again. Without marriage, the higher races cannot reproduce successfully, and reproduction is dysgenic.

Leftist marriage, modern marriage, is gay. Marriage has been gay since 1928.

Obviously reactionaries must reintroduce marriage that is suitable for heterogamous organisms, and we will have to introduce it as a matter of faith and morals before we can introduce it as a matter of law.

The left offers your wife cash and prizes for destroying the family assets, destroying you and destroying your children. The lawyer and the marriage counselor will tell her she is oppressed, and she can get a court order that gives her cash and prizes, raises her status, and will result in her marrying a six foot six billionaire athlete with a dong the size of a salami.

Modern marriage is gay. Everyone who gets married gets gay married. If your wedding vows are symmetric and interchangeable, the same of the man as for the woman, your marriage is gay and you are being gay married.

If your wedding has a master of ceremonies or a priest who acts like he, rather than the groom, is the big important man at the wedding, that he is the alpha male, your wedding is gay, and you are being gay married. (And the master of ceremonies is usually gay, and if he is not gay, he thinks that two males pretending to marry each other with the intention of cruising for nine year old boys to transexualize is smart and fashionable.)

The wedding organizer appoints a gay master of ceremonies whose main job is to define the groom as Homer Simpson, to emasculate him in the eyes of the bride. The minister conducts a gay wedding ceremony that treats the bride and groom as equal and interchangeable, even though experience has demonstrated that wives will not tolerate househusbands, and will invariably leave a domesticated man for a wild man who beats her, rapes her, and rapes and beats her husband’s children.

The worst thing progs did ever was remove “Honor and obey”, “submit and reverence” from the marriage ceremony.

The book of common prayer purged the wife’s vow to honor and obey and purged Paul’s letter to the Ephesians 5:22-33 in 1928. That, not female suffrage, was the worst thing ever, effectively abolishing marriage.

One household necessarily has one captain. If the wife does not promise to honor and obey, to submit and reverence, you are not actually getting married, because you are not actually forming one household, so no point in the ceremony, and, surprise surprise, people stopped holding the ceremony, just as they stopped turning up to Church when the pastor started telling them their husbands were Homer Simpson and if you showed up at Church you were likely homophobic.

We have to restore the marriage ceremony to what it was before first wave feminism.

The marriage ceremony needs to include “honor and obey”, and it needs to once again include Paul’s letter to the Ephesians 5:22-33

  1. Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
  2. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
  3. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
  4. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
  5. That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,
  6. That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
  7. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.
  8. For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:
  9. For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.
  10. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
  11. This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.
  12. Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.

And once again include the first epistle of Peter 3:1-7

  1. Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;
  2. While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.
  3. Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
  4. But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.
  5. For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:
  6. Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.
  7. Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered

And we also need to have 1 Corinthians 7:3-5, though the book of common prayer does the same thing in a different way:

  1. Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband.
  2. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife.
  3. Defraud ye not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinency.

Because without the obligation each to sexually gratify the other, no marriage.

The need to bring marriage back implies a familist movement will look awfully like a religion.

Another important aspect of family is eating together at the same time. Everyone, kids, wife, and guests, holds off from eating until the patriarch says “Amen” then they all eat together. Grace is a ritual that ensures that everyone eats together and that presents the alpha male as backed by the ultimate alpha male, God. Women inherently like their alpha male to be backed by a bigger alpha male, and they are astonishingly comfortable with being assigned to another man by a higher alpha.

So any effective familist movement necessarily has religious rituals that are going to qualify it as a religion. But, like the Masons and progressivism, will probably have to pretend that it is not a religion.

On the other hand, to inculcate the appropriate attitude in women, to make the rituals work, have to tell them “God says do it this way”, which kind of gives the game away.

OK, if God is three and God is one, familism can be a religion and not a religion. If AA can be not a religion, familism can be not a religion.

The Anglican Church died, as the Congregational Church died as a Christian movement long before them, and the Roman Catholic Church is dying in the west. The Pope defends priests having gay sex in a great big pile by saying “consenting adults” and “Global Warming”. Well, if Global Warming is the great moral crisis of our times, why should anyone show up at Church. And they don’t. And if the Church abolishes marriage, why should anyone get married. And they don’t.

The Christian and biblical position is that Christians are kin by adoption and by marriage, that Christians are adoptively the children of God, and the Church is the bride of Christ. So when the pastor abolishes marriage and attacks the authority of the father and the husband, he saws of the branch on which he sits, and it looks to me that every Church dies after it abolishes marriage, though its death takes a bit over a century. The longer ago they abolished marriage and the family, the longer ago they died. Congregationalism was the first to abolish marriage and the family, and the first to go.

We want a synthetic tribe, because we are detribalized. God backing dad comes in mighty handy for making the family a family, particularly for making people eat meals at mealtime. And God comes in mighty handy for promoting ingroup cooperate/cooperate equilibrium by making people kin. These two functions of God seem to be connected in practice.

It is recorded that Christianity spread in the early Roman empire in large part through conversion of women. It is also recorded that marriage had collapsed in the early Roman empire. I suspect these two facts are connected, that Christian marriage may have been a familist movement in the early Roman empire. Similarly we notice that today white female Christian converts to Islam are overwhelming fertile age single women. Roman women converting from dead paganism to live Christianity in the Roman Empire may well have been similar to white Christian women converting to Islam today. They are joining a synthetic tribe where the ultimate alpha male will assign them a husband and ensure that they have a family. While the ultimate alpha male of today’s Christianity is going to give them a “season of singleness”.

If we look at the marriages depicted in the bible, they are all marriages in which the top alpha male assigns the woman. Which is what women want, even if they don’t know they want it.

In Genesis, God, the ultimate alpha male, marries Eve to Adam.

Abraham, a powerful alpha male who successfully made war with kings, marries Rebecca to Isaac. Rebecca is not consulted until afterwards, and Isaac is not consulted at all.

In the book of Ruth, Boaz is a powerful male who is the top alpha in the environment where Ruth is working. Ruth sneaks into Boaz’s bed while he is drunk and sleeping, asks Boaz to marry her, and appears to believe he has authority to perform marriage on the spot. He declines to do so, saying he has to resolve some legalities first but they spend the night together anyway. In the morning he goes off and successfully resolves those legalities, and later assembles witnesses and marries Ruth. Ruth’s mother in law (Ruth is a widow and the adoptive daughter of her mother in law) gives the bride away. Boaz, a powerful alpha male, is the one who presides over this ritual, not a judge or a priest. The elders witness, but they don’t emcee. If Ruth is present at this ritual she does not speak, but before the ritual she had plenty to say to her mother in law and to Boaz in private.

Chicks like the man who is throwing a party, because he is top alpha at the party. As “Setting the Record Straight” tells us, game boils down to three simple things.

  • Pass her shit tests
  • Don’t show weakness
  • Dominate other men

It is obviously optimal for marital harmony if the wife always sees her husband in social contexts where he is top alpha. When you throw a party, other alpha males act at the party as if you are the top alpha, even if in other social contexts you are not. So having someone else preside over the marriage is not a good idea. Marriages should resemble the marriage of Boaz and Ruth – unless the bride actually is being assigned to someone else by a powerful human alpha, as tended to happen during the early days of Australian settlement. If we look at first millennium Christian doctrine on marriage, it appears that marriage is a sacrament performed by the husband with the priest being wedding organizer, rather than presiding over the wedding. Existing Catholic doctrine is that marriage is a sacrament performed by the husband (which was very recently re-interpreted as the husband and the wife), but the priest presides over the ceremony, with the husband not being the alpha male in that context. Anglican doctrine back in the days when it was actually functioning as a religion is that marriage is and is not a sacrament. The articles say it is not a sacrament, but the preamble given by the priest in the book of common prayer treats it as a sacrament, and in the ritual the husband performs that sacrament.

He takes the brides hand, and

With this ring I thee wed

And then the priest tells the congregation what just happened, describing it terms that make it sound mighty like a sacrament performed by the husband. So, marriage is a sacrament or something very similar performed by the husband. And we know from evolutionary theory, PUA theory, and PUA empirical observation that this is in fact what women want – which suggests that the husband, rather than the priest should preside over the marriage, with the priest acting as wedding organizer and second in command at the party.

To get women to collectively behave better, women have to be informed as to what behavior is good.

Depict wives and children interacting with husbands and fathers the way they were depicted on television and movies after 1933 and before 1963. That will inform them. We cannot do that till we are in power. But while out of power, can restore the marriage ceremony to what it was before 1928: Wife promises to honor and obey, husband promises to love and cherish.

And let us go back a bit further, nine hundred years further. Husband administers the sacrament of marriage. Technically he still does: Takes wife hand. “With this ring I thee wed.” Places ring on finger. But that has been heavily played down for many centuries. It was a big power struggle in the Church of England after Henry the Eighth. They keep trying to make the marriage contractual (“I do”), when it should be sacramental (“with this ring I thee wed”). Women really hate contractual marriage. Contractual marriage is failing a shit test right at the starter’s gun.

We also need to restore the tradition that is implied in the story of the wise and foolish virgins, where the husband mock abducts the wife to a big party which he emcees, and everyone at the party treats him as top alpha male. Abduction, or else someone with family authority over the bride gives this woman to this man, leading her to the man. “Who giveth this woman to this man?” Women do not really like consensual and contractual marriage, hence the need for the bride to be given away or abducted.

Mueller Testimony

July 28th, 2019

A lot of people interpreted the Mueller testimony as Mueller being senile and forgetful.

Did not look like that to me. He was “forgetful” under hostile cross examination:

Looked to me that he was repeatedly caught lying to congress. He was not forgetful, he was changing his story in midstream.

Looked to me that he is used to an environment where lying is mandatory, crimethought forbidden, so you can lie easily and comfortably and no problems ensue, everyone lies to each other and to themselves, everyone is supposed to lie, and was caught like a deer in the headlights when he was required to interact with those so shockingly discourteous as to follow different rules.

When Nunes issues his opening statement Mueller looked to me like a criminal listening to the prosecutor make his opening statement, then, part way through the prosecutor’s indictment, realize that the prosecutor has not yet found the good stuff, and he stands a good chance of beating the rap. Mueller is worried, but he not as worried as he would be if Nunes had the goods on him.

The General Flynn Affair

July 17th, 2019

From the beginning, it has been obvious that the FBI and the Democrats sincerely believed they had the goods on Trump, that he was guilty of something or other, had to be guilty of something or other, even though they were never clear in their own minds of exactly what. And from the beginning, it has been obvious that the FBI and the Democrats did not have the goods on Trump, because anything that they deluded themselves that they had, they leaked ten times over to the press in ten different versions, and it was all nuts.

It was always obvious that all this stuff was self delusion, wishful thinking, and motivated reasoning, usually reasoning so highly motivated as to be Trump derangement syndrome. It was obvious from the beginning that they were evil plotters who could not get their evil plot together because driven mad by Trump.

General Flynn hired defense lawyers that were completely in the pocket of Trumps enemies, completely in the pocket of Mueller, completely in the pocket of those prosecuting him. He pled guilty to lying to the FBI, which is the universal all purpose charge of which anyone who talks the FBI is guilty. If they ask you questions for eighty hours, you are bound to say something that that plausibly can be interpreted as contradicting something else, so anyone who talks the FBI for long enough is guilty of lying to the FBI. He then got a plea deal in which this terrible crime would be excused, because he was such a cooperative witness.  They talk to you until you say something that can plausibly be argued contradicts something else you said, then they demand you tell them what they want to hear.  This is a closed loop that leads to madness, because it is guaranteed to produce confirmation of delusions.

Which plea deal makes sense only if the FBI and the Democrats believed he had the goods on Trump and he had agreed to give them the goods on Trump. And also makes sense only if he believed that the presidency, the traitors, had the power, and the mere president did not have the power. And similarly, hiring “defense” lawyers that were completely in the pocket of Mueller and the prosecution lawyers only makes sense if the presidency, the traitors, have the power, and the mere president does not have the power.

His lawyers were radical leftist traitors attempting to overthrow the elected government of the United States, the prosecutors were radical leftist traitors attempting to overthrow the elected government of the United States, and Mueller is a radical leftist traitor attempting attempting to overthrow the government of the United States with a long history of abusing the power of the FBI to persecute real and imagined rightists, while turning a blind eye to the crimes of leftists. There was no daylight between Flynn’s defense team, and Mueller’s prosecution team, they were all in each other’s pockets, they were all one big happy family. And it only makes sense for them to be all one big happy family if they were all after Trump, they all believed Flynn had the goods on Trump, and they all believed that Flynn had given them the goods on Trump.

The Mueller investigation consisted of going after everyone connected to Trump, concocting crimes for them, and demanding that they sing on Trump to be excused these crimes. And, often enough, when put under sufficient pressure, they did sing on Trump but the tales they came up with never had any substance, always wild assed speculation, bare faced lies, sheer nonsense, or just hints that pointed Mueller’s team to go after someone else, anyone else. Trouble with putting people under pressure is if you apply too much pressure, they are going to tell you what you want to hear, but it is not necessarily going to be anything likely to stand up in court.

Eventually, belatedly, very belatedly, the light dawned, that Flynn had not given them the goods on Trump, that he did not have the goods on Trump. This had always been obvious to me from the transparent insanity of all the leaks telling us that Flynn had the goods on Trump, but it had not been obvious to all the transparently insane people leaking how Flynn’s testimony nailed Trump.

So the defenseprosecution team, defense and prosecution being a single team that was after Trump, not Flynn, decided that Flynn had broken his plea deal, and they would hang him out to dry. Whereupon Flynn, to Trump’s delight, fired his “defense” lawyers, who were trying to lock him up and throw away the key, being driven mad with rage by the failure of Flynn to nail Trump. Flynn then got a Trumpist defense lawyer who was, and is, determined to expose the crimes of the Mueller investigation and nail Mueller’s hide to the wall. Flynn’s choice of defense lawyer only makes sense if the president has the power, and the presidency, the traitors, do not have the power.

So this looks like a creeping coup, and a creeping countercoup, with Trump countercoup successful. Going after Flynn is an act of pointless self destructive vindictiveness, an act of madness. They just want to lash out and hurt people for no sane reason. Punishing Flynn does not help them – it just makes it more obvious that the investigation of Trump was criminal, and used criminal methods. And if their attempt to punish Flynn fails, as it looks like it will fail, it also makes it more obvious that they lost, that they are defeated, that they are out of power. If they can punish Flynn, they are still in power. If they cannot, not in power. And now, whether they are in power or not is about to be put to the test. If they cannot punish Flynn, no one will fear them any more, and if no one fears them any more, everything falls apart for the traitors.

Trump closes the asylum loophole.

July 16th, 2019

a new immigration rule Monday that will restrict illegal immigrants from countries, other than those bordering the United States, for applying for asylum first in the U.S. if they have attempted “to enter the United States across the southern border after failing to apply for protection in a third country.”

Trump threatened Mexico with tariffs, they gave asylum. Mexico agreed to new asylum rules designed to meet the long established US rules on third country asylum, and now Trump can deport hundreds of thousands of people pouring over the border, a quarter of a million last year, if the borders remain open, likely increasing, if Democrats continue to hold the borders open, to a million next year, four million the year after that, sixty million in 2026, a billion in 2030.

New rules apply allowing Trump to immediately deport asylum applicants back to Mexico.

If the flood of people demanding asylum from the poverty, violence, chaos, and destruction that they created and intend to inflict upon us continues to grow exponentially there will be over a billion black male military age Muslims in the US by 2030 screaming for infidel blood and white pussy.

If we go by what the asylum seekers are saying, they believe that all white people need killing, that the poverty and violence from which they fled is the result of us stealing from them, that our wealth is an indication of our sinfulness, and destroying our wealth will make them rich.

Now maybe they are just saying that like Havel’s greengrocer. Maybe they are just saying that because the murder of white people, the destruction of white property, and the destruction of the technology that white people developed is politically correct, and don’t really intend any of it. Marxist economics has become dangerous to doubt. But that is what they are saying.

Judges are likely to rule Trump’s order illegal and order the borders remain open, a flagrant abuse of judicial power, and an abuse that is likely to get my children killed and my property destroyed. At some point, Trump has to do a Jackson, or threaten a Jackson and see if the judges back down.

If Trump is defeated on this, hundreds of millions of Americans are likely to be murdered. If the current asylum seekers, like Havel’s Greengrocer, do not truly believe what they are saying, and quite likely they do not truly believe, they are eventually going to be massively outnumbered by a billion black male Muslim military age asylum seekers from black Africa in 2030 who do truly believe it, in so far as they are capable of any thought beyond “gibmedat”.

At some point Trump has to just damn well close the border against illegal immigration, which Judges are likely to rule illegal and unconstitutional. And if he hopes to win the 2020 election, he has to do it well before the end of 2020. And if he loses the election he and his family are going to be arrested, and once you start arresting ex presidents, you soon start killing them.

The Faith

June 28th, 2019

Holy war is coming, as the poz gets ever more extreme, ever faster, and our ruling elite increasingly uses state coercion and the FBI to accomplish political outcomes, coercing fellow members of the political elite for political reasons.

Have to bring a gun to a gunfight, and a faith to a holy war.

Deus Vult.

Whites are detribalized, and contrary to the white nationalists, “white” is not a tribal identifier. Whites are wolf to whites. A religion, defining religion broadly to include things like communism and poz, is a synthetic tribe. To win, we need a faith.

With our enemies going further and further into delusion, we have to form a faith on the Truth of Gnon, the Will of God as manifested in the natural order, the Logos manifested in the order of the world, natural law as the will of God. We will, in accordance with the Christianity of about a thousand years ago, interpret Christ as, among other things, the incarnation of the Logos, and thus interpret his words as in accordance with game theory and evolutionary psychology, and divine prophecies as the predictable outcome of cause and effect.

One can deduce ought from is, which is exactly what the Book of Solomon and the copybook headings do, what every reasonable person does in practice.  If one is a strict atheist materialist, then “good” is what game theory and evolutionary psychology tells us that we should desire in our  kin, our friends, and the character of those that we should ally with.  If God created the world then “is” was created by God, and cause and effect a manifestation of the Logos.  And if a Christian, then cause and effect manifested as  wholly man, and that man ended Talmudic legalism, ended the practice of deducing “ought” from some other “ought” taken as given and absolute and then deducing ever sillier and ever more repugnant conclusions from the first “ought”, whether one takes that given “ought” as the “greatest good for the greatest number”, or takes as that given “ought” that one should not boil a goat in its mother’s milk.

The expulsion of the Jews by the Romans illustrates the Divine Logos telling us “The letter killeth but the spirit giveth life” The divine will manifested through entirely natural causes, because the natural order of the universe reflects the will of God. And the spirit of the law, being manifest in cause and effect and manifest in the natural order, needs to be understood with reference to natural law, game theory, and evolutionary psychology. When the Jews obeyed the letter of the law while massively violating the spirit of the law, they were, in accordance with prophecy, expelled from Israel – which reflects the will of God and divine prophecy, but also reflects the fact that if you violate the spirit of the law, you will get into stupid wars with your neighbors, and eventually war with one of your neighbors that happens to be a six hundred pound gorilla. The Jews got into war with Rome not because of corrupt Roman tax collectors, oppressive taxation, harsh Roman law enforcement, and all that, but because they were so scrupulous about avoiding contamination by blood that they wound up getting covered in the wrongfully spilled blood of a Roman cop whom they murdered in the performance of his duty while he was attempting to impartially enforce a just, reasonable, and necessary law that applied to everyone. Which would not have led to war had they not felt so very righteous about it because they were being so faithful to rule about avoiding blood – so faithful to it that they spectacularly disregarded the commandments on coveting, theft, and murder. Attending synagogue while avoiding walking on ground contaminated by chicken blood was so terribly important that they could do anything they liked to accomplish these holy goals, including theft and murder, and their great determination to accomplish these holy goals demonstrated their superior holiness.  And their stubborn self righteousness over this incident eventually and predictably led to the Romans going Roman on them.

In Christianity, the rot set in on women about a thousand years ago, with romance and contractual marriage, with natural law increasingly being tortured to fit church doctrines that were increasingly arbitrary, unreasonable, and out of contact with reality, and with contractual marriage quietly and subtly replacing sacramental marriage, though Christianity only went really progressive on women during the twentieth century. We endorse old style contractual and old style sacramental marriage right now, at least as a moral standard and ritual solemnization, even though we are in no position to enforce it collectively, and after we gain power, start by rolling contractual marriage back to the late eighteenth century, while celebrating sacramental marriage at least symbolically, and eventually go all the way back to sacramental marriage.  We approve of and support husbands and fathers unilaterally enforcing it, even though such enforcement is highly illegal and subject to social disapproval, and we will have our marriage ceremonies proclaim it.

Evolutionary psychology and game theory implies that the family law of the Old Temple Hebrews and the first Millenium Christian Church was entirely correct, and the eighteenth century Christian position on family, war, identity, and the establishment of religion was quite good.

Pozzed Christianity, which dumps on fathers on father’s day and tells us we are Homer Simpson, and which thinks that Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming is far more important that a bunch of priests having gay sex in a great big pile, because the priests were all consenting adults, is not Christian.

Chaos is coming.  Chaos is already here, and will get a lot worse.  Eventually order will be restored through Caesarism, that being the cycle of history.  I hope this happens soon, with Holy American Emperor Trump, but if it does not happen soon, it will happen eventually, possibly after a century of blood and ruin.

When it starts happening, and I hope it is beginning now, we should catch that tide and sail it to victory.

Revolutionary movements never get anywhere without backing from a substantial faction of the elite. So what section of the elite is going to back us?

Warriors need priests, and priests need warriors. We are always ruled by priests or warriors, so they tend to struggle for power, priests destroying the military, instead of sustaining it and giving it cohesion. The recent stupid wars where the military fought for no sane, useful, or achievable purpose, with one hand tied behind its back, were attacks by the priesthood on the military, as was insourcing logistics, putting camp followers in military uniforms.

To explain these stupid wars, people say they were fought for Israel, but if fought for Israel, would have been fought to win, rather than lose. If fought for Israel, we would not have women in the military, Israel would not have women in the military, we would not have kicked Israel out of Gaza, and logistic workers would not be wearing warrior uniforms.

We are priests who believe warriors should rule (using the term “priesthood” to mean any knowledge faction that internally coordinates its story in order to give the story more effect and in order to gain power, analogously to using the term “religion” to include communism and poz.)  We are therefore in a good position to catch the coming tide.

The time of Ceasarism approaches. Caesar, Napoleon, or Augustus will need priests who say and believe his rule under God is right, because God said so, because one stationary bandit is better than mobile banditry, and because one King three thousand miles away is better than a thousand kings three miles away.

The counter coup unfolds.

June 7th, 2019

A couple weeks ago, Trump condemned congresswoman Ilhan Omar for dismissing 9/11, and all the left and all the mainstream media united around her, and repeatedly told us she was black, and Trump hates blacks, and a woman, and Trump hates women, and he is lying liar.

Lo and behold, by a strange coincidence, an investigation of congresswomen Ilhan Omar comes out revealing she has committed no end of illegal acts – but until now these laws were never enforced against Democrats.

At almost the same time, the black leftist Democratic party House Oversight Committee chairman is discovered to have been cheerfully embezzling from charities, shortly after he complained about a whole lot of Trumpists getting security clearances that would enable them to see information formerly only visible to leftists in good standing, information that will likely reveal a whole lot of stuff that Democrats would prefer buried.

I predict that thanks to a change in leadership of the FBI and the justice department, in particular the resignation of Mueller, there will be sudden drop in criticism of president Trump, and a sudden drop in anything likely to attract a hostile tweet from president Trump.

By another amazing coincidence, ABC news reporters who cheerfully and openly committed illegal acts find themselves facing dawn raids and charges from the Australian government in relation to their most recent illegal act.  It is interesting that these utterly unprecedented and extraordinary actions, for enforcing laws against leftists is unprecedented and extraordinary (laws are for us, not them) happened at almost the same time.

Because of ever more laws, whosoever controls the FBI and the justice department holds the political process by its throat.  A very short while ago, no end of people connected to Trump were getting the dawn raids, and being charged with a multitude of legalistic crimes that were difficult to explain or comprehend.  That was a dangerous escalation of a process that has long been in motion, and escalation is not always passively accepted by the victims, nor is Trump a man who is inclined to passively accept escalation by his opponents.

It was inevitable that the use of the coercive power of the state to manage electoral outcomes would eventually be used against the left itself, though I expected and predicted that the left would use it against each other. But using such means against the president himself was the most dangerous use of that power possible, and Trump probably the most dangerous man to use it against.

The right using the power of the state against the left is unprecedented, despite a huge volume of complaints by the left projecting their own conduct onto their enemies.  Nixon used “plumbers”, but Obama used the FBI.  And now Trump is using the FBI.

Now that the dawn raids on Trumpists have stopped, I predict we will suddenly find a whole lot more Trumpists around, and a much bigger pool of loyalists for him to hire.  And as loyalists get appointed to positions where they can destroy their enemies and protect their friends from destruction, this will in turn make it easier for him to hire more loyalists. And now that the dawn raids on mainstream media reporters have started, at least in Australia, I predict that the quality of “fact checking” on Trump’s tweets will show a dramatic improvement.   When Trump does something like talking with the veterans of D-Day, it will mysteriously become a whole lot easier to find in the mainstream media.  It seems to me that reporting has improved already.

I am not yet sending in an application for the post of Grand Inquisitor.  Maybe after Trump gets re-elected in 2024.

Trump’s state visit to England

June 4th, 2019

Ideas are more powerful than guns, and fashion is more powerful than ideas.

The main weapon and instrument of successful rulers is their role as the fount of all honors, mortal and divine. Because of the problems of scaling, their bureaucracy, rather than being the instrument of their rule, tends to become the main threat to their rule.

Trump’s visit to England is primarily a status parade.  Trump bestows status on the queen (which is useless, but required, because one should always give one’s host top status, even though it is only useful to bestow status on one’s host if the host is a man), and the Queen bestows status on him.

They also bestowed status on the other people assembled.  And guess who is not there?

Hollywood, the media, and for the most part, woke capital is not there.  Capital is there, but the media and such are mere onlookers  The Queen and Trump bestow status on the military and on merchants, but somehow merchants whose activities overlap with the priesthood generally seem to have been neglected.

Depressingly, the Queen’s speech was about universalism, framing World War II as a holy war to establish the rule by the “international community” over the entire world – and that this was a good thing intended to thereby end war forever.  Of course, in fact, World War II was so horribly bloody precisely because it was a holy war by universalists seeking to rule the world, and universalist rule has been terribly bad, destroying men’s families, ending science, suppressing the scientific method, and causing technological progress to stagnate. As promised universalism has so far avoided large scale horrifying wars, but war is a bursty phenomenon, and the recent period of relative peace has so far lasted no longer than previous periods of relative peace that follow a terrible war in which one hegemon gains overwhelming dominance. China now has radar coverage of the South China sea, and is building a fleet of artificial islands as unsinkable aircraft carriers – a strategy that suggests that they believe that aircraft carriers are eminently sinkable, that in a war between technologically advanced wealthy powers, each side will be able to deny the other side the air and the sea, a vision of conflict that if accurate makes it hard for one hegemon to dominate the entire world. We have already seen how Russian anti air capabilities limit US reach.

But then, to my considerable relief, she segued onto Anglosphere nationalism “Our strong cultural links” … “British descent“.

And then “Economic ties”, a hat tip to Trump boosting brexit with a promise of a US-UK trade deal. Trump nods.

And then a toast to Trump and the prosperity of the United States (not universal peace, nor universal prosperity). The start spangled banner plays. Trump and his wife stand with their hands over their hearts. Behind the queen stands a British warrior, a member of the Coldstream Guards, costumed in seventeenth century dress uniform. The Coldstream guards were General Monck’s Praetorians when he secured parliament and ensured the restoration of Charles the second, a coup well dressed in the costume of legality and constitutionality, steel on the inside, legality on the outside.

The guards are recruited from those parts of England and Scotland where General Monck recruited his praetorians, so they tend to have family ties to each other and to ancestors who were part of the Coldstream guards.

The guards behind Trump, the Queen, and Melanie salute the playing of the star spangled banner.

Hollywood and the media will call this all silly low status obsolete rigmarole, but it is hard to say “low status” to someone with warriors behind him and powerful and wealthy men assembled before him.

Then Trump speaks, remembering World War II. Trump, however, frames world war two as as a war for our civilization, where “our” is, in context the Anglosphere, and tells us that the British fought to hold their destiny in their own hands, another nod to brexit. Then he gives a nod to universalism – liberty in all lands – which looks remarkably like all lands having the culture of Harvard imposed upon them. Then it is back to the Anglosphere winning World War II for the Anglosphere. “Shared Victory”.

And then, after piously giving the nod to universalism he starts redefining universalism to not be universalism, much as the progressives have redefined Christianity to be exemplified by the right of women to freedom from husbands, moment to moment consent to marriage, unilateral abortion on demand to birth and immediately afterwards without the consent of their husbands, and the right of men to have gay sex in a great big pile.

This is the reverse of Pope Francis defending gay priests having gay sex in a great big pile by pointing out that they were all consenting adults, and look, Global Warming.

Nah, supposedly this great crusade was not about the international community making everyone into clones of Harvard. It was supposedly about “Freedom, Sovereignty, self determination, the rule of law, and reverence for the rights given to us by Almighty God”. (Which is pretty much the opposite of what the great crusade accomplished). So, if brexit fails to go through, you are falling short of the noble goals of this great crusade. And just in case you failed to notice, he said the bad word “crusade” again – and then that other bad word “God” – the ultimate patriarchal alpha male that stands behind the authority of each patriarch when he summons his family and guests to eat and says grace, the patriarchal alpha male that stands behind the ruler making his people one nation under God.

And then another bad word “patriotism”: “The patriotism that beats proudly in every British heart”. Yet another nod to brexit. So if you are against brexit, you are against God, country, and the goals of the great crusade, not to mention against a man who has a warrior standing behind him, a warrior of a group of warriors who put the current royal line back on the throne.

And then a toast to the Queen. Being an alpha male, he gives her a little pat, which she much enjoys.

The polls were wrong about the brexit referendum, indicating that our priestly elite had successfully made support for brexit wicked and low status.  Trump proceeds to make it virtuous and high status.

Fat is a reactionary issue

May 26th, 2019

Facebook recently purged a facebook group for advocating healthy eating habits – right wing healthy eating habits – adequate protein, plenty of animal fats and less or no snacking, especially snacking of overly processed foods made from unknown ingredients, which tends to be what snacks are made of.

Leftism being the party of defection, infanticide, sodomy, adultery, effeminacy, and treason, is also the party of vice.  And the most common vices of today are gluttony, sloth, and adultery.

Gluttony, as well as being the most common vice, is a highly visible vice.  And usually indicative of other vices.

A leftist chick in a “long term relationship” is far more likely to be cruising for an upgrade, and apt to go right on cruising long after the wall has made an upgrade improbable, and a leftist, male or female, is far more likely to be fat and weak. Adultery is primarily a female sin, since female sexual misconduct is far more likely to obfuscate paternity and obstruct fatherhood.

Obesity is epidemic in the modern world.  How do you fix it?  The solution to obesity is now well known – well, well known in some circles, but oddly unknown in left wing circles, in the mainstream media (but I repeat myself).  And now unknown on Facebook.

The primary cause of obesity in the modern world is the cafeteria diet, snacking, especially snacking on foods that contain a lot of carbs, vegetable oil, and not much protein.  (And what protein there is tends to be soy.)

The formula for losing weight is fewer meals, approximately one hundred grams of protein per day for a male, which is approximately a pound of meat, and plenty of animal fat, as for example bacon, eggs, cheese, and butter.  You should go about seventeen hours, if socially possible, before breaking fast.  And since dinner is usually socially required, that likely means skipping breakfast.

Too little animal protein makes you weak, less muscled, and impairs healing and body regeneration, but too much protein stresses your kidneys and liver, and if you are eating too much protein, you probably will find you don’t like it. People on very high protein diets get sick, and find it hard to keep meat down.  For most men, one hundred grams of protein per day is about the right amount.

Some white people, and most Asians and middle easterners can handle carbs just fine, but a lot of white people cannot. Cut the carbs. You will find it far easier to control your eating on a very low carb diet, one where you mostly eat low carb vegetables like broccoli roasted with butter, or mushrooms fried in lots of butter, rather than high carb vegetables.  And most fruit is a bit on the high carb side, if you need a very low carb diet to control your appetite.

Don’t eat vegetable oils, except for olive oil, coconut oil, avocado oil, and palm oil.  Nuts are generally OK, even peanuts, but peanut oil not so much.

Our metabolisms are primarily designed to handle saturated fats – the short chain fats generated by our bowels, and our own fat stores.  Animal fat is what we are designed to metabolize as our primary energy source.  Apes consume a lot of fibre which gets metabolized into short chain fats in their large intestine, and our ancestors lived on their own body fat between kills.

Avoid soft drinks, especially zero calorie soft drinks.  It is a mystery to me why zero calorie soft drinks are fattening, but just looking around, you can see that they are.  Maybe they stimulate insulin secretion.  Notice that people who is insulin secretion is defective (as in type one diabetes) don’t get fat even if they eat a lot, and are apt to lose alarming amounts of weight unless they inject themselves with insulin.  That, however, is just a wild assed guess.

Or maybe it is that sweet drinks cause you to overeat. I drink Mountain Dew with moonshine on social occasions, and Mountain Dew always makes me eat and drink too much.  Likely Coke Zero would have similar effect.  Maybe that is the problem.  That is just another wild assed guess, but looking at fat people’s eating habits, you can see that substituting zero calorie soft drinks for sugary soft drinks is not a solution.  Get your caffeine fix from black coffee or unsweetened tea.

These specific prohibitions don’t matter that much, and do not necessarily apply to everyone, provided you follow the general rule which does apply to everyone:  The main thing that makes people fat in the modern world is continual snacking – the cafeteria diet.  It is snacks, and, for white people carbs, that make you fat.  Don’t do that.  Go for long periods, at least seventeen hours every day, and every now and then forty two hours, where you eat nothing and drink nothing but water and zero calorie tea and coffee. On a forty hour fast, you will lose about two pounds, and a seventy hour fast about five pounds but doing it too often can stress you, resulting in diverse non specific illness.  You should not lose weight too fast over the long term.

If you are trying to lose weight, you need to weigh yourself every morning.  What you do not measure, you will not control.  Scales are cheap.  I have three of them, two of which I use – the two that usually give very similar results.  They lean against the wall facing the sunrise, and I weigh myself at about the time that I watch the sun rise, and record my weight every day.  (I have big problem with lust, gluttony, and wrath, and have managed, with some difficulty, to control gluttony.  My current weight, as of this morning, is four pounds over my ideal weight.)

 

When the rot set in

May 23rd, 2019

The priesthood exists to serve the army, by providing legitimacy, moral guidance, and social cohesion. When the priests undermine army officers, pretty soon you get what we have got.

Priests are supposed to supply asabiyyah. That is their number one job in this world. What we have is priests destroying asabiyyah .

The problem is not so much elite disloyalty to the masses, nor a Jewish plot against members of the elite not of their own race, as elite disloyalty to the elite. When the priesthood seeks to destroy the common man and return flyover country to wilderness, their real target is not lumberjacks and coal miners, but military officers. Lumberjacks and coal miners are just collateral damage.

We are always ruled by priests or warriors. When priests get on top, there is military weakness. When they get on top, there is also an incentive and ability to go into a holiness spiral.

So, when did the rot set in?

This interpretation of events is largely based on Volume 55 of the North American Review, page 45, “The English in Afghanistan” by Summer, who quotes extensively from contemporary primary sources

Before the British intervened in Afghanistan, the most recent news that most people had of it was records of Alexander’s army passing through two millennia ago.

The empire of the East India company was expanding, and the empire of the Russias was expanding, and it was inevitable that the two would meet. And so it came to pass that the Kings of Afghanistan encountered both, and played each against the other.

When the British became aware of Afghanistan, they interpreted its inhabitants as predominantly white or whitish – as descendants of Alexander’s troops and camp followers and/or descendants of Jews converted to Islam.

Afghanistan was, and perhaps still is, a elective monarchy, and the fractious electors tended to fight each other and elect weak kings who could scarcely control their followers, and so it has been ever since Alexander’s troops lost Alexander.

Mister Mountstuart Elphinstone, in his account of is mission to Kabul in 1809, says he once urged upon a very intelligent old man of the tribe of Meankheile, the superiority of a quiet life under a powerful monarch, over the state of chaotic anarchy that so frequently prevailed.

The reply was “We are content with alarms, we are content with discord, we are content with blood, but we will never be content with a master!”

As Machiavelli observed, such places are easy to conquer, but hard to hold, and so it proved.

To conquer and hold such places, one must massacre, castrate, or enslave all of the ruling elite that seems fractious, which is pretty much all of them, and replace them with your own people, speaking your own language, and practicing your own customs, as the Normans did in England, and the French did in Algeria, starting 1830. The British of 1840, however, had no stomach for French methods, and were already starting to fall short of the population growth necessary for such methods.

So what the British could have done is paid the occasional visit to kill any king that they found obnoxious, kill his friends, family, his children, and leading supporters, install a replacement king, and leave. The replacement king would have found his throne shaky, because Afghan Kings have usually found their thrones shaky, but the British did not need to view that as their problem, knowing the solution to that problem to be drastic and extreme. If the throne has been shaky for two thousand years, it is apt to be difficult to stop it from rocking.

After a long period of disorderly violence, where brother savagely tortured brother to death, and all sorts of utterly horrifying crimes were committed, King Dost Mahomed Khan took power in Kabul in 1826, and proceeded to rule well, creating order, peace, and prosperity, and receiving near universal support from fractious and quarreling clans of Afghanistan.

The only tax under his rule was a tariff of one fortieth on goods entering and leaving the country. This and the Jizya poll tax are the only taxes allowed by the Koran, at least as Islamic law is interpreted in this rebellious country which has historically been disinclined to pay taxes, and because this tax was actually paid, it brought him unprecedented revenues. On paying this tax “the merchant may travel without guard or protection from one border to the other, an unheard of circumstance”

However he did not rule Herat, which was controlled by one of his enemies, who been King before and had ambitions to be King again. He therefore offered Herat to the Shah of Persia in return for the Shah’s support against another of his enemies, Runjeet Singh. He was probably scarcely aware that Runjeet Singh was allied to the British, and the Shah was allied to the Tsar of all the Russias.

Notice that this deal was remarkably tight fisted, as was infamously typical of deals made by Dost Mahomed Khan. He would give the Persians that which he did not possess, in return for them taking care of one of his enemies and helping him against another.

The British East India Company, however, saw this as Afghanistan moving into Russian empire, though I am pretty sure that neither the Shah of Persia nor the King of Afghanistan thought they were part of anyone’s empire.

So Russia and the East India Company sent ambassadors to the King of Afghanistan, who held a bidding contest asking which of them could best protect him against Runjeet Singh.  He then proceeded to duplicitously accept both bids from both empires, which was a little too clever by half, though absolutely typical of the deals he made with his neighbors.

Dost Mahomed Khan was a very clever king, but double crossing the East India Company had in the past never been very clever at all. No one ever got ahead double crossing the East India Company. It was like borrowing money from the Mafia and forgetting to pay them back.

Russia and England then agreed to not get overly agitated over the doings of unreliable and duplicitous proxies that they could scarcely control – which agreement the East India Company took as permission to hold a gun to the head of the Shah of Persia. The East India company seized control of the Persian Gulf, an implicit threat to invade if the Shah intervened in Afghanistan to protect Dost Mahomed Khan. It then let Runjeet Singh off the leash, and promised to support his invasion of Afghanistan.

So far, so sane. Someone double crosses you, then you make an horrible example of him, and no one will do it again. Then get out, and whoever rules in Afghanistan, if anyone does manage to rule, will refrain from pissing you off a second time.

The British decided to give a large part of Afghanistan to Runjeet Singh, and install Shah Shoudjah-ool-Moolk, a Kinglet with somewhat plausible pretensions to the Afghan throne, in place of Dost Mahomet Khan.

Up to this point everything the East India Company is doing is sane, honorable, competent, just, and wonderfully eighteenth century.

Unfortunately, it is the nineteenth century. And the nineteenth century is when the rot set in.

His Majesty Shah Shoudjah-ool-Moolk will enter Afghanistan, surrounded by his own troops, and will be supported against foreign interference, and factious opposition, by the British Army.  The Governor-general confidently hopes, that the Shah will be speedily replaced on his throne by his own subjects and adherents, and that the independence and integrity of Afghanistan established, the British army will be withdrawn. The Governor-general has been led to these acts by the duty which is imposed upon him, of providing for the security of the possessions of the British crown, but he rejoices, that, in the discharge of this duty, he will be enabled to assist in restoring the union and prosperity of the Afghan people.

So: The English tell themselves and each other: We not smacking Afghans against a wall to teach them not to play games with the East India Company. On the contrary. We are doing them a favor. A really big favor. Because we love everyone. We even love total strangers in far away places very different from ourselves. We are defending the independence of Afghanistan by removing the strongest King it has had in centuries and installing our puppet, and defending its integrity by arranging for invasion, conquest, rape and pillage by its ancient enemies the Sikhs, in particular Runjeet Singh. Because we love far away strangers who speak a language different from our own and live in places we cannot find on the map. We just love them to pieces. And when we invade, we will doubtless be greeted by people throwing flowers at us.

You might ask who would believe such guff? Obviously not the Afghans, who are being smacked against the wall. Obviously not the Russians. Obviously not the Persians. Obviously not the British troops who are apt to notice they are not being pelted with flowers.

The answer is: the commanding officer believed this guff. And not long thereafter, he and his troops died of it, the first great defeat of British colonialism. And, of course, the same causes are today leading to our current defeat in Afghanistan.

The commanding officer of the British expedition made a long series of horrifyingly evil and stupid decisions, which decisions only made sense if he was doing the Afghans a big favor, if the Afghans were likely to appreciate the big favor he was doing them, and his troops were being pelted with flowers, or Afghans were likely to start pelting them with flowers real soon now. The East India company was no stranger to evil acts, being in the business of piracy, brigandry, conquest, and extortion, but people tend to forgive evil acts that lead to success, prosperity, good roads, safe roads, and strong government. These evil acts, the evil acts committed by the British expedition to Afghanistan, are long remembered because they led to failure, defeat, lawlessness, disorder, and weak government.

As a result, he, his men, and their camp followers, were all killed.

Progressives tend to judge people by their good intentions, and the intentions of the British Empire in invading Afghanistan were absolutely wonderful, but the man who does evil because insane is a worse problem than the man who does evil because he expects to profit. The rational profit seeking evildoer, you can pay off, or deter. You can surrender on terms that will probably not be too bad. The irrational evildoer just has to be killed. Before 1840, the East India Company was sometimes deterred, frequently paid off, and frequently accepted surrender on reasonable terms. In 1841, just had to be killed.

This illustrates the importance of the rectification of names, of formalism. If you lie to yourself, you are deceived. I have been reading the Clinton emails, and one of the most striking features is that Clinton and company were deluded and deceived by self flattering lies, that despite having vast spy networks in far flung places, were seriously out of contact with reality, as their circle told each other what they want to hear.

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle. Hillary and her advisers, and therefore I suppose the entire state department, know neither the enemy nor themselves. They dream grandiose delusions, in which they are the terribly smart and virtuous people, rather than a drunken old sow surrounded by lying flatterers.

The East India Company did not realize that it was about to be recast, or was recasting itself, from being a for profit company, empowered to make war and engage in acts of piracy and extortion for private profit, to being the British government’s instrument of holy do gooding, benevolently carrying the white man’s burden for the benefit of a bunch of strangely ungrateful foreigners. In place of a ruthless mafia with uniformed soldiers, the East India Company was about to become an NGO with uniformed nursemaids.

Yet strangely, the greater the good intentions, the more they were to be resented. </sarcasm> The East India Company seems to have been more popular when they were pirates and bandits than when they were pious do gooders. No one seemed to appreciate the East India Company doing good to them at gunpoint. The ridiculous part of the white man’s burden was the striking ingratitude of the supposed beneficiaries, resembling the striking ingratitude of Middle Easterner’s towards meddling by presidents Bush and Obama in the Middle East. Those @!^&$ Middle Easterners just somehow do not know what is good for them, unlike far away strangers, who, being terribly clever, know exactly what is good for the Middle East without ever having lived there.

In the Clinton emails there is an awareness that everything is going horribly wrong and a suspicion that things are about to get a great deal worse, but that cannot possibly be caused by any mistakes of the current leadership, who are of course the smartest, wisest, noblest, best, and most beloved leadership ever.

Coup

May 11th, 2019

Trump has said the coup word.

Of course, it is not really a Democrat coup until they send a bunch of guys dressed in freshly issued police uniforms and equipped with a subpoena from some judge in Hawaii and give him the perp walk without bothering with the old fashioned inconvenience of a senate supermajority impeachment. And if one coup once, chances are there will be another coup, this time without bothering with the freshly issued police uniforms and subpoena.

But it is a creeping coup. In a creeping coup coupists do bad things, get away with it, and, getting away with it, people dare not stop them when they do worse things. And so far, the Democrats have gotten away with it, which inevitably results, and is intended to result, in an escalation of those bad things.

And if he starts arresting Democrats for their numerous illegal acts, they will certainly think it is a Trump self coup – and it will be, regardless of whether Trump intends it to be or not.

The Roman Republic died when the Gracchi defied term limits, and the senate murdered them.

When Augustus attempted to revive the Republic, or pretended to attempt to revive the Republic, he was not attempting to heal a gravely ill patient, but to perform necromancy. He revived the forms of the republic, but those forms were full of imperial content, for the imperium was the only thing that could make them function.

The presidency has grown and swollen the American government, and the only thing that can make it function is if a president swallows it.

The Mueller report was a dud. Not only did it find no Trump collaboration with efforts to influence the US election, nor any obstruction of justice – the allegations of obstruction of justice are just mind reading that Trump thought about killing off the Mueller investigation, but whatever he thought about, he did not in fact obstruct it, and even if he did obstruct it, which he did not, you cannot have obstruction of justice without an underlying crime.

Further, extraordinarily, the Russian government did not attempt to influence the American election – unlike one hell of a lot of other governments, or if they did, Mueller could not find any such attempts, and is lying when he claims that he did. The people being charged are accused in the Mueller report of being Russian agents, but when he actually brought charges which a hostile lawyer might cross examine, he did not charge the offender with being an agent of the Russian government, revealing that he knew that under hostile cross examination, the charge would sink like a stone. Instead the offender is charged with incomprehensible legal technicalities under vague and sweeping laws in an unsuccessful effort to get them to rat out Trump – which they were unable to do, having no connection to Trump, and no connection to the Russian government that Mueller was willing to present in court.

Mueller has been caught lying about two of the supposed Russian agents, one of whom is in fact a Mueller agent. If one lie, all lies.

The behavior of the democrats show that they are not actually interested in the contents of the Mueller report – they failed to read the minimally redacted redacted report issued for limited non public distribution. They know it is a dud. They want the attorney general removed because he is investigating them, and are just trying to link his removal to supposed Russian intervention in US elections. They are working on a coup because the perceive Trump as working on a self coup, and Trump is working on a self coup, or perceived to be working on a self coup, because the Democrats are working on a coup.

Everyone pretending there is some substance in the Mueller report is doing a Point Deer Make Horse – including the numerous republicans going along with the pretense. Point Deer Make Horse is a classic part of a coup: if people go along with the blatant lie, this shows they will go along with the coup. So everyone who talks as if the Mueller Report was not a dud, is signaling he is on board with an anti Trump coup.

So either Trump does a self coup – takes control of the FBI and turns it on his enemies, or will be removed in a coup – which will initially only arrest him, but such arrests lead to escalating drama, which eventually result in the arrested leader and various people close to him being executed.

If Trump does a self coup he will say, and perhaps believe, he is preserving the Republic, but once struggle within the political elite goes violent, it is going to get more violent. If Trump succeeds, the general public will not see a coup, but the Democrats and the left generally will, and even if they quietly submit this time, and everyone gets into line, we will be in the situation of the Roman Republic after the Gracchi: the political elite lacks cohesion, and will no longer play by mutually agreed rules, which inevitably results in political conflicts turning violent.

The Democrats have deleted God from the house of representatives. For a nation to be one nation, people need a big daddy on top. If no longer “One nation under God”, going to need a cult of personality leader to be one nation. The state religion of progressivism cannot provide for the orderly transfer of power, so we are inevitably moving towards disorderly transfer of power.

Augustus had to be deified to make the Roman government work (steel alone did not suffice) but the trouble is that when your state religion is based on flagrant lies, it is fragile so has to be repressive.