And another one bites the dust

The American empire, aka anti American Empire, aka The international community, aka rule by rootless childless cosmopolitans with no future and no past, is in retreat.

Having lost Russia, Poland, Hungary, and Philippines, it just took another body blow in Australia.

A shark has to keep swimming, or it will drown, and the ever increasing holiness of the left has to keep knocking over new applecarts, or else there will be no apples rolling around for ambitious leftist to pick up.

They never stop; they only pause to re-group and change strategy. They can’t stop.

The Trump like Australian Prime minister Tony Abbot decisively stopped illegal immigration, (Zero illegal arrivals since 2014, yes, zero. You read that correctly. Zero.) and busted near every illegal visa overstay and violation of visa conditions, as near to all of them as makes no difference

Leftism had to start advancing in Australia on another front, on something other than white genocide. They dithered between expanding legal immigration as a slower route to white genocide, and smashing western civilization by rolling back the industrial revolution. And eventually coalesced on smashing western civilization, rolling back the industrial revolution.

Western civilization depends on concentrated and reliable energy sources, power on tap. Which means carbon or nuclear.

Nuclear was stopped primarily the way NASA was stopped, by putting stupid people in charge. It is not apparent that fusion power would be workable even with smart people in charge, but to be on the safe side, they put stupid people in charge of developing thermonuclear as well. The big vulnerability of nuclear power is not the imaginary evils of nuclear power (The long term effect of Chernobyl was the deaths of at most nine people outside the power plant outer fence) it is that you need smart people in charge of nuclear power. It is easy to disrupt cooperation between smart people by inserting stupid people.

The objective of the global warming scam is to stop carbon power, coal and oil.

And the left decided that was the front it would advance on in Australia was, instead of eradicating the white race. Expanding legal immigration had some success, but legal means that the numbers are known, and political pushback likely to be effective.

South Australia, and to a lesser extent Queensland, proceeded to smash their energy industries at the state level, but for any one Australian state to destroy its energy industry has limited effect if energy using businesses can flee to other states, and if energy can be imported through the grid from one state to another. For the policy to be effective, has to be federally implemented.

The Australian federal Prime minister bowed to pressure and introduced an “energy security” plan, which would have provided energy security the way that Lucy was going to hold the football for Charlie Brown. The real intent of the Global Warming scam was revealed in South Australia, where the South Australian state government did to South Australia what Obama did to flyover country.

With the “energy security plan” it became obvious that greenies would absolutely never accept any compromise that left Western high tech civilization viable, that any attempt compromise with greenies would end with a result that would do to the Australian economy what it damn near did to the South Australian economy.

Turnbull, the Australian Prime Minister, proceeded to “compromise” with those who will never compromise, with the result that he failed to compromise with the substantial sane and decent faction of his own party.  No carbon program that does not radically disrupt our comfortable modern lifestyles and throw large numbers of people out of work is going to be acceptable to the left.

And so, he got thrown out and Scott Morrison became Australian Prime minister on a program of not destroying the energy industry, and still not allowing illegal immigration. No word yet on what he is going to do about alarming levels of legal immigration, but did I mention that they are alarming, and voters are becoming alarmed.

The shark is not drowning yet, still has white replacement going through legal immigration, but this latest is causing it major trouble breathing, and we are seeing calls for a color revolution against Australia.  Australia has not decisively left the empire yet, the way Poland and the Philippines have, but this has become a very real possibility:

Scott Morrison may well cuck on Green (unreliable) energy, and may well cuck on legal immigration.  Maybe he will get subverted the way Abbot was, but that his predecessor got thrown out for cucking on unreliable energy on top of cucking on legal immigration is a very good sign.

Current strategy is to overthrow Scott Morrison by fully legitimate and constitutional means, should he fail to cuck out, but that will likely prove difficult, whereupon constitutionality will likely get seriously stretched, the way that efforts to impeach Trump have seriously stretched constitutionality in the US.

The South Australian energy industry was looted in the course of being destroyed, and I expect that the federal destruction of the Australian energy industry would have provided a whole lot of loot for leftists. That they are not going to get this loot, at least not by peaceful, constitutional, and democratic means, is a major body blow. They were expecting another apple cart, and that cart is not falling – this is has had an immediate and obvious effect on their motivation and capability to generate political pressure.

The more stuff leftists knock over, the more loot for leftists, the more leftist activism you get. Conversely, when the expected gold rush fails to eventuate, you get loss of left wing morale and energy.

As leftism goes ever lefter, you have more people seeking holiness jobs, which means that ever larger apple carts have to be knocked over at ever shorter intervals. The shark cannot stop swimming, and will do whatever it takes to keep on swimming. And it is going to take measures that increasing collapse constitutional legitimacy and peaceful relations between nations, leading to internal war, external war, or both. Notice that when the color revolution in Libya failed, the state department turned spectacularly murderous and destructive, and that when the color revolution in Syria failed, it turned genocidal.

Expect, therefore, the unexpected.  As the arc of history bends ever more to indiscriminate, destructive, and malicious evil, it encounters more resistance.  One might expect that this will result in stability at some tolerable level of evil.  This stabilization has never happened in the past and is unlikely to happen in the future.  What happens instead is what we see happening in the US.  The left escalates, drifting closer to war internal and external.

307 Responses to “And another one bites the dust”

  1. […] And another one bites the dust […]

    • analyticbastard says:

      Hi Jim, started reading you just recently.

      I am a Spaniard and deeply aware of white genocide for a number of years now. I am trying to rationally explain this but every model I come up with fails.

      If the elites behind white genocide are white, what is the advantage of replacing their peoples with others? Surely these others will want to have elites of their same race so they’ll eventually get replaced.

      If the elites are not white, then they must be jewish, mostly ashkenazi from the events we can witness, whatever their genetical history is. Can they effectively control continents of muslims (many of whom are also semites, but not the majority) and blacks, and bend them to their will? What will their stand be against yellow asians in this polarized future world? Will they be able to infiltrate them too if this is the case at all?

      How did the white elite come to be puppets or perpetrators of this sickening events?

      • peppermint says:

        The company loves to go to the government and demand more H1B slaves, which are cheaper and more docile than Americans.

        Is the company and its HR people aware that in so doing they are making the Americans cheaper, more docile, and furthermore making American men in STEM lower status? How much are they aware of that and how much does crimestop prevent them from conscious awareness?

        Most people, especially non-intelligent people, have a very limited view of their situation, and the elite has ensured that there are local advantages to be gained through treason.

        In particular, access to better women.

        The elite in 1970 were WASPy and had christo-communist ideals. The elite of 2015 are jew-dominated with singularitarian ideals. The transition was fairly smooth, managed by the mass media especially the conservative media, and each step seemed like an okay idea at the time.

        What’s new is that the communists no longer are eaten last. Being a communist means you’re required to dogfood the sexual ideology meaning you get nothing.

        Which means all the intelligent young men understand that if you’re not a fascist you’re a faggot and if you’re not a faggot you’re a fascist.

        And we will slaughter the communists, because the major reason they went nuts and nominated crazy people to run in 2018 ensuring we win is that they were unable to tell a moderate from a deserter because they are terrified that we will impose justice.

        • X says:

          The company loves to go to the government and demand more H1B slaves, which are cheaper and more docile than Americans.

          Is the company and its HR people aware that in so doing they are making the Americans cheaper, more docile, and furthermore making American men in STEM lower status? How much are they aware of that and how much does crimestop prevent them from conscious awareness?

          As I explained about entropy in the prior blog The optics of noticing, defection is entirely natural and on trend with the universal maximization of entropy. You fight nature at your peril.

          Which means all the intelligent young men understand that if you’re not a fascist you’re a faggot and if you’re not a faggot you’re a fascist.

          And we will slaughter the communists, because […]

          You will splinter into a multitude of tribes disagreeing over various matters and the entire Western civilization will collapse into chaos with AK-47s totting roaming gangs. You’re delusional if you think Trump is going to hold together a victorious super minority of conservatives unified along a well organized and well defined cooperation. That would be too highly ordered and negentropic.

          Order only increases when paradigms are small and growing as they can export entropy. Saplings grow to large oak trees, but oak trees don’t grow to the moon.

          The West is decadent and has far too many problems and too many opportunities for defection for their to be any salvaging of it. Kiss it goodbye. It’s in terminal decline.

      • The Cominator says:

        Its called progressivism and its a religion.

        White people especially white men have become evil demonic figures under modern progressivism because

        1) Bioleninism. White males are naturally higher status then the coalition of the fringes.

        2) White men have by and large rejected progressivism in modern times and hence must be evil.

        Now greed and non progressive ethnonationalism among other groups plays a role, but it would all fall apart without the “religious” impetus.

        BTW Spain seems to me to be a deeply sick country looking at it from the outside… you had 50% youth unemployment AND mass immigration at one point. How did your politicians avoid lampposts? Spain doesn’t have the massive police/army infrastructure to protect them.

        • analyticbastard says:

          I know about left and progressivism and all that, they are pretty sick from the point of view of self preservation of life and genetic continuation, but why did elites choose to finish off their own people (assuming elites are white)?

          Spain is a very sick country yes. People’s brains are a continuation of the TV so they are totally brainwashed. They are childless fucktards working their asses off just to see brack africans having 3, 4 or 5 children, and they call you nazi if you point out this fact. (yes I am currently working on a plan to get the hell out of here, most likely to the East, not to the dumpster that any major Western city is/will become)

          • X says:

            but why did elites choose to finish off their own people (assuming elites are white)?

            Because they don’t have any choice. If they didn’t do it, then nature would replace them with elite who would do it. Because nature needs defection in order to maximize entropy.

      • jim says:

        Holiness spiral.

        In a holiness spiral everyone knows where the spiral is going, and nobody wants to go there, but everyone wants to be the first to take one more step in that direction.

        It is more accurately modeled as demonic possession than “the Jews”

        Suppose you are Canaanite, late bronze age, early iron age. You worship Moloch. Who demands that you burn your children alive in front of the congregation.

        All the nice respectable important people worship Moloch, and if you want to get ahead in your society, you need to be a nice respectable person also. And if you are ambitious, you had better demonstrate that you worship Moloch even more sincerely and enthusiastically than your neighbor.

        The Canaanite state department sends out true believers in Moloch to neighboring land, where they show how sincere they are, what true believers they are. When people from other lands visit, they are steered into locations full of high status canaanites with strong and sincere faith, and if they want to be high status like those people they should be virtuously true believers like those people. When people in other lands start worshiping Moloch, that gives the Canaanite state department a leg up to influence and control those other lands through its quietly state sponsored missionaries.

        • analyticbastard says:

          I believe I get your parallelism implying world leaders influenced by zionism, but I fail to see when these “canaanites” have replaced their own population.

        • X says:

          Indeed Jim, this inertia you describe is one of the mechanisms by which civilization as an analogy to oak trees (referring to my reply to @peppermint), matures then rots and decays. Entropy forces a cycle. Without cycles nothing could exist in our universe:

          http://unheresy.com/The%20Universe.html#Matter_as_a_continuum

          https://steemit.com/philosophy/@anonymint/geographical-cultural-ethos-science-is-dead-part-2

          (skip to the science physics section of the last linked blog)

        • >In a holiness spiral everyone knows where the spiral is going, and nobody wants to go there, but everyone wants to be the first to take one more step in that direction.

          It has striking parallels to the tragedy of commons. But in a tragedy of commons it is easy to see everybody wants more cows, but it is not so easy to see why the spiral is going exactly in that direction and why nobody seems to be able to push it somewhere else.

          The tragedy of commons is usually solved by privatization, but it seems human social behavior as such is inherently social and not-privatizable. I mean, to a certain extent it is, a society can split into sub-societies, tribes, each with their own status ladders and spirals. But that is just more, smaller commons. And if human cooperation is our greatest strength and if we split into clans and clan wars where each clan is a closed status ladder, a more cooperative nation next door eats the clannish one for breakfast.

          I suppose this is why a state church under a king is the only solution. If air pollution or overfishing of the oceans is not solvable by privatization because it is hard to split it up, then you privatize it without splitting it up, making one guy the global owner of air or owner of the ocean fish, however crazy and far-fetched it sounds.

          I haven’t seen any libertarian solutions for this tragedy of non-splittable commons. If they exist, I would listen, as perhaps the idea can also be borrowed for dealing with human social behavior, holiness spirals and status ladders.

          • jim says:

            > but it is not so easy to see why the spiral is going exactly in that direction and why nobody seems to be able to push it somewhere else.

            They are trying to push it somewhere else, but it is not easy, since the KKKrazy glue holding the coalition of the fringest together is hatred of straight white males. They can see it is heading towards genocide, and are trying to steer it towards Venezuelan socialism instead – which is not as bad, but is still extremely bad. But they are not actually having that much success in steering.

          • >but it is not so easy to see why the spiral is going exactly in that direction and why nobody seems to be able to push it somewhere else

            On second thought, it may be because of the sunken costs fallacy. My favorite example of a right-wing and distinctly Continental European (to show it is really a human universal) spiral was: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gott_strafe_England look at the cuff link. Basically, conspicious patriotism, supporting an immensely destructive and costly war that everybody would be happy to end with a white peace now but nobody wants to be the guy who proposes it firsts and everybody wants to be the guy who is more enthusiastically supporting the war than his neighbor.

            And the reason was sunken costs. “We sacrificed so much, it cannot be for nothing, it cannot be meaningless.”

            Is this always the reason? If I already burned one of my children for Moloch, then my choices are I either admitting it was a horrible immoral crazy mistake, or decide if I sunk such a cost into it I should try to get something out of it and try to get status preaching that burning children to Moloch is good and because others do the same I will soon have to burn by second one just to keep up? That is the engine? Sunken costs?

      • The problem with your question is the assumption of coordinated behavior, long-term planning amongst the elites. This is not true. Evil is chaos, chaos is evil, evil never cooperates well. Rather it is their internal competition that drives these results. White genocide is a result, not a goal as such. The goals – not coordinated, but individual goals – 1) getting more money out of the taxpayer for solving social problems by importing people who cause social problems 2) import people who will happily vote for socialism 3) bioleninism. Look up that term on Spandrell’s blog. In short, the idea is that people who are unable to succeed on their own in life, only with help from the elites, will be loyal to the elites. That is, back when the Soviet Union put complete dumbfuck proles into party cadre positions, they were loyal. When they began to use some more meritocracy in promotions (hoping to improve economic efficiency) the new cadre quickly figured they could also be on top in a more private property oriented system, they could become oligarchs or something, so they had no incentive to be loyal and defend the system.

        When you see Africans tearing down the fence in Ceuta, and the police does nothing, probably because the Spanish government ordered them to stand down, that is partially because a lot of people on the top in Spain see them as excellent excuses to raise your taxes and spend it on, say, their good friends who are teachers and will be hired to teach those guys Spanish. But only partially. Mostly they are just following the fashion, the latest religion from Washington.

        While the whole thing is not coordinated but based on competition within elites, it generates a religion where whites are evil and immigrants are holy. You and I, of a Catholic background may find it difficult to imagine how it works. Anglos with Protestant backgrounds find it easier to imagine, because it is exactly how the Reformation worked, every preacher competed with each other for being the holiest holy and attracting a following and thus gaining power, and yet the result still was something that looked coordinated. And it seems back then, just like now, this inner chaos was turned into something more coordinated looking at the universities. But this primarily happens in American and to a lesser extent British universities today, in Continental Europe it mostly comes over as the latest fashion, the new cool thing you must follow kind of thing. Doing a semester in Cambridge or Oxford with the Erasmus programme helps in having a close peek at it.

  2. eternal anglo says:

    If the CCP is not part of the Cathedral, why does China build wind turbines, solar panels and make biofuel? Soft power, cargo cult westernization?

    • jim says:

      Soft power.

      • pdimov says:

        I’d say cargo cult. They just copy everything.

        • jim says:

          Jews are the most priestly race, and we are the second most priestly. Chinese are dangerously vulnerable to our soft power.

          • pdimov says:

            Look at their “5th gen” fighters and compare to the Russian one.

            https://www.businessinsider.com/russian-su-57-stealth-jet-photos-reveal-its-a-threat-to-f-22-f-35-2018-5?op=1

            They’ve tried to copy the US stealth fighters because that’s what they do. The Russians did not; they’ve pursued their own counterstrategy.

            “As the scientist said, Russia didn’t even appear to seriously try to make a stealth aircraft. The Su-57 takes certain measures, like storing weapons internally, that improve the stealth, but it’s leaps and bounds from a US or even Chinese effort.

            This highlights the true purpose of Russia’s new fighter — not to evade radar itself, but to kill US stealth jets like the F-35 and F-22.”

          • X says:

            Jews are the most priestly race, and we are the second most priestly. Chinese are dangerously vulnerable to our soft power.

            Because the Jews detect on the goyim instead on their own tribe. The Jews understand that their must be a higher opportunity cost to defecting on their own tribe than on the goyim. And this social contract doesn’t need to be enforced from the top-down, because it is Nash equilibrium.

            We dumb ass Europeans haven’t figured this out yet.

            Well I am part Cherokee, so I might have some Jewish genetics. But I am also Welsh, French, and German.

            Asians have the tall poppy syndrome social contract. Everyone defects except on their own tribe, but doesn’t let it appear too obvious. So they’re vulnerable to soft power because the State is not religion for them. They’re easily swayed by other religions, which is why the Communist Party must crackdown so fiercely on for example Islam within its borders.

            • The Cominator says:

              “Because the Jews defect on the goyim instead on their own tribe.”

              Far leftist jews also defect on their own tribe (there USED TO BE left wing zionists, the kind of jews who worked on the kibbutzim and who Israel drew its elite troops that won the war in 48 from, these were Jews were both wholly Socialists and wholly Zionist but those kind of jews no longer exists in large numbers). Orthodox Jews aren’t leftists, secular Likud voters aren’t leftists.

              Leftists Jews in Israel support open borders for Israel and thus are traitors to their own as well. American Jews now tend to support if not totally open borders for Israel much more open borders for Israel.

              • Yara says:

                I don’t think anyone’s arguing that Jews, though astonishingly frequently highly impressive as individuals, aren’t incomparably destructive as a race.

              • X says:

                Far leftist jews also defect on their own tribe

                Elite must always defect on their own State else they will be replaced by nature because otherwise it would be negentropic at that scale. C.f. also my reply to @analyticbastard up-thread.

                Defecting on a State is not defecting on your tribe. A tribe and a State are never isomorphic.

                Also the tribe of the elite Jews is not the same tribe as the commoner Jews.

                Leftists Jews in Israel support open borders for Israel and thus are traitors to their own as well.

                Destroying States is entirely consistent with the Jewish priestly status. Their tribe is of highly disordered congruence with the trend of entropy than those stupid Europeans who idol States.

                I don’t think anyone’s arguing that Jews, though astonishingly frequently highly impressive as individuals, aren’t incomparably destructive as a race.

                Destruction of order is what nature does as it’s primary function.

                • Steve Johnson says:

                  Elite must always defect on their own State else they will be replaced by nature</blockquote?

                  Nature won't replace non-defecting elites – other potential elites will.

                  When a group of men has little power they need cohesion to gain power and form a government – when the government exists and power is there to be seized the incentive is to defect and use the power for personal benefit. A wisely run state is aware of this tendency and takes action to mitigate it – it's not a law of thermodynamics that they'll fail.

                • X says:

                  Nature won’t replace non-defecting elites – other potential elites will.

                  You’re missing key insights of my abstraction in your (sorry I must say) inkblot. The other potential elites are nature’s entropy at-work.

                  Please review my points on this blog and the prior blog The optics of noticing about the terms “entropic cooperation” and negentropic.

                  Assimilate that with Eric S. Raymond’s point that the most powerful are those who defect the most because the collective is a power vaccum:

                  Some Iron Laws of Political Economics

                  When a group of men has little power they need cohesion to gain power and form a government – when the government exists and power is there to be seized the incentive is to defect and use the power for personal benefit. A wisely run state is aware of this tendency and takes action to mitigate it – it’s not a law of thermodynamics that they’ll fail.

                  You’re failing to assimilate for example that the State is a power vacuum that will be filled by the most powerful. Those who promise the most defection to all, win the elections. Please refer to Eric’s blog for the more eloquent explanation.

                • Steve Johnson says:

                  You are a high verbal IQ, low g writer who is in love with his not great prose and doesn’t make good arguments or observations.

                • X says:

                  You are a high verbal IQ, low g writer who is in love with his not great prose and doesn’t make good arguments or observations.

                  The Dunning-Kruger effect would probably explain why you got that precisely transposed. My 1983 SAT scores were 580 Verbal and 740 Math. So my g is probably ~2 SD and my verbal is weak compared to my abstraction and math capabilities. Which probably explains why you think I am writing noise because my math and abstraction ability appears to be in the ~3 SD range:

                  http://unheresy.com/Essence%20of%20Genius.html

                  My reading comprehension is very high though. My main flaw is I don’t have highly detailed long-term memory (88th percentile vocabulary). And I don’t process serialized patterns well. Thus I am a poor writer actually. Much prefer math, coding, engineering, philosophy and abstractions.

                  I will take a long break from this blog so we don’t waste time trolling each other.

        • retardedanglos says:

          These are both retarded answers. There are 2 clear practical reasons for China to go all in on green energy. First is the drive to reduce air pollution, and second is to reduce dependence on energy imports (and thus external forces).

          • pdimov says:

            “Green energy” requires 100% coal backup, so no.

            • Stephen W says:

              If the solar panels are cheap enough that still saves you money as you buy less coal. The price of both solar panels and batteries is falling every year on a steady predictable trend line that goes back decades. Be aware that your talking points although quite true a decade ago may soon become out of date. Extend the trend lines in solar panel and battery prices and it becomes the cheapest source of power in about 2020.

              • jim says:

                Even if solar panels are free, solar panel installation and maintenance is free, and solar panel installations last forever, solar power will still double the cost of electricity, because you wind up with double the grid. You do get less pollution from coal though.

                Trouble is that solar power tends to be accompanied by an influx of criminals into the power distribution system, so you end up with double the cost, more than double the cost, and still get blackouts and brownouts. But even if everything was done honestly and competently, and solar panels were free, would still double the cost of power, because the cost of the grid dominates all other costs.

                • Stephen W says:

                  It is not just solar panels, batteries are coming down in price also. By the late 2020s the combination of solar power and batteries for storage will be cheaper than the grid connection.

                • jim says:

                  Maybe.

                  But batteries have a long way to go.

                  For batteries to be cheap, need cheap materials: Air iron batteries, zinc chlorine batteries, or sodium sulfur flow batteries.

                • pdimov says:

                  Fans of renewables have pointed me to the article

                  “Colorado approves Xcel plan to retire coal, shift to renewables and storage”

                  https://www.utilitydive.com/news/xcel-solicitation-returns-incredible-renewable-energy-storage-bids/514287/

                  and

                  https://www.utilitydive.com/news/colorado-approves-xcel-plan-to-retire-coal-shift-to-renewables-and-storage/531098/

                  but I remain somewhat unconvinced.

                • jim says:

                  Story of South Australia indicates that this is Lucy, Charlie Brown, and the football.

                  They really don’t approve of ordinary white people having electricity, and no procedure that continues to supply ordinary white people with electricity will ever be deemed sufficiently green.

                • jim says:

                  What happened with South Australia is that greenies made gigantic amounts of money supposedly supplying cheap reliable green energy, and this was supposedly a huge success, and yet, strangely, at the same time, for reasons totally unrelated to going green, reasons that somehow no one could explain except that it was terribly terribly complicated and caused by evil coal burning capitalists, electricity became more expensive, and kept blacking out.

                  It is like Human Dvelopment Index. Socialist measures are a huge success, if you don’t notice poverty, misery, and neglected children. I still see lefties publish statistics showing the enormous success of Venezuelan socialism. Their Human Development Index has gone through the roof. Similarly, South Australian green energy was a huge success except that the lights went out and businesses fled the state.
                  They hate you, they are going to take your money, dismantle and steal the high technology equipment that supports your modern lifestyle, and leave you in the dark.

                  You can hear their rage and hatred, and observe their actions.

                • pdimov says:

                  >and yet, strangely, at the same time, for reasons totally unrelated to going green, reasons that somehow no one could explain except that it was terribly terribly complicated and caused by evil coal burning capitalists, electricity became more expensive, and kept blacking out.

                  My libertarian acquaintances inform me that this is because the state interferes on behalf of the fossilized status quo.

                • jim says:

                  Pretty sure that they are not libertarians any more than Carlylean Restorationist is a restorationist. (He wants to smash every accomplishment of Charles the Second that has not yet been smashed)

                  They are entryists. If they were libertarians they would notice massive government intervention against carbon, and irrational hatred and vilification of flyover country, for which carbon is one of several excuses.

                  Observed results are that cost of electricity goes up in proportion to how green it is, and reliability goes down.

                • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                  Ref. libertarians for renewable energy

                  “Pretty sure that they are not libertarians any more than Carlylean Restorationist is a restorationist. (He wants to smash every accomplishment of Charles the Second that has not yet been smashed)”

                  If they’re true libertarians, they should be for a total wild west, held in check only by voluntary private quality assurance ratings agencies. If people use their independent rational faculties to choose energy suppliers that power their plants with scrap rubber tyres, that’s absolutely fine so long as no-one’s natural rights are violated.
                  A truly Talmudic libertarian will add to this that the negative externalities of tyre-burning can potentially be factored in through service-level agreements and mutual protection clauses between the (definitely not governing, definitely not sovereign) insurance service providers operating in the residential and industrial zones (and they definitely wouldn’t collude or be owned/controlled by intermeshing interests).

                  Similarly a Jimian reactionary will decry the state of the modern world but insist that a return to Charles II’s noblesse oblige universe would be constrained by the need for individual consumers to be freeeeeee to do whatever they want.

                  The two look remarkably similar. See the reality is Charles II was many things, but a believe in ‘liberté’ he was not.

                • pdimov says:

                  >If they’re true libertarians, they should be for a total wild west

                  They are true libertarians in that they blame the state for everything bad that happens.

                  And since they consider reliance on fossil fuels bad, they come to the logical conclusion that the state backs fossil fuels. Somehow.

                  They can’t point to any specific thing the state does in order to support fossil fuels, whereas I can point to many things it does that have the exact opposite effect, but this doesn’t matter, because their logic is airtight.

              • pdimov says:

                >your talking points although quite true a decade ago

                They are true today. There’s a 100% correlation in Germany between new “green” power and increase in CO2 emissions. It doesn’t matter how much wind or solar cost, you can’t depend on them being there when you need power.

                Of course you can use natural gas instead of coal if you like being dependent on Russia.

    • Cloudswrest says:

      Why not? There are plenty of buyers, especially in the West. Big money to be made.

    • ivvenalis says:

      Wind power can be a good use of marginal land, especially since it doesn’t preclude other uses. China’s west, like America’s, contains a lot of sparsely populated areas good for little more than grazing.

      Photovoltaics are good for generating power off the grid. Pakistani villagers use solar panels to charge their cell phones. China wants to make money selling them.

      Biofuel, eh, I don’t know. I don’t think that’s anywhere as big as the other two.

      • jim says:

        Without economical storage, wind power and solar power is not very useful. Has to be one hundred percent backed by coal, and your grid costs enormously exceed your generation costs.

        • ivvenalis says:

          The electrical grid is sufficiently complex/chaotic that operators may not be properly accounting for the costs you mention, and wind turbine owner/operators can still get paid enough selling power to make a profit. The motive for correct accounting is further undermined because the government isn’t actually going to let critical utilities shut down for lack of money. It’s also possible that some combination of pumped hydro + not actually backing wind generation 100% (more likely & feasible when demand is growing, as it is in China) allows an efficient profit. Most likely a combination of these factors. Either way I don’t think it requires a huge subsidy and and the opportunity cost is relatively low — knowing how to make turbines is good and the land they’re on doesn’t have any better uses.

          • jim says:

            Intermittent energy sources combined with pumped hydro work, provided you have some geology that is favorable for pumped hydro.

            Which you usually do not.

            Absent pumped hydro, intermittent energy sources are just not worth the trouble.

            • Cloudswrest says:

              It would seem that something similar to hydro could work. Assume you live near a 100m+ hillside. A railroad car filled with sand, say 150 metric tons. A drop of only 100 meters provides approximately 42 KW-hrs storage per rail car. And weight powered generators are probably more efficient than hydro generators. There are thousands of acres of barren mountain hillside along the Diablo range in California. Just crank them up during the day and let them roll down at night.

      • jim says:

        Not good. Costs are dominated by grid providing distribution and reliability. Take account grid costs, solar and wind is intolerably expensive. It is not so much the coal backup, as the grid distribution. If you have two sources of power located in different places, and sometimes access one, and sometimes the other, you grid costs roughly twice as much, and your grid is the dominant cost.

        So, to a good approximation, intermittent power is always twice as expensive as reliable power.

  3. George Henty says:

    CCP makes “green” energy for two reasons. It provides good, fairly cheap, PR in the West and it serves as a jobs program.

  4. ikacer says:

    Regarding nuclear, you have the mechanism slightly wrong. There are some incompetent people in the nuclear industry, but there are still huge numbers of very smart people. The real reason is that for the political reasons you mentioned, legislators and judges have put so many laws and regulations in place, and consequently so much bureaucracy has formed to oversee the regulations that it takes decades and a fortune to get anything through all the regulatory tape.

    The final blow that killed the industry was what happened to Seabrook station. Wikipedia gives a decent overview, if you read between the lines. Protestors were bused in and a frivolous lawsuit forced them to halt mid construction, they had to keep construction crews and engineers on payroll while they were legally barred from working and it took almost a year before the lawsuit was dismissed for being without merit. Also a law was passed which required them to get the governor to sign off on the evacuation plans and the Democrat governor decided to just sit on it for the duration of his term. All the bureaucratic stalling delayed the opening by 10 years and caused the bankruptcy of one of the largest electric companies in the US. Since then, quite reasonably, no one builds nuclear power plants in the US anymore.

  5. Dave says:

    Jim,

    My country is done….. Australia’s turbo charged non-white immigration has turned vast areas of my home town (Melbourne) in unrecognizable third world holes…. try to speak out and you are handed a section 18c invitation to the magistrates court for huge fines and possible jail time too. Don’t dare start to publicly complain about the African rampages across Melbourne!

    Even if all immigration is halted the ones already here are on a turbo-charged breeding program thanks to all the welfare they receive. I’ll be dead before this (white) man made hell explodes, but I pity those (soon to be minority) white kids being born today who will have to try and survive within what is to come.

    The whites who did this to my country seem to think the non-whites will spare them for some strange reason in-spite of what is now happening in South Africa.

    • Yara says:

      Part of the unspoken subtext of our host’s post is that legal immigration is somehow better than illegal immigration.

      It isn’t.

      It’s worse. Far better that your rising tide of color, if you are to have such, be illegal, less even a shred of moral excuse for their pestful presence in an age that legislative fiat by the stroke of a parliamentarian’s pen carries with it such weight of moral condonation or opprobrium as ours.

      • jim says:

        Illegal immigration is always predominantly composed of criminals, and it is often times far more people than you are told that it is.

        • Yara says:

          The more flagrantly criminal and patently intolerably uncivilized, the less assimilation.

          • X says:

            As I argued in my first post in the prior blog The optics of noticing, the only solution available to white men is to form an elite tribe in the small, practice strict patriarchy, and stop assimilating.

            When do we begin? Where do we chat and organize? Certainly we can’t have an interactive chat discussion in blog comments.

            All this talk about rescuing the State, is useless masturbation. I am do’er not a talker. White men are do’ers. As Jim pointed out, we’re the engineers that keep all the lights on. The Jews are the defection priesthood. We white males become negentropic collateral damage when we align ourselves with the decadent State.

            It’s time for us to defect from the morass and do what we do best!

            • Simon says:

              Nothing will happen without a prophet, and I do not see one.

              • X says:

                That’s sad, but probably true. So white men can’t cooperate without the delusion of idols. The prefrontal cortex is not sufficient?

              • X says:

                On further thought the issue is really that there’s a power vacuum without a prophet because Hajnal whites defect on clan tribalism. There’s also Nietzsche’s ressentiment in play.

                https://steemit.com/philosophy/@anonymint/geographical-cultural-ethos-science-is-dead

                Whereas, the psychology of ressentiment replaces the bitterness of resentment for one’s plight, with a delusional, selfish illusion of righteous superiority or control over the situation such as: a focus on Christianity as exclusionary, vindictive, apocalyptic Revelation, and promise of salvation that the faithful meek will inherit the glorious earth upon the return of Jesus whilst the selfish rich suffer damnation in eternal hell. And our smug vengefulness could be mistakenly supported by Jesus purportedly stated that a rich person that hadn’t given all his possessions to the poor had less chance to pass through the gates of heaven than an elephant (or camel) through the eye-of-a-needle. Nietzsche’s conceptualization focuses on the irrationality from an individual perspective but afaik doesn’t consider the groupwise benefit from squelching defection […]

                That ressentiment complex enabled Hajnal whites to subjugate clans and rise up in levels of cooperation. While that was small and growing, it exported entropy such as the agricultural and industrial revolutions.

                But on the decadent side that we’re in now, the ressentiment has the Hajnal whites trapped, as Nietzsche predicted it would.

                The Hajnal whites will ride the State all the way down into the abyss because they’re incapable of non-Hajnal whites defection. And they’ll end up doing Nazi genocide blaming their idealistic ressentiment delusion on some scapegoat other than themselves, e.g. this blog blaming everything on females as if all of us aren’t part of the problem, lol.

  6. X says:

    The chaos coming is weakening the nation-state and taking us back towards the chaos of separatism with 1000s of tribes but with a highly ordered NWO channel of which Bitcoin is an essential component. George Gilder explained that nature wants to maximize entropy but this requires a low entropy channel:

    https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4920367.msg44663327#msg44663327

    (the above post is very important for you to read Jim)

    Strict patriarchy is always disrupted at any scale larger than the tribe, because strict patriarchy at any large scale would be negentropic.

    • Dave says:

      “nature requires a low entropy channel in order to increase entropy overall”

      Not true, the Universe’s total entropy is always increasing. Any local decrease in entropy requires a bigger increase somewhere else, but the converse is not true; entropy can increase everywhere at the same time.

      This principle also applies to societies, which can collapse to the point where everyone is desperately digging for grubs with a pointy stick. The British Empire “exported entropy” by allowing its elites to conquer and exploit brown and black peoples, and exiling its criminal underclass to penal colonies. But when other white nations felt they weren’t getting a fair share of the loot, WW1 broke out and entropy came home.

      “Low-entropy” Bitcoin is now eating about one percent of all electricity generated on Earth, and all we get for it is orders of magnitude fewer electronic transactions than banks were clearing in the 1960s with less total computing power than a modern ten-dollar burner phone.

      • Steve Johnson says:

        “Low-entropy” Bitcoin is now eating about one percent of all electricity generated on Earth, and all we get for it is orders of magnitude fewer electronic transactions than banks were clearing in the 1960s with less total computing power than a modern ten-dollar burner phone.

        Nah, what we’re getting for it is a cryptographically guaranteed uninflatable currency.

        How much total energy goes into gold mining?

        • Dave says:

          When people tried using Bitcoin as money, transaction fees exploded, eroding purchasing power much like inflation. Fees dropped back down when vendors stopped accepting Bitcoin — you even have to pay dollars to attend a Bitcoin conference!

          “How much total energy goes into gold mining?”

          It doesn’t matter because we don’t need miners to trade with the gold we already have. If the miners all dropped dead tomorrow, gold would be more valuable without them.

          In Bitcoin, no miners = no transactions. Asshole miners who won’t raise the blocksize = high fees for said miners to collect!

          • X says:

            Not true, the Universe’s total entropy is always increasing. Any local decrease in entropy requires a bigger increase somewhere else, but the converse is not true; entropy can increase everywhere at the same time.

            Of course I know the entropy of the universe is inexorably trending to maximum. I wrote about that in the comments of Jim’s prior blog on the Optics of noticing. I suggest you review my comments there to get some more in depth explanations of my conceptualizations about the importance of entropy in our analysis. I made two new comments there today to address Jim’s narrative about the history of the middle kingdom in the 16th through 18th centuries.

            Actually you don’t know the converse is not true. You would have to explain which mechanisms nature employs to increase entropy. If you study that, you will discover that I’m correct and you’re being flippant. I suggest you for example listen to 180 IQ Freemany Dyson’s theory and account of the origins of life from the soup of disorder into humans. You can find this video on his profile at the theedge.com website. You will hear about how nature created RNA order in the small inside the cell to promote a more structured genetics that we have now that of course fostered all the incredible uncertainty (i.e. disorder aka entropy) we have now at informational scale of the Internet for example.

            The point is that low-entropy stable frameworks provide the conduit by which greater levels of chaos can form. How can we get the chaos of the doubly-hinged pendulum if we have no humans to build the invention.

            and all we get for it is orders of magnitude fewer electronic transactions than banks were clearing in the 1960s with less total computing power than a modern ten-dollar burner phone.

            You obviously didn’t read the linked post I cited, because are totally ignorant of the very important raison d’etre of Bitcoin which requires that transaction volume must not scale up! You’ve got your conceptualization totally backwards.

            When people tried using Bitcoin as money, transaction fees exploded

            You didn’t read the linked post I provided, therefore you do not understand that fees going to $5000 is absolutely necessary for Bitcoin to become the international reserve currency that kicks all the riff-raff offchain. Read the linked post. I am extremely knowledgable about Bitcoin.

            • Yara says:

              What happens if the World Bank wakes up one day and realizes it can issue a crypto-powered, Internet-enable Universal Currency Device, i.e. a “mark of the beast”?

              Let me just say, I was never into conspiratorial bullshit until it was unignorably demonstrated to me that elite cohesion is generated by ritual, mutually performed crimes of monstrosity. Now I find myself unironically on the same page as many end-of-the-wooorld evangelical christcucks. I find this an unpleasant realization.

              Please, self-professed expert, explain to me how Bitcoin, or its successor, doesn’t wind up a post-Orwellian bed-wetting night-terror.

              • jim says:

                A crypto currency needs to be centerless – it needs to able to survive the seizure of key servers by a hostile powerful party.

                Trouble with bitcoin is that it is not centerless – proof of work winds up being centralized in a small number of extremely powerful and extremely expensive computers.

                Thus we need a system with proof of stake, and not only proof of stake, but proof of client stake – the power over the system needs to reside with peers that have a lot of wealthy clients – and it needs to be hard to find who the clients are, and where they are keeping their secrets, so that even if Mueller seizes important peers on charges of tax evasion and money laundering, does not thereby gain control.

                If the system handles an enormous number of transactions, peers are going to be big and expensive, thus vulnerable to people like Mueller armed with vague and open ended charges of tax evasion and money laundering. Hence the power of peer over the currency needs to be proportional to the wealth controlled by the secrets held by that peer’s clients. And that peer’s clients need to be free to move from one peer to the next, and apt to move to peers that make it difficult for Mueller to find their clients.

                Need a system Bob can prove to the whole world that he paid Ann such and such amount, in accord with such and such a bill, but no one else can prove he paid Ann, nor that there ever was such a bill, except he shows them. With bitcoin, payments are disturbingly traceable.

                The reason we have end user demand for crypto currency is the same as the reason we have end user demand for gold.

                When quasi governmental entities started freezing the accounts of “Nazis”, “racists”, “Russian trolls”, and suchlike, a lot of “Nazis” and “Russian trolls” moved to crypto currency, shortly thereafter followed by a great many very wealthy men who were worried that when they needed their wealth in a hurry, they would suddenly become Nazis and Russian trolls also, and their wealth would suddenly become inaccessible or worthless.

                For a long time the big demand for crypto currency has been wealthy Chinese evading currency controls, but with the recent crackdown on hate speech, we are seeing massive American and European demand, which directly resulted in the recent spike in crypto currency values.

                Another substantial source of demand for crypto currency, which has been around since the beginning, is buying steroids and suchlike over the internet, but the really huge move in crypto currency demand came during the recent crackdown on political activists.

                Obviously political activists do not in themselves have enough wealth to cause such a huge move in market value, but when you go after political activists, you are going to make a whole lot of wealthy people reflect that they are none too popular either. If you are a rich man, makes sense to put a significant chunk of your wealth in crypto currency in case you suddenly become a refugee. For example, if, as is looking increasingly likely, there is a pogrom against whites in the USA, a whole lot of rich people will flee to Singapore, China, Russia, Hong Kong, the Philippines, and Dubai with nothing but the clothes they stand up in, and the master secret controlling their crypto currency in their heads.

                North Korea is poor in substantial part because it dares not allow something like the internet to exist. Any contact with the west is used by the state department as a vector for subversion and color revolution.

                Full bore totalitarianism sufficient to shut down crypto currency is not far from full bore totalitarianism sufficient to shut down the internet.

                Full bore totalitarianism sufficient to shut down the internet is going to strangle your economy. If your enemies are markedly wealthier than you are, it is likely to be a problem. North Korea wants to open up, and has repeatedly attempted to open up, but wants it to be safe for it to open up. If it does open up, expect a lot of North Koreans to buy crypto currency.

                However, turning the US into Venezuela is entirely feasible, might well happen. We have a potential Democratic Party president who proposes to do exactly that.

                Which is exactly why wealthy Americans are buying crypto currency, so that they can run to those parts of the world that do not turn into North Korea or Venezuela.

                The best example of repression which does not bother people too much or damage the economy too much is China and the great firewall of China, which is carrying out a program of cracking down on the internet as best it can without destroying its economy. And until recently, the major demand for crypto currency came from Chinese evading currency controls. So, proof by experiment. Crypto currency can resist state power – and if state power is figuring out how to handle bitcoin, we can provide a successor more capable of resisting state power.

                • Anonymous 2 says:

                  Well said, except the really rich are already internationally based and would exfiltrate via Ernst Young rather than carrying a USB stick across the border.

                  However, one would still expect government to seize assets in America, such as nationalizing tech companies, and possibly try to freeze wreckers’ assets abroad. To what extent this would work when a Venezuela America is trying to call the shots is an open question.

                • Yara says:

                  Thank you for your long and detailed reply. I remain skeptical of Bitcoin in the long term, and crypto generally, but I can appreciate its value in the short term in response to the already alarming and increasing abnormality of the American political situation.

                  You specifically mention a recent influx into Bitcoin (and others?) I know that you are rather involved in crypto and would like to petition your expertise: which source(s) are high-quality, accurate, and information-dense for me to get up to speed? Something straddling highly technical analysis and “political” (financial/current-events/etc.) would, I think, be ideal. Thanks in advance.

                  P.S. If for some reason you’re reticent to post publicly, private contact address follows.

                • jim says:

                  The best source of information on crypto is Perry’s Crypto list archives.

                • Yara says:

                  filler

                • Yara says:

                  I’ve searched various variations of those keywords with DuckDuckGo, Bing, and Google, but all I see are page after page after page of Katy Perry-related bullshit.

                • jim says:

                  Crypto Mailing List <cryptography@metzdowd.com>

                • X says:

                  Trouble with bitcoin is that it is not centerless – proof of work winds up being centralized in a small number of extremely powerful and extremely expensive computers.

                  This is not problem until the end game of the NWO. Because Satoshi employed John Nash’s Ideal Money manifesto and Nash’s new game theory that was published right before Bitcoin was released. So essentially those in control of the mining of Bitcoin can’t defect from the protocol, because if they do then the value of Bitcoin as an Ideal Money reserve asset is destroyed. In the post linked to by prior bitcointalk.org linked I had provided, I have some links to detailed analysis I have done of the game theory poison pill that Satoshi put in Bitcoin that prevents the current Core hijacking of the protocol. Actually there is going to be an event in the future where all those holding Bitcoin in Core addresses that begin with 3 will be taken by the miners as donations. Because the original Satoshi protocol is still in force and running simultaneously with the Core hijacked protocol. When the SegWit booty piles up, the miners will be incentivized to take them as donations because the poison pill makes them “pay to anyone” and the miner who wins the block has first dibs on “anyone”. So Satoshi anticipated everything. And I actually believe that who ever Satoshi was (i.e. the Zionists) actually are funding Core as a creative disruption to take Bitcoin from the n00bs. They banned me at bitcointalk.org because they do not want this information to be widely known now.

                  But in the long-run yes indeed the Zionists who control Bitcoin mining from behind the curtain will have a 666 level of control over the earth and all the money will be holed up on a hill in Israel as Revelation states. It is actually coming to fruition.

                  Btw Jim I remember you used to post on Eric S. Raymond’s blog under the name James A. Donald, so are you the actually that same James A. Donald who was the first person to respond to Satoshi on the mailing list when he announced Bitcoin to the public for the very first time:

                  https://www.mail-archive.com/cryptography@metzdowd.com/msg09959.html

                  I’m envious that you had the chance to communicate with Satoshi. I arrived on the scene a couple of years later.

                  Thus we need a system with proof of stake, and not only proof of stake, but proof of client stake – the power over the system needs to reside with peers that have a lot of wealthy clients – and it needs to be hard to find who the clients are, and where they are keeping their secrets, so that even if Mueller seizes important peers on charges of tax evasion and money laundering, does not thereby gain control.

                  Jim no one has designed a proof-of-stake system that doesn’t centralized. I covered this in my 4 part blog series on blockchains:

                  https://steemit.com/cryptocurrency/@anonymint/scaling-decentralization-security-of-distributed-ledgers

                  But as I commented in the comments of part 4, I think I have the solution of how to decentralize proof-of-stake and eliminate the nothing-at-stake problem. This is very technical and I will not try to summarize it here in your blog. Are you still interested in working on a solution?

                  I am actively coding now.

                  Note I can tell that no proof-of-stake system even as decentralized in my solution, will have the same security as Bitcoin. Because any decentralization solution will be necessarily more stochastic than Bitcoin. Again the details are far too technical to summarize here.

                  If you know of any programmers who can help me on my project, please ask them to contact me. I have funding.

                  Which is exactly why wealthy Americans are buying crypto currency, so that they can run to those parts of the world that do not turn into North Korea or Venezuela.

                  In summary, blockchains enable jurisdictional arbitrage. And this is not just about monetary, we also need to decentralized every database on the Internet (including Facebook, Wikipedia, Reddit, and your blog!).

                • jim says:

                  > Jim no one has designed a proof-of-stake system that doesn’t centralized. I covered this in my 4 part blog series on blockchains:

                  I have.

                • X says:

                  Well said, except the really rich are already internationally based and would exfiltrate via Ernst Young rather than carrying a USB stick across the border.

                  The global elite created Bitcoin. Please refer the bitcointalk.org post that I linked to up-thread that started this discussion. I explain why they created Bitcoin. Assimilate those points with the points I clarified today in Jim’s prior blog The optics of noticing about the meaning of “entropic cooperation”. Also assimilate the comments I added today in this thread about the Jewish elite. The Zionist must create the NWO and they need Bitcoin to help them accomplish it because otherwise the nation-states would resist an Ideal Money reserve currency. Note John Nash was killed in a fiery car crash that looks very suspicious. John Nash was not Satoshi, but there seems to be come connection there. Satoshi was probably an arm of the Mossad. Mossad was also involved in the 9/11 false flag. Dig into the facts. Don’t just assume I am a nutter. I have studied the evidence in great detail. Much of that detail can be located from my Steemit blogs.

                  I remain skeptical of Bitcoin in the long term, and crypto generally

                  You shouldn’t be:

                  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4920367.msg44843681#msg44843681

                  The best source of information on crypto is Perry’s Crypto list archives.

                  I would quibble with that. That archive doesn’t include my research.

                • X says:

                  was killed

                  I’m writing sloppily because rushing. I mean Nash died in a fiery crash. I can’t prove he was murdered.

                • X says:

                  I have.

                  I am able to find flaws in these proof-of-stake systems that nobody else realizes until I point out the flaw. I expect I will find a flaw in yours also. I read something recently where you were vaguely describing your design work and I thought you were far off course.

                  How deeply do you understand the nothing-at-stake issue?

  7. Edward III says:

    Morrison is Turnbull’s centrist doppleganger, so the change by itself will have no effect and may even temporarily embolden the sycophants with no ideas. But the real story is the slim majority by which he squeaked in (45-40). The centrist Liberal party is divided–its decline cannot be arrested, much less reversed, only managed. And everyone knows it. Labour smells blood in the water. The centre-right Nats are getting nervous, and with the continuous rise of the nationalist One Nation and Anning’s incendiary maiden speech that dispensed with dogwhistling and overtly called for white nationalism, don’t be surprised if the “sensible centre” “unexpectedly” evaporates and the conservatives ally with the more serious rightist elements to mount an actual challenge to civilizational collapse.

    • jim says:

      > Morrison is Turnbull’s centrist doppleganger

      Morrison accurately nailed Global Warmism as religious and superstitious.

      That is 180 proof reaction, and you would not get it from Turnbull. Turnbull was going along with their self perception that the warmists are morally superior to us, because they speak for the Earth.

      • Piers says:

        There is only one issue that matters and that is immigration. Morrison is a cuck on immigration and there is no point having the best energy grid in the world if our country is over run by foreigners.

        • jim says:

          As long as Villawood detention center still in operation, not cucking on immigration. Villawood detention center is an intolerable insult to leftists.

      • X says:

        Morrison accurately nailed Global Warmism as religious and superstitious.

        What does this tell us about the vulnerability of whites to idols?

        Sorry I am going to defect from that irrational white race at least at the decadent State level of collectivism.

  8. John Smith says:

    This is not a good thing at all – only a misunderstanding leads to the idea that it is. Scott Morrison is a clone of Turnbull and will continue all his policies no matter what he’s said. The Globalists have been pushing to control Australia for some time through Turnbull and insiders inside both the Liberal and Labor party and now they have succeeded completely. As a side note 2 of the 3 main Networks are also now under the control of Globalist corporations, and the 2 government networks have the loyalties one would expect.
    No, look at the dirty tricks played against Dutton (the real populist contender in the Liberal party, and the one whose policies represented a reversal of globalist plans) and you’ll see the true game. Turnbull (the former lawyer and Goldman Sachs Banker) had become an untenable Prime Minister so the forces that commanded him directed him to manipulate the situation to put his deputy and appropriate successor into power. Dirty tricks were being used against Dutton, similar to what are being used against Trunp – i wonder who these people could be…
    This is actually their total triumph since it shows their triumph over Australia who had seemed previously to be resistant to this kind of attack.

    • jim says:

      Possibly, possibly. Like Trump, he emits mixed signals. He will cuck on the destruction of concentrated reliable energy sources, and he will not cuck. He will cuck on legal immigration, and he will not cuck.

      But one of the signals he has inconsistently emitted is that Global Warming is a superstitious religion in a holiness spiral.

  9. Mike says:

    Australia’s real problem is that it has too many Labor voters.

    • Walt says:

      Australians have always loved big government.

      • jim says:

        Pretty sure that they don’t like the lights going out and the air conditioning stops working.

        The Global Warming scam has always been based on hatred to industrial civilization, largely because white people created Industrial Civilization, also because capitalists created it, partly because men created it. And no compromise that leaves the lights on will ever be acceptable to warmists, just as no amount of safety precautions were ever enough for nuclear power. Reflect on South Australia and rural Queensland.

        • X says:

          Pretty sure that they don’t like the lights going out and the air conditioning stops working.

          Domesticated animals gladly overeat until they slowly die of diseases related to obesity. Humans collectively as expressed by the majority also love to mortgage the future for more idols and debt today. This can only be resolved by economic collapse and chaos.

          “I’ll gladly repay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.” — Wimpy Burger

          • jim says:

            As someone who managed to control his weight, and to save and invest, surrounded by people who mostly control their weight, who save and invest, who drink responsibly, and so on and so forth, not seeing it.

            • X says:

              Where is this nirvana place you speak of? I must have never been there. Do you actually commune with your fellow humans much or just some select elite group?

  10. Calvin says:

    In a happy coincidence, McCain has also bitten the dust. Any parting words of him?

    Or just press S to spit on his grave.

    • Steve Johnson says:

      Hey, have some respect – a brave patriot died.

      RIP, John McCain’s brain tumor.

    • jim says:

      When taken prisoner in Vietnam, he committed treason under pressure. Likely I would have done the same, but would not have then announced myself to be a hero.

    • Frederick Algernon says:

      I met McCain once. I was working on [REDACTED] in DC and after his takes were done he was leaving. I saw my opening, walked up and said:

      “Hello Senator.”

      He turned and assessed me, then stuck out a hand. His arms really were quite stiff. I shook his hand and said:

      “My grandfather was also a naval aviator.”

      I shit you not, he released my hand quickly and put his hands up in a defensive posture as his SS guy stepped closer. He said:

      “Uh oh.”

      It was surreal. I’d always heard the rumors about the military’s distaste for the man, but this was both enlightening and pathetic. I smiled effusively and thanked him for his time, then beat a hasty retreat back to my post.

      Some years earlier, when I was playing at being a lefty, I remember being at a family function. Obama was on his way to the presidency and every realist had accepted it. I was in a circle of my betters, waxing eloquent about things I didn’t really understand, when one of my Uncles pointed out that McCain was a war hero and Obama was a community organizer. I quickly responded:

      “McCain has killed at least 40 service members. How many has Obama killed?”

      This was in reference to McCain bellying in on a carrier and generally fucking things up. I related as much, then turned to the patriarch of my family for reinforcement. He stared me dead in my Kool aid besotted eyes then said:

      “Have you ever flown a plane? I have, and the last thing I will do is judge a man for a situation I wasn’t in.”

      My grandfather is erudite as fuck. He always goes into detail, explains ad nauseum, and generally informs you on just how fucking ignorant you are. He delivered one sentence about not judging a man I know, beyond any doubt, that he despises, and said nothing else.

      I’m glad McCain is dead. I’m glad he was never president. But I do think we must be careful with our invective. This is all anecdotal, so take it with an appropriately sized grain of salt.

      • X says:

        Some years earlier, when I was playing at being a lefty

        That can never be play. That disease is never fully eradicated. Those who could ever in their life succumb that temptation are never to be trusted again because it is indicative of a lack of resolve w.r.t. to discernment/dedication to independent fact checking and the vulnerability to holiness spiral. I avoid such people like the plague.

      • Alrenous says:

        Some people are qualified to judge. Some are not. Flying a plane is not one of the qualifications. Unfortunately, experience as a magistrate is also not one of the qualifications…

  11. X says:

    Jim as I explained in your blog Optics of noticing you’re praying for what is negentropic.

    The reality is that Western civilization is going into it’s collapse mode into chaos and splintering into separatism movements. The leftists lose when it turns bloody and there are roaming gangs carrying AK-47s.

    Armstrong’s computer with $1 billion of historical data correlated has accurately predicted the trends (including predicting back in 2014 the rise of the 3rd party candidate taking over the Republican party). His computer explains well what is coming to Australia politically:

    https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/international-news/australia-oceania/australian-politics-6-prime-ministers-in-13-years/

    The coming Constitutional crisis in the USA will drive the dissolution of the USA as we know it. The West will descend into utter chaos.

    It’s over. Stick a fork in it. Buy Bitcoin.

    • Samuel Skinner says:

      Bitcoin becomes worthless if the power goes out and never comes back.

      • X says:

        Nonsense. Use Ctrl+F and search for every occurrence of “grid” in the following linked blog of mine:

        https://steemit.com/cryptocurrency/@anonymint/bitcoin-rises-because-land-is-becoming-worthless

        There’s nothing you can write about Bitcoin which I do not know more than you about. You would be wise to go click the bitcointalk.org link I provided and read everything “Traxo” posted there on my behalf (my words actually).

        • peppermint says:

          There will be some cryptocurrency the bankers use to settle between themselves their clients’ transactions. The clients only need access to ATMs and to carry around tokens in their wallets or their cell phones and don’t need reliable power and networking, and the bankers will have private security and arrangements with power and networking providers.

          This will be an upgrade over the old system of cheques, but the state will control the cryptocurrencies just like they always control money, and one way or another, government scrip will be legal tender.

          Bitcoin is an unlikely choice for the banks to use externally or internally, because of its age and processing requirements.

          Only Americans would ever expect Bitcoin to stop government counterfeiting, because Boomers grew up in an ecomomy so good they never had to learn anything about the way the world actually works.

          This is where Carl can post that governments should use their control over crypto to juice the economy so everyone can have a high paying job or to fight a total war against some other country for some reason.

          • Anonymous 2 says:

            We already have all that, except the current system is built on trusting the participant banks to issue money on demand, uses SWIFT as the basis for international transactions, and issues credit/debit cards as tokens (along with a dwindling amount of physical bills and coins).

            So any gains from going to crypto ledgers are incremental rather than disruptive. Perhaps the main win is that money flows can be tracked in exquisite detail by the IRS.

            • X says:

              So any gains from going to crypto ledgers are incremental rather than disruptive.

              You don’t seem to grasp jurisdictional arbitrage. For the nation-states to effectively regulate Bitcoin, they must cooperate with each other, otherwise there’s always a country Bitcoin can escape to. Thus to regulate Bitcoin, nation-states must forsake their authority and hand it over to a world authority.

              Bitcoin is a Trojan Horse. There was no way to transition from the Brenton Woods U.S. dollar reserve system to a NWO John Nash Ideal Money system willingly. The nation-states will not willingly give up their political power. You can see the tried the Euro experiment. Then they devised Bitcoin which is far more clever and insidious. Bitcoin is our friend because we need decentralization to side-step the Western civilization decadence morass, yet in the long-term Bitcoin is part of the 666.

          • Carlylean Restorationist says:

            There’s no reason why a strong leader needs to fiddle about with the money supply at all. That stuff’s pure modernism. Even MacAulay is full of nothing but praise for (I think) William III refusing to recognise face value of shaved coins, insisting on silver weight.

            Obviously in the 21st century where we need to pay internet bills and so on, there’s nothing to be gained by having a metallic standard or anything like that, but as Moldbug correctly points out, a fiat currency controlled by a STRONG SANE ruler is much harder than any gold standard.

            If people are wasting their money on nonsense, just clamp down on the nonsense. No reason to muck about with the money supply.

            • X says:

              but as Moldbug correctly points out, a fiat currency controlled by a STRONG SANE ruler is much harder than any gold standard

              John Nash’s Ideal Money is harder than fiat.

              Bitcoin is modeled to be Ideal Money.

              You may not deeply grok John Nash’s manifesto if you don’t also
              grok his intricate models of game theory. He was working on equilibrium in cooperative games just before the time of the inception of Bitcoin. He actually seemed to disappear from public life during the time in which Bitcoin would have been initially developed. And he seemed to come back to public life after Satoshi stopped communicating publicly. Also he was at Princeton while Gavin Andresen was there. I think the other key figure of Bitcoin was Hal Finney who suddenly contracted ALS. There is a nasty little secret about ALS, Lyme disease, and Plum island. Google search can locate it for you.

          • X says:

            This will be an upgrade over the old system of cheques, but the state will control the cryptocurrencies just like they always control money, and one way or another, government scrip will be legal tender.

            Bitcoin is an unlikely choice for the banks to use externally or internally, because of its age and processing requirements.

            It seems you haven’t actually read the linked blog I wrote including my debate with Martin Armstrong in the comments below the blog. Also the posts I linked at Bitcointalk.org on this page.

            If you really take the time to digest my writing, you will come to understand that Bitcoin was put here by the global elite precisely to disrupt the nation-states with jurisdictional arbitrage which subjugate them to the NWO.

            If you think about Bitcoin is such simple terms as you are in the above quote, then you’re entirely missing the point.

          • X says:

            Somehow my reply to you ended up outdented one level below.

      • R7 Rocket says:

        @Samuel Skinner

        Electricity isn’t hard to make.

        • jim says:

          Anything is hard to make when one has a bunch of stupid holier-than-thou religious fanatics standing over one.

          • X says:

            True if we’re referring to population-wide needs.

            But in the context we’re discussing of producing enough electricity for communication via ham radio within the 10 minute block period of Bitcoin, then certainly Bitcoin can never be taken down by the failure of the society-at-large. Anyone with a handcrank generator could produce enough energy. As you know, Nakamoto proof-of-work difficulty scales down as supply of mining decreases, so the electricity needed would also scale down to the level of electricity available globally. Also we make have viable (removing the nothing-at-stake problem) proof-of-stake systems soon (e.g. I am working on one).

            Bitcoin is more resilient than society and thus more reliable as a monetary mechanism than gold:

            https://steemit.com/money/@anonymint/get-ready-for-a-world-currency

            (c.f. the last section about cryptocurrency being analogous to an endospore organism that can’t be destroyed)

            Gold can be confiscated at check points and worse is that the liquidity is only with gold dealers that the government can regulate. Wrote some more about this at the following linked post:

            https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4920367.msg44422077#msg44422077

        • pyrrhus says:

          The very definition of a 3d world country is an unreliable electric system and frequent, lengthy blackouts and brownouts…So reliable electricity is clearly beyond the abilities of most of humanity.
          The apparent aim of the Warmists is to make that universal.

          • Yara says:

            Carbon electricity is clearly beyond the limits of most extant hominids. It requires complex logistical operations (including mining and refining and/or importing and transporting) and the constant loving care of adept technically inclined men.

            Solar electricity is failfree, failsafe, failproof. It “just works”. Plug it in; point it at the sky. If sol fails to rise, we’re all pretty much fucked anyway.

            Not that favela electrification is necessarily a good thing.

            • peppermint says:

              You can burn something to crank a generator and have a system any White man can repair or replace components of. That’s something White men feel safe using.

              Or you can have niggertech and beg for replacements to be bought from China with US taxpayer money, cutting out any repairability or responsibility for repairs. That’s what everyone else prefers.

              • Yara says:

                Yeah, but it isn’t just burn petrol => get power, like the point-of-use machine itself matters very much. Where the energy comes from is supremely important. The freedom of the farmer is the freedom of the solar ray. One must simply walk outside to bask in the divine light of extraterrestrial nucleation. Oil, on the other hand, must be extracted, transported, refined, transported, and delivered, an extraordinary logistical process, to say nothing of the dependence cultivated on politico-economic authority figures thereby. Petroleum-powered civilization by its very nature necessitates the subserviation of the free and independent farming yeoman to the metallic whim of divergently-interested corporate-governmental power.

                Solar capturing apparati, sufficiently refined, can power the free proliferation of more solar capturing apparati, but oil will always require more Arab Springs abroad and human-centipedian bureaucratic ass-kissing at home.

                • peppermint says:

                  Special crystals are needed to collect the quantum energy from sunlight, which I have no idea how to begin to make.

                  If I had some bronze, I could make a steam engine, with some wire, a dynamo. Biomass can be burned.

                  An internal combustion engine can be designed to run on alcohols fermented from biomass. I wouldn’t be able to build one from scratch, but I could repair it.

                • jim says:

                  Solar power is higher tech than combustion power, thus makes the farmer more dependent on far away technological suppliers

                  Solar power is unusable without being backed up by the grid, thus makes the farmer more dependent on the central political authority, which always necessarily owns and controls the grid.

                  If the farmer could himself homebrew solar panels, could himself maintain solar panels, and could himself make batteries considerably better than any batteries that now exist, then solar power would favor power to the patriarch.

                • pdimov says:

                  >Solar capturing apparati, sufficiently refined, can power the free proliferation of more solar capturing apparati

                  I’m not quite sure that solar panels aren’t a net energy loss, but I freely admit that I’m too lazy to do the research required to determine whether this is so.

                  Sure, they’ll get cheaper – measured in dollars – but will they get cheap enough when measured in energy?

                • Yara says:

                  >Solar power is higher tech than combustion power, thus makes the farmer more dependent on far away technological suppliers

                  This is true now, though I would not bet on it being true forever.

                  Besides this, there is a dramatic difference between being reliant on a distant high-tech supplier once every 10 or 20 or 30 years and being reliant on a nearer (though still distant) low-medium-tech grid every minute of every day until one’s dying breath. If the oil were to be shut off tomorrow, the oil-dependent (nearly everyone) would be rioting in the streets by the end of the week, but those with green houses powered by solar would hardly notice for many years.

                  >Solar power is unusable without being backed up by the grid, thus makes the farmer more dependent on the central political authority, which always necessarily owns and controls the grid.

                  Not really. The architectural technology now exists and is readily available for highly effective, completely unpowered thermal regulation in nearly any environment. Besides for heating, which is unnecessary in not-McMansion cookie-cutter houses built to modern standards, for what does a human even need electricity at night? Lighting? Absolutely minimal batteries; a self-contained vat of lead acid is far more than sufficient. Internet? Now we’re in serious luxury territory. Look, my grandparents had memories from before they were electrified, and that material standard of living was dramatically inferior to anything today proposed.

                  >If the farmer could himself homebrew solar panels, could himself maintain solar panels, and could himself make batteries considerably better than any batteries that now exist, then solar power would favor power to the patriarch.

                  A brief search reveals anecdotes of solar panels from 1980 still operating at substantial capacity. Look, independent energy favors the patriarch, but only inasmuch as it doesn’t convey the omnipresent electronic poz.

                • jim says:

                  > being reliant on a nearer (though still distant) low-medium-tech grid every minute of every day until one’s dying breath.

                  But solar power makes one more reliant on the grid, not less. And the grid is always necessarily owned and controlled by the state or a quasi state organization which is apt to find the management problem too large, detailed, and complex to handle well.

                  For solar power to make one less dependent on the grid, requires a battery technology that does not yet exist.

                  You tell me we can do without substantial amounts of electricity at night – and in bad weather. As someone who has spent a lot of time off the grid, I tell you, not so. If there was a satisfactory technology, I would have implemented it. Been there, done that, sucks golf balls.

                  I have lived like that, and I don’t want to live like that.

                • X says:

                  Solar power is unusable without being backed up by the grid, thus makes the farmer more dependent on the central political authority, which always necessarily owns and controls the grid.

                  Farmer can back it up (diversify) with biomass:

                  An internal combustion engine can be designed to run on alcohols fermented from biomass.

                  If the farmer could himself homebrew solar panels, could himself maintain solar panels, and could himself make batteries considerably better than any batteries that now exist, then solar power would favor power to the patriarch.

                  Why can’t a farmer employ a pump and water to elevation to store energy?

                  Surely we white man can learn how to manufacture solar panels, but that defeats the point of maximum division-of-labor. Let China make them. As long as we don’t forget how to make them, then we can ramp up if ever need be.

                  Sourcing hardware is not really a bottleneck. We have backup power with biomass and long duration MTBF for solar panels.

                  Besides this, there is a dramatic difference between being reliant on a distant high-tech supplier once every 10 or 20 or 30 years and being reliant on a nearer (though still distant) low-medium-tech grid every minute of every day until one’s dying breath.

                  Exactly the point I was making. Read yours after writing mine.

                • X says:

                  Internet? Now we’re in serious luxury territory. Look, my grandparents had memories from before they were electrified, and that material standard of living was dramatically inferior to anything today proposed.

                  Sorry that’s not competitive in the modern age. We’re not going back there unless we want to be conquered.

                  You tell me we can do without substantial amounts of electricity at night – and in bad weather. As someone who has spent a lot of time off the grid, I tell you, not so. If there was a satisfactory technology, I would have implemented it. Been there, done that, sucks golf balls.

                  I have lived like that, and I don’t want to live like that.

                  I have tried it also and it does suck.

                  I think you’re correct that we need a community with economies-of-scale. So we pool our resources and build a proper water elevation battery system.

                  But we don’t need to tie our shoelaces to the entire clusterfucked State and the wide-scale grid and energy policy. Fuck the riff-raff. Let them destroy themselves.

            • The Cominator says:

              Problem with solar is storing and transmitting power (the former being a worse problem).

              If you had much much better battery tech it would be viable.

            • X says:

              If sol fails to rise, we’re all pretty much fucked anyway.

              That actually happened for a year when a VEI6 volcano erupted.

              It would be unwise to depend only on solar. Diversify.

  12. Joe says:

    >The Trump like Australian Prime minister Tony Abbot decisively stopped illegal immigration, (Zero illegal arrivals since 2014, yes, zero. You read that correctly. Zero.) and busted near every illegal visa overstay and violation of visa conditions, as near to all of them as makes no difference

    Jim, you are either ignorantly or purposefully falling for the Australian immigration bait and switch. Refugee arrivals are 10% of all immigrants and boat arrivals are lucky to hit 1-2%.

    There is a certain tribe that forms a large proportion of recent immigrants and is frequently seen in IT. Its members are both disruptive and useless. Australia could be a technology superpower, but not for as long as this tribe exists.

    • jim says:

      Boat arrivals are not one or two percent. They are precisely zero, and before Tony Abbott, they were overwhelming, and were the fast track to turn Australia brown.

      • X says:

        Jim I can’t get past WordPress’s filters if I post from my high-quality coding desktop PC which is not running a VPN. Apparently WordPress has blacklisted me or the Philippines IP address where I am. Therefore I’m forced to post from a shitty laptop that has the SoftEther VPN installed.

    • X says:

      Joe unfortunately my reply ended up out-dented at the top level. Please find it.

    • jim says:

      You misread the tribes slightly. There are several such tribes, and they hate each other as much as they hate us, probably more, but within each tribe, their ethnic cohesion is impressive and alarming.

      I have worked in a corporation flooded with such hostile tribes, and if the shareholders, board and CEO is of a different tribe, which is to say outsiders to their tightly tribal employees, they are hosed.

      • X says:

        I have worked in a corporation flooded with such hostile tribes, and if the shareholders, board and CEO is of a different tribe, which is to say outsiders to their tightly tribal employees, they are hosed.

        Which is why we white men need to regroup at scale much smaller than the State and outgroup those who can’t be trusted.

        We have the ability to conquer any other tribe when we are lean, mean, fighting machines. And we’re allowing ourselves be divided-and-conquered because we want to carry along all the dead-weight of the entire State. Cast off that baggage and get lean, mean, and poised for victory.

        • Steve Johnson says:

          Which is why we white men need to regroup at scale much smaller than the State and outgroup those who can’t be trusted.

          Hajnal whites aren’t the best players at the game of grouping at smaller than state scale – non-hajnal whites are.

          Recommending that whites join up in clan-based structures and don’t trust outsiders – in other words, that they act like Sicilian peasants – isn’t a winning formula.

          • X says:

            Hajnal whites aren’t the best players at the game of grouping at smaller than state scale – non-hajnal whites are.

            Agreed. My recent blog made that observation:

            https://steemit.com/philosophy/@anonymint/geographical-cultural-ethos-science-is-dead

            (that is part 1, the relevant bit may there or in part 2)

            Recommending that whites join up in clan-based structures and don’t trust outsiders – in other words, that they act like Sicilian peasants – isn’t a winning formula.

            Actually I have something more decentralized in mind. I hope you noted that I wrote that strict patriarchy (i.e. clan based tribalism) is stagnation and noncompetitive. It breeds mediocrity and insufficient economies-of-scale, while also denying maximum division-of-labor.

            I agree the psyche of Hajnal males seems to be incongruent with my ideas. Must be my Cherokee genetics at-work.

  13. X says:

    That tribe having a disproportionate representation in software in the U.S.A. may partially explain the following phenomenon although it’s also driven by the ad revenue model:

    https://steemit.com/politics/@anonymint/why-social-media-software-sucks

    I was talking to an Indian national (now U.S. citizen) about working on my crypto project and he basically told me he was going to work on my project at his day job cheating his employer. This is the sort of ethics we’re legally immigrating into the U.S.A. When I told him I would compartmentalize him for the first several months to gain confidence in him and not give him access to all my secrets, he never replied again. So clearly he was going to rip me off.

  14. Joe says:

    Do you think that the current rate of legal immigration into Australia is excessive?

    I will concede that boat arrivals were a little on the high side the year Tony Abbott was elected.

    • jim says:

      Of course the current immigration rate is excessive – but that immigrants are required to jump through paperwork hoops means a somewhat higher level of competence and lower level of aggressive violence than immigrants that enter illegally.

      • X says:

        It’s still a slide into decadence especially given the leftist politics of multiculturalism instead insisting on assimilation to white culture and values.

        I read recently that Australia is proposing to require immigrants to work and reside 5 years in the countryside before they can migrate to a major city, but no one thinks they can actually enforce that.

  15. X says:

    Jim the Philippines is still tribal. The filipinos dislike (don’t trust, criticize, try to cheat) each other if they aren’t from the same family/tribe. That is the main reason why Philippines is still highly patriarchal and traditional family values. Family and tribe are #1 for them by an extreme degree compared to their feelings about the country as a whole. Believe me, many of them don’t even really like Manny Pacquaio unless he gives them something. Filipinos have the attitude of “what did my family get from his success.”

    • Yara says:

      >That is the main reason why Philippines is still highly patriarchal and traditional family values.

      That’s true. Tribalness is a biologically originating, highly resilient power structure intermediate to the individual and the state. It and nepotism are mutually self-sustaining, which both are preserved by inbreeding [non-pejorative] as opposed to outbreeding. And it’s absolutely true that tribalness has preserved the patriarchy of the Flips of the Flippines against depredation by external powers, chiefly the colonially-fabricated, historically American-supported Flippino government, and Israeli television.

      What is a patriarch?– a man who rules with the weight of hereditary authority; a man who rules other men; a man who guarantees the rights to life and property of those under his dominion, i.e. of his blood.

      So in a sense, the inbred [non-pejorative] Flippinos have many kings, a veritable mosaic of them, while we, thanks to our profound outbreeding, have, and only can have, one. Clearly, our system is far more fragile; equally clearly, when it works, its function surpasses all others.

  16. Neurotoxin says:

    “They never stop; they only pause to re-group and change strategy.”

    Hey!

  17. simplyconnected says:

    The neurotoxin has dibs on that “They never stop; they only pause to re-group and change strategy”, from his latest “Miscellany 8: Living in a Post-Miscellany Wasteland” post from a day earlier.
    Deserves h/t.

  18. FrankNorman says:

    Jim, if the Left are really what you say, they need to be exterminated. Wanting to destroy civilization like that makes them enemies of all mankind.

  19. Mister Grumpus says:

    This is how Jim makes everyone think he’s Australian, to throw the dogs off his scent like Cool Hand Luke.

    “On the internet, no one knows that you’re an IQ-180 neo-reactionary body-building Irish bricklayer with air mail subscriptions to every Australian newspaper.”

    Watch and learn!

    • eternal anglo says:

      Unless he can fake accents perfectly, Jim is Australian. He appeared a few times on Descending the Tower podcast with Social Matter. Before I listened, I was half expecting him to be using a voice modulator.

  20. Carlylean Restorationist says:

    The trouble with the current conversation is everyone’s talking about the supply side.
    Everything Jim says here is true: unreliable energy requires more infrastructure, which under globohomo means ever more auditors, regulators and administrators, all with armies of mouths to feed and empires to grow. Any time a middle management post becomes redundant and leaves someone impossible to promote away, a new middle management post has to be created, generally at higher pay, to accommodate them. Too many Indians who think they’re Chiefs but don’t want the responsibility of actually Chiefing.

    But the answer isn’t just to shrug our shoulders and watch as the energy security of future centuries gets dragged into the present in one huge Misesian misallocation across time.

    Leave the supply side alone, yes, absolutely.

    The thing to address though is the demand side. These air flights have to stop. These entertainments – big festivals and rock concerts with flood lighting and huge speakers; this culture of consumption, from endless dinners out to clothing thrown away out of boredom; from new sofas for a change to kitchens ripped out, land-filled and replaced as a sign of wealth.

    Wealth is not consumption. Wealth is accumulation of capital. Consumption is at best a side effect. A libertarian will tell you consumption is the goal of production but it needn’t be: we *could* have production, saving and capital accumulation *without* hedonistic-nihilistic boredom-stemming entertainments and whimsies.

    The energy will run out eventually – not any time soon and not next century either, but that would’ve been a no comfort message had Newton or Da Vinci said it. We need to think big: the next millennium and beyond.

    No more mindless construction for comfort and displays of waste. We’re not savages so we don’t need a potlatch to reassure ourselves that we done good.

    We’ll know we’ve achieved something for our civilisation when we leave it in a better state for our descendants than we found it.

    • Roberto says:

      >A libertarian will tell you consumption is the goal of production

      Jewish Boomers =/= libertarianism.

    • The Cominator says:

      Once again your ideology is not our ideology.

      You are essentially a Stalinist I think and I mean this sincerely. Stalinists and reactionaries overlap in hating radical Trotskyite utopian leftists.

      Doesn’t mean we see eye to eye on how society should be run.

      “The energy will run out eventually – not any time soon and not next century either, but that would’ve been a no comfort message had Newton or Da Vinci said it. We need to think big: the next millennium and beyond.”

      Prisoner’s dilemma. The best way to escape scarcity is to technology our way out of it and reach space.

      You should really read through Pournelle’s (RIP) old blog. You’ll have a better understanding of technological development.

      • Carlylean Restorationist says:

        Teching your way out of it sounds a lot like the government quite honestly: don’t worry about how we’ll pay for the pensions, we’ll sort it out long before it becomes a problem! 22 trillion? The wrong way to think about it, just keep going, everything’s great!

        In the real world, especially at the moment, but even in a sane society, tech solutions are a fair way off, whereas reducing consumption is the easiest thing in the world. It doesn’t HAVE to be the case that someone working minimum wage takes three foreign holidays a year. It’s better for the nation if they have one holiday at home.

        Are we living in the good times? No, it’s a vicious lie. People aren’t happy. Sure they’re entertained but they’re on more anti-depressants than you can poke a stick at, and not all of it’s bad actors dishing them out: there’s a lot of genuine ennui.

        If we assume that the 1950s were the peak of crass prosperity, irrespective of what we think about the sexual mores and so on, then certainly technology’s a big part of the explanation, but so’s two decades of frugality running up to it.
        War itself does no good to any economy but the habits war instils can be extremely eugenic and extremely prosocial.

        • The Cominator says:

          “Teching your way out of it sounds a lot like the government quite honestly: don’t worry about how we’ll pay for the pensions, we’ll sort it out long before it becomes a problem! 22 trillion? The wrong way to think about it, just keep going, everything’s great!”

          Well since the debt can’t be paid off… inflation IS the only way.

          “In the real world, especially at the moment, but even in a sane society, tech solutions are a fair way off, whereas reducing consumption is the easiest thing in the world.”

          Prisoner’s dilemma. China’s consumption increases for what we decrease. So no its not the easiest thing in the world. That you assume so marks you as a non reactionary.

          “Are we living in the good times? No, it’s a vicious lie. People aren’t happy.”

          Feminism the media and the education system do this. Better living does not do this.

          • Carlylean Restorationist says:

            I hear a lot of excuses for the high living of the pozzed West.

            High living is not better living. We’re dying. When the food’s not outright toxic, it’s either deadly fattening or else we’re just eating too much of it.

            This is the problem with capitalism in human affairs: restaurants have to compete on having the best tasting food, so they load it up with fat, salt and sugar.
            There’s no non-ridiculous argument to be made that home-cooked food is no better than restaurant swill.

            Capitalism’s a wonderful thing when it comes to finding efficient ways to do important things and when it comes to using price to direct the factors of production to their most urgently needed uses.

            When it comes to affairs of the soul and human life, it’s awful. There can be no non-ridiculous argument that says Justin Bieber’s better than Josef Joachim. It’s as simple as that. Sorry Jeffrey Tucker but where humans are concerned, markets can GTFO.

            • patrician says:

              >We’re dying. When the food’s not outright toxic, it’s either deadly fattening or else we’re just eating too much of it.

              Who’s “we”?

            • peppermint says:

              > restaurants have to compete on having the best tasting food

              so what’s up with chipotle

              • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                1) The same thing that’s up with the X Men movies, Madonna and Fifty Shades Of Grey.

                2) The same thing that’s up with housing being priced at 10x median gross salary.

                3) The same thing that’s up with all night raves, Grinder and pornography.

                4) The same thing that’s up with giving children candy and letting them play video games and have mobile phones.

        • jim says:

          “Reducing consumption” is code for “I know socialism makes people poor, but I declare this to be a virtue and that we actually intended this all along”.

          • Carlylean Restorationist says:

            Depends how you define ‘poor’. You have ‘reactionaries’ above you in this thread arguing that junk food’s a good thing.

            If you want to maximise GDP, here’s how you do it:

            – open the borders, bring in the cheapest possible labour on transports paid for by printed money which is immediately cancelled out afterwards

            – deregulate EVERYTHING: if people want to invent and pay for private regulators, that’s fine and allowable but they can’t have any ‘teeth’ because it’s good to have the option for people to choose dangerous cancer-giving products if they so wish, fascist

            – build a LOT of houses – this will slow down the rise in unaffordability for the legacy population, provide somewhere to live for the needed new workers for the coming boom, and provide excellent opportunities for industry

            – slash or abolish VAT and keep interest rates at rock bottom. In fact tax savings outright

            – price controls on the essentials of life, combined with massive subsidies

            I reckon this could probably target a GDP growth rate of 10% for a fair while, maybe thirty years or so.

            Before anyone jumps to conclusions, the above is pretty much the exact OPPOSITE of a reactionary programme for government.

            • The Cominator says:

              We do favor deregulating almost everything.

              Jim has said that you should imagine all regulation will be done by Jon Corzine.

              Reactionaries also generally respect Jerry Pournelle and his iron law of bureaucracy.

            • Roberto says:

              Hello.

              I am a legit totally sincere left-wing progressive, and I want to applaud you.

              The evil libertarian (genocidal) nazis on this blog clearly hate the poor downtrodden proletariat, hate POCs, and hate the LGBTQA community. Hate them so much that they wanna inflict on them junk food, degeneracy, and drugs. Also reality television.

              It just so deeply saddens me to think of all the children of color (some cruel, vicious people call them “niglets” – a bad, bad word!) who become obese as a result of the free market. You know? The longevity of whites is just too damn high, because they poisoned all the poor POCs with junk food.

              We must keep drugs off the market, because LGBTQAs are vastly disproportionately likelier to abuse them, because of the cis-het patriarchy and so on. As a staunch ally of the LGBTQA, I’ll do anything and everything to prevent the legalization of heroin.

              Gotta protect vulnerable people from the consequences of their own behavior. Just think: will there be any transsexuals-of-color if all drugs are legal? No! And that is a shame; our democracy just won’t survive without transsexuals-of-color. Now, the evil nazis here might say, “What do we need nigger trannies for?” but that’s just typical right-wing sociopathy talking.

              The bigotry must end. Domino’s Pizza (more like Domimo’s Privilege, amirite?) is vastly disproportionately harming POCs, oppressed proletarians, and the mentally disabled. Whitey just wants to make Latinos and African-Americans fat, because whitey is evil.

              CR, I salute your calling out the libertarianazis here for being oppressors. And I promise you: after I become Dear Leader, you will definitely, definitely, definitely NOT end-up in a Gulag. Trust me.

              • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                What would your post look like if you took out all the stuff you know I don’t believe and haven’t said?

                Crickets?

                That’s pretty much a sure sign that I’m right and you’re uncomfortable with the fact I’m right.

                Here’s another angle for the Jimites on economics…. Jim wrote:

                “[CR is saying] “I know socialism makes people poor, but I declare this to be a virtue and that we actually intended this all along””

                Since when was living paycheck to paycheck and blowing all your dough on rubbish with nothing to show for it a sign of wealth? Consider this account of the super-healthy GDP of recent years:

                Man knows he’ll never buy a house because house is 10 years of his gross salary, so he looks at renting, but because house prices are super-high and because rich investors have been driven to using housing as a source of income when they wouldn’t normally have done so (this being a big part of the artificial housing market), man cannot afford that either.

                So what does he do? Maybe he lives with family. Let’s not concern ourselves with that because obviously as good Misesian libertarians we think he should just work harder, maybe retrain now that the Pajits are doing all the computery stuff he foolishly trained for previously.

                OK fine. So what does he *do*? We’re Misesians so we’re concerned with the actions people take, not with macro-economics and airy ideas.

                Well, he can’t save enough to buy a house and saving won’t help him rent a house. Let’s say he has $500 left over each month, and renting will cost him $800 a month. If he saves his $500, he gets to rent for almost two months for every month he saves, so if he saves for three years, he might get to rent for five before he’s screwed again. Not a good plan.

                So what does he *do*?

                Well he’s got $500 so he spends it. He can go to town with his holidays, his dinners out, his big screen TV, maybe get a couple of subscriptions, some fun top end gadgets. Heck, maybe we see things like posh versions of stuff like beer – craft beer; maybe we see him spending a lot on hobbies that combine nostalgia and élite indie tastes: board games for example. Maybe he goes to a few conventions; maybe he gets into comic books too.

                Very good for GDP. Are we ok with it? Sure, sounds healthy to me, right?

                What about a guy who wants to buy a car. Now if that was me, I’d buy it outright, but our indie high taste ‘finer things in life’ consumerist wants to spend at least $15000 on a car, even second hand, so he takes out a loan. I’ve seen eight year car loans at very low rates of interest. Well, what’s the difference in the monthly payments between $15000 and $16000?
                So he goes a bit further up market – it’s all rational, it’s all compatible with Misesian praxeology.

                Are we glad that people are having more luxury in their lives? Isn’t this a sign that we’re living in healthy, happy times?

                You libertarians are being intellectually lazy, mistaking the symptoms of cancer for getting in shape.

                • jim says:

                  Socialism does not suppress pizza in favor of Cathedrals. It suppresses pizza in favor of housing projects.

                  The socialism that would deny me a swimming pool will make me live in project housing.

                  Socialism does not suppress cake in favor of good dentistry. Socialism means there is nothing eat but sweet bread, you have to wait in line for the bread, and dentistry is free but all the dentist will do is pull your teeth when you get a toothache.

                • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                  You’re just hung up on the word, but like I said, if I hadn’t embraced the term ‘socialism’ it would quickly have been used against me.
                  Fine, we’ll drop it then. Forget socialism. What’s needed is for the government TO suppress pizza in favour of cathedrals; TO deny you a swimming pool without social housing (although social housing is not radioactive quite honestly); and TO suppress cake in favour of good dentistry.

                • jim says:

                  What you are describing is old type 1950s socialism and leftism, no matter what name you want to call it. It is just Bernie leftism. “Hey, instead of murdering white people, let us murder capitalists (and kulaks).”

                  It is the leftism of Andrew Gillum when he campaigns in front of white people (when he campaigns in front of black people, his leftism is “kill whitey an take whitey’s stuff.”)

                • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                  No, what I’m describing is the King does what he wants, not the King does what he wants so long as natural rights are not violated.

                  The King does not want his subjects to take their disposable income abroad, or to hand it to globohomo corporations selling over-priced poison.

                • jim says:

                  King Charles the Second was a very good King, and implemented the restoration that we need today.

                  King Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum is a good King.

                  Duterte is a good ruler, and would make a good King.

                  None of them acted or act, or would wish to act, like your commie despot.

                • jim says:

                  Observed Kingly behavior is not socialist, nor is socialism a sane response to the problems you list. To the extent that Kings go socialist, they try to manage too much, they fail, and their dangerously powerful bureaucracy is apt to overthrown them.

                • peppermint says:

                  No pizza was bad enough, you didn’t need to ban birthday cake too.

                  In America, we have pizza and cake birthday parties. In Carl’s Free State, we visit the Party cathedral instead.

                  This is boring. Redistribution of social status is 63.7% worse than redistribution of goods, but redistribution of goods implies a redistribution of social status, 33.6% to the person recieving the stolen goods, 53.2% to the person stealing, the rest to the government that allows it.

                  Those are scientific figures determined by the Party.

                  During WWI the German govt banned sausage making because animal intestines were needed to build airships.

                  Banning things at random is a good way to acquire the social status of a general without actually leading men in battle. Any easy path to social status attracts faggots like rotting aids-infested buttholes.

                • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                  Duterte et al, agreed 100%.

                  “None of them acted or act, or would wish to act, like your commie despot.”

                  I believe Duterte executes drug smugglers unless I’m sorely mistaken.
                  If his nation’s life expectancy was plummeting due to an out-of-control obesity crisis and at the same time, his citizens were wasting every penny of their disposable income on the foods that cause it, and every penny of it was sent overseas to Zog, you shouldn’t assume he wouldn’t tell them to FO, because I think he would.

                  Same goes for Orban, and none of these guys are hard enough. King Charles II wouldn’t have had any qualms at all on this question, and the only reason you do is you’re a libertarian at heart and consider it a violation of rights.

                  Toxic food, foreign holidays, wasteful home ‘improvements’ and so on are every bit as cancerous to our people as butt sex and pop music, and every piece of globohomo needs to be ruthlessly suppressed, from CNN to Lady Gaga to Franky&Benny.

                  Every step forward you make with your reform of sexual mores, society takes two steps backward drinking flavoured gin and watching Big Brother.

                • peppermint says:

                  During the 20th century the American people desperately wanted some mass media that catered to their values, but the market refused to provide it.

                  Rather than asking why, you demand a return to the 20s when alcohol was banned because lips that touch liquor shall never touch mine because alcohol turns White men into violent rapists checked only by their laziness.

              • The Cominator says:

                “Since when was living paycheck to paycheck and blowing all your dough on rubbish with nothing to show for it a sign of wealth?”

                Stupid gonna stupid.

                It was hard to get by in the age of Dubya and Obama.

                In the age of His most Capitalist Majesty Donald Trump, by the Grace of God Emperor of West its easy to make money. If they aren’t sacrificing it makes it all that easier for you to get ahead.

                Don’t claim to be reactionary when you come on here bashing capitalism when things are a lot better under a real capitalist then they were under a fake Cathedral Capitalist (Dubya) followed by the fake Cathedral Socialist (Obama). Trump is proving to me that real capitalism works just fine.

                • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                  Anyone got something other than partisan sarcasm?

                  The rise to historically grotesque proportions in individual consumption spending has correlated perfectly with the decline in the ability of average people to buy the big things: houses at all or cars without going into long-term debt.

                  GDP not only fails to catch this but in fact shows it as a good thing.

                  Moldbug observed in one of his Mises/Libertarian pieces that government borrowing is also good for GDP. The same’s true for corporate and individual debt. The same’s also true of borrowing from the future to fund the present, which isn’t limited to government: I’m in the UK and here the pensions deficit for many important companies including all the supermarkets and people like the Automobile Association (breakdown services) are measured in the billions.

                • jim says:

                  The big wasteful spending I see is not individual consumption spending. People are spending money on “good schools” – meaning paying big money to live away from diversity. People are spending money on college in a wasteful signaling spiral.

                  These are positional goods, negative sum expenditures. If you spend more on them, you make the other guy worse off. You get a useless masters, the other guy has to get a useless PhD. You spend money to get away from diversity, the other guy has to spend more money to get away from diversity.

                  We need to spend a lot less on such zero sum capital expenditure, and a lot more on parties.

                  I spend more on big parties, often on or near the beach, than anyone I know and it is not a significant part of my living expenses. Everyone could throw a hundred big beach parties for what they spend on college.

                • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                  Of course abolishing the n-word tax is one of the very highest priorities.

                  I honestly wasn’t expecting this community, the community that thinks the Victorians were too progressive and modern, to take the side of splurge consumerism as strongly as it has.
                  What I at first saw as an undue attachment to libertarian ‘natural rights’ is in fact something much simpler: you guys actually ARE high living consumerists.

                  I did not expect that.

                  So what are you talking about when you talk about degeneracy in the culture as a whole? I mean does it just boil down to the queers basically? (I’m ok with that: Common Filth Radio is a sad loss and he should start it up again ASAP.)

                • jim says:

                  People who plan to make me wait in breadlines and live in project housing are not planning to themselves be waiting in breadlines and themselves live in project housing.

                • jim says:

                  > So what are you talking about when you talk about degeneracy in the culture as a whole

                  The culture is degenerate because I am not allowed to beat up white knights and shoot adulterers.

                  The culture is degenerate because there is a gay parade, which makes it impossible for males to signal cohesion,

                  The culture is degenerate because romance books are permitted, which tell a forty year old woman with two children that she is entitled to a six foot six athletic billionaire.

                  The culture is degenerate because a disgusting tranny wins the Eurovision contest.

                  The culture is degenerate because heroes are demonized, and perverts are valorized.

                  The culture is degenerate because boys are deprived of fathers.

                  The culture is degenerate because single motherhood is celebrated and subsidized, instead of being publicly whipped.

                  The culture is degenerate because manliness is condemned and punished.

                  The culture is degenerate because it builds housing projects rather than Cathedrals.

                  The culture is degenerate because modern art celebrates ugliness, incompetence, and lack of artistic technical skill.

                  The culture is degenerate because it cuts us off from our past and demonizes our ancestors.

                  The culture is degenerate because it celebrates ugliness and destroys beauty.

                  The culture is degenerate because it celebrates losers and punishes greatness.

                  The culture is degenerate because, as the Challenger inquiry revealed, stupid people run NASA.

                  Our culture is degenerate because it has arrest quotas setting maxima on the number of minorities that can be arrested, and minima on the number of whites that must be arrested.

                  The culture is degenerate because nine year old girls without adult male supervision go to rock concert to see a whore perform obscene dances on stage where she simulates riding the cock carousel.

                  The culture is degenerate because Lord Cardigan is demonized and denigrated.

                  Our culture is degenerate because it lends cat-eating no-hablo-english illegal immigrants with no job, no income, and no assets, a million dollars to buy a house.

                  The culture is degenerate because the Africa Association tells us that ebonics is a perfectly valid form of speech that is as capable of communicating ideas as regular English.

                  The fact that you have to ask the question shows you are a degenerate, an academic leftist.

                • pdimov says:

                  >you guys actually ARE high living consumerists.

                  To not be a consumerist you need to be able to make the choice of foregoing consumption.

                  If you don’t consume because there’s nothing to consume, you’re still a consumerist, just a very unhappy one.

                  Or stated differently, we don’t want you to limit our consumption not because we consider consumption our highest value, but because we don’t like you.

                  This is like “you don’t trust science!” “no, we just don’t trust you” which is similarly invisible to liberal “scientists”.

                • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                  So degeneracy is entirely a phenomenon of socio-sexual interactions and has no ‘market’ manifestations.
                  Interesting.

                  I agree with your entire shopping list by the way, except for social housing but it’s not important enough to quibble about: it amounts to “whatever they do is fine so long as the name badge ends in inc or plc rather than begins in department of”, which is basically the same argument used by British prime ministers since John Major to justify giving tax-funded grants to private service providers and calling it privatisation. The name badges, the name badges!

                  Maybe things are different in the states, although from your pool party comment I get the sense that maybe they’re not.
                  Either way, when I’m sat in a ‘restaurant’ where everyone’s eating hot dogs, beef burgers and pizza, and some 50-something party bursts into the birthday song, my sense of dread and discomfort on behalf of my ancestors is every bit as strong as when I see two queers cargo cult romantic love.

                  For the time being, each to their own, but don’t be surprised if, when you get what you want, the King doesn’t put up with your degenerate consumerism any more than he puts up with girls acting like brats.

                • Roberto says:

                  You know CR, there are still a few monarchies around, such as Jordan and Morocco, and I don’t see their Kings banning Domino’s, even while queer stuff isn’t tolerated at all.

                  And no, the State Department doesn’t shill for Domino’s; on the contrary, it shills for queers. And yet…

                  How do you explain that? Random choice?

                • javier says:

                  CR is worse than a vegan. He derails every thread into the same tired schtick: he’s better than all of us because he thinks we need communism to ban gluten. It’s tiresome.

                  We don’t have a “consumerism problem,” we have a “woman spending problem.”. Men spend their own money, women spend someone else’s. Since the bill never comes to them, they are frivolous and wasteful.

                  A man should spend his money however he pleases. A woman should ask a man’s permission before spending (they always spend men’s money, one way or another). Men must be taught to be firm and tell women no. Our society actually teaches that if a woman wants your money, you are wrong to deny her, no matter the reason. Women always know best. Hence, sky high debt and no savings.

                  Japan allowed their women to control their finances, and they ended up spending it on “investments” that were scams. Whoops. Women say, we can get the big house. My husband will work a third job.

                  The bible teaches women are more prone to sin. This is obvious to anyone who pays attention. The solution is to remove female autonomy. The “overspending” problem will resolve itself.

                • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                  Javier:

                  “A man should spend his money however he pleases. A woman should ask a man’s permission before spending (they always spend men’s money, one way or another). Men must be taught to be firm and tell women no. Our society actually teaches that if a woman wants your money, you are wrong to deny her, no matter the reason. Women always know best. Hence, sky high debt and no savings.”

                  ALLELUJAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

                  ALLELUJAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

                  And do you think the reversion to sanity is going to happen spontaneously by the King suggesting it to people?
                  Or do you think some ‘scaffolding’ is advisable here?

                  Would you consider some ‘scaffolding’ to be harmful?

                  If it might be helpful then why would you try to prevent the King from doing it? Because you’re a libertarian.

                  You should seek maximal help from a restoration in bringing about: a restoration!

      • Steve Johnson says:

        CR:

        “The energy will run out eventually – not any time soon and not next century either, but that would’ve been a no comfort message had Newton or Da Vinci said it. We need to think big: the next millennium and beyond.”

        The Cominator:

        Prisoner’s dilemma. The best way to escape scarcity is to technology our way out of it and reach space.

        Nah, the solution here is actually markets – abundant energy is cheap, scarce energy is expensive and both incentivizes lower energy usage and greater energy production. CR might understand this but academia installed a crimestop module to prevent thinking about this so they can make ridiculous arguments about mandating “renewables” in terms that are palatable to normal people rather than straightforwardly arguing in favor of poverty. CR – being a leftist – is still stuck with that mental block so he argues that something that the market can solve must be solved by his preferred form of governance – communism.

        • Carlylean Restorationist says:

          Abundant for how long? 200 years?
          That’s nowhere near long enough.

          We need to keep the lights on and produce the essentials of life and civilisation.

          What we do NOT need is three foreign holidays a year and air travel whenever we want it.
          The first generation to lack lighting during the winter will not thank you for standing up for the right of bougie SWPLs to go to Croatia and drink Starbucks.

          • Simon says:

            Haha, again, who is “we”?

          • jim says:

            If technology stagnates, we are going to be short of everything. If technology continues to progress, we never run out.

            Nuclear power is good for forty thousand years or so, longer if we go to fusio

            • Carlylean Restorationist says:

              “Nuclear power is good for forty thousand years or so”

              Let’s say that’s true. We solve the current globohomo problem and get competent people in sufficient numbers for every town to have a nuclear power plant.

              It still doesn’t have to involve consumption at current levels. We don’t HAVE to commit 15%+ of our productive capacity to energy generation.

              There’s no reason why this competent, non-debauched society has to continue going on three foreign holidays a year and dining out three times a week. There’s no reason why competent, non-debauched people would want to tear out their kitchen in order to put a new one in because they like the colour better, and there’s no reason for competent, non-debauched people to spend $50+ getting their nails done.

              We could, as a competent, non-debauched society, re-adopt the values of our grandparents: hand-me-down clothing, turns in the tub, dripping sandwiches and the permanent ‘hoarding’ of family heirlooms from fine silverware to the best hand-made master furniture.

              The only thing that leads people in our circles to insist on people’s right to their hamburger feast at their 57th birthday celebration is muh non-aggression principle: it would be a violation of the rights of the consumer and the corporate burger joint to just say “enough”.

              Yes it would, and I for one would be 100% ok with that.

              • The Cominator says:

                Yes you still want to control the economy with some social reaction thrown in because you are essentially a Stalinist admit it.

                I’ve lived in squalor for a while now suppressing my own consumption far below my means… but with the idea to be rich in the future. I would not happily live in squalor with the idea that I can never be rich in the future. One of the big things I want is my private swimming pool. That day is very soon now…

                • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                  The Cominator writes:

                  “I’ve lived in squalor for a while now suppressing my own consumption far below my means”

                  Do you see how profoundly you’ve absorbed consumerist values?
                  So squalor is eating fresh whole foods and looking after your clothing and possessions, while cleanliness is eating food that will distort the shape of your body and cause your arteries to clog up.

                  Note also that “far below my means” in this context means that the proper use of money is to spend all of it immediately, whereas what you’re doing by abstaining from the splurge is unnatural and abnormal.

                  “One of the big things I want is my private swimming pool.”

                  You’re one of the intelligent, right-leaning ones who cares about the future of your civilisation and understands that things are very wrong in the highest echelons of society.

                  And you STILL say that lol

                  …….thereby proving my point………..

                  “you still want to control the economy with some social reaction thrown in because you are essentially a Stalinist admit it.”

                  That’s not my understanding of Stalinism.

                  I’m sympathetic to the Jimian take, namely that Stalin was a necessary brake on the holiness spiral which otherwise would have genocided the entire USSR, but we shouldn’t over-egg it.
                  Stalin was a Marxian egalitarian who believed that nationalising the means of production and placing the economy in the hands of the proletariat would bring about an orderly and prosperous society.

                  Yes I do want someone with some class and foresight to control the economy, because even people like you – heck, I’m no holier than thou – people like US are not capable of doing it.

                • peppermint says:

                  Does it burn you that private swimming pools exist because you don’t have access to one without paying for a good gym membership?

                  If you want a public swimming pool, you need to solve the problem of its employees needing to be able to kick you out for being a faggot and putting your gay viruses in the water.

                  Not sure why you hate the idea that I eat pizza all the time, look great, and can kick your ass in a heartbeat, though. I mean I know why you hate the latter parts but why the focus on pizza?

              • jim says:

                Socialism will suppress frivolities not because it will do more on important things, but because socialism is so unproductive, so destructive, so disruptive, that it has to suppress frivolities to get anything done on important things. The pilgrims starved. Russia is ugly. Russian communism did not build Cathedrals, and it did not provide adequate dentistry. People had ugly towns and ugly teeth.

                • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                  Socialism probably does carry too much baggage. The reason I used it strategically was I knew if I didn’t, someone would cleverly accuse me of it, so I got in first. I now see that this is no defence against misrepresentation.

                  For the trillionth time, I’ve been consistent and clear that this is socialism, or ‘socialism’ if you prefer, of what’s permitted to go on sale, and am open not only to large scale prohibitions but also to the state taking direct control of the retail of finished goods and consumer services.

                  For the trillionth time, I’ve been consistent and clear that the MEANS OF PRODUCTION, or in Misesian terms the higher order factors of production, are the one area of the economy that MUST be free to fix prices in order to correctly direct resources to their most appropriate uses.

                  If you want to avoid the word ‘socialism’ because you’re not able to separate it from the idea of nationalising the higher order factors of production, then just call it ‘very extreme regulation’. If you do, someone will call you a socialist, and it’s quite possible that the libertarian impulse runs so deep here that conversation is literally impossible.

                  I’ll say it one more time for good measure: people are dying from their toxic environment and the wealth of the west is being literally turned into faeces and jet exhaust fumes, with nothing at all to show. Worse even than that, any investment that does accrue accrues to other nations, whether it’s through insourcing/outsourcing or through holiday spending.

                  We’re busily setting about the total dismantling of our society and its transformation into third world subsistence living.

                  What you guys are ultimately saying is there’s nothing we can do about any of that because the King may not violate the natural rights of the free citizens and if he does, he’s a socialist.

                • Doug Smythe says:

                  Need to distinguish between Socialism (an abomination on its face) sumptuary law (a time-honoured means of reinforcing social hierarchies and encouraging the lower classes to save money).

                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sumptuary_law#Medieval_and_Renaissance_Europe

                • jim says:

                  Agreed: We need to shut down wasteful zero sum signaling spirals, and make male status visible to women.

                  The business suit needs to be more colorful, and should feature open carry.

                • peppermint says:

                  no need to restrict people’s clothes when everyone knows where everyone else works and what their titles and salaries are

                • The Cominator says:

                  Sumptuary laws should restrict expensive clothing and particulary jewelry (one very very good incentive to women, no unmarried woman widows excepted should be permitted to wear any jewelry in public).

                • peppermint says:

                  > hey guys lets make law abiding men and women look stupid on purpose since we can solve the problems of crime and contempt for the government

              • Javier says:

                Everyone of those things you mentioned is not a capitalism problem, they are woman problems. Kitchen remodels, expensive nail treatments, dinng out too much: misbehaving women. Like a typical leftist, the only solution you can imagine to solve this simple problem is to give the government control over everything and ban kitchen remodels (???).

                The reactionary solution is to restore the power of the husband over the household, and for the king to support the man when he disciplines a misbehaving wife, as opposed to supporting the wife’s usurpation of her husband.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Kitchen remodels, thats what my mother blew most of her post divorce money on when I told her not to.

                  Should not be banned but that is the ultimate in stupid women expenditures.

                  CR writes

                  “For the trillionth time, I’ve been consistent and clear that this is socialism, or ‘socialism’ if you prefer, of what’s permitted to go on sale, and am open not only to large scale prohibitions but also to the state taking direct control of the retail of finished goods and consumer services.”

                  Neither of which work. You are ignorant of economics both in theory and practice and consistently fail to take into account Pournelle’s Iron Law of Bureaucracy. We do not want to have a long “conversation” about overly planned and regulated Stalinist style economies because we reject socialist economics.

                • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                  Cominator:

                  “Kitchen remodels, thats what my mother blew most of her post divorce money on when I told her not to.

                  ***Should not be banned*** but that is the ultimate in stupid women expenditures.”

                  Why not?

                  Seriously, why not? You’ve settled along with Javier, on the truth of the situation: this degenerate wastefulness is a manifestation of societal sickness, driven in large part (though I wouldn’t grant that it’s driven entirely) by women’s bad behaviour.

                  So what’s stopping you from wanting the state to help restore sanity? If you want to say “natural rights” then do so: don’t try and dissemble.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Women should not have freedom because they don’t exercise it well and subconsciously 99% of them don’t really want it (they DO want to be able to get away with stuff occasionally though).

                  But a male freeholder should be able to remodel his kitchen even at wasteful expense because he should be CLOSE to a king under his own roof (though I do think there should be limits to how much he can abuse his wife and children, what there should not be is professional abuse hunters) and for other reasons Jim summed up well in Throne Altar and Freehold.

                • Yara says:

                  >***Should not be banned*** but that is the ultimate in stupid women expenditures.”
                  >Why not?

                  Because “heiress” should be a word gratingly foreign to every ear.

          • Steve Johnson says:

            Abundant for how long? 200 years?
            That’s nowhere near long enough.

            Demonstrating that mental block I see. “Abundant energy is cheap, scarce energy is expensive” says exactly zero about how abundant energy actually is – it just states that prices give signals about energy use and they motivate more energy production when prices go up.

            Sure, in your state of perfect communism you may not get market driven innovation in energy production like fracking but I’m sure the energy savings from lack of pizza delivery drivers will more than compensate. Prices? Who needs them!

            We need to keep the lights on and produce the essentials of life and civilisation.

            What we do NOT need is three foreign holidays a year and air travel whenever we want it.

            Pure envy driven communism. Pathetic.

          • Steve Johnson says:

            Abundant for how long? 200 years?
            That’s nowhere near long enough.

            Demonstrating that mental block I see. “Abundant energy is cheap, scarce energy is expensive” says exactly zero about how abundant energy actually is – it just states that prices give signals about energy use and they motivate more energy production when prices go up.

            Sure, in your state of perfect communism you may not get market driven innovation in energy production like fracking but I’m sure the energy savings from lack of pizza delivery drivers will more than compensate. Prices? Who needs them!

            We need to keep the lights on and produce the essentials of life and civilisation.

            What we do NOT need is three foreign holidays a year and air travel whenever we want it.

            Pure envy driven communism. Pathetic.

            • Yara says:

              The worst part is that C.R. isn’t even a real communist.

              See, real communism has never been tried. Russia never had it, nor did China, nor Cuba, nor Cambodia, nor any of the other places. They each called themselves communism, but they were fake through and through. Real communism is about scientifically deriving a system of government (and of society) optimal for the well-being of the Workers (with a capital W). Everyone wants the same things: wealth, good education, inexpensive healthcare, high culture, and so on, and that’s what Real Communism is about. The only “communisms” we’ve ever had were dictatorial totalitarian bureaucies, unfortunately the exact opposite of “power to the people”, i.e. Real Communism.

              Sadly, C.R. is a Fake Communist. He doesn’t want to extend a hand to raise the workers up from the dirt, he wants to smash them back into the mud and stamp his boot on their collective face.

              • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                Au contraire, Carlyle was very clear: workers are not well served by being traded on the open market as commodities.
                What they need is job security. That used to be the norm when we had heavy industry, and if tariffs can bring that back, it may be sufficient, but if it turns out not to be sufficient then we have three basic options:

                1. Cut them loose and step over the bodies in the street, which no Westerner has ever put up with for long, whatever you and I might think about it

                2. Redistributive socialism so that productive deals between employers and employees entail a portion of compensation used as a subsidy to counter-act the unemployment of labour (our version would not much resemble globohomo welfare schemes but it’d still be welfare)

                3. Indentured servitude of one sort or another

                I’m for 3. I assume most here would say they’re for 1 but in practice would be for 2, like Ron Paul.

      • jim says:

        A Stalinist is a progressive who is sufficiently pragmatic and sufficiently in contact with reality that his goals are not impossibly utopian, and therefore his murders will be reasonably limited in scale. Therefore suspicious of those whose holiness is demonstrated by the ever more fantastic utopianism of their goals.

        But he is still extremely holy, holier than thou, requiring some moderate level of murders. Just that he wants the holiness to stop somewhere short of total insanity.

    • Steve Johnson says:

      Shut the fuck up communist.

    • jim says:

      The solution is not to impose austerity on people – for those who get to impose austerity on others will not impose it on themselves. The solution is to reach for space.

  21. Om79anZac0tevu4 says:

    Jim’s Blog: Bastion of Pedophilia Normalization

    Jim (in his own words): “Women are quite agreeable to being made to have sex. They prefer it that way. Resistance is a shit test, and they are turned on by being overpowered. So we need to make it the law that the man that they should have sex with, their husband, the father of their children, gets to overpower them.”

    Standard (((PUA))) nonsense, here justifying marital rape. Nothing warps one’s mind worse than Jew-invented, anti-woman, anti-White, “Pick-Up Artistry.” It’s one of the least healthy scams the Jews have ever concocted, and the Jews sure do know something about unhealthy scams.

    Jim (in his own words) “If a girl has boobs, chances are she can get pregnant. If a girl has menarche, can probably get pregnant. If she can get pregnant, sexually mature.

    Reality also is that they are often disturbingly keen on sex even at age ten, even before sexual maturity. Girls that are keen on sex before menarche and boob development are a minority, but they are a very large minority. Girls that are sexually mature at twelve, have menarche at twelve and have boobs that dramatically advertise this fact, are also a large minority, possibly a majority.

    And should be married off to young men who are starting their careers, because otherwise there is a very high likelyhood that they are going to seduce the first male they encounter who plausibly seems high alpha – who is likely an affluent mature adult male with an adult girlfriend, a mistress, and a wife.”

    In other words, claims (((pedo Jim))), if he finds an underage child sexually attractive, he should have the right to violate her. Otherwise, warns he, she herself will go around seducing married men. That’s actually the argument.

    And so forth….read more below if you have the stomach for it….

    http://www.renegadetribune.com/jims-blog-bastion-pedophilia-normalization/

    • The Cominator says:

      You are a leftist if you believe in “marital rape”.

      “Marital rape” is a feminist legal innovation invented in the 1970s to destroy marriage.

      • Om79anZac0tevu4 says:

        Society, it turns out, will utterly collapse if Jim doesn’t get to rape little ten year old girls. That’s how pedophiles think, folks. That’s what goes on in their inhuman, psychopathic minds. In case you were thinking that pedophiles were “just like you and me”. They aren’t; they simply aren’t human. Look at this horror. It’s not human.

        • Yara says:

          Welcome, Nazi. We are well-immunized to your farcical beta cuckery w/r/t to the Woman Question; we may colonize your brain with our mind worms or not, but yours will not find purchase here.

          The Party line is this: late virgin marriage and the present age of consent laws, 15-18 varying on the state in particular, is perfectly fine… for men. Unfortunately, women, being substantially less evolved than men, find it quite disagreeable. Therefore, they must be switched into line until married, at which point, to maximize their Benthamian utility, they bear a moral imperative to bear early and often to ensure the surthrival of the race.

          For a more erudite perspective on what was once and will be again, please refer to this following passage from the greatest science fiction writer:

          I found myself mulling over a discussion in our class in History and Moral Philosophy. Mr. Dubois was talking about the disorders that preceded the breakup of the North American republic, back in the XXth century.

          According to him, there was a time just before they went down the drain when such crimes as Dillinger’s were as common as dogfights. The Terror had not been just in North America — Russia and the British Isles had it, too, as well as other places. But it reached its peak in North America shortly before things went to pieces.

          “Law-abiding people,” Dubois had told us, “hardly dared go into a public park at night. To do so was to risk attack by wolf packs of children, armed with chains, knives, homemade guns, bludgeons… to be hurt at least, robbed most certainly, injured for life probably — or even killed.

          This went on for years, right up to the war between the Russo-Anglo-American Alliance and the Chinese Hegemony. Murder, drug addiction, larceny, assault, and vandalism were commonplace. Nor were parks the only places — these things happened also on the streets in daylight, on school grounds, even inside school buildings. But parks were so notoriously unsafe that honest people stayed clear of them after dark.”

          I had tried to imagine such things happening in our schools. I simply couldn’t. Nor in our parks. A park was a place for fun, not for getting hurt. As for getting killed in one — “Mr. Dubois, didn’t they have police? Or courts?”

          “They had many more police than we have. And more courts. All overworked.”

          “I guess I don’t get it.” If a boy in our city had done anything half that bad… well, he and his father would have been flogged side by side.

          But such things just didn’t happen.

          Mr. Dubois then demanded of me, “Define a ‘juvenile delinquent.’ ”

          “Uh, one of those kids — the ones who used to beat up people.”

          “Wrong.”

          “Huh? But the book said — ”

          “My apologies. Your textbook does so state. But calling a tail a leg does not make the name fit ‘Juvenile delinquent’ is a contradiction in terms, one which gives a clue to their problem and their failure to solve it. Have you ever raised a puppy?”

          “Yes, sir.”

          “Did you housebreak him?”

          “Err… yes, sir. Eventually.” It was my slowness in this that caused my mother to rule that dogs must stay out of the house.

          “Ah, yes. When your puppy made mistakes, were you angry?”

          “What? Why, he didn’t know any better; he was just a puppy.

          “What did you do?”

          “Why, I scolded him and rubbed his nose in it and paddled him.”

          “Surely he could not understand your words?”

          “No, but he could tell I was sore at him!”

          “But you just said that you were not angry.”

          Mr. Dubois had an infuriating way of getting a person mixed up. “No, but I had to make him think I was. He had to learn, didn’t he?”

          “Conceded. But, having made it clear to him that you disapproved, how could you be so cruel as to spank him as well? You said the poor beastie didn’t know that he was doing wrong. Yet you indicted pain. Justify yourself! Or are you a sadist?”

          I didn’t then know what a sadist was — but I knew pups. “Mr. Dubois, you have to! You scold him so that he knows he’s in trouble, you rub his nose in it so that he will know what trouble you mean, you paddle him so that he darn well won’t do it again — and you have to do it right away! It doesn’t do a bit of good to punish him later; you’ll just confuse him. Even so, he won’t learn from one lesson, so you watch and catch him again and paddle him still harder. Pretty soon he learns. But it’s a waste of breath just to scold him.” Then I added, “I guess you’ve never raised pups.”

          “Many. I’m raising a dachshund now — by your methods. Let’s get back to those juvenile criminals. The most vicious averaged somewhat younger than you here in this class… and they often started their lawless careers much younger. Let us never forget that puppy. These children were often caught; police arrested batches each day. Were they scolded? Yes, often scathingly. Were their noses rubbed in it? Rarely. News organs and officials usually kept their names secret — in many places the law so required for criminals under eighteen. Were they spanked? Indeed not! Many had never been spanked even as small children; there was a widespread belief that spanking, or any punishment involving pain, did a child permanent psychic damage.”

          (I had reflected that my father must never have heard of that theory.)

          “Corporal punishment in schools was forbidden by law,” he had gone on.

          “Flogging was lawful as sentence of court only in one small province, Delaware, and there only for a few crimes and was rarely invoked; it was regarded as ‘cruel and unusual punishment.’ ” Dubois had mused aloud, “I do not understand objections to ‘cruel and unusual’ punishment. While a judge should be benevolent in purpose, his awards should cause the criminal to suffer, else there is no punishment — and pain is the basic mechanism built into us by millions of years of evolution which safeguards us by warning when something threatens our survival. Why should society refuse to use such a highly perfected survival mechanism? However, that period was loaded with pre-scientific pseudo-psychological nonsense.

          “As for ‘unusual,’ punishment must be unusual or it serves no purpose.” He then pointed his stump at another boy. “What would happen if a puppy were spanked every hour?”

          “Uh… probably drive him crazy!”

          “Probably. It certainly will not teach him anything. How long has it been since the principal of this school last had to switch a pupil?”

          “Uh, I’m not sure. About two years. The kid that swiped — ”

          “Never mind. Long enough. It means that such punishment is so unusual as to be significant, to deter, to instruct. Back to these young criminals — They probably were not spanked as babies; they certainly were not flogged for their crimes. The usual sequence was: for a first offense, a warning — a scolding, often without trial. After several offenses a sentence of confinement but with sentence suspended and the youngster placed on probation. A boy might be arrested many times and convicted several times before he was punished — and then it would be merely confinement, with others like him from whom he learned still more criminal habits. If he kept out of major trouble while confined, he could usually evade most of even that mild punishment, be given probation — ‘paroled’ in the jargon of the times.

          “This incredible sequence could go on for years while his crimes increased in frequency and viciousness, with no punishment whatever save rare dull-but-comfortable confinements. Then suddenly, usually by law on his eighteenth birthday, this so-called ‘juvenile delinquent’ becomes an adult criminal — and sometimes wound up in only weeks or months in a death cell awaiting execution for murder. You — ”

          He had singled me out again. “Suppose you merely scolded your puppy, never punished him, let him go on making messes in the house… and occasionally locked him up in an outbuilding but soon let him back into the house with a warning not to do it again. Then one day you notice that he is now a grown dog and still not housebroken — whereupon you whip out a gun and shoot him dead. Comment, please?”

          “Why… that’s the craziest way to raise a dog I ever heard of!”

          “I agree. Or a child. Whose fault would it be?”

          “Uh… why, mine, I guess.”

          “Again I agree. But I’m not guessing.”

          “Mr. Dubois,” a girl blurted out, “but why? Why didn’t they spank little kids when they needed it and use a good dose of the strap on any older ones who deserved it — the sort of lesson they wouldn’t forget! I mean ones who did things really bad. Why not?”

          “I don’t know,” he had answered grimly, “except that the time-tested method of instilling social virtue and respect for law in the minds of the young did not appeal to a pre-scientific pseudo-professional class who called themselves ‘social workers’ or sometimes ‘child psychologists.’ It was too simple for them, apparently, since anybody could do it, using only the patience and firmness needed in training a puppy. I have sometimes wondered if they cherished a vested interest in disorder — but that is unlikely; adults almost always act from conscious ‘highest motives’ no matter what their behavior.”

          “But — good heavens!” the girl answered. “I didn’t like being spanked any more than any kid does, but when I needed it, my mama delivered. The only time I ever got a switching in school I got another one when I got home and that was years and years ago. I don’t ever expect to be hauled up in front of a judge and sentenced to a flogging; you behave yourself and such things don’t happen. I don’t see anything wrong with our system; it’s a lot better than not being able to walk outdoors for fear of your life — why, that’s horrible!”

          “I agree. Young lady, the tragic wrongness of what those well-meaning people did, contrasted with what they thought they were doing, goes very deep. They had no scientific theory of morals. They did have a theory of morals and they tried to live by it (I should not have sneered at their motives) but their theory was wrong — half of it fuzzy-headed wishful thinking, half of it rationalized charlatanry. The more earnest they were, the farther it led them astray. You see, they assumed that Man has a moral instinct.”

          “Sir? But I thought — But he does! I have.”

          “No, my dear, you have a cultivated conscience, a most carefully trained one. Man has no moral instinct. He is not born with moral sense. You were not born with it, I was not — and a puppy has none. We acquire moral sense, when we do, through training, experience, and hard sweat of the mind.

          These unfortunate juvenile criminals were born with none, even as you and I, and they had no chance to acquire any; their experiences did not permit it. What is ‘moral sense’? It is an elaboration of the instinct to survive. The instinct to survive is human nature itself, and every aspect of our personalities derives from it. Anything that conflicts with the survival instinct acts sooner or later to eliminate the individual and thereby fails to show up in future generations. This truth is mathematically demonstrable, everywhere verifiable; it is the single eternal imperative controlling everything we do.”

          “But the instinct to survive,” he had gone on, “can be cultivated into motivations more subtle and much more complex than the blind, brute urge of the individual to stay alive. Young lady, what you miscalled your ‘moral instinct’ was the instilling in you by your elders of the truth that survival can have stronger imperatives than that of your own personal survival. Survival of your family, for example. Of your children, when you have them. Of your nation, if you struggle that high up the scale. And so on up. A scientifically verifiable theory of morals must be rooted in the individual’s instinct to survive — and nowhere else! — and must correctly describe the hierarchy of survival, note the motivations at each level, and resolve all conflicts.”

          “We have such a theory now; we can solve any moral problem, on any level. Self-interest, love of family, duty to country, responsibility toward the human race — we are even developing an exact ethic for extra-human relations. But all moral problems can be illustrated by one misquotation: ‘Greater love hath no man than a mother cat dying to defend her kittens.’ Once you understand the problem facing that cat and how she solved it, you will then be ready to examine yourself and learn how high up the moral ladder you are capable of climbing.

          “These juvenile criminals hit a low level. Born with only the instinct for survival, the highest morality they achieved was a shaky loyalty to a peer group, a street gang. But the do-gooders attempted to ‘appeal to their better natures,’ to ‘reach them,’ to ‘spark their moral sense.’ Tosh! They had no ‘better natures’; experience taught them that what they were doing was the way to survive. The puppy never got his spanking; therefore what he did with pleasure and success must be ‘moral.’

          “The basis of all morality is duty, a concept with the same relation to group that self-interest has to individual. Nobody preached duty to these kids in a way they could understand — that is, with a spanking. But the society they were in told them endlessly about their ‘rights.’ ”

          “The results should have been predictable, since a human being has no natural rights of any nature.”

          Mr. Dubois had paused. Somebody took the bait. “Sir? How about ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’?”

          “Ah, yes, the ‘unalienable rights.’ Each year someone quotes that magnificent poetry. Life? What ‘right’ to life has a man who is drowning in the Pacific? The ocean will not hearken to his cries. What ‘right’ to life has a man who must die if he is to save his children? If he chooses to save his own life, does he do so as a matter of ‘right’? If two men are starving and cannibalism is the only alternative to death, which man’s right is ‘unalienable’? And is it ‘right’? As to liberty, the heroes who signed that great document pledged themselves to buy liberty with their lives. Liberty is never unalienable; it must be redeemed regularly with the blood of patriots or it always vanishes. Of all the so-called ‘natural human rights’ that have ever been invented, liberty is least likely to be cheap and is never free of cost.

          “The third ‘right’? — the ‘pursuit of happiness’? It is indeed unalienable but it is not a right; it is simply a universal condition which tyrants cannot take away nor patriots restore. Cast me into a dungeon, burn me at the stake, crown me king of kings, I can ‘pursue happiness’ as long as my brain lives — but neither gods nor saints, wise men nor subtle drugs, can insure that I will catch it.”

          Mr. Dubois then turned to me. “I told you that ‘juvenile delinquent’ is a contradiction in terms. ‘Delinquent’ means ‘failing in duty.’ But duty is an adult virtue — indeed a juvenile becomes an adult when, and only when, he acquires a knowledge of duty and embraces it as dearer than the self-love he was born with. There never was, there cannot be a ‘juvenile delinquent.’ But for every juvenile criminal there are always one or more adult delinquents — people of mature years who either do not know their duty, or who, knowing it, fail.”

          “And that was the soft spot which destroyed what was in many ways an admirable culture. The junior hoodlums who roamed their streets were symptoms of a greater sickness; their citizens (all of them counted as such) glorified their mythology of ‘rights’… and lost track of their duties. No nation, so constituted, can endure.”

          • peppermint says:

            typical mid 20c cuckservativism.

            There’s no such thing as society, everyone can be an American, Christianity just means being nice to everyone, man has no moral instinct.

            This passes for conservatism because the leftism is full communism.

            Today’s leftism isn’t as idealistic, even as 20c cuckservativism.

            • Yara says:

              Late virgin marriage is an integral part of the inner-Hajnal line mating pattern, an extraordinary selector of K-compatible strategists, and essential to the continued genetic supremacy of Western European man. As white men settled the New World, the sheer abundance of the vast open continent partially devolved them. They married earlier and had far more children, the most well-adapted children being those who matured earliest. This fast-living genetic scar persists to this day in certain types of full-blooded men and women of European descent, as well attested to by Jayman and his American Nations.

              • peppermint says:

                that’s an interesting point. I was commenting on the Heinlein though, if you posted that to troll me, good job

                • Yara says:

                  No troll: I thought you were referring to marriage age, which began its return to historical norms around that time.

                  I don’t detect any cuckery in Heinlein’s endorsement of corporal discipline. Perhaps you can explain.

                • peppermint says:

                  Like many pedophile scifi authors, Heinlein gets some stuff right, but asserts the wrong reasons for it.

                  Man surely does have a moral instinct. That’s why to get men to act even to save mankind itself, even to save their own skins, a moral case must be made.

                  Heinlein made the moral case for cuckservativism / civic “nationalism”, which is right wing compared to the insane ideals the 20c elites were doing.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Heinlein was pretty much on the reactionary libertarian spectrum (like Hoppe reactionary libertarian) late in life.

                  He still had wrong views on the woman question (though different wrong views then say feminist wrong views) but otherwise his ideas and ours would be very close. He was never quite in favor of monarchy but there is no strong indication he was opposed either. He was certainly opposed to universal suffrage Democracy.

                  I’d like to reiterate my question on early arranged marriage vs late virgin. The former would be easy to impose the latter would be exceedingly difficult (and was only ever really for aristocrats outside the Muslim world and a few mountain tribes). Why not throw all support to the former and abandon the latter.

                • Roberto says:

                  It’s obvious to me that early arranged is much more in line with human nature than late virgin (we are not fallen angels; we are risen killer apes), but I’m always told that K-selected people prefer the latter for whatever reason.

                • Samuel Skinner says:

                  “Heinlein was pretty much on the reactionary libertarian spectrum (like Hoppe reactionary libertarian) late in life.”

                  The reveal in Starship Trooper is our protagonist is a Filipino. Racial egalitarianism and American exceptionalism is why he gets labeled cuckservative. I’m not aware of him backing away from those late in life.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I like Jim but outside of high nobles who could put multiple guards on their daughters late virgin marriage was never the norm among europeans because we’ve never really gone for strict purdah. Asians despite (rightly) being much harder on women and assigning them lower social status never really went for purdah either.

                  You need purdah to make late virgin marriages work with commoners and we’re just not going to do that.. the will isn’t really there at any level.

                • Roberto says:

                  At the very least, marrying off women aged 10 to 15 should not be outside the Overton Window, should not be taboo; Reaction does not need to demand it, but must not denounce it either.

                  In other words, if you can afford late virgin marriage, then go ahead and have that.

                  But if, like most hominids, one is not evolutionarily programmed for that — if one’s genes urgently command one to “Breed!” once one hits puberty — then one should have the option available to breed maritally rather than resorting to extramarital sex.

                  The problem with modern materialism, which CR totally fails to articulate, is not that it detracts people away from some or other transcendental ideals; just the opposite: excessive comfort drives people to search for high-flown ideals to give themselves a potent dose of “feelgood,” which is why comfy people are so self-deluded about everything. The end result is moralism and “moralsturbatory” behavior, if you pardon the portmanteau.

                  In my view, Reaction should not seek to eliminate affluence a la CR, but should find a way to keep the people, and especially the elites, busy with a worldly mission that would leave them no time and no energy to search for faggy transcendental ideals.

                  Perhaps the colonization of space needs to be explicitly on the NRx agenda and become an essential component of the New Religion. In order to colonize space, need people — and high IQ people in particular — to breed; if you want people to breed, need to do away with “moralsturbation.”

                  If I were King, instead of banning pizza and cake, I’d impose an incremental Space Tax, which would be very heavy on childless people (who are usually holier-than-thou) and minimal on people with 8+ children. So as a citizen, you either help fund the National Space Program with your shekels or else provide human material to build it.

                  I’d also abolish all legislation post-1820, and make it a crime (blasphemy perhaps) to promote “feelgood morality.” This would ensure that competent people who can contribute to my National Space Program don’t end up in prison for offending the comfy morality of white knights. Right now, a lot of human potential is maliciously wasted because males are sent to prison for possessing “too much” testosterone and acting on it; this needs to change.

                  Or, people in Reaction will continue to pat themselves on the back for being “K-selected” while sniffing their own feelgood farts while civilization burns.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Roberto writes

                  “Perhaps the colonization of space needs to be explicitly on the NRx agenda and become an essential component of the New Religion. In order to colonize space, need people — and high IQ people in particular — to breed; if you want people to breed, need to do away with “moralsturbation.”

                  Seconded. Humanity must improve itself and expand off world. Any NRx’s who haven’t read Pournelle’s old blog a lot (Chaos Manor) should.

                  There should not be some huge tax increase though, space advances are best made by offering massive prize money. An NRx regime would eliminate so much wasteful spending (and probably debt by imposing a non debt based monetary system) that tax increases to fund this would not be necessary.

                  With virtually no unowned women, no mandatory public education beyond basics and minimal fatherless children social spending would drop an order of magnitude. More then enough to get us to the stars as fast as possible probably with a decrease in taxes.

              • jim says:

                > Late virgin marriage is an integral part of the inner-Hajnal line mating pattern, an extraordinary selector of K-compatible strategists,

                Late virgin marriage requires a level of coercion and violence against women that moderns find hard to imagine. Eighteenth century England made the Taliban look like fat blue haired lesbian feminists, and made Boko Haram look softhearted.

                This is why people keep calling me a pedophile, because they refuse to see how women are in fact behaving, and will inevitably behave unless quite forcefully restrained.

              • The Cominator says:

                Jim is right about the level of coercion it takes for late virgin marriage.

                Whatever decrees come down from on high modern white males won’t be willing to do it.

                Better solution is early arranged marriage.

        • jim says:

          Society is collapsing because we fail to control women, and we fail to control women because we attribute angelic character to them, despite what we see in front of our noses.

          • Carlylean Restorationist says:

            Absolutely right. These idiots talking about the ‘marital rape’ oxymoron want to give women everything they demand, whereas we reactionaries put our foot down after the first holiday and enforce the rule that dining out is for genuinely special occasions only. Right?

            Just gently mocking: if it’s a choice between feminist cuckservatopia with austerity vs Jimtopia with splurging, I guess I’ll have a side order of onion rings and a ticket to Turkey.

            • Yara says:

              >whereas we reactionaries put our foot down after the first holiday and enforce the rule that dining out is for genuinely special occasions only. Right?

              Truly you have transcended parody. Now you want to stop people from having free time and servant-prepared food. What else do you want to stop people from having? swimming pools?

              • The Cominator says:

                “What else do you want to stop people from having? swimming pools?”

                Yep hes on record with that one.

              • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                I suspect you already know the answer to that Yara lol!!

                Yes indeed, if Jim’s willing to throw Jared Diamond a bone over decentralisation vs centralisation, I’ll throw Jared Diamond a bone over this: aliens in the future seeing the ruins of America would assume people had reservoirs of drinking water in their gardens until they found their mistake, at which point they’d no longer be surprised at the collapse.

                The idea of owning a private swimming pool is so unimaginably anti-social I don’t even know where to begin. Either we ban the whole thing outright or else we tax the hell outta them.

                If you’re serious about the Reaction, you must be ready to use the power of the state to promote and enforce your grandparents’ values and social habits.

                Otherwise it simply will not work.

                • a window of perception says:

                  >If you’re serious about the Reaction, you must be ready to use the power of the state to promote and enforce your grandparents’ values and social habits.

                  “My long-term girlfriend and I agreed not to have a baby yesterday.”

                • jim says:

                  A society that conquers the world and conquers the stars will have swimming pools and good dentistry.

                  A gray socialist society will slowly wither in mediocrity, breadlines, impotence, grey project housing, bad teeth, and chronic mild malnutrition.

                  I was in Cuba during the last days of communism. No swimming pools. Also the buildings had not had maintenance or much paint since the revolution. There was enough bread and sugar, but widespread malnutrition for lack of quality foods, resulting in an epidemic of blindness. No breadlines, but no better quality foods either.

                  You are announcing the failures of socialism as triumphs. A society that has no swimming pools will have ugly gray project housing, or, like Cuba, the run down ruins of pre socialist housing.

                • pdimov says:

                  >resulting in an epidemic of blindness

                  That’s usually the result of methanol in moonshine.

                • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                  It doesn’t follow at all that getting rid of private swimming pools leads to the loss of quality foods.
                  On the contrary, getting rid of Domino’s and Bella Italia would free up a lot of fresh vegetables for normal uses.
                  There would be ‘distortions’ on the economy from banning private swimming pools.

                  The demand for chlorine and PH-correcting chemicals would fall. Demands on the energy supply and water infrastructure would be moderately relaxed.
                  Capital allocated to saving and investment would be increased somewhat.

                  I see no a priori Mengerian reason for breadlines to follow from a swimming pool ban.

                • jim says:

                  Under socialism, people eat bread. People eat better quality food under capitalism. That they are apt to eat too much of it a problem with gluttony, not capitalism.

                • Roberto says:

                  >The idea of owning a private swimming pool is so unimaginably anti-social I don’t even know where to begin. Either we ban the whole thing outright or else we tax the hell outta them.

                  Why?

                  I bet (the money I don’t have) your standard of living is significantly higher than mine, so don’t even bother accusing me of reckless consumerism or whatever. I don’t fly abroad, neither do I dine out, etc.

                  But do tell: what’s so bad about private swimming pools?

                  Why should people who can afford that, not be allowed to?

                  Why should those dastardly people who attempt to privately in-doors build “a structure designed to hold water to enable swimming or other leisure activities” be arrested, tried, convicted, then imprisoned and/or flogged in public square and/or executed by firing squad?

                • The Cominator says:

                  If I could not someday own a private swimming pool I would have been strongly tempted to spend all of my excess money on whores.

                • Roberto says:

                  >If I could not someday own a private swimming pool I would have been strongly tempted to spend all of my excess money on whores.

                  For which CR has a solution:

                  “You’re found to have procured the services of a prostitute? Instant castration and excommunication.”

                • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                  Roberto:

                  “I don’t fly abroad, neither do I dine out, etc.”

                  You’re better for it, and the nation’s better for it.

                  “What’s so bad about private swimming pools?”

                  This:

                  Cominator:

                  “If I could not someday own a private swimming pool I would have been strongly tempted to spend all of my excess money on whores.”

                  This is a correct lumping together of like things.

                  Private swimming pools are inherently anti-social, the epitome of the atomised individual. They’re also inherently conspicuous consumption, which is a symptom of a demoralised, insecure people who have something to prove.

                  Worst of all, they’re a terrible use of scarce resources. If we care about the long-term health of the nation, we should not squander her resources on anti-social individualist status signals to impress ‘liberated’ females and consumerist retards.

                  Anyhow, I’m finally dipping out. I was going to flounce out before over the socialist-vs-libertarian stuff and got drawn back in, but it’s no longer necessary to have these debates. I’m no longer NRx.

                  Strike&Mike 31: “Strikehacks” is extremely persuasive and I wash my hands of NRx the way I washed my hands of libertarianism thanks to Moldbug.

                  If anyone reaches the conclusion that going full third positionist TRS style is basically being a left-wing entryist, that’s their business and I have no problem with it.

                  I’d also like to express my admiration for all of you and my support for the objectives and approaches you have.

                  We want many, many, many of the same things, and the differences only matter if I want to remain NRx. I don’t, so they don’t.

                  Enjoy and prosper: you’re a good community doing good things.

                • jim says:

                  Third Positionists are leftists and entryists. Always have been in the past. Why should anyone expect them to be different in the future?

                  Supposedly CR’s socialism will be different from every previous socialism, and supposedly his third positionism is different from every previous third positionism.

                  Sorel turned out to be a Bolshevik, supposedly nationalist third positionists invariably turn out to be not only socialist, but like Sorel, turn out to be internationalist, identifying with the interests of an outgroup of different nationality and ethnicity.

                  Sorel was the first third positionist, and the same pattern plays out over and over again. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.

                  Leftists always try to get you to ingroup people who outgroup you, and third positionism always reveals as an effort to get you to ingroup hostile people with hostile beliefs and of hostile ethnicity, people who hate your beliefs, hate your ethnicity, and hate your nation.

                  Sorel says “Ingroup with me against the evil capitalist outgroup”

                  Then Sorel says “ingroup with us anticapitalists”

                  Then it becomes apparent that the anticapitalists that Sorel wants you to ingroup with are of a a different race, religion, and nationality to you, and hate your nation, your ethnicity, and people of your beliefs.

                • peppermint says:

                  See, the funny thing is, Mike is fat and vapes or smokes cigars.

                  Why don’t you tell him about how in the ethnostate there will be no fun allowed?

                • Nikolai says:

                  CR I can’t tell if you’re an entryist or if you’re a rightist with some latent leftist tendencies and weeks of debating in the comments made you stubbornly dig in your heels. Either way I’ll try to relieve you of your errors.

                  I agree with you that morbid obesity is disgusting and degenerate, though not quite as bad as sodomy. Obesity is more common because it’s socially acceptable, fat acceptance is largely pushed by the Cathedral. To fix the problem just have the Cathedral emphasize the importance of health and good looks. Culture is downstream from power and people are already naturally repulsed by obesity so it wouldn’t even be that difficult. Banning fast food isn’t really going to work since most fast food is easy to replicate with ingredients found in every supermarket.

                  “Private swimming pools are inherently anti-social, the epitome of the atomised individual. They’re also inherently conspicuous consumption, which is a symptom of a demoralised, insecure people who have something to prove.”

                  Private swimming pools are generally pro-social, hence pool parties. There’s no way you’ve been listening to TRS without constantly hearing about them. Private pools give people a reason to get together, grill some food, drink a few beers and have a good time.

                  “Strike&Mike 31: “Strikehacks” is extremely persuasive and I wash my hands of NRx the way I washed my hands of libertarianism thanks to Moldbug.”

                  Not a paycuck so can’t listen to the show, but I know Striker is a socialist who wants to make the US into a whites only Venezuela. He also blames Jews on everything to the point of absurdity.

                  Mike Enoch thinks he’s much smarter than he actually is. He’s generally right about race and the effects of diversity on social cohesion, but he singlemindedly looks at every issue as a racial issue and downplays very important factors like women, class and religion. Eg he thinks Merkel is importing millions of migrants to destroy Germany because she’s partly Jewish when it’s really because she’s a childless old woman.

                  And neither one of them can validly critique NRx because they don’t even understand it. Mike’s take on Moldbug is that “he just hates democracy because he’s a Jew afraid of the goyim uprising”. And it’s not very “restorationist” to align yourself with racist liberals who just want to go back 70 or 80 years (if that) against reactionaries who want to back 350 years.

    • Roberto says:

      Renegade Tribune is a CIA psyops website and both Kyle Hunt and Sinead McCarthy are glow-in-the-dark fucking CIAniggers. “Incidentally,” all the CIA psyops websites are telling you in no-uncertain terms that you should be very, very afraid of those scary Communi… errr, Musli…… errr, “pedophiles.”

      Almost like there’s a STRATEGY OF TENSION going on.

      • Yara says:

        I have a theory that the CIA and related propagate things like “neo-Nazi” and “white nationalist” almost reflexively; it’s what they would be if they weren’t crimestopped, so they just can’t help themselves. It’s like when the average prog says to his fellow prog, “what, are you a racist?” Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

        Incidentally, did the Tom Cruise movie American Made strike you almost as a gloating brag?

    • eternal anglo says:

      I notice a strange correlation. Those who are obsessed with Jewish influence, and finding the Jew behind everything, have a tendency to be bluepilled on women, to the point of outright white knighting. And they also have a tendency to be bluepilled on capitalism. Despite appearances, everything that has gone wrong in the West must be the work of scheming usurers and moneyed interests in top hats straight out of a Soviet cartoon.

      You Nazis will not ruin the reaction the way you destroyed the alt right. “X is the work of the kikes, and if you doubt this, you are a kike” is the only thing approaching a holiness spiral I’ve seen circulating in the resurrected right-wing of the internet, and even so it has been very effective in inducing mass hysteria among otherwise normal, sensible and interesting people. But reactionaries are wary of holiness spirals.

      • jim says:

        Nazis are 1930s leftists who have been left behind by ninety years of movement further left, so are inevitably prone to holiness spirals.

        Nazis are blue pilled both on white cohesion and female virtue. Our enemy is not the Jews. We are our enemy. Whites are fissiparous because the most militarily formidable race, and the most militarily formidable race because fissiparous.

        • simplyconnected says:

          > most militarily formidable race because fissiparous.

          is there an argument behind the assertion?

          • jim says:

            The argument is Darwin.

            • simplyconnected says:

              I see what you are saying.

              • Carlylean Restorationist says:

                Are you sure SC?
                It’s the old Jared Diamond argument from many kingdoms, one of the few wacky Marxist tropes libertarians agree with.

                The centralisation-decentralisation argument is far from settled. Diamond et al would point to China as an example of how large centralised states pass stupid laws (banning guns and seafaring for example) and these have larger effects than they would have had had China been a hundred smaller kingdoms with diverse legislatures.
                Ironically Lew Rockwell would agree 100% with this: let the pinkos have their commune over there and we’ll have our ancap paradise over here next door to our #1 trading partners the Rod Dreher commune. Corporations will serve the needs of all these places but won’t attempt to influence their direction in order to homogenise, standardise and increase margins….because….. reasons

                Even Moldbug falls for it in “Patchwork”: there will be failed states and hellholes but the competition between SovCorps means you’ll be able to go somewhere lush and futuristic and the financial incentive for boards of directors will be to attract foot-votes by being awesome. Again there’ll be no possibility of a push by the people selling the food, keeping the lights on or handling the money to promote an agenda that better suits *them*, because….. reasons

                Now is it the case that Germany and Italy ended up in a worse state after becoming more centralised? This could be argued, but it’s association-as-causation: you could argue that technology causes envy-socialism on the same grounds, but I assume most of us wouldn’t take that idea very seriously at all.

                Why did Italy suddenly want to centralise? Can it really be ‘nationalism’ to unite the Two Sicilies with Sardinia and Bologna? Wouldn’t it be more like ‘nationalism’ to sing “E Signuruzzu mia, faciti bon tempu”?

                “Whites rule because obnoxious” is plausible, don’t get me wrong. My ego just likes “whites rule because smart, hard-working, creative and long-sighted” better.

                • simplyconnected says:

                  Not sure about centralization/decentralization argument.
                  You know more than I do.

                  The point about Darwin and fissiparousness seems to be that the fact the European peoples are easily fractured means we’ve been at each other’s throats for long, the “silicon valley” of massacring each other forms.

        • Mister Grumpus says:

          This is the next level shit right here. The keys to the kingdom.

          JQ? Yeah sure I guess. But only because Whites try to use J’s as a weapon against other whites.

          Same as using Blacks against working Whites via slavery and apartheid. It’s all to dick over and humiliate other Whites.

          The brown-on-white crime spree has been going on for 50 years now, and we just can’t see it. All we notice is that “Them” Whites are catching the brunt of it, so it’s OK. Preferable even. “Winning.”

          The Us Question. Such a pill.

      • Roberto says:

        >You Nazis will not…

        I’m all with you, EA, but come on. You don’t actually believe that these people are “for real,” do you? Seriously – could it be any more obvious that they are actors, hired by TPTD to play a certain role and spread certain ideas under the guise of whatever it is they’re supposed to be playing?

        They. Are. ACTORS. Kyle Hunt, the owner of Renegade Tribune, is literally (!) an actor:

        https://www.imdb.com/name/nm7305785/

        It’s so obvious to me (and apparently only to me) what they are doing… it’s not even funny at this point.

        There are no “Nazis.” On the internet, it is 90% teenagers full of hormones who post dank may-mays to say “fuck you society!”; and 10% carefully-crafted, well-funded ASTROTURFers whose agenda happens to be the exact same agenda as that of those who really run society. Like, for instance, abolishing internet anonymity.

        These “blue pilled Nazis” are not useful idiots of the system. These people are actors, and they *are* the system. You better start believing in psyops – you’re in one.

        • eternal anglo says:

          I like Yara’s suggestion that when glow in the darks imitate right-wingers, they can’t help themselves from gravitating to sperg tier WN1.0 Nazism, because that’s what they would be if they weren’t crimestopped. Or perhaps it’s because, as progressives, they genuinely can’t see anything to the right of Bush II as anything other than Nazi.

          • jim says:

            It is simple ignorance. Sperg tier WN1.0 Nazism is simply the only belief system to the right of Pol Pot that they know anything about. If we are not libertarians, we must be socialists, and, obviously, we are nationalists, therefore …

            • Carlylean Restorationist says:

              The modern third position doesn’t throw Hitler or Mussolini under the bus, but that doesn’t mean we can’t see beyond the differences between now and the 1930s and it doesn’t mean we have an automatic knee-jerk agreement with everything uncle did, none of which was wrong.

              Modern nationalists aren’t libertarians – in fact when we look at what libertarianism has achieved, we’re anti-libertarian.
              When we look at the English countryside, it speaks to us in an English accent, and when we look at the towns and sealines of Albania, they speak to us in Albanian and in an Albanian accent.
              We like that. We’re not burning with a desire to go and physically touch Albania but we can love it from afar as Schumann loved Persia from afar.
              (We also love Persia and there’s a lot to love about the current year Iran as well – it may not be for us, and we have no wish to ‘blend’ with them, but as a Ding an sich, Iran is doing more right than wrong.)

              We’re the only people who really stand for diversity and tolerance. We want to leave people alone to be themselves, in ways that work for them. In return, we will be ourselves, in ways that work for our people.

              Sadly our people have had Grima Wormtongue dribbling in our ears for more than three centuries now, and there’s a lot of harm to be undone before we can truly be ourselves.

              Our children speak with foreign accents and listen to heartless anti-art made and sold by foreigners. Our adults work hard so they can go and give the spoils to foreigners, and given the chance, they import foreigners to look after their own houses.

              Our people need to be led back to happiness.

            • Yara says:

              We know that any given heretical memeset tends to hate its parental memeset, e.g. Hitler hated Christianity, Superprotestants hate regular Protestants, and secular Jews are becoming increasingly hostile to zionist Jews. We know that there were some serious connections between the then-Anglo American intelligence establishment and post-War Nazis, e.g. Operation Paperclip, the CIA’s hiring of thousands of Nazi spies, NASA’s rocket program, and so on.

              Racists become antiracists, fascists became antifascists, men became mysogynists, and whites became antisemites.

              I don’t think it’s outrageous to suggest that when someone accuses another of a thoughtcrime — or displays a dramatically outsized fascination with, and persistent predilection to, dressing up as and acting like a certain group “as a LARP” — it’s invariably a psychological projection.

            • Yara says:

              Ironically — or perhaps not so ironically — Democrats really are the real racists.

            • Yara says:

              And we should admire their strength of will.

          • The Cominator says:

            They can be the cuckiest of cuckservatives too depending on whether they want to be weak or whether they want to scare normies.

            I’m almost sure David French is a salary drawing glow in the dark. I don’t think Jonah Goldberg and Ben Shapiro are card carrying glows in the dark, but I’m almost sure they are handled by them.

            When they want to demoralize normies they go cuck, when they want to be scary to normies they go nazis.

        • Dave says:

          Anyone who believes in femisocialism, but thinks the Jews are doing it all wrong, is a Nazi.

      • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

        There is a strange correlation between living white males in 2018, and a tendency to be bluepilled on women.

    • jim says:

      > In other words, claims (((pedo Jim))), if he finds an underage child sexually attractive, he should have the right to violate her. Otherwise, warns he, she herself will go around seducing married men. That’s actually the argument.

      No that is not the argument. You cannot hear the the argument because you cannot bear to hear crimethought.

      The argument is that women are dangerously and disruptively lustful, and need to be kept under control, often starting at a very early age. Most males fail to notice this, because they are brainwashed against noticing what is in front of their noses, and because hypergamy means that women don’t lust for, or even notice, the vast majority of males.

      • Theshadowedknight says:

        Jim’s position is the position that will result in the lowest number of girls having early sexual relations. Properly controlling them, which will be disturbingly harsh to the modern sensibilities we have remaining, will ensure that as many as possible wait for marriage at a more reasonable age. Those protesting the control of women are dangerously ill informed and their delusions are doing harm to the women they are trying to “save,” and fucking up our attempts at civilization.

  22. Cohen says:

    It’s okay to rape shiksas, we are chosen, and they are sub-human, so I hope the rest of you enjoy the following account, as much as I did

    And I have no doubt that you will:

    “A German woman has her jaws forced open by the filthy brutish hands of a Soviet serial rapist. He literally spits into her mouth and forces her to swallow his salivary filth as he rams her body again . . . and again . . . and again – until he’s satisfied fulfilling his oath to Stalin and his chief Holocaust propagandist, (((Ilya Ehrenburg)))

    Stalin officially sanctioned the systematic rape of German women. (((Ilya Ehrenburg))) for his part as the lascivious advocator of rape of German women, helped the Red Army perpetrate the largest gynocide and mass rape in recorded history.

    Commissar Ehrenburg’s pamphlet — distributed in the millions among Red Army troops on the front lines of battle who were already intoxicated with hate and vengefulness as a result of over two decades of Bolshevik oppression, mass murder of their families and mass collectivization — urged Soviet troops to plunder, rape and KILL.

    The final paragraph of his pamphlet entitled “Kill” reads:

    The Germans are not human beings. From now on, the word ‘German’ is the most horrible curse. From now on, the word ‘German’ strikes us to the quick. We have nothing to discuss. We will not get excited. We will kill. If you have not killed at least one German a day, you have wasted that day… If you cannot kill a German with a bullet, then kill him with your bayonet. If your part of the front is quiet and there is no fighting, then kill a German in the meantime…If you have already killed a German, then kill another one — there is nothing more amusing to us than a heap of German corpses. Don’t count the days, don’t count the kilometers. Count only one thing: the number of Germans you have killed.

    Kill the Germans!…

    — Kill the Germans!

    Kill!

    And in another leaflet:

    The Germans must be killed. One must kill them…Do you feel sick? Do you feel a nightmare in your breast?…Kill a German! If you are a righteous and conscientious man –

    kill a German!

    . . . Kill!

    From eight to eighty, healthy or ill, indoors or out, in fields, on sidewalks, against walls, the spiritual massacre of German women continued unabated. When even violated corpses could no longer be of use, sticks, iron bars, and telephone receivers were commonly rammed up their vaginas.

    Brazilian German Leonora Cavoa:

    “Suddenly I heard loud screams, and immediately two Red Army soldiers brought in five girls. The Commissar ordered them to undress. When they refused out of modesty, he ordered me to do it to them, and for all of us to follow him. We crossed the yard to the former works kitchen, which had been completely cleared out except for a few tables on the window side. It was terribly cold, and the poor girls shivered. In the large, tiled room some Russians were waiting for us, making remarks that must have been very obscene, judging from how everything they said drew gales of laughter. The Commissar told me to watch and learn how to turn the Master Race into whimpering bits of misery.”

    . . . Now two Poles came in, dressed only in their trousers, and the girls cried out at their sight. They quickly grabbed the first of the girls, and bent her backwards over the edge of the table until her joints cracked. I was close to passing out as one of them took his knife and, before the very eyes of the other girls, cut off her right breast. He paused for a moment, then cut off the other side. I have never heard anyone scream as desperately as that girl. After this operation he drove his knife into her abdomen several times, which again was accompanied by the cheers of the Russians.”

    Leonora:

    The next girl cried for mercy, but in vain—it even seemed that the gruesome deed was done particularly slowly because she was especially pretty. The other three had collapsed, they cried for their mothers and begged for a quick death, but the same fate awaited them as well. The last of them was still almost a child, with barely developed breasts. They literally tore the flesh off her ribs until the white bones showed.

    Loud howls of approval began when someone brought a saw from a tool chest. This was used to tear up the breasts of the other girls, which soon caused the floor to be awash in blood. The Russians were in a blood frenzy. More girls were being brought in continually.

    I saw these grisly proceedings as through a red haze.

    Leonora tried to dissociate from the situation, which is one of the brain’s foremost methods for dealing with psychological and physical trauma. But to no avail, the Russian and Polish “soldiers” disallowed it.

    . . . Over and over again I heard the terrible screams when the breasts were tortured, and the loud groans at the mutilation of the genitals. . . . [I]t was always the same, the begging for mercy, the high-pitched scream when the breasts were cut and the groans when the genitals were mutilated. The slaughter was interrupted several times to sweep the blood out of the room and clear away the bodies. . . . When my knees buckled I was forced onto a chair. The Commissar always made sure that I was watching, and when I had to throw up they even paused in their tortures. One girl had not undressed completely, she may also have been a little older than the others, who were around seventeen years of age. They soaked her bra with oil and set it on fire, and while she screamed, a thin iron rod was shoved into her vagina . . .

    . . . until it came out her navel.

    In the yard entire groups of girls were clubbed to death after the prettiest of them had been selected for this torture. The air was filled with the death cries of many hundred girls”

    Play it again Sam!

    RTFLMAO

    • Roberto says:

      You are a robot lol

      • Cohen says:

        CAPTCHA test: “mark all the images of Metzitzah B’peh”

        (Note: in case there are clueless goyim still reading this blog, Metzitzah B’peh is the Blood-Sucking Jewish Circumcision Ritual or the process by which the rabbi places his mouth directly on the circumcision wound to draw blood away from the cut. This blood is a delicacy amongst the rabbis.)

        PASSED

        CAPTCHA test: “mark all the images of Ritual Murder”

        (Note to goyim: When a Ritual Murder was done at Passover, it was usually that of a child under seven years old, as perfect a specimen as possible, who was not only bled white, but crucified, sometimes circumcised and crowned with thorns, tortured, beaten, stabbed, and sometimes finished off by wounding in the side in imitation of the murder of Christ.)

        PASSED

        CAPTCHA test: check all passages in the Talmud in which the non-jews are described as animals. Some of them are as follows:

        1). “It is permitted to take the body and the life of a non-Jew.” (Sepher Ikkarim IIIc, 25)
        2). “It is the law to kill anyone who denies the Torah (Talmud – Sanhedrin 59b). The Christians belong to the denying ones of the Torah (Talmud).” (Coschen Hamischpat 425, Hagah 425, 5)
        3). “Every Jew, who spills the blood of the godless (non-Jew), is doing the same as making a sacrifice to God.” (Bammidber Raba, c 21 & Jalkut 772)

        PASSED = NOT a Robot

        • Roberto says:

          The absolute state of current AI smdh

        • peppermint says:

          We know that kikes make enthusiastic murderers, and know that many Aryans don’t know that. As normal Aryans, we don’t like those images, and know that other Aryans will think us jewish if we talk about them too much. So it’s sort of a delicate thing, making sure every Aryan knows what the jew is capable of, without excessive discussion.

          There’s a reason I haven’t watched Hellstorm, and a reason Jack Dorsey hasn’t, and I want everyone to not watch for my reason while slapping everyone who doesn’t watch for Jack Dorsey’s reason.

          • Carlylean Restorationist says:

            Here’s a little parting thought for you minty… your judeo-sceptic mind is ready but will your pro-capitalist module rebel?

            Wonga went into administration today in Britain. They were a payday loans company, offering short term, usually fairly small, loans to people without prejudice to their credit history, at a rate of 1% per day plus a small fee. They’ve been losing a lot of money for a long time.

            Anyway the founder was a guy called Errol Damelin. He was born in Sud Afrika. When he was at university there, he was involved in subversive left-wing activism, contributing in a probably fairly small way to the fall of the Boere government and the institution of Bantu-invader communist rule. Wikipedia says he had ‘many leadership positions’ within the student union.

            Upon graduating he left his (cough) homeland to emigrate to Israel before going back to university in Boston (where else!) before picking his victim: the British working class.
            He then moved to London and carried out his campaign of mass usury.

            If I say frack people like that, is that ambiguous enough?

            Frack Jack Dorsey too.

            • Steve Johnson says:

              What exactly is your problem with him?

              Under his preferred government in SA there won’t be private swimming pools or pizza delivery.

            • jim says:

              Yes, disloyal and hostile capitalists are disproportionately Jewish. And white Harvard grads in Haiti from the State Department did not care much whether Haitians lived or died.

              But you are not telling us to outgroup Jews. You are telling us to outgroup capitalists – who are disproportionately our own race, sex, and religion.

              Georges Sorel tells Frenchmen: “Hail fellow Nationalist Frenchmen. I am a patriotic nationalist frenchman also. Let us outgroup capitalists. Right. Then we ingroup anti capitalists. It is the patriotic French thing to do, because I am French, french, french nationalist, nationalist. Me French Nationalist.”

              And then it turns out that Georges Sorel is a Bolshevik tool, a tool of people who hate France, hate Frenchmen, hate nationalism, hate nationalists, and intend to harm France and Frenchmen. And the Bolsheviks, being Russian, want Frenchmen to outgroup each other.

            • peppermint says:

              > losing money
              > loan sharking
              > to working people

              You’re so blinded by your ideological need to find something to ban you can’t even stop to ask how that makes any sense.

              Working people don’t need loan sharks. Foreign criminals do.

              Loan sharks don’t lose money. Quangoes do.

              Usury against working people makes non-quango bankers a ton of money.

  23. Cohen says:

    Then give me CAPTCHA test: “mark all images with raped shiksas”…I will pass it every time …because I am just like you and everyone here….LOL

  24. Pseudo-chrysostom says:

    Was there an article that got deleted? Im certain you (Jim) had posted something after this one a day or so ago.

  25. TBeholder says:

    The objective of the global warming scam is to stop carbon power, coal and oil.

    Burning oil is much like burning paper money. Which was clear enough back in XIX century.
    But let’s not forget the one carbohydrate fuel naturally produced quickly and in vast quantities: methane. Yes, it’s inconvenient for cars, but it’s fine for almost everything big and/or stationary.
    It looks like methane power development was in a better shape 30 years ago.
    Then it got “protected” by the Church of Energiewende, received more subsidies and… “somehow” have been corrupted into a pustulant sore.
    The result stinks (literally and profusely):
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4078820/The-great-green-guzzler-Monster-digesters-meant-guzzle-waste-churn-eco-friendly-energy-fed-CROPS-produce-pitiful-levels-power-cost-216m-subsidies-HARM-environment.html

    • Dave says:

      Methane (and also coal) can be converted to methanol and used to power automobiles, albeit at a lower MPG. Bob Zubrin had a good idea: Require all new cars to accept gasoline, ethanol, methanol, or any mixture thereof. Gives us plenty of liquid fuel for the next thousand years without taking arable land away from food production.

      • jim says:

        dimethyl ether can be made by any process that makes methanol, costs about the same, has higher energy density, properties similar to liquified petroleum gas, and makes a clean burning diesel fuel.

        Best system would be two stroke turbocharged diesel running on dimethyl ether. High efficiency, very high power to engine weight ratio, and clean burning.

        • Cloudswrest says:

          Looks like dimethyl ether has a boiling point very similar to R12. I wonder how stable it is in a refrigeration system. The current automotive R12 substitutes are anhydrous propane/butane blends. But since these blends are not azeotropes the ratio changes over time as the more volatile propane leaks out faster.

      • peppermint says:

        Ethanol absorbs water, which means certain materians can’t be used in engines, and is hard to manufacture anyway.

Leave a Reply