Posts Tagged ‘religion’

Deus Vult

Monday, January 28th, 2019

Gnon wills it.


Trump cannot get stuff done, because he is merely president, and the permanent government is full of people that hate him.

But it is not just the permanent government. His political appointees are in bed with his enemies, and are subverting his agenda. Two years after Hitler was elected, Hitler had a Nazi running ever boy scout troop and every trade union chapter. Trump cannot even get a Trumpist running border security.

The one area where Trump has been successful is putting his people in the judiciary. Trumpist judges, though still massively outnumbered, are coming in at every level. Trump has been effective in appointing judges, because he has a big bench he can draw upon, which bench knows who whom, which bench is self policing, which bench can be relied upon to carry out his program without him needing to be on their back. Personnel is policy, and the Federalist society has a supply.

Reflect on the Federalist society: They have their article of faith – original intent. And they have a network to identify their fellow faithful. Just as Constantine adopted Christianity that provided him with a cohesive group to staff his government, in a Roman Empire disintegrating from elite incohesion.

To govern, you need a synthetic tribe, which Hitler had, which Constantine adopted, and which Trump lacks, except for the federalist society which is narrowly focused on judicial process.

The Federalist article of faith (Original Intent) that provides unity and cohesion is also an effective antibody against enemy outgroups. It is something no leftist can admit is even thinkable – to them, just words with no meaning that they dare conceive of. So when leftist entryists attempt to infiltrate the Federalists, they use their shibboleths incorrectly, like a Marxist purporting to be channeling Adam Smith, and wind up babbling random nonsensical meaningless scripted formulaic NPC gibberish.

We, on the other hand, agree with the leftists, that original intent is not really going to fly, while we agree with the Federalists that judges exercising executive, legislative, budgetary authority is intolerable. One emperor is a stationary bandit. A thousand little emperors is mobile banditry and anarcho tyranny. We, however, propose a solution far more radical than that of the federalists – that the final court of appeal should be the Sovereign, should be Moses, the King, or the President, and he should be able to intervene in any case, and fire any judge. We also propose William the Conqueror’s “forms of action”, meaning that judges should be reduced to data entry clerks filling out forms that result in remote procedure calls to a system of central databases, similar to the system used by Australia’s border control force for dealing with “Illegal persons”. (Australian Border Force is Judge Dredd with more typing required than Judge Dredd had to do, but the same refreshing speed, efficiency, and absence of lawyers and priestly robes as with Judge Dredd.) William the Conqueror’s “Forms of action” kept judges in line for seven hundred years, and modern databases and remote procedure calls make William the Conqueror’s solution lightning fast, so that it can be applied by a cop on the beat, after the fashion of Judge Dredd and the Australian Border Force.

We have our mailing lists and forums, like the federalist society. What we don’t have is some articles of faith, a canon, a creed, a catechism. Constantine’s Christians had a creed. Trump’s federalist society has one. By getting agreement on certain principles, we can identify our fellow faithful, we can provide a tribe capable of governing. Our basic plan is that someone grabs power, needs a tribe to actually govern. Ideally, a warrior grabs power at gunpoint, swiftly discovers that guns do not suffice, realizes he needs a priesthood, looks around for a priesthood, finds us, as Constantine found Christendom, and Trump found the Federalist Society. When Trump appoints someone in charge of border security, he does not necessarily get someone who favors border security. When Trump appoints a Federalist Society judge, he reliably gets a Federalist, as Constantine reliably got a Christian, and Hitler reliably got a Nazi.

The political appointees that Trump appoints are frequently disloyal to Trump and hostile to his agenda. The Federalist Judges he appoints are loyal to federalism, thus reasonably loyal to Trump and supportive of his agenda. Indeed the left regularly complains that federalist judges are more supportive of Trump and his agenda than they are to federalism, which is not true, but has a substantial grain of truth in that federalist judges appointed on the basis of their federalism are more supportive of Trump and his agenda than are political appointees appointed on the basis of loyalty to Trump and his agenda. The Federalist society polices itself. Trump is not having much success policing Trump political appointees.

We are the reaction. Our program is to rectify social decay by reviving ancient and lost social technologies, among them Pauline marriage. These ancient social technologies tend, for the most part, to be social technologies preserved by Christianity through the Dark Age following the collapse of the Roman Empire, and by the Children of Israel through the dark age following the collapse of Bronze Age civilization, thus our program is Christian – old type Christian. Modern type Christians tend to assimilate to progressivism and worship demons.

There is a lot of stuff in the New Testament that can plausibly be used to justify gnosticism, communism, and suicidal social policies, stuff that is plausibly interpreted as opposed to family, social cohesion, and civilization “There is neither Jew nor Greek”. But those variants of Christianity that survived have given sane, Gnon compliant, survival consistent, interpretations of these statements, banishing the crazy from this world to the next. After the resurrection there will be neither Jew nor Greek, neither man nor women, but in the here and now, women should obey their husbands. The New and Old Testaments, as generally interpreted by the community of saints in the apostolic succession, is sound social technology. It commands a market economy, durable marriage, and the authority of husbands and fathers over wives and daughters.

Nature’s God is the Gods of the copybook headings. The God of the Old and New Testament keeps getting reinterpreted as the Gods of the marketplace, but the ancient and long lasting Christian tradition is expressed by those copybook headings – Natures God, a God who in the fall instituted evolutionary psychology and a world of conflict accurately described by game theory. The curse of Eve explains the distressing female behavior also explained by evolutionary psychology, but people who are reluctant to believe in On the Origin of Species by Natural Selection, for example Vox Day, tend to interpret away the Curse of Eve and become blue pilled, or at best purple pilled, on women. I have often sarcastically remarked how in Vox Day’s books Action Girl is apt to rescue the Lad in Distress. Darwin protects us from that heresy better than overly literal biblical literalism.

So: here are the articles of the Canon:

  1. Throne
  2. Altar
  3. Freehold
  4. Family
  5. Property

Throne

Division of powers, divided sovereignty does not work, more rulers means mobile banditry and anarcho tyranny. A stationary bandit has better incentives than a mobile bandit.

Altar

You cannot separate state and church. The church will undermine the state and take state power for itself, or the state subvert the church, or both at once. Harvard is our high holy Cathedral. A holiness spiral ensues as the priestly classes, the professoriat, the judiciary, and the media, pursue power by each being holier than the other. Obviously we have a state religion a state religion that every day becomes crazier, more dogmatic, and more intrusive, and that state religion needs to be formalized and made official so that the high priest and grand inquisitor can stop holiness spirals.

When Charles the Second was restored, the people of England held pagan celebrations, in the correct expectation that an officially official religion would be less repressive than an unofficially official religion.

The earthly telos of holiness is to promote the broadest possible cooperate/cooperate equilibrium. Holiness competition results in people finding grounds to declare other people unholy, thus Starbucks and LucasFilms declare their customers unholy, thus holiness competition destroys the earthly telos of holiness. Therefore we cannot allow excessively holy people to gain power in the state religion. Which requires that the state religion be formally the state religion, and appropriate restraints applied.

Freehold

Freehold necessarily involves and requires rejection of the principle of equality before the law, and property rejection of equality of outcomes. Not all men were created equal, nor are women equal to men, nor is one group or category of men equal to another. Stereotypes are stereotypical, because the stereotype is usually true for most individual members of the group or category.

We have never had equality before the law, and are having it less every day. Cops have a special right to use violence, blacks have a special right to use violence and to not be insulted, similar to that of the traditional aristocracy, Hispanics and illegal immigrants in California have a special right to use violence and to not be insulted.

State building is coalition building to rule. We need a coalition of the smart, the cooperative, and the productive, ruling the stupid, the disruptive, and the destructive. The doctrine of equality means you cannot reward the elite with status? What! Of course the ruling elite is going to be rewarded with status, and that is exactly what is happening.

The ruling elite always gets rewarded, the ruling coalition always gets rewarded. Members of the ruling coalition always get a superior right to use violence, and a superior right to not be insulted. That is the way it is, and that is what we saw when white people were ethnically cleansed out of Detroit. The doctrine of equality before the law was always a lie intended to destroy the coalition of the smart, the cooperative, and the productive, to guilt the best people into surrender, so that they could be destroyed by a coalition of the worst.

Freehold means that we acknowledge that some state power is in fact private property, and the sovereign lets his loyal vassals enjoy their privilege, because if he tries to meddle, he will be overwhelmed by detail and complexity, so best to formalize that privilege and make it official. If we don’t have the aristocracy that so offended the founding fathers, we find ourselves with blacks exercising aristocratic privilege over whites. Equality before the law is an unworkable ideal, hypocritically betrayed in actual practice. Some people are going to be unjustly privileged. Let us try to make it the best people rather than the worst people, and try to make it the people that the state draws is wealth and coercive power from, rather than the people who sponge off the state.

Family

The immense biological and reproductive differences between men and women means that they can only cooperate for family formation on asymmetric, unequal terms. The wife has a duty to honor and obey, the husband to love and cherish. To ensure cooperation between men and women, the state, the family, society, and religion have to force men and women who sleep together to stick together, to force them to perform their marital duties, to force the man to cherish and the woman to obey, otherwise you get defect/defect, and reproduction and family become difficult for both men and woman.

For hypergamy to be eugenic rather than dysgenic, taxpayers and warriors need to have a special right to use violence and to not be insulted. For marriage to work, pimps, sluts, and whores need to have a substantially less protection against violence, insult, and rape. For marriage to be incentive compatible for women it has to be simply legal for a respectable man to chain a slut up in his basement, and if she does not want to risk that outcome, she needs to sign up in a nunnery or submit to husband. A right to protection should require chastity and/or submission to the authority of a husband or father. Sluts shall have legal authority equal to chaste women? What! This inevitably results in sluts being given legal status higher than that of chaste woman, and that is exactly what is happening. Wives, like whites, are very much second class low status citizens. We have an aristocracy, and black whores are at the top.

Women always wind up heading off the protection of the most alpha male around. If that is the protection of uncle Sam, you get what we have got.

You will notice that the doctrine that all women shall be equal required and led to the doctrine that all women are naturally chaste, enshrined in our current law on rape and sexual harassment, which presupposes that the primary person who is harmed by rape and sexual harassment is the woman, and the primary person who is going to object to it and be distressed by it is the woman, rather than the father, her biological kinfolk, and the husband. The transparent falsity and absurdity of this doctrine leads to the transparent falsity and absurdity of all rape and sexual harassment charges and convictions, as near to all of them as makes no difference. Legal equality necessitates and results in a denial of biological inequality.

Rape and sexual harassment laws that give women equal status to males are a problem, because in practice their resistance to rape and sexual harassment is a fitness test – they are pissed at you if you fail the test, not pissed by being successfully raped. So rape and sexual harassment charges based on the legal theory that these are crimes against the women herself, rather than her husband or family, always originate from failed shit tests – and the overwhelming majority of these failures do not involve rape and sexual harassment. What happens in the vast majority of cases, for all practical purposes all of them, is that a woman is sexually attracted to a man, hits him with a brutal and hard to pass shit test out of the blue, he fails, she feels creeped out, and comes to believe that something must have happened that legally justifies her feeling of being creeped out. In the rare and unusual occasions when they are based on an actual attempt at rape or sexual harassment, they are based not on the rape or the sexual harassment, but on the man failing her fitness test by retreating from her hostile response. They originate from male behavior that is not all that bad – just weak, the male trying something, but then retreating in the face of determined opposition.

We cannot give women the same legal right to protection against violence and insult as men, because they fail to cooperate in that protection. The best we can do is grant state backing for nunneries, husbands, and fathers protecting their wives and daughters, because husbands and fathers are are going to cooperate in that protection, and the male priests supervising the nunnery will cooperate in that protection. Violence and insult against women has to be handled as an offense against the male authority that cares for them, because if handled as an offense against the women themselves, the women are unhelpful, untruthful, deluded, and uncooperative, failing to report the kind of offenses that we want to suppress, and delusively reporting non offenses.

Men and women want families. Men and women want to cooperate to have families. But prisoners dilemma gets in the way. To fix the prisoner dilemma problem, need to hit women with a stick.

Property

Anti discrimination law violates people’s property rights. Google hates us, but the problem is not primarily too much capitalism, but too little. In the James Damore affair, Google’s Human Resources Department (the Human Resources department being a tentacle of the state inserted into every corporation) threatened the board and the management of Google with a lawsuit for not hating us enough, issuing an official opinion that thinking forbidden thoughts constituted a “hostile environment for women”. Because stereotypes are usually true, private individuals and corporations should be free to make use of the information expressed by stereotyping. The trouble with libertarians and libertarianism is that they support every socialist intervention that is destroying our lives and our economy.

Family law and anti discrimination law violates the fourth amendment and the seventh, eighth, and final commandments

  1. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
  2. Thou shalt not steal.
  3. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that thy neighbour’s.

Anti discrimination law reaches into a man’s property, and commands it to be applied to the good of the ruling coalition, and moment to moment consent to sex reaches into a man’s marriage and abolishes marriage.

  1. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects,[a] against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The state deciding whether James Damore’s thoughts constituted a “hostile environment for women” is an unreasonable search if ever there was, and it is an obvious violation of private property rights that libertarians would get terribly excited by if the government was bothering a black serial murderer.

Technological advance and industrialization comes from Ayn Rand’s heroic engineer CEO, mobilizing other people’s capital and other people’s labor. We first see this archetype appear immediately after the restoration, when Charles the Second made it OK to use the corporate form to get rich. Unfortunately, Ayn Rand’s hero is not heroically on our side, contrary to what Ayn Rand promised.. He unheroically endorses the official religion, knowing his property could be attacked if he does not. But we should keep in mind that this makes him merely the instrument of power, not power. When we are in charge he will support our official religion and scarcely notice the change in the slogans posted in the rec room, which formerly endorsed coveting what belonged to others and females adopting male clothing and roles, but will then condemn coveting and endorse males performing male roles and females performing female roles.

Rand’s superman is not on our side. But he is not on the progs side. He is his own side, and this makes him largely irrelevant for political power, which requires cohesion.

The state can facilitate science by being a customer and buying high tech stuff. Indeed, a great deal of advance has come from the state seeking means to hurt people and break their toys, but when the state tries to itself advance technology, it usually turns out badly: Nasa could not build rockets. Kidnapped Wernher von Braun. Asked him how to build rockets. Still could not build rockets.

Nasa puts Wernher von Braun in charge. Now it can build rockets. Puts a man on the moon.

Wernher von Braun retires. New types of rockets don’t work. Old types of rockets gradually stop working no matter how much government money is poured down the toilet.

Where did Nasa find Wernher von Braun?

Nazis kidnapped him from the German rocket club which they shut down.

Seems obvious that we would have wound up with a whole lot better rocket technology if the rocket club became, or spawned, a bunch of startups, one of them led by Wernher von Braun, and governments outsourced rockets. Which is what gave us the reusable booster that lands as a rocket should land.

Before Wernher von Braun, american government rockets did not work. After Wernher von Braun, government rockets gradually stopped working. And the rocket club, not the Nazis, and not NASA, found Wernher von Braun.

Radar and wartime electronics present a similar story. Harvard created a huge radar and counter radar program during the war – which led nowhere, as NASA’s rockets went nowhere after Wernher von Braun retired.

Reaction 101: Priests and warriors

Friday, December 21st, 2018

We are always ruled by priests or warriors.

Priests are in the business of controlling what people think, warriors in the business of controlling people by hurting them and breaking their toys.

So who else matters?

Merchants can control people by offering them value, hence get targeted due to envy and covetousness, but merchants have no substantial incentive to cohere into guilds, whereas priests naturally cohere into priesthoods (see the Climategate files for this process in operation) because if you hear the same story from several different people it sounds a lot more convincing, and warriors naturally cohere into armies, because otherwise, likely to die.

And the rest should do as they are told, and if we make sure they get a wife, children, and a home by doing what they are told, they will surely do it.

If merchants group into a cartel, that would profit them collectively, but any one merchant has large incentive to defect on the cartel, and there is not much the cartel can do to stop him, whereas the priest does not profit by defecting on the priesthood. The warrior sometimes has large incentive to defect on the army, but there is a lot the army can do to stop him.

By “priest” we don’t mean someone overtly in the business of making supernatural claims. We mean a member of a priesthood, and by a priesthood, we mean what the Chinese call a “knowledge faction” – a bunch of intellectuals who conspire together to give everyone the same story and use the same shibboleths, so that it sounds more convincing.

In practice, even when a priesthood vehemently denies making supernatural claims, as for example the communists vehemently claiming to be strict materialists, they frequently wind up sounding remarkably similar to those that do make overtly supernatural claims. Thus “occupy” meetings sound like prayer meetings. The Occupy Priest chants an incantation, and the congregation chants a response. Similarly the Chinese communist party is always talking about faith and values. Everywhere in communist China there are official party books about “How to be a good party member who has faith”, “Chinese people have faith in the party”, “Have faith in the …” In China, you are forbidden to call Communism a religion, but it is perfectly OK to call Communism a religion in every way short of actually calling it a religion and the Communist Party itself does this all the time.

The claim that all men are created equal is transparently supernatural. The Marxist theory of history is the God of nineteenth century Judaism renamed “History”, a thinly disguised supernatural claim. Holocaustianity is the tenth commandment inverted, a somewhat better disguised supernatural claim.

But what makes a priesthood a priesthood is not supernatural claims. Long lived religions usually restrict their supernatural claims to unfalsifiable issues, like transubstantiation and so forth. In the long run, falsifiable claims, claims about this world, claims that conflict with science, lead to problems, as for example the progressive claim that men and women are indistinguishable, a claim that every music video must endorse, which restriction makes music videos and comedians boring. What makes a priesthood a priesthood is that they get together to get their story straight, so that all of them are on message – which is what makes them a knowledge faction. Lots of people are knowledge workers, but the essential element that makes a priesthood a faction is that they coordinate to get their story straight in order to make it sound more convincing, and what makes them a priesthood, a knowledge faction, is that they seek power by controlling what people think.

To be effective, a priest needs to be part of a group of priests who back each other up by telling the same story, and a warrior needs to be part of a group of warriors that back each other up by physical violence, thus warriors naturally cohere into armies capable of ruling, and priests naturally cohere into priesthoods capable of ruling, while capitalists naturally compete for workers and customers, workers for jobs, entrepreneurs for capital and workers, so do not cohere into groups capable of ruling. If you see a capitalist who appears to rule, for example George Soros, he is a hireling of those who do rule.

When we are in power the state religion will make overtly supernatural claims, but these claims, unlike the supernatural claims made by the current state religion, such as that all men are created equal, will be entirely unfalsifiable, and will never draw faith into conflict with science, for in such conflicts, science always loses totally and devastatingly, as for example in Global Warming debate, and the ensuing destruction of science is bad for your society, your technology, your economy, and your military capability. The reason that our nukes do not work any more is because men and women are supposedly equal. Nukes don’t work for the same reason that music videos and comedians are no longer entertaining. The state religion has to stay out of the way of science and technology, because science and technology are so terribly weak and fragile. Religions that make falsifiable earthly claims usually self destruct eventually, not because science defeats them, but because they blow themselves up, as for example the Jewish Zealots. The holiness spiral leads them to make earthly claims that require faith to be demonstrated by ever more disastrous earthly actions, as for example the Zealots destroying their own food supplies while besieged by the Romans, and transgenderism requiring one to castrate one’s own children and sit them on the laps of gays.

This account of priests and warriors make them sound like entirely bad things, that warriors are bandits, priests conspiratorial conmen. That is the libertarian and anarcho capitalist position: bandits and conmen.

The reactionary position, on the contrary, is that warriors performing the right role of warriors is the most honorable profession, and in a good society warriors shoud be honored, and that priests performing the right role of priest is an honorable profession, and priests should be honored second only to warriors.

Obviously we need warriors to prevent bandits. The defense of property and freedom is costly, the price is terribly high, and the honor due to warriors is part of the fair price we must pay for the security of our persons and our property.

What about priests?

Priesthood is rather more complicated. The state cannot really enforce law. Your computer is not registered with the government. You have to enforce your property rights in it. The government will back you up, but this only works because there is widespread agreement on property rights and right conduct, shared beliefs about good conduct with other members of the ingroup. That the state is all powerful is bluff and illusion. We are never out of anarchy. The state is a ramshackle ship on a storm tossed sea. It cannot really enforce law, only back up private enforcement. And private enforcement will only work if beliefs about what should privately be enforced are widely shared.

And lately these beliefs have been radically and rapidly changing – most notably in the direction that women and gays can do no wrong. The old testament position that if one’s wife or betrothed slept with another man, then it was fine to kill them, seems more in accord with human nature.

The American position on hot burglary, when a burglar openly and obnoxiously burgles an occupied dwelling, is that it is that it is totally OK to kill the burglar on sight without warning. The british postion is that it is totally and absolutely to do anything violent to the burglar, no matter how violent the burglar is, especially if you are white and the burglar is nonwhite. Similarly, the American debate about Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman – some people took the position that it was totally OK for Zimmerman to kill Trayvon, if Trayvon was on top hammering Zimmerman’s head against the concrete, while other people took the position it was not OK for a “white” man to kill a black man, no matter what the black man was doing. (Zimmerman got white status from both those who supported him and those who condemned him. Those who condemned Zimmerman called him white, because they hate whites, even if they themselves are whites, especially if they themselves are whites. Those who supported him called him white because they wanted to claim a man who can shoot straight while blood runs over his eye as of their own race, called him white for being able to shoot straight while having his head banged on the concrete. One shot directly through the heart.)

The Book of Deuteronomy tells us that if a adulterers should be killed, but takes no position on whether it should be state, Church, family, or offended husband that kills adulterers. The position of the Rabbis at the time of Roman rule, the time of Jesus, was that it should be church (temple) that kills adulterers. The law as interpreted and applied at the time of King Solomon was that it was the offended husband, which is very much in accord with human nature. Gnon tells men to defend their own.

Adultery means adulteration as in beer – a man sleeping with another man’s wife or betrothed. If a man sleeps with a woman not his wife, but that women is not married or betrothed to another man, this is not adultery in the sense used in the old and new testaments.

If it is right for a man to defend his television set with deadly force (the American position) it is surely right to defend his capacity to reproduce with deadly force. State, family, and church should apply less extreme measures to adulterers, as they do to burglars, while backing the choice of the man who was personally threatened to use more extreme measures to adulterers, as he can to burglars.

The useful and proper function of warriors is to prevent mobile banditry – the stationary bandit prevents the mobile bandit. The useful and proper earthly function of the priesthood is to get the ingroup all on the same page of right conduct – to create a synthetic tribe, to get everyone feeling like part of the ingroup, and to promote shared values of right conduct, to get everyone acting like part of the ingroup.

You want everyone to agree on what constitutes cooperation, what constitutes defection from fair and reasonable expectations, and what constitutes defection so serious that violence on the spot is necessary and justified. And the legitimate earthly job of the priesthood is to form, represent, and communicate this consensus.

A priest should be in the business of teaching values and managing group identity, managing shared mythos and shared values. Thus something very like a priesthood creates something very like a religion, not necessarily in that it is about overtly supernatural claims, but in that it is an adoptive kin group based on shared values.

That the claims of traditional Christianity were either verifiable or unfalsifiable makes it a lot less supernatural than its new age competitors such as global warming or cultural Marxism, whose claims are not only supernatural, but entirely falsifiable, and usually falsified.

You want your warriors to be fighting for God, King and Tribe, as well as for gold, pussy, and land. And if you don’t have a priesthood that is on your side and on the warrior’s side, you don’t have a tribe.

For being a warrior to be an honorable profession, the warrior must fight not only for gold, pussy and land, but for God, King, and Tribe. If a warrior fights only for gold, pussy, and land, not honorable. If only for gold and pussy, he is a mobile bandit, which is the most dishonorable of professions. And without a good priesthood, hard to have a good tribe.

And since the west is detribalizing, since the priesthood is hostile to us and to our warriors, we are going to be overrun by mobile bandits soon. The great asylum seeker migration, which is largely military aged males, prefigures this.

From the time we defeated the Mongol hordes in Hungary in 1241, to our defeat in Afghanistan in 1840, the west was uniformly victorious for six centuries. (The Mongols were victorious in Hungary in that they successfully devastated and terrorized it, but were defeated in that they were never able to control it, that they never were able to draw revenues from it, that they kept on losing large amounts of treasure, men, and horses in it, and that the west gained the secret of gunpowder from them.)

Since then, since 1841 we have been suffering defeats by ever weaker enemies, notably the hilariously humiliating British defeats in Basra, the Persian Gulf, and Helmand province. The writing on the wall is that the west is ripe for conquest, like a wealthy elderly widow in a neighborhood that has turned bad. Not so much conquest by a major power like China, but rather a dark age collapse, when ever changing minor actors engage in mobile banditry – closer to the New Year rape festival in Cologne, or the car burning festivals in Paris, than D Day. There is a lot of loot and pussy for the taking, and neither the will nor capability to defend it. Something is like to go pear shaped sooner or later. The forever war in the middle east is a sign that the west has delusions of power – that its actual military capability is far less than it is used to, far less than everyone tends to take for granted. The west has not fought a war against a substantial enemy for quite a while, and has been losing, or winning inconclusively, against absurdly weak and tiny enemies.

As a warrior is honorable when he fights for God, King and Tribe, as well as for gold, pussy, and land, a priest is honorable when he performs the earthly task, the task in this world, of ensuring that there is a tribe to fight for, and that the tribe has agreement on what constitutes good conduct such that good members of the tribe do not feel like fighting each other, that the interactions are, as far as possible, cooperate/cooperate.

Since our current State religion is headed towards suicide and mass murder, we are going to need a replacement, assuming we survive at all. And that replacement has to grant warriors honor, and enable men and women to form families.

Why feminists support Islamic Rape Jihad

Sunday, June 11th, 2017

Doubtless you have heard of the recent Idaho gang rape.

This was Islamic Rape Jihad, not just Muslim rapists, because the girl was five, because the boys put it on video, because the boys expected the support of their community, and because the boys received the support of their community.

Feminist response to this rape shows what feminists really want. Everyone reacting to this in an indignant manner is a male who is in favor of patriarchy to a greater or lesser extent, and many of them want to completely reverse female emancipation.

In the ancestral environment, and indeed today’s environment, if a woman was property the way a cow is property, she was likely to have substantially greater reproductive success than a free woman. If a man was property the way a cow is property, likely to have zero reproductive success.

In the ancestral environment, as today, male slaves don’t reproduce. Female slaves generally outreproduce free women. Thus the optimal strategy for a woman is to provoke until provocation results in enslavement.

The evolutionary optimal strategy for a female, in the ancestral environment, and in our present day environment, is to act in ways that gets the west conquered by Islamic State. If free, likely to have 1.5 children, and similarly her grandchildren, rapidly resulting in the total disappearance of her genes. If her menfolk are conquered and she is sold naked in chains on the auction block by Islamic state, likely to have six or seven children.

Optimal reproductive strategy for a woman is to be captured by a man who owns her much as he owns a cow and can do anything to her he could do to a cow. The optimal reproductive strategy for her owner is to treat her considerably better than he treats his cows, but the less he has power to do bad things to her, the more it is in his interests to do bad things to her. For a free woman, the stable strategy is defect/defect, for the woman to defect by serial monogamy, for the woman to spend her hottest and most fertile years continually trying to trade up to a higher status male or better place on some other male’s booty call list, and for a male to defect by keeping as many women as possible on his booty call list, to spin as many plates as possible, without investing in any of them. For a slave, because the slave cannot defect, because the slave is guaranteed to play cooperate, cooperate is also a good move for the male owner of a female slave, because he has a biological interest in the welfare of her children. He is free to impose cooperate/defect on her, but that is not actually all that much in his biological interest, which biological interest manifests in the tendency of men to love and care for women that they regularly have sex with, provided that they believe those women are not having sex with other men.

Feminist demands for emancipation ever escalate, no matter how extraordinary the privilege women are granted, because they are pushing for someone strong enough to master them. In the ancestral environment, free women were unsuccessful at reproducing, because prisoner’s dilemma. That she can defect on a man guarantees defect/defect, guarantees that he will try to defect before she does – giving her no care, protection, or support, keeping as many plates spinning as he can, so they look for someone powerful enough to stop them from defecting. Slave women will generally outreproduce free women, because he who owns a woman absolutely has incentive to invest in her and her children. Similarly, cows are numerous, their wild ancestors are generally extinct. If animal liberationists liberate chickens and cows, there are not going to be very many chickens or cows. If the People’s Popular Committee for Food Abundance tells the farmer he does not own his land and his crops, there is going to be crop failure.

And feminists, in supporting Rape Jihad, are unconsciously pursuing their optimal evolutionary reproductive strategy, which is to be sold by Islamic state naked in chains on the auction block. We are descended from free men and unfree women. Peoples, nations religions, cultures and groups with strong, proud, free, and independent women died out. They always die out.

Female emancipation is a shit test that we failed. Feminists support Rape Jihad because they are unconsciously looking for men who will pass their shit test.

Technological decay

Sunday, December 6th, 2015

I have long argued, and commenters on this blog have long been disputed, that science died shortly after World War II, replaced by official state religion wearing lab coats as priestly robes, and using test tubes as aspersoria for holy water.

The age of science began with the Restoration and the Royal Society.  The Royal Society’s motto was “Take no one’s word for it”.   Feynman, in his address “What is Science?”, rephrased this as “Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.” Now, however science consists of taking the word of secret anonymous committees meeting behind closed doors, committees that refuse to show their evidence, data, calculations, and method of calculation even while demanding trillion dollar programs, gigantic human sacrifice, and challenged by freedom of information requests.

I have long argued, and commenters on this blog have long been disputed, that since 1972, the west has been in technological stagnation or outright decline in most everyday fields, in an ever increasing number of fields. Yes, DNA reading and computer disk drives keep improving, but clothes washing machines have gone to $#!&, and there is a reason why people are nostalgic for the old muscle cars.

Observe our ability to build and operate tall buildings has been diminishing since 1972.

The highest level of technology is found in war. Soldiers are to take control of or destroy men and assets. Tanks, artillery, mortars and Armored Personnel carriers are to destroy soldiers. Ground attack planes and helicopters are to destroy tanks and armored personnel carriers, and air to air fighters are to destroy ground attack planes, and other air to air fighters.

So the highest level of technology, and the greatest expense, is found in the air to air fighter. A people’s capability to build and operate air to air fighters is the most sensitive barometer of its technological level, and a vital factor in that people’s capacity to win wars. You get air superiority, so the other side cannot use tanks against your soldiers, and you can use tanks against their soldiers, and artillery against their population centers and assets. You flatten their population centers and destroy their assets so that they cannot feed and equip their soldiers, and then your soldiers take charge.

And as you know, American air to air fighters have been getting slower and slower, more and more expensive, less and less maneuverable, flying less and less high, and carrying less and less ordinance. But now they are stealthed, right?  And Russian fighters are not stealthed.

Stealth can be beaten by sufficiently advanced electronics – you need two radars in substantially different locations whose radar is coordinated – one paints the target with a radar beam, and the other views the scatter from a substantially different angle. In response to the Turkish attack Russia now has part of the technology to beat stealth deployed in Syria: AEASA radars that can spray beams out in several thousand completely different directions per second. Does it have all of the technology deployed? Does it have the capability to coordinate two AEASA radars so as to see through stealth? Maybe. Probably. Though we will not really know until we see a major air battle between Russia and another advanced power.

Further Russian air to air fighters can fly faster, fly higher, are more maneuverable, and carry more ordinance than American air to air fighters. The recent display of Russian capability in Syria seems to be giving the Pentagon a nervous breakdown.  The Su-34 is every way superior, except for the very important defect that it lacks stealth.

When Dubai wants to build a tall building, it hires western experts. But those western experts are expatriates, semi permanent exiles from the west. They have foreign wives, girlfriends, and concubines. They don’t build tall buildings in the West because a horde of bureaucrats would shake them down for bribes (politely laundered through “consultants”, aka bagmen) and because they could not get any decent pussy in the west.

Our increasingly diverse ruling elite loses cohesion, in part through diversity, in part through selecting for cowards and liars. Because of this loss of cohesion, if you want to build a tall building in the west, you have to bribe a thousand priestly bureaucrats (whose self justifications are increasingly priestly – mostly they are protecting Gaia) and each of these thousand bureaucrats wants his pet consultant to collect ten percent of the surplus value that would be created by the building, adding up to a demand for one hundred times the value, while the King of Dubai is likely to content himself with a mere fifty percent of the value.

Anti slavery people were evil from the beginning

Saturday, June 20th, 2015

Anti slavery people were always evil scum, and the modern left walks in their evil and hateful footsteps.

The Africa Association was founded to explore and economically develop africa. It came completely under the control of anti slavery people, and changed its purpose to opposing slavery and humanizing blacks, showing that the left were entryists back then as they are now.

The Africa Association launched a lawsuit against the Hottentot Venus, to gain control of her and her assets, alleging she was kept in slavery.

The court blew them off, implying that their testimony was perjury.

So then as now, they engaged in perjury to accuse innocent people of grave crimes.

William Wilberforce, the founder of the anti slavery movement, purported to be an Anglican and to subscribe to the 39 articles, that being at the time a requirement to be allowed near the levers of power, but his claim was fraudulent, making him an apostate, for his church claimed that members of his church were saints, and regular Anglicans were not – and again, the left has not changed since then.

He should have been enslaved for apostasy in office, and sent to the West Indies, and if he had been England and the British Empire would still be going fine.

Similarly, John Brown was a terrorist, horse thief, and cold blooded sadistic killer: John Brown: The Making of a Martyr

Cladistic analysis of neoreaction

Thursday, September 5th, 2013

As humans are bony fishes, and the Cathedral the heretical spawn of Cromwell’s puritans, the neoreaction is the heretical spawn of Libertarianism and anarcho capitalism.  Consider for example the blog title Anarcho Papist.

The Dark Enlightenment is libertarians mugged by reality, a libertarian who realizes that the eighteenth century was right about women, and Bull Conner right about blacks..

An anarcho capitalist favors a free market in law and defense agencies, defense agencies that are in many cases the private property of individuals and small groups.  A neoreactionary is an anarcho capitalist who thinks that a monopoly defense agency that is the private property of one man (monarchy) or a cartel of defense agencies that are the private property of a few men (feudalism) is not so bad after all.  Hence, throne conservatism.

He concludes that, progressivism being an official religion, therefore an official religion is unavoidable.  He suspects that most people need religion to persuade them to act sensibly, hence, whether Atheist or Christian, he endorses altar conservatism. (Or in the case of Israel, Temple Judaism.)

Thus libertarianism mutates into throne and altar conservatism, as puritanism mutated into militant atheism. (more…)

The thirty nine articles and the second book of homilies.

Sunday, April 21st, 2013

The most successful recovery from a left singularity was the restoration, which created a counter theocracy, restoration Anglicanism, which lasted from 1660 to 1828.  (more…)

Origins of Leftism

Sunday, October 28th, 2012

Bruce Charlton, who is usually wise except when his religion gets in the way of reality, argues that the origins of the left are not in Christianity, but rather in secularism, that Christianity became corrupted into leftism by becoming secular, rather than secular because corrupted into leftism.

He is wrong.  Christianity really is to blame.  First Christians became leftists, then, being leftists, became secularists.

Christianity became corrupted, then became secular because corrupted.  It did not become corrupted because secular.  It was corrupt when it opposed New Testament style marriage, slavery, and supported the emancipation of women. (more…)

Curious cuddles between the Cathedral and Islam

Tuesday, January 11th, 2011

If someone is a called a “moderate Muslim”, he is probably part of the establishment, part of our ruling elite, or spends much of his day in their circles.

If someone is a Muslim, and part of our ruling elite or close to it, he is probably a terrorist, or spends much of the rest of his day in their circles.

There is at most one degree of separation between the elite, and Islam.  In contrast, there are several degrees of separation between the elite, and conventional Christianity.

Exhibit A in this story is Abdul Rahman al-Amoudi, who spent a great deal of time walking and talking with US presidents Clinton and Bush and the usual parade of the good and the great – and who also addressed terror rallies demonizing the US. In 2004 was an unindicted co-conspirator in a plot to assassinate the man who is now King of Saudi Arabia. So Abdul Rahman al-Amoudi is zero degrees of separation between the Cathedral and the terrorists.

Well, perhaps the Cathedral just happened to have one bad apple? But it’s other Muslim apples have smelly connections also.

Suhail Khan: Wikipedia tells us “Khan serves on the Board of Directors for the American Conservative Union, the Indian American Republican Council, the Islamic Free Market Institute, and on the interfaith Buxton Initiative Advisory Council. He speaks regularly at conferences and venues such as the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), the Council for National Policy (CNP), the Harbour League, and the National Press Club and has contributed to publications such as the Washington Post/Newsweek Forum On Faith, the Washington Post, Foreign Policy, and Human Events.”

Suhail Khan is Senior Fellow at the Institute for Global Engagement, a Christian organization dedicated to religious freedom worldwide.

And yet this same Suhail Khan, moderate, pillar of the establishment, advocate of tolerance, also seems to spend a lot of time with people dedicated to blowing up infidels.

So Suhail Khan is one degree of separation between the Cathedral and terrorism.

Similarly for Imam Feisal Adbul Rauf, of the ground zero victory mosque. So of three Muslims that I noticed as being Cathedral insiders, three had ties to terror.

It does not appear the Cathedral is consciously and cynically cozying up to terrorists – Suhail Khan put quite a bit of effort into appearing to be moderate.  Rather, they turn a blind eye to terrorist connections, because to do otherwise would be racism and discrimination – while quite slight and vague connections to conventional Christianity cause them to reel back in shock and horror, like a vampire at the sight of the cross, as they do from Sarah Palin.

They want to include Muslims, but terrorism is as central to Islam as the Eucharist is to Christianity, and so if someone is an important Muslim, he is apt to have important connections to terror, and if a Muslim is in with the Cathedral, he is an important Muslim.  In contrast, if a nominal Christian knew what the Eucharist was, the Cathedral would treat him with extreme suspicion.

This is not a pro terror bias, but an anti discrimination bias – which bias in practice means we are not allowed to discriminate against people trying to kill us.

Britain goes totalitarian

Saturday, November 13th, 2010

Sean Gabb, speaking very carefully to avoid saying things he could be arrested for, tell us:

Without thinking very hard, I can remember how Nick Griffin of the British National Party stood trial for having called Islam “a wicked vicious faith”. I can remember how a drunken student was arrested and fined for telling a policeman that his horse looked “gay”. I can remember how a man was arrested and charged and fined for standing beside the Cenotaph and reading out the names of the British war dead in Iraq. I remember a case from this year where a pacifist unfurled a banner outside an army cadet training base. “Stop training murderers”, it said. His home was promptly raided by police with dogs, while a helicopter hovered overhead.He was arrested and cautioned. If I started mentioning the cases where Christian street preachers have been arrested for quoting the Bible, or where Moslems have set the police on people for alleged words or displays, or if I even alluded to the Public Order Act or the various racial and sexual hate speech laws, this article would swell immensely. It is enough to say that anything said in public is now illegal if someone complains to the police, or if the police themselves take against it. And, when something is not illegal, we are all getting used to the idea – second nature in most other countries – that we should “watch ourselves”. Even I find that, if I discuss politics in a coffee bar, I sometimes drop my voice. A few weeks ago, I found myself looking round to see who might be within earshot.