Color Revolution

This blog does not pay much attention to the events of the day, because if you pay too much attention the events of the day you lose track of the long term trend, which has been in a leftist holiness spiral for two centuries, ever holier, ever faster, which unless checked by military dictatorship, ends in infinite leftism in finite time. We had such holiness spirals in the past, many times, and they usually end in disaster, unless terminated early by military dictatorship. Since leftism is inherently destructive, going all the way means total self extermination of the group subject to the left singularity. Sometimes they end in the near total disappearance of the population subject to the holiness spiral as with Szechuan and the Seven Kill Stele, where everyone tortured each other to death for insufficient leftism until there was almost no one left.

But the events of today are a conspicuous new stage in the left singularity, color revolution, which is likely to result in Trump and his family being murdered, or a Trump self coup.

If a left singularity is not halted by strong and harsh dictatorship, with a single man exercising absolute power, it usually ends when the self extermination reaches a point that it profoundly weakens the polity, resulting in foreign conquest, as with Khmer Rouge Cambodia. But sometimes the foreigners sit back and let it go all the way.

Usually that single man ascended to power by being one of the holiest, as with Cromwell and Stalin, and then discovers that suddenly no end of his followers have become even holier than his very holy self, and are demanding greater holiness, which superior holiness might well be implemented by them taking power and him losing power, and them picking up the apples from the applecarts knocked over in the process. He is usually a military man, and therefore turns from those who were loyal to him because of shared faith in the holiness of the synthetic faith based tribe, and instead to those who are loyal to him because they were with him in committing organized violence, and who do not care much about the supposedly shared tenets of the holy faith, turns to those who identify primarily with their band of brothers, rather than the people of the very holy faith. When Cromwell set his troops around to make a problem go away, the person causing the problems found the troops had little interest in discussing the Trinity, the Resurrection and the Incarnation. Stalin relied heavily on the far from communist Beria and on Beria’s apolitical gang.

If Trump halts the left singularity that would be great, because, unlike Cromwell and Stalin, not very holy. Unfortunately, unlike Cromwell, not very military. But though a merchant, Trump has a warrior spirit, and great support among the rank and file at the tip of the spear. He is a man they would like to be able to follow.

The recent rioting was a state sponsored color revolution. Antifa funding and delivering piles of bricks, Antifa paying rioters, which is to say the US permanent government paying, either with Soros as a cutout, or directly. The riots were given cover by Democratic blue state governors and the legacy media (but I repeat myself). When the relatively peaceful mob of plains apes passed an Antifa selected target, white Antifa agents would break windows and start fires. The sound of breaking glass attracted the plains apes into the target, as blood in the water attracts sharks. The Antifa agents would move out as the plains apes moved in, to repeat the operation at another target, while police stood around like potted palms.

Trump tweeted about sending in the military to restore order. The Twitter blue checks laughed. “Empty bluster” they said. “He has not got the power”

What did they mean by that? Legally he has the power, by the constitution and by numerous acts of congress. Presidents have done it before, many times, starting with George Washington, and have done it within living memory, as for example the LA Rodney King riots.

What they meant, or what the handlers writing their scripts meant, is that the permanent government would not let him.

The blue checks, or the handlers writing their scripts, expected the permanent government to successfully ignore him, or that Trump would not try it because the permanent government would successfully ignore him and this would likely result in his death.

The color revolution narrative: The color revolution script is “he is weak, weak, weaker, weaker, he is falling, he is falling, falling, falling, falling, he has fallen”. And if enough people actually believe he has fallen, then belief creates reality, and the State Department gets a bloodless victory. But often “He has fallen” is announced prematurely, resulting in at best a bloodbath, at worst genocidal holy war. Color revolutions are apt to turn into genocidal holy war when the other side does not play along with the script.

When Trump cleared out Layfayette Park, he showed he was not weak. When the military obeyed him, not fallen.

The protesters had peacefully assembled in Layfayette park to peacefully assemble for the redress of grievance, and proceeded to peacefully vandalize the Church where Trump goes on Sundays, peacefully start a fire in it, and peacefully throw peaceful rocks at police.

Trump gave the order, and it was not ignored. Trump marched in triumph into Lafayette Park. And I assumed that would end the matter. I thought, and said, that was the end of that, that the color revolution was over. But they are still trying, not entirely unsuccessfully, to countermand Trump, and are shouting ten times that they are successful for every time that they impede his footsteps a little.

Color revolutions do not stop. It is dangerous to be the first man to stop cheering at a gay wedding, and it is dangerous to be the first man to call a halt to color revolution. Hillary was able to call an end to the color revolution in Libya, but she was probably able to get away with it because the Libyans had sodomized and decapitated a senior State Department official, which made a good stop signal. And today, no one is in charge to call a stop, even if Trump were to have a few senior State Department officials sodomized and decapitated.

The Mueller frame up went on and on, despite repeatedly blowing up in the Democrats faces, and it looks like color revolution in the US may well go on and on. Indeed, the Mueller frame up has still not stopped. They are still pressuring General Flynn to commit perjury against President Trump, though since he has not committed perjury under far more severe pressure, he is certainly not going to under present circumstances. But just as the frame up came unstuck at the beginning, when the Clinton dossier was exposed, the color revolution came unstuck at the beginning, when the troops were deployed and continued to deploy.

The usual color revolution is instigated by Soros and the State Department in a foreign country, and color revolution in the US itself may not necessarily follow the same course. In a foreign country, a color revolution stubbornly persists, and when it is not going too well, it becomes more violent and destructive, more and more unpopular, with the hand of the US government more and more visible, with greater and greater direct US military intervention. The US dropped thirty thousand tons of high explosive on Libya. In the US itself, direct military intervention is unlikely to be available, and were the hand of the US government to become unduly visible, as it inevitably will if color revolution continues, criminal and treason charges might well result.

The Republic has been dead for a long time, and its corpse starting to stink, but Trump needs to restore the American Republic the way Augustus restored the Roman Republic. Augustus probably believed he was restoring the Republic, and I expect that Trump will believe it also. Although helicopter trips to the Pacific would be far more satisfactory and effective, rolling up the deep state for perverting the course of justice, treason, and color revolution would likely suffice. And they are going to continue, until Trump loses or he wins. If he loses, he and his family will likely die. If he wins, he and his family will likely rule for generations. And he has not won, he is indeed weak, so long as those who perverted the course of justice against him and set American cities on fire are not in prison, and are still in his administration. They will continue with investigation, except that they lost interest and ran with Wu Flu to shut down normal America. And when the opportunity to have riots happened, they lost interest in Wu Flu. But they are going to keep on going with all of these, throwing one thing after another at the wall to see what sticks, until they are stopped. As long as they can commit criminal acts unpunished, and we cannot perform lawful acts unpunished, their unlawful acts are going to get bigger, and happen more and more frequently. They will continue on color revolution, as they are continuing on Wu Flu and the Mueller investigation, and if none of these pan out, and it looks like none of them are going to pan out, they will start another thing.

Tags:

1,079 Responses to “Color Revolution”

  1. Encelad says:

    So… Local priests here are all of a sudden freaking out about Belarus 24h/24, denouncing its president as a dangerous dictator. In particular, one writer who is the most vocal Cathedral’s megaphone is following the same identical, comically identical, script used for Assad, Rohani and Maduro on social media. What’s the issue with that?
    There is a story going around about the WHO trying to bribe Lukashenko into enforcing a lockdown, but he refused. That’s all I know there.

  2. The Cominator says:

    LOL Kanye West is working with Elon Musk to screw the democrats out of the black vote in swing states.

    • Pooch says:

      Haha it’s great. I don’t see how that can only help Trump although I’m not sure how popular Kanye really is with Blacks at this point.

  3. Theshadowedknight says:

    The traitor Vindman is retiring instead of being promoted. One more enemy of Trump getting sacked, and that much more control over the military. It also makes career military men less likely to fuck with Trump in the future.

    • The Cominator says:

      Its more likely he was more loyal to (his stupid idea of, most of the Ukranians in the Ukraine would rather just join Russia at this point) his native Ukraine than the United States. In his case hes hates Russia for nationalistic reason rather than being a cathedral believer…

      So even if the cathedral is purged, why are foreigners (without very good reason) getting promoted above captain anyway… especially if their job concerns their native country? Vindman is the biggest dual loyalist traitor since Pollard.

    • jim says:

      A very good sign

      • Theshadowedknight says:

        Tucker Carlson attacking Duckworth for being unpatriotic is also a good sign. The left can’t hide behind the military and attack America anymore without mainstream voices coming after them. Tucker Carlson is doing work dragging the Overton Window rightward.

        • Pooch says:

          If Trump loses, I wonder if they would kill Tucker along with Trump. They already came to his house once.

          • The Cominator says:

            If Trump loses they’ll intend to kill Tucker Trump and anyone who profiles as a Republican voter but the leftist singularity is so far along that they’ll probably end up killing each other in the shitlib cities far more effectively than Republicans in the styx.

            • Pooch says:

              Tucker doesn’t live in the sticks unless he’s already made/making preparations to get out.

              • The Cominator says:

                Tucker will be able to secure himself quickly out in the boonies or perhaps somewhere in Asia or the Russian sphere of influence if the need arises Tucker knows what these people are hes rich and hes smart enough and he knows they’ll consider him a high value target.

                • Pooch says:

                  It’s good to know that he knows what’s at stake for him personally.

        • Strannik says:

          President Trump himself moved the ‘Overton Window’ in regards to going after leftist military vets when he went after John McCain, and the Muslim ‘Gold Star’ family.

          • jim says:

            Vindeman “retiring” means that henceforth, when the Commander in chief issues a command to the military, he will be obeyed, rather than having to find a workaround.

            It is a huge step towards an autocoup. As was Lafayette Park.

            If all goes well, if we are lucky and brave, and if Trump plays his cards correctly, we will have a small group of “bad apple” arrests of key elements in the FBI chain of command and their co conspirator before the election, a disputed election in which the Dems engage in blatant and colossal ballot box stuffing, which stuffing goes nowhere because the people who are supposed to detect it, expose it, and prevent it, obey Trump and actually do detect it, expose it, and prevent it, resulting in a storm of arrests that disable the left’s command and control.

            A few bad apple arrests in the FBI command and control will make it possible to make a whole lot more arrests when massive ballot box stuffing occurs in the November election.

            Trump recently arrested hundreds of antifa. I feared that they were just line troops of no significance, but after the arrests, antifa acted like a headless chicken. He took out their command and control. Maybe the revolving door judiciary will let them out again, but it does not seem to have happened yet.

            It looks to me that DOJ have a little list and are going into blue states, letting the rioters riot, not trying to stop them, but are arresting people on their little list for riot related offenses, while ignoring the rest. The collapse of antifa’s command and control indicates that even though these people are being arrested for minor line troop like offenses, they are not minor line troops.

            • Karl says:

              The revolving door of the judiciary is only quick if the executive complies. It is an improtatnt step that Trump can have Antifa arrested, another important step if the arrest results in Antifa being charged in court.

              If a judge then dismisses the charges, the executive can comply or appeal. Even before an appeal the prosecution has lots of options to make a dismissal of charges easy for the judge or hard (i.e. slow and involving a lot of work).

              If the DOJ really wants Antifa prosecuted, they can do a lot, even if the courts side with Antifa. Legal defense is expensive. The Cathedral has often used legal prosecution simply to burden the victims with huge legal bills.

              • jim says:

                The antifa collapse of command and control, and videos I have been seeing of of what look highly selective and targeted arrests, suggest that DOJ is currently taking antifa leadership off the streets. In which case, they are probably doing their best to keep them off the streets, and worry about sentencing them after the election. Even if they get sentenced to thirty years, they are still all going to be let out if Trump loses power. If Trump wins election, then judges will be a lot more cooperative, so might as well stall till after the election, so long as they can keep them off the streets till then.

            • Pooch says:

              https://www.foxnews.com/politics/durham-under-pressure-to-wrap-up-investigation-could-punt-to-after-election-day-source

              Not what I want to hear if we are going to have arrests from the Durham report before the election.

      • Strannik says:

        I agree. Things might be better in reality than the Media enemy might suggest. This retirement is concrete ‘giving up’ by an Deep State operative, while the rest of what I’ve seen from the Left lately is just magic hocus pocus to convince the few who haven’t already made a decision for November 2020 one way or another, to just give up and vote for Biden.

  4. Icon says:

    [*deleted*]

    • jim says:

      You want me to “name the Jew”?

      You first.

      Let us see if you can talk about your employer. Let us see if you can name that Jew. What has Soros been up to?

      Soros is Jewish and has been the state department’s instrument in doing all sorts of evil things. Tell us about some of the evil things that Jew did, and I will let it through.

      Somehow people who “name the Jew” tend to tell us the Jews killed Epstein – because everyone knows the Clinton crime family killed Epstein and Clinton crime family shills are telling us “Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain”. Tell us about some stuff that Jews are plausibly guilty of. Soros, for example.

      And, by the way, who is the most obvious suspect in Epstein’s murder? Can you name him? (For a change, not Soros, though he has his finger in most of the rest.) And can you tell us about the misconduct of Mueller and the FBI in 9/11? Let us see whom you can name.

      • Icon says:

        deleted for inability to name George Soros.

        • jim says:

          If you cannot name the Jew, you probably are a Jewish employee. You ranted on Jews. I suspected you were an entryist employed by George Soros, so I asked you to tell us what that one particular evil and powerful Jew has been up to.

          And now you rant some more on Jews, but are still unable to name that particular Jew.

          We are not obsessed by Jews. FBI entryists don’t care much about Jews except they blame Israel for the two towers, and Mossad for all the crimes committed by the FBI. Soros entryists are obsessed by Jews, that is why I guessed you to be a Soros entryist.

          If Jews rule, name the one that matters the most and tell us what he is doing.

          I know what he is doing. He is paying antifa to tear down white history, and paying shills to subvert the alt right, reaction among those being subverted.

  5. Mister Grumpus says:

    @Jim (from a different comment thread above):

    “…and the fact that some whites are using those blacks as a weapon to destroy the lives of other whites does not make those whites pulling the strings high status.”

    Now that is one intriguing observation. It “makes no sense” at first glance, but it’s also actually true, and that grabs me.

    That Judge who let off the Mexican illegal who had shot Kate Steinle? If he himself was the one who had been shot then the result would probably have been the same.

    Perhaps I, Congressman Evil, can mess around with HUD rules to mud-bomb Bobby and Janine and their kids’ lives, with Rayshawn and Shaniqua and their kids, with brutal ultimate effects in the aggregate. But if I, Congressman Evil myself, should ever have an in-person run-in with Rayshawn or Shaniqua, and they video me saying “no” to them or whatever, then I catch those very same “brutal ultimate effects” for myself.

    So from far away I’m the master, but up close I’m just another slave.

    Does anyone else smell the profundity here?

    Is there a game theory term for this “paradox”?

    Whatever this is that I’m talking about, it’s a sort of “cheat code” to… something important. I’m just too dim to perceive the “this” and the “something important” clearly, so I’m requesting your help with this.

    • Not Tom says:

      There’s no paradox. Elites always seek to insulate themselves from those they rule, that is completely normal and natural. The problem is that our elites are all virtue-signaling, holiness-spiraling priests. Solution is to put warriors in charge of the priests and give those priests beatdowns when they get out of control.

      Aristocracies with ingroup loyalty are a good thing, if they are fertile and promote virtue. America’s current aristocracy is gutter trash. The “cheat code” is “take out the trash and start over”, with the usual caveats about allowing existing members with a record of mostly-good behavior to convert.

      • Mister Grumpus says:

        @Not Tom:
        “Elites always seek to insulate themselves from those they rule, that is completely normal and natural.”

        Hold up. That’s not the same thing. A Lord or Lady, if by chance finding himself amongst a pack of unwashed low class commoners, is NOT suddenly fair game for an ass kicking.

    • Atavistic Morality says:

      You’re just describing the holiness spiral of the priests in charge, there’s your cheat code. Really, these people are not doing this for personal gain so there’s no paradox there, they’re as insane as the priests that went around self flagellating themselves during the Black Death.

      To this people, being enslaved by niggers would probably be the most holy and sanctifying of things, straight out ticket to their own delusion of utopia. You think they put Shaniqua because they hate only you? No, they put Shaniqua in charge because they hate themselves and Shaniqua in charge is somehow going to bring utopia to Earth. Like every stupid Venezuelan that voted for Chavez for magic socialism to save him and starved to death, like Trotsky catching a bullet to the back of his head for magic socialism.

      I don’t know if people have forgotten what evil is because they’ve forsaken Christianity or because their minds have been overwritten with literary memes. Evil is not like the magic figure of Sauron, a great mastermind with obscure evil plans. Evil in the real world is like the lunatics at the Khmer Rouge: erratic, twisted, ugly, irrational, entropic. Order, planification, reason… are qualities of God, not qualities of Satan.

      • jim says:

        > I don’t know if people have forgotten what evil is because they’ve forsaken Christianity or because their minds have been overwritten with literary memes. Evil is not like the magic figure of Sauron, a great mastermind with obscure evil plans. Evil in the real world is like the lunatics at the Khmer Rouge: erratic, twisted, ugly, irrational, entropic. Order, planification, reason… are qualities of God, not qualities of Satan.

        Jesus Christ is, among other things, the incarnation of the logos, and the logos is manifest the telos of living creatures, and moral consequences of cause and effect, chance and necessity, what the Greek philosophers and early Christians called material causation and effective causation.

        It is interesting that heresies from Christianity that quietly or overtly reject the trinity, always wind up also rejecting the telos of living creatures, and the moral consequences of cause and effect, and soon thereafter start denouncing reality as thought crimes and hate facts.

        Albeit after pope embraced the donatist heresy, the Catholic Church started torturing natural law to say whatever the latest silly doctrine of the Church said. But the non trinitarian heresies from Christianity have the same problem with spades.

        • Random1234 says:

          Are there any good books on the history of Christian heresies and how they compare across time? Knowing what traps priests are apt to fall into seems like valuable knowledge.

          • jim says:

            I found the first edition of “English Society, 1660-1832: Religion, Ideology and Politics During the Ancien Régime” highly informative, but what is even more informative is that it has been purged and censored – what is even more interesting is what is missing from the second edition, and how hard it is to obtain the first edition from used book stores – also that the first edition appears to have been removed from every library everywhere and burned. The Cathedral does not want there to be any good books on Christian heresies, revealing the guilty knowledge that it itself is yet another Christian heresy.

            Religion and ideology was mostly deleted and censored from the second edition, with only enough remaining to hint that it mattered.

            • The Cominator says:

              Unitarianism and puritanism I think are mere manifestations of the left but I agree with BAP rather than Moldbug that the true spiritual heart of leftism is Rosseauianism (and therefore if you want to trace it to a christian heresy PELAGIANISM) rather than the puritans.

              • jim says:

                We are ruled by Harvard.

                Harvard was created by Puritan refugees from Charles the Second’s purge of Puritans, to reconquer. It did so.

                The rousseauian heresy is descended from the false Popes of Avignon. That heresy died with Napoleon, though the ideological descendants of the Puritans adopted some of its clothes and language in the course of conquering France.

                There is a large element of rousseauian heresy in today’s progressivism, and a large element of Marxism, which is a Jewish heresy descended from Jewish Satanism, but in terms of organizational continuity and personnel, we have a continuous line of state priests going all the way back to the Church of England.

                The State Church of England was established by Alfred the great, and was Orthodox. When the Vatican adopted Donatism, this led to unending conflict between the Kings of England, the martial aristocracy of England, and the Roman Catholic Church, which the King eventually won in the dissolution of the monasteries, but the ideological descendants of the Donatists adopted an entryist position “We hate Rome even more than you do”, and eventually the Church became more and more hostile to the monarchy, resulting in execution of Charles the First. Charles the second re-established the State Church under the King, which held from 1660 to 1832. In 1832 Puritan descended theocrats (who had by then become holier than Christ, and so had ceased to be Trinitarian) gained the upper hand in England, and here we are.

                In America, puritan descended theocrats always had the upper hand in New England, were never out of power, but in Virginia, Anglican (Which became Episcopalian) In the war of Northern Aggression, Harvard conquered Virginia. In World War II, Europe and most of the world.

                In terms of organizational continuity, personnel, and state power, it is Puritan descended all the way, but they keep killing off other groups, gutting their corpses, and wear them as skin suits. Descended from entryists, continue to practice entryism. Among their large supply of skin suits from the groups they have successfully conquered, is the skin suit of Rosseaunism.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I agree we are ruled by Harvard and Harvard was once a puritan seminary (but not of Cromwell’s type of Puritan) but allow me to argue that maybe modern leftism is not so puritan derived anyway…

                  Woodrow Wilson one of my most hated figures was a puritan leftist (though a Southerner), he believed the mass of damned normies should be ruled by the bureaucrat and academic elect who could manage their damned and sinful lives much better than they could. And also like a puritan did not believe in infinite malleability of human nature and hence hated niggers.

                  The modern progressive left is far more Rosseauian and less puritan, they believe that human nature is infinitely malleable and enviroment is everything, that men can be women that Shaniquas can be rocket scientists and all that crap that Wilson for all the evil he did would have thought (rightly) was ludicrous.

                  I think Puritan leftism never recovered from how unpopular Wilson became towards the end of his term, the type of leftism that was popular in the 1930s was more Orthodox Marxism but the kind of progressivism we’ve seen since the 1960s… it derives far more from Rosseau.

                • jim says:

                  > the kind of progressivism we’ve seen since the 1960s… it derives far more from Rosseau.

                  Leftism has no essence and no ideology, only targets. If you pay attention to the ideology, you are watching the hand that the magician is using to distract you. Watch the hand he does not want you to pay attention to. Notice that Wu Flu lockdown was the same program with the same targets as Green New Deal, and neither rationalization derived from Rousseau. Black Lives Matter (while white lives do not) is a different program with the same targets, and it does not derive from Rousseau either. Rousseau is just one more flim flam to cover attacks on the same targets in a great big pile of flim flams, which have little in common with each other except for the people targeted for destruction.

                • Mountain Dude says:

                  I’m seeing my local public school flail trying to reopen.

                  Are there so many minor bureaucrats with a bit of power in public education that, at this point, that the public school system will collapse? Will they be unable to reopen, physically, for anything resembling normal school?

                  What will that mean for efforts to spread Harvard’s ideas through public schools? Is this a good thing?

                  Or is enough value still delivered through public schools in suburbs and rural areas that this is yet another way to deposition the middle class to further the interests of the elite?

                  And, practically speaking, is it time to jump into parachial school with both feet?

                • jim says:

                  Not if your priest worships Satan, which most of them do. It is time to jump into homeschooling.

                • Mountain Dude’s Friend says:

                  In broad terms, how does one homeschool successfully?

                  My limited experience with homeschoolers in the shadow of a coastal megalopolis is that they are children of progressive parents (namely mothers) who feel the local public & private schools aren’t holy enough, and they can be holier on their own. The results are predictable. Every homeschooled kid I know is a basket case and semi-functional at best.

                  What might a blue print for red-pilled homeschooling look like?

                • jim says:

                  https://blog.jim.com/culture/time-for-a-second-dissolution-of-the-monasteries/

                  Empirically, it has been demonstrated that everyone knows how to educate kids, and if you give them half a chance, they will make you do it.

                • Bob says:

                  >In broad terms, how does one homeschool successfully?

                  I have known many homeschoolers growing up, some retarded but most ending up successful. The gist of homeschooling is that the influence of parents on their kids is magnified. The homeschoolers I knew acted like their parents, sometimes coming across as kids with adult mannerisms and speech patterns. You can homeschool successfully because you and your wife will rub off on them.

                  You may want to find a curriculum, like the Robinson Curriculum. It’s more helpful to provide structure instead of a daily schedule. Something more like deadlines and goals/expected skills. But Jim’s linked post is gold.

                  There are lots of homeschool groups if your kids need friends that aren’t pozzed. Just find the evangelical or fundamentalist Christian groups. LDS groups in or out of Utah probably suck. The non-Christian groups I saw were terrible. Look for huge vans in the parking lot and families with 5+ kids.

                  This guy successfully homeschooled his sons, who almost all have wives and kids and homes with gardens. He did what Jim says.

                • Mountain Dude’s Friend says:

                  Thank you both, very helpful. I’ve lurked for a while but had forgotten the dissolution of the monasteries post. Even more meaningful now that public education has seemingly collapsed (sure didn’t take much to tip it over). We’re in a rural school district and were supplementing public education with private tutoring/training. We had a fairly decent balance…or so we thought…but now that the public component has imploded we need to get more creative. Great guidelines, and very interesting times indeed. I enjoy the topics and commentary on this site very much.

            • Random1234 says:

              Thank you. Both 1st and 2nd Ed. are available on AMZ, though they have different titles. I purchased the 1st.

              (1st) English Society, 1688–1832: Ideology, Social Structure, and Political Practice During the Ancien Regime (Cambridge University Press, 1985). ISBN 0-521-30922-0

              2nd (revised) ed. English Society 1660–1832: Religion, Ideology and Politics During the Ancien Regime (Cambridge University Press, 2000). ISBN 0-521-66180-3

              • jim says:

                They do?

                I gave up very quickly and went for used books. Perhaps I assumed the worst too quickly. Give me the link.

    • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

      Parts of them know it; and at the same time, parts of them don’t know it; and at the same time, parts of them know not to know it.

      These distinctions have long been noticed at least in embryo forms, eg, ‘diversity for thee, but not for me’.

      The double-thinking founders created a system where entry to the halls of power is selected on the basis of cleavage to their officially unofficial ideology; given that the official story of their officially unofficial ideology is essentially gnostic in character – a particular being’s particular belief in it’s own particular standard of creation, whereby if (when) the nature of creation is found to differ from it’s own preconcepted standard, it holds that creation itself must be in error, rather than update it’s conceits in light of truth – it, over time, increasingly selects for an elite membership consisting of persons who don’t get the joke; persons who *are not capable* of ‘getting the joke’.

      That which is made explicit, can be made godly; that one might know what something is for, and hence might know how it might be made better to accomplish such. Likewise, that which is occulted, can become occupied by the scurrilous; that one may not truly know what something is for, and hence, cannot tell how it may be going wrong.

      It is not unusual for entrance to halls of power to be gated behind allegiance to the official religion – rather, this is the natural state of things. What is unnatural is the pretension that entrance into the halls of power is *not* gated behind allegiance to the official religion. Nature abhors a vacuum. Our cosmic wreckers, and their far more numerous useful idiots (to various degrees), tore down their institutions, their social superstructures, their Traditions, that which they exoterically recognized as ‘religion’. And the replacement of course was not ‘no-religion’, but such religion that they, in particular, did not recognize *as* ‘religion’. That is to say, occupation by such sorts of occulted profanities that, like a chameleon, would be successful in slipping past their own particular conceits of what ‘religion’ counted as (so often, in practice, superficial trappings of symbology in general, but *Christian* symbology, in particular).

      No throne goes unoccupied.

  6. simplyconnected says:

    They’re coming for Steven Pinker for “speaking over genuine grievances and downplaying injustices” (insufficient enthusiasm?):
    https://docs.google.com/document/d/17ZqWl5grm_F5Kn_0OarY9Q2jlOnk200PvhM5e3isPvY/edit

    Pinker of course tried to distance himself from what he described in one of his talks as awful sexists and racist opinions which, to his surprise, he saw a few otherwise intelligent students express.

    • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

      Piker wrote a book critical of blank-slatism (however purplepilled a fashion it was); he’s pretty much doomed no matter what if a troop of self-appointed thought-policepersyns come for him.

  7. Theshadowedknight says:

    Is there any significance to Trump bringing down the hammer in response to the attack on Andrew Jackson’s statue? Or is it merely that they were close to the White House?

    • jim says:

      I conjecture that he is simply reaching hammer time.

      If he has the balls to end chaos, if he has the power to end chaos, then letting the Democrats riot may merely be giving them enough rope to hang themselves.

      • BC says:

        The CHAZ murdering a couple of black carjackering kids in cold blood is making the left look ridiculous.

        • jim says:

          The left holiness spiral is reaching the point where leftists grab for totalitarian power. If this happens with Trump president, they will grab within blue states.

          • Pooch says:

            Which leftists?

            • jim says:

              When Kerensky was in power, there were a hundred Lenins each of them about to replace him. There are half a dozen Lenins around Biden, and many more waiting in the wings.

              Since Kerensky is not in power, they are now busy beating up their fellow Democrats to make their move should Kerensky come to power.

              The left piously claims to be decentralized. Supposedly it is just ordinary people reacting to injustice. As we approach the singularity, it really is becoming decentralized, albeit not in the way claimed.

      • Tom Hart says:

        Trump is doubtless aware that Andrew Jackson has become known as a populist icon, perhaps the first American populist, and he’s often likened to Trump. To attack a statue of Jackson has about the same symbolic weight as attacking Trump (or a Trump building), hence it generates a strong reaction from Trump.

        • jim says:

          DOJ has arrested Jason Charter, the antifa that organized the attempted destruction of the Andrew Jackson statue. Normally when a significant leftist is arrested, the judiciary releases him promptly. It will be a big tell what happens to Jason Charter. If he can arrest Jason Charter for vandalism, he can arrest Biden for taking bribes.

          • Tom Hart says:

            Yes, it is not enough that people are arrested, they have to be prosecuted and given appropriate sentences as well—whether that happens is an indication of Trump’s success. Even better, though not likely for the foreseeable future, would be for the police to actually prevent statues from being destroyed. In Britain and America (state-level differentiation probably), someone has told the police to stand back and watch. Arrests seem to be a slap on the wrist and once the statue is down, it stays down. The people who have the will to put it back up don’t exist or are powerless, and, anyway, it’s hard to fight entropy—what’s broken often stays broken.

            In France, Macron has come out against statue destruction, but this is probably because he subscribes to an older version of leftism, the French republican tradition, that swept away the Ancien Regime and heralded two centuries of French decline. It just so happens that French republican leftism looks well to the right in today’s world. As with Putin, Macron also has an independent nuclear force to back up his civic religion, so he can deviate from the Cathedral a little more than most.

          • Karl says:

            Can a crimal sentence be had within a time frame of only a year or so? At best, the state attorney charges Charter in court. How soon can the court be expected to decide on the case? How soon will an appeal court decide on the case?

            Criminal charges can be quick if there is no defence. I assume that Charter has enough leftist support that he can afford a defence.

            I have no idea how quick such things go in the USA, but if things are as slow as they are in Germany, the best Trump can hope for is a conviction in about 2 years.

            Even if the judiciary is willing to give Charter a hard sentence, I do not see how they can prevent Charter’s allies to pay whatever bail is necessary.

            How could this arrest stick in a time frame of a few months?

            • Not Tom says:

              They could post a ludicrously high bail, but that is unlikely to happen.

              The system was designed, in theory, to protect the innocent, and was actually pretty good at it. Once co-opted, it’s become equally good at protecting political allies/devout worshippers. I would be genuinely surprised if anyone, at any level of government, is able to make one of these Antifa charges stick.

              I believe the only way is to work outside the conventional legal system: charge them as terrorists and hold military tribunals. My guess is that would also come with a gag order, so if it does happen, we’ll suddenly stop hearing about that individual in the prestige press. At least for now while the executive branch is still extremely weak.

            • Pooch says:

              I believe Trump’s EO instructs the DOJ to prioritize these vandalism charges for prosecution. I don’t know the exact details but I’d imagine he will prosecuted before 2 months. Maybe it could done in a few months.

            • Mister Grumpus says:

              Well for now, just charging the guy and managing to hold onto him through Election Day, like awaiting trial or starting a trial, or something, would be a heck of an accomplishment, a victory unto itself.

      • Mister Grumpus says:

        “When you’re strong appear weak, and when you’re weak appear strong.”

    • Pooch says:

      It’s definitely a step in the right direction. The DC district attorney was on Tucker and he was refusing to name Antifa as a cohesive group causing the chaos (Lone actors, bullshit about far left and far right, etc) however he was saying anyone caught in the act destroying federal property will be prosecuted hard.

  8. Anonymous Fake says:

    High salary earning is high status. Entrepreneurs are seen as losers who failed to perform well in school and secure an elite professional position based on merit. There’s always a suspicion that a successful entrepreneur is either lucky (essentially a gambler) or cheating. In any case, they don’t create much value in any developed economy.

    Entrepreneurs could be made higher status by being given access to capital based on school performance of themselves and something like the average college ranking of their employees. It would be an alternative to the ladder climbing culture of the current elites. But it doesn’t exist yet and it has to be granted by political elites first, who are always going to be above the business class.

    What is most important is that social conservatives prize salaries because they can support a family. Entrepreneurship is not a family friendly culture. It’s not truly conservative at all. It’s another tool in the tool box, but the idea of the salary is best seen as being a part of the box itself. It’s a more sophisticated economic concept.

    • jim says:

      High salary earning is high status. Entrepreneurs are seen as losers who failed to perform well in school and secure an elite professional position based on merit. There’s always a suspicion that a successful entrepreneur is either lucky (essentially a gambler) or cheating. In any case, they don’t create much value in any developed economy.

      Nuts.

      All the wealth of the world comes from entrepreneurs, for example the computer on which you are typing this.

      High salary is not high status either. The man in the corner office of the top floor of the skyscraper does not get hot letters from hot chicks. The White House press corps is immensely high status, and generally paid with the smell of an oil rag.

      Entrepreneurs could be made higher status by being given access to capital based on school performance of themselves and something like the average college ranking of their employees.

      You are proposing to give bureaucrats all the wealth of the world and call bureaucrats entrepreneurs.

      The bureaucrats would wind up destroying the capital. Where would the capital come from, if it was assigned by the state rather than invested by those who save? You would wind up squeezing the kulaks.

      You propose socialism, in which the commissar has charge of the capital. But the commissar already has high status (and neither the ability to manage capital profitably, nor interest and incentive to do so).

      If people were assigned capital by the state, rather than by investors, they would not be entrepreneurs. What you propose is the staff of the New York Times taking over SpaceX. The staff of the New York Times is already high status, and the rockets would not fly.

      • Karl says:

        The White House press corps is immensly high status, the staff of the New York Times is high status? Really? Please explain.

        The way I (so far) understood “status” is that whoever gets away with using violence or is backed by a group in a violent conflict is high status.

        Arguably, the police will routinely back the White House press corps in any violent confrontation. This indicates status, but if that suffices then Bill Gates would be high status. He can afford to have body guards who will be violent on his behalf as long as a plausible legal argument can be made that use of force was legitimate (plausible legal arguments is one of the things money can buy pretty well.

        The White House press corps cannot even order the police to beat someone up. Maybe the White House press coprs can direct an Antfa mob to a target by writing a hit piece. Is that what you mean?

        • jim says:

          > > The White House press corps is immensely high status, the staff of the New York Times is high status?

          > Really? Please explain.

          Under Obama, billionaires and starlets would kiss ass for an invite to White House Press Corps parties. I suspect the billionaires took suitcases full of small bills, and the starlets delivered sexual services. Whether they did nor did not, the White House Press Corps status seems to have diminished markedly under Trump, but it is still fairly godlike.

          And, as you point out, the White House Press Corps can have some people beaten up and their property destroyed, while protecting other people engaged in criminal acts, but I was not thinking of that. I was thinking of moderately high status people such as starlets acting as if the White House Press Corps had immense status.

          • Karl says:

            The behaviour of the billionaires is an indicator of high status as being bribed or receiving protection money shows high status.

            Females perceive status differently. So the behaviour of the starlets is a much weaker indicator – they might even haven viewed the press corps as disgustingly low status and were simple doing what they were paid for.

            I am pretty sure that females by and large do not think that the members of the press corps are hot.

            • Not Tom says:

              I am pretty sure that females by and large do not think that the members of the press corps are hot.

              Great. So having one quality – high status – does not mean women will perceive you with a subordinate quality – good looks. This demonstrates what exactly?

              • Karl says:

                I’m still doubting that the White house press corps is high status. Maybe it is, but the presence of startlets (who might have to be paid to show up) at a press corp party is no evidence of high status of the press corps.

                • jim says:

                  Maybe you are right, but I remember and treasure the look on a pressman’s face when Trump security laid hands on him at a Trump rally. He absolutely could not believe, was utterly shocked and outraged, that a mere warrior could lay hands on a priest. He thought he was high status.

          • Dave says:

            Male and female instincts agree that a badge that authorizes you to throw insulting questions at the President of the United States without getting your head chopped off is extremely high-status.

            • BC says:

              Probably one of the reasons Trump has a hot chick insulting the press all day long as these briefings now.

              • Theshadowedknight says:

                Which is amazingly good. It’s so fun to watch her tear on them with such disdain in her every expression and tone. She is tearing them down, and they can’t do a thing about it. I love that woman, in a strictly platonic sense.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Is she good, I haven’t watched a single second of muh press corps since I could go out again and when I last was watching there was no secretary it was Trump, Pence Fauci (I do not understand why that man was ever allowed in front of the cameras) and Birx who did 95% of the talking.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  Watching her shit on the media and talk over them is amazingly cathartic. Its great to see a pretty woman dump on nasty, ugly people and they have to take it. Its glorious.

                • Pooch says:

                  She’s amazing. It’s a great contrast of the beautiful, true, and righteous vs the ugly, false, and wicked.

          • Miu says:

            One’s status is predicated by the degree of his freedom to do or abstain from whatever he wants, whenever he wants. The broader the scope of the ‘what,’ the higher the status. Does that make sense?

    • The Cominator says:

      Communist revolutionary is that you again?

    • Not Tom says:

      High salary is high status only in the Indigo-pilled beta narrative of the 1980s. Even back then, they referred to it as the “rat race”, strongly implying that it wasn’t really high status, that Keeping Up with the Joneses was really a trap and a false narrative used to keep salaried employees (especially managers and other high earners) on the reservation.

      People in the 80s were pretty smart by today’s standards. They were cowardly, they went along with political correctness and beta framing, but deep down they knew it was all bullshit. Today, we have people like Anonymous Fake who are true believers in that fake narrative.

      At some point in time, I think sometime between the 70s and the 80s, there emerged a meme that women could and would sniff out high salary earners. This mutated into several sub-memes; Bill Burr’s black-pilled “gold-digging whores”, Vox Day’s purple-pilled “betas vs. deltas”, and the pure blue-pilled version espoused in the comment above and in Dilbert comics where status and wages really do go hand-in-hand. But all of these were based on a misreading of the original meme, which was 100% shit test.

      Every PUA knows the pimp’s motto: never let her see the money. Conspicuous consumption can be part of a game strategy, but only when the player retains some mystery about his true wealth. It’s the consumption, not the wealth, that triggers the female hindbrain. Like boobs to men, at some point in the evolutionary process the secondary signal became more important than the primary trait it represented.

      • Atavistic Morality says:

        In this case maybe it’s not that the secondary signal became more important, maybe it was never secondary: it doesn’t matter how much money you have if you are not willing to use it. The man who looks strong is the man who has enough to spare, the logic of the weak would tell him to be careful and afraid, but the strong go around running stuff over like a truck.

        Jeff Bezos is seen as low status because even if had the mind and attitude for good business he’ll never do anything remarkable with it, you can look at Elon Musk for the difference. Almost no one in the general populace knows who Crassus was, but they all know Caesar.

        “Peaceful”, “moderate”, “conservative”, the only thing it means is that you are too much of a faggot to make a difference, no one cares for it. You are going nowhere and you are building nothing. I remember when I was a little kid Bill Gates was someone for a bit when he had the courage to change the world, like Elon Musk, but now he is too busy buying social credit from the Cathedral like a dog so no one cares anymore.

        It was and is called a rat race because it is a **rat** race. A big earner, oooh, big deaaaal! Whoof Whoof, go back to your boss, he’s calling you. And everyone knows it… isn’t the military and law enforcement the same? High status soldiers are always mavericks who are borderline mutinous, winning medals by wiping their asses with orders and “by the book”, IRL and in movies both. No one, absolutely no one, cares for rats and dogs.

        • Not Tom says:

          Those are good points. As Jim says, the purpose of a strong patriarchy is to take those people who are highly skilled but not particularly rebellious (i.e. tend toward cooperate-cooperate) and make them higher status. And we’ve seen that it can work if the system is properly maintained.

          Indeed, “material wealth” has no real analogue in nature. All that the gatherer woman can see is material possessions (especially land), and skulls decorating the cave.

          But I’m thinking of terms of why evolution would make us a certain way. Overconsumption decreases survival odds, especially in colder climates. We aren’t hunter-gatherers anymore and from the point that humans started living in those colder climates, productive capacity and long-term planning became far more important than merely having stuff, and having stuff was important mainly as a signal for how much you could produce in trade.

          But it’s as Jim says: men evolved this new layer of abstraction, women didn’t, because by the time men were developing these new abstractions, women were already considered property, and actually counted among those strategic possessions in the male hierarchy. The modern woman’s idea of status hasn’t changed much from when we lived in forests and caves.

          • jim says:

            As I have said many times, the fact that women find male apes sexually attractive, while men have difficulty telling the difference between a male ape and a female ape, but can accurately assess a woman’s potential fertility in three seconds at thirty paces tells me that that among those of our ancestors that left descendants, female choice has been under control since we looked very like apes.

          • Atavistic Morality says:

            If the modern woman’s idea of status hasn’t changed much they never cared about how much you have, since possessions and private property as we understand it are part of that new layer of abstraction.

            So for women status would be proven with the biggest stick and consumption shows off the stick. The silverback earns his status by beating the shit out of everyone else, being in control of the food and giving it away, etc., those all forms of “consumption” in a sense of “exothermic”. Then going by that logic you’d get indeed laid more by having a great car and a lavishly decorated fuckpad then 7 digits in a bank account.

            Perhaps having stock only signals to other men, it doesn’t register with women. Perhaps that’s where the confusion is created. You have stock, it registers with other men, other men perceive your potential and engage in cooperation, women perceive this phenomena which hints at leadership and higher social standing among other males, then you also consume which shows “strength” and “alphaness”, you are seen as alpha.

            If a woman can’t understand that layer of abstraction, what difference is there for her between you bossing around others because you are a huge silverback with 50 pounds on everyone else and very bad temper or you bossing around others because you are the one paying.

            • jim says:

              > what difference is there for her between you bossing around others because you are a huge silverback with 50 pounds on everyone else and very bad temper or you bossing around others because you are the one paying.

              Observed behavior is that it is hard to make the fact that you are the one bossing around others register with women. Bodyguard game turns out to be subtle and tricky even if the body guard is enthusiastically kissing your ass in front of target female.

              On the other hand, just sitting at the table with a really alpha bodyguard, who emits quite subtle beta tells when he is interacting with you, and massive alpha tells when he is interacting with everyone else – suddenly every female in the vicinity gets turned on. If you have entourage and you are alpha male of the group, that works. But there has to be a group, one on one interactions do not seem to cut the mustard with women, and it helps a lot if there are some fertile age females in the entourage.

              Women seem utterly oblivious to tells that seem glaringly obvious and overwhelmingly important to men, and at the same time can pick up on stuff, like hover handing, that are not very obvious to men. So your bodyguard cheerfully slaps everyone on the back from behind, which is massively alpha body language, but you he taps and hover hands, they pick up on that and suddenly every female in the vicinity has the uncontrollable hots. They will detect the alpha male of the group with same super effective super subtle radar that men pick up on indications of female fertility – but the CEO generally fails to register on that otherwise amazingly subtle and sensitive radar.

              The CEO needs to do what Trump does, and theatrically set up situations that do register on female radar, and it is not altogether obvious to men how to do this.

              Classic comedy scenario, back in the days when the red pill was well known and taken for granted: The groom hires a wedding singer, the bride runs off with the wedding singer, because everyone is looking at the singer, not the groom, even though the groom calls the tune. Silencing the DJ for a time works, but calling the tune does not. I am not actually all that good at this – it is hard to explain why women zoom in on subtle tells and totally go into heat, and are at the same time utterly impervious to what seems to men to be arrogant and obvious displays of authority.

              Women’s Alpha Male of the Group detector is exquisitely super sensitive and super powered, but it regularly produces silly results that are discrepant with the perfectly obvious and straightforward male understanding of the perfectly obvious and straightforward hierarchy.

              On the one hand women’s Alpha Male of the Group detector is amazingly subtle and sensitive, but it is tuned to the ancestral environment, and its very subtlety and super sensitivity is apt to cause it to go horribly off the rails in the modern environment.

              Because their alpha male detector is so subtle and supersensitive, they detect that the CEO is frightened of the accounting department, frightened of the legal department, and terrified by the morbidly obese cat lady of human resources, and nothing he does will ever register with them again.

              With the CEO, and with the man who hires the DJ or the singer and calls the tune, a woman’s Alpha Male Of the Group detector goes off the rails because the gain is set too high, and the same thing can easily happen with bodyguard game and entourage game. At some point you have to obnoxiously silence the DJ and command center stage, and then graciously permit the DJ to resume, after you have taken center stage and finished with center stage.

              Sometimes you have to hit the females in the audience over the head with a grossly obvious display of alphatude that men are likely to be gratuitously offended by, and it can all be negated by an incredibly subtle display of betahood that is very difficult for a man to detect, and that were a man to detect it, he would rightly dismiss it as the ordinary courtesy of one male to another. When the bride runs off with the wedding singer, her Alpha Male of the Group detector is being so sensitive that it misfires.

              • Atavistic Morality says:

                The things you say always interest me, it’s a crime that older men like you can’t be out there providing very necessary guidance from a rightful place, it turns up my misanthropy to a million. I really really fucking hate this society and progressivism, I hope I live to see our societies restored to the good and proper order.

                The bodyguard, entourage and CEO situation seem pretty straight forward. If there are people doing whatever they want with you, it’s like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3C_BubeBU8E

                But I’m a bit confused about the frame you’re giving to the DJ situation. I acknowledge the cliche, I’m young but I’ve heard of it and it makes sense to a degree, but isn’t it more about the groom being beta than the DJ specifically signaling alpha to the bride? Well, my experience is null for marriage but I’ve never been “out-alphaed” by a faggot singer if I already had had contact with the woman.

                In the cliche you’re talking about it also happens to be an indigo blue John that gets abducted into a gay marriage and concedes every single demand and bankrupts himself at his wife’s whim and to boot puts as the star of the show another man, it definitely makes sense that the DJ gets the better of him. But, if he didn’t do anything like that, does it really happen? If the man has proper control it seems unlikely.

                • jim says:

                  > In the cliche you’re talking about it also happens to be an indigo blue John that gets abducted into a gay marriage and concedes every single demand and bankrupts himself at his wife’s whim and to boot puts as the star of the show another man, it definitely makes sense that the DJ gets the better of him. But, if he didn’t do anything like that, does it really happen? If the man has proper control it seems unlikely.

                  It is trickier to get right than you think. Even if you are good at playing alpha, the DJ is going to trigger the females into shit testing you, and you are going to have to pass.

                  Obviously you have the upper hand, and passing is not that hard. But you don’t get an automatic pass. It is never automatic.

                  If a chick is convinced the man she is with is alpha, she is not going to switch horses on one brief interaction where there is someone briefly around who appears as more alpha than he is. Women are not fickle. Whereas a man can assess a woman’s fertility in five seconds and is ready for action in thirty seconds, in the time it takes for his blood to flow from his brain to his dick, a woman is not going to be ready for action for quite a while. But she is going to be checking out relative alphatude in thirty seconds. She will be drawn to obtain further interactions with the man who appeared to be more alpha than the man she is with, and will continue to research his alphatude, her boyfriend’s alphatude, and their relative alphatude, and if he were to continue over time to be more alpha, you are in trouble.

                  In the cliche, the woman is fickle, probably because she is already convinced her fiancee is beta. But if the very alpha fiancee fails to manage his interaction with the DJ correctly, she will start checking out just how alpha her fiancee is.

                  Now if you are already reasonably alpha, the woman’s exquisitely sensitive alpha detector will eventually discover that the faggot singers apparent alpha is merely situational. But every man in the audience already knew it was obviously situational, because they noticed what the woman’s otherwise sensitive alpha detector failed to register: Who was paying the singer and organizing the venue.

                  > The bodyguard, entourage and CEO situation seem pretty straight forward. If there are people doing whatever they want with you, it’s like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3C_BubeBU8E

                  The problem is that female alpha detector is so supersensitive that it does not take an interaction with General Buttnaked to unman you, as in the video you link to. An interaction with obese catlady of human resources can unman you. This makes it considerably less than straightforward. Indeed, your chick will probably figure General Buttnaked is out of her league, so if you flee General Buttnaked, no problem, but if you flinch from the morbidly obese cat lady of Human Resources, big problem.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  >but if you flinch from the morbidly obese cat lady of Human Resources, big problem.

                  I don’t think that makes it less straight forward, the issue is simple. The solution… now that can get emotionally tough to deal with, as in, the CEO in his 50s feels he could lose everything so he is afraid, finding himself between a rock and a hard place, I get it.

                  What can I say, if I make it sound easy I definitely don’t mean to sound callous to anyone’s personal situation. But I’m a young man who has had a painful and violent life, in my own life I’m more than willing to bite almost any bullet and play like I’ve got nothing to lose, like I imagine General Buttnaked was. And I imagine when Trump went down that escalator he also wasn’t thinking much about what he could lose, and that’s one CEO denying the pussy pass to an entire nation, pretty goddamn impressive. If CEOs were courageous enough to be a bit more like Trump and a bit less like Bill Gates, it’d really change everything.

              • Mister Grumpus says:

                @Jim:
                “Observed behavior is that it is hard to make the fact that you are the one bossing around others register with women.

                (His whole post above, really)

                When the bride runs off with the wedding singer, her Alpha Male of the Group detector is being so sensitive that it misfires.”

                Has there ever been a woman who teaches this material? To women or to men or to anybody?

                Could there ever be a woman who perceives this material?

                I guess that’s what romance novelists do, but it’s always a fleshed-out “for example”, and never the actual blueprints.

              • Coverage Wave says:

                I just stumbled across the following video clip and it reminded me of the discussion here about women going for the wedding singer:

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsL9gpvbWn0&t=117

                Comedian Nikki Glaser is telling Joe Rogan (2 minutes in) how seeing a good male stand-up comedian affects her “cavewoman brain”. Seeing him command the audience’s attention and controlling their emotions makes her feel like he is the head of the tribe. She feels it even though she knows it is obviously not true.

                It’s only 30 seconds of the clip but it’s interesting to hear a woman put it in her own words.

            • Anonymous 2 says:

              “If the modern woman’s idea of status hasn’t changed much they never cared about how much you have, since possessions and private property as we understand it are part of that new layer of abstraction.”

              In the very ancestral environment, or in the ghetto, the bigger guy just takes your painstakingly collected possessions. Thanks for looking after all this nice stuff for me, buddy!

              • Pooch says:

                Right. Unless you are the leader of several men that will follow your order on command to collect his skull to you for trying.

    • Andre says:

      “In any case, they don’t create much value in any developed economy.”

      Directive 10-289?

    • simplyconnected says:

      ‘Entrepreneur’ was one of the two occupations getting laid the most on tinder (I forgot the other).
      Chicks seem to perceive as high status people with high degree of autonomy: professors, entrepreneurs, CEOs… but not people with low degree of autonomy: programmers, middle managers, etc. who get told what to do by other, higher status men.

      I don’t think it matters if the programmer in question is making tons of money, programmer is a low status occupation, which programmers themselves avoid (calling themselves software engineers to get some of the limited engineer status rub off on them). A CEO entrepreneur may be broke but is seen as some sort of cool maverick.

      • Not Tom says:

        ‘Entrepreneur’ was one of the two occupations getting laid the most on tinder

        I believe it, but is that because chicks dig founders of internet startups, or is it because drug dealers, pimps, broke musicians and chad gym owners tend to put their occupation down as “entrepreneur”?

  9. Not Tom says:

    Kind of a random aside, but Flynn apparently wrote an op-ed:

    https://www.westernjournal.com/exclusive-gen-flynn-dont-act-2-people-control-98/

    I have to say, it doesn’t make him sound like he knows where the bodies are buried. Could be that I’m failing to read between the lines, but, writing on a very friendly platform and yet still going on about muh elections, muh police, muh constitution, muh Judeo-Christianity… well, it’s disappointing. He implies that he thinks that he thinks that politicians and elected officials are in charge, not the permanent government.

    Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure he’s still about a thousand times more competent than 99% of the individuals Trump is able to draw from on staff, but after reading that, I’m a lot less confident that Trump rehiring him would be anything other than a symbolic gesture.

    • Pooch says:

      Everything he said is 100% spot on considering his messaging must still be contained in the Overton Window on that platform.

      • Not Tom says:

        It’s hardly outside the Overton window to talk about the permanent government/deep state. Progressives have been talking about it openly in the New York Times for a few years now. And he’s not even writing on a mainstream platform.

        I’m looking at the subtext, which to me reads a lot like “I’m sorry, I won’t push the envelope any more, I’ll just mouth the standard cucky Republican platitudes from now on if you leave me alone”.

        Not expecting Flynn to be an edgelord. Obviously. But Stephen Miller, Steve Bannon, Trump Jr, and even Bill Barr regularly demonstrate levels of awareness well beyond what’s in that op-ed. It doesn’t sound like dissident rightism dumbed down for normies, it sounds like 90s-era uniparty speechwriting.

        The main question I keep asking myself is: do these sound like the words of someone who would back Trump and the praetorians in a military coup? I’m left with some serious nagging doubts.

        • jim says:

          Trump is going to face an uphill struggle re-appointing General Flynn. If he gets his job, DIA or FBI, let us see how Flynn sounds then.

        • R7 Rocket says:

          General Flynn says “the elected government is the real government of the American Republic” the same way Augustus said, “the elected government is the real government of the Roman Republic.”

  10. Pseudo-chrysostom says:

    When money is accepted in exchange for something valuable, what is being demonstrated thereby is not so much relative status, as such, but ability to make things happen…

    Moneys are abstract approximations of potency; potency facilitating processes are reflected with renumeration; such renumeration then parlayed by such parties for the furnishing of some other desired ends; the use of money by components of a system to do things (like buy food) is a reflection of the system having the power to make such things happen; the use of money to signal your desire for some good, in the stead of sending your men-at-arms to secure it, of course generally affording much more elegant conduction of social operations.

    The ‘price’ of a thing is essentially a measure of how much potency is required to accomplish it (in the context of who is buying, what they are buying for, and where they are buying it). This is useful information, gives decisions makers extra sense of the ‘landscape’ of that slice of Being that they need to make decisions in. It affords means by which the coordination of things can be accomplished; even a system ‘without money’, would still have money – if in degenerate forms.

    More broadly, moneys become tools of divination. How are calculation problems handled in markets? Well, because most of the heavy lifting is done by divine entities, instantiated through the ‘price mechanism’. Or to put it in other words, artificial intelligence was invented 5,000 years ago, if not earlier.

    Money, in the basal state of affairs, is a representation of potency; and so naturally, this also opens the possibility of manipulation of the representation itself, to give the appearance of the represented; the appearance of potency precipitating the extraction of capital, divestment of rival’s power producing structures; thus illusions of power transfigured into realities of force.

    This, incidentally, becomes why ‘redistribution’ of money necessarily becomes calumnious; it does not reflect the underlying realities of the different structures of potency represented by the various parties involved; ‘taking money’ from that which has more potency and ‘giving it’ to that which has less potency does does little to essentially change the structure of their potestas; much like, in more specific senses, how taking away James Watson’s nobel prize and giving it to a black lesbian feminist would not make them less and more genii respectively (but it does render the ‘nobel prize’ system worse than useless).

    A man with a ‘net worth’ of ‘100 million dollars’, does not have 100 million dollars. The more ‘worth’ something has, the more potency the structures it inheres in have. There may be certain amounts of more liquid forms of capital on hand already, but appropriation of any significant fraction of that ‘net worth’ in that moment, often precipitates mounting liquidations of potency facilitating structures themselves. But the value of an organism is in what it does, and when those organisms start getting broken up, all of a sudden, that ‘net worth’ starts evaporating like the morning dew; and in the end, you somehow find yourself far short of that ‘100 million’ in plunder.

    Far better for the parasite it would be to not kill the goose that lays the golden eggs, to keep the systems intact so that they can continue skimming off the top. This is something certain numbers of the mid twentieth-century underlords had a sense of, even if dimly, or subconsciously, or schizo-affectively. But it begs the question: why would the other party agree to this arrangement? Or perhaps more pragmatically, how would you get other people to agree with you that they should agree with you?

    If one is rationalizing that it is good for them to take some blood and treasure from a superior party on account of defining that party as an infidel… then it would be even gooder to take even *more* blood and treasure, wouldn’t it?

    All power has a flavor, different forms of power more or less given to given ends. Their though of ‘freedom’ was as ‘the ability to do whatever you want’, but the power used by a synagogite to get into a position to make those decisions in the first place, could not be used to make any other kinds of decisions happen. They become enslaved, in such a more comprehensive way they could scarcely have dreamed of before. It would be in their *interest* to not destroy civilization, in their interest to not *kill each other* in the process of destroying civilization; but they can’t help themselves.

    Or in other words, they are literally possessed by daemons.

    • Andre says:

      [*unresponsive*]

      • jim says:

        We already had that argument. Been there, done that, worked to some extent, but it was far from being a reliable source of status.

        A woman will always perceive the DJ at the wedding as higher status than her husband (in the old days there were a lot of jokes about the bride running off with the wedding singer, but today red pill jokes are unspeakable) and she and the wedding organizer will promptly create a shit test, which you have to pass, because they see the status leaking out of the husband, even though his money made the whole thing happen.

        Turning money into making things happen is easy. Turning the power to make things happen into status is a fine art and difficult to accomplish, as Bill Gates is finding out.

    • Oliver Cromwell says:

      Status makes money buy different things depending on who holds it, which is to say status is something else than money.

      If you get for free what other men have to pay for, you are high status.

      If all social life were monetary trades at flat and equal market prices then status would be a null concept.

      • Dave says:

        I suppose that in poor, corrupt countries with weak enforcement of property rights, like Brazil, it’s easier and more necessary to convert money into status (and why not convert status into money; everyone else does), so there’s a much higher correlation between wealth and status, leading Andre to conflate these concepts.

        • Andre says:

          Explain to me what you mean by status.

          • jim says:

            He “explained” and I censored it, as an attack on language, meaning, and our ability to communicate with each other. I asked him to coin a new word or phrase.

            I suggest that instead of using phrase “status” he uses the phrase “evil witchcraft”, or “work of demons”, but I suspect that phrase is unlikely to be to his liking.

            The proposed definition was part of a theory about how the world works, and a redefinition of numerous words that describes existent society so that the new meanings presuppose his theory, taking away all the words necessary to describe how most people believe society works, taking away all the words that you need to disagree with his theory.

            He is allowed to argue his theory, but has to coin numerous new words describing social relationships to describe his theory, so that it is possible for people to disagree and argue in favor of the conventional understanding of the social order using words that refer to social relationships as most people understand them.

            It is analogous to Marxists redefining the word “value’ so that capital has negative impact on the creation of value, so that private investment causes poverty and under development instead of development, and entrepreneurs are merely thieves. Hence Mao’s Great Leap Forward, which destroyed most of what little capital China possessed, including, indeed especially, the ability to make iron, steel, and copper, in order to create an abundance of steel, and Pol Pot’s “Year Zero” when they cut down the orchards, slaughtered the cattle, and destroyed those little dikes that run between fields of flood rice, in order to create an abundance of food. Pol Pot proceeded to export rice, on the theory that now there was now a theoretical abundance of rice, that destroying the capital used to produce food automatically increased the supply of food.

            I am not going to tolerate that form of argument. Loaded definitions are an illegitimate form of argument, but I will tolerate that approach if someone coins a new word with a loaded definition, not if he takes away an existing word to deny people the capacity to disagree. That path led to the confusion that led to Mao attempting to industrialize and develop China by deindustrializing and de-developing it..

      • Andre says:

        If you get money for free, when other men have to work for it, does that not indicate high status? I never claimed all social life is monetary trades.

        • jim says:

          In which case the money most people receive, including Musk and Bill Gates, is not an indicator of status, and certainly not a substantial source of status.

          What is a substantial source of status is state favor – money, unlike state favor, is generally earned and saved. The problem is that the state is rapidly accumulating a growing number of parasites, who are looking for high status jobs in social justice.

          Black people have higher status than white people, not because they get free money from the state, but because in a fight, the state will back the black man against the white man.

          And, to the extent that we are dominated by a state overwhelmed with excessive entry into the quasi state elite, money is almost the opposite of status, as Bill Gates is painfully discovering.

  11. The Cominator says:

    https://townhall.com/columnists/patbuchanan/2020/06/30/now-its-woodrow-wilsons-turn-n2571568

    What do we all think of this, personally I’m kind of okay with cancelling Woodrow Wilson (in my mind the creator of the Cathedral and one of histories most evil men). If I were king he’d be posthumously declared a traitor and be subjected to Damnatio Memoriae anyway.

    • Pooch says:

      The canceling of white history should bother you.

      • The Cominator says:

        Woodrow Wilson was the greatest traitor in American history though. Worse even than LBJ. He should be subject to something of a Damnatio Memoriae.

        I’m not okay with canceling the rest of history just specifically cathedral creator Woodrow Wilson.

        • Not Tom says:

          They’re not cancelling Wilsonianism, just some white guy who they will later claim didn’t actually invent Wilsonianism.

          Does Wilson deserve ignominy? Absolutely.

          Does expunging him from history achieve that? Not really, we want the Cathedral’s architects and high priests to be exposed and condemned for what they are, not quietly forgotten.

          Will this change anything about the modern state of progressivism? Unlikely.

          Defecting from the left is always a tactical victory and a strategic defeat. Reasons do matter, and Wilson being cancelled for being insufficiently left or insufficiently brown does not strike me as a strategic victory. The statue-topplers don’t know or care who Wilson was, they’re just finding a few more applecarts to flip, and the normies who see or hear about it won’t learn anything about Wilson’s true crimes.

          I’m sure someone is going to go “hurr durr we shouldn’t defend Wilson” just like the “hurr durr we shouldn’t defend the popos” before, entirely missing the point that the conflict itself will add to human misery no matter which side is victorious.

          • Miu says:

            Not Tom is right; we can’t let THEM cancel Woodrow Wilson. He belongs to us. Not to Raj Streetshitter.

            • The Cominator says:

              I just personally could NEVER bring myself to defend Woodrow Wilson or anything about him… the best I could do is say Woodrow Wilson should be canceled for other reasons. And if I could machine gun a leftist mob tearing down his statue I’d sure be willing to machine gun them, but I’d wait for them to tear his statue down 1st.

              And yes Not Tom is right that we don’t want him written out of history truly we want him in history as a warning we want to say his crimes that he was a vile traitor and that he is why professor types (especially of subjects other than hard science) should never get to rule.

              • Not Tom says:

                Of course, I won’t go out of my way to defend Wilson either.

                These questions are often presented as a choice between this side or that side, but there’s no requirement to take sides. In a Left vs. Lefter battle, we’d all be well advised to sit on the sidelines and quietly weep for humanity while praying for either a Pinochet or a Stalin to put an end to it all.

                If you enjoy watching the evil suffer at the hands of the more evil then that’s fine. Personally, I find it doesn’t really get me off, because I always know in the back of my mind that the new normal – whatever it ends up being – will make my life just a little bit worse. But perhaps that’s just a personal defect, not a clever philosophical position.

        • Frederick Algernon says:

          @Cominator

          Can you explain how this is not a holiness-spiral supporting post? I hate what Wilson stood for, supported, and did, but I’m not a primitive so I know that harming his statue won’t harm him because he is dead. I am also sophisticated enough to know that his cause would also not be harmed by this savage and low-status act. Indeed, Wilson, if reanimated and shown a Jimian Interpretation of what his 14 + 4 points had wrought, would very likely become a force for restoration (my subjective opinion, obviously).

          • The Cominator says:

            Why would it be a holiness spiraling post, I’m saying if the left wants to cancel Wilson an evil vile traitor largely responsible for creating this leftist hellscape we have to live in today we should let them. If I were the Emperor Wilson would be declared posthumously a traitor and all statues of him would be smashed and nothing would be allowed to bear his name. All future history books would have to refer to him as the traitor Woodrow Wilson.

            The most we should do is say that he should be canceled not for insufficient leftism but for treason, communism, and having created the cathedral.

            Most leftists cannot be saved or redeemed, David Horowitz is an extreme minority and even with him it took a traumatic event.

    • Fred says:

      Fantastic. Even if it’s for pozzed reasons I’ll take it.

      At any rate, fighting for an old version of progressivism is the usual conservative failure mode, which is what fighting against cancelling Wilson would be.

      So good riddance to the dickhead.

  12. ten says:

    What’s been up with your domain these days, jim? Was worried they might have got to you, or that you were ducking and covering.

  13. pyrrhus says:

    “He did not get started on his dad’s money. He got started working out of his bedroom.”

    His father, lead partner in an important law firm, had enough money to send Gates to an exclusive private school and then Harvard…More important, when Bill Gates was stealing other companies’ stuff, the fact that he had access to essentially free legal services was a huge obstacle to lawsuits against him…

    • jim says:

      Bill Gates skipped out of Harvard. Busy playing with computers.

      His dad was not rich and his dad had no business connections with the businesses that made Bill Gates rich.

      • pyrrhus says:

        Speaking as a business lawyer myself, his connection to the Gates law firm was of inestimable value, avoiding many lawsuits, valid or otherwise, by patent trolls…I know other small startups that have been sued out of existence by such…

    • Anonymous 2 says:

      And if memory serves, Bill’s mum, working at IBM, was instrumental in getting IBM to use MSDOS.

      It’s not uncommon that getting really rich is done by a ‘two stage rocket’ if you will. For instance, Warren Buffetts father was a businessman and congressman. Apparently not ‘rich’ but I’m sure it could open a few doors for young Warren. For instance, “Taking a train to Washington, D.C. on a Saturday, [Warren Buffett] knocked on the door of GEICO’s headquarters until a janitor admitted him. There he met Lorimer Davidson, GEICO’s Vice President, and the two discussed the insurance business for hours.”

    • Not Tom says:

      “Microsoft stole all their products” is such an old shitlib meme.

      There have been thousands of product flops, followed by later successes by other companies, for all sorts of reasons. Sometimes the initial flop was a marketing failure, or a larger business failure, or it was poorly managed, or in many cases it was actually a putrid product (see: betamax) whose supposed superiority/originality is only touted by those who were fool enough to be early adopters.

      Microsoft acquired some of their later products, yes. But they didn’t steal MS-DOS or Windows; earlier implementations of those ideas by other companies were either god-awful or marketed to completely the wrong segment.

      “I thought of it first” isn’t an argument in capitalism; it’s whoever executes first (and best) that tends to win. Apple didn’t invent smartphones either, are we going to stay that Steve Jobs “stole” the iPhone? Did Elon Musk “steal” from NASA?

  14. Cloudswrest says:

    Police hosing down attempted statue topplers with pepper spray. Looks like they’re enjoying it. General cheering in the replies.

    https://twitter.com/BasedPoland/status/1276601710149021696

    • Not Tom says:

      I’d prefer automatic weapons fire, but progress is progress.

      What a surprise that the loudest and most persistent shrieking in that video is coming from women. At least feral blacks know when it’s quitting time; feral women think they’re invulnerable.

  15. John Q Public says:

    You people need to get real an admit the horrible truth. As Frank Burton put it, Corona was a test, and the Right failed – hard. You might want to take a little time and do a little soul searching – rather, take a LOT of time and do a LOT of soul searching.

    P.S. Calling WuFlu “N-COVID-19” is what we call satire. Your self-important mockery of Captain Trips was just the flu – or for kids, just a cold. You stayed at home because you were afraid of a cold. You destroyed civil society because you were afraid of a cold. You embraced the Progressive Singularity like a gay lover because you were afraid of a cold. You did it. OWN it.

    • R7 Rocket says:

      Not Tom isn’t me or Cominator.

      Cominator was the first to call out this hoax. I only called it a hoax when the predicted dead bodies in the streets from COVID19 failed to materialize.

    • The Cominator says:

      If you are indeed the author I’m cutting Yarvin some slack but I was in the hard skeptics camp on the virus since at least early March and I agree this was something a lot of people should have read with their eyes closed (at least once the South Korean data came out and deaths were very very few worldwide outside of nursing homes and a few big cities, not at all like the 1918 flu) but for whatever reason did not.

    • Mike says:

      @John Q Public And you’re acting like dipshits in Congress are the ones representing the New Right. We here have no power, zero, to have affected what policies were chosen. I noticed from the very beginning some odd things about Coronavirus messaging (such as how it was at first no masks, then masks, it spreads on surfaces, no its airborne, its racist to close borders, oh now its essential that all of society be closed) but you can’t have expected all of us to get everything right from the very beginning, BECAUSE IT WAS NEW. We aren’t omniscient dude, and so if some of us thought it had legitimate danger at first, than good riddance to you.

      It’s obvious to all of us it’s a psy-op now, because the Floyd protests got official elite sanction in the face of this so-called “pandemic.”

      • The Cominator says:

        “We aren’t omniscient dude, and so if some of us thought it had legitimate danger at first”

        After the South Korean data (which was much more thorough than everyone else) came out everyone should have realized it was bullshit (also they were claiming it was both much more deadly AND more contangious than the flu but it was obvious from total deaths that both things could not be true) but for some reason people did not.

    • Fred says:

      As Frank Burton put it

      Who?

    • Not Tom says:

      P.S. Calling WuFlu “N-COVID-19” is what we call satire.

      Sure it was. That’s totally obvious from the context and totally consistent with the obviously satirical tone and content.

      Lol. “It’s satire” is the dumbest defense mechanism ever. The alt-right tried this for years and failed.

      I didn’t destroy anything. I’m not in the government or part of the ruling elite, I didn’t stay at home, and from the very beginning I was pointing out (like Moldbug/Curtis) that contact tracing a la SK/HK was the right solution but that the U.S. was too dysfunctional to implement it, was a militant supporter of HCQ and never believed the negative “studies”, and never hesitated to point out that the WHO and CDC were lying and flip-flopping constantly. Oh, and I was gaining infamy in progressive communities by constantly violating the “trust the experts” and “it’s bad orange man’s fault” narratives, changing real people’s minds on the subject.

      I’m very far away from the positions of Cominator, R7 and Jim on this, but you’ve clearly put zero effort into actually learning the positions of the people you’re apparently trying to criticize. You’re just butthurt over being called out, as is clear from the laughable “it’s satire” defense. It’s OK, I have that effect on people, I forgive you as long as you don’t come to dispense blue pills.

      Spend some time with us and you’ll realize that on the right it’s OK to disagree and cooperate. It’s the progressive religion that demands total consensus (aka submission) on everything. I think well-known people like Briggs really shit the bed on Covid, but that doesn’t mean I’ve “written them off” or am going to waste time rageposting on their blogs. That’s grade school tier defection. I’ve never forgotten who my friends and enemies are, and you’d be wise to do the same.

  16. Pooch says:

    Looks like 2nd battle for Lafayette Park happening now. Color revolution back on maybe.

  17. Not Tom says:

    The fact that the author (this is apparently a guest post) continually refers to “N-COVID-19”, a designation that literally no one used at any point in time, does not speak well of his comprehension level.

    I don’t see anything particularly damning from Curtis, just his usual bombastic style, decorated with the guest-post author’s third-grade analysis and hysterical emotionalism mirroring Briggs’s own track record of (quite uncharacteristic of him) hysterical emotionalism on this topic. Curtis never advocated mass lockdowns, he advocated mass contact tracing. Yes, he exaggerated in many places; he always does. So does Jim. So do most of us. It’s called rhetoric.

    Actual quotes from Curtis:

    And if you still believe in the wisdom of our public-health experts, read this expose of how FDA slow-rolled high-speed RT-PCR testing for two and a half months — ostensibly because ethics, clearly to protect the sanctity of its hallowed turf.

    Anyone repeating lines like “the Trump administration has failed” is spreading an Orwellian lie. There is no “Trump administration.” There is an elected showman and his cronies, fronting for an unaccountable permanent government.

    Absolutely nothing like the way this divisive idiot guest-poster is portraying it. Whether you agree with it or not, it’s the same Reaction 101 that we’ve always known.

    I thought we were better than resorting to hastily-written anonymous “takedowns” of intellectuals on the right. Primary sources, people. Do not rely on secondary sources when primary sources are available.

    • Mike says:

      His point still stands that it’s garbage writing compared to what we are used to from him. You aren’t going to get many, if any, real takes from Yarvin, simply because he has to maintain a livelihood. I don’t think the article reflects anything bad about Molbug’s character, like Briggs stupidly seems to think, but it does further prove that Yarvin’s writing is very meh to bad. I thought the article felt odd even when it first came out, in April, back when we all were confused about what we should think of the Corona Crisis. His writing now is all fluff, no substance. It has the same convoluted language and inside jokes as it always has had, the rhetorical style all of us enjoyed on UR, but now it never gets to the point, because he knows he’d be un-personned if he did get to the point.

    • R7 Rocket says:

      COVID19, the magic virus, that experts say, can read your politics. BoonLivesMatter riots good! Going to church bad!

  18. Atavistic Morality says:

    https://wmbriggs.com/post/31415/

    Briggs wrote an excellent article on Curtis Yarvin that everyone who believes he is still Moldbug should read. Some of the quotes are damning, it’s even worse than I thought, wow.

    • The Cominator says:

      Yarvin virtue signals but as other people have said what he said wasn’t actually this bad.

      Yarvin points people to BAP which shows he is on the right side of things.

      • Atavistic Morality says:

        In a sane world, anyone with a public record of minimizing the coronavirus would be cancelled — unfit for any further employment, let alone in this crisis. Old friends would edit their phonebooks and duck them in public, worried about being linked to a coronavirus minimizer.

        Curtis Yarvin wants you cancelled, eternally unemployed and socially assassinated. I don’t understand why this doesn’t bother you. Well, to each their own…

        • The Cominator says:

          Curtis Yarvin is a Silicon Valley namefag who must virtue signal, he backs my old buddy from another forum BAP so lets cut him some slack as its not hard to tell when he is virtue signalling.

    • Fred says:

      Briggs wrote an excellent article

      Literally says “Guest Post” in the title

  19. Mike says:

    An interesting (if disgusting) look into the mindset of the Antifa squads during the Minneapolis riots. Note the continuous use of the word “liberated”, and the total absence of them mentioning the fact that the state government was quite obviously on their side.
    https://crimethinc.com/2020/06/10/the-siege-of-the-third-precinct-in-minneapolis-an-account-and-analysis

    • Dave says:

      Also overlooking the fact that any army that obtains its supplies by theft has to keep moving or starve. When looters leave their dense urban environment, they become either a conspicuous slow-moving mass, or they scatter into small groups that can be easily ambushed and dirt-napped. Shoot, shovel, and shut up.

      • Mike says:

        I guess antifa thinks they’ll be able to replicate Napoleon’s army living off the land or some shit haha.

    • jim says:

      Leftism has no essence. Leftism just heads off in the direction of whatever apple cart can be knocked over.

      The hatred of marriage and family is because the man with a house, a wife, and a garden has something. The left went all in on Wu Flu, because they figured they could knock over some apple carts, and all in on Global Warming, though these have no logical connection to any idea that the left is defined by some broad social goal or goals.

      No matter what you have, the left has a reason to smash it up and grab something, anything, from the wreckage, as the Open Source movement is now discovering despite having very little.

      Why is Global Warming leftist? Why is Wu Flu leftist? The only common thread connecting one left wing issue to another is that they are all rationals for messing people up.

  20. Anon 1 says:

    this point is interesting
    “As a final point, psychopaths and self-aware sociopaths are actively screened out”

  21. Dave says:

    Jim, you have righteously condemned Gnosticism on several occasions, but Gnosticism wears so many disguises that I have trouble recognizing it. Is this article Gnostic?

    http://voxday.blogspot.com/2020/06/the-only-way-to-win.html

    • jim says:

      It is a bit suspicious. Hard to say. Sneaking in that direction.

      If salvation is merely inward, you are then allowed to do bad things – and thereby avoid conflict with power.

    • polifugue says:

      When in doubt, trust your gut. The writer of this article is a Gnostic, at the least a spiritual Gnostic.

      Gnosticism is a simple system made complicated by layers of obfuscation by its believers. The essence of Gnosticism is that the world is under the demiurge, a lesser being than God, fallen and corrupt. Since human nature is intrinsically broken, man cannot achieve theosis in this world thus salvation is found through knowledge alone. The demiurge as fallen creator is the reason why there is almost no difference between Gnosticism and satanism, and Gnosticism and schizophrenia.

      As Moldbug pointed out, Progressivism is a Christian heresy, and thus Progressivism and Gnosticism share certain elements. In Progressivism, the world as racist, sexist and intolerant is akin to the doctrine of the demiurge, and thus being “woke” is akin to being “the enlightened one.” Progressive salvation gives moral justification to destroy civilization as racist, whereas Gnostic salvation gives moral justification to self-destruct, to defect against family, kin, and society.

      Secular Gnosticism is popular in fiction because the world as enemy makes for a better story. For example, “The Matrix” is a Gnostic work, evident through Agent Smith’s reflection on the failure of the first Matrix. “I believe that, as a species, human beings define their reality through suffering and misery” is Gnostic spirituality. The world as a cruel and evil place is the key sentiment of secular Gnosticism.

      Spirituality in Christ is all about fleeing sin and “the passions,” and it is an primarily inward struggle, whereas Gnosticism is about fleeing the world with a sense of moral superiority. In Christianity, the world is a wonderful and beautiful place; suffering is caused by man’s rejection of God as death and suffering came into the world through sin and is inherited all the way back from Adam.

      The last paragraph of the article quoted by Teddy Spaghetti is the antithesis of Christian thinking. You don’t win by being a “person who knows,” you win through repentance and prayer, “Lord Jesus Christ, have mercy on me a sinner.” In the fallen world, you win by crushing enemies, by winning wars and debates. Christianity was spread by the sword as Christians before Constantine were a marginalized group less than ten percent of the population even after almost three-hundred years, and as Progressivism smothers churches in its filth, Christians are falling to that number.

      I hope this will allow for a better detection of and vigilance against Gnosticism.

      • jim says:

        > As Moldbug pointed out, Progressivism is a Christian heresy, and thus Progressivism and Gnosticism share certain elements. In Progressivism, the world as racist, sexist and intolerant is akin to the doctrine of the demiurge, and thus being “woke” is akin to being “the enlightened one.” Progressive salvation gives moral justification to destroy civilization as racist, whereas Gnostic salvation gives moral justification to self-destruct, to defect against family, kin, and society.

        Exactly so.

        Moral superiority without the inconvenient need to act justly. Similarly, antinomianism.

        All three tend to merge into Satanism, since progressives, gnostics, and antinomians are apt to celebrate and officially valorize transgression, and are apt to engage in religious rituals that are transgressive and celebrate transgression.

        The dominant group of people on the radical left have a very powerful desire to desecrate things, to destroy anything that is good for society, that is joyful, that is prosocial, that is beautiful. They have a spiteful drive to destroy all that is good. Soundcloud at 25 minutes

        Progressivism, gnosticism, and antinomianism, all tend to be in practice heavily influenced by Satanism, and frequently dominated by it.

  22. notglowing says:

    https://i.imgur.com/BL0oLoN.png
    Major corporations donating money to police foundations
    Guess they don’t like having their stores destroyed?
    Still they advocate for BLM

  23. Atavistic Morality says:

    https://rmx.news/article/article/hungary-s-pm-orban-says-western-europe-pursues-liberal-imperialism

    https://rmx.news/article/article/romania-joins-hungary-in-banning-gender-studies

    Eastern Europe dispensing very necessary white pills, they need to drain the EU gibs dry and then ditch them to make their own thing, maybe include Russia.

    • Strannik says:

      Unfortunately Poland is looking to be America’s new main base of military and political operations in Europe, focused on being an Anti-Russian fortress instead of looking to the dangers in the West.

      • Poland, not thinking unhistorically, sees a powerful Russia with a big boy pile of missiles led by a powerful man right on its doorstep, and judges it a greater threat than degenerate US cultural influence from far away. Russia is pretty scary when you’re staring the bear in the face, and fags are not very scary when they’re lisping at you from halfway around the world. Not a lot of people “get” that Poland would be even more eagerly bombed then Libya and Syria were.

        My guess is that Hungary has a robust intelligence service consciously and actively working against color revolution, which is why they can take fag empire money while openly countersignalling the fags.

  24. Nikolai says:

    Getting increasingly blackpilled for obvious reasons. Please change my mind.

    • jim says:

      Not obvious.

      They tried color revolution, and it collapsed when Trump took Lafayette Park.

      To my surprise, and contrary to my prediction, they gave up on color revolution, and are now going with cultural revolution, to which Trump has no good reply.

      Or maybe he does have a good reply: Reflect on his tweet

      That color revolution collapsed should white pill you. Let us see how cultural revolution goes. It naturally manifests as race hatred, race based murder, and white erasure – with white democrats being the primary targets. OK, Trump is losing and we are losing, but this weapon is going to blow back in their faces, as #metoo did. (Believe all women except for the ones that Biden creeped out)

      • jim says:

        That color revolution failed indicates that Trump has sufficient loyalists to arrest antifa.

        If he has sufficient loyalists to arrest antifa, he has sufficient loyalists to arrest some interesting people.

        In the late stages of leftism, any weapon they pick up is going to shoot insufficiently left wing leftists in the back.

    • Allah says:

      Well, at least they haven’t sodomized Trump with a bayonet yet. That’s what passes for a white pill for Americans these days. Heh. Trump’s tweet that Jim linked is not a good reply at all, what does supposedly nationalist Trump and the Western right gain by showing how much they support foreigners? Are they lying and marketing themselves as such or do they genuinely think serving foreigners is a good thing? Does not build support among his men and makes him look weak to his enemies.

      • jim says:

        The point of Trump’s tweet is that hysteria about racism leads grossly wrongful persecution, that people are so eager to find witches that they find witches, whether witches exist or not.

        How is this signaling support for foreigners?

        • Javier says:

          The hilarious part is Jim Acosta’s brainless response. “Huh, what, I never said that! Boo! Manipulated video.”

        • Allah says:

          He’s pleading to the left and trying to convince them that he’s not like those evil white nationalists. Instead of highlighting the white man’s receptivity to outgroups, he should have instead highlighted his courage and willingness to protect his family and neighborhood, especially given current events. If people see you chasing blacks out of your neighborhood, they should not be thinking “evil racist bigot hitler nazi”, they should be thinking “this guy has a spine and I can rely on him if I need to”. Therefore, saying “I wasn’t actually chasing blacks out of my neighborhood, that would of course be evil and immoral” just shits and pisses all over your status.

          I just rewatched the video as I couldn’t tell the gender of the passenger in the back at first but it seems to be a woman. So we’ve got an unescorted single woman getting into a car with an unknown man at 1 AM and this is all portrayed as normal in a supposedly right wing propaganda video. Just how much did these guys actually concede to the left?

          • jim says:

            > He’s pleading to the left and trying to convince them that he’s not like those evil white nationalists

            You are nuts.

            The point of Trump’s video was that none of the evil white racists were evil white racists – that the left sees witches riding broomsticks, that the left is terrifying, dangerous, and out of control, a message that is going to resonate in the cultural revolution, as the excesses of the cultural revolutionaries piles up and the search for witches escalates without end.

            The video was pushback against the cultural revolution. Trump’s message was that the “anti racists” are wicked, dangerous, thoughtless, and cruel, that the “anti racist” mob is scary. Trump sees overreach, and is pushing back.

            • Allah says:

              [*unresponsive*]

            • Andre says:

              While I am technically a civic nationalist, the fact of the matter is that nearly all blacks have sided with the enemy, and as a group they are made almost exclusively of useless and dangerous individuals. In an ideal world we could save the 10% of blacks that are decent and incorporate them into the polis. I don’t think that is going to happen. Allah’s point is that blacks are foreigners, always have been and always will be, racism is necessary, and Trump is virtue signaling. Trump is basically saying “we are true believers, holier than the fake news media, and that is why we have a legitimate right to rule”.

              • The Cominator says:

                Blacks are simple people prone to groupthink and following their lords but they are not ideological, the left bribes the black “leaders”. Ideologically not leftists.

                • Andre says:

                  Most black males are destined to be low status as they are more or less useless to a civilized society. Low status males are inclined to revolt as they have little to lose. On a primal level, blacks feel they could win, because they look at white men and they see males that are about the same size as them. There will always be low status males but when you have an obvious marker like skin color, it becomes an obvious political problem. The right offers blacks a chance to compete with other races, and lose. The left offers blacks a chance to be worshiped and provided for. It’s no surprise blacks support the left. The race problem wasn’t created by the left, it was exploited. It is rooted in biology, not ideology. Solutions to it would require thoughtcrime on a level that is probably only going to be possible once people are so filled with visceral hatred that they will not be interested in finding a peaceful solution. I don’t particularly want a race war but I’m not sure it can be avoided. All pandering is useless.

                • Pooch says:

                  The solution is separate nations. As the reactionary right, that’s what we propose. You are right, will take the destruction of the Cathedral first before that solution can be discussed without committing thoughtcrime.

                • Pooch says:

                  When the Cathedral comes down, many blacks may indeed come down with it but when you’ve been dealing with the devil for so long it should be no surprise when he throws you under the bus.

                • Andre says:

                  “The solution is separate nations. As the reactionary right, that’s what we propose. You are right, will take the destruction of the Cathedral first before that solution can be discussed without committing thoughtcrime.”

                  Nationalism is a left wing idea that was used to destroy the conservative empires of europe.

                • Andre says:

                  Even if we assume that the peace of westphalia was a good thing, do you realize that over the last few centuries we developed long distance communication, computers, airplanes, atomic bombs and genetic engineering?

                • jim says:

                  > do you realize that over the last few centuries we developed long distance communication, computers, airplanes, atomic bombs and genetic engineering?

                  Nuts

                  War, social decay, and ever escalating religious fanaticism is occurring in spite of technological progress, not because of it.

                  It is caused by the same things as caused previous mass murders, social collapses, and dark ages. Nothing has changed. Our social technology is collapsing back to primitive levels, as it has done many times before, for the same reasons as it did many times before.

                  We were drifting into holy war under Obama, and Biden has proposed holy war on China – use US naval and air superiority to “protect” Chinese in China from the Chinese government. Worked so well in Libya and Syria, and it was so humane and people were so well protected in the Congo, so lets try it on a nuclear power.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “Nationalism is a left wing idea”

                  19th century extreme romantic ethnonationalism is a left wing idea.

                  But normal Nationalism like capitalism is ancient.

                • Andre says:

                  “normal Nationalism is ancient.”

                  Please describe “normal nationalism”.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Did the Greeks unite against the Persians? Did the rest of the Italians resent the Romans but keep together with them against the Carthraginians? Did the French keep resisting the English after Agincourt?

                  Seems like nationalism is ancient to me.

                • R7 Rocket says:

                  @Andre

                  “do you realize that over the last few centuries we developed long distance communication, computers, airplanes, atomic bombs and genetic engineering?”

                  And what does that have to do with the Peace of Westphalia?

                • R7 Rocket says:

                  @Jim

                  “We were drifting into holy war under Obama, and Biden has proposed holy war on China – use US naval and air superiority to “protect” Chinese in China from the Chinese government. Worked so well in Libya and Syria, and it was so humane and people were so well protected in the Congo, so lets try it on a nuclear power.”

                  I noticed the shift. President Trump is now being depicted as a Chinese puppet in Mad Bomber Bolton’s book. I guess the Trump-as-Russian-Puppet story has gotten stale.

                • jim says:

                  Trump is a Chinese puppet because, though revising trade deals in our favor and to their very considerable economic disadvantage, though cutting off access to our chip technology, though collecting immense amounts of tariff money from them, which they paid and American consumers did not pay because they were forced to devalue in response, he is not using our connections with China to subvert and overthrow their government. Also, failed to bomb Hong Kong in support of their color revolution.

                  Also, Trump failed to make much fuss when the Chinese rolled up our agents in China who were instigating troubles for the Chinese government, which lack of fuss suggests that their operations for the American presidency were not authorized by the American president, or even known to him until they were rolled up.

                  Which is reminiscent of the conflict between Austria and Serbia that led to World War I. The Serbian government appears to have not known that the Serbian government was instigating the murder of Austrian heads of state, and when Archduke Ferdinand was murdered, and the Austrians got upset, the Serbian government was unable to stop the Serbian government from continuing to instigate the murder of Austrian heads of state.

                  Biden, on the other hand, is not a Chinese puppet, because although agreeing to grotesquely one sided trade deals in their favor and pocketing immense amounts of money from them through his family immediately after those negotiations, promises to bomb China to protect Chinese citizens from the Chinese government.

                • Cloudswrest says:

                  Interesting Twitter thread today about some new Leftwing corporate shakedown organization founded by fellow whites.

                  https://twitter.com/RealWriteWinger/status/1274484709347610624

                • Andre says:

                  “War, social decay, and ever escalating religious fanaticism is occurring in spite of technological progress, not because of it.”

                  Explain to me how you spread feminism to every corner of the earth with 17th century technology.

                • jim says:

                  Television does not spread culture. Power spreads culture.

                  It is not the television. It is who decides what is allowed on television.

                  Observe that the Floyd protests are where there is American dominion, not where there is American television. No one protected by the nuclear weapons of Russia, China, or India, is very interested.

                  King Alfred did not need television to make England Christian. He converted the elite, and everyone eventually followed, and the elite converted because they saw which bread their side was buttered on.

                  Feminism is not a television show. Feminism exists because men stop other men from cooperating to restrain female misconduct. Patriarchy requires men to acknowledge other men’s property rights in female sexual and domestic services. Patriarchy is cooperation between men – it is a military, political, and religious system. Primarily it is a military system – coordination and cooperation in the use of force, agreement between men about what is legitimate and proper use of force. The alpha makes sure his betas have women. The King makes sure the young men of the tribe have a reason to work and to fight for God, King and Tribe.

                  So God makes women swear to sleep with only one man as long as the first man that they sleep with lives, and King and Priest make sure that she does. So Miss Average is forcibly restrained from spending her youth, beauty, and fertility waiting for a booty call from Jeremy Meeks.

                  Late eighteenth century Australia had far too many men, and very few women. England exported some ships full of wicked women who had been causing problems. They turned out, to the astonishment of the Australian authorities, to be strong, empowered, and all that. Initially the Australian authorities were shocked, confused, helpless, and discommbobulated. Imagine the Taliban is in charge of security at Fort Lauderdale Beach, and then spring break happens.

                  After a bit, the Taliban would figure out what to do. Television would not have made the slightest difference to what happened in early eighteenth century Australia.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  That detail is mostly unclear to everyone who has tried to find out, we can observe the phenomena but we can’t fully explain it. The TL;DR that I’ve seen made these days is that strong men create good times, good times create weak men, weak men create bad times.

                  The fact is there, and we are hardly special or first to this party. John Glubb wrote about it in The fate of empires, there’s a common process in every fall of every civilization even Assyrians and Sumerians, Rome, whatever.

                  At some point men become feminist faggots, and then they all die. How is feminist faggotry spread to every corner of those empires and their known world with even less technology than the 17th century possessed?

                • Dave says:

                  It’s like old age — the details vary from person to person but the general pattern does not. Over time, your cells gradually forget how to work together as a single coherent organism. An unhealthy lifestyle accelerates this process, but there is no way to stop or reverse it.

                  We desperately need and will get a new dark age ruled by local tribal warlords. Tribalism solves the woman problem, the faggot problem, the Jew problem, and the nigger problem in one fell swoop. Tribal societies do not succumb to entropy because they *are* entropy. As soon as one tribe weakens even slightly, its land and women are seized by stronger tribes.

                • Andre says:

                  “The fact is there, and we are hardly special or first to this party. John Glubb wrote about it in The fate of empires, there’s a common process in every fall of every civilization even Assyrians and Sumerians, Rome, whatever.

                  At some point men become feminist faggots, and then they all die. How is feminist faggotry spread to every corner of those empires and their known world with even less technology than the 17th century possessed?”

                  By horse, by boat, by foot. In other words, slowly. Did Rome’s feminist faggotry cause India and China to also adopt feminist faggotry? The peace of westphalia is an utopian pipe dream, like the league of nations.

                • Andre says:

                  “We desperately need and will get a new dark age ruled by local tribal warlords. Tribalism solves the woman problem, the faggot problem, the Jew problem, and the nigger problem in one fell swoop. Tribal societies do not succumb to entropy because they *are* entropy. As soon as one tribe weakens even slightly, its land and women are seized by stronger tribes.”

                  You know what happens when you are ruled by local tribal warlords? You get taken over by an empire.

                • Dave says:

                  By which empire? Russia and China have such low elite fertility that we’d end up colonizing them if they conquered us. Every other country is either an American vassal state or a third-world tribal shit-hole.

                • jim says:

                  We will be conquered by Somalia. It is already happening

                  The future belongs to those that show up.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  One thing has nothing to do with the other, considering that according to the data we know that feminist faggotry is eventually spread regardless of technology.

                  The Peace of Westphalia worked perfectly fine until it didn’t, like the Republic of Rome, the Persian Empire or the monarchies of Europe. The fact that they failed doesn’t mean they were intrinsically wrong, the important thing is why they failed, if it’s an intrinsic systematic failure or incentive like communism. However they failed because existence is entropic and imperfect, and humans more so.

                  If you build a good bridge it’ll last a good time, the precepts that built it were correct, it’s just, entropy eventually takes care of it unless a conscious actor works on it. All these civilizations lasted as long as they had conscious actors that knew what the bridge was and how it was built, the social technology Jim speaks of, and when they didn’t they died, like we have forgotten and we are dying as well.

                • Mike says:

                  Andre does have a point though, in that notions such as “world communism” or a “brotherhood of nations” and other leftist, internationalist bullshit didn’t exist until the modern era. Leftism has always existed within nations yes, but international leftism did not exist until very recently. Rome turning leftist, as Andre said, did not make Han China turn leftist. The Abbasids becoming decadent, did not make Europe become decadent. It is an entirely modern phenomenon that leftism on one side of the world affects another side of the world, as we see with George Floyd protests popping up in Japan.

                  However, as Jim noted, this is only because those nations are American controlled. So at the end of the day, it still mostly comes down to political power and patronage, not technology.

                • jim says:

                  Universalism has been around since shortly after the collapse of Bronze Age civilization. But they lacked the necessary communication technology to be as universal as they would have liked to be. The Papacy, however, made a good go of it, resulting in the incredibly bloody holy wars of Europe. It is a difference of degree, not kind. Vatican attempting to rule the world is not hugely different from Harvard attempting to rule the world. The Vatican wound up with a mighty good part of the world. The Hebrews had a big problem with Moloch universalism, and Moloch Universalism got hold of a big part of the Mediterranean basin.

                  Moloch dominating the Southern Mediterranean was only a difference in degree from Harvard dominating the Atlantic, and not a very large difference in degree.

                • R7 Rocket says:

                  @Andre

                  “Explain to me how you spread feminism to every corner of the earth with 17th century technology.”

                  Christianity was spread to every corner of the Earth with 17th century technology.

                • R7 Rocket says:

                  “We will be conquered by Somalia.”

                  This is why Prophet Elon Musk’s Starship is a conundrum for the nigger-worshiping Left. They can’t openly oppose space travel because PROGRESSivism isn’t just a religion, it’s a brand. But they know that low IQ Somalia cannot conquer Mars and that the 26 month gap makes it hard for them to enforce feminist power on a patriarchal wild-cat Mars settlement.

                  And thus the indirect attacks on the StarProphet.

                • Dave says:

                  “We will be conquered by Somalia. It is already happening”

                  That doesn’t make us a vassal state of the Somali Empire; it only accelerates our transition into a fourth-world failed state followed by a tribal warlord society without EBT cards. I have no food to send to our new skinny overlords, but I invite them to harvest all the bacon they want from our inner-city feedlots.

                • jim says:

                  When a lot of the world is Somalia, a Genghis or a Mohammed will appear and create an empire. If an empire has fertile elite, it will prosper. This happens at roughly four hundred year intervals.

                  Let us hope the next Genghis or Mohammed is white or east Asian, or else the process is going to produce a low IQ world.

                • Andre says:

                  “Christianity was spread to every corner of the Earth with 17th century technology.”

                  What you describe as Christianity was a functional, and very decentralized civilizational model/meme. That is not the same as feminism.

                  “But they lacked the necessary communication technology to be as universal as they would have liked to be.”

                  That is what I’m trying to explain. Fossil fuel powered airplanes and radio waves (among other things) fundamentally changed the dynamics of power in the world. There were massive empires in the past, but they were decentralized, and if they became too dysfunctional they would lose territory or completely collapse before exporting their dysfunction to the rest of the planet. Talk all you want about how there aren’t George Floyd riots in Russia, but Putin still parrots feminist talking points. China is openly racist… sort of… but who was researching novel coronaviruses there? Oh right, a woman.

                • jim says:

                  > What you describe as Christianity was a functional, and very decentralized civilizational model/meme. That is not the same as feminism.

                  Vatican version of Christianity was dysfunctional after Anno Domini 1100, and steadily became more and more centralized and dysfunctional until the counter reformation.

                  Moloch worship was notoriously dysfunctional.

                  Fossil fuel powered airplanes and radio waves (among other things) fundamentally changed the dynamics of power in the world

                  Nuts.

                  The Vatican struggle with Kings was mighty similar to the Harvard struggle with presidents and “dictators”, is conducted by similar means and methods, on a similar geographic scale. No fundamental change. The Universalist wars of the French revolution were similar in geographic scale to the universalist wars of World War I and II. The holy wars of the sixteenth and early seventeenth century were broader in geographic scale than the recent holy wars in Libya and Syria, though they will be dwarfed by the coming holy war against China.

                  As our social technology regresses from its eighteenth century peek, we parallel past times more and more closely. Somalia has come to small parts of America, and is expanding.

                  When more advanced forms of social technology self destruct, the winning system is the patriarchal patrilineal clan, which is effective in securing property rights between the great grandchildren of the patriarch, but fails to secure property rights outside the clan. We are a long way from a society of small patriarchal patrilineal clans in a constant state of armed conflict with each other, but they are coming in sight.

                  Swedish whites are discovering that clan members get pussy, and Swedish whites get leftovers, if there are any leftovers.

                • Andre says:

                  “similar geographic scale”

                  I am not aware of any documents showing 10th century China, or India, or Mexico, parroting vatican doctrine.

                • jim says:

                  China is still not parroting Cathedral doctrine. Cathedral missionaries in China are parroting Cathedral doctrine, as Vatican missionaries over most of the world parroted Vatican doctrine. Russia parroted the doctrine of Constantinople for a long time, then declared itself the New Rome many centuries ago. It now returns to its rightful position as the new Rome after a brief flirtation with Harvard.

                  India is parroting Cathedral doctrine, despite nukes, but the relationship gets tense from time to time, like the relationship between the Vatican and theoretically Roman Catholic claimants to the throne of holy Roman emperor.

                  The activities are the same, and the scale not much different. The distance between Moscow and Constantinople was not that much smaller than the difference between Moscow and Harvard.

                • Andre says:

                  “China is still not parroting Cathedral doctrine.”

                  Maybe I have a blindspot. Can you name one or more doctrinal points of the Cathedral that are not parroted by China?

                • jim says:

                  https://blog.jim.com/economics/analysis-of-a-chinese-video/

                  And even India is a considerably less faithful parrot than countries without nuclear weapons.

                • Andre says:

                  I’ll check that out.

                • Dave says:

                  “When a lot of the world is Somalia, a Genghis or a Mohammed will appear and create an empire.”

                  Don’t expect this to happen right away. After the Romans abandoned Britain, 500 years passed before any man ruled enough territory to call himself “King of England”. Great leaders are rare, and even the greatest fall if an enemy archer makes a lucky shot on the battlefield.

              • jim says:

                I see no virtue signaling.

                He is telling us the anti racists are wicked for finding imaginary witches. He does not say “I am not one of those horrible witches”.

                He says “You guys went looking for horrible witches, and wound up destroying the lives of the Comington kids”.

    • Javier says:

      SSC is so funny, he’s a generally smart and insightful person, and you can see numerous cases where his line of inquiry will lead him to NRX conclusions. Then see exactly where the mental crime-stop kicks in and steers him towards only cathedral-approved conclusions.

      He seems to have spent the current crisis busily examining the mating habits of spotted barn owls or whatever, so I think the worst they will say is he isn’t groveling on his knees like other good leftists right now. They may also ding him just for interacting with Yarvin but who knows, the NYT may prefer to ignore his existence.

    • Not Tom says:

      I see Scott and his fans are about 10 years behind the times on the DTTTM issue.

      “They’re going to write the article whether you cooperate or not, so night as well cooperate”. Sigh.

  25. The Cominator says:

    But I do think we are near a point where Trump needs to gather some Praetorians and start arresting people in the government and the judiciary or he risks being defeated at least in November (by Michelle Obama most likely not Biden but if not Michelle someone else).

    SCOTUS issued a triple fuckover and the appeals court seems like its going to allow the judge to appoint his own prosecutor against Flynn, the lawyers are in open revolt with Roberts siding with the shitlibs on every issue.

    Something must be done soon… none of this would have happened if Trump had done the right thing with the Corona shutdowns and the economy was good. Roberts a spineless political jellyfish wouldn’t have dared.

    • Pooch says:

      It wasn’t Corona. It was BLM and specifically Trump’s victory at the Battle of Lafayette Park which has flushed the cuckservatives out in open defiance of Trump.

      • Pooch says:

        It was not the crossing of the Rubicon but it was a dry fire exercise crossing of the Rubicon and Caesar’s enemies are making themselves known.

      • Pooch says:

        For some reason comments are going into moderation with certain words:

        It was not the crossing of the Rub*con but it was a dry fire exercise crossing of the Rub*con and Caesar’s enemies are making themselves known.

    • Not Tom says:

      Lol. Is there any problem, anywhere in the USA and possibly globally, that is not caused by the Corona shutdowns, which were primarily instituted and enforced by state governments with virtually no federal involvement except to close the borders?

      Talk about monomania. I don’t even want to understand the mental gymnastics it took to link these awful SCOTUS decisions to that. Are you just going to keep going on and on about this, in every thread and every reply to every thread? Does it ever end?

      • BC says:

        Dude, Cominator never going to let the Corona virus go, it’s literally the only prediction he’s ever gotten right around here.

        • The Cominator says:

          You’re the ones making some kind of personal issue about it I haven’t attacked you on the issue since you let it drop.

          I haven’t made too many predictions other than the nominee (which I said won’t be Biden and most likely will be Michelle Obama) and that Comey when he testifies is going to do a lot of damage to other side.

          We shall see about both.

      • The Cominator says:

        Trump had a well deserved aura of infallibility at least on economic questions before then, and the rank and file of the GOP was solid behind because of that.

        But now things are wobbly. Yes the Corona shutdowns that Trump could have prevented via using the Orville Faubus precedent are indeed the font of all our current evils.

        • Pooch says:

          It was the race riots that forced the cucks to cuck, but corona did create the ripe environment to maximize mob numbers.

    • BC says:

      >Something must be done soon

      Trump’s doing his normal let the leftist go to far play.

      >SCOTUS issued a triple fuckover and the appeals court seems like its going to allow the judge to appoint his own prosecutor against Flynn, the lawyers are in open revolt with Roberts siding with the shitlibs on every issue.

      They’re about to impeach Barr.

      • The Cominator says:

        “Trump’s doing his normal let the leftist go to far play.”

        Not talking about the riots we should not care if Democrats destroy their own cities I mean the courts… Roberts siding with the liberals on everything suddenly is not a tolerable situation.

        Trump needs something Hillary had, people who will kill his enemies for him.

        • Theshadowedknight says:

          Ooh, ooh, pick me! Pick me!

          • The Cominator says:

            Not saying you but he needs to make a vacancy on the court quickly… one way or another.

            • Mr.P says:

              “… he needs to make a vacancy on the court quickly.”

              Maybe I’m slow, and daft to boot, but how is this comment not holiness spiraling?

              If we all were sitting around a real table in a real room, talkin’ it out, what would be the likely reaction to this comment?

              • The Cominator says:

                Trump cannot do ANYTHING if he is going to defer to the courts and Roberts is going to consistently back his enemies. Roberts defection is intolerable…

                So either he needs to recruit soldiers and pull a Jackson and enforce his Jackson… OR he needs to do something about the court as is.

                • Mr.P says:

                  Yes, of course, but as a point and choice of strategy … that needs to be Pres. Trump’s next move?

                • The Cominator says:

                  Well he has to move quickly on this… even if he has to take a horrible risk and cross the Rubicon.

                  Roberts defection does make him weak and getting weaker… as Jim says. Not a tolerable situation.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I made a reply to this but it seems it is stuck in moderation.

                  But lets see if this one gets through… yes Trump must act on this quickly even if it is at great risk…

                • Pooch says:

                  Why? What big cases are outstanding still?

                • The Cominator says:

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMLa4IeFKHM

                  Pooch great scene from when Game of Thrones was actually good.

                  If SCOTUS is going to be striking down all of Trump’s actions now the perception that he is weaker becomes more real providing a feedback loop.

                  A vacancy among the 5 shitlibs (including Roberts not the one time traitor Gorsuch) must arise very soon one way or another.

                • Not Tom says:

                  the one time traitor Gorsuch

                  Don’t take this to mean I’m not furious with Gorsuch’s decision – I am – but essentially his argument was that judges should follow the existing law and not make up their own. It’s a classic case of muh principles.

                  What he said was: this is the actual law, as written, and if you don’t like the law, then fix it yourselves. It’s not the outcome I would have wanted, but it is consistent with many of his past judgments, and he’s not entirely wrong; finding creative ways to interpret the Civil Rights Act is not going to make the Act go away, and that Act is largely what enshrines progressivism as the state religion.

                  I doubt we’ll ever have lawmakers with the balls to kill the CRA, but that doesn’t mean it was Gorsuch’s responsibility to overturn it on that particular day – and besides, he wasn’t even the deciding vote, it was 6-3.

              • Theshadowedknight says:

                It isn’t a holiness spiral. If the king asks me to remove his enemies, I would do so. “Will no one rid me of this troublesome judge?” That is the heart of NRx. The sovreign gives the orders and the rest of us carry them out. You all are priest types so perhaps direct action is out of your remit, but I am very much a warrior, from a warrior family. If the God-Emperor asked me to start discretely removing his opponents, I would do my best as long as I was able.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Yes, but he has to ask you. The difference between restoration and revolution is legitimate authority.

                • kawaii_kike says:

                  If Trump did start removing his enemies, where would he start to have the greatest effect? Trump is surrounded by enemies on all sides; traitorous Republicans, disloyal judges, deranged academics, every Democrat, every journalist at the NYT, every social science professor at Harvard. It’s always hard to tell who’s pulling the strings of the Cathedral.

                • Andre says:

                  “The difference between restoration and revolution is legitimate authority.”

                  Violence legitimizes itself.

                • jim says:

                  Two thousand years of history demonstrate otherwise.

                  Force alone does not suffice. Military dictatorship without a legitimizing story does not work very well.

                  Our current story “Democracy”, “Republic” does not work, because a republic needs a virtuous and cohesive elite.

                  Lacking a virtuous and cohesive elite, the solution is legitimate monarchy. Americans, disgusted by our ruling elite, are becoming hungry for Kings.

                • The Cominator says:

                  KK this is a hard question but in my opinion the flag officer corps and pentagon bureaucracy.

                  Trump has the loyalty of the fighting men of the military but the flag officers and pentagon bureaucrats were way back in the Clinton admin purged of anyone who wasn’t a raging shitlib.

                  If Trump were able to purge the military he could then use the military to wipe out the rest of America’s domestic enemies.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Jim not sure if you are responding to me because you responded above my post or to theshadowedknight…

                  Its not possible to present something like the Augustan settlement without a massive purge of the ruling elite, Octavian (before he reinvented himself as the much gentler Augustus) was extremely ruthless in carrying this out. Octavian was particularly insistent that all know enemies of his “father” Julius Caesar be hunted down to the ends of the earth.

                  So you don’t want a military regime to be the permanent standing government, but its great for a transition where you have a list of people especially within the former elite that you need to have killed.

                • Pooch says:

                  Americans, disgusted by our ruling elite, are becoming hungry for Kings.

                  How does Trump reconcile that with the American origin story of a revolt against a king though to extend past his term limit? Maybe he can invoke the war-time FDR exception?

                • jim says:

                  Dengism is theoretically Maoist, but the party decides what communism is.

                  Communist party approved videos endorse and explain capitalism 101, and assure us that this Maoism and communism, rightly understood.

                  This of course leaves the door ajar for the Chinese government to be attacked from the left, just as “all men are created equal” leaves the door ajar for Trump’s national capitalism to be attacked from the left, for the economic doctrines that every Chinese child is now imbibing on ever kid’s show are flatly and directly incompatible with Marxist economics, but hey, they are absorbing those doctrines regardless.

                  Should Trump succeed, he will find that even with death squads at his command, he will still be unable to rule. Augustus Caesar entered Rome at the head of an army, applied death squads liberally, and it took him twelve years to bring the Roman government to heel, and it never heeled very well until Constantine adopted Christianity.

                  Trump needs a state religion that is on his side, rather than an enemy. If all goes well, it will be called Republican Nationalism and will celebrate the American Revolution and the long march and the Bill of Rights, but the newly Orthodox Episcopalian Church will be strangely influential, and Christian statues will go up as they are now going up in Russia, and we will once again be building Cathedrals, though they will be of steel and glass instead of stone and glass, as they are now once again building Cathedrals of steel and glass in Russia.

                • R7 Rocket says:

                  @Cominator
                  Speaking of the Augustan Settlement:

                  Octavian Cæsar took power without breaking any law or violating the Roman Constitution. He destroyed his enemies by prosecuting them for real crimes they committed (Julius Cæsar’s murder, and virtually every single politician committed a crimes) and used proscription laws that his political enemies passed.

                  He made only slight changes that in the long term gave him effective monarchical power without having any official monarchical power. Examples:
                  Automatic re-election as one of the 12 Tribunes, giving him the Tribunician veto power over any legislation.
                  Being commander-in-chief (“imperator”) of most of the Roman army, instead illegally commanding 100% of the Roman army, this gave him a real power backup for just-in-case.
                  What about real power in Rome itself? Inside the Pomerium, the Prætorian Guard were just civilian bodyguards in civilian clothes with a sword or a club. Totally legal and totally not a military occupation of Rome 😜… Outside the Pomerium, they were Octavian’s crack troops. Awesome for him, shitty for his successors.

                  Octavian carefully avoided the mistakes of Cornelius Sulla and Julius Cæsar.

                • jim says:

                  Octavian Cæsar took power without breaking any law or violating the Roman Constitution. He destroyed his enemies by prosecuting them for real crimes they committed (Julius Cæsar’s murder, and virtually every single politician committed a crimes)

                  And Trump can arrest most Democrat politicians and Democrat judges for real crimes. He does not have to arrest the judges for concocting thin legal rationales for illegal acts, he can arrest them for having friendly private chats with litigants from which some parties to the litigation were excluded.

                  Biden would be a good start.

                • R7 Rocket says:

                  “instead of illegally commanding” not “instead illegally commanding”

                  Also, as first citizen, Augustus was always the first Senator to put out a legislative proposal.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “Octavian Cæsar took power without breaking any law or violating the Roman Constitution.”

                  I think you are speaking in jest but he broke many “laws” but everyone else was, there was no real law at that point.

                  He even broke a precedent that none of the late Republic’s strongmen had ever broken having seized Antony’s will (supposedly it could well have been a forgery) from the Vestal Virgins.

                  If you win it doesn’t matter…

                • Not Tom says:

                  Violence legitimizes itself.

                  That’s possibly the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard. I don’t know if this is some recent BAP influence or if we’ve just had an influx of people who like to larp as rough customers, or if it’s some new form of entryism, but it’s dumb as fuck.

                  The reaction is not despotism, and is definitely not violent anarchy. Power might be defined reasonably accurately as the capacity to commit violence without consequences, but there is plenty of violence that does get punished, and quite harshly, either by the state or by private actors. Violent criminals who are too stupid and disorganized to stay out of prison do not possess any form of legitimacy. Even the highest dictators and emperors who rule solely by the sword inevitably find themselves assassinated before long.

                  We recognize that in clown world, many types of antisocial violence do in fact confer high status, but that is because the Cathedral prevents organized suppression of that violence. It is not some iron law that whoever exhibits the most uncontrolled ape-rage is automatically the legitimate ruler; it’s whoever is able to hold that position, which ultimately requires the willing cooperation of other men. Mindless brutes may be able to take the top spot, briefly, but they can’t hold it.

                  You are extremely confused about the relationships between power, status, title, possession, violence, law, governance and just about every other concept in political philosophy, and when caught in this confusion, you invent new definitions that contradict both conventional definitions and your own previous definitions. You direly need to take several steps back and read some of the “101” essays before trying to participate in these conversations.

                • R7 Rocket says:

                  @Cominator

                  ” He even broke a precedent that none of the late Republic’s strongmen had ever broken having seized Antony’s will (supposedly it could well have been a forgery) from the Vestal Virgins.”

                  In that leaked will of Proconsul Antony, the will stated that Antony was going to hand over the Eastern Roman Empire to a degenerate, whorish foreign queen. It didn’t help that Mark Antony stayed in Alexandria, instead of Rome. It wasn’t very hard for Proconsul Octavian to find one out of twelve Tribunes to veto any prosecution of the leaker/forger.

                • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

                  >Even the highest dictators and emperors who rule solely by the sword inevitably find themselves assassinated before long.

                  Do they? By whom? Beware the dangers of the passive voice.

                  ‘You need to give the people democracy because otherwise they will rise up and inevitably defeat your running class as a rolling tide of history. It’s just being pragmatic, you see.’

                • jim says:

                  If the ruler is just a guy with a sword, well, lot of other people have swords.

                  The army has to have cohesion. And the cohesion cannot come from steel. That is the job of priests – and right now the priesthood is industriously undermining the discipline and unity of the armed forces.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Violence doesn’t legitimize itself BUT victory (ie successful violence where you can impose a new order) does kind of legitimize itself.

                  R7

                  We are not sure if the will was legitimate or a forgery (it was mighty convient) but its not likely to have “leaked”.

                • jim says:

                  Victory is a start.

                  The next part is harder.

                • R7 Rocket says:

                  @Cominator

                  “We are not sure if the will was legitimate or a forgery (it was mighty convient) but its not likely to have ‘leaked’.”

                  The Vestal Virgin or her associates hand over Antony’s Will to Octavian, thus the “leak.” Or it could’ve been forged instead, with Antony’s adoption of Alexandrian Greek customs giving it plausibility.

                  I think you’re underestimating how outrageous the idea of handing over the Eastern Roman Empire to the hated Queen Cleopatra is to the Romans. Imagine how outrageous it would look to the Americans in WWII if handing over California to the Japanese Emperor was suggested.

                • The Cominator says:

                  No I completely understand how outrageous the idea was in Rome and this was what made the Romans forget about how outrageous the idea would be under normal circumstances of seizing the will from the Vestals and my understanding was that the will was “seized” (which given that seizing the will from the Vestal virgins would have been considered a sacrilege akin to “piss christ” under normal circumstances, but this was also forgotten given how outrageous the will was to Roman sentiments) not voluntarily handed over.

                • Not Tom says:

                  You need to give the people democracy because otherwise they will rise up and inevitably defeat your running class as a rolling tide of history. It’s just being pragmatic, you see.

                  Not even close to what I said. Emperors were generally assassinated by their own inner circle, either political or military. I have never used, nor accepted that as an argument for democracy or any other popular government or revolution. The mandate of heaven is a fundamental concept of divine-right monarchy as well; not everyone is worthy to rule.

                  It’s really not hard to come up with a list of emperors who were assassinated by various parties. Compare Marcus Aurelius to his immediate successor Commodus. Neither were a stranger to violence, but Marcus Aurelius was a brilliant philosopher and strategist and Commodus was a brute, and the latter paid for it with his life.

                • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

                  I agree, i am just sensitive to forms of rhetoric that make it sound like ‘just one of those things’ that ‘just happens to happen’.

                  The solipsistic world-view is an existence with no agency; that is to say, that phenomena happen with noone responsible for causing anything. That power just happens on it’s own, that apple carts just happen on their own, that assassinations just happen on their own… that swarthy immivaders ‘fleeing’ from ‘war and poverty’ are not conduits through which such conditions are instantiated in the first place; that present states of affairs, and acts of subversives throughout history, are just ‘things that happen’, rather than certain things that needed to be *caused*, by certain peoples in particular…

                • The Cominator says:

                  “Lacking a virtuous and cohesive elite, the solution is legitimate monarchy. Americans, disgusted by our ruling elite, are becoming hungry for Kings.”

                  Jim you remember this one from the Babylon Bee.

                  https://babylonbee.com/news/disillusioned-with-democratic-process-more-americans-throwing-support-behind-aragorn-king-of-gondor

        • Contaminated NEET says:

          Say hello to the FBI for me, Cominator. Either you’re incredibly stupid and about to get a visit from them, or you hang out around the watercooler with them.

          • The Cominator says:

            I did not specifically say I was going to do anything, I implied that Trump should do something. And btw if the threat is on judges its the US Marshals who handle this not the FBI.

          • Theshadowedknight says:

            He isn’t suggesting we go out and start shooting people, so stop being dramatic. He said Trump needs to find someone to do it for him. I have long said this will not be settled without bloodshed. If you don’t want to do it, that’s fine. However, if Trump approached us and asked us to start killing people, at that point its time to plant your flag, pick a side, and ride or die.

            If he actually needs RWDS, he isn’t going to pick us. He’ll get disgruntled cops, soldiers, marines, and other trained trigger pullers. Its an intellectual exercise, not a prescription to run about like idiots shooting.

            • Contaminated NEET says:

              You’re technically right, of course, but I don’t expect a nuanced and good-faith reading of his words from our enemies. People have been locked up for saying far less.

              • Theshadowedknight says:

                If they wanted to ruin us, they could easily do so. Post a few of our worst comments on social media and its all over. All of us would lose our jobs, be lepers from polite society, etc. They don’t need to jail us to destroy us.

                • Contaminated NEET says:

                  I’d rather be canceled than jailed. My handle is more than a LARP; I know the NEET life and I can take it.

                • Andre says:

                  Why are you trying to live in polite society?

                • BC says:

                  The jailing is coming soon. They just had the step mother of the cop charged with murder in Atlanta fired from her job, as director of HR.

                • Andre says:

                  “The jailing is coming soon. They just had the step mother of the cop charged with murder in Atlanta fired from her job, as director of HR.”

                  Can you explain to me why this matters? Was she fired simply for being his stepmother? What’s the context here?

                • jim says:

                  Yes of course she was fired for being his kin. If I came out in the open, they would come after my children. They have been coming after people’s parents and children for years. This is one more, of far too many to keep track of.

                • BC says:

                  https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/tucker-carlson-reports-stepmother-of-ex-atlanta-officer-who-shot-rayshard-brooks-fired-from-job

                  She was fired for being his step mother. They’ve already been firing husbands for what wives have said on social about BLM. This moving rapidly to full on Soviet Style family punishments.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  I want to live in polite society because I do not want to live in the American equivalent of the Brazilian favelas among people barely better behaved than Hatians. I lack the social ability to create a criminal operation that would elevate me to a comfortable position. I would be reduced to a unpleasant subsistence on the edge of civilization.

                  For what, the chance to, “own the libs?” To tell someone incapable of understanding the concepts the way the world really works? This is not a populist movement. Speaking out loud without fuck you money and a resilient setup is pointless and foolish.

                • Andre says:

                  If you want to survive, you are going to have to get past that. There will not be a clean coup d’etat, certainly not a clean right wing coup d’etat. Maybe move to Russia.

                • I says:

                  If no clean coup d’etat, then a red terror or right wing death squads. I am adequately prepared for all eventualities.

                  The left has been moving ever lefter, ever faster, for two centuries.

                  Trees do not grow to the sky, but they do not stop growing till they fall.

                • Andre says:

                  Let me be clearer. If you think you will be able to hide where you stand politically for much longer, you are wrong. You can only find safety by being completely open and finding your tribe.

                • jim says:

                  Nuts.

                  Being completely open would get us all out of a job tomorrow, and all dead in a couple of years.

                • Andre says:

                  “Being completely open would get us all out of a job tomorrow, and all dead in a couple of years.”

                  If that is the case then you are already dead. Then again, I actually believe in Jesus Christ and you obviously do not, so you are already dead either way.

                • jim says:

                  A few years to go before the killing starts, though the firings started many years ago, and I am very far from being out in the open. If one identity should be found, and the heat should come down on that identity, I have more.

                • Mackus says:

                  They can’t. They cannot even _quote_ though crime, even while actively pretending to be though criminals, as if fearful they’d burst in flames.

                • Contaminated NEET says:

                  >They just had the step mother of the cop charged with murder in Atlanta fired from her job, as director of HR.

                  That is priceless. I guarantee she would have cancelled any one of us with a song in her heart. At least our schadenfreude supplies are likely to hold out for the foreseeable future.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  At least our schadenfreude supplies are likely to hold out for the foreseeable future.

                  I’m the kind of person that would be willing to suffer hell if only to be the jailer of this demons, you can’t imagine how happy it makes me see leftists killing leftists and dying by leftism. Divine retribution.

                • The Cominator says:

                  If you want to defend a cop better to defend the innocent Atlanta cop who did nothing wrong (guy shots a taser at a cop and gets shot, what the fuck does he expect) not the guilty Derek Chauvin.

                • Andre says:

                  “If you want to defend a cop better to defend the innocent Atlanta cop who did nothing wrong (guy shots a taser at a cop and gets shot, what the fuck does he expect) not the guilty Derek Chauvin.”

                  The reason they went after the cop in Atlanta is because Derek was thrown under the bus. Trump himself took the side of a lowlife black criminal. They smelled fear so they pushed.

                  https://www.amazon.com/Civilization-Its-Enemies-Stage-History/dp/1451655339

                • jim says:

                  Police conduct in Derek Chauvin’s case was indefensible, and they intend to pin it on Trump’s America. He had to throw that cop to the wolves.

                • Pseudo-chrysostom says:

                  Throwing meat to the wolves attracts more wolves.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Chauvin wasn’t wolf meat because

                  1) Guilty.

                  2) Not a right winger.

                • Pooch says:

                  If there’s someone worth defending it was the white guy who was attacked by the original jogger in that was routinely burglarizing his neighborhood in Georgia.

                  I almost think they tried to make that the mass riot trigger but it failed to have the impact so they kept searching until they found the Floyd video.

                • jim says:

                  Yes, in retrospect, they have been looking for an excuse for this when it became apparent that Wu Flu was just yet another new flu, deadlier than most, but less deadly than some.

                • Mike says:

                  Only reason Chauvin’s conduct was indefensible was because it lasted for 9 minutes. There was nothing wrong with the hold itself, and it probably needed to be used on Floyd for at least 2 or so minutes because they thought he was in a state of “Excited Delirium”, like you see with niggers tripping on PCP in Washington DC. https://medium.com/@gavrilodavid/why-derek-chauvin-may-get-off-his-murder-charge-2e2ad8d0911

        • jim says:

          > Trump needs something Hillary had, people who will kill his enemies for him.

          Not our job.

          • The Cominator says:

            Didn’t say that but Trump needs to have people fear him…

            • Filthy Liar says:

              Far too late for that. If he wanted fear he’d have had to have responded to the Women’s March in a way that didn’t make him look weak. His supporters in the city were terrified the day after his Inauguration.

          • Miu says:

            Then whose?

            • jim says:

              That would be telling.

              • Miu says:

                I don’t get it, ser. I will continue to lurk moar and seek understanding.

                I appreciate the clear thinking exhibited upon your blog, Jim, I always wanted to tell you that I learn much here and I’m grateful.

  26. Andre says:

    So here in Brazil this ex-femen staged a mock attack on the supreme court, launching fireworks at their building. She is part of a group that calls itself “the 300 of Brazil”, in reference to the spartans. She was arrested and apparently her boyfriend then did the same thing, except targeting the prison, not sure I haven’t looked that deeply into it. The Supreme Court in Brazil is blocking everything that Bolsonaro does, and is actively persecuting his supporters, literally going after youtubers because of “fake news” and “insulting members of the court”. Governors threaten lockdowns due to covid, and yet there is a permanent propaganda campaign on TV trying to convince people that Bolsonaro is a horrible, totalitarian dictator that must be stopped. The “anti-racist” and “covid” rethoric is perfectly synchronized, they even dig up local “incidents” of “evil racism” to show on tv and the Supreme Court has declared police operations in the favelas illegal for the duration of the pandemic (which should be obvious to everyone, will last as long as they want it to last). The situation in the United States is… it worries me, because the right is bending the knee and if Trump falls, I don’t think Bolsonaro can survive the siege. I get that both Trump and Bolsonaro are walking a tightrope but I’m losing my patience with their abject cowardice and it does not look like I’m the only one. I see americans enraged that Trump is doing nothing and I see brazilians enraged that Bolsonaro is doing nothing.

    • The Cominator says:

      You are a blackpiller and possibly a glowjogger. If Democrats want to burn their own cities we should let them.

      Cowards? Did you run for office. Neither Trump nor Bolsonarno had to put themselves out there like they did.

      Trump’s major mistake was cucking to the lockdowns, Bolsonarno to my understanding didn’t even do that he tried to stop them from the beginning.

      • Andre says:

        Trump praised George Floyd as a martyr. Cops threw Derek under the bus and then started literally kneeling. And then they dared bitch that the zombies are still hungry. All cowards. Bolsonaro’s son said he and many others understand that a break with the institutional order is inevitable (that is, some sort of coup), yet they allow an institution that is despised by everyone (the Supreme Court) to act in a blatantly illegal manner and persecute their allies, because they are too scared of the optics of actually doing anything. With friends like Bolsonaro, who needs enemies?

        • The Cominator says:

          Derek Chauvin is guilty of murder even if Floyd is generally a scumbag. Everyone agrees on that but you apparently.

            • The Cominator says:

              Oh he is going to walk because the leftist AG there wants him to walks because it will inflame the situation. I called that the minute he took over the case.

              But did he murder the guy, yeah.

              • Pooch says:

                Letting him walk right before the election and forcing another round of riots for Trump to deal with seems like a possibility.

              • Mr.P says:

                ” … did he murder the guy, yeah.”

                Sorry. The videos are gruesome but are inconclusive.

                We still do not know precisely how Floyd died. To put it in Covid terms, did Floyd die *of* arrest or *with* arrest.

                • The Cominator says:

                  There is no good reason to pin a guy you’ve already cuffed down with a hold that is banned in MMA. I don’t care about George Floyd but pinning someone’s neck tight will kill a lot of people.

                • Andre says:

                  Cops aren’t play fighting you fucking dumbass.

              • Andre says:

                No, he did not, and you are completely insane if you think he did.

              • Theshadowedknight says:

                Floyd was ODing on meth and feyntanyl. They tried to hold him down while he was spazzing out. Then he died. Thats not murder, at worst its manslaughter. If you let an ODing junkie run off he dies. If you hold him down, he dies. At that point, let his junkie ass die in the least inconvenient manner. If they tazed him his heart would have popped. If they shot him, he probably would have died. When they held him down, he died. If younput yourself in that bad a situation because of your own stupid choices, you deserve to die. Chauvin was the application of the will of Gnon to Floyd’s stupidity.

                Yeah the video looks bad, but everyone is so busy virtue sugnalling that it looks bad that when the rest of the info came out it got drowned out. Even on the right, because we are sick of cops treating the lockdown as an excuse to be petty tyrants. A lot of people got to see what cops are like and didn’t like what they saw. Floyd is just the excuse. Just like liberals buying guns to fend off Trump’s tyranny. They did fuck all for three years, then after the first couple of days of pavement apes burning shit down they arm up to fught Trump?

                • The Cominator says:

                  Well I think the right should embrace abolishing the police because they will inevitably be replaced by right wing paramilitaries for reasons we’ve discussed. I don’t care about a Democrat cop anymore than I do some drug addict jogger but my specific feeling on the case was that he was already down and you don’t need to use a hold that is banned in MMA to do it.

                  Americans cops DO statistically have a bad tendency to kill when not necessary compared to other countries. Remember the Simon Says video, many such cases.

                • Mr.P says:

                  “Floyd was ODing on meth and feyntanyl.”

                  Quite right, confirmed by autopsy.

                  Floyd was a dead man walking.

                  If Mother Teresa herself had conducted the arrest, it’s nearly certain Floyd would have died by her hand while being taken into custody.

                • jim says:

                  Very likely, but the guy who took him into custody had disturbingly heavy hands.

                • Andre says:

                  You don’t even need an autopsy, there is video showing him collapsing to the ground like a ragdoll twice before even getting to the cop car. Would he have survived if the cops had been nicer? Maybe. It doesn’t matter. That is one of the problems with being tall and muscular, people have to err on the side of caution when dealing with you. He made the choice to live his life like a thug, so he got treated like a thug.

                • BC says:

                  >Well I think the right should embrace abolishing the police because they will inevitably be replaced by right wing paramilitaries for reasons we’ve discussed. I don’t care about a Democrat cop anymore than I do some drug addict jogger but my specific feeling on the case was that he was already down and you don’t need to use a hold that is banned in MMA to do it.

                  I’m rather less than convinced of this. Abolishing the cops would just channel all that money to antifa goons and black gangs. As much as I’d think they’d make great targets for backyard snipers, they’d have the funding to be an actual military force and that would be very bad for us.

                  Secondly, having cops around gives us intelligence about our enemies plans. I would wager Trump was getting a stream of Intel from the DC cops during the attempt putsch.

                • R7 Rocket says:

                  ” I’m rather less than convinced of this. Abolishing the cops would just channel all that money to antifa goons and black gangs. As much as I’d think they’d make great targets for backyard snipers, they’d have the funding to be an actual military force and that would be very bad for us.”

                  The black gangs and Antifa goons are paper tigers without cops to protect them. See Roof Koreans, Katrina. Although I can see that with funding, you can turn the White antifa goons into commissars, but no amount of police funding is going to turn nigger gangs into a real fighting force.

                  Money by itself doesn’t turn into power, just look at poor Jeff Bezos,

                • BC says:

                  Money and training can turn white soy boys into cohesive warriors. The Spanish civil war is proof of that and with whites as atomized as we are, they could be dangerous.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The Bolshevik left of the early 20th century was very masculine compared to the modern left.

                • Pooch says:

                  The blacks and Hispanics would be the warriors for them because they are the only ones masculine enough to be warriors on their side. With training and funding they could resemble something like the warlord gangs in Africa.

                • The Cominator says:

                  You imagine an orc horde whipped into battle by antifa officers

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdXQJS3Yv0Y (I know this is the cheesy animated version but I thought the song was apt).

                  Need plausibly masculine white officers for that to work and with a nearly alll black army really draconian military discipline, even if they could find such officers putting them in charge of the blacks and hispanics would be terribly unholy.

                  It just wouldn’t work with the modern left.

                • Pooch says:

                  They could have mulatto leaders like André Rigaud in Haiti and they will have overwhelming numbers in the blue territory also like in Haiti.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  @BC

                  Leftists back then in Spain were actually masculine. In fact they were red-pilled by today standards… they made propaganda claiming Franco was bringing a nigger mob to rape white women because of the Guardia Mora, and in the “leftist Spain” working women only got paid half the amount men did and of course no independence of any kind to be seen. They were retarded and destructive, but they weren’t pussies, you cannot compare to what you have today.

                  Pantransexual strong independent cishet doublebi alphabet soy boys cannot become disciplined soldiers, because what you’re saying is that they can be progressive faggots and at the same time red-pilled men who realize certain virtue, hierarchy and discipline are necessary… it’s a contradiction. If that ever happened, they might maintain the retarded economics but they’d purge the progressives like Stalin purged the trotskyites.

                  Well, to be honest, the “reds” as they were called here weren’t exactly good disciplined soldiers either. They were more akin to a savage horde of bandits killing everything in sight for a few apples, including each other, especially each other. When “the nationals” reached Barcelona they stayed back and just encouraged the anarchs from the CNT to keep killing the PSOE/PCE retards, fun times.

                  And if you get into it, at the end of the day a lot of men fighting with the reds weren’t necessarily leftists, they were forcefully conscripted or just gaslighted with the impression that they were defending the Republic. Before the war began the PCE and the Falange both were composed of a very small percentage of people, but the war just pushed people to either one because that’s how it goes. But at the beginning a lot of people were fighting for the reds without realizing what they were because they pretended to defend the “Republic”. That’s also why as the war went on more and more people joined Franco, because they experienced the truth. If we didn’t have to be careful about doxxing I could go into detail using my own ancestors as an example, but well, let’s just leave it at that.

                  In any case, modern people are nothing like people back then so it won’t play out the same way if that’s what you’re thinking. Ideological war in the 20th century is not exactly the same as the civilizational collapse that we are experiencing.

              • Javier says:

                > pinning someone’s neck tight will kill a lot of people

                -Knee hold is officially non-lethal and has been used hundreds of times without fatality. Floyd wasn’t fully pinned he could move his head.

                -Floyd was on three times the lethal dose of Fentanyl. Same thing that killed Prince and Tom Petty.

                -Floyd was spazzing out which is consistent with excited delirium syndrome

                -Official response for excited delirium is to restrain subject while waiting for medical help.

                Chauvin did nothing wrong. The worst you could say is he did not react fast enough to Floyd’s condition or provide enough medical care, but cops are cops not EMTs. Fact is, some dead junkie should not have mattered, should not have even made the news, and if an entire propaganda machine priming the populace to riot had not been in place none of this would have happened.

                The law of averages tell us plenty of black people will get killed by cops no matter what anyone does, unless you get rid of cops entirely and then black people will be killed by citizens. So blacks die and the left gets the rest enraged and lets them loose. Rinse and repeat until society is crushed. The fact the left is punishing us for the sky being blue is a massive propaganda win, not some sign of nefarious police problems in dire need of fixing.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Knee hold on neck is eventually lethal for everyone regardless of whatever official lie you read and there are two autopsy reports both that have reasons to be dishonest.

                  Hating joggers is all well and good but trust for the cops is a cuckservatism inc thing. We far right types should regard the cathedral’s enforcers especially when they are unionized Democrats with the same cynicism we regard the rest of the cathedral.

                  “The fact the left is punishing us for the sky being blue is a massive propaganda win, not some sign of nefarious police problems in dire need of fixing.”

                  Oh its definitely good that Democrats are burning their own cities down and that is a propaganda win, with the one MASSIVE negative that it apparently convinced Roberts he should become Souter II.

                • Pooch says:

                  Yeah the risk of letting Antifa and the joggers run roughshod over the cities and pull down every statue with impunity (as Tucker pointed out) is that the cucks are going to be more willing to cuck out in an effort to avoid the salami slicer. They have no concept of the leftism spiral, they think they are simply acting in self-preservation.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Do you have a link to the Tucker segment where he says this?

                • Pooch says:

                  not glowing already posted it in the thread:

                  https://mobile.twitter.com/stillgray/status/1272745791661039616

                  He doesn’t state it like us but basically that if no one stops them they get stronger. He’s basically touched on the same idea with the cultural revolution every night pretty much. I forget which night he talked about the statues.

                  My take is that Trump stopped outright rioting by force in DC but they immediately switched to Cultural Revolution afterwards (huge black lives matter painted on the road outside the WH in DC the next day) and are seemingly gaining strength through it since there is very little resistance. That’s the problem with letting them burn down the cities, they are the cultural centers of America.

                • Pooch says:

                  Adding on:

                  Burning their own grocery stores makes them look insane, but pulling down statues of George Washington and making Juneteenth a more important holiday than July 4th is making the right look weak.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Roberts is the one who is making the right look weak because if he is going to be a Souter than Trump can’t do basically anything unless as I suggested he starts taking creative actions…

                  Of course it may have nothing to do with the rioting, Roberts is probably a homosexual and may be being blackmailed. Strange though if that is the case that he hasn’t been hostile from the very beginning.

                • Pooch says:

                  I think he was always a cuck (like all Bush Republicans) but now is signaling to the left to spare him. I suppose he has made the determination that they are the strong horse.

                  If/when Trump proclaims himself Augustus, the courts won’t matter though.

                • Pooch says:

                  I’m hoping once Trump’s massive rallies start back up he will look strong again. Probably why they are so hellbent on stopping them.

                • Javier says:

                  Cominator you are right that cops are not on our side by and large, but when the left is sacrificing their own enforcers to appease the mob that is a good time to snag some recruits. The zeal of the converso tends to be higher, they can see how their loyalty is being ‘rewarded’ by their current masters.

                  The cops in Atlanta are quitting right now, the last thing the right should be doing is piling on. We should be saying hey we want to help you, come to our camp. We can protect you. Of course the right would actually have to protect anyone for that to be effective.

                • The Cominator says:

                  No we shouldn’t pile on if only because the centrist and normie right are horrified by the idea of abolishing the police but we shouldn’t lift a finger to help them either. Cuckservatism inc. has been pro cop as long as I can remember it never has done them any good.

                  Trump needs to call out the body of armed men who ARE (mostly) on his side, soldiers and marines who have a combat MOS (I don’t know if its called an MOS in the corps).

                  The Atlanta cops may be more on our side than most big city PDs because most of them probably come from regular Southern areas not the cancer of Metro-Atlanta. Also the Atlanta cop unlike Chauvin did nothing wrong.

          • Andre says:

            Are you seriously this stupid?

            • The Cominator says:

              You ain’t supposed to pin non-resisting suspects with holds that are banned in MMA. Best for everyone if Derek Chauvin were hanged in public tomorrow.

              Why do you care about this Democrat cop? I don’t care about George Floyd but I agree that cops should not murder people who aren’t resisting. They traditionally don’t get in trouble when they murder white people either.

              But have no fear the leftist Minnesotta AG plans to let him walk.

              • Andre says:

                Are you seriously going to use sports rules to judge appropriate police procedure? As for why I care about Derek, I don’t particularly do, I’m simply pointing out the abject cowardice displayed by those that SHOULD care about him, namely other cops and conservatives that still believe in the system, Trump included.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Trump should never spend any political capital doing anything for a Democrat.

                • Andre says:

                  Trump didn’t just stay silent on the matter.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Well you sure seem to care about him.

                  Democrats are all in line for the helicopter as far I’m concerned, white male democrats ESPECIALLY. The white male democrat is the lowest form of life and if we are to have aasibayah among white males its especially important that every leftist white male takes flight.

                  I do not especially trust the toxicology report put together by his Democrat police colleagues either.

                • Andre says:

                  Explain something to me. Why should anyone convert to the right if the right will not protect them? The root of all politics is loyalty. The right is now nothing but a bunch of ivory tower intellectuals bitching that the left keeps attacking them and is not pure like they are. The left on the other hand does everything it can to be loyal to itself while policing its ranks. The left is practical, guided by psychopaths that drive hysterical lunatics into action. What the fuck is the right? A bunch of martyrs that hope people will one day realize they are the pure ones. By what miracle do you expect to win? Cops in Atlanta should be in open rebellion, not calling in sick.

                • jim says:

                  > Explain something to me. Why should anyone convert to the right if the right will not protect them?

                  One side wins, one side loses. The losing side is not protected. That is just the way it is. Nothing we can do about that. Then the left lose to the further left, and they are not protected either, and the further left lose to the even further left, and that goes on till one man takes supreme power, or everyone dies, whichever happens first.

                  To stop the process that leads inevitably to autogenocide, you have stop Harvard from endlessly holiness spiraling the official state religion. Which means you need a high priest in charge of Harvard doctrine, a King who makes restrains the high priest from inconvenient holiness, and a grand inquisitor to take care of all those people who keep trying to add new stuff to the state religion. And then everyone can subscribe to the official religion with the assurance it will not be shifted out from under them, rendering them unprotected. (I favor calling it Western Orthodox Christianity, or Anglican Orthodox Christianity, but maybe it will wind up being called something that invokes the founding of our long dead Republic. Or if things go all the way to Mao style mass murder, “Communism with American Characteristics”.

                • jim says:

                  > Are you seriously going to use sports rules to judge appropriate police procedure?

                  When the subject is handcuffed, seems entirely reasonable.

                  A good neck hold will render anyone unconscious in twenty seconds, and mighty quiet when he wakes up, if he wakes up. Doing it for several minutes was just sadism.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “Explain something to me. Why should anyone convert to the right if the right will not protect them? ”

                  Hes not on the right and be might convient to convert now.

                  But I agree with the general point more should be done for Roger Stone Flynn etc…

                • Contaminated NEET says:

                  >The left on the other hand does everything it can to be loyal to itself while policing its ranks.

                  That loyalty is one-sided. Everyone is infinitely loyal to anyone to his left, and disloyal to anyone to his right. It works because they all believe this is truly right and just.

                • Not Tom says:

                  A good neck hold will render anyone unconscious in twenty seconds

                  Not under conditions of excited delirium, and not with that kind of hold.

                  The dude died of a fentanyl overdose, and the Coroner’s report confirmed it. How are we even still talking about this? He wasn’t killed by the hold, period.

                  And “non-resisting suspects”? Are you fucking kidding me?

                • The Cominator says:

                  There are two contradictory autopsy reports actually both of them have reasons to be dishonest.

                  Defending Chauvin is not a hill we should fight on at all. If you want to signal your defense of the cops defend the Atlanta cop and his poor stepmother who fired strictly for guilt by association. Hes a much better case.

                • Andre says:

                  “A good neck hold will render anyone unconscious in twenty seconds”

                  Floyd bitched in a loud voice about not being able to breathe for way longer than 20 seconds.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “Floyd bitched in a loud voice about not being able to breathe for way longer than 20 seconds.”

                  If you pin the neck a certain way you can breathe in and out air but your bloodflow to the head and back is severely constricted, supposedly it feels like your drowning even though you can breath.

                • Andre says:

                  Listen to me. This has nothing to do with defending cops. What is happening is a propaganda push to make it unacceptable for white men to use violence against black men. That is why Derek must be defended and everyone throwing him under the bus is an idiot and a race traitor. It wasn’t supposed to end with Derek, which is why it didn’t.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  We are race traitors if we don’t agree with a cop using deadly force unnecessarily? Who is to say that cop won’t do the same to someone else? We’ve seen it before: https://youtu.be/VBUUx0jUKxc?t=260

                  If I was an American living in the same area in Arizona I’d be more concerned about the fucking cops than gangbangers. At least I can shoot back at gangbangers and a judge will concede it was self-defense, imagine trying to shoot to survive this fucking checkists, even if you win they’ll put you in prison for life. And if you don’t? Eh, who knows, Russian roulette!

                  Since when are cops the defenders of white people? The same cops that will put you in prison for false rape accusations, the same cops that will put you in prison if you refuse to pay taxes to a regime that wants you dead, the same cops that will put you in prison if you even dare to commit thoughtcrime in any public sphere. The enforcers of progressivism, feminism, nigger worship and everything that is wrong with society, oh, the great heroes! Cops are not your friends retard, if it was up to me cops would get the bullet, THEY are the traitors.

                • Andre says:

                  “The same cops that will put you in prison for false rape accusations, the same cops that will put you in prison if you refuse to pay taxes to a regime that wants you dead, the same cops that will put you in prison if you even dare to commit thoughtcrime in any public sphere. The enforcers of progressivism, feminism, nigger worship and everything that is wrong with society, oh, the great heroes! Cops are not your friends retard, if it was up to me cops would get the bullet, THEY are the traitors.”

                  Are you under the impression that I disagree with this?

                • Andre says:

                  “We are race traitors if we don’t agree with a cop using deadly force unnecessarily?”

                  There is no evidence that Derek used deadly force. It is POSSIBLE that Derek used deadly force, but it is not OBVIOUS that Derek used deadly force, and that is the issue. He was declared an evil racist murderer, no trial needed. Someone bitching for several minutes that they can’t breathe when being restrained after resisting arrest is not evidence of murder, much less racism, much less evil.

                  If you believe in the system, that is, if you believe that Trump can lead and no revolution is necessary, that some sort of coup d’etat (or even less) is possible and all that is truly necessary to save civilization, then you must defend Derek. This means Trump had to defend Derek. This means other cops had to defend Derek. Instead, he pandered and they piled on.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  You’re not wrong about the first part, except, it’s is very obvious to me that is excessively deadly.

                  Maybe it’s because you don’t deal with it, you have no experience or whatever, but pressing your knee against a neck like that is literally attempted murder. And Trump can’t afford to defend that to go against the stupid narrative of evil white racist.

                  You’re right, he didn’t do it because he is an evil white man, he probably did it because he is a low IQ retarded grunt trying to stop a drug addled criminal nigger and he didn’t know any better. But not a good hill to die on from my perspective. Trump has fought for the hills he had to fight very hard as he has shown us when protecting warriors from State Department accusations. There is not need and no good is going to come for protecting a low IQ retarded grunt who by neglect attempted murder against a criminal nigger. I don’t want a low IQ retarded grunt attempting murder against whites, he can get the bullet.

              • Theshadowedknight says:

                A. Fuck the police. NWA had it right.

                B. This is where we care about the truth, and a counterfeiting negro overdosing on drugs after being too stupid to let the matter go with the store owner and then fighting cops in a drugged up zombie state dying of terminal stupidity isn’t murder.

                • Not Tom says:

                  VD, bless that old conspiracy nutter, did surface a very interesting question today: exactly when did he OD? Isn’t Fentanyl pretty fast-acting? When did he take it?

                  Maybe there was a murder here, just not the murder everyone’s talking about. We were talking about false flag snipers just the other day, so why not false flag cops? It does fit into the color revolution script pretty well, and the timing sure is one hell of a coincidence, all of this happening at exactly the time when COVID lockdowns were ending across the country and it looked like a V-shaped recovery was imminent. Also, for some odd reason, all of the other cops on the scene were greenhorns, IIRC one was literally on his first or second beat.

                  I haven’t bought into the theory yet – but it’s plausible. Of course it’s also possible he just “flushed” his stash down his own gullet when he saw the unis; if so, I’m sure it should be possible to check if the guy had a history of taking or dealing the stuff.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Teddy Spaghetti is right about Fentanyl generally being something that if its going to kill you is going to kill you fast but his explanation is perhaps too complex.

                  The simplest explanation is that the autopsy/toxicology reports were faked because the cops wanted to give their colleagues a plausible defense. We know the far left Minnesotta AG wants them to walk to further fan the flames of the great leftist color chimpout.

                  The family had their own report done which did not show he had any Fentanyl.

                  The problem is both reports have reasons to be dishonest. Floyd’s family obviously wants the cops hanged and they want to sue the city. The cops want to protect their own (the cops are not on our side but they ARE on their own side 100%).

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  I don’t know how close the state medical examiner is to the police, but I for damned sure wouldn’t trust a thing out of the family. Their side is completely untrustworthy. On the other hand, if the ME is in close with cops and looking to provide cover to the state, then he could have easily faked it as well. However, the video and reporting did have him as belligerent and unresponsive, and he was also foaming at the mouth. The cops on scene assumed an OD, so that backs up their story. Hard to tell anything with as unreliable both sources are, but observable factors back up that it was legitimately a drug overdose.

                  Keep in mind that if the tox report was accurate, he was also on meth. A strong upper could have slowed down a strong downer and kept him alive longer than he expected. I dont know how those play off one another, but I am reminded of caffinated alcohol that killed a few people who drank too much because they didn’t feel drunk and know to slow down. That was an upper and downer working in concert. Same thing with Floyd?

                • Not Tom says:

                  Not just foaming at the mouth, but claiming he couldn’t breathe long before they had him in any kind of hold.

                  You guys realize that perps do this shit all the time, right? “I don’t feel well”, “you’re breaking my wrists”, “I can’t breathe”, they’ll make up any ridiculous lie, any play for sympathy to get out of police custody. Sometimes, they’ll have a bona fide panic attack and really will have trouble breathing, but as the cops themselves are inclined to say, “if you can talk, you can breathe”.

                  I’m almost inclined to say that police should stop using this hold, not because it’s actually a bad hold but because of how bad it looks on camera and how gullible the public is and how the internet remembers everything. But I’m still going to remain personally emotionally detached and watch cop footage with an internal mute button on the perp. When cops are really abusive (which is often), it’s obvious even when you don’t listen to a word the suspect is saying.

                • Andre says:

                  “The simplest explanation is that the autopsy/toxicology reports were faked because the cops wanted to give their colleagues a plausible defense.”

                  Good God… did you see the videos? Maybe he wasn’t high on fentanyl. Maybe the guy who called the police and said he was acting “drunk” and “not right” was tripping. Maybe the autopsy is fraudulent. Still, we have video of the cops getting Floyd out of his car and then walking him to their car. He is clearly distressed and collapsed twice. There was obviously something wrong with him. Derek had two newbies with him, trying to handle a guy that towered over them all and had a history of violence. Cuffs are not magical devices.

            • Bob says:

              The Cominator is that stupid. Don’t let the blog’s tolerance of him drive you away.

              • The Cominator says:

                Jim agrees with me that officer Derek Chauvin was acting in a way that is plausibly going to kill a lot of people and in a situation where Floyd (though a scumbag) was not plausibly a threat anymore. Everyone else I’ve discussed the matter even far right types such as myself (and living in the non urban Southeastern US that is not uncommon here) agrees the cop was acting badly. Floyd may well have been drugged up out of his mind, having a man’d bodyweight compressed upon your neck for any length of time is going to kill a lot of people who aren’t high on drugs.

                So where am I stupid here. Defending Democrat Derek Chauvin is not something we should spend any effort on in fact its in our best interest if he either gets the death penalty or is thrown into gen pop with a bunch of lifers who know he was a cop.

                Also if you really think hes innocent there is no need to defend him from the case anyway, the left Minnesotta AG is deliberately botching the case for political reasons.

                But I guess a smart guy like you doesn’t understand any of that.

                • Bob says:

                  I’ve written paragraphs and paragraphs detailing your mental retardation. Learn to read.

                • Not Tom says:

                  having a man’d bodyweight compressed upon your neck for any length of time is going to kill a lot of people who aren’t high on drugs.

                  And yet this hold is used in PDs across the country, has been used tens of thousands of times, and this is the first time it has ever killed anyone – assuming you believe that it even killed Floyd, which is impossible to believe when you actually look at the facts.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Most of the people who accused me of being retarded were on the wrong side of the corona scam controversy and I barely remember you. Since I was right and they all were wrong I guess your paragraphs must have been nothing more than bullshit.

                  Now if you called me an autist you would be unironically correct.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “And yet this hold is used in PDs across the country, has been used tens of thousands of times, and this is the first time it has ever killed anyone – assuming you believe that it even killed Floyd, which is impossible to believe when you actually look at the facts.”

                  Floyd being high out of his mind is also not a rare case in arrests, a very high % of people who get arrested are high out of their minds so your argument does not hold up.

                  The fact that this is the 1st prominent case (that I know of anyway) of a man being killed via a bodyweight to the neck chokehold by a cop suggest to me that use of this is very rare and almost unheard of to use for long periods of time. Since many arrested people are drugged up if neck pins were commonly used on drugged up suspects and this would be enough to trigger their deaths we would have had a lot more cases of this.

                  I’m not a cop and do not claim a thorough knowledge of police procedure but it would surprise me if it was often used for long periods of time especially after the guy is cuffed because having a mans body weight constricting the blood vessels in your neck is likely to kill a lot of people. It was used on Floyd for multiple minutes after he was cuffed.

                • Bob says:

                  Haha, I failed. Oh well, The Cominator is too dumb to change anyway.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Since I was right and they all were wrong

                  Yeah ok there Mr. “it kills less than the flu”. (but really you were still right, because really the official numbers are off by a factor of 5 or more but seasonal flu numbers are always 100% accurate or even understated, and who cares about a silly complementary metric like excess deaths?).

                  It’s easy to be right when your goalposts are not merely moving, but literally on skates.

                  And before you fly into autistic rage, don’t worry, I’m perfectly capable of seeing the insane hypocrisy on the left and have been of the opinion since May that it’s time to reopen most businesses. But claiming you were right and everyone else was wrong, that’s about seven bridges too far.

                • jim says:

                  Deaths from Wu Flu were unremarkable compared to the usual flu season, and it is showing the normal pattern of any new flu.

                  Lockdown made only a modest difference, and was never intended to make a difference. As with Green New Deal, just a rationalization for hateful stuff that they want to do regardless of the rationalization. They banned walking on beaches at the same time as they were forcing patients with Wu Flu from hospitals into old people’s homes.

                  Rapid exponential growth ceased when it had infected most of the small minority of superspreaders. No authority anywhere, except South Korea, was interested in doing the obvious thing – identify superspreader subpopulations and superspreader behaviors. Instead, every authority went after normal people.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  Bullshit, Not Tom. He was right. I was in the middle of both of you and I was wrong, too. The official numbers have an IFR around that of the flu last time I checked, and that is with the people who died in car crashes or from gunshot wounds being counted. The reason it got so bad is because of the media panic Cominator spoke out against and because states were literally killing the elderly to prop up the narrative. You are the one moving the goalposts, and making up strawman arguments. Don’t do that. Eat some crow, admit the mistake, and learn from it.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I was more right than wrong but I’ll give Not Tom (as I have before) that I was not right on it being less than the flu but the reason was because certain Democrat states were deliberately killing people to make things worse. If not for Andrew Cuomo Phil Murphy and the HCQ deniers I would have been right. I’m also aware that flu deaths are a rather soft statistic.

                  Not Tom, I don’t actually want to restart the feud over the Corona scam with you I was more initially responding to this unmemorable and possibly shill character “Bob” here calling me retarded out of the blue.

                  We should confine our dispute here to what it seems is a disagreement over Derek Chauvin.

                  1. Did he do anything wrong.

                  2. Should people on the far right lift a finger to help him.

                  3. Should people on the far right lift a finger for cops in general.

                  My answers to these questions are

                  1. Yes, there were better ways to restrain a cuffed guy than to put the bodyweight on his neck and he wasn’t much of a threat at that point.

                  2. No, and even if you think hes genuinely an innocent man and want to save him for that reason have no fear the Minnesotta AG is doing everything possible to ensure his acquittal.

                  3. We should back the police only in very selective cases (the case of the Atlanta officer) but mostly we should not.

                • jim says:

                  Cominator was the closest to the truth of any of us.

                  I was not wrong, but I did not commit myself clearly to one position or the other – other than the position that the hype was on, and mass murder was on, because the left never wants to let an emergency go to waste. I very quickly (but not as quickly as The Cominator to the best of my recollection) announced that the disease had peaked – which was not exactly correct either, in that from time to time they managed to boost the death rate a bit above my call, but not by much above my call.

                  If you jump to a conclusion early, as the Cominator did, of course your position is likely to be inaccurate, as his was, but his position was close enough.

                • Not Tom says:

                  The official numbers have an IFR around that of the flu last time I checked

                  The official numbers have an IFR about 5 times that of the flu, which I’ll freely admit is lower than the 10x that I assumed based on China’s figures.

                  The actual fatality count is far higher than any flu (and hasn’t actually stopped), and that was his actual (very wrong) prediction. I’m not even going to bother arguing about the ridiculous theory that official death tallies are padded by as large a factor as 3-5x, it’s a coping mechanism that requires militant ignorance of excess-death stats and basic math to maintain. If you or anyone else believes that those particular numbers are off by more than 10-20%, then there’s no sense in debating anything, you’ll just invent whatever explanations are necessary to maintain the illusion.

                  I won’t insult anyone’s intelligence by claiming that I made 100% accurate predictions. I didn’t. But I’m also getting seriously tired of TC’s arrogance on the subject given that his predictions were mostly worse. They might “feel” right in the sense of being on the “right side” if you frame everything in terms of partisan politics but objectively, quantitatively they were not even close.

                  And I’d be perfectly happy never to discuss it again, I have never felt the need to keep re-litigating the issue and nobody even really cares anymore. But it’s really starting to look like he’ll never let it die, he keeps bringing it up over and over again on subtopics where it’s totally irrelevant. It’s a new blackpill script, instead of the alt-right’s “Trump cucked to Kushner” narrative it’s “Trump cucked on Covid”. Dumb AF.

                • Not Tom says:

                  We should confine our dispute here to what it seems is a disagreement over Derek Chauvin.

                  1. Did he do anything wrong.

                  2. Should people on the far right lift a finger to help him.

                  3. Should people on the far right lift a finger for cops in general.

                  Fine, then let’s drop it. Sorry for the previous post, I wrote it before you’d written this reply.

                  My answers:

                  1. Absolutely not. He was dealing with a case of excited delirium, Floyd was going to die anyway and what he did probably caused the least amount of collateral damage. Unless the false flag conspiracy theory is true and Chauvin was part of it, which I’m not ruling out at this point.

                  2. No, but there are very few people we should lift a finger to help. We’re passivists, not activists. As SK says, what matters is the truth.

                  3. Depends heavily on individual cops and locality. There are probably many cops in small towns who deserve it, and a much smaller but maybe non-zero number in blue areas. I agree that the policing system as currently designed tends to be emasculating to men, but I don’t believe ACAB.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “1. Absolutely not. He was dealing with a case of excited delirium, Floyd was going to die anyway and what he did probably caused the least amount of collateral damage. Unless the false flag conspiracy theory is true and Chauvin was part of it, which I’m not ruling out at this point.”

                  You don’t need a complex false flag conspiracy just a faked toxicology report which would be created for no other reason than cops look out for their own…

                  I find it easy to believe that Floyd was drunk and pilled and coked up on various things. Meth and Fentanyl I find harder to believe. He doesn’t look bad enough to be a methhead (and he is in fact older than the age your average methhead lives to) and if he had 3x the lethal level of Fentanyl would likely be dead and dead quick as Teddy Spaghetti very rightly points out.

                • Not Tom says:

                  You don’t need a complex false flag conspiracy just a faked toxicology report

                  A lot of shit out there is fake, but if you just go labeling everything that doesn’t support your point of view as fake, then there is no difference between you and a crazy person.

                  To be a coherent theory, there needs to be some rational reason to doubt the evidence, beyond what is deemed to be motive for lying (because a motive can always be retroactively invented, it tells us nothing about reality), and there needs to be some capacity to distinguish between different types of lying: embellishment, omission, or outright fabrication.

                  Your point of view lacks logical consistency. On the one hand, medical examiners and indeed the entire medical profession are in the pocket of the Cathedral (Epstein, Covid, etc.). Yet in this one instance they are actually in the pocket of the police, doing the exact opposite of what any Cathedral actor could plausibly want, unless you invent an even less plausible conspiracy to cover it – e.g. they really want to get him off, to cause more unrest, despite this being quite inconsistent with the holiness spiral and despite them consistently showing a lack of ability to plan or even foresee long-term consequences, which therefore must also be a fake-out… and so on. That way lies madness.

                  There are a lot of casual, opportunistic conspiracies out there, and even some bigger coordinated conspiracies. And when the facts don’t seem to add up, it can point to a conspiracy. But the facts do add up here; Floyd’s behavior on video was consistent with drugs, not alcohol. And when you have to keep expanding the conspiracy to explain away inconsistencies in the original conspiracy, that usually means it’s time to take a step back and reset your priors.

                  The family putting out a conflicting medical report is not a rational reason to doubt the Coroner’s report. Why? Because that report was released after the media narrative was in full swing, but more importantly, because their “examiner” never had access to the body, and based all conclusions on watching the video! That’s how absurd and useless their “report” is. It’s almost as bad as the armchair psychologists “diagnosing” Trump with various mental illnesses.

                  Chauvin did nothing wrong, at least insofar as what the video appears to show. If there is more to the story that the video does not show, that’s a different story.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “A lot of shit out there is fake, but if you just go labeling everything that doesn’t support your point of view as fake, then there is no difference between you and a crazy person.”

                  If there is a motive to fake something and it can plausibly to be done you must always consider the possibility it is fake. That does not make you crazy it does make your worldview incredibly dark though…

                  I’m not sure the toxicology report is fake but it fits the criteria above so it can’t be trusted on its face and Meth and Fentanyl do not jibe with other facts of the case. Strong possibility of faked toxicology report.

                  “Your point of view lacks logical consistency. On the one hand, medical examiners and indeed the entire medical profession are in the pocket of the Cathedral (Epstein, Covid, etc.). Yet in this one instance they are actually in the pocket of the police”

                  Fauci is a high ranking priest doctor who works for the Cathedral. Toxicologists are doctors who work for the police department basically.

                  People in organizations tend to

                  1) Do what they are told by superiors.

                  2) Try to not be completely hated by their colleagues.

                  No logical inconsistencies here. I said I don’t trust the family toxicology report either and that both sides have motives to lie.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  He was overdosing on something, and thats why they hauled him into the ambulance without doing any preliminary checks. They knew his only chance at survival was immediate professional medical attention. No matter what in particular he was on, and lets assume the ME is lying and it was not a feyntanyl/meth cocktail, an overdose is typically fatal. The cops were in a no-win scenario. They might have fucked up, but he was a dead man walking and they were trying to keep him alive.

                • jim says:

                  If I am trying to keep someone alive, not going keep prolonged pressure on his neck. I might keep mild pressure on his neck, and any time he starts being difficult increase it considerably until he stops being difficult – which is only going to take twenty seconds.

                  When restraining someone difficult, one necessarily has to use dangerous methods. When all is quiet for twenty seconds or so, then one should start exercising care.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  I am not sure that any namefag could possibly defend that when it came out and not knowing all of the details. While that isn’t necessarily what happened here, it is something to keep in mind. I have no idea what it takes to hold down a 6’4″ man during an overdose. I have surprised people trying to hold me down, and I’m not a 6’4″ athlete high on who knows what. I have also been trained in restraint techniques, and the difference between an effective hold and an ineffective hold can be imperceptible to an observer.

                  Does it look bad? Hell yes. Is it? I don’t know. All I can say is that it reminds me of Rodney King, who got beat down over and over because he was high on PCP and wouldn’t stop fighting. Was it the case that he had to be held down that way to keep him from running off and dying? Again, I don’t know. That is why we have trials.

                  At first I was with you all. I saw it and it was out of control. It was a perfect opportunity to reign in out of control policemen. It appeared to be an open and shut case of police brutality and apathy. However, and this took longer than usual because of the universal disgust with what we saw, I started hearing of other sides to it. Now, I’m not so sure.

                  Is Chauvin a saint? Fuck no. Was he completely out of control? Possibly. Is Floyd ultimately responsible for his own death? Yes. Should Chauvin be punished for his role in Floyd’s death? Possibly, even probably. I think we were all blinded by our dislike of cops and how bad the optics were, and not enough discussion was had, and that is a major problem for us. Gnon demands truth, and we, as His servants, must always seek it. I am not sure we have it yet.

                • jim says:

                  Let us do a little experiment. Someone report to me what happens when another man holds you down with his full weight on your throat for eight minutes. I would rather not try the experiment myself.

                  My guess is that it would be mighty bad, but I am extrapolating from choke holds, and have never used or suffered the knee on the throat.

                  My expectation is that any normal man would be rendered quiet in twenty seconds, but maybe I am wrong.

                • Andre says:

                  “My expectation is that any normal man would be rendered quiet in twenty seconds, but maybe I am wrong.”

                  Floyd was not rendered quiet in twenty seconds.

                • Cloudswrest says:

                  “Jim agrees with me that officer Derek Chauvin was acting in a way that is plausibly going to kill a lot of people”

                  One wonders though whether Chauvin’s actions were malicious, or was he just a human “robot” doing what he’s been told/trained to do by the police agencies?

                • Cloudswrest says:

                  My understanding is rank and file police officers aren’t selected for their intelligence nowadays. In fact they consider it a liability. They’re selected for their willingness to follow the policies of their department and their training.

              • BC says:

                Chauvin did nothing wrong, at least insofar as what the video appears to show. If there is more to the story that the video does not show, that’s a different story.

                The cops I’ve talking about this out all thought Chauvin behavior was way over the line and probably contributed to his deaht. One of his own cops kept questioning how they were treating Floyd during his death.

                My take is nothing of value was lost by the death of Floyd and nothing of value will be lost by the long term imprisonment of Chauvin. Bad cops should be punished.

                • Andre says:

                  “The cops I’ve talking about this out all thought Chauvin behavior was way over the line and probably contributed to his deaht.”

                  Most cops are cucks.

                  “One of his own cops kept questioning how they were treating Floyd during his death.”

                  You mean one of the newbies?

                • Not Tom says:

                  What everyone seems to be forgetting is that progressives do not have genuine principles and do not care about police brutality.

                  Throwing him under the bus because “police brutality” is giving them an inch, and they will take a mile. They already have. They will not use his indictment or his conviction to improve policing, or even to go after specifically bad cops. They will use it as a confession that the cops are racist and that everything is racist and that racism is still the biggest problem we need to solve. If you think the “open conversations” happening in every corporation across America are bad now, just wait until the verdict comes in.

                  In fact it does not even matter what the verdict ends up being. If the verdict is guilty, evidence that evil white racists are destroying virtuous black bodies and need to spend the rest of their lives repenting, or be cancelled. If innocent, means that the criminal justice system is also racist and protects evil racist cops and we need ten times as many false flags and social media astroturf to bring down this horrible system. If they drop the charges, it’s because the DA is racist and works with the racist cops and probably some judge will declare that actually they are not allowed to drop the charges, just like the DoJ cannot drop the Flynn charges.

                  Any narrative that concedes that this was a “murder” gives more ground to progressives in the cultural revolution that is now in full swing. The narrative that does not give ground, which is also probably the correct narrative, is that this was at worst an accidental death occuring as a result of an officer following standard police procedure (and whatever you may think of this hold, it was quite literally documented procedure at Minneapolis PD), but more likely a case of mild incompetence at restraining a dangerous, uncooperative and jacked-up suspect with a disturbing criminal history who was already near death at the moment of capture.

                  But, quack quack, we are all determined and well trained to respond to this immense level of social pressure and find something about this that we can grudgingly agree with and feel the right feels.

                  Well, I won’t do it. If they have a real non-railroaded trial and the evidence shows third-degree manslaughter and the evidence actually proves that beyond a reasonable doubt, then fine – justice was served, and not the racial kind. But if the trial is clearly a show trial or he is found guilty on some nonsensical trumped-up charge like 2nd-degree murder, and the sentencing judge makes some pious statement about ending police racism, then I will go on believing that Chauvin was as innocent as OJ was guilty, and don’t particularly care about the optics of it, only the truth of it.

  27. BC says:

    So on the subject the great cop purge, how do Right Wing Death Squads form and are the US cops going to start operating them? I know a bit about RWDS from south America where it’s always the cops or people associated with the cops doing the actual ops, but I know almost nothing else about them. I’m assuming someone with real power will signal them that they have their backs and gives them a degree of direction.

    • jim says:

      Cops are on strike in some places because they hate the theater they are forced to play in which brutal cops are defeated by triumphant protesters because the people united shall never be defeated. They hate being the fall guy in a fake fight set up by their local administration and antifa.

      It is a good step towards right wing death squads, but right wing death squads, like antifa itself, can only operate under state and federal protection. It is a coup complete problem. When antifa stops being protected by the presidency, the judiciary, and the police, then “off duty” policemen will start being protected.

  28. notglowing says:

    Trump apparently called for journalists to be executed behind closed doors
    https://mobile.twitter.com/thehill/status/1273355498750988289
    One can hope?

    • yewotm8 says:

      I give absolutely no credibility to anything coming from John Bolton. He is a pathetic buffoon. I’ve heard so many snippets coming from that book, all of which seem to be so outrageous that there is no way they are true, and exist only to be memes for the media to spew.

  29. Encelad says:

    “Brooks, the Georgetown Law professor and former Obama official, is helping lead an informal bipartisan group called the Transition Integrity Project that is looking to ensure the election and potential transition go smoothly.”

    Why do I feel a shiver down my spine when I read about an Obama official appointed to check that the election go “smoothly”?

    https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/613060/

  30. Pooch says:

    Their plan has been announced on the news. Trump is supposedly weak, weak, weak, getting weaker, weaker, …

    Wasn’t that narrative smashed when Trump defeated them at the Battle of Lafayette Park? How can they carry on the weak, weak, weaker plan after that event?

    • Mister Grumpus says:

      Sadly, this is an easy question to answer.

      All they have to do is beat up and arrest “Trump supporters” for trying to defend themselves, tear down every statue of a white person, and then tease Trump for not being able to stop them.

      • Pooch says:

        NM guy who shot antifa trying to mob him got charges dropped I believe. That seems like a nice win for white defense from mob. Albuquerque is pretty blue. I supposed they could always add charges later.

  31. Pooch says:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/16/world/asia/Beijing-coronavirus-flareup.html

    Beijing going on soft lockdown for coronavirus wave 2. Now I’m starting to think they are in on this.

  32. notglowing says:

    https://mobile.twitter.com/stillgray/status/1272745791661039616
    Tucker saying that BLM’s support is growing because they’re getting what they want after committing violence and the public supports whoever is strong.
    This signals that violence is the answer and that elections are not useful.

    • The Cominator says:

      They look like the strong horse in (most) blue areas because the left is not willing to stop them. They will not try anything in red areas because will be stopped.

      Blue shitholes will get more blue as the spiral continues while the red areas (where they don’t look like a strong horse but just a species of liberal insanity) will come to hate them more and more.

    • Oliver Cromwell says:

      How on earth does it signal that? The right lost at violence with the nominal commander-in-chief and the nominal military obeying his orders, but if random hicks take up their pitchforks the right will suddenly win?

      If Trump wins, which is still possible, internal institutional attempts can continue.

      If not, the left is going to have to burn itself out, and the best strategy is to make potential future General Moncks aware of their options.

      • Oliver Cromwell says:

        A thought occurs to me, which is that Monck had the advantage of restoring legitimate authority. How bad do things have to get before Queen Elizabeth II looks more legitimate as ruler of America than the Constitution? Are there any other alternatives?

      • notglowing says:

        >but if random hicks take up their pitchforks the right will suddenly win?
        No one is saying this. It doesn’t work for the right.
        But on the left this is what is happening, by capitulating to BLM, a violent organization, because they commit violence and burn down cities.
        Even Trump signed an executive order against police brutality, supporting the cause.
        Also that was just me repeating what Tucker said, not suggesting anything to people here.

        • jim says:

          Capitulation to the BLM (actually antifa) is accelerating the holiness spiral. We are now getting home invasions of insufficient progressive Democrats. Frankenstein’s monster is devouring Frankenstein. If Obama was president, it would be devouring us, but it is not.

          • Theshadowedknight says:

            Are you talking about the Olympia mayor who had her house attacked, or something else? Also, shooting started in Albuquerque, New Mexico. That was an interesting watch. Peaceful protesters peacefully screaming that they were going to peacefully kill a heavily armed far right extremist who was carrying a single pistol.

            • BC says:

              >Are you talking about the Olympia mayor who had her house attacked, or something else?

              It wasn’t just the mayor, the entire area around the capital building was smashed up pretty good. There wasn’t any BLM people either, it was 100% Antifa troops.

              • The Cominator says:

                The funny thing is if the last BAP podcast is correct (and I don’t think hes lying or full of shit) antifa works off lists given by some kind of central authority which also provides their funding…

                So this is not spontaneous at all its organized coordinated attacks by far leftists on insufficiently holy Democrats.

                • jim says:

                  Top democrats and deep staters are having their antifa clients attack top democrats (and probably top deep staters).

                  When you try color revolution in America itself, the dynamic of the holiness spiral is going to grab it and run off with it.

                  When the State Department did color revolutions elsewhere, their big problem was carryon baggers, people who were helicoptered into power in countries where they lacked local roots and connections. The carryon baggers would rule from a hotel, with the cafeteria serving their meals, a succession of whores warming their bed, and the maids cleaning their rooms. They did not care who would rule the target country, since in truth America would rule it, so they proceeded to steal everything and take the next flight out, leaving the ensuing political mess for someone else to sort out, like their hotel rooms.

                  In America itself, successful color revolution would mean real power up for grabs, and the color revolutionaries care deeply who is going to grab it, and are apt to set to work sorting that problem out before power is seized.

                  Thus color revolution in America itself is likely to take a different turn, with a lot of bloodshed and destruction setting in before the color revolutionaries seize power, rather than after they seize power. Mild stuff so far, but the logic of the holiness spiral, like the logic of color revolution, is escalation till final victory. If we are very lucky, the left could kill itself off before seizing total power, instead of after, as the Red Brigades did.

                  One might suppose the Democrat party “moderates” will get their stuff together and crush Antifa and its sponsors, which they could easily do, but that would mean cooperating with Bad Orange Man and letting him win. Their friends to the left are going to kill them, while their enemies to the right are not going to kill them, especially if they decide to assist in crushing Antifa, but nonetheless, no enemies to the left, no friends to the right.

                • The Cominator says:

                  To the extent they are being centrally directed I would ask you what is the plan?

                  Leftists burning their own cities can’t help the Democrats much but I don’t want to assume total incompetence on the part of the enemy especially given the enemies very successful Corona sabotage of the economy…

                • jim says:

                  Their plan has been announced on the news. Trump is supposedly weak, weak, weak, getting weaker, weaker, …

                  Antifa, with enough blacks around summoned by the sound of broken glass to provide plausibility for the official narrative, breaks stuff and starts fires. Everyone loves a strong horse. The more fires they start, the more glass they break, the more popular they become. It is intoxicating for them, intoxicating for Democrats. It is intoxicating even for those Democrats who get targeted by Antifa. Everyone loves Kristallnacht.

                • Anonymous 2 says:

                  Yes, antifa are fairly obviously directed and organized and funded (and protected) by some discreet power. Interestingly, during the riots Soros explicitly denied it, as a “debunked conspiracy theory”, naturally.

                  https://www.zerohedge.com/political/rare-statement-soros-denies-paying-protesters-riot

                • Mister Grumpus says:

                  @Jim again recites and applies the model:
                  “One might suppose the Democrat party “moderates” will get their stuff together and crush Antifa and its sponsors, which they could easily do, but that would mean cooperating with Bad Orange Man and letting him win. Their friends to the left are going to kill them, while their enemies to the right are not going to kill them, especially if they decide to assist in crushing Antifa, but nonetheless, no enemies to the left, no friends to the right.”

                  What words could better make sense of Pelosi et al kneeling to their own career destroyers?

                  I’ve been in this so long, the above is completely obvious to me. Not obvious enough that I could have written it myself word for word, but it makes perfect sense. There’s nothing here that makes me go “You’re crazy, that’s wrong, you’re terrible, and let’s fight about it.”

                  This leads to me asking:

                  Why doesn’t Fox News have a show that’s nothing but this kind of NrXish analysis, over and over, on the events of the day? Where is that show? Why isn’t it on right now?

                  Or are Carlson and Gutfeld way ahead of me, and know how to IRL this stuff, folding it into their act, slowly over time, so they don’t lose anyone abruptly?

                  How naughty is this anymore, really though? Is there anything particularly racist-bigot-homophobe-horrible about the content here? Nobody on Jim is carrying on about “GTKRWN”, or “I can’t stand these niggers no more” or “liberals get the bullet too”, or “Hitler did nothing wrong”, or anything like that.

                  So once again it’s obvious. I’ve lost touch with how far outside the mainstream I really am, because I can’t even tell what’s so horrible and mean about what we read and write here. And then I try 10 minutes of CNN and it’s putting my face in a lawnmower.

                  I know I’m “slow class”, but your comments are always appreciated.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I’ve posted Jim stuff on my facebook but i genuinely dont give a fuck, i think the worst most unpalatable to normies things Jim posts on are related to

                  1) The redpill on early female sexuality, his real position is as we see right now easy to distort.

                  2) His position condoning lethal private violence in regards to being cucked. Would be palatable if you just said beating the shit out of them badly was ok…

                  3) his imho genuinely morally bad view that bastards should be left to a fate like 1950s Quebec.

                  The 1st item there is nothing wrong with but its easy to misconstrue because even a lot of right wingers are too emotional about the topic. The 2nd item is too associated with the way moon worshipping sand joggers behave… A savage beating suffices to restore alphaness. The 3rd is genuinely kind of horrible…

                • jim says:

                  There was remarkably little curiosity about what happened to bastards until quite modern times. And there is today remarkably little interest in late term abortions. The Republicans recently voted with Democrats, yet again, to fund the sale of baby meat, which I am sure never happened in the 1950s. A genuinely civilized society might well take effective action to prevent both, but we need to reboot the original and working operating system before we start making improvements yet again. How do you secure the safety of bastards without undermining the family, the authority of husbands, and the authority of fathers? Maybe it can be done, certainly it should be done if it can be done, but until we have a more functional social order, tinkering with improvements is unwise.

                  I don’t think my position on female sexuality is easy to distort. I run into the same strange incomprehension on all manner of topics. People detect crimethink, and reflexively substitute a less criminal position, partly because they do not dare think about my actual position, partly because they are forbidden to debate it.

                  One is apt to use lethal violence defending one’s home, and this is socially approved, and legal in most American states. What is it that makes one’s home valuable? Does a man want a house and garden, if he has no one but himself in it? Everything we do, we do for women. If no women, and no prospect of owning a a woman, might as well live in your single mother’s basement playing pornographic video games. All men are like that, unless there is something broken in them. If a man is not like that, probably left no descendants, so we are descended from men like that.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Your position is only easy to distort not because its overly complicated but because people have been trained to have a visceral reaction to any implication of young girls behaving badly the way you see, its a horrible thoughtcrime for the vast majority of the population. We saw people presumably from the purple pilled MPC engaging in this last night.

                  I’ll concede that perhaps deadly violence for catching your wife under your roof under the freehold doctrine but most women who fuck around tend to have it “just happen” over and over again OUTSIDE their homes (I suppose the trope about rich broads fucking the poolboy being a possible exception). And condoning lethality for anything short of caught in the act under your own roof is just too sand joggery for whites, its not generally been our custom though dueling was.

                  “How do you secure the safety of bastards without undermining the family, the authority of husbands, and the authority of fathers? ”

                  You would not have to undermine it very much.

                  In general I think let Christian families adopt them if their father is unable to care for them and for whatever reason can’t be married, screen out any fags, sadists and certain other mental types. There would be so few under our system that demand would likely exceed supply.

                • Pooch says:

                  Why doesn’t Fox News have a show that’s nothing but this kind of NrXish analysis, over and over, on the events of the day? Where is that show? Why isn’t it on right now?

                  Normies can’t fully digest Jim without full internalization of the woman and race pill, discussion of which is still well outside the Overton Window. I do see the window slowly shifting to the right though. This is where guys like Tucker come in to fill the gap. He is discussing race (without actually saying “black” or “white”) in ways that I’ve never seen before on television so that’s a good thing. If he were to push it too far though he would likely be fired and canceled.

                • Pooch says:

                  Sorry for the double-post..

                  Their plan has been announced on the news. Trump is supposedly weak, weak, weak, getting weaker, weaker, …

                  Wasn’t that narrative smashed when Trump defeated them at the Battle of Lafayette Park? How can they honestly carry on the weak, weak, weaker plan after that event?

                • jim says:

                  The narrative was indeed smashed. New York Times has quietly gone back to “will lose in November”

                  If the establishment Democrats are in charge, color revolution is over now. Are the establishment Democrats in charge? The insurgency is now not only against Trump, but against establishment Democrats. Maybe establishment Democrats will prevail. The last conspicuous burning seemed to result in effective Democratic part action to identify and punish the offenders. Cultural Revolution is go, which is a retreat position.

                  I expected, and predicted, loss of establishment Democrat control. Less sure now.

                • Pooch says:

                  To add on, seems like maybe they’ve back off of color revolution and are switching to Cultural Revolution for a while with the smashing of statutes and such. Some similarities to when the CPC smashed the Buddhist statues in China.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Why doesn’t Fox News have a show that’s nothing but this kind of NrXish analysis, over and over, on the events of the day? Where is that show? Why isn’t it on right now?

                  Because the average Fox News viewer wouldn’t understand most of it and would be terrified of the rest.

                  NRx is an intellectual movement for elites in exile, not a demotistic prole activist ideology. Proles need religion, not abstract ideas. They want to be left alone with their jobs and their families, not to rule or join mass protests.

                  Like we asked you before: to what end? What do you think that we, or society, would gain from such exposure? If the thought leaders of progressivism, which is totally mainstream, work largely in the shadows, what could possibly lead you to believe that reaction, which is maligned and demonized, would operate effectively on cable TV?

                  We know our audience, and Fox News viewers ain’t it.

                • Javier says:

                  Greg Gutfeld said ‘the Cathedral,’ is that commonly used outside of NRX circles? He was also alluding to motte and bailey.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Greg Gutfeld said ‘the Cathedral,’ is that commonly used outside of NRX circles?

                  Never. Kind of reminds me of Ivanka’s bizarre reference to the red pill. I doubt these people fully understand what they’re talking about, but that’s actually OK; progs mostly don’t understand the memes coming from academia either, that’s not essential for transmission or correct function. Some of his viewers are going to Google the Cathedral and find out what it means. (well, until Google starts suppressing it)

            • Pooch says:

              NM got charged dropped so that’s good news.

              https://twitter.com/reuters/status/1273466660058542082?s=21

              • Javier says:

                Good, I was afraid that would be another case of the courts declaring that putting yourself in a scenario where self-defense is likely is the same as murder. Which is horseshit.

  33. Fred says:

    Jim’s “Cambodia thesis” (left is purging everyone smart) confirmed: https://twitter.com/XiXiDu/status/1271853751071051779

    • Not Tom says:

      Boring.

      • lol says:

        On June 9, 2008, Madsen wrote that unnamed “GOP dirty tricks operatives” had found a Kenyan birth certificate registering the birth of Barack Obama, Jr. on August 4, 1961. “However, the registration is a common practice in African countries whose citizens abroad have families with foreign nationals.”[34] He claimed in August 2009 that Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu was responsible for creating the Obama “birther” movement in a broadcast on the RT (formerly known as Russia Today) network.[31]

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

        • Not Tom says:

          Still boring. No one here cares about birtherism, for or against. At least I hope they don’t. Presidential elections are fake and gay, Obama was a fake and gay president who didn’t single-handedly destroy the U.S. economy and incite the prog holiness spiral but sure did his part (and is still doing his part, through OFA) to help those causes along. I’m not sure if he was true Inner Party, an Inner Party mouthpiece or merely a useful idiot, perhaps some combination of all of the above.

          Birtherism is just a stupid tradcuck meme invented because tradcucks knew in their hearts that the gay mulatto would accelerate America’s already steep decline but were terrified of being called racist, so they came up with this meme to try to avoid being called racists, which predictably failed to fool anyone on the left and backfired on tradcucks even more than “Trump’s taxes” and “emoluments clause” backfired on the more desperate and incompetent elements of the left.

          We here aren’t terrified of being called racists and therefore don’t really care where the shitskin halfbreed was born. That’s really one of the least important aspects of his election/presidency. I suppose it might be interesting if we could peer into the networks of people who helped fabricate his past, but there are far juicier conspiracies afoot these days.

          • lol says:

            Birtherism is just a stupid tradcuck meme

            Interesting, because:

            When people say that it silly to doubt Obama’s citizenship, what they actually mean is that it is silly to suppose we still have a constitution.

            That Obama was born in Kenya was an important and prominent part of his identity and website until he started running for president, and his alleged birth certificate is a crude and poorly done photoshop job. No one really believes he is actually a citizen, any more than they really believe that women are equal to men.

            Written by someone who has voiced support for Birtherism on a number of occasions, both during and after Obama’s administration.

            • Not Tom says:

              I assume that’s a Jim quote – still don’t really care, and don’t have to agree with him on everything. Regardless, we’re 4 years into the Trump administration and the circumstances surrounding Obama’s birth have long since ceased to be important. I don’t know why you or anyone else would bother to bring it up at this time or on under this topic, other than as deliberate distraction and misdirection.

              It is silly to suppose we still have a constitution, and frankly rather silly to suppose we ever had one. Pretty sure SCOTUS just removed all doubt, mere hours ago, on this very day. If Trump ever manages to exercise real executive power it will be though extra-constitutional measures.

              But you want to use birtherism as a wedge. Proven shill tactic. We’re not allowed to simply not give a shit, we have to take a position. Well, I don’t give a shit and I’m not taking a position; it’s a boring, irrelevant distraction.

              • lol says:

                We’re not allowed to simply not give a shit, we have to take a position.

                I don’t recall asking what your position is, ever. You volunteered it, so in response I brought up Jim’s position which contradicts yours.

                You did not “have” to take a position – you chose to do it.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Re Birtherism

                  Birtherism is useful to some degree in pointing out Cathedral corruption and hypocrisy but what its not is something likely to succeed in getting the Obama years declared legally null and void.

                  Was Barrack Obama born in Kenya, most likely.

                  Is there any prospect of SCOTUS EVER ruling that he was not a “natural born” citizen even if someone all the justices were replaced by clones of Clarence Thomas, no. Obama sucked but no court ever wants to create the kind of administrative chaos that would result in ruling an 8 year presidency null and void.

                  Even if the court finds he was born in Kenya they will simply find he was a natural born citizen because his mother was a citizen (this is already precedent via Ted Cruz). So birtherism isn’t that important.

              • R7 Rocket says:

                I wonder if “lol” is ready for a RedPill on women question?

                • Approved by Karen and Samantha from HR says:

                  Yesterday, I came home to find a nigger smashing it into my 8-year-old daughter.

                  As I was mentally preparing myself for glorious bloodshed, the figure of Foghorn Leghorn emerged, seemingly out of nowhere, and informed me thus: “If you were Mr. 1-in-30, like yours truly, you’d certainly know that your homicidal rage is wholly misplaced. What really enrages you is blue-pilled society’s taboo against forcibly restricting and/or marrying off little girls, who sometimes run off to Arlington Beach to seduce adult-female-preselected gangsters 30 years their senior.”

                  Instantly, my fury abated, and after some reflection, I firmly made up my mind: “This nigger is now my son-in-law. They are getting married. Mazel tov!” I’m now looking for a destination where I can take the happy couple to tie the knot; perhaps Saudi Arabia? This, in fact, is why I came here in the first place – to ask where I can legally practice Jimianity. Please forward the answer here:

                  https://tips.fbi.gov/

                • jim says:

                  Well, at least the shills are announcing that they are shills.

                • Not Tom says:

                  I’d consider this a fail, for the exact same reason Jim considered info’s responses further up above to be a fail. It contains some of the correct shibboleths, but uses them incorrectly and in the wrong combinations (adult males are not attracted to eight-year-olds, it’s the other way around). And focuses all the attention on the irrelevant minority of precocious girls who cause no real problems, instead of the majority of adult women who do.

                • Approved by Karen and Samantha from HR says:

                  How is this a fail? Obviously, when you find out that an adult male has been ramming it into your prepubescent daughter, the only conclusion to be drawn is that she seduced him (or “placed herself in a situation where sex would be likely to ensue”), so why not look for legal means to formalize that loving and wonderful relationship? If it worked in a penal colony, it will work everywhere.

                  The same rule obviously applies when an adult woman, let’s say your wife or mother, goes out to buy some groceries to make dinner, and is later found unconscious (comatose) in a nearby park, with signs of physical struggle, scars over her upper body and torso, some skull fractures, and deep vaginal and anal wounds – obviously she wanted a roving pack of groids to have their way with her, because they are so, so alpha. The solution is to kill your wife/mother for adultery, and to make it illegal for women to go outside without kin male supervision.

                • jim says:

                  The problem is that an eight year old girl is unlikely to form a loving and wonderful relationship that lasts for longer than half an hour. She is severely lacking in the required assets.

                  Hence likely to be banging someone unlikely and unable to stick around, a black, a drug dealer, a pimp with a string of whores all of them hotter than your daughter, or someone who would make a great husband except he already has a wife, three mistresses, and a string of women on his booty call list, all of them hotter than your daughter. At best, he is likely to be a roadie for a second rate band.

                  So you kill him. (Unless, as is by far the most common case, your daughter crept into his bed while he was drunk and sleeping, and then brought him to a happy awakening, followed by a big surprise.)

                  You threaten to kill your daughter. (I suggest partial drowning. It is terrifying, but unlikely to cause permanent damage.) And then you keep her under tight control.

                • Ex says:

                  The first one was mildly amusing. The second one should be deleted.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  Women getting raped by roving packs of groids really put themselves out there for it to happen, I’d say a 100% of the times but I’m sure there are exceptions.

                  It’s never some virtuous wife going to buy groceries to make dinner for his husband and children and always some slut that went with the groids/Pakis to some shady apartment to use drugs and ends up with a slit throat. I could go into the /r/new_right subreddit and find several cases exactly like that right now.

                  The red pill requires from you to be able to observe reality and its conclusions are drawn from that observation of reality. You are not observing reality, you are making up imaginary incidents to justify your pathetic programming.

                  Regarding prepubescent daughters, they are basically private property of their fathers, if there was no consent from him then it is always a crime. Now, it’s very interesting that in this scenario you made up you decided it to happen in your own home, meaning, it’s some dude your little whore found on Instagram and invited over. Even your subconscious knows the truth, that it’s likely she did in fact engage actively for it to happen.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  *time *her

                  I really need to check my posts before submitting them…

                • Approved by Karen and Samantha from HR says:

                  It’s never some virtuous wife going to buy groceries to make dinner for her husband and children and always some slut that went with the groids

                  Exactly. When your wife or mother goes missing and ends up lying unconscious and paralyzed on a bench in a public park at night, you’ll retroactively know for a fact that she was a dirty slut who went looking for it. Chaste women never, ever suffer such fates, so if that happened to her, she must not have been chaste.

                  in this scenario you made up you decided it to happen in your own home, meaning, it’s some dude your little whore found on Instagram and invited over. Even your subconscious knows the truth, that it’s likely she did in fact engage actively for it to happen.

                  Exactly. When you catch your 2nd-grader daughter in bed with a burly male 30 years her senior, probably named DeShawn or Abdul, your first instinct and reaction will totally be, “Damn, I should not have allowed her to install the Instagram app on her cellphone.”

                  Even if she’s crying and screaming and doing all the usual drama, you should never believe her that this was “rape”; and after apologizing to DeShawn/Abdul for your little whore’s sexually-predatory misbehavior, and for the terrible trauma he must have suffered when she wrapped her “clearly lubricated” vagina around his cock, you gotta beat her up severely as punishment for seducing him and for so terribly traumatizing him.

                  Then, you need to follow that up by marrying her off to one of your friends, preferably a socially awkward engineer with acne and irritable bowel syndrome, who’ll no doubt be glad to lose his virginity to a horny 2nd grader. Otherwise, your behavior would be contrary to the Red Pill on Women.

                  The first one was mildly amusing. The second one should be deleted.

                  Amusing? It’s dead serious, as dead as your wife’s bastard son from her ex-husband (nice job killing that stupid f**k and disposing of his remains, by the way).

                  I used to be a cuck for thinking that e.g. White Sharia is a lame meme, but then I’ve seen the light and now I’m totally on board with child brides and execution for marital indiscretions, ‘consent’ be damned – this is Trad life! Oh, sorry, wrong shibboleth; I meant to write “Jihad-complete Restoration life.”

                  Sure, such ideas may come across as an autistic loser’s raging misogyny, but really it’s this sheer altruistic concern for the future of civilization that motives us, amirite folks? Feminists = PWNED. This blog needs to get way greater exposure for its totally based approach to women, and I’m not sure why that hasn’t happened yet.

                  P. S. The Old Testament is an Aryan document.

                • jim says:

                  > Exactly. When your wife or mother goes missing and ends up lying unconscious and paralyzed on a bench in a public park at night, you’ll retroactively know for a fact that she was a dirty slut who went looking for it

                  All reported ‘rapes’, without exception, are fake. Women seldom complain about actual rapes if completed successfully.

                  All reported “rapes”, either no sex occurred, or after the sexual act the male revealed himself as insufficiently alpha. Women are demonstrably failing to cooperate in our laws on rape and sexual harassment.

                  If a reported rape coincides with a real rape, it is only because the rapist revealed himself to be beta during or immediately after the rape.

                  You can see in the workplace that reported sexual harassment bears absolutely no connection to what males think of as sexual harassment. Every sexual harassment complaint is a horny woman complaining about lack of alpha.

                  How do rape reports go? University of Virginia had thirty six complaints of rape and sexual assault. Investigated thirty six of them, no disciplinary or police action taken in any of them. So Rolling Stone investigated the University of Virginia. Came up empty.

                  Looks like rape complaints follow the same pattern of sexual harassment complaints that we see in the workplace.

                  For our laws against rape and sexual harassment to be effective, to stop what men think of as rape and sexual harassment, we need rape and sexual harassment laws where the complainant and victim is the father or husband, and the consent or lack thereof of the woman is legally and morally irrelevant to the men involved. (It is morally relevant to her, in that her husband should probably kill her if she consented, and comfort and praise her if she stubbornly resisted, but it has to be irrelevant to the guilt of the adulterer or fornicator, or else we get what we have got.)

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  I think you think that you are being clever, but one “smart”-assed shitlib is scarcely indistinguishable from another. Plus you clearly don’t understand us. Aryan? Really? Check your script, you seem to mixed them up.

                • Approved by Karen and Samantha from HR says:

                  Plus you clearly don’t understand us. Aryan? Really? Check your script, you seem to mixed them up.

                  How DARE YOU disagree with Jim that the original Hebrews had significant Aryan ancestry, and that as such the Bible is Aryan!

                  https://blog.jim.com/culture/hail-fellow-comicsgate-fan/#comment-1946715

                  Yeah I’m totally a shitlib for showing you the absurdities of your own worldview. I’m glad you’re here to “own the libs,” though. Well, since I’m a special snowflake and you triggered me so very hard, I gotta go. Bye.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  Okay wignat, don’t bother using your brain, better start your monologue about magic and obscure Jews with dark technologies that mind control women to get into cars with niggers to drug themselves in shady apartments before Jim moderates your posts.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  Own the libs? Who do you think we are?

                • Oliver Cromwell says:

                  Though Karen and Sam are trolling, her account of the rape of Rotherham agrees with accounts in official documents. Young girls were “groomer” with their consent, and police were set on the fathers because fathers are not allowed to control the movements of young girls, not primarily because the fathers were white. Muslim gangs raped white girls rather than the other way around because the Muslims had an informal patriarchal apparatus backing them, whereas the whites only had the feminist state. While officials presumably did not mind that Muslims were subduing and humiliating whites, the main motivation for their actions was feminism, the right of a young girl to go out and find the strongest gang to hang around with. While the anti-white racism angle is speakable in Britain, even if it results in no consequences for officials, the true feminist cause of the rapes is not speakable. As such, Britain First is an anti-Muslim but pro-feminist organisation. Indeed, anti-Muslim on feminist grounds.

                • Mike says:

                  @R7

                  >I wonder if “lol” is ready for a RedPill on women question?

                  Yes, it could be very interesting to see how he responds to that, albeit not for the reason you might think. You should post it here and if we’re lucky he’ll come back to answer it.

                  @Karen

                  >Sure, such ideas may come across as an autistic loser’s raging misogyny, but really it’s this sheer altruistic concern for the future of civilization that motives us, amirite folks?

                  I was with you until that line. Using leftist shibboleths such as misogyny, whether ironically or not, should be discouraged. Otherwise nice troll, gg, would definitely read again.

                  @Tom

                  >adult males are not attracted to eight-year-olds, it’s the other way around

                  Bullshit. There’s a reason why all nrx now ignores Jim completely, and that is his incessant normalization of pedophilia, and then his 6 bajillion gorillion denials that this phenomenon even exists. You really shouldn’t be doing that, both because of horrible optics, and because it’s wrong.

                  @Atavistic

                  >Okay wignat, don’t bother using your brain, better start your monologue about magic and obscure Jews with dark technologies that mind control women

                  I don’t think that he is a shitlib or a wignat, tbh fam. If he’s on the fbi’s payroll, then they seem to have loosened up their human resources protocols and regulation.

                • jim says:

                  > > adult males are not attracted to eight-year-olds, it’s the other way around

                  > Bullshit.

                  Disney got rich peddling romance to nine year old girls. No one tries to sell porn or romance to nine year old boys, and porn featuring adult males with nine year old girls is a niche market comparable to “Grandmothers I would like to fuck”. The porn market featuring adult males with nine year old female actresses is a tiny niche that is massively outweighed by porn featuring adult males with nine year old boys.

                  And most “young adult” romances feature a female protagonist whom we are told is sixteen or so, but who suspiciously resembles a nine year old.

                  The supply and demand situation is as plain as the nose on your face. Massive demand by very young girls, not much supply. (in part because they only want supply that has massive adult female pre-selection, as for example the Prince in “Cinderella”)

                • jim says:

                  Pedophilia is an enemy anti concept, invented quite recently in order to normalize gays and to displace the rage we feel about misconduct by very young girls.

                  The word “Pedophile” did not exist before 1944. (Check google ngrams). Nor did any equivalent concept. If no such word, no such thing.

                  > here’s a reason why all nrx now ignores Jim completely

                  You entryists took over Socialist Matter, and it died, as everything that you take over dies. You are now destroying Linux and Rust. The “nrx” that ignored me was entryist controlled, and swiftly ceased to exist. Everything that fails to resist social justice entryism dies.

                  We intend to abolish pedophilia, as we will abolish gay. No one will think or use the word. And if a nine year old girl gets married off, perhaps because fatherless or perhaps to sweep scandal under the rug, it will not be common, but neither will it be any big deal. The word and the thought did not exist before 1944, nor any where at any time in the past few thousand years. It will soon once again cease to exist, remembered only by learned historians of late twentieth and early twenty first century history. We will still, however, have a word for sex between boys and men. And a noose.

                • Mike says:

                  Also he reminds me of Sinead, for those who don’t know.

                  https://www.bitchute.com/video/Hnds6oKgAfeW/

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  What rest of nrx is ignoring Jim? The rest of nrx collapsed into irrelevance and despair. Its a bunch of blackpillers who are moaning all is lost, a lot like the Republicans that always attack the right and never somehow the left. Who cares that we lost them?

                • Anon says:

                  >Linking to Sinead

                  Yes, that’s what we need: a Nazi Feminist Flat-Earther.

                • polifugue says:

                  The references made to “own the libs” and “special snowflake” is projection; a wignat would never refer to opposition to subjects of which he writes in that particular language. The writing style of this person is too refined to be coming from a wignat.

                  What the Leftist is doing here is projecting a false frame, called a motte and bailey tactic or fallacy. When the Leftist’s bailey is questioned, when those with morality greater than not at all assert that underage girls should not be given HPV vaccines and allowed to misbehave, he will retreat to the motte, and accuse the opponent of the most carefully crafted of straw men. This tactic is used in most Leftist social programs, such as modern no-fault divorce, in that the Leftist wishes for women to destroy the family in the name of equality, just as he wants little girls to misbehave. In my elementary school sex education, the old [childless] white hag told the class that just because you haven’t had your period it doesn’t mean you can’t get pregnant. Of course, this wasn’t said to the boys, but then boys don’t engage in such behavior.

                  The disgusting piece of shit above crafts an elaborate fantastical straw man out of touch with reality to take down a complex and difficult issue. This tactic can be described in Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals:” “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” On the subject of divorce, the Leftist constructs an alternative reality where millions of well-behaved women are being mercilessly assaulted by their evil drunken husbands for no reason, and the only reason anyone would be against the divorce industry would be because he wants to mercilessly beat poor innocent wives for no reason out of pure hatred for the color of their skin – oh, wrong metric – out of pure hatred for the fairer sex.

                  One could say that when it comes to the subject of real rape, such as in war, the father would kill the rapist and provide the necessary emotional support to his wife, daughter or sister. This was always done after raids of bandits and invading armies entered settlements. However, this vile piece of shit is standing on the suffering of real women raped in war to promote degeneracy among his own family, kin, and community. He probably doesn’t think all underage girls are sexless, because Leftists openly promote elementary school sex education, but that underage girls are wonderful even if they aren’t sexless, and that underage girls must be allowed and encouraged to misbehave, given birth control and abortions, in order to bring about the eschaton.

                • my posting career observer says:

                  This is what Jim-cultists non-ironically believe:

                  When your wife or mother goes missing and ends up lying unconscious and paralyzed on a bench in a public park at night, you’ll retroactively know for a fact that she was a dirty slut who went looking for it. Chaste women never, ever suffer such fates, so if that happened to her, she must not have been chaste.

                  When you catch your 2nd-grader daughter in bed with a burly male 30 years her senior, probably named DeShawn or Abdul, your first instinct and reaction will totally be, “Damn, I should not have allowed her to install the Instagram app on her cellphone.”

                  Even if she’s crying and screaming and doing all the usual drama, you should never believe her that this was “rape”; and after apologizing to DeShawn/Abdul for your little whore’s sexually-predatory misbehavior, and for the terrible trauma he must have suffered when she wrapped her “clearly lubricated” vagina around his cock, you gotta beat her up severely as punishment for seducing him and for so terribly traumatizing him.

                  Then, you need to follow that up by marrying her off to one of your friends, preferably a socially awkward engineer with acne and irritable bowel syndrome, who’ll no doubt be glad to lose his virginity to a horny 2nd grader. Otherwise, your behavior would be contrary to the Red Pill on Women.

                  This is your actual position on female sexuality, laid bare. That it’s ugly as hell should tell you guys that you are on the wrong track. But instead, you attack the messenger (wonder why that is), who’s done an excellent job putting a mirror in front of your faces. I bet the majority here feels discomfort reading that in those words, but afraid of being censored by Jim, so they say nothing.

                • The Cominator says:

                  MPC observer

                  In some ways some of Jim’s positions are too extreme for whites. But jim is generally right that most women who are “raped” tend to be looking for it. Jim is also right that female sexual choice destroys civilizations.

                  Jim goes too far on things like marriage by abduction and killings for adultery (the punishment should be painful scary and humiliating but it should not IMHO be death…). Tradcuckery cannot put women back in their place and women should be married off by their fathers shortly after puberty.

                • jim says:

                  Gnon commands the death penalty for men who sleep with other men’s wives or betrothed, and allows the death penalty for wives and daughters that exercise female sexual choice. Groups that follow this rule survive. Groups that do not, do not.

                  It is written. Written in our genes, and written in the Old Testament.

                  And it is beyond my power to refrain from carrying it out when a man threatens my reproductive assets, though I am capable of restraining myself enough to do it inconspicuously. Laws attempting to restrain men from doing that which is necessary for their genes to survive are apt to be ineffectual. Ineffectual laws are bad laws that bring the law into justified contempt.

                  Laws that run up against fundamental biological forces will fail, and bring law into discredit.

                • polifugue says:

                  >my posting career observer

                  The leftist reasserts his straw man “that’s your actual position,” attempts to gaslight “you attack the messenger,” appeals to authority “I bet the majority here,” and plays the victim “afraid of being censored.”

                  The fact that Jim’s blog is facing attacks from well-trained Leftists show that this blog is punching far above its weight. I’m impressed with all of the work that Jim has done in promoting NRX, and all of the commentators for their contributions.

                • The Cominator says:

                  95% or more of pedophiles are gays. Heterosexual men almost never interested in pre pubescent women.

                • jack says:

                  Polifugue:

                  >fantastical straw man

                  Lol, your entire post has been nothing but strawmans and psychobabble and histrionic theoreticals. Why don’t you actually address any of the points made in these series of posts? Is that too difficult? Do you *not* always blame the girls and the women who undergo rape? Do you *not* consider it redpileld to always take the side of the rapist, no matter what?

                  Sinead is awesome, by the way. Cray-cray and awesome

                • jack says:

                  Polyamorist:

                  >I’m impressed with all of the work that Jim has done in promoting NRX, and all
                  of the commentators for their contributions.

                  Nice flattery; now explain when exactly do the Jimtards *not* blame the girl or the woman for being raped? Like, under which exact circumstances? Seems to me that you dipshits are in a holiness spiral to show “who is the most pro-pedo,” in the process losing all the common sense you may have initially possessed.

                • jim says:

                  Rape should be defined as removal of a woman from the authority of her father or husband. And should get the death penalty.

                  But all observed complaints about modern day rape are buyer’s remorse. So no male should be punished. Rape as currently defined is not in practice definable. It can only be defined in a system where a woman’s sexual and reproductive services are owned by some male, because as currently defined it fails to map onto observed female behavior.

                  The mating dance is pursuit and predation, conquest and surrender. But women in the presence of a potential rapist or sexual harasser do not act like a mouse in the presence of a cat. They act like a cat toy in the presence of a cat. The laws just don’t work, and we need to replace them with laws that do work.

                  You can see the laws not working right in front of you in sexual harassment cases. Rape, you cannot see so easily, but the statistics indicate that rape complaints are similar to sexual harassment complaints – all bogus, not because it did not happen, but because women complain about what in fact upsets them, and phrase their complaints in high status language without regard to the actual meaning of the words. And rape and sexual harassment does not really upset them, whereas being in the general vicinity of beta males does upset them.

                  The woman’s consent should be morally and legally irrelevant to the guilt of the adulterer or fornicator. It should only be relevant to her guilt, because if it is deemed relevant to his guilt, you get what we have got, the collapse of male and female cooperation in reproduction, defect/defect equilibrium between men and women.

                • The Cominator says:

                  If these people are truly from MPC they are not EXACTLY leftist, pleasureman and crew are more what you would call tradcucks.

                  We do nearly always blame the women because at least in the modern world it is almost always their fault.

                  I disagree with jim on aspects of the women question but his position on rape is at least 99% correct. Real rape occurs when conquering armies sack cities. Otherwise its generally the womans having buyers remorse.

                • The Cominator says:

                  The tradcuck seems to be deeply motivatef fear that Tyrone and Muhammad will have the 1st crack at his precious little pumpkin under jims system, not realizing that this is the case under the status quo.

                • polifugue says:

                  There is nothing to address in the posts because it is a straw man of what Jim and this blog advocates, and the questions have been answered over and over again. I analyzed the tactics used by the above posts.

                  The answer is that rape is complicated. Sometimes, women get assaulted because of lustful misbehavior, where they venture into dangerous scenarios. Other times, women get assaulted because of the evil behavior of men, such as in war, or by a lone rapist. Rape does happen, and it is not always the fault of women, but it is not necessarily the fault of men. Jim mentions, and I have seen personally, girls before puberty act in a grossly sexual manner which is horrifying. No one is saying the white knight position that just because girls want sex means they should get it.

                  With regard to the straw man, the response would be to do what any man would do. Kill the rapist and then take care of the assault victim. If an 8 year old girl were genuinely assaulted against her will, she needs to be protected and cared for. Not all prepubescents are into sex. But you and your ilk are unable to grasp any form of nuance, complexity, because all of what’s on the blog is thoughtcrime, so you resort to straw men.

                • MPC says:

                  >Kill the rapist and then take care of the assault victim.

                  Jim has been arguing *against* that for ages.

                  Motte and bailey is your strategy, not your imaginary “leftist” interlocutor’s. If you agree that the natural and moral response is to kill the rapist — which Jim has been vehemently arguing *against* for a trillion years — then okay.

                • Not Tom says:

                  If these people are truly from MPC

                  I haven’t been to MPC in a long time, but if so, then apparently their pay-to-play policy has not been effective at resisting entryism.

                  But I don’t think it’s MPC. The posts are probably all from the same person, or possibly two people. In one instance he didn’t even change the email address.

                  You asshats do realize that brigading is not an effective strategy in closed communities with well-established pseudonyms? The chan entryism strategy is not universally applicable.

                  The rest of nrx collapsed into irrelevance and despair.

                  Exactly. I’ve never been on board with the everything-is-HR perspective and can confirm that there are parts of the deeply black-pilled right who have adopted this frame – I know a few personally. I can also confirm that they’re irrelevant, often childless and/or divorced, and generally unpleasant to be around. Basically they’re disaffected MRAs, and in at least one case I know of, probably an FBI asset.

                  You can paint a black pill red, but that doesn’t make it a red pill.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “But I don’t think it’s MPC.”

                  I never joined because apparently Pleasureman likes to dox people who don’t kiss his ass all the time and I’ll disagree with anyone if I think they are wrong, I’m too autistic that way.

                  But it would be good if anyone has a membership to politely ask Pleasureman and the crew politely whether its indeed them who are trolling here or whether there are leftist trolls impersonating them.

                • polifugue says:

                  There is a big difference between the rape of an innocent prepubescent girl by a loser or a marauding soldier and the “rape” of an “innocent” prepubescent girl where she crawled on top of an alpha male. The former should be resolved by execution, the latter by shotgun marriage, as was done historically. The key is that some girls start misbehaving at an early age. I believe that girls who start showing signs at nine should be disciplined by her father, rather than shotgun married, but if she cannot be controlled and she sleeps with a man anyway, shotgun marriage is preferable to whoring. I have seen misbehaving girls with my own eyes, and having worked with little girls in the past have been given more than a couple of chances to have sex with preteens, all of which I have refused.

                  The reason why Jim talks about this subject is that for the higher races to reproduce, women must be controlled, and in order for women to be controlled, they cannot be allowed to misbehave.

                • Anon says:

                  the response would be to do what any man would do. Kill the rapist and then take care of the assault victim.

                  Somehow, in his 15 or so years of blogging, Jim never mentioned that. In fact, he always says the opposite of that. Looks to me that you’re talking out of your ass, and making endless excuses for a shitty worldview, mischaracterizing and misconstruing both your own beliefs and what others say.

                • BC says:

                  >my posting career observer

                  https://www.news4jax.com/news/2018/01/28/man-found-in-girls-bedroom-claims-he-was-there-to-have-a-few-beers-affidavit-says/

                  A man who was found in the bedroom of an 11-year-old girl told sheriff’s deputies he was there to “have a few beers” with her.

                  An arrest warrant affidavit said the parents of the girl found Castellano in her bedroom at a home in West Bexar County around 11 p.m. and held him until deputies arrived.

                  The girl told deputies that Castellano entered the home by climbing through her bedroom window, the affidavit said.

                  She told them that Castellano had done the same thing on two other occasions this month.

                  The affidavit said the girl told deputies that she met Castellano on an online app in 2016 and reconnected with him last year.

                  ————————————————

                  She invited him over multiple times.

                  Almost all of these cases involve 11 and 12 year old girls inviting someone in.

                  You need to protect your daughters mostly from their out of control sexuality.

                • anon says:

                  The former should be resolved by execution

                  News to me; Jim has never said that. Never, ever, in all of his blogging career. Good thing that at least some of you have a tiny little bit of common sense.

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  Okay, so if its MPC NPCs, then that fits the white knight, tradcuck, pedo line of attack. Also the cognitive blindness that they cannot see the argument we are making and imagine something else. It reminds me a little of Glenfilthie.

                  Just so we are clear, you retard, we are saying that 8 year olds sometimes want sex, and they should absolutely NOT get it if at all possible. Up to and including chaining them in the basement (or some modern variant or innovation) until they can be safely married off. No, women don’t get to make sexual choice under this system, merely the illusion of choice, so they don’t get to run around and fuck whoever they want.

                • anon says:

                  Virgin Knight:

                  >we are saying that 8 year olds sometimes want sex

                  Yes, this is indeed your position, which you have been using to argue that whenever an adult male is caught in bed with a little girl, it’s because she invited him or seduced him somehow. If you *dispute* that, then you go against “orthodox jimism.” But you don’t seem to ever dispute that.

                  The mental gymnastics you faggots engage in are astounding. Literally in this very thread, Tom writes:

                  >adult males are not attracted to eight-year-olds, it’s the other way around

                  Which is Jim’s position. But then you go back and forth, and once again back and forth, on that uncomfortable position, whose implications you don’t like to think about. That’s the cognitive dissonance of people who try to defend the indefensible.

                • jim says:

                  > Which is Jim’s position. But then you go back and forth, and once again back and forth, on that uncomfortable position

                  Projection. Our position is plainly stated much repeated, and unshifting, despite your endless attempts to shift it.

                  You keep inventing for us a multitude of absurd positions that are violently contradicted by everyone’s daily life, everyone’s lived experience. Not to mention the marketing strategies of Romance and Porn entertainment.

                  It is your position that is incoherent, contradictory, and continually shifting. You continually attribute to us some version of your own position, your own beliefs about the nature of the interaction between men and women.

                  Your position also makes it difficult for males to reproduce, to have a family. Hard to be alpha if you think in your heart that your wife is capable of consenting to sex moment to moment, or that she genuinely has opinions about the broader society, about groups larger than the immediate close ingroup. I have a wife and sons. Do you?

                  Hard to participate in the courtship dance, if you do not realize that we men must dance pursuit and predation, that men perform but women choose.

                  It is hard to interact successfully with women, while believing what you purport to believe, and it is glaring obvious that those leftists who do successfully interact with women, for example Bill Clinton, do not genuinely believe such hateful, evil, absurd madness.

                • Not Tom says:

                  now explain when exactly do the Jimtards *not* blame the girl or the woman for being raped?

                  The Jimian position on rape has always been crystal clear:

                  1. Women generally do not consciously want to be raped. However, many (more than half) have some degree of rape fantasies, and most read and are aroused by romance fiction that is barely distinguishable from the male definition of rape.

                  2. Regardless of conscious or unconscious desire, most women will eventually escalate to situations that are very likely to result in the male definition of rape, unless either they are physically restrained by a male guardian, or they encounter a man who passes the softer shit tests without rape.

                  3. A small minority of women will always escalate and cannot be satisfied at all without some violence; bondage, choking, etc. usually happen not because the man enjoys it, but because the woman does. This is only a minority of women, but is a large enough minority to show up on the radar and is therefore easy to misinterpret or misrepresent as cruelty or exploitation, when it is actually nothing of the sort.

                  4. The overwhelming majority of female-reported rape and harassment is false, which feminists deny but police and HR statistics confirm. Conversely, most rapes really do go unreported, which feminists admit. Women lie about rape for all sorts of reasons – for example, to escape responsibility for assorted bad behavior – but by far the most common is regret, which demonstrates that women are more traumatized by deliberate sex with a beta than they are by actual rape by a man they perceive as alpha.

                  5. Actual rape can happen, most often by foreign invaders (and America and Europe are in a perpetual state of foreign invasion), but (a) the numbers are too small to warrant the attention it gets, (b) it is not nearly as traumatizing to women as feminists would have you believe, and (c) by virtue of #4, women’s testimony is a completely unreliable guide to both the scope and severity. While a small minority of women may be telling the truth, our default response should be skepticism; don’t #BelieveAllWomen.

                  6. Therefore the best solution is to leave it up to the woman’s male guardian – generally her husband or father. If the “rape” was adulterous, he may punish the wife and/or seek retribution on her “rapist” while the legal system kindly looks the other way. If it occurred with a single daughter, the approved resolution is shotgun marriage, and cases where shotgun marriage is inappropriate should ideally be very rare because a reactionary society wouldn’t have nice white girls living next door to inner-city nagger thugs, but if the father doesn’t want to shotgun-marry then he should punish her appropriately and find her a better man as soon as possible.

                  7. To the extent that any of this happens at all with prepubescent girls who are really actually prepubescent and not just going through early puberty/adrenarche, it is insanely rare, usually involves a sexual degenerate (i.e. a fag), and is also easily handled by Johnny Law simply looking the other way when said buggerer mysteriously vanishes without a trace. Normal adult males are attracted to secondary sexual characteristics, i.e. tits, which only show up during puberty; the “stranger danger” that your 8-year-old is constantly surrounded by evil men who want to abuse her is even more remote than your odds of dying from COVID-19 because you went outside to empty your mailbox.

                  None of this is even remotely like the frame you shills are trying to put forward. You start with the assumption that the rape happened exactly as the woman described, imagine a scenario where everything she says is true, and then try to reason backwards to show why the Jimian position is somehow ridiculous. But these are imaginary scenarios that only exist in women’s imaginations and the foolish men who believe them. If it actually did not happen as the woman described, there is nothing strange about the position he (and we) take on it.

                • anon says:

                  Jim:

                  >and allows the death penalty for wives and daughters that exercise female sexual choice.

                  But not the rapist who was caught smashing his sock into an 8-year-old girl’s vagina or anus, because obviously she seduced him. (Let’s not even reflect on how, if he has no sick urges at all, an 8-year-old girl managed to “seduce” him. Yeah, Tyrone was “asleep” apparently)

                  >And it is beyond my power to refrain from carrying it out when a man threatens my reproductive assets, though I am capable of restraining my self to do it inconspicuously.

                  See, your actual real-life instincts are healthier than the ideology you promote on your blog. Your actual real-life instinct would be to kill the motherf**ker, but you go on this blog and convince the posters here that the misbehavior is the female’s, not the male’s, so the punishment is for the former, not the latter.

                  Hypocrite?

                • Not Tom says:

                  But not the rapist who was caught smashing his sock into an 8-year-old girl’s vagina or anus

                  Salami slicing (unfortunate metaphor here, but whatever) is such an obvious leftist tactic, you idiots should know better than to think it’s going to work here.

                  Nobody cares about this fantasy of yours because it doesn’t. fucking. happen. And if it does, it is almost certainly due to some well-known sexual degenerate whom society would have “neutralized” long ago if there weren’t an elaborate system in place to protect him.

                  Talk about something that actually exists, you ridiculous shill.

                • c says:

                  You start with the assumption that the rape happened exactly as the woman described, imagine a scenario where everything she says is true, and then try to reason backwards to show why the Jimian position is somehow ridiculous.

                  The Jimian position is ridiculous, because you know as much as anyone, as much as Jim himself (in a rare moment of honesty, he admitted to it), that when an 8-year-old girl receives a dick in her holes, there is an immoral man responsible for it, and that man should get his s**t kicked in. That you need to spend so much brainpower making excuses for why, when your prepubescent daughter’s getting raped, it’s actually her fault, because you (pretend to) assume that she must have strong sexual urges, or the rape would not be happening, shows that you too can understand how untenable this position.

                  You reject the assumptions of most people, in theory. In practice, you hold the same assumptions as I do, and this entire exercise in child-rape-apologetics is a tremendous LARP on the part of this community.

                • jim says:

                  > Jim himself (in a rare moment of honesty, he admitted to it), that when an 8-year-old girl receives a dick in her holes, there is an immoral man responsible for it,

                  Nuts

                  In the vast majority of cases where a very young girl sleeps with a much older man, he has adult female preselection and alpha credibility, and in a large proportion of cases, probably a majority, she crept into bed with him while he was drunk and sleeping, and therefore he bears no responsibility.

                  In those cases where he bears some responsibility, it is morally no different from someone seducing your twenty four year old daughter, except that the prospects of your eight year old daughter pulling a suitable husband are considerably worse.

                • c says:

                  in a large proportion of cases, probably a majority, she crept into bed with him while he was drunk and sleeping, and therefore he bears no responsibility.

                  I don’t believe that this scenario is common whatsoever. If it’s not common, then you need to explain how 8-year-old girls could seduce sexually normal, non-degenerate men. How do you get *seduced* by a prepubescent girl?

                  You claim, “The man is almost always asleep and drunk.” All you have is your own personal anecdote, nothing to prove this assertion.

                • jim says:

                  > I don’t believe that this scenario is common whatsoever.

                  How would you know?

                  I see what is front of my face, and I see other people hallucinating about what is in front of both our faces, including hallucinations concerning the conduct of very young girls.

                  Let us reflect on things we both can know: Every Disney movie targeted at nine year old girls, which is most of them, has an underage girl protagonist getting off by herself isolated with an adult male stranger. (In some cases, a sixteen year old girl who is an insert character for nine year old girls, in that we get an lot of the movie taking place long before she is sixteen.) The male character is usually middle aged, (Ralph, the Beast), frequently quite old (Maui is nearing retirement age, and reluctantly coming out of retirement for one last round of heroing) and when the male love interest appears almost age appropriate, (Frozen) he is performing an adult middle aged role (independent businessman, high ranking military officer, then a girl that the movie claims is sixteen disappears into the wilderness or into his castle with him.)

                  No movie targeted at young boys has the boy getting off by himself isolated with an adult stranger.

                  No movie targeted at teen males has an unrelated nine year old girl getting off by herself isolated with the teen male protagonist.

                  Looks to me like massively one sided demand. That is what I see in movie marketing, and that is what I see in my life.

                • Not Tom says:

                  when an 8-year-old girl receives a dick in her holes

                  What kind of gutter filth are you to be so violently obsessed with the sexuality of 8-year-old girls? It’s almost as if this is personal for you.

                  Yeah, it happens, at about 1 in a million frequency. Cock carouseling, divorce rape and false rape/harassment accusations happen at about 1 in 2 frequency. Which is the more pertinent issue? Answer the question, stop going back to your obnoxious little strawman.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  These losers keep deflecting and misconstruing.

                  Are any of you going to address what BC said with evidence, which is exactly the same I claimed previously and the first retard didn’t bother answering, but rather decided to call a wife with children “chaste”, to showcase his great IQ?

                  As polifugue very well remarked, you continue to construct false scenarios and argue from false assumption, instead of addressing the facts. There might be some women forcefully getting raped, however when you look at most of the cases the women made an active effort to put themselves out there, and the same goes for the young teenage girls. You argue in the same lying and bad faith manner that progressives do when they argue the #MeToo ordeal. Somehow, a woman going inside a room alone with a man, getting undressed and getting in his bed is unimportant, because she claims she said “no”, or whatever arbitrary insanity you come up.

                  @Mike

                  Not all wignats are FBI. If these people aren’t wignats, they are very hard pushing the perfect and blameless Aryan princess angle here. It’s ridiculous that anyone would claim being “red-pilled” while shamelessly ignoring the facts. Every time I heard of some Paki rape and the article has the context, the woman willingly got inside a car with 5 dudes, went to somewhere shady alone with them, the pretext is “fun” or “drugs”. Might as well release every criminal from prison, they all are also innocent, ask them…

                • Theshadowedknight says:

                  AV, if he is using chaste in that sense, then it is almost certainly some tradcuck heretic type. A woman can have children and be chaste, but she sure wasn’t celibate. Chaste means no sexual sin, so a woman who only ever has sex with her husband is chaste. Chastity is not celibacy but they are often confused.

                  Since this shill is making the distinction, I am thinking some kind of purity movement heresy. Those are the types that know enough to distinguish between the two. Could be something else, but that is a big tell for Christian heresies.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Why are they not addressing the fact the heterosexual males who are attracted to prepubescents are as rare as unicorns. Pedophiles are almost universally homosexuals and in the rare a male really does rape a prepubescent its almost always some pansexual drug addict degenerate like John Podesta and crew.

                  Pedophiles are almost always gays. Heterosexual male “pedophiles” generally are with a 15 to less than 18 year old girl.

                • ten says:

                  Dear annoying stupid shills,

                  female sexual immorality is a primary concern for our civilization. When you try to redirect the response to this problem, “but whaddabout nigger rape? but whaddabout evil men raping innocent preteen princesses?”, you are sowing seeds of evil in the response to an existential problem, and your shill sabotage should not be encouraged by jim or anyone else accepting your stupid frame and ceding ground.

                  If that ground is ceded, we are suddenly discussing how to protect “our women” from evil men instead of how to manage our women. We already know how to protect our women, but we are not allowed to do so, because the cathedral are using your attack vectors to protect them from being protected by us, instead letting them be free targets by the rotten men that undoubtedly exist, whose company these women often seek because they want male command, and we are forbidden and often prevented from giving it to them.

                  We can all find an evil man that raped a girl, or evil niggers that gang raped your wife. This is a smalll and rare thing compared to our big problem, which is that the cathedral are weaponizing our women’s poor sexual morality against us and our civilization, and you wish us to strain a gnat and swallow a camel cock.

                  When it is said, in the context of counteracting female sexual immorality, that shot gun marrying even the young girls as soon as they start with it is the old and traditional and functional solution, you twist this like an insane prog to mean that the espoused method of pair forming is girl rape. Are you literally insane or merely so marinated in progressive insanity that some of it passed the brain blood barrier?

                  I have heard some weird hippies speak fondly of coffee enemas as detox – with your predilection for getting shit ass backwards, maybe it could be something for you, too.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “female sexual immorality”

                  Try to avoid using the term morality when describing it.

                  Use of the word morality implies that we have a “whore” problem and maybe the former Soviet bloc and Asian countries have a whore problem as they have resisted making single women high status compared to men but yet they don’t have effective patriarchy. This is preferable to the problem that we have and its something much much worse.

                  We have a problem with single women (being high status compared to the average man because of our insane system) chastely waiting around for Jeremy Meeks to give them a booty call every six months and hating the mass of men and both genders mostly going insane from a lack of sex.

                  This is something almost everyone gets wrong.

                • ten says:

                  I use “female sexual immorality” to invite the question what defines it, to answer “any and all sex outside of marriage*”, and i think it is a good angle despite implying whores being the problem.

                  Lack of sex and ungrounded female sense of self-worth is indeed as you say our problem rather than whores, but i was responding to our latest shill friends, not speaking generally.

                  *with marked leniency regarding sex leading towards marriage – if they get married, nothing happened, if they don’t, something happened.

                • jim says:

                  Trouble is, that when men think of female sexual immorality, they think “easy women”, projecting male nature onto women. Our problem is the exact reverse of that. Miss Chubby Average is waiting for a booty call from a six foot six athletic vampire King billionaire.

                  Men are polygamous, women hypergamous. Hypergamy, women waiting for men of higher sociosexual ranking than their own, is female sexual immorality. They should be waiting for men willing and able to keep them around, and such men can only be of approximately similar sociosexual rank to their own.

                  Women like and dislike mate guarding behavior. She wants a man of way higher sexual rank than her own, who guards her, but …

                  In one thousand romance stories, the love interest initially fails to guard the insert character, and at the end, does. They want that. But in one thousand sequels to one thousand romance stories … they wander off, and there is some man even more super duper alpha around than the super duper alpha who scooped her up in the last pages of the previous book. If the male fantasy is an ever growing harem, the female fantasy is serial monogamy from one alpha to an even higher alpha, never ending romance.

                • R7 Rocket says:

                  How come none of these shills are able to answer fully my RedPill on Women question? Despite the answer being spoonfed to them?

                  …….

                  Oh, never mind! One of them, (“Approved by Karen and Samantha from HR”), posted a link from their employer.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “I use “female sexual immorality” to invite the question what defines it, to answer “any and all sex outside of marriage*”, and i think it is a good angle despite implying whores being the problem.”

                  Not really a good angle either, marriage has to really exist anymore for this to be a good angle and what we have now is progressive skinsuit marriage. Tradcucks love talking about morality and marriage while defining morality in emotional terms and accepting progressive skinsuit marriage as just as good as patriarchy marriage.

                  Use of the word morality or putting things in moral terms should be avoided.

                  We need to spread the word of the actual problem, one that that almost everyone gets wrong and not confuse our position with the tradcuck position.

                  Our description of this subject should probably (maybe I’m wrong because I’m a sperg and people aren’t my strong suit) always start with no we don’t have a whore problem and in fact a whore problem would be downright paradise compared to our current situation.

                • Pooch says:

                  What is the whore problem? Too many women fucking multiple men?

                • The Cominator says:

                  Whore problem.

                  Patriarchy not effective and women are not effectively owned but single men still higher status than single women (or at least the government isn’t openly hostile to men).

                  Women are easy to pick up and fuck multiple guys, a very high % will spend some time working as a literal prostitute. Most actually get married in this kind of society but more likely to cuck you.

                  The former Soviet bloc countries and some Asian countries are supposedly like this, America in the 1960s thru most of the 1980s was I’m told like this.

                  This is not the problem the US and Western Europe (though Germany and Switzerland are kind of like this so I’m told) has now. We have something worse as I’ve described.

                  Whore problem is paradise compared to what we have because getting women and getting laid is not so hard and women do like men there will give you the time of day and you can even get married generally. But keeping a woman in such a country is hard.

                • Dave says:

                  I caught the last ten minutes of this program when it aired, then waited twenty years for someone to upload it to YouTube:

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0WLEyuCvQc

                  It’s about upper-middle-class suburban white kids being wildly promiscuous, causing a syphilis outbreak, and their parents struggling to deal with the fact that their daughters are whores. I can’t imagine how much worse things are now, a generation later.

                  Except for three cute but chubby virgins, the girls interviewed must all be taking Botox because their eyes show no expression at all.

                  They didn’t interview the boy who shot up the school, but he was probably an incel frustrated that everyone was getting laid except him.

                • The Cominator says:

                  You didn’t read through my discussion.

                  I watched a little. All the girls were fucking the same four chads by admission of one of the girls ergo the vast majority of non-chads were not getting laid.

                  This is the Western feminist sexual pattern not the whore society sexual pattern. In former Soviet bloc and Asian countries most guys get laid because merely being a man who is not a complete wuss is high status compared to being a woman.

                • Dave says:

                  To the incel it seems like everyone is getting laid except him.

                • Not Tom says:

                  To the incel it seems like everyone is getting laid except him.

                  Hypergamy is a fact understood by incels and PUAs alike; PUAs have merely learned how to capitalize on it.

                  Cominator is right, both qualitatively and quantitatively. While almost any guy can pull a decent women with enough game, if you just let everybody “be themselves” then 80% of the women will chase after 20% of the men in the best case; worst case, that 20% can shrink to as low as 1% because hypergamy has no intrinsic limiting principle.

                • Dave says:

                  Hypergamy was not widely understood in 1999 when the Conyers shooting happened. I was a decade older than that kid and did not know this word.

                  Hypergamy has one intrinsic limiting principle: Women are physically much weaker than men. If men typically reacted the way animals do to the sight of a single mother with a baby i.e. bashing the baby’s brains out and raping the mother, all women would quickly pair up with men one-to-one. Sperm is cheap but protection is not.

                • Not Tom says:

                  If men typically reacted the way animals do to the sight of a single mother with a baby i.e. bashing the baby’s brains out and raping the mother, all women would quickly pair up with men one-to-one.

                  And what makes you so certain that women are so averse to this scenario that they would stop trading up in order to avoid it?

                  As you rightly point out, it happens in nature already, and it doesn’t stop those females from being hypergamous.

                  What will generally stop hypergamy in its tracks is the threat of violence against her person for present unfaithfulness. Stoning was a time-honored tradition, but public scorn and ridicule from everyone (men and women) in the community works almost as well, and feels much more civilized, but requires a strong patriarchy to maintain.

                • Mike says:

                  Continuing the subject of how using “female sexual immorality” is a problem, wasn’t that one of the things wrong with the Old South? That they were too busy upholding their Southern belles as angels who could do no wrong, and would just blame negros for raping them when they were slutting around? I don’t want to sound like a libtard, but it is kinda suspicious that they always blamed blacks for female misbehavior.

                • The Cominator says:

                  So is there general agreement that framing the problem in moral terms produces only confusion with the false tradcuck view of the problem and that the problem of the distorted sexual market in the west should be discussed strictly in more factual and empirical terms.

                • Oak says:

                  Exactly. When your wife or mother goes missing and ends up lying unconscious and paralyzed on a bench in a public park at night, you’ll retroactively know for a fact that she was a dirty slut who went looking for it. Chaste women never, ever suffer such fates, so if that happened to her, she must not have been chaste.

                  There are obviously situations where women aren’t looking for it, but get it.

                  But not seeking consent is such a powerful display of reproductive value to women’s archaic firmware that they will often retrospectively approve. And it will likely cause them less psychological damage than having sex with a man who actively seeks consent prior to the act.

                • pig says:

                  [*Deleted*]

                • jim says:

                  Not going to hold a conversation using enemy shibboleths and anticoncepts.

                • Oliver Cromwell says:

                  “Exactly. When your wife or mother goes missing and ends up lying unconscious and paralyzed on a bench in a public park at night, you’ll retroactively know for a fact that she was a dirty slut who went looking for it. Chaste women never, ever suffer such fates, so if that happened to her, she must not have been chaste.”

                  This guy simply lives in a different mental universe, either because his personal living situation is only a few steps above Scott Alexander’s polyhovel, or because he is a 13 year old boy. When exactly are these things meant to happen to my mother? When she is going somewhere with my father, a rape in presence of husband being about as likely as death by lightning strike? When she is walking to the store or the clinic, the only places she goes on her own? It’s just taken for granted that peoples’ mothers are all out at some bar alone in their down time, or wandering dimly lit parks at night…?

                • Not Tom says:

                  This guy simply lives in a different mental universe, either because his personal living situation is only a few steps above Scott Alexander’s polyhovel, or because he is a 13 year old boy.

                  I was thinking, baby daddy spawn, which wouldn’t necessarily be inconsistent with either of the above.

                  Only situation I can imagine where someone’s mother is at risk of “rape” is if she’s single and in her early 30s. In other words, teenage pregnancy, no husband, son/daughter doing the worrying is in early teens.

  34. BC says:

    Goverment agencies are ignoring Trump’s orders:

    https://www.axios.com/hydroxychloroquine-fda-ends-emergency-use-authorization-f5353a2c-115a-4a57-b8e2-360b735b4937.html

    I hope he smacks them down hard for it.

    • Cloudswrest says:

      Curious, after it turns out all the FUD studies were fake.

      https://duckduckgo.com/?q=hydroxychloroquine+retract&ia=news

    • The Cominator says:

      This is also a disingenuous reason.

      HCQ is effective if used early not as effective in the emergency stage, so what they should be doing is expanding the label to early use.

      This kind of shit is why I strongly advocate for judging everyone in a priestly job politically and helicoptering the vast majority who will fail. Best to build an entirely new priesthood on a good foundation than suffer these vipers to poison the countries mind in the future.

      • Not Tom says:

        They’re just doing what we all predicted they would do – concoct some excuse to put out a “peer reviewed” study showing that HCQ doesn’t work and/or is dangerous. Intentionally accidentally failing to distinguish between terminal case recovery and early/prophylactic use was just the easiest way for them to do it, since there’s already too much evidence out there that the drug is totally safe, and once the virus has shredded up the lungs of terminal patients, there’s practically no way to save them anyway. So, test the drug on patients who are already terminally ill with a >90% chance of death and hey, guess what, it doesn’t really help and might even kill them (just like almost any treatment given to the terminally ill).

        The Soviets showed us that it IS possible to double and triple down even when huge numbers of lives are hanging in the balance. The parallels between the US today and late-stage Soviet Communism are actually pretty shocking.

        • The Cominator says:

          That they were as predictably awful as Jim predicted isnot an argument for sparing them.

  35. Yul Bornhold says:

    Checking in to signal disgust at Gorsuch. Predictable but still feels bad, man.

    • BC says:

      Guess we know why the left didn’t fight Gorsuch at all, while they fought Kavanaugh endlessly.

  36. Cloudswrest says:

    Tangentially related to priests and warriors, does the West have any “military” cathedrals?

    https://www.unz.com/isteve/main-cathedral-of-the-russian-armed-forces-consecrated-to-celebrate-75th-defeat-of-naziism/

  37. Fred says:

    What do you guys make of this?

    It suggests the State Dept is aligned with BLM rather than Soros.

  38. BC says:

    Based Poland:

    “Polish president calls LGBT ‘ideology’ worse than communism”
    https://apnews.com/72fab166f1cfd02794c9add62247960e

    • Anonymous 2 says:

      Correct thinking. Teachers (up to and including the graduate level) should get helicopter rides too, and, I would suggest, with preference.

    • Strannik says:

      I have my doubts. Mayor Keisha Bottoms I suspect has higher political ambitions and I think she’ll manage to show sufficient police force to discourage too much rioting.

      It’s of little import anyway, this isn’t going to stop the reaction, in fact it is only helping it grow ever stronger.

      • The Cominator says:

        Leftists burning and Tyrone looting demshit hellholes is good, the more they do it the less the media can try to gin up the Corona hoax again.

        • Pooch says:

          Already starting to see some west coast deep blue left zones halt their reopenings. I wouldn’t be surprised if they start to shut themselves down again. That makes things complicated for Trump with simultaneous riots/protests going on in the same zones.

          • jim says:

            The emergent strategy is to take the holiness spiral of black-lives-matter-covid19-lockdown-abolish-police to color revolution.

            This strategy is transparently self contradictory. Your business has to close and your job has to go away, but crowds assembling on the streets to burn stuff down is totally OK. You cannot assemble to produce, but you can assemble to destroy.

            Supposedly, color revolutions always succeed in peacefully deposing the evil tyrant (when mass murder ensues, it is absolutely not the fault of the color revolutionists, much as when famine follows communism the kulaks caused the famine) so for leftists to doubt the sanity and workability of this strategy is dangerous.

            The strategy would work fine if Obama, Biden, or Cuomo was in the White House, though Hillary would probably see she was threatened from even further left and do something about that threat, but with Trump in the White House enjoying praetorian loyalty, likely to be more difficult.

            • Pooch says:

              It appears blue cities are going to continue internally combust with a never ending cycle of protests/riots, covid lockdowns, and tearing down statues until the election. Is there any point at which Trump must intervene? Should he even intervene? Or should he just let the cities die?

              • jim says:

                The color revolution strategy is “weak, weak, weak, weaker, weaker, weaker, he is falling, falling. He has fallen!”

                Optimal strategy is probable to clean up the Democrats mess closer to election time. The mess in Washington DC needed to be cleaned up immediately, as it was, and further mess prevented, as it is being prevented, but the blue state mess needs to be cleaned up before the presidential election so that they cannot carry out a coup under cover of preventing Trump Russia interference in the elections. It looks like they were plotting a coup under cover of Trump Russia interference in the impeachment process, but that did not happen.

      • jim says:

        You assume that Mayor Keisha Bottom is free to pursue her rational self interest and the rational self interest of her party, able to act rationally individually and collectively.

        But rational self interest is insufficiently holy.

        Right now everyone is saying “We support the rioters” because they are worried about being killed or their property burned, while society enthusiastically supports the rioters killing them or burning them

        The final stage of holiness spiral, where people ever become holier not because they hope to get to the top, but in order to not be killed, is now in sight.

        “White silence is violence”, meaning “support us or be subjected to community self defense”

        The logic of the holiness spiral is that everyone tortures each other to death for insufficient leftism. The Democrats have set foot on that path. It is a slippery slope. Having set one foot on the path, and noticed it is going to a very bad place, it is very hard to step back from the path.

        Obviously Trump can run on the platform “If you elect Biden, your cities will burn”, which sounds fairly persuasive.

        To rule, Trump has to show he can protect his people from the Deep State, which is going to require punishing Democrats who commit crimes. If their crimes continue to go unpunished, they are strong, and he is weak, and their crimes will frighten his people and make him weaker. To win the election, he has to show that he can protect property and people from the rioters, aka the Democrats.

        If the Democrats are unable to pursue their rational individual and collective self interest and end this – well Trump has already demonstrated that he is strong enough to end this. The Praetorian guard will obey.

        That his numbers are holding steady in the face of massive intimidation and violence suggests to me that come the election, if something plausibly resembling an election is held, he will win in a landslide.

        • The Cominator says:

          Atlanta is a blue abscess surrounded by people who increasingly and openly think like us. I don’t know if you’ve ever lived in the American South outside the big city but even the women here have multiple guns and some of them were posting on facebook (back a week or so ago when they were looting blue suburbs) that looters=target practice.

          The real ghetto niggers aren’t going to leave their containment zones no matter how much antifa promises them, they KNOW they are going to be shot if they do. They won’t even go into the nicer areas of Atlanta for that reason… and the mayor can just setup base in such a place and crush them. This is what happened in Miami by the way.

        • Contaminated NEET says:

          >“If you elect Biden, your cities will burn”, which sounds fairly persuasive.

          To persuade me of that, the Orange Man would actually have to stop a city from burning, which he hasn’t done so far, and seems unlikely to do. Of course, if he did, we’d see him perp-walked out of the White House in handcuffs withing a week. Still, he’s not making a compelling case that a vote for him is a vote for law and order. If anything, Biden will have more leeway to rein in the commies and the blacks.

          • Pooch says:

            Trump stopped DC from burning in impressive fashion and pressured most cities to finally call up the National Guard.

          • jim says:

            Trump stopped Washington burning. The peaceful peacefully protesting protesters in Lafayette Park peacefully burned down one government building and peacefully started peaceful fires in several others, among them Trump’s Church. They also peacefully through peaceful rocks, peacefully injuring very large numbers of brutal violent cops. Trump acted, and it ended.

            Trump, expecting a false flag murder of the protesters by the protesters as when the peaceful Ukraine color revolution was forcibly prevented from peacefully burning down further government buildings and peacefully maiming further cops, personally led counter snipers into position in Lafayette Park.

            • Contaminated NEET says:

              >Trump stopped Washington burning.

              He arguably prevented it from burning. This is not as dramatic, risky, or noticeably as stopping it once the riots really get going.

              • jim says:

                > > Trump stopped Washington burning.

                > He arguably prevented it from burning.

                Some of it burned. He stopped it from burning further.

                If the fires were still burning you would be getting wall to wall coverage of the fires with a “weak, weak, weaker, weaker, he is falling” narrative. They were already on that narrative when he gave his law and order speech and took over Lafayette Park, whereupon in mid breath they switched to the photo-op-peaceful demonstrators narrative.

          • Javier says:

            honestly seems more accurate that a vote for Trump is a vote for (blue) cities burning. Violence and intimidation work. The left has made it clear they will kick and scream until they get their way and historically the Republicans are the party of caving in. I can see lot of moderates voting Biden just out of desperation for the chaos to end.

            • BC says:

              I can see lot of moderates voting Biden just out of desperation for the chaos to end.

              Unlikly to happen. The left had a similar spew chaos movement in 68 and it got Nixon reelected in a landslide.

              • jim says:

                The sixty eight riots were against the Democrats. The Democrats were totally in control of every level of government, and were under attack from the holiness spiral. They surrendered to the holiness spiral, and the spiral has escalated since then.

                The situation would be analogous if the right was rioting against Trump for going slow on the wall. Today, it is the Democrats burning their own cities to protest Trump. Not analogous.

                For two centuries, leftist repression of rightists has been steadily escalating. It never came and went. It was always there, and we just got used to it until they intensified it some more. Now they are intensifying it faster and faster.

                • BC says:

                  I just reviewed the results of an antifa riot against the state capital of Washington State. The only people targeted were Democrats. Including the mayor of the city having her home vandalized by a mob of Antifa. It still looks like Leftists on Demicrat violence.

              • Oliver Cromwell says:

                Nixon was candidate because he had been Eisenhower’s VP. Eisenhower was an FDR placeman who had been invited to run on either ticket. I guess he was advised to choose the Republican ticket to allow the US to make the claim that it was a real multiparty democracy during the Anglo-Soviet split.

            • jim says:

              But, obviously, if you elect Democrats, the chaos will not end. Black Lives Matter burned Ferguson with the aggressive encouragement of Obama. Blue state chaos, red state order, feds restore order in Washington.

              The violence and chaos is holiness spiral related. Nothing will restore normality except crushing the left, and the further the holiness spiral goes, the more drastic the violence needed to end the violence.

              Intimidation and violence very obviously work, always have, always will. The problem is that the left can commit crimes with impunity, and the right cannot. And it has been that way for two centuries, and getting worse, and getting worse faster and faster.

              • Not Tom says:

                Blue state chaos, red state order, feds restore order in Washington.

                Part of the problem in the US has always been that rightists – what passes for rightists anyway – are always ready to swoop in, save people from the chaos of the left, restore order, and not make any structural changes that would enable them to stay in power.

                Public opinion is about as nuanced as the average eight-year-old. And what does an eight-year-old do if mommy keeps cleaning up after him and daddy fights all of his schoolyard battles? He becomes weak, irresponsible, destructive, and grows up believing that his problems are always somebody else’s fault and they’ll always be around to fix them.

                Deep down, every Democratic voter (and progressive elite) believes that if things get bad enough, they can always vote in a Republican to fix things, and then promptly vote them out again as soon as they feel safe and content and are ready to get back to their regular schedule of virtue-signaling and wanton destruction. Republicans, for the progressive city folk, are the janitors of America: call them up once in a while to clean up a mess but always treat them as low-status and beneath your station.

                As much as I sympathize with the minority of actual rightists who live in cities (they do exist), Trump is correct to disabuse the urban majority of this notion. It’s time for leftists to start cleaning up their own messes, and if they can’t, then once they’ve thinned their own herd, we’ll clean it up one last time, at a very steep price.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Now this is a good post from you. Yes need to let some redpills go down hard, people need to experience the consequences of shitlib rule and that sometimes if you vote them in you aren’t getting bailed out.

                  Saving the Democrats is not going to do the now persecuted and ostracized rightist in blue areas any favors either…

                • pdimov says:

                  Quality post.

                • Mr.P says:

                  Dang. Nailed it. Thank you.

                • Javier says:

                  At this point I am about ready to call it for the dems. They flexed and Trump flinched. He’s not just letting the left lie it it’s bed, he’s agreeing with them and making their case for them.

                  Trump just signed an EO agreeing with dems. Even as the evidence is slowly disseminating that Chauvin is innocent, Trump is ready to throw him to the mob. Madness. Unless someone can point out the super-duper 4D chess move I am missing? No one can claim the left is lying if Trump concedes to them this way.

                  The new campaign strategy seems to be pointing out Biden said things 15 years ago that are forbidden today. Or, “Dems are the real racists.” FFS, seriously? Everyone knows that shit doesn’t work, has never worked, and will not work. Despite everything, Trump is still part of the boomercuck generation who believes in numinous negroes, and never figured out that racism is just a duck whistle to flush out the left’s enemies.

                  Sorry to be debbie downer. Please tell me what I am missing and show how I am wrong.

                • jim says:

                  The Floyd video looks really bad. Trump has to run away from that video as fast as he can. But he has also said, on twitter, “When the looting starts, the shooting starts”. Always keep in mind that fifty percent of the voters are below average IQ, and that Trump is a genius who has mastered the art of speaking in the language of the median voter. The video looks bad, and the looting looks bad. Trump presents as a strong man to keep order, when order is threatened He wants to roll the protests back from anywhere in his vicinity, without that video sticking to him.

                  Trump is not talking to us. He is talking to the median voter. Barr is carrying a more nuanced message to the police.

                  No one likes the cops when they look like weak bullies. The point of the riots is to make the police look weak, which is working. Trump has to make them look strong, while at the same time he cannot afford to be seen on their side by the median voter, because the riots are working and the Floyd video looks horrible – but he simultaneously needs to be seen by them to be on their side, because we are now in the head counting phase of a pre-coup.

                  Barr has loyalist cops performing strength theatrics, while the Blue states force their cops to perform weak bully theatrics, giving Black Lives Matter and Antifa artificial popularity. What they are doing is working, but what Trump is doing is also working. And the Democrats cannot afford to go too far on the weak bully theatrics, or else the left faction of the Democrats will eat the less left faction of the Democrats, and the way the wind blows, may well eat them anyway.

                  Not seeing this new Trump campaign strategy of which you speak. I have not been following all of Trump’s tweets. Has he given us a Dems-are-the-real-racists tweet? What Trump does do is have a black rapper do a dems-are-the-real-racists rap.

                  Blacks vote tribally, not according to individual self interest, thus the black vote is not up for grabs. The real target of wooing black voters is to give white Democrat voters whose homes are about to go up in flames, and whose kids get disciplined in school when a mob of adult blacks beat them up (which black adults are still in school with white children because schools refuse to recognize biological differences between whites and blacks) a not-a-thought-crime excuse for voting their individual self interest. The white democrats, in danger of being burned of their homes who had their son disciplined for attacking the boot of a young black black man with his face in school in front of the teacher, get permission from a holy magic black rapper to vote Trump.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Javier nah.

                  The only truly bad news lately is that the left seems to have intimidated the justices into cucking. Trump is not going to take any damage from dems burning their own cities down.

                  Trump’s worst mistake of commission BY FAR was allowing the lockdown karens to go past Easter.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Not seeing this new Trump campaign strategy of which you speak.

                  I do think the executive order itself appears weak and capitulating, don’t understand why he would write or even allow it.

                  When I heard the EO was coming I figured “ok, don’t panic, wait and see what the EO actually is”, and well, unfortunately it was pretty much what the blackpillers were afraid it would be.

                  https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-safe-policing-safe-communities/

                  About the only good thing I can say about it is that it basically vests all the power in the AG, i.e. Barr, whom we assume is one of the good guys right now. Nevertheless, it accedes to a lot of the leftist demands like mandatory “de-escalation” and bans on “chokeholds”, which is the memetic equivalent of “assault weapons”.

                  I haven’t been talking about it because I find blackpill topics pointless, but if we are going to talk about it, then I don’t think it’s very easy to explain this away. It’s a very cucked EO; if Trump wants to recruit praetorians from the LEO frontlines, they need to know he’s got their back, and this is very much the opposite of that.

                  I’m sure there’s an explanation; there always is. Whether or not it’s a very good explanation or whether it makes any difference is another question.

                • The Cominator says:

                  Why do we care whether it bans chokeholds in most cases and establishes some kind of authority outside Democrat police unions to review Democrat police thugs…

                  We have very little dog in this fight.

                  Trump’s hopefully not fatal mistake was pushing the lockdown deadline back Easter rather than declaring that he was revoking all emergency authority for lockdowns, that they were unconstitutional absent a state of emergency, that continuing them was economic sabotage and that any governor who tried to do it from then on was going to get the Orville Faubus treatment.

                  “It’s a very cucked EO; if Trump wants to recruit praetorians from the LEO frontlines, they need to know he’s got their back, and this is very much the opposite of that.”

                  Loyal praetorians have to come from the military, forget the Democrat union kwaps. If the Democrats really go through with their defund the police plan we’ll almost immediately get right wing “security forces” filling the void and they will provide ideologically far more reliable men.

                • Javier says:

                  Good points. I guess I’m just getting exhausted with all this shit.

                  Here are the tweets I’m talking about, perhaps not from Trump himself.

                  https://twitter.com/Communism_Kills/status/1273284195058622464

                  Trump meanwhile is bragging about out-pandering Biden with his executive order which I don’t even know what is supposed to accomplish.

                • Pooch says:

                  The real target of wooing black voters is to give white Democrat voters whose homes are about to go up in flames,

                  That’s a great point. Trump is throwing white Democrats a lifeline. These people still care deeply about not being called a racist and would actually have their houses go up in flames by a black mob then be called a racist.

                  Having Trump surrounded by black allies and clips of Biden making racist comments gives them the plausible deniability they need to not feel like a racist by voting Trump to save their houses from being burnt down.

                • Not Tom says:

                  We have very little dog in this fight.

                  The substance is not even as important as the fact that it appears very much like capitulation or even endorsement of the Antifa point of view. In fact it even seems to borrow some passages from their literature, almost word for word.

                  It’s a bad look, and I’ve been viewing this whole thing as an optics play. If I have to update my priors, then so be it, but in any attempt to come up with a reasonable explanation, I’m drawing blanks.

                  Maybe he really just couldn’t win this one, maybe the Megaphone still has too much power to emotionally manipulate normies and he couldn’t get away with what I assumed was a much better strategy, doing nothing at all. But if that’s the case then it’s not a win, merely a vague explanation for the loss.

                • jim says:

                  > It appears very much like capitulation or even endorsement of the Antifa point of view. In fact it even seems to borrow some passages from their literature, almost word for word.

                  Voters are not going to read the executive order, so will not see any weakness or capitulation. When I read it I see the conspicuous absence of direct endorsement of the major real Democrat demand, and the major real Antifa demand (but I repeat myself), that money be redirected from cops to sinecures for radical activists, social justice warriors, riot organizers, and race hustlers, which handouts to left activists and Democratic party get-out-the vote workers shall appear on the local small town police budget, that a Republican city council shall pay the Democrats to campaign against them. The major objective is to have people who get out the vote from the graveyard and start fires on demand be paid from the municipal police budget, that the federal government force red cities to hire Democrat activists from the blue bicoastal megalopoli to get out the Democratic party vote from the graveyard with ratepayer funds.

                  Since the Democrats have a majority in the House of Representatives, they are going to get that demand through the house of Representatives. If all goes well, Trump can stall it in the Senate. Trump can then position himself trying to get police reform through that meets every item on the wish list, but he was, alas, foiled by the obstructionist do nothing Democrats, who insist on adding expensive riders to it. The voters will not care what is in the riders. Worst case outcome – and a highly likely outcome – is that the Democrats get a jobs-for-the-boys police reform bill through the Senate, in which case Trump will be in a difficult position – he will be blamed for obstructing police reform if he resists, and will be forcing the local governments pay Biden campaigners if he yields. In which situation the prompt signing of this executive order will help cover his ass. If he led with police reform, blaming him for obstructing it will not stick as effectively.

                • Pooch says:

                  Trump just signed an EO agreeing with dems.

                  Congress is debating the real police reform legislation. The EO is basically a symbolic gesture to get the conversation started. Trump signing it next to Tim Scott is going to be a nice image to point to for wooing white Democrats.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Voters are not going to read the executive order, so will not see any weakness or capitulation.

                  As if I’ve ever cared about the voters. The voters will kill their remaining brain cells with TV and beer (or Clitflix and box wine) as they always do. The more well-read shitlibs will see it for the empty gesture that it is and award him no points.

                  The issue is what it signals to the two groups that matter: the warriors and the priests. The warriors will hear about it, at least indirectly, and interpret it as being thrown under the bus. The priests will get the gist of it from the news, and use it to increase their status and push their policies, and this includes liberal mayors in red states and Democratic governors who were briefly elected (or “elected”) in 2016. This isn’t as well-contained as everyone here seems to think; the coastal cities can go fuck themselves, but it also might be helping these cancerous tumors to grow faster inside the heartland states.

                  Sorry, I just don’t see the upside.

                  When I read it I see the conspicuous absence of direct endorsement of the major real Democrat demand, and the major real Antifa demand (but I repeat myself), that money be redirected from cops to sinecures for radical activists, social justice warriors, riot organizers, and race hustlers

                  What do you think an “independent credentialing body” is?

                  Trump can then position himself trying to get police reform through that meets every item on the wish list, but he was, alas, foiled by the obstructionist do nothing Democrats

                  Yes, that sounds like a Trumpian strategy. I recall he tried to use the same strategy with DACA, and twice with the omnibus budgets. I recall those not going so well. Trump’s not holy enough to cede frame while secretly stabbing them in the back. Whenever he tries this strategy, generally the Democrats get what they want, and part of his base gets demoralized.

                  Maybe, optimistically, none of this will make the slightest bit of difference and nothing will get done. But then at best it was a waste of time and an annoying distraction.

                  I’ll repeat that I’m not a black piller; he’s building the wall, he’s drastically cut immigration, he’s made real progress at consolidating power and helping the Democrats self-destruct, and he may even have started to internalize the concept of the self-coup. But that doesn’t mean there’s some brilliant strategy behind every move he makes. To me this just looks like he made the foolish mistake of believing that DR3 could be a useful rhetorical tactic.

                  I hear people saying “it’s not for the blacks, it’s for the liberal whites who are scared”. Yeah, I know, I was one of the first people to make that argument when he was talking up black employment last year. But it’s kind of hard to swallow when just last week we were saying that his powerful demonstration in DC was awesome because projecting force against the chaos is exactly what scared liberal whites need to see. It can’t be brilliant to take the frame of pour la canaille, la mitraille and then immediately afterward walk it back with an EO granting la canaille any form of legitimacy. It’s self-contradictory.

                  Anyway, I’m not going to say any more on it. I’m annoyed by it, and I don’t enjoy mindless partisanship, but I also realize it’s not helpful to go on for too long about the depressing shit. It happened, it sucked, time to move on, next week most of us will have forgotten all about it anyway.

                • jim says:

                  > What do you think an “independent credentialing body” is?

                  Jobs for the boys, but not jobs in “Community Relations”, not jobs on the street getting out the vote, and working up blacks to attack cops and burn down shit.

                  We all know that “Independent” is code for “rigidly far left and tightly under the thumb of Harvard”, so yes, it is going to suck. And you are right that it is going to piss off the loyalists he vitally needs in the police force. But it falls short of making every small town cop shop host to a department for spreading leftism. But:

                  (c) The Attorney General shall certify independent credentialing bodies that meet standards to be set by the Attorney General

                  And the Attorney General has for sometime been campaigning for cop support, telling them that his on their side, and Trump is on their side.

                • BC says:

                  @Not Tom

                  Trump’s attempts to strike deals with the left reminds me of Nixion’s pandering to the left. Very bad idea.

                • Atavistic Morality says:

                  @Javier

                  You shouldn’t work yourself up about something outside of your control. Just vote for the man and move on, put your energy towards what you can do for yourself and those you care.

                  You think you’re doing bad? Half of the countries in Europe are headed towards extinction without any hope in just a couple of decades, like France and the UK facing complete demographic replacement. In Spain we aren’t doing so hot either, our children aren’t mostly named Mohammed yet, but our politics will kill us… especially with this government we are in the fast track towards becoming Venezuela, not kidding. And Germany? Not so far off France and the UK for what I know. Italy I think is still getting overrun by invaders from Lybia so good luck to them. In the next decades I totally expect Western Europeans to flee their countries and look for refuge in the Eastern side, reverse Byzantine.

                  At least most Americans have a lot of land to work with, a lot of rural population to count on and a lot of guns to defend yourselves. Here in Europe we don’t have squat, no place to run and cover, no guns to shot back, taxes go as high as 50%, 60% of your working days and worse… the blood is going to paint the streets, gonna make look the stories about Sulla like children’s play.

        • Karl says:

          The final stage of holiness spiral, where people become ever holier because they worry about being killed, can only happen if there is no opposition left. As long as there is an opposition its members will be killed before insufficiently holy leftists are killed.

          In the burning cities there is no opposition. Anyone who lives there has to give lip service to the left, becasue if he does not, he’ll be killed.

          Nationwide the left is not yet in such power, there is still opposition. Thus people can still defect from the left and support the opposition, in secret by voting or overtly outside left-controlled areas.

          When the left is in power nationwide, the situation is ripe for a Stalin. As long as the left is not yet in power nationwide, we can still hope for Trump becoming Augustus or, if he fails, for a Franco.

          • ten says:

            Riots occurring in insufficiently holy leftist cities, not in opposition cities. Holiness spiral targeting shitlibs first.

            PC policing first erupting in leftist ingroups online and in academia, cutting off the insufficiently PC, and spirally inserting new criteria of holiness, salami slicing yesterdays PC police unless they enthusiastically keep slicing according to new standards. Only when the infighting has stopped and a criterion of holiness has gained complete acceptance in leftist ingroups will they start search&destroy missions in enemy territory, and only while the criterion has not been outflanked and grown stale as a holiness criterion for the ingroup.

            I bet there are vocal opponents of leftism in the burning cities, albeit their vocalization must be partial, and i bet they did not and do not get targeted first. The first targets instead being for example the “of course BLM but pandemic, of course BLM but violence begets violence, of course BLM but bad optics and popular pushback” voice of reason leftists.

            • ten says:

              To the extent there even are rational targets – for the most part, it’s an avalanche, flowing according to least resistance, which resistance to a significant degree can be affected by antifa blood in the water tactics.

            • Karl says:

              Rioters are rioting where they can. Going after the opposition is very holy, but difficult. Going after the insufficiently left in left cities is holy and much easier.

              • Anonymous 2 says:

                There is an undeniable element of theatre to all this, and it’s so much easier to win the match if the big bad blue government throws the game.

  39. Dave says:

    The extreme Left is giddy with delight because all institutions in the West have surrendered unconditionally to them except for a small pocket of resistance around the President. The extreme Right is giddy with delight because we know what total victory means for the Left: millions of dead Leftists. Everyone else is like, “Wait, WTF just happened?”

    • The Cominator says:

      The left needs to get the power to commit mass murder before they start mass murdering each other. They don’t have that power yet.

      I would prefer it was our side (which will only kill leftists and maybe a few muslims) that was doing the mass murdering, what I warn against is the right being squeamish if we get the chance… we need to be ruthless and thorough about wiping them out.

      • Dave says:

        Well then, call in the right-wing death squads, the number’s on the fridge.

        • The Cominator says:

          I know you joke but Trump does not quite have that power yet either but the time approaches I think…

          https://twitter.com/michaeljknowles/status/1270776202404474881?lang=en

          Michael Knowles is quite right here, when the left talks about institutional racism it means the cathedral must soon purge itself of white guys (they’ve already been not promoting them) and let Shaniqua run the show. When that happens the collapse will be epic and rapid.

          • Pooch says:

            At that point, any white who doesn’t come to the light of Trump will be self-purged anyway. No right-wing death squads necessary.

            • Not Tom says:

              Unclear what you mean by this.

              Mass suicide? Unlikely.

              Death by low fertility? Sure, but it would take generations and in the meantime demographics are getting worse.

              White flight/loss of power? Sure, but they’re still around, still leftists, and will cause even more problems by screwing up the right-controlled areas.

              If none of those are what you meant, then what did you mean?

              • Pooch says:

                It will probably come in the form of a black/brown mob killing most whites they encounter.

                https://twitter.com/rooshv/status/1267918232238854145

                • Dave says:

                  Day of the Machete, when a million unarmed white liberals are hacked to death by their beloved diversity, their news sources not warning them of the massacre in progress because they were afraid of saying something that might be construed as racist.

                  I saw a CNN report from the CHAZ, and even though the reporter was in no danger, he and Anderson Cooper both spoke nervously and haltingly, knowing that a single racist word out of either one of them would instantly end their careers.

                • Pooch says:

                  I increasingly see White Silence is Violence which eventually will mean anyone white not actively engaging in the killing and burning themselves must be purged.

                • jim says:

                  If white silence is violence, then logically a non white needs to engage “self defense” against any white who is being “silent”. And if any white is not assisting him to defend himself, that white is being silent, and thus he needs to defend himself against that white also. But after all the badwhites have been killed, the first goodwhite to stop killing must be a badwhite. So the goodwhites all kill each other until none remain.

                  After that, intersectionality, where the same slogan is applied to one group after another of those remaining. The logic of leftism will not stop at one genocide. It will not stop until someone stops it, and the further it goes, the more drastic the violence needed to stop it.

                • Pooch says:

                  Anyone*

                • The Cominator says:

                  The left will not be able to effectively commit mass murder unless they can effectively control the federal government enough to

                  1) Mass murder people.

                  2) Make food a “right” and enforce that, mass deaths by starvation.

                  This also depends on the Federal government being intact and functional enough to enforce this… the way they are trying to replace the perfectly obedient thugs of the blue state police with dysfunctional antifa/Shaniqua police does not speak well of their prospects fortunately.

                  Machete mobs will not in practice kill all too many white leftist… if we don’t wuss out that is going to be our sides job…

                • Pooch says:

                  1 million is definitely doable given the population density of American cities. Most would probably burn/choke to death on fumes when their high rise apartments catch fire.

                • The Cominator says:

                  I love how Seattle is turning into a John Carpenter movie.

                • Oliver Cromwell says:

                  The left doesn’t murder by coordination. It murders by chaos. It outlaws the local imposition of order, withdraws the distant imposition of order, and then lets chaos take its course.

                • Anonymous 2 says:

                  The CHAZ is a rather ridiculous thing. In the very first week, this anarchist autonomous hard left commune has: (1) built a wall to keep out neighbors, (2) become the subjects of a rather 90s-styled black warlord, and (3) has started demanding/begging its non-autonomous neighbors for supplies like food and clothes. I’m not sure what boxes are left to tick at this point.

                • jim says:

                  Occupy could not run an urban campsite. As time passed, people wandered off due to disease, violence, crime, and human feces.

                  The same is likely to happen to the Chaz. Detroit was destroyed. America can afford to lose six more city blocks.

                  Raz Simone reinvented the monopoly of violence in the Chaz and made himself warlord. Ran into political flak for protecting property and protecting personal safety. So, he seems to have retired. We shall see how well they do without a warlord.

                • Oliver Cromwell says:

                  CHAZ’s warlord is shown in youtube videos defending property and actually maintaining order.

                  The left does not want CHAZ to look bad, so they let this continue.

                  But a real left thing would be to drone strike the warlord, and whoever took his place, so that there is no order, no law, no property, and everyone starves to death.

                • Dave says:

                  Whatever the warlord’s race or gender, if he keeps the applecarts upright, I won’t get a chance to steal apples. No fair!

                • R7 Rocket says:

                  Sho ‘Nuff, the Shogun of Seattle, is doing a better job of protecting property than the cunt mayorette of Seattle.

                • Not Tom says:

                  Sho ‘Nuff, the Shogun of Seattle, is doing a better job of protecting property than the cunt mayorette of Seattle.

                  Sometimes I wonder if shitlib negro-worship is just the expression of an unconscious yet desperate desire to find someone, anyone, who will put feral white women in their place.

                • Javier says:

                  Apparently the CHAZ is being dismantled and the Proud Boys are taking credit:

                  https://t.me/s/proudboysusa

                  They notified the cops they were going to demonstrate and the mayor pulled the plug on the whole thing.

                  Even if it’s not related, historically PBs vs Antifa has not gone well for Antifa. They rely heavily on police protection. CHAZ means no cops so the hill would have quickly become the Proud Boys Zone, which would have been hilarious. The SPLC has also complained that every time the news covers a PB rally or brawl the PBs get more recruits.

  40. Mister Grumpus says:

    Mr. Naive earnestly asks…

    Why doesn’t Trump do a sit-down with Hannity or somebody, for as long as they need, and just come straight out with it:

    “OK look. This is a Color Revolution and a Cultural Revolution at the same time. Let me tell you what these are, how they operate, where this is going, and why we don’t want it.”

    Now I get it, Trump’s a warrior merchant comedian, and not a professor. But I’m going a little nuts over here with only Tucker even trying to put to words what’s actually happening with any level of thoughtful context.

    And BTW if Tucker hasn’t set up his own HD Bitchute studio in an unmarked business unit by now then come on, man, come on.

    • Mister Grumpus says:

      And if Fox News is too chicken to put it on then maybe Joe Rogan or Tim Pool won’t be. Why the heck not.

    • Not Tom says:

      And the point of doing this would be…?

      Executive power can’t really be measured by money, but try to imagine someone who charges a million dollars per hour. Would you consider this to be an efficient use of their limited time?

    • polifugue says:

      There is no point in doing so.

      We live in a democracy, and half the voters are below average intelligence. The average person neither knows what a “color revolution” is nor cares. Trump speaks in fifth grade English because it is a language the masses can understand.

      When people say that education is useless, it’s true when it comes to practical issues. However, people parrot the same lines about politics and government. Moldbug pointed out the different emotional effect between “politicizing an issue” and “democratizing an issue.” Every American is subject to the brainwashing of modern education.

      If Trump used the term “color revolution,” people would think Trump is asserting that blacks are taking over the country. The media would launch a campaign declaring Trump a racist conspiracy theorist, and most people would buy it. The average prole is not intelligent enough to grasp concepts like “color revolution” or “the cathedral.”

      Secondly, what purpose would it serve? Even if the proles were able to grasp the concepts of “color revolution,” would it make a difference? Would it boost morale to tell the average Trump voter that no matter what efforts they make for him in elections it won’t change the fundamental nature of our government? Our wish is for Trump to become first citizen of the Roman Republic, not King. Trump will restore our democracy, our republic, in much the way Augustus restored the Roman republic. The red pill is an exercise in logical consistency, and most people don’t care.

      Trump used the phrase “relearning forgotten truths” at the United Nations, conveying Chesterton’s fence. That’s all any one of us needs to know about Trump.

      • The Cominator says:

        Exactly correct.

      • Atavistic Morality says:

        I know you’re right but I can’t help wish you weren’t, sometimes it is too blackpilling. Most people truly are… especially compared to most people in reactionary circles. I can still remember most things I learned from a Tyco executive about selling products to John Doe, and I still cringe at the fact that it does indeed work like that.

        They make everything so difficult only by the “virtue” of their imbecility and I see it every day around me. You go to a supermarket, to a coffee shop, wherever and whenever and you can just see it staring at you. Best thing I ever did was to design a business model that required the least amount of external cooperation while yielding maximum profit for a living. I could walk into most places in Earth and immediately increase their productivity by a considerable margin in a couple minutes pointing out the most obvious things, just like Gordon Ramsay running into a Kitchen Nightmare shithole and just being blown out of his mind. It truly is like that in most places, it’s painful.

        • Not Tom says:

          That’s why democracy is a terrible system. Crowds are not wise, and people are not smart, nor interested in abstract notions such as the common good.

          Wise sovereigns must find ways to align proletarian self-interest with the common good. Capitalism is the go-to tool to align self-interest with wealth creation, and religion is the tool for aligning self-interest with virtue. Both designed by geniuses (or perhaps God himself), to be administered by cognitive elite, and used in every day life by mouth-breathing idiots.

          That’s the reality of our world. Whether you think of us as risen apes or fallen from paradise, MPAI.

          • pdimov says:

            >That’s why democracy is a terrible system. Crowds are not wise, and people are not smart, nor interested in abstract notions such as the common good.

            That’s not why representative democracy is terrible. Crowds don’t need to be wise, or smart, or interested in abstract notions. They only need to be good judges of character. Which they generally are. You need a spectacular amount of gaslighting to deceive them, and it doesn’t necessarily work even then, or upsets like Trump wouldn’t exist.

            As an example, most people who disbelieve the global warming narrative have zero understanding of atmospheric physics or climatology – but they can tell a liar when they see one.

            • The Cominator says:

              Crowds are not generally good judges of character either not even Republican crowds.

              The Republicans for a while had a pretty good primary option in Newt Gingrich in 2012, he does not have Trump’s charisma but he would have been a good president and he would have beaten weak incumbent Obama…

              Too many idiots picked shitlib Romney though.

            • Not Tom says:

              The reason for distinguishing “smart” from “wise” is to identify the qualities like good character judgment. The average man is neither smart nor wise, and that includes character judgment; the average woman, triply so, and the average mob is downright evil.

      • “In these conditions so much of old and great traditions as remains… acquires an unequaled potency. For us creative piety… adheres only to forms that are older than the Revolution and Napoleon, forms which grew and were not made. (Including the Constitution of the USA. Only thus can we account for the reverence the American still cherishes for it, even where he clearly sees its insufficiency). Every remnant of them will before long rise to incalculable values and bring about historical effects which no one yet imagines to be possible”

  41. Atavistic Morality says:

    I can’t stop laughing about this: https://twitter.com/RHGR/status/1270814875200245760

    Niggers can’t help themselves, can they? Hahahaha

  42. Aldon says:

    https://twitter.com/spookyMN/status/1270313836210466816

    So George Floyd had a gun at a pregnant woman? That’s the first time I heard of that.

    • James says:

      If you log in here:

      https://www.hcdistrictclerk.com/eDocs/Public/NewUserAcknowledgement.aspx

      You can see that he was a repeat offender for drug and theft charges if you fiddle with the search a lot. It’s…not the best website.

      For this particular offense, the case number is 114323001010-3.

      If you don’t want to go through the painful registration process, you can find it here:
      https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/06/12/george-floyd-criminal-record/

      Do a text search for, “Police Arrested Floyd a Total of 9 Times, Mostly on Drug and Theft Charges”. That’s the paragraph heading which has a screencap of the charges.

      Here’s a summary of the latest action items on his case:

      05/29/2009 ORDER ATTORNEY FEE VOUCHER SNU: 994 05/29/09
      05/29/2009 ORDER ATTY FEE AMT $1980.00 SNU: 994 05/29/09
      05/29/2009 OFFENSE AGG ROBBERY-DEADLY WPN LEVEL F1 05/29/09
      04/03/2009 SENTENCED IN COURT 337 STARTING 04/03/09 SNU: 999 04/03/09
      04/03/2009 SENTENCE TO 5 YEARS CONFINEMENT 04/03/09
      04/03/2009 MOTIONS INTENT DESTROY EVID SNU: 998 04/03/09

      So, basically, he was sentenced for 5 years. The snopes article actually follows it fairly well based on my own digging, albeit with the adequate doubt-casting to make it marginally acceptable to prog overlords.

      However, it is worth noting that it isn’t clear based on the evidence available whether or not she was pregnant, not that it really makes him look better either way.

  43. CIA Disinformer says:

    A question about Adolf Hitler’s views on sex.

    In Table Talk he reportedly said,

    Incidentally, I have heard of a priest in Bavaria being reproached for having had an affair with his serving-maid. On the contrary, the whole community hugs itself with glee. “He’s a young lad, our chaplain is,” they chortle; “you can’t expect him to sweat it all out of himself by means of his learning alone”! And we should make a great mistake, politically, if we use these normal liaisons between priest and serving-wench as a weapon against them. The people see nothing wrong in it — quite the contrary!

    Is that BASED or degenerate?

    • The Cominator says:

      Hitler was not on the whole redpilled on women as he permitted them to initiate divorces, though he did discourage them from pursuing careers (and even held off on encouraging German women from entering the war labor force until at least late 1942… and as sexist as I am I would have mobilized them for labor strictly as an emergency war measure long before that).

      • Atavistic Morality says:

        Women should always participate in the productive texture of society, not just in emergencies. What… can the Imperium of Man afford having more than half of the population dozing off after a couple of hours of housework? Logically, women have always contributed and worked along men here and there, only they did so organically and functionally instead of “righteously”.

        Whether we are talking about pre-agrarian tribes where men hunt and women collect fruits plus village stuff, or Christian pre-industrial towns where women made stuff like cheese, wove the clothes for the family, helped with field stuff or whatever, in any functional and prosperous society women work. In Franco’s Spain women worked.

        Reactionary social technology is not against women working, it’s against women “working”. Because when progressives say “working” they mean temple prostitutes and HR retards that have no husbands, no children, no actual lives, and produce nothing of value. In that sense our social technology is as opposed to men “working” as it is to women “working”, because that joke is not work, it’s an insidious and destructive pretense.

        I wouldn’t let my wife be a lazy fuck and I wouldn’t expect her to remain sane for long if I allowed it. Production is the basis of morality, people that don’t work are driven insane. While the house and children take precedence, there’s no reason why she can’t work in whatever interests her in an organic way, obviously corporate degenerate cubicles are not even in consideration here.

        No one should have the “career” progs talk so much about, because “career” means drone slavery to prog corp. Well, I’d be curious what Jim has to say about this particular aspect, maybe it’s just me that I’m too pro yeoman, but this society requires a massive rearrangement in many ways.

        • The Cominator says:

          I’d like to hear what Jim says but barring a total war emergency we should STRONGLY discourage women working outside the home and to the extent they do only in their traditional pre feminist jobs. We do not want many dual incomes…

          • Atavistic Morality says:

            “Dual” income is not a problem if you are talking about what I think you’re talking, because it’s not dual, everything belongs to the husband.

            In Spain it was called derecho marital, which existed under Franco. My grandmother required my grandfathers signature to even manage things she had inherited from her own father. It’s pretty similar if not the same as what you guys call coverture, Wikipedia has an article on it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marital_power

            I do agree women shouldn’t be doing certain jobs of course, women don’t belong in certain areas, neither do men in some others for that matter.

          • James says:

            The way I see it, there are two reactionary options for women working.

            One is women working inside the home (not just cleaning, but also cooking from scratch and thus adding more to the bottom line, minding the chickens, and making shit to sell on Etsy).

            The other is working in a gender-segregated workplace. When men work the mill, and women work the loom (with line supervisors who are themselves older women particularly selected for their prudence), it spares us a lot of the headaches of typical male-female workplace relations.

            • BC says:

              Wives should return to making/altering everyday clothing again. This would lead to higher better fitting clothing and thus higher status for males who have a good wife.

          • We’ve been over this. There are myriad productive things that a woman can do not just in the home , but in her husband’s business under his supervision. It was near-universal in preindustrial times that a wife participated in her husband’s trade, up to even lawyers, bankers, and greater merchants. Women are good at balancing books and managing the petty issues that come up running a business. The problem is not that a woman is doing something other than cleaning the floor and breeding, the problem is putting your wife out of your sight and under the supervision of a more alpha man.

            “Wench” meant single working woman, a rarity, and it became synonymous with slut for obvious and intuitive reasons. To the extent that unmarried women work outside the home, need to be supervised by other women, need some dried-up old hag matron in charge who will jealously restrict them from fucking around, as was the case with teachers and nurses.

        • jim says:

          Women should always participate in the productive texture of society, not just in emergencies

          Women should work under the supervision of husbands or fathers. Or else they are going to either fuck the man supervising them, or disrupt the workplace with shit tests. And if they take a job outside that supervision, it should only be by the continuing consent of father or husband. The complainant and victim of “sexual harassment” should be based on objections by the father or husband, not the wife or daughter. The wife or daughter is not the victim of rape or sexual harassment, but the beneficiary and likely a co-conspirator.

          Women are productive in some jobs, and have always worked in roles that apprentice them for the duties of a wife, as nurses, waitresses, checkout girls, cleaning ladies, and so on and so forth. And they should continue to do so. Women make excellent veterinarians and dental assistants, though as doctors they need supervision. But their large group socialization is defective, and they disrupt the workplace, so have negative productivity in jobs requiring a team and teamwork, because the team goes pear shaped.

          The traditional arrangement of hospitals was that the nurses worked under the authority of the matron, but the matron and nurses worked under the supervision of doctors. That the matron was in authority over them, rather than the doctors, reduced the problems caused by nurses fucking the doctors. Similarly, nunneries. The nuns were under the authority of the abbess, but the abbess and the nuns were under the supervision of male priests.

          • Theshadowedknight says:

            I am working to be an engineer. The ideal wife would be trained to maintain a house, manage money, and know general chemistry, physics, algebra, and calculus to teach my children. An engineering secretary, in other words. Nurses should marry doctors, engineerettes should marry engineers, businessmen should marry secretaries, etc. Work that assists their husband, in short, and that will help prepare them to manage the household while the husband runs it and does his own work.

          • Atavistic Morality says:

            My ideas around this subject aren’t completely organized because I have never put too much thought into it considering it belongs to an already well established reactionary society, but your points are part of the concept. I also like TSK’s line of thinking.

            For instance my grandmother started her own business after she had had her 4 children before even hitting 30. At that point, since her children were already going to school and engaging in several other activities, she decided to start a hairdressing thing and she did so under the advice and financial supervision of my grandfather, the whole arrangement worked out pretty well. According to my father it used to be common to see women take the shopkeeping part of family business and stuff like that as well.

            I guess there’s a lot to be said about the subject, after all we are talking about organizing the producive fabric of society. What we shouldn’t be hearing around here is that women are supposed to laze around at home, that’s just terrible. One of the things I hate the most about modern society is the obsession with idleness, the mindset should be set on production, not avoiding it like the subhuman tankies.

    • jim says:

      Hitler’s personal conduct in relation to women, as reported by his youthful friends, was blue pilled and degenerate.

  44. BC says:

    I’d say the likely next move for the left is large scale false flag attacks. Their attempt at DC failed, but they should be easy to stage in blue cities.

    • jim says:

      But in the blue cities, it will not be plausible that Trump had it done.

      The way it works is that when the sovereign successfully maintains order, at least in the vicinity of his seat, and forces the protesters to limit themselves to peaceable assembly to petition for the redress of grievances, the color revolutionaries then shoot some of their own people right in front of the sovereign’s seat and blame the sovereign who is maintaining order. Which looks plausible because the sovereign is right there and his loyalists are right there maintaining order and protecting the right to peaceably assemble to petition for the redress of grievances.

      If Trump intervened in New York to restore order, then it would work to shoot some of their own people in New York, but shooting them in New York right now would just look like obvious left on left infighting, of which there is no shortage.

      And, in Lafayette Park, Trump gave extremely high priority to installing counter snipers to prevent such an incident. Probably if he intervened in New York he would go about things the same way as he did in Lafayette park.

  45. Encelad says:

    Biden is already airing the hypothesis that a Trump victory would not be legitimate, thus requiring military to “escort him out of the White House”.

    https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/biden-warns-trump-steal-election/story?id=71192753

    • Anonymous 2 says:

      “Access to voting”, eh? Presumably fraudulent mail votes is a big part of the Biden strategy.

      • Pooch says:

        It appears they aren’t giving up on the Covid Hoax. Fauci is still preaching its dangers. I’d imagine they are going to ratchet up 2nd wave rhetoric big time after the summer to force mail voting through and may even try for lockdowns again.

        • The Cominator says:

          Yeah they are starting to push that again which is worrisome. The riots/color revolution is a disaster strategy for them… the covid hoax was working well given that only some people need to buy into it for it to cause damage.

          Trump absolutely must order a mass execution of all so called “public health experts” if ever he gets the opportunity, wiping them out is just as important as wiping out the leaders of the media and the democratic party.

          • Pooch says:

            Trump isn’t falling for it a 2nd time. The race riots were actually good in a way in that they are allowing Trump to shift focus away from his mistake of falling for the fake virus and move on from it.

            • The Cominator says:

              Yes I agree.

            • jim says:

              I was impressed that Trump treated preventing a re-run of the Ukraine false flag murders as the highest priority. I don’t think he was taking a photo op immediately after Barr cleared the park. He had counter snipers ready to take up positions in the park the moment it was cleared, and was personally leading them in, so that they would see their commander in chief leading them, and he would see them and know they were on the ball.

              • Mister Grumpus says:

                So Trump was doing an experiment of his own, and checking to see if his praetorians really would protect him and his posse out on that park?

                “So you’re on my side, you say? Well let’s take a little walk and you can show me.”

                Like that?

                • jim says:

                  He is on the inside, and I am not, so I have no way of knowing what is in Trump’s mind, but the media have been rather publicly doubting he had what he needed to protect himself, and sure looks as if everyone is counting heads, that the possibility of a coup, thinly veiled in some constitutional pretext, is much on people’s minds. Under those circumstances, it would seem like a good idea to see his praetorians, and for them to see him.

                  The Park police were, Barr says, overwhelmed, but the mob can only overawe police when police have orders to be overawed, as was hilariously apparent in Oaklands, where the scripting was amusingly ham-fisted and incompetent, so when Barr deemed the Park police overwhelmed, and pulled in cops from all over the place, I doubt that he regarded the Park police as very reliable.

                  I have seen no end of theatrics, for example during “Occupy”, where police were clearly engaging the mob with the intent that the police shall play the role of bad guys and give the mob the victory. I did not see what went down in Lafayette Park, and have no direct evidence that that happened, yet again, but clearly the protesters were victorious over the park police, which sounds to me suspiciously like theatrics.

    • jim says:

      It is clear that the Democrats are planning a coup followed by flagrantly fraudulent election, and/or that they plan to argue that the election was illegitimate, therefore we need a coup.

      The generals want very much to escort him out of the White House, but it looks to me that in the run up to impeachment, the Democrats wanted to have a coup under cover of impeachment, and the generals were initially in on it, but got got cold feet. Probably the praetorians told them that it would “undermine the discipline and unity of the armed forces”.

  46. The Cominator says:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8410819/Republican-senators-DEFY-Donald-Trump-vote-strip-Confederate-names-Army-bases.html

    The headline is misleading but this kind of thing isn’t good, too many Republicans have an instinct to cuck.

    Not that I really have any affection for the CSA which I consider to be the cheap labor lobby in arms but in light of current events it sends the wrong message.

    • The Cominator says:

      Misleading in the sense that only one Republican had to side with the Dems…

    • Not Tom says:

      It’s weird, in that entire insanely long pile of steaming dung, I can’t find a single clear reference to who actually voted for the amendment. One said (informally) that he “wasn’t opposed”, and another is “included” in the committee, but if there’s anything about the actual votes, it’s buried extremely well.

      I used to sort of like the Daily Mail but they’ve really crashed and burned over the last 5 years or so. They’re just British-flavored Fox at this point, shitlibs larping as tradcons.

    • The Cominator says:

      The Catholic Church despite one letter is not our friend. I thought that debate was resolved here already…

      • Karl says:

        The letter is from a group inside the Catholic Church not from the Catholic Church. That group is far away from power. The letter merely shows that there are some Christian remnants inside the Catholic Church that are still resisting the cathedral.

      • Its people who do stuff, not organizations. Most of the Catholic leadership, as people, are on the wrong side, steering the org in a wrong direction. Apparently, not all, and it matters as we can tell Catholics “listen to that guy, not Francis”. Bettet than expecting them to abandon it altogether. This dude is pretty based: https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archbishop-vigano-dc-archbishop-who-criticized-trumps-visit-to-catholic-shrine-is-false-shepherd

        • The Cominator says:

          Okay so there are three scenarios for the papacy and the Vatican.

          1) Its openly controlled by a prog pope. Its not our friend in this case but its also politically impotent.

          2) Its controlled by a prog pope who is good at lying about it (John Paul II) this is the worst case as its a terrible politically effective enemy that can bolster the Cathedral and turn Catholics against nationalist but most people don’t quite get it.

          3) It is controlled by real Catholics, in which case its not entirely our friend though it also hates progs. It is not our friend because it ultimately wants priestly rule the destruction of non catholic nations and international churches. It also would STILL be filled with homosexuals.

          There is no case where the whore of Rome is our friend and an ineffective prog led church is probably the best case since we don’t want this institution to continue to exist anyway.

          • After centuries of disastrous attempts to play worldly politics, the Church is back to rendering unto Caesar, except that Caesar in this case is the evil Carthagesque ruler of the West. Their ready submission to globohomo indicates that they will be readily submissive to our type of people in charge.

            Aside from a few voices propagating the heresy of integralism, Rome has lost its political will. When the few real Catholics remaining pray for the church to be cleansed of its bugger infestation, they do not frame it in the terms of a man with a sword building a pyramid of dead buggers, but that is how God understands it.

          • Pooch says:

            Archbishop Vigano came out hard against faggotry in 2018. He is on our side. If there are more like him in the various Christian sects, even if they are in hiding, that can only be good for us and Trump.

            • The Cominator says:

              Sure one bishop may be on our side but it doesn’t mean much. Just keep in mind in the long term its best if Catholicism ceases to exist and becomes part of the (much more amenable to what we want) Orthodox Church.

              • Pooch says:

                It’s more than one bishop. There seems to be a group behind Archbishop Vigano based on the signatories of this letter.

                https://veritasliberabitvos.info/appeal/

                We are not in a position to pick and choose what sect (Orthodox, Catholic, Anglican, etc) we want. It hardly matters. They are converged. Any and all red pill Christians must be backed 100%.

                • Pooch says:

                  They are all*

                • Not Tom says:

                  I don’t really get why this is significant. You can find the same number of signatories to James Damore’s defense, and indeed it is completely reasonable to assume that most engineers are not total pozzed faggots, but it doesn’t change the reality of the organization they work for.

                  It shows that there are individuals within corrupt institutions who aren’t corrupt, or who aren’t as corrupt. That should be the end of the story; don’t try to extrapolate anything else about the institution. If you want to capitalize on it, you could try to build a new institution using them as seed members, or you could try to assert forceful control over the old institution (usually fails). Short of those two options, the institution should be considered unsalvageable.

                  Christianity is an abstract, not an institution, so it can theoretically be revived or reimagined. The Catholic Church is concrete, and it isn’t going to get fixed. Perhaps some of its members could be salvaged, but not the Vatican itself.

              • Look, Orthodoxy does a lot of things well. They are the most “based”, their theology makes more sense, and most importantly they let themselves be controlled by warriors: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procurator_(Russia) which is better than the Popes always trying to undermine kings, and even better than the Anglican way of making the King the high priest, as it could mean that the King will get a priestly, not warriorly education and upbringing. You know what I mean. Such a role gives too much excuse for priests to try to control the education of the heir to the throne. Dangerous. The Holy Synod way is better, it creates a distance between King and Church, while the former still rules the later.

                But. Look. Culturally, the whole thing is too Slavic-Greek. In its current form it is not a culturally good fit for the West. I was at an Orthodox funeral. All kinds of singing in Old Church Slavonic and Greek, and generally it was just very foreign to me, even though in my Central European culture they are less foreign than in Anglo culture, as we mixed more with them throughout the ages.

                • The Cominator says:

                  “But. Look. Culturally, the whole thing is too Slavic-Greek. In its current form it is not a culturally good fit for the West. I was at an Orthodox funeral. All kinds of singing in Old Church Slavonic and Greek”

                  The American Orthodox Church under the American Metropolitan can in the name of God and the his most Serene Majesty Emperor Trump, Protector of Western Christendom. Can revise some of the cultural and liturgical issues to make it the national Orthodox church more suitable for Westerners.

                • ten says:

                  I believe the idea is that orthodoxy allows for national churches, and so there is nothing that would imply the american orthodox church should adopt slavonic or greek lithurgy or cultural particularitites, no reason reformed, deheretizied catholicism should abandon the latin mass, etc.

  47. Kevin Churchel says:

    Any thoughts on the latest judicial effort to override Barr and keep the charges against Flynn in place?

    • R7 Rocket says:

      Already been discussed on this blog.

      It’s obvious that Judge Emmit Sullivan doesn’t know what he is doing, he is being told what to do by the Deep State (the higher district court demanded Sullivan to explain himself, but instead of explaining, he hired a lawyer instead. An odd thing to do, Sullivan is not on trial here).

      • Kevin C. says:

        Note, this isn’t Sullivan; but a retired judge filing an amicus brief (AIUI a bit unusual) to back up the cause of overriding Barr. In particular, there’s reference to a rule which was originally intended to limit the ability of the government to harass an individual by bringing charges, dismissing them, then bringing them again, then dismissing again, et cetera, and arguing that it instead bestows a total requirement for Federal prosecutors to get judicial approval for any and all dismissals, and that pretty much any federal judge has cause to keep a prosecution alive even if the prosecutor wants to drop it. And the other argument is a repeat of Hawaiian Judge’s “pretext” argument — Bad Orange Man wants this for the “wrong” reason, therefore judge can overrule.

        It’s definitely an escalation in the struggle between judiciary and parts of the DOJ.

        • R7 Rocket says:

          @Kevin C.

          ” Note, this isn’t Sullivan”

          This IS Emmit Sullivan’s retired judge that Sullivan is trying to use as a “prosecutor.” Why did you leave that part out? This is why the higher court demanded that Sullivan explain himself. Sullivan couldn’t explain (because he was told to by the Deep State to do anything to try to keep General Flynn trapped).

          Sullivan is within physical reach of President Trump’s Prætorian Guard. Trump would have to send his Prætorians to Sullivan’s courthouse… on behalf of a higher court of course.

          • Not Tom says:

            To review, this judge:
            – Refused to accept the DoJ’s motion, despite a unanimous SCOTUS ruling one week earlier clearly affirming that the sole authority to prosecute rests with the DoJ
            – Appointed his own prosecutor, who just happens to be one of his old cronies and a well-known vocal Flynn-hater
            – Instructed this prosecutor on exactly which arguments to make in court
            – Added charges that were not even in the original prosecution
            – Set it all up in a way that it would take months to resolve, instead of merely asking the questions in court himself, which would take mere minutes and which he actually did have the lawful authority to do.

            This isn’t just some mild bias, accidental misunderstanding/misuse of an old law, or even garden-variety corruption. It’s straight-up, in-the-open, knives-out railroading that shows huge flashing signs of coordinated behavior. It also hints at desperation; they need Flynn’s scalp, or else he is extremely dangerous to them.

            Sullivan is both (a) taking orders from an outside party and (b) not being particularly smart or subtle about it. Much like the rioting and looting and burning now going on in the cities, such behavior will continue until it is forcibly suppressed.

            • Deaderick Algernon says:

              Flynn is DIA. They hold the keys. Cops and PMCs are good, but DIA is the key. The military question is basically answered; the next chapter is the War for the Judicial. Gee, I wonder who carries guns in courthouses… . . .

              • jim says:

                DIA is loyal to the commander in chief, be he Obama or Trump. That is why the FBI and DOJ had to take out Flynn.

                DIA knows where the bodies are buried. It is not in the business of arresting the people who buried the bodies. It is in the business of killing the people who buried the bodies, though the time for applying that measure this side of the Rubicon has not yet come.

        • jim says:

          The judiciary is appealing to the judiciary against the Department of Justice.

          The judiciary is the last major asset of the Cathedral that has not been burned in the current struggle. General Flynn is an honest Democrat with no skeletons in his cupboard, hence they needed to purge him. Trump needs to get Flynn out of the woods and rehire him both because he would be immensely valuable (he knows where the bodies are buried, has high motivation to dig them up, and nothing to lose by digging them up) and because it would establish the principle that Trump can hire people the Cathedral has purged, and getting Flynn out of the woods would unleash a flood of loyalists who are reluctant to work for Trump because of Cathedral reprisals.

          The Judiciary is on very shaky ground, because General Flynn is exhibit A of what is wrong with the coerced plea deal system – General Flynn was bankrupted by legal process, and they threatened his son. They also promised him leniency for cooperation, and after he pled guilty redefined “cooperation” to be committing perjury against Trump.

          Morally, the judges are in an abyss and digging deeper, but they seem to structuring things to avoid giving Trump the option of a Jackson.

          The constitutional remedy is to fire the judge, which the constitution gives the merely elected government broad grounds and broad powers to do. How do you fire a misbehaving judge? Despite a vast number of grossly egregious and shockingly outrageous examples of misbehavior, particularly in patents, bankruptcy law, tenancy disputes, and deep pocket lawsuits, despite obvious indications of financial corruption that everyone knows and yet strangely no one speaks of, I do not recall it ever being done. Judicial corruption has the same cloak of mysterious invisibility as female misconduct resulting from workplace shit tests.

          The question is not why cannot Trump fire judges who corruptly use judicial power on political questions, but why can no one, left or right, fire judges who use corruptly use judicial power on financial questions?

          • Karl says:

            I’m no expert, but the word “financial” in the last sentence of the above post seems overly specific.

            As far as I can see, judicial misconduct is far from limited to financial questions.

            • jim says:

              Indeed it is, but I find it odd that the left fails to notice judicial misconduct related to large amounts of money.

              • Karl says:

                Ah yes, according to the left’s projected self-image judicial misconduct to large amounts of money should enrage them.

                I just assumed that the left is a bunch of lying hypocrites and therefore did not find it odd. But then the left has its share of true believers. Some of those should pick that topic up occasionaly. I guess those few guys will have to talk with their handlers. If they don’t shut up and manage to find an audience, they will simply be silenced.