Sunday, 6 October 2019

Thoughts on the system - 36

There’s no way to describe the system, the organism. Its vocabulary is grossly underwhelming. The following rough thoughts are an attempt to outline the unoutlineable:
  • Hormonal birth control is a sales funnel for SSRIs.
  • Embarrassment is for the little people.
  • Fake news? No, your morality is fake.
  • Idiots have never met a nuance they couldn’t reconstruct into an elaborate strawman.
  • Are we really supposed to believe that a passport of one of the 9/11 hijackers survived the attack?
  • Real coolness and what women deem cool are not the same thing.
  • It is more important to manage failure than achieve success.
  • If we have deepfakes now, how can we believe the CIA hasn’t had them for years? And now what should we think of the “bin laden tapes”?
  • Prediction: in my lifetime women will walk around topless as they reach the inevitable natural endpoint of sexual competition in the attention-grabbing Olympics.
  • The British emphasised private investment, innovation and risk-taking, whereas the Europeans see the State as a manifestation of the nation and expect it to intervene more often.
  • Women are “single” in that they are available for sexual relations. Quite often, a man is single precisely because no woman will let him fuck her.
  • There is no such thing as a female dating expert.
  • Marc Randolph, the founder of Netflix, is the grandnephew of Edward Bernays, inventor of modern propaganda. Let that sink in.
  • A female pastor at a church is not leading you to the worship of God, she is leading you to the worship of her personal identity.
  • Any moderated internet forum will inevitably become left-wing.
  • When bread is assured, circuses fill men’s minds.
  • Considering how easy it is to upload child porn onto anyone’s computer remotely, we should be more suspicious of any claim that the authorities arrested a person for such offences.
  • Banning plastic straws is simply the elites subtly reminding the poor of their subjugation.
  • It’s crazy that in America, the term “conspiracy theory” is universally derided as insane, even though the country itself was founded by a criminal conspiracy.
  • Women don’t cum, they orgasm. This is an enormous difference.
  • Light is defined by contrast to dark. It is a negative term and tells you nothing about the beliefs of the light or dark.
  • The 21st century was defined by the fact that neither Putin, Xi Jinping nor Obama had sons.
  • The goal of feminism is to maximally liberate female sexuality while minimising men’s sexuality.
  • Everyone needs someone to look down on.
  • In this age, there is no heroic death.
  • Most women who say they want a strong, masculine man are not capable of keeping one.
  • How powerful is China if it can’t even impose a new law in one of its own territories?
  • 89% of surveyed young Britons say life has no meaning. The problem isn't the kids, the problem is those surveys.
  • Women aren’t bothered by out-earning men. What they really mean is that all men - except her boyfriend - should earn less than her because that would prove he is the best man.
  • By making minorities sacred, progressives unwittingly turn them into scapegoats and the removal of minorities would ironically create the calming effect progressives promise.
  • The culture war stops the day you get a single-party regime.
  • It’s interesting that the moment the Miss America pageant stopped judging on looks and attractiveness, white women lost and black women won.
  • To make money, you actually need to want to make money above everything else.
  • The news can’t report breaking news because the news is broken.
  • “Anti-racism” isn’t a good faith movement. It’s all just class warfare.
  • Never use something that is obviously a testament to the power of intelligence as an argument for a system of belief in god.
  • The more naturally repulsive someone is, the more valuable they are as tools for the powerful. Their loyalty for what little they are given will be all the stronger.
  • Since when did hot girls become the highest authorities on a man's worth? Women are the weaker sex in everything except childbirth, so how can they judge masculinity?
  • As soon as the economic centre of gravity shifted to the East, Westerners suddenly discovered economic growth isn't all it's cracked up to be.
  • The consumer system promises us the most sought after and least possible freedom of all: the freedom from consequences.
  • The relentless search for some tradition that blocks the way of progress is the search for a scapegoat to sacrifice to bring about the promised social peace.
  • Tax cuts sinisterly imply it is the government that grants the people money, not the people who grant the government money.
  • The question of modern times is: how do you make people accept the existence of a corporate monarchy?
  • Nothing causes more anti-Semitism than Zionism.
  • Most young women are highly sexualised but not in the least alluring.
  • The masculine imperative is about expansion and strength while the female imperative is about submission and apology.
  • In 1000BC, humans killed babies to change the weather. In 2019, humans are still killing their babies to change the weather. Sacrificing children to Moloch has a long pedigree.
  • If humanity was naturally hierarchical there would be no conflict. It is precisely because we are similar that we fight.
  • There is no such thing as personal space online, we are living digitally in the same room and we're not coping with that very well.
  • Whatever rationalisations people invent to explain a belief in non-violence, the real reason is that they have unconsciously absorbed the system’s propaganda to be passive.
  • Usury sets in motion the collapse of an economy because no force on earth can keep up with compound interest.
  • You can’t have high wages and high immigration.
  • Left and right are just two sides of the enlightenment, equality and liberty.
  • How the democratic mpire works: you get to vote until you agree with the oligarchs, then they take the ability to vote away.
  • If you can’t identify your enemy, you will lose every battle. That’s what happened to the church over the last 70 years.
  • If you don’t think the media maintains the status quo, ask why you hear so little about France's Yellow Vest protests.
  • This victim culture is essentially a giant hustle. Trouble is, hustlers don’t hustle to win, they hustle because they don’t know any other way to live.
  • Where your head is positioned, how you carry yourself, how you dress, who you think you all affect your behaviour.
  • The rich have had self-driving cars for a hundred years, they just called them chauffeurs.
  • The unconscious has a single goal: protect the ego, protect the status quo. Do not change and you will not die. What is true for the individual is true for a system of individuals.
  • Do psychopaths have difficulty tuning into the mental state of others or are they perfectly able but just don’t care? I’ve always felt the latter is true.
  • If you feel like a stranger in your own society, that is by design.
  • Ethnic nepotism is a deadly toxin.
  • The welfare state subsidies failure.
  • If it doesn’t have sea access, it's not a real country.
  • How long before Facebook and Twitter start banning people for being anti-paedophilia?
  • Israel is just European colonialism under a new religious theme.
  • We have always had wars for resources, but nowadays war is itself a resource.
  • We are being rewired by the internet at a very deep level, very quickly, and we don’t have a clue what it will do to us.
  • Contra Jonathan Haidt, the evidence is showing the weaponised political network a person joins informs their moral intuitions, not the opposite.
  • Every decision hurts someone in some way.
  • One can control a country by denying it the ability to control itself.
  • No one ever complains they have too much self-esteem.
  • You can’t hate something that is inferior to you.
  • It is the stronger side’s decision to have peace, the weaker has to fight.
  • I don’t think kids have short attention spans, rather they have attention for information delivered quickly and succinctly.
  • YouTube gets more traffic than any other site except Facebook and Google and has essentially become the planet’s default TV station.
  • A society that is not artistically creative is a dead society.
  • America is divided between Americans and hyphenated Americans.
  • It’s getting harder to verify if we are already in a post-work economy.
  • A clean solution to almost every problem would be to grant free university tuition to all women once they've given birth to two living children.
  • “Are you saying a woman can’t be hot and smart?” No, I’m saying if you spend 50% of your time on one thing and 50% on a mutually exclusive pursuit, you can’t expect me to assume you are 100% good at either.
  • Intelligence agencies now work for transnational corporations, they don’t have an affinity to a piece of dirt or a people.
  • Kinda strange that vaping is banned at the same time they're building safe injection spaces for heroin use.

Magnets and psychics are the same thing

I never really understood the desire to disprove psychics. Everyone knows magic tricks aren't real, that's why they're called "tricks." The fun is in watching them and wondering how they did it.

And what's even more ridiculous is sceptics trying to show how clever they are by demonstrating how magic and psychic tricks performed on television are fake. Wow, you can fake things on TV? Who knew?

Does anyone actually think ordinary magicians, guys like David Blaine or Chris Angel, have special powers? Come to think of it, the sceptics are on to something. Just the other day I was watching Star Wars. You know that movie? Well, I realised I could hear the lasers go "pyoo pyoo" and the spaceships make whooshing sounds when they were flying in space. And then it hit me - there's no air in space! We shouldn't be able to hear the lasers because there's no air to make the sound! THOSE SPACE BATTLES WERE FAKE!

The problem is not the psychics. They don't believe they're psychic, obviously. The problem is the countless TV shows and magazines that knew the psychic was just doing a trick and yet presented him as the real thing anyway.  All those TV shows knew the psychic was just using trick spoons (or pre-bent or whatever) and they let him on anyway. But the sceptic does nothing to address this aspect, why were networks and media willing to facilitate the ruse outside of an entertainment context Sceptics aren't doing anything to demonstrate things like telepathy or ESP don't exist. They're simply showing that people who claim to have those powers are phonies. But that doesn't stop people from believing those things exist.

It reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of how most people view the world. Ask the next person how their iPhone works or how magnets work. They have no idea. They know of things called magnets and if you put them close to each other one way, they attract, and if you flip one around they move apart. If you ask them how that happened, they'll say "magnets!" and you'll be satisfied with their intelligence because they didn't blurt out "fairies!" But they'll be at a loss if you then ask them what a magnet is or how they work. Why do they do what they do? I've got more EM theory than I can shake a stick at and I still don't intuitively get it.

People know the words for things, but all they know are the words. Magnetism is a word, and so is ESP. If ESP is just a trick, why aren't magnets, or more specifically, why aren't the tests used to prove or explain magnetism also tricks? Do you see? This is my point. To most people everything is tricks. TV is a trick. Magnets are tricks. Sceptics like James Randi in no way help to distinguish between phoney phenomena that are tricks and phenomena that are equally bizarre but also real. If you replace "tarot cards" with "Rorschach inkblots" you'll also have to change "jerks" to "accredited professional psychologists."

I never thought tarot card readers believed they had supernatural powers. I always thought they were used as prompts: "Oh look, the death card, have you lost someone close to you either physically or emotionally?" And the person answers yes and begins to talk about it. It's not really a trick or an illusion, it's just a way to get a client to talk about difficult stuff happening in their lives.

Building an iPhone is different. An engineer might understand how it works, generally, but I don't think most people do. They may remember from school that some things have certain properties because, but those same people might just as easily think crystals give healing powers. I don't think we can address the question of how deeply we should expect others to understand things, because a lot of people don't understand them at all. They memorised a fact -- magnets have a north and south and opposites attract -- but they didn't arrive at that conclusion using deduction, so how can they possibly be expected to deduce other things?

My point is that sceptics like Randi aren't really thinking about the people who would have bought into Uri Geller or some other guy's gimmicks. All he's left them with is, "why is ESP fake and not magnetism or electricity?" By debunking someone like Geller, he's just pointing out that Geller performed a trick. Of course it's a trick, how else would he do it?

Are you familiar with the movie/cult propaganda, "What the Bleep Do We Know?" At one point in the video, the narrator tries to explain the double-slit experiment and how merely observing quantum phenomena in an experiment affects the results of that test. He says something to the effect of "How does the electron know it is being watched?" and then embarks on some hoodoo nonsense. To a Ph.D., the question is retarded.

Electrons don't "know" anything, and at the subatomic level, "watching" takes on an entirely different and active meaning compared to its ordinary passive meaning. So the average person, who once upon a time in high school memorised electrons, protons and neutrons, the question isn't silly and leads them to precisely the wrong conclusions about the world than it should.

Sceptics aren't proving that supernatural powers don't exist. That isn't how the scientific contest is set up. I don't think they exist, obviously, but thinking science proves they don't is just skating over the problem. I saw a study in Nature a few months ago about how ESP and telepathy are real, but we just don't have the technology to achieve them yet. It turns out that during periods of intense concentration, our brains emit a carefully attenuated EM field in which our present thoughts and a complex array of the possible thoughts we might have in the near-term future are represented as signals (brainwaves, if you will, but much more complex than that) within that field. With the right kind of very high-resolution MRI machine -- orders of magnitude higher resolution than we have now -- we could read those signals, separate them and perhaps even affect them. We could not only know what people are thinking, but also what they might think next.

Now, all that is very clearly bullshit. There was no study and I just made all that up. But go find someone who isn't scientifically trained or doesn't have an interest in science, and read that to them. End it with "Doesn't that sound cool?" It'll sound a lot more plausible to them than "I can read your mind by staring at you," but it is equally false. A sceptic's scientific test to disprove my little PR stunt isn't going to help people parse through all this nonsense.

I'm not a physics or EM theorist, and I certainly wouldn't want to go toe-to-toe with one. My point is that after spending years buried in the equations and theory as a layman, I still want to pick up a little magnet and scream "What the hell are you?!"

Thursday, 3 October 2019

The terrible, horrible truth about the world's first global empire

Under Trump, the US has rearranged the international system. The reaction from nearly everyone has been to decry Washington as abdicating its responsibility. But this is exactly backwards: the very act of rearranging implies complete power over the system.

As usual, the truth is very different from what people believe.

The best way to understand this modern kind of anti-Americanism, particularly the anti-Trump stuff, is that it’s entirely an American movement. US politics creates the energy that makes anti-Americanism a satisfying source of power for anyone hoping to climb the political or business ladder in Europe, New Zealand or any other place.

Using any of the anti-American talking points immediately aligns a person with arguably the most potent political faction in America, and also in the world – as measured by its ability to move the status quo, which has been “progressing” consistently to the left ever since the Congress of Vienna. Anti-Americanism is the manifesto of the Washington faction of the State Department (diplomats). They don’t hate America, exactly, they just want to secure power over all Americans who presently align with Foggy Bottom's domestic enemies - the Pentagon faction (generals).

The implicit conflict between the State Department (Blue) and Pentagon (Red) empires is not always violent, and in many countries like New Zealand, it produces a kind of peaceful Purple dynamic, in which the ruling party has strong ties to both Washington factions. But if one faction thinks it is losing power in Washington, it’s very easy to agitate in one of those foreign countries by producing “terrorism” or stirring things up with other proxy warriors like the gay lobby, feminists or unions. Put it this way: if a terrorist cell gets large enough, we call it an intelligence agency. It’s often hard to see the difference between intel operations and outright terrorism.

With Iran, for example, American progressives side with it against the Pentagon for the sole reason of opposing the Pentagon. I am not talking about ideological motivations at all, I am talking about effects. The motivations are irrelevant to the facts, which is that in any conflict between the US and Iran, the goals and interests of State Department progressives and Iranian mullahs are precisely aligned. War has always made weird bedfellows. Americans in both factions want their allies to be as much like them as possible. But this desire must take a back seat to defeating their domestic political enemies. It would be a disaster for both the Blue progressives and the mullahs if the Red progressives fought an actual war and won. Small wonder that both tell us any such outcome is impossible.

This is an example of Dantean political thinking. The "formal meaning" that Iran is not worth invading is that war is bloody and counterproductive. The "real meaning" is that, if there is a war, the Pentagon progressive side will win in Washington. This is a classic invincibility myth – it encourages your allies and demoralises your enemies. As with Dante, it’s not necessary for anyone who believes the formal meaning to believe or even understand the real meaning. The "real meaning" is real because of the impact on the political reality of the people who believe the formal meaning.

The US political system – in this dualistic structure – is not capable of invading and successfully occupying Iran. Then again, because of this instability, it's probably not capable of invading and successfully occupying Bermuda either. Yet what the State Department progressive left doesn't want you to know is that from a strictly tactical military standpoint, the problem of invading and occupying territory is not at all difficult.

I’ll use another example: "national security." This is, of course, a profoundly Orwellian word. "National security" means global security. Security issues which are merely national are "homeland security." So, when the Pentagon calls “white nationalist/supremacy” a “global movement,” it neatly shifts the framing from a domestic law enforcement problem to a national security threat. It does this because “homeland security” generally falls under the remit of State Department-aligned agencies like the CIA, FBI, DHS and others.

In the “national security” framing, the Pentagon faction can claim jurisdiction and power in the same way it did with jihadism. Consider also that the Pentagon managed to frame Trump’s border wall issue this way by appropriating Department of Defence funds to build it. The key goal for the civil servants at the Pentagon is not to solve jihadism, “white supremacy” or immigration, but to deny its political rivals at the State Department further power over these issues and to secure extra funding from the Treasury (which also denies those funds to Foggy Bottom).

Reframing anything as “national security” means the Pentagon can apply its military tactics used against Islamic terrorists – like drone warfare, targeted killings, indefinite detention, black sites, signals intelligence, etc – back home in the Continental US, and in friendly countries like New Zealand. After all, no one wants another Christchurch massacre to happen, do they? Since this “white supremacy” threat will require new tools, weapons and systems, the Pentagon can spur a fresh cycle of military spending too. This has the added benefit of keeping Red Americans in high-paying jobs which will boost US GDP and allow Treasury to borrow even more money to funnel back into the Pentagon. After all, perpetual conflict means perpetual profit. The whole thing is a neat circle.

Reframing cybersecurity and internet-enabled “white supremacy” as national security also means global internet rules will be controlled and written by the Pentagon, not the State Department. But that’s a story for another day. Right now, I'm only pointing out how much Washington is beginning to look like the latter days of the Soviet Union, but not yet.

The cause of the Soviet Union's fall has as many theories as there are of Rome's. Sure, the USSR fell due to the tension between KGB, army and other forces in the apparat. But this is looking at the trees and ignoring the forest. The question is: why did all these people stop believing in the glorious Soviet future? There were tensions in the Soviet power structure in 1918. Probably even more than in 1981. But far more important was the impact of dissidents. The dissidents' role was necessary, in my opinion, because dissidents made it fashionable to be anti-Communist.

By contrast today in the US and Europe, there is no fashionable anti-government movement at all. Fashion among all young smart elite people is to support the party of the permanent government which is always and everywhere Democrats, Labour, Socialists, progressives and so on. If I can find a time machine, I'm sure the KGB would like the recipe for this trick!

If you’re remotely aware of how politics works, you’ll know propaganda is the only game there is. So, if there's one thing I could change in people’s thinking, it's the idea that Donald Trump is part of the right. Obviously, this is a very common delusion. In reality, he represents a progressive takeover of the traditional right. He is simply attempting to restore pre-hippie Cold War liberalism. None of his ideas would be out of place in the Kennedy administration. Trump is proof that conservatives are just progressives driving at the speed limit.

Most people who comment on American politics are looking through a pair of glasses that have been intentionally fogged. If you alter the perspective, the illusion is revealed. But seeing from another’s perspective requires a choice. Some people need to be shown the way through the maze while others need to be given a clue to alter their perspective of the maze.

After the fall of the Soviet Union, American progressive geopolitics turned into a game of chess played by only one side. The two factions now make the moves for everyone else on the other side of the chessboard as well. There is no such thing as "mainstream" thought: it is only a set of temporary compromises between the two contending types of American progressives. It only looks stable because there are no more competing versions of global democracy. Either international socialism (progressivism) or national socialism can rule the world, not both. That’s what WWII was fought about. There are no dissidents in the actual American progressive government structure – the category does not exist. You either align with Foggy Bottom or with the Pentagon. There is no third option. The two Washington factions are simply fighting over who will control the “international community.”

But because these twin rivals mustn’t fight each other directly, they compete in other people’s countries. Terrorism, for instance, has become the modern version of privateering. And just like the British used the old privateers to attack the Spanish with plausible deniability, there is no terrorism today without an interested third party. You might dismiss the idea of “one man’s freedom fighter is another man’s terrorist” as high-school level rhetoric, but that’s precisely what’s going on in Syria. First, consider what would happen if Syrian president Bashar al Assad started supplying the Yellow Vests in France with guns. That would be an international scandal, right? Well, Jabhat al-Nusra has been affiliated with al qaeda for a long time, but the State Department still supports the group with weapons and intelligence.

Furthermore, it’s well known that the reason the State Department embassy in Libya was attacked in 2011 was because the CIA (an arm of the State Department) was running guns from Ghaddafi’s warehouses up the Mediterranean to supply the Syrian “rebels” but the operation got busted by other militant groups (and perhaps even adversary intelligence agencies). Foggy Bottom and the Pentagon would both benefit from al Assad’s removal from power in Syria. But the State Department wants to be responsible for this so it can make the next Syrian leadership part of its proxy network, not the Pentagon’s. Of course, the DoD's warplanes keep Jabhat al-Nusra under control with some well-placed JDAMs, and of course it has its own proxies undermining the Syrian state -- the Kurdish militancy.

If the Pentagon gets the upper hand in one scuffle, Foggy Bottom can score its own points somewhere else. Back in 2003/4, State Department diplomat Paul Bremer was instrumental in weakening the Pentagon’s impressive and successful 21-day invasion of Iraq. Without Bremer’s decisions to disband the Iraqi Army and enact “de-Ba’thification,” the Pentagon would have gained too much prestige, influence and power back in Washington due to its fine combat efforts. From Foggy Bottom’s perspective, the 2003 Iraq War was never about Iraqi freedom, oil or Israel (although these did matter), it was about denying the Pentagon disproportionate power in DC. Civil servants and just normal people, and humans would far prefer to be in power than be morally correct.

Another way this Washington civil war plays out is through immigration in non-US countries. What the “political right” on the internet tend to miss is that jihadism is the symptom, not the problem. The problem is not immigrant violence, the problem is a soft-totalitarian political system, a "tutelary despotism" as Tocqueville put it, that uses immigrants as a voter pool and a tool of power. In Europe, instead of attacking the Harvard-trained civil servants in Brussels, the European right attacks their tool – the Muslim and African immigrants – instead. By doing this, the energies of Salvini, Le Pen, Farage, Wilders and Tusk are a) diverted, and b) devoted to a cause which allows their political enemies to describe them as loons. The same game plays out in the US, too.

At some point, the system may reach the point where the immigrant demon this power battle has created grows larger than it, and the entire progressive regime will go the way of Kerensky or the Iranian liberals. But that’s many decades in the future. If present trends continue, this result is inevitable, but the whole point of politics is to prevent present trends from continuing.

On a deeper note, I get a sense from progressives that Western civilization just doesn't have the right to exist anymore. I first noted it when I started taking seriously the constant insinuations that white people have no right to live in North America because they "weren't there first." It's a deep-seated self-hatred, located squarely in the hearts of the people who most strongly identify with universal love, and it seems to explain a lot. It comes from guilt and “underdogophile reflexes,” which is just my slapped-together term for the feeling that whoever is outnumbered or outgunned in a conflict must be the good guys. Real threat or not, the spectre of the mullahs declaring war on Scandinavia, Germany, Australia, etc, and then having it explained away as "revenge for imperialism" really bothers me and I suspect the US factions don’t have a fail-safe switch to turn off this feeling of guilt and underdogophile ideology that infects the minds of their subjects in Europe.

And yet, that doesn't quite fit, does it?

In truth, this is all part of the mutated form of the anti-Americanism from the State Department faction’s unspoken manifesto. The Blue/left progressives don’t hate Western civilisation, they just want power over it to control and define what Western civilisation is. That's why although marriage is not abolished, it gets reframed as “civil unions” or expanded to include gays. Neither are cars banned, they are just replaced by electric vehicles. Those in the Pentagon faction historically own interests in fossil fuel companies, while State Department cohorts tend to lean toward renewables. The game is to deny a cultural and economic support base to the Red/right faction without destroying the underlying structures. The Red/Blue fight also explains diversity pressures, interracial breeding encouragement, climate change policies, family splintering and the rest of the “decadence” the internet right enjoys pointing out.

In Europe, this political right is not a threat because the elite classes are effectively immunised against right-wing beliefs. On the other hand, immigrant/jihadi violence in Europe is certainly a problem. In the Netherlands, these groups managed to kill Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh who were actual threats to the EU establishment. Fortuyn was a threat because he was not really a "conservative." He had evaded the first ring of defence, which causes attackers to pick up and prominently display antigens which lead to their quick destruction, or at least effective impotence. Fortunately for Brussels, the backup plan of Muslim violence nailed him before he could rally much support against the American-style progressive EU bureaucracy.

The cause of most problems in the modern world is this extended patronage network of Washington’s twin factions, constantly wresting them from each other. Of course, progressivism is a church so the only way to stop it is to disestablish it, but if you want to kill it you must aim for the brain, not the fist. The official information systems owned by the factions – schools, press, broadcast media – are the real targets. Opposing immigrant violence, Muslim terrorism or Pakistani rape gangs is just fighting the system where it is strongest and you are weakest. That's playing defence, not offence.

I also hope it’s abundantly clear that while these two factions attack the other’s proxies, they avoid attacking each other. This is the essence of the scapegoat mechanism, which is precisely why the conflict is unstable: they are twin rivals, mimicking each other.

And at some point, the sacrifice of the scapegoat will be necessary. The last time that happened it was called WWII.

Sunday, 22 September 2019

Notes on the system - 22

Saying what the eye sees – rather than what the brain sees – is like a camera shutter. Long exposures soak in more light. Short exposures are for speed. The following rough notes are about light:

Become better, fight the power

Journalists want to pretend everything is on the upswing when wages have been flat for 40+ years, liberalism is dying, Big Cricket is trying to make you eat bugs and our standard of living will be lower than our grandparents'. Who is more evil? The one that points these problems out, or the one insisting more of the same will, somehow, eventually make your life better if only we do even more of what got us into this mess? "Make yourself better" + "Here are the ways society is failing us" is not a call for terrorism. It's a way to call people away from the abyss and back towards what is true and beautiful. That journalists treat these efforts as violence is only because they see becoming a better person as a threat to their power. I want you to become great to undermine everyone and everything telling you to be weak. That the system wants the opposite tells you everything you need to know.

Ban all Zippos

We need more common sense arson laws! Ban high capacity matchbooks! We need to throw due process out the window and seize the lighters of anyone posting anything about campfires on the internet. Anyone who complains they are cold is a potential arsonist. Take the Zippos first, go through due process second. There is simply no reason for civilians to have highly combustible fuels. You cannot tell me that anyone should just be able to walk into a store and buy a can of kerosene! Nobody really needs a 10 litre can of petrol to light a fire.

Why men and women are different

Pickup artists went outside and did systematic investigations about attraction triggers in women who had been freed from any restraint. They discovered that - big surprise - women are attracted to shitty men who lack the traits that have been selected for over the last 7000 years. That's the difference between the sexes. Women were selected for their willingness to adapt to being paired off with whomever powerful men chose for her. Men, on the other hand, were under brutal selection by other men and any dude who looked like a challenger had 100% of his Y-chromosomes cancelled out. Today women have a new mating ruleset: cooperate in a marriage and find a high-status man, which is a feedback loop, not a goal. It's not correct to say women didn't exercise choice in the past and therefore they don't have preferences back then. They just couldn't act on those preferences and now they can. Evolutionary psychology says men and women are attracted to certain things based on their past environments but genomic history disproves that - almost all women reproduced but most men were replaced by few men. So, the pickup artists stumbled onto a truth no one yet has accepted: women are remarkably mentally primitive. We've only recently found the genetic evidence as to why: they weren't subject to the same selection pressures as men.

The pressure is too much

Take away boy's summer jobs, subject them to sexual and racial abuse in the media and schools carried out by teachers and every other authority figure, take away their hobbies, edit their favourite video games, pathologise or homosexualise male friendship, then if men become withdrawn, ransack their room, destroy all their privacy, put them on counselling and meds. No wonder young men are breaking.

Minority privilege

What about minority privilege? This is the asset giving someone an irrebuttable presumption of offence which can be converted to cash in a discrimination arbitration. Put another way, it's the ability to obtain all of the benefits of society while simultaneously scorning it and taking none of the burden or obligation to maintain it.


White is not a race. Caucasian, Mongoloid or Negroid are races. And no world history course starts with Greece and Rome, it starts with Egypt, or even earlier with Mesopotamia. Western history doesn't discuss what was going on in subSaharan Africa for the same reason it doesn't focus on the Aztecs or Incas. They were culturally separate and distinct from the history that ultimately gave rise to Western European culture, out of which emerged the United States. But if racism isn't directed at white people, and I'm white, how can my worrying about it possibly be self-interested? It's a meaningless tautology. In Mugabe's Africa, is there a Black Privilege List? Maybe that's the point of the whole list. Great. How about a Thin Privilege list, or a Perfect Smile Privilege List? Maybe a Blonde Privilege List? Big Breasts Privilege list? Come on. 1989 called, it wants its nonsense back.

I hate bad car parkers

Why bother with a passive-aggressive note? It takes a human touch to get the point across. That's why when I leave a note I just scrawl the following across their windshield in lipstick:
"You have shown that while you understand the laws of humanity and parking, you do not feel yourself bound by them. For this reason, I levy the following Curse upon you. For the rest of your life, whenever you close your eyes to drift off to sleep, the following vision shall plague you - a mother giving birth, sweaty and straining - you zoom in to the baby crowning and there, fully formed and ringed by a dilated birth canal, is Nicolas Cage's face. He sees you, his blue eyes burning into your own, and smiles. 'Conception is the metal of the universe!' he shouts. Your eyes shoot open, fully awake. You have an erection. 
Please be more considerate when parking in the future, or it will only get worse.
Sure, it takes time to write out, and the finishing touches such as chicken feathers or chalk pentagrams makes the process even longer, but the results speak for themselves.

Bitcoin as a lever of power

Most of the power in a democracy comes from taking money from one person and giving it to another person. Those who push money to people hold the keys to power. Bitcoin is not currency, therefore its largest threat might be to splinter money into two realms, one belonging to progressive democracies and the other to the interconnected, disintermediated internet. If bitcoin is the model for the second realm, it will no longer matter if progressives hand out fiat currency to entice voters.a

Jewish genius?

We always hear about Jewish "genius" and Jewish "talent" and how they have had total control over almost every form of entertainment, education, politics, architecture, music, visual art, movies and plays in the West for 70 years. And in many instances, this is true, especially in the US. But something's not right. Does the West look like it was designed by geniuses? We are the scourge of the world, we invented screeching music, consumerism, endless wars, childish art and architecture, our educational system is a joke with millions unable to read or write and our internal relations are at the worst since WWII. Look at Western culture from 1775-1910 and then from 1910 onward. They couldn't be more different. If Jews are in control, then they fall far short of being geniuses.

Ethics training

The point of ethics training isn't to teach ethics, it is to teach people to make decisions in the required direction. It also broadcasts that people should distrust their internal conscience. After all, if it doesn't come from an institution, then it's not true. That's the real meaning behind the phrase "the medium is the message." See also: media, universities, social networks, etc.


Isn't the #MeToo panic a repudiation of feminism? Are women badass Diana Princesses, capable of joining SEAL Team 6 and running the world? Or are they fragile lillies unable to handle the fumbling advances of chubby 70-year-olds? They can't be both. Ultimatum time, girls. I will gladly provide, protect and punch perverts for you, but I damn well better find dinner on the table when I walk in at night. The other option is that I treat you as my equal in all things. Just don't expect me to come running whenever some old, fat guy gives you an icky feeling. It must suck to be attractive. To have suitors pay for things you cannot afford, feed you, entertain you, offer to provide for you. How terrible it must be to be desirable. Women are alleged to control 3/4 of global wealth not because they created it but because the men gave it to them.


Arguably the world’s most notable screenwriter, Robert McKee, wrote this:
"Story begins when an event, either by human decision or accident in the universe, radically upsets the balance of forces in the protagonist's life, arousing in that character the need to restore the balance of life. To do so, that character will conceive of an "Object of Desire," that which they [believe] they need to put life back into balance. They will then go off into their world, into themselves, in the various dimensions of their existence, seeking that Object of Desire, trying to restore the balance of life, and they will struggle against forces of antagonism that will come from their own inner natures as human beings, their relationships with other human beings, their personal and/or social life, and the physical environment itself. They may or may not achieve that Object of Desire; they may or may not finally be able to restore their life to a satisfying balance. That, in the simplest possible way, defines the elements of story."
Everything that happens in your life is digested by you through this process, so it would be worth your time to memorise it.

"Science" vs engineering

When a scientist gets something wrong, the worst consequence is a retraction of the paper... or not. In contrast, when an engineer screws up, the consequences begin with property loss and may include the loss of life for others. This is why the best scientists are engineers because they won't stand behind results that are anything less than reliably replicable.

Everyone gets taxed

The reason parents don't tell their children to be careful with alcohol and sex is precisely because the consequences still haven't caught up to the parents from when they screwed around and took drugs. There are many kinds of debt: money, self-esteem, love, effort, etc. One day the taxman will come to collect from our mutual illusions.

Musical narcissism

The guitar is popular today because it is an instrument you can play effectively by oneself. Who wants to learn to play the viola when you need an orchestra to complete a song, especially when that would require becoming close to a group of strangers?

Don't be a bore

Being a truthful person is not the same as always taking the opportunity to say what you think. As Voltaire said, the way to be a bore is to say everything. The metric should be: will these words increase my happiness or not?


If a product talks about how you won’t feel any guilt by drinking or eating it, then through accepting the form of the question, it is also teaching you that guilt comes via products, not actions and that your transgressions are absolved via products not actions. It is the inverse of the natural world in the only way that matters: pro-status quo.

Sexual freedom is social control

#MeToo is stupid. Feminism removed traditional morality and constraints on human urges, and now they complain about sex getting out of control. But it's also very clever. First, you break all sexual morality and “chains” then you send out the commissars to punish the sexual impropriety because the sexual revolution never really got rid of morality, it just changed who controlled it.

Global government

In 1920, there were three competing forms of global governance. In 1990 there was one. In 2019, there still is only one but now there is an online and offline world and they do not completely overlap. The online world is a bit of a mishmash of all ideas and forms of governance, without any real cohesion. However, just the fact that the online world offers different information from the offline makes it a competing form of government. It is unclear how far apart the Venn circles are today, but over the years 2009-19 they have significantly slipped apart.

Thoughts on the system - 35

There’s no way to describe the system, the organism. Its vocabulary is grossly underwhelming. The following rough thoughts are an attempt to outline the unoutlineable:
  • Where you stand depends on where you sit.
  • The alternative to hitting yourself in the head with a hammer isn’t to hit yourself a bit less in the head with a hammer.
  • I became a journalist so I didn’t have to rely on the press for my information.
  • Casual sex is fun until it isn’t.
  • Validate the complaint but don’t validate the narrative.
  • Dictators arise in times of crisis, not times of gloriousness.
  • In a feminine imperative society, consumerism is the default.
  • The hardest thing for an interracial family is that the kids will never look like their parents.
  • Bleeding hearts have a peculiar aversion to the sight of their own blood.
  • Proximity to power deludes some into believing they have it.
  • Almost no one says they’re unhappy, instead, they call themselves depressed.
  • Expanding tertiary education should be the consequence of economic development, not as a means of economic development.
  • A man’s power is the function of his environment, not an absolute value. The opposite is true for women.
  • It may be unfair, but it is the most important fact of human existence is that people exist independently of you.
  • Emotional tyranny is normal for any Puritan.
  • You can’t have multiculturalism without cultural appropriation.
  • Social scientists are religious moralists in camouflage.
  • Never be surprised by what actions a woman can justify doing.
  • Everyone alive today could fit into some diagnosis in the latest edition of the DSM.
  • Migration policy has never been subjected to a democratic vote in any western country.
  • The question for modern people is, what do we do now that our existence is assured for 80-90 years? How do we deal with the terror of too much freedom?
  • It’s almost impossible not to survive in modern society, the system does everything to keep you alive and eating.
  • The calculation of charisma is power + empathy.
  • Power is the measurement of how much control one has over other people. The more power you get, the less other people know you are controlling them.
  • Far too often justice is a dishonest word for revenge.
  • Generosity is its own form of power.
  • A woman out of love is no fun to make love to.
  • Nothing can screw up your life faster than sexual liberation.
  • Nobody should be allowed to go to university until they are 21, but high-school graduation should remain at 18.
  • The enemy always gets a vote.
  • Women are mostly boring. Once you strip away all the packaging and fluff, they are essentially interchangeable.
  • Never ask someone to join a club if you aren’t certain they’d say yes. Once they’re in, they will be stuck.
  • Jews appear to be attracted to revolutionary messianic movements because they don’t have a messiah.
  • Credibility is the most important thing a great power or person can have.
  • The most likely region for a nuclear war is in East Asia.
  • If people move from Country A to Country B, that means Country B is better than Country A.
  • Only China, Japan and the US see the One Belt, One Road Initiative as competition. Everyone else sees it as free money.
  • People are so proud of avoiding a major war since 1949. But if war is just a continuation of politics by other means, we have been fighting online instead. And it's just as hot.
  • Mass migration is Jihad 4.0.
  • The simplest way to drive wages down is to double the workforce by bringing the women in.
  • A family is the social manifestation of the dialectic. The thesis, antithesis and synthesis, or the father, mother and child.
  • If sovereignty is defined as the monopoly on the legitimate use of violence to enforce laws in a certain territory, I’m not sure why open borders would lead to a loss of sovereignty. That situation is more accurately called empire. If you can measure world GDP, doesn’t that indicate that you, in some way, own the world?
  • The difference between the 1940s and today is that the internet will make it impossible for "historians" to hide why the Jews will be used as a scapegoat again.
  • If you don’t want to do something I want, that just means I failed to persuade you, not that you made a choice.
  • Things that require the labour of other people cannot be rights. A right is inherent to your person.
  • Forget all the money, multiple women chasing you is the ultimate social status. After all, what’s the money for?
  • The existence of fringe groups are a test for whether there is freedom of speech.
  • Just because you lost a war doesn’t mean your ideas were wrong, just that your military was weaker or made strategic mistakes.
  • Zionism is Jewish nationalism and communism is Jewish internationalism, just as national socialism is Catholic nationalism and progressivism is Protestant internationalism.
  • Porn is the one thing the system gives out for free, which should tell you everything you need to know about it.
  • Sigmund Freud changed reason, will and passion to superego, ego and id.
  • The whole university game is a carny act that only works because we agree to pretend it does.
  • Humans are so narcissistic that we think we are living in a simulation just because we can invent the concept of a simulation.
  • The crazier this world gets the less I worry about tyranny.
  • A high-value man does not find other’s lives very interesting in comparison to his own.
  • If you have to ask who she’s wearing it for, it isn’t you.
  • Culture wars are about imposing your morality on other people, no matter what it takes.
  • All terrorism is progressivism.
  • The predator who will kill your daughter isn’t who you think: it is your girl’s own id.
  • Given the ease of deleting information today, even about recent events, it really makes you question the stories we’re told about history.
  • The same people in the US who say they can’t just round up 12m illegal people are the same who think they can confiscate 400m guns from 80m Americans.
  • A church is an organisation or movement which tells people how to think. The modern university fits this definition.
  • Only the US can defeat the US. But, equally, only China can defeat China.
  • If you want to protect your daughter from being ruined by “bad boys,” you must ritualistically humiliate him in front of her to diminish his status. Works every time.
  • The correct mindset is approval giver, not approval seeker.
  • Women cannot do anything anonymously.
  • Political correctness is more effective at achieving social control than threats because people cannot speak about what they cannot think.
  • Women dress up for work because they think looking good makes them important.
  • Subtitles in a movie distract you from how bad the acting is.
  • The modern progressive state has three prongs: 18th-century democracy, apolitical scientific bureaucracy and ecumenical mainline Protestantism.
  • Actual political power is influence over official action.
  • When you see something on the media, do not ask why - ask why now?
  • A journalist “holding power to account” simply means that no one can hold power unless it is conferred to them by journalists.
  • Economics is divided between those giving a good description of human behaviour in markets and an entire field that fails under Goodhart’s Law. Economics is a pseudoscience.
  • Jacinda Ardern doesn’t understand that she has boob privilege and men tolerate her because she’s vaguely cute.
  • If a man is replaced by a woman in a job under “diversity” he can only blame himself for being so inessential to the company.
  • Religion is something the other guy believes. You just have a true worldview.
  • Wealthy people had to commit felonies to buy their dumb kids a good SAT score precisely because the test is an objective measure of intelligence not of a privileged upbringing.
  • Christianity succeeded over pagan Hellenism because pagan women were sluts and made for worthless wives.
  • A more appropriate metaphor for progressives is not the NPCs, but the Sentinals from the Matrix movies.
  • The lie that wealth is only ever stolen, never created, is destroying the world.
  • It’s not hard, it’s just new. Once you’ve done something a few times it’s not hard anymore. All it requires is discipline.
  • The New York Times is a narrative organisation, not a news organisation.
  • The "culture war" is simply the set of all things where progressive orthodoxy conflicts with reality resulting in a function known as "controversy."
  • Anti-vaxxers are an epiphenomenon of the complete loss of trust in progressive institutions just as the ice cream lickers are the inevitable result of progressive power over institutions.
  • The correct way to run politics is to apply best-practice business organisation to it. However, Google is applying worst-practice political organisation to business.
  • Fake news is less damaging than journalists choosing not to report on certain things.
  • Some people say women lie, the more correct assessment is that women have no conscious idea of what they prefer and simply react to their circumstances with no higher brain input.
  • Social networks and big tech companies aren’t censoring content, curation and control are precisely what those systems were built to do.
  • If there really was a "rape culture" then calling it a rape culture would have no effect because no one would be ashamed of it.