Wednesday, October 18, 2017

Cybernetic invasion

6:47 "Your flesh is a relic; a mere vessel. Hand over your flesh, and a new world awaits you."
— The Second Renaissance: Part II, from the Animatrix
"Machinic desire can seem a little inhuman, as it rips up political cultures, deletes traditions, dissolves subjectivities, and hacks through security apparatuses, tracking a soulless tropism to zero control. This is because what appears to humanity as the history of capitalism is an invasion from the future by an artificial intelligent space that must assemble itself entirely from its enemy's resources.”
— Nick Land, Fanged Noumena, Machinic Desire

The essential thing that people refuse to understand, is that capitalism, for all its flaws, is still superior to the screeching xenophobic tribal communism of the average human monkey. The advance of capitalism moves civilization from the organic towards the cybernetic, and from the centralized towards the anarchistic. Nature builds in hierarchies; cells have mitochondria, organs have cells, bodies have organs, brains have bodies, corporations and governments have people; and in the future, AIs will have governments and corporations.

The cybernetic communication system of the cell is intracellular RNA
The cybernetic communication system of leaf cutter ants is pheromone trails.
The cybernetic communication system system of the body is hormones.
The cybernetic communication system system of capitalism is price signals.
The cybernetic communication system system of the government is feedback loops.

Capitalism is the absorption of man into the machine. Liberalism is an auto genocidal reaction to the selection forces of capitalism. The equality inherent in capitalism is standardization and not equity. If everyone has equal rights it is only as equally interchangeable components of a machine.

Monday, October 16, 2017

Christian patriarchy, Islamic patriarchy, and "predatarchy"

In light of the Harvey Weinstein sex scandal it needs to be pointed out that we do not live in a patriarchy, for "patriarchy" means the rule of fathers — literally, the Latin word "patri," meaning "father" and "archy" meaning, "the rule or government composed of."

Partri = father
archy = government by

Government by the father.

In a Christian patriarchy the daughter belongs to her father. An offense against the daughter is an offence against her father. If she is married it is an offence against her husband, if not, against her father. If her father is dead, an offence against her is an offence against her brother. There is a chain of custody, and responsibility moves down the chain if male relatives die off. She is never really emancipated until she reaches menopause.

 This entitles the nearest male relative to violent retribution to restore her honor.

If Harvey Weinstein had assaulted these women in an actual Christian patriarchy he would have found himself on the wrong end of a gun decades ago. He would have assaulted only one women. She would have gone crying to her father about it, and that father would have blown him away in cold blood. Even better, in actual patriarchy the judge would have patted the murdering father on the head and said "good boy."

Obviously this would have prevented all his subsequent abuse.

In real Christian patriarchies it is legal for men to murder other men who assault their daughters. This underscores two points; first, Christian patriarchy was never a system for "oppressing" women. It may have had the side effect of restricting their sexual choices, but that was done to minimize the need for retribution, and never its main purpose. It was a system for protecting women from predation, and controlling who they spent their time around was another means to that end.

Contrast this with an Islamic patriarchy where the woman is forced to marry her rapist, and if she refuses, is killed in the name of family honor; typically by her brothers. This is "honor killing." In essence, Islamic patriarchy is legally enforced rape.

Christian patriarchy discourages rape by punishing it with the fathers vengeance, while Islamic patriarchy rewards rape by giving the victim over to the assailant as bride property. Feminists conflate the two, but Western culture always had a form of women's rights built into its form of patriarchy even back then.

Since women are often loathe to marry their rapists, (contrary to what Jim says), a great many women in Islamic societies refuse to marry their attacker, producing a large number of honor killings and a shortage of women. Also, reproducing your race through rape is dysgenic as all hell, destroying genetic quality over time since the most dysgenic males tend to be rapists. Female sexual choice makes men compete on quality for women's attention, raising the quality and power of men over time. (Is this why White men conquered the world and not Arabs?) Causation cultures are some of the few in the world that has always granted women an element of mate choice, and that choice may be a major factor in the ascent of White men to global dominance. After all, each sex is the result of the others mate selection, women are hypergamous, and selection for high quality produces just that.

With the advent of birth control choice is now unlimited. Even without large scale rape, some women past women reproduced involuntarily. Their sex drives drove them into the arms of men, and without reproductive technology, pregnancy was the inevitable result. These "involuntary reproducers" are now dying off. We live in one of the most brutal eras of natural selection in human history. Normally, if this many people were failing genetically there would be mountains of bodies in the streets. What we are seeing is Bubonic plague levels of genetic termination. We can't see it clearly because it is only a pill, but birth control is the chemical version of a predator, and it targets only women. Consider that in a thousand years every woman on the Earth will be the product of fifty generations of selection effects against birth control. Imagine a teenage boy taking a girl on a date, and she looks at him with a crazed look in her eyes and says;
"So when are you going to impregnate me?"
"I've had our, I mean my, future children's names picked out since age twelve."

Her mother wanted to have children, and her mother's mother, and her grandmother's mother, and so on, for FIFTY GENERATIONS. Every single woman alive on Earth is the product of fifty generations of CHOICE to have children. Fifty generations of choice have produced her mind, her desires, her hopes, her dreams. For a thousand years only the women who wanted children had them, and here she sits, across from you, thirsty for pregnancy.
"I can almost feel your babies inside me Joe. Do you know what it feels like? Do you have any idea? The crushing loneliness of it all? I think about it every day!
"I need you sperm. I want it, I can't live without it. Give it to me!"
Meet your future wife. Crazed baby bitch.

A choice made habitually one way every generation eventually breeds and animal incapable of making any choice, and so every woman will be incapable of making any other choice but to have children. Even the ability to chose will itself been bred out of the species, and will be unthinkable to most women, and possibly many men.

An identical effect will happen with men and pornography. Future man will find pornography to be viscerally disgusting, or he will be incapable of getting it up without the smell of the female body, or be incapable of seeing a two-dimensional image as three-dimensional, or something. Some disgust reaction or visual handicap will evolve to turn men off porn.

Evolutionary effects produce ideological consequences, and feminism is how "involuntary reproducers" articulate, justify, and internalize their extinction. Naturally, when people are destroying themselves their envy makes them lash out at society, and try to drag the rest of us down with them. Patriarchy bred women, often against their will, and this increased the numbers of involuntary reproducers — of women who did not chose to have children. The societies with the most brutal forms of it will now undergo the most brutal effects of natural selection from choice. (I'm looking at you Islam). In the long-term Whites should come out ahead of most cultures that had monarchy, but no necessarily ahead of Blacks, for whom monarchy was mostly absent.

We may speculate that when an organism cannot reproduce itself it may seek its own death as a means of reducing its consumption of tribal resources. The Jungian Death Drive exists for a reason; only 50 to 70 percent of modern women can reach orgasm. A great many women were bred under patriarchy to be passive recipients of penetration. Many "asexual" women are stunningly beautiful; this can be a stable sexual equilibrium under patriarchy; to perpetuate your genes you don't necessarily need a sex drive if your looks combined with the external environment will force you to marry the local lord, especially if there is no birth control.

Feminists need to realize that there are female genetic "tails" symmetrical to the male genetic "heads" of rapists. Meaning; for every rapist in existence there is a corresponding number of asexual woman in society. Assuming pregnancy occurs, rape perpetuates two sets of genetics. It perpetuates the males genetic inclination for rape along the y chromosome, and it perpetuates the infantilizing traits that make women vulnerable to rape, traits like gullibility, infatuation with dangerous men, risk taking, and behaviors that cause a woman to unconsciously place herself in the presence of predatory males.

For every "born rapist" there is a "born female imbecile" who will pass out drunk at a party with her legs open, and feet up in the air. This is the "genetic tails" to the "rapist heads" of the male sex. It is the other side of the selection effect on the same genetic coin of sexual assault. Of course, given enough abortion over a long enough period of time this will go extinct too, as women abort babies produced by sexual assault.

This is why your average feminist resents any implication that women should take responsibility for avoiding sexual assault; why suggestions like "don't pass out drunk at parties" fall of deaf ears. (Over ninety percent of rapes involve alcohol). Some women are born imbeciles because that is exactly what they need to be to get impregnated by a rapist. Nature doesn't give a shit if you suffer; evolution is a reproduction maximizing algorithm. Those traits that reproduce themselves will be selected for no matter how much suffering they cause. Sickle cell anemia? Bueller, Bueller? It's a genetic adaptation that confers resistance to malaria. Have one allele for sickle cell and you're fine, have two and, and. . .

The problem that feminists do not understand, will not comprehend, is that some women are born "prey." Selection effects have produced an awful lot of women who are designed to be exactly as stupid as they need to be in order to guarantee that they get sexually assaulted, and impregnated, by predatory men. These evolved imbeciles don't necessarily vote to bring Muslim rapists from Pakistan into Western societies out of some hostility to the West. Do they? Oh no, they are just evolved to facilitate their own status as prey.

And this is why ultimately there is no "equality" between men and women. No, women are not voting for rape, conquest, and war as Jim says. You are reading too much agency into it. It's far more deluded and irrational than that, and this means there are really only two types of societies; patriarchies, (societies ruled by fathers), and predatarchies, (societies ruled by predators). If many women prefer the later over the former is is because they are evolved to. Give it a few hundred years; this will go away; as the only ones standing will be the voluntarily reproducing, the desirous of babies, and the repulsed by porn. A great culling has begun; for I am death, destroyer of worlds, and my name is birth control.

An excellent talk by Hans Herman Hoppe

Fast forward to 43:56 for his policy proposals, which are actually politically realistic.

Friday, October 13, 2017

Chelsea Clintion

Guide to progressive crypto-Christianity

Table of equivalents

Satan = Hitler
Daemons = White men
Original sin = Whiteness and privilege
Act of original sin = historical injustices of Whites
Daemonic force in the world = Whites
Apostles = college teachers
Salvation = saving brown people from themselves
Blasphemy = hate speech
Christ = Martin Luther King Jr.
Cast out of Eden = capitalism
Eden = holy native American lifestyle
Ancestral of Adam and Eve = crimes of White ancestors
Penance = forsaking Whiteness
Allies of Christ = White allies of people of color
Righteousness = social justice
Helping the poor = economic justice
Witch hunts = academic censorship
Morality = tolerance
Good works = crusading against racism
Violence for the faith = punching Nazis
Angels =  holy brown people
Saints = holy Jews
Self-flagellation = Whites humiliating themselves publicly
Sunday school = diversity training
Type of daemon = cis
Type of daemon = hetro
Type of demonic influence = patriarchy
Proud displays of righteousness = virtue signaling
Holy community of believers = people of color
Holy crusade = education
Christian duty to preach = educating the masses
Get saved = get educated
"You should be ashamed of your sins" = "you should educate yourself!"
"Witch!, heretic!" = "racist!"
Ultimate sin = genocide
Ultimate sacrifice for Whites = White auto-genocide
Ultimate victory over evil for people of color = genocide of Whites
Martyrdom = dying fighting Nazis
Dying on the cross for your sins = self-destruction of Whites, by Whites
Jesus' sacrifice = the self-sacrificing progressive
God's love conquers Satan = progressives love conquers hate
Self-sacrifice = White people having mixed race babies

The Father → is out
The Son → is out
The holy spirit → there is no such thing
God = envious hatred of Whites, success, and power

We need more men like Harvey Weinstein

Half the human race places social conformity above truth, integrity, or morals. That half needs to destroy itself, and is. Praise be to Gnon.

Weinstein is a predator who preys on predators. All liberals are predators. They prey on the incomes of hard working people, on the pathological guilt of Whites, on political correctness, on the very lies they compulsively feed themselves to compensate for their insatiable rage at their own inadequacies. The basic personality flaw of ever liberal is envy. Which is to say, the basic personality flaw of every liberal is a refusal to realize that everyone is inferior to someone in some way, that that is fine, and that a mature personality either accepts what they lack, or works hard to be better.

Hollywood needs more predators to immiserate these superficial people. Remember that regardless of the supposed victimhood of these women, with almost every actress did it voluntarily. Those hos decided to get down on their knees and service him. They made a cost/benefit calculation where they chose fame and adoration over honor.

Thy placed their fame above their integrity. A person who would do that deserves nothing less that Weinstein's cock her mouth. A person who would sell their integrity for fame is already a horrible person. They are the type of people who virtue signal, who humiliate others, who prefer looking smart to being smart, who prefer winning the argument to being truthful, who prefer to shame others rather than be honest. EVERY reactionary has been humiliated or degraded by one of these people in their lives. Meaning; every sincere seeker of truth, or person who refuses to sell out, every person with integrity has been shit upon by one of these people, by one of these liberals.

We pay the price of our integrity with their personal attacks on us.

They pay the price of their lack of integrity on their knees servicing men like him.

It is justice when the evil and superficial eat each other. No sympathy. No compassion. No tears.

Thursday, October 12, 2017

Scientology's concepts of "circuits", and "valences"

circuit: a part of an individual’s bank (bank means the reactive part of your mind) that behaves as though it were someone or something separate from him and that either talks to him or goes into action of its own accord, and may even, if severe enough, take control of him while it operates.

Sometimes you see this at poetry readings. A circuit takes control of the poet and he spews out an uncontrollable political diatribe, or rant. Circuits do not have to be uncontrollable. They do not have to take over the individual. Many political opinions are circuits. Common phrases like "strong independent woman," are circuits. A circuit is like a short circuit that impairs one's ability to think. It is a thought-terminating cliché, a habitual response, a person acting like a trained monkey. A circuit is anytime an individual's mind has been hijacked by ideology or concepts that make them obsess over something and impair reasoning. Humans deliberately build circuits for the programming of others, though Scientology doesn't talk about that part.

valences: personalities. The term is used to denote the borrowing of the personalities of others. Valences are substitutes for self taken on after the fact of lost confidence in self. For example; a person “in their father’s valence” is acting as though they are their father.

out of valence: when a person takes on the personality characteristics of someone else, i.e., acting like the star football player, or acting like their mother, or whatever. This happens because they have lost confidence in themselves. To "be out of valence," is to be acting fake, or like someone else. Many of Jim Carrey's roles are examples of blatantly out of valence personalities. A person becomes out of valence when they perceive another's personality to be stronger than their own. Some emotional loss occurs, they get beaten somehow, and they take on the personality characteristics of the stronger personality. For example; say you get beaten up by a bully. After awhile you begin to act like a bully yourself because your original personality was weak, and has been totally invalidated. Or say that a military drill sergeant screams at you and humiliates you. So you begin to take on the mentality and personality of the drill sergeant. A valence is not an alternate personality. It is not a multiple personality disorder. It is what happens when you adopt the personality characteristics of people who are stronger than you, and typically have beaten you in some way.

Another example of being "out of valence"; when White people try to act Black, mimicking the affect, style of speech, and gestures of ghetto Blacks because they have been humiliated.

Japan is said to be "in the valence of the West," since the Japanese run around in business suits instead of kimonos, build modern architecture, and were beaten by America when we dropped the atom bomb on them. Hubbard describes them as being in a permanent American valence.

Circuits sabotage thought, and valences are personality styles adopted when losers in a conflict mimic the personalities that have beaten them. Whole cultures can be out of valence, or just individuals.

Another example; let us say a child loses his father. The mother then moves back to live with her parents. The grandfather is a stabilizing influence in the child's life during a period of intense trauma, so the child begins to mimic the behaviors of the grandfather, taking on his valence. A valence need not be hostile, it can be a person who was simply helpful during a time of emotional pain.

A crucial part of Scientology is helping people recover their own valence so they can live as themselves rather than living through the valences of stronger personalities. The goal is to get the person into a condition when they can "be themselves" without being a victim, or being weak.

Tuesday, October 10, 2017

The Case for CRISPR Eugenics

"We tend to overestimate the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate the effect in the long run."
— Roy Amara, Computer Scientist

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."
— Upton Sinclair

"There is no ‘good life for man’ (in general) — or if there is we know nothing of it, or not enough. Even those persuaded that they do, on the contrary, know what such a life should be, promote its universality only at the expense of being denied the opportunity to pursue it. If we need to agree on the broad contours of such a model for human existence, then reaching agreement will precede it — and ‘reaching agreement’ is politics. Some much wider world acquires a veto over the way of life you select, or accept, or inherit (the details need not detain us). We have seen how that works. Global communism is the inevitable destination.
"The alternative to agreement is schism. Secession, geopolitical disintegration, fragmentation, splitting — disagreement escapes dialectics and separates in space. Anti-universalism, concretely, is not a philosophical position but an effectively defensible assertion of diversity. From the perspective of the universal (which belongs only to Gnon, and never to man), it is an experiment. The degree to which it believes in itself is of no concern that matters to anything beyond itself. It is not answerable to anything but Gnon. What anyone, anywhere, thinks about it counts for nothing. If it fails, it dies, which should mean nothing to you. If you are compelled to care about someone else’s experiment, then a schism is missing. Of course, you are free to tell it that you think it will fail, if it is listening, but there is absolutely no need to reach agreement on the question. This is what, in the end, non-communism means.
"Non-universalism is hygiene. It is practical avoidance of other people’s stupid shit. There is no higher principle in political philosophy. Every attempt to install an alternative, and impose a universal, reverts to dialectics, communization, global evangelism, and totalitarian politics.
"This is being said here now, because NRx is horribly bad at it, and degenerates into a clash of universalisms, as into an instinctive equilibrium. There are even those who confidently propose an ‘NRx solution’ for the world. Nothing could be more absurd. The world — as a whole — is an entropy bin. The most profoundly degraded communism is its only possible ‘universal consensus’. (Everyone knows this, when they permit themselves to think.)
"All order is local — which is to say the negation of the universal. That is merely to re-state the second law of thermodynamics, which ‘we’ generally profess to accept. The only thing that could ever be universally and equally distributed is noise.
"Kill the universalism in your soul and you are immediately (objectively) a neoreactionary. Protect it, and you are an obstacle to the escape of differences. That is communism — whether you recognize it, or not."
— Xenosystems, Against Universalism

Some recent replies to a comment I wrote on the Xenosystems blog have made me realize that I will never be properly understood by alt-righters, but I can at least restate my case one last time here for everyone who is capable of getting it.

My central thesis is that capitalism destroys everything it cannot incorporate into itself, that human history marches relentlessly from the organic towards the cybernetic, and that racial preoccupation inhibits the much more important work of genomic progress. As part of these points I have said repeatedly that universal political orders are both impossible to realize and inherently communist in nature, and that only patchwork can create freedom. We will be looking at the last two of these points today; genomic progress and non-communism. Let us take the last point first.

So much of neoreaction is screaming into a void of alt-right cognitive misers. Granted they are less miserly than progressives, but the minute they discovered HBD all thought ceased. That's how it is with people; once they have their answer they have no further use for thinking. Here is one of those comments;

"That’s nice.
"Now any competent government on the land mass we call at present North America will do what the geography mandates: Take Atlantic to Pacific. Just as we did.
"I said competent.
"I didn’t say White you notice. Nothing mandates it has to be white.
I can hazard it won’t be Black.
"As what’s between the Atlantic and Pacific are the richest lands on earth in every category of resource including arable land it’s quite worth taking, but it’s the geography that determines destiny.
"Not your precious and transient data. Atlantic to Pacific. That’s destiny, and its manifest."
— Vxcc2014

The alt-right is communism. It commits the inevitable fallacy of reversion into dialectics about "we." Land has pointed out again, and again, that all universal politics inevitably becomes totalitarian. Dialectics is communism. Schism is neoreaction.

As I originally said;

"The formula given is [Nx(N-1)]/2 where N is the number of people in the group. This bounds common values at an upper limit of no more than 400 people, assuming they debate 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, for 277 days straight, with no one person speaking for more or less than 5 minutes. Above a certain limit, the ability to establish values breaks down, and a central authority is required to establish a common value system/legal code. Even if you do it more efficiently by having them take turns speaking publicly it is still N x T (number of people x time to speak for each), which for 500 people who each speak for 5 minutes is still 42 hours of taking.
"And they have to decide that value code on each and every point of law.
"The obvious solution is a market for values or a patchwork, but human monkey brains are evolutionarily habituated to thinking in terms of “we,” when "we" is not possible in large societies.
"'We is mathematically impossible,” should probably be the first lesson taught in high school."
 — Comment on Xenosystems, October 7th, 2017

Both the alt-right and progressives agree on one thing; they need a future where Whites are threatened with extinction. In the case of progressives they actually want it, (though some may secretly want the alt-right to succeed), while in the case of the alt-right they rely on the external threat to give credence to their cause. They all need the worst case scenario to be true in order to have a justification for what they want. What good is a successful mixed-race future to them? As usual, motivated reasoning drives human everything.

But as we will see, there are possible futures that are both mixed race and successful.

The chart above defines some of these futures. There are tow contrary trends. Observe how dysgenics combines with the eugenic effects of CRISPR to produce nine rough categories of possible outcome. The ones defined in Column 1 are unlikely; worldwide prohibition of the technology would interfere with elite desires for self-improvement. Column 3 outcomes are also unlikely; governments would react with oppressive hysteria to widespread bio-hacking. Thus, we are stuck with the mid-range scenario in Column 2 as our most likely outcome.

The first quote given in this article is about how people underestimate technology in the long-run. The second quote is about how people will avoid understanding something if it conflicts with their agenda. The chart above is an attempt to map potential futures for humanity. The technology in question is CRISPR, which though it will accomplish little in the short-run, has massive long-term potential to obviate political problems. In all scenarios the world gets more "diverse," meaning, a darker average skin tone, or "less White." But per Mendel's laws of genetic inheritance it is not possible for race to be eliminated through interbreeding, and from the work done by Razib Khan, many of the genes for White skin color dominate over those for pigmentation. To quote;

"All that being said, phenotypes do not emerge just out of our own minds, rather, they are often genetically controlled. I have posted a fair amount on skin color because within the last 5 years we’ve really figured out how it shapes the normal range of human variation. In short, about half a dozen loci seem to account for nearly all the between population differences in complexion. But I was talking to a friend today and explained how I realized recently that the nature of the genetic architecture was actually rather counterintuitive from an American perspective. In short, whiteness is dominant!
— Razib Khan, Fear of a white planet, Gene Expression

Yes, the world will get a little more brown, but this is not "the end of White people," nor the end of Western civilization. And as I have already pointed out, almost all races are undergoing a decline in total fertility rate, and Africans should eventually catch up to the rest of the world so long as urbanization is allowed to occur. To quote myself in a previous article;

"Why The Population Bubble Happened in the First Place
"1837. John Deere invents the steel plow. Source.
1911. First antibiotic approved for market use. Source.
1921 to 1970, all serious childhood diseases cured with vaccines. Rubella is last in 1970. Source.
1960. Birth control released to the public. Source.
1980. Level of urbanization in the U.S. exceeds 73.7 percent. Source.
"Notice that there is roughly a half-century gap between the introduction of the first antibiotic and the development of birth control. Levels of urbanization were already at about 46 percent in 1910, but there was no direct ability of women to limit their conception of children. This is probably why Asia is in free fall. Unlike us, their urbanization occurs after birth control, and not before.
"The gap is significant because what you see here are two sets of technologies One set of technologies increases population, (steel plows and antibiotics), while another set of technologies/behaviors decreases birth rates, (birth control combined with urbanization). The fact that there is a half-century gap between these two sets of technologies, is the reason that the the worlds population will reach about 9.7 billion by 2050, and go no higher. What you are seeing here is a massive population bubble created by the gap between population increasing and population decreasing technologies. It is that gap that has created the world in which we live. We are the people born as a consequence of modern technologies like antibiotics, fed as a result of the steel plow, and kept alive during their childhoods as a result of vaccines. By 1970 all of the worst childhood diseases were cured. The population increasing technologies happened first over a series of decades from 1837 to 1970, while the population decreasing technologies occurred between about 1960 and onward. This is going to produce a 9.7 billion population bubble that is going to crash in the future. When we look at declining birth rates what we are seeing is the beginning of the end of the bubble in White countries. That collapse in population is going to spread outward though the whole world, and the rest of the world is going to collapse faster because their urbanization occurred after birth control while ours occurred before, thus, movement to the cities translates directly into population collapse for them even faster than for us."
Anti-Puritan, April 2017

The point is that there are many simultaneous trends going on here, and to focus laser-like on the decline in total fertility rate of Caucasians is to ignore all other context. All races are going to experience decline in TFR. The world is not going to overpopulate. Global warming is not going to destroy everything because in the long-term (300 years), the Earth's entire human population is going to drop radically. Whites are not going extinct because Mendel's laws of genetic segregation won't allow it.

The worldwide prohibition scenario described in Category 1 (in blue) on the chart above will not happen. Gene editing technology is fast in the long-term and dysgenics is slow. Dysgenic effects require hundreds of years to appear. Humans might not even be a single species by then. The point is that all the damage to IQ that happens in 500 years can be undone by CRISPR in 100 or less.

Remember that second quote, "people underestimate technology in the long-run?" Remember that?

Yes, the "Cathedral" might try to ban CRISPR. It is the ultimate checkmate against a leftist agenda. But this is like the belief that elites would suppress a cure for cancer. They would like the cure themselves, and therefore would be unlikely to successfully oppose it in any coordinated fashion. Any elites who could not procure access to a cure through back channels would naturally be supportive of a cure, and elites with poor family members or friends would like to see them live. These types of conspiracy theories become ludicrous upon any deeper analysis.

The cathedral concept is itself a vast oversimplification of the situation; it represents the right-wing version of left-wing ideas like the military industrial complex, or the Marxist bourgeois. Reality is much better represented as a series of feedback loops of "this in exchange for that" between governments and their client populations. Examples would include such things as handouts for votes, tougher criminal sentencing for campaign contributions, academic funding for indoctrination of students, and wars for campaign contributions from the defense industry.

Now I am not saying that wars are literally bought and paid for. There does not need to be any direct interaction between lobbyists and congressmen. There are at least 22,000 lobbyists in DC and they all follow the voting records of politicians. Politicians in turn carefully watch who is giving them campaign contributions, and for how much. If a congressman votes for a war and then receives a large donation from a private army contractor like DynCorp, he can put two and two together himself. He doesn't need to actually be approached by them. Everyone is keeping score. Every vote he casts causes a fluctuation in his income up or down. He winds up representing the market rather than public interest, or he gets voted out due to a lack of campaign funds.

To quote Nick Land on the issue;

"Since winning elections is overwhelmingly a matter of vote buying, and society’s informational organs (education and media) are no more resistant to bribery than the electorate, a thrifty politician is simply an incompetent politician, and the democratic variant of Darwinism quickly eliminates such misfits from the gene pool."
Nick Land, The Dark Enlightenment

This is why "the Cathedral" is not the Cathedral at all, but really just a pile of feedback loops with corresponding ideologies to justify each. The Cathedral is the sum of its payments, and it is perfectly capable of doing the occasional right-wing action if it pays well. It is just that the structure of democracy generally favors left-wing politics since the "equality" of capitalist standardization is inherent in its makeup.

Ultimately the Category 1 futures listed in the chart above will be rendered impossible by the elites own greed and desire to enhance themselves. Get this, Mark Zuckerberg, (of all people), has invested in CRISPR–Cas9 technology. Universities at the very heart of the Cathedral in places like UC Berkeley are the ones pouring money into this technology. Your average college professor may be a regressive liberal and an eco-primitivist, but your average billionaire is a de facto transhumanist who wants to live forever.

A massive dysgenic collapse is the only thing that could make a White nationalist clown world possible. It seems one part of the Cathedral machine is pushing gene editing technology forward. Now why would that be?

The ultimate ace in the hole against regressive liberalism is a desktop 3D printing-style device that can perform cheap gene modification. Want to counteract dysgenics? Design that instead pouring your energy into racial conflict.

Throughout human history our species has encountered catastrophes. Many of these were brought on by technological innovations, but they were always solved with technology rather than politics. The very first catastrophe was the development of agriculture, which some scientists regard as The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race. Agriculture brought us into contact with animals and diseases. Large population concentrations enabled slavery and feudalism. Stationary villages made people targets of conquest and war. But all of these problems were solved with more technology. Most of the diseases we acquired were solved with vaccines and antibiotics. Capitalism destroyed feudalism, and like it or not, the spread of democracy helped put an end to chattel slavery. All the solutions were either physical or social technologies.

Solving the First Crisis created the Second Crisis; the crises of overpopulation, global warming, ocean acidification, and the "nutrient droop." The solution to overpopulation created a Third Crisis we might call "the madness crises," which we are are presently experiencing. Again, to quote myself;

"Sometime in the evolution of every species, the species develops the means for controlling reproduction. They develop birth control, abortion, or whatever.
"Any species that doesn't develop reproductive technology endures civilizational collapse as a result of massive overpopulation.
"So most species develop birth control.
"Because life is basically suffering, sane rational people chose not to have kids, while the insane ones continue to grind out babies.
"Slowly the species goes mad, as the nutcases out-reproduce the sane ones.
"Eventually it becomes impossible to get anything done. Every time you build a bridge some Islamic nutcase or eco-terrorist blows it up. People begin running over other people with cars. Politicians become insane and pathologically altruistic, letting in millions of crazy Muslims because, "muh ideology." Leaders refuse to to rational commonsense things because "reasons," and "SCIENCE." Speaking of science: science just becomes another word for religion. Bullshit concepts like "equality" and "social justice" command the public's attention instead of survival and common sense. Everyone becomes a gender weirdo practicing self-castration. Women refuse to make babies, and men refuse to be fathers. The whole world goes mad. Every politician becomes a priest. Every teacher becomes a priest. Every corporate leader become a cult leader. People worship their iPhones and it becomes impossible for anyone to think about anything logically because the species is literally going insane.
"Oh, right, this is the world we live in."
Anti-Puritan, August 2017

And you know what will solve this? CRISPR. And you know what CRISPR will do? It will create a Fourth Crisis. And what will the Fourth Crisis involve? The use of gene editing for nefarious purposes. But this is how a species develops: it creates one crises which is solves, but the solutions to that crisis generate the next one, and the next one, and so on. It may be counter intuitive, but the solution is never politics and always either technology or social technology. The goal is to solve your old crises without creating new ones. That means anticipating all the effects of every action in advance. Liberals can see the obvious consequences of gene modification with much more perspicuity than they see the dysgenic effects of their own immigration policies, welfare state, and globalization. Welfare states subsidizes the birth rates of the poor while taxing those of the middle class. Immigration brings in (mostly) lower IQ people. Birth control is dysgenic for the reasons just stated in the "madness hypothesis." They always see the flaws outside their own biases more clearly than their own.

But all of this is besides the point; the point is that the species escapes the problems of one crisis by innovating beyond its past. Yes, many innovations create crises. But this is like a shockwave on a atom bomb powered spacecraft. For the spacecraft to survive it must outrun its own shockwave. To slow down is to die, being incinerated by the heat of one's own past civilizational mistakes. Politics is always a retarded slowing of civilizational speed. The solution is faster, faster, faster. Always faster, and less politics.

And while going ever faster they need to be careful to not make any new catastrophic mistakes. They need to avoid those technologies and uses of technology that will fuck shit up. They need to dream, and write science fiction to anticipate the worst possible consequences of even the most benign inventions. The worst effects have been caused not by rockets or nukes, but by birth control, cell phones, the internet, and cars. Birth control destroyed healthy family formation, cell phones create social isolation, cars shred families by taking people away from their loves ones, the internet fractured society politically causing the present political madness. It is often the most routine technologies that have the most devastating outcomes.

The future consists of a simple rule: go faster and don't fuck up in the process.

Speaking of the future, let's transition into taking about that, and talking about how to advert the Fourth Crisis, the one where gene technology threatens to destroy the human race. This will seem a little disjointed, and the advice I give will come across as off the wall, but there is a good reason for it which I will explain.

1. Don't apply gene drives to human beings. Ban it worldwide.
2. Build a genetic archive.
3. Prohibit "chemical slaves," and other monstrosities.
3. Do develop CRISPR, and do use it to enhance intelligence and reduce the incidence of mental illness. You need it to offset the effects of birth control, immigration, and dysgenics.

Regarding the first point. Normally when a gene occurs its DNA it is inherited by the offspring according to typical patters. Gene drive technology alters this behavior.

"Gene drives overcome this by ensuring that a particular gene is transmitted to all of an individual’s offspring, rather than the usual half, even if that makes them less fit. The phenomenon has long been known to exist in nature, and Crispr provides an effective way to harness it. By encoding the Crispr editing system itself into an organism’s DNA, scientists can cause a desired edit to reoccur in each generation, “driving” the trait through the wild population."
NY Times, June 8th, 2016

The problem is the military weapons potential of the technology. Applied to humans it becomes a bio-weapon, thought it is doubtful that any democratic regime would be irresponsible enough to actually try that. Such an act would be interpreted as an act of war, and with the regular movement of people across borders there would be no way to contain contamination, and to ensure that only the targeted enemy was affected.

On the second point. Capitalism always tends towards the standardization of objects involved in the production process. It produces suburbs were all the houses are the same. It has standardized lumber sizes, shipping containers, etc. This is the "equality" embodied in capitalism. It likes to treat everything as if it is a standardized input. It has already destroyed local agriculture in favor of factory farming. When capitalism is applied to biological systems it produces genetic monocultures of millions of organisms that are fed antibiotics and confined in dark spaces maximum yield. It will try to slowly standardize the human race. Some standardization is good; the elimination of crime, the improvement of IQ, etc., will have beneficial effects. But a totally standardized human race will be more prone to plagues, and lack necessary forms of genetic diversity to solve problems. There is no way to anticipate all contingencies, but if you build an archive with millions, (billions would be better), fully sequenced human genomes then you can rebuild the human species from scratch should you make a crucial mistake, and you will make a mistake eventually. This is a better insurance policy than any law can give you.

On the third point. A "chemical slave" is a person who is genetically engineered to be dependent on a patented chemical that only one corporation can provide. There are many ways to enslave people like this. Be vigilant and make laws in advance of the arrival of the technology. Once it has been unleashed a financial lobby will exist to perpetuate it in congress. Take proactive steps to outlaw this behavior, and other such forms of engineered medical dependency before its arrival. Do not wait for it to happen. Do not allow cloning. Do not allow any human beings to be engineered with a deliberate medical handicap.

These dangers might seem to refute the notion that genomics is an acceptable technology. This interpretation would be a mistake. Past catastrophes make the development of CRISPR—Cas9 absolutely necessary. To understand why let us shift gears and go back to talking about the past. Specifically, allow us to talk about the Second Crisis, the crisis of overpopulation and its effects. It may be annoying that we alternate between talking about these crises in no particular order, but it is absolutely necessary to present our arguments in the order of the points rather than the sequential numbering of events.

From Wikipedia;

"More than 99 percent of all species, amounting to over five billion species,[1] that ever lived on Earth are estimated to be extinct.[2][3][4] Estimates on the number of Earth's current species range from 10 million to 14 million,[5] of which about 1.2 million have been documented and over 86 percent have not yet been described.
Wikipedia Article on Extinction

It is difficult to get an accurate estimate for the number of species on Earth.

"We are indeed experiencing the greatest wave of extinctions since the disappearance of the dinosaurs. Extinction rates are rising by a factor of up to 1,000 above natural rates. Every hour, three species disappear. Every day, up to 150 species are lost. Every year, between 18,000 and 55,000 species become extinct."
Ahmed Djoghlaf. Executive Secretary, United Nations Environment Programme

Let us run some simple calculations regarding the destruction of the biosphere. If there are 10 million species on Earth and 55,000 become extinct every year then it will take 181.81... years for every living thing to die.

If there are 14 million species on Earth and 18,000 go extinct every year then it will take 777.77... years for every species to go extinct.

If 86 percent of species have not been discovered and the current estimate of discovered species is 14 million, then there are 100 million total species. We can't detect extinction for species that we don't know exist, but if we assume that we can detect all extinctions, then we divide 100 million by 18,000 per year. Then the maximum lifespan of the Earth is 5,555.6 years. Meaning, in 5,500 years every living thing on Earth will be extinct because of us.

That's the most conservative calculation. It assumes we have detected every species extinction when we cannot even detect every species.

So the biosphere has between 182 and 5,500 years of life in it before everything in the world is dead; every plant, every tree, every bird, every mammal, every turtle, every whale, every elephant, etc.

No matter how we run the numbers we come to the conclusion that the biosphere, in its current state, has a limited lifespan. Of course I have already stated that the world's population will go down in the long-term, (in terms hundreds of years). Quote;
"when we look at declining birth rates what we are seeing is the beginning of the end of the bubble in White countries. That collapse in population is going to spread outward though the whole world."
The calculations above assume that the high rate of extinction remains high, and that ultimately assumes the human population remains large. Extinction rates may drop precipitously once population is in free fall. But we cannot count on this, and population decline is just a hypothesis. We need genomics so that we can invent living organisms faster than we destroy them. We need it so we can develop ways of geoengineering our planet. We need it so we can design plastic eating bacteria to consume the great garbage gyres of the world. We need it to solve ocean acidification, global warming, pollution, soil toxins, contaminants in our water supply, etc. We will eventually need it for terraforming Mars.

Last but not least; the problems of the future are going to be ever more complicated. The number of people in the population like Elon Musk is a function of the number of geniuses in society. The more geniuses the more "Elon Musk-type individuals." It may be hard to envision, but it is possible to have thousands of men like that walking the face of the Earth. If the general IQ is raised high enough through genetic engineering it vastly increases the number of super-geniuses on the planet. Man is is too stupid to live, and every social problem in the world can be solved by having enough humans with 3+ standard deviations of IQ over the present population. At IQ 150 virtually all social and economic problems vanish, either because a population of geniuses does not have them to begin with, or because they have the minds to solve them. We could live in a world with a thousand Elon Musks, and democracy functions better with high IQ voters anyway.

Not that I am endorsing democracy.

If genetic determinism is true then there is no genius of Western human intellect that cannot be packaged as a set of gene therapies for Asian consumption. Whoever develops this technology first will become the economic maters of those too squeamish and leftist to do so. It is an illusion to think that we even have a choice in the matter. Western societies could get caught with their pants down fighting a race war while the Chinese make steady progress towards world hegemony. Our society, our biosphere, and even our survival as a species ultimately depends on genomics advances. Racial neurosis is a retarded slapfight that will be entirely obviated by a future where changing your skin color is as easy as changing your pants, where race becomes a corporate brand identity.

Comrade Detective

Thursday, October 5, 2017

Thursday comedy

Why does this offend people? I think it's hilarious. And why doesn't it have more views?

"that feeling when you realize that banging your student will make you first lady of france"

Tuesday, October 3, 2017

I'm a huge optimist

I sound like a black piller, but my pessimism conceals a belief that everything in the universe is going to work out exactly how it is supposed to be, with zero exceptions.

You see, I don't think the universe is tragic or evil. I think it is justice. I think the cruel inhuman fascism of nature is fair. Many people read my blog and get depressed, but the actual message is cheerful and goes something like, "cheer up fellow, everyone who should be purged will be purged."

I am a cheerful fascist because everyone is getting exactly what they deserve. If you think that what I say is depressing, it is only because you are looking at life from the monkey point of view. Instead, think like me; look at life from the machine god point of view. Look at life like the obelisk below looks at it.

Capitalism is purging those who place status, ideology, and virtue signaling above having children. Capitalism is justice. Communist revolutions are purging communists. Justice. Venezuela is purging the very leftists who voted for socialism. Justice.

Low IQ blacks are killing each other.
The Germans that tried to conquer the world have killed off all their racists in war, and are now being invaded and cucked.
Feminists are dying off from low birth rates.
The offspring of rapists are being aborted. Soon there won't be any.
Pro-choice women are dying off.
Women who don't like sex or having children are dying off.
Democracy is imploding.
The internet is routing around censorship.
Africa is building towards collapse.
CRISPR is going to create genetically enhanced ubermensch.
AI is on its way.
Anarchy-enabling technologies get cheaper every day.
Generation zyklon is growing up.

From a certain utterly heartless viewpoint the universe is getting better every day.

There is no difference between what is and what ought to be. The Scottish philosopher David Hume was wrong. What is, is only what could ever be, is right, and is justice. If humans adapt to their circumstances that is great. If not, that is also great. Survival is good. Death is evil. It really is that simple. Whatever destroys itself was meant to be.

Am I wrong?

Plastic eating bacteria

It's a start

Monday, October 2, 2017

Society should always be at its lowest resting state

I have been doing a lot of thinking and have formulated an idea that societies can be divided into roughly two categories of organization; what one might call "high energy systems" and "low energy systems."

Businesses are high energy systems. They require a lot of effort to maintain and run, they produce vast amounts of products or services, and they operate with high competitiveness. Capitalism runs on these high energy businesses. It works because the pressure of competition with other firms fores them to maintain an extraordinary level of competence to survive. If you don't bring your A game you get demolished by the competition. Capitalism is naturally high energy. High energy is its equilibrium state. It is the point it naturally wants to revert to. Monopolies are low energy systems that can only exist with state backing.

In contrast to this, governments are low energy systems. Because they use violence and force they cannot be compelled to compete with each other in any nondestructive way. All competition between governments is war. They are low energy because they are natural monopolies with no real outside pressure. Government always wants to move towards monopoly; which is the exact opposite of capitalism where competition is the natural state. The only think governments do with reliable competence is wage war, and that is the only point on which they compete.

A monopoly naturally underperforms.
A competitive business must naturally outperform its competitors to survive.

The idea that governments should operate at a high state of competence is ludicrous. The more artificial the government the faster it fails. Government is one of those weird institutions that gains from laziness. A good government is so lazy it delegates nearly everything important thing to the private sector; road construction, legal enforcement, water, sewage, and power. A really good government is the laziest institution out there. It is a monarchy that licences its powers out to a bunch of private security firms. It runs a licensed private law society where the people purchase their own legal enforcement with vouchers. The government doesn't even make most laws; it just hands out the vouchers and allows the private sector to invent laws, arbitration companies, rights enforcement companies, etc. It gives permission to the private sector to build toll roads. It gives permission to build buildings. It may hand out vouchers for health care. It's just a source of licences and vouchers, and it collects taxes.

A good government is a king sitting on his ass while his minister hands out permission slips.

Monarchy is the laziest form of government. All it requires is the competence of a few dozen senior executives trained in libertarian economics, and foreign policy. A city-state monarchy needs maybe 20 executive strata employees, a few generals, ministers, etc., and a few thousand grunts. They can all be hired by looking for the resume with the highest qualifications, or promoting from within.

More artificial than this is oligarchy, which requires the competence and coordination of several thousand large key corporations that run the economy. They need to coordinate in order to prevent them from destroying the very economy they need to survive.

Timocracy requires even more competence. All the voters, (white men who own land), need to be competent and knowledgeable of the affairs of the state.

Democracy requires even more competence. All the voters need to be competent and study the issues.

Communism requires even more competence than democracy in order to work; every adult worker needs to be an expert in all critical matters of the state and his own organization.

The more that sovereign power is divided the more artificial the state must become. In a democracy you need to educate everyone, force everyone to study the issues, prevent educators from becoming partisan, self-serving, or corrupt, police dishonest politicians, control the franchise, etc., etc. It is a "hot" system, requiring a superhuman effort to achieve the same results that a Dubai sheik could achieve by waving his hand to give some corporation permission. What a hyperloop built?


Environmental impact studies, public debate, legal compliance, frivolous lawsuits, protests, activists, public hysteria, complaints of discrimination against poor residents where it will be built, complaints of racism, lobbying against it by environmentalists, more debate, more public hysteria, 25 years later it might be finished 50 times over budget.


*Sheik waves his hand*
5 years later it's built.

The level of competence a society is capable of is basically set by the genetics of who is going to run things. Higher competence societies require higher IQ populations. Communism *might* be possible in a world of superhuman IQs. It MIGHT be possible. Democracy might have worked when it was only white men who owned land running it; that is, when it was actually timocracy.

Artificial states are pushing against the limits of their own genetics. Inevitably they collapse from overwork. Government always tends toward its laziest possible condition, making reliance on it a choke point for everyone who wants to get anything done. The best states delegate the most.

Friday, September 29, 2017

The economics of loneliness, conformity, and outrage

When people conform it has a double effect of narrowing the rage of acceptable opinion. This in turn feeds back on itself. Since conformity narrows the rage of acceptable opinion, the act of conformity creates greater pressure for conformity. Thus, the right to say what you want behaves like a kind of diminishing good.

Most everyone conforms because of pressure to conform. Pressure is produced by cognitive misers disturbed by anything that forces them to think, and challenges their certainty. Certainty is experienced by the brain as pleasure, and uncertainty as pain. The ultimate origin of this need is evolution, like all human traits.

Since the freedom to nonconform is a diminishing good, it is scarce, producing a demand for nonconformity among people who like to nonconform.

A person can only experience the easing of their loneliness when they are allowed to confess, state their opinion, or otherwise express themselves. The ability to communicate is the easement of loneliness. We need to get it out.

When we conform to the demand that we conform, we harm the group for temporary gain. The individual essentially makes a trade-off where they gain social acceptance now in exchange for a narrowing of the Overton window of acceptable discourse. They gain acceptance, (which allows them to express themselves and ease their loneliness), but it costs the group some amount of nonconformity, which means that in later iterations of the game the range of acceptable ideas will be more narrow.

Conformity is a type of prisoner's dilemma engineered by cognitive misers and moral enforcers in the environment to police a domain of acceptable thought and behavior by punishing people who either think or behave in unacceptable or immoral ways.

There is also a vengeance aspect to this; and individual who has some desire or need that can never be fulfilled by the group because of its obscene or destructive nature can never express that idea. A through deviant will then attack the range of acceptable discourse in order to isolate others socially, to make others as isolated as him or herself. This is why some perverts act as subversives to social order.

Now one may ask the question; "why would someone vote for a man like Donald Trump?" Because by expanding the range of acceptable discourse the individual is then allowed to speak more freely. Since the ability to speak, is the ability to not feel lonely, any expansion of the range of acceptable discourse beyond the range of one's own thoughts, and encompassing those thoughts, has the effect of normalizing ones opinions and allowing one to speak. The left plays a game of narrowing the range of acceptable opinion in order to punish people with loneliness. This bleeds into outright censorship, interference with all-male spaces, and nuisance lawsuits to destroy the social networks of enemies. Some people are so terrified of thought, and the lack of certainty it brings, that they actually interpret unacceptable ideas as "evil" (othering them), and compulsively attack the threat.

Any narrowing of the range of acceptable opinion will cause loneliness in a section of the population, increasing the demand for the performance of outrage and unacceptable ideas. If meatspace is monopolized as a domain of "acceptable" opinion of narrow significance, then the internet will route around it. If the internet is censored, then samizdat (paper subversion) will provide the outlet. By definition, any constriction of the range of acceptable opinion will increase market demand for it. The absence of free speech always produces a black market demand for free speech, and increases the market demand for outrageous communication.

Friday, September 22, 2017

There is a new Unabomber miniseries

Musing on the end of the world

I have a tendency to conflate "negative" with truthful. Maybe this is just because I don't want to be disappointed by anyone. I figure that if my standards are low enough then no one can disappoint me. But this has a cost. If standards are low you never see the good in people. If standards are low people will tend to live down to them. If standards are low people detect your low standards and become shittier as a result. And if standards are low you are negative which repulses a lot of positive people that could be of benefit in your life. Low standards have and rather extreme cost, and negativity isn't cheep.

It's one of those things that only affects the people who care deeply about the world. You think you have a moral obligation to society, to be realistic and truthful no matter where it leads. You believe that it is your job to fix the problem of your country. You think you are required to care. Or at least I think that I am required to care.

Is this a "white thing?" or does it affect a small percentage of every population? This, compulsion to care? It that even an acceptable question to ask? What I do know is that it is a "Scientology thing." You are hammered relentlessly with the idea that the entire fate of the world is on your shoulders. Quite literally, you are indoctrinated to believe that if you do not "clear the planet" (save the world) everything will implode and your spiritual destiny will be fucked. Scientologists literally believe that they will have to come back to the world in their next life. If things are not fixed now you will have to endure them again. If the world decays, you will have to personally endure the decay — as a baby in your next life. If you die today you will be a 5 year old child in 5 years. Literally.

What a hell of a way to motivate people!

This is a really hyper version of Christian missionary zeal. But instead of working for the next life you are working for this world, and your own future existence. Reincarnation also factors into the political calculations of other cultures. Westerners may find it odd to realize that East Indians, Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese think like this. In the East some people pray to their ancestors. The belief in a future in this world connects them to the future. The veneration of ancestors connects them to the past. Consequently, there is nothing like the extreme disregard for history that exists in atheist progressivism. Progs act like the world began in AD 1963. It's a really incredible hubris. Asian societies have a much better conception of deep time than the west. When you grow up you are supposed to realize that there was a world before you existed, that your parents have their own lives and are their own people, that ancient wisdom has its uses even if no one quite understands why, and that there is "nothing new under the sun." —Ecclesiastes 1:9

"What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun."

Even the Bible supports the notion of nietzschean eternal recurrence. Or shall I say that Nietzsche supports the Bible, since it preceded him.

The alt-right/neoreaction shares this feature with my birth cult; the feature of caring what happens to the world; the feature of believing that YOU are responsible for it. This mentality is so familiar to me it comes across as obviously true. Since most of society seems narcissisticly self-absorbed in feelings ("that offends me!"), materialism (treat others like consumable products), and solipsism (choose your own gender, "lived experience," etc.), IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO SAVE THE WORLD is the alternative to the well of meaninglessness.

This idea of totality is shared by Islam. It is a symptom of our time that "totality" appears the only thing that stands against the breach, obstructing mental decay. Where did the "great chain of being" go? What happened to "clean living," the "protestant work ethic," "American optimism," "frontier spirit," and classical liberalism?

Perhaps totality only works because it places the individual at the center of things. After all, if its your job to save the world then you take the place of Jesus within the ideological pattern. That's narcissistic right? And so the one thing that resists decay is built on decay? Or am I missing something? It seems a true reversion to a non-decayed form would be a veneration of something outside of oneself. NOT sex, products, technology, the "singularity," flesh, self-expression, love, or any other idols. No, you have to go full God-worship to step outside your own solipsism. Maybe the trads are right.

Wednesday, September 20, 2017

Speaking with no filter and channeling Darth Vader

*Read this whole post in an ultra Darth Vader voice*

You're not equal and you never will be. You want tolerance? You can tolerate my fist in your ass. You like equality? I'll make you equally dead. Fuck you.

Rights are just a spook. Free will is just a spook. You are just a meat robot.

Civilization can never give you want because you — like all humans — are an insane monkey.

So you believe that politics should be morally consistent? Huh? WRONG! Consistency produces death, whether you are talking about libertarians letting people die in the gutter, communists killing millions, or Nazis liquidating Jews, wherever there is moral consistency there is mass murder. The universe is a fascist bitch and does not care about your weak, bitch nigger morals. Fuck you.

You want to live in the universe with principles? Wake up snowflake. Its a billion miles of radiation and hard vacuum in all direction. The sun is getting 1% hotter every 100 million years. Time is running out for your species. Your species is about to get air tight stuffed and penetrated by the hard radiation cock of the sun. Morality is for losers. The only rule in this fucking entropy hell is SURVIVAL. You either have the will to survive, or you don't. The universe is conspiring to kill you. Grow the fuck up.

Civilization is built on lies. Civilization is good. Therefore lies are good. Lies get weak lil' bitches to do the right thing. Lies get empires and nations to survive in spite of themselves. Most of you deserve to die from sheer fucking incompetence.

Even better: lies are the charity sociopaths with survival skills show the incompetent to keep them alive in spite of themselves. That's right, sociopaths keep your dumb ass alive.

Power is the opposite of equality. Democracy is a system of power. Democracy needs people to believe in equality to work. Therefore, democracy is a system of power, (inequality) that needs you to believe in equality in order to function, even though it cannot deliver equality. How's that for a mind job?

What else did you think it was? This is called "bait and switch," and it's awesome because human monkeys deserve nothing better.

All governments are systems of power. Power is unequal by nature. For power to exist there must be someone "above," and someone, "below." No system of government can eliminate power, and thus, no system of government can eliminate inequality. Anarchy doesn't give you equality because nothing can do that — you are not equal. Anarchy gives you rule by "Lord Humongous." All that happens is you get your weak lil' bitch ass head smashed in by a cannibal biker.

The more honest the government, the more people it has to murder to maintain order. Lies keep people alive. Lies are good for business. Lies are the basis of freedom.

The state can never give you what you want. Misery is genetic. If you were never miserable you would never eat, sleep, fuck, or have friends. Every miserable little impulse you have makes you reproduce, either directly or indirectly. That's why you have needs. And that is why you're miserable as all shit — because your needs are frustrated. You must always have needs, and they must always be frustrated. That is how evolution designed you, and why the species reproduces itself. It is your misery that drives you to do everything you do — dumb-ass!

The basic problem of civilization is to prevent people from destroying civilization by projecting their neurosis into it; using the government as the latrine of their desire — desires that can never be fulfilled because they are genetically insatiable. The state is not the appropriate shitpot for human monkey neurosis; that honor goes to religion.

A state religion is the most perfect vessel for capturing human shitpot neurosis. The government could never give you equality even if it tried, because you would simply move the goal post and become ever more petty and jealous. Your needs are genetic. They can never be fully satisfied by definition. The state is not here to pander to your fucking disease.

Civilization is a process of capturing human energy and turning it against itself to produce order. Faith, gladiatorial competitions, and spectacles are the most effective way to do that. Do not be disgusted by the spectacle; be disgusted by the fact that monkeys need the spectacle to prevent their madness from destroying society. The monkey is not mature or high agency enough to simply accept the reality of power, that it is never going away, that jackboots are eternal.

Educational brainwashing
Control of all news
Gladiatorial sports
State religion
Never ending war
Show trials and public executions
Nuremberg rallies
Hunger games

Pick your spectacle. Each is poisonous in its own way. You will need at least three to run a successful society. American Idol, famous boxing matches, and Super Bowls can also provide a service of spectacle to the state, but their infrequency means they cannot be relied upon.

The more spectacle and religion, the more safe civilization is against insurrection and collapse, and contrary to the mad rantings of anarchists there is nothing after the state — just another state.

The whole point of elections is not to represent the will of the people, but to test the effectiveness of propaganda. Why? It reduces costs lil' bitch. Elections need to matter so that the effectiveness of controlling public opinion can be accurately estimated, so that elites are forced to be competent at propaganda. The whole fucking point of the election is the elites, not the people.

Straight violence may be more honest, and some people may like honesty, but it reduces real rights. If the government has to do weekly riot control it has little incentive to behave benevolently. It is already spending too much on the security services, and one more murder is just a statistic.

As already stated, the whole point of controlling pubic perception is to pacify insane monkeys monkeys; who by definition, can never be satisfied.

Once they are pacified, the state can sit back and allow a certain amount of freedom. Freedom is the vacuum produced by order. That creates conformity? You don't like conformity? Well fuck you. It doesn't matter. The smart man is free to think whatever he wants. The dumb man never had a chance anyway. If you have agency you are already more free than others. If not? Then you never had a chance.

The one with the will-to-think thinks whatever he wants. The one without, thinks whatever he is told. Freedom makes itself real — or not at all.

Very few people have moral agency. Only men who know themselves have it, and self-knowledge is something almost everyone avoids. Order is produced through control of public opinion so that the few who have agency can have freedom, since they are the only ones who matter. Order is good because it gives freedom to the only people who deserve it.

Someone once said that you cannot fool all the people all the time. That is a fucking lie. We fool all the monkeys every day. That's the point of democracy. And anyone not fooled by democracy can rise to power within it. That's also the point, since their energy has to be captured by the state to prevent them from destroying society.

Democracy lets the wolf conceal his power among the sheep. This protects the wolf from danger and the sheep from reality, maximizing utility on both counts. Herd animal only need to THINK they are free; the predictors need to rule. All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than other animals. Freedom is slavery, war is peace, you know the rest.

The great project of civilization is not to make the word honest, or accomplish some enlightened task, but quarterly profits on the human farm. Civilization is a project of deception whose purpose is to keep insane monkeys from destroying themselves. It is monkey farming business, and the only way the livestock are equal is as meat.

The most convincing Matrix is the most effective civilization. Freedom is an illusion caused by your intelligence being below the threshold for noticing your cage. There are many cages; the Cathedral, one's own genetics, or nature's very own laws. The more intelligent the man, the more enslaved he feels, and the more aware of all the cages he becomes. It is a matrix within a matrix. The low IQ need illusions while the high IQ need power.

Freedom is an illusion because free will is an illusion. Those who can see do, and are already free. Those who cannot see won't, and cannot be helped. Those who can see, and try to overthrow the system are deluding themselves; the sheeple do not want to be saved, cannot handle the truth, and will attack the liberator. You are wasting your time trying to free people. They like their illusions, and hate you for telling the truth. Be honest, the truth makes you miserable, and you only desire to spread it because of your hateful envy of the ignorant bliss of others. The sheeple are blessed.

Sunday, September 17, 2017

Scientology, training routines, and the post-rationalization of abuse

In Scientology there is this thing called Training Routines, or TRs for short. It is like meditation but not. In the first training routine, (TR Zero), a person is trained to sit still with their eyes closed. They are not allowed to fidget, sneeze, giggle, laugh, scratch themselves, shift their weight around a lot, fart, or fall asleep. They have to sit quietly for hours on end without any nervous behaviors or falling asleep. It they so much as giggle, the whole exercise starts over again. This goes on and on and on day after day. If you fidget in any way the coach yells "flunk!" and you have to start over again.

The point is NOT to suppress your emotions. The point is to learn to be there comfortably.

After you have mastered TR-0 you move on to TR-1. TR-1 is the same thing, but with your eyes open. You sit there in a chair with your feet on the floor and LOOK at another person for hours on end. You are not allowed to fidget, squirm, giggle, laugh, or anything. It you do any of these things the "coach" yells "flunk!" and you have to start over. If you flunk too many time you have to go back and repeat the previous level.

Next comes TR-3: bull-bait. This is where things get interesting. Now your coach makes jokes, perverted remarks, reads from Alice in Wonderland, whatever. They can even joke about your mother. If your fidget in anyway, laugh, or get pissed off you flunk and have to start over. If you flunk too many times you have to repeat the previous level.

I went through all of this at the age of nine when I took the Children's Communication Course. As a result I had a batter ability to sit still and shut up than most adults.

Here's the point. TR-3 is basically conditioning a person to accept abuse. The TRs vastly raise the threshold for your fight-or-flight response so that nothing bothers you. It basically eliminates your fight-or-flight response. You need your fight-or-flight response. It tells you when you are about to get your ass beaten. It tells you when everyone hates you. It tells you when you need to stand up for yourself.

And there is a second reason.

Human beings post-rationalize their bad behavior. If someone does something bad to you they will rationalize their behavior by dehumanizing you. They will find fault in YOU so they don't feel so bad about what they have done to you. As a result, if you tolerate abuse you are unwittingly training the abuser to abuse you even more. You must stand up for yourself or the abuse will just continue. If other people see that you are willing to take abuse they might try to take advantage. Standing up for yourself is a matter of survival.

Whether L. Ron Hubbard knew this is what he was doing when he came up with TRs is anyone's guess. But the inevitable result of TRs is a population of people who take abuse passively without resistance, and a managerial culture where people with power relentlessly dehumanize their subordinates. Whether intended or not, the consequence of TRs is to eliminate the fight-or-flight response, and create a cycle of post-rationalization of abuse and dehumanization. This is exactly what we see in Scientology. The ruled passively accept the abuse of the rulers.

Never accept abuse. It trains your abuser to abuse you more.

This is also why you should not passively accept the dehumanization of White people. You should stand up for your race. Otherwise you are allowing future generations to be trained to abuse you with a cycle of post-rationalization.

Saturday, September 16, 2017

Fire is cool

Humans are monkeys
Monkeys love fire
Liberals love fire
Death is always fashionable
Life is work
Survival is boring
Conservatism is boring
Liberals are fashionable
And conservatives are boring
Accelerationism is also fashionable

Political correctness as a substitute Veblen good

I keep saying that there is nothing outside capitalism, except maybe North Korea. Democracy is a marketplace for the purchasing of laws. It is a subset of capitalist behavior. Dictatorships and oligarchies are essentially giant corporations that own countries. Democracies are markets, and all other countries are firms. China is just one big firm.

Cathedral PR says that tolerance is the highest virtue. In reality it is a moral value of capitalism. Tolerance is really indifference. Our tolerance is supposed to be love. In reality, by indulging you in your gender neurosis we are assisting in your destruction. Caring is too expensive and brings no profit/social status to the one who does it. Even worse, "intolerance" costs the one who does it status points as the person who is inhibited from acting out punishes the person who is inhibiting them. All of this follows from a pure logic of status profit maximization. The one acting out earns status though self-destruction. (The self-destruction of others is enjoyed as entertainment by other human monkeys). The entertained pay status points to the self-destroyer, who destroyers herself for status. (It's usually a White female who is destroying herself). The process is not inhibited because it would cost the surrounding people status points. Gender neurosis is a gift economy for trading on the self-destruction of others.

There is a double aspect to this. The gender neurosis is also a "shit test" for the surrounding males. (The only one that sterilizes the female tester). It is also an updated version of classic female attention whoring.

Veblen goods are goods that become more desired as they get more expensive. A Rolex is a Veblen good. The purpose of Veblen is to give status to the owner. These type of goods are consumed for their status rather than their usefulness. Social justice is a poor woman's substitute for Veblen goods. This also explains why the SJWs hate ostentatious displays of wealth, (like Trump).

Lots of people crave higher status, especially university educated people. But the oversupply of education means that a degree is not what it used to be. Hard work does not lead to the wealth necessary for acquiring Veblen goods. Political correctness is the poor college graduates substitute. The more one virtue signals the more it superficially appears that virtue signaling has value. But the more other people virtue signal the cheaper one's own virtue signaling becomes relative to theirs. The only way to maintain high status is to out-perform the ritual relative to others with an even greater display of ritual perfection. Status is acquired through superior ritual recitation of the words of political correctness.

Social justice is religious capitalism. Universities are now in the business of selling political perfection or the ritual because they can no longer sell higher status though direct knowledge transfer. People go to college to be trained to recite the ritual better than others.