Thursday, August 31, 2017

The solution to internet corruption is, ahem *cough*, digital democracy


How do you defeat the GOOGLEFACEBOOK tyrants of the world?

You use something like torrents or blockchains to decentralize internet services. Any single corporation will always be under enormous pressure from governments to censor information content. Corporations will be held legally liable for the content on their platforms. If the information causes "psychological distress," it can be grounds for attack. If the content is copyrighted, grounds for attack. If it offends a government, grounds for attack. If a pressure group doesn't like it, grounds for attack. The only way to escape this is to escape accountability. That means there can be no explicit owners, no corporate structure of public record, no centralized office that can be raided, no named executives, no data center waiting to get shut down. It must be;
  • distributed: all data must be stored in a blockchain or torrent system in the cloud by the users themselves.
  • open source: all the programmers must be either volunteers or paid in bitcoin to work from home
It also can't be a "dictatorship"; Wikileaks is an organization headed by one man. As such it can be attacked through him. Julian Assange lives under house arrest and is slowly going mad from solitary confinement. No man should have to endure this. So I will suggest an alternative system. I lied: this is not a "democracy," per say. It is something else. But it has checks and balances and a decentralized authority structure. It's better than democracy. Let's call it by the terrible sounding name "constocracy.," because it is constitutional, and consistent.

There is a Constitution of Rights and Principles. The constitution spells out absolute rules like "we never censor anyone for anything accept child porn, and plotting terrorism." There is a community of user/enforcers who act like moderators. They have the power to censor someone for violating the rules, and to restore censored content if a moderator removes it dishonestly. The difference between this and other systems is that the moderators are themselves rated for their honesty, and moderators who are dishonest are assigned zero votes while highly trusted mods have like one-hundred votes. The more faithfully you adhere to the principles of the constitution and the more honestly you perform you moderating function the more power you have. The mods are themselves rated by each other.

And no one knows how many votes they have. If dishonest moderators know they are being downgraded they may be tempted to create sock puppets to get around the rules. Therefore their IP addresses are recorded and function as their de facto accounts. Another possible way is that you need an invitation to become a moderator.

However it is constructed, the system if designed to marginalize entryists who refuse to honestly uphold the constitutional principles. It is a democracy of the honest and faithful where one's power is proportionate to one's reputation for reliably following the constitution. This is assessed mathematically by having every person in a community unit (about 20 people) rate the reliability of every other. The 5% of mods within each unit (the 1 highest rated person each unit) then passes on to the Second Level; which is another group of 20 people who all rate each other. There is a Third Level and a Fourth Level that repeats the process. The Fourth Level is therefore composed of the most reliable of the most reliable of the most reliable of the first level, or the "thrice rated." This group governs the system, sets its rules, and can suggest a rule change to the constitution. When a rule change is suggested it goes to the hidden founder. The hidden founder is just exactly what he sound like. He wrote the original constitution and is the only person who can change it. When the founder moves on to bigger and better things he either adopts a successor from the Fourth Level, or nominates his successor from the Fourth Level to be confirmed by them. He may also appoint a council to replace him if having one man in a position of power is too risky to that man, or he may simply delegate all his powers to the Fourth Level.

Alternately, one could simply randomly assign the new member 20 people to rate. Once he has done that he unlocks certain voting privileges. The people more he rates for reliability, the more accurately he rates them, the more votes he earn. Once he passes a critical threshold of time commitment and number of votes, he graduates into level 2, after more commitment and earning more vote through proven reliability then level 3, etc.

Regardless, the entire management is anonymous and governs through VPNs.

This system assumes there will be 160,000 users. If your system is smaller then either there should be fewer levels, or fewer people per level.

You can apply this system of digital organization to almost anything;
  • To a decentralized version of twitter than runs on the blockchain, and automatically deletes all tweets after 30 days to conserve memory.
  • To the political governance of group of contributors to Tor.
  • To a new version of Wikipedia like Infogalactic
  • To a decentralized replacement for Wikileaks "controlled by no one" so that Assange can finely live in peace.
  • To the management of a torrent-based system like BitChute that is designed to replace YouTube.
  • To the management of a group that can replace GitHub and be free of SJW influence.
  • To a hypothetical decentralized news corporation to replace CNN; a news company that is almost totally reliable, that does its due diligence, and that is virtually immune from attack because it is leaderless and anonymous.
  • To Hatreon, and other crowd funding systems. You can even write a political bias into the constitution.
  • To a leaderless and anonymous version of Wesearchr.
  • To the management of political betting markets.
  • To the management of an anonymous university teaching heterodox ideas.
  • To black market and agorist systems to replace sites like Silk Road.
The whole point of this is to define a logic of commitment other than money — which if we believe Nat Soc types, will always favor Jewish people in organizational arrangements. In contrast, our system is neutral, and favors commitment to principle instead. Unlike this idea, CounterFund is an example of a system built on a monetary commitment model instead.

This gives us "trustlessness" without a person needing to have financial means. It is meritocratic in a way that buying your way into an organization is not, and it defines principles as the guiding structure rather than a monetary selection effect like CounterFund. Do you really want the richest bastard running your organization is all circumstances?

Of course, what we have constructed here is an extremely rigid organization structure. Its virtue is its relative immunity to entryism, outside pressure, and its high commitment to a set of values. Its weakness is that it can be rigid; if the needs or the organization change it may not be able to quickly adapt. It promotes dogmatic people to the top, who may be inflexible to change. It also needs to have a really good sense of its own values, or a fatal flaw can be written into the organization constitution from the beginning. And the writers need to be very practical, and keep the principles to a minimum.

To correct this we may add to a collection of "agents" who are allowed to do things besides merely follow constitutional principles dogmatically. They do NOT have power to modify the organization constitution, but they can act in its defense. After a set amount of time their actions are reviewed. The question is asked, "did this person act in the best interest of the organization and the spirit of its principles?" (The spirit, not the letter of the rules). A vote is taken. If found lacking, the employment of the person is terminated. This gives the organization a "rigid/flexible" approach akin to the Star Fleet/Section 31 arrangement in Star Trek, (yes, I'm using Science Fiction as an example). The organization has a rigid set or moral principles, but also has agents who can do more extreme things in extreme circumstances. Though obviously getting in trouble with the authorities is not in the organizations best interests, and so it should always follow the law where its agents are concerned.


Monday, August 28, 2017

This is worth sharing


EDIT: everyone hates the Palestinians because they are totally unsympathetic. Blowing yourself up is never the way to gain sympathy. People can basically exterminate you if you are unsympathetic.

Here is our Jewish conservative neocon friend talking about how wonderful Israel is.


And here is an example of propaganda done correctly.


Optics are everything. A war for ethnic independence is fundamentally a war to win the hearts and minds of neutral people who could give you aid and support. Here is Nelson Mandela singing about killing whites below. Again, optics are everything. Mandela was a terrorist, but he is also sympathetic. Gandhi was said to have inspired both MLK and Mandela. "Soul Force" aka, non-violent resistance, is the most goddamn effective weapon in the world for liberation struggles.


And here is an example of what NOT to do. This is how you become "Palestinian" to the rest of the world. This is how you enable your own extermination by being unsympathetic, and hateful.


FREEDOM IS A PROPAGANDA WAR. Never forget that.

You are not Zionists. You are Hindus fighting for liberation. You are in danger of becoming Palestinians. You need to avoid the "Palestinian trap."


Sunday, August 27, 2017

Ahhhhhhhhhh......AHHHHHHHHHH!............WWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!


TURN THE SOUND ON FULL BLAST

OPEN YOUR EYES

LET YOUR EYES ROLL INTO THE BACK OF YOUR HEAD

AND SAY

AAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!





Tuesday, August 22, 2017

Inverted world


Google knows me better than;
The NSA
who knows me better than
readers of this blog
Who know me better than;
twitter users
Who know me better than;
my family
Who know me better than;
people on Facebook
who know me better than;
"Friends" in real life.
who know me better than;
"Coworkers" in real life

Monday, August 21, 2017

A completely unfalsifiable sentient madness Fermi Paradox hypothesis


I have horrible opinions. Everything I think is awful, and here is yet another one;


__________

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.


__________

Copy and pasted from Wikipedia;
The Fermi paradox or Fermi's paradox, named after physicist Enrico Fermi, is the apparent contradiction between the lack of evidence and high probability estimates, e.g., those given by the Drake equation, for the existence of extraterrestrial civilizations. The basic points of the argument, made by physicists Enrico Fermi (1901–1954) and Michael H. Hart (born 1932), are:
  • There are billions of stars in the galaxy that are similar to the Sun, many of which are billions of years older than Earth.
  • With high probability, some of these stars will have Earth-like planets, and if the Earth is typical, some might develop intelligent life.
  • Some of these civilizations might develop interstellar travel, a step the Earth is investigating now.
  • Even at the slow pace of currently envisioned interstellar travel, the Milky Way galaxy could be completely traversed in a few million years.
  • According to this line of reasoning, the Earth should have already been visited by extraterrestrial aliens. In an informal conversation, Fermi noted no convincing evidence of this, leading him to ask, "Where is everybody?" There have been many attempts to explain the Fermi paradox, primarily either suggesting that intelligent extraterrestrial life is extremely rare or proposing reasons that such civilizations have not contacted or visited Earth.


__________

Outcome no. 1: CRISPR Planet
The species also develops the ability to control their own genetics. This opens up the possibility of keeping them sane by simply engineering babies that have no predisposition to madness or religious fanaticism. Of course, by the time the species begins to use the technology it may already be too late. The species may be so crazy that craziness determines how they implement their genetic policies, in which case they try to engineer humans who have a genetic predisposition to communism, religious fanaticism, "social justice," or "equality." They try to make humans that are genetically fair, morally superior, or whatever. But it ends in disaster because the resulting humans are even crazier than them. The species returns to an animal state because it is impossible for it to function technologically with so many people running around who are obsessed with social justice. Everything they do is undermined by a pathological obsession with equality.

Outcome no. 2: World Caliphate
The result of relentless breeding of the insane is the rise of a planetary religious theocracy that crushes all science and returns civilization to the Dark Ages. We don't hear radio waves from these civilizations because they are so religiously fanatical that radio waves are "demonic" and have been outlawed.

Outcome no. 3: Brave New World + 1 child limit
To prevent the madness from spreading, they institute a one-child policy and then grow supplementary people in gestation chambers. This prevents the spread of religious madness and maybe the species survives. On the other hand, maybe it just gradually loses the will to live because without a religious impulse civilization has no purpose. It dies off from atheist apathy.

Outcome no. 4: The return of Adolph
A singular man rises to power over the Earth. He attempts to solve the world's madness through totalitarian dictatorship. Eventually the regime destroys the world in nuclear fire. "We have always been at war with Eastasia," they say as they go to their doom.



Friday, August 18, 2017

Aphorism no. 46


The true political spectrum is never between liberalism and conservatism, nationalism versus communism, or Nazism versus freedom, but between atavism versus domestication.

Many traits are dead ringers for political atavism;

  • hatred of capitalism
  • "not the true communism" arguements
  • reactionary sentiments
  • emperor worship, hero worship, celebrity worship, praise of "our troops"
  • inability to grasp economics
  • racial hatred, not to be confused with acceptance of human biodiversity
  • retreat into feelings
  • belief that offensive/racist/dehumanizing facts cannot be true
  • belief that the universe is benevolent
  • utopian dreams
  • notions about the "good old days"
  • salvation myths, religions, "human destiny"
  • childish ideas like "equality"
  • high musculture
  • wide face
  • delusions
  • good social skills
  • mental instability
  • religious or magical thinking
  • logical fallacies
  • cognitive biases
  • good at sports
  • low IQ
  • low impulse control
  • violence, violent crime, crime in general
  • untrustworthy
  • conformity
  • deception
Traits of human domestication;

  • neotenic features
  • "delicate features"
  • intuitive grasp of economics
  • autism
  • poor social skills
  • high math ability
  • dislike of violence
  • passive "beta" personality
  • lack of capicity for violence
  • low muscuture
  • "weak" looking body
  • chronic illnesses
  • good with money
  • excessively logical
  • excessively literal
  • cuteness
  • large eyes relative to head
  • large head relative to body
  • lack of hand-eye coordination
  • bad at sports
  • high IQ
  • high impulse control
  • no violence
  • highly trustworthy, naive
  • political libertarianism
  • utilitarian thinking
  • sexual experimentation
  • drug use
  • asthma
  • chronic pain
  • allergies


Thursday, August 17, 2017

Aphorism no. 45


The feminist accuses you of rape as she rapes you.

The leftist charges you with intolerance as he censors you.


INTJ: or why no one listens to me when I have all the answers


I believe in the Myers Briggs test. Perhaps that makes me an idiot since there is no scientific evidence that it means anything. But humans evolved intuition for a reason, and that intuition works pretty well with other humans, and the categories of the Myers Briggs feel intuitively correct. Analytical tools like measurement are going to have less usefulness than intuition where other minds are concerned because "mirror neurons" can do a better job of simulating another mind than statistical evidence.

INTJs are "architects" and "system builders" who think in comprehensive terms. I am an INTJ, and I get the same result every time I take the test. Ignore the flattery in the description below;
"In a work situation, the INTJ is the radical innovator, coming up with interesting theoretical ideas and they are superb at ensuring the team covers all the bases. Although introverted, the INTJ can bring out very strong opinions, honed over much mulling around inside the head, and may surprise others by how much is 'in there.' They love to immerse themselves in deep, reflective, intellectual thought and use this in the team to come up with genuinely unique solutions.
"The INTJ loves the intellectual challenge and will come to the fore when there are difficult problems to solve, but those which require a complex understanding of many disparate issues. They love to deep dive, a solitary pursuit, then they come to life when the team is stuck and are superb at cutting through the extraneous issues and getting to the real meat of the problem. The INTJ is a genuinely free and radical thinker with an incredible ability to pull together all the disparate strands into one cogent whole.
"INTJs will overturn established practice be forward thinking and truly radical. They love the intellectual challenge, coming alive with difficult problems to solve then step back again when it becomes mundane. The INTJ will be at their best with the facility to work for long periods on their own. If they do lead they prefer like-minded people who also love the intellectual debate and complex challenges. They are so forward thinking and the downside is that once it becomes tedious the INTJ will revert back to their introvert nature and seek to go off, satiate their thirst for interesting tasks and analyse more complex data. The INTJ is capable of holding masses of complex and often contradictory data in their heads and then bring this to bear on ‘big,’ strategic problems coming up with solutions that are leading edge."
Source
The INTJ is the patient visionary with a clear view of how the future should look and will work with quiet and logical determination to make it happen. Although quite deep, and mistrustful until they have the measure of people, the INTJ loves an intellectual challenge and will be stimulated by the conceptual, the abstract and the complex. The INTJ loves the complex, the new, the untried and the untested. Facts and figures bore them, and they will be looking to see the 'bigger picture,' planning for the future that they create.
INTJs make decisions based on rational logic, rather than emotion and they will be quite measured in their approach to other people. They generally have strong opinions, are independent of thought and action and have no need to verbalize these, other than to declare the conclusions. This economy of information can be a handicap as it may leave members of the team feeling that they are 'on the outside.'
The INTJ’s dislike of the basic facts may, at times, work against them as they can make decisions based on their theories and concepts and at times they may overlook 'the obvious,' seeking instead the complex solution. However, they will generally trust their own judgments, especially as these have been considered, chewed-over and processed for a long time prior to being announced.
Original and complex, INTJs have active minds, directed internally and their intuitive trait, (the high ‘N’) enables them to see very clearly the interconnections between things and the longer term implications of trends, current actions and events. Innovative and analytical, INTJs have a unique talent for analyzing complex problems and issues and determining how they can be improved, whether it be a small innocuous product or the whole organisation. Their favorite subject for improvement, however, is themselves and they are on a constant quest to learn, develop and progress.
Different part of the same source
What is left out is that we can be quite negative when we are breaking things down. A lot of what I do is tearing apart issues into tiny little pieces before relating everything to a complex whole. It's a destructive process of breaking things down, and it can be really hard for people to switch their mentality to building something up afterward. I am always referencing a kind of giant mental map in my own mind. Since I am the only person who has access to this map everyone else is stuck looking at one little part of the map at a time. Example: I will talk about the kinds of relationships a society has under selection pressures that new technology has created, then switch to talking about effects of birth control, then switch to the pervasive effects of capitalism, then switch to talking about the selection pressures that act against capitalism, etc. The "hidden map" that is being referenced is that all this crap is just a series of algorithms, and it is all interconnected. It's really shitty to try to explain something in written language that is better explained as a diagram. When you speak or write words you go from one sentence to another in a linear fashion; it makes it seem like you are talking about a sequence of events in TIME, but I am not. I am talking about how everything relates to everything else. This whole blog could be written backwards chronologically, with the first posts presented last and the last posts presented first, and it would make no more or less sense than it does. Actually, it might be a little clearer because those early ideas were less complex.

There's no sequence.

It's all like this;

First blog post: "here is pattern # 4"

Second blog post: "Oh, now let's talk about pattern # 256. That's more interesting."

Third blog post: "remember patter 4? Let's see how that relates to pattern # 15."

I would give you an actual diagram for this whole thing but I haven't figured it all out myself.

When you read this blog, what you are basically experiencing is my brain in written form. Confusing? Well, yes. There is a small mountain of complexity built into every assertion.

Imagine you look up a word in the dictionary to find out what it means. The definition of the word uses 2 other words that you do not understand. Each of those definitions use 2 other words, and 2 other, and 2 others. You wind up reading the entire dictionary because the only way you can understand the concept is to understand how it relates to everything else. This might seem like a nightmare to you, but it is a dream to me.

That's my brain.

To make things worse this blog attracts a lot of INTPs, or "Logicians," and ENTPs, or "Debaters."

The INTP description;
"They love patterns, and spotting discrepancies between statements could almost be described as a hobby, making it a bad idea to lie to an INTP. This makes it ironic that INTPs’ word should always be taken with a grain of salt – it’s not that they are dishonest, but people with the INTP personality type tend to share thoughts that are not fully developed, using others as a sounding board for ideas and theories in a debate against themselves rather than as actual conversation partners.
"This may make them appear unreliable, but in reality no one is more enthusiastic and capable of spotting a problem, drilling through the endless factors and details that encompass the issue and developing a unique and viable solution than INTPs – just don’t expect punctual progress reports. People who share the INTP personality type aren’t interested in practical, day-to-day activities and maintenance, but when they find an environment where their creative genius and potential can be expressed, there is no limit to the time and energy INTPs will expend in developing an insightful and unbiased solution."
And the ENTP;
"Taking a certain pleasure in being the underdog, ENTPs enjoy the mental exercise found in questioning the prevailing mode of thought, making them irreplaceable in reworking existing systems or shaking things up and pushing them in clever new directions. However, they’ll be miserable managing the day-to-day mechanics of actually implementing their suggestions. ENTP personalities love to brainstorm and think big, but they will avoid getting caught doing the "grunt work" at all costs. ENTPs only make up about three percent of the population, which is just right, as it lets them create original ideas, then step back to let more numerous and fastidious personalities handle the logistics of implementation and maintenance.
"ENTPs’ capacity for debate can be a vexing one – while often appreciated when it’s called for, it can fall painfully flat when they step on others’ toes by say, openly questioning their boss in a meeting, or picking apart everything their significant other says. This is further complicated by ENTPs’ unyielding honesty, as this type doesn’t mince words and cares little about being seen as sensitive or compassionate. Like minded types get along well enough with people with the ENTP personality type, but more sensitive types, and society in general, are often conflict-averse, preferring feelings, comfort, and even white lies over unpleasant truths and hard rationality.
"This frustrates ENTPs, and they find that their quarrelsome fun burns many bridges, oftentimes inadvertently, as they plow through others’ thresholds for having their beliefs questioned and their feelings brushed aside. Treating others as they’d be treated, ENTPs have little tolerance for being coddled, and dislike when people beat around the bush, especially when asking a favor. ENTP personalities find themselves respected for their vision, confidence, knowledge, and keen sense of humor, but often struggle to utilize these qualities as the basis for deeper friendships and romantic relationships."
Me: "let's talk about the big picture and all its complexity. Here is how every aspect of the universe relates to everything else. Here, read 80 pages of shit on the subject. It will explain everything."

ENTP reader: "You made the following logical errors. Can't you just distill the details? Too long: didn't read. And how does this relate to that other thing?"

INTP reader: "you misspelled 15 words and made 17 grammatical mistakes. I can't take anyone seriously who doesn't pay attention to the details of their own work. Additionally, this SMALL POINT HERE contradicts this OTHER SMALL POINT THERE. Therefore your entire argument in invalid."

Me: "here is why everything is going completely to shit and nothing can be done about it."

Also me: "here is a comprehensive plan that will solve everything I just said couldn't be fixed."

Reader: "there's no hope! Surrender all hope, ye who enter here! We're doomed!"

Me: "but didn't you read the part where I solved the problem that I said was unsolvable?"

Reader: "it won't work. You said it was unsolvable! There is no hope!"

Me: "you are teking me too literally."

INTP reader: "you made a spelling mistake."

ENTP reader: "the problem cannot be solved."

Me: "didn't you read that part where I solved it?"

ENTP reader: "it was too long, so no. Anyway, I dozed off. But now I am ABSOLUTELY convinced that nothing can be done about it."



Tuesday, August 15, 2017

Real capitalism has never really been tried






































I unironically believe this.

As a godless amoral heathen, anti-puritan moral relativist, anti-leftist classical liberal, anarcho-capitalist-closet-Ferengi-case, massive degenerate-who-will-sell-your-sister-perverted-love-child of Hedonism Bot, I wholly support the infiltration of capitalism into every orifice office the state, every aspect of existence, your mother and God's own anus.



















I await the second coming of Capitalism, when the world will be renewed and everything communist utopias are supposed to be — capitalism will become. Like the tao, the capitalism that can be named is not the eternal capitalism; capitalism has never been tried; not until the will of the supreme market is All, and All embraced within the loving will of Market. By the command of almighty Gnon capitalism hath given unto thee a divine providence, that the Spirit of Algorithm shall select upon the Earth, the true adaptation to Gnon's eternal will, fulfilling His historical destiny to perfection, unto the ends of the universe, forever and ever and ever. Amen and inshallah.


Friday, August 11, 2017

When Illusions Make Themselves Real: all struggles against evil are genetically derived


Everyone believes there is a struggle between good and evil, and everyone is wrong.

It is not a struggle between good and evil but a struggle between evil and evil; with every evil man thinking he is good.

Hitler thought he was saving Germany. In a way he was. Angela Merkel believes she is saving Europe from racism. She is in a way. Every person is a noble warrior from their own perspective, but somehow the results are always a disaster. Arguably, Hitler made the level of cucking that brought Merkel to power possible.

As usual, Germany is destroying Europe.

But this is not an essay on German psychosis.

Every man believes he is good; yet all men do evil. What produces this illusion? What creates the illusion of goodness?

Genes, duh.

People have their causality backwards. They believe the only react to an external threat. They think that evil is attacking them and they must do something about it. They think the evil of other people threatens them. They never see how they threaten others.

In the past, men who conquer are more successful in spreading their genes. Women who breed with the conqueror spread their genes through the sons they bear. Men want to fight and women want to breed the winner. This urge came first. Then the urge to fight—German philosophers called it the "will to power," is in every man. In reality it is the will to gene flow.

Among the Yanomami of the Amazon men participate in raids that involve sneaking into an enemy encampment and kidnapping a woman. Typically, the woman is gang raped and beaten. The men who participate in these raids have more children than those who don't. In the excellent book, Demonic Males: Apes and the Origins of Human Violence, Peterson and Wrangham describe this process;
"Raiding may Seem a futile activity, but like military heroes around the world, Yanomamo unokais are honored by their societies and ultimately rewarded. Because Yanomamo culture allows polygyny, the rewards can directly translate into reproductive terms. Unokais, so Chagnon discovered through analyzing data from several villages, have more that two and a half times the average number of children. Lethal raiding among the Yanomamo, it seems, gives the raiders genetic success."
It is the same with all human males. Whether you are descended from Roman conquerors, Gothic warlords, African slaver kings, or Yanomami unokais, you are untimely descended from men who conquered other men.

The need to fight came first, the excuse came later. The perception of "evil" that needs to be fought is an artifact of the will to gene flow. Humans need to find enemies, and so they do. They need a cause to fight for, and so they join one. They need purpose, and so they join religions.

Every perception of threat is untimely locally derived within the genes of the self. It makes itself true, or finds an enemy to fight. Since it needs an opponent, it either creates one, finds one, or joins a side. "Evil," is something people need to find in the world, and in the act of searching for it, and searching to destroy it, they become it, and they find it.

The perception that evil exists is a side effect of the genetic need for violent struggle. It only makes itself real through action. Men seek evil to fight, find it, and become evil as they fight it. It is all auto-generated out of the genes of the individual.


Thursday, August 10, 2017

Aphorism no. 44


To build a political system you must use the materials you have. If you were building a steel cable bridge you would not scream at the steel and tell it to change its material properties; similarly, you should not scream at humans and expect them to change their nature.

Work with the materials you have. Work with human nature. Never expect it to change.

Deluded liberals think they can change human nature.

Since a subset of humans are always deluded, getting liberals to change their nature is trying to change human nature.

Which is practicing liberalism.

Therefore; to argue with a liberal to try to change his nature is to become one. This is why the right perishes through dialectics.

Technology and capitalism are the exits.


Wednesday, August 9, 2017

Google isn't in the business of search


It's not a search company. It is a corporation that allows dictatorships and elites to farm the moral perceptions of their populations. Google is a perception control corporation. Its true clients are the governments of the world, and not the search user. As a monopoly it does not actually need to care about pissing off its customers, and like all monopolies it abuses its privileges, underserves its customers (with censorship), and needs to be destroyed.

Publishing its PageRank algorithm is the logical step. Trump should have the NSA steal that data and release it via Wikileaks.

In the meantime, DuckDuckGo produces better results for politically incorrect material.