Author Archive

Diversity Is A Swindle

Tuesday, May 23rd, 2017

As any confidence man will tell you, a good swindle involves convincing people that their illusions are real. They will meet you halfway, and your suggestion does not quite meet the level of a legal promise, so you can go free, unless the law finds that you made enough of an assurance that your scam was manipulative.

In the case of diversity, the promises were made, albeit by a mixture of media, politicians, academia and mass culture voices. We were told that we could avoid becoming Hitler, that people from different groups would live in peace and harmony, that our culture would be enriched, and that the days of race riots and ethnic violence were behind us.

The reality of the situation could not be much worse.

No matter what we do, we are accused of being Hitler, and the only salvation seems to be in opening our pocketbooks further and ceding more ground to the new dominant group of angry minorities and defensive, resentful Leftists. Diverse communities are less stable and more distrustful. Diverse children have more health problems. Our culture has descended to a lowest common denominator previously unreachable. Race riots, constant crime and ethnic violence, and now exciting terrorist fireworks have become a way of life. In the media and on campuses, white people are viewed as essentially the worst thing ever, while affirmative action attempts to exclude our young men from careers and business ownership.

Everything that was promised was a lie.

And so, a cultural wave has formed in the West, and it wants to get rid of all of the lies that have interrupted what normal and productive people do, which is to have full lives including interacting only with people like them, having a culture and being proud of who they are. Normal people do not need government except to enforce a few laws, build some roads, and defend the nation. Everything else they do for themselves.

Right now, many of these functional people are getting impatient. They elected Trump and voted for Brexit, and want the problem to go away quickly. Unfortunately for them, the many millions of little changes made to our governments during the past seventy years when the voters were apparently asleep are complicating the process. This will take time. But the attitudinal shift is here to stay, and shows signs of intensifying, not flagging as the Leftist media and Establishment hopes.

Diversity was a swindle that delivered the exact opposite of what was promised. It is not just one problem, but all the problems at once. African-American crime and race riots, Hispanic obliteration of any jobs below corporate cube slave, Asians cheating on their income taxes, Muslims taking over old churches and plotting jihad… each of these alone would be acceptable. But all of diversity is causing all of problems all the time. Even worse, it causes more profound problems. America no longer looks or feels like America; the land of the 1980s and 1950s is gone, and people feel like strangers in the towns where their great-great-grandfathers lived. Europe has lost its recognizable culture as well. Since diversity removes social standards held in common, everywhere distrust and atomization are spreading, and people feel alienated, hopeless and existentially miserable.

Then we add up the huge bill, as we look and see that all of our governments are in debt and broke but still trying to add more social welfare programs. We realize diversity has none of the promised positives, many deep negatives, and lots of constant disadvantages that are causing a “death of a thousand cuts” to our daily lives as functional people. We were told we could add new ethnic groups and they would bring cultural enrichment, great restaurants — for some reason, every Leftist mentions this in every discussion about diversity — and new ways of learning and living. None of those have manifested, at least not in good ways. Instead, we are in a constant slow grinding decay as each group pulls our nations in different directions from within, effectively dissolving them.

To the people of the West, the scam has been exposed and we consider it fraudulent. This means that it was based on false or deceptive promises, and as we all know, any contract based on fraud is null and void. The people of the West do not mind calling this in. They are familiar with the law and its principles, and the spirit of the law says that we were lied to and bullied into accepting this fraudulent notion known as diversity, and so we want to tear up the contract.

That means that all of the laws applying to diversity are no longer law, in our view. They were made using fraudulent assertions and so they are null and void. Birthright citizenship? Fraudulent, now defunct. Affirmative action? A fraud through and through, so not enforceable. Immigration laws like Hart-Celler? Based on false pretenses, sold with lies, and therefore invalidated. In our view, all of these laws and the legal status of aliens among us were frauds, and so we consider them dissolved. This means we want these people repatriated and we do not care what rules the Left waves at our faces because we know those laws no longer apply.

The Left are fundamentally bullies. They like to make nonsensical statements, then band together in a group and punish anyone who does not agree. Then they look around and claim that these changes are a done deal, and since anyone who dares speak up will be beaten down, no one speaks up. However, this does not mean we assent, and when given a chance, we will exit the contract because it was based on lies and coercion. In the world of honest dealing in which functional people exist, a fraudulent contract invalidates all legal standing of everything that was based upon it, as well. With our faith in diversity failing and our recognition that it was a lie, we view every rule, law and program based upon diversity to no longer have any legal weight or political value.

Diversity never works. It took a long time for the people of the West to catch on, but now that we have, a cultural wave has seized our societies which recognizes that diversity is over. We see that it was a scam, and we have abandoned any faith in that fraud, and now want to remove the damage it has caused and go back to the last point where things worked, which was pre-diversity. We are over it. We know that we were deceived, and we are emboldened to call the deception the fraud that it was, and in our new knowledge, we want the mess cleaned up by tomorrow.

As Europe Struggles Under Diversity, Japan Thrives Through Homogeneity

Tuesday, May 23rd, 2017

While invited third world terrorists — brought in to pay for the social welfare benefits that European socialist states require, in theory — continue their rampage of car attacks, suicide bombs and violent sexual assaults across Europe, Japan is enjoy the benefits of being a homogeneous society:

Japan’s cluttered streets are not always pretty but they are remarkably safe. Crime rates have been falling for 13 years. The murder rate of 0.3 per 100,000 people is among the lowest in the world; in America it is almost 4 (see chart). A single gun slaying was recorded for the whole of 2015. Even yakuza gangsters, once a potent criminal force, have been weakened by tougher laws and old age.

…Rates of recidivism are low and a great deal of effort is made to keep young offenders out of the prison system; police work with parents to keep young people on the straight and narrow. Adults are incarcerated at a far lower rate than in most rich countries: 45 per 100,000, compared with 146 in Britain and 666 in the United States.

…Japan is almost crime-free not thanks to the police, says Yoshihiro Yasuda, a campaigning lawyer, but because people police themselves.

The Western press likes to talk up demographic decline in Japan, but never mentions the benefits of having a single culture genetically hard-coded into the population. Leftists fear nationalism because it establishes standards for behavior and social order, both of which impede the greedy anarchic individualism that the Leftist desires and forms into collectives to enforce.

Positive Views Of Slavery And Evolution

Tuesday, May 23rd, 2017

Olatunji Jesutomisin writes of the advantages of slavery in a provocative essay on the struggles of Africa:

You didn’t have ships when they sailed in on their ships into the African coast. You didn’t have anything comparable to defend against or valuable to trade with when they brought their guns and trinkets to your shores and sold it to your African lords in exchange for slaves. Africa is what African Americans would be if not for slavery. So where is this a example of massive development and wealth that the white man was supposed to have stifled and stole from you.

Get your priorities right sir. The problems of the African whether in Africa or America go deeper than something a white man stole. We are spoiled and lazy. We have never been forced out of life and death necessity to create value for ourselves — think electricity for warmth, trains, cars and ships for transportation, industrial level farming for sustainable food supply. The very things that define an industrialised and wealth creating society.

Slavery became the gift that kept on giving. The hill we would die on. And to this day we keep asserting that simply because we survived slavery and segregation that we deserved some hidden wealth without having to produce it. As if we are the only group who have had to go through massive suffering. We have a saying in Africa that we are a lucky continent in that we would literally all be wiped off if we had the earthquakes and hurricanes that frequently hit the northern hemisphere.

The whole thing is worth reading. In addition, it makes sense to mention that slaves sold were “excess population” — captives of war, political enemies, prisoners — who had no value, and by being bought and sold, were given value so that there was a reason to spare their lives. Then they were given a place in a thriving society and cradle-to-grave care.

Relentless realist nationalists like myself will note that slavery, like keeping the American Indians on the continent, was a form of diversity and in itself was detestable. Failing to rehome the freed slaves after the War Of Northern Aggression was also a mistake. However, we can correct this mistake now, and give Africa people with new learning who can give it a chance to thrive on its own terms.

What Is Civilization?

Tuesday, May 23rd, 2017

In the modern era, every term has been redefined to mean what is comfortable for those in control, namely the herd of individualistic voters who want to believe human individuals do no wrong. In reality, human individuals are usually wrong, and we need to restrain ourselves or face decline. But first, we must learn what terms mean.

We use the term “civilization” in many contexts. Someone who just arrived from a very rural area might see toilets, air conditioning and electricity as civilization. A person fleeing a war zone may arrive in a town with relatively non-corrupt police and think that is civilization. For others, it means a good symphony or excellent restaurants.

At its root, civilization is a simple thing: people learning to cooperate toward a goal that benefits everyone unequally.

If my nephew and his friends run away to the hills, as they have threatened to do, and start growing and hunting their own food and making their own tools and shelter, they will have created a civilization. It may not be a long-lasting one, but nonetheless, they will have learned to work together.

The primary form of civilization involves trade, military-style hierarchy, familial social order, shared customs and cuisine, and a founding myth or philosophy. With that, every group can get started. The founding myth explains the purpose of this civilization. It can be as simple as “we wanted to get away from others, so we are on our own to form the best civilization we can.”

Over the years, people have tampered with the formula for civilization. In most cases, this leads to the same result: a sudden rise in power followed by a slow collapse into irrelevance, leaving behind a third world ruin. Every civilization somehow confuses its internal mechanisms of power with achieving its goals, loses sight of what holds it together, and dissolves in a flurry of special interests and individualism.

Bruce Charlton laments the fact that civilization reaches its apex and after that, becomes a form of mental and physical slavery:

I certainly appreciate the benefits of civilisation (indeed I once wrote a book-length ‘hymn’ to the advantages of the post-industrial revolution); but ultimately the degree of compulsion and distortion of human life (by specialization, partiality, repetition – the need to treat the world as raw material; the need to treat people as ‘human resources'[)]… is probably not possible to justify; and – really – we shouldn’t even try.

Perhaps it was acceptable and spiritually advantageous for Man to have a period of this kind of thinking, knowing, being… but any such advantages were exhausted long before the end of the 19th century. Since then we have just been digging deeper and deeper into error and desolation.

At some point, every tool becomes a quest in itself. Money, which is meant to convey freedom, becomes an obligation; work, which should produce results, is done instead for the sake of itself; power, which means the ability to do good things, becomes a replacement for those good things. Inversion occurs when we replace purpose with our short-term desires and defensive need to feel justified in our choices.

This shows us that civilization — like capitalism, authority, sex, reading, eating or any other powerful human activity — can reverse our thinking. Instead of trying to achieve the goal, we do what is familiar, and then justify whatever goal it achieves as what we intended. The cart comes before the horse, the tail wags the dog, the kingdom is lost for a twopenny nail.

To the reflective mind, this means that we need civilization to a certain degree in order to avoid tipping over to the downward part of a ballistic trajectory. In addition, that civilization needs a purpose which is qualitative, or able to be achieved in relative degrees with an immutable core but never can be realized in full.

If the coming fashwave has any core idea, it is the rejection of equality, which makes us the goal instead of that form of transcendental purpose which allows us to have civilization without being consumed by it. Much as stomach acid enables us to live but would kill us if it escaped the stomach, civilization is essential to human life but must be guarded — and disciplined — carefully.

You Cannot Afford Democracy

Tuesday, May 23rd, 2017

You think you can afford it, but it will bury you. Democracy is what happens when selfish people gather in a group so that they will not be held accountable for their actions. “There’s strength in numbers” — ever hear that one? How do you punish a mob? You do not, and so people form little groups to enable individualists to act out without blame: gangs, cults, cliques, mobs, herds, crowds, stampedes.

Democracy is just a formalized form of the mob. By writing down rules and laws, they think they have legitimized what is basically anti-leadership and anti-values which we pretend are somehow morally superior because everyone gets an (insignificant) voice. The truth of democracy is that whatever is simplest and most distracting — bread and circuses — wins, and everyone loses.

This week shows us the peak of Liberal democracy heading into the downfall as California proves how entitlement programs will swallow up society itself because costs are infinite while resources are not:

It would cost $400 billion to remake California’s health insurance marketplace and create a publicly funded universal heath care system, according to a state financial analysis released Monday.

California would have to find an additional $200 billion per year, including in new tax revenues, to create a so-called “single-payer” system, the analysis by the Senate Appropriations Committee found. The estimate assumes the state would retain the existing $200 billion in local, state and federal funding it currently receives to offset the total $400 billion price tag.

This is a state with a $171 billion budget in total, and now they will need to find another $200 billion in addition to their current outlays for healthcare, and what feds and local communities throw in.

If you want a cosmic metaphor, healthcare is a black hole. In that way, it is like all socialist programs: society has a few really productive members and a whole lot of “me too” type people, and when you enact wealth transfer from the productive in order to destroy a caste structure to society, you kill the goose that laid golden eggs and your society starves.

Just like in Venezuela. Cuba. The Soviet Union. Post-Revolutionary France. Cambodia. Zimbabwe. North Korea. Socialism is not so much a “command economy” as it is a demand that wealth be distributed to the Crowd, which discriminates against those who are more productive, and as a result, creates a society of minimal contributors that cannot sustain itself.

In any group of humans, “let’s divide up what we have equally” is the most popular topic of conversation, and in the same group, one in twenty people produce most of that wealth. When you tell them that they are in effect slaves to the rest and must work to support them, they make a simple calculus: produce, and give up my life for idiots, or join the line of expectant mouths and have time to myself?

Socialism does not work. Egalitarianism does not work for the same reason: when you divide up power, those who know better stop contributing, and then idiots rule you. Looking around at politics in the US/EU, it is clear that the end result of liberal democracy is permanent leadership by indistinguishable idiots. Who really can tell the difference between Francois Hollande and Immanuel Macron, or Hillary Clinton and Angela Merkel, or Theresa May and Tony Blair?

As the world is reeling from the notice that in California, one government program will cost more than twice the entire government budget, Donald Trump has launched an ambitious attack on the entitlement spending integral to democracy, which since the 1930s has taken over most of the US budget:

President Donald Trump would dramatically reduce the U.S. government’s role in society with $3.6 trillion in spending cuts over the next 10 years in a budget plan that shrinks the safety net for the poor, recent college graduates and farmers.

…The plan would slash Medicaid payments, increase monthly student loan payments and cut food stamps and agricultural subsidies, each backed by powerful constituencies.

…He’s also proposing severe cuts to foreign aid and tighter eligibility for tax cuts that benefit the working poor. He also seeks cuts in food stamps and disability insurance.

Trump’s budget recognizes the truth: entitlements and civil rights programs make government into a huge powerful monster, and if we cut those, people will become self-reliant and stop stealing from each other under the guise of tax and spend and wealth redistribution. This rewards the productive and forces the unproductive to either become useful or face Darwinian consequences.

With the Trump budget, the Republicans have become the party of science once again, instead of denying Darwinism like the Left.

If government slashed its entitlement programs, it would eliminate up to 60% of its budget.

Looking further, Trump wants to downsize the bureaucracy and provide incentives for people to leave behind dependency programs like entitlements:

…would cut domestic agencies by 10 percent in 2018 and by 40 percent in 2027…

…Medicaid cuts of $610 billion would come alongside $250 billion savings — partly fueled by limiting expanded Medicaid — from repealing Obamacare. Food stamps would be cut by $193 billion.

Federal workers would see much less generous retirement benefits under the budget. Eliminating cost-of-living adjustments for retirees would save $42 billion while increasing required employee retirement contributions would save $72 billion. And the budget would save $72 billion through cuts to Social Security Disability Insurance.

Part of what keeps the system going is that it rewards people for mere participation. This creates legions of bureaucrats and clerks who expect to work easy jobs and then retire with massive benefits. Once that practice is legitimized, those in private industry will expect the same, and demand government pay for it. They will rob tomorrow to pay for today.

This mentality — participation, subsidies, entitlements, benefits — is like a path through a forest. Once you start going down the path, it is hard to see where it branched off, so you make the best of the path, but as time passes, you go further down it. Until you repudiate the decision to take the path in the first place, the path itself becomes your purpose, and you cannot change.

Democracy always goes down this path. Democracy starts with the idea of equality. Once that seems to work, people assume that whatever the herd votes for is good. At that point, the herd realizes that it can write checks on tomorrow’s account with impunity, and begins to award itself little freebies here and there.

At first, this is always done in the name of “the poor,” referring to a group of natural selection failures who seem to never do well no matter what is done for them. This group is a perfect symbol because all of the armchair voters imagine themselves impoverished, and react emotionally by approving whatever is done in the name of the poor.

But democracy is not finished. It finds other groups to add to the list, because each time it comes up with a justification that voters will knee-jerk approve, its power grows, as does the wealth going to all those bureaucrats, politicians, clerks and public servants. The trough is full, and they will belly up and feast until beaten back.

To pay for all this, government introduces little methods of making wealth. New taxes, especially on products that not everyone uses. Speeding tickets, fines, service fees. Once these are on the books, they expand every few years when someone notices that government cannot pay its bills. The take always expands, and people work less efficiently in retaliation.

Eventually this creates the system in which we find ourselves: ruled by fools, chasing after symbolic victories, ignoring real problems and living in a Potemkin economy where most jobs are make-work to keep the tax-and-spend empire going, in which we claim to be an important economy because we give people free money and they spend it on plastic junk to amuse themselves before they toss it in the landfill.

In such a system, people have two choices: they can either signal that they are good obedient citizens by repeating the dogma heaped on them, or they can resist it and risk becoming social outcasts. This creates a system that is a more effective form of totalitarianism because it is invisible and enforced by the citizens on each other.

Do not say you were not warned! If the crisis of democracy was not apparent to you from the way ancient Athens just dropped out of history, then consider the lesson of the French Revolution: claiming to be unjustly impoverished, “we the people” revolted and made themselves more impoverished, but not before killing off the smartest and best ten percent of their society, dropping the average IQ by ten points.

That event, called The Terror, seems to be in history books but is explained as an unfortunate necessity for the People’s Victory. In our modern era, we have made The Terror into a daily event, where instead of killing people we simply destroy the best among us with boring jobs, ugly repetitive life, disgusting mass culture, millions of petit tyrants in middle management and endless red tape.

Anyone with any brains would bail out, and most of them have, which conveniently clears the field for those who are insane, neurotic or simply rationalizing the decline — that first option above of being good obedient citizens — to take over and do even more damage. The death spiral has been reached and there is no way out.

The West has killed itself with democracy, which was its response to instability. Instead of working toward the difficult solution of fixing root problems, people opted instead to divide up the wealth and live easy on the momentum of the past.

Democracy will not stop terrorism. People who succeed in democracy do so by being obedient, which means repeating egalitarian dogma no matter what happens. They will not divide us. Muh freedom. Muh rights. Muh diversity. All of these things stem from egalitarianism, or the idea that all people “should” be equal, so we will make it so with government force, taxes and welfare.

Any who deviate from the dogma are punished, and only those who approve of the dogma succeed in the system, so most people just go along with the forced march to doom. They cleverly blame everyone but themselves, since if they were to reject the dogma, they might give up some of what they have today in exchange for a better tomorrow. We cannot have that; we would feel like we bought losing lottery tickets!

This leads us to the current day, where anything resembling common sense is demonized for being disobedient to the dogma of equality, and Godwin’s law is always enforced:

Katie Hopkins has been reported to police for calling for a “final solution” following the terror attack at Manchester Arena.

The Mail Online columnist swiftly deleted the tweet, which echoed the Nazi term for the Holocaust, amid widespread condemnation for the “despicable” post.

The herd objects to anyone who fails to affirm the dogma of our time. They are terrified of change, but more than that, they resent and hate any suggestion that herd rule has failed us. Even though they acknowledge that they have the power of the vote, they will always blame someone else for their own bad decisions. This is how it goes in a democracy.

The fact is that we have not left behind our glorious Simian heritage at all. As William S. Burroughs once wrote:

Spot of bother there. Scalpel fight with a colleague in the operating room. And my baboon assistant jumped on the patient and tore him to pieces. Baboons always attack the weakest party in an altercation. Quite right too. We must never forget our glorious simian heritage.

In human tribes, we always attack the person who is socially weakest, because we are creatures of the Word and not the body entirely. Whoever offers up an opinion that unsettles the group is immediately attacked; civilization was possible while this urge was suppressed by maintaining a focus on transcendental goals, but now, we have settled back into monkey dynamics.

Democracy always shifts Leftward, but before that point, unless stopped by those who have more wisdom, civilization always shifts Leftward because people want to believe that they are immune to criticism, and equality delivers on that promise. If we are all equal, no one can be seen as wrong and therefore lose status in the group.

In this way, the principle behind a monkey troupe is the same as behind a union, gang, cult, clique or other “dark organization” within a larger organization. They value stability of the group over getting anything done. When someone acts in any way that is smarter than what everyone else is doing, they attack.

This is the built-in self-destruct feature on human civilizations. Unless humans are actively oppressed, or at least the majority of them are, they form a riot mob and tear down everything good. This is because good things insult them, while mediocrity makes them feel comfortable because it does not reveal them to be lower.

As a result, when you see Leftists or other Crowdist groups out there, keep in mind that they want to see you die. They want to tear down everything good, beautiful and true. They want to sabotage anything more than subsistence, third-world-style living. They will try to destroy you unless you force them to heel. They are driven by a mixture of envy, fear, scapegoating, resentment, narcissism and opportunism.

Human living becomes simple when you view us as a biological species that behaves like other animals. If we want to be more than a third world ruin, we must install and perpetuate a social order based on putting the intelligent and good in charge, and taking care of everyone else by restraining their power. This is what it means to be anti-egalitarian.

Regarding the situation at hand, we will continue to have terrorism until we get rid of democracy because the herd is actually just fine with terrorism. To them, it is like a lottery: we all played, and they won by not dying, and in the meantime, they are going to virtue signal and attention whore about how great diversity is because it asserts their desired order of mediocrity winning over excellence.

Democracy wants you dead, at least if you are above the only true “equality” that exists, which is a lack of any exceptional ability. Inside every human being lurks the potential for this kind of vindictive and petty behavior. And so, despite knowing that it means more terrorism, voters go into those booths and pull the levers for what gratifies this impulse to destroy. And so it goes, over and over again.

Q: What Is The Goal Of Politics? A: The Organic Nation

Tuesday, May 23rd, 2017

Politics fools us because it erects a false target within the political system itself. That way, instead of trying to do what is right, we do what the system allows.

That includes the voters, who require every topic to be distilled to a simplistic level and converted into an emotional contest. They like anger, but they also love a soft-hearted story. And so, soon all ideas converge on the same few concepts that voters like and politicians can implement within the system.

One of the ways politics fools us is by having us direct our attention toward government instead of nation, and then confuses the concept of nation to mean the nation-state — the institutional entity joined by economic and political systems — instead of the intersection of founding heritage, culture and values that created the nation.

We can find our way around this question by looking into the related query of what “we” should possess as the object of our purpose:

From Donald Trump’s inauguration address:

At the center of this movement is a crucial conviction: that a nation exists to serve its citizens.

I wonder how many politicians in the political class believe anything at all like that? Hardly any, I imagine.

For most of them, as far as I can see, government is just a gravy train for their own enrichment. And that was what Trump was accusing most of the people standing behind him on the Capitol of having done: enrich themselves.

And if any of those people actually had any deep political convictions, it’s quite likely that they would have been almost exactly the opposite of Trump’s: that the citizens exist to serve the nation, that the citizens must be bent to serve the national will.

By “nation,” Trump means government and citizens united, which means that citizens compromise their interests with those of government. That leads to the question of what their interests are.

Most people think in exclusively short-term bursts, and so they define their interests as a retirement plan, a solid job, lower taxes and more benefits (a paradoxical combination) and a nebulous sense of having “good feelings” about the direction the nation is taking. That last need runs contrary to all the ones previous to it.

A nation does not find itself on a positive direction through the acts of government. It also will not find itself moving in a positive way through paying attention to what “most people” claim to “want.” These things are at odds just like lower taxes and higher benefits. No group of voters has ever seen their way out of this paradox.

The above is correct in its assessment of politicians: they are paid actors who deliver warm fuzzy feelings to voters in exchange for access to nearly limitless wealth. Even if they do not personally own the wealth directly, they can create lucrative consulting firms, build up portfolios through those, and, once out of office, pay themselves massive salaries for life.

But this leads us back to the question of what we should be acting toward, and whether it is a false target or a realistic goal.

There are three basic options:

  1. Self. In nature, all things are self-interested. In the human world, we depend on civilization. Thus self-interest is bound up with civilization, much as it is with our neighbors and intangibles, like life being good, beautiful and true. However, many live only for the self, and choose as their goals those things which reward them at the expense of others, the organic nation, government, society, nature, history, heritage, future…
  2. Group. We can live for the group, meaning that we sacrifice ourselves for the benefit of others. However, the group is bound with an intangible thing which is the order and organization that holds the group together and keeps nurturing it toward health. By nature, all things decay. Something must counteract that, and this is usually a mélange of culture, laws and leadership.
  3. Organic. In any list, one thing is the hardest to define, and this is it. The organic nation is the intersection of past, present and future in which the individual and group both work toward the perpetuation of an idea through its physical counterpart, namely “a people” and the order and organization that holds them together and nurtures them toward health.

Modern society is very happy if you choose options one or two. These present no challenge to authority; the selfish person is easily manipulated, and those who give themselves to the group effectively neutralize themselves, presenting no challenge to power and no brakes on the decline.

The organic nation on the other hand requires us to think of a goal higher than self, government or group; it implicitly requires us to think of the long term view, maybe in the range of ten thousand years, and to view civilization through a qualitatively filter, namely asking ourselves how good, beautiful and true everything is.

Those who are born to the Right instinctively think of the organic whole for which they sacrifice, realizing that they are holding back the decay of time and yet, by doing so, find themselves in a state of mind more eternal than temporal, and in this they find great meaning.

Voters Are To Blame For The Manchester Terror Attacks

Monday, May 22nd, 2017

Get ready for the weepy speeches. Prepare to change your Facebook profile picture. Haul out that piano and play “Imagine” in the burnt ruins. Feel the sense of righteousness surge through your veins as you proclaim allegiance to democracy, equality, liberty, diversity, freedom and tolerance in the face of this senseless violence. You know the drill; it is routine now.

Another day, another terrorist attack. We should have no sympathy for the victims: they voted for this. Every election where we have a chance to cut back on the root causes of terrorism — namely democracy, equality, liberty, diversity, freedom and tolerance — the voters bow their round heads and go in there and affirm the same insanity time and again.

So some of them got blown up. Cry me a river; they are morons who supported this stuff. Certainly they have someone they want to scapegoat for their failing. They will blame politicians, the media, academia, anyone at all. They want to dodge responsibility for the fact that they are voters in a democracy, and that it was up to them to fix this.

That is how democracy works. We categorize political systems by who makes the decisions. In a democracy, it is the voters. If a politician is bad, it is up to the voters to signal enough discontent to get a challenger, and then they must support this person. But they do not. Voters have no responsibility, as they see it, so they pick safe options like Merkel, Macron, Obama and May.

People like that will never change the system. Their interest is in keeping government nice and steady, always growing just a bit and expanding its power. To do that, it needs some justification like diversity. And so they are never going to cut back on immigration, set up social standards, or otherwise reverse the decline. They profit from the decline.

As long as you keep voting for these establishment candidates, there will be more terror attacks. In fact, if you allow democracy in your land, it eventually shifts into this dead-end cycle where it doubles down on its bad ideas and always drifts Leftward, because going Leftward gives government an excuse to expand its power.

The dead lying in Manchester had their chance. Maybe not them specifically; maybe their parents could have changed this. But they did not. And now, like explosions follow pulling the pin on a hand grenade, a terrorist attack has happened. Islamists have never lied to us. They have always said they come to conquer, first with the womb and then with the gun. We knew the nature of this beast.

We also know how democracy and diversity work out. Democracy divides a society into many special interest groups, and eventually just atomized citizens drifting around, with nothing really important on their minds. Diversity replaces the majority — through a process known as soft genocide — with first many warring groups, then a mixed-race beige cultureless herd.

None of these things are mysteries. None of them require all that much thinking to grasp. And yet, the voters go in there every time and pull the lever for evil. Forgive me if I feel nothing for them when that decision (literally) blows up in their faces.

Exhaustion Is A Cornerstone Of Modernity

Monday, May 22nd, 2017

Clever humans! So fascinated with their own abilities, they created cities that — had they been thinking more clearly — they would have realized are deathtraps.

By treating the world like a material substrate to be acted on by the human machine, we made ourselves into machines. We live repetitive lives doing repeated tasks. We exist surrounded by evidence of others and their constant messages. Politics, socializing and the economy more resemble acts of terror holding us in suspense than sustaining forces that make us think life is stable or good.

On top of this, sleep itself is threatened, and has been for centuries by our air pollution. Perhaps the dazed and broken analytical thinking of modern people arises from the air pollution that deprives us of sleep:

Householders in known pollution hotspots were almost 60 per cent more likely to suffer sleep deprivation over a five-year period compared with those breathing the cleanest air, according to research.

Academics said that the damage caused to the respiratory system and central nervous system — commonly associated with exposure to pollution — had a big impact on sleep.

If we had to describe our modern world, we might use the adjective toxic. We welter in the waste of others, including their memetic waste through advertising, contentless conversation, televisions on every corner, noise and dust. Personalities, made unstable by a lack of place, also become toxic.

And now we see that we are the walking dead: people saturated in air pollution, unable to sleep, with our brains degenerating as cars, factories, planes and furnaces blast us with their smoke. Lobotomized, we are too exhausted and bewildered to notice that our situation is fatal, so we soldier on, like drunks in the fog just trying to find our way home.

What Is The Core Of Western Civilization?

Monday, May 22nd, 2017

As we embark on the lengthy process of declaring that Western Civilization went down a bad path and crashed, and realize that we must reboot it from the ashes, the question arises as to what the core of Western Civilization is.

Some, like Richard Spencer, identify this as “conquest,” or an extension of the Nietzschean duality of sensitivity and aggression. That makes sense. Others claim is the church, individuality, liberty or some other proxy for the good. Spencer is closer than those.

Around here, we refer to the core of the West as reflection, or the ability to mirror the outsider world in our inner selves, and to contemplate it with the transcendental purpose of understanding its ways and order so that we can adapt to them, and then improve our lot “qualitatively” by improving quality, goodness and accuracy in our thinking.

Another factor might be a transcendental frequently mentioned and commonly misunderstood, beauty. This means that life is made not on a utilitarian level, but to celebrate and enhance the goodness of life in everyday experience. These are things which lift us up and make us appreciate life in a renewed sensation that it might be holy or at least incomparable.

Roger Scruton writes in Country And Townhouse about the necessity of transcendental beauty:

Aged 14, quite by accident, I discovered the soul of Mozart. It was soon obvious to me that Mozart’s music contained a kind of knowledge that could never be obtained from a psychology textbook or even from a prayer book or sacred text. I made this knowledge my own – even though I could not tell you what it is, but only play it to you on the piano. But this knowledge guides me through life. Were the ability to respond to Mozart to be forgotten, I know that the world would be a much poorer place. We would have lost one avenue to the ‘knowledge of ends’. Those that have this knowledge will do whatever they can to perpetuate it. They will teach it to their children; they will put pressure on schools and universities to do the same. They will do this not for their own good but for the common good, knowing that something necessary to human life is at stake.

…As long as places and times exist where this can be done there is hope in the world. Wordsworth wrote that ‘getting and spending, we lay waste our powers’. But when we stand back from the mill of consumption and look on the turbulent waters with the eye of an artist, we are rested in our hearts and our powers are restored. People who do this are the friends of order in a world of entropy, for they see, in the depths of the swirling pool, the still point where meaning lies. They cannot describe what they see, and that is why the highest forms of art exist – not to describe the meaning, but to reveal it, as the loveliness of the world was revealed on that first imagined Sabbath.

The core of the West is found in this reflective outlook: to see the beauty of the world, to bring it to an apex of quality, and then to let it infuse us and guide us in all of our tasks, both exceptional and mundane.

Evil Hubristic Crowdists Gaslight Your Sense Of Inner Knowledge

Monday, May 22nd, 2017

What is hubris, which the Greeks identified as the great evil of humankind? It is “me first”: a tendency to put oneself above one’s rightful station in the social order. This can be men pretending to be gods, proles pretending to be kings, or people who care nothing for social order or consequences in reality and claw their way above others from some mild sociopathic impulse.

Crowdists, or those who unite individualism and collectivism into a force designed to legitimize hubris, gaslight us constantly by creating the impression that what “everyone knows” contradicts our inner knowledge, found in deep in the self in the intuition, aesthetics and moral wisdom nature has fashioned for us. These forms of knowledge are unique in that they are qualitative, or accept reality as it is but aim for the best possible versions of it, and while found in the inner self are directed toward the world which is seen as a continuity between physical reality, intuitions and any thought-like or metaphysical reality.

You can witness this gaslighting — a reference to an Alfred Hitchcock film in which a character deftly manipulates another by making events seem to be the opposite of how they were observed — whenever the Leftist-fueled media talks about what “intelligent” people know:

The researchers examined different models that had been proposed for explaining why believers are allegedly less intelligent. It selected and revised evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa’s Savanna-IQ Principle. This suggests that what we do and believe has its foundation in the environment of our ancestors.

The researchers concluded that religion is an evolved instinct, while intelligence “involves rising above our instincts.” After all, intelligence and all that comes with it does often involve controlling our instincts in order to allow our minds to reach rational conclusions.

Indeed, as Hawking told Spain’s El Mundo last year: “Before we understand science, it is natural to believe that God created the universe. But now science offers a more convincing explanation.”

This is the ultimate in human hubris: researchers telling us that those who see more than they do are in fact wrong, and that “intelligence” arises by denying any logical facts which require more sensitivity to perceive. In other words, dumb it down to what the herd thinks is right so we can all stop worrying about any duty to know reality or moral right. Anarchy is saved!

Intelligence cannot be made into a mass-produced, identical creation as this article implies. But what they can do is a classic egalitarian technique: reduce everyone to a level called “equal” by claiming that since all of us do not understand what the most perceptive among us are going on about, those things are simply not real and we are smarter for excluding that wisdom.

As usual, this is an inversion, or the tendency of a group (herd, crowd, mob, gang, cult, clique) to make a term mean the opposite of what it was intended to mean by eliminating the parts that do not apply equally to the group. In that sense, intelligence is reduced to ignorance, beauty to utilitarianism, and justice to treating people of unequal contribution as if they were equal.

You can see this inversion pathology at work in this herd analysis of another idea familiar to readers here, in which having the mental ability to notice differences becomes not higher ability but lower in the wisdom of the crowd:

In a scholarly journal called Social Bias: Prejudice, Stereotyping, and Discrimination written by Sabrina Keene, Keene explains social bias, prejudice, and stereotyping and how it affects the lives of individuals from day to day. She explains that:

Individuals who do not fall victim to bias are often able to use such circumstances as motivating factors. Individuals are often afraid of what they do not know. The best defense against ignorance is knowledge. Education and familiarization with the object of a prejudice or stereotype allows the truth to be discovered and applied. Being educated allows an individual the ability to embrace and accept differences in other, and aids in bringing society together.

As Keene perfectly explains, a person who falls victim to stereotypes and prejudice is likely to feel defeated and have negative connotations towards others. People of color that experience color-blind racism everyday can either fall victim or use this newly found ignorance to their advantage. When people begin to familiarize themselves with racial discrimination toward people of color, even if it doesn’t apply to them personally, there are able to gain a newly found sympathy for the individual.

Once a social bias is destroyed, society gets one step closer to eliminating racial discrimination due to less people spreading the negative ideals and more people being educated on the effects of discrimination and why they can cause people of color to feel anger toward those trying to suppress them.

Read this one in inverse: the real social bias is the notion that pleases everyone, which is that we are all the same. This allows individualists to bond together into a group united on the selfish notion that we do not need standards, purpose or values in common, but we can all do whatever we want and society should foot the bill.

Diversity, or racial egalitarianism, emerged from egalitarian thought in the early days of the French Revolution. It lives on through the idea of “workers of the world unite,” which is a handy way of saying that if you discard any allegiance but to a paycheck, a crowd of great power can be formed to seize wealth and authority from those who are naturally more competent at using them.

In both of these circumstances, Leftist propagandists identify thinking that requires inner knowledge and contemplation of reality as ignorant, and replace it with their own dogma, essentially arguing against depth of knowledge in favor of having the “correct” knowledge according to egalitarianism.