Archive for the ‘Lifestyle’ Category

Modernity Seeks To Pollute Art In Order To Control Your Minds

Monday, May 22nd, 2017

Netflix released an update to the classic Anne of Green Gables franchise. As with all modern retellings, this one is heavy on crypto-ideology and light on literary merit. Lauren Hanson at The Federalist gives this slab of mentally sluggard propaganda the dismissal it deserves:

What is it about endearing childhood classics that makes today’s writers, directors, and producers so eager to butcher them in the name of realism and modernity? Producer Moira Walley-Beckett (who also produced the acclaimed series “Breaking Bad”) has said that she wanted to “push the boundaries” by creating a more dark and “realistic” adaptation. She certainly succeeded at changing the tone and atmosphere. But in so doing, she completely lost Anne.

What is it, indeed, that attracts evil to good, as if it were pathologically driven to attempt to smash it? Let us look at the agenda within this new version of a classic:

In contrast, Walley-Beckett’s Anne walks around with a giant chip on her shoulder, ready to crumble at the slightest provocation. There’s nary a trace in this Anne of the indomitable spirit readers have come to admire so much.

Long-time fans will also find it incomprehensible that Walley-Beckett would transform sweet, simple Avonlea and its kind (if occasionally uptight) citizens into such cold bullies and spineless cowards.

The story of Anne of Green Gables has changed from an encouraging tale about a plucky orphan who makes a place for herself in an unfamiliar world and wins over normal people because they see in her something of the good parts of themselves, and has become a typical victimhood tale in which art serves as political protest against the inequality of life.

In other words, Leftists took a classic story and turned it into Leftist propaganda. The new Anne is a retelling of the lies behind the French Revolution or the election of Barack Obama: people are unequal only because other people keep them down, and the only learning that all of history can give us is that we have to fight (while wearing pink pussy hats) against this inequality.

This is exactly the problem with adaptations: they are someone else’s vision of a completed work by more competent authors telling timeless stories. The same problem exists with symphony conductors for whom their interpretation of a classic piece of music is more important than the composer’s. Can a conductor really improve upon Beethoven’s vision?

The same could be asked about this horrible adaptation of Anne of Green Gables. L.M. Montgomery’s vision of Anne, Avonlea and Avonlea’s inhabitants is complete, in and of itself. It doesn’t require our so-called enlightened modern interpretation to better understand it. We’ve lost the author’s actual intent when we project ourselves onto Anne. Anne doesn’t need our improvement; she’s perfect and complete just as Montgomery wrote her, and she stands the test of time.

Anyone with a soul hates Anne With An E but all the proles adore it. Proles just can’t keep their dirty mitts off of the good and must destroy it, create it in their own hideous image. In the meantime, the rest of us tire, seeing the classics of our culture vandalized for the pretense of proles. May the war begin soon.

Power-Nihilism: A Case For Moral & Political Nihilism by James Theodore Stillwell III

Thursday, May 18th, 2017

Power-Nihilism: A Case For Moral & Political Nihilism
by James Theodore Stillwell III
88 pages, Bookemon, $30

Nihilism attracts much confusion because it is an entirely different way of viewing the world. It is the direct opposite of the universalism of this time, which states that there are universal truths which can be discovered and spread to other human beings. Instead, nihilism advocates a hard realism in which aspects of reality are discovered, but not preserved or communicated.

James Theodore Stillwell III enters the fray with Power-Nihilism: A Case For Moral & Political Nihilism, a short book which affirms a Nietzsche-Redbeard view of nihilism as the need for the individual to not be ruled by the herd, and find meaning where it is relevant to the individual. This “might is right” expression of nihilism conveys many benefits, but also might need further development.

The book affirms the basic idea of nihilism through a study of morality which it rightly views as conditional. That is, if someone wants to survive, they must eat; however, there is no universal commandment that all must want to survive. With that in mind, Stillwell dispenses with the idea of objective and subjective morality, and focuses instead on the morality of survival and self-expression.

Morality doesn’t state ‘If you want to achieve X you ought to do Y.’ Rather, it says ‘Thou shalt not commit murder!’ regardless of whether you are concerned about facing the death penalty or not! It is this kind of imperative the moral skeptic rejects because outside of the context of punishment and reward there can be no motivating force to propel one to act in a certain manner. After all, if I want to perform X and am immune to penalty why ought I not do X? Because it’s ‘wrong’? What does that mean? Hence the nihilist contends that only hypothetical imperatives are tenable. Every prescription not based upon a value premise (a goal) raises questions such as a ‘According to whom?’ and ‘Why not?’ because every imperative logically implies a subjective aim. Therefore the Categorical Imperative is nothing but moral mysticism dreamed up by moralizing sophists! (32)

His vision is to restate morality not as a normative commandment, or that which tells people what they should do, but as an gesture of will: people are different, and some who wish to break from the herd find a morality in asserting their will upon reality and need no reason to do so. This instinctual morality fits within a naturalistic analysis, where humans are Darwinian creatures struggling for survival.

Onto that, Stillwell grafts a bit of Nietzsche — “Nietzsche defines a healthy society as not existing for its own sake, but for the sake of a higher type, that is the ‘value creators'” — and argues essentially that these cannot sensibly obey herd morality and must do what they must, in full barbarian bloodlust, because like the natural selection in nature this produces higher proficiency and therefore, better results for humanity.

This combines with his individualist theme, and ultimately masters it, somewhat to the surprise of the writer. Stillwell correctly intuits that higher men cannot live by the rules of the herd, but then posits that they should live for their own instincts, when really his writing verges on the idea of instead having them act toward the value creation process, i.e. a transcendental outlook that values supremacy, proficiency, excellence and creativity above the usual rote labor-by-the-pound of the herd.

The slavish herd animal lives a pessimistic and fearful existence. He is timid and uncertain of himself. This type of man lacks courage, he attempts to make virtues out of his weakness and cowardice and ‘to make the best of a bad situation.’ He elevates those virtues which serve to alleviate his suffering. He honors virtues such as pity, empathy, compassion, patience, humility, and equality, for to him these are the most useful qualities. Slave morality is essentially that of utility. Such ones tend to demonize and resent the powerful, the virile, the egoistic, and self-assertive. Such lowly specimens are often pessimistic concerning the human condition, and some even find themselves gazing into the abyss of anti natalism. (73)

In this, Stillwell also reveals a flaw in Nietzsche. For Nietzsche, philosophy resolved into a type of artistic idealism whereby the individual struggled for beauty in a fusion of the Romantic and ancient ideals. The nihilistic perspective on this, however, is twofold: first, it is esoteric and most people cannot visualize it, so teaching them individualism works against it, as individualism re-invents the values of the herd. Second, it is a goal higher than the individual which requires subsuming the individual to its direction. A nihilist must be nihilistic about all things, including the self.

Power-Nihilism: A Case For Moral & Political Nihilism does an expert job of introducing all these ideas efficiently and compactly within a small package, and opens more questions than it offers answers. Mainly it demystifies and debunks most modern illusions and introduces readers to a world where reality is only known by some humans in varying degrees, and there is no “us” or universal right way of doing things.

Stillwell writes in an open style, merging contemporary idiom with philosophical language, that allows the book to introduce a dense concept and then breathe as it explores its depth at a more leisurely pace. Citing extensively from philosophers including Nietzsche and Schopenhauer, Power-Nihilism: A Case For Moral & Political Nihilism provides a doorway from kiddie nihilism of the anarchistic revolutionary type into the full moral ambiguity of the real deal.

No Campus For White Men: The Transformation Of Higher Education Into Hateful Indoctrination by Scott Greer

Friday, May 12th, 2017

Scott Greer
No Campus For White Men: The Transformation Of Higher Education Into Hateful Indoctrination
192 pages, WND Books, $12 (2017)

As the new millennium dawned, it became clear that a sea change in attitudes among the people of the West was underway. While in the long term this seems to be a shift from bureaucratic and artificial societies to more organic and hierarchical ones, the rising battlefield presented political correctness as a target of opportunity because in recent years, it has been the primary weapon of the Leftist takeover of Western Civilization.

This phenomenon has become most visible on the campus, where a new cadre of seemingly all-powerful student groups are demanding — and winning — increasing concessions from school administrators, usually because no one wants to appear to be allied with horrible racists, sexists and classists in our increasingly Leftist cultural milieu. Scott Greer tackles this topic with a book written for everyday conservatives but which applies the wisdom of the underground right through a careful recounting of the events leading to this new norm.

Greer begins by diving into the most recent events at universities which show the insanity of political correctness, then explores related fields in race-based politics and false rape accusations, then delves deeper into the theory and political goals of the PC movement. In doing so, he points out that PC does not aim toward positive goals, but negative ones, namely shattering the power of white people, conservatives, realists and other non-Leftists in the university setting.

In other words, it is a classic power grab through public shaming of dissidents — but in this case, your skin is your uniform, and you can be a dissident through simply failing to agree with what the PC overlords say; actively opposing them is not necessary. By implication and revelation of a conspiracy of details, Greer unveils the fundamentally Soviet nature of Political Correctness.

What’s happening at campuses is not an isolated affair — it is a result of what is happening in America as a whole. The sense of shared values and culture among Americans is vanishing rapidly, at the same time many feel isolated from their communities and families. Mass immigration has dramatically altered our country’s demographics, while multiculturalism has created a confusing landscape of competing visions for what it means to be an American. Many citizens see our national society as one of millions of alienated atoms living in a continental strip mall, not interconnected denizens living happily together in one proud country.

Thus, they turn to alternative forms of identity. A real American identity — one not entirely composed of platitudes about “equality and opportunity — is becoming a thing of the past. The ones who cling to it, as evidenced by Hillary Clinton’s and the press’s treatment of Donald Trump’s supporters, are considered racist buffoons who need to die off. The momentum of the present is veering toward tribalism, not unity. And the only thing keeping all the tribes of the Left unified right now is their shared animosity toward whites. (159)

We can see Greer’s thesis here: the success of the Left in advancing class warfare and multiculturalism has destroyed any unifying sense of culture, and so groups are going their own way, which has fragmented the Left, requiring that it cook up a new enemy in order to unite its ranks, and it has chosen “privilege theory”: because white people have “privilege” in historically-white societies, they are the only ones who can be racist, and therefore — by implication, of course — the only way to end racism is to eliminate whites.

This is a more complex analysis of the “anti-racism = anti-white” meme that has been floating around, but Greer is correct go into the nuance because it reveals how Leftism is a kind of inertia which by destroying existing social order, creates conditions under which it has no choice but to explode like a supernova and become fully totalitarian. The success of the Left is its actual enemy, but it needs a scapegoat, just like the Communists needed kulaks and the Nazis needed Jews.

By taking this balanced approach, Greer avoids tackling the historical questions which at this point are so muddied by centuries of political fighting that there is no way to even approach them in an unbiased manner, and instead looks at political correctness the way a sociologist would. Increasing Balkanization of the West means the need for a scapegoat, and PC found it in white men.

In order to reach this point, the book narrates some of the recent history of political correctness, including various incidents which — when removed from the context of the Leftist media — stand out as appalling. Even though to those of us who recognize a consistency in Leftist behavior from the French Revolution to the Soviet Union, the blatant inversion of concepts such as “fairness” and “equality” into persecution of those who do not need these things shows us the human animal at its worst: a snarling beast, enraged that any may succeed, thus demanding that all be brought down to a lower level through the social power of the word “equality.”

The most important thing to remember is that the favored form of diversity isn’t necessarily “the state of having people who are different races or who have different cultures in a group or organization,” as Merriam-Webster would put it. Diversity in today’s America simply means having fewer whites around. Segregation, such as universities having racially exclusive dorms and events, is great as long as that racial exclusion doesn’t mean “white only.” An all-black dorm is a sign of diversity, but an all-white fraternity is a sign of Jim Crow. That double standard is easier to understand once you think of higher education’s commitment to ethnic diversity as not one upholding the strict definition of the term. (16)

No Campus For White Men: The Transformation Of Higher Education Into Hateful Indoctrination maintains a thoroughly professional view of the situation, avoiding partisanship as much as possible, in order to dig far enough into the headlines to see the motivation behind political correctness and how it is being applied, which ordinary people will not hear from the media or from a single source.

Greer uses an investigative journalism approach. He begins with a single incident, then digs into similar incidents, then looks at the parties involved and their statements, and contrasts these to public statements made by schools and organizations. In doing so, the reader can witness the application of the theory sliding away from the theory as time goes on. The cognitive dissonance effect is erased through this method.

While No Campus For White Men uses a provocative title, it is in fact a mild book, with flashes of humor and cultured alertness to the actual goals of institutions versus what they have become scattered throughout. It makes for a quick read and a good refresher on the politically correct disasters of recent years. For any reader from innocent novice through cynical veteran, this book provides a cornerstone of a practical attack on PC culture.

Small Revolts Against Modernity: Slow TV

Monday, May 8th, 2017

From the oddities-of-culture department, “slow TV”:

It began with the broadcast of a train journey from the coastal city of Bergen to the capital, Oslo. The formula was simple: put a few cameras on a train and watch the scenery go by — for seven hours.

…About a quarter of all Norwegians tuned in to watch some part of that train trip.

…”It’s important that it’s an unbroken timeline, that you don’t take away anything,” said Hellum. “It’s all the boring stuff in there, all the exciting things in there, so you as a viewer has to find out what’s boring and what’s interesting.”

One has to ponder on this for some time to realize that what is occurring here is a revolt against narrative. People do not want a managed experience, where a story is told through fake characters and slowly shapes the viewer toward a conclusion. They want something more like real life, where they discover the good bits for themselves, presumably while doing something else at the same time.

Pundits tell us that television and movies have never been better, which is presumably why they are revisiting old ideas in new combinations. But even more, it may be that people are tired of the modern method of inserting control instructions in every form of public media, and want to discover life outside what others people want us to think.

LD50 Gallery Launches New Corporeality Exhibit

Wednesday, May 3rd, 2017

Controversial London underground art gallery LD50 unleashes a new exhibit today entitled Corporeality. According to Kantbot, an artist in the exhibition, “This show explores moral entrepreneurship and what it means to deconstruct and control thought in an age when ideas are completely divorced as digital entities, from any tangible reality as objects.”

The installation comprises:

  • 6 computer workstations where participants are encouraged to seat and work through the paper content and destroy it if they find it inappropriate, uninteresting or offensive. To that end, the gallery has made available commercial shredding machines, scissors, markers and other means of folding, spindling or mutilating the content.
  • 5 visual art prints of generative models produced by the Deep Convolutional Generative Adversarial Networks (DCGAN) software. Unlike early generative models, these are high quality and are produced through use of computer modeling of “adversarial” objects that assess output in terms of realness versus fakeness.
  • 1 video by TV KWA for new hot startup KWALY.

Artists: menaquinone, Kantbot, Logo Dadealus, Nick P, TV KWA, and 95364421130

Although it has attracted the most attention for its Neoreaction and Alt Right exhibits, LD50 represents a new brand of artist that combines trolling, provocation, surrealism and critical theory into ensconcing art experiences that raise more questions than offer answers. Visitors report leaving in a state of suspension of faith in the world as they knew it, resulting in confusion and paranoia before the images and tokens settled into a discernible order in the mind.

White Survival by Stephen Christopher

Monday, March 20th, 2017

White Survival
by Stephen Christopher
149 pages, $9; free ebook

The quest to create nationalist fiction remains elusive because, after traditionalist and realist sentiment dominated literature for the first half of the last century, control and financial power in literature were handed over to the Left. The result has now bottomed out because it repeats empty distractions and so has no meat, and therefore produces no great literature, only novelty.

What this means is that the writers on the Right face a unique challenge, which is how to express themselves clearly and yet avoid falling into the Leftist trap of echoing dogma, which removes the ambiguity and conflict that is at the core of every great work. Stephen Christopher steps up with White Survival, a science fiction novella designed to both provoke and explore the conflict inherent to attempting to have hope in a time of civilization decline.

The plot involves a group of white people who, dismayed at the fall of the West and the seemingly pathological desire to exterminate white genetics of the “new” population, create a cryogenic facility that will enable them to re-awaken several centuries later to restart a world of European-descended people.

What they discover is the raw animal nature of this pathology, finding it rooted not in religion or ethnicity per se but through the natural conflict between populations, which is reframed in a biological context instead of the political. If this book has one compelling feature, it is this tendency to skip the entire political structure of the West and focus on the underpinning biological reasoning.

In addition, White Survival puts into visual and metaphorical form the sensations the alert people experience now as they watch the trainwreck of the West while everyone else runs screaming into denial:

She looked at me with fright in her eyes and tried to loose my grasp. But I held her firmly. I tried to explain to her what I had seen, what was going to happen to this place, to us. She began to panic. She struck me on the arm and chest with her free hand, dropping her phone on the path, screaming for help. I grabbed her other arm, trying to pacify her. I looked into her eyes, told her it would be OK. I told her there was a place for her with us, a place underground, safe, away from the hell that would soon befall us.

She became hysterical, started kicking out at me and trying to pull herself away. I lessened my grip, and she fell to her knees on the footpath, dirt sullying her clothes. Immediately she scrambled to her feet and ran away. I could hear her crying as she went. I watched her go, not attempting to follow her.

Another one not worth saving… (88)

While on the surface this is a science fiction book about the future, thematically it describes our present state of mind: witnessing a collapse of Western Civilization and the genocidal intentions of most of our people toward themselves. Its goal is not so much political diagnosis, but using the lens of history applied in the science fiction genre, looking toward a cure for the soul-illness that causes civilizations to suicide.

The prose is brisk and sparse, told in first person through a fairly reliable everyman narrator who describes long-term concerns as immediate because, once having been made aware of them, he cannot deny them any longer. While the book does not focus too much on the collapse denialism of the present time, it does illustrate the fatalistic mindset found in most people: a lack of will to survive, like a biological entity aware of the need to adapt and reproduce.

This heavy Darwinistic outlook places this book in good company with other lone remnant stories like Battlestar Galactica and Pandorum, as well as classic science fiction like The Martian Chronicles. In this case, an explicitly racial filter is placed on the story, which seems more honest since each group represents only itself and cannot honestly speak for others.

When the book does speak of a theory of politics, it is tied to biological survival and aims for a bigger, wider picture than contemporary politics can deliver:

Instead the population was made to believe that all this deterioration was ‘progress’. That impoverishment was really ‘enrichment’. That genocide was ‘diversity’. That sin was virtue. That a religion of violence was a ‘religion of peace’. That patriotism was sedition. That love was hate. That good was evil and that evil was good. The anti-whites had a habit of calling everything the opposite of what it was, including themselves (‘liberals’, ‘anti-racists’ etc.). It was another incredibly simple tactic that had depressingly effective results on your average white man and woman.

Thus most of the citizenry dutifully kept their heads down, saying and doing nothing about the invasion. They lied to themselves that it wasn’t really a problem, or that somehow it would all magically be fixed by someone else – most likely by someone they themselves would denounce as a ‘racist’ whenever they broached the subject. In short, they did as the masses have always done: as they’re told. (14-15)

White Survival offers a fun, quick read with the briefest of political offerings dispatched before it heads straight into post-dystopian science fiction. In addition, it offers up an interesting new world, including a type of enemy warrior born of technology that is so terrifying it might even shock awake the most bourgeois of us in the middle of the night.

Where this book strides ahead is in its ability to frame a ground for future literature of this type, melding the biological and the historical and skipping over the present day issues for the most part, which gives people a direction and a reason to fight for it before we get to the horrors described in this adventure.

Death Race 2050 (2016)

Tuesday, January 24th, 2017

The original Death Race 2000 came about for many of the same reasons as Black Sabbath did: skepticism of the optimism based in technological and political Utopianism around it, a phenomenon that seemed irrefutable but in fact, as human assertions often do, concealed a vast and secret doubt.

Death Race 2000 introduced us to an alternate vision of the future in which democracy and consumerism have merged, producing a single mega-powerful corporation which serves as both consumer magnet and socialist state. To keep the groundlings from rioting, the state stages a number of panem et circenses style spectacles including the Death Race, a cannonball run across America where the goal is for drivers to kill each other and rack up points by murdering unsuspecting citizens with their cars.

Add in a massive dose of grim humor, and you have the groundwork for a satire that is amazingly both insightful and watchable. This in turn may have influenced a generation of anti-positive movies like Idiocracy and Demolition Man, in which the future is portrayed not as Blade Runner styled dystopia but a Utopian project that succeeds and makes its citizens into neutered idiots as a result.

In this way, Death Race 2050 turns back the dial of seriousness established by Death Race (2008) which was more of an adventure/horror film featuring the growling and unshaven Jason Statham. In that film, the power struggle was grim and the focus was more on a struggle for life and death; here, the focus is on satirizing what civilization has become in the hands of good intentions (as in, “the road to Hell is paved with…”).

A decade or so after Idiocracy woke up the world to the consequences of democratic empowerment and the welfare state, Death Race 2050 revisits the original film in a grimmer postmodern version: the world presented is bleaker, a space where most of the population are indeterminately beige and living off Universal Basic Income (UBI) which keeps them in poverty. The few white people are relatively impoverished but consider themselves proud to be middle class. As society winds down, rich multi-racial elites rule the world cynically and citizens flee to whatever sources of meaning — cults, drugs, rebellion — that they think will make the process existentially survivable.

In this brave new Amerika, regions are named after Mark Zuckerberg and cities have become sprawling favelas. The race car drivers, chosen for their membership in ethnic and gender stereotypes common to this future time, are as cynical as the elites, seeing the race as a way to survive better through the destruction of others. In this way, the entirety of USA 2050 resembles William S. Burroughs’ “algebra of need”: people using others as a means to their own power because there is no unity or cooperation, and in its stead, a cynical tyranny has arisen, empowered by a population more concerned with tacos and television than the future.

Race is treated as part of the dysfunction. Most actors are mixed-race or racially ambiguous. Perhaps the most profound moment in the film is when the ghetto-talking African-American driver reveals, in elegant academic English, that her parents were university professors and she acts out a stereotype in public for the profit potential (she is also the author of a contemporary pop hit, “Drive, Drive, Kill, Kill,” which is both catchy and disturbingly simplistic).

Featuring the delightfully pathological Malcolm McDowell as the leader of the Cathedral, this film takes callous indifference to human life to new comedic levels. Corpses pop apart, flinging intestines across the screen; ordinary people who seem dumb as rocks can be counted on to do only what is least productive and most destructive at any time. The country, portrayed as essentially an open-air junkyard, seems in the grips of heat death and conscious only of its next distraction as the darkness slowly — ever so slowly — closes in.

Should we seek a message in Death Race 2050, it can be found in the Huxleyian revelation that most people in fact not only enjoy the race but derive meaning from it of a religious level, much like pre-2016 Americans found in watching sports or politics. It is a distraction from the fact that civilization and life is moribund, so they strap on virtual reality goggles and distract themselves with drugs, celebrities and murder.

This cynical vision of America is not really American so much as it is human. When we confuse what we wish were true with what is real, we create disasters which always end this way: pointless, hopeless and excited only by destruction. Filmed in the type of off-hand and low-budget style as Idiocracy, the grimly humorous Death Race 2050 is a similar warning that its vision is not of the future, but the present.

The Purge: Election Year (2016)

Saturday, January 14th, 2017

by Adam Rath

The Purge: Election Year was released thirteen months after President-Elect Trump’s announcement of his candidacy, giving the producers plenty of time to tap into the periodic emotional frenzy of democratic societies. The theatrical poster evoked the themes of Trump’s campaign, including the tagline “Keep America Great.”

For those unfamiliar with the Purge series, it portrays a near-future USA where a pseudo-fascist nationalist party rules with popular approval. Once a year, in an extreme hybrid of ancient Greek ostracism, eugenics, and Escape From New York, all laws are suspended for 24 hours. While most people with the means and organization (middle-class and above) seal up in their homes and wait it out, some venture out into the wild to enact some extra-legal justice or to unleash the beast within them in psychopathic violence. The more disorganized areas of the country, like urban ghettos, predictably devolve into a melee of chaos that leaves a good portion of the population dead.

Interestingly, in the movies’ internal history, this policy has resulted in a healthy economy and 1% unemployment rate, as well as widespread popular support. The movies portray the Purge as a time of fear where families cower in the fortress-like homes, but what would really happen if professional law and medical services were removed (with warning)? Look to the behavior of American pioneers: common citizens join together for protection in times of danger, such as savage redskin attacks. In this light, the Purge seems like a way to weed out those communities incapable of such basic organization.

In Election Year this becomes explicit, accompanied by the anti-majority ethnic animus which has reached a fever pitch over the past decade. The establishment — apparently all conservative white males of Anglo-Saxon heritage — are under threat by a new, exciting candidate in the form of a white woman with hipster glasses. After a failed assassination attempt, she and her gay-looking bodyguard end up with a group of various ethnic minorities from poor neighborhoods.

They fight their way back to safety against a cadre of stereotypical evilwhites including militia men with Confederate/Nazi flag patches and Russian tourists. Long story short, our oppressed heroes join up with the multicultural Rebellion ripped off from Star Wars for the millionth time, and win over the evil conservative white people in the end. The Purge is ended forever, and the incompetent are safe again.

Unlike the first Purge film, this fails even on the level of exploitation/thriller by wasting most of the screentime with its bloated moral message. It performed well at the box office due to the political tie-in, suggesting producers will attempt more such movies, but the surprise majoritarian electoral upset may have changed the cultural taste. Already the tropes trotted out in this movie seem like the tired cliches of a past age.

Friedensreich Hundertwasser, Visionary

Wednesday, January 11th, 2017

Austrian-Jewish artist Friedensreich Hundertwasser broke boundaries not so much through progress, but through rejection of it in favor of nature. He spoke highly of the organic form and rejected the intellectualized human intent which characterized so much of his chosen field, architecture, and instead aspired to make buildings that conveyed a sense of naturalness and pleasure for their occupants.

“Fortunately I’m not a trained architect,” he said, “because if I had been, I would have been brainwashed – straight, square, ugly, empty, dogmatic and intellectual. It’s so important that the buildings in which people live are in harmony with nature and in harmony with human creativity.”

Hundertwasser has a hatred of the straight line, which he says occurs nowhere in nature. He believes that conventional geometrically-based architecture is “not only obsolete, but a crime against humanity”.1

In his revolution against the straight line, Hunterwasser discovered another principle: architecture should resemble nature, which unlike the blocky constructions that are easy for the human mind to remember, has a flexible layout with high internal variation that pairs closely to function, making its use transparent to the human which has evolved under a similar system.

These thoughts lead Hunterwasser to places that good Leftist subjects are not supposed to go, namely the idea that modernity itself was the same type of arrogance and denial of both nature and our inner nature:

Austria needs something to look up to, consisting of perennial higher values—of which one now hardly dares to speak—such as beauty, culture, internal and external peace, faith, richness of heart […] Austria needs an emperor, who is subservient to the people. A superior and radiant figure in whom everyone has confidence, because this great figure is a possession of all. The rationalist way of thinking has brought us, in this century, an ephemeral higher, American standard of living at the expense of nature and creation, which is now coming to an end, for it is destroying our heart, our quality of life, our longing, without which an Austrian does not want to live. It is outrageous that Austria has an emperor who did no evil to anyone but is still treated like a leper. Austria needs a crown! Long live Austria! Long live the constitutional monarchy! Long live Otto von Habsburg!2

In this way, he saw nature as emerging from a sense of intense power of design, and an inherent wisdom that is beyond the human and approaches the divine. This extended, as he saw it, to the structures humans used to rule themselves as well as the ones they live in.

A community should not consider it an honour how much spontaneous vegetation it destroys; it should rather be a point of honour for every community to protect as much of its natural landscape as possible.

The brook, the river, the swamp, the riverside wetlands as they are, the way God created them, must be sacred and inviolable to us.

Correcting a stream only has evil effects, which are expensive in the end: the lowering of water tables, the destruction of forests, the transformation of large areas into steppes, no regeneration of the water, which runs off too fast. The river wetlands can no longer fulfill their sponge-like function: the absorption of excess water and slow feedback in dry spells, like a good piggy bank in times of emergency.3

In turn this pushed him to less politically correct realizations. He became a foe of human intent, and an ally of that which humans refuse to recognize, which is that subjugating the world to human intent produces destruction, not Utopia.

The so-called E.U. is contriving to destroy our life base, our ageold cultures, our small, evolved idiosyncrasies, our species diversity and our self-esteem.

…Europe is only strong thanks to the diversity of its autonomies. This small-scale diversity must be bolstered and protected. This diversity is Europe.

While his designs reflect a postmodern rococo vision that allies itself with the corrupt nature of modern thinking, his attempt to make these outlandish and colorful structures into something more natural lessened the sense of “triumph of the ego” of modern design, and pointed it toward a more organic, variable and flexible pattern language.

2 John MacDonald, “Hundertwasser’s radical vision for a new Australian flag,” The Sydney Morning Herald, September 24, 2015. Retrieved from

2 Friedensreich Hundertwasser, “For the Return of the Constitutional Monarchy.” Kaurinui, New Zealand, 28 March 1983; dedicated, on 14 May 1987, to Otto von Habsburg for his 75th birthday.

3 “There Are No Evils in Nature. There Are Only Evils of Man.” Retrieved from

4 “To Join the EU Is To Betray Austria And Betray Europe. Why?” Retrieved from

How To Get Off Of Mainstream Social Media

Friday, December 9th, 2016

The news from the internet is not good: as ad revenues collapse, social media is becoming more extreme in its desire to present only happy content and drama — just like 1980s daytime television — so that it can attract the herd.

Although they think they are geniuses, they do not realize that this will fail, because where in the 1980s we had three channels (newspaper, magazines, television/radio) for ads, now we have gutted those traditional channels for a medium where people have no particular investment in staying on a site. That, and the fact that the group that came on the internet and pushed the others out with its idiocy is comprised of people earning under $40K per year who are far from ideal consumers, means that internet advertising is effectively dead except on highly-specialized sites that people read for the content, like The Wall Street Journal or Ars Technica.

Under pressure from the Left to remove non-Narrative content, the social media sites are already inclined to do this because even a few reality-based voices will ruin the experience of oblivion that they hope to offer, just like daytime TV did back in the 1980s. Corporate and government interests converge because both are interested in using the herd as a “personal army” to fulfill their own profit motives, one through advertising and the other through taxes.

With that in mind, it makes sense to begin a short list of alternatives:

Also consider dropping out of the corporate software chain with some software alternatives: