I’ve borrowed a motif from a large, obnoxious Leftist slob. Not the one from Flint MI, but rather George R. R. Martin instead. It is his motto for House Stark from his Song of Fire and Ice novels.
Winter is Coming!
As society in America declines and grows worse, this meme of coming troubles fits our time too well for me to quibble over Martin’s Maoist political beliefs. The meme fits what is happening regardless of whether he ever finishes his septology of novels or not.
Since winter seems to be coming, getting ready may seem like a logical consequentialist strategy. Therefore I hope to embark on what will be a logical intelligent discussion of disaster preparation before the early frost kills our herbaceous borders. Today I offer part I, “What is a SHTF Event?”
When people think of prepping or planning for SHTF, there is a stupid, popular tendency to just assume these are morons who have spent too many hours playing Fallout on their PC and are just LARPING their (((end of days))) fantasies. This is inaccurate. SHTF events occur every year in several places around the globe. They also occur in scales of calamity. Prepping on at least some level is a wise and beneficial decision I would commend to all of you.
As America morphs into Amerika, SHTF events will continue at the same rate they occurred before the decline set in. There will be no more SHTF events and no fewer. The difference between these events occurring in America; as opposed to Amerika, is the extent to which you will be on your own as society continues its selfish degeneration into solipsistic crowdism. Hurricane Katrina, The Alabama Tornado Spree of 2011 and the Eruption of Mt. Saint Helens were all three SHTF events of varying magnitude that would have befallen people in the contiguous 48 states regardless of how well or poorly our society functioned.
The impacts on society differed. Hurricane Katrina was the worst of the three for two reasons. It struck a dense population. That population’s leadership and government on every level performed execrably. The Mayor delayed ordering evacuation until 24 hours before the storm hit. If you’ve ever been on the I-10 Bridge heading west the morning after a big party, you know that was the wrong call. So a city so shot through with corruption that a good chunk of its police force couldn’t be bothered to show up for duty and even looted a Walmart during the storm, left an awful lot of its people to quite literally sink or swim.
The Alabama Tornado Outbreak was also tragic, but less a disaster. The local governments responding were hampered by a lack of resources and pre-planning. Many public officials throughout Alabama could be justifiably criticized in that regard.
However, they didn’t loot any Walmarts and nobody on the Tuscaloosa police force deserted in the aftermath of the F5 that ripped through the downtown. There were one to two week aftermaths in places all over Alabama where the power was out and roads were blocked for miles. One advantage Alabama had over New Orleans was that volunteers came in waves to saw the roads clear and clean up the debris.
The point being, that places where order breaks down and the community is disinterested in mutual assistance will suffer a far worse fate from a SHTF event than places where people are being turned away as volunteers because there isn’t enough food to feed them or equipment to put them all to work in a gainful fashion. So as society degenerates, it is less and less unintelligent to prep for at least some form of SHTF event.
The worse our culture becomes, the more you will be on your own to look after yourself, your family and the people you care about. Let’s first address what you prepare for. SHTF events can be measure on the Bi-dimensional Feke Scale* from F1 to F5 depending upon length and severity. The scale is shown below.
The Length Scale addresses the length of time normal society is disrupted by the event. F1 events are acute, non-recurring events that hit and then move on. F2 and F3 events occur for progressively longer time scales and require greater preparation or outside help to survive. F4 events probably cannot be survived without prior preparation and will significantly impact the culture and history of an area from the time length of social disruption alone. F5 SHTF events are historical milestones that are burned into cultural memory. Think WWI, WWII and the Great Depression. For much of Europe, the time span from 1936 to 1950 could be viewed as a F5 Length SHTF Event.
The Severity Scale attempts to categorize how wide spread the fertilizer becomes once it blows off the oscillating rotary device. F1 events impact the vicinity around you. F2 events take out/ take down entire local regions. F3 events reduce us to maybe 48 or 49 states instead of 50 for a while. F4 events hammer an entire nation or continent while F5 events impact the entire globe.
An F(1,1) would be a major storm or tornado that damages houses and threatens lives but then blows away. The Alabama Tornado Outbreak of 2011 would be about an F(2,3). It killed 300 people and knocked the power grid out, but was over in 3 weeks and never posed an existential threat to life and limb once the storms subsided. Katrina could go up to F(3,3). The Yellowstone Caldera blowing up would rate F(4,4) or F(5,4). The thermonuclear Shoah-Jobs portrayed in A Canticle For Leibowitz or On The Beach would score F(5,5).
Thus, an SHTF event involves some form of major natural or manmade disaster that causes destruction, loss of life and a breakdown of social order. These can classified using a standard risk cube scaled from 1 to 5. The two axis of SHTF can be Length and Severity. The length axis measures for how long social order is disrupted, the severity axis measures how wide of an area will be torn up or non-functional. In the next piece I’ll discuss some of the types of SHTF events that may occur in “Winter Is Coming Part II – Classifying SHTF Events By Type.”
The Harvard-trained theorist who can write a dissertation but not boil an egg, we are told, is “intelligent”; similarly, we are told, a mass of people acting in self-interest to buy products or cast votes will achieve a type of “intelligence.”
I offer an alternate theory: intelligence occurs in degrees, and is as logical as a computer, which means that “Garbage In, Garbage Out” (GIGO) applies. If you feed a computer paradox and nonsense, you will get more of the same. If you feed it sensible principles, you get logical results. This is a parallel to Plato’s “good to the good, and bad to the bad.”
But what is intelligence, this gradient which cannot be seen but whose effects (or lack thereof) can be painfully felt? It seems to be both brain activity, and an ability to correlate that to activity in the real world. We call that “creativity” in some areas because actual creativity requires not making up fantastical stuff, but making up fantastical stuff that is plausible enough as a type of reality, or addresses real-world issues enough to be appealing. Creativity is not arbitrary; it is as logical as science, but uses another approach.
Thus intelligence has two aspects: thinking power, and application power.
Creativity is associated with a style of thinking that is relatively loose in its associations, inclusive in its linking of disparate elements – a style of thinking akin to that of dreaming sleep, psychotic illness, and intoxication.
Creativity is not positively associated with intelligence – or if so at a very modest level. Some societies with high average IQ have low creativity, and vice versa. European societies had (in the past) high average IQ and also reasonably high creativity.
However, creativity is moderately associated with mental illness, psychopathy and addiction – and also with impulsiveness and ‘fecklessness’ – with a lack of perseverance.
This leads us closer to the idea of a genius: someone possessed by genius is literally possessed, in that this power directs the person toward an entirely different view of life which re-organizes it to be far from the normal. In particular, the creative genius resembles the apex predator: lazy, erratic at times, resistant to discipline and aloof.
Scott Adams calls these people “wizards,” and reveals a list of traits they seem to share:
Look for these clues:
1. The wizard succeeds in a high-profile field without the benefit of as much talent as you would expect should be necessary. (This is the biggest tell.)
2. People seem to have an irrational hate for the wizard that is not entirely explained by the wizard’s actions. Regular readers already know these unusual reactions are signs of cognitive dissonance. Wizards induce cognitive dissonance often, without trying.
3. Look for an inflated ego combined with an unusually strong ability to withstand withering criticism. (Wizards get a lot of criticism.) The common view is that wizards are egomaniacs. In reality, the wizard works hard to remain ego-free, and hence can handle criticism well.
4. Wizards are often more ambitious, and often more aggressive, than you think is normal.
5. One or more major PR disasters define the wizard’s history.
6. The wizard has a gift for simplification.
7. Observers detect a reality distortion field.
8. Wizards have an ability to succeed where other fail by changing the entire game as opposed to winning at the existing one.
9. Wizards use words to create images and emotions in people’s minds.
10. Wizards seek public attention.
The wizard filter on the world isn’t necessarily true in some objective sense. The fun is seeing if the data and predictions fit the filter.
I submit that much as Adams writes, creative genius cannot be tested for; it appears and can be identified later because it fit the filter, but beyond that, it is something that emerges in the real world through results and not through human selection.
That shows us the basis of the aristocratic system: find those who have done great things, breed them with the noblest and smartest women, and create a permanent group of high-intelligence and high-creativity people. This was the reason for Europe’s success and is the method by which it can be restored.
Today, on April 20th, I think often of Hitler: a man who knew so much, yet did so much wrong. Perhaps the division between Hitler and what we need as a civilization is this aristocratic division. We do not need a better modern, or “predictive” system, but an absence of systems entirely and a reliance instead on proven wizardry/creative genius.
That alone demonstrates a working model of intelligence. You can separate the men from the boys with SATs and IQ tests, but to find the gold among the silver and copper, we must rely on nature and instead of trying to control her, channel her natural bounty of genius and creativity into a new elite.
Thirty years ago, William Gibson wrote a series of cyberpunk stories — visual counterparts to the theories of Burroughs and Pynchon — which suggested a reality “underneath” the world of appearance and human “face value” assurances in which most of us live.
A terrible movie was made some years later to translate that simplification into an even simpler version. Called The Matrix, this movie gave the Hollywood treatment to cyberpunk but also gave us a powerful metaphor: the red pill.
In The Matrix, the protagonist was given the choice between a red pill and a blue pill. The red pill would make him see reality as it was, underneath the appearance; the blue pill would make him expert at the false reality. (Distracted observers may draw comparisons to the ring of Gyges from Plato and not be wrong).
While this movie was a fantasy, and its vision of actual reality in fact a false reality that scapegoated a centralized force instead of the decentralized decay we are experiencing, the metaphor sticks. Some people embrace the unpopular and unpleasant truths of life, where others just want to become good/successful at the illusion.
Some years later, my esteemed colleague Colin Liddell unleashed “The Black Pill”:
The Black Pill is the least dialectical of the three. It leads from actual inferiority back to actual inferiority. It is nihilism, but nihilism made flesh calls forth absolute egoism, a sense of the self detached from wider contexts and responsibilities—it is this that makes it evil and murderous.
The inferior person can either accept context and therefore inferiority, or fight it. The Blue Piller rejects his future inferiority by retreating backwards into illusion. The Red Piller rejects his present lack of superiority by marching forward through positive consciousness and action to redress the situation. The Black Piller, however, chooses neither the palliatives of illusion nor the challenge of positive action. He stares into the abyss—passively because his actions will never be capable of changing it—and, as Nietzsche so pertinently observed, the abyss stares back.
For almost thirty years, I have written about nihilism as a philosophy. In my view, nihilism is the gateway to all useful thought. It clears aside the human pretense and solipsistic illusion and replaces it with a cold, unflinching, logical and realistic look at our world and our place within it, including the Darwinian need to adapt. More disturbingly, it shows us that the standard of life is not how to explain away our failings, but that each time we observe a better method than our own, we will be dissatisfied and self-hating if we do not adopt it.
Without nihilism, religion becomes obedience out of fear, not a choice to seek out possible metaphysical dimensions to the universe. With nihilism, science becomes applied logic; literature becomes communication; art becomes Jungian symbolism. It is a gateway to a kingdom of darkness in which suddenly, the photonegative of normal human life — invert by social impulses, which are individual fears amplified and then placated by collective illusion — is negatived again, revealing that what we call “light” is darkness and vice-versa. Illusions fall in cold white flame.
In my view, nihilism is the black pill. It is not egoism, because nihilism denies the notion of humanity and the individual being the center of the world. In nihilism, as in the universe, the self is a tiny portion of a great vast space that is mostly emptiness. Nihilism is mostly negation, or destruction of human illusions and plans that turned out to be unrealistic. That process begins by attacking the deception of the mind by itself.
The black pill provides a gateway into an entirely different way of seeing the world. Where most people live in a purely social world, where they assume the goodwill of others, black pilled people see a natural struggle every bit as violent and constant as that experienced by a common mouse. Predators surround us and parasites infest us unless we actively and aggressively remove them without mercy.
In the black pill world, government is nothing more than a parasite. Salesmen are predators, hoping to convince you to pay high prices for something that is easy for them to acquire. Police and taxmen are parasites as well, looking for some way to justify taking money and time from you. Most people are parasites and predators alike who want to use you as a means toward their own aggrandizement. In addition, all but a few people — one in a hundred, maybe — are delusional to the edge of clinical insanity.
This is a new view of reality that has a tendency to snap into place suddenly so that thousands of details make sense at once as if aligned. It is a more realistic view, and statistically more likely true, than the happy world of “love and trust” (dependency and subsidies) erected by democratic society. It points out the obvious: humans are still mostly the same filthy little beasts that crawled out of the primordial ooze, and those who have risen above that state are targets of the rest.
Vice: First of all, could you explain what you mean by the term progress and why you think it’s a myth?
John Gray: I define progress in my new book as any kind of advance that’s cumulative, so that what’s achieved at one period is the basis for later achievement that then, over time, becomes more and more irreversible. In science and technology, progress isn’t a myth. However, the myth is that the progress achieved in science and technology can occur in ethics, politics, or, more simply, civilization. The myth is that the advances made in civilization can be the basis for a continuing, cumulative improvement.
This exchange is classic black pill. “Progress” is a myth told by salesmen to customers. The reality is that absent evolution or eugenics, humans do not change, and in fact have zero incentive to because they have made society parasite-friendly through egalitarianism. The myth exists only to justify the parasitism. “Progress” is like fashion in that it argues for something new you must buy or be inferior socially and (implicitly) evolutionarily.
With the impending election, the futility of our lives becomes even clearer with one salient point inescapable: It doesn’t matter who wins. The underlying issues destroying our society will never be dealt with under our current democratic system. Voting is pointless. The only possible utility voting possesses is the potential to vote for the worst possible candidate in order to hasten the demise of this broken society. There is nothing to preserve, conserve or improve. The only way forward is to destroy the corpse so something better can take its place.
As long as civilizations make intelligent or semi-intelligent decisions, they thrive. When people start making stupid decisions, as has happened for the past thousand years, it means both that the future will be bad and that the past was bad, since no society gets to the point of making stupid decisions without somehow putting the stupid in power.
Once a civilization falls into decline, far more decisive action is required than its political, social and economic system allows. It requires the intervention of strong power to remove the rot and send it far away, then rebuild institutions around good people who can make the complex decisions that rules, elections and markets cannot. This means that many dreams will be smashed, and all parasitic people need to be disenfranchised if not outright removed.
These are hard truths. They are also a source of great joy for those who discover them because that revelation lifts the burden of having to uphold illusions and fantasies as reality. It also shows a path forward out of a situation where everything we do is bound to be adulterated and fail, and allows us hope for a better future through our own hands, not government or “We The People” surging in like the cavalry to save the heroine at a movie’s end.
It’s 1954, when an angry mob of hundreds of people storm a cemetery, armed with knives, stones and hand-crafted spears. A vampire is said to reside there, who has killed and eaten two children. The vampire is said to be seven feet tall and according to the rumors has iron teeth. What country are we talking about? Lily white England. Plot twist: The mob consisted of children.
In contrast to what you might have heard from the alt-right, different cultures can in fact co-exist in peace for generations. I am talking here, of course, about the culture of children and the culture of adults. For centuries, children have maintained their own cultures separate from adults, passed on from older children to younger children. That culture has been lost, but it can be revived.
All that was necessary for these culture to be preserved, was for adults to leave their children unsupervised for sufficient amounts of time. These cultures emerged spontaneously and passed on legends and practices from older children to younger ones. They declined as we increasingly began to supervise our children, restricted their right to roam outside and gave them access at first to television and later on, computers, tablets and smartphones.
We might say that we wish to protect our children from harm, but more primitive cultures seem to have had less concern when it comes to such harm. Certain primitive African cultures have children with hands covered by scars, because the children are left for themselves to find out that fire is hot. As we isolate ourselves from the natural world and become anxious and risk averse, we impose our mentality on our children as well.
The problem is that we have placed excessively high expectations on our children. In addition, we have embraced the wrong values as a culture. We aim to make our children successful, that is, capable of holding onto some full-time white collar job that will allow them to provide for a family. In addition, in our meritocratic culture, we all expect that our child will inevitably rise in socio-economic status, rather than dropping down. When nepotism and inherited privilege ensure that social status is determined at birth, people have less reason to place high expectations on their children.
Children naturally learn new valuable skills. Their method of learning is called play, it teaches them all the skills that were necessary for most of human history. Leave a bunch of (tom)boys by themselves and they will build huts, rafts, slingshots and carts. If children’s natural method of learning doesn’t prepare them for adult life anymore, the solution is not to force children to play less and to do more homework. Rather, the solution is to change adult life to be more in tune with humans natural inclinations.
In many places, people are beginning to understand this. In Denmark, traditionally far ahead of the rest of Western civilization, we see an explosion in the number of nature based elementary schools and childcare facilities. Young children are given knives and taught to make spears from branches, or how to recognize and where to find wild plants and animals. Caregivers take the children outside and let them dig through the mud.
Of course at the same time, from the higher echelons of society we see an attempt to keep their disastrous project from falling apart. All developed nations are currently struggling with a shortage of STEM-nerds. To prepare children for the mediocre lives that adults have planned for them, as future objected-oriented PHP programmers and C# developers, a growing number of elementary schools are teaching children how to code, through the use of games on tablets.
The thought never seems to occur to our central planners that perhaps technology’s natural inclination is not to create a paradise on Earth, but rather to force lifestyles onto human beings that are increasingly at odds with our natural instincts and make us miserable. Perhaps there is no degree of indoctrination that could ever get women to look forward to spending their lives as PHP programmers. As much as people might fail to admit it, to work in IT is a choice of last resort, for people who need the money and have no real idea where else to get hired.
Another taboo to break through is as following: No matter how good looking they might be, the average engineer or computer programmer is an awful guy that women struggle to maintain relationships with. Silicon Valley is known to have an epidemic of singles, the main reason being that the high-earning white collar males who work there are awful people to interact with.
Intelligent, non-autistic women who had to work with successful IT nerds tend to have a variety of nightmare stories to share. Interacting with other people takes effort, those who spend their days interacting with computers and learning their logic inevitably struggle to develop this skill. If anything, the covert subtle language of human communication is diametrically opposed to the overt concrete language of computers. Thus, to learn one is to lose our understanding of the other.
When we educate our children, we give birth to the cultures that are to follow us. If we drown them with busywork to give them a chance in the rat-race for the shrinking pool of high-status white-collar jobs, we prepare a society that is as hellish as the one we find ourselves in today. They become like us, drones who expect to receive fat pension checks after they turn 65 that allow them to spend the last years of their lives as modern day leisurely aristocrats, to make up for the miserable decades before retirement spent in cubicles.
If on the other hand, we teach our children to love, enjoy and admire the living world that they inherited, they stand a chance of growing up to become adults with lives worth living. Our children deserve something better than we received.
To take one example, if you say there is no God and then turn around and tell me I should not be a racist, or that I should help someone in need, and I say, “why should I?” how do you respond? If we are all evolutionary accidents, why can’t I believe and practice anything I wish?
Let us refresh our historical memories with a short insight from Friedrich Nietzsche:
“Where has God gone?” he cried. “I shall tell you. We have killed him – you and I. We are his murderers. But how have we done this? How were we able to drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the entire horizon? What did we do when we unchained the earth from its sun? Whither is it moving now? Whither are we moving now? Away from all suns? Are we not perpetually falling? Backward, sideward, forward, in all directions? Is there any up or down left? Are we not straying as through an infinite nothing? Do we not feel the breath of empty space? Has it not become colder? Is it not more and more night coming on all the time? Must not lanterns be lit in the morning? Do we not hear anything yet of the noise of the gravediggers who are burying God? Do we not smell anything yet of God’s decomposition? Gods too decompose. God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we, murderers of all murderers, console ourselves? That which was the holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet possessed has bled to death under our knives. Who will wipe this blood off us? With what water could we purify ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we need to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we not ourselves become gods simply to be worthy of it? There has never been a greater deed; and whosoever shall be born after us – for the sake of this deed he shall be part of a higher history than all history hitherto.”
Nietzsche’s point is that God did not die by his own hand, but by ours. We forgot how to value and notice God, and so He passed out of our consciousness.
In other words, choosing God is like everything else, a choice. Before we can make that choice, we must choose to choose, which means we must decide to be good, or that we value good more than its alternatives. Then we can discover what is good and pursue it, but not before we make the conscious election to want good and not any other option.
It is a narrow path, as they say.
It is the same with God. We must choose Him. Otherwise, we continue to live like the other beasts, limited in what they can do. And in fact, many humans have no choice but to be godless as they are unaware of many things. They lack the wiring to understand things more complex than cheeseburgers and the time period until the next paycheck.
We also do not need God for morality. We can choose to be moral the same way.
We need God for an entirely different reason: God is part of reality, and the only sensible answer to many of our questions. Reality without God is incomplete, but reality without being able to speak German is incomplete, too. This is not a binary choice, but an option to optimize our experience.
Pursuit of God is like the pursuit of any other transcendental — such as “the good, the beautiful and the true” — in that these are things above and beyond mere survival, but they enhance life from subsisting to thriving. Thus to those who reach a certain level of understanding, they become essential. This is the philosophy called esotericism.
A human needs food, shelter, and water to survive. Above that, life becomes better, but only when those basics are so well taken care of that the mind can look to other things. This is both Mazlow’s hierarchy and our own evolution. As we became more powerful, we turned to questions that required more power.
But in each individual, evolution is recapitulated: we must develop ourselves to the highest levels we can, and we are limited by what we are given to work with. Someone with an IQ of a hundred has far fewer options than someone with an IQ of 130.
Morality comes from realism. We are here to adapt to this world in all of its complexity and, once we become aware of an option, we must either choose it and rise or remain where we are. There is no Hell, only a knowledge of “what could have been” which is beaten into our heads by time. Foreclosure and regret and strong teachers!
All traditional morality consists of choosing the things that work out better than others. The family, culture, tradition, even religion itself — these things are important to us because like other methods of survival, they work better than the other options.
And yet there is no need to choose them. Not everyone can, and not everyone wants to. The human notion of rationalism — based in the presumed but unproven and illogical belief that all people are “equal,” an algebraic notion applied to a multi-dimensional space — demands that we see God as universal and therefore accessible to all.
But in reality, like understanding The Republic, God is not open to all. God is not a machine or a wonder-drug. God is first and foremost a state we must reach within ourselves to choose God.
There is no equality. Equality is the death of God because it assumes that what is shared between humans, the human form, is perfection and is therefore superior to God’s order a.k.a. reality. Egalitarianism is our arrogance and denial of God, but most insist that it is necessary so that God can be universal instead of optional.
But He is optional, like every other good thing. He is also “racist”: God made the different groups with different abilities, and they serve different roles. Race, too, is not universal. Universalism is the bigotry of humans against the complexity and unknowability (for everyone) of God.
And yet, we must beat back our raging human Ego. What is important is reality, including its transcendental dimensions if we can fire up the inner gumption to seek them out. And with that, we will rediscover God, and he will no longer remain dead.
The modern world is based on rationalism, or the idea that we can understand our world using logic independent of direct experience. It tends to overlap with empiricism, or the idea that replicated results are the highest form of sense-experience.
From the opposite side of the debate comes the older view: human reason is misleading unless it is deeply intuitive and guided by morally honest, self-disciplined character. Our logical deductions often reflect more of the chaos of our own minds than the world around us.
In practice, rationalism means the assumption of equality a.k.a. “universality.” This thinking assumes that all objects sharing some attribute belong to the same category, and they behave the same way. It allows those objects to be treated as generic, and without any changes to our logical approach for their type versus another.
This reveals the human projection behind rationalism: we want the world to be uniform for the convenience of our thinking, which does not want to know particulars. It wants to make broad conclusions and apply them mechanically to achieve magical results. That provides the maximum convenience and ego-flattery for the individual.
Rationality starts with deduction, and ends with broad almost religious conclusions, but in the middle there is the imposition of assumptions about logic. Rationalists tend to assume that the boundaries of a category are more important than its center, in the same way the nuances of words in interpreting law has become more important than the spirit of the law. “Technically correct” is the hallmark of rationalism.
The utility of rationalism is found purely in material sciences. Technically, its results are correct, although there are always externalities and imprecisions that somehow were never noticed, and they are usually not mentioned.
If you wonder why our society is so advanced and yet so incapable of getting basic things right, you are seeing this rationalistic approach in action. When Microsoft Word glitches constantly and does by default some very stupid things, rest assured you are seeing the remnants and externalities of rationalism at work. People looked at the details and treated them as universal, instead of seeing how the parts connect up.
Rationalism has one sole advantage: it extends analytical thinking, or a bad analogue of it the way Budweiser is technically “beer,” to people who are not geniuses. The Crowd can participate if they memorize enough equations, rules and methods to be able to have some way of breaking apart a problem. But as with all things modern, the deconstructed is never assembled again into coherence, spreading entropy and misery alike.
Late stage empires are rootless. People have no fixed pursuits because they have no consistent values. As a result, they pursue novelty to distract themselves from the emptiness. This spills over into policy because whatever the hive is excited about becomes an opportunity for marketers, advertisers, politicians and celebrities to use in their own appeal.
These “obsessions” happen periodically and sweep through like a desert wind, then depart and are forgotten. The fear of eggs as a source of cancer was one, back in the 1980s. For several years, the news was filled with scientific studies about how eggs were linked to different cancers and were probably killing us all right now. There were calls for increased taxes and regulation of eggs.
Then, it all vanished. Someone put out contrary data, or discovered some common sense, and they bucked the herd. Once one person had stood up to the great wall of conformist neurosis, others did the same and the wall came tumbling down. It had always been a phantom of our minds, as it turned out, but for most of a decade people accepted it as ironclad fact.
Another nonsense freakout was the AIDS epidemic of the 1980s. If you listened to the media, and the scientists who apparently wrote studies hoping to get picked up by the media, AIDS was going to wipe us all out. It was going to become airborne and you could get it from doorknobs if you had a cut on your hand. And then, poof!, this attack of fear also disappeared.
There are other great freakouts. From the 1940s through the end of the 1980s, people were just about certain that humanity would perish by nuclear warfare. Admittedly, there was a greater chance of this threat than eggs giving us all AIDS, but it also made little sense given that the risk was widely known. Panic and obsession crowded out good sense as usual.
Since that time, we have had global warming and now global terror. Neither of these are an actual threat, but with a twist: they are visible manifestations of bigger problems. “Global warming” consists of lumping together observations of some of the impacts of overpopulation and blaming gasoline for them; terrorism is just the tip of the iceberg of the many problems of globalism, a stupid Tower of Babel project for our elites and their fawning egalitarian useful idiots.
On the flip side, some obsessions are positive. When something succeed, all the monkeys imitate it slavishly. The best example of these is multitasking, an illusion which is failing. Back in the 1990s, someone came up with the idea that the ideal dot-com employee could multitask, which originally meant that they could be on hold on the phone and still get stuff done elsewhere on their desk.
Then the idea of “multitasking” became a trend. Employers were asking janitor candidates if they could multitask. Articles and books were written about the importance of multitasking, and motivational speakers earned a living by teaching people who to multitask in daily life. And then, the first people bucked the trend. They pointed out that multitasking meant lower attention to each task, thus less depth and quality.
And now, the multitasking trend is vanishing into silence, just like all the other panics and fads.
Let us look at diversity. In the 1970s, the West was looking for allies to stop the spread of Communism through the third world. We came up with the idea of forcing them to be linked to us by economics. So we started importing them into Europe and the USA as cheap labor, enjoying the luxury of newly-affordable goods and services that provided, and the notion of the healthy mixed population — a goal of Leftists since the French Revolution at least — was born.
Over the last four decades, diversity has always been the answer. It is a form of pacifism which entails no longer struggling to rise above the lower, but mixing everyone into one big happy pool so that there is no longer racial strife and class warfare. It makes women swoon and men think about golf. The illusion being pitched is that with this problem of racial strife out of the way, we can all go back to what we were doing.
And yet the reality starts to dawn. Diversity does not mean that people are here to live elsewhere; it means they live among us. It means our children, who are still not neurologically mature, will bond with them and want to marry them. It means that they will always be given preference in jobs and customs, since we are trying to show how nice we are. It means endless costs and slowdowns making life so miserable normal people want to die.
Look for this trend to die this year. Like the others, it will blow away, forgotten in our embarrassment and irritation at having been duped for so long.
In general, individual differences in educational achievement were to a large extent due to genes and the influence of the family environment was negligible. Moreover, there is no evidence for gender differences in the underlying etiology.
Taken from the abstract of “Arithmetic, reading and writing performance has a strong genetic component: A study in primary school children.”
Hard determinism wins in the end. The !SCIENCE! is settled. You can truck your kiddoes to Kuman. You can do your bloody best to get them hooked on phonics; not on Chronic. Whether they play for the Green Bay Packers or the Green Bowl Packers has nothing to do with your behavior as a mommy or daddy. It simply doesn’t matter. Either they win the sperm-shot lottery, or its Gorbutt, PA forever.
I utterly reject most of what I wrote in the paragraph above (but not quite all). It’s there to caricature an unfortunate philosophical point of view. Determinism (religious, biological, social or financial) is often used as a pathetic copout. Families that produce multiple generations of athletes, scholars, business pioneers, war heroes, or successful politicians have more going for them than just Lilith’s Enchanted Ovum and shining pools of +5 Sperm of Smiting. Family lines that consistently produce a certain quality do so because they repeatedly do something right long after they “put the biscuit in the basket.”
A certain level of Bio-Determinism certainly exists. The odds of three generations of Berras playing Major League Baseball strictly at random are about even with my odds of walking into a Trump Casino, playing six hours of Red Dawg and ending the viability The Donald’s candidacy just from the turn of a friendly card or two. The New York Yankees don’t pick their starting catcher by throwing darts. Three generations of Bush didn’t get elected at least governor, if not higher, just from social connections. What we on the Alt-Right call HBD has a significant but not overdetermining role in determining who ends up finishing where in life’s grueling Ironman triathlon.
OK, so what else helps if I want my kids to be smarter, better-looking, and oh yeah, !RICHER! than I ever was? This is why we here at Amerika preach consequentialism. A lot of what you get out of life is the result of what you input. To do is to be said Socrates. It’s like a mathematical function. You set the independent variable going in and then you get a certain result coming out. Determining which values of x will get you at least an acceptable y is analogous to the System Identification Problem from Systems Engineering.
In the JPW Family, the magic ticket from what hard-over HBD types describe as the genetic lottery is mathematical ability. We aren’t all great at it, a lot of us know enough to bang out code, solve intricate systems, and build a good, basic predictive or explanatory mathematical model. We JPWs can do the stuff that gets you hired and out of Gorbutt. So how does that get passed on to the next generation like the baseball skills of Yogi Berra being handed down to Dale?
When you have a tradition, you fight for it. You demand of the generation that comes next. You preserve it athwart an entropic, collapsing world like Amerika. In my family we tell how my maternal grandfather worked as a mathematician for the US Navy. We Americans used to kill the enemy with our minds as well our drones. We let both our children know that we agree with Descartes with regards to which field of study will lead them to the highest rung on the ladder of thought.
In a partially, but not entirely np-complete fashion, genetics does matter. Yet, when it gets overplayed, determinism becomes both an excuse for failure and a facile justification for subtle and self-defeating forms of bigotry. Anyone who has either read Walter Williams or read about a fvcked-up Kennedy brat in rehab would logically concede this point.
HBD can be useful for making large-scale predictions. It doesn’t turn you into a savant-like Hari Seldon. It does not excuse failure to make something out or your own life and relying on genetic determinism isn’t going to get you into Harvard unless you are Princess Lieawatha.
Do what will make you successful and seek what you are naturally predestined to be good at. Both genetics and effort work together and can have positive or negative feedback with regards to determining whether you will get what you want out of life. Determinism is no excuse not to identify what works, codify it as tradition and establish Conservatism as a fight for those traditions that lead to superior outcomes.
Triacetone Triperoxide (TATP), often referred to as “acetone peroxide,” was the explosive used in the recent Brussels attacks. It is relatively simple to make from commonly-available ingredients. It is an entropy burst explosive, releasing massive amounts of fast-moving gas as its internal structure collapses.
Straight out of the early 1980s to you, here is the G-file on acetone peroxide, courtesy of Textfiles.com:
acetone (hardware, paint store)
hydrogen peroxide (hair bleach type – 15 volume or higher – hair/cosmetics store)
sulfuric acid (concentrated; if you use battery acid,boil until white fumes appear to remove all of the water)
You also need a thermometer, ice, salt, and containers.
Combine 30 milliliters of acetone and 50 milliliters of hydrogen
peroxide into a glass container and mix thoroughly.
The container must now be put into ice/salt water and cooled to
below 5 degrees Celsius. The easiest way to do this: take a coffee
can, put in water and salt to about half full, put container
(empty) into can, put plastic lid on can to keep container from
floating, put can in freezer, when water is frozen, take out,
remove lid, proceed. This will provide excellent cooling and also
keep container from floating.
Now, put a thermometer in the mixture. When it is below 5 degrees
Celsius, start putting in the sulfuric acid, one drop at a time.
Keep stirring and watching the thermometer. Adding the acid
produces heat; if it gets up to 10 degrees, stop adding acid and
wait for it to cool. You need to add a total of 2.5 milliliters of
sulfuric acid, one drop at a time.
What happens if the temp gets significantly higher than 10 degrees?
I don’t know, because I never let it happen. The BlackBook usually
warns you if you are in danger, and there is no warning here, but
still, don’t try it! Keep the temperature down. Also watch the
acid, as it tends to splatter.
Keep stirring for a couple minutes after adding all the acid. Put
the container in the fridge (not freezer) and let it sit overnight.
When you get it out the next morning, there will be a white
precipitate on the bottom.
Pour the solution through a coffee filter, paper towel, or other
filtering paper. This will collect the precipitate. Pour a couple
of spoonfuls of ice-cold water through the towel to remove acid.
Now set the paper out to dry. The resulting powder/crystals are a
very powerful primary explosive. According to the book, “Keep away
from shock, friction, and flame.”
This material can be loaded into a 2.5 inch length of brass or
copper tubing and pressed down to make blasting caps. The pressing
may be hazardous – the book details the manufacture of a loading
press which includes a shield to protect the user. The book says
this type of blasting cap will detonate most homemade explosives
without a booster explosive: “Acetone peroxide is a very powerful
initiator and can be used by itself as the main filler when making
This is the explosive of choice — called the “Mother of Satan” by some terrorists — of those who are attacking us in Europe. All of its ingredients are easily obtained, and the process of making it is simple and (relatively) stable. In other words, we cannot stop it from happening.
It illustrates the failure of diversity: without social trust, a society turns on itself. If you cannot trust that your neighbor and you — barring his insanity or sociopathy — have the same goals and values, you can expect terrorist attacks on a regular basis. Also expect complaints to be ignored, because they will be used spuriously.
Our future is one in which either we hyper-regulate many common chemicals, or we get used to the gentle sound of explosions and the wailing of victims. This is the future under diversity in a free society, and if it has a flag, it should have the TATP molecule on it.