This question came up recently in a discussion of conservatism where the phrase “1788 conservative” was used. This one floats around at the periphery, but I have heard it in real life as well as on the internet, and think it deserves elucidation.
The name “1788 conservative” refers to this:
“My principles are only those that, before the French Revolution, every well-born person considered sane and normal.” ― Julius Evola
The French Revolution began in 1789, and so “1788 conservatives” are those who see this as a horrible error and want to go back to the point before the error, and try again.
We tend to see the French Revolution as formalizing the decay of the West. The decay existed long before that, but picked up when political and military pressures weakened our aristocracy and our society did not support them. Rules made on paper are never good, but having enlightened and intelligent people in charge always works.
The aristocracy made this happen at every level: kings, dukes, and lords. These served as a mediating force on growth and finance, kept most of the land intact as hunting preserves, conserved culture and religion, and avoided the unbroken string of idiotic decisions and pointless wars that democracy has embarked upon.
The term “Right-wing” came about after the French Revolution to describe those who thought the ancient order before the Revolution was a better idea than the revolution; after that, “conservatives” — or those who accept the new government of the post-Revolution years, but want to conserve as much as possible of what went before — and “liberals” who accept the ideals of the Revolution but want it applied through conservative methods, became the only options.
1788 conservatives merely take conservatism to its root: we conserve that which has worked best in the past as proven by history, which is a society with heavy cultural influence regulating liberty, aristocracy in the lead, no government and no safety net, and a tendency toward excellence, divinity and other transcendental goals. We are the most honest form of conservative and the least politically correct and socially acceptable in a democratic regime.
What makes 1788 conservatives unique is that we recognize the inter-connected nature of aspects of civilization. We cannot deconstruct and separate ideas, as the democrats do, from their effect and the existential experience of life in that civilization. Leadership is connected to values and all is vested in the organic nation, or the people born of a similar root with similar abilities and inclinations which form the basis of culture and values.
In our degenerated time, where most of the people who should be able to think exist in a one-dimensional cartoon of ideological thinking, these ideas are mostly lost and forgotten. However, as liberal democracy continues to fail despite our patching it up more than Windows 10, the brightest lights among our people are reconsidering the era of kings as a future and not the distant past.
Surely the obituary for Western culture will include a footnote for the newish film Batman vs. Superman: Dawn of Justice:
Not only did the subject matter — a fantasy designed for small boys — trigger concerns of an infantilized and out of touch population, but also as many commentators noted, the movie was terrible. Robotic script, wooden acting, surface emotional content and brain-degrading dialogue. And yet, audiences seemed not to care, and attended it happily in large groups, possibly so busy texting and chattering that they were unaware they were watching a movie.
When entertainment for adults becomes cartoons, it says something about the audience. They need to feel like heroes, and they want to watch something with the depth of a Soviet propaganda film that makes them feel good about their society and its direction. This tells us that they are not heroes, and they are not confident in our future.
This takes us to a study of the psychology of projection. People assert what they doubt. They do this fanatically because it is psychologically easier than facing what they are afraid is true. Primitive societies dress their warriors like terrors in the hope that this will protect them. Sophisticated societies create mythologies of morality to rationalize failure by explaining that, while all is destroyed, it was done in the name of being good sociable creatures who never harmed anyone.
Projection allows us to assign our own choices to external forces. This can make us feel heroic, as in a superhero movie or “Social Justice” where people assume that armchair activism makes them into Martin Luther King, Jr. It can also avoid the elephant in the room, which is our bad choices, by blaming external actors like The Jews™, the Rich, “poverty” or Satan himself for the results of our poor decisions. Scapegoats of this nature are always more popular because they are simpler and psychologically easier than facing the actual problem, which is usually denied because people are afraid of it.
And yet fixing this actual problem is our only hope. We made bad choices and got bad results. Allowing mercantile elements to take over our society from below was stupid, as was pacifying the masses to avoid revolts. Democracy was stupid — especially after the warning from ancient Athens — and now tolerance, social justice, diversity, transgender bathroom rights and other artifacts of democracy are stupid. Just as Communism in Russia was stupid, Liberalism in America and Europe is stupid and heading in the same direction.
What makes history fascinating is that it is a story of people looking in the wrong places because they were afraid of the underlying issues. Then some disobedient individual or non-conforming group takes a new look at the problem, sees the obvious common sense reality and acts on it, and gets ahead. Then everyone else slavishly imitates that group, just as they slavishly imitated one another in avoiding the problem previously. Until we get to that state, our existence will be much like the odious Batman vs. Superman: a simplistic cartoon on the screen, and our feet stuck to the floor where an unknown sticky substance accumulates gradually, eventually pulling us all down into its decay.
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.”
*-I made this up. So sue me.
So this is what made Tipper Gore flip her bit back in the day. That, of course, was “Darling Nikki” performed by the artist formerly known as Prince (RIP). That was how I and several of my immature teenage sidekicks used to get back at Mom for making us stop behaving like pseudo-sapient primates.
Yet, as Prince aged, he came to espouse a philosophy more in line with Tipper than Nikki. He once shocked his libertine fandom by stating the following.
“God came to earth and saw people sticking it wherever and doing it with whatever, and he just cleared it all out,” he told the magazine. “He was, like, ‘Enough’.”
So that’s what happens if too many people grab a hold of Nikki and go upstairs and grind? Well, Prince didn’t claim to be converted to Christianity. He saw it as more of an enlightenment.
“I don’t see it really as a conversion,” he said. “More, you know, it’s a realization. It’s like Morpheus and Neo in ‘The Matrix’.”
This is not a shocker. Generally this is a logical reaction to the impact of the whole Darling Nikki lifestyle has over time. It’s fun at first and then the hate facts about lifestyle are begrudgingly acknowledged as drag sets in. Thus many people tend to fall into grace as C.S. Lewis put it. This seems particularly garish and jarring when we see it among the wild, hyper-sexualized rock singers and other entertainers who realize the cost of their lifestyles. Ozzy Osbourne and Alice Cooper have both been born again. Cooper even cast it as a rebellion against counterculture.*
“Drinking beer is easy. Trashing your hotel room is easy. But being a Christian, that’s a tough call. That’s rebellion.” “Sex, drugs and rock ‘n’ roll is easy. True Christianity … that’s rebellion.”
And this happens throughout the most radical counterculture. Howard Stern and Steven Tyler portray one lifestyle in their public content and then separate their daughters from it rigorously. The lesbian coprophages that Howard Stern interviews as part of his radio freakshow would be shot through the chest if they set foot on his lawn. The Obamas may party with ‘Yonce and JayZ, but their daughters attend Sidwell Friends.
We see the same with Prince. He made his money selling sexual sin like the Whore of Babylon. But he only lasted 57 years because of the extent to which he attempted to avoid the lifestyle he glorified to others in much of his music. Yep, when it came time to grind with Darling Nikki, an older, wiser Prince would only do it with someone else’s mentulla. The dichotomy did him in at last. He received an anti-opiate “save shot” days before he finally met his demise.
I’m firmly convinced he fell victim to the Hollywood Dichotomy. You can profess Christianity,** but can only serve one master in the end. I can only hope that Prince wasn’t claimed at last by the darker master that much of his pop-rock lifestyle ultimately served.
For those who care, take a lesson from this. If a person lives his own life diametrically opposite from how he suggests you live yours; then you probably do not want to heed his advice. People who are doing what they are supposed to do in life properly, do not suffer a dichotomy –- Hollywood or otherwise.
*-Dare I say it? A Neo-Reaction.
**-Or any other form of higher spiritual enlightenment or religious faith.
by Bill Waggoner
Following up on my article on mutual tolerance, I feel it due to point out that it founders in some circumstances. A distinction must be made if we are to preserve our sanity relatively intact between a behavior and its symbolic representation in our mental model of civilization and its values.
Even the most cursory familiarity with nature suffices to recognize the archetypal pattern that runs from people all the way down through animals, birds and (to the extent of their limited capacity) some fish and reptiles like alligators. Mommy and daddy make babies and devote their lives to feeding, teaching and defending them until they are able to go it on their own. This abstraction of the real into an idea/ideal it approximates is thus the normative model of human relations involving the procreative organs.
But since everything in the sublunary realm is subject to accident, as with any other model founded on the idealization of imperfect realities, divergences from it occur. The working solution to this, where people are concerned, has long been a policy of benign neglect. By common consent, what goes on behind closed doors is simply ignored: excluded from notice and comment. Like free market capitalism, while as imperfect in practice as any other makeshift compromise, this (at east in theory) nevertheless results in Bentham’s greatest good for the greatest number, with the inevitable abuses it enables written off as unavoidable without violating the compromise itself.
What we have been enduring in recent years is not, at root, inundation with distasteful “sexuality” but a frontal assault on the archetype itself as a normative model and guide. Like Satan, the rabidly “alternate sexual preference” brigade is not content with a place in the scheme of things. They must ascend the throne of “Nature and nature’s God” and rule from it. Not only should their behaviors come out of the closet, they must have their place in — and dominate — the drawing room. And the school system. And the media. And the workplace. And relations between people.
It isn’t really about homosexuality at all. That’s only the tip of the splitting wedge. The objective is the fragmentation of the coherence of Western Civilization that stands in the way of the forces using them as stalking horses — the setting of women against men, children against their parents, immigrants against natives and, in the final analysis, everyman against himself. In military parlance, it’s “softening up” an enemy target before invading and attempting to physically occupy it.
We are under assault, and our assailants are intelligent enough to use as their weapons those we would not attack because of their natural lower status. Homosexuals and transsexuals, by virtue of being rare and their sexual practices appalling to the vast majority of people, are natural targets of bullies and sadists. Our instinct is to protect them. Our enemies are using that goodwill against us to force us into internal conflict and thus, collapse. It’s not about sex at all; the great homosexual/transgender debate of 2016 is about conquest.
If this blog has a dominant theory, it is The enemy is us, in recognition of the fact that human groups tend toward entropy. Without intervention by the few among us who possess leadership ability, people follow individual paths that lead nowhere and generate social chaos.
In contrast, history teaches us a binary: true and not-true. Some methods of civilization work; others do not. Civilization is all; the individual without civilization has few options. Not surprisingly, most human fantasies involve being free of the burden of civilizational upkeep.
These fantasies started with the idea of equality, or that we do not need talented leaders, only rules on paper to make the average person into a responsible leader. This inept form of government then approved the next popular desire, which was that society should subsidize every person just for being human.
This leads us to the present. We have combined capitalism ingenuity with Socialist benefits to create the final state of liberal democracy: an egalitarian system in which all are safe, and all are miserable. Existential misery has risen to the level that few people are reproducing and most are miserable and destructive at the family level.
While this shows the function of government — squeezing the few productive ones to pay for the rest, thus keeping itself in power — it reveals a broader decline. Our civilization lost clear purpose about a thousand years ago when it started growing and as a result, tolerating people who could work as labor but had no other abilities.
This growth in robots of the biological type took its time to obliterate us, but managed to crowd out the few smart people by forcing them to manage and subsidize the masses. The masses then overthrew their leaders, established democracy, and our dysfunctional government now is merely acting out their fantasies.
Like all illusions, this one is coming to an end.
- Life is hell: people are stupid, behavior is bad, jobs are jails, neighborhoods are alienating, products are low quality and culture is idiocy.
- We’re dying out. Reproduction lags replacement levels.
- Bad leadership. Our governments are in debt beyond what we could ever repay and bloated, inefficient and destructive in their policies.
- Moron victory. Most people, industries and bureaucrats are incompetent.
- Diversity. We are surrounded by those that diversity makes into enemies. We invited them here to pay for our subsidies with their labor, and they hate us as a result.
The situation seems hopeless. The morons have won; all is decline. As a result, most smart people aim for either self-destruction or escape. The thought of retreating somewhere away from the disaster is tempting until one considers that the decay always needs more money and enemies to keep going. Breakaway “exit” is not an option.
This means that we either gain control of the beast, or we let it destroy itself and then some of us rebuild. The problem with rebuilding is that idiots always outnumber the intelligent, and when idiots see something good next door, they will go there and ruin it too (this is the Peet Conundrum).
As with most hard problems, neither option seems particularly rewarding. Gaining control of an out-of-control democracy (but I repeat myself, as Ann Coulter says) is nearly impossible because people always vote for personal benefit at the expense of the whole. The future requires cutting benefits, and voters would rather die.
Thus I propose a hybrid plan: a society which rises up from within the ashes of the old, by destroying the old through parasitism, with a goal toward seizing the power that remains and using it to disenfranchise those who do not understand why this is necessary. In short: a replication of the liberal strategy.
Liberals conquered the West with relatively few people. They did so through a simple formula:
- A plausible complaint. Inequality causes internal division.
- A simple theory. An inverted form of pacifism: give equality in exchange for comradeship.
- A scapegoat. The only reason our policies fail is the more-equal thwarting us.
- A bribe. Fight the enemy and you can join our gang, and we’ll help you.
Comparisons to cults, street gangs and cancers are appropriate. This is the same mentality: form a dissident group and take over by working for each other, against the society at large, forcing it to accept you, at which point you can hoodwink the rest with simple promises.
If we can unite even a half-percent of the right people in our society, we can make them the force for revolutionary change. In the late 1990s, I wrote:
Among us, there are 2-5% of people in our society who are leaders in a practical sense. This means that whether they have an official title or not, they lead the community in business, spiritual, community, academic or social settings.
These are the people that your average person trusts. They trust information from these people more than from the government, their televisions, or casual friends. They respect the judgment abilities of these people.
Our goal is to inform these leaders of our values, get them to form consensus that these should be adopted, and then send them forth to implement these values in all that they do and to demand them from politicians.
This group becomes valuable when liberal democracy fails as is inevitable. Like the Soviet Union and post-Revolutionary France, Western liberal democracy is collapsing for the usual reason: it is based on rebellion, and not on having a positive and affirmative life direction.
The collapse of Western liberal democracy is a subordinate event to the collapse of the West itself. The choice of liberal democracy was a symptom of this greater collapse, and when liberal democracy goes, we will still have the broader problem of decline to deal with. But as with most human error, it is relatively easily counteracted.
At that time, a power vacuum will occur, much as happened after the fall of the USSR. Into this state normally come tyrants because strong power is the only force which can unify a distracted, narcissistic, oblivious and robotic population. But into that power vacuum a unified group can project itself and seize power.
The fall of liberal democracy in the West will occur because the government has created too many benefits it cannot sustain, and it will need to drop those to avoid both external and internal threats. Unable to do that, it has become dependent on the flow of money and thus corrupted by business and special interest groups.
As its options narrow, liberal democracy will be unable to avoid the financial collapse of its governments, internal unrest and the threats from outside forces — notably Russia, India, China and South American states — who will attempt to overthrow it. In bankruptcy, riots and war it will exit this world.
That brings a condition where power will be handed to those who are able to instill order so people can earn a living. Your average person makes poor decisions and will settle for those alone, figuring he’ll fix the rest later. Humans never change. This is how tyrants gain power.
If, on the other hand, the one group that was not agitating for some variety of liberal democracy steps up and proclaims a new plan, it can then gain enough support from the 60% of people in the West who are not totally lost and use that to seize power.
It goal must then be to learn from the past, and realize that there are many among us who do not fit. All Other must go gently back to their homelands, but so must all who do not fit the Western European model of tall, thin-faced, slender and intelligent people. We need a general purge through deportation to restore eugenic health.
Another essential task is to disenfranchise the 99 out of 100 people who have no capacity for leadership decisions. If they are allowed to continue voting, they will screw it up the exact same way as last time because their historical consciousness lasts for six months. They cannot be educated or instructed to make right choices.
At this point, the new regime can begin to focus on restoring genetic, moral and spiritual health. This cannot be done from outside, but by choosing those who exhibit more of these traits than others and advancing them. A process of many centuries leads us back to health.
Of late, I have grown more optimistic because the fall of liberal democracy is not only clear and imminent, but also looks to be extreme enough to give us momentum toward an entirely different system, which I formulate as:
- Nationalism. Only those of the founding ethnic group constitute the nation. These must uphold the ideals of the group in appearance, ability and inclinations.
- Capitalism. No managed economies. Allow people to buy and sell from each other, as limited by cultural values and where abusive, the strong hands of kings and lords.
- Aristocracy. Put the best people by leadership ability into power and give them the authority to fix problems without reference to precedent.
- Transcendentals. Instead of looking backward to threats and fears, society must set itself toward affirmative goals involving excellence.
Right now, this seems like a LARP dream list. That will change as liberal democracy crashes and its obvious fiscal irresponsibility, statecraft incompetence, and inner corruption is revealed. At that point, this entirely different system will resemble what it is, which is the true to liberal democracy’s not-true.
For now, people want a task, and this is it: help destroy the governments of your nations. Do whatever you can to make everyday life for the average person miserable and to cause government to screw up and self-destruct. Push it toward bankruptcy, warfare, and failure. Show no mercy, as it will show you none.
By nature, we are conservatives who wish to destroy nothing. But when the disease has taken over most of the tree, or at least blocked the roots from the leaves, it is time to savagely hack until it falls, and then set it ablaze so its infection does not spread. Thus shall be the end of liberal democracy and the rebirth of humanity.
It may well be time to update some of the stale linguistics that describe the ongoing political efforts to game democratic governance. Perhaps the terms Google Nudge, Google Auction or even worse; Google Veto need to be added to the lexicon. This new anti-democratic influence on political decision-making is emerging because of a confluence of technology, ideology and material means to effect said dominance. The technology is the internet search engine, the ideology is Progressive Liberaltarianism* and the material means is the obvious wellspring of vast wealth that has been accumulated in Silicon Valley.
The internet search engine works as a technological conduit by which information can be gathered, sorted and delivered for consumption via the personal computer or other digital platforms. When you control a utility; you also control a bottle neck. Google currently dominates the search engine industry. This means they also have the option to control or auction what bit of information makes it through the search engine queue first. Given the Modern high time preference, this is an awesome power to control what people think. Robert Epstein explains the limiting power of this conduit.
That ordered list is so good, in fact, that about 50 per cent of our clicks go to the top two items, and more than 90 per cent of our clicks go to the 10 items listed on the first page of results; few people look at other results pages…
So given the limited queue time to get your information read and the awesome power of the internet search engine, who shows up where in a search priority is a huge monetary event for the people publishing the information.
Because people are far more likely to read and click on higher-ranked items, companies now spend billions of dollars every year trying to trick Google’s search algorithm – the computer program that does the selecting and ranking – into boosting them another notch or two. Moving up a notch can mean the difference between success and failure for a business, and moving into the top slots can be the key to fat profits.
So how does this translate into political power? Through the Search Engine Manipulation Effect. What internet users get shown, influences what they see of the truth and how they view the world around them.
We present evidence from five experiments in two countries suggesting the power and robustness of the search engine manipulation effect (SEME). Specifically, we show that (i) biased search rankings can shift the voting preferences of undecided voters by 20% or more, (ii) the shift can be much higher in some demographic groups, and (iii) such rankings can be masked so that people show no awareness of the manipulation. Knowing the proportion of undecided voters in a population who have Internet access, along with the proportion of those voters who can be influenced using SEME, allows one to calculate the win margin below which SEME might be able to determine an election outcome.
Corporations and workers who make a living controlling power internet sites gain a measure of political power by their proximity to the data conduits. Here is an example of how this may occur in future elections.
To test the hypothesis that political behavior can spread through an online social network, we conducted a randomized controlled trial with all users of at least 18 years of age in the United States who accessed the Facebook website on 2 November 2010, the day of the US congressional elections. Users were randomly assigned to a ‘social message’ group, an ‘informational message’ group or a control group. The social message group (n= 60,055,176) was shown a statement at the top of their ‘News Feed’. This message encouraged the user to vote, provided a link to find local polling places, showed a clickable button reading ‘I Voted’, showed a counter indicating how many other Facebook users had previously reported voting, and displayed up to six small randomly selected ‘profile pictures’ of the user’s Facebook friends who had already clicked the I Voted button (Fig. 1). The informational message group (n=611,044) was shown the message, poll information, counter and button, but they were not shown any faces of friends. The control group (n=613,096) did not receive any message at the top of their News Feed.
People receiving the “social message” were 0.39% more likely to vote than those who did not. Out of approximately 610,000 voters, this makes turnout increase by a notch under 2,500. When so-called social-contagion is taken into account, this increase in turnout becomes 0.60% or something on the order 3,800 to 4,000 out of 610,000. Out of an electorate of 240 Million (approximate US eligible voters); this would be almost 1.5 million votes. If these votes were to be effectively controlled and aimed, this could “nudge” a close election such as Bush v. Gore in a desired direction. Hence we have our possible Google Nudge.
What happens when an election (or a primary contest) is projected to go down to the wire? Any good OR analyst working for a politician then has to consider the Google Nudge a mathematically significant variable. Politicians pay their mathematicians to perform two functions: identify these variables and manipulate them to favor the politician or not impact the election.
The people who run Google are brilliant engineers and better-than-passable business professionals. They have a good they can use to trade/leverage the politician running in a close election. It becomes time to either hold an auction or determine the outcome of the election. If Google is indifferent to which side wins, they can call up both campaigns and ask them “What’cha gonna’ do me?” The candidates then change their platforms/proposals to adopt a more Google-Compliant agenda. This allows Google to choose between which political candidate will be a more profitable/reliable Sugar Daddy for regulatory capture.
The Google Veto is more pernicious. Google could decide that Candidate A is a flaming rectal orifice who is completely iniquitous to the corporate interest. At this point, they will slant the results, flood the meme-zone with anti-A SEME and use their abilities to drive all 1.5 million voters to the polls to vote for B. Google would only have to hack one election to prove its point and permanently accrue a measure of power over national governance. This gives Google, Apple, Facebook and all the rest the ability to hack and rewire democracy to their tastes at any juncture where electoral politics are competitive.
This makes potential Google Nudges, Google Auctions and Google Vetoes stochastically unpredictable and chaotic anti-democratic features of the current system. It would lead to greater chaos, enhanced social entropy, stilted economic growth and eroded social cohesion. An unpredictable life is rarely pleasant, productive or beneficial. Silicon Valley thereby becomes a Liberaltarian engine of destruction that further accelerates the unraveling of America into Amerika. This digital branch of government could become yet another force that works to lay basic decency to nines.
*-Social Liberalism combined with crony capitalism. Think regulatory capture with open borders, anti-religious agitation and complete undermining of all non-governmental social support structures.
by Bill Waggoner
Let me share with you one of my favorite passages from Benjamin Disraeli’s Coningsby (1844):
Eschew political sentimentalism. What I contend is, that if you permit men to accumulate property, and they use that permission to a great extent, power is inseparable from that property, and it is in the last degree impolitic to make it the interest of any powerful class to oppose the institutions under which they live. The Jews, for example, independently of the capital qualities for citizenship which they possess in their industry, temperance, and energy and vivacity of mind, are a race essentially monarchical, deeply religious, and shrinking themselves from converts as from a calamity, are ever anxious to see the religious systems of the countries in which they live flourish; yet, since your society has become agitated in England, and powerful combinations menace your institutions, you find the once loyal Hebrew invariably arrayed in the same ranks as the leveller, and the latitudinarian, and prepared to support the policy which may even endanger his life and property, rather than tamely continue under a system which seeks to degrade him. The Tories lose an important election at a critical moment; ’tis the Jews come forward to vote against them. The Church is alarmed at the scheme of a latitudinarian university, and learns with relief that funds are not forthcoming for its establishment; a Jew immediately advances and endows it. Yet the Jews, Coningsby, are essentially Tories. Toryism, indeed, is but copied from the mighty prototype which has fashioned Europe. And every generation they must become more powerful and more dangerous to the society which is hostile to them. Do you think that the quiet humdrum persecution of a decorous representative of an English university can crush those who have successively baffled the Pharaohs, Nebuchadnezzar, Rome, and the Feudal ages? The fact is, you cannot destroy a pure race of the Caucasian organisation. It is a physiological fact; a simple law of nature, which has baffled Egyptian and Assyrian Kings, Roman Emperors, and Christian Inquisitors. No penal laws, no physical tortures, can effect that a superior race should be absorbed in an inferior, or be destroyed by it. The mixed persecuting races disappear; the pure persecuted race remains. And at this moment, in spite of centuries, of tens of centuries, of degradation, the Jewish mind exercises a vast influence on the affairs of Europe. I speak not of their laws, which you still obey; of their literature, with which your minds are saturated; but of the living Hebrew intellect.
‘You never observe a great intellectual movement in Europe in which the Jews do not greatly participate. The first Jesuits were Jews; that mysterious Russian Diplomacy which so alarms Western Europe is organised and principally carried on by Jews; that mighty revolution which is at this moment preparing in Germany, and which will be, in fact, a second and greater Reformation, and of which so little is as yet known in England, is entirely developing under the auspices of Jews, who almost monopolise the professorial chairs of Germany. Neander, the founder of Spiritual Christianity, and who is Regius Professor of Divinity in the University of Berlin, is a Jew. Benary, equally famous, and in the same University, is a Jew. Wehl, the Arabic Professor of Heidelberg, is a Jew. Years ago, when I was In Palestine, I met a German student who was accumulating materials for the History of Christianity, and studying the genius of the place; a modest and learned man. It was Wehl; then unknown, since become the first Arabic scholar of the day, and the author of the life of Mahomet. But for the German professors of this race, their name is Legion. I think there are more than ten at Berlin alone.
‘I told you just now that I was going up to town tomorrow, because I always made it a rule to interpose when affairs of State were on the carpet. Otherwise, I never interfere. I hear of peace and war in newspapers, but I am never alarmed, except when I am informed that the Sovereigns want treasure; then I know that monarchs are serious.
‘A few years back we were applied, to by Russia. Now, there has been no friendship between the Court of St. Petersburg and my family. It has Dutch connections, which have generally supplied it; and our representations in favour of the Polish Hebrews, a numerous race, but the most suffering and degraded of all the tribes, have not been very agreeable to the Czar. However, circumstances drew to an approximation between the Romanoffs and the Sidonias. I resolved to go myself to St. Petersburg. I had, on my arrival, an interview with the Russian Minister of Finance, Count Cancrin; I beheld the son of a Lithuanian Jew. The loan was connected with the affairs of Spain; I resolved on repairing to Spain from Russia. I travelled without intermission. I had an audience immediately on my arrival with the Spanish Minister, Senor Mendizabel; I beheld one like myself, the son of a Nuevo Christiano, a Jew of Arragon. In consequence of what transpired at Madrid, I went straight to Paris to consult the President of the French Council; I beheld the son of a French Jew, a hero, an imperial marshal, and very properly so, for who should be military heroes if not those who worship the Lord of Hosts?’
‘And is Soult a Hebrew?’
‘Yes, and others of the French marshals, and the most famous; Massena, for example; his real name was Manasseh: but to my anecdote. The consequence of our consultations was, that some Northern power should be applied to in a friendly and mediative capacity. We fixed on Prussia; and the President of the Council made an application to the Prussian Minister, who attended a few days after our conference. Count Arnim entered the cabinet, and I beheld a Prussian Jew. So you see, my dear Coningsby, that the world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.’
‘You startle, and deeply interest me.’
‘You must study physiology, my dear child. Pure races of Caucasus may be persecuted, but they cannot be despised, except by the brutal ignorance of some mongrel breed, that brandishes fagots and howls extermination, but is itself exterminated without persecution, by that irresistible law of Nature which is fatal to curs.’
‘But I come also from Caucasus,’ said Coningsby.
‘Verily; and thank your Creator for such a destiny: and your race is sufficiently pure. You come from the shores of the Northern Sea, land of the blue eye, and the golden hair, and the frank brow: ’tis a famous breed, with whom we Arabs have contended long; from whom we have suffered much: but these Goths, and Saxons, and Normans were doubtless great men.’
‘But so favoured by Nature, why has not your race produced great poets, great orators, great writers?’
‘Favoured by Nature and by Nature’s God, we produced the lyre of David; we gave you Isaiah and Ezekiel; they are our Olynthians, our Philippics. Favoured by Nature we still remain: but in exact proportion as we have been favoured by Nature we have been persecuted by Man. After a thousand struggles; after acts of heroic courage that Rome has never equalled; deeds of divine patriotism that Athens, and Sparta, and Carthage have never excelled; we have endured fifteen hundred years of supernatural slavery, during which, every device that can degrade or destroy man has been the destiny that we have sustained and baffled. The Hebrew child has entered adolescence only to learn that he was the Pariah of that ungrateful Europe that owes to him the best part of its laws, a fine portion of its literature, all its religion. Great poets require a public; we have been content with the immortal melodies that we sung more than two thousand years ago by the waters of Babylon and wept. They record our triumphs; they solace our affliction. Great orators are the creatures of popular assemblies; we were permitted only by stealth to meet even in our temples. And as for great writers, the catalogue is not blank. What are all the schoolmen, Aquinas himself, to Maimonides? And as for modern philosophy, all springs from Spinoza.
‘But the passionate and creative genius, that is the nearest link to Divinity, and which no human tyranny can destroy, though it can divert it; that should have stirred the hearts of nations by its inspired sympathy, or governed senates by its burning eloquence; has found a medium for its expression, to which, in spite of your prejudices and your evil passions, you have been obliged to bow. The ear, the voice, the fancy teeming with combinations, the imagination fervent with picture and emotion, that came from Caucasus, and which we have preserved unpolluted, have endowed us with almost the exclusive privilege of Music; that science of harmonious sounds, which the ancients recognised as most divine, and deified in the person of their most beautiful creation. I speak not of the past; though, were I to enter into the history of the lords of melody, you would find it the annals of Hebrew genius. But at this moment even, musical Europe is ours. There is not a company of singers, not an orchestra in a single capital, that is not crowded with our children under the feigned names which they adopt to conciliate the dark aversion which your posterity will some day disclaim with shame and disgust. Almost every great composer, skilled musician, almost every voice that ravishes you with its transporting strains, springs from our tribes. The catalogue is too vast to enumerate; too illustrious to dwell for a moment on secondary names, however eminent. Enough for us that the three great creative minds to whose exquisite inventions all nations at this moment yield, Rossini, Meyerbeer, Mendelssohn, are of Hebrew race; and little do your men of fashion, your muscadins of Paris, and your dandies of London, as they thrill into raptures at the notes of a Pasta or a Grisi, little do they suspect that they are offering their homage to “the sweet singers of Israel!”‘
Brett’s commentary: The above shows us why to appreciate literature more than polemic. It shows a depth of idea which is not one-dimensional, but introduces the complexity and seeming contradictions within each part.
Like many thriving societies, Indo-Europeans tend to became overwhelmed by their own momentum, and lose sight of the goal. At that point, they look outside of themselves for inspiration — and also for scapegoats.
Those who are scapegoated, in the meantime, are both aware of a path that is clearer to them than it is to their hosts, but also, are themselves in the grip of decline and fighting hard to avoid being scapegoated.
This pits each group against itself, and against each other, when in fact the Jewish approach is correct and should simply be adopted by the Indo-Europeans, much as they adopted Christianity, despite much of that originating in Greek and Hindu sources before Hebrew ones.
When I talk to suicidal people that I care about, I get angry. I recognize that we can’t really save these people, that a will to live must come from within, and though we might help others regain this, we ultimately can’t do it for them. This painful frustration combines with a deep revulsion for listless, dejected, and lifeless modes of thought.
I end up in a similar rage when listening to John Lennon’s Imagine. Read through the lyrics with me and I’ll show you why.
Imagine there’s no heaven
It’s easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Lennon is doing more than criticizing religion here; he is affirming plain, boring, hopeless materialism. Lennon preaches that this earth, this dirt, is all there is. All is merely meaningless atoms, occasionally being bound in a solid, but usually just wandering randomly and bouncing off other atoms. Nothing has any value or purpose beyond, we presume, human desires like fame, money, popularity and other palliative distractions.
It’s certainly easy for modern people, who have had no contact with traditional religion, who have no real understanding of what heaven is, to imagine it doesn’t exist. They don’t even have to try; they were born into this belief and follow it unquestioningly. This belief is the official view of science, government and most artists, just as it was the official policy of the French Revolution and Bolshevik rebels.
Despite this, the wife batterer presents this materialism the same way a teenage atheist smugly announces that he’s noticed that there wouldn’t be room for all the animals in the Arc, and so there is no God, and aren’t you amazed at how smart he is for figuring this out?
Imagine all the people
Living for today
This we don’t have to imagine! We already live in a sea of myopic hedonists with no attention span, and we’ll be seeing even more of them if current trends of low fertility of the highly intelligent and mass immigration from high time preference populations continue. Might as well tell a fish to imagine water.
Even more, in this statement we see Lennon’s real solution to humanity: stop aspiring, stop dreaming, just hang out and be cool with each other like good little hippies. That sounds groovy until you realize that someone will have to grow the food and fix the roads, so there’s going to be some kind of Soviet society to enforce that so all you hep cats can keep the love-in alive.
Is this as bleak as the USSR? You bet. It shows what happens when, like Lennon, your belief system is based in the idea that your own troubles are the fault of civilization, and the correct answer is to dismantle civilization and reduce it to a hipster party. Then when morning comes, the good feelings are gone and you must find some way to force the beautiful people to start the cleanup.
Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
The underlying assumption is that wars happen because there are countries, that conflict is merely the by-product of arbitrary lines in the ground. Conflict is in fact present in every ecosystem, and is a necessary result of very basic factors like resource finiteness. Borders, well defended borders, actually shield against this conflict.
Pacifism is another negative emotion. Where a sensible view would be that struggle creates evolution, the pacifist vision — a lot like heat-death — is to eliminate all conflict and just go with the flow. Endless compromise, settling, rationalization and justification, but no forward action.
Nothing to kill or die for
Here is the most depressing line in the song. It’s so blatantly chilling and bleak that we should question the sanity of those who enjoy the song. Do they not notice? Is this actually appealing to them?
Nothing to kill or die for means that there is nothing worth killing or dying for. All that exists is mundane, petty, worthless. It’s not clear how Lennon imagines children fitting into this picture — does he wish people didn’t love their children enough to kill and die for them, or does he wish no one had children? Does he imagine a loveless world or a suicidal population? Either way, this fantasy of his is fundamentally horrible and miserable.
And no religion too
Well, except Islam. We can’t ever oppose or offend Islam in any way. Our minds are so overthrown by political correctness that we can’t even imagine doing so.
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace…
Lennon really double-downstrokes that pacifism chord. Here we have the belief that the best thing to do in a knife fight is put down the knife and hug the opponent. A pattern emerges: this entire song is comprised of Leftist ideas that only work, only play out in the intended manner, in the imagination of a leftist.
You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will be as one
When a leftist says “we hope you’ll join us”, consider it a threat.
Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
He means communism, and that’s sad enough, but consider the words at face value and it sounds like poverty — no one has anything. It’s no coincidence that that’s the reality that communism has historically moved towards. It is also not coincidental that those who preach “no possessions” tend to be, like John Lennon or Hugo Chavez, immensely wealthy.
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world
Yeah, we get it, international communism. It’s not a good idea, and it’s always accompanied by loads of greed and hunger. When does he stop to think that if it were this simple, it would have been solved already. Or that long-haired drop-outs have been preaching this kind of philosophy since the dawn of time, and every time it has been tried, it has failed.
You may say I’m a dreamer
But I’m not the only one
I hope someday you’ll join us
And the world will live as one
You are a dreamer, John, and your dream is a miserable lie. So then why is this so popular? How can such an evil, depressing song be so popular?
The music itself is highly simplified and dull. If I play the tune in my head and allow an image to form (try it) what I see is padded walls and drooling patients being soothed by bland melodies as they’re beckoned to take their medications, sup their mush, and have their backsides wiped. This is not so far off from its intended purpose.
The song promises extreme comfort, complete shielding from nature and all its dangers, like hunger and death. It promises a sterile freedom from consequences and ultimate safety, showing us a world where nothing bad ever happens. This will all happen, if we only just imagine it. Ironically, it’s very similar to the popular notion of heaven conceived as a kind of Earth II, where things are pretty much like they are here, but without the meanies and bad stuff, and with comfy clouds and smooth jazz.
Now, no healthy person wants to die, or wants their loved ones to die, but retreating from danger into a psychology that denies its inherent value, a psychology that refuses to accept that death and pain are not just unavoidable, but vital to life results in a mind that has disengaged from life. Someone who adheres to this utopian pablum has abdicated from life, from actively participating in this world. This means they are also cut off from everything good. Blindfolded and groping, they will still experience pain and death, but won’t see why, won’t understand, and can only find solace in delusion.
These people, those who are moved to tears by this song, want to sleep, sleep forever in death. Freedom from conflict is impossible in this world, and can only be achieved by slipping into death.
Next time you see this song played in the wake of a terrorist attack, consider the audience as members of a death cult. They’ve just witness a terrible tragedy, an attack on them and their people, and they steadfastly refuse to address the cause, or retaliate in any way. They remain committed to the demise of their people.
It’s depressing observing a single suicidal person, and far more so observing a suicidal people. That’s why this is the most depressing song ever: it’s the song of a suicidal people.
When the patient has no hope, we enter palliative care. Sedatives and painkillers abound. Food and water are withdrawn, to allow the body to exit with grace. When that moves too slowly, ever-increasing doses of morphine are administered. At some point, the soul flies away and the gasping corpse returns to the earth.
We are at that point with America (and come to think of it, Europe, too).
These were groups of people, but they were replaced by governments — by their own hands, I might add. The politicians offered benefits like merchants offer discounts, and We The People leapt for the freebie. Then they found out that the cost was the creation of a USSR-style permanent bureaucracy that determined who would succeed and who would fail on the basis of ideology.
America was designed around the idea that democracy could be constrained by rules on paper. If we cannot have the best leading us, we can plan for an average equal robot-citizen to take the role, and put enough rules in there to keep him from doing damage. Or could we? The history of America shows that this approach has failed.
It is time to put the dying beast out of its misery. Its purpose long ago destroyed, it survives from lack of anything else to do. But having no direction, it merely lingers in boredom and complaint to the point that it does not even fear death. This is not life; it is living death. Release it!
Government is not the nation. The nation is the nation: the people, their genetics, their culture and values. In saner times, we avoided government and had kings instead, people drawn from the nation who showed the best of its traits, and could lead it to excellence. But that hurt snowflake feelings: not everyone can be excellent.
It took them almost two centuries, but in 1968 the destroyers won. They did not want a nation. They wanted a jobs program with some kind of talking competition in which unexceptional people could become important just for destroying things and justifying it in creative ways.
At that point, America the organism died, and was replaced by Amerika the zombie-robot-ideology. Ever since that time, it has been miserable to live here. Jobs have replaced purpose, politics has replaced thinking, and a string of foreigners have replaced the people.
Mr. Trump, please do the right thing. Put this terminal patient to rest. Shoot it in the head. Declare a world war for transgender rights and ensure that the governments of USA and the EU perish in flames so that we do not have to watch the long slow decay to Brazil 2.0. Ruin government, so we can rebuild.
The remnant is out here. But they are paralyzed until the power falls. Burn it down, tear it down. Make America Go Away (MAGA). Send the EU to the fires of Hades. Smash all that is rotten and dead, and cover the earth in ash so something new can grow.
Anything is better than this.