Savvy readers will look at this story not for what India is doing, since with industrialization it is the same as what everyone else is doing, but for a look at what is happening to us as well. With the rise of industry, so also rises Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) which is basically severe lung conditions caused by excessive deposits of airborne particulate pollution. This comes from “dirty diesel exhaust fumes, construction dust, rising industrial emissions and crop burning,” and we have the same here. When populations are sparse as opposed to dense, much of this drifts away and is diluted to safe amounts; when populations are sparse and also separated by lots of open natural land, this pollution is filtered out. As humanity expands, none of us will be able to escape the consummate lung destruction wrought by our industry and density.
At this point in history, any time you see the tag “racist” attached to anything, you know that it simply means that this thing opposes the agenda of worldwide Leftism, which hopes to destroy all culture through class war and replace it with robotic grey people in uniforms doing exactly the right thing, sort of a hybrid between Brave New World, Idiocracy, and Brazil. Trump cites a Buchanan article that he thought was insightful which points out that the 1965 changes to immigration law were designed to import a permanent Leftist majority and that, once this happens, the USA will commit suicide by becoming a third-world nation. This is the brutal reality with which we are now dealing, and most people are late in awakening to this, although those of us who have read up on the fall of Rome and Greece realize that diversity is not our strength, but our euthanasia. The media seems shocked that Trump would avoid committing an ad hominem fallacy, and instead accept articles from people he dislikes but only when those articles are correct and relevant. In the meantime, the media is doing its best to hedge its bets: both rail against Trump, and introduce to people these ideas, since even media is starting to realize that if the USA goes third world, the days of big fat profits and comfortable journalists are over.
Right-wing group sets up protest outside newspaper office; woman from inside the office rushes out and does something that causes one of them to grab her by the back of the neck and fling her aside. Those are the facts as we know them. Knowing what I do of Leftists, it is most likely that she ran in and physically intervened or otherwise obstructed these Right-wingers, at which point they removed her from the situation; no one tries to disable someone else by grabbing them by the back of the neck, since that is a move that one uses to move someone out of the way as opposed to knocking them out cold. Still, she did it for the headlines, and the subservient media is there to deliver as usual. They still get to issue a headline which inverts circumstance: instead of a Leftist interrupting a Rightist protest, you have a Rightist interrupting a Leftist. As usual, the media will take advantage of “the pocket,” or the time between when it issues its breaking news reports and when the full facts are discovered, to spin the narrative.
The key to this one comes from the fact that his fellow dancers have been status signaling against him on Twitter. The big point there is that ultimately, having “politically correct” opinions has become a competition, or a way to get a leg up if you are not “one of the most talented dancers of his generation.” Then we see that those who are in authority want to keep order by removing that which rocks the boat. In this way, the vast number of mediocre can depose the talented for having the wrong opinions, and “everyone” seems happy, at least statistically. When you let the Crowd in, even a little bit, it quickly takes over, because it has put you in the position of explaining yourself to an angry mob instead of leading them toward what has been historically proven to be correct. Political correctness is a filter we impose in order to manage others, and as we can see here, it has ludicrous results. People from previous centuries would wonder so much why we care what someone says on Twitter, until they realize that our society is dying of its infection by the Crowd, and so it has become committed to denial, and anyone who points out that the emperor has no new clothes thus becomes a thought-criminal and enemy of the herd.
A sensible summary of the Trump years might begin with the statement from this Op-Ed that “The United States will not be the world’s premier chump anymore.” Europe destroyed itself with the world wars, and America won by entering late once the conflict was defined and the technology needed in order to win was clear. Both of these wars started with one level of technology and finished on an entirely different one. This means that America is the center of the world because it is the center of the West, despite its many problems. If Europe wants to revitalize itself, it will have to kick out its weak DNA and foreigners and restore itself from its roots, which will take centuries. As it turns out, those revolutions and other The Enlightenment™ drama did have a high cost, but it took centuries to manifest. America survives because despite its Leftward plunge and massive diversity problems, it never attempted to shape its citizens as much as Europe has, in part because it is not trying to play comeback to an impossible dream. Europe can say, “Ah, once we were great!” but until it is able to improve the quality of its people, stop its degeneracy, establish commanding powers, and beat back the parasites at its door in Eurasia and the Mediterranean, it is doomed to become a tourist destination with good food and not much else. America faces a different challenge, which in my view is to overcome the path that it went down shortly before the Civil War, where its ethnically-diverse mix of new citizens wanted it to become an managerial/ideological republic enforcing civil rights in order to make everyone equal, instead of a government which served as a curator for those who founded it, which meant not just the Western European pioneers but those who upheld the spirit and capabilities of Western Civilization. If America ever realizes that she is the one who must restore Western Civilization, she may rediscover her ancestral identity and overcome the disasters of the 1820s, 1860s, 1930s, 1960s, and 1990s.
Hysterical historical factoid of the day: the divorce bill for Brexit (£40bn) will cost less than the Bezos divorce (£52bn). In his jurisdiction, law demands that he give her half of everything acquired after the marriage.
Everywhere diversity has been tried, rape and sexual assault seem to accelerate. People forget that rape is a weapon of demographic change. It allows a minority to subjugate a majority by making them live in fear, and so it is an effective weapon, plus over time it introduces enough of that minority DNA into the majority through pregnancy that the small group can eventually be seen as a natural part of the society. This is about conquest, not coexistence, but it always is under diversity. There is a reason that human societies in a state of nature found themselves isolated.
What comes after social media? It turns out that three out of four users prefers forums to social media. Granted, this is a poll, and polls are only as reliable as their survey group is representative of the population at large. However, this does show a shift: where once people went to centralized sources because they seemed to have authority because they had responsibility, people are slowly realizing that this was an illusion and therefore, are moving toward a redecentralized internet. As reported here before, the strategy of building up many small independent platforms instead of one big voicebox works for the Right, as it makes it harder to target us and fits more with our decentralized, autonomous, and hierarchical mentality.
While the American media exults in the massive trade deficit with China from last year, in the present year it is becoming clear that the paper-tiger economy is unraveling. The boom in imports last year mostly consisted of American companies stocking up and warehousing massive quantities of Chinese goods before the trade wars could hit; the crash in imports now comes as the American and European economies revitalize themselves thanks to their products being more competitive domestically as we sell off the last of the cheap Chinese gear. China, having come from an Asiatic mentality of game-playing, continues to attempt to work around Western-style categorical rules with very cagey, clever, and specific manipulations. In an ideal situation, Europe and America become self-sufficient, which will force us to get our labor costs out of control by removing profit subtractors like unions, regulations, and the benefits state. At that point, we can stand aside as the Chinese hybrid of communism and consumerism comes crashing down, having proven just as unstable as previous hybrid systems, including the capitalist-socialist hack that the US and Europe adopted in the 1930s.
LePen repositions her party from being purely nationalist to being a party against social decline in general which points out simply that Leftist policies do not work and that we do better with an organic approach based in national unity and culture. This message will win. It appeals to rising discontent over how ugly and menial life in the bureaucratic first world has become, the high cost of living created by a need to support the entitlements state, and the erasure of national identity by Leftism, the EU, globalism, diversity, and probably many other synonyms for the same thing, which is destruction of national unity by bringing in many conflicting special interest groups, including ethnic and racial multiculturalism.
Not surprisingly, diversity works nowhere. Apparently a disagreement has arisen between the “Batende and Banunu ethnic groups” and they are resolving it through warfare. As more of this activity becomes obvious, we will abandon the idea of the nation-state — the “magic dirt” notion that you can unify people through legal, political, and economic “values” alone — and go back to the notion of tribalism, which will result in loose alliances among many smaller nations instead of a consolidation into nations. Interestingly, this will probably stop the urbanization trend which has swept the world as industrialization concentrates populations around the centers of industry. When the size of the nation decreases, however, so does the propensity to build mega-cities, and with the need for resilience, the impetus to have many smaller locations so that no single attack can paralyze the entire tribe rises. During this time, ethnic and racial diversity will be seen for what they are — disunity — and replaced by a strong sense of national meaning tribal and ethnic identity.
American writers love to look at China and point out that it has become a dystopian technocratic Hell, without realizing that we are doing the same thing here but using subtler methods. Asian societies are based on saving face, or not being humiliated; the West imported this method — control or management instead of our previous natural selection based habit of rewarding achievement and ignoring failure — after the Mongol invasions through its adoption of individualism, at which point people were no longer rewarded for doing right by an abstract order (natural order, the divine, the hierarchy of men, the endless golden chain) but for acquiring favor among the group of other individuals. We still retain some of our ancestral methods, so instead of demanding that everyone show loyalty to the control apparatus, we demand that they show loyalty to our ideology, and publicly humiliate anyone who fails to do so. In a way, we have all become unpaid Confidential Informants (CIs) of law enforcement in that, if someone fails to do what is politically correct, we gang up on them and publicize their disobedience so that they can be punished by the crowd. The Western model is more effective because it causes control within the mind, where people watch everything they do for fear of violating some taboo or another, but it is based on the Asiatic notion of control instead of the Western notion of organic order at a level higher than the individual. The Enlightenment™ was our downfall. As this shakes out, watch for more people to be crucified through Google or ostracized on anonymous lists which ensure that they never get jobs, friends, spouses, housing, or public acceptance again. 1984 was a distraction to enable this to take place; Brave New World described it as it happened in the 1930s.
If the UK allows itself to be dominated here, it will never regain its former stature. The EU is making overtures to the UK because it stands to gain if it can force the UK to reverse a popular vote and remain in the EU because it is too difficult to leave. The EU gains power when the UK stays in the EU because it knows it can always override any national demands that the UK makes. Now that we know that the EU represents the empire-building aspirations of a genetically and spiritually exhausted Europe, it becomes clear what it is doing: trading wealth for loyalty, essentially buying the allegiance of all of Europe and parts of Eurasia by transferring wealth from its most productive to its least productive. This enables them to grow their economies and, the theory goes, support the EU in its quest for empire. We see this most clearly in the re-allocation of British fishing rights to spread the profit to central Europe. The EU has thus become a control structure: it is concerned most about loyalty and conformity and less about quality. If the UK fails to Brexit, it will forever be treated as a subjugated and conquered territory, even if the conquest was political and not military. Within the UK however infighting created by Leftists there is so strong that it may opt for self-destruction as a sacrifice to The Cause™ of its Leftist brethren in the EU rather than retaining national autonomy and self-respect. In the meantime, the media works its propaganda by heightening fear through y2k2 style panic stories designed to cuck and nudge the population into hysteria.
Someone please remind our propaganda media that if an American senator is having surgery in Canada, he is not doing so through the nationalized health system, but buying specialized services from an independent medical provider.
Check this out: “The 1982 track is quadruple platinum, and was the most streamed song in 2017, with over 440m views on YouTube.” What does it tell us when a track from thirty-five years ago is the most popular streaming track? It could simply be a trend, but it could also signify a longing for the past and a recognition that our current diverse mass culture is simply exhausted.
France spends fifty-seven percent of its GDP on entitlements which means that the richest one percent people in France do not actually earn more than the lowest fifty percent of earners. One might see this as the triumph of socialism except that the system keeps going bankrupt, and Macron attempted to stimulate growth by lowering taxes on the wealthy because squeezing them out caused them to move, much as is happening in American states. The cost of this nice flat curve — in an ideal socialist society, the income curve would be entirely flat, because everyone would earn roughly the same amount — is a stifling of growth and with it a reduced intensity of production, just as happened within the Soviet Union. America and Europe are slowly realizing that we could never afford the entitlements state; it simply crushes us from within by taking from the productive to give to the unproductive. The only other option, which seems to have occurred to no one, is the society geared toward an intangible goal like culture, heroism, and the transcendental, in which people are not forced to battle their society for mere survival. That however would leave no role for government except as curator of the organic society, and as a result, society would transition to a smaller load for leadership, which inevitably brings us back to aristocracy.
Egalitarian societies offer one way to be powerful: be a victim. When society has devoted itself to the managerial project of making its citizens equal, those who are above the equality line have things taken from them to give to those below the line. For that reason, in order to win, you have to show that you are the injured party. This plays out in lawsuits, special interest groups in democracy, and personal outrage in our political correctness culture. As a result, even harmless games become targets because someone somewhere took it upon themselves to be “shocked” and “horrified” so that they could have a moment of power over everyone else.
It is 2019 and we are banning flowers. The blue cornflower, although it belonged to far-Right groups before the rise of the Nazis, was used by national socialists during the time that the party was banned as a covert signal of loyalty to the party. In practical terms, the rise of a splinter group from the AfD shows the Right learning from the Left and discovering how to play “good cop, bad cop.” When the voters are terrified of Right-wing parties, having a farther-Right option drives the nearer-Right choice further into the mainstream and makes it more politically acceptable. Think of it as not just opening the Overton Window, but chiseling out the frame.
Before we explore space, we are going to have to fix our social organization at home. We cannot do great things with all of this infighting, and that requires us to choose a direction and a working way of organizing ourselves into civilization, and stick with it. This inherently requires conservatism, which as part of its mission to conserve the best of the past tends to favor small slow qualitative improvements instead of sudden dynamic quantitative improvements, such as changing around our political, economic, and social order based on conjectural, hypothetical, and theoretical notions which flatter what people think they want instead of what they actually need. We do this because we recognize that the latter is best determined by a small group — one percent or fewer — who are naturally talented in force of intellect and force moral character, and that for this reason, decisions made by the group are inherently short-sighted and therefore bad, while by placing those who are congenitally fit for leadership into that role and from an early age grooming them to perform it, we stand the best chance of having quality decisions made, or those which take into account the long term, depth, nuance, synchronized detail forming a larger picture, and most of all, a sense of what is the excellent (arete). We either overcome our addiction to spreading power evenly among the herd, or the herd oppresses us and lowers us to a lowest common denominator. We cannot fix this problem by going to another planet, as the Ray Bradbury book The Martian Chronicles argues, but we have to figure out our own balance with sanity, health, stability, and realism before we can go to another planet and not have the exact same problems there. To a great degree, eugenics provides the answer, in that we will need to breed into ourselves the natural inclination to behave well, and we will have to filter out the deleterious mutations who are programmed by genetics to act differently. In other words, now that we have leveled up by forming civilization, natural selection must continue on an even more precise level, that is by selecting humans who always further civilization by advancing the qualitative good. There are planets out there just waiting for us and novel means of getting there but this bickering troupe of “talking monkeys with car keys” is not going to make it happen. Instead, they will focus on moral preening or making themselves look good to others in the group so that they can advance as individuals, a form of egotism expressed through the collective, which requires that they ignore long-term threats and opportunities because addressing those would require that they drop the pretense and instead focus on the real that exists outside of the individual. Can we overcome the inherent narcissism of being small animals with big brains, or do we doom ourselves by turning inward and becoming self-referential? As Varg Vikernes would say, “Let’s find out!”
Conservatives do not understand that pity is a growth industry. That is, if you create a vast underclass dependent on government, your bureaucrats then spend a ton of money accommodating that group, which in the short term makes lots of people rich in certain industries: construction, food service, bureaucracy, law, medicine, and law enforcement. If you notice what these have in common, it is that they are inward-facing; they do not achieve productivity in the classic sense of making things which are valuable, but instead they address demand which divides up what productive wealth already exists. This is eating the seed corn by another name. Pity gives us license to enrich ourselves by providing for those for whom care is considered a moral imperative, which makes us look good to others in our social group and then allows us to get ahead as individuals through our reflection in the collective.
No one wants to admit it, but most of our voters pay very little into the tax system, and they vote to get free stuff that someone else will pay for. This is why we are $21tn in debt at this point. Most systems tear themselves down this way because they focus on a false unity which consists of ensuring that every person has enough, instead of realizing that natural selection applies and we should look toward the people who are being productive and protect them from the rest because the default state of humanity is incompetence, avarice, stupidity, greed, and criminality. We want more of the productive, so we should reward them, instead of using them as a subsidy for the others, which grows us in quantity but not quality. A sensible society does not aim to “end equality” any more than it aims to “end gravity,” but instead tries to make sure that those who are succeeding are those actually worthy of doing so. We have steadfastly avoided that goal, and instead focus on spreading the money around, during which time those who are succeeding has become a larger group which now includes many who have no business wielding money, power, or prestige.
As I said back in the 1990s, the problem with censoring content is that then you are asserting that you are providing only safe content. After all, if something were unsafe, you would have removed it. Ignoring that warning, Big Tech firms have opted for removing the controversial instead of the spam, off-topic, and vandalism which people really want to see gone. It does not harm us to have someone else express a differing opinion so long as they do it in the right form; in other words, the content of their statements — the meaning, what is conveyed — is less important than how they present it. If they repeat it too much, put it in the wrong place, or use words as an emotional weapon it falls under the headings of spam, off-topic, and vandalism (the first two are two degrees of the same, with spam being simply broader spread and more repetitive). This lawsuit alleges that Grindr is a defective product because it promises a safe experience but does not deliver it. The natural and sane response would be for online services to stop promising a safe experience in the same way that shopkeepers, big corporations, and kindergartens have promised for aeons; the bourgeois mentality realizes that if you make something safe and inoffensive — think McDonald’s, Coca-Cola, or daytime television — then the herd will show up because they are fundamentally afraid of the Wild West or the lawless state of nature bloody in tooth and claw. However, the Wild West saves companies from this kind of liability. Let us hope for this suit to succeed so that we get closer to a frame of mind free speech can be established with limits on form and not content.
Taxes are more complex than percentages. For starters, there are deductions for the cost of doing business, and second, tax structures consist of tiers, so that people with incomes over a certain amount are not taxed wholly at that rate. One might add the big exception, which is that wealthy people tend not to realize much in the way of income, but to have ownership of things that are worth money, such that their income can be taxed without touching what they own, which is separately taxed under a corporate tax rate and generates many more deductions because it racks up more of these in the course of doing regular business. As an older article illustrates (non-paywall), the main change between the years of our high tax rates and now is that the bottom two-thirds of taxpayers are paying a lot less. In addition, we have fewer people who have made it to a level of wealth where it can be said that they are independent of the system and can do whatever they want. This occurred because back in those golden ages, the higher-level taxpayers paid less than they do now which meant that they could re-invest more income into their businesses and personal lives, spreading it more widely and directly to the broader population instead of filtering it through government which spends most of it on hiring 400-lb bureaucrats to sloppily administer chaotic paperwork. Taken from an orbital view, this presents a picture of an America which is following the Soviet Union in the pursuit of a flatter wealth curve, effectively squeezing out its most productive and replacing them with the mediocre. Not surprisingly, we are doing the same in education, hiring, public figures, and art as well. Call it the reign of the proles, and be not surprised when it ends with us being a third world nation with no future hope of greatness.
Populations can grow either through quality or quantity alone. Those who choose quality find themselves becoming more homogeneous but also more effective, since the successful traits win out and so they come closer to “equality” by making people more likely to share the same basic intelligence, aptitudes, and inclinations. This eventually produces a golden age in which no one feels helpless and no one works too hard, since economic competition is reduced and people naturally earn enough because they are able to do similar tasks. There is not a huge split as in the third world where a few competent ones have everything and the rest are clueless, incompetent, impoverished, and forever raging for more power which they have no idea how to wield. Any nation which wishes to succeed must avoid the third world model.