Posts Tagged ‘idiocracy’

Visions Of The Coming Purge

Thursday, June 22nd, 2017

In his dimly lit attic workroom, the inventor tightened the final screw, and flipped the power switch. The robot lit up and awoke, taking in his surroundings with an unchanging gaze that shone aggression through bright red eyes.

“Who are you?” His maker stood in front of the robot with stern anticipation, his eagerness to see the fruits of his life’s labour still held in check by lingering sceptical doubts.

The robot quickly turned its head and took in the form of the man before him.  “I AM SODOMOTRON.”  The voice was loud, monotone, and clouded in a raspy distortion that seemed to give the crudely computer generated sound an organic feeling. “WHO ARE YOU?”

This was new.  None of the previous failed prototypes had posed its own question so soon after awakening.  Could this be a sign that he’d succeeded?  The maker tried restraining his joy at his promising creation’s animation, knowing that the true test of the robot had yet to come.  But the attempt was futile, and his face beamed out a wild jubilant desire for the manifestation of his greatest dream.  

“I–I am your maker,” he said. The moment of truth lay ahead.

Sodomotron glared motionlessly, his prominent inflected brow seeming to exude pure disgust at the weakness of the squishy, quivering, flesh bag in his way.  The light from those eyes was unpleasant, and filled the man’s vision to the edges with red, as if becoming drenched in blood, but he forced himself to stare directly back into them, straining to show no sign of self-doubt or fear. 

The sound of a short hydraulic twitch originating in the robot’s lower structure caused his heart to jump and rail against its cage of ribs, but his overriding drive to live to see the metal beast unleashed upon the world, to know that it would make the world a better place was the anchor with which he forced himself calm.  Finally, the voice once again bellowed, this time at a subtly lowered tone, “ABOVE WEAKNESS THRESHOLD.”

Dual relief washed over the man.  He would be spared, he would remain unviolated.  But more important than that, he had looked into the eyes of the beast and therein gained an inexplicable confidence in the soundness of his creation.  He’d done it.  His dream had become real.

For years, the inventor had observed that in human society, the natural predators became the prey and so a mouse-like ineptitude had prevailed in all that humanity did. Evil and stupidity always won, usually on the backs of vast popularity by people who were as casual with the truth as they were with their paychecks, and anything good or honest was smashed down to the roars of pleasure by the jubilant crowd. The only solution was a mass purge of the weak, and in this instrument of terror, the inventor felt he may have created the true salvation of his race.

He addressed the mechanical embodiment of domination.  “Sodomotron!”  The maker’s eye’s glowed back red light as little embers, scorching away any remaining doubt.  “What is your purpose?”

Waiting no longer, the robot arose to its full towering height, rapidly thudded across the room and crashed through the door.  Not pausing to look back, it rumbled one last time in a bowel-loosening timbre:


Ethnic Genetic Interests And Group Selection

Wednesday, June 7th, 2017

Scientists have their method reversed: they look at details, and then draw conclusions about the whole, forgetting that a detail serving to represent the whole has only partial truth value and is inherently misleading.

One of the conclusions drawn by scientists is that, because the genes that prevail through natural selection are the ones that reproduce themselves, there is no such thing as “ethnic genetic interests.”

If they were a bit more attentive, they would notice that genetic information contradicts this view entirely, because we can see how European groups pursued homogeneous breeding practices through the ages.

The paradox of group genetic interests and group selection is that, if natural selection picks traits that survive, why do people choose to breed within their tribe rather than without? The safe liberal conclusion is that they only did so because they were geographically isolated, but history shows us that this is not even true, since tribes contacted each other all the time.

A more sensible view is that people choose others like them for the health of the offspring and from the knowledge that, if people who share more of their DNA survive, they are closer to reproductive success than if they invest their DNA into people who do not have any of the common substructure that makes a group similar to one another.

Not Politically Correct serves up a version of the group genetic interest theory that makes sense of this paradox:

How, for example, can I be 50% identical to my father if I’m 99.8% identical to all living humans? The answer is that I am not 50% identical to my father; rather, I am 50% identical to my father by comparison to the baseline level of relatedness of all living humans. If all living humans are 99.8% genetically identical then I’m 99.9% identical to my father. Jayman’s argument that two random co-ethnics aren’t related fails to factor this into account: a calculation of relation needs a baseline level of relatedness for comparison. So he’s correct in stating that two co-ethnics are not similar to one another- but only by comparison to the baseline level of relatedness of their entire population.

Since the ethnic kinship coefficient has been worked out to the equivalent of half siblings, it may be useful to frame the issue in those terms. If I am 25% identical to my half sibling by comparison to any other co-ethnic, it is because there is a quarter of my genome that I share with my half sibling due to our common descent. Specifically, our mutual descent from our mutual parent gives us a specific combination of genes that nobody else is likely to have. 25% of my genome is 100% identical to his alleles of the same genes and the other 75% is as similar to his as it is to any other co-ethnic, but taken as an average across my entire genome, any given allele is 25% more likely to be shared with him than it is everyone else in our race.

The ethnic kinship coefficient works in an uncannily similar way. Instead of inheriting those 25% identical genes from recent common ancestors, the two co-ethnics inherit the same genes due to the fact that people of their race usually have those genes (think melanin, keratin, microcephalin, EDAR, HERC2, or any other gene for which the frequency of alleles differs overpopulation).

All animals act in self-interest. People, as a type of animal, do the same. Human groups also do the same, and they identify themselves by the metric of “more similar than different.” This means that they share traits and pass them on together, which is why people choose to breed within a group if they are healthy and confident.

Because of this shared genetic heritage, your neighbors pass on your genes as well as their own. This allows the group to choose isolation, as advanced societies did over the ages, and then focus on selective breeding for the best of those traits. Smart observers will notice that this mirrors the conservative formula of realism plus transcendentalism, or a desire to improve quality in the way that nature does.

In addition, there is another factor. Social capital consists of all of the knowledge passed along by family, friends and society to the youngsters of the next generation. For this to work, the new generation must be roughly similar to the old and with the same inclinations, or the social capital will be incomprehensible or seem irrelevant to them.

Natural selection does not reward the person who wins the fistfight. It rewards the traits that are found in the individuals that reproduce the most. In groups, this means that shared traits are the ones that won out, and therefore, the traits that will continue to propagate.

Denial of ethnic group interest and group selection are motivated by a fundamentally egalitarian desire, which is to insist that all people are compatible and that race is an accident of history. Common sense, logic, history itself and the genetic data show that this is an illusory theory.

After Equality Comes Mass Murder

Thursday, April 20th, 2017

Bryan Caplan finds himself confused by the link between recognizing the importance of IQ and wanting most of humanity dead. He argues for acceptance of fact without rancor, but seems perplexed by the vitriol expressed (h/t Outside In):

My fellow IQ realists are, on average, a scary bunch. People who vocally defend the power of IQ are vastly more likely than normal people to advocate extreme human rights violations. I’ve heard IQ realists advocate a One-Child Policy for people with low IQs. I’ve heard IQ realists advocate a No-Child Policy for people with low IQs. I’ve heard IQ realists advocate forced sterilization for people with low IQs. I’ve heard IQ realists advocate forcible exile of people with low IQs – fellow citizens, not just immigrants. I’ve heard IQ realists advocate murdering people with low IQs.

…If someone says, “I’m more intelligent than other people, so it’s acceptable for me to murder them,” the sensible response isn’t, “Intelligence is a myth.” The sensible response is, “Are you mad? That doesn’t justify murder.” Advocating brutality in the name of your superior intellect is the mark of a super-villain, not a logician.

Generally, his point is agreeable, but that is mostly because human groups require a span of IQs to cover all of the roles in society. Every general needs soldiers, and every soldier needs a cascade of leaders in order to give him guidance so that he is not left alone and confused to make decisions he has no hope of getting correct.

However, as one of the misanthropes he describes — or as we might call it, a “human quality control advocate” — I can attest to the power of wanting to purge the weak. This comes more from the conditions of our time than an innate will to do harm based on this realization.

Let us look at the factors involved:

  1. Overpopulation. There are too many of us, and too few good ones, especially in power. The urge to purge the excess and pare away the useless is great because daily, we see many people whose absence would make life better.
  2. Idiocracy. The herd rules us. When we look at the products available and the decisions made by our leaders, it is clear that mass opinion sways the day, and like a demonic compass it always points toward full retard.
  3. Stupidity. Our time is stupid. The cities are ugly, the jobs moronic, the culture idiotic. We want a war on stupidity and bad decision-making, and associate it with the stupid people we see among us.

We also live in a time of lies. IQ is denied, as well as most other natural and intelligent things. When people “wake up” from the stupor of egalitarianism, they react as does any consumer who has been defrauded: with injured rage.

The temptation is to make a continental mass grave to remind future humans not to go down this path because it ends badly. This arises as much from the perception that all decency and truth are lost on this world, and that all is futile, which produces a suffocating rage.

A more sensible view is that we could divide the useful from the useless. A janitor who does his job in a conscientious way and does not live like a degenerate is necessary just as a rocket scientist is, but people of any intelligence level who are given to evil merely thwart the realization of the good.

This would be done informally, in a natural method, if applied intelligently. A hierarchy of natural leaders would be set up; they would decide who to retain, and send the others away. Those who could not find a place would have to relocate to easier places to live, like the third world.

An Alt Right Goal

Wednesday, March 8th, 2017

As the news struggles to accept the suddenness of vast change forced upon it, the Alt Right has faded into the background hum a little bit. Part of this is that the Alt Right seems confused as to its own actual goals, or in other words, what it proposes instead of the failing system we have now.

What makes the Alt Right fascinating is that it arose organically in parallel between several belief systems — libertarians, human biodiversity, nationalist, deep ecologists and the new right — and then lived on through what was found in common between them, pushed to an extreme by its irreverent, absurdist troll culture.

But a different view would be that these different belief systems were not the cause of the Alt Right but rather a vocabulary through which it could spring up. Instead, the Alt Right came from a yearning for something so simple and powerful that it was nearly impossible to articulate. It is something one assumes, not speaks.

And yet, those of us who have grown up in a failed civilization and who have realized that this was the case from an early age have always yearned for something like the Alt Right. We were born depressed, have lived in ambivalence and alienation our entire lives, and finally found a voice and animated it however we could.

While the Alt Right proposes many related ideas — nationalism, anti-egalitarianism, post-democracy, futurism — the root behind them is a simple desire: we want to escape civilization collapse. We know that most societies collapse, but that someone can beat the odds and rise to a greatness merely dreamed of by the rest of humanity.

One cannot escape civilization collapse as one dodges a bullet. Instead, civilization collapse is like a path in a forest that leads to a large pit. The only solution is to get on another path that both (1) goes away from the pit and (2) goes somewhere good, so that one does not die the slow death of purposeless wandering until entropy becomes victorious.

This leads us to our goal: restore Western Civilization by giving it a purpose unrelated to individualism, equality or any of the impulses that cause fragmentation in a society. The Alt Right is our desire to be a great civilization again and to live our lives with meaning, instead of in service to consumerism, democracy and social popularity.

We want order. We want a path. We want meaning. That requires values, customs and something worth sacrificing for so that we can bond with life itself. We wish to see the infinity open before us and to become an eternal civilization, exploring the stars and establishing new great civilizations, with intricate histories, triumphs and tragedies.

This is what we are. We are the reflective people, or those who contemplate life and search for meaning not in ourselves but in the universe around us. From that we can bond our intuition to that of the cosmos, and from that, discover a way of life that fits who we are. We do not expect it to be universal; it is enough that it fits Us, and that is all we need.

The first step on this path is clear thinking not about what we hate, but about what we desire. We must visualize the future we see for ourselves, and make it become incarnate by sorting the data around us through our choice. This fits within the informational substructure to the universe that encloses our physical reality:

Perhaps the most renowned of its mysteries is the fact that the outcome of a quantum experiment can change depending on whether or not we choose to measure some property of the particles involved.

…The physicist Pascual Jordan, who worked with quantum guru Niels Bohr in Copenhagen in the 1920s, put it like this: “observations not only disturb what has to be measured, they produce it… We compel [a quantum particle] to assume a definite position.” In other words, Jordan said, “we ourselves produce the results of measurements.”

…Whenever, in these experiments, we discover the path of a quantum particle, its cloud of possible routes “collapses” into a single well-defined state. What’s more, the delayed-choice experiment implies that the sheer act of noticing, rather than any physical disturbance caused by measuring, can cause the collapse.

Our job is to notice our present options, and then put our focus into those which offer us a future of restored Western Civilization. In doing so, we make them more likely to become incarnate, much as our noticing can render light into particle or wave. We then become sorting engines within the calculation machine that is the cosmos, a pattern-based reality which constantly self-evolves.

The act of observation links the observer and the observed. This implies an informational basis to reality, as if it were composed of patterns that manifest in materiality, and shows us that we wield a force greater than materiality in the focus of our minds. When we create links between ourselves and ideas, we manifest them, albeit not directly like material force.

When Nietzsche said, “God is dead…and we have killed him,” what he means is that we have failed to rediscover things such as “God.” These are not innate to the universe because they are not universally accessible. Only those who forge their thinking into directed noticing can access these ideas, and their effects will remain invisible to others much as most truths are.

We know from Darwin that the whole universe acts as a calculating machine, forever refining its objects into a greater balance and efficiency. Our thoughts act the same way — this is one of the precepts of my upcoming book Parallelism — and so we see that our first task is to visualize and thus “attract” what we desire.

While that may not be known in precise visual terms, it can be known in general direction. We can stop reacting to what is happening as if we are trying to save a miserable society that makes people bored and frustrated. Instead, we can escape the loop of trying to salvage the dead and focus instead on rising again.

If the Alt Right has a goal, this is it. We want to restore Western Civilization by aiming for greatness. We wish to embrace excellence in our future and to use that, and not reacting to material problems, as our guide. It seems too New Age for us right now, but once upon a time, it was accepted knowledge, and perhaps deviation from that is responsible for our current downfall.

Death Race 2050 (2016)

Tuesday, January 24th, 2017

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Organic Versus Individualist Views Of Civilization

Saturday, January 14th, 2017

In a traditional society, the aristocrats take care of three functions: leadership in war, leading cultural events, and interpreting religion. These are the foundation of a healthy society.

They do not take on the functions of government. Government tries to protect everyone from themselves, which shows us the flaws of both government and consumerism: it needs any 25% of the population to endorse it to win, and it does not care who they are, only for the numbers. Thus it always displaces a more discerning audience for a less scrupulous one.

Looking at this mechanism, we can see that government is parasitic to the whole of society because it emphasizes saving individuals who are perhaps not fit to be part of it, at the expense of the standards, quality and purpose of the whole. This is the nature of individualistic government: protect the individual no matter who they are, and by extension, damage the organic whole which suffers for having lesser individuals survive.

The idea of individualism is that society stops being concerned about the whole — including tradition, the past, the future, values and philosophy — and focuses on saving every individual from whatever terrors or doom awaits them. Organicism is the opposite idea, holding that society should save itself as if it were an organism, focusing on the health of the whole in which individuals are but cells.

Democracy attempts to be individualistic.

Monarchy is organicist.

Our modern viewpoint skews entirely toward the individualistic because the motivation behind equality and humanism is the protection of the individual. It represents the lone person, terrified of being insufficient, joining with others around the credo that there should no longer be external standards, so that everyone is included… exclusively so that the terrified individual is automatically included and safe from fear.

Organicism recognizes that for the civilization as a whole to thrive, Darwinism and moral Darwinism must exist, promoting the best above the rest. This is not some simplistic “kill the weak” calculus, although it would not oppose such a crude but effective model. Instead, it demands that we see society as a body and demote the individual to its place as one of many unequal forces working toward that end, like different species in an ecosystem.

To see society as a body requires giving up the pretense that the individual means anything without context. That is: the individual is only significant where serving a role in the world, and has no significance when limited to the self alone. This denies all of our fantasies of power and control over our world, but gives us something better, namely a chance for meaning.

And yet, with meaning, we have something to lose, so like the teenage girl breaking up with her boyfriend because she fears to lose him, we cast aside all meaning and embrace the meaningless because it makes us feel powerful. With having given up anything external, we can focus on ourselves and follow along with the world as conformists, dedicating none of our mind to it.

Like a symbolic victory, it makes us the most important thing in the world, and yet makes that victory empty. In fact, over time it becomes apparent as a defeat disguised as victory. And where does that leave us? As cells in a vast body, having betrayed it, hoping now that its death will not be ours as well.

But it will.

Entering The Great Filter

Wednesday, January 4th, 2017

Our modern time is full of depression. We know our society has failed, and it makes us grim. We are surrounded by “invisible” examples of this, where we see how stupid the design of our society is, and how it makes people miserable, but others merely rationalize this in order to make themselves seem more successful.

Let us look instead toward a different interpretation of history.

In this, we are going through a great filter to weed out the weak. Some will be seduced by the modern time and its lies, and they will fade away, whether by miscegenation or death through one of the many trendy modern methods like opiate addiction or alcoholism.

What will remain are those who see the numinous light

Imagine this:

Thousands of years ago, or thousands of years in the future, a primitive man crouches on a hillside. He is surrounded by the radiant light reflected from the ice and snow. Life is hard: he struggles to find food through hunting and gathering roots and berries, and often, the cold takes members of his tribe in the night.

He sees the darkness enclosing the earth, and the likelihood of his early death, but still he keeps on. Against what seems obviously true, against all signs, against what others think… he keeps on. Past the darkness, he sees light, an abstract light. He sees what may become, and the goodness that is there, as well as the threats against that. But always, he pushes himself toward a greater degree of organization, like the patterns in the forest he observes around him.

The numinous light is what we see in sensible mental patterns and understanding of the ways of nature. It is a supreme logic, both practical and always pointed toward increasing degrees of beauty and excellence. It is intangible, which excludes it from the grasp of most. And yet in the darkest hours of night, it is the only clarity as life seems misbegotten and hopeless.

We live in an age of error. Following the herd is death. All those who give in to its weakness will be destroyed. This leaves a much smaller group to rebuild, and when it regains its strength, it will exile the other of all forms: ethnic Other, and among itself, the perverts, criminals, parasites, weaklings, idiots, fools and sycophants of the modern time.

Imagine a long line of stockbrockers, lawyers, shop owners, union bosses, thugs and journalists in chains, marched to the sea where boats await to take them to Brazil. The great exodus of that which does not fit into the society of the future, but thrived in the degenerate society of the past (our present).

In past times, when society failed, the sane ones fled to the north. They took on the rocky and inhospitable territory that everyone else feared, and forged a life for themselves there. In this new world, they died, and those that were able to survive created the next iteration of the human species. They evolved.

When the era of failure was over, and the ice receded, they stormed back over the mountains to conquer those that a thousand generations before had displaced them. Those fell, and were replaced by a stronger race. Those in turn were refined by the long years struggling against the wilderness. Only those who saw the numinous light, and had something to strive for beyond the immediate, survived the long winters and dark nights.

The point is that we suffer a bad time. We cannot merely break away to the north, but must reconquer our civilization, and then must act like those dark nights and long winters: the weak among us, who gave in to the seductions of modernity, must go elsewhere.

We do not need many. A few hundred thousand stalwarts of good character, intellect and health can rebuild a civilization. They must have autonomy to do so; they cannot do it among the rest. But as they rise, they will gain confidence, and then when it is time, storm over the mountains to remake civilization — where the real rises above the human — once again.

An Opportunity

Monday, December 12th, 2016

It is tempting to bemoan our time, but recently, our prospects for the future have improved. With the debunking of liberal democracy as the US and EU collapse in a flurry of convergent failures, people are seeing that Systems — networks of rules — are inferior to culture and organic civilization.

Those two things, culture and organic civilization, have been banned by the Left through the use of diversity. By insisting that society be mixed-ethnic, they prevent it from ever having a single origin and single people, which it needs to have social standards and cultural values.

We might view the Left as a social contract: it offers guaranteed inclusion in society, or “equality,” in exchange for political support of the Left. This creates a mass within society that consumes it, but because it is unstable, it tends toward direct authoritarian rule instead of decentralized rule by principle as occurs with social standards and cultural values.

The problem with this is that it works against itself. As social acceptance approaches 100%, people have no need for Leftism anymore. Leftists then tend toward authoritarianism, especially acts which are symbolic only.

For example, diversity is a symbolic-only act. Leftists import the third world, then carefully live apart from them. The point is to smash down symbols of majority culture, because that has a values standard and so some people can be “wrong” and not included by those rules.

When Leftism becomes irrelevant, the social contract evaporates, which is why Leftists must constantly invent new crusades to “unify their base.” Luckily this is easy as much of the appeal of the Left is that it justifies revenge on those more naturally gifted or successful. When the base is given a new target, like gay marriage, they sense the ability to smash down the sane and make insanity standard, which delights them.

The problem with this, as with all work in search of a purpose, is that it gradually becomes disorganized and paradoxical. The more people we make equal, the less they are to agree with one another, and more likely to fragment into nearly infinite special interest groups, at which point those will be at war with one another.

In addition to the failures of their leadership, which are many because ideology is inherently reality-denying, Leftist societies fail because they cannot achieve voluntarily cooperation. As soon as people have guaranteed acceptance, they start pulling away from ideology, and even whipping them up into a Two Minutes Hate with the ideological outrage of the day is less effective, lasting for shorter periods of time.

Leftist society in the US and EU resembles the Soviet Union for exactly this reason: as soon as it took over, Leftism became The Establishment and the same bratty human behavior that Leftism took advantage of to get into power began to work against it. This requires them to switch to “negative authority,” or punishment, to keep people in line.

Your average Leftist does not care a fig for transgender rights or gay marriage. They want these things because they are absurd and offensive and therefore can become shibboleths, or quick tests for who is a good obedient Leftist cog and who is not, with the latter group seen as The Enemy even when — especially when — they do not identify as such. This is the bullying mentality behind Leftism.

The combination of this bullying, the predictable failure of unrealistic Leftist policies, and the growing uneasy sensation that our society was heading down a path to doom from which there could be no recovery, together motivated a backlash that we see with the election of Donald J. Trump, Brexit and other anti-Government actions.

These are more than a rejection of the last eight years, or even the last seventy, but more importantly, reject the entire concept of the System as good and Modernity as a variety of Utopia. We have seen what is on the end of the fork, and we now realize that all modern paths lead to authoritarianism, entropy and breakdown to a third-world status.

As pragmatic people, we realize that when a certain action is failing, the best thing to do is to stop doing it — or at least do less of it. This is why the narrative we see now is more anti-government than anything else. We want fewer taxes, welfare, healthcare, immigration, political correctness, censorship and other government programs. We want more normal life without its intervention.

For the functional among us, very little is needed from government. We like roads, military and police, and beyond that, want very little. But this conflicts with a segment of our population that probably would have been eliminated by natural selection who are a biologically-determined drain on civilization:

After 35 years, the researchers found one fifth of the group was responsible for 81 per cent of the criminal convictions; three quarters of drug prescriptions; two thirds of welfare benefit payments and more than half of nights in hospital.

…“About 20 per cent of population is using the lion’s share of a wide array of public services,” said Prof Terrie Moffitt, of King’s College and Duke University in North Carolina. “The same people use most of the NHS, the criminal courts, insurance claims, for disabling injury, pharmaceutical prescriptions and special welfare benefits.

…“But we also went further back into their childhood and found that 20 per cent begin their lives with mild problems with brain function and brain health when they were very small children.

In other words, civilization has been hijacked by its least competent because its most competent are afraid of appearing non-compassionate.

Symbolically, these elections are about more than politics. They are a cultural shift against the religion of compassion, and in favor of the lifestyle of realism and common sense, applied knowledge.

This places the West at a juncture where it has never been before, and possibly at a chasm that no society has ever managed to cross: it is rejecting our monkey-instinct fear of social disapproval and instead, suggesting that self-discipline and logical prevail over the impulses we otherwise follow.

If we reject our fear, we can stop making our policy around those who need to be moved on, and instead focus on what makes us healthy, sane and experiencing existential pleasure in life.

The team began the project to test the ‘Pareto principle’ – also known as the ‘80-20 rule’ – which states that in the majority of systems, around 80 per cent of the effects come from about 20 per cent of the causes.

This principle has been found to work computer science, biology, physics, economics and many other fields.

The new research found that the law is also true for societal burden. As well as increased criminality and NHS use, the most-costly participants of the study also carried 40 per cent of the obese weight and filed 36 per cent of personal-injury insurance claims.

All of nature fits this pattern. There is a corresponding 20% who do most of the good, and by definition, 60% in the middle. Societies that succeed are those which push the good 20% to the top, chop off the bad 20%, and reward the 60% only when they act more like the good 20%.

Government and Systems move in the opposite direction, which is to design around a lowest common denominator so that they do not leave the bad 20% behind, thus avoiding the appearance of being bad and keeping the fear of the sheep from being inflamed. That way of living does not work.

Since the West went egalitarian, or believing that Good = Bad so that it could accept the bad 20%, it has steadily devolved into incompetence, corruption, stupidity and mass slavery to boring tasks that are designed to accommodate the lowest achievers. We have made life existentially miserable, and as a result, our people are self-destructing.

These elections are the first step, a symbolic gesture, in the reversal of this path toward the bad and, in order to avoid it, setting a path for the good instead.

Many civilizations have faced this fork in the road, and apparently they all chose wrong, because history is a graveyard of failed empires.

We have the possibility of fixing a thousand years of decay and to move past it, just by pushing forward toward a non-Government, non-System based society anchored in realism and moral attention, which requires denial of individualism. All of these things are present in nascent form in the existing cultural change.

Right now, we have a chance to do what no others have done, and by so doing, end the crisis of leadership that has afflicted humanity and allowed it to overpopulate, pollute and vandalize a planet with useless activity.

We may rise above all who have come before us, starting with these little baby steps.

TLB: “She’s Making History Tonight”

Monday, November 28th, 2016


One of the hardest tasks for me was realizing that conservatism is fact-proven living, where Leftism is entirely conjectural.

This means that Leftists are opposed to facts and logical facts which invalidate Leftist thinking, which in turn means they cherry-pick every field of facts to find only what is convenient for advancing their narrative, or the story of how their conjecture leads to Utopia.

From that, we can see how our press and all Leftist politicians are essentially liars. To them, reality denial is the only good, because it leads to equality, which is “progress” toward Utopia.

As a result, they have developed a number of tropes that we refer to as “Typical Leftist Behavior” or TLB.

One of these can be seen in the recent triviality of a teenager entering a beauty contest wearing a burkini, a type of bathing suit/burka fusion that seems to offend both cultures.

As the neurotic Leftist press opines:

The 19-year-old St Cloud college student was born in a refugee camp in Kenya, which borders Somalia, and moved Minnesota as a young child.

Halima Aden starts off Miss Minnesota USA’s swimsuit segment to big cheers from the crowd. Announcer: “She’s making history tonight.” — Liz Sawyer (@ByLizSawyer) November 27, 2016

A burkini is a full-body wetsuit that covers the torso, limbs and head and is worn by some Muslim women. The garment became the centre of a controversial debate in France earlier this year, after officials in at least six towns on the Mediterranean coast banned women from wearing it on beaches.

The idea of “she’s making history tonight” — announced by a white woman to the right of the burkini-clad teen in the photo — is to introduce political symbolism as history, which is standard TLB that consists of erasing and rewriting history to make Leftist seem like it has some logical basis instead of being purely a message of human intent and self-image.

She wore a different swimsuit in a beauty contest. The only “history” made is that she is forcing her political agenda on others. Otherwise, we see this for what it is: someone wearing a different cut of swimsuit.

Outside of political symbolism, framed here in the “girl power” narrative of defying stereotypes, there is no news here, but the press reports it as if she swam to the moon.

This is how insanity destroys human civilizations. It makes itself socially popular by crushing those who do not see it as important, and then when it takes over, it places unrealistic rules and incompetent people in charge, which makes life miserable and drives away the sane, competent and morally good.

Then the civilization implodes to a third world state, committing suicide through pretense. And since this is the most common way that civilizations exit, it is hardly “making history tonight” either.

The Peat Party

Saturday, November 5th, 2016


Back in the day, people were more alert and attentive to what was going on around them. They were not obsessed by detail, but trusted themselves because of their intuitive connection to their world, and so when they noticed a general change in the “shape” of events, they knew it was time to act.

The boys would break into the mead early one afternoon and talk it over. There would be some low, quiet voices from the elders, and louder voices from the young. Eventually, they would identify nodal points where things were going wrong. These points were people.

As night fell, the torches would be lit. The boys would go through the town or city, picking up those people who formed the nexus of decay. Then they threw them on wagons, and went outside the settlements to the peat bogs. There, the unfortunates were thrown in, and with long poles, pushed underneath the viscous surface of the bog.

Centuries later we find evidence of these peat parties. Bog mummies were a common discovery over the past ages, and adults told their children to be quiet and left them alone. They were remnants not of mob justice, but of the wisdom of the elders. That is, the wisdom that some are born bad, and can only do bad.


In 2024 AD, the Peat Party ran for election against the existing degeneracy parties and won, not so much by the popular vote as a formless mass, but because the 3% of the population that does all the thinking supported them and cowed everyone else into following along. Or at least enough of them.

Their first act was to suspend all laws written after 1789, when the Constitution was signed, and then to amend the Constitution to replace government with an aristocracy and modify “rights” to be “roles,” such that privilege did not exist without contribution. This was the first anti-parasite legislation enacted in the West.

Next, the Peat Party sent delegates — generally, the sharpest minds and biggest hearts they could find — to every region, where those delegates then found people like themselves among the population. These groups were assembled into councils of elders, and they drew up lists.

The rule was simple: those who contributed positive and necessary effort were good; those who did not were unnecessary; among the unnecessary, those who contribute negative or unnecessary effort — “make-work” — were bad. The boys were summoned, beer was poured in great golden draughts, and then the peat parties set out.

This time, there was no need for a bog. Instead, in front of every city hall, there were trucks. These were comfortable. On them went the bog mummies of the future, and all that was required of them was to surrender their passports. These were punched with a special symbol and the records marked in the databases.

The trucks drove to train stations, and trains took these people into Mexico. In America, over one hundred million people were removed, in addition to the repatriation of all of those who were not ethnically of the founding group. This left fewer than one hundred and twenty million people.

Along the Mexican border, a great wall was constructed, with cameras that saw in infrared and could track crossers. A great jobs program hired many men to stand at this wall with weapons at the ready, discouraging re-entry.

The parasite purge continued in the normal way. With most of the parasites gone, laws could be enforced, and instead of prison, the offenders when convicted went over the wall. This purged many more millions over the years, both impoverished criminals and billionaire grifters.

Mexico, as the new peat bog, received these people with open arms. They were able to take their wealth and possessions, and settled into Mexico to begin doing what they had done in the past. They found however that their voices were less powerful there because Mexico, having suffered centuries of parasites, simply ignored them.


In the revitalized United States, the same one-fifth of the population that did everything in the past kept doing what it had done, but now it bore far fewer burdens. Wealth, stability, sanity and happiness returned. People began investing extra income into what had been ignored, namely growth of culture and learning.

History would record this time as a momentary burst of sanity in the otherwise dysfunctional human tendency to destroy great things by creating ideology, or an excuse for why parasites should be included alongside the productive. For once, civilization won over the destroyers.

Ten thousand years afterwards, the people who came out of America were different. They were tall, strong and lean with high intelligence and bold, loving hearts. And yet, because they were the descendants of the Peat Party, they were also uncompromising in their tendency to remove parasites.

Passing generations had intensified what made these people great and distributed these traits throughout the population. If there is a state close to “equality,” a notion these people would instinctively see as parasitic, these people were the living embodiment of it.

Recommended Reading