Furthest Right

He is Risen

Let us break out the high colonic of raging realism here: Jesus was a prophet, a man most likely inspired by Plato in The Republic and Phaedo, who saw that the likelihood of divine underpinnings to the intricate order of nature as more likely than not.

He was nailed to a cross, taken down perhaps upon receipt of a fee by the executioners, hid out in the caves for three days, and then sailed to France. At that point, he had a normal life and family and probably spent his remaining days musing over the genius of Plato (and his protagonist, Socrates).

Religion cannot substitute for realism; it can only parallel realism. When it diverges from the obvious demands of this world, it is not a pursuit of holiness but of evil, namely that of solipsism. When religion denies reality, it becomes an agent of that which it claims to avoid.

Conservatives in the West have steadfastly driven away intellectuals, artists, thinkers, engineers, scientists, and natural leaders by insisting that religion can replace the loss of our culture and genetics. It cannot. You cannot Christianize America into being what WASP America was.

Even more, unlike the more elegant formulations from Plato, Christianity was designed for a mass audience and therefore uses symbolism and emotion to convey what philosophy explains to such depth that we understand the why behind it.

Our ancestors probably adopted it because it was very close to their own faith, a remnant of the Proto-Indo-European Religion, and it wrote simple rules which would keep the proles in line. Successful societies breed lots of NPCs because they make life easier for those who would otherwise die.

We are now seeing the consequence of our dysgenic success. Instead of rewarding only the good, we rewarded all, which meant that the good stayed small in number but the confused — a biological/genetic condition — expanded in number.

The bourgeois middle classes took over our elegant tiered hierarchy and instead made a centralized order based around cities, bureaucracy, and commerce. The Left cheers the bureaucracy and the Right cheers commerce, but neither is a whole answer. Nor is religion.

Although we all love grey areas because they, like pluralism and pacifism, allow us to evade making hard decisions so that we can continue to be individualistic and focus on small pleasures (in contrast to the big pleasure of having a functional civilization and wisdom), at some point choices must be made.

When we look over the options we have from the catalogue of past choices, we can see how each turned out and therefore, choose what will achieve the goals we have in mind. Individualism exists to shirk the burden of making informed choices, substituting good intentions for hard choices to hide selfishness.

Perhaps our society would best be served by looking over history for some A/B testing:

A/B testing, at its most basic, is a way to compare two versions of something to figure out which performs better. While it’s most often associated with websites and apps, Fung says the method is almost 100 years old.

In the 1920s statistician and biologist Ronald Fisher discovered the most important principles behind A/B testing and randomized controlled experiments in general. “He wasn’t the first to run an experiment like this, but he was the first to figure out the basic principles and mathematics and make them a science,” Fung says.

Fisher ran agricultural experiments, asking questions such as, What happens if I put more fertilizer on this land? The principles persisted and in the early 1950s scientists started running clinical trials in medicine. In the 1960s and 1970s the concept was adapted by marketers to evaluate direct response campaigns (e.g., would a postcard or a letter to target customers result in more sales?).

Let us compare (A) America before diversity with (B) America after diversity. Which one worked better?

Then let us compare (A) the West before equality with (B) the West after equality. Which one produced higher quality?

Finally, we have to ask the question that scares the living daylights out of Leftists, which was a rising civilization, (A) the West with the Kings or (B) the West with democracy? Suddenly answers become a lot clearer.

The West existed before Christianity and if I get my way, will exist after it. Symbolic religions do not do well in scientific eras, true, but even more there is the sense that Christianity was a surrogate for the culture, race, and ethnicity we needed. The West is not the West without Western people.

After all, of all the races on Earth, the Western races — ethnic Western European Nordid/Cro-Magnids — rose by sheer gumption and our secret, which was the transcendental view. We looked at the whole, found out how it worked and what was good about it, and then aimed for enhancing that.

Whatever we found, we made into something better. We followed a type of brutal realism that recognized the importance of culture, hierarchy, order, and most of all, finding out the best “truths” we could and compiling them as knowledge.

At some point, we bred enough semi-useful people that being socially acceptable took precedence over being realistic and quality-oriented, and our decline began. Now we make decisions by committee, vote, sales numbers, and popularity. It is government by algorithm.

This seemed to work at first, but now, thanks to the final nail in the coffin through postwar diversity, the suicide of the West has revealed its final form in Late Stage Democracy:

Overall, only 39% said religion was important to them, compared with 62% the first time the survey was taken in 1998. For those under 30, religion appeals to a bare 31%, against 55% who grew up in an era before militant secularism held sway.

Patriotism is also increasingly unpopular — 70% said it was important 25 years ago, against 38% today.

Ours is a skeptical age that’s been taught to scoff at real values — God, family and country. In roughly the same period as the two polls, the marriage rate dropped by nearly 60%.

The mainstream Right, who have failed to stop this decline, like to view this as a binary: either we all become fanatical Christians, or we give in to the forces of materialism, nihilism, sexual libertinism, sodomy, and greed.

However, they have picked the wrong binary. When you choose equality, you get all of those things because you have abolished culture. Using religion as a proxy for culture does not work, which is how we have gotten to this stage.

They are doubling down on religion because they like simple answers where one thing seems to solve every problem. Reality is more complex. We could resurrect America in forty-eight hours by repealing laws, but we still need to rebuild it through culture, genetics, social order, and producing quality people.

Equality was the first of the one-thing-that-solves-everything style thoughts. There were conflicts between culture and individuals, so people bowed to peer pressure and let the individuals run free. Let loose from the constraints of order, they proceeded to eat society from within.

All of our bad decisions come from that point. To save a civilization, you have to peel an onion: remove the most recent bad decisions, then the earlier ones, finally getting your way back to the core. But if you leave it up to the vote, people will stop at the outer layers to avoid controversy.

Or just from laziness. Mental laziness seems more pervasive than physical laziness. All of them arise from self-pity, or feeling bad for oneself because reality is hard or something, instead of seeing reality as a vast opportunity with its pluses and minuses.

Conservatives — the only option for those of us who are realists and recognize equality as the symbolic illusion that it is — need to recognize that our methods are not working. We have to cut deep into the onion and rip out its core, then peel its layers outward from that.

Religion will not save you; it has failed to do so, and most cannot honestly believe in fantastical worlds of pure symbolism. Plato had a better idea: derive from nature the notion that something like God and gods exist because there is clearly an order to reality.

Patriotism will not save you; if anything, it simply makes you beholden to uphold the same failed solutions and bloated bureaucracy that is draining the life from you. An actual patriot cares about his civilization and sees government and most people as standing in the way.

Money will not save you; yes, you can buy your way out of the problem in the short term, but then it takes over in the long term. At that point, it simply writes lots of laws and regulations to take your money and make you the subsidy cash cow that funds the decline.

Only culture — this requires race and ethnicity — will build a future. We can make the West out of (A) Western people but not (B) random people instructed in our ways. They simply revert to their own biological-genetic programming and those institutions die out.

It all seems so cruel because we are dashing the dreams of others. Perhaps, but our dreams matter too, even if for most people they are cloudy and frenetic. Our dream is to be a successful civilization again instead of a dying one buying off the world as it collapses in disorder.

Almost everything around you is a lie. People like easy answers that allow them to command one change from their armchair to be done by others, and then everything is fixed, so they offer up endless scapegoats to blame and talismans that will messianically fix everything at once. Like Jesus.

The problem is not technology. We have always had technology to one degree or other; that we abuse it is an artifact of our bad leadership via democracy and equality, not a problem in the technology itself. We should embrace technology and recognize our duty to use it well.

The problem is not capitalism. The greed we see around us comes from a lack of culture added to a high tax environment where everyone who makes money legitimately feels victimized, and therefore exploits in order to get their pile and get out of the rat race before it implodes.

The problem is not atheism. Atheists and agnostics have existed since the dawn of time and contributed a great deal to society. When you share a culture, believers and unbelievers can coexist because you are working together toward the goal of having civilization. Each can enjoy it as he must.

The problem is individualism, or the prioritization of personal intentions, desires, judgments, and feelings over a duty to understand reality and do what produces the best quality results over time.

In politics, individualism manifests as the drive for equality, a Utopian notion that seems to fix everything by letting the population sort itself out bottom-up. That produces as many divergent motives as there are people, and ends in the same chaos we see today.

Equality removes culture. Its whole goal is to destroy constraints on the individual, which in the long calculus, means removing civilization itself. Its spawn like feminism, socialism, diversity, and permissiveness follow because they are simply forms of equality.

At its core, the religious people are right about one thing: self-worship took over because the citizens born into civilization did not have to work to create civilization, so they took it for granted and exploited it, mostly because the lower-quality people breed more and faster.

You cannot fight self-worship; you can only have a better goal. It cannot be a goal “above” reality, but must be a goal in reality. If the God and gods made the world, then it is their Order, and we must understand it and make our own order within that framework.

When you are in power, all you see are negatives. Problems arise and you bat them away. You lose the sense of positives, or working toward a distant goal that will improve civilization and nature as a whole. You become defensive and listen to the special interests.

This is why success is a trap for civilizations. When you are striving, you have a goal; once you achieve that goal, you have nothing but negatives to Whack-a-Mole at, and then all of the mentally confused people who are self-pitying and therefore selfish make their demands subsume civilization.

We need to see a positive again: the opportunity to build a great civilization. No one is happy now, and our best are not breeding, while our governments follow precedent to the ten-thousandth level and end up at pure insanity as the new normal, which is somehow the old dysfunctional normal but tried harder.

“Progress” and diversity are proxies for the positive that misdirect us from the real world. It is easier to hand out money and acceptance than it is to rebuild a civilization by pointing it toward an unrealized future. That involves risk and making hard choices, even changing our thinking.

People fear changing their thinking more than anything else. It involves admitting that they were wrong in the past, that they must change their behaviors, and therefore that their individualistic desires have to take a backseat to reality. This bothers most people.

Trying to re-Christianize the West will not work. We have moved past that. The people who advocate Christianity as a solution have given up and simply want an easy answer to shout at people. This makes them feel superior and allows them to believe that there is some workable plan.

We need to restore our culture, stop doing the things that damage us, and then build toward a futuristic vision of the West where the good are rewarded, the bad exiled, and everyone else left alone. Neither conservatives nor liberals will do that, so it is up to us to save humanity from itself yet again.

Tags: , , , , , ,

Share on FacebookShare on RedditTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn