Being correct, the term must be disavowed by Moldbug.
"it evolves; this doctrine has a predictable direction of evolution, and the whole structure moves together."
No mystery.There's a Pope. We don't know who it is because they rely on security by obscurity. As per the principles of responsibility laundering, they never show up in the news. One of the side effects is that their decrees are typically slow. Can take years to get through the system.
Getting a quick response is to buy a sonar unit for those it's getting a response from. We as observers would be able to trace the orders, so they normally don't. Further, since America is basically a usurper regime, and lots of high-church proggies are more than happy to usurp the Pope position, even before we have time to trace the orders the Pope would be violently replaced. We would trace the orders to a branch that has already been pruned.
Fascism, as per Land, is Communism that's insecure and ashamed of itself. In a properly Fascist country (not Russia or China, which barely even pretend to be democratic) naturally the evolution is from more ashamed and hypocritical to more zealous and pure. Imagine the counterfactual: if the evolution is towards less Fascism, it means they have already converted to anti-Fascist convictions. For completeness I will also mention the second counterfactual: a confident and assertive Communist country is one with over 90% mortality. All are equal only in death. The Fascist dimly senses this, and they don't want to actually die, which is why they're ashamed and compromise Communism with some form of Reality, such as Capitalism.
Fun trivia: the Pope doesn't like SJWs, and wants them to sit down and shut up. They're making things worse for everyone, including themselves. However, SJWs really do arise spontaneously, and do so more often than the Pope can order them shut down. Any that truly step beyond the pale get whacked by one of the fast-track orders, though.
There has to be a Pope in theory due to the nature of property. If two fight over ownership of something, one must win. Shocking news: once I've eaten a pear, you can't also eat it. Whichever hungry person ends up eating the pear was already the owner. The conflict arose due to someone being mistaken about this ownership. (See also: Socrates, evil vs. ignorance.)
As previously, we can see there must also be a Pope in practice, because we don't see dead evolutionary lines. One of which would have caused America to nuke itself a long time ago.
Let's talk about evolution, tornadoes, and blind watchmakers. I think it's funny.
The argument runs thus: evolution is like a tornado assembling an airliner. In fact evolution supposes that, given that tornadoes are caused by airliners and the airliners can adjust the tornadoes to be more likely to assemble an airliner, and further that airliners kill and eat any tornadoes that destroy airliners, it's not particularly surprising to see a tornado assemble a complex artifact.
Or: yeah, evolution is a blind watchmaker assuming blind watchmakers exist as a matter of logical necessity and it turns out watches can unblind watchmakers if they manage to successfully assemble a watch.
Moldbug's prospiracy hypothesis is that not only do tornadoes assemble airliners, they can only assemble airliners as a matter of logical necessity. Every tornado assembles an airliner perfectly. It must be so, because the Cathedral essentially never tries anything that ultimately goes extinct. Good joke! Bad logic.
More: you can see the command structure in the way the election was stolen. If they were merely ordered to defraud guerrilla style, the methods would have varied. In reality we get a series of late-night vote dumps with hecked up ratios. (There was some guerrilla stuff but it's insignificant and Twitter lets you post about it.) It's not hard to imagine how this happened. They tried to be all wink-wink nudge-nudge but democratic operatives are biological trash - not merely peasants, but underclass - and had to repeatedly ask for clarification until they functionally got a direct, detailed order. Similarly one of courts would have heard one of Trump's suits, accidentally or by brain damage. Evolution is sloppy. The Cathedral is not sloppy. Not when it matters.
I tried to resist hammering this into the ground, but the prospiracy theory is real fuckin' dumb, so I decline.
The 2016-2020 series makes perfect sense as the reaction of a perfectly normal command-and-control structure. Normally you can defraud about 6% of the vote. I estimate DNC gets 6% and RNC gets 5%, adds up to 1%. In 2016 they knew a) if they defrauded properly like they did in 2020, it would be obvious, as in fact it was and b) 6% fraud means a swing of 12%. 50-50 goes to 44-56. They figured they had very little to worry about. The RNC wasn't going to play ball with Trump, giving the DNC free reign. No way Trump would overcome a 12-point disadvantage, right? He's a reality TV star for Satan's sake. Worst case they blackmail him later or kill his credibility with wall-to-wall negative coverage.
Haha, oops.
Sorry, Americans really do hate you that much, nerd.
Frankly Trump constitutes lese majeste just by existing, so they decided to show their full might in 2020. Gloves off. Yeah it would be expensive and embarrassing but Trump's worth it, so they went for the throat.
Have you seen some of the designs evolution comes up with? Evolution is inhuman. When it goes off the chain the things it makes are almost unfathomable. How do eyes evolve? It's absurdly clever, however it's managed. Oh, except for these inexplicable idiotic solecisms like the tailbone and making the birth canal also the insemination canal, not to mention running this plumbing through the hips instead of around them. Evolution does not make for clean and easy to understand narratives with understandable mistakes you could have made yourself. If tornadoes really were handing you airliners every time they passed through your back yard, yes 2020 would have been stolen but how would it have been done? We would not have a clue on God's green Earth. There would have been vote dumps in Trump's favour happening at high noon in the middle of urban Wisconsin. WTF moments everywhere.
No, if 2016 wasn't defrauded enough, evolution doesn't try proper fraud in 2020. Evolution is super dumb on timescales like that. If Trump had fired the Swamp, then maybe the selection would have been harsh enough. In reality Trump fired Sir Diddly and the Right Honourable Squat.
Look, I'm trying to run out of reasons to say [prospiracy considered retarded] but I keep finding new ones. Sorry.
Moldbug is a lord. If this isn't obvious to you, remember he built an Urbit. Moldbug's problem is that he's a lower-ranked lord than the Pope and is very successfully bottoming from the bottom. Fascist gonna fasc.
11 comments:
By the way, set 1s.
Theory: cathedral is a natural selection regime.
Prediction: dead evolutionary lines.
Evidence: no dead evolutionary lines.
One of the premises just got spiked. If we're doing a proper set 1 we would break out all the individual premises in the theory and do more set 1s on each of them, to figure out which epistemic principle we cocked up.
Hope you weren't holding that premise too deep in your brain when we impaled it. It's uncomfortable for the stake to have to pass through the parietal lobe before it gets to the false belief.
Since I'm apparently spamming my own blog today: I had a good laugh, and I'd like to share.
"Curtis, just an FYI, links to graymirror.substack.com are shadow-banned on Hacker News. I did an Ask HN: post about the ban just now, and some mod deleted it after a few minutes.
Presumably, Substack (aren't they funded by Y Combinator?) should be made aware that one of their popular authors are being banned."
Yes! Obviously they should! Raise that awareness, kek!
Much to my surprise, I caught up on all your things. This was quite good:
You taste me
I'm nectar
But that's not how I feel
If I can't be myself
Then I'll try being you
And I'll keep being someone else
Til I taste nectar too
That sounds sort of 'aware pedophile victim', I guess. Or just *gay*, I guess, but in 'little-girl voice'. Some fag-gits have voices like that, but don't enunciate properly so that you can tell it's English. So, GAMES w/tutorial. No thank you. Musically, the first one was better, the above actually reminds me of the very vice (Twitter) itself. I can't believe how much of this I've been spared. People have often told me that I 'live a charmed life'. That seems to be true.
Oh, except for these inexplicable idiotic solecisms like the tailbone and making the birth canal also the insemination canal, not to mention running this plumbing through the hips instead of around them.
Jon Stewart said something to Charlie Rose about 6 years ago like this, although his was 'the scrotum'. That was very clearly Jewish even at the time. Who else would think that way? That's not all that's 'also' in your favoured 'solecism' of course. I wonder how many began to suffer from frigidity by pondering these varied biological functions all somehow coalescing at 'the wrong place'. The reasons for going into celibacy must be manifold, and I'm sure many who find chastity pleasurable and prefer convents and ashrams to brothels and resorts don't tell the biological secrets they dread so and that are the reason for their 'religious' or 'spiritual' life-style. I'm aware that there are people who cannot stand the duple purpose-function in either's primary sex's organs (although piss is not native to the balls), and far more who are squeamish about the ass, and I don't mean gay only--women do it all the time, and neither they nor their partners are thinking about shit. I have heard people in your circles completely unaware of the regularity with which women 'commit sodomy'; they think it's inarguably dangerous, or they're freaked out with 'faeces thoughts'. But since I have no squeamishness about the body at all, that's why, without TMI, I never have hemorrhoids. I'm an individualized yogi, although I've been to classes, etc., taught by people who don't know how to do what I can do.
Strongly confident in a false interpretation of what I said. When confidence is false, it is known as overconfidence. Do you plan to fix your overconfidence?
Of course not. I was never 'strongly confident'. I just laid it out there, you could explain it or not. So you think most people would know what the fuck you meant? I often don't, so it's your responsibility if you want me to know how you arrive at such a formulation. I don't know if anybody else thinks such a thing, especially 'going round the hips'. I tried to visualize it and couldn't. I related it to things I do know about as means to see if that was related. You say it wasn't, so that's that. You can either explain it or not. I DO know that becoming priests and nuns is simply often the price they have to pay not to have to have sex. There are many people who recoil from it, and that last McEwan novel was about two virgins on their wedding night, he was eager, she was frigid, and they divorced either the next day or the next two days. I don't have any patience with frigidity if there is no attempt to 'fix it', and she was not. She just said "It's revolting!"
But yes, this does fucking suck:
Gays and virgins and bar chads are all sterile. Childless: that's all that matters. They're the same.
Being a rustic also comes with its liabilities. Maybe you're not just 'techno-Amish', but fell into it so easily because you're 'religiously Amish'. Although they do 'shunning', which is a good bit more biting than 'shadow-banning'.
In a wonderfully ironic twist, you're like Susan Sontag, who also hated fun and humour, thought they were time-wasting. Hey, so maybe you won't have to be reincarnated to 'fix' anything.
So you do have children, right? If you don't, then you're just gay. I guess that includes Emmanuel Macron then. Both Mr. and Mrs. Macron are gay. I hadn't known till this last Moldbug that gay was not only interdit, it was also the foundation stone for all garden-variety NRxers. Nick wasn't so concerned about it even at the beginning of Outside In, but he, like you, felt the need to join and join hard. Much as I don't actually admire virginity, that doesn't mean a virgin is 'gay'. Erebus explained that he was a 'childless chad' and 'likely to remain so' very eloquently on Outside In. But I'm going to assume you're literal Amish unless corrected, and that would explain your attraction to such extremism.
I'm hard too, and have to have a hard mattress. I'm not interested in sleeping on the floor. Alors, "Continuons-nous ... ou non. "
It bears hammering in that you write that I was 'strongly confident' as if you KNOW that that's true.
You do not know it, and it was not true.
I think it was lovely Peppermint who used to say that Plato was gay due to childlessness. That is about as intelligent as the black woman columnist who said 'we must listen to Aristotle despite his Politics, which included 'Natural Slavery'. As you well know, of course.
But, naturally, having children does make you go for the broad stroke, the long view, etc.
In the past, everyone who has flatly contradicted my assessment in this way has been lying to me.
I had a working bullshit detector as a toddler, and as a result I'm kind of over my lifetime quota. If you could stop, I would appreciate it.
If you can't stop, head's up: I'm going to keep calling you on it.
I wasn't lying. Why would I lie about something like that? It's genuinely unusual, or maybe a lot more people have thought this way than I'm aware of. So call me on it, call me a liar while you continue caricaturing yourself in this embarassing way. It doesn't hurt if I don't believe it too. If you see me as only to call 'liar', of course there won't be any opportunities to do so. Which is fine.
I already told you it might be a 'wrong interpretation', but it does not follow that I am lying that I was 'strongly confident' that my interpretation was right. It wasn't even really an interpretation anyway, it was a query, to some degree--frankly, it was written because I was slightly embarassed that I didn't automatically know what you were talking about in this case at least (I don't always care that I don't, but this was more arresting, I'd never heard anything like it) any more than I know what curses Moldbug was saying "i can't write this out" after the "Grandma" thing.
So no, if I flatly contradicted your assessment, I was NOT lying. It doesn't matter enough to lie about. I wanted to know about your fucking strange-talk about the birth canal and the insemination canal. You won't tell me why it should go around the hips, so that's that. Another thing I can easily live without. It's your blog, and you didn't invite me here, so you can call me a liar all you want, which is apparently your plan.
I.e., if I'd just asked you what you meant by that, you wouldn't have answered me. You still didn't. I don't know why I should care, since that's not the evolution that did occur, but somehow you think or know it's a 'solecism'.
I don't think there is a Pope. However, more importantly, why do we have to invent terms like Cathedral or prospiracy or whatever? Look.
There was this Game of Thrones series. The King is dead and a lot of folks do not obey the boy on Throne controlled by her mother, so in practice there is no King. Of course it is not a democracy either. It is the rule of the few, aristocracy, oligarchy. And just like that, making the setting an oligarchy, aristocracy, they automatically got a plot full of secrecy, conspiracy and intrigue. Because that is how the rule of the few works, it is all about elites secretly backstabbing each other. The rule of the few is always like that. Always. Imagine working for a big corporation with a weak to nonexistent CEO. One day this group of managers is stronger and things go their way, the other day another. As an average peasant, it is all secret to you.
Whereas in a monarchy, like working for a strong CEO, you do not know how the decision is made but you know very clearly what is the decision and how it is executed.
Whereas in a pure democracy, you know how the decision is made because you are out in the Athenian agora, participating in the debate. But you do not know how it will be executed, because you voted on raising a war tax but Sidereos voted against it and is refusing to pay, who is going to force him, he has ten strong guys working for him, not easy.
But in an oligarchy you are entirely in the dark, you have no idea of what is going on. What is going on is the net sum of all conspiracies.
Why do we have to invent new terms for oligarchy? We just have to understand oligarchy is necessarily secretive and conspiratorial.
And this is why there is no Pope. A Pope does not hide. He makes it clear he is a Pope and makes his commands clear.
>Evidence: no dead evolutionary lines.
There absolutely are. Can't you see the semi-forgotten fossils of past failed attempts at power grabs? Like in the nineties, they came up with gaymarriage, implying marriage is a good thing. But in 1960's the story was that marriage is a bad thing, free love is a good thing. Today they want gays and transgender serve in the military, implying serving in the military is a good thing. In the 1960's they really hated soldiers. If you would ask the 1960's folks, they would be really puzzled why would gays marry or serve in the military, only brainwashed conservatives do such things.
To be fair, it is more like that they still want to destroy marriage and the military, but instead of attacking it head-first, now it is infiltrate and subvert.
Still, it implies the old methods did not work.
Populism was leftist when it was Huey Long. Populism is rightist and bad when it is Donald Trump. Evidently, they tried populism, used it for a while and then gave up on it.
Post a Comment