Saturday, May 21, 2022

How to BTFO Mercantilists, E.g. Grapes

Let's say France heavily subsidizes her grape producers. She uses tax money so they can afford to sell all the way down at half price. If you let her export to England, it will wipe out all English grape production.

Step 1: tariffs to put French grapes at exactly English prices at the English docks, effectively anti-subsidizing them. Throw all this money into the treasury. "Thanks for giving us your tax money, France. We appreciate it!" 

Step 2: release the tariffs entirely. When your own domestic vineyards threaten to go out of business, use the tariff money to buy them out so they personally suffer ~0 losses. Functionally, forcing France to buy all your vineyards out with her own tax money. "You can put them out of business if you like, but only if you pay for it."

Step 3: France is paying for England to eat grapes. Thanks France! What a nice country. So generous. The more French grapes they sell in England, the more French tax dollars effectively end up in England.

Maybe you keep a small tariff so as to pay for the mothballed vineyards? Grapes aren't a terribly critical good, so maybe the government just re-sells the land and lets the chips fall where they may; the land was paid for by France, so anything you can get for it is pure profit. With something more important, like meat or steel, you would want to preserve them against the inevitable time when the "protectionist" economy falls to its own inept policies. Mothballing isn't free, so a small tariff could be used to cover that - again, making France pay for it. "Steel supply shock, huh? Oh yeah we have those strategic steel mill reserves."

Friday, May 20, 2022

Grammarly Solecism Example

"The luck of a main character was often, unbelievably good."

I didn't know luck could be often. I wonder what often luck is?

I guess it's a synonym for 'good' in context. Quick reversal: "The luck of a main character was good. Unbelievably often." Hardly superb diction, but it works.

This is exactly the kind of mistake that computer-based grammar is likely to make. It will have trouble identifying sub-phrases, because (like the author using it and the readers reading it) it doesn't actually know what words mean. It has to identify a phrase based on how it's spelled. The author doesn't know what commas are for, they have to figure out which commas go where by imitation, which is inflexible &c.

As I said earlier, this may be an accent. Maybe in their native language putting a comma there doesn't make you sound like a stuttering idiot child. However, at best, it's a grammar mistake that Grammarly doesn't fix. 

That, said, there's this, one guy who, puts so, many unnecessary, commas that while, I'm exaggerating a lot it, rapidly, becomes, unreadable. This is the kind of problem that's caused when an insecure writer trusts a tool that's dumber than they are. 

Language Evolution & Professional Tools

Background: it's normal for peasants not to be fluent in their mother tongue. They're like a search engine: if you say "explosion" you get one set of results, and if you say, "rapidly expanding volume of gas as a result of a runaway chemical reaction moving faster than the speed of sound in the local medium" you get a different set of results, because the search engines don't know what words mean. They instead have a sort of historical, Pavlovian association.  Use words in the "wrong" context and they get confused and lost.

We say the language becomes "corrupted" over time because the later version is inherently less fluent than the previous version. E.g. what are social conditions? They are livingish livingranks. Livingranks are livingish? You don't fuckin' say. Come up with that on your own, did you. Using "livingranks" for "things-which-we-call-conditions" is also plain wrong. I wonder what word the Old English had for worldstate? Don't forget worldstate is two syllables, conditions three. 

In a corrupt language you take longer to redundantly say words that are being used wrong. It's unquestionably decline (down-sloping).

You know how I have to say "you" because English has no second-person singular? It used to, ye prat. Almost exactly this occurred: because egalitarianism, everyone started using the royal We to signal that nobody was less valuable than anyone else and especially not less valuable than royalty, to the point where the singular "I" was completely forgotten. Peasants don't know their own tongue (trying to make them pick up a second tongue is plain mean). Then ye got some troubled peasants distinguishing between we and we-all, or we and wees, to try to remember the word I. You fuckin' dolts.

Why do Americans say "entree" entering-dish, when they refer to the main course? Because Americans are not fluent and don't know what words mean.

Over time, languages (especially lingua franca and attempted imperial lingua franca) forget their own words. If they do remember the words, they forget what they mean. That's corruption. 

P.S. English peasants in particular seem proud of being non-fluent in English. If they can speak their own tongue like a broken pidgin, they're as happy as a pig in shit. French peasants, at least, seem to strive (uselessly, but with feeling) to be more fluent. Japanese peasants give face to those who are more fluent than they are, rather than mocking them like English peasants do. 

Then, the English peasant, speaking an improverished pidgin, keeps accidentally absorbing pretentious (stretch-ish) bureaucratese which serves the linguistic need they suddenly find themselves with. Which bureaucratisms are then used wrong, in case you weren't sure they were foreign implants.

This is why it was very correct when for centuries scholars wrote exclusively in Latin. 

Should have used Greek instead, tho. Using Latin revealed they were doing it for social reasons, not logical or scholastic ones. Exactly as accused, they did it to sound fancy and for no other reason. They were correct (co-rect; with-the_line) by accident.

Scholars need their own language. Restricting a tongue to scholars means it's restricted to high-IQ users who put real demands on the tongue, which means it corrupts very slowly if at all. Even if it does get corrupt, the professionals can fix it, unlike hapless peasants. 

(You don't want to know what "professional" actually means. Save yourself the headache.) 

I see no reason wealthy scholars have to use a natural language. Construct a purpose-built one and use that. Maybe some kind of lojban except un-sodomized by cross-pollination with Greek.

You want "in" on the scholarly clique? Don't make scholars write in the vulgate. Merchant-tongue simply isn't good enough. Make the scholar-tongue your native language if you want it so bad, villeins. 

Scholars deserve the frustration they suffer for taking the merchant whining more seriously than the merchants themselves do. Why should we do all this work if they're not willing to do any work? They were just bitching. Should have assumed bad faith and demanded proof of good faith.

Thursday, May 19, 2022

Monopoly vs. Ykk

Having a monopoly is not necessarily a death sentence for your firm.

Ykk basically has a monopoly and they're fine. You can tell they're fine because you've never really thought about your zipper before. They just work. When zippers have issues it's because Americans are cheapskates, not because Ykk can't make a good zipper. 

I would be interested in investigating what they do differently. 

I accidentally investigated a bit just now. They're not a public company. That's 100% relevant. Incorporated and joint-stock, but not publicly traded. Don't have to make the Dow Jones happy. Result: this is the first time I've seen a corporate wiki page that has both revenue and profits with the green triangle. Not coincidentally the latest data is 8 years old - uh, actually, how much money they make is none of your business. They make enough. Just buy your zipper and piss off.

4chan means narcissist when they say autistic

In most contexts.

Recall Ghost in the Shell. Autistic mode is when they turn off their bluetooth network, aka airplane mode. This is a correct use of the Latin. Narcissists necessarily function in this kind of autistic mode all the time - narcissists have a version of closed shell syndrome. 

Regular autists merely have difficulty understanding others because we're so different. The Caino hypcriens brain functions by assuming the other brain works more or less like yours does, which is a problem when it doesn't. If the assumption doesn't hold, the function constitutes a bug. Unfortunately allists are actually incapable of debugging the function, so they're just kinda boned when it comes to dealing with autists. Once we grow beyond the larval stage it's up to us whether we want to make the allist comfortable or exploit them or troll them, and they can't do shit about it except go full shrieking monkey mob and lynch us. Even then, it's not hard to spot the line.

For a narcissist it's actually impossible to understand others, because they're entirely invisible. They can't see anything except their own reflection. (Reminder: which, unlike Narcissus, they hate. If it were consistent and not self-destructive we wouldn't call it crazy.)


Excepted context: autistic map makers or autistic flag-finders are genuinely autistic. Or more probably spergs. Spegs have in fact a heightened capacity for empathy, but it tends to be object-directed instead of person-directed. Still, as the global capture-the-flag incident showed, spergy empathy will in fact reveal more about the person than allist empathy, in the end. 

This is part of the reason allists hate spergs so much. This is the reason narcissists immediately go into an incandescent berzerk fury on contact with spergs: their illusionary fake persona will be casually pierced. Autists will straight-up fail to notice the narcissist demanding they play along, whereas the allist can be fooled into playing along even if they resist.

Wednesday, May 18, 2022

Morality Isn't Real: Inner Peace

Did anyone tell you inner peace makes you comically powerful?

When you don't fight yourself every step of the way, getting anything done is about fifty times easier. 

Don't do it to try to win Afterlife Points™ or whatever your so-called religion tries to pawn off on you. Do inner peace because it's the difference between a pedalled tricycle and a rocket engine. 

Also it feels good. Shockingly, health feels good. Puritans BTFO. 

Oh but you might get Afterlife Points™ anyway. Why do yourself right twice over when you can do it thrice?

BTC Ideal For Backing Banknotes

BTC has high transaction costs, so you want your transactions bundled into batches. Using a bank for this is ideal. BTC-backed banknotes and bank balances allow fast and easy low-key transactions, but you can withdraw your BTC balance at any time.

Turns out "digital gold" was an even more apt moniker than you thought. 

Meanwhile, BTC does most of the fractional-reserve auditing for you. The correct fractional reserve is 1:1, because the risk of a bank run is 0 at this ratio. BTC balances are public: you can check how much BTC your bank holds at any time just by looking at their address on the blockchain. You can check yourself that you aren't issued more notes than is warranted by how much their BTC balance goes up. You can even give them special permission to invest your fraction of their BTC balance. Upside: higher interest rates for you; downside, risk of default.

Tuesday, May 17, 2022

Twitter is Fake

And probably gay. (I could figure it out, but why bother?) 

I'm concerned they told Musk he'll get Epstein'd if he buys twitter and he's using the fake-account thing to get out of it. 

That said, my twitter account has over 800 followers, which means I had a good sample size. How many were real? Most were inactive accounts. Someone would follow me and later forget twitter existed. The reason I approached 1000 followers can be found here: "Joined 2012."

Folk who don't sign in can't unfollow you for over-spiced tweets. The older your account, the more links will be dead.

You may note my account is itself inactive, because I was locked out. "Give us your phone number!" "No." That's 130 fundamentally-fake follows right there. Though probably most of those accounts are, in turn, inactive.

Also I never checked my main feed because I got tired of folk getting salty for getting unfollowed. Thus I followed promiscuously but instead used purely lists, so even when I was active, most of them were fake. (Bonus: the lists weren't {aren't?} algorithmically "managed." They displayed every tweet, in chronological order.)

There were certainly no shortage of bots and spammers either. I always remember the JBP tweet which was, "Depression and substance abuse: the facts" with a missing link. Got nearly 100 retweets, never mind the 800 dinks. Revealing that many of JBP's readers don't read his tweets (all about who says it, not what's said), nor does JBP himself have any idea what's on his own twitter feed.

Repair of Anatta

With permanence postscript.

In Buddhism, the term anattā (Pali: अनत्ता) or anātman (Sanskrit: अनात्मन्) refers to the doctrine of "non-self" – that no unchanging, permanent self or essence can be found in any phenomenon.[note 1] While often interpreted as a doctrine denying the existence of a self, anatman is more accurately described as a strategy to attain non-attachment by recognizing everything as impermanent, while staying silent on the ultimate existence of an unchanging essence.

The issue is Siddhartha wrote in Sanskrit, and I'm reading in English. I don't exactly trust La Wik to understand nuances. 

However, at least regarding Western interpretations of anatta, it's suicide for the squeamish. Too much of a pussy to drag a knife down your arm? That's cool: meditate on destroying your ego until you don't have a soul anymore and become a zombie. That's dumb, let's fix it.

1: no fixed essence.
Impermanence is very real (although it’s a blessing, not a curse). We have a nature, as do all other entities and events. Everything has a list of properties which describe it; the least-redundant form of such a list is its essence. E.g. maybe a rock is a collection of misaligned silica crystals, and likewise we can describe what silica is. However, it changes constantly. You can’t step into the same river twice, as they say – you can’t even be the same person who stepped in the river the first time, never mind the river itself.
More, I prefer to describe everything as an event. Stable "objects" are merely events that tend to cause themselves to re-occur. They are events that re-create themselves, which re-creation re-creates itself again. A door right now causes a door to be in the doorway in the next second, which causes a door to be there in the third second, and so on. By contrast a fire doesn't cause the same fire to re-appear.

Yet more: to write out the full list of an event's properties (even if you have the immortal capacity to not die before you finish) means writing out the list of properties of the entire universe. There are no hard boundaries; all is one (although the Dao looks like two everywhere). To fully describe an event means describing the things it is currently interacting with, which means describing what they, in turn, are interacting with, and then you end up having to describe literally everything, the alpha and the omega. Luckily full understanding is not necessary to get on with it; a distinctly impoverished list of properties can get you like 99% of the way there.


2: physics, as an objective, external world, is somewhat illusionary.
It is in fact not external – treating it as external is something like a shorthand or a compression. It’s close enough that it works, but if you truly want to understand, you have to realize the physical world you see is, to summarize for brevity, just you, but again. It’s me over here, and it’s me over there too. 

What we perceive as the "external" world are in fact our internal noumena which we don't have willful control over. The blue cube "out there" is in fact your thought/perception of a blue cube, and thoughts are inside. What makes the thought fixed is that it's [our] thought instead of purely [your] thought; you can't change my mind, just as I can't change yours, so if we both have a thing in mind at the same time, neither of us can change it. The "external" world isn't outside, it's merely shared. 

Note that this is more or less my repair of Descartes' proof of God. Minds actually can't share; that's the nature of subjectivity. Unless, that is, they are in fact both part of a greater mind. An overmind, if you will, which is imagining two minds that perceive themselves as separate. Also, imagining a world so vividly and consistently that we can't tell the difference between that consistency and lawful physics. 

3: even Easterners say they have no "real" ego any more than, say, Lara Croft has a "real" ego. I would say Lara Croft really does exist, rather than that I don’t exist, except that Lara Croft is distinctly less complicated than I am. 

Lara suffers* a lot more from impermanence. I can’t be switched off at the push of a button, and if I am switched off, I can’t be easily switched back on either. My complexity comes with inertia, you might say. As a result, stuff done to me (or by me) is much more lasting than stuff done to Croft. This, however, is a difference of degree, not a difference in kind.
*the joke is impermanence is not suffering 

Likewise, it's not that dreams aren't "real" exactly. Rather, dreams have bonus impermanence. The long term is truncated, 0) making the short term much more valuable by comparison and 1) meaning the total value of events in a dream much, much lower. We don't much care what happens in dreams because, ultimately, much less happens in dreams. It's not actually 0 events, though.

This is important, because sometimes physical-world events are also highly impermanent, and yet it's easy to treat them as "real" even though they have consequences exactly of the same magnitude as actions in a dream.


The issue is Siddhartha wrote in Sanskrit, and I'm reading in English. Maybe this is exactly what Gautama-sensei meant by anatta. Or maybe he would virulently disagree. Maybe I even missed the point. Hard to tell. It's easy to imagine he would know more about it than I do.

P.S. Mistakes cut off future possibility of virtue. If permanence were real, mistakes would accumulate until they choked out all existence. Impermanence forgives all your mistakes, sooner or later. The price of this forgiveness is having to re-up your good decisions periodically. 

Try to remember that if it feels bad to re-up a particular good decision, you need to start doing accounting. Most likely the event's impermanence is too high and it's not worth doing. The problem isn't impermanence, the problem is you want unprofitable things to be profitable, and Gnon says, "No." 

P.P.S. Sadly the modern world is highly anti-intellectual, so it's unlikely I will ever meet someone a) willing to explain on Siddhartha's behalf & b) not too couch potato to grasp the intended idea. Gotta do your reps unless you want to give me carte blanche to walk all over you, scholastically speaking.

Monday, May 16, 2022

More War => More Veterans

The more Putin fights in the Ukraine, the larger his blooded army becomes.

Grinding XP on his little mans. 

Strategy, or a happy accident?

How Velocity Doesn't Affect Prices

The actual money supply according to the market is #_transactions * average_transaction_size. If April saw 100 transactions with average price $100, then the supply of money in April was $10,000. Goods demanded $10,000 dollars, and $10,000 dollars demanded goods. The actual amount of coinage in circulation is irrelevant except that it has to be at least $100 so that this set of transactions is logically possible. 

If you increase transactions, you increase the money supply, lowering the price of money. Inflation.
However, to increase transactions, you also have to increase the amount of goods the market sees, causing deflation.
As it happens, these effects exactly cancel out.
Put  another way, if additional good production is zero (e.g. it's all arbitrage) then the velocity of goods rises in lock-step with the velocity of money. If it's not all arbitrage you get production increases of equivalent goodness.
Put a third way, velocity is measuring the price of money in money. If you increase transactions you increase the money supply, but if you increase transactions you also increase the demand for money. Price of money in money is always going to be 1.


Which is why, for example, the price of a bushel of wheat is 11 pence (or local equivalent; dram, drachma, denarius, &c). Any time production should cause deflation, it also increases velocity, cancelling the deflation with inflation, and wheat prices remain the same. Along with the price of everything else. Indeed it is likely that the very slight price increase that wheat did see (actually there was a low of 8 pence) was due to ongoing silver mining.

Absent central banks, long-run prices are absurdly stable. 

Population growth: more people demand the same amount of money, causing deflation, but also demand goods, causing inflation. The additional food purchases raise the price of food, and then the additional velocity raises the price of money. Meanwhile, of course they are also adding labour, thus adding to goods, thus causing price to fall. Blah blah etc. 

Check: the long-run price of oil (as in, neglecting the many price shocks) in grams of gold is absurdly stable. 

Is productivity the same?
If you raise productivity you definitely decrease the price of the good. However, you then also free up some labour to go make something else....which seems like it shouldn't have a net effect. There might be something I'm missing, but it makes sense that productivity changes should properly affect good prices. It changes their relative cost. Indeed it's productivity which determines prices in the first place. In a sense, the labour theory of value is correct, at economic equilibrium: the only limiting input for any good is human labour, because labour can be transmuted into more supply of any good that can be supplied. Just don't forget labour is not created equal.

When you print or otherwise debase money, you don't increase the number of goods, so you don't change the number of transactions, you just increase the average transaction size near the money printer. Higher supply of money, lower price of money. 

P.S. Population growth is equivalent to immigration from a market perspective. More demand for jobs + more demand for output of jobs => more supply of jobs etc etc. If the immigrants can take all your jobs, then your children can take all your jobs too. Eventually population grows so much that all the jobs are taken long before anyone can find one...that's how it works, right? 

Sunday, May 15, 2022

Americans Too Poor to Afford to be Mammalia

Naturally baby formula is Satanist. Of course is it. With Satan dead, nobody can get it.

I dunno if you've heard, there's this amazing product called "breast milk." Try it. Even without teeth, babies can eat the stuff. An astounding advance. I've heard this too - practically every mother has access. Very democratic. 

Practically every baby has a mother too, I think? What an amazing thing.

Also note that due to the finely-ground food issue, the Gerber stuff is basically also poison. It's persorption or something. I would recommend against even buying your own blender; the good ones really do blend like mad. That said, I have no hard evidence to indict blenders. Gerber has so many red flags it's hard to know where to start. 

But, like, if your child doesn't have teeth, try the breast milk. They seem to really go for that stuff. If they do have teeth, have you considered letting them chew their own food? The need for braces is caused by crowded teeth, which is caused by lack of jaw development, which is caused by not chewing enough. 

You can tell Tucker doesn't quite get anti-Fascism because he throws shade at breast milk.
It's a class thing. Even the proles can get access to breast milk. They can't afford to be sophisticated and artificial. You're not some prole, are you? 

For nearly ten thousand years, mothers could afford not to work outside the home. America is too poor for that, apparently.

Strategy Example: Exploit Back-Page-Effect

The trucker convoys were doomed when Putin invaded Ukraine, because they required news coverage but of course peaceful protests can't hold a candle to a hot war. 

But what if you want to do something that specifically relies on dodging journalist interest? You can make this dynamic work for you, instead of against you. Exploit the limited attention total. 

Build the thing, then sit on it until something big and flashy appears in the news, then release it under the cover of that thing. Accumulate some inertia while nobody is looking. 

Like releasing your game a a week before e.g. Skyrim is released, except that's a good thing because you're much closer to a mind-your-own-business sphere. 

Don't wait for an opportunity to show up, make your own. Alternatively: luck is a skill. Fortune favours the prepared.

Saturday, May 14, 2022

Debt-Backed Currency & Corruption

How money in America works, neglecting the <1% or so of real currency:

Step 1: there is no money.

You take out a $100 loan from a bank. Now there's $100 and a $100 debt. I call this virtual currency, for reasons that will become obvious if they aren't already.

Bank charges $5 in interest.

That means there is $100 total, in the entire world, and you owe the bank $105. 

To pay this back, someone else has to take out another $100 loan, and pay you $5 of it. This means they owe the bank $105, have $95. When you pay back your loan, the $100 vanishes, and the bank keeps the other $5. There is $100 in the entire world, the dude owes $105, and the bank already has $5 of it.

Fiat banking is pure economic rent. Inherently a Ponzi scheme. On average the bank accumulates all the money. Or Goldman Sachs, who very cleverly somehow runs the same kind of scam, in turn, on the banks. 

To pay the bank back for the privilege of being allowed to have money to spend, you have to sell something to the bank. Banks accumulate all the goods.

This continues until someone defaults on their loan. Some of the money remains in circulation when the debt vanishes.

Fiat banks don't much care if someone defaults. The loan poofs out of existence again and they still keep whatever interest you paid. They only care in that they want to extract as much interest from you as possible before you default. Hence credit cards & other deadbeat-positive initiatives.

The Fed has to lower interest rates to stave off the loan-defaults, because the defaults cause deflation, which triggers the potential recession that accumulates under price-controlled interest rates. When you have to pay back as much of the loan as possible, that part poofs out of existence, and the defaultee isn't allowed to take out a new loan to replace the vanished cash supply. 

On the minor plus side, since defaulting does leave that residual, the system isn't inherently headed to a crash. This causes real currency inflation, however. When the reified cash is re-deposited with the bank to pay off interest, I believe the banks deposit this money with the Fed, in case the 1:100 fractional reserve is somehow not enough to supply every demanded loan.

Under a real-money regime, money is also a debt. If you hold a gold coin worth $100, it means society at large owes you a debt of $100. You can call in this debt at any time, from a variety of vendors offering to do exactly that, in exchange for giving the vendor the debt you held. 

Under a fiat regime, society owes you a debt, but you in turn owe that debt to the bank - either directly or via a debtor. Who charges you for the privilege of being indebted to it.

Friday, May 13, 2022

On Carlson, Spades, Impotence, and, Inevitably, Fascism

Carlson gets it, Carlson doesn't get it. Did you know you can get transcripts of Tucker's monologues? Much more palatable.

"It's pretty hard to argue with people who are passive-aggressive. You may have tried it before. "Why are you so angry?" they scream. "Stop being violent," they snarl as they punch you in the face. Passive-aggressive people are intent on dominating you, but they're too dishonest to admit it.  

Now, it's not an honorable style of attack, but it's very effective, mostly because it's so bewildering. The Democratic Party practices this. Democrats will never meet you on an open field of battle. Instead, they will sneak up behind you and knock you unconscious with a bag of sanctimony. This is the party of weak men and angry women, so passive aggression is their only mode of communication."

Naturally, this is narcissism, but Tucker is tactful and calls it "passive-aggressive" so he doesn't have to condemn them as harshly as they deserve. Americans don't like it if you're too harsh. "Everyone has some good in them," etc etc. Well, maybe, but at some point it's nowhere near enough good. At some point you have to put a stop to them with however much violence as it happens to take.

Not that this matters; America is well beyond the point where mere condemnation can make a difference. Could execute every narcissist tomorrow and it still wouldn't be enough.

I'm of course a huge fan of calling out dishonour and the cowardly tactics of the impotent. Good work, dude.

However, Carlson's not quite willing to call a spade a spade. You may consider this a red flag, and if so, you are correct. In the end, he's still a Fascist. Doesn't know any better.

"Christianity has been the single greatest force for human rights in history. In fact, the Western understanding of human rights, our understanding of human rights, all of us, atheists included, is based on Christianity. That's where it comes from. Christianity is the reason we don't have slavery and segregation"

Let's be blunt: the Bill of Rights (note date) is Communism. Tucker is just saying: Christianity has been the greatest force for Communism in history.

I fully agree. 

Now he's mad that hyper-Christianity is going all "fuck you dad" due to the narcissism of small differences. Maybe don't worship Satan, you dumb fucks. 

Christianity opposes slavery because it wants everyone to be a slave, as per Nietzsche. Having de jure slaves would make the lack of contrast too obvious.

Christianity opposes segregation because, in short, it's evil and it hates you.

Christianity forwards "human" rights because it opposes property rights. Because it's Communist. (More precisely, egalitarian.) "Christianity describes a universal brotherhood of man, every person created in God's image and therefore, for that reason, morally equal." Yup. Idiots. Reap what you sow, and know them by their fruits. Christianity either leads to exactly Wokeness, or is too weak to so much as slow it down.

Children working in factories is vastly healthier than children being chained to narcissist busywork at school, and in any case this is almost certainly a wealth thing. Christians jumping in front of a train that already left the station. China has these anti-child laws as well, revealing some serious parochial blindness. Never forget the most insular, narcissistic homebody is the one who calls themselves cosmopolitan.
If parents agree that child labour is bad, then if they can afford not to, they won't.
If parents think they have the right to enslave their children for profit, then these laws are tyranny.
Either unnecessary or inherently evil.
Don't worry about it; it's actually both.

Calling a spade a spade is logically isomorphic.
If calling a spade a spade is enough, then do it already.
If calling a spade a spade won't work for whatever reason, it's already too late. If you're tempted to shade the truth for optics, you've already lost; your instincts just told you the fight is already over. A population that has already abandoned the truth is forsaken. If you have to carefully "lead" someone out of Plato's cave, save yourself the effort. They won't follow.

Either call a spade a spade or shut up and stop wasting your time. 


The point of calling them weak is to point out you don't need to fight back. The Churches being burned are suffering Gnon's wrath; they have richly earned such things. If you don't do anything stupid, you have nothing to fear.

They are not forcing you to commit infanticide. Mind your own business. None of you or yours are under threat; why are you so activated? Because Fascism. As always.

Render under Kaisar what is Kaisar's, which is, in fact, nothing.
By giving a shit about Roe vs. Wade, Christians render unto Kaisar the right to determine whether infanticide is moral or not. Does that sound like something allegorical-Jehovah would approve of? You dumb fucks? You condemn yourselves, never mind anyone else's opinion.

"The Christian counseling center only talks to women who are pregnant and aren't sure what to do next." When a stranger sins that's none of your goddamn business. Maybe let them know it's a sin, and beyond that, put up a fence. (Not chicken wire - it won't stop the blood spatter. Choose something you can quickly hose down.) It's between them and the heavens. The heavens can take care of it without your...assistance...thank you very much. 

Unlike non-Amish Christians, the heavens are responsible and can take care of themselves.  

You, too, can be like the Amish and the heavens, and take care of yourself. The Regime is too weak to stop you. You can just not commit infanticide. How hard is this, really? It's all like this. (Turns out America really is a free country, it's the people who are the problem.)
When you try to change the Pope's mind all you do is reinforce the Pope's perceived moral authority. It's not dissidence, it's kowtowing. Just stop. Mind your own business.

For the record, both infanticide and Ukraine are Gnon's wrath. When Gnon wants a human dead, I approve. Good for me, since Gnon is going to kill them either way. My choice is to be upset about Reality or to not be upset about Reality. I also don't object to gravity, because I'm not a moron. 

If you don't want to die, get on Gnon's good side, you dumb fucks.

Thursday, May 12, 2022

Olds From the Heavens: Corona-Chan Hates Narcissists

It's a godplague, specifically expressing heavenly wrath toward narcissism.

The actual virus itself was a nothingburger. However, it has exactly the correct appearance to make narcissists rip out their own guts in an attempt to deal with it.

The more narcissist you are, the more Corona-chan wrecked your shit.
For those of  us who aren't narcissist, it was a net gain. The heavens still make things like they used to. 

I'm starting to think most narcissists are literally p-zombies. Corona-chan may have a true body count in the dozens, all accidents, because nobody dies when you kill a narcissist. Nobody is home; you can't knock the lights out, and nobody leaves when the body perishes. It's not homicide, it's tidying.

How Christianity and Post-Christianity Causes Narcissism

The core symptom of narcissism is self-hatred. Something causes the patient to hate themselves, which is intolerable, which results in a death spiral, permanently distorting their cognition. 

Christianity says you are unworthy, and thus that you should hate yourself. For example, it doesn't merely say that you shouldn't masturbate; it says if you even think about masturbating, you are a wicked person. 

These impulses aren't even genuinely [you], because [you] can't control them. They're not your responsibility. As a result, you will be unable to stop thinking about masturbation. If you truly believe Christian preaching, you believe you deserve to be hated. Then you become a narcissist. 

This is entirely intentional. Christianity is a cult. Non-narcissists are, in the long term, resistant to manipulation. They have a tendency to falsify your brainwashing. Narcissists brainwash themselves daily, utterly destroying any resistance to brainwashing they might have. They are extremely vulnerable to anyone who gives them narcissistic supply. They love dogma that everyone has to believe. 

"You don't have to hate yourself if you come to Church every week." To a healthy person this is terribly off-putting. To a narcissist, this is catnip. "I will save you. I will redeem you." It's all narcissism-targeted. They save you from your own hatred. Redeem you from your own judgment...except that these are drugs. They only reinforce that the narcissist's original assessment was correct: they deserve to be hated for wanting to masturbate. Turns out biological drives don't go away. The narcissist is temporarily saved and permanently damned to the hellfire of their own wrath.

Wokism, American Fascism, works the same way. A racist is anyone who has less than complimentary thoughts about blacks. But Bantu are not, in fact, pure as driven snow. As with masturbation, these thoughts are not under your control; they are injected into your mind by outside events. You're simply acknowledging what you saw, the words which describe the event, and the feelings that naturally go with those words. 

Thus, everyone is racist. But racists deserve to hate themselves and have no friends; they are bad people. Thus, Wokism causes narcissism. Because it's a cult. Because Christianity is just Wokeness but for folk who are too poor to be completely batshit insane; Christianity is leavened with a bit of sense here and there.

Wednesday, May 11, 2022

Get Them Made Like They Used To

You can still buy a 1950s-style toaster that will have a 1950s-style toaster function and lifetime. 

It's just that $22 in 1950s dollars is $320 in 2022 dollars. Each 2022 dollar is worth nearly seven cents in 1950. 

I believe you can still get 1950s fridges as well, it's just that you're looking at around $6000. 

Almost all these "productivity" improvement have in fact been cutting corners. Wheat costs 11 pence a bushel, and a real toaster still costs $22. The price of money has changed, so this is less obvious than it should be.

The Narcissism Algorithm

There's a simple algorithm to convert thoughts to narcissism. Every pronoun is first person. "Do you like jam?" == "Do I like jam?" 

When the Woke narcissist accuses you of being racist, it's projection. They became a narcissist because of the fatal amount of lies they told to themselves about themselves, to hide from themselves the intolerable "racist" thoughts they keep having. 

Thus, "You have a racist thought," = "I have a racist thought," and hence, "I have a racist thought," = "You have a racist thought." Projection. Every time the Woke narcissist thinks something racist, they have to find a Drumpf voter to attribute it to. 

"I would never vote for Drumpf," = "You would never vote for Drumpf." Then they do this: "Why would I pretend I'm voting for Drumpf? When would that make sense for me?" Why would I say racist things? Why would I not virtue-signal about the poor?
Which is why they're constantly accusing others of lying. Obviously everyone thinks the same thing, because you = I. Thus they must have some sinister motives to cause them to falsify their own thoughts. 

If something happens that's unmistakably different, like watching someone pull the lever for Drumpf in person, they go crazy. "But...but, I would never vote for Drumpf! But I just voted for Drumpf...but I would never....WAT" That's when Othering happens. You're incomprehensible. You must not even be human.
There should be no Drumpf votes at all...unless there's Russian meddling of course. It makes far more sense that every vote was hacked in, rather than supposing the existence of humans who differ from the narcissist in any way except circumstances.

Same with the "Koch funding" line and similar. "I may say I'm voting for Drumpf if someone paid me, thus you are being paid."

Tuesday, May 10, 2022

Recification: the Unknown is Not Scary & Narcissism Some More

The unknowable is scary. 

If you see something you don't understand, it's not a big deal. I shouldn't even have to explain this. If you want to understand, you can go and learn about it. 

If you see something you can't understand, which is metaphysically immune to understanding, then yes that's a problem, now isn't it? If it's a threat, you can't defend yourself. You can't even tell if it is a threat or not. 

It's crazy-making, because Turing completeness is a thing. Nothing is impossible to understand, so if you see something impossible to understand, it's like a triangle with six sides. A logical contradiction.

If a thing can touch you, if you can interact with it, then you can learn about it. Touching is knowing; something that is unknowable is untouchable. In Reality you have no need to fear the unknowable, because it cannot possibly harm you. Even recognizing an allegedly unknowable thing as different from other, knowable things is to know something about it, contradicting the premise that it is unknowable. Having given it boundaries, you can simply list the effects of things inside those boundaries. Every time it touches you, you can record what happened and when it did so, and eventually this list will become a pattern. 

I shouldn't have to say but probably do: if it doesn't interact with you enough to form a pattern, then it doesn't matter if it's unknowable, because it approximately doesn't exist. Further, we can see that nothing with this sort of nature occurs in real life. While certain complex arrangements can be rare, the simple components which make them up always happen near-constantly. It's not like you can cast RPG wizard spells once every 3000 years, but not otherwise. To oversimplify, the elemental stuff happens daily or not at all. 

Further, experiencing something as unknowable is something that genuinely happens to you when you have a cognitive illness. Narcissists in particular. If you see something you inherently can't understand, it is evidence that you are insane. Your genes know; you don't need to be taught. If your genes know you're suffering from a probably-fatal fitness deficit, that's a problem, now isn't it? 

Monday, May 9, 2022

Moldbug's Autocracy is Leftist Part 2


"At the top level of scholarship, these new red organs will be as serious and intellectually ambitious as the old blue organs that compete with them."

Well, yes, and that's exactly why it will fail. Both of those are negative numbers. 

Look upon the internet, as I did, and despair. Nobody is even slightly serious. The culture is deeply, deeply anti-intellectual. Grass monke happy no think. Play in grass with spear, then hungry, then go chase and stab, then cook, then play again. No think gud liaf!


"Pillarization requires your cultural identity to be formalized and visible to the state—as visible as to any advertiser with two nickels to rub together. "

Pillarization is asking the Pope for permission. The peasant must do what they're told - at best they can beg daddy to be told to do something different. I can see no evidence they are even capable of disobeying. They can forget, misunderstand, or get confused about who the prime mover is. They can't actually disobey.


"There are many reasons to switch pillars—but this is never a trivial, or even easily reversible, process."

Yeah? Why not? You intending to let them keep voting? 

Why would someone want to keep flitting back and forth across a "cultural" divide? What, the Jew is going to join the neo-Nazis for a week because they're handing out cookies? "It's okay honey, I don't mean it. Back in a bit. Put my yarmulke in the wash for me." 

Don't take Moldbug's fungus rot any more seriously than Moldbug takes it.

"Unfortunately, since sovereignty is conserved, this balance implies a third party which is supreme over both others, and enforces the balance."

Today I learned sovereignty is not conserved.

Has Moldbug really been fully converted to narcissism? "There is no cooperation, only dominance or submission." 

Yeah imagine loving someone and wanting the best for them. What a loser, right? Who does that?

Moldbug of course admires China's anti-virus policies.
Moldbug clearly disdains China's anti-expansionist policies. 


"The cure for a culture war, or for any civil war cold or hot, is simple: [arch-busybody]."

"After Augustus, Rome was unified. It had lots of problems and developed more, but never under the Empire did it have class conflict—not until Christianity."

Who wants to bet this is a journalism?

"It is true that Caesar came to power as the candidate of one faction"

So yeah it turns out you can get this "monarchy" thing by just winning.

"the populares—roughly red-state Rome."

Populares are of course the blues. Party of irresponsible paupers, criminals, and fraud. Liberals, basically. Optimates are the rich haughty net-tax-payer party. Armies were made primarily of Optimates. Truckers vote against Caesar.

"In 60 BC, Caesar sought election as consul for 59 BC, along with two other candidates. The election was sordid—even Cato, with his reputation for incorruptibility, is said to have resorted to bribery in favour of one of Caesar's opponents."

Reminder that -returning to proper spelling- Kaisar had to cross the Rubicon because he had broken approximately every law during his stay as consul. The reason he wanted to be consul in the first place was exactly to get away with breaking the law - Roman consuls could not be persecuted for lawbreaking during their tenure. He was none too good at following it even without that protection.

Only there were term limits. Kaisar was not eligible for re-election. If he had crossed into Rome without declaring war, he would have ended up very, very arrested. Had to stage War of American Rebellion, alpha version 0.2 instead. 

Hey maybe don't hold up criminals as heroes. Unless you want me to rightly call you a criminal, of course. 

"In power he did treat his original supporters well. But he treated everyone well. "

More journalisms? 

I mean, that's who gets literally stabbed in the back, with a knife, right? Someone who treats everyone well? Reminder that Hungary's Orban can drive around his country without a secret service escort. 

Kaisar was known for his mercy. He would sometimes forgive those who antagonized him. Not those pirates that one time, but quite a few folk. Brutus, for example, was a beneficiary of Kaisar's mercy. 

"Oligarchies often contain little invisible emperors of their own fields—but they abhor any formal centralization of power."

The Alrenous Thousand Emperors hypothesis. In particular, the crypto-Pope. 

"[Kaisar] was also an aristocrat born and raised, which was no more an obstacle then than it is now."

He was a degenerate. He fatally wounded Rome, ensuring it was 100% destined for total destruction. He got the traitor's end he exactly deserved. Rome should have rejected him utterly, but instead joined the traitor's cause and likewise suffered the wrath of Nemesis. 

"When we compare Chinese politics today to Chinese politics 50 years ago, from the Red Guards to TikTok, we cannot ascribe the loss of mass political engagement to any genetic or cultural factor. We are still looking at Chinese people, in China, being Chinese."

Mao was a CIA agent - admitted on the CIA's own website - almost fully Anglified. When the CCP referred to a Communist party, it wasn't being Chinese in the slightest.

Maoist were immensely destructive towards traditional Chinese culture, a) because it was so offensively Chinese and b) because that's how Anglos behave toward traditional Anglo culture in their own home countries.

You can check out ESR, but the match between Yuri Bezmenov's account and Maoist tactics demonstrates the GAE isn't as innocent of demoralization operations as ESR supposes.

Indeed - who said it? - Communism is as American as apple pie. Stalin was Anglified. Anglos run demoralization on themselves and try to make everyone else do so too. 

"It is hard to imagine what blue Americans would look like if excluded from power"

They can't feed themselves, so they would look dead.

"While it is hard to answer this question, any one who is not a gamer would probably agree: without games, gamers would probably be better off than they are now."

Aspiring boomer. 

I mean yeah don't play Fortnite, sure. 

I guess I moralize about coffee, though. Pretty sure coffee's worse. Games don't have withdrawal.

"All we know is that this aristocracy is, like most aristocracies, made out of amazing human beings."

Allegedly knows all about Kaisar and hasn't even read the Republic.

Not like this guy:

"Plato! Gawker may not know Plato, but Plato knows Gawker:"

"I mean that the father grows accustomed to descend to the level of his sons and to fear them, and the son is on a level with his father, he having no respect or reverence for either of his parents; and this is his freedom, and the metic is equal with the citizen and the citizen with the metic, and the stranger is quite as good as either."

"In such a state of society the master fears and flatters his scholars, and the scholars despise their masters and tutors; young and old are all alike; and the young man is on a level with the old, and is ready to compete with him in word or deed; and old men condescend to the young and are full of pleasantry and gaiety; they are loth to be thought morose and authoritative, and therefore they adopt the manners of the young."

"In any case, from Plato’s dialogue we see how the witch-hunter can invert the reality of power and presents himself as the underdog, fighting back against the gigantic and all-encompassing conspiracy of witches."

That guy seemed to get it.

Sunday, May 8, 2022

Moldbug's Autocracy is Leftist Part 1

"must be neutral in the American culture war."

An actual rightist is in fact neutral - because it's none of his business. How many Amish even know that Woke is a thing? If you want to hold a culture war, be my guest. It has nothing to do with me. In this case it takes two to tango, and I refuse to dance; find someone else.

"has the formula which lets both sides win their wars: monarchy."

This. My god.

"We have the formula that lets Stalin and Hitler both win!" No, uh, you kind of need both of them to lose.
"We have the formula that lets smallpox and (mythological) covid both win!" sure that's what you're going with?

As above, I don't. Both are weak and can't make me do shit. Stop following the Pope, bro.

ProTip: speaking of, stop trying to convert the Pope. Professionals don't try to wake up someone who is pretending to be asleep!
The Pope is always an atheist. He knows he's not Catholic. Like, papal infallibility alone...he, above all, knows damn fine God doesn't have anything to say to him and he's not infallible. He's not in it for piety, he's a psychopath. The B-est of cluster B's. Sees nothing of value in this world except political power. Kratia uber alles. 

"The deep right is neutral in any culture war—sympathizing sincerely with both black plague and polio"

"because its mission is to anticipate being the [arch-meddler]" As leftist, as irresponsible, as possible, yes, that's how I always characterize rightists. 

"Such a [super-meddler] will peacefully impose a healthy, well-designed peace on both sides." It would be funny if this weren't replacing old Moldbug. I suppose it's still pretty funny. Bittersweet, though. 

Christianity obviously has some internal tensions. The Old Testament in particular has some pro-property statements. "Leave your neighbour's stuff with your neighbour, asshats." Then it has communism and other forms of pure masochism.

Old Moldbug took this lesson to heart. First, have some internal tensions. Next, resolve them by coming down firmly on Satan's side. "The way to defeat your enemies is to feed and clothe them."
Buddhism does this occasionally too. "Oh, you're stealing from me? Allow me to help. I keep my money over here!" Here in Reality that merely encourages crime. Ref: read a newspaper.

"Peace is possible because both sides sincerely believe they are fighting in self-defense."

Laughable. Moldbug believes peace is impossible. 

"A well-designed peace can relieve both sides of the feeling that they need to dominate the other side "

When you dominate both sides, it really discredits the idea that you win via domination...

It's true that democracy makes these tensions worse. That's by design. Divide and conquer. If no divisions exist, create them. 

Something a ""Monarchy"" can also do just fine.

If this solution was what it's trying to portray itself as, you don't actually need to win anything. Craft a peace proposal and start telling folk about it. If it's really a good idea, in their own self-interest, they will accept it. Don't have to "monarchy" a damn thing. 

Problem: democracy reveals they want a fight. They like having someone to punch. Reign in Hell vs. serve in Heaven. I do get tired of having to repeat cliches when it's clear someone doesn't know them yet. 

"In a culture war, it is very easy to see the difference between peace and victory: do you impose your culture on your enemy?"

Making gay marriage legal, for example. Making immigration and ""assimilation"" normal. Smearing responsibility with the "autocracy" brush. 

Easiest way to manufacture consent is fait accompli; everyone is mostly okay with gay marriage now. As a matter of fact something like 80% of America took at least one shot of the vax. Peasants do what they're told, think what they're told, and feel what they're told.

So yeah that's what happens. The only problem is Communism is Omnicide. Recalling that in America it's left vs. less-left...if the left wins, you all starve to death. The fact this is so obvious is the only reason it hasn't already happened, and it will continue to be the only reason it doesn't happen in the future.

"An aristocracy loves nothing so much as to kick around the commoners."

Disgusting democratic propaganda. In reality an aristocrat can't be arsed to even know what the commoners are up to, unless forced by events to pay attention. If you told Elon Musk your problems, would he even remember them ten seconds later? He has rockets to launch and you don't matter.

Of course this is exactly how narcissists and psychopaths behave, due to their intolerable self-loathing. These are sick people, not aristocrats. 

Lowborn narcissists in particular are consumed by envy. Musk "kicks them around" because his rockets give him social status, and social status is zero-sum. The more Musk has, the less the narcissist has. Like psychopaths, they see no point in this world but kratia, so this "damages" the only thing they care about.

"in such behavior the student of history can see no unnatural order of things."



 "A king also has a motivation to protect the aristocracy, who are in general his most delicate, refined, talented and fragile citizens."

Weird version of democratic propaganda.

You think of someone delicate and fragile when you imagine a Kshatriya? Yeah, sure you do.

Totally, when I think of Cardinals, I think of total pushovers who need protection...

From these particularly egregious solecisms, we can work out what fantasy world Moldbug is trying to push. E.g. whose ego do these lies flatter. From the fantasy world you can work out the intended real-world effects. If you're into that sort of thing. 


"The blue mind may have more trouble abandoning its universal ambitions."

Yeah, weird how the parasite has trouble relinquishing the host. "May," kek.
The gross thing is how the host feels that parasitism is justified. Of the many reasons I call the "red" mind less-left, this is one of them.

"But the opinions of progressives will not matter at all to conservatives."

Don't need a monarchy. It already doesn't matter to the Amish, and it already doesn't matter to me.

Disavow the Pope already.




A healthy society can't tolerate crime. This really should be self-evident.

Present Americans think they can't live without crime, especially the left. Conquest #1: they're probably not wrong.  

Maybe their children could learn different. There's quite a few leftist urges that aren't inherently criminal, if properly contained in a system of strong property rights. It's not like they have to give up their openness to experiences. 

Anyway, concluding the other half tomorrow.

Friday, May 6, 2022

Twitter's Biowarfare Labs

Musk will discover Twitter is not a profitable company and requires regular infusions of "liquidity" with dubious provenance because it's actually laundered Fed money.

It is likely he will mention this in public. 

I am thus a bit puzzled: why aren't they fighting his purchase tooth and nail? Maybe, like 2016, they think the cutouts are secure - that the fix is already in? 

They are in fact secure. Musk could trumpet this stuff from the rooftops and it still wouldn't make a difference. The American voter is sufficiently subservient. The Regime habitually acts as if these things are relevant, though. Much the same way the weird thing isn't that 2020 was defrauded, but that like 2004 wasn't defrauded. 

Maybe they realize that, since Americans are so subservient, control of Twitter is an unnecessary expense? "Thanks Musk; now we don't have to pay off these useless yuppies anymore." However, that's drinking deeply from the 4D chess well.

The only thing you can be 100% sure about is that the real story isn't being told.

Hume's Guillotine, Final Form

Universal morality is a contradiction in terms. Good and evil are only approximately real.

If evil is unrewarding in the long term, you don't avoid it because of morality, you avoid it because it's imprudent. E.g. hard drugs. Costs are bad mmmkay.

If evil is rewarding in the long term, it's not evil. Even if it imposes costs on others, then you can pay off those affected out of the profits of evil. Everyone benefits. Nobody is harmed. Not evil. E.g. waste disposal.

Assuming evil exists, there is no such thing as evil. QED. 

There is no ought from is because there is no ought, period.

What exists is the tension between short and long term. Drugs: good high, long crash. Imprudent. But, worth talking about. The short term is easy to see and the long term more difficult; it's worth reminding yourself and others that the long term is bigger than the short term and thus worth more. 

In the case of short term costs and long term profits, but the costs are borne by others: they will fight back, making the costs higher and higher until you see no profit, and then you won't do it unless you're an idiot. There are in fact no long term profits. Indeed you will likely see this very obvious response and not even attempt it in the first place. Or you will pay them off to let you do it anyway, thus reviving the profits. Edge cases aside, they will charge you the market rate. 

Naturally some try to trick you into letting them impose costs on you, and this approximation of evil is a close approximation. 

It is important not to let them get away with it unless you want to die.

They will try to tell you costs are not costs. Remind them that costs are in fact costs, and any attempt to impose costs will be met with imposing costs right back. Violence, if you will. It is always the case that you can inflict enough damage on someone that their attempt to unilaterally extract value from you becomes unprofitable. The only real question is whether you're a coward or not. 

Even in the case they're too stupid to acknowledge deterrance, that means they are stupid and weak. As long as you're not totally pathetic you will be able to exploit their stupidity to get them killed or otherwise neutralized. 

In a sense there's a pseudo-ought. If you value a thing, there is some action that leads to you getting that thing, and some actions that don't. You ought to choose the actions that work, not the actions that don't. A rather degenerate [ought]. Again, merely a subset of prudence. Be wise, not foolish. If you were foolish and it worked out for you, it wasn't foolish; if you were wise and it didn't, it wasn't wise. Trying to be "moral" per se isn't wise.

Thursday, May 5, 2022

Weapons of the Hand vs. Weapons of the Mind

Pre-script: this is a post about meta-thinking. Recognize a weapon by its purpose, not whether it's gun-shaped. 

Anything you can use to defeat your enemy is a weapon. The environment, social rules, the law, words or silence, their own friends, time itself - all weapons. At least, weapons as and when the opportunity to use them as such arises. 

A true warrior erases the distinction between warrior and scholar caste. All of Reality is a potential weapon, and wisdom & training is required to grasp things in such a wide scope. (P.S. As such, being a warrior is one way of training scholarship.) Truth is the deadliest.

Naturally artifacts specifically designed to be weapons are particularly good at defeating your enemies. However, even non-thinkers are aware of this. Even a mindless drone will work out that they need a bullet-proof vest if you shoot enough of their acquaintances. The attack draws forth the defence. The mind, then, becomes the ultimate weapon. If you can grasp more weapons in the mind than they can, then they are unable to defend themselves. You will always have an avenue of attack.  

Further, artifacts cost money whereas the environment happens by itself. If you allow the world to grant you weapons, you don't need to desperately seize or hold manmade weapons. If offence is needed, offence will be provided. Opportunity is as boundless as time.

P.P.S. Yet another reason honourable cooperation is important. Perfect security is impossible. Anything man can make, man can unmake. Allegorically, be tamper-evident, not tamper-proof. If someone wishes to tamper with your property, convince them it's more profitable not to - and catch them if they're trying to scam you. Likewise, the death sentence is critical. If someone refuses to abjure deviance, they must be deviated right off the mortal coil.

Because the mind is the greatest weapon, it behooves the highest warriors to attack the mind directly. Destroy their ability to want to attack you. Make them underestimate you. Make them think you're not a threat. Make them think you don't exist. The fate of a true warrior's enemy is to drown in delusion. 

They're stupid enough to want to be an enemy instead of a cooperator. Your mind is guaranteed to be superior to theirs. Accept this advantage, exploit it, and crush them when and however is convenient for you. 

If "God" is a metaphor for Reality in the widest possible view, then the Alpha and Omega of weapons is piety. A truly sacrosanct zone will not be attacked. The profanity from which the conflict arises makes them weak, unable to defend against it. In a material sense, the sacrosanct security will not be tested at all, because its enemies cannot conceive of it as an opponent. Security cannot be perfect, but perhaps meta-security can be.

Wednesday, May 4, 2022

Extreme Efficiency and Soul Death

Some artifacts are "useful," and some are mere art. Being "useful" means the building of such things allows you to build more of them, whereas an art piece doesn't let you afford any art you couldn't already afford. 

If you obsess about making all your artifacts useful, you become useless. Extrinsic value and intrinsic value diverge. You make things that are valuable because they make more of themselves, but 0 * ∞ is zero. You have an endless supply of something that serves no purpose. Rather than accruing profits, you have wasted your labour.

When spending time on a "useful" device or technique, it must always be subordinated to "useless" ends. The point of money isn't actually to be accumulated. The point, ultimately, is to spend it. Once creating the "useful" artifact conflicts with spending the money, it is costing more than you're gaining. 

Work to buy leisure. The more leisure the work can purchase, the more profitable the work is. Keep in mind that youthful years tend to be worth more than elder years. Discount future profits to taste. 

Leisure doesn't have to be so-called unproductive, but it does have to be something you would do without being paid for, whether you can get paid for it or not. Indeed the work-leisure dichotomy seems like yet another trap.

Tuesday, May 3, 2022

Neural Emotion Algorithm & Armed Peasants

Emotions are checked in some order. If an emotion is sufficiently excited, the rest of the list is ignored. For peasants, the emotion at the top is always fear.

When a non-peasant sees someone with a gun, they may think, "Ah, he has a gun, good for him I guess." Unless you were planning on antagonizing him, it's of little consequence.

When a peasant sees someone with a gun, they are afraid of the gun. And that's it. They are consumed by fear of the gun. They'll find themselves unable to appreciate anything else until the gun is removed from their perceptible environs.

This is why peasants like kittens. You can't possibly be afraid of a kitten. They can feel something other than fear in the presence of nothing but kittens, which is a nice change for them. 

This effect is likely enhanced by living in democratic times. The local norm is cowardice. Bravery is enviable, so even the few individuals who are capable of it know better than to openly display any. The peasant's role models all act like cowards. He is never shown how the self-secure act; he is not genuinely aware that non-cowardice is an option. At best courage is a distant, abstract hypothetical vagueness. 

This is particular bad when the peasant himself is holding the gun. He's more afraid of his own tools than he is of the attacker. Not the best idea to give a coward a deadly weapon. The irrationality of this is obvious even to the peasant themselves, and the strain is apt to drive them nuts. Even if they manage to be strategically stupid and forget to be afraid of the weapon, they're still likely to panic due to being a coward who is under attack.

Perhaps it is sociologically prudent to discourage armament in democratic times. Only those who are willing to brave the frowns will arm themselves, ensuring few cowards adopt the habit.

Monday, May 2, 2022

"Communism creates enormous destruction while failing to advance at all towards equality. That’s kind of why communism sucks so much."
(Who said it?)

Democracy creates enormous destruction while failing to create a single iota of freedom. That's kind of why democracy sucks so much.

Example of De-Legitimization and Security

“Typical,” said Mariko. “The Corps took over somebody’s business and turned it into a den of lies.”

“I take it you don’t approve of Heida’s methods?”

“How could I? She’s conning these people and scaring them with monsters that don’t even exist!”


“Then let’s promise to not take the easy way out. We’ll see what we can really do to help people. No taking shortcuts to put on a good show.”

“Hm,” I said, scratching my chin in contemplation. “I don’t think our hostess will care for that. She is our superior, after all.”

“When we have a choice, then,” she said. “Please? For me? I couldn’t look myself in the mirror otherwise.”

Mariko wants to force Heida to tell the truth: “Should we tell Mr. Maki? Maybe the Headmaster?” This is both unnecessary and dishonourable. 

[Dishonourable] because it isn't a purchase or a war. Mariko is allegedly a pacifist, but isn't above threatening someone to get what she wants, as long as it's an "authority" doing the threatening on her behalf. Wants someone to wage war as long as it doesn't look like war. Typical pacifism.

Unnecessary because Mariko can't be fired for disagreeing with her superior in public. Doesn't have to even call it out as a lie - she can simply refuse to play along. "I don't see any evidence such a monster exists." Heida will get angry, but she's in a bind - either she allows Mariko to puncture the lies, or she removes Mariko from the situation where she has to play along with lies...which plays to Mariko's pacifism and isn't reasonably possible.

In these cases, the opportunity to revoke your consent from the illegitimate authority always exists. The only question is whether you take the opportunity. Whether you manifest your ideas as action, or discredit your own ideas with inaction.

Mariko has already won. It's merely a question of whether she accepts victory or not.

I personally have lost every shred of patience for those who make excuses. As we can see, Mariko is rejecting victory - she wants to play along with the superstitious peasants who she knows and accepts are superstitious. Novel authors feel obligated to uphold the local mores, after all.

Sunday, May 1, 2022

Rectification of Names: Time is Boundless

The term "temporal" is supposed to refer to time-bound entities. 

Problem: time is infinite and unending. What does infinity look like in real life? It looks like Time. 

Time isn't a boundary. Time is permission. Time is permission to exist; permission to act. Time is omnipotence. All things that can be done require time to be done.

The "eternal" entities are those which don't exist. No matter how imperfect temporal entities are, they are superior to those that don't count as [are]. 

Don't confuse Time with Death just because you get old. That's on you, not Death. If you blame Time, you're saying you wish you weren't born at all. Set Time allotment = 0. Okay, fine, but then why are you mad at Death for fixing the mistake, liar?

Saturday, April 30, 2022

America Summary

America suffers from a lethal affliction. There is a medicine which cures the affliction. However, the medicine itself is stressful. The patient is too weak to survive the administration of the required dose. Its only choices are dying quickly, or slowly and painfully. 

If the patient dies quickly, salvage will be possible. In this analogy, some of its organs will still be healthy enough to donate. If it dies slowly, the degeneracy will thoroughly ravage every tissue. Meanwhile, it will bankrupt anyone trying to delay the inevitable. 

At this point, killing America quickly is a mercy. You keep it alive if and only if you deeply, profoundly hate America, Americans, and their allies. 

Sodom and Gomorrah have come again. The challenge is the same: find 10 virtuous men. The rules are more lax; you have all of NATO to look through, not just a couple cities. 

Just like the first time around, we already know what you're going to find. Perhaps save yourself the effort. 

P.S. It's an allegory. [Look back] == [turn to salt] represents the fact that anyone who doesn't wholly and profoundly reject the American way is going to go down with them. Merely distancing yourself somewhat is not enough.

Friday, April 29, 2022

Moldbug Conspiracy Hypothesis

Being more cynical than the reality of GAE is extremely hard, but I'ma give it a shot.

Moldbug's wife didn't "die" she was assassinated. "And if you don't mislead your flock, your kids are next." 

Moldbug blogged under his real name and then got involved with real money. Two very serious sins. Living in metro cali surely doesn't help. In retrospect, it would have been weirder if his output didn't fall off a cliff and go splat at the bottom. Sins really do destroy you, even if nobody assassinates your wife.

He would take the easy road and stop writing, but now he can't. Under contract. 

If you look at post-mortem interviews, Moldbug looks wrecked. Grief, sure, but there's horror there too, as well as defeat. 

There's even a small chance she died of natural causes and then some deep stater claimed she was assassinated. Why let a crisis go to waste?
Further: you going to claim the massively overstaffed CIA didn't harass him? It would be weirder if he didn't get any creepy 2 am phone calls. They must have been sufficiently creepy, because he hasn't talked about them in public. 

Last real post on UR was 2013.* CIA gained the legal right to harass domestic Americans in 2013. Could be a coincidence, I suppose... I mean, there have to be coincidences now and again, right? Birthday paradox: the odds of a coincidence are extremely high given how many opportunities for coincidence there are. 

*Great post too.

What makes the provincial critic so grimly, hilariously terrible is that he imagines himself not just equal to the wits of the metropolis, but vastly superior. Is it even possible to respond? Shall the man of letters respond: “Excuse me, ‘Dr. Lexus,’ but I am resolutely heterosexual—as if it mattered—and ‘my shit,’ as you call it, is anything but ‘all retarded’?”

Quibble: intellectually, Rome, since at least Tarquin, was a province of Greece. Further, when Greece became too Platonic, it became a province of itself.

P.S. The difference between a sin and a regular mistake is complexity. Sins reliably cause problems that make allegorical sense without any obvious physical mechanism. The mechanism exists, but in these cases it's subordinate to the spiritual realities, thus complex and hard like all theology. 

E.g. selling your soul is real, and it turns you into an NPC. A soulless p-zombie. You can look at the changes in the brain and work out what's happening that way, but it's dramatically harder than just acknowledging that the things called [deals with the devil] are literal.

My boring hypothesis: if you didn't sell your soul to the devil at school yourself, you will 100% sell your soul when you send your own kids to school. Moldbug sent his kids to school, and became doomed.

Thursday, April 28, 2022

Hanlon's Razor is Disrespectful

If Hanlon's razor applies to anyone, it means they're a helpless child that shouldn't be allowed out of the house without supervision, let alone be allowed to hold a job with decision-making powers. 

Underestimating your enemies is foolish. If a malevolence model and an incompetence model lead to the same predictions, then they should also lead to the same response: jail time. Ideally a non-degenerate response instead of jail, but you know what I mean. Personnel is policy, and problems are problems. If a person is causing problems, regardless of whether it's malice or incompetence, they need to be replaced.

Hanlon's razor is clearly cope, but not seethe. "I don't have a knife. I'm not stabbing you. You're not bleeding." Delay defensive response as long as possible. Americans like malevolence. The reason any non-malevolent bureaucrat gets talked up is to highlight them for their enemies. Make it easy to find them and know exactly what they're doing. Americans consistently choose to uphold malevolence and interfere with non-malevolence. 

Benevolence is inegalitarian, you see. It's rare and intrinsically admirable, which makes the self-absorbed envious. 

The fact Hanlon's razor is incredibly rude is considered a bonus. Very American. Uphold your malevolent administrators and call them shitheads at the same time? What's not to love?

Wednesday, April 27, 2022

Incels Don't Exist

If you lower your standards, a partner can be found. 

Stephen Hawking was married. Can you compete with a petty, twisted cripple?
(I both kind of want to know how that works...and rather don't.)

Every incel is a volcel. The question is whether they're keeping their standards high for good reasons or bad reasons. For some, especially males, a partner isn't worth very much. The marginal value of an average American woman is close to 0. Yes, they can get a below-average woman, but then she's worth less than nothing. A partner can be found, but at some point you're trading on desperation rather than attraction. (Reminder that femcels can get sex, but not commitment. They can put out, but can't get it back. Only pathetically heinous femcels can't even get sex. Otherwise it's the same dynamic.)

However, that's not women rejecting them, that's them rejecting women. While indeed the positive-value women are rejecting them, well, if it wasn't contradictory and self-defeating we wouldn't call it crazy. Very American to think you deserve something because you want it. For some reason, children who never grow up can't get sex...

Rather, children who never grow up manifest their lack of desire for sex, one way or another. Obediently being infantilized, just like they're told. I'm sure the good kiddies will get the marshmallow they were promised. Any day now.

Tuesday, April 26, 2022

For the record, Trump amuses me as a phenomenon. I'm tickled to hear he's said the kinds of things he says. Clearly pisses off many who firmly deserve to be pissed off.

I don't like him as a person. Would not have a beer with. Seems kinda abrasive. I've seen worse, sure - he's no NPR or CNN American - but not good enough. Happy he's over there and not over here. Even more there-ish would be good.

Tucker Carlson needs to work on his fake laugh. Unless it's supposed to be incompetent on purpose? The lower classes get repelled by someone who doesn't screw up enough. Tucker doesn't stumble over his words; perhaps it's a good idea to have a "humanizing" behavioural feature.

Microcosm of True PPP, America vs. Russia and Lawns

"that is $1.42 billion on average for one shuttle launch, while the launch of a Soyuz cost in average $50 million"
There's like 1000 comments so this page barely loads, but 

This is why an American with $60,000 is poorer than a Russian with $20,000. It all works this way. Americans love to choose to do the thing using the most expensive method possible (because [temporarily embarrassed millionaire], because [egalitarianism]). 

Of course they then do the expensive thing with the cheapest possible materials. For normal roads, there are many better designs than tarmac. Then, they use the cheapest possible tarmac on top of the cheapest possible Portland cement. Result: American roads suck balls, just like American shuttles. There's nothing Americans love more than being the stingiest cheapskate about their millionaire signalling.

Bonus round: the best road is probably a tarmac version, and I bet America's Road Czar has proper roads in whatever county he lives in. Because all of America uses tarmac roads, they don't stand out, despite costing 3-10 times as much as roads everywhere else. (He doesn't live in DC, the roads are awful there.)

Likewise lawns. If it's not a 100-year lawn with a dedicated gardener, it's a piece of shit. Thus, Americans would literally die for their lawns. Which look like ass 99.5% of the time, as expected. If you're gonna grow weeds, at least choose a good local weed and grow it on purpose. (Moscow doesn't do lawns, and as a result doesn't look like a sewage spill.) Those tippy-top century lawns are great though.
To say it another way: you definitely do not drive on a real lawn. Not if you don't want to be ritually murdered by the gardener. Gasoline lawnmowers don't even get within earshot of a real lawn. I dunno if they still use scythes, but lawnmowers rip the grass blades instead of cutting them. Very unhealthy. If he even sees a weed-whacker he probably beats you to death with it. That's a mercy - when he last left an interloper alive, he was ordered to finish the job next time.
Meanwhile it's almost weird if I don't see car tracks in Americoid lawns. They like to desecrate their own hallowed ground.

It's not weird that the Shuttle is a pile of junk that costs 30 times as much as a reasonable alternative. It's not weird that Musk can casually manhandle NASA. The opposite would be weird and disturbingly unAmerican. I might have to rethink my entire worldview. 

I have neglected the core problem: parasitism. Every productive American has to carry some lawyer (sophist) or politician (sophist) on their back. In fact the Shuttle itself probably only costs like 5-6 times as much as Soyuz and the other 25 points of factor are kickbacks, pork, embezzlement, and so on. All very legal, though. Not corrupt, see: Congress signed off on these regs.

Russia is "corrupt" which means you can bribe the big vampires to beat off the little vampires with a stick, whereas in America it's illegal to not allow every passing Tom Dick and Harry to suck your blood. Indeed if you take an American aside and suggest they discourage blood sucking, they will get super angry at you. "Fuck you dad! I'll do what I want!" *bends over and presents* Errr, I'm not your dad, genius. Kindly go fuck yourself instead of waving your grovelling slavishness in my face, thanks. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

In Reality Galt is already living in his Gulch, only he's Amish. The rest of America likes the tyranny and hates anyone who wants to take the "oppression" away from them.

Monday, April 25, 2022

Land and Moldbug as Microcosm

My thesis is that taxation is highway robbery, and the fact the State has to lie about this in the political formula is epistemic cancer, which causes civilizations to fall. Cancer is a lethal affliction. Falsehood is a deadly sin.

Land and Moldbug ran this cycle in micro.

First, they adopted a political science that's superior to democracy. They rewound the tape back to a superior state. Undid some of the democratic degeneration. However, they refused to go whole hog. They neither accepted that the State is inherently criminal, nor did they go full anarcho-optimist and posit a just, post-crime society. Ultimately their political science uses Satan as a core.

Because they hailed Satan, their brain got Satanized, and they lost all contact with Reality. The cancer metastasized, devouring the marginal piety they managed to accrue. 

They were given a choice, and now we can see the choice they chose. They could have rewound the tape all the way to the beginning, but didn't. Their paths are clear.

Sunday, April 24, 2022

Hypothetical Pandemic Conspiracy

If your conspiracy doesn't sound venal and stupid, it's unrealistic.

Here's my stupid and venal ncov conspiracy theory: slow news day. 

The Journalists knew they were going to have a news slowdown what with Trump being ousted. As a result, they desperately cast around for something to panic over. When China flipped their lid about a minor virus in that inimitable Chinese way, the Journalists found something.

After double-checking that it was genuinely harmless, they hyped the living shit out of it. (Wouldn't want to have to answer to Satan in the afterlife for telling truths, after all.) And damn did their customers buy it. 

Hence the "pandemic." Entirely invented - because Journalists like ad dollars. 

Everything except the Chicken Little [sky is falling] stuff was merely folk leaping to take advantage of opportunities as they arose. Fauci got to run his mouth off the leash. Pfizer got a lovely liquid investment vehicle - remember they frequently got paid twice per vaccine dose delivered, because government efficiency. Karens got to indulge their lack of compulse control. Journalists got Impact when "regulators" got on board. Et cetera.

Supply. Demand. The market knows.

Saturday, April 23, 2022

Particular Gifts

"If you buy a gift for someone and that person does not take it, to whom does the gift belong?"

Siddhartha was correct.
Though I rather suspect his words were later twisted just enough. Let's read only the steelman.

If someone offers you insult, simply don't accept. "No, thanks all the same." Talk is cheap because supply exceeds demand. Insults even cheaper; can them by the dozen without spending a penny. If someone wants to waste their breath on such worthless endeavours, that's their call.

If someone tries to humiliate you, turn it down. "I prefer to use other methods to train humility, sorry."

If someone forces you at gunpoint to trample your idols, it's a compliment. "They're so afraid of a bit of canvas and paint that they have to threaten to kill me over it." Recall that if you have a true god, he wants you to live more than he wants you to care about fundamentally meaningless symbols. You're no use to anyone dead.
Conquest #1: they should know whether they ought to be afraid, shouldn't they? Have some faith that their fear will be justified, as long as you don't accept their claims of legitimacy. 

Certainly, if you have been militarily outmanoeuvred, you ought to physically surrender. Weakness is a sin; accept your responsibility and reflect upon your misdeeds. Live, that you might do better next time.

If you spiritually surrender, you accept the gift.

Caino hypocriens is rather fond of being stupid and crazy. If you speak to strangers, you will naturally provoke some of them, especially if you are sane or intelligent. It's a predictable effect, and thus essentially your own fault and your own responsibility. If you do not find it worthy behaviour, then it is your own speeches you need to look at.

Many make the mistake of thinking the speech itself is wrong. No, it's fine: they really are stupid and/or crazy. Being universally liked is something to be ashamed of, not proud. Reworking your words to accommodate stupidity and madness only makes the prose worse. Strictly less valuable. 

Having cray-crays be crazy at you is simply part of the cost of the practice. 

Likewise if the crowd sides with the cray-crays, then they have chosen. At some point, adults are responsible for their own actions. Fraud is inherently limited; anyone who thinks to check discovers it immediately. Even for the oblivious, when the rubber hits the road, it can no longer be concealed.

Simply accept that they have rejected sanity. They are obstacles. NPCs, not people. Simply accept your competitive advantage, and win to taste. Allow them the loss, failure, and suffering that they clearly crave. Free Will is an aspect of the highest law; don't try to abrogate it.

Friday, April 22, 2022

I really should be a librarian

A high-end librarian, but just a librarian. Maybe an abbot, with authority over one (1) abbey. 

I'm not, though. 

Instead, there are no competitors. Nobody even showed up. Doesn't even occur to anyone to try to stop me. Well, okay then. Thanks, I guess. Now I'm tired of winning. I would prefer to face some resistance, but it's better than losing, I suppose.

Communication vs. Politeness

I find most of "politeness" is playing a game where you're not supposed to say certain things and not supposed to talk about certain things, and the end result is that it seems it was deliberately designed to be crippling. Folk spend so much time worrying about how to wink-wink nudge-nudge a topic that they end up never discussing it at all. "He misunderstood!" Yeah it would be a lot easier not to "misunderstand" if you said it straight out. 

The undiscussed topics end up piling up until you have no genuine relationship at all. 

The first dynamic seems to be overreacting to over-sharers. Hey, uh, you're not supposed to talk about how you have to clear your sinuses with saline regularly the second time you have a conversation with someone. Folk experience this and develop an allergy, meaning they won't talk about it ever. At some point in the relationship you are, in fact, supposed to share these things. Admittedly I don't know when exactly. Much like Plato never saw an aristocratic society, I see a lot of over-sharers and a lot of never-sharers, so I'm not terribly familiar with what a healthy golden mean looks like. Merely: due to the fundamental theorem of algebra, it must exist. 

At some point the relationship is supposed to stop being polite. At some point trust is supposed to be earned. 

At some point even if trust isn't earned, you're deeply involved enough that impolite topics become relevant. 

Part of the reason you should reject Americoid socialization is because they have a severe narcissism problem. Narcissists functionally have no boundaries, so they treat everyone the same. They can't tell the difference, after all. Either they're impolite to everyone, or they're polite to everyone. Either they'll tell you about their anal hernias after knowing you for five minutes, or they'll treat you like a retail cashier even after knowing you for ten years. You get them a hard chair as present, and they'll pretend to like it - while you're looking. Either way it's a big WTF moment.

Because narcissism is so prevalent in hyper-Christian America, even non-narcissists end up behaving this way, because they think you're "supposed" to. Like me, they never see anyone but over-sharers and never-sharers. 

In part this is the middle class foolishly trying to ape upper-class behaviour, and confusing viper-pit court politics with upper-class behaviour. Trust no-one, because everyone is plotting to overthrow you or use you as a cat's paw to overthrow someone else. Mai heero, yeah? Egalitarianism means we're all lords, which means we're all supposed to be backstabbing traitors, right? 


Seems like most can only make friends in childhood, because you're not socialized yet. Automatically don't over-share because children are shy, and automatically share enough later because they're bad at keeping secrets and generally don't know how you're "supposed" to cripple all your relationships. 

Americoid socializing is so bad it only works if you're socially incompetent.


Hard times are hard. On one prong you have to suffer the fake and gay relationships you get. Either you drive away the "polite" folk who are disgusted by over-sharers and are limited to the low-end crass folk, or you eliminate the possibility of genuine intimacy, nipping it in the bud. On the other prong, you have to re-derive culture from scratch, or go looking for very specific foreigners to imitate on very specific points.

P.S. Alcohol as "social lubricant" apparently means you can use "I'm drunk" as an excuse to be impolite without being labelled an impolite person and shunned by "polite" society. 

This means going out to drink isn't for having "fun" it's about deliberately risking having a fight, because you can't have a real discussion about anything unless you're drunk. Naturally since you can't bring up the topic immediately, the frustration and resentment builds up and it's a much worse fight than it inherently has to be.

Yeah it's super fun to have a fake relationship except when you're "drunk" wow why didn't I think of this awesome state of affairs.

P.P.S. On one prong you're "allowed" to say rude things. Being impolite doesn't necessarily mean being tactless, but having rejected any sort of filter you can't ask someone to use tact either. Being rude is practically required. Feels weird if you're all being total shitheads except this one guy, you know? Stands out in a bad way.

On the other prong, you're allowed to be passive-aggressive. You can say the most insulting things as long as they're phrased "politely," because it's "impolite" to point out the insult.

Thursday, April 21, 2022

Free Speech = Subsidized Speech

If what you have to say is valuable, your audience will create a black market for you to sell your speech in. Only functionally worthless speakers need the "right" to speak protected. 

As we can see ref: any newspaper, "free" speech is not immune to the pays-the-piper mechanic. Subsidized speech merely lets the State launder its fatwas.

Imagine I actually had to pay hosting fees.
Imagine you, dear commentator, had to pay hosting fees.
Irresponsible speech.

Sympathy for Karens

They would probably be no more than 20% of the pain that they are if Americans weren't so abominably rude. Americans are as rude as they can get away with to everyone all the time. Nobody likes it when you're rude to them.

Digression: due to this background, being polite is a superpower. Bureaucrats can't even and just submit to you. 

However, Karens aren't allowed to call other Americans out on being rude. Which makes them pissy.
Not to mention all the other very-not-socially-constructed norms that are constantly violated, which Karens (and everyone else) have to put up with it. E.g. what if marriage was a promise and not merely a hat you can doff at any time.

All this anger has to come out somewhere, so you get high-pressure squirts out of every available nook and cranny. The instant they're allowed to care about a norm they go wholly overboard. Trying to soothe their frantic stress with an overreaction.

Thanks America. You did done an essential Americanism again. It's very American of you.

Wednesday, April 20, 2022

How Right-Wingers Protect Labour

Have them hire security.

If you're not paying the piper, you're the product, not the customer. 

Pretty sure "labour" is just a fancy-pants way of saying "peasants," "serfs," or "peons," in any case. Real brainwave: if they need someone else to protect them, they aren't adults. Non-emancipated.

Hypothetical Core of Christian Profanity

Piety makes you strong. The more pious, the more power.

Christians want you to lionize the weak so you reject true piety. 

Tuesday, April 19, 2022

Things the Cold War Wasn't

1: A war.
2: Cold.

In accordance with prophecy. An extension of the iron of Conquest's Third Law.

It was a warm alliance. FDR and Stalin teamed up in WWII because [heads of Communist countries], and then never stopped. USA + USSR 4 lyf, I guess. (Names not similar by chance, you know.) 

They loved each other like sister and brother. As much as Fascists can simulate love, anyway. Had a few spats. Sometimes your toys get broke. A few million worthless peasants die here and there, you know how it goes. 

You say FDR's New Deal Republic had a Soviet spy problem? Please. Soviets had a horrible American ideas problem. The Soviets were Owenites. Marx was an Owenite - it's not some weird coincidence he was based in London, that's exactly where you would expect him to be. 

The Owenites, of course, were merely taking the Founding Mothers' statements to their logical conclusion. Again, not some weird coincidence they popped up first in America.

Apparently the Russians deeply hate Nazis because Stalin really threw them into the meatgrinder instead of using, you know, strategy or technology or shit like that. (Villeins gonna vill, I guess.) Substantially deadlier than the War of Northern Aggression; not something Americans would really understand. Result: America bought all the way into Stalin's strategic/ass-covering anti-Nazism, because [thoroughly allied], hence America's heretical State Enemy became "white" racists. 

As I've mentioned before, Marx's class-based envy wasn't working out anyway. Racial envy: now you're cooking with gas. 

P.S. Primarily "black" comes from the fact that ninjas all look the same to Europeans, much like Orientals do. You can tell a Frog from a Kraut from a Limey, but from ninjas it's all overly-excited jibba-jabba, so they only get one word or so. "White" is a legal category, not a race. It was invented for the convenience of the Regressive Inquisition, partly in response to the ninjas, and partly because voters aren't sophisticated enough to handle nuance beyond black and white. Thing good, or thing bad? Ug need Big Man tell Ug what like what not-like. When Ug flee, when Ug hug? 

You wouldn't want to confuse poor Ug, would you? He'll run off into the woods if you do, so...