American bureaucracies are playing chess against each other with human lives because they're bored. I made a starcraft map like that...
Meanwhile, at navel-gazing central,
"There's some voting irregularities!"
Wow junior, you don't say.
"I heard that free speech might not be absolute!"
I'm shocked. This is my shocked face.
"The medical authorities could possible not be authoritative!"
Corruption? In my america? It's more likely than you think!
House prices are brutal. My childhood home costs 3x what my parents paid in 1987 and it's not a high demand area
https://twitter.com/ItIsHoeMath/status/1816311351033151602
Whoops, innumeracy.
Why does society fall? Because it allows folk who lack even basic due diligence to speak. Even lets them explicitly lead.
Gas prices are nominally more than triple what they were in 1987. The house in question has in fact fallen in price. What level of consciousness is seeing the opposite of reality?
That's how you get a central bank. Humans become prey. Predators eat prey.
If the price is brutal, it's because wages have fallen even more than the house. Partly because the post-war boom was fake (based on looting, not production), partly because the purpose of prey is to be exploited. Ask them: they'll tell you that themselves. The only thing prey violently resists is anyone telling them not to be exploited.
Speaking of things that are the opposite of reality, let's show a blackpill:
"Don't worry about what's real. Your brain can't tell."
What twits see this as: affirmation. What is actually is: surrender to Satan. Particularly pathetic now that Satan is dead.
Evil is weak. If you are losing to evil, you are even weaker, and deserve it.
P.S. All three sides of WWII were Communist. Nameless government, adhering to the Nameless religion. The only [[[[war crime]]]] that matters is this one: all three sides traitorously tortured and maimed their own children. The torture camps exist in every country in the world. Even Caino hypocriens won't submit to literal torture if they don't think it's mandatory, but it's okay, it's [[compulsory]].
Call me when hoe math addresses the elephant in the room. lol
Satan ni Aten was very literally the god of lies. Divinity of deception. If he ever had a proper name, his own nature forbid him from telling you. Using his true name, if any, would have been heresy against Satan, and
even Satan could justly punish you for directly and deliberating
profaning him. He was always stealing the names and faces of others. He was obliged to, in order to appear as anything at all.
Likewise the seemingly nebulous motivating force behind progressivism and wokism and communism and so on keeps changing its mask. It genuinely has no true name. Conveniently for it, this means any name you give it becomes obsolete once the lies it is currently lionizing go stale and get discarded.
However, as always, lies are a critical weakness. Conveniently for us, there is a term for a nameless religion. It's [the nameless religion]. Fascism is the Nameless form of government. Atheism is, properly, a version of Namelessism. Perhaps one of the purest versions.
Progressives claim they're not marxists, who claim they're not owenists, who claim they're not merely christians, who would claim they're not atenists if anyone knew enough to accuse them of it. In a sense, they're not even wrong. The similarities do look esoteric at first glance. Wokists step it up and claim they're not wokists.
Using Namelessism explicitly calls out this behaviour. "In this turn of fashion, are you claiming a new false name, or claiming you aren't an identifiable group?" It puts [that name is not your real name] in, front, at the centre of the frame. Every time they change their spots, you can call them out as the spot-changing theonate.
Do you see the connection with falsehood per se?
1. All lies are gaslighting. The liar is trying to convince you that A is not identical to A. That A's true name is something other than A.
2. Atheism means, "There is no name for the thing I worship." Or, equivalently, they worship something that inherently can't be named, an absence.
3. There is one truth, and everything that contradicts that truth is a falsehood, meaning endless choices of dogma. As each skin rots and perishes, they can don an endless parade of new false skins.
"We're new!"
"You're not. Your age is comparable to time itself."
"You can't pigeonhole me!"
"A core tenet of Namelessism."
"We're all unique and special!"
"You already said that. Yes, we know, there is no single Name that describes you as a whole, because your essence is directly opposed to wholes and wholesomeness."
"Don't discriminate!"
"You mean I shouldn't use distinct Names for distinct entities? I shouldn't Name the distinction?"
Etc etc.
Yes, she gets to fuck chad. It costs her more than it is worth. Short-term gain for long-term pain.
She's looking for love, and she finds sex. Every time she uses tinder, she becomes that much more convinced she is unlovable.
But, well, Caino masochiens.
She keeps using tinder because self-harm is the point. The fact hot sex is involved is the sugar on the poison pill. The sweeter it is, the more she can mutilate herself without reflexively recoiling. She would just hold her hand on the stove if the pesky flesh wasn't so weak. Maybe dab caustic lye on her hand, like fight club dude.
I shouldn't say it doesn't work. That's the lightside narrative. Everything is working as intended. Feminism makes female happiness plunge, and that's what women want. Gets her away from men of Darwinism and their icky care-for-women reflexes.
Monotheism was invented around 3300 years ago in Egypt, by a pharaoh and his bros usually calling themselves Atenists.
"Hey, Aten sounds remarkably like Satan." Yes it does.
The best part is la wik going out of her way to specify it's not to be confused with atheism, as if they've read my blog and know atheism needs to fend off accusations of being Satan-worship. This is protesting too much, in the wikipedia's traditionally naive style. In much the same way, the Sophism article used to flatly disavow the link between Sophists and Democracy. Postscript: the Sophism article is now forced to admit the opposite.
As per the narcissist norms, Atenists immediately set about suppressing all other forms of worship. First, they instigated a rivalry with non-Atenist temples, then they used the fact they had a pharaoh to close the rival temples. They legally persecuting anyone who disagreed with them, in the manner you're almost certainly painfully, tediously familiar with.
Egypt responded all but perfectly: they exiled every Atenist and erased every trace of their legacy. Books status: burned. Depictions of Aten long pedate the monotheists, but the infection ultimately destroyed any respect for Aten, up to and including an architectural style that became associated with Atenism.
Unfortunately, although also inevitably, they did not hunt down and butcher every Atenist. Instead, the exiles found a new home among the hebrews.
At the time, hebrews were pagan as far as anyone knows. Jehovah's message and treatment were right in line with Baal's, Isis', Moloch's, Marduk's and so on. Indeed Baal is Tyr or Tiw, middle-east style. The words are titles, not names. It means divine lord.
A few hebrews got mind-controlled by the exiled Atenists. They survived as basically a secret cult and later called themselves maccabees. These seized judea and Jehovah's religion was twisted in the characteristic Atenist way. Atenists were not truly worshipping Aten, and likewise YHWH's followers were no longer worshipping Jehovah. Speaking of painfully familiar, if you read through the wikipedia page, you'll find the tenets of Atenism are painfully familiar. Abstract sun disks, gender egalitarianism, a mary figure, and so on.
A main reason the snake got into genesis is because Egyptians were in the habit of wearing snakes on their hats, and the Atenists were unimaginably resentful about their loss.
Exodus in fact tells a distorted tale of the Atenists, having little to nothing to do with full-blooded hebrews. Nobody was in fact enslaved, and certainly not as a whole ethne. The plagues allegedly suffered by Egypt are more of their resentful revenge fantasies. In Reality, it was the Atenists who suffered a god plague. It heavily contributed to their sudden failure in Egypt, due to a suspiciously improbable high death rate among their elites.
It is likely the plague was sent by a furious Aten. Later the hebrews were repeatedly cursed by a spurned Jehovah. E.g. several Jehovan temples were destroyed and dishonoured on account of not being consecrated to Jehovah anymore, despite semite claims to the contrary.
Had Egypt not correctly cleansed the Amarnite infection, it would have evolved into proper full-spectrum atheism, exactly the way its successors do.
Atenist genes vanished into the general hebrew pool, but the hebrew religion had already been irredeemably desecrated.
At this point, the hebrews ran around being hebraic, and it seems this part of the story is already well-known. One exception: greece is not far from that region, and the hebrews observed the greek Sophists. They were highly impressed. They absorbed the ideas of protagoras and plato. Maccabees explicitly rejiggered Jehovah-worship along platonist lines. Updating the lies. Stuff like orphism is also uncannily modern, and it is suspicious when modern takes on greek mythology strenuously omit it.
I'ma repeat that: judaism as it is known is a school of platonism. It's not jewish.
Also, plato studied in Egypt, meaning platonism itself grew in the same soil that Atenism grew in.
Hebrews continuing to admire the fashionable intellectuals of their day seems to have lead to Jesus.
Jesus looks like a physical human to me, although the standard story is probably just wrong. Even Official histories place neither his birth nor his death at 1 AD, and I suspect even so they're significantly off. Nevertheless, it looks like he existed. Moreover, according to my personal research, he was indeed an avatar of the being who had stolen the faces of Aten and Jehovah.
Although the old testament is horrifyingly desecrated, Satan was not a perfect being and you can see remnant flecks and fragments of the old, basically healthy worship of Jehovah. Stupid example: "Oi, don't steal from your neighbours, you twats." It's a bad sign that this doesn't go without saying...but at least it's not saying the opposite. As per Jordan B. Peterson, genesis is indeed supremely deep and sophisticated, as is typical of myths from the time. Unlike a physical egg, provided you already know the answers, you can pick out and discard the rotten parts of this curate's egg.
My educated guess is that Satan became frustrated with the corruption-resistant parts of ye olde testament, having spent centuries bashing his head against those gleaming goldbrick walls. At this point, exploiting Sophist techniques and stealing evocative motifs from his successful neighbours, he went and made a new testament.
It worked out great. For the father of lies.
The new testament is curiously undesecrated. Profane, yes, corrupt, not so much. Creates a smoother reading experience. This is because it was never at any point supposed to be anything but devil-worship. Gestating atheism. It's all working as intended. There are parts that are not wholly self-hating, as Satan was still not a perfect being, but they come off as understandable missteps, little oopsies. Occasionally they are later edits, by gullible true believers who believe they're [clarifying] an earlier miswording, as they heroically try to understand how their devil-worship document is supposed to be divine.
I suspect that broadly christians have always seen through the lies, and that's intended. A proper initiate is supposed to see through the lies precisely so that they can be re-told most effectively, rather than mindlessly repeated with no regard for the target audience. This would explain why chistians are always so fuzzy on the explicit denotations of their own creed, but have all the fine details of Satan himself picked out. They know exactly what they're supposed to be doing, and if you ask them exactly what they say they're avoiding, they'll tell you.
Outsiders need to be tricked into worshipping hatred, but if you properly accept Satan into your heart, you can worship self-destruction most effectively, provided you outwardly claim to be condemning it.
The romans desecrated their own temples by accepting funding from their black government. Consequently they were seized by Satan, and ultimately replaced by his own pet religion. Consequently rome was destroyed, as Atenism and Judaism were.
Since the bibble was written in latin, the fall of rome caused christians to stop reading their bibble. For around 500 years, 600-1100, christianity was reverting to something comically pagan, and europe was vaguely functional.
Mohammed lived 570-632, creating Atenism v.4.0. Can you really think, even for a second, that timing was a coincidence? Satan, having lost his foothold in the west, moved his attentions to the immediate east.
I think it was always intended for the new testament to evolve into something like the koran. Lies fail and must be replaced. Living document etc etc. However, the unplanned interruption made it ossify into an ancient holy text of [[wisdom]], ironically quite contrary to Satan's designs. Wokists and other modern sects claim to be anti-christian to escape the lodestone of the old, stale lies.
In 1085 the library at toledo was seized from the muslims, releasing many greek and latin texts into european circulation. This encouraged the christian races to learn latin, which caused them to start reading their bibble again. It certainly didn't help that many Sophists were also released from quarantine. If Satan did not plant this vile seed, well, he should have. It would have been a brilliant move. The reconquista was sponsored by the father of lies, whoopsie doodle. No wonder, unlike every other crusade, it wasn't a humiliating failure. (Exciting Satan on Satan action.)
As an example, It seems the muzzies, through their persian thralls, were the originators of courtly love in this cycle, which is where the french got the idea. Feminism can also be found at the time of Egypt's Ipuwer - oh hey look the papyrus artifact is a contemporary of the Atenists. What an unexpected coincidence that nobody could have expected.
The french adopted courtly love immediately after ritual contamination from toledo. No more than 15 years later.
Since 1085, european society has been suffering ever-worsening Satanism symptoms, such as demagogues leading peasant uprisings, and now including a beat-for-beat rerun of the fall of rome.
The first thing a formalized government would have to do is jail itself for heinous corruption charges. The jail would be unguarded and there would be nobody to lock the doors, the staff having put themselves on the inside.
History records no government that is not inherently treasonous. They all prescribe capital punishment for themselves.
Got your dark-truth hazmat suit on?
Breeding women for appearance results in daughters so hot it overwhelms the anti-incest instincts of the father, and he wants to breed her.
In a sufficient number of cases, for various reasons, this results in incestuous breeding.
Indeed there's nonzero evidence daughters have evolved emotional tolerance to incestuous assault. Going on so long it's part of the selective landscape. Like a psychic sickle-cell anti-anaemia mutation, see?
Even if it doesn't result in an overt attack, she picks up on it and becomes deranged as a result. Merely perceiving sexual interest from a parent counts as sexual abuse, and it easily causes crippling scars.
This is a specific example of the general problem with artificial selection. Breeding for one trait always causes a second trait to become maladaptive. Causes more problems than you gain in glory.
Naturally, this problem disproportionately afflicts the upper classes.
Mortals are smart enough to run dysgenics but not smart enough to run a eugenic program. Smart enough to breed women for looks, not smart enough to breed men for the proper kind of sexual disgust - it doesn't even have its own name, let alone regularly rise to conscious awareness, let alone be part of the strategy.
There are two kinds of women.
1. Women who are aware they don't know what they want.
2. Women who think they know what they want, but are mistaken.
https://www.anarchonomicon.com/p/is-violence-the-answer
Allow me to summarize: "Violence makes me wet." Possible proximity to violence also scares her...which makes her wet. All the data and high-falutin ratiocination exists in and as a result of a total vacuum of self-awareness. She's scolding men for failing to provide her with enough porn.
Not exactly a cooperator.
As with all lies, self-awareness would be detrimental. Stated plainly, her case is self-refuting.
For reference, I don't think the Amish are particularly virtuous in absolute terms. I rather expect they cheerfully torment each other on the regular. Technological restriction as self-flagellation, not genuine protection of community. Nevertheless, they are virtuous enough. It is not a spartan commitment to violence that frees them of the yoke* of the black government. They merely refrain from doing anything that constitutes consent. They don't unilaterally involve themselves with the government, and as a result, it turns out the government cannot unilaterally involve itself with them.
*joke
Evil is weak. You do not need awe-inspiring weapons to defeat it. A single smirk will usually suffice.
Tragically, the fight between good vs. evil is not nearly as grand as evil (bibbles/hollwood) would lead you to believe. It's more like the battle between you and a trash bag, as the force of gravity resists your efforts to take it to the curb. If you have not deliberately broken your own arms...
I like the part where she's virulently feminist. An honourable woman, asked what she wants for dinner, says this: "I'm a woman, I have no idea." A feminist woman, such as this one, claims to want something very specific, at first. Conveniently, she does not expect to be directly involved in any of the violence for which she calls.
The predicament isn't a problem, it's already solved. Sorry, men aren't providing you with porn because they don't want to. You maybe temporarily trick a few into thinking they do want to, but the key word here is temporarily, along with few and maybe. Uppity of you to demand more.
Ultimately, tyranny can't be considered oppression. If the livestock didn't want to be oppressed, they could wake up, get a cup of coffee, and...just...stop. Propaganda exists because there is great demand for propaganda. Herdbeasts, it seems, crave predation. They know, they accept, the purpose of their life is to be eaten.
--
That said, in a limited sense the thesis is true. If you want Satan's throne, so you can set Hell's policies, you will need extraordinary amounts of violence. Shepherds not nearly as peaceful as the hollywood portrayal. However, given it costs pennies to be free of Satan, to render Hell's policies irrelevant, you will find that only someone more evil than Satan cares enough to buy the ability to out-lie Satan and seize the throne. Anyone sitting on the throne, or even where Satan's right hand used to be, used extraordinary amounts of violence to get there is and is hardly shy about using more.
Non-cooperator wants to encourage a non-cooperator...what a coincidence. "Use defection that matches my tastes, rather than defection that doesn't," she says, stridently.
There is no way to stop replacement migration without a civil war.
You know who the main constituency for replacement is? BOOMERS.
Their Medicare, Social Security, and home prices depend on infinite migration
The only way to stop Replacement and DEI is a hot civil war, lasting decades, with millions of young dead from combat and millions of old dead from want of Medicare.
That's it.
There's no way with current demographics to keep Boomer entitlements without LITERALLY INFINITE MIGRATION
(the migrants themselves are a net negative, they never become net taxpayers. Each new one just kicks the can down the road... but if that can get's kicked far enough your boomer parents will get to die before the bill is due, and you'll be left with 10x the problems when the shooting starts)
https://twitter.com/FromKulak/status/1824584540901294270
Keeping mind that rome had this exact problem, and solved it by erasing their economy with inflation, suffering a plague, deleting their legacy genes, and collapsing into the dark ages...
and italy has never really left their dark ages, because deleted genes don't come back...
Yes, that's correct. For example, home prices are completely dependent on immigration. Suburbs charge less in tax than they cost. To cover the difference and afford maintenance, the town draws federal subsidies (money printing, inflation) for new neighbourhoods and skims some off the top to pay for maintenance of old neighbourhoods. Ponzi, with the Fed at the top. Conveniently this means they need to buy undermarket contractors to build the new neighbourhood, which means it breaks down faster, and they need to make two new neighbourhoods, far faster than even a 12 TFR would call for, so they can skim off the top for maintenance again.
Without immigration, property tax would have to go up by at least 50%. Everyone would sell their homes, crashing both population density and property evaluations, meaning everyone left would need to pay 300% tax to afford power/water maintenance, which means more would have to sell their homes, which means....
This is why, even if black government water and power service is currently working for you, you don't want it. It causes infinity immigration. If you're lucky. When the government offers you a service, refuse. Violently, if necessary. "Muh roads" your roads are costing you more than they're worth. You would be far better off with no roads than with a road-provided government.
Presumably medicaid works the same way. The program is administered by the state, and the funding is per-capita. Or something much more convoluted that basically works the same way: to get more money, to pay for the sicker degenerates produced by christian nations, they need more young, healthy immigrants. Whether the immigrants in fact work or pay for the system is irrelevant, because the Fed is at the top.
Nobody at social security keeps track of your contributions. It's not like the contributions are there to pay for social security. Doubtless there's some arcane black magic that means the budget of the SS bureaucracy is based on pure population numbers. It's not that the immigrants are paying, and certainly not that they're net paying, it's politics. In this case, manipulating procedural outcomes such that line go up means accumulating more livestock. America turned away from private systems, therefore, this happens.
Finally, some of the immigrants do pay taxes, and the IRS cares about absolute tax receipts. In particular, the IRS does not care about government expenses, secondarily because it's not their department, primarily because they care due to embezzlement. The more taxes, the more they can skim off the top without being too obvious about it.
You can tell IRS agents embezzle because one or two dozen IRS agents are not guillotined for embezzlement every year. Whether they try is not in question, the only question is whether anyone stops them, and the answer is no.
If you just love money and are totally amoral and tasteless, I highly recommend moving to america and getting a job at the IRS. Why dick around with applying for funding or doing weird quant market scams or Fed credit-default swaps when you can get the dosh directly from the faucet? No amount of money would be enough to induce me to voluntarily associate with tax farmers, but if their characters don't bother you, there's absolutely no reason to work anywhere else.
Trying to gaslight god into thinking he kicked them out, gross.
It's very easy to prove that Earth = Eden. Literally. Bit for bit identical. In a materialist sense. Yeah there probably is an angel with a flaming sword keeping the riff-raff out, but y'all are on the inside.
The whole homo genus would have gone extinct aeons ago if this were not a great paradise. Mortals are not good enough, not remotely, and rely on industrial quantities of divine mercy to survive.
Hail Eden, you ungrateful prats.
Check: look around. Disregard the human artifacts... Oh yeah. It's a paradise. The only problem is having too much life, not too little. Overflowing from every nook and cranny. Obvious, isn't it? Cue midwit meme. Not quite the best of all possible worlds, but unquestionably a cradle of near incomprehensible gentleness.
Civilization is when, after raiding your village and raping your daughters, the bandits tell you it was for your own good. "You'll thank me later."
Barbarism is when, after you kill a bandit for trying to rape your daughter, your neighbours don't turn on you and try to hand you over to the head bandit.
Social status is epistemically disqualifying.
Quality epistemology is socially disqualifying.
History repeats because it's working as intended.
Rome fell because it wanted to fall. Mission accomplished. The west got up expressly for the purpose of falling over again.
My congenital optimism was acting up again.
History is not over the way the journalist!famous guy says, but he said it because that would indeed be the solution.
War crimes as table stakes? Yes, sort of. Still lowballing it, honestly. Have to interrupt history per se and replace it with something else, by replacing the species that makes history with a species that does something else. The only way for history to stop repeating is to interrupt demand for a repeat of history, meaning something so different it can't rightly be called history anymore.
It stands for turbo cancer.
The potomac is a river of cringe. They don't like coal mining because america is already pure coal and they're trying not to make it worse.
Almost without limit.
If you want approval, go to your mom. The parent who hangs up your toddler scrawl on the fridge like the kitchen is a world-famous art museum. Unless she's seriously deranged, she thinks you're perfect just the way you are.
Consequently, you learn her approval is meaningless. Create a masterpiece? Advance the sum total of planetary wisdom? "That's wonderful, I love you!" Literally shit your pants? "That's okay, I still think you're wonderful, love you!" If anything, it's an accomplishment to get her to disapprove.
A father's approval has to mean something, because someone's approval needs to mean something, and by process of elimination...
When dad approves, you can be sure it's good enough.
When you throw a tantrum, dad should shut you in a soundproof room so he doesn't have to hear it. Forgets to let you out for dinner? "Oh, whoops." That's not abuse, that's good. Try to get something by saying, "I want it I want it" over and over? Enjoy your new muzzle, bitch. Dad gag, lel.
Good. Excellent. Why?
What you need to know is that, when dad gives you something, it's not because you forced him. It's not because you manipulated him. It's not because he's afraid of the government. It's not because mom will divorce him if he doesn't. It's not because you'll say, "I hate you!" even if you really mean it. It's not because he's hallucinating: he definitely sees you as you really are.
In a very real sense, mom's love is fake. She doesn't have a choice, any more than she has a choice about anything else. It's not earned. It doesn't matter who or what you are - you can even be adopted, or, like, literally a cat - you get mom!love anyway. Mom's approval is all but empty because it's not optional.
Is getting hit so hard you fall over when you mess up, shall we say, suboptimal? Sure.
Worth it, though.
When your father gives you something, it's because he wants you to have it. That's it. That's all.
It's come to my attention that wonderland alice is wearing hooker lipstick.
She's seven.
Looks like her eyebrows and eyelashes have been done too. More degenerate than you can possibly comprehend. This is not some little oopsie or naive oversight. It's hooker lipstick because it feels like looking at hooker lipstick, which is why hookers use it. Nobody at disney had any problem drawing a seven-year-old like a prostitute. The audience didn't have a problem with it either.
For comparison, ariel, 16, also wears hooker lipstick. An illegal implication, but hardly unusual in real life. Also kinda impressive, keeping her makeup on underwater.
"No, you idiot. Trump/RFK ticket. Do it."
https://alrenous.blogspot.com/2023/12/results-of-failure-to-surrender.html
Note date.
If RFK somehow gets the dem nomination despite everything, ensure it's RFK/Trump vs. Trump/RFK.
Black government cannot allow men to be hard. Indeed men have to already be soft to permit a black government. More on this in a bit.
Your wife will never really believe in you unless she sees you beat up a violent man in front of her. This is one of the reasons women are inherently polygynous. Like, you can beat up the guy everyone else already beat up, but he doesn't count as violent or whatever. Beating up the local hobo doesn't disgust the woman because she's [[compassionate]] it disgusts her that you think this is a worthy offering - the [[compassion]] is an excuse she uses due to her omnipresent terror.
Take some risks, coward. A risk as far as the woman can tell, anyway. You at least have to beat up someone new, which means at most half of men can get a willing woman.
Traditionally the solution is to not listen to women. What do they want? Who cares?
Theoretically you could make friends with a guy in the next town over. Go take a dive in a boxing match with him, then he comes to your town and takes a dive in a boxing match with you. In front of the respective balls-and-chain, it goes without saying. In the long term women would hear about the habit, and that would likely spell its doom. Theoretically men could keep the secret...it's not logically impossible or anything...but have you met a man, lol? At best you would get an arms race, with women knowing all boxing matches are rigged, so you do a sprint or something, then...
When Democracy proposed that women be allowed a seat at the table, men were too soft. They should have simply said, "Nobody does or should care what women say, or otherwise indicate, they want." Then, because we all already know argument wouldn't have worked, beat the shit out of everyone proposing it. If anyone saying that stuff had all their teeth, fix it ASAP. (Both of these things make women wet, btw.) Also, get a pope so randos aren't allowed to say things, wtf.
Tofu men accept a black government, and create hard times. Hard times create jello men, who create harder times, unable to even afford the parasite. Harder times make tofu men, who create hard times.
If the 19th amendment didn't exist, voters would have to invent it. Oh wait, they really did. There is a mild inflection point...before 1920. E.g. NAACP formed 1909, and that's when black bastardy started going up. Men were already voting like women. Letting single moms vote is a scapegoat. Men can say they voted for McCain or whoever, without losing that sweet sweet whipping from daddy government.
Were the 19th repealed (lol) men would have to start openly voting like women, and have nobody to blame. Real awkward for everyone. Super cringe.
Last Psych: blame is defence against change. When you blame you openly state your intention to do nothing about it. Burger voters blame the 19th so they can continue suffering its effects.
P.S. Women vote for whoever the nearest man tells them to vote for. If you really wanted to repeal the 19th, you don't have to, you just have to tell women to vote differently. Tell them it's feminine to vote Ron Paul or whatever. As you already know, they've done dumber shit already. Make 'em vote for a horse, or a deer. A desk lamp, maybe. Not even vaguely a stretch. They can flip-flop on [just a flu], they can flip-flop on trump.
Jello men love harder times. Harder, harder, baby. Their prayers will be answered until it's so hard they literally die, leaving only the atavistic tofu men.
ukraine achieved total twitter overmatch, an overwhelming victory of words
excellent job, I'm sure it's a great comfort for the hundreds of thousands of families...
It's the same for every conflict. If you have access to strategic assets, the propaganda war is irrelevant. If you don't have access to strategic assets, you've already lost, and the propaganda war is still irrelevant. If you [[need]] to win that part, it's already over. Surrender, unless the point is to torment yourself...so great work, I guess, carry on.
Trump can win as many elections as he likes, whether twitter elections or ballot elections, and it just doesn't matter as long as he hasn't sent tanks to harvard ballot-counters yard. Gonna meme the dominion voting machines, lel?
Hey, maybe the name [dominion] is a hint. A little shower thought for you.
Guy has the right basic idea. However, I do have to point out,
At the end of the day I’m not a moralizer by temperament
is simply untrue. As noted by Nick Land, the christian races are almost incorrigibly sanctimonious. Takes truly heroic effort for a pure-blooded christian to even consciously appreciate what he sounds like to non-abrahoids.
First, [civilization] as an applause light.
Obviously piracy is not civilization. Or, if it is, civilization is not admirable.
The men of BisBuc are disgusted and appalled
https://www.tortugasociety.org/p/bismarcks-buccaneers
...not if they're pirates they're not. Virtue signalling priests, yeah, sure, sounds familiar. Pirates look at fat and corrupt officials as delicious prey. Disgust? No, slavering. Appalled? At my meal ticket? Um, wat?
Smell that? The weakness of your enemies? That's the smell of opportunity in the morning.
The moralizing, exceptionally uncoincidentally, leads to the [out-lie Satan] strategy. I don't call them the christian races facetiously.
have instead decided to cheat, lie, and ruthlessly job stack our way to outsized money and power.
"We deserve to be able to lie." Yeah, okay, whatever, but that's not how it works. What happens, if you job-stack enough through deception to get noticeable levels of [[hard power]], is that is becomes illegal to job stack. Thanks. Great job.
Pirates are found in boats because they have to keep moving.
See, unlike you perpetually nomadic and eternally unimpressed latchkey kids
Ah, yes, exceptional not-moralizing, lol.
Ah, yes, the famously non-nomadic...pirate raider...
Intuitively this looks like taking Ultima and Pirates of the Caribbean at face value. Choosing pirates because they appear cool to children, not because they are substantially sacred wealth. Not paying your respects to Mars.
Ultima's Buccaneer's Den is a real place...provided they have tacit approval from the nearest civilization. (The answer is civilization really is piratical, and therefore unadmirable, btw. Worse than barbarism.) Else it is a real place, really temporarily. Only lasts as long as it does because the local civilization (rightly) expects them to turn on each other, lying and cheating each other to death. If they demonstrate uncommon longevity, then the civilization plays atropos.
That means some level of ingroup solidarity and outgroup exclusion will be necessary going forward.
But not, like, having a pope or a king, thus a genuine leader and a genuine group. This ain't no pack of predatory pirates, this is a wonderful sanctimonious herd of grazing pirates.
it’s not just permissible, it’s fucking obligatory. Every agentic and capable man has a duty to the vitality of his civilization
The morali- Okay, sorry. I do try not to explain that the sun rises in the morning. I want to make sure, but at the same time...
I have an issue where I penetrate lies too easily. I counter them so fast I didn't even realize a lie occurred, meaning if you ask me - or more relevantly if I ask myself - how many lies appeared, I can only remember 1.5. I have instead a general impression of faint ridiculousness. "Nn...nobody can take this seriously, right? ....right?" Democratic Man gonna clown world.
In this particular case, the first time around, I glossed right over the above quote as nonsense, didn't realize what a howler it was.
It's not some duty to break your oaths due to some detail of the oaths. Yes, you can break your oaths if you swear them with traitors, but more importantly, you shouldn't knowingly deal with traitors in the first place.
If someone asks you to sign a noncompete, and you intend to compete, don't. This isn't a moral cooperate-with-cooperators thing, it's the fact that knowingly pretending to cooperate with Satanists gives them power over you, and you will not gain more than it costs.
Deliberately surrounding yourself with traitors is not piracy. Traitors can't secure their wealth because they're too busy betraying each other. When a pirate is surrounded by traitors, his first action is to skedaddle with this unsecured loot ASAP. He gets the booty and himself out of there. In this, the pirate is wise.
Instead, job-stack outside the field until that job goes belly-up. Take bigger risks with the NCC job, risks which happen to be orthogonal to competition. Go for broke - after all, it's not like it's your only job, lel.
It's the moonlighting provisions that are inherently unenforceable. If they want to own your time 24/7 - and you should explicitly mention this - they need to pay you 24/7. They will of course refuse, but as it happens this puts the ball in their court. At this point ideally you let them believe you agreed to the moonlighting provisions when you in fact didn't, but it's also okay to outright lie because they can't reasonably be fooled except by self-deception. If you don't see how that's different, it helps to explicitly write down how the conversation goes. In short their objection to the moonlighting thing will admit you're right, if they want your time they need to pay for it, and thus not agreeing to pay for it is agreeing it's an illegitimate ask. They can return the serve ("not moonlighting is a requirement because we say it is, that's what this job costs") but won't.
expectation of thoroughgoing employee selfishness, which means every employee has a moral obligation to himself, his family, and his people to behave just as ruthlessly in return.
Ah yes, the famously non-moral moral obligation.
This isn’t a matter of “morality”
Sigh.
I do recognize explaining the sun here, this is in fact about calling out the moralistic condemnation of selfishness.
What if I selfishly want to be ruthful? What if I feel compassion and I selfishly want to express it? Well, too bad, that's [[selfish]].
Are you saying ruth doesn't have its own rewards? Does affection and trust feel bad in your world?
I have to be careful about not moralizing about sanctimoniousness. If your king wants to forbid selfishness, that's his prerogative. If your pope wants to falsely declare that serving your own interests, having self-compassion, is the opposite of compassion, he can certainly do that, and you're obligated by your own word to believe him.
Here in my world, every time I'm not selfish, I reduce the resources I can spend on those who I'm oathbound to support. I etiolate my own promises, my own honour. Selflessness is treachery.
Piratically preying on civilization is very fine. However, Democratic Man is not virtuous enough to manage piracy.
Here's the bar => ==================
They are here.
Prey aren't even genuinely alive. There's no problem with killing one. Even if there were, they're interchangeable and nothing of value is lost.
For something genuinely alive, a predator, the value of their life per se is negative. You can say life is [priceless] but only because nobody would buy it. Taking down prey is hard work, and each additional predator is another mouth to feed. Cooperation, or perhaps we can say trust, scales in cost quadratically. The number of relationships in a group scales with the square of the number of members, and (for non-autists) all those relationships require maintenance. Pack hunting is ludicrously effective, but it scales linearly, meaning there's a maximum pack size beyond which each additional pack member cannot possibly pull their own weight.
The predator has to pay the pack back for merely existing. Life has negative value.
When a new herdbeast is born, it means the grass is grazed faster and the herd needs to move more often. It does pay the herd back by being someone else for the predators to eat, but who cares, it's prey. If there were no predators, prey wouldn't form herds at all. However, if there were no predators, prey would dysgenic'd themselves into extinction. (Ref: Democracy.) During the middle part each herdbeast would be of no value to other herdbeasts (ref: look outside). Without predators, prey masses grow until they have to compete with each other, and they're not equipped with the neurons to handle it. Likewise, because predators do exist, when the herd grows the predator population also grows and the net protection of each new herdbeast is cancelled out. Irrelevant. Prey thinks a larger herd makes them safer, but it doesn't. They're not even alive, and cannot escape insanity or delusion.
Prey is only valuable when it loses its life. It is said that death is what gives life meaning - for prey, that's strictly true. By becoming food for a predator, they have value.
An immortal is a being who doesn't die even if they don't pay back the debt their existence accrues. A mortal is a being who isn't properly alive and can't conceive of paying back the debts their pseudo-existence accrues.
There's a common canard that the rich have to buy the same stuff as us poors. Democratic Man loves his gaslighting.
Easy example: instead of commissioning a painting or two, commission a whole book. Perhaps the rich don't do this, but it's not because they can't. You can get bespoke stories told for you specifically. Be your own publisher with an expected market size of one.
Saw a jew try to say the rich can't get planes to leave on time, as if he had never heard of private jets.
Consider a wooden chair. Upholstery made privately, without fire retardants or plasticized foams. Bespoke bronze screws that won't rust like iron alloys. The screws are two-part screws with an outer metal jacket so the item can be disassembled and reassembled without risking damage to the wood. Bespoke carving, so they don't have to follow postmodern uglifying trends. Deliberately designed to either last or have replaceable parts, e.g. the upholstery is not stapled to the wood. Heirloom chair.
Sure it's expensive, but we're talking maybe $30k, not billions. Maybe instead of bronze screws they use antibacterial silver. Or carve it all in one piece. Perhaps instead of metal sockets for the screws, they're in replaceable pegs. They can buy a prototype and then tweak it for the final version.
You can get a machine shop to make you custom screws made of arbitrary metals, it's merely expensive. Etc etc.
Bonus: bespoke items are stealthy. No ad campaign, no journalisms. Only a few individuals need to find out you're rich, and they're unlikely to talk, starting with the fact nobody would listen even if they did. Top-out-of-sight class. In a Democracy, it's important that the roaming herds of ravenous voters can't find you.
Perhaps the rich choose not to get bespoke, artisanal versions of everything they want, but if they can't get them, it's because they're not genuinely rich.
Mortals refuse to use cognitive resources on anything except betraying their friends, and are functionally retarded in all other areas. Artistic limitations mean there are fewer factors to consider, and those factors vary less. This means it's not impossible for the artist to be willing to fit the whole piece of art in his mind at once, producing a coherent or sensible whole. Secondly there's a conformity dynamic.
Stupid example: if the artist has five colours to choose from, it's very likely he will pick the optimal colour. If the artist has 20 billion colours to choose from, to get the optimal colour he either has to individually evaluate every colour one by one (lol) or construct some sort of filtering or search algorithm (lmao).
With billions of options, he instead recognizes a wonderful opportunity to use the huge space as an excuse to pick the worst colour, betraying his organization, his friends, and his society. "I looked really hard and this is the best I found!" Labour theory of value as conspiratorial plausible deniability. If he has a way to artificially impose colour limits on someone else (e.g. robocraft blocks) then he will deliberately choose the ugliest colours he thinks he can get away with - which is exactly what the other artists want as well. He's providing them an excuse to choose horrible colours. (Then folk stop playing robocraft because the ugliness pushes too hard against their Darwinian impulses.)
Since their friends largely deploy betrayal defences against nonconformists, it's important to appear to be as boring and slavishly obedient as possible. However, if it is physically impossible to conform, the artist has an excuse to be less boring than usual.
The palace in civilization 1 faced severe technical limitations. Consequently, they couldn't properly portray any real-world architecture. Consequently they had to come up with their own variation on architecture, consequently it's unique and interesting.
Likewise the towns. They couldn't show construction scenes. The buildings appear by drawing random pixels with a distinctly electronic sound cue. This gives the impression of a truly different world, hinting at profound and imaginative intent. What is actually shown in civ1 is inferior to the real world, but if they had gone further down that path, it's clear it would be different and better than the real world. Its palace looks better than real palaces, and its libraries would have been more librarian than real libraries. The cities would be more civilized than real cities.
Imagine a society so humble they would spontaneously raise up the already high. Imagine it was normal for taxes to be so low, and rule so good, that citizens would donate to the government out of gratitude. If that's unrealistic, then clearly the most important thing is not to disparage old games, but to work out how to make reality less realistic. Make the game civilization work like that, and improve the fidelity of the model until it functions as a real-world blueprint. Transition from developing computer games to developing real life.
Naturally, when the limitations were lifted, they didn't go down that path. They discarded the art style they had developed, and made instead poor copies of the real world. I don't need construction pictures, game, I can see those by going outside.
Microprose returned to mindless conformity.
That is not clearly a world in which the Holocaust is carried out for banal reasons, by regular people, where just anyone could be one of its perpetrators.Milgram's experiment is confounded. What you should do is tell them the electric shocks are medicinal. It sounds like they're dying in excruciating pain, but actually it's for their own good. It will turn out okay in the end.
https://www.cremieux.xyz/p/the-vast-emptiness-of-social-psychology
Then you'll find: you live in a world where everyone sends their own children to concentration camps to be tortured by kiddy diddlers, on the daily. Public prussian prostitute pedophile school is there to reveal the truth. It worked: say thanks. Before the 1760 invention by fred the great satan, it was arguable that parents in fact cared about their kids and had their best interests in mind, but were merely incompetent or cowardly. With [[compulsory]] education you can trivially evade, it becomes indisputable: they're doing it on purpose.
P.S. Alex jones is indeed a clown. It's all genuinely cope, all 360 degrees.
I suppose not all fleshly mortification considered a loser thing. Maybe tell them gender dysphoria treatments (castration/spaying) have better outcomes when used without anaesthetic, and task them with carrying new scalpels to the [[[surgeon]]] or something. See how many balk when they see his blood-spattered hand poking past the curtain, with a background refrain of agonized gasping.
Mortification has to be considered low class so that the higher classes can continue to use it as a punishment.
[Milgram] has an authority mismatch. The black government clearly doesn't want you doing any unauthorized torture. Certainly doesn't want you slaughtering its livestock without permission. There's no reason to think milgram has received a special dispensation. Conformity to milgram is dissidence against the state.
I was reminded of fairy tail, and how anime normally doesn't have a plot.
The plot of fairy tail: natsu tries to find dragons and doesn't. Later, natsu tries to find dragons and doesn't. Eventually, natsu finds a dragon and it dies, so, basically, he doesn't. I guess he meets some folk sometimes but they're not relevant to finding dragons, so...
Almost every anime and manga have a plot in the first episode and the last episode, and other than that it's spinning its wheels. You're lucky if the manga even gets to the last issue before the author dies or it's cancelled. I often wonder if it's normal for manga authors to skip planning an ending, because why bother? It's all setup for a status quo that can be milked infinitely.
But, lord of the rings doesn't have much plot either.
Ringwraiths attack hobbits, it is scary. They band up. The band breaks up. Orcs attack helm's deep, but they lose. Ents attack orthanc, but they don't lose. Orcs attack gondor, but they lose. At some point gandalf loses a fight but he gets better. Hobbits try to throw ring in mount doom. It is scary. No really, scary things happen. Then they throw ring in mount doom, the end.
They barely do anything. The biggest event is something that happens to them: the band breaking up. Not so much protagonists as along-for-the-ride-gonists. After the sieges the locations are never seen again, so it's possible tolkein lied to us and the orcs won. We wouldn't much notice.
The illiad: achilles angsts for a while, then he dies. Troy falls due to achilles dying gloriously.
"But, it's, like, really angsty! The king is involved and shit!" Yeah okay but we don't even have a band gets together, band breaks up dynamic. The odyssey has a plot, but the plot is basically: crewman dies. They get to the next island, then a crewman dies. Later, a crewman dies. "But they all die in interesting ways!" Okay, cool, but that's spectacle, not a plot. Odysseus lives, though, and ends up killing ten dozen guys who weren't on his crew, the end.
But really one piece is the master. Monkey tries to find treasure, it isn't there. Repeat for 1000 chapters.
I like daughter of the empire because shit in fact happens. She gets a giant ant colony, for example. Colonization stories in general have, like, plots. I'm sure I'd find red mars intolerable nowadays, but you can't say it didn't have a plot.
Shannara: gang tries to find macguffin. It is scary. There's no reasonable way they don't die horribly, in fact. But anyway, they find macguffin, they win, the end. One time the only likeable character gets turned into a tree. "Shit I wrote someone tolerable...wait I know, I can milk this for [[[tragedy]]]." When novels were invented they were said to be wholly evil, and it's difficult to blame them for this viewpoint. Hard to defend the history of fiction.
You may remember a lot of plot, but it's sleight of hand. It's all: there was an obstacle, but they got over the obstacle, and kept going. In one piece it's: monkey is afflicted by horrible ADD and can't focus on treasure to save his life, but eventually he gets over it and realizes the the treasure might be over there. 100% of eveything is crud, we merely like some of it anyway because our taste is bad.
Real life has a plot. Get married: stuff will happen. Have kids: there is no return to normalcy with kids underfoot. An endless font of things happening.
In modern art, almost all plot is amputations. Some guys' life changes because he doesn't have a right arm anymore. Okay it's plot, but nobody wants to read that, and rightly so. (Everyone wants to read shannara apparently, and wrongly so.)
You might want to make allowances for the fact that a genuine plot will change the genre of the story. I will be explicit: when plot happens, the characters can do things they couldn't previously do, or can't do things they previously could. Stuff changes. E.g. a genuine warrior story doesn't stop when the war is over, the next volume is about the warrior getting married on his farm or whatever. He can't go around killing anymore. Things happened.
I don't want to make those allowances. No matter how confusing genre shift might be to consumers, it's better than not having a plot.
Lately online comments are far less toxic. Turns out yelling random
insults at strangers online is, like, not good. Who knew. Whomst amongst
us.
There was tons of bullying in boomer schools because boomers are behaviour disorder: the generation. They were badly behaved children who grew up to be badly behaved adults grownups non-minors, and are still behaving badly. "Rough talk is normal among male friends." Sure, so why are you treating total strangers that way, lel? "I have known this guy for ten seconds, time to call him a faggit. I'm sure he knows I'm not totally serious."
Instead, zoomers are startlingly lame. They think if everyone trusted and liked the government, everything would be fine. The [outta be a law] boomerism but less strident and more petulant. "If only companies followed the regulations." (lol) Didn't like gen x cynicism, so they decided to be gullible conformists, because that's definitely the opposite of cynicism.
Properly naive the way children are supposed to be, I guess. Trust mommy and daddy - it's not like you have a choice, lmao. Especially since they don't have both a mommy and a daddy, and have no choice but to rely on daddy DC.
The issue is that nobody is following the rules the way they're supposed to. Yeah that's it.
At first it looks like the empathy and compassion crowd are displaying zero empathy, as usual. Int curiosity = 0.
At second, like it's stupid and irrational. You made a thinking machine, it's not thinking what you want it to think, why not ask what it's thinking and try to learn to explain better? "Hey, this article you cited doesn't seem to exist. Where did you find it? Why did you cite it?"
However, it's yet another case of just lying. Everyone talking about AI is just lying. Nobody thinks AI is a thinking machine. Everyone is aware it has no self-awareness. Everyone is aware it's little more than an overcomplicated unconscious marble run. They don't ask the AI's reasoning because it's preposterous to assume it has anything resembling reasoning. Even Communists can't take that one seriously.
It's only irrational in that lying to friendlies is inherently irrational.
The source texts also display no empathy, compassion, or curiosity, so the LLM would have no idea what to do with them, even insofar it has any ideas at all.
Hey, uh, have you tried making friends with part of the world? Friends are more kind to you than random strangers! Weird, I know, but true nonetheless!
If you pick low-hanging fruit, you grow. Get taller. Relative to you, the tree is shorter, and new fruit comes into the money.
First problem: truth is all one thing. You do have to pick all the fruit if you want to grow. Not optional.
Second problem: mortals love lies and hate the truth. They are not willing to pick all the fruit.
You will never run out of low-hanging fruit, but you will very quickly run out of easy fruit with market demand. The failure to [discover] these truths stunts the growth of the mortals, ensuring the next tier of fruit is forever beyond their reach.
Or rather, mortals are already dead. Growth is impossible. Therefore they love lies, therefore they don't eat the fruit, therefore they are stunted, which is where we started. Truth really is all one thing. This chain of causation is all a single link, but viewed at different angles.
Midwit twitter rightists less-leftists are currently counter-signalling intelligence. A barely-veiled confession. They're Communists who hate excellence for the usual biotrash reasons.
We can applaud them for having nonzero restraint. Unlike more-leftists, they do the monkey dance occasionally, instead of every day.
Unfortunately, restraint is merely stylistic. They get the society they deserve. (Where is your king? What is his name?)
It's important to have the highest tier of intelligence. Everyone reacts to disagreement by concluding the disagreement comes from stupidity or evil. If you're at the highest tier of intelligence, this is not false - it really is because they're dumb. Assuming someone smarter than you is in fact stupider is undiluted Satanism, clown world. Species who are not children of Satan don't assume all disagreement comes from stupidity or equivalents.
("Introducing his royal highness Lol, king of Clownworld!")
Even someone at the highest tier can make mistakes. Not to mention [smart] in mortal terms is still laughably stupid in absolute terms. There's nothing stopping a problem from being overwhelming even to the most capable mortal brain alive.
This is why it's important to do the science thing and doubt what is said. Go check. Watch them acting as it is said they act.
Angle one: what [mind-altering] means is that you're not you anymore. It's an act of self-negation. If you can't socialize while sober, you can't socialize, only someone else can. To drink is to quit trying to learn social skills, to accept that, for you, it's impossible.
If you try sobriety, especially over many years, you feel alive. Even in the short term, booze deadens the senses. Partial annihilation is total annihilation of a part.
But, rather, drinkers are already dead. A special case of all mortals already being dead. They use booze to harmonize the physical with the spiritual.
Ethanol kills brain cells. Symbolically, it turns you into a zombie. Progressively, you become the zombie you were always meant to be.
If sobriety is a burden, it means you're tired of living. Perhaps stop beating around the bush, and seek Canadian Healthcare. Set an onsen appointment with the toaster.
There is no such thing as a bureaucracy, there is only a bureauslum.
The spectrograph of a bureauslum might differ slightly from a classical slum. However, do you want to live there? Around all those bureaucrats? The crime rate is the same, it's just white collar instead of blue collar, and they're just as fond of victimizing their neighbours. Or rather, too lazy to go any further than next door if they don't have to.
The problem with journalists is they're a kind a bureaucrat. Secondly, they are classical slum dwellers, so you get it from both barrels. Blue-stained white-collar crime.
Bloody peasants. Real life: "You're not a briton?" Retainer gets off his
horse, draws his sword, decapitates the loudmouthed idiot. Turns and
kneels. "Sire, I have defeated the invader. Albion's borders are once again secure." "Good work, sir
whatshisname." Almost all liars can be defeated by listening to them
carefully and believing them.
"So who else isn't a briton?"
Liars depend on being unbelievable at some level. It is critical that you take it for granted that they aren't trustworthy, or their lie will fail.
"Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help, help, I'm being repressed!"
"Errr...how are we supposed to stop him repressing you without using violence, tho? This system of [help] seems flawed."
Hey guys, I wonder if supreme executive power doesn't in fact come from a [mandate], whatever that is, and isn't related to the masses in any way? Arthur is treating this moron like an inferior because it's automatically obvious that he's an inferior.
"Civil rights will improve the lot of the negro." If someone says that seriously, you don't go, "Ah, but sir, I believe you're mistaken." You have them committed. Instant impeachment for dramatic levels of incompetence. "Do...do you have schizophrenia? That's quite the hallucination. Come along now...we have a nice long-sleeved white jacket for you...."
You can only take it remotely seriously if you start with the proposition that they can't possibly be serious.
That is: you can't con an honest man. Revenge is sour: if you're not already batshit insane, lying doesn't work on you.
"Global warming will roast the planet if I don't give you all my money and power? Errr...so I'm going to keep my money and power, since I'm roasted either way, but global warming takes time and you're trying to rob me blind right now."
It just doesn't fucking work.
"These weren't riots? They were mostly peaceful? Neat. Next time I'm at your house party, I'll be sure to be mostly peaceful." Haha, whoops. "Oh geeze I mostly peaceful'd your house all the way to the ground. Do I get a six million dollar mansion for doing it, the way BLM does?"
Specifically, if you believe that the liar believes what they're saying, it's foolproof way to defeat the liar.
"Trump said nazis were fine people."
"Hey trump, what do you think about nazis?"
Rumbled. Schizophrenia again. Have a nice trip to the sanitarium...
"This video proves it!"
"You think news agencies are trustworthy? I'm so sorry. My deepest condolences."
"Let me put a grey checkmark on your twitter profile, you know, like the grey lady. You'd like that, wouldn't you? Being associated with the jew york slimes?"
God, can you imagine real twitter? Every time someone goes all [team sports], they involuntarily get that team's flag stapled to their display name? "I see you're pushing DNC talking points. Here's a lovely DNC badge for you! Hooray!"
"Another Ukraine account associated with the CIA. You're proud of your connections, right? Proud to be getting paid by USG? I hope so, because it's going on your permanent record."
Report: user is using false flags. "Thanks for reporting this user. Their team flags have been corrected."
Force every group to publish a manifesto so there's an objective way to determine who is on their team, lol. If they refuse to publish one, conclude they have no desires and don't need to speak. "I'm helping! You don't want anything, engaging in these debates is a waste of your time. Bad for you! Shut up now, rofl!"
I've suggested an explicitly hierarchical social medium before, come to think. Re-invented my own take on the wheel...
Is it possible for lies to make sense internally? Maybe if you're very careless. I can't think of an example.
Do you get it? Internally. You hardly need fact checks, the lie disproves itself.
"You too can save the planet, for only a small contribution..."
"Oh excuse me, you don't want to say that, it's how scams work. Stranger charity is ineffective 100% of the time."
"I'm
going to have to revoke all your business licenses, you're now
blacklisted for incompetence. Can't even recognize a scam when you're
about to run one."
"Black lives matter? Matter to whom? In what way?"
"Oh you're trying to save black lives? Cool, we'll get started on shutting down BLM ASAP! Hope it doesn't take too long, we have to get around to repealing civil rights!"
"I didn't mean it that way!"
"Yeah, I know. I know you don't mean the words that come out of your mouth. You're a putrid sack of lying shit."
Like...class action lawsuit, on behalf of blacks, against the government, for refusing to designate ethnic-cleansing organization BLM as a terrorist organization and anti-black hate group. What are they going to do, admit it's okay to kill blacks as long as other blacks are doing it? When you try to cite FBI statistics and the FBI seals the files, hire a PR firm to tell everyone the FBI sealed which files and why. Every lie is a critical weakness.
Unless the population has demand for propaganda, of course. If lies are abundant because demand for lies is high, and demand for truth is negative at best. You can't con an honest man, ergo, a conned man is not honest. He's not being fooled, he's lying to himself. And you can take advantage of that too, it merely takes two steps instead of one. Secure your shit, short their stock. Their lies create handy blind spots you can comfortably stand in.
Basically the black government tries to make it illegal to speak the truth, then alleged dissidents try to "disprove" the lies with different lies instead of the truth. Functionally dissidents uphold the legitimacy of the black government, and uphold the legitimacy of the original liars, suggesting that they're debating in good faith.
Imagine a twitter where not only do organizations have to publish a manifesto, but users can't join twitter per se - they have to explicitly subordinate themselves to one of these explicit manifestos, and they all have custom nametags. Clans, loool. Musk's job as over-manifesto is to police the manifestos, forcing organizations to update the planks if their message doesn't match. As determined by who they don't kick out of their organization, basically.
You might call it formalism, lel.
You can't imagine the outrage. How dare musk force us to uphold our own words! So many deviant strategies, gone, like tears in the rain....
I wonder what flags the bots and porn stars would pick, teehee.
The false manifesto musk would write for the ""far"" right would also be amusing.
"I never said that."
"Yeah you did, right here."
"That's a ridiculous interpretation." (Even the left agrees it's ridiculous, btw.)
"Fuck you, 40 billion."
Whelp. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The real solution looks like [defund washington]. That is wholly unrealistic. Because americans cannot or will not pursue workable solutions, no solution will be worked. Presumably rome had the same issue, and consequently america will follow rome's trajectory, or rather, will continue to follow rome's trajectory, as it has been following since at least 1776.
"My reason: I do not want to live in a world where only one political opinion is acceptable."
Problem: you want to live in a world where there are more than zero acceptable political opinions. Above zero, [one opinion] is merely the Nash equilibrium. Ref: Tocqueville.
Topic: wealth cap.
The root cause of democracy is that a people is too poor to afford anything better. In turn, democracy makes them even poorer, incapable of affording democracy, and ultimately incapable of affording even tyranny.
America is in fact between 200 and 1500 kingdoms, each with their own secret king. Probably a few queens, even.
A handful of these can field a DNC president. At least 3.
However, these are the junior partners. The president's identity doesn't matter at all the functioning of the alliance. The electoral thing is basically a hobby.
They're proper election geeks who make their hobby their whole identity and lifestyle, but that doesn't mean it isn't a hobby. Yeah they have assassinations and stuff over their hobby - what, as if the nintendo vs. sony fanboys wouldn't assassinate each other if they knew a hitman? Think of the otaku sending a ninja after someone who defiled their waifu. Still a hobby, they're just freaks.
Come to think, that is likely the real story of JFK. "The president should be in charge of things!" "Stay in your lane." "No really, my teacher said, in civics class!" "The president serves us, we don't serve you." *bang*
It is true that a DNC president is simply superior. Functionally, POTUS can do two things: stay out of the way, or interfere with the 0.2% of bureaucrats who have work to do. Certainly america shouldn't be involved with DC at all, but given that they are involved and do rely on it, in the short term not letting the bureaucrats do their jobs is plain bad.
What would happen if an adult was forced into christian confession?
"I have nothing to confess."
"Then you will go to hell, my son. All have sinned."
"Who the fuck is your son? But yes, that's what they tell me."
"Don't swear."
"...."
"...."
Men own their actions. They don't say they shouldn't have done them and ask to have their consequences reversed. E.g. if you genuinely make a mistake, you clean it up yourself. You don't need [forgiveness] from random bystanders. You don't need to apologize at all if the net harm was zero or less, do you? See also: meddling. Hey [[holy]] [[man]], how abouts you mind your own fucking business.
When a man acts, it's with full intention. If it's something he knows he shouldn't do, he doesn't do it in the first place. Men have self-control. He's not a woman, at the mercy of her impulses.
Having imagined a grownup at confessional, it's obvious it's a submission ritual. The priest tells the man boy-child he's not good enough, and the boy is supposed to accept the priest's judgment. "I get to decide what's good and what isn't, not you." <= that's the point.
You're not supposed to notice the priest is in flagrant violation of matthew 7, lol. Many have noticed that if the boys behave too well, the church will start inventing new sins until a proper level of [[guilt]] is reached. Just bad enough to need forgiveness, not so bad they go, "fuck this" and try maturity instead of churchgoing.
The boy is supposed to accept the priest's judgment, and he's supposed to call him [father] to reinforce the child-parent relationship. To reinforce his infantilization.
If a man, having made his decision, suffers for doing so, he accepts this suffering as his responsibility. He made his bed, he lies in it. In general, if he's a genuine grownup, he was aware of the suffering when he made the decision. He can't call it unjust, or wrong in any way for that matter. A man doesn't ask someone to let him make decisions but not suffer for them.
To be [forgiven] is to make the outcome of the wrong decision the same as the right decision. The point of [confession] is to strip responsibility from the flock. To a man, this is a curse, not a gift. If the wrong decision is the same as the right decision, there was no decision. There was no power.
If you make a decision, then ask to have some of the consequences deleted after the fact, then you're not the one genuinely making the decision. Someone else is doing the real acting; your decision was a toy, not real. They permit you to influence which consequences they choose to realize. If they're in the mood.
No man would allow this relationship. He would seize the decision-making power, or die trying. He doesn't really have a choice about this meta-choice: that's just what men are like. The toy situation would not obtain, or he wouldn't be around for the situation to apply to. By hook or by crook.
The point of making decisions is to cause their effects. If the effects are removed, the decision, also. There's no point in pretending to make decisions if they don't have consequences.
Confession is not useful for sane women either. What's the point of apologizing for her impulses? It's not like she decided to have them. To you, from the outside, whether they're truly her impulses or she's merely an inert conduit doesn't much matter, but it matters a great deal to her, on the inside, who can trivially observe she's only a conduit. God is the one who made her with no self-control, is she apologizing for what God did, lol, lmao, rofl?
I'm told italian women confess other people's sins. "Forgive me father...do you know what my husband did?!?" Err, except this is hardly limited to italian women. A woman isn't responsible for her own actions and trying to hold her responsible is pure farce. If an impulse causes her to sin, she's going to have that impulse again regardless and regardless, because it was never her decision to have it in the first place. The italians are merely dropping the mask, acknowledging the real dynamic, rather than continuing the clown show.
"Forgive me father, for I have sinned. My parents had sex, the spermatozoon was an X, and thus I was born female. Mea culpa."
"Forgive me father, for I have sinned. Evolution made my genes function the way they do. Mea culpa."
Twisted. Twisted and deranged.
Christianity is Satanism. Reality: "Forgive me Satan, for I have sinned." "Great work! Keep it up!"
P.S. Do you really think "god" couldn't write a book that's comprehensible to the believers who are supposed to read it? It's Pride all the way down.
The bibble's dribble needs to be "interpreted" or "explained" because it's manipulative lies, and the lies have reached their expiration date. They either need to be re-interpreted so "believers" are manipulated into doing something for the church instead of something that has become irrelevant, or replaced with a new manipulation that accomplishes the intended result in a modern context.
Matthew 7 is clearly condemning all forms of judgment if you're not literally god. Do you know a society where being judgmental isn't considered Bad? Yet the church wants to tell christians to judge sometimes, therefore you find lots of [[interpretations]] of matt 7...
"Decided to read Hitler, see what the big guy's all about. I've never really looked into him before. Here he is talking about school:"
https://twitter.com/BullOfHeaven2/status/1823423309884842219
I had a teacher of French whose whole preoccupation was to catch us out in a a mistake. He was a hair-splitter and a bully. When I think of the men who were my teachers, I realize most of them were slightly mad. The men who could be regarded as good teachers were exceptional. It's tragic to think that such people have the power to bar a young man's way. [...]
Then, incomprehensibly, he locks jews up instead of teachers. "Hmm, we have concentration camps for children so they can be betrayed
at industrial scale. I know, the problem is that we don't have enough
concentration camps. Some adults (not traitors tho) should have to go
too."
"Yeah teachers only slightly mad." The teachers who could be regarded as [good] were nonexistent, but maybe some were just barely acceptable.
The man who would have put teachers into camps wouldn't have been drawn into an unwinnable war. In recompense, the man who would have put teacher in camps was inelectable. Hitler was indeed a good avatar of germany. Teachers seem slightly mad in reference to the average german, who was twisted at least 360 degrees...a derangement level the modern american can only envy.
Ah, american politicians are crazy mad that hitler was dramatically more electable than they are. Trump is similar to hitler, in the sense he is reflexively detestable to only a small degree. In other words, yes trump is exactly like hitler, as far as the traits that matter to american whores politicians go.
We need a single great leader, a charismatic leader to unify us against our enemies, a man of iron will and perfect discipline, capable of rendering justice without pity.
https://twitter.com/BullOfHeaven2/status/1822465029532533225
What you want, however, is a wife, not a prostitute. If you want a leader, gotta stop being a john.
[Our enemies] are primarily yourselves. Rise up, unite, against your own vices. Whoops.
Most mortals don't understand human language. They're parrots, they repeat what they think they're supposed to say, with no understanding of meaning and semantics.
This is important, because it's impossible to keep your word if you yourself don't know what you said you were going to do.
Corollary: it's impossible to avoid hypocrisy if you don't know which words describe your own actions.
Hack: if they have a limited set of promises, they can be painstakingly trained to ritualistically associate the proper words with their associated promise.
I always knew I thought it was cool, but I sat down and thought about it properly and my god but I get excited about being disciplined. And discipline in general. I love it very nearly as much as I love learning.
It's pretty easy to share why: discipline causes bad things to go away. Mercy rewards bad things and helps them proliferate. All hail severity! Woo!
I figure it's due to my nontrivial warrior genes. Where is discipline the greatest, the most unavoidable? In war. In battle. It's easy to imagine that if it was my first priority rather than my second, I might be all: "Yeah, Ragnarok me! Right in the face, bring it!"
That which can be destroyed ought to be! Should have secured your shit, Odin, lol!
(Baldr's mom didn't genuinely pray for security, and neither did Baldr. They got what they prayed for. Loki was very correct: that which cannot get hurt is already not alive. Re-create, do not preserve. Which in turn makes his Prometheus-like imprisonment wildly unjust...except Loki, also, should have secured his shit. Careless cunts.)
{Though, hint: correctly, Loki's wife did the opposite of abandoning him. These old stories are as startlingly coherent as you might have heard, as long as you keep in mind the re-tellers are repeating the words of self-serving liars.}
What's even the point of living to be so old you can't fight? What a waste of air! it's finally okay guys, I figured it out: yes, warrior ought die in battle.
I do try to understand you, all 0 warrior caste readers. I even try to understand the merchant caste...but then I would, wouldn't it? It's not really for them now is it?
Actually I might have nonzero. It's not like warriors write comments. How would I know?
Why do you think I want the glorious death penalty for everything and its dog? Discipline. (Woo!)
It's more than that, though. I love discipline for its own sake. It's just fuckin' cool. What kind of degenerate likes mercy more than severity. Bruh. The line you're over is miles thataway.
Indeed I am perhaps overexcited. I use too much self-control, so much it causes damage, among other things reducing my discipline capacity. The Truth is that which is spontaneous. I seem to have, as of now, discovered a fundamental caste dissonance in virtues. (Learning!!!!)
Should probably love discipline less, but I don't think I will.
Don't tell me the equivalent merchant virtue. I want to put off knowing that as long as possible. Feel like I'll regret looking at it. I'm sure it's unavoidable in the long run anyway.
Once I fully appreciated the predator vs. prey distinction, I started seeing prey talk everywhere.
Prey animals care about two things: having the tasty grass instead of the boring grass, and being in the middle of the herd instead of at the edges. In the middle it's warm and it's almost impossible for a predator to reach.
If you're at the fringes of {{society}}, then the scawwy scawwy pwedatoors might eat yoo. Oooh nooo!
"I can hear it now: "There is no place for violence in our communities." That's the problem. There should be one, single, national community of which everyone is a part."
https://twitter.com/jollyheretic/status/1814061378329874558
"There is no place for [predation] in the herd. That's the problem: everyone needs to be part of the same herd."
The larger the herd, the smaller the fringes as a proportion of the total herd, and the harder it is to be pushed out of the warm middle.
Both creation and Creation are acts of transcendent annihilation.
White Dao is cosmic mascline. Black Dao is cosmic feminine.
How creation and Creation works: the male, using a needle, pierces through the cosmic eggshell, Death, unleashing an infinite torrent of contradictory possibilities. The slightest breach is equivalent to infinite big bangs - an act of unfathomable destruction. A transcendence-transcending fundamental-force bomb, obliterating everything in its path by overwriting it with everything else it wasn't already.
The female then devours everything. -everything- Also an act of unfathomable destruction. Infinities upon infinities pour into her gullet, all identity obliterated by chewing, vanishing into her bottomless, pitiless gullet.
Infinity, minus infinity.
An overproductive tube, capped by a unfillable cup.
Oh, but the male/female seal isn't quite perfect. She leaks a bit of the male. Just a touch. Smaller than the smallest thing she can possibly perceive. Of all the infinities the male unleashed, one tiny finity, the one thing that doesn't contradict that which already Exists, manage to survive this ultimate catastrophic hell.
This infinity minus infinity is some particular scalar.
Through two acts of utter obliteration...Life. Unnoticeable to them, yet still it Exists.
Everything that Exists, even the Dao, even Death, came into being by destroying literally every other thing it isn't. Creation is incomprehensible unfathomable transcendent Destruction, including, very importantly, destroying unfathomability and incomprehensibility. Those two would contaminate everything and bring it back to nothingness, should they be allowed to touch anything in Existence. Transcendent antimatter: they're antilogic. (Get it? In retrospect it couldn't be more obvious.)
You may have noticed some resonant reflections of the cosmic male and female in the material mortal female and male.
Put very mortally, to create something is to contradict everything that it isn't. To Realize a possibility is to Unrealize every other possible possibility. If something is blue, that means it's not red, orange, yellow, green, purple, infrared or ultraviolet. If it is one shape, it is not every other possible shape.
To be in healthy harmony with Creation, is necessary to simultaneously embrace Destruction. From Death, Life, from Life, Death, thus, to be truly alive is to worship death. To retain Life, one must retain Death.
Embracing transition to nonexistence doesn't mean embracing nonexistence itself. Embracing Destruction doesn't mean embracing the [destroyed] state of being.
In a sense, Existence happens between the moment White Dao unleashes everything, and Black Dao destroys it again. There's a finite distance. The process takes finite time. To properly worship Destruction is also to worship Creation, for something must first be created before it can be destroyed. Worshipping as such positions you comfortably in the middle zone; the margin which directly touches neither destruction zone.
Death is not annihilation. Death is not nothingness. Death is not Khaos. The whole point is that Death separates Life from these things!
The sin, then, is cosmic Preservation. It has a season: winter. Restoration, spring, is also contrary to the natural order. To preserve is to interrupt destruction, which will in turn clog the creator, having the effect of interrupting Existence, the diametric opposite of the intended result. It is not a coincidence that all preservatives are poisons. Formaldehyde kills whatever is put into it. To restore is to attempt to reverse the flow, even worse. To make the male into female, the female into male. The only true form of restoration is RPG!necromancy, raising the dead. Nothing can be restored and it should never be attempted.
To separate Life from the things which are truly the opposite of Life, Death and Life must be in direct contact. Intimate contact, even.
You might even call it the Dao.
It is fall that symbolizes Death, not winter. Autumn is the season of
destruction; in winter proper, everything that can be destroyed already
has been.
In a startling real sense, the guys who said the universe is destroyed and created anew every instant were correct. When the present transitions to the past, it is perfectly annihilated. When the future transitions to the present, it is transitioning from possibility to actuality: it is being created.
The fire is hot, so it creates future flames. Fire creates fire.
If you want to see something in the present again in the future, what you should not do is try to preserve it. What you should not do is try to restore a version of it that was already destroyed. What you should do is create it anew.
The door is solid, which means it is creating future doors. Fire makes fire obviously, and doors make doors nonobviously, in such a way that doors are much better at creating future doors than fire is at creating future fire. Mortals do love their upside-down perceptions.
There's a great deal wrong with trying to preserve the mountain, because, profoundly, you can make a mountain that recreates itself. Although nothing is as adept at re-creating itself in the immediate future as Logic itself.
Eternal life is not achieved through reincarnation. Eternal life is not achieved through immortality. Immortals are indestructible, and that is why they are doomed. Each and every single one.
P.S. Peacocking looks gay because it is. This is true even in peacocks, which in turn is why the feather eyes are held up by ragged spindly scawny skeletons. Cheapskates. The corruption is obvious, as it must be. The female is supposed to be the beautiful, attracting the boundless providence of the male, but spring is the season of sin, when up is down and black is white. Thus Earthly mating patterns have a habit of backsliding into perversion, the physical converging on the spiritual.
(Seahorses are so gay the male is a passive homebody who gets pregnant, lmao.)
Despite everything, humans genuinely are the most spiritual of animals, which is how mortals have been able to escape the trap most other animals succumb to. Mortals sometimes resonate with a global spiritual truth well enough to override the local one. To a degree.
P.P.S. Armour gets you killed on the battlefield almost all of the time. Because preservation is a sin.