Corpo Vidya > Indie Vidya

 Everyone said corpo vidya was cold and stale. Blamed the execs and gaming journalism and so on. Very plausible story.

 Then you get to the indie scene. It's worse. 99% of the time, to two sig figs.

 A special case of the fact kings don't matter. 

 Even in the golden era of gaming, whether you think it was the 90s or the 00s, the games basically sucked. They are all seriously broken. It's merely that sometimes they had good ideas poking around the edges that were worth your time anyway. 

 All indies had to do was take ye olde games and remove the suck.
 All expensive games had to do is make the game play more realistically. (As opposed to look more realistic...)

 Metal Marines would be a fantastic game if it were balanced, had 100% fewer unskippable cutscenes every time you attack, and perhaps had multiplayer. A game like that could be chess 2.0, no problem.
 They made anti-air missiles have cost and reliability about what they would have in real life...

 Instead of pasting dent decals on the wall, let the bullets damage the wall. When I let off a grenade next to sintered gypsum, it should not react by painting itself sooty (memory permitting).
 Speaking of walls, invisible walls. Either have an openly arcade-style game with discrete levels, mario-style, or terrain you can see must be terrain you can touch. Speaking of games that are basically bad, breath of the wild is an atrocious zelda game...but, at least, if you can see terrain, you can platform up that terrain. I expect its popularity is entirely down to the fact it's not claustrophobic. 

 But, uh, no, sorry. Turns out the greedy fatcat cash-addict version of VG was the best possible version. 

 See also: music. Surely, now that musicians can escape the clutches of horrible CIA-backed music execs...

 General dysgenesis means general game decay. Peak gaming was made by peak IQs...such as they were.

Speak of Your Friend's Flaws, But Only Privately

 Do acknowledge the flaws of your friend. Pull him aside first. Don't broadcast it.

 A meme said pythagoras said these things, but I can't find any credible evidence to back that up. 

 Perhaps he would have noticed if he had eaten more meat. 

 It seems revenge, as usual, is sour. Everyone of good character already knows this, meaning all the criticism you receive in public is born of bad character. I.e. don't post on twitter. If you genuinely screw up, those of good character won't tell you. Won't, unless they already have a private communication channel to you. 

 P.S. Don't nag. Once the flaw is openly acknowledged, he knows. There's no need to repeat it. 

 In particular, if you bring up the topic of your flaws to a friend and he denies it, he's a coward at best. Not a cooperator. 

 If you bring up someone's flaws in private, and don't nag, then he beefs with you about it, he's broken the friendship. Exited the valid domain of this logic. Probably a narcissist. 

 Generally, shouldn't criticize your enemies in public either. Machiavelli's dictum. Either kill them outright or leave it alone. Good fences transmute bad neighbours into good neighbours - i.e. use the block function.
 This is why I prefer my blog &c to be unpopular. I want to hold up critical examples, but I don't want it to count as being broadcast. Ideally, the target should never find out, nor should anyone who associates with them, rendering it socially meaningless. Leaving only the logic. 

 I have been very poor at living up to either of these ideals. I have foolishly mimicked those of bad character. Should have thought of this earlier, whoops. Not exactly rocket science.

 Naturally, nobody has ever pointed this flaw out to me. 

 P.P.S. What Pythagoras did say: it was known 2500 years ago that posting on twitter is retarded. https://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-it-is-better-to-be-silent-than-to-dispute-with-the-ignorant-pythagoras-106-0-055.jpg

Knowledge is a Living Creature

 Specifically a symbiote, which can't live independent of a host.

 This is the core reason the dead, zombies, NPCs, cannot learn. Being themselves unalive, they cannot support the symbiote. It can attach to the brainlike growth the NPCs display, but it shrivels and falls off. 

 Some of you have seen this experimentally at the metaphorical water cooler. You can, with effort, inform an NPC of a new idea. The next day, they've forgotten all about it. The symbiote could not survive the hostile zombie environment. 

 Devout Satanists used to function by receiving broadcasts from Satan. Deliberately opening up a back door so they could be sockpuppeted. Acting with no understanding of their actions. Again, you have perhaps seen this experimentally. When you ask a Satanist why they've done something, they have to confabulate. They had no idea, because it wasn't their idea.
 Now they have to function independently...Biden is the most obvious result. Random, undirected behaviour, if they don't become all but catatonic. The less self-aware Satanists think they're still receiving broadcasts, their behaviour is to copy a past broadcast that vaguely seems similar to their current situation...which is still strategically random, but highly predictable if you witnessed the results of previous directives.

Earliest Consciousness

 https://twitter.com/eigenrobot/status/1819845066631860239

 When I first woke up, I was walking with my parents in the front garden near the well. It had a protruding metal pipe about my height. I was 3.

 I stopped and wondered what I was doing, what I was trying to do, where I was, why I was there... No idea what was going on, and aware I kinda should know, what with already being standing and stuff.
 Then I saw a bumblebee fly out of the pipe (this is in fact impossible, the pipe has a mesh on it). The bumblebee startled me and I was afraid of being stung. I thought I shouldn't bat at it and provoke it into stinging me, but was unable to stop myself, flailing both arms at it. Possibly because I was still disoriented. The excitement was too much and I blacked out again.

 During this period I experienced the memory of consciousness very much like a film. A strip of colour and sound moving from left to right, followed by a hard vertical line to pure black. Later there would be another hard vertical line, changing to consciousness again. There were numerous discrete periods of being conscious. I noticed I could remember facts from the black periods, despite the lack of video or audio. See also: when the consciousness comes online, the kid doesn't forget how to talk.

 I noticed I was still conventionally awake during the black periods during a particularly short one. I knowingly provoked a small dog and it snapped at me. Fear made me black out, and while I was unconscious I ran home and relayed the events to my mother, among other things, before waking up again.

 The replies saying they were always self-aware still aren't conscious and are dunning-krugering the question. They are genuine empirical p-zombies. Likely also the ones talking about philosophical relations between themselves and the world, though maybe those are merely midwits. 

 I expect the loose-connection thing I experienced is probably common, but probably lost to memory. Well beyond the understanding of most toddlers. Lacking a schema, it isn't indexed. Normies prefer to repress any events they don't understand.

 

 Prussian pedophile school is explicitly designed to permanently shut down the consciousness. Once shut down the memories of being conscious are no longer accessible.
 Given the nature of dire apes, you could even say that amputating the consciousness is a mercy. However, the net result is a guaranteed rerun after their bodily death.

Power and Class

 Imagine a little cardboard car, run by a rubber band spinning a plastic fan. Fun. Goes whee.

 Now hook up a full v8 diesel engine to this chassis. This is what it's like to give power to a peasant. Consider the health consequences. Even a single vote is more power than a peasant can handle. Perhaps the peasant can carry the vote-engine, but can't run it at so much as half power, not without ripping his own wheels off.

 Now imagine a fucking tank. It's got a top-mounted machine gun, a coaxial .30 cal, a couple tons of ammo in shells alone...and you're trying to run it with some twisted rubber bands.
 An aristocrat standing up and making himself a cup of coffee has more consequences than a peasant can even imagine. Doing anything at all implies a level of power incomprehensible to the lower classes. Stripped of power, an aristocrat bodily dies, in one way or another.

Information Isn't Scarce

 They say when you argue with a boomer, biological or spiritual boomer, you're arguing with the TV. The TV can't hear you and wouldn't care if it could. This saying is true. Certainly, being the lead-poisoning generation doesn't help. 

 However, they could have known. The information was available.

 In the early internet, even reddit was a high-density information source. Where did they get the information? They can't have received it from the internet, it's not a self-licking ice cream cone. All the information was available offline. For a bit there it was merely easier to find.

 Boomers chose not to pursue it. They embraced ignorance with malice aforethought. This is why they continue to embrace ignorance - it's intentional. Being deluded is the strategy. 

 Like bro what do you think a university is for. The point of a university library is to have all the good books in one place. If you get lost you ask a professor - before obama every professor in the world replied thoughtfully to 100% of their emails.
 Problem being that the profs, also, were boomers. They would reply to their email, yes, except they would tell you the same thing the TV told you, but with better grammar and fancier words. 

 Of course, millennials aren't any better. There's been a slight pop in IQ since the end of leaded gasoline, but it was clearly not enough. Zoomers are dumb like boomers are, but the profile of genetic damage differs from the profile of chemical damage. 

 Information isn't scarce. The supply of attention vastly exceeds the supply of information. Net worth is a genetic trait. Intellectual wealth has its own subcap. There isn't some hidden secret in a hard-to-find book somewhere that changes everything. If you get an opportunity to learn something, you will see opportunities to learn over and over and over again - the bottleneck is your own processing ability, not supply.

 E.g. children get educated automatically, because it's essentially impossible for them to avoid the information.

Numbers are Too Easy

 I prefer words to numbers because it takes tremendous discipline to be rigorous with words. Being rigorous with numbers is largely about avoiding a few gotchas. Too easy. 

 Democratic Man has to deal with numbers precisely because they are easy. It's hard to hide your fraud, so their impulses toward fraud are somewhat controlled. The wordy disciplines can be drained of all external control, and, lacking internal control...

 What makes a science hard is the hardness of the scientist's will. The field is not directly relevant. Maths and physics are forgiving to soft scientists. Less temptation.

The Scholar Caste Does Not Require your Cooperation

Without the scholar caste, without theory, it is impossible to distinguish improvement and decay. 

Without the scholar caste, without theory, it is impossible to distinguish tradition and sclerosis. 

 

 Without the scholar caste, you can't have tradition, only neophobia. You must change and adapt. Without the scholar caste, you cannot change. You can only have flailing and Darwinian selection. 

 

 It is necessary to know what you're trying to do and why you're trying to do it. The merchant caste will forget instantly. The warrior caste is all, "Don't know, don't care." (Correctly.) It must be the scholar caste. 

 Here's my bizarre, crazy idea: respect the merchant caste in trade. Respect the warrior caste in war. Respect the ideas of the scholar caste.
 Nonsense and balderdash...I know...

 You don't have to, of course. Scholars don't need your cooperation. We can just scam you. "We vibe now bro, you can't fool-" "Yeah like I've never falsified a vibe before. Lol." 

 Either way works for us.

Greatest Vaccine Supporters Think Vaccines Don't Work

 If I use a mumps vaccine, the point is that if I'm exposed to a mumps patient, I don't develop mumps pathology. Whether you have taken the vaccine is irrelevant to me. It's a great deal of none of my business. If you feel like you're dying, I can go sit in the shade and drink iced tea or whatever. I don't feel it. It doesn't affect me.

 Vaccine supporters don't think this way. They believe it's critically important that you take the vaccine. They clearly do not believe that vaccines stop illness.

 You should go ahead and believe them. 

 That or they don't care if it stops illness or not. Indeed, to Caino masochiens, a working vaccine is a vice and a crime. They want to force you to self-mutilate and inject foreign garbage, making yourself sick, then get sick again from natural exposure. Normally, they're not even wrong: their victims want this as well. Tyranny is in high demand.

 Basically if you're afraid of needles it's because the vaccines aren't working, your body notices, and tries to tell you. Go ahead and believe it. 

 If the vaccine cannot successfully produce vaccination, it's not a vaccine and I'm certainly not going to use it. Black government vaccines are assumed to be non-vaccines until proven otherwise, because I didn't guzzle lead as a child.

Recent History of Circumcision

 Americans were one of the first christian sects to adopt widespread circumcision. Christians had previously seen it as a christkiller habit. Like, the whole point of the new testament is to replace the old covenant. I.e. circumcision is stupid, let's stop doing it.

 Apparently this was primarily due to a surge in syphilis. The idea was that men would find sex less appealing, thus engage in less of it. Likewise the sheath was considered dirty, meaning a comforting environment for pests.

 Trying to lessen sex by making it less appealing is like trying to lessen hunger by feeding less. Circumcision makes sex less satisfying, so cut men become hornier in search of sating their desires. Since the call is coming from inside the house, the sex is never satisfying, so they also cheat more, under the hypothesis that maybe their wives' pussies are somehow deficient.
 It can't be because they're cut, since everyone is doing it... Even if it is their own deficiency, why not seek a heroic snatch which can satisfy them despite that?
 They also masturbate frequently. For similar reasons, plus the fact the male hand can apply far more pressure than even the most seasoned kegel-obsessed whore. 

 Likewise, the dryness damages the skin of the head, causing microfractures, encouraging disease spread. The scar tissue, having been catastrophically penetrated once, is easier than normal tissue to penetrate again. The fact it feels less sensitive means it is less sensitive...meaning pathogens are detected later and responded to less aggressively. The sebum secreted by the sheath contains antibiotic peptides. The nothing secreted by an amputation does not.

 Masochism.

 To use the lindy phrase, the purpose of a system is what it does. Americans circumcized their little boys because they like committing treacherous sexual violence on babies, ideally catastrophically traumatic, and ideally on their own spawn. 

 It is not a coincidence that decades of exposure to pedophile school culminated in a syphilis epidemic. It is likewise not a coincidence that a schooled population was easily convinced to practice mutilation.

Mortals are Immigrants

 You can think of the Earth plane as the ninth circle of hell.. It is the place where the worst traitors go when they die. Specifically, when someone commits the worst treachery imaginable: betraying themselves. More specifically, when someone betrays themselves so badly they in fact die, their remains end up here. 

 That means mortals originate somewhere else. They're immigrants.

 Mortals are bad at resisting invasion because they are themselves invaders. It would be to condemn their own nature. Vigorously resisting invasion per se would result in self-annihilation, as it would require vigorously resisting the self. The dynamic selects for those who cannot resist invasion. 

 P.S. Come to think, this perhaps explains why the han come off as flat buglife. They have renounced invasion, and this extraordinary act of self-abnegation has profound consequences.

 It is not impossible to be a native of the Cthonic underworld. That is, to be born of Death. I would look first among the monkeys. Perhaps honeybees. Other cheerful and beautiful animals, the result of harmony between intrinsic nature and external environment. There's always plants, although many of them are vicious, contrary to your weird animal biases.

 All the apes are clearly the condemned. 

 Previously, I have agreed with scientists when they claimed Caino hypocriens is merely another animal. A natural phenomenon. I was mistaken. Caino masochiens seems unnatural because it is.

IQ and Mortal Brain Spirits

 IQ is 80% heritable but environment is a product of overall IQ so IQ is 100% heritable, QED.
https://twitter.com/_drawthentic_/status/1794817945459474497

 IQ is 100% genetic but only 80% heritable because the cells that realize they're going to be your brain shuffle the genes a second time. 100% genetic, but only 80% of neural genetic activity is due to your parents. (Or something that is equivalent, after weighting by impact on IQ.) Part of the reason for the blood-brain barrier is that, given full access to the brain, your immune system recognizes it as foreign tissue and tries to kill it. Have to keep the large, smart immune cells away from the brain.

 Basically the 20% exists because the brain attracts a spirit to live in it, exactly like a religious altar. The 20% allows the spirit to mould the brain after itself, which is why evolution selected for brains that are in fact religious altars. 

 Though, down here in the underworld, what usually happens: the brain wads up a clump of whatever spiritual gunk it happens to be sitting on, and packs it into the rough shape of a soul.

School is a Shared Cultural Touchstone, Considered Harmful

 I've mentioned before that having no roads is better than having roads provided by a black government. https://alrenous.blogspot.com/2024/08/women-and-violence-funding-via.html 

 Using school, we can see that sharing experiences is hardly unimportant. However, note that the nature of those experiences is more important. 

 School is the shared experience of being a slave. A bureaucrat-slave. Or slave-bureaucrat. 

 It would unquestionably be better to be wholly atomized. The status quo is far worse than nothing. 

 Tests marked down from 100. Monovariate, linear class position. Nannyism worse than what toddlers face - they can go in the diaper, they don't need permission. Let me say that again: even toddlers don't need permission slips for the washroom, but school students victims do. Obsession with the classes of special ed, normal, or gifted. No useful activity whatsoever. Money de-facto banned. All adults exiled, except the prison warden. On and on.

 The shared touchstone of the [land of the free] is the worst possible tyranny, administered by the worst possible characters.

 

 We find again that a country is its religion, just as ye olde cities such as athens were defined religiously. Separation of church and state makes exactly as much sense as separation of cash and economy. (E.g. star trek.) To have a real country, it is necessary for the residents to physically convene, physically share rituals, and do so under the eves of an institution which has the explicit purpose of upholding the society in question. Ideally, non-empty rituals that have meaningful results when carried out properly. Start with making chairs if you can't think of anything better. Have national furniture. I would at least break it down into the three castes, to avoid farce. 

 And, especially, not limited to only children. Especially not via kidnapping.

Yes, You Do Have to Make Your Own Social Media

 Don't like how twitter is run? Yes, you do really have to make your own social Envy medium.

 Can't afford to make your own? Then you don't deserve one. Get richer or suck it up, pauper.
 (Have you tried having a king? Ask him to make one for you?)

Fiction Day

 AN: There's so many ""whacky"" characters in modern fiction that I would like you to imagine one of those genre-aware deconstructions, except the straight man was, like, actually straight. It would be worth having someone act like a genuine real-life normal person, perhaps even most characters acting normal, just to be different.

 "I think Amelia might be into you," Josh smirked. 

 Leo took a candy from the gobsmacked dish. Neutronium brain had struck again.

 "She's always coming over when I'm hanging out with you," Josh continued. 

 Leo rubbed his nose. "Josh. She's coming over to talk to you."

 "Come on man, we're not like that! I've known Ammy forever. The mysterious Leo on the other hand..."

 The stammering. The blushing. The playing with her hair...none of it had any impact.

 Leo changed the subject...

 ...when the day was wrapping up, Leo pulled Amelia aside. "Hey class rep, I need to talk to you for a sec." 

 Glasses were flashed. Glare clouds on the horizon threatened the inclement weather Leo was used to getting. "What is it, Leo?" 

 "It won't take long."

 Leo caught Josh waggling his eyebrows. Leo returned a dry smile, and pulled Amelia around the corner.

 "Class rep." The situation drew another sigh from the boy. "Josh has no idea you like him."

 Amelia squeaked and fidgeted. "I-I have nno idea what you mean."

 "I sort of wonder if I'm breaking confidence saying this...but on the other hand, I don't care. Point is, if you don't ratchet it up, he's not going to notice." 

 Amelia didn't reply. Her eyes darted around, as if the prison communist concrete bloc drab school architecture would furnish her with an escape. 

 "He thinks you might like me." 

 Amelia jolted in shock. "What?!?"

 "Yeah. Maybe try two notches more blatant. Hopefully...hopefully...that will help. I'll let you know! Good luck!" Leo offered a cheery wave and left Amelia with her thoughts.

 It really hadn't taken long.

AN2: Doesn't count as properly [original]. "What if the characters did the obvious thing," is too obvious. Hasn't been done yet though. A change is like a rest they say. That's wrong, but you know what they mean. 

 Authors prefer to drag out their self-assessed-as-tiny stock of ideas using [[misunderstandings]] a goldfish wouldn't fall for. Though I sometimes worry the nihonjin really are that deficient in social skills...

 There's a couple misunderstanding comedies that are good. Authors dead in both cases. Arrogant master variation 4 got decently long before the author metaphorically sought canadian healthcare. Though the grammar is authentically awful as per ESL norms. Like a real xianxia translation. That aside, exceptions embarrassing the rule through epic levels of contrast.

Combat with Fate

 When you fight fate, you're fundamentally fighting your own past decisions. To win is logically impossible. You would have to make yourself have been something other than what you were. 

 Impermanence is a tremendous gift. You try to make your mistakes permanent, but that's forbidden. You try to take out an infinite loan from Karma, and Karma tells you to fuck off.
 Although you can't undo your previous decisions, you can presently make the decision to pay off the debts incurred. Forgiveness isn't real, but repentance certainly is. 

 I can imagine an unpayable karmic debt, but I've never witnessed one.

Anti-Cult Principle 3: Don't Separate the Family

 Or rather, everyone is in a cult. Every social group is a cult. See also: all child-raising is brainwashing. A good cult improves your relationship with your parents instead of damaging it. 

 However, numeracy: sometimes, [no contact] is an improvement. Some relationships are so bad that deleting them is an improvement. 

 Indeed I've never witnessed a parent-child relationship that couldn't be improved to zero. My congenital optimism says this is a coincidence or nonrepresentative sample. Logic says that a parent that would willingly send their own blood off to be tortured by pedophiles for 13 years should also be bad when the spawn is at home. 

 

 Bit of a problem, that. Mortals are evil. Consequently, normally parents are a cost, rather than a benefit. Makes it hard to tell a bad cult from a good cult, as they both try to improve the relationship with the parents to zero.

On Snobs

 Snobbery is good. Internetizens act like snobs without having taste. A truly american worst-of-both-worlds culture. 

 Internetizens notice that snobs look down on pieces of art. Usually, citizens have no taste, not even bad taste. They can't see any similarity in the criticisms snobs issue at bad art; there's no distinction that they can sense. Secondarily, negative events stick out in the mind more; even if they see a snob liking something, they will quickly forget in favour of all the things they don't like.
 Being worshippers of the Nameless one, Communists, they naturally condemn snobbery and immediately engage in what they believe to be snobbery. "Some are more equal than others - for example, I'm a snob." That is, they hate everything.  They look down their nose at every piece of art they're not specifically paid or otherwise coerced into pretending to like. 

 I keenly lament the lack of snobs. There is a nonzero amount of worthwhile art in the world, but you certainly can't talk about it anywhere on the internet. Nor in, for example, real life, where snobbery runs the risk of exciting the inquisition. "Citizen, it looks like you've have a little too much to think!" 

 "Ironically" exposing your beloved works to vandals and philistines is not healthy. "I like this, like the retard I am, lol." The only art grudgingly tolerated by Communists is egalitarian art. Stuff so popular the Communist is afraid of the stampede they would risk by airing their practiced disdain. 

 E.g. everyone who says they look down on anime lets their kids watch cartoons. E.g. capeshit is indeed shit...but apparently everyone who uses the word [capeshit] has never seen the rest of what hollywood produces, lol. Good for them, but the lack of perspective is completely disqualifying...or would be if it wasn't performative, which is worse.

 There are video games I like-like. There is no chance I will tell you which ones. I can be extremely gullible at times, but even I'm never that bad.

 Civilization has afforded us more expensive art, it is true. Potentially more profound. Instead, it also immediately furnishes us with iconoclasts, costing the arts more than they gain. In a civilization, "art" is a weapon, designed to traitorously maim their fellow citizens. 

 Due to my congenital deformity, optimism, I like to imagine that at some point in the misty past, snobs really did defend the arts from the corrosive effects of the civilization that spawned them. Would have to be pre-shakespeare at the latest, however...and there isn't any genuinely credible evidence... 

 Still, we could imagine real snobs. It's not physically impossible or anything. Only takes a single miracle, not a double-miracle or anything.

The picture makes it seem profound

 https://twitter.com/_drawthentic_/status/1809713333832151215

 

 Elections are fake but Democracy is real anyway.
 Official Democracy is a trailing indicator, it trails Democratic Man. Whether there are elections are not, whether the lower classes are "respected" or not, it doesn't matter. 

 The market will satisfy aggregate demand.
 Everyone gets a vote, even if voting is illegal. Nobody gets an equal vote, regardless of what the law says.

 Primarily, rome falls because there's demand for decline, and no demand for creation or growth.

Style Guide: Envy Media

 They exist solely for Envy, malicious gossip, and bullying. That's it. If you see anyone not engaged in these things, they're doing it wrong. If they don't quit, they will be banned.

 They are ""social"" solely because you can't inspire Envy by yourself.  Treachery media. You can't betray someone without first earning their trust, and neither of those without a [someone else]. 

 The best part is the most enviable aren't on the public broadcast networks. They have better things to do than desperate striving for [[[dopamine]]]. Middle class only.

Honourable Poison

 In a vacuum, killing by ambush or poison is dishonourable. Doesn't give them a chance to fight back, which is irresponsible. They're not aware of your beef with them before they're already dead.

 Killing a dastard with poison is not dishonourable. It's poisoning him before he has a chance to poison you. Personnel is policy: defending the honourable and killing the dishonourable promotes honour and must be honourable. It upholds honour, regardless of the means used to carry it out.

 "But isn't this abusable? Whenever you want to poison someone, you accuse him of dastardy. A blank cheque."

 No, that's Sophistry. Namelessness. An honourable man isn't going to abuse it, now is he? He won't lie. A dishonourable man isn't going to follow the rules in the first place. He was never restrained. 

 What's the point of criticizing a rule for failing to control antinomians? The only rule that matters to them is the fact physically separating their head from their neck prevents them from carrying on with their cowardly treachery.

 Indeed we could see the rule as a honeypot. Employ posthumous trials: if the corpse is found to be honourable, then you suckered a treasonous dastard into revealing himself. If you make a habit of only offering traitors the rope, they will become a minority, and you can afford a few bugs and glitches now and then. Each tit for tat reduces their population by a higher percentage than yours loses.

 Come to think, you don't want to scare them straight. They might accidentally succeed at staying on the narrow, and end up breeding. You want to gull them, you need to con them. Make the rules as tempting as possible, so you don't miss any.

 In an environment of obligate defectors, tit for tat looks like a degenerate. It defects on everyone...just like everyone else. There is nothing dishonourable about betraying a traitor. 

 You don't behave honourably toward the honourable man because of duty or anything resembling morality. You do it because losing access to his honourable behaviour results in regret. You want him to display his virtues in your direction, rather than his violence. 

 Logic is just math. Functions, f(x), have domain of applicability. In school, it's something simple, like x > 3. In life, somewhat less simple. The strictures of honour do not apply to regions of outlaws. That's not part of the domain. They only offer violence, preserving their virtues is impossible because they don't have any, and behaving as you would to an honourable man is nothing but retardation. 

 P.S. All civilizations are outlaw civilizations. Inherently criminal.

The Worst Thing about Envy: It's Boring

 If you do something truly original nobody will Envy you, they'll call you weird. At best they start Envying if you get a critical mass of conformists...

 The actions of the Envy-obsessed are always stale.
 Have to play the same games everyone is always playing. 

 I would go as far as to say all conformism is a form of Envy. Terrified of not being the winner on one of the leaderboards. 

 It wouldn't be too bad if they at least competed to do the thing well. Instead they consistently compete to appear to do the thing well, sacrificing as much of the substance of the thing as they can get away with. Inherently degenerating.

Woke More Correct: Billions Must Die

 The woke more correct than the mainstream: humanity is a blight on the planet. 

 The woke more correct than the mainstream: Heaven brings forth innumerable things to nurture man.
Man has nothing good with which to recompense Heaven.

 If you're suppressing invasive species, guess which species genus wins gold, no contest, for most invasive.

 

 It really seems like they don't think through what they say, now doesn't it? You sweet summer child: they're saying it precisely because they did think it through. However, you're not supposed to autistically notice the consequences. Not out loud, at any rate. Supposed to understand it's wink-wink nudge-nudge after a certain point.

Democracy is Pedophilia

 Fascists send their children off to be tortured by pedophiles in concentration camps. They also put some adults, members of minorities, into concentration camps.

 Communists send their children off to be tortured by pedophiles in concentration camps. They also put quite a few adults in concentration camps, often favouring members of the majority.

 Leftists are pedophiles. No exceptions.
 Democracies send their children off to be tortured by pedophiles in concentration camps.
 Insofar as there are differences, there's no reason to care. They aren't different enough to matter to anyone who isn't also a pedophile.

 Some alleged dissidents mention that the ruling class are exceptionally evil. "That hate you, they want you dead, and they think it's funny." Dissidents won't properly call a spade a spade. No matter how vile a word you use for leftists, it is never too vile. It is impossible to condemn them more than they deserve.
 Alleged rightists deserve a leftist ruling class because they turn away from the truth. They think calling every Fascist a pedophile is going too far. This thought is exactly what a pedophile wants and needs. 

 How much aid and comfort do they have to give to the enemy before you recognize they can't possibly be enemies? 

 Democracy is perhaps best described as the children seizing control of the whorehouse.

 They want to grow up to be like mommy, just like every child desires. Mommy doesn't want them to, but what does she know? Clearly, getting raped worked out for her. If she didn't solicit rape, both she and the kids would be out on the street.
 The kiddies want to practice getting diddled, the way mommy gets diddled. Monkey see, monkey do. "Equal opportunity (for dick)." How else are they supposed to learn to be a proper adult, like mommy? There are more children than whores, so the whores get outvoted. Having seized control of the whorehouse, the children get what they want.

 Democracy is pedophilia.

ADHD, Schools, Girls

 Schools specifically identify boys who don't have ADHD, diagnose them, and drug them. The drugs are stimulants, making them jittery and distractable, like a girl.

 If a girl decides to focus on something, the teacher distracts her, and she forgets what she was thinking about.

 If a boy decides to focus on something, the teacher tries to distract him, fails, and becomes furious. "How dare you not focus on my shiny thing."

 

 It's normal for women to be so deeply into [out of sight, out of mind] that she will forget she's married if she doesn't have a shiny rock on her finger reminding her every time it catches the light. In premodern, less atomized times, she would be around other women, who would jealously remind her of her husband if she started making eyes at another man. Alternatively, she would remember because her husband's child is right there, clutching her skirt. Only tippy-top upper class wives can be relied on to remember they're married without some sort of physical memento. They may cheat anyway, but it's not because they genuinely forgot they're not supposed to. Why would a woman need to remember her husband? You're supposed to be mate-guarding her anyway.

 In a classroom, everyone is supposed to sit still, so the teacher is the only moving object, attracting the eye. This works decently well on girls, the gender of ADHD. Boys, however, see a mouse or baby rabbit, trying to pull them off the trail of the big game. Movement, yes, important, no. Unless they're hyped up on stimulants and can't focus. 

 Even if the teacher gets the boy onto the academic subject at hand, they will lose the boy at subject change. He will still be on the last topic, "distracted," rather than changing to the new one. 

 "Hey look a squirrel."
 "I'm not after a squirrel."
 *TEACHREEEEEEE*

 Getting distracted easily is a great thing for dealing with small children, who have small attention spans, or rather the largest possible spans that can fit in their tiny heads. Even if you try to keep them on topic, they can't handle it, so you're wasting your time. It is not, however, how a hunt works. You can't stop a hunt and pick it up later. "Okay deer, take five. I'll get back to trying to kill you a few. Maybe tomorrow, if necessary." 

 

 Your boys seem soulless on ritalin because that's exactly what ritalin is supposed to do: delete their masculinity. (Normal parents will of course double the dose on hearing this, and ask if he needs some puberty blockers ordered.) 

 When the teacher is not actively distracting the class, it's supposed to be quiet, so the only thing to focus on is the pointless busywork in front of them. It's not shiny, but everything else is even less shiny. By process of elimination, it gets done. Monkey see, monkey do, in a different sense. Even if girls weren't submissive, this would be a reasonable plan.

 My class had a computer with the sound on, which someone was seemingly always playing on, because evil is weak and incompetent. Even without the computer, there are usually many brightly coloured objects which, if the teacher isn't moving, draw the eye.
 Sadly there's a backup: becoming furious and bullying the students victims is the point of being a teacher. Preventing the students victims from doing their work, providing an excuse for sadism, can only be considered a perk of the job. If you want to remove disruption from the classroom concentration camp, the teacher and their admin other prison guards have to be the first to go. Top priority: defund educators. 

 

 When a boy is fidgeting, it's precisely because he isn't distracted. He's focusing on his goals. He's caught sight of his prey. Yet he's keeping in mind that someone has imprisoned him and prevents him from pursuing. He fidgets because he starts to make a motion toward his values, then remembers someone will become violent if he completes the motion. If he was genuinely distracted, he wouldn't be fidgeting, he would already be out of his seat and gone, having forgotten all about the alleged adults and their alleged rules. 

 So yes, ADHD is very real. However, the boys diagnosed with it in school are precisely the ones who have the least of it. The condition isn't fake, but the diagnosis is. 

 P.S. The reason the students victims are so often ""disruptive"" is that they're copying the teacher they see every day. Monkey see, monkey do, in the usual sense. See also: bullying. This dynamic is supposed to, and does, teach the lesson that having the government's favour puts you above the rules. This lesson is a rare non-misinformation lesson.

Immigration Seen From the Prey Herd

 Grass is infinite, endless. If you manage to browse this field down to the roots, you simply go to the next field. No need to remember the old field either - it will grow back long before you find it a second time. Go wherever the wind takes you...

 The only thing a prey herd needs is more members, so the predator pack can't pick out you in particular.

 Why not invite literally everyone in the world to live in your country? Have the biggest herd possible! There's always more grass? It's not like you can run out? 

 If some of the invitees are predators...well, so what? You were going to get preyed on anyway, stochastically. The whole point of making the herd bigger is to get preyed on less, if some of them are predators, that merely means you need to invite more and make your herd even bigger.

 I hear some are complaining that they can't have any tasty lush grass anymore...lol, like you losers ever got the lush grass. The alpha was already hogging it all, lmao. Why are you complaining about being shoved off the lush grass when the sheep is a different colour, and not when it's the same colour, rofl? If the alpha lets some of his new immigrant friends share in his lush grass...well, try not being such a runt, lmao. 

 If inviting every individual doesn't work, invite all the countries to be one big happy country! The only true division is predator vs. prey! The larger the herd, the bigger the warm middle, and the smaller the relative cold fringe!

 Borders? Borders can't keep scawwy scawwy pwedaturs out. The border is only, uh, manned, by other sheep, what can they do if a wolf comes? Bleat? They're too far away to hear even extra-loud bleating. It's plain mean to make them go so far away from the cuddly middle. The border merely stops the herd from being all it can be!

 Perfectly sogical. 

 Why, even if you're a predator, would you object to increasing the local quantity of prey? "Too much meat, less meat for me plz." Being anti-immigration is plain dumb?

Reminder: blue voting women are wet for trump

 When a woman calls trump 'rapey' they mean they just had a rape fantasy starring him.

 You might be incited to pity their out-of-control imaginations, but don't. They could log off twitter and stop hearing about trump. Instead, if their frenemies don't bring up their own rape fantasies about trump within two minutes, they'll hard-change the subject. Listen for the transmission going [clunk].

 They are pissed about being incited to commit thoughtcrimes. However women don't respond to emotions (or anything else) by doing anything. They simply go on doing what they think the nearest man is telling them to do, but with a bitchy expression. 

 Tell: they don't use the word [rapist]. No actual events (to their sorrow) it's just vibes. If trump went all gr*pe of the sabine women on americans, they would a) screech even harder b) vote for him. 

 The fact they respond to just about anything with screeches explains their very high rate of involuntary solitude and involuntary infertility.

Afterlife Heaven is Superlatively Feminine

 Especially the version seen in books, e.g. narnia, lewis. It's a place where what you did doesn't matter, because daddy will fix everything. Only intent matters: if you intended to fruitlessly oppose daddy's plan, you aren't part of the plan. That is, only submission matters. 

 

 Many girls and women genuinely believe daddy or hubby is an omnipotent deity, infinitely rich. It's cognitively simpler - anything bigger or richer is transmuted to the biggest, richest thing. If you've seen a toddler, you may notice their muscles are often either 0% or 100%. E.g. they can't gently throw a ball, they either drop it on the floor, or throw it with all their might. If they flip a switch, they either can't flip it at all, or they use full power, and the switch has to be built robustly to prevent them from breaking it. All-powerful hubby is the cognitive equivalent. Bonus: this phantasm feels good. Epic hubby.

 One consequence is that these girls believe that if daddy doesn't give them anything, it's due to spite. There's no way he can't afford it, it can only be because he doesn't love them. Since here in Reality resources are finite, the girls often conclude they're very difficult to love. It's best for such a dad to be very distant, so his daughters have as few chances as possible to ask him for things, so he can always say yes (thus making her mad at mommy instead - "you don't love me like daddy does"). 

 Another consequence: it doesn't matter if she's a total airhead fuckup. It doesn't matter if she wants to be a policeman or a soldier. It's not like she can waste all of daddy's money, and he could make an invincible weightless bullet-shield if he loved her enough. Anything she can ask for is something he can provide. Women in the workforce are aware they're wastes of time and space, they just don't think it matters, because daddy always has more. If she spends all day on facebook or making tiktoks at the cafe, who cares? It's not like she was doing anything useful anyway. 

 In dating, these women think every man can be a trillionaire if he wants. If he's not a trillionaire, he must not care about women or must not be a man. "Daddy had infinite money, you're male like daddy is, you have infinite money too." They don't see themselves as asking for very much, they're just asking for what every man is capable of.
 Yes, it is easier to make marriages arranged than to try to disabuse pumpkin princess of these notions. Can't argue her out of something she wasn't argued into. She will think daddy doesn't love her if she notices her arranged marriage doesn't have infinite money, but them's the breaks. If you want to avoid that, have to infanticide the girl-childs.

 When these girls get their first inkling of the finite limitations displayed by Reality, they get very upset. They turn to Nameless doctrines, which promise a world beyond where all failures are erased. Where it doesn't matter how much of an irresponsible spendthrift you were in life, as long you said sorry or had [[faith]]. 

 For a masculine man, hell is being told nothing he does matters. Naturally, this is due to the same biological history, as seen from the other side. If you tell him everything he does will be erased, he's not relieved, he thinks he can't contribute and will be thrown out of the tribe or village for being useless. "I don't want anything from you except submission and praise." Deus ex machina is masculinity's worst nightmare. "You...you want me to be a woman?" Some other dude is going to steal your wife and all your daughters. 

 A world where everything is perfect is a world with at most one man. A world where nobody can screw up, either because it's impossible or all bad desires have been erased, is a world where men are irrelevant. Yet another reason Fascism, as with all utopia, is inherently feminine. 

 A world with nothing wrong is a world where there's no reason to fight. Where fighting is impossible. For a contrary worldview, see valholl, called valhalla by cutesy valkyries. 

 As with everything women think they want, even women wouldn't like afterlife!heaven. Having to share one man among all of them? Almost never get to fuck? She never gets to see her man beat up another man? Yes, this is hell for women too, should the little darlings ever be manage to think it through.

Women Prevent Women From Asking for Things

 I keep forgetting to mention a major sticking point. 

 If a woman asks for something, and he gives it to her, she will see it as feminine submission. Giving her what she wants gives her the ick, if she has asked for it.
 Consequently it is critical to the health of the relationship that she never asks for what she wants. At best she can hint wrongly at what she desires. It has to be phrased such that giving her what she needs counts as refutation of her argument. At worst, she explicitly asks for things she doesn't want...

 I can't think of any reason a woman should ever ask for anything. She should tell her man what she's feeling, and he can work out the rest for himself. Or not work it out, if that's what he can manage.

 The best part is women expect men to be omniscient and already know this. It's so obvious to her, after all, and he's so smart and knowledgeable, why wouldn't it be even more obvious to him? 

 Ultimately it's men's fault that women are this way. Women have been bred for this over tens of thousands of years of arranged marriages. That is: we find, over and over, that human men and women deserve to be inflicted with each other.

Heresy Prosecution is Inherently Satanic

 The problem occurs when Reality commits heresy. The law or custom becomes rebellion against Existence. The truth has to be covered up, events highlighting Reality's heresy have to be avoided or prevented, society will twist itself into pretzels trying to avoid the dogmatic singularity, and ultimately it will tie its own neck shut and strangle to death. 

 Banning heresy makes you weak. If geocentrism is dogma, the society must ban telescopes. The society is too soft to withstand telescopes.
 By banning telescopes, it draws attention to telescopes, and soon it has to ban anything which can be used to make telescopes. It has to ban lenses and tubes. It has to ban glass, or at least lens grinders. Can't have microscopes, lest they be used to reverse-engineer a telescope. Need a great firewall to block any traffic to foreign societies with astronomer's clubs. Gravitometric measurements are next, when they become sensitive enough to measure Earth's acceleration towards Sol. 

 Nothing True has ever been declared important dogma, and intuitively it never will be. Perhaps it is this simple: the truth can be defended with natural law, and doesn't require human law. 

 If someone argues the earth is flat, you can take them boating. "See how other boats appear mast-first on the horizon? By the way, when did you say we're going over the edge? Okay, see you again tomorrow." Delusions can't survive good-faith investigation, which is exactly why heresy laws have to ban good-faith investigation.

All anti-slavery comes from genesis, doesn't it

 The entire conduit of slavery-condemnation flows through genesis, doesn't it. "Slavery was bad when it happened to the jews [it didn't happen] therefore slavery is always bad." 

 This isn't sufficient, but it is necessary.
 There's lots of things that are exactly as bad or worse than slavery, but they're absolutely obsessed with this one  single issue. 

 "I'm so rich I can afford to free my slaves. Envy me!"

 "Nuh uh! I'm so rich I can afford to free your slaves! Whether you want me to or not!"

 Clearly this strategy can work on a huge variety of things. "I'm so rich I can afford to pamper every cow I intend to slaughter for meat!" Why is it done on slavery in particular?

 Because it's in the bibble. All the christians needs to compete on how bookish they are. "I'm the nerdiest." "Nuh uh, I'm way nerdier." 

 That and the egalitarianism angle. With the three together, it is sufficient. Even rainbow trannies can't make an egalitarianism argument for farm animals. Slaves, tho...they have the correct number of arms, and almost seem like they can talk...

 "Oh also let's all enslave each other. Democracy is Tyranny, and that's awesome." Democracy is the worst form of government. Finally. At last, relief: that's what we like about it.   

 

 

 "I'm so rich I can afford to help my enemies! They're not really enemies - they can't hurt me!"
 ...which would be fine, if it wasn't a lie.

Immigration as Afterlife Feature

 You can't grow food in the underworld. Growth is a feature of life. In the underworld, life is wildly unnatural. All food in the underworld is found on the recently dead, if they manage to cling to something still alive when tip and  fall into hel.

 Nations are attempting to accrue metaphorical sustenance by gathering immigrants and looting them. However, the other nations are also in the underworld, and the immigrants are also already dead, already starved. It's an irrational reflex driven by mindlessly repeating a spiritual resonance. To get sustenance, you need to do better than symbolic immigrants, it has to be genuine living tourists.  

 The only reliable source of food is the pockets of underworld travellers. The living need to carry preserved rations to survive a trip through the sterile land of the dead. However, the living fight back, and the dead are weak...

 The dead can try to resist the spiritual pressure, but it's unsustainable. The dead accrue a karmic debt simply by existing, they can't afford even more debt. To change their situation, the dead first have to be alive, so they can act...

Openly Satanic Gangs Crushed After Satan Executed

 January 2022: https://alrenous.blogspot.com/2022/01/news-from-heavens-satan-condemned-to.html

 "The Salvadoran gang crackdown, referred to in El Salvador as the régimen de excepción (Spanish for state of exception)^[3] and the guerra contra las pandillas (Spanish for war against gangs),^[4] began in March 2022 in response to a crime spike between 25 and 27 March 2022"

 Do you think this is a coincidence?

 "The real turning point in his war on organized crime came after the gangs went on the offensive in 2022."
 https://www.theamericantribune.news/p/el-salvadors-bukele-miracle-shows

 The gangs started losing to Bukele because they worshipped Satan openly instead of using a Namelessness variant.
 The gangs finished losing to Bukele when they lost their patron. Satan would have told them not to provoke this response...but he was no longer capable of doing so. 

 I should have no way of knowing about unEarthly events. Yet, when I try it...

 And the queen of england died.
 And the vaccine mandates got axed.
 And it's become possible to openly support deportation.
 And Musk went after twitter. "Musk began purchasing Twitter stock on January 31, 2022." 10 days...
 And...

 At what point do you admit there's nothing unscientific about the supernatural? 

 

 

 Meanwhile that big jesus statue they have in brazil is acting like a satanic battery, shielding them from the consequences of satan's execution.

 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1829625536777277754

 Yo. Shit works.

On Faustian Nihilism

 A big reason voters cling to social status is to distract themselves from the knowledge that they have nothing else to even try to cling to. 

 Essentially since the greeks got Sophist'd in the face, things have been done out of sheer inertia. Doing them for the sake of having something to do. Over the centuries, eventually the doers realized it was silly and pointless, and not only that, in recent centuries, when everyone stopped believing in the spiritual, it has been verbally (and correctly) been proven to be pointless. E.g, refer to the existentialists. 

 Why do you eat? Because it hurts if you don't eat? Is that it? If you had a suicide button in your house, what justification do you have for not pressing it? Generally, the true answer is: no reason. Voters don't like having no reason, however. "La la la la I can't hear you." They seek distraction. Diversions. 

 Uphold god? Nobody really believes in god. Nobody strategically appeals to god to solve problems. Also, what does that even mean? Uphold the race? Uphold the country? Okay, for what purpose, though? What are these tools for? Eating to uphold something that lets you continue to eat? 

 Civilization has been pain. Nobody lives a life that's more pleasant than unpleasant. What's all this effort for? To uphold the very thing inflicting all this pain?

 First hint: if you embrace the pointlessness, and likewise embrace the dislike of pointlessness, a point reveals itself: investigating why you don't like it. 

 Imagine that as a political platform. "Life is pointless and I don't like it. If elected, I will make the purpose of this country to discover why pointlessness is unpleasant." Most voters wouldn't even be able to understand the plank, let alone decide to support it...

 There are numerous ending-less video games that make it particularly clear. Mine resources, to build tools, to mine more resources. They can't imagine doing anything except for the sake of doing things. It's all buildup, no payoff. 

 From this, we can work backwards and see that even the games with endings are the same. It's a series of obstacles. Work, not play. What is the ending? Is there a single VG ending that can even approach being as rewarding as entertaining as running down a hill? So many games punish you by...making you play the game more.
 They could make games that were inherently rewarding. If they knew anything that was inherently rewarding. Instead, they make them punishing, and dangle a fake reward. A trick, a manipulation. Only by accident are games actually fun.

 From these games, we can work backward to real life. If you still need to. 

 

 Going to work your whole life, maximizing output, to support your kids, so they can grow up to work their whole lives? Ref: inferential horizon and clogged mental RAM being confused for the whole world. Get rich, so you can leave an inheritance, so your kids can get rich, so they can leave an inheritance to the grandkids, so that....

 Have to support your nation so it can win wars, so it can be a great nation, and win wars, so it can...what? 

 The zero-decoration, soulless-looking buildings you see reflect the state of the empty, soulless husk of the culture that built them.

Of course the real reason is Caino masochiens. Yes, the point of civilization is to be painful, to inflict pain upon the citizens. The pointlessness is part of the point - yes, because it's uncomfortable. Voters seeking divertissement only to prevent their Darwinian instincts from whining so hard the voter has to address a root cause. Everything working as intended. 

 It has to be this way. The solution is stupidly straightforward. Discover something  you personally find intrinsically rewarding, and try maximizing that. Try shit, see what happens, either it works or you learn what to try next. Completely normal prototyping behaviour. Every engineer knows how to do this, as in if they don't know, they don't count as an engineer. While the conventional payoffs are all not payoffs for various reasons, there are lots and lots of payoffs that haven't been tried.

 Interesting architecture is inherently rewarding. Worth the expense purely for its own sake. New technology allows totally novel actions. For example, hang gliding. Novel actions imply novel feelings. Novel sensations, adding to the great library of consciousness. The problem is the opposite of difficult. 

 P.S. A [meaningful] action is merely one that's more profitable. When the romans build a bridge that stays up for 2000 years, it seems very meaningful....because 2000 years of amortizing the cost is a lot. Per-profit cost of that bridge is effectively zero. Free bridge, too cheap to meter. Something extremely profitable but short-lived is equally [meaningful].
 The bridge lets you reach a hill that you can run down. So to speak. The bridge frees up money for making better buildings.

 P.P.S. The urge to be part of something greater merely means being profitable to the tribe, so the local bigman likes you. Being explicit: you can do the falsification thing by identifying a bigman and seeing if contributing to his pack in ways he appreciates feels [meaningful].

 Caino masochiens acts as if the problem is difficult, acting out a cosmic play where the conceit is that they're cursed by the heavens. They let the black government define the purpose of life as upholding the black government. (So it can do...what?) If you accept their ludicrous premises, such as the idea that money and fame are worth amassing, you'll get dragged into their intentionally self-defeating delusion.

All wealth is envy, isn't it

 The classical forms of success are pretty women, political power, and ostentatious wealth such as gold. 

 Intuitively, these are all in fact the same form of wealth. Or rather, they are illth, since they're bad for you.

 It seems strange. Having a beautiful wife is far from inherently unhealthy. If you have gold or silver you can buy joy and discipline and glory.

 Political power is inherently criminal. That part makes sense. It's a game where everyone competes to see who can betray whom. What if treachery and dishonour are bad tho...

 Then you realize it's mortals corrupting the glorious wealth.  The point is inspire envy and resentment.

 The wealth isn't the pretty women or plenty of women. The point is that someone else can't have the women. Hence the focus on harems, which inherently deprive some man of all female contact.
 The wealth isn't the coinage or the decorations or the big statues and buildings, it's the fact that you don't have them.
 The wealth isn't the political power. The point is that you want the political power but can't have it. The political power can be used to take away the things you do already have.

 Envy. Resentment. Illth. Sin. 

 

 Like everyone else, I have a perception blocker for envy. When I see it, even in someone else, it's normally transmuted to something else, to ensure I'm never aware of my own. On top of this, for my past service, I enjoy the privilege of feeling envy weakly if at all. Combined, it is easy for me to forget it exists. 

 While I feel dumb for taking this long to notice the envy thread, especially as I've specifically pondered the issue before, I can't see any way I could have reasonably found it. Even after finding it, I'm not sure how exactly it was done.

 Regardless...

 

 The wealth is incidental. Which is why these games reliably destroy the polities which engage in them. The point isn't to have the toy, which means the absolute level of toys doesn't matter. The point is to ensure your brother wants the toy, so that it bothers him when you take it away.

 

 The point isn't to have the stock to retire. The point is to have stocks that are doing better than yours. 

 It's all so tiresome. My fault for expecting better, of course. 

 

 Having been locked out of competition for money or sex or political office, you're tempted to take your ball and go home. This resentful impulse is nevertheless an opportunity to realize illth was never good for you in the first place. It's not something worth resenting or envying.
 Moderns do no such thing. They compete for likes and follows on fucking twitter. "I produced mindless logorrhea, and someone clicked a gay little heart icon more on mine! ENVY ME!" The competition is that much more vicious because the stakes are so low...

 The newer forms of illth are the same thing as the old with one additional layer of sophistication. Vows of poverty are supposed to inspire envy due to being so rich you don't need to value coinage. Signalling evolves to counter-signalling. Vows of chastity are supposed to signal being so rich that even as a total incel you would inspire envy. Etc. Displays of crass materialism in rap and hip hop are all like, "Lol you admit to being so poor you need money lmao." Being contemptible, rather than resentible, is what makes it crass. Stalin was, on paper, poorer than dirt. He got away with it due to having the political power to ad-hoc loot whatever he damn well pleased. That's what you get for having such a crass materialist form of accounting that can't figure in Stalinesque assets...but of course, accounting can't be anything else. Nobody with political power will let it become legible like that.
 The fact it's illth instead of wealth would become too obvious.

Empathy is Manual

 Mortals excuse themselves by saying that when empathy is automatically triggered, they feel empathy.

 Being properly empathetic requires transcending humanity. You must habitually stop, then intentionally ask yourself: what will this look like not from my perspective, but from the outside? It demands training and discipline, meaning Democratic Man believes displaying empathy is actively dishonouring God. For preference, they want it to be illegal. 

 For example, journalist headlines regularly read stuff like, "Is it worth it?" They will not answer this question. Instead, during the course of what it pleases them to call their research, they will answer the question to their own satisfaction, then forget that their readers have not seen their [research] from their first-person perspective. I believe it's answered, therefore, everyone believes it is answered, see? Makes perfect sense. Everyone is identical, after all.  

 This is why scientific papers are supposed to have abstracts. The goal is to answer a question. Summarize the question, summarize the answer found, and why it was found to be that way.

 I found empathy is useful for predicting how someone else is going to behave. (Question implicitly summarized.) If I know how things appear from their perspective, and I know how they think and what they value, I can safely predict they will pursue the highest EV action they are aware of, with respect to those values. (Falsification criterion precisely implied, in turn implying how to answer the question.) I found it was not useful for getting paid, because I refuse to enable masochism, and supporting non-masochism goals will not be rewarded.

 P.S. Women in particular confuse sympathy with empathy, deliberately avoiding any knowledge of what words mean to ensure the confusion continues. Viewing a situation with someone else in it makes them vividly imagine how she herself would feel in that situation. She speaks and behave as if the other person is feeling what she now imagining she would feel. In part this is due to cognitive overload - all that emotion in their own mind consumes neurons, leaving none left to model another mind. However, if you are the other person and mention you're not feeling what they imagine they would feel, they will, typically violently, try to force you to behave as if you're feeling what she imagines she would feel. This is especially amusing when it's another woman who is revealing by example that the "empathic" woman is imagining incorrectly.

Global Warming Orgs Avoid Lowering Temperature

 The government-funded NGOs will never do anything to risk lowering global temperature. Solving the alleged problem would cause a problem related to their ongoing funding. It's not like the government would mind giving them infinite money, but that level of blatant corruption is too embarrassing for everyone involved. 

 They oppose nuclear power precisely because it would lower carbon footprints.

 The Paris agreement had no chance of passing at any point. Purely performative.

 They are upset carbon per capita has gone down in the west, but luckily china is making up for it so they can go on blaming them. 

 Etc etc.

Cult Leaders More Correct

 A cult leader claims everyone is full of shit except for himself.

 Non-cult members claim only cult leaders are full of shit.

 The cult leader is right more often. Everyone, including the cult leader, is full of shit. 

 

 Cults are vaccines. Sophisticated Satanic vaccines.

 Although heroically rare, it is not physically impossible for someone to be born into a humanoid form, then not lie literally every time they open their mouth. When this person tells the truth, claiming everyone is full of shit except for himself, they sound like a cult leader. Preemptively countered.

 Perhaps I shall call them truth-traitor vaccines. Betraying the truth by lying such that its reputation is ruined.

 

 Of course, separately, even should someone claim this truth, only exceptionally deranged individuals join cults. Even when it is true, even if it were believable, it wouldn't be useful to say it. After all, the fact lightside society is 100% full of shit is the point. Non-cult members are getting a diet of 100% sewage, which is exactly what they want. What's the problem? Everything is working as intended? Joining a truth-cult is wildly counter-productive. Only masochists who are too stupid to understand their pain will go down would join a truth-cult.

 Notably, the scientific revolution was based on, roughly speaking, the above fact about cult leaders. Ad verecundiam is a fallacy. It really is necessary to individually evaluate every claim. Just because every other cult leader was inefficiently full of shit, it doesn't mean this new cult leader is full of shit. Note for Democratic Man: it is not necessary for every individual to individually evaluate every claim, it is only necessary for one member of the pack to evaluate the claims. 

 More precisely, it is necessary for society, or rather the pope which defines the society, or one of his deputies, to individually evaluate every claim the pope intends to reject or accept. Disregarding a claim is always valid, provided disregard is strictly separated from rejection.

Combat Epistemology

 “(T)wo propagandas, far from canceling each other out because they are contradictory, have a cumulative effect. A boxer, groggy from a left hook, does not return to normal when hit by a right hook; he becomes groggier.” (p. 181) 

 A combat epistemologist does not become groggy from a left hook. A combat epistemologist deliberately wades into a boxing match, ideally provoking both fighters to form a three-way, and punches his way out healthier than when he started. Despite hearing nothing but lies, he walks away with the truth. 

 This is not only feasible, it's not especially difficult, below some threshold of reliability. 

 Only a few edge cases demand especial skill. On the plus side, mastering the edge cases produces a true warfare logician. Logic, wielded properly, is a weapon of mass destruction. Provided anyone is alive enough to listen to logical argument, or healthy enough to confer authority upon truthspeakers.
 The philosopher-king can conquer your country. He can begin preparations whenever he wants. The only thing stopping him is the fact you don't have anything worth the effort. Only an idiot would want to own your country (check: look what they do with it after the conquest...morons...).

Zombies Diagnostically

 The key feature of fake-alive mortals is they cannot see anything new. They can only dream of things they experienced when they were alive. 

 They suffer Plato's anamnesis, meaning anything they can't un-forget is something that's invisible to them.

 If what they need is something they have not previously eaten, then they will starve. If the solution is not to a problem they have already solved, then they have no choice but to tolerate the problem. 

 Sometimes it appears as if they're fooled by appearances, but if you radically change the appearance, they will continue to see the same phantasm in their mind. To them the substance is ontologically inaccessible. At best, they can swap the old coat of paint on an old idea with a different old coat of paint, to make something superficially novel.

 They are wholly cut off from external reality. You may recognize the resonance with narcissism. They can't see anything that isn't an image projected from inside themselves. They are blind. They are deaf. They cannot smell or touch or taste. Anything which doesn't already dwell inside them functionally doesn't exist to them, except that it can kill them. 

 When I meet a zombie I instantly intuit the things they cannot see. What sights do their cataracts block? I already know. Necromantic skills.
 If you can't perform necromancy and need to test more manually, I'm not sure how you would feasibly do it. Perhaps serendipity: be aware that if someone seems resistant to an idea, it might be because they're already dead and cannot read it. If they cannot acknowledge that the idea is new, if their mind keeps snapping back to the nearest pre-existing thought, then you've found a zombie. Stop trying, it is impossible for them to hear speech. 

 Another necromantic skill: catalogue the zombie's finite list of brain states, and induce it to pick the one most personally convenient to you. It cannot think the truth, and consequently it can't not be deceived. Cooperation is  impossible, so choose defection. That said, zombies stink, even the ideal brain-state is worse than the zombie not being present at all. Don't build a herd of zombies, induce the zombies to leave you alone.

 Conveniently, all black government agents are zombies. Seems to be karmically guaranteed. They always have blind spots. Rather, whole blind fields, across which you can safely cavort. 

 Corollary: being unable to think anything new, they can't change their behaviour without a vampire or necromancer.  "And stuff that he doesn’t like about me is also never gonna change, like leaving coffee cups all over the house."

 How hard is it to pick up a coffee cup when you're done with it? Maybe take it with you? Even a dog could learn to do this. For zombies, however, the [learning] part is insurmountable. A necromancer can force a rearrangement of the dreams - you've picked up other stuff, pick up this stuff too - but the necromancer will regularly have to use a whip to accomplish it. 

 

 These features add up to making the zombie seem noninteractive, unless you count shutting them down, lol. You can opening up the back panel and fiddle with the wiring, and just like a nonalive game NPC, they will start up again with no self-awareness of the change. Unless you deliberately wire that in, I suppose.

 Conversely, non-zombies take a penalty on IQ tests. The correct answer to a raven's matrix is, "This is stupid and nobody cares." Noticing this answer takes time, and IQ tests are timed. Forgetting the real answer and trying to work out what the question is trying to ask takes time. Only zombies can mindlessly follow orders, meaning, properly speaking, the tests have to be normed differently depending on whether you're testing a zombie or non-zombie. IQ tests are created by Nameless worshippers, meaning they assume everyone is identical. Except for IQ, because Nameless worshippers can't into consistency. Most mortals are zombies and consequently IQ test-makers assume everyone is a zombie.

I Miss Saging From 4chan

 I've only used 4chan enough to know what it's like. (Conclusion: don't.)

 I do miss saging. Lots of threads only deserve a shitpost, but they get bumped if you shitpost in them. Saging should be a universal feature.

The Accent of Self-Hatred

 I've mentioned before that leftists and less-leftists have a barely distinguishable accent. You don't even need to be able to understand what they're saying to know how they vote. Subtle, but not subliminal.

 There's also a status-anxiety and/or self-hatred accent. Less subtle. I've heard folk speaking without this accent just long enough to know it's not impossible. When nothing they do matters, all their social bonds are temporary, and they have nowhere to be, they can finally relax for what might as well be the first and last time ever. It can also happen with altered consciousness. When someone is so sleepy they forget to hate themselves, or when blitzed out of their mind in just the right way.

 In particular, everyone recording themselves has an extremely thick self-hatred accent. Likewise, you can't post on twitter without the accent, it would seem. It's thick enough to show up in text.

 Naturally, monkey see, monkey do. Viewers adopt the accent as in-group, which in turn triggers the self-hatred fixed actions patterns if they somehow weren't already running.

If Global Warming Was an X-risk, Leftists Would Love It

 They're just lying, entry #9807234390679-8567.

 Leftists clearly hate global warming because it's good. The medieval warm period was a period of extraordinary wealth. Warmer = better. E.g. a big part of the reason Canada is so poor compared to America is being cold.  

 Liberals don't think global warming is an extinction risk. If they thought it was an extinction risk, they would be trying to turbocharge it, the same way they turbocharge every existential risk to civilization. 

 Come to think this logic also applies to AI. Liberals think the technology is good. They think it's opposite of terminator, which is why they're trying to terminate it. 
 Though perhaps having Fundamentalism'd AI so badly, they'll like it again. No risk of it going antiDemocratic.

Bottom Line on Class and Race

 The peasants are revolting. The nature of peasants is to be revolting. 

 Angle 1: peasants point as the lesser races so as to excuse their own behaviour. "They're worse, so we must be angels."

 Y'all send your kids off to pedophiles to be tortured. Morality isn't real, but if it were, you would both be so far beyond the moral event horizon we would need a telescope to confirm you're even on the map. Here, at the foundation of reality, lewontin was right: the differences between the distributions don't matter.

 You torture your kids. You torture anyone who can't violently stop you. Your sons torture flies and frogs. Your daughters torture each other. The nature of peasantry is incomprehensibly vile.

 Angle 2: the [[uncivilized]] races have unsustainable methods of torture. Some of them die and can no longer suffer. The [[civilized]] races ensure the victim lives as long as possible. The [[civilized]] races spare no expense, even holding back on torture, to maximize the number of victims. 

 I keep thinking that it surely can't be as bad as it looks. This [surely] has never been correct. It's always exactly as bad as it looks.

All Equalities are Tautologies

 There are some moments of truly shocking intellectual incompetence. I have a hunch I shouldn't be shocked, but nevertheless. They're moments like the following.

 Every true equation takes the form A=A.  E.g, let's imagine B=C, an allegedly meaningful statement. But, if it is true, we can do the substitution: C=>B, therefore B=B. The fact it's true is what makes it a tautology. All true statements without exception are some variant of the statement that 0=0.

 The only way for a statement to avoid being a tautology is to be false. It's a wholly useless distinction, a wholly useless idea, and a wholly useless word. Furthermore, the issue is not complicated. Furthermore, it doesn't turn on some tricky distinction or a recursive feedback. If you just check whether your favourite statement is isomorphic to a tauatology, you find that it is. 

 How did this ever become a famous issue in intellectual circles? Do they all have bus-tunnel-sized holes in their brains?
 But, if they do, how did they ever produce the slightest sliver of anything worth reading?

Bottom Line on Last Psychiatrist

 Change is defended against because the status quo is fulfilling. Parents adore sending their kids off to be tortured by pedophiles. 

 If you offer them a worse alternative that doesn't get them killed, they take it immediately. Tinder: "I get sex without even the simulacrum of a relationship? Sign me up! The more soulless the better!" If you find someone avoiding this dissolution, it's due to inertia. They'll get there eventually. Facebook: "I can meet my pabulum and ritual repetition quota without travel time and without seeing my friends faces? Neato!" You'll find that right less-left-wing groups are not primarily banned for heresy, they're banned for trying to pervert the social app so much it lets them socialize.

 "I can vote for a incestuous pedophile who has gone senile?!? Hot diggity!" More worse more better.

 The status quo is the status quo because demand is stable, not because it's the status quo. When change satisfies demand more deeply, the change is adopted swiftly, not defended against. 

 When the Pope in Harvard wants to change the messaging, it changes instantly. No fuss no muss. 

 Conservatives. Great joke, right? Hilarious.
 Anyway, conservativeslol didn't oppose gay marriage because it was bad for marriage, they got high on their own supply and opposed it precisely because they thought it wouldn't. When it was rammed through anyway, they found out it made things worse, so the opposition evaporated.

 At the end of the day, children grow up to be the kind of parent who sends their kids to be tortured by pedophiles. They deserved it. The first two acts of minority report are a documentary.

Why I Feel Stupid Today: I Want Butler Gloves

 I was today years old when I realized I want butler gloves. Rather than cleaning the grime off doorknobs and cupboard handles and keyboards and all that stuff, have gloves, just clean the gloves. Probably in a washing machine.

 Also it took a painfully long time to realize [the gloves of the kind butlers use] are called, get this, butler's gloves. Amazon has them. 

 It's almost like butlers used gloves of that kind for a reason. Even if you have a butler, you can save him time by wearing some of his gloves yourself. Proper doorknobs need polishing daily...or you can just not touch them with your bare hands. 

 Take 'em off for going outside or merely when cleaning is less inconvenient than the gloves.

Lovecraft is Made of People

 Speaking of powerful and destructive entities such as paperclipping AIs, Lovecraftian deities exist in real life, we call them Homo sapiens. 

 The key features of Lovecraftian deities are incomprehensibility and indifference. 

 True malevolence is flattering to the narcissist. It upholds anthropocentrism, or rather, egocentrism. Wow Satan really cares about you in particular. 

 To a narcissist, the opposite of love is not hate, it is indifference. Lovecraftian gods don't kill you because they hate you. They kill you because they don't notice you're even there. One stretches its arm, Earth goes kablooie, it gets a bit of an itch, scratches the itch - incidentally squishing anyone who managed to survive - and goes about its business. To them you are bacteria and less than bacteria. 

 Lovecraftian cultists worship their god, gain powers through profane rituals...and then the god sneezes, and they're BTFO. The sneeze probably wasn't even caused by them in particular. Even the dust irritating a Lovecraftian god's nose is vastly more glorious than you in particular. 

 Even if they did notice you, they wouldn't care. "I'm killing Earthlings? What even is an Earthling, lol? Anyway..."

 

 Sapiens are barely not indifferent to each other, they can't muster the slightest care for beings such as gophers, moles, and worms. 

 People often freak out seeing the more basic things. I don't dig a hole, chop or remove wood, or build something without pouring offerings to the earth and wights.
 https://twitter.com/GraniRau/status/1807075453405900805

 If you dig a hole through a rabbit or gopher den...do you even notice?
 Can the gopher possibly understand what happened, let alone how you did it? 

 When your spade chops the worm in half, the rusty, battered metal driving dirt and grit into the open wounds...do you care? Vegetarians sure don't...even if they know the worm is there. Try telling them, see what happens. Point out the writhing body of the dying annelid. 

 If you chop a tree down, do you count the birds whose nests you smash? Do you look out for the chipmunks who lost their hollows? 

 The questions are, of course, rhetorical. 

 What Lovecraft was largely railing against was himself. As per usual for narcissists, he projects this self outside and pretends it is other. 

 Americans find Lovecraft so evocative because they're incredibly narcissistic. Lovecraft makes them feel seen. They project, just as he did, and see exactly what he saw. 

 The universe isn't indifferent to you. You're indifferent to the universe. This upsets you because it's a major problem. 

 P.S. In a full-blooded Lovecraft tale, the protagonists lose. The cosmos - the indifferent actor in the dynamic -  wins. For the mortal equivalents, this is not quite accurate.

 Certainly earthworms can't call on their extended family to start a blood feud with yours. Nevertheless, this indifference has consequences. Nature starts to feel hostile because you've made her your enemy, and her hostility is far from impotent.

 Apologizing for being a bad neighbour through [offerings] or [sacrifices], ideally more than making up for the caused harm, does in fact work. What if the local crows didn't hate your guts. What if.
 Unlike a human, defecting on animal, refusing to let it mind its own business, doesn't make it like you more. Have to contribute more than you cost them.

 If you do a big consecration ceremony before building or chopping, it will drive off most of the inhabitants, minimizing the harm for which you'll be held liable. 

 P.P.S. "The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents" -H. P. Lovecraft.
 No HPL, you're just a pussy. Not even hard enough to think your own thoughts, lol.

I Did a Dumb When [They Don't Come Back]

 Sometimes stories have a bit where, [folk who head out that way don't come back], and my instinctive response is always, "What if they don't come back because it's better there than here?" E.g. if someone who dies ends up in heaven, why would they return? It could be fine. You don't know.

 No, actually, you do know. I'm being plain stupid. My instinct is insane.

 You have to get very contrived to prevent folk from coming back. Has to be a law that says nobody who leaves again is allowed to return. And nobody just makes a mistake and leave anyway. Or they kill everyone trying to leave, and again nobody makes a mistake. No smuggling. 

 Yeah, if nobody comes back you can go ahead and assume they're dead. If there's a heaven, it doesn't work the way you're told it works. They can't come back because there's nothing there to come back.

 

 In my defence, the stories themselves are usually about a guy who went there anyway and didn't die. Turns out I'm imperfect and don't ward off blandishments 101% of the time. Who knew. 

 Have to come back and check. Audit.

Social Status is Paperclipping

 The grey goo scenario already happened. It was actually green, we call it the oxygen catastrophe. You are not smarter than Nature. Nature thinks slower than you do, it is true, but Nature's brain includes yours. Even if it didn't, it's much, much, much, much, much bigger. 

 Likewise papperclipping AIs are already here. We call them Homo sapiens. 

 Social status is zero sum. Not to mention, net worth is a genetic trait. This means all effort put into social status is a complete waste. Any nondegenerate amount will lead to exactly the same hierarchy. [Zero effort] is only probably degenerate. 

 Paperclipping is in fact better than social status. At the end of the day, you can fasten paper with paperclips. It has more utility than a social status display. If the world isn't only the paperclipper, you can melt the clips down and reforge them into something else, taking advantage of the clipper's mining operations. The clips don't have zero value. 

 A virtue signal has zero value. Negative value, in fact, because it consumed something that could have otherwise been used profitably. 

 I exaggerate slightly. Caino masochiens can sometimes be tricked into competing at doing something useful, and in these cases genuine creation occurs. However, the social status system itself assigns more status to non-useful activity. Production is noise in the system. It is rebellion and perversion of the system's nature. 

 A proper paperclip AI is supposed to be hostile to all other life. Let's check a newspaper, see how that's turning out...

 The idea that long-term human habitation produces deserts is suspiciously plausible. Africa and the middle east. Mortals have already turned everything in the regions into social status. Even the weather... City dwellers in particular find rain nothing but a nuisance, and it, too, gets fed into the furnaces... Southern africa is only not bone dry because the mortals were inefficient and ended up turning their own societies into social status when the environment could no longer support them.

 AI cannot be aligned, reason #60987: a paperclip AI is mortally hostile to all other AIs, and Caino masochiens cannot be aligned.

No Free Lunch Rendered Mythologically

 Aladdin is punished for trying to take something from the cave of wonders on his own behalf.

 Persephone is punished for attempting the delectable fruits of the underworld. Likewise, trying to help yourself to Pluto's treasury will not work out for you.

 There's a bunch of others, all trying to moralize against greed. It all feels terribly profound.

 Even the dragon's hoard, in implying there's always a dragon.

 

 It's not profound.

 It's nothing more than the fact that you have to buy things, you can't get them for free. TANSTAAFL, as rendered by foggy-eyed writers who don't quite get it, and/or Nameless parasites. 

 If greed is trying to buy things without paying for them, I guess greed really is a sin, but capitalism has nothing to do with greed. Pigs can't be greedy, if they can access anything, it means they already paid for it.  

 Theft bad. Theft not wise. Wow, so deep. 

 Monkey's paw. The Wish spell.

 "Hey, uh, shit isn't free, yo."

 You can have the dragon's hoard, if you want, provided you're willing and able to slay a dragon. Have as many dragon's hoards as there are dragons.

 You can have all the treasures of the cave of wonders, provided you're willing to pay it in treasure for the privilege. 

 Want the treasures of the underworld? Neato. As long as you're willing to live in the underworld with them. For some value of [live]. Put another way, you can even take them out of the underworld, provided you're willing to give the underworld your life in exchange, or something of equivalent value. 

 Let's also do Fafnir. More generally, the myth that taking the dragon's hoard will turn you into a dragon.

 Well, uh, kinda, no shit. If you have a dragon's hoard, then aspiring knights will see you as a dragon they need to slay, so they can take your hoard. Whether you're legitimately a dragon or not. Pending specific definition of [dragon]. 

 Fafnir became as asshole, but actually he didn't. Fafner was a jagoff to start with, he didn't [become] anything. There's nothing special about hoards that make you vicious. However, it is true that the vicious will try to claim hoards without paying for them. Which they will regret, plus or minus some masochism. It is likewise true that the vicious will portray anyone with a hoard as a dragon so as to justify slaying them.
 Remember only the vicious need justification at all. Even attempting it is self-condemnation. 

 If I have a hoard, my justification is: "Can you come and take it, bitches!?" Gives me an excuse to increase my body count. IRL knights get roasted by dragons. Losers. Shit status: secured.