Minor on Collectivism

 Collectivism is when an individual claims to be all of a community, and thus benefitting him individually is beneficial to everyone. E.g. if you empty your wallet into his, everyone becomes richer.

 Spade language is important because it makes stupid lies sound stupid, and collectivism is always a stupid lie. 

 If you both really did get richer by paying him, he would be able to pay you for the privilege, out of the profits, and emptying your wallet into his should end up with more money in your wallet. He wouldn't have to appeal to [[collectivism]], he could appeal to your self-interest. This obvious scam is a scam precisely because it doesn't work that way. Indeed moderns have this whole [investment] thing where you do this the non-scam way. Nobody has to justify stocks or bonds based on collectivist reasoning. 

 If it's collectivist and not obviously a scam, that means it's not obvious.
 If it has to be justified using collectivism, it is unjustifiable, and they're confessing.

On Aggression, Stingers

 Honeybees have valuable honey stored in expensive wax. They're kind of laissez faire, live and let live. "Oh you need this flower? Cool bro, I'll be done in a second here." They're not doormats but they don't make a big deal out of small things.

 There's yellowjackets, who look like right assholes and are. They have worthless and hideous paper nests. "Oh? Looking at me funny and/or not looking at me funny? I'll kill your entire bloodline." They'll sting you just because.

 Then there's bumblebees, who are so docile it's hard to understand how they survive in the wild. Many folk doubt bumblebees have stingers at all.

 Yellowjackets really are assholes for no reason.
 It's karma, they're the remains of an asshole immortal; almost certainly was such an asshole he killed himself.

Bears Repeating: The Political Formula is Perverse.

 Divine right of kings? Result: king does the most profane thing he can bring himself to. "If I do this, will you love me anyway? If I do this will you love me anyway?" Psychosexual.
 
 Only a cluster-B can take a position in a black government. The marked self-hatred drives a constant need for affirmation. A power addiction is like any other addiction; the source is a failure to elicit love from mommy. Drugs are poisonous, which leads to tolerance, which leads to overdose.

 The only exception is Exit. If you try to prove you're the genuine article thus put up a berlin wall, everyone leaves before the first course of bricks is laid. Nobody is trapped. Nobody still around to see your touchdown dance.

 If your political formula is consent of the governed, are you really in charge if you merely carry out that which has been consented to?

 How are you supposed to get your fix if you carry out your duty?

 Consequently, democratic representatives concern themselves with doing that which provokes the most dissent. Moldbug's Impact. If you can get away with it, you know you're a real chad. Not some virgin who has to [listen to the people].
 "If I do THIS will you vote for me anyway?"

 How can you get your fix when you can be voted out? Imagine being the dumb kind of junkie that has to pay for her heroin. How gauche. What a rube.

The merchant caste is inherently the loser caste.

 Highly feminized.
 This is one reason to believe the great filter is in the rear view mirror, and it's given h. sapiens a big fat F.
 The warrior and merchant castes are founded on destruction, not creation. The scholar invents the weapons, the warrior uses the weapons, but it's the merchant who creates the weapons, via trading with other losers.

 Not to mention, in circumstances the warrior can become subservient to the woman-merchant. It's unhealthy if the head doesn't lead so this isn't all bad, but unfortunately the jock can beat up the nerd, so mortal soyciety is inherently unstable. The warrior has to consistently choose humility to make it function, and the warrior is not one to understand the long term like that.

 As an example of circumstance, the warrior can't into debt  (long term) and shouldn't be allowed, but why would the merchant forgo their greatest debt slave? Especially since the merchant has no leverage over the scholar (he scams the scammers) except via leading warriors around by the nose. When the scholar, the brain, bans debt for the warrior for his own good, the skid tells the jock the nerd won't do his homework anymore...

 There's other things too. In peak societies, the warrior:peasant ratio is 1:100. If you have fixed assets to defend, like kernel fields, mines, factories, no warrior is so elite he can defeat 100 cannon fodder. Never mind the cannon fodder is also lead by a genuine warrior. In modern times you're lucky to get a mere 2000 fodder per warrior.
 The merchants supply the cannon fodder. They tell their ""friends"" to enlist. They're also the ones that administrate a draft. If they tell their ""friends"" not to enlist, the warrior is on his own.

 Cannon fodder is slow and vulnerable, so the warrior can still defeat them, provided he doesn't have a kernel field they can fetch their tubs of lard up against. That is: soyvilization is inherently weak. What if he gets all his bird feed by stealing it from the soyvilization? Why build factories when you can steal from the factories build by dysgenics dumb enough to breed cannon fodder?
 However, as we can see historically, the warrior has a raucously perverse need to avoid slaying the golden goose. The one time the warrior appreciates the long term, he holds back when the soyciety he pillages starts to flag.

 Turns out that's strategic defeat. The soyvilization only has to win once. They wipe out the warrior. The warrior has to win every time.

 Soyvilization is worse than barbarism. Unfortunately barbarians are too dumb, they can't bring themselves to lance the infection.

 Anyway the merchant caste is the loser caste.
 Merchants, as in the example above, are all about obeying norms. Who chooses the norms? Not the merchants, lol.
 Merchants are inherently dishonest. They compete to have the most friends, meaning they're the lowest-common-denominator caste. To say [cope merchant] is redundant, because every merchant is a cope merchant. They cannot possibly stand against the verbal destruction of the scholar or indeed the physical destruction of the warrior. Like women, they are cowards. Like women, they're all about [getting along]. Like women, the only aggression they can wield is passive-aggression. Merchants (fascists, democrats, egalitarians, christians) are only male in the most brute technical senses. Merchants do not have good breeding. Merchants are the caste of, [if it saves even one life], by which they mean even one customer.
 This wouldn't be such a serious problem if merchants didn't deal in intra-tribal competition. The traitor, parasite caste. They should be all about positive-sum trades, but instead focus near exclusively on scamming their alleged [[friends]]. All about eating without working. In a 100-man band, there's only so many real friends you can make before you've caught them all. There's only so many spears you can knap in a day, but you're still awake. There's only so many spears you can trade before everyone has one, and then what do you suppose they turn to?
 This still wouldn't be a problem if either warriors or scholars could into positive-sum hierarchies. Instead, mortals gonna mort. It would be weird if they didn't choose decline, fall, and death.  

 

 

 

 Democracies suffer immensely from the blood memory of already having supplied everyone with spears.
They call it [overproduction], and you've never heard this from a journalist, have you? It's mainstream political science. The idea - which is still current to a fever pitch - is that the factories will make so much stuff the peasants will be satisfied and put themselves out of a job. What if they only have to work 20 hours a week to get everything they want? Or only 10?

 Well...then nothing? This isn't a real problem. But your leaders...excuse me, [[[leaders]]]...including d.trump, absolutely think it is. Because, like everyone else and particularly women, they are still hallucinating a savannah. They still see only 100-150 people. They can't see iphones, they see stone spears. Made by hand.
 And if everyone has a spear, if they don't scam someone, they're [gasp] gonna have to hunt for their own food. It wouldn't have gone well then, and consider what happens now to fat, old trump when he thinks he might have to hunt for his own food. Which he can't not think. Mortals are dead, and like all dead things, cannot learn. Everyone will laugh at their hunting efforts, at best. All the skilled hunters are also the best warriors...

Some fighting things that aren't said out loud.

 The common sense is that every attack creates some opening. Done correctly it's an opening your opponent cannot exploit, but it goes meta: it's impossible to always pick the unexploitable opening. To attack is to open a hole in your defence.

 You can defend perfectly, but doing so gives up any opportunity to attack. You have to stand too far away to initiate an attack they don't have time to respond to, precisely because you have to give yourself time to respond to all their attacks. You have to bunch up too much to riposte in a dangerous way. As you're standing back, they can carefully plan an attack that has no riposte.

 You win a fight when the opponent makes a mistake. If neither make a mistake, it is a draw.

 Not merely in martial arts. In a gunfight, you can put yourself in a pillbox without any windows, so you can't get shot, in exchange for being unable to shoot back.

 This generalizes to life. You can only win by giving Reality the opportunity to make you lose. If you can't lose, you don't prove anything. You can't gain anything at all. 

Chaos Theory Too Orderly

 Chaos theory doesn't really work. It only allows chaos among basically-identical states.

 If a small effect can snowball, it was going to snowball anyway.

 Mortals have many cognitive deficiencies. If a mortal sees one snowflake cause an avalanche, she thinks removing that snowflake will prevent the avalanche. "Ha ha! I caught it!"

 Then the sound of her voice causes the avalanche. If she manages to stay quiet, a snowflake the next day causes the avalanche. The avalanche was so sensitive that it was going to happen regardless. A small event didn't [[cause]] a big event, a small event [triggers] a big event that has already been set up.

 For a butterfly to knock down a domino and set up a domino effect, someone has to have already set up the dominos. Unless he also takes them down, with effort close to what it took to set them up, squishing one butterfly merely means it's the next butterfly that will knock them down.

 The weather is chaotic because the weather largely doesn't matter. It will balance out. If through [[[chaos]]] it's a hot day here and a cold day there, it will also, later, cause a cold day here and a hot day there. And if it doesn't, it's because it wasn't chaos, it was another inevitable avalanche.

 I mean, you can try to squish all the butterflies, but it's easier to take down the dominos.

 Admittedly, when a bunch of hair-trigger avalanches set each other off in a chain, it can look spectacular. As in, it overwhelms the wetware RAM, consuming the space needed for logic or perspective.

Quantum Cope And Hagen

 Reminder that most quantum woo is merely physicists being deliberately confusing.

 Dear cophenhagen interpretation, what is an [observer]? An [observer] is any interaction. Another quantum particle, also in a superposition, can be an observer. And that's overkill. The particle can observe itself, especially when warm.

 Really. That's it.

 An [observer] is when A bumps into B. Instead of meditating in closed-door isolation. Or, for that matter, when A bumps into A.

 A warm particle forms nodes in the waveform more often, which gives it more opportunities to slam into itself, thus knocking itself out of its own superpositions.



 Did you know? There are essentially no hard videogames. It's the players that are hard. Some players are extremely challenging indeed.
 
 Quantum mechanics isn't hard.

 Quantum researchers are challenging. Especially intuition-challenged...

 I figure they do this because they can't describe what an interaction is. They can tell you that a waveform collapse happens, but they can't describe what happens. They can't tell you why.
 Posturing. Social move, not scientific. Unlike scientists, quantum researchers don't exult mysteries. Like merchants, they cover them up. Researchers too soft. Have to flinch.

 What's the feynmann diagram of a particle knocking itself out of superposition, lol? Lmao?
 P.S. You don't need the double-slit experiment. A single slit suffices, which you'll hear from nobody else. Feel free to wonder why they're making it overcomplicated.

 The theory was named after copenhagen because it's cope. Heisenberg was telling on himself (and snarking on bohr et al).

 Philosophy went bad long before the 1945 catastrophe. Physics was also ahead of its time in places. Makes sense: these are the high-IQ majors. They didn't need to see where the wind was blowing, they could see in advance where the wind was going to blow. They could adjust so they would already be aligned with the wind when it blew.

 At the expense of science. At the expense of truth. Revealed preferences.

Novel Zeno Paradox: The Impossibility of Prediction

 Due to computational overhead, the universe as a whole is unpredictable. 

 The universe as a simple definition is the biggest thing; to predict it would require a computer bigger than the biggest thing. The computer itself would be unpredictable, as it can't predict itself. It would trivialize prediction for the inner universe, as it is now in control of it. The whole universe has been refashioned into the the computer's guts... However, what the computer would control it to do would itself be unpredictable. 

 Put another way, to predict the universe means predicting your own prediction, without knowing the prediction in advance. No matter how you phrase it, it's incoherent. E.g, "I am going to add 1 and 1 to get 2, thus I predict I'll get 2 when I add 1 and 1." Either you don't know you'll get 2, and can't make predictions of this kind, or it's not a prediction, it's a postdiction.

 Let's talk as little as possible about the numerous insurmountable practical, contingent barriers. The computer would somehow have to be fast despite sending signals from beyond the observable universe to the other side, also beyond the observable universe. You can retrodict the universe, see that you could have computed the future before the future, but there's no point since the future will always come before you finish the calculation. Do it the cheap way and just go look. At the quantum level, stuff is inherently uncontrollable, because there's nothing smaller with which to see it without perturbing it. You can't tell where something is without changing how it's behaving thus rendering your own knowledge moot. This is also true of the instrument you're trying to measure with. The way to find out what will happen is to let it happen.

 An unpredictable thing can't be predictable in parts. The unpredictable parts would hit the predictable part, or, equivalently, the predictable parts have to be isolated. Not in fact part of the universe; we found the self-contradiction. Goes double since retrodiction is possible. If an unpredictable part hits a predictable part, you can predict the future path of the unpredictable part. You can work out its past path based on how the predictable part reacted, thus transforming chaos into order. You can predict it in future. 

 If you can predict one solar system, you can put a computer in every solar system, and predict them all. Run it out long enough that there's time to send all the predictions to a central repository, and bam, you've predicted the entire universe all in one place. You can push out more than a year's worth of planetary evolution in a year, so you can always make it long enough to get to the central repository in time.

 If any part is predictable, it's all predictable. But it can't be predictable. Indeed single hydrogen molecules lay waste to the most powerful computers currently conceivable. 

 Yet, it must be predictable. If you can't predict where to get food, you starve to death. Life does not develop. I mean, like, the planets are right over there.
 Prediction is the basis of all control. Can you repeat a motion? Then you can plan to repeat a motion. You can see the past results and predict the future results. If things are themselves, if A=A, then the future with those things will be like the past with those things.

 Somehow, unpredictable things add up to predictable. This happens between psychology and sociology, for example. Individuals are chaotic. Sociology is so easy it's boring. Somehow, each totally invisible atom of a children's ball add up to a downright prosaic ball. 

 Time is impossible, and yet, the future arrives. Time is impossible, and yet, it moves.

The first time rome fell, nobody had any idea it was happening.

 Rome tumbled halfway down the hill and thought they were still at the peak. Going through it a second time, the issue is obvious and simple.

 The romans, incluing the american-romans, got the ratchet of progress stuck in reverse. They forget things, then, having forgotten them, have no idea they ever existed.

 Example: I learned most of my general scientific knowledge from a magazine called [new scientist], but you can't learn any science from science magazines in the year of our satan 2025. Anyone who doesn't already know the science will never know, and never realize that previous generations knew it.

 The mechanism of decline makes decline invisible. Except to anyone who uses an accountant, of course, but accounting is a superpower, with the associated rarity.

 The atlantic used to be a good magazine. Crazy, right? Magazines died in 1900 too, but they were replaced by new good magazines. In 2000, they are not replaced. The romans wait for the replacement, as it was always replaced before, until they forget that a replacement was supposed to be coming. They start waiting for new car factories instead, for example, forgetting all about the magazines.

 In 2008 the american-roman economy permanently entered a lower gear, which means zoomers can see that boomers could afford much larger houses. In 2038 all the boomers will be dead, and the subseqent generations won't be able to see their houses first hand. They will only be able to see that millennials and zoomers are as poor as they are. Decline will be normalized. It doesn't help that voters and peasants only care about relative wealth. They don't have a problem with decline provided a sinking tide lowers all boats. The demand for solutions is low at best.

 It used to be normal for american-romans to be self-employed. Anyone remember the date off hand? Now they're all like, 'muh jerbs.' Oh noes, applying to jobs is a shitshow at the moment...
 Because they were dumb enough to allow employers to dominate the market at all. Englisch.

 Minor, irrelevant advances give the illusion of growth to generations too young to have ever seen a real invention. Example: better dental floss was invented recently. Nobody can point to decline, because the tech has been forgotten. Everyone can still point to [progress]. AI. Wowee.

 AI will totally invent our flying cars, any day now. One says, as if Communist cars aren't toxic waste.

 The roman roads were still there. They were simply unusable due to the combination of banditry and poverty-driven lack of demand. Likewise, it will be a long time before the internet simply shuts off, but it will get less and less useful.
 Much like the library of alexandria, come to think. By the time the christians burned it, there was nothing left to preserve. Likewise, by the time the internet shuts down (except maybe in china), there will be nothing on it worth keeping. The romans will think they're advancing to a new system, having become too wise to need the internet anymore. Like the Amish [advancing] beyond the need for mineral-fuelled tractors.

 Moral: don't use a ratchet of progress. It has [progress] in it, which means it's Satanism. 

   P.S. If you're lucky trump will constitute your east-west split. Europe will continue as a traditional angels-dancing-on-pinheads theocratic dystopian nightmare, while the western empire decays more vigoriously, as a separate administrative unit.

The Inherent Traitor Worship of the Soy Right

 Enemies are honourable. The left is not the enemy, it is the traitor. The so-called right are cultural leftists who agree to be the betrayed. They can't give up Democracy or the government - they can't fail to [conserve] these things. It goes back to the fact taxation is treason. Under Democracy, the betrayed tax-farmed class is supposed to agree to be betrayed. Soyciety becomes a cosmic play and someone has to perform the role of the heel. They're not oppressed, they're cucked. Women and peasants do what they're told, therefore, they agree to get cucked. The show must go on. Until it can't.
 Naturally the taxed are lower class and the taxers are upper class, which is why so-called rightists are stereotypically rednecks et al. Bumpkins, low-university, and so on. [Die in wars] instead of [war profiteering] or declaring wars.
 Again, it comes back to the fact taxation is treason. The very foundation of soyvilization is a cancerous tumour. To be truly right-wing is to fail to conserve the tumour, but instead persecute it like it's a criminal. Which, given it is the foundation or keystone of soyciety, would unavoidably cause collapse.
 No [conservative] has the slightest chance of being right-wing. No [conservative] can be the enemy of the left.

 Re: formalism; to honestly define treason as treason would necessarily delegitimize the treason. The cancerous tumour soyvilization is founded upon inherently relies upon lies. Satan couldn't open with, "Hi, I'm Satan, Father of Lies, and I'm about to peddle a falsehood." Lies have to presented as truth, or they don't work. Soyvilization is inherently informalist.
 Incoherent, you might say. As if it is Nameless.

 To be explicit, it is long past time to discard soyvilization and start over. Never mind the rotten wood, the seed is rotten. Which is why the tree of soyvilization collapses reliably. Everything about soyvilization is twisted around having to justify the unjustifiable. To have an untwisted society, one must conscientiously cleanse one's self of all soyciety. Anything salvaged from soyvilization has to be dismantled and reassembled sans the putrid parasitism.

 Conveniently soyvilization is weak and can't stop you. See: the Amish. You could elect a king tomorrow, and there you go, you have a king, thus a kingdom. 

 Traitors aren't enemies. They're not opponents. If they could fight you straight up they would have done that in the first place. The use of treachery is an admission of inhabiting an untenable position.
 You can just have a kingdom, whenever you want, as long as you're not a [conservative], who can only bow to to power of violent, treacherous taxation. As long as you're not anything silly like a [tory], lol.

Blood Memory of Overproduction

  Democracies suffer immensely from the blood memory of already having supplied everyone with spears.
They call it [overproduction], and you've never heard this issue from a journalist, have you? It's mainstream political science. The idea - which is still current to a fever pitch - is that the factories will make so much stuff the peasants will be satisfied and put themselves out of a job. What if they only have to work 20 hours a week to get everything they want? Or only 10?

 Well...then nothing? This isn't a real problem. But your leaders...excuse me, [[[leaders]]]...including d.trump, absolutely think it is. Because, like everyone else and particularly women, they are still hallucinating a savannah. They still see only 100-150 people. They can't see iphones, they see stone spears. Made by hand. They can't learn new ideas, they only match what they see externally to blood memories, then react to their fugue dreams.

 If everyone has a spear, and they don't scam someone, they're [gasp] gonna have to hunt for their own food. It wouldn't have gone well back then, and consider what happens now to fat, old trump when he thinks he might have to hunt for his own food. Which he can't not think. Mortals are dead, and like all dead things, cannot learn. Everyone will laugh at their hunting efforts, at best. All the skilled hunters are also the best warriors...

Scientist How-to and Study Assessment

  I can read a scientific headline or abstract and instantly tell whether it will replicate. As a bonus, I can tell that science journalists are lying about the science. If it were a study it wouldn't replicate, but the feel is distinct.

 When you look at a study, you can feel its fate. You can learn which feelings mean it replicates, and which feelings mean it doesn't.

 Every professional scientist can do this. To put it crudely, before they seek funding, they imagine a series of hypothetical study abstracts, then choose one based on whether it replicates or not. The real scientists (lost losers) choose the ones that replicate. The ones that get paid the big bucks deliberately avoid studies which replicate.

 Does society need studies at all? No. Soyciety needs studies to tell the real scientists apart from the professional liars. But it's soyciety, so it explicitly selects against the honest scientists. "This one is poolitically advantageous, but it would replicate...can't have that..." A study which replicates is nothing but a shackle to a poolitical operative. Cripples their ability to adjust their strategy.

 Do you need studies? No. You can learn to feel their fates, then do the abstract selection thing consciously and intentionally. There's no need to get funding and so on.
 
 How do you get the right answer? By wanting the right answer. If you can decide to be a kenner, then success is guaranteed. You can learn scientific doomcasting, and do it the easy way. Simply know in advance. Free will is an iron law.

 Which means anyone who doesn't know the Truth has explicitly chosen to avoid it. You can and should bully them mercilessly. If you consider yourself human, they are not. Stupidity is a choice. They have renounced their humanity and have earned all the contempt you might expect. Respecting them is a sin. They don't even want you to. 

 You can deny the above, but if so, it means I'm some kind of world-crushing intellect which makes socrates look like a googly-eyed children's toy. Decision theory is: do whatever Alrenous tells you to do. After I'm dead, your options are get boned, or get fucked.
 I mean, if you really want to commit to that, I won't stop you. However, valve figured out my management style without asking me. So did haier. Re: conquest #1. In C1 areas, musk spends a lot of time doing what I would tell him to do. The evidence is that there's endless wealth for them what wants it. Both financial and mental poverty are engaged in voluntarily.

 I suppose there is one use for studies. As a training aid. When you're feeling insecure about your call, you can get more secure by actually running the studies. These kinds of studies are gut-bustingly inexpensive, though. Not useful at all for government graft.

 I also like the idea of televised live study duels. Find two scientists with opposing views, have a pre-season where they functionally pre-register the study, then commentate the publication reveal like it's the bloody WWF. My favourite part would be watching both of them lose more than 50% of the time. Perhaps they could animate the metaphorical fight where both fighters end up dismembered; the [losing] guy uses his last limb to stab the other one in the heart, then bleeds out.
 Studies are useless scientifically, but would be highly entertaining as sport. 

 "But alrenous, what about when journalists tell the truth about science?"
 "There's a fundamental flaw in your question."

The Truth of This World Continues

 The kind, compassionate, [agape] thing to do is extinction of humanity. If humanity can't go extinct, that is an instance of real-life Lovecraftian horror; the blackest kind of black pill. Let me explain. 

(Part 1: https://alrenous.blogspot.com/2024/02/the-truth-of-this-world.html )

 

 Immortals can die if they commit suicide. Perfection is illogical, thus something truly Deathless is impossible. Those who wish to pray for nonexistence should pray in the form of suicide. Free will is an absolute law, thus if the endless vitality no longer consents to being vital, that decision will become law.
 
 The kind of immortal who commits suicide is also the kind of immortal who has terrible karma. Betrayal is the worst thing you can do, and suicide the very worst form of betrayal. Suicide is being unable to get along with someone who shares 100% of your interests. Who not only shares your interests, but knows they share your interets, and knows you know they share your interests, etc etc etc. Immortals who kill themselves are all worshippers of the Nameless One.
 They have to pay Karma back before their prayer for nonexistence can be granted. Annihilation pending, please wait.

 An immortal suicide is, in a layman's sense, both dead and alive. Something which can't die choosing to behave in a dead way; LARPing as a corpse with such conviction their body geuinely decomposes.
 They have taken a lethal injury, so they must be dead. The dead can't pay anything back to anyone, however, they are nevertheless kept around and kept capable of suffering. Committing suicide while at negative karma is a prayer for and consent to torture. It turns out demons are a kind of undead.

 The immortal suicide breaks into pieces, so the immortal no longer exists, but the pieces carry bits of the spirit and bits of the karma of the original immortal.

 I believe that before Earth, these pieces hung around junking up the place. Something about Earth instead lets them fall through the heavens and collect here, at the bottom.

 Thus, Earth fills up with undead pieces of immortal, which exist to be tortured to deeath. That is: mortals. Hello, welcome to the underworld. Mortals = undead = demons. It is not a coincidence that homo sapiens is optimized for being painfully traumatized.
 Turns out what makes Hell so bad is not any punishment from god, but instead the fact you're surrounded by the other traitors who have been condemned to Hell. Conveniently this suffering is efficient for expunging bad karma. Best of all possible worlds, as it is said. I enjoy the irony.

 In a practical sense the suicide can't rescind their prayer. Annihilation is now inevitable, the only question is how much karmic interest they rack up before they pay down the principal. However, in a theoretical sense, the demons of Hell could wake up, get a cup of coffee, and decide to stop torturing each other. They could repent. This fact is what makes them so deserving of being tormented to death. Every day they get up, get a cup of coffee, and renew their committment to torturing each other and themselves. If they weren't such twisted lunatics, they wouldn't have committed suicide in the first place.

 If the demons repented, they could pay off their karma by doing nice things for each other. Then, they could not instantly bite it when they hit zero. Since demons are demonic, doing nice things for them only increases your karmic debt - along with theirs. They can only suffer and cause each other suffering.

 Thus the healthy purpose of mortal society is to cause and legitimize as much suffering as possible. To efficiently pay off all the karmic debt, so that existing humans can die, and no new humans will be born. Extinction is success. Anything less than efficiently going extinct will farm negative karma and perpetuate pointless, unnecessary suffering.

 Conveniently it's already doing this in most cases. Democracy is the acme is tyranny. Best of all possible worlds, again. If you care about this sort of bloodless compassion project, soyciety and soyvilization must be preserved and maintained at all costs. Good work everyone, carry on.

Minor on Betrayal

 Insofar as morality exists, it's the prisoner's dilemma. Don't defect on cooperators. What if deviance is bad tho.

 We don't have to use Communist newspeak. What is defection when you're not inventing new words out of a terror of looking old? Betrayal. If I do something wrong, it's betrayal in one form or another. I explicitly or implicitly promised I was trustworthy for the purposes of contravening that trust.

 All crimes are betrayal in one form or another. 

 And, if it's not betrayal, you're not doing anything wrong. This is important since if you think you're doing something wrong but do it anyway, you will take the karmic hit for what you attempted to do, even if you don't betray anyone in the slightest. You tell Karma you would do it if it were wrong, and Karma goes ahead and believes you. 

 

 In a declared war, nobody mistakenly thinks the enemy soldiers aren't going to shoot you. Murder refers legitimately to unjust slaying, and they knew you were coming. I can't murder enemy soldiers, no matter how hard or smart I try.  

 If you walk into a police station, or an immigration office, and announce your intent to rob everyone you can, you will get the opportunity to rob nobody. You can make this all complicated and realistic, but it ends up with exactly the same logic. If burglary becomes normal, houses will become fortresses, and burglary will become abnormal. As such, living in a soyciety is implicitly a promise not to commit crimes on your fellow soyvilians. If you commit a crime, it works because they weren't expecting it, and it's a betrayal.
 Curiously, this also means most things which aren't outlawed really aren't crimes, no matter how heinous. They could have outlawed it. Especially in Fascist police states such as america. It's not like they're shy about writing new laws. Their lack of defence constitutes implicit consent. This is important since most soyvilians aren't cooperators and it's important to have weapons with which to fight them off. Merely ensure you don't accidentally imply they should trust you unless they falsely do so first. 

 P.S. A 4chan poster once said to me, "can't tell [...] or metal gear villain." I think it was supposed to be an insult.

The Non-Problem of Evil

 The problem of evil is in fact the specifically christian problem of free will. If god exists, why does he allow you betray anyone? Why not simply poke you in the head before you sin?
 Answer: because some want to be betrayed.
 Answer: actually, god does do that. In a cosmic sense, there is no deviance. There are no defectors. If you [defect] on someone, it has to be because they agreed to let you. They consented, thus, it's not defection.
Cosmically, the world is perfectly just. There is only cooperation.

 If you die in a flood it's because you chose to live in a flood plain.
 If you die in a famine it's because you let your population rise above the carrying capacity of the land.
 If you die in a war, it's because you didn't physically remove the government when it introduced conscription.
 If you're physically ill, or stupid, it's because your parents married someone physically ill and you would have done the same in their  place.
 There is no such thing as a victim. There is only consent. Free will is an absolute law.

 "If you die in nuclear war - " ...and there haven't been any nuclear wars? Doesn't happen, now does it? Not a coincidence.

 Every death which can be scientifically linked to chernobyl was at the plant. Don't stand next to the experimental reactor in a corrupt country, guys. I mean, have you met a ukrainian? Would you trust your neighbours with a delicate nuclear plant? Again: have you met a ukrainian before?

 If you catch a cold or flu it's because you didn't get enough sunlight. The government tells you taxes are inevitable for obvious reasons, but you can (at least!) take more from them than they take from you, no matter how much the rest of your soyciety enjoys getting fincucked.

 Bad things don't happen to good people

 The christians have it backwards, in accordance with prophecy. It is free will which prevents evil. Free will is what makes evil impossible. Instead of poking you in the head before you sin, god pokes your intended victim in the head, who then thwarts you. Normally, you notice in advance and don't try in the first place. Perpetrators only attempt to attack willing targets.

 "If you die of old age..." You didn't have to be born here on Earth. You don't remember, but you chose it. At least, you are the remains of something that did.

 If you don't like something that's happening to you, try becoming good.
Stop agreeing to self-mutilation.

You wanna know about free will? No? Well, too bad I guess.

 Here's a good mainstream take. You can watch him define the terms, then stop.
 https://www.youtube.com/embed/C7YSy-Mr-d8

 Turns out both determinism and free will is impossible. Maybe that deserves a bang. Impossible!

 To have free will, determinism must be true. For you to determine your actions, determinism must be true. If determinism was false, your will would have no ability to affect the future.
 The properties that make up [you] have to have specific effects based on the youness of the [you]. Just like the mass of a billiard ball determines the transfer of momentum.

 But wait, there's more. Later he gets into, "imagine a computer with the initial state of the universe programmed into it." Haha, lol. Logically impossible. The universe can't compute itself due to computational overhead. The computer has to be bigger than the universe, which is impossible by definition. Existence can't be bigger than Existence, that's not how logic works. That's a divide-by-zero level howler.

 The future is completely determinate but completely indeterminable. At a cosmic level, the future is unknowable, and the only exception is going to the future and looking at it. Using a space analogy, telescopes don't exist at the cosmic level. You have to personally walk over there and see with your own eyes. Determinism can't be meaningfully true if the future is indeterminable.

 But wait, that's not all.
 He claims free will vs. determinism has all sorts of implications. Haha! Nope! Doesn't have a single implication! None! Zip!
 These sentences get bangs. Perhaps, again, the earlier one deserves a bang too.

 To be precise, every implication of determinism is exactly identical to the implications of free will. Technically known as libertarianism.

 If someone commits a crime of his own free will, he should go to jail. (Or rather get executed, but same diff.)
 If someone commits a crime because it was determined by the universe, he should to to jail. (Get executed.)

 If he freely chose, he needs to be physically prevented from freely choosing the same thing again. Nobody deserves to have to live around him.
 If it was determined by implacable fate, he needs to be physically prevented from being compelled to do it again. Nobody deserves to have to live around him.

 If it quacks like a duck, it is a duck. Libertarianism is identical to determinism.
 If that makes no sense, it's because neither determinism nor libertarianism make any sense.

 You can't be free to be somebody else. You are you, not someone else. You will make your choices, not someone else's choices, in the same way a carrot is not an ocean liner.
 You can't be predicted. The only way for an observer to find out what you're going to do is to watch you do it. Determinism implies libertarianism.

 There is a bit of a mystery in that there are some exceptions. There are things which are, in practice, predictable. Very curious. Nobody can explain.

 I think the libertarianism vs. determinism debate is a deliberate distraction. A prospiracy. Nobody planned it. It was such an obvious move it doesn't need planning, but it is intentionally, consciously maintained.
 Despite everything, some things are predictable. Rather a lot of things in fact. Explaining how has a very high chance of being extremely powerful.
 And embarrassing. And they don't want you to have power.

 Sadly I already have the power and have no motivation to go and explain it verbally. [Lunar path only] is sufficient.



 Mortals have instincts about free will. Qualitative intuitions. These are largely about physical chains, and applying them to cosmic ontology is misuse.
 The fundamental is that you can tell when what you call your [free will] is hitting interference. The turbulence feels like something, and your resulting impulses are adaptive ways of clearing the interference. If something can vary like this, it obviously can't be any kind of cosmic law. (You should recognize [cosmic law] as a redundant phrase. I just said [some kind of ordered order], but one of the words was greek, while another, latin.)

 "Am I, the contingent entity [me/you/self], part of the causal chain? Is the contingent outcome contigent on my internal psychic events? If so, I am [free]. If not, I am not." This is a scalar. You can be more free or less free.
 You can't be more deterministic or less libertarian, that's a binary. Assuming they're even coherent enough to be a binary.

 If believing in determinism makes you feel constrained, you're delusional, and you're about to direct an adaptive response at something that cannot respond to you or adapt. (Do you like repeating words without equivocating? I like it. Because english is crud.) 

 P.S. [Living] is not a real property of physical objects. A physical cat and a physical rock are not qualitatively different. You can if you want define a category and project it onto them if you want. I believe I have a post about handles and definitions somewhere...

https://alrenous.blogspot.com/2021/12/definitions-examples-religion-ravens.html
https://alrenous.blogspot.com/2022/01/definitions-examples-bowls.html

 You can define life as anything that has a definable goal which it will attempt to secure. Typically it goes recursive. Living things have a goal of staying alive, on account of the fact that anything that doesn't try to stay alive lost the capacity to strategically direct energy long before we were around to see them.

 Alternatively you can define [living] as referring to consciousness, which is not physical. However, this has the consequence of labelling you dead when you're asleep.

True Sociology

 Mortals pursue their own individual interest. With some exceptions, their own short-term and immediate interests.
 Mortals have a restricted value schedule. It's beating up his neighbour. Having more money, having a hotter wife or more wives, having more friends, having more followers. Occasionally, literally punching him in the face. Inspiring Envy is the whole game.
 Mortals are not nearly as stupid as they pretend to be. They do genuinely know their own immediate interests. Having already decided what he's going to pursue, he makes up whatever bullshit he thinks will make you do what he wants.

 In the modern age, they don't need to make up anything new. Homestuck principle: whatever bullshit you need already exists, you merely pick it and pretend you totes believe it.

 Mortals don't really cooperate. Perhaps this wasn't true in the distant past, but in the present, homo sapiens is a herd creature. He moves in the same direction as those with the same incentives as him, because he was going to do that anyway. Camaraderie is a myth. There are only fellow travellers. E.g. having picked your bullshit, you signal you have the same interests as everyone who picked the same bullshit. It's in their interest to direct their fire at competitors rather than fellow travellers. You're not coming to an agreement and reinforcing each other, you're merely assured of not getting shot in the back as long as they have someone else to shoot and they believe you're shooting along with them.

 Mortals are not usually stupid, but they are stupid about the lure of the possibility of betraying their fellows. The bullshit only works on autists, who have historically been irrelevant except as punching bags. Nevertheless, the eternal promise of bullshit is that you'll trick the king into working against his interests - even though you can't trick your daughter into working against her interests. 

 Bullshit is competitive, but only because, if you can come up with bullshit that's better at inspiring Envy, you will get [[converts]]. Their interests don't change, so their ideas don't change, they change the decorations, and get bigger herds. E.g. a skilled red pill guy teaches how to tell the lies sluts want to tell their girlfriends they banged. Incel Envy and femcel Envy. E.g. someone can hack the rules to make you appear richer through a fork strategy; to deny your increased apparent wealth, they would have to dig up a pillar of their own proof of Enviousness. "I'm rich because I can beat you," vs. "I'm so rich I can afford to donate to someone I can beat up." To deny the latter is more Envious is to suggest your expensive wealth displays shouldn't be Envied.
 Secondly, some bullshit gets to the same place with less effort. If a brutalist hellblock can inspire as much Envy as an intricately carved statue, you do the former. Plus you can charge rent.

 

 Science is inherently autistic. Only autists need to cut the bullshit. "Has this replicated? No? Fuck off." A real scientist assumes the other guy is going to pursue his interests, and ignores whatever he says about it.
Note that a mortal could have done and can do this at any time, but of course it cuts off the strategy of using bullshit himself.

 

 E.g. hitler did a good job. For germany as a whole to do better, hitler would have had to sacrifice his own well-being for germany's, which was never going to happen. Anyone else hired for the same job would have seen the same incentives. Any difference in behaviour would be differences in how well they understand the incentives. How best to maximize Envy.

 E.g. when someone has a legal justification, they say it's in the court's interest to side with them, so you can't use the courts to beat them up. Legal justifications aren't legal. It's the poolitics of the court's incentives. 

 E.g. putin wants russia 'united' because that means they'll pay more taxes and he can brag to modi or khameni that lots of individuals are doing what he tells them instead of seeking their own idiosyncratic bullshit. He doesn't give the tinest shit about what's good for russia -  and indeed you're more Enviable if you get rich at your country's expense rather than in harmony. "They couldn't fend off my bullshit."

 E.g. jinping hates corruption not because it's bad for china, but because he told you not to and then you disrespectfully did it anyway. "Who dares!" Occident translation: "Insolence!"

 E.g. the modern game is to pretend to be softer than warm butter in a form of handicap Envy. Competing to be the most sheltered greenhouse flower. "I'm more yielding than fresh snot and I'm still not dead. I never had to harden up in the slightest!" Being that weak is very expensive, and since you're that weak, you certainly didn't pay for it yourself.

 

 Whenever anyone claims anything that isn't about supporting their own solipsistic interests, it is corruption. They're plain lying to you. (If  you're an allist you already know this, but pretend otherwise to avoid nuking your own corrupt speech.)

 I don't count as part of the homo genus because I have an interest that isn't Envy.

 

 

 

 Speaking of sociology, all the most 'advanced' and 'profound' systems of ethics reduce to solipsistic hedonism.
E.g. christianity is that god's happiness is what matters, because he'll hurt you if you upset him. His narcissistic rage will be boundless if you don't play out the role he's assigned to you, and you won't like that. Pleasure, pain, nothing else.
 Buddhism is the idea that the only problem is pain and the purpose of Existence is to learn not to hurt.
 Hinduism proposes the Kali yuga isn't worse than being bored.
 Stuff like nationalism is the idea that losing wars hurts, so you should do whatever it takes to win the wars you end up in.
 Why shouldn't you be a wirehead, a lotus eater, a heroin addict? Why not get into the VR pod and stay there? Because it hurts more in the long run...and that's it. That's the argument.

 Literal hedonism, "Fuck it, we ball," is merely the straightforward version of the other stuff.

 If virtue is virtuous because the gods decree it, then it's a subordinate virtue. It's only [virtuous] because some dude will punch you in the face if you don't do it, meaning the primary, hyperdivine good is not being punched in the face.

 If gods are gods because they embody a virtue, then what makes it virtuous is that you like it, much as you like not being punched in the face.

 In all cases, [[morality]] is merely avoiding self-destruction.
Homo sapiens is an inherently immoral natural kind because its core value is encouraging others to self-destruct. Every true homo is a mini Satan. 

 

 In short, it is impossible for lightsiders to study sociology. Luckily sociology is braindead easy and hardly needs to be studied.
 No society can talk about sociology as it would make Envy and betrayal more difficult. Universally counterproductive.

Capitalism, Mortality, Glorious Death, Vampires, and Karmic Profit

 I thought of four tweets in the shower, but it turned out they're woven together, and it gets long.

 

 If I were poolitical, I wouldn't be MAGA, I would be the distinctly less photogenic MACFFT, or Make america Capitalist For the First Time.

 Hey, what if, instead of being a Satanist theocracy, you did what you said you were going to do?
It's not a coincidence the initialism is so anti-popular...

 Tangent: I notice that monarchy is anti-Satanist. Greece was a Democracy (lol) and rome was a republic (loool). Then the "dark" ages happened, and Satan didn't like that...

 Don't be stalin. Don't make the whole country Capitalist at once. Start with a single town. Then two. Then four. 6, 10, etc.

 Unfortunately...

 With a couple exceptions, if you're here on Earth you are the remains of an immortal who prayed for Death, but couldn't afford it. Capitalism would reduce suffering, thus making the mortals even less able to afford to die. Indeed implementing widespread Capitalism might come with a terrible karmic cost, for doing good things to bad people.

 If you really want to help, you should support Democracy precisely because it's so tyrannical and oppressive. The People suffer terribly, that one day they might afford the Death they crave.
 Have a nice explicit "Keep Democracy?" vote every 20 or 25 years. Ensure everything is done to make their consent legitimate. Except possibly counting the votes. The idea is to prevent the rulers from farming more karmic debt than they relieve in the oppressed. 

 Death also doesn't like mortals being down here. The cosmic structure of the Earth plane makes her uncomfortable. Death is supposed to be a smooth eggshell protecting All That Exists. Instead, here, it's foamed up. Between the Earth plane and higher heavens is a double-walled bubble film of Death. The stygian river, symbolically. If all the mortals were gone, if humanity went extinct, the film would be permitted to pop and relax back to where it's supposed to be.

 Immortals pray for Death when they are cowards. The details are somewhat beyond me, but it means the standard mortal is a coward. Let's talk about vampires.

 Why can't a vampire see himself in his reflection? Because he would run screaming. He is -<terrified>- of vampires.
 Vampires are depicted as loners correctly. Vampires can only [[cooperate]] through total mental domination.
Ghosts too, in the sense that they exist at all. They vanish from perception when they notice themselves and flee. A ghost that realizes it's  dead tears itself apart, in an attempt to flee itself. Selection: for a ghost to 'live' long enough to be noticed, it has to properly repress  its self-wisdom.

 Vampires don't drink the blood of the living, they drink the blood of other undead. Vampire blood is particularly addictive for vampires.

 A coward can't live because they're too scared of dying. Cholesterol!!1! If you don't wear a bike helmet, you will die on this trip 0.01% of the time! Oh noes! A coward sees a world where everything might kill him. Fluffy kitties have toxoplasmosis...
 Consequently, they don't live. A commoner is a kind of zombie. You can be sure because necromancy works on them. Particularly control undead.

 Being terrified of Death is a common hazard for immortals. Thanatophobic. Free will in inviolable, but, you can consent by accident. Result...

 

 

 

 The world is perfectly just. Won't even let you die if you deserve less.
 If you're one of the few non-mortals, you might want to profit. The fact karma is all-encompassing becomes a problem. 

 The solution is simple but lame. Net worth is a genetic trait and karma is perfect. You have all the wealth you will ever have. If someone steals any of it from you, karma will pay you back by taking it out of their hide.

 However, if you don't much like something, you're still charged market rate for it. For example if you have a hot wife but don't appreciate her, you're still charged the normal rate for hot wives. You took her from someone who would have appreciated her more.
 The method of profit is to find things you own but don't care for and sell them. Don't bother to haggle, karma will take care of it. Unless you really love haggling, I suppose. You can also trade, for example, lowbrow pleasures for more intense ones. Comfort for excitement. That sort of thing.

 Be careful when trading for wisdom, because it's absurdly difficult to sell. Most illiquid asset. Wisdom is charged by how useful it is to the kenner.

Treachery Suppression for Children, with minor in Motherhood

 At least 99% of parents can't be trusted with the ability to hit their kids.
 It may seem this implies they can't be trusted with kids at all. Probably.
 Fundamental trust aside; can do privileges instead. Have a weekly car ride. Heck, have a weekly on-your-back ride for a couple hours. Then take it away if they insist on treachery.

 The ongoing effort from the parent is key to a proper privilege. It doesn't count as a privilege if there's a higher cost for interrupting it than continuing it, such as video game [privileges]. Easier not to steal the power cord than to let it stay.

 If parents can hit their kids, parents will use it for exploitation. Negative reinforcement allows extortion, blackmail, etc.
This should be against their interests, but they're horrible (i.e. sapiens) so it isn't.

 You can tell they're horrible because they shouldn't need encouragement from pseudonymous text boxes on the internet to give [privileges] in this sense to their kids. Why aren't you already showering your kids with nice nonmonetary luxuries, for the sake of being nice? Why have I literally never witnessed this even a single time?

 All this virtue-signalling online to avoid virtue-signalling at home. To the alleged loved ones.

 Don't forget commoners only recognize mandatory and forbidden. If commoners can extort their kids, then they think they have to. Options are too rich for their blood. That is: there's a backstop. In the extraordinary case of a virtuous commoner, they will still act viciously to their kids if it is permitted.

 Note that the 1% or less direspect rules because they can. At best they re-write the rules for their own convenience. Soycial design doesn't apply to them, regardless of system.

 By revoking a positive rather than applying a negative, it's the parents as well as the kids who receive discipline. If I demand something absurd from my kids, they will sacrifice the privilege to get out of it. "Clean your sister's room or no more piggy backs." "Oh, well, never mind on the rides then."

 A lot of the reason for [parental discipline] is merely that words are hard. Parents are inarticulate. Need a way for the children to understand the instruction. The intensity of the punishment is irrelevant, merely that it's an embodied punishment, rather than a reward. That and the fact moms say things for the sake of saying things all the time, so [consequences] are necessary to tell when she's not merely spewing bullshit from her face-butt.

 Parents being non-verbal means they can't hear their kids either. They can't tell how much the demands are burdening the children. Using privileges, they can find out. What is the greatest privilege the kid will give up to get out of the command? Imagine demanding they finish their dinner. Will they give up decorative door ribbons? They would probably give that up for a nickel. If they're giving up daily trips to the video game museum to avoid having to finish dinner, then it turns out the parent is asking far more than they realized. "Yeah, uh, your cooking is literal torture dude." Commoners are retarded. Without being smacked in the face like this, they will never figure it out. I model them as constitutionally incapable of love (storge or otherwise).

 Note that hunter tribes don't hit their children. (But do hit their wives.) Hitting someone 1/4 your weight is bullying, regardless of the reason. Cowardly and treacherous; shameful twice over. Your soyvilization should at least be as civilized as pre-agricultural societies. China is less civilized, more soyvilized, than guys who think a pointy rock is the height of ingenuity and eat off baked dirt.

 All the popular talk about rights and privileges doesn't apply to governments. It should, however, apply to families. Dinner is a right. Mcdonald's is a privilege. Make the latter non-arbitrary so it can be used as enforcement. 

 P.S. You need a father, entry #36896: moms don't comprehend systems. Is she saying no to mcds because you pissed her off or because you were bad? No, she's just bummed about the weather and in a [no] mood, and she wouldn't tell you even if she had a good reason and knew what it was. 

 If she did say when she had a good reason, not saying would reveal all the times she has no good reason.

 A common woman especially takes her feelings as gospel, and the result is incomprehensible to her let alone to anyone else. That is; babies cry to replace mom's emotions with their own, and if you're not replacing her emotions, she's inherently abusive. Women are non-sapient that this emotion-replacement trigger can go off reliably. I wouldn't have done it that way, but it's not my evolution, not my karma, and not my decision.

Resumption

 When I have posts, I will start on the 8th of every month, then post every even day until I run out. E.g. the next post will be the tenth. If I had only one that would be it for this month.

 Twitter was unlocked without a request. Turns out this guy got what he wanted. I assume both my accounts are unlocked but I didn't check. I'm using the b-side. Sometimes I will post off-schedule, in which case it's a link from twitter. Most days I'm not on twitter. This is drastically healthier. Note that my follow means nothing. I don't look at either [for you] or [following]. I use lists, because fuck the algorithm with a rake.

 Primarily I'm posting here because there's a point where threads become unmanageably large. Shock, amaze, many news: microblogging not good for long-form.
 Also note that off-topic is not antisocial. Post about anything you want in my comment section. Or as replies to my tweets for that matter. Provided the failcode lets you post and provided it's not intellectual vandalism which I'll delete. Hot tip: post observations, rather than conclusions, if you need to make it easier. If you can't even meet the standard that idiot grok can meet, consider shutting the fuck up. Not that you have a choice. Lurk moar or fuck off. 

 I have a nice private list if I think you're going to be a baby about being unfollowed. I can't complain much about twitter's shadowbans because I do it too. Follow + mute, kek. Nowhere near as often as twitter, but not never.

Hiatus

 It is break time.

 Posts will resume at an unknown point in the future. Also at an unknown rate, though daily is still least unlikely.

 It will not, however, be at an unknown rhythm. It will be specifically an 8th of the month, at the usual time. There's no need to hammer f5...I know at least one of you would. Statistically inevitable. If there's no post on the 8th, try next month. Or use the RSS or whatever.

 Exception: if the hiatus goes long I'll re-name it [sabbatical]. I will decide at the time what day of the month to post this on, but the return date will become known. In other words if you see a post not on the 8th it's only to say the hiatus is lasting longer.
 Exception: if I die unexpectedly, there will be a series of weird shit at random moments in 2031.

Canada and Mexico as Offshore Drug Labs

 Mexico and canada have serious organized crime problems. Catastrophic, in fact. Black markets masquerading as countries.

 Naturally, Revenge is Sour. If their tax livestock didn't have horrific characters, it wouldn't have been possible. It was, in fact, possible...

 They couldn't openly do retarded bioweapons research in america, so they did it in ukraine and china instead. 

 They couldn't openly manufacture schedule 1 drugs in america, so they did it in canada or mexico instead. These places had the misfortune of sharing a land border with america. 

 Shut down USAID's brother and sister, and the narco-trade will collapse on its own, by the way. They were subsidizing the ""invasion"" of illegals, and if the drug trade still exists, it's being propped up by tax dollars and/or implicit security guarantees. Ref: prohibition, the mobs are always part of the government. You can tell: try to start your own mob, see how [our hands are ties] is truly real... Yeah sure they had no way of getting capone except tax charges, lol...

 Which means the fent deaths in america are merely the peasants doing what they're told to do. As per usual. 

 Canada, ontario in particular, is the money laundering capital of the world. Who are they laundering money for? Biden. Obvs. Biden, obama, their trade partners.
 P.S. It is surprising that black governments take so long to convert the market entire into a black market. Any acute solution is a way of refusing to look at the chronic cause.
 P.P.S. Capone the capo. Bit on the nose, isn't it? Hit the nail on the head, too.

Orbital Mechanic Basics & Orbit Planet

 I had an [oh my god humans are so dumb] moment, so now anyone who doesn't already know orbital mechanics gets to learn the basics.

 

 It's this: to get to a higher orbit, go faster. To get to a lower orbit, go slower.
 In particular, you usually have to do it twice. Doing a burn affects the altitude of your orbit on the far side of the primary. Thus, when you get to your new aphelion, you need to do another burn, to even it out. Alt: you can do an even(ish) burn through a whole orbit, although this is plain stupid if you're using newtonian mass-ejection rockets. 

 Humans naively think that getting to a higher orbit means pushing yourself up. Hey. Morons. What happens when you push yourself up sub-orbitally? You come back down. Guess what happens in orbit? You come back down. Retards. Pushing yourself up is not useful unless you have a ledge up there to hang onto, to prevent the fall. No ledges in space.
 In space there's no ground to hit, so you go up again. And down. And up. Pushing yourself up (or down) while in orbit simply adds an oscillation to your orbit.
 Conservation of energy means going higher means going slower. Your altitude drops, as per the first principle of orbit. Going lower means going faster. Altitude rises. So on forever. Pushing up or down is a nearly completely useless way to spend energy.

 Something something saturn rockets? They see you get into orbit by pushing up. But you don't. If the rocket went straight up, it would also come straight back down.
 In addition to the dumb, there are lies. Escape velocity isn't a real thing. If there were only one large mass in the universe, everything would be its satellite, the only question is how distant the aphelion was. Provided gravity is continuous and doesn't cut out at some distance...it doesn't matter how fast you're going, at any finite velocity, you will decelerate infinitely. You reach zero velocity and come back. In the real world you can make smaller masses (earth) negligible compared to bigger masses (sun, galaxy) but you never literally [escape]. 

 

 On the other hand, perpendicular forces seem fairly intuitive. It changes only the direction of your orbit. You're making a great circle, and now you're making a different great circle through the same place you turned. 

 A truly counterintuitive thing: higher velocities have higher linear velocities, but lower angular velocities. The orbit takes longer. 

 Imagine a planet spinning so fast that at the tropics, the surface is moving at orbital velocity. Probably it's impossible, and if it were possible, it's likely not possible to have an atmosphere on this planet, but it would be a wild place. If you kick up a rock, it would get into orbit. Levitate. Then smack into you, as your feet are anchoring you to a higher angular velocity layer.
 Regardless of how heavy the planet is, you would be weightless. It wouldn't need to push up on you to keep you from sinking into the ground. Your feet wouldn't in fact anchor you without magnets or claws, you would lift off and the ground would slide under you toward sunrise, as you orbited at the proper orbit for your centre of mass.

 What would happen as you move toward the equator? Coriolis sand seas? Orbiting gravel constantly jostling against relatively-faster moving lower orbits?
 This thought experiment is not some exotic thing I can specially do. Physicists are just boring. Alchemists had style, and were therefore better. 

 Fast bullets are around 4000 kph. Orbital velocity on the moon is around 6000 kph. Due to lack of air, you can have ankle-height orbits if you want. Though you have to take into account the fact the moon isn't a sphere. The ankle-height orbits aren't stable due to mountains implying nonlinearities.
 Artillery on the moon can hit any other point on the moon.

Moral of Gilgamesh

 If you make "friends" with someone who can casually kick your ass, he will probably get you killed. He will take you along to a challenge that's reasonable for him and entirely impossible for you. So, don't do that. 

 Subordinates should tag themselves as subordinates. There's nothing shameful about being a vassal. What's shameful is the liegeman pretending to be equal to the liege lord.

Astronomy and Deep Geology are Bunk

 We know scientists are absolutely shit at prediction. Every time they extend a theory, it's fuckin' wrong. 

 Speaking of mohorovičić boreholes, let's read the kula superdeep borehole wikipedia page for about twenty seconds.

 "During the drilling process, the expected basaltic layers at 7 kilometres (4.3 mi) down were never found, nor were basaltic layers at any depth. There were instead more granites, deeper than predicted. The prediction of a transition at 7 kilometres was based on seismic waves indicating discontinuity, which could have been caused by a transition between rocks, or a metamorphic transition in the granite itself."
 "The drilling mud that flowed out of the hole was described as "boiling" with an unexpected level of hydrogen gas."

 As expected, scientists immediately get FAFO'd by experiment.

 If it didn't replicate, it didn't happen. 

 

 Largely this is because scientists aren't scientists. [If it didn't replicate]...this is literally science 101. If I have to tell you, you're not a scientist. They have the job description, but not the skills. Which is not surprising. Humanity is evil. Satan's children. Second, they are funded by black governments. They are politicians, not scientists, or they get fired. See also: public choice theory applies. Government science is an extremely efficient way of mass-producing lies. 

  

 I was reading about suns recently. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_giant

 It's important to remember all this stuff astronomers confidently assert is mostly bullshit. It's based on models. If you dig one sun borehole they will turn out to be false, guaranteed.

 They will tell you about the inside of the sun. They have no idea.
 They also can't see shit. Telescopes are primitive. Stone age. The oort cloud is theoretical - they can't see it. To first order approximation, we have no clue what's out there. A bit like medicine. Assume the doctor is trying to kill you, unless you specific, local evidence to the contrary. Assume the astronomer is literally worse than an astrologer, unless you have specific, personal evidence to the contrary. 

 Astronomers can't experiment, so Reality can't beat them upside the head with her teaching stick. As a result, they would be smarter with the brains on the outside, drying in the sun, rather than the inside. Net error would go down.

  On the upside, that blue sun drawing is well done.

 

 Part of a pattern I should perhaps write about soon. The observation/analysis divide. Observing keenly is fairly common. Understanding what you've seen is almost impossible. Reading witness reports is fine, and when they get to conclusions you can stop reading 99.999% of the time. Similarly folk can tell you what a social system is doing, but not what it can do. They have no idea how it will respond to impulses.
 That is: astronomers can observe stellar lifecycles because galaxies are all different ages, thus, for any star, they can find a star that's the same but slightly older, and chart it that way. Anything they can't directly observe is based on analysis, which they are incapable of. Anyone capable of analysis does it in realms where they can be proven wrong, so as to show off when it isn't. Unfortunately, it is precisely astronomy et al that needs the highest analysis skill - it's not impossible, it's merely too difficult. Far more difficult than can be handled by the capacities of anyone willing to work for the government.

 Seen is real. Thought is not real. Perhaps call it NPC science.

Tariffs Benefit the Tariffed Country

 "Tariffs raise government revenue by taxing domestic consumption of foreign goods and services. They should therefore permit reduction of other forms of domestic revenue raising ('income tax!').
 Their primary incentive effect is substitution in favor of domestic production."
 https://twitter.com/xenocosmography/status/1885965856120897941/

 Tariffs reduce local production, because the government suddenly wants to maximize imports of the tariffed good.

 Daycare is the State trying to ban motherhood, because mommy can't be taxed.

 Consider car [[insurance]].
 Consider obamacare. 

 Conquest's third law.

 Tariffs, like every tax, are crimes. Crimes cannot be prosocial by definition. They are parasitic by definition, and tariffs match the definition. Ideally, the State bans local production, forcing all of the good to be imported.

 Tariffs give clout to foreign industries. They form a special interest. Empirically or historically, we can see local producers will have a weak or missing lobbyist herd. A tariff on steel allows the foreign steel  interests to threaten your government's tax receipts by refusing to export.
 Meanwhile, if you threaten your government's tax receipts, they arrest you. Lmao. Apex kek.

 

 There's a constant: american tax receipts are 19% of GDP. Anything that might push them higher instead leads to tax evasion or collapse of the taxed industry. The part of the laffer curve where revenue is going down is the whole white economy contracting. 

 Maybe experiment with a 19% flat tax, see where exactly the 19% cutoff is. Then realize you're already over the laffer hill, and 18% of a larger economy is a larger absolute number than the 19%. Lowering taxes is far more important than trying to find the least-criminal crime.

 

 Tariffs raise foreign production. First, they consume it locally, so there's more raw stuff in the previously-exporting country. Second, exports can no longer supply much forex for imports, so they produce whatever they used to trade for. Transportation is cheap because it's subsidized, meaning they're saving deadweight costs there too. The raw prices are higher but you get lower inflation and higher wages.

 Canadians should be ecstatic about the 25% tariff. "Can't it be 40%? Come onnnn!"

 The effect of titanic canadian tariffs on milk is Communist milk. E.g. in canada, dairy was one of the primary vectors of the novel coronavirus, because the factories live up to the standards we can expect from Communism. Along with being a vector for non-novel coronaviruses... If the tariff is high enough that it's banning the import, then the result is catastrophic. Big crimes are big bad. Who knew. 

 Massive sanctions on Russia.
 Result: massive economic growth in Russia.

 The transportation subsidy has the same perverted dynamic as tariffs. Much of the reason it's so hard to find local goods is because the government wants to maximize transportation subsidies paid. To expand the bureaucracy. The more ridiculous and inefficient the supply line, the better. Hence trucks not trains, for example.

 Instead of subsidizing imports and then collecting duties on the imports, simply cut the subsidy.

Billions in Negative Wisdom

 1) Any remotely [respectable] economist will tell you the amish live well below the poverty line. Negligible amounts of wealth.

 2) Random amish individuals are about as happy as billionaire americans.

 These facts together tell us this: americans have billions of dollars invested in negative wisdom. 

 Perhaps one in a hundred million have wisdom worth zero. In modern times, getting wisdom all the way up to [not holding you back] is a tremendous, heroic achievement.

 Naturally, I'm one in a billion or so. There are others. Fewer than 10. We're so hard to find that I would like to rank us (so I can get to #1 obvs) but I can't. The necessary information is not available. Also the others wouldn't care about the ranking, so it's quite pointless. Even more pointless: nobody but the other wisdom one-in-billionaires can even understand the ranking. "But what are you even measuring?" (Not that sub-billionaires are fluent enough to state their thoughts this clearly.)

 Check: amish [wisdom] amounts to what dark ages peasants thought was obvious. It can be considered a default. The free gift package. If you're doing worse than this, it is due to epic levels of villainy. Colossal, titanic investments in negative wisdom. 

 It bears repeating: a poor american is not merely poor. Including the intangible asset of wisdom, they are billions of dollars in the hole. Their net worth is Infernal. Have to dig a mohorovičić borehole to draw the line on the graph low enough.

The Sun is Female

 She is moody, variable, and she doesn't like it when you stare at her.

 Women follow men. They have a lunar cycle, following the steady, predictable, precise, clear moon, because they follow the masculine's lead. 

 The lesson here is that mortals are profoundly fond of embracing falsehoods. Cognitive health is abnormal. 

 Well, that or male mortals are feminine like the moon, and female mortals are masculine like the sun.

If trump doesn't get his fourth term y'all are fucked in four years

 'fourth' is not a typo by the way

 

 Who else you gonna elect? Maybe vance once, but it seems unlikely, and it only delays the inevitable.

 It's extremely simple. FDR got a third term. To unbugger the country you need four terms, minimum.

 Reminder that if public school is not abolished, it's nothing but palliatives. The kind of person who can do structural change is the kind of person who won't tolerate prostitute schools. Ideally it would happen on purpose, but anyone vaguely sane will make it happen by accident by chopping down all their pedophilic supports, causing a collapse cascade.

 In the long run the trumpenreich is also fucked. Politicians exist to humiliate. When humiliation of leftists runs dry, trumpistas will turn into rinos, who exist to humiliate the base. The game theory that led to rinos hasn't gone anywhere, and even if you slaughter them in concentration camps (good riddance) they will simply re-evolve. 

 More precisely, there will be some pushback to the trumpenreich, at some point. The form this takes, and how successful it is, will be extremely revealing. I'm wired in anticipation. Practically wired shut...

 POTUS has no power. Trump should have already known that, but he had it elaborately demonstrated to him by 2020, so he has figured it out. Insofar as his ideas were followed, it was unofficially, by officials who could have done it at any time but didn't have the guts to do it without a saviour running air cover.
 No legal power. This time, he's working around the legalities entirely. Just ignoring them. As was always necessary.
 Turns out if your EO is already carried out before the inevitable court challenge...it doesn't matter that the court would throw it out with extreme prejudice.
 Just need the people. Individuals willing to get shit done in, as the Communists say, a timely manner.
 The deep state is slow. The surface state is almost as slow. If you get it already done before the ethics committee has time to convene and scold you...the ethics committee doesn't matter anymore. 

 Personnel. What is it, dear audience? Policy.

Boolean Thinking vs. Santaism

 "This is a perfect example of what I'm going to start calling "Santaism," as in "believing that Santa brings infinity free goodies, therefore if you don't share your effortless, infinite wealth, you are a meanie." 

 "Believe it or not, leftoid mud goblins actually lack the cognitive ability to process thoughts like "white men or my family or whoever else I hate are actual humans"
https://twitter.com/ItIsHoeMath/status/1884696940488909177/

 More false than true. Classic midwit overcomplication.

 Men are stronger than women. This is a scalar comparison, but it's much cognitively simpler to have a boolean. 0=powerless, 1=omnipotent.

 In particular, if nobody does (or nobody should) listen to you, spending effort on nuanced opinions is a waste of time. Women round to the nearest boolean. Most peasants round to the nearest boolean.

 Since men are omnipotent, if they're not giving the woman nice things, it's solely out of spite. He has one thing, therefore he doesn't have zero things, therefore he has everything. If !=0, then 1, see? No matter how much he gives away, as long as he has one thing left, it's more than women have, therefore he's still omnipotent.

 "But lots of men say this too!"
 No. If she says this, she is a woman. Turns out the woke were right: there are female penises, it's merely not about declaration. It's about empirical behaviour. "Maybe he's lying!" Appealing to women by lying is extremely feminine. (Also, women without pussies are not sexy, unless you're a sodomite. Missing vital equipment...it's difficulty enough even with one...)

 

 "What about divorce-raped men?" Even after he's practically in debtor's prison, working three jobs just to keep up with the alimony payments, it's still the case that if other men don't stop him from welching on the payments, the woman can't do anything about it. It's all man-on-man action, the woman is a bystander. Heckler or kibbutzer at best. Men often don't appreciate this, but all women appreciate this viscerally. Men instead round the men letting themselves be manipulated by women into the woman's power. 

 

 Nobody knows if leftists (grass-monkey normal) lack the cognitive ability to process whatever, because they don't care to try. 
 Classic ~dissident~ cope. "Oh yes the leftists surely want to be nice, but they don't know how!" How sad. Tragic. It's especially funny when you get this stuff from a guy who says lefties are plain evil. As if that's unexpected for a mortal.

 Secondarily, the OP is correct. The point of trump and trumpism is to humiliate further-leftists. How nice of wokists to make themselves so vulnerable.

 If men aren't giving women everything, it's because daddy doesn't love her. She can't do anything about it except call daddy a poopyhead and cry. If that doesn't work, she's SOL. She already tried being nice, to the best of her ability, and it already didn't work. 

 This is reinforced by the obvious fact that her male progenitor really doesn't love her. Who can love a mortal? Not even god loves mortals.

Minimum Viable University Killshot

 If you want to kill the universities, you barely have to do anything.

Like, try just not giving them tax dollars...the first GONGO was harvard.

More importantly, legalize employment by IQ test. Let the [[resume]] be one line, your tested IQ, with a reference body to double-check with.
Making Firing Legal Again, so it's not critical to the business to avoid making bad hires. Which nobody can do. Especially not non-lords; everyone makes bad hires, and if you can't fire them, they destroy your business.

HR has to use universities to avoid being fired when they inevitably approve a bad hire. Make it so they don't have to be fired, because you can fire the bad hire. Make it so they can use a cheap, fast IQ test. You can get close enough in literally five minutes.
...then HR looks basically redundant.
...which is it, and always was. The ideal HR department is a dead weight. Most are worse.

Hmm...

 You hear about how comically bad the CIA is.

 You hear about how terrifyingly good the KGB is.

 You barely hear about MI6 at all...

Fifth Reich Defeated

 Around 1969, the new left, american communism 4, violently overthrew fdr's american communism 3. So that's what happened in 1971 - they got around to implementing their policies. 

 The new new left, or the ew left for short, believe the new left isn't wholly devoted to their lord and saviour, Satan. Which is true. The ew left tried to [new left] the new left.

 The thing is, Satan worship is bad for you. That's kind of the point. The Satanist worships failure, worships being a loser. The purer Satanist, like a more pious devout of any higher power, gets their prayers answered more often. Purifying it makes it even more purely bad for you. In Satanist on Satanist action, the more devout Satanist gets, uh, Trumped. 

 The new left was already as purely communist as it is possible to get away with. On purpose; by conscious design. Communism 5 was too communist to live, even on this hell planet, with this hell specie.
 You could tell it was going down when you heard of the world economic forum from a journalist. They failed the [show up in the news] test. Justice grinds slow and fine, and apparently also deep states, and communists who aren't quite as batshit insane as some other communists. 

 

 It is not unrelated that the ew left wanted to supply slightly more tyranny than americans demand. 

 Perhapskis we will see the new left sacrificing the new new left as an offering, to permit them to reverse civil rights. "It wasn't our mistake, they fucked it up for everyone." Probably not. Empires decay. The cancer is already very terminal. But it's not impossible.

No Whitepill: Still Not Deporting Retards

 America will still continue to reward ignorance, self-deception, foolishness, or malice pretending to be any of those. 

 Call me when you can get banned from X for the great insight that battle can lead to deaths. Yes, officer, that one: too stupid, speech rights revoked. 

 The low shall be high, the high shall be low. Wisdom, deftness, competence, will continue to be punished. It will remain a useless intellectual wasteland. No respect, only disrespect. Degeneration as highest virtue.

 Still Envy worshippers.
 Hatred isn't real. It would be better if it were.
 Spite is their blood, their bones, their soul. Disregard destruction, acquire treacherous torment.

Christians Want Rotherham Everywhere

 Let's stop pretending the christian races don't hate themselves, particularly their children. They're not mad rotherham happened, they're mad it happened only in rotherham.

 The IRA existing in living memory. The cop shop in rotherham is still standing. This latter fact is what's known as [consent]. They want their daughters raped. They like it when their daughters are raped. They're pissed it was only underclass daughters, and not everyone.

 The sexual assault rate in schools is roughly 40,000/100,000. It's 17,000/100,000 just from staff. This is too low for the christian races. They want to import pakistanis et al to bump that up. 

 Consider that BLM happened, and all of america could only muster one St. Rittens. Further, he almost went to jail. Almost certainly required divine abjuration. (Also, Rittens was not good enough. Even if everyone was a Rittens, it would not be good enough.) This is consent. Everyone knows Rittens is anti-american, but jailing him for his flagrant subversion was so profane the heavens wouldn't allow it.

 Christians do not think abortion is murder. They'll work harder to get begonias in the front yard than they will to prevent a [[[murder]]]. (Go ahead, mess with their ugly flowers, see what happens.) That, or they like murder. They want murder to be higher. 

 It's exactly like a woman; "No tall dark scary stranger, don't rape me, oh no no don't do it." (The man was trying to mind his own business. "Who is this bitch and why is she suddenly talking to me?" They have to get childish animals, or the manipulation is too crude to work.) 

 What christians object to is having fewer children to torture. The wrong of murder, some states believe, is less wrong than leaving them alive, so the murder has to go. 

 When the dad is arrested by rotherham cops for reporting underage actually-violent rape, he is grateful. "Sorry sorry I don't know what came over me." The cops are there to rescue him from his unreconstructed stone-age instincts.The dad got confused, and thought he might get censured for stripping all security from his daughter. Don't worry man, we gotchu. Nothing more than supply for demand.
  It's cope. Now the dad can believe he can claim [I tried my best].
 I would call them losers, but losing is the point. "Yes! Thank you for noticing!"

 

 Why do prepubescent english boarding school kids even think of buggery, lol? The buggery was the point. I wonder what went wrong? Perhaps the boys accidentally stopped buggering each other. "Wait...this is actually evil. Why don't I defend myself?" Too young to fully understand submission, see. Weren't soycialized enough yet. The sexual assault rate got lower than 90,000/100,000. Whoops, can't have that. "Let's try locking the boys up with girls and minimal supervision. Don't forget to rile them up with porn mags and bikinis." 

 

 Always remember, if your society is in decline, you don't deserve decline. You deserve worse.
 What's pissing you off: not receiving what you deserve. Work hard, I'm sure you'll get there.

RFK believes free speech isn't a right. As he shouldn't.

 "RFK just gave a flawless answer to Bernie Sanders asking if health care is a human right. Bet Sanders didn't expect an answer this intelligent... he interrupted RFK IMMEDIATELY. 

 "SANDERS: Is it a human right? Yes or no? 

 "RFK: In the way that free speech is? It's different, because free speech costs nothing. In health care - if you smoke cigs for 20 years, and you get cancer - you are now taking from the pool of resources..-" https://twitter.com/EricLDaugh/status/1884650963140596219

 

 Free speech isn't free.
 Do you pay for your twitter server? lel

 Subsidized speech.
 [[[Free]]] publishing. 

 Even if you're only permitted to say whatever you want verbally, with your mouth, with your friends at the bar, you have to prosecute the bartender who throws you out. Which costs money. 

 Naturally this irrelevant eric loser, by quoting RFK, also believes this. He's just lying about it, because he believes (probably correctly) it's politically useful in the short term.

School is Hate

 Fasco-Communists, black governments, Nameless One worshippers, make a big deal about Hate. 

 What is it, really? Hate is when you are under the power of honourless evil. 

 If you're under the power of a honourable man who hates you, he will kill you. It won't suck for very long. 

 True Hate can only be received from madmen or the depraved. 

 In particular, schoolteachers. As a student, they have absolute power over your fate. You can't even go to the bathroom without explicit permission. Further and obviously, at best they don't care about you at all. Indeed it's clear that if you express joy, they get upset. Having fun? Getting along with your friends? Cut that out. Cut that out right now. 

  There's no need to demonstrate this is a major purpose of the school system. Ensure all children, when faced with at-best-indifferent masters, masters who are their enemies, the child feels despair. The child gives up, surrenders, doesn't even try to fight back. It must become an absolutely engrained habit. 

 Ironically, I have to say the system doesn't work. Personnel is policy. If the children weren't basically losers in the first place, it wouldn't function. It won't take root in anyone who wasn't born to submit. Almost all the hassle has no strategic function.
 It's done because children are born to folk to hate them, who want them to suffer. Naturally, such losers will hate themselves with unlimited passion. They have trouble tormenting themselves, as their own Darwinian instincts are in the way, so they outsource the torment to someone else, who can't flinch from the task. Likewise, they hate their children - the children remind the parents of themselves, as one does, but likewise, the parents can't easily torment the children.
 The point of school isn't to efficiently break any leftover bits of virtue. The point is that these masters are deranged and depraved. They want the agony to be as inefficient as possible. Any reasonable kid could absorb the whole k-12 curriculum in under two years? Yes. They know. They are well aware. That's why they want to push for pre-K. 

  True Hate can only be received from madmen or the depraved. However, they are weak. You don't need training to beat a madman in a fight, you need training to lose to a madman in a fight. Unless you're a true degenerate, a garbage slime in human form.

 School looks like it works, because schoolchildren grow up to be politicians on twitter. Arguing that their masters should show them Hatred in a different way. "Massa massa that's too much hatred! How are you supposed to go on hating us if we don't reproduce? Think of the birf rate!" It never occurs to them that it's possible to swear fealty to a master who doesn't Hate them. 

 Seemingly never occurs to them. Go ahead and tell one in words. It's not like they'll experience a lightning bolt of inspiration. A master who didn't despise them wouldn't serve their goals. It would not supply their demands. What a pointless suggestion. Hence: voting. ¡Jeb!

Manifestation of Revenge is Sour in Degeneracy

 Normally, one believes the γαυς were let out of the closet, and therefore all positive male interaction was sexualized. (gamma alpha upsilon sigma) Men now had to explicitly [no homo] any indication of approval or affection...or rather, most can't be arsed, so no positive interaction is now possible.

 That's backwards, isn't it? It's not that γαυς were let out of the closet and now everyone is γαυ, it's that everyone got γαυ, therefore γαυs were let out of the closet. "Eh, why bother?" and they no longer did. 

 Voters, women, and peasants lack masculinity.  φαγγωτς
 Civilization believes it has no use for males.

 Hitler's communists bullied minorities because they believed getting bullied maximizes suffering. They lost because they were deeply mistaken. Obviously bullying the majority on behalf of some tiny minority causes far more suffering. Especially if the minority is deeply diseased, incapable of satisfaction. 

 When you're already kind of γαυ, what happens if a man gives you a compliment? You start developing feelings. If you don't want to be γαυ, you have to tell him "that's γαυ," projecting the issue. Being harsh with your friends cunts becomes a norm. Because you're all γαυ cunts. 

 The strategy is to use all the harsh language as a "joke" that nobody could possibly take seriously. But isn't a lot easier if you're a total cunt for real? Why make them go to all the effort to come up with fake insults when you can inspire real ones? You are here.

 Degeneracy.