Blog Service Interrupt

 I said shitfest will return.

 

Reality was all like, "Ah HA! I can make it very impractical for Alrenous to keep that commitment!" So she did.

 

Blogger is in [that browser is not supported] mode. Comment interaction is also suspended. Shitfest will still probably return, but unless someone wants to buy me a whole-ass computer it's not going to be any time soon. In the middle time, twitter's B-aAlrenous will be spammed. 

 

Note that in fact blogger hasn't been supported for years but it still loads and functions, provided it is allowed to try. Blogger probably didn't even want to be a dick but it was overruled by alphabet.

 

Speaking of impractical, answering or even reading comments here will be impractical for the forseeable future.

 

As before, when service returns, it will be on an 8th. Unless I physically die, in which case there will be a few very odd posts in 5-6 years. Got me a dead man's switch. I will also prophesize the return on twitter.

 

 

 

Reality's habit of doing such things is so manic I will sometimes deliberately prevent something by promising to do a thing that requires the event in question to continue or occur. Reliable to an exploitable degree.

With some caveats, if I detail a situation on twitter and it doesn't immediately interrupt itself, it means it is impossible for that thing to stop being true.

You might think you want the world to revolve around you. You probably don't; it can be very spiteful.

Predictive God Taking Responsibility For Women

https://youtu.be/pp0E1gb80WQ?t=4756
(timestamp late)
 
 First time I've heard a good explanation of the yeshuan self-sacrifice. Even so, he phrases it wrong.

 God punishes himself for failing to foresee eve would kill the dog. For failing to prevent it, for failing to protect the dog.

 Here's a time the leftists aren't totally wrong.* When you're dealing with God, there's a power imbalance. You can't do anything, anything at all, unless he gives you permission. All responsibility percolates to God, regardless of what you do or how you do it. 

 Then jiang says, "She will feel so much remorse she will never doubt God again." This is cluster B. If God punishes himself because it was his own fault, then eve's remorse or lack thereof is irrelevant. Why should she feel remorse for something she didn't cause? The thing she learns, via role model, is to punish herself if she messes up. Should she ever have the opportunity to make a decision in the first place.

 In this particular example, God should have explained himself better. She did it because she didn't understand, but let's really go out on a limb here and suggest that God has transcendent, incomprehensibly good teaching skills. Glorious and divine, you might say. If eve didn't understand it's because God didn't use these skills.
 Jiang is ontologically committed to the idea that God can't teach. This is atheism: denying the divinity of the divine. I use the term yaleism for jiang's particular species of atheism. 

 For completeness, I will also mention that God could have fenced the dog away. Perhaps given eve a fake toy dog, so she could be tricked into thinking she killed it. Teaching doesn't have to come in the form of words - and if I can think of that, a fortiori God can think of it. There are numerous ways to demonstrate harm is harmful without permitting any harm to genuinely occur.

 

 The dog that didn't bark: why does God have to create someone as twisted as eve in the first place? "No God, infinite love isn't enough for me. I need more than that." Holy shit woman what is wrong with you. Let's explicit say the word Envy here; when it isn't enough that you have enough, when it is only enough that others are deprived.
 I believe nobody tries to explain why such creation is necessary because you can't even pretend there's a justification. It occurs to me that this is the problem, so, what, am I the smartest sapient text box that ever lived; or did it a fortiori occur to all the geniuses before me, they merely hope it doesn't occur to you?

 Unless, inevitably, euhemerism. If there is no god here, but only distinctly incomplete mortals, then it makes sense when god dad screws up. However, also, god dad doesn't have infinite love &c...

 

 Socrates was the only wizard who was willing to say [I don't know], which is why, and why we know, he is the only virtuous wizard recorded in history. That's all they had to do. Say, yeah this is a problem and we don't know why it had to be created this way. They're incomprehensibly evil if they can't say [I don't know] and they're incomprehensibly evil if they did know.
 Holy shit you [wise] elders, what the fuck is wrong with you. If you were trying to be as evil as it is possible to be, well, congratulations. You win.

 A fortiori, the godel incompleteness theorem. "We don't know because we do know we can't know." Not [know], it's a [no].
 No.
 Not at all.
 You don't know not because Reality is incomplete but because you are incomplete. We add Pride to the list next to Envy. 

 

 The fact jiang uses eve, a woman, in his example, is not a coincidence. If women are doing something, it is because men are allowing her to do it. Women, fundamentally, cannot cause soycial problems without men's explicit written permission. Blaming them for anything is genuinely retarded.

 Hunter-gatherers beat their women, but this is largely for the woman's sexual pleasure. If you're doing it for punishment you're a degenerate coward. If she does something you don't like, find the man that told her to and punch him instead. Beat him, shun him, outlaw him. If you don't, then anything else you do constitutes consent to her misbehaviour.

 

 *P.S. This can only happen because rightoids are a kind of leftist. During left-on-left violence, sometimes the left can win.

P.P.S. Jiang claims you have to learn for yourself and not follow a priest or prophet. He does not explain, because the reason is omnievil, Romans 3:10, which is heresy against yaleism. "Everyone is evil so obey the priests." "The priest is also cursed, I mean, evil." "That's bad." "Yes, the blind leading the blind." Mortals maintain their divine spark specifically so they may do the opposite of what it says, priests and jesuses included.

Genetic Jigsaw Metaphor

 A lot of human genes work like puzzle pieces. Imagine a four-piece puzzle. If you have all four pieces, they work together. If you have a different set of four pieces, they also work together. If you mix and match, they won't instantly kill you, but it won't work. If you get a mutation in any of the four pieces, it breaks the whole system, which explains the high level of runts in caino masochiens.

 E.g. cold tolerance and low-light tolerance can be inherited separately, but cold tolerance and bright-light tolerance can't be used simultaneously, nor can heat and dark tolerance.
 E.g. high confidence and high ability can be inherited separately.
 E.g. orientals work well on high carb (particularly rice) diets, whereas european pastoralists need lots of red meat and milk. What if you inherit the need for both, due to miscegenation? You have the need for idiosyncratic microvitamins from both sets...but good luck, your stomach physically isn't big enough to satisfy both appetites.

 In particular, caino masochiens jumps to conclusions in a way that would be perfectly healthy with IQs around 160. All the untrained intellectual reflexes work well, assuming the 0.01% used to be the 50%, under which conditions they evolved.

 A bastard is a bastard because he has the ambition of a duke with the abilities of a swineherd. (william of orange.) Ultra cringe. A fop is a man with the attitude of a dockworker and the abilities of a kaiser. "I want to bang a prostitute, like me mam." Gee whiz, he can really afford a lot of prostitutes. Good, uh, work. I guess.

 Aristocrats have to be careful about breeding with other aristocrats, never mind the lower classes.
 E.g. the genes of a purebred horse archer don't go well with a purebred scholar. You can't throw a harness on the wisdom of the ages. The scrolls and codecies don't need brushing. What if you need fresh air and deep reading at the same time, in a windy region? Hwoops.

 By (low) chance, children of peasants can reassemble a noble genome from fragmentary inclusions. However, the child will carry lots of recessive peasant genes, so the grandchilren will see rapid downward mobility. If they marry another peasant (bill gates) it will guarantee mediocre scions. If they marry a noble (no known examples) it will pollute the noble's house.

 There is a division between jumbled-up aristocrats and purebred peasantry. Since both are basically incompetent, I wonder how distinguishable they are in practice. Probably can't eyeball it.

 Maybe the shuffled aristos are crazier? More bastardy, in contrast to content, humble peasants? You don't hear much from peasants who vibe well with the peasant life, because they aren't literate. Don't show up in books or on twitter. When you push them, they don't push back, they congenially move. 30% of american adults don't even |have| facebook. How many use facebook only to say happy birthday and wow that's a nice picture?

 P.S. Fun fact: a facebook subscription costs $70 a year. If it's not worth significantly more than $70 to you, it's a net loss to society. Dead weight.

Bears, Illustrating Womanism

 Women like danger. They chose the bear precisely because they know it's more dangerous.
 They're mad at white men for not raping and murdering women more often. (Especially that cucking funt who showed up at the party with the same dress. AFTER the woman herself arrived, I might add. Murder the shit out of that one. That would be hot. Or her mom.) Fuck peace! Or rather, peace makes them not want to fuck. What kind of misogynist asshole made cities peaceful? The guy who outlawed domestic violence was worse than hitler, even mythological hitler.

 The bear thing would be an example of women displaying desire by complaining about what they want. If she already had a bearfriend we would call it humblebragging. "I'm so tired. My boyfriend bearly lets me sleep!" Yeah yeah of course you hate being irresistable and satisfied, you poor baby. "My boyfriend hand me a pile of money and tells me to sort it out myself, cryface, I can't bear it." Absolutely unsupervised free-money shopping sprees are the worst, how could you possibly cope.

 Quick reminder: all women are morons. They have mild down's syndrome on account of their oversupply of chromosome X. One X is plenty for men, meaning a double dose is too strong. Men can manipulate women, but women can only manipulate men if he helps.

 Although women are shockingly clumsy and socially awkward, even they know the bear is more dangerous. Men are supposed to know she knows, and work out what her girl logic could possibly mean. Unfortunately, sometimes women really will try to pet wild bears if nobody restrains them...decisively muddies the issue...
 If men were genuinely more dangerous than bears it would be a straight compliment. Humblebragging about her violent bearfriend. By process of elimination, it is indeed a complaint.

 Women think male socialization works like female socialization. Female socialization is all about sussing out what she is being told to do, so she can do it. And blame being told to do it if it goes wrong - naturally, no woman is an adult capable of responsibility or even discernment.

 E.g. "All women are whores." Men read this as a complaint, as a call for women to do better. Women read it as a social role they're supposed to fulfill. "Women are whores. I'm a woman. I'm supposed to be a whore. If I'm not a whore I'm not a woman."

 After women see stuff like [all women are whores] they turn around and do it back. "All men are rapists." You're supposed to read that as: "I'm a man. If I want to man properly, I should rape her."
 Obviously she can't openly ask to be raped. If she consents, it's not rape. She has to [[scheme]], she has to [[manipulate]]. Morons.

 "I choose the bear." I.e. you should be more like the bear. See woman, chase woman, try to [eat] woman. Get it?

 Bears repeating: women complain about rape because she wants you to rape her. Of course, if you do everything the woman complains about, she'll hate that too. It's the double X down's syndrome again. It's best for normies to totally ignore what women say - entire ignore, completely ignore, treat it like a yapping dog - and simply do whatever he thinks is best a priori. Women can't into incentives.

 Get that too? Women can't do anything to affect the world except complain, then turn around and deliberately make more than half their complaints fake and untrustworthy. (Of course [and gay], it goes without saying, women are gay. They like dick; never beating that charge.)

 If you're bright and bored I suppose you can kill some time trying to suss out which complaints are real and which are clown girl backwards day. You have my permission. Women spend all their limited cognitive resources ensuring the puzzles are as ambiguous as possible, maximizing the failure rate, so they are indeed challenging.

Hollow World

https://www.royalroad.com/fiction/15193/ave-xia-rem-y/chapter/2788148/chapter-336-if-all-else

 Yes, exactly. If the world is hollow, that means you can put things in it.

 If you did not want things, you wouldn't mind the world being empty and meaningless. You want things.

 Because the world is empty and meaningless, it cannot stop you. What is truly in your way? Nothing. Nothing at all. You can put anything you want there.

Truth of Ragnarok

 The Sun also rises.
What goes up must come down.

All life and all divinity must perish, as even the Cosmos must sleep. It can't remain awake forever, it must awake anew. 

Later, Shitfest Will Continue

  Looks like it's hiatus time. There are a few posts - hopefully of better quality except the first - for january. Following this there will be a pause. Hibernation, perhaps. As previously, posts will resume on an 8th of a month and follow the pattern of this december.

Tariffs Cause Inflation

 You don't think crown corporations pay tariffs do you? If general motors wants a part from china and there's a tariff on it, then they do some financial wizardry, pretend they didn't print the money, and put a tax on dollars per se on behalf of china. Then, presumably, china sees a similar tariff, does a similar journalism, and voila their central bank is taxing yuan on behalf of america.

 Sector-specific tariffs are meaningless. Every tariff increases general inflation.

 I should mention the bubble du jour AI is Officially exempt from tariffs. Not even a fig leaf. Tariffs for thee but not for me. Protected from protectionism, apex kek. Print money for them directly, see, minimal wizardry. Where do you think all their [[[investment]]] is coming from? It decidedly isn't the banker's money.

 Of course, as before, in the long term domestic production is deprecated because it doesn't drive as much tax revenue. The foreign interests all get expensive lobbies. Colonial britain banned all tobacco except the heavily-taxed american tobacco. Within reason, the higher the tariffs, the closer the government gets to banning domestic industry. This dynamic is only interrupted when the tariffs make imports completely impossible, leaving domestic as the only option...but then domestic goes communist, or mobs up to say the same thing twice. (Ref: canadian dairy, now a wholly-owned subsidiary of the spy industrial complex.)

 A sales tax is merely a domestic tariff. Why would the government go all the way to china for tariffs when they can tax you for selling your tomatoes down the road? Tariffs + totalitarianism = VAT. "There's a border where I damn well say there's a border, lol." "Yes master let me cringe harder master." 

 

 Reminder: taxes are redistribution. A [good] tax doesn't destroy any wealth directly, it merely arrogates it to the government. What matters is the tangible stuff the country has, and how much of it the non-government has to share. When you buy untariffed imports, you're driving foreign taxation thus redistributing goods to a foreign government. Internal taxes always drive purchasing offshore if possible, trying to enrich foreign hostile parasites instead of domestic parasites. External taxes do the same thing, moreso, and also enrich the internal parasites who use the sucked blood to abuse you.

Dietary Assays, of Energy, Insulin, Chlorination

 How would I feel if I hadn't eaten breakfast this morning? I would feel the same, because I didn't. I would also feel the same if I had.

 Folk regularly say they need to eat for [energy], and I have to assume it's some sort of bizarre superstition or severe health problem.
 Yeah if you insulin crash overnight I suppose you'll need breakfast to get moving in the morning. I suppose that's why you're not supposed to eat before bed too - so you don't wake yourself up with your insulin crash.

 Instead exploit the crash to try to put yourself down for the night, I guess? Works the opposite way around for me. Can't sleep until I eat. Often fall asleep right after eating.

 I don't have this insulin crash issue. Eat meat: it's therapeutic. I don't feel any problems until at least 24 hours after my last meal. This is, also, a health issue.

 Imagine: you're on the savannah, you go hunting. Hunting isn't reliable, so you come back with nothing. The next day, you're too tired to go hunting because you went a whole day without eating, so you starve to death. Whoops.
 There's no way that's natural. I'm merely on the second level of insulin crashes. Possibly a different hormone.
 And indeed this going away is part of how I'm [aging in reverse], as the kids say.
 
 Of course, I live in a G8 country, in a major city. This means the water isn't safe to drink. Has to be boiled.

 My first guess for the 24-hour limit is toxic fat deposits. Since I'm boiling the chlorine out of my water, my liver is no longer swamped and it's able to clear out poisons instead of sequestering them.
 Fat does sequester the poison but nothing in the body is airtight. The poisons leak, and the liver has to deal with them, but it's still swamped, so it sequesters them in more fat. Which leaks, and then...

 Without the toxic fat deposits, I'm sleeping better, and closing on 48 hours of peak operation after my last meal. Presumably if I had true health it would be a week or two, but I'm not optimistic about ever reaching that level. Five days would be more than enough.

  Action: boil water. Result: absurd profit.

 P.S. If cooking vegetables, boil twice. If organics are in the water the chlorine becomes chloroamines rather than being driven off. If you want more chlorine in your system, try salt.

Newcomb's Narcissism

 Why is the predictor handing out arbitrary boxes of money?
 What does he get out of it?
 Sounds like a self-contradiction to me. A reliable predictor would reliably predict he should keep the money. The 'paradox' vanishes if we introduce rationality to the players. Otherwise: insanity is not reliable. Whoops.

 Is he giving out money because it's worthless to him? Prediction isn't worthless, it has some cost. There's no way he would bother to make the effort to achieve reliability if the money was meaningless. "In one box, there is visibly pocket lint. In the other...there might be a rusty penny." Yeah the predictor is totally going to bother to play this game straight. 

 More importantly, what does newcomb want? What does he get out of it?

 "I'm an atheist because I can't imagine my personal god as a person. It is inconceivable that he has his own desires or motivations." Good 'ol clockwork personal god.

 This is what that whole [frame] discourse is about. Whether you one-box or two-box, you're accepting that clockwork personal gods, who exist only to hand out cold hard cash for fluffy bunny unicorn reasons, are a reasonable part of practical ontology. The frame is the payload. The 'paradox' is merely bait. 

 This puzzle is not created out of curiosity and it would be stranger if it weren't inherently erroneous. Newcomb's troll box. 

 "Mommy, I don't care what you want. I have the right to your milk, hurry it up."
Nothing but very very Sophisticated mommy issues. Or congenital brain damage. 

 If you can't precommit to taking box B such that omega can safely predict you won't take both boxes, the other thing he can't do is stop you from changing your mind and picking up box A too anyway.
 Take box B as if you're only taking box B. See what's in it.
 Then, what, the money in B vanishes when you change your mind? You going to build a concrete bunker to stop anyone taking box A? What if someone takes A but, generously, gifts it to you, does that count as taking both? Do you have to refuse?
 Newcomb clearly suffered from aphantasia. Or was perhaps illiterate. Didn't know what words mean. An affliction shared by the interlocutors.

 At least the trolley problem happens in real life, in very rare cases. It's not immune to experiment.

Monetary Affordance In And Of Itself

 The only things that can't be bought with money are things which can't be acquired by any means. You can't buy antigravity, and you can't get it in any other way either. 

 Can you buy love? You can buy time, and spending time you can buy wisdom about love. Yes, you can buy love.

 Can you buy trust? Absolutely. You can spend time learning about trust, then execute on that knowledge. You can buy someone else's time with money too, and spend their time on things that will make them trust you. Buy true friends in job lots if you have the cash.

 Can you buy quality? You can, and indeed must, buy the things which lead to quality. Not only is there no such thing that can't be bought, failing to spend in pursuit of quality will fail strategically. 

 Can you buy health? What kind of stupid question is this? Buy the right to sleep in every morning. Just try it. 

 Can you buy honour? You can buy training, from which you get discipline. You can buy a Stoic tutor and meditate on your faults until you don't have them anymore, buying the time to do so. Yes, you can buy honour.

 Can you buy karma? Assuming karma can be changed at all, then, yes, obviously, how else are you going to get it?

 Can you buy a god? Absolutely. The divine is for sale.

 If you had, could have, enough money, you could buy the laws of physics. 

 

 When someone says a thing can't be bought, they are a politician. They are lying to you, trying to harm your interests.

Elo Telos N

 Game theory professor man is right and wrong about musk. Check out the last 1/4 to 1/8 of the video if you don't want to watch the whole thing. Perhaps skim the transcript.

  https://www.youtube.com/embed/9MURGjjG4aA

 Musk is in fact doing the Socrates thing. He looked at other mortals, understood them sufficiently well, and reacted logically. "Get me off this rock. Whatever means necessary." Musk adds, "(a few of you can come with)"

 The secret societies think musk is doing what p.history says they think he's doing, and they're right. Musk is mistaken. What p.history calls the [secret societies] (probably the spy agency lords) permit musk to do what he does because musk is not doing what musk thinks he's doing. Which is why he's sort of rich and you're, you know, not.

 E.g. assuming !!america!! really is a jew-owned enterprise, then musk was allowed to buy twitter because it was, in the end, good for the jews. Swap out the variables as necessary to get the truth; the equation itself and the operators are accurate.

Women Can't Into Incentives

 "It is far from ideal, as Shao Zhilan sits far too close to him and smells far too good for his comfort."

devastated; realized she's uglier than shao zhilan

 

 If she was smelling good for the benefit of the man in question, it would be no problem. He could appreciate the benefit and perhaps offer some token in response. Why, they might even develop a positive relationship.

 She isn't. She's trying to manipulate him. She wants to tease, to fool him, and have him offer real things - not mere tokens - in reply.

 The problem is he can simply know this. He can appreciate her olfactory benefits and offer nothing in return. By trying to exploit him, she ensures the winning move is to exploit her, and there's nothing she can do to defend herself.

 Women are not cooperators. It's [[[polarity]]] you see. Men (can be, should be) cooperators. Therefore, women, to avoid being masculine, must be traitors.

 Defect on defectors.

 "As Emperor Xiang contemplates such deep, philosophical questions and most definitely does not stare at Lady Shao in any manner that can be deemed improper,"
 Why the fuck not? Stare like crazy. What's she going to do, stop smelling good at you? Your only thought of restraint: don't stare so much she learns to dress modestly. Stop precisely just before she figures it out. Even if you fail to finesse the line, oh well. Don't care, had ogle.
 If women were cooperators, the calculus would be different. They're not, so it isn't.

 Always Be Exploiting.

Romance Considered Retarded

 Hot chicks have indifferent husbands because every modern woman has an indifferent husband, if he cared she would trade up. It would mean he thought he was getting a great deal, implying she can buy more at the same price. 

 The lovers of hot chicks are even more indifferent because he has options. You don't devote yourself to the fifth beer in the case. 

 Disney romance is a function of market failure or a relationship built on delusion and hysteria. It's exciting when you thought you didn't deserve it. Japanese doormat + cute anime girl or dowdy denise + billionaire immortal mass murderer. Problem: you're not as stupid as disney tries to tell you, you really don't deserve it.

 Also, as always, watch out for gender inversion. Devotion in women is very attractive. Due to !!polarity!!, by necessity devotion is actively unattractive in men. Unless it's illegal for her to fuck off, don't be nice to her, it's dumb.

 You can get a devoted girl by being hotter than her, but you can't be hotter than a 10, you can only also be a 10. Women especially rank these things relatively, not by absolutes.

Why Teenagers Hide Their Crush

  Gee alrenous, why do you feel stupid today?

 Today, I feel stupid for only now figuring out why you want to keep the object of your courtship secret. It's because girls will threaten each other out of risible jealousy, and girls are cowardly so it will work. 

 Turns out this secrecy impulse is a perfectly rational and probably genetic.

 How to stop this? Ensure the girls have no idea who you're after. Either look aloof, keeping all courting interactions completely private, or flirt indiscriminately, so it's impossible to tell who you're serious about.

 Or, you know, do the arranged marriage thing. End-run the entire dynamic. What if not isomorphic to adultery.
You may notice these indirect, manipulative tactics seem distinctly unmasculine. Feminine, even. That's because they are. Difficult, usually impossible, to engage in them and retain self-respect. Which is why you don't flirt. Don't court. Walk up to some bitch, say, "Hey you, marry me." Either it works or it doesn't, end of story.

Steel Communism

  Communism IRL: all are equal in death. This is why full AAA communism ends up killing everyone.

 This is close to the correct collectivist outcome: execution of 90-95% of the population. If the purpose of your soyciety is to work as hard as possible for the collective, what is truly the best way to contribute? In a truly non-individualist society, the most valuable thing nearly everyone can contribute is to cease existing. 

 Keep that in mind next time anyone argues for collectivism. "Cool. You're volunteering to be executed first, right? Show us how it's done! Be a real hero, an hero!"
Gotta lead from the front, in this case.

 Deadweights should instead be dead simpliciter, and the dead weight is a supermajority. The only reason to retain them is cannon fodder. Give them a gun and send them to be blown up by a FPV drone. Keep your warriors alive at their expense. Should cost the enemy more than you, enough to offset the slave's food and board in the short time before they're killed, even less the lost equipment. Can't exactly reuse the uniform...
Or, if not, execution 100%. "You have two weeks to get yourself killed. Non-suicide is a firing squad offence."

 P.S. Who cares about the morale of cannon fodder? They're not supposed to win, they're supposed to die instead of someone who can contribute in ways other than by ceasing to take up space or air.

Accepting Preyer

 On one hand my predatory instinct took over; saw a weakness and thoughtlessly pounced. On the other hand, I'm trying to do him a favour. If a sapient text box can effortlessly spot your weakness from a throwaway line in single-medium text, then everyone else is seeing it too. The only question is whether they're exploiting it openly or covertly.

 Grant me the strength to accept the herbivory I cannot change.

https://xcancel.com/cloneristic/status/1996688925629599903

 The favour is phrased and structured as an attack, as if from a peer. Doing the kindness of not openly asserting total dominance by phrasing it as merciful advice offered from above. 

 If he can get over himself long enough to admit there's a weakness there, then he can fix it. He can psychologically cast it as showing me up, showing he can do anything I can do, rather than having to admit I can position as a parent to his child. Which is how I would have phrased it if I wanted to make it impossible for him to address the chink in the armour; stenting it permanently open.

 Unfortunately, as I say, everyone is doing it all the time. https://xcancel.com/Baalren/status/1996692879713226996 He knows that I see him as prey. Effeminately passive-aggressing about it is not a way of disputing this assessment.

 I want him to stop being soft prey. It seems he is deeply attached to being prey. Which I knew going into this, which is why I say my predatory instinct took over. Sorry, my bad. Can't wake up someone pretending to be asleep, and if you're trying you're only being an asshole. 

 Hence posting this here where, hopefully, it isn't seen by anyone who is only going to get sad if they see it.

 Here's the confession.
 "you're gonna get doubly fucked and blindsided even worse expecting to bat 1.000"
 "Batting 1.000 means getting it right the first time and cash out for life."

 Blatant, gauche goalpost shifting. Gish gallop. Batting 1000 means knowing ~no girl offers the opportunity to cash out for life, hence not getting married. Batting 1000 is knowing ~no girl is worth the effort even if you can keep it together. Can't get double fucked if you respect your own knowledge of the incoming double fucking. If you weren't born in a backwater/chaste village that by chance happened to have a marriageable girl in it, then marriage is simply erroneous. Also, good luck getting red-pilled in time to snap her up before an NPC random-walks her to the altar. Really, good luck. It's not, theoretically, impossible...

 He himself knows he's full of shit. I'm in the wrong for suggesting he shouldn't be full of shit; he is perfectly capable of stopping without my help, and has spent decades choosing not to. 

 That said, I shouldn't really apologize. I'm going to do this again.

 Bro, at least have a defence handy rather than resorting to wild, panicked flailing. There's only so many raw steaks I can see left out on the counter without snapping at one. If you're going to openly advertise your weaknesses, expect to get a claw massage from time to time.

Aristocracy Report

  https://accelerationist.substack.com/p/the-french-aristocracys-secret-selective

 Summary: "Membership is by invitation only, and to my knowledge there isn’t a single rallye that even has a website."
 "It’s also telling that the name for the institution is really a nickname, because there is no formal name for it."

 If aristocratic families are 0.1% of the population, that's 1 in 1000, as I estimated earlier.
Note that even if every child of an aristocrat is also an aristocrat, the spontaneous generation segment, lowborn aristocrats, have to be no more than 1 in 1000 commoner births for such aristocrats to outnumber the well-bred type. That's before factoring in the larger family sizes of commoners. Naturally nobody does studies on aristocrats so we can't get a clean fertility number.

 Also note the harmony with my assertion that the aristocracy wasn't fired, they quit. Popular rule occurs out of necessity, when the upper classers can no longer be arsed. It only even appears to be a fight due to a few stragglers who lose track of the times, who conveniently manufacture some symbolic victories for the rabble.  

 No they're not really Catholic. Obviously they can't follow the Pope. I'm sure they do fervently attest to their Catholicism, but you would think in clown world folk would finally learn not to take Caino hypocriens at its word.

Low Quality Festival

 I have a bunch of shitty posts to post, so december has been elected shitpost month. Shitfest. 

 Maybe in the future I will start enforcing quality control on myself. Probably not, but we can dream.

The Meaning of Communist America

 The government owns all the women, all the children, and all the businesses. The government owns all the land. The government owns all the money; it can buy whatever it wants whenever it wants, and if that makes a man poor, they can suck it up (women already own everything at the State's pleasure, or lack thereof). The government can make any laws it wants to, or make a not-law with the force of law to bypass !!the constitution!!, and enforce them as much or as little as it likes, in any interpretation that happens to please it.

 The reason the USSA runs better than the USSR is that the american soviets are less brutal and more sophisticated than the russian. Have nonzero ability to appreciate the future beyond the immediate. That's it. E.g. a congressional committee is exactly a soviet. It's merely that americans aren't gauche enough to call it a soviet, like some uneducated peasant. You have never heard of any of the important soviets, nor do you know the names of anyone on them. They are very, very unelected. By design.

 In america you're allowed a thin veneer of Capital-adjacent behaviour, provided the soviets are too busy to stop you. For example, the soviets have very little control over small businesses. However, someone told DC that crude regulations disproportionately harm small businesses, and therefore they doubled down. For example covid lockdown relief. Lobbyists - the soviet funding bodies - ensure the regs don't conflict too much with the large businesses. They're owned by the government after all, what's the point of shooting your own foot off? Regulatory "capture" is in fact the large businesses being captured by the State. Small businesses clash too much to have a unified lobby cooperative - which is how they remain, in turn, superficially free. 

 Regardless, if you do anything in america, it's either with soviet permission, with soviet inattention, or you end up in jail. As all appreciable businesses are government-owned, annoying a soviet will result in getting fired and blacklisted. Alternatively they merely repossess "your" children or wife. The latter is the government's woman, it's merely lending her to you, on account of not currently using her body.

 Conveniently the soviets are always very busy trying to prevent the other soviets from eating their lunch. In poolitics, it is always backwards day, so [united] means [divided]. DSSA, it's not divided at the state level, and is a world Empire, not restricted to america. [Checks and balances] means even the government isn't allowed to legitimately own things; other soviets are permitted to take stuff away if they can finagle a way or means. Usurper Regime. With all this background noise citizen-slaves can get away with a lot provided they don't brazenly cause a soviet to lose face, and even more if they don't try to muscle in on State monopolies.

 Don't try to start a pepsi competitor unless you've paid your full danegeld for the last ten years. And know exactly who to start paying jizya to, and how much. Meanwhile the Amish get away with mogging !!america!! in every way because they're poor. They can do whatever they want provided they're not obviously superior.

 If !!capitalism!! means anything in the Empire, it's that paying off your local soviet isn't considered corruption in !!america!!. Instead it's the expected minimum. If you're rich enough you can in fact pay the correct soviets to let you do whatever you want. As it turns out [whatever you want] is 15-year-old whores rather than, for example, inventing the airplane, but never mind. Owning your own houseblimp is on the table, but too expensive even for the most voracious leeches. In soviet russia a billionaire's fortune would be redistributed - usually directly to stalin - but in !!america!! you can pay your soviet enough to let you keep some of the money. As long as you don't tell anyone who the soviet is, how much you paid them, in what way you paid them, etc etc.  

 Generational wealth is not real in !!america!! on account of these extraordinary payments. If the stock market could keep your sons and daughters comfortable you wouldn't be permitted to invest in the stock market. Anyone rich and not in a soviet must either quietly bleed money or work enough to pay the soviets to allow them to keep working to pay the soviets.

 Large businesses, especially banks, are [bailed out] by the government because the costs were going to be eaten by the government either way, what with being wholly-owned government enterprises. Why bother raising new State-owned businesses - especially re-running all the nonsense about pretending they're private - when you can simply keep the old ones? Of course when I say the government eats the cost I mean they counterfeit the money and tax the base more.

 The phrase [eating their lunch] is amusing but in fact every time one soviet eats another's lunch, nobody gets lunch. That lunch is simply gone forever, and america is permanently poorer. This will be a source of ever more vicious infighting as every soviet spoils a slice of pie before one of their competitors can take a bite, making the pie smaller and smaller until, like rome, washington loses 90% of its population. Goes full detroit, in other words.

 In the mean time, voters are realizing voters get the shaft, and joining the soviets. The pie-bakers, as in rome, notice they're getting a bad gig and quit the bakery. The pie needed to feed everyone on the "to each according to their [[[need]]]" side grows larger and larger as the available pie erodes from both ends, from waste and supply shocks.

 The only thing not too small to grasp that the government does not own are the univerities, because the ownership goes in the other direction. The universities own important parts of the government. Universities are run by soviets, which subordinate the soviets in mere Official capacities. The universities don't get taxed, they get paid taxes. This includes their VCs; venture Communists. If you get university investment, your investors have no taxes to pay, and you outcompete everyone who does have to pay taxes. Perhaps if taxes were some reasonable percentage...but instead they're normal Communist rates for everyone who doesn't own the tax office lock stock and barrel.

 Using these tax-preferred university investors, america pretends to be Capitalist for the dumb monkeys who can't (and don't want to) add 2+2. These investors decide who wins and who loses in [the marketplace] with a minimum of open, heavy-handed sanctions. If you refuse to bend the knee they can always start and fund a competitor. Conveniently the schools and universities don't teach you do to math. What a coincidental and convenient coincidence.

 Large businesses pay enormous bribes to retain the privilege of being owned by the government and having to do exactly what they're told to do.

 They're told to pay huge bribes. For example, pharma companies don't violate FDA rules once a year by accident. "Whoopsie doodle we made a new endemic virus what a shame who could have seen this coming." Where do you think these billion-dollar fines end up? Any pharma company that doesn't find a way to launder money into a soviet's pocket will quickly find their business becoming illegal. As long as gates keeps kicking back a large portion of his blood-sucking into "foundations" and "political campaign contributions" the taxpayers will ensure he is never poor. Or in jail.
 Until a competing soviet manages to eat his soviet's lunch, that is. Sorry epstein's body double. Should have backed the winning horse if you didn't want to be suicided.

 If you learn the names of any of the important soviet members, kindly don't let me know because I don't want to be suicided either. I don't plan to shoot myself three times in the spine and then throw myself off a low bridge to drown, but you never know where life's gonna take you I guess. Unless someone speaks the wrong name over an insecure line.