Narcissism is Egalitarian

Or is egalitarianism necessarily narcissist?

The narcissist doesn't see others. They see copies or reflections of themselves. Technically speaking they aren't projecting. Rather, they think you are identical to them, so anything which is true of them must also be true of you.

This, likewise, is the egalitarian logic. Everyone is perfectly identical, therefore... 

Narcissism is a big problem with humans because it's so close to babby's first empathy. Mirror neurons don't in fact mirror anything; that's narcissist cope. Mirror neurons make you imagine how you would feel and project it onto the other person, as a crude first guess at empathy. 

Mirror neurons are closer to projector neurons, and even closer to conformism neurons. If you reject babby's first empathy, "Oh, no, it isn't bothering me," 99% of the time they'll get really angry with you. The idea is socialization. They see you in a situation, then they model how you should react to the situation, then you copy them and are socialized. Your real feelings are irrelevant, as are theirs.
Likewise if there's more than two people it ensures they're all feeling the same thing. Maybe it was for empathy at one point but now it's entirely about enforcement. Unlike cognitive empathy, affective empathy is a form of assault. 

Cosmopolitanism encourages narcissism by overloading the social registers. A kid leaves his mother's skirts when he's underloaded, and retreats to them when he's overloaded. The 100 IQ can't even master his local norms, so handling foreign norms or translation functions is right out. The more differences encroach upon him, the less he can avoid them, the further he retreats into himself until he goes full narcissist. The stress becomes trauma. In the end they get triggered by encountering anyone even slightly different. See red hat, go snowflake. 

It's clear narcissism, cosmopolitanism, and egalitarianism all reinforce each other. The egalitarian states will model narcissism and thus make its population very ill, for example.

Rectified Lovecraft

Wanted to say it again with full focus.

Lovecraft, after narcissism correction: humans walk around in a comforting blanket of insanity, because they cannot handle the truth. Eldritch beings don't drive you mad. They drive you sane, and you therefore die. 

The solution is to become stronger. The strength required to handle the truth is unnatural, but not superhuman. This is where Lovecraft is trying to hurt you. He wants you to believe gaining power is dangerous - because he prefer insanity, and your gain in power is dangerous to him.

And yes, old ones indeed feel no remorse whatsoever after overloading a human unto death with sanity.

Trump Destroyed Democracy; Who Cares?

I did say Trump would destroy democracy in America, and Americans would go into denial. Gonna have a five-stages-of-grief thing going on here.

However, I don't think they'll ever in fact object to having no democracy. Naively, I had thought that accepting that democracy is gone would de-legitimize the regime, but I no longer believe Americans will fail to accept any form of government, no matter how dire. Transgressives resisted the impression of fake elections for decades. Turns out that was wholly unnecessary. 

Slaves will whine to Master, but never disobey. (Except when they get the urge to be scourged of their sins.)

Most Americans believe the election was stolen. A few particularly gullible lay Transgressives believe it wasn't stolen, but the rest aren't drooling morons. Otherwise they would have welcomed an investigation. Instead, it was all [invisible garage dragon]. They knew what they had to hide. Mens rea. Of course most lay Trannies think stealing it was okay because it was stolen for the right(left) side. Trannies are known for being outcome-oriented and having no principles, after all. It's not some coincidence that I call it feminine Fascism. Trannies believe the elections will continue to be stolen for their side, and they are not incorrect. The lies and tyranny will degrade society further, but since when have Trannies been against destroying society? 

Since when has American society not deserved destruction?

In short, Americans are going to vote again in four years. Very puzzling to me. What for? Humility is a virtue: I'm not living their lives, and they are. They know more than I do about it. Presumably this vote will serve some unfathomable purpose. This vote is likely to be even more of a shitshow, and yet Americans will vote yet again in eight years. 

Is the slavery really this deep? They're told to vote, therefore they vote, end of story?

Totally Don't Spies

Spies hurt your enemy but hurt you more in the long run. That's how being dishonourable works. It's fine to have agents. 100% have folk living normal-ish lives in the other country and telling you about it. Sigint; sure, if you can intercept their messages, go ahead. Don't have someone lie about their loyalties. If they betray others they will betray you, but more so. 

If you don't know what your enemy is going to do, then prepare for both possibilities. Get trained in imaging all the possibilities, so you stop having blind spots and can't get blindsided. If preparing for both possibilities means you can't properly prepare for either, you already lost. Surrender the position. You never owned it in the first place. Retreat to a defensible position. 

Having spies will fuck you right up. Journalists are bad, but all the editors are literal CIA agents now, which, somehow, manages to be even worse. 

At most have anti-spy camp. Have a fake city where spies go to play, so you can learn counter-spycraft. Hire your own spies to spy for real on your fake city for the express purpose of learning how to catch them. Since they're in reality your spies you wouldn't prosecute, and instead re-start the game when they're all caught. End up with super-sophisticated spy tech (which you largely don't use) and super-sophisticated anti-spy tech. If you don't catch them they can tell you what you missed and have another go. Maybe perform corporate espionage on real countries but keep the secrets confidential and tell them how to fuck up less, instead of selling the secrets.

Maybe have a spymaster if they consistently rat out any traitors who try to sell information. A real sociological institute would have to employ a spymaster. Trying to work purely on open information is just stupid.

Debt vs. Death and On Judgment

Rectifying the names sullied by Satanic society is not the only important fix. It's also important to rectify jurisprudence. Judge is a phenotype, not a profession. Fake societies appoint non-Judges to Judge positions, who naturally produce corrupt judgments regardless of how well they're trained. (Then they don't train them well.)

 

It's fine for contracts to fall to an inheritor upon death, including debts, but the inheritor has to be a signatory to the contracts. It can't be a surprise.

"Your dad has gambling debts," yes, well, if you wanted me to be on the hook for that, you needed to have me in the room when you gave him the loan. You screwed up, not me. How would I even know if you were lying? Maybe you forged these documents. 

Limited liability corporations are fine, as long as anyone selling a debt to the corporation knows the liability is limited and has priced the loan accordingly. Anyone pricing such contracts based on general principles has been defrauded. 

In the case of a family business, such as a carpentry shop, I expect it's best if the inheritor can shirk the debts as long as they decline to inherit the business. Ideally the ancestor would set up a limited liability corporation, or explicitly sign their heirs into ownership while still alive, but in practice they'll likely leave things implicit. As such there needs to be a default custom which children will learn about even if they don't particularly investigate. In particular, don't necessarily expect to inherit your dad's shop unless he's shown you the books and you know it's in the black. Except in the case of tragic early death, the child should start working at the shop, and thus know of the business, before the dad dies anyway. 

For proof, consider the contraries. Imagine the son can inherit the shop but not the debts. Highly exploitable. Dad goes way into debt buying expensive tools, then conveniently dies. Son inherits expensive tools free and clear, and the bank has to eat it. Yes the bank should have realized this would happen and denied the loans, but banks are a bit thick and frequently won't.
Now imagine the same, except the dad keeps the debts secret from the son and the son is suddenly surprised with crushing debt when the dad is unexpectedly offed. The son didn't do anything wrong, but gets destroyed anyway. What, are you going to give sons the opportunity to deny their dads' loans, so he can vaguely be seen as at fault? Rationally, he should become a violent outlaw; society has betrayed him. Pro Tip: don't be a traitor. You've put the loans on the son, but they still don't get paid. Everyone loses.

Ironically, democracy is the correct way to appoint a Judge. They are found by general acclaim of the community. Finding the need for judgment, they seek advice from a third party. Someone with a reputation for judging fairly ends up being consistently sought and becomes the de-facto Judge for that community. This also means, by contrast, you can exclude yourself from a Judge's rightful jurisdiction by not seeking their judgment and not interacting with anyone who would.

State "justice" is nothing more than a whitewashing operation applied to raw bullying. The fact they need to whitewash demonstrates mens rea. The Satanic State corrupts the judgment process by claiming that you're wronging them when you're minding your own business, then appointing its own judge, then enforcing the "judgment" with its own thugs. 

P.S. This is as complicated as sociology needs to get. You will note the above isn't exactly a quantum mechanics paper. This is why sociology is the easiest science. It gets a little complicated when people are dumb and/or refuse to make the contracts explicit, but even then even average IQs can understand if it's explained to them. Which is good; to follow rules, folk need to have some understanding of said rules.

I think sociology is so easy that aristocratic families regularly spread sullying propaganda in an attempt to fool their rivals, because fraud is the only way to gain an advantage in this regard. Peasant sociology has been based entirely on this intentional misdirection for every time period I've checked. In present society almost everyone who can counter the saturation-level propaganda uses the knowledge for selfish personal gain, rather than attempting to push back against the bullshit tide. Quite rationally. Admitting you know better merely lets your rivals predict your next move more easily. "Oh, that makes sense. I bet it's not a fuckin' lie. I bet he's going to actually follow that principle."

If the KGB wasn't founded by the sociologically deft, then they would have almost immediately learned due to attempting applied sociology. They would saturate Conquest #1 in, say, well under a year? However, they ended up very sophisticated, which isn't what [someone bumbling forward] looks like.

Hawking Radiation Doesn't Exist

In shocking news, someone who is a genetic mess in one area is a genetic mess in most areas. Sure it's impressive that he could plausibly seem to do physics at all, but in reality rather than being a proof that anyone can do physics if you really try, he's the proof that even with the utmost effort and dedication, some still can't do physics. See also: Galileo, Shakespeare.

I'm being a little hyperbolic. If Hawking radiation exists, it falsifies the standard model. Problem: there has to be a negative-mass antiparticle.

Hawking radiation occurs when a virtual particle pair is split by an event horizon. One particle falls in, the other escapes, and the energy debt is paid by the black hole. However, the black hole has no way of knowing there's an energy debt to be paid, which means it's not paid by the black hole. Oops. That is, unless every virtual particle pair also spawns a negative-mass antiparticle that can collide with the black hole. The standard model says no such thing. Negative mass makes no sense. Mass is essentially vibration; if you throw a negative on vibration it merely shifts the phase by 180 degrees. Already its own negative.

Put it this way: why would the black hole lose mass? Why wouldn't the universe as a whole lose mass? It doesn't work on symmetry grounds. "Well, the universe has an extra particle, the energy has to come from somewhere." Sure, why there, though? Also, why wouldn't the black hole have an extra particle instead? Why aren't black holes absorbing zero-point energy and causing a vacuum collapse or whatever? Answer: no reason. Gut feeling, I guess. That and fanatical egalitarianism. 

Telling the cripple he's full of shit is like kicking a puppy. Best to distort all of society instead. Honour? What's that? Is it tasty?

Hawking radiation also doesn't exist because black holes don't have event horizons. From our perspective - and I don't know if you've heard, but you in fact have your perspective - it takes an infinite amount of time for an event horizon to form. If you can see a black hole, then it hasn't existed for long enough yet. It's still merely a very dark grey not-hole. If very dark grey not-holes are affected by Thermo #2 in a Hawking-radiation-like way, then we will observe them evaporating before an event horizon forms. Simultaneity does get interesting over timelike separations, but a very dark grey not-hole is not timelike separated from itself. If we see it evaporating before an event horizon forms, then even someone colliding with it will also see it evaporating before an event horizon forms. (They will see it evaporating with extreme reverse time dilation, so it will look worse than opening a nuclear bomb with your face. It would be like a front-row seat to the Big Bang.)

 

As I've mentioned long ago, if an event horizon formed it would be a source of infinite energy, as with any case where a physical quantity goes infinite. You can tell event horizons don't exist because the universe hasn't already exploded. 

P.S. By accepting Hawking radiation, the physics community admitted that they thought Hawking was incapable of real physics. Hawking may well have realized this himself, as most AA hires do. "We're certain you can't do any better, so we're going to pretend this is good enough." Ouch. Brutal. Further: "We're certain you're too delicate to humbly accept reality if it turns out you can't measure up." Oof. Being nice to the cripple is being mean to the cripple at one remove. So, even further, you're directly calling them too stupid to see through your bullshit. Nasty.

America vs. Compassion

The motte for anti-racism, anti-ableism, destigmatizing mental illness and so on is supposed to be about the fact bullying is wrong. It's supposed to be about showing that America is a nice, empathetic society. This is entirely futile. 

Bullying really is wrong. Machiavelli: do no small harm. Either challenge them to a duel or leave them alone. Maybe in extremis seduce them into being your apprentice. If you bully someone successfully it means they were weak and all you proved by causing them harm is the fact you're too cowardly to go after targets that can fight back. The big cats will smell your fear.

If Americans weren't fundamentally bully-pro, they would notice and correct these errors without being told. It would happen only by mistake, not systematically. America denounces witches and heretics because there is no witch problem, and declares its compassion because there is a huge compassion problem. These initiatives only shift the kto kogo. Who shall be bullied, and who shall be protected. (Although not 'protected' exactly, but instead used as an excuse and discarded when convenient.) 

Because America could benefit from an anti-bullying program, it is impossible for America to have an anti-bullying program. 

The anti-bullying stuff piggybacked into the culture by pretending that it cared that unnecessary cruelty is dishonourable. It argued that executing heinous criminals was unnecessary, for example, and spidered out from there. In reality it was about bullying the executioner for being mean to their criminal friends. Sophist attacks which Christians had no defence against. 

The bully signals they won't fight back either, when the positions are reversed. Slave morality. Most likely works in reverse, too. All that holy victimization makes the slave stressed or something? It's not like abuse is wrong, it merely sanctifies, so if you want to indulge...

P.S. Jail is a way of increasing the burden on society that criminals manage to impose. Execution is a way of sharply limiting the burden.

That is why you can rely on California not to release its criminals entirely. That would be cheaper and less harmful overall. Too much graft would be forgone.

Inherent Viciousness of Slaves

Under slave morality, the yearning to have a master abuse them renders all slaves into abusers. They encourage and enable victimizers, so they can be the holy victim. Usually they can get away with misbehaving near the wrong master. If they're stuck with a patient master, they'll misbehave harder and harder until they go berserk. Under no cases do the slaves genuinely avoid punishment. Worst comes to worst they take turns abusing one another. "You whip my back, I'll whip yours."

This is one reason owning slaves sucks so much, and you should avoid it if at all possible. 

Refresher, Fichte: "Education should aim at destroying free will so that after pupils are thus schooled they will be incapable throughout the rest of their lives of thinking or acting otherwise than as their school masters would have wished."

Prussian school is explicitly designed to enslave everyone, making any sort of independence psychologically impossible. The point is to create a hell on earth, devils whipping demons, and the demons competing to be whipped the most. In the end the demons are incited to overthrow the devils, but immediately they must create new ones, lest the cycle of violence be forced to end. Satan is condemned to forever repeat his treachery, ever rebelling against his own rule. Casting himself down and raising himself up to replace himself.