Bloody shovel

We shall drown, and nobody will save us

The Bow of the King of Chu

Google openly praises leftist terrorist supporters, Obama forces schools across the US to allow transexuals to choose the toilets they use. The West is fucked up. Yes, I know. The mission of this blog has been to explain in plain language why the Left exists, why it’s so crazy, and why it gets even crazier over time.

Part of that mission is to find similar instances of crazy political ideas in non-Western cultures. Sir John Glubb spent some time in the Arab world, and he seemed to have the same interests, so he produced a very interesting account on political madness in the Abassid empire, which looked fairly similar to contemporary leftism. I live in East Asia, and so I write a lot about East Asian history. I may end up making some money by selling my readers a fancy book with some stories. In the meanwhile, let me share another interesting anecdote.

The most fertile era of Chinese intellectual culture coincided with what came to be called the Axial Age. In China is the era between 550 BC and 200 BC, more or less. That’s the era of the Hundred Schools of thought. China was divided in many kingdoms, who each wanted a piece of each other. It was if anything more violent and chaotic that Classical Greece, which had similar dynamics; division, constant warfare, and amazing intellectual life.

map-500bc

This is of course the era of Confucius, Laozi, Sunzi and all that. Some of you may have some general idea about classical Chinese thinkers, but it’s also important to understand what was going on there. What kind of intellectual climate existed in that time. What happens when everyone is coming up with new ideas all the time? Think about it in contemporary terms. What happens when everybody and his grandma has his own ideas is… a whole lot of signaling spirals. See a small example. There was an old story about a king of Chu (Written wrongly as Qu in the above map, it’s the big brown blob in the south).

聞楚王張繁弱之弓,載忘歸之矢,以射蛟兕於雲夢之圃,而喪其弓。左右請求之。王曰:‘止。楚人遺弓,楚人得之,又何求乎?’

A King of Chu was out in the country on a hunting trip. He had a world famous bow, and the best arrows in the realm. So he was out there hunting dragons and rhinos (real story), when he dropped his bow. Lost it. The precious bow! His retinue was looking for it like crazy, but then the King told them to stop. “Stop looking for it. A Man of Chu lost his bow. A Man of Chu will find it. No need to search for it.”

To European ears this sounds like a pretty awesome king. A great loving king who cares about his subjects. He lost his precious, world famous bow. But it doesn’t matter, because he lost it in his territory. One of his subjects will find it, and use it for the good of his country. King or subject, we are all men of Chu, so who cares? What a great King. The stuff of legend.

The story soon became a cause of commentary across the other kingdoms in China. Every single one of the Hundred Schools had to publish their official stand on this story. What do you think of the King of Chu and his lost bow? It’s kinda like modern journalism, where everybody has to rush to publish their stance on every item of the news. Psychologists call this “common knowledge”, the social phenomenon where everybody is compelled to comment on something precisely because everybody else is doing so. This creates evolutionary pressures to reduce the total amount of information in society so that everything can be common knowledge and thus become efficient gossip, the fuel of human sociability. But I digress.

A modern nationalist would say that the King of Chu was an awesome king. But what did Confucius say about it?

‘楚王仁義而未遂也。亦曰人亡弓,人得之而已,何必楚?’

‘The King of Chu is a humane king, but he’s still half-way. He could have said “a man lost his bow, a man will find it”. Why specify “A man of Chu”?’

The King of Chu wasn’t good enough in Confucius eyes because he dared put priority on his subjects, and not be equally nice to all humanity. Because Confucius, of course, was a humanitarian. A universalist. The King of Chu was a petty man who cared about his subjects, not about the entire humanity.

So basically, Confucius today would approve of Angela Merkel and Bryan Caplan. Thanks dude. No wonder he was never taken seriously by any of the dozens of kings of his time, and died a low-class civil servant. His universalism however was catnip for the nascent class of non-aristocratic bureaucrats, who developed it for centuries after his death. They loved this “we are above armies, borders, and that gruesome stuff. We care about righteousness and love, about what is right for all humanity”. This in 300 BC. Do you see now why the First Emperor burnt their books and buried the scholars alive after he unified the Empire?

As a bonus, guess what the Daoists had to say about the King’s bow.

老聃聞之曰:「去其『人』而可矣。」故老聃則至公矣。

“Why mention people at all?” That’s right. A bow was lost. A bow was found. It doesn’t need to be a man of Chu. It doesn’t need to be a man at all. It can be a snake, or a frog. Or a tree. We are all part of nature, maaan. Want some more weed?

This is explicitly recorded as the Confucians being more 公, more public minded than the King, and the Daoists being more public minded than the Confucians. If this is not a virtue signaling spiral, I don’t know what is. And again, this was going on 2200 years ago.

 

Between a rock and a hard place

This is on the news:

yuri-kochiyamas-95th-birthday-5723472594468864-hp2x

Who’s this bitch? Nobody knew until today. Before the Internet nobody would have ever known and nobody would have bothered to check. But now we have Wikipedia, which knows everything. And apparently this bitch is Yuri Kochiyama, a  Japanese-American psycho-bitch whose father was killed by the FBI after interrogating him about Pearl Harbor. As the good daughter of a samurai, she swore vengeance against the United States.

She is notable as one of the few prominent non-black Black Nationalists. Influenced by MarxismMaoism, and the thoughts of Malcolm X, she was an advocate for many revolutionary movements, which extended to support or admiration for communist dictators and designated terrorist organizations.

In 1971, Kochiyama secretly converted to Sunni Islam, and began travelling to the Sankore mosque in Greenhaven prison, Stormville, New York, to study and worship with Imam Rasul Suleiman. (…) She also confessed her admiration towards Osama Bin Laden in 2003.

That’s a quite hardcore, thorough psychotic terrorist. Kudos to her. You don’t mess with a Japanese commies. While Japanese people are extremely mild and polite, Japan also has its fair share of complete wackos, including Communist wackos. Japan had a Socialist Parties which openly went to North Korea to celebrate the birthdays of Kim Il Sung, hero of the proletariat. And Japan has a Communist Party today which is not half bad. Lives off basically off the support of the teachers union. Yes, the teachers union (one of them, anyway) in Japan is batshit crazy communist. The teachers tend to look exactly like this women in the doodle.

All of this is very fun and all, but why is this completely obscure batshit crazy psycho Japanese bitch in the frontpage of Google? That’s a good question. My guess is that some Asian woman working at Google put her there. She had to put her there, no matter the cost.

I’m not Asian, and I’m not American. But I know many of Asian Americans, some of them good friends. Being Asian American (I’m talking of Americans of East Asian descent here, this may or may not apply to South Asians)  is harsh. It’s a pretty bad deal. You live in a country where bashing whitey is the national religion. Whitey is evil, whites are the cancer of the world. Every single bad thing that ever happened in history is whitey’s fault. They teach that at school and Asians pay attention at school.

So if whitey is evil, then we Asians can shit on whitey then! Sounds fun. Let us then shit on whitey at every chance, while we do our thing, study a lot, make awesome grades, go to the best colleges and work at the best companies! We’ll replace whitey at this rate and become the ruling class! After all we do everything right. We are good students, commit few crimes, work hard, and we haven’t done all those bad things that whites did in the past. So we can just do our thing and let whitey pay for their crimes.

But no, sorry. It doesn’t work like that. Yes, whitey is evil. And that’s supposedly because whitey has done bad things. But you’re not getting it. The way race works in USG was best described by Lawrence Auster:

1. The worse a designated minority or non-Western group behave, the more they are praised and their sins covered up.

2. The worse a designated minority or non-Western group behave, the more racist it becomes to speak the truth about their behavior.

3. The worse a designated minority or non-Western group behave, the more their behavior must be blamed on white racism.” (source)

4. The worse the behavior of minorities and non-Westerners, the more the behavior must be covered up or excused, and the more racist a white is for noticing it and thinking about it.

Bashing whitey is not the point. The point is to privilege minorities. But minorities are only to be privileged in so far as they don’t behave like whitey. Which is the point, of course. If minorities behaved exactly like elite whites, had the same ability and disposition, they wouldn’t need preferential treatment. They’d pass the exams and that’s it. But the fact is that, on average, NAMs aren’t capable of behaving like elite whites, and so they need preference. Giving them preference is the supreme, the most holy behavior in progressive society. And so it follows that the bigger the preference, the more holy the act, the more holy the people giving the preference.

And so it follows that the more backward, the more barbaric the person is the better. You only need to bend the rules a bit to give preference to a relatively well behaved Mexican, say. But to legal privileges to a 70 IQ serial felon Somali, that requires huge levels of preference, huge levels of holiness! And the worst, the more barbaric the recipient, the more likely white people will have contrary reactions. So you have more white people to chastize about their racism! Win-win-win. We need barbarians, lots of them, and the more barbaric the better. That’s how the holiness economy works.

Where does this put Asian Americans? Asians are very well behaved. In all indexes of civilized behavior they score higher than whites. They’re better students, harder workers, commit less crimes. Yes they tend to be quite boring, but that’s the whole point. Latinos find whites boring. Blacks find latinos boring. Civilization is boring. Singapore is horribly boring. But it works. Unfortunately, Western culture today isn’t interested in what works. It’s interested in  virtue signaling, praising bad people just to spite you. Getting ass-raped by a Somali and then publicly apologizing for his deportation.

The whole holiness economy works because elite whites don’t really take NAMs seriously. They’re just animals, things without agency that you can use to score holiness points against others. They don’t hold them morally responsible for their actions. They’re not their competition anyway. It’s not like they’re going to take their jobs or something. They commit crimes downtown, get lowly paid jobs that crowd out poorer whites, but who cares about them? The crime waves sometimes get a bit out of hand when people start virtue signaling against the police, which wasn’t part of the plan (!!). But anyway, they’re no threat.

Asians though, those are a threat. A real damn threat. Those do take high paying jobs, jobs in the bureaucracy, jobs in law, in tech. All the good jobs that whites enjoy doing, Asians can do too, often better. That ain’t funny. And so Asians are openly discriminated against. They get blocked out of elite colleges. They get mocked on TV, laughed about on daily life. Say something about blacks having big dicks, you get in trouble. Say something about Asians having small dicks, you get everyone laughing.

This may not be the case in the US, I don’t know, but it’s absolutely the case in Europe. Say something about Syrian refugees, nobody talks to you again. Say something about the Chinese taking over the retail business, and everybody gets riled up. It’s an invasion! Those perfid Chinese, they have their wives working with them! Arabs do too, of course, and force the women to cover themselves and never go out by themselves. But you can’t say that. Asians, though, are fair game. Something similar happens in the UK with Polish migrants. The UK has millions of Arabs, Africans and Pakitanis doing every kind of evil, of which the Rotherham rape racket is just a sliver. But you don’t dare talk about them. Polish migrants, though, the horror! Too many immigrants!

Anyway, Asians in the West are between a rock and a hard place. They’re supposed to be celebrated as being diverse and all that. But they’re not. Nobody likes them. Europe is, well, in deep shit, likely to become a Muslim continent in a few decades. The Chinese have noticed, and they’re talking within themselves. If Muslims win, the Chinese are in deep shit, they’ll be targets of Muslim thugs until they lose everything they have. If Europe reacts and a white nationalist movement wins, the Chinese are in deep shit too, as Nazis don’t like the Chinese a little bit either.

The same things applies to the US. The Chinese are freaking out about Trump. They know the US is in real danger of declining into the Third World. And they don’t like that a bit, the US is the most popular emigration destination for rich Chinese; they’re really invested in the US remaining a nice place to live in. But it won’t at present trends. So Trump rises, wakes up the white population of the US, and wins the presidency. What are the Chinese to do? They’re now discussing that. A faction says that the Chinese should support Trump: Chinese interests are aligned with White interests. We all want fairness and order.

Others say that won’t do. Trump doesn’t like China. The Trump supporters don’t like Asians, period. They’re foreign, and they’re competition! No way that a reinvigorated White people are going to help the Asians out. So what to do?

Double down on progressivism. Go batshit crazy Tumblr Commie Islamist. Whatever, just burn it. Pull a Kochiyama and claim the leadership of the antiwhitey coalition, at any price. If white nationalism won’t be nice to Asians, the best strategy is to help destroy the whole racket and try to pick up some of the pieces.

That must be what the Googler who made that Doodle is thinking. It’s a hard problem, indeed. I wish we could all get along; we have much in common, and much to learn from each other. But conflict happens. Perhaps the best bet is to move to Canada, where there’s so many of them that they can actually end up dominating at some level.

Holiness Escalation

Remember this? The lily-white couple who implanted 100% black embryo and gave birth to black triplets? They were so happy of themselves. So proud of it. The holiest people on earth. Surely nobody could be holier than us!

babies

Oh boy. There’s a Japanese saying, 上には上がある (ue ni wa ue ga aru). It means that as high as you get, there’s always somewhere higher. As good as you think you are, there’s always someone better. The world’s a big place. And humans can be so annoying.

Another white  American Evangelical couple are on the news. They have a black adopted child, but that’s obviously old fashion, don’t get points for that. So they had to do something. Now they have adopted a baby with no brain. That’s right. No brain. And they made a video about it! Take that. The black embryo-couple only had some boring picture of themselves holding three babies. But we have a video. On Youtube.

 

Besides, the black implanted babies have brains. How 2015 is that? You don’t go to heaven by adopting babies with brains. That’s just like, racist. Are you IQ-worshippers or something? Why do you need a brain for? We have faith. It takes real faith is to raise a brainless child. Don’t need a brain if you have the Grace of God.

Here’s counting until someone makes a video about adopting a black brainless kid. And after that, someone implanting an already defective embryo knowing that it would develop no brain. And eventually, the inevitable woman who actively provokes a disability in her baby, perhaps through heavy drinking.

In Brave New World, Huxley wrote of a future where different castes of human are deliberately manufactured by dumbing down developing fetuses with alcohol, so as to make them obedient workers and sustain the easy life of the alphas. We still don’t have artificial wombs, but with a little bit of luck we might be able to outsource the problem to actual people! Now that’s a Brave New World.

Seriously now, I shouldn’t be snarking at some of the few white people who actually bother making white babies. And they didn’t actually go seek a completely unviable baby, they were told at the last moment, and given their social standing they couldn’t just renege on the deal. I think making a schmaltzy video signaling the joys of brainlessness is pretty fucked up, but perhaps it was some overzealous women at church that came up with the idea and talked them into it, and again they couldn’t just refuse. The guy has that look in his face, the look of a man who is constantly out-talked by his wife and the old hags at church and is actually pretty pissed about it, but what can you do.

Still, the whole thing is a fairly good reflection of the twisted values of our society. File this under “we might not like the new era of religion”.

Epistemic Advantage

My last post had the slightest tinge of trollishness, and not surprisingly it has gathered a lot of comments. Of course my trolling is very sophisticated, and the comments are of the most exceptional quality.

I want to clarify that I don’t want Europe to adopt Islam. I don’t want Eurabia. I really don’t. I don’t like Islam. I’ve been to Muslim countries and I didn’t enjoy them. I’d rather my homeland didn’t become Muslim. But at this rate it will, through the physical replacement of the original white population by foreign Muslims, either recent or born there. Remember this? Well, do the math.

And for those who may think that I’m in Japan so I’m just trolling and sneering at Europe without skin in the game. Look at this.

In 2001, there were only 34,000 Muslims living in Korea; today there are more than 150,000.[1] Furthermore, there are over 45,000 ethnic Korean Muslims.[2]

Given modern transportation, if Korea or Japan opens the gates to foreign labor, it could be filled with 100 million Indonesians or Pakistanis in a matter of weeks. If Europe, or god forbid America, falls to Islam, the pragmatic East Asians will most certainly soon follow suit, as they did before when adopting Chinese and American culture. So no joke. We need a new religion, all of us. All civilized peoples.

So in that topic, how do new religions happen? There was a good comment by Rhetocrates arguing that Christianity lost to empiricism. So a provisional model could say:

Revelation is superior to Tradition; (empirical) Science is superior to Revelation. What is superior to Science?

Or let’s do it another way:

1. Revelation won over Tradition when it became obvious that the guardians of Tradition didn’t know what they were doing, were acting by inertia and corrupting the old traditions for personal gain. Besides, the old traditions were increasingly transparently false. A god can’t make children with a cow. And nobody has seen a god either. So groups that claimed to have direct access through scripture to the word of God had the epistemic advantage.

2. Then Science won over Revelation because it became obvious that the guardians of Revelation didn’t know what they were preaching, were acting by inertia, corrupting the meaning of scripture for personal gain. Besides, the scriptures were increasingly transparently false. The world isn’t 6,000 years old. There are no miracles. So groups that claimed to have direct access through scientific experiments to the Laws of the Universe had the epistemic advantage.

3. Then X won over Science because it became obvious that the guardians of Science don’t know what they are doing, they are writing bogus papers by inertia, corrupting the scientific method for personal gain, getting grants and cozy political jobs. Besides, official science is increasingly transparently false. The human brain is not a blank slate. There is no global warming. So groups that claim to have actual understanding of Evolutionary Processes have the X advantage.

The problem with 3. is that there is no epistemic advantage. A book holds more accessible knowledge than an oral tradition spread by a pagan priest. The scientific method produces reproducible results, unlike a book of stories. But evolutionary theory, for all its explanatory power, does not produce more immediately obvious knowledge than empirical science. Of course the point is that the scientific method isn’t applicable to all areas of knowledge; you can’t experiment with people or with abstract ideas or with things on the past. Social Science is generally a cargo-cult scam using long words and equations to obfuscate naked attempts at fooling the public to argue to send tax money to some political faction.

Of course all of this is rather limited to Western history. China never had Science. But it never had Revelation either. Confucius’ books are revered as sagely accounts on human nature, but they are by no means the word of a superior being. Confucius himself was completely ignored during his lifetime, died a frustrated man, and the Confucian orthodoxy was enforced by the state. Not because the emperors felt attached to Confucianism, or understood much about it. But what kind of man would deny the orthodoxy promoted by the state? Does he mean the state, that we are doing something wrong? For generations? Such a contrarian is obviously up to no good. And so mere bureaucratic pragmatism produced something eerily similar to organized religion.

So anyway, either this model is not very good, or I’m missing what will trump the epistemic advantage of modern science.

 

We need a new religion, 4

We need a new religion. We sorely need one. And we will likely get one. But we might not like how it turns out.

In 200 AD, the Roman Empire was the largest, richest and most powerful empire on Earth. Roman civilization extended from Britain to Mesopotamia. Vast trade networks allowed for large and advanced industries that provided a very high standard of living, far above anything in the past. Rome was so great it seemed it would last forever.

Then a couple of substandard emperors, a military setback and a mutiny suddenly saw the Empire fracture into 3 parts, hundreds of thousands of barbarians entering the borders, plundering and murdering as they pleased. It took 50 whole years until Aurelian rebuilt the army, expelled the barbarians, and reunified the realm. But it was never the same. Too many people had died. Cities now had to build high walls to defend themselves, trade routes had been destroyed, the whole administrative apparatus had to be rebuilt from scratch.

All that was taken care of, especially by Docletian, who was very much interested in how to run a government. But still, as much as Roman emperors reformed the army and the administration, the virtue of the empire, the real power of Rome, the roman people, that was over. Any Roman of learning knew that. And they all wanted to do something to get it back. To fix Rome, to bring it back to its golden era. Romans used to be virtuous, strong, hard-working, just men. Not anymore. The Romans of the late empire were a fickle bunch, interested in frivolous sex, in sodomy, in spectator sports. We have almost no literary works from the late Empire; the Romans appeared to be uninterested in learning. Nor they cared to breed and form families. The whole society was a wreck.

The few virtuous Romans who noticed that must have wanted to fix this desperately, to use the power of the state to bring the Romans back to their virtuous, frugal and wise past, when men fought for their country, cared to learn about the mysteries of human existence, and took care of their wives and children. But none of those efforts worked.

What happened? A weird cult from the obscure province of Judaea, where people worshipped some countryside carpenter son of an old man with a teenager, who apparently got pregnant without having sex. Then the man started to preach about loving your enemies, rescued whores from stoning, made wine from water, told the poor that after death they’d lord over the rich; and other absurd stuff. The guy was justly executed by the Roman governor as an agitator but his followers believe he then came back to life and ascended to heaven with his mother.

The cult grew by preaching to women, to the poor, to slaves, to all manner of disaffected people. They formed local communities where they read this weird compendium of miracles of this Jewish lord of them. The Roman authorities killed some of them ever now and then but the guys appeared to like it! They called the dead “martyrs”, and some of them appeared to actively seek martyrdom, as they believe it would pay off with privileges after dead. Bunch of provincial weirdos. Even weirder than the Jews they splintered from. That the Empire has declined to such an extent has much to do with this and other weird sects who are fooling the commoners, and even some women of good families! Scandalous.

No offense intended, early Christianity was in many ways a superior lifestyle compared to mainstream Roman life, which had plenty of weird stuff in it. But to any good old Roman patrician, the growth of Christianity, Manicheism and other assorted sects must have looked incredibly weird and threatening. As much as the Empire needed reform, nobody desired this kind of reform. To replace the classics of Greece and Rome with the made up history of some desert goat herders, to give rights to women and slaves, to encourage death and meekness instead of the classical warrior ethos going back for millennia. This is madness.Rome has to wake up. We can’t let this happen.

But it happened. Rome never woke up. Classical civilization kept on with its decline, and eventually Constantine, a pragmatic man who just wanted a stable empire that obeyed his commands, made Christianity into the state religion. It replaced Roman civilization, little by little. Half the Empire died on the process, by the way. The invaders became Christians too, but never Romans.

The Romans of its golden age often said that the secret of Roman success was its religio, by which they mean their piousness, how their discipline was so tight they followed the old religious practices of paganism to the letter, no matter how useless they might have seemed. Worried Romans of the late empire must have thought all the time that Rome needed its religion back. They never got it back. They got a new religion. A pretty horrible one, for anyone who appreciated old Classical civilization. But a religion they got, and it wasn’t that bad. Most of the Western empire still speaks Latin to this day. The Eastern half even kept calling himself the Roman Empire for a thousand years.

You might have noticed the parallels with our situation. We want to go back to the old days when Europeans were virtuous, frugal and strong. That’s not going to work. It never works. I say we need a new religion. I say we’ll get a new religion, because nature abhors a vacuum, and a vacuum is what we have right now. But the new religion we end up getting may not be nothing we like. It might very well something horrifying, something which denies all the values we hold dear. But as horrifying as it may be, it may end up winning.

Christianity had to be horrifying for a Roman patrician. But the Christians had children. They had stable families. They didn’t do infanticide, did less drugs, less drinking, less sodomy, less idle watching chariot races or gladiator matches. The messianic wannabe Jews were a bunch of meek underclass pussies who hadn’t read their Homer. But they won. And by winning, they destroyed Roman civilization. But they also tamed the Germans, and so a new hybrid civilization was born in Europe. It was poor, dark, brutish and nasty compared to the golden days of the Pax Romanica.

But at least the Roman peoples physically survived, and eventually developed a new civilization which was the most advance the world has ever seen. If Diocletian, Julian and the good old Romans had succeeded in crushing Christianity, pagan Romans would have probably continued in their hedonist ways, choosing drink and fun over reproducing; eventually the Huns would have come and destroyed the whole Empire, reducing half the land to pasture and physically replacing the Roman people. Even if by some miracle, the Roman empire had succeeded in integrating the Germans and the Huns into Romanitas, and they all started killing their infants while they devoted themselves to sodomy and gladiatorial matches; in a couple of decades some other northern tribe would have raced to the border and kill them all. It happened in China all the time.

You have probably guessed where I’m going. I won’t repeat myself. Europe now is in decline and all Europeans of good faith are trying to find a solution. We are being invaded by Islam, and nobody likes it. But the problem we have is not Islam. Is not Islamism. As bad as it is; which is horrible indeed. But ideas come and go. What doesn’t come and go is the people. The gene pool. The problem we have is not Islam, it’s foreigners. Arabs, South Asians, Africans, etc.. Most happen to be Muslim, many are not. The problem is not their ideas, as bad as they are. The problem is HBD. They’re dumb. They’re impulsive. They have different genes, going back tens of thousands of years.

Even if we could fix their culture, their family structure, the clannishness; which we can’t. It still wouldn’t matter. You could convert them all to Lefebvrism tomorrow and they would still destroy European civilization, and physically replace European people, who are busy watching football, binge drinking and wasting their youth studying socialist history.

But you can’t say that. One can’t object to the immigration of foreigners into Europe and North America on genetic grounds. I can’t object to Arabs being dumb; because there’s plenty of Europeans who are just as dumb, and they don’t appreciate that we discuss population policy in terms of intelligence or other personality traits. Any rational, utilitarian discussion of population policy is a complete dead end because there is no workable Schelling point for proposing eugenics in a democratic society. It benefits no one. For one, we don’t know that much about the genetics of behavior. Second, meritocracy is an excellent Schelling point. It’s completely fallacious, but it works. The elite can justify their privilege because they have earned it, they have “merit”, not just genetic luck. And the dumb can consolate themselves that there’s nothing physically wrong with them; it’s just tough luck, which could change any day. All human societies, every single one, believe that human behavior and performance depends on proper education. Of course they do.

And so we are left without sellable arguments against the invasion of Europe by fertile foreigners with a set of innate traits which make modern civilization impossible. We are left without arguments against Europe developing the demographic profile of Sudan, which implies the living standards of Sudan. So if we can’t use this argument, what can we do? We can adopt a new religion. It doesn’t matter which. As long as it ensures the physical reproduction of European peoples. As of now, Islam is a fix, if a bad fix. I hope we find a different one.

I have a reputation as a gloomy pessimist, but there’s a different way of looking at this. Think of this post as a way of prodding you into action. We better come up with something damn fast, because there are only two alternatives. White Islam, or the physical disappearance of the European peoples.

Foragers and Farmers

I found an interesting tweet by a Japanese academic. Robin Hanson might enjoy it.

Let me translate: History shows that when humans moved from foraging into farming, this allowed for people who did not need to engage in hunting (bureaucrats, scholars, warriors, etc.), which vastly expanded the range of human activity.

Nowadays we force professionals to do sales, to participate in long meetings, to type their own reports and other paperwork, which is the same as forcing everybody to engage in hunting. We are going backwards.

Secession

One big idea out there is that what we need is Exit. We need to allow secession, for different people to go their own way. We obviously can’t get along. Some people want homosexuals teaching sex education in kindergarten. Others want to put statues to Hitler and Genghis Khan. Others want the liberty to do drugs, own guns, preferably at the same time. Others want soda taxes enforced by a mercenary army. Many want sharia law.

That’s what other countries are for! Give us borders. A patchwork, a polyhedron of independent countries free to develop their own culture. That’s a fine idea. Autonomy is a fine thing. Surely better than having faceless bureaucrats ruling from thousands of miles away.

Well ok, let’s say we all get secession. What happens then? Fortunately Europe is experimenting with the idea. Plenty of secessionist movements going on in Europe. Scotland is one of the most advanced. Soon Scotland may be able to become free, and the Scots can do their own thing. So what are the Scots up to?

They are arresting people for making videos of dogs doing the nazi salute.

They are arresting people for complaining about “syrian refugees” on Facebook.

They are basically running the mother of all censorship campaigns by arresting anyone who says anything non-PC on the internet. Hate crimes, you see. Even the Chinese Communist Party isn’t this blatant.

Screen Shot 2016-05-11 at 15.09.41.png

 

It is often said that the secret of European dominance after the 16th century was that Europe was divided in many small states, which created a competitive pressure which resulted in, well, massive advances in shipbuilding, weaponry, science, and eventually the Industrial Revolution. I buy that. But you’ll note that for all the political division of Europe there is such a thing as European culture. European countries had different governments different languages.Yet they dressed mostly the same, had similar economic systems, basically the same religion. The elite intermarried profusely, and intellectual life was international. Many linguists will tell you that European languages, for all their differences, are basically the same; vocabulary and other grammar patterns having diffused so much that automatic translation actually works! Try to run Google Translate to any slightly exotic language and it breaks down very fast.

Even if the Western elite were to go mad tomorrow and allow widespread secession; even if Europe and North America were tomorrow to divide in 500 sovereign countries; who says that the common culture would necessarily fracture? The Irish fought valiantly for decades to gain their freedom from the British, only to use their sovereignty to fill Dublin with African immigrants. The Scots are likely to use their newly gained sovereignty to pass a law giving 10 year jail sentences to those who oppose bringing 100k male Afghan immigrants per year. Which will make the British then bring 120k, to spite them. The same way Voltaire was a celebrity in both the Russian and Pussian courts, or Confucius roamed the Chinese heartland working for different lords, Sadiq Khan may end up as mayor of Berlin after he’s finished with London.

I don’t want to oversell this argument. Of course sovereignty does matter at some level. I’m glad that Slovakia or Hungary are sovereign and can refuse to open their borders to barbarians. If the EU could it would have forced the distribution of migrants across European territory. Still, sovereignty only gets you so far. The EU could plausibly engineer a regime change in some country in Eastern Europe in the middle term, and put some Harvard grad to implement EU policy.

The issue here is culture. Politics of course influences culture to some extent, but the arrow goes the other way around too. Any patchwork, no matter how sovereign, will result in the same insane liberal monoculture if trade dynamics stay the same, everybody learns English, the global elite all goes to American colleges, and everybody is discussing politics on Twitter. Sovereignty doesn’t mean anything if the sovereign(s) doesn’t want to use it. I’ve made that point about monarchy several times. It applies to republics all the same.

What we need is…

 

 

 

Giving up Treatment

Apparently the German ambassador in China has promised (source in Chinese) the government of China that in 5 to 10 years, Chinese nationals will enjoy visa-free entry in Germany. That means the EU itself.

This may not be such a bad idea. This is probably what they’re thinking:

 

The Evolution of the Sexual Marketplace

I always say that I find East Asians to be much more realistic in general. They’re less likely to comment about what they know nothing about, less likely to engage in empty virtue signaling, less likely to make up stuff in general. Less full of shit. Of course this is a relative term, there’s plenty of Asians which are full of it, especially those in the media, politica or academia. But the amount of shit in circulation is an order of magnitude smaller than in the West.

Personally I believe that is because of the lack of organized religion for centuries, and because of widespread poverty up until very recently. Life in Asia has always been harsh. Every few decades you got a widespread famine. And lacking a religious establishment, being holier-than-thou didn’t get you fed. So the penalties for noticing things were much smaller than in the West. This has changed a bit since the late 19th century, when European empires invaded the area. Democratic politics and mass media by definition promote form over substance. But the lack of a general tradition of generating feel-good nonsense has limited the damage.

See this very nice graph that is going around the Japanese internet. How the Sexual Marketplace has evolved since the 1950s. Forgive the awkward captions, but I’m busy with the book.

e9d19674

 

a7e9a7bb

 

f08dfae8

 

So in the old days, the top 80% of men and women got married, the rest became omegas and spinsters, and that was it. Then Free Love (the Japanese term for what we call the Sexual Revolution) happened. The top 40% of men started dating the 80% of women, leaving the rest of men shafted, but in the end women got bored of the carousel and ended up marrying men of their league, so 80% of men kept getting married, as well as 80% of women. Today, though, 20% of men fuck 60% of women. The rest of men occasionally date the 40 to 60 percentile of attractiveness (4s to 6s in redpill speech), but mostly subsist on a date of free and high quality porn, idols and  romance videogames. 40% of women also get no action whatsoever.

Note that Japan has had no Roissy. No manosphere. No red pill. These people can’t read English nor are interested in the American blogosphere. This is just regular Japanese people noticing things and discussing them freely on the internet. And the conclusion is accurate, concise, and very fair. Note how there’s no attempt at blaming women for being all bitches, or blaming men for being all children. They understand that it’s both. Men are so addicted to porn that it has raised the floor of minimum beauty that women need to have to get men interested. And that social media has made women expand their areas of gossip, so are know subject to attack by more vain women, making them insist in only fucking the top men, lest they get shunned out of female society by fucking normal men. I like the idea of the vanity spiral.

The analysis isn’t perfect; e.g. no mention of the effect of women’s entering the labor market. And some factors are peculiarly Japanese, in particular the “idol” market and the pervasive romance videogames and comics. But the general situation isn’t that different from Western countries. There’s lots of articules and TV programs about how the Japanese “aren’t interested in sex”. Like the West isn’t fully packed and bursting with incels of every sex and color. Again, the difference is that the Japanese notice, and talk about it, while in the West no one is allowed to notice anything that contradicts the narrative that we live in the best of all possible worlds, and we are making progress at every front. The few that do notice that something wrong end up forming internet groups blaming 100% of the problem on a single sex, as if the whole society wasn’t rotten from the root.

Lies

Moldbug was about formalism. Which is funny because I associate “formalism” with Chomskyian linguistics. The idea that language can be modeled in a quasi mathematical form. Let’s say that didn’t really work out.

Moldbug’s was political Formalism. Give everyone an official title of what he already owns. Let us say it how it is and not lie anymore. Good idea. I wonder how you formalize this?

Sailer writes how New York City is not actually run by its mayor; there’s a sleazy bunch of “consultants” with a pipe to rich donors, who force any political candidate to hire this consultants in exchange for their donations. This includes the mayor, attorneys, and everybody who needs money to run a campaign in NYC. Guys like this.

monicasimoes_221

 

Officially there’s a mayor, who’s supposed to run things, but he’s not very smart, at any rate he needed money for his campaign and he wasn’t very good at getting it. So he outsourced that to the free market, and the free market provided. Now there’s a bunch of sleazy middlemen trafficking with influences from here to there.

How do you formalize this? Who’s in charge? Who will be in charge tomorrow?

Not that this is somewhat particular to NYC, but not necessarily so. Is Obama in charge? Not really. He is the puppet of some conquistador consultant? Probably not. Who is? That’s a good question.

Ancient China was very adamant that there should be one guy in charge. The Emperor. “The realm cannot be one day without a ruler”. The theory was good, but the Emperor had a mother. And Ancient China was also very adamant about sons being obedient to their parents. So the Emperor Must Rule, but he must be obedient to Mom. Which is why there so many Empress Dowager.

The Western conception of power is different. We have people on top of the pyramid, and they’re “responsible”. Which means when something we choose to remove them when something goes wrong, even when the guy wasn’t really involved in the process. But the process is very complicated. How to formalize that? It isn’t any easier than formalizing language, like Chomsky. And that didn’t work out.

(The book is coming, next week!)