Bloody shovel

Don't call it a spade

Monthly Archives: December 2011

The narrow light of Experience

I’ve been watching these days Kenneth Clark’s Civilisation series, BBC (1969). Its basically a history of western civilisation taught through the history of art, him being a curator. Although Clark also makes the occasional comment on culture, from his aesthetically traditionalist angle. Its normally just a short remark on how 1960s hippies are tasteless, or how the Reformation was little less than mass peasant histeria. But in the end of the 8th chapter, The Light of Experience,  which is about the 17th century, he makes this long, very charged comment.

Between Descartes and Newton, Western man created those instruments of thought that set him apart from the other peoples of the world. And if you look at the average 19th century historian (…), you’ll think that European Civilisation seems almost to begin with this achievement. The strange thing is that none of these mid-century writers (except for Carlyle and Ruskin) seemed to notice that the triumph of rational philosophy had resulted in a new form of barbarism.  If, from the balcony of the Greeenwich observatory, I look beyond the order of Wrens’s hospital I see the squalid disorder of industrial society. It has grown up as a result of the same conditions that allowed the Dutch to build their beautiful towns, to support their painters, to print the works of philosophers: fluid capital, a free economy, a flow of exports and imports, a belief in cause and effect. Well every civilisation seems to have its nemesis, not only because first, bright impulses become tarnished by greed and laziness, but because of unpredictables. In this case the unpredictable was a growth of population.The greedy became greedier, the ignorant lost touch with traditional skills, and the light of experience narrowed its beam, so that a grand design like Greenwich became simply a waste of money.

Lately I’ve been thinking about the roots of leftism, and how its not a clear cut good/evil story.  This comment is food for thought. I’ll try to follow up and make a post on it next year.

Happy new year to everyone. 2012 promises to be a most interesting (in the Chinese idiom sense) year. Let us have clear heads, and wish misfortune to our enemies.

Left and Right, continued

Bill was very kind to write a long comment to my last post. I was answering when I saw that it was getting even longer, and consequently I thought it’d be wise to just start a new post for it.

So here’s the original comment:

The post is about the 1960s. Seen that way, it is largely right. What happened in the 1960s is that the elite decided that they no longer wanted the (minor) inconveniences imposed on them by the norms and enforcement mechanisms which existed to prevent the proles immiserating themselves. They assigned their children the job of “making it so.”

Traditional sexual mores protect Joe and Jane Sixpack, but pretending to comply with them is annoying to the great and the good. The police dealing out rough justice protects the working class from the predators amongst them but can be inconvenient for hippies: hippies who have other methods to escape the genuinely unwashed. Etc.

The New Left / SWPLism / PC is, in effect, a war on the stupid by the smart. “Taking away this support of civilization will fuck up your life, your family’s life, the life of everyone you know? Well, you see, I find that prop slightly annoying, so, well, fuck you, yours, and everyone you know. Am I my brother’s keeper?”

The mainline Protestant denominations by this time were empty shells, consisting of some guy bleating out platitudes before the main event: coffee, donuts, and networking. Post Vatican II, the Catholic Church tried its best to become just one more of these sad zombies. So, your points about religion are similarly apt, for that time and those religions.

“Reactionaries” who want to go back to the 1950s or to Victorian England are daft. It’s like wanting to go back to the soaring feeling you get after jumping off a skyscraper or the high feeling you have at the peak of your bender. The crash may not be the part of the experience you like, but it is part of the experience.

I agree that simply going back is not possible, though. Social roles designed for a society in which 99% of the workforce is farm labor are not going to be functional for a society in which 1% of the workforce is farm labor . . . It seems a bit of a strawman.

That the Orientals and Muslims have their own scholasticism is also true.

What are you talking about here? Confucius and Mencius? The “Golden Age of Islamic Science?” If you think these are equivalent (even very roughly) to the European intellectual project which culminated in Scholasticism, then Simon is right about the need to read more books. Approximately everything people have done was done either in the strange, short burst of golden age Pagan Greece or in the long, fertile history of Christian Europe. This long advance is closing as Europe is becoming non-Christian.

Western elites did not become openly non-Christian until the 19th C at the earliest and, I think, more accurately not until the 20th C. America’s founders, for example, were not openly non-Christian. Revolutionary France had openly non-Christian elites, but it didn’t really last all that long (and it sucked). Napoleon, for example, sometimes pretended to be Catholic. Hell, President Obama is not openly non-Christian.

The problem for your larger story, though, is that the current slowdown in intellectual life seems to have started in the 1960s also. The elites, freed from their social constraints, have not done great things. Rather, they have not done much of anything, except devising every more intricate ways to con morons out of their money, of course. If you believe the conventional story that scientific advance begets technological advance (I don’t), then we are surely headed for a doozy of a technological slowdown real soon now. Oh, and kinky sex is an elite thing and always has been.


Americans have this fixation with… well, America. So I wasn’t talking about 1960s America, but rather about the late 18th century French Enlightenment, which is what I’ve been reading lately. The freemason, philosophe milieu was mostly anti-Christian, and they mostly caused the French Revolution, which killed traditional politics forever. Even as Napoleon lost, the same people kept causing revolution after revolution, so in effect they won. And even if they professed lip-service to Christianism (which they increasingly didn’t), traditional modes of behavior were dead. They had intellectual freedom, and slowly by the late 19th, all of Europe’s upper class was positively decadent.

That’s what I call the double standard, where elites did what they pleased (wife swapping at Kenya, orgies with Napoleon III), yet workers were subject to harsh discipline, and behaved well. That era of the double standard was from say, Rousseau until 1968. Was the most productive and innovative era of mankind, and we are still living off its advances.

What happened during the 1960s is that elite decadence trickled down. So it wasn’t just the jet set playing around, it was total freedom for everyone, with the added chip of state redistribution of wealth to make possible for the poor to play around. Of course intellectual advance has slowed down. The ‘freedom’ cult overextended. Freedom for elites meant gentleman science, writing novels, surveying Africa or simply doing drugs and group sex, all sustained by dozens of poor servants. Of course many elites still behaved, but they could choose not to.

But with universal freedom its different. Freedom for the proles can only mean debauchery. And that without even touching the racial angle (as I say I’m not American so it was never a priority here until recently). So freedom for Joe Sixpack has meant… lots of sixpacks, soccer, and kinky sex. Which is everywhere now, just google around. Even Roissy puts his dick in girls’ rectums. Eek.

As for the foreign reference, I have some expertise on Chinese classics (I can read the stuff), and they aren’t that bad. Not saying they arrived to the level of logical inquiry that Ockham or Abelard achieved, but still, there’s good thought there. The problem being that Confucius designed very stable social manners and they have been following them since, not really bothering to think anymore. And Chinese just don’t dig metaphysical abstraction, they think its pointless. I think Neoteny may cause short-termness.
And Islam had some ok philosophy until Al-Ghazali appeared and told everyone to shut up and pray.
Common point being scholasticism was based on a dogmatic authority, and if something as half-assed as Descartes was able to revolutionize it, its because scholasticism didn’t have much appeal left. But that’s another discussion.

Anyway why are people so touchy when talking about other cultures? I know leftists talking how we owe our culture to the Moors are annoying as hell, but it doesn’t mean everything out there is crap. I’m all for European supremacism but lets remove the outsiders before we insult them.

How Left and Right both suck

I used to call myself a reactionary, but lately I’m developing a hate for the word. Let’s say I’m evolving. I not longer think we should go back to the past. The modern world sucks alright, but the past sucked in his own way. Let me explain.

Let’s talk about myths.

Conservatives have this myth.

In the old days people were reasonably well behaved, religious, serious, forthright, strong, men were manly women were ladies. Society enforced this behavior in many different ways, which we call tradition.

Then liberals came by and destroyed tradition, killed standards, and said people should be free and do what they wanted. The result is Juggalos, Juggalettes, Big Brother, American Idol, and basically civilization collapse.

So Conservatives cry, its all about those liberals! They destroyed those traditions that made people behave. We should just go back and enforce them, so the common people will go back to be god-fearing, hard-working honest fellas.

All of this is quite true. Yet let’s look at the historical angle.

Those liberals that deconstructed and destroyed the old traditions were, on average, quite smart people. And they did that because they were bored by those traditions. They didn’t want go to to mass to listen to some old fool preach some moralizing BS. They didn’t want to be chaste and refuse to explore the pleasures of the body. And they didn’t want to self-censor, to pay respect to some bunch of old geezers who were only worried, it seemed, on keeping their power and position. They wanted freedom! Because they felt, they knew, that they could do great things with it. Tradition be damned.

That’s also very true. The fact remains that the deconstruction of European tradition since the late 18th century has coincided with history’s greatest advances on science, art, and knowledge in general. Well maybe not the visual arts, but literature for certain. Old reactionaries must come to terms with this fact. P.J.O. Rourke used to say that Utopia was the 18th century with air conditioning and modern medicine. The fact remains that they didn’t have that. We had to destroy that world to develop air conditioning and modern medicine.

So we see that both conservatives and liberals are quite right in their positions. So there must be something fishy.

And that is one huge wrong assumption. Human Neurological Uniformity. The fact that humans are all the same, i.e. the same inputs will produce the same outputs.

Let’s say there’s two kinds of people, dumb and smart. Let’s call it proles and elites, using modern blog terms. Well all those behavior-constraining traditions that the Conservatives champion were necessary to make the proles behave. Proof is that since we made away with them, the proles have stopped behaving, and they are pretty much a savage bunch, who only care about sports, beer and kinky sex. The problem is that elites don’t want to be subject to the same rules as the proles. They want freedom to use their natural talents (and show off their status), and tradition won’t let them. So you get Galileo bullied by the Roman curia. Watch that Galileo had a mistress he never married. He just couldn’t be bothered with common mores. He was special. As was Abelard, that horny bastard centuries before him. Intellectual and moral innovation go together.

The Elites wanted freedom to search for new things, and slowly, first in the Renaissance, then Enlightenment, then Revolution, they got it. And they unleashed the biggest intellectual advances ever known to mankind. Of course some people will say that’s all thanks to the Church, that we would have got there anyway, that we advanced in spite of liberalism, instead of because of it. Well that’s pointless drivel. That the intellectual tradition that modern science was based of was, in the end, Catholic scholasticism, that is true. That the Orientals and Muslims have their own scholasticism is also true. It never developed, and a still piously Catholic Europe would probably also never done much.

Byzantium was cool too, alas its dead, and its descendants pretty decadent. Modern Japan is still a traditional society where smart people are drilled to death to learn some pointless traditional knowledge about tea varieties they must know. They end up being workbots without a personality. We all know the type. They are still a Rightist society. Their proles behave, which tends to amaze White people who visit. But their smart people are oppressed and lifeless.

So we see that Conservatives and Liberals, Right and Left, are both right, they just aren’t talking about the same people.

So we just need double standards, non? Well we had those, sort of, until 1968. The problem with double standards is that there’s always the danger of the Gracchi raising from their graves and raise a prole army on promises of equal rights. And we all know where that leads.

So there’s only one way out. Eugenics.

Either we make everyone elite, or equal rights makes proles of everyone.

What’s really important

Is fags. That’s whats important.

Just yesterday 3 different news caught my eye.

One is Google Zeitgeist, some trend analysis project that Google has, surely for Brin and Page to laugh at how stupid the goyim masses are.

Well they made this ‘year on review’ video, which you can see at Youtube here. The video is pretty well done, if too self-promoting (nobody is going to use Google +, stop trying). But watch at the last clip of all, of some American dude (I don’t know the source clip, I guess he’s a soldier or something) confessing to his father that he enjoys being fucked in the ass, and asking if he will still love him. The father of course, doesn’t care what his son introduces into his rectum, and nobly obliges ‘I still love you son’. This triangle relationship between a father, his son, and his son’s rectum is deemed to be one of the big stories of 2011.

Well during 2011 there was this nuclear reactor in Japan which exploded, sending hundreds of tons of radioactive material onto the land. Well the reactor is still broken, and the radioactive gases are already contaminating the food supply, food which is concealed and sent into public schools for little kids to eat. But that is of no importance. What is really important is that this poor American soldier happens to enjoy shoving dicks into his rectum, so as to stimulate the pleasure sensors in his prostate gland. And that his father still loves him in spite of it. Now THAT’s important. The Zeitgeist indeed.

Two, via Ed West, probably the journalist with more balls in Europe. He tells how the Conservative government has introduced a new law, which determines that the killing of a transgender, those coherent homosexuals, will be punished with a minimum of 30 years in jail, doubling the minimum sentence for normal murder. The Ministry of Justice says that ‘hate crimes are abhorrent’. Well surely murder is abhorrent itself. And while England is rapidly collapsing into Anarcho-islamo-tyranny, well the ‘Conservative’ Government considers that what is most important is not the defense of public safety, but punishing those who hate homosexuals.

Of coure its wrong to qualify the current British government as ‘conservative’. Surely the Conservative party won the elections, but they don’t run the government. It runs itself, as Foseti can tell you. It all makes much more sense if you take the parties out of the equation.

And three, Christopher Hitchens died. The left blogosphere is pumping a dozen articles each day to mourn him. Funny when you think he was a Bush loving Iraq-war apologist. Makes more sense when you see that he was raised a Trotskyist, in Oxford. That Moldbug assertion that leftism is a social club, not an ideology, rings truer every day.

British love

From the Daily Mail we learn of the other things Hitchens used to do at Oxford. That is Sodomizing future Tory ministers. Please read the whole thing, its a fascinating article on high-class English mores. Its really mind boggling. It also links nicely with news number 2 I wrote about above. We can safely guess that Hitchens probably screwed William Hague or any other fag that works in the Conservative party. Conservative my ass. Oh wait.

This reminds me of a post this past week at Auster’s, about the English disease. Anyone who’s read some Oscar Wilde knows about English fags back in the 19th century. It certainly isn’t my area of expertise, but there’s widespread scholarly recognition that the modern figure of the ‘gay’, meant as men who make of their liking dicks an identity itself, was born in London sometime around the mid 18th century. I wonder when did it become part of the leftist bible though. Old,  jew inspired communism was sexually quite wholesome. Yet in today’s America most fag activists are jewish homos and lesbians. Maybe the Anglo embrace of Jews ushered this new leftism, which combines Jewish Communism with English Buggering. So you get modern leftism. Jews get world domination, but English fuck their asses. Hah.

PS: turns out that the whole sodomy thing wasn’t as widespread as it is today, and old time fags used to do intercrural sex. So my descriptions may not be 100% accurate. Still my point stands.


I’ll be travelling in Japan during this month. Japan that marvellous country without low IQ slaves migrants doing work that the natives won’t do.

I’ll be quite busy these days, but I’ll comment about some funny news I just saw.

Japan has a huge debt problem, bigger than Greece in a sense. And the country is aging rapidly, leftist politics are rising, which means welfare spending is going up. So they are running out of money fast. The first instinct of the government has been to raise the consumption tax, which is currently 5%, to 10%. They’ve been trying to raise it for years, and they just agreed to do so in 2012.

Well, breaking news, the tax will be raised to all but pensioners, single mothers and welfare recipients. Japanese netizens, the only sane people left, of course have cried for the public execution of the government officials responsible. I wouldn’t hold my breath though.

Basically it means that the few young working males will have to pay for old geezers, trash women, assorted lazy dudes and the connected minorities (basically Koreans and feudal lower castes who are on welfare by default).

To all those who argue if leftism is a Puritan offshoot, or a Jew conspiracy… well Japan has none of both. I’m starting to think that leftism is just an epiphenomenon of democratic politics. Demotism is a good name for it.

Still we are all screwed. Japan is dying too, just wait for the government to agree for a plan to introduce southern migrants to prop up the pension system.

We need a war. And then a new religion.