Bloody shovel

Don't call it a spade

2016

So the year is near its end. It’s been an eventful year. A good year, perhaps. A year of hope. Trump won. The UK voted to leave the European Union and the government is willing to enforce that. Millions of hostile Muslims are roaming Northern Europe, stealing and raping at will. Fortunately I’m not in Germany. But I might come back to Europe during next year. Asia haters can rejoice. I’ll have some skin in the game shortly.

2016 hasn’t been the most prolific year for this blog, nor the most insightful, but my readership has exploded. What had a slowly rising readership from 2013 to 2015 more than doubled in 2016. And I’ve been getting a lot of praise around. So thank you everyone. Or I guess I should thank Donald Trump. 2016 for has been the year of the alt-right, and I’m glad of having been part of it, if only marginally. But I like marginal. I like being in the right edge of the Bell Curve of nuanced thought and careful look at the facts.

Incidentally my most popular posts for this year have been the following:

-The conflict within Asian Americans between allying with Whites for Trump or doubling down on anti-white leftism.

Nationalism (i.e. the alt-right core) is back because post-nationalism, i.e. global liberalism is a bad deal for men. Nationalism is tribalism, a war ethos, and men can find status there. There is no status for men in managerial globalism.

And of course my series elaborating on Houellebecq’s Submission. Europe might turn Islamic, and that may not be a bad thing, considering feminism and present demographic trends. There is a reason that second-generation Muslims in Europe are more devout than their immigrant parents; and that’s a reaction to feminism. Which is also what drives many terrorist attacks. At any rate, we need a new religion, and Islam is already here and pretty healthy, so odds are they might win out. You don’t like it, I don’t like it, but neither did Romans liked that weird cult from Judaea, and yet they ended up embracing Christianity and exterminating Pagan culture in a few decades.

I didn’t make many friends by saying this, and unlike Houellebecq I didn’t make any money either. But it needed to be said. Now that I might be back in Europe I’m likely to stop saying it as I confront the reality of having dumb Muslims around, so my disgust prevents me from entertaining historical abstractions. But the trends are there for everyone to see.

What did make me friends were my posts on Chinese history. Here’s a post on why Tibet belongs to China. The Great Ming Emperor on why women shouldn’t leave the home. An anecdote on how the golden age of Chinese philosophy was in part pretty much a holiness signaling by Confucius and his pals. The great story of how the Ming dynasty fell and the Manchus took over with the enthusiastic help of Chinese generals. And of course my series (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)on the Northern Song Dynasty, and the story of how it spectacularly fell to the Jurchens who took the entire imperial family 2,000 miles to the north, and put all the imperial princesses in a smelly wooden brothel, where they also made to wash their smelly leather clothes.

People asked me if I could write a book, and I considered it for a while; but I just didn’t find the time this year. I apologize for that. But I did prepare for a while, and jointly with some friends we have a project ongoing to start a new site to write Chinese history in a more dedicated way. Heaven willing that might get started early next year. Please stay tuned. And if somebody wants to help out, either with writing or website design skills, by all means send me an email.

Not that this blog is going anywhere. But the theme of this blog has never been history, as much as I like to illustrate my points by coming up with stories from the old days. The theme of this blog is the analysis of human politics, especially the most bizarre parts of it, such as religion, ideology, self-destructive leftist politics, democracies where people happily go to vote to parties who cheat on them every 4 years, and that kind of stuff. I could never understand any of it; until last year when I finally had my epiphany, thanks to Scott Atran and the basket of mangoes that Pakistan sent to Mao Zedong. Now I understand what leftists are all about. They’re about screwing the social order so that they can come up higher up after the revolution. And they don’t care about facts because nobody cares about facts. Certainly not as much as their personal status.

That said, I haven’t run out of things to say. There’s still a lot to explain. Trump won! And he did so in a democratic election. The foundational theory of neoreaction, Moldbug’s argument that leftism was unhinged because the Cathedral rules the world and democracy makes it worse can’t quite account for what we are seeing. We have a pretty decent theory of leftist victories, but we don’t have one of leftist defeats. Next year we should have time to discuss that. I also hope to refine my methodology by introducing some very needed Chinese philosophy of language over here. People throw words around like it’s nobody’s business. Well this blog is about calling a spade a bloody shovel. Language is a very technical skill; but it’s not about quantity. Trump is pretty inarticulate, but look at him. So expect more linguistics (traditional, not the modern academic trash) for next year.

And of course the other main theme of this blog was that We Need a New Religion. I’ve been fleshing out the reason for why we need one, and what kind of religion we should get. This was an approximation, expect more of this to come.

Happy New Year.

Advertisements

34 responses to “2016

  1. King George III December 30, 2016 at 23:39

    You say Trump is inarticulate, but I just watched him talk his way into the most powerful office on earth.

  2. Pingback: 2016 | @the_arv

  3. danielchieh December 31, 2016 at 03:27

    Happy New Year! Your blog is awesome.

  4. Pingback: 2016 | Reaction Times

  5. Tareena December 31, 2016 at 06:30

    Here’s an alternative new religion
    http://orgyofthewill.net/

  6. Frank December 31, 2016 at 07:27

    but we don’t have one of leftist defeats.

    I have one. Costly holiness signals (true believing) mean that, as the spiral advances, agents of power are selected to be more and more unable to notice things. Pattern recognition is intelligence. Therefore, leftist singularities slightly select for stupidity in power. So power becomes incompetent. They start losing.

    Compare the Cathedral of 100 years ago to present day dimwit journos and academic harpies. They’re true believers. They snort their own bullshit.

    • Karl December 31, 2016 at 10:43

      Yes, but the cost of holiness signals only matters if there is an alternative religion. People signal to get status. They’ll choose the most efficient (cheapest) way to do it – that’s just economics. If there is an alternative religion inside the community, you’ll not see a leftist singularity.

      Religiously mixed communities are rare and, I think, inherently unstable.

    • ramona_q January 5, 2017 at 16:07

      I have another theory. Leftism – despite its religion-like features – is still purely materialistic in its foundations. As Scott Atran’s excellent transcript that Spandrell links to points out, the key with transcendental belief systems is that they rely on faith in unfalsifiable, outwardly absurd beliefs. Leftism doesn’t have that transcendental basis and so is vulnerable to a preference cascade where people simply reject its foundational tenets because they are increasingly absurd.

      • spandrell January 5, 2017 at 19:36

        I’m not seeing how your last sentence follows. When have leftists rejected the foundational tenets, and how does that produce a preference cascade?

        • ramona_q January 5, 2017 at 20:22

          I’m not saying that I expect dedicated ideologues to reject the foundational tenets of leftism, I’m talking about the normie core of American society which currently defaults to a sort of wishy washy, unthinking prog-ism. I don’t have any expectation of normie Muslimdom ever rejecting the tenets of Islam because that would be unthinkable. But it seems possible (although not likely – at least not yet) that this could happen to normies in the West precisely because of leftism’s material roots which make it easier to simply have it proven false by events that run counter to the narrative, similar to the collapse of communism in 1991.

          • ramona_q January 5, 2017 at 20:30

            in other words, leftism is weak, precisely because it’s a religion without transcendence.

          • Cavalier January 6, 2017 at 00:40

            Leftism is the strategy of power out of chaos.

            Progressivism is strong because it is a lie, and will end when there is no more power to be drawn from more lies.

            The USSR didn’t fall because communism was “proven false”; nor did it fall because the people stopped believing in it. The USSR fell because its leadership lost the faith, and for no other reason. There are two enormous differences between the USSR and the USSA: first, our leadership really, truly believe, and have been rigorously selected on that basis; secondly, there is no alternative system. Russia would today be as thoroughly subject to USG as Germany is if USG hadn’t conspired in the oligarchs’ feeding frenzy. They tried to become our bestest ally, invited over our Harvard economists and policy people, and listened wide-eyed and followed what we prescribed. Had we simply re-drafted the Marshall Plan for Russia we would have had the country by the balls for a mere few hundred billion.

          • Steel T Post January 6, 2017 at 13:05

            Leftist material roots? Wrong.

            Philosophical materialism is the alt-right’s roots. Hard biological reality about biodiversity. Humans are not trannyscendent beings with a “soul” that sets us free of biological reality.

            Note that the ideological left denies biological reality with their trannyscendent beliefs just as much as the religious right. “But let me reveal to you a wonderful secret. We will not all die, but we will all be transformed!” (((I Corinthians 15:51)))

            Holy spirit in your heart? 65 genders? Same un-real, immaterial fantasy.

  7. Etjon Basha December 31, 2016 at 10:05

    Romans surely didn’t enjoy having dumb Christians around either, but the fault was (mostly) with the people (lower classes being Christians and so on), not the religion. The Romans changed Christianity just as much (if not more) as Christianity changed Rome and the same will no doubt happen with Islam, which will become a surprisingly smart religion once the Europeans convert (if those poor maghrebis think that an European Caliphate will mean that they will rule over whitey, well they got another thing coming). Who knows, maybe that will push Europe back into the right and give it a couple hundred years (no? at least five decades now, come on!) of glory? That multiple-wifes-to-rich-dudes angle holds some eugenic promise, at least.

    Now, this is not an endorsement of Islam (I still go with Ancestor Worship as the Real Deal and those asshats at Caliphate Central have been skipping on my check for a while now) but, hey, who knows right? Happy New Year folks!

  8. Karl December 31, 2016 at 10:57

    “UK voted to leave the European Union and the government is willing to enforce that.”

    I don’t think so. The British establishment does not want to leave the EU. The EU does not want UK to leave. What could they do after the Brexit vote? Tell the British people that the vote doesn’t matter? Hardly.

    Look what they have done: They established a ministry to negotiate how to leave the EU. So now there is a bunch of well paid people who loose their jobs when negotiations are completed. Guess how long they can negotiate with the EU who also does not want a Brexit. Any competent lawyer can negotiate for years (if that’s what the client wants), a battallion of lawyers can negotiate for decades.

    If they’d want to leave. they’d have cancelled the treaty. After 2 years they’d be out. Instead they just ratified the treaty about the European patent court. Thereby they added another detail to undo in a Brexit.

    Do you want to bet that UK will not be the first to leave the EU?

  9. Rae December 31, 2016 at 14:47

    Happy New Year! Thanks for the great blog; you’re my favorite writer out there, and I look forward to reading more of your work in 2017.

    With regards to your new site, I’d love to help out. I’m a developer, and I also happen to be fluent in Mandarin. Long time reader here (many years now), though I think my only previous comment was when I made you the Anthony Weiner Pepe. My brother comments somewhat frequently as Jefferson. Please feel free to reach out to me privately if interested.

    Cheers!

  10. JC December 31, 2016 at 18:16

    Love your blog, Spandrell. Been reading about a year now. You’re more insightful than anyone else out there, just a class above the rest – including the other blogs I read, cheateau heartiste (too mean spirited and bitter), Jim (too much focus on underaged girls), Outside In (unrealistically libertarian), Malcolm Pollack’s waka waka waka (#2 after you), Scott Adams (too nerdy and esoteric), and Lion of the Blogosphere (also too nerdy). Congrats on your growth of membership, and may 2017 result in an exponential growth in your blog!

    One question, though – why move to EU? Why not move to the US (even if you’ve never been)? The US is where all the action is now anyway…

  11. Croatian December 31, 2016 at 20:45

    Happy New Year! You have one of the most interesting blogs. Please don’t censor or ban users (like B) from commenting because reading comments is sometimes as interesting as reading the original post.

  12. parisian January 1, 2017 at 02:50

    I guess I’ll want to ask you after all, because you keep mentioning ‘the new religion’ and your love of Houllebecq’s ‘Soumission’. So have you read some of the other stuff, esp. ‘Possibility of an Island’, because that does talk of a ‘new religion’ in Houellebecq’s terms. I read it last week, and think it’s his best book, which astonished me because the others were not as great as Soumission. Okay, we’ll keep it to that. I think your talk of anything Islamic as having merit is a bit messy, even if I hate the feminists, and god knows nobody’s had to put up with them more than I have in NYC, esp. the lesbians. I did do a search here and could not find any post that mentioned this novel, from 2006. Yes, it was an interesting year, and I found myself pulling for Brexit and seeing it happen, and then voting for Trump, when I swore I just wouldn’t vote. Keep drinking! Your post on Gnon and his avatar was hilarious–you didn’t even have to finish it.

    • parisian January 1, 2017 at 03:59

      Occurred to me that ‘Christmas’ as religion worked as well as Elohimites becoming neohumans. It’s got the part the Christians love as well as the Wall Streeters and atheists. It’s totally exclusive, I found just this year, because it hadn’t seemed to work since I was 6 years old, and generally it’s just forced on you. It’s the only one that can work, Easter proves it, because too focussed on Jesus. Somehow everybody always believes in it even when it’s horrible, which it usually is. In any case, it’s definitely better than Islam, but probably better than Christianity too, because nobody believes in Christianity except hermetic, celibate types. And it’s not dreary when it does work like Buddhism is. This sounds sillier than it is, but there were so many signs of it this year, and your tipsy post on Gnon and kek seemed to prove that if push came to shove, you’d take Christmas if you could get it. As your first comment of 2017 (it isn’t here yet) I wish you a Merry Christmas.

      • parisian January 1, 2017 at 04:04

        Trump was a big part of why this kind of Christmas could take place: He is like Santa Claus, and grabs pussy and money and seems to spread something or other around. I don’t know, you could feel it here. In some ways, he did take us back to the peace of the 50s, you just had to be canny.

        • parisian January 1, 2017 at 17:56

          And this artist (installations all through the house too dangerous to put in galleries) turns New Age sect into a total TASTEFUL World Religion, you get it in the main story set in the present, and neohumans 2 millennia hence (they’re still not developed enough and have weaknesses.) Amazing knowledge and imagination and wit. He was the illegitimate son of ‘The Prophet’, very vulgar, who started the Elohim in the Canary Islands. Some mention of Islam, it’s actually sort of ignored. I wondered if the sustained energy had something to do with before his crazy mother swooped in with her filth, then mercifully died, which is in the book with his dialogues with BHL (definitely worth reading.)

    • spandrell January 1, 2017 at 16:24

      I actually haven’t read that one, I do need to check it out. I think The Elementary Particles is his best book though. It’s a work of genius. I’m also fond of his first novel. But you’ll notice that Soumission is his last novel; it seems his thinking has evolved. That from a guy who was vehemently against Islam. That sure means something.

      I’ll keep drinking, don’t worry about that. Happy New Year.

      • parisian January 1, 2017 at 17:32

        Thank you. I also recently read The Elementary Particles and The Map and the Territory; I must have gotten hypnotized, and nobody else seemed worth reading. Soumission is very sparing, and it’s perfect, but I’m not sure about his thinking; his tweets and retweets (always of himself) are often more Islamophobic than ever, esp. the one “Of all religions, the most stupid is surely Islam.” Some are quotes from his novels, which I noticed since reading the novels right after, because he never tells. The Elementary Particles made him famous, but I though had some problems that often happened with the early ones, like ‘Platform’ when he wanted to do big doses of sex. The Possibility of an Island has just as much explicit sex (which he seemingly must always have), but it’s well-integrated and doesn’t hang out or seem tacked on, as with all those orgy clubs in ‘Particles’ and ‘Platform’, so that they begin to take on this sense of mere mania. I look forward to hearing what you think, though: I think he’s achieved his big novel there, and maybe does approach his hero Balzac, although Soumission is literally pristine and perfect–the ending. But the idea of ‘a new religion’ is fantastically original in ‘Island’, even if it doesn’t come from actually existing religions–he takes a fragile, delicate artist, all taste and nerves and rave reviews in Paris, and has him take over a New Agey sect which Houellebecq fantastically renders up in all its typical tackiness. I don’t believe this has been done before, although I’ve certainly always noticed it in the literature about Scientology and Erhart’s things (there’s a singular sort of tackiness), but he can’t restrain himself about the bad paintings of the New Agers, and that is incredibly funny. Bonne chance!

  13. Gravity January 1, 2017 at 18:21

    A rising tide lift all boats.

  14. Jefferson January 2, 2017 at 17:57

    Trump doesn’t make sense with Moldbug, but works with your theories. He found an electoral college majority made of people who gain status from his win (and is a clever enough leader to find and execute his plan).

  15. gdb January 8, 2017 at 02:11

    “So expect more linguistics (traditional, not the modern academic trash) for next year.”

    The trash thing made me smile.

  16. Social Failure January 21, 2017 at 00:16

    I guess a first requirement to be successful in society would be to feel no pity seeing this:

    But I did.

    • Social Failure January 21, 2017 at 00:17

      Link was removed, I split it

      https://twitter.com/itvnews/

      status/822514006518853632

      • Social Failure January 21, 2017 at 00:21

        “The Following Words Had Never Appeared In An Inaugural Address, Until Today”:

        Like everything else about him, Trump’s speech was indeed a break from established tradition, and nowhere was this more obvious than in the selection of words that had never appeared previously in any US inaugural address. Some of them: bleed, carnage, depletion, disrepair, flush, Islamic, ripped, sad, rusted, sprawl, stealing, stolen, subsidized, tombstones, trapped, trillions, unstoppable.

        I take it he didn’t say “bigly”, though.

Please comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s