Don't call it a spade
Monthly Archives: May 2017
A while ago I said that France deserves to die, if only to atone for the dozens of evil intellectuals that she has inflicted on the world, from Rousseau to Derrida. That’s a bit harsh. France after all has given us Michel Houellebecq, and while he will never have 1/1000 of the influence of a crazy sodomite on drugs like Foucault, he is still the best writer in the whole world of the last 50 years, and that counts for a lot.
Apparently Monsieur Houellebecq went to Argentina to give some talks, and here’s one which got uploaded to Youtube. The talk is in French, with Spanish subtitles, both of which are quite tractable on Google translate. He talks about the current intellectual landscape of France, where everyone even half interesting is a reactionary, haunted by the left, but they don’t mind it, hold it as a badge of honor. Let me highlight the last 15 minutes.
Let me quote Tocqueville:
I want to imagine under what new features despotism could present itself to the world; I see an innumerable crowd of similar and equal men who spin around restlessly, in order to gain small and vulgar pleasures with which they fill their souls. Each one of them, withdrawn apart, is like a stranger to the destiny of all the others; his children and his particular friends form for him the entire human species;g as for the remainder of his fellow citizens, he is next to them, but he does not see them; he touches them without feeling them; he exists only in himself and for himself alone, and if he still has a family, you can say that at least he no longer has a homeland [patrie].
Above those men arises an immense and tutelary power that alone takes charge of assuring their enjoyment and of looking after their fate. It is absolute, detailed, regular, far-sighted and mild. It would resemble paternal power if, like it, it had as a goal to prepare men for manhood; but on the contrary it seeks only to fix them irrevocably in childhood; it likes the citizens to enjoy themselves, provided that they think only about enjoying themselves. It works willingly for their happiness; but it wants to be the unique agent for it and the sole arbiter; it attends to their security, provides for their needs, facilitates their pleasures, conducts their principal affairs, directs their industry, settles their estates, divides their inheritances; how can it not remove entirely from them the trouble to think and the difficulty of living?
This was published in 1840, in the second part of Democracy in America. I found it breathtaking. In terms of ideas, this own passage contains the whole of my work. I’d only add one thing: the individual in Toqueville at least has a friend and a family; in my universe he doesn’t anymore. So the process of atomization that he described has reached it’s final conclusion.
This passage also contains almost all of the work of Phillippe Muray. Phillippe only added one thing: that that power he described isn’t a fatherly power. He sees it as motherly power. And so the modernity announced by Muray implies the comeback of the matriarchy, in a new form, formed by the state. So the state keeps the people in a perpetual state of infancy; and the first enemy that modern society attempts to crush is virility itself.
In this sense, the evolution of France since Muray’s death [in 2006], and in particular since the socialists won the presidency, have confirmed his prophecies to an amazing degree. So much that even himself would have been surprised by, for example, the fact that France was after Sweden the second country in Europe to criminalize prostitution. I think he would have had trouble understanding it.
If I tell you my opinion, I believe that banning prostitution amounts to abolishing one of the fundamental pillars of society. It means making marriage impossible. Without prostitution as a corrective, marriage collapses, family collapses too, and then society for demographic reasons. And so banning prostitution is simply one aspect of the European suicide.
So as things stand now we can predict a great future with a rather ancient formula, which comes from the Middle Ages, the 7th century. Salafist Islam. It’s true that right now the events aren’t quite agreeing with me. But I stand by my prophecy. Because jihadism will end, people always end up tiring of carnage and suicide. The proliferation of Islam is only on its early phases, because demographics are on its side. And Europe, by not defending itself, has a suicidal attitude. And we mustn’t think it will be a slow suicide. With a fertility rate of 1.3 or 1.4, it will happen very quickly.
Given the circumstances, I think all those debates that French intellectuals are having on secularism, Islam, etc. are all completely pointless. For they ignore the only relevant factor, which is the present state of the couple and the family.
Let us talk demographics. Because life doesn’t suck enough as it does. Yes, had a bad day.
A while ago I proposed the concept of “projected population”. You get the total live births in a country, then you multiply it by 80, an approximation of life expectancy. So, assuming the level of births remains constant (which it won’t), in 80 years a country would have that amount of people.
So to put an example. Japan today has a population of 127 million. Live births in 2016 were 981k, so if the birth rate remained constant, in 80 years, roughly 2100, Japan would have a population of 78 million. Now of course the birth rate will not remain constant, given the fertility rate, 1.4, the population will shrink way beyond that. But there’s always a chance the birth rate comes up again. Some miracle. So projected population is only a way to understand how things stand right now. I’m not predicting anything. To the extent the projected population predicts anything it’s a best scenario. A miracle scenario.
So right here we got stats on birth rates across Europe. As of now, the 28 countries of the EU (including Britain), had a total of 5,103,165 births in 2015. Of course the EU isn’t the whole of Europe. But it’s close enough, and Serbia, Ukraine or Norway aren’t having that many babies anyway. So get this number as a good proxy. In Europe right now 5.1 million babies are being born per year.
Multiply per 80 and you get 408 million total population. The population as of 2015 was 510 million, so that’s a whopping 20% decrease. 100 million less Europeans at this rate. But wait. If you clicked the link you’d see there are stats on births “per country of birth of the mother”. That’s the total, this includes mothers born outside the EU. How many babies did foreign mothers have in 2015? 1,015,926 million. 20% of the total births. And this has been increasing at 25k per year. Babies from mothers born in the EU were just 4 million.
Interestingly enough the stats have data from Turkey. Over there in 2015 they had 1.3 million babies, of which only 22k were born to foreign mothers.
So anyway, at this rate, the population of the EU in 2100 would be 408 total, of which 80 million would be foreign or half-foreign babies, 328 million native. But wait. There’s plenty of ethnically foreign women in the EU having babies who weren’t themselves born abroad. Second and third generation immigrants. These count inside the 4 million EU births. How many of them are there? The EU wouldn’t say. If anybody has good data by all means put it in the comments.
I guess it’s fair to assume they’re somewhat above 10%. Perhaps not 25% yet, not EU wide. But again this is about mothers. Conveniently. Foreign fathers with native mothers are a pretty big part of the birth rate these days. So to say that 25% of kids born to “native mothers” aren’t 100% native kids sounds reasonable. That would mean that of the 4 million total births to European born mothers, 1 million kids are either foreign or half-foreign. So that leaves 3 million white kids born in 2015. And 2 million foreign or kinda foreign kids. 40% of the total. As of now. And it’s getting worse pretty fast.
So again, get that number into your head. As of 2015:
3 million White babies per year in Europe.
2 million White babies in the USA.
1.3 million Turkish babies.
17 million Chinese babies.
27 million Indian babies.
7 million Nigerian babies (!)
In 20 years, there will be just as many 20 year-olds.
This is the future we will live in.
That wasn’t my point, I recall Candide first saying it. But it’s a good point. Current government policy is to crack down on white men, converting to Islam wouldn’t necessarily change that. The government could use selective enforcement and crack down on White muslims making their women wear hijabs, say, while leaving Arabs completely unaffected, and suppressing press coverage of the whole thing.
Now that is funny to contemplate. America was lucky that Nation of Islam never caught up. Hispanics have things in common with Arabs. 5-10% African admixture, for example. Similar IQs. Who knows, maybe Arabs should try some intersectional outreach. Though I think Mexicans like their liquor a bit.
So, a 22 year old Arab dork,
born and raised in England, who probably grew up obsessed by all those scantily-clad white girls all around him who wouldn’t give him the time of day. One day he suddenly “radicalized”, became a hard-core Salafist, made some Salafist buddies who took them to the Middle East to train as a ghazi. He found his call.
And what he do with his call? He bombed an Ariana Grande concert. Of all places.
Now why would that be? What is it he disliked or resented about hundreds upon hundreds of teenage girls in short skirts?
These links may help.
Incidentally, this is China’s First Lady, Peng Liyuan. I suggest you lower a bit the volume. The song is intense.
So the Chinese government just had a huge party in Beijing, attended by 100 or so heads of government, where they announced the launching of the One Belt One Road initiative. They even had cute videos in English like this.
But still, nobody has any idea what this is all about. And the reason is that Chinese public PR is utterly retarded. It just doesn’t work. China’s government has absolutely no way of reaching the hearts and minds of white people.
Part of it is racial hostility. Yellow men just aren’t cool. I hate saying this, I’ve lived half my life among them, and personally I like them very much. But I gotta say the truth. They just aren’t cool. Not even physically. They’re not small, the average Chinese is probably taller than the average Italian by now. But they’re skinny and awkward and just not very alpha. You just can’t fight average T levels. There’s plenty of cool guys in the right edge of the distribution, but alas. China will never be cool. Not even Japan is cool. Look at Cool Japan and other government initiatives. Only Anime and other stuff geared to 13 year olds is cool, because the Japanese never grow out of that age, as McArthur famously said. And the Koreans are basically prostituting their teenage girls all across the world for cheap (Korean dramas and K-pop shows are sold really cheap to get access) just in order to spite Japan getting more Western attention.
So now that I’ve established my impartiality by shitting on all of East Asia at the same time: what is the One Belt One Road thing? Well I don’t really know; but what I know is why it sounds so weird. You see, Chinese has this thing where ideally any word or language unit must be 4 syllables long, in order to sounds good and be memorable. As it happens Chinese characters are all 1 syllable long, so it’s also 4 characters, 4 words. It just has to. It just sounds good. It fits. It has been like that for 3,000 years. Even Confucius spoke in 4-word units. Mandarin today is about 30% 4-word idioms, some classical idioms going back thousands of years, some neologisms made by ad agencies, some political slogans made by the Communist Party Propaganda Department. That’s how Chinese works. And it’s beautiful once you get used to it.
So One Belt One Road is exactly 一带一路 yidai yilu, 4 words. Other famous slogans would be Mao Zedong’s 造反有理 zaofan youli, “rebellion is justified”, Deng Xiaoping’s 改革开放 gaige kaifang “reform and opening”, or Jiang Zemin’s 三个代表 sange daibiao “the three represents”, which incidentally means the Communist party represents the peasants, the workers and the capitalists whether they like it or not.
So anyway, everything has to fit in 4 words, so 一带一路 it was. They couldn’t just say “Land and Sea overseas infrastructure investment plan”. That would be more than 4 words. So you get this weird “belt” and “road” thing, where the belt stands for land route and road stands for sea route, for the only reason that it sounds right. Apparently the Koran doesn’t make any sense at all when read in translation but the Arabic just sounds so incredibly good, with rhyming and stuff that it became incredibly popular. Although it really doesn’t make any sense at all. Well, welcome to humanity.
So anyway, a friend of mine just told me he’d been to a conference on One Belt One Road and that it was the most boring official speech he’d ever listen in his damn life, and that’s saying something in China. Another friend though just sent me this chain-mail sort of stuff which kinda cheers on the whole thing. I assume it was made by the government, but I’ll translate it here so you can also have the Chinese side. Or better put, what China’s government says internally. Because remember, 90% of what the mainstream western press says is also, exactly, government made propaganda, we just don’t call it that.
A lot of people can’t quite get what One Belt One Road means. In fact it’s quite easy if you make a simple metaphor: say infrastructure to a country is like a person who goes buy a house. For the vast majority of people, they do need a house, but they don’t have the money on hand. Well, China here is like a developer, a construction company and a bank all put together. China has money it doesn’t know what to do with, it has empty houses, and the construction companies have no orders either. So we have both demand and supply sides here with nothing to do. What can we do?
Easy, we make a mortgage. China lends money to all these countries, and then these countries use this very money to ask Chinese companies to build them infrastructure, paying back the money to China in installments in the next decades.
By doing this China can use it’s foreign currency reserves in a smart way. We can avoid buying US treasury bonds like we’re stupid; those give almost no yield. By lending out the money for interest, the yield is much higher. With this plan China can also put to use its industrial overcapacity, we get orders which reactivate our manufacturing base. And all these countries which would use China’s money and rely on China to build infrastructure; their economies will grow eventually, they’ll use money to pay us back, and they will also buy Chinese products.
So everybody wins, that’s what One Belt One Road is all about. [This sentences rhymes in the original]
Also through this infrastructure we can achieve two roads to Europe, one by land and one by sea. If there is any war with the US, the US won’t be able to encircle us. At the same time this would accelerate the speed of transport from China to Europe, lowering transport costs and increasing China’s competitiveness.
All these countries would use Chinese products as the standard of their infrastructure. This means that in the future they would need to use Chinese products to service the infrastructure. This would exclude other countries’ products, giving our manufacturers an advantage when competing with foreign manufacturers.
Of course inside all this there will be some loans which go bad. It’s like a bank, there’s always someone who can’t pay back their mortgage or their car loan. But banks don’t care about that, why? Because they make enough profit to compensate for it. And with China’s One Belt One Road, China would profit twice. One through the interest on the given loans, way higher than the yield of US debt. And then again when these countries buy Chinese products, giving money to Chinese private businesses. In business terms this is a very lucrative process, if we can manage well the level of bad debt, we are sure to make a net profit.
Also if China gets to develop these countries’ infrastructure, naturally these countries will become more friendly towards China. All these countries will be our friends. And as everybody knows, it is always good to have many friends. This applies to people and to states.
During this process, you may notice that China outright gives aid to some countries, without expecting payback. Some people don’t understand this, how can we give stuff away for free? It’s very easy. When you get some business from someone, you gotta give them some advantage. When shopping in a store, many shops give regular discounts, they’d give you coupons if you buy a lot, or even free products. Countries do the same. You’re making money out of someone, if you don’t give them something in exchange, well the business won’t go anywhere. All these aid packages are in fact discount coupons of a sort. Because besides us there’s also Japan or Germany giving loans, helping others build infrastructure. We have competition.
This kind of plan was in fact invented by the Americans. When the US wanted to open up foreign markets, they didn’t do like other countries and use military force to conquer colonies and their markets. What the US did was use what they called “open-door policy”, they used loans, the Marshall plan, etc. They gave loans to other countries, and these countries then used the money to buy American products. By doing so the US occupied these countries’ markets without shedding blood, which helped America become wealthy, and the US dollar become the world’s reserve currency. Thus the US became the world’s factory and ultimately the boss of the world. China is actually learning from America’s path to greatness, growing through peace, and not force.
So, you see, One Belt One Road is a very farseeing policy, it is precisely the path for China’s rising. If you have any friends who still don’t get it, send this piece their way. Let everyone get it. The Great Renewal of the Chinese Nation is just around the corner!
THE SMALL WORLD OF MODERN THRILLERS
Plots used to be driven by real-world conflict, but now they revolve around domestic drama. It’s a trend that blights films and TV, from Sherlock to Bourne
I did like Steve Sailer and did a Control+F on “women” and “female”. There was nothing to be found.
The elephant in the room, that men are playing videogames and only women are watching TV so plots cater to female tastes, i.e. domestic drama, cannot be mentioned. It is crimethink. It really must be exhausting to be a writer these days.
So this article is doing the rounds. Chinese netizens have synthetized a very powerful compound which has the Cathedral in complete terror. What is it? The word 白左, the White Left. This means that some people in China understand that progressivism is a foreign conspiracy against the Chinese nation. And they see this is in overt racial terms. It’s not “Western left”. It’s the “White left”.
Now, don’t get too excited. Nick Land is excited. But he lives in Shanghai. And he just found out about this. Which means it’s not anything mainstream going on in China. I found the word in my Twitter feed about the time of Merkel’s boner, when she decided to bring 1 million hostile men into Europe.
The Chinese in Europe were livid. And for good reason. The Chinese went through a lot of hoops to get legal residence in Europe. The Muslims just got in for free. The Chinese are law-abiding and industrious. The Muslims are lazy and prone to crime. The Chinese live in low-rent areas where the Muslims flock to, and they assault the local Chinese all the time, while the police do nothing.
Now the Chinese have long had their problems with western style progressivism. There’s lots of Chinese living in the West, many go back taking their newly learned progressivism with them. And of course China is poor, the West is rich, so there’s plenty of people who consume Western media like crazy just because they think it smells of status. China even has SJWs; but they’re almost always women. They have a word for them: 聖母婊, “saint whore”, in that they claim to be as compassionate as a Catholic female saint, but are in fact mere attention-whores.
But it took the Muslim invasion of Europe for the Chinese to connect the dots. Feminist saint-whores are one thing: but ethnic pandering is a huge topic in China. China has plenty of Muslims and they hate them. Well, the people do, the Communist party is committed to diversity. The hates comes especially the college-grads who are likely to be into political discussion. Everybody has stories of Muslim minority kids getting affirmative action to get to college, making gangs inside school, picking up Han girls, getting privileges for Halal food and shit. Say you’re some Han college grad, who has been resenting this people for 4 years. You then get to go to America or England for grad school, and what do you find? Ethnic pandering squared. And Saint-whores cubed.
And then Trump happened. Trump started a big debate among the Chinese, both those abroad and those in China. Soon the consensus was that anti-Trumpism was a conspiracy of the “white-left”, that coalition of feminists, pro-muslims and anti-chinese leftists that come from the West. China has a local left, the Maoists, which are called 毛左, the Mao-left, so this brand of very different leftism was called the 白左, the White-left.
But again, this is not something big in China. Your average Chinese citizen doesn’t talk politics, doesn’t read politics. If the alt-right is small, the Chinese alt-right is an order of magnitude smaller. This, if anything, is the ethnic-Chinese branch of the alt-right, here in the West, learning from the alt-right what is going on. These guys don’t want China to beat the West. They want the West to be the nice hedonistic place they always wanted to live in, or copy their institutions. Now they’re seeing that Eurabia and North Brazil are in progress, and they’re not happy about it. Who are they gonna sell their crap to? If the West falls to Islam, then China is the last fortress standing. They’re not happy about that prospect.
A few centuries ago people in Europe discovered free trade. The market. They got the state to say: go make money, free of any guilds or regulations. I won’t stop you. Go out there and make money. Compete freely. So people went to make money. Started businesses, factories, mines. In short order we got 2 industrial revolutions, the greatest technological advances in history, and vast, vast, amazing amounts of wealth. Pretty neat.
But. We also found the market isn’t perfect. Yeah it produces wealth. A damn lot of it. But leaving people alone to make money also resulted in other outcomes which weren’t so desirable. For some people, at least. You see, people compete to make money, and the competition can get ruthless, so people start doing bad stuff. These undesirable outcomes ended up being called “market failures”. There’s a whole literature about that. Externalities. Monopoly. Sweatshops. There’s lots of stuff, it isn’t quite clear what is and what isn’t a market failure; but the consensus out there is that there are quite a lot. And that the government should use its power to regulate the market in order to prevent and/or fix market failures. Again, it’s messy business, as tends to happen with government stuff, but that is how it works today. And it doesn’t work that badly. We got clean air and stuff. Which is nice.
So let me do this analogy:
A few centuries ago people in Europe discovered civil rights. Democracy. They got the state to say: go, be free of all legal restrictions in status. No more nobility or medieval ties. You are all citizens, get into politics. I won’t stop you. Go out there and say and read and assemble as you wish. Compete freely. So people went out there and started to do what they wished. Started newspapers, political parties, clubs. In short order we got a dozen liberal revolutions, the abolition of all hereditary privileges, universal suffrage, equality before the law. The first East Asian visitors to Europe in the late 1860s saw how cargo was transported by animal-drawn carts, never by people, and wrote: pretty neat. This white guys treat men like men, not like animals. The shock killed Confucianism in a decade.
I digress. And there is no but. Only a small minority of reactionaries ever protested against this. Civil rights only got bigger, deeper. The free market produced much wealth. Free societies also produced much good stuff. But surely free societies have also resulted in undesirable outcomes. You see, people compete in society, competition can get ruthless, and people do bad stuff. We might call that social failures.
Surely low natality is a social failure? The education bubble? Youth unemployment? High criminality? Ugly art and architecture? You name it. All caused by the same thing that causes market failures. Competition run amok; too little oversight. Too much competition makes ruthless people take the upper hand, and the little people suffer.
Libertarians have this dream about the market which self-regulates. The market is just Human Action. Well, to a point. The market doesn’t care about what humans want long term. If it did there wouldn’t be Capitalist accelerationists who openly cheer for Skynet. So it stands to reason that public force is to be used to correct some market outcomes produced by too much economic freedom.
Libertarians also have this dream about society itself, which self-regulates. Hayek pontificating against social engineering. Well, to a point. If society self-regulated perfectly no people ever would have gone extinct. And there’s a ton of social equilibriums, which we may or may not like. Not sure if I want lip plates as standard fashion. So, it stands to reason that public force is to be sued to correct some social outcomes produced by too much social freedom.