Rape Culture

Yet more heads roll! Amusingly, the string of sexual crimes by Leftists now includes Harvey Weinstein's brother, Amazon's Roy Price, New Republic Editor Leon Wieseltier, director David O. Russel, director James Toback (now accused by 238 women), the proprietor of a prog videogame forum and bourgeois commie LARPer and Jacobin contributor Sam Kriss. We've come a long way from Harvey. I'd pause to say something about how I'm still not tired of winning, but I have more pressing questions.

First, why? The scale of the accusations since Weinstein was outed is almost mind boggling. Almost. It's no secret that male feminists have ulterior motives when they sign up for the equality struggle session. Every once in a while a low to mid tier male feminist with name recognition would be outed for some sort of sexual impropriety against the, erm, fairer sex. Anyone who somehow avoids the news, but attended college with millennials would harbor similar suspicions. Most men I met in college had very little sympathy for feminism, but all men who sympathized with feminism were lackluster examples of masculinity. There is a certain, delicious irony in hearing individuals who only barely resemble a man bitch about "toxic" masculinity. Chiefest among those accused of the crime of toxic masculinity were fraternities. If you ever have the opportunity to listen to some soymen bitch about Greek Life, hold off on interjecting and just listen. You will very quickly realize that the animosity SJWs hold towards the Greek system is not just based in resentment, but also ressentiment. I touched on this in my very first post:

Didn't get a bid from a fraternity or sorority? Resent that you don't get invited to their bangin ragers? No problemo famalam, just call them racist and the school will be right there, just like your stupid fucking helicopter parents, to put those above you on their knees in supplication, begging for mercy. That is power, but cheap and easy and wholly devoid of obligation, responsibility or the burden of care and foresight.

As I see it, the ressentiment soymen hold for fraternities is inseparable from their sexual frustration. At the end of my teens and into my earliest twenties, I was a frat boy. I jokingly told my non-Greek friends that a fraternity is more or less a glorified drinking club. Sure, to a large extent that is true. But fraternities also serve as easy access to women. Joining a fraternity is a status booster. I'm not as erudite as Roissy when it comes to explaining how the sexual market works, so bear with me. Women, being hypergamous, are particularly aware of where men rank on the social hierarchy - or at least how men present their rank, as there appears to be little difference in the female mind. This explains the efficacy of 'game'. Membership in a fraternity checks off a bunch of qualifiers that boost relative status: Trial by fire vis-a-vis pledging, popularity through the easy friendship of membership, access to resources through alcohol and parties, exclusivity through invitations to closed parties, etc. There are other benefits (primarily post-graduation networking), but that is relatively unimportant when you're trying to rail some thots. I certainly never boasted about how great a job I was going to have when I was flirting. And none of this is to say that all of my frat buddies slayed pussy non-stop. A fraternity will certainly get you through the door, and give you a higher initial status, but its up to you to close the deal. There were guys who brought home some strange every night, and there were a handful of guys who didn't even touch a woman. But that doesn't matter, because to an outsider all that is visible is the long line of women one-night-standed by a bunch of Chads. Hence, ressentiment. Amusingly, despite the incessant bitching from prog women about the Greek system, I have yet to meet a feminist who wasn't deeply flattered by the prospect of getting railed by a frat boy. The incongruity between what a woman says and what a woman does is a dead horse I don't need to beat.

Being shut out from the (perceived) access to pussy vis-a-vis fraternal organizations, men who still have a sex drive turn elsewhere. There are a whole bunch of strategies to getting laid in college, some good and some bad, but for some reason there is a very obvious, very loud and outspoken, and very wretched group of men who decided being a yes man white knight to a woman's worst impulses was the best. Really, for them, it was the path of least resistance. I normally would scoff, but evidently the thirsty are quenched every now and again. Sorta. Do yourself a solid - if you aren't the sort of person that reflexively flinches at cringe - and compare the woman's account of her unwanted encounter with Sam Kriss (below), and the secret recording of Harvey Weinstein attempting to seduce that model.

Fucking cringe.

I don't even need to lead you where I want to take you, the cringe is so very real. I could tell you a few stories about buddies (fraternal or otherwise) who failed spectacularly in seducing women while in my vicinity, but without a face or a name, the anecdote is more or less meaningless and hogging up space. Suffice it to say I've seen some godawful pickup attempts, but the rub is that I have never in my life seen anything in person that makes me cringe as hard as listening to Weinstein's pathetic pleading and demanding, or reading Sam Kriss's increasingly desperate attempts to get the girl in the above picture to come home with him. There is a certain sense of entitlement that you might see in the way both men attempt to ingratiate their sexual urges, and this sense, I think, is key to understanding the why here, and much more broadly, the why of why our ruling class is failing and consuming itself.

There are a lot of ways to distill the problem of the modern world and the crisis of Western Civilization. Brett Stevens refers to our pathology as both hubris and solipsism. I would add to that, because I generally agree with Stevens, by saying that most people want something for nothing, and as the eventual consequence of racking up physical, metaphysical and spiritual debt has yet to arrive, most people willfully delude themselves into thinking that the debtor will never actually collect his due. People like Harvey Weinstein, his brother, Sam Kriss, the idiot burning his Lefty vidya games forum to the ground, and male feminists generally are cut and dry examples of something for nothing. Pledging allegiance to the degrading nonsense of postmodernism requires no effort, and costs nothing (save for what Theodore Dalrymple said about the purpose of communist propaganda). Whatever effort steeled the Leftists of yore, the Anarchist terrorists, the Communist infiltrators and the Marxists of the Frankfurt School is worthless now, because their sons paid no price for their father's efforts. It is actually not surprising that the bourgeois fucktards who were handed the cultural controls of the greatest technomagic civilization of all time have gone and fucked up everything by trying to fuck everything. And it's even less a surprise that they had no grace doing so! They were untested! They paid no price, burned no calories. For Christ's sake, Sam Kriss is the scion of rich bourgeois urbanites, and contrary to his socialist creds he tried to puff himself up to his would be cumdumpster based on the astonishing wealth of his progenitors.

A long time ago Roissy (I believe, I actually don't want to dig through the CH archives to find this particular post) shed some light on the old "grass is always greener" adage. If I remember the chain correctly, George Clooney's manager envies the way that extremely attractive women will simply slip Clooney their numbers. This manager, no schlub himself, has a name that carries weight (being the manager of an A list celebrity tends to do this), and himself attracts many women, though not as many as Clooney. The managers friend who... maybe was in a band or something, envies the manager, but himself reels in a lot of women vis-a-vis being a musician, and the bartender envies the friend, who is in turn envied by so on and so forth, all the way down the line with men who do slightly worse, sexually, envying their betters. The story eventually ends with some guy who goes home to his Japanese love pillow envying his friend who has a female coworker he talks to regularly. I forget what the moral exactly was, but why I am bringing it up is that a man who harvests desirable anything without effort is a man untested.

We are all born virgins. In the seemingly ancillary story I hamfistedly related to you above, we all start at Japanese love pillow, and we all know the peak is George Clooney. Or maybe some other actor with better taste. Just roll with it, it's a lame metaphor anyways. I don't actually advocate hedonism or the PUA lifestyle, despite the sex metaphor you're about to be shoved into.

Leftists look at George Clooney and say my life would be so much better if I were him, and they either inherit the building blocks of staggering sexual prowess (fame, power, wealth, access) and fuck it up royally by never putting in the work, or they hover as male feminist allies/lesser betas, watching in anguish as their oneitis slowly morphs into a cumdumpster courtesy of a long line of Chads. Hence, ressentiment. Much to their surpise, the Left's shortcut to power only enfeebles them more (to borrow from PA again).

You never, ever, ever want to just look at the goal, because it isn't the goal that makes you better, it's the lessons and character and muscle you accrue along the way. We all want to be Emperor, but without the conquest... the top of the mountain is just a pretty view if you didn't climb up it yourself. 

---

There is fairly good reason to believe that the defenestration of Harvey Weinstein was simply the crack necessary to burst the dam. Given that the sexual impropriety among modern Leftists (and, according to Thermidore, the Leftists of yore) is fairly common, we should expect that there is a significant population of young women who have experienced anything ranging from mild discomfort to straight horror, who are more than willing to spill the beans given that being a sexual victim itself is a profitable way to harvest attention - the only currency that really matters to women.

Some have pointed to Bannon being the source, although I am fairly unconvinced. I am extremely unconvinced that there is anyone "directing" the outflow of victims from the shadows of our Leftist overlords, much as I would otherwise like to believe.

What is important is that this is tearing the Left apart. Complete madness.

Caste, Then Now and Forever

Declasse though it may be to mention, it is impossible to ignore that America has a caste system. Caste, of course, more or less just means categories on a hierarchy, although the American caste system is less a pyramid and more a pyramid-ish tree, with branches sprouting in three dimensions. Where do millionaires stand relative to celebrities? What about celebrity millionaires? People with pretensions of intellectual grandeur call that sort of questioning intersectionality. You can tell that the sort of people who tell you about such a term are very thoughtful.

Caste in America is also fluid, as people are able to move up and down categories depending on their circumstances. This is peculiar relative to the more rigid and overt caste systems of yore. Jennifer Lawrence and Justin Bieber are to examples of famous individuals moving up in caste, and Harvey Weinstein is an example of the opposite.

Thinking of the drive to "equalize", I can't help but suspect that no one has really thought that much about how total social equality would work. Would we all be celebrities, recognized by everyone that we pass on the streets? Or would we all be friendless nobodies? Given the atomizing trends of urbanization, and the sort of people who fall prey to the glow of city life (ignoring the filth readily apparent upon close inspection), the latter seems far more likely than the former. Needless to say, there is a social discrepancy between the famous and the mundane, such that privileges are conferred in one direction and clearly this sort of thing is an anathema to our drive to totally obliterate distinctions and uniqueness.

A handful of sentences in and I've already thought about this way more than your average liberal arts student. Or professor. Anyways, I can't help but suspect that fashionable equality is a sort of inbred abomination of a fever dream and a child's tantrum. A half baked cry of Pay attention to me!

Channeling Mencken

Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.

From the Hill:

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) blasted “half-baked, spurious nationalism” in the United States in an emotional speech Monday night after receiving the National Constitution Center’s Liberty Medal.

“To fear the world we have organized and led for three-quarters of a century, to abandon the ideals we have advanced around the globe, to refuse the obligations of international leadership and our duty to remain 'the last best hope of earth' for the sake of some half-baked, spurious nationalism cooked up by people who would rather find scapegoats than solve problems is as unpatriotic as an attachment to any other tired dogma of the past that Americans consigned to the ash heap of history,” McCain said in the speech.

The Arizona senator said “we live in a land made of ideals, not blood and soil” and said Americans “are the custodians of those ideals at home, and their champion abroad.”

“We have done great good in the world. That leadership has had its costs, but we have become incomparably powerful and wealthy as we did,” McCain said.

“We have a moral obligation to continue in our just cause, and we would bring more than shame on ourselves if we don’t. We will not thrive in a world where our leadership and ideals are absent.”

There are several curious remarks in the above passage, but the one most worth commenting on is people who would rather find scapegoats than solve problems. Although these words were doubtlessly written by an aide, it none the less serves as a tell, a passable reconstruction of what John McCain sees when he looks in the mirror.

I solve problems.

In another era John McCain would have been an unimpressive middle manager. Alas, today, he is an unimpressive Senator. It's funny, not ha ha funny but gallows humor funny, that this man and his peers regard themselves as problem solvers.

The post-World War II order saw to it that the citizens of the West be rewarded with an expanding set of entitlement programs. The first-level flaw with our model of entitlements is that there must be a larger pool of payers-in to recipients, such that social security, to quote Rick Perry, is a ponzi scheme. So long as the ratio of payers to receivers is maintained, everyone is happy. Unfortunately the birthrate of the West declined and the ratio of payers to receivers skewed wildly, and the whole house of cards began to groan under the weight of the Baby Boomers.

Enter Mr. McCain, et. al. Instead of looking at the conundrum and asking the basest of questions - why did the ratio of payers to receivers change? - our democratic overlords simply said "We'll just add new people" and rewarded themselves with raises and accolades and fancy parties. A whole new categories of problems emerged from the importation of new tribes, and to smooth over the turbulence an ex post rationale called a proposition nation crept into the education of young Westerners. Now only those who actively seek the truth discover how heinous the lies they were taught are, and worse still those actively resisting lies almost always face some sort of social sanction from ostensible members of their own tribe. What an incredible mess, though you who read this are doubtlessly well aware of the scale of this whole catastrophe.

So why point it out?

Because the hubris of John McCain is a worthy example of how not to lead and how not to solve problems. It's easy to look up to a Caesar, a Napoleon, an Alexander. The greatest men that ever lived get their due recognition, but even when the bad and the failed become a cultural byword for treachery or loss, like Benedict Arnold or Pyrrhus of Epirus, we seldom stop to pause and wonder where exactly they went so wrong. In the case of McCain, whatever his personal failings are (and I have no desire to recount all that I have heard about Mr. McCain), there is an argument to be made that it is not McCain's failures per se that we should focus on, but rather that there exists a system that allows men like McCain to take power beyond their measure.

In a sane era, John McCain would have been an unimpressive middle manager.

Signs of the Kali Yuga I

Nazis watch out!

"Communism doesn't work" is a conservative banality. "Communism has never been tried" is a progressive banality. "Communism doesn't work but Marx was spot on in his criticism of Capitalism" is a substantially less banal observation. Despite being less banal than the others, this requires a little bit of unpacking along the same lines as my post about the proto-Indo-Europeans and Urheimat.

It isn't exactly that Marx was particularly prescient about Capitalism. Marx's prescience comes from his observation about the bourgeoisie.

I would encourage you to take an hour or so to re-read Marx's Communist Manifesto. I was never a Communist. I had a brief period - literally 10 weeks, or one semester at my first college - where I subscribed to what you might call "Socialism Lite". I reasoned that if everyone had their basic needs provided for them by the state, then the time they would have otherwise spent acquiring the necessities of existence could be reallocated towards higher level productivity. Imagine how much art we could create if no one had to work to eat. I worked out the flaw in that sort of thinking through the course of one class (much to the chagrin of my professor, whom I still regard as a vapid douche), and moved on. Ever since, academic or social encounters with anything influenced by Marx caused me much eye-rolling.

This wasn't exactly fair on my part, but it wasn't unprecedented. The number of self-described Communists that I met during my undergraduate who recognized Bakunin and Gramsci was exactly zero. With a handful of exceptions among well read and thoughtful friends who reside on the Left end of the political spectrum, I found college commies to be boring, unoriginal, and slightly more annoying than the handful of College Republicans I met.

On a whim, I bought Marx's Communist Manifesto for one dollar, and, reveling in the irony, spent one evening rereading it and taking notes. I gave Marx something better than the old college try by reading him as a reactionary, and had I not already rejected his solution as impossible, I may very well have been swept away from my longing for hierarchy and order and converted into a sort of Orwell-ish communist. By which I mean I would have looked upon the sum total of Leftism and despaired. The connections I made are disturbing, but not unprecedented. There is a particularly humorous exchange between Richard Spencer and some fat idiot where Spencer makes fun of the man's taste for being, as he called it, bourgeois.

The implementation (or attempt at implementation) of Communism is widely regarded as a failure. For those who do not see the raw kill count as evidence of Communism's impossibility, that Communism (or the attempt thereof) was always a revolution of intellectuals as opposed to the proletariat surely tips the scales towards Marx's designs as failed. The unfortunate history of Communism being relatively well known, there is little else to say in that regard. Where Marx curries some serious favor from people who otherwise regard Marx with the same enthusiasm you might hold for finding dog crap smashed in the treads of your boots is his thoughts on the bourgeoisie. You often hear this rephrased as "Communism doesn't work but Marx was correct in his criticism of Capitalism." If they've done their homework and aren't just repeating something they once heard, Capitalism refers to the behavior of the bourgeoisie. Most people leave out that seemingly small but extremely important detail.

Allow me to quote The Communist Manifesto liberally before we substantiate Marx's... correctness:

The modern bourgeois society that has sprouted from the ruins of feudal society has not done away with class antagonisms. It has but established new classes, new conditions of oppression, new forms of struggle in place of the old ones.

The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionising the instruments of production, and thereby the relations of production, and with them the whole relations of society.

All fixed, fast-frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify.

The need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the whole surface of the globe. It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connexions everywhere.

The bourgeoisie has stripped of its halo every occupation hitherto honoured and looked up to with reverent awe.

The bourgeoisie has torn away from the family its sentimental veil, and has reduced the family relation to a mere money relation.

If you look at that the right way, from the right angle, you just might be able to stuff an SJW into Marx's list of crimes committed by the bourgeoisie. This is, of course, something of a stretch, but it certainly coincides with the now almost banal conservative observation that Marxists typically have nothing to do with the working class, and are almost always academics, aspirants of the academic-industrial complex, or white collar workers who have passed through the ivory tower. Still, isn't it the slightest bit peculiar that the Marxism, a colossal failure in implementation, is now championed by people who we could charitably accuse of being bourgeois? What a strange fate.

Hell Hath No Fury II

Wayward White woman caught in signalling spiral evidently vaporized by drone strike.

I raise half a glass to the vaguely amusing thought of this weeping widow meeting her end the same way as her husband went: Scattered across the barren landscape of Outremer, mourned only by desert tribalists with room temperature IQs.

Her son died with her. Once upon a time I was younger and libertarian and horrified that Barrack Obama killed 16 year old Abdulrahman Al-Awlaki in a drone strike intended to take out his Jihadi father. Today, not so much. Perhaps the passage of years have embittered me. Good riddance.

The Curious Fall of Harvey Weinstein

Your humble wordsmith attempted to find a flattering photograph of Mr. Weinstein. Regrettably, none could be found. Perhaps the old college try wasn't thorough enough. Perhaps Mr. Weinstein is just comically ugly.

If you haven't heard the recording of Harvey pathetically attempting to seduce a model who I've never heard of, brace yourself: The cringe is very real. All that money, the power, the access to even more powerful people, the fame and accolades and all the other perks associated with America's deranged celebrity caste, and the man still has terrible game.

As the accusations grow in number and a potential criminal case begins to build, its worth asking a couple questions:

Why now?

How far does the rabbit hole go?

Pretty far, evidently.

A Miscellaneous Note About Progressive Christianity and Progressive Islam

Not far from where I live is a Methodist church. There are lots of churches where I live, but I notice this one more than the others because the building is decidedly low-church protestant and there's an electric sign in the lawn that has read "hate has no home here" since the election of Donald Trump. Coincidentally, the parking lot is always devoid of life.

"Hate has no home here" is a popular lawn sign among the handful of signally dickheads who somehow manage to stomach the astounding ignorance of a vastly White, vastly conservative town enough to live among the lowly, regressive residents of the wrong side of history. There's also a few "love trumps hate" and "we're glad you're our neighbor" signs for those select few who want to display an extra level of fart-sniffing superiority.

And so their lines ended, with the hushed sound of an insufflated fart. 

The yard signs aren't particularly interesting, and for my purposes serve more as a ready-made, obvious warning that the residents of a particular property are prepared to lecture you about their moral superiority at the drop of a hat.

What is interesting is the church sign. The empty Methodist church is not the first church I've seen with a dildo-tier message on their signboard, but it is the most persistent.

Christians who take their religion seriously, or as seriously as the Kali Yuga can possibly allow, have a sort of odd sense that the aggregate body of Christ is rather... ill. Generally they don't have a good way of expressing this, and I suspect that the wild deformities of low church Protestantism, i.e. Biblical Literalism and Young Earth Creationism, are a socio-evolutionary strategy to escape the nigh-infinite gravity well of Christianities inbred offspring, Ultracalvinism. I also generally suspect that the astoundingly vicious turn that Islam has taken in the past decade or two has as much to do with America's wayward adventures in nation building as the it does with the sinister influence that Ultra Calvinism allegedly has inculcated among the Western university educated leaders of the various militant factions of Islam.

By socio-evolutionary strategy I don't mean that there is some earnest but otherwise inept board of low church Protestants who decided that the best way to combat the incursions of Ultracalvinism on their faith-territory is to slowly become weirder until the last surviving churches with any sort of congregation to speak of are indistinguishable from Common Filth's fans (although the end result is basically going to be the same). Rather, the incursions of Ultracalvinism infect a particular institution and ultimately drive out those who cannot be converted, much as colleges and universities have already done to conservative or right-leaning professors. The survivors are left to search for a new place of worship (or study) and as Ultracalvinism attacks by moving rightward on the classic political line, the institutions that remain unconverged tend to be... weirder.

This is a hypothesis, but mostly a narrative that I hope someone else might find useful. Needless to say it's going to require quite a bit more refining.

---

In any event, here's a further thought I wrote at an earlier date about the nature of Progressivism relative to Christianity and Islam. It has been gently abused to fit my above thoughts:

Christianity, rightly understood, is progressive according to Progressives. It comes as no surprise then that Progressives also believe Islam, rightly understood, to be a progressive religion. Anything that Islam does that isn't progressive therefore cannot be Islam. The vacuity of "Islam is a religion of peace" trope is a hill perfectly constructed for a conservative to die on: He gets lost in the details of Arab violence and forgets to see the narrative. X isn't X if it doesn't perfectly mirror Progressive Idealism. You may have your X, Y, and Z, but they are always and forever subservient to Progressive Idealism. Like the Roman practice of incorporating local Gods into the Imperial Cult, they will herd all things under the banner of "progress". There is a sick, suicidal trick to the whole affair in that  the mental gymnastics they force themselves through to accept such nonsense really only applies to themselves and the ruralite Whites they both loath and love to keep subjugated vis-a-vis the bourgeois narrative of Cultural Marxism. A small mound grows daily over Marx's tomb as he ceaselessly spins in the grave knowing that his theories were ultimately captured and repurposed as a "market" for the victorious bourgeoisie. His prescience, such that it did exist, could not save his work, and so corrupted they sink into a particular ironic failure, reduced to a petty social signalling device and a tool for capturing new markets - if we consider churches, religions and schools of philosophy as the 4th generation warfare equivalent to the material markets Marx was speaking of when he excoriated the bourgeoisie for their insatiable hunger for 'profits'.

Also worth considering is how the lie of egalitarianism fails in contention with third world devotees of the religion of the Prophet. There is no material reason to believe that the Pashtun tribalists we conquered in Afghanistan have a whole new appreciation for teaching their children to put condoms on bananas. Our attempts to do so, under the auspicious guidance of the "anointed" academics (as Thomas Sowell calls them), have probably done as much to enrage them as the occasional obliteration of weddings by Hellfire missiles. The shockwave echoes here and in Europe, and ultimately Progressive Idealism falls on its own sword. Christianity, for the most part, has succumbed to Progressive Idealism, but there is little reason to believe that Islam will submit as well. Their violence says as much, not that it seems to bother the sort of people who think you can simply deconstruct things into the category that makes the world look as you think it should, as opposed to how the world is.

And so we circle the drain.

Quick Reactions II

We focus on recent or semi-recent tradition, and the loss thereof, that I thought it wise to take a moment to step back for a little perspective. Really, really far back.

Hands down the most interesting class I took during my undergraduate was History of the English Language. My professor was a classicist who specialized in medieval English poetry and was, thankfully, actually interested in her line of work and not deconstructing it. She could also speak Old English, which was fascinating, though I think it bored most of the rest of my peers. This woman earned an extraordinary sense of gratitude from yours truly, because despite generally liking my professors, no one else even came close to this woman. I seldom gave anything more than the old college try, being generally disgruntled and apathetic to the whole stupid system, but she earned my full effort.

Modern English is ultimately traced back to a reconstructed language linguists have dubbed proto-Indo-European. The people who spoke proto-Indo-European lived approximately where Ukraine is today, which scholars have termed Urheimat, or the original homeland. Where exactly the proto-Indo-Europeans came from is not something that I have heard a whole lot of evidence or even speculation, not that it doesn't exist, but the matter was largely outside the purview of the class I took. None the less, a curious but grim sense of amusement descended upon me when I realized how heretical the base knowledge of this class was, relative to Progressive orthodoxy. Consider: The proto-Indo-Europeans lived in Urheimat at least 4000 years before Christ, but perhaps up to 7500 B.C. as the earliest date of settlement. For the sake of the back of a napkin math I'm about to do, let's call it 5000 B.C. - 7000 years ago. The latest the out-of-Africa theory estimates for human migration out of Africa proper is approximately 50,000 years ago. There is a 43,000 year gap between the two populations. Assuming an average age of reproduction at 20 years old... there are 2,150 generations between one and the other. At least. Now this is all back of my napkin, with the barely remedial understanding of biology and genetics that comes with it. None the less, something to think about. Sometimes, I get the feeling people see images on 4chan and just grab on to what they say without necessarily stopping to really soak up the staggering implications of heretical knowledge. Sometimes, as I pointed out with the Kalergi and Rockefeller quotes, our eagerness may inhibit us from constructing the most accurate picture that we can. None the less, something to pause and consider.

One more thing to pause and consider:

This probably falls under the category of anachronisms, but since our enemy does this by transposing modern, fashionable morality on earlier periods, who cares. Urheimat is sometimes identified with Hyperborea, for any Evola fans who happen to read this. Not that we can prove that the Greeks carried on the memory of Urheimat in their ancestral mythology, but it is none the less a curious narrative, if only to give you a small sense of wonder if you pause to think about those ancients who preceded the people we already consider ancient.

Wonder away.

Your Memes Are Shit, Vol. II of MCDLXXXVIII

This one's a freebie.

I never wanted to come down. Every once in a while someone starts an election day memories thread on the old Mongolian throat-singing forum, and its always worth a read. Just for the good feels. I'm under no illusions about the ability of the Trump administration to unfuck my homeland. No one who is serious about saving Western Civilization believes that we are going to democracy our way out of this mess, and it may very well be that Trump is the final but hilarious punctuation mark on the Empire of the United States. But I'm still smiling about it.

Where were you on that day, anon?

I was watching in utter awe as one man punched several generations of emotionally stunted losers in the face over and over and over and over. He's been doing it since election day and he shows no signs of stopping. What are these people going to look like after four, possibly eight, years of getting punched in the face non-stop by a strawberry blonde comb-over with a weird tan?

Its like what Michael Moore said, about Joe Blow and Billy Blow and Billy Bob Blow blowing up the whole damn system. Have you ever been out to the country? I mean as a real guest, with people you know and get to interact with, not just as the passenger in a car heading from one urban tumor to the next. Because I have. There are a whole bunch of people I know who get down on themselves because they're urbanites or suburbanites and they live in an environment that spawns an unending wave of human fucking garbage. And they see no end to it, and they spend their days bitching among themselves about the coin clutchers. I feel a little bad for them, and I feel the same impulse that they feel in their incessant crusade to inform people about the malfeasance of a certain tribe of volcano demon worshipers - the impulse to grab them by their eyelids and force them to see what I see. Whether I succeed remains to be seen. I burn less calories with each subsequent attempt, so don't hold your breath.

Out there, out in the sticks, is Heritage America. Real, live Amerikaners. And it is simultaneously the most beautiful thing, and the saddest thing you will ever see. You have to force yourself to not see the accoutrements of globalism to see it. Forget the shuttered factories and the rust, the shitty cars and the tired looks on young men's faces. Try not to flinch at the divorce, the alcoholism, the drug abuse, or the suicides. Especially the suicides. Those ones always haunt me. Its almost always men, and its the young ones that hit hardest. Sister came home to find his body hanging. Friend dropped by and he was on the floor with a massive exit wound in his skull. They found his body in his car, down by the river. Et fucking cetera. Despite the natural compulsion to come running when a girl starts crying, female suicide is comparatively rare. They seldom graduate from ideation to action, and maybe that's because people pay attention when girls cry. Roissy's eggs are expensive, sperm is cheap, maybe.

And when you tally all of that up, every punch to the face and kick to the groin that globalism savagely launched on Heritage America, suddenly the feral rage that propelled Trump into the highest office starts to make a lot more sense. Because it's not just the things that I listed. It's not just the shuttered factories and the rust and the substance abuse and all the other material evils you get tired of counting. It's the abuse that rural America receives from their urbanite co-nationals. Fly-over country. Voting against your economic interests. Dumbfuckistan. Your vote was a hate crime. Et cetera, ad nauseam. Its no secret that the city hates the country, but the why is for another time. Country folk are well aware, and even though they tend to be uneducated, that is by no means related to how smart or stupid, clever or dumb they may or may not be. It speaks volumes about Hindu eschatology that the most educated today tend to also be the most vapid, uninformed, childish and ignorant. Furthermore, a non-trivial percentage of ruralite men are itching for war. Someday, anon, they may very well wall off the cities and torch the whole of it, a crude but passable emergency surgery to excise a cancerous growth that threatens to choke them off for good. I can't say I'd shed any tears for the people I know who would meet such a fate.

There's beauty out there too, after you peel away the layers of shit dropped on Heritage America from on high, where their bourgeois urbanite cousins LARP as a sort of demented caricature of an aristocracy, only inverted. When I go out there I see pregnant women, young families, laughing children. People know each other, talk to their neighbors, form healthy communities that are actually connected by blood and by soil, even if they don't have the hifalutin reactionary rhetoric to describe what exactly it is that they build. They just do, and it's a remarkable thing. Once, in high school, a teacher whom I remember particularly fondly brought us outside to the parking lot for an exercise in creative writing. Way in the back, poking out of the recently re-tarred asphalt, a white flower pushed itself out of the pavement, spreading it's petals to the burning glory of the sun. When I go out to the country, I think of that flower.

Like how the ancient regime of Feudalism accidentally shoved Europeans through a thousand year eugenics program, the silver lining of the modern era is that modernity selects against those most predisposed to the excesses of the modern world. On a long enough timeline, the cancer of Progressive Idealism is a problem that solves itself. We may not live to see such a timeline, and the feckless idiots who conspire to dethrone the God Emperor may yet have their way. As shortsighted as the policies of globalism and mass immigration have proven to be, nothing yet will compare to the white hot rage the establishment would unleash if they succeed in undermining Trump. And so be it! May we at least die standing, if we're doomed to fall.

But come what may, I'll never come down.

The Great White Culture Change

I think we may be seeing the start of a trend: Jason Kessler's Credentials

Further commentary from VoxDay and Aurini.

---

Naturally there are those who have noticed Jason Kessler and Garon Archer's histories with the Occupy movement and sense that the Eye of Soros has cast its gaze upon the Alt-Right. I seem to have misplaced my magic sunglasses, so I'm seeing something a little different. Allow me to flatter myself and play Cassandra for a moment.

I don't know where exactly this comes from because I am not its original recipient. Take it for whatever it's worth to you, but for now I'm only going to quote a part of it and use it as a starting point. Honestly, this looks tongue in cheek, out of context or satirical, but I have no further comment on it's origination. Emphasis mine.

Prime Directive: Always Blame the Jews for Everything

As Hitler says in Mein Kampf, people will become confused and disheartened if they feel there are multiple enemies. As such, all enemies should be combined into one enemy, which is the Jews. This is pretty much objectively true anyway, but we want to leave out any and all nuance.

So no blaming Enlightenment though, pathological altruism, technology/urbanization, etc. - just blame Jews for everything.

This basically includes blaming Jews for the behavior of other non-Whites. Of course it should not be that they are innocent, but the message should always be that if we didn't have the Jews we could figure out how to deal with non-Whites very easily.

The same deal with women. Women should be attacked, but there should always be mention that if it wasn't for the Jews, they would be acting normally.

What should be completely avoided is the sometimes mentioned idea that "even if we got rid of the Jews we would still have all these other problems." The Jews should always be the beginning and the end of every problem, from poverty to poor family dynamics to war to the destruction of the rainforest....

The its the kikes! narrative is faulty because despite what humor can be derived from things like trolling the ever living fuck out of neoconservative shill Ben Shapiro, the blame the other function offers White Leftists an attractive, ready-made escape hatch when the economy of progressive morality implodes and the value of a signal collapses under the strain of minorities demanding White 'allies' dutifully stand in silent solidarity with non-Whites who openly conspire to eat all White people.

Why is this a problem? Doesn't the Alt-Right need more bodies? What's wrong with Leftist conversions? Glad you asked.

First, despite the humor vector, blaming the Jews is basically a knock-off version of the we wuz kangz until whitey showed up. As with Blacks, the idea that eliminating a particular oppressor, confiscating their property, or vacating their seats of authority will magically heal us of the evils that plague us is patent nonsense. Obviously for Blacks this is fairly easy to substantiate through the precipitous decline in Africa's quality of life after the end of the colonial era. For Whites, whom I generally (but not universally) have a higher opinion of than Blacks, allow me to offer a couple of lines of evidence that suggest that White people are declining in quality and coin-clutchers are the least of our concerns:

1. Average White IQ has declined by nearly one standard deviation since 1889
2. As a population approaches post-scarcity, aberrant behavior appears and propagates.
3. Several White (and non-White) civilizations have collapsed under similar circumstances to our own, without Jews.

It is far more accurate to say that we have succeeded so hard that we've begun to fail ourselves. The malfeasance of certain Jews, however enraging it may be, is more like rats feasting on a corpse than the knife that bled us dry. Poisoning (or ovening, as the case may be) the rats is not going to bring the corpse back from the dead.

People point to things like the Kalergi Plan as a counterweight to my three strongest points that the decline of White people is suicide and not murder. I will address the "conspiracy" angle momentarily, but before I get to that I must address another issue.

The second problem with Leftist conversions is that there is a risk that the tendencies of Leftism will transfer over even when garden variety Leftist philosophy and policies do not. A sizable portion of SJWs exhibit outward signs of their poor inner health. Excess fat, frumpy and weak physique, pastel hair dye, gaudy clothes, and bad tattoos are examples of aposematism, or warning coloration. While on a superficial level hipster chic has the purpose of signalling caste and attracting mates, the ubiquitous poor life choices, poor physical and mental health, and small minded pursuit of cheap social gains suggests to us that the aesthetic of Millennial progressives is an accidental socio-evolutionary step towards warning others that there is something seriously wrong with these sort of people.

Supposing that the outward signs of dysfunction even could be suppressed by the wholesale conversion of this particular caste of White people, does that likewise mean that the other excesses, particularly in temperament and disposition, can also be suppressed? My gut says no. My very first post on women and entryism generally pointed out that there is a certain suspicious tendency among Alt-lite and entry-level Alt-Right female e-celebrities that has all the signs and symptoms of classic attention seeking, only cleverly wrapped in the accouterments of the dissident right. I am generally predisposed against single females in and around the Alt-Right for this reason, although I'm willing to give some credit to partially mitigate this bias because being anything to the Right of a New York Times editorial carries substantial career risks vis-a-vis the Social Justice Inquisition. Still, these women need to hurry up and find husbands. That they seem to have a less than enthusiastic interest in effectively obliterating their share of the market by husbanding up suggests an element of faddishness influences their political alignment. Faddishness, in turn, suggests that there will be an incongruity between actions and words, and as the fad becomes more mainstream, numbers will swell.

Mass proliferation of a set of ideas among a group of people who are not selected for based off quality carries the risk of reducing the aggregate quality of the idea set. Case in point, conventional Progressive Idealism is suffering the entropic effects of egalitarianism to the point that "poop swastikas" are very serious business that the whole nation needs to be notified about and galvanized against. If you're looking for a handy line of evidence that suggests that the people in charge are not organized or particularly smart or driven by some sort of grand plan to genocide Whites, the incessant but badly contrived hate crime hoaxes are where you want to start. The clever and scheming men of the Frankfurt School are long since dead, and their heirs look less like this and more like this. Far from being the nigh-omnipotent ruling class that the most counter-Semitic members of the Alt-Right see, the true believers in the gospel of Progressive Idealism are more like a very small but very malevolent child attempting to play boss while swimming in his father's suit. They are wayward, evil certainly, but less than our worst suspicions suggest and simultaneously worse for us than the sort of evil the Alt-Right sees. The Left is increasingly peopled by low-caste Whites who are way out of their own league in terms of being an actual ruling class. They are crude and inept, however dangerous they are regardless, but they are only successful because a previous, higher-quality generation left them a network of institutions and resources to amplify their voices. They do little good with it, and are slowly pulling the trigger on their own obliteration as a philosophy.

Note that there are structural parallels between the Alt-Right's take on the JQ and the anti-White SJW Inquisition. Erasing the proper nouns and adjectives that make the two camp's arguments distinct, a simple formula emerges in the form of the oppressed and dispossessed struggling against their illegitimate overlords. Most the Alt-Right might wrinkle their noses at this and think that I'm channeling Sargon of Akkad's insufferable "above the fray" centrism. To that I say, no, I am not, but I am pointing out a coincidence of epistemology that at least one person prior to me suspected would serve as the impetus for the mass conversion of Leftists to the cause of pro-White racialism.

There is one crucial fact that we must not overlook, if we are to see the political situation as it is, rather than in the anamorphosis of some ‘ideology,’ i.e., propaganda-line, whether “Liberal” or “conservative.” The real fulcrum of power in our society is neither the votaries of an ideological sect nor the Jews, clear-sighted and shrewd as they are, but the intelligent members of our own race whose one principle is an unmitigated and ruthless egotism, an implacable determination to satisfy their own ambitions and lusts at whatever cost to their race, their nation, and even their own progeny. And with them we must reckon the bureaucrats, men who, however much or little they may think about the predictable consequences of the policies they carry out, are governed by a corporate determination to sink their probosces ever deeper into the body politic from which they draw their nourishment. Neither of these groups can be regarded as being “Liberal” or as having any other political attitude from conviction. The first are guarded by the lucidity of their minds, and the second by their collective interests, from adhesion to any ideology or other superstition.

Bureaucracies contain, of course, ambitious men who are climbing upward. One thinks of the bureaucrats who, shortly before the “Battle of the Bulge” in the last days of 1944, were openly distressed “lest a premature victory in Europe compromise our social gains at home,” meaning, of course, that they were afraid that peace might break out before they had climbed another rung on their way to real power. After the defeat of Japan, one of them, a major in the ever-growing battalions of chair-borne troops, too precious to be distressed by such nasty things as fighting battles, frankly lamented his hard luck: if only the war had lasted another three months, and a suitable number of Americans been killed, he would have been promoted to colonel and would also have a “command” that would have qualified him as the foremost expert in his field and thus assured his prosperity after the evil day on which he would have to face the hardships of peace. This attitude may not be admirable, but it is quite common and a political force of the first magnitude, which it would be childish to ignore. It is not, of course, peculiar to the United States. When the National Socialists came to power in Germany, they had many enthusiastic adherents of the same type, who, after the defeat of their nation, did not have to be tortured to become witnesses to the “evils of Nazism” and endorse any lie desired by the brutal conquerors. The attitude, furthermore, though especially prevalent in our demoralized age, is not peculiar to it. One thinks of the Popes who are reported to have told their intimates, “How much profit this fable of Christ has brought us!” And the same realistic appraisal of the main chance was doubtless present in many ecclesiastics who did not reach the top or did not have so much confidence in the discretion of their immediate associates.

Unmitigated egotism, which is necessarily a prime factor on all the higher levels of society in a “democracy,” is a political force with which one cannot cope directly; one can only attack the masks that are worn in public. It is, however, an obstacle that can be circumvented and one which could become an asset. The only strategic consideration here is represented by the truism, “nothing succeeds like success” — a crude statement, which you may find elaborated with elegance and sagacity in the Or culo manual of the great Jesuit, Baltasar Gracián. Our formidable enemies today will become our enthusiastic allies tomorrow, if it appears that we are likely to succeed. I speak, of course, only of members of our race, but the most competent and acute “Liberals,” who today declaim most eloquently about the “underprivileged” and “world peace,” could become tomorrow the most eloquent champions of the hierarchical principle (with which they secretly agree) and a guerre l’outrance against our enemies, if their calculations of the probable future were changed. And, as the Jews well know, the great humanitarian, whose soul shudders today at the very thought of insufficient veneration of the Jews, could become tomorrow grateful to the Jews only for the wonderful idea about gas chambers that was incorporated in the hoax about the “six million,” and he would probably find a real personal satisfaction in putting the idea into practice at last. As Gracián says, the prudent man will ascertain where power really lies, in order to use those who have it and to spurn those who have it not.

Revilo P. Oliver, 1981 

Backed into a corner by an ideology that promises to erase them, White Leftists have two options - do something drastic to claim oppressed status (such as sexual reassignment surgery), or join the Alt-Right. The fad of claiming to be transgender is actually an attempt by White kids to feebly clutch at oppressed status by literally making shit up. Demisexual, genderfluid, and other fashionable gender terms are not just simple nonsense, although at first glance the list of Tumblr genders appears that way. They're a social survival tool, as the cost of Whiteness is increasingly the ability to freely participate in the supposedly prestigious social circles of academia. The cost of Whiteness is imposed on goodthinkful Whites by minorities.

During my undergraduate, I had the grim opportunity to observe the behavior of a somewhat older black woman who bears a striking resemblance to the author of the piece I linked to on how White 'allies' must behave. Fortunately I never had class with this woman, but I would occasionally see her in my department's study lounge. A girl pulled a book off of the shelf to use in conjunction with whatever her small study group was working on, and some time later this woman came in looking for her book, which coincidentally was the exact same book that the first girl pulled off of the bookshelf in a common area. The next ten minutes were grimly amusing in the same sort of way that you might be amused by watching someone you find annoying take repeated punches to the face. The woman berated the study group with a particularly nasty series of passive-aggressive questions about why you would think that you have the right to touch a book in a common area of a public university. The girl who pulled the book off the shelf apologized profusely for touching a book left on a shelf in a common area of a public university, and satisfied that she had forced a handful of white kids to grovel for the crime of touching the book she left.

Do you remember what Tolkien said about Smaug's reaction to the theft of his cup? An no, I am not referencing the behavior of the Negress.

Goodthinkful and naive though these White students were, and likely still are, the look of servile embarrassment on their faces suggested to me something similar to the classic "this is not what I paid for". How many of these sort of rude and sudden left hooks to the dome will goodthinkful Whites take? The most common answer I get from Alt-Right fellows I've talked to in person is something akin to all the punches, which is puerile, vapid, reflexive, and frankly a little disappointing. This isn't to say that this sort of thing is without precedent, as Leftists are notorious for fleeing the (usually ethnic) destruction which their policies wreak upon their petty enclaves. But what if there's no where else to run?

My prediction, which I will reiterate until we are finally done rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic, is that the closer Leftist institutions get to pushing out all Whites from circles of prestige, the greater the pressure to eject will build within the White Leftist caste. At first, a select few will bridge the gap between conventional Progressive Idealism and the Alt-Right. While I am not casting aspersions per se on Messrs. Kessler and Archer because I do not know them personally, and likely will never meet them face to face where I can draw conclusions for myself, it is none the less increasingly obvious to me that these two are among the first high-profile Leftist converts. It is also very likely true that the earlier converts will more readily assimilate into the organic Alt-Right host culture, but like subsequent generations of immigrants, the Leftist crossover will more and more taint Alt-Right culture in temperament, though probably not philosophically.

If that is true, it is likely that the "conspiracy" angle will ease an otherwise dubious and unlikely transition. Kalergi's prediction about race may be enraging and frightening to those among us who have woken to the precarious situation of our race, culture and nations, but I have yet to meet someone who has read, much less owns, Kalergi's book in any part other than as it is presented as a common image on a certain Cambodian basket-weaving forum. Considering that much of what is believed about the designs oven-dodging coin clutchers have in store for Huwyte people originates with images on 4chan and elsewhere, I reserve any serious judgement beyond my continued insistence that this shit is far less important than any of you really think. The classic quote from the David Rockefeller book being taken wildly out of context and selectively omitting the preceding and following paragraphs is further cause for my reservations about coin clutching cabals.

My reservations, however justified I think they may be, are irrelevant, and for the purposes of the Alt-Right none the less serve as a ready-made, cookie cutter framework recently converted Leftists can conveniently jam themselves into in order to ease the transition from one wing of politics to the other. A less studious conservative might huff and puff at the anti-White invective, and mumble to themselves (ineffectively as well) about how wildly disproportionate the response would be if the slew of anti-White people articles coming out of Salon, HuffPo, et. al. were directed at Jews. To this I say to our humble but unimaginative cuck, worry not! Someday they will. All you have to do is switch the adjectives, and boom! Target adjusted. And how easy these people may someday find it, to put the ovens myth to the test.

This, however, does not solve the problem of White people and quality.