The situation is volatile because the old balances have imploded. There is a political vacuum in the heart of the West that cannot easily be filled by the debris, riots, or noooo! What Donald Trump has come into possession of is probably a mystery to him as well. His instinct is to circle the wagons around America. Perhaps that is not as silly as progressives think. You consolidate on general principles precisely when no one knows what is next and only huge shadows are seen moving beyond the campfire.
… the tumultuous events of the last six months have dragged the Deep State into the fray. A slow motion ‘constitutional crisis’ is already occurring. The future of the Supreme Court, the independence (or neutrality) of the FBI, the role of Congress are now at issue. In the words of president Obama “I hate to put pressure on you but the fate of the Republic rests in your hands. The fate of the world is teetering”. The election has become a referendum. It is not just who heads the executive branch but what the executive branch will become that are on the ballot. Obama’s legacy and the political arc of the last 40 years are up for a vote. “The American Brexit is coming,” wrote James Stavridis in Foreign Policy, a comparison which if anything, understates the case.
It perhaps goes without saying (but I’ll say it anyway): from the perspective of NRx, as also probably more widely, tumult in the Deep State counts for far more than any democratic transition. Events are occurring that can’t be kept in the theater.
It’s 2016, so suddenly it’s imaginable we could witness the Singularity within a few years. It’s tempting to say (even if the rumors are true) that he has better things to do, but he’s not actually Musking about that much these days, and the mere possibility has to count as a peculiar life-circuit.
For thermonuclear domestic politics, this one would clearly be hard to beat.
Fiasco is rooting for Trump.
(Hillary, then fiasco, would be the optimum sequence.)
It is surely a crucial (and inadequately acknowledged) feature of Darwin’s The Origin of Species that its point of departure is artificial selection, which might also be described as primordial technology, or the foundation of material civilization. Natural selection acquires definition through comparison with the (predominantly unconscious) process of domestication, or cultivation. This is the transitional paragraph (from Chapter IV):
As man can produce, and certainly has produced, a great result by his methodical and unconscious means of selection, what may not natural selection effect? Man can act only on external and visible characters: Nature, if I many be allowed to personify the natural preservation or survival of the fittest, cares nothing for appearances, except in so far as they are useful to any being. She can act on every internal organ, on every shade of constitutional difference, on the whole machinery of life. Man selects only for his own good: Nature only for that of the being which she tends. Every selected character is fully exercised by her, as is implied by the fact of their selection. Man keeps the natives of many climates in the same country; he seldom exercises each selected character in some peculiar and fitting manner; he feeds a long- and short-beaked pigeon on the same food; he does not exercise a long-backed or long-legged quadruped in any peculiar manner; he exposes sheep with long and short wool to the same climate. He does not allow the most vigorous males to struggle for the females. He does not rigidly destroy all inferior animals, but protects during each varying season, as far as lies in his power, all his productions. He often begins his selection from some half-monstrous form; or at least by some modification prominent enough to catch the eye or to be plainly useful to him. Under Nature, the slightest difference of structure or constitution may well turn the nicely balanced scale in the struggle for life, and so be preserved. How fleeting are the wishes and efforts of man! how short his time! and consequently how poor will be his results, compared with those accumulated by Nature during whole geological periods! Can we wonder, then, that Natures productions should be far “truer” in character than man’s productions; that they should be infinitely better adapted to the most complex conditions of life, and should plainly bear the stamp of far higher workmanship?
XS wishes all its readers a productive Bitcoin Halving Day. (It’s only the second ever — with the first falling on November 28, 2012, when Block 210000 was solved.)
Bitcoin likes Countdown numbers (only 21000000 will ever be produced).
(Countdown = 210.)
For discussion of UK independence, UK fragmentation, EU disintegration, Pan-secessionism, and catabolic geopolitics in general.
Here‘s Geert Wilders widening the conversation.
(Content coming later, probably in a subsequent post.)
ADDED: There’s a lot of gravy. One little drip. Bye: “Prime Minister David Cameron, who had led the campaign to keep Britain in the EU, said he would resign by October and left it to his successor to decide when to invoke Article 50, which triggers a departure from European Union.”
XS has received a firm (but fair) scolding for not linking to this development in yesterday’s Chaos Patch (or elsewhere).
Here’s the website and a nested blogpost (containing a deeper link to the whitepaper (which is good)). The (minimalistic) manifesto is an ideological mish-mash which has been worked-over by PR imperatives and demands cold scrutiny to extract its real content.
From the whitepaper:
A word of caution, at the outset: the legal status of DAOs remains the subject of active and vigorous debate and discussion. Not everyone shares the same definition. Some have said that they are autonomous code and can operate independently of legal systems; others have said that they must be owned or operate by humans or human created entities. There will be many uses cases, and the DAO code will develop over time. Ultimately, how a DAO functions and its legal status will depend on many factors, including how DAO code is used, where it is used, and who uses it. This paper does not speculate about the legal status of DAOs worldwide.
The XS prediction is itself predictable: This only goes in one direction (and eventually its going to be vast).
ADDED: When the marketing aesthetics go in this direction, we’re done.
ADDED: Andrea Castillo comments.
Phillip Mark McGough, writing in Quillette, buys his way in with a bald truth ticket:
After Cologne, feminism is dead.
The whole article is solid, giving clear voice to what is already a common understanding. The feminist establishment is only in derivative, flexible, and tactical opposition to extreme sexual violence against women. It consists of hardcore leftist race-politics hacks in women’s rights drag. Now everybody knows it (which is huge).