Chaos Patch (#103)

(Open thread + links)

What is Neoreaction? (Snarl.) The bargain. The way out is forward. Death by Utopianism. Lifeboat ethics (also). Distributed blind conspiracy. Institutional capture. A failed fitness test. Social media as a model of collapse. Quite a bit more persuasion needed. New(ish) blog of the week. The weekly round.

Evil is conserved. Ingroups and outgroups. Zizek, rightist. Leftism for little children. Embrace the collapse (video). “Perhaps more dramatically than any other voting block, un­married women — comprising as they do other liberal-voting groups including young women and women of color — lean left. Way left.” Could millennials turn to the dark side? The outgroup are conspiracy nuts. Post-racial morality (on steroids). The progressive Hitler.

Saudi oil economics, and military challenges (1, 2). Realism on Syria (plus some relevant nervousness). Jinnah’s dead dreams. Ruinous modernity. Xi Jinping tightens the media leash. Chinese migration sanity. Lessons from Venezuela. SA in crisis. Rolling migration catastrophe in Europe. The backlash is the real problem (Hollande agrees). Dissent spreads (1, 2). Camp of the Saints tours (1, 2). The meaning of Rotherham. Morbid delusions. Nazi cult tourist destination.

Brexit chatter heats up (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8). Historical timeline here. The best-case outcome.

“The bottom line is simple. The great wave of commodity and industrial deflation now sweeping through the world economy is the bastard offspring of the debt binge that was enabled by the central banks over the last two decades. Yet they now pretend that this massive headwind to growth originated in some exogenous force that must be counted with even more of the same monetary intrusion.” Keynesian error. Cash suppression. Oil glut hurts pirates. Robot job-hunting.

Trumpenführer panic report (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6), with additional fingerpointing. About that nuclear business. Uh oh (+), plus. Violent rhetoric. Why? The GOP is broken, seriously. Neocons flee. Game theory for the GOPe (note 1, 2). The torture. Trump the monster, miracle, and new Charlemagne (also bad for the Jews). The democratic comedy. Unhinged media (exhibit). Preference cascade. Revenge all around. The China angle. On to higher things? End of an era.

Twitter’s war against the right (plus, also). The troll tamers. The Ace strategy.

Garett Jones talks to Stefan Molyneux (video). Pygmies just became a little awkward. Mainstream HBD against ‘pathological altruism’. The canceled Derb speech. Diversity and its discontents. The case for blind hiring. Ferguson effect. Warped reality. Love is overrated. Only obeying orders. Updated oaths.

“Tech product cycles are mutually reinforcing interactions between platforms and applications. New platforms enable new applications, which in turn make the new platforms more valuable, creating a positive feedback loop. Smaller, offshoot tech cycles happen all the time, but every once in a while — historically, about every 10 to 15 years — major new cycles begin that completely reshape the computing landscape.” Latest steps in robotics. The real promise of VR. Dopaminergic headphones. Tech politics, subterfuge, and insecurity.

The cosmic web. A big rip timeframe. A Fermi Paradox for the multiverse. Serpentization on Enceladus. Secret sentience.

Apocalypse Corner. On AI panic (and some relevant PR). A New Doomsday Argument.
22nd century blues. Hyperbolic Joy.

Schizoid psychiatry. Inconvenient worlds. Zero stroke. A numerical oddity. The absence of sense.

February 28, 2016admin 54 Comments »

TAGGED WITH : , , , , , , , , , , , ,

54 Responses to this entry

  • Chaos Patch (#103) | Neoreactive Says:

    […] By admin […]

    Posted on February 28th, 2016 at 1:31 pm Reply | Quote
  • Ursus Says:

    Reactionary Future’s post has a nice auto-populated list of suggestions at the end, like “last comments on neoreaction.” The guy just can’t break orbit.


    admin Reply:

    Presently, he’s surrendered his considerable intellectual gifts to undisciplined irritability.


    Hurlock Reply:

    He has become a self-parody by now, but what is more disturbing is that some people around here still take him seriously.


    Alrenous Reply:

    Some neoreactionaries react to anarcho-capitalism like vampires react to garlic. I’m sure it’s just a coincidence.

    Ahote Reply:

    His writing implies that he ought to consider Russia between 1597 and 1861 as having a perfect governance. Despite claim to being the only one who stayed true to Moldbug, I’m pretty sure that when Moldbug said “free exit,” he did not, in fact, mean “no exit.”

    SVErshov Reply:

    unfortunately most people do not understand the need in reevaluating content before going public.

    Chris B Reply:

    @Ursus The whole patchwork thing has become a giant myth in which absolutely no one bothers to even read the initial conception, but instead goes of a imagined anarcho-capitalist interpretation. The patchwork is supposed to be a patchwork of sovereign states in which the sovereigns hold total control. If citizens disagree with the running of the thing, then they are free to leave. The mechanism behind this is supposed to be self interest. Now, you have some issues here, firstly, he makes it clears these are sovereign entities, hence the citizens are not weaponised against it ” each governed by its own joint-stock corporation without regard to the residents’ opinions.” Secondly, this is not some multicultural state experiment, all leftism is expelled, and his conception of leftism is very clear. He even writes the following –
    “Children growing up in the Patchwork era will learn a new name and a new history of the democratic past. They will date the period to the Dutch invasion of England (1688), which ended the span of legitimate continuity in English government that began with William the Conqueror, replacing it with eternal, degenerate Whiggery and the quisling, “constitutional” or ceremonial Hanover princes. And they will surely call it something cool, like the Anglo-American Interregnum. Insulting it with the name of “democracy” will be coarse and over-the-top.” followed by “On theoretical grounds alone – the feat has never really been achieved, at least never for good – the only cure for leftism is complete and permanent excision. Success implies complete absence of the organism from the body politic.” so, no, democratic or Nazi states being part of patchwork is absurd. Also, how about this –
    “These political three-card monte tricks, in which sovereign authority is in some way divided, “limited” (obviously, no sovereign can limit itself), or otherwise weakened, in all cases for the purported purpose of securing liberty, have no more place in a Patchwork realm than they do at, say, Apple. They are spurious artifacts of the Interregnum. Their effect on both a realm and its residents is purely counterproductive. Begone with them.” and “In reality, no sovereign can be subject to law. This is a political perpetual motion machine. Law is not law unless it is judged and enforced.”

    Face it, there has been massive leaps and bounds away from what Moldbug was writing about, and what is now claimed it means makes little sense – it’s just an anarcho-cap circle jerk. You cannot maintain an intellectual discourse with this level of dishonesty.


    admin Reply:

    Huge chunks of Moldbug’s Patchwork writing has been cited here, word-for-word. For instance, here, and here.

    The interest this blog has in Moldbug, and I suspect that of many who hang out here, is Neocameral and Patchwork theory. I’d be entirely happen to describe myself as a Neocameralist, and ignore ‘Modlbug’ completely, if that made the slightest sense. Arguments from personal authority are absolutely worthless, from the XS PoV.

    It’s hard to know why you get yourself wound up into such a fury about this. Why not just do your romantic humanist Moldbug, and let us keep Patchwork / Neocam (which you seem to have no serious interest in, anyway). Or is the very idea of people going their own way now offensive to your ideas of political authority?


    Neo Soliar Reply:

    I think the main complaint (that I also have) is that many people in “NRx” have opinions on Moldbug that have little to do with anything Moldbug wrote. It is a situation similar to public education where everyone is told what society is telling them. I do not accuse you of this Nick, nor do I necessarily endorse Moldbug. But if someone told me that Hillary was actually an anarchist or something I would be annoyed at that person. Not because I care for Hillary, but because it is just dishonest. The name Moldbug is thrown around a lot, and I bet that most of us using it have not read more than a couple pieces of Moldbug. Very few have read all, or even a fraction of his work which in the PDF I have comes too 6 million words. 12 times larger than war, and piece. I have just scratched the half way mark. Even the folks at Hestia have probably only read the open letter. The best case would be for people to stop saying moldbug believes X / Y, and just pull from the sections you read, and like, such as Admin has done.

    Grotesque Body Reply:

    @Neo Soliar,

    Bits and pieces of the UR corpus have been uploaded to various sites in PDF format but I haven’t found a single master copy as a PDF yet. Is that available somewhere or have you had to put that together yourself?

    Yakimi Reply:

    @Neo Soliar,

    >The best case would be for people to stop saying moldbug believes X / Y, and just pull from the sections you read, and like, such as Admin has done.

    It would be unfortunate if people missed out on some other aspect of Moldbug just because of the length. I’m trying to put together a representative selection of Moldbug’s thought over at Wikiquote.

    (Incidentally, I’ve read the entirety of Unqualified Reservations, many of the pieces several times over, along with all the comments Moldbug has ever posted elsewhere. It took only a year. It’s epic, but no chore at all.)

    Posted on February 28th, 2016 at 2:06 pm Reply | Quote
  • Mark Warburton Says:

    The Ladybird guide is hilarious… ‘left-wing people are funny’ section is only the more trenchant in the kiddy-simple style.


    Posted on February 28th, 2016 at 2:25 pm Reply | Quote
  • grey enlightenment Says:

    But what if some of these concepts correspond to phenomena in the universe that pose risks to our survival? To use the chipmunk analogy again: the universe is full of cosmic dangers — such as asteroid impacts, super volcanoes, solar flares, black hole explosions or mergers, supernovae, galactic center outbursts, and gamma-ray bursts, to name a few — that the chipmunk can’t possibly comprehend. It’s not merely ignorant of such risks, but it’s ignorant of its ignorance. It has no idea that it’s utterly oblivious that annihilation could take so many exotic forms.

    Epistemic limitations. Unknown unknowns. This is not really a new concept.

    Black people are twice as likely as white people to be out of work and looking for a job. This fact was as true in 1954 as it is today.

    That’s what happens when an achievement gap is an IQ gap. War on poverty, civil rights movement, and hundreds of billions of dollars spent on public education, entitlement spending, and other programs have not helped.

    Also interesting:

    They are going much lower. Would not surprise me to see the 10-yr bond go to .4% should the US economy enter another recession. Low rates good for homeowners.


    Posted on February 28th, 2016 at 2:51 pm Reply | Quote
  • Tentative Joiner Says:

    The Žižek article, despite being published on “World Socialist Web Site” as part of the self-purging cycle of the left, may hint at an important truth. That truth is not that Žižek has suddenly moved rightwards on a Moldbuggian scale but that the category of “new right” and, to a slightly lesser extent, of “alternative right” can plausibly include someone like Žižek. Under this supposition the term “alternative left” (of the type) becomes redundant.


    grey enlightenment Reply:

    Žižek is part or related of the Frankfurt school, which tends to reject modernity, democracy, fascism, as well as orthodox Marxism. seems similar to this: also Foucault and Jean-François Lyotard . The weird thing is when you go really far to the left, you sometimes end up in the ‘right’


    Hurlock Reply:

    So Žižek wrote this:
    “The fact that someone is at the bottom, does not make them automatically a voice of morality and justice.”

    He’s done for. He is trying to make leftism intellectually consistent. That’s impossible, because leftism would never work if it tried to be consistent, because it is a power play, not a philosophical stream seeking the truth, or whatever.

    Poor Žižek just doesn’t get leftism. He’s not getting the joke.


    Frog Do Reply:

    He’s always known, this is him pivoting. There’s a bunch of fun conspiracy stuff on what he was doing as a university student back in the day.

    Seth Largo Reply:

    Good quote to highlight, Hurlock. It really is simple. Though all leftists are intersectional in theory, they must in practice elevate race, class, sexuality, or gender at the expense of the others. For most leftists, race trumps the others, then gender, then sexuality . . . and class? . . . banish the thought!

    Zizek is an oddity in that he elevates sexuality and gender above race. He is intellectually honest enough to recognize and say out loud that the Muslims flooding Europe are not interested in allowing women and gays to participate in the public sphere. He has inverted the de facto hierarchy of critical categories and ruptured leftist time-space.

    Grotesque Body Reply:

    It would be an interesting, although useless, exercise to set up a plot of the radical thinkers of history represented at data points, mapping the time in which they lived against the point at which the Overton window passed them moving leftwards. So while de Sade lived 300 years ago and we have yet to catch up to him (although we’re on our way, given that we’re following his blueprint) Zizek is one of those unfortunate souls (Germaine Greer is another) who live to see the Zeitgeist leave them behind.


    Bettega Reply:

    The Post-Modern tradition has it’s torch past to the New Right.

    Post modern concerns about authorities of knowledge, distrust of meta narratives, and notions of cultural relativity now can be used to attack liberal power structures and modernist-narrative about universalism and progress.

    In the end, it was all about power. When Charles de Gaulle was President of France and it seemed like the postwar consensus was precluding any revolutionary potential, academic intellectuals created postmodernism to dislodge the technocratic ruling class, but now that these intellectuals have become the ruling class and base their authority on being on the “right side of history”, postmodernism has no more use for them.


    Duder Reply:

    In my opinion, Zizek has always been one of us. I can’t think of that many differences between his opinion and mine. At least from the things I understand enough.

    The only thing really separating us is his constant obsession with trying to justify everything back to Marxist theory in one way or another. Otherwise I agree with most of the things I have read by him. He’s great.

    A lot of the criticism he gets is completely incorrect.

    Actually I am a bit off. But honestly I have pretty much always knew Zizek was closet realist. He just continues to confirm that hypothesis more and more. Albeit of course with usual posturing and scrambling for Marxist points to make.


    Grotesque Body Reply:

    Inside every troll there is a disappointed realist.


    Posted on February 28th, 2016 at 2:54 pm Reply | Quote
  • michael Says:

    Clarkhat on democracy, democracy doesnt work mainly because people have no real power through it. I dont imagine he thinks things would really be better if they did, nor do I. But my point remains the problem is not the people its the elites. Cathedralism Democracy is actually a brilliant system put to evil use.Better still, it would work even better if its aims were more aligned with peoples natural reactionary instincts presently it uses a lot of its energy countering them.One of the reasons it does so well is democracy may actually be a biological trait, or at least consensus rule.Later kings were a weak form where it was agreed they must have divine right because there they were.But there was always some Baron who remembered the Kings grandfather father was no big deal and the kings mom was something of a slut and their were plenty of courtiers who knew the King to be ever so human so despite a lot of dont rock the boat NRO types, shit happened. In a democracy you have to calculate that even if you can seize the capital more than half the people are on the other side so if you want it bad enough you go into politics where you find out if you wanted power you should have gone into business or the civil service.Reaction is betting all on ‘muh Collapse” Want to know how to make Gnon laugh?


    Erebus Reply:

    >”democracy may actually be a biological trait”

    What the hell are you on about?

    Besides Athens and its Delian League vassal states — which, as I’ve noted many times before, were nothing like today’s “democracy” and were much more akin to military oligarchies or juntas with little internal hierarchy — there is no other instance of a Democratic state prior to the 18th century. I’d also note that hierarchy is a common feature of social structures in the animal kingdom, whereas herd decision-making-by-consensus is extremely rare. Democracy does not come naturally to men or beasts.

    With respect to “people have no real power through [democracy]”: I think it’s worth noting that direct democracy could actually work — clearly the technology exists to make it work, and to an extent which would immediately render “representatives” obsolete — but it can only work if suffrage is restricted to a degree that most people would find unthinkable. This is an ironclad requirement. Initially, in the early days of the USA, only white men with property were eligible to vote… That would be a start. Restrictions would need to be taken much further. I don’t think that this will ever happen, but it’s an interesting thought exercise.

    (…Much more interesting than that idiotic “Multiverse Fermi Paradox” article. The author is an idiot, and the comments on the article look like they were written by honest-to-goodness retards… and yet even those YouTube-caliber comments suffice to make the author look stupid. Pardon the digression.)


    Brett Stevens Reply:

    If cuck is genetic, democracy is biological.

    We know that when lower echelons — the left side of the Bell Curve — gain power, they demand democracy.

    Obviously a certain IQ is required to understand that democracy is shit, and among people above 120 IQ points, this is a common opinion. But maybe something else is required, too, like a genetic trait for honesty or giving a damn about the future.

    Clearly the masses do not have it.


    Erebus Reply:

    >”We know that when lower echelons — the left side of the Bell Curve — gain power, they demand democracy.”

    …Or Marxism, or Socialism, or the Islamic Brotherhood, or……

    The truth is that they demand whatever system is most fashionable or pious — which always happens to be a system which would impart unto them undeserved power and wealth. Perhaps it would be simpler to say that holiness signalling and rapacious opportunism are biological traits.

    Cichlimbar Reply:

    “What the hell are you on about?”

    What he is probably trying to point out (and is entirely correct to do so), is that impressions in the same vein as this

    “there is no other instance of a Democratic state prior to the 18th century”

    err by appealing to anachronisms on the one hand (among Europeans, proto-parlamentarianism/democratism can in fact be observed outside the confines of ancient Greece, both spatially and temporally) and by arguing about the rationalisations (political theory) for the observed social arrangements on the other (i.e. completely ignoring the premises of the argument you’re dismissing).

    In short: you don’t get it.


    Erebus Reply:

    The point of the original post — at least insofar as I can understand it — appears to be: “It’s not the people, it’s the elites” and “democracy is a brilliant system put to evil use.” I’ll get right to the point: I think that he’s utterly wrong on both counts.

    -The people are degenerate, decadent, cowed, and almost unfathomably stupid. Most of them are entirely without merit. Were this not the case, I’d be wrong about direct democracy — it would stand a chance of success, even with broad suffrage.

    -If the goal is good government, democracy is the furthest possible thing from a brilliant system. I don’t think I need to expound on this any further. There’s nothing to say that hasn’t been said thousands of times already, over thousands of years.

    >”proto-parlamentarianism/democratism can in fact be observed outside the confines of ancient Greece, both spatially and temporally”

    Yeah, yeah… merchant guilds occasionally voted, war councils occasionally voted, advisory councils voted, parliamentary systems existed, and so on… but these much-lauded examples of “proto-democratism” have little to do with Democracy as people understand it at present. In 18th century England, for instance, Parliament was far weaker than it is today, was packed to the brim with aristocrats, and only the landed yeomanry had the vote. If the monarch had not existed, would this system not be much closer to the classical definition of Oligarchy — that is to say, rule by the wealthy? (And yet wouldn’t a system like that, of strictly limited suffrage, ensure better outcomes? And didn’t it ensure a fine outcome in practice, with an English empire that spanned the globe?)

    In any case, one certainly can’t say that Democracy is something that comes naturally. It’s a joke to say that it’s a biological trait, when you’d be hard pressed to find a form of government that comes less naturally to man, or is less common over the past few thousand years.

    In any case, if neoreaction “doesn’t get it,” I think that this may simply be due to anti-egalitarian tendencies.

    Cichlimbar Reply:

    “these much-lauded examples of “proto-democratism” have little to do with Democracy as people understand it at present”

    No, they have everything to do with democracy at present, because democracy emerged from them. Once you seriously consider sociobiology/HBD/whateveryouwanttocallit, the conclusion that the present is a function of history is inescapable. It’s not your diligent (and in some cases I’ve noticed, unnatural — phoney) pursuit of anti-egalitarianism that’s obstructing your understanding. Exactly the opposite: you don’t seem to actively penetrate the existence of human nature at all, in spite of your claims to the contrary.

    Not in any meaningful way in any case; only insofar as you are constricted to adhere to some degree of and innate limit to human malleability so that rhetorical rubbish (i.e. sophistry) such as “the people are degenerate, decadent, cowed, and almost unfathomably stupid” (and everything you want this rhetorics to lead into) can admissibly make sense to you. It is all so very strange. But then again, humans are quite capable of holding entirely contradictory positions simultaneously.

    Still — you, Erebus, must implicitly grasp that these matters are in fact otherwise; rhetorical question: is democracy behind the Chinese “dynastic cycle”?

    Erebus Reply:

    Modern Democracy did not emerge from the Things of Scandinavia, nor from the mercantile guilds of northern Italy, nor from any other (exceedingly rare) instance of pre-18th century rule-by-consensus. It originated in England, exclusively — and that with the advancement of the English parliament from a council of barons, to something which approximated an oligarchy, to something more democratic but still essentially oligarchic in nature. It is precisely this latter system that America initially adopted.

    Your “proto-democratic” systems ended in collapse, transitions into naked oligarchy, or long declines into irrelevance. We didn’t get here from there. There is a historical thread, but those small experiments in something akin to democracy have no meaningful connection to it. They are mere historical curiosities.

    It bears mentioning that the British Empire was forged under a system where only propertied men could vote. When they extended suffrage to their masses, first in 1884 and again in 1928, they entered and then dramatically hastened their decline. I do not think that this is a coincidence. The English simply did not heed the warnings of the Ancients. When the ignorant masses gain power, pay attention to how they vote & what they vote for. Particularly with women voters and, as mentioned by Brett Stevens, those on the wrong side of the bell curve.

    I have no faith in the volk. If we are to have a future at all, I believe that it is with an elite “aristocratic” class that will, with technological assistance, become more than human. (I’m a transhumanist, when you get right down to it. And I firmly believe that transhumanism and egalitarianism cannot coexist.)
    …You seem to hold the opposite opinion — you seem sympathetic to populism. Why?

    Peasant revolts had a great deal to do with the dynastic cycle, by the way. (The peasants simply didn’t have any conception of democracy or socialism — so much the better!) And what better way to describe egalitarian democracy than as “peasant revolts synchronized to an election cycle”? Conceptually, in any case.

    Xoth Reply:

    The Roman Republic was arguably a better ancient example of modern mass democracy. The journey towards homeopathic voting was perhaps begun there.


    Posted on February 28th, 2016 at 2:54 pm Reply | Quote
  • Brett Stevens Says:

    The great wave of commodity and industrial deflation now sweeping through the world economy is the bastard offspring of the debt binge that was enabled by the central banks over the last two decades.

    It’s worth remembering that this debt binge was also known as the Clinton Miracle.


    Posted on February 28th, 2016 at 3:47 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alrenous Says:

    Why think that the computers behind our eyes can generate all the concepts needed to mentally represent every type of phenomenon in the universe?

    It’s called Turing complete. Any Turing machine can be used to represent any other Turing machine. Given enough time, that is. Sophomore needs to graduate.


    admin Reply:

    While nominally Turing complete, it’s quite obvious that lots of things are for all practical purposes inaccessible to human intelligence. There are mathematical proofs intractable to human comprehension. “Given enough time” could easily overspill the expected life-span of the universe.


    Posted on February 28th, 2016 at 4:52 pm Reply | Quote
  • Irving Says:

    Frankly, the article about robots taking every job that pays $20 an hour or below is the most important of the articles linked to on this chaos patch.

    I’ve no doubt that the automation of all low and some medium skilled jobs will solve a lot of the problems that the west is currently facing . Everyone with an IQ of 115 or below will more or less be expelled from the labor force and will then face imminent starvation. The better ones among them will figure out a way to survive, and we should happily give them whatever help they need towards achieving that end, but the rest will be done for, and good riddance to them.


    Posted on February 28th, 2016 at 5:10 pm Reply | Quote
  • Kgaard Says:

    The Crawford book is of course stupendous. The implied question of the book is: how does one recover the deep, felt experience of a community that is not manipulated by somebody trying to make or take money off you?

    That is a hard one — particularly if you are either a) anti-democratic in a democratic age or b) the target of re-distributors seeking to leech off your ability to delay gratification and create wealth.

    Anger and community building do not go well together.


    Posted on February 28th, 2016 at 6:02 pm Reply | Quote
  • SVErshov Says:

    I need better tool to reevalute significance of those or another article in ChaosPatch. Initially my idea was in detecting traces of non linear thinking, but as occurances of such kind of thought increase (example : recent article about destroing economy, for a purpose of saving it) I going to add additional parameter ‘decomposition of a problem’. linear thinking have to demonstate some theoretical signifance, dynamical does ot not. sorry for sounding pedagogically, talking to myself.


    Posted on February 28th, 2016 at 7:18 pm Reply | Quote
  • Arkon Says:

    Trump’s rise is revealing some fascinating things about America’s opinion-control system. Notice, for example, how Jews are almost unanimously circling the wagons to condemn him in their media in a very aggressive manner. You see this a lot with any popular, strong, non-liberal white gentile who connects to his own kind like this, but it’s usually a lot more subtle. We are seeing one Jewish pundit or intellectual after another lining up to tell us why Trump is a dangerous menace — the nerve of these guys is truly impressive!

    I know you guys like to talk about the “Cathedral”, but from where I sit it’s the “Synagogue” that is the really manipulative and insidious power in America. Much is being revealed now — it’s really starting to look like Trump vs. the Synagogue in Weimar Amerika to me.


    Morkyz Reply:

    This isn’t exactly anathema to my worldview, lol. Still, counter-semites (of which I am one) tend by saying things like:

    >We are seeing one Jewish pundit or intellectual after another lining up to tell us why Trump is a dangerous menace — the nerve of these guys is truly impressive!

    I guarantee no one who isn’t already an anti-semite will care, dude. Also, can you name a single pundit who can talk about trump in an even handed and fair way? Only one I could name would be @michaelbd.


    Posted on February 28th, 2016 at 7:47 pm Reply | Quote
  • Morkyz Says:

    Nick, I’ve heard that you think ethnic diversity can be economically beneficial b/c it makes financial transactions run more smoothly. Can you explain on this.


    admin Reply:

    That sounds like a reference to Yuri Slezkine’s stuff (which is good).


    Cichlimbar Reply:

    Every anti-semite should take note of this reply. It answers more than was asked.


    Posted on February 28th, 2016 at 10:31 pm Reply | Quote
  • Frog Do Says:

    Speaking of schizoid psychiatry, contrast this post:

    with this one


    Tentative Joiner Reply:

    Clicking around from the latter link I found a quote that is delightfully untainted by self-awareness (emphasis in bold mine):

    [The alt right] cluster in little self-aggrandizing bubbles where they can spin conspiracy theories about how the Progs are responsible for their own inability to engage with the world or change it or even enjoy living in it. I want a worthy opponent, an enemy we can feel some righteous anger at, and we’re stuck with this shit. I feel cheated.


    SVErshov Reply:

    that is interesting point – ‘inability to engage with the world ‘. Trum campaing manager Corey Lewandowski said – ‘The days of a politician talking platitudes are over.’

    or You can try to identify issues which nobody see, or go on waving your archeological platitudes all over the place.


    Posted on February 29th, 2016 at 12:48 am Reply | Quote
  • SanguineEmpiricist Says:

    Who was the person who said that it was not Nietzsche who surpassed Schopenhauer but the reverse? Is this true y/n ? It was in an old chaos patch.


    Erebus Reply:

    I think that Kgaard said that Nietzsche is a riff on Schopenhauer.

    That is certainly true in many respects. Schopenhauer was a major influence on Nietzsche. I don’t think it can be said that Schopenhauer surpassed Nietzsche — though I wholeheartedly believe that Schopenhauer was a more rigorous, exacting, and original thinker.

    Much of what Nietzsche wrote about the primacy of the Will is directly from Schopenhauer, or is at least an extension of Schopenhauer’s thought. But what’s very important to note is that Nietzsche reversed Schopenhauer’s prescription: Schopenhauer was called a “pessimist” and was certainly a passivist who favored stoicism and even asceticism. Nietzsche, to the contrary, seemed to favor nothing more than the aggressive assertion of the Will — forcefully and without restraint. Nietzsche believed that the most noble virtues are those of the warrior.

    I think that both men believed that the world is an evil place. One advocated for acquiescence, the other for struggle.

    Nietzsche’s interpretation of art (Apollonian: visual art; Dionysian: music, dance, etc.) is also directly from Schopenhauer, who regarded music as the direct expression of the Will & as something which does not need to mask its nature with representation or with practical concerns. (Architecture, the most practical and constrained form of art, was Schopenhauer’s lowest.)


    Posted on February 29th, 2016 at 5:44 am Reply | Quote
  • SVErshov Says:

    Love is overrated

    that is for sure. love concept been over exploited up to stomach sickness, but arbitrary comparission with Gengis Khan hardly saficient.

    because : ‘Across time and space, the more peaceable societies also tend to be richer, healthier, better educated, better governed, more respectful of their women, and more likely to engage in trade.’ the Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined by Steven Pinker


    Posted on March 1st, 2016 at 3:45 am Reply | Quote
  • Morkyz Says:

    Been reading the old posts on this blog and the comments are really impressive.

    From Konkvistador

    “While white people’s out bred ways precedes the 1940s, until then they mostly had a strong if ideologically malleable racial identity. Notice that for the entire second half of the 19th century, as the vastness of space grew exponentially, as time became older and older, as unseen rays pierced flesh and bone, as the universality of the universe sparked enthusiasm and terror, through all this the feeling Westerners experienced was racial sentiment rising. Happiness is the feeling of power rising. Can it be extricated in hominid minds from the feeling of ingroup rising?

    1945. It keeps coming back to that, a race war, yes. But not the one we imagined. It wasn’t crazy Nazis against the world.The Nazis wanted to be Mongols, they wanted to be Normans laying waste to Saxon England, they wanted to be ancient Jews. They wanted to be Human; Competent and industrially empowered but tribal killer apes. It was a war against Cthulhu.

    So what where the allies? In 1945 Cthulhu finally found his Fish People. The politics of the second war where the politics of horror. The Nazis weren’t terror, they where a desperate failed jump away from the yawning chasm of Fish People metamorphosis. Germany was a V2 flying to the edge of space on its way to London. So close, yet so far from the right escape velocity. If they wanted to remain human they should have aimed for the Moon instead. So here modern Germany is. In London. In Innsmouth.

    Universalism became fully universal, the United Nations where born, rising out of the deep dark mental waters of Massachusetts and New York. Von Braun chained and selfishly happy to serve a mad master as ačways, took Innsmouth to the Moon. Don’t believe me? Its right there on the plaque The stars where right.

    We are trapped in Innsmouth. White nationalists are hatching natives who don’t want to follow the transformation to its conclusion. Nonwhite people are tourists… for now. The Fish People will eventually come for them as well. That the rest of mankind doesn’t unite in horror against the masses of deracianted white people in the year of our lord 2014 is a sign they don’t think white people really are post-racial. They assume this is just an extra special hoax, a brilliant gambit intended to trick them. Hahahaha, what a silly gig they play to con and frighten us, with the make up and prosthetic gills… right?

    So white nationalists are people. The only white people in whiteness. What are non-white nationalist rightist white people?

    Fish People vs People. Zombies vs. People. The comfortable racial framing reestablished for fully transformed Fish People who want to leave Innsmouth. Their perverse minds already acclimatized to the concept of anti-fish people fish people, anti-zombie zombies, they chew on fish people instead of participating in the black masses chanting praise to Cthulhu. Some want a cure. Some do not.

    Fish people fully removed from Cthulhu’s influence might become people once more. Or not.”


    “The racial destiny of Fish People is a fascinating question.

    Will their black masses raise, Cthulhu from the sea once more, drowning the world in blood, as superhuman progressive AI rises to rule an eternity of souls tortured in hell?

    Will Fish People mutate in a way resistant to the siren call of their master and mother? And what will they then become.

    Will evolution swiftly eliminate them as Western civilization collapses, its maintenance neglected by the now insane cultist race. Once Darwin’s cleansing is done people both brown and even a few white would remains and history returns to its track.’


    Nice writing, but the best part is if you reverse it you could get a pretty interesting national mythology: As Americans, we are Cthulhu’s chosen people. Our destiny, if we don’t fuck it up at least, is to raise R’lyeh out of the waters so Cthulhu can enter out world, cut short the Kali Yuga, and end the cycle of human civilizations for good. (this is what I was getting at when I mentioned neo reactionary satanism awhile back, btw) What it would work out to in practice would probably have to some some kind of nationalist transhumansism synthesis. (one of the ways modern ethnats are less compelling then the actual fascists is that they’ve lost a sense of the nation as a trajectory instead of a static, imo.)


    Posted on March 1st, 2016 at 5:37 am Reply | Quote
  • SanguineEmpiricist Says:

    read the pygmy split story you guys, it’s great.


    Posted on March 1st, 2016 at 5:39 am Reply | Quote
  • Mariani Says:

    Holy shit that Zizek article.

    “To date, there is no evidence that anything happened other than what regularly takes place in similar mass gatherings where much alcohol is involved.”

    Yeah man, mass rape is just a thing that happens when people have too much to drink, you know?


    Posted on March 1st, 2016 at 3:51 pm Reply | Quote
  • Mark Warburton Says:


    Posted on March 1st, 2016 at 9:47 pm Reply | Quote
  • Tentative Joiner Says:

    Unequal karma.


    Posted on March 5th, 2016 at 12:29 am Reply | Quote

Leave a comment