Moral Terror

Before we get around to bravely denouncing — with whatever degree of theatricality falls just short of laughable camp — those ‘sociopaths’ or ‘psychopaths’ who are effortless indifferent to intuitive qualms, perhaps we can agree that such anomalous psychological types are definitively incapable of moral terror. In this respect, they are human precursors of that which, from a strictly functional point of view, we want our military robotics control systems to be. They have no squeamishness to overcome. Stone cold killers no doubt exist, and even more certainly soon will. If moral terror is the topic, however, they fall entirely outside it.

A discussion of the roots of moral intuition far exceeds the reasonable ambition of a modest blog post. Those wanting to plug it more or less directly into God will do so. Even radical religious skeptics, however, are unable to deny the fact of very basic, deeply pre-reflective moral commitments as a human norm. The scientific literature alone is now huge. There is no serious controversy about the existence of a ‘sense or right and wrong’ (irrespective of its variability regarding specifics) as a fundamental component of human evolved psychology. This only needs to be said because of widespread childish delusions that ‘moral nihilism’ could be considered a default condition of the non-indoctrinated human individual. ‘Wolf-boy’ is still a moral animal.

If moral nihilism is possible at all, it is touched upon only at the limit of moral terror, which is to say as a horror that is — from the human perspective — absolute. In the Western religious tradition it is epitomized by God’s testing of Abraham (Genesis 22), which shallow souls are tempted to rush through. Abraham fully expected that it would be necessary to murder his own son, in compliance with a higher purpose (identified with God’s will). There is probably no example of moral terror that does not conform, abstractly, to this template. Anyone suggesting that the most extreme possibility of soul-shuddering horror is in some way external to Biblical Monotheism is a fool. The passage through moral terror is a commandment of God — and ‘through’ is a retrospective comfort alien to the original divine decree.

… but forget God (almost everyone has). Consider instead Thomas Malthus, or his most brilliant recent students. Can anybody read these texts without an immersion in moral terror? Our moral sensibilities are cancelled by the blood-mill of history — under the iron rule of a higher conservation law — making a horrible jest of even our most uncorrupted impulses towards the good. The philosophical virtue of the Scottish Enlightenment lay entirely in its meditation upon such perversion of purposes. It is from such heights that we have fallen into our presently-dominant — lazy, cowardly, and despicable — moralistic cant.

How can we advance in accordance with our most sacred moral intuitions? asks the progressive, who then requests:

“Assume the desirability of universal human equality …”
“No,” responds the Neoreactionary, whose question is rather: What are we assuming, that we could instead think about?

February 27, 2015admin 55 Comments »

TAGGED WITH : , , , , ,

55 Responses to this entry

  • Moral Terror | Neoreactive Says:

    […] Moral Terror […]

    Posted on February 27th, 2015 at 4:50 pm Reply | Quote
  • peppermint Says:

    » incapable of moral terror

    It is fortunate, of course, that we do not have a good theory of psychology, because if psychology was understood, the USSR might still exist and the USA might be much more socialist by now.


    Posted on February 27th, 2015 at 5:14 pm Reply | Quote
  • Nick B. Steves Says:

    This is not objectionable. Calling every moral qualm “skirt clutching” is.

    Moral qualms are generally adaptively beneficial. Sometimes (e.g., feeding Africa) they are not and it is often (tho’ not always) in our power to say why. In my book I chalk that up to a False Moral Qualm = a failure to discern the true natural law—a failure of human collective reason to get at the truth, and no strike whatsoever against the general species of Moral Qualms.

    It is one thing if Gnon “decides” Africa is over-populated and “deals with it”; it is quite another for me to decide so and start culling. And if you cannot see the moral difference between these two, i.e., between considered inaction and considered action, then I call [Onan’s Law violation].

    When the going gets tough, as it often does, you’re gonna want people with Moral Qualms around (e.g., so they don’t betray you or eat you). Ideally they’d have the right (e.g., most adaptive, most social, least annoying) Moral Qualms, but either way at least they’ll have em. But if someone’s made a high art of denigrating all of the ones that ever came up in casual conversation, then your not going to trust that person very much.


    admin Reply:

    My tolerance for philosophical compromise in the interests of coalition-building is zero. There are plenty of other venues where people can concentrate upon the practicalities of intra-tribal mutual placation.


    Nick B. Steves Reply:

    Well “Skirt Clutching” it is then.


    admin Reply:

    Shouting “puppy-torturer!’ rather than ‘racist!’ is still safely in skirt-clutching territory.

    pseudo-chrysostom Reply:

    on a scale of 1-10, how confident are you that this isint a rationalization of yet another deep monkey instinct to distinguish its unique status relative to other monkeys.


    admin Reply:

    Readily willing to select low (tilting to zero), so long as I can add the rider that cognitive liberty cannot be wholly reducible to monkey politics.

    Lucian Reply:

    That’s really gay.


    Posted on February 27th, 2015 at 5:24 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alpha Omega Says:

    Well isn’t sociopathy/psychopathy a mutation that could render some of this moot? Aren’t the ‘paths outcompeting the moralistic normals by almost every metric? Why shouldn’t we have a new breed of “Augments” who dispense with some of our moral qualms in the interest of greater power/intelligence/evolution/whatever. Don’t we need such a vanguard of transhuman supermen to cut through the debilitating cruft of human moralism and build a real New World Order?


    Aeroguy Reply:

    There is a balance of psychopaths to normals similar to predators and prey. A population composed entirely of psychopaths is much weaker than a population composed entirely of normals because psychopaths will defect on each other while normals will cooperate. Western Europe with a relative lack of psychopathy was able to defeat the more psychopathic tribal societies from without, but psychopaths find an easy time defeating the west from within. Same story with Rome.

    You get a cycle, group of normals defeats a group of psychopaths, normals become dominant and prevalent, the minority psychopaths whether by mutation or decent from conquered tribes rise quickly to dominance in an environment chock full of normals. Psychopathy and tribalism become selected for and becomes prevalent. Cooperation breaks down and the group weakens and fractures. Room exists for a group of normals to form whether by mutation or decent from the founders of the original group of normals. Group of normals defeats a group of psychopaths.

    Typically the original group of normals attacks when it has psychopaths at the top leading it, a hierarchy is strongest when it has a few psychopaths at the top. The trouble is that you can’t freeze a hierarchy in place, it’s a dynamic evolving system.


    E. Antony Gray (@RiverC) Reply:

    It’s also important to note that psychopaths are not bad people by default, but that they merely have no compulsion of conscience upon them. Rigorous moral training works on them because it gives them a negative response for immoral things which at least teaches them what they are, though they may have little to no natural feeling for them. When the normals get soft and stop beating people who misbehave, the psychopaths do not learn to be principled (for they cannot really be moral) and the autophagy begins.

    “Spare the rod, spoil the child.”


    R. Reply:

    Not even wrong, you are.

    Psychopaths are neurologically incapable to be trained by punishment. The only things that really motivates them are prospects of rewards. They are optimistic, don’t expect to fail.

    Beatings work only on normals.

    Alpha Omega Reply:

    This is interesting. So where are Western countries now in the cycle? America seems dominated by ‘paths and the normals are starting to regroup. How much of this “social justice” collectivism is normals lashing out at the ‘paths, and how much is actually ‘path-led power games? In my experience, mostly the latter…


    Izak Reply:

    I’m pretty sure that sociopaths and psychopaths have only marginal influence over society, at best.

    an inanimate aluminum tube Reply:

    ” Aren’t the ‘paths outcompeting the moralistic normals by almost every metric?”

    No, sociopaths are only like 1-4% of the population and psychopaths are only like 1% of the population. If ‘Path genes were so great we would expect them to have more evolutionary success.

    It is obvious that ‘Paths have some advantages when swimming in a sea of normals, but the diminishing returns of this strategy are also obvious when you try to imagine a society mostly composed of ‘Paths.

    ‘Paths prosper by defecting when other people expect cooperation. As society came to be more and more ‘Path dominated, fewer and fewer people would offer cooperation. Instead they’d assume they assume that the other person was going to defect and open by defecting as well, reducing the possibility for a ‘Path to take advantage of them.

    As society shifted towards a defect / defect equilibrium, (say, everyone living in walled mud brick compounds with a small number of immediate family members) the advantages of the ‘Path traits would fade and we might expect an eventual culling of much of the ‘Path population as ‘Path traits become detrimental outside of the environment for which they are specialized.


    Hurlock Reply:

    This, exactly.

    A lot of people think of sociopaths and psychopaths as predators, but that is actually really silly. In reality all kinds of ‘paths are simply social parasites. They have evolved to survive in a certain host environment of normal people, where they outcompete all the ‘normal’ people. However, as all parasites, they are entirely dependent on their host environment. They would immediately die off if the host environment stopped existing. And as you point out, if too much of the population is made up of ‘paths, the smaller the host environment becomes and in a society full of ‘paths, or even just a majority of ‘paths and just a few normal people, the ‘paths will die off, along with the host environment. This is what happens in nature when parasites weaken their host too much. There is a limit to how much parasites can feed on their hosts before endangering the life of the host and thus endangering their own.

    In the biosphere lot of very developed species are hosts to parasites which have evolved entirely to life off that specific species and these parasites cannot survive when separated from their host.
    ‘Paths are like that, but for human society.

    Somewhat ironically, sociopaths and psychopaths, although commonly considered anti-social, would have a much lower survival rate outside of a specific host social environment of normal people, than any bunch of said normal people.

    Human society can survive without sociopaths and psychopaths, but sociopaths and psychopaths cannot survive without human society.


    Aeroguy Reply:


    You make it seem like psychopaths have no useful niche to fill. Psychopaths do for leadership what spergs do for engineering and programming. A normal person can still be an engineer but a major part of their education/training is learning to think more like a sperg.

    Same with leadership. The essence of leadership is coordinating people to accomplish something, there’s another word for that, manipulation, something psychopaths excel at like no other. Sure there’s confidence building, something psychopaths also excel at, manage perceptions, show strength, strong resolve, dark triad. Psychopathy may as well be how strong leadership is defined the way being a sperg practically defines what you want in a programmer.

    I can’t imagine being a shareholder in a company if I didn’t think the CEO was at least somewhat of a psychopath. Sure you want constraints and regulations on them but you can’t ask for better results focused leadership.


    Izak Reply:

    Aeroguy: what are you basing these claims on?


    Aeroguy Reply:

    Four years inside the leadership training laboratory skinner box. I’m naturally resistant to brainwashing (I grew up actively and loudly resisting prog indoctrination since elementary school) though 4 years of it left me psychologically damaged. It gave me a front row seat to watching the transformation of my classmates in horror. Take my words with a grain of salt but I was a sausage that fell off the conveyor belt in a literal leadership factory.


    Peter A. Taylor Reply:

    Any idea how unusual you are? Are you one, two, or three standard deviations of resistant, or are you average? And how does indoctrination survive contact with the enemy? My impression is that combat experience produces a lot of Ralph Peters’ and Tom Kratman’s.


    Izak Reply:

    Hmm, interesting. Thank you for the honest response.

    I cannot speak much about psychopaths, but my understanding of sociopaths is that they’re basically incompetent and sloppy. They prey on people’s emotional sympathies and low self-worth, and they can definitely gain followers — but for any objective outsider, they easily get called out on their nonsense. They often create elaborate webs of lies that unravel very easily if just one is disproved. I mentioned him somewhere else, but look up Marcel Petiot, he’s a pretty zany example of a sociopath who took public office.


    Posted on February 27th, 2015 at 5:45 pm Reply | Quote
  • Toddy Cat Says:

    “My tolerance for philosophical compromise in the interests of coalition-building is zero.”

    With all due respect, I don’t think that this is what is being called for here. I think that what Mr. Steves is pointing out is that some things are…well, wrong, that pretty much everybody believes this except psychopaths, and that a movement made up of psychopaths is not desirable, especially since we already have one of those, called Communism. The last go-round the world had with a “vanguard of transhuman supermen” didn’t go so well, as I recall. The answer to the false morality of the Left is true morality, not amorality. Or am I totally misunderstanding what’s going on here?


    admin Reply:

    The relation between morality and moralism is almost certainly negative. The Puritans taught us that. (Psychopaths have no problem engaging in moralism whatsoever, and they thrive on the confusion you make.)


    Lesser Bull Reply:

    They did? Puritan societies in the New World were both more moral and more moralistic.


    admin Reply:

    During the 16th century Protestant Revolution put Europe to the torch. I’m not as unsympathetic as many of my more overtly Jacobite comrades, but to suggest that Puritanism was not the anticipatory Western version of Crimson Jihad is a stretch.

    Cormac McCarthy understands Omega Puritanism: “War is God.” (That’s where Kurtz comes from.)

    Hegemonizing Swarm Reply:

    > Psychopaths have no problem engaging in moralism whatsoever, and they thrive on the confusion you make.

    Yes, yes. Moralism is a wonderful weapon, it mobilizes populations for war, and even makes them believe it’s for the enemy’s own good. It’s a win-win, the cynical sociopaths get their war and conquest, and the rest believe they do something good.


    Posted on February 27th, 2015 at 7:02 pm Reply | Quote
  • Aeroguy Says:

    I see elements of the “will to think” at work here. Moralism as a part of our biological programming, and the will to think about our biological programming and question it rather than act as it’s blind slave. Biological designs are by their nature in existence for a reason, however this shouldn’t be construed as any sort of evidence what so ever that the design can scale. This isn’t a call to abandon the general morality our instincts guide us towards, but a warning against optimizing moralism to the point of absurdity (most of the guys who fret about paperclippers ARE paperclippers). Moralism is a tool Gnon has clearly found a use for, but it is hardly an end in of itself.


    Alpha Omega Reply:

    >”most of the guys who fret about paperclippers ARE paperclippers”

    LOL this is a great line. I’ve long thought that people like Yudkowsky and Bostrom are actually rather insane sociopaths and nihilists who are trying a little too hard to save the world and be thought of as good guys. What sane, decent person worries about the shit they worry about? These are some of the most dangerous minds on the planet, imo, and they’re at least as likely to destroy it as save it.


    Erebus Reply:

    @Alpha Omega
    I find your comment ironic, given the stuff written at your link — this, for instance.

    (Off topic: The “Omega Society” appears to be a really pretentious and sophomoric attempt at a “secret society.” Is it some sort of joke?)


    Alpha Omega Reply:

    The League is dead serious friend. There is no enterprise in the world today playing for higher stakes than our organization. The fate of the entire multiverse may very well hinge on whether or not we are successful.

    Lucian Reply:

    What’s the next step of your master plan?


    Alpha Omega Reply:

    Kidnap a billionaire.

    Lucian Reply:

    You’re an ambitious guy.

    Posted on February 27th, 2015 at 7:33 pm Reply | Quote
  • E. Antony Gray (@RiverC) Says:

    The horror is that humans are not individuals at all, and the primal existence of moral intuition (even if it is attenuated in wolf-boy) means that its negation is implicitly a negation of ‘humanness’. The question of psychopaths or sociopaths ‘outcompeting’ is not a question, it is already answered; they don’t. Or at least, they don’t in an future that isn’t Mad Max tribes shooting one another for honor violations until all that is left is a few scared women.

    That is to say, in the perpsective of GNON the problem of psychopaths or sociopaths simply isn’t a problem; if man fails to maintain the balance between moral paralysis (Eloi) and moral nihilism (Morlock) called ‘sensible and practical morality’ (conveniently difficult to precisely define) he will be filtered.

    The degree to which humans require the assistance of other humans is quite well masked by the present atomized state of things, but the strange moral ‘sickness’ and its unresolvable malaise are artifacts of this.

    When I talk to people about the story of the binding of Isaac, many try to write their own fanfiction where Abraham said this, or said that, or already knew what would happen. There is a certain inability to face what Abraham faced, and this precisely is what the Apostle says, “and he was called a Friend of God.”

    On the other hand, it’s obvious that the lesson is NOT to sacrifice your children, but that Abraham’s faith was such as to overcome any horror this terrible command engendered.

    This is one reason I don’t hold out much hope for the non-religious in the long run; the real world is full of black spaces that you have to jump into.


    admin Reply:



    Posted on February 27th, 2015 at 7:46 pm Reply | Quote
  • Alex Says:

    One had better accept the universe — to do otherwise is psychopathy — but it does no harm to apply a little (hyper-literal?) anagogy:

    So Abraham rising up in the night, saddled his ass: and took with him two young men, and Isaac his son: and when he had cut wood for the holocaust he went his way to the place which God had commanded him. And on the third day, lifting up his eyes, he saw the place afar off. And he said to his young men: Stay you here with the ass: I and the boy will go with speed as far as yonder, and after we have worshipped, will return to you.

    (“God tempteth no man to evil. But by trial and experiment, maketh known to the world and to ourselves, what we are”)


    admin Reply:

    Not sure I’m getting what you’re saying here (but sure that I’d like to).


    Alex Reply:

    There is a tradition among the rabbinites that the spirit of prophecy entered into Abraham when he told his retainers that both “I and the boy … will return”. It’s conceivable that his obedience involved a trust in God’s ultimate mercy. At any rate if Abe had to face the moral terror of this divine decree, we at least may contemplate it without having to share it — since we know the “passage through” came to pass and we are the inheritors of a legitimate “retrospective comfort”.

    As you say, the world is a blood-mill and butcher’s yard. One finds occasions for horror in implacable natural processes, human folly and wickedness, spiritual evil and — most excruciating for the man who would be just — the awareness that perfect justice is impossible in the world. Cioran said “the leftist’s despair is to do battle in the name of principles that forbid him cynicism” and the moralising rejection of reality (I should have said ‘psychosis’ rather than psychopathy) is to avert one’s gaze from ‘Gnon’ and so invite intensified suffering under her iron law. But horror exerts a glamour and to look too long into Gnon’s eyes risks ending up on one’s knees before her.


    admin Reply:

    Thanks — the clarification is greatly appreciated.

    Posted on February 27th, 2015 at 8:17 pm Reply | Quote
  • Moral Terror | Reaction Times Says:

    […] Source: Outside In […]

    Posted on February 27th, 2015 at 9:24 pm Reply | Quote
  • Chris B Says:

    I hold on to my prediction that within a year, large segments of people in NRx will balk at the ramifications of potential ramifications of (tech-comm) thought on matters including morality, property and social theory in general.


    Posted on February 28th, 2015 at 6:04 am Reply | Quote
  • spandrell Says:

    It’s quite obvious that many great political leaders, in fact I’d say most founders of dynasties were psycopathic. And the whole political edifice they built often collapsed after the next generation came up and their children happened to have inherited their mother’s regular sense of morality.

    Though it also sometimes collapsed after their descendants expressed the psychopathic dynasty genes in ways that weren’t very productive. You do need to be a ruthless bastard to run an army; not necessarily to run a stable state. If anything, that’s the great idea of Confucianism.

    The fact is you can’t make an omelette without breaking some eggs. But once you’ve made the omelette you don’t need to go on breaking eggs all the time.

    Haidt is great, but when I see him trying to sell his advise to the Democratic Part I can’t help wonder what the hell is he thinking.


    Posted on February 28th, 2015 at 12:25 pm Reply | Quote
  • Michael Says:

    color me a path but your moralism seems highly illogical. you admit its an evolved survival strategy and in many cases no longer serves us and often serves our enemies, why then persist in this when reason can show the way yes we must admit of this illogical impulse in some of you but do we let that prompt us to kill every minor threat as we once did. if africa needs culling then cull it or it will cull you.the only objective moral revealed by the universe is to survive that is the good the rest is as the left says correctly subjective actually survival is subjective and thats the point.


    vxxc2014 Reply:

    That requires work, risk and action Michael.

    And it’s too hard.

    And we know what happens when it’s too hard, which means hard at all.



    Posted on February 28th, 2015 at 5:57 pm Reply | Quote
  • Chuck Says:

    Late at night, when time permits lurking thoughts to disclose, with trepidation I consider that God may be a progressive — I glimpse that dread in the visage of Pope Francis. I bow before the Truth; when it is the abyss, I follow obediently. But what if equality? The thought of oblivion I can bear — but the horror of sameness? Oh my God if thou are that why have you formed me with a constitution that ever defies and yet is compelled to obey?

    But it is still day, so why anguish over such thoughts? Let us instead attempt to bridge chasm between the moralist and free-thinking right:

    –accept that selfishness is the natural state of affairs (not e.g., a bourgeois corruption)
    –agree that ethics represents a set of rules created to limit the deleterious consequences of this in excessive
    –grant that in practice morales function as a modus vivendi made to allow individuals maximize their good
    –recognize that this is consistent with the natural state since good maximization is not a zero sum game
    –concur that some attempt to manipulate ethics so to shift the rules in their favor (for example, utilitarians such as Mill and Singer engage in logical subterfuge to establish their good, the equal well-being of all, as the only ethical good).

    Accepting the above, we just need one concession from each party:

    –our free thinkers: allow that, in principle, there are some objective prescriptive laws, established by nature or god, that are not simply either fair negotiations, sneaky manipulations, or evolve illusions And grant that as right thinkers, as ones who recognize true hierarchy and who seek order, we are bound by these.
    –our moralists: concede that there is some doubt as to the legitimacy of said strictures and that we free-thinkers of the right have a legitimate concern about left-morale cuckoldry. Also grant that as right thinkers, as ones who root themselves in reality, we have a calling to search “into things under the earth and in heaven”.

    This agreed, the “religion question” reduces to a mere onto-epidemiological one. That established, we can turn back to the regular show.


    Alex Reply:

    God may be a progressive …


    Erebus Reply:

    The risible God of Pope Francis almost certainly is a progressive — but Gnon isn’t. Gnon is only progressive, demonstrably progressive, insofar as the second law of thermodynamics is “progressive.” (Indeed, I believe that the easiest way to visualize Gnon is as a subtle and unrelenting pressure.) So you can rest easy; unlike the God of Pope Francis, Gnon is a living force, and it clearly doesn’t hold that all men were created equal!


    John Reply:

    “The easiest way to visualize Gnon is as a subtle and unrelenting pressure.”



    Posted on February 28th, 2015 at 8:15 pm Reply | Quote
  • epicleses Says:

    ‘beyond good and evil’ remains the maxim for this. it reminds us that bio-encoded revulsion towards the standard horror/gore movie fare (or anything else) is an adaptation to specific environments, nothing more or less. the telos of an action or event is not at all understood merely by apprehending our own reaction to it, but by careful consideration of the event within the context in which it is found – otherwise we are sucked into universalist eschatology, where good actions ( = make me feel good) make the world a better place ( = build the kingdom of heaven, etc). there is a fundamental disconnection between how good an action feels and how good it is – a truth which the retrospective gaze seeks relentlessly to ignore, by re-evaluating the felt goodness of past actions in the light of what we know today (probably a beneficial adaptation)


    SanguineEmpiricist Reply:

    Enlightenment rationalism?

    Tradition is demonstrated preference good morality is encoded into much traditions and the reasonable traditional response since it survived for hundreds of years is more than sufficient for humans.


    epicleses Reply:

    yeah im not totally persuaded by my line of argument.

    two things to consider, though, if you’re making recourse to tradition. one is that traditions can be shredded by eg. hostile education systems, and after that they can be hard to recover. second is that certain societal transitions can render certain traditions maladaptive. going from rural to urban life, or from face-to-face to online communication, renders a lot of folk wisdom into self-harm. problem is exacerbated by transitions to higher complexity states such as modern urban life. plenty of problems arise with no traditional moral solution, where moral guidelines might lead to non-optimal behaviour – behaviour which hasnt had the chance to put through the darwinian wringer yet, due to newness of the situation.


    Posted on February 28th, 2015 at 11:51 pm Reply | Quote
  • vxxc2014 Says:

    Very Deep post Admin.

    A worthy rebuttal to the earlier attack.

    So…maybe on right and wrong we shouldn’t think, just DO.

    I’m just being solutions oriented about Western Civ’s great problem, which may be no longer a case of Western Civ salvage or salvation but what is to be done? To Survive?

    Maybe when we come to naked wrong we just crush it. Our instincts are there for a reason.

    Maybe we don’t think about it, anymore than the antibody does. It comes to something that doesn’t belong and destroys it. There’s plenty of moral terror. We’ve been thinking entirely too much that is certain. Our enemies don’t and they won, now they must hold onto everything and doubt has entered their consciousness. Let them think about it, that’s valuable time they’d waste in mortal combat [training].

    “I don’t wanna think.” – State of Grace Hood justifying constant drunkenness.

    Perhaps we shouldn’t since for well good or evil our instincts have the answers for good or evil. Protect good, protect our own and destroy evil and the stranger.

    It’s been working just well enough – Gnon’s goodness – for 2 million + years.


    Posted on March 1st, 2015 at 5:53 am Reply | Quote
  • vxxc2014 Says:

    War Daddy.

    War Daddy is the Father Figure of rough or subtle justice and defender, upholder of Order in the World – that being the Tank.

    Order being such a concern of Catholic Rule it hardly needs exposition.

    War Daddy is an excellent leader and fighter who also loves his men [this is important in life and the parable that War Daddy is] and fights for the cause. He dies defending rear echelon medical troops from SS counterattack against which they’d be slaughtered: that may well serve as the normal people who build civilization.

    He tempers force with love, being a father figure and being a killer, a dispenser of justice against the SS. He forces the newbie to Kill then rewards him with civilization, breakfast and a girl. Then men are rewarded with liquor and whores for victory.

    He has a thuggish mechanic/loader whom he both kicks “you’re an animal and this is all you understand” and also loves.

    War Daddy has a crew that fills out in the tank the required other characters as well – his gunner is a thinking and intelligent Christian who may well be a Quaker – he’s clearly a Protestant.

    He has a decent fellow who’s Hispanic as driver who is becoming less decent like the rest of them.

    The character undergoing brutal introduction to War as well as it’s moral terror is a new kid who’s up in the meat grinder by chance as he trained to be a typist.

    All these men are being damaged and ground down in terms of civilized behavior by the conflict, even the Quaker Gunner is a drinker [this sort of thing happens you know]. They find themselves shocked by their own animal instincts and even cruelty coming out around the edges – and War Daddy lets them have their head but only so far – “anybody touches the girl gets his teeth kicked in.” Let them have their head then rein them in is small unit leadership as is loving them, even with punches and kicks.

    When the moment of truth comes and the Tank having lost a tread can still fight but can’t maneuver War Daddy releases his men with “It’s alright, you go” and stays to defend the weak with the Tank “it’s my home.” His men stay with him, only one escapes.

    But Civilization is defended [the units too weak to fight off Waffen SS survive].


    Posted on March 1st, 2015 at 6:14 am Reply | Quote
  • vxxc2014 Says:


    I’m debating whether to register on PJ media to make the following points:

    The next time the Defenders of Civilization are doing their Dirty work don’t relentlessly undermine them and expect Civilization to be Defended.

    For those who do and those that did – you are simply carping, backstabbing cunts. You elect politicians who reflect you, they appoint your college professors and their prize winning freakish students as Civil Servants and Cabinet Ministers and you wonder why the results are failure.

    There is no pretty way to kill someone, there’s no pretty way to brutalize people and there’s no photogenic conquest once you get past the entertaining fireworks and see what they did to people’s bodies. Nor is their any way to make the conquered anything but sullen and at least potentially violent and vengeful. These things cannot be done. All are ugly.

    But if these ugly things aren’t done the natural entropy of human nature wins.

    I’m quite certain at this moment many allied with ISIS and even many sworn ISIS members are gritting their teeth over the destruction of their own heritage, Iraq is where Civilization West of China began in Sumer. However they had to pick a side that offers Victory and at least some order, as horrible as it is ISIS does. ISIS is erasing all traces of any history or order but it’s own [as is done in Saudi Arabia]. But ISIS does offer victory and order albeit it a terrible price.

    Now if and when – and it’s when – the defenders of civilization go forth again to defend something, anything kindly give us the blind and non-qualified support the Jihadi get. We may well be defending your tiny piece of civilization, your local museums, libraries and churches. We can’t do it with knives constantly in our backs.

    By the way we’ve adapted, and the same tricks won’t work. They won’t. [== understand that for many that and the implicit consequences are the only thing that hold above all the educated villain to decent behavior.

    All education has done the last 50 years is give us glib agents of entropy.

    So for the educated entropy agents force and fear are more normal than necessary.

    Have a blessed Sunday, I’m off to Tridentine Mass [Latin].


    Posted on March 1st, 2015 at 11:24 am Reply | Quote

Leave a comment