Chronicle of King Donald I

It is easier to think about Trump and his presidency through the lens of ancient politics rather than filter it through the illusion of modern democratic politics. Hence this post.

If one has the haze and illusion of democratic politics clouding his vision, it looks like Trump is not getting much done. Almost counterintuitively, it is the democratic understanding of the US federal government to say that the President has power. He was elected to wield certain powers, endowed with them by the people. One who works from this frame assumes presidential power when he says that Trump is not getting much done. If the President had the actual powers he has on paper? Then Trump is not an effectual president.

But democracy does not exist. It is easier to consider American politics through a medieval or ancient lens. The presidency is a vestigial and ceremonial monarchy. The Parliament our Congress also has theoretical powers. In actuality, we are ruled by our priesthood. This priesthood has thoroughly infiltrated both the Parliament and the “Presidency”. The kritarchy is not infiltrated but a legitimate and actual branch of the priesthood. It is the representative of the Church.

Trump inherited a presidency that was tiny and weak. A mere ceremonial monarch. The “executive branch”, however, has become a purely priestly apparatus. The President appears to be exercising power when he is in harmony with the priesthood. Obama was not an exceptionally powerful president who bent the executive branch to his will. Rather, he was an avatar of those who already worked for the Executive.

Being ruled by the priestly class doesn’t sound so bad. At least until you realize that our priesthood, simply as I can put it, worships Satan. And Trump is fighting against it and trying to diminish its power. His task is about as difficult as the Queen of England trying to exercise political power. From that perspective, he’s doing a great job. If we imagine Trump as a ceremonial monarch trying to become an actual monarch, his actions make a lot more sense.

Let us envision the Kingdom of America as it exists today. We have a rotating King, who is mostly chief diplomat and war-leader. He also has the bully pulpit and oversees matters of domestic security. Around the King has grown up a bureaucratic apparatus typical of the absolutist state. It is staffed by members of the priesthood, and every command given by the King, save those directly to the military, are filtered through several levels of priest before they are put into action. This is especially true of the diplomatic and domestic security apparati. But take a look. What’s that? Even the King’s speechwriters have degrees from seminary school. And a requirement of promotion in the military is to have an advanced degree from seminary school. Curious. Before a guy in a helmet fires a gun, the King’s order passes through several ranks of priests. We’ll get back to this.

We have a bicameral Parliament that writes legislation for the King to approve or reject. Supposedly, the Parliament most directly represents the “People”. The people always elect priests though. Isn’t that funny? Every member of the Parliament just so happened to go to seminary school. And everyone in Parliament tends to take the advice of bodies of actually-ordained priests that we call NGOs. In the spirit of priestly charity and poverty, they are usually nonprofit organizations.

Finally, we have High Courts that serve, officially, as the Church’s direct representatives in government. Technically, the King gets to hire new priests when one dies or resigns, with the approval of Parliament. It causes a great deal of unrest when a priest thus chosen is either excessively holy or openly heretical, choosing instead to follow the Old Religion that still believes in Christ. Mostly, secretly radical priests tend to be appointed, as the Court openly values neutrality. Priests suspected of heresy need to have publicly impeccable records to make it through. Priests who are obviously holy and dogmatic need not even be literate. The priesthood is generally holy and dogmatic, and shrieks like banshees over the fact that the High Court may be less holy than the priesthood at large.


So onto this field, a new ceremonial monarch steps, one who has promised to curtail the worst excesses of the priesthood. He has even committed open heresy! The priesthood is united in their opposition to him, almost categorically. Only dissident priests, and merchants who have bought up some priestly power, dare voice their support. His alliance is a patchwork one, but he managed to secure the support of most of the unordained common folk, who still practice the Old Religion half in secret. The wealthiest and most successful merchants, knowing where Power is, support the Church. But many smaller merchants are unhappy with priestly interference in their business, and most warriors, frighteningly enough, are enthusiastic in their support for the crass and headstrong Donald I. It is official dogma, of course, for the Church to consider the provinces of the Empire to be holier than its heartland, and this belief has proven unsurprisingly unpopular among the unenlightened heartlanders.

As soon as Donald I was coronated, a Grand Inquisition was opened against him. For the Church to open an Inquisition against the King is a very rare thing. To actually convict the monarch of treasonous heresy is almost never done. Nonetheless, the Church hopes to use this Inquisition to remove the King’s closest allies and prevent him from carrying out his agenda. The King’s advisers and favored aristocrats enjoy no such traditional immunity from conviction, and it seems likely they will betray him rather than face the Inquisitor’s lash.

King Donald I immediately began to withdraw the Empire’s legions from their Holy Jihad in the desert lands, and pledged to only use the great Legions in defense of the Empire. The truculent heretics of the desert had proven themselves resilient in the face of the Empire’s superior force, and the costly Jihad had become unpopular in the eyes of all but the holiest priests.

Shortly into the reign of Donald I, a crisis arose in the land of Syria, in which prophets professing the Holy Faith of the American Empire incited a civil war against its legitimate monarch. The Church was unanimous in declaring a righteous Jihad against Syria’s King, the scholarly and methodical “Lion of Damascus” Bashar Al-Assad. Al-Assad cannily entered into alliance with the heretical Russian Empire, employing its considerable military might to fight against the rebellion in his lands. It was clear to all that the rebellion in heretical Syria had been instigated by the Church, though the Church, finding actual American dogma rather rare in Syria, was forced to employ Wahhabi zealots in the rebellion, a fact which when revealed, consternated followers of the Old Religion and the New alike.

Here we see the wisdom of King Donald show itself for the first time. He could not dare, in the face of the Church’s enthusiasm for Jihad, portray the Empire as militarily weak, and Wahhabi zealots indeed posed a present threat to the Empire. Thus he entered into secret diplomacy with the Russian Tzar and the Syrian King as he sent a small detachment of Holy Crusaders to Syria. As per this agreement, his Crusaders made a show of force against empty military bases in supposed retaliation for Assad’s heresies, while the “ISIS” zealots were, in cooperation with the Tzar, methodically forced out of Syria and eventually eradicated. The outcome satisfied all parties involved, and the people rejoiced when King Donald’s crusaders returned home with the ISIS leader’s head upon a pike, for it was a moment of pure victory in an Empire that had almost forgotten the meaning of the word. The Church decried the fact that Assad remained on his throne, and lamented the lost opportunity of Jihad against heretical Russia, but had lost its capacity to incite further war.

However, on certain fronts King Donald has not yet managed to wrest power from the Church. He is faced with a critical shortage of competent aristocrats desirous to enact his will, and those he trusts with power have often been revealed as traitors and agents of the Cathedral. He cannot openly acknowledge the dissident priests and heretics, (those who call for the dissolution of the monasteries and removal of favored status for provincials) among his most loyal supporters, nor can he appoint them without the Inquisition falling upon his head. All he does, for the moment, must plausibly be in the name of the Church’s doctrines, for many of his supporters are firm believers in its righteousness while reviling what they consider to be recent errors.

Not trusting to priests, he instead relies upon prominent members of the warrior and merchant classes to renegotiate unfavorable trade agreements with the provinces and other Empires, seeking to move the manufacture of goods and production of energy back to the heartlands of Empire as a reward for his common supporters. In this, he has been successful, for the Empire is now a net exporter of energy, as mining booms and manufacture trickles back in. He has also employed certain strict measures against provincials seeking employment in the heart of the Empire, both in the sponsored preferential hiring of provincials and in the mass movement of such, technically illegal but long endorsed by the Church, across the Empire’s southern border with Aztlan. Though heretical, both policies enjoy wild popular support among the unordinated while causing the merchants who support him some discomfort.

Though the Church has forbidden King Donald from erecting his promised border wall, construction has begun nonetheless, under the pretext of “fortifying existing barriers”. The work has been slow, as it was only recently revealed that the administrator he appointed to oversee it had in fact been in the pay of the Church. Within just the past week, King Donald appointed the controversial minister Jared Kushner, his son-in-law, to oversee the remaining construction. While Kushner has long been suspected by those loyal to our King to be an agent of the Church, our King shows wisdom in this appointment. One can only imagine the temptation that must exist to betray the King; Kushner, should he do so, would likely be canonized overnight. Yet because the Church’s official position holds that the border wall is a heretical offense against sacred provincial dignity, the completion of this task would forever alienate him from the Church’s favor. If the suspicions among our King’s loyalists are correct, and Kushner sabotages the task for the Church, our King has easy pretext to rid himself of a snake, which he could not otherwise do. As always, our King sets up confrontations that are, in the common parlance, win-win, or Catch-22’s for his enemies.

Our King has also taken action to circumvent priestly control of our legions, foreseeing future military conflict within the Empire. He has sided with the common warrior against the Church’s officer class in legal disputes, knowing that should the religious tensions in the Empire come to a head, he will need the direct support of the Legions against the Church. He has also used his capacity for public speech to discredit and embarrass the most prominent members of the Empire’s domestic security forces, knowing that the Church has deployed them against him in the Inquisition. On all sides, he appears to be bracing for a great conflict.

And yet he does not display a lack of wisdom in his manner of provoking this conflict. While appearing brash and impulsive, he encourages his enemies to underestimate him. He dangled before the Church the tempting bait of his apparently illegal dealings with the puppet-state of Ukraine, knowing full well that an inquiry into these matters would reveal many crimes the Church committed in establishing and maintaining this province. Before many more years turn, it is likely that he will have sufficient pretext to order arrests of many prominent Church members. Most likely, this will come on the heels of his reelection and the great legitimacy it lends his cause. Reelection is likely, as the Church struggles to find a plausible replacement to promote among the field of senile old men, hedonistic degenerates, and half-insane holy women it has cultivated. Should one walk into a tavern, nigh every man who works with his hands will raise them in a toast to our King, and raise their voices in blasphemy of the Church’s most recent and holiest strictures.

The Inquisition has since mounted in fervor against King Donald, and this chronicler fears that the Church, of late becoming holier and holier in its innovation of doctrine, has lost all reason as it calls openly for the mass sacrifice of the unborn, the buggery of young boys, and the forced creation of eunuchs to join the priestly ranks. King Donald is heading towards a confrontation which will see either his victory, or his burning at the stake. Make no mistake, the Inquisition will then turn its zeal against all who supported our King. We may only pray that he realizes the gravity of the situation and acts appropriately.

94 thoughts on “Chronicle of King Donald I

    1. Thoughts on it:

      MM is telling the normie conservative exactly what the enemy is and how it came about, expecting his reader to be canny enough to read between the lines. I am writing from the frame that my readers understand this already, so I take it for granted and go from there.

      I think Moldbug should give me a read if he can stomach it. He rejects outright the idea of a “lascivious society”. All patriarchal societies are based in part on providing the opportunity for eros to those who would be otherwise deprived. Gaining a titanic competitive advantage. “Eros should be left off the page”. Ha. Moldbug is way smarter than I am. Think I could design Urbit? Lol. But I look better in a biker jacket than he does, and I think I could tell him a thing or two about Eros.

      Even super hard science is corruptible. I am preparing a post on this. Astrophysics serves no political need. But if your consensus of scientists, who vet new experiments, hypotheses, and math, is garbage or misguided due to another cause…

      Well, a mathematical proof is not political. But if a given mathematician happens to be a heretic… soon your “Hard sciences” are filled with people who can both do math and circumvent accusations of heresy. That is not the same set as the best people at doing math.

      “Congress has two sources of legislative input: activists and lobbyists. The activists come for power; the lobbyists, money”

      Translation: Congress has two sources of input; priests and merchants. The merchants always end up doing the bidding of the priests. Congress has one source of input: Priests. As Moldbug says, congressmen are supposed to directly represent their communities. In reality, they are elected to assuage their communities while they take it up the shitter from NGOs. Who writes the legislation? Not congressmen. They don’t even read the bills they endorse. Congress is run by 24-year-old graduates from UVA and Georgetown. I went to school with them. I’ve microchimerized some of them. I have a perfectly accurate measure of their abilities and character. It’s not high.

      USG is run by mid-20’s catladies who throw back SSRIs with their wine and cry for hours on the weekend unable to get out of bed. Someone tell Xi and Putin. Komm, susser todd.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Moldbug is, of course, one of those semi-corrupted hard scientists, who thinks he is incorruptible because he is a hard scientist. In reality he is too autistic, or something, to swallow the last bit of his own redpill—the problem is not so much that he doesn’t care about sex, but that he’s a nerd who can’t let go of the idea that nerds should rule the world, because he likes feeling superior to guys who get more pussy than him. That’s really where our official priesthood first went wrong—they started selecting for sexual weakness, and then tried to make it illegal to be more alpha than them. This goes way back, of course. In the days when the official priesthood of the West was the actual Latin Rite Catholic priesthood, there was an explicit celibacy requirement. As far as I know there is no such requirement to work for the New York Times, but the kind of men they attract is much the same.

        Also, lol at “microchimerize” as a euphemism for “fuck”.


      2. I think MM ignores the WQ because it is distasteful to the audience he is trying to attract. Afaik he has refused to address the question of female liberation, but he cannot be unaware of it. And I think he is always playing a bit coy, coming off as more aloof and impartial than he actually is.

        Moldbug talks about “designing sovereign systems” or some such. Odysseus strung his mighty bow, told his son to lock the door, and let fly. This is not in the sense of Froude’s favorite metaphor, this is literal. One of these is a time-tested basis for good government. The other always leads to disaster.

        Charles the Hammer founded (what led to) the Holy Roman Empire through no other virtue than hitting Muslims on the head with a very big hammer. Eventually, a bunch of nerds came to kiss his grandson’s ring, and tell him that God favored him, and now you have culture to go along with Chad barbarism. Everyone who tries to “engineer power structures” ends up starving a quarter of their population to death.

        As he himself hinted at in his latest piece, the human tribal model is the only one that really works. Can’t deviate too much from the natural order; you can only stack tribes on top of, and next to, one another. Moldbug must submit to jock rule!

        Liked by 1 person

      3. Moldbug’s intended audience is people like him, who would almost certainly be horrified by the actual answer to the WQ—since MM himself is in this category, I’m not convinced that he does know that much more than he’s letting on.

        Moldbug’s strategy, which made sense in 2006, is to persuade enough members of the current (priestly) ruling elite that their religion is wrong, stupid, and evil, so that the system either collapses or transitions into something better. On an individual level this is not an absurd idea—he persuaded me—but it’s useless when the actual solution is jock rule. Jocks don’t give a shit about anything Moldbug has to say.

        I’m nonetheless not personally convinced of the value, or the feasibility, of actual jock rule. The pen is not actually mightier than the sword, but the AK-47 and the atom bomb are, and it takes nerds to make those. We’re not going to undo the revenge of the nerds unless we bomb ourselves back into the Bronze Age, which for all the barbarian right likes to idolise it was not that pleasant of a place to live. But then, there are nerds and there are nerds. As you’ve said, nerds used to be manly. The problem is that our official religion, a long time ago, decided to be holier than God (or at least holier than Gnon) on the subject of human sexuality, with the result that nerd-caste alphas are mostly extinct or crippled.

        Hitting Muslims on the head with a hammer is not a viable basis for government in the 21st century. At least, if it once more becomes one (and it might!), we’re all kind of screwed anyway. Even the most hardcore accelerationists are usually hopelessly naïve about this. I’m not sure if there was a late-Roman equivalent of NRx, but they would have looked at Charles Martel the same way we look at El Chapo. We are still priests, as may be seen from the fact that we’re here talking about shit on the Internet instead of doing something about it. You have more mettle as a warrior than I, but your post-apocalyptic fantasies of war brides are still likely as not to end with you being shot by a gang of Mexicans. Our goal as NRxers is to avoid rock bottom—to find Augustus, before Odoacer finds us.

        Liked by 2 people

      4. Any writer in the Roman Empire would have been horrified by a barbarian like Charlemagne (Martel’s descendant) calling himself Caesar of the Holy Roman Empire. Rome, too, was founded by barbarians; founders metaphorically raised by wolves.

        Jocks need nerds. It usually takes time for nerd contributions to flourish. Pure warrior rule, like Moldbug always hinted at, looks pretty ugly at first if you’re not a warrior. The problem today with many warrior states is that they leave priestly power, in the form of universities and NGOs, in the hands of their enemies. Pinochet comes to mind.

        Post-apocalyptic civil war would probably end up with my bleeding to death in a gutter in the rain, yes. Caesarism is coming to the US Empire, and my ideal situation is that our current dissidents take over priestly power when a warrior decides to take over. Moldbug may understand that without wanting to tell the readers of The American Mind that dictatorship is the only outcome.


      5. “Hitting Muslims on the head with a hammer is not a viable basis for government in the 21st century. ”

        Yes, it is. Especially if those Muslims are intent on coming into white lands, robbing white men, taking welfare and white women. If you’re the guy who smacks Muslims on the head, thereby preventing the theft of resources and women, you can count of the loyalty of the men you’ve protected.

        “I’m not sure if there was a late-Roman equivalent of NRx, but they would have looked at Charles Martel the same way we look at El Chapo.”

        Are you saying you have a negative view of El Chapo? Cabron, he is a great man who has valiantly fought against the US government and his noble son continues to humiliate their puppets in Mexico.

        But this feeds into another one of Moldbug’s blind spots. I was reading “Moldbug on Carlyle”, where he describes fascism as “Carlyle implemented by swine”. I was quite taken aback that he provides no definition of “swine”, using it entirely as a rhetorical device, and his counterexample of “not swine” is a military officer and the whole thing stank of typically Jewish neuroses about Germans with balls – he disliked the fascists for being paramilitary. But this assumes that he doesn’t know about stationary vs. mobile banditry, which is a Rothbardian idea, and Moldbug knows Rothbard. This was very strange, especially given that actual aristocrats and military officers were strong supporters and even leaders of fascist parties all over Europe. I think that Moldbug, ironically, romanticizes the state and cannot see that El Chapo could easily morph into Emperor of Aztlan given the chance and that Mexican MacLear (De Alegre?) would be writing the chronicles of Emperor Joaquin I.

        “The merchants always end up doing the bidding of the priests.”
        You need more proof in this step, friend. Also, it’s worth pointing out that not everyone running around with sackfuls of cash is a merchant.


      6. El Chapo, or at least the cartels collectively, are indeed the de facto government of an unrecognized Aztlan Empire, and they are a lot more manly and badass than the people they are fighting.

        But they are my enemies nonetheless, because they want to sacrifice me to their dark gods and get my family hooked on heroin. This threat probably feels a lot less visceral looking over from Macedonia.

        Fascism could easily have evolved into a proper state given time. Not that any of them lived long enough. Even America had no culture whatsoever for almost a hundred years after its founding. There is indeed a distinction we could make between priest-fascism and warrior-fascism. Priest-fascism has an obsession with centrally-planned culture. Hitler and Mussolini fall into this box. Warrior-fascism starts off with no culture. Metaxas and Pinochet come to mind. Franco may also qualify. Need to learn more about him. It’s quite possible that after a couple of generations of warrior rule under fascism, you get a renaissance of culture and science.

        It is not that merchants never get anything they want in Washington, but when merchant interests and priest interests conflict, merchants lose and priests win in the long run. Before Trump, could not open a coal mine in West Virginia, could not get a permit for a new offshore drilling rig, could not do natural gas exploration. Merchants are not allowed to test prospective employees to see if they will actually be good at the job or not; priests have managed to substitute a seminary school degree for this. I could come up with a million examples of merchants submitting to priest power.


      7. “But they are my enemies nonetheless, because they want to sacrifice me to their dark gods and get my family hooked on heroin. This threat probably feels a lot less visceral looking over from Macedonia.”
        All men who would be kings want to sacrifice you to their gods and enslave your family in one way or another. Personally, I want to be Emperor of the Known Universe and feed all who dare oppose me to the Unconquered Sun (i. e. burn them alive), but I’m willing to negotiate down from that. I’m pretty sure if Joaquin the Short faces stern resistance at the Rio Grande, he’d be willing to negotiate from “kill the gringo, take his lands and women and reign over a 10. 000 year Empire of Aztlan built on the back of heroin-addicted white bugman slaves” down to “recognize the Gringo Empire and reign over a 10. 000 year Empire of Aztlan which includes today’s Mexico and possibly the other shitholes to the south.”
        I’ll concede that I fear the cartels less because I’m over here, and not over there. Recent Macedonian-US relations have also made me a little… more understanding to anyone who seeks to destroy USG.

        “Franco may also qualify. Need to learn more about him.”

        He was a general and of royal descent, apparently. Sounds like a warrior to me. Salazar’s Estado Nuovo is very interesting. Salazar was very obviously a priest, but his fascist state wasn’t prone to ideologism like Italy and Germany.

        ” I could come up with a million examples of merchants submitting to priest power.”
        First of all, you’re giving me examples of honest merchants losing to crooked priests. Not applicable
        Second of all, merchants are more practical than priests. They can “lose” many times, as long as they win in the few times it matters and in the long run. Priests gotta eat too and they produce nothing. If Congress is the safety valve, then they are sovereign because he is sovereign who rules in the state of exception (if the peasants vote for Hitler). The question then becomes: who rules Congress. Given that it takes vast sums of cash to get elected and re-elected, and in an age of waning media (priestly) power, we see that the donor class, who tend to be merchants.
        I’ve suspected for a long time that the way for merchants to circumvent the market defenses against cartelization is to do end-runs through the priesthood, which is to say LARP as priests until they’re in position to direct the state and obtain a free option. I wrote an essay to that effect (linked below). The revolving doors between corps and the regulatory agencies is a feature of this. Managerialism in the tripartite caste model usually means the fusing of priestly and mercantile roles (with some bleeding into the upper echelons of the military towards the end stages). It may look indistinguishable from priestly metastasis, but I think the vectors of convergence come from both the priestly and mercantile sides.


      8. The jock-nerd dichotomy is a false dichotomy. I’m a nerd with nerdy hobbies like roleplaying games, wargames, and video games. I am studying engineering, and I am using the GI Bill to pay for school because I did my stint in the Marines and I lift weights and shoot guns when I can get to the country, so I can also jock.

        Your smart men do not have to be weak, sensitive pussies. I am plenty smart, and I am decently strong. Most of the really elite warrior types are also decently smart and plenty strong. There is no requirement that smart men neglect the development of their body. That is a recent affectation of the unmanly, effeminate priestly class. Moreover, strong men who are able benefit greatly from intellectual pursuits, and smart men who are able benefit likewise from physical development.

        A sharp, educated mind needs a trained, powerful body to be at its peak. If the flesh is weak, it makes the mind–which is really another part of the body, not a separate component–sluggish and clouded. High T actually raises IQ. The mind-body dualism is as false as the nerd-jock dualism. Look at College football of past, when colleges actually selected for the elite. You had 130+ IQ guys beating each other up on the football field for fun before it was an industry and competing against other teams of similarly elite men for nothing but the glory of winning.


      9. I get that use, Aidan, but I was responding more to Eternal Anglo. If you read the accounts of the Manhattan Project, the scientists and engineers working there were not what we would stereotypically consider nerds. They would not have been out of place among other manly men of the day.


      10. Astrophysics does serve a political need. It is the cornerstone of materialism (along with evolution by random mutation.) The major agenda is to resist traditional western civilization and to claim academic rigor. The occupation of science requires there to be great mysteries in the universe, and the understanding that nothing is know with absolute certainty. The priesthood, on the other hand, survives by proposing a solution to all the great mysteries with total confidence. The proponents of the standard astrophysics model behave much more like the latter.


      11. Proclaiming a solution has become, or maybe it always was, higher status than intellectual humility. Why is the rate of the universe’s expansion accelerating? Must be dark energy. What’s dark energy? Anyone? Bueller?

        We can make use of fundamental forces, but science still fails to tell us the what. We don’t really know what mass is, or what gravity is, or what space is. What the fuck is kinetic energy? In an understanding of the universe defined by quantum electromagnetic fields, motion, inertia, acceleration, and mechanical energy make less sense.

        The standard model of physics is based on flawed assumptions and it reminds me of nothing more than the elegant and hilariously incorrect math employed to justify the geocentric solar system. You have to be a brilliant mathematician to explain why Mercury goes retrograde with the Earth at the center of the universe, but the much simpler explanation with the much simpler math proved obvious in hindsight.


      12. A priest needn’t be a pussy and a warrior needn’t be a mouth-breather. Personally, I like to make the distinction based on the primary motivation of the man. If a man seeks and is enthralled by conflict and victory, he is a warrior, even though he may be able to probe into the deepest mysteries of the mind. If a man seeks and is enthralled by spiritual conflict and understanding, he is a priest, even though he may be able to break your average MMA fighter in half.
        The best warriors are warrior poets. The best priests are temple knights.


      13. Shadowed Knight—You are conflating (or perhaps accusing me of conflating) two different definitions of the word “nerd”, or “priest” in NRx-speak. On the one hand you have the nerd or priestly caste, and on the other you have the priests of our official religion. The former has nothing to do with being a pussy. The latter does, because our official religion idolises sexual weakness and has since at least St. Augustine. The reason for the conflation is that the official religion has subsumed all intellectual activities. The Manhattan Project, and pre-1945 science in general, was a lot more manly because it was still largely outside the official religion.

        Nicholas and Aidan—I have a positive view of El Chapo in the sense that I respect him as an enemy in a way that I don’t respect USG. That doesn’t mean I want him to win. In all likelihood victory would soften the cartels as it did the Carolingians, and we would eventually get a legitimate dynasty, but that only after a century or two of blood that I’d prefer to avoid. They also might not get as soft as Charlemagne. There was a lot less racial distance between a Frank and a Roman than there is between an Aztec and a gringo. It’s not an experiment I want to try, at any rate.

        Hitting Muslims, or Mexicans, on the head with a hammer is a viable basis for government on the level of a neighbourhood. Eventually, if your fame spreads far enough and other local hammer-men swear allegiance to you, you might be able to call yourself king of somewhere, but that implies that there is no existing government above the neighbourhood level able to contest your rule. If we ever do get to that point, I’m afraid we’ll find that our enemies are way ahead of us on the whole feudalism thing, and then any hammer-man who wants to live will find himself swearing allegiance to them.

        On the other hand, I’m not that scared of the cartels specifically. The only difference between a drug cartel and an incipient feudal monarchy are the drugs, but the drugs are quite a big difference. Addiction is a kind of slavery-at-a-distance—the word in Latin refers to a debt-slave. Getting us hooked on heroin is their way of leeching off the fabulous wealth of the empire to their north at minimal personal risk compared with the barbarian raiders of old. If USG actually goes down the shitter, and our money becomes worthless to them, they will have to come and enslave us the old-fashioned way, and then we will shoot them. Even at the end of our strength we are very strong, which is why Emperor Joaquin the Short is currently rotting in ADX Florence instead of sitting on a throne of skulls being waited on by naked concubines.

        Liked by 1 person

      14. @Eternal Anglo
        “The only difference between a drug cartel and an incipient feudal monarchy are the drugs, but the drugs are quite a big difference.”
        Pish. European feudal monarchies have used alcohol to drain wealth out of peasants, and select out the impulsive peasants for centuries. Just give the local Jews the charter for alcohol retail (they won’t turn down the drunkard out of compassion) and watch as the peasants drink themselves to death, while turning a tidy profit for you and your Jewish pet. Over the centuries, this produces a population which has an innate tolerance for alcohol, because everyone who didn’t drank himself to death before reproducing (see Native Americans).
        Heroin is no different as a stimulus. It will select for heroin tolerance. Unless heroin is clamped down on, the man of the future will probably look like this one guy I knew back in college who quit heroin cold turkey one day and never looked back.
        The only difference at this point is that the cartel isn’t using Jews as insulating patsies for heroin retail, though I suspect this will change as the US empire weakens and the rats start fleeing the ship.
        “Even at the end of our strength we are very strong, which is why Emperor Joaquin the Short is currently rotting in ADX Florence instead of sitting on a throne of skulls being waited on by naked concubines.”
        I consider ADX Florence to be a kind of execution that a fag empire would implement (or a fate worse than death, which is the same thing). Not unheard of for kings and emperors to die in battle – skin in the game is very important. Emperor Joaquin the Short is dead, long live Emperor Ovidio the Mouse, scourge of the cowardly AMLO and his fag brigades.


      15. Nah man, everybody drank in the middle ages and well beyond because water was of dubious quality and could make you sick. There was beer for refreshment, maybe of 2-4% alcohol content, too low to get you drunk. In the Americas this was replaced by hard cider until water purification was invented, which would be the early 1900s. People could not even imagine being a tea-totaller until boiling your water for tea was ubiquitous.

        This type of beer has been drunk since probably before settled agriculture, with nomads leaving wild grains in the ground to ferment as they migrated along hunting routes. It bred a tolerance for alcohol in our populations, but over the course of 10,000 years. Very different from heroin. Guy who quit heroin cold turkey, he was probably lying. I know someone who quit heroin cold turkey, he was massively physically ill for weeks and hormonal issues for months.

        Not sure if widespread drug use and overdoses has a eugenic effect. Might be weeding out natural thrillseekers and adventurers


      16. No European feudal monarchy used alcohol as its primary method of wealth extraction. It may have helped to pacify the peasantry, but at the end of the day there were still guys with swords making sure you paid your taxes. The more powerful cartels actually do collect taxes in parts of Mexico, but without American drug money they would still be screwed—at the very least, unable to pose any threat whatsoever to the US.

        (On the other hand, I was mistaken on the effect collapse would have on the US dollar—its value would go way up, since USG would no longer be around to dilute the supply and a great deal of “virtual” dollars would be wiped out. An actual physical greenback might end up worth fifty times its present value, and the cartels (who never used the banking system) would have a disproportionate number of them.)

        Supermax is indeed execution for fags, and the cartel survived Chapo’s arrest, but that doesn’t change the fact that we got him. In fact, our Mexican puppets got him. If you look at the video footage of the Battle of Culiacán, it’s fairly obvious that the Federales were militarily superior to the Sinaloas, but then the civilian government surrendered anyway. USG does this a lot, as remarked on by Moldbug, but always in irrelevant overseas proxy wars. If the civilian government, or the priestly infiltrators in the military’s upper ranks, tried this in the event of actual war on US soil, there would be a coup in 0.2 seconds.

        If USG ceased to exist—or ordered its forces to stand down in the face of a legitimate threat to its sovereignty, which is basically the same thing—the men, equipment, and loyalty structures that make up the US Armed Forces and police would continue to exist, and finally be unhobbled by priestly power above them. Even after a violent purge of priests and foreigners, I don’t imagine that such a group could fail to put down every drug cartel and negro street gang on US soil in a matter of weeks, and then we’d end up with a solider-emperor, or several solider-kings of more local areas. A military coup is the obvious path to dictatorship. It might be a little messier in our case because anyone in our military at Caesar’s rank is a priestly infiltrator, but we’ll get through it.


      17. “Not sure if widespread drug use and overdoses has a eugenic effect. Might be weeding out natural thrillseekers and adventurers.”
        As with all questions of eugenics, we first have to define “eu”. Is weeding the thrillseekers and adventurers a good thing? Yes, if you want to build bugworld. Given the positive manifold between thrillseeking adventurism and what makes a good warrior, no if we want manly kingdoms.

        @Eternal anglo
        What does “militarily superior” mean? Better toys, more men? History is littered with well-armed corpses. What wins battles are asabiyyah, wit and will. The cartels were willing to kill civilians, the federales, whose testicles are kept under lock and key in a vault under Harvard, weren’t ready to accept those casualties. The confident man with a rock is more dangerous than a pussy with a howitzer.
        You have far more confidence in the heterosexuality of the US armed forces than any rational observer should. Being from the “provinces”, I have better insight into the state of the legions than homelanders. The Albanian mafia’s chief purchaser of heroin are US forces stationed in Kosovo. The US military’s personnel are those selfsame white people who are quite readily eliminating themselves through deaths of despair. They come to my town looking to get laid, but one twisted grin of warning from a local and they back off like whipped curs. The brass and the priestly caste who rules do indeed encourage this behavior, but the poison and weakness are already baked into their genome. The West is dead, the American empire was the fourth turning and its legions are no more capable of resisting the barbarians than the Roman empire’s legions were towards the end.
        If King Donald is to reign, he will have to strike a deal with Emperor Joaquin the Short and possibly the Ebony Princes of the Negropolitan Alliance


      18. @Eternal Ango:

        You are forgetting that MM already has what the Patriarchy would deliver to smart autistic nerds – he is married with children. The WQ isn’t a priority for him, and a significant part of the normiecon audience is also married without big problems, especially that they are like 60 and wife is 55. I wanted to write a gentle introduction to non-English speaking normiecons and the first problem to face was: just how to write about the WQ without insulting their generally decent wives?

        MM is actually hinting at some level of the WQ redpill: downplaying Eros is hinting that those stories of romantic novels are not true that you should just be yourself and you will just magically mutually fall in love with a great woman, and the focus on thymos and hinting at its biological source is hinting at the essence of masculinity and alpha: personal power.

        I have recently decided that the best short summary of Reaction is personal power. And it ranges from Aidan’s three rules of Game which can be summed up as personal power to MM’s old fantasies about King Steven Jobs. The idea of personal power is what connects MM’s nerdier ideas with the Manosphere. Also notice how afraid libs are of “arbitrary” personal power. They are more afraid of it than anything else.

        The Social Pathologist is right, Nazis is alpha male socialism, socialism with a cult of personal power. But practically every political system has such a variation. Theodore Roosevelt: alpha male democracy. Monarchies and aristocracies for example have to be ran by alpha males or they collapse.

        Notice how the lib gamma hates all of them and is basically far more okay with any kind of system that is ran by a bureaucracy and not personal power.

        So this, IMHO, the idea of personal power is absolutely the essence of the whole reactor.

        Liked by 1 person

      19. I have a full “Gentle Introduction to the WQ” written and ready to go, but none of my readers really need it and it may be of more use elsewhere, so I’m holding off on it. I don’t care about older normiecons, they will die soon and their beliefs are too entrenched. Zoomers otoh take very readily to the WQ. Tinder, Snapchat, etc. are means girls use to find sugar daddies and older alphas, but kids currently in high school today have gotten very cliquish and will crack down very hard on girls who date outside the clique. When I was in high school, girls fucked around a lot, random hookups were common, and very few people had steady gf/bf. Now, the cool kids all have girlfriends from within their cliques rather than hooking up at parties, and girls who do are heavily bullied and ostracized. This has probably extended to early college by now, since I noticed it among 2017 highschoolers. In the US, went from hookup culture back to girlfriend culture in less than 10 years, so it can be done.

        Focusing on thymos will get you farther than being gymcel, so MM>BAP on the WQ. But Zuckerberg married a 5 and couldn’t even get her to take his name. And look at what Bezos got divorced over. Lol.


      20. I have noticed such cliqueishness over here much earlier in different ways.

        1992: in a music club people freely mingle with each other, easy to chat up girls.

        1997: People dance in circles with their friends and the circles never mingle. I used to have photos from above to prove it, closed circles, going into an circle of strangers to chat up a girl is just weird.

        2001: Lot of music clubs closed, and were replaced with the kind of bars where people just sit at tables and chat with their friends and do not talk to strangers. At all.

        Isn’t Bezos supposed to be gay to begin with? Like BAP, which is another issue.

        I don’t know about Zuck’s situation. Clearly when choosing a lifelong partner, I am more interested in things like a sense of humor than beauty, because she will not be pretty at 55 or 65 anyway. Beauty is a short-term, these stuff are more of a long-term good. But Zuck should be able to find a woman who has both, having so many employees and it is easy to maintain alpha frame when asking out an employee girl for a date.


      21. @Aidan
        “Focusing on thymos will get you farther than being gymcel, so MM>BAP on the WQ.”
        BAP is nearly pure thymos. He is singing an anthem of revolt and victory (with a secondary tune of largesse). He is convincing young men to conceive of themselves as beautiful and lifting is a means to Becoming – from an aesthetic viewpoint. From a biological one, it increases your testosterone levels, giving you the biological means for thumotic activity. His conception of conquering and controlling space is also highly thumotic.
        In fact, you can consider BAM to be the anti-Republic, insofar as we conceptualize of Plato’s Republic as a psychegogical means of correcting for an excess of thumos (as observed in Glaucon), BAM is a means of correcting for an excess of pistos and reason which is present in the modern bugman.

        “Clearly when choosing a lifelong partner, I am more interested in things like a sense of humor than beauty, because she will not be pretty at 55 or 65 anyway. Beauty is a short-term, these stuff are more of a long-term good.”
        There are two biological elements to female beauty: 1. Genetic quality markers, 2. Fertility markers. Eugenic females retain their quality well into old age, though they will lose their fertility. Hence, a woman’s symmetrical and well-formed face and body will remain when she’s 70, but she will lose the fertility markers (boobs, ass, redness of face and lips etc.) If you look for genetic quality, your wife will turn into a MILF at 40. Luckily, symmetrical phenotypes correlate with high IQ and a right-wing disposition when we control for autism.
        Incidentally, I think that the milf phenomenon is a result primarily of the plummeting genetic quality of Western populations due to the proliferation of mutants, leading to those strange “mother is hotter than the daughter” situations where the difference of genetic quality between the older woman and younger woman outweighs the difference in fertility. In some cases, the young girl is carrying several generations of mutations and this is expressed in her lopsided phenotype.


      22. BAP constantly contradicts himself, by design, because he is attempting to revive or create an aesthetic of power and beauty and not a “system”, “ideology” or “philosophy” (all generally for fags). He also says in BAM that “ambition” (thymos) is for bugmen, that truly superior specimens feel like winners, act like winners, and glory and achievement follow from this. He will deny the existence of the soul and also talk about the magical seductive power of a great charisma. His actual guidelines for political action at the end of BAM are pragmatic and solid in contrast to the barbarian esoterica and talk of plundering cities. What BAP’s followers seem to have gotten from him on the WQ is that lifting/aesthetics=pussy, which deserves to be countersignalled.


      23. “Nerd-jock dichotomy is casual shorthand for priest-warrior dichotomy, and since you comment at Jim’s you’ll know what it means”

        That is a very bad shorthand, because in Jimian theory warriors and priests are men who are *actually* cooperating in fighting/telling stories, while jocks and nerds are simply those who have the potential, the ability to do so.

        It is better to see them as jock=testosterone, nerd=IQ, and yes, you can have both and they aren’t even negatively correlated. But the thing is, in our school those boys who were low on both were called losers, those average on both were not called anything, just normal, those high on both more or less seen as supermen. All three would try to solve some problems via T and some problems via IQ. Thus the jock will be someone who has high T, low IQ, who has to solve all problems via the jock way and cannot attempt to solve them via the nerd way. Same for nerds – they must solve all problems via IQ and cannot solve problems via T.

        So the dichotomy exists merely because some men who rank high in one and low in the other specialize in the stuff they rank high in and use it as an all-around problem solver.

        E.g. someone insults you, in a lame way. Do you employ IQ and make fun of him or employ T and threaten a beating? Losers, normals, and supermen, whose T and IQ is about on the same level, low, middle or high, will sometimes do this, sometimes that. But the high T low IQ guy will always threaten, the high IQ low T guy will always make fun. Thus these are the stereotypical jock or nerd behaviors.

        This is just how language works. Someone who only has a hammer you call a hammer guy, someone who only has a screwdriver you call a screwdriver guy, and someone who has both you call a well-tooled guy. Thus the dichotomy.

        And this does not even mesh that well with warrior-priest. Low ranking warriors may be stupid, but their leaders should not be. Uncharismatic smart guys may be good at figuring things out, but to tell stories convincingly one needs charisma.


      24. Fair enough. Two dichotomies at play. Priest-warrior does not have to do with IQ/T very much. Harald Hardrada was probably a very smart guy. He was also seven feet tall and loved nothing better than hitting people with his gigantic Dane axe. He used his high IQ to figure out how to make the maximum profit and status from splitting people like firewood. But he was pure warrior. Or imagine some badass saint like Boniface with titanic balls who walked into a pagan village with an axe and cut down their sacred tree.

        Most men are not natural warriors (20% of infantry cause 80% of enemy casualties) or natural priests. There are far more natural artisans and merchants.

        But there is always tension and conflict between warriors and priests. Pinochet was a warrior. He was also very smart and loved to read, but his library was all nonfiction. Literally all of it. He would read textbooks on engineering before ever picking up a novel. This naturally horrifies our priest classes, who report this fact with hushed tones and an air of shock and horror. The same way Seneca would have been horrified by Charlemagne. The high-IQ warrior is alien to the priest. Lots of priests see warriors as just jocks (T only) and lots of warriors see priests as nerds (IQ only). There are hardly any jock (T only) priests and hardly any nerd (IQ only) warriors, though rare exceptions may be dug up.


      25. “Ambition” may be an aspect of thumos, one way of expressing thumos, or maybe even a degenerated form of thumos as expressed by decadent modern bugmen, but it is not in any way the whole of thumos, nor can thumos be dismissed as bugmanite ambition. Moldbug might be doing a lot of damage by conflating thumos with shitlib power-lust. Socrates, Plato and Aristotle are in agreement that a city (or a man) cannot function without a measure of thumos, of spiritedness. It is the natural aspect of a warrior (as opposed to priestly nous).


  1. Unqualified Reservations includes a sly link to Heartiste. Can’t remember the page but, unless the later editor added it, the significance is clear.

    As to the post, it’s all very tidy but do we have any proof that Trump understands the situation this way? If he still buys into ‘checks and balances,’ ‘government by the people’ and other such inanities, he won’t come to anything.

    If Kushner betrays Trump on the wall, the president will have an excuse to be rid of him. But couldn’t he just… be rid of him? Kushner isn’t a judge or a congressman. He’s a relative. That’s not job safety in USG. The only way this could make sense is Trump so desperately needing loyal supporters that he’s forcing this particular enemy to flip.


    1. Firing people for no reason demoralizes everyone else working for you. Trump firing Kushner because he smells like enemy encourages everyone else working for you to defect.

      If Trump somehow does not understand the situation in terms of a coming coup, he is at least acting like he understands it. Many competent people do not understand things intellectually put prove to have incredible instincts and intuition and end up being great leaders.


    2. Yeah that part is silly. It was clear from the beginning Trump should not have brought any family members with him into the white house.
      Agreed that the president doesn’t have as much power as people think, but if he had taken this seriously and hired more people further down the bureaucratic chains of command he would have more power. That’s what the 2.5 month transition is for. Instead he let the Republican establishment hire a few people and left tons of slots open.

      It’s a mess and he doesn’t know what he’s doing. There’s no 4d chess going on.


  2. “Only dissident priests, and merchants who have bought up some priestly power, dare voice their support.” This is the only part of your great post where I wondered whether that is reasonable or what you really meant.

    The working men of the general population do voice their support. In private anyway, but that is all they can do, because there is no public forum in which they are allowed to speak.

    Maybe you meant that a dissident priest and -to a lesser degree- merchants with some priestly power are less vulnerable to the inquisition than a working man. Working man usually means “employee” and most employers will fire (perhaps even have to) fire anyone who is accused by the inquisition.

    Anyway, I live in one of the empire’s provinces and here opposition to the ruling religion is based on working men. The backbone of the opposition in Germany is working men of moderate wealth, mostly self-employed and small business owners. The have no priestly power at all as they lack the means to purchase it and lack the time (or inclination) to become dissident priests.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. A dissident priest who can voice his dissent in public would be someone who has fuck-you money or influence. Personally, I have familial wealth and connections which allow me to say fuck-you to the Cathedral. Sometimes it means learning to live with less, but hey, hardship is part and parcel of dissent.
      Now, my case is special – I live in a land where the Cathedral is weaker, and my family are Balkaners, which means that they’ll never fully disown me, even though I embarrass them in front of the emissaries from the Imperial Capital. Inner Hajnal dissidents should think twice before relying on their families.


  3. >The standard model of physics is based on flawed assumptions and it reminds me of nothing more than the elegant and hilariously incorrect math employed to justify the geocentric solar system. You have to be a brilliant mathematician to explain why Mercury goes retrograde with the Earth at the center of the universe, but the much simpler explanation with the much simpler math proved obvious in hindsight.

    What “model of physics” do you recommend then? Any sources you’d suggest to read?


    1. I don’t have some alternate explanation, rather I think astrophysics is crippled by flawed assumptions and fundamental lack of knowledge. What is space? Why does mass warp it? And so on.

      I don’t think science in its current form is capable of this kind of advancement. Understanding will probably not come in our lifetimes.


      1. Science can’t be crippled by lack of knowledge. Science is the quest for knowledge; it is only possible because the lack of knowledge is acknowledged.

        Science might be crippled by flawed assumptions, but then it is already mutating in to Religion with Dogma instead of assumptions.


      2. Science is not “the quest for knowledge”. The quest for knowledge existed before science, and we retroactively call it science in the same way that the Cathedral baptizes historical figures into liberalism.

        Science is a specific set of procedures, a method of inquiry, that produces a workable, actionable model of reality. When the procedure falls apart, as it did with peer review, you indeed find its former institutions mutating into talmudic houses of dogma.


  4. It is crippled by peer review, which Einstein hated for the same reason Watson hated it: they reject “too speculative” stuff. So instead of “too speculative” grand theories we get millions of petty insignificant experiments.


  5. New thread because constant replies reduce clarity.

    “Guy who quit heroin cold turkey, he was probably lying. I know someone who quit heroin cold turkey, he was massively physically ill for weeks and hormonal issues for months.”

    When I quit risperidon (prescription antipsychotic) cold turkey, I was massively physically and psychologically ill for two weeks and had hormonal and mood issues until I shed every ounce of fat which trapped even trace amounts of the drug. It took me about 6 years to completely get that shit out of my system. But I did it.


    1. Not saying impossible, saying it is a matter of extreme willpower to overcome rather than some kind of biological resistance to the drug, because such drugs wreak havoc on the biology. Maybe in 10,000 years, we develop resistance to opium like we developed resistance to alcohol


      1. My personal experience with substances is that different ones pose different challenges in terms of willpower. Quitting risperidon was a grueling experience, but I never once wanted it back. Quitting smoking was laughably easy, though I credit my religious awakening for this. But much like our good friend with the face of a rooster, I am powerless before a pizza or a great big pitcher of ale (hate soft drinks, though).


  6. (bringing it up to top level)
    >Pinochet was a warrior. He was also very smart and loved to read, but his library was all nonfiction. Literally all of it. He would read textbooks on engineering before ever picking up a novel. This naturally horrifies our priest classes, who report this fact with hushed tones and an air of shock and horror.

    Waitwaitwait. You are just casually mentioning something important and totally not-obvious to me. I am an artisan with priestly leanings, so I have thought, but I rarely ever read fiction. The precise reason why I like Anglo culture more than my Continental one is that we tend have an undue influence of poetry and literature in politics. And my impression was that Anglo culture is drier in this regard, more essay oriented, more social science oriented. In my impression in the Anglo tradition it was easier to argue politics based on an econ textbook than in the French or German one.

    I have always be uninterested in literature, now that Yarvin on BAP is saying aesthetics is a political weapon i.e. that undue influence is unavoidable I am sort of trying to get used to the idea of sometime reading Goethe or Maupassant but I really don’t like to do it.

    But are you saying priests are totally into novels, fiction, poetry, stories, aesthetics, arts? So when leftie types argue with social “science” from The Spirit Level to intersectionalism that is not that priestly? Or with Rawlsian philosophy?

    You are almost saying priests are not autistic 😀

    I mean, for example, about capitalism, autistic lolbertarians were driveling about mutually beneficial NAP-conforming exchanges while Ayn Rand provided an aesthetic vision. That, apparently, had more of an effect. But is that the “real priestly” stuff and all that dry analysis not? In academia, the dry analysis is certain supposed to be dominant so if the academia is the brain of the Cathedral then Rothbard ought to have more effect than Ayn Rand… or to put it differently, on the left side, Rawls, Dworkin, or Keynes ought to have more effect than someone with an aesthetic vision of leftism, which is more suitable for the non-academics.


    1. Here’s another twist: Rothbard’s nonfiction has more soul and fire than Rand’s fiction. Reading a Rothbard paper on consumption taxes is more riveting than reading The Fountainhead, because Rothbard has that je ne sais quoi that makes a great writer and Rand doesn’t – he also doesn’t disregard aesthetics.


      1. Rothbard was terribly inflexible and doctrinaire, not accepting any exceptions whatsoever, full on horse blinders. His stuff always had put me off because it looked like he is creating a cult. I had brief flirts with Scientology and Transcendental Meditation when I was young and thus tend to both detect well and despise cultishness.

        The Fountainhead was pretty boring but I liked Atlas Shrugged. I didn’t realize back then but I think now I do that it was the quite realistic sexual dynamics that I liked, that women want to hero-worship men and want to find men worthy of hero-worshipping. Ayn Rand wasn’t just writing about a heroic view of capitalism but quite obviously lusting for heroic capitalists. I think that was the part I liked.


    2. Anyone can enjoy the arts, but holding them sacrosanct is a priest thing. Note the millennial commissar’s obsession with say Harry Potter. Dry Anglo philosophy, including libertarianism, and “social science” is still priestly storytelling and preaching. It’s the difference between a Puritan priest and an old Catholic saint.

      An engineering textbook is artisan information for other artisans. Business contracts of the sort Trump loves to pore over are merchant information for other merchants. Priests are concerned with everything that tells us is and ought. Both Rand and Rothbard are priest class providing priestly information.


  7. “Guy who quit heroin cold turkey, he was probably lying. I know someone who quit heroin cold turkey, he was massively physically ill for weeks and hormonal issues for months. ”

    Your one guy trumps his one guy, eh?


      1. I was hardcore addicted to them pain pills ten years ago. Back when they made the real deal.
        Doctors were prescribing 80mg and 160mg opiod pills that could be ground up into powder and insufflated. Or burnt and inhaled. I was using multiples a day. It was disgusting. I quit cold with hardly any withdrawal. A friend quit with awful withdrawal.

        I had worse symptoms when I quit smoking weed. Which tells me something about the new government leaf they are pushing.

        I tried real dope once. I felt a purely incredible wave wash over me. I thank God for sparing me a habit there, for whatever reason.

        Nowadays, I’ve got a hard time clarifying my attitude towards drug addicts and drug pushers. I vacillate between compassion and rodrigo duterte.


      2. I have compassion for addicts, am duterte towards pushers.

        Weed does absolutely nothing for me and I’ve never personally tried opium. Perhaps some can quit opium cold turkey with few side effects, but that is not the experience of the populace at large.


      3. “Perhaps some can quit opium cold turkey with few side effects, but that is not the experience of the populace at large.”

        Which was precisely the state of European population with regard to alcohol all those many years ago. Those who survived alcohol as a selection pressure passed on their genes and you have situations like on the Greek islands, where the oldest farming populations of Europe live, where it takes enormous amounts of wine to get them drunk. Those Europeans who couldn’t hack it ended up like injuns today – losing their souls and then their lives to the firewater.
        This can very easily happen with opioids and other type drugs, leaving behind only those that can live with them. The “populace at large” will die off without issue, or ignore its issue while strung out on the horse (and young humans die without nurture), while opioid-resistant humans will inherit the Earth.

        That’s one scenario, at least.


      4. Alcohol serves a useful social function as a truth serum. In vino veritas. Get drunk with your friends, and hidden grudges will come out, and you will see who really loves you and is loyal. Great plans are hatched when men get together to drink. Write drunk, edit sober.

        Opium has the opposite, discivic, effect of alienation and dissociation from the world. There was very good reason for our ancestors to stick with booze, at first only brewing it at very low levels of alcohol, and making it stronger and stronger as we got more tolerant. (Hard liquor is no more than 600 years old). I do not see a good reason to stick with opium.


      5. Jeelvy,

        At present, don’t most people not consume alcohol?

        I know that a lot of Asians can’t process alcohol efficiently. Maybe they avoided the selection pressure of alcohol by foregoing alcohol completely.

        I had a thought once that races with a propensity for degenerate alcoholism tended to have had their land taken and their culture replaced/destroyed. Possessed by a collective shame.

        I’ve previously heard about Europeans drinking beer because of the germs in the water. Surely that only applied to the cities? There must’ve been plenty of folk in the countryside, not getting drunk but still passing on their genes.


      6. @Aidan
        Alcohol is useful to early-stage civilizations where the cohesion and loyalty of a warband is the means by which this civilization proliferates. It is eusocial when the objective is to build, conquer and create. All I have in my life I owe to alcohol
        Late stage, degenerate civilizations do not depend on cohesion and loyalty (Spengler’s Blood), but money and policing to remain stable. Being dehumanizing and painful to live in, they can greatly benefit from drugs which cause the millions subject bugmen to disassociate themselves from the ugly world and alienate themselves from each other, lest the bonds of Blood are formed. You do not see a good reason to stick with opium because you think like a tribal war chief, not like a managerialist bugman farmer. Same arguments for weed, which is why I suspect the managerial class is pushing it.


    1. Naturally. The smarter, older democrats realize that impeachment on such flimsy grounds will destroy them and bolster Trump’s power. Trump also knows this. The young stupid ones are thirsty for blood and taking the bait.


    1. I remember that piece. It’s a good one. Moldbug is using Heartiste to explain the political will (well concealed under democracy) in terms of the sexual will (open and obvious). Civil liberties (porn) versus real power (actual sex).

      “UR comes to you proudly from [San Francisco], in which pure alpha sexuality unrestrained by womanly wisdom flames out from every other storefront”

      Blue Pill: “gay is hypermasculine”

      MM has the honest nerd’s reaction to the womanizer. He is impressed, maybe a little envious, and also slightly horrified. I recognize the tone and attitude because I’ve seen it in person countless times.

      MM’s classing of Roissy as a “sex addict” is typically low-T. We would probably both agree that “PUA” is unhealthy. MM probably considers Roissy to have an unnaturally high libido, that normal men do not want to act like Roissy does. I contend that for most normal men, being Heartiste would be living the dream, that obtaining a high quantity and quality of bitches is a fundamental masculine dream. Though for most men it is just a fantasy, and they channel their libido into something more productive.

      It raises the question. Is PUA selection bias or not? Does Roissy only think AWALT because all women who will sleep with him are like that? After all, even the best PUA don’t hit a 10% open-to-bang ratio. I have an alternate hypothesis in “PUA is Unnatural”. AWALT, but “That” is something the PUA fails to totally hit on.

      “unrestrained by womanly wisdom”. Kind of a telling phrase. When I look at the great men of history, conquerors and statesmen, I see men unrestrained by womanly wisdom. MM and I have a different apprehension of “gay”, and I think the less womanly wisdom in society the better. Unrestrained female imperative is the slut fridge, not Jane Austen. Jane Austen is on her way from the ducking-stool to the slut fridge, but MM has a Victorian’s idea of women, the idea that marriage and family are a womanly restraint on men like Roissy.


      1. I will remind the esteemed audience that Ashkenazi pronouncements on gentile male sexuality are always to be taken with a fuckton of salt, even when the Ashkenazi is /ourguy/. Much of the goy hate among male Jews is sexual neuroticism. See Borat, Seinfeld.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Yes, Jews tend to be sexually fucked up and grow up feeling insecure in the face of Chad the Goy, because their girls can’t get enough of goy dick. “Nice jewish boy” is not so secretly an insulting pejorative.


      3. More to the point, however, if Moldbug’s idea of male sexuality is wrong, how can we trust his ideas on power? If actual power is sex and LARPing as a civil right activist is porn, then he considers someone who wants power unnatural and pathological – and we see in the second part of the clear pill series that he considers thumos to be a bad thing (elsewhere on UR he praises the apolitical).
        Low-t doesn’t just mean low sex drive, but low thumos, because power can be very readily converted into sex and sex is “the center” as per your own writing.
        All normal men have a thumotic drive just as all men have a sex drive. All men, therefore, want to be Roissy and want to be the King. Most will fail and we will abound in sour grape realizations on why being Roissy is bad (it’s just like those homos in SF) and why being the King isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. Not addressing the male sex drive is bad, not addressing or worse, pathologizing the male thumotic drive is downright evil. Zero power for normal men is not a viable social formula.
        Of course, you can engineer your society to select against high-t men and you’ll have a society of low-t bugmen in a few generations. Now these will readily chomp down every bluepill you serve them, and if not, there’s always opiates and porn.


      4. I am preparing a post on BAP and Moldbug so you’ll have to wait for a detailed answer. Short answer is that Moldbug desires an unnatural stasis, wants to figure out power and incentives well enough to engineer a “closed system” that allows business to go on as usual indefinitely.

        I see human history as the history of war and conflict between men, with a “shadow war” over mating lying beneath. A war fought both inter and intra the sexes.

        If you’ve read Spengler or BAP, Moldbug becomes obvious as either paragon of “yeast-humanity” or the coming fellaheen condition of the West. Naturally Jews attach themselves to this process, since Jews are a fellaheen people themselves, with a culture that had exhausted itself even before the fall of Western Rome.


      5. He’s a lolbertarian Jew nerd. A cesspit of neuroticism.

        Nerds, being defective/effeminate males, scorn other less defective males. They identify with the woman (if only as something they want to masturbate to themselves as, hence all the trannies/homos/coomers you see among circles like the “transhumanist” scene) and hold her to be The Good. Hence so much nerd/goony fiction is filled with “strong women” like Wonder Woman (look like a pornstar, acts like a slut, is either a lesbo or treats men like a weird courtesy).

        Jew men behave real effeminately with their women feral harpies too.

        Liked by 1 person

      6. “…to engineer a “closed system” that allows business to go on as usual indefinitely.”

        And this is why engineers should be severely beaten, pantsed, stuffed into lockers, given swirlies, wedgies and called mean names in front of women, especially if they dare to speak of matters they cannot possibly understand. Nerds do not understand the concept of “stick to your lane.”


      7. That Moldbug reads Roissy demonstrates he’s not entirely blue pilled. He’s coy about sexuality in a way that he is not when discussing history or politics. For example, he insists, in more than one place, that he sees nothing wrong with buggery. Then he casually mentions the obvious physical consequences of living as a degenerate.

        In any case, Moldbug isn’t a sacred oracle whose every word must be studied.

        You have yourself (effectively) said that men don’t want to live like Roissy. That is, men would rather have wives than whores. A mistress or two on the side, sure, but a ordinary looking wife is better than regular romps with sluts. Even Genghis Khan was breeding heirs, not meddling with thots on birth control. Gay, as Roissy said, is a loud and obnoxious parody of proper sexuality. As such, it is possible to recognize the distorted image.

        There may be something in ‘womanly wisdom’ but this is only something that could flourish under male authority. In the same way, children need to obey their parents and men need a place in the male hierarchy. Any concept of ‘womanly wisdom’ that claims to override male authority is, of course, dangerous nonsense.


  8. I didn’t find this easier to understand at all. In fact, all it really seems to do is label as “priests” anyone in the bureaucracy that doesn’t support Trump. It also has the typical “common conservative man good, elite liberal bad” pseudo-populist trope beloved by the likes of Rush Limbaugh – not to mention lots of “our troops” rhetoric popular among the same crowd.

    Frankly, the racial and class analysis is far more explanatory. But then, that might reveal some powerful factions that cannot be called “neo-Calvinist” without everyone falling on the floor laughing. I guess the entire point is to obscure and mystify the power of a certain country that cannot be named and its lobby in America.

    While Kushner has long been suspected by those loyal to our King to be an agent of the Church, our King shows wisdom in this appointment

    Ah, yes, Kushner is suspected of being an agent of … “the Church.” Uh-huh. Kushner must be an agent of all those neo-Calvinists from Harvard. That’s the best explanation, eh?

    I guess if all you have is an NRx hammer, everything looks like a Dungeons & Dragons nail.


    1. And if the only thing in your kitchen is an oven, every problem looks like a Jew.

      This is a class analysis. The class that rules by telling people what and how to think are priests, whether they believe in God or not.

      The racial analysis fails to adequately explain why whites are attacking other whites, the (marxist) class analysis fails to adequately explain why huge corporations are publicly attacking their customers in direct violation of the profit motive.

      Jewish preference is to be conservative when Jews rule Jews, as in Israel, and are liberal when telling whites what to do. But where they live among whites, they are not conservative with their own families, do not breed to replacement, and Jewish daughters are among the sluttiest out there. That tells me that they are janissaries of leftism, controlled and not controlling.

      Maybe the Orthodox Jews are secretly in charge of the liberal ones, but if so, they would not be getting ethnically cleansed from Brooklyn. Blacks do not riot against Chinamen in Chinatown, forcing them out through violence, because Chinamen have actually infiltrated the government and get a special blind eye from the cops to deal with the riffraff. But blacks riot against Orthodox jews in Brooklyn, who are moving en masse out of the city to places in the mountains where no blacks live. Liberal Jews in New York have shown themselves eager to throw their jewish cousins to the mob, showing they have no racial solidarity, whereas Chinamen have real racial solidarity and act on it.


      1. The class that rules by telling people what and how to think are priests, whether they believe in God or not.

        OK. Are the “priests” secular Jews, or secular Calvinists?

        I mean, you damn well know the answer, you’re just too cowardly to say it.

        “Cowardly” is the correct word, by the way.

        Orthodox Jews are secretly in charge of the liberal ones

        Pfft – I’m not as stupid as you pretend you think I am, nor are any of us.

        Really, what does this get you, Maclear? The Jews will hate you regardless. It doesn’t make any difference how much you suck up to them, or try to distract from Jewish/Zionist power.

        We can all see it. We’ve all read Curtis Yarvin, it’s obviously nothing more than neo-conservatism with a libertarian gloss.

        You’re a smart guy. You’re Scottish. Good god, have some self-respect. What would your mother say?


      2. There are lots of secular Jews out to get us. Calvinists, not quite the right word. The Puritans who settled New England were absurdly manly and based compared to men of today. There were many evolutions before Puritan thought became leftist thought.

        Who founded the SPLC? The ACLU? Who had Emma Lazarus’ poem inscribed on the Statue of Liberty? Who did the Jews learn leftism at the hand of? Who taught the Frankfurt School what they believed?

        Lots of Jews need helicopter rides, but even if we put every single one in the oven, would not solve our problems.


      3. “That tells me that they are janissaries of leftism, controlled and not controlling.”

        I find myself obligated to point out that at a certain point in history, the janissaries took near-complete control of the Ottoman Empire’s military and administrative apparatus and started acting as a Praetorian guard, to the point that they were the decisive forces in the princely conflicts and the effective sovereign of the Empire (per the Schmittean “he who rules in the state of exception”) until their bloody dissolution by Mahmud II.


        I checked out your site. You raise valid points about Moldbug, his links to Sullivan and Moldbug’s hawkishness. I’d love to read more on the subject and I’ve taken to re-reading the old Moldbug oeuvre. It’s a shame that all the comments to Moldbug’s posts were lost – would have loved to see the responses before his mystique developed.
        That being said, it’s not all Jews, all the time. Parsimonious reasoning indicates that Jews, especially Ashkenazim are natural bugmen due to millennia of selection for bugmanry under the rabbinical regimes of the ghettos which selected for obedience, bookishness and other non-martial, non-agrarian values. Observe, in contrast, the Sephardim, who are an urban population, but not quite tyrannized by their rabbis – there are still examples of manly virtue among them, which is not to imply that having lots of them or having them anywhere near government or other positions of power is a good idea.
        The idea is that the chief organizing principle of our odious elites is a particularly evil religion which glorifies bugmanry, talmudic bullshitting and belief in talmudic bullshit, which disproportionately attracts Jews who are natural bugmen, purveryors and consumers of bullshit. They’ve naturally flocked to liberalism, which is the religion of the Western elites, and having gotten in, actually took part in its development, mostly by being better liberals than the liberals. Today’s liberalism is especially Jewy because its latest and current high-level priests are ethnic Jews. This thesis is one that accommodates both the Cathedral theory and Kevin MacDonald’s findings in the Culture of Critique. This thesis is unpopular because very few people have read both the Moldbug opus AND the Culture of Critique series (you gotta read all three). Lots of dissident right projection and fed disinfo about K-Max and CoC too, making him out to be honky Farrakhan, but the central thesis of CoC is fairly narrow (also points out that Jewish power is on the wane, with Bush-era neoconism being a last hurrah).
        NRx bloggers tend to have predictable knee-jerk reactions to anyone mentioning the JQ, but I’ve not really seen anyone seriously contend with the actual facts on the ground. Rather, they’ll default to refuting the most excessively and patently false propositions about full ZOG control of the world. Actually arguing for full ZOG control is getting us nowhere. I’ve been trying to solve this problem for about a year now – obviously can’t do it alone, even if I have found a solution. Taking the most refutable position doesn’t help us solve the problem.


      4. His former blog was shoah’d. See “hipster racist’s” comments on older posts of mine.

        Jews, like janissaries, could take control of the leftist state quite easily, but they lack both manliness and cohesion. Jews are individually good at sleazing individuals over. Do business with a Jew, make sure you read the fine print twice. I grew up around lots of jews. I don’t personally like them very much. But having to read the fine print and not trusting verbal promises with them is the extent of their maliciousness. Collectively, not so good at sleazing over other collectives. Being kicked out of 115 countries is evidence of being bad at the whole conspiracy thing. They tried to screw over Rome, and got their temple burned to the ground.

        About “full ZOG control of the world”. No, very few believe it. But within 20 years, we went from “lets vote against gay marriage” to “transender 8 year old drag shows”. That level of cultural influence requires either immense power and control, like Akhenaton’s attempt to impose his sun-god, or it requires mass insanity among the elite. Undue Jewish influence on the government is real, but it means cutting a check equaling 1.4% of our annual military budget to the state of Israel, and a bunch of evangelical boomers signalling about Our Greatest Ally. Forgive me if I’m not frothing at the mouth over this.

        If Jewish influence is the answer, Jews would need “ZOG total control” to go from anti-gay marriage to 8-year-old male hookers in less than a generation, so that is the hypothesis I address. If mass insanity, the fact that Jews are prominent and vociferous among the collectively insane and evil is not evidence that they caused the insanity.


      5. I’m with you on no Jewish manliness, especially among Ashkenazim. But modern Jews do have cohesion, their organizing principle and asabiyyah generator being the Holocaust religion. It’s pretty crappy as far as religion goes, no positive virtue, only negative virtue (not-Hitler), but it gets the job done. Recall that Jews turned out massively to watch Spielberg’s hierophanic teleplays, especially Schindler’s List. Old Jewish ladies nagged their daughters into watching Ralph Fiennes completely dominate Jewish men, leading to much Jewish pussy for us goys who look good in leather and have that Dark Triad twinkle in our eyes. This is their religion, this is what gives them cohesion. Because they have the same devil as the progs, they function as a mystery cult, especially for Jewish men who are deathly afraid that Amon Göth is going to shoah them and hog all the khazar milkers.
        I’ll also point out that history is full of eunuchs seizing power, which casts doubt that manliness is a necessary precondition for seizing power in a late-stage decadent society. Indeed, it might be a liability as masculinity is socialized in late-stage decadent empires, in the forms of the police and military and given a very powerful psychic shock collar in the form of bugman/faggot officers and commissioners – nothing outside the state is allowed to be manly (unless it is the pet attack dog of state actors, such as the cartels and negro gangs), hence my caution on believing that Trump can rise to become God-Emperor.

        “Jews would need “ZOG total control” to go from anti-gay marriage to 8-year-old male hookers in less than a generation,”

        Not total, only over the sectors of society that matter, namely colleges, media and finance, so they can pull the strings of all the opinion-makers. Not even the Cathedral has total control over the USG (though they have limiter gates installed in the brains of military officers), and still it’s victory after victory.

        My personal experience with Jews is sparse. My country has been deprived of their presence by yonder mustached Austrian painter, he missed a few and I used to boink one of their progeny back in college (apparently, I have Ralph Fiennes energy when I get angry). It was her that redpilled me on the JQ, though she framed it as the Ashkenazi Question. Further reading on Sephardic shenanigans in Spain and the Ottoman Empire fleshed out the picture for me.


  9. why huge corporations are publicly attacking their customers in direct violation of the profit motive.

    It’s *US* that explains that, and specifically *NOT YOU* because you can’t admit it.

    Henry Ford, in America, explained this 100 years ago.

    It’s *YOU* – Aidan Maclear – that cannot be honest, even though everyone north of 100 IQ knows it.

    That’s why we’re censored by Google, and you are welcomed by them.

    “Coward” is the right word. When are you going to post about SNP winning?


    1. Look up the Ford foundation. What did it do, after Ford’s death. Who were its donors. Google is fine with my blog because I categorized it under history, not politics or whatever, so I can say Jew all I like.

      I don’t care about elections and don’t pay attention to them. The SNP won because Scotland is cucked. Scottish independence, to trade England for Brussels. The best Scots died at Culloden or left for the U.S.


  10. Jews … lack … cohesion

    It’s astonishing anyone could say this with a straight face. Certainly, in America, Jews are, by far, the most cohesive ethnic group, bar none.

    In fact, it’s difficult to even take seriously someone pretending that highly organized and powerful Jewish groups like the ADL, the SPLC, AIPAC, etc., are not examples of extreme Jewish cohesion.

    Certainly, anti-semites often over-exaggerate, say, Jewish control of finance. Superstitious Catholics have all sorts of bizarre “Judeo-Masonic” conspiracy theories.

    But the idea that Jews lack cohesion?

    Even mainstream media will sometimes admit that AIPAC is one of the most powerful lobbies on Capital Hill.

    It’s amazing that NRx people will downplay the Jewish issue even more than Jews themselves, even more than mainstream media – certainly even more than Israeli media.

    It’s so utterly transparent why NRx does it too – it’s simply nothing more than status-signaling, the right-wing version of Social Justice Warriorism, desperately trying to distance themselves from the low-status “anti-semites.”

    It’s so transparently dishonest.

    Look up the Ford foundation. What did it do, after Ford’s death

    Are you serious? Literally the Ford foundation was taken over by Jews after his death. You see this with any number of WASP institutions, The Atlantic magazine being a perfect example.

    I can only assume that Europeans simply have zero clue about the reality of America.


    1. They have cohesion as progressives, and are progressives before they are jews. Leftists have no enemies to the left, but leftist jews have a lot of jewish enemies and throw other jews under the bus at the slightest provocation. The SPLC (cofounded, btw, by a Jew and a baptist of Anglo stock) is cohesive in the SPLC, but it is not cohesive with AIPAC and Mossad, because you see leftist jews shrieking about the poor palestinian children being BBQ’d alive. If Jews had cohesion as jews and were collectively looking out for Jewish interests, Palestine would have been bulldozed ages ago and bearded men in little hats would be dancing on pyramids of human skulls. Then our media and academia would collectively spin this as a triumph of human rights and progress. When a feral gang of blacks gets into a fight with the jewish neighborhood watch in Brooklyn, whose side does the media take? When the Chinese mob roughs up a black vagrant on the streets of Chinatown and sends him packing… wait, you haven’t even heard about that. And that’s exactly my point.

      When Jews play up jewish influence, it is always jewish influence -in the context of progressivism-. Jews are sucking up to leftism; “look how good we are to the Movement, please don’t lump us together with the badwhites and turn us into lampposts”. I see Jews licking a boot, and I care more about who is wearing the boot than I do about the ones licking it. Jewish power and influence is an infection. I don’t like having any alien people so close to the levers of power. But we have an infection because we have AIDS, and the AIDS is by far the most pressing issue to me, so I rarely talk about the infection. Cure the AIDS, and the infection will disappear. When you say “I am a racist liberal”, I hear “AIDS? I don’t have AIDS. I’m sick because of this infection. Give me the strongest possible medicine for this infection, take the harshest measures to expunge it, and I will go back to my lifestyle strong and healthy”.

      I don’t have any need to appear respectable. I am anti-semitic in the same way that I am anti-black. I do not like most of them, and want to keep them far away from political and cultural power, but the claim that jews are running things is only slightly more credible to me than the claim that blacks are running things based on US aid to Africa, black advocacy organizations, and the constant fellating of blacks by the media. In fact, I like blacks more than jews, because blacks are pleasant people when well behaved and jews are seldom pleasant, even when not stirring up trouble.


  11. They have cohesion as progressives, and are progressives before they are jews.

    The opposite is true, hence the popularity of the term “progressive except for Palestine” not to mention the constant double-speak over whether Jews are “white” or not and whether or not they have “white privilege.”

    leftist jews have a lot of jewish enemies and throw other jews under the bus at the slightest provocation.

    Again, it’s like a fun-house mirror of reality. Everything you are claiming is the exact opposite of easily observable reality. Leftist Jewish groups like the ADL spend virtually no time attacking neo-conservative Jews like, say, Ezra Levant. Under Bush II, the liberal Jews always attacked the “goy” conservatives and ignored the Jewish neo-cons.

    it is not cohesive with AIPAC and Mossad,

    Again, a blatant reversal of the reality that everyone can easily observe.

    you see leftist jews shrieking about the poor palestinian children being BBQ’d alive.

    That is precisely what you do NOT see except in very, very unusual cases like Mondoweiss. Celebrity Jew leftist Noam Chomsky is notorious for being a gatekeeper on Palestine.

    If Jews had cohesion as jews and were collectively looking out for Jewish interests, Palestine would have been bulldozed ages ago and bearded men in little hats would be dancing on pyramids of human skulls.

    Ah, the Jim Donald tactic, basic false dilemma fallacy. Palestine is being currently bulldozed as we speak and they have doubled-down now that Trump is breaking with long-standing US policy. “Pyramids of human skulls” is just more of that D&D LARPing so beloved by the NRx crowd.

    When a feral gang of blacks gets into a fight with the jewish neighborhood watch in Brooklyn, whose side does the media take?

    Oh, I can answer that question, having direct experience – they always, always take the side of Jews.

    I do not like most of them

    Irrelevant. Your analysis suffers because you are denying reality. Saying Jews have big noses, or are sharp in business, does not challenge power – it’s a way of not challenging power.

    The entire NRx has a giant, gaping hole in its analysis precisely because it exists to distract from Jewish power. The only think Yarvin added was a nice juicy misdirection – without that, NRx is nothing but old fashioned conservative libertarian. Yarvin just created an astroturf movement because the Ron Paul crowd was full of “anti-semites” and noticed the Israel lobby.

    Even in the UK, north of 80% of both parties are in the “Friends of Israel” group and UK Jews are far less powerful than American Jews.

    Jewish “progressives” only promote “progressive” policies to outsiders.

    All one has to do is simply read the Jewish press to show how completely and utterly wrong NRx is about Jewish behavior. Read five articles on TOO – or – and it shows everything you are claiming is completely false.


    1. “Palestine is being currently bulldozed as we speak and they have doubled-down now that Trump is breaking with long-standing US policy.”
      Palestine is being bulldozed more slowly than Israel would like, because Israel is scared shitless that, despite AIPAC, the prog US State Department would throw them to the Arabs if their “human rights” abuses were too open or flagrant. Jews have some power, because they can do some colonization, but the fact that Israel proceeds with caution tells me that they don’t think US support is guaranteed, that they don’t think they have much control.

      “they always, always take the side of Jews.”
      Al Sharpton burned an Israeli flag during a riot in a Jewish neighborhood. What happened to his career? Yeah, nothing. He’s still around. The ADL can unperson you or me for questioning the holocaust, but cannot unperson Al Sharpton. Black leftists are holier than Jewish leftists, and accuse me of LARPing all you want, “holiness” is the right word for it. Humans are religious. All of them, everywhere, no matter what they worship or what they deem taboo.

      “Jewish “progressives” only promote “progressive” policies to outsiders.”
      This argument is going in circles. I have given you an example of Jews damaging Jews with progressive politics, of Jews practicing what they preach in the West when it comes to marriage and patriarchy and failing to reproduce at replacement. Orthodox Jews are being ethnically cleansed out of Brooklyn by the housing and cop nonintervention policies that liberal Jews promoted, and when they tried to move to a liberal Jewish suburb far away from blacks, the liberal Jews in the neighborhood waged a vicious campaign against it rather than welcoming their ethnic brothers.

      You say that UK Jews are far less powerful than US ones, but I see a whole lot more poz in the isles than I do in the states. I am not orthodox NRx and do not hold orthodox NRx beliefs, but you insist on using me as a scapegoat to vent your grievances against the school of thought.


      1. “Jews have some power, because they can do some colonization, but the fact that Israel proceeds with caution tells me that they don’t think US support is guaranteed, that they don’t think they have much control.”

        No other state has that much power in the world, which is enough of a marginal edge to win in evolutionary conflict. If we could cleanse Albanians and gypsies from Macedonia at the rate that Israel cleanses Arabs, I’d be generally optimistic as to my country’s future, even if it weren’t my ideal state of affairs. It shows that even though it has no absolute power over USG, Israel and Jews have enough power over USG to force a compromise onto the Cathedral.
        On the other hand, Macedonia has been forced to change its ancient name, accept Albanian replacement and cultural supremacy and we have been forbidden from purging hostile ethnics and degenerate buggers from our state apparatus. USG threw us a color revolution, replaced our imperfect prime minister (a Bibi analogue) with a gypsy-admixed carpetbagger and humiliated us as a people. That this is not happening in Israel and that Israel can promote Jewish reproduction, and is empowered to ban pornography is to me evidence that the Jews, or at least Israelis are not terrified bootlickers. The only states aside from Israel which are spared this treatment are Russia, China and their satellites. This indicates nontrivial amounts of Jewish and/or Israeli power.


      2. Immediately after Mugabe began his white genocide in Rhodesia, which was in scale and brutality orders of magnitude greater than Israel’s settlement of Palestine, the US cut him a massive check, and continues to send money to his government to this day. Mentioning the white genocide in Rhodesia is far more taboo a topic for media and academia than condemning Israeli colonization, which is why you’ve never heard of Rhodesia if you’re not an anonymous online racist but everyone has an opinion on jewish colonization. The race that inhabits Zimbabwe is at least as protected from criticism as Jews are, and when you turn on the TV, you will see black pundits vociferously defending the evil and criminal actions of their coethnics. A black man can burn the Israeli flag with no consequences and a white man cannot burn the flag of Zimbabwe without severe and eternal consequences.

        Every argument for Jewish power, Israeli influence, and Jewish infiltration of institutions also applies to blacks and Africa, to Mugabe and Mandela. Israel is not the only country, nor Jews the only holy people, who can get away with the kind of shit Israel does. Jews have power in the Left, but if Jews were the left, Palestine would be synonymous with Rhodesia as a country that has been memory-holed and a genocide that receives no attention at all. The Left has memory-holed lots of leftist genocide, but Israel and Palestine is not one of them.


      3. “The race that inhabits Zimbabwe is at least as protected from criticism as Jews are, and when you turn on the TV, you will see black pundits vociferously defending the evil and criminal actions of their coethnics.”
        True. Kneegrows are holier than Jews in the prog faith. However, they are so comically low IQ that they cannot leverage their holiness and depend on shitlib largesse to survive. They are powerless to resist any Cathedral flexing – notice that King Donald forced buttsex legalization on Botswana and they just took it. Being that the Cathedral is essentially a gnostic cult, I believe they think of negroes like Ascendi – people who have peeked beyond the veil imposed by the demiurge and are incomparably holy, but are now too ascended to function in this fallen world and therefore need to be taken care of. Jews have SOME of that Ascendus status, in the sense that muh shoah was their peep beyond the veil and so they have sufficient holiness and therefore must be shielded from the world – hence the cuckservative rationalization for Israeli ethnonationalism in a world where ethnonationalism is the ultimate of evils. This is readily encouraged by Jews in the US who are themselves considered holy – not holier than negroes, but holy.
        In order to succeed in clownworld, you need some IQ and cohesion, but you also need the favor of the Cathedral (holiness). Jews (and Chinese) are in this goldilocks zone of being holy enough and smart enough to hack it. White people are obviously evil. And any disease that kills you, but weakens your enemy is good. This is why we see Jews, even Israelis encouraging shitlibery, because it leaves them and the chinkos as the only people who are both holy and intelligent.
        This is not formally recognized and then disseminated to Jews by the Elders of Zion, obviously, but understood by Jews on a subconscious level – that the white goyim are a far greater threat to Jews than the holy negro golems.

        “A black man can burn the Israeli flag with no consequences and a white man cannot burn the flag of Zimbabwe without severe and eternal consequences.”

        A white man cannot even pose a question as to why OUR GREATEST ALLY receives a buttload of money from USG, as we saw with the groypers. You had Dan Crenshaw quite seriously threaten young men with infamia for asking questions about the USS Liberty incident. This is nontrivial holiness which exists even in reactionary circles. When I brought up the JQ on Jim’s blog, I was called a shill and a fed by commenters tripping over each other to KO a strawman. Reactionaries slander and defame Kevin MacDonald as “honky Farrakhan”, while Culture of Critique is in reality a fairly narrow thesis which is eminently defensible with empirical data – showcasing that nobody has actually read CoC.

        Unless the Jewish question is addressed, and addressed in a manner which satisfies empirical observation of Jewish behavior, it could be the thread which unravels the new religion. Jimianity is at serious risk of becoming evopsych except for Jews.


  12. despite AIPAC, the prog US State Department would throw them to the Arabs if their “human rights” abuses were too open or flagrant. Jews have some power, because they can do some colonization, but the fact that Israel proceeds with caution tells me that they don’t think US support is guaranteed,

    Thanks for admitting it. Jews are not all-powerful, just extremely powerful, more powerful than any other ethnic group. Also – LOL – the “prog” State Department that sometimes has some concerns over publicity of, say, the 20 year long torture campaign against Arabs.

    You’re either a Jew yourself or so committed to defending Jews it really explains the term “shabbos goyim,” not to mention your D&D fantasies have made you at the least signal against basic humanity.

    I have given you an example of Jews damaging Jews with progressive politics

    No, you gave ZERO examples, you merely typed out a claim without a single example, or explanation of any kind.

    The fact you so slavishly defend power and suck up to to power is really illustrative of exactly what I’ve said.


    1. I am not going to continuously jump from your motte to your bailey. There is a massive gulf between “Jews created/hijacked the Left in an act of cohesive ethnic and religious solidarity and have near-total control over its message and institutions, using it to advance Jewish interests and damage Goyish interests” and “Jews wield unhealthy power and influence over western societies”.

      You seem to believe that legitimate institutions of human progress in the West were hijacked at some point by a cohesive Jewish interest acting in solidarity, said Jewish interest remaining in control of these institutions to this day, but I say -seem- because you have not stated a definite position on the nature of Jewish power. State an actual position on how Jewish power is constituted, how it operates, and how it took over, or link to something you wrote in which you describe it.


  13. I am not going to continuously jump from your motte to your bailey.

    Of course you aren’t, you’re better at doing that than I am.

    I was wrongly under the impression you were a pro-European Scotsman, which I was clearly mistaken about. It’s obvious that your ethnic loyalties lie elsewhere.

    Your special pleading for Ashkenazis half-way around the globe – for whatever reason – makes it a pointless exercise. You spend more time defending them than you do discussing Scotland. Your junior-tier defense of Trump’s Zionism makes it quite obvious what your agenda is.

    I was a fool to believe the “Scottish” crypsis. Mea Culpa.


    1. Me: “Jewish influence is an infection but leftism is the AIDS”
      You: “special pleading for Ashkenazis”

      Madness. I live in the US, I talk about the US. I haven’t written a single word in defense of Jews. I don’t give a shit about Jews. I want to get rid of leftism, and if we get rid of leftism, Jews will lose whatever power and influence they have, humongous, substantial, or moderate, and I won’t cry a single fucking tear over it. If you get rid of the Jews alone, the poz will continue unabated and our grandkids will be forced to whore themselves out wearing dresses in fag bars as part of their elementary school field trips. Bryce Norfolk-Smith wants to rape your kids in the ass as much as Schlomo Goldstein does.

      The JQ is the only means you have of reconciling being a liberal with noticing reality and hating poz. There is no baby in the bathwater worth saving. I want the whole tub tossed out.


      1. “If you get rid of the Jews alone, the poz will continue unabated and our grandkids will be forced to whore themselves out wearing dresses in fag bars as part of their elementary school field trips. ”

        Poz is a problem of late-stage decadent empires. Jewish power is similarly a problem which arises in late-stage decadent empires. Allow me to draw a parallel, once again using Balkan conflicts.

        In the Balkans, Albanians have made themselves available as the local allies to every empire which has ever laid claim to the southwestern Balkans. Without their assistance as mountain guerrillas, empires, which are often in command of large armies used to moving over open terrain, would have to face local lords and nations in the mountainous and wooded terrain of the Balkans, where fighting is best done in small squads and the successful tactic is the ambush. The history of the Albanian people is a history of bootlicking. The Cathedral is currently using them as local confederates against Macedonia, used them as local confederates in 1999 against Serbia, and is using them to keep the Greeks on a short leash (should the Greeks get too friendly with the Russians or the Chinese, the Albanians will start shit in the Epirus).
        Our predicaments in the Balkans are ultimately the fault of the Cathedral and before the Cathedral, they were the fault of the Serbian (later Yugoslav) empire and before that, the fault of the Ottomans. Exterminating the Albanians won’t fix the problem of the big gay empire with the big gay guns humiliating our people and forcing our sons to be homos. But if we do exterminate the Albanians, we deny the big gay empire and any future empires the local confederates it needs to operate effectively in the Balkans. Without the Albanians, USG’s very fragile and over-engineered weapons systems would have to tread over countries which are basically Afghanistan, but heavily wooded and with a high IQ population. Without the Albanians, USG’s transgender and humiliated sardaukar would have to engage bloodthirsty Balkan savages in the dark woods – like Vietnam, but with the added casual cruelty of the Slavic irregular light infantryman.
        It’s not a solution for this turning, but a solution for all turnings. We save future generations no end of trouble by ridding ourselves of troublesome minorities.

        Liked by 1 person

  14. Immediately after Mugabe began his white genocide in Rhodesia, which was in scale and brutality orders of magnitude greater than Israel’s settlement of Palestine, the US cut him a massive check, and continues to send money to his government to this day. Mentioning the white genocide in Rhodesia is far more taboo a topic for media and academia than condemning Israeli colonization

    Well, duh, that is exactly what we are saying. And it was Ashkenazi Zionists that were a key component – perhaps the core component – of the anti-South African movement.

    So, this proves exactly that:

    1. Jews are anti-White.

    2. Jews are Zionists.

    3. You’re desperate to distract from this obvious reality we can all see and no one outside of fringe NRx-er Zionists even try to pretend otherwise.

    Which makes your agenda … I don’t know, how to say this? Really obvious?


  15. I haven’t written a single word in defense of Jews.

    Wait, what were you just saying about motte and bailey?

    I mean, this entire conversation is all about your defense of Jews.

    Trump’s Mossad son-in-law is an “agent of the church?”

    You’re too smart to keep peddling this shit. Have some self-respect.

    Unless I’m the stupid one and have just mistaken a Scot for an Ashkenazi or a non-Ashkenazi who is being paid by one (or blackmailed like Jim “LOL” Donald.)

    I can guarantee you – there is no future in NRx shilling like compromised Jim Donald.

    Are you compromised like Jim Donald?


    1. Yeah bro, Mossad is paying me the big bucks to write my tiny blog that gets 200 clicks on a good day.

      While we’re accusing each other of being shills, I’m sure the Chinese and the Indians would be fucking thrilled to replace the Jews as the Left’s favorite attack-dog minority and let whites buttsex themselves into oblivion. Got any yuan in your pocket dude?


      1. Hey, don’t sell yourself short, nigga. This tiny blog influences at least me. I get between 10.000 – 15. 000 clicks on Counter-Currents, and from what I’ve been told, my readership is the brightest of the dissident right, i. e. the people likeliest to influence others. Great big network of influence.

        You’ve probably never heard of Warren Zevon, but you know his music. Bob Dylan, Bruce Springsteen and Billy Bob Thornton were massive fans and sometimes collaborators of his.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s