FORWARD BASE B

"Pay my troops no mind; they're just on a fact-finding mission."

The Problems of Secession and Dissolution

Frustrated dissidents often speak in favor of some kind of secession.  Sometimes they wish California seceded, other times they wish there was a new Southern Confederacy or just some kind of “White ethnostate” carved off from the rest of the country.  They also like to call for a dissolution of the United States.  They are tired of being stuck in a cosmopolitan declining empire.  Escape starts to seem like the best, easiest, most equitable solution.  The truth is there’s no easy way out.

Firstly, allowing the secession of California would be idiotic and disastrous.  The nation would be letting go of its best seaports, best farmland, best tourism, best economic productivity, its greatest cultural output and for what in return?
The peoples who took over California would be lavishly rewarded for their subterfuge and treason.  Such an easy victory for them would not mean peace in our time.  It would only embolden their advances into a crumbling empire that has signaled a pathetic unwillingness to defend itself.  If people think the US border is bad now, imagine if the whole length and width of California were added to it.

Independent California would be a hostile enemy nation constantly conspiring against the USA.  If we cynically suggest that’s no different than now, let’s consider this Californian state would be free to make its own foreign policy.  They would be natural allies of China.

Even if we imagine only limited city states ended up seceding instead of the entire state, they’d all have Chinese military bases on them in no time to guarantee their security.  And in a little time more, they’d magically end up with nukes so they could be North Koreas in America extorting the rest of the country for electricity and water.  The USA would never again have a whole continent to itself unchallenged by any other major power.  Any sort of Californian independence would go down as one of the greatest geo-political blunders in history.

The idea of secession from the USA is little better.  Cynics like to say we are oppressed and abused by the government now.  Imagine what level of abuse becomes possible if the dissidents are all in a new country the US doesn’t even have to pretend to rule.  They could impose sanctions, foment regime changes, send drone strikes while chuckling to themselves at how their opponents were kind enough to be easy targets in a perfect kill-zone.  Volunteering to be a smaller, weaker, nation right by a greater and more powerful one is dumb and disastrous.  

The secessionists would be deluded if they thought they’d be part of the legitimate world order just like Canada.  They’d be shocked how quick there would be UN resolutions declaring their new country a “rogue state.”  Aid from the “international community” would not be forthcoming.  Perhaps other “rogue states” around the world would send money and weapons but the result would just be a prolonged, bloody, pointless guerilla conflict for an increasingly isolated and impoverished territory.

Some might propose the peaceful separation of the United States into its consituent parts.  They’d be foolish though to think this arrangement would stay peaceful.  We can look at the dissolution of the Soviet Union as a good example.  Some parts of the old empire are bound to be more powerful than others if they are not divided up with the balance of power in mind.  Then the greatest remaining state constantly conspires against the weaker states surrounding it. 

We must also consider how alliances would fall into place.  Perhaps a New Confederacy and Midwest Republic would get along but would find themselves trapped in the pincer of hostile coastal states where more wealth is concentrated.  Canada would align with the remnants of the establishment powers while Mexico and the Narco-States would be opportunistic.

Of course, powers from other continents would have their proxy machinations in the divided states of America.  They would more likely support the Coastal Nations since so many of their investments are located in the major cities and because many are already members of the globalist empire.  Futhermore, just as in the US Civil War, the establishment alliance would likely end up with most of the naval power and be able to deny the Red America alliance access to its own international allies. 

The Red federation might even be allowed to exist so long as it dutifully sent its raw commodities to the coasts but it would never be allowed to grow too high or have the wrong sorts of leaders without being deftly pruned back.  In the end, flyover country would still be flyover country and the coastal cosmopolites wouldn’t even have to waste any time governing it anymore.  It would be like a very large Panama.

Thus even the dissolution of America would be another failed attempt to keep postponing problems that must be confronted and solved.  One empire and way of life must achieve total victory.  If the power of the Imperial Capital were completely broken, its international empire would unravel soon after.  If only weakened, the combined weight of the world’s liberal democratic, blank slatist regimes would reinforce it and slowly strangle all opposition once and for all.

One of the most common things right wing people say is “We just want to be left alone.”  There’s no such thing as being left alone.  A polity either has enough power to defend itself or it is subjugated by a stronger power.  Only on a North American continent where opposition was relatively weak after the early 19th century could such a notion be seriously thought of. Just imagine how expecting to be left alone would sound to Polish or Ukrainians?
The trucon cuckservative fantasy of noble retreat into wilderness fallout shelters must be tossed in the trash once and for all.  It is a pathetic, self-pitying, cowardly, failed idea.  Any successful group must completely focus on objectives that lead to decisive victory.

For the dissidents this lies in adopting the 4th generation mentality in every way.  The 19th century nation-state is a strategic liability in the 21st.  Worse, it is an obsolete political unit outside of a few major centers of power.  The US does not invade Canada, for example, because it has no need to.  Canada is already an integrated department of the economic empire.  It is better to forget about the hollow formality of lines on a map and instead operate within established cultural, legal, and political structures—and as in jiu jitsu—use the opponent’s own limbs and leverage against him while offering no easy way to hit back. 

The default ultimate goal should be to retain the entire territory of the US. Entertaining the idea of secession or dissolution is the reverse of how we should be thinking.

It should be incumbent on hostile and invasive groups to leave if they are displeased, not us.  Those allowed to stay would understand they live here at the good will of their generous hosts with no ability to participate in politics, finance, or any part of the state.  They would from then on be 2nd in line after core tribal members.

Worshiping White Women Is A Losing Strategy For the Dissident Right

One of the most frequent topics I see in the manosphere and alt-right is paeans to the superior desirability White women.  Alongside the writing are those same pictures of Baltic women in ethnic costumes no one wears for real anymore.  Then in the same breath I see rants about how these same women have terrible princess attitudes and are totally unsuitable for long term relationships or motherhood.  Then the next article on x site is always outrage that Blacks or Muslims are abusing White women.  What are they trying to accomplish by this?  Do they think their precious White women are going to come rushing back into their patriarchal arms in response to this rhetoric?  Do they think this will inspire other men?

These guys are prostrating themselves for the privilege of defending women who are not theirs.  They are trying to raise the status of women who are already looking down their noses from a mile-high pedestal.  This kind of foolishness played a significant role in making White Nationalism 1.0 a laughingstock.  There are millions of White men out there who have been frivorced, pounded down by the HR ladies at work, or just want a nice girlfriend.  Trying to talk to them about protecting the poor beautiful White wimminz is astonishingly tone deaf.  What the dissidents should be talking about is how they will help raise the artificially low status of ordinary White men.

On a primal level, any movement is successful because enough people are convinced they will get higher status.
The alt-right has been successful so far because it is the first group in decades to dare promote a positive self-image for Euro-Americans.  A people who have lived all their lives in a prison of collective guilt are amazed when sunlight they forgot even existed starts pouring in through a crack in the cold, damp rock walls.  It is a mistake though, to think heaping yet more praise on the women is part of the process of revival.

Women by their very natures are not truly members of any people.  They are heavily selected by nature to smoothly transition from one tribe to another whether by marriage or warfare.  White knighting is such a destructive force for nations because women have no nation.  They do not care where the high status men come from and they happily absorb the language and customs of wherever they happen to end up.   That blond-haired, blue eyed goddess who can do no wrong orgasms just as hard with the swarthy Mongol who burnt her village and slew all her Darwininan loser brothers.

The cuckish impulse to perpetually build up and defend feral White women

-Raises their value even higher, ensuring their fertility plummets even lower.
-Pushes away millions of White men who would otherwise be receptive.  Any idea that proposes sexual limitations on men who already have collective blue-balls and no hope of marriage or family is stone cold dead on arrival.
-Fosters a “one drop rule” that helps push even 3/4 white people into the coalition of the fringes, where they become a natural leadership class—making minority organizations far more dangerous than they otherwise would be.

Worship and protectiveness towards White women not only fails to win them back, this beta orbiter behavior only earns their contempt.  If the dissidents offer status to the men and engage in the conquest of hostile tribes, the woman problem solves itself.  In turn, men who sense they will get more sex and power are willing to pursue victory to the ends of the earth.

In this process, the bizarre Anglo-Saxon imposition of feminine race chastity onto men has to be discarded.  As long as humans have existed, the conquerers mate with the defeated people’s women.  Successful tribes want to control their pool of women but also let their Y chromosomes drift far and wide like dandelion seeds, if for no other reason as a pressure valve for internal tensions.  Then the mixed people who result all but beg to be janissaries and spies for the ruling tribe rather than defacto retainers of sacred minorities.  Then, over time, every generation is less “ethnic” than the last as the highest status group biologically wins each round.

In any case, we will know the alt-right has won when White male cuck porn is a popular genre and everyone tries to identify as Euro-American if they are 1/4 Euro and the Euros have stopped boasting about being 1/32nd Indian.

Podcast with Rob Stark: Status Mechanics and Alt-Right Aesthetics

http://www.starktruthradio.com/?p=5701

Rob Stark deserves substantial credit in recent series of posts I have written on the sexual market and status as key forces in societies.  He likes to make suggestions and we’ll bounce some ideas off each other.  The result has often been ideas I deem worth developing in a post and which Rob sees sufficiently of interest for the next podcast.  I was actually reluctant at first to write on the sexual market again since that is a subject that has been well-covered in the dissident sphere many times over by people far better qualified to comment than I am.  But I came to realize discussing the matter with Rob that almost all treatments of the subject takes place on the individual level, rather than the macro-societal level.  Or, rather if the larger scale is mentioned, it’s to suggest how the individual could do better(i.e. expating to Eastern Europe.)  So then I agreed with him it was an area worth working on.
With the status and high school article, Rob shared useful sources on the subject such as Vincent Law’s article criticizing Chad Nationalism(linked to in high school article).  High school hadn’t been the first example of status systems on my mind so I credit both Rob Stark and Ulric Kerensky in helping to inspire that focus.  The subject kept coming up with them and around the web until I realized something about it was at the very heart of American culture.
Writing is a solitary endeavor requiring hours alone and self-motivation but I have found in recent months that discussion and collaboration are enjoyable parts of the creative process.

Sexual Markets:
The Macro-Sexenomics of Female Beauty
Macro-Sexenomics: Female Beauty Dysgenics in Modern Society

Status:
The Mechanics of Status
High School and Status in America

Aesthetics:
The Social Cosmology
The Alt-Sphere Should Embrace Culture and Aesthetics

All Focus on 2018 Midterms

There will be periodic excitement and panic but that should not distract from the next strategic bottleneck: the 2018 midterms.  Pretty much everything going on in politics should be seen in the context of the upcoming elections.  Last year, I predicted the next major step after Trump’s victory would be to somehow bring populist candidates into congress against establishment resistance.  To my relief, we are already seeing the first challengers step up and so far the support they need seems to be there.

It is tempting to fixate on the president, but he has been mostly neutralized until he has more support from within the system.  I will assume for now he’s not going to commit obvious political suicide by signing an illegal immigrant amnesty and what we’re seeing is more showmanship to get people angry and energized.  This posturing is hurting him, but with no good moves available, he may be gambling it will hurt congress more and keep things in turmoil for everyone.

Since Trump has little actual power in the government, the most meaningful litmus test is whether he acts to increase his power.  We will know he is still serious if he fully backs GOP challengers leading up to midterms.  Failing that, we can conclude with a high degree of confidence that he has resigned himself to spending his retirement as a ceremonial figurehead.

So far, it is promising that he has steadily distanced himself from Ryan, McConnell, and the GOPe since they humiliated him on the senate floor by getting his hopes up and then immediately sinking the healthcare debate.  I have also noticed Trump has spent far less time in a White House controlled by the permanent bureaucracy and the pentagon.  It is encouraging that the frequency of leaks has dwindled ever since he started shifting his base of operations.  Now, in the coming months, he needs to endorse candidates like Kid Rock.

As the mood gets doomier and gloomier I hear more people say “we can’t vote our way out of this.”  They are right that the underlying problems are systemic but if we are persistent we will find the political process is still useful enough.  In any case, there is no reason to allow the establishment free control over any battlefield.

People tend to forget what everybody accepted as common sense just a few months ago.  This human cognitive weakness makes it easy for us to forget the strategic value of gaining every political advantage only to have nothing happen.  In less than a year, the public attitude toward government has shifted from cautious, fading reverence to outright cynicism and disgust.  Even “normies” are starting to discuss whether this democracy is still viable.  The importance of this shift should not be underestimated.  From the perspective of a dissident, discrediting the edifice of hostile rulers is nearly as good as taking over the system.

So if we are patient and can ignore distractions and drama, we keep pressing until either the populists finally gain political traction or the entire system is shown to be a sham.  Either of those outcomes is a big loss for the ruling establishment.

Update 9/17/17: I hardly wrote about Trump needing to help friendly populist candidates only to discover he’s actually attacking them by campaigning for Luther Strange in Alabama!  If this nonsense persists, it will sink him as surely as an amnesty deal.
I will assume Trump has resigned himself to being a puppet until I see reason to believe otherwise.

Alt-Lite and the Weakening of the Merchant Caste

Since Charlottesville, most of the alt-lite has fallen into line and is back to to selling merchandise and maxing out their follower counts.  Nevertheless, a significant segment still seem to be flailing about in fury and confusion.  As I noted in my article about dissident factions, those making money from the spread of ideas tend to be unhappy when the fault lines shift.  The alt-lite’s business lies in being just edgy enough so whenever the edge moves they have to pick up and move their market stalls.  It’s especially annoying when they’ve written a book or a blog only to find it’s suddenly irrelevant.

I knew they would be indignant and that a great deal of this indignation comes from their self-image as the leaders.  But there has been more of a reaction than I was expecting, because like the establishment, they misunderstand their position in a changing ecosystem.  Furious that the core alt-right has asserted control over the rules of engagement there has actually been a foolhardy attempt at a takeover.  Needless to say, this attempt and its aftermath has been one of the most hilarious things I’ve seen on the internet in some time.

A faction best known for selling e-books, t-shirts, and supplement pills actually thought they had the social and political capital to co-opt a movement from those who have real organizations, go out in the streets, and take physical risks.  How is this?  This depth of childish miscalculation just doesn’t make sense until we examine on a cultural level.

Such delusional thinking is more understandable when we realize the mercantile caste of society has been ascendant since at least the French Revolution.  The obsession with equality that we take for granted is connected to the bourgeois attitude that the customer is always right and two men with the same amount of money in their outstretched palms are effectively the same, to be treated the same.  This attitude informs the obsession of the modern world with being popular and inoffensive above all else.  This attitude is so ingrained we run even our personal relationships like businesses.

Concepts like honor and loyalty seem like anachronistic ideas from old stories of knights and samurais, or even the creed of alien species like Klingons.  It has been so long since any other world view held sway, we have have forgotten any other way is possible.

We see a great example when alt-lite personalities discuss the alt-right as a “brand.”  They cannot yet understand anything other than the mass market.  Why would they?  The business of America is business.  The attitudes of the marketplace have dominated the culture of the USA and the entire West for centuries.
When we realize they are going by the rules that have worked for generations which we are all taught our whole lives, it is easier to understand why they are unable to adjust to a changing reality.

The enlightenment itself was a new value system for a rising merchant caste.  It is no coincidence that secularism’s original and eternal enemies are the aristocracy and the priesthood who stood in the way of advancement.  With widespread literacy and the dawn of an industrial revolution the old order of landed nobles backed by priests was obsolete.  Wherever the forces of modernity came into play, the merchants became the new ruling class.  Even Japan which was far away, culturally distant, and not exposed to modernity until much later went through the same developments as everywhere else.
A nobility and bureaucracy dominated by a hereditary warrior caste steadily fell from grace as wealth and influence went to the new captains of industry and commerce.

History has its longer cycles that are greater than the parochial span of a human life.  We reach a point where all the easy gains from colonies and industry have been taken.  In a mature, saturated world, the winnings go to the strongest.  In this kind of a world, warriors and barbarians bound by clans and honor re-emerge with a vengeance.

In our present transactional utopia we think money is the source of power.  The truth is money is a manifestation of power as light and heat comes from the sun.  The light is soon extinguished without its source.  The established merchant princes thought money alone could defeat an unusual challenger in the 2016 election and to their complete astonishment they failed miserably.  Likewise, a faction of the alt-lite thought wealth and popularity alone would be enough to take over an organically-formed group with ardent devotion to a clear mission.  These foolish modern magnates are not unusual in the course of history.
If you read Spandrell’s brilliant series of essays on the Song dynasty, you will learn how a mere 1,000 horse archers was enough to conquer the wealthiest nation on earth—a huge empire of millions.  We can also consider the Italian city states, which relied heavily on mercenary armies.  They were able to fight each other to a draw but when faced with real armies from real countries they never stood a chance.

The fundamental limitation of money is that all the money in the world is worthless to a dead man.  The currency of successful organizational violence is men who are willing to risk their lives.  This is a law of the universe so primal and obvious that the wealthy and the educated are bound to forget it.  As cultures of honor and prestige again take root, the cosmopolitan bourgeois will have to accept that they are no longer the natural ruling class of society just as the lords and the samurai once had to make way for them.  Like their predecessors, they can either accept their proper place in the hierarchy from where they can contribute, or they can go down fighting against the universe itself and maybe leave behind some tragic legends if they’re lucky.

The Alt-Sphere Should Embrace Culture and Aesthetics

“STEM! Trades! Moar STEM!” sums up most of what I see in dissident sphere discussions about what endeavors are worthwhile. This bias reflects the practical sensibilities of the upper working class core with its skilled tradesmen and small business owners.
The engineers and computer programmers of the dark enlightenment suffer from the same conceit, heartily recommending more of what they already do as the highest virtue.
Then in the same breath I see ranting and raging about how Jews make all the movies.  They recognize a weakness in themselves but they willfully get their priorities wrong. So long as they do that, nothing changes.

To be fair, I see commendable support for revival of the classics of the Greco-Roman world but this is part of a larger conservative trend to focus on the old without making anything new.
I also wholeheartedly agree with the reaction to degenerate modern art but a return to monolithic marble columns, sterile white statues, stuffy baroque decor, the 10^19th painting of St. Sebastian looking rather bored as he gets shot full of arrows, or heroic St. George spearing a pitiful, dog-sized dragon just brings us back to the origins of modern problems.

One of the obvious growth areas for alt-dissidents is culture and aesthetics, which are too often dismissed contemptuously as the province of soy-addled literature majors.  In reality, conceding this battlefield to the enemy is a grave strategic error that stems from wounded pride and class resentment.  

 No one is inspired by the artistic output of no-frills proles with greasy hands.  Even positive portrayals of the white working class such as biscuit and gravy Terran marines flying Confederate flags are created by SWPLs and Jews in the gaming industry.  Look at any actual worker’s revolution and we see the art is always grandiosely uninspired.  At their best, the common people can sustain a steady folk-culture.

Good aesthetics come from creative, high IQ people with high openness to novelty.  We can take a quick look at something as mundane as beer.  Proles drink watery lager and tend to stick to the same brand.  Meanwhile craft beer comes in dozens of different varieties and there’s always new ones to try.  IPAs in particular have distinct aromas from different blends of hops.  
As infuriating as the SWPL culture can be, it blows the combined might of the red states out of the water.  That’s part of the deceptively great power of culture—a small number of creative people easily overpowers and reprograms masses who are lesser in beauty and ideas.

In the current order, many creative people end up as hardcore social justice warriors.  The rulers only need to inundate those of heightened sensitivity with injustice porn and beautiful rainforests getting cut down from an early age to command their allegiance for life.  The creative people won’t listen to the arguments of the other side because the other side is ugly.  Until the emergence of internet countercultures, this kneejerk assumption was rarely challenged.

The rigid right-wing personality type, on the other hand, tends to unimaginatively double down on the enlightenment error of ignoring culture. Rightist rulers such as Franco, Salazar, or Pinochet successfully crushed open opposition as they blissfully let their opponents take over the universities.  Sepsis eventually spread to the officer corps and once that happens a right-wing ruler’s days are numbered.  

Even in the best case with Franco dying of old age after being in power for decades, the cultural and aesthetic reality of Spain had already aligned with the rest of the “international community.”  Now it’s just another Euro country with massive youth unemployment, waves of migrants, and abysmal fertility rates.

Fortunately, the mainstream culture now grows weaker and more insipid by the day as censorship and conformity stifles even the best creative types.  It’s become a meme to point out how even educated adults draw heavily on Harry Potter, a series of books written for kids, to make cultural references and analogies.
Hollywood movies have sunk into embarassing mediocrity with a lineup dominated by remakes of remakes and x superhero of the week.  Musically, there hasn’t been much memorable or distinct since the 1980s.
Strangely, television shows, which were largely mid-tier schlock as recently as the 90s are the last medium with any sort of vitality, and much of that is borrowed from dissident ideologies which as of yet can only be hinted at.  

There’s nothing to stop a burst of real creativity from challenging and displacing the established aesthetic.
Dissident dominance over the generation of memes and the realm of uncensored ideas already demonstrates just how sickly the mass culture really is.
A next step might be as simple as an alt-sphere literary magazine like many ordinary high schools have—or even a neighborhood band with an alt-right theme.  The important thing is ridicule and destruction only goes so far.  It should be clearly understood the birth of a new dominant aesthetic and culture is the larger strategic goal.

See Also:  The Aesthetics of Dominance

The Social Cosmology

Even as a kid, I noticed that the hierarchy of heaven suspiciously resembled the social organization of humans here on earth.  As an adult it is clear that the heavenly order is a metaphor for idealized human society.  Atheists might say religion is stupid and false.  Religion is true, though, in the language of symbols.  Symbols are very powerful because they are rooted in the collective consciousness—everyone intuitively understands them, even if they don’t know it.  Literal-minded modernists think themselves logical and above-it-all but in their pride they have deafened themselves to the deeper dialogue.  From politics to policies their initiatives backfire because they engineer structures without understanding the less tangible natural forces.

If heaven is the ideal social order of the rulers, hell is the concept of the ultimate counterculture.  In between lies earth where ordinary people are subjected to the ebb and rise of the great forces fighting for their souls.  In the social cosmology, the highest status people live in heaven and their most dangerous enemies are from hell.  As the ruler represents the state itself, there can be gods of other abstractions such as love, wisdom, or war.

About a decade ago I started intuitively thinking of cultural conflicts by this model of Zoroastrian/Christian dualism.  I realized that in a society of hundreds of millions of strangers, those known to all are best thought of as gods who are not people but divine representations of concepts and ideals.

Humans can only process around 150 personal relationships, the Dunbar number.  The demands of mass society are so astronomically beyond those limits, we need to repurpose our mental constructs to process our environment.

The memetic spaces that used to be occupied by polytheistic deities and animistic spirits are now used to comprehend entities whose every word is heard by millions.  This was how I came to understand people’s reverent attitudes to celebrities, athletes, or royal families who will never personally know or care about them.

Even where the stars are selfish and dysfunctional, it is little different than reading about Zeus’ serial infidelity and Hera’s spiteful revenge or Apollo getting his sister’s best friend killed out of jealousy and then punished for it with exile to the mortal world.

The reality show dynamic has an unmistakably mythological feel to it.  People are hard-wired to be receptive to archetypal human narratives about the interaction of abstract concepts because it has been a reliable means of transmitting complex ideas to simple, illiterate people since prehistory.

Cain and Abel have sibling rivalry fueled by jealousy that any of us can understand.  Through this conflict that culminates in the first murder, we understand the depth of the ancient rivalry between farmers and herders.  Trying to explain things logically is by comparison a very feeble way to communicate, especially back before everyone had modern levels of information exposure.

In modern times people still understand the world through these primal archetypes.  If you try to talk to the average person about the strengths and weaknesses of Trump’s policies, the conversation does not typically go far.  Trump is one of the great lords of hell since he has opposed the established order and acts contrary to the supposedly genteel manners of the ruling class.  If I try to explain Trump’s reasoning to someone aligned with the status quo, I may as well be trying to persuade a Christian that Lucifer had good reasons to rebel against God.

I have found this heuristic to be a very useful way of analyzing and predicting how a group will perceive the world.  Sure enough, those who see Trump as the devil have raised great idols to him that would not seem amiss in a traditional Balinese procession of demons.

Likewise, I thought of Hillary Clinton as a high goddess of the establishment and it proved to be an excellent way to model the social reality.  When she fell, it was clear from the reactions of overwhelming despair, even from people who reluctantly voted for her, that greater forces were at work.  They had witnessed nothing less than the fall of a goddess from the top of their pantheon and the ascent of a victorious devil.  Viewed in this context, the magnitude of their hysteria and the violent methods they are now willing to employ make a lot more sense.

From watching the cultural unraveling of 2016, the hierarchy more clearly revealed itself.  As far as I could figure it looked something like this:

Olympians:  Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, MLK, Harry Potter, Gandhi, John Lennon, Lincoln, Mandela, Dalai Lama, Mickey Mouse, Coca Cola, Apple
2nd Tier Gods: A list celebrities, Nancy Pelosi, Che Guevara, Noam Chomsky, Frida Kahlo, Zuckerberg, Daenarys from GoT
Angels/Mythic Heroes/Paladins of the Light: Actors, Musicians, Athletes, Harriet Tubman, Rosa Parks, George Washington Carver, Susan B. Anthony, Betty Friedhan, Neil Degrasse Tyson, Bill Nye, Steven Hawking, Jackson Pollock
Saints/Martyrs:  Malala, Emmet Till, Matthew Shephard, Anne Frank, Tibetans, Trayvon, Galileo

How they perceive hell:

Greater Evils: Trump, Hitler, Voldemort, Holocaust, KKK, Nazis, Putin, Russia
Lesser Evils: Bannon, Timothy McVeigh, Saddam Hussein, Columbine shooters, Goebbels, Himmler, Goering
Greater Demons/Dark Angels: Alt-Bloggers, podcasters, youtubers, twitter accounts who get millions of visits.  Alex Jones, John Wilkes Booth, David Duke, Dylan Roof
Demonic Centurions: Less popular internet personalities with a steady following, “neo-nazis”

I hesitate to try my hand at defining a dissident cosmology yet because it is still settling into place and none of the factions would agree.  Figures like Trump, Bannon, or Spencer play prominent roles in that hierarchy, but at the moment it’s hard to know if that will be true even next year.  Nevertheless I can guess at some of the divine archetypes.

The Holy: 40k’s God Emperor of Mankind, Kek/Pepe, Gnon, Dune universe, Men of Gondor and Rohan, Starship Troopers(Heinlein book), Space Marines, The Joker, Bane, Harrison Bergeron, Marcus Aurelius, Pinochet, the red pill

The Underworld:  Sauron, Uruk-Hai/Orcs, the Zerg swarm, Nurse Ratched, Grendel’s Mother, the Borg collective, Big Brother, Diana Moon Glampers, Trotsky, Lenin, Alinsky, the blue pill, Le Happy Merchant

That’s all of that I will do for now.  I feel like I’ve gotten the idea across.  Feel free to expand on it, critique or make your own in the comments.

See Also: Election 2016: The War In Heaven

High School And Status in America

Conventional wisdom tells us that we leave behind high school for adult life, a moral impressed on us with the bittersweet ending of every teen movie.  If we observe the real-life American culture it’s obvious that high school informs our attitudes about status for the rest of our lives.

After Charlottesville, one mainstream news article I read surmised “angry white boys…had no prom queen waiting at home.”  On the dissident side we see the meme of the Chad nationalist contrasted with the hapless virgin or the general idea of the teacher’s pet “shitlib” getting shoved into lockers by cool bullies and still being bitter about it as a hot-chocolate-sipping, pajama-wearing adult.  No matter what people believe, we always see references to the jailhouse hierarchy of high school.

There is a reason high school ridicule is as reliable a default as “small penis,” “can’t get a gf,” “lives in mother’s basement” is for angry women.  These insults endure because they are intended to hit people where it hurts most.  There are millions of men to whom the feminist stock insults at least partially apply in the most humiliating way.  High school is the same.  It speaks for itself that the most tender possible spot for many people is to even suggest that they were bottom-tier punks in kid prison.

Coming of age in high school teaches us at a critical formative time that the most athletic and outgoing people are the natural aristocracy of humanity, literally crowned as monarchs in school assemblies held in their honor.  The whole point is the elites are not particularly useful, specializing in showmanship and sales.  The golden people perform on the field while the subordinate bug people line up to adore them in a synchronized marching band.
Status competition in a royal court is all about currying favor while those merely useful are but tools in the games of those who matter.

This sets up the narrative that defines the rest of our lives.  We must accept our places as cogs in a machine to uplift widely smiling “personalities” secure in their status while we must push hard against the gears around us to stay where we’re at.

The football players get to enjoy sultry virgins as callow teens while those who go sexless spend the rest of their lives striving for the left-overs as cubicle-farm underlings.  While the golden ones start out with society’s highest rewards, the rest must prove themselves worthy of diminished value through a years-long slog.

Resentment of the jocks plays no small role in kneejerk upper middle class resentment of Donald Trump.  He reminds them of crass school bullies who scored with their first crushes—a source of panic and pain their cultural enemies love rubbing their faces in to pay them back richly for their airs of studied contempt.

We should understand though, SWPL posturing is so persistent and insufferable because of status anxiety.  As the urban upper middle class, they far outrank the working classes yet they still stew in rankling jealousy.  Rather than take up the mantle of noblesse oblige as a secure lesser aristocracy might, they never miss a chance to dump their chamber pots on their low-ranked brethren.

High school inflicts Americans with a bizarre status schizophrenia.  On one hand, the culture feeds us a silly myth that the quarterback ends up bagging groceries while the unpopular kids become Silicon Valley billionaires.  Of course, this is an attempt to assuage the losers, much like religions telling the poor they’ll finally win after they’re dead.  In real life even highly paid STEM professionals can end up getting ordered around by Biff Tannen who got into the right fraternity and got connected with type A alums.  While SWPL America is relatively high status, they are smug and callous about it because they sense somewhere deep in their marrow that all is not as it appears.

Another status conflict can be seen in hostile alt-lite reactions to alt-right activism.  The most popular elements of the counter-culture see popularity itself as proof of their worthiness just as they would have back in high school.  We will never fail to see grand boasts of how many copies of x book have been sold or how many views they get or what publications they’ve been mentioned in.  The culture of high school is akin to culture of marketing and this is no mistake.

High school reflects the values of the merchant and managerial classes who have ruled since they beheaded, deposed, and out-earned the hereditary aristocracy.
This makes it hard for most to even grasp the concept of groups founded on principle and loyalty.  After all, standing on principle against popular sentiment in prison only gets met with a beatdown in the shower room.  It’s not much different at school or on the job.

This mindset is now being challenged by an incipient warrior class supported by an aspiring priesthood.  Dissident merchants are doing their part but they don’t yet understand they can no longer lead the hierarchy.  This is causing them cognitive dissonance every step of the way as the nature of the movement grows more clear.  Marketers who can attract millions of views have great strategic strength but their weakness is that of all those millions, hardly any would risk their lives or reputations.  At some point, meaningful action requires serious personal risk and sacrifice.

It is past time to abandon the dysfunctional zero sum non-culture high school initiates us into for a real society capable of giving the best rewards to the best and able to recognize virtues besides marketplace self-interest.  If Euro-descended peoples ultimately fail to face this challenge, they will have justly earned a cozy spot on the trash heap of history.

See Also:
Vincent Law: Chad Nationalism Is A Bad Idea
Robert Stark Interviews Vincent Law
Ulric Kerensky: The Judgment of High School
Abolishing Compulsory Schooling
Referred to National Review Story, Angry White Boys, don’t want to link to them.

 

The Mechanics of Status

Social status is a force enlightenment thinking fails to incorporate into its model of reality, like anything else that is not readily empirically validated.

Yet nothing humans do can be understood without understanding status.  Humans are very much like other social creatures.  Monkeys and dogs have status hierarchies similar to what people have, but we can never look at this objectively because the enlightenment religion insists humans are blank-slate rational agents separate from the rest of nature.

Status does 2 main things for people:

-Enables reproduction with desirable mates.

-Increases odds of survival.  When a famine hits, social status decides who dies first once there’s no longer enough food for everyone.

Penguins have a behavior in Antarctic winter storms where they cluster tightly and inividuals rotate from the center of the group to the edges and then back again when they get cold.

Humans are like penguins except we typically stay near wherever in the group we’re at.  The elite stay insulated in the center at all times while the losers live their whole lives on the fringe taking the full brunt of the Antarctic blizzard.  They are always one small emergency away from death and when some of them fall by the wayside, no one cares.

When we understand this core fact about the human condition.  All the fashions, class anxiety, shameless imitation, and sucking up is suddenly decoded.  We’re all descended from people who could beg the last crumbs off the bread merchant while the other poor loser with less appeal went hungry and died.

This is like the pressures exerted on domesticated dogs.  Every last one has the ability to look sad and shamelessly beg for scraps seared into its genetic code with a white-hot blowtorch.

We need only see how people move in herds when it comes to clothing, opinions, jobs, politics to understand how the group life has selected for human behavior.  Otherwise, no one would be willing to work 40+ hours a week wasting their lives on things they hate so they can have the house, car, and new clothing required for basic respectablity.

One of the most extraordinary things about human nature is a typical person who would be happy to just eat doritos and watch TV can easily be made to labor 12 hours a day if they think they can get social status that will keep them safe, make people like them, and get them laid.  Humans, like all living things, are lazy by nature but when they feel they must they toil like worker bees.

An instinctive need for status powerful enough to turn a couch potato into a workaholic is an obvious, low-effort lever of mass control that only secular societies are stupid enough to ignore.  As a result, parasites are free to hack the status system with no fear of punishment, ultimately bringing the whole structure down in flames once degenerate psychopaths crowd the top of the pyramid.

A functional society guards the avenues to status as jealously as the state guards its monopoly over violence.  High status people are models everyone else follows, especially in a modern society where the most famous people are known to everyone and god-like in their social influence.

Manipulating the status system is more effective and far less energetically expensive than direct coercion.  Most people do not have the level of abstraction to understand this form of control let alone begin to resist it.  Thus as the state is downstream of society, status shaming is upstream of state violence.

The successful ruler relies on shaming and social demotion 90% of the time with state coercion and books of laws only resolving outliers.  The silly secular society tries to reverse this ratio, with predictable results.  The establishment now tries to shame people back into obedience but that doesn’t work as well as it used to when most people are rootless individuals just living for a paycheck.

Recently, an angel was cast down from the upper middle class layer of Heaven called Silicon Valley.  Instead of transforming into a vile demon doomed to live in hell, James Damore found instead that he was rewarded with far more status and fame than Heaven ever offered him.

Many have pointed out that Damore will probably take a huge hit to his usual 300k-a-year salary, but money is valuable in relation to social status.
An upper middle class programmer makes more money than an upper prole policeman but is lower status in much of society, especially in the eyes of women.
Programmers are stereotyped as wimpy, socially awkward dweebs.  However they may be paid, they are hirelings with no power to speak of.  Although cops are disliked by many, they enjoy a certain prestige because of their power to administer controlled violence.

Status is linked to power and money alone is just one form of power that generally has to be used with other forms of influence.  As the election of Trump demonstrates, money is not enough when the status game has been lost.  Someone like Damore who has lost money but gained status, will probably be able to translate his influence into riches anyway.  Money is a proxy for resources, high-status people get first dibs on resources and mates in every society from hunter-gatherer bands to massive nation-states.

Observations Leading Up To Bannon Resignation

I will break with my usual habit of waiting for things to settle down a bit and indulge in some speculation.  At this point, things may not settle down for quite awhile.

Over the last few weeks I have observed that Trump has been spending progressively more time away from DC operating out of Bedminster and Trump Tower instead.

My suspicion is this behavior is entirely intentional, especially since it seems to have increased the moment General Kelly was moved to the White House.  I also noticed the media is attacking Trump over the length of his absences.  Trump has pointed to convenient renovations going on in the White House as justification, assuring the public that affairs of state are proceeding as usual.

Now, this behavior pattern has continued for weeks and could become the new normal.  Once one 17 day “work vacation” ends we shouldn’t be too surprised as another excuse is contrived with Trump only commuting to DC for several hours at a time as needed.  Meanwhile, it seems as though the leaks have abruptly stopped.

With this development, it is far less surprising to me that Bannon is leaving a White House that is no longer Trump’s center of operations.  Both men have found the DC swamp to be intractable and are now trying to gain leverage from outside it.

As far as I can tell, Trump tried his utmost to work with the Republican party establishment, backing their legislative initiatives to the hilt so they could accumulate some political capital for midterms.  Over time the tone of Trump’s tweets shifted from praising Paul Ryan’s leadership to criticizing Congress for not keeping promises they had made for years.

The final break happened when McCain cast the vote to get Obamacare repeal to the debate stage in the senate.  McCain then cast the vote to kill the debate as if to say “Just kidding!”  This public humiliation on the senate floor was finally too much.  The GOPe had openly admitted they would drag their feet indefinitely in order to wreck the president.  With midterms just over a year away, there was no more time to waste.

Trump brought in an outside consultant to sack his ambassador to the GOP starting a crazy chain of events that continues to cascade.
Furious that Trump was going off script even with McMaster there to “guide” him the beltway generals made sure Kelly got moved to chief of staff for good measure so the “pentagon boarding party” could keep the White House under lock and key.

Trump reacted by starting to contrive excuses to be away most of the time where he is likely establishing his own control structures with people he trusts. 

This time, when the president broke free of the generals to make an independent statement on Charlottesville, they had no immediate way of shutting him down.  Kelly was there, but as his despondent reaction revealed, he was powerless to intervene when unmoored from his place of power. 

With the GOPe’s strong condemnation of Trump’s statements and apparent support for tearing down historical monuments, all pretense of civility has been dropped.  They have hugely overextended with their unpopular positions and have created an opening for Trump to start displacing them in the upcoming midterms.

I am seriously wondering if I now see what may effectively be the emergence of two rival executive branches.  One run by the Pentagon, political establishment, and corporations in DC and another run from New York.  Perhaps we will get to see which is Rome and which is Avignon.

On Alt-Sphere Reactions to Charlottesville

I previously wrote about the elements of the alt-sphere and their natural roles.  In the aftermath of Charlottesville the reactions I’ve seen are somewhat unsurprising.  Fish in a coral reef do not understand how they fill a niche in a larger ecosystem.

Most prominently the alt-lite and much of the manosphere went into complete freakout mode as soon as the news emerged.  The airwaves were full of screeching about how “bad optics” and “naivety” have forever tarnished a new conservative civic-nationalist movement.

It made me smile when I found largely supportive reactions on sites like Breitbart and the_donald where lots of red-state normies hang out.  Fox news was blaring on about “white supremacists” but from what I was hearing, the commentariat wasn’t buying it.  The alt-lite was far less supportive than plenty of people who would never associate with alt-anything.

The alt-lite meltdown makes sense when we remember they are the dissident marketing and PR department.  Their mentality is all about building a brand and getting as large an audience as possible.  Their way of thinking is consistent with commercially-oriented American culture so they do not easily understand the mindset or objectives of the other dissidents.

Because alt-lightists have by far the largest mainstream exposure they see themselves as the true alt-movement and any other factions as lesser hangers-on.  The impact of Charlottesville infuriates them because it challenges their notion of being CEOs and shoves the truth in their face that they are in fact the far less glorious marketing department.  In truth, it is the soldier class of the alt-right that have the power of executive action and this is too much for them to bear right now.

The marketers will always be upset when there is a major change.  They like a predictable steady environment to build their followings and sell supplement pills.  Whenever the gravy train hits a bumpy section of track, they will be very unhappy about it.  But there’s nothing they can do either because their role is inherently passive.  The way to deal with the alt-lite is not to get mad or try to disavow them.  Just let them blow off their steam for a few days as they adjust their brands to market changes.

A civic nationalist on twitter with hundreds of thousands of followers might scream about how nazis have killed the movement in all caps but it’s the nature of who they are to walk back their heated statements just hours later as they sense a sea change rolling in.  3 days and 300 tweets later, nobody even remembers their initial rage.  They are best left on their own to do their job.  The alt-right soldiers through their actions have shown they effectively control the terms of engagement for the alt-lite.

The NRx reaction to Charlottesville has been a bit more complex.  I’ve gotten an overall sense of disapproval from them.  I think the class divide is very important here.  The stereotypical neo-reactionary in my mind’s eye is a gen-x computer programmer, IT guy, or engineer with a hint of baldness and 1-2 kids at home.  They are patient and cautious types who are reluctant to take bold risks.  They also have a tendency to look down on and counter-signal anything that seems remotely working class which many of the alt-right soldiers certainly are.  NRxers are typically comfortable financially and socially so they tend not to understand the urgency and anger felt by the other dissidents—or at least they don’t share it on a gut level.

A common NRx criticism I’ve seen of Charlottesville is that it has distracted from Damore’s firing from google over his politically incorrect memo.  They are correct to identify this event as being hugely important.  The first cracks are showing at the top tiers of the upper middle classes.  The NRx critics betray their SWPL affinities when they insist Damore “did it the right way” by being mild-mannered and going through the right channels to get his message out.

Faux-polite office politics only applies to the middle classes and above.  I see the google memo as one prong of a double-sided attack in the last week, one for each half of the social spectrum.  Therefore, I think it is to misunderstand the social situation to insist that Charlottesville and Googlememo compete with each other when they are in fact synergistic forces.

Even NRxers sometimes mock each other over “passivism” the idea that a group can come to power by becoming worthy to rule.  I think it’s a very legitimate concept in the right context.  History is full of revolutions that just made things even worse.  It’s hard to build something worthwhile and easy to complain and wreck things.  The neoreactionaries are on the right track in thinking about how to build a new social order as the present society crumbles.  They have their own important role—there’s no need for them to compete with the front line soldiers.

As for red-pilled progressives, I am not sure if we can continue to call them alt-leftists.  That namespace seems to have been appropriated by President Trump to refer to antifa gangsters.  Whatever we may call alt-leftists, the forces unleashed by Charlottesville and googlememo ensure that more SWPL men will be disillusioned and forced to choose sides as they realize the politically correct society will have no mercy on them no matter how they signal even as they continue to struggle with college debt and see their wages driven down by endless waves of H-1B Indians and Chinese.

Charlottesville Will Help Alt-Dissidents

Right now the dust is still settling and people are still wrought up and that is a good thing. There are lots of objections and black pills.  I will address some:

They had bad optics!
Nothing they could have done would have assuaged their opponents in the least.  This has been proven ad nauseum.  Internally discourage the worst excesses like Nazi flags, Wehrmacht helmets, or anything KKK, but otherwise let it go.  Charlottesville should be enough to bury thoughts of appeasement for good.

But they did x thing wrong!
In making a move from the internet into meatspace lots of stuff is going to go wrong.  Real life is sloppy.  Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.  Remember how many panicked said it was the end of the world when Spencer said “Hail victory, hail Trump?”  That was a mistake, but everyone learned from it quickly and used the real-life feedback to adjust their strategy.
The important fact of Charlottesville is we saw an internet-based movement make a major transition into physical space.  That’s all that will matter.  Armchair generals gonna armchair.  They will always handwring over what could have been better while others go out and do things.

Trump Didn’t Help!
Mainstream political figures can’t overtly sympathize with those on extreme ends of the spectrum.  Do we ever see someone like Hillary Clinton praising the antifas?  Of course not!
Politicians deal with extremists in their coalition by pretending they don’t exist.  Trump refused to explicitly condemn the alt-rightists and that’s all that is needed, or can be reasonably expected from him.  Just imagine what the situation would be if Hillary Clinton were in power instead?  I don’t think the public emergence of the alt-right would have been politically possible.  Had it even been attempted, the leaders would have ended up in jail.  We’d have been busy fighting to prevent Chinese-style internet censorship and thereby losing even the ethereal platform we have.
A favorable leader gives the extremists a tacit nod that they will be unopposed as long as they don’t cross certain lines.   Then it’s up to the fringe political operators to achieve their objectives with the slack they’re given.

They Were Naive! What did they think would happen!
The whole point has been to play by the letter of the rules, one rule at a time so eventually an approach of moderation and appeasement becomes totally indefensible.  In this respect, Charlottesville is a brilliant success.  No one can ever again seriously argue that being more conciliatory is a reasonable approach.  This will ultimately force many fence-sitters squarely into the radical camp.

Now the Normies Hate Us! 
The vast majority of people go along to get along so long as their bread and butter isn’t immediately threatened.  They’d rather watch netflix, have a normal social life, and feed their families.  They can be thought of as neutrons.  Maybe they collectively have a weak gravitational pull but are otherwise inert.  The interaction of the charged particles is what matters.  As the course of the mainstream changes, those who go with the flow change with it.  So long as there is at least one significant demographic that is somewhat sympathetic towards the radicals, they’ll be fine.  Comments on Breitbart and the_donald suggest to me the necessary support is there.

This Proves the Institutions Are All Against Us!
This only disillusions people even more. Charlottesville even redpills people regarding the cops.  Until now it’s been a common sentiment on the right that law-enforcement will be on their side.  This expectation has now been proven horribly wrong.  At first, many may react with despair as each established institution lets its mask slip when pressured.  In the long run, it helps destroy the legitimacy of the system as its true nature is methodically exposed in all its facets.  The vast majority will just keep going to their day jobs no matter what happens but there is a proper audience that sees what’s happening and cares.  Even if they do nothing, it is essential to have a base of sympathizers. Even making ordinary, contented people feel the system is no longer infallible or the best possible way of life is enough.

The Deaths Will Drown Out The Message!
The people who got ran over make sure the story is on the front page of every publication and everyone’s heard of it.  Hillary Clinton’s alt-right speech made normal middle class people aware of an alt-right consisting of civic-nationalist infowars and breitbart.  Now the public has been introduced to the ethnic-identitarian alt-right as a movement.  Simply entering into the mainstream consciousness is a major milestone and implicitly expands the window of political views.  Breitbart is not longer the farthest, scariest edge before you reach the KKK.
That the accident took place as someone panicked while under attack means the alt-right can’t really be blamed for it.  A deliberate attack by an alt-rightist would have been a genuine disaster and of course that’s what they were hoping for, but they didn’t get it.
They can spin it so many people, who are implacably unfavorable anyway, think nazis are out to run people over, but they can’t actually do anything to perpetuate it more than a couple news cycles or get the leverage to force Trump to denounce the alt-rightists.

Overall:
Charlottesville was a significant strategic victory for the dissidents even if some might see it as a tactical defeat.
They conclusively proved for anyone who was receptive that the established order cannot be reasoned with.  At the same time, the core groups are energized by the official beginning of white civil rights.
For everyone else, they only need to be known.  Being a household name will be all that matters in getting them future international attention and recognition.

Update 8/16/2017: Every time before the antifas have engaged in a strategic action and then immediately melted away.  This kept it so most Americans hadn’t really heard of them.   The C’ville protest has triggered them into staying out in plain sight where they are massively overextending by lashing out with no long term strategy.  This has against my wildest expectations allowed the president to publicly denounce them.  This is  a huge victory for alt-dissidents!  The establishment has either lost control of their thugs or they have been baited into revealing their true nature in front of millions.  Humiliated in 2016, they are further exposed as both weak and incompetent.

Macro-Sexenomics: Female Beauty Dysgenics In Modern Society

When the most beautiful women tend to go to the universities and the cities to chase the most successful men, their fertility is necessarily delayed.  They are then lulled into complacency by an endless stream of adoration and awards even as their best days evaporate.

Meanwhile, a plain girl with no equivalent cascade of brain-hacking reward signals sooner cashes in her more clearly finite pile of chips and has a family.  For some reason those girls who got pregnant in high school always seemed to be the chubby, ugly ones.  With no line of admirers awaiting them, there was no reason to delay past the first male willing to rut with them.  Their homeliness turned out to be the greatest fitness advantage in this upside-down modernity in perfect inverse to our primal desires.

Cities have always been gene-shredders, only made possible by the abundant fecundity of the countryside. When the prettiest women are carted en masse into these kill zones the society sacrifices them so they can grace the harems of the mandarin classes in sterile splendor for a short while.
For a woman who lives by her beauty, pregnancy is just an obstacle to her aims of securing adulation, power, and money from men. The game itself becomes untied from its biological objective of children.

How many jaw-dropping starlets have we seen end up barren because their very job is the appearance of eternal availability as a mate?  The moment, she sports a baby bump, she’s never lusted after the same, that irresistible power over powerful men, that unrelenting dopamine surge never to return.

Actresses and entertainers are outliers, but there are millions of pretty young women who have much to gain by staying barren in the short term.  Then some short terms later, their term is up, all the prizes they thought they had won but a vapor at midnight when the spell is broken.  Then their bloodlines are lost to us forever, or at best below replacement as those species with unassuming dun-colored plumage endure.

Never do we seem to consider that beautiful women are some of the most valuable social capital of all.  Just by existing, the group’s men are motivated to the heights of achievement and the best men from other tribes want to join in. 

As with superiority in painting or sculpture, the prettiest women help establish legitimate rule over lesser peoples through dominant aesthetics. 

Female beauty is not just ornamental but an inspiring force that backs the power of money to drive the massive gears of the economy as much as gold ever did. 

Any serious society sees it worthwhile to select for female beauty, in sharp contrast to the present dysfunctional order that aggressively purges the prettiest from the gene pool.

Somehow, modern societies must actively perpetuate and grow their socio-sexual wealth.  
Furthermore, society’s greatest rewards must be funneled to the most valuable men.  A smart tribe in modern times makes sure to hook up successful inventors with supermodels and intuitively cockblocks charismatic charlatans.

The obvious methods of implementation rely on outright coercion but as I’ve pointed out, patriarchy is hard to restore in post-scarcity, post-agrarian, high-information conditions.  Women are better at cooperation than men.  From the telegraph onwards, instant communications meant male political hegemony was dead. 

Many have noted the single great weakness of women, though, is their susceptibility to public opinion and custom.  If the status system can be rigged, the sharia police can be saved a lot of effort. 

The female imperative has some sense of indignation when it is being strategically diverted, as the feminist allegory, The Stepford Wives demonstrates, but against the right suggestive pressures they are as powerless to stop it as men are powerless to stop their own lust and sexual jealousy from being used against them.

Reclaiming male selection for female beauty relies on males’ ability to capitalize in turn on the foibles of the opposite sex in the information age while preferably limiting coercive strategies only to where they are most effective and necessary.

Failing that, humans will perhaps start to revert to a tournament species where a dozen dashing males fight for the attention of one drab female until the edifice of enabling technology finally collapses.

The Macro-Sexenomics of Female Beauty

Thinkers like Adam Smith and Karl Marx were on the right track in asserting that self-interest is a key animating force of society but they both overestimated human rationality in the enlightenment fashion.  Stuck in this literal-minded rut they assumed economic activity is the only manifestation of self-interest that matters. Clinging to prudish 18th century notions of human nature, they never considered that more animal desires are upstream of economic activity.

It’s true the butcher and the baker want to make money, but they don’t do so just so they can be consumer cogs buying more stuff to sustain the virtuous cycle.  They also want to get laid and have kids.  If they had no hope of forming a family or even getting a nice girlfriend, they might well abandon getting up early every day to work hard in favor of easy lives just getting by.

Our conventional economics rely on financial gain for its own sake and on the surface this seems to work.  But within this paradigm we fail to ask why people so reliably want more money, even well past the threshold of marginal utility. We typically handwave this, saying that human desire knows no bounds.  There is truth to this but we neglect to inquire into why this is.

It only becomes rational for people to acquire more than they will ever need because they are competing for relative status against one another.  Status competition is ultimately connected to the struggle for the best possible shares of the sexual market.  In other words, this means access to the most desirable mates.
For men this means a chance to court beautiful women that most men can never dream of having a shot at.   Young women as a whole in society are like dangling carrots that keep the masses of males striving away in the office and designing rocket ships.

We are told, of course, that we live in a modern wonderland of free sexual opportunity for men but this is of course misleading.  Pretty women know they are always in high demand by millions of men and this age of internet and urbanization allows them to play their hands in the most discerning way.

Past the last day of high school or college, a man usually has to pay to be in the same room with pretty young women.  In the general population these ladies are scarce to be seen.  The overwhelming demand causes them to insulate themselves from public exposure or else they go out with those huge movie star face-hiding, eye-contact-avoiding sunglasses and a stony “resting bitch face” as the manosphere calls it.  I don’t know if we can overestimate the value of a pretty woman’s spontaneous smile in keeping a society healthy even when no flirtation is intended.  Defensive stinginess creates a vicious cycle of desperation and hostility when the slightest friendly gesture invites urgent sexual advances.

There was once the concept of the “girl next door” a wholesomely pretty girl close at hand in ordinary daily life.  In the 21st century this no longer really exists past high school as attractive young women migrate to the biggest cities where they are from then on concentrated.
This serves a dual purpose in giving them access to the highest ranking men while imposing high costs of living and huge decreases in quality of life on the thirsty masses of men who try to pursue them there.

It is not even a viable strategy for most men to try to lock down the hot women before their great urban migration as the society stigmatizes youthful marriage and statutory rape laws make it illegal for older men to seek teenage brides in the suburbs and countryside.

Thus, the sex and the city lifestyle in pricey hipster neighborhoods functions like a burqa for modern women, denying the gaze of unworthy men as they go scantily-clad to the nearby wine bar.

When most men rarely see higher than a 6.5 in public who isn’t flagrantly anti-social, their morale and motivation is sapped and the scale of sexual market value is drastically distorted in favor of those obese and plain women who stay behind.  

While men will always get thirsty enough to settle for whatever they can find, they aren’t as willing to sacrifice as they would be if access to potential mates were more equitable.  Once the girls they could approach are repulsive enough compared to anime porn, enthusiasm for the chase goes into a downward spiral.

For every low-status nerd who is willing to date a fat woman, there is another who ends up a celibate omega.  This creates millions of bare branches with no roots or prospects in the social order, a state of affairs which makes steadily increasing agitation against the establishment inevitable.

Even those men who still succeed with women know they could be doing a lot better.  Without any real status or bargaining leverage they are struggling with long term relationships and family formation.  They have no more stake in the present state of affairs than do incels.  

Just as illegal immigration and offshoring push down wages for everyone, most men see their sexual market payoff reduced by relentless demand inflation.
To put it in perspective, we all know how an influx of millions of pretty young women would be received by the matriarchy. 

The overwhelming thirst caused by the hyper-inflationary collapse of the sexual market has played a significant role in the death of civic life.  Whether churches or old-fashioned bowling leagues, widespread male desperation erodes the social trust required for co-ed contact or cooperation between men outside of carefully vetted social circles.
Whenever a new man shows up, he is bound to be met with suspicion by the women and hostility by the men.  No one wants yet another swinging dick adding to the society-wide sausage fest. 

Clearly, a society that wants to persist under modern conditions must acknowledge the importance of balancing the sexual market for the sake of cohesion and stability.
To prevent complete social breakdown we might begin by:

-Making it less easy and desirable for pretty women to hide themselves in urban walled harems.
-Making it easy to import pretty young women to control sexual market hyper-inflation.
-Easing statutory rape laws so men who take until the their late 20s/30s to get established can be rewarded by society with high school brides.
-A fat tax.
-Deport illegal men, children, old, ugly women, but let 5s or better stay.

A main point here is when we objectively rate beauty in a new inegalitarian age we can incorporate it into policy.   A special tax on obese women for instance would tacitly acknowledge they are reneging on their side of the social contract by depriving society of the beauty that motivates male participation and helps sustain a workable balance of power between the sexes.
Similar penalties might apply to disfigurative piercings or tattoos.

Congregating in a few neighborhoods in a few cities could be dis-incentivized by removing feminist laws that make it easier for women to get nice white collar jobs they can’t get fired from and imposing special taxes on certain places of residence for single females.

These kinds of measures would obviously trigger massive female opposition, but if women as a whole tried living within a stable balance of power rather than an extractive matriarchy, they might actually like it.  
At present, even plain women have countless suitors to choose from but they live with a millionaire’s dilemma where they have to assume every man they meet is trying to get what’s in between their legs.
If they could live in a healthy society where non-adversarial social interactions are actually possible, they might to their surprise cease to be as angry and lonely as they are now.

Interview With Rob Stark About the Alt-Center

http://www.starktruthradio.com/?p=5109

This time Rob, his cohosts, and I discussed the emergence of an alt-center that departs from established political traditions and in general what sort of social re-organization will prove necessary to deal constructively with the unprecedented challenges of the information age.
Correction:  I somehow referred to the T-1000 as the T-2000.  How could I do such a thing?

The Factions of Alt-Dissidents

There has been a sudden burst of interest in defining the quarrelsome factions of the alt-sphere, often with an emphasis on bashing rivals.
Alf of AlfaNL blog wrote one of the most level-headed pieces yet on the subject. He sticks to analyzing the groups by their size, demographics, and motivations.

I will add my own thoughts after seeing the umpteenth article about how the alt-lite is doomed because they are just selling a brand, how the alt-right is bound to become an irrelevant fringe like White Nationalism 1.0, or how the “passivism” of neo-reactionaries is an excuse to do nothing.  Doom and gloom all the time. 

From my perspective, things have been going great and it has been a delight to watch the alt-sphere begin to mature.  Now it reaches a point of self-awareness where it begins to introspect.   Even the constant squabbling serves a natural function of figuring out each faction’s jurisdiction and specialty.

The alt-lite civic nationalists are often brawling with alt-right groups on social media or even confronting them physically in meatspace.  These guys get a lot of hate from ethnic nationalist alt-rightists, but I don’t see the need.  They inhabit different niches in the dissident ecosystem.

The alt-lite are by far the largest faction since they stick to positions that can be made acceptable for millions of ordinary, disillusioned republican voters.  They are accused of just going along with what’s popular to sell a brand, but over time more will realize, that is precisely their job.  

They are the marketing and advertising department that engages in public outreach.  Because they have the largest audience, they also have the greatest influence when it comes to running psy-ops that disrupt the establishment “narrative” and to sap their morale through relentless agitation.

Their large numbers make it impossible to ban them all from social media and by saturating the filters of censorship, they make it harder to crack down on more extreme factions.  The alt-lite is also a valuable farm system for new recruits.  Of the millions who get drawn in by the advertising campaign, once nudged down that path some percentage decide to keep going of their own accord and become alt-right.  

The alt-right are gradually showing themselves to be the front-line soldiers and true believers who risk physical injury and destruction of their reputations. While the alt-lite’s strength is crowd tactics, the alt-right is forming cohesive units capable of pursuing strategic objectives such as shutting down the antifa dominion of Berkeley.
Their beliefs are still considered too extreme for them to take part in the normal political discourse.  They hungrily wait as the alt-lite helps to gradually ease the Overton window in their direction, each grudging millimeter giving them more space to operate in.

The core alt-rightists rely on many ideological shibboleths to solidify in-group cohesion and loyalty.  Counter-signal them on the Jews, white women, or Vladimir Putin and they are not likely to be patient about it.  It is not their role to be discerning about shades of gray since they are increasingly oriented towards action.  They have no shortage of discussion but within clear boundaries.  Leaders such as Richard Spencer may have intellectual interests and more nuanced views, but he does not have the luxury to focus on this in his daily activism and speeches.

For most citizens, the alt-lite are the extremists and the alt-right are simply “nazis.”  Ask the average person on the street about neo-reactionaries, the dark enlightenment, or even the alt-left and they’ll probably just stare at you wondering what the hell you’re talking about.

There’s the PR reps and the soldiers, but the dissidents also have an R and D department where participants are free to mix and match ideas and see what happens without political constraints.  These outliers are kind of like priests who try to construct an over-arching theology. Working on the level of ideas, they are mostly invisible amidst the turmoil.  They are not trying to move a crowd.  Their mission is to corrode the secular state religion and replace it with their own vision.  Rather than direct the course of schools of fish, they hope to change the water all fish swim in.

These evil acolytes recognize that much of their discussion is theoretical and intangible.  They even point and accuse among themselves that they are debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin with no plan to realize their aims in the real world.

They will come to understand they are pursuing their natural role just fine.  Their discussions are not viable in the popular discourse but their ideas gradually filter through more relatable interpreters until the populace unwittingly embraces concepts that came from black scriptural exegesis.  The end game for the apostate priests is not so much to become emperors as to establish a new academy on the ruins of the Enlightenment.

There are those who despair at the in-fighting of the rebels but I would point out that they begin to know who they are and what they need to do within a larger synergistic organism.  Even mainstream sources have begun to officially distinguish between the alt-lite and alt-right, a sure sign that an organized structure is emerging despite the decentralized nature of 4th generation politics.

Korezaan, A Regular Commenter, Gets His Own Interview

My congratulations to Korezaan, it made me smile when I learned about it.  I get a lot of high quality commenters here who take time from their day to contribute to the creative process, so it’s nice to see one of them getting recognition.

http://www.starktruthradio.com/?p=5088

Korezaan recently wrote a comment about the deficiencies of urban planning and public transit in the Bay Area:

I’d love to do work and play the same rat race, but I’m basically not even allowed to. Look up non-Starbucks jobs in Silicon Valley; “entry level” is 3-5 years experience generally, 5-7 isn’t difficult to find either. “Entry level” is just a phrase in a search engine, it’ll mean whatever people putting up offers label it to be. Unlike maybe some other periods or locations, these numbers aren’t a joke – if they call you at all, they’ll ask about it, and then tell you you’re unqualified.

If you do get one that is “actually” entry level, they’ll give you 40k, or if you’re really lucky 50, and that sounds great if you live in “flyover country”, but even the feds classify low income in silicon valley from, depending on which area in it, as 80 to 105. 80k is *low* income. Also to qualify for california state health insurance, your income must be below 10. I won’t go into how much other health insurance costs here.

All the jobs are in San Francisco and San Jose, and at 6:30 in the morning it’ll take you, if you live in the wrong direction, 60 minutes to go 20 miles. Distance between SF and SJ is ~50 miles. There is a metro here called BART, which is a joke, has murders and robberies left and right, takes 15 years to build 1 station 5 miles from the previous terminal, and is essentially a glorified parking lot shuttle for SF (it doesn’t reach SJ). And it can’t even do that properly because people literally don’t use BART because there is no parking space.

The new station is “right next to” the TESLA factory. Quotes because even though property lines are bordering, it’s 2 miles from the exit of the station to the entrance of TESLA. 1 mile of which is no sidewalk, 45mph road, the other 1 mile being parking lots.

Guess we’re all just not passionate enough about our field / about saving the planet.

If within 30 years Silicon Valley isn’t another Chicago or Detroit, I will be thoroughly surprised. Those walled and guarded neighborhoods in South America will appear here for sure.

>
Company housing is just marketing. I saw pictures about it 10 years ago in Popular Science. What have they done in the past 10 years? Buying up small lots to make a big one? They’re not going to do it.

On one hand they proudly allow articles to be published about their employees living in trucks in their parking lots to show how “motivated” their employees are, what a great company they are to work for etc. etc.

On the other hand it doesn’t get them anything. Google Fiber is no longer coming to a home near you because they decided doing all that extra work at that cost didn’t get them any money. Do you have any idea how unprofitable it is to build and then make back that moeny off of high rise apartments? That’s assuming they get around the zoning laws and NIMBYism, which they probably could if they wanted to simply because of how much money they have. But they don’t. They don’t care.

These thoughts caught the attention of Robert Stark who lives in the same area. They met up and had a talk.

The main focus of the discussion was to expand on the original comment regarding urban planning in the Bay Area and in general.  They go into some detail on Hong Kong as well and discuss differences between Eastern and Western cyberpunk aesthetics.

They do make mention of me at a few junctures.

Korezaan makes clear he has a mind of his own but describes himself as being on the “same vector” with the sort of ideas I have put forth.

Later on, they bring up my recent post about traditional marriage.  I will clarify here briefly:
I am not saying there’s some future where men and women no longer fall in love and become attached to each other.  I would not so blatantly disregard such basics of human nature.
I am saying that traditional marriage has lost relevance as the foundational institution of society.  To be truly foundational, you have to be able to assume it will be central to most people’s lives.  Now it’s just another “lifestyle choice.”  If a substantial portion of the population defects on the deal, it destabilizes a social contract that requires self-discipline and sacrifice.  When the naughty kids gorge on dessert first, the patient and disciplined kids who ate their vegetables end up missing out.

I pose the problem that having a decades-long union might not be viable as a founding social norm in an information age, post-agrarian, post-industrial society.  We’re entering unexplored territory so I am speculating what social systems that organically spring up under new pressures might look like.

Alt-Right Drift Towards “Leftist” Policies

I’ve recently discussed the combination of Alt-Right and Alt-Left into an Alt-Center synthesis but it has been increasingly brought to my attention that elements of the alt-right already show support for issues such as single-payer healthcare.  I was skeptical when commenter Nulle Terre Sans Seigneur told me that Spencer’s group and Counter-currents embraced “leftist” policies.  I figured it might just be a few outliers.  Then Robert Stark of Stark Truth Radio brought it up as well, pointing me to certain links.  It appears that actual leaders such as Richard Spencer endorse these issues.

That this is new to me suggests they may downplay their position on this issue relative to others, knowing well it is still unacceptable and equated with evil “socialism” on much of the right.  Or, it could be I tend to exclude individual personalities as noise from much of my analysis, preferring to look at trends and incentives.  I took a closer look and found Spencer wrote a piece on the issue back in March when Ryancare was the topic of discussion and sure enough, a good proportion of his commenters were skeptical at best about his proposal with libertarian types as usual insisting on a return to “the free market.”

I can’t honestly say how much influence Spencer or writers for Counter-Currents actually have over the larger dissident right but they have already understood in which direction the natural synthesis of ideas lies.  It comes as no surprise to me that Spencer seems to come from an upper middle class or higher background, a demographic that more typically produces alt-leftists or neo-reactionaries.  As a fashion-conscious, city-dwelling socialite, who speaks with a faint lisp it seems in retrospect less surprising that his political views might be hybridized in some ways very similar to what I have anticipated.

The alt-nationalists will ultimately go in this direction as a whole.  As whites steadily slip from being an overwhelming majority, their politics will increasingly resemble minority politics.  In other words, leaders will be expected to bring back pork barrel rewards for their people at the expense of the other tribes.  Little do triumphalists or defeatists watching demographic trends realize that a 40% white country where all whites are forced to bloc vote to survive will be paradoxically more formidable in politics than a 65% white population that’s deeply divided.   As this shift occurs, single-payer healthcare will be tacitly understood as healthcare for whites first.

Just today, it has been decided a dismantling of Obamacare is finally to be discussed on the senate floor.  Mainstream leftists are recoiling in horror that the party of rich corporate warhawks is taking away healthcare from ordinary people.  It cannot even be explained to them within their egalitarian world view where the popular support for these measures derives.  First universal systems of redistribution that are bleeding the remnants of the middle class dry have to be done away with so that wealth can be run through more protected channels.  In countries where groups with 100 IQ or greater are in the minority,  we see the emergence of parallel societies and institutions for emergent castes in the 3rd world style.  The USA, unexceptional as ever, is in no way immune to the forces that affect everywhere else.

Abortion too is backed by Spencer and friends.  This implacable rock on which culture warriors shattered themselves will be reinforced by the dissidents as tribes form, with the tacit understanding that its purpose is to restrict the fecundity of ethnic rivals and keep the dysgenic underclasses in check.  The practical necessity of such measures as the struggle grows desperate will gradually discredit those misguided conservatives who still object.

The more intellectual alt-rightists are already thinking some years ahead.  They are aware that a constituency with many ex-mainstream conservatives and libertarians isn’t ready to accept alt-centrist views just yet and may be gradually testing the popular mood until the time is right to push the discourse of their blogs into popular rhetoric.

Thoughts On Replacing Traditional Marriage In A Post-Scarcity Society

If we reflect for just a moment on human nature with all its in-born capriciousness and greed, we understand that a system where everyone stays in any kind of permanent alliance must be fastened in place by necessity.

Traditional marriage worked as a foundation of society when most people made a living growing their own food and going hungry if you screwed up in life was a real possibility.  Most people’s priority was achieving a state of security and holding onto it at all costs.  Kids naturally fit into that mission as free farmhands and as a retirement policy.  Most people lived in rural areas where there was a limit on the number of people they encountered and therefore a limit to temptations.  

There’s no precedent for even poor people wallowing in unlimited junk food or going online to window-shop for mates from the entire array of the human race—or a society that is majority urbanized where most people meet dozens of strangers every day and kids are just an endless suck of time and money.

In this dyamic environment, it may be that bringing back traditional marriage as the founding institution of society is untenable.  Already, as many people still bother to get married, it is in practice a 5-7 year alliance to raise a kid or two past infancy and move on.  Only for the upper middle classes and above does it remain a somewhat stable way to build wealth in a polite society.

Ironically, our better health and sanitation conditions disincentivize parental investment in offspring below the middle classes.  Until modern medicine child mortality had always been very high even with both parents putting in their best effort.  With the survival of children practically assured, the life-long union with its extreme opportunity costs becomes strategically obsolete.

Of course, nobody calculates like a Darwinian robot when they make life decisions and culture informs their perspective as well, but sexual strategies that are no longer evolutionarily optimal for most people must steadily lose market share even if no one knows quite why.  

The traditional marriage asks the female to get married young to have all her offspring with a single man who is unlikely to be her best possible option.  Or even if he were highest quality, she might still want to diversify her portfolio so her genes survive even if one type of Galapagos finch gets wiped out by a freak disaster.  When we remember a typical woman has less than 6 rounds in her revolver with all the forces of nature arrayed against the continuation of her line, the least she can do is have different types of ammo against different adversaries.  Or at least, she weighs the benefits of sibling inclusive fitness against the advantages of genetic diversification.

Men, meanwhile, are asked to bring home the bacon their whole lives and to stand by for decades as their wives get old instead of searching for a “younger model.”  The ability of females to defect any time and take the kids, or take his money and then get impregnated by another man without consequence undermines even what diminished rewards he enjoys.  
He too instinctually wants a variety of mates to spread his line to prevent a single disaster from wiping him out.  The modern high-information society means he can spend his energy trying for multiple low-investment sexual partners instead of sinking all his resources into one insecure prospect.

Neither sex really wants to restore traditional marriage under present conditions.  Tellingly, aging pickup artists are now among the biggest promoters of turning back the clock.  Many people still get married, but only under pressure as they start to get their first grey hairs and wrinkles.  When scarcity of resources isn’t enough to make people have weddings only scarcity of time suffices.  If we were young forever, successful pickup artists would be forever unrepentant.  It’s only when we worry about ending up without children or unpaid companionship for the last 4 decades of our lives that we’re suddenly willing to make the huge sacrifices marriage requires.

It has been pointed out for years in the manosphere that traditional marriage is a game for young people, especially young women at peak fertility.
People have been using the word “traditional” for a reason because the present institution bears little resemblance.  The old arrangement means cashing in your chips at the start of the game.  The modern version means playing the game as long as you can and then rushing to cash in at the last moment.  So if we draw a clear line in our definitions, we can see outside of some rural areas, real marriage has already been dead for decades.

The question then is how we might begin to organize mating markets in an urban, post-scarcity, semi-nomadic society, unless of course, we are counting on a collapse to “rescue” us.
Presently, we are faced with falling fertility rates and the costs imposed on society by single motherhood.
Also, monogamy serves as a truce between men so they can spend their energies collaborating against other groups rather than fighting among themselves over women. 

The reality on the ground already is the truce has been broken and we have seen a return to soft harems that would not have seemed out of place in the stone age with most women chasing a few chieftains.  This arrangement has already put society on a path to the intermittent warfare typical of hunter-gatherer societies.  There are simply too many men in our peaceful society.  Eventually, violence culls the herd until sexual market pressures are again tolerable.

As greatly as Black culture is maligned, I have noticed it has been a preview of where the rest of society will be in about 20 years.  The word “game” itself comes straight from ghetto slang.  As the rewards and accessibility of being a career drone drastically dwindle for men, even the sons of respectable families try to adopt drug dealer swagger to signal status.  This is by its nature a strategy that signals low investment because high investment signals he has few options.

Since modern day marriage is associated with balding cubicle schlubs rushing to settle before it’s too late, the institution itself becomes uncool.  Even if all feminist legislation was done away with tomorrow there would be no grand reversal.  Doing away with no-fault divorce might actually send men running away even faster.

Traditional society rewarded men and gave them status but this also came with huge responsibilities that were expected to consume their entire lives.  So even as we see internet personalities indulge in nostalgia, hardly any of them actually take the plunge themselves.  Many of them talk tough about protecting any daughters they may have, but not a one of them wants to go back to asking the father’s permission to court a girl.

A workable new system might be one that secures mating rights for men with desirable qualities, but doesn’t force them to spend the rest of their lives breaking their backs so the wife can watch daytime TV.  Perhaps all the benefits a single mother currently enjoys would be conditional on having her kids with socially sanctioned men in good standing with the tribe.  If she bred with outlaws or blood enemies, access to benefits would be witheld and free abortions made readily available.  Most of them would get the hint.

Even in ancient Rome subsidies and legislation did very little to revive traditional marriage.  Once people aren’t afraid of starving, personal freedom and unfettered mate selection becomes priceless.  Women would rather work full-time to make their own money than have a provider if they think they can get the best genes that way.  As we can see with ghetto welfare, though, subsidies are highly effective at boosting fertility when they don’t require anyone to seal permanent alliances.

So, a future system might be structured around giving women the illusion of choice by carefully pre-selecting their dating pool.  Status is artificially bestowed on men easily enough.  A mediocre man has an officer’s badge pinned to his shirt-front and suddenly he’s never lonely again.  In the neo-tribal society, male status would be managed very deliberately along with subsidies to channel female mating choice in desirable ways even as she thinks it was her own idea all along.

As for paternal involvement, I learned a few things by listening to black co-workers talk about their baby mommas.  Smooth operators who were broke but had no entangling ties could move seamlessly from one woman’s house to another with as much access to his children as he desired.  This struck me in stark contrast to white schlubs who have to petition the courts to see the one kid they had with a woman who divorced him.

The married man’s need to beg makes him appear low-status even if he earns a good salary.  If he was free to withdraw his presence and his funds, he would be freely invited into her house.  High-status men would end up with multiple children by different women and he would be at leisure to identify his most promising offspring and invest in them most while still having time to focus on supporting the society.

Male sexual emancipation from the provider marriage might also serve some use in undermining overwhelming female political power.  As I have discussed previously, Western women already had extraordinary influence even before they got the vote because they had guaranteed access to husbands who were effectively chained to them.  Mycroft, one of my regular commenters, astutely pointed out that this position of total security from which to agitate was the cradle of the modern matriarchy and the cause behind millions of appeasing white knight males.  It may be necessary in a modern patriarchy to sever female relationship security so they cannot press relentlessly for their own selfish agenda without facing consequences.

With a tribal dating pool, some men would effectively have harems, but there would be a clear obligation among the brotherhood to get even the stragglers laid from time-to-time—if loyalty is to be expected of them.  The core idea would be that the mating market reflect the male hierarchy. 

Of course, not everything can be done with incentives and loose controls, but the trouble with a system of hard coercion is it is more energetically expensive by far and requires diligent upkeep to sustain.  So the question is that which kings often asked wandering scholars back in the Chinese era of warring states: What is the softest touch by which effective rule can be implemented?
Failing that, though, there’s always Islam waiting in the wings.

How We Get to an Alt-Center

Both the alt-left and alt-right are populist but attack the elements of the establishment most pertinent to their interests.  I have repeatedly noted, that if their platforms were combined into a single agenda, we would have an alt-center that comprehensively rejects the establishment.

As astute commenters have pointed out, a major culture and class divide separates these dissidents.
The working class alt-right and the upper-middle class alt-left progressives revile and distrust each other but my calculation is that they will be forced to work together.

The alt-right has scored some major victories but finds itself stalled in need of some kind of push to go further.  They need one more group to make a coalition that can put politicians directly loyal to them into office.

The alt-left meanwhile languishes at the bottom of the heap after Bernie was shot down and their attempt to install Keith Ellison as a compromise party leader was soundly rejected by the establishment core.

The progressive white males who are the heart of the alt-left have been humiliated at every turn and are asked to sit at the back of the bus by brown people and single women with no hopes of realizing their agenda of punishing wall street and the military industrial complex, or relieving the stranglehold of student loans. This state of stasis getting none of their demands met can’t last.

These scorned progressives may vote for third parties trying to start an independent movement.  This already happened to some degree in the 2016 presidential election.  Bernie voters defecting to Stein and Johnson certainly played a role in Hillary Clinton’s historic defeat. 

Of course, if they did not even have the power to get leverage within a coalition, they certainly can’t accomplish much on their own.  Alt-leftists simply by being higher class are relatively few in number.  Voting for third parties, they would hate to admit, is a tacit confession that your votes are on the table, inviting a bigger coalition to throw you a bone and take you in.

My prediction has been that necessity will force all white males into the same coalition.  When you have poor alt-left millennials with useless degrees looking for jobs in urban areas they end up competing with other ethnic groups for scarce low-skill jobs where the cost of living is highest.

Even a lifetime of indoctrination is irreparably damaged once you realize everyone stops acting nice and abruptly drops the platitudes when bread and butter are on the line and they all play favorites with their own kind.  Progressive whites find themselves trapped in the same hell at their coffee shop or adjunct teaching jobs as they do in the democrat party.

They are assigned lowest status even when working part time at minimum wage.  This insult is finally too great a hit for the egos of the sons of engineers or lawyers to bear.  They are living along the faultline, getting ground in between clashing tectonic plates with nowhere else to go.  Eventually they must snap and sure enough, we have seen a disproportionate amount of political violence from exactly these disgruntled progressives.

So far, they’ve just lashed out in a panic, unable to really grasp the contradictions that have condemned them to suffer.  Any kind of widespread movement, though, lasts because it has some promise to increase the status of its followers and achieve their objectives.  If the left-progressive movement does not benefit, or actually hurts its believers, they must migrate or else leave behind a failed ideology.

As they start to explore the wilderness, they’ll find the alt-right and dark enlightenment waiting for them.  Some have already begun to experiment with being “edgy” and “fashy” to suddenly realize that there’s a way to status and influence outside the infernal volcanic rift they now live in.  As the way out of their predicament becomes clear they’ll be steadily squeezed into another camp.

The fundamentals of self-interest are stronger than class or ideologicial animosity in the long run.
Once these groups are stuck together they’ll find they belong together.  Both factions are dominated by white males who have been designated the collective Satan of the national religion.

The alt-rightists were also white men who were no longer getting enough status and access to desirable women or prospects of family formation.  Instead of trying to petition for a piece of the action in a mainstream political coalition they went out into the wilderness and began to clear a pasture for themselves hoping as all rebels do that some female groupies might follow them. 

Perhaps because the alt-rightists rejected the shibboleths of the conventional discourse from the start, they could not delude themselves, as alt-leftists have that they have a place at the table of the orthodoxy.  The clear path to success always was to ply the cool rebel angle to get mates and status.  Now that the alt-right is meeting with some success despite the best efforts of the establishment they suddenly find themselves defining the new cool of the 21st century.

The alt-leftists can already perceive that the coolness of the rebels has paid off better than trying to be “good” white men in exchange for getting their issues addressed.  Coolness is what they lack most.  Even many of those who have good tech jobs or are in academia still struggle to get laid and even what little they have left is being taken away.  

The few politicians who align with them aren’t cool either.  Bernie Sanders is likable but not cool. Elizabeth Warren is shrill and only slightly cooler than Hillary Clinton.  The only remotely cool alt-left-leaning politician is Tulsi Gabbard and she is a part-Indian, part-Polynesian female from one of the least white states.  Progressive hipsters would find themselves sorely disappointed even if Gabbard somehow got real power.  She, like rabid black muslim Keith Ellison, does not represent them.  

By 2020, it will be clear to even those in deep in denial that their attempt at a mainstream movement is dead.  There will be no Sanders, Warren, or Gabbard running for president except as a third party spoiler.  They’ll get to take a back seat yet again as an establishment matriarch like Kamala Harris easily captures the democrat nomination.

The massed in-group nepotism of every minority tribe packed into one coalition is finally too much.  The more the European-American population shrinks the more strongly it will be pushed through the process of ethnogenesis as the weight of the earth transforms loose sand into rock.

Those who doubt this should consider that African-Americans regard themselves as a single people despite descending from hundreds of different tribes scattered across thousands miles of coastline, desert, and jungle.  White-Americans will be no different as they are placed under siege.  Instead of slavery, being attacked from every side will be the crucible in which they are forged into a single people. 

As these pressures mount, the alt-rightists will be forced to jettison their own cargo of cognitive dissonance.  Many of them look to the Reagonian 80s with worshipful nostalgia just like corporate-backed republican puppets.  Somehow, even as rebels, they still sing hymns in praise of the “free market” and trickle down economics after 30 disastrous years of plunder and kleptocracy.

Those that come from a more sophisticated libertarian background, gulp from the same poisoned chalice.  No matter how the free-for-all is justified right wingers are easily cucked out of their birthright as multi-national corporations thrive.

As with the alt-leftists, I count not on a mass epiphany arrived at through reason to change their minds, but the relentless lashings we all receive from harsh reality that grow ever worse until we finally change our ways.

The issue that will finally force the alt-right to abandon their old assumptions is free association for white Americans.  They’ve been against affirmative action and illegal immigration since the beginning but they don’t yet understand where this will lead them.  

As their platform congeals, a neo-tribalist alt-center begins to take form.  From the necessity of in-group preference they will learn that unfettered competition is not society’s highest goal.  In the present year, the mere mention of social safety nets or mutual aid on the right begets a frenzy of primal rage.

Like Pavlov’s dogs they have been well-conditioned.  Every time the bell of redistribution rings, some of their food is taken from them and given to other dogs as they receive a nasty electric shock.  So naturally, they snap viciously at the cage bars whenever they are triggered.  It will take some time and a sense of security for them to begin to overcome their trauma.

As an unchallenged cultural territory is established a new tribe can begin to discuss what role the financial sector or the weapons industry should play.  They will finally be able to talk about job training and apprenticeship in a way that makes more sense than credential-hunting that destroys the savings of the middle class and makes even the lucky graduates indentured debt servants of their employers.

The alt-left is actually ahead of the curve and more imaginative than the alt-rightists but they still don’t quite get the urgency, that alt-rightists understand deep in their guts.  We’re faced with a fight to survive right now and until existence is secure, struggling white college grads will never get any help with their loans and the “too big to fail” banks will never get properly punished.  Only when all the white male populists are forced to fight back to back in battle will we see all their issues addressed within an alt-center that leaves behind the fake dichotomy of left and right.

Interview with Stark Truth Radio About Post Scarcity Economics

http://www.starktruthradio.com/?p=4972

We spoke about topics related to many of my more recent posts: post-scarcity economics, the leisure economy, urban land management, state capitalism, and mentioned an alt-center.

Defining the Alt-Center: Neo-Tribalism

An alt-center is not moderate—it is alternate—that is, opposed to the discredited establishment.  It doesn’t try to be exactly in between, grey, or neutral.  It is a synthesis taking the best of different mindsets and ideas to put together the pieces in a way that makes sense.  

The alt-right understands that people are not equal and can be categorized quite accurately by race, ethnicity, sex, status, and intelligence.  It is hamstrung though by favoring the continuation of a Hobbesian nightmare and tragedy of the commons.  Many vanilla republican politicians would readily agree with this stance when it comes to economics and social policy.  In this respect, the alt-right is not alternate.

The alt-left understands that you can’t have a real society unless people have a sense of belonging and investment.  People cooperate much better if they know there are safety nets if they stumble.  It is hamstrung though by failing to understand people vary widely in character and capability.  An indiscriminate system of aid quickly degenerates into a tragedy of the commons.  The alt left is not alternate in this sense because plenty of the the entrenched technocratic elite share their egalitarian views.

Both alt-right and alt-left retain ideological ties to the conventional platforms they’ve departed from, so in a way of thinking, alt-center, can be thought of as a true-alternate point of view that reaches on both sides and snips the last ties to prevailing political traditions.

On the right, the propaganda of rugged individualism and not taking “handouts” is used to manipulate atomized consumers into letting corporations and wall-street run rampant.  The left shrewdly critiqued this view by coining the term “corporate welfare.”
On the left, the shrill politics of victimhood combined with socialist attitudes is a cynical ploy to drain resources from the republican middle and working classes to buy the votes of a teeming underclass that depends on their largesse.  The right astutely points out that the leftist elites are trying to “elect a new people” through mass immigration and welfare babies to keep them in power forever.

An alt-center rejects poisonous propaganda positions from both fake sides.  It is a complete rejection of the authority of rulers who have long since lost the mandate of heaven through their incompetence and greed, whatever irrelevant side of a made-up spectrum they claim they’re on.
The alt-center recognizes these ideas are just deception used to herd political opinion by parasite-kings and prevent any dangerous(to them) mixtures of ideas from taking place.  

Is free healthcare a “left-wing” position when we’re just giving it to members of the tribe we identify with and jealously witholding our wealth from openly-declared blood enemies?  What made this stance left-wing is that it was charity without judgment.
Is it “right-wing” to adopt protectionist trade policies when doing away with “free competition” to make sure the newly created jobs go first to people in good standing with the tribe?  What made this stance right wing was competition without context. 
When we no longer assume an atomized society, to even ask these questions is meaningless.  We find ourselves with something different.

Alt-centrism then might be called neo-tribalism, an authoritarian system that maximizes liberties and benefits for cooperators with basic safety nets for all members, generous formal privileges for the best, but treats outgroups as other countries, or within the context of empire as auxiliary associates who are explicitly 2nd class.  More important than individuals becoming billionaires would be the ability of society itself to preserve wealth and build assets.

The neo-tribal alt-center understands there is no more nation-state in an age of instant mass communication where hardly anyone farms the land and where we live as semi-nomads drifting from job to job.  People, not lines on a map are the territorial borders.  Wherever the people set up camp their nation resides in them.

Combining The Alt-Right and the Alt-Left

The populist rebellion against the establishment presently comes in two main flavors, the alt-right and the alt-left. 

Of these the alt-right has met with much greater real world success so far for it is heir to years of internet dissident thought, which while considered right wing cares little for conventional political parties.  The alt-right discourse has tapped into the anger of the working classes while guided by a priesthood of savvy students of human nature.  Alt-lite civic nationalists market a less threatening entry-level brand to normie republican voters who then are given tacit permission to radicalize until some of them progress to the alt-right where the ideas are formed and taken to their logical conclusions.

The alt-left is still being formed from increasingly disillusioned white middle class progressives who have typically affiliated with the democrat party or third parties.  Some of this cohort freak out and go off the deep end into nutty socialist utopianism and impotent activism as a coping mechanism but others realize there’s something incomplete in how they understand the world.  They begin by reading a bit about the dark arts and soon find themselves falling as Lucifer fell.  One day it hits them: the nepotistic minority groups who pushed them out of their own party are a major reason why we can’t have nice things.

As things stand, the alt-lite and alt-right often see themselves as rivals and the to the extent they know about an alt-left, they’re just more enemies in the direction they’re told to always punch.
I’ve observed, though, since I was watching Bernie Sanders’ efforts in the primaries last year that populists on both sides of an obsolete political spectrum possess pieces of the puzzle.

For all their sudden and dizzying victories, the alt-right has little idea what to do next.  By decoding the obfuscation of political correctness, they established a superior understanding of the political situation, applied their knowledge, and spent long years gnawing on the roots of the world tree, Ygdrasil. 

The weakness of the alt-right is it lacks any compelling or coherent vision, or even any motivation to establish a functional society.  They indulge in warmed over libertarian theories every bit as fanciful as progressive dreams of US universal socialism, telling themselves they’re going Galt any day now.  Attitudes of personal responsibility, taking initiative, and every-man-for-himself served them well in the days when they just wanted to get laid more but now the question is how to have a society that doesn’t suck to begin with.

To be fair, there are those who grapple with these problems and their prevailing impulse is to try to go back in time to a more traditional society.  We see pickup artists getting grey hair, losing their youthful horniness, and suddenly wondering what to do with the rest of their lives.  They end up advocating for traditional family and marriage they never had any interest in—making them eerie parallels to feminist relationship and marriage advice columnists who always seem to be divorced and single in their 30s.

Bizarrely, they look to a historically backward Russia with deep social problems, low fertility rates, and millions of Muslims and Central Asians as an example of the ideal white nation.  There are indeed good reasons to admire Putin’s strong leadership and the staunchly nationalist direction he is taking his country, but mayor of a city-on-a-hill he is not.

The alt-right types including red pillers and neo-reactionaries are undisputed masters of understanding the darker corners of human nature but so far they have failed to apply their cynical worldly wisdom to create a viable new culture.  This is where they can benefit from fallen progressives.

The alt-leftists started out believing in all the feelgood ideas about human nature taught by school and well-meaning boomer parents but they went down a path to heresy as the world view they were taught was torn apart by cold and pitiless reality.  As they absorb some of the hard lessons of race, sex, and general human scumminess it dawns on them they’ll never have a nice society until they are selective and give the smart, responsible people most of the power and resources.

The fallen leftists understood even under egalitarian tutelage that hostile elites exert great control by rigging the economic system itself and especially the financial system.  They tried to make sense of their situation, like the alt-right did, by studying history.  I have actually come to think of Graeber’s Debt: The First 5000 Years as one of their founding works.  For many middle class progressive kids their first big red pill was graduating from college and finding there weren’t any jobs and everything the schools and their parents had told them was a lie.  So as manospherians studied Ancient Rome to gain insights into feminist cultural decay, unemployed hipsters who took out big loans to get useless degrees read about debt forgiveness in Ancient Mesopotamia.

The key insight the alt-left arrived at was that people need actual incentives to care about society whether we’re looking at hunter gatherers or the inhabitants of the first cities.  An endless war between the butcher and the baker isn’t the basis of the social contract, mutual obligation is.  There was no primitive system of barter engaged in by atomized Smithian savages—instead, credit predates coinage by tens of thousands of years.

Thus, these inquiries led alt-leftists to challenge a core assumption of Marxism—that the market is the central concern of human affairs and religion, tradition, and aesthetics mere distractions compared.
Alt-rightists, including the dark enlightenment, actually double down on flawed enlightenment theories of human motivation when they advocate for ultra individualism and atomization where everyone has to prove themselves from scratch and pull themselves up by their own bootstraps in the market economy.
The way successful human groups really work is by helping each other out, giving the most help to the best but always remembering no one can get far alone.

The alt-rightists though, can teach the fallen leftists the underclasses are the way they are for a reason and most resources given them disappear without a trace.  The most you can accomplish is prevent riots caused by empty stomachs.  Their unapologetic Randian ubermensch self-interest is unsuitable for a society, but it is just the medicine ex-leftists need to get past sentimental egalitarian attitudes, take responsibility, and be willing accept harsh truths.  With some tough lessons, the alt-left can acquire the will-to-power and pragmatism they need to rise above wishful thinking.

When we combine a matter-of-fact understanding of the harsh competitiveness of cruel nature with the principle that societies are made successful by reciprocity and shared purpose we end up with a new synthesis.  We have arrived at the alt-center.

Female Power and the Vote

Before female suffrage there had already been a huge and influential temperance movement for decades.  It was partly the cause of sanctimonious WASPs trying to sabotage the finer things in life for Catholic immigrants.
More importantly, though, it was staunchly backed by legions of matronly housewives who resented their husbands spending money at the pub instead of on her kids.

The prominence of the temperance movement shows us that women had great political influence long before they got the vote.  Not to mention, history is replete with concubines and mistresses who molded the most iron-fisted emperors to their wills.
Average Joes were like play-doh in their hands when it came to pursuing a political agenda.  Moral pontificating from ladies’ associations backed by sob stories about drunk and abusive husbands was enough to trigger vast armies of white knights into action.

Female suffrage, then, was overkill.  The temperance movement grew from an already powerful political lobby into an overwhelming force that banned alcohol altogether, with disastrous results.  With females given the vote themselves soon afterwards, they were all but crowned as empresses.

As we would expect, the West has become a de facto matriarchy.  Women bloc vote more than men since they are by nature more collectivist and can recruit the millions of white knights who are already under their control.  

 If we look at the particulars of the female vote, we notice there is one great divide in the matriarchy.  Single and married women play a great game of tug-of-war over society’s resources.  Married women mostly try to enable the wellbeing of their husbands and families.  Single women, on the other hand, try to provision themselves by using government as an extractive proxy provider.  Worse, they form traitorous alliances with hostile outside tribes to pry even more concessions from the married woman side of the matriarchy and the masses of hapless male helots.

An eternal truth, though, is matriarchies last only until the next invasion.  A society that doesn’t make its men the primary shareholders, always loses.  As much as people like to speak of fairness and equality, women simply don’t have the same territorial impulses common in men.  Whenever some bereaved band of unfortunates comes begging at the gates, women evaluate the situation through the nurturing instinct rather than the male’s timeless drive to act as guardian.  The territory itself to some extent is naturally a male concept.  Females, in some sense, have no country, especially when they are young and single.  A conquerer who just butchered all the boys she grew up with will get her pregnant just fine.  He might even be an upgrade as far as her genes are concerned.

When the walled city is under attack, every man knows he will be killed or enslaved, his family dissolved, his property plundered if he’s on the losing side.  For young women, especially those without kids, the consequence of conquest has been the inconvenient shuffling from one sheikh’s tent to another’s.  Even older women are not expected to risk their lives on society’s front line as men are though they have outlived their immediate usefulness to mother nature.  Modern society erroneously continues to assume they are involved in nurturing young ones even as they age.  

Women simply don’t have as much skin in the game.  As a perpetually protected class they haven’t undergone the brutal culling of life and death struggle for power, status, and territory every male ancestor has survived through back to y chromosomal Adam.  Women just don’t understand high stakes and danger in the same way or with the same sense of urgency that goes down to every male’s very marrow.  The way women fear rape by undesirable men to the very bottom of their psyche, men fear being conquered and disenfranchised.  

First the tribe must protect its holdings, then other issues may be settled.
At the very least, we could recognize the incentives and natural tendencies that make single and childless women unreliable potential traitors and thereby strip them of the vote and bar them from political office.  Principles aside, we might hope this would sufficiently compensate for the vast underground reservoir of female soft power that has always been there.

When weighing whether someone should vote, whatever their sex, we might ask: “What happens to them and their own if the walled city gets sacked?” Beyond that, we ought to test for judgment and intelligence.  After all, weak and stupid men were pawns of women anyway back in the “good old days” before women could vote.  Maybe it’s better a competent woman who owns property, has kids, and runs a business can vote while a man of poor character and weak wits who she’d manipulate with ease loses his vote.  Perhaps then we approach a somewhat more balanced equation where soft influence and hard power coincide.  Though the tribe is founded and defended by men, the reality of female power might then be incorporated within reason into a functional political system.

Career Women and Dysgenics

With the rise of automation and AI, encouraging women to spend more time out of the job market to raise children could serve as another pressure release valve.

They could be incentivized to have more kids while politically correct subsidies on female employment are removed and laws hostile to fathers and blank-check rape and harassment laws are repealed.  As we all know, though, women love careers with a fierceness men have never known because it gives them the illusion of unlimited choice in the sexual market.  So where material incentives might fail to persuade women to be less involved in the labor market and have above replacement fertility we need to look at some cultural roots of the problem.

To begin with, women have always worked outside the home and on the farm, so the whole idea of barefoot and in the kitchen is the other side of a false dichotomy perpetuated by feminists.  Being a purely stay-at-home wife was a privilege of the middle classes and above.  Any history of the industrial revolution tells us of the huge role women played in manufacturing.  Though many women worked, they tended to work fewer hours and stuck to positions that could be plausibly returned to after extended leave of absence, or left behind altogether.

It is not reasonable, though, to leave a competitive career track and expect to easily come back a year later.  This kind of gender welfare is untenable.
The simple truth about women in serious careers is they are trading their fertility for more personal autonomy and mate choice.  Even if they manage to have an only child in their 30s, they’re left far behind in the genetic arms race.

A society that encourages female careerism has to consider the impact of female dysgenics as the brightest and most capable of each generation are wiped out as surely as male soldiers charging a machine gun bunker.  First world civilizations are remarkable in that women are experiencing almost male levels of selective pressure.  Typically, societies with high female attrition disappear.

One possibility is we accept that the human species needs to be more sexually dimorphic in a prosperous, high-information society and simply let all those who take the bait of feminism breed themselves out over the next couple generations.  The problem is everyone gets genes from their mothers so dysgenics for women might be dysgenic for everyone.

Not to mention, it is already hard enough for high IQ men to find compatible partners.  The only way for such a society to stay at modern levels would be to make sure smart men have many babies with concubines he doesn’t have to spend too much time around and perhaps eugenic qualities would get progressively more linked to the y chromosome.

If we look for a more moderate path, maybe some females, especially those plainly of a man-jawed aspect should be encouraged to enter into careers but everyone would understand they are to be regarded as nuns or honorary men.  They would have no special status in the general class of women and thereby be denied a podium to normalize tribally suicidal behaviors.
These cleverest, most socially dominant women would have to be prevented from poisoning the cultural well by making anti-natal behaviors appear high status to the female masses.  Feisty upper middle class Jewesses with chiseled chins who churn out tomes of gender vitriol would have to be either given sufficient outlets to keep them happy or else crushed down and bred out when they get out of line.  

The basic social contract for career women would be that they have to help society with cheerful good will rather than try to destroy it with subversion and activism.  They would have their place in the hierarchy they must respect like men do.  They wouldn’t be allowed to go completely wild in the workplace like they do now.

Those competent women sufficiently attractive and of not completely abrasive character might be encouraged to donate their eggs to wombs belonging to those of low intellect. The surrogates could be given special rewards for volunteering.

Also, there could be subsidized in-home nannies instead of daycare for high IQ women so lady scientists don’t have to spend a couple years changing diapers or nursing.  This would help reduce the basic conflict of female fertility with self-actualizing work.  
A setup like this was actually pretty normal for aristocratic women of past ages, leaving them free to continue participating in high-status social life while still producing heirs.

We need to consider alternatives because until we return to times of subsistence poverty and small farming, traditional marriages won’t be attractive to most people, especially not men.

As bitterly as red pillers complain about female sexual adventuresses, none of them want to go back to bringing home the bacon for a lifetime to a surly wife he’s chained to.  Most men enjoy the load taken off their shoulders by female economic independence.  When it comes to meeting girls nobody really wants to go back to asking the father’s permission to talk to her.

The popular imagination seems only capable of conceiving of either our present feminist dystopia or rigid traditionalism nobody really likes.  A solution might involve the creation of a new type of society that is functional in the modern environment.
A beginning requirement is to re-evaluate the balance of power between the sexes.  Otherwise we have our present dark age of soft harems and millions of incel basement dweller males.
Until we deal with fundamental contradictions in our present society, we will be locked in a dysgenic and social downward spiral until we go the way of Ancient Rome.

%d bloggers like this: