Author: VD

They were never on our side

Steven Hayward of Powerline writes about the late David Koch:

When I really want to creep out a liberal, I tell them that I not only have met the Koch brothers, but once visited Charles Koch at the Death Star in Wichita, and dined with David Koch once in New York (in addition to some very friendly and thoughtful meetings in his office a long time ago). But then I usually like to deepen their dismay by going on to tell them that I also once had lunch with George Soros and some of his foundation board members (at his invitation and expense), where I had great fun pointing out how much Soros and the Koch brothers had in common, on immigration, foreign and defense policy, same sex marriage, drug policy, and so forth. At this point, you can almost see the synapses frying and shriveling up inside the simple-minded Manichean liberal brain.

That tells you a lot about the simple-minded conservative brain too, doesn’t it. The problem isn’t just “the Left” and the liberals. The neoclowns, the libertarians, and the conservatives are all also on-board with the post-Western descent into Hell on Earth.

Statistical analysis is not Intelligent Design

Reading the Z-man can be mildly frustrating at times, because he not infrequently starts off on the right path, but then fails to make the vital distinctions that are necessary in order to reach the correct conclusions.

Whenever the subject of Intelligent Design turns up, it is always in the context of believers in ID attacking evolutionary biology. The ID’ers have a list of claims about “Darwinism” that they insist make evolution impossible. A popular one now, for example, is that there is not enough time for natural selection to produce enough gene mutations to explain the fossil record. 

This is incorrect on two levels. First, the popular idea is something that I first articulated some time ago before more recently making my case in detail concerning the time required to account for the fixed genetic mutations that have been observed, and it is not necessarily related to the fossil record. In fact, the fossil record is now almost entirely irrelevant to the TENS debate, in which genetic science is rapidly demolishing the last credible vestiges of Neo-Darwinism.

Second, this specific event-based criticism of Neo-Darwinism is not Intelligent Design and has nothing whatsoever to do with Intelligent Design. I pay no attention to Creationists or Intelligent Design advocates. Their meanderings are of little interest to me. I am but a humble game designer with an educational background in economics, which combination tends to alert me to various statistical anomalies and mathematical improbabilities and impossibilities when I happen to come across them for one reason or another.

Since scientists and political commentators alike seem to struggle with the basic concept, I will attempt to put it into terms simple enough for even a sportsball player to follow.

If we are told that a sportsball team has gained 1,500 yards on the ground and that it averages three yards per rushing play, and we know that the maximum number of offensive plays per game is 84, then we know, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that the yards reported were not gained in a single 60-minute game. They could not have been. It is impossible.

The math is inexorable. The maximum number of yards that could have been gained on the ground in a single game is 252. It does not matter if a desperate proponent of Neo-Schembechlerism proposes the idea that perhaps the team ran a hurry-up wishbone offense, or that the quarterback was a dual-threat as a runner, or that the team played in a league known for its terrible run defenses, or that one of the halfbacks once ripped off a 99-yard gain, or that NCAA teams have been known to play up to seven overtime periods, or that perhaps five different players touched the ball on the same play. The math is inexorable. The assertion that a sportsball team which averages three yards per carry gained 1,500 yards on the ground in a single game is flat-out impossible. We can say with certainty that it never happened.

In like manner, the number of fixed mutations that are presently observed to distinguish two species, whether we contemplate Man and the Chimpanzee–Human last common ancestor (CHLCA) or the dog and one of the therapsids, are considerably – CONSIDERABLY – in excess of the maximum amount of time that could have passed since the speciation process is believed to have begun. There is only one defense against this straightforward mathematical observation, and that is the idea that enough parallel mutations happened very, very quickly to significantly reduce the average time per fixed mutation to permit it to happen in the intervening time period.

The problem here, of course, is that the numerical gap that needs to be filled is so large that if that were the case, then these mutations would be have to be happening so rapidly, and fixing in parallel so quickly, that we could observe evolution by natural selection happening in real time all the time. Except we don’t, so the Neo-Darwinian is forced to retreat to the absurd scientific equivalent of claiming that he does too have a girlfriend, it’s just that she lives in Canada, and you wouldn’t know her anyhow.

This is not a defense of intelligent design. It is a defense of math and logic, both of which have to be abandoned if one is still to take Neo-Darwinism or the theory of evolution by natural selection seriously.

Declaring a war that is already lost

Jeff Goldstein is not only a liar, he’s an utterly inept one at that. And he has been for years.

Vox Day says the alt-right is conservative. It’s actually an identity movement on par with Black Lives Matter, La Raza, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, and other products of cultural Marxism.

Notice that Goldstein falsely claims I said the precise opposite of what I actually wrote in the very first two points of the manifesto to which he refers. Also, recall that identity politics are a superset of cultural Marxism, and that they long predate Marx, Gramsci, and the Frankfurt School.

  1. The Alt Right is of the political right in both the American and the European sense of the term. Socialists are not Alt Right. Progressives are not Alt Right. Liberals are not Alt Right. Communists, Marxists, Marxians, cultural Marxists, and neocons are not Alt Right. National Socialists are not Alt Right.
  2. The Alt Right is an ALTERNATIVE to the mainstream conservative movement in the USA that is nominally encapsulated by Russel Kirk’s 10 Conservative Principles, but in reality has devolved towards progressivism. It is also an alternative to libertarianism.

There is nothing conservative about the Alt Right, or as we more accurately describe it now in response to the authorized media’s successful attempts to redefine and delegitimize the term, the Nationalist Right. Conservativism is nothing more than a defeatist posture of continual retreat, and the Nationalist Right is a coherent political philosophy that entirely rejects both conservatism and conservatives.

Indeed, the neoclowns even had to coin a brand new term, “National Conservatives”, in order to present a defeatist skinsuit identity that could potentially pass for the real thing. But we reject National Conservatives just as we reject all conservatives and conservatisms. And as for me, I have NEVER been a conservative and I have always been very clear about that.

April 12, 2006
I am not a conservative and have not been for many years, but I don’t think anyone, on the Right or Left, would deny that I am a hard-core right winger.

September 24, 2007
Because I’m not a conservative, I don’t fit what the conservative media are selling, so they stick to their tried-and-true formulas even though my columns repeatedly prove more popular than the usual grist for the mill.

September 30, 2010
I am not a conservative. I am a Christian libertarian technodemocrat. But if this is what is actually supposed to pass for conservative opinion leadership at a leading conservative publication, it’s no wonder that the Tea Partiers are abandoning both the Republican Party and the conservative media.

January 30, 2013
I am not a phony conservative, or indeed, a conservative of any kind.

June 9, 2016
I am not a conservative and I have long had to correct those who mistakenly believed I was.

Anyhow, three years later, Goldstein is still doubling down on his false and outdated perspective:

3 yrs ago, writing in The Federalist, I noted how the left’s embrace — and political deployment — of identity politics had given rise to, and a perverse justification for (in its own hive mind), white supremacy, a blunt rejection of the collective call by the left and academia to demonize whiteness.

I pored over & unpacked the “alt-right manifesto” of an influential “thought leader” of the movement and found what was easily recognizable: a progressive strain placing it on par with La Raza, BLM, CAIR, and Occupy (now Antifa). Essentially, Farrakhanism in a bed sheet.

The El Paso shooter, if we believe his manifesto, is for all intents and purposes, a confused National Socialist. He trafficked in identity and grievance politics while supporting much of the Green New Deal. He railed against capitalism and jobs lost to automation. He’s a leftist — as were the Nazis — who found himself part of an unprotected class; the Dayton shooter supported, in addition to Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders, Antifa, which may have actually provided him gun tips in advance of his eventual spree killing. He, too, was a leftist.

Which is why conservatives should deplore all identity and grievance politics, regardless of the color it takes. Intersectionality, however, is the left’s stock and trade, from the academy to the media to Hollywood. Until that is marginalized, you won’t kill white supremacy, despite pleadings by the editors at National Review.

And here’s why: Many of the motivations of the white supremacist movement, which Vox Day couched as “alt-right” in his alt-right “manifesto,” were predictable and — again, however perversely — understandable: in a political and cultural ethos wherein white straight Christian males have become one of the last “identity groups” eligible for collective hostility and scapegoating, there was bound to be defensive push-back. In my piece I commiserated with some of the alt-right’s concerns while rejecting its underlying philosophy; I counseled the rejection of all identity politics and intersectionality, suggesting instead a return to founding principals: constitutionalism, federalism, republicanism, the rule of law, assimilation, and — most crucially —individualism and individual rights and autonomy….

We are a country of individuals. We need to act like it. It’s time to declare war on identity politics.

Let conservatives reject identity politics if they like. Who cares what conservatives do, say, or think anymore? They didn’t conserve America. They didn’t conserve the ladies room. They couldn’t even conserve the two human sexes! And they won’t be able to conserve indoor plumbing either. As for declaring war on identity politics, in 2019 that is like declaring war on gravity, or more to the point, declaring war on Alexander the Great on behalf of King Darius III of the Achaemenid Empire.

That war is already over. That war is already lost.

Counseling American Christians to return to principles that literally none of their rival identity groups accept is not merely idiotic, it is completely irrelevant. The literally satanic ideology of the individual is now as dead as the Whig Party and the Yangtze River dolphin, and no one is going to be able to revive it in a time when material identity has replaced abstract ideology.

Conservatives: I will not risk open identity politics.

Nationalists: Identity politics is upon you whether you would risk it or not.

Conservatives had better come to terms with accepting the reality of identity politics very, very soon, because what comes next is what Clausewitz would have called identity politics by other means.

Jordan Peterson is a sanctimonious crybaby

And you can absolutely quote me on that, in whatever voice you like. He’s such a ridiculous whiner as well as being a profoundly non-philosophical fraud.

This week, however, a company called notjordanpeterson.com put an AI engine online that allows anyone to type anything and have it reproduced in my voice. It’s hard to get access to or use the site, at the moment, presumably because it is currently attracting more traffic than its servers can handle. [NOTE: As of August 23, this website posted the following announcement: In light of Dr. Peterson’s response to the technology demonstrated by this site, which you can read here, and out of respect for Dr. Peterson, the functionality of the site will be disabled for the time being.]

A variety of sites that pass themselves off as news portals—and sometimes are—have either reported this story straight (Sputnik News) or had a field day (Gizmodo) having me read, for example, the SCUM manifesto (hypothetically an acronym for Society for Cutting Up Men), a radical feminist rant by Valerie Solanos published in 1967. Solanos, by the way, later shot the artist Andy Warhol, an act, driven by her developing paranoia. He was seriously wounded, requiring a surgical corset to hold his organs in place for the rest of his life. TNW takes a middle path, reporting the facts of the situation with little bias but using the system to have me voice very vulgar phrases.

Some of you might know—and those of you who don’t should—that similar technology has also been developed for video. This was reported, for example, by BBC, as far back in July of 2017, who broadcast a speech delivered by an AI Obama, that was essentially indistinguishable from the real thing. Similar technology has been used, equally notoriously, to superimpose the faces of famous actresses on porn stars, while they perform their various sexual exploits (you can find this story covered, for example, on The Verge, Jan 24, 2018). Movies have also been reshot so that the main actor is transformed from someone unknown to someone with real box office draw. This has happened, for example, to Nicolas Cage, primarily on a YouTube site known as Derpfakes, a play on the phrase “Deep Fakes,” which is what the video recordings created fraudulently by AI have come to be known. More recently Ctrl Shift Face, a YouTube channel, posted a video showing Bill Hader transforming very subtly into Tom Cruise as he performs an impression of the latter on Dave Letterman’s show. It’s picked up four million views in a week. It’s important to note, by the way, that this ability is available to amateurs. I don’t mean people with no tech knowledge whatsoever, obviously—more that the electronic machinery that makes such things possible will soon be within the reach of everyone.

It’s hard to imagine a technology with more power to disrupt. I’m already in the position (as many of you soon will be as well) where anyone can produce a believable audio and perhaps video of me saying absolutely anything they want me to say. How can that possible be fought? More to the point: how are we going to trust anything electronically-mediated in the very near future (say, during the next Presidential election)? We’re already concerned, rightly or wrongly, with “fake news”—and that’s only news that has been slanted, arguably, by the bias of the reporter or editor or news organization. What do we do when “fake news” is just as real as “real news”? What do we do when anyone can imitate anyone else, for any reason that suits them?

And what of the legality of this process? It seems to me that active and aware lawmakers would take immediate steps to make the unauthorized production of AI Deep Fakes a felony offense, at least in the case where the fake is being used to defame, damage or deceive. And it seems to be that we should perhaps throw caution to the wind, and make this an exceptionally wide-ranging law. We need to seriously consider the idea that someone’s voice is an integral part of their identity, of their reality, of their person—and that stealing that voice is a genuinely criminal act, regardless (perhaps) of intent. What’s the alternative? Are we entering a future where the only credible source of information will be direct personal contact? What’s that going to do to mass media, of all types? Why should we not assume that the noise to signal ratio will creep so high that all political and economic information disseminated broadly will be rendered completely untrustworthy?

I can tell you from personal experience, for what that’s worth, that it is far from comforting to discover an entire website devoted to allowing whoever is inspired to do so produce audio clips imitating my voice delivering whatever content the user chooses—for serious, comic or malevolent purposes. I can’t imagine what the world will be like when we will truly be unable to distinguish the real from the unreal, or exercise any control whatsoever on what videos reveal about behaviors we never engaged in, or audio avatars broadcasting any opinion at all about anything at all. I see no defense, and a tremendously expanded opportunity for unscrupulous troublemakers to warp our personal and collective reality in any manner they see fit.

Wake up. The sanctity of your voice, and your image, is at serious risk. It’s hard to imagine a more serious challenge to the sense of shared, reliable reality that keeps us linked together in relative peace. The Deep Fake artists need to be stopped, using whatever legal means are necessary, as soon as possible.

This guy doesn’t even believe in the Divine, so to what “sanctity of your voice and your image” is he referring? He doesn’t even believe in group identity or taking pride in one’s direct ancestors, he’s the most famous advocate of individual uber alles since Ayn Rand, so what is this “sense of shared, reliable reality that keeps us linked together” to which he’s suddenly appealing.

If you didn’t grasp that Jordan Peterson is an intellectual fraud before, his call to outlaw synthetic speech and make it a felony offense should more than suffice.

Personally, I love synthetic speech. I’ve been wanting to design games around it since 1996.

China rejects servitude to Satan

At least the Babel 2.0 version of it, anyhow:

The hope through these years was that a more prosperous China would also become more democratic and tolerant at home, and less aggressive abroad. But as foreign affairs journalist James Mann pointed out in his 2007 book, “The China Fantasy,” and as longtime Kissingerian Michael Pillsbury wrote in his 2015 book, “The Hundred-Year Marathon,” China’s leaders weren’t interested in following this script.

On the contrary, Pillsbury argued that they had their own scenario, in which China would embark quietly but steadily on a long-term race to world supremacy by 2049, the 100th anniversary of Mao Zedong’s victory over Chiang Kai-shek.

China would use strategy and tactics laid out by Sun Tzu 2,500 years ago and restore the state to the primacy it enjoyed before the civil wars and invasions that started with the Taiping rebellion in 1849 and ended with Mao’s death in 1976, costing millions of Chinese lives. Before this strife, China had 40 percent of the world’s population and economic production, and an emperor reigning 60 years, who reportedly told the British envoy Lord Macartney in 1793, “Our Celestial Empire possesses all things in prolific abundance” and has “no need to import the manufactures of outside barbarians.”

Hence the cancellation of the long-planned post-US-collapse leap to China on the part of those who “heal the nations” and have destroyed America as part of that healing process.

“We have so much to teach, so much to share, so much light to shine upon a world that needs it – perhaps now more than ever before.”
– Dennis Prager

如何對小男孩進行雞姦並吃人肉？ 我們會通過，謝謝。

Voxiversities are up again

One step at a time. The techs are still making infrastructure changes, so if something isn’t working properly, please don’t email me, just wait a few hours and try again. Also, please note that the fact that the screen still says “Login” does not mean you are not logged in. It is an inability to play a paywalled video that indicates you are not logged in.

As noted in the title, all 12 Voxiversities are now playable and downloadable again. I hope to record one or two new ones this weekend, time permitting.

Chuck Dixon on Comics #16 is now up as well, featuring his fascinating recounting of the history of the GI JOE franchise.

Four years later

Four years ago, I published SJWs Always Lie. Mike Cernovich told me at the time that it would be what he called an “evergreen” book. It would appear that he was right, because the social justice Narrative hasn’t disappeared in the intervening period. To the contrary, it is now a much bigger problem affecting even more people across a far wider spectrum of activities and organizations than before.

If SJWAL is still on the bestseller list several hundred years from now, will that indicate that we failed or that we succeeded in defending Western civilization? The latter, I suppose, since the alternative is illiterate gay satanists living in filth and literally devouring each other whenever they take a break from molesting stolen animals and kidnapped children. It does amuse me, though, to know that John Scalzi’s lasting claim to fame in the long run is much more likely to be his brief appearance in SJWAL than any of the color-by-numbers works of fiction that he presented as his own over the years.

How low can they go?

Just how far back do the haters of Western civilization want to turn back the clock? Even farther back than you think.

Though accusations of cannibalism have often been falsely made to demonize groups, it isn’t absent from human history. The Fore people of Papua New Guinea were reported to have participated in funerary cannibalism, believing it better that the body was eaten by people who loved the deceased than by worms and maggots. Parts of mummies were eaten for medicinal purposes in post-Renaissance Europe.

We suspect that we could adapt to human flesh if need be. Many people develop disgust for all kinds of meat, while morticians and surgeons quickly adapt to the initially difficult experience of handling dead bodies. Our ongoing research with butchers in England suggests that they easily adapt to working with animal parts that the average consumer finds quite disgusting.

Thankfully for most of us, there is no need to overcome our repulsion for the foreseeable future.

They reject Jesus Christ, they believe we are animals, and they want us to live like animals. There is literally no depth to which they will not sink, which is why we have to stand firmly against the entire project on behalf of our faith, our families, our nations, and our Christian civilization.

Mark this well: if you are on the side of equality, tolerance, inclusivity, and diversity, then you are on the side of the satanists, the cannibals, and the pedophiles… among others.

Marvel and the Devil Mouse abused Stan Lee

Both converged entities stand condemned by Stan Lee’s daughter:

“When my father died, no one from Marvel or Disney reached out to me. From day one, they have commoditized my father’s work and never shown him or his legacy any respect or decency.”

JC concluded with some fiery words aimed at Disney and Marvel, “In the end, no one could have treated my father worse than Marvel and Disney’s executives.”

Of course they treat people badly. Even legends! They worship Satan and they are – at best – in league with pedos and child sex traffickers. What else would you expect?

Philosophy as tactical manual

A book recommendation from ex-Google whistleblower Zach Vorhies:

ZV: I actually want to recommend a book called SJWS ALWAYS LIE by Vox Day. That’s the only book that I would recommend that someone would read.

AJ: We do sell it in our store. That’s one of the few books I’ve read the last year, I’ve been so busy. Yeah, they always lie!

ZV: They always lie, and the thing is is that people that aren’t familiar with the tactics, you know, because this is weaponized. They don’t understand what’s going on and so they’re likely to make a bunch of mistakes they think that they just capitulate and like apologize then it’s just gonna go away.

AJ: Oh no! A few years ago I’m like well I’m not really saying that about Sandy Hook but if you say I’m hurting you and sending people to your house, I never did that but I apologize, that’s when they just full-metal attacked!

ZV: Yeah they double down and the thing is is that they’re gonna parade your apology around and say well, you know, he admits to this and that, he’s like X, Y, or Z bad person and then they’re gonna use that and they’re gonna parade it around. And this is not something that people understand intuitively and so the thing is, get this book, SJWS ALWAYS LIE by Vox Day and read it. It’s a fascinating read and it goes by really quickly, and it’s kind of a funny title but

AJ: The point is stop capitulating, stop kissing their ass.

ZV: Yes, exactly. Exactly…. So I followed this book, basically, as a tactical operation manual on how I was going to leak this information.

That is arguably the best review SJWAL has received yet. I’ll be talking with Zach on Alex’s show today at 2 PM EST.