Category: Uncategorized

Yeats the Baptist

Greg Johnson writes of what he considers to be the hopeful message of Yeats’s Second Coming:

And the poem seems to indicate a reversal of that flight, and a reversal of the birth of Christ. Could Mary, resting on the flight into Egypt, rocking Jesus cradled between the paws of a sphinx, have vexed the stony beast to nightmare? Could it have finally stirred from its troubled sleep, its womb heavy with the prophet of a new age, and begun the search for an appropriate place to give birth? “And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?” And what better place than Bethlehem, not to repeat but to reverse the birth of Christ and inaugurate a post-Christian age.

One can ask, however, if the poem ends on a note of horror or of hope. As I read it, there are three distinct stages to Yeats’ narrative. The first is the age when Christian values were the unchallenged core of Western civilization. This was a vital, flourishing civilization, but now it is over. The second stage is nihilism, both active and passive, occasioned by the loss of these core values. This is the present-day for Yeats and ourselves.

The third stage, which is yet to come, will follow the birth of the “rough beast.” Just as the birth of Jesus inaugurated Christian civilization, the rough beast will inaugurate a new pagan civilization. Its core values will be different than Christian values, which, of course, horrifies Christians, who hope to revive their religion. But the new pagan values, unlike Christian ones, will actually be believed, bringing the reign of nihilism to its end and creating a new, vital civilization. For pagans, this is a message of hope.

I think his interpretation of the three distinct stages is correct. Which is why it is really going to be fascinating to see what Greg makes of Jordanetics, which I understand he plans to review. Because, despite the best efforts of fools, false prophets, and philosophers, no Man has been able to coherently conceive, let alone construct, a viable post-Christian civilization.

Slandered by the Secret King

Two-Face van Sciver is clearly shaken by something, as he’s now emotionally projecting worse than the average SJW and resorting to outright slander. Perhaps Nick Rekeita informed him that IndieGoGo is going to be required to turn over all of their communications with him to Arkhaven as part of the discovery process permitted by the required arbitration system. Or perhaps it’s just the strain of Cyberfrog being late and 2VS feeling the pressure to deliver something capable of justifying more than half a million dollars’ worth of hype. This is from the transcript of his November 15th video called The FUTURE of the CG Movement.

You know about John Del Arroz, and I’ll tell you guys here, you know John Del Arroz, basically, I’m not sure what his whole thing with white nationalism was. He says “I was just explaining what it is that’s not how I feel.” That’s not what I remember him saying when I heard him say it, but I’ll take his word for it. Uh, the problem is, and I told him privately, I said, “yeah you know, listen, even if it’s true that everyone’s smearing you as a white nationalist and you’re not, we all misheard, you everyone knows you an apology because that’s a serious thing.” But the next thing you know, when Vox Day tried to take over ComicsGate and I fought back, he sided with Vox Day in a really snake-like way, and then what he did after we had kind of, after we had sort of, it seemed, made up, um, he started to he started to mess with me on behalf of Vox Day, like he became Vox Day’s little toady.

Vox Day said, “you think that you can stop me with, you think you can stop me with,  with your copyright trademark stuff, I’ll show you what trademark, you know what I can do with trademark, I’ll play with you with that. So what he did was he went on Amazon.com and he launched a parody kind of, of CyberFrog, but spelled with a P like PsyberFrog, and he put it up for sale on, on Amazon.com. Now I never would have known about this because I don’t talk to Vox Day so he wouldn’t, I wouldn’t have found out, so who was the one who was assigned to let me know that this troll had happened?  John Del Arroz! And he shows up immediately and goes, “hey man, I just wanted to let you know about this, like what do you think of this, like that’s wrong,” and I was like, I got it, so you guys are just gonna do this, what what’s next, it’s gonna be like cyber frog but spelled like TSyberfrog, I mean like, are you guys just gonna do this just to show that you can get around? I get it, I get it, it’s funny, now stop it!

So after that,  like, I just kind of said, all right this guy is there’s something up with him. I don’t know what his thing is. I don’t know what what his thing is, but like if he’s gonna be Vox Day’s toady and troll me on behalf of Vox, like, I just, get away from me. Kind of, you know, like, just get away from me! But me saying get away from me, like, that’s apparently, you’re not allowed to just tell people to go away. You used to be able to tell people to go away, now when you tell people to go away,  they go “he’s harassing me by telling me to go away, how dare he told me to go away, this guy,  and he’s turned everyone against me and he’s telling me to go away!” No, I just, I don’t, I don’t like you, I think you’re a snake, you’ve proven yourself to be a snake over and over again. I don’t know what’s up with the white nationalism thing, but you know it seemed to me that you know that’s what you said, and then you’re gonna do this on behalf of Vox Day? You, you know, it’s, it’s just two-faced! Get away, you’re trouble.

First of all, as you might expect, 2VS is shamelessly and blatantly lying. And he knows he is lying. I did nothing of the sort. I didn’t say that and I didn’t do that. I had absolutely nothing to do with this Psyberfrog parody. I didn’t create it, I didn’t launch it, I didn’t put it on Amazon, I didn’t tell anyone to do it and I didn’t suggest the idea to anyone do. This is straightforward slander and I can easily prove it by providing a court with the complete list of all of our products in our Amazon accounts.

Second, Jon Del Arroz is not my toady. He’s not one of my 535 Vile Faceless Minions. He’s not Dread Ilk. Nor is he two-faced or snake-like; 2VS is clearly projecting. Jon is, of course, one of our Dark Legion and Castalia House authors, as we will be publishing his Flying Sparks as well as his Alt-Hero novel, and he was an outspoken figure within ComicsGate who refused to denounce and disavow me, which is probably why 2VS is attacking him and attempting to imply that Jon is a white nationalist despite being one of the leading Hispanic science fiction authors. And speaking of Jon Del Arroz, here is his take on why ComicsGate fell apart.

Third, I never tried to take over ComicsGate and 2VS knows that better than anyone. Again, he is projecting his own behavior onto others and repeatedly lying to cover the fact that he had no objection to my acquisition of the imprint and creation of a logo until others reacted badly to it.

And fourth, everyone here knows that if I were to launch a parody of something, it would be high-quality and quite likely better than the original. Read The Corroding Empire Book One: Corrosion and The Collapsing Empire, if you harbor any doubts about that. If I were to do a parody of a 2VS comic, I would hire a good illustrator and a good colorist, then publish a comic called Rainbow Brutus in January which would almost certainly be considerably more entertaining than whatever hapless story 2VS will end up cobbling together when Rainbow Brute finally appears in April 2021.

2VS is a good example of what happens when Gammas find themselves in positions of leadership. It never ends well.

Darkstream: Rethinking capitalism

From the transcript of the Darkstream:

Something that I said the other night I think is more important than I had initially thought it was, it was an answer to a question that Alex Jones had when he asked, “what should we do, what’s the one thing we should do on the Right? What I realized that we need to do is we need to fundamentally question our assumptions and ideals, because part of what has gotten us here, part of what has gotten us into these very difficult situations and challenging circumstances is our ideals and assumptions.

I’m talking about our ideals and assumptions on the Right. We cannot blame everything on the Left. You know if you look at the people who do nothing but bitch about the Left that’s that’s what the Ben Shapiros do, that’s what the Dennis Pragers do,  that’s what the William F. Buckley types did. You know, they’re constantly pointing their fingers at the Democrats, at the leftists, and they’re never looking at their own assumptions. Now, we’ve begun to do that. You know, those of us who are on the Nationalist Right have begun to do that, we’ve begun to question things like free trade, we’ve begun to question things like legal immigration. Think about how all the Republicans and the conservatives who have said for decade, “the problem isn’t the immigration the problem is the illegal immigration.”  As we are learning, the problem is actually the legal immigration, you know, legal immigration is just another word for slow invasion, especially in a democracy.

Okay, any time you catch yourself thinking in that the problem is not the pure ideal, the problem is the application of the ideal, that’s been used to try to rescue everything from communism to feminism to civil rights. I want to quote this guy here because it’s important. Patriot 95 says “crony capitalism is what’s wrong with capitalism, capitalism untouched and not corrupted it works well, it’s what grew America early on,” Well, no, that’s not true. Here’s the the problem with these false dichotomies, these false dichotomies lend themselves to that sort of misleading formula. Crony capitalism is a problem but the fact that crony capitalism is bad does not mean that capitalism is necessarily intrinsically and always good.

I was thinking about Murray Rothbard’s economic history he’s got a very large two-volume history of of economics, it’s from the Austrian perspective, it’s very interesting it’s very, very well-founded in economic history, but what I realized about it is that from the  Rothbardian perspective, modern economics is simply the acceptance of debt. Everything that he writes about – it’s kind of shocking when you think about it – he devotes an incredible amount of time in this very long book to address the question of usury and it’s really remarkable how much space he devotes to Christian theology because he’s focused on how getting rid of the prohibitions on usury was necessary for economic development and the modern economic system.

I started thinking more and more about the conceptual problems of capitalism because obviously the issue of debt is a massive problem, and I’ve demonstrated this, I’ve dealt with this before. You know, the biggest single problem with debt is that it completely warps the supply-demand curves, and this is without even getting into Steve Keen’s mathematical demonstration that there is no such thing as a collective supply-demand curve, that you cannot create a supply-demand curve by adding multiple supply-demand curves together so we’re still working within the concept of conventional economics, we’re still in the world of Adam Smith here. But once you add debt into the equation, then what you start seeing is people whose demand is lower than someone else’s suddenly have the ability to outbid those who have a higher level of demand and a greater ability to pay, and so this turns into a absolute warp of the demand process that completely eliminates the efficiencies of capitalism.

We’re not talking about crony capitalism here. We’re not talking about the fact that there are favored parties and disfavored parties and that sort thing. We’re simply talking about the fact that you have the ability to spend resources you don’t have to outbid people who have more resources than you today is intrinsically introducing a level of inefficiency and a level of market misinformation that did not exist before.

Let me back up for a second. One of the problems with communism was the fact that it destroyed the information that is provided to everyone by the market, it destroyed the pricing mechanism, but if you think about it, debt does exactly the same thing! It destroys the pricing information,  and if you look at the situation that we’re in now where you have the elimination of contract law and you have the elimination of accountability and contracts and the basic ability to reliably buy and sell – you know you can be working with Pay Pal one day and the very next day, even though you’ve met your obligations and you’ve paid what you’re supposed to pay and then suddenly it’s gone – well how can you build a business based on that kind of unreliable information foundation? You can’t….

What is our economy fundamentally built on? It’s not debt, if you think about it. What is our economy fundamentally built on? We know it’s not built on labor. What do we spend all kinds of money on trying to convince people to do? What our entire economy is built on is sales and contracts. It is entirely built upon talking somebody into agreeing to something, the whole concept of exchange. Rational capitalism is based on the idea that all exchanges are to the benefit of the person exchanging, but we know that’s not true, we know that’s false.

A reckoning cometh

From the Introduction to Jordanetics: A Journey Into the Mind of Humanity’s Greatest Thinker, which is now complete and will be published on Amazon on Monday. It also features a Foreword by Milo Yiannopoulos that is a real barnburner. The final draft has been turned in, it’s the #1 New Release in Political Philosophy three days prior to publication, and you can still preorder it.

I also discussed the forthcoming book during my recent appearance with Alex Jones.

—
Introduction: The Meandering Fog of Meaning

Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent’s fate.
—Sun Tzu


I decided to begin looking more deeply into this popular professor who was being so widely hailed as a formidable thinker, a thoughtful philosopher, a courageous defender of free speech, and a champion of young men. But almost immediately, I discovered that his reputation was at variance with his actions, as in the case of his deeply ironic decision to ban investigative journalist Faith Goldy from participating in an August 2017 event at Ryerson University called The Stifling of Free Speech on University Campuses. The event was cancelled, and with Peterson’s approval, Goldy was barred from participating in the rescheduled event.

When he was subsequently asked about his decision in public, Peterson responded with what I eventually came to recognize was his characteristic bafflegarble, the word-smog he habitually utilizes to conceal his actual meaning.

QUESTION: I understand that Faith Goldy was removed from the original August panel because of her podcast with the controversial Daily Stormer after Charlottesville…. This strategy appears to parallel the SJWs, who wish to deny platforms to conservative speakers. I want to understand why Faithy Goldy was removed from the event simply for associating with identitarians, and if each of the panelists agree with that decision.

JORDAN PETERSON: That’s an excellent question. So, the first thing I should say is that it’s not like we’re unaware of the irony. Number one. Ryerson cancelled a panel about the cancellation of panels about free speech. That’s irony number one. And then irony number two was the panelists removed a speaker for arguably engaging in the act of free speech. Okay, we got that, believe me.

All right, so why did we come to this decision? I sat down personally—the other people can say what they have to say—I sat down with my son and we went through Faith’s interview. I know Faith, I don’t believe that she is a reprehensible person. I think that Charlottesville was very shocking to her and I think that she put herself in a very difficult position. And I think some of that was brave, that she went down there to cover it.

However, I listened very carefully to her podcast, the one that got her in trouble. And my sense was that she wasn’t, she didn’t, she was associating with people whose views she should have questioned. It was her journalistic, um, responsibility to question them. She had to ask at least one hard question. At least one. Three would have been better. You know, and I understand she had to toe a careful line. She was on the podcast, they had invited her on, it’s much more difficult than you might think when you’re facing people, even when you don’t believe them, to be rude enough to challenge them, right? That’s not so easy, especially if you’re an agreeable person and she is a rather agreeable person.

But I believe she, she failed in her journalistic responsibility. And as a consequence of that, she became too hot a property for us. And not just for us. And, well, that was, that was the reason for the decision. That was, that was my reasoning.

Now, this was manifestly not the correct behavior of a highly principled man or even a reasonably honest one. Jordan Peterson did something he clearly knew to be wrong, he did something he clearly knew to be hypocritical, but instead of simply owning up to his obvious failure when called on it in public, he attempted to concoct a ridiculous ex post facto excuse to justify it. Again.

He had to know that he was going to have to face the question sooner or later. He even appears to have prepared for it, and yet this response was the best that he could manage. If you watch the video, you can even see that Jordan Peterson has, he has, a reliable tell that warns the viewer when he’s about to say something that he knows is not true. He also betrays another tell that indicates when he is going to very carefully attempt to conceal the weakness of one of his assertions or conclusions.

Just watch for the repetitions and the adverbs. Once you learn to recognize them, you can identify when Jordan Peterson is trying to pull a fast one on his audience even when you don’t know what he’s talking about.

And the obvious question Peterson’s response raises is this: according to what theory of human rights or journalism does one’s own right to free speech rely upon one’s correct performance of nonexistent journalistic responsibilities?

There is no such theory. It’s a nonsensical assertion. It’s classic Petersonian bafflegarble. But it requires a high level of mental focus to penetrate the fog of Peterson’s word-salad and see what he is literally saying.

After twice seeing Peterson’s shameless dishonesty in action, I decided that it was time to delve deeper into the man’s actual work. Being a writer myself, I was aware that men express themselves differently in different media. Many eloquent speakers reveal themselves to be superficial thinkers in writing, and no few writers—myself included—are unable to express their genuinely profound thoughts in a facile manner in front of a microphone or a camera. Perhaps Peterson was much better in print than he was on video or on the Internet; after all, he was the bestselling author on the planet at the time.

So, I read his bestseller, 12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos. I read his would-be magnum opus, Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief. I even read his contribution to the UN Secretary General’s High Level Panel on Sustainable Development of which he was a member, Resilient People, Resilient Planet: A future worth choosing.

And this book is the result of what I learned from reading the three published works of Jordan Peterson.

UPDATE: Now the #1 New Release in Spiritual Self-Help too!

Darkstream: Decision time for Donald Trump

From the transcript of the Darkstream:

Not stick not stay that bag STATCOM and Amy’s to shake the happy a finish big medics begin my humanity is biggest angle. He started haven’t been I didn’t birthday last couple days I’ve been a little busy trying to get away it has a book on pre-order heels it for a while. Maybe I do? Big Mike Patton okay hang on and it she yeah let me see that I can give you okay hmm seems to be going in and out okay are we doing any better yeah it looks like oh it’s fixed okay, all right.

Seriously, that’s the actual transcript. I appear to have had a mic issue there at the start. But doesn’t it remind you of Jordan Peterson’s lectures, at least just a little? Perhaps I should do them all that way. Anyhow, it’s been disappointing to be reminded that not everyone is capable of grasping the basic idea that seeds planted in the spring face different prospects than those planted in the fall or winter.

The cooling climate

I give it another six years before the incessant warnings about “global warming” become warnings about “the next Ice Age”. Again.

The trend for fall snow across the northern hemisphere has been increasing, defying the forecasts over the last two decades for snows becoming an increasingly rare event. The 10-year running mean of the Boston area snowfall has skyrocketed to the highest level since snow records were kept and that goes back about 145 years! Fluctuations in the temperature regime and annual snowfalls are a function of about 25 global factors including changing oceanic oscillations mainly sea-surface temperature anomaly locations which impact atmospheric conditions creating certain jet stream configurations plus others such as solar activity and irradiance, geomagnetic activity, volcanism, etc.

Interestingly, some scientists have stated that increasing snow is consistent with climate change because warmer air holds more moisture, more water vapor and this can result in more storms with heavy precipitation. The trick, of course, is having sufficient cold air to produce that snow. But note that 93{9fe07fc990c3789707497e3d2c7a52a79af10be4715f25651e7c90f910695225} of the years with more than 60″ of snow in Boston were colder than average years. The reality is cooling, not warming, increases snowfall. Note the graph depicting declining January through March temperatures for 20 years at a rate of 1.5 degrees F. per decade in the Northeast!

The lesson, as always, is pay no attention to politically-motivated science that is used as an excuse to further centralize the economy and society.

Just do it already

The way that Leave Tories have pussyfooted around taking down the EU puppet Theresa May was always bound to fail. All the talk about “a good deal” and so forth was nonsense, as Hard Brexit with no agreement and no payout was always the ideal path to independence. They should stop issuing threats, eject the Puppet Minister, and get on with it.

Fury is growing over Mrs May’s deal which has been slammed by both sides of the debate after she pushed it through last night’s five hour sessions at Number 10. The Prime Minister is reportedly facing rebellion within her own party as backbench MPs begin to file votes of no confidence against Mrs May.

Senior MPs from the Brexit-supporting European Research Group (ERG) – chaired by Jacob Rees-Mogg – are reportedly readying to trigger a vote of no confidence against the PM.

Brexit-supporting MPs unhappy with Mrs May’s draft withdrawal agreement have already been vocal in suggestions she could resign.

BBC political editor Laura Kuenssberg said last night “Brexiteer anger” is driving backbenchers to take matters into their own hands – and this morning three Cabinet ministers have resigned, including Brexit secretary Dominic Raab.

They know, they absolutely know, that a majority of the British people favor Brexit. So stop worrying about Jeremy Corbyn and get the job done. Do that, and Corbyn’s Labour won’t be a problem.

UPDATE: Why is anyone surprised that Theresa May did what she was always expected to do, and sell out Britain’s interests at the last minute?

Theresa May is fighting for her political life today after Brexiteers effectively declared war – with Cabinet ministers quitting and an all-out bid to oust her. The Prime Minister is braced for a Tory no-confidence vote to be triggered potentially within hours after she vowed to push on with her controversial Brexit plan despite Dominic Raab and Esther McVey quitting accusing her of bowing to EU ‘blackmail’.

The EU negotiations gameplan is always the same. Posture, posture, posture, then give just a little bit at the very end to their puppet on the other side in order to allow said puppet to pull a rabbit out of the hat for maximum dramatic effect. It’s not working this time because everyone has learned to anticipate it.

And the idea that May is appealing to the loyalty of her cabinet members to try to salvage her position as Puppet Minister is simply absurd. What about loyalty to Her Majesty the Queen? What about loyalty to Great Britain.

Jordan Peterson, Trilateralist

On the off-chance you still doubted that Jordan Peterson is a globalist sell-out, he is currently attending the 42nd European Meeting of the Trilateral Commission, which is entitled Liberal Democracy in the Age of Political and Technological Disruption.

From February to Sunday more than 200 most influential individuals will be literally from all over the world in Ljubljana. This will be the annual European Meeting of the Trilateral Commission, which has nearly 400 members. The host is the head of the European section Trilaterale Jean-Claude Trichet, together with the host, the first husband of Gorenje, Franjo Bobincom, who is the Slovenian trilateral at the invitation of the first member of Trilaterala from Slovenia, former chairman of the NLB Board, Marko Voljc , who then went to the Belgian bank group KBC. The young guard of the successful and successful are Trilateral Slovenians Žiga Vavpotič , Chairman of the Board of Directors Outfit7 and co-organizer of the Ljubljana meeting, and Mark Boris Andrijanič from Uber Warsaw.

Ten years after the collapse of Lehman Brother’s, which was the beginning of the global economic crisis, one of the worst in the last hundred years, the economic future of Europe will be discussed in Ljubljana. Former President of the European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso , former President of the European Council Herman Van Rompuy , three former heads of state, and six former presidents of the government come from many distinguished thinkers and businessmen from all over the world, including Nigel Higgins of the Rothschild & Co of London, Jacob Frenkel , JPMorgan Chase International, head of Munich Security Conference Wolfgang Ischinger , former Secretary General of NATO Jaap de Hoop Scheffer , star globally-sold psychologist Jordan Peterson, Internet starter from Israel Yossi Vardi , former Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti , KBC Bank Group Thomas Leysen , former head of EBRD Jean Lemierre , Franz Fischler , Forum Alpbach, Lionel Barber of The Financial Times, President of the Atlantic Grupa Group of Companies Emil Tedeschi , Stanford’s Jure Leskovec and so on and so on. Vice-President of the European Commission, Frans Timmermans, the last moment of cancellation of the arrival due to urgent obligations in Brussels, is one of the candidates for the future President of the European Commission. The president of the Republic Borut Pahor is taking over the trilateral on Friday in the presidential palace, and on Saturday he is hosting a gala dinner at the National Gallery.

How fortunate that upon his arrival home the next day, the globally-sold one will be able to pick up a copy of the forthcoming Jordanetics: A Journey Into the Mind of Humanity’s Greatest Thinker, which is currently on preorder for release on November 19th.

Now what could the Commission’s interest in Jordan Peterson possibly be? He is post-ideological, right? Are we not reliably informed that he has no interest in politics? And we are told he doesn’t do philosophy either, right? So, are we to assume that a few of these global leaders are simply in need of a therapy session or two?