Battlefield 5 and GamerGate 2

This Darkstream starts poorly, but bear with it as it appears I am finally beginning to figure out how this livestreaming thing actually works.

This is Battlefield 5. The trailer was released quite recently and a couple of the striking things about it are the way in which that we have this figure here. At first you’re not sure what the time frame is, then you realize there are World War II tanks, some of the weapons are also WWII-era, and then you realize, wait a minute, is that a woman riding on a Jeep on the battlefield?

Now what is a jeep doing suddenly surrounded by all of these tanks, and is that a… what kind of plane is that? I can’t tell. It looked for a second like it might be some sort of Messerschmitt, like a Messerschmitt 109, but if you recall your World War II history then you realize that Messerschmitt 109s were mostly used in air-to-air combat, they were not used as ground support, and you certainly were not shooting them down with machine guns. And so you know what we’re seeing here…  and that was, if I recall correctly, that was actually a V1 buzz bomb rocket, which again you would not use on the battlefield, okay, they were used for bombing civilian centers.

Oh, and here we get rescued by a woman, a woman with a claw no less, interesting. So, a lot of people were not terribly impressed with this and for good reason. What is the purpose of this game, what are they trying to demonstrate? You know, I understand, I think we all understand, that an arcade game is not meant to be a serious World War II combat simulation okay? I played Modern Warfare 2 through Level 70 Elite and I also played two previous Battlefields, and you know, the interesting thing about this is that were we’re seeing the same sort of behavior from the producers that we were seeing when GamerGate first got started and what we’re seeing is the appeal to possibility.

So what SJWs do is they come in and then they begin messing around with the history. They begin messing around with whatever they can in order to get the point across that they want to get across, and so it doesn’t matter whether you’re talking about a fantasy game, it doesn’t matter whether you’re talking about a World War II game. What was particularly egregious about this is that we all had the same response when they first came out with the remake of the old Dungeons & Dragons games [Beamdog’s Balder’s Gate II etc] but the argument then was that it’s fantasy, you know, it’s  fantasy, so what does it matter? If you can have dragons, and you have flying dragons and dragons breathing fire and all this sort of thing, well, why can’t you have women who are just as good at fighting as men?

Well, the reason is because it’s not consistent with the story lines, it’s also not consistent with what the audience wants, and so now what we’re seeing is that they’re getting even more egregious, now they are putting these women in the battlefield and they are making them more heroic and more lethal than the men as this particular trailer demonstrated, and they’re using the excuse of saying, well you know there were WACS and there were WAVS and there were Russian snipers and all that sort of thing, and that’s all true, but none of that excuses what they’re doing. All they’re trying to do is come up with some sort of ex post facto rationalization for what they’re doing.

I’ve played dozens of World War II-related games, you can look on my shelf right there, you can see I’m an Advanced Squad Leader player. At no point in time in the extremely complicated Advanced Squad Leader system – where they literally count the precise numbers and probability of the appearance on the battlefield of the most obscure German, Romanian, and Russian tanks – at no point did they ever see any need to simulate women. I mean they’ve got everything from the late war  German militias that were called “the stomach battalions” because they were made of young kids and men who had previously been disqualified from service and they even got that accounted for My son and I are about to play Decision at Elst, which is the the first ASL Starter Kit campaign game, and they’ve actually got special rules for steeples because it’s important for the actual physical characteristics of the territory where that was found… again they’re going to that level of detail and yet there’s been no need whatsoever to figure out how to simulate women in combat in World War II.

So you know, this is a new level of egregious, this is a new level of SJW onslaught, this is a new offensive by SJWs in the game industry.

Dawkins Syndrome

Apparently my hypothesis that atheism is a mild form of autism was correct, but didn’t go anywhere nearly far enough. Scientists are determining that atheists are mutants who are literally unfit in a variety of ways.

Until the Industrial Revolution, we were under harsh conditions of Darwinian Selection, meaning that about 40{434e4795edb8718426f2262f16bc350bda72304c69f2c22d1de5754882bdf177} of children died before they reached adulthood. These children would have been those who had mutant genes, leading to poor immune systems and death from childhood diseases. But they would also have had mutant genes affecting the mind. This is because the brain, home to 84{434e4795edb8718426f2262f16bc350bda72304c69f2c22d1de5754882bdf177} of the genome, is extraordinarily sensitive to mutation, so mental and physical mutation robustly correlate. If these children had grown up, they might have had autism, schizophrenia, depression… but they had poor immune systems, so they never had the chance.

Under these conditions, prevalent until the nineteenth century, we were individually selected for but we were also “group selected” for. Ethnic groups are simply a genetic extended family and some groups fared better against the environment and enemy groups than others did, due to the kind of partly genetic psychological adaptations they developed.

Among these, the authors argue, was a very specific kind of religiosity which developed in all complex societies: the collective worship of gods concerned with morality. Belief in these kinds of gods was selected for, they maintain, because once we developed cities we had to deal with strangers—people who weren’t part of our extended family. By conceiving of a god who demanded moral behaviour towards other believers, people were compelled to cooperate with these strangers, meaning that large, highly cooperative groups could develop.

Computer models have proven that the more internally cooperative group—which is also hostile to infidel outsiders—wins the battle of group selection [The Evolutionary Dominance of Ethnocentric Cooperation. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation by Max Hartshorn, June 2013]. This very specific kind of religiousness was selected for and, indeed, it correlates with positive and negative ethnocentrism even today.

The authors demonstrate that this kind of religiousness has clearly been selected for in itself. It is about 40{434e4795edb8718426f2262f16bc350bda72304c69f2c22d1de5754882bdf177} genetic according to twin studies, it is associated with strongly elevated fertility, it can be traced to activity in specific regions of the brain, and it is associated with elevated health: all the key markers that something has been selected for.

And it is from here that the authors make the leap that has made SJW blood boil. Drawing on research by Michael Woodley of Menie and his team (see here and here)they argue that conditions of Darwinian selection have now massively weakened, leading to a huge rise in people with damaging mutations. This is evidenced in increasing rates of autism, schizophrenia, homosexuality, sex-dysmorphia, left-handedness, asymmetrical bodies and much else. These are all indicators of mutant genes.

Woodley suggests that weakened Darwinian selection would have led to the spread of “spiteful mutations” of the mind, which would help to destroy the increasingly physically and mentally sick group, even influencing the non-carriers to behave against their genetic interests, as carriers would help undermine the structures through which members learnt adaptive behaviour.

This is exactly what happened in the infamous Mouse Utopia experiment in the late 1960s, where a colony of mice was placed in conditions of zero Darwinian selection and eventually died out. [Death squared: The explosive growth and demise of a mouse population. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, January 1973(PDF)].

So Dutton and his team argue that, this being the case, deviation from this very specific form of religiousness—the collective worship of moral gods in which almost everyone engaged in 1800—should be associated with these markers of mutation. In other words, both atheists and those interested in spirituality with no moral gods (such as the paranormal) should be disproportionately mutants.

And this is precisely what they show. Poor physical and mental health are both significantly genetic and imply high mutational load. Dutton and his team demonstrate that this specific form of religiousness, when controlling for key factors such as SES, predicts much better objective mental and physical health, recovery from illness, and longevity than atheism.

It’s generally believed that religiousness makes you healthier because it makes you worry less and elevates your mood, but they turn this view on its head, showing that religious worshippers are more likely to carry gene forms associated with being low in anxiety. Schizophrenia, they show, is associated with extreme and anti-social religiosity, rather than collective worship. Similarly, belief in the paranormal is predicted by schizophrenia, and this is a marker of genetic mutation.

Next, they test autism, another widely accepted marker of mutation, as evidenced by the fact that it’s more common among the children of older men, whose fathers are prone to mutant sperm. Autism predicts atheism.

The good news is that once times get difficult again, atheism will again recede in both quantities and virulence. The bad news is that we are going to have to try to treat people born with what I suggest we call “Dawkins Syndrome” with a little more sympathy, since they probably can’t help their lack of belief or behavior much more than those born with Downe’s Syndrome.

How fortunate that those born with Dawkins Syndrome are so highly rational and inclined to put perfect faith in science. Surely they will accept these new scientific discoveries about their condition with grace and aplomb.

The EU buys time

But the resulting so-called chaos is very far from a negative result; it is certainly not the “worst possible outcome”. Remember, Italy is well-accustomed to operating without a sitting government.

Recall that when we previewing the possible outcomes of Italy’s government stalemate, in which president Mattarella had threatened to veto the choice of Paolo Savona as economy minister due to his anti-Euro/establishment sentiment, we said that the most likely – and market friendly – outcome, was for President Mattarella to give in to public pressure and the threat of a new election, averting a potential constitutional crisis. We also said that the second most likely outcome, and potentially far worse for markets, was that “if Mattarella and the coalition partners hold firm, we may be set for new elections, with M5S likely to repeat April’s success and Lega likely to increase its share of the votes, eating up Berlusconi’s party.”

Moments ago that’s precisely what happened, when Italy’s premier designate, Giuseppe Conte, 53, told reporters after meeting the head of state Sunday evening that he had handed back his mandate for forming “the government of change” to president Mattarella. “I can assure you that I did my utmost to try to fulfill this task” he added.

As we reported earlier, Mattarella, who is supposed to be impartial but appears to have been anything but in this case, and was tasked with naming the premier and ministers, earlier rejected the candidacy of economist Paolo Savona, 81, who has repeatedly urged the Italian government to plan for a euro-exit, and who has criticized what he says is German dominance over Europe.

In other words, Mattarella sided with Europe over Italy’s own choice.

“We worked for weeks, day and night, to ensure the birth of a government which defends the interests of Italian citizens. But someone (under pressure from whom?) said no to us,” Salvini wrote in a Facebook post, indirectly attacking the president’s veto of Savona.

“At this point, with the honesty, coherence and courage of always, you must now have a say,” Salvini added in a call for early elections.

Salvini’s scathing attack on the president continued: “If a government has to start conditioned by threats from Europe, that government won’t be backed by the League.” The League leader then said he’d seek a full mandate in the event of new elections.

This betrayal of Italy by Mattarella is neither unforeseen nor unexpected. Everyone knew he was EU-owned. Salvini and La Lega were fully prepared to go back to the polls, knowing that this possibility would only strengthen the euroskeptics’ position, which is why they refused to back down over the Finance Ministry. I tend to doubt 5 Stelle are shedding any tears over the chance to increase their numbers in the Parliament either.

The Cargo Cultists respond

A Jordan Peterson fan responds to my apology to Jordan Peterson:

Vox Day is an arrogant creep who thinks he’s the burning bush and everyone else is stupid. If you met him in real life, or ever tried to correspond with him in any serious way, you would know that. He’s also envious of anyone who achieves more success and notoriety than him, or even threatens to achieve more of a following.

In short, this is not a good person who is the least bit interested in anything approaching unity on the alt-right or new right or whatever you want to call it. He is only interested in his own self promotion and achieving some level of fame and fortune by hawking his own books and maybe latching on to some of his own sycophants if he thinks they can sell some books on his label too, so he can make more money off people he views as his intellectual inferiors and does not really view as a threat.

Basically he’s a failed musicians who tries to give you this impression that he is on Jordan Peterson’s level as an intellectual, with these phony claims about his supposed genius IQ, and BTW it wouldn’t even matter if that were true because it doesn’t make you a good person, and he’s not. Lastly, Jordan Peterson was raised in a tough place around tough men, and that teaches you things like humility and respect for others, cause the alternative could be a punch in the face. Vox Day, OTOH, grew up with a silver spoon in his mouth, around other effeminate male who were no threat to him physically, and it shows in his demeanor. Thats why he’s such an arrogant pr*ck with a smart mouth.

In closing, I’ll guarantee you Peterson is the kind of guy you would want to have a few drinks and laughs with, whereas Vox Day wouldn’t give you the time of day, unless he thought you could help advance his career and perhaps make him some money. I know his fan-club will jump all over me for this, but I’ve encountered the man and he is NOT a nice guy, he’s only not nearly as smart as he wants you to believe that he is. In that respect he is not even in Jordan Peterson’s league.

Far from being upset by these imprecations, I find these retreats to attempted rebuttal by ad hominem to be very satisfying indeed. They make it very clear to all and sundry that Peterson’s most enthusiastic defenders have no way to even begin trying to defend his evil philosophy, his inept syllogisms, or his insane mission.

After all, what possible reason could anyone have for questioning the intellectual and philosophical legitimacy of a man who has already done so much good for the world and only wishes to do even more by eliminating group identification, war, and evil.

  1. It’s very strange that no one believes I am envious of Jensen Huang, NN Taleb, John Carmack, Richard Garriott, or Neal Stephenson, the men of talent I admire who happen to have considerably more success than the individuals I criticize. It’s downright inexplicable that no one ever accuses me of envying Milo, Mike Cernovich, Jack Posobiec, or Stefan Molyneux despite the fact that they all have much larger followings than I do.
  2. If I was primarily interested in self-promotion, then why do I turn down 99 percent of the interviews and media appearances that are offered to me? All one has to do is ask anyone who has tried to get me on their show or podcast, or interview me for their newspaper or magazine or television show, to learn how interested in self-promotion I am. I don’t have an agent, I don’t send out press releases and I don’t ask to appear on anyone’s show. Not even my friends’ shows when I have a new book out. I don’t think people understand how often the media contacts me for various reasons; I literally just got off the phone with my friend James Delingpole from Breitbart and The Spectator after he called me with some questions about a piece he is working on. It’s not about me and it may not even mention me.
  3. The band I founded, Psykosonik, had four Billboard Top 40 Club Chart hits, (three of which I co-wrote), beat out Prince for Best Dance Record at the Minnesota Music Awards, had our music featured in movies and Nintendo games, played live at First Avenue and Glam Slam, and was invited to play at the second Lollapalooza. I do not consider that to be a failure.
  4. Jordan Peterson is, by his own admission, a physical coward who literally ran from fights in his school days. I spent six years in the best mixed martial arts school in the state, have sparred with several national Tang Soo Do and Karate champions, have won school fights, street fights, and ring fights, and was given the name “Berserker” by a nationally respected sensei. The reason I don’t fear being punched in the mouth isn’t because I am surrounded by effeminate males, but because I know for a fact that I can take a punch and I can give it back with interest.
  5. I have no idea who this “Whiskey Slick” is. I suspect our “encounters” are limited to him reading my blog.

Another cargo cultist can’t believe that Peterson claimed human thought was fundamentally different as little as five centuries ago.

Yeah…….where in the world did you read JBP say men 500 years ago thought differently? One of JBP’s arguments is that a significant part of our behvior and thought processes are older than trees…

In Maps of Meaning, by Jordan Peterson.

  1. Prior to the time of Descartes, Bacon and Newton, man lived in an animated, spiritual world, saturated with meaning, imbued with moral purpose. The nature of this purpose was revealed in the stories people told each other—stories about the structure of the cosmos and the place of man. But now we think empirically (at least we think we think empirically), and the spirits that once inhabited the universe have vanished.
  2. The consequence of exploration that allows for emotional regulation (that generates security, essentially) is not objective description, as the scientist might have it, but categorization of the implications of an unexpected occurrence for specification of means and ends. Such categorization is what an object “is,” from the perspective of archaic affect and subjective experience. The orienting reflex, and the exploratory behavior following its manifestation, also allows for the differentiation of the unknown into the familiar categories of objective reality. However, this ability is a late development, emerging only four hundred years ago, and cannot be considered basic to “thinking.” Specification of the collectively apprehensible sensory qualities of something—generally considered, in the modern world, as the essential aspect of the description of reality—merely serves as an aid to the more fundamental process of evaluation, determining the precise nature of relevant or potentially relevant phenomena.
  3. The distance between the idea and the action has widened within the course of recent evolutionary history. Medieval people, unused to rhetorical speech, were easily seized emotionally or inspired to action by passionate words.

Perhaps he doesn’t realize that the furthest back we can place that reference to Descartes, Bacon, and Newton is 1561 AD, when Francis Bacon was born. And then we have this double-team:

So the argument from this guy is that because he doesn’t understand Dr. Peterson, that Peterson must be crazy? Isn’t that called Dunning-Kreuger effect?

Vox Day frequently discusses the 30 IQ point communication gap. If this Peterson affair has taught me nothing else, it has driven this point home. Dr Peterson is rumored to have an IQ of 158 btw. I’ve kept a close eye on Vox’s commentary at the blog. The “arguments” made against Peterson there are no more substantive there than they are here–at least to someone who refrains from using the term “Dark Lord”.

To the contrary, it is because, unlike nearly all of his fans, I do understand what Jordan Peterson is writing that I say he is crazy. It seems strange that this is in any way debatable, considering that the man is open about being prescribed medication for his mental illness. And if the arguments I have presented here are not real, actual, of a considerable amount quantity, or having practical effect, then obviously I shall have to continue to dig deeper and present even more substantial evidence and arguments against Dr. Peterson.

I note that this implication that all the combined arguments presented in the videos and on the blog are not substantive was made just yesterday. And then, there are a fair collection of comments like these.

You are a master at double speak! and very snide. People need to watch out for sophists like you. You try to look intelligent with your leather bound books but your thinking is as shallow as a paddling pool.

Always nice to hear from the rhetoricals. But this comment probably takes the cake.

Alright….. Just stepping into the war-room you have going against Jordan Peterson here…. How’s it going, guys? Just pouring myself some coffee, don’t mind me…. Okay…. We’ve got the map over the table, the radar-reports coming in, the jeeps rolling by…. The choppers thundering overhead…. Cool cool cool! Good to see us all making progress, hey? At this rate, our forces will be in Toronto by as early as NEXT WEEK! Ahh, yes! There’s Admiral-Lieutenant-Commander mastermind, Vox Day I see entering the headquaters tent…. TEN HUTT!!! …..Say, Vox, like…. What’s the VICTORY CONDITION here anyway? Assuming you do win this rather sad and autistic deathstruggle you have going against Peterson and his people…. (Ohh, and I’m sure it’s ALL VERY EPIC AND AWESOME AND THOROUGHLY PLANNED OUT TO THE LAST ACT, DUDE! -Stop looking at me like that, Vox! Stop looking at me like I’m some spy sent from the Enemy to sabotage your incredible efforts here! I’m just a neutral observer from a Foriegn Power taking notes, alright? Don’t mind me!) Like…. What do you hope to GAIN, by helping Peterson’s enemies, even if you DO manage to win and take the guy down, huh Vox? A kiss from Kathy Newman? Is THAT what you’re looking for? How about a handjob from Yvette Flarka? Have a thing for Mrs. Flarka, Vox? Is THAT what this anti-Peterson crusade of your’s is about? How about an endorsement from Black Lives Matter? Maybe a gold star awarded to you from King Richard Spencer to cherish and show your family when you get home from this war? I’m sure THAT fake-ass “Conservative” race-pimp Sociaoist creep would like to see Peterson out of the way as well! Maybe, uhhh….. Hillary Clinton might spend a little more time with you, Vox? Gain you some of that noteriety you seem desperate for? Yeah- I’m sure praise from the Clintons or the Treudeaus for taking out an annoying rival of their’s will be JUST THE KIND OF GOOD PR you need, huh boy? Look, what I’m getting at here, Vox Day, is that you can tell a hell of alot from a man by the enemies he makes, can’t you? All the characters I mentioned above really would be quite pleased if you took Jordan Peterson down for them, believe me they would! What the fuck do you think you’re trying to accomplish here, Vox? Seriously? My own people would like to know…. Who’s side are you REALLY on? You and the halfbrained fools who kiss YOUR ass for a pat on the head? Antifa, Vox? Are you some Antifa pig in disguise? I’m wondering about that, you know? I mean, just recently, these last two weeks, you certainly have decided that you are MIGHTY THREATENED by the likes of Jordan Peterson, and that the time has come to mobilize against him. I’m telling you, Vox- if you ever needed a way to commit politocal suicide for you, your website and your publishing company, this is it, right here! I’d laugh at how ridiculous you are being about this, if I didn’t suspect some other plot you have cooking is up, and that taking down Peterson is only the tip of the iceberg. It’s gotta be something hidden and Machiavellian like that, because, Vox- honestly- I KNOW you’re not a fucking moron, dude….. There MUST be an actual reason you want Peterson off the board! 

It’s utterly bizarre to me to see how Peterson fans like these still believe that Jordan Peterson isn’t on the same team as Hillary Clinton, George Soros, Jacob Zuma, John Podesta and all the other globalists and eminent persons. As I mentioned to the Peterson die-hard Rick Flair, Peterson isn’t opposed to globalism, the United Nations, or utopianism. He’s trying to FIX globalism by creating a dynamic utopianism that works because he is aware that the static utopianism of the 20th Century variety doesn’t.

Not as easy as it looks

The campaign to equalitize the British military meets a setback:

The first woman to join an infantry regiment since defence chiefs lifted a ban on females serving in combat units has quit after just two weeks of training, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

The recruit dropped out of an 18-week course this month after falling behind her male counterparts on endurance marches and failing other physical tests at a training base in Suffolk.

It is understood that when the woman resigned, she admitted having underestimated the physical requirements of being an infantry recruit. She also told officers that living in female-only accommodation made her feel ‘like an outsider’ and weakened her resolve. Her resignation is a huge blow to officials who are determined to integrate women into fighting units in the Army, Royal Marines and Royal Air Force.

The feminist notion that resolve can overcome reality tends to remind one of the WWI French generals’ firm belief that esprit was capable of overcoming machine guns.

Darkstream: 7 Answers for Jordan Peterson


Seven Answers to Jordan Peterson’s seven questions on the Darkstream.

1. What if it was nothing but our self-deceit, our cowardice, hatred and fear, that pollutes our experience and turns the world into hell?

Then the problem could be solved by sweet reason and a dedication to facing the truth about ourselves. But it isn’t so it can’t. And it isn’t our self-deceit, cowardice, hatred, and fear, but our greed, our pride, our lusts, and our will to power. Beyond that is the problem of supernatural evil, which is totally unaffected by our internal emotions. Moreover, this concept of evil contradicts Peterson’s own stated belief that it is group identification that lies at the bottom of the human motivation for evil

2. This is a hypothesis, at least—as good as any other, admirable and capable of generating hope. Why can’t we make the experiment, and find out if it is true? 

Because it will turn out like every other utopian experiment; in large quantities of bloodshed. Especially since Peterson is determined to try the experiment on a global level.

3. Does survival itself depend upon a solution to the problem of war?

No. Because war is not the problem as far as human survival is concerned. Neither is religion. Science, and more importantly, technology, are what pose a potential danger to the species. That being said, inasmuch as this is a problem of survival, the problem is likely to cure itself, as the infrastructure required to maintain this level of destructive technology is more fragile than either the Earth or the species.

4. Is Tammy Peterson’s dream that it was five minutes to midnight back in 2016 prophetic or significant in any way?

No. It was a bad dream and nothing more. Her dream is considerably less significant than Jordan Peterson’s dreams about dog-headed aliens butchering his beautiful cousin and offering the meat to him.

5. Is history itself a unitary phenomenon?

No. History is neither a force nor an inevitability. It is merely a very incomplete record of the past. Peterson is no more correct in his bizarre take on history than Marx or Fukuyama were.

6. Is Western culture the only one to possess a history based on objective events?

No. There are ancient Egyptian records of the height of the annual Nile flooding dating back to 3050 BC. The formal rules of sumo date back to 726 BC. The tax records of the Qin Dynasty date back to 221 BC.

7. Have I have discovered something that no one else has any idea about?

No, you’re just a very frightened and mentally disturbed individual who was literally driven crazy due to your fear of death.

Jordan Peterson’s grand solution to war is the elimination of competing group identities. One world, one race, one identity. Evil will be vanquished and paradise on Earth will result.

SJW Wars continues to fail

Disney continues to strangle the goose with the golden eggs:

Disney and Lucasfilm’s Solo: A Star Wars Story is struggling in its debut at the Memorial Day box office, where it is coming in well behind expectations with a projected $110 million-$115 million four-day holiday. The three-day weekend tally looks to be in the $90 million-plus range.

The Han Solo origin story is pacing well behind fellow standalone movie, Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016), which took in $29 million in Thursday-evening previews on its way to a $71 million Friday and a three-day debut of $155 million.

The news is grim overseas, where Solo is launching in most points around the globe timed to its U.S. launch, including China. The movie took in a dismal $11.4 million from its first 43 markets on Wednesday and Thursday. Disney hasn’t yet provided numbers from China, but box-office sources there show the movie opening to roughly $3 million on Friday for a possible weekend debut in the $10 million range.

And to think we thought Lucas was ruining the franchise….

Excerpt: WARDOGS INC #2

HUNTER KILLER is the second in the WARDOGS INC. series of Merc-SF action by G.D. Stark

“So,” Jones asked, punching in his order on the table computer. “Where the hell is Ward?”

“Arrested,” I said, taking a coffee from the robowaitress. One sugar, one cream. I considered having a shot of bourbon added then decided against it.

“Arrested?” Zelag and Jones said simultaneously.

“Yeah,” I said, selecting my own order. Pancakes sounded good.

“Why?” Jones asked.

“The cops pushed him, questioned his integrity, almost accused him of doing it himself,” I said. “Damned pigs.”

“And he blew up,” Jones said.

“Bingo. They kept pressing him until he snapped and shoved the cop, they stunned him, then off to the tank he went.”

“That’s bullshit,” Zelag said. “They should be talking to the crazy butterfly people, not us.”

“What did you do?” Jones asked.

The robowaitress approached and brought my pancakes, along with Jones’s and Welag’s orders. She refilled my coffee silently, then wheeled off.

“What was I supposed to do?” I said. “I let them take him away. He was out of control and it wasn’t like I could take them all down and carry him out. I did the responsible thing. I answered their questions like a good little sheep. But they had it in for Ward. They pushed him too far.”

“We should bust him out,” Zelag said.

“What?” I said. “You barely know him.”

“He’s a Wardog,” Zelag said. “That’s good enough for me.”

“He’s right, Tommy,” Jones said. “We could bust him out easy.”

“We’re going to requisition arms from the WDI office so we can hit a local police station?” I said. “They’ve probably already cleared out everything we’ve got at the house and in the car.”

“Naw,” said Jones. “Hell, we could probably neutralize everyone in the station if I could get ahold of a few ingredients at a hardware store. Jam the sensors and the sniffers, kill the lights, hack the ventilation and put down the cops—with our optics we could get in and out in the dark—10 minutes.”

“I’m not going to say I’m not tempted,” I said. And I was. I’d love to put the jackasses in their place. “We’d never get off planet after that, though,” I said, realizing how screwed we’d be without official Wardogs support.

“I have friends in the diplomatic corps here,” Zelag said. “I could get a system jumper lined up. They wouldn’t even have to know we were Wardogs. No questions asked.”

I chewed thoughtfully. We could do it. Ward was our boy. If I could simply– Then my transceiver pinged and I twitched my eyes to bring up an incoming message. I saw Jones and Zelag were receiving as well. We’d all been jacked before this mission, since the tech level allowed it.

I read the message off the table top in front of me. It wasn’t really on the table, of course, but that’s how it looks when you’re jacked. I wasn’t on AI and I was firewalled so those Unity bastards couldn’t turn me Manchurian, but it was good to forgo carrying a tablet when you’re in the field.

Falkland, Jones, Zelag—why the hell are you screwing around with the local police? Shut the hell up and let legal team play dice. Do not answer any more questions and for God’s sake don’t do anything else stupid. Client dead, lethal force utilized at public event, and now Ward is assaulting peace officers? Shut down and sit tight, the cavalry is on the way. This is NOT the time to go off the chain!
—Captain Arden Williams, Sales Division

“Damn,” Jones said after I showed it to them.

“Yeah,” I said. This should have been simple. Now I was in the sauce.

Zelag yawned. “I figure getting some sleep is probably the best way to keep out of trouble.” He stabbed at a last piece of sausage and washed it down with a swallow of tomato juice. Or maybe it was a Bloody Mary. I didn’t ask.

“Agreed,” Jones said. His eyes unfocused for a moment. “There’s a hotel about five minutes walk from here. Anyone got any money?”

“I have the company card,” I said. I was half-way through my pancakes but I’d lost my appetite. “Let’s go.”

We got ourselves rooms and I lay down on the bed without undressing. I was beat inside and out.

The door chimed cheerfully, waking me up. I rolled out of bed quickly and looked for my gun, then realized it was gone. The events of the last 24 hours raced back to me. That death—geez—I tried to tell myself it was a nightmare but knew full well it wasn’t. No nightmare was that vivid. I walked to the door and looked at the small security monitor to see who was outside. There I saw a pair of women and three guys in suits. The woman in front rang the chime again.

Great. Ambulance chasers. I ran my fingers through my hair and opened the door.

“Tommy Falkland?” said the woman. I nodded. “Veronique Parey. I’m a Senior Investigator in the Intelligence Department.” Ah, so this was the cavalry. Not bad. “This is my partner, Bettina Wolfsganger,” she continued, gesturing to the second woman. Veronique was maybe 35, tall, thin and athletic, with high cheekbones and long black hair. Bettina was a little shorter and more compact, with blonde hair and wide-set silver eyes. She was either wearing fancy contacts or had optical implants. My bet was on the latter, given her occupation.

“May we come in?” Parey asked.

“Sure,” I said. “Who are these guys?” I asked, gesturing towards the guys in suits.

“Just the local element of your new legal team. Jeston, Forman, and Ashbach.”

“Let me get some coffee started,” I said. I walked to the small kitchenette and studied the machine I knew could produce caffeine. It had too many options and my eyes were blurry.

“Here,” Wolfsganger said, walking in behind me and pressing a button. There was a hiss and a moment later a panel opened containing a mug of black coffee. “Cream? Sugar?” she said. “One of each,” I replied. She pressed a couple of buttons and my coffee was complete.

“Thanks,” I said, taking a sip.

“The situation is not ideal,” Parey said, sitting on the edge of the bed. Two of the lawyers sat on the love seat, another stood uncomfortably against the wall. “But I’ve seen worse.”

“Tell me about it,” I said. I was starting to feel less stupid as the caffeine hit my system.

“We’re working on getting Ward out,” she said. There was another chime at the door and I got up to let in Jones and Zelag.

“Looks like a great party,” Jones said, smiling and sitting on the bed next to Parey. “Who are you all?”

“This is our legal team, I think,” I said.

Wolfsganger stood just inside the kitchenette, silently watching us over a cup of steaming tea. Zelag looked around for a seat, then sat on the bed on the other side of Parey. I stayed standing.

“We’re considerably more than that,” Parey said. “You and the rest of your team not only blew the mission, but managed to get yourselves into a legal mess. If you’re lucky, we’ll get you safely disentangled and off the planet before you screw up anything else. And while these three gentlemen are the legal team. Betti and I are investigators who have been assigned to this case. We’re going to find out what happened and how they managed to get past you boys.”

“We didn’t kill him, you know,” Zelag said.

“Of course not,” Parey agreed, with a professional smile. “But let me take a little stab in the dark here. The four of you don’t think much of the local police, and after you were all taken into custody, you were less than perfectly cooperative during the interview process. I’ll even bet that the three of you are already planning to break into the police station and exfil Mr. Ward.”

Zelag’s eyes widened. Jones shrugged. I did my best to look as if the thought hadn’t even crossed our minds.

“Look,” she said. “I get it. You’re mercs. Your job is to break stuff and do bad things. But what you have to understand is that our job is to fix things and correct the problems that are occasionally caused by excessively violent men.”

“The three of you are going to have to trust us,” Wolfsganger declared, entering the conversation for the first time. “This is far from the worst situation we’ve had to clean up. All we need you guys to do is not dig the hole any deeper, all right?”

“Thanks, Betti,” Parey said, then turned back to us. “Now listen. As the first order of business, you three need to stay put, sit tight, and shut up. That is an order!”

“Who put you in charge,” Jones muttered. I kicked his shin.

Direct from the lunatic’s mouth

This is the most informative, and damning, section of Maps of Meaning. Perhaps it will help some of the morons and midwits who have never read any of this and simply can’t seem to grasp that Jordan Peterson is a globalist lunatic with delusions of grandiosity and a Messiah complex despite it being repeatedly pointed out to them.

I have put what I consider to be the most important revelations in bold. It’s a bit frustrating, since I have been telling people about this since the day I read what confirmed my earlier suspicions about the man, but instead of simply going to the source and determining if I was telling the truth or not, literally scores of Peterson defenders opted to instead accuse me of everything from jealousy to slander to invention. But it is not only all right there, it has all been right there since 1999!

Christ said, the kingdom of heaven is spread out upon the earth, but men do not see it. What if it was nothing but our self-deceit, our cowardice, hatred and fear, that pollutes our experience and turns the world into hell? This is a hypothesis, at least—as good as any other, admirable and capable of generating hope. Why can’t we make the experiment, and find out if it is true?

The central ideas of Christianity are rooted in Gnostic philosophy, which, in accordance with psychological laws, simply had to grow up at a time when the classical religions had become obsolete. It was founded on the perception of symbols thrown up by the unconscious individuation process which always sets in when the collective dominants of human life fall into decay. At such a time there is bound to be a considerable number of individuals who are possesed by archetypes of a numinous nature that force their way to the surface in order to form new dominants.

This state of possession shows itself almost without exception in the fact that the possessed identify themselves with the archetypal contents of their unconscious, and, because they do not realize that the role which is being thrust upon them is the effect of new contents still to be understood, they exemplify these concretely in their own lives, thus becoming prophets and reformers.

In so far as the archetypal content of the Christian drama was able to give satisfying expression to the uneasy and clamorous unconscious of the many, the consensus omnium raised this drama to a universally binding truth—not of course by an act of judgment, but by the irrational fact of possession, which is far more effective.

Thus Jesus became the tutelary image or amulet against the archetypal powers that threatened to possess everyone. The glad tidings announced: “It has happened, but it will not happen to you inasmuch as you believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of God!”

Yet it could and it can and it will happen to everyone in whom the Christian dominant has decayed….

Dear Dad

I promised you that one day I would tell you what the book I am trying to write is supposed to be about. I haven’t been working on it much in the last month, although in some regards it is always on my mind and everything I learn, in my other work, has some bearing upon it. Because I have abandoned it, temporarily, I thought perhaps I could tell you about it, and that would help me organize my thoughts.

I don’t completely understand the driving force behind what I have been working on, although I understand it better now than I used to, three or four years ago, when it was literally driving me crazy. I had been obsessed with the idea of war for three or four years prior to that, often dreaming extremely violent dreams, centered around the theme of destruction. I believe now that my concern with death on a mass scale was intimately tied into my personal life, and that concerns with the meaning of life on a personal level (which arise with the contemplation of death) took a general form for me, which had to do with the value of humanity, and the purpose of life in general.

Carl Jung has suggested that all personal problems are relevant to society, because we are all so much alike, and that any sufficiently profound solution to a personal problem may, if communicated, reduce the likelihood of that problem existing in anyone’s experience in the future. This is in fact how society and the individual support one another. It was in this way that my concern with war, which is the application of death on the general level, led me into concepts and ideas concerning the meaning of life on the personal level, which I could never have imagined as relevant, or believable, prior to learning about them—and which I still believe border on what might normally be considered insanity.

The reasons for war, many believe, are rooted in politics. Since it is groups of men that fight, and since groups indulge in politics, this belief seems well-founded and in fact contains some truth. It is just as true, however, that it is a good thing to look for something you don’t want to find in a place where you know it won’t be—and the modern concern with global politics, and the necessity to be involved in a “good cause, ” rather than to live responsibly, seems to me to be evidence that the desire not to find often overpowers the real search for truth. You see, it is true that people don’t want the truth, because the truth destroys what lack of faith erects, and the false comfort it contains. It is not possible to live in the world that you wish could be, and in the real world at the same time, and it often seems a bad bargain to destroy fantasy for reality. It is desire for lack of responsibility that underlies this evasion, in part—but it is also fear of possibility. At least this is how it seems to me.

Because everyone is a product of their times, and because that applies to me as well, I looked for what I wanted to find where it was obvious to everyone it would be—in politics, in political science, in the study of group behavior. This took up the years I spent involved with the NDP, and in studying political science, until I learned that the application of a system of thought, like socialism (or any other ism, for that matter) to a problem, and solving that problem, were not the same thing. In the former case, you have someone (who is not you) to blame—the rich, the Americans, the white people, the government, the system—whatever, as long as it is someone else.

I came to realize, slowly, that a problem of global proportions existed as a problem because everyone on the globe thought and acted to maintain that problem. Now what that means is that if the problem has a solution, then what everyone thinks is wrong—and that meant, too, that what I thought had to be fundamentally wrong. Now the problem with this line of reasoning is simple. It leads inexorably to the following conclusion: the more fundamental the problem, the more fundamental the error—in my own viewpoint.

I came to believe that survival itself, and more, depended upon a solution to the problem of war. This made me consider that perhaps everything I believed was wrong. This consideration was not particularly pleasant, and was severely complicated by the fact that I had also come to realize that, although I definitely believed a variety of things, I did not always know what I believed—and when I knew what, I did not know why.

You see, history itself conditioned everything I believed, even when I did not know it, and it was sheer unconscious arrogance that made me posit to begin with that I had half a notion of who or what I was, or what the process of history had created, and how I was affected by that creation.

It is one thing to be unconscious of the answers, and quite another to be unable to even consider the question.

I had a notion that confronting what terrified me—what turned my dreams against me—could help me withstand that terrible thing. This idea—granted me by the grace of God—allowed me to believe that I could find what I most wanted (if I could tolerate the truth; if I was willing to follow wherever it led me; if I was willing to devote my life to acting upon what I had discovered, whatever that might be, without reservation— knowing somehow that once started, an aborted attempt would destroy at least my self-respect, at most my sanity and desire to live).

I believe now that everyone has this choice in front of them, even when they do not know or refuse to admit it; that everyone makes this choice, with every decision and action they take.

I mentioned earlier that history conditioned what I think and acted. Pursuit of this realization—which is rather self-evident, once realized—has led me to the study of history, as a psychological phenomenon. You see, if what I think and am is a product of history, that means that history must take form inside me, so to speak, and from inside me determine who I am. This is easier to understand if you consider that I carry around inside me an image of you—composed of memories of how you act, and what you expected, and depictions of your behavior. This image has had profound impact on howI behaved, as a child—when, even in your absence, I was compelled to follow the rules which you followed (and which I learned through imitation, and which you instilled into me, through praise and punishment). Sometimes that image of you, in me, even takes the form of a personality, when I dream about you.

So it is a straightforward matter to believe, from the psychological point of view, that each individual carries around an image of his parents, and that this image governs his behavior, at least in part.

But you see it is the case that the rules that you followed—and which I learned from you—were not rules that you yourself created, but rather those that you handed to me just as you had been handed them while still a child.

And it is more than likely true that the majority of what I learned from you was never verbalized—that the rules which governed the way you acted (and that I learned while watching you) were implicit in your behavior, and are now implicit in mine. It was exactly in this manner that I learned language—mostly from watching and listening, partly from explicit instruction. And just as it is certainly possible (and most commonly so) to speak correctly and yet to be unable to describe the rules of grammar that “underlie” the production of language, it is possible to act upon the world and make assumptions about its nature without knowing much about the values and beliefs that necessarily underlie those actions and assumptions.

The structure of our language has been created in a historical process, and is in a sense an embodiment of that process. The structure of that which governs our actions and perceptions has also been created during the course of history, and is the embodiment of history.

The implications of this idea overwhelmed me. I have been attempting to consider history itself as a unitary phenomenon—as a single thing, in a sense—in order to understand what it is, and how it affects what I think and do. If you realize that history is in some sense in your head, and you also realize that you know nothing of the significance of history, of its meaning—which is almost certainly true—then you must realize that you know nothing of the significance of yourself, and of y our own meaning.

I am writing my book in an attempt to explain the psychological significance of history—to explain the meaning of history. In doing so, I have “discovered” a number of interesting things:

1.All cultures, excepting the Western, do not possess a history based on “objective events.” The history of alternative cultures—even those as highly developed as the Indian, Chinese, and ancient Greco-Roman—is mythological, which means that it describes what an event meant, in psychological terms, instead of how it happened, in empirical terms.

2.All cultures, even those most disparate in nature, develop among broadly predictable lines, and have, within their mythological history, certain constant features (just as all languages share grammatical structure, given a sufficiently abstract analysis). The lines among which culture develops are determined biologically, and the rules which govern that development are the consequence of the pyschological expression of neurophysiological structures. (This thesis will be the most difficult for me to prove, but I have some solid evidence in its favor, and as I study more neuroanatomy and neuropsychology, the evidence becomes clearer).

3.Mythological renditions of history, like those in the Bible, are just as “true” as the standard Western empirical renditions, just as literally true, but how they are true is different. Western historians describe (or think they describe) “what” happened. The traditions of mythology and religion describe the significance of what happened (and it must be noted that if what happens is without significance, it is irrelevant).

Anyway—I can’t explain in one letter the full scope of what I am planning to do. In this book, I hope to describe a number of historical tendencies, and how they affect individual behavior—in the manner I have attempted in this letter. More importantly, perhaps, I hope to describe not only what the problem is (in historical terms), but where a possible solution might lie, and what that solution conceivably could be—and I hope to describe it in a manner that makes its application possible.

If you ‘re interested in me telling you more (I can’t always tell if someone is interested) then I will, later. I don’t know, Dad, but I think I have discovered something that no one else has any idea about, and I’m not sure I can do it justice. Its scope is so broad that I can see only parts of it clearly at one time, and it is exceedingly difficult to set down comprehensibly in writing. You see, most of the kind of knowledge that I am trying to transmit verbally and logically has always been passed down from one person to another by means of art and music and religion and tradition, and not by rational explanation, and it is like translating from one language to another. It’s not just a different language, though—it is an entirely different mode of experience.

Anyways

I’m glad that you and Mom are doing well. Thank you for doing my income tax returns.

Jordan

It has been almost twelve years since I first grasped the essence of the paradox that lies at the bottom of human motivation for evil: People need their group identification, because that identification protects them, literally, from the terrible forces of the unknown. It is for this reason that every individual who is not decadent will strive to protect his territory, actual and psychological. But the tendency to protect means hatred of the other, and the inevitability of war—and we are now too technologically powerful to engage in war. To allow victory to the other, however—or even continued existence, on his terms—means subjugation, dissolution of protective structure, and exposure to that which is most feared. For me, this meant “damned if you do, damned if you don’t”: belief systems regulate affect, but conflict between belief systems is inevitable.

Formulation and understanding of this terrible paradox devastated me. I had always been convinced that sufficient understanding of a problem—any problem—would lead to its resolution. Here I was, however, possessed of understanding that seemed not only sufficient but complete, caught nonetheless between the devil and the deep blue sea. I could not see how there could be any alternative to either having a belief system or to not having a belief system—and could see little but the disadvantage of both positions.

So, in case you still haven’t figured it out yet, Peterson’s grand solution to war is the elimination of competing group identities. One world, one race, one identity. Evil will be vanquished and paradise on Earth will result.

Yes, it’s really that stupid. And notice that in this passage, he made the very transformation from inference to fact, from thought experiment to grasping the essence of the paradox, that Schiff points out in his article on Peterson.

Darkstream: why comics are collapsing

From the transcript of last night’s live Darkstream. I’m still figuring out the system; for some reason the charts I prepared in the edit screen were not available once I went live. Also, thanks to Hooper, we were able to determine that the donation system is working but you have to use the Streamlabs system and not the YouTube one, since my channel has been deemed ineligible for both monetisation and SuperChats by YouTube.

What happened is that comics went from being a fairly broadly distributed product to one that was
completely dominated by a single distributor. Now, what usually happens in the case of a single  distributor. You can probably guess. They’ve got a monopoly position and so they have a tendency to significantly increase their prices at the expense of everyone else. Remember, the distribution is part of the pie and distribution cannot, by definition, increase the pie, and so it’s always going to have to take something from somebody else.

Now if we’re going to take it, are you gonna take it from Marvel? No, you can’t. Marvel has about  40{434e4795edb8718426f2262f16bc350bda72304c69f2c22d1de5754882bdf177} of the market. Are you gonna take it from DC? No you can’t. because DC is already very closely tied to Diamond. So who do they take it from? Well, when a distributor can’t take it from the suppliers, they take it from the retailers, and that’s exactly what’s happened.

You know I knew what this situation was going to be even before I knew what the numbers were because I have worked in a distribution retail channel before. My father owned a large supplier in a particular industry and so my first job out of college was actually managing part of the distribution channel, so what that means is that if you look at a normal distributor, the kind of distributor that Arkhaven is working with, the kind of distributor that Castalia is working with, they usually do a 20{434e4795edb8718426f2262f16bc350bda72304c69f2c22d1de5754882bdf177} markup at most.

Diamond’s markup is 38 percent. And so what that means is that if you run the numbers and you work out the details, then what you see is that instead of taking 11.9 percent of the total retail price of a comic, that would be what a normal distributor takes, Diamond is actually taking 22 percent of the total retail price of a comic. so where does that additional 10 percent come from? Well, it’s not coming from Marvel and it’s not coming from DC, it’s coming from the comic stores. I worked it out, and the comic stores are losing, on average, each of them, $31,885 apiece because Diamond is a monopoly. So that’s what’s killing them, that’s why we’re seeing so many retailers going out of business, and this is not going to improve because the market is declining so everybody is trying to take bigger and bigger pieces out of a smaller and smaller pie.

I calculate that it’s going to go down from 74 million [correction: 79 million] last year which is well down from you know the previous figure of 86 million, and I believe it’s gonna drop down to 67 million or less by the end of the year.

The decline from 100.32 million units in 1997 to 67 million in 2001 is known as the Comics Crash. However, the current decline from the 2015-2016 peak of 89 million appears to be gaining momentum, due to rising prices, failing stores, and declining quality. The average price of comics has risen from $2.62 in 1997 to $4.14 in April 2018, Top 300 unit sales are already down 7 percent for the year, and the much-ballyhooed move of SJW Marvel writer Brian Bendis to DC is proving more disastrous than even the skeptics had expected.

I have been tipped off by DC editorial sources that the numbers that DC Comics received were a lot lower than expected. A lot lower. Less than you might expect for a new Superman title relaunching the character with A-List talent and spinning out of Action Comics #1001 and DC Nation #0 and more like – well, a newly launching Brian Bendis title at Marvel, without the tiered variants. And out of the top ten as a result.

Also note that at -10 percent, total unit sales are down even more than Top 300 unit sales. Put these factors together and it looks as if the comics industry will hit a new 21st century low in annual unit sales by 2019 at the latest, and quite possibly, by the end of this year.