Tag: history

Sea Power vs Land Power

Sea power tends to be more aggressive and expansive, but land power tends to last longer:

For over a century, two dead advisors have shaped the way great powers view the world.

On one side, we have Alfred Thayer Mahan—the American naval officer who believed sea power determined global supremacy. According to Mahan, controlling the oceans means controlling trade. If you control trade, you control wealth. If you control wealth… well, you get the picture.

On the other side is Halford Mackinder, the British geographer who argued the exact opposite. Forget the seas, he said. Whoever controls the “World Island”—Eurasia—controls the world. Railways, rivers, pipelines, and land empires are what count. Not frigates and aircraft carriers.

Mahan and Mackinder are no longer with us, but their ideas continue to influence the world today.

And we’re watching it unfold.

The United States and the United Kingdom—Mahan’s spiritual children—have long benefited from an ocean-based order. Ruling the waves built their prosperity and power. The British Empire’s reach was maritime. The U.S. Navy now patrols every major sea lane. The dollar reigns supreme because oil, commodities, and trade settle in greenbacks. That world—the Mahan world—is why Americans live like kings while land powers like Russia and China have spent decades playing catch-up.

But Mahan’s world has limits. Especially when you try to keep your rivals bottled up in theirs.

That’s precisely what the U.S. has tried to do with China.

If you look at ancient history, the rivalries between Athens and Sparta, and between Carthage and Rome, all ended the same way; with the land power eventually defeating the sea power. This is because sea power is intrinsically offensive, which means that it doesn’t have much in the way of defense in depth once its advantages are counteracted in one way or another.

It’s already apparent that either China or Russia can defeat the USA in a war. Which means that the US is an empire in decline, and the only real question is how fast it will collapse and how far.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Globalist Charade

It’s fascinating to observe how simply paying attention to the details of the Ukrainian war inevitably leads to the observation of the complete failure of the globalists presently running what passes for the West:

The entire globalist charade at this point consists of presenting an image of solidarity, growth, and ‘optimism’—a narcotic psyop for the masses drowning in the post-modernist hell of social and cultural breakdown. Think of these deals as nothing more than kabuki theater aimed at concealing the massive printing of central bank debt meant to prop up the disintegrating system a little while longer. At this point, the elite cabal’s only remaining mandate is to conceal the disrepair and present an air of ‘health’ and systemic structural integrity—nothing else matters to them; but the charade no longer fools us.

Granted, what Trump is doing is still head and shoulders above the decrepit Biden regime’s lifeless pantomime. From the perspective of the US, Trump is at least attempting something radical, rather than the same old hyper-progressive Keynesian Malthusianism. But at the same time, the increasing vapidity of each new ‘victory’ can only be interpreted as a dead cat bounce theory of the US’ terminal imperial decline. All the pomp and glory associated with Trump’s ‘triumphant’ return to the throne seems to be a kind of last gasp from the stiffening cadaver: everything we see rings hollow, every initiative superficial and short-lived; the thin gold leaf veneer is flaking off to reveal weathered vinyl.

This translates to the combined ‘victories’ of the Euro-American Atlanticist sphere. We’re barraged with daily proclamations of bold new initiatives dressed up with pomp and frills, but nothing concrete is ever done: lives never improve and infrastructure stays rotting…

But ultimately, one cannot escape the feeling that, even despite hopes for a broader global restructuring, any benefits that come will too represent nothing more than the dead cat’s final feeble bounce. The systemic undergirdings prevalent in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries are simply not in place anymore, and the monstrosity of global finance and capital which has grown since the post-war era likely cannot be undone with even these far-looking and well-intentioned half-measures.

Which is to say, as I wrote in 2004, you can’t fix a corpse.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Classicist Conspiracy

The more deeply one looks into the facts related to the mainstream historian’s version of the official Shakespeare story, the more obviously implausible it becomes.

In my debate with classicist Philip Womack, he pushed the orthodox view detailed above that the apocryphal plays and bad quartos were all the result of some form of piracy. And I responded with something like the following:

Can you not tell how anti-Strafordian you sound here? You think the majority of plays attributed to William Shakespeare while he was alive and up till 1621 are fraudulent and the result of corruption (this is counting all apocryphal plays and bad quartos) despite the fact that:

  • Shakespeare never protested about his name falsely being used.
  • Shakespeare and company, who performed all these plays, never complained about their illicit procurement and unauthorized publication.
  • No one else ever mentioned it at the time or for decades afterward.
  • The real authors of the apocryphal plays never demanded proper credit.
  • None of the dozens of printers or publishers were ever punished for it.
  • These nefarious printers and publishers ended up pulling off a ruse that fooled the world for a century—as scholars, editors, etc. were still referring to “Yorkshire Tragedy” and “London Prodigal” as Shakespeare’s into the 18th century.
  • No other playwright of the Shakespeare era was similarly victimized. In fact, no other living writer in all of English history had a similar misattribution occur to him just once—let alone twelve times!

Expanding on the last point above, there is no known case in history in which an English printer or publisher has ever purposefully misattributed a single work (like a play, essay, or novel) to a single, living author whom they knew had nothing to do with the work. Why is that? Well, because the printer and publisher would know that the credited author would complain—and so too would the wronged author whose work had been stolen and assigned to someone else. In fact, as I have shown, there also may not even be an indisputable example of such a deliberate misattribution occurring to a dead author.

There’s just no rational reason to doubt Shakespeare’s authorship of the quartos attributed to him—and no one at the time, or for even a century afterward, ever doubted those title pages either.

As usual, the mainstream inverts the actual situation. It’s not those who are revising the official history on the basis of the available facts who are the conspiracy theorists, it’s the classicists who are defending their unsupportable dogma by concocting a whole series of conspiratorial explanations.

DISCUSS ON SG

RIP Julian LeFay

Legendary Elder Scrolls creator Julian LeFay passes away at 59. Julian LeFay, the designer largely credited with helping shape the vision of fan favorite Elder Scrolls franchise, has passed away at the age of 59.

This is a hard one to hear. I was friends with Bennie for years, and it will probably surprise a lot of people to learn that we even worked together for 18 months on what was supposed to be a launch title for the Sega Dreamcast.

He left Bethesda to come work for Fenris Wolf after we signed a $1.5 million deal with Sega to provide its first RPG for its new Katana system after our original producer at GT moved to Sega of America and made signing us one of his first orders of business. I’d licensed the rights to Traveller from Marc Miller, and Julian was not only tired of working at Bethesda after his friend Vijay had left for Microsoft, but was very excited to take his innovative design concepts into a science fiction space for the first time.

And, of course, he liked the idea of working with me and my partner, as we’d hung out together at various CGDCs and E3s for four or five years by that point. He, Vijay, Bobby Prince from id, and Carter from Spectrum Holobyte were the people I spent the most time with at the Westin and the various other locations outside of the CGW crew.

Unfortunately, Sega of Japan eliminated Sega of America and cancelled all ten launch titles that SOA had in development, including ours, about one year prior to the launch of the Dreamcast, in favor of spending the $100 million that had been budgeted for those games on putting the Dreamcast logo on the front of the Arsenal FC jerseys. This was, of course, a terrible decision that was much-mocked in the industry, and helped contribute to the failure of the Dreamcast to compete with the original Sony PlayStation despite its technical superiorities.

I still remember Julian, Kurt (from SOA) and I laughing about the fake headline in a parody newsletter given out at CGDC that read: “SEGA REFUSES TO REVEAL PLANS FOR SELF-IMMOLATION” or something to that effect. It wasn’t quite so funny when I got the phone call from Kurt telling me that a) he had been let go, b) SOA was being shut down by SOJ, and c) Traveller was canceled. In retrospect, that was the beginning of the end for my time in the game industry, as GT’s collapse followed Sega of America’s by about 18 months.

So Julian and I never finished our game. We talked once or twice about possibly working together, and I think he ended up getting back together with Vijay toward the end, but things never managed to quite work out. It’s truly a pity, because I think that what we could have – what we WOULD have – achieved would have been truly epic, in fact, more epic than Epic.

It is truly the end of an era. Julian LeFay is gone, but he should never be forgotten by the gaming community. He never received the plaudits of Richard Garriott, John Romero, or Sid Meier, but he was genuinely one of the great designers of the era. He always imagined things on a larger scope than most of us were able to conceptualize. He set the standard for complex randomized environments and laid some of the conceptual foundations for both the MMO and all modern games that incorporate random elements as part of their design.

DISCUSS ON SG

Scott Adams is a Liar

Scott Adams is against trying to construct a false historical narrative that is not going to fool anyone at all. The man’s Gamma compulsion to refuse to take the L or simply accept that he was wrong about anything, ever, is truly astounding. Although it’s hardly surprising, given his past behavior.

I’m a master hypnotist
And you’re the narcissist
So shut the fuck up, Shelly, go the hell away!

I’m seer, I’m the law
I’m perfect without a flaw
The best thing that ever happened to you
Bitch, you’re probably fat and
I’ve got you hypnotized
Can’t say I ever lied
You know I’m always right in every single way!

A lot of false memories about me from the Covid Carls. I’m the only public figure who predicted the shots would not work when first announced and then again when rolled out. I waited six months to see who died from the shots and by then we knew they did not stop the spread but did greatly reduce hospitalizations for my age group. I got the shots so I could go to Bora Bora on my honeymoon. And I regularly told people I’m not your doctor so don’t look to me for medical advice of any kind, especially Covid. The Covid Carls started the rumors that reversed my vax opinions. Lots of retards believed them. Many are in the comments today. It’s a mental health issue, no hyperbole intended.

No, Scott, you blithering vaxx-addled idiot, you were absolutely NOT “the only public figure who predicted the shots would not work when first announced and then again when rolled out.” Furthermore, you were dumb enough to actually get vaxxed because while you believed the vaxx was ineffective, you wrongly concluded that it was safe.

Plenty of people advised others against getting vaxxed prior to when the vaxxes were first officially approved in August 2021, including both Karl Denninger and me. More importantly, we both correctly warned that in addition to being INEFFECTIVE, the Covid vaccines were UNSAFE and should be avoided at all costs and in all circumstances.

Sadly, it appears the vaccine damage to his brain has rendered him completely delusional.

I had the best Covid predictions in the country. No one else was close.

No, he absolutely didn’t. Even I was better, and it’s a matter of historical record that Karl Denninger was the first and foremost authority on the subject. His detailed work saved hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, from various forms of Covid-related harm; most of what I put out there was just amplifying what he said. The evidence compiled by Deepseek:

Based on historical records and media reports, here are factual details about early public figures who voiced opposition to Covid-19 vaccines during the development and initial rollout phase (mid-2020 to early 2021), focusing on those who actively warned against taking them:

  • Robert F. Kennedy Jr.:
    • Timing: Publicly criticized Covid-19 vaccines as early as June 2020, before any were authorized.
    • Platform: Chair of Children’s Health Defense (CHD), a prominent anti-vaccine organization. Used CHD’s platform, social media, and interviews.
    • Message: Claimed the vaccines were unnecessary, unsafe, part of a corrupt pharmaceutical agenda, and that safety testing was being rushed. Explicitly urged people to refuse them.
  • Karl Denninger:
    • Date: June 25, 2020
    • Source: Denninger’s blog, Market-Ticker.
    • Content: In a post titled “Spike Proteins, COVID and Vaccines”, Denninger raised specific concerns about the safety profile of spike-protein-based vaccines (like mRNA vaccines) under development. He argued the spike protein itself was pathogenic (“toxic”) and that using it as the antigen could trigger dangerous immune responses or other health issues, explicitly warning against taking such a vaccine. This is one of the earliest and most specific technical critiques of the emerging vaccine technology by a public figure.
    • Key Quote: *”If you are offered a vaccine against COVID-19 that is based on a spike protein, either as the antigen or the mechanism of generating the antigen (e.g. mRNA that causes your body to manufacture the spike protein) DO NOT TAKE IT.”*
  • Vox Day:
    • Date: February 10, 2021
    • Source: Day’s blog, Vox Popoli.
    • Content: In a post titled “Two Shots and You’re Out” Day issued a directive instructing his followers to categorically refuse COVID-19 vaccines. This memo framed vaccine refusal as a critical stance against perceived globalist control and explicitly cited safety concerns as a primary reason.
    • Key Directive: “Do not take the vaccine. Do not take any vaccine. There are no exceptions… The potential mid-term and long-term side effects are catastrophic.” This was a clear, blanket warning against all COVID-19 vaccines based on claimed safety dangers.
  • Scott Adams:
    • Date: February 23, 2021
    • Source: Adams’ blog, Dilbert Blog, post titled “Second Warning”.
    • Content: Adams explicitly warned his readers against taking the COVID-19 vaccine, citing concerns about unknown long-term effects, rapid development, and questioning the risk-benefit analysis for younger, healthier individuals. He framed it as a personal risk assessment decision, but strongly advised against vaccination for his audience.
    • Key Quote: *”I recommend you do not get the Covid-19 vaccine at this time… My reason is that we don’t know the long-term effects… The risk of Covid to you might be lower than the risk of the vaccine. We don’t know.”* (Note: Adams had expressed significant skepticism about vaccine necessity and mandates earlier, but this Feb 23 post is the earliest clear, direct public warning against taking the vaccine itself based on safety/effectiveness concerns found in his primary blog).
    • Context: Adams had voiced general skepticism and opposition to mandates in podcasts and blog posts earlier in February 2021 (e.g., Feb 10 podcast titled “The Vaccine is Worse Than the Problem”), but the Feb 23 blog post is a definitive, written public warning against taking the vaccine.

I’m a little surprised I didn’t post anything earlier than that, aside from a December 2020 post that viciously mocked the vaxx, to be honest. I suppose my opposition was more overt on the Darkstream, which isn’t very accessible to the AI systems. If anyone happens to recall anything, feel free to post it on SG.

UPDATE: My first explicit don’t-get-vaxxed post on VP was 6 January 2021, titled A Cure Worse than the Disease. And the Darkstream from 21 February 2021 is entitled Not Taking the Not-Vaccine.

Anyhow, this ex post facto revisionism by Adams is just a small and self-centered example of what Uncle John describes as “narrative washing”:

By now it should be obvious the House of Lies runs on fake narratives that replace knowledge for NPCs. What makes it effective is that it’s so interwoven. Every component and pillar supports each others. Note how one scrap of nonsense can bubble out of the clown knowledge industry, get amplified by clown media, become policy of clown government, then drive institutions that run on official definitions.

Take the recent progression from [“the science”] → [fear the flu!] → [institutions & large businesses of every stripe throwing out basic moral order]. With each liar leaning on the others. As damning actual empirical evidence mounts across the spectrum that shooting poison was a terrible idea. The mainstream is still dodging this one hard – despite studies now clearing sacred peer review. The reality-facing lesson here is an important one. That “proving” you were right on their terms doesn’t get an admission, retraction, or any other acknowledgment of error. The screens just drop the topic. And for the NPCs, that’s as if it never was.

Clown World isn’t just dishonest – it’s the diametric inverse of what’s true. The frequent use of “inverted” isn’t just rhetoric. It’s literally what clown world is. 

This is why it is so frustrating to see people returning, again and again and again, to the very mainstream platforms they know to be aggressively unreliable, while being reluctant to support platforms that are not constructed with the primary purpose of deceiving them.

DISCUSS ON SG

On Self-Determination and Failed Rhetoric

We are told that Taiwan is an international flash point and the USA is honor-bound to defend Tawian against reunification with the mainland because, and I quote: “Taiwan’s 23 million people deserve self-determination”.

Why didn’t the 9,103,332 people of the Confederate States of America deserve self-determination?

Why don’t the 4,543,126 people of Palestine deserve self-determination?

Why didn’t the 10.3 million people of the separatist oblasts of Ukraine deserve self-determination?

Why don’t the 8,012,231 people of Catalunya deserve self-determination?

Self-determination is just another Enlightenment inversion. It means that Clown World will claim it is a casus belli whenever it wants a war, and use military force to deny whenever it fears losing control. Unless the USA is going to go to war with Israel, Ukraine, and Spain, and permit the former-Confederate states to depart the Union in peace, it has absolutely no business claiming any right or responsibility to “defend” one part of China from the rest of it.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Wrong Lesson

The grand strategery of Clown World is quite possibly going to get an enormous number of soldiers killed because their abject retardery knows no bounds. This is what purports to be a military history piece encouraging direct US and European intervention published a year ago by the director of something called “Lazard Geopolitical Advisory” which makes an excellent case for never taking the advice of Lazard Geopolitical Advisory:

Northern Russia must have felt bitterly cold to U.S. soldiers, even though nearly all were from Michigan. On Sept. 4, 1918, 4,800 U.S. troops landed in Arkhangelsk, Russia, only 140 miles from the Arctic Circle. Three weeks later, they were plunged into battle against the Red Army among towering pine forests and subarctic swamps, alongside the British and French. Ultimately, 244 U.S. soldiers died from the fighting over two years. Diaries of U.S. troops paint a harrowing picture of first contact:

We run into a nest of machine-guns, we retire. [Bolsheviks] still shelling heavily. Perry and Adamson of my squad wounded, bullet clips my shoulder on both sides. … Am terribly tired, hungry and all in, so are the rest of the boys. Casualties in this attack 4 killed and 10 wounded.

These unlucky souls represented just one prong of the sprawling and ill-fated Allied intervention in the Russian civil war. From 1918 to 1920, the United States, Britain, France, and Japan sent thousands of troops from the Baltics to northern Russia to Siberia to Crimea—and millions of dollars in aid and military supplies to the anti-communist White Russians—in an abortive attempt to strangle Bolshevism in its crib. It’s one of the most complicated and oft-forgot foreign-policy failures of the 20th century…

Despite the current pall of pessimism pervading Western capitals, today’s war in Ukraine presents some of the more propitious circumstances a policymaker could hope for—unlike those faced by the Allies during the Russian civil war. Ukraine is a worthy and competent ally, fighting to defend its territory with a highly motivated population behind it. The Ukrainian cause is a righteous one, with a Manichean quality to it easily explained to Western publics. While Putin’s personal will to win is strong, it’s clear by his actions and hesitancy to fully mobilize Russian society that he senses a ceiling on what he can ask from his population. Though Russia’s manpower and materiel are larger than Ukraine’s, the amount needed to keep Ukraine armed and in the fight is completely manageable. A $60 billion aid supplement from the United States—currently held up by far-right Republicans in the House of Representatives—is a pittance compared with the returns: holding the line on international norms; standing up for the Ukrainians and, in doing so, Western values; bogging down Russia in a strategic sinkhole and reducing its capacity to threaten the rest of NATO’s eastern flank; and fortifying the trans-Atlantic alliance. Today, Western capitals are much more united than they were in 1918, and defense coordination among them is strong. Though they can sharpen the shared sense of an endgame in Ukraine, everybody knows that the conflict will end in some sort of negotiated settlement—the questions will be on whose terms.

If the United States and its allies can avoid the pitfalls of the Western intervention in the Russian civil war—developing a clear long-term strategy, continuing to coordinate closely, and reinforcing domestic support by making the case to their own populations—then they have a real shot of prevailing over Putin. 

Despite the current pall of pessimism pervading Western capitals, today’s war in Ukraine presents some of the more propitious circumstances a policymaker could hope for—unlike those faced by the Allies during the Russian civil war. Ukraine is a worthy and competent ally, fighting to defend its territory with a highly motivated population behind it. The Ukrainian cause is a righteous one, with a Manichean quality to it easily explained to Western publics. While Putin’s personal will to win is strong, it’s clear by his actions and hesitancy to fully mobilize Russian society that he senses a ceiling on what he can ask from his population. Though Russia’s manpower and materiel are larger than Ukraine’s, the amount needed to keep Ukraine armed and in the fight is completely manageable. A $60 billion aid supplement from the United States—currently held up by far-right Republicans in the House of Representatives—is a pittance compared with the returns: holding the line on international norms; standing up for the Ukrainians and, in doing so, Western values; bogging down Russia in a strategic sinkhole and reducing its capacity to threaten the rest of NATO’s eastern flank; and fortifying the trans-Atlantic alliance. Today, Western capitals are much more united than they were in 1918, and defense coordination among them is strong. Though they can sharpen the shared sense of an endgame in Ukraine, everybody knows that the conflict will end in some sort of negotiated settlement—the questions will be on whose terms.

If the United States and its allies can avoid the pitfalls of the Western intervention in the Russian civil war—developing a clear long-term strategy, continuing to coordinate closely, and reinforcing domestic support by making the case to their own populations—then they have a real shot of prevailing over Putin. 

This is totally insane advice. In addition to the obvious fact that a) there is zero domestic support for war with Russia in any country outside of the Baltics and Finland, b) the Russian industrial advantage with regards to weaponry, vehicles, missiles, and ammunition is insurmountable, and c) Russia’s global allies outproduce, outnumber, and outgun the entire forces of the West, the historical invaders had one massive advantage that Russia’s current enemies lack.

The Western forces of 1918 had the ability to transport and stage their troops without fear of being attacked. In 2025, any trans-oceanic transports carrying men and materials to invade Russia will be sunk with hypersonic missiles long before they come anywhere close to the Russian coast. Not only that, but the entire logistics line leading all the way back to factories in Dusseldorf and Columbus, Ohio is similarly vulnerable to complete destruction.

The inability of Clown World’s elite to understand that it is no longer 1950, much less 1918, is truly remarkable. Andrei Martyanov is absolutely right to denigrate and disregard the military doctrine of the Western militaries, because their grasp on the history of warfare and how it applies to the present appears to be nonexistent.

DISCUSS ON SG

Russia Acknowledges WWIII

In my opinion, WWIII began in the spring of 2014 with the US-backed coup given the highly Orwellian name “the Revolution of Dignity” and the Russian occupation of Crimea. This is similar how WWII actually began eight years before most people realized with the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931. But regardless, it’s clear that the Russian intellectual elite are fully aware of the situation.

Many now speak of humanity’s drift towards World War III, imagining events similar to those of the 20th century. But war evolves. It will not begin with a June 1941 Barbarossa-style invasion or a Cuban Missile Crisis-style nuclear standoff. In fact, the new world war is already underway – it’s just that not everyone has recognized it yet.

For Russia, the pre-war period ended in 2014. For China, it was 2017. For Iran, 2023. Since then, war – in its modern, diffuse form – has intensified. This is not a new Cold War. Since 2022, the West’s campaign against Russia has grown more decisive. The risk of direct nuclear confrontation with NATO over the Ukraine conflict is rising. Donald Trump’s return to the White House created a temporary window in which such a clash could be avoided, but by mid-2025, hawks in the US and Western Europe had pushed us dangerously close again.

This war involves the world’s leading powers: the United States and its allies on one side, China and Russia on the other. It is global, not because of its scale, but because of the stakes: the future balance of power. The West sees the rise of China and the resurgence of Russia as existential threats. Its counteroffensive, economic and ideological, is meant to put a halt to that shift.

It is a war of survival for the West, not just geopolitically but ideologically. Western globalism – whether economic, political, or cultural – cannot tolerate alternative civilizational models. Post-national elites in the US and Western Europe are committed to preserving their dominance. A diversity of worldviews, civilizational autonomy, and national sovereignty are seen not as options, but as threats.

This explains the severity of the West’s response. When Joe Biden told Brazil’s President Lula that he wanted to “destroy” Russia, he revealed the truth behind euphemisms like “strategic defeat.” Western-backed Israel has shown how total this doctrine is – first in Gaza, then Lebanon, and finally Iran. In early June, a similar strategy was used in attacks on Russian airfields. Reports suggest US and British involvement in both cases. To Western planners, Russia, Iran, China and North Korea are part of a single axis. That belief shapes military planning.

Compromise is no longer part of the game. What we’re seeing are not temporary crises but rolling conflicts. Eastern Europe and the Middle East are the two current flashpoints. A third has long been identified: East Asia, particularly Taiwan. Russia is directly engaged in Ukraine, holds stakes in the Middle East, and may become involved in the Pacific.

The war is no longer about occupation, but destabilization. The new strategy focuses on sowing internal disorder: economic sabotage, social unrest, and psychological attrition. The West’s plan for Russia is not defeat on the battlefield, but gradual internal collapse.

The irony, of course, is that it is not Russia that is being destabilized, but all of the Western governments from France to the USA. Influence and subversion are no substitute for material power once the latter is aware of the situation.

But regardless, the author is correct. “The time for illusions is over.”

DISCUSS ON SG

It Might Not Survive to 2033

Martin Armstrong and his computer are predicting the collapse of the US government and the European governments by 2032:

When Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon during a major debt crisis, he didn’t have to fight to get to Rome—all the cities cheered and opened their gates. It was the Senate that fled to Asia. You know, unfortunately, a lot of people believed Cicero, but he was the fake news back then. He was one of the oligarchs.

“Oh, Caesar’s this dictator.” Well, then if he’s this dictator so against the people, why did the people cheer him and why did you flee? You know, it’s just—look at the facts. You know, that’s pretty much it.

You know, it was that whole civil war that was propagated by Cato, and they even named the Cato Institute after him. “Oh, he’s defending the republic.” Total nonsense.

But you know, this is where we’re going. By 2032, we’ll have a new form of government. All of them are going to collapse. Europe is really a basket case. And in all the interviews I do throughout Europe, they all are asking the same question: “When will it fall?” They’ve all had enough.

Clown World delenda est.

It has been absolutely fascinating to see how my 2004 prediction that the USA would collapse as a political entity by 2033 has gone from being regarded as insane and totally impossible to optimistic. And I fully anticipate that I won’t get any more credit for being correct than I did for my prediction of the 2008 financial crisis.

People really don’t want the truth until right before it becomes obvious to everyone. They certainly won’t pay anything for it. History suggests you’re fortunate if you don’t get crucified for it.

DISCUSS ON SG

The Bear Necessities

A UATV supporter explains the necessity of Big Bear on Instagram.

Et tu, Spacebunny? She added a comment there.

We have had this convo – your ability to make Vox comprehensible is legendary.

To be fair, it is a genuine problem. My idea of what is a sufficient explanation and pretty much everyone else’s don’t tend to have much in common. I see this coming and going, both in what apparently are popularly regarded as my insufficient explanations and everyone else’s determination to give me ten times more information than I need or want. What is so impressive about Big Bear in this regard is his ability to instantly grasp the various levels of detail required to explain a given concept to different people.

I still remember one time on a stream when he asked me to explain something, so I provided what I felt was the requisite explanation in what I thought was all the necessary detail. Big Bear just stared at me for a second, then said: “Yeah, you’re going to need to go two levels deeper for that to make any sense.”

Which was very helpful, because it’s not a problem to do that. The real challenge that most people don’t seem to grasp is that when you do understand something, you seldom know the precise point of another person’s failure to understand, except that it is somewhere between the complete absence of information and the comprehension of the whole. Compounding this problem is that it is quite normal for people to get offended if you begin at the beginning.

“What do you think I am, an idiot?”

Well, yes, at least in relative terms, given that you’ve already demonstrated that you don’t understand something despite being provided everything that is required for you to do so. But it only took a few beatings from fellow elementary school scholars and a lecture or three from teachers and parents to realize that it is never socially acceptable to say what you are actually thinking about anyone.

That’s why I always think it is outright comical whenever people say, in real life or on TV, that honesty is paramount in relationships. It quite obviously isn’t, in fact, I would go so far as to say that at least for the intelligent individual, relentless dishonesty is the basis for all human relationships, from the most casual to the most intimate. Because if there is one skill that is necessary for surviving the endless sea of retardery in which Man must daily swim, it is relentlessly concealing the truth of one’s thoughts, feelings, and opinions from absolutely everyone.

Marcus Aurelius, Roman emperor and Stoic philosopher, obviously understood that.

Begin each day by telling yourself: Today I shall be meeting with interference, ingratitude, insolence, disloyalty, ill-will, and selfishness – all of them due to the offenders’ ignorance…

Do you know what that is? That’s the rock-solid stoicism born of the despair that comes from 19 years of putting up with a son like Commodus and knowing he had no choice but to leave the whole empire in the care of the solipsistic lunatic.

DISCUSS ON SG