Triggering the Irrelevant

All the cowards and incels on Gab were triggered by this.

The future belongs to those who show up for it. Stop whining. Start fighting by getting married, having children, and planting the acorns of the trees in whose shade your grandchildren will play. Yes, there are risks. You might get your heart broken. You might lose half your toys. So what? Action requires risk and risk is inherent to life.

There is no point in whining, blackpilling, or worrying about things you can’t possibly control. If you’re not willing to take risks to build the future, if you’re not willing to live, if you’re not willing to set your face against the entropy of the universe, then you are irrelevant and your inferior genetic line will end with you, due to your cowardly narcissism.

DISCUSS ON SG


The Canadian Tea Party

The Canadian Truckers’ Convoy ended up pretty much as I anticipated, effecting zero change despite the media theater as it was easily dismantled by the authorities. So much for the Internet’s armchair logistics experts:

Some mistakes were merely operational. There was no vetting. I gave one person my pseudonym and an invented autobiography, and within hours I was in a boardroom with all the organizers, going through maps, talking about internal weak points, looking at charts, and inputting every important phone number into my contact list. The lack of operational security was astounding.

The grass-roots organizations also meant that no one—yet everyone—was in charge. It was a classic case of “too many chiefs, not enough Indians,” but worse, as if the chiefs had all been drinking mouthwash. So much time was wasted between defective people competing for status and control, including podcasters and lawyers who thought of themselves as serious leaders, that it felt like the Special Olympics of political resistance. Resultantly, there was no distinction between strategy and tactics. Some organizers became so committed to certain small tasks, they could not understand that a bigger picture existed, while at the same time, it was rare for anyone to discuss what success would look like.

Another problem was the lack of quality men: we had some who were brave and others who were sharp, but few who were both. Most damaging of all was that nearly every organizer saw the occupation and their battle with the regime through the lens of a feminine morality, with undue concern about how we would be perceived. There was no understanding of conflict. The organizers couldn’t even fathom the regime extending its power through the judiciary or the financial system, and every time the government used the tools within their control, the organizers would become histrionic, and take comfort in videos of commentary and ranting by political celebrities who supported the convoy.

Somehow, most organizers and demonstrators held two incompatible premises at the same time. They took for granted that the Canadian government had been acting illegally over the past two years, even harming its citizenry for their own gain; and also believed guilelessly that the government would not lie, seize donations, freeze personal finances, use brutal force, or commit any other illegal action regarding the convoy. Every time the government demonstrated its willingness not to “play fair,” there was widespread emotional breakdown among the organizers. Some left fearful for their lives, while others became meritoriously cavalier and tried to get themselves arrested, even if their skillset was irreplaceable. There was an indulgent narcissism in the desire to be arrested for “counselling to commit mischief” and other misdemeanors. Since most organizers were released without charge, there was a sense that you could achieve martyrdom without real sacrifice.

So, as usual, it accomplished nothing except to wake up more regular citizens to the fact that they are not going to be able to vote, protest, posture, or threaten their way out of the neo-liberal world order’s chains. Which is why nothing is likely to change before its eventual, and inevitable, collapse under the weight of its own inversions and internal contradictions.

As a general rule, very few people are moved to act unless they are made sufficiently uncomfortable first. And the societies of the WereWest are literally too fat, well-fed, overstimulated, and drug-addled to be even remotely uncomfortable. But they are fragile and increasingly unstable societies, and their collapse is clearly coming.

DISCUSS ON SG


We’re Not Locked Out By You

You’re locked out by us:

A majority of vaccinated Americans do not want unvaccinated relatives attending their holiday parties, and almost half have cut off family members over their vaccination status, according to a new poll. According to a survey of 2,000 Americans conducted by OnePoll this month, 63% of those vaccinated against Covid-19 “don’t feel comfortable” allowing their unvaccinated relatives to attend their holiday parties, while 58% have completely broken contact with family members who refuse the jab.

Around two-thirds of Americans said they felt unwelcome at family parties unless they got vaccinated first, however only 22% of unvaxxed reported being excluded from an event so far.

Almost a half of unvaccinated respondents had cut off communication with their vaccinated relatives for not respecting their decision not to get jabbed. Despite the risks of perpetual family alienation, 14% of those polled said they would never get a Covid-19 vaccine.

First, let me point out that this is ridiculous. I have no problem with any guest in my home being either vaccinated or unvaccinated, although I’d prefer to not be in too close contact with the vaccinated in the first week after their vaccination due to the known issue of shedding. While I haven’t personally experienced that particular problem, I do know one individual who has; it is a genuine problem and one that is best avoided if possible.

That being said, if a vaccinated family member cuts you off or disinvites you because you refused to sacrifice your health to the vaccine regime, don’t permit them to reestablish contact once their absurdity of their position finally becomes apparent to them. They have demonstrated what their priorities are and the true nature of their character… and you are much better off without people like that in your life.

I have never had any cause to regret cutting contact with former friends and family members after they revealed themselves to possess unacceptably flawed characters. To the contrary, life is considerably more enjoyable when one no longer feels obliged to endure the constant stream of nonsense that inevitably flows from the deceitful, the depthless, and the deranged.

DISCUSS ON SG


See how they squeal

It’s going to be interesting to see the media attempting to simultaneously argue that a) businesses can discriminate against the unvaccinated and b) businesses cannot discriminate against the vaccinated. Because you know they’re going to screech like crazy about second-class status for the unvaccinated:

An anti-vax beauty therapist has said she will refuse to treat anyone who has been vaccinated against coronavirus. 

Sarah McCutcheon, based in Glasgow, wrote in a post on her business’ Instagram page: ‘We will not treat anyone who has had a Covid-19 jab.’  

The owner of Wellness and Wellbeing With Sarah made the comment alongside a post from an Australian hair salon which read: ‘We are not your hairdresser if you have had the Covid vax.’  She added: ‘We agree and will not conduct massages or treatments on any vaccinated people…sorry not sorry.’

The National Hair and Beauty Federation (NHBF) told the Daily Record such a policy would go against Government guidance, which should be followed to keep customers safe.      

I don’t know about you, but I definitely know more people that are concerned about contact with the vaccinated than they are about contact with the unvaccinated. 


Divide or be conquered

Yes, Virginia, your very good friend and family are absolutely going to cancel you if you don’t submit to the Narrative like they do:

Mumford & Sons have reportedly ‘axed’ Winston Marshall from the group after he posted a tweet praising a controversial Right-wing writer.

The I Will Wait hitmakers – also comprised of Marcus Mumford, Ted Dwane and Ben Lovett – are said to have held crisis talks on Sunday – a day after banjoist and lead guitarist Winston, 33, posted a tweet in support of a book by Andy Ngo, claims The Sun.

The band and their management are then said to have made the decision that Winston would be asked to 

A source close to the band told the website: ‘Winston’s staunchly right wing political views have been causing tension for some time now within the band. They continued that a rift had been ‘forming for the past four years’ saying: ‘Marcus would always be an advocate for his right to free speech and for him to believe what he wants. Adding that the decision had been ‘hugely difficult’ the source also alleged the band thought Winston’s tweet ‘impacted the band’s image.’ 

All of this became inevitable once the social media companies were permitted to police their users by banning them for badthink and thoughtcrime. The sooner you sever your ties with your Narrative-spouting friends and family members, the better off you are going to be. What fellowship does light have with darkness? What fellowship can truth have with ever-mutating lies?

How much longer are you going to try to fit in among the walking dead and pass for one of them? And even if you are successful, what do you think that will accomplish? Living in fear of constant exposure is no way for a free man or a free woman to live.

UPDATE: And this is what they will force you to do, if you do not have the courage or the strength to walk away from them on your own.


The secret of the elites

“The secret of the elites is that they’re not all that smart so they need the deck stacked to continue the illusion that they are elite at all.”

– Rob Peffer

He’s absolutely right. That’s why the fake elite devotes 100 percent of their collective effort to trying to maintain the illusion and keep the deck stacked. It’s also why nationalism and populism terrify them. They know their power and influence could be broken literally overnight by a sufficiently angry populace.

This is no longer about ideology. All the idearrhea about “liberal” and “conservative” and “communism” and “objectivism” is a veil to obscure the realities of the stacked deck. It’s about lawless rule by a small, mostly foreign and self-appointed fake elite. They all have imposter syndrome because they are all imposters.


The importance of intelligence

Differences in intelligence matter. For members of the cognitive elite to maintain otherwise is like the rich arguing that money does not matter. Differences in g affect the lives of individuals and families. They help shape the social order and limit our ability to reshape it (Gottfredson, 1985, 1986b; Gottfredson & Sharf, 1988).

Much social policy has long been based on the false presumption that there exist no stubborn or consequential differences in mental capability. Worse than merely fruitless, such policy has produced one predictable failure and side effect after another, breeding widespread cynicism and recrimination. Educators routinely overpromise and schools, accordingly, consistently disappoint. Welfare reformers do not take seriously the possibility that today’s labor market cannot or will not utilize all low-IQ individuals, no matter how motivated they may be. Civil rights advocates resolutely ignore the possibility that a distressingly high proportion of poor Black youth may be more disadvantaged today by low IQ than by racial discrimination, and thus that they will realize few if any benefits (unlike their more able brethren) from ever-more aggressive affirmative action. Virtually everyone is capable of living productive, fulfilling lives in which they contribute to the general welfare of their communities. However, protecting and enhancing that potential requires us to appreciate its greater vulnerability to disruption among lower IQ individuals.

From a study entitled “Why g Matters: The Complexity of Everyday Life” by Linda Gottfredson. There are essentially three factors that determine what a society will be like. The first is average IQ. The second is the level of trust. And the third is religion.

Note that two of those factors are genetic and heritable.


Where do all these betrayers come from?

As one of Melania’s “friends” writes a book about her private conversations, Anonymous Conservative explains how all of these problematic people just happen to have people in their lives who not only have no personal loyalty to them, but just happen to have been making recordings of their conversations from the start:

Once you are isolated, then they can send in their people, briefed on your likes and dislikes, and arrange a chance meeting. Knowing just how to click with you, suddenly you have a friend. And once that friend is there, they can bring in others. And if they want you on tape saying something specific, look at how they can arrange circumstances….

Not everyone will get that treatment, but if you intend to succeed and begin to succeed at your intention, It is going to happen to you. Just look at how many people around Trump were recording covertly, that we have heard about. There was his fucking lawyer of all people, Cohen, the niece with the book, Omarosa, the Access Hollywood crew, this one, almost Rosenstein, the FBI, the CIA, and probably multiple agents from them. And I’ll bet there were three of four for every one of those, at least, who never managed to get anything useful and you haven’t heard about them. It is not a coincidence all of these people and more were running tape on Trump and his family. That is what it is like to be the target of Cabal’s intelligence operations. If you aspire to exert influence, understand it is not unlikely that your “friends” were sent in to work against you. If fact, it is probably more than likely.

This is why it is vital to speak exactly the same truth in your personal life that you do in your public one. It is also why you should never, ever, let your guard down when speaking with anyone, no matter how strongly they’ve backed you or how enthusiastically they’ve supported you. Especially these days of the Panaudiocon, when even the televisions and computers, to say nothing of Alexa and Siri, are actively listening to everyone, it is simply necessary to discipline your tongue in all circumstances.

In East Germany, 620,000 people worked undercover for the secret state police. That’s 3.8 percent of the population; the US equivalent is 12.3 million. Now ask yourself this question: what are the chances that none of those social surveillance agents are paying any attention to a confirmed dissident and thought criminal like you?

Keep your old friends. And keep a polite, but firm, distance from everyone else, especially those who want to become your new best friend.


A labor-free economy

Nothing destroys the fantastical imaginings of Marxist economics more completely than the observation of the disappearance of work:

A common topic around the web is whether automation will drastically increase unemployment. The usual scholarly answer is only a bit, and conservatives often insist that new jobs will always be found. Actually, automation has already created much joblessness. It continues to do so. We don’t notice because we have disguised the unemployment.

Consider. In 1850, everybody worked. In England, children notoriously were sweated in mines and factories and, in America, worked on their parents’ farms.

Then child labor laws took kids off the labor market, keeping them from competing with adults. Compulsory high school removed adolescents perfectly capable of doing many jobs of adults. College now keeps millions more in, usually, economically pointless idleness. We have over three million people in prisons. Large numbers live on welfare. The government factors none of these into the unemployment stats. If it did, the unemployment numbers would rise sharply.

Then there is makework. A great many governmental workers do little or nothing of use. This amounts to paid unemployment. Sometimes this unemployment is distributed: A hundred workers do useful work that thirty could do. Then there is the military. It produces nothing and, since the US has no military enemies, amounts to more paid unemployment. The arms industry uses more multitudes in building things of no use, such as ever more intercontinental nuclear bombers. For engineers, this is marginally more dignified than digging holes and filling them in. It is as much a jobs program as the Depression-era CCC.

Another phenomenon we see is the disimportantification (patent applied for) of work. In 1850, work done was genuinely important: growing food, without which we tend to be dead and not of much use in an economy. Then the farms automated and everybody went to work in factories, making cars and refrigerators. These were pretty important, but not as important as food. You can’t eat a refrigerator. Then the factories automated or went away and people became massage therapists, nail salon operators, psychologists, sociologists, consultants, or diversity counselors. Others ran massage parlors, restaurants, gymnasiums, or cutesy-wootsy boutiques selling unbearable kitsch. They were employed, but in occupations of ever-increasing triviality. We have gone from feeding people to rubbing their backs.

You know it’s getting out of hand when even the world’s oldest profession is being automated.


Forget conferences, we need these for life

I can’t say that I would honestly mind having a badge that would forbid anyone to talk to me in real life:

Transgender conference organisers have given academics traffic light ‘safe space’ badges to show whether they can cope with a conversation.

Scholars attending the Thinking Beyond: Transversal Transfeminisms event at Roehampton University in southwest London were given green, amber and red lanyards to signal if they could talk.

A green badge meant ‘I wish to speak with other delegates and welcome you to approach’, yellow was for ‘I will approach you if I wish to speak’ and red meant ‘I do not wish to speak with other delegates.’

The guests were able to switch between the colours if they chose during the day, according to the Sunday Times.

Women, of course, will require a pink badge, which means “I do not wish for you to speak with me unless I find you attractive.”