—“Permissiveness and promiscuity haven’t done anything good for Western societies. We’ve just been able to afford more of them by spending down capital accumulated through past repression.”— Ely Harman
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-29 08:22:00 UTC
—“Permissiveness and promiscuity haven’t done anything good for Western societies. We’ve just been able to afford more of them by spending down capital accumulated through past repression.”— Ely Harman
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-29 08:22:00 UTC
by Ely Harman
Slaves -> Serfs -> Free Men -> Lords -> Kings -> Gods -> King of the Gods
(Also: Beast > Slave > Serf > Freeman > Citizen > Senator > Emperor. )
The hierarchy can of course be reorganized or individuals can rise or fall within it (to a limited extent) but the point of even having a hierarchy is to be united under one structure.
If you’re just doing your own thing, you don’t get that benefit, you don’t get the economies of scale or the network effects. People doing that might as well be atheists.
But if they’re doing stuff together, they are a true religious community, and their own, individual, influence on the norms, doctrines, beliefs, etc… Of the community are minimal. Rather, they adopt those of the community.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-28 12:59:00 UTC
by Ely Harman Slaves -> Serfs -> Free Men -> Lords -> Kings -> Gods -> King of the Gods (Also: Beast > Slave > Serf > Freeman > Citizen > Senator > Emperor. ) The hierarchy can of course be reorganized or individuals can rise or fall within it (to a limited extent) but the point of even having a hierarchy is to be united under one structure. If you’re just doing your own thing, you don’t get that benefit, you don’t get the economies of scale or the network effects. People doing that might as well be atheists. But if they’re doing stuff together, they are a true religious community, and their own, individual, influence on the norms, doctrines, beliefs, etc… Of the community are minimal. Rather, they adopt those of the community.
by Ely Harman Slaves -> Serfs -> Free Men -> Lords -> Kings -> Gods -> King of the Gods (Also: Beast > Slave > Serf > Freeman > Citizen > Senator > Emperor. ) The hierarchy can of course be reorganized or individuals can rise or fall within it (to a limited extent) but the point of even having a hierarchy is to be united under one structure. If you’re just doing your own thing, you don’t get that benefit, you don’t get the economies of scale or the network effects. People doing that might as well be atheists. But if they’re doing stuff together, they are a true religious community, and their own, individual, influence on the norms, doctrines, beliefs, etc… Of the community are minimal. Rather, they adopt those of the community.
ON SATIRE
by Ana Stowe
I have a theory that irony and satire are symptoms of a civilization in death throes (hence modern memetic warfare). There’s a striking difference in tone in Juvenal’s Satires compared to Caesar, Virgil, Nepos, etc. Juvenal was the one who coined the “bread and the circus” phrase. His reasons for writing satire included (from Wikipedia): “eunuchs getting married, elite women performing in a beast hunt, and the dregs of society suddenly becoming wealthy by gross acts of sycophancy […] [Juvenal] contends that traditional Roman virtues, such as fides and virtus, had disappeared from society to the extent that “Rome was no longer Roman.”
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-27 16:53:00 UTC
UM. I AM NOT PRO AMERICAN, PRO ANGLO AT ALL
Um. Don’t leap to the conclusion that I’m pro american. I’m pretty anti-anglo all around. I’m pro american post-hoc law and entrepreneurialism, and pro-american and russian militarism. I’m pro anglo empiricism. I’m pro german almost everything else. And I’m pro dutch and scandinavian genetics. And I’m pro the source of western civilization’s exceptionalism: aggressive self domestication (Paternalism), individual sovereignty, rule of natural law of reciprocity, and markets in everything.I’m not pro anglo, or pro-american, as much as pro western civilization’s ability to rapidly evolve compared to all other civilizations.
I’m anti ignorance, error, bias, wishful-thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalism, propaganda, and deceit, because they impede the west’s ability to drag humanity kicking and screaming into godhood.
In the choice between middle eastern dysgenic globalism, and east asian and western eugenic nationalism, the choice is very clear.
Diversity is a bad because it does not force families, clans, tribes and nations to pay the cost of their domestication, and instead exteralizes that cost and devolves host populations permanently through genetic cultural and institutional damages.
I am not a white nationalist in the sense that I am perfectly happy to cut our population to the bone to rid ourselves of the undomesticated of our own. And putting those feeble genes to work improving those further behind.
Let a thousand nations bloom. Small homogenous states with professional warriors, citizen militias and a few nukes are all but invulnerable.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-27 11:30:00 UTC
RUSSIA’S SERIOUS PROBLEMS
(please ignore the bullshit about expanding immigration, russia is already having the same problems we are, they’re just earlier in the cycle.)
via: The Whitney and Betty MacMillan Center for International and Area Studies at Yale
The perfect demographic storm of comparatively high mortality, low fertility and emigration of well-educated professionals is increasingly burdening Russian society and its deteriorating economy. In addition to a shrinking labor force, mounting costs for its aging population and troubling premature deaths, especially among men, Russia is facing difficulties in filling critical jobs with largely unskilled non-Russian migrants, many working illegally in the country.
Throughout most of the second half of the 20th century, Russia’s population increased. Whereas the Russian population was slightly more than 100 million in 1950, it peaked at nearly 149 million by the early 1990s. Since then, the population has declined, and official reports put it at around 144 million.
The shrinking population is the result of deaths outnumbering births for nearly two decades without sufficient immigration to compensate for the deficit. The increasing number of deaths reflects the persistence of comparatively high mortality. The decreasing number of births is due to the prevailing low fertility, which plummeted to 1.2 births per woman in the late 1990s and now hovers at 1.7 births per woman. That rate is still about 20 percent below 2.1 births per woman, the level necessary to ensure population replacement.
High rates of smoking, alcohol consumption, drug use, HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, obesity, heart disease, violence, suicide and environmental pollution contribute to Russians’ poor health. Russia’s current male life expectancy at birth of 64 years is 15 years lower than male life expectancies in Germany, Italy and Sweden.
Russia also stands out for the gap between male and female life expectancies at birth; at almost 13 years, it is one of the widest sex differentials. Moreover, the life expectancy at birth of 74 years for Russian females compares unfavorably with other developed countries, such as 80 years for Polish females.
Policies to address the health crisis are woefully inadequate. Russia’s periodic crackdown on alcohol consumption has had limited effect. About 700,000 Russians were estimated to be living with HIV/AIDS in 2013, a 5 percent increase over the previous year. With official policy forbidding opioid substitution and therapy services for drug users, HIV prevalence among Russians who inject drugs is between 18 and 31 percent.
In most European countries, where coverage of needle programs and opioid substitution therapy is high, HIV/AIDS prevalence among drug users is lower, under 17 percent. To curb smoking, estimated at 40 percent of the adult population, Russia now bans smoking in public places. In terms of health expenditure per capita, Russia ranks near the bottom among OECD countries – spending $1,474 in 2012, compared with the OECD average of $3,484.
Notwithstanding a recent fertility uptick, low fertility persists due to inadequate reproductive health services, lack of modern and low-cost contraceptives, widespread and unsafe abortions, infertility, fewer women of childbearing age, changing attitudes toward marriage and voluntary childlessness. In addition, Russia’s abortion rate, estimated at two abortions for every birth, has traditionally been the highest in the world.
Another factor mitigating against higher fertility is Russia’s high divorce rate. In 2012, for every two marriages, there was one divorce. To counter these trends, the government has sought to promote childbearing through various measures. For example, Russian families are entitled to a certificate for 429,408 rubles, $12,500, after the birth or adoption of a second child.
In 2013 the government was deliberating on whether to boost the divorce tax as a means of discouraging divorce and promoting family values. The protection of children and traditional family values was also the stated purpose for the enactment of a lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender propaganda law to prevent distribution of “non-traditional sexual relationships” ideas among minors. The government is also considering reinstatement of a tax on childlessness, estimated at 10 percent of women in their late 40s.
Despite being home to the world’s second largest immigrant population, 11 million migrants or 8 percent of the total population, this inflow has not compensated for Russia’s population losses. These migrants, mostly from the impoverished former Soviet republics are often poorly educated and thus tend to have low paying jobs, which ethnic Russians are loathe to accept. Many migrants are from the former Central Asian Republics and the Caucasus, especially Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kazakhstan, and thus differ in religion, ethnicity and language from the ethnic Russian population.
Scenarios: Russia’s future depends on fertility and, for now, a population increase seems unlikely (Source: UN Population Division)Enlarge Image
Furthermore, over a third of these migrants, or some 4 million, reside unlawfully in the country and live under constant threat of harassment and deportation. The issue of illegal immigration has become so politicized that it has inflamed xenophobia and Russian ultra-nationalism, spawning numerous anti-immigration groups.
More recently, some 800,000 people, many ethnically Russian, were uprooted by the ongoing conflict in the Ukraine and have poured across the border into Russia, with various forms of status. In some cases, they receive government subsidies, as well as being relocated to other regions across Russia. Additional arrivals from Ukraine are likely, given continuing instability in the area.
Russia’s immigration policy has focused on attracting highly skilled workers from abroad, but has fallen short of its goals. Migrant labor is considered essential to counter the steep decline in Russia’s working-age population, expected to decline by 25 percent by mid-century.
Russia’s aging population has placed strains on the economy that will impact numerous sectors including agriculture, manufacturing, the armed forces and retirement schemes. In the next decade, Russia’s labor force is expected to shrink by more than 12 million, or around 15 percent.
The contraction of Russia’s labor force is exacerbated by low retirement ages: 60 for men and 55 for women. In certain situations, for example, hazardous occupations or unemployment, retirement ages are lower. Nevertheless, Russia’s older population does not fare well. According to a 2014 global survey of the social and economic well-being of older people, Russia ranked 65 among 96 countries.
The future size of Russia may follow a number of scenarios, largely determined by fertility (Figure 1). For example, if fertility remained essentially constant, not an unreasonable assumption, the Russian population would fall to around 111 million by mid-century and 67 million by 2100. Such an outcome would mean that the Russian population would be less than half of its current size by the close of the 21st century.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-27 11:20:00 UTC
by Oliver Westcott Genes -> Culture -> Politics -> Law The UK is made up of many more than 4 distinct cultures. BUT the British are mostly united in the very least on mutual defence. This has been invested into over the centuries and is one of our greatest commons as Britons. (Culture is downstream of genes, and we share largely very similar and distinctive genes, even the Scotts are on average over 30% anglo-saxon, the source of our common law) We have other commons, language, science… and we have not only maintained these commons but strengthened these commons, it has been an increasingly harmonious arrangement. It has been the lubrication on the wheels of contracts and the market. Our common trust. There are differences and to the extent that there are, as much as possible authority might ought be decentralised as locally as possible.
by Oliver Westcott Genes -> Culture -> Politics -> Law The UK is made up of many more than 4 distinct cultures. BUT the British are mostly united in the very least on mutual defence. This has been invested into over the centuries and is one of our greatest commons as Britons. (Culture is downstream of genes, and we share largely very similar and distinctive genes, even the Scotts are on average over 30% anglo-saxon, the source of our common law) We have other commons, language, science… and we have not only maintained these commons but strengthened these commons, it has been an increasingly harmonious arrangement. It has been the lubrication on the wheels of contracts and the market. Our common trust. There are differences and to the extent that there are, as much as possible authority might ought be decentralised as locally as possible.
THE MYTHOS OF NAZI GENERAL PLAN OST All general staffs develop war plans. The war plan to use asymmetric warfare against ukraine was produced somewhere between 2010 and 2012. Every single general staff in the world has hundreds of such plans. They vary from the trivial, to the devious, to the genocidal. That is what general staffs do. Yet these plans are rarely if ever used. The american Plan Red was to conquer canada so that the british couldn’t for example (I know this because they bought my great-grandparents farm to use as an airport in case they needed to put the plan into action. The plans that are currently in the russian (and soviet) archives are horrific, and include nuclear saturation of the west, and rapid movement of artillery and armor through that territory. There are plans to take finland, to take sweden, to defend from china, to take back constantinople. These are not likely to happen, but they are the research and development plans that all general staffs occupy their time with so that they are NEVER in a position of lacking a plan for any possible contingency. Generalplan Ost existed in six only in preliminary versions from January 1940 to the last one dated 23. Dec. 1942 named “Generalsiedlungsplan”. The plan was subject to a continuous ongoing development, and no version of it was ever approved. Further development of the plan was abandoned in 1943. The 2′nd, 3′rd and 4′th versions of the plan have never been found. Their existence and content is only known from other secondary documentary references. In other words, this is more propaganda. As far as I know the general solution was to resettle people in order to prevent communist expansion from the soviets into european spaces where it could threaten germans. Fascism was a reaction to soviet communism. That’s all. Just as russians today want to defend their ‘resettled’ people in eastern europe, (despite the fact that they are despised in every country), the germans wanted to defend their settled peoples, because they had been incrementally civilizing europe through commerce since the beginning of the Hansa league. I never believe anyone’s history. I look at the economics, and the demographics, and search for incentives. People just make excuses to justify seizure of opportunities. And history is nothing but such excuses. The only measure of a people is trust and the technical, and economic velocity that results from it. The measure of any philosophy or ideology is the long term condition of those who practice it.