Category: Politics, Power, and Governance

CHOOSE, A SECOND FALL OF ROME, OR THE CARTHAGINIAN WAR?

(important) (core)

1) So will you go down in history as the second fall of Rome? Or will you go down as Rome defeating Carthage and salting the earth so it can never rise again?

2) I think of racists as solving the obvious problem by the simplest means that they can imagine – but one that easily fails. People’s sensitivity changes under duress. So you must increase duress in order to reduce their tolerance to threats. This is how a general thinks about a strategic problem. Minimum force here, to cause minimum resistance there, for maximum consequence over there,

3) P was purely conservative libertarian. Race based people came to P when I stated that the science is clear that the optimum social order is ethnocentrism, the optimum political order rule of law, and the optimum ethic christian because it is compatible and enhances via negativa natural law into a via-positiva advantage. In P I didn’t even consider race as a motivator. I just stated that if you want a wealthy, competitive, commons producing, highly redistributive, high trust polity that continues the western tradition you need to restore the market for polities with rule of law and many small polities each producing commons needed by that body of people given the differences in our abilities, rates, and depths of maturity and genetic load.

4) If you search my site you will find (a) a decade of my argument stating that conflict is largely one of the primacy of loyalty to kin because of the advantage of kin cooperation, with the problem being differences in class sizes between the races and tribes, with whites and east asians producing the best genetic distribution with the least genetic load (bad genes). And (b) that the primary conflict is one over natural status conflicts given the differing demands for commons – including that of normative behavior – between different groups with different rates and depths of sexual matureity and different class sizes. So my argument was that ending segregation was not only a catastrophic failure, not only destroyed the nascent black middle class leadership, but forced the abandonment of the black underclass. This is not dissimilar to the hispanic-indian-black divide in south america (that like mexico at its core is often still amerindian).

5) I think sh-t thru. So I am aware that all political movements move from the fringe where they depend on very radical very dissatisfied, and often mentally troubled individuals, through ‘generatons’ until they reach enough people to obtain power. I have done the same with P by attacking and undermining the jewish libertarians, then providing a home for the hard right while undermining the swastika ideology and replacing it with the hard science of economics and biology, and I have been working on neutralizing the feminism of the christian right that like women operates under the pretense of needing their approval on their terms, rather than that they need a means of survival and competition in the generations to come but that christianity is scientifically ‘right’ as far as christian ethics – and that I have an answer to the institutionalization of that ethic by embodying it in law. At present john and I together took a gamble last year (and I risked the whole movement) that we could move directly to the revolutionary message, and eventually an anti-left constitutional convention, from there to the certain threat of civil war, while trump was still in office. Right now I think we have to demonstrate (YET AGAIN) that I am right, and that it is with science, reason, evidence, and the law, expressed in our rights to self determination, and to state openly and truthully the superiority of our civilization, and its rescue of man. And that we need to correctly identify the enemy as the financial and political sector. and that the returns on ‘correcting past crimes’ will produce a renaissance not only for our people but for the world and for mankind – or else another dark age. If we do this successfully, there will be no resistance from even the middle, and only resistance from the political and financial sector and hard leftists, and dependent immigrants. How we conduct that war is something I am absolutely confident in and know how to win. It is actually a matter of choosing a strategy from the number I have in my head. All of them will produce such horrific pressure not only on our government but on the rest of the world, that it will be increasingly hard for anyone other than our unwanted immigrants in blue cities and the new mexico-invasion, that to resist the solution. That solution will provide a peaceful transitional means while preserving the strength of the military and the continental defense. Conversely, with resistance we would make a certain union general’s destruction of the south, and isis’ destruction of Syria/Iraq look like a visit from father christmas. (Just one example. What would Mexico do if certain things started happening? What would the largest military base in the states be occupied with? This is how you strategically think about war. Small pressures that create large pressures from elsewhere.)

6) “All who bleed with me will be my brother in war.” After war, we will naturally sort by our kin as all people do when advantageous, and try to ‘associate or mate upward or downward’ to capture better opportunities if the kin group is not in your interest. The objective being obtaining the ability to voluntarily associate or disassociate as our preference demands. So my understanding is that:

(a) all of us who want to be left alone so to speak to build a middle class majority polity will get a long just fine as long as we can separate into polities or neighborhoods;

(b) if we limit our political order to those people wanting a middle class majority polity, then the racial differences will largely ameliorate because most differences that cause conflict are the difference in class sizes between the races on the one hand, and the group strategy of other tribes, races, sub-races being destructive on the other.

(c) therefore given the vast demographic differences between the races we would end up with a very white polity with minorities, all whom agree to rule of law, and all whom operate under rule of law. And if we can produce commons suitable to our kin we will be fine. I suspect that over time we will re-sort into small nation states if only to limit competition.

(d) the only problem then is really eliminating falsehood and irreciprocity and letting market forces do their thing., Why? We (and some east asians) appear to be the only people who can do it.

We could have fixed this politically in 92 at the latest. Now we have to fix it militarily, and this is our last chance to do it before the second fall of the roman empire.

So will you go down in history as the second fall of Rome? Or will you go down as Rome defeating Carthage and salting the earth so it can never rise again?