Theme: Crisis

  • No Spengler Is Wrong. Too Much Middle East, Not Enough China and India

    Oct 8, 2019, 1:26 PM

    —“Somebody like Spengler would say that there is no way around the decline and eventual fall of the Faustian West, no matter what we do politically. What if like an individual human life, and indeed the universe itself, an expiration date is just destiny?”—

    He’s demonstrably wrong. China and india are the examples, The problem for most western intellectuals is that fertile crescent begins both the agrarian and bronze ages, and that we were behind them because we didn’t have that climate with those rivers, and so agrarian production had to be distributed over broader colder territories. I can envision history now without semitic influences and the semitic dark ages of ignorance. The problem is we let our civilizations partly merge when rome was conquered by byzantium (se europeans, anatolians and syrians and levantines) and so almost all out intellectuals are infected by the european semitic competition rather than studying europe, semitia, india, and china as different models. The Chinese have always been right. Homogeneity. gradual genetic colonization. Isolation. and eradication of any and all competition. We failed because when we moved from land trade through the Bosporus, to the age of sail, we didn’t put a wall at gibraltar, the Bosporus, the caucuses, and between the caspian, the aral sea, and the himalayas. We didn’t wall ourselves off like the chinese. Civilizations and territories, and SPECIES: china, India, europa (to the urals), semitia, africa, austronesia, north and south america, and australia.

  • The Postwar Narrative in Historical Context

    Oct 9, 2019, 9:29 AM

    1. Prussia was the completion of the restoration of western civilization to its origins after the roman collapse, Carolingian failure, Church failure, The French Failure b/c of church influence. The British failure b/c of french influence.

    2. French Socialism and Jewish Marxism were a reformation from supernatural religion to pseudoscientific religion to compete with Prussia, Darwin, and finally Nietzsche.

    3. Nazi Germany was an attempt to convert monarchical Prussianism to political prussianism to resist marxism.
      The German upper classes, at least in prussia, and then in broader germany, had been trying to restore western civilization, to its foundations.

    4. The postwar french, jewish, and less so english attempt to end prussianization was successful, largely through thought leadership in pseudoscience by marxists feminists and postmodernists.

    5. I see the current conflict between those of us who are ahead of the curve (again) restoring the prussian aristocratic ethic, the english who are trying to restore the british empire, and the protestants who are trying to restore the church, and the catholics who are in sympathy with the marxists, the underclasses who are the new postmodernists as well as marxists, and the jews and muslims who are seeking to undermine all of the above.

    6. We must restore our aristocracy, our rule of law, our military, our militia, and our family, and we can easily do so by depoliticization, definancialization, and re-familializtion.

  • The Postwar Narrative in Historical Context

    Oct 9, 2019, 9:29 AM

    1. Prussia was the completion of the restoration of western civilization to its origins after the roman collapse, Carolingian failure, Church failure, The French Failure b/c of church influence. The British failure b/c of french influence.

    2. French Socialism and Jewish Marxism were a reformation from supernatural religion to pseudoscientific religion to compete with Prussia, Darwin, and finally Nietzsche.

    3. Nazi Germany was an attempt to convert monarchical Prussianism to political prussianism to resist marxism.
      The German upper classes, at least in prussia, and then in broader germany, had been trying to restore western civilization, to its foundations.

    4. The postwar french, jewish, and less so english attempt to end prussianization was successful, largely through thought leadership in pseudoscience by marxists feminists and postmodernists.

    5. I see the current conflict between those of us who are ahead of the curve (again) restoring the prussian aristocratic ethic, the english who are trying to restore the british empire, and the protestants who are trying to restore the church, and the catholics who are in sympathy with the marxists, the underclasses who are the new postmodernists as well as marxists, and the jews and muslims who are seeking to undermine all of the above.

    6. We must restore our aristocracy, our rule of law, our military, our militia, and our family, and we can easily do so by depoliticization, definancialization, and re-familializtion.

  • “we Continually Advise Against Taking Individual Action for A Reason”

    “we Continually Advise Against Taking Individual Action for A Reason” https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/we-continually-advise-against-taking-individual-action-for-a-reason/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 17:45:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265700564676997120

  • “we Continually Advise Against Taking Individual Action for A Reason”

    Oct 11, 2019, 4:18 PM by Stephen Thomas Why do people assume any of us are going on a k— spree? We do the opposite! So yeah, I get it… a civil war is “scary”.. You know what else is “scary”? Another Dark Age! Another 500 or more years of ignorance and regression. With mankind having to scratch and claw to merely survive! Losing our heritage AGAIN to the same monsters that destroyed it before! That’s what’s “scary”. We continuously advise against individuals taking action FOR A REASON. I’m so tired of these cowards. You are far more patient with them than I.


    (CD: I’m patient because I want to expose them and teach others how to expose them.)

  • “we Continually Advise Against Taking Individual Action for A Reason”

    Oct 11, 2019, 4:18 PM by Stephen Thomas Why do people assume any of us are going on a k— spree? We do the opposite! So yeah, I get it… a civil war is “scary”.. You know what else is “scary”? Another Dark Age! Another 500 or more years of ignorance and regression. With mankind having to scratch and claw to merely survive! Losing our heritage AGAIN to the same monsters that destroyed it before! That’s what’s “scary”. We continuously advise against individuals taking action FOR A REASON. I’m so tired of these cowards. You are far more patient with them than I.


    (CD: I’m patient because I want to expose them and teach others how to expose them.)

  • A Possibility of Democratic Process?

    Oct 17, 2019, 5:21 PM

    QUESTION: —“Curt I have a question for you. Do you think that there is any possibility of a tyrant getting in charge of the USA should it descend into civil war for separation? Or do we think this can be done by democratic processes in place? The latter one I think realistically doesn’t have a chance.”—

    There is a possibility of democratic process IF we propose a solution that is a superior alternative to certain conflict. This is what I hope to do. But the public won’t accept that until the conflict is certain. Which will happen soon. Any democrat is by definition a tyrant, because any rule by legislation rather than rule by law of reciprocity is by definition despotism. My hope, and most probable is a military takeover of the government. The problem is that the military needs something to enforce. So we must provide them with the market demand (up rising), moral license (to prevent chaos and civil war), and solution (that they can enforce to maintain the peace). We will need to act before the election. That’s all I can tell you. And that is why I’m working so hard to get enough done to provide that solution – at the last minute. Edit

  • A Possibility of Democratic Process?

    Oct 17, 2019, 5:21 PM

    QUESTION: —“Curt I have a question for you. Do you think that there is any possibility of a tyrant getting in charge of the USA should it descend into civil war for separation? Or do we think this can be done by democratic processes in place? The latter one I think realistically doesn’t have a chance.”—

    There is a possibility of democratic process IF we propose a solution that is a superior alternative to certain conflict. This is what I hope to do. But the public won’t accept that until the conflict is certain. Which will happen soon. Any democrat is by definition a tyrant, because any rule by legislation rather than rule by law of reciprocity is by definition despotism. My hope, and most probable is a military takeover of the government. The problem is that the military needs something to enforce. So we must provide them with the market demand (up rising), moral license (to prevent chaos and civil war), and solution (that they can enforce to maintain the peace). We will need to act before the election. That’s all I can tell you. And that is why I’m working so hard to get enough done to provide that solution – at the last minute. Edit

  • “Nothing Else Really Defines Alternatives with Actionable Solutions.”

    Oct 22, 2019, 11:22 AM (worth repeating)

    —“Millenials and Gen Z are mad that we have no community, society, fair ratio of marriageable women, reason to invest at all. Most of us would trade what we have now for communism, anarchy or any number of flawed systems. Philosophically speaking, fight club or the joker are more compelling than most or the abstract appeals pitched at us in the past 50 years. Except for P. Nothing else really defines or offers appealing alternatives with actionable solutions.”— GL Sevier

  • “Nothing Else Really Defines Alternatives with Actionable Solutions.”

    Oct 22, 2019, 11:22 AM (worth repeating)

    —“Millenials and Gen Z are mad that we have no community, society, fair ratio of marriageable women, reason to invest at all. Most of us would trade what we have now for communism, anarchy or any number of flawed systems. Philosophically speaking, fight club or the joker are more compelling than most or the abstract appeals pitched at us in the past 50 years. Except for P. Nothing else really defines or offers appealing alternatives with actionable solutions.”— GL Sevier