Archive for August, 2007

Dave

ME:

This is a coaching session from Dave.

I left out his final comment on marijuana because I think commenters would obsess on that one paragraph. I hope this is an undeserved insult, but I hope it is useful cautionary one:

DAVE:

TV is an irrelevant thing because of the Internet. The real minds on the Internet show through like a cop’s 500-lumen flashlight. It has been fascinating to watch the Internet’s influence on the markets. The whole market commentariat evolves together with lightening speed based upon the highest IQs. I can trace the influencers with complete transparency and immediately detect those who have failed their homework or whose intellectual horsepower isn’t up to snuff.

This is a new world with its speed and access for those with IQ horsepower. The blocking intermediary has been flushed out and passes to elite clubs have been made much easier to obtain.

This process is in early stages. Take a look at Facebook.com. Facebook.com is yet another incipient engine of conspiracy, a fabulous tool in intelligent hands for loyalty coupled with a conspiracy is a badge of social class.

For example, I remember as a kid the Patty Hearst saga: These “revolutionaries” calling themselves the “Symbionese Revolutionary Army” sold each other out in the less than 5 seconds flat. Revolutionaries indeed! They were double-digit IQ mutt niggers pretending to be revolutionaries.

Pretending is something we do profusely as kids and we don’t usually drop the habit in adulthood. The kid who put together Facebook.com is a revolutionary. He is not a pretender. He puts to shame all Wordists.

Responsibility is there for those willing to shoulder it and pretending comes to an end when you realize our world is far more deterministic than our “rising expectations” culture dares to acknowledge. Fear takes the driver’s seat, ebbing and flowing over great secular eras. It has been so long since America has known the flow, the mass of Americans have forgotten it exists, yet the competitive struggle deepens and the consequences for delusion become ever more onerous.

5 Comments

Pain

“The Tough Guy approach is to learn “both sides,” to aggressively Question. But he is already into step two. His big concern is LOOKING doubtful, not in analyzing reality.”

I always thought that meant he knew who was wrong and was protecting him. So when he puts on the tough image, I’m thinking “What a wuss,” and he can tell he’s not fooling me, so he gets pissed.

ME:

You got it!

All my life the people who chickened out did so by sayng they were just being “realistic” and “experienced.” No member of the Masturbatin Generation said, “I’m not going to go out there and get my butt beat with you,” they said, “I was IN World War II, and I MADE my REAL sacrifices.”

The Masturbation Generation never said, “I had my butt kicked into line and was taught to obey without question.” They said, “I learned out in the REAL world that you just have to settle for things as they REALLY are.

1 Comment

Tough Guys Versus Reality

I keep asking you to consider WHY any information is PRODUCED.

This is very different from asking you to DOUBT. It goes deeper, and should take MORE time. The Tough Guy approach is to learn “both sides,” to aggressively Question. But he is already into step two. His big concern is LOOKING doubtful, not in analyzing reality. If you “study the question,” that means YOU know all about it.

And for the Tough Guy, everybody seeing that you know it all is where the process stops. What good does any Wisdom do if it doesn’t show how wise YOU are?

Please note that I began here by analyzing WHY the Tough Guy says what he says, not by casting doubt on it from my endless fund of information about all aspects of the question. Why do ***I*** use this approach? Because the Tough Guy is aiming to look tough. I, on the other hand, am interested solely in power in the real world.

Look at that word “real.” Do you think it is accidental that whenever we hear the word “reality” it means something awful? But you could do this for YOURSELF: WHY does the word “reality” always mean something awful? It is because the person using that word is saying,

1) ***I*** really know what reality is, because of my virtues.
2) ***I*** have “been there.”
3) ***I*** am tough and experienced.

In other words, the person who defines “reality” is talking entirely about HIMSELF, which is precisely what reality is NOT about.

The most Tough Guy things I have ever done were a COVER. If you have papers to show you are working with a sewing machine company and someone figures out that you are actually a combat merc, they stop looking. To look any further would be like finding someone is covering up an armed robbery and then saying, “Well, this must be a cover for something SERIOUS.”

Like acting the Dumb Southerner in DC, this analysis of reality has a very, VERY practical side. That is WHY it is REALITY. That someone may be using being a merc as a cover simply doesn’t occur to people. Why?

Because the information people are used to from Tough Guys is aimed at making Tough Guys look TOUGH. Merc is the toughest so merc is the end of the chain.

In other words, “reality” begins and ends with his being a Tough Guy.

7 Comments

Is That BUG Copyrighted?

GREAT layout!

I just saw it for the first time.

A fighitng bug is a wonderful idea, but check and be sure we’re not using one we can be sued for.

4 Comments

AFKAN

“Ironically, the safe, comfortable past is an elegant trap…”

2 Comments

Thanks, Pain!

Thinking ahead and thinking things through does NOT mean central planning.

Populist leadership can be as simple as recognizing worth and expertise and drumming up support for those that have them, while at the same time recognizing what is insane and harmful and sweeping such people out of the way. But somebody, a generalist, needs to have an idea of what is going on, or there will be no change, no revolution, no politics.

Another example I gave in the past is how the West was won. There was no central planning. There was a little politics and there were guide books. The guide books described the trails heading West, how to survive in the wilderness, and how to scratch out a living wherever you were. This was revolutionary. This was planning. But it was NOT central planning.

There was a kind of bureaucracy involved in printing and selling the books, in the manufacture of the wagons, and in holding a group together while tracking months through the Great American Desert and keeping scalps away from bloodthirsty Injuns. There was planning, but no CENTRAL planning.

It is not that anyone thinks you are trying to create a mass movement, it’s that you still have more practical knowledge to share with those who could help you use it. I know you are tired, so if that’s it, then we will focus on organizing what you have already written, which is a job well done. Organizing always brings out new insights and general conclusions and this is what Dave is doing at National Salvation.

2 Comments

Is This a Contradiction?

1) The white race is DOOMED, because it is due to decline from seven hundred million (guess) to (guess) three hundred million in this century.

2) Jews rule the world and are going to KEEP ruling it, though their population is about one in five hundred of the people on earth and is dropping like a rock.

14 Comments

PC “Change” Versus change

Those who talk about Change cannot deal with real, honest-to-God change, just as the last people who know love are those who shout Love incessantly. No one is a better hater than a person who insists he is fighting Hate.

Marxism believed it was obvious that the best economy would be a PLANNED one. Instead of all that inefficient competition everyone would just pull together in an organized fashion. The term Social Progress has been laughed out of existence. Now they call it Change, though I haven’t even heard that term in a while.

But Social Progress or Change, it means that Political Correctness knows exactly where society is going, that it is going in his direction, so Change is on his side. Which is the exact set of assumptions that got Social Progress laughed off the map.

Wordists all claim to know exactly where the world is headed. Every Wordist also knows that if he could consistently predict the stock market that way, he could BUY the world in a few years. When peabrains like that actually take over an economy, anybody who should be trusted with sharp objects should know what will happen. But the experts and intellectuals declared it a success until it literally collapsed before their eyes.

The fatal weakness of Change is that it cannot deal with the slightest bit of real change. Marx assumed that what he thought were the trends of his day would continue unchanged. The proletariat would get poorer and more desperate. Even as he wrote, the first we of the city proletariat was becoming management and beginning to buy property and workers were being given the vote.

None of this concerned Marx in the least. A good Wordist never lets reality slow him down.

Everything here RELATES. To an extent a present reader finds it impossible to conceive, the Middle East was the absolute basis of ALL thinking that thought itself civilized In Marx’s day. There was no real change. Every Great Civilization progressed through rigid phases. The High Culture was the pyramid-building and scribe phase Egypt had reached and we had fallen from.

You don’t need a free market to tell you how to build a pyramid. In fact you don’t need a market economy to do ANYTHING that twentieth century history says High Cultures did. All you need is scribes to plan and organize it.

Meanwhile out in the real world slamming an Egypt-style planned economy into the modern world was like taking the Wright Brothers’ plane up against a modern jet fighter.

And that is why what I say sounds so confusing. After a lifetime of being given exact plans and specifications for building an endless number of Wordist pyramids, I am trying to get you back to a system that visibly takes Wordism apart when it goes for a test flight. I do not NEED a mass movement. I need to push certain basics to keep the movement in a rational direction.

But, as with the economy, the apparent winner is the equivalent of planning, the torchlight parade approach. Just as a Great Civilization was based on building pyramids, a great movement is based on getting millions of people out on the street. That is why someone like me spends WEEKS arranging that “spontaneous” crowd when The Candidate shows up. That’s the way Harry Truman did it and, by gum, that’s the way it’s done NOW!

Meanwhile, back on Planet Earth, mass meetings are strictly for show. The real campaign is one-on-one or the despised “campaign slogan,” which is really an attempt to express the public mood, however crude. It is not “good” in the sense Marx would define a “good” economy. A campaign slogan is as hit-or-miss, when judged on its “goodness” as the latest trend in consumer spending. But have you ever LISTENED to the total, changeless crap that is shouted at mass meetings. They are mobs, with the IQ of mobs.

The age of TV moved from the mass meeting to the slogan. Has anybody noticed that we are no longer in the age where television is the Latest Thing? In our age, an idea very rapidly becomes either outdated or a challenge that must be met. This is the first time in history when the ordinary person has the POWER to DEMAND an answer. It is very, VERY hard to do so, but one of my favorite things is watching the old “professional journalists” get together and moan about this modern age when “professionals” no longer control every outlet.

Thirty years ago everyone knew who the Anchor Man on CBS was. I don’t. IS there one?

People always want me to present a more “solid” set of ANSWERS. Everyone you know can present you with a solid list of what constitutes Change. Everyone but me. I deal in a world that changes from year to year. Rule One: No kind of Change can deal with real changes.

The most “progressive” economies on earth proved that.

5 Comments