Sunday, 19 February 2017

So here's a crazy thought...


Not to blow my own trumpet or anything, but it strikes me as something of an achievement that I've been able to write and post consistently for going on five years now. Most blogs don't last even six months, never mind four years (and counting). Fewer still, at least those maintained by single individuals, can claim to post with consistent regularity.

And if you were to go through my blog's archives, you will find quite a lot of good material and associated wisdom compiled over the years.

Not everything I write is of particularly high quality, obviously. Some of my work has been pretty poor due to muddled thinking, inexperience with writing, stylistic issues, and so on and so forth. But I think you would be hard-pressed to argue that there has been no evolution whatsoever in terms of output, quality, consistency, and literary style over the years. Indeed, I think that any fair-minded observer who went back and read what I wrote in 2012 2013 (ye cats, I'm getting old- my memory's going already!), when this blog came into existence, would be pleasantly surprised at how the style, fluency, content of my writing has improved.

Of course, my blog does not fall into easy categorisation. It isn't really a Manosphere blog, even though there is a core focus on masculinity and men's self-improvement.

It isn't really a politics blog, even though I spend quite a lot of time writing on the subject.

It isn't really a video game blog- even though its very title was inspired by my beloved HALO franchise, and my online persona, though an accurate and relatively unfiltered reflection of who I actually am, is also partly inspired by the personality of the IsoDidact.

It isn't really a philosophy blog either, despite the vast amount of writing that I have done on fairly esoteric philosophical and religious subjects.

It isn't really an alt-Right blog, an economics blog, or a single-issue nerdistry blog- and it sure as hell isn't a PUA blog.

It is all of these things, except the PUA stuff. It is none of these things.

In that respect it's pretty unusual among most Manosphere/alt-Right blogs, in that I don't concentrate on one cause du jour and harp endlessly about.

One could argue that this makes my output unfocused and scattershot. That is a fair criticism. And yet, people keep coming back to read what I write- because, similar to other (far superior) bloggers like Vox Day, I maintain a diverse range of interests and then try to reason my way through them into a coherent set of views and arguments.

Which brings me to an idea that I've been chewing over for a few weeks.

As a reader and friend pointed out before, it might be useful to actually put some of this writing, in some edited form, into an e-book of some kind, and put it out there for wider distribution.

Now obviously my output is not comparable to that of, say, Vox Day or Quintus Curtius. But there is clearly a point of view articulated here that my readers find valuable and useful, and it might not be a bad thing to put together some of that experience and wisdom in distilled, focused form and distribute it out to whoever is interested.

I do not pretend that such a venture would be a runaway success, but if the output was of sufficient quality, clarity, and wisdom, it might just help convert a few more Millennials over to the Truth. And that, in and of itself, is a worthy enough goal.

So- what do you think? Is this a useful venture? Or am I just barking mad? Stick your ideas in the comments below.

The swift vengeance of the God-Emperor

President Donald Trump- dear Lord Almighty, I don't think I'm ever going to get tired of saying those words- held a press conference on Thursday which was... quite the performance.

Actually, a correction is in order there. The event was billed as a press conference, but it actually ended up being a savage verbal beatdown of much of the White House press corps. And it was EPIC:



The odd thing about the God-Emperor's reign thus far is that, depending on who you listen to for news about what he's done, either he is the most incompetent, foolish, loudmouthed, narcissistic buffoon ever to have occupied the Oval Office (if you listen to the failing legacy media), or he is a competent, skilled, forceful administrator who gives his subordinates considerable freedom and trust but swiftly and ruthlessly punishes them if they prove unworthy (if you listen to the alt-Right).

Given how frequently and predictably and lamentably the lamestream media has gotten things completely and totally wrong over the past year, I'm rather inclined to go with what the alt-Right has to say about the God-Emperor.

Make no mistake, there are many things that President Trump could improve upon in his interactions with the press. He is not a natural rhetorician, at least not in the sense that he can deliver a carefully constructed and articulated message in the way that a Cicero, a Caesar, or a Reagan could. He rambles, sometimes incoherently. He jumps from topic to topic with seemingly little connecting those random changes in tack. He frequently gets facts and figures wrong, misinterprets or misplaces basic information, and sometimes takes quotes and ideas way out of context.

And yet he is a fearsome opponent for the mainstream media- the toughest that they have ever seen.

Why is that?

Well, as the Chateau put it a couple of days ago, the God-Emperor is not a rhetorician- he is a RETORTICIAN.

He does a superb job of taking the MSM's hypocrisy, blatant bias, and astonishing lack of foresight and vision, and turning it right back at them. His quips, put-downs, and outright slams of various reporters are delivered with the deft touch and supreme skill of a man used to taking on his enemies face-to-face.

Even when he gets things glaringly wrong- as he did with that assertion that he made about his victory being the biggest electoral college win since that of Ronald Reagan- he doesn't necessarily back down. He dissembles and dodges and changes the subject, but he doesn't apologise and he doesn't show weakness.

He displays classic, characteristic aggressive Alpha-male behaviour in his dealings with both the press and his enemies in the Senate and the House. He tolerates and even encourages honest and fair reporting- but he shows no hesitation in crushing his opponents when he needs to.

His critics in the press have no idea how to handle him- other than by displaying classic Gamma fighting-retreat tactics. Here is a perfect example from The Daily Mail- which, unusually for a big media outlet, actually does try to report things honestly from time to time:
During a campaign-style rally on Saturday, Donald Trump used a quote from one of the nation's Founding Fathers out of context to vindicate his war against the media. 
At the 'Make America Great Again' rally in Melbourne, Florida which mirrored the rhetoric throughout his campaign tour, Trump said he hoped to speak 'without the filter of fake news' - whom he declared the 'enemy of America' this week. 
The President then referenced previous American leaders who combated the media during their time in the White House. 
He said: 'Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson, and Abraham Lincoln: many of our greatest Presidents fought with the media, and called them out, often-times, on their lies. 
'In fact, Thomas Jefferson said: 'Nothing can be believed which is seen in a newspaper'.'  
The clipped excerpt comes from a personal letter Jefferson wrote in June 1807 to John Norvell in regard to the First Amendment - which legally protects the rights for free speech and free press. 
The actual quote says: 'It is a melancholy truth, that a suppression of the press could not more compleatly [sic] deprive the nation of it's benefits, than is done by it's abandoned prostitution to falsehood. Nothing can now be believed which is seen in a newspaper. Truth itself becomes suspicious by being put into that polluted vehicle.' 
The document goes on to describe possible ways to construct newspapers to distinguish areas of undeniable fact from conjecture - much in the way we structure newspapers today, differentiating news and crime from opinion and feature pieces. 
Several years earlier, Jefferson defended the necessity of the media, saying: 'were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.'
The tone-deafness and lack of comprehension displayed by even this, one of the more competent media outlets, is amazing.

They simply do not realise that the rest of us cottoned on to their game a long time ago. Their much-ballyhooed separation of editorial and sports pieces from their headline news was long ago thrown right out the window. We of the news-consuming public know full well nowadays that fake-news peddlers like The Carlos Slim Blog, The Jeff Bezos Blog, The Puffington Host, the Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation, and the Clinton News Network, are not in the slightest bit interested in merely "presenting the facts". They have a clear agenda and that permeates their reporting to the very core.

We know full well that even once-respectable outlets like The Daily Telegraph in Britain have long since become SJW-converged. They report what they want to report, not what is actually happening.


After all, is it not written in the Imperial Creed that "The Emperor Protects"?

And even then, people still don't get it. I've seen posts by liberal Jewish friends of mine on my (pretty much inactive) personal Facebook account arguing that The Donald is an anti-Semite and has a great deal of trouble answering questions about his own inherent hostility toward the Jewish people.

Such an assertion is surely the product of an unhinged mind.

First, the God-Emperor has already clearly demonstrated his affection and regard for the nation of Israel and the Jewish people. He hosted Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House recently, and showed clearly that he is far more interested in fostering close good relations with Israel than his buffoon of a predecessor.

Second, his son-in-law is Jewish. His own daughter converted to her husband's faith. His grandchildren are Jewish. The idea that Donald Trump is an anti-Semite is so ridiculous that even the reporter who pressed President Trump about anti-Semitism stated bluntly that he agreed with the God-Emperor about his outrage at the charge of anti-Semitism.

Turning to the "scandal", if it is that, which prompted this brutal, wanton (and quite delightful) beating of the unwanted stepchildren of the press, I also suspect that The Donald pays attention to the mindset writings of men like Mike Cernovich, even if he doesn't say so and even if he did disavow the alt-Right. (Technically he was repudiating the white-supremacist elements of it, but not necessarily the alt-Right's core philosophy of mounting a vigourous physical and moral defence of Western civilisation.)

When the whole NSA issue broke, Mike argued that it was a serious strategic defeat for the new Administration (which, realistically, it was), that other targets were being lined up by the Deep State and the lying media (which is absolutely true), and that The Donald needed to make a major mindset change and go right back on the offensive.

Evidently, the God-Emperor thinks exactly the same way.

This is not exactly surprising if you know anything about Alpha-male behaviour. Alphas have monumental egos (I write this as someone with a large and somewhat prickly ego myself, though I don't claim to be any sort of Alpha male), and do not take slights against their person or their "tribe" well at all. The natural response of an Alpha male to truly personal and dangerous attacks is to crush the opposition as brutally and ruthlessly as possible.

And of course, that is exactly what Gustavus Donaldus went and did.

My reservations about the God-Emperor remain. I have yet to be fully convinced that he can push through his legislative agenda through the House and Senate. He can issue all of the Executive Orders that he likes, but until and unless he actually signs into binding law some of the items he has talked about, it is going to be difficult to argue that he has actually accomplished all that much.

And his civic nationalism is, while highly refreshing and a vastly preferable alternative to the cucked and hopelessly inept bumbling of the conservative establishment, still not sufficient. Civic nationalism is all well and good in a largely homogeneous population with common racial memory and attitudes; it is nowhere near enough in a heterogeneous empire made up of disparate minority groups which seek to use government power and force to trample upon the rights of the white majority that actually built the empire itself.

Sooner or later, the direct, culture-based nationalism of the Alt-Right is going to make its presence felt. It's simply a matter of time- because we acknowledge Truth for what it is, however harsh and terrible, not what we want it to be.

Nonetheless, I remain optimistic that, based on his latest performance, the God-Emperor is likely to prove the single most effective leader of American nationalism that the world has seen since President Reagan. He may even eclipse the Gipper himself one day, and be held in the same regard as President Andrew Jackson- an American nationalist par excellence.

Even President Trump would be hard-pressed to do better than that, really. But he just might.

So I ask you, lads, once again- ARE YOU TIRED OF WINNING YET?!?

Friday, 17 February 2017

Friday T&A: Fruit platter Edition

Since last week's (rather well received) serving of beautiful women involved mostly the fun stuff up the front, and since this IS technically a T and A segment, I figured it might be useful to balance out the scales a little bit. Not too much, obviously, I'm still very much in favour of one over the other, but a little variety doesn't hurt.

The ladies below all have the kinds of curves that you'd find on apples, oranges, and peaches- especially peaches, and especially in the boot.

Today's heavy dose of Vitamin C brought to you once again by our buddies at Radass.com (which if you think about it is really quite fitting). This really is a public service that they perform, and a highly enjoyable one at that.

Happy Friday, lads.








Thursday, 16 February 2017

The Spirit of Fire returns

HALO WARS was not, by any stretch of anybody's imagination, the best HALO game ever. It wasn't even in the top five. It is difficult, after all, to imagine an RTS game making much sense in a universe generally defined by what was originally a first person shooter.

And yet... there is something oddly appealing about HALO WARS. I've always enjoyed its simple, intuitive, point-and-shoot control scheme and its straightforward, uncluttered approach to resource gathering. The folks at Ensemble Studios basically created a strategy game that allowed for nearly infinite variation and flexibility on the part of the player, subject only to a few simple rules, and then sat back and let that same player just get on with business.

I have to say, I also loved the music. Stephen Rippy's soundtrack was both innovative and nostalgic at the same time, blending great references to the classic HALO soundtracks and themes while adding new ideas and flavours in at every turn.

So I am very much looking forward to seeing what 343 Industries can do with their latest release, which picks up the torch 25 years after the ending of the original HALO WARS with a similar cast of characters in a familiar location:


This should be good fun to play- and hopefully a damn sight less disappointing than HALO 5: Guardians turned out to be.

Wednesday, 15 February 2017

More glass ceilings, Pt. 2: Why fight biology?


A little under a year ago, I wrote the first post in what I had originally intended to be a two- or three-part series providing my unfair, unbalanced, and thoroughly unmedicated views as to why it is that women should be held back by that dreaded "glass ceiling". It took me a rather long time to get around to writing the follow-up (of which I think there will almost certainly only be one) partly because I'm quite lazy sometimes, partly because I got rather busy with everything else, and mostly because of the way things evolved at work after I wrote that post.

You see, I originally wrote it after I landed in soup thanks to someone in my team who complained to management that I had created a "hostile working environment" for her.

That was... interesting, to say the least.

Even so, my sentiments in the intervening time on the subject of women in the workplace have not changed. Women, particularly in fast-paced, challenging, technical environments, or in dangerous and difficult ones, are on balance a detriment to the health of a workforce and the profitability of a business.

However, that post was not, as it happens, written in a fit of pique. There was and remains a serious point to be made, and it is simple: pushing women into the workplace is not just bad for business, it's bad for them as well.

The Dilbert Principle

As for the reason why I landed in soup in the first place, it's easy to narrate: I found, and still find, the person in question to be deeply unqualified for the job and totally unsuited to the work. And since I do not tolerate fools, incompetents, or slowpokes, it should come as no surprise at all that we don't exactly see eye-to-eye.

The stupid thing, though, is that this entire mess could have been avoided three years ago if only we as a team had exercised a bit of sense.

I had interviewed her back in the day for a position in our team. I knew instantly that she was not sufficiently qualified, rejected her as a candidate, provided my feedback, and basically got on with my day. At the time my team consisted of basically three people- me and two other chaps, all with technical backgrounds and all well-versed in the complex systems and processes that we deal with on a daily basis.

Of the remaining two interviewers, one agreed entirely with me and rejected her as a candidate. But the other... well, it so happened that the interviewee and the interviewer are of the same ethnicity and speak the same language. And the interviewer basically wanted someone to follow his orders.

The end result was that the VP in question overrode the objections of his co-equals and hired this woman into our team- despite our clearly voiced opinions that she would be totally unsuited for the work.

I have since spent the last three years watching myself being proven correct. Again. And all because of racial preferences and the Iron Law of Bureaucracy that we know of as The Dilbert Principle: the tendency of people to get promoted or hired into their areas of maximum incompetence.

The result has been a clear fracturing of our team into disparate little units with no common goal or vision, and no development of individual skills or cross-training.

Worst of all, from my perspective, is the inevitable effect that substandard team members have on relationships with clients. Problems that would take me an hour or two to investigate, analyse, and resolve routinely take this person two weeks- or more. Her ability to talk to the business is non-existent. Her skill set is quite limited and has not grown in the entire time that she has been in the group.

Indeed, there are, in fact, times when being right so often gets to be a real burden.

But then, at the beginning of the year, she went to our senior managers and told them that she was expecting her third child with her husband.

This, as far as I am concerned, is a very Good Thing.

What Women Really Want

Everyone benefits. Our team gets rid of some dead weight for about a year. Our clients benefit from actually getting their problems resolved in a timely and efficient fashion- or at least, I hope so, given the internal politics of my group. And our erstwhile colleague gets a new child.

It is almost certain that, in the long run, she will be far happier being a wife and a mother to her two existing daughters, and her future child, than she will coming in at 9, leaving at 5, and barely getting anything done during her time at the workplace. And good for her- because that is exactly what most women would prefer in the first place.

You see, no matter what any STRAWNG EMPAWAHHHD WIMMENZ tells you, the fact of the matter is that women are almost universally going to be happier being mothers and housewives than they are ever going to be climbing the corporate ladder.

There are exceptions to this rule, to be sure. A very small number of so-called "alpha females" do exist who are extremely intelligent, inclined to logic, equipped with a very sharp sense of humour and pair it with a deeply cutting sense of sarcasm, and do not tolerate nonsense or softness.

Here is a rather good example of that sort of thing:


That is not, by the way, a criticism of the supremely talented Ms. Coulter. On the contrary, I have immense respect and admiration for her. But the fact is that Ms. Coulter is not exactly what one might call "housewife material". She lacks the feminine softness and delicacy and tolerance for nonsense that is required of such- and she knows it. She knows that her greatest talents lie in the field of political punditry, and she herself knows that she probably wouldn't prove to be a very good wife, because very, very few men would have the necessary Alpha-male qualities needed to handle a woman like her.

She is, however, a rarity. And I suspect that if you are a young woman, or if you are a man with a young daughter, and you asked Ms. Coulter what she thinks young women should do with their lives, she would agree with me.

Sperm is Cheap, Eggs are Expensive

The harsh but true reality is that the Western world simply does not need women in the workforce.

Quite aside from the points that I had raised in my first article on the subject, pertaining to how having women in a team is often detrimental to productivity, morale, camaraderie, and career security, all of the data that we have available point to two inescapable facts.

First, as stated above, housewives and mothers are far happier than their working, stressed-out, career-driven counterparts.

Whether you like it or not, whether you are willing to admit it or not, the fact remains that men can do (just about) everything that women can in the workplace. Actually, they can do considerably more in manually intensive, or very technical, or very risky jobs- because men are constitutionally and biologically more willing and able to take risks, work longer and harder hours, and endure privation and discomfort than women are.

(I am aware of the standard female counterargument that nothing a man experiences could ever be as bad as childbirth. I'll believe it when a woman who has worked 12-hour shifts in the freezing cold of a North Dakota oil rig for weeks on end, and then given birth to a child, tells me that the latter is more miserable and more difficult than the former.)

But, there is one thing that women can do that men cannot ever do:

Conceive, carry, and give birth to, new human life.

That simple fact alone is what makes women valuable and men expendable. This one distinction more than makes up for every deficiency that a woman possesses in physical strength and stamina relative to a man. It is what gives women such immense power over men.

This is why the maxim about sperm being cheap and eggs being expensive is much more than merely a glib remark. It is a fundamental truth.

And (almost) any woman who ignores that fundamental truth, and thereby ignores her own biology, is setting herself up for a lifetime of unhappiness and pain. The sole exceptions are the very, very rare Alpha females, as mentioned above, who are actually better off being single and doing their own thing instead of becoming wives and mothers.

But for most women, their true path to happiness is not in their careers. It is in their families, and in the joys that they will find from building families of their own.

Raise the Ceiling a Few Feet Higher

If, therefore, women are inclined by temperament and biology to pursue motherhood and family over careers and stress, why, then, do we insist on supporting their careerist ambitions when all of the evidence tells us that doing so is plainly idiotic and simply makes women less happy?

And, by extension, makes men less happy too?

We do so partly because we're men, and therefore not very bright sometimes- but mostly because Western culture and civilisation has forgotten these basic truths, and is in the process of receiving a very harsh lesson about the costs associated with ignoring the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God.

If anything, we should be making it harder for women to climb the corporate ladder, and easier for them to quit and become mothers and wives.

We should be giving them incentives to work part-time for lower pay but with generous benefits. Western governments, in particular, might need to start thinking about subsidising children of native-born parents (not immigrants, let's get that straight).

Most of the Western world, and most of the Far Eastern world, does not need more childless, stressed-out, unhappy, pill-popping HR ladies and marketing managers in their late twenties and early thirties working themselves into infertility and misery.

Those parts of the world do need masculine sons and feminine daughters- which will not happen if their women are stuck in the same stupid rat-race of promotions, anti-depressants, binge-drinking, and meaningless short-term flings.

Tuesday, 14 February 2017

Powersliding in Anne Hathaway's cottage

One of the absolute best things about being an Amazon Prime subscriber has GOT to be the fact that TOP GEAR series 2-17 are all available, FOR FREE, as part of one's subscription.

Which allows petrol addicts like me to binge-watch the great heresies of the Lord's very own Prophets of Oversteer- and allows me, in particular, to relive the glory days of the show back before the Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation's nanny-statist ninnies got a hold of it and forced out the mad geniuses who made it such a monumental success.

One of my favourite episodes has always been the one in which Jezza took an old Mercedes S-class and decided to... umm... quaint his ride. The results were predictably hilarious, and involved numerous (completely justified) shots at the French nation, which as we all know is of course a land of pretentious cheese-eating Communists who all smell of garlic and cigarettes and wouldn't know a good glass of wine if they were hit in the face with one.

But as funny as all of those lovely insults against the Frogs are, they pale in comparison to the sheer genius involved at putting a dining room on wheels and then sending it around a track for a power lap- in the wet.


If you've ever wondered what it would be like to drive a cottage, and you didn't have the money or the desire to buy and drive, say, a Cadillac Marmalade Escalade, then wonder no longer, because that is exactly what it is like. And it's RUBBISH.

It's really a rather good thing that we have the blokes from THE GRAND TOUR around to explain these things to us, eh?

Monday, 13 February 2017

Eigo de, onegaishimasu?

Those of you who were introduced to the balls-out batshit insanity that is BABYMETAL probably know this already, but when it comes to music, Japan is actually considerably crazier than you might be led to believe initially.

This is especially true when it comes to my beloved genre of heavy metal.

If your entire exposure to Japanese music consisted of bland J-pop played in shopping malls- not a common experience for my American readers, I know, but those of you who have been to Asia know what I'm talking about- then you probably don't think terribly much of modern Japanese music. J-pop is even more lowest-common-denominator music than your average Western boy-band.

You see, the Japanese are actually HUGE metal fans. Legends of the genre, like IRON MAIDEN, MEGADETH, and JUDAS PRIEST enjoy massive, if underground, followings throughout Japan.

And of course, it turns out that they do in fact have some very good homegrown heavy metal talent of their own.

One band, in particular, has been flying the flag of Japanese power metal high and proud for the better part of twenty years now. They're called GALNERYUS (no idea what the name means), and they combine the speed of DRAGONFORCE, the musicianship of ANGRA, and the lyrics of... well, considering that their lyrics are completely incomprehensible, I have no clue who to compare them with, other than maybe, say, GWAR?

Anyway, they're really pretty damn good.

I'm not kidding about their lyrics, by the way. I actually speak a little Japanese- not particularly well, mind you, but enough to hold a very short conversation- and I have absolutely no bloody clue what the lyrics are, even though I grew up watching and listening to Japanese anime.





The distant mirror of heresy

The modern attack will not tolerate us. It will attempt to destroy us. Nor can we tolerate it. We must attempt to destroy it as being the fully equipped and ardent enemy of the Truth by which men live. The duel is to the death.

-- Hilaire Belloc, The Great Heresies
Reading through historian Hilaire Belloc's superbly written account of the five great heresies that have riven and nearly destroyed Christian civilisation over its two-thousand year history, one is much struck by the fact that many of the ideas and arguments advanced by the great heresiarchs of the past are almost identical to the ones put forth by the degenerates of the modern age.

In this book, which I started last year and then (rather stupidly) more or less forgot about for months, the great historian laid out five great schisms that have shaken the Catholic Church and all that it stands for. He starts with the Arian Heresy, which was (supposedly) resolved by the Council of Nicaea and the resulting Nicene Creed but festered on for several decades afterwards; continues with the great and devastating heresy that is Islam; carries on into the Albigensian Heresy which very nearly tore apart European Christian civilisation in civil war; delves into the Reformation at some length; and finally, writing in the late 1930s, looks at the attacks brought forth by scientific atheism and modernism upon the Faith.

Belloc himself was an an ardent traditional Catholic, and was in his lifetime one of the foremost defenders of the Faith; this point of view clearly colours the entire book, but in my opinion it is the better for this. In the hands of a lesser writer, such impositions of one's own point of view would be jarring and irritating, but Belloc's deft touch and superb eye for history make it possible for him to mount arguments using his faith in a way that persuades the reader by showing, not telling.

This, however, is not a book review- even though I highly recommend the book. I want to look in particular at the Albigensian Heresy and its roots, because the results of that heresy, and the extremely bloody way in which it ended, offer us a clear glimpse into the future that awaits us.

The Albigensian heresy started out as a complete rejection of a number of core teachings of the Catholic Church. Specifically, it rejected the doctrinal teaching of the universality and omnipotent goodness of God the Creator, taking the rather Manichaean view that there was a "good" God and an "evil" God. The Albigensians did this because they found the Catholic teachings concerning the fundamental problem of the existence of evil to be insufficient, claiming that Man's priceless gift of free will was just too simple an explanation.

The Albigensians didn't just abandon the core teachings of the Church on the subject of the nature of God- which would have been bad enough. They abandoned all appreciation of mortal beauty, arguing that alcohol, sex, physical pleasure, music, art- anything that is to do with the mortal realm and not the spiritual- is evil.

They refused to acknowledge the province of Earthly law; since civilian authority was derived from the corporeal world, according to their doctrine it held no sway or authority over them. They took to true extremes the teaching that one should "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, and render unto God what is God's".

As Belloc explains, 
Hence derive the main lines which were completed in detail as the Albigensian movement spread. Our bodies are material, they decay and die. Therefore it was the evil god that made the human body, while the good god made the soul. Hence also our Lord was only apparently clothed with a human body. He only apparently suffered. Hence the denial of the Resurrection.
Among the most controversial of the Cathar teachings, though, were the proto-feminist ideals of their heresy. The Cathars, at least initially, allowed and even encouraged women to become prefects and own property, evangelise, and proselytise in favour of their heresy.


The Cathars were hardcore vegetarians, arguing that killing animals was immoral. They were also dead-set against marriage; because they viewed mortal human flesh as evil, they believed that reproducing, and therefore perpetuating evil, was a great sin.

Rather unsurprisingly, to traditionalist and mainstream eyes, these folks were, quite simply, nutters.

Which brings us rather neatly to the realities of our modern age and our present afflictions.

It should be clear by this point why I brought up the Cathar Heresy and its eventual extermination. Almost all of their heretical beliefs are today mirrored in modern Western society- but in our case, these heresies have long since become acceptable mainstream ideas.

Vegetarianism and veganism, once jovially tolerated as merely the quaint and childish follies of men and women who simply do not want to consume animal protein, is now fashionable. In some circles, proclaiming that you are in fact a carnivore is a very good way to get yourself excommunicated permanently. (This is not a particularly Bad Thing in most cases. Be honest: if you're at a dinner party, would you prefer to be snacking on beef steak tartare, or tofurkey sausages?)

Materialism and hedonism, which eventually the Cathars began to commit in excess, are the order of the day- sanctified and encouraged by a ruling elite that denies the existence of an absolute Truth, and therefore delegitimises the power of God over His Creation.

Marriage is increasingly regarded as an unnecessary anachronism by women, and (correctly) as an incredibly high-risk, low-reward gamble with devastating consequences in the highly likely event of failure by men. This, despite the clearly established historical fact that monogamous marriage is the only proven way to provide any kind of lifelong guarantee of sexual access for men while giving women the financial security and emotional stability that they need.

Marriage is, quite simply, the only way humanity has yet devised to achieve any kind of functioning compromise between competing and often conflicting interests. Men satisfy our sexual needs and genetic drive to procreate through marriage. Women satisfy their need for protection and stability.

And, most importantly civilisation is kept alive, for two reasons.

Firstly, one of the most dangerous threats to any civilisation is a large population of young, sexless men, whose frustrations are expressed through lawlessness and rage against a society that denies them the ability to satisfy their most basic desire, one that is literally hard-coded into their genetics.

And secondly, there is the hard fact that civilisation endures if and only if there are successive generations to inherit it.

The modern heresies that have now become mainstream are nothing more than a mirror image of heresies of the past. It is simply a case of the old becoming the new once more.

That, however, is not a source of comfort for anyone who knows anything about how heresies tend to resolve themselves.

As we gaze through the dark distant mirror of the 13th Century, in which the Cathar Heresy flourished and failed, we will come across a particularly bloody and brutal episode called the Albigensian Crusade. This was a 20-year military campaign, called together by Pope Innocent III, designed specifically to exterminate the Cathars- so great had their heresy become, so terrible a threat did they pose to established order, and indeed to civilisation itself.

Between the 11th and 13th Centuries the Cathars had converted many thousands to their cause, away from the Faith and toward a rejection of everything that the Faith stood for. Conflict was inevitable; the surprise is not that it erupted, but that it took nearly two hundred years for the Catholic Church to bestir itself into ridding European civilisation of what had become a truly grave threat.

The lesson for our modern age is absolutely clear: any prolonged attempt to defy the laws of Nature, and of Nature's God, inevitably ends in bloodshed and disaster.

The heretical pseudo-religions of our modern age, whether they be "man-made climate change", forced veganism and vegetarianism, feminism, equalitarianism, globalism, or scientific authoritarianism, are direct violations of logic and stand against the entire weight of historical evidence that we have proving that such passing fads are dangerous and foolish in the extreme.

For those who are religiously inclined, or at least have some sense of what God intended for His Creation, these things go beyond merely silly ideas with no basis in evidence or logic. They go far beyond simple heresy. They are, in fact, abominations.

The Cathar Heresy ended with the massacre of thousands of followers of their pseudo-religion and the burning alive of over 200 Cathar prefects. It resulted in the establishment of the Inquisition, a deeply maligned and thoroughly misunderstood organisation that nonetheless has gone down in history as one of the most infamous and feared defenders of the Faith ever seen.

The outcome for our modern age is going to be even worse, even more bloody, and far more brutal. The Time of Testing that is to come will make the Cathar Heresy look like a pleasant diversion by comparison- because our modern heresies are far greater, far more dangerous to both body and soul, and far less sustainable than even the follies of the Albigensians.

We would do well to pay heed to the lessons of our past. Only by recognising just how far we have deviated from the paths of sense and reason do we have any hope of recovering at least some dignity from the tattered remains of Western civilisation.

Friday, 10 February 2017

Friday T&A: My eyes are UP HERE!!!!! Edition

Gentlemen, what is breast in life?

Well, Friday nights full of bacon, booze, and babes would probably rank right up there. And speaking of that last, here you go. All pictures courtesy of Radass.com.

Happy Friday, lads.







Note: I do realise that such things might seem a little... declasse to certain people. Since I am nothing if not a cultured and refined man with an eye for epic beauty, let me attempt to make amends for this by showing you a picture of the one, the only, the gloriously beautiful, Kate Beckinsale:



(I had to correct out the earlier photo after VigiliaPretiumLibertatis pointed out that it's actually one of the, very gorgeous, supermodel Petra Nemcova. Technically the oversight belongs to the muppet who created a wallpaper out of the wrong woman, but it's my mistake too.)

Yes, I know she's over 40 now, but for my money she is one of the most beautiful women in the world. I'm not sure what it is about her- there are younger, prettier women than her, and there are certainly tighter and hotter women, but she simply has this odd combination of attributes that take her far beyond merely "cute" and "hot" and right into jaw-droppingly beautiful territory.

Thursday, 9 February 2017

The last of the Romans

Paul Joseph Watson does a superb job of explaining not just what is (so very, horribly, dreadfully) wrong with Western culture today, but how we go about stopping the rot:



He does go on a bit, I'll admit that. But overall, this is unquestionably one of his best ever videos.

The most important part, for my money, is the bit right at the end featuring "feminist" Camille Paglia. I put the word in quotes because, while Ms. Paglia certainly calls herself a feminist, she has done nothing but take a sledgehammer to the entire edifice of third-wave feminism for most of her career.

Take careful note of what she says. The pattern that she illustrates is indeed one that is repeated throughout history. Basically, as a dominant once-masculine culture weakens and begins to lose faith in itself, still-masculine cultures begin to assert themselves at the periphery of that dominant culture's influence- and eventually, those peripheral forces rise up in direct rebellion against their former masters.

That pattern has repeated itself so many times throughout human history that it can be summed up in a four-line meme, which I used in my post from yesterday.

It just does not matter where you look- the same pattern always repeats itself.

It happened to imperial Rome, when the Vandals and Goths, from whom we get today the highly masculine and rich lore of Germanic and Viking mythology, settled within the borders of the empire and were offered citizenship in exchange for military service. Eventually, the Vandals sacked Rome- which is precisely why their name has gone down in history as a pejorative. Later, the leader of the Goths- who happened to be an officer in the Roman Army named Odoacer- deposed the last Roman emperor and became the first King of Italy.

It happened to imperial China, when at the end of the Ming Dynasty, the much more masculine and virile Manchus from the north invaded and conquered the Middle Kingdom.

It probably happened to the Mayans. It almost surely would have happened to the Incas and the Aztecs, whose ultimate destruction was hastened by the arrival of technologically vastly superior Europeans. It happened to the English and the French and the Germans in their time. It happened to the Seleucid Persians and the Ptolemaic Egyptians and the Abbasid Arabs.

It is an iron law of history: weak men create hard times.

They create those hard times because they directly weaken the culture that bred them in the first place. They deny their own cultural heritage and, in so doing, ensure the ultimate destruction of the very ideals and modes of thought that gave them life and substance.

Brothers, there is no getting around the fact that the outlook for Western civilisation is bleak in the extreme.

However, not all is lost.

As PJW's video points out, when the dominant culture weakens, the wolves do gather on the outskirts- but sometimes we also see great reformers and strong men rise up from within, determined to preserve and defend that which they were given.

And that, too, has been a repeated pattern throughout history.

It happened to the Roman Republic when Scipio Africanus pushed back the Carthaginians in the Second Punic War. It happened again when Julius Caesar rose to power and turned the Roman Republic into the Roman Empire.

It has happened to America before too, when Ronald Reagan was elected to power in 1980. It happened again in 2016 with the election of the God-Emperor Trump, although it remains to be seen whether he can be a truly effective President.

It happened to Japan when the Emperor Meiji arose to take over power from the moribund Tokugawa bakufu and pushed his country into the modern age.

It happened in Italy during the time of the much-maligned Borgias. It happened in France during the time of the equally maligned Cardinal Richelieu. It happened to England under Alfred the Great, it happened to the Scandinavian nations during the time of Gustavus Adolphus and King Charles XII, it happened to Russia under Peter the Great.

For while it is true that weak men create hard times, it is also absolutely true that hard times create strong men.

There is one strong man, in particular, that we should strive to emulate. His name was Flavius Aetius, and in many ways he was responsible for the survival of the Roman Empire against the single greatest threat it had ever seen.

In 451AD, General Flavius Aetius, himself originally of probably Germanic origin, faced the single greatest Hunnic army ever assembled, under Attila, on the field of Chalons in what history has since recorded as the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains. If he had failed to win that pivotal battle, the entire course of human history would surely have been vastly different.

For his efforts to preserve and defend his nation and his people, Flavius Aetius is rightly remembered as "the last of the Romans"- the last of a great nation, the inheritor of a mighty culture, the defender of a dying but proud empire.

It is his example that we must emulate, if we are to win our own war.

We must turn our backs upon the puerile and wretched state of modern pop culture, and rediscover the immensely rich and magnificent intellectual, musical, spiritual, and cultural heritage that our forerunners left to us. We must reclaim that heritage for ourselves, and build upon it.

We who have chosen the hard path have been given an incredible opportunity, and we cannot turn from it even if we want to. We have been offered a chance to be remembered as the last of the new Romans- and we should embrace it readily, because our children, and their children, will grow up better for it.

The Lost Legion by Rudyard Kipling

I don't know how y'all feel about this, but my vote is for this as the unofficial anthem of the Manosphere.

There's a Legion that never was 'listed,
That carries no colours or crest,
But, split in a thousand detachments,
Is breaking the road for the rest.
Our fathers they left us their blessing --
They taught us, and groomed us, and crammed;
But we've shaken the Clubs and the Messes
To go and find out and be damned
(Dear boys!),
To go and get shot and be damned.

So some of us chivy the slaver,
And some of us cherish the black,
And some of us hunt on the Oil Coast,
And some on -- the Wallaby track:
And some of us drift to Sarawak,
And some of us drift up The Fly,
And some share our tucker with tigers,
And some with the gentle Masai
(Dear boys!),
Take tea with the giddy Masai.

We've painted The Islands vermilion,
We've pearled on half-shares in the Bay,
We've shouted on seven-ounce nuggets,
We've starved on a Seedeeboy's pay;
We've laughed at the world as we found it --
Its women and cities and men --
From Sayyid Burgash in a tantrum
To the smoke-reddened eyes of Loben
(Dear boys!),
We've a little account with Loben.

The ends o' the Earth were our portion,
The ocean at large was our share.
There was never a skirmish to windward
But the Leaderless Legion was there:
Yes, somehow and somewhere and always
We were first when the trouble began,
From a lottery-row in Manila,
To an I.D.B. race on the Pan
(Dear boys!),
With the Mounted Police on the Pan.

We preach in advance of the Army,
We skirmish ahead of the Church,
With never a gunboat to help us
When we're scuppered and left in the lurch.
But we know as the cartridges finish,
And we're filed on our last little shelves,
That the Legion that never was 'listed
Will send us as good as ourselves
(Good men!),
Five hundred as good as ourselves.

Then a health (we must drink it in whispers)
To our wholly unauthorised horde --
To the line of our dusty foreloopers,
The Gentlemen Rovers abroad --
Yes, a health to ourselves ere we scatter,
For the steamer won't wait for the train,
And the Legion that never was 'listed
Goes back into quarters again!
'Regards!
Goes back under canvas again.
Hurrah!
The swag and the billy again.
Here's how!
The trail and the packhorse again.
Salue!

Wednesday, 8 February 2017

The Winterborn, Pt. 1: The coming ice age


If you've been reading the works of people like me for any significant length of time, bemoaning as we do the very real threat of the collapse of Western civilisation, you will almost surely be familiar with the term, "Demographic Winter".

The basic idea behind the term is quite simple: in a world of rapidly declining and in many cases terminally low birth rates, the economy simply begins to run out of warm bodies to keep it going, and the result is a nationwide, region-wide, and possibly even worldwide "economic winter".

Here are a bunch of beardies, boffins, and assorted other clever people to help explain it a little better (and at considerably greater length):



There are several key points brought up in that long video, but three most important are these:

1. A Unique Time in History

In previous eras, going all the way back to the dawn of human civilisation, never before have we seen rising economic prosperity combined with declining populations. It just didn't happen. Prosperity and population growth simply went together like peas in a pod: greater material wealth meant that more mouths could be fed, and more babies could be born, and more harvests could be reaped and more trade could occur, and so on.

If a nation were unlucky enough to face the spectre of war, it was often- not always, mind you, but often- the more populous nation that won, simply by virtue of sheer force of numbers, with the very important caveat that both antagonists were approximately equal in terms of technology.

This has been (mostly) true, with very few exceptions, for as long as you care to look back through recorded history.

So what changed all of a sudden?

The answer is that humanity became vastly more productive in the last 200 years.

That is the direct result of three seismic upheavals in technology, industry, and agriculture. The first was the Industrial Revolution, which for pretty much the first time ever made it possible for humanity to escape the infamous "Malthusian trap", wherein food resources increased arithmetically but human populations increased geometrically.

The second was Norman Borlaug's "Green Revolution", which made it possible for humanity to support far more humans using far less arable land due to greatly increased crop yields. The gifts of bioengineering and Mendellian genetics created rust-resistant strains of wheat and highly robust strains of corn and rice, doubling and in some cases even tripling crop yields almost overnight in countries that had once walked the knife-edge of starvation year in and year out.

The third and most recent was the Digital Revolution, which has of course forever transformed the way we work, play, and live. That is what makes it possible for you to read these words and watch that video. It is what gives all of us material comforts far beyond anything seen in the most fevered dreams of our ancestors.

All of this means that Mankind can achieve far more than ever before with far fewer humans than might otherwise have been required to achieve these standards of living.

It would appear, in the West at least, that we have achieved all of the material comfort that any advanced society could possibly want. Which leads us on to the second major point:

2. Weak Men Create Hard Times...

It is true that Mankind has achieved unimaginable material prosperity and economic comfort. Yet for all of that, our entire way of life still depends on people. Nothing can or will change that anytime soon.

We still need farmers to grow our crops and craftsmen and engineers to build things- we just need far fewer of them than we used to. We still need programmers to create and maintain and enhance our digital infrastructure- but we don't need everyone to be a programmer, the way we needed most people to be serfs and peasants to maintain a feudal economy back in the day. We still need scientists and biochemists to come up with new ways of growing food and feeding the world- but these are now highly specialised occupations requiring intense training and years if not decades of dedication.

We still need warriors willing and able to defend us from each other- but there are fewer and fewer of us willing to put our lives at risk.

As it turns out, if you give people everything that they need to live, it seems that they will do everything possible to prolong their own lives- but will not be terribly concerned about whether the society that gave them these things will live beyond them.

If you look at a stable society- one that is not growing, nor dying, but is merely static in terms of numbers and is merely interested in maintaining its current standard of living, as Western and Japanese society seems intent on doing- then you will see that there will be about 2.1 children born per woman.

That is all that you need in order to stay in "maintenance mode": one son to replace the man who spawned him, one daughter to replace the woman who gave birth to her (and in turn produce the one son and daughter required to maintain a static society), and 0.1 children of either sex which are, in coldly Darwinian terms, completely disposable.

Now here's an important question: what happens when a completely static society runs into a civilisation that isn't interested in stasis, but is instead growing?

3. There Is Only War...

Such is the conundrum faced by Western civilisation today. Its nations are shrinking and dying. The white race that created this incredibly advanced, sophisticated, and immensely prosperous civilisation has apparently largely lost interest in maintaining its own power and position.

Yet Western civilisation finds itself locked in a contest against multiple other civilisations that want pretty much the same real estate, the same resources, and the same prestige and glory.

As Robert A. Heinlein pointed out in Starship Troopers, any society that fails to breed and fails to defend its territory will find itself simply shouldered aside by more virile, more energetic, and just plain more interested groups that have not forgotten what it means to live for a future.

And it's not like the West's rivals are immune to the same problems, by the way. Eastern civilisation faces the same population crisis that the West does, but on a vastly greater scale. As Mark Steyn pointed out at some point in the past, right now China has about 700 million very poor people. In about forty years, China will have about 400 million very old poor people- and its population isn't growing nearly fast enough to offset the massive impact this will have upon their economy.

Japan is facing a halving of its population. Russia, until about ten years ago, was facing the same. Parts of Eastern Europe have already experienced this hollowing-out.

Even the demographically fertile lands of the Arab and Persian Islamic realms are facing their own (very poorly publicised) population crises. Even the Arabs have stopped breeding like rabbits- at least, relative to the way they used to.

But it is the West that has the biggest problem right now- because of all of those civilisations it is the strongest, the richest, the most powerful, and, let's face facts, the whitest.

That is right: white people are basically not breeding, and in so doing are allowing themselves to be bred right out of existence.

Why, exactly, would an entire society condemn itself to stagnation and decay and eventual destruction?


The Death-Spiral of the West

The problem that Western civilisation faces, and we might as well call it white civilisation because white people did very largely create what we call "the West", is quite simply that there are fewer white people around every year to maintain what their forefathers built.

Birth rates across the developed world are in the tank- this has been known for years. Just how bad the problem is, though, takes seeing to believe:



And even that doesn't quite tell the full story. To see that, you have to go back farther in time than 1990. Here, using the same World Bank dataset, is developed Europe's fertility rate dating back to the tail end of the Baby Boomer generation:



Now, fertility statistics are all very well and good, but there is one statistic that is more important than all of the rest:

1.6

That, based on historical evidence, is what we might call the "event horizon of birth rates". We might as well call it that because no civilisation in recorded history has ever survived a birth rate lower than this number.

Think about that for a moment, and you will realise what an appalling future awaits most of Eastern Europe and the southern Mediterranean nations. They are not merely aging, they are doomed.


Our Damned Fate

So that is the problem: the West is doomed unless it starts breeding again. And given that the current Millennial generation is evidently having less sex than any generation before it, getting married later, having children later, and having far fewer children (if any) than our ancestors, the picture is bleak, to say the least.

This begs the question: what did civilisations in the past do to stave off impending doom?

Some, like imperial Rome, imported barbarians from the East and North to replace the native citizens who refused to reproduce. Most of you who read my work probably know how that worked out for them.

Another alternative comes to us from those wonderfully mad Spartans. Legend says that when the Spartans realised that they were losing too many men in one of their wars- my recollection of this story is imperfect, but I think it was the Athenians- the kings and the ephors decided to bring the youngest and most virile of those men home from the front lines for a very pleasurable duty.

Their mission, should they choose to accept it- and why wouldn't they- was to come back to Lakonia and impregnate the most nubile young women of the land, so that a new generation of Spartan citizen-soldiers could be raised.

That is one way to solve the problem. I rather doubt it would fly in the current political and sociological climate, but one cannot deny that it would be pretty damned effective.

There is, in all of the gloom and doom, one piece of good news: religious folks apparently have not lost the desire to "go forth and multiply".

As David P. Goldman pointed out in his rather good book on the subject of civilisational collapse, Orthodox Jews, traditional and evangelical Christians, and (unfortunately) devout Muslims all enjoy much higher birth rates than their secular counterparts.

It doesn't matter whether you agree with their religious beliefs or not. It doesn't matter whether you like the idea of having 19 children. All that matters, in the end, is the unbreakable law that the future belongs to those who show up for it.

And the data tell us that the future will belong to much more traditionalist, more conservative, more K-selected types than are currently in charge.

That is not necessarily a bad thing if you think like we do. The problem is that the transition from where we are right now, with an aging population that is increasingly parasitical upon a shrinking base of caretakers and producers, will necessarily be filled with extreme hardship and considerable chaos.

Those, then, are the inescapable facts of our current predicament. What, then, is a self-aware man to do about this situation? Well, that is for Pt 2, if and when I get around to writing it.