Hypocrisy So Dense that Not Even Light Can Escape its Surface

SouthCentralYo
“Why does Tierra del Fuego have a Spanish name? I dunno, I’d rather not think about it!”

Someone writes a pair of poems: a poem in Spanish and a sneaky mis-translation of it into English.

The mistranslation is not secret; it’s the point. In the original Spanish poem, a mermaid comes onto land and is maimed by a man; in the English translation she is grateful for the maiming, seeing it as an operation performed by a benevolent surgeon. Deliberate mis-translation is an interesting idea for a ficcion a la Borges and is by itself not a problem.

The problem is a person in the comments, a self-identified “Latina woman,” who goes off on a mind-blowingly hypocritical leftist appreciation of this work, praising it for calling out the translation into English as the language of the oppressor, and an act of “colonization” and “violence.” REALLY!? Are you fucking kidding me? You’re actually saying that Spanish is the language of VICTIMS of colonialism? What the fuck? You are aware that Spain is a country in EUROPE, right? Hey, since you’re so interested in calling out colonialism, a question for you:

Why is Spanish the language of the vast majority of the Americas?

Why do they speak Spanish in Mexico?
Why do they speak Spanish in Argentina?
Why do they speak Spanish in Bolivia?
Why do they speak Spanish in Chile?
Why do they speak Spanish in Colombia?
Why do they speak Spanish in Ecuador?
Why do they speak Spanish in Paraguay?
Why do they speak Spanish in Peru?
Why do they speak Spanish in Uruguay?
Why do they speak Spanish in Venezuela?
Why do they speak Spanish in Panama?
Why do they speak Spanish in Honduras?
Why do they speak Spanish in Costa Rica?
Why do they speak Spanish in Guatemala?
Why do they speak Spanish in El Salvador?
Why do they speak Spanish in Nicaragua?

These are all countries in the Americas in which Spanish is the official language (excepting Mexico, where Spanish is the majority language, though apparently it’s not official). I checked.

The answer to all these questions, of course, is that the Spanish conquistadors went on a raging frenzy of genocide, slaughtering their way from the middle of North America to Tierra del Fuego, and turning an entire hemisphere into an abattoir.

The population of South America is 385.7 million, the population of Central America is 42.7 million, and the population of Mexico (which is in North America) is 119.5 million. That gives us a total of population of more than 547 million in Spanish-speaking countries in the Americas.

The two majority-English language countries in the Americas are the US and Canada, with a combined population of 360.2 million. This is rough-cut, but the difference is almost 200 million, so a more precise comparison is not going to change the elemental fact:

SPANISH IS FAR AND AWAY THE LANGUAGE OF COLONIALISM IN THE AMERICAS.

This is simply a fact. There’s no way to even argue it.

Yet all the bloodletting by the conquistadores, all the slaughter by Spain in its colonization of vast swathes of the Americas: South America, Central America, and North America – all that murder gets pushed down the memory hole by this hypocritical attack-bot and a billion other vile assholes just like her.

She’s the descendant of genocidal Spanish colonizers (self-identified “Latina”)… and she dares to complain that English is the language of colonial oppression of her country. Un Fucking Believable.

This is the thing about the Left: No matter how brazenly hypocritical they are, they can always get worse. Just when you think they’ve explored the very last splinter of the absolute bottom of the barrel of hypocrisy, you get a wail of self-pity from the descendants of genocidal invaders, whining on behalf of the invaders’ descendants because “translation into English can be an act of colonization and violence.”

These people defy belief.

And not only does she take this sly, affecting, and interesting work of art and turn it political, she turns it political in the most stupid, tunnel-visioned way imaginable. Aside from the sheer stupidity of translation being an act of “violence”: Really? Translating into other languages can’t be “an act of colonization and violence”? Only English? Ugh.

You see why we can’t reason with the Left. There’s nothing to reason with; no part of them is even interested in getting at the truth. They’re all just violence, aggression, lying propaganda, projection, and blood libels that blame others for their own sins.

This is a good example of that fact that the alleged badness of the US is not something that has anything to do with actual facts of the US or English. In these psychopaths’ minds, it is OK for Spain to conquer, rape, and murder its way across several continents in a raging apocalyptic slaughterfest. But not okay for the English to do so across part of one continent. Oh. Why? Oh, you know, just because. I’m Spanish-speaking, so I’m axiomatically oppressed and virtuous. Symmetrically, all English-speaking people are axiomatically oppressors, just because. Just remember: Spanish speakers are axiomatically virtuous, even when they’re genocidally slaughtering their way across a couple of continents.

An extended quote from this psychopathic hypocrite, interpolations by yours truly:

The reason this mistranslation is so brilliant is that it takes a story about a mermaid trying to forgive a man who’s committed senseless violence against her, and turns it into a story about a man who uplifts a woman to a better life out of the kindness of his heart. And the thing is, that’s exactly what happens to so many stories from colonized cultures, LIKE THOSE GENOCIDALLY COLONIZED BY SPAIN, when they’re adapted by the oppressor, I.E. THE MASSACRING CONQUISTADORES AND THEIR DESCENDANTS. Translation into SPANISH, and further the cultural language of the oppressor, THAT IS, SPANISH, can be an act of violence and erasure rather than one of respect.

This is why I have worked so hard to translate poetry from Spanish to English that has previously only been translated by white Americans who learned Spanish in college. I can bring something to the translation that they can’t: A DEGREE OF HYPOCRISY HERETOFORE ACHIEVED ONLY BY SATAN.

“Bourgeois”

The Left is the Party of the Lie. This is because their desires are so evil and insane that they cannot survive discourse in which truth prevails, or is even a reasonably prominent element. One kind of lie they like is to change the meaning of words, to corrupt language so that it is harder to think non-leftist thoughts. On that subject…

The word “bourgeois” comes from a root word that means city-dwellers. It derives from the same root as borough, burg, berg, etc. Marx, being an asshole, deliberately confused things when he used the word in a new way, to mean, basically, “capitalists.” What it really meant until then— and still means subtextually as neo-Marxists use it— is normal people.

Even left-slanted Wikipedia admits that “bourgeoisie,” aside from its original meaning of city-dweller, denotes

a sociologically defined class, especially in contemporary times, referring to people with a certain cultural and financial capital belonging to the middle or upper middle class: the upper (haute), middle (moyenne), and petty (petite) bourgeoisie (which are collectively designated “the bourgeoisie”); an affluent and often opulent stratum of the middle class.

During the centuries in Europe before Marx was born, which centuries were the focus of much of Marx’s “history,” there were two main groups of normal people: Peasants and city dwellers. (In medieval Europe, peasants were about 85 percent of the population. Towns grew throughout the medieval period and eventually started to become cities.) Peasants were generally too poor to be worth expropriating, so parasites like Marxists weren’t much interested in them— although as history has shown, they’ll expropriate anyone in a pinch.

Plus, so many of the peasants were dispersed out in the boonies. There’d be so much travel per peasant expropriated, it would hardly be worth it.

But the bourgeois, now that was a different story. They were reasonably prosperous, those city-dwellers, and there were so many of them! And they were conveniently concentrated in metropolitan areas. There was some real stuff you could get your hands on. And all you had to do was assemble a mob and attack them. So simple! There wasn’t enough there to last the parasites very long, and certainly expropriation can’t be the basis of an economic system, but since when do parasites think about the long run?

One Marxist actually wrote a book called The Right to Be Lazy, which I imagine made the other Marxists hiss, “Dude, shut the fuck up, you’re exposing us!”

So, Marx thought, let’s come up with a theory that says that normal people are somehow attacking us, so that when we attack them it can be portrayed as merely the taking back of our own stuff which they stole from us. “The expropriators are expropriated,” he cheekily said.

Of course, you could also expropriate the nobility, and that was fine and dandy, but there simply weren’t enough such people to provide much loot. Not when their loot was distributed among a mob large enough to actually defeat them. So for Marxists’ main target: the great middle classes it was!


Later in the Wikipedia article on “bourgeoisie” we get:

In Marxist philosophy, the bourgeoisie is the social class that came to own the means of production during modern industrialization and whose societal concerns are the value of property and the preservation of capital to ensure the perpetuation of their economic supremacy in society.

Right: People don’t want to keep their stuff just because it’s…their stuff. They want to keep their stuff TO ENSURE THE PERPETUATION OF THEIR ECONOMIC SUPREMACY!

IN SOCIETY!

Uh-huh. I don’t like my Bose stereo because I like well-balanced, high-res music; I like it because I enjoy imagining all the poor proletarians shivering in the cold on the street outside, unable to afford high-fidelity audio reproduction.

Marxists are assholes. That’s all, just particularly violent assholes.

Holiness Spirals and Wars of Attrition

A crucial concept in understanding our current political situation is holiness spiral. It may be the single most important concept.

A holiness spiral is equivalent, in terms of game theory, to a war of attrition. I know what you’re thinking: “Sure, Neuro, wars of attrition are interesting, but what about all-pay auctions and patent races? Is a holiness spiral game theoretically isomorphic to those also?”

You’re in luck; the answer is Yes, because they are winner-take-all contests.

AttritionWar

Why does that matter? Because once you’re invested in a winner-take-all contest, it is actually rational, in a certain sense, for you to keep putting resources into winning the contest even after the value of winning is lower than the value of the total resources you’ve put into it. No, I’m not crazy; this is well-known in game theory.

A classic example is the “dollar auction.” This can be an auction in which all bidders must pay their bids even if they don’t win (all-pay) or it can be such that only the two highest bidders pay their bids. Business schools have done experiments. A professor of business goes in front of his class and says, “Here’s a dollar bill. I’m going to auction it off. The rules: Highest bidder pays his bid and gets the dollar. Second-highest bidder pays his bid but doesn’t get anything. All lower bids pay nothing and get nothing.”

Some doofus bids a cent. Some other doofus bids 2 cents. And the idiocy has begun! Now that someone has bid 2, the guy who bid 1 is in the following position: If he doesn’t change his bid he loses 1 cent. If he raises his bid to 3 cents he wins the dollar and pays 3 cents, for a net gain of 97 cents. OK, so they’ll bid until one of them has bid 99 cents, then they’ll stop, right?

Nope. Say the bids stand at 98 cents and 99 cents. The guy who bid 98 loses 98 cents if he stands pat. If he bids a dollar he wins and breaks even. So he does that.

OK, now the bidding is done, right?

Nnnnnnnnope.

The guy who currently has a bid of 99 cents loses 99 cents if he stands pat. If he raises his bid to $1.01, then he wins the dollar, for a net loss of 1 cent. That’s better than a net loss of 99 cents.

Hmm. And the other guy? If he stands pat he loses his dollar bid. If he raises his bid to $1.02, he wins the dollar, for a net loss of 2 cents. But that’s better than a net loss of a dollar.

You see where this is going (“To infinity and beyond!”). Not only in theory, but in actual experiments, people do in fact end up paying more than a dollar to win a dollar!

Key features:

• Your outcome depends on where you are relative to the other player. Just knowing your own bid doesn’t tell you whether you’ve won; you have to know the other guy’s bid as well.

• You bear costs whether you win or lose. This is the “all-pay” feature. An all-pay auction is an artificial situation, but consider a war of attrition: some of your soldiers are killed, etc., whether you win or lose. It really is all-pay. Same for patent races: Suppose you spend $0.9 billion on R&D trying to develop a new medicine worth $1 billion, but your competitor is on track to win by spending $1 billion. Win or lose, you pay the R&D costs. It would actually be better to plow another $0.2 billion in, so you’ll “win” the race by paying $1.1 billion.

• Action is sequential: You would never start by bidding $1.02 for a dollar, obviously. But once you’re invested, you have some losses you’d like to recover. So your investment in the contest keeps rising.

So… holiness spirals. If you’re new to this concept, the word “holiness” is ironic here; it means “leftist.” It probably started centuries ago with some totally innocent-sounding thing like, “Let’s expand women’s rights. Why shouldn’t women be allowed to work as secretaries outside the home?” Before you know it, it’s the official position of the Washington Post that no woman should ever go to prison, no matter what crime she commits.

And someone said, reasonably, “Why should it be illegal for men to wear women’s clothes and vice-versa?” (Used to be illegal, apparently.) A century later, male-to-female transvestites are in the women’s bathroom, and a security guard who tries to remove one from the ladies’ room is charged with assault.

What the hell happened? What happened is that some asshole started the political equivalent of an all-pay auction.

Let’s look at holiness spirals in light of the three features above. We want to understand this because that will help us to stop the fucking thing. And a holiness spiral is like an asset bubble: It either keeps advancing or it collapses. So if we stop it, we destroy it.

Holiness spirals:

• Your outcome depends on where you are relative to the other player(s). You can attack people less holy than you, but they can’t effectively attack you. If Fred is the holiest he can say to the mob, “Attack Steve; he’s not holy enough!” But Steve can’t say, “Attack Fred; he’s too holy!” That’s saying, “Attack Fred; he’s too good!” So everyone tries to out-holy everyone else.

• You bear costs whether you win or lose. Say your position is that a man should be allowed to use the ladies’ bathroom. If your policy wins, you (along with the rest of the society, by the way) pay the costs of an insane bathroom policy. But you pay those costs whether or not some other lunatic is saying, “Yeah, AND anyone who objects should be thrown into the hoosegow!” If that guy wins, then there are dudes in the women’s bathroom— as you advocated— plus dissenters are punished. Why did he outflank you to your left? Because while that made the society somewhat more insane, it made him personally safer, since now he is the holiest.

• Action is sequential: You would never start by saying men should be allowed to use the women’s bathroom. Indeed people didn’t start by saying that, historically. But your initial sane position that “There’s no need for laws to enforce gender clothing norms” got outflanked by someone who said something a little more pro-trans. That put you in a less holy position relative to him, so he could attack you, but you couldn’t counter-attack. So you outflanked him with something a little more in that direction. Thus the bidding war. It starts with you saying “I bid one cent for that dollar.” It ends with guards being charged with a crime if they try to keep a man out of the women’s bathroom. Well, that’s not actually where it ends. We’re not done with our holiness spiral yet.

Fighting these fucking disasters.

Above I wrote this: “Say your position is that a man should be allowed to use the ladies’ bathroom. If your policy wins, you (along with the rest of the society, by the way) pay the costs of an insane bathroom policy.”

THIS IS KEY. One of the crucial aspects of all this is that even sane, normal people pay the costs of having trannies in their bathrooms, and women (if the WaPo gets its way) being allowed to commit murder without punishment. (Well, they already are, but the WaPo wants this to be expanded beyond babies.) That means that— unlike the all-pay dollar auction— even people who aren’t participating in the holiness spiral have an incentive to stop it. This mattered e.g., on November 8, 2016 and will matter more as the holiness spiral becomes ever more extreme.

What specific actions can we take? First, we need to spread the awareness of the insanity as far and wide as possible. I do this in various corners of the Net, and everyone on the right should.

Also— and plainly this has already started— we need to ramp up our black knighting. N.B. not black knighting as in Monty Python’s hapless knight, but black knighting as in attacking our enemies under the guise of being holier enemies. For example, when an organization proudly announces on Twitter that it has hired a homosexual female, attack them for not hiring a minority or Muslim homosexual female. This sort of thing happens all the time now, and one can’t tell whether it’s the crazies getting crazier or good guys black knighting. The great thing is precisely that one can’t tell. That’s why it’s effective.

And what is the effect? Simple: It eliminates the safety, and therefore the benefit, of leftward movement. If my proudly announcing that I just hired a white lesbian immediately gets me attacked for not hiring a black lesbian, there’s no safety in that holiness-signaling move, so no reason to do it. Lately, if you just hire a straight white Christian male and don’t say anything, you’re less likely to be attacked by the hate mob than if you’re a leftist who proudly boasts about that lesbian hire. (Leftists seek vulnerability: They go after other leftists because they know leftists (1) care about fitting in with the lefty herd, and (2) must comply with the latest left-wing demand to keep their leftist customers/donors/whatever. In contrast, what will happen if they scream about Vox Day hiring a straight white male for his publishing company? He’ll just laugh at them. His customer base sure as hell isn’t SJWs.) The realization will spread that you might as well just hire the best person and keep quiet about it. That is becoming safer. And to the extent that it’s not safe, it’s not much less safe than trying to appease the SJW mob. And that destroys the incentives that propel the holiness spiral.

Black knighting must be done absolutely straight-faced. Don’t try this in a forum where they already know you’re not an SJW; you’ll just be dismissed as stirring up shit. But: New personality (dox-proof) in a forum where they don’t know you. We can all get to work black knighting.

The beautiful thing about black knighting is that the enemy has no defense against it. If they even try to defend, then you’re like, “Hey! They’re Anti-trans! Anti-wymyn! Anti-gay!” Etc., etc. They simply cannot deny that you’ve out-holied them. This isn’t theory; we’ve seen this happen increasingly in the last few years. E.g., the gay black author who was just SJW-shamed into pulling his book due to accusations of insufficient political correctness.

So, two things everybody on the right can do: Spread news to normies about the craziness. And join the black knighting movement, which is already well underway.

Leftists Surprised to Find Themselves Eaten by Monsters They Created (part of a continuing series)

The assault on leftists by monsters they created is not merely continuing; it’s accelerating.

SawingBranchYoureOn
“This can only end well!”

(1) Headline: Chelsea Clinton is berated by Muslim NYU students who blame HER for New Zealand mosques attack because she ‘incited an Islamophobic mob’ against Rep Ilhan Omar
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6815797/Chelsea-Clinton-berated-Muslim-students-blame-New-Zealand-mosques-attack.html

“This right here is the result of a massacre stoked by people like you and the words that you put out into the world,” says Dweik, gesturing to the vigil for the 49 who were killed in Christchurch when a white nationalist shooter stormed two mosques.

“And I want you to know that and I want you to feel that deeply – 49 people died because of the rhetoric you put out there,” Dweik continues, jabbing her index finger toward Clinton as other students snap their fingers in apparent approval of her words.

Via Vox Day, who comments,

It’s rather amusing to see how bewildered the media is about this unanticipated reaction. “Wait, you’re supposed to blame the false flag on white supremacists, WHITE SUPREMACISTS! How can you possibly screw this up?”

(2) On House Dems’ failed attempt to admonish Ilhan Omar for (alleged) anti-semitic remarks:
https://pjmedia.com/homeland-security/ilhan-omar-leader-of-the-democratic-party/

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) faced rebuke, albeit indirectly, from her own party in a resolution condemning anti-Semitism that had been developed as a response to her repeated anti-Semitic statements… Omar’s victory is total. The anti-Semitism resolution was turned into a condemnation of “Islamophobia” and “white supremacism,” she remains on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and the entire Democratic leadership has made it clear that they don’t dare cross her.

…the sclerotic Democratic Party establishment lacks the will to tangle with Omar, who is an exponent of a skilled and ruthless propaganda machine that has long been in the Democrats’ corner, but has never — until now — turned its brute force against the Democrats themselves.

Pelosi and her cohorts learned this week… that if they cross Ilhan Omar, they will be accused of “racism” and “Islamophobia” just as swiftly and reflexively as those smear labels are applied to Republicans.

Heh heh heh. In your fucking face, Pelosi. And all the rest of you.

And then there are Jews, who vote overwhelmingly Democrat, that is, for the party that has been avidly importing Jew-hating Muslims for decades. Seriously, what the fuck did they think would be the result of that?

(3) Related to the foreoing: It’s Omar’s Party Now

…Yesterday, the arch-leftist group MoveOn denounced the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), which has until now enjoyed broad bipartisan support, and urged Democratic presidential candidates to boycott AIPAC’s upcoming conference.

…Democratic presidential candidates see which way their party is going. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Beto O’Rourke, Pete Buttigieg, and Julián Castro have all announced that they are boycotting AIPAC. So far, no prominent Democratic contender has said he intends to attend. The AIPAC boycott is obviously related to Ilhan Omar’s claim that American support for Israel is “all about the Benjamins,” followed by “AIPAC!” It’s Omar’s party now.

Just a few years ago, the idea of the Democrats turning anti-Israel en masse would have been unthinkable.

Actually, no, it was thinkable. In fact, it was bloody obvious… to anyone but a breathtakingly stupid and short-sighted leftist.

(4) Transvestites advocating violence against lesbians who don’t date transvestites.

• Today, do something for the environment and kill your local terf [Trans-Excluding Radical Feminist].

• you cant say “pun*h a t*rf” on twitter, but that doesn’t mean you cant do it in real life

• That TERF deserves a punch straight in the ovaries.
To which someone replied,
I’d pay to watch someone violently rip her ovaries from her abdomen

• …if you call yourself a lesbian except you’re only cool with girls with vaginas, YOU ARE SIDING WITH ANTI-TRANS RHETORIC.

• You’ve been a closted terf for while, but now you don’t even try to hide. Go choke on my dick you cunt.

Lesbians, bewildered to find themselves on the other end of the identity politics attack mob for once: “What?! But… but I’m BOTH female AND gay! Didn’t you hear that I’m female AND gay? I have lots of victim identity points! Why aren’t you respecting my victim points!?”

(5) Attack-mob asshole forced to eat the shit sandwich he helped make:

Kosoko Jackson, a gay black author writing about a gay black protagonist, gets taken down by the YA [young adult fiction] Twitterati.

Sourcebooks announced that A Place for Wolves, the debut YA novel by Kosoko Jackson, will be withdrawn from publication, at the request of the author.

Until recently, Kosoko Jackson’s website described him as “a vocal champion of diversity in YA literature, the author of YA novels featuring African American queer protagonists, and a sensitivity reader for Big Five Publishers.”

But Jackson was subjected to a Twitter attack mob due to some accusation of political incorrectness, and he was shamed and intimidated into withdrawing his book from publication.

Part of what makes this story so interesting is that Kosoko himself has been on the other side of these online attacks on authors.

He was outspoken during a particularly intense recent example, when a campaign based on misunderstanding and exaggeration led the author Amélie Zhao to take the unusual step of agreeing to cancel the publication of Blood Heir, her hotly anticipated debut novel…

And now the sadism mob he helped to create has destroyed him. Awww.

Leftists raise their heads, listening intently. “What’s that… What is that ominous bass note I’m hearing on the wind?”

It’s horror movie music, assholes. And the role you’re playing is… dinner.

A Warning to the Future

…from 2018.

Yes, we know the insanity we’re swamped in is insane.

A few examples of what I’m referring to:

California downgrades knowingly infecting someone with HIV from a felony to a misdemeanor.
http://www.latimes.com/politics/essential/la-pol-ca-essential-politics-updates-gov-brown-downgrades-from-felony-to-1507331544-htmlstory.html

Hispanic student in college newspaper, to white people: “Your DNA is an Abomination… I hate you because you shouldn’t exist.”
https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=10206

Seattle councilman: Removing human feces from sidewalks is “racist.”
http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/12/seattle-councilman-cleaning-poop-off-sidewalks-is-racist/

Transvestite in bathroom sexually assaults 10-year-old girl:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5000666/Transgender-woman-guilty-sexually-assaulting-girl-10.html

Feminist: “If you have a penis you probably deserve murdering.”
https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/2017/11/24/have-a-penis-woke-blue-checked-filmmaker-kate-morgan-says-you-deserve-murdering/

The problem is not, as you might think, that everyone in my time is insane. Of course we know the current raging hate-filled psychopathic idiocy for what it is. It’s just that it’s not easy or quick to put an end to it. If it were as simple as one person standing up at a lectern and saying, “This is raging hate-filled psychopathic idiocy!” it would have ended decades ago. But the perpetrators don’t care – they’re sadists who enjoy inflicting hateful insanity on others; that’s the entire point for them. And normal people know it’s insanity; the problem is to organize collective action to fight it.

Once the psychotics have amassed a certain amount of social power – which they do by stealth at first – it becomes risky in certain ways to speak up. This doesn’t mean no one is speaking up – if you read contemporaneous accounts you’ll see many people are – but it does make it more difficult to recruit the 90-something percent of people who are sane to all speak up at once. (To induce every sane person to speak up at once, and create an overwhelming and publicly visible consensus against the insanity, would be the easiest way to end it without violence.)

Furthermore, the evil have a certain amount of animal cunning about taking and holding power, because that’s all they ever think about. On average they are less intelligent than the population as a whole… but they are obsessed. And one does acquire a certain facility at activities with which one is obsessed. So for examples:

They immediately move to isolate and hurt anyone who speaks out. “Hurt” here could mean many things, from violence, to making death-threat phone calls in the middle of the night, to having the person fired from their employment, to staging a boycott of the person’s business, and so on.

They obsessively, obsessively move to take over the idea-spreading professions – the news media and the educational system – to instill an utterly false worldview in the minds of the population. Normal people want to have enjoyable lives, to have hobbies, to enjoy friends and family, to have a career that is satisfying in and of itself – but these people only crave a career that lets them stifle any information which reveals their side to be the evil that it is, and spread any lies which make their side look good.

They engage in electoral fraud incessantly.

And to the extent that fraud doesn’t suffice, they buy votes. Many of their constituents are people who will be hurt drastically, or outright murdered, if the psychos ever acquire total power. But those constituents don’t think that far ahead. So they vote for whoever promises a heavier basket of state-funded goodies. And of course, the evil have fewer scruples than the good about using this political tactic.

And they have infiltrated the government in key areas, including, as I write this, the intelligence agencies. Those are the worst institutions for them to have infiltrated (from the point of view of decent people), because they have surveillance technology everywhere and by necessity they operate in secrecy. The evil love secrecy.

None of this is to suggest that the struggle against these vile maniacs is hopeless. Au contraire, as I write this I have good hope and the momentum has shifted dramatically in our favor in the last few years. And of course, in every conflict, each side has advantages and disadvantages; one just keeps fighting.

Rather, my point is this: There is a reason that the prevailing discourse asserts things that are obviously insane, and the reason is not that anyone believes it. The reason is that power-mad psychotics spent decades infiltrating themselves into positions where they could stifle and attack those who would question it.

Everyone knows the emperor is not wearing any clothes. Everyone knows, for example, that a man in a dress is not a woman. The question is how to get everyone to say it, and to say it publicly, and how to make fence-sitters understand, before the rage-mob shows up at their door, that the problem is the trend, not the state of the system at the current moment in time. We need to make people realize how urgent the situation already is and induce them to start fighting.

When I was younger I thought that episodes like the Salem Witch Trials happened because people back then were so benighted as to actually believe in witches! Ha! The absurdity of it! In light of our current situation, I now rather suspect that no one believed any such thing. Any more than anyone really believes that being heterosexual is a form of “bigotry.” No, the problem is a particular kind of social dynamics, namely holiness spirals. The problem is not one of stupidity and actual belief. It is one of incentives, of bad Nash Equilibria which the evil deliberately try to establish.

Understand, the very moment some political group begins asserting something that is obviously false: You are in a war. It is not a debate – though of course persuasion of the neutral is part of the conflict. It is a war with a type of madman and madwoman who, every time they attained power in the 20th century, slaughtered people by the millions. Understand that, and start planning, not to convince them, but to defeat them.

The Game Theory of Holiness Spirals

If a social process is accelerating, why is it? Is it because of, say, learning? (E.g., a new technology: The more people use it, the more non-users see it, so the faster it spreads.) Or is it because there are game-theoretic reasons for it? The latter is obviously the case with a holiness spiral.

Holiness Spirals

A holiness spiral is when a group of people try to outdo each other in expressions of ideological piety. Other terms are signaling spiral (because people are competitively signaling their faith), purity spiral (I’m ideologically pure!), and Left Singularity. The last term is due to the fact that the current holiness spiral in the western world is a leftist phenomenon.

A key part of such a spiral is that one attacks people to one’s right, but not to one’s left. Indeed, participants are expected to attack those to their right as an expression of piety. The driving dynamic is that it makes sense to say, “That guy’s not holy enough! Attack him!” but it does not make sense to say, “That guy’s too holy! Attack him!”

As far as I know, Jim of blog.jim.com came up with the concept of a holiness spiral/ left-wing singularity, and if he didn’t, he’s certainly doing more with the concept than anyone else. (See e.g. here: http://blog.jim.com/war/recap-on-the-left-singularity/)

As noted, the current holiness spiral is a leftist one. An example of the leftist acceleration:

• The time from gay marriage first being mentioned, to the moment leftists started calling opponents of gay marriage “bigots,” was about 15 years.

• The time from the start of Transvestite Lib to the moment leftists called a man who refused to kiss a tranny a “bigot” was about 3 years.

The process was well articulated by whatever asshole leftist came up with the slogan pas d’ennemis à gauche: “No enemy to the left.” (It started in Revolutionary France; see e.g. http://www.newoxfordreview.org/article.jsp?did=0701-whitehead and was, unsurprisingly, important in Soviet Russia: https://infogalactic.com/info/Alexander_Kerensky)
That established the dynamic. It would have happened anyway, but this slogan certainly accelerated it. It explicitly created the incentive to attack people to one’s right only, thus created the incentive for every leftist to try to get to the left of— to out-holy— every other leftist.

There’s only one way that ends. If everyone is rushing to get to the left of everyone else, obviously there will be acceleration to the left, which will never stop until it hits the most extreme possible situation: Genocide or an attempt at genocide that starts a civil war.

We are not at overt civil war yet, but we have entered the start of it. Consider our political situation right now: We are obviously living in Chapter One of every history book about a civil war ever written.

The Game Theory

The central problem of a holiness spiral is that the advantage is relative. That is, what determines whether the mob attacks you is not your absolute position, but your position relative to everyone else. That’s what creates the incentive for the perpetual leftward movement and the acceleration of that movement.

Importantly, when the participants in the holiness spiral realize they’re in a holiness spiral the problem becomes worse, not better. There are two key moments in a holiness spiral. The first is when is when a typical participant in the spiral notices that the movement to the left is accelerating. The second key moment is when a typical participant not only notices that the movement left is accelerating, but realizes that everyone else must also be noticing that. Then he starts thinking game-theoretically:

If some holiness spiral participant, call him Fred, notices the rapid leftward movement, then he has an incentive to move leftward too, to stay in the middle of the group. In fact, to be safe, he has an incentive to move left a little faster than he expects other people to move. That will leave him a margin for error, so that at worst, he stays in the middle, and at best, he’s a little to the left of the average, so he’s somewhat more holy than average.

But eventually Fred thinks: “Hmm, but presumably a lot of people are thinking the same way I just did. So they’ll also try to move more rapidly to the left.” For example, if the average belief is that the movement will be 10 miles per hour, then everyone actually has an incentive to move at, say, 12 miles per hour. That way there’s a margin for error, and at worst you outpace the average person a little to the left, which is always safe. (Being to the right isn’t safe.)

Note the logic here. For everyone to expect movement of X miles per hour is actually not a Nash Equilibrium, because if everyone believed that, then they wouldn’t behave that way; they’d move faster. Thus we have a proof by contradiction: Assume everyone expects movement of X mph. Then they have incentive to actually move at X+2 mph. Thus the acceleration.

But of course, it’s even worse than that. Because once Fred thinks game-theoretically, drawing the conclusions I’ve just drawn, he realizes that everybody else is, or will soon start, thinking that way too. So Fred’s incentive is to move leftward at 14 mph. That is, suppose everyone at first anticipates movement of 10 mph. Then their reasoning process tells each individual he’d better move at 12 mph. But it occurs to him that other people might also reason this out and move at 12 mph, so he thinks, “Hmm, actually I’d better move at 14 mph.” And so on.

Plainly this process has no sane limit.

This is why Jim notes that a holiness spiral cannot last forever; it must be forcibly stopped either by civil war, someone seriously stepping on the brakes with hardcore punishments for trying to out-holy everyone else, or until everybody goes as extreme as possible. The most extreme possible position is that everyone who’s a sinner must be tortured to death immediately, and indeed, that is where these things often end up. E.g., various Communist states’ purges in the 20th century.

Killing a Spiral

There are other possibilities, of course. For example, if I correctly recall the history of the Salem Witch Trials: At some point the Salem Witch Persecutions simply became too extreme, with everybody at risk because anyone could accuse anyone else of being a witch, and no one was safe. And it became obvious that some innocent people were being executed, when people standing on the gallows refused to confess and recant, and went to their deaths instead. So the thing was stopped, apparently by a sudden public agreement that the entire thing was BS and had Gone Too Far. Everyone just woke up and said, “What the fuck were we thinking?” Or the incentive to speak up became overwhelming, since you were likely to be accused of being a witch and sentenced to death even if you remained silent.

It would be good to try to push things in that direction, the Salem direction. The most obvious example is to make it clear to white people that this is tending toward the most holy thing of all, as leftists currently define holiness, which is torturing all white people to death. They won’t succeed, but the civil war they’ll force upon us will certainly create an astoundingly large pile of bodies. ’Twere best avoided. Getting white people to see where this is headed is one way to increase the number of people pushing back. And most of the western world is still white. Important: Spreading the idea of the holiness spiral increases the incentive for those participating in it to move leftward faster, but it increases the incentive for everyone else to resist.

The reason that participants in a spiral participate in it, beyond a certain point, is that they perceive it (correctly or not) to be their safest option. As more people oppose the HS, it becomes safer to exit the HS. That’s crucial.

It is, in fact, one reason the left tries to prevent people from realizing that there is widespread opposition to left-wing ideas. They know that a preference cascade can ruin their entire plan.

PREFERENCE CASCADE is indeed a kind of equal and opposite dynamic to a holiness spiral. It’s an important part of our conceptual and practical toolkit as we try to fight the HS.

A preference cascade can occur in an environment of widespread preference falsification, which is when everyone lies about their preferences. It could be because you’d damn well better lie – e.g., in 1940 in the USSR, you’d better say that Stalin is wonderful, or else. Or it could be just because you don’t want to say things that you’re afraid will make you unpopular, perceived as foolish, etc. A preference cascade is when enough people say, “The orthodoxy is bullshit!” and that can encourage others to join in, etc., until the orthodoxy is destroyed.

Such a cascade is exemplified by the little boy shouting, “Hey! The Emperor’s not wearing any clothes!” This can lead to other people – it doesn’t have to be everyone at first – saying, “Yeah, that’s true, he’s not wearing any clothes!” Then more people chime in, and so on, until the explicit consensus has converged to the truth, that the Emperor has no clothes.

Note though that there are always evil people who actually enjoy attacking others; indeed that’s who starts a spiral in the first place. So just pointing and laughing at leftists, even after the preference cascade, may not be enough. It is very plausible (Jim again) that some sort of firm incentive will be necessary to robustly discourage continued participation in holiness signaling.

The Cabal’s Timetable

I wonder if the Cabal’s timetable was much more advanced than we’d thought before Trump’s election. Consider how much they care that Trump is going to be in the White House for four or eight years. Even the prospect of four years has them absolutely frantic. They’re going after him on blatantly false pretenses to try to get him out of the White House. Now if they hadn’t been planning on moving overtly within the next four years, why would they care so much? They could just bide their time, continuing to burrow in and consolidate their power as they have been doing for decades.

So it makes me wonder if they had a plan that involved going for it all during Hillary Clinton’s anticipated first term. Remember, these people are leftists, i.e., power-mad. They think about a revolution in which they seize power, kill everyone they don’t like, and rule unopposed for the rest of their lives. They’re been thinking about such a “revolution,” i.e. totalitarian coup, their whole adult lives; they fantasized that some day they’d reach the “It’s time to go for it” moment. It’s very far from “unthinkable” for this crowd. They think about it constantly.

But still, why should just waiting another four to eight years bother them so much? (Especially since demographic dynamics, absent big changes on immigration policy, are on their side.) Trump in the White House is freaking their shit so as to be almost unbelievable. Why, why, why?

Here are some possibilities:

(1) They have a timetable which, once started, cannot be frozen for several years and then re-started. I’m hard-pressed to imagine what that might be, though.

(2) Some of the darker possibilities a la PizzaGate and the suspicious deaths of, to name just two, Antonin Scalia and Seth Rich are true. Perhaps if these truths are brought to light some of these people will swing or at least go to prison for a long time.

(3) Hillary Clinton and her crowd really were planning to try to start a nuclear war with Russia— because that would be fun, apparently— and the longer it’s deferred the stronger Russia grows, perhaps to the point that a nuclear war simply wouldn’t be worth it. And how chilling is it to think that we might have had a President who would have thought it to be “worth it”!

(4) Supreme Court appointments. Kennedy, The Leftist Who Occasionally Pretends Not To Be OneTM, is gone, and the utterly vile Ginsberg is starting to look like the star of Weekend at Bernie’s.

(5) The role of financing is more important than some of us had realized, and Trump was expected, correctly, to go after their financing. Anonymous Conservative is one of the people who frequently discusses this aspect of the situation. I’d always thought they were so hooked into the government that funding was simply not a problem, but it may be more complicated than that. If that’s an important aspect, then four or eight years of President Trump could set them back much more than four or eight years. If he really kills a significant percentage of their money sources, then two Trump terms could set them back, say 15 or even 20 years, rather than eight. And that leads to much more unpredictability, as well as delaying the planned final power-grab past the expected lifetime of some of these people. (E.g. George Soros is no spring chicken.)

(6) Speaking of unpredictability: The very fact that traditional European populations are catching on to what the bad guys are attempting must be scary for them. Brexit, political developments on the Continent, and of course Trump’s election must have been a devastating set of shocks for the Left in general and the Cabal in particular. It tells the Cabal they no longer, to a significant extent, have the luxury of operating in secrecy; western populations are on to them. It signaled that identity politics is no longer on the upswing. While it’s not over yet, its end is in the foreseeable future. This doesn’t actually mean identity politics will stop; it means that it has reached the point where it is no longer a net benefit to the Left. White attitudes toward “You’re racist!” have hardened up considerably in the last few years. As white attitudes harden and become more angry with identity politics, they will block vote more, just like all other ethnic/ racial groups. That has to be absolutely terrifying for the Left.

It won’t help them to import tons of minority Dem voters, if white voters are turning Republican, and hardcore Trump-type Republican, just as fast.

We have a generation of white people who haven’t grown up with the nonchalant comfort of being in a firm majority before the rise of identity politics. We are looking at an entire generation that has grown up with “You’re evil because you’re white!” As we learn from observing black America in decades past, hearing “You suck because of your skin color” all the time doesn’t convince you it’s true; it just makes you hate the people who say it. It was one thing when a white comedian trashed white people in the 1980s. Its obvious “Hey, I’m so NOT a racist!” performativeness was annoying, but it wasn’t threatening in a nation that was 85% white, and before real politics of white genocide had appeared. But in a nation that’s only 60-something percent white, and declining noticeably, and in an environment where non-whites are taught that white people are evil and deserve to be exterminated, that sort of thing is very different. It is even less “funny” or “cute” than it used to be; it is now threatening.

It’s stunning— and thank God!— how the left overplayed a very strong hand. They’d infiltrated the media and the educational system, for fuck’s sake! Their optimal strategy was to keep the volume down for another couple of decades. Yet they couldn’t restrain themselves, and they showed no desire to restrain their own most extreme members. So we get a class called “The Depravity of Whiteness” at a U.S. university. In a nation with a majority white population (and the Internet to spread the news of this garbage).

It’s astonishing how good the Left is at battlespace preparation (e.g., taking over the media and the educational system), and yet how bad they are at optimizing the advantage they acquire this way. Again, thank God.

Anyway, the point being: The Left may understand that they missed their window to strike while their advantage from identity politics was maximized. Realizing that they missed their window must have them enraged with regret. And they see the window closing more rapidly as white attitudes harden as fast as minorities flood into the country.

(Another advantage for us, while I’m on the subject, is the sheer stupidity of these people and the Nash trap they created for themselves. For example, black parents might like hearing a politician say, “I’ll get more funding for schools in your district,” but most of them aren’t much more likely to vote for you if you say, “I’ll get more funding for schools in your district, and by the way, white people suck.” Some of them are more likely to, but the politician loses dozens of white voters for every minority voter he gains with that last part. Surely the less retarded of the Left’s politicians know that. And yet they can’t seem to stop themselves because of the nature of the Democrat Party establishment, the primary process, the superdelegates, they fact that they’ll be attacked for not being white-hating enough, etc. (In the contest for Dem Party Chair after the 2016 election, white woman Sally Boynton Brown’s plank was an appeal to minorities in the party: “Vote for me because I can go back to my white community and scold them for being racist.”) No single leftist can start a movement out of this trap because the first people to speak up are attacked and drummed out of the party, and accomplish nothing. To put it another way, they created a leftist holiness spiral in the broader society, but of course by its very nature that spiral affects left-wing organizations faster and more thoroughly than the rest of the society.)

(7) Another possibility is that they understand and are appropriately terrified of the possibility of a preference cascade. The Left has always been very aware of this, if only at a gut level. (One of their core skills is propaganda.) Even after a right-wing victory in a referendum or election, the left instantly starts in with the rhetoric in the nature of, “As we all know and agree, anyone who voted for that person/ ballot measure is totally on the wrong side of popular opinion!” Even though everyone in the country knows that a majority of popular opinion is for the person/ measure, because they just won!

That takes me to our current rapidly intensifying political situation. A crucial aspect of it is a race between a holiness spiral and a preference cascade.

I’ll have more to say about that in a future post.