1) Programming note: For fans of the Red Pill in Fiction series, it’s still very much alive; I’ve just been busy with other stuff lately. Teaser: The next one is actually going to be Blue Pill in Fiction.
2) Hillary Clinton says of blacks, “they all look alike.”
Dems and NeverTrumpers are really squealing in pain over this ad, so we know we’ve got ’em!
Speaking of hostile invaders: Media coverage of the invader caravan has changed from “There’s a caravan and here’s some video of them marching toward us” (what the hell were they thinking with that?) to “That bastard Trump is trying to turn the caravan into a political issue!” Trying to turn it into a political issue!? Like it’s not inherently a political issue!? Like he started it?
Whatever. Their anger at his mentioning this fact proves they know this issue is a loser for them. Hence the “Stop talking about this!” Uh, no. We’re going to talk about it. Loudly and frequently.
I also noticed that the media has largely replaced photos and video of the caravan marching, with maps showing its progress. The left has acquired a clue that vivid images of a hostile force marching toward our border are devastating for them.
And it illustrates how insane they are that this wasn’t obvious to them to begin with.
6) In response to the President talking about the invasion caravan, the left is busting out the “Nazi/white nationalist” stuff.
Wow, in the 1940s Nazis invaded other countries. Now apparently “Nazis” are those who object to invasions!
As if that isn’t bad enough for Evergreen,
“All of this is happening as enrollment at competing schools is up. This year the University of Washington announced it was welcoming its largest freshman class ever. So this is not a regional trend. This is about Evergreen and what happened there last year.”
8) Google employees stage a walkout over Google’s “treatment of women.”
Bolsonaro is described as “even worse than Trump” by the left. If the left describes him that way he must be good. And of course they’ve pulled out the usual “racist, sexist, homophobic,” etc.
His political program is on the face of it unremarkable: for gun rights, for family, against abortion, for capitalism, for God, for country, for secure property rights and in particular for secure property rights in land and houses, against crime and corruption.
So he’s for good stuff and against bad stuff. Well, that explains why the left hates him.
Bolsonaro’s victory means the rebellion against the disgusting left is gaining momentum. Of course that was already obvious, but now it has spread to three continents: North America (Trump), continental Europe and the UK (Brexit vote in the UK; too many encouraging events to mention on the continent), and now South America (Bolsonaro). And the most populous country in South America, by the way.
This encourages us and discourages the bad guys.
It makes life significantly more difficult for the globalists as they now have to spread themselves thinner over a larger set of adversaries. The game of whack-a-mole they have to play has just gotten significantly more complicated.
The left’s precious Overton Window continues to be smashed.
The preference cascade has grown. An entire nation of people just joined the chorus shouting “The Emperor’s not wearing any clothes!”
People who naturally are in sympathy with us but have been too intimidated to join in will now be less intimidated.
Fence-sitters who only care about being on the winning team have even more evidence that the momentum has shifted in favor of the good guys.
Another delightful feature of this: It shows that racial politics is not as simple as many had thought. Brazil is less white than the US, and they voted for a man who’s “more extreme than Trump, ZOMG!” …and by a wider margin: Bolsonaro won by more than 55% to 45%.
Get ready for a schadenboner (ladies, get ready to get, er, schaden-wet).
Headline: Lessons From Brazil
Sub-head: A disturbing election shows that we can’t count on the lessons of history—or multiculturalism—to save democracy.
Translation: We thought that if we demographically replaced white people, we lefties would win. But oh no! That’s not guaranteed!
Some choice quotes:
“the biggest democracy in Latin America is now in mortal danger.”
LOL. Lefties are such assholes. Whenever they don’t win, they define it as “not democratic.” The left really does believe that “democracy” means “the left always wins.” That is, they ascribe no legitimacy to actual democracy.
PS: Eat shit, loser.
And “The danger to Brazil’s democratic institutions is very serious indeed.”
The dork draws “four important lessons” from Bolsonaro’s win, among them:
“The populist wave is still accelerating.”
Oh no! Politicians who appeal to the people are winning elections!
Another “lesson” (extended quotes in bold):
Countries don’t learn from their history
…Another election that took place on Sunday shows that Brazil is not the only country in which elites have long been too willing to assume that a dark past would somehow pave the way for a brighter future. When I traveled to Berlin to talk to some of Germany’s most senior politicians in the fall of 2016, at a time when the far-right Alternative for Germany already enjoyed double-digit support in many polls, nearly all of them assured me that Germans, well aware of the dangers of fascism, would never give the far-right the 5 percent they needed to enter the Bundestag. Less than 12 months later, they got 13 percent in federal elections held in September 2017, becoming the country’s third-strongest party.
Alternative for Germany’s streak of success has only continued since. Just this past Sunday, it took 13 percent of the vote in Hesse, a state that should provide them with less fertile hunting ground. Thanks to this latest victory, the party is now represented in every single state parliament in the country.
According to the left, if you don’t want to be gang-raped by hordes of invaders (put Cologne, New Year’s Eve into a search engine) you’re a “far-right extremist.”
Authoritarian demagogues can thrive in diverse countries
Demography, it turns out, is not destiny.
We thought it was! We might not be as clever as we thought! Uh oh!
Particularly in the United States, many people equate authoritarian populism with xenophobia, and xenophobia with white people.
First of all, Fuck you. Secondly, notice how the demographic group that votes most consistently for small government is called the group that most supports authoritarianism. The left loves to do this: to assert the precise, exact opposite of the truth. It happens too often to be a coincidence; I think it’s some sort of lying fetish.
A candidate like Trump, they believe, can only appeal to a dwindling white majority running scared because it is about to lose its privileges.
Behold: “losing your country” is translated into left-speak as “losing your privileges.”
A surprisingly hopeful conclusion follows from this frightening premise: Because the United States—and many other countries around the world—are growing more diverse, the potential for authoritarian populists keeps shrinking. If only we get through the next few years, the good side will win the demographic race and triumph over the populists.
Bolsonaro’s success shows that this is simply not the case… Bolsonaro has managed to win well over half of the vote in a country that is already “majority minority.”
Looks like your side is in trouble!
The same, I’m afraid, could easily be possible in the United States… a recent poll showed that more than four in 10 Latinos approve of his [Trump’s] performance in office.
HOW CAN THIS BE?! WE CALLED HIM RACIST! DIDN’T THEY HEAR US CALL HIM RACIST?!
In short, the rise of Bolsonaro shows that Brazilian democracy now faces an acute threat…
LOL, “democracy faces an acute threat” means “the left didn’t win.”
the populist wave continues to go strong; that we should not trust democratic messiahs to deliver us…
Note that in a moment of weakened focus, he inadvertently lets slip how he actually feels about democracy: “we leftists cannot trust democracy.”
Oops, be careful, dude! Your self-censorship algorithm glitched there for a second!
The people are going to continue to reject the totalitarians of the left, no matter how much you try to label the right totalitarians, authoritarians, etc. And the best thing about it is that you can’t stop yourselves. The holiness spiral that you’re caught up in forces you to be more extreme over time, even as the voters come to hate the extremism more and more.
You and your asshole leftist friends:
I’m melting, melting! Ohhhhh, what a world, what a world! Who would have thought that some little voters like you could destroy my beautiful wickedness!?
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.
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!”
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.
…and then rubs abrasive rock salt in their wounds by doing the most painful thing you can do to a leftist chick: He ignores her.
It’s like she doesn’t exist.
The great thing about the photo is… well, everything.
One great thing about it is that you actually can’t tell if he is genuinely unaware of her existence, or if he is aware, but just deliberately ignores her. And the stylish adjusting of the tie… the complacently serene look on his face… She is utterly irrelevant to his world, as she yowls in well-deserved pain and/or a performative bid for attention. Fuck, that is priceless.
The instant I saw this already-iconic photo of Graham, I thought of this scene from the Bond movie Goldeneye (watch to the end to get the reference):
Reposting this today because it’s October first, a good date to put up stuff about skating. If your local rink isn’t open for the season yet, they will be soon. I think I’ll repost this every year on Oct. 1 (until I forget or get bored).
Aright, bitches, ’tis the season, so listen up.
Ice skating is awesome. When you’re going fast it is the closest a human being can get to flying. The American Psychiatric Association defines “not liking ice skating” as a mental disorder. It’s in their diagnostic manual.
I always see a lot of n00bs ice skating, which is great! Here are some tips.
(1) You will fall. Get used to it.
(2) Ice skating is not walking on ice. The physics is different.
When you walk, you push backward with one foot. (See Figure 1.) If your foot has good traction on the ground, it can’t slip back, though, so instead you are pushed forward. (Newton’s third law of motion, “Every action has an equal and opposite reaction.”)
You cannot do this on ice skates, padawan, because you are on a blade that’s like a sixth of an inch thick. If you push your foot straight back, there is not enough area of the blade making contact with the ice to produce good traction. (See Figure 2.) Instead of being planted on the ice and thus propelling you forward, your foot will simply slide back. Then, because you’re a n00b, you’ll fall down. (Newton’s lesser-known fourth law of motion, “N00bs fall down.”)
How do you deal with this? Well, plainly you need more area of the blade making contact with the ice. Simply turning your foot somewhat sideways does it. (See Figure 3.) This gives your foot enough traction, so when you push it back, the only thing that can happen is that the rest of you goes forward.
Meanwhile you are pointing the other foot in roughly the direction you want to go, so you glide forward on that foot. (As per Newton’s fifth law, “Ice is slippery.”)
Then the feet switch roles, with the gliding foot becoming the foot you’re pushing back with, and the pushing foot becoming the gliding foot. Repeat.
Once you learn this, it really is easy and natural.
(3) On falling: One of the problems is that your instincts about righting yourself when you’re off balance are all wrong. Moves that help you regain your balance when you’re on terra firma don’t necessarily help you, to put it mildly, when you’re skating on blades on ice. You have to learn new reflexes (if learned reflexes isn’t an oxymoron). I can’t re-wire your neural wiring that handles these reflexes, so I don’t know what to tell you here, except that you have to practice.
(4) “Crossover,” logically enough, is the term for when you cross one foot over the other. You’ve seen this: It’s that thing a skater does where it seems like his feet are moving independently of the direction his body is traveling in, so it looks like he’s moonwalking or something.
Crossovers function best when you’re turning at high speed and really leaning into the turn. You do this naturally when you turn while running on ground, but when you do that your foot is planted. When you’re skating, in contrast, you continue to glide on that foot as you shift your weight into the turn, so that for a moment the foot is actually moving in a different direction from your body’s center of mass.
Crossovers are a great way to add speed with relatively little effort, because gravity is doing some of the work for you. When you change direction you lean in the direction you want to go in. So you start to fall in that direction. Before you fall very far, though, you put a foot out under yourself so you glide in that direction instead of falling.
By the way, when you take a turn with a fast series of crossovers, it actually is as fun as it looks. Hell, it’s much more fun. There’s a power and smoothness that is like nothing else. Cf. comment above, in re: “flying.”
(5) Control: As long as you’re not going too fast, turning is so easy that it’s practically subliminal. (No crossovers for the moment; I’m not talking about that level of speed.) What is actually going on, of course, is that you’re shifting your weight ever so slightly in the direction you want to go in. But it feels like you’re just thinking yourself into changing direction. Telekinesis!
(6) Efficiency: Another way you can tell n00bs, even after they’ve learned to not fall much, is by how much energy they waste. In extreme cases it looks like they’re expending half again as much energy as they need to per foot-pound of work accomplished.
If this is you, don’t worry; this takes care of itself over time. Your body’s natural reluctance to waste energy will quickly make you adjust so that your motion is economical.
(7) Stopping. Several n00bs at rinks have asked me for advice, particularly about how to stop.
The correct answer is: Stopping is for the weak and timid! Are you a wuss!? Are you!? Huh!? Good, I didn’t think so. Let’s have no more nonsense about stopping.
If you insist, though, you can just point yourself at a wall. That usually works.
All kidding aside: There are basically two ways to slow yourself down, and if you keep slowing long enough you’ll stop.
The first I call the two-feet method: Just point your skates toward each other, while keeping your legs stiff so your feet don’t actually come together. If your feet bump into each other you’ll fall, obviously. But if you hold your feet apart at that angle, the blades will scrape against the ice, slowing you. And if you keep doing it, stopping you.
You can feel and hear the scraping, at least if you’re not at a rink where they constantly blast fucking country music over the sound system at full volume, what the actual fuck, not that I’m complaining or anything, but what the fuck? Don’t they know that playing that shit voids the warranty on your speaker system? Anyway…
The second method of stopping is the much-admired “hockey stop.” That’s the one you think of when I say “how to stop,” where they turn sideways and kick up ice shavings.
Just turn sideways and dig the blade of your leading foot into the ice. You’re also using your trailing foot, of course, but more for balance than friction, at least the way I do it (YMMV). Also, you’re doing some rapid adjustment of your balance, naturally.
When you first try this you’re going to think, “I shall now attempt a hockey stop.” That’s well and good, but you learn faster if you just think, “Shit! I need to stop!” and imagine what you’d do if you really needed to stop suddenly. This makes it more instinctive and less cerebral.
(8) Sharpness matters so your blades dig in. You need this (a) for acceleration, so your pushing foot can bite into the ice, (b) to slow yourself and stop, and (c) to execute a crossover. (Probably for six other reasons that I’m not thinking of at the moment too.) When you’re doing a crossover, the gliding foot has to bite into the ice to a certain extent or the foot will just slide out from under you. This happened to me once when I was trying to take too steep an angle with my gliding foot. Foot shot backward, rest of body went, “Hello, ice!”
The blade has some thickness; it’s not a knife blade. It’s the blade’s edges that are sharp. Once I actually drew blood from my hand accidentally with the edge. But that was probably right after they’d been sharpened; normally blades aren’t that sharp.
(A) Little kids on the ice are cute, but DANGER DANGER DANGER!!! Partly this is because they can’t control themselves yet, and partly because even the ones who can control themselves have no social awareness whatsoever. If they see Mom over there, they will simply turn with no warning in that direction, and if you’re behind them you’re going to be doing some fancy dancing to not hit them. This leads to hilarity and occasional bruises, because of course you’re going to steer yourself into a wall or shift so that you fall, instead of plowing into a little kid.
I recently cracked my elbow into the wall of a rink because I had to dodge a little one who seemed to execute a right-angle turn right in front of me with no warning. I had to do something to avoid smashing into him and ended up saying Hi to the plexi-glass. He didn’t even realize it had happened, but I did get a sympathetic look from someone on the other side of the glass.
They can also turn quite suddenly because their centers of gravity are so low. It’s like they’re equipped with little inertialess drives.
Just remember this:
Little kids on ice = Brownian motion + inertialess drives.
(B) Use your ears as well as your eyes to help maintain awareness of other skaters in your vicinity. Thus you can avoid pulling a “little kid” and turning suddenly just when someone’s coming up behind you.
Caveat: In the corners of the rink, noise bounces around weirdly. Sometimes it sounds like someone is coming up behind you and just about to smash into you. You’re like “Gah!” but when you look around there’s no one within ten yards.
(C) Downhill skating. Sweet! But why didn’t they have this when I was 19? You kids today don’t know how good you have it, let me tell you, when I was your age I had to skate 40 miles to school, and it was uphill both ways! By God!
(D) This is a politically incorrect blog, so an observation about the sexes. Normal people, continue to read; shrieking feminist shrikes, go somewhere else (permanently).
Still with me? OK, a fun observation:
All good skaters have both power and grace, strength and fluidity. But there is a difference between good female skaters and good male skaters. Good female skaters have power – you can’t be a good skater without it – but they have more grace compared to male skaters. And good male skaters have grace – you can’t be a good skater without that, either(*) – but they have more power compared to female skaters. Just a nice little “the world is gendered” observation to affirm normality and freak out the screaming SJWs.
If you’re like most people, i.e. psychologically normal, you understand (there was a time when no one denied this!) that the sexes are different and that the differences, in so many ways, can be a source of delight to everyone. This is just a small example of that.
* Even the most brutal hockey player, 190 pounds of muscle and missing three front teeth, who starts throwing jabs at the slightest provocation, has grace on the ice. If you don’t believe me, Youtube is your friend.
(10) Have fun!
UPDATE: DON’T TEXT OR TAKE SELFIES WHILE SKATING! FUCKING RETARDS!
Using Keynesian equations, supergeniuses like me will achieve total permanent economic stability!
How the rest of the world sees liberals:
Forcing banks to make mortgage loans to people who couldn’t afford them seemed like such a good idea! Also, I once again have an octopus stuck to my face, GLAVIN!
How Hillary! sees herself:
I am a supervillain! All the deplorables will fall before me!
How the rest of the world sees her:
“The people were like, ‘We love you, Hillary!’ but then who should intervene but Trump and Comey and Facebook and Russians and the Electoral College and white women who are easily led and let their husbands tell them how to vote…”
How Open border libertarians see themselves:
If I virtue signal hard enough, all these people will remember and be nice to me! Also, look, leftists, look how NOT racist I am! And by the way, I don’t mind this guy’s elbow on my neck at all!
How the rest of the world (including their new “friends”) sees Open border libertarians:
Slather more A-1 sauce on yourself. And be quick about it!
“…and WikiLeaks and racists and misogynists and the Trilateral Commission and a cartoon frog…”
How SJWs see themselves (when they’re telling themselves that they actually believe their own bullshit):