The End Of The Road

At the end of the Cold War, when Francis Fukuyama wrote The End of History and the Last Man, the belief among the Western elites was that the great debates were over and liberal democracy was the winner. The days of nations competing for resources and ideologies competing for adherents were gone. Instead, liberal democracy would spread to the rest of the world and capitalism would be the universal economic model. If there was to be a debate at all, it would be over how best to distribute the great surplus.

Thirty years later, it seems a bit ridiculous, but in the context of the age, it was not an unreasonable prediction. The Cold War suppressed economic development in both the East and West, for close to seventy years. The West spending lavishly on armaments meant not spending on other things. The East having embraced communism meant three generations lost to pointless social experimentation. Stripped of the burden of war, the world could rapidly develop, unleashing an enormous supply of human capital.

It did not really turn out that way, of course. The West is noticeably less free today than it was thirty years ago. The ruling class is rushing to close off political debate and free expression. In the name of democracy elites are sending gangs of thugs to harass and assault people exercising their democratic rights. In the name of capitalism, a narrowing group of oligarchs are exercising control over large swaths of the economy. The surveillance state is reaching levels unimaginable thirty years ago.

In the shadow of this growing authoritarianism sits the political and cognitive elite, unable to come to terms with what is happening. What is remarkable about the current age is the public debate, the officially permitted one, at least, is irrelevant to what is actually happening in the world. Three years on and the American media is still talking about invisible gremlins supposedly hypnotizing voters in the 2016 elections. Meanwhile, millions of barbarians pour over the southern border and the public space collapses.

This summer, various types of patriotic groups will come to Washington to demonstrate and proselytize for their constitutional rights. It is a feature of life in the Imperial Capital that used to go unnoticed. People demanding free speech by speaking freely in front of the White House was always a bit amusing. Now, however, those speakers will be attacked by black clad militants, calling the speakers fascists. The media will hiss at the speakers, claiming their demands for free speech are a threat to democracy.

Meanwhile, the supposed conservative opposition will be having name tag parties where they will talk about the threat of socialism. Nowhere is the absurdity of the age more obvious than in the so-called conservative movement. They have coordinated, with the Republican Party, a campaign to fight socialism. The stunning inability to come to terms with present reality is breathtaking. Their campaign against socialism is every bit as ridiculous as seeing people walking around dressed in leisure suits.

It is not just right-wing Progressives trapped in the past. What passes for serious thinking on the Left side is just as vacuous. This is a journal published by a Harvard graduate student that’s popular with the “serious” Progressive. It is every bit as retrograde and irrelevant as the nonsense belched out by so-called conservatives. The midget wrestling of this age is two young intellectuals, like Nathan Robinson and Ben Shapiro, debating socialism, using language that fell out of fashion a generation ago.

In all candor, many on the dissident right suffer from the same problem. Look around the intellectual space – and it is quite vibrant – and you cannot help but notice that a lot of it is backward looking. A big part of it is “rediscovering” thinkers from the last century, who were on the losing side of the great debates of their age. There’s that haunting, familiar to every southerner, that the wrong side won. If only we could go back and re-fight those old fights, maybe things would be different. It’s a longing for an unrealized present.

This antiquarianism is most obvious in the street fights between the radical Left and radical Right. One side imagines themselves as the Rotfrontkämpferbund while the other side is the Sturmabteilung. The silliness of either side thinking they are part of some radical tradition is obvious. More important, it reveals the lack of original thinking. Old dead ideas like fascism, anarchism and radical socialism have little to tell us about politics in the post-industrial, technological age. It’s nothing more than play acting to no end.

Fukuyama was a bit grandiose in pronouncing the end of history, but he was not wrong about the Cold War marking the end of something. It turns out that it was the end of the Enlightenment. All of the debates important to the intellectuals who emerged from the middle ages have been addressed. There’s nothing left to be said on those topics. It turns out that much of it was just a dead end. Perhaps all of it. The resulting conclusions don’t seem to have much value in this post-Enlightenment age.

Meanwhile, noises coming from the cognitive elites fill the air, but they mean nothing to any man standing in the current age looking forward down the timeline. Instead, the noises from these people are like the wailing of animals trapped in the tar pits. They are sad, mournful and a bit terrifying, but the only reason to pay any attention to them is to listen for signs of their waning. Their time is done and once they are gone, the world can move forward with whatever comes next and stop thinking about a now dead past.

To support my work, subscribe here.

145 thoughts on “The End Of The Road

  1. I should check what age Fukuyama was when he wrote that.
    If you observe humans enough time, you learn that power-seeking will never stop playing a foreground part in their business — thus no final ideology, or political geography.

  2. Few fall for the ideology of the Left, but many fall for the seductive promise that they will be among the favored. The extreme fringe of socialists – Democrat Socialist, National Socialist, and any leftover Left – are only able to get interest from the extremely young and naive.

    I’m beginning to think that those hunkering down in their “Last Stand” sites, prepared to meet the Barbarians who dare to try to dislodge them, are the sane ones. The future of the Left may be questionable, but we always have Barbarians.

  3. It’s hard to predict the future, but one thing is absolutely certain: White liberals aren’t in it. Not because they’ll be hacked to death by their beloved diversity, though some will be, but because their birthrate is far below replacement. It turns out that racism is essential to long-term survival because without it, why bother having children, there are plenty of kids in Africa!

    White liberals won’t even deny this — they say you shouldn’t breed because the world will be uninhabitable by 2060 (I said 2100 until a white liberal corrected me).

    Non-white liberals can only create another Zimbabwe or Venezuela. I’m guessing that in 2120 the temperate latitudes will be a fractious patchwork of patriarchal, fecund, low-trust tribal societies resembling today’s Pakistan. Not ideal but a lot more real, with white liberals and their silly ideas dead, gone, and forgotten.

    • Out-think, out-plan, out-strategize, out-technologize the African hordes. But trying to out-breed them is a fool’s errand. We need to rely on our natural strengths, not imitate the primitives.

  4. Excellent post that captures perfectly what is happening in Western White countries especially one run by the tribe.

    However, in Asia life moves forward for better and worse. They too are continuing fights from before the fall of the wall but those fights are usually grounded in reality (and not just fantasy role-playing) such as the poor rural against the more affluent city folks and the average person against crony capitalists or crony communists.

  5. This antiquarianism, fretting over the past, etc… is pretty much how Christianity came into being, and it had a pretty good 2000-year run.

    Reactionary ideas may have been on the losing side of the debates in early 20C America, but they’re clearly on the winning side today in China, Russia, India, Turkey, and much of Eastern Europe.

    I don’t hold out much hope for neo-Nazis and neo-Confederates, the few who actually exist and aren’t bogeymen created by the very establishment they supposedly oppose. But traditional ideas on sexual and race relations, hierarchical structures, and so on – those ideas will always eventually regain prominence, because they are correct, whereas any ideology based on observable lies will eventually fail. Maybe not tomorrow, maybe not in any of our lifetimes, but it will happen.

    One reason why the study of history is important is that it makes very plain the cyclical nature of demographics and culture. Technology has been improving throughout all human history. There’s no reason to believe we’re now at some magical stage that will end the cycle. We’ve repeated it dozens of times before, and we’ll repeat it dozens of times more.

  6. I agree with everything except “the end of the Enlightenment.”

    The Enlightenment ended around 1800, and it was replaced by the Romantic Era. Besides Beethoven, Keats, Goethe, the Romantic Era spawned the French Revolution, socialism, communism, Fascism, and it most characteristic product Naziism.

    The end of the Cold War likely marks the end of Romanticism, or maybe Post-Modernism, if it marks anything.

    Personally, I think it marks the beginning of the New Dark Age.

  7. Thanks to the doyens of the Silicon Valley Salon, we’re going from EN-lightenment to IN-lightenment.

  8. With as much humility and appreciation of Z and these comments, what’s the simple, pragmatic response? I’m red pilled (maybe some black pill mixed in) fully. At my core, I’ve known much of the truth that we now discuss but had no framework, nor community, to process it.
    My future is less valuable to me now beyond setting my children up for life in the projected reality we see becoming more clear.
    Debate, historical lessons, observations…I’m thankful for all of it. I need some action items. I crave preparation now for this future clown world.
    If the answer is “nothing can be done”, I’ll default to our family ethos. This is summed up pretty well with “No one is coming, everything is your responsibility, don’t get eaten”.

    • I think that we’re in the “trying to figure out what to do” phase at the moment. It’s frustrating to not have specific action items, but we’re all just waking up to the reality so it’s going to take a bit to figure out what’s next.

      But here’s a couple of ideas:

      1. Joint community/political/church/business groups and look for others who think like you. They’ll show themselves over time if you’re look.
      2. Support people like Z-Man, Ramzpaul and others
      3. Go to meetings of AmRen or the Mencken Society
      4. Consider an escape plan, i.e. moving you and your family to another country or part of the U.S. (Optional and fairly drastic)

  9. ” Look around the intellectual space – and it is quite vibrant – and you cannot help but notice that a lot of it is backward looking. ”

    If Enlightenment ideas have been refuted then looking back to contemporary counter arguments, evaluating them on new observations and building new ideas from their foundations is the only option. Its not a desire to re-fight old fights, its regrouping, reorienting and(hopefully) restarting in a better direction. When you walk into a wall, you have to step back, turn and walk around.

    Besides, there’s nothing new under the sun; human nature doesn’t change and seemingly can’t learn from mistakes.

    • Afterthought : what we’re expecting is something like a new enlightenment -science overcoming the progressive faith- and will probably follow a similar trajectory.

      In medieval times faith dominated the public mind. Slowly, over generations, skeptics swung the public towards science which eventually became the public faith, ie science will solve all our problems. Science ran on for a while until a new faith claiming to be based on the tenets of science grabbed the public mind-progressivism. Currently, we’re living in a political culture based on this relatively new faith.

      A fundamental difference between medieval Christianity and progressivism is Christianity doesn’t promise to solve problems in this life but to transcend them. Progressivism, on the other hand, believes man and this world can be perfected. An unreasonable faith leads to unreasonable outcomes.

      Hopefully it won’t take as long for this new faith to pass, but history suggests whatever comes next will probably be even stupider.

  10. Dennis Prager briefly pulled his head from the sand and spoke truth when he said years back that the greatest failing of his generation was that they had failed to give their posterity a meaningful sense of what it meant to be an American. His America is a Second Founding shibboleth, of course, but there’s a thread of truth in his lament. Our ideologies and world-views may incorporate eternal truths, but overall they are largely ephemeral and context-sensitive. Each generation faces its own challenges and even venerable societies tend to decay on a Spenglerian arc.

    Instead of teaching our children ossified past ideologies and simply indoctrinating them to revere what worked for us, we need to teach them the technology of political thought – the methods and means to create the ideologies they need to cope with the world they’ll inherit. Present day academics and public intellectuals are worse than useless for this. Un-learning their nonsense is a necessary precursor to the project of teaching the how of politics rather than simply the why. We’re doing this ourselves, with only our biased and incomplete knowledge of the past to guide us. But it has to be done.

    • The main reason Prager’s generation failed to teach its posterity the meaning of “American” is because they weren’t American, themselves. They were the children or grandchildren of immigrants from 1885-1925. This is one area where Vox is absolutely correct, although most readers have an instinctive aversion to it. No, they insist, MY grandparents were true patriots. No, my family couldn’t wait to assimilate.

      Uh-oh, there’s that word again. “Assimilation.” What it really means is never thought or spelled out. Most even here are desperately anxious to welcome Nguyen and Juan and even Odibwe as long as he wears jeans, eats burgers and pizza, and speaks reasonable English. All minor surface alterations. No consideration of the tens of generations of genetics that clearly indicate that Nguyen’s “entrepreneurship” will favor his family, that Juan’s politics will favor wealth redistribution, and that Odibwe is unlikely to prioritize truthfulness and honor in either his business or social transactions.

      There is no magic dirt; no magic papers. Becoming something other than what one is born as takes time. Generations. Plus self awareness, and effort, and host society pressure, etc. All those people who loathe
      Benny Shapiro but like Prager, or David Horowitz, or Matthew Continenti never seem to notice that the reason these people still push various global shibboleths, even if they are averse to Mohammedan immigration, is because they, themselves, have no true idea what it meant to be American – i.e. an independent settler – prior to mass immigration (albeit European, but still essentially alien in spirit).

  11. Thirty years later, it seems a bit ridiculous, but in the context of the age, it was not an unreasonable prediction.


    I remember the euphoria and back at that moment, everybody loved America, everybody. America could’ve done a shitton of righteous stuff with all that goodwill, if she’d grabbed the chance and spent her efforts to promote true American values rather than start a bloody rampage in the Middle East.

  12. I understand the appeal of dismissing “antiquarian” modes of thought, but what are some forward-looking alternatives? To date, the people claiming to have the most future-conscious programs are folks like Andrew “Grab the Bag” Yang. There’s got to be something better.

    • It’s unwise to give any credence at all to what people claim of themselves and their ideas.

  13. I’m inclined to think otherwise. There is nothing new under the sun, the way “forward” when you are on the wrong road is to turn around and go back. But to where?

    Z has convinced me that the old idea that we need to restore our Constitution is an error: where we are is not a bastardized version of the original documents, it is their logical outcome. But now I think the old Greeks were right and that we just cycle through forms of government that are more of less stable and designed to solve some problem or other that is more or less current. What’s next is something that came before & it will contain the seed of its own demise. Repeat, ‘til the last syllable of recorded time.

  14. On into space and what William Burroughs called “new nadirs of depravity.” That’s my guess…

  15. Read the book again. I did. Too his credit, Fukuyama (whom I am no fan of whatsoever) is more nuanced than what you give credit for. He believes, as do I, that free market based systems had proven their superiority over others. However, he makes clear in his book that the case for liberal democratic political systems is still not resolved.

  16. Interesting take, much appreciated.

    Perhaps the Booby has his own take that is somewhat different. In the Booby’s view the Cold War ended, not in 1990 with the West victorious, but sometime around 1980 when the radical left had finally completed its quest to usurp academia in its totality, and by extension the power institutions of the state. In the Booby’s take the West lost the Cold War.

    No, the radical left doesn’t spill much ink anymore sympathizing with Soviet totalitarianism. They’ve moved on to other brilliant ideas, like identity politics, race/gender/orientation rabble-rousing, and global warming, er… climate change.

    Apparently the corporate world is OK with singing the tune of an ideological tradition whose members would have once been happy to send them all to the concentration camps in cattle cars. For it’s part the academics of the radical left seem content to let the corporate world live for now, so long as their 401(k)s and pension plans are growing fat, but they will nevertheless still flood the boardrooms and HR offices with progressive stormtroopers, thought police, and preachers of newspeak.

    The Cold War ended. The West lost. We are slowly becoming a totalitarian society. No, it doesn’t look like the one academics dreamed of half a century ago, but it’s hellish nonetheless, and the radical left now has effective control over the Western world and its frightening military might.

    • How frightening is that might though? Nearly 20 years later and we still cannot beat Afghani goat herders despite having supremacy in air, armor, and cyber.

      We spend tens of thousands of dollars per infantryman, I guarantee Bob the Taliban has a fraction of that. I suspect that our next fight against a better supplied peer adversary will be humiliating.

      • Maybe. But Western forces cannot unleash their worst weapons on brown people. They have no such restriction on dropping them on white people.

      • The US could whip their asses in an afternoon – as they literally did in the first hours of the war – but whipping Taleban is not the reason American troops are in Afghanistan. If the Taleban was wiped out, we’d have to make up a new excuse to keep the country occupied.

        • Sure, we win in pitched battles almost all the time. Heck we did that in Vietnam too. We still lost the war to the guys in straw hats and black pajamas.

          The only way a Western modern military could win a 4th Generation war is by glassing the entire country. We do not even know if that would work since nobody has tried it.

          • The only way a Western modern military could win a 4th Generation war is by glassing the entire country.

            This has always been the case, it’s not particular to America or the West.

            As I see it, we (NATO – I’m not American) are winning right now: every year we stay, we keep the Russians, the Iranians, the Chinese and the Pakis out. Afghanistan makes a hundred times more sense than Iraq.

            Also, Afghanistan provides a nice proofing ground for troops and weapon systems, something much appreciated by smaller NATO countries who can’t afford their own wars.

          • I admit that I do not know much about the geopolitics in that area, however I am not sure why we would be concerned with most of those countries going into Afghanistan since there seems to be no impact on American interests and major players China and Russia have more pressing concerns elsewhere..

          • Afghanistan is part of a global American strategy to contain Russia and China, it was dubbed the lily-pad doctrine by the neocons. You have a few massive, regional bases and a lot of smaller bases with a skeleton crew that can quickly be boosted up to full war readiness.

            Afghanistan is one of the keystones in this strategy, like Kosovo, Okinawa and Poland.

        • Yep. We’re still there because we (or rather our masters) want us to be there. There are various explanations on offer, but it’s definitely not to bring freedom to the Afghans. And Trump (or anyone else) is not going to be permitted to somehow unite the Koreans, because “we” want to be there too.

  17. Most of us here know this truism, but I’ll whisper it again: demographics is destiny.

    • Yep, and that’s why any number of us HBDers bet on the future being very kind to China and Japan.

      • I have a gut-level aversion to eugenics but the world doesn’t seem worried about my feelings on the matter. I reluctantly concede that you guys are probably going to win that bet. I just have to convince myself to get my head in the new game I still don’t want to play.

        • I don’t want to play it either, but what hope does one hold out to the majority of the population being left behind? If you think of eugenics in the same light as medical procedures designed to cure disease and enhance life outcomes, and reject the concept of eliminating “inferior” beings, it becomes more palatable. And I fully understand current concerns wrt misuse. Men are not angels.

          Much will depend on what techniques are the first to be developed/perfected. For example, suppose embryo selection comes about at a reasonable cost. Who would not want to bring your own children into the world at a level of genetic health that makes them competitive among everyone else?

  18. The real political divide is between politics based on HBD, and anti-HBD.

    The problem for Team HBD is how to propagandize, to “religionize,” something that is (a) science, and therefore not inherently exciting, and (b) the target of the left’s already well-developed demonology (“racist!”, “anti-Semite!”, “sexist!”, etc.)

    But that’s the struggle right there.

    • The problem is that the overwhelming majority of the population is on the wrong side of the curve wrt HBD and it’s meaning in a highly technological society. Given the misstep taken wrt HBD in the early 20th century, it is impossible to convince those on the wrong side of the curve that such science is in the best interest of all. And I don’t particularly blame them.

    • I’d say the divide is between those who believe in the primacy of tribalism versus the proposition nation. To say that the real divide is acceptance of HBD may suggest that the solution is for high IQ people of all races to form an identity group. As tempting as this may be, it looks to me like racial identity binds non-whites more tightly than deracinated high IQ. Or maybe just that anti-whiteness binds non-whites more tightly than anything else.

      I guess what you mean by “politics based on HBD” is acknowledging that races have different, unalterable capabilities.

  19. the public debate, the officially permitted one, at least, is irrelevant to what is actually happening in the world.

    Have you noticed that, on the real issues, that there is no public debate? More and more the Cathedral just hands down the new Party Line, and that’s just how it’s going to be.

    And if you try to debate, say, transsexual children, which would have been an abomination for all of human history up until yesterday, they’re not going to debate, they’re just going to give you the Full Totalitarian.

    • The school shooting in Colorado occurred at a STEM school about a mile from the home where I lived.The STEM school had caved to SJW pressure and became a STEAM school, adding arts to the STEM program to mollify the usual suspects. This, of course, resulted in the addition of a large population of “alternative” kids to what was formerly a nerd school mostly full of white and Asian kids bound for engineering or science programs in college.

      In a surprise to everyone (/s), both shooters came from the population of “alternative” kids. One of the shooters is a minor who is transitioning from female to male. Upon learning this, all media outlets dutifully changed their writing to refer to this piece of human garbage by its preferred pronoun.

      The poz is strong. We are doomed.

      • My general impression is that there can be no public STEM or “gifted” schools in a multi-racial district/area. Perhaps in Utah or Idaho, but not in any of our more vibrant states. In such states, they all come under attack because the student enrollment/achievement inevitably reflect HBD truths.

        A case in point. Here in the state where I live, the second largest school district had *one* secondary school set aside for the gifted. It was close to the university and had numerous faculty children attending over the years (no surprise). The school was always rated *nationwide* in the top ten secondary schools—often ranked fourth or sixth! Every graduate was so sought after that the local university gave everyone of them a full scholarship to get them to attend (not only worth $$$, but the University is in the top 20 research institutions).

        Well, the school board turned poz (read minority, as did the district) and they began to adjust the admissions criteria. One change, admit the top graduates from all grade schools—regardless of relative merit among them. Another was wrt to AP courses. Obama disciplinary changes was another blow. Guess what happened? The school seems to have vanished from the national rankings last I checked. Folks wanting the best for their children need to go private. Great if you can afford it.

          • I refer you to bob sykes’ post near the top about how a third of US discoveries are done by Chinese grads working in the US. There’s a reason they’re doing it here, not there.

            We’re giving them the ammunition they’ll use to shoot us. US schools should be for US students. Let the Chinese educate their own damn kids.

          • True, and don’t forget that the cadres of Chinese “students” in American universities are quite often in the pay of the Chinese State intelligence agencies.

          • Not really, they just want those engineers to be people of color—regardless of ability. 🙁

        • Highlands Ranch is in Douglas County. It is very Yt, very affluent, and low diversity. Solidly Republican, something like 75/25 in local elections. Given property prices and the lack of public trans, the location is very vibrancy-resistant. Conclusion: the mind virus is not race-aware. Chalk this one up to CNN fanning the flames of the American Troubles.

          • You underestimate the mission creep of goodwhite virtue signaling.

            Poz doesn’t start out as poz, it starts as “tolerance”, and “equality”, and free floating altruism stoked by proximate absence of diversity and the easy good livin of baseball ad bbq Americans. Diveristy for thee, until its not and suddenly castle rock looks good, you know, “for the schools”.

            Highlands ranch is full of churchian types who beam and gloat when their daughters go to Africa to fill their instagrams full of adorable dark babies.

            Voting Republican is not a reliable metric of anti-poz.

        • There can be. It just has to be an area where the elites have sufficient power. Note how quickly de Blasio got shut down when he moved to have high-performing Upper East Side kids’ schools enriched with vibrant diversity.

      • Denver – and rapidly the rest of Colorado, is full “arts” and “alternative”. Look at the governor, the mayor of Denver, the denver city council. So much poz.

        You can walk around with weed (and now mushrooms) and thats fine but don’t you dare have a 20 round mag for your rifle.

        Meanwhile your $750k 600sf townhouse gets robbed every other month with no resolution despite the cameras everywhere, but you get nicked for $50 street sweeping and your backyard fire pit is a code violation.

        And you better bake that cake for the rainbow gals or your small business will get destroyed by the mob before the minimum wage laws and tax rates put you out.

        If Denver was a person, xe would be a tranny studying poop painting at a tech school full of asians and goodwhites trying to escape the diversity that xis suicidal white parent’s told xim would save xim from xis toxic masculinity and raciss ways.

        Its Hillary country. Whatever rugged occidental spirit raised Denver out of the desert is long gone. Its just Orange County CA with better beer.

  20. A wise man whose name escapes me (think it started with a “Z”) once said we’re moving from the Ideological Age to the Demographic Age. Once you understand that, the world becomes more clear.

    Whites of all stripes (liberal, conservative, etc.) continue to view the world through the lens of being in the Ideological Age. Every political debate, every political choice is about ideas – socialism or capitalism, free speech vs limited speech, etc. They don’t realize that political debates, political choices, the functioning of the economy, are becoming about demographics, not ideas.

    Blacks and browns instinctively understand this. Their politicians aren’t socialists because they have a deep love and understanding of Marx. They’re socialists because it’s a way to take from whites, to help their group. If their group was on top and the wealthiest, they’d be small government, low tax libertarians because that would help their group the most.

    Whites don’t want to leave the Ideological Age, so they keep acting as though nothing has changed. But the Demographic Age is moving toward us like a glacier, and it won’t be stopped.

    • I believe it’s Paul Kersey who says, “Democracy is nothing more than a racial headcount.”

      • Lee Kuan Yew’s famous observation about politics should be hung as a banner in the House and Senate so we can’t forget:

        “In multiracial societies, you don’t vote in accordance with your economic interests and social interests, you vote in accordance with race and religion.”

    • Brilliant comment. My only quibble is that, to me, it feels more like a freight train than a glacier.

    • Like the dumb white guy wandering through the third world marketplace on a busy afternoon and finding his pocket picked and his wallet gone. How could such a thing have happened?

  21. I will have little sympathy for contemporary progressives when, after the ancien regime falls, the new regime imposes blasphemy laws and progressive auto da fe is measured in great gross lots.

  22. You have to study the past if for nothing else than not to repeat the same mistakes.

  23. We are certainly in interesting times, and the next decade will be as pivotal as the 1930s, 1860s, or even 50-40 BC. At the very least we are at the end of this particular world order, it having lasted for three generations.

    China will not be spared, they have a very serious demographic problem as well, just different than ours. Nip-land might be one of the few countries left intact after all this. They still have ethnic homogeneity (aka social cohesion), and despite the herbivore men, there are plenty of Japanese having families, even if it is just one child. When I was there most recently, I saw a lot of under 6 children, but almost no 6-16.

    Overall, I think we are likely to see a return to the caste like system (de facto), as the intelligence gap between the widens. It could lead to a nightmare hellscape where the top 5%, still possessing genius level intelligence, performs maintenance on the automated systems used to keep material society running; the oligarchs own everything (libertarians should love this future), and everyone else is some level of slave. Just a guess, though, we’ll find out in time.

    • Tacitus, I’ve been thinking exactly along those same lines. Really not that different from what we see now in any number of South American countries. And yet, most SA countries are pretty dysfunctional.

      What I’m not sure of is whether the remaining 5% constitutes the required “smart fraction”, nor whether in this day and age the remaining 95% of the population can be placated/supported by the upper 5% or the .1% (oligarchy). But we are headed there, if not already arrived.

      • Compsci:

        All signs point to “population control” being the future for the slave class, which means a limited future. Perhaps some docile examples can be kept as token pets in model villages. Google search “women’s education” with any country that has a high fertility rate and you’ll find plenty of articles talking about how imperative it is. Replace women’s education with population control and you will get an idea of what the plan is.

        Neofeudalism does seem to be the future, though…

        • Replace women’s education with population control and you will get an idea of what the plan is.

          Replace? Women’s education IS population control.

    • Reminds me of “The Marching Morons” by C.M. Kornbluth. The only thing he probably got wrong was the nationality of those would be the rapidly procreating morons marching past the line.

  24. This is getting frustrating!

    For the THIRD time, I clicked on your ‘subscribe here’ link, and attempted to support you through a monthly donation.

    I took the time to type in my name, credit card info, and address… only to *once again* have the whole thing fail:
    “The payment gateway is not responding, please try again later”

    I want to give you money! But I’m not going to continue trying indefinitely!

    BTW: great essay today, as usual.

  25. The world doesn’t lack for a host of dying pastimes, such as philately or numismatism. Clubs like DeMolay or Oddfellows have nearly vanished. However few elicit sadness more than the wizened folks toying with Republican outreach to minority groups. They even have secret passphrases like “Hispanics are natural conservatives” and “proposition nation.”

  26. Almost all of the normie conservatives warning about socialism fail to consider rapid demographic change, and the fact that the new invaders prefer socialist policies. I suppose their plan is to use logic! reason! facts! to convince the newcomers to vote Republican.

    Any serious discussion about what comes next has to include the reality of the new people of color soon outnumbering the white people, and the ways people of different ethnicities and races are different and always will be.

    It’s interesting that they, the normie writers, pundits and politicians, think we’re the ones stuck in the past with our “belief” that the races are different. To them, “what comes next” is that there will be no racial differences, once we rid society of unconscious bias and hatred and bigotry, and there’s plenty of race-mixing. To us, that’s laughably out-dated thinking.

    • “…there will be no racial differences, once we rid society of unconscious bias and hatred and bigotry, and there’s plenty of race-mixing.”
      Precisely the same dogma at the center of prog thought, yet the decay of the proton will happen sooner than the mainstream Republican will see through this fiction.

    • I am going to get freaking RICH selling these tricorn hats to the New Americans.

      They’re made in China, profit margin to da moon!

    • Whenever I’ve tried to point out that immigrants typically vote Democrat in large numbers – and therefore immigration should be completely and totally cut off ……. the usual response I get back is screams of racism and references to that placque on the Statue of Liberty and shit like that. There will usually be one guy who says something like ” I work with a guy from Guatamala – and he’s a hard core conservative who owns guns”

      Yeah – ok – sure… whatever. What about the other 20 million? AND their kids?

      • People typically get the NAXALT fallacy when explained to them. No one has had the balls to do it on a large scale.

      • Normie conservative: “Yes, 70% of immigrants vote leftist, but we’ll make it up in volume!”

    • Has there ever been an example of a harmonious racially mixed society? Hell, even countries with populations of the same race speaking different languages — e.g., Canada, Belgium — are “two solitudes” at best. The fantasy that everyone is eager to assimilate with other ethnicities is responsible for no end of strife. But ideologues don’t care about reality testing. If their belief system insists that we’re all alike aside from superficial physical differences, they’ll demand we die in racial violence if necessary to support their beliefs!

  27. Yes, we are all dancing on the deck of the Titanic. And we have the luxury of this extravagance because hardship is extinct and there is no existential penalty for stupidity, laziness, or lack of robustness. We argue fatuously about politics because there is literally no wolf at the door. We are in decline as a species and no one cares because life is comfortable and, by God, a comfortable life matters.

    Do not use brain power trying to craft magic words that may persuade the masses to reverse course. That is a waste of mental energy. Observe, analyze, predict, react, and survive the coming chaos.

  28. I think it was Harry Truman who said something along the lines of: “The only thing new is the history you don’t know.” So I wouldn’t rule out looking at the commentators of the past; even if they lost, they may give us ideas going forward.

    • Today I saw a comment about German soldiers marching proudly into Paris, with French women falling all over them… in 1871?!?

      Oh no. Not more to learn. So much relevant history being ignored. Do we have to do ALL the damned work?

  29. Imagine trying to have, say, a YouTube channel that was all about carpentry, where the hosts for some reason scrupulously avoided any sort of mention about wood, hammers, nails, and various types of saws. It would be pretty silly, wouldn’t it. What in fact are they actually talking about?

    Now imagine trying to have a serious conversation about all the political, economic, military and sociological fiascos of the 20th-century, and the giant catastrophic miasmas of the 21st-century which were caused by the former… and never ever mentioning Jews.

    It sounds pretty silly when you put it that way.

    This isn’t even some adolescent “anti-Semitic” (which anyway doesn’t even exist) rant. It’s just a clear-headed statement of the nature of realistic discussion. If for instance you wanted to talk about the biology of wolves in their natural habitat, but for some weird ideological reason you’ve forbidden yourself from using the word or the concept of “hunting”, then in reality you are not having a serious discussion about wolves.

    In a similar way it is not possible to talk with any sort of seriousness about the grotesque deformities of 20th and 21st century Western societies while only referring to musty ancient stuff like Edmund Burke and the Enlightenment, while never discussing what is one of the most obvious sources of the inflammation and destruction which is quite ready to hand and hiding as it were in plain sight… Jews.

    • Think of where we were 10 years ago compared to where dissent is today.

      Beyond the continued hardening of tribal identity does ideology even matter any more…

      Who takes talk of constitutional principles and market forces seriously any more beyond a rapidly aging and collapsing element…

      Within 10 more years everyone will be defining everything in terms of ethnic nationalism, if not sooner.

    • In large portions of Europe, the above could get you a prison sentence. In this country it will get you deplatformed and fired.

      That’s why it is avoided, not to mention that a moderate engages in Orwellian crimestop whenever negative thoughts about Jews happen.

      • Actually you can mention the J word in public and talk about their actions. But you either have to be Muslim or a person of color. That will shield you from the white MSM attack dogs and the ruling class stooges.

        In fact you can even verbally and physically assault Jews in Europe with impunity if you are a Muslim.

        See the only ones they don’t want having a public platform are conservative whites of any stripe.

        • Other groups are not in a guilt culture like we are. They also act tribally rather than ideologically.

          I think its not irrational that people want our perspective excluded, given that its last emergence led to millions of deaths; and the sporadic nihilistic terrorism today. Now, by excluding peaceful change, they risk a violent reaction. But nothing has changed in their calculus to cause doubt on the “right side of history”.

          • That Ruwanda genocide didn’t count right? It’s only YT. Exclude your own perspective. Oh yeah, forgot about the Armenian genocide. Irrational? You make me laugh.

    • Lotta people whistling past the graveyard on that one. (Operative word: graveyard.)

      I think the internet is the big game-changer on that one. JQ redpilling has opened up in a way never possible before.

      The problem is that this lèse-majesté is still so verboten that you can’t just do a public opinion poll about it. So the question of what percentage of people know is a mystery.

      • If you want to go public about Jews you ought to convert or pretend to Islam first, that will give a person the protection they need. Plus it gives you the right to get in the faces of nasty white liberals and tear them a new a**hole in public and as a bonus you can go after queer and all the other sexual abominations out there.

        The reality is for secular and Christian whites, the ruling class has it in for us and is well on it’s way to deplatforming and putting us in a economic ghetto.

      • Then how about simply being truthful?

        Can you make an argument that Zionism has been good for the West?

        Can you ignore the Jewish radicalism that was complicit in the spread of Communism ?

        Can you justify the now millions of deaths in the Middle East along with terrorism that has gone with it all in the name of Zionism?

        Can you deny the Jewish influence in our press, entertainment, and finance industries and the ideology that is espoused?

        These are all real issues that the Jews are knee deep in. There is no blame, these are all intentional and conscious acts that they have been and are engaged in.

        • If the Jews had lost to the Arabs in ’48, I’d imagine that Jews would be even angrier than they are today. And many of the Jews from Europe that ended up in Israel would have probably moved to the Anglo countries.

          Most of deaths in the Middle East wars are best directly attributed to Saddam Hussein’s governance failures, and before that to the unstable nature of British-drawn Iraq. Muslims, and Muslim leaders do have agency.

          • Iraq was drawn up by more than the British. I mean, this is high school level history

        • I don’t see how Zionism has been bad for the West. if Jew-blaming dimwits hadn’t hounded Jews for a thousand years, Zionism wouldn’t exist. You want more Zionism? Blaming problems on the Jews is how you get more Zionism.

          As to Communism, the old Bolsheviks were Jewish but Stalin and his henchmen (the worst of the lot) were gentiles. Mao, Ho Chi Minh and Pol Pot weren’t Jewish. Niether were Otto Grotewohll, Walter Ulbricht, János Kádár, Nicolae Ceaușescu or Josip Broz Tito. I could go on, but it’s silly to think that communism was exclusively a Jewish-run deal..

          The vast millions of death in the Middle East are primarily caused by Muslims killing each other, Jews don’t have much to do with the internecine squabbles of a religion that hates them.

          There are lots of Jews in media and entertainment and those industries produce a lot of crap, but it’s crap that sells to the masses, so blame the mindless idiots who eat it up.

          There are lots of Jews in finance, but would the goyim you’d replace them with do any better, given the financial environment? I doubt it.

          • Lorenzo,

            Christ said to judge a tree by its fruits. I challenge you to judge the tree of the Talmud against the tree of the Gospels.

            Do it honestly and you will understand why your people continuously get in trouble.

          • My people? I’m a honky of German and Scandinavian descent, raised Catholic, now agnostic and have nothing to do with Judaism. If I’m acquainted with any Jews, I don’t even know it nor do I care to find out.

            As an agnostic, I don’t hold with judging anything by the tree of the Gospels, whatever the hell that is.

          • I’ll take you at your word.

            But some advice, the Jews don’t need you to white knight for them. Stop performing uncompensated emotional labor for the ADL and AIPAC.

          • I don’t care about AIPAC or the ADl. It’s just that I’d rather have the people on the right half of the IQ curve on my side, or at least not go out of my way to antagonize them.

          • That’s a good Goy, polish our circumcised knobs. Never forget that Jews and ONLY Jews have high IQs! Now run along and read Ann Frank’s Diary again while we run your society for you. Never forget the Holocaust!

          • If as you claim you were raised Catholic, it would be virtually impossible for you to not know what the Gospels said about the metaphoric “fruits” of “trees”. I happen to think that in this context that argument is rather simplistic, but then again everything you’ve said here is childish and simple-minded as well.

            But if you claim to be a former Catholic and profess ignorance of that teaching, odds are you’re simply a liar.

          • I’m familiar with biblical subjects, but I believe that a metaphorical phrase from the New Testament is just that: A metaphor.

            I suppose we could apply a discussion of the Hivites and Jebusites to the question of open borders while we’re at it, but there are more productive ways to think about things.

          • My flashlight was not shining on what you think about metaphors, it was focused on what you claim you do and do not recognize. You claimed to be a former Catholic, yet your reaction to the teaching in question was “whatever the hell that is.” I submit that anyone who was actually raised Catholic knows quite well “what the hell that is.”

            So now you’re both lying and flagrantly moving the goal posts. Gee wiz, I wonder where I’ve seen (((those sorts of stunts))) before.

            Doesn’t really matter in the long run, as your position and analysis are those of a retarded four-year-old, so now I’m really just jerkin’ yer chain for lulz.

            Keep on Keepin’ It Real, boychik.

          • If I’m acquainted with any Jews, I don’t even know it nor do I care to find out.

            Then maybe you ought not to opine about things with which you are unfamiliar. I went to a large, heavily Jewish New Jersey middle school and high school and counted many Jews as good friends. I’ve attended temple, Bar Mitzvahs and family Passover dinners. I’ve associated with many Jews since in friendly fashion — was a member for years of a gaming group where about half the players were Jewish, one family Orthodox — the husband was an atheist child of fundamentalist Christians when I met him and converted to Judaism. Very odd fellow, but a great guy.

            As individuals, they can be fine people, but they’re tribal and nepotistic. So were Italians in the mafia. So were Irish when they first came over. So are Indians (dot) and Chinese — I saw that in tech companies: Indians and Chinese will hire other Indians and Chinese and before you know it, half your staff is Asian.

            Jews just did really well at it, because they’ve been doing it so long. They’ve been aliens in other peoples’ nations since the diaspora. I don’t think there is any grand conspiracy, in general, but almost all the ones I associated with, and their parents, were liberal to a staggering degree and largely secular and progressive in their political and social values — even the ones that were practicing Jews. So, when you get them gathered together in influence in an area: Hollywood, the Supreme Court, banking, Congress, they shift whatever organization their in toward globalist progressive.

            When they are in their own nation, understandably, they become nationalists!

            An aside: weirdly my seventh grade social studies teacher, Mr. Feinberg, once told me Nixon was worse that Hitler. A ludicrous statement, but it didn’t strike me until I was an adult what an odd thing that was to come out of the mouth of a Jew.

            I find myself getting called an anti-Semite on internet boards a lot, because I simply believe people, religions, countries, ethnic groups should be allowed to be targets of discussion and criticism, and you can’t say anything negative about Jews or Israel without being called an anti-Semite. Jews hold a lot of the levers of power in this country, thus, that should be a topic for discussion. Progressives seem to have no problem pointing out peoples’ Christianity as influences of their decisions on public policy, yet there’s no grand movement to deplatform everyone who says nasty, prejudiced things about Mike Pence.

            Christianity and Christians are fair game. Jews should be, too.

          • What I am familiar with is the thousand year history of Jewish blaming and how little good that has done for anybody and what a waste of time it is.

          • No one is allowed to study or comment upon the Jews except for Jews or Jewish approved goyim.

            The Jews have been part of all of recorded history. They have had problems with their neighbors for 3000 years not 1000 years. In every century and in every corner of the world including Korea and China. Most anti Semites have been from the middle classes and upper classes. In Israel, different groups of Jews accuse each other of anti-semitism.

            A scholar who has studied the Jews in both historical settings and in the present day is the Irish academic Andrew Joyce.


            There is a lot here. Of course you could ignore it as well as continue to ignore the periodic rise of anti-semitism for which there is a 3000 year record. The same story over and over again, on every continent and in every age, but the Jews have no agency in any of this?

          • Lorenzo! That IS amazing!
            All those guys came up with the same idea at the same time!

            And all by themselves, too!
            This is incredible!

      • Yep, stupid hicks just keep kicking Jews out of their countries over and over for no reason at all. Poor Jews, just minding their own business and quietly trying to help and integrate into the local community, and, boom, out of nowhere these dimwits go off on them.

        Country after country, century after century, more than 100 times and always with the same complaints. What a bunch of losers. Can’t wait til those bumpkins are gone and Jews can live in peace with their neighbors.

        • A fave: Zman, when he said “ claim that Jews have been kicked out of six million countries…”

      • The Jews’ real problem: poor timing.

        Look at England. Since 700 A.D., every time they got there, it just happened to be a short time before the English economy collapsed!

        Of all the rotten luck, huh?
        Man, those English must be stupid.

    • Ezcuse me, Cigar. Excuuuuse me.

      That bunch doesn’t just operate under the most insanely dangerous conditions, they *create* them so they can operate. Collapses, genocides, civil wars, revolutions, World Wars.

      The Spanish Inquisition, rooting out collaborators with the Moors?
      The Czar’s secret police, seeking Czar Alexander’s killers?
      The National Socialists, taking back their homelands from the Weimar occupiers and their Antifa Red Front?

      Run away? No. Not the most dangerous, foolhardy creatures on the planet.
      Instead, they infiltrated and TOOK THEM OVER.

      If they can do this with active hostiles, paper-thin democracies and Third World dolts are gonna be child’s play.

  30. It’s only the end of the road for the navel gazers of the West. I’m placing my bets solidly on China. While the West expends its energy debating the finer points of whether the application of AI technology to facial recognition algorithms at border crossings violates the constitutional rights of agrarian workers in Guatemala, China is quietly taking over the world.

    We deserve our fate.

    • China represents the Deadman walking; the logical collusion of the dictatorship of the proletariat.

      Technological innovations that enhance repression and suppression are the modern day equivalent of the gladius. The killing potential of the former is exponential but the latter stacked corpses like cordwood until it could no longer contain the next thing.

      • This is precisely the sort of naval gazing that I mentioned. I used to think along the same lines, but I have concluded that I was wrong.

        China is racing ahead of the US in advanced technology sectors and shows no signs of slowing down. China has all but colonized large swaths of Africa, claiming its resources for China. Once the belt/road initiative is complete China will have locked down trade routes to approximately 2/3 of the population of Earth. All this happened within a span of about fifty years.

        Say what you will about the Chinese system of government. It has proved itself far more adept at advancing the national interest than modern Western democracy. The West looks far more like a Deadman walking than China.

        • Correct, but you leave out the one big thing about China and it’s future: superior intellect. The decline we often discuss here can also happen in China, but they have no qualms (historical baggage) about using current technology to ameliorate such. Look to China to be the first country to develop and effect a successful eugenics program. The future belongs to the first nation that can raise a couple of generations of 115 average IQ cohorts.

          • Most of what China has done successfully over the past 40 years is a result of copying or stealing ideas and information from the West. If the West got their act together again, they could retake center stage on the world.

          • I’m sorry, but this is just completely wrong. Per my above post, China is already the world leader in numerous high-tech fields, and is gaining in others. They are not copying the West; they are well ahead of us.

            Once the road/belt initiative is complete China will have positioned itself in the center of a global trade system that services about 2/3 of the population of Earth. Resources will be extracted from Africa/Australia/Asia, shipped to China, manufactured into value-added products, and shipped onto the rest of the world. The last time the West had anything like this was during the height of the British Empire.

            Your statement was pretty accurate 20-30 years ago, but no longer.

          • Completely false. A substantial fraction of the research conducted in our best engineering and hard science graduate schools is done by Chinese graduate students and US faculty raised in China. At least a third of all “US” discoveries are achieved by Chinese working in the US

        • The question for China is do they try to assimilate the populations of their trading partners, strip them bare and leave them in the desert to die, or actively exterminate them? My bet is some combination of the three, but it will be tough to pull it all off for very long.

        • I am incredulous about claims that seizing the natural resources of the dark continent will go anywhere. “Africa wins again” and all that. I see no reason that Xi can succeed with diesel where George failed with steam. It’s not like the British were shy about massacring the natives, so the willingness of the colonizers to be brutal does not seem determinant. China into Africa seems like it has the same chances of the Germans into Russia.

          • China will collude with the ruling factions of the various African countries to jointly strip mine everything and split the proceeds. Then the Chinese will move on, leaving those wealthy local rulers to answer for it all. It will work, for a while.

          • The British did not have the manpower to massacre the natives as a default policy. Brits had fewer people in India than the French had in Tunisia. The Brits co-opted the local elites.

          • The Chinese also lack the Christian morality/white man’s burden mentality.
            I’ve been working w/Asians in Asia, for 20:yrs.
            They will do whatever it takes to get what they want from Africa & if they decide they are tired of those Africans, they will do away with them. Simple as that.
            Also, in terms of Asian superiority, it’s Japan, all day, every day.

            As for the GOP, gradually I began to hate them…

          • Pretty sure the Chinese can do slaughter far better than any European country could even think about. Africa is theirs now. No whites needed. No unwashed college students will be holding rallys to stop them either. Chinese won’t face any Boer treatment by the rest of the world. No Rhodesia, no Mandela going to stop them. They know slaughter and will use it if needed.

    • “China is quietly taking over the world.”
      What does that really mean? What does it mean to us? China definitely doesn’t go for our delusions as in the examples you mentioned. But how will this affect us? China seems to be taking over Africa to some extent, but what difference does that make to us? Our misadventures in the Middle East get more attention, but the U.S. military-industrial complex is obsessed with being able to defeat China in a war in the Pacific. What’s the point of that?

      • In 1906 the Royal Navy launched HMS Dreadnought, which immediately rendered all the other ships afloat obsolete. Lord Fisher, along with Churchill and Grey were advocates of an aggressive policy against the Germans. They needed the image of a German threat to maintain their budgets in the faces of new demands for welfare statism. This is why we get all that fearmongering about new Chinese carriers, but little about the USN atrophy in Anti-submarine.

        • There’s also a difference in allies. Most EU countries are not going to hike military spending, except for the Eastern Europeans who are stupidly thinking that Russia is a bigger threat than Poz. The Pentagon still plays up the “Russia threat”, even through Russia’s new fighter jet might never go into production, and Russia is unlikely to replace its single carrier.

          Most East Asian countries are quite willing to spend resources on military spending. They also think defensively, while NATO is actually an offensive alliance.

          • Even though I don’t think that there is anything worth fighting China over, at least China is a plausible “threat.” (I just don’t know what China is a threat to. The real threat is Poz, as you mentioned).

            But the “Russia threat” is a joke. Today’s Russia is pathetic compared to its Cold War iteration as the Soviet Union and its satellite states. Where the Soviet Union had a formidable military positioned all the way into the heart of Germany, today’s Russia is shrunken and surrounded by hostile states that it once controlled and a united Germany. Russia’s population and economy are a fraction of the United States.

        • The reality, imho, is that the US nor the EU face a foreign threat from conventional arms. The real threat is domestic cultural subversion, which is not a problem that can be solved with higher military spending. While military force could stop illegal migration, it can’t stop “legal” migration, nor can it shut down journolists that amplify any alleged “human rights violation”. Arguably the military establishment is the enemy, given its desires to implement Affirmative Action and enlist immigrants.

          • “The reality, imho, is that the US nor the EU face a foreign threat from conventional arms.” True. It brings a twitch to my jowl whenever we hear anything in Britain about “national security”. Er, what security would that be? Security from what or from whom? The enemy is already inside the gates and fixing to take over the place.

            And who, exactly, is going to expend massive amounts of blood and treasure in trying to conquer the US militarily when they could just fetch up at JFK and demand passports or drop some relatively modest bribes on your political masters.

            You don’t need tanks to conquer territory anymore; you just need a suitcase full of cash.

        • Prussia tried to provoke Britain into war twice before 1906. Britain considered the fact that Prussia was ready to instigate war with Britain as a sign that they wanted war with Britain. Britain increased its military power as a defensive measure and as a signal to the Prussians.

          • Lord Fisher was a proponent of a preemptive strike on Germany, because the two-power standard was becoming unviable with the growth of the US. That’s also why the UK sold its most modern designs to Japan.

            Grey as Foreign Minister re-aligned the traditional UK foreign policy to a new alliance with France, which built comparatively few ships. Almost as if it was planned that way.

            The Germans were fundamentally outnumbered, and were never in a position to attack in 1905. The UK could devote the entirety of its resources to the RN, while Germany needed to split between the Army and Navy.

      • China will not take over the USA. Meanwhile while they take Africa we’ll take Space.

        Let them have Africa.
        We really should know by now we don’t want more Africans. 🤣

    • Yes, there is a hubris among whites that explains some, if not much, of our downfall. Our unfailing believe that everyone in the world can be, wants to be and should be just like us. We’re the pinnacle.

      We couldn’t just be happy creating a world that fit us in our own lands. We had to send missionaries out into the world to convert people, first to Christianity and, later, to capitalism and democracy. Then we decided to bring the heathen to our lands to turn them into us.

      • Steyn touched on this in the “Afters” when he criticized Westerners for “mirroring” themselves in intepreting Muslim psychology. WEIRDs defining pathology is solipsism, hardly surprising given our self-first pseudo-religion and navel-gazing academics. I think that realizing Muslims had a world view that would never fit with mine was my first tiny red pill.

      • I really don’t think missionaries are the problem, even politically. Cardinal Sarah is not our problem.

    • As I noted below replying to Compsci, as much as I dread a future defined by rutheless Han scientists pushing us into eugenics, cloning and other “Black Mirror” technologies, I have to admit you guys are on the right track. I can retreat into fantasy and pray the ancient gods visit their wrath on man for tampering with nature, or I can cope with the real. Tough call, but an obvious one.

    • It’s not about experimenting on our people. Our businessman created the Chinese monster out of sheer greed. The Chinese themselves were too damn stupid and insular to pull themselves out of 40 years of Maoism. So we transferred massive amounts of technology and manufacturing know-how to the genocidal monsters.

      Had we not done it, we’d be top dog. But our businessmen are sociopaths and greedy pigs, Lenin had them figured out a long time ago.

      BTW experimenting on people without their consent is really evil. The USG did for 30+ years of radiation experiment and left a trail of dead and damaged people suffering from a myriad of cancers and other diseases.

    • I’m very skeptical that China’s going to take over the world. Their population is aging fast, almost to the point of outright decline. Their African colonies are hamstrung by the need to use local labor, as seen in the documentary “Empire of Dust”. Children are dying of lung cancer because the air pollution is so bad. A severe shortage of nubile women forces men to take foreign brides, a great way to foul China’s gene pool.

      Chinese cheat at every opportunity — parents have to buy American baby formula because half the formula made in China is fake and you won’t know it until your baby dies. Remember when they told us all to throw away our eclipse glasses and watch the event on TV because some glasses were Chinese fakes that could leave you blind? The cough syrup with antifreeze? The children’s toys with lead paint? What are you supposed to do, send every Chinese product to an American laboratory for thousands of dollars worth of tests? But China’s economic statistics are totally real, honest injun!

    • Even much of the ruling class navel gazing about AI isn’t *really* due to concern for the poor Guatemalan peasants about whom they don’t really give a fuck. It’s driven by their (well justified) concern that if AIs turn out to be half as smart as we think they will be they are strongly likely to spend a few quality nanoseconds scanning the news, historical documents, financial statements, and everything else and determine precisely what and precisely who is the problem. After that many members of the elite will often be heard to say things like “who’s shining a laser dot on my ch….”.

      There was a panic a few years back at Google for instance, when they discovered that one of their experimental AIs that they had been feeding a fairly unrestricted information diet had become a Yuuuge racist and sexist. Well they did teach it to infer general rules from specific data points after all…. The Chinese are unlikely to care if their AIs aren’t very pozzed since after all neither are they. Indeed much of their success may be due to the fact that, while they operate a fairly nasty little totalitarian regime there, they don’t seem burdened by many affirmative action rules and thanks to the corruption even the ones they have can be easily overlooked if the price is right. There are also many concerns of the Western elites like gay and trannie rights that just aren’t on the map in China. Indeed they even have a derogatory word for our elite Left – “Baizuo” (white Left).

      The Western elites love to congratulate themselves for being so cosmopolitan but their thinking is actually blinkered and provincial. Their commitment to the importation of millions of Muslims and Latin Americans, driven by greed (for cheap labor) and poz virtue signalling, ignores the obvious fact that these people are notoriously illiberal in their moral values and will have no trouble suppressing gays and “wymmyn” once they have the clout. It doesn’t matter though because the elites’ entire focus is on destroying the hated white man whom they regard as the more dangerous foe because he is (currently) closer. When they do give any thought to the people they are bringing in they assume that because it has been easy to bully whites into handing over their lands and property and cucking on moral principles that the Brown Horde will do likewise. However, white cuckery and vulnerability to shaming is probably a unique “bug” in the white “operating system”. So our elite bumbles forward confident that their 1995 AOL floppy full of DOS viruses will be able to take down the Invaders’ Linux servers. That shit only works in bad sci-fi movies like ID4. Of course this is another topic for another day – the elites actually seem to have been p0wned by the ideas they put in their movies. They can’t seem to distinguish between the naive propaganda they create for us rubes and reality. Of course anyone who listens to one of Zman’s Xirl Science bits probably suspects as much.

Comments are closed.